Plato's Pharmacy Jacques Derrida (from Dissemination Chicago, U Chicago P, 1981 trans. by Barbara Johnson !

"ote to the student# footnotes are designated by bo$d numbers in %arentheses and ha&e been mo&ed to the end of the te't instead of at the bottom of each %age.( Kolaphos: (1) b$o) to the chee*, *noc*, s$a% . . . (kolapto). Kolapto: 1. to go into, %enetrate, esp., said of birds, to %ec* . . . hence, to s$ash o%en )ith the bea* . . . by anal., said of a horse striking the ground with his hoof. 2. by extension, to notch, engra&e# gramma eis aigeiron !%o%$ar( +nrh. 9, ,-1, or kata phloiou !bar*(, Ca$$. fr. 1.1, an inscri%tion on a %o%$ar or on the bar* of a tree (/. Klaph cf. /. !luph, to ho$$o) out, scratch . + te't is not a te't un$ess it hides from the first comer, from the first g$ance, the $a) of its com%osition and the ru$es of its game. + te't remains, moreo&er, fore&er im%erce%tib$e. 0ts $a) and its ru$es are not, ho)e&er, harbored in the inaccessibi$ity of a secret1 it is sim%$y that they can ne&er be boo*ed, in the present, into anything that cou$d rigorous$y be ca$$ed a %erce%tion . +nd hence, %er%etua$$y and essentia$$y, they run the ris* of being definiti&e$y $ost. 2ho )i$$ e&er *no) of such disa%%earances3 4he dissimu$ation of the )o&en te'ture can in any case ta*e centuries to undo its )eb# a )eb that en&e$o%s a )eb, undoing the )eb for centuries1 reconstituting it too as an organism, indefinite$y regenerating its o)n tissue behind the cutting trace, the decision of each reading . 4here is a$)ays a sur%rise in store for the anatomy or %hysio$ogy of any criticism that might thin* it had mastered the game, sur&eyed a$$ the threads at once, de$uding itse$f, too, in )anting to $oo* at the te't )ithout touching it, )ithout $aying a hand on the 5ob6ect,5 )ithout ris*ing77)hich is the on$y chance of entering into the game, by getting a fe) fingers caught77the addition of some ne) thread. +dding, here, is nothing other than gi&ing to read. 8ne must manage to thin* this out# that it is not a question of embroidering u%on a te't, un$ess one considers that to *no) ho) to embroider sti$$ means to ha&e the abi$ity to fo$$o) the gi&en thread. 4hat is, if you fo$$o) me, the hidden thread. 0f reading and )riting are one, as is easi$y thought these days, if reading is )riting, this oneness designates neither undifferentiated

9-

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

(con fusion nor identity at %erfect rest1 the is that cou%$es reading )ith )riting must ri% a%art. 8ne must then, in a sing$e gesture, but doub$ed, read and )rite. +nd that %erson )ou$d ha&e understood nothing of the game )ho, at this "du #oup$, )ou$d fee$ himse$f authori@ed mere$y to add on1 that is, to add any o$d thing. =e )ou$d add nothing# the seam )ou$dnAt ho$d. /eci%roca$$y, he )ho through 5methodo$ogica$ %rudence,5 5norms of ob6ecti&ity,5 or 5safeguards of *no)$edge5 )ou$d refrain from committing anything of himse$f, )ou$d not read at a$$. 4he same foo$ishness, the same steri$ity, obtains in the 5not serious5 as in the 5serious.5 4he reading or )riting su%%$ement must be rigorous$y %rescribed, but by the necessities of a game, by the $ogic of play, signs to )hich the system of a$$ te'tua$ %o)ers must be accorded and attuned.

P=+/>+C0+

9B

4o a considerab$e degree, )e ha&e a$ready said a$$ )e meant to say. 8ur $e'icon at any rate is not far from being e'hausted. 2ith the e'ce%tion of this or that su%%$ement, our questions )i$$ ha&e nothing more to name but the te'ture of the te't, reading and )riting, mastery and %$ay, the %arado'es of su%%$ementarity, and the gra%hic re$ations bet)een the $i&ing and the dead# )ithin the te'tua$, the te'ti$e, and the histo$ogica$. 2e )i$$ *ee% )ithin the $imits of this tissue: bet)een the meta%hor of the histos (2) and the question of the histos of meta%hor. <ince )e ha&e a$ready said e&erything, the reader must bear )ith us if )e continue on a)hi$e. 0f )e e'tend ourse$&es by force of %$ay. 0f )e then write a bit# on P$ato, )ho a$ready said in the %haedrus that )riting can on$y re%eat (itse$f , that it 5a$)ays signifies (semainei) the same5 and that it is a 5game5 (paidia). 1. Pharmacia :et us begin again. 4herefore the dissimu$ation of the )o&en te'ture can in any case ta*e centuries to undo its )eb. 4he e'am%$e )e sha$$ %ro%ose of this )i$$ not, seeing that )e are dea$ing )ith P$ato, be the &tatesman, )hich )i$$ ha&e come to mind first, no doubt because of the %aradigm of the )ea&er, and es%ecia$$y because of the %aradigm of the %aradigm, the e'am%$e of the e'am%$e )riting77)hich immediate$y %recedes it. (3) 2e )i$$ come bac* to that on$y after a $ong detour.

99

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

2e )i$$ ta*e off here from the %haedrus. (4) 2e are s%ea*ing of the %haedrus that )as ob$iged to )ait a$most t)enty7fi&e centuries before anyone ga&e u% the idea that it )as a bad$y com%osed dia$ogue. 0t )as at first be$ie&ed that P$ato )as too young to do the thing right, to construct a )e$$7made ob6ect. Diogenes :aertius records this 5they say5 (logos 'sc. esti(, legetai) according to )hich the %haedrus )as P$atoAs first attem%t and thus manifested a certain 6u&eni$e qua$ity (meirakiodes ti . (5) <ch$eiermacher thin*s this $egend can be corroborated by means of a $udicrous argument# an aging )riter )ou$d not ha&e condemned )riting as P$ato does in the %haedrus. 4his argument is not mere$y sus%ect in itse$f# it $ends credit to the :aertian $egend by basing itse$f

P=+/>+C0+

9C

on a second $egend. 8n$y a b$ind or gross$y insensiti&e reading cou$d indeed ha&e s%read the rumor that P$ato )as simply condemning the )riterAs acti&ity. "othing here is of a sing$e %iece and the %haedrus a$so, in its o)n )riting, %$ays at sa&ing )riting77)hich a$so means causing it to be $ost77as the best, the nob$est game. +s for the stunning hand P$ato has thus dea$t himse$f, )e )i$$ be ab$e to fo$$o) its incidence and its %ayoff $ater on. 0n 19.B, the tradition of Diogenes :aertius )as re&ersed, not in order to bring about a recognition of the e'ce$$ent com%osition of the %haedrus but in order to attribute its fau$ts this time to the seni$e im%otence of the author# 54he %haedrus is bad$y com%osed. 4his defect is a$$ the more sur%rising since it is %recise$y there that <ocrates defines the )or* of art as a $i&ing being. But the inabi$ity to accom%$ish )hat has been )e$$ concei&ed is %recise$y a %roof of o$d age.5 (6) 2e are no $onger at that %oint. 4he hy%othesis of a rigorous, sure, and subt$e form is natura$$y more ferti$e. 0t disco&ers ne) chords, ne) concordances1 it sur%rises them in minute$y fashioned counter%oint, )ithin a more secret organi@ation of themes, of names, of )ords. 0t unties a )ho$e sumploke %atient$y inter$acing the arguments. 2hat is magisteria$ about the demonstration affirms itse$f and effaces itse$f at once, )ith su%%$eness, irony, and discretion. 4his is, in %articu$ar, the case77and this )i$$ be our su%%$ementary thread77)ith the )ho$e $ast section (2)*b ff. , de&oted, as e&eryone *no)s, to the origin, history, and &a$ue of )riting. 4hat entire hearing of the trial of writing shou$d some day cease to a%%ear as an e'traneous mytho$ogica$ fantasy, an a%%endi' the organism cou$d easi$y, )ith no $oss, ha&e done )ithout. 0n truth, it is rigorous$y ca$$ed for from one end of the %haedrus to the other. +$)ays )ith irony. But )hat can be said of irony here3 2hat is its ma6or sign3 4he dia$ogue contains the on$y 5rigorous$y origina$ P$atonic myths# the fab$e of the cicadas in the %haedrus, and the story of 4heuth in the same dia$ogue.5 (7) 0nteresting$y, <ocratesA first )ords, in the o%ening $ines of the con&ersation, had concerned 5not bothering about5 mytho$ogemes (22+#,2-.a). "ot in order to re6ect them abso$ute$y, but, on the one hand, not bothering them, $ea&ing them a$one, ma*ing room for them, in order to free them from the hea&y serious nai&ete of the scientific 5rationa$ists,5 and

98

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

on the other, not bothering with them, in order to free oneself for the re$ation )ith onese$f and the %ursuit of se$f7*no)$edge. 4o gi&e myths a send7off# a sa$ute, a &acation, a dismissa$1 this fine reso$ution of the khairein, )hich means a$$ that at once, )i$$ be t)ice interru%ted in order to )e$come these 5t)o P$atonic myths,5 so 5rigorous$y origina$.5 Both of these myths arise, moreo&er, in the o%ening of a question about the status of )riting. 4his is undoubted$y $ess ob&ious77has anyone e&er %ic*ed u% on it377in the case of the cicada story. But it is no $ess certain. Both myths fo$$o) u%on the same question, and they are on$y se%arated by a short s%ace, 6ust time enough for a detour. 4he first, of course, does not ans)er the question1 on the contrary, it $ea&es it hanging, mar*s time for a rest, and ma*es us )ait for the re%rise that )i$$ $ead us to the second. :et us read this more c$ose$y. +t the %recise$y ca$cu$ated center of the dia$ogue the reader can count the $ines77the question of logography is raised (2/)#). Phaedrus reminds <ocrates that the citi@ens of greatest inf$uence and dignity, the men )ho are the most free, fee$ ashamed (aiskhunontai) at 5s%eech)riting5 and at $ea&ing sungrammata behind them. 4hey fear the 6udgment of %osterity, )hich might consider them 5so%hists5 (DBCd . 4he $ogogra%her, in the strict sense, is a ghost writer )ho com%oses s%eeches for use by $itigants, s%eeches )hich he himse$f does not %ronounce, )hich he does not attend, so to s%ea*, in %erson, and )hich %roduce their effects in his absence. 0n )riting )hat he does not s%ea*, )hat he )ou$d ne&er say and, in truth, )ou$d %robab$y ne&er e&en thin*, the author of the )ritten s%eech is a$ready entrenched in the %osture of the so%hist# the man of non7%resence and of non7truth. 2riting is thus a$ready on the scene. 4he incom%atibi$ity bet)een the written and the true is c$ear$y announced at the moment <ocrates starts to recount the )ay in )hich men are carried out of themse$&es by %$easure, become absent from themse$&es, forget themse$&es and die in the thri$$ of song (DB9# . But the issue is de$ayed. <ocrates sti$$ has a neutra$ attitude# )riting is not in itse$f a shamefu$, indecent, infamous (aiskhron) acti&ity. 8ne is dishonored on$y if one )rites in a dishonorab$e manner. But )hat does it mean to )rite in a dishonorab$e manner3 and, Phaedrus a$so )ants to *no), )hat does it mean to )rite beautifu$$y (kalos)0 4his question s*etches out the centra$ ner&ure, the great fo$d that di&ides the dia$ogue. Bet)een this question and the ans)er that ta*es u% its terms in the $ast section (5But there remains the question of %ro%riety and im%ro%riety in )riting, that is to say the conditions )hich ma*e it %ro%er or im%ro%er. 0snAt that so35

P=+/>+C0+

99

2)*b), the thread remains so$id, if not easi$y &isib$e, a$$ through the fab$e of the cicadas and the themes of %sychagogy, rhetoric, and dia$ectics. 4hus <ocrates begins by sending myths off1 and then, t)ice sto%%ed before the question of )riting, he in&ents t)o of them77 not, as )e sha$$ see, entire$y from scratch, but more free$y and s%ontaneous$y than any)here e$se in his )or*. "o), the khairein, in the %haedrus1 o%ening %ages, takes pla#e in the name of truth. 2e )i$$ ref$ect u%on the fact that the myths come bac* from &acation at the time and in the name of )riting. 4he khairein ta*es %$ace in the name of truth: that is, in the name of *no)$edge of truth and, more %recise$y, of truth in the *no)$edge of the se$f. 4his is )hat <ocrates e'%$ains (2-.a). But this im%erati&e of se$f7*no)$edge is not first fe$t or dictated by any trans%arent immediacy of se$f7%resence. 0t is not %ercei&ed. 8n$y inter%reted, read, deci%hered. + hermeneutics assigns intuition. +n inscri%tion, the Delphikon gramma, )hich is anything but an orac$e, %rescribes through its si$ent ci%her1 it signifies as one signifies an order77autosco%y and autognosis. 4he &ery acti&ities that <ocrates thin*s can be contrasted to the hermeneutic ad&enture of myths, )hich he $ea&es to the so%hists (22+d). +nd the khairein ta*es pla#e in the name of truth. 4he topoi of the dia$ogue are ne&er indifferent. 4he themes, the to%ics, the (common7 %$aces, in a rhetorica$ sense, are strict$y inscribed, com%rehended each time )ithin a significant site. 4hey are dramatica$$y staged, and in this theatrica$ geogra%hy, unity of %$ace corres%onds to an infa$$ib$e ca$cu$ation or necessity. Eor e'am%$e, the fab$e of the cicadas )ou$d not ha&e ta*en %$ace, )ou$d not ha&e been recounted, <ocrates )ou$d not ha&e been incited to te$$ it, if the heat, )hich )eighs o&er the )ho$e dia$ogue, had not dri&en the t)o friends out of the city, into the countryside, a$ong the ri&er 0$issus. 2e$$ before detai$ing the genea$ogy of the genus cicada, <ocrates had e'c$aimed, 5=o) )e$come and s)eet the fresh air is, resounding )ith the summer chir%ing of the cicada chorus5 (D,.c . But this is not the on$y counter%oint7effect required by the s%ace of the dia$ogue. 4he myth that ser&es as a %rete't for the khairein and for the retreat into autosco%y can itse$f on$y arise, during the first ste%s of this e'cursion, at the sight of the 0$issus. 0snAt this the s%ot, as*s Phaedrus, )here Boreas, according to tradition, carried off 8rithyia3 4his ri&erban*, the dia%hanous %urity of these )aters, must ha&e )e$comed the young &irgins, or e&en dra)n them $i*e a s%e$$, inciting them to %$ay here. <ocrates then moc*ing$y %ro%oses a $earned e'%$anation of the myth in the rationa$istic, %hysica$ist sty$e of the sophoi: it )as )hi$e she )as %$aying )ith Pharmacia (sun %harmakeiai pai3ousan) that the borea$ )ind (pneuma

C8

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

4oreou) caught 8rithyia u% and b$e) her into the abyss, 5do)n from the roc*s hard by,F 5and ha&ing thus met her death )as said to ha&e been sei@ed by Boreas . . . Eor my %art, Phaedrus, 0 regard such theories as attracti&e no doubt, but as the in&ention of c$e&er, industrious %eo%$e )ho are not e'act$y to be en&ied5 (22+d). 4his brief e&ocation of Pharmacia at the beginning of the %haedrus,,is it an accident3 +n hors dAoeu&re3 + fountain, 5%erha%s )ith curati&e %o)ers,5 notes /obin, )as dedicated to Pharmacia near the 0$issus. :et us in any case retain this# that a $itt$e s%ot, a $itt$e stitch or mesh (ma#ula) )o&en into the bac* of the can&as, mar*s out for the entire dia$ogue the scene )here that 5irgin )as cast into the abyss, sur%rised by death while playing with %harma#ia. Pharmacia (%harmakeia) is a$so a common noun signifying the administration of the pharmakon, the drug# the medicine andGor %oison. 5Poisoning5 )as not the $east usua$ meaning of 5%harmacia.5 +nti%hon has $eft us the $ogogram of an 5accusation of %oisoning against a mother7in7$a)5 (%harmakeias kata tes metryias). 4hrough her games, Pharmacia has dragged do)n to death a &irgina$ %urity and an un%enetrated interior. 8n$y a $itt$e further on, <ocrates com%ares the )ritten te'ts Phaedrus has brought a$ong to a drug (pharmakon). 4his pharmakon, this 5medicine, 5 this %hi$ter, )hich acts as both remedy and %oison, a$ready introduces itse$f into the body of the discourse )ith a$$ its ambi&a$ence. 4his charm, this s%e$$binding &irtue, this %o)er of fascination, can be77 a$ternate$y or simu$taneous$y77beneficent or ma$eficent. 4he pharmakon )ou$d be a substan#e,,)ith a$$ that that )ord can connote in terms of matter )ith occu$t &irtues, cry%tic de%ths refusing to submit their ambi&a$ence to ana$ysis, a$ready %a&ing the )ay for a$chemy77if )e didnAt ha&e e&entua$$y to come to recogni@e it as antisubstance itse$f# that )hich resists any %hi$oso%heme, indefinite$y e'ceeding its bounds as nonidentity, nonessence, nonsubstance1 granting %hi$oso%hy by that &ery fact the ine'haustib$e ad&ersity of )hat funds it and the infinite absence of )hat founds it. 8%erating through seduction, the pharmakon ma*es one stray from oneAs genera$, natura$, habitua$ %aths and $a)s. =ere, it ta*es <ocrates out of his %ro%er %$ace and off his customary trac*. 4he $atter had a$)ays *e%t him inside the city. 4he $ea&es of )riting act as a pharmakon to %ush or attract out of the city the one )ho ne5er )anted to get out, e5en at the end, to esca%e the hem$oc*. 4hey ta*e him out of himse$f and dra) him onto a %ath that is %ro%er$y an exodus: %haedrus: +nyone )ou$d ta*e you, as you say, for a foreigner

being sho)n the country by a guide, and not a nati&e77you ne&er $ea&e

P=+/>+C0+

C1

to)n to #ross the frontier nor e&en, 0 be$ie&e, so much as set foot outside the )a$$s. &o#rates: 6ou must forgi&e me, dear friend1 0Am a $o&er of $earning, and trees and o%en country )onAt teach me anything, )hereas men in the to)n do. ?et you seem to ha&e disco&ered a drug (8) for getting me out (dokeis moi tel emes exo#ou to pharmakon heurekenai). + hungry anima$ can be dri&en by dang$ing a carrot or a bit of greenstuff in front of it1 simi$ar$y if you %roffer me s%eeches bound in boo*s (en bibliois) 0 donAt doubt you can cart me a$$ round +ttica, and any)here e$se you %$ease. +nyho), no) that )eA&e got here 0 %ro%ose for the time being to $ie do)n, and you can choose )hate&er %osture you thin* most con&enient for reading, and %roceed (2-.d,e). 0t is at this %oint, )hen <ocrates has fina$$y stretched out on the ground and Phaedrus has ta*en the most comfortab$e %osition for hand$ing the te't or, if you )i$$, the pharmakon, that the discussion actua$$y gets off the ground. + s%o*en s%eech77 )hether by :ysias or by Phaedrus in %erson77a s%eech %roffered in the present, in the presen#e of <ocrates, )ou$d not ha&e had the same effect. 8n$y the logoi en bibliois, on$y )ords that are deferred, reser&ed, en&e$o%ed, ro$$ed u%, )ords that force one to )ait for them in the form and under co&er of a so$id ob6ect, $etting themse$&es be desired for the s%ace of a )a$*, on$y hidden $etters can thus get <ocrates mo&ing. 0f a s%eech cou$d be %ure$y %resent, un&ei$ed, na*ed, offered u% in %erson in its truth, )ithout the detours of a logos were signifier foreign to it, if at the $imit an undeferred %ossib$e, it )ou$d not seduce anyone. 0t )ou$d not dra) <ocrates, as if under the effects of a pharmakon, out of his )ay. :et us get ahead of ourse$&es. +$ready# )riting, the pharmakon, the going or $eading astray. 0n our discussion of this te't )e ha&e been using an authoritati&e Erench trans$ation of P$ato, the one %ub$ished by Hui$$aume Bude. 0n the case of the %haedrus, the trans$ation is by :eon /obin. 2e )i$$ continue to refer to it, inserting the Hree* te't in %arentheses, ho)e&er, )hene&er it seems o%%ortune or %ertinent to our %oint. =ence, for e'am%$e, the )ord pharmakon. 0n this )ay )e ho%e to dis%$ay in the most stri*ing manner the regu$ar, ordered %o$ysemy that has, through s*e)ing, indetermination, or o&erdetermination, but )ithout mistrans$ation, %ermitted the rendering of the same )ord by 5remedy,5 5reci%e,5 5%oison,5 5drug,5 5%hi$ter,5 etc. 0t )i$$ a$so be seen to )hat e'tent the ma$$eab$e unity of this conce%t, or rather its ru$es and the strange $ogic that $in*s it )ith its signifier, has been dis7

CD

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

%ersed, mas*ed, ob$iterated, and rendered a$most unreadab$e not on$y by the im%rudence or em%iricism of the trans$ators, but first and foremost by the redoubtab$e, irreducib$e difficu$ty of trans$ation. 0t is a difficu$ty inherent in its &ery %rinci%$e, situated $ess in the %assage from one $anguage to another, from one %hi$oso%hica$ $anguage to another, than a$ready, as )e sha$$ see, in the tradition bet)een Hree* and Hree*1 a &io$ent difficu$ty in the transference of a non%hi$oso%heme into a %hi$oso%heme. 2ith this %rob$em of trans$ation )e )i$$ thus be dea$ing )ith nothing $ess than the %rob$em of the &ery %assage into %hi$oso%hy. 4he biblia that )i$$ dra) <ocrates out of his reser&e and out of the s%ace in )hich he is )ont to $earn, to teach, to s%ea*, to dia$ogue the she$tered enc$osure of the city77these biblia contain a te't )ritten by Ithe ab$est )riter of our day5 (deinotatos on ton nun graphein). =is name is :ysias. Phaedrus is *ee%ing the te't or, if you )i$$, the pharmakon, hidden under his c$oa*. =e needs it because he has not $earned the s%eech by heart. 4his %oint is im%ortant for )hat fo$$o)s, the %rob$em of )riting being c$ose$y $in*ed to the %rob$em of 5*no)ing by heart.5 Before <ocrates had stretched out on the ground and in&ited Phaedrus to ta*e the most comfortab$e %osition, the $atter had offered to reconstitute, )ithout the he$% of the te't, the reasoning, argument, and design of :ysiasA s%eech, its dianoia. <ocrates sto%s him short# 5Jery )e$$, my dear fe$$o), but you must first sho) me )hat it is that you ha&e in your $eft hand under you c$oa*, for 0 surmise that it is the actua$ discourse (ton logon auton)7 (228d). Bet)een the in&itation and the start of the reading, )hi$e the pharmakon is )andering about under PhaedrusA c$oa*, there occurs the e&ocation of Pharmacia and the send7off of myths. 0s it after a$$ by chance or by harmonics that, e&en before the o&ert %resentation of )riting as a pharmakon arises in the midd$e of the myth of 4heuth, the connection bet)een biblia and pharmaka shou$d a$ready be mentioned in a ma$e&o$ent or sus%icious &ein3 +s o%%osed to the true %ractice of medicine, founded on science, )e find indeed, $isted in a sing$e stro*e, em%irica$ %ractice, treatments based on reci%es $earned by heart, mere boo*ish *no)$edge, and the b$ind usage of drugs. +$$ that, )e are to$d, s%rings out of mania: I0 e'%ect they )ou$d say, Athe man is mad1 he thin*s he has made himse$f a doctor by %ic*ing u% something out of a boo* (ek bibliou), or coming across a cou%$e of ordinary drugs (pharmakiois), )ithout any rea$ *no)$edge of medicineA5 (298#). 4his association bet)een )riting and the pharmakon sti$$ seems e'terna$1 it cou$d be 6udged artificia$ or %ure$y coincidenta$. But the intention and intonation are recogni@ab$y the same# one

and the same sus%icion en&e$o%s

P=+/>+C0+

C,

in a sing$e embrace the boo* and the drug, )riting and )hate&er )or*s in an occu$t, ambiguous manner o%en to em%iricism and chance, go&erned by the )ays of magic and not the $a)s of necessity. Boo*s, the dead and rigid *no)$edge shut u% in biblia, %i$es of histories, nomenc$atures, reci%es and formu$as $earned by heart, a$$ this is as foreign to $i&ing *no)$edge and dia$ectics as the pharmakon is to medica$ science. +nd myth to true *no)$edge. 0n dea$ing )ith P$ato, )ho *ne) so )e$$ on occasion ho) to treat myth in its archeo7$ogica$ or %a$eo7$ogica$ ca%acity, one can g$im%se the immensity and difficu$ty of this $ast o%%osition. 4he e'tent of the difficu$ty is mar*ed out77this is, among a hundred others, the e'am%$e that retains us here77in that the truth77the origina$ truth77about )riting as a pharmakon )i$$ at first be $eft u% to a myth. 4he myth of 4heuth, to )hich )e no) turn. U% to this %oint in the dia$ogue, one can say that the pharmakon and the gra%heme ha&e been bec*oning to each other from afar, indirect$y sending bac* to each other, and, as if by chance, a%%earing and disa%%earing together on the same $ine, for yet uncertain reasons, )ith an effecti&eness that is quite discrete and %erha%s after a$$ unintentiona$. But in order to $ift this doubt and on the su%%osition that the categories of the &o$untary and the in&o$untary sti$$ ha&e some abso$ute %ertinence in a reading77)hich )e donAt for a minute be$ie&e, at $east not on the te'tua$ $e&e$ on )hich )e are no) ad&ancing77 $et us %roceed to the $ast %hase of the dia$ogue, to the %oint )here 4heuth a%%ears on the scene. 4his time it is )ithout indirection, )ithout hidden mediation, )ithout secret argumentation, that )riting is %ro%osed, %resented, and asserted as a pharmakon (2)*e). 0n a certain sense, one can see ho) this section cou$d ha&e been set a%art as an a%%endi', a su%eradded su%%$ement. +nd des%ite a$$ that ca$$s for it in the %receding ste%s, it is true that P$ato offers it some)hat as an amusement, an hors dAoeu&re or rather a dessert. +$$ the sub6ects of the dia$ogue, both themes and s%ea*ers, seem e'hausted at the moment the su%%$ement, )riting, or the pharmakon, are introduced# 54hen )e may fee$ that )e ha&e said enough both about the art of s%ea*ing and about the $ac* of art (to men tekhnes te kai atekhnias logon)7 (9) (2)*b). +nd yet it is at this moment of genera$ e'haustion that the question of )riting is set out. (10) +nd, as )as foreshad7

C-

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

o)ed ear$ier by the use of the )ord aiskhron (or the ad&erb aiskhrol), the question of )riting o%ens as a question of mora$ity. 0t is tru$y morality that is at sta*e, both in the sense of the o%%osition bet)een good and e&i$, or good and bad, and in the sense of mores, %ub$ic mora$s and socia$ con&entions. 0t is a question of *no)ing )hat is done and )hat is not done. 4his mora$ disquiet is in no )ay to be distinguished from questions of truth, memory, and dia$ectics. 4his $atter question, )hich )i$$ quic*$y be engaged as the question of )riting, is c$ose$y associated )ith the mora$ity theme, and indeed de&e$o%s it by affinity of essence and not by su%erim%osition. But )ithin a debate rendered &ery rea$ by the %o$itica$ de&e$o%ment of the city, the %ro%agation of )riting and the acti&ity of the so%hists and s%eech)riters, the %rimary accent is natura$$y %$aced u%on %o$itica$ and socia$ %ro%rieties. 4he ty%e of arbitration %ro%osed by <ocrates %$ays )ithin the o%%osition bet)een the &a$ues of seem$iness and unseem$iness (euprepeial aprepeia): 5But there remains the question of %ro%riety and im%ro%riety in )riting, that is to say the conditions )hich ma*e it %ro%er or im%ro%er. 0snAt that so35 (2)*b). 0s )riting seem$y3 Does the )riter cut a res%ectab$e figure3 0s it %ro%er to )rite3 0s it done3 8f course not. But the ans)er is not so sim%$e, and <ocrates does not immediate$y offer it on his o)n account in a rationa$ discourse or logos. =e $ets it be heard by de$egating it to an akoe, to a )e$$7*no)n rumor, to hearsay e&idence, to a fab$e transmitted from ear to ear# 50 can te$$ you )hat our forefathers ha&e said about it, but the truth of it is on$y *no)n by tradition. =o)e&er, if )e cou$d disco&er that truth for ourse$&es, shou$d )e sti$$ be concerned )ith the fancies of man*ind35 (2)*#). 4he truth of )riting, that is, as )e sha$$ see, (the nontruth, cannot be disco&ered in ourse$&es by ourse$&es. +nd it is not the ob6ect of a science, on$y of a history that is recited, a fab$e that is re%eated. 4he $in* bet)een )riting and myth becomes c$earer, as does its o%%osition to *no)$edge, notab$y the *no)$edge one see*s in onese$f, by onese$f. +nd at the same time, through )riting or through myth, the genea$ogica$ brea* and the estrangement from the origin are sounded. 8ne shou$d note most es%ecia$$y that )hat )riting )i$$ $ater be accused of77re%eating )ithout *no)ing77here defines the &ery a%%roach that $eads to the statement and determina7

4=K E+4=K/ 8E :8H8<

CB

tion of its status. 8ne thus begins by re%eating )ithout *no)ing77through a myth77the definition of )riting, )hich is to re%eat )ithout *no)ing. 4his *inshi% of )riting and myth, both of them distinguished from logos and dia$ectics, )i$$ on$y become more %recise as the te't conc$udes. =a&ing 6ust re%eated )ithout *no)ing that )riting consists of re%eating )ithout *no)ing, <ocrates goes on to base the demonstration of his indictment, of his logos, u%on the %remises of the akoe, u%on structures that are readab$e through a fabu$ous genea$ogy of )riting. +s soon as the myth has struc* the first b$o), the logos of <ocrates )i$$ demo$ish the accused. D. 4he Eather of :ogos 4he story begins $i*e this# Socrates: Jery )e$$. 0 heard, then, that at "aucratis in Kgy%t there $i&ed one of the o$d gods of that country, the one )hose sacred bird is ca$$ed the ibis1 and the name of the di&inity )as 4heuth. 0t )as he )ho first in&ented numbers and ca$cu$ation, geometry and astronomy, not to s%ea* of draughts and dice, and abo&e a$$ )riting (grammata). "o) the Ling of a$$ Kgy%t at that time )as 4hamus )ho $i&ed in the great city of the u%%er region )hich the Hree*s ca$$ the Kgy%tian 4hebes1 the god himse$f they ca$$ +mmon. 4heuth came to him and e'hibited his arts and dec$ared that they ought to be im%arted to the other Kgy%tians. +nd 4hamus questioned him about the usefu$ness of each one1 and as 4heuth enumerated, the Ling b$amed or %raised )hat he thought )ere the good or bad %oints in the e'%$anation. "o) 4hamus is said to ha&e had a good dea$ to remar* on both sides of the question about e&ery sing$e art (it )ou$d ta*e too $ong to re%eat it here 1 but )hen it came to )riting, 4heuth said, 54his disci%$ine (to mathema), my Ling, )i$$ ma*e the Kgy%tians )iser and )i$$ im%ro&e their memories (sophoterous kai mnemonikoterous): my in&ention is a reci%e (pharmakon) for both memory and )isdom.5 But the Ling said . . . etc. (2)*#,e). :et us cut the Ling off here. =e is faced )ith the pharmakon. =is re%$y )i$$ be incisi&e. :et us free@e the scene and the characters and ta*e a $oo* at them. 2riting (or, if you )i$$, the pharmakon) is thus %resented to the Ling. Presented# $i*e a *ind of %resent offered u% in homage by a &assa$ to his $ord

C9

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

(4heuth is a demigod s%ea*ing to the *ing of the gods , but abo&e a$$ as a finished )or* submitted to his a%%reciation. +nd this )or* is itse$f an art, a ca%acity for )or*, a %o)er of o%eration. 4his artefactum is an art. But the &a$ue of this gift is sti$$ uncertain. 4he &a$ue of )riting77or of the pharmakon,, has of course been s%e$$ed out to the Ling, but it is the Ling )ho )i$$ gi&e it its &a$ue, )ho )i$$ set the %rice of )hat, in the act of recei&ing, he constitutes or institutes. 4he *ing or god (4hamus re%resents (11) +mmon, the *ing of the gods, the *ing of *ings, the god of gods. 4heuth says to him# 8 basileu) is thus the other name for the origin of &a$ue. 4he &a$ue of )riting )i$$ not be itse$f, )riting )i$$ ha&e no &a$ue, un$ess and to the e'tent that god7the7*ing a%%ro&es of it. But god7the7*ing nonethe$ess e'%eriences the pharmakon as a %roduct, an ergon, )hich is not his o)n, )hich comes to him from outside but a$so from be$o), and )hich a)aits his condescending 6udgment in order to be consecrated in its being and &a$ue. Hod the *ing does not *no) ho) to )rite, but that ignorance or inca%acity on$y testifies to his so&ereign inde%endence. =e has no need to )rite. =e s%ea*s, he says, he dictates, and his )ord suffices. 2hether a scribe from his secretaria$ staff then adds the su%%$ement of a transcri%tion or not, that consignment is a$)ays in essence secondary. Erom this %osition, )ithout re6ecting the homage, the god7*ing )i$$ de%reciate it, %ointing out not on$y its use$essness but its menace and its mischief. +nother )ay of not recei&ing the offering of )riting. 0n so doing, god7the7*ing7that7s%ea*s is acting $i*e a father. 4he pharmakon is here %resented to the father and is by him re6ected, be$itt$ed, abandoned, dis%araged. 4he father is a$)ays sus%icious and )atchfu$ to)ard )riting. K&en if )e did not )ant to gi&e in here to the easy %assage uniting the figures of the *ing, the god, and the father, it )ou$d suffice to %ay systematic attention77)hich to our *no)$edge has ne&er been done77to the %ermanence of a P$atonic schema that assigns the origin and %o)er of s%eech, %recise$y of logos, to the %aterna$ %osition. "ot that this ha%%ens es%ecia$$y and e'c$usi&e$y in P$ato. K&eryone *no)s this or can easi$y imagine it. But the fact that 5P$atonism,5 )hich sets u% the )ho$e of 2estern meta%hysics in its conce%tua$ity, shou$d not esca%e the genera$ity of this structura$ constraint, and e&en i$$ustrates it )ith incom%arab$e subt$ety and force, stands out as a$$ the more significant.

4=K E+4=K/ 8E :8H8<

CC

"ot that $ogos is the father, either. But the origin of $ogos is its father. 8ne cou$d say anachronous$y that the 5s%ea*ing sub6ect5 is the father of his s%eech. +nd one )ou$d quic*$y rea$i@e that this is no meta%hor, at $east not in the sense of any common, con&entiona$ effect of rhetoric. :ogos is a son, then, a son that )ou$d be destroyed in his 5ery presen#e )ithout the %resent attendan#e of his father. =is father )ho ans)ers. =is father )ho s%ea*s for him and ans)ers for him. 2ithout his father, he )ou$d be nothing but, in fact, )riting. +t $east that is )hat is said by the one )ho says# it is the fatherAs thesis. 4he s%ecificity of )riting )ou$d thus be intimate$y bound to the absence of the father. <uch an absence can of course e'ist a$ong &ery di&erse moda$ities, distinct$y or confused$y, successi&e$y or simu$taneous$y# to ha&e $ost oneAs father, through natura$ or &io$ent death, through random &io$ence or %atricide1 and then to so$icit the aid and attendance, %ossib$e or im%ossib$e, of the %aterna$ %resence, to so$icit it direct$y or to c$aim to be getting a$ong )ithout it, etc. 4he reader )i$$ ha&e noted <ocratesA insistence on the misery, )hether %itifu$ or arrogant, of a logos committed to )riting# I. . . 0t a$)ays needs its father to attend to it, being quite unab$e to defend itse$f or attend to its o)n needs5 (2)/e). 4his misery is ambiguous# it is the distress of the or%han, of course, )ho needs not on$y an attending %resence but a$so a %resence that )i$$ attend to its needs1 but in %itying the or%han, one a$so ma*es an accusation against him, a$ong )ith )riting, for c$aiming to do a)ay )ith the father, for achie&ing emanci%ation )ith com%$acent se$f7sufficiency. Erom the %osition of the ho$der of the sce%ter, the desire of )riting is indicated, designated, and denounced as a desire for or%hanhood and %atricida$ sub&ersion. 0snAt this pharmakon then a crimina$ thing, a %oisoned %resent3 4he status of this or%han, )hose )e$fare cannot be assured by any attendance or assistance, coincides )ith that of a graphein )hich, being nobodyAs son at the instant it reaches inscri%tion, scarce$y remains a son at a$$ and no $onger re#ogni3es its origins, )hether $ega$$y or mora$$y. 0n contrast to )riting, $i&ing logos is a$i&e in that it has a $i&ing father ()hereas the or%han is a$ready ha$f dead , a father that is present, standing near it, behind it, )ithin it, sustaining it )ith his rectitude, attending it in %erson in his o)n name. :i&ing logos, for its %art, recogni@es its debt, $i&es off that recognition, and forbids itse$f, thin*s it can forbid itse$f %atricide. But %rohibition and %atricide, $i*e the re$ations bet)een s%eech and )riting, are structures sur%rising enough to require us $ater on to articu$ate P$atoAs te't bet)een a %atricide %rohibited and a %atricide %roc$aimed. 4he deferred murder of the father and rector.

4he %haedrus )ou$d a$ready be sufficient to %ro&e that the res%onsibi$ity

C8

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

for logos, for its meaning and effects, goes to those )ho attend it, to those )ho are %resent )ith the %resence of a father. 4hese 5meta%hors5 must be tire$ess$y questioned. 2itness <ocrates, addressing Kros# 50f in our former s%eech Phaedrus or 0 said anything harsh against you, b$ame :ysias, the father of the sub6ect (ton tou logou patera)7 (2)/b). :ogos,,5discourse577 has the meaning here of argument, $ine of reasoning, guiding thread animating the s%o*en discussion (the :ogos). 4o trans$ate it by 5sub6ect5 'su;et(, as /obin does, is not mere$y anachronistic. 4he )ho$e intention and the organic unity of signification is destroyed. Eor on$y the 5$i&ing5 discourse, on$y a s%o*en )ord (and not a s%eechAs theme, ob6ect, or sub6ect can ha&e a father1 and, according to a necessity that )i$$ not cease to become c$earer to us from no) on, the logoi are the chi$dren. +$i&e enough to %rotest on occasion and to $et themse$&es be questioned1 ca%ab$e, too, in contrast to )ritten things, of res%onding )hen their father is there. 4hey are their fatherAs res%onsib$e %resence. <ome of them, for e'am%$e, descend from Phaedrus, )ho is sometimes ca$$ed u%on to sustain them. :et us refer again to /obin, )ho trans$ates logos this time not by 5sub6ect5 but by 5argument, 5 and disru%ts in a s%ace of ten $ines the %$ay on the tekhne to logon. (2hat is in question is the tekhne the so%hists and rhetors had or %retended to ha&e at their dis%osa$, )hich )as at once an art and an instrument, a reci%e, an occu$t but transmissib$e 5treatise,5 etc. <ocrates considers the then c$assica$ %rob$em in terms of the o%%osition bet)een %ersuasion 'peitho( and truth Ma$etheiaN '29. a(.) Socrates: 0 agree77if, that is, the arguments (logoi) that come for)ard to s%ea* for oratory shou$d gi&e testimony that it is an art (tekhne). "o) 0 seem, as it )ere, to hear some arguments ad&ancing to gi&e their e&idence that it te$$s $ies, that it is not an art at a$$, but an art$ess routine. 52ithout a gri% on truth,5 says the <%artan, 5there can be no genuine art of s%ea*ing (tou de legein) either no) or in the future.5 Phaedrus: <ocrates, )e need these arguments (<outon dei ton logon, o &okrates). Bring the )itnesses here and $etAs find out )hat they ha&e to say and ho) theyA$$ say it (ti kai pos legousin). Socrates: Come here, then, nob$e brood (gennaia), and con&ince Phaedrus, father of such fine chi$dren (kallipaida te %haidron), that if he doesnAt gi&e enough attention to %hi$oso%hy, he )i$$ ne&er become a com%etent s%ea*er on any sub6ect. "o) $et Phaedrus ans)er (29.e,29 la).

4=K E+4=K/ 8E :8H8<

C9

0t is again Phaedrus, but this time in the &ymposium, )ho must s%ea* first because he is both 5head of the tab$e5 and 5father of our sub6ect5 (pater tou logou) (1))d). 2hat )e are %ro&isiona$$y and for the sa*e of con&enience continuing to ca$$ a meta%hor thus in any e&ent be$ongs to a )ho$e system. 0f logos has a father, if it is a logos on$y )hen attended by its father, this is because it is a$)ays a being (on) and e&en a certain s%ecies of being (the &ophist, 29.a), more %recise$y a li5ing being. :ogos is a 3oon. +n anima$ that is born, gro)s, be$ongs to the phusis. :inguistics, $ogic, dia$ectics, and @oo$ogy are a$$ in the same cam%. 0n describing logos as a 3oon, P$ato is fo$$o)ing certain rhetors and so%hists before him )ho, as a contrast to the cada&erous rigidity of )riting, had he$d u% the $i&ing s%o*en )ord, )hich infa$$ib$y conforms to the necessities of the situation at hand, to the e'%ectations and demands of the inter$ocutors %resent, and )hich sniffs out the s%ots )here it ought to %roduce itse$f, feigning to bend and ada%t at the moment it is actua$$y achie&ing ma'imum %ersuasi&eness and contro$. (12) :ogos, a $i&ing, animate creature, is thus a$so an organism that has been engendered. +n organism: a differentiated body proper, )ith a center and e'tremities, 6oints, a head, and feet. 0n order to be 5%ro%er,5 a )ritten discourse ought to submit to the $a)s of $ife 6ust as a $i&ing discourse does. :ogogra%hica$ necessity (anangke logographike) ought to be ana$ogous to bio$ogica$, or rather @oo$ogica$, necessity. 8ther)ise, ob&ious$y, it )ou$d ha&e neither head nor tai$. Both stru#ture and #onstitution are in question in the ris* run by logos of $osing through )riting both its tai$ and its head# Socrates: +nd )hat about the rest3 DonAt you thin* the different %arts of the s%eech (ta tou logou) are tossed in hit or miss3 8r is there rea$$y a cogent reason for starting his second %oint in the second %$ace3 +nd is that the case )ith the rest of the s%eech3 +s for myse$f, in my ignorance, 0 thought that the )riter bo$d$y set do)n )hate&er ha%%ened to come into his head. Can you e'%$ain his arrangement of the to%ics in the order he has ado%ted as the resu$t of some %rinci%$e of com%osition, some $ogogra%hic necessity3

8.

P:+48;< P=+/>+C? Phaedrus: 0tAs &ery *ind of you to thin* me ca%ab$e of such an accurate insight into his methods. Socrates: But to this you )i$$ sure$y agree# e&ery discourse (logon), $i*e a $i&ing creature (osper 3oon), shou$d be so %ut together (sunestanai) that it has its o)n body and $ac*s neither head nor foot, midd$e nor e'tremities, a$$ com%osed in such a )ay that they suit both each other and the )ho$e (29*,#).

4he organism thus engendered must be )e$$ born, of nob$e b$ood# 7gennaia=,7 )e reca$$, is )hat <ocrates ca$$ed the logoi, those 5nob$e creatures.F 4his im%$ies that the organism, ha&ing been engendered, must ha&e a beginning and an end. =ere, <ocratesA standards become %recise and insistent# a s%eech must ha&e a beginning and an end, it must begin )ith the beginning and end )ith the end# I0t certain$y seems as though :ysias, at $east, )as far from satisfying our demands# itAs from the end, not the beginning, that he tries to s)im (on his bac*O u%stream through the current of his discourse. =e starts out )ith )hat the $o&er ought to say at the &ery end to his be$o&edO5 (29*a). 4he im%$ications and consequences of such a norm are immense, but they are ob&ious enough for us not to ha&e to be$abor them. 0t fo$$o)s that the s%o*en discourse beha&es $i*e someone attended in origin and %resent in %erson. :ogos: 7&ermo tan>uam persona ipse lo>uens,7 as one P$atonic :e'icon %uts it. (13) :i*e any %erson, the logos,3oon has a father. But )hat is a father3 <hou$d )e consider this *no)n, and )ith this term77the *no)n77 c$assify the other term )ithin )hat one )ou$d hasten to c$assify as a meta%hor3 8ne )ou$d then say that the origin or cause of logos is being com%ared to )hat )e *no) to be the cause of a $i&ing son, his father. 8ne )ou$d understand or imagine the birth and de&e$o%ment of logos from the stand%oint of a domain foreign to it, the transmission of $ife or the generati&e re$ation. But the father is not the generator or %rocreator in any 5rea$5 sense %rior to or outside a$$ re$ation to $anguage. 0n )hat )ay, indeed, is the fatherGson re$ation distinguishab$e from a mere causeGeffect or generatorGengendered re$ation, if not by the instance of $ogos3 8n$y a %o)er of s%eech can ha&e a father. 4he father is a$)ays father to a s%ea*ingG$i&ing being. 0n other )ords, it is %recise$y logos that enab$es us to %ercei&e and in&estigate something $i*e %aternity. 0f there )ere a sim%$e meta%hor in the

4=K E+4=K/ 8E :8H8<

81

e'%ression 5father of $ogos,5 the first )ord, )hich seemed the more familiar, )ou$d ne&erthe$ess recei&e more meaning from the second than it )ou$d transmit to it. 4he first fami$iarity is a$)ays in&o$&ed in a re$ation of cohabitation )ith logos. :i&ing7beings, father and son, are announced to us and re$ated to each other )ithin the househo$d of logos. Erom )hich one does not esca%e, in s%ite of a%%earances, )hen one is trans%orted, by 5meta%hor,5 to a foreign territory )here one meets fathers, sons, $i&ing creatures, a$$ sorts of beings that come in handy for e'%$aining to anyone that doesnAt *no), by com%arison, )hat logos, that strange thing, is a$$ about. K&en though this hearth is the heart of a$$ meta%horicity, 5father of $ogos5 is not a sim%$e meta%hor. 4o ha&e sim%$e meta%horicity, one )ou$d ha&e to ma*e the statement that some $i&ing creature inca%ab$e of $anguage, if anyone sti$$ )ished to be$ie&e in such a thing, has a father. 8ne must thus %roceed to underta*e a genera$ re&ersa$ of a$$ meta%horica$ directions, no $onger as*ing )hether logos can ha&e a father but understanding that )hat the father c$aims to be the father of cannot go )ithout the essentia$ %ossibi$ity of logos. + logos indebted to a father, )hat does that mean3 +t $east ho) can it be read )ithin the stratum of the P$atonic te't that interests us here3 4he figure of the father, of course, is a$so that of the good (agathon). :ogos represents )hat it is indebted to# the father )ho is a$so chief, ca%ita$, and good(s . 8r rather the chief, the ca%ita$, the good(s . %ater in Hree* means a$$ that at once. "either trans$ators nor commentators of P$ato seem to ha&e accounted for the %$ay of these schemas. 0t is e'treme$y difficu$t, )e must recogni@e, to res%ect this %$ay in a trans$ation, and the fact can at $east be e'%$ained in that no one has e&er raised the question. 4hus, at the %oint in the ?epubli# )here <ocrates bac*s a)ay from s%ea*ing of the good in itse$f (@A, /.9e), he immediate$y suggests re%$acing it )ith its ekgonos, its son, its offs%ring# . . . $et us dismiss for the time being the nature of the good in itse$f, for to attain to my %resent surmise of that seems a %itch abo&e the im%u$se that )ings my f$ight today. But )hat seems to be the offs%ring (ekgonos) of the good and most near$y made in its $i*eness 0 am )i$$ing to s%ea* if you too )ish it, and other)ise to $et the matter dro%. 2e$$, s%ea* on, he said, for you )i$$ du$y %ay me the ta$e of the %arent another time. 0 cou$d )ish, 0 said, that 0 )ere ab$e to ma*e and you to recei&e the %ayment, and not mere$y as no) the interest

(tokous). But at any rate recei&e this interest and the offs%ring of the good (tokon te kai ekgonon autou tou agathou).

8D

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

<okos, )hich is here associated )ith ekgonos, signifies %roduction and the %roduct, birth and the chi$d, etc. 4his )ord functions )ith this meaning in the domains of agricu$ture, of *inshi% re$ations, and of fiduciary o%erations. "one of these domains, as )e sha$$ see, $ies outside the in&estment and %ossibi$ity of a logos. +s %roduct, the tokos is the chi$d, the human or anima$ brood, as )e$$ as the fruits of the seed so)n in the fie$d, and the interest on a ca%ita$ in&estment# it is a return or re5enue. 4he distribution of a$$ these meanings can be fo$$o)ed in P$atoAs te't. 4he meaning of pater is sometimes e&en inf$ected in the e'c$usi&e sense of financia$ ca%ita$. 0n the ?epubli# itse$f, and not far from the %assage )e ha&e 6ust quoted. 8ne of the dra)bac*s of democracy $ies in the ro$e that ca%ita$ is often a$$o)ed to %$ay in it# 5But these money7ma*ers )ith do)n7bent heads, %retending not e&en to see the %oor, but inserting the sting of their money into any of the remainder )ho do not resist, and har&esting from them in interest as it )ere a manifo$d %rogeny of the %arent sum (tou patros ekgonous tokous pollaplasious), foster the drone and %au%er e$ement in the state5 (///e). "o), about this father, this ca%ita$, this good, this origin of &a$ue and of a%%earing beings, it is not %ossib$e to s%ea* sim%$y or direct$y. Eirst of a$$ because it is no more %ossib$e to $oo* them in the face than to stare at the sun. 8n the sub6ect of this beda@@$ement before the face of the sun, a rereading of the famous %assage of the ?epubli# (J00, /1/# ff is strong$y recommended here. 4hus )i$$ <ocrates e&o*e on$y the &isib$e sun, the son that resemb$es the father, the analogon of the inte$$igib$e sun# 50t )as the sun, then, that 0 meant )hen 0 s%o*e of that offs%ring of the Hood (ton tou agathou ekgonon), )hich the Hood has created in its o)n image (hon tagathon egennesen analogon heautoi), and )hich stands in the &isib$e )or$d in the same re$ation to &ision and &isib$e things as that )hich the good itse$f bears in the inte$$igib$e )or$d to inte$$igence and to inte$$igib$e ob6ects5 (/.8#). =o) does :ogos intercede in this analogy bet)een the father and the son, the nooumena and the horomena0 4he Hood, in the &isib$e7in&isib$e figure of the father, the sun, or ca%ita$, is the origin of a$$ onta, res%onsib$e for their a%%earing and their coming into logos, )hich both assemb$es and distinguishes them# 52e %redicate Ato beA of many beautifu$ things and many good things, saying of them se&era$$y that they are, and so define them in our s%eech (einai phamen te kai diori3omen toi logoi)7 (/.) b). 4he good (father, sun, ca%ita$ is thus the hidden

i$$uminating, b$inding source of logos. +nd since one cannot s%ea* of that )hich enab$es one to

4=K E+4=K/ 8E :8H8<

8,

s%ea* (being forbidden to s%ea* of it or to s%ea* to it face to face , one )i$$ s%ea* on$y of that )hich s%ea*s and of things that, )ith a sing$e e'ce%tion, one is constant$y s%ea*ing of. +nd since an account or reason cannot be gi&en of )hat logos (account or reason# ratio) is accountab$e or o)ing to, since the ca%ita$ cannot be counted nor the chief $oo*ed in the eye, it )i$$ be necessary, by means of a discriminati&e, diacritica$ o%eration, to count u% the %$ura$ity of interests, returns, %roducts, and offs%ring# 52e$$, s%ea* on (lege), he said, for you )i$$ du$y %ay me the ta$e of the %arent another time770 cou$d )ish, 0 said, that 0 )ere ab$e to ma*e and you to recei&e the %ayment, and not mere$y as no) the interest. But at any rate recei&e this interest and the offs%ring of the good. =a&e a care, ho)e&er, $est 0 decei&e you unintentiona$$y )ith a fa$se rec*oning (ton logon) of the interest (tou tokou)7 (/.)a). Erom the foregoing %assage )e shou$d a$so retain the fact that, a$ong )ith the account (logos) of the su%%$ements (to the father7good7ca%ita$7origin, etc. , a$ong )ith )hat comes abo&e and beyond the 8ne in the &ery mo&ement through )hich it absents itse$f and becomes in&isib$e, thus requiring that its %$ace be su%%$ied, a$ong )ith differance and diacriticity, <ocrates introduces or disco&ers the e&er o%en %ossibi$ity of the kibdelon, that )hich is fa$sified, adu$terated, mendacious, dece%ti&e, equi&oca$. =a&e a care, he says, $est 0 decei&e you )ith a fa$se rec*oning of the interest (kibdelon apodidous ton logon tou tokou). Kibdeleuma is fraudu$ent merchandise. 4he corres%onding &erb (kibdeleuo) signifies 5to tam%er )ith money or merchandise, and, by e'tension, to be of bad faith.5 4his recourse to logos, from fear of being b$inded by any direct intuition of the face of the father, of good, of ca%ita$, of the origin of being in itse$f, of the form of forms, etc., this recourse to $ogos as that )hich prote#ts us from the sun, %rotects us under it and from it, is %ro%osed by <ocrates e$se)here, in the analogous order of the sensib$e or the &isib$e. 2e sha$$ quote at $ength from that te't. 0n addition to its intrinsic interest, the te't, in its officia$ /obin trans$ation, manifests a series of s$idings, as it )ere, that are high$y significant. (14) 4he %assage in question is the critique, in the %haedo, of 5%hysica$ists5# Socrates proceeded#770 thought that as 0 had fai$ed in the contem%$ation of true e'istence (ta onta), 0 ought to be carefu$ that 0 did not $ose the eye of my sou$1 as %eo%$e may in6ure their bodi$y eye by obser&ing

8-

P:+48;< P=+/>+C? and ga@ing on the sun during an ec$i%se, un$ess they ta*e the %recaution of on$y $oo*ing at the image (eikona) ref$ected in the )ater, or in some ana$ogous medium. <o in my o)n case, 0 )as afraid that my sou$ might be b$inded a$together if 0 $oo*ed at things )ith my eyes or tried to a%%rehend them )ith the he$% of the senses. +nd 0 thought that 0 had better ha&e recourse to the )or$d of idea (en logois) and see* there the truth of things.... <o, basing myse$f in each case on the idea (logon) that 0 6udged to be the strongest . . .5 (++d,lBBa).

:ogos is thus a resour#e. 8ne must turn to it, and not mere$y )hen the so$ar source is present and ris*s burning the eyes if stared at1 one has a$so to turn a)ay to)ard logos )hen the sun seems to )ithdra) during its ec$i%se. Dead, e'tinguished, or hidden, that star is more dangerous than e&er. 2e )i$$ $et these yarns of suns and sons s%in on for a )hi$e. U% to no) )e ha&e on$y fo$$o)ed this $ine so as to mo&e from logos to the father, so as to tie s%eech to the kurios, the master, the $ord, another name gi&en in the ?epubli# to the good7sun7ca%ita$7father (/.8a). :ater, )ithin the same tissue, )ithin the same te'ts, )e )i$$ dra) on other fi$ia$ fi$aments, %u$$ the same strings once more, and )itness the )ea&ing or unra&e$ing of other designs. ,. 4he Ei$ia$ 0nscri%tion# 4heuth, =ermes, 4hoth, "abu, "ebo Uni&ersa$ history continued to unro$$, the a$$7too7human gods )hom Peno%hanes had denounced )ere demoted to figures of %oetic fiction, or to demons77a$though it )as re%orted that one of them, =ermes 4rismegistus, had dictated a &ariab$e number of boo*s (-D according to C$ement of +$e'andria1 D.,... according to 0amb$icus1 ,9,BDB according to the %riests of 4hoth77)ho is a$so =ermes in the %ages of )hich are )ritten a$$ things. Eragments of this i$$usory $ibrary, com%i$ed or concocted beginning in the third century, go to form )hat is ca$$ed the Corpus Dermeti#um... 77Jorge :uis Borges, 54he Eearfu$ <%here of Pasca$5 + sense of fear of the un*no)n mo&ed in the heart of his )eariness, a fear of symbo$s and %ortents, of the ha)*7$i*e man )hose name he bore soaring out of his ca%ti&ity on osier )o&en )ing, of 4hoth, the god of )riters, )riting )ith a reed u%on a tab$et and bearing on his narro) ibis head the cus%ed moon. 77James Joyce, E %ortrait of the Ertist as a 6oung Fan

4=K E0:0+: 0"<C/0P408"

8B

+nother schoo$ dec$ares that all time has a$ready trans%ired and that our $ife is on$y the cre%uscu$ar and no doubt fa$sified and muti$ated memory or ref$ection of an irreco&erab$e %rocess. +nother, that the history of the uni&erse77and in it our $i&es and the most tenuous detai$ of our $i&es77is the scri%ture %roduced by a subordinate god in order to communicate )ith a demon. +nother, that the uni&erse is com%arab$e to those cry%togra%hs in )hich not a$$ the symbo$s are &a$id . . . 77Jorge :ouis Borges, 54$on, Uqbar, 8rbis 4ertius5 8ur intention here has on$y been to so) the idea that the s%ontaneity, freedom, and fantasy attributed to P$ato in his $egend of 4heuth )ere actua$$y su%er&ised and $imited by rigorous necessities. 4he organi@ation of the myth conforms to %o)erfu$ constraints. 4hese constraints coordinate as a system certain ru$es that ma*e their %resence *no)n, sometimes in )hat is em%irica$$y %artitioned off for us as 5Hree* $anguage5 or 5cu$ture,5 and sometimes, from )ithout, in 5foreign mytho$ogy.5 Erom )hich P$ato has not sim%$y borro)ed, nor borro)ed a sim%$e e$ement# the identity of a character, 4hoth, the god of )riting. 8ne cannot, in fact, s%ea*77and )e donAt rea$$y *no) )hat the )ord cou$d mean here any)ay77of a borro)ing, that is, of an addition contingent and e'terna$ to the te't. P$ato had to ma*e his ta$e conform to structura$ $a)s. 4he most genera$ of these, those that go&ern and articu$ate the o%%ositions s%eechG)riting, $ifeGdeath, fatherG son, masterGser&ant, firstGsecond, $egitimate sonGor%han7bastard, sou$G body, insideGoutside, goodG e&i$, seriousnessG%$ay, dayGnight, sunGmoon, etc., a$so go&ern, and according to the same configurations, Kgy%tian, Baby$onian, and +ssyrian mytho$ogy. +nd others, too, no doubt, )hich )e ha&e neither the intention nor the means to situate here. 0n concerning ourse$&es )ith the fact that P$ato has not mere$y borrowed a simple e$ement, )e are thus brac*eting off the %rob$em of factua$ genea$ogy and of the em%irica$, effecti&e communication among cu$tures and mytho$ogies. (15) 2hat )e )ish to do here is sim%$y to %oint to the interna$, structura$ necessity )hich a$one has made %ossib$e such communication and any e&entua$ contagion of mythemes.

89

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

P$ato, of course, does not describe 4heuth as a character. "ot a sing$e concrete characteristic is attributed to him, neither in the %haedrus nor in the &ery brief a$$usion in the %hilebus. 4hat is at $east ho) things a%%ear. But in $oo*ing more c$ose$y, one comes to recogni@e that the situation he occu%ies, the content of his s%eeches and o%erations, and the re$ations among the themes, conce%ts, and signifiers in )hich his inter&entions are engaged, a$$ organi@e the features of a strong$y mar*ed figure. 4he structura$ ana$ogy that re$ates these features to other gods of )riting, and main$y to the Kgy%tian 4hoth, can be the effect neither of a %artia$ or tota$ borro)ing, nor of chance or P$atoAs imagination. +nd in the simu$taneous insertion, so rigorous and c$ose$y fit, of these traits into the systematic arrangement of P$atoAs %hi$oso%hemes, this meshing of the mytho$ogica$ and the %hi$oso%hica$ %oints to some more dee%$y buried necessity. "o doubt the god 4hoth had se&era$ faces, be$onged to se&era$ eras, $i&ed in se&era$ homes. (16) 4he discordant tang$e of mytho$ogica$ accounts in )hich he is caught shou$d not be neg$ected. "e&erthe$ess, certain constants can be distinguished throughout, dra)n in broad $etters )ith firm stro*es. 8ne )ou$d be tem%ted to say that these constitute the %ermanent identity of this god in the %antheon, if his function, as )e sha$$ see, )ere not %recise$y to )or* at the sub&ersi&e dis$ocation of identity in genera$, starting )ith that of theo$ogica$ rega$ity. 2hat then, are the %ertinent traits for someone )ho is trying to reconstitute the structura$ resemb$ance bet)een the P$atonic and the other mytho$ogica$ figures of the origin of )riting3 4he bringing out of these traits shou$d not mere$y ser&e to determine each of the significations )ithin the %$ay of thematic o%%ositions as they ha&e been $isted here, )hether in P$atoAs discourse or in a genera$ configuration of mytho$ogies. 0t must o%en onto the genera$ %rob$ematic of the re$ations bet)een the mythemes and the %hi$oso%hemes that $ie at the origin of )estern logos. 4hat is to say, of a history77or rather, of =istory77 )hich has been %roduced in its entirety in the philosophi#al difference bet)een mythos and logos, b$ind$y sin*ing do)n into that difference as the natura$ ob&iousness of its o)n e$ement. 0n the %haedrus, the god of )riting is thus a subordinate character, a second, a technocrat )ithout %o)er of decision, an engineer, a c$e&er, ingenious ser&ant )ho has been granted an audience )ith the *ing of the gods. 4he *ing has been *ind enough to admit him to his counse$. 4heuth %resents a tekhne and a pharmakon to the *ing, father, and god )ho s%ea*s or commands )ith his sun7fi$$ed &oice. 2hen the $atter has made his sentence

4=K E0:0+: 0"<C/0P408"

8C

*no)n, )hen he has $et it dro% from on high, )hen he has in the same blow %rescribed that the pharmakon be dro%%ed, 4heuth )i$$ not res%ond. 4he forces %resent )ish him to remain in his %$ace. DoesnAt he ha&e the same %$ace in Kgy%tian mytho$ogy3 4here too, 4hoth is an engendered god. =e often ca$$s himse$f the son of the god7*ing, the sun7god, +mmon7/a# 50 am 4hoth, the e$dest son of /a.F (17) /a (the sun is god the creator, and he engenders through the mediation of the )ord. (18) =is other name, the one by )hich he is in fact designated in the %haedrus, is +mmon. 4he acce%ted sense of this %ro%er name# the hidden. (19) 8nce again )e encounter here a hidden sun, the father of a$$ things, $etting himse$f be re%resented by s%eech. 4he configurati&e unity of these significations77the %o)er of s%eech, the creation of being and $ife, the sun ()hich is a$so, as )e sha$$ see, the eye , the se$f7concea$ment77is con6ugated in )hat cou$d be ca$$ed the history of the egg or the egg of history. 4he )or$d came out of an egg. >ore %recise$y, the $i&ing creator of the $ife of the )or$d came out of an egg# the sun, then, )as at first carried in an eggshe$$. 2hich e'%$ains a number of +mmon7/aAs characteristics# he is a$so a bird, a fa$con (50 am the great fa$con, hatched from his egg5 . But in his ca%acity as origin of e&erything, +mmon7/a is a$so the origin of the egg. =e is designated sometimes as the bird7sun born from the %rima$ egg, sometimes as the originary bird, carrier of the first egg. 0n this case, and since the %o)er of s%eech is one )ith the %o)er of creation, certain te'ts s%ea* of 5the egg of the great cac*$er.5 0t )ou$d ma*e no sense here to as* the at once tri&ia$ and %hi$oso%hica$

88

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

question of 5the chic*en or the egg,AA of the $ogica$, chrono$ogica$, or onto$ogica$ %riority of the cause o&er the effect. 4his question has been magnificent$y ans)ered by, certain sarco%hagi# 58 /a, )ho art in thy egg. 5 0f )e add that this egg is a$so a 5hidden egg,F (20) )e sha$$ ha&e constituted but a$so o%ened u% the system of these significations. 4he subordination of 4hoth, the ibis, e$dest son of the origina$ bird, is mar*ed in se&era$ )ays# in the >em%hitic doctrine, for e'am%$e, 4hoth is the e'ecutor, through $anguage, of =orusA creati&e %ro6ect. (21) =e bears the signs of the great sun7god. =e inter%rets him as a s%o*esman, a standard7bearer. +nd $i*e his Hree* counter%art, =ermes, )hom P$ato moreo&er ne&er mentions, he occu%ies the ro$e of messenger7god, of c$e&er intermediary, ingenious and subt$e enough to stea$, and a$)ays to stea$ a)ay. 4he signifier7god. 2hate&er he has to enounce or inform in )ords has a$ready been thought by =orus. :anguage, of )hich he is de%ositary and secretary, can thus on$y re%resent, so as to transmit the message, an a$ready formed di&ine thought, a fi'ed design. (22) 4he message itse$f is not, but on$y re%resents, the abso$ute$y creati&e moment. 0t is a second and secondary )ord. +nd )hen 4hoth is concerned )ith the s%o*en rather than )ith the )ritten )ord, )hich is rather se$dom, he is ne&er the abso$ute author or initiator of $anguage. 8n the contrary, he introduces difference into $anguage and it is to him that the origin of the %$ura$ity of $anguages is attributed. (23) (:ater, )e )i$$ as*, turning bac* to P$ato and to the %hilebus, )hether differentiation is rea$$y a second ste% and )hether this 5secondarity5 is not the emergence of the gra%heme as the &ery origin and %ossibi$ity

4=K E0:0+: 0"<C/0P408"

89

of logos itse$f. 0n the %hilebus, 4heuth is e&o*ed indeed as the author of difference# of differentiation )ithin $anguage and not of the %$ura$ity of $anguages. But it is our be$ief that at their root the t)o %rob$ems are inse%arab$e. +s the god of $anguage second and of $inguistic difference, 4hoth can become the god of the creati&e )ord on$y by metonymic substitution, by historica$ dis%$acement, and sometimes by &io$ent sub&ersion. 4his ty%e of substitution thus %uts 4hoth in ?a1s pla#e as the moon ta*es the %$ace of the sun. 4he god of )riting thus su%%$ies the %$ace of /a, su%%$ementing him and su%%$anting him in his absence and essentia$ disa%%earance. <uch is the origin of the moon as su%%$ement to the sun, of night $ight as su%%$ement to day$ight. +nd )riting as the su%%$ement of s%eech. 58ne day )hi$e /a )as in the s*y, he said# 14ring me <hoth,1 and 4hoth )as straight)ay brought to him. 4he >a6esty of this god said to 4hoth# 14e in the sky in my pla#e, while A shine o5er the blessed of the lower regions. . . 6ou are in my pla#e, my repla#ement, and you will be #alled thus: <hoth, he who repla#es ?a.1 4hen a$$ sorts of things s%rang u% than*s to the %$ay of /aAs )ords. =e said to 4hoth# AA will #ause you to embra#e (ionh) the two skies with your beauty and your rays1,,and thus the moon (ioh) was born. :ater, a$$uding to the fact that 4hoth, as /aAs re%$acement, occu%ies a some)hat subordinate %osition# AA will #ause you to send (hob) greater ones than yourself,, and thus was born the Abis (hib), the bird of 4hoth.F (24) 4his %rocess of substitution, )hich thus functions as a %ure %$ay of traces or su%%$ements or, again, o%erates )ithin the order of the %ure signifier )hich no rea$ity, no abso$ute$y e'terna$ reference, no transcendenta$ signified, can come to $imit, bound, or contro$1 this substitution, )hich cou$d be 6udged 5mad5 since it can go on infinite$y in the e$ement of the $inguistic %ermutation of substitutes, of substitutes for substitutes1 this un$eashed chain is ne&erthe$ess not $ac*ing in &io$ence. 8ne )ou$d not ha&e understood anything of this 5$inguistic5 5immanence5 if one sa) it as the %eacefu$ mi$ieu of a mere$y fictiona$ )ar, an inoffensi&e )ord7%$ay, in contrast to some raging polemos in 7rea$ity.7 0t is not in any rea$ity foreign to the 5%$ay of )ords5 that 4hoth a$so frequent$y %artici%ates in %$ots, %erfidious intrigues, cons%iracies to usur% the throne. =e he$%s the sons do a)ay )ith the father, the brothers do a)ay )ith the brother that has become *ing. "out, cursed by /a, no $onger dis%osed of a sing$e date, a sing$e day of the ca$endar on )hich she cou$d gi&e birth. /a had b$oc*ed from her a$$ time, a$$ the days and %eriods there )ere for bringing a chi$d into the )or$d. 4hoth, )ho a$so had a %o)er of ca$cu$ation o&er the institution of the

9.

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

ca$endar and the march of time, added the fi&e e%agomenic days. 4his su%%$ementary time enab$ed "out to %roduce fi&e chi$dren# =aroeris, <eth, 0sis, "e%htys and 8siris, )ho )ou$d $ater become *ing in the %$ace of his father Heb. During the reign of 8siris (the sun7*ing , 4hoth, )ho )as a$so his brother, (25) Iinitiated men into arts and $etters,5 and 5created hierog$y%hic )riting to enab$e them to fi' their thoughts.5 (26) But $ater, he %artici%ates in the %$ot $ed by <eth, 8sirisA 6ea$ous brother. 4he famous $egend of the death of 8siris is )e$$ *no)n# tric*ed into being shut u% in a trun* the si@e of his body, he is dismembered, and his fourteen %arts are scattered to the )inds. +fter many com%$ications, he is found and reassemb$ed by his )ife 0sis, a$$ e'ce%t for the %ha$$us, )hich has been s)a$$o)ed by an 8'yrhynchus fish. (27) 4his does not %re&ent 4hoth from acting )ith the c$e&erest and most ob$i&ious o%%ortunism. 0sis, transformed into a &u$ture, $ies on the cor%se of 8siris. 0n that %osition she engenders =orus, 5the chi$d7)ith7his7finger7in7his7mouth,5 )ho )i$$ attac* his fatherAs murderer. 4he $atter, <eth, tears out =orusA eye )hi$e =orus ri%s off <ethAs testic$es. 2hen =orus can get his eye bac*, he offers it to his father77and this eye is a$so the moon# 4hoth, if you )i$$77and the eye brings 8siris bac* to $ife and %otency. 0n the course of the fight, 4hoth se%arates the combatants and, in his ro$e of god7doctor7%harmacist7magician, se)s u% their )ounds and hea$s them of their muti$ation. :ater, )hen the eye and testic$es are bac* in %$ace, a tria$ is he$d, during )hich 4hoth turns on <eth )hose accom%$ice he had ne&erthe$ess once been, and confirms as true the )ords of 8siris. (28) +s a substitute ca%ab$e of doub$ing for the *ing, the father, the sun, and the )ord, distinguished from these on$y by dint of re%resenting, re%eating, and masquerading, 4hoth )as natura$$y a$so ca%ab$e of tota$$y su%%$anting them and a%%ro%riating a$$ their attributes. =e is added as the essentia$ attribute of )hat he is added to, and from )hich a$most nothing distinguishes him. =e differs from s%eech or di&ine $ight on$y as the re&ea$er from the re&ea$ed. Bare$y. (29)

4=K E0:0+: 0"<C/0P408"

91

But before, as it )ere, his adequacy of re%$acement and usur%ation, 4hoth is essentia$$y the god of )riting, the secretary of /a and the nine gods, the hierogrammate and the hy%omnetogra%her. (30) "o), it is %recise$y by %ointing out, as )e sha$$ see, that the pharmakon of )riting is good for hypomnesis (re7memoration, reco$$ection, consignation and not for the mneme ($i&ing, *no)ing memory that 4hamus, in the %haedrus, condemns it as being of $itt$e )orth. 0n $ater e%isodes of the 8siris cyc$e, 4hoth a$so becomes the scribe and boo**ee%er of 8siris, )ho, it shou$d not be forgotten, is then considered his brother. 4hoth is re%resented as the mode$ and %atron of scribes, so im%ortant to the chance$$eries of the Pharaohs# 5)hi$e the sun god is the uni&ersa$ master, 4hoth is his to% functionary, his &i@ir, )ho stands near him in his shi% in order to submit his re%orts.F (31) +s 5>aster of the boo*s,5 he becomes, by dint of consigning them, registering them, *ee%ing account of them, and guarding their stoc*, the 5master of di&ine )ords.F (32) =is fema$e counter%art )rites, too# her name, <eshat, doubt$ess means she,who,writes. 5>istress of $ibraries,5 she records the e'%$oits of the *ings. 4he first goddess &ersed in the art of engra&ing, she mar*s the names of the *ings on a tree in the tem%$e of =e$io%o$is, )hi$e 4hoth *ee%s account of the years on a notched %o$e. 4here is a$so the famous scene of the roya$ intitu$ation re%roduced on the bas7re$iefs of numerous tem%$es# the *ing is seated beneath a %ersea7tree )hi$e 4hoth and <eshat inscribe his name on the $ea&es of a sacred tree. (33) +nd a$so the scene of the $ast 6udgment# in the under)or$d, o%%osite 8siris, 4hoth records the )eight of the heart7sou$s of the dead. (34) Eor it goes )ithout saying that the god of )riting must a$so be the god of death. 2e shou$d not forget that, in the %haedrus, another thing he$d

9D

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

against the in&ention of the pharmakon is that it substitutes the breath$ess sign for the $i&ing &oice, c$aims to do )ithout the father ()ho is both $i&ing and $ife7gi&ing of logos, and can no more ans)er for itse$f than a scu$%ture or inanimate %ainting, etc. 0n a$$ the cyc$es of Kgy%tian mytho$ogy, 4hoth %resides o&er the organi@ation of death. 4he master of )riting, numbers, and ca$cu$ation does not mere$y )rite do)n the )eight of dead sou$s1 he first counts out the days of $ife, enumerates history. =is arithmetic thus co&ers the e&ents of di&ine biogra%hy. =e is 5the one )ho measures the $ength of the $i&es of gods and men.F (35) =e beha&es $i*e a chief of funerea$ %rotoco$, charged in %articu$ar )ith the dressing of the dead. <ometimes the dead %erson ta*es the %$ace of the scribe. 2ithin the s%ace of such a scene, the dead oneAs %$ace 'la pla#e du mort a$so Q the dummy, in bridgeN then fa$$s to 4hoth. 8ne can read on the %yramids the ce$estia$ history of one such sou$# 512here is he going01 asks a great bu$$ threatening him )ith his horn5 ()e shou$d note in %assing that another name for 4hoth, /aAs nocturna$ re%resentati&e, is the 5bu$$ among the stars5 . 51De1s going full of 5ital energy to the skies, to see his father, to #ontemplate ?a,1 and the terrifying creature $ets him %ass.5 (4he boo*s of the dead, %$aced in the coffin ne't to the cor%se, contained in %articu$ar formu$as enab$ing him to 5go out into the $ight of day5 and see the sun. 4he dead %erson must see the sun# death is the %rerequisite, or e&en the e'%erience, of that face7to7face encounter. 8ne thin*s of the %haedo.) Hod the father )e$comes him into his bar*, and 5it e&en ha%%ens that he $ets off his o)n ce$estia$ scribe and %uts the dead man in his pla#e, so that he ;udges, arbitrates, and gi5es orders to one who is greater than himself.F (36) 4he dead man can a$so sim%$y be identified )ith 4hoth# 5he is sim%$y ca$$ed a god1 he is 4hoth, the strongest of the gods.F (37) 4he hierarchica$ o%%osition bet)een son and father, sub6ect and *ing, death and $ife, )riting and s%eech, etc., natura$$y com%$etes its system )ith that bet)een night and day, 2est and Kast, moon, and sun. 4hoth, the 5nocturna$ re%resentati&e of /a, the bu$$ among the stars,F (38) turns to)ard the )est. =e is the god of the moon, either as identified )ith it or as its %rotector. (39) 4he system of these traits brings into %$ay an origina$ *ind of $ogic# the figure of 4hoth is o%%osed to its other (father, sun, $ife, s%eech, origin or

4=K E0:0+: 0"<C/0P408"

9,

orient, etc. , but as that )hich at once su%%$ements and su%%$ants it. 4hoth e'tends or o%%oses by re%eating or re%$acing. By the same to*en, the figure of 4hoth ta*es sha%e and ta*es its sha%e from the &ery thing it resists and substitutes for. But it thereby o%%oses itself, %asses into its other, and this messenger7god is tru$y a god of the abso$ute %assage bet)een o%%osites. 0f he had any identity77but he is %recise$y the god of nonidentity77he )ou$d be that #oin#identia oppositorum to )hich )e )i$$ soon ha&e recourse again. 0n distinguishing himse$f from his o%%osite, 4hoth a$so imitates it, becomes its sign and re%resentati&e, obeys it and #onforms to it, re%$aces it, by &io$ence if need be. =e is thus the fatherAs other, the father, and the sub&ersi&e mo&ement of re%$acement. 4he god of )riting is thus at once his father, his son, and himse$f. =e cannot be assigned a fi'ed s%ot in the %$ay of differences. <$y, s$i%%ery, and mas*ed, an intriguer and a card, $i*e =ermes, he is neither *ing nor 6ac*, but rather a sort of ;oker, a f$oating signifier, a )i$d card, one )ho %uts %$ay into %$ay. 4his god of resurrection is $ess interested in $ife or death than in death as a re%etition of $ife and $ife as a rehearsa$ of death, in the a)a*ening of $ife and in the recommencement of death. 4his is )hat numbers, of )hich he is a$so the in&entor and %atron, mean. 4hoth re%eats e&erything in the addition of the su%%$ement# in adding to and doub$ing as the sun, he is other than the sun and the same as it1 other than the good and the same, etc. +$)ays ta*ing a %$ace not his o)n, a %$ace one cou$d ca$$ that of the dead or the dummy, he has neither a %ro%er %$ace nor a %ro%er name. =is %ro%riety or %ro%erty is im%ro%riety or ina%%ro%riateness, the f$oating indetermination that a$$o)s for substitution and %$ay. %lay, of )hich he is a$so the in&entor, as P$ato himse$f reminds us. 0t is to him that )e o)e the games of dice (kubeia) and draughts (petteia) (2)*d). =e )ou$d be the mediating mo&ement of dia$ectics if he did not a$so mimic it, indefinite$y %re&enting it, through this ironic doub$ing, from reaching some fina$ fu$fi$$ment or eschato$ogica$ rea%%ro%riation. 4hoth is ne&er %resent. "o)here does he a%%ear in %erson. "o being7there can %ro%er$y be his own. K&ery act of his is mar*ed by this unstab$e ambi&a$ence. 4his god of ca$cu$ation, arithmetic, and rationa$ science (40) a$so %resides o&er the occu$t sciences, astro$ogy and a$chemy. =e is the god of magic formu$as that ca$m the sea, of secret accounts, of hidden te'ts# an archety%e of =ermes, god of cry%togra%hy no $ess than of e&ery other 7gra%hy.

9-

P:+48;< P=+/>+C?

<cience and magic, the %assage bet)een $ife and death, the su%%$ement to e&i$ and to $ac*# the %ri&i$eged domain of 4hoth had, fina$$y, to be medicine. +$$ his %o)ers are summed u% and find em%$oyment there. 4he god of )riting, )ho *no)s ho) to %ut an end to $ife, can a$so hea$ the sic*. +nd e&en the dead. (41) 4he ste$es of =orus on the Crocodi$es te$$ of ho) the *ing of the gods sends 4hoth do)n to hea$ =arsiesis, )ho has been bitten by a sna*e in his motherAs absence. (42) 4he god of )riting is thus a$so a god of medicine. 8f 5medicine5# both a science and an occu$t drug. 8f the remedy and the %oison. 4he god of )riting is the god of the pharmakon. +nd it is )riting as a pharmakon that he %resents to the *ing in the %haedrus, )ith a humi$ity as unsett$ing as a dare.

Notes 1. 4". 0t shou$d be noted that the Hree* )ord Lcr+o$R%os, )hich here begins the essay on P$ato, is the $ast )ord %rinted in :ittre;s $ong definition of the Erench )ord #oup, )ith )hich the Dors,li5re has 6ust %$ayfu$$y $eft off. D. 7Distos: anything set upright, hence# 0. mast. 00. beam of a $oom, )hich stood u%right, instead of $ying hori@onta$ as in our $ooms (e'ce%t in the )ea&ing methods used by the Hobe$ins and in 0ndia to )hich the threads of the )ar% are attached, hence# 1. loom 2. the war fixed to the loom, hence, the woof -. wo5en #loth, pie#e of #an5as *. by ana$. spider web or honey#omb of bees. 000. rod, wand, sti#k. 0J. by ana$. shinbone, leg.7 ,. 5<tranger# it is difficu$t, my dear <ocrates, to demonstrate anything of rea$ im%ortance )ithout the use of e'am%$es. K&ery one of us is $i*e a man )ho sees things in a dream and thin*s that he *no)s them %erfect$y and then )a*es u%, as it )ere, to find he *no)s nothing. 6oung &o#rates: 2hat do you mean by this3 &tranger: 0 ha&e made a rea$ foo$ of myse$f by choosing this moment to discuss our strange human %$ight )here the )inning of *no)$edge is concerned. 6oung &o#rates: 2hat do you mean3 &tranger: K'am%$e, my good friend, has been found to require an e'am%$e. 6oung &o#rates: 2hat is this3 <ay on and do not hesitate for my sa*e. &tranger: A will,,in fact, 0 must, since you are so ready to fo$$o). 2hen young chi$dren ha&e on$y 6ust $earned their $etters . . . (hotan arti grammaton empeiroi gignontai . . . )7 (DCCd e, trans. <*em% . +nd the descri%tion of the inter)ea&ing (sumploke) in )riting necessitates recourse to the %aradigm in grammatica$ e'%erience, and then %rogressi&e$y $eads to the use of this %rocedure in its 5*ing$y5 form and to the e'am%$e or %aradigm of )ea&ing. -. <G. 4he basic Kng$ish7$anguage of P$atoAs dia$ogues to )hich 0 sha$$ refer is <he Colle#ted Dialogues of %lato (ed. Kdith =ami$ton and =untington Cairns , Bo$$ingen <eries :PP0 (Princeton, G.H.: Princeton Uni&ersity Press, 1991 . 4he dia$ogues ha&e been trans$ated by the fo$$o)ing# =ugh 4redennic* (Epology, Crito, %haedo) Ben6amin Jo)ett (Charmides, :a#hes, Fenexenus, :esser Dippias, Cratylus, <imaeus, !reater Dippias) H. 2right (:ysis) :ane Coo%er (Iuthyphro, Aon) 2. D. 2oodhead (!orgias) 2. K. C. Huthrie (%rotagoras, Feno) 2. =. D. /ouse (Iuthydemus) /. =ac*forth (%haedrus, %hilebus) >ichae$ Hoy#e (&ymposium) Pau$ <hor$ey (?epubli#) E. >. Cornford (<heaetetus, %armenides, &ophist) H. B. <*em% (&tatesman) +. K. 4ay$or (Critias, :aws, Ipinomis) :. +. Post (:etters).

0 ha&e a$so consu$ted and sometimes %artia$$y ado%ted the renditions gi&en in the fo$$o)ing# %haedrus, trans. 2. C. =e$mbo$d and 2. H. /abino)it@ (0ndiana%o$is# Bobbs>erri$$ Kducationa$ Pub$ishing, 4he :ibrary of :ibera$ +rts, 19B9 1 !orgias, trans. 2. =ami$ton (Ba$timore# Penguin Boo*s, 199. 1 Epology, Crito, %haedo, &ymposium, ?epubli#, trans. Ben6amin Howett, in Dialogues of %lato (Gew ?or*# 2ashington <quare Press, 19B1 1 ?epubli#, trans. E. >. Cornford (Gew ?or* S :ondon# 8'ford Uni&ersity Press, 19-1 1 <he :aws, trans. 4re&or J. <aunders ("e) ?or*# Penguin Boo*s, 19C. . 0n addition, 0 ha&e occasiona$$y modified the )ording or )ord order of the P$atonic te'ts in order to bring them into $ine )ith the %arenthetica$ Hree* inserts. <ome minor ad6ustments ha&e a$so been made )hen it seemed necessary to achie&e a c$oser %ara$$e$ to the Erench &ersion )ith )hich Derrida is )or*ing. 4he %arenthetica$ numbers gi&en after the quotations are the standard references to the <te%hanus edition of P$atoAs )or*s, traditiona$$y re%roduced in a$$ trans$ations. B . 8n the history of inter%retations of the %haedrus and the %rob$em of its com%osition, a rich, detai$ed account can be found in :. /obinAs :a <heorie platoni#ienne de l1amour, Dd ed. (Paris# Presses Uni&ersitaires de Erance, 199- , and in the same authorAs 0ntroduction to the Bude edition of the %haedrus. 9. =. /aeder, %latons philosophis#he Intwi#kelung(:eip3ig, 19.B . + critique of this &ie), 5<ur $a com%osition du %hedre,7 by K. Bourguet, a%%eared in the ?e5ue de Fetaphysi>ue et de Forale, 1919, %. ,,B. C. P. Erutiger, :es Fythes de %laton (Paris# +$can, 19,. . 8. 4". =ac*forth trans$ates 5reci%e51 =e$mbo$d S /abino)ir@, 5remedy.5 9. =ere, )hen it is a question of logos, /obin trans$ates tekhne by 5art.5 :ater, in the course of the indictment, the same )ord, this time %ertaining to )riting, )i$$ be rendered by 5technica$ *no)$edge5 "#onnaissan#e te#hni>ue$. 1.. 2hi$e <aussure, in his Course in !eneral :inguisti#s, e'c$udes or sett$es the question of )riting in a sort of %re$iminary e'cursus or hors dAoeu&re, the cha%ter /ousseau de&otes to )riting in the Issay on the Brigin of :anguages is a$so %resented, des%ite its actua$ im%ortance, as a sort of some)hat contingent su%%$ement, a ma*eu% criterion, 5another means of com%aring $anguages and of 6udging their re$ati&e antiquity.5 4he same o%eration is found in =ege$As In#y#lopedia cf. 5:e Puits et $a %yramide,5 (171998 in Degel et la pensee

moderne, (Paris# Presses Uni&ersitaires de Erance, 19C., co$$. 5K%imethee.5 . 11. Eor P$ato, 4hamus is doubt$ess another name for +mmon, )hose figure (that of the sun *ing and of the father of the gods )e sha$$ s*etch out $ater for its o)n sa*e. 8n this question and the debate to )hich it has gi&en rise, see Erutiger, Fythes, p D,,, n. D, and notab$y Kis$er, IP$aton und das agy%tische +$%habet,5 Er#hi5 fur !es#hi#hte der %hilosophie, 19DD1 Pau$y72isso)a, ?eal,In#y#lopadie der #lassis#hen Eltertumswissens#haft (art. +mmon 1 /oscher, :exikon der grie#his#hen und romis#hen Fythologie (art. 4hamus . 1D. 4he association logos,3oon a%%ears in the discourse of 0socrates Egainst the &ophists and in that of +$cidamas Bn the &ophists. Cf. a$so 2. <uss, )ho com%ares these t)o discourses $ine by $ine )ith the %haedrus, in Ithos: &tudien 3ur alteren grie#his#hen ?hetorik (:ei%@ig, 191. , %%. ,- ff) and +. Dies, 5Phi$oso%hie et rhetorique,5 in Eutour de %laton (Paris# Harbrie$ Beauchesne, 19DC 0, 1.,. 1,. Er. +st, :exi>ue platoni#ien. Cf. a$so B. Parain, Issai sur le logos platoni#ien (Paris# Ha$$imard, 19-D , %. D111 and P. :ouis, :es Fetaphores de %laton (Paris# :es Be$$es :ettres, 19-B , %%. -, --. 1-. 0 am indebted to the friendshi% and a$ertness of Erancine >ar*o&its for ha&ing brought this to my attention. 4his te't shou$d of course be %$aced a$ongside those of boo*s J0 and J00 of the ?epubli#. 1B. 2e can here on$y refer the reader to a$$ the e'isting studies of the communications bet)een Hreece and the Kast or >idd$e Kast. <uch scho$arshi% abounds. 8n P$ato, his re$ations )ith Kgy%t, the hy%othesis of his &oyage to =e$io%o$is, the testimony of <trabo and Diogenes :aertius, one can find the references and essentia$ documentation in EestugiereAs ?e5elation d1Dermes <rismegiste (Paris# J. Haba$da, 19--77B- , &o$. 11 /. Hode$As %laton a Deliopolis d 1Igypte (Paris# :es Be$$es :ettres, 19B9 1 and <. <auneronAs :es %retres de l1an#ienne Igypte (Paris# :e <eui$, 19BC . 19. Cf. Jacques Jandier, :a ?eligion egyptienne (Paris# Presses Uni&ersitaires de Erance, 19-9 , es%. %%. 9-79B. 1C . Cf. <. >oren@, :a ?eligion egyptienne (Paris# Payot, 199D , %. B8. 4his formu$ation is note)orthy, according to >oren@, through its use of the first %erson. 54his rarity seems

remar*ab$e to us because such formu$ae are common in the hymns com%osed in Hree* )hich in&o$&e the Kgy%tian goddess 0sis (50 am 0sis,5 etc. 1 there is thus good reason to )onder )hether this does not %oint to some e'tra7Kgy%tian origin of these hymns.5 18. Cf. <. <auneron, %. 1D,# 54he initia$ god had on$y to speak to create1 and the beings and things e&o*ed )ere born through his &oice,5 etc. 19. Cf. >oren@, %. -9, and <. <auneron, )ho %ro&ides the fo$$o)ing account# 52hat his name signifies e'act$y, )e do not *no). But it )as %ronounced in the same )ay as another )ord meaning Ato hide,A Ato concea$ onese$f,A and the scribes %$ayed on that assonance so as to define +mmon as the great god )ho mas*s his rea$ countenance before his chi$dren.... <ome )ent e&en further than that# =ecataeus of +bdera records a sacerdota$ tradition according to )hich this name (+mmon is su%%osed to be the e'%ression used in Kgy%t to ca$$ someone . . . 0t is indeed true that the )ord amoini means Acome,A Acome to meA1 it is a fact, furthermore, that certain hymns begin )ith the )ords Emoini Emoun . . . ACome to me, +mmon. 4he simi$arity of sound a$one bet)een these t)o )ords made the %riests sus%ect that there )as some intimate $in* bet)een them77to see therein an e'%$anation of the di&ine name# thus, in addressing the %rimordia$ god . . . as an in&isib$e, hidden being, they in&ite and e'hort him, ca$$ing him +mmon, to sho) himse$f to them and unmas* himse$f5 (%. 1DC . D.. Cf. >oren@, %%. D,D7,,. 4he %aragra%h that is about to end here )i$$ ha&e mar*ed the fact that this %harmacy of P$atoAs a$so brings into %$ay 'entraine$ Batai$$eAs te't, inscribing )ithin the story of the egg the sun of the accursed %art "la part maudite$ the )ho$e of that essay, as )i$$ quic*$y become a%%arent, being itse$f nothing but a reading of Jinnegans 2ake. D1. Cf. Jandier, %. ,9# 54hese t)o gods =orus and 4hoth )ere said to ha&e been associates in the creati&e act, =orus re%resenting the thought that concei&es and 4hoth the s%eech that e'ecutes5 (%. 9- . Cf. a$so +. Krman, :a ?eligion des Igyptiens (Paris# Payot , %. 1 18. DD. Cf. >oren@, %%. -9 -C1 and Eestugiere, %%. C. C,. +s a messenger, 4hoth is consequent$y a$so an inter%reter, hermeneus. 4his is one, among numerous others, of the features of his resemb$ance )ith =ermes. Eestugiere ana$y@es this in cha%ter of his boo*. D,. J. Cerny cites a hymn to 4hoth beginning in the fo$$o)ing terms# 5=ai$ to thee, >oon74hoth, )ho made different the tongue of one country from another.5 Cerny had thought this document

unique, but soon disco&ered that Boy$an (<hoth: <he Dermes of Igypt !:ondon, 19DD( had quoted (%. 18- another ana$ogous %a%yrus (Iyou )ho distinguished !or se%arated( the tongue of country from country5 and sti$$ another (%. 19C (5you )ho distinguished the tongue of e&ery foreign $and5 . Cf. J. Cerny, 7<hoth as Creator of :anguages, 7 Hournal of Igyptian Er#haeology ,- (19-8 # 1D1 ff1 <. <aunerson, :a Differen#iation des languages d1apres la tradition egyptienne, Bu$$etin de $Ainstitut francais dA+rcheo$ogie orienta$e du Caire (Cairo, 199. . D-. Krman, %%. 9. 91. DB. 0bid. %. 99. D9. Jandier, %. B1. DC. 0bid. %. BD. D8. Krman, %. 1.1 D9. 4hus it is that the god of )riting can become the god of creati&e s%eech. 4his is a structura$ %ossibi$ity deri&ed from his su%%$ementary status and from the $ogic of the su%%$ement. 4he same can a$so be seen to occur in the e&o$ution of the history of mytho$ogy. Eestugiere, in %articu$ar, %oints this out# 54hoth, ho)e&er, does nor remain content )ith this secondary ran*. +t the time )hen the %riests in Kgy%t )ere forging cosmogonies in )hich the $oca$ c$ergy of each area sought to gi&e the %rimary ro$e to the god it honored, the theo$ogians of =ermo%o$is, )ho )ere com%eting )ith those of the De$ta and of =e$io%o$is, e$aborated a cosmogony in )hich the %rinci%a$ share fe$$ to 4hoth. <ince 4hoth )as a magician, and since he *ne) of the %o)er of sounds )hich, )hen emitted %ro%er$y, unfai$ing$y %roduce their effect, it )as by means of &oice, of s%eech, or rather, incantation, that 4hoth )as said to ha&e created the )or$d. 4hothAs &oice is thus creati&e# it sha%es and creates1 and, condensing and so$idifying into matter, it becomes a being. 4hoth becomes identified )ith his breath1 his e'ha$ation a$one causes a$$ things to be born. 0t is not im%ossib$e that these =ermo%o$itan s%ecu$ations may offer some simi$arity )ith the :ogos of the Hree*s77at once <%eech, /eason, and Demiurge77and )ith the &ophia of the +$e'andrian Je)s1 %erha%s the Priests of 4hoth e&en under)ent, )e$$ before the Christian era, the inf$uence of Hree* thought, but this cannot be so$id$y affirmed5 (%. 98 . ,.. 0bid.1 cf. a$so Jandier, %assim, and Krman, %assim. ,1. Krman, %. 81.

,D. 0bid. ,,. Jandier, %. 18D. ,-. Jandier, %%. 1,97,C1 >oren@, %. 1C,1 Eestugiere, %. 98. ,B. >oren@, %%. -C -8. ,9. Krman, %. D-9. ,C. 0bid. %. DB.. ,8. 0bid. %. -1. ,9. Boy$an, %%. 9D7CB1 Jandier, %. 9B1 >oren@, %. B-1 Eestugiere, %. 9C. -.. >oren@, %. 9B . +nother of 4hothAs com%anions is >aat, goddess of truth . <he is a$so Idaughter of /a, mistress of the s*y, she )ho go&erns the doub$e country, the eye of /a )hich has no match.5 Krman, in the %age de&oted to >aar, notes# 5 .... one of her insignia, Hod *no)s )hy, )as a &u$ture feather5 (%. 8D . -1. Jandier, %%. C 0 ff. Cf. es%ecia$$y Eestugiere, %%. D8C ff )here a number of te'ts on 4hoth as the in&entor of magic are assemb$ed. 8ne of them, )hich %articu$ar$y interests us, begins# 5+ formu$a to be recited before the sun: 1A am 4hoth, in&entor and creator of %hi$ters and $etters, etc.A 5 (D9D . -D. Jandier, %. D,.. Cry%togra%hy, medicina$ magic, and the figure of the ser%ent are in fact intert)ined in an astonishing fo$* ta$e transcribed by H. >as%ero in :es Contes populaires de l1Igypte an#ienne (Paris# K . Hui$moro, 1911 . 0t is the ta$e of <atni7Lhamois and the mummies. <atni7Lhamois, the son of a *ing, 5s%ent his days running about the metro%o$is of >em%his so as to read the boo*s )ritten in sacred scri%t and the boo*s of the Double Douse of :ife. 8ne day a nob$eman came a$ong and made fun of him. 7A2hy are you $aughing at me3A 4he nob$eman said# 7 A0 am not $aughing at you1 but can 0 he$% $aughing )hen you s%end your time here deci%hering )ritings that ha&e no %o)ers3 0f you rea$$y )ish to read effecti&e )riting, come )ith me1 0 )i$$ send you to the %$ace )here you )i$$ find the boo* )hich 4hoth himse$f has )ritten )ith his o)n hand and )hich )i$$ %$ace you 6ust be$o) the gods. 4here are t)o formu$as )ritten in it# if you recite the first, you )i$$ charm the s*y, the earth, the )or$d of night, the mountains, the )aters1 you )i$$ understand )hat the birds of the s*y and the re%ti$es are a$$ saying, as they are1 you )i$$ see the fish, for a di&ine force )i$$ ma*e them rise to the surface of the )ater. 0f you read the second

formu$a, e&en if you are in the gra&e you )i$$ reassume the form you had on earth1 e&en sha$$ you see the sun rising in the s*y, and its cyc$e, and the moon in the form it has )hen it a%%ears. A<atni cried1 ABy my $ifeO $et me *no) )hat you )ish and 0 )i$$ ha&e it granted you1 but ta*e me to the %$ace )here 0 can find the boo*OA 4he nob$eman said to <atni# A4he boo* in question is not mine. 0t is in the heart of the necro%o$is, in the tomb of "enofer*e%tah, son of *ing >ineb%tah.... 4a*e great heed not to ta*e this boo* a)ay from him, for he )ou$d ha&e you bring it bac*, a %itchfor* and a rod in his hand, a $ighted bra@ier on his head.... A Dee% inside the tomb, $ight )as shining out of the boo*. 4he doub$es of the *ing and of his fami$y )ere beside him, Athrough the &irtues of the boo* of 4hoth. A . . . +$$ this )as re%eating itse$f. "enofer*e%tah had a$ready himse$f $i&ed <atniAs story. 4he %riest had to$d him# A4he boo* in question is in the midd$e of the sea of Co%ros, in an iron cas*et. 4he iron cas*et is inside a bron@e cas*et1 the bron@e cas*et is inside a cas*et of cinnamon )ood1 the cas*et of cinnamon )ood is inside a cas*et of i&ory and ebony. 4he cas*et of i&ory and ebony is inside a si$&er cas*et. 4he si$&er cas*et is inside a go$den cas*et, and the boo* is found therein. !<cribeAs error3 the first &ersion 0 consu$ted had consigned or re%roduced it1 a $ater edition of >as%eroAs boo* %ointed it out in a note# 54he scribe has made a mista*e here in his enumeration. =e shou$d ha&e said# inside the iron cas*et is . . . etc.5 (0tem $eft as e&idence for a $ogic of inc$usion .( +nd there is a schoene !in Pto$emyAs day, equa$ to about 1D,... roya$ cubits of