{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03272027373823781, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00855431993156544, 'mean_word_length': 4.755282051282052, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Title: Of false philosophers and inept teachers: Theodore Prodromos’ satirical writings (with a translation of the poem Against the old man with a long beard)

Ψευδοφιλόσοφοι και Αδαείς Δάσκαλοι:Τα Σατιρικά Κείμενα του Θεοδώρου ΠροδρόμουΟρισμένα από τα σατιρικά κείμενα του Θεοδώρου Προδρόμου (όπωςο Φιλοπλάτων, ο Αμαθής, ή το ποίημα κατά μακρογενείου γέροντος)μπορούν να θεωρηθούν ως οι διδακτικές του προγραμματικές δηλώσεις.Επιπλέον δείχνουν πώς αντιλαμβανόταν ο Πρόδρομος την «ὑπόκρισιν»,να προσποιείται δηλαδή κάποιος ότι είναι ένας άλλος.

as it is usually referred to), which is translated in the appendix, belongs to the latter group. It shares its purpose with, and evokes the same literary motifs and traditions as other, hitherto unstudied, works by Prodromos, such as the Ἀμαθής, and the Φιλοπλάτων. The main focus of this contribution will thus be on two interconnected issues -a competition between γραμματικοί, and an ensuing ὑπόκρισις, i.e. pretending to be somebody else.
The poem Against the old man draws heavily on Lucianic imagery -perhaps most importantly, it should be noted how the self-proclaimed philosopher is contrasted with Menippos, who himself performed the role of "a self-parodic preacher making fun of supernatural attempts to get at the truth" 4 . Menippos, a character from Lucianic texts (vv. 25-26), might forcibly cut both the beard and the lifted eyebrows of the impostor. This imagery serves several purposes simultaneously. To begin with, when taken in tandem with the reference to Thoukritos as the symbol of old age, it roots the text in the Lucianic tradition, and more specifically the tradition of anti-(pseudo)philosophical discourse 5 . Such discourse has a long tradition, and was also popular with the Latin authors of the Imperial age such as Fronto, Gellius, and Apuleius. Additionally, as with Prodromos, the figure of the false philosopher in their writings symbolized a general concern of their age, "a deep concern about the prevalence of teachers who engaged in higher education without displaying any inclinations or qualities relevant for those who should be an intellectual and moral example to their pupils" 6 . Moreover, the reference to Menippos also dictates the tone of the text, which could be read as a "Menippean satire" -as Northrop Frye has noted: "The Menippean satire deals less with people as such than with mental BYZANTINA ΣΥΜΜΕΙΚΤΑ 30 (2020), 131-148 attitudes" 7 . Thus, Prodromos' text becomes a mixture of both social and intellectual satire. It addresses both a real social problem facing his times (a surplus of teachers vying for the attention of potential students) 8 and also highlights the problem of intellectual frauds, who twist the definitions of wisdom, rhetoric, and philosophy. Prodromos thus (re)creates a Lucianic world populated by frauds, false prophets and charlatans, which mirrors his own concerns as a twelfth century γραμματικός.
This short work is usually paired with a second verse invective authored by Prodromos, Κατὰ φιλοπόρνου γραός (Against an old lustful woman) 9 . While these two texts bear some similarities on the level of diction (e.g. the use of the Lucianic figure of Thoukritos), their purposes appear to be rather different. While the invective against the old hag looks like yet another réécriture of the old literary τόποι that can be found in ancient Greek poetry 10 , the poem against an old man is a form of Prodromos' educational manifesto, in which he both defends his teaching method and attacks the false philosophers and γραμματικοί 11 . Moreover, while the poem against the old crone is indeed a collection of invectives taken from ancient Greek poetry, comedy and the epigrammatic tradition, the other work is built on a completely different principle. Instead of merely piling up abuses, Prodromos collects anecdotes and comparisons, and these ultimately serve the purpose of extolling his own knowledge, rather than simply ridiculing the opponent. Therefore, the poem can be surmised to be closer to two other satirical works by Prodromos: the Lover of Plato or the leather tanner (the Φιλοπλάτων ἢ Σκυτοδέψης) and the Uneducated man, or the false grammarian (the Ἀμαθής ἢ παρὰ ἑαυτῷ γραμματικός). In the Φιλοπλάτων, Prodromos' monologue opens with lavish praise of Plato, who seemingly has but one flaw: he was not gifted with attributes of a non-existent tenth Muse BYZANTINA SYMMEIKTA 30 (2020), 131-148 described as ἐμπνευσίλογος 12 . This is a ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, which can be roughly translated as "the one who is the inspiration for reason/thinking". This obscure passage might in fact hold the key to the interpretation of this piece -even Plato, qua his works, does not have the power to breathe inspiration and knowledge into a person who has just begun to read them (οὐ μὴν καὶ γνῶσιν ἐμπνέειν ἔλαχες τοῖς ἐκ πρώτης, ὅ φασιν, ἀφετηρίας πελάσασί σου ταῖς βίβλοις). This is the Prodromos γραμματικός speaking -everyone needs proper guidance, and a proper teacher. What follows is a stinging attack on a person who claims to be well-versed in Platonic philosophy but, in fact, knows nothing about it. At the same time, it is also a warning against being misled by a bad teacher: Εἶτα ἵνα σε, Πλάτων, παραλιπὼν ἐπὶ τὸν ὑβριστήν σου τῆς βίβλου τράπωμαι, καὶ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀποτενοῦμαι τὸν λόγον.
However, the Φιλοπλάτων is much richer in sophisticated abuses than the poem Against the old man. The self-proclaimed specialist in Plato's philosophy is called the ass of Cumae (κυμαῖος ὄνος), rural Praxiteles (lit. Praxiteles from barley, κρίθινος Πραξιτέλης), and Mud-Plato (Πηλοπλάτων). However, all these invectives are elaborated allusions to fables, Lucianic texts or other literary sources. For example, "rural Praxiteles" alludes both to the famous sculptor and the phrase κρίθινος Δημοσθένης (Herm. Id. 2.11), the ass of Cumae refers to the proverbial story from Lucian's The Fisher (c. 32) wherein the ass pretends to be a lion. The nickname "Mud-Plato" was given to a Greek rhetorician, Alexander of Seleukia (Philostr.VS 2.5.1). According to tradition, one of his listeners is supposed to have said that after Alexander's speech, instead of Plato he found πηλός (mud).
12. LBGr, s.v.: Denken einhauchend. 13. ("So, having left you, Plato, aside, I will turn to this person who offended your book and my speech will be directed to him. Therefore, the Φιλοπλάτων creates the impression that its main purpose is not to denigrate the pseudo-specialist but to rather demonstrate Theodore Prodromos' knowledge and promote him as the true (and better) teacher of Plato's philosophy. Perhaps the list of philosophers mentioned in the Against the old man also has a deeper purpose. Not only does it refer to real philosophers who did not need an extravagant beard to be called wise (such as Plato, Aristotle, Empedokles, Pythagoras, and Socrates) 14 , it also announces Prodromos' own versatility when it comes to teaching philosophy.
What is even clearer is how Prodromos expresses his programmatic educational statements in the Ἀμαθής 15 . This work is directed against a (false) γραμματικός, who is apparently lacking the necessary basic scholarly competencies required to teach. However, instead of simply hurling invective against the γραμματικός, Prodromos delineates what looks to be a part of the curriculum studiorum 16 . Prodromos' list includes a discussion regarding the definition(s) of grammar (or more precisely, a division between elementary and advanced) and their relationship to both ἐμπειρία and τέχνη. His arguments go back to Plato and Aristotle (who are both mentioned by Prodromos), but he also alludes to the works of Dionysios the Thrax and 14. It would be tempting to conclude that this list is arranged according to some criteria such as Prodromos' personal preference or the importance of the philosophers mentioned in the poem.
15. Prodromos also reveals both his educational methods and the content of his teaching in other texts, see N. Philo of Alexandria 17 . Next, he moves on to the issues of etymology, by criticizing a way of teaching it: the self-proclaimed grammarian, arguably following some unmentioned ancient authority, explains the name Xenophon as "the one who was killed in foreign lands" 18 . Finally, Prodromos discusses σύγκρισις (here exemplified by the comparison between Homer and Hesiod). This is, however, by no means a random list: Prodromos, under the guise of an insult, demonstrates to the listener/reader the whole array of his teachings -this starts from the basics (what is grammar? how should teaching therefore be structured?) to linguistic issues, and finally to a discussion of the poets (what is earlier described as advanced grammar) and more specifically to the σύγκρισις being one of the προγυμνάσματα. Similar to the Φιλοπλάτων, the entire text is an educational manifesto that is designed to display Prodromos' knowledge and educational programme.
All three texts, albeit different in form, tackle the same topiceducation-and all of them also contain an elaborated insult. However, it might be naïve for us to believe that the antagonists: a false philosopher, a self-proclaimed γραμματικός, and an incompetent teacher of Plato, might have been real people. Jean François Boissonade, in his edition of the poem Against the old man, went as far as to suggest that the name of the false philosopher was Thoukritos 19 . While it cannot be excluded that the literary protagonists had some real-life counterparts, or were inspired by real people at the very least, it is equally possible to surmise that they were just figments of Prodromos' imagination. In the 11th century, some of the invective poems penned by literati and γραμματικοὶ provide testimony for what is called λογικοὶ ἀγῶνες. These formalised contests were supposed to showcase the skills of both students, and of teachers who hoped to attract pupils 20 . I argue that the satirical/education texts by Prodromos do not reflect real contests (or any formalised rivalry) between teachers. They are rather imaginary  ἀγῶνες, where the opponent is not of importance, and most likely does not exist at all, but rather this is an opportunity to display the author's knowledge and underscore the attractiveness of his teaching programme that needs highlighting. In a highly competitive society, such a presentation of the teacher, his offer and his competences could be construed as more attractive and convincing.
A LIFE AMONGST ΥποΚρΙΤΑΙ One of the recurring themes in some of the Prodromic works is ὑπόκρισις, which is understood as 'pretending' and 'mimicry'. These also occur, while not immediately connected to his activities as a teacher, in works such as Against an old woman. (Remember that you are an actor in a play, which is decided by its producer: if short, [it will be] short; if long, [it will be] long. If he wants you to perform as a beggar, so you perform even that in a skillful manner, as with a cripple, a ruler or a citizen. Because this is what you should do: to perform the role that is given to you well.) In the later period, this imagery was extensively used by Theodore Metochites, see W. Puchner, Greek Theatre Between Antiquity consequently develops, especially, but not exclusively, in his writings categorised as satirical.
Prodromos' description of social interactions based on theatrical imagery is also reminiscent of Edwin Goffman's dramaturgical metaphor, which was later adopted and developed by other scholars 24 . According to this model, social interactions are understood in terms of how people live and behave, akin to actors performing on a stage. These performances (presentations of self) are designed to convince the audience (other people), and to make a specific impression on them 25 . A successful performance means that the audience is convinced by the actor and does not challenge the presentation. Prodromos, in his works, positions himself as a member of the audience, and questions the social performance of the objects of his attack (whether these are imaginary is irrelevant at this juncture) and seeks to expose their act (in Goffman's model, this would roughly -but not completely-correspond with the role of a "spotter", a person who has more insightful information about a performance and reveals these insights to the audience). In his writings, Prodromos uses vocabulary and imagery designed to underscore the act of pretending, and to illustrate the attempts being made to convince others of the possession of skills and wisdom that one does not really have.
Prodromos almost obsessively refers to Aesopian fables in his texts, and uses tales which tell the story of dissimulation and pretending to possess certain talents and qualities: the story about a donkey disguised as a lion (Perry no. 188); a weasel turned into a man by Aphrodite (Perry no. 50); a raven cheated by a fox because he believed in the fox's deceitful praises (Perry no. 126). In the Ἀμαθὴς, not only does he openly state that the self-proclaimed grammarian "plays/imitates a teacher" (εὖ οἶδ᾿ ὅτι, 25. gOffman, The Presentation, 10: "They [observers] are asked to believe that the character they see actually possesses the attributes he appears to possess […]". τὸν διδάσκαλον ὑποκρίνοιο) but he also reverts to using a theatrical comparison. According to Prodromos, even the mimes have to train in order to be able to perform and dance the κόρδαξ. Given the usual disdain for and low status of scenic performers, in addition to the thoroughly negative connotations of the κόρδαξ, this comparison is meant as an obvious insult 26 . Furthermore, it could be assumed that Prodromos, by bringing forth this type of performative analogy, sought to highlight the imitation performed by the γραμματικός. In the Φιλοπλάτων, the act of reading and interpreting the writings of Plato by the unqualified teacher is also described as a performance: ἔπειτα τὸ πλατωνικὸν ἀναπτύσσεις βιβλίον καὶ τοῦτο κατὰ κεφαλῆς, νὴ τὸν οὐρανόν, καὶ καθιζάνεις ἐπὶ τοῦ γόνατος καί, τὸν πῆχυν ἐπερείδῃ τῇ παρειᾷ καὶ παντοίως τὸν ἀναγινώσκοντα σχηματίζῃ, οἷς τε ὑποψήλλεις 27 τὼ χείλη καὶ οἷς τὰ βλέφαρα ξυγχαλᾷς 28 This excerpt illustrates how the pseudo-specialist does not actually read -he just assumes the role of somebody who reads by re-creating the bodily posture and movement. Such a bodily performance reaches its extreme in the poem Against an old lustful woman, as the piece focuses on describing how the protagonist attempts to conceal her age and her old looks, along with how she plays a young girl when she is no longer able to attract young lovers. She uses makeup in order to deceive spectators and to appear younger 30 . In other words, the body of the old hag becomes a corporeal performance that is presented to play with potential spectators 31 . However, the machinations of an old woman will still be uncovered, and her efforts to conceal her true age, 26. J. kOder, Kordax und Methe: lasterhaftes Treiben in byzantinischer Zeit, ZRVI 50 (2013), 947-948.
27. According to LSJ ὑποψήλλω means "to sing". However, here it is probably meant as murmuring, silently speaking senseless things.
28. Lit. "loosen eyelids". 29. ed. migliOrini [as in n. 13], 69 ("And then you open the Platonic book and, for heaven's sake, upside down, and you put it on your lap, you press [your] fists against your cheek and you in every aspect assume the position of someone who is reading: you both murmur with your lips and squint your eyes"). as well as her attempts to seduce a younger lover using material means, will fail. As the narrator states proverbially, only someone very stupid would eat dung mixed with honey or would marry a pig covered with gold 32 , and this statement underscores the fact that external qualities qua ornaments which do not correspond to someone's character, age, and education make him or her simply look hilarious. Similarly, Prodromos speaks in the Philoplaton about a ruby on a pig, a golden ring worn by a monkey, and a weasel in a purple robe, while in the Ἀμάραντος, or the passions of an old man, he tells the story of an older philosopher, Stratokles, who marries a young girl and uses extensive makeup and a haircut to hide his age and act as a young groom 33 .
However, the most misused prop in these performances is the philosophical beard 34 . The protagonists of Prodromos' stories refer to it as having the power to transform them into philosophers, teachers, and wise people. In the Ἀμαθής, when the false γραμματικὸς puts on a performance, he lets his beard loose (χαλάσεις μὲν τὴν ὑπήνην), while in the poem Against the old man, the beard plays a central role, as it becomes the most important sign of the old man's wisdom. The act of having it shorn off by Menippos, Lucian's porte parole (vv. 21-29) could perhaps be conceived as the act of revealing the truth with the help of satirical, Lucianic, writing. However, what is most interesting would be how the beard defines Stratokles in the Ἀμάραντος. Before his transformation into a groom, Stratokles presents himself as a philosopher: Ταῦτα ὁ μὲν ἔλεγεν· ἐθαυμάζομεν δὲ ἡμεῖς καὶ ἐμακαρίζομεν καὶ τῷ ὄντι εὐδαίμονα ἐκαλοῦμεν, τῇ τε διδασκαλίᾳ τῶν ὤτων οἷον ἐξαιωρούμενοι δεινότατος γὰρ εἰπεῖν ὁ ἀνήρ-καὶ τῇ ἰδέᾳ πιστεύοντες· ἥ τε γὰρ ὑπήνη καθεῖτο μέχρι καὶ ἐπὶ γόνατον καὶ ὁ τράχηλος ἐσιμοῦτο καὶ συνέσπαστο ἡ ὀφρῦς καὶ ἡ ὤχρα περιεπλανᾶτο τὸ πρόσωπον καὶ τὸ ὅλον εἰπεῖν φιλόσοφον αὑτὸν καὶ τοῖς ἀγνοοῦσι 32 The appearance of Stratokles was just a performance designed to convince the audience that he was a philosopher. However, he changed his appearance when his aims were redefined -instead of playing a philosopher in order to impress listeners, he turned himself into a groom: he wore heavy makeup, his beard was cut in a way that was inappropriate for a philosopher. Performing the self does not exclude mutability, and therefore a person's identity is not unchangeable, and could be remade as the person interacts with others -this is exactly what Stratokles does when he reinvents himself to interact with his bride and wedding guests. Amarantos, one of his former students, however, sees this new performance as fundamentally contradictory to the previous one, and consequently he believes that the earlier Stratokles merely impersonated a philosopher/teacher. Nevertheless, Stratokles' new appearance is also described with the help of theatrical imagery (ὅθεν ἡμῖν εὑρεθείη οὗτος ὁ μῖμος), and thus supports the suggestion that this is indeed just a new performance.
Enacting a performance, however, goes beyond corporeal presentation. In the Sale of Lives (Βίων πρᾶσις), one of the auctioned characters is Hippocrates, who promises to turn the potential buyer into a successful doctor 36 . Hippocrates' advice is to recite the titles of his works and as many maxims as possible. This is more than just a re-use of a traditional τόπος of an incompetent medic, and Hippocrates' instruction is reminiscent of the superficial knowledge that is displayed by the self-proclaimed grammarian in the Ἀμαθής, and the incompetent teacher of Plato in the Φιλοπλάτων. The doctor from Kos is not teaching how to be a real doctor but how to perform as one. 35. T. migliOrini, Teodoro Prodromo Amaranto, MEG 7 (2007), ch. 8, 85. ("He said this, and we admired him, praised him and called him fortunate indeed, and we were all ears when he taught, because the man is a terrific speaker, and we trusted in his appearance. For his beard fell down to his knees and his neck was bent, his eyebrows were drawn together, and ochre was all over his face and, generally speaking, his look indicated that he was a philosopher even to those who did not know him. But yesterday, my dear, unveiled the drama and took away the skene and revealed the truth").
Understandably enough, Prodromos embeds the notion of a ὑπόκρισις within the theatrical imagery -through bodily movements, makeup, and even props. This theatrical/dramatical connection was more thoroughly explored by Eustathios of Thessalonike in his oration On simulation (Περὶ ὑποκρίσεως), wherein the contemporary ὑπόκρισις was presented as a corrupted offshoot of the ancient dramatical art 37 . Eustathios discusses various manifestations of this phenomenon, including false friends, politicians, and even wives who pretend to be happy in a marriage (Γυνὴ γὰρ ὑποκρινομένη τὸ τῆς συζυγίας εὐάρμοστον, οἰστρηλατεῖται εἰς μοιχικόν, ed. tafel 9.19). Bishop's treatment of a ὑπόκρισις is both wider and more general than that of Prodromos, as he is more concerned with morality and the moral implications of falsehood, lying and pretence. Prodromos, as stated earlier, is perhaps less troubled by the moral consequences and more so by the immediate effect of a ὑπόκρισις on his own well-being. CONCLUSION Prodromos seems to be obsessed with people who pretended to be someone else, or to use an anachronistic description, with con-men who had social motivations. As stated earlier, a surplus of literati who sought positions as teachers, or a job in the state administration, or who sought to secure a commission from a wealthy patron in twelfth-century Constantinople, thereby resulted in fierce competition between them. Moreover, it was not only knowledge or innovative methods that counted. Rather, it was likely that the ability to present one's skills -to perform-was also a factor. As Emmanuel Bourbouhakis notes, "competition among rhetors in Byzantium was not decided on the basis of texts alone; the brilliance of a speech was a function of the performance it enabled" 38 . This must have led to situations where less skilled teachers and literati relied more on their performative skills than on their knowledge. Greater importance was attached to external, unimportant symbols and appearances, such as the 'philosophical beard', rather than real wisdom and experience.
A closer reading of texts, many of which are concerned with similar issues such as teaching and ὑπόκρισις, suggests that Prodromos, similarly to Lucian, recycled his own motifs, ideas, and imagery by creating new works out of old ones. This multiplying of works on seemingly identical topics should, however, be construed as a conscious literary technique, where similar problems were given varied literary forms. Prodromos was "the new Lucian", but this descriptor should be understood as much more than simply a superficial comparison. Rather, what makes the Byzantine author a true successor to the Syrian satirist was the use of similar motifs and imagery to express his own opinions and social fears. TRANSLATION

Against an old man, who thinks himself wise because of his long beard
Yow ow ow! 39 That bushy beard, which that decrepit, putrid old man, Thoukritos 40 , lets fall, all the way down to his breast. Yow ow ow! That smell, that stench of goat! 5 Oh, that burden so enormous of the beard! How big is its length, its width how big, how big, quite simply, all its dimensions.
39. "Yow ow ow" gr. ἰαταταιάξ; a interjection defined by the ancient and Byzantine lexica as expressive of sorrow (θρηνητικὸν ἐπίρρημα; Suda s.v.); used in Old Attic Comedy (Aristophanes, Ἱππῆς 1); the translation "Yow ow ow" is Jeffrey Henderson's. Prodromos used the same word once again in a satirical/comical context in the song of the chorus in the Κατομυομαχία (v. 193). I am grateful to Janek Kucharski for his help in preparing the commentary. Some fragments of the translation were used in J. kucharski -P. marciniak, The Beard and its Philosopher [as in n. 11].
40. Thoukritos is a protagonists of the Dialogi mortuorum, 16. This dialogue tells the story of a young legacy hunter, Terpsion, who squandered his own means and health striving to inherit the wealth of the nonagenarian Thoukritos, and ultimately died before him; the name Thoukritos is never before associated with such a figure in extant literature; Prodromos' protagonist is also very old, and elsewhere he uses the name as a byword for old age, see Against an old lustful woman 3. for the sweet Syrian will provide us with it, having drawn it from his writing tablets. And should the dog come first, woe to you, wretch; for he will not only cut off your beard, but also with it a part of your eyebrows 42 . 30 You're foolishly deluding yourself, old man, taking the exuberance of your beard to be a sign of philosophy. Indeed, the man from Athens, the great one, the glory of dialogues 43 , the theologian, 35 the purest reason, nature above nature, the son of Ariston, whose name was Plato, . Perhaps then this passage should be translated "Empedokles who became an addition to fire". 46. "If … indeed" (εἰ μέν) -following Mangelli's conjecture (E. magnelli, Prodromea (con una nota su Gregorio di Nazianzo), Medioevo Greco 10 (2010), 120-21); the MS reads "if they had not" (εἰ μή).
47. "There was a certain Archibiades, nicknamed Laconistes, because in imitation of the Spartans, he let his beard grow to an extravagant size" (πώγωνά τε καθειμένος ὑπερφυῆ μεγέθει), always wore a short cloak, and had a scowl on his face. Phokion was once interrupted in the council, and called upon this man for testimony and support in what he said. But when the man rose up and gave such counsel as was pleasing to the Athenians, Phokion seized him by the beard (ἁψάμενος αὐτοῦ τῶν γενείων) and said: "O Archibiades, why then didst thou not shave yourself" (τί οὖν οὐκ ἀπεκείρω), Plutarch, Φωκίων 10.1 (tr. B. Perrin; Loeb); the point here is that Phokion himself was considered a stern laconophile (more in terms of mores than foreign policy) and expected support from an apparently kindred spirit; with his hopes frustrated, he questions the laconizing stance of Archebiades (J. kirchner, Prosopographia Attica, 2 vols (Berlin, 1901), 1302; Α Lexikon of Greek Personal Names II 2, 4) by asking him to shave off the beard he wore in a Spartan fashion; the whole story seems highly anecdotal, and its authenticity has been questioned. BYZANTINA  It seems to me that you assign philosopher's grace rather to the flocks of goats if you're defining reason by the beard: for it is goats that grow a big beard. But let us not give reason to the beard, 75 nor count goats among philosophers: Just like among intelligent men no one would be called wise having put on a himation which reaches to his feet, or at least girded around the waist 51 .
As Plato ungirded in yesterday's times 80 came to the heart of the Academy and spoke these words to his students: "if Plato gird himself today, and spoke girded, he would be no better than of yesterday 52 ; for it is not garments that distinguish men of knowledge, nor the changing fashions of belts and sandals, 85 but spirited nature and learning from books, and great eloquence in argument and inquiry". Thus long beards have nothing to do with judging the intellect of both student and teacher. My good man, even if the entire philosophy 90 did indeed hang from your beard, you ought to cut it nonetheless, so that you would avoid its ugliness; since the beauty of limbs comes from due proportion, of hands, legs, -simply speaking-the entire body 53 , 95 while all contractions and dilations bring ugliness, just as vices do, so does the dignity of the beard lie in proportion. "Moderation is the best thing", as the old saying goes 54 . But, my dear beard, do grow even more, 100 cut your way forward in every direction, in width and in length 55 and drag down along with you the back of that decrepit one, until you break him down completely.
52. Following the sense suggested by magnelli, Prodromea, 122; the source of the anecdote is unknown. Perhaps Prodromos alludes to the Roman custom of wearing an ungirded tunica when a person was at home or resting and thus creating a difference between a working and resting person. However, Plato's philosopher remains a philosopher regardless of what he is wearing (and how). 54. Μέτρον ἄριστον: This is a saying attributed, like many others, to Kleoboulos of Lindos.
55. lit: 'grow in width and grow in length'.