Eternal glory

Heraclitus wrote:
αἱρεῦνται γὰρ ἒν ἀντὶ ἀπάντων οἱ ἄριστοι, κλέος ἀέναον θνητῶν· οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ κεκόρηνται ὄκωσπερ κτήνεα (Fragments B29).
Again, like in my last blog, I give different translations of this Greek text:

- For even the best of them choose one thing above all others, immortal glory among mortals, while most of them are glutted like beasts. (Source)
- The best of men choose one thing in preference to all else, immortal glory in preference to mortal good; whereas the masses simply glut themselves like cattle. (Source)
- The best of men refrain from everything for one thing, so that they continuously get respect from mortals, but most people glut like cattle in the yard. (This is the re-translation into English of the text in my Dutch edition of the Fragments, ed. by Ben Schomakers (Source))

Again we see here, like in my last blog, some striking differences in the translations. However, I think that the essence of Heraclitus’ text is this:
- The best of men look for eternal glory from the mortals, while most people glut themselves like cattle.

How should we interpret this? According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Heraclitus “recommends” here “the conventional Greek goal of seeking fame: ‘The best choose one thing above all, the everlasting fame of mortals; the many gorge themselves like cattle’ ” This should be in line with other texts by Heraclitus like “Gods and men honour those who are slain by Ares.” and “Greater deaths win greater portions.” (B24 and B25) On the other hand, Heraclitus speaks about glory given by the mortals (κλέος θνητῶν), and that he speaks of mortals, and not, for instance, of men, or that he doesn’t simply say “eternal glory” without any specification, may have a reason. According to Schomakers (Source, p. 70) the word “mortals” puts the text into another perspective: Glory given by mortals is transitory. It doesn’t last forever and will fade away. Actually, there is not much difference between the “external” satisfaction of glory given by mortals and the “external” satisfaction given by stuffing your stomach. (the word “eternal” is used by Schomakers) Implicitly, the text may suggest that it is better to follow your internal morality, your internal values and norms, than to keep yourself busy with this external satisfaction. Don’t be fascinated by the superficial.

This makes me think of what Montaigne tells us in his essay “Not to communicate one’s glory” (Essays, Book I-41; discussed by me in a blog two years ago): “Of all the follies of the world, that which is most universally received is the solicitude of reputation and glory”. Although I think that there is much truth in Montaigne’s view that glory is a folly, nevertheless, I think that to strive for some glory or fame can be practical. For a small amount of glory or fame, can help to open doors. Often people cannot reach their goals because nobody knows them and because just for this reason they are not taken seriously. Once people know you, or rather have heard of you, they tend to listen better to you and are more disposed to help (and maybe they even think that they can profit by helping you). And this can make realizing your personal values and norms easier.