13.32.1.78

The Manumission of Socrates: A Rereading of Plato's PhaedoAuthor(s): Deborah KamenSource: Classical Antiquity, Vol. 32, No. 1 (April 2013), pp. 78-100Published by: University of California PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/ca.2013.32.1.78 .Accessed: 15/05/2014 21:25

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of California Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ClassicalAntiquity.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Thu, 15 May 2014 21:25:48 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

DEBORAH KAMEN

Classical Antiquity. Vol. 32, Issue 1, pp. 78100. ISSN 0278-6656(p); 1067-8344 (e).Copyright 2013 by The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Pleasedirect all requests for permission to photocopy or reproduce article content through the University ofCalifornia Presss Rights and Permissions website at http://www.ucpressjournals.com/reprintInfo.asp.DOI:10.1525/CA.2013.32.1.78.

The Manumission of Socrates:A Rereading of Platos Phaedo

This article argues we can better interpret key aspects of Platos Phaedo, including Socratescryptic nal words, if we read the dialogue against the background of Greek manumission.I rst discuss modes of manumission in ancient Greece, showing that the frequent participationof healing gods (Apollo, Asklepios, and Sarapis) reveals a conception of manumission ashealing. I next examine Platos use of manumission and slavery as metaphors, arguing thatPlato uses the language of slavery in two main ways: like real slavery, metaphorical slaverycould be good, if it reected a natural hierarchy, or bad, if it entailed an inversion thereof.Accordingly, metaphorical manumission from good and bad slavery are shown to be bad andgood, respectively. Finally, I reread Platos Phaedo, showing that Socrates, a willing slaveof the gods, seeks the manumission/healing of his soul. It is in exchange for his completemanumission, attainable only through the death of his body, that Socrates oers a cock tothe healing/manumission god Asklepios.

Platos Phaedo is a puzzling text in a number of ways, not least of whichis Socrates famous last words: Krito, we owe a cock to Asklepios. Pay it anddo not neglect it (Phd. 1118a). While the most common explanation is thatthe cock is a thank-oering to Asklepios for healing Socrates from the sick-ness of life,1 Glenn Mosts objections to this interpretation are manifold: Platonever asserts that life is an illness or death its cure; one passage (Phd. 95c-d)in which Socrates questions Kebes view that the entrance of the soul intothe body causes its ruin, like a disease ()actually provides evidenceagainst such a notion; and because Socrates is fullling a vow, he must be re-

For their helpful comments at various stages of this project, I thank Ruby Blondell, Sandra Joshel,Leslie Kurke, Sarah Levin-Richardson, Ron Stroud, and Classical Antiquitys two anonymousreviewers. I also thank Leslie Kurke for inspiring the idea for this paper in the rst place. Allerrors are of course my own.

1. See, perhaps most famously, Nietzsches The Problem of Socrates.


kamen: The Manumission of Socrates 79

ferring to a healing not in the future but in the past.2 Most argues, instead, thatSocrates is thanking Asklepios for having healed someone. He contends that themention of Platos sickness in the dialogue (Phd. 59b), coupled with the factsthat the sickness must be one that aected the whole circleit is we who owea cockand that Plato is the obvious intellectual heir to Socrates, marks Platoas the likeliest candidate.3 Although this interpretation is certainly possible, Iwould argue that there is no reason to assume that someone was literally healed.In this respect, I agree with scholars who view this as a reference to allegor-ical or metaphorical healing, though I dier in my explanation as to what hasbeen healed.4

This article argues that an understanding of Greek manumission can help usbetter interpret key aspects of this dialogue, including the mysterious cock toAsklepios. After discussing the modes of manumission in ancient Greece, as wellas conceptions thereof, I next examine Platos use of manumission and slavery asmetaphors. Finally, I turn to a rereading of Platos Phaedo, showing the specicways in which manumission practices, conceptions, and metaphors underlie thetext, and ultimately providing answers to a number of contested questions: Forexample, why does Plato align the philosopher Socrates with the sixth-centurybce fabulist Aesop? Why is Phaedo, a foreigner and a minor gure in the Socraticcircle, the dialogues narrator? And nally, what kind of healing is Asklepiosbelieved to have performed?

PRACTICES OF MANUMISSION

But rst: manumission.5 Scholars have traditionally classied Greek man-umission practices as either secular or sacral in nature, depending on whethergods were thought to be involved. In what follows, I employ this categorizationfor heuristic reasons, although there are many areas of overlap between the twocategories.6 Secular manumission appears to have preceded, but was never en-tirely supplanted by, sacral manumission, with the latter arising as a way of betterprotecting the status of the newly freed slave.7

2. Most 1993: 100104.3. Most 1993: 10411.4. See, e.g., Loraux 1989 (Asklepios saves the life of the logos [32]); Crooks 1998 (Socrates,

through his philosophy, cures his community from the illness of Pythagoreanism); Wilson 2007:11318 (Socrates gives birth to his own death); and Leimbach 2008 (Asklepios saves Socratessoul, that is, guarantees its immortality).

5. For a similar overview of manumission practices, see Kamen 2012.6. See also Radle 1969: 6. On the lack of radical separation of sacred and secular more

broadly in ancient Greece, see Connor 1988; Samons 2000: 32529. For a recent categorizationof Greek manumission types, see Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 6999.

7. That secular manumission preceded sacral, see, e.g., Bomer 1960: 1011; Radle 1969 (cf.Rensch 1908: 90; Sokolowski 1954; Lauer 1979: 205206). On the precarious status of freedslaves, see Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005, esp. ch. 6.


classical antiquity Volume 32/No. 1 /April 201380

The majority of our evidence for secular manumission comes from classicalAthens, especially from the fourth century bce, when rates of manumission beganto increase signicantly.8 The simplest way to free a slave was through a mastersverbal declaration.9 Slaves could also be freed in their masters wills,10 a practicebest attested in the so-called philosophers wills of Diogenes Laertius.11 Yetanother way of manumitting slaves was through ctive sale, in which a thirdparty (often the slaves lover) ostensibly bought the slave but actually paid forthe slaves freedom (see, e.g., Hyp. 3).12 Slaves could, in addition, be freedby means of a heralds proclamation, a practice that seems to have involved aperformative utterance in the theatre delivering the slave into freedom (Aesch.3.4142).13 Finally, in addition to individuals freeing their own (or others) slaves,the polis itself sometimes performed manumissions. This generally happened intimes of crisis: for example, in wartime, when slaves could be manumitted forproviding military service,14 and following major transgressions aecting the city(e.g., the Mutilation of the Herms), when slaves were granted freedom for oeringup information.15

Often when masters freed their own slaves, they mandated that the newlyfreed slave perform further obligations. For these obligations, we might cautiouslycompare the following passage of Platos Laws:

upsilonacute, upsilonacute upsilongrave - ! "#$ % ' upsilonperispomene - upsilonperispomene )%, * ' # % . #, /* 0 1 #2 2 .

Laws 915a; see further 915bc

And a man may lead away a freedman, if he does not serve, or does notsuciently serve, those who have freed him. And the service (%)consists in the freedman visiting three times a month the hearth of theman who freed him, promising to do whatever is necessary of those things

8. On this increase, see, e.g., Ciccotti 1910 [1899]: 16667; Westermann 1955: 25; Bourriot1974; Garlan 1988: 74; Patterson 1991: 134; Fisher 2001 [1993]: 70, 2006: 338, 2008: 125.

9. Radle 1969: 1012; Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 74.10. Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 7475.11. That the wills, despite the lateness of their source (probably third century ce), are likely

authentic, see Gottschalk 1972: esp. 317; Sollenberger 1992: 3860 with nn.341 and 342.12. Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 8182.13. Radle 1971: 36164; Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 7172, 2009: 305306; Mactoux 2008:

43751.14. E.g., Battle of Marathon: see Hunt 1998: 27n.5 for bibliography; Battle of Arginousai: see

Hunt 2001; Tamiolaki 2008. See also the measures taken after the battles of Mounichia ([Arist.]Ath. Pol. 40.2) and Chaironeia ([Plut.] Mor. 849A).

15. E.g., after the mutilation of the Herms and defamation of the mysteries: see Thuc. 6.27.2;Andoc. 1.1218, 2728. That freedom was oered primarily in cases pertaining to religious oenses,see Osborne 2000.



which are just and at the same time possible, and concerning marriageto do what seems good also to his former master.

Even if we do not accept Platos laws as authentically Athenian, they do suggest thetypes of service (%) that might have been dened for freedmen in classicalAthens.16 Other evidence comes from the requirements specied in DiogenesLaertius wills: in one instance, some slaves are freed unconditionally, whileothers are required to remain () and perform further obligations forthe owners heir (D.L. 5.73).

This period of remaining service was not necessarily indenite. An end-pointcould be spelled out in advance, or a master could decide at a certain point thathe wanted to grant his freedman full freedom. At least for a short period in latefourth-century Athens (ca. 330322 bce), it appears that if a master wanted torelease a freed slave from his or her remaining obligations, one way he could doso was by ling a private lawsuit called a dike apostasiou under the jurisdictionof the polemarch ([Arist.] Ath. Pol. 58.3; Harp. s.v. % %).17 Mostscholars believe that it is the (perhaps pre-arranged) acquittals of freedmen inthese trials that resulted in the so-called phialai exeleutherikai (freedmen bowls)inscriptions. These inscriptions, set up prominently on the Acropolis, recordedfreed slaves dedications of silver phialai to the goddess Athena in exchange fortheir complete freedom.18

In addition to these (mostly) secular modes of manumission, the Greeks alsopracticed sacral manumissionthat is, manumission involving the gods in oneway or another.19 Epigraphic evidence for this practice comes from all over theGreek world, ranging in date from the archaic period to the Roman, with mostinscriptions dating to the Hellenistic period. I would describe the main categoriesof sacral manumission as general protection by a god, ctive consecration to agod, and ctive sale to a god.20

Of these three categories, the rst is the most exible, involving the gods ina number of dierent roles.21 So, for example, an inscription from Bouthrotos(in Epiros), found on the supporting wall of the western parodos of the theatreand dated to the third or second century bce, reads:

16. On Platos freedman laws, see Radle 1972.17. For a recent discussion of the dike apostasiou, see Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 27492.18. For these inscriptions, see IG II2 155378, Ag. Inv. I 3183 (Lewis 1959); Ag. Inv. I 4665

(SEG XLVI.180); Ag. Inv. I 4763 (SEG XXV.178); Ag. Inv. I 5656 (Lewis 1968 #49 and 50; SEGXXV.180); Ag. Inv. I 5774 (SEG XXI.561); and possibly Ag. Inv. I 1580 (SEG XLIV.68) (seeMeyer 2010: 14142). A new edition of all of these inscriptions, with commentary, can be foundin Meyer 2010; she argues, however, that these inscriptions record not prosecutions of freedmenin dikai apostasiou but of metics in graphai aprostasiou (public suits for lacking a prostates).

19. On sacral manumission, see Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005: 8699, with bibliography.20. For the earliest categorization of sacral manumission along these lines, see Calderini 1908:

9495.21. On this category, see Inscr. Jur. II: 28889; Calderini 1908: 104107; Zelnick-Abramovitz

2005: 8791.



3' upsilonacute %$ 3 " upsilonperispomene 3upsilonperispomene | - upsilonperispomene , " upsilonacute | 7 3upsilonasper 3 ' , |7 # , ,|, %, %.22With good fortune and for salvation. When Nikostratos, son of Nikanor,was priest of Asklepios, those set free ( upsilonacute) before() Asklepios, by Argea, daughter of Polemon, in accordance with thelaw on childless people, were Pardalis, Pythias, Dionysia, and Kleoteima.

The precise meaning of this law is uncertain, but it clearly refers to childlessmasters.23 Moreover, its frequent appearance in the manumission inscriptionsfrom Bouthrotos implies that the polis had some sort of vested interest in over-seeing manumission practiceat the very least, in cases where the owner waschildless, as here. In addition to the polis secular involvement, this inscrip-tion also contains sacral elements, including the naming (and perhaps impliedparticipation) of the priest of Asklepios and the freeing of the slaves (upsilonacute) before () the god. Presumably, Asklepios was thought to bepresent in the theatre, at least during civic festivals, overseeing any acts of manu-mission conducted there.24 Temples and altars, like theatres, were also popularvenues for manumission, oering both human witnesses and the implied presenceof the gods.25

Gods also played a role in ctive consecration, in which an owner nominallyconsecrated or dedicated his slave to a god. The slave, however, rather thanactually entering into the gods possession, was in eect freed. Chaironea, a polisin Boiotia, has yielded an enormous number of ctive-consecration inscriptions,with slaves consecrated most commonly to the gods Sarapis or Asklepios.26 Totake just one example, a typical inscription from the middle or end of the secondcentury bce reads:


| F 1 1 G$ upsilonacute | 7 upsilonperispomene % 7 .

IG VII 3362

With Dexippos as archon, on the 15th of the month of Thyios, Sami-chos, son of Hippomenes, consecrates (%) his slave, Sosibios,as sacred (") to Sarapis, not belonging (F) in any way toanyone from this day on; conducting the consecration through the councilin accordance with the law.

As " to Sarapis, Sosibios has technically become the sacred property ofthe god,27 but this consecration is clearly ctive: the fact that Sosibios no longerbelongs (F) in any way to anyone anymore means that he is nowfree. Moreover, it should be pointed out that although this act of consecration(%) is primarily sacral, secular or civic involvement is also impliedthrough the presence of the council, as well as the mention of the laws.

Probably the most popular way of manumitting slaves from the second centurybce onwards was through ctive sale. In this mode of manumission, a master madethe pretense of selling his slave to a god, usually Apollo, for a certain price. Thective nature of the sale is made clear by the fact that the slave is said to besold () to Apollo for freedom (H %I). In this way, slaves,who notionally could not earn or dispense money,28 were allowed to pay fortheir manumission via the god. After the sale, the slave became the propertyof the god, with the understanding that the god would not exercise his right ofownership.29 This right was then transferred by default to the slave, who cameinto possession of himselfthat is, became free.30

Manumission through ctive sale is found predominantly in central Greece,especially in Delphi.31 Over a thousand recorded acts of manumission, datedbetween 201 bce and ca. 100 ce, survive from Delphi, entailing the manumissionof over 1350 slaves. The inscriptions themselves fall into two main categories:

27. On the consecrated freedman as the sacred property of the god, see Koschaker 1931: 46;Sokolowski 1954: 175; Klaenbach 1966: 86; Bomer 1960: 123. Cf. Burkert 1985: 269, who denes" as that which belongs to a god or a sanctuary in an irrevocable way; Benveniste 1973: 460,who says that " belongs to the domain of the sacred, whether this quality is attached to thenotion by a natural connexion or is associated with it by circumstance; and Bomer 1960: 123 andRadle 1969: 41, who argue that " means untouchable by men.

28. For the gap between theory and practice in this instance, see Todd 1995: 18788 (cf. Radle1969: 6566).

29. On the ctive nature of the sale, see Foucart 1896: 31; Calderini 1908: 102104 (symbolicsale); Inscr. Jur. II 251; Samuel 1965: 268; Pringsheim 1950: 18487 (legal ownership belongsto the god but in reality the slave is free [185]); Radle 1969: 6566. Cf. Bomer 1960: 32.

30. See, e.g., Bomer 1960: 32; see also Pringsheim 1950: 185.31. The Delphic manumission inscriptions are collected in Sammlung der griechischen Dialekt-

Inschriften (GDI 16842342) and Fouilles de Delphes (vol. 3), and now in Mulliez forthcoming.For an overview of these inscriptions, see, e.g., Bloch 1914; Hopkins 1978: ch. 3; Kranzlein 1980;Mulliez 1992. Fictive sale appears to have originated in Delphi: see Bomer 1960: 2729.



those granting full freedom, and those oering only conditional release. In theformer case, the entire price for the manumission was paid immediately, and thefreed slave was granted the formulaic four freedoms: mastery over himself(upsilonacute upsilonlenisupsilonperispomene), protection from illegal seizure (), freedomof choice of work (# * ), and the privilege of moving wherever hewished ( K ).32 A number of slaves, however, were freedconditionally. The most striking feature of conditional-freedom inscriptions is aso-called paramone clause, mandating that the freedman remain ()and serve his former master, generally until the latters death.33 Paramone didnot necessarily entail living in the ex-masters home, only that the freed slaveremain close enough to carry out his remaining obligations.

These, then, were the primary modes of sacral manumission. It must benoted, in addition, that the particular gods involved in these practices are notinsignicant. Aristide Calderini categorized into three groups all of the godswho appear in Greek manumission inscriptions: what he called local gods(e.g. Zeus Naios in Dodona, Apollo in Delphi, Zeus in Olympia, and Posei-don in Tainaron); helper gods (e.g. Sarapis, Asklepios, and Apollo); andforeign gods (e.g. Artemis Gazoria, Ma, and Dea Syria).34 Of these gods,three appear much more frequently than the others: namely, Apollo, Askle-pios, and Sarapis (along with Isis). Apollo shows up in the greatest numberof records, but this has to do in part with the vast numbers of manumissioninscriptions preserved in Delphi. Outside of Delphi, Sarapis and Asklepios ap-pear much more often than Apollo does, especially in ctive consecrations.35They are even called upon in cities where some other deity was clearly themore prominent local god, demonstrating that their appeal went beyond a matterof convenience.36

The conventional explanation for the prominence of these three gods (ifany is oered) is that it is their particular character as assistants of those underduresswhether slave or freethat makes them particularly t for involvementin manumission, a procedure involving a dicult transformation of status.37 Inmy opinion, this interpretation is not incorrect, but it does not represent the full

32. Westermann 1946: 92. On the four freedoms, see further Hopkins 1978: 142, 150.33. On paramone, see Samuel 1965. Although the noun paramone is not attested prior to the

third century bce, paramone-like obligations existed as early as the classical period, as demonstratedabove.

34. Calderini 1908: 113. For the argument that the inscriptions in which these foreign godsappear may represent not manumissions but true consecrations of slaves, see Bomer 1960: 132.Sarapis does not qualify as a foreign god, since by the period of the bulk of these inscriptions, theAlexandrian triad of Isis, Osiris, and Sarapis had been for the most part incorporated into the Greekpantheon.

35. Sarapis, either alone or associated with Isis, appears in four dierent poleis and in 77 ofthe surviving 205 records of ctive consecration; Asklepios appears in six poleis, in 52 records.For these gures, see Darmezin 1999: 184.

36. Bomer 1960: 113.37. See, e.g., Bomer 1960: 132 and Darmezin 1999: 184.



picture. Beyond being merely helper gods, Apollo, Asklepios, and Sarapis (alongwith Isis) were especially well known for their ability to heal. In fact, these threegods were thought of, collectively, as the primary healing gods (see, e.g., Cass.Dio 78 (77).15.56). The evidence for these three gods as healers is abundant. So,for example, Apollo was very early syncretized with the healing god Paian, as canbe seen in both the use of paian (healer) as an epithet and a role for Apollo,and in the use of the paian-song addressed to the god.38 Asklepios, the othermajor paianic god,39 in addition to being the son of Apollo, is perhaps the mostfamous of the healing gods. Greeks from all over made pilgrimages to his healingsanctuaries (Asklepeia), most famously those at Athens and at Epidauros, in orderto be healed from everything from aches and pains to life-threatening illnesses.40Finally, Sarapis too is a paianic god (D.L. 5.76), albeit a less prominent onethan Apollo and Asklepios. Sarapis connections with healing are clearest whenhe is looked at alongside his sister and consort Isis, who is better attested as ahealing deity.41

Furthermore, we can extrapolate certain conceptions about manumission fromthe frequent involvement of these healing gods: in particular, that manumissionwas thought by the Greeks to heal slaves from the sickness of slavery.42This conception is similar, though not identical, to the conception of slavery associal death (and manumission as rebirth), which is found in many slave-holdingsocieties.43 It is true that our documentary evidence for the involvement of thesehealing gods derives primarily from the Hellenistic period (and later), but it iscertainly plausible that the conceptualization of manumission as healing wasalready in place in late fth-/early fourth-century Athens.

SLAVERY AND MANUMISSION IN PLATO

In fact, I would argue that such practices and conceptions of manumissionwere not unfamiliar to Plato. Tradition even holds (probably apocryphally) thatPlato, like a number of other philosophers, was himself once a slave. If true, thiswould have been a temporary servitude, since he was quickly ransomed.44 TheGreeks, averse (in principle) to the enslavement of other Greeks (see, e.g., Pl.

38. See, e.g., h.Ap. 51619; Il. 1.47274; A. Ag. 51213. On the Apolline paian, see Rutherford2001: 2326.

39. On the paians role in the cult of Asklepios, see Rutherford 2001: 3842.40. For a compendium of evidence attesting to Asklepios as healer, see Edelstein and Edelstein

1945.41. See, e.g., D.S. 1.25.26; [Plut.] Mor. 364F, 357C; Artem. 2.39. See also Kockelmann 2008:

6366 on Isis role as a savior and divine healer.42. I develop this argument at greater length in Kamen 2012.43. Patterson 1982.44. See, e.g., D.S. 15.7.1; Plut. Dion. 5.17, Mor. 471E; D.L. 3.1920. On the tradition of

Platos enslavement, see Riginos 1976: 8692; on the motif of the philosopher enslaved, see duBois2003: 15357.



Rep. 469b-c), often ransomed their fellow citizens who were captured in war orby pirates.45

Although Plato, unlike Aristotle, does not present a formal theory of slavery,46he appears to agree with his disciple on at least three points: slavery is good bothfor the slave (because he lacks logos, reason) and for the master; the dierencein status between master and slave is due to a dierence in native endowment;and this dierence in turn reects a larger cosmic hierarchy.47 To my mind, theseviews inevitably lurk behind Platos repeated use of metaphors of slavery andmanumission.48

In what follows, I argue that Plato employs the language of slavery in twomain ways: like real slavery, metaphorical slavery could be good, both for theslave and for the community as a whole, if it reected a natural hierarchy;49or bad, if it entailed an inversion of a natural hierarchy. For Plato, good slaverygenerally involves the subjection of individuals or communities to external forceslike (good) laws and rulers (i.e., natural masters). Bad slavery, on the otherhand, involves either internal subjection (of the soul to the body, or one part ofthe soul to another part), or external subjection (to a bad ruler or enemy state),or some combination of the two. Accordingly, metaphorical manumission fromgood and bad slavery will be shown to be bad and good, respectively.50 It shouldbe noted at the outset that because the Greeks rarely use technical terminologyto refer to manumission, it is likewise the case that metaphors of manumission useinformal, non-technical language (e.g., , upsilonacute, ).

45. For this aversion, see Garlan 1987: 1719 and 1988: 4753. For antidotes to the enslavementof Greeks, see Garlan 1987: 1923.

46. For Plato on slavery, see, e.g., Morrow 1939; Vlastos 1981 [1941]; Vlastos 1981 [1968];Despotopoulos 1970; Klees 1975: 14281; Calvert 1987; duBois 2003: ch. 7. For other ancient viewson slavery, see Garnsey 1996. Even Aristotles theory is notoriously full of seeming contradictions(but cf. Millett 2007): so, e.g., while Aristotle argues for the existence of the slave by nature,for whom it is good and just to be a slave (Arist. Pol. 1254a1719), he also grants that somepeoplethose captured in warare slaves by law rather than by nature (Arist. Pol. 1255a57).

47. For these points, see Vlastos 1981 [1941]: 161.48. Glenn Morrow rst pointed out the signicance of the slave metaphor in Plato (1939:

18687), followed shortly thereafter by Vlastos important article on the topic (1981 [1941]). Ina later postscript (1959), Vlastos retracted a bit: As for the slave metaphor in Plato, I do believethat it illuminates important aspects of Platos thought which do not otherwise make sense or asgood sense. But I would gladly confess that there are many, and equally important, aspects ofPlatos thought which this metaphor does not illuminate. I would not wish to suggest that slaveryis the key to Platos philosophy. There are many locks in this marvelously complex and delicatemechanism, and I know of no one key, or set of keys, that opens all of them (Vlastos 1981 [1941]:163). For a critique of Vlastos retraction, see duBois 2003: 166. On the metaphor of slaverymore broadly in Greek thought and literature, see Mactoux 1981; Just 1985; Brock 2007; Hunt2011: 2325.

49. On good metaphorical slavery, see Vlastos 1981 [1941]: 15051; Pohlenz 1966: 8388;Patterson 1991: 15661; Brock 2007: 215.

50. Cf. Hansen 2010: 26, who argues that in Plato, the dierence between the good and the badform of freedom depends on who is your master (despotes): your rationality which instructs youto obey the laws, or your desires which tempt you to indulge your inclinations.



Let us start by looking at Platos treatment of good slavery. According to theLaws, although the best state is one without laws (as portrayed in the Republic),the second-best state is governed by a good lawgiver. In the latter case, thelaw is master, and the people, comparatively decient in logos, its slaves.51The demos, like a good slave, does whatever the laws order.52 Moreover, oneis beautied (%)that is, one looks good in the eyes of onesfellow citizensby being a good slave (#2 # upsilonperispomene) to the laws,since this is slavery (%) to the gods (Laws 762e; see also [Pl.] Epist.355a). The Laws Athenian Stranger says, with admiration, that under Solonsconstitution the Athenians lived willingly as slaves to the laws (upsilonacute,Laws 698b; see also Laws 700a).53 The Persian Wars frightened them into beingslaves (%. . .upsilonperispomene; Laws 698c), even more so than before, to theirleaders and laws, thereby increasing their commitment to each other and to theirpolis. This sort of metaphorical slavery, then, clearly was good: like literal slavery,it beneted not only the slaves themselves but also society as a whole.54

But this metaphorical good slavery did not last forever in Athens. With time,the Athenian Stranger says, a new type of freedom (%) arose, by whichmen became overly self-assured and fearless. Out of this (bad) freedom camethe peoples refusal to be slaves (upsilonacute) to rulers, parents and elders, laws,oaths, pledges, and the gods (Laws 701a-b). Put another way, the people wantedto be free and did not want anyone or anything to be master () over them(Rep. 563d). Plato presents such bad freedom as characteristic of democraticAthens. Thus in the Republic, Plato has Socrates describe the democratic city,full of freedom (%) and free speech (%), consisting of free men(upsilonacute), each of whom has the liberty to do whatever he wants (/ * upsilonacute) and to arrange his own life however he wishes ( upsilonperispomeneupsilonasperupsilonperispomene % upsilonlenis1, M N ) (Rep. 557b).55These libertiesto live and act as one chooseslikely reminded Platos readers ofthe characteristic freedoms granted to the slave upon his manumission (and spelledout in later manumission inscriptions): namely, doing whatever he wishes andgoing wherever he wishes.

The problem here, as Plato presents it, is not freedom per se, but excessivefreedom on the part of those who were naturally slaves. In Athens, his Socratesclaims, this bad freedom has driven children to disrespect their parents; metics

51. See also Ober 2005 [2000], who argues that for Platos Socrates, being a slave to thelaws was fully compatible with pursuing personal freedom.

52. Cf. Hdt. 7.104: the Spartan king Demaratos tells Xerxes that law is master ()[for the Spartans] . . .. they do whatever it commands.

53. See also Laws 700a: under these old laws, the demos in a certain way was a willing slave(upsilonacute) to the laws.

54. Cf. Thuc. 2.37.3: in his funeral oration, Pericles says that obedience () to thosein authority and to the laws is one of the things that makes Athenian society so successful.

55. For the conception of democracy as the freedom to live and act as one chooses, see Liddel2007: 2024 and passim.



and foreigners to be made equal to citizens; and at the furthest extreme (O),purchased slaves to be as free (upsilonacute) as those who bought them (Rep. 563b).That is, this freedom not only entails disrespect for the authorities (laws, parents,rulers, etc.) to which one should (naturally) be subject, it also causes a disruption ofsocial hierarchies on the largest possible scale, exemplied by the worst possibleinversion: literal slaves as free as their masters! The oligarchically inclinedPseudo-Xenophon claims to have observed precisely this inversion occurring infourth-century Athens (Ath. Pol. 1.1012).

Slavery to the laws (and rulers, parents, gods, etc.), then, is meant toevoke for Platos audience the best aspects of the slaves condition vis-a`-vis hismaster: a mutually benecial relationship with a natural superior. Manumissionfrom these external forces, on the other hand, creates chaos in the social orderjust as real manumission involved the introduction (anxiety-producing to manyAthenians) of outsiders into the civic body.56

In addition to this positive sense of metaphorical slavery, Plato also uses it in anegative sense.57 For example, in the Symposium, Socrates voices the words of thepriestess Diotima, who says that being content with the beauty of particularsabeautiful boy or man or anything else58is being a slave, just like a householdslave (P Q. . .upsilonacute, Symp. 210c-d). The vividness of Diotimasdescriptionparticularly the juxtaposition of the metaphorical upsilonacute withthe literal Qcalls to mind the status of a real slave, the household slave, towhom nearly every Greek could put a face. Unlike good slavery, then, whichsuggests the mutual benets accruing to both slave and society from the slavescondition, bad slavery evokes the concrete reality of the slaves condition inorder to convey its inappropriateness for a free person.

In Plato, bad slavery often takes the form of internal subjection (i.e.,slavery of the soul or parts thereof), itself sometimes analogized to externalsubjection (e.g., slavery to a tyrant). In his discussion of the tripartite soulin the Republic (made up of reasoning, spirited, and appetitive parts), Plato hasSocrates say that the naturally superior part ( upsilonacute) of a persons soul(namely, the reasoning part) should be in control of the inferior part(s) of thesoul (upsilonperispomene %).59 If, however, the inferior part is master over the superior,the person in question is reproachable as subjected to himself (M )upsilonperispomene,Rep. 431a-b). That is, if the naturally masterful part of the soul is enslavedto the lower parts of the soulrepresenting a reversal of the natural order ofthingsthis constitutes bad slavery.

56. On the anxiety caused by manumission in classical Athens, see Kamen 2009.57. On Plato and internal freedom (i.e., freedom from bad slavery), see, e.g., Pohlenz 1966:

8896; Patterson 1991: 17380.58. Bad slavery in fact often describes the behaviors and attitudes of lovers vis-a`-vis their

beloveds: see, e.g., Phdr. 238e, 252a; Symp. 183a, 184c; cf. Symp. 219e.59. On the tripartite soul in the Republic, see Ferrari 2007. On Platos changing conception of

the parts of the soul (and their relationship to one another) over time, see Bobonich 2002: ch. 3 and 4.



Later in the Republic, to illustrate the degeneration from a timocratic regimeto an oligarchic one, Socrates gives the analogy of a boy who, having seen hisonce-successful father suer some setback, devotes himself entirely to makingmoney, promoting to king the appetitive part of the soul and thereby reducingto slavery () the rational and spirited parts of his soul (Rep.553c-d). Likewise, the soul of a man who lives in a city ruled by a tyrant isitself full of slavery and unfreedom (% %), with thebest parts () of the soul enslaved (upsilonacute), and the most eviland insane part ( ) as master () (Rep.577d). Finally, in a striking association of real slavery with metaphorical slavery,Socrates likens enslaving (upsilonperispomene) the best part ( ) ofones soul to the worst (#2 2) to selling ones own children intoslavery (upsilonperispomene) to horrible men (Rep. 589d-e).

It is in cases like these, where the naturally superior parts of the soul are(wrongly) enslaved, that Plato encourages manumission. In his discussionof the charioteer model of the soul in the Phaedrus, Socrates declares that ifthe better elements of ones mind prevail, they enslave () thatwhich causes evil (%) in the soul and set free ( ) thatwhich causes virtue (F)here probably reason (Phdr. 256b). The impli-cation seems to be that reason, once liberated, in a sense obtains free rein inthe soul. This is good manumission, akin to freeing a slave who has earnedhis or her right to freedom. Similarly, in the Republic, Socrates says that in a manwho has committed an injustice and been appropriately punished, the beastly part(#) of him is tamed and the gentle part (M) set free (upsilonperispomene).In this way, the entire soulakin to a societyreturns to its best nature(Rep. 591b).

If, on the other hand, the naturally inferior parts of the soul are enslaved,they should remain that way and not be manumitted. As an analogy for the(negative) change from an oligarchic to a democratic regime, Socrates describesa boy who has been raised in a stingy manner, able to fulll only the mostnecessary desires, who then gets a taste of pleasure. This sort of boy exchangeshis prudent upbringing for the manumission () of his unnecessaryand useless desires (Rep. 561a). But these base desireslike bad slavesshould not be liberated, since they might then become, contrary to their nature,masters of the soul. Indeed, this boy will be overcome by beliefs that, havingjust been released from slavery ( % , Rep. 574d; see also, Rep. 575a), now rule alongside Eros. Previously, the boy wasunder the control of (upsilonasper) his father and the laws; now he is under the tyranny(%) of Eros (Rep. 574e). That is, he has replaced good slaverywith bad, the latter of which is analogized to political subjection. This interplayof good and bad metaphorical slaverynot to mention internal and externalsubjectionis particularly prominent in Platos Phaedo, to which I now turn.We will see that Socrates is a willing slave of the gods (i.e., good slavery),



while simultaneously seeking the manumission of his soul from his body (i.e.,manumission from bad slavery).

REREADING PLATOS PHAEDO

Both in the Phaedo and elsewhere, Socrates is represented as having a specialrelationship with Apollo.60 Early on in the dialogue, Socrates says that he hasbeen composing a hymn to Apollo (Phd. 60d),61 and in the Apology, we learn notonly that Apollo deems Socrates the wisest man in Greece (Apol. 21a-b), but alsothat Socrates, at least in his nal moments, possesses the mantic power of Apollo(Apol. 39c). Again in the Phaedo, Socrates shows prophetic capacity, aligninghimself with the swans of Apollo.62 Swans sing best when they are about to die,he says, because they are going to the god whose servants () they are(Phd. 85a).63 Indeed,

. R upsilonperispomene 3 S, % Q 7 T 7 EI % G ! #2 O 2. V upsilonlenis Gupsilonperispomene W R # upsilonacute " upsilonperispomene upsilonlenisupsilonperispomene upsilonperispomene, upsilonlenis / % O 7 upsilonperispomene , upsilonlenis upsilonlenis#upsilonperispomene % .

Phd. 85b

Since, I think, they are Apollos birds, they are prophetic, and havingforeknowledge of the good things in Hades, they sing and rejoice onthat day more than in previous time. And I think that I am myself afellow-slave (W) of the swans, and that I am sacred (") tothe same god and have received from our master () propheticpower not inferior to theirs, and that I am separated ()from life no more melancholy than they are.

Beyond sharing the swans power of prophecy, Socrates also gures himself asthe slave (W) and the sacred (") possession of Apollo. It is temptingto compare this to the language used of freed slaves in the sacral manumissioninscriptions (described above), who are often described as hieroi of the god.

60. Thus, e.g., on the day before Socrates trial, a ship was sent to Delos because of a civicvow to Apollo; this is why Socrates spends so long in prison between the trial and his death (Phd.58b). On the many connections between Socrates and Apollo, see Kurke 2011: 11112, 25455, 327.

61. On Socrates composing paians, see also D.L. 2.42, Epict. 4.4.22.62. Cf. Plato as Socrates swan (!): Socrates has a dream of a swan perched on his knees;

the next day, Plato is introduced as his student (see D.L. 3.5).63. Cf. Apol. 23b, in which Socrates says that he is poor because of his service (%) to the

god. Although (like Q) is often translated as (personal) servant, in the classicalperiod it refers only to unfree people (see also Osborne 1995: 32).



At least in this dialogue,64 Socrates refers to the gods, in general, as masters(), and mortals as their chattel (F).65 Thus he says:

W upsilonlenisperispomene F upsilonlenis# , Y O 'I " E upsilonlenis / ) upsilonacute upsilonacuteupsilonlenisH , % % upsilonlenis ZI /$upsilonlenis 7 /, \ , upsilonlenisperispomene , upsilongraveR G# upsilongrave G' upsilongrave ] # / / R.

Phd. 62b

Now, the account told in secret concerning these things, that we mortalsare in a kind of phroura and must not in fact free ourselves (upsilonacute) fromthis or run away (), seems to me over-great and not easy tounderstand. Nevertheless, this at least, Kebes, seems to me to be said well,that the gods are our guardians () and that we mortals areone of the chattel (F) of the gods.

In this way, then, every human being, including Socrates, is a slave to the gods,and this is a good slavery66comparable to slavery to the laws.

But Plato is using not only the language of slavery here. As Nicole Loraux hasdemonstrated, phroura has many simultaneous meanings in this passage.67 Thisword is most often translated as prison,68 a meaning that well suits Socratesliteral context. In addition, given the metaphorical language of slavery employedthus far, one of the words other meanings, a pen for slaves, is likely alsoin play. Moreover, since, as Loraux has pointed out, Socrates often conates thelanguage of slavery and war,69 phroura here may also have its sense of garrisonservice. That is, Socrates may be drawing on yet another conceptual metaphornamely that souls are hoplite soldiers, staying where they are stationedin theservice of his larger argument.70 If so, this is similar to the language Socratesuses in the Apology, when he says that it would be terrible if, having stayed(O) where the (mortal) generals at Potideia and Amphipolis and Delion hadstationed him, he now left his post (% =), having been stationed

64. Rowe 2001 apud 62b78 points out that the notion of mortals as slaves of the gods is notP.s usual view; Burnet 1959 ad loc. suggests an Orphic-Pythagorean origin for the passage.

65. On mortals as chattel and the gods as masters, see also Phd. 62d (upsilonacute. . .F),63a (), 63c (), 69e (). Cf. Arist. Pol. 1253b32, who calls slaves chattelwith souls (1 ).

66. As the author of a pseudo-Platonic letter puts it, measured slavery is good, and slavery togod (#2) is measured (Epist. 354e355a).

67. My discussion of phroura here closely follows Loraux 1989: 2729.68. Cf. Burnet 1959 ad loc. (prison or watch).69. Loraux 1989: 2728.70. This conceptual metaphor is especially useful in its immediate context, in which Socrates is

explaining why a philosopherdespite considering death a good thingshould not commit suicide(see Loraux 1989: 2829). For the term conceptual metaphor, see Lako and Johnson 1980.



by the god (Apol. 28d-e).71 The multivalent language in the Phaedo passagecontinues with luein, a verb that can refer to any kind of release, and especiallywith apodidraskein, which is used of both runaway slaves (e.g. Pl. Crit. 52d)and deserting soldiers (see LSJ s.v.).

In addition to good service to the godsconceptualized as the obediencesimultaneously of a slave to his master and of a soldier to his generalmortals alsoface bad slavery. Bad slavery in this dialogue entails submission to ones body,a condition from which manumission is desirable. Indeed, Socrates repeatedlystresses that the soul is, unfortunately, often the slave of the body: We areslaves to its service (upsilonacute 1 upsilonacute %I), he says (Phd. 66c; seealso 83d).72 In order to attain manumission of the soulsomething that is fullyrealized only through literal deathone must devote oneself to philosophizingand to becoming master of oneself.73 Only in this way can one begin the processof freeing the soul from the body. As Socrates says, true philosophers especially,and they alone, are always most eager to release (upsilonacute) the soul, and the careof the philosophers is thisthe release (upsilonacute) and separation () of thesoul from the bodyis it not? (Phd. 67d).74

Philosophy, then, is conceived of as preparation of the soul for the bodysdeath.75 As Socrates says,

_ E ! 1 1 upsilonperispomene F, R upsilonperispomene , 1 1 upsilonlenisH upsilonasper # , upsilonperispomene / upsilonlenis H upsilonasper R

Phd. 64c

Is death anything other than the separation (F) of the soul fromthe body? And is this not what being dead is: the body, separated apartfrom ( . . .) the soul, has become alone by itself (Hupsilonasper); and the soul, separated apart from (. . ./) thebody, is alone by itself (H upsilonasperF)?

The language used here to describe death, along with the attendant freeingof the soul, is very similar to the language of manumission. So, for exam-ple, the lexicographer Harpocration says that freedmen live by themselves,

71. But cf. Loraux 1989: 28, who draws a contrast between phroura (garrison service) and taxis(order in the ranks).

72. That the soul is in general the slave of the body (because of the latters physical demands)does not preclude the seeming opposite from obtaining simultaneously in good people, namely thatthe soul is in a dierent way the master or ruler of the body: see, e.g., Phd. 80 (E ),Tim. 34c ( E=); and Vlastos 1981 [1941]. Cf. a similar notion in Aristotle: see,e.g., Ar. Pol. 1254a3436, 1254b34.

73. See [Pl.] Def. 415a: free is ruling oneself (upsilonacute E upsilonlenisupsilonperispomene).74. For philosophy as a freeing of the soul from the body, see also Phd. 66a (%),

66d (), 83a (upsilonacute), 84a (upsilonacute, upsilonacute).75. Thus, e.g., the true philosophers practice dying (Phd. 67e); see also Phd. 80e.



apart from their manumitters (" upsilonacute H upsilonasperupsilongrave a2, #).76 In addition, forms of the verb (and therelated noun F) show up a remarkable number of times in the dialogue,77and while it can simply mean depart from or be separated from, it is frequentlyused in Greek texts in conjunction with the noun % to indicate a releasefrom slavery.78

Through the process of philosophizing, then, Socrates becomes his soul,79 andthrough his death he becomes a manumitted soul, free to go where he pleases. It isparticularly striking, in light of the manumission practices discussed above, whenSocrates says,

F upsilonlenisperispomene %, O, % upsilonacute ! bupsilonasperperispomene upsilongrave 7 d'. upsilonasperperispomene 7 e /$upsilonasper/ e / F 7 , 7QF .

Phd. 115d

Give a pledge for me to Krito, the opposite of what he [Krito] gave thejudges; for he gave a pledge that I would remain (), but you,give a pledge that I will not remain () when I die, but goingaway will be gone (QF ).

Like a real freedman, Socrates seeks a guarantee that after his masters (i.e.bodys) death he will be unconditionally free, his soul not subject to paramone.80Moreover, the emphasis here on Socrates departure (QF ) callsto mind one of the dening features of freed slaves, namely freedom of movement(e.g., R ). In these ways, Plato co-opts the most positiveelements of manumissionincluding complete freedom for the deserving slaveto frame the transition of Socrates soul in death.

As suggested earlier in this article, Platos use of metaphors of slavery andmanumission also sheds new light on certain perplexing aspects of the dialogue.First, there is the question of why Socrates repeatedly calls attention to Aesop.The fourth-century ce Greek rhetorician Libanius wrote, Who, unless theyrebeing contentious, would compare Aesop the Phrygian with your (fellow-citizen)Socrates? (Lib. Socr. Apol. 181), but Plato does precisely this: he has Socratesnot only versify Aesops fables (Phd. 60d, 61b), but also invent an Aesopic fable

76. Harp. s.v. upsilongrave Qupsilonperispomene. Although Harpocration is admittedly late (second centuryce), he is glossing a phrase found in Demosthenes (Dem. 4.3637).

77. Verbs/nouns related to : Phd. 63a, 64c (3X), 66a, 66d, 67a, 68a, 70a (3X),77b, 80d, 80e (2X), 81a, 81b, 81c, 84b (2X), 107c (2X), 114b (paired with upsilonacute). Cf.verbs/nouns related to upsilonacute: Phd. 67a, 67d (3X), 83a, 84a (2X); %: Phd. 66e, 67d.

78. See, e.g. Hdt. 1.170; Thuc. 4.87.3, 5.100; Isok. Plat. 18; [Pl.] Epist. 336a.79. Cf. Loraux 1989: 32: Socrates is, of course, his soul. See also Pohlenz 1966: 66: The

Socratic soul is nothing other than the true self of man.80. Cf. (and its derivatives) used metaphorically in Xenophon to evoke literal para-

mone (on which see Tamiolaki 2010: 327n.221).



about the interconnectedness of pleasure and pain (Phd. 60c). Scholars have inthe past either ignored the presence of Aesop in this text, or have, somewhatunsatisfactorily, explained it as a way of oering up a poetic alternative to thephilosopher;81 of assimilating Socrates (unjust) trial and death to Aesops;82 or ofpresenting a negative contrast to the portrait of Socrates.83

More convincingly, Leslie Kurke has recently argued that Plato (both in thePhaedo and elsewhere) invokes Aesops challenge to the wisdom tradition andhis dialogic style of speaking in order to fashion an Aesopic Socrates.84 Iwould add that calling upon a paradigmatic freed slave like Aesopwho wasfreed, like Socrates, for his skill in interpreting omens (Vita G, ch. 8990)wasparticularly useful for the aims of this dialogue: namely, painting Socrates as aguratively manumitted slave. In fact, the notion of Socrates as a slave mighthave contributed to the tradition that he was once literally a slave: according tothe Greek historian Duris of Samos, Socrates was a slave (upsilonperispomene) who didstonework (D.L. 2.19).

A second curious aspect of the Phaedo is the choice of Phaedo as theeponymous narrator. Why is he the one entrusted with the important task ofnarrating the nal moments of Socrates life? George Boys-Stones has arguedthat it was because Phaedo was not only himself a writer of Socratic dialogues,but also one whose beliefs about the soulor at least what little we know ofthemprovided a particularly good basis for the ideas Plato wants to convey inthis dialogue.85 But while this may in part explain Platos choice, we should notdownplay the signicance of Phaedos biographical tradition. Diogenes Laertiustells us that:

% 3/, # upsilonlenis#, 1 % d1 H QF$ 7 upsilonacute / ,N upsilonlenis upsilongrave 3 ! % upsilonlenisacute$ upsilonlenisupsilonperispomene % . A H #2 1 upsilonperispomene upsilonlenis C.

D.L. 2.105

Phaedo, a native of Elis, born of a noble family, was taken captive alongwith his city, and was forced to be a prostitute. But closing the door heused to join with (/) Socrates, until Socrates urged Alcibiades orKrito, with their friends, to ransom ( ) him; and from thattime on, he studied philosophy like a free man (%). Hieronymosin his work On Suspense of Judgment, attacking him, called him a slave(upsilonperispomene).

81. Loraux 1989: 2021. This interpretation is unsatisfactory in part because Aesop is not infact a poet (see Kurke 2011).

82. Compton 1990: 34041, 2006: ch. 15.83. Schauer and Merkle 1992.84. See Kurke 2011, esp. 25164, 32560.85. See Boys-Stones 2004.



Phaedos story is much like that of many prostitutes: enslaved in war, forced tosell his body, and nally ransomed by a man, possibly his lover.86 But why wouldsomeone of this sort necessarily be a good narrator? E. I. McQueen and C. J. Rowemake the attractive suggestion that:

given that at least part of Platos purpose in writing the Phaedo wasto encourage its hearers and readers to follow Socrates example andbecome philosophers, and also that one of its chief themes is about theway in which philosophy frees its practitioners from body concerns(as it frees Socrates from concern about his physical imprisonment andimpending death), it would be a happy coincidence if its narrator turnedout to be someone whom Socrates had actually freed and converted tothe philosophical life.87

I think they are completely right that Phaedos status as a freedmanhis bodyfreed by Socrates agency and his soul by Socrates philosophyis signicant. Iwould argue further that Phaedos status not only frames the dialogue but alsounderlies, and helps explain, certain facets of the text.

So, for example, Phaedo at one point states that he admired Socrates becausethe philosopher healed (Q) us well, and, as it were, recalled us from ouright () and defeat and turned us around to follow him and examinethe argument with him (Phd. 89a). As in 62b discussed above, Plato is employingtwo simultaneous conceptual metaphors here. More obvious, perhaps, is the battlemetaphor, but the language of slavery is also in play. It is likely in connectionwith the latter metaphor that Socrates is gured as a healer:88 that is, Socratesmanumitted Phaedo, both literally and guratively, thusby the conceptualmetaphor of manumission as healing (see above)healing him. As a result,Phaedo is no longer a (runaway) slave. Moreover, by calling attention to Socrateshealing powers, Phaedo highlights Socrates already-emphasized connection withApollo, suggesting that it might be to Apollo in his capacity as healing god thatSocrates is " (Phd. 85b5).

A nal, and perhaps the most important, element of the text illuminated by anunderstanding of Platos use of slavery and manumission metaphors is Socratescontroversial last words. When Socrates nally drinks the hemlock, his soul on thecusp of freedom, he tells Krito to pay the cock that we owe to Asklepios (Phd.118a). As mentioned above, Most believes that Socrates is thanking Asklepiosfor healing the sick Plato. It is true that Platos sickness is worth marking, but

86. On Phaedo as a ransomed prostitute, see also D.L. 2.31, Gell. 2.18. Whether we takeSocrates as Phaedos erastes depends on how we interpret two things: the verb / in D.L. 2.105and Socrates playing with Phaedos hair in Phd. 89b.

87. McQueen and Rowe 1989: 3. See also Dusanic 1993 on the enslavement and liberationof Phaedo.

88. Cf. Plato as healer: Asklepios is a doctor of the body, just as Plato is of the immortalsoul (D.L. 3.45).



perhaps it is part of a larger narratological strategy: it removes him from the sceneof Socrates death (where one might have expected him to be present), allowinghim to foreground the freed slave Phaedo. For the reasons already discussed,Phaedo is a particularly good gure to frame a dialogue about philosophy andthe manumission/healing of the soul.

I would therefore like to propose another reading of Socrates last words,one taking into account the metaphors of slavery and manumission permeatingthe text: namely, that the cock is a thank-oering to Asklepios, the healing godpar excellence in classical Athens,89 for securing the manumission of Socratessoul. After all, a manumitted soula soul that has experienced Fis ahealed soul. In fact, we nd the phrase # (relief from ills ortoils) in the context of both genuine healing90 and of metaphorical and literalmanumission.91 It is presumably in thanks for their being healed that departingsouls are said to sing paians.92 This reading also explains the choice of a cock,rather than another sacricial animal. A common gift to Asklepios,93 the cockpossesses a special relationship with the god, one seemingly parallel to Apollosswan-.94 If we can trust Aelians designation of the cock as a memberof Asklepios paianic chorus, as well as his servant and attendant ( Q) (Ael. fr. 98),95 we might consider the cock a payment, on behalfof the community, for Socrates freedomthat is, a replacement, or exchange, ofone servant of the gods for another.96 Just like the conditionally freed slaves whodedicated phialai to Athena in exchange for their full-edged freedom, Socratesmakes a dedication to Asklepios when his soul nally attains complete freedomfrom his body.

CONCLUSIONS

In this article, I have shown that by examining the ways in which slaveswere freed, as well as the ways in which Plato deploys metaphors of slaveryand manumission, we can better understand some of Platos narrative strategies

89. See Wikkiser 2008 on the popularity of Asklepios in Athens starting in the late fth centurybce.

90. See, e.g., SEG IX 347, line 4, a sacred law found in an Asklepeion.91. See, e.g., Aesch. Ag. 1, 20. This passage of the Agamemnon, in which the (servile) watchman

begs to be released from his service (#H , 1; , 20)namely hiswatch (', 2)is a provocative parallel for the language used by Plato to describe Socratesmanumission. I thank one of Classical Antiquitys anonymous reviewers for directing my attentionto this passage.

92. See Olymp. In Phd. p. 244, 14 (Edelstein and Edelstein 1945: 297 T527).93. On the cock as a common gift, see Edelstein and Edelstein 1945: 29669 T52331; Herod.

4.1118; Liban. Decl. 34.36.94. I thank Leslie Kurke for suggesting to me the cock/swan parallel.95. Edelstein and Edelstein 1945: 26566 T466.96. Slaves, as commodities (Kopyto 1986), can be exchanged for other commodities of

equivalent value. On manumission as part of a system of exchange, see Patterson 1982: 21119.



and philosophical ideas in the Phaedo. Put quite simply, it has been argued thatfor Plato, at least in this dialogue, the soul can be freed from bad slavery tothe body both through philosophy and through good slavery to the gods. It is,however, only with the bodys death that the soul is completely freed from badslaveryno longer subject to paramoneand thus in a sense healed.

University of [email protected]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Benveniste, E. 1973. Indo-European Language and Society. Trans. E. Palmer. London.Bloch, M. 1914. Die Freilassungsbedingungen der delphischen Freilassungsinschriften.

Diss. Strassburg.Bobonich, C. 2002. Platos Utopia Recast: His Later Ethics and Politics. Oxford.Bomer, F. 1960. Untersuchungen uber die Religion der Sklaven in Griechenland und

Rom. Vol. II: Die sogenannte sakrale Freilassung in Griechenland und die (upsilonperispomene)"%. Wiesbaden.

Bourriot, F. 1974. Levolution de lesclave dans les comedies dAristophane et lessordes aranchissements au IVe sie`cle. In Melanges dhistoire offerts a` William Seston,3547. Paris.

Boys-Stones, G. 2004. Phaedo of Elis and Plato on the Soul. Phronesis 49: 123.Brock, R. 2007. Figurative Slavery in Greek Thought. In A. Serghidou, ed., Fear of

Slaves: Fear of Enslavement in the Ancient Mediterranean, 20915. Besanon.Burkert, W. 1985. Greek Religion. Trans. J. Raan. Cambridge, Mass.Burnet, J., ed. 1959. Platos Phaedo. Oxford.Cabanes, P. 1974. Les Inscriptions du theatre de Bouthrotos. In Actes de Colloque

1972 sur lesclavage, 105209. Besanon.Cabanes, P., et al., eds. 2007. Corpus des inscriptions grecques dIllyrie meridionale

et dE pire 2, Inscriptions de Bouthrotos. Athens.Calderini, A. 1908. La manomissione e la condizione dei liberti in Grecia. Milan.Calvert, B. 1987. Slavery in Platos Republic. CQ 37: 36772.Ciccotti, E. 1910 [1899]. Le declin de lesclavage antique. Trans. J. G. Platon. Paris.Compton, T. 1990. The Trial of the Satirist: Poetic Vitae (Aesop, Archilochus, Homer)

as Background for Platos Apology. AJP 111: 33047.. 2006. Victim of the Muses: Poet as Scapegoat, Warrior and Hero in Greco-

Roman and Indo-European Myth and History. Cambridge, Mass., and London.Connor, W. R. 1988. Sacred and Secular: A7 * and the Classical Athenian

Concept of the State. Ancient Society 19: 16188.Crooks, J. 1998. Socrates Last Words: Another Look at an Ancient Riddle. CQ 48:

11725.Darmezin, L. 1999. Les affranchissements par consecration en Beotie et dans le monde

grec hellenistique. Nancy.Despotopoulos, C. 1970. La cite parfaite de Platon et lesclavage. REG 83: 2637.duBois, P. 2003. Slaves and Other Objects. Chicago.Dusanic, S. 1993. Phaedos Enslavement and Liberation. ICS 18: 8397.



Edelstein, E. J., and L. Edelstein. 1945. Asclepius: A Collection and Interpretation ofthe Testimonies. Vol. I. Baltimore.

Ferrari, G. R. F. 2007. The Three-Part Soul. In G. R. F. Ferrari, ed., The CambridgeCompanion to Platos Republic, 165201. Cambridge.

Fisher, N. 2001 [1993]. Slavery in Classical Greece. London.. 2006. Citizens, Foreigners and Slaves in Greek Society. In K. H. Kinzl, ed.,

A Companion to the Classical Greek World, 32749. Malden, Mass.. 2008. Independent Slaves in Classical Athens and the Ideology of Slavery.

In C. Katsari and E. Dal Lago, eds., From Captivity to Freedom, 12146. Leicester.Foucart, G. 1896. De libertorum conditione apud Athenienses. Paris.Garlan, Y. 1987. War, Piracy and Slavery in the Greek World. Trans. M.-J. Roy. In

M. I. Finley, ed., Classical Slavery, 927. London.. 1988. Slavery in Ancient Greece. Trans. J. Lloyd. Ithaca.

Garnsey, P. 1996. Ideas of Slavery from Aristotle to Augustine. Cambridge.Gonzales, A., ed. 2008. La fin du statut servile? (Affranchissement, liberation, aboli-

tion): Hommage a` Jacques Annequin. 2 vols. Besanon.Gottschalk, H. B. 1972. Notes on the Wills of the Peripatetic Scholarchs. Hermes 100:

31442.Hansen, M. H. 2010. Democratic Freedom and the Concept of Freedom in Plato and

Aristotle. GRBS 50: 127.Herman, G. 2007. Rituals of Evasion in the Greek World. In G. Herman and I.

Shatzman, eds., Greeks Between East and West: Essays in Greek Literature andHistory in Memory of David Asheri, 13659. Jerusalem.

Hopkins, K. 1978. Conquerors and Slaves. Cambridge.Hunt, P. 1998. Slaves, Warfare and Ideology in the Greek Historians. Cambridge.

. 2001. The Slaves and Generals of Arginusae. AJP 122: 35980.

. 2011. Slaves in Greek Literary Culture. In K. Bradley and P. Cartledge, eds.,The Cambridge World History of Slavery, 2247. Cambridge.

Just, R. 1985. Freedom, Slavery and the Female Psyche. History of Political Thought6: 16988.

Kamen, D. 2009. Servile Invective in Classical Athens. SCI 28: 4356.. 2012. Manumission, Social Rebirth, and Healing Gods in Ancient Greece. In

D. Geary and S. Hodkinson, eds., Slaves and Religions in Graeco-Roman Antiquityand Modern Brazil, 17494. Newcastle upon Tyne.

Klaenbach, G. 1966. Griechische Epigraphik. Studienhefte zur Altertumswissenschaft6. Gottingen.

Klees, H. 1975. Herren und Sklaven. Forschungen zur antiken Sklaverei 6. Wiesbaden.Kockelmann, H. 2008. Praising the Goddess: A Comparative and Annotated Re-Edition

of Six Demotic Hymns and Praises Addressed to Isis. Berlin.Kopyto, I. 1986. The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization as Process.

In A. Appadurai, ed., The Social Life of Things, 6491. Cambridge.Koschaker, P. 1931. U ber einige griechische Rechtsurkunden aus den ostlichen Randge-

bieten des Hellenismus, mit Beitragen zum Eigentums und Pfandbegriff nachgriechischen und orientalischen Rechten. Abhandlungen der Philologischen-histor-ischen Klasse der Sachsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 42. Leipzig.

Kranzlein, A. 1980. Bemerkungen zu Form der delphischen Freilassungen. RIDA 27:8191.



Kurke, L. 2011. Aesopic Conversations: Popular Tradition, Cultural Dialogue, and theInvention of Greek Prose. Princeton.

Lako, G., and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago.Lauer, S. 1979. Die Bergwerkssklaven von Laureion. Weisbaden.Leimbach, R. 2008. Was hat Asklepios fur Sokrates getan? Hermes 136: 27592.Lewis, D. M. 1959. Attic Manumissions. Hesperia 28: 20838.

. 1968. Dedications of Phialai at Athens. Hesperia 37: 36880.Liddel, P. 2007. Civic Obligation and Individual Liberty in Ancient Athens. Oxford.Loraux, N. 1989. Therefore, Socrates is Immortal. Trans. J. Lloyd. In M. Feher, R.

Naddaf, and N. Tazi, eds., Fragments for a History of the Human Body, 1345. NewYork.

Mactoux, M.-M. 1981. Lesclavage comme metaphore: Douleuo chez les orateursattiques. Index 10: 2042.

. 2008. Regards sur la proclamation de laranchissement au theatre a` Athe`nes.In Gonzales 2008, vol. II, 43751. Besanon.

McQueen, E. I., and C. J. Rowe. 1989. Phaedo, Socrates, and the Chronology of theSpartan War with Elis. Methexis 2: 118.

Meyer, E. A. 2010. Metics and the Athenian Phialai-Inscriptions: A Study in AthenianEpigraphy and Law. Historia Einzelschriften Bd. 208. Wiesbaden.

Millett, P. 2007. Aristotle and Slavery in Athens. G& R 54: 178209.Morrow, G. R. 1939. Plato and Greek Slavery. Mind n.s. 48: 186201.Most, G. W. 1993. A Cock for Asclepius. CQ 43: 96111.Mulliez, D. 1992. Les actes daranchissement delphiques. Cahiers du Centre G.

Glotz 3: 3144.. Forthcoming. Corpus des Inscriptions de Delphes. Tome V: Recherches sur les

actes daffranchissement delphiques. Paris.Ober, J. 2005 [2000]. Living Freely as a Slave of the Law: Notes on Why Sokrates

Lives in Athens. In J. Ober, Athenian Legacies: Essays on the Politics of GoingOn Together, 15770. Princeton.

Osborne, R. 1995. The Economics and Politics of Slavery at Athens. In A. Powell, ed.,The Greek World, 2743. London.

. 2000. Religion, Imperial Politics, and the Oering of Freedom to Slaves. InV. Hunter and J. Edmondson, eds., Law and Social Status in Classical Athens, 7592.Oxford.

Patterson, O. 1982. Slavery and Social Death: A Comparative Study. Cambridge, Mass.. 1991. Freedom. Volume 1: Freedom in the Making of Western Culture. New

York.Pohlenz, M. 1966. Freedom in Greek Life and Thought: The History of an Ideal. Trans.

C. Lofmark. Dordrecht.Pringsheim, F. 1950. The Greek Law of Sale. Weimar.Radle, H. 1969. Untersuchungen zum griechischen Freilassungswesen. Diss. Munich.

. 1971. Freilassung von Sklaven im Theater (Inschriftliche Zeugnisse). RIDA18: 36164.

. 1972. Platons Freigelassenengesetze als Ausdruck attischer Standespolitik des4. Jahrhunderts. Gymnasium 79: 30513.

Rensch, W. 1908. De manumissionum titulis apud Thessalos. Diss. Halle.Riginos, A. S. 1976. Platonica: The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of

Plato. Leiden.



Rowe, C. J., ed. 2001. Plato Phaedo. Cambridge.Rutherford, I. 2001. Pindars Paeans: A Reading of the Fragments with a Survey of the

Genre. Oxford.Samons, L. J., II. 2000. Empire of the Owl: Athenian Imperial Finance. Historia

Einzelschriften 142. Stuttgart.Samuel, A. E. 1965. The Role of Paramone Clauses in Ancient Documents. JJP 15:

221311.Schauer, M., and S. Merkle. 1992. A sop und Sokrates. In N. Holzberg, ed., Der

A sop-Roman: Motivgeschichte und Erzahlstruktur, 8596. Tubingen.Sokolowski, F. 1954. The Real Meaning of Sacral Manumission. HTR 47: 17381.Sollenberger, M. 1992. The Lives of the Peripatetics: An Analysis of the Contents and

Structure of Diogenes Laertius Vitae Philosophorum Book 5. ANRW II 36.6:3793879.

Tamiolaki, M. 2008. La liberation et la citoyennete des esclaves aux Arginuses: Plateensou Atheniens? Un vers controverse dAristophane (Gren. 694) et lideologie de lasociete athenienne. In Gonzales 2008, vol. I, 5363. Besanon.

. 2010. Liberte et esclavage chez les historiens grecs classiques. Paris.Todd, S. C. 1995. The Shape of Athenian Law. Oxford.Vlastos, G. 1981 [1941]. Slavery in Platos Thought. In G. Vlastos, Platonic Studies,

14763. Princeton.. 1981 [1968]. Does Slavery Exist in Platos Republic? Ibid., 14046. Prince-

ton.Westermann, W. L. 1946. Two Studies in Athenian Manumission. JNES 5: 92104.

. 1955. The Slave Systems of Greek and Roman Antiquity. Philadelphia.Wickkiser, B. L. 2008. Asklepios, Medicine, and the Politics of Healing in Fifth-Century

Greece: Between Craft and Cult. Baltimore.Wilson, E. 2007. The Death of Socrates: Hero, Villain, Chatterbox, Saint. London.Zelnick-Abramovitz, R. 2005. Not Wholly Free: The Concept of Manumission and the

Status of Manumitted Slaves in the Ancient Greek World. Mnemosyne Suppl. 266.Leiden.

. 2009. Freed Slaves, Their Status and State Control in Ancient Greece. Eu-ropean Review of History: Revue europeenne dhistoire 16: 30318.


13.32.1.78

Documents

manumission of socrates

platos use of manumission

healing socrates

socrates oers

metaphorical manumission

modes of manumission

bad slavery

jstor terms