SOPHISTS SOPHOCLES. 



321 



hearer. Thus Gorgias, in a treatise on nature, 

 proved, 1. that there is nothing real; 2. if there 

 were any thing real, it could not be known ; and, 3. 

 if it were capable of being known, it could not be 

 communicated by words. Prodicus of Cos proved, 

 in a discourse cited by JEschines, that life is not a 

 desirable gift, and attempted to remove the fear of 

 death by declaring death a nonentity ; it does not 

 concern the living, for they have nothing to do 

 with it ; nor the dead, because they are no more. 

 By similar sophistry, Protagoras destroyed the dis- 

 tinction between truth and falsehood. He main- 

 tained, that man is the measure of all things, and 

 that nothing really exists but what he conceives, 

 and in the way in which he conceives it ; and as 

 every assertion may be met by another, it is folly 

 to dispute, and refutation is absolutely impossible. 

 These notions relate to important subjects ; but 

 among the host of disciples, who followed the 

 Sophists, there was a multitude who endeavoured 

 to make themselves conspicuous by the most absurd 

 and ridiculous assertions. Plato has drawn one of 

 these characters in his Dialogue of Euthydemus, 

 which, in the persons of Euthydemus and Dionyso- 

 dorus, describes the whole tribe, and holds them 

 up to contempt. A single example will suffice. 

 Dionysodorus says, " Tell me, Ctesippus, have you 

 a bitch?" C. " Yes, and a very bad one too." D. 

 " Has she young ?" C. " Yes ; just like herself." 

 D. " Is not a dog their father ?" C. " Yes ; I saw 

 them couple myself." D. " Is he not your dog?" 

 C. " Certainly." D. " Then he is your father ! 

 So your father is a dog, and the puppies are your 

 brothers !" On such miserable verbal quibbles did 

 these learned disputants lay claim to the title of 

 profound and subtle inquirers. But however little 

 intrinsic value their teachings had, they served to 

 set the mind at work ; and we cannot help regret- 

 ing the total loss of their writings, as we can now 

 only judge of their tenets and practice from the 

 accounts of others. These accounts, however, are 

 so full and consistent that we should probably find 

 no cause for changing our opinions, if we had their 

 own works. The most flourishing period of the 

 Sophists was from the Persian war, 490 B. C., to 

 the death of Socrates, ninety years later. A rapid 

 glance at the causes of the rise and success of such 

 a class of men in Greece, is necessary. It is, in 

 fact, however, not more wonderful than that a 

 Socrates should nourish there : the versatile genius 

 of the Greeks exerted itself in every form imagin- 

 able. Besides, the state of scientific and religious 

 knowledge among the Greeks, at that time, will 

 sufficiently account for the appearance of the 

 Sophists. Learning was in its infancy ; science 

 was but just beginning to flourish ; morals and 

 theology had never yet been made the subject of 

 deep and critical examination. These great services 

 were first performed by the Socratic school ; and it 

 is not strange that selfish and superficial men erred 

 so egregiously respecting those lofty subjects, par- 

 ticularly where the Eleatic school denied the reality 

 of experience and the evidence of the senses, and 

 perverted logic into dialectics. Considering also 

 the democratical constitution of the states of 

 Greece, which allowed unlimited freedom of investi- 

 gation, it will appear not less natural for Sophists 

 to have sprung up among the Greeks, than impossi- 

 ble for them to have arisen among the Hebrews or 

 Romans. 



SOPHOCLES. This immortal poet, who carried 

 the Greek drama to perfection, was probably about 



VI 



twenty-five years younger than ^schylus, and fif- 

 teen years older than Euripides, whom, however, 

 he survived. They both died in the third year of 

 the 93d Olympiad. The second year of the 71st 

 Olympiad (B. C. 495) is assigned as the period of 

 his birth. He was descended from a rich and noble 

 family in Athens (or rather in Colonos, a village 

 belonging to Athens). The advantages of a fine 

 person (though nature had denied him a good voice) 

 and his brilb'ant genius contributed to open a splen- 

 did career before him. Though the fame of 

 Sophocles, as a poet, has eclipsed his reputation as 

 a statesman, yet he is mentioned in the history of 

 Athens as an archon, with Pericles and Thucydides, 

 in the war against Samos ; and his name is recorded 

 among the priests of the city. His death, which 

 happened in his ninety-fifth year, is so enveloped 

 in obscurity, that, by some, he is said to have ex- 

 pired from excessive joy, in consequence of the un- 

 expected success of one of his dramas at the Olym- 

 pic games ; and by others, to have closed his life 

 during the recitation of his Antigone, then just 

 completed. In his eightieth year, an ungrateful 

 son charged him before a judicial tribunal with 

 being incompetent, from age, to manage his domestic 

 affairs; but, on his reading to the judges his (Edi- 

 pus at Colonos, which he had just written, the 

 complaint was dismissed, and he was carried to his 

 house in triumph. On his tomb was erected a 

 marble statue of Bacchus, with the tragic mask of 

 Antigone in his hand. Sophocles began his career 

 as a lyric poet ; but, at the age of twenty, he de- 

 voted himself to the drama, and became the rival of 

 .^Eschylus, whom he surpassed in the popular fa- 

 vour. The first victory which he gained over his 

 predecessor was brilliant : the first prize was 

 awarded to him nineteen times ; the second still 

 oftener, but never the third. His reputation soon 

 spread to foreign countries, and several princes in- 

 vited him to their courts. But he remained faith- 

 ful to his country. The Greek drama is seen in its 

 perfection in his productions. Of his numerous 

 plays, which some have estimated at 130, only 

 seven have come down to us; but these are all 

 complete and masterly performances : 1. the Ajax ; 

 2. Electra ; 3. Antigone ; 4. King (Edipus ; 5. 

 CEdipus at Colonos; 6. the Tfachinians; 7- Philoc- 

 tetes. We will give a short sketch of their con 

 tents, remarking, by the way, that we can distin- 

 guish no trilogies and tetralogies, as in jEschylus ; 

 and that, according to the Scholiasts, he introduced 

 the practice of contending for the prize with a 

 single piece ; so that the distribution of the tragic 

 part into trilogies (three parts or distinct pieces), 

 to which a satirical piece was often appended (the 

 whole being styled a tetralogy), almost wholly 

 went out of use. Sophocles also first introduced a 

 third actor, and limited the lyrical element or 

 chorus, which .ZEschylus frequently made the chief 

 part of the tragedy. In the Ajax, we see that 

 hero, wounded in his honour by Ulysses, in the 

 contest for the armour of Achilles, seized with 

 frenzy : on recovering from which, as if blinded by 

 the dreadful discovery, he destroyed his own life. 

 The Electra belongs to the tragic scenes of the 

 family of Pelops. It contains the murder of Clyte- 

 mnestra (who, with her lover, JEgisthus, had assas- 

 sinated her husband Agamemnon) by the hand of 

 her son Orestes, under the direction of his sister 

 Electra. By the art of the poet, Electra, who 

 would naturally appear as a subordinate character, 

 is made the heroine of the action. In Antigone, 



