Labour one: slay the Nemean lion

A little over a week ago, I introduced a new series for the blog: a short series about the labours of Hēraklēs. In that post, I described the life of Hēraklēs up until the point where he set out to complete the tasks. Today, I'm taking you through the first of twelve labours: Hēraklēs' challenge to slay the Nemean lion.

The Leon Nemeios (Λεον Νεμειος), or Nemean lion has been described with a large variety of parents. Selene is mentioned by Aelian and Seneca, amongst others, but one of the drakons is also possible, especially Echidna. Diodorus Siculus, in his Library of History describes the lion so: 

"This was a beast of enormous size, which could not be wounded by iron or bronze or stone and required the compulsion of the human hand for his subduing. It passed the larger part of its time between Mycenae and Nemea, in the neighbourhood of a mountain which was called Tretus from a peculiarity which it possessed; for it had a cleft at its base which extended clean through it and in which the beast was accustomed to lurk." [4.11.3]

As the lion was terrorizing the area surrounding the mountain, Eurystheus must have seen in the lion a worthy opponent of  Hēraklēs, whose tales of bravery and brute strength has proceeded him. He ordered the hero to return with its skin. In the words of Apollodorus:

"When Hercules heard that, he went to Tiryns and did as he was bid by Eurystheus. First, Eurystheus ordered him to bring the skin of the Nemean lion; now that was an invulnerable beast begotten by Typhon. On his way to attack the lion he came to Cleonae and lodged at the house of a day-laborer, Molorchus; and when his host would have offered a victim in sacrifice, Hercules told him to wait for thirty days, and then, if he had returned safe from the hunt, to sacrifice to Saviour Zeus, but if he were dead, to sacrifice to him as to a hero." [2.5.1.]

And so, Hēraklēs went to the cave of the lion after picking up a bow and quiver of arrows, because he was unaware he would not be able to harm the creature with mortal weapons. What comes after is undoubtedly best said by Theocretus in the third century BC. In his 'Idylls', he has Hēraklēs explain his victory himself:

"Now this did Eurystheus make my very first task; he charged me to slay that direful beast. So I took with me my supple bow and a good quiverful of arrows, and in the other hand a stout cudgel, made, without peeling or pithing, of a shady wild-olive which myself had found under holy Helicon and torn up whole and complete with all her branching roots; and so forth and made for those parts where the lion was. Whither when I was come, I took and tipped my string, and straightway notched a bearer of pain and grief, and fell a-looking this way and that way after the pestilent monster, if so be I might espy him ere he should espy me. ‘Twas midday now, yet could I nowhere mark his track nor hear his roaring; neither was there any man set over a plough-team and the toil of the seed-furrow that I could see and ask of him, seeing pale wan fear kept every man at the farmstead. Howbeit, I never gave over to search the leafy uplands till I should behold him and put my strength speedily to the test.

 

Now towards evening he came his ways unto his den full fed both of flesh and gore, his tangled mane, his grim visage and all his chest spattered with blood, and his tongue licking his chaps. To waylay him I hid myself quickly in a brake beside the woody path, and when he came near let fly at his left flank. But it availed me not; the barbèd shaft could not pass the flesh, but glanced and fell on the fresh green sward. Astonished, the beast lift suddenly up his gory head, and looked about him and about, opening his mouth and showing his gluttonous teeth; whereupon I sped another shaft from the string (for I took it ill that the fist had left my hand to no purpose), and smote him clean in the middle of the chest where the lungs do lie. But nay; not even so was the hide of him to be pierced by the sore grievous arrow; there it fell vain and frustrate at his feet.

 

At this I waxed exceedingly distempered and made to draw for the third time. But, ere that, the ravening beast rolled around his eyes and beheld me, and lashing all his tail about his hinder parts bethought him quickly of battle. Now was his neck brimming with ire, his tawny tresses an-end for wrath, his chine arched like a bow, as he gathered him up all together unto flank and loin. Then even as, when a wainwright, cunning man, takes the seasoned wild-fig boughs he hath warmed at the fire and bends them into wheels for an axled chariot, the thin-ringed figwood escapes at the bending from his grasp and leaps at one bound afar, even so did that direful lion from a great way off spring upon me, panting to be at my flesh. Then it was that with the one hand I thrust before me the cloak from my shoulders folded about my bunched arrows, and with the other lift my good sound staff above my head and down with it on his crown, and lo! my hard wild-olive was broke clean in twain on the mere shaggy pate of that unvanquishable beast. Yes as for him, or ever he could reach me he was fallen from the midst of his spring, and so stood with trembling feet and wagging head, his two eyes being covered in darkness because the brains were all-to-shaken in the skull of him.

 

Perceiving now that he was all abroad with the pain and grief of it, ere he might recover his wits I cast my bow and my broidered quiver upon the ground and let drive at the nape of that massy neck. Then from the rear, lest he should tear me with his talons, I gat my arm about his throat, and treading his hind-paws hard into the ground for to keep the legs of them from my sides, held on with might and main till at length I could rear him backward by the foreleg, and vasty Hades received his spirit.

That done, I fell a-pondering how I might flay me off the dead beast’s shag-neckèd skin. ‘What a task!’ thought I; for there was no cutting that, neither with wood nor with stone nor yet with iron. At that moment one of the Immortals did mind me I should cut up the lion’s skin with the lion’s talons. So I to it, and had him flayed in a trice, and cast the skin about me for a defense against the havoc of gashing war. Such, good friend, was the slaying of the Lion of Nemea, that had brought so much and sore trouble both upon man and beast.” [204-280]
 

There are other versions, mostly those where Hēraklēs does not fight the lion outside, but instead pursues the beast into his den, having blocked the other end of it so the lion cannot escape. In the dark, he hits the lion over the head, and then proceeds to strangle it. Depending on the author, Hēraklēs looses a finger in the struggle. Polemy Hephaestion, for example, speaks of the finger in his New Histories 2:

"...Heracles, after the Nemean lion had bitten off one of his fingers had only nine and that there exists a tomb erected for this detached finger; other authors say that he lost his finger following a blow by a dart of a stingray and one can see at Sparta a stone lion erected on the tomb of the finger and which is the symbol of the power of the hero.  It is since then that stone lions have likewise been erected on the tombs of other important people; other authors give different explications of the lion statues."

In my introductory post, I spoke of the first lion who was vanquished by Hēraklēs, the lion at Kithairon, whom Hēraklēs is said to have skinned as well, and whose skin he wore as a cloak. Which famous lion skin cloak Hēraklēs wear in most of the art he is depicted on is unclear, but the properties of the hide of the Nemean lion do make it likely he swapped out the cloaks after cutting the pelt off of the lion with the help of Athena. In some versions of the myth, however, he does no skin the beast, but takes it to Eurysteus in one piece. Apollodorus:

"And when the lion took refuge in a cave with two mouths, Hercules built up the one entrance and came in upon the beast through the other, and putting his arm round its neck held it tight till he had choked it; so laying it on his shoulders he carried it to Cleonae. And finding Molorchus on the last of the thirty days about to sacrifice the victim to him as to a dead man, he sacrificed to Saviour Zeus and brought the lion to Mycenae. Amazed at his manhood, Eurystheus forbade him thenceforth to enter the city, but ordered him to exhibit the fruits of his labours before the gates. They say, too, that in his fear he had a bronze jar made for himself to hide in under the earth, and that he sent his commands for the labours through a herald, Copreus, son of Pelops the Elean. This Copreus had killed Iphitus and fled to Mycenae, where he was purified by Eurystheus and took up his abode."  [2.5.1.]

And so, Hēraklēs vanquishes the lion--in one way or another--and completes the first of what he then thinks will be ten labours. Eurystheus warns him, however, that the labours will only become harder as time passes. For his next labour, he will need to keep all of his wits about him, as he is to slay the nine-headed Lernaean Hydra.

Image source: talariaenterprises.com

PBP: Jury reformations of Solon

Those who visit this blog on a regular basis know that I'm a fan of Solon and his reformations of the political landscape of Athens in the sixth century BC. I wrote about some of his reforms a little while ago. Solon (Σόλων) was an Athenian statesman, lawmaker, and poet, who lived from 638 BC to 558 BC. He spent most of his adult life trying to legislate against political, economic, and moral decline in archaic Athens. His ideologies are often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy. Today, I want to discuss one of his most important reforms: the move from a judicial system where the Zeus-born kings decided the fate of the accused, to the basic foundations of democracy. I fully admit that I'm hanging this off of a 'J'-post, because 'J' is a hard letter for a Hellenist--no such letter in the Greek language--so expect the 'jury' part to be a somewhat loose interpretation.

I have written about the Zeus-born kings and the democracy in ancient Athens before, in separate Pagan Blog Posts. I suggest reading those posts before reading this one, but I'll add the highlights of those post below just in case, with links to these articles (mostly) so you know where to find more information on the terms.

Back in ancient Hellas, if you were a citizen--and especially one from an important family--you could trace your family line back to a Theos. For Athenians, this divine link was first through Gaea (autochthonous, αὐτός χθών, 'earth-born') and/or Athena (with links to Zeus), and then through Poseidon. The kings of Athens were legendary, mythological, even in the time of ancient Hellas. With the death of Codrus, this system came to an end and was replaced by a political system were the decadents of these kings became árchōntes.

The árchōntes did not rule as kings; where kings were sole rulers of the city state, archons ruled first in threes, then in nines, then in tens and their power did not extend to law-making. Indeed, the Athenians had a clear understanding of the difference between sovereign power and executive government, and they kept the two separate far more than any modern government. The system started with three árchōntes: the 'Archōn Epōnymos' (ἄρχων Ἐπώνυμος), the 'Polemarchos' (πολέμαρχος), and the 'Archōn Basileus' (Ἄρχων Βασιλεύς). Together, these three oversaw the tasks the ancient kings had carried alone.

Originally the árchōntes were chosen from the 'eupatridae'--those who were 'good fathered'--by elections every ten years, but after 508 BC the titles were held for only a single year. Other changes came in 487 BC, when the archonships became assigned by lot to any citizen. Before this assignment by lots, for which I have described the procedures here, there was another system in place for a while: Solon's system, which still operated by lot, but with a few more rules to placate the aristocracy.

When Solon came to power, he pushed a few very important changes through the system. As a statesman, Solon put principles before expediency. In a time when Athens was struggling under the burden of civil war, his reforms strove to bridge the gap between the rich an the poor. He cancelled all debts, and purchased the freedom of all slaves, allowing everyone to start with a clean slate. This caused a massive financial crisis, for which new reforms were necessary, including new trade ties, and an halt in the export of all foodstuffs but olive oil, of which there was plenty. Solon did not stop there, however. Once he was given full legislative powers, he abolished political distinctions of birth in politics. Instead, he created four new groups:

• Thetes, the lowest group, who paid no taxes, provided no equipment city state or its army, and who were not eligible to hold an office of any kind.
• Zeugitae, the second lowest group, who paid tax at the lowest rate, provided body armor to the Athenian army, and who were eligible to hold office.
• Hippeus, the second highest group, who paid higher taxes at the middle rate, provided their own war horse when they served in the army, and they were eligible for higher offices.
• Pentacosiomedimni, the top class of citizens, who paid the highest amount of taxes, and were eligible for all top positions of government in Athens. Archōntes were chosen from this class.

A person belonged to the first class if he could produce more than five hundred measures of goods, to the second class for more than three hundred, to the third class for more than two hundred, and everybody else belonged to the last class, the thetes. Members of the first three classes could hold offices such as those of the archons and the treasurers. The last class gathered at the assembly and could act as jury in court.

 

Especially the latter of the reforms created a system where the power was in the hands of the people, because instead of leaving justice to be administered by the aristocracy, Solon formed a 'boule' (βουλή), who met at the 'bouleterion'. The term comes from the ancient Greek word for 'citizens': bouleutai (βουλευταί). About a hundred years after these reforms took place, in 508 BC, the árchōntes Kleisthénês (Κλεισθένης) organized the citizens of Athens into ten tribes, but in Solons time, there were only four, and every Athenian belonged to one of them. It may have been that these tribes were originally small villages which came together to form the foundation of Athens, but this is pure speculation on my part. No evidence of this--or any other theory--survives. At any rate, in Kleisthénês' time, the boule was assembled from 50 men, chosen from each of the ten tribes of Athens, for a total of 500 men. Solon founded the boule with 400 men, one hundred from each of the four tribes, but only with members from the three most wealthy of classes. This council was responsible for processing  public matters before bringing them to the assembly, or 'ekklesia'.

 

In the ancient Athens after Solon and Kleisthénês, sovereign power was held by the ekklesia, and only by the ekklesia: they were the jurors of ancient Athens. The árchōntes didn't factor into lawmaking at all. Every citizen in ancient Hellas had the right to vote on new or changing laws and was thus required to be aware of them and have an opinion on them; a direct democracy. In fact, Solon introduced a controversial law punishing those who did not take part in public decisions on crucial matters, following the view that everybody should care about public issues. This law was overturned in later times, but there were still reminders of it in Athenian life afterwards, like the miltos. In Solon's time, however, the árchōntes did still have the power to act as judge in disputes, as they--and he kings before them--had always had. However, after Solon's reforms, anyone could appeal to the jury of the ekklesia if a decision of the árchōntes was not acceptable. Furthermore, one could seek justice for other persons who could not represent themselves, something that had not been possible before. 

 

When I say 'everyone' it is important to distinguish that there were quite a few people who were not entitled to serve on the ekklesia; women, for example, and children, but also métoikos--resident aliens--and slaves, because in no way did Solon's reforms end slavery; his reforms only bought the freedom of indentured citizens. Very roughly measured, about a quarter of the inhabitants of ancient Athens were eligible to vote.

Solon's reforms were substantial, and took a lot of power away from the aristocracy. They gave every free man the hope that they could hold office one day, if they worked hard to reach the upper class. For those without political aspirations, Solon's reforms provided judicial safety and a sense of power: no matter who you were, if you were an adult male citizen, your opinion counted, and you could influence the course of the city's political and social landscape. Obviously, Solon's reforms did not create a democracy, but they did lay the groundwork for further reforms, and they did so wisely, and with consent from the elite--at least for his lifetime.

Archaic Greek in a modern world

Some days I get reminded how little ancient or even modern Greek I know. I'm not the best with languages, and although I'd love to say I have a special Percy Jackson-esque ability to read ancient Greek without effort, I don't. My understanding of the ancient language is one I hope to increase in the coming years, and when I do, perhaps I could travel to Turkey for some practice.

This video, by the University of Cambridge, shows a bit of the journey of  Cambridge researcher Dr. Ioanna Sitaridou, as she travels to north-eastern Turkey, where an endangered Greek dialect which closely resembles ancient Hellenic is still spoken. The dialect, called Romeyka, is far more widespread than the tiny mountain villages of north-eastern Turkey, but because of the remote location of the towns, their version of the dialect was influenced far less by contact with other languages and dialects that the more widespread version of Romeyka. The discovery is labeled a linguistic treasure trove by researchers.

Because this is not my area of expertise at all, I'm going to copy/paste wiki for a bit of history on the Romeyka language:

"Pontic Greek (Greek: Ποντιακή διάλεκτος or Ποντιακά), is a form of the Greek language originally spoken in the Pontus area on the southern shores of the Black Sea, northeastern Anatolia, Eastern Turkish/Caucasus province of Kars, southern Georgia, and today mainly in northern Greece. Its speakers are referred to as Pontic Greeks or Pontian Greeks.

The linguistic lineage of Pontic Greek stems from Ionic Greek via Koine and Byzantine Greek and contains influences from Georgian, Russian, Turkish and to a lesser extent, Persian (via Ottoman Turkish) and various Caucasian languages. Pontic is most closely related to Cappadocian Greek, and the Greek spoken in Mariupolis (and formerly in Crimea, Ukraine) (see Mariupolitan Greek).

Historically the speakers of Pontic Greek called it Romeyka (Romeika, Greek: Ρωμαίικα), which, in a more general sense, is also a historical and colloquial term for the modern Greek language as a whole. The term "Pontic" originated in scholarly usage, but has been adopted as a mark of identity by Pontic Greeks living in Greece.

The inhabitants of the Of valley who had converted to Islam in the 17th century remained in Turkey and have partly retained the Pontic language until today. Their dialect, which forms part of the Trapezountiac subgroup, is called "Ophitic" by linguists, but speakers generally call it Romeyka. As few as 5,000 people speak this dialect. Estimations show however that the real number of the speakers must be considerably higher.

Ophitic has retained the infinitive, which is present in Ancient Greek but has been lost in other variants of Modern Greek; it has therefore been characterized as "archaic" (even in relation to other Pontic dialects) and as the living language that is closest to Ancient Greek. A very similar dialect is spoken by descendants of Christians from the Of valley now living in Greece in the village of Nea Trapezounta, Pieria, Central Macedonia), with about 400 speakers."

It's striking to me how different the pronunciation is between these speakers and, for example, the young man below, who is trained in ancient Greek (and Latin, Italian, Russian, Japanese, etc.).

I am sure dialect is part of the difference, but I think the biggest difference comes from years upon years of use. For the young man above, ancient Greek is a subject of study. For the men and women in the Turkish mountain villages, their language is their language; they were raised with it. Their version is a lot less 'clean'. I value this young man's recording, I love hearing the women in the other video speak. It sounds far more like the way the ancient Hellenes would have spoken with each other, although that opinion is, of course, subjective.

Drakones in ancient Hellas

Yesterday we spoke about the constellation Draco, or Drakon, which was said to represent two on ancient Hellas' dragons. I mentioned in that post that I would speak more of dragons tomorrow, so here we are. The dragons of ancient Hellas had very little--if anything--to do with the fantasy dragons we are so accustomed to now. The ancient Hellenes knew four types of dragon: the Drakones, the Ketea, the Khimaira and the Drakaenae.

The Drakones were named after the Greek 'drakein' and 'derkomai, meaning 'to see clearly' or 'gaze sharply'. These were guardians, usually of wells and springs, groves, Gods, or treasure. As guardians, they were usually equipped with sharp fangs, deadly poison and/or multiple heads. In essence, they were however seen as giant snakes which--and this is wholly a personal observation--makes sense when most protective and purifying Theoi were depicted as snakes.

Some examples of the Drakones are the Drakon Hesperios (Hesperian Drakon), who guarded the golden apples in the grove of the Hesperides; the Hydra, most famous of all mythological drakons, who had nine, regenerating, heads which grew back in pairs when cut off; and the Drakon Ismenios, who guarded the sacred spring of Ares near Thebes and was slain by Kadmos. The ancient Hellenes also believed that remote, unexplored corners of the earth housed a variety of Drakones, which could be found in Aethiopia, the hills and mountains of India, and in central Anatolia.

The second type were the Ketea, sea-monsters. These resembled snakes, again, but did no guard anything. These were destroyers, usually sent by the Gods in punishment. Cetus, the sea monster sent to ravage the coasts of Aethiopia after a prideful boast by Queen Cassiopeia. Cetus could only be appeased by sacrificing Androméda to it. According to the ancient Hellenes, the Ketea had real-life counterparts as well, in the deep Indian oceans, and in the form of the Scolopendra. Aelian, Hellenic natural historian from the second century AD describes them as follows in his 'On Animals':

"Now in the course of examining and investigating these subjects and what bears upon them, to the utmost limit, with all the zeal that I could command, I have ascertained that the Skolopendra is a Ketos (Sea-Monster), and of Sea-Monsters it is the biggest, and if cast up on the shore no one would have the courage to look at it. And those who are expert in marine matters say that they have seen them floating and that they extend the whole of their head above the sea, exposing hairs of immense length protruding from their nostrils, and the tail is flat and resembles that of a crayfish. And at times the rest of their body is to be seen floating on the surface, and its bulk is comparable to a full-sized trireme. And they swim with numerous feet in line on either side as though they were rowing themselves (though the expression is somewhat harsh) with tholepins hung alongside. So those who have experience in these matters say that the surge corresponds with a gentle murmur, and their statement convinces me." [13.23]

The third type of drakon was the Khimaira, a fire-breathing mythical beast whose form was a hybrid of lion, serpent and goat. Medieval artists used this creature as the template for the Dragon of Saint George, and this form became the link from ancient Hellas to modern D&D creature. The hero Bellerophon was commanded to slay it by King Iobates. He rode into battle against the beast on the back of the winged horse Pegasos and, driving a lead-tipped lance down the Khimaira's flaming throat, suffocated it. From Hómēros' Iliad:

 "On first deciphering the fatal message, he ordered Bellerephon to kill the monstrous Chimaera, spawned by gods and not men, that had a lion’s head, goat’s body and serpent’s tail, and breathed out deadly blasts of scorching fire. But Bellerephon slew her, guided by the gods." [VI:119-211]

The Drakaena were hybrids as well, usually with the upper body of a beautiful nymph, and the lower body of a drakon or sea-monster. Most often, these were parents to the above--a necessary evolutionary step. Famous examples include the Goddess Keto, who spawned the Hesperian Drakon, Ekhidna, who was married to the serpent-giant Typhôeus and spawned most of the dragons and monsters of myth, and Skilla, who did not spawn anyone, but was the she-dragon who haunted the Straits of Messina, snapping up sailors from ships--as Odysseus discovered.

These are the four types of drakones the ancient Hellenes identified, some mythological, some actually living in those days. Hopefully this will clear up the confusion of dragons in ancient Hellas and Hellenic myth once and for all.

Image source: Hydra, Cetus, Khimaira, Skilla.

Constellation Draco: the dragon

The constellation Draco (from the Greek Drakon, meaning dragon) is identified--funnily enough--with some dragons in Hellenic myth but not others. There are quite a few creatures, after all, who would qualify as a dragon in Hellenic myth. For a dragon or hydra not connected to the constellation, think of the one Kadmos vanquished, for example, or the one Apollon vanquished at Delphi, or even the dragon who guarded the Golden Fleece and was slain by Iásōn. In truth, only two dragons were associated with the myth in ancient times, most notably by Hyginus in his Astronomica: Drakon Hesperios, the Hesperian Dragon, and Drakon Gigantomakhios, the Gigantomachian Dragon.

The first of the myths associated with the constellation is the legend of the Drakon Hesperios (Δρακων Ἑσπεριος), who was slain by Hēraklēs during one of his Labours. I will tell the whole myth of the labour soon enough, but I will share what Hyginus wrote about this labour, and Hēraklēs' encounter with Ladôn (Λαδων), as the dragon was often called.

"This huge serpent is pointed out as lying between the two Bears. He is said to have guarded the golden apples of the Hesperides, and after Hercules killed him, to have been put by Juno [Hera] among the stars, because at her instigation Hercules set out for him. He is considered the usual watchman of the Gardens of Juno. Pherecydes says that when Jupiter [Zeus] wed Juno, Terra [Gaea] came, bearing branches with golden applies, and Juno, in admiration, asked Terra to plant them in her gardens near distant Mount Atlas. When Atlas’ daughters kept picking the apples from the trees, Juno is said to have placed this guardian there. Proof of this will be the form of Hercules above the dragon, as Eratosthenes shows, so that anyone may know that for this reason in particular it is called the dragon." [II.3]

The sole other dragon this myth is linked to is Drakon Gigantomakhios (Δρακων Γιγαντομαχιος), who rose up during the Gigantomachy. When the Olympians rose to power, they first fought the Titans during the Titanomachy. Vanquishing them, the Theoi thought They had won. Yet, there was one who sought revenge for the defeat of his father: Typhôeus, the most-feared son of Tartaros and Gaea. Some versions of the myth say that Typhôeus was actually the Drakon Gigantomakhios, or one of his offspring. Hyginus shares what happened to the dragon:

"Some also say this dragon was thrown at Minerva [Athena] by the Giants, when she fought them. Minerva, however, snatched its twisted form and threw it to the stars, and fixed it at the very pole of heaven. And so to this day it appears with twisted body, as if recently transported to the stars."

The constellation Draco is visible at latitudes between +90° and −15°, and best visible at 21:00 (9 p.m.) during the month of July. Tomorrow, we will talk a little more about the types of dragons in Hellenic myth, because I suddenly realized the association with medieval dragons is very easily made when reading 'dragon', but I assure you, the ancient Hellenes were unaccustomed to giant, fire breathing, lizards.

I've got myself an olive tree!

About a week ago, I asked my girlfriend's parents--who are avid fair goers and garden center visitors--if they would mind looking for an olive tree for me. I've been looking for one for a while but to no avail. Yesterday, they surprised me with a little tree that is absolutely adorable.

Olive trees were considered especially sacred in ancient Hellas, most notably in Athens, where the growth of an olive tree provided Athena victory over Poseidon in who would become the patron of the city. Olive tree branches and olive oil were used as gifts for the winners of athletic competitions, and many groves integrated the trees as well. It's a perfect symbol. and with the Panathenaia coming up in July, I really wanted to have a thriving olive tree in honor of Athena--and now I can!

Plato's cave analysis

Ask any college student who Plato is, and if they have heard of him at all, they will undoubtedly also know the 'cave theory'. The Allegory of the Cave--as it is better known as--was written by Hellenic philosopher Plato in his work The Republic to illustrate 'our nature in its education and want of education'.

In The Republic, Plato has his mentor Socrates describe a group of people who have been chained to a wall in a cave their whole lives. In front of them is a blank wall. The only thing these people have seen all their lives lived are shadows, projected onto the wall by a fire burning behind the people. Everyone and everything that passes between the fire and the people is projected upon the wall. As humans do, the people begin to ascribe forms to these shadows, even though they can not see--and do not know--what or whom has caused these shadows. As the walls echo back sound, the people think that it is actually the shadows that speak, not the people behind them. When the people are released and look around, they will be shocked, horrified, and blinded by the light. They will fear what they see and for them, the shadows will be truer than everything around them, as they are used to the shadows.

Plato saw in these people the philosopher's struggle to look beyond the obvious, and look deeper into the fabric of the world, despite pain, fear, and shock. In Plato's words:

"...the prison-house is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But, whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort; and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye fixed."

Many of us have heard this allegory in high school or college, but you've probably never heard it quite in the way Tim Wilson tells it in the following video, wherein he explains the entire analogy in great--and humorous--detail. If this theory was something you were struggling with, this video should fix that. You're welcome.

PS: I did not hear about this analogy in school, I heard it from a stoned friend while watching The Matrix. that movie, when you about it, is incredibly close to the allegory: Neo thinks he's living life, but in fact, he's trapped in a kind of shadow play. Once he yanked out violently, he is forced to learn about real life. After that, goes back in to free those still trapped inside. After that, he gets distracted, but that is besides the point. All of this to say that Plato's ideas are still very much relevant to this day.