The primitive Republican., 1851-04-10
= 4

- OIlc Il0fllbs OF YloW IN which tho
& ,pof Socrates has always possessed an
he TEST, perhaps too sacred to be dweH upon
IN these pages, but to which Mr.. GrotessEi
cseHtation almost Of necessity invites the
thoughtful reader. We have always felt.
and he has made us feel more strongly than
ever, that, in studying the character and
life of Socrates, we are studying the most
lremarkabl lie moral phenomenon in tho ancient
world We are conscious of having climbed
the highest point Of the ascent Of heathen
Virtue and wisdom; we find ourselves in. a
lpresence which invests with an interest ap-
lproaehing to sublimity allAthat relates to IT,
We feel that here alone, or almost alone, in
the Greeian world, we are breathing aIl at
lnlosphere, not nlerelysmoral, but religious,
not merely religious it may be a strong ex-
preston, yet we are borne out by the author
lity of the earliest Fathers Of the Church, j,
not merely religious, but Christian, Diff
Icult as it was to escape from these associa-
fions under any circumstances, the language
Iof Mr.. Grote has now rendered it all but
| Impossible. The startling phrases which he
uses, as alone adequate to the occasion, are
dictated by the necessity of the case; and
when we are told that Socrates was "a cross
Examining missionary that tle spent his
life IN public apostolic dialectics that he
was habitually aetnated by shis persuasion
of a special religious mission, we are at once
carried forward from the age of Socrates
himself to that more sacred age, from which
these expressions are borrowed, and (which
alone We are enabled fully to appreciate and
recognize what Socrates was and did
OF those comparisons which have again
and again been instituted between the life
and death of the Athenian sage, and that
Divine life and death which admits gf no no
equal or parallel, it has indeed be-
said IF Christ were no mgr - M r ,oe, oo,,
tes, then soer2ttsss atss to miseonceiyc relations
Iplilrh are in fact incolnmensurable. Still
we cannot wonder that such comparisons
should have been suggested, and, IF viewed
Alright, there are few more remarkable Illus
trations of the reality of the Gospel history,
than the light whicli, by way of contrast or
| likeness, is thrown upon it by the highest
lexa4ple Of Greek antiquity Tt IS instruc-
| tive to observe that there alohc-on no low
er level before or since IN that climax ard
criisis Of the human Development of ancient
ffimes is to be found tic only career which,
at however remote a distance, suggests yile.
IIflcT III AFlcIlttSE EDE
1tion of tie One Life, which is the turning
point Of the history of the whole world.-
When we contemplate the contented poverty
i the self-dcyotion, the publicity, of the career
lof Socrates, we feel that ne can understand
better than before the outward aspect at least
fEof that Sacred presence which nloyed on tle
busy shores of the scasof tsalilec, and in th,
streets and courts Of Jerisalem. lien wt
Eread the last conversations of tie prisonei
lin the Athenian dungeon, orr thoughts al
Inost insensibly rise to,tlle parting discourse:
in the upper chamber ut Jerusalem, and wt
rcnenbcr with gratitude and revercntia
Iawe the uncertain the wayerfng gtht
dark fzatssre of the philosophie speculations
when contgast9d with the unbroken rcpos,
and confidence which pervades every Wora
4 Iof tie Divine assurances. Or Ito turn t.
sIanother side) whom We. are perplexed by tht
difficulty of reconciling the narrative of thc
three first Evangelists, with the altered ton,
Iof the fourth, tits atleast step towards ths
Isolution of that diifRcuity to remember tina
Itlereis here a parallel diversity of narratiy.
(which 50 far from destroying the Historical
truth Of the whole representation, has ratheI
lconfirned it; the Socrates of Xenopho1l i
! widely different from the Socrates of Plato
land yet no one has been tempted by that di
: yersity to doubt the substantial identy-=-th
: true charactcr-much less the historical cxis
tence of the master whom they both profes
Ito describe. Nor when we think Of thc tota
lsilence of Josephus, of other contenp porarJ
writers, respectieg the events which we nov
regard as the greatest in the history of man
i kind, IS it altogether irrelevant to reflect tha
ll for the whole thirty years Il hich E Ihueydide
lcomprises in his work, SocratesNsi vas Rot olil'
Lying, hut7acting a more public part and
for all the future history Of Greece, an IN
, comparably more important part than an.
: other Athcnian citizen; and yet that SO abI
and 50 tbou tful an observer as i Ihucs dide
Il has nexer once noticed him directly on indi
frcctly There is no stronger proof Of th
d weakness ef the argument from omission
! slespeeially in the case of ancient histor.
(which, unlike our own, contained within it
] range Of vision no more than was iinmedi
I ately before it foa tie saoSpcnt.
If ne descend frolq this higher ground I
: those lower but still lofty regions of Chris
tan history To which perhaps AIr, frote'
s. ! language more naturalls md ilrcslstabh
9 leass Us, the ilustra ions supplied by til
3 life Of tes are still more opposite mi
Instructive When NE are Teminded Of til
ggll<apostelie devotion Of Socrates, ne
6 I light seems to break on the character an
s career Of him from whose life that ezpre:
sion IS especially dcriy ed and the CLOWN
eusge ID Il lsiell Irs rote describes th
easeroy and the elltlinsissn af the Atlleilia
hi visionary enables lis toIealize With create
force than eyer the DIR sess, AZ kBoRqledp
q Iove uIlfei pncd Of tho 1aissi onara Of q Il