_Hippias_ was a marvellously all-round genius. He once came to the Olympian festival with everything that he wore or carried made by himself, ring, oil bottle, shoes, clothes, a wonderful Persian girdle; he also brought epic poems, tragedies, dithyrambs, and all sorts of prose-works.[522] He knew astronomy, geometry, arithmetic, grammar. At Sparta he taught history and archæology. He had a wonderful system of mnemonics, by which, if he once heard a string of fifty names, he could remember them all.[523] He lectured on Homer and other poets. He also composed a moral discourse, which won great applause at Sparta, where quibbles or bad morality would have been sternly repressed; it was afterwards delivered in an Athenian school-room. Hippias was always ready to answer any question which was put to him, and was rarely at a loss.
A less prominent Sophist was _Antiphon_, who must be carefully distinguished from his namesake the Attic orator. He published works on physics, on concord (ὁμόνοια [homonoia]), and on political science. The fragments are interesting, and show some popular handling of ethical teaching. The following extracts[524] will give some idea of the man:――
“First among things human I reckon education. For if you begin anything whatever in the right way, the end will probably be right also. The nature of the harvest depends upon the seed you sow. If you plant good education in a young body, it bears leaves and fruit the whole life long, and no rain or drought can destroy it.”
“Life is like a day’s sentry-duty, and the length of life is comparable to a single day. While our day lasts, we look up to the sunlight, then we pass on our duty to our successors.”
“A miser stored up money in a hiding-place, and did not lend or use it. Then it was stolen. A man to whom he had refused to lend it told him to put a stone in the hiding-place instead, and imagine that it was money; it would be just as useful.”
Among the Sophists were some apparently who were merely jesters, and used their brains solely in arousing laughter. It may well be doubted whether the account which Plato gives of _Euthudemos_ and _Dionusodoros_ is true to life; but they probably represent a type. As teachers, no sane man could take them seriously. They had been gladiators, and had taught forensic rhetoric; afterwards they discovered a genius for quibbles. They were ready to make out any statement to be true or false. The respondent may only answer “Yes” or “No,” and no previous statement could be quoted against them, since they did not claim to teach anything consistent. A sample[525] of their arguments will make their methods clearer. “_A._ Your father is a dog. _B._ So is yours. _A._ If you answer my questions, you will admit it. Have you a dog? _B._ Yes, a very bad one. _A._ Has it puppies? _B._ Mongrels like itself. _A._ Then the dog is a father? _B._ Yes. _A._ Isn’t the dog yours? _B._ Certainly. _A._ Then being yours and a father, it is your father, and you are the brother of puppies.” Absurd as it is, such discussions are a good means of teaching logic, since they make the search for rules intellectually compulsory.