Lucian prometheus. THEM

opposition against it, pedantic archaism and empty content of literature - all these symptoms of ideological decay found in the person of Lucian a sharp and caustic critic who turned the formal stylistic art of sophistry against herself.

Lucian (born about 120 CE, died after 180) was a Syrian native of Samosata, a small town on the Euphrates, and descended from a poor artisan family. Having already become a famous writer and speaking in front of the inhabitants of his hometown, he recalls in his autobiographical Dream about the difficulties of his path to education. His parents wanted to teach him some kind of craft, but he was attracted by the glory of a sophist.

The Dream depicts how, after an unsuccessful attempt to learn from his uncle, the sculptor, Sculpture and Education (that is, sophistry) appear to the boy in a dream, and each tries to attract him to herself. Lucian fully shares the slaveholding contempt for the artisan "who lives by the labor of his own hands," and Education promises fame, honor and wealth.

Lucian left his homeland and went to the Ionian cities of Asia Minor to study rhetoric; he was then a Syrian boy who did not know much Greek. In hard work on the classics of Attic prose, he achieved that he completely mastered the literary Greek language and received the necessary training for sophisticated activities. Rhetoric, he later admits, "raised me, traveled with me and enrolled in the number of the Hellenes." As an itinerant sophist, he visited Italy, was in Rome, and for a time held a well-paid chair of rhetoric in one of the communities of Gaul; having achieved some fame and fortune, he returned to the east and gave public readings in the Greek and Asia Minor cities. From the sophistic period of Lucian's activity, a number of works have survived that belong to various genres of epidictic eloquence. These are the numerous "introductory speeches" (among them the aforementioned "Dream"), declamations on fictitious historical and fictitious legal topics. An example of fictitious-historical recitation is "Falarid": the tyrant of the Sicilian city of Akraganta, Falarid (VI century BC), known for his cruelty, allegedly sends a hollow copper bull as a gift to Apollo of Delphic, which, according to legend, served as an instrument of the refined torture and execution; two speeches are made, one of the ambassadors of Phalaris, the other of the Delphic citizen, in favor of accepting this "pious" gift. “Deprived of his inheritance” is a fictitious speech in a fantastic court case. The son, disinherited, healed his father from a serious mental illness, and was taken back into the family; then the stepmother went mad, and when the son declared that he could not heal her, the father deprived him of his inheritance for the second time - on this issue the son makes a speech before the court. Topics of this kind were not new, but Lucian, as a typical sophist, repeatedly emphasizes that the stylistic finish and wit of presentation are more precious to him than the novelty of ideas. He shines with the skill of a lively, light storytelling, relief details, figurative style; he is especially successful in describing monuments of fine art. Already in these early works, the future satirist is sometimes felt. Phalaris ironically depicts the greed of the Delphic priesthood, and

GREEK LITERATURE OF THE PERIOD OF ROMAN DOMINANCE

In the II and I centuries BC. the expansion of Rome to the east begins., to Greece and the countries of Hellenism. The Roman Republic predatory exploited the extra-Italian possessions - "provinces", headed by an annually changing governor - "proconsul". The wealthy elite of the Greek regions supported the Roman order, since Roman legions protected it from the "lower classes".

Figures of Greek culture began to move to Rome. Greek became the language of high society in Rome. Only Alexandria was still held as a scientific center, and the center of art at the beginning of the 1st century was democratic Rhodes.

With the fall of Egypt (30 BC) and the establishment of the Roman Empire, the eastern regions of the Hellenistic world began to experience some submission. This period is sometimes called the Greek Renaissance of the 2nd century. A new religion is emerging - Christianity, combined with the Hellenistic legends of the gods.

A native of Chaeronea in Boeotia, Plutarch was educated in Athens, was a homebody and a lover of reading. From his friends and students, a small academy was formed, which existed for about 100 years after his death.

Roman connections and Romanophilic convictions won him the favor of Trajan and Hadrian, the title of consular and, in his declining years, procurator of Achaia. Plutarch was admitted to the college of the Delphic priests. The Delphians and the Chaeroneans jointly erected a monument to him, and in the Chaeronean church they still show the "chair of Plutarch".

Of the 227 titles of his works, 150 have survived. Plutarch's works are usually divided into 2 categories: 1. moralia - "moral treatises" and 2. biographies. The term moralia unites all kinds of topics - religion, philosophy, pedagogy, politics, hygiene, animal psychology, music, literature. Interesting is his reasoning about ethical issues - talkativeness, curiosity, false shame, brotherly love, love for children, etc.

Plutarch's significance in modern times is based on Parallel Lives, a series of paired biographies of Greek and Roman figures. Sometimes they are concluded by "comparison". There are also several separate biographies. The selection of historical figures sometimes suggests itself (for example, Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar), sometimes it is rather artificial. 23 pairs have reached us, i.e. 46 biographies.

The external events described in the biography, according to Plutarch, reveal more the character of the hero than his characteristics.

In the Foreword, he warns that he is writing a biography, not history. An insignificant act, phrase, joke sometimes reveals character more than battles or sieges of cities. Therefore, in his biographies there is a place for jokes, and historical anecdotes, even gossip. At the same time, he manages to remain a moralist. He is not limited to goodies, along with valor, he describes the vices of the great.

Plutarch's popularity has always been enormous. His "Biographies" have had a huge impact on many great authors - from Erasmus, Rabelais, Shakespeare, Montaigne, Corneille, Racine, Rousseau - to the present day.

Plutarch 46-127

He turned to the genre of biography, following the Hellenistic-Roman tradition, which took a keen interest in the personality of commanders, emperors, famous for their high exploits and their atrocities. Plutarch wrote 50 biographies, 46 of which are paired biographies of the Greeks and Romans, consisting in the comparative characteristics of the heroes. For Plutarch, the figures of both Greece and Rome are equally great. He clearly distinguishes between the tasks of a historian and a biographer. It is important for Plutarch to understand a person in everyday life, in private life. He also strives for realism, although he does not consider it necessary to talk about the bad and the low. He assigns a large role to sciences and education. He perceives human life in the spirit of Hellenistic traditions: as a struggle with fate. Plutarch seeks to highlight the most striking features in the character of not only a person, but even an entire people. Plutarch is a master of psychological details, even often symbolic ones. Appreciates the inner beauty of a person who is unhappy, tortured and has lost all his outer charm. Plutarch is not only a keen observer, he knows how to sketch a wide tragic canvas. He does not forget to notify the reader that the tragic events are prepared by the gods. The tragedy of human life is depicted as the result of the vicissitudes and laws of fate. He gives his work a kind of decorative coloring. Understands life as a theatrical performance, where bloody dramas and funny comedies are played. And all this is unthinkable without a sense of Greek and Roman patriotism. He does not bother the reader with morality, he seeks to capture with expressiveness. The style is distinguished by noble restraint

Comparative Biographies of Plutarch

Plutarch 46-127 He turned to the genre of biography following the Hellenistic-Roman tradition, cat. showed a keen interest in the personality of the commanders, emperors, famous for both high exploits and their atrocities. Plutarch wrote 50 biographies, 46 of which are paired biographies of the Greeks and Romans, consisting in a comparative x-ke of heroes. For Plutarch, the figures of both Greece and Rome are equally great. He clearly distinguishes between the tasks of the historian and the biographer. It is important for Plutarch to understand a person in everyday life, in private life. He also strives for realism, although he does not consider it necessary to talk about the bad and the low. He assigns a large role to sciences and education. He perceives human life in the spirit of Hellenistic traditions: as a struggle with fate.

Almost all biographies are built on approximately the same scheme: the origin of the hero, his family, family, youth, upbringing, activity and death. Thus, a person's life is depicted in front of us in a moral and psychological aspect, highlighting several aspects that are important for the author's intention. Sometimes the biography is closed with a detailed conclusion with an appeal to a friend, and sometimes it just breaks off. Some biographies are filled to the limit with entertaining anecdotes and aphorisms. Plutarch seeks to highlight the most striking features in the character of not only a person, but even an entire people. Plutarch is a master of psychological details, even often symbolic ones. Appreciates the inner beauty of a person who is unhappy, tortured and has lost all his outer charm. Plutarch is not only a keen observer, he knows how to sketch a wide tragic canvas. He does not forget to notify the reader that the tragic events are prepared by the gods. The tragedy of human life is portrayed as the result of the vicissitudes and laws of fate. He gives a somewhat decorative coloring to his work. He understands life as a theatrical performance, where bloody dramas and funny comedies are played. And all this is impossible without a sense of Greek and Roman patriotism. He does not bother the reader with morality, strive to capture with expressiveness. The style is distinguished by noble restraint.

"Seriously - funny" works of Lucian: criticism of mythology and religion in his "Conversations" and speeches.

120 AD - 185 AD Born in Samostat, Syria. A Syrian by birth, Lucian was fluent in Greek, in which all of his writings are written. Lucian changed many occupations: he was a student of a sculptor, was engaged in rhetoric, legal practice, and later became seriously interested in philosophy. L.'s creative heritage is very extensive - more than 80 of his works have survived, satirical dialogue occupies a significant place among them. In his works. L. criticized various aspects of the ideological life of late antiquity: rhetoric, philosophy, history, religion. Criticism of religion, both pagan and emerging Christian.

"Prometheus or Caucasus" is a brilliant defensive speech of Prometheus against Zeus. As you know, Prometheus, by the will of Zeus, was chained to a rock in the Caucasus. In form, this is a completely rhetorical work, capable even now of making an effective impression with its argumentation and composition. In essence, this work is very far from empty rhetoric, since in it we find a criticism of the mythological views of the ancients and the overthrow of one of the most significant myths of classical antiquity.

Another work by Lucian of the same group is "Conversations of the Gods". Here we find very brief conversations of the gods, in which they appear in the most unattractive form, in the role of some very stupid philistines with their insignificant passions, love affairs, limited mind. L. does not invent any new mythologist. situations, but uses only what is known from tradition. what once had significant interest and expressed the deep feelings of the Greek people, after being transferred to everyday life, received a comic, completely parodic orientation. "Conversations of heterosexuals" depict a vulgar, limited world of small love adventures, and in "Sea Conversations" again there is a parody mythological theme. see text

LucianArchaic tendencies and the desire to revive the former greatness of Greek literature contributed to the development of eloquence and the emergence of rhetorical schools. The basis of general education is again declared rhetorical, competing with philosophy. Itinerant orators who delivered solemn public speeches at popular or religious holidays called themselves sophists, emphasizing the importance of their profession and its historical continuity.

The flowering of this so-called second sophistry dates back to the 2nd century. n. e., and its main centers were the Greek cities of Asia Minor. The external brilliance and theatricality of such speeches, combined with a careful finishing of the language and deliberate imitation of classical models, primarily Demosthenes, further emphasized their complete ideological vacuousness. The renowned masters of the second sophistry were considered Herod Atticus and Aelius Aristides. The latter reveled in his formal art so much that he was even completely indifferent to where and what it was necessary to talk about. He was fluent in the language of classical fiction and claimed the role of the second Plato or Demosthenes.

A contemporary of Aelius Aristides was the great ancient satirist Lucian (117 - circa 180 AD), whom Engels called the Voltaire of classical antiquity. 66

Lucian was born in the Syrian city of Samosat on the Euphrates River and did not know Greek as a child. As a youth, he became an apprentice to a sculptor, but then became interested in rhetoric and became an itinerant orator. He reached the heights of sophistic skill, but became disillusioned with this idle occupation and was carried away by philosophy. Soon, with his characteristic ardor, he also began to expose the inconsistency of philosophy, as he had mocked the rhetoric, art and literature of his time. Lucian traveled a lot, and in his old age settled in Alexandria, where he held the post of a major government official.

More than 70 works of Lucian have come down to us, differing in content and genres. Some works are composed in the form of letters, in the epistolary genre, which is very common among representatives of the second sophistry, others in the form of dialogues, still others - genre scenes, and so on. As a typical sophist who went through a good school, Lucian brilliantly grasped all the subtleties of the sophistic style: the impeccability of the exterior, the lightness and liveliness of the story. But already in the early works of Lucian, dating back to the time of his fascination with sophistry, one can feel that special wit in which the future satirist is anticipated. Enkomy (solemn speech) - "Praise to the Fly" sounds almost parody. By all the rules of sophistic art, Lucian glorifies the common fly. The song of a fly resembles the sound of a "honey flute". Her courage is beyond description, since "caught ... she does not give up, but stings." Her taste should be considered exemplary, because she is the first to try to "taste everything" and "get honey from beauty".

Philosophical dogmatism, hypocrisy and rudeness of philosophers Lucian exposes in many works. For example, in the dialogue "Selling lives" Zeus and Hermes briskly auction off the leaders of philosophical schools, giving each a corresponding characteristic. The pamphlet-message "On the Philosophers on the Salary" speaks of those philosophers who play the role of buffoons and hangers-on with noble patrons and, arguing about morality, forget about it when applied to themselves.

Lucian is especially merciless towards religion. His caustic satire exposes the obsolete ancient religion with its ridiculous rituals and numerous anthropomorphic gods, religious superstitions and philosophical theology. Lucian does not spare the emerging Christianity, in which he sees one of the crudest superstitions. In short dialogical scenes, united by the common title "Conversations of the Gods", Lucian describes mythological situations as they might appear to a modern layman. The divine majestic Olympus, the seat of the ancient gods, turns into a remote place in Lucian, where they quarrel, overeat, fight, deceive each other and commit adultery by stupid, greedy and depraved inhabitants. Like rival gossips, Hera, the wife of Zeus, and his mistress, the goddess Latona, argue. The myth about the judgment of Paris becomes a spicy everyday scene of a meeting of a cunning shepherd with three beauties. Lucian makes funny farces from the myths about the miraculous birth of Athena and Dionysus with the unlucky woman in labor Zeus in the title role. A remarkable anti-religious satire is Zeus the Tragic, written in the Menippean style. Panic reigns on Olympus, caused by the fact that there is a philosophical dispute on earth about the existence of gods. Each of the gods speaks in his characteristic manner, some in poetry, some in prose. Since none of the gods, even the soothsayer Apollo himself, can prejudge the outcome of the dispute, the gods slightly open the heavenly gates and eavesdrop, but they cannot understand anything in the incoherent speeches of philosophers. They can only console themselves with the fact that there are still many fools in the world who will not doubt their existence, so the income of the gods is not in danger for now.

"The gods of Greece, who were already once - in a tragic form - mortally wounded in Aeschylus' Chained Prometheus, - wrote Marx, - had to die once again - in a comic form - in Lucian's Conversations. Why is this the course of history? so that humanity can cheerfully part with its past. " 67

Those charlatans who, deceiving ignorant and gullible people, passed themselves off as saviors and prophets, Lucian ridiculed in his satirical biography "Alexander, or - the False Prophet", parodying the genre of "living" widespread at that time, and in a letter "On the death of Peregrinus". Peregrinus, in search of glory, joined the sect of Christians, and they "revered him as a god, resorted to his help as a legislator and chose as their patron." When he felt the imminent revelation was near, he self-immolated himself in order to strengthen the shaken authority and stage the ascension.

The Christian Church could not forgive Lucian for his ridicule and repaid the writer with a legend, according to which he was torn to pieces by dogs sent by God for "barking against the truth."

Lucian paid much attention to literary criticism and the problems of literary creation. Among the works entirely devoted to these issues, the "True Story" is especially interesting - a parody of fantastic stories, which were then read by amateurs of entertaining reading. The hero of the story is shipwrecked and goes to the moon. The inhabitants of the moon are at war with the inhabitants of the sun. The hero takes part in the war, reconciles the warring parties and returns safely to earth.

Lucian is rightfully considered one of the most remarkable satirists in world literature. However, his work bears traces of inevitable historical limitations, which the writer could not overcome. His satire, witty and graceful, lacks deep ideological content. Of course, Lucian is immeasurably superior to all the representatives of the second sophistry, whose achievements he uses along with the best traditions of Greek culture. The breath of the time of the decline of ancient culture is also felt in the fact that Lucian does not have a positive program. He himself formulates his simple attitude to the world: "Considering everything to be empty nonsense, pursue only one thing: so that the present is convenient; pass everything else with a laugh and do not become attached to anything firmly."

Despite the opposition of the Christian Church, Lucian's satire enjoyed great fame. In the XV century. Europe gets to know her. Italian humanists are read by Lucian, Reuchlin and Erasmus of Rotterdam ("Praise of Folly"), Thomas More, Cervantes, Rabelais and Swift imitate him. In Russia, the first translator of Lucian was Lomonosov.

PlutarchOne of the first places among the figures of late Greek literature belongs to Plutarch (46-120 AD), a native of the city of Chaeronea in Boeotia. Plutarch received an excellent education in Athens, was fond of philosophy, natural sciences, rhetoric, but most of all he was interested in issues of morality and education. He took an active part in the public life of his homeland and enjoyed great prestige among the Romans, even receiving the right of Roman citizenship.

Plutarch was an extremely prolific writer, and over 150 of his works on a wide variety of topics have survived. Quantitatively, the most significant group is made up of the so-called "Morals", which include treatises of the most diverse content ("Raising Children", "On Peace of Mind", "How a Young Man Should Read Poems", "On Music", "On Superstition", "Comparison Aristophanes and Menander "," About the face that is visible on the moon "and others), among them even works written by the writer's students come across.

But glory in the centuries brought Plutarch not these works, but "Comparative Biographies", written by him in old age. Of these, 23 pairs of biographies of prominent Greek and Roman figures have been preserved, compared by the commonality of their characters or fate, regardless of chronology and specific historical facts (Theseus - Romulus, Lycurgus - Numa Pompilius, Pericles - Fabius Maximus, Alexander - Julius Caesar, Demosthenes - Cicero etc). This work has nothing to do with that scientific historiography, the purpose of which is to establish objective truth. Plutarch is interested in historical facts as a background for the manifestation of the character of an outstanding figure of the past. Following established traditions, Plutarch understands personality statically, as a kind of permanent and unchanging character. He sees the purpose of his work in helping readers understand their own characters and be able to discover them, imitating virtuous heroes and avoiding following the vicious ones. The life of a great man consists of tragic and comic moments, therefore it is always dramatic, and chance and fate play a big role in it. Plutarch understands biography not as a description of a person's life path, but as a disclosure of those means and ways by which the character of a person is revealed. Therefore, Plutarch, with extraordinary care, collects all kinds of anecdotes from the lives of his heroes, tendentiously selects and highlights the facts he found in countless sources. "An insignificant act, a word, a joke often reveals character better," he says, "than bloody battles, great battles and sieges of cities." So, the ambition of Julius Caesar is clearly manifested in the thought expressed by him that it is better to be the first in a provincial city than the second in Rome. For the characterization of Alexander the Great, his conversation with the philosopher Diogenes turns out to be important, to whom the great commander publicly declared that he would like to become Diogenes if he were not Alexander. The well-known stories about Demosthenes, who underwent painful exercises to overcome natural defects that prevented him during public speaking, about the last minutes of Queen Cleopatra, the death of Anthony, and so on, go back to Plutarch.

Shakespeare's Roman tragedies are written on the basis of the corresponding biographies of Plutarch ("Coriolanus", "Julius Caesar", "Antony and Cleopatra"). After the fall of Constantinople, Plutarch became widely known in Europe until the 18th century. thanks to his "scholarly" writings, he was considered an educator of Europeans. The activists of the French Revolution extolled Plutarch as a biographer and viewed his heroes (the brothers Gracchus, Cato) as the embodiment of civil valor. The Decembrists treated Plutarch in the same way. For Belinsky, Plutarch is "a great life writer", "an innocent sublime Greek." Belinsky writes about the biographies of Plutarch: "This book drove me crazy ... I understood through Plutarch a lot that I did not understand." 65 But later in the 19th century. with his demand for historical accuracy, he treated Plutarch unfairly, for, having condemned him as a historian, he underestimated him as a writer. Plutarch was and remains a remarkable artist of the word. His famous "Biographies" are still interesting for a wide range of readers, mainly for young people.

Lucian

Lucian is a wonderful and, one might say, unprecedented phenomenon in ancient literature. Of course, Lucian does not have a special section of aesthetics, just as there is none, and generally nowhere in ancient literature. Nevertheless, the very search for aesthetics as a system is characteristic of Lucian in the deepest degree. In order to understand this, it is only necessary to abandon those current ideas about Lucian, which reduce him to a simple and flat satirist or humorist and ignore the incredible psychological complexity that he has to admit. In this regard, it is necessary to dwell on a review of the periods of his creative development, while we often ignored such an analysis when studying other ancient writers. These periods are interesting in that they testify to Lucian's great interest in rhetoric and ethics, and in outlining the extremely complex structure of human mental development, and in the use of a wide variety of artistic genres. An analysis of Lucian's periods of creativity also testifies to his constant throwing, and his colossal sense of social evil, and his own pathetic weakness and inability to fight this evil, about some kind of constant uncertainty bordering on aesthetic and psychological decay.

If we proceed from the fact that the first two centuries of our era were generally full of chaotic searches and that in those days some lofty aesthetic ideal was presented to talented minds that they could not achieve, then all this must be said about Lucian first of all; Lucian is known as a critic of mythology. But even a cursory glance at his respective works testifies to the fact that he interprets the myth he is criticizing in an extremely flat, empty and comical way. This, of course, has nothing to do with ancient mythology, which Lucian hardly touched upon. But the seething of mental passions that overwhelm his works, vividly testifies to Lucian's striving for some lofty ideals that he cannot achieve, which he reduces to a comic, everyday plan and about the impossibility of achieving which he, in the end, only grieves miserably. being close to complete moral and philosophical corruption. The picture of the work of such a writer undoubtedly plays a huge role for us, and for the history of aesthetics we find here unusually interesting factual material.

§1. General information

1. General overview of Lucian's activities

Lucian was born in the city of Samosat, that is, he was a Syrian by birth. The years of his life cannot be determined with certainty, but approximately it was 120-180 AD. His biography is almost unknown, and what little is known is drawn from vague indications in his own works. He did not follow the path of his artisan father and his sculptor uncle, but began to strive for a liberal arts education. After moving to Greece, he perfectly learned the Greek language and became an itinerant rhetorician, reading his own works to the general public in different cities of the empire. At one time he lived in Athens and was a teacher of rhetoric, and in old age he took up a highly paid position of judicial officer in Egypt, to which he was appointed by the emperor himself.

Eighty-four works have come down to us with the name of Lucian, which can with some certainty be divided into three periods. However, the complete accuracy of this periodization cannot be established, since the dating of most of the works is very approximate, so that the distribution of treatises by period may be different. We will cite only the most important of the treatises.

The first period of the literary work of Lucian can be called rhetorical. It probably lasted until the 60s. Soon, however, Lucian began to feel disappointment in his rhetoric (this disappointment, as far as one can judge by his own statement, he experienced already at the age of forty) and moved on to philosophical topics, although he was not a professional philosopher.

During this second, philosophical, period of his activity - probably until the end of the 80th year - Lucian dealt with many different topics, of which, first of all, it is necessary to note his numerous satirical works against mythology, which brought him world fame, as well as a number of treatises against philosophers, superstition and fantasy.

The third period of his activity is characterized by a partial return to rhetoric, an interest in Epicurean philosophy and clearly expressed traits of disappointment.

Having occupied a large post of a judicial official, Lucian did not shy away from flattery to the then rulers, despite the fact that he himself brutally exposed the humiliation of philosophers to rich people. The lack of positive convictions always led Lucian to a great limitation of his criticism, and this became especially noticeable in the last period of creativity. However, this can hardly be considered the fault of Lucian himself. In the person of Lucian, the whole of antiquity came to self-denial; not only he, but the entire slave-owning society to which he belonged, was gradually deprived of all prospects, since the old ideals had long been lost, and it was not easy to get used to new ones (and such was the Christianity that arose only a hundred years before Lucian), this required not only more time, but also a great social upheaval.

2. The first rhetorical period

With the development of Roman absolutism, rhetoric had to lose that tremendous social and political significance that belonged to it during the period of the republic in Greece and Rome. Nevertheless, the ancient craving for a beautiful word never left either the Greeks or the Romans. But during the period of the empire, this rhetoric broke away from life, was limited to formalistic exercises and pursued exclusively artistic goals, attractive to all lovers of literature. Starting with rhetoric, Lucian creates a long series of speeches of fictitious content, just as in those days in rhetorical schools they wrote essays on a given topic for the sake of exercise in style and for the sake of creating a declamatory effect for readers and listeners. Such is, for example, Lucian's speech entitled "Disinherited", where the rights to inheritance are proved for a fictional person who has lost these rights for family reasons. Such is the speech of "Tyranicide", where Lucian casuistically proves that after the murder of the tyrant's son and after the tyrant's own suicide on this occasion, the murderer of the tyrant's son should be considered the murderer of the tyrant himself.

It is often pointed out that even in this rhetorical period Lucian did not remain only a rhetorician, but in some places already began to show himself as a philosopher using a dialogical form. In the "Teacher of Eloquence" (Ch. 8), high and vulgar, ignorant rhetoric is distinguished. In the speech "Praise the Fly" we find satire on rhetorical praiseworthy speeches, because here such an object as a fly is praised in the most serious way, with quotations from classical literature, the fly's head, eyes, legs, abdomen, wings are described in detail.

3. The transition from sophistry to philosophy

Lucian, further, has a group of works of the second half of the 50s that do not yet contain direct philosophical judgments, but which can no longer be called purely rhetorical, that is, pursuing only a beautiful form of presentation.

These include: a) the critical-aesthetic group "Zeuxis", "Harmonides", "Herodotus", "About the House" and b) comic dialogues - "Prometheus, or the Caucasus", "Conversations of the Gods", "Conversations of heterosexuals", "Sea conversations. "

In "Zeuxis" we find a description of the paintings of the famous painter Zeuxis. Here is praise in essence, since its subject is this time that which has aesthetic value, and moreover for Lucian himself. In the treatise On Home, a beautiful building is praised; praise is conducted in the form of dialogue. Dialogue was in Greece the original form of philosophical reasoning. Here is a direct transitional link from the rhetoric of laudable speeches to philosophical dialogue.

In comic dialogues, Lucian's talent as a satirist and comedian was widely developed.

"Prometheus, or Caucasus" is a brilliant defensive speech of Prometheus directed against Zeus. As you know, Prometheus, by the will of Zeus, was chained to a rock in the Caucasus. In form, this is a completely rhetorical work, capable even now of making an effective impression with its argumentation and composition. In essence, this work is very far from empty and empty rhetoric, since in it we already find the beginning of a deep criticism of the mythological views of the ancients and a virtuoso overthrow of one of the most significant myths of classical antiquity. Another work of Lucian of the same group and also with world fame is "Conversations of the Gods". Here we find very brief conversations of the gods, in which they appear in the most unattractive philistine form, in the role of some very stupid bourgeoisie with their insignificant passions, love affairs, all sorts of base needs, greed and an extremely limited mental horizon. Lucian does not invent any new mythological situations, but uses only what is known from tradition. What had once been of considerable interest and expressed the deep feelings of the Greek people, after being transferred to everyday life, received a comic, completely parodic orientation. "Conversations of heterosexuals" depict a vulgar and limited world of small love adventures, and in "Sea Conversations" again there is a parody mythological theme. The dialogue of all these works has been brought down from its high pedestal of the classical literary form of philosophical discourse.

4. Philosophical period

For the convenience of reviewing numerous works of this period, they can be divided into several groups.

and) Menippian group: "Conversations in the realm of the dead", "Twice accused", "Zeus tragic", "Zeus convicted", "Meeting of the gods", "Menippus", "Ikaroma-nipp", "Dream, or Rooster", "Timon" , "Charon", "Ferry, or Tyrant".

Menippus was a very popular philosopher of the 3rd century. BC, belonging to the Cynic school; the cynics demanded complete simplification, the denial of any civilization and freedom from all those benefits that people usually chase after. Lucian undoubtedly sympathized with this cynical philosophy for some time. So, in "Conversations in the Kingdom of the Dead" depicts the dead, suffering from the loss of wealth, and only Menippus and other films remain here cheerful and carefree, and the simplicity of life is preached.

Of this group of Lucian's works, "Zeus the tragic" is especially sharp in character, where the gods are also depicted in a vulgar and insignificant form, and a certain epicurean clogs the Stoic with his arguments with his doctrine of the gods and the expediency of world history imposed by them. The "tragedy" of Zeus lies here in the fact that in the event of the victory of the atheists, the gods will not receive the sacrifices due for them and therefore will have to perish. But the victory of the Epicurean, it turns out, does not mean anything, since there are still enough fools on earth who continue to believe in Zeus and other gods.

b) Satire on pseudo-philosophers is contained in the works of Lucian: "The Ship, or Desires", "Kinik", "The Sale of Lives", "The Teacher of Eloquence" (the last two works, perhaps, date back to the end of the rhetorical period).

Lucian was interested in the inconsistency of the life of philosophers with the ideals they preached. In this regard, we find a lot of material in the work "The Feast", where philosophers of different schools are depicted as hangers-on and flatterers of rich people, spend their lives in revelry and adventures, as well as in mutual quarrels and fights. Some scholars have suggested that in this criticism of the philosophers, Lucian remained a cynicist with his protest against the excesses of civilization and protection of the poor.

in) Satire on superstition, pseudoscience and fantasy is contained in the treatises: "Lover of lies", "On the death of Peregrinus" (after 167), "On sacrifices", "On offerings", "On sorrow", "Luky, or Donkey", "How to Write History" (165). Especially against narrow-minded rhetoricians and school grammarians - "Leksifan", "Parasite", "Liar".

A small treatise "On the death of Peregrine" deserves special attention. Usually this treatise is regarded as a document from the history of early Christianity, because the hero Peregrinus depicted here was at one time in the Christian community, carried it along with his teachings and behavior, and enjoyed its protection. This is absolutely correct. Among the early Christian communities, there could undoubtedly be those who consisted of gullible simpletons and succumbed to all kinds of influences that had nothing to do with the doctrine of Christianity itself. But about Christians, there are only a few phrases here: the Christian community excommunicated Peregrine from itself and thereby, from the point of view of Lucian himself, proved its complete alienation from this Peregrine. Undoubtedly, this very Lucian's image of Peregrin gives more, which is still capable of shaking the reader's imagination.

Peregrine began his life with debauchery and parricide. Obsessed with ambition, he went around cities in the form of some kind of prophet - a miracle worker and preacher of unprecedented teachings. He was greedy for money and suffered from gluttony, although at the same time he strove to be an ascetic, preaching the highest ideals. This is a cynic with all the features inherent in these philosophers, including extreme simplicity and hostility to "other" philosophers. Lucian tries to portray him as an elementary charlatan, using human superstition for selfish purposes, mainly for the sake of increasing his fame. Lucian's mockery of Peregrine depicted by him is very spiteful, sometimes very subtle and speaks of the writer's hatred of his hero. However, what Lucian actually told about his Peregrine by painting the latter as a charlatan goes far beyond the usual scam. Peregrine is the most incredible mixture of depravity, ambition and popularity, asceticism, belief in all kinds of fabulous miracles, in your divinity or, at least, special heavenly destiny, desire to rule over people and be their savior, desperate adventurism and fearless attitude to death and fortitude. It's a mixture of incredible acting, self-esteem, but also dedication. In the end, in order to become even more famous, he wants to end his life by self-immolation, but somehow Lucian's constant assertions that Peregrinus is doing this only for glory cannot be believed. Shortly before self-immolation, he broadcasts that his golden life must end with a golden crown. By his death he wants to show what real philosophy is, and wants to teach him to despise death. In a solemn atmosphere, a bonfire is arranged for Peregrin. With a pale face and in a frenzied state in front of a fire in the presence of an excited crowd, he turns to his deceased father and mother with a request to accept him, and he shivers, and the crowd buzzes and shouts, demanding from him either immediate self-immolation or an end to this execution.

The burning takes place at night in the moonlight, after the faithful disciples of Peregrinus, the cynics, in a solemn ceremony, light the brought firewood, and Peregrine fearlessly throws himself into the fire. They say that later he was seen in a white robe with a wreath of the sacred olive tree, joyfully walking in the temple of Zeus in the Olympic portico. Note that Peregrine did not arrange his self-immolation in any other place and not at any other time, like at the Olympic Games.

This amazing picture of individual and social hysteria, painted with great talent in Lucian, is regarded by the writer himself very flatly and rationalistically. All this monstrous pathology of the spirit Lucian understands only as Peregrine's desire for glory. About Lucian and his religious skepticism, Engels wrote: “One of our best sources about the early Christians is Lucian of Samosata, this Voltaire of classical antiquity, who was equally skeptical of all types of religious superstition and who therefore had neither religious-pagan nor political reasons to treat Christians differently than to any other religious association. On the contrary, he showered them all with ridicule for their superstition - there are no less worshipers of Jupiter than worshipers of Christ; from his flat-rationalistic point of view, both types of superstition are equally absurd. " 57. The above judgment of Engels must also be combined with the literary characterization of Peregrine. Other works of this group, especially "The Lover of Lies", "On the Syrian Goddess" and "Luky, or the Donkey", exposing the superstition of that time in a most talented way, also go far beyond the framework of simple ideological criticism. The treatise "How to Write History" exposes the other side of ignorance, namely, the antiscientific methods of historiography, which do not take into account the facts and replace them with rhetorical-poetic fantasy, in contrast to the sane approach to them of the writers of the classical period - Thucydides and Xenophon.

d) The critical-aesthetic group of Lucian's works of this period contains treatises: "Images", "On Images", "On Dance", "Two Loves" - and refers more to the history of aesthetics or culture in general, than specifically to literature.

e) From the moralistic group of works of the same period let us name "Germotim" (165 or 177), "Nigrin" (161 or 178), "Life of the Demonact" (177-180). In "Germotima" Stoics, Epicureans, Platonists are very superficially criticized, and the Cynics are also no exception for Lucian. But in "Nigrin" Lucian's rarest respect for philosophy is noticeable, and, moreover, for Plato's philosophy, the preacher of which Nigrin is portrayed here. True, here Lucian was mainly interested in the critical side of the sermon of Nigrin, who smashed the then Roman customs no worse than the great Roman satirists.

5. Late period

The third period of Lucian's activity is characterized by a partial return to rhetoric and, undoubtedly, by features of decline and creative weakness.

The news is Lucian's partial return to rhetoric. But this rhetoric is striking in its empty content and petty subject matter. Such are the small treatises "Dionysus" and "Hercules", where the former Lucian's sharpness and power of the satirical depiction are no longer there. He is also engaged in empty scholasticism in the treatise On the Error Committed While Bowing. In three works - "Saturnalia", "Kronosolon", "Correspondence with Kronos" - the image of Kronos is drawn in the form of an old and flabby Epicurean, who threw away all affairs and spent his life in gastronomic pleasures. Apparently, Lucian himself was conscious of his downfall, because he had to write a letter of acquittal, where he no longer condemns, but justifies those on the salary and where he protects even the emperor himself, who receives a salary from his own state. In the treatise "About the eloquence who called me Prometheus" Lucian expresses his fear that he might not turn out to be a Prometheus in the spirit of Hesiod, covering up his "comic laughter" with "philosophical importance."

Views: 1,050 889
Category: ,

The ideological state of the top of ancient society on the eve of its catastrophe was reflected in many ways in the work of the prolific satirist Lucian. The shredding of philosophical thought and the growth of superstition, the claims of sophistry and the vulgar philosophical opposition against it, pedantic archaism and the empty content of literature - all these symptoms of ideological decay found in Lucian a sharp and caustic critic who turned the formal stylistic art of sophistry against itself.

Having already become a famous writer, he recalls in his autobiographical Dream about the difficulties of his path to education. His parents wanted to teach him some kind of craft, but he was attracted by the glory of a sophist.

The Dream depicts how, after an unsuccessful attempt to learn from his uncle, the sculptor, Sculpture and Education (that is, sophistry) appear to the boy in a dream, and each tries to attract him to herself. Lucian fully shares the slaveholding contempt for the artisan "who lives by the labor of his own hands", and Education promises fame, honor and wealth.

Topics of this kind were not new, but Lucian, as a typical sophist, repeatedly emphasizes that the stylistic finish and wit of presentation are more precious to him than the novelty of ideas. He shines with the skill of a lively, light narration, relief details, figurative style; he is especially successful in describing monuments of fine art. Already in these early works, the future satirist is sometimes felt.

the rhetorical paradox "Praise the Fly" is almost parody in nature.

Over the years, Lucian began to feel himself increasingly in opposition to the dominant trend in sophistry. The solemn, panegyric attitude towards artificial "lofty" feelings was always alien to him, and he was sharply negative about the growing religious tendencies. The satirical stream in his work began to expand. The first stage on this path was the transition to peripheral small forms of sophistic prose. Lucian chose here the genre of comic dialogue, mimicry,

In "Conversations of Heteries" situations of the type of middle and new comedy are reproduced with their constant motives of procuring, teaching young heterosexuals, their mutual rivalry, love and jealousy towards "young men." The same development is received by mythological themes in "Conversations of the Gods" and "Sea Talks".

Lucian makes the mythological plot the subject of intimate everyday conversation of the gods. achieves a caricature effect by the very fact of transferring the mythological plot into the everyday sphere. The myth turns out to be ridiculous and contradictory, the gods - petty, insignificant, immoral. Numerous acts of love turn into the "scandalous chronicle" of Olympus; the existence of the Olympians is filled with love affairs, gossip, mutual reproaches, the gods complain about the arrogance of Zeus and the fact that they have to perform all kinds of servile duties for him.

Lucian was attracted to the image of Prometheus more than once. In the dialogue "Prometheus, or the Caucasus", the situation of Aeschylus "Chained Prometheus" is reproduced, and Prometheus's sophisticated defense speech turns into an indictment against Zeus in the name of reason and morality. for Lucian this served only as a prelude to a more serious and sharper criticism of religion and the vulgar philosophy that supported religion.

By the 60s. II century. Lucian's departure from sophistry was outlined. Philosophy begins to attract him. The theories of philosophers, however, interested the satirist Lucian not with positive teachings, to which he treated with ironic doubt, but with his critical side, as an instrument of the educational struggle against religious and moral prejudices.

The satyr of Lucian takes on a pronounced philosophical bias. Its main objects are religious superstition, Stoic theology with its doctrine of divine providence and oracles (pp. 194, 237), the emptiness and insignificance of human aspirations for wealth and power, the whims of the rich, the dogmatism of vulgar philosophers, their unworthy way of life, their vanity and envy, strife and servility.

In the face of death, everything turns out to be insignificant, beauty and wealth, glory and power - only one cynic arrives in the underworld with a smile, preserving his "freedom of spirit and freedom of speech, carelessness, nobility and laughter." Against the teachings of divine providence, foresight and retribution is directed "Zeus caught."

One of the most colorful anti-religious satyrs of Lucian is "Zeus the tragic". Along with anti-religious satire, Lucian often encounters a satire directed against philosophers.

The hypocrisy of philosophers, their rudeness, greed and gluttony are outlined in the dialogue "The Feast", and the pamphlet "On the Salaried" gives a vivid picture of the humiliation that the "domestic philosophers" who were in the service of the nobility were subjected to.

The acuteness of social satire is, however, relatively rare in Lucian. His satire is distinguished by grace and wit, but not by the depth of capture !. A clear, simply unfolding satirical plot, clarity of literary intention, variety and ease of presentation, witty, ironic argumentation, lively, entertaining narration, inexhaustible abundance of expressive means, colors, images, comparisons, all these are indisputable advantages of Lucian's works, but he lacks the depth of ideological content. The most important flaw in Lucian's satire is the lack of a positive program.

His satire glides over the surface of social life, avoiding "dangerous" topics; The inevitable historical limitations of Lucian's satire and his lack of a positive program should nevertheless not obscure the fact that Lucian was one of the most free-thinking minds of his time. Despite his sophistic upbringing, he did not succumb to the reactionary moods widespread in sophistry. Lucian was not the original thinker; the ideological weapon that he used was created by others and long before him, but he devoted his remarkable literary talent to the incessant struggle against superstition, charlatanism and posturing, resurrecting the best traditions of Hellenic culture.

In the last period of Lucian's literary activity, this struggle took on even more acute forms. The subject matter is becoming more and more modern. The satirist moves away from the dialogical form, which forced him to act in the mask of one of the interlocutors, and turns to a pamphlet-letter, speaking directly on his behalf.

Lucian repeatedly spoke with pamphlets on purely literary issues. In The Teacher of Eloquence, he reckoned with sophistry by drawing a caricatured image of a fashionable orator, an insolent and ignorant charlatan;

80 works have survived under the name of Lucian; some of them are mistakenly attributed to Lucian, and in other cases the question of authenticity is controversial. To this last category of controversial works belongs, among other things, Luky, or Donkey, an abridged presentation of a novel about a man turned into a donkey. The novel is also known to us in a more complete Latin edition: these are the famous "Metamorphoses" of Apuleius, and in the section dedicated to this writer, we will return to the work that came down under the name of Lucian.

Lucian was too militant a figure not to arouse the hatred of both sophists and religious leaders. Lucian's brilliant satire influenced the literature of medieval Byzantium. Since the 15th century. he became one of the favorite authors of the humanists. Lucian was also inspired by the humanistic satire [Erasmus, Gutten, in France Deperier ("Cymbal of Peace")] and the satire of the Age of Enlightenment, and "True Story" served as a prototype for Rabelais and Swift.

48. MORAL-PHILOSOPHICAL SOUND AND POETICS OF THE NOVEL OF APOLEY "METAMARPHOSIS" OR "GOLDEN DONKEY"

The philosopher Apuleius is fascinated by mystical cults and is initiated into various "sacraments". But he is above all a "sophist"

A philosopher, sophist and magician, Apuleius is a characteristic phenomenon of his time. His creativity is extremely diverse. He writes in Latin and Greek, composes speeches, philosophical and natural science works, poetry in various genres.

The legend of a man, transformed into an animal by the spell of a witch and regaining human form, is found in numerous variants among various peoples.

Apuleius has expanded the plot with numerous episodes in which the hero takes a personal part, and with a number of plug-in short stories that are not directly related to the plot and are introduced as stories about what he saw and heard before and after the transformation.

“Pay attention, reader: you’ll have some fun,” the opening chapter of “Metamorphoses” ends with these words. The author promises to entertain the reader, but also pursues a moralizing goal. The ideological concept of the novel is revealed only in the last book, when the lines between the hero and the author begin to blur. The plot receives an allegorical interpretation, in which the moral side is complicated by the teachings of the sacramental religion. The stay of the reasonable Lucius in the skin becomes an allegory of sensual life.

Thus, sensuality is joined by a second vice, the perniciousness of which can be illustrated by the novel — “curiosity,” the desire to delve into the hidden secrets of the supernatural without permission. But the other side of the question is even more important for Apuleius. A sensual person is a slave to "blind fate"; the one who has overcome sensuality in the religion of initiation "reigns victory over destiny." Lucius, prior to initiation, never ceases to be a plaything of insidious fate; the life of Lucius after initiation moves in a planned manner, according to the order of the deity, from the lowest to the highest.

however, satirical goals are not alien to him either. The hero's donkey mask opened wide possibilities for the satirical depiction of morals: "people, regardless of my presence, freely spoke and acted as they wanted."

A huge number of small strokes are scattered throughout the novel, depicting various strata of provincial society in various settings, and Apuleius is not limited to the comic and everyday side; he does not hide the heavy exploitation of slaves, the difficult situation of small landowners, and the arbitrariness of the administration. Descriptions related to religion and theater are of great cultural and historical value.

We find rich folklore and novelistic material in episodes and inserts.

In this motley and colorful picture, the large inserted story about Cupid and Psyche stands out.

The amazing beauty of the youngest of three daughters, her appointed marriage with a terrible monster, the magic palace of her husband with invisible servants, a mysterious husband who visits his wife at night and forbids looking at himself in the light, violation of the prohibition at the instigation of insidious sisters, the search for the disappeared husband who turned out to be a charming boy , revenge to the sisters, wanderings and slave service of the heroine, performing difficult tasks with the assistance of wonderful assistants, her death and resurrection - all this fabulous ligature is present in Apuleius.

The fall of Psyche is the result of an ill-fated "curiosity", makes her a victim of evil forces, condemns her to suffering and wandering until the final deliverance comes at the mercy of the supreme deity - in this respect Psyche is similar to the protagonist Luke.

Translation by B.V. Kazansky

Hermes, Hephaestus and Prometheus

1. Hermes. This is the Caucasus, Hephaestus, to which this unfortunate titan needs to be nailed. Let's look around to see if there is any suitable cliff here, not covered with snow, so that we can tighten the chains and hang Prometheus so that he can be clearly seen by everyone.

Hephaestus. Let's see, Hermes. It is necessary to crucify him not too low to the ground, so that people, the creation of his hands, do not come to his aid, but also not close to the top, since he will not be seen from below; but, if you want, we will crucify him here, in the middle, over the abyss, so that his arms are extended from this cliff to the opposite.

Hermes. You made the right decision. These rocks are bare, inaccessible from everywhere and slightly sloping, and that cliff has such a narrow rise that you can hardly stand on your fingertips: this would be the most convenient place for crucifixion ... Do not hesitate, Prometheus, come up here and let yourself be chained to the mountain ...

2. Prometheus. If only you, Hephaestus and Hermes, felt sorry for me: I suffer undeservedly!

Hermes. It’s good for you to say “have mercy”! So that we will be tortured in your place as soon as we disobey orders? Does it seem to you that the Caucasus is not large enough and there will be no room on it to chain two more to it? But stretch out your right hand. And you, Hephaestus, close it in a ring and beat it, hitting the nail with a hammer with force. Come on and another! Let this hand be better fettered. That is great! Soon an eagle will fly to rip your liver apart so that you will be fully paid for your wonderful and ingenious invention.

3. Prometheus. Oh, Cronus, Iapet, and you, my mother, look what I, unfortunate, endure, although I have not committed anything criminal!

Hermes. Nothing criminal, Prometheus? But after all, when you were entrusted with the division of the meat between you and Zeus, you first of all acted completely unfair and dishonorable, taking the best pieces for yourself, and deceiving Zeus with only bones, "covering them with white fat"? After all, I swear by Zeus, I remember that Hesiod said so. Then you sculpted people, these criminal beings, and worst of all, women. In addition to all this, you stole the most valuable property of the gods, fire, and gave it to people. And, having committed such crimes, you claim that you were chained without any fault on your part?

4. Prometheus. Apparently, Hermes, and you want, in the words of Homer, "to make the innocent guilty" if you accuse me of such crimes. As for me, for what I have done, I would consider myself worthy of an honorable treat in a pritanee, if there were justice. Indeed, if you had free time, I would gladly make a speech in defense of the accusations against me, to show how unfair Zeus's verdict is. But you’re a talker and a scoundrel, take upon yourself the protection of Zeus, proving that he passed the correct verdict on my crucifixion in the Caucasus, at these Caspian gates, as a pitiful sight for all Scythians.

Hermes. Your desire to reconsider the case, Prometheus, is belated and completely unnecessary. But tell me all the same. I still have to wait for the eagle to fly off to take care of your liver. It would be good to take advantage of free time to listen to your sophistry, since you are the most resourceful in an argument.

5. Prometheus. In that case, Hermes, speak first and so as to accuse me in the strongest way and not to miss anything in protecting your father. You, Hephaestus, I take as a judge.

Hephaestus. No, I swear by Zeus, I will not be a judge, but also an accuser: after all, you stole the fire and left my forge without heat!

Prometheus. Well, share your speeches: you support the charge of stealing fire, and let Hermes accuse me of creating man and dividing meat. After all, you both seem to be skillful and strong in arguing.

Hephaestus. Hermes will speak for me too. I am not made for court speeches, for me everything is in my forge. And he is a rhetorician and thoroughly engaged in such things.

Prometheus. I would not have thought that Hermes would also want to talk about the theft of the fire and condemn me, since in this case I am his comrade in the craft.

But, by the way, son of May, if you take on this case too, then it's time to start the accusation.

6. Hermes. Really, Prometheus, you need a lot of speeches and good preparation to find out everything that you have done. After all, it is enough to list your main iniquities: namely, when you were allowed to divide the meat, you saved the best pieces for yourself, and deceived the king of the gods; you sculpted people, a thing completely unnecessary, and brought them fire, stolen from us. And, it seems to me, dear one, you do not understand that you experienced Zeus's boundless philanthropy after such actions. And if you deny that you did all this, then you will have to prove it in a detailed speech and try to find the truth. If you admit that you have made the division of meat, that you have introduced an innovation with your own people and stolen the fire, I have had enough of the accusation, and I would not speak further; it would be idle chatter.

7. Prometheus. We will see a little later if what you said is also chattering; and now, if you say that the accusation is enough, I will try, as far as I can, to destroy it.

First of all, listen to the meat case. Although, I swear by Uranus, and now, speaking of this, I am ashamed of Zeus! He is so petty and rancorous that, having found a small bone in his part, he sends an ancient god like me to crucifixion, forgetting about my help and not thinking how insignificant the reason for his anger is. He, like a boy, gets angry and indignant if he doesn't get the most.

8. Meanwhile, Hermes, it seems to me that you should not remember about such table deceptions, and if there was any mistake, then you need to take it for a joke and immediately leave your anger at the feast. And to save hatred for tomorrow, to mischief and to preserve some kind of yesterday's anger - this is not at all for the gods and in general it is not a royal business.

Really, if we were to deprive the feast of these amusements - deception, jokes, teasing and ridicule, then only drunkenness, satiety and silence would remain - all gloomy and joyless things, very unsuitable for the feast. And I never thought that Zeus would still remember this the next day, start to get angry and begin to think that he was subjected to a terrible insult if, when cutting the meat, someone plays a joke with him in order to test whether he will distinguish the best a piece.

9. Suppose, however, Hermes, even worse: that Zeus not only got the worst part in the division, but it was completely taken away from him. What? Because of this, according to the proverb, the sky should mix with the earth, invent chains and torture, and the Caucasus, send eagles and peck out the liver? See that this indignation does not convict Zeus of pettiness, poverty of thought and irritability. Indeed, what would Zeus do, having lost a whole bull, if he is so angry because of a small share of meat?

10. Still, how much more just are people treating such things, and it would seem that it is more natural for them to be more harsh in anger than the gods! Meanwhile, none of them will condemn the cook to crucifixion if, while cooking meat, he dipped his finger into the fat and licked it, or, while frying, would cut himself off and swallow a piece of roast - people forgive this. And if they get too angry, they will use their fists or slap in the face, but they will not torture anyone for such an insignificant offense.

Well, that's all about the meat; I am ashamed to make excuses, but he is much more ashamed to accuse me of this.

11. But it's time to talk about my sculpting and creating people. There is a double accusation in this misconduct, Hermes, and I do not know in what sense you impute it to me. Does it consist in the fact that it was not necessary to create people at all, and it would be better if they continued to remain the earth; Or is it my fault that people should have been sculpted, but it was necessary to give them a different look? But I'll talk about both. And first I will try to show that the gods were not harmed by the birth of humans; and then - that for the gods it was much more profitable and more pleasant than if the land continued to remain deserted and deserted.