Humanitext Reader

Plutarch · On the Eating of Flesh (II) §3-4

Animal Perception and the Habit of Slaughter

Passage 2 of 3 · Greek

Summary

The author criticizes doctrines allowing cannibalism (such as those of the Stoics) as barbaric, contrasting them with the fireless diet and justice of Pythagoras and Empedocles, while emphasizing that animals possess perception. He then explains how humans gradually became desensitized to killing—moving from wild beasts to domestic animals and eventually to human warfare—and argues that even without proving reincarnation, the physical and moral corruption caused by meat-eating remains clear.

§3ποῖον οὖν οὐ πολυτελὲς δεῖπνον, εἰς ὃ οὐ θανατοῦταί τι ἔμψυχον;
What dinner, then, is not expensive, in which some living thing is not put to death?
μικρὸν ἀνάλωμα ἡγούμεθα ψυχήν;
Do we consider a soul to be a small expense?
οὔπω λέγω τάχα μητρὸς ἢ πατρὸς ἢ φίλου τινὸς ἢ παιδός, ὡς ἔλεγεν Ἐμπεδοκλῆς· ἀλλʼ αἰσθήσεώς γε μετέχουσαν, ὄψεως ἀκοῆς, φαντασίας συνέσεως, ἣν ἐπὶ κτήσει τοῦ οἰκείου καὶ φυγῇ τάλλοτρίου παρὰ τῆς φύσεως ἕκαστον εἴληχε.
I do not yet speak, perhaps, of a mother or a father or some friend or a child, as Empedocles used to say; but at least of one participating in perception—sight, hearing, imagination, understanding—which each has received from nature for the acquisition of what is akin and the avoidance of what is alien.
σκόπει δʼ ἡμᾶς πότεροι βέλτιον ἐξημεροῦσι τῶν φιλοσόφων, οἱ καὶ τέκνα καὶ φίλους καὶ πατέρας καὶ γυναῖκας ἐσθίειν κελεύοντες ὡς ἀποθανόντας, ἢ Πυθαγόρας καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλῆς ἐθίζοντες εἶναι καὶ πρὸς· τὰ ἄλλα μέρη δικαίους.
And consider which of the philosophers civilize us better: those who bid us to eat even children and friends and fathers and wives when they have died, or Pythagoras and Empedocles who accustom us to be just even toward the other parts.
σὺ μὲν καταγελᾷς τοῦ τὸ πρόβατον μὴ ἐσθίοντος· ἀλλʼ ἡμεῖς γε, φήσουσι, θεασάμενοι τοῦ πατρὸς τεθνηκότος ἢ τῆς μητρὸς ἀποτεμόντα μερίδας καὶ τῶν φίλων ἀποπεμπόμενον τοῖς μὴ παροῦσι, τοὺς δὲ παρόντας καλοῦντα καὶ παρατιθέντα τῶν σαρκῶν ἀφειδῶς, μή τι γελάσωμεν;
You indeed laugh at the man who does not eat sheep; but we indeed, they will say, if we should see someone cutting off portions from his deceased father or mother and sending them to absent friends, and calling those present and serving of the flesh unsparingly, should we not laugh at all?
ἀλλὰ καὶ νῦν ἴσως ἁμαρτάνομεν, ὅταν ἁψώμεθα τῶν βιβλίων τούτων, μὴ καθαιρόμενοι χεῖρας καὶ ὄψεις καὶ πόδας καὶ ἀκοάς, εἰ μὴ νὴ Δία ἐκείνων καθαρμὸς ἐστι τὸ περὶ τούτων διαλέγεσθαι ποτίμῳ λόγῳ ὥς φησιν ὁ Πλάτων ἁλμυρὰν ἀκοὴν ἀποκλυζομένους.
But even now perhaps we sin when we touch these books, not purifying our hands and eyes and feet and hearings, unless, by Zeus, a purification of those organs is to discourse about them "with potable speech," as Plato says, washing away the briny hearing.
εἰ δὲ θείη τις τὰ βιβλία παρʼ ἄλληλα καὶ τοὺς λόγους, ἐκεῖνα μὲν Σκύθαις φιλοσοφεῖσθαι καὶ Σογδιανοῖς καὶ Μελαγχλαίνοις, περὶ ὧν Ἡρόδοτος ἱστορῶν ἀπιστεῖται τὰ δὲ Πυθαγόρου καὶ Ἐμπεδοκλέους δόγματα νόμοι τῶν παλαιῶν ἦσαν Ἑλλήνων καὶ αἱ ἄπυροι δίαιται.
And if someone should place the books and the doctrines side by side, those former ones indeed ought to be studied as philosophy by Scythians, Sogdians, and Melanchlaeni, concerning whom Herodotus is disbelieved as he narrates, while the doctrines of Pythagoras and Empedocles were the laws of the ancient Greeks, and their fireless diets.
ὅτι πρὸς τὰ ἄλογα ζῷα δίκαιον ἡμῖν οὐδὲν ἔστι.
That there is no justice between us and irrational animals.
§4τίνες οὖν ὕστερον τοῦτʼ ἔγνωσαν;
Who, then, later came to this view?
" οἳ πρῶτοι κακοεργὸν ἐχαλκεύσαντο μάχαιραν εἰνοδίην, πρῶτοι δὲ βοῶν ἐπάσαντʼ ἀροτήρων.
"They who first forged the evil-working sword of the highway, and first tasted of plowing oxen.
" οὕτω τοι καὶ οἱ τυραννοῦντες ἄρχουσι μιαιφονίας.
"Thus indeed do tyrants also begin their blood-guilt.
ὥσπερ γὰρ τὸ πρῶτον ἀπέκτειναν Ἀθήνησι τὸν κάκιστον τῶν συκοφαντῶν, ὃς ἐπιτήδειος προσηγορεύθη, καὶ δεύτερον ὁμοίως, καὶ τρίτον· εἶτʼ ἐκ τούτου συνήθεις γενόμενοι Νικήρατον περιεώρων ἀπολλύμενον τὸν Νικίου καὶ Θηραμένη τὸν στρατηγὸν καὶ Πολέμαρχον τὸν φιλόσοφον· οὕτω τὸ πρῶτον ἄγριόν τι ζῷον ἐβρώθη καὶ κακοῦργον, εἶτʼ ὄρνις τις ἢ ἰχθὺς εἵλκυστο καὶ γευσάμενον οὕτω καὶ προμελετῆσαν ἐν ἐκείνοις τὸ φονικὸν ἐπὶ βοῦν ἐργάτην ἦλθε καὶ τὸ κόσμιον πρόβατον καὶ τὸν οἰκουρὸν ἀλεκτρυόνα καὶ κατὰ μικρὸν οὕτω τὴν ἀπληστίαν στομώσαντες ἐπὶ σφαγὰς ἀνθρώπων καὶ πολέμους καὶ φόνους προῆλθον.
For just as at Athens they first put to death the worst of the sycophants, who was called "fitting," and a second in like manner, and a third; then, having become accustomed from this, they overlooked the destruction of Niceratus the son of Nicias, and Theramenes the general, and Polemarchus the philosopher; so at first some wild and harmful animal was eaten, then some bird or fish was dragged up, and thus, having tasted and practiced beforehand the murderous spirit upon those, it proceeded to the working ox, and the gentle sheep, and the house-guarding cock, and thus by degrees having steeled their greed, they advanced to the slaughters of men and wars and murders.
ἀλλʼ ἐὰν μὴ προσαποδείξῃ τις, ὅτι χρῶνται κοινοῖς αἱ ψυχαὶ σώμασιν ἐν ταῖς παλιγγενεσίαις καὶ τὸ νῦν λογικὸν αὖθις γίγνεται ἄλογον καὶ πάλιν ἥμερον τὸ νῦν ἄγριον, ἀλλάσσει δʼ ἡ φύσις ἅπαντα καὶ μετοικίζει "σαρκῶν ἀλλογνῶτι περιστέλλουσα χιτῶνι" ταῦτʼ οὐκ ἀποτρέπει τῶν ἀνῃρημένων τὸ ἀκόλαστον τὸ καὶ σώματι νόσους καὶ βαρύτητας ἐμποιεῖν καὶ ψυχὴν ἐπὶ πόλεμον ἀνομωτέρων τρεπομένην διαφθείρειν ὅταν ἐθισθῶμεν μὴ αἵματος ἄνευ καὶ φόνου μὴ ξένον ἑστιᾶν, μὴ γάμον ἑορτάζειν, μὴ φίλοις συγγίγνεσθαι.
But even if one does not further demonstrate that souls employ common bodies in their rebirths, and that what is now rational becomes again irrational, and again what is now wild becomes tame, and that nature changes and migrates everything, "clothing them in a strange garment of flesh," these things do not avert the wantonness regarding the slaughtered from producing diseases and heaviness in the body, and corrupting the soul as it turns toward a war of more lawless things, whenever we are accustomed not to entertain a guest, nor to celebrate a marriage, nor to associate with friends without blood and slaughter.

Notes

  1. 997eαἰσθήσεώς γε μετέχουσαν — A participle in the feminine accusative singular, modifying the preceding `ψυχήν`. It emphasizes that even without assuming the extreme view suggested by Empedocles that the animal's soul is that of a reincarnated relative, it is at least a soul that "participates in perception."
  2. 997fθεασάμενοι τοῦ πατρὸς τεθνηκότος ἢ τῆς μητρὸς ἀποτεμόντα μερίδας — The direct objects of the participle `θεασάμενοι` (when we see) are the accusative participles `ἀποτεμόντα`, `ἀποπεμπόμενον`, `καλοῦντα`, and `παρατιθέντα`. Although the genitive phrase `τοῦ πατρὸς τεθνηκότος ἢ τῆς μητρὸς` could be taken as a genitive absolute ("when the father or mother has died"), here it functions as a genitive of separation or partitive depending on `ἀποτεμόντα` ("cutting off portions from the deceased father or mother").
  3. 998aἐκεῖνα μὲν ... φιλοσοφεῖσθαι ... τὰ δὲ ... ἦσαν — A contrastive main clause structure led by the conditional clause `εἰ δὲ θείη τις` (if someone should place). The infinitive `φιλοσοφεῖσθαι` following `ἐκεῖνα μὲν` is used in indirect discourse, where a verb of necessity or judgment (such as `χρῆναι` or `φαίη ἄν`) is omitted. In contrast, `τὰ δὲ... ἦσαν` uses the past indicative to state a historical fact with contrastive emphasis.
  4. 998bγευσάμενον ... προμελετῆσαν ... τὸ φονικόν — The neuter singular participles `γευσάμενον` and `προμελετῆσαν` modify the subject neuter noun phrase `τὸ φονικόν` (the murderous spirit/disposition). This personifies the abstract concept, creating a metaphorical construction where the "murderous spirit" tasted and practiced beforehand upon wild animals.
  5. 998cἐὰν μὴ προσαποδείξῃ τις ... ταῦτʼ οὐκ ἀποτρέπει — The main clause responding to the concessive conditional clause `ἐὰν μὴ προσαποδείξῃ` (even if one does not further demonstrate). Here, `ταῦτα` (the lack of proof of reincarnation, or these arguments) is the subject of `ἀποτρέπει` (averts/prevents). The direct object is `τὸ ἀκόλαστον` (wantonness), and the following infinitives `τὸ ... ἐμποιεῖν ... καὶ ... διαφθείρειν` are appositive to it, explaining the specific harms of this wantonness.

Cite this passage

Plutarch, On the Eating of Flesh (II) §3-4. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg132.humanitext-grc2:3-4

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.