Why, how am I forgetting?

Do you not remember that you said that the art of the rhapsode was different from that of the charioteer?

I remember.

And you also admitted that, being different, it would know different things?

Yes.

Then by your own account the rhapsode’s art cannot know everything, nor the rhapsode either.

Let us say, everything except those instances, Socrates.

By those instances you imply the subjects of practically all the other arts. Well, as he does not know all of them, which kinds will he know?

Those things, I imagine, that it befits a man to say, and the sort of thing that a woman should say; the sort for a slave and the sort for a freeman; and the sort for a subject or for a ruler.

Do you mean that the rhapsode will know better than the pilot what sort of thing a ruler of a storm-tossed vessel at sea should say?

No, the pilot knows better in that case.

Well, will the rhapsode know better than the doctor what sort of thing a ruler of a sick man should say?

Not in that case either.

But he will know the sort for a slave, you say?

Yes.

For instance, if the slave is a cowherd, you say the rhapsode will know what the other should say to pacify his cows when they get fierce, but the cowherd will not?

That is not so.

Well, the sort of thing that a woman ought to say—a spinning-woman—about the working of wool?

No.

But he will know what a man should say, when he is a general exhorting his men?

Yes, that sort of thing the rhapsode will know.

Well, but is the art of the rhapsode the art of the general?

I, at any rate, should know what a general ought to say.

Yes, since I daresay you are good at generalship also, Ion. For in fact, if you happened to have skill in horsemanship as well as in the lyre, you would know when horses were well or ill managed: but if I asked you, By which art is it, Ion, that you know that horses are being well managed, by your skill as a horseman, or as a player of the lyre? what would your answer be?

I should say, by my skill as a horseman.

And if again you were distinguishing the good lyre-players, you would admit that you distinguished by your skill in the lyre, and not by your skill as a horseman.

Yes.

And when you judge of military matters, do you judge as having skill in generalship, or as a good rhapsode?

To my mind, there is no difference.

What, no difference, do you say? Do you mean that the art of the rhapsode and the general is one, not two?

It is one, to my mind.

So that anyone who is a good rhapsode is also, in fact, a good general?

Certainly, Socrates.

And again, anyone who happens to be a good general is also a good rhapsode.

No there I do not agree.

But still you agree that anyone who is a good rhapsode is also a good general?

To be sure.

And you are the best rhapsode in Greece?

Far the best, Socrates.

Are you also, Ion, the best general in Greece?

Be sure of it, Socrates and that I owe to my study of Homer.

Then how, in Heaven’s name, can it be, Ion, that you, who are both the best general and the best rhapsode in Greece, go about performing as a rhapsode to the Greeks, but not as a general? Or do you suppose that the Greeks feel a great need of a rhapsode in the glory of his golden crown, but of a general none at all?

It is because my city, Ephesus. Socrates, is under the rule and generalship of your people, and is not in want of a general; whilst you and Sparta would not choose me as a general, since you think you manage well enough for yourselves.

My excellent Ion, you are acquainted with Apollodorus Nothing else is known of this general. of Cyzicus, are you not?

What might he be?

A man whom the Athenians have often chosen as their general, though a foreigner; and Phanosthenes Captured the Thurian admiral Dorieus, 407 B. C. of Andros, and Heracleides Nothing else is known of this general. of Clazomenae, whom my city invests with the high command and other offices although they are foreigners, because they have proved themselves to be competent. And will she not choose Ion of Ephesus as her general, and honor him, if he shows himself competent? Why, you Ephesians are by origin Athenians, Androclus of Attica founded Ephesus as the Ionian city known to the Greeks of Plato’s time. are you not, and Ephesus is inferior to no city? But in fact, Ion, if you are right in saying it is by art and knowledge that you are able to praise Homer, you are playing me false: you have professed to me that you know any amount of fine things about Homer, and you promise to display them; but you are only deceiving me, and so far from displaying the subjects of your skill, you decline even to tell me what they are, for all my entreaties.

You are a perfect Proteus in the way you take on every kind of shape, twisting about this way and that, until at last you elude my grasp in the guise of a general, so as to avoid displaying your skill in Homeric lore. Now if you are an artist and, as I was saying just now, you only promised me a display about Homer to deceive me, you are playing me false; whilst if you are no artist, but speak fully and finely about Homer, as I said you did, without any knowledge but by a divine dispensation which causes you to be possessed by the poet, you play quite fair. Choose therefore which of the two you prefer us to call you, dishonest or divine.

The difference is great, Socrates; for it is far nobler to be called divine.

Then you may count on this nobler title in our minds, Ion, of being a divine and not an artistic praiser of Homer.