；　for　he　suffers　not　by　force　if　he　suffers；　force　comes　not　near　him；　neither　when　he　acts　does　he　act　by　force。　For　all　men　in　all　things　serve　him　of　their　own　free　will；　and　where　there　is　voluntary　agreement；　there；　as　the　laws　which　are　the　lords　of　the　city　say；　is　justice。　And　not　only　is　he　just　but　exceedingly　temperate；　for　Temperance　is　the　acknowledged　ruler　of　the　pleasures　and　desires；　and　no　pleasure　ever　masters　Love；　he　is　their　master　and　they　are　his　servants；　and　if　he　conquers　them　he　must　be　temperate　indeed。　As　to　courage；　even　the　God　of　War　is　no　match　for　him；　he　is　the　captive　and　Love　is　the　lord；　for　love；　the　love　of　Aphrodite；　masters　him；　as　the　tale　runs；　and　the　master　is　stronger　than　the　servant。　And　if　he　conquers　the　bravest　of　all　others；　he　must　be　himself　the　bravest。　　　Of　his　courage　and　justice　and　temperance　I　have　spoken；　but　I　have　yet　to　speak　of　his　wisdom…and　according　to　the　measure　of　my　ability　I　must　try　to　do　my　best。　In　the　first　place　he　is　a　poet　（and　here；　like　Eryximachus；　I　magnify　my　art）；　and　he　is　also　the　source　of　poesy　in　others；　which　he　could　not　be　if　he　were　not　himself　a　poet。　And　at　the　touch　of　him　every　one　becomes　a　poet；　even　though　he　had　no　music　in　him　before；　this　also　is　a　proof　that　Love　is　a　good　poet　and　accomplished　in　all　the　fine　arts；　for　no　one　can　give　to　another　that　which　he　has　not　himself；　or　teach　that　of　which　he　has　no　knowledge。　Who　will　deny　that　the　creation　of　the　animals　is　his　doing？　Are　they　not　all　the　works　his　wisdom；　born　and　begotten　of　him？　And　as　to　the　artists；　do　we　not　know　that　he　only　of　them　whom　love　inspires　has　the　light　of　fame？…he　whom　Love　touches　riot　walks　in　darkness。　The　arts　of　medicine　and　archery　and　divination　were　discovered　by　Apollo；　under　the　guidance　of　love　and　desire；　so　that　he　too　is　a　disciple　of　Love。　Also　the　melody　of　the　Muses；　the　metallurgy　of　Hephaestus；　the　weaving　of　Athene；　the　empire　of　Zeus　over　gods　and　men；　are　all　due　to　Love；　who　was　the　inventor　of　them。　And　so　Love　set　in　order　the　empire　of　the　gods…the　love　of　beauty；　as　is　evident；　for　with　deformity　Love　has　no　concern。　In　the　days　of　old；　as　I　began　by　saying；　dreadful　deeds　were　done　among　the　gods；　for　they　were　ruled　by　Necessity；　but　now　since　the　birth　of　Love；　and　from　the　Love　of　the　beautiful；　has　sprung　every　good　in　heaven　and　earth。　Therefore；　Phaedrus；　I　say　of　Love　that　he　is　the　fairest　and　best　in　himself；　and　the　cause　of　what　is　fairest　and　best　in　all　other　things。　And　there　comes　into　my　mind　a　line　of　poetry　in　which　he　is　said　to　be　the　god　who
  Gives　peace　on　earth　and　calms　the　stormy　deep；　　　　　　Who　stills　the　winds　and　bids　the　sufferer　sleep。
  This　is　he　who　empties　men　of　disaffection　and　fills　them　with　affection；　who　makes　them　to　meet　together　at　banquets　such　as　these：　in　sacrifices；　feasts；　dances；　he　is　our　lord…who　sends　courtesy　and　sends　away　discourtesy；　who　gives　kindness　ever　and　never　gives　unkindness；　the　friend　of　the　good；　the　wonder　of　the　wise；　the　amazement　of　the　gods；　desired　by　those　who　have　no　part　in　him；　and　precious　to　those　who　have　the　better　part　in　him；　parent　of　delicacy；　luxury；　desire；　fondness；　softness；　grace；　regardful　of　the　good；　regardless　of　the　evil：　in　every　word；　work；　wish；　fear…saviour；　pilot；　comrade；　helper；　glory　of　gods　and　men；　leader　best　and　brightest：　in　whose　footsteps　let　every　man　follow；　sweetly　singing　in　his　honour　and　joining　in　that　sweet　strain　with　which　love　charms　the　souls　of　gods　and　men。　Such　is　the　speech；　Phaedrus；　half…playful；　yet　having　a　certain　measure　of　seriousness；　which；　according　to　my　ability；　I　dedicate　to　the　god。　　　When　Agathon　had　done　speaking；　Aristodemus　said　that　there　was　a　general　cheer；　the　young　man　was　thought　to　have　spoken　in　a　manner　worthy　of　himself；　and　of　the　god。　And　Socrates；　looking　at　Eryximachus；　said：　Tell　me；　son　of　Acumenus；　was　there　not　reason　in　my　fears？　and　was　I　not　a　true　prophet　when　I　said　that　Agathon　would　make　a　wonderful　oration；　and　that　I　should　be　in　a　strait？　　　The　part　of　the　prophecy　which　concerns　Agathon；　replied　Eryximachus；　appears　to　me　to　be　true；　but；　not　the　other　part…that　you　will　be　in　a　strait。　　　Why；　my　dear　friend；　said　Socrates；　must　not　I　or　any　one　be　in　a　strait　who　has　to　speak　after　he　has　heard　such　a　rich　and　varied　discourse？　I　am　especially　struck　with　the　beauty　of　the　concluding　words…who　could　listen　to　them　without　amazement？　When　I　reflected　on　the　immeasurable　inferiority　of　my　own　powers；　I　was　ready　to　run　away　for　shame；　if　there　had　been　a　possibility　of　escape。　For　I　was　reminded　of　Gorgias；　and　at　the　end　of　his　speech　I　fancied　that　Agathon　was　shaking　at　me　the　Gorginian　or　Gorgonian　head　of　the　great　master　of　rhetoric；　which　was　simply　to　turn　me　and　my　speech；　into　stone；　as　Homer　says；　and　strike　me　dumb。　And　then　I　perceived　how　foolish　I　had　been　in　consenting　to　take　my　turn　with　you　in　praising　love；　and　saying　that　I　too　was　a　master　of　the　art；　when　I　really　had　no　conception　how　anything　ought　to　be　praised。　For　in　my　simplicity　I　imagined　that　the　topics　of　praise　should　be　true；　and　that　this　being　presupposed；　out　of　the　true　the　speaker　was　to　choose　the　best　and　set　them　forth　in　the　best　manner。　And　I　felt　quite　proud；　thinking　that　I　knew　the　nature　of　true　praise；　and　should　speak　well。　Whereas　I　now　see　that　the　intention　was　to　attribute　to　Love　every　species　of　greatness　and　glory；　whether　really　belonging　to　him　not；　without　regard　to　truth　or　falsehood…that　was　no　matter；　for　the　original；　proposal　seems　to　have　been　not　that　each　of　you　should　really　praise　Love；　but　only　that　you　should　appear　to　praise　him。　And　so　you　attribute　to　Love　every　imaginable　form　of　praise　which　can　be　gathered　anywhere；　and　you　say　that　〃he　is　all　this；〃　and　〃the　cause　of　all　that；〃　making　him　appear　the　fairest　and　best　of　all　to　those　who　know　him　not；　for　you　cannot　impose　upon　those　who　know　him。　And　a　noble　and　solemn　hymn　of　praise　have　you　rehearsed。　But　as　I　misunderstood　the　nature　of　the　praise　when　I　said　that　I　would　take　my　turn；　I　must　beg　to　be　absolved　from　the　promise　which　I　made　in　ignorance；　and　which　（as　Euripides　would　say）　was　a　promise　of　the　lips　and　not　of　the　mind。　Farewell　then　to　such　a　strain：　for　I　do　not　praise　in　that　way；　no；　indeed；　I　cannot。　But　if　you　like　to　here　the　truth　about　love；　I　am　ready　to　speak　in　my　own　manner；　though　I　will　not　make　myself　ridiculous　by　entering　into　any　rivalry　with　you。　Say　then；　Phaedrus；　whether　you　would　like；　to　have　the　truth　about　love；　spoken　in　any　words　and　in　any　order　which　may　happen　to　come　into　my　mind　at　the　time。　Will　that　be　agreeable　to　you？　　　Aristodemus　said　that　Phaedrus　and　the　company　bid　him　speak　in　any　manner　which　he　thought　best。　Then；　he　added；　let　me　have　your　permission　first　to　ask　Agathon　a　few　more　questions；　in　order　that　I　may　take　his　admissions　as　the　premisses　of　my　discourse。　　　I　grant　the　permission；　said　Phaedrus：　put　your　questions。　Socrates　then　proceeded　as　follows：…　　　In　the　magnificent　oration　which　you　have　just　uttered；　I　think　that　you　were　right；　my　dear　Agathon；　in　proposing　to　speak　of　the　nature　of　Love　first　and　afterwards　of　his　works…that　is　a　way　of　beginning　which　I　very　much　approve。　And　as　you　have　spoken　so　eloquently　of　his　nature；　may　I　ask　you　further；　Whether　love　is　the　love　of　something　or　of　nothing？　And　here　I　must　explain　myself：　I　do　not　want　you　to　say　that　love　is　the　love　of　a　father　or　the　love　of　a　mother…that　would　be　ridiculous；　but　to　answer　as　you　would；　if　I　asked　is　a　father　a　father　of　something？　to　which　you　would　find　no　difficulty　in　replying；　of　a　son　or　daughter：　and　the　answer　would　be　right。　　　Very　true；　said　Agathon。　　　And　you　would　say　the　same　of　a　mother？　　　He　assented。　　　Yet　let　me　ask　you　one　more　question　in　order　to　illustrate　my　meaning：　Is　not　a　brother　to　be　regarded　essentially　as　a　brother　of　something？　　　Certainly；　he　replied。　　　That　is；　of　a　brother　or　sister？　　　Yes；　he　said。　　　And　now；　said　Socrates；　I　will　ask　about　Love：…Is　Love　of　something　or　of　nothing？　　　Of　something；　surely；　he　replied。　　　Keep　in　mind　what　this　is；　and　tell　me　what　I　want　to　know…whether　Love　desires　that　of　which　love　is。　　　Yes；　surely。　　　And　does　he　possess；　or　does　he　not　possess；　that　which　he　loves　and　desires？　　　Probably　not；　I　should　say。　　　Nay；　replied　Socrates；　I　would　have　you　consider　whether　〃necessarily〃　is　not　rather　the　word。　The　inference　that　he　who　desires　something　is　in　want　of　something；　and　that　he　who　desires　nothing　is　in　want　of　nothing；　is　in　my　judgment；　Agathon　absolutely　and　necessarily　true。　What　do　you　think？　　　I　agree　with　you；　said　Agathon。　　　Very　good。　Would　he　who　is　great；　desire　to　be　great；　or　he　who　is　strong；　desire　to　be　strong？　　　That　would　be　inconsistent　with　our　previous　admissions。　　　True。　For　he　who　is　anything　cannot　want　to　be　that　which　he　is？　　　Very　true。　　　And　yet；　added　Socrates；　if　a　man　being　strong　desired　to　be　strong；　or　being　swift　desired　to　be　swift；　or　being　healthy　desired　to　be　healthy；　in　that　case　he　might　be　thought　to　desire　something　which　he　already　has　or　is。　I　give　the　example　in　order　that　we　may　avoid　mis