<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg049.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg049.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="26"><p>
In Heaven’s name, if your tongue should say that,
acquiring a voice of its own, and getting your beard
to join in the accusation, what response would you
make? The reply, manifestly, which you made
recently to Glaucus when he rebuked you just after a
performance, that by this means you had speedily
become famous and known to everyone, and how could
you have become so notorious by making speeches?
It was highly desirable, you said, to be renowned and
celebrated in any way whatsoever. And then you
might tell it your many nicknames, acquired in
different nations. In that connection I marvel at it
that you were distressed when you heard ‘ nefandous ’
but were not angry over those names.
</p></div><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg049.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="27"><p>
In Syria you
were called Rhododaphne; the reason, by Athena,
I am ashamed to tell. So as far as lies in me, it will
still remain a mystery. In Palestine, you were
Thorn-hedge, with reference, no doubt, to the
prickling of your stubbly beard; for you still kept it
shaved. In Egypt you were called Quinsy, which is
clear. In fact, they say you were nearly throttled
when you ran afoul of a lusty sailor who closed with
you and stopped your mouth. The Athenians, excellent fellows that they are, gave you no enigmatic
name but called you Atimarchus, honouring you with
the addition of a single letter because you had to have
something that went even beyond Timarchus.<note xml:lang="eng" n="v.5.p.405.n.1"><p>Timarchus is the man whom Aeschines castigated for his vices in an extant speech. From the wording of this passage it has been very generally inferred that the name of Lucian’s butt was Timarchus. That, however, would be a singular coincidence, which would surely have called for especial emphasis. All that Lucian intends to convey, I think, is that the Athenians did not nickname the man Timarchus as they might have done, but went a step further and styled him Atimarchus. </p></note>. And
in Italy—my word! you got that epic nickname of



<pb n="v.5.p.407"/>

Cyclops, because once, over and above your old bag
of tricks, you took a notion to do an obscene parody
on Homer’s poetry itself, and while you lay there,
drunk already, with a bowl of ivy-wood in your hand,
a lecherous Polyphemus, a young man whom you
had hired came at you as Odysseus, presenting his
bar, thoroughly made ready, to put out your eye;

<cit><quote><l>And that he missed; his shaft was turned aside.</l><l>Its point drove through beside the jawbone’s
root.</l></quote><bibl>The first line of this cento from the Iliad is XIII, 605 combined with XI, 233; the second is V, 293.
</bibl></cit>


(Of course it is not at all out of the way, in discussing
you, to be silly.) Well, you as the Cyclops, opening
your mouth and setting it agape as widely as you
could, submitted to having your jaw put out by him,
or rather, like Charybdis, you strove to engulf your
Noman whole, along with his crew, his rudder, and
his sails. That was seen by other people present.
Then the next day your only defence was drunkenness, and you sought sanctuary in the unwatered
wine.
</p></div><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg049.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="28"><p>
Rich as you are in these choice and numerous
appellations, are you ashamed of ‘nefandous’? In
the name of the gods, tell me how you feel when
the rabble call you names derived from Lesbos and
Phoenicia?, Are you as unacquainted with these as
with ‘nefandous,’ and do you perhaps think they are
praising you? Or do you know these through old
acquaintance, and is it only ‘ nefandous’ that you scorn
as unknown and exclude from your list of names?
Consequently, you are paying us a penalty which
cannot be considered inadequate; no, your notoriety

<pb n="v.5.p.409"/>

extends even to the women’s quarters. Recently,
for instance, when you had the hardihood to seek a
match in Cyzicus, that excellent woman, who had
very thoroughly informed herself in every particular
said: ‘I do not care to have a man who needs
one.”
</p></div><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg049.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="29"><p>
Then, being in such case, you bother about words,
do you, and laugh, and insult other people? Not
without reason, for we could not all use expressions
like yours. How ever could we? Who is so greatly
daring in language as to ask for a trident instead of a
sword to use on three adulterers, as you did?<note xml:lang="eng" n="v.5.p.409.n.1"><p>The quaint conceit that with a trident all three might be despatched at a blow undoubtedly embellished a rhetorical “exercise” like Lucian’s own Tyrannicide or Disowned. </p></note> Or
to say of Theopompus, in passing judgement on his
Tricaranus,<note xml:lang="eng" n="v.5.p.409.n.2"><p>On the book entitled Tricaranus (“Tricipitine,” or “Three-Headed”) see p. 96, n. 9. </p></note> that he had razed the outstanding cities
single-handed with a three-pronged book? And
again, that he had plied a ruinous trident upon Hellas,
and that he was a literary Cerberus.<note xml:lang="eng" n="v.5.p.409.n.3"><p>Cerberus had three heads. </p></note> Why, the other
day you even lighted a lantern and went peering
about, for some “brother,” I suppose, that had got
astray. And there are other examples beyond
counting, which it is not worth while to mention,
except for one that was heard and reported. A rich
man, I gather, and two poor men were on bad terms.
Then, in the middle of the story, speaking of the rich
man, you said: “He killed θάτερον (meaning one of
the two, instead of saying τὸν ἕτερον); and when those
present laughed, as was natural, by way of correcting
and undoing your slip you said: “No, not that;
he killed ἅτερον Your old-time slips I pass over,
your use of the dual in speaking of three months, of
ἀνηνεμία (for νηνεμία, windlessness), of πέταμαι (for
πέτομαι, I fly), of ἐκχύνειν (for ἐκχεῖν, to pour out), and
all the other fine flowers that adorn your compositions.




<pb n="v.5.p.411"/>
</p></div><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg049.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="30"><p>
As to what you do under the impulsion of poverty
—by our Lady of Necessity! I cannot censure a
single act. It can be overlooked, for example, if a
man in the pinch of hunger who has received moneys
entrusted to him by a man of his own city subsequently takes a false oath that he received nothing;
or if a man shamelessly asks for gifts—begs, in fact—
and steals and plies the trade of publican. That is
not what I am talking about; for there is nothing
invidious in fending off destitution by every means.
But it goes beyond what is endurable when you, a
poor man, pour the proceeds of your shamelessness
into such indulgences only. However, you will permit me to praise one thing, anyhow, that very pretty
performance of yours when you yourself—and you
know it—composed the “Tisias’ Handbook,” that
work of an ill-omened crow, thus robbing that stupid
old man of thirty gold pieces; for because of Tisias’
name he paid seven hundred and fifty drachmas for
the book, gulled into it by you.<note xml:lang="eng" n="v.5.p.411.n.1"><p>Apparently, Lucian’s hero had sold to the old man as “Tisias’ Handbook” a work on rhetoric which he had himself forged. Both Tisias and his master Corax, the founder of rhetoric, were said to have written handbooks. This production, purporting to be by Tisias, was really the work of an ill-omened Korax (crow), thievish as such birds always are. </p></note>
</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>