The Sophists. 175 the subject, and leave the inference to be drawn as to the character of the rest from what has been said of these two. However at the risk I fear of wearying my readers, I will add a few words about the others. The Apologue of the Choice of Hercules, the verse of Aristo- phanes, Nub. 361, and the declaration of Socrates (Theset. 151. b.) that he had sent a great many pupils to Prodicus, have availed to rescue this latter Sophist from the moral pillory in which the rest of his brethren have been for ages exposed. I will not impugn the justice of this exception, nor call in ques- tion the truth of Mr Grote's remarks upon the character of Prodicus I will only observe that we may believe Prodicus to have been the author of a popular and pretty moral Apologue, which conveyed, according to the Greek notions, an adequate view of a man's duties and obligations, without having our con- fidence in Plato's candour and integrity in the smallest degree shaken thereby (see p. 518). Plato represents Prodicus in the Protagoras as a man of lazy luxurious habits, and moreover a good deal of a coxcomb and somewhat of a charlatan ; and at the beginning of the Cratylus there is a sly allusion to the high fee which he exacted for one of his lectures. But I am not aware that he anywhere accuses him of immoral doctrines or practice ; and surely ridiculous verbal distinctions and a habit of lying late in bed under a great many blankets (Protag. 315. d.) are not incompatible with the purest and soundest ethical teach- ing. I must be allowed to repeat my former question. What, conceivable motive could Plato have had for delineating Prodicus' intellectual and personal character in other than its true colours? If he was not a vain man rather given to trifling with the dis- tinctions of words why should Plato have chosen to represent him so? As to his 50 drachma lecture, that is mentioned by other writers, comp. Arist. Rhet. in. 14, and is at least no inven- tion of Plato. The nature of Hippias' teaching may be gathered from Xen. Mem. iv. 4. 6, where he so candidly confesses that his great object is to say something new: ib. 14, the obligation to obey the laws of one's country is disputed because they are so often changed : in Protag. 337. c. he refers to the opposition of 4>v<ns and vopos, and speaks of the law as a tyrant which forces men to do many things contrary to nature. Amongst those who
