nna, and many such.
Dicearchus, and some other, carp at Plato's majesty, that he would
vouchsafe to indite such love toys: amongst the rest, for that dalliance
with Agatho,

"Suavia dans Agathoni, animam ipse in labra tenebam;
Aegra etenim properans tanquam abitura fuit."

For my part, saith [4423]Maximus Tyrius, a great Platonist himself, _me non
tantum admiratio habet, sed eliam stupor_, I do not only admire, but stand
amazed to read, that Plato and Socrates both should expel Homer from their
city, because he writ of such light and wanton subjects, _Quod Junonem cum
Jove in Ida concumbentes inducit, ab immortali nube contectos_, Vulcan's
net. Mars and Venus' fopperies before all the gods, because Apollo fled,
when he was persecuted by Achilles, the [4424]gods were wounded and ran
whining away, as Mars that roared louder than Stentor, and covered nine
acres of ground with his fall; Vulcan was a summer's day falling down from
heaven, and in Lemnos Isle brake his leg, &c., with such ridiculous
passages; when, as both Socrates and Plato, by his testimony, writ lighter
themselves: _quid enim tam distat_ (as he follows it) _quam amans a
temperante, formarum admirator a demente_, what can be more absurd than for
grave philosophers to treat of such fooleries, to admire Autiloquus,
Alcibiades, for their beauties as they did, to run after, to gaze, to dote
on fair Phaedrus, delicate Agatho, young Lysis, fine Charmides, _haeccine
Philosophum decent_? Doth this become grave philosophers? Thus peradventure
Callias, Thrasimachus, Polus, Aristophanes, or some of his adversaries and
emulators might object; but neither they nor [4425]Anytus and Melitus his
bitter enemies, that condemned him for teaching Critias to tyrannise, his
impiety for swearing by dogs and plain trees, for his juggling sophistry,
&c., never so much as upbraided him with impure love, writing or speaking
of that subject; and therefore without question, as he concludes, both
Socrates and Plato in this are justly to be excused. But suppose they had
been a little overseen, should divine Plato be defamed? no, rather as he
said of Cato's drunkenness, if Cato were drunk, it should be no vice at all
to be drunk. They reprove Plato then, but without cause (as [4426]Ficinus
pleads) "for all love is honest and good, and they are worthy to be loved
that speak well of love." Being to speak of this admirable affection of
love (saith [4427]Valleriola) "there lie