Libanius's Accusations

Stuart Moore

Dale Carrico/ GSI Kuan

Rhetoric 103A

November 26, 2016

Figurative Reading: “The Silence of Socrates”

[2] You ordered Socrates to die. He obeys, uncomplaining. But they are imposing a second penalty upon him: to be silent and not to talk to anyone until he dies. This is to kill him before the hemlock comes. It is of course easy for Socrates -- he is as capable of silence as he is of speech -- but you need to take care for yourselves, lest gods and men should charge you with taking away from Socrates the common right of all who live, and robbing him not only of his life, even before that, of his voice.

This passage is taken from Libanius’s “Silence of Socrates” speech. The reader is immediately thrust into the passage with the accusatory, “You ordered Socrates to die.” It feels as if Libanius is talking directly to the reader. It reads like, we, the audience are directly responsible for the death of Socrates. Each reader must deal with the fact that they sentenced one of the greatest minds to death. This places a heavy burden upon the audience and as a result, one reads the passage with a much different perspective.

Now that the audience is thoroughly engaged in the passage, Libanius introduces the third person plural. He introduces “they” into the passage. We can assume “they” are the jurors and judges who spelled out Socrate’s sentence. It is interesting that Libanius would use both the second person(singular and plural) and third person plural. What this does is differentiate who is responsible for sentencing Socrates to death and who is responsible for sentencing him to silence. One would initially think that both sentences would be carried out by the same person or group of people. However, this is not the case. The second person invokes a feeling that “you” or the general public are responsible for pushing for the death of Socrates. In an act of jealousy or feeling threatened, “you,” the people turned on Socrates. You are responsible for his death, but “they” are responsible for the real killing of Socrates. “They” took away his voice before his literal death. The judges who decreed that his voice was too dangerous to be allowed to continue speaking are the ones responsible.

This dichotomy of guilt is further split latter on in the passage when Libanius threatens the audience and warns you “to take care of yourselves.” He again accuses the reader of a great injustice, of taking away the power of speech, which is a right all people are entitled to. He warns the audience to be careful, for the gods may punish those who take away one’s god given rights. These accusations and threats serve to alienate the audience and create a distinct separation between speaker and listener. So while Libanius is tearing the audience down, he is raising himself up. He is placing himself above this moral fray, and distancing himself from any feelings of guilt.

Libanius projects the guilt of Socrates’ sentencing upon everyone but himself. He is portraying himself as the lone crusader fighting for a hopeless cause. His monologue, which includes the above passage, is mainly a series of repeating accusations and ethos appeals. They are essentially self-serving soliloquies that attempt to relieve the feelings of guilt and sadness that Libanius feels for Socrates. The speech is a vehicle for Libanius to express his frustration and. in his mind, relieving himself of any guilt.

Libanius cleverly clears his name and conscience of any guilt in his monologue by hurling strong accusations and threats at the audience. He is so strongly opinionated that he cannot possibly be part of “the audience,” and cannot possibly be one of the cursed souls who sent Socrates to his death and essentially cut out his tongue. His usage of the second person is very effective at accomplishing this.