“Such was the notion, Pheidolaοs, that we for our part held about Sokrates’ divine signal while he was alive and still hold now he is dead; we have scant use for those who account for it by chance remarks overheard or sneezes or the like. The story I had about it from Timarchos of Chaironeia, as it more resembles a myth or fiction than an argument, I had better perhaps leave untold.”
“Do no such thing,” said Theokritos, “but let us have it; for myths, too, despite the loose manner in which they do so, have a way of reaching the truth. But first tell us who this Timarchos was, as I do not recognize the name.”
“And little wonder, Theokritos,” said Simmias, “for he died very young, after asking Sokrates’ leave to be buried beside Lamprokles, Sokrates’ son, his friend and agefellow, who had died a few days before. Timarchos, then, in his desire to learn the nature of Sokrates’ sign, acted like the high-spirited young initiate in philosophy he was: consulting no one but Kebes and me, he descended into the crypt of Trophonios, first performing the rites that are customary at the oracle. He remained underground two nights and a day, and most people had already given up hope, and his family were lamenting him for dead, when he came up in the morning with a radiant countenance. He did obeisance to the god, and as soon as he had escaped the crowd, began to tell us of many wonders seen and heard.
“He said that on descending into the oracular crypt his first experience was of profound darkness; next, after a prayer, he lay a long time not clearly aware whether he was awake or dreaming. It did seem to him, however, that at the same moment he heard a crash and was struck on the head, and that the sutures parted and released his soul. As it withdrew and mingled joyfully with air that was translucent and pure, it felt in the first place that now, after long being cramped, it had again found relief, and was growing larger than before, spreading out like a sail; and next that it faintly caught the whir of something revolving overhead with a pleasant sound. When he lifted his eyes the earth was nowhere to be seen; but he saw islands illuminated by one another with soft fire, taking on now one colour, now another, like a dye, as the light kept varying with their mutations. […]
“After an interval someone he did not see addressed him: ‘Timarchos, what would you have me explain?’
“‘Everything,’ he answered; ‘for what is here that is not marvellous?’
“‘Nay,’ the voice replied, ‘in the higher regions we others have but little part, as they belong to gods; but you may, if you wish, inquire into the portion of Persephone, administered by ourselves; it is one of the four, and marked off by the course of the Styx.’ […]
“‘As the Styx draws near the souls cry out in terror, for many slip off and are carried away by Hades; others, whose cessation of birth falls out at the proper moment, swim up from below and are rescued by the Moon, the foul and unclean excepted. These the Moon, with lightning and a terrible roar, forbids to approach, and bewailing their lot they fall away and are borne downward again to another birth, as you see.’
“‘But I see nothing,’ said Timarchos; ‘only many stars trembling about the abyss, others sinking into it, and others again shooting up from below.’
“‘Then without knowing it,’ the being replied, ‘you see the daimons themselves. I will explain: every soul partakes of understanding; none is irrational or unintelligent. But the portion of the soul that mingles with flesh and passions suffers alteration and becomes in the pleasures and pains it undergoes irrational. […]
Now the part carried submerged in the body is called the soul, whereas the part left free from corruption is called by the multitude the understanding, who take it to be within themselves, as they take reflected objects to be in the mirrors that reflect them; but those who conceive the matter rightly call it a daimon, as being external. […]
“‘These souls indeed,’ the voice pursued, ‘are brought to their duty and made firm in it late and gradually; but from those other souls, which from their very beginning and birth are docile to the rein and obedient to their daimon, comes the race of diviners and of men inspired. Among such souls you have doubtless heard of that of Hermodoros of Klazomenai – how night and day it used to leave his body entirely and travel far and wide, returning after it had met with and witnessed many things said and done in remote places, until his wife betrayed him and his enemies found his body at home untenanted by his soul and burned it. The story as thus told is indeed not true: his soul did not leave his body, but gave its daimon free play by always yielding to it and slackening the tie, permitting it to move about and roam at will, so that the daimon could see and hear much that passed in the world outside and return with the report. The men who destroyed his body as he slept are still atoning for the deed in Tartarus. Of these matters,’ the voice said, ‘you will have better knowledge, young man, in the third month from now; for the present, depart.’
“When the voice ceased Timarchos desired to turn (he said) and see who the speaker was. But once more he felt a sharp pain in his head, as though it had been violently compressed, and he lost all recognition and awareness of what was going on about him; but he presently recovered and saw that he was lying in the crypt of Trophonios near the entrance, at the very spot where he had first laid himself down.
“Such then is the myth of Timarchos. When he had come to Athens and died in the third month, as the voice had foretold, we were amazed and told Sokrates the story, who censured us for recounting it when Timarchos was no longer alive, as he would have been glad to hear it from Timarchos himself and question him about it more closely.
“My statement is now complete, Theokritos, and you have the myth along with the argument.”
Author: Plutarch
Title of Work: Moralia: On Sokrates’ Divine Signal (or On the Sign of Socrates)
Location in Work: 21-23/589f-592f (with redactions)
Date of Work: c. 105 CE
Original Language: Greek (Attic)
Original Text:
“Ἡμῖν μέν, ὦ Φειδόλαε, καὶ ζῶντος Σωκράτους καὶ τεθνηκότος οὕτως ἐννοεῖν περὶ τοῦ δαιμονίου παρίσταται, τῶν κληδόνας ἢ πταρμοὺς ἤ τι τοιοῦτον παραγόντων ἄλλο καταφρονοῦσιν· ἃ δὲ Τιμάρχου τοῦ Χαιρωνέως ἠκούσαμεν ὑπὲρ τούτου διεξιόντος, οὐκ οἶδα μὴ μύθοις ὁμοιότερα καὶ πλάσμασιν ἢ λόγοις ὄντα σιωπᾶν ἄμεινον.”
“Μηδαμῶς,” εἶπεν ὁ Θεόκριτος, “ἀλλὰ δίελθε αὐτά· καὶ γὰρ εἰ μὴ λίαν ἀκριβῶς, ἀλλ᾿ ἔστιν ὅπῃ ψαύει τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ τὸ μυθῶδες. πρότερον δὲ τίς ἦν οὗτος ὁ Τίμαρχος φράσον· οὐ γὰρ ἔγνων τὸν ἄνθρωπον.”
“Εἰκότως γε,” εἶπεν ὁ Σιμμίας, “ὦ Θεόκριτε· νέος γὰρ ὢν κομιδῇ κατέστρεψε τὸν βίον καὶ Σωκράτους δεηθεὶς ταφῆναι παρὰ Λαμπροκλέα τὸν Σωκράτους υἱόν, ὀλίγαις πρότερον ἡμέραις αὐτοῦ τεθνηκότα, φίλον καὶ ἡλικιώτην γενόμενον. οὗτος οὖν ποθῶν γνῶναι τὸ Σωκράτους δαιμόνιον ἣν ἔχει δύναμιν, ἅτε δὴ νέος οὐκ ἀγεννὴς ἄρτι γεγευμένος φιλοσοφίας, ἐμοὶ καὶ Κέβητι κοινωσάμενος μόνοις εἰς Τροφωνίου κατῆλθε δράσας τὰ νομιζόμενα περὶ τὸ μαντεῖον. ἐμμείνας δὲ δύο νύκτας κάτω καὶ μίαν ἡμέραν, τῶν πολλῶν ἀπεγνωκότων αὐτὸν ἤδη καὶ τῶν οἰκείων ὀδυρομένων, πρωὶ μάλα φαιδρὸς ἀνῆλθε· προσκυνήσας δὲ τὸν θεόν, ὡς πρῶτον διέφυγε τὸν ὄχλον, διηγεῖτο ἡμῖν θαυμάσια πολλὰ καὶ ἰδεῖν καὶ ἀκοῦσαι.
“Ἔφη δὲ καταβὰς εἰς τὸ μαντεῖον περιτυχεῖν σκότῳ πολλῷ τὸ πρῶτον, εἶτα ἐπευξάμενος κεῖσθαι πολὺν χρόνον οὐ μάλα συμφρονῶν ἐναργῶς εἴτ᾿ ἐγρήγορεν εἴτε ὀνειροπολεῖ· πλὴν δόξαι γε τῆς κεφαλῆς ἅμα ψόφῳ προσπεσόντι πληγείσης τὰς ῥαφὰς διαστάσας μεθιέναι τὴν ψυχήν. ὡς δ᾿ ἀναχωροῦσα κατεμίγνυτο πρὸς ἀέρα διαυγῆ καὶ καθαρὸν ἀσμένη, πρῶτον μὲν ἀναπνεῦσαι τότε δοκεῖν διὰ χρόνου συχνοῦ, τεινομένην τέως, καὶ πλείονα γίνεσθαι τῆς πρότερον ὥσπερ ἱστίον ἐκπεταννυμένην, ἔπειτα κατακούειν ἀμαυρῶς ῥοίζου τινὸς ὑπὲρ κεφαλῆς περιελαυνομένου φωνὴν ἡδεῖαν ἱέντος. ἀναβλέψας δὲ τὴν μὲν γῆν οὐδαμοῦ καθορᾶν, νήσους δὲ λαμπομένας μαλακῷ πυρὶ κατ᾿ ἀλλήλων ἐξαμειβούσας ἄλλην ἄλλοτε χρόαν ὥσπερ βαφὴν ἀεὶ τῷ φωτὶ ποικιλλομένῳ κατὰ τὰς μεταβολάς. [...]
“Χρόνου δὲ προϊόντος εἰπεῖν τινα πρὸς αὐτὸν οὐχ ὁρώμενον· ‘ὦ Τίμαρχε, τί ποθεῖς πυθέσθαι;’
“Φράσαι δ᾿ αὐτὸν ὅτι ‘πάντα· τί γὰρ οὐ θαυμάσιον;’
“‘Ἀλλ᾿ ἡμῖν,’ φάναι, ‘τῶν ἄνω μέτεστι μικρόν· ἄλλων γὰρ θεῶν ἐκεῖνα· τὴν δὲ Φερσεφόνης μοῖραν, ἣν ἡμεῖς διέπομεν, τῶν τεττάρων μίαν οὖσαν ὡς ἡ Στὺξ ὁρίζει, βουλομένῳ σοι σκοπεῖν πάρεστιν.’ [...]
“‘Καὶ τῆς Στυγὸς ἐπιφερομένης αἱ ψυχαὶ βοῶσι δειμαίνουσαι· πολλὰς γὰρ ὁ Ἅιδης ἀφαρπάζει περιολισθανούσας, ἄλλας δ᾿ ἀνακομίζεται κάτωθεν ἡ σελήνη προσνηχομένας, αἷς εἰς καιρὸν ἡ τῆς γενέσεως τελευτὴ συνέπεσεν, πλὴν ὅσαι μιαραὶ καὶ ἀκάθαρτοι· ταύτας δ᾿, ἀστράπτουσα καὶ μυκωμένη φοβερόν, οὐκ ἐᾷ πελάζειν, ἀλλὰ θρηνοῦσαι τὸν ἑαυτῶν πότμον ἀποσφαλλόμεναι φέρονται κάτω πάλιν ἐπ᾿ ἄλλην γένεσιν, ὡς ὀρᾷς.’
“‘Ἀλλ᾿ οὐδὲν ὁρῶ,’ τὸν Τίμαρχον εἰπεῖν, ‘ἢ πολλοὺς ἀστέρας περὶ τὸ χάσμα παλλομένους, ἑτέρους δὲ καταδυομένους εἰς αὐτό, τοὺς δὲ ᾄττοντας αὖ κάτωθεν.’
“‘Αὐτοὺς ἄρα,’ φάναι, ‘τοὺς δαίμονας ὁρῶν ἀγνοεῖς. ἔχει γὰρ ὧδε· ψυχὴ πᾶσα νοῦ μετέσχεν, ἄλογος δὲ καὶ ἄνους οὐκ ἔστιν, ἀλλ᾿ ὅσον ἂν αὐτῆς σαρκὶ μιχθῇ καὶ πάθεσιν, ἀλλοιούμενον τρέπεται καθ᾿ ἡδονὰς καὶ ἀλγηδόνας εἰς τὸ ἄλογον. [...]
τὸ μὲν οὖν ὑποβρύχιον ἐν τῷ σώματι φερόμενον ψυχὴ λέγεται· τὸ δὲ φθορᾶς λειφθὲν οἱ πολλοὶ νοῦν καλοῦντες ἐντὸς εἶναι νομίζουσιν αὑτῶν, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς ἐσόπτροις τὰ φαινόμενα κατ᾿ ἀνταύγειαν· οἱ δὲ ὀρθῶς ὑπονοοῦντες ὡς ἐκτὸς ὄντα δαίμονα προσαγορεύουσι. [...]
“‘Αὗται μὲν οὖν ὀψέ ποτε καὶ βραδέως ἄγονται καὶ καθίστανται πρὸς τὸ δέον. ἐκ δὲ τῶν εὐηνίων ἐκείνων καὶ κατηκόων εὐθὺς ἐξ ἀρχῆς καὶ γενέσεως τοῦ οἰκείου δαίμονος καὶ τὸ μαντικόν ἐστι καὶ θεοκλυτούμενον γένος· ὧν τὴν Ἑρμοδώρου τοῦ Κλαζομενίου ψυχὴν ἀκήκοας δήπουθεν ὡς ἀπολείπουσα παντάπασι τὸ σῶμα νύκτωρ καὶ μεθ᾿ ἡμέραν ἐπλανᾶτο πολὺν τόπον, εἶτ᾿ αὖθις ἐπανῄει πολλοῖς τῶν μακρὰν λεγομένων καὶ πραττομένων ἐντυχοῦσα καὶ παραγενομένη, μέχρι οὗ τὸ σῶμα, τῆς γυναικὸς προδούσης, λαβόντες οἱ ἐχθροὶ ψυχῆς ἔρημον οἴκοι κατέπρησαν. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἀληθές ἐστιν· οὐ γὰρ ἐξέβαινεν ἡ ψυχὴ τοῦ σώματος, ὑπείκουσα δὲ ἀεὶ καὶ χαλῶσα τῷ δαίμονι τὸν σύνδεσμον ἐδίδου περιδρομὴν καὶ περιφοίτησιν, ὥστε πολλὰ συνορῶντα καὶ κατακούοντα τῶν ἐκτὸς εἰσαγγέλλειν. οἱ δὲ ἀφανίσαντες τὸ σῶμα κοιμωμένου μέχρι νῦν δίκην ἐν τῷ Ταρτάρῳ τίνουσι. ταῦτα δὲ εἴσῃ,’ φάναι, ‘σαφέστερον, ὦ νεανία, τρίτῳ μηνί· νῦν δ᾿ ἄπιθι.’
“Παυσαμένης δὲ τῆς φωνῆς βούλεσθαι μὲν αὑτὸν ὁ Τίμαρχος ἔφη θεάσασθαι περιστρέφοντα τίς ὁ φθεγγόμενος εἴη· σφόδρα δὲ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὖθις ἀλγήσας, καθάπερ βίᾳ συμπιεσθεῖσαν, οὐδὲν ἔτι γινώσκειν οὐδ᾿ αἰσθάνεσθαι τῶν καθ᾿ ἑαυτόν· εἶτα μέντοι μετὰ μικρὸν ἀνενεγκὼν ὁρᾶν αὑτὸν ἐν Τροφωνίου παρὰ τὴν εἴσοδον, οὗπερ ἐξ ἀρχῆς κατεκλίθη, κείμενον.
“Ὁ μὲν οὖν Τιμάρχου μῦθος οὗτος· ἐπεὶ δὲ ἐλθὼν Ἀθήναζε τρίτῳ μηνὶ κατὰ τὴν γενομένην φωνὴν ἐτελεύτησεν, ἡμεῖς δὲ Σωκράτει θαυμάζοντες ἀπηγγέλλομεν, ἐμέμψατο Σωκράτης ἡμᾶς ὅτι μὴ ζῶντος ἔτι τοῦ Τιμάρχου διήλθομεν· αὐτοῦ γὰρ ἂν ἡδέως ἐκείνου πυθέσθαι καὶ προσανακρῖναι σαφέστερον.
“Ἀπέχεις, ὦ Θεόκριτε, μετὰ τοῦ λόγου τὸν μῦθον.
Reference Edition: De Lacy and Einarson, Moralia, v. 7, 372-509
Translation Source: De Lacy and Einarson, Moralia, v. 7, 458-476
Source of Date of Work: Jones, Chronology of Plutarch
Commentary:
This story helps demonstrate the widespread belief among ancient Greeks that souls can become untethered from the body during catalepsy and have visions that reveal truths about the universe that are not normally accessible. This is a story of the most common type of near-death vision, relating to the afterlife.
Trophonios was a Boiotian son of Apollo of the heroic age who killed his brother to conceal their crime and was punished by being swallowed by the earth, but was later discovered in a subterranean cave, which became a famous oracular site (Pausanias 9.37.4-8 and 9.39.3-9.40.3). This story of a visit to that cave is part of a larger philosophical dialogue set in the first half of the 4th century BCE among a group that includes acquaintances of Sokrates. One of the main questions discussed is Sokrates’ reference in Plato’s Phaidros and other dialogues to his ‘divine signal’ (δαιμόνιον σημεῖον, traditionally misleadingly translated as ‘sign’), which is a kind of guardian spirit or divinely controlled moral conscience. The topic relates to Plato’s adaptation of the daimon, traditionally a minor divinity or spirit, into a personal spirit that couples with a soul before embodiment, inhabits the body together with the soul, and to some extent guides the soul through life, as referenced in this story and in Plato’s near-death story of Er. Sokrates’ divine signal is also mentioned by Clement of Alexandria.
In line with that doctrine, Plutarch gives a new interpretation of the story of Hermodotimos of Klazomenai, called here ‘Hermodoros,’ who was traditionally believed to be able to untether his soul from his body, much like Aristeas. But in Plutarch’s retelling, Hermotimos was actually loosening the tethers of his daimon and sending it out on fact-finding missions. Hermotimos was mentioned together with Aristeas in texts by Apollonios the paradoxographer, Pliny the Elder and Origen (citing Celsus). A mention of Hermotimos together with Aristeas by Proklos of Lykia and a mention of Aithalides together with Aristeas by Tzetzes seem to both refer to another legend that Aithalides and Hermotimos were among the previous incarnations of Pythagoras (told by Diogenes of Laertios, 8.1.4-5). Hermotimos was also mentioned much earlier by Aristotle (Metaphysics, 984b) as a philosopher predating Anaxagoras, who lived in the 5th century BCE.
Plutarch tells another story of a near-death vision in On the Delays of the Divine Vengeance, 22-33/563d-568 (also in De Lacy and Einarson, Moralia, v. 7).