The Sophists. 167 practical trainers of youth. He says that they profess to lead young men to virtue, but do in fact lead them to the very oppo- site : for we have never seen a single person whose character the Sophists have improved, nor are their writings such as to make good men. They have written much, he continues, on subjects of idle speculation [Xenophon it must be remembered was not of a philosophical turn of mind] from which youth may derive vain pleasure but gain no advance in virtue. Further on he speaks of them as practising the art of cheating : hints that they make men not wise (o-cxpovs) and good, but like themselves o-ofao-nKovs, idle disputants and fallacious reasoners : what they write seems to be useful, but is not : " the Sophists," he concludes, " speak for the purpose of deceiving, and write for their own profit, and do no good to any body : for none of them is at all wise, nor ever was, but it is sufficient for them to obtain the name of Sophist, which is a disgrace in the eyes of all men of sense. And I advise men to beware of the professions of the Sophists, but not to con- temn the reasonings of philosophers ; for the Sophists hunt after young and wealthy persons, whilst the philosophers are common to all and friends of all : but as to the accidental fortunes of men they are indifferent." I have quoted this passage somewhat at length, because Mr Grote in the analysis given of it in his note has hardly done jus- tice to its force and severity. It conveys in distinct and formal terms the same charge of daoveLa which is implied in Plato's comic representation, and Aristotle's grave analysis ; great pro- fessions and no performance ; show without substance ; ostenta- tious display without solid acquirements or sound principles : in short the doicelp, but not the efoai. To the same effect is a passage of Isocrates, Kara rap 2o#. 1, which Mr Grote amidst his numerous references to this author has unaccountably omitted to notice. He begins by saying that " If all that undertake to teach would only tell the truth and not make greater promises than they intended to perform, they would never have got an ill name from unprofessional persons" (comp. Arist. Eth. ix. 1, already quoted). In the same sentence the word dXaCopevea-dai is applied to them. Their audacity in attempting to persuade the young that they would teach them how to act and make them happy by that knowledge is inveighed against, 3, and the author then goes on to ridicule the small-
