Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
PREFACE.
THIS
is
translation
of
the
second
section
of
Dr.
Zeller's
tf
Philosophic
der
Gbriechen,
Dritter
Theil,
Erste
Abtheilung/
The
first
section
of
the
volume,
concerning1
the
Stoics,
Epicureans,
and
Sceptics,
has
already
been
translated
by
Dr.
Reichel.
The
present
translation
has
been
made
from
the
third
and
latest
edition
of
the
German
work.
S.
CLIFTON
Seirfeniber
14
1883.
Errata.
Page
83,
line
15
:
for
belonged
read
belongs
95,
"
"
26
:
for
fundamental
impulse
read
impulse
116,
" "
2
:
for
their
read
its
162,
"
"
19
:
for
read
we
205,
"
31
:
"
for
effects
read
affect
206,
9, "
6
:
for
enquires
read
asks
207,
"
2
:
"
substitute
a
semicolon
for
a comma^
after
'doctrine,'
210,
"
13
:
"
substitute
a
note
of
interrogation
for
a
after
comma
'ourselves.'
294,
" "
3
:
for
under
read
in
357,
"
lines
and
for
:
that
universal,
which
he
claims
for
all
men as
their
inborn
conviction
read
that
universal
viction con-
which
he
claims
for
all
men
innate
as
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER
I.
PAGE
ORIGIN
AND
CHAKACTEK
OF
ECLECTICISM
.
Gradual
causes
blending
of
of 1 sg.
the
schools
causes
of
philosophy:
:
this,
External the
philosophy
diffusion of later eclectic upon
among-
Romans,
14.
17.
6.
philosophy,
Principle
philosophy,
21 ;
Contained
germs
22
scepticism,
and
of
Neo-Platonism,
CHAPTEB,
II.
ECLECTICISM
INT
THE
SECOND
AND
FIRST
CENTURIES
BEFORE
CHRIST
THE
EPICUREANS
ASCLEPIADES
24
Relation
ades
of
the
later
Epicureans
29 sq.
to
Epicurus,
24.
Aeclepi-
of
Bithynia,
CHAPTER
III.
THE
STOICS
BOETHUS,
PAN^ETIUS,
POSIDONIUS
.
34:
Successors
Character 43
of
Ohrysippus,
of his
34.
Boethus,
42.
Pansetius,
from
philosophy,
47.
sff.
Ethics,
52.
Contemporaries
56. 64. 7O
disciples
Panaetius,
50. first
Posidonius,
His before
H^s
philosophic
Other Stoics of
anthropology,
Chrisfe,
the
century
vi
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER
THE
IV.
PAGE
ACADEMIC CENTURY
PHILOSOPHERS
IN
THE
FIRST
BEFORE
CHRIST
.75
.
Pbilo
of
Larissa,
75.
His
His theory of scepticism of of 85. Polemic Antiochus 81. Ascalon, knowledge, essential Eclecticism 87. : against scepticism, ment agreeof of the various 91 theory knowledge, 93. systems, j of the
Modification
Physics Potamo,
and
Antiochus,
109
94. 103.
Ethics,
Arms
95.
School
of 106.
Didymus,
CHAPTER
THE PERIPATETIC
V.
IN
SCHOOL BEFORE
THE
FIRST
CENTURY
CHRIST
.112
.
The
Commentators: of
Andronicus
of
Rhodes,
113.
Boethus
Siclon, 117.
and theories 132.
on
Aristo, others,
as
Staseas,
s%.
The
Xenarchus,
various
to
origin,
date
145
treatise,
Treatise
Origin
and
composition,
virtues
vices,
CHAPTER
CICERO
-
VI.
VARRO
.146
Cicero,
Practical Its limits, 151. scepticism, 149. of philosophy, 156. view Eclecticism of innate : doctrine pology, Anthro159. Ethics, 162. knowledge, Theology, 167. of His 171. 169. view Yarro, philosophy and the various schools, 172. Ethics, 173. Anthropology and philosophy, 176
146. His
CHAPTER,
THE
SCHOOL
OF
THE
SEXT1I
.180
and
History
of
the
school,
80.
Its
philosophic character
standpoint, 183
CONTENTS.
Tii
CHAPTER
THE FIRST SCHOOL CENTURIES OF THE
VIII.
PAGE
AFTER STOICS
"
CHRIST SENECA
"
THE
.
.189
Philosophy in the Imperial period : study of the ancient of Endowment of public chairs philosophers, 189. of the Stoics from The the first school philosophy, 190.
to
the
third His
century,
of
194 of the
SQ.
Cornutus,
199.
Seneca,
202.
conception
merely
Uselessness of
dialectic, 207.
Physics,
Metaphysical
and
world The and nature, 217. theological views, 212. speculative theories, Uncertainty of Seneca's Man, 219. His 225, ethics essentially Stoic in principle, 226. of Stoic Modification Application of pardogmas, 227. ticular
moral
doctrines,
Love
235.
Independence
239.
of
things
perament, tem-
external, 236.
242
of
mankind,
Religious
CHAPTER
THE
STOICS
CONTINUED
MARCUS
MTTSONIUS,
.
EPICTETUS, 246
.
AURELIUS
Musonius,
255.
246.
His
-practical standpoint,
and
248.
His
ethics,
end of 260.
Arrian,
world,
256.
Practical of
Inferior the of
value 268.
knowledge,
266.
;
Man,
Ethics,
clination In-
Independence
and
to
things
of 272. the
external
resignation to
270
destiny
mankind,
His
the
course
universe,
Gentleness
sq. love
Cynicism,
275.
and
of 276.
274,
Marcus of
Aurelius
277.
Antoninus,
His
practical
of the
view
all
philosophy,
; the
theoretic
opinions
order
; flux of
things, 279
sgr*
Deity, Providence,
of
man
world,
280
Kinship
into
to
God,
283.
Ethics, 284.
to the
Withdrawal 285.
self, 284.
Eesignation
286
will of God,
I^ove of mankind,
viii
CONTENTS.
CHAPTEB
THE
X.
PAGE
CYNICS
OF
THE
IMPERIAL
ERA
.288
.
Revival
of
Cynicism,
291. 299.
289.
adherents,
Bemonax,
290 296.
sq.
metrius, DePere-
(Enomaus,
Later
grinus,
Cynics,
CHAPTER
THE PERIPATETICS
AFTER
XI.
THE
OF
FIRST
.
CENTURIES
.
CHRIST
.304
304%
The
Peripatetic school
Commentators
of
of
the
first and
second
:
century,
Aristocles
318.
on
Aristotle's
works
Aspasius, Adrastus,
of
Herminus,
Sosig-enes, Alexander 314. of Aphrodisias, Messene, for Aristotle's writings and commentaries
Achaicus,
The 324. Particular The soul of and the
vovs,
306.
Apologies
them,
322.
Universal,
324.
and
Matter,
329.
and the
God
world,
Extinction
CHAPTEB
THE PLATONIC
AFTER
XII.
IN
CHRISTIAN
SCHOOL
THE
THE
FIRST ERA
.
CENTURIES
.
334
.
Platonists
of
this
337.
.
period,
Atticus,
334.
Commentators of alien
of
Platonic
writings,
"by
Taurus
Introduction
340.
doctrines
and
Eclecticism
344
opposed exemplified, in
CHAPTER
ECLECTICS Dio
WHO BELONG TO
XIII.
MO DEFINITE SCHOOL
351
Lucian, 357. Chrysostom, 353. Galen, 360. Character of his philosophy, 362. Theory of knowledge, 362 sg. Logic, 363. Physics and metaphysics, 365. Contempt for theoretic Ethics, 370 enquiry, 369.
IKDEX
373
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
I.
ORIGIN
AND
CHARACTER
OF
ECLECTICISM.
THAT
form
of
philosophy
the the
its had
to
which
appeared period
about
the
in
CHAP.
beginning
the
course
of
of in
post- Aristotelian
third three
and
had,
second
centuries,
perThese
@m.
itself
principal branches.
existed itself in side its
^ald.
Of the
schools
hitherto
maintain
by
side,
striving
purity, and
and
or
^f^s.
totetiau
merely
the
adopting
towards
an
the
others,
towards
previous philosophy,
But it lies in
aggressive
nature of
defensive that
dred kin-
attitude. mental
the have
things
from
a
tendencies, soil,
cannot
which
very
sprung
in
long
continue first
this
ally mutu-
exclusive
position.
immediate
The
founders
in
of fervour upon
;
\
of this.
school of
and
their
successors,
the
excessive mode of
weight thought
from
that
peculiar
to
see
their
in
opponents
truth
not
:
they
only
on
deviations
later
members,
this
the
contrary,
with
it
sought
peculiar
have
B
element
zeal, and
therefore
not
grasped
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
the
same
more one-sidedness,
easily
which
is
"
even perceive,
common
statements, that
are more
and
akin,and
ready
own
to
sacrifice
subordinate
of peculiarities
their
standpoint ;
exaggerated accusations and of that in by the stronger enforcement with others, which they coincide to give up or put
aside untenable
and
to
break
off
from
their
systems
the
of the adversary an sharpestangles objection ; many maintains its ground, and in seekingto elude it by another
it is found interpretation,
that
the
positions presup-
have been partially ceded, conobjection together with the objectionitself. It is, natural a therefore,
in the conflict of and
of the
universal
experience that
their the
in and
parties and
schools
tions opposicommon
more
time
mediation
fusion
is
livingand
never
active
or
people,the
case
will
either
arise science
arise
only temporarily,that
is
infected
by
this
eclecticism,
new
alreadyin
them
its
youthful
course,
decidedly begun
the of
to
grow
old.
soon,
on
the
contrary, as
scientific
is spirit of
new
exhausted,and
cieations,is
the
time, devoid
discussions result
with
natural
among of
existingschools, the
these
ITS
ORIGIN.
discussions, the
partial blending
of
the
hostile
will appear to a greater extent, and the parties, that eclectic character whole philosophywill assume is always the prewhich, in its universal diffusion, monitory
or
deeply seated revolution, the posiof scientific decay. This was precisely tion Greek in which philosophyfound itself in the
sign
of
a
either
last centuries
before
Christ. the
a
All
the
causes
which
cal of classion
to speaking, led,generally
dissolution
also
had
paralysinginfluence
after
marks of the
end
of the
no
fourth
new
and
the
beginning
;
century already
to
system
in
arose
and
if the
posthad in
Aristotelian lost
systems
the of
and
for
themselves
interest their
contemplation
the life and discontinuance
cessation
to dull
the
restriction
of men,
had
announced
-
the
of
scientific
endeavour, the
and
long
of
the
still more,
to call in
question general.
of scientific knowledge in possibility This, state of things found its proper' expression which opposed the dogmatic in scepticism, The and more signal success. systems with more which since the beginning of the first eclecticism had Christ repressed scepticism century before
the
and
united of side
dencies together the previouslyseparate tenverse thought, was, however, merely the reof scepticismitself. Scepticism had
B
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
placedall dogmatic
a
__
theories
on
an
in equality to
such
manner
'
as
to
one
c
deny
nor as
scientific truth
'
all alike.
This
neither
another well
in eclecticism
One
als-aucli) ; but
had rest
very
transition
scepticism
able
to
paved the
in
for it
had had up
once
not
been
pure
of
as
doctrine conviction
was
in therefore,
more a
its
positive
to full
not
indeed but
come
forward fail to
with
claim
certainty ;
cannot
of the
and Arcesilaus, estimation it to further,
was
from
of the value
of the
knowledge of probability:
decidedly as against the sceptical theory,and of the probable would receive the significance
"
scepticismwould
acceptance of truth
be transformed
into
dogmatic
this
In (Furwahrhalten*). would
matism, dog-
however, doubt
to
exercise
as
such
an
influence
be
individual
system
the
true
such
out
would
all
recognisedas
would
true, but
of
systems
of
be
separated
accordingto
and of
the
measure
opinion.
the
as
This
had
sceptics in the
they develop their doubt in the criticism of existing do they seek the so theories, in the existing probable primarily systems, among which they have reserved to themselves the rightto
the
probable;
ITS
ORIGIN,
decide. the
Carneades,
former
more
as
we
ethical
questions to
and
more
so
treated
CHAP.
told,abanhimself with
Tl
doning his
he opinions,
advancing years.2 Similarly Clitomachus, while to contending with the dogmatic schools, seems
have
learn
adhered
ing.4 only of his master's teachThus scepticismforms the bridge from the one-sided dogmatism of the Stoic and Epicurean that
side
to eclecticism philosophy cannot regard it as a mere
; and
in
we
accident
the
followers of Carneades
this mode
in
of
it
was
thought chiefly
immediately
the Stoics
and and
emanated,
connected
that the
them
on
point
which
their
Epicureans
even
sustained
dogmatism,
definite
of
the
of necessity
theories
It was,
however, generallyspeaking,
the the
condition the
of
strife of
the
caused
and in spreadof scepticism, the eclectic tendency in philosophy. sequel, most The important est-ernal impulse to rise and
the
this
ii.Ester
der Grie/ta^r^r aXXa. r6re ye, cTrev, eyik Zeller, Philosojrftie SL^KOVOV -rty ore le Kapj/ea"ou Theil, Abttieilung, 3CT ehen,
1
seni
5 p*v
s.
ovy
ge-v. resj?.
6 faxtav Kal rbv $6(pov atyetK"s S*a T" y^pas els rb x6yos avrov
13, 1. p. 791
8ri tey6j"T"avt
'A/caS??-
a-vvrjKTO ^p^crt/J-ov
3
Kal KOLV^VIK"V.
PHI.
der
Grieclim, III. i.
2.
TrpoffiroieLrat yeyo-
viva*
^ Kapj/ea5ov,
yeyov"s,
2.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
was cliange
given by
culture
the stood
relation in which
to
Greek
world.1
science
_ _
and
the
Eoman
The
came
Romans
doubtless philosophy from Lower : the founder Italy is the first philosopher (Pythagoras)
is mentioned in
Eome.2
But
of the
Greek
in
been
heard
of there
Diffusion
of Green
')iiiu)sophy
mg the
beginning of the second century before Christ. This state of things chancre(i however, when, after the second j^g mus"
manner fragmentary
before the
07
77
arms
pressed
farther towards
and
the
wars
while,on
state
the
other
and
tinguishe Syria brought disin great numbers to Greece, and hand, Greek ambassadors also slaves, soon appeared more in
Eome
| when
men
of the
For
what
to the Eomans
on
physics of
Achse-
axe
that
3
philosopher.
Such
as
given
I. pp.
in Phil, der
Part
ans
the thousand
287, 3
2 ; and
450,
1 ; cf. ibid,
who,
313,
Part
III. ii. p. 77
"%. A still earlier date (ifthis is historical) be must statement fixed of who the tables
even
168
repute
Hermodorus assisted
in Eome (among them whose Bphesian, Polybius), in but the for the in if the
know
was
long residence
could not have
country
the had
drawing
if he have
twelve
been
without
(Part I. 566, 2) :
friend
no
even
of them in that
abode
celebrated tus,
we
Heraclei-
city.
ground
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY
IN
ItOMK
with
delightto
Greek
literature ; when,
from
the
was
CHAP.
century, Greek
soil in
poetry
or
^_
the
more
less free
of
Ennius,
Pacuvius, Statins,Plautus,
Eoman
was history
their
the
successors
; and
related
other
Greek
annalists. stood
in
"
and
of
Greece
far too
connection
with
the other
occupied far too important a philosophy place in the whole Hellenic sphere of culture,as a and object of universal interest of instruction means found for such as had once it possible to make intellectual life to shut themselves in Greek pleasure it very small the need for long,however up from We scientific enquiry might be in them. find, then^
branches
"
even
of the second
century,many
of the
a
and
of the commencement
ledge know-
of
Ennius
Greek
philosophy among
that he
was
Eoraans.
shows
adopts from
181
B.C.
an
it isolated
attempt
was
dogmas of Greek philosophy into the Eoman religion.2 Twenty-six years later the activity of the to others only eight) (according their Epicurean philosophersin. teaching caused
of Numa,1
to introduce
banishment
of the the
1
from
Borne.3 in
In
161
B.C., by
was
decree
to
senate, residence
Eome
;
and philosophers
Cf
.
rhetoricians
4
always
is DG 11
PUl.
der.
Grieoli. III.
to CL
This be
decree in
of the senate
ii. p. 8B.
"
found
Suetonius,
xv.
Rhetor.
I ; G-ell.JV.l.
(cf.also Clinton,
Fasti
Hellen.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
proves
to
that
there
was
reason
for
anxietyin regard
youth. Macedonia, gavcpurpose
toot of
their
influence
upon
the
education
of
Paulus,
his
sons
the
conqueror
Greek
on
and instructors,
for that
with
him
his
dorus.1
His
the
astronomical
knowledge
have the Greeks.2
But
merely
the
a
isolated of
signs
the
of the second
extent.
movement
which
from
middle
century manifested
Hitherto
with
itself to
much had
greater
comparatively
Greek
few
now
occupied
themselves
in
philosophy;
more
the interest
that
philosophy was
universally diffused.
Borne
in
P.
Greek
161
us
philosopherscome
These edict
of
to
tell
order
6. The the
to
try
B.C.).
of
: an
authors the
latter Greeks
another
similar Ahenobarbus
enactcensor
among
j^Emilius
ment
whom
surrounded
On. L.
Domitius Licinius
and
Crassus, in which
they express their serious displeasure with the teachers and frequenters of the newly-arisen
Latin account
that from
after the
sent
was
Perseus
definite
schools consuetude
to
of rhetoricians
on
of this mention
the
not
able him
in
good philosopher.
a
Metrodorus,
one
both d. Gr.
person.
Latini, who
were
Cf. PMl.
2
by
to
were
this
Cicero of
ledge
6, 19.
37
;
with
decree
until
and before
Nat. of
53, he
sun
eclipseof
account
we B.C., as of Cicero, i. 7, 24. loe. eit. with Clinton, Fasti Bellen., dates it in 92 B.C. see
battle
Pydna.
of
to
from
comparison
more
authorities
event
regard
3,
Plin. Hist.
Nat.
xxxv.
135
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY
IN
ROME.
their fortune,, or
men.
are
sent
for thither
desirous of
"by distinguished
CHAP.
"
Young
state,
or
Eomans,
of
playinga part in
gaining distinction in cultivated that think do without the they cannot society, of a philosopher, instruction and it soon became usual to seek this not only in Borne, but in Athens
the the chief itself,
the famous
school
of Greek
science.
Already
Carneades
philosophy
we
regarded
overrate
in
though
it gave
should
we
not may,
the
effect of
passing event,
a
considerable
interest in
the
previously
the
awakened
in wider
circles.
More
doubt, was
been
influence
of the
Stoic Pansetius
seem
prolonged as
years, in the
a man
it would
of the capital
Eoman the
empire, he being
character
for Stoicism of
his
among Blossius
was
Soon
after him
Caius
Cumse,
Stoic,
of
Borne, the
Tiberius have
Gracchus,3 who
1
through
for this
are
him
must
likewise
The
authorities
of Gracchus
was
d. GT. II. ii. p. 928, cited PMl. 1 ; cf, p. 498, 1 ; cf. Part III. i. p. 498, 1. 2 Further ter iii.
3
also
to
in
Eome,
Minor whose himself. tion
into
details Til.
infra,chap8, 17,
thorough
is to be
exazninafound
Plut.
6fracc7i.
20 ; Val.
Max.
10
ECLECTICISM.
CFTA.P. I
become
acquainted with
Greek
Stoicism.1 learned
men
And
now
that
begins, which, in time, assumed greater and greater proportions.2 who the Eomans themselves, men by Among their intellect so and decidedly position were Scipio Africanus, his pre-eminent as the younger immigrationof
friend Philus and Laelius,L. Furius Tiberius Gracchus, took philosophicstudies under connected "With them their protection.3 are Scipio's the
wise
nephew
while
Tubero,4
disciple of
eruditissimos
Pansetius, who.
homines
ex
he himself Kal
Grcccia
kaftuerutit. De palam, semper "p"vvai P. 5 iii. : 3, Quid so Seijtwne, Rep. decidedly preponderate, historical that our Quid C. Lcelio, quid Jj. Pliilo knowledge is scarcely extended of the man perfeetius cogitari potest ? qni ad do?nesticum the treatise. 'niajorumque by
and eiKaa-tat,
. .
That
care
Gracchus, through the guished his of mother, had distinGreeks tors for his instruc-
tnorem
etiam Cicero
adstance sub-
v"nticiam
runt.
doctrinam
adMbue-
(Cic.
Plut. known.
2
Tib.
discourse
self himhe mouth
however, Polyhius (xxxii. 10), much when earlier, only eighteen (166 Scipio was and his he said to him B.C.),
relates that brother:
Philus,
at
makes follow
the
time
Academic
consmtudo
pher philosocontra-
rias in paries disserendi ; loe,. repljub'y"pT"/ia(%uara, " cit. vvy c. 5, 8 sq, ; Lact. Inst. v. 6p"" crvov'Sd^ovras Trepl vjj,as Kal "pL\ori/JLov/n,"Vovs, OVK cbrop^o-ere 14. Concerning the connection of Lselius with Scipio and Kal (rol Ka.K"LV(f'
7TOA.T/
yap
PanEetius
we on.
shall
Cic. Fiti. the
have
to
cording ac-
speak
with p.
later
to
Laelius,
had
of
no
also attended
what
note
3
is
4.
quoted
sugra,
7,
:
Diogenes,
doubt,
in
which in
must,
his year the
connect
with
Cicero,De Orat.
oerte aut
non
J^t
tulit
Jicec Jiu-
Home
aut gloriaclariores,
Q. JSlius
mother
Tubero, through
a
"uctoritate
gramores,
a/at
his
grandson
was
a
of very
out
JEmilius zealous
Paulus,
who Stoic,
carried
12
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
series
same
of
Eoman
Stoics.
a
time, obtained
"books earlier those
through
at
an
written
period than
who had
not
other
systems,
a
even
among
received
Greek
and
not
cation.1 edu-
Somewhat
later the
Academic
patetic Peri-
whose schools,
remained
have
unknown
to the
of Panaetius,were
in Eome.
by celebrated represented
the
Eome
Among
in
Platonists
is known
Philo
to
us
is the
first whose
presence
of
; of philosophers)
a
the
Staseas.2 Peripatetics,
But
already,at
dedicated
we himself,
much
to
earlier
two
works
are
was told,
sought out
after the
in
Athens
by
beginning of the first century before (vide Christ, Posidonius infra) visited the metropolisof the world; before
Eoman
travellers.4
Soon
the middle
Mummiiis,
of the
of
same
century we
cons
encounter
there
brother
the
queror of Corinth, who, to judge by the date (Cic. J3rut. 25, 94),
must
102 L.
in
owed
(148B.c), previously to consul Censorinus, who was 149 B.C.; Cic. Acad. ii. 32,
and So much the truth may
un-
To
the
poet Lucilius
to Pansetius.
1
102.
Fuse,
vercs
3,
6:
of Cicero eUgantisque iii. Orat. (the Stoic, Peripa- (JDe 18, 68) even jphilosophiof and nulla itself Academic) supposing the statement teticj statement
. . .
Itaque illius
derlie
fere
termi
sunt
aut
yoauca
.
.
admodum
.
to
be
untrue
to the
that
as
a
Q. Metellus
young
man
Latina
monumenta
cum
inAma-
(Numidicus)
listened
C.
finius extitit
2
Philo De
to Eome
we
Carneades,
the ". 6V. Part
of
Btaseas,
Orat.
there
find
Cic.
i. 22, in 92 B.O.
104, appeared
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY
IN
ROME.
13
the
Epicureans
was
Philodemus
and
Syro.1
very
common
Meanfor
CHAP,
Awhile,it
^'' Roman
and tjiead,
^
alreadyat
for
to
_____
youths to seek
the the
science
at its fountainto
sake
of their studies
betake
themselves
and
seats principal
of that
science,
At the commencement to Athens,2 especially of the imperial era, at any rate, Rome swarmed with Greek savants of every kind,3and among these who were not merely turning to account were many 4 a superficial knowledge in a mechanical manner ; in various places of the west while contemporaneously of Greece became naturalised together the philosophy
with other
and sciences,
from the
these
centres
spread
With
Greek
from
the time
and
Roman
literature sprang
IH.
i. 374. of
at
its
side,5
and will of
the
time
Augustus
on.
" Xare
"rf^
i
best shall
known
examples
andAtticus,
with many
of Cicero
meet
before The
was
us
further ancient
but
most
important
For
these
the
Greek
where in
Cicero
describes
life in Athens
with companions study (77 B.C.); and in relater time, gard to a somewhat Aead. YaiTO i. 2, 8, where Sed meos :
ut
city Massilia, of which Strabo (iv. 1, 5, p. 181) says: irdvres rb Xeyew irpbs ycc,p of "x.apiwrss
Kal fyiXoffo"fTw. An Tpe'-nwrcu
he
says
to in
amicos,
advances
quibus est
stiidium, in Grcec-iam
ea a
pursued
these
fi
mitto,
t"ntwr.
8
fontibits potius
rivulos
consec-
of in Athens.
two
were
Jiawiant, qitam
The fact
Qr
X*
first is notorious
; for
writers Latin
tongue
examples cf. Strabo, xiv. 5, 15, is certain ; the few earlier atykp Kal 'AXe"az/-tempts (cf.III. i. 372, 2) seem p. 675. TccpcreW to have been ear* SpeW fj.ea'T'fj [y *Pc6/Mj]. very unsatisfac4 Several Greek philosophers tory. Both, moreover, expressly
14
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
which
I.
scarcelyinferior to the contemporary Greek, though not to be compared with the earlier, either in scientific acumen creative individuality. or
was
At
were
the
beginning of
to the
this movement,
related
Greeks
merely
as
adopted and imitated the science and, to a certain degree,this throughoutits whole course ; for
genius
much
Inevitable reaction
continued the
even
tific sciento
so
and
spiritnever
attained
of that diffusion
upon
it had in Greece as self-dependence still preservedin the latter period. But in the end could not remain this influence of Greek philosophy without itself. Though Eomans reaction a on by like Cicero and birth, Lucretius, might rehabilitate
force and
Greek
science
for
their
countrymen
and
Greek
like Panaetius and Antiochus, might philosophers, it was lecture to the Eomans, in both cases able unavoid-
of their
presentationsshould
to
less determined
by regard
hearers
the
spirit
requirementsof
the
their Eoman
and
readers.
schools of philosophy in purely Greek could not free themselves Athens, Ehodes, and other places,
from of the
this
determining influence,on
of young
; for it
was
account
great number
them
Eomans
of
position
these
who
visited
from naturally
claim
for
themselves
this
habuit
lumen*
, . .
literamm
Lati-
honour, cf. Lucr. v. 336 : Hano in- quo narum co magis nolis (the Epicurean doctrine) priest mus elaborandwn, quod cum jprimis ipse repertus tnulti jam esse libri Latini dinwnc in putrias qui cuntur ego sum scripti i/nconsider cite ah Cic. Tune. joossimvertere voces. optimis illls quidem vlris, sod i. 3, 5 : PMlosopMa jacuit satis eruditis. non 'usque
ad 7ianc
fetatem
nee
GREEK
PHILOSOPHY
IN
JtOMU.
15
scholars
the than
that
honour Of
and
teachers.
these
still
CHAP.
___'__
be rated
the
not
scious uncon-
influence
upon upon
Eoman
spirit ;
the Eoman
merely
also
;
the
the
Romans
Greek
in philosophers
empire
culture
for,however
over
great the
however
of Greek superiority
Eoman,
the
conquered, it
receive that in
was
spiritual
the
which,
should
spite of
that It
to
science, she
succumbed,
value of
as
necessarily
acquire
science
was
compared with
in the
the
subjugated nations.
however, spirit,
consistent the
the
of
Eoman
estimate
worth
as philosophy,
of all other
of practical ascribe
no no
scientific
on
opinions as
life
was
such, when
those
even
influence
human
source
perceptible in prejudices
to
this
sprang
at first led
same
terial magiswas
point
of
of view
Cf. Cato's
on
Plutarch of of
this
contents
their
lectures, he
away Also
as
advised
should
as
be sent
em-
quickly
ap. Gell. Lactant. edict supra,
sures
possible.
id.
bassy
whom ot
philosophers
the
to
outset
rptyavXeyeiv
xviii. 7, 3 ; Nepos ap. the 15, 10 ; and of the censors quoted iiL
cen:
rfy
eirl T$
ibi dies
homines desidere*
had
heard
the
states-
10
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
also,however, maintained
even as
in
the
pursuit
and
cerned con-
___!_
study
of
philosophy.
So far
was philosophy
it merely with scientific questions, than be regarded as anything more scarcely to recreation ; it only attained serious
as
could
a spectable re-
more
value
in
the
an
eyes
of the
Eoman,
of
inasmuch
it
proved
The
itself
instrument
tion. educapractical
and strengthening of moral principles of orator and statesman, the trainingfor the calling and principally these are the aspectswhich primarily
recommended
But
on
to treat
studies to his attention. philosophic he was this very account inclined necessarily them with reference to these points of view. little for the
He
cared
scientific establishment
and
development of a philosophic system ; that logical him was which alone, or almost alone, concerned its practical utility ;
turned the strife of he thought, schools,
and things,
to
mostly on
non-essential hesitate
of the
he himself the
could not
various
therefore
select from
systems, careless
deeper
tion interconnec-
that which seemed to him definitions, particular The who made serviceable. the proconsul Grellius, to the philosophers in Athens well-meaning proposal that they should amicably settle their points of
of
as
mediator,1expressed
the
trulyEoman
too
somewhat
this
man
standpointwould
and soldier have
waste
have
affected Greek
53.
must
even
naturally
greater
rhetoric.
philosophy appeared
of time
Cic. Vide
L"gg. i. 20,
in 682
Gellius
=
was
consul
A.u.O.
72
'
B.C.
Clinton, Fasti
H"llen.
than
for that
year.
ITS
PRINCIPLE
AND
CHARACTER.
17
philosophyvery
earlier
little had
was
it been
exerted
at
an
CEAP.
'_
period, it
quite otherwise
the the of direction
when which
philoally especiWhen
Eoman the
nature.
internal
condition last
philosophic schools,
in this
the especially
"
important phenomenon
of Carneades
"
sphere
only the
concurrence
the
doctrine
must
eclecticism,it
more
have necessarily
speedilyand
of internal
motives
But
although this
as
eclecticism
primarilyappears
'
B.
merelyJ
the
L''lfl
cliaractcr
to the
external
connection
than
to
of edeet'w
which
enquire
till then
existed
If
we
accordingto
what
point of
were
the doctrines
we
of the
not
different systems
chosen,
find it in then
was
sufficient to maintain
were
those
doctrines would
which
all
agreed;
to
a
eclectics
have
been
limited
of propositions
indefinite
universality.
theories
could
But
not
even
the
practical utilityof
as
be
considered
the
final of
mark
practical problem
was was
mankind,
of its solution
itself
of the standard
strife ; the
question
and
main
aims practical
relations standard
should could
selves them-
be be
determined?
in
This
only
ultimately sought
immediate individual
consciousness.
If it be
required that
the
c
shall choose
18
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
is true
man
for his
J
v
use,
this presupposes
the
carries in
true
man
himself
standard
between
and
directly given to
it
in
his
in this preis'precisely suppositio and importance that the individuality eclectic philosophy seem chieflyto lie. of the that the soul brought assumed Plato had indeed with it from a previouslife into its present existence the Stoics of ideas ; and similarly the consciousness which are implanted in had spoken of conceptions
neither
to teach
Plato
an
nor
the
immediate
term
;
in the
strict
sense
of the
for the
arises, according to
scientific activities
"
him, by
which he
means
of the moral
and
as preliminary stagesof philosophy regards of the Stoics are not, as and the natural conceptions tific been shown, innate ideas ; but, like scienhas already derived merely in a natural manner are thoughts, velop from experience. Knowledge here also has to deand itself from experience,and is attained ment conditioned by intercourse with things. This attainfirst denied of knowledge was by scepticism, declared the relation of our which conceptions to to be unknowable, and made the things conceived al] our convictions exclusively jective dependent upon sub-
bases.
But
if in this way,
in
of the
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, T'
out
course man
of
is
philosophic
regarded as
essential maintained
development.
the
the interior of
placewhere
to opposition
the
knowledge
of the most
truth
in
has originally
that in self-consciousness
is
is
higherknowledge
experience
"
of inner
though this
into the
yet it is empiricismof direct consciousness, from which all truth is perception no longer the mere to the immediately certain may? derived. This appeal
be regarded as therefore,
a
reaction
against the
sen-
sualistic because
as
empiricismof
not
it does
such, and
go is nevertheless
and
scientificestablishment convictions
from
are
not
the hnman
on man
in their origin actually recognised stowed mind, but appear as something beby a power standing above him ; and
thus innate
form of
knowledge
forms
the transition
to
that
which philosophy
to self-consciousness,
of the
God.
How
revelations
and
allied are religion leaning of philosophyto positive later on ; at present it is to this, will be shown of fact, in a enough to remark that,as a matter
Numenius,
the
and
of
first two
and the
philosophy
of revelation
went
hand
in hand.
ITS
PRINCIPLE
AND
CHARACTER.
21
But
as
in this of
aspect
bore
within
it
__.
CHAP.
the germ
developed
from
"__
"
Edec-
another
point of
in
the
own
^"^'tfo
germs
to which scepticism,
great part
in
:
it owed
of
dissatisfaction which
peace any definite
will not
allow
system, has
come overfully
truth
to
recognisedoubt as to certain even though it does not approve of it particulars, not merely in principle. Scepticism is consequently
refuse
one
of
the
causes
which
have
conditioned has
own
the
it
development
and
of
eclecticism;
itself
as a
eclecticism
its
to
continually within
its
own
phase of
tends
tence; exisit
behaviour
vacillation
keep
awake
the
is
eclectic
between
unrest
different
systems
nothing else
of
than
the
of
sceptical original
are
thought,a
consciousness to be
little moderated
by
belief
in the
truth,the
The
utterances
of which and
broughttogetherout
more was
of the many
various
by. a
mode less
was
of
the principle,
be
expected that
which
to be
it should
for
ever
silenced.
no
the truth
could
be
found
in
individual
system
was
gleaned out
attention
to
of all
systems would
united
"
allow themselves
to be
directly
with
that
definite
meaning only
22
ECLECTICISM.
imp.
some
definite
system; while,
on
the
other
hand,
from different systems, like the systems propositions another : that one themselves, mutually exclude the
contradiction of
their
that
basis out
of harmonising propositions
philosophers^
the fact of their on truth,is wrecked recognised disagreement. Therefore after the scepticismof the Academy had been extinguishedin the eclecticism of the first century before Christ, doubt arose anew in the school of JEnesidemus to lose itself only in the with third century, simultaneously
in
all other
theories,
greater
Neo-Platonism
and
no
argument
has
than that which the weight with these new sceptics precedent of eclecticism readilyfurnished to them : the impossibility of knowledge is shown by the contradiction of the systems of philosophy; the pretended harmony of these systems has resolved
itself into
the
perception of
their
mutual
patibility. incom-
ii. And
of
of
scepticism
ment treat-
imtm"'
the
uncritical
eclectic
it could no philosophy, longer attain the importance which it had had in the school of the exhaustion of thought which new academy, The
can
be shown
even
in too
made scepticism,
to allow many
to in
pure
doubt.
the
truth
of the
if
even
systems hitherto
vogue
was
shaken, and
not
could for
strengthwas
wanting
ITS
PRINCIPLE
AND
CHARACTER.
23
the
independent
result
was
production only
for
a
of
new
system
the
CHAP.
*"
general
more
that
thought
of
began knowledge
to
long
_
and
more
source
lying
itself
and
science
as
hitherto
inner
existing
revelation of Thus
was
sought
and
partly partly
in
in
the
Deity
way
was
religious
which
tradition.
entered
upon,
more
Neo-Platonisrn
the
next
period
last
definitely
of Greek
pursued,
and
so
opened
the
epoch
philosophy.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
ECLECTICISM BEFORE
IN THE THE
II.
AND FIRST CENTURIES
SECOND
CHRIST.
EPICUREANS.
ASCLEPIADES.
CHAP. II.
OF
of
philosophywhich
on
had
the
theatre
of history
I. EclectJte two
centuries
B.C.
the ticism
in
middle of
the
second
of the
Epicureanswas,
to all appearance,
by the
its had
scientific movement
of the
Though
tendencies
seem
A.
Tlie
other intellectual
jEpieureans.
traces, it does
not
to
have
a no
influenced
by
any
of these
manner.
v
tendencies
We
in
permanent
that
even
must,
of the
the the
to
refutation
which objections
on
encountered occasion
Epicurean doctrine
new
sides, gave
some
phases
in
the
conception and
subordinate
establishment further
of it ; that
the
in
system perhapswas
certain
developed or modified
one
pointsby
and
another have
of its
may
been
by thoroughlyinvestigated
But when
we seem
them
than followed
by
up that
himself. Epicurus"
of
tJie later
have
to
Epito
all the
traces
which
cureans individual
1
might
indicate
JSpicurm.
of Epicurus had departed, either disciples from their master,1the sum formallyor materially,
A collection of these
"
and the
examinavalue
which
we
cannot
we
but
acknowmay not
tion
of
ledge, though
THE
EPICUREANS.
total of such
departures which,
inconsiderable Seneca
the
can
be the
historically CHAP.
well-known
j
that
from
them.
learn from
not
Cicero
that
the his
theory of Epicurus
Eoman
to
seldom
conceived ascribed
and
by
an
compatriots
Cicero
in
no
if he
had
independent value
virtue
to
; but
intellectual
culture
this
to
himself
adds, that
tells
opinion is
the
be
found
scientific
of representative
us
Epicurean philosophy.3 He
of his time who
of
some
cureans Epi-
separatedthemselves from Epicurus 4 by their theory of a disinterested love to this It is doubtful, however, whether friends.
should be
regarded
of
asserts
as
radical deviation
statement
from in
the
Eudaemonism
Epicurus ; the
that friends may when
tion ques-
only
own
be loved
us no
for their
sake, even
not
they bring
advantage ; 5
intercourse
exclude
upon
the
pleasure secured
these be 'later and
by
with, all the inferences agree from and conjectures deduced them i.
"
philosophers'
Philodemus
be
to
Siro
; but
has
been
undertaken
zu
by
Cio.
Hirzel, Tfntermehungen
improbascer-
with 165-190, in connection vita et Diining, De Metrodori scriptis, p. 18 sgq. 1 Phil. (Lev 6fr.III. i. p. 379, 4.
2
whether
L
it has
any
foun-
Cic. Fin.
it
:
ex-
presses
Primos
conyressus
Fin.
Phil, der
3
cf.
Quos quidem (he makes Torquatus, i. 17, 55, observe video esse respecting them)
multos
4
(and so forth) fieri propter autem itsus wlwptat"m,, cum famiMaritatem effeyrogrediens
cerit,
turn
amorem
efflorescere
si
milla
sit
sed
iniperitos.
der
amidtia,
se
tamen
ipsi
propter
ipsosamentw.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
with of
them.1
much,
Such
difference
Nor
cannot
are
we
be considered
II.
importance.
alteration
an ascribing
of the
to
it
have carried Philodemus, though he may, perhaps, self:2 than Epicurus himfurther in certain particulars and
from deviations pure though many perceptible3in Lucretius, on Epicureanism are closer which
be
found
to refer to traits
the affect
form the
of the
poetic
sentation pre-
do not
scientific theories.4
all. The of is described
In
as
the of
more
amare
gropter
to
se
over
as an
sun
ijjsos,
because
opposed
the the
love lies
ception con-
essence
which the
generates
utility,there
than the
an
the
births
world;
the
nothing
upon
of
based
of
on
a a
delight in
of the this
can
earth, in animated language, as of living creatures the mother ; the even conjecture that the
stars not
are
friend, and
calculation such based
an
merely
benefits.
can
But
be
cast
affection
on
also
This
to
own
v.
living beings he does aside (v. 523 *#".)" however, last, according
122 is
motive
of
sure. plea-
sqg., cannot
What he
same
x.
be
his"
that also
To
only
the
further
opinion.
really
argument
J"tenim, si
si
be
applied :
says
112)
his
of
thetical hypo-
explanations
with reference
of Nature
to earlier theories
soleniiis, quanto
consMetudine 6V.
Jiomimtm
8 3 4
id
himself
remarks of the
that
the
scriptions de-
Hitter,iv.
Kitter and
are
89-106.
be that this
(p. 94)
with
the would
Nature
parts
perhaps
passages be
most
at times
more
vivid, and
more
at times
much than
(v.
534
detailed
manner,
that the
the air
earth
is borne
x,
uniform
physics
(Diog.
74)
the
up by with the
seem Epicureans would is to have permitted. Nature conceived as a by Lucretius rules absolutely Unity, which
observation
that the
air is not
oppressed by
the earth
was
earth, because
one
of originally
piece with
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. II.
we
also
find with
Demetrius
an
meeting
which
an
objection of
us
answer
leads
to
suppose
training gained in logical through the dialectic of the Academy.1 But that definition of in any either of these philosophers doctrine diverged from the doctrine of materially Epicurean
had
their When
men
master
is
not
maintained his
in
any
quarter.
Diogenes in
who
certain cataloguementions called Sophistsby the genuine Epicureans were these Sophists to consider have no reason we
as
more
than
isolated
offshoots of the
any
school,or
seated
to
argue
from
deeply
agreement dis-
it,or
any
change
in its
general
character.2
3
In
4)
Sext
ap. he the
6
Kal 6 tevK6s.
6* 6 Z'fji/cav
maintains, in oppositionto
statement
about
at p.
argumentation
504, and
distinction harin mony of
eVz/cArffisis AaKow,
ras
discussed
"yevLKT] and
6 Tapcreiis
the
valid
separate
once
proof
(lew.
that
is adduced, him is
the
admissibilityof
shown.
cit.
sqq.)
believes
argument
is at
those
true
all
here
tioned, men-
what it shows 330 ; in any case of Carinfluence the objections had made neades even upon the
Epicureans.
2
The
words
in
Diog.x.
of of
several
immediate
OI"TOI
Epicurus) KCU
meaning
at
rovrovs
of
ol
writer,
:
least
irdvras
%v BatnAet 8775-. A.LOVUCTLOS, "5i"5e'"aro 'EiriKovpeioi ffQfyicrr"s yvficrioi, airo6 KyTrortipav$' if he wished Mai iA.iroXX6^ct}pos to KaXovtriv ; and
yos
yeyovev
ttsvirep eAA^yiyUOS,
ra
express
himself
clearly even
been insuffi-
this would
have
ASCLEPIADES.
The stands
He
famous
in
is not any
of Bithynia,1 CHAP. physician, Asclepiades II. another relation to the Epicurean school, its members expresslyenumerated Ascleamong
by
had
of the
would
authors
who
mention
us
yltt/sioian
theories
some
lead certainly
to
suppose
He
and
that
is at
is it
he
one
n'"t
an
connection
must
with
:
the
of
school. Epicurus;
Epicu-
rean,
but shows school.
cient. rby
5e
He
have
written
avrbjs
would that he /ecu *A.iro\\6$capojf rovs per ot after apply the yvfjcriOL 'ETHKroiJpeioi
a.iroK.a\ov(nv.
same
ffofyLcrras
we ovs
As
it
is,
to
those
who
were
can
only refer
or
the
words
to
by the
as
cbro/mA-outru/
either
to the
aAAoi
genes.
case
the immediately ability improbceding improbable, but preand Biobecomes them, Orion greater still when find that among in this these we Diogenes may the
same
be this
as
person
tioned men-
by
but
case,
Sophists are two of the most distinguished leaders, Apollodorus and Zeno. Hirzel shown has that
not
Diogenes
and of
rean, Epicu-
the
tion enumera-
(p. 170) ooly Epicureans of the purest selected as overseers type were
school
we ; and to him can
of the
all
an
that
"
over,
as
Apollodorusanda
as a
Zeno
the former,
the Zeno. of
far
celebrated the
But
positive
sition suppostill more
arguments
decisive.
against the
Hirzel
are
designation proves, head of the highly- esteemed school ; the latter regarded by
Cicero and Plrilodemus
as one
ties According to this, of the first Epicurean authoricould have the the been, in the Epicurean with whom of Diogenes originates judgment of the mention yvficrioi only have must pseudo-Epicurean Sophists. pointed out a whole 1 ries theowhose This physician, of series Epicurean philosophers,
"
whom
he
himself
calls
are
constantly mentioned
Placita, and
in
who as men were "\\6yifj.QL the named genuine Sophists by consequently Epicureans, and members become of the school
to
in the
ascribed the
tarch, to Plu-
writings of
K,
Galen, is counted
as one
who
had
unfaithful
its true
the
? logical school How is this conceivable spirit. had he As eAA^iaoi, previously According to mentioned
physicians.
MatJi. vii. Vide
Metrodorus,
"
Her-
contemporary
of Ascalon.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. II.
his
true
statement
image
of
the conthat reason, but on trary, thing perceived, of knowledge, is not an independent source
all its
content
borrows
to
from
perception,and
connection
has
with
be
verified
by perception.2In
reason
as an superfluous,3
integral part
:
the
of
as
soul, he
all the
compounded
he gave
animo
4 collectively ;
which
Sext. Math.
were
vii. 201.
some
That the
principale,dum
esse
in
ipso
there
also
who
to be
sensations
sensus,"
of criterion truth, Antiochus 5e in these words shows : "\\os ovdzybs larpiKri tv vis fJ.ev ry
which
Asclepiades
live
or
argues for a
that time
heart
(the two
5e KOI of the a-TrrSfM^vos """zAo- parts regarded as seats fievrepos, eireiQero See cucrfl^creis ras 5iyeij.ovLK6v}. next note. "ro(f)ias, fJ.ev 4 This aA7j0"Ss ayriA^eis etvcu, results ovrcas KOI conception from the passage in Tertullian, \6ycp Se Here Asclepiades the which therefore compares piades AscleAayujSaz/e**'. with can Dicasarchus ; and contemporary of Antiochus
alone
2
to.
Gal. i. 14 Sext.
This the
nothing
opinion
Aurel.
be
of
piades, Ascle-
(quoted
Math.
by
Fabric,
Asclepiacles animcs regmim aliquaparte conis based, for he, like Epicurus, stitutum (a TjyejAoviKdv dwelling denominated his atoms patrol, in a definite part of the body) (infra,p. 31 n. 5), negat. JEtenim niJiil aliud esse X6ycp eewpyrol
:
which
the statement,
vii.
380)
and
also believed
in
an
'dieit animam
omnium autem
rerum
quam
:
sensmtm
knowledge
of by means perceived.
3
of
the
costum
inferences "Vide
vii. 202
.
infra,note
:
. .
Sext. Math.
rb
'AcrK\vj380,
15
:
avatpovvra
Ibid. 7]yefj.oviK6v.
:
m perspectioneperfcitur
he says Messenius
ou"Je 0Ao"s
n virdpx*iv
i:ero
alterno
Plao.
eorum
exerdtio the
:
Tert. v)j"/jLoviK6y.
De
an.
Plut.
iv. 2, 8
(Stob. Eel.
same
aliquis Dictzarcktis, 496) expresses Andreas autem et ex m edicts followingwords abstulerunt Ascleyiades ita
'Acr/cA. 6
tarpbs
ASCLEPIADES.
si
substratum round
memory of
the
Trvev/jia
consistingof
traced
light
the
and
__
CHAP. IJ"
He particles.1
and
also
the
in
activities of organs
intellect to
If
movements
sense.2
piades 3 is Pontus,4 it
this
be
supposed that he
tradition of
arrived
at
theory without
which
was
the
the
atomistic
system
The small
stillliving in the
Epicurean school.
held to be
primary
bodies
constituents
of all
thingshe
distinguishedfrom the atoms of Democritus and Epicurus in that they From all eternity they strike todivisible. were gether in constant and motion berless splitup into numparts, of which sensiblyperceptiblethings consist.5 But even in compound bodies their ceasewere
which
the
vao-iav r""v
from, and
3
complex
of
motions,
these
cer-
detach
themselves,
arise Lasshis
through
done
sense
or together,'
whether
not
abstract
otherwise
de-
witz, who
treatise p. 425 sq. wissensch.
it in
"rvyyvfjiva,"6iL"voi.
Chalcid. moles
sunt in
Tim. leves
213
Aut
Daniel
eniwi
vide (J"yKoi,
et
guceda/m
German
of the
with
5
Asclepiades.
PMl. The
d. most
est, ut
On of
.
Asclethe
GT.
ii. i. 886
sq.
somewhat
different
rus
definitions
Epicu-
and
2
Democritus,
;
cf PMl.
poris primo
also I. 808.
(thisis
call them
inaccurate
so
he
reason
conception
from The the Aurelius 30.
to
for the
clear
the pass-
they
ulla
are
not
corindivisible)
Cselius
quoted
solubilis
idea that
pmcula
intellects
setwa,
sine
4, p. points
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
any
section If
__^1
unchanged.1
comitata
moventia mutuis
tium
itself). That these 07*0* (as offensa Epicurus had said of the atoms) qua suo iimmu 5i* alcoves and are \6y"y deuprjrol ictil)us in infimta parsolvantur eundo mag-
fragment"
rursiim
nitud'me
atqiiescJwmate conjunct"
in
are
by
Sext. and of
He
speaks
Caelius
220) (viii.
VOTITO.
of
vorjrol UJKOL
apatcapara.
autper
wiagnudtituaut
shattering
confirmation
witz Lass-
quoted by
from
c.
per
ca-
(p. 426)
Galen,
698 7(5 : Introd.
Kara
the
pseudo-
9, vol. xiv.
videtur quod mdliusfaGiant rere (that being corpora quiditatis without generate bodies quality, of definite quality) ; silver is is which that white, whereas is black it off from rubbed ; the
goat's
of
horn it
sawdust
bodies
to
(the theories
Heracleitus in
the
ascribed
the
in
foregoing,and
"
passages ever, der Gr. II i. 886, 3 ; where, howin Eus. Par. ev. xiv. 23, 3, instead
(of. the
quoted, Phil,
cf.
of the OJKOL is referred to when of "u,eybvofj.d.craj'TGS, /*eroSextus ing is to be read, accord(Math. x. 318) observes vofj.d"ravres and Epicurus to Diels, jDoxogr. 252, 2). that Democritus the expression represent things as I previouslyunderstood arising "=| (i,e. TQLS yzwojfjLGVQis*) avo^oLcoy as applying to bodies Kal axraQcav. Heraclides and not re not i.e., joined together
"
concede
not
Asclepiades, on
yuev
the
contrary,
The
of
Asclepiades
irep with
same
r"v
aydpju.(ay oytttav.
are
this.
f
by
the
side
the void
tioned men-
loose'
(therefore capable
seem
of
the
oyKoi,
have also
separation), and
e
imgeordnet,
to me,
significance as
the atoms,
are
unordered,'
I
ever, how-
beside Pis.
1
'in point of
language, questionable.
therefore,
combined each the from
c.
by
Sext.
Galen,
Math.
Theriac.
K.
ad.
should,
to not
'
*
the "vapfj"os
Plato
not-
ascribes sensible
Being
the
state
another and
(so that
is
separated
moves
sensible of
other
itself for
Becoming:
A8CLEP1A"ES.
these
theories
member
had
of
been the
attributed
to
an
acknow-
CHAP,
IL
ledged
no
Epicurean
school,
they
from
would
doubt
contain
noteworthy
but
as
the
is
of
the
master,
not
as
an
Epicurean,
what that the
seems
they
in
in
one
case
natural
and
probable,
of other
viz.,
influence
Epicureanism,
confined within
as
systems,
of
was
not
strictly
the
limits
the
school.
Trjs
TOUS
Qvtr'ias,
eAa^icrrous"
Sxrre
Tavrb
["%
5uo
r^jv
of
o^vrTjra
tlie
rrjs
pays
(on
of itself
account
xp6vovs
KaQdirep
5vo
imo^v^iv
"\eje
5xa
swiftness
can
tlie
flow
^77^6
sTTLdexecrdaL,
idfi
7]$,
nothing
sliow
twice),
Ka.rA.fftth.7j7r
eTriSei^eiS
34
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
III.
THE
STOICS
BOETHUS,
PAN^ETIUS, schools of
in
POSIDONIUS.
CHAP.
AMONG
the Stoics
remaining
was
philosophy,
foreign
to
a
that
of
the
B. TJie
the
first
which,
partial divergence
elements.
still from seat
more
from This
its older
teachers, admitted
Stoics.
considerable
first
in
the
Academy
was
/which,
the chief
on
the of
century
before The
Christ,
eclecticism.
to
Peripatetics
the
we
seem,
the
whole,
in
even
have
preserved
;
were
tradition
shall find
of
their that
an
school
some,
greater purity
among
but
them,
towards
other
eclectic
bination com-
of that In
standpoints.
rise of eclecticism
the
school
with
Stoics,the
names
is connected and
of
Boethus,
Pansetius,
Posidonius.
Supposed
vaciUfi-
Already
tjie
,~"
at
the
of
p. /-XT
beginning
,-,
of Zeno
the
of of
"
second
century
.
tionofthe
successor
Cnrysippus,
as
Tarsus,
the of
is
said
to
have
been of his
perplexed
school
so
:
"
to
one
distinctive
destrucof
?
ipjrus
the that
*
doctrine
ne
the
left
the
J
question
him
of
truth
Numen. 2.
and
of world
similarly, after
the
:
tion
of the
l
icorld.
ev.
xv.
18,
Zeno,
Cleanthes,
the
and
rbv
Chrysippns
taught
doctrine
r^v
Kal
the
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. III.
with
the
Stoic
with
harmonised But
is still
doctrine.1 Peripatetic
to the Stoic
theology
he
antagonistic.For
was an
although
ethereal the
to
held,
with
substance,2
world
as
he would
admit he
a
that
He
dwelt in
consequentlyrefused
describe
being ; 3 he rather assignedthe living presented rethe Deity to the highest sphere, and the Him as working from thence upon
As
to the
reasons
universe.4
which
determined
the
In
respect
in Phil
to
vovs
this
Is
sLown
Se 3v
rfyv
is to
Aristotle the
traces
nowhere,
as upej-ts
or a
indeed,
source
cLirX".vS)vcrQcfipay, which
of
be understood
as
presentations
aims of
must to be
cognitions ;
to
the
in the
practicalends
natural
stitution con-
of other
Stoics
partly
desires,and
partlyto the
i.137, 1, 2),the ^^oviKlv of the world is said to have its seat in the This that thence the the which But
depend
purest
would
the It
part of
not
the
ether.
clude necessarilyex-
ancient
JV". i. 7 ;
spreads
all But would and
from of
through
the^ parts
that
a
Stob.
Mel. i. 60
Ed^Qos rbv
his he
world.
world
case
be
living
allow.
creature
the
faithful
143.
to
the The
'
Stoic Stoics
Boethus
materialism.
if this
there
conception
remains far the from
be
jected, rea
Diog. vii.
the
only
out, withextract
sponds corre-
declare
world
:
to
be
motion
living and
$t](nv Bern.
K'ara
OVK
animate *Tj"cu
Bo^fos 16, p.
""o
c. rov
i
given by
Stoic
:
Philo, JEtern.
:
m.
(I
c.)
view
of
out
fyvxfy "e
a v r
[_6
oTa
real
r'obs
"
6 Bets
the
now
KvBepj/'firov
sense.
BOETHUS.
philosopherto
tradition
no
this
us
rejection of
the fear of
Stoic
pantheism,
cause
CHAP.
tells have
nothing: the
lain in
decisive
must
_.__!_.
doubt
of unchangeableness His
substance,
theories with
connected
these
Boethus,
school,agreed
him God that from
but Aristotle,
in his
oppositionto he essentially
in the
*"
differs from
both
not
materialism.,and
opinion
universe
part
of
only directs and guides the the ruling point, but stands beside Aristotle it, ready to help ; whereas Deity
every
.to the
Boethus
activitydirected
to
the
is therefore
seekinga
middle
course
the
pantheism of
that the
Aristotle; like
from
attempted
With
side Peripatetic
Book
of
Boethus'
of
the
of conflagration
Of
trine,3 doc-
arguments by which
first shows that
a
he opposes
destruction for
the
of the
the
result without
cause,
outside
nothing but the void,and in the world to it. there is nothing which could bring destruction The second seeks to prove, not altogether conclusively,
there is that of
all the different kinds of destruction
4
none
a Kal fiXov "5tafj.ov$]v According to Ps.-Philo, I.e. Trpbs rfyv rov avvirainov 16 c. HOLT TV X6yov opeby sg., p. 249-253, Bern. (952, 0. *#. H., 503 *$. M.). SLolK-riffiv. * 1 Kar" avcdpscriv Kal rots Kara. $Laipe"riv, jjXlcare Kal ffeX-fivr)
"\Xots
8* aepi
rys
Kal rots fjiepecrtrov K6crp.ov the Kal crvvSpcav (Philo, Kara -jrapicrrd/jievQs loc. eit.}. Vide infra, chapter
*
(chemical
cL
mix-
Gr.
III. i. 127,
1).
;J3
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
could
_
be
to applicable
the
world.1
The
third main-
TIL
Deity
sequently con-
have
no
sink the
world-soul,
Lastly,the fourth
annihilation
contends
of the
world, this
world
of nourishment
and
formation
of the
would concluded
be
impossible.
from
But
Boethus
the
had
doubtless
was
this not
also that
only that
it had
no
world
beginning ; 3
for doctrine
Stoic
mology cos-
not
/
the Platonic
of the
theory,the
his transition
to
eternity of the
here
world
also
departurefrom
That Boethus
the
Stoic
that of the
likewise
Stoic
belief in
utterances on prophecy is not asserted ; 4 his own to an confined this subject are enquiry concerning the similar and the prognosticsof weather things,
1
For
that which
only
is
Is
capable of
this would
division
or "K
luminous
body,
weakly
is
An
not
that
which of is the
not
superiorto
entire of the
from especially the third argument; thepseudoPhilo also (p.249, 4) represents him sition
4
annihilation
quality
maintained of fire.
were
presuppo6 "{"6aprb$
el
The
contrary would
from
rather
finallyall elements
Cic. Divin. seem ii. 42, 88, according1to which Panastius units " Stolois astroloto result
be
"
transition Because
#y. (JL)J
2
as
pure
expressly
not
be
neither
belief,
shared
that
d.
it.
PANJETIUS.
connection he
of
to
which
with
the
phenomena
his his
portended
CHAP.
'"
sought
With
discover.1
Is
not
Boethus
associated
celebrated
to
co-
Panc?tiu":
disciple Pansetius,2
doctrine
only
he
in
in
opposition
world, hut
to
the
in
^Si^es
ISO
B.C.
o"
the
of the
assumed his
also
the
independent
of his
to
the
to
school,
other
readiness
entrance
This chief
seem, to
distinguished
founder
about
influential
philosopher,
was
the
of
180
Koman
B.C., in
Stoicism,
born,
was
it would
Ehodes,
and
introduced
the
Stoic
philosophy
went to
after
by Diogenes
1
and
Antipater.4
8, 13
:
He
afterwards longer
Van between
Cic.
Divin. elicere
L
causas
Quis
was
no
living
185-112
igitur
sionum tJiuvi
i"otest?
Stoieutri
Etsi
esse so
prfssenBo'evideo
B.C.
Lynden
places
B.C.
life Ind.
oonatum^
c[ui,
rerum
Hero.
d.
Camp.
as
Col. 51
i. 33,
hactenus
{only
earwn
""r. III.
effit,itt Jierent.
et prog
rationem in
Nicagoras
in
his
2) father,
his That
cxplicaret, qiice
Ibid. nostieorum
niari 47
coslove
:
and
two
Col.
55
mentions
ii. 21,
causas
-ZV"m
perse. . .
he
was
younger of good
brothers.
family,
When
we
know
cutismitet
et
. . .
Stoicus In both,
on
from
Strabo,
roce,
I.e.
Suidas,
from
a
sub
and
distinguishes
Pansetius
the
passages
the
causce
emphasis
falls
celebrated
second
jyrognosticorwm,
connection
between
the
natural
friend
Pa.ncQtio
Rlwdio,
3
Leiden,
is
no
1802. his
Concerning
doubt p.
we
native
place
Strabo,
the
is
Van
as
there xiv.
(vide
Ms
teacher
in
the
Ind.
Here.
655).
are
On
Col.
Dii'in. wards the
51,
told of
can
nothing
his birth be
Tlavair.
either
or
death,
facts
and
that
they
he
only
and
approximately
the discourses cia
; in
determined
attended
from the
Ind.
Col. 60.
to
Besides his
own
these,
statement
according
of Diogenes
143
B.C.
as an
of Seleu-
(ap.
Strab.
siv. Crates
5, 16,
of
openlypanied accom-
Polemo clirono-
also, thePeriegete,is, on
40
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
III.
Kome,1 where
household
and
over
of
of the inmate an long remained ScipioAfricanus,the younger.2 Scipio lie his friends
3
Mu Home,
dence resi-
Lselius
many
were
and
and he hearers,
won
ill
zealous
chose
was
him
for
at the
sent
Scipioalso youths to Stoicism.4 in 143 B.C. he his companion when head of a deputationto the East,
After the
the
and
to Alexandria.5 particularly
death
of
the
Appointed
head school
in
of leadership
was
of
Athens/
rather
text
of which
as
apparentlyhe
135-130 that B.C., he worked
we
the
must
Ms
disciple. The
asserts
Suidas
number
the latter
(EoAe^.
Bern36 s%. after and Kome does
Vellejus
him and
seems
says
with the
to
him Ind.
Whether
speak
if he the
the
Alexandrian Pansetius
journey,
whether
of his own
there
not
accord,or by others,tradition
us.
invited
Of.
JV.
Scipioto
8, 24. Gell,
xvii.
21,
1.
Suidas
inform
Plutarch
i. 12, p. Pansetius
(O.
777)
was
TLavair. Tlo\v@ios.
4 5
PriiiG.
not
PMlowpJi.
that
to
presupposes
in Kome him
Vide supra, p. 10 s$. Cic. Acad. ii. 2, 5 ; Position. I. c.} and Apophthegm. imp. Scrip. Min. 13 s#.
when
accompany
given
such
case
slip of
the
memory
for is Gf.
Vide Cic.
the
following note,
Mur.
and Veil.
Pro
31,
66;
i. 13, 3. How long Pantetius was in Eome we do not know but he as came ;
Paterc.
Ind.
these he he he did
further
statements
return
thither
in 142 that other who
to
; to ;
at
latest
after
the
died in Athens
not
(Suid.);
37, 107)
the
Alexandrian
journey,therefore
probably
and 81 him as, before the
on
again
v.
B.C., and
Ehodes of
did
(Cic. Tmo.
was
journey,
hand,
died after
offered
right
Rutilius
in
Eufus,
Kome
can
B.C., seems
have
heard
Hesiod.
no
Kal
after in
'H,u. 707,
doubt
Plutarch) ;
Athens
a
before
that
there
was
PANJETITTS.
41
head
been
not
until about
active in
a
110
B.C.1
That
he had
previously
CRAP. III.
similar
likely.2As
for
The
common
HlS
ICHTi
and
ing society
called been the mediate imPansetiasts Position.
(Athen.
of
v.
of Panagtins
tioti.
186, a).
attempt
p.
not
pig, De
dersh. Panaatius
SchepAgain. (Son-
1869),
the and and
of
the
Rhodian,
towards
and
Khodian,
of
the the
nian Athe-
the of
Athenian
school, and
the
school
is
settled
by
the
had end
3
post
his
foregoing, ( Mnesarchus
1
by
proofs
p. 52, 3
second
century.
Concerning
Lynden,
best
writings vide
Dardanus). place his death much earlier, as, according to Cic Off. iii. 2, 8, he lived after the composition of his work on have Duty (which he cannot
written
the books
acknowledged,
Cicero,to
work of also
on
young),
he when was very for 30 years ; but especially could because Posidonius
Cicero's
own. a
are
quoted
the
scarcely
much
as
have
it
been have
disciple;nor
came
can
occurred
there,
and i.
of philosophy (TT.alpeif. evdv/jitas, "rea"j"), v. Trpoyoias^ a politicaltreatise (Cic. Legg. iii. 6, 14) and a letter to Tubero. From the .treatise v. vpo-voias Cicero
seems
schools
(Cic. De
Orat,
to have
taken
his
criticism of Crassus, born, astrology, De ; ii. 42, 87"46, 97. according to Cicero, Brut. 43, Dimn. (Of. 161, under the Consuls Q. Caepio I c. " 88, 97; Schiche, p. 37 and C. Laelius (140 B.C.) could sgg; Hartf elder, p. 20 s##. of
11, 45)
not
have 110
become
quasstor
also
not
fore be-
his
treatise Hirzel
to
Die
long
Zumpt,
Hist.
3
date.
very Vide
Cic. ; Biich, De
Dnin.
1878).
treatise
1842;
be
PJdl Suidas
DC. is
ii. 30t
he
presupposes of Posidonius
he
says
Schwenke
1879, book,
p.
derives
section, with
from The been letter used book
Uavairiov.
Two. among
v.
of
Qe"v.
those
g%i
semel hand
egressi
;
revertemmt
by
of
Suidas that
Tiiseulana
Disputationes
Tusc. J)is~
manifestly
presupposes
(cf Zietzschmannj
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
he philosopher,
no
it is
I?L__probable that
with
i* did-
since
Chrysippus had
worked
greater success
The Stoic
for the
spreadof
had
Stoicism.
con-
system, however,
undergone
siderable
Though
Panaetius
and found no part of it agreed with its principles with consistently interest, yet his own superfluous,2 directed to the of the period, the spirit was chiefly 3 and he therefore endeavoured side of philosophy practical ;
the
to
usage the
of his
and when
attractive the
form.4
But
this
scientific
an
objects are
subordinated
and
it,
always involves
put.
other the Font. hand
attempt
on
to harmonise
Halle, 1868) ;
the chief Heine of the
the of
"hiewas 71
we
held
are
in
Athens
; in
Col,
source
first book
burial pares
2
coni-
Disp.
(De
to
him
Posidonius
and from the
with his
Disp. p.
a
s^.)* Zeno,Cleanthes,
Which of title and tions
3
Chrysippus.
Stoicorum.,
be
sought
in
treatise view
is
is evident
Pansetius, biit,as
H7wd. tise of
1
whose
rectlyopposed
Corssen
to that
of Gieero
is confirmed
princess by
quota-
says
(De Po^id.
in
a
in Part
Bonn,
1878),
trea-
A few
physical propositions
handed
us;
Posidonius,
of
Pansetius
to
has been This, after what said, scarcely requiresa special proof. Cicero, e.g., calls him (Divin. i. 3, 6) vel prineeps
greater
charac-
and that
teristic of the
we
quotations from
possess
relate to
anthropology, theology, and ; ejus [sc. Stoiocs]disciplines Jwrno et (Legg. 1. "?.)magnus morality. Such of his writings know either historical, as we are ; (Fin. iv. 9, imprints eruditm %$)iniprimu ingemus et gruvis; ethical,or theologicalin their (Off. ii. 14, 51) ffravissiviuscontents; whereas not a single
StoicO'Tum
;
the
Ind.
Hero,
dialectic been
4
has
ever
Gimp.
sided
quoted
Cic. Fin.
; ii.
iv. 28, 79 ;
Off, i.
68) the
esteem
in which
2, 7
10, 35.
44
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. III.
of the he
avrbs
.
of conflagration
said
and
of Phil.
though
Chios d.
are
only
that
the
r}VTO/jL6\"r)(rcw. Epiph.
iil 2,9, p. 1090, D With this Eel.
:
discussed
6fr.
ttavair.
27, and
that
seems,
Athen.
was
xiii the
556,
as
Z", in
it of
he
substance
Stob,
agrees i. 414
he
to
first,
elvou vo/Aifci (TLav. IT iday are pav Kal IJLO.X.XQV apeffKovffav avrq" TTJV aWiOTyra
oAwy
we
TOV
the
from
bigamy
Plut.
a
Socrates, and
1, that
of
corrected Demetrius
a
had
expressed
upon the
x"P^y^a
closer the
matter
Aristides
too
guardedly
through
It is far in
investigation. point
he went of Ariston 's
possiblethat
and his
the
universe
pro-.
conjecture
(cf,Phil.
have his been 1493
bably emanating from Pansetius ii. 45, 115, 46, (ap. Oic. N. D is asserted it emphatically 119),
.
in
opinion
that framed
the with
whole
a
universe view
to
is in-
Ran. AristojjJi.
the
colwmatas is
nmndi, and
in it
so
nothing
speaking of
the fact
another
Socrates
but
that
Pansetius
felt
nation, necessity of critical examirarely felt in his time, On the is not affected by this. the other hand it is in the
qiwciita stabilis est mimguam dus atqiie ita eoliferet ad permane-ndim, tit niltil UB excogitcLri quide-mpossit aptius, for a
philosopher who
destruction had does
no
assumed world
to
the would
highest
of the
sertion have degree improbable that the aschief of his having denied
occasion
on
lay the
stress
its JV. D.
durability.
ii. 33, 85, : if the
come
Plato's
rests
authorship of thePhado
any other
Nor
Cic.
upon
a
ground
than have
offer any contradiction Stoic do.es not here decision last for whether
ever or
to
the world
will
length
Momm5'
only for
an
definitel in-
opinion
it is not
immediate of
a
Philo,
yovv
"ray
Mtevn.
m.
"
c.
proof
world
forming intelligence to bring 6 3,L$c"vto$Kal HavairLOS discussion. this question into Kal In is true that the burning of eKTrvp"creis TraXtyycvGffias
is mentioned, "56y- the world 46, 118, with the comment I.
;
c.
da
SIS
ItELATIOy
TO
STOICISM,
world
see
was,
that
in his
opinion
more
CHAP.
__._IIL_
Aristotelian with
theoryto
not to
this, he
death
only limited
a
the of
soul's
after it
certain
space
time,
quo
entirely/2 It
dipression ex-
is also stated
that
Pancetium
but
can
addubitare
this mode
be
word
as
aiStoTTjs (nor in
no as
cebant)
from
of
having
was
end.
a
But
as
the
taken of
former
d. Or.
rule admitted
Pansetiusnor
cannot
Cicero's learned
by the Platonic
II. i. 876
school
(cf PML
.
Greek
original,the
author
sq.\
were
and the
as
the
which
chief opponents
since Zeno
merely by hearsay that Pangetius was sceptical concerning the world's conflagration. The
words account
are
tetics Peripa-
(PMl.
d.
Gr.
to be
can even
laid
we
to Cicero's
; nor
infer from
was tain uncer-
to me 929)rit seems he had once Paasetius, when given up the Stoic dogma, did not
over
them
he
remain
to
half
way,
was
but
went
Panaetius's may
of
as
real
ployed em-
the
which Peripatetic,
meaning*, for he
form
to
have
at
that
2
perk "I
is
of
generally
from Cic.
language
speaking
of oral
represent
his
Balbus
from
recollection
i. 32, 78.
a
After
communications
(cf. Comment.
doctrine
soul
has been
:
continued
causes,
repudiated, Nwrnguid,
amicns
est iffitiir
qmn
dimittavnw* conflagration theory eos only a proof of his superficialitydicOj qui ajunt animos manere, e cum (cf.Diels, Doxogr. 172 sq.'). excesserint, sed coTpore
Stotcos
i
of these
"
two
non
decided
a
whether
A.
Istos rero,
.
"c.
ore-
rep'relienclAs
a
repudiated
world
are
varov as
well told.
beginning of an as ending
The
damns
suo
igiturPanaatio
dissentienH locis
?
Platone
enim
"
quern
not
words,
o:0a-
omnibus
divininn,
aal
ayfjpa in Epiphanras,
emanate
us
sapientiss^mium^ quern
g/uem, sanetis-
if
they really
from Plato's
Pansetius, remind
ayripcav
of
and do of of
so
even
sententiam animorum
de immortalinon,
tate
probat.
negat*
interire
. .
not
with
certainty
the notion is not in the
Vult
nasci autem esse,
enim,
autem
quod
anivnos
nemo
beyond
the
quicquid
natum
sit
.
world,
no
alterant:
:
having
beginning
included
adfert rationem
nihil
completely
quod doleat,quin
id (egrum
40
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP.
he reckoned
the the
III.
only six divisions in the soul instead of traditional eight; for he included speech under voluntarymotions, and ascribed sexual propagation, not to the soul,but to the vegetablenature.1
not to internal
disease
and
solution dis-
but
to
external
force.
doned aban-
twiturum
mos,
as
dolere
autem
ani-
When,
at
last,Panastius
ergo etiam
interire.
to
Now,
the
of conflagration
the
I must
Heine
(He
an
Fontibw*.
orthodox
1863, p. 8 sq.\
would
oppose the
he
had
only
the
sarily neces-
between
absolute
denial
doctrine
of
and
its
death, but
But of Pansstius
an
eternal
the had
we
tinuance. con-
that
tions objecthis
see
soul
Is
immediately
animus,
est Jiorum
not
can
death.
autem,
meaning
from Cicero the
merely,
manner
it is here
said, qui, si
esc are
in them.
introduces
which He
g_uatuorgenerum^
nia, const
quibus owi-
manere.
Thes
swperiora cajjessatnecesse
JVi7i.ilenim
genera,
eat*
disposed of, and previously ~?H remain there en only two that of Plato possibleviews,
and which duration and that it.
even
habent
et
JICPC
diM
$roni)
that
sire,
et
cons
ant
liahine~
of
life
after
death,
evident
suum, est
IIOG etiam
magis
in
which The
the
same
ferantur
here
ccelitm,. that
cerning con-
When
Cicero view
remarks
from
'the
of
Pansetius
Panaetius, quotes from especially the second : he who till represents souls as lasting
Cicero the
must
the
admit Heaven its it that
even
nature it in is
of the
we
soul
must to
being presupposed,
the
exalted
event,
of conflagration
not
base
of after
unlimited
that
argument die,but
are
they become
view
himself found
diseased, and
on
may that of
cumb, suc-
whom
the
1
dissolution Iffom.
they
not
soul.
Nemes. 96 Nat.
c.
from for
15,
they
to
according
theory,
$6 "5
RELATION
TO
STOICISM.
47
The
first of these
i
l
theories
is not in
of
much
tance imporof
CHAP.
II L
but
the
second,
the
discrimination
duala psychological (j"vcrt,$" presupposes Panseto Stoicism.2 foreign ism5 which is originally in his tius here follows the Peripatetic as doctrine, of theory of immortality. "We are again reminded it in his ethics,, "bythe division of the virtues into That he also departed theoretical and practical.3 from the severity of the Stoics and approximated to the view of the Academy and the- Peripatetics, in his definition of the highest good, is not probable ;
^t%?7 from
His
Ethics.
pepos
Se
able
how
to
far
this
dependence
it is
here that this the
details, and
follows
to
nbv
TTJS
ov
perfectlyconceivable
in what
(pva-ecas.
:
he himself
un-
14
Dimditur
nunc
\_anima\
duas
. . .
first have
given
of the
in
mine
partes
in
in
meaning
notion
truly
the
quingue
205,
(to
from
dominion
over
Biels, Doxogr.
the
the
\6yos (ratio)
parallel passage
CUT. Or.
in Theodoret, dpfjify (temeritas). 1 Bitter (iii. 698) undoubtedly Aff. v. 20, adds : ah in it. et in sex Pancetio, seeks too much a Aristotele} 2 old The Stoic psychology storation reThrough Diel's luminous derives all practical activities the of text, those
conjectures
which
are,1 set
20
at
rest
from
the
in its and
Zietzschmann
Font. Mine the
:
(De
of the
Tusc.
occasion
Disp.
with
connects sgq.')
scripts manu-
distinction
to
of
^v%^
reading
in
et qiiingiie Tusc. in
changed
f
sex
Pan. from
enwi
afterbirth
Phil,
infers 47 tributus
(est
jpartes
altera in his of
duos,
est
giiarum
Pansetius the
ration-is
pa/rticeps^ altera
Platonic
expert}
ethics and
a
that
followed
Aristotelian
distinction irrational
and
I
Even
part
of
soul,
cannot
with
agree if Cicero in
to Panastius
Kal Kdl vyieicLS q"a"rl But this ment stateas xopriyias. in regard to Posidonius (vide proofs in Phil. d. @r. III. elvai Kal i. p. 214, 2 ; 216, false, Tennemann
this section
holds
1) is decidedly
throughout, it
is still
question-
{GeschicJite
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
though
he
_^__distinction
the
that he denied
fadeeta
he
of the
wise,,1 may
traceable
to
the
fact that
between
the difference clearly brought out more over pain and the the Stoic superiority
But we to it. may, Cynic insensibility he tried to soften gatherfrom these statements that the among of the Stoic ethics, and the asperities gave the views of their propositions, possible many brought him least into to those which preference
nevertheless,
collision with
the
same
deavour en-
is also evinced
work
for this is
on
for the
perfected
to nature when
in we
d in ine
Phil
iv.
we
382)
is
right
in
pleasure according
not
is the
ot
sayino- that
cannot
trust to it
inconsistent
; but
regard
to
AccordDemos-
understand
narrower
by pleasure
sense
the
emotion
he tried
thenes
prove
the he
that
held would
Katin* alone
: atperbv
to
be less
81* autb
himself
Cicero
every emotion Of. ibid. III. nature. to contrary 218, 3. 1 10: am\A. (Ml. xii.
$5"w^, it
is like
5%
doubted
it; and
iuqnit,sed giwrwnineo "pressly (infra,,p. 49, 2) eadem etiam ex portion dam Bitter (iii. 699) did not. When sicuti Jwmitmm finds in the proposition(ap. prudentiorum
he
says that
ex-
yntria enim
tantum,
atgue
airaGeia
non,
Sext. is not
Math.
xi.
a
only
fadicioPanatfo
est. abjec-kaque
2
vnyprolxtia
the
cir-
to nature, but
pleasureaccord-
This
is
seen
from
ino- to nature,'a'manif est de viaolder Stoicism, the tion from both questionable, this seems from the
cumstance
Cicero, Fin.
letter declare
to
de
dolore,
passage
in
itself
and
paticndo, he
that
expressly
pain is not an the quotation Stoic The evil,but only enquired: Quid i. p. 219 III sq. in en esset et quale,$ uantumgue that is pleasure only doctrine
Phil.
d.
Gfr.
deinde
qiue
ratio
with
which
the
theory
of
esset
perferendi.
'
PANMTIU"
RELATION
TO
STOICISM,
49
wise
man,
only
for those
for
who
are reason
making
it
pro'
CHAP,
gress
treat
in of
; and
this
does
f
not
of
the
no are
Meanwhile,
from told
in
however,
Stoic the
all this
contains
we
real deviation
the
otherwise
Panastius is
concerning
with
of
harmony
It
them.2
divergences from
more
the
traditional
able. considerPansetius
His
of
which
Varro
are
his
3
(like
at
later
when period),
that there
gods, those spoken of by the and by the statesmen. poets, by the philosophers, of the poets concerning the gods are The narratives and unworthy fables : they represent full of absurd the gods as stealing, committing adultery,changing dren, chilinto beasts, swallowing their own themselves the other hand, philosophic theology "c. On is valueless to states (it does not adopt itself to a
classes
1
three
of
This
at
least
results
from
sets
forth
the
to
claim
of
life
exposition, Off. iii. 3, 13 s$. ; also ap. Sen. Ep. 116, 5, would first of all give Pancetius who those not for are precepts the In to wise. reply quesyet the tion of a youth as to whether
Cicero's wise
says better
man
clares id solutti lornim,, qiwd esset ap. Stob. _BuZ.ii. 112, compares marksmen
mark.
will
fall in
love, he
different
same
that
to
an
such
as
quotes
(Off. ii. 1-4, 51) has also an analogy (Pliil.d. 6rr. III.i. 263)
with
they
not
yet
wise
men.
the
ancient in
Stoics.
The
further
details
of
concerning
see
utterance
Off.
treatise
d.
Panaetius
truly
4
Zenonian.
6rr. III. i. p.
Clem. Stob. Alex. Ucl
273, 276
Strom,
ii.
**CLi"fra, chapter
According
iv. to
Ap.
Civ. D.
was
27, whose
Varro.
Augustine, authority
416, B;
ii. 114, he
doubtless
'
50
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IIL
for it contains things the many public religion), or dicial prejuknowledge of which is either superfluous the latter category, the people; under to of that many Scsevola places the two propositions honoured as the gods as Heracles, personages
"
were
merely
has
no
human
as no
in appearance
they
age,
are
for represented,
no
the
true
God
sex,
and
members.1
From
this it
that the
a
convenient
public institution
of the
the
service
of
order, and
of it must
selves regulatethemthe
we
comprehensionin
whether this discrimination
know
Pansetius
bring
forward of the
of
doctrine
must at any rate that assume gods,3we in that of the men who for in his theology,as the most part adoptedv it Scsevola,Varro, and Seneca a thoroughlyfree attitude to the popular and found expression was : though justified religion either of them, in the that known it is not of myths, which was so interpretation allegorical
" "
much
1
in
favour
those
with
the
of
Scoics
6fr.
Stoics Stoic of the IIL
as
and
i.
from
317, 3)
which
this
to
Among
portions
theology philosophical
are
which
treated
belonging
whom here the
cone
universally ;
from Plaeitacan
but takes
author
silent,
must
reckon
the
Varro In the
says
this
more
defi-
nitely.
3
only have belonged to the later period, which is also indicated by the appeal to Plato, i. 6, 3.
excerpt
Placita
(cf Phil, d.
.
52
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. III.
in adoptingthis Pansetius,
mode
of
thought,
above
stand
alone among
the
we
Contemand
proved,not
also
only by what
of Boethus
we are
of
from
Stoic
doctrine,
of jples
Pancetius.
but
Heraelides.
disciples, Heraclides and Sosigenes. The former opposed the Stoic proposition concerning the equality of all faults ; ] the latter,like others, is said to have
by what attempted, not without
the Aristotelian with that
to combine inconsistencies,
further of
In
theoryof the mingling of substances of Chrysippus.2 But know we nothing of Pansetius. either of these contemporaries
school
we
his
own
may
suppose
that
the
ception con-
and
treatment
of
the
Stoical
doctrine,
But
which
he himself
we
favoured, was
have
to
predominant.
here, again,
of the with
meagreness
we are quainted ac-
of many
is
of his
one
numerous
Posidonius disciples,3
so
the
concerning
far
as
his
character concerned.
as
philosopheris
Lyndon
among
Van
(72
these
comets
s^O
his
mentions
specting d6"r)s opinion reSuvTjflevres, v"rrepov aitovcrai r""v eipyuLsvcav UTT' eAcet^ou (Sen. Nat. Qu. TroAAa vii. 30, 2) ; his theory that Attica, irepl avrol \"yov"riv. KOI Kpdtfecos $"v els ""TTL teal'StO)"ny4vf]s, account of its healthy on ercupos climate, produced gifted men (cf ibid. III. i. p. 48). 'Aj/rtTrarpou (Procl.in Tim,. 50 c.s following Because they could not, on ment account of their other presupPlato, Tim. 24, c.); the statepositions
.
"
gard
cf Phil, d, "r. III. 126
Tives
sgq.)oi 5e
avr"v,
rris
^ApLcrroreXovs
that inhabited
1 2
the
torrid
zone
is
in
follow
the into
3
Aristotle
tirely en-
(Ach. Tat.
contradictions.
/J"e"s 142,
after
Among
these be
the
following
:
a,
Stoics
ftev
names
should
mentioned
Chrysippus,
"Xpvffitrircp of (1) Greeks: Mnesarchus, in ffvfjufrepovrat Athens, who (especially reJaad also heard
SCHOOL
OF
PAN^TIUS.
53
whose
cessor
opinionswe
of
possess any
details.
we can
Of the
snccon-
CHAP.
III.
Pansetius,Mnesarclms,
only
Diogenes
successor
and of
Pansetius
De 2nd.
Orat. Here.
;
84 ; Ltd.
Here. father
as
whom
his
78, 5
cf tyit.Dioff.
d. Or.
Diphilusis
a
also mentioned
2), who
likewise
heard
Stoic.
To him
two
belong,
as
epigrams Jac. Dionysius thol.6rr.ii.$"t i. 22, 69 ; Numen. ap. Eus. Pr. him of Cyrene, a great geometrician JEJv.xiv. 9, 2 ; quoting from Acad. Hi. 18, 40). (Ind. Here. 52). Georgius Augustin. c. of Lacedasnion Fin. c f. i. Cicero (I.e. 2, 6) calls (Ind. Here. 76, Hecato of PJiodes, whose him and Dardanus tirniprin- 5). dedicated Ind. treatise From Duties, on eipes Stoic or um. is Col. 51, 53, 78, cf. Epit. to Tubero, Here. quoted by Cicero, it follows nus' Dardathat Off.iii.15, 63 : 23, 89 sgg. From Dioff.,
was
in Athens
(Cic.Acad.
the
likewise
an
Athenian
the he
same
treatise, if not
from
and
disciple
the
to in
same
of
Diogenes,
As
and Antipater,
was
Panaatius.
time
at
called the
of his own on separate work Seneca t seems Benevolence, have the greater part o" taken what he
i.
successor seem
quotes
3,
from
him
(Sen.
Senef.
9 ; ii.
18, 2, 21, 4;
school archus.
with
successor
Mneswas
Their
probably
AM. Kl.
rus
(as Zumpt
supposes,
d."j3erl.Acad. Hist. Phil. 1842, p. 105) Apollocioof Cicero Athens, whom of a as contemporary
describes Zeno
of them comprehensive, quoted by Diogenes (see Ms Index), who, according to the Rose (in which epitome 'E/car. for rightly substitutes
some
the and
Epicurean
the
Ind.
(N.
Here.
I), i. Col.
his
to
him
Bi-
The
the who
disciples thynians
is to be Seleuwith
and
Jjjco(Tnd.
Mnasagoras
r am onus
75, 5 ;
76, 1).
Pa-
distinguished
cian whom before
from
the
(JUpit. D).
Tarsus Pausanias
mentioned,
(Ind.
of Plato
Zumpt confuses him. His leadership of the school must the in fallen have beginning
of the first century, and even began before the the
Here. Pontus of
74, 77).
perhaps
end of of
second.
Apollonius
Nysa, in Phrygia, rS"y Uavairlov of Ascalon, Antiochus 1, whom #/"io'Tos"(Strabo."xiv. -yvapifAcav named had a nothing the Academician, 48, p. 650), of whom treatise (infra, further is known. Asclepiop. 86, 2). Perhaps he of Panaetius after the death d o t u s, of Nicosa (Ind. Here. Col.
(Hid. 76, 1). (Diog. iii. 109). P o s id o n iu s infra\ (vide of Ascalon Sosus (Ind. Here. Url. 75, 1 ; Steph. Byz. De after the doubtless same JAcTK.),
Ehodes
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. III.
jecture that
the
Stoicism
it
so
which, his
easy
to
pupil Antic-elms
with Scylax
as
(vide infra)found
had of still belonged to the Mnesarchus Antiochus older and also Hero.
combine
Concerning
and
the
of
an
school
402).
Dardanus,
Halicarnassns, celebrated
astronomer learn
(which
as an
visited),
Sotas
politician, we
member.
from he
was
of
Paphos by
(Ind.
of Strabo
a
Stratocles
opponent
astrology.
the school of
That of said.
he the
belonged
Stoics, is
In he
not, however,
to
regard
it is not
was
a
Panjstius
on
Nestor clear
Tarsus,
work
the of
quite
fellow time. mentions and the
whether
a
Timocles also
Knosos
Cnihave of
as,
discipleor
or
disciple of
at
a
(Itid. Hero.
us
Panaetius,
lived after
later
belonged
Panaitius
to
or
appears the
school
Mnesarchns,
Here.
according Antipater
to
to Ind.
Col. 79,
Athenodori
of
have
been
afterwards
Stratocles. of of whom
many
disciple
the
of
other
disciples
hand, Tarsus,
of berius, Ti-
Seleucia,before
the other
39),
Jacob.
contains
according
21, the
had been
to
Lucian,
Nestor of teacher
Macrol).
Stoic
Anthol.
to the
846),
the
belongs
Pansatius
which, as a of Pansetius,
the
contemporary in spite of
life here could "We the
not
ninety-two
to
years
he
B.C.,
same
attributed
him,
the
event
in
might
Stoic
so-called
(De Fato, 3, 5), which would Posidonius to have seem quoted. Diotimus,
timus,
same x. or
must
or
have
a
been
philosopher of Academy of the same name (mentioned infra, p. 102, 1),the teacher of Marcellus (who
may
a
Biog.
letters
rius), Tibewas
with
of
Epicurus
contemporary
Nestor
(perhaps also the same person that is quoted by Sext. Math. vii. 140) ; for, according to Athen.
xiii. 611, ", he this at the
was
Pansetius. Dardanus
executed of Zeno d.
for the
instance
sil Baa Epitome This, however, was teacher of probably not the Marcus Aurelius (iwfra, ch. otherwise viii.)butan
introduces
Epicurean (Phil.
G-r. III. i.
unknown
SCHOOL
OF
PANMTIUS.
doctrine
of
the
Academy
o\vn
already approximated
of exposition of his it ;
l
to
CHAP. III.
in his
and
on
that
resembled
those
master
other
which that
this is he
expressly
considerably
of the Stoics
departedfrom
member
not
was
the
of for
the
the
school former
of
genes; Dio-
therefore,
iii. 21, 78 B.C.), of
were
we
hear
in De
Balbi
Orat.
91
could
(supposed
two
one
elate
have
no
who
must
a
Stoics,
the
same
of
these
source
of
biographies
Besides the the ciples disof Romans for
some
be meant of these
names
together with
name, Ind.
third
of whom them of
the
Laertian.
were
Greeks, there
in
also
the
the
Here* which
Pansetms
had and
Samnites
;
Rome,
The
and
JSFysius
perhaps
most
afterwards
introduced
the
"r7rov$ai6TaTot
in Athens.
important
Tubero,
c se v o
these, Q.
Mucius
JElius
S
Q.
C.
(in distinction from the as a separate class. ctLot) 1 Nothing else has ever
been
an
Fannius,
L.
been
P.
Rutilius
M. Vi-
quoted
utterance
from
him
except
Rufus,
JSlius,
gellius,
have
Sp.
10
Mummius,
{supra, p.
may whom
we
mention:
Piso, of
against imphilosophical rhetoric (ap. Cic. De Orat. i. 18, S3), a logical observation (ap. Stob. Eel. i. 436), and a God of definition (ibid. 60).
These Stoic
2
divergent
nothing
general
doctrine.
he Pi 133
was so
the
L. who
Calpurnius
was
Frugi,
consul
in
Pompejus
c.
and
i. 15, 67 ;
47, 175; Off. i. 6, 19; guished 12, 11, 27), a distinPktityj). civil law, on authority
geometry,
bus
and
the
Stoic
sophy; philoBal:
tius
(Panseit according
as
andL.
; for
JBnct.
last
42, 154)
owed
other bus be
to Pange-
tius is most
probable.
On
the Balto
$"VXTI*), V-spT]JeTTjs ri" l*-6vov Koyucbv Kal ^X^s $1811 the latter being rb a.la-Bf]rLK6v, into naturally again divided
the
come
p. 46, to the
1, siqwa,,
longing be-
seems
we
six
too
"When,
faculties of the
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. III.
details ; ] in this individual to application certainlyanticipatedby Diogenes ; respect he was but tradition tells us nothing further of these philosophers. in its
Posidonins.
Bather
more
has
been
communicated
to
us
specting re-
Posidonius,2 a
seems long activity
Syrian
first
one,
of
Apamea,3
over,
or
whose
to have
extended
over,
J 2
century.4
or
nearly disciple
Phil.
the
most
known
54 Kal els 'IP"fj.Tjj', eVl ReBake, Posidanii Rhodii thus shows Doctrine 1810; ; Leiden, MaoKeAAou), and liquice Muller, Fraffm. Hist. Gh'"c. iii. himself (as in the statement discussed Posid. 245 supra, p. 41, 2) to sqq. ; Scheppig, De O-entium Apam. JZerum : Sondersh. rum Soriptore
3
Tdrra,1869.
655
;
be
imperfectly
:
informed
as
to
Posidonius
we
Strabo, xiv. 2, 18, p. 2, 10, p. 753; AtUen. 252, e. ; Lucian, Macrob. Suidas, sub voce.
xvi.
4
should
some
and
vi.
find
20;
in Borne
More do not be
precise information
possess. the made Three basis data of
an
of
a
his later
letters, were
time. the with haps Perthat
we
at
may
the M. the
circumstance
approximate
that
Marcellus
Bhodians
league
Borne
(2) that he lived to be eighty-four years L old (Lucian, c.); and (3) that, according to Suidas, he came
of Panastius
to
renewed Famil.
a
ad
however,
error"may
have which
caused in
the
Borne
under
the
consulate
journey
occurred
the
of M.
Marcellus almost
last consulate cordingly of Marius (51 B.C.). Ac(infra,, quently subseto and be Bake, placed under p. 57, 2)
all the
was
ties, authoriborn 51
that
of Marcellus. believes
ten
Miiller Posidonius
years
(I.c.
to
that he died
in
B.C.
and
in of
the
statement
Suidas
he
to the
bases
ordinary theory. He the partly on tion asserof Athen. xiv. 657, /., that
this B.
old
man
Strabo,
had
on
vii., said
Posidonius
xvi.
that
:
he
than
a
eighty
second
journeyed
Borne;
known
partly
753
Strabo,
2, 10, p.
partly because
to
speaks as
if this visit of
-Borne
were
the
only
Plut.
Brut,
i.,where
some-
POSIDONIUS.
of
visited
not
the
countries
a
of the his
CHAP. III.
West,
thing
which
written
far
as
but Grades,2
Posidonius have been death.
correct ;
to seek
spherefor
latter
is
quoted
seems
from
to
well It
as
the
in
statement.
not
relates, perhaps,
the
last
to
after
Csesar's
is not
But the
the
last
passage Btrabo's
C.
part
of
to
seventh
quotation
no
from
Posidonins
to
3, 4, p. 297
a
efore
contains murder.
can
Caesar's
or UoffeiSc"vios'),
5,
8, p.
donius Posian
From
the Katf
at
^uas
we
316, where
is event
report of
in his
only
most
that had of
quoted concerning
an
the would
that occurred
period
represented oral the
touched
Strabo, which
case
office, which
to
inaccurate have
as an
recollection communication.
two
might
Athenseus
if Posidonius
B.C.
in that
50
in
Wyttenbach
sq., shows in seldom
a
But
if
Bake,
the
which of
visit
sioned occa-
expression even by
sense.
is not
used,
wider of
to be
Posidonius
51 to B.C.,
Strabo
ac
placed in
Marcellus with the
before and
^uaintance
concerning
under
his
Piome both
not
may
his meeting
are
placing
much
Stiabo,
death
is possibility
For Strabo as beyond 50 B.C. to (vide infra, p. 73, w.) went the year Borne as a boy before 44, perhaps (as Scheppig, p. 11 Hathinks, agreeing with sq sen-Miiller, De Strab.Vita, 18)
,
some
that he may have been years before 135 B.C. have died
iii. before 51 B.C.
;
may
Cic.
Of.
2, 8
Mvin.
i. 3, 6; Suid.
2.
2
vide
sujjra, p. 41,
in
46-7,
or
even
in have
48
might
Ehodian later and
on
possibly
The
traces
are
preserved
from
see a
in
philosopher
Scheppig
birth in 46 be which from
B.C.
Posidonius.
Posidonius
here
that
in 130
c.
long
time
in
Spain,
Even for
especiallyat
138
c.
Gades
(iii.1, 5,
this
assumption
not
would received is
instruction therefore
we
shores
questionable
whether
can
depend
of
occurs
statement
statement
upon Athensens.
at
the
place
where that
Athenseus Posidonius
2, 0 ; svii. Italy (iii. he 3, 4, p. 144, 827); that 4. visited Gaul 5, p. 198), (iv. Liguria (iii. 3, 18, p. 165), Sicily (vi. 2, 7, p. 273), the Lipari islands (vi.2, 11, p. 277),
to
east
coast
of
the
Adriatic
(aujwa,
be
p.
founded
upon
mistake
as
Eome visiting
58
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. III.
in
Rhodes,2 where
he
was
that he is
attracted
Ehodian.3
His
name
and
Eomans especially
therefore,, althoughhe
he
who
must
himself reckoned
taught
among
the
in
Eome5
men
certainly be
most
the
did
for
the
4
spread of
for time
Stoic
philosophyamong
a
the Eomans
granted.
from of
He
came
the
manner
in which
Rhodes
under
Rome
on
mentions
to
him, treating
as a man
consulate
on
Marius
to
business the
throughout
his
well
;
Eoman
readers
Mar.
45), while,
51
seems
JV". D. omnium He
i.
44,
hand,
year
1
supposed
to
visit in the
as
trum nos-
me,
himself
shown,
At the
a
improbable.
any
had have
not
heard
in Rhodes
(Plut.
rate, The
we
intimation slightest
of such
design.
this
as
chief
of
in
journey
far
as we
Oic. 4 ; Cic. N. D. i. 3, 6 ; Tuso. ii. 25, 01 ; De Fato, 3, 5 ; Brut. stant 91, 316), and kept up a conconnection
6
:
with
him
gather, (JFin. 1. 2,
historical
seems
geographical
and
date the
of the
first
war
Posido59
B.C.
the
year
he
after ;
the
to
memorial
of
revise, but
the sition, propocould
ad
vii. 2, 2, 293.
2
Posidonius
as
declined
At
memorial
Ehodes
to settle
induced
are
him
Att.
definite
there, we
not
told ;
west
life
of
Posidonius.
had made Previously Pompey acquaintance of the philosopher, and given him years, it is to be supposed that repeated he only commenced his activity proofs of his esteem (IStrabo, as a teacher xi. 1, 6, p. 492; Plut. Pomp. subsequently.
as
but
journey
in
the
must
have
consumed
several
Athen.
vi.
252,
Luc.
20 ; Suid, From Luc. Z. G. ; Strabo, xiv. 2, 13, p. 655 : vii 5, 8, p. 316; Pint, Mar. 45; find that he received we the Ehodian and filled citizenship,
Maerol).
112).
to
The
visit of
(Tusc.
1.
Stoic
also
is sufferings,
was
known.
"
even
that
of
older
at
once
We
can
perceive
tilius
BO
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, III.
the tradition
as
of Ms
master
school with
did. In
the
same
his
regard to
Stoic
to the
Pansetius returned
deserted
to it.
held
fire ; l
dogma
of destruction
some
of the
world
by
and
he added
further
he
ascribed
external
be
sary neces-
(Bake, 87 $"".) we
ytrabo's natural
Scheppig,
evidence
15 in
allow
so
mimerous
Concerning
with
space would
world's
The
contrary
^Stern. passage the
eKirvpcacris. in statement
history
he
bined com-
Philo,
in
Mimdi,
where,
supra,
geographical
ift/ra,
p. in the
quoted
read
descriptions,
62,
3. A
mass
vide of
historical
(previously correction),instead
SiSc^iosr,Bo7]8. Kal
nullified the
true away
of "BoyQbs 6
restoration
by
this
49th work of
book
of
is
quoted
This books
clusion con-
text,
with
byAthenseus,
treated of the
A. the
does
two fifty-
period
B.C.)
to
Poly bias's
B.C.
history
For
2
zu objections (Uiiters. to my i. 225 5^/7.) tion exposiof the nius. theory of Posido-
(146
further
Further
in
details the
will
be We had
sqq. ;
1
Scheppig,24
vii. 142:
sgq.
d. Gr.
learn
quoted,
Diog.
that
TTJS
treated the
of 2nd
prophecy
book
of his
only "j"vtfiKbs
and iv
Jlavairios
TOV
he sought to establish belief in irzpl wfK"Ttp KOffftov, "C. 5' "$"Qa.pTQV it,and to explain its possibility airety'fji'aro
That in these
KOO-JAOV.
words
but
more
particularly by
;
not
merely
the
discussion,
of the world
the and
assertion, destruction
to
of the
beginning
is of the
; that
fulfilled
was
Posidonius, is selfconfirmation
we
just
In
uncritical III. i.
to
statement
have ii.9, 3
Antipater
(IMd.
ibid.
predecessors Chrysippus
To
(Pint.Plao.
par.} only
339, 5).
be
him,
indeed, is
II.
referred
(cf.
en-
Ms
predecessors,would
i. 337,
1) the
DOCTRINES
OF
POSIDONIUS. incline
61
value him
might
a
us
to
consider
CHAP. III.
merely
demons
Stoic but
was
Syrian Hellenist.
under
a
The
belief in
and
;
l
also taken
his protection
in
utilised
in
support
But
of
belief
phecy pro-
of immortality
on
the
which soul,2 he
Pansetius
opposed.
the
whole
is,in
his mode
of thought,unmistakably the disciple The chief problem of philosophy Pansetius. for him also avowedly lies in ethics : it is the soul of the whole in and for system ; 3 a point of view which
tire
doctrine
existence
of has
immortal
no
1st book
De
ground
souls also
c.
to
JMvinatione.
1
Cf.
319,2;
Trilus
from
Cicero
(/.c.
31,
the
sq.}
that
320, 3 ; Cic.Z"m^.i.
modis censet
30, 64
somniare animus JDeorum
that Posidonius
maintained
Deorum (Posid.')
: WIG
adpiilm
homines
gift of
there ment argu-
(for
this
to
him) the altero natione in sleep detaches teneatur, even giioci soul which sit aniimmortalium itself from the aer body, plemis in and thus is rendered quilnis tumquam morum, capable adveritatis of looking into futurity,m-iilto imignitce notce Dl tert'w, quod ijM magis faciet post worte?]}, cum pewea-nt,
cog-
ipseper
doubt also
that
belongs
cum
2
conloquantur.
231
om-ttitw
norj)ore
excesserit.
morte
Itaniulto
it has
que
never
adpropinquante
been of
the
'
donius Posi-
eat divinior.
As, moreover,
said
in
disbelieved
conflagrationof
he must doctrine
even
death,
denied in
of
tality. immorwere
though
if this
itself is
it has
conjecture
when
that doubt
of the
Posidonius
of the world. demons future
especially had every opportunity of asserting the have not slightest it, we the for assumption. ground whether But we are justified in going still farther,and cribing asto
conflagration
him the be
the
Platonic
belief
in
in
doctrine
will
of
already
to
discussed
him life
j for
(untilthe
he
of the the
p. 67, 4. 3 Phil.
world)
62
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IIL
itself was
ence
alreadylikelyto
cause
certain
indiffer-
His
lave
of
rUetoriG.
had
not
also
for Posidonius
value
is not
which
they
a
had
for the
older
Stoics ; he
merely
Erudition,
Natural
and even in his scientific but a rhetorician^ philosopher he does not belie this character.1 If, exposition in learning, be excelled most philosophers lastly, in philothere lay therein an sophy, attempt to work? even the surface than in the depths ; rather on inclined to be gainsaidthat he was and it cannot philosophic enquiry ignore the difference between in natural and erudite knowledge.2 If the interest science
was
stronger
the
to
in him
than
was
usual
in
the
tarnish
nearer
him
might also contribute purity of his Stoicism,and to bring the Peripatetics.3 His admiration
even
TloffeiddvLos jueTaAAaw
the Golden
mechanical
arts
were
invented the
by
the age.
as
philosophersof
Perhaps
for what he is is Strabo
(in Spain)
responsible also
says,
vwevdov-
i. 1, that di vine
vireppoXeus. Even the fragments we possess are sometimes in ornate style, but always well written, and show
"na
rais
the and
knowledge
of
3), so 7ro\vpddeiacan
no
one
except
belong to philosopher ;
a
no
trace
of the form of
mode inand
of in
expositiondelighting mostly
the
Strabo,
yap
e"m
ii.
3,
rb
8, p. 104:
ference
employed by Chrysippus.
-
TTOTU)
a.lrLoKojLKbv
According
and 7
to
Seneca, Ep.
mathearts
reckoned all
liberal combats
T^ue'repo: (the
philosophy.
sgq.,
Seneca,
the
Stoics) 5i"
alriw.
rowed Some
13p. 90,
statement had
which
to
Posidonius
"
by
are
Posidonius
from
Ari*
tried
establish
that
stotle
given by Simplicius
DOCTRINES
OF
POSIDONIUS.
for of
Plato
was
just
and
as
example
on
CHAP.
III.
; Panaetius)
2
in
commentary
that the
Is of
the
to
Timsgus,
combine his his him
we
well doctrine
suppose with
he
tried
the
Platonic.
consequence is reckoned the of
Even
in
agreement
3
Pythagoras
4
eyes
and the
have
Democritus
himself
by
among
philosophers;
demurred
to
to which
account
earlier the
lation re-
Stoics would
on
of Democritus
Epicurus.5
Hence
it is mani-
Phys. 64, #.
abstract
OT.
of
bis
of the passage
in Math.
not
iv. 2 sqg.
to
shows, does
citation the that
with remark
belong
the
De
in ccelo, 309, ", 2 K ; SchoL Aphr. Ariat. 517, ", 31 ; Alex. Meteorol. 116, a, o. 1 Galen, Hipp, et Plat. iv. 7, 421
:
from
and
even
Posidonius.
in Theo
Also
day
the
Kairoi.
K.a.1
rov
TlXdrrcavos
?s aL
manifestly taken
on
from
the
mentary com-
Kal
the
to
6avOLTTOTO. ra
only
sense
serve
T^JS [jLcifov
"v$pa
Kal
Belov
to the Platonic
Ka\"i,
re
ws
Kal
avrov Trpecr/Beuaji'
and in
therefore
can
nothing
own
TWV Trspl
regard
to to
Posidonius' the
"c. fivj/duetov, Trepi r""v rTJs^v^s 6 Posid. ibid. v. 6, p. 472 : Sxrirep riAarwj/
2
adhesion
number
4
Pythagorean
Patter iii. 701.
32. would
system.
90. 23jp.
65i'5a"e. fjfjLas
Math. vii. 93
; Plut.
Sen.
His
Best. An. De
eclecticism
have
Procr.
22, p.
Mus.
c.
1023;
Pheedr.
on
Theo
gone had
from
still further
if Posidonius says,
Smyrn. Bull.;
Pksedrus referred
wrote
46, p. 162,
p. the
really, as
Hermias
a
in
his
derived Oriental
is
a
philosophy
This,
in that
was so
H-ijAst., if
of
commentary
own
is not
here the
been
however,
universal said from
of
correct ;
to.
a
That
he
perhaps
on
he
merely
Ms taken
commentary
has
Democritus
of
atoms
Parmenides
already
doctrine
the
observed, siipra, p. 43, 1. 3 Galen, I. c. iv. 7, p. 425 ; What Plutarch, L 6, p. 478. quotes
Phil,
to not
supposed
this tells
Phoenician
v.
philosopher Mochus
I.
to
(Phil. d. Gr.
c.,
765),
the
but
nothing
as
from
d
Posidonius
(vide
Gr.
II. i. 659, 1)
of the
belongs
Timseus,
the
exposition
the
and
to his own theory ; opinion Pythagorean the comparison Z. as Sext. "?., ap.
directly
philosophical tendency of Posidonius, but only as to his historical deficiency in is abundantly criticism, which attested by Cicero and Strabo.
64
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IIL
tie must
to
necessarily have
Stoicism,, and
approximated
to the for
the
systems
A
Stoicism
other
to
systems.
have been Antiochus
specialopportunity
to
this
seems
afforded
him,
as
to
his
contemporary
(vide infra), by the polemic against accusations In order to repel the scepticism. conflict of the philothe from derived sophic which were
systems,
it
was
asserted
It
does not
that
in
the
main
they
that
were
agreed.1
allowed himself the
appear,
in
however,
material at
he
many
departures
:
respects from
any
""$
ancient
one
Stoicism
our
sources,
important
Whereas
of
divergence, his
the and
to to
Platonising anthropology.2
trine, in opposition
denied and
a
Stoic
doc-
to
that
Plato
Aristotle,
the
faculties
belonging
of life
soul,
one
reduced
phenomena
the
was
intellectual
fundamental
faculty,Posidonius
soul's life
are
of be
opinion that the facts of the to one explained in reference it, like Plato, inconceivable
the
cause
not
to
principle.
that
reason reason
He
found be of
our
should
and
of that
which he
the
1
passions; 3
To this the refers
8'
and
the
fact
of
sage 5o/cet
definitions, though
less tions contain and
O.VTOLS
many rectifications
a""("/rao-0cu r^v dicxpcDviav (pi\orovro) croQias, eVel r"$ h.6yq" -rrporbv (3iov,"s ical Aefyeiz/ o\ov
Uo(rei5("vt.6s fytiffiv eV
rols irpo-
earlier of with
the any
Stoic
his
philosophical view
It to
of the
TpeTTTiKoIy.
'The
universe. suffice
observation
the
:
mentioned
world is
fore
supra, space
quite
we
unimportant
otherwise
what
i,
the Plat.
know
physical,
Galen,
this
De
Hipp,
et
astronomical,
geographical
(where
subject is treated
POSIDONIUS.
65
being frequently at strife with, our will could only be explained by an original oppositionof he showed that the faculties working in man ;
affections
l
CHAP.
"
passionatemovements
merely
for
as
of the about
mind
could and
a
not
arise
from
soon
our as
notions
good
of
these
notions
a
are
they
have
manner
do
not
produce
passionate movement,
all persons
in
they
;
a
with
the does
existing emotion
and
not
exclude reason.2
simultaneous
opposite activity
that the the mind
of
Finally
that
fresh be
he
remarked
stance circummore
cannot strongly
the
presuppositions
of the
the
Stoic
of
theory things
all these
for
is not
our
worth
time.3
For
reasons,
himself
arose
doctrine
that the
from
from
the from
rational
two
soul but
and
at
desire,as
which, particularfaculties,4
5,
length)
1 2
iv. 3, p. 377
s%. ;
v.
questions
as
the
seat
in be
of
the
to
461.
Loc. LOG.
; v.
*#. 5, 397;
only
may
regard
decided
7,
416
3
6, 473
sg.
simply ception
As
an
from
or
immediate
of the of
perhe
self-consciousness.
latter mental them condithat
L.c.
some
instance
however,
sents
forward says
Posidonius
to
saying
the
In
order
trine
understand
the
no
doc-
of is this
v.
passive
need of
emotions
"v l/ecwrrore
not
lengthy
cannot in
arguments
Galen,
and in
I proofs,
them
there
needs
no
the blames
to
utterance
constitu-
immediately
1, 429
:
here
Chrysippus
from to
through
4
self -consciousness.
"
c.
.
appealing poets in
passages
Galen,
/xey
v.
.
Xp"r-
regard
such
nriros
o%v
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
III.
being
forces
distinct from
of
reason,
are :
l
by
the
constitution
the
body
he
these
however, not as parts of the soul regarded, the same and but only as separate faculties of one to the prevailthe seat of which, according ing essence, opinion of his school,he placed in the heart.2 he thought, belong and must Desire also, courage to all ; the latter only to to the animals ; the former indicathose capable of changing their place: 3 an
iretparai
rivet,* Kpicrets ra
elvat
rov
KoyiffriKOv
ra$
yiyvop."Vct,s
Xvcreis
(rvffroXas
ras
Kal
eceorsii-s titulis, principali, qiiocl ajunt yye/ji.ovikbv, et a rat'ionali,guod ajunt in duodeoim KoyiKbv, exindegroa
qui
duolus
irrcfxreis secuit, this discrimination of elvai the from the irdQ-rj, ra yyeiwviKbv Xoyutov ris iv6fj,L^ey that we have shows here to do with a misunderstanding of vexdeisGTraivsi re a^aa KO! irpocrieKal eTrdpffeis
rai
rb TiXdrcavos rols
\4yei
ovre vvtav
own
in
regard
in his
to what
he
found this
"iri'ytyv6fj."va /cptn'scrt, of
erepow
aXXa
KLvf](rei$ nvas
dvvd-
^3Galen,
crev
1 LOG. cit. v. 2, 464 : "$ rfav rrjs tyvxnseiroiraSyrLK"vKivf}ff""av rcus
Z.
o.
v.
6,476:
tea
e"rrl tcai fluftoeiST?. K[vr\r* re GTriQvfjiTirLK^v ^cpw fiver juez" o?"v r"v Kal irpOffiretyvKora SlKrjv (j)vr(av Ibid. iv. 3, 139, et passim.
irerpais
tfriffiv
rois,
eTTLdv/LLia fi6vy
erepois rowi)SioiKe'io'Qai
/j."VO)V aei
2
5ia06"r6i rf,
rov
Loo.
5' aXAa ra "rcafJLaros. Xeyei aura, ra a\oya 5' 515 : o rats (rti/j.irai'rci $vvdfj.e(riv a/u."porepaLs
bvo-
Kal
fj.dfova'n/ (which
done in
he
has
inaccurate
rpiffl, perhaps IJLQVQV rcus TfpoffeL\f]"p"vai guage, yap lanKal rty XoyiffriK^v ap-^v.
between mals aniinfra p. 68, 5) dwdfjieis The distinction ovcrias S' eivcLi fj"a(TL which e/c picis are rys capable of When Termotion from those a place and KapSlas6pfjL(t)fj.evr)s. tull. (De An. are 14), departing which not, together with from
says
the
above
exposition,
autem
. . .
the
that
even
the
and in
Dividitur
in
(sc.
decem
et in
latter must
sensation
met
paHes
desire, is
Aristotle II.
with
duas
68
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
donius
which,
;
we
his
own
_L_
utterances
though
theoryof
doctrine
:
the
emotions,1
would ment state-
nothing told
the Stoic
ns
of his ethics
which
for the
clash with of
moral
that he did not hold virtue to Diogenes,2 sufficient for happiness,we be the only good, and 3 and to be untrustworthy if he have already seen ; for the preof opinion that many even was things, servation of one's country, ought not to be done,4 this, though a deviation,was, in any case, only such the cynicismof the oldest Stoics deviation from a
as
may
be
considered
an
amendment
in
harmony
of the system.5 Nevertheless, we spirit of our cannot regard the Platonisinganthropology admission of alien a merely isolated as philosopher elements into the Stoic system ; for in this alliance with the with Plato and Aristotle
not
there
comes
to
light an
This the
Aristotelian
matter
:
and
substance,spiritand
v.
Loc.
tit. iv. 7,
421;
6,
469
2 3 4 5
rb
aA^emz/ 47, 4.
159.
Kara
T"%LV
Kara
Vide supra,
Cic. Even the
p.
af/rbv ovcevafaz/
Off. i. 45,
fj.ri""v a^pevov
contradiction
a\6yov
a
tyv^s,
only
definitions.
tween III.
Posidonras i, 232,
of
Ghrysd.
(G-alen,I. c.
not
v.
6, p. 470)
of
own
ippus (mentioned
2),
the
diseases
6V.
does the
touch
the
nucleus his
Stoic
theory,
and
definition of the
highest good
unimportant.
POSIDONIUS.
69
and
in
connection
therewith
had
also
denied
the
CHAP.
existence At the
same
of
it had
demanded
of self-consciousness
an
from
such
and externality,
as
ethical dualism
had
neither
Plato
Aristotle
recognised.
now
The
makes the
contradiction
of these two
determinations
dualism, which
marks
tendency of the Stoic philosophy, the theoretic view of the world,and obliges reacts on the Stoics in this also,at any rate in the sphere of
to introduce of principles; an anthropology, opposition for we easilysee that it is not the Platonic may
fundamental
tripledivision
rather the
in
of reason,
courage, of
and
desire,but
and rational ir-
twofold
distinction
rational
the
human Our
soul,with
which
Posidonius
is concerned.1
cates
this connection
and
emotions
as
their connection
"
he exalts
to recognise
their
in
use principal
that
they teach
of the
and and
ourselves from
the
distinction
divine and
and to
rational
follow
the
irrational within
not
us,
animal,
not
the
demon Here
the
evil and
un-divine.2
onlyis
TT\S
the
This
dualism, notice
an
is in
expressed
Plutarch,
re
KO!
rov
KCUC"irav
also in the
Karct.
Salmon
crvy-
yevei re
e^ovn
ttovvrt.,
Trore
activities
ff(a~ tyvxtKo.,
rbv
2""
r"$
partita,
ffvvettK\ivovra$(pepecrdai. ol
rovro ovre iraptlSdvres
Se
rots
rotv-
fieXnovcri
ey
rfyv alriav
ro7s
r"v
ovr3 iradoay,
ireplrrj$
70
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP*
the proper
nucleus
;
in.
Psychodualism.
logic
enunciated division clearly triple Platonising chiefly is also said that this dualism appears
to the
necessary the
for philosopher
the
reason
of presupposition anthropological
sense
and
reason.
The
first symptom
in
have
alreadynoticed tyvxy
and
Panaetius
"
in the distinction of
foe is
; in its
we
further shall
development
later find,
A link
in
one
on,
prepared
the The
transition
from
Stoa
to
NeoPlatonism.
between
the Stoic
doctrine
and nism. NeoPlato-
therefore appears as a of Posidonius psychology it was not link in a great historical nexus ; that without importance for the later conception of the Stoic doctrine,we
may
met
see
from
none
the
statement
of
with known
among
to
the Stoics
answer
had
how
the Stoic
objections
Posidonius
against the
old
Stoics
the
of
first century^
B.C.
theory.2 Posidonius the In the periodimmediatelyfollowing of the Stoic schoolisindeed attestedbythe spread great
ical ofjLoKoyias evSaifLoviasr opdotioj-ovtrLV.ov
yap
sv
been
shown
what
as
is peculiar
fiKtirovcrtv'fai
to Posidonius
compared
doctrines
he
as
irp"r"v sffnv
Kal
avrfj rb
rov
K."T"
re
the older
Stoic
a\oyov
aBeov
points
for
on
is in
real KOKodaifj.oi'OS
TTJS
evidence
them,
such
repeatedly
enumerated
quoted
this
earlier sections
are
work,
In his
opposition to
the
by
Bake.
dignity of the spirit, collection, completed by Mxiller, iii. 252 sg$., PosidoniuSj ap. Sen. Ep, 92, 10, Fragm, JBRst. Gr. and Scheppig, De Posid. 45 sqq." speaks of the body as iwwtiMs et flitida, to be found taffi* are the historical GO/TO recejotandis turn ciUs JiaMlis. and geographicalfragmentsand
1 2
LOG.
402
tg.
theories
of this
philosopher.
In
the
preceding
pages
it
STOICS
OF
THE
FIRST
CENTURY
B.C.
71
numbers but
of itsmembers
a
with whom
of these
seem
we
are
acquainted ; l
CHAP.
III.
only
portion
to have
occupied
themselves
of
and even independently with philosophy, that portionthere was not one certainly philosopher
to compare
with Pansetius
and influence.
and
Posidonius It
in scientific
importance
1
Beside p.
may here
those
52
already
mentioned
merated, enu-
In the and
xiv.
$""., the
ing follow:
"
be
Ind. Here. col. 52, 1) ; whom Leonides, Strabo, 2, 13, p. 655, describes as a Pihodes of
was
Greeks:
to
Stoic from
a
probably
Also
pupil
Posidonius.
still have
the two
teachers
in Athens
Cicero
Cato, Athenodorus
surname
Cordylio,
Cato him
xiv.
whom from
took
to
young In that
interlocutor
case
in that
city.
Pergamum
with Cato
he must
guished be distin-
from tins of
the
of Dionysius of Pansedisciple
;
kept (Strabo,
Plut. the
till Ms
Min.
at
but
he
is
no
Dioy.}, previously
of
in
same spoken library Pergamum person which he capriciouslycorrected by Diog. vi, 43, ix. 15, and IT. (Diog. opposed by Philodemus writings of Zeno 0-77- the vii. of 7 col. from jueiW, Antipater 34) ; and sqq. (as results If after 4 xvi. col. 19, 4: sq. Zeno). Tyre (Plut.Cato, ; Strabo, of the school, 2, 24, p. he was the head 757; Epit. Diog.\ ing doubtless the same he can who, accordscarcely have followed ii. Mnesarchus to 24, 86, Cicero, Off. immediately after the compodied shortly before (vide supra, p. 53) ; perhaps,as sition in this of loo. treatise, has shown, already been
doubt
cit., Apollodorus is
between have them. the three
:
to
be
placed Athens,
would treatise
and
seem,
had
written,
it
of in
Asclepiodotus (Sen. Nat. Qu. ii. 26, 6 ; vi. 17, (Diog. 3, et passim') ; Phanias
vii. his him Bhodes
on
quoted
and
Diog. respecting
etpass.;
tises, treato which
other
it is uncertain
the
son
of in
is
Antipater they
to
belong.
Hero.
one
cording Ac-
succeeded school
;
2nd.
col. 79
or
head
of the
(Suidas,sufi vocc
other PUl d.
while
as
(supra, perhaps
tius
p.
two
Panse-
the
hand,
G-r.
Apol-
shown, 48, he
III.
i.
lonius
treatises
quoted by
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. ill.
more
probable that
which
at
most two
of
men
them had
followed
the
;
these
given
that
period held in the main to the doctrine and of Zeno Chrysippus,but repudiated than before ; and alien elements less strictly partly
that
Strabo,
and ap.
Diog. vii. 1, 2,
also Phot.
of
Sandon,
of
from
Tarsus
or a
the
ciple dis-
6, 24, perhaps ap. Cod. 161, p. 104, 5, 15. Dioinstructed dotus, who Cicero,
and who afterwards lived with
neighbourhood, perhaps
of
the
Posidonius, the teacher cerning Emperor Augustus, conwhom Dio cf. Strabo, xiv.
21,
23
Chrysost.
Or.
33,
and
made
Cicero
his
(Cic. Brut.
90, 309
; Acad.
p. 24 Plut.
R;
^Elian.
c. Pojjlic.
ii. 36, 115 ; N. JD. i. 3, 6 ; ad JDiv. xiii. 16, ix. 4 ; Two. v. 39, of
tliegm. jReg.
113; ad Att. ii. 20); a disciple freedman of the his, a Muller. triumvir Crassus, Apollonius 485 mentioned is Cicero, by name, by 8%.
ad must
Aug. 7, p. ii. 1, 13, 3, p. 207 ; Qu. Com. 634 ; Dio Cass. lii. 36 ; Ivi. 43 ; i. 6 ; Suid.JA07p(f". Zosim.-S^. ;
Cm.
Fragm.
Whether
Hist. the
Gr.
iii.
Fam. be Ind.
xiii. 16. of
From Ptolemais
Mm the in
and
sayings
to
distinguished
Here.
col.
Athenodorus
or
same
Apollonius
the the calls
as
another
name,
of with
to
the
tainty, cerme
78, whom
in it
instances
cannot
be
discovered
seems
but
is there
probable
that
by
the
in
dorus AthenoSen.
Dardanus
were
mentioned
both (cf.p. 53) disciples Trtmgu. An. 3, 1-8, 7, 2 ; Ep. further 10, 5, without tion, descripDiogenes, and as such can is to be understood our hardly have lived to the year 90 since that the at B.C. ; whereas Athenodorus, Apollonius of of
Cicero,
as
boy
this
in
his
he
was man
certainly the
of he the
was name
best in
house, long
after
date,
of
enjoyed
Diodotus Caesar extreme
war.
the and
instruction
likewise
wrote
about, i.e.
gories, cate-
against, the
and
on we
Aristotelian who
was
opposed
Comparetti (1. c.
the about
particularpoints by Conutus,
find from
Min.
Simpl. 5, a. 15, 5. 41, 7. (Schol. in Arist. 47, ~b, 20 ; 61, a, 25 54.) 32, e. 47, f.; in Porph. itfy. 4, 1,21, I (ScJiol.
Arist.
Abhandl.
48). Athenodorus,
48, 5, 12)
d. Berl.
; cf
Brandis,
1833
;
Akad,
STOICS
OF
THE
FIRST
CEXTUUY
B.C.
in
its learned
of its
in the practical cation applipartly activity, into amicable contact came principles,
CHAP.
III.
on
many
points with
the extent will
other
schools.
An
example
attained in Arms
showing
in
to which
this eclecticism
us
individuals
be
presented to
other of the do the the Stoics
Kl.
of this
name,
them
from
Antioch,
fragments
been The
of
an
historical
and have
geographical
collected ethics
may
character
other
68, 121,
son
not
Suidas, 0eW ^pvpv^ tioned Tithora, menis. we 82, by Diogenes, the but know dates,
by
from
latter famous
must
be
older
than
of
Sandon;
the
JEnesidemas.)
Lastly, Strabo,
doubt who
on
Athenodorus
Calvns,
Duties
to the must
Stoic be
school.
as
His
birth Vita 13
the of the
other
placed,
D"
Hasen-
icspi-muller
says,
Strab.
which
Diogenes
more
cites,is
the
name
probably
s$.
various
To Theo
same Peripatetic of the of infray spoken p. 124:. this same period belongs
theories),in
as
or
before
saw
in 44
B.C.
he
58 B.C., P. Servilius
Isauricus, who
died him
can
in his ninetieth
in
of under
Alexandria,
to
cording ac-
Suidas.
voce,
was
Augustus
of
a an
(Strabo, sii
6, 2" Ptome,
scarcely
author besides
work
Eheto-
Apollodorus'Physics.
may be the
to
epitome of Perhaps
gone before his fourteenth native Bis city was year. in Pontus Ainasea (Strabo,sii.
luded S, 15, E9, p. 547, 561) ; he lived, alperson Here. Ind. Augustus and however, under at Rome. Tiberius "v words the (At the end in JAAe"an~ col. 79, he book his 6th names of thought by Gomparetti
in
the
Speus,
be
to
Dio
of
the
Academy
Tiberius and
as
the
must
present ruler
as
(vide infra, p. 100). In that he a was disciple of case Stratocles (vide supra, p. 54) and only the latter part of his
life Arms says
fjiera
can
Germanicus
his
son
; 14
accordingly
between
have If
fallen
he
,
under
Augustus.
survived
1
after and 19 Christ.) He betrays himself to be a Stoic such as not only by utterances
i. 1, p. 2 (the Stoic definition : Suidas (vide infra,106 of philosophy),i. 2, 2, p. 15" : yeyov^s eiri AiryOTJcrrov have but he also calls Zeno 6 ^/teVepos "Apewv) he musfe
to
a
lived
master
great age
like
Ms
two
Stratocles.
(Of
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP III.
Didyrmis,
the Stoic
who
indeed but
counted
who
himself
member
so
of
to
school,
the of him
approximates
that it
seems
closely preferable
Alexander
to
Academician,
after that
speak
philosopher.
(Parad.
Stoicvs',
Procem.
in
Perhaps
Sandon,
him
calls to
Athenodorus,
may Stoicism
eTcupos
the
son
of
2,
Stoieus
as
perfectus
118
;
as
have
;
introduced
whom,
Brut,
31,
he
perfectissimus
Pro
account
and
in
on
-ri/juv
(xvi.
be
4,
whom
21,
Mur. of
in De
29,
61
attacked
p. he
779),
shows
and
concerning
himself
to
Stoical Flnibus
the
asperities,
the leader
of
rately accu-
called p.
of
informed
(xiv.
he
5,
had
14,
his
school,
Cato
and
writings earnestly
death
one
674).
heard
Meanwhile
the
also
which
(iii. 27)
after
of the his
Peripatetic
16,
p.
Tyrannic
and
p. Xen-
studied,
of the d. ffr. III.
Oii.
archus had Boethus
3,
had
548)
4,
ideals
Stoics
His
(PJiil.
(xiv.
the
4,
670)
famous fellow
and
3).
teachers,
still
as
more
a
Antipater
ciple dis-
Athenodorus
either
or
and have
his
Apollonides
before Stoicism Nat. M. vii.
us.
more
prohably
(for
also
a
the
already
his Hist.
92.
come
word
xvi. in crvj/e"f"i\ocroct"'f)(ras.i."i' p.
Concerning
also xxxiv.
a
vide
2, 24,
757,
permits
as
this
Pliny,
8,
30,
113,
interpretation)
(Of
a
teacher. Aristoin
Favonius,
of
third
instructor,
does
to in
not
passionate
whom Min. 73 Cato
;
admirer cf
.
Cato's,
Brut.
demus, 1, 48,
p.
he
say
xiv. he
respecting
34;
Plut.
650,
or
what what
The
a
school he date
tioned men-
32,
;
46;
Cfesar,
Octav.
belonged, Protagoras,
by
unknown. Bonaans of
structed 21 in-
Pomp.
Valer. xxxviii.
Sueton. ii.
him.)
of
13
Max.
10,
14.
an
Dio Also
Stoic,
ix.
Cass. is Valerius
7, xxxix.
Diogenes, ("")
this known the
56,
Soraiius,
and
older
Among1 period,
to
us
the
the
as
contemporary
of
seems
acquaintance
Brut. is
D.
Cicero's
from
(Cic.
what
46,
169),
following
adherents
:
are
quoted
11,
treatise
by 13),
on
of
Stoic
trine doc-
Augustine probably
Gods
(Civ.
from
vii.
Q.
Lucilius
Balbus,
as
a
his
whom
Cicero
praises
Stoic
(Bernhardy,
to
Rom.
to
(JV:
the he
D.
i. 6,
15)
Lit. the
229),
school who
have
belonged
Some
and of the
M.
whom, this
in
second considers
of
book
as
of
are
Pansetius. also
treatise
occasionally
the will
representative
Porcius
the
school.
among and
Stoics,
be
as
OatoUticensis,
described
Brutus,
on.
spoken
already
by
Cicero
of
later
76
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
IV.
the Mithridatic
war
on
the Koman
gained
and
to the
as
for himself
a man.
great
esteem,2 both
him
as
a won
teacher
over
Through
of the
new
Cicero
as
was
doctrine
Academy,
he
any
ever case
Philo
had
apprehended
we
it.3
know
"Whether
; but
returned he does
to Athens
do not
in
not As
seem a
Roman
journey.4
he had of least
to
Here,
also
enjoyed
Tuso.
3
:
instruction
Stoic, at
text
seems
this ;
whether
Apollodorus is the
mentioned Seleucian Gr. III. i. mentioned
toric,
Plut. 6^.
$iXa"vos SrfiKova-e
KAeiro/m^ou orvvii-
Sia
"rbv
\6yav sQcLVfjiaa'av
Athenian
(supra,^. 47)
as seems
KCU
Cic.
mis
5ia
rbv
more
doubtful,
Philo's school
and
3
leadership of
the
Apollodorus
as
of
The in
to
Mithridatic
88 B.C., and
war
broke
out
of Philo's
the teacher Mnesarchus, was pupil Antiochus (vide 86, 1). That he followed infra, Glitomachus
as
Philo this
came
Borne. he had
was
treatise Antiochus
composed
Aoad. (Cic.
head
of the
the Ind.
Lucullus
school,
Herd, from
was
we
find
from
in Alexandria
J"v. xiv. S, 9 (accordingto Numenius) ; and Cic. Brut. the most of the
and
Bus. Pr.
ii. 4, 11), which, according to Zumpt d. Berl. Acad. (AM. 1842; Hut. Phil. JZl.p. fall 67),would mann 84, according to Her87. When he
to Athens I. G. 1. 4, in
Academice} ; (princeps
6, 17 (PMlone
einium In Athens
came
in 79 B.C.
he cannot
have
been
there, as
have
Academics
would deficit}.
his
otherwise in Plut.
;
been
Antiochus
mentioned
Brut.
Cic. 4 ; Cic.
v.
Besides
91, 315
to me
Fin.
haps 1, 1. Per-
he remained
as
in
more
seems
no
was
longer living.
as
89, 306.
statement
to
instructions
his life is to be
the
there
in
philosophy and
be
ascertained.
PHILO.
77
are
defended told,zealously
its
CHAP. IY*
in
whole
content;
in
in
sequel, however, he
to
became without
unsettled
regard
this
doctrine,and
expressly abandoningit,he sought greater the principles than of his preof conviction fixity decessors
afforded.1
to
Though
it
was
not
in itself contrary
the
spirit of
scepticism
that
he
should
ms'
point of view,2 regardphilosophyfrom the practical timl of treating it received him from an yet this mode which went beyond scepticism: he was application like Pyrrho, by the of destruction not satisfied, moval dogmatism to clear away hindrances,with the reof which
to (according
that
philosopher)
this
happinesscame
end
to
he found
be
complete directions for right conduct The philosopher, he says, may be necessary.
with
a
compared
so
is
physician ; as health is for the latter, happinessfor the former, the final end of his
3 activity ;
whole
and
from
eiredv^e^ ev
6vr"av rvxew,
v"ra
in the
eS"c
. "
jSaAAooz/avrtis CK"J'
Philo had
at first professed
That the
Numen.
:
At
as
Academic
scepticism
he
more
unconditionally than
wards Acad.
2
after-
teacher,
in
Philo
full
of
zeal
the leal
flaxy
doctrine
ra
of the
defending Academy :
KAem"-
p. 80, 2.
"""o7,ueVa T$
i?v"e Kal
rots
STou/coTs
eoucevat
ouSev
jj.lv 5e (pyffLT"vQi^croipoj'iarpq}
Kal yap rrj larpiKycnrovB^jiraffa. f)5e rcav laur^JevJei, rb re\osy rovro 5J %v vyleia, avrbv ave"Trpe"pep irepl irad7)]ut.dra)v Kal Kal TTO\Trepl r)jv dpo^oyta. ry "f"i\0(TO"plq evdpyetdre
'
73
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
*
lie derives
of
philosophywhich
he himself Where
he
IV.
treated
extent.2
the interest
of doctrine, though primarily form systematic so was philosophy, only in the sphere of practical tific of scienthere also the belief in the probability strong, have been strengthknowledge must necessarily
I. c.,
The he
man
to
maintain
that
so
the
Stoic all
of
ethics
agreed
entirely in
with
things
the that
those occasion
that
the
to
sick
Academy
Zeno
Peripatetics,
to
prevailed
and that be
himself
should
to upon medical
no
separate
himself
from
the
demy, Aca-
treatment,
counsels this is the
other
"
r4\ov$,
of
primarily
individuals.
for
the
The
by in fifthpart, the TroAm/eds, philosophy) and partlyto confute the objections regard to the commonwealth. againstphilosophy. (The irpo- In order to provide not only
of virtue
more same curately, ac-
the
worth
conduct
the
problem
is undertaken
rpeirriKos
of
Philo
is
thought
for
the
wise, but
also
for
the
mann, by Krische, I c. p. 191, and Heri. 6, ii. 7, to be the prototype of Cicero's JEFortensius ; cf ., however, Phil. d. Gr. II. ii. 63). This being attained, there must,
who SiaKel/j.evoi Mpcairoi, vestigation to follow unable are logical inthe sixth part is required, the viroQ"-riKbs \6yos,
peffcas
which
into
2
coins the
rules
results of ethics
cases.
secondly,
"
be
applied
and
on
the
one
remedy hand,
This
the
false injurious opinions concluding words the be discarded, and, on must p. 46 (in regard to be must mus) : auras IJ.GV other, right opinions " Trepl aya6tav KCU imparted
"
Stobseus,
Didy-
KaKtov
rfaos.
The
third is the
In the this
part
jectures con-
avrf)
rot.
Trepl
"c.
(ii.7)
4th book
source
of
of Cicero's treatise
Any
one
who
agrees
with
mann's Her-
Finibus.
This, however,
be
only
not
cannot
proved, but
as
it is also and
Philo,
the first
PHILO. ened
79
and
so we
the
inclination
to
scepticismweakened
CHAP. Iy-
actuallyfind that Philo withdrew from the standpointwhich had simply disputed the posof sibility knowledge. The Stoic theory of knowledge he could not, of course, adopt ; against the
doctrine of
and
Modifier
timi
"f^
If'tlT*
Academy-
intellectual that
cognition,he
is
no
argued with
so
Carneades
that
a
there
may
notion co-exist
constituted
it
: 2
false notion
of
not
with
and
the
truth
sensible
perception from
all notions
which denied
the for
Stoics
all the
derived ultimately
reasons
he
which
and
his
had
1
given ; 3
This
little
he
could
agree
with
the
connection Is,indeed, impre"wm ex effietumque eo" by Hermann, 1. o. ; but unde esset,guale esse non posset know as we (from Stob. I.e.} ex eo, unde non esset JIQG that Philo placed the ultimate cum infirmat toUitque Philo, end of philosophy in happiness, judicium tollit incogniti et that he believed this to be But this cogniti. does not conditioned by right moral Hermann as mean, (ii.11) asviews (f"yi"sUxovo-ai86"ai, 0e"Philo serts, that maintained "rt 0fov), and by a whole frfmara that if there were visum like a views, and desystem of such that required by Zeno, no cornvoted of the six sections of preJiensio would one be possible ; his ethics expressly to the rebut rather, if the comprehenof false and the impart- sible must moval be a visum impresing of true opinions, the in- sum, and so forth,there would
denied
. . .
f erence held
true
is
inevitable
to
that be did
he
be
same
nothing comprehensible;
statement Of. that
235 to
the
opinions consequently
any
"
neces-
is made the of
by
not
Sest.
PyrrJi. i.
as
(infra,p.
Car-
81, 2).
cone-'
the practical sphere of doubt, point pure satisfied with and shows
case.
2
spending propositions
neades, PMl.
3
d. 6V.IU.
no
mere
we
probability ;
know of not him
was
If
we
have
on
what that
formation
this
point, gather
it
this
the
Cum,
follows
from the book Priora
with
we
great probability
can
what
contents
of 1st of
Cic. ita
Acad.
ii. 6, 18:
of the
the 2nd
lost book
a
enim
quod
si
negwet, qutequam esse eompreliendi posset, illud esset sicut Zeino dejmiret
. . .
of
Cicero's
Academies
\ from from the
and
the Academica
Posterior
tale
msum
visum
igitw
Acad.
80
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IY"
adversaries
of
the
as
Academic
doctrine
to
as
hitherto
the vanced ad-
understood, he
doctrine
renounce
itself. the
When
propositionthat
been
untrue to
school
of
the
Academy
had
tendency original
that there
must to
of Arcesilaus, and
return
therefore be
from
the
new
Academy
the
the
old,Philo
raised the
liveliest
to opposition
: new
this demand,
statement from
Academy,
there
to
distinct
no
be could, therefore,
but latter,
one
question of
doctrine.1
union
return
the
solelyand
look with
is
when
we
of the
Academy Academy,
only to be attained by
not
Academy, that of Cliand Carneades, which (c".the arguments of Krische, tomachus he undertakes to defend against L "?., p. 154 "#., 182 sg[.; HerOf. Antiochus. c. Augustin, ii. 10). mann, 1 Hide AnAcad. Hi. 18, 41: i. 4, 13: (AnCic. Acad. illis PMlo tiocftitnagister negcct tiochus) arreptis tterum
Nonius
.
in Wwis,
mias
quod
coram
etiwn
ex
armis
et
Pkilon
restitit
ijpsoaudiebawius,
esse, erroremque
duas
Ac"de-
morervtur,, et
Tullivs q'ttias Philo the rived
owinen
ejus
eorum,
qui
is
an
noster
are
oppres"it.
of Cicero
From itaputarimt("sA.ntioclcms,vidl#
probably
The
same as
arguments
doctrine
Academy),
to
c.
12, 46.
into
Antiochus
ii. 4,
relation says
autem
non
this
(Acad.
vivo
ii. 6,
subject 17) :
The is
(as
asked
relates, Acad.
11) he
patrooimum
defuit.
defends
Heraclitus
Academy
which
he
Viderenturne
PHILO.
81
Philo
believed, was,
as
CHAP.
'
well perfectly
established
had
for the
rational
concepas
tion, which
not
they
: 1
made
such
un-
His
theory
available
;
but in
in themselves connection
things are
with
not
ledge.
knowable
and the
this,he Academy
this
sense
tained mainwas,
; it
that
from
was
scepticism of the
meant
the
not
beginning, only
design
2
in
its
to
deny
all and
every in the
knowledge
Stoic
rion,3 criteas
of the
things;
while
this
was
denied
reference
only
to
was
opposition to
maintained As
to to
Stoics, and
esoteric from
with
genuine
doctrine the
Platonism
of
no
the
the
school.4
the be go
danger
back
to
Stoics
longer appeared
an
pressing,he
the
considered
it
opportune
time
originaldoctrines
"num
professed by the
ilia Pltil"nis, aiit ea Philotie vel eos ullo audivisset lie the
Tel
Academico
Carneadean pure scepticism, the representative of which in the first edition of the Academica was Catulus), negat Academicos
omnino
work the
dicere
and
(cf.
the
as
described
censure
rise
design
and
this
is
Sext.
Pyrrh.
vt
i. 235
ot Be
), Tovrecrn
the Academy scepticism is represented by Augustine (C.Aead. ii. 6, 14), who no doubt derived this conception from Philo as explained by Cicero.
4
of
LKy
a
elvai
TCL
1.
us
This
meets
often
expression
be
d. Gv. is is
III. i.
'
must
taken
sense;
derived with
Philo
ultimately probable,
in cf.
2
partly from
of
not
its inter-connection
inf. p. 82,
Cic. he
acer
all other
4, 12.
The
arguments
Philo
enim
of Antiochus
against
minus
C. Acad. in
iii. 17, 38 j 18, 40 ; but 20, 43, Augustine expressly to Cicero for it.
defensa (the
appeals
ECLECTICISM.
1
CHAP. IV.
Platonic
school ; of the
but
lie could
not
see
in
this
storation re-
old
Academy
any
of
the
tendency
Academy had
Platonism.2
departed at
if
we
original
this
factory. satis-
ask
in
consisted
genuine Platonism,
On
his
the
answer
is not
very
the
one
of the new Academy, denied the predecessors of a complete knowledge, of comprehending possibility merely in regard to the Stoic theory ; not of
; for like those knowledge, but quite universally
he predecessors, of
lacked
true
sure
criterion
for the
criminati dis-
and
false.3
Notwithstanding.,
to Philo
novam.'
3
PMlonis
tutn
yuan-
arbitror
Acad. oircutnspectissimiy
as
qui jam
dentibus
rat et ad
tiochus
domum
e
remigrare
from
in
vetere.
This
is evident
Cic.
Cicero, Philo, has defended the proposition,niJiil esse gwocL percipi possit, with
an
After
of
Academiam
legesque
enemy
the
treat, re-
the of
tinues con-
(as
the
were
he
saw
in
to
he
begun
the
open
true
establish re-
discrimination
here
city they
to
and
:
false, he
which the
2
war).
So
cum priiis pauca AntiocJio, gui TICSG ipsa, yMt? " me defenduntur, et didicit apiid Philonem tain diu, itt const aret
Plutarch
call
diirtim etidem
didicisse
licecnon quam
.
neminem,
et
J3rut. head
Academy,
and
acriiis accusavit
antea
old ; and Antiochus similarly Cicero (Acad. i. 4, 33 ; chus describe Antioii. 22, 70) may who through the man as that of the the
in senectute
taverat
.
defensi-
derit
esse
earn,
giiam
multos
et
awnos
renovation
fell
away
of
the from
negitavisset,veri
Vide
the
fain
notam? note.
following
while in Ms
he himself
conversely sees
from retrogression
84
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IV'
part with
Ids
discipleCicero.
venture
When,
however,
we
the full
consequentlyassumed
the conviction,
kind
mere
of
certainty of
transcends
but does not reach the unconditional tainty cerprobability, of the conception this is very characteristic between of the middle position of our philosopher
"
Carneades
without
and
reason
Antiochus,1
that Philo
less than
and
it
was
so
far
not
was
from distinguished
his
no predecessors,
from
his
successors,2 as while, on
favour
and of the
the founder
of the
fourth
Academy;
in
other
the
between
the doctrine
of Philo
that of
taken important divergence had really certain element, Philo, like Cicero place.That directly ances after him, might seek before all things in the utterof moral consciousness, and
ledge theoryof knowfoundation for practical
so
his
which
seems
to have been
determining influence
in
be
there
is
no esse
Hermann's
Philo's with
contradiction
admit
(I.c.
that
the
even
Kara-
contrary, when
in the Stoic the and
he
missed
perspicuitas coincides
unconditioned
cer-
fywraffia
A^n/c^
tainty, which,
of the the
according
excels
in
to
ledge,
nota
veri et
must
more
have in he
intellectual
Had
knowledge
this he could
knowledge
such
PML
.
which
been uni-
unconditional
Philo's
meaning
he
certainty.
Of
possiblyhave
versallyas
maintained does
(vide sugra,
Sit/pra, p.
PHILO.
85
But
in
itself Philo's
scientific
position could
assumes a
not
CHAP.
long be maintained.
as
He
who
certainty.
or
Philo
did
in
his
doctrine
of the
self-evident
manifest, could
every
sure
not,without
to
token
of distinction between
us
and
longer profess of the new the principles Academy; conversely, could not logically yond did professthem he who go beCarneades' doctrine of probability. If a man himself it impossibleto satisfy found longei any with that doctrine,there remained nothing for him but to break with the whole standpoint of the scepticism of the new Academy, and to claim afresh for for the knowledge of human thought the capability further taken This truth. by the most step was
the false is
wanting
he
could
important
Ascalon.3 This
of
Philo's
Antiochus2 disciples,1
of
philosopherhad
for
long
time
enjoyed
upon
AntwcTm*
had
himself
embarked
works
when may
advocating the
he have
scepticism of the
uncertain
measure
Academy,
it.4
began
been
to grow
about the
This of his
in
great
result
having attended
1
the
lectures
not
only of Philo,but
treatise of in Ger-
Of
whom mentioned
those
known
to
us
2
are
infra,, p. 99s^.
him,
De mde
Concerning
C.
160-170; ~K.iische,6rott.Stud.ii"
and
Chappins,
et
AntiooM
death
3
Asc.
1854 go
A
vita
doctri.na,
Paris,
Strabo, xvi.
Luc.
2, 29, p. 759
Pint,
42 ; Cic. 4 ; Brut.
2 ;
literal copy of this dissertation appeared in D'AHemand's and Marb. Asc. J)e Antioclw
Cic. Acad.
4; 19,
63.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
1
of tlie Stoic
Mnesarchus,1 who,
indeed
at
as
the
of disciple
of
Pansetius,had
the the
new
opposed the
the of
same
scepticism
time
Academy, but
for
prepared
with the
way
that
blending
in the
Stoicism
Platonic
doctrine which
sequelwas
in
-completed
war,
;
2
by
we
Antiochus.
find
During
with
the
first Mithridatic
him
did and
Lucullus
to
Alexandria
'
and
only then
him
1
things come
Philo.3
He
an
open
afterwards ing
the
Pr. Ev. Kumen. ap. Ens. xiv. 9, 2 ; Augustine, C. Acad. from taken iii.18, 41, doubtless ii. 22, Cicero j cf. Cic. Acad.
Stoic
whose
name
treatise
of Antiochus
bore, p.
or
in this work
Mnes"rcM Dardani?
turn
the second
passage
is
quoted
in in
Sext. p. the
Math.
vii. 201
Athenis giii erant He Stoicorum, oipes rated later sarchus himself date. and from
prinat
a
Concerning
Dardanus,
ii.
30, 1), but prohave former, we bably the source of the whole polemic the scepticism of the against Cicero (Acad. Academy, which (vide sup.
ii. 5
as
$##.)represents
from
Lucullus
spoken disof Antiochus courses (vide 5, swpra, he went Whether 61. straight 12 ; 19, 61). Cf. Krische, I c. Athens to from Alexandria, 168 sg$. Of the second version of the Aoademica had Cicero exhowever, or accompanied here allied Philo to Borne, and pressly says (Ad Att. xiii. 19), himself with contra Lucullus, is not cucaraXiitylav %uce erant stated. prceclarecollecta, ab Antioeho, 3 had According to Cicero, 1.o.t it Vcvrrarvi dedi ; but Varro in Alexandria Antaken the place of Lucullus. that now was
4, 11 (cf. 76, 4); ibid. 2, 4; 19,
repeating
tiochus
to
first
saw
the
was
work
so
of doc-
use
of Antiobooks DG is
re-
Philo, which
reconcile trines
to him
he
unable
with he
those
chus
in
the of
fifth
which
already known
would treatise
to write
to
from to the
him.
Also, in
scarcely gard
be Font. shows Cicero
believe
genuine (w^sz^.
this induced
probable
Antiochus
as
that in
follows
(vide
Philo
in
the
this short
at hand
again
p.
to have
responded
concern-
books wrote
(vide sup.
80, 1, and
consequently
from
ANTIOCHUS.
87
head
in ten
of the
Platonic
was
school in Athens
when
year.
Cicero,
About
CHAP.
79-78 years
B.C.,
his
pnpil l
the
for half
!
"
later he
died.2
Through
diverted from
Antiochus
the
Academy
was
so
decidedlySis
it had
as a
tendency sceptical
it ; and
to which
abandoned
whole, returned
called the
once
is,therefore,
founder
of the
he
had
freed
made
own
himself
a
Carneades, he
task of
polemicagainstit
The the
special
the for
if
his
life.4
sceptic,as
Antiochus
he
himself
memory
(Top.
5)
a
we
may
in
mortuus
Luc,
28,
cording ac-
perhaps
substance he
it had
which
Antiochus battle
as
lecture
with
mentioned
the
at
an
heard
and
notes
Antiochus,
of written
help
away;
battle
brought
besides
nothing
of any
is known
this
on
place (69
have
on
October
6, 685
till the the he
B.C.)
lived
at
treatise
of Antiochus
must
Topwa*
1
the
Plut.
v.
1,
following hand, we
Sere. in
year.
see
L 91, ; cf. Acad. L 113 ii. 21, 13 35, 4r, ; ; Legg. his Atticus also had made 54. Athens in (Legg* acquaintance 1 ; Brut.
34,
5,
expedition.
later Athens which for
not
Brutus
no
some
this
later
time
must
what Hero.
is said in the
years Antiochus
tus
heard but
longer
Aris-
in
332, with
not
8, 21,
to
generals
see
in
the
does provinces.
disagree).
it is
dates
2
More
We
this from
more
:
Cic. Acad.
ii. from
2, 4:,and
c.
distinctly
Antiochus
3
4
Phil. Cf.
19, 61
Hcec
fere
et Alexandra
tis annis
post
Augustine,
Nihil quam,
tamen
verum
C.
Acad.
6,
15:
severantius, in
mecum,
Syria
ante
cum
essst
est
p^ulo
qztam
83
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IV
allow
itself to be known
as
such, it
_____J
anything appears to be true;1 consequentlyhe not only contradicts the natural all action, for knowledge,2 but also makes necessity rejected impossible ; for Antiochus, like Chrysippus, in action, the notion that we might follow probability without knowledge and assent ; partlybecause, even
be said that
as we
have
seen,
without
truth
there
can
be
no
it is impossible to the
act
and
to
conviction, or, on
the
of the
other
hand,
possibility
conceded.3
which
portion
interest is just what is,in his eyes, of practical of virtue the highest importance : the consideration is,as Cicero expresses it,the strongest proof of the
This
could
of
the virtuous
make
no
duty, if
he
had
fixed and
unassailable be
conviction
aim
? how
and
would
wisdom practical
of life
were
if the possible
?
4
problem
he
unknowable
But
he
even
had
of
the better
sphere
on
theory.
The
question here
Carneades
the
tokens
chiefly that true conceptions have his attacks tinguish in themselves,by which they may be disfrom false.5 Against this with certainty
In
had
ii. 11, 33, 36 ; 17, 54 ; 18, 59 ; 34, 109. 2 LOG. oit. 10, 30 sg_t
1
Cic.
Acad.
the
first of
in
objections against
oratio contra,
LOG.
37 B$q. 4 LOG
5
2)
Omnis
cit. 8, 23 ; cf. 9, 27. Phil. d. 6fr. III. i. 501 sgg. Cic. Acad. ii. 6, 18 ;
miam
susoipitiura
earn
noMs,
retineamus
definitionem,,
evertere.
and
13, 40.
quern PMlo
wluit
ANTIOCHUS.
80
the
of
scepticshad
deceptionsof the
of these
we
chiefly urged
senses,
errors
the
-various
errors.
cases
CHAP. iy-
and
similar
The
existence but
Antiochus
not
on
does
not
deny,
to
he believed the
ought
of the
to
that
account
discard
dicta
senses
; it
merely follows
"
that
the
senses
are
be
kept healthy
are
that be
all
hindrances
and
to to
a
to
correct
observation
of
to
ished, banare
all rules
and foresight
prudence
senses are
be be
source
observed,
valid.1
In
if the
testimony of the
the
senses
is
us
themselves
for
of true
sensation
is
it also
that
"We
by
to
means
of which
this
change is
would
not
effected.2
must
Antiochus as likewise,
generalconcepts,if we
all
and crafts, arts
thought,and
impossible.3 But
against this,the tions imaginaof dreamers lunatics are brought forward by or his opponents, Antiochus repliesthat these are all wanting
true
to
if, as
in that
self-evidentness
and
which
is proper
to
intentions embarrass
us
the
of similarity
no
that
if in
our
there
particularcases
judgment,,6 we
6
obliged
after
to
suspend
1
need
That
not, therefore"
Antiochus of the
cit.
7, 19 sg_q.
vii. 162
3
3 4
Math.
*#.
precedent
Oic. I, c. 7, 21 8$. cit. 15, 47 *##, ; 16, 51 According to 16, 49, Anmust
purely dialectical
such
we
as
objections,
have
discussed
the from
so-called
^ewJ^evasii. 29*
see
Gic. Acad.
95 s%^
90
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
IVt
all claim permanently renounce tics themselves,however, are so that they their principles out
in
a
to
it.1
The
seep-
little able to
involve
carry themselves
it
can
the
most
contradiction
and
not
be
maintained,
of
a
convinced
of the
person,
impossibility
who allows
no or
firm conviction
Can
distinction between
truth and
a
error,
use
definitions
or even classifications,
which
to
he
it ? 3
that there
true
that
between
and
false notions
there
is
no
since difference,
propositions presupposes
must
this very
of
allow
that
some
these
arguments,
deficient in
called very
those last quoted, are not especially but others must subtlety, certainlybe rather postulates than and superficial,
proofs.
In any case,
however, Antiochus
such should
believed
self him-
justified by
demand
;
1
that
5
we
all
cence acquies-
and
16,
in
dogmatic knowledge
Arcesilaus
:
tit.
49 sq. ;
tiochus.
inference adsentietur etiam
autem
drew rei
this
SQg.
2
Si
ulli
sapiens
3 4
unguani,
alflqucmdo
adsome-
this
was
the
objeo
the
the wise
which
caused
Philo
embarrassment.
Carneades, "cesilaus,
and
An-
therefore agreed, and had an opinion. The Stoics and Antiochus deny this latter ; but they also deny that from agreement opinion necessarily fol-
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. IV.
Sophy, and
admitted" in
only changed
that
Zeno
* :
or,
if it be
was new
introduced
was
that
a
substance
that
this also,2
such
may,
subordinate
kind,
of the chus
the
as
Stoic
an
philosophy
form
a new
nevertheless,
be considered
amended
not
so as
of the
Academy,
and
adopted
member of
many
Stoic
:
c
that
Cicero
to be
concerning
a
him
of
he
desired, indeed,
but
was,
4
the
Academy,
pure of his
we
with Yet
exception
few review
points,a
that
Stoic.'
these
are as
points,as
of such
a
doctrine
can
show,
call him
importance
Stoic
as an
in
or
little in
Academician
; and
thought
Jlis eclec-
with
eclectic. ticism.
Antiochus
into
same
divided
philosophyin
5
the usual
not
ner, man-
three
to
parts ;
each
that he
did
ascribe the
the
value
Cic. Acad.
v.
of these
is clear from
posiCicero
ii. 5, 15 ,* 6, 16
Cic. 4.
When he had
Fin. N.
S, 22;
25,74;
29, 88;
Antiochus.
new
20, 54
2rauVc")j'GK
Acad. Ibid.
i.
9,
35
:
1 2, 43
"%. Verum
Xojov
esse
~
roTs
Sext.
i. 235 Pijrrli.
5Avr/o%oy rfyv
autem, nostro
ut a?'fiitro7',
AntiocJw
cor-
famttiari placebat,
veteris
a?s
rectionem
Academic dis-
August.
18, 41.
5
C. Acad.
iii.
Cic.
Acad.
That
i. 5, 19
these
(cf. ii.
two
Acad.
ii. 43,
132:
Antio-
36, 116).
views of
presentations re-
reproduce
the
gid"em
si perpaitca,
Mn.
v.
3, 8.
Stoicus
perpawa
T}aibutien".
ANTIOCHUS. tion
83
lie
most
assignedto them;
the and
for he
CHAP. R
'
the
Ethics,especially,
in his
said
most
by
of
Cicero essential
to
have
been
opinion
his
Hi*
the
part of philosophy.3 In
the
theory
theory
knowledge
of
principalthing
we nave
is
that
refutation
scepticism which
rest
already
to
mentioned;
for the
he
adhered, according
to the principles of Chrysippus Cicero,4 strictly ; and this is not contradicted by the fact that he also held
the Platonic
as
theory;
essential
for he
seems
to
have
regarded
agreed
also
the
most
element
of
the
latter those
universal
not
determinations with
in which
Platonism
only
that
the the
Peripatetic doctrine,but
Stoics: that all sensible the
with
of
knowledge proceeded,
in
indeed, from
itself
was an
perception, but
affair of
The understanding.5
So at least
we
qiiitur
telem,
.
ant
ipsitm
c.
Aristo-
i. 5 ###., not
only
?
.
Chrysippo pedem
28-30,
An-
ration, but
in
2
also,and
repeatedly,
the three
the
exposition of
ap.
duo
niisguam. is tiochus
on
So, in
throughout opposed
re-
divisions.
Antiochus,
9, 29,
in etenwi
Gic.
Acad.
JKBG
the
of
ii.
esse
Chrysippus.
5
maxima
indicium pJdlosop7iia,j
Acad.i.
8, 30:
Tertia deinde
. . .
I'eri etfinem
3 4
"bonorum, "c.
:
Acad.
Acad.
omne
Aristotle) ;
a
aidem
judicium
veritatis dbductam
sensibus
oriretur
esse
judi-
veritatemgiie ipsam,
ab
cium
veritatis
sensibus.
vulebant opinionibus et a sensibus, Mentem rerum esse et mentis But "c. the disciple judicem, cogitationisipsiics of Antiochns wluit* esse NumgiiiA horuni speaks in a preAntioehus ille ? noster of Zeno cisely similar manner probat vero (11 42). ne majorum snwwtm, gitidem
,
ubi
enim
aut
^enocraten
se-
04
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IV.
doctrine _and
of ideas,on
in his
hand,
he
abandoned,1
thus,
appear
to him
was
at last that
only an
Plato
extension and
and
of
tent ex-
the
theoryof
were
Aristotle.2
what and
in
an
Aristotelian
and
sions expres-
Topica^
Antiochus.4
mingled in supposing
In the
Cicero's
combines
the
those
or
of
but Aristotle,
also
of the
Stoics ; for
he,
Varro
in his
supposed
as
identical doctrine
there force
are
and
Aristotle and
ever
follows
two
natures, the
which
active is
the
passive,
the
is called
and
matter, but
is
neither
without
other.
a
That
or a
compounded
of both
the quality.6 Among these qualities simple and the compound are to be distinguished ; the former consistingof the four,or, according to five,primitive bodies ; the latter,of all Aristotle,
body
fire and air are the category, active,earth and water the receptiveand passive. however, is the matter without Underlying them all, which is their substratum, the imperishable, quality,
Vide with
Acad.
i. 8, 30,
pared com-
as
he
himself the
remarks,
word
he
troduces in-
9, 33 and
2
3
newly
as a
qualitas language
Greek
of the
have
found
thoroughly (De
23
5 6
Top. Cic.
iroibv, employed
to
"##.).
Acad. Cicero
',
by
i. 6, 24 sqq.
were
his
predecessor. Qualities
be
declared
Stoics 111X
.
bodies
by
tas
and
(cf PMl.
d. Gr. III. i.
ANTIOCEUS.
95
but the
CHAP. IV"
change
these which
of
its
forms
definite bodies
the
moves
togetherform
animates
or
world
; the
and
the world
is called
the
Deity
of the
and, because
sometimes
even
Chance.
the
man
who
could
so
doctrines of the older mistake the fundamental entirely ments systems, and mingle togetherearlier and later elethe oppositionof the in so arbitrary a manner, Stoic system to
could
no
the
system
of Plato
and
Aristotle
longer
we
appear have
so
Zeno
discarded
was
fifth element
of Aristotle
and (aether),
likewise
the earlier
to be
in philosopher
real. the
How
eclectic
far
even
distinction
to
does
not
seem
suspect.
2
He
says
expressly confounds
of for which sether,
assume certainty
mind
with
sense
and
spiritsas
fire.3
not
consisting
We
substituted that he
did
may into
with
enter
physics. special
In
true to
regard
his
to
morals
also, Antiochus
He
remained
eclectic
character.
from Stoics, of
impulse
of
impulse
human
nature, and
attains
from
this
startingpoint
ipsa
1 2
LOG.
Acad.
:
smimfom
sensus
3
est, "c.
says
Mens
i^satgw
sen,-
Acad.
96
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
Stoics and Academics, of the ground principle It is as much that of life accordingto nature.1 a doctrine of the Stoics,however, as of the Academy is determined that that which is according to nature for each creature particular according to its own nature, and that therefore the highestgood for man the is found
on
in
life according to
But
our
human
the
nature, perfected
all sides.2
at
herein
point is already
which
philosopherdiverges from
had
as
Whereas
element
the Stoics
in
man
recognised only
his
true
rational
Antiochus
says that
sensuousness
man
also
belongs to
of
human
nature, that
consists
soul and
body,and though the goods of the noblest part have the highest worth, those of the body are not on that worthless ; they are not merely to be desired account for the sake of another, but in and for themselves.3 The highestgood, therefore,according to him, consists
of human in regard to nature perfection of the highest soul and body, in the attainment 4 mental and bodily completeness ; or, according to another the possession of all in representation,5 external stituents mental, bodily, and goods. These conof the highestgood are doubtless of un1 2
in the
v.
9, 11.
hominis
et n"ttira
joorisper
est maxime
$e e
niMl
re~
Varro,
on.
4
as
will
later
44 ; 17,"
i. 5, 19 ; 'Mn. v. 12, 34 ; 13, 38 ; 16, 44 ; 17,47. Beanty, desired health, strength, are for themselves
natwa suis
:
Acad.
Fin.
v.
13, 37
16,
47.
s
Acad.i.
ANTIOCHUS.
07
"equalworth
value, and
l gifts ;
mental
endowments
have endowments
the
highest
CHAP.
among
a
these,moral
(volun- ______!___
tarice)have
but
higher place than merely natural although corporeal goods and evils have
only
be
it would slight influence on our well-being, 2 and if to deny all importance to them ; wrong
a
it be conceded alone of
to
the
Stoics that
virtue
for
itself
suffices for
happiness, yet
for the
highest stage
necessary.3
he agrees
to
happiness
the old
other
Through
with
these
Academy,4
mean
philosopherhopes
the value
between
school Peripatetic
to
which,
the
too
opinion, ascribed too much and the Stoic school which external,5
in
his
ascribed
little ; 6
but
it is undeniable
exactness
that
his
whole
fails in exposition
The
same
observation had
and
If Aristotle Zeno
to
original impulses of
the
If the
v. v.
Stoics
had
maintained
is
unity,
an au-
tion)
thentic tetic
recognised
source
as
of
;
so
the
Peripaeven
In
ima
doctrine
that
virtute
esite nee
positam.
tamen et
'beatam.
here in
respect
to
to the Academic
vitam,
nisi
"beati"wmam,
school, Antiochus
innovations be
wishes
his of the
corporis qucB supra, dicta simt *ad virtutis iisum idonea (ii. 43,
ft cetera, 134
4
5
adjungerentnr
regarded
of
; Fin.
v.
27,
5,
81
d. 6V. ILL
resuscitation doctrine
Fin. Fin.
v. v.
24, 72.
21, 58:
minora autem
12;
25,
75.
Actlonvm
irt
himself his
is thus
from him
with
aictem
getiera
etlam
plura,,
ol-
scurentur
majorwrit
Theophrastus only
a
ilust. Maxima*
prtmuni consi
(though
certain
98
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
IV.
_
presents itself
individual
as
attempt,
of their
l he does not, however^ activity ; Plato did, to give any deeper account
difference.
If the
or
Stoic
schools
were
not
not
community with
sense
"
other
something to for itself Antiochus here again be desired in and ledges acknowseeks to mediate ; for while he most fully of this relation,2 he the value and necessity distinction among makes things of value a double those which are directly in and for themselves : viz., of the highest good (the endowmentsa constituent of the soul and the body),and those which are to be
a
good
in the strict
"
v"rum T"nvni
"c. ccelestiuvi,
Delude
to
the
Peripateticschool.
Of.
tratio
tes.
1
PMl and
et actiones
mrtuti'bws Gonqru"n-
Of. 18, 48 ; 20, 55 ; 23, 66. Fin. v. 23, 66 s$. 3f\n. v. 23, 65 sqq. ; Acad.
In both of
men
as
same
by
Antiochus
i. 5, 21.
passages
with nature
is shown
the
one
of
Ka
the
same
community
another inherent the
is treated
rovs
in human
it
OpdirovscicaLvov/jiev,
added
tSot. 5* "v
ws OIKGIOV
ns
and Kal
*v
it
is
in the former
rcus-
feeling
for in
this, from
in
an
its is
first appearance
family love,
ever
spreadsitself
circle universal and
ing widen-
Kal
becomes finally
love
of
mankind
ap. J2ol. ii. 250 "#., in a discussion which recalls the so distinctly
manner
we
of
the Stob.
of
may this
Theophrastus
derive
that
it
doubtless
of whom Peripatetic, similar is something observed, Phil. d. Gr. II. ii. 851.
from
of men,
was
100
ECLECTICISM.
the
contrary,1Anti.och.us
the
to according
Kl. 67
sg.)has
"been misled
into CliPlutarch
besides
his
brother.
(Brut. 2) places his character tomachus and Philo patetic. moral Perias a higher than his Also less is perhaps the He Dio, doubt"%is tv\6yoi$. the of who whom is said it same same (according person
of consideringthe disciple in the he 2nd.
was
sophers
33, 4,
old.
pied occu-
Here. Romans
to
that
seventy years
Cic.
Strabo, xvii. 1, 11, p. 796 ; Coel. 10, 23; 21, 51) Pro
as
a
Among
the
perished
Alexandrian in
member
to
of
an
themselves
Oreek
tioned men-
embassy
philosophy,0.
(who B.C.) by Cicero
was
Gotta consul
in
76
$".)as
adherent
an
(IV.D. acquaintance
a
i. 7, 16 and
author
conversations
3). Also,
Here.
but
disciple
He
of
Philo.
34,
Epicurean (I. o. i. 2J 1 sgg.") the Stoic "#".)and (iii. the standpoint theology from of the As new Academy. of Philo, Cicero also hearers {Aead. ii. 4, 11) mentions
Publius,
Tetrilius
rus,
a
the
any Antiochus
other
Cratippus,
to
who
went
Caius
Selius,
and
the
,
Peripatetic school,
p.
vide
seems
infra
121, 2.
been whom
Aristus
to have
followed
by
period, Theopompus,
school
heard in Athens
Brutus Brut.
tioned men-
(Plut.
is
614)
; but counted
24)
(v.
date
at the
i. $0jp7i. there
court
6).
At
the
same
lived in Alexandria of
isAristus, succeeded Antiochus, who in his position of instructor Athens at (Cic. Brut. 97,
;
the brother
Ptolemy 16),
no
XII.
sus) (Dionywe
Demetrius Calwim. of
(Lucian, De
whom further tiling
was a
know, however,
but,
than
at
ii. 4, 12 ; i. 3, 12 ; Tusc. v. 8, 21 ; Plut. Britt. 2 ; 2nd. Here. 34, 2 sq. In 51 B.C. Cicero
Acad.
worthier the
school
tioned men-
(ad
met
Att. him
as an
v.
10 ; Tusc.
v.
by
8,22)
who the state lie had
there, and
the
him formed of
generally
to
Cicero, Varro,
have
to later
a
speak
on,
particularly also M.
disciple of
had Aristus
Antiochus.
been
According
Here.,
Brutus
instructed
philo- by
(Cic.Brut.
97, 332
SCHOOL
OF
ANTIOCHUS.
101
of the
new
Academy
was
in Ms
time
almost
same
entirely
CHAP.
IT.
abandoned.1
Acad. Tusc. his ad
a
JSnesidenms
says the
8 ; to which
thing; and
not
v.
3,
lie
he
wrote
was
sembled re-
Cicero
1
De
both
Att.. xiii.
personallyand
25)
in classes Par ad. him Pro.
in
In
Acad.
as
I.c. ;
as
mentions,
Heracleitus
sane nunc
have
observed,
:
the
Tynan
Homo
of
Antiochus In Brut.
enumerates
with
in
ista,
-pltilowpltia* qua*
dlmlssa
Yarro,
with with
2,
;
jyrope
revocatur,
himself. he
the
31, 120
him
40, 149,
followers
of
the old
Academy, and (Tusc. I. c.}puts into a proposition of Antiochus his month. Plutarch also (I. c., cf. DiOi 1) says that he was indeed well acquainted with
all the
was
That this prolattiset woHlis. the philosophy can only mean new Academy, is clear from the context. For when a disciple of that he Clitomaclras
we can
and
but
is
mentioned,
the
philosophy in
himself these
Greek
an an
the
distinguished philosophy of
Cicero rival says of the
himself and
of Antiochusand of the
to the
Heracleitus the
opposed Antiochus,
Academy (of
new
old
Academy,
and
new
opposed
Academy.
later talent
His
are
Carneades, "c.),dispassionately
and
knowledge
Cicero
praised by
(ad
Att.
xiv.
in
I)h\ 20 ; ad ix. 14 ; Brut. 6, iii. 2, 6 ; his writings 22 ; Fin. in Acad. i. 3, 12 ; Tusc. v. 1, 1 : Fin.
to
had
been
almost
was
universally abandoned,
revived. Cicero
most
by
the
says
i. 3, 8 ; vide
also,in regard
Consol. ad 45 ; Quintil. p. 83 ;
;
thing
distinctly,
his
writings, Sen.
;
;
Heh\
x.
9, 4 1, 123
Mp. 95,
p.
the
Charisius,
679
i. o, 11 : JVec Tero deserrelict arum tawnn rerum giie patroehiium smcepimiis (through
_T. D.
Priscian, vi.
p. 378. M. with Fin. Pi
so
Diomed.
the
defence
new urn
of
the
doctrine
enini ; non sent entice-
On
preceding,vide
sq$.)
Cic. Antiochus
to
of the Itom i n
Academy)
mteritu
Krische, Gott.
also
1
(according in pliilosopliiaratio contra owi~ acknowledged sg?([.}" his disciple himself dmer"ndi 7 nia c. 3, (I. $#.), nullamque rem and expounded his ethical principles aperte judicandi grofecta, aSocrate, repeMta "b Arcesila, (c.4-25), bnt in such a
v.
Cicero
manner
he
to
confirmat
nunc
Carneade
mgue
ad
retain
loyaltyto
"tatem trigitit
Staseas, of Naples, him had introduced (I.c. 3, 8 ; Orat. i. 22, 104). 25, 75; De
housemate
considered the
to be
proved disvide-
by
C.
saying
of
tine, Augus-
Cf. ad
Att.
xiii. 19
(according
Acad.
iii. 18, 41
102
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. IV.
with
these
testimonies
everything that
the Academic
we
l
know
until
school
nearly the
end
of
Our
knowledge of this school at that time is certainly but that the eclecticism of Antiovery incomplete,2
chus
supra, which had
of to
still maintained
itself there,is
cannot
plain from
have
lived
the
but
be
seems
definitelyfixed,
to
who than
earlier from 4 ;
suppressing
the
Thrasyllus, we
Introd. Tim.
in in
find Plat.
;
raUquia
This
to
Albinus,
Procl.
ap.
Antiochus
the
opposed by
7, B.
Porph.
an importance Augustinian phrase which clearlydoes not belong it is plain that the to it,since of Cicero's refuting the notion
is to ascribe
the which
Platonic
philosophy, from
Theo
in
astronomical
eclecticism
1
of Antiochus
is false.
Smyrn.
Plat. A.
Ap.
:
Phot.
14
of 8s
Cod. 212, p. 170, c. 40 8Q., and a7r" TTJS 'A/ca$7ftu.fas, in Proclus rrjs vvv,
ai KCU
the smaller
excerpt
Hemp.
Class.
ra
2rwi-
(quoted
from.
Mai,
Aiiot. i. 362, by Martin on "(f"cus, Theo, Sreoltaken. ra\-r]des elieeiv, Thrasyllus p. 74) are 'Srca'CKo'ts, became KOL tyaivovTai acquainted in Rhodes, fj.a%6fj.evoi and others judged in a Cicero perhaps his native city, with he succeeded of Antiochus; similar manner Tiberius, to whom in making himself ride supra, p. 92, 4. sable indispen2 nian of the AtheOf the heads an as astrologer(what is school know we none however, as to the proofs related,
ez/iore
between teacher
Theomnestus
(vide
the of other
;
Ann.
mi-pro) and
of members
Ammonius,
Plutarch
Sueton,
Ti7)er.
14;
and,
in Dio Cass. Iv. 11 ; Iviii. more, with sides 27, is embellished befables). He then sus of Tarthe last lived, from Eudorus, Nestor (Strabo, xiv. 5, 14, p. 675, years of Augustus (Sueton. Aug. expressly distinguishes this 98 ; Dio Cass.lvii. 15), in Rome,
of the
Academy,
Nestor mentioned
name
"
from vide
the
previously- and
of, the
p. 54
same
:
Stoic
supra,,
the
was son
died
of the II. i.
as a
Platonic
logues diaHe is
tetralogies {vide
428).
Platonist with phyry, Porboth
Octavia)
of in
and PMl.
the
Tubero
spoken
d. 6V.
III.,
mentioned
Pythagorean
Plot.
by
as
are
told
very
little. date
Thrasyllus
seem
Dercyllides
gramma-
Dercyllides, whose
to
have
EUDORUS.
108
example
and
a
of Eudorus,1
CHAP.
'
member
of of "f
the
but
he
as
had those
as Aristotle,5
well
works had
coursed dis-
which lengthon the Pythagoreandoctrine, of the later Platonising he apprehended in the sense Pythagorism.7 This many-sided occupation with
ap.) Stob. Z. 7AK"^av^p"0 refer, in regard to Thrasyllus, JJ.LKOV "pi\off6"pov. Simp. ScJwl. De TJtrasyUo in Arist. 63, a, 43 ; Achil. Tat. to K. F. Hermann, (Ind. Schol. Getting. 1852); Isag. ii. 6 (in Petav. Doctr. Hi. 96 ; Endorus is also Miiller, Fragm. JHist. GT. iii. Temj). Tlieo. Astron. 501 ; Martin quoted in Isag. i. 2, 13, p. 74, on in regard to 69 sq. ; and 79). p. 5 His the last on commentary Dercyllides to the work mentioned, p. 72 sqq, Categories is often quoted in 1 Concerning Eudorus, vide that of SimpUcius (cf.Schol. in
xians rather than
phers, philosoto
(Ar.
Did.
it
may
here
suffice
rov
534
sq. ;
et
Arist.
81
sq. Tide
Stob. The
in-
61, a, 25 sqq. ; 63, ", 43 ; 22 ; 66, ", 18 ; 70, ", 26 ; 71, Z", 73, I, 18 ; 74, ", 2, and Cat. ed. Basil. 44, e. 65, e). That he also
,Jra,p. 104,1.
3
expounded
of his life cannot with does Alex.
not
the
Metaphysics
from
Son.
be
determined
Strabo Brandis
accuracy. scribes Schol. 552, b, 29. (xvii.i. 5, p. 790) de" A}). Pint. De him as his contemporary.
3, 2;
seems
16, 1, p. 1013,
also to
on
7
1019
a
des leger
Organons,AbJi.
; Hist. Phil
refer Timtsm.
to
derS"fl. XI.
1833
the
that Ehodian
he
was
In the
fragment
a, not
Anin
PHI,
"
dronicus,
which Arist. the
seems
the
manner
Pliys.39,
two
in Simplicitis{Scltol.
61,
him
with
One the
Matter, attributed
themselves
these
ferred re-
principles are
the 46
other sqq. is
hand,
taken
Stob. from
their
uniform
basis.
same
theory, however,
by
Eudorus
even
104
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. IV.
the older
the
and philosophers,
Aristotelian that
lead
was
us
to suppose
of Eudorus
not
ments state-
entirely pure
of
; and
this is confirmed
by the
of Stobseus
concerning an
are
work encyclopaedic
treated
his,in which
we
told
he
the whole
a
of
science
i.e.he : problematically
gave
summary
of
the different parts of questions with which are concerned, and compared the answers philosophy the
given to
In
to
by the most important philosophers.1 has been which the epitome of ethics, preserved
them from
us
logy terminono
is rather Stoic
and
doubt
Plato, when, according to Alex. (uLMetaphA. 6, 988, a, 10),after ri the words ra efttyrov yap
ecrrtv
concerning the
rb KaXbv
extracts
are no
Si' aurb
also,
doubt
as
rois
a\\oi$, ro?s S*
KO! rp vXy. in
borrowed
Arius
is
p. 88, from
scribing. tran-
efSecri rb ev, he
added
Eudorus whom
3
by
Stobseus
Didymus
here
On with
theory,
Stoic
agreement
monism
(on
without
138, 145
even
$#.) though
vXy
must
of
Having divided the whole sics, philosophy into ethics,phyand three tinguishes dislogic, Eudorus parts in ethics :
/ca0'
GKOLcfrov
its materialistic
interpretation,
have the sprung
the the
from
1
Deity or
:
primal One.
odv Ei^-
Eel. ii. 46
rov
frriv
pov
Kara
The riit6v).
of
two
these
tions: sec-
\6yov,
ev
parts
then
Tracrav (j"
of
rty irpofi\ii{J.artK(os
The above
explanation of this
results p. 54 the author, after Eudorus' division
apKreov
and
expression
of subdivisions
among-
ethics,
rtav
continues,
of
ire pi rQv vpo'riyovfji.Gvwj', Trepl ffvjj.iroo'i"virepl epcaros, (cf PMl. d. Gr. HI. i. 260 sq. ;
.
241,
the the
1 ;
273, 7
283, 2).
Even
doctrine sections
the
TeAos,
and
then
goods
(for
be-
EUDORUS.
105
it
was
the
same
with
in
the
details of Ms
so ethics,1
CHAP.
IY.
that Endoras
followed entirely he
did
not
the
precedent of Antiochus.
himself
to ethics appears from certain
confine
what
has been
already
quoted, and
How
divided
widely spread,in
by
the
words,
or
roiirov
p.
50,
5e
from p.
apeT"v, "C.,
ecFTi
from
have
Stoic four
Qa.vearQa.1
aurou,
TO
fapov TTJS
Ao-ytK^v
robs
.
ovTrca
aAA.J
Kal s %.\oyov,Kara the place of the Platonic crocfu'a. y"i/6~ ff-rrepfjLarLKovs Xoyovs: division r" ""jiov The main of second t$K i nvl fj.evav yap ethics treats partly of the 6pfj.7] TrdvrcasevQvs l|apxys (Phil. d. Gr. III. i. 208 "#.)" How B^dorus partly of the generally and
virtues, (ppovyo-istakes
xa077, which
in the The Stoic third
are
defined into
quite
was
Antiochus
in this
manner,
^pfrJ?is
the
division of into
appcaffr^fjia. is
separated by
TOVOL
ordinate subev
classes
:
eight
How
nra0oA0'jrapajJLvdirj'TiKbs, III. i. 518. 1), ire pi Kadij- 6, 16 (vide iUd. acr/d? s, irepl crews, Antiochus. from Karopdafidraiv, irepl quotes "av, irepl fticav, ydfj.ov. 2 According to Strabo, xvii. irepl Trepl rcav, and Aristo cation 1, 5, 790, ludorus closely this whole classifithat the resembles of the cused Peripatetic mutually acseen
$ rpicav* fyyap ev Tjfiovrj rots Kara sv ei/ fy aoy^kficria. vptarois with what Cicero, JFYw. v. fpvcnv}
Stoics will be
Gr. HE. i. 206
from
each
other
to
a
of
plagiarism
on
sq.
Bucloras from
regard
treatise he
the who
completely
what
in
agreement
Nile the
(Strabo
is there
quoted
is in the
but right,
says that
ment 84, 14, and the commenceJBfp. cation especiallyof Ms classifiStobseus quoted by bears such striking resemblance
language of the treatise is Tat. like Aristo's).AchiL more that Isag. 96 (169), mentions
Eudorus,
agreeing with
Panse-
passage Seneca
of
must
or
Seneca, that
have both lowed folmust
Eudorus,
followed
in that This of
case
some
common,
Stoic,source.
the
next
as
the torrid zone tius, believed the sameto be inhabited, and writer (as Diels shows, Doxogr22) quotes something further, Diofrom taken by Eudorus dorus from the
is clear from
mathematician,
bv
and
section before
Diodorus
Posidonius.
to
106
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. IV.
this eclecticism
was
of
which,
sentative, repre-
have
seen, is also
Antiochus
clear from
the foremost
Ii. Arius
the
example
of Arius
Didym
m*
Didymus.1
with
1
For
the
is of
to
no
Stoic
doubt
He
"ApeTos
known
Anton.
Alexandria
us
who
is
80
sq. ;
Plut. (Jalirl. f. Class. (from Reg. Apoplith. 613) the friend Prcec. 207; 3, p. 814 ; from which and Arius It is rather of which
is
an
1869,
Stoic. of that
Augustus
Aug.
Ger.
Sen. Sueton.
3,
5,
p.
Didymus
Reip.
Consol. Octav.
18,
ad
instance he adduces
M"rc. 4 sq. ; Oass. 89 ; Dio Ii. 16, lii.36 ; ^Elian. V. 3. xii. 31 ; Themist. 25; M. AureljViii.
examples
same
man
by his own times some130, ", Pet. ; Julian, 23j". name, of his by the addition 51, p. 96, Heyl. ; cf. Or. viii. to distinguish him from 265, C ; Strabo, xiv. 5, 4, p. father's,
Or.
2.
670)
a
as
teacher of
of Maecenas. read
philosophy,
and
was
others and
bearing
the
same
name,
names
confidant of
Augustus
He
sometimes
by
both
friend
so
together:
Ehodian is sometimes
highly esteemed
we
by Augustus
well-known
Apollonius
'A-TroAAdmos 'ATTOAA.CC$even
the
by Ms Cicero, Apollonius (Cic. place, disciple capture for the he pardoned them ad Att. ii.1 ; Brut. 89, 307 ; 91, of their founder Alexander, 316) ; Molo (De Or at. i. 17, 75 ; beautiful city,and their 28, 126 ; De. Invent, i. 56) ; and
VLOS
"5 MoAwj/os, 6
Wi6\caj/
and
fellow
citizen
Arius.
From Arius
the and
Stoic
Musonius
Rufus
is
consolatory epistleof
to
called
by Epictetus, Rufus only, sonius by others, as a rule, Muonly {ride infra, ch. vi.).
case name
survived,
a
Seneca,
none
I. "?., As the
in the the
surname
of and
Arius
times some-
quotes
considerable in
fragment.
of these
sometimes
we first,
It is true that
stands be certain
cannot
whether
of
the authors
to
us
who
fragments
to
more
2
Diels, 1. c.3
the latter
seems
show The
that
is the
him
as
an
friend occasion
of
Augustus.
into
none
of these
to
d.
6V,
2)
mentions vide
any
Arius
Antipater (the
personalcircumstances
of Arius
108
CHAP. IV.
a so
approaches
so
entirely
opinionsof Antiochns as represented to mistake that it is scarcely its possible by Cicero, l ultimate and though the work is ostensibly source ;
agrees with the
ments to
of this
treatise
relating
chus, Antiothat
he then
some
of
same
Meineke's
writer his works,
in
conjectures. The
treats
and
1. c. p. 69-88.
1
Antioclms,
for him end
his
count ac-
of the
(which
those the the
of the double
point of view belongriends ,countrymen,human ings,f sired society generally, are to be defor themselves ; also praise and glory, health, strength, beauty, corporeal advantages of all kinds : only the goods of the soul are incomparably more valuable than all others (p. 246discussion of the 264). His
natural other love of all
men
Platonic-Aristotelian
for each
pecially es-
against
Stoics, and
the Stoic p. 95 Arius. of
the attacks
(already mentioned)
reminds
us
combining
it with
doctrine
(vide supra,
of
Antiochus (vide sitflra, p. 97, sg$.),so do we find with he takes Like Antiochus, 1), he classes the iroXiriKal Kal. and the his basis the commonly cognised KOWcaviKal reas 6"api]TiKal demand of life according irpd^is together as equally original this in its to nature, and problems (p. 264 sg.); like two kinds Stoic acceptation. The ^VO-LK^ him, he distinguishes oLKetaxris is the point of view of goods those which to be are considered constituents as according to which it is decided ("ru^cis a good, a Si' atirb atperbv TrXypariKa) of what happiness, and itself a definition such as thing only contribute some(of the atperbv to is given, p. 272, corresponding happiness ("ru/xj8aA.with the Stoic definition quoted Xecrdat) ; corporeal goods he will Phil, d. Gr. III. i. 223, 4). The not, like Cicero's Antiochsean,, under reckon the instinct of self-preservationis but the first,
"
acknowledged
as
the
mental funda-
second
class:
'6n
TJ fj.ev
252, 258
distinction
avcry/ccua,
Ka\a
the
and "v OVK Stoics, and, supra", p. 95 /jLepr] "v$aifjiovias tfivev*) j about the he like Antiochus); KaOrjAristotle,the sqq., opposes, is Kovra (this conception also is theory that the virtuous man reduced' to are the in of the extremity Stoic) "K\oyt) happy even
r"v
Tiav
Kara
Qvcrtv and
the
;
airenXoy^ suffering;also
cf
.
the
Stoic the
position pro-
Phil.
concerning
POTATO.
109
and
a chiefly
mere
CHAP.
still it "doctrine,
could
not
have
brought that doctrine so near to that of the Stoics,, which, did so (that "or of adopted an older exposition if the distinctive doctrines of the different Antiochus),1
schools
as
had
had
the
same
importance
which
for him
for the
ancient
Stoic of
if he authorities,
had
not
inspiredthe expositionof Antiochus, and had not been disposed, like Antiochus, to disregard the opposition of Stoics, as Academics, and Peripatetics, compared "with their
common
shared
the
mode
thought
conviction.2 With
Anus of and
Antiochus
we
must
connect
m.
mo'
p0ta-
Potamo
neia
and virtue, and the impossibility /CQTTJ]. In Ms (Economics the Politics he of losing it; and keeps entirely to that there is nothing Aristotle, statement only that he calls the
of
intermediate
and
between ness happinnhappiness (p. 282 ; self cf.'p. 314) ; thus showing himin these particularsless Antiochus
third
not
of the
right constitutions
Polity,but Democracy, and cracy, its defective counterpart Ochloand introduces,beside the
.strictthan
(sup.p. 97, rightand wrong forms of government forms hand (p. (p. 330), the mixed 3). three of the doctrine the from Stoic the compounded 566), cussed disHI. of first Dicasarchus, efaoyos c"yu'y}) (PMLd.Gr. (those II. ii. d. in I. 305 *0.) is also forced PMl. Gr. 892). upon
On
the other the
Peripatetics1 For
of virtue, Arlus
the
trine docuse
Their
common
use
of
this
plain ex-
makes
well
philosopher may
why Didymus, in
ethics of the
same
perhaps
and
of especially
Theophrastus (jride
as as
Cicero
Arius
ibid.
Il/ii.860, 1)
and the
expounding
the
Antiochus
disciple Aristotle; (Cic.Fin*v. 5) quotes these two sophers philoonly from 97, 5) ; but in (siijjra, expounding the doctrine (p.314 )
he the into
uses
of
words He
6 ;
-
times
entirely
to
forget that
an
he is
merely giving
from
.
the 264
account
of the doctrines
direct in-
and KofiiiKQVTCL it
(III. i.
imports
Tpo-
to direct narration
110
CHAP. IV.
a
ECLECTICISM.
time, therefore
towards
the end
second may
an
Christian here
be older
writer.3
had predecessors
actually
should
system which
of all the
philosophical
as
as
also avowed
the
little
he it
we
know
not
of
his
doctrine this
name
certainly
without
shows
cause;
that
for
had
chosen
apparentlycombines, regardlessof
: or
Said.
#iib.
voee
to
reconcile
them,
more
and
to
discover
something
cf. Fabric.
about of 6V.
Trpb Avyovffrov
be
2
real
fter' avr"v
is here
8e to
the
life and
circumstances Bibl.
Potamo,
oXtyov
iii.184 sgi.Harl. ; Brucker, Hist. 193 sqq. ; J. Simon, JFIistoire de VJEoole d'Alexana'lpecfts
In
these the
to
tnere
review
name
of known
other
us
"
of this
but with
to
the
omission
more
of
suitable un-
the found 48
3
expression still
in
the
rhetorician
of
(cf. "eJ5.
the in
r"x5. and
rhetorician
B.).
""iA(4cro""os), taught
Rome;
of and ever, howcall the
someare
under
Tiberius
Potarno, the
the
new
ward
Plotinus
others by Diels
81,
on
4),
the be
ascribes of
Diogenes greatwant
not,
thought,
more
whole,
the
might
expected
between
in the
different
513,.
Diogenes anciSuidas,
Vide
precedingnote.
POTAMO.
Ill
logical
ments
consistency,
with of
an
Platonic Stoic
and
Peripatetic
In with
elethe
_
CHAP.
essentially
criterion,
instead
a
L_
question
Stoics,
he
'most
the
he
of
the
only
that,
the form In
notion,'
the
he
substituted
accurate
vaguer notion.'
expression,
metaphysics
and
quality
the
and
space
to
substance
;
efficient
highest
efficient
principles
force itself he the
that
to
he
reduced,
is
like
not
Stoics,
The
stated. the
highest
of the
in
good,
life,
virtue,
and
were
thought,
most
in
dition con-
perfection
of
which with
external any
lay
for
which,
older
however,
in
poreal cor-
agreement
and
Aristotle
the
Academy,
goods
found
are
indispensable.2
to
Scarcely
this older for
original
thoughts
be
found
in
superficial
doctrines the
one
combination
;
and
c
modification
of
and
so
the of
Eclectic
school,'
except
and
trace
mention
it
by
no
Diogenes
further
his
in
Byzantine
followers,
has
left
history.
1
According1
a
to
on
Snidas,
the Platonic
he
fyavracriav.
rfo
TTJTO
re
ap^cis
Kal T6irov
iroiep
re
TUSV
wrote
treatise
%XT]V
-re
rb
TTOLOVV,
iroi6yap
Repnblic.
2
KO! Kal
e" o"
Kal
ev
Kal
reAos
sAp""r/cei
1.
,
S'
avry
(continues
(j"i](nv
ev
""'
5e
ov
"y.
Diog".
etvai
"?.)" fikv
KaOd
a"rot-
elvai
l^"*
irdvra
rb
"$
v"p
r"b
ov
yiveTai
^
i-b
OVK
"VGV
rcav
TOV
ar^aros
Kal
rS"v
Kpicris,
Se
TOUT6CTTI
TjyefjiQviKbVy
"Kr6s.
"s
8?
ov,
olov
112
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTER
THE
V.
IN THE FIRST
PERIPATETIC
SCHOOL
BEFORE
CENTURY
CHRIST.
CHA V.
P.
SIMULTANEOUSLY
into the
with
the
Academy
D.
The.
Peripate-
tic School
Its later direction.
also received a new impulse and Peripatetics altered As Antiochus course. pursued a partially wished to bring back the Academy to the doctrine of turned to the their founder, so the Peripatetics anew works of Aristotle : it is to the expounding of these
of
the
works
times
to
which
for whole
centuries, down
entire
to
the
of
JSTeo-Platonism,their
in which
strength is
and directed,
Here
also there of
characteristic
and
task consists. principal is displayed the phenomenon so this whole mistakable unperiod: the more pressingis the feeling of mental mistrust
of its
own
their
scepticismhas
more
been
expression,the
return to
obvious
masters
becomes and
to
to necessity
the
old
upon
them.
No
other
zealouslyand carefullycarried
and connected
none
the such
work
a
of
has
produced
as
long
and
line of
commentators
Concerning these,
'wide
Zumpt
(Ucb"r
d.
13estand
"le"r
THE
PERIPATETICS.
113
The
school, since
the
as
CHAP.
'
middle
we can
century, had
the
accounts
.
already,so
we
far
"judge from
J
have
.
received,
J/*e Cmnwent
a
confined
and
Itself to the
propagation,exposition, defence,
tors.
of Aristotle and popularisingof the doctrines portant imeven Critolaus, its most Theophrastus ; and second in the representative century, did After Critolaus the school itself not go beyond this. and more ledge lost more the preciseknowto have seems Aristotelian of the and doctrines writings. Cicero l and the Strabo 2 expressly tell us so, and is confirmed assertion that, by the circumstance the to excepting the approximation of Diodorus Epicurean ethics,3 not a single scientific proposition has been
handed
of
down
to
us
from
a
any
of of
Atidron'tcvs
the
successors
a
Critolaus, during
Andronicus
-,
period
T.C
nearly
gave
a
century.
of
scientinc was,
."/"
Ehodes
iiie ol
.c
first
-L-
new
school.
third the of
This the
,1
of
nis
in the
second
head of
century
His
before
Christ,
of
here
school
in
Athens.4
in
edition
not be
Aristotle's
mentioned,
Athen.)
93 sq. : Griecli.
pateticsare
it cannot
der
JBerL Phil.
Arixt.
AJtade-mie,
"2.
Hist.
des
great
of
with
were
mass
Brandis,
TJeber
die
the
time
Ausleger
1
Organons,
Aristotle's
not
sq.
A
neglected in
itself.
Top.
i. 3.
rhetorician the
known minime to
SUM
had
him
that
un-
Topica of Aristotle
:
Quod
quidem,
ewm
3 4
Cf
.
admiratus,
Andronicus
according
to
paucos
the
Peri-
Tyrannio appears
come
to 66
to
Kome
in
114
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, V.
used
Ms ings writ-
himself
of
transcripts of
own
Aristotle's
of them,
must
certainly be
B.C.
placed
who
60
invariable
el?6dio$
designates
ras
Ms
crvvayay"v. This statement, as birthplace ; Strabo mentions well the celebrated him (Sulla, losophers as that of Plutarch phiamong
of Rhodes
p.
(xiv. 2, 13,
26)
cravra
avrov -Trap'
"
head 655). That he was school the (in Peripatetic Athens) is asserted "by David, of Scliol. in Arist. 24, a, 20 ; 25, 5, 42 ; Ammon. De Interpret. Z. c.
rSsv
a.VTiypd"pGw (supplied
with
eis
understood if
to
actual
edition
94,
#, 21 ;
97,
a,
19.
He
is here
a.irb
rov
of Aristotle's
we
called
the
evfiettaros
remember
following 'ApicrroTeXovs ;
Scholium
in
the
Plutarch,
Peripatetics
had
dered wan-
Waitz,
i.
however,
which
is
before
Andronicus
(Aristot.Org.
also ascribed
45),
was
to
Ammonius,
his this
disciple
eleventh
as we one
Boethus
scanty
works.
acquaintance
When the Kal the
same
with
Ms-
philosopher.
ing Accord-
writer
give
or
the
to
the
the
other
words
already
vvit-
and
or
reckon
to
must
omit heads
him, there
the
understand edition
not
by
which of also
these
lists
to
of the did
wanting
known
writings a supplement
confine itself the
to
a
probably
works,
as
mere-
but to
enquiries
In any
two,
are
or
names.
If insert d.
genuineness,contents, and
dronicus case, Ansuch had
three
deficient, I
to
arrangement.
should
be
not
instituted
is shown of the
them,
and
with
enquiries,
condemnation
as
by
his
so-called
gap Andronicus.
most
to
me
only
two
that
II. ii, 67, 1 ; 69, 1), and the reasons he gives for it. The
Gr.
according
be
Boethus
that, proposition (cf. David, SchoL in Arist. 25, 5, 41) that dronicus the reckon, Anthus study of might philosophy should
called
the
eleventh
(counted
Aristotle
"
begin
been what
not
1
after,but from
with
GCTT^'ApICTTOT"A.OUS).
connection. says he
other
hand,
116
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
v.
the way
in which
from
henceforth
to proceed. He did was exegesis hut sought not confine himself to mere explanation, the same to maintain as a philosopher independence with which as a critic he departedfrom tradition in of weighty questions. This we the treatment see from various and not altogether minations unimportant deter-
he by which in the doctrine of categories Aristotle,1and still more diverged from clearly.
lion of the had also contents. 1 Of. Bran-
Hermes,
cannot
ii. with
212.
Andronicus
been
cerned con-
possibly have
either of
the
1
low Physics does not certainly fola ; from 101, Simpl. Phys. although it 103, "; 216, a; is
probable
from
not
the
first of
According 47, ",25),he regarded (Sclwl. with Xenocrates (cf. Phil. d. Gr. II. i. 865, 4)" this division,
e.
Simplicius, however, is in the main Platonic to mental seem (cf.I. e. 556, 4)" as the fundathis commentary in have had the /ca0' avrb categories, and the irp6s his own hands, or he would TL (the Aristotelian quently. fredefinition of which it more have quoted from he expounds,
these passages. does however, The Arist. De An. $gq., and of the observations
on
ap.
Simpl.
a,
ScJiol.
/m0' aurb 43, a}. The Karriy. discussed, he must then have divided still is quoted from cus Androniwhich further,for (accordingto Simpl. De An. ii. 56, p. 67, 7. 69, a ; Scliol. 73, ", 10 ; by Themist. li; 59, 6 Speng., point to an 74, ",29) he added to the four Aristotelian kinds of exposition of the treatise on the quality Phil. d. Gr. II. ii. 269, 2) a soul (vide infra,p. 117, 2). The (cf. fifth kiod under definition of ird6o$, which ness, thickap. Aspas. in heaviness, "c., must Hth.N.(infra,p 1 IS, 3) is taken, fall, but which, as he observed, a perhaps, from commentary may
66,
39 ;
Porph. '""777."f. r.
on
the
Ethics.
Of
the
two
itself
be
reckoned
"
the
it
ing bearexistence, the name of Andronicus, one, the treatise Animi De Affecis the work tionibits, iiicus Callistus in the of Androfifteenth
mentary com-
treatises still in
iradfiTLKal TtWr^res
is
only with
division
reference
gories cate-
arising
that he
from
can
further
(Simpl. 40
cf. 60, a,, to be the ultimate all.
century,
the
on
other, the
the
", 41;
f ; 38)
of
have SoJwl
serted as-
59,
Relation his
Nicomachsean
category of
are
Ethics, is written
of Prusa
Observations
also mentioned
concerning
the
117
from
Ms
view and
of
the
soul, which
in
the
spiritof
CHAP
V.
Aristoxenus
and Dieaearchus,1
approximation to
be
a
the the
product
of
must to have been however, we assume standpoint, that of the Peripatetics, though he strove to improve of his school in regard to particular the doctrine points. work The of Andronicus continued was by his of Sidon,3who is often mentioned Boethus disciple
8idon-
%"ts (Simp!. 55, ". ; SchoL 59, 6 sqq. Sp.) the well-known and definition of Xenocrates 65, a, 7), TToieiy, trdtrxetv (PJdl. and i. those d.6fr. II. While 84, ".), (Simpl. 871). censuring he Aristotle called in Ms objecbecause conceptions which tions to that Indefinite sired, definition he kept magnitudes, and denot therefore, to reckon exclusively to the expression but under he himself also rov Relation, only apiBfiov, rovvopa 36 5. in under the it Quantity (I. c. thought that ; perceived all Sclwl. lie consist of a 58, a, 37). Lastly, living natures
wished
to
substitute
irov
Time
Tore,
and and
mixture
Kara, so
rivas
of the
elements Ktd of
formed
Space
not
and
\oyovs
reduction
api6jjLovs ;
main
to reckon
these and
categories
but
all
that the
it coincides
in the
only
Time.
a.
irore,
with
to
the
the
soul
other and
determinations
of
Place
87,
a,
88,
self- moving
earn?
24: ; 58,
79, ", 1
30,
(aurT? yap
^i"%7?
rov
atria Kal
Log.
2
reap \6yov Kal rrjs fjiil~"(0$ irp"rtov this does not (rroixeiuv), agree
with
Galen's
to which
by
and
in the
first
j
Galen,
vol.
Qit. Animl
sq. K.
4, cus, Androni-
place
it is
product questionable
of the the
Kpacns
whether
ing mean-
freely
Galen has not missed to speak wont says, was obscure cumlocutions, cirof Andronicus. and without he the soul
plainly
the the
clares dea
Strabo
mentions of
that he rvi.
names
was
to be
Kpaa-is
native
Sidon,
Ammon. I. c,
2, 24,
as
(sc. TOV
sense
or en^uaros)
"Svvaju.i$ p.
same
757;
Andronicus
his teacher
in
Categ.5
that he
seems.
explains (accordingto
De An. ii. 56, 11;
(ap. Zumpt
was
94)
Themistius,
also
follower
of his
118
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. V.
with. him.
an
fame
as
expounder of
2 :
known
of his works
but
some
commentary
found
the
ries categoon
traces
are
of commentaries
"
the
on
Physics and
the treatise
result from
'
the De
Prior
5
Anima
the Ethics.3
In
his
to
quoted
find
is frequently the Sclwlion,, quoted in in that of 4. also that and But, 113, Simplicius su_pra, p. of Dexippus. In opposition to this theory, we it, perhaps, that
B.C.
in
the
44
Cicero
years himself
45
(Off.i. Syrian,
a,
mentary
and
was
the
statement
which
1,1) and Trebonius (in Cicero's Fam. xii. ad Ep. 16) mention of only Cratippns as teacher the in Peripateticphilosophy
Athens. whom Eoethus whereas
is not
tioned, men-
in
ideas
the A
on
same
as
classtise trean
conceptions.
of mentioned
3
separate
the
irpos
his
is
a,
by Simplicius,42,
there
was
a
this
Strabo,
1. "?.,designates
the 011 ($" Physics is "TUl'"(f)t\QG'0"pri(ra,ljL"V7][Jt,"t$ his shown own as TO, 'ApLcrroreXeia) by the quotations in this date teacher, survived by Tliemistius,PJiys.145, 14 ; 337,
at least
one
decade,
also
perhaps
no
23;
from three
341, 9
no
Sp. ; which
a
plicius, Sim-
several. him
Strabo
would,
doubt, have
lecture of
heard
him
ISO,
Boethus,
been have
a
last
of
these
therefore,
teacher
have
philosophyelsewhere.
Strabo may of his instructions
expressly
tius, Tliemisthose adduces of
Perhaps
availed
in
1
and
only
in them
himself Eome.
nowhere Boethus'
Physics
(Cut.1, a. 41 ". ; except what he finds in his preSiinplicius decessor. SclioL 40, a, 21 ; 61, a, 14) calls An exposition of the him and be eXXtyi/nos Qavjp.a.G'Los Analytics may jectured con; First and on page 309 j8.; ScJwl. 92, from the quotations of the "a, 42, he praises his acuteness. pseudo-Galen Ela-ay. StaA. Cf. p. 3, 7. ; JSoJwl. 29, 0, 47 ; p. 19, and of Ammon. in Arist. ed. "ra TOV Boydov TTO\TJS a.yxtvoia.s Waitz, i. 45, from the Ory.
"yGfjLoyra,.
2
doctrine
to
of
the
syllogism;
an
According
one
(L a)
Tepcus
of those
Simplicius exposition of the books on the which fiadv- soul (though less certainly)
from what
veplavro
(the Aristotelian
GxprjcravTO,
Simplicius (De
us
An.
book) swoiais
the
but
at
69, 1) tells
an
time (7, same c. 7, 7. ; ScJwl. a continuous 42, a,'S*) exposition Ae^ty, This com-
chsean
from
what
BOETHUS.
of "apprehension
so
the
far
an
as
we
can
J;HAP. Y-
and
Inclination
followers
that
naturalism had
which
in the
powered over-
Immediate
of Aristotle and
already
the which
was
Platonic
Idealistic
element,
and of
prominent in Alexander especially Aphrodisias. This also appears in the fact that to be commenced "wished the study of philosophy with logicbut with physics,1When, moreover,
denied
he
not
he the
that
the
universal would in
not
was
priorto
and particular,2
as a
to be
regarded
over
substance
the
and
matter
strict in
3
(737x0 TT;
"
la),
but
Is
one
aspect, that
form of priority
which
of
and and
this presupposes
matter
of the
value
In
rather The
approaches
same
Stoics.
mode
of
thought is apparent
understood the
of and JStlt.
in his utterances
on
place him
the
side
those
(De
the
who
An.
Aristotelian
waives the
doctrine
ander Ms and
,
entirely
enquiry
cr(a/j.a.riK^
it
same
observations
self-love
concerning
over/a, but
does
not
VOTJTTI and
what
only
because
to
belong
He
the
'Classical
xsix.
106)
connection.
desired
(vide
Themist. "ndRose(Arutot.Pseuflo-I!pi"/r.
109) says
"
Andronicus' Ar.
25
Sp. ;
mat-
definition
1
irdBos.
ter
called the
{'AT? only
which and
David,
For der
SeJtol. in
",
in relation
it
not
form
41. been
2
what
follows,
Prantl's
yet assumed,
Gesch.
.
i. 540 sqq. has Loc/ik, of. use gratefully made in, Arist.
Dexfpp.inCWfcy. 54:Speng.
50, ",
20 15
Sohol.
3
sqc[.
;
Simpl. Categ.
^8 gg.
to the in relation viroKeifievov form imparted to it, but this of verbal is merely a matter Simplicius expression. What BoSthus (24 f "j. quotes from to SeJwL 53, a, 38-45) seems
me
of
small
importance.
120
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP.
v.
as
simple denial
of it ; 1 and
we
in further that in
agreement
the
with, these
of Ethics
tendencies
learn that
he maintained
and self,
only because
of its relation
now
to one's
self.2
In
other
instances, Boethus
the Aristotelian
and
then
sought to justify
sometimes fended debut
determinations,3 and
Stoics ; 4
",
sqq.
and
Simpl.
cos
De
An.
69,
T" : *iva
N.
viii. 1, 1155,
a,
6 Boijdbs
35 9th
the
books,
of evidently by a confusion alphabetical designations tiriovra, e|- the (Jievovcrav rbv ddyarov of the books the(0 1) with corresponding numerical ""VTL oLTr6x\vffQoLL. This refers signs. 3 To these Plato's to ontological proof attempts belong^ of immortality. Boethus cedes con(1) a remark, ap. Simpl. Cat. 109, to him that,strictly speak- IB ; SoJiol. 92, a, 33 ; Categories, ing, the soul does not die, but 34, 15, 5, 1 sqq.} on the applicability of the (because death, opposition of only the man and K.ivr\ffi$ to qualitative according to the Phccdo, 64 C, fyen'ia. in the separation of consists change ; (2) the demonstration in which soul from body, and therefore Theophrastus had the dissolution of man denotes already anticipated him, that the syllogisms of the first andinto his constituent and parts, second of those the destruction not figure are perfect (Amin but he thinks mon. as such) ; Analyt. Pr. i. 1, 24, 1), parts the continuance soul 18 ; ap Waitz, Arist. Org. i, 45) ; of the does not follow from this. Eufrom (3) the doctrine evolved the hypotheticalsyllogisms as sebius (Pr. Efa. xi. 28, 4 ; xiv. the av(x.Tc6""iKTOLand from a 10, 3) gives extracts irp"rot "v~ airdSetKToi. treatise of Porphyry, Trept ^i/%r}s-, (Pseudo- Galen. EiVay, SiaX. p. 19 j Mm. in which he defended tality immorap. Prantl, p. From the 554) ,* (4) the remarks on against Boethus. the former it question whether of these passages time is a
,
is
clear the
Boethus
had
also
or
a even
measure,
and without
attacked
from
proof
the
derived
human
it
existed reckons
kinship of
that
it, ap.
with spirit
78, (P7i"$do,
is ascribed
Themist.
*"??")"
2
This De
by
Alex. archus in
Ptys. 337, 23; 341, 9 Sp. ; Simpl. PJiys.180, a, 181, " ; Simpl. Categ, 88, " ; ScJwL 79, 5, 40. 4 Thus hedef ends (ap.Simpl.
43,
a,
support
";
Sokol.
62,
a,
18, 27)*
ARISTO.
121
what
has
come
down
as
to
us
In
this
connection
is of of
CHAP.
little importance
his
philosophy.
A third
interpreter of
same
Aristotle's
.to the
period, is
afterwards
of
Antiochus, Academy
to
who
from
the
the
the
Peripatetics.2But
know
Peripatetic doctrine of tlie iii. p. 277 Hi Id. (where he is for this) trine added rt rightly censured against the Stoic doc"jrpSs of the irpos n -rrcas %Xoyi to the Aristotelian syllogistic while at the same forms time he tried tary (perhaps in a commenthe to Aristotle's finition dePrior on apprehend Analytics) three modi of the first and two more exactly, in the of the second to pointed out by Andronicus figures,and way the in (Simpl. 51, j8 ; Sehol. 66, a, 34 ; whom, following passages cf Simpl. 41, " $4. ; 42, a ; Sclwl. (where Frantl, Gesch. der 61 a, 9, 25 i. 590, 23, restores the He dered consib, 9). Logilii sq#.
.
the
iracrxeiz'
as
division
two
of Trouiiv and
Arista
of
the
MSS.
instead of
of the
distinct
ries catego-
(Simpl.77
ascribed. Bio-
sqq.\ and also the category of he examined Having, which particularly (Simpl. 94: e; Schol.
81,
1
Alexandrian whom
Peripatetic
Aristo
a,
4") as
well
founded.
He
7. ;
is mentioned ScJwl.
by Simpl.
25, together
nicus, Andro-
mentions (vii.1G4 ; also genes ride siij)7'a, p. 105, 2). 2 Tnd. Acad. Hercul. col. 35:
41,
with the
61,
a,
[Antiochiis
had
for
disciples]
Boethus, Eudorus,
Athenodorus and SpeTs Kal KparfTTTTOv TL among Kal TraXaiol r"v I^TJ- aiv 'Api(TTOov [/lev] TS-arriyopiav
jTjral,and,
doubt of
TI,
consequently,
author this treatise of
a
no
the
on
mentary com-
book, and
on
not
Cic.
him
(Acad.
and Dio
ii. 4,
to
us
12)
at
shows
mere
the his
irp6$
tion menas
dria Alexan-
which of
Simplicius in
him
at p. In in- this
;
in
the ille If
to in
place
;
tiochus, with
well
51, 0
SeJiol.
alone
qmlus
dum
allows.
the
the
definition and
37
fratrem
luebat. resorted
have
latter
Andronicus
TTpos
TL v"as
GXOV
from remark
same.
taught life; meanwhile, quoted primarily part of Ms the lepidus philosophic A*risto" the him, with
has
Borne
the
that He of
to
Andronicus is
no
the that
cording ac-
of
whom
Seneca
here
must
relates
mean same
doubt
certain another
name
anecdotes,
person of
Aristo
Alexandria,
who,
the
; not
only
because
Seneca
322
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. V.
little about
us
him,
him
and
a
that
little
does
not
lead
to suppose
of philosophy
first
century before
this
man
among
the
B.C.
we
with him meet circulatores giti 2)liilosoj)ltiam De Univ. 1 Jionestius -neglexissent von(Cic. quam
Mytilene
71. 250 ;
Brut.
dunt,
Julius remark died the
was
but
also him is
because whom
the
a
Pwip.
he
must
75).
have
Soon
after in
from Gfrsecinus,
on
settled
Athens,
the
where Eoman
Cicero
discipleof
Mm
at
Areopagus
to
request
this
him 5 ; ad
remain
reign
rate
of
cannot
of
the
at any survived
(Cic. Off.
1,
1 ;
it. The
Aristo be
mentioned
p.
2,
by
must
Strabo,
not
xiv.
2, 19,
taken
658,
our
for
iii.16
That school
he
was
Aristo Alh.
(as Zumpt
d. IJerL
expressly stated, but is very PML Kl. 68), for was a probable. Cicero, who the discipleand described as great friend of his, speaks with the highest appreciation of his heir of the well-known tetic, Peripaof Julis (Phil. d. Aristo scientific importance (Bwct. 71, 250 ; Off. i. 1, 1 ; iii. 2, 5 ; Or. II. ii. 925). 1 structor of Naples, the inDivin. i. 3, 5 ; De Univ. 1), but Staseas this praise is scarcely altogether resided of Piso, who with him Orat. i. 22, impartial, As to his views, (Cic. De
Alad. the former is 104
; Fin.
v.
is not
3, 8, 25,
75
; rifle
nothing
us
has
been
transmitted
but
to
is
censured much
too ascribing
external
fortunes
told are except what we Cicero,JDivin. i. 3, 5 ; 32, 70 An. 46) : SQ. (cf.Tertullian,De that he admitted prophecy in and dreams, and ecstasy (furor}, he based this
An
is Nat. him De
2
conditions
that the
theory
upon
Piso 92
B.C.
heard
of
fulfilled this is
homiextrinhaustos
about
must
as
(I.c.
been in
prophecies.
presupposed
the
num
The
anthropology
him in animos
Orat.')he
as
have
by
ex
at least
old
Andronicus.
Aristotelian:
This
philosopher, born
quadami
"
parte
et
likewise from Pergamus, was nally secus( 0*Jpa0ej/, origiof Antiochus. a tractos spirit) esse disciple
the divine
124
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
V.
them.1
But
Xenarehus
and
his treatise
againstthemay
Aristotelian theories
here be
chus.
As
an
historian
by Joseph as {Anof account xvi. 7, 1) on tiquit. his partiality for Herod ; and his life of Augustus no was doubt only a panegyric. For the rest yule, concerning' his
historical Dindorf. Phllol Miiller ; cf Jalirbueli"r filr Clans.
Ithodian, named by Quint illian,, Inst. ii. 17, 15, with Critolaus as
the enemy
of rhetoric of the
(cf
.
Phil.
haps per-
d. G-i\
; and
the author
nepiVaroi
v.
quoted
Diog.
iii. 3 ;
36 ; lived
works,
he he
seems
be later than
Critolaus,whom
Mm. places before to Borne, according Cicero, sqt[f Meyer's supposition he wrote the treatise irspl already have been, "pvrS}vy there must the beginning of the first about II. Phil. d. Gr. is discussed ii. 98, note. century, acquainted persons 1 Aristotelian with the of them, the owner sophy philoAmong and writings, if M. AnTheophrastus' library, A p e 1 Lutatius and Q. lico, o" Teos {Phil d, G-r. II. tonius Catulus ii. 139); but though this man really spoke as he ii. 152 himself {Orat. 36, ^#.) repreoccasionally occupied sents. have We no with the Peripatetic warrant, philosophy posed comhowever, for supposing that {Athou. v. 214, d), and this representation is historically treatise Hermlas on a self himEus. true Cicero and Aristotle (Aristocl. indeed, ; ap. Pr. Ei\ xv. 2, 9), Strabo implies clearly enough (p. both here and calls doubt in c. 14, 59, that rightly, 609), no Antonius not was him "piX63) acquainted, fj.a\\ov ""iAdj8i/8A.os vol. xcix.
H,
2,
107
Quintillian
that
In
A th d.
e 11
io
so
far
as
he
knew,
been
with
-Greek
Aristio
PhiL (cf.
G-r. III.
literature
ii. 934,
among
3)
the
he
deserve a place pliilosphers,even really taught the what Someander, Alexhave and
though
it may otherwise
the teacher M.
friend of of
we are hardly in ascribing to him an justified accurate of that knowledge literature, and particularly of the Peripatetic philosophy. The
Crassus,
the
Triumvir
3);
in
At h emeus,
adherent of whom
we
of
this hear
in the Oillcia,
time
(Strabo,xiv. 5, 4, p. 670) ;
Pi
s o
is that
spoken,
of friend the Demetrius, with him in his was Oato, who last days (Plut. Cato Mm. 65, 67
supra, p. 100, 1, end; "but, as is there shown, he also attended the instruction of Antiochus, whose
2
sq.} ;
D io d
s
,
the brother
To
eclectic
into his
Cicero principles
of xvi.
Boethus
of
p. hen
Sidon
(Strabo, puts
the
mouth.
2, 24,
757).
odor
Peripatetic school
no
doubt, At
the
of his life
as
teacher
in Alex-
TItEATI"E
ON
THE
COSMOS.
125
mentioned
polemic against so integral a portion of the Aristotelian physicsaffords a further proof that the Peripatetic school was not so absolutely united
;
for this
CHAP.
V.
by the
But in
a
doctrine
as
to
departuresfrom,
there
treatise
among
preclude
tury before
as
which
from
the first
transmitted of the
-1
to
the work
the work
book
was
Cosmos.2
l~arhlUS
Tkeofies
4
a
The
in
authenticity of this
already questioned
;
von
antiquity/
and
in the
and
Rome. these
denied
It
"
by Melanehthon
"Weisse, Aristateles
und
von
in
dtr
to it*
andria, Athens,
was
first of
Seele
p. 373
der
Welt, 1829,
Aristoteles
Strabo Befriended
probably by
sqq. ; 8tahr,
by Arius, and
patronised
in Tide
and in
Augustus,
at
a
bei
Piome
gTeat
this
ZMeraturgegch.i. 143
in the review
sqq.
this
Petersen
of
concerning
the it
f. icissensefi*
sqq. ;
Ideler,
sq. ;
ii. 286
doctrine
Bamasc.
8c7wl. Casio,
in
Arist.
456, ",
5, 15 ; Simpl. De Ccelo, Stihol. 470, ", 20 ; 472, a, 22 ; 472, #, 38 sqq. ; 473, a, 9 ; 43, 7;, .24; (9, a, 11; 11, 5,41; 13, ", 6 ; 36 ; 14, a, 19 ; 21, ", 32 sqq. ; 25, I, 4 : 27, 5, 20-34, a, IS K) ; Julian. Or at. v. 162, A, sq. Sinirfc plicius calls it : a: TT/J^S460,
TrejjLTTTTjv ovcriav
TO. aTropfai,
1838,
A'rist.
Libra
Hist.
9
Heidelb.
1842, p.
debrand,
?qq* ; Or dine
i. 44
Li'br,
Adam,
DeAuet"re
T$]V
were
IT.
OVCT.
Anstotelici Berl. 1861; K. -*. irpbs Barthelemy Saint-Hilaire, Meteorologied'Aristcte, Par. 1863. 7J7TOp7JjU6I/a01" *y"same
ypaftjuLzva.
In
the
to
treatise
p. 88
perhaps
doctrine
be
found
the
f.
Ztsclw*
xxrv.
ran
observations
pus*
ap, His
Rritil
Simpl.
129,
",
IS
K.
Procl.
in
;Aptcrire
concerning the "jrp"Tov otKe'tov (sKjjra, 120, 2), and Ms (Aristotelian) definition of the soul i. 798) Eel. (Stob. opinion
are
TOTeATjs,
4
efwep
GKCLVOV
rb
pi
KOCT/JLOV jSijSAfoz'.
xiii. 213
also
quoted elsewhere.
126
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
modern
times
it has found
some
but advocates,1
As
is
nevertheless
can
quite
untenable.
little, however.,
other
a a
to any
as
school than
the upon
but Aristotle,
as
the
work
of
which
"
did not
itself claim of
to be Aristotelian
or
even
the times
to
elaboration its
such
work.
In
modern sometimes
authorship has
been
assigned
sometimes to Posidonius,3 Chrysippus,2 but against each of these sometimes to April eius,4 there are most important objections. In conjectures regard to Chrysippus it is highly improbable that
he
should and
have
sent
forth
work
under
borrowed have
name,
quite inconceivable
purpose
that he should
Its
authenticity
has
been
supposition that
the
finallymaintained
most
confi-
was
designedly
foisted
Both in manner npon Aristotle. of exposition, he says, and its unlikeness substance, Aristotle is
so
in to-
unmistakably
evi-
already been fully accomplished by Osann, Stahr, and Adam (p. 14 sgq. "c.),and as the decisive points in the matter in the will be brought forward
has
dent, that
followingpages.
2
Osann,
this
tablish
3
theory
only a person entirely unacquainted with Aristotle,or have indulged the a fool,could fancy that it could possibly be of that regarded as the work philosopher.But this,the only argument that he adduces, tries
to prove
are
too
much. the
many in.
the
wet
forged writings
at
which
can
glance,
From that
detect
it
are are
the
forgery ?
not
Stahr, I. "?.,and,
Adam.
in another
this
does
not
Barthelemy
Saint-
follows the former, naming him, 5 Osann, indeed, declares himself, p. 191, very decidedly
they they
not
In the present case, however, the forgery was not clumsy enough
to
prevent
numerous
persons
ITS
OEIGIX.
12T
and
-when
Osann from
would the
rest
separate
of
its dedication
to
an
CHAP.
Alexander1
the
work,
this is
__.H_
arbitrary proceeding which is whollyunjustifiable.2 Moreover, the exposition of Chrysippus, according unanimous to the testimony of antiquity and the as possession,is distinguished specimens in our much as by its dialectic by its learned prolixity, pedantry and contempt of all rhetorical adornment ; 3 the treatise Trspl whereas KoV/^ou exhibits throughout
the most
so oppositequalities,
that
even
on
this
ground
it is
quite impossibleto
attribute
a
it to
ChryStoic
of
sippus.
No
however,is less,
That
such
theoryexcluded
many
some
by
it has
adopted
expresses
and definitions,
the
formulae
which,
after
had Chiysipptis,
is school,
Stoic
will
indeed
undeniable;
immediatelybe
the
most
shown,
this
work
so
entirelycontradicts
doctrines
and dework
important distinctive
and for that
even our
of the
Ms is
Stoic
of the
school
author this in
philosophers
own
"
theory
no
criticsof
ceived.
was
"
Welsse,
a
book.
Apart
trace
from either
example
And
being
evidently not
pass
were
written
by
for than
name
1
more
easily
under his the
it in
originallyabsent,
6, 398, ", 10, the
that the
he Permust
anonymous
C.
forth
language
sian
to
is such
empire
still in Ms
supposed
if the
nu-
Naturally
Alexander of the of
be
and existing,
to
this Alexander
name
writer,
inerous
necessarily
has
references
older
whom
no
nothing further
reader
is
philosophers,
avoided
to
we
carefully
known,
what
see
every is from
definite allusion
post-Aristotelian,
as
Osann
further the
has
no
that
his work
3
to pass
dedication
incompatible
Cf
p. 42.
128
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
as
compared
to
with any
we
the
author
it
might
be
ascribed
than
to
Chrysippus.
more
Lastly, though
is sufficient
to
will not
anticipate the
date of this
of the
book,
Cosmos
it
refutation
of Osann's
on
hypothesis,
the
observe
consisted
are
that
to
quotations
found in
made
nowhere
be
same
the
writing
hold
considering.1
in
The
ments argu-
good
great
measure
against those
been
who of
have
the
Its
author
ornate
treatise.
language, however,
be
are more
with
to
far
more
probability
and there much
attributed many
to
to him
than
Chrysippus ;
than that
particulardetails which
the
:
approximate
to
time
of
we
Posidonius
shall find
that
of
Chrysippus probably
direct should
use
indeed,
a
the
author
made
in
considerable
of this
philosopher.
a
Posidonius
is
as
have
forged
that
work
of
Aristotle have
wholly
so
unlikely as
Chrysippus should
done
; and
in him certainly remark though we can concerning and Peripatetic specialpoints, a leaning to the Academic this never makes him untrue philosophy, (like the author of irspl to the fundamental trines docKoay^ou)
of presence
his of
school
God
in
"
so
as
to
deny
to
the
substantial
and
the
world, the
or
destruction
conflagrationof
1
the
world,
distinguishaether
Osann, of. Petersen, p. Gieseler, SpeneeL ;
c.
Stob.
d.
i.
180
Alex.
Against
554
sag.
ApTir. Anal.
Phil.
Adam,
I.
THEORIES
RESPECTING
IT.
129
.and
all
elementary
the
bodies
Is
whatever.1
not
As
to
Apugood
:
leius this
in his
It objection,
on
true, would
he has the
hold
treatise the
Cosmos of
entirelyappropriated
Aristotelian
contents how
are
so-called
treatise. not
But
as
we
merely
the translator
latter
reviser,but
work
is not
also
as
the
of the
? the
If the remains
not
mentioned literature
In Apuleius,2
we
of ancient from
possess. It does
exist
:
follow
this that
it
tion though Apulelus, In the introducnot to his Latin recension, speaks as if It were a the translation, but an independent work on mere there Is foundations of Aristotle and Theophrastus,3 no scrupulous proof whatever that he was sufficiently free about literaryrightof property, and sufficiently claim of original from a boastfulness, not to found
did not
and
authorship
which
1
on
the
minor is
alterations
and from
additions
by
his
these
work
reasons
4 distinguished
Aristotle's.5
auctorem
For
the hypois
TheopUrastum
secuti,
omnl Jiae
thesis
of
Posidonius
Position.
opposed
237 sq. ;
by Bake,
Rel.
in
cogitatlom
de
Spengel,
2
p. IT ; Adam,
p. 32.
The
words
in
in the
The
quotation
ad
Justin,
be
parenthesis are
best less MSS. to
; but
wanting
are
Cohort
0r.
c.
5, cannot
neverthe-
placed
since shown
cisive
3
earlier the
than
Aptdeius,
this been
be
considered
1.
c.
treatise,
Of. Goldbacher,
4
by Adam
to
reasons
(p. against
which that
*"#.) in
has cle-
debrand,
5
opposition
At
Semisch,
The
it.
known,
ideas sides
matters
much
have
less
on
of the dedication
is distin-
to
Fanstinus,
snbject
"ndshed
of
the
Alexander
alterations
surprising laxity,
nowhere his work
a new
Eudemus,
to
on
and
omissions:
,
Quare
[-nos
et
have
*
vrwleniiwiMtm
Physics'
of
only
nor
pWosojJwrum']
et
edition
Aristotle's
does
ISO
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. Yt
no
doubt
the Cosmos
is not
(asStahr
is to be
Barthelemy
revision
our
Saint-Hilaire
of the Greek
lection col-
of Aristotelian
form more original throughoutthe conciser,sharper, while the former has the character of a of expression, paraphrased translation: the flowerylanguage of other becomes often in the the one too bombast, which is sometimes hardly comprehensible without
a
text
; and
while
there
cannot
the which
be
on
Lave have
from
the
Latin, but
possibly evidently
But
of
been
to admit
make he
Apuleius
then
the Greek
into
book
which
himself
translated
in
the first
the onlyground on which placewe thus abandon of his authorship could even the hypothesis plausibly of his be maintained viz., the credibility own
"
he
say
so
of
Ethics. he
He
the has
sources
of
so
treatise
speaks,even independent
name
adheres
as an
taken
much Stoic
from
doc-
authors of
:
and
own
writer
are
Some
these
of the
Magna,
Moralia.
5 j
325,
#, 7
398, b, 23
400,
#,
at
rate, transcribed
Ms from
exten-
6 ; #, 23 ;
from
the
Greeks,
sources
without
tioning And would they came. Apu- must refer to Adam, p. his in TheoArlstoteles et leius, Gfoldbacher, 671 sq. 2 phrastus auctor, have really Adam, I. "?.,41 sgq.
the
which
1, 12, 27, 33, 35, p. 291, 317, For the rest I 362, 368 Oud.
38 sg%. ;
132
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, v*
work
undoubtedly is ; to find in this have expected and we must necessarily from him, much if it had emanated more writing, distinct traces of those Platonising metaphysicsand
as
the
treatise
on
the
Cosmos
of that demonology, which and especially theology, discover in Apuleius. This third shall presently we
to attempt, therefore,
find
definite
author
book
must
also
us
be
can
considered
and unsuccessful,
not
question for
only be,
by whom
school
it
to what
period and
reckoned
its author
That
.
this author
himself
irom
among
name
the
"
point and
character.
Peripateticsseems
which Aristotle,
it claims
to
probable
the work considered
the
of
name
bears ; for
one
by that
the The
be
of
genuine
same
records
is
of the
doctrines
of the school.
its contents.
confirmed, however, by
Though
is far
the
conceptionof the
world
which
it advances
enough from the truly Aristotelian conception, and though it is full of foreign constituents,yet its
fundamental features
it
are
taken
doctrine,and
it
as
the
philosophy. The approximates to the Platonic foundations of the Aristotelian system, metaphysical the author leaves,indeed,in the spiritof his time,
unnoticed, but
and in
to
its relation
God, he
does
so
chieflyallies himself
when the he
asserts
with
Aristotle. of
our
He
the
distance
world
from
and changefulness
imperfectionin
with
DOGTRISES
CONTAINED
IS
IT,
133
of the heavenly purityand invariability spheres,1 and when he makes the perfection of Being graduallydiminish with the distance from the supreme
_._
the
CHAP. Y"
heaven
and
when
he
maintains expressly
the distinction
between bodies
the
and consist,
of which the heavenly aether, the four elements, in unmistakable the Stoic doctrines.3
to
Further,
the
to
essence,
according to
whole
world
even
Stoic the
doctrine,permeates
smallest and
the
author finds this our ugliestthings, presentation of the Divine Majesty altogether worthy unthe contrary, most ; he declares himself, on
theory that God, removed from all contact with the earthly, has His abode at the extreme limits of the universe, and from hence, without moving Himself,and simply through His influence,effects the movement of the whole,
1
for decidedly
the Aristotelian
C. 6, 897, 5, 30
*#. ; 400, a,
the
27 s$%. 1),
C. 2, 392, ", 5, 29 sq. ; c. 3,392, 35 434, s$. 5, ; cf.Phil, d. ffr.II, ii, How
to
theory of the treatise v*pl K6"riJLQv concerning the asther is Aristotelian ; it is,therefore, all the more astonishing that he
can
believe
advanced
our
Chrysippus to have
the
same
adheres /,
also
theory
Stoic idenwith i 11,
expositions has
c.
for
treatise
of Cic.
one
declares
itself fire
we
heen
already observed,
6. it
p.
expresslyagainstthe
tification from
was
437,
should
speak
sether
(392, 5, 35
8) of
five "rro#e*a,
sether,fire,"c., is unimportant,
Aristotle himself
asther d. scribed
repo?
(Aead.
of
and of
39),
this
between tetics.
the
most contest
notorious The
points
Stoics
for
he fc".H.ii.437,7),andif
Peripais
not
question
on
(Gm. An.
tise
as means
ii.3,736,",29)the treasame
the
392,
a,
8,
p.
Aristotle
of the
bases world
(rroix"overepo*'
rerrdpoty^the
below allows that
re atcfipardy
world
above.
134
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. v.
However
world.1
manifold Still
the
forms
it may
can
:
assume
in
the the
less, of
course,
he
a
admit Stoic
the world he
tion defini-
only adopts after language.2 Finally, having altered its pantheistic the author shows himself to be a Peripateticby 3 the and unchangeable eternity defending expressly
-
this
ness
of
the
world
(alsoa
the
or
distinctive
doctrine
of
this from
Though
cannot
it is clear
work any
or
have
of the
been Stoic
written
by
by
leader
school,such
it the
Posidonius
is very
endeavour
the the
(cf. p. 397 ,5, 16 1 398, a, sqgi. ; sg. 5, 4-22 ; 400, 5, 6 *".)and the theory (Osann,
unmistakable
doctrines i.444
from
divergence from
concession
to the
Stob. JEel.
i.!47,l)has
The tions altera-
only
necessary
more
in the treatise admissible; popular religion is quite inof note the ligion worthy popular re-
all the
we K.6fffj.ov "5',
is not
at
all in
question
logy; theo-
Stob., elvai tyyviv 6 XpvKal ffunros ffvarryiLia e" ovpavov $) yrjs Kal rfav eV rovTOis ^(reajv,
read
in
rb Kal
rcav.
e/e e/c
Qe"v T"V
Kal
avdp"ircav (TiKTryfjia
7670^6 K^CT/JLOS
he religion,
as this, we
quite
seen,
able
to
eVe/ca ro^rcov
have
without
the fundamental contradicting We of his system. principles tion indicaa as special quote may of the Peripatetic origin the passage to have 16 seems 398, ", sqq. reference to I)e Motu Anim. 7,
our
Our
treatise
the
tions definiover
and literally,
passes
:
of
treatise
that
second;
third
it
substitutes
re rd"ts
these
Aeysrat
701, ",
2
1 sqg.
The
treatise the
begins, after
c.
Kal dia.K6crfj.7ja' is, v^rb 0ea"y Kal Sia Qefov ^vXaTro/xe^. 3 0. 4, end ; c. 5, beginning ;
1, with
definitions
of
the
I. c.
397,
"", 14 s$.
5, 5.
AFFINITY
WITH
STOICISM.
Stoic
to
doctrine
even
with those
the
and Aristotelian,
to
partially
which
an
admit
determinations
CHAP. ^'
TVith
the Stoic
even
which writings
the
author also
has
transcribed,1he
to
a
has
trines docbe
considerable
of
extent; and
astronomical, eosmological, details which Osann ward,2 and bringsformeteorological the also of definitions deeply affecting but whole Quite at the beginning of the system. encounter a Chrysippean we exposition,3 cosmological monstrated, it is dedefinition of the on Kocr/ios. Further in the spirit and after the precedent of
said
not
merely
the
system, that
the elements
it is and
the precisely
contrast
depends the unity and subsistence of the in Stoic language, whole : 4 this unity itself is called, sympathy : 5 and that his harmony with the Stoics
shall not
escape us, the author does
not
hesitate
to
behalf,6 "quote,expresslyas a witness in his own In of this school, Heracleitus. the great authority
his
theory of the elements, he allies himself with Aristotle in the Stoics, though he divergesfrom quality of air.7 He making cold the fundamental
doctrine
later
of the Trvsvpa,
7
with
which
.
.
This
will
be
proved
on.
2 3
Page
C.
208
"pv"nv.
2, beginning;
p. 134 2. 4 C. 5.
5
Aristotle
(cf.Phil
d. Or. H. ii.
to
444)
maintains and
cold
be the
determination
moisture that
of
of
"nrres.
6
C. 5, 396, ", 13 ; cf
c.
6, end.
air.
186
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
v*
there
are
points
But
of his
contact
even
in the to
Peripatetic
is
most
doctrine.1
approach
such,
the
Stoicism While
repudiating
of theauthor
as
the
Stoic
Pantheism
as
the
diffusion
divine approves
substance of
its
to
through
the
world, the
as soon
quite
are
propositions
divine
they
the the
applied,not
force
2
essence,
but that
divine active
and
he
accordingly teaches
from
influence
emanating
to
indeed, primarily
universe, but
and
so
the
the
spreads from
law the the of the world
inner
spheres,
Grod
is transmitted
through
whole
whole.3
Him of of
is,
,
therefore,the
the order of into their classified
;
means
from
proceeds
it
by
which
is
various
species
existences,
5
through
of bears the
individual
seminification
and
this, his
manifold which the
all-governing influence,
names, in
most
the
enumeration
explanation of
are
the
treatise
irsplKScrj"ov
The
are-
stamped
the
with
genuine Stoicism.
the the
3
name,
predicates,and
in
5e
origin
of
Zeus
here
1
explained quite
0.
Stoic
0.
sense;
20
4, 394,
5,
\cyertu
ev
6, 398, 5, 6 sg$.
:
sq. ;
Kal erepcos
Kal
Trvet/jaa
tfre
tealSiot,iravrvv "c*"oi$ K"d ytvLfj.os ovcria. Of. T" fy-fyvxts the quotations, PJdl.d. 6rr. III. i. p. 138,
2
fywrols Si^Kovcra
v6/j,os y"p
The the
as
"
con-
ception
of
of
v6p.osfor
Is,
order
is
the Phil.
.
universe d.
well Stoic.
r$"v
known,
222
5
pre-eminently
6fr. III. sq.
i. p.
TraAcucDj/
7rpo^%077"ray Cf
dewy
?rAea
140,
This
#Ti
ra
Trdyra Kal
ravrd
ecrr*
sg. 303
C.
6, 400,
5, 31
sg.
Kal
alffirda"r)s
Trpeov
/cara/SaXAoVevoiXoyov
ovcrta.
exposition likewise reminds us of the Stoics, in the doctrine of the \6yoi or7T"pfj.arLKot.
pfyvTTJ y"
THEOLOGY.
187
Nemesis,
Moirse,
are
Adrasteia, the
of Stoic of
are
CHAP.
referred
to him
by
means
etym-
for the confirmation ologies; and doctrines, the sayings of the poets after the
manner
philosophic interspersed
,
of
Chrysippus.1
to
It
is clear
that
the author
wishes but
as was
indeed
to
maintain
the with
Peripatetic
it
as
doctrine,
Stoicism
also
combine
possible without
Plato indicated
That
likewise
at
his
proposition
is
the
a
work,
the
by
c
of approving citation Laws' (IV., 715, E.), and we of Plato, when Grod is extolled and
the
passage
are
again
the
reminded
as
not
as
merely
the
Almighty
of
Eternal,
But
but like
also all
prototype
was
beauty.3
this,
eclecticism,
of
relaxation
the de-
interest
we see
and
in
philosophic
the
erudition
writing rrspl
played dis-
Kocr/^ou, side by
with
the
cheap
in Chapters II. to IY., the popular especially decidedly preponderating over theological element
the
In
the of the
a
sions discusdivine
the this
transcendental
character
assumes
essence
religiosityeven
the
mystic
exaltato
tinge
1 2
when
dignity
of
(rod
of
and
the
His
school
trines he
which
to
to
consePeripatetic and Zellems ipse suwni sententiami refellere egregie vide"ur* (Adam. p. 34) is a sinif As no gnlar assertion. had ever mingled philosopher with the docforeign elements
be
belonged belong.
3
and
desired
quently
KO!
p.ev 5e TOU,
6, 399, ", 19
irepl Qeov
Siavo"iar8cu
apery
5e
"c. Kparlcrrov,
138
CHAP.
V.
all contact
with the
world
immanence
is made
the
the
chief divine
argument
essence
against the
universe.
of here
in the
We
see
how
accomplished the transition from pure of the neoto the religious philosophy speculation road Platonists and their predecessors. The of strict enquiry being abandoned, and those results of which commended speculation alone maintained
themselves
and
to
eclecticism
the
universal
consciousness
must
as
true
expedient, metaphysics
the
their theoretical wants satisfy based on the Aristotelian time this theology were same doctrine of the transcendency of (rod,and the Stoic the world, idea of his omnipresent influence on there resulted at once a theory of the universe in which the dualism Peripatetic of the Stoic school and
were
the
substantial
in
a
Pantheism
reconciled
To
what
at such
of
contained
may
book
we
have
been
com/posi-
tion.
is not certain, but it *may be assigned, The revision of the approximately determined. in circulation treatise by Apuleius shows that it was
be
as
an
Aristotelian
work
about The
the
middle
of the
second
1
The the
developed,
treatise in As the it of the Peteralso
of
character
been
of the
first preparation of this work, independently of Petersen, to whose be book my attention of its
was
advanced
the
by
first drawn in
by Adam,
had my
"?#.)"
favour
result
in investigation,
140
ECLECTICISM.
GHAP.
V.
rather
constrained
the work
one
or
that
Posidonius,, employs,,
others
even
more
himself
after
says
that
Hipparchus set up other in the computations : Artemidorus, for telian pseudo-Aristotreatise example, in agreement with the TreplGavfj-acricav K"r/xou, aKovcrpdrav (c. 155, p. 846), trepl gives the length of
already
scribed trancannot
be
more
recent
the than
terrestrial
plain
as
more
Antigomis
died about of borrowed be of the
of 220
two
Carystus,
B.C.
stadia, and its than 39,000 (Plin. breadth more Sfat. Nat. ii. 108, 242 sq. Of 68,000
Posidonius
he reckoned he said does'
we
from
the
know
only
that
at
cannot
discovered
the passage Bose which
a
from
the
of
not
length
the
comparison
moreover
the
passages; in the
CLKOVCT-
treatise
Trepl6av/jia(riuv
tradition
believes he
to
anything concerning
of the be
treatise, therefore,
from
its from Eratosthenes
to
section
deduced
considers
to be
(cf PMl.
.
this
argument,
can
therefore,
thing no-
3,
be based. in
that habitable
serves 393 Bose 5, 23, as asserts,, (2)Eose obthe Caspian and Black Kutr^ov (c.3, between irepl breadth of the Seas there is crrev^raros
IffOpbs ;
tained plain of the earth, and this could not be main$s tpaffivoi ei" y"ccypa(f"'f)"ravT"$, after Eratosthenes had breadth of this is given as nearly 40,000 stadia, placed the its length about and at 1,000 (?)stadia,and isthmus 70,000 Posidonius at 1,500 (Strabo xi. that stadia; and this proves the work written not only was author,, 1, 5, p. 491). Our does before maintain not but also however, Hipparchus,
before
at
Eratosthenes;
reckoned
for its
he
says,
are
the
length
of
Europe
yuv^ol
els
rbv
mostly followed, counted 70,000 for its length and 30,000 for its breadth (Strabo, i, 4, 2, p. 62
sqq. ; ii. 5, 7, p. il3 how do know we author
to must
whom
the later
writers
Caspian
the the and
place
was
where also
isthmus Pontus
between
it
$##.)" But
that
our
have
these
designated as the boundary between Europe and Asia, according to Dionys. Perieg. Orl). Desor. v. 20) is (which
narrowest.
The
further
I venture
servations obto*
he
were
later than
of Bose
LATER
THAN
POSIDQNIVS.
141
and
from
whom
the
greater
The
5e
CHAP.
V.
part of the
pass
over,
are
natural
he
imparts to us.1
y"vias
as,
even
supposing
they
would
ol jSpacrrai,
Ttt
they only
not
correct,
the
KQXa.
prove tlie
ot Se
yovres 154
a;
avoi-
Kal
yijv
av
of
1
his
It has
theory. already
how
are
with
Biog. vii. yivea-Qai els ra KoiX"fiaTaTTJS irvevf^aros yrjs evfivovTQS ^ [/cai] /caSefp%0eV: TOVS
KaXovj/rat. ffiKTai.
Cf.
(T"L{r]J.ovs 5e
TOS,
KaBd
; and
non phenomeK.
c.
:
eivai oyfioT}'
TOVS
juev
deserves Thus
we
all consideration.
it.
find
4"
5e
TOVS
%a"r/iarias, 5e fipacr-
895,
at
32, the
definition
?/ns
albO
Sen.
-i we
Nat.
Qu.
vi.
read
that
kinds
; from
KoiXcg
ws
KOU
(Twe^e! irpbsfyav~
dry
and
moist
Tacriav
KaTa
fog,
This Tr"pi"f""p"tav. is definition quoted by singular the Diogenes, vii. 152, with
KVKXOV
same
"c.
words from
and
with
only
ences differMerew-
this,
J\Tune
rever-
slight and
unimportant
opini"nem
terra
terrenisque
on-
winds,
blows
/ecu/das is the
the
that
from
place
comes
(which
must
sun's
rising in
summer,
much vapours
given dry
the
shut break
up
west
clouds, they through thunder. them, and this causes the from Svo-is, fe"pvposWith this explanation of thunder Qepivfy from the itrnficpudj, Aty from the treatise also our agrees (c. finitions These very deSe 7n/eu/ia 4, 395, a, 11) : "tXr)6ev XGifAeptvT] Svcris. Strabo, Kal are quoted by ev Tra^e? re V""f"Gi voTepip Kal i. 2, 21, p. 29, from. Posidonius. Si* avTov fitaicas fayvvov read: In c. 4, 395, ", 33, we TOV iX^]p,ara V""J"QVS, Kal Ttarayov Earthquakes are occasioned by "p6fj.ov aireippeyav winds With being pent up in the "yacraro, ^povT^vX"y6fievov. ing cavities of the earth and seekthe explanation of snow quoted to escape : T"V 5e O'SIG'IJ."V by Diogenes (vii.153),and no
"
avaToXal x"ifjL"pival
winds,
apyecrrys
doubt detailed
abbreviated the in
from
donius, Posimore
somewhat
ire
ol 5e "vca
KOU finrrcvvres
/carw
account
142
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. V.
work
cannot, according
to
this,have
been
written
(c.4,394,0,32).
of the
creXas
beyond
in
those
irepl
(ap. Kocrpov
those of
; whereas
is most Diog. I. #.)" which of most like taken, probably the meteorologicalportions of his expositions of Stoicism, from
all that
concerning
the character
subjectsbears
a
Posidonius,
we
again
find
results ; how
can
we
then
think
nius credible that Posidoin irepl (4, 395, I, 2). it more K6a-fjLOv taken his should have said there 2, is (c. Also what this from the compendium opinions 391, ", 16 ; 392, a, 5) on author the of the that than the and ether, reminds stars
us
of
the
description
Stobasus from
of
the
compendium
his
have work is
it
rowed bor-
quotes
of
our
ever
of had
plicable ex-
Posidonius?
that should
to
if this
agreement
with is not
occurred,
have of
Posidonins
writers them
a
merely
As their
of
all
can
we
Posidonius,
and But all
without to
lable syltheir
allusion
well-known
name
result in
ancient
source,
common
dependence on
have been
third
case
attested
?
not
by the
even
of Aristotle
we
which exposition,
that
if
gard disrewill
nothing less than a complete meteorology ; for in the first placePosidonius in these matters enjoys great
could
cannot we reputation, and such ascribe dependence to him would and
; and be not
this, the
save
theory
the
suffice to
our
of
Hose,
we
the
mology cos-
exposition of
was
the taken
in
the
second,
it he
(ap. Stob.
likewise
444)
it.
that inexplicable
always
followed
this exposition, That however, his predecessorshould contradicts such a the thority, auas altogether be named will shown be diately. immehave must he theory whom very
him
closely if
word for that
he instead of
Who of the
can
believe
that
copied
Still
more
Stoic upon
doctrines Aristotle
untenable
p.
being foisted
out
theory (I. c.
the resembles Posidonius
96)
from
in
borrowed passages
it.
which
know
We
that
himself?
have,
wrote
on
works
dwelt too comprehensive long upon this is manifestly which meteorology, hypothesis,
geography,
result of his
the contents
and
own
astronomy,
the
only
device
to
escape it
from
of
passages
beyond
ABOUT
THE
FIRST
CENTURY
B.Q.
143
CHAP.
V.
com-
probablyit
to
a
is rather
later ; but
we
cannot
assign it
later date
than
doubt
that
the
from
also
our
treatise
in it there third
is
the treatise
use
wanting
of these
of
Posidonius,
from
we
even
copied
certain,
this
is
shown
manner
(as is
in be
esa
conceived
great
can
only
by the design of the tions to bring the definimeteorological Peripatetic from dissertations hand to in the (c. 3, 4) ready Stoic the Stoic authority into harmony philosopher whose achievements with his own in these departments standpoint. Now the To him of celebrated. Stobaaus only are passage
the
sea
detailed had
on
discussion
on
the
claims Stoic
see
to be
an
account
of the
especially
the
points; Posidoa
doctrine,
it is not Stoic clear
our
a a
and
we
written sea,
separate
therein treatise
that
taken
clearly literally
it is ment agree-
and
our
from
work.
asserted, what
equally
it
(and doubt)
such
also
strongly
of the
with
treatise
places
it is
beyond
this
is surrounded
abstracted That
from
was as
work.
sea (Strabo, ii. 2, 1,5, p. i 100 94, 1, 9, 3, 12, p. 6, 55). ; There is another portion of the
by
the
Chrysippus's irepl
Osann
more
K6ff]j.ovy
seems
to
me
treatise from
which
borrowed
Osann shown the that
himself
two
first definitions
to K"j"r/*os
Chrysippus.
he may
(p. 211
$"#.)has already
the section
c.
statement to
a
from
c.
third
so,
was
writer, and
and
no
beginning of
2 to the
3,
it is writer
that other
is almost
as
point
for
Stob.
no
Posidonius,
reasons
is
:
probable
first,the
which definitions Chrysippus, set to Stobasus, according Didymus) up, in Biog. vii. 138, there be are quoted even though may the in the ffroiperecapohoyiK)] rangementfrom arslight differences nius Posidoof Posidonius and the conceptions ; XeiacrLs ; and
must
that be
our
a
here
not
also
an no
must,
them doubt
as
from For
as
what the
have
mentioned
author.
our
their of
Stobseus the
source
names
section of
Chrysippus
with is
so
the
sage pas-
definifirst of its three tions this quotaof the jc4"r/xo?, tion taken been have cannot
closely
connected
in which
144
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, ^-
mencement
of down
to
our
era
since
a
it had
alreadybeen
handed
Apuleius as
work
of Aristotle, and
found have false some Apuleius in his copy must l which is that it the probability still exist, readings was composed a longer or shorter time before the end
of the
However
this
may
of the memorial be. It is,at any rate, a remarkable this time, had found eclecticism which, about trance eneven
into the
be
school. Peripatetic
transformation of the of
Posidonius
no
can
proved, that
nius Posido-
into the predicate Ao|-J? island, Oxe an or for by the that and Loxe, is accounted comes another from source. Lastly, still existing variant, Ao|^ instead of Ao"^ irpbs the islands, KaXovfjievri, the dissertation on that the assertion the and r)]i'oiKOV}jLev'nv('ir.K.3,S9$) 1", 15). break
is
between perceptible
what
is borrowed
from which
compre
name
an
2
supposed mainland
island
is
also
To
fix the
date
of
its
position com-
more KJo-^ov, exactly would (Stob. 446 ; irepl be 20 to seems possible. That the hardly c. 3, 392, 5, $##.) wrote author before Strabo have suit Posidonius we (as
would his
seem
because probable,
of the
sea
work
of
nius, Posidoof
(c.
is less
precise
than o"roi%e"/jLtrGcapoXoyLKTi
(ii.5,
rwcris, from
the
an
first section
"?.).
Meantime
more
which
Stobseus
mus)
which
gives
the
is the
unsafe
author
in the
geographicalpart
The
author used
of -n-epl
his work
has
Posidonius. the
extent, in which
much
he
apportionedto
to
the 6v/j.o"t^"$
placed
(p.
and the
to avbpeia,
As
G-oldbacher
to the whole
Sucaiocrvvr],
681
$#")from
c. 7, p. first of these
288,
Oud.).
p. In the
and ju-eyaXotyvxta GXsvdepLdrifis, likewise the opposite failings. duties and faults
unnatural
definitions superficial
is shown
by
in
IT.
the
given; lastly, it
K.
1, 391,
with
ovf
22
he of
may
our
have MSS.
read
uepovs
some
they
are
oliertffftev ; in
of
other faults
the
second,
the
otherwise
in-
brought forward.
TREATISE
OST
VIRTUES.
145
Another possess
to
remnant
of
that
on
eclecticism
we
probably
vices,
The
also
~
CHAP V".
in
the
in
short
our
treatise
virtues collection.
and
be
found
of of virtue
doean
trine
nation
is
the the
Platonic
discrimiand
virtues
the
;
three
to of
of
soul,
tries
the reduce
four the
and
rl"es*
chief
virtues
virtues
author
;
to
treated
vices
to to
by
evil
;
and
the
the them
of
at
the
same
parts
time
relating
in review
while
and
the
he of the
passes
ferent dif-
the
virtues
tokens
and
manifestation in
seems
vices
as
the
to
descriptive
have school
are
manner
of
the
later
ethics,
in
been after
ally especiTheoeven
customary
the
Peripatetic
there But
to
phrastus.
external
is not
With
Stoicism of
scarcely
short
us
points
of sufficient
harmony.1
importance
the
this
detain
treatise
longer.2
have
so
a
IFor
Instance,
that
the
perhaps,
whole
to
would himself
to
hardly
Plato
if it
allied
remark
from
treatise end
is
beginning
to
the
and its
opposition
^e/CTa.
tetic
voted dethe
as were
of
course, writer
in
the in
way
the
",
ejrcuyeTck
2
does
c.
1,
1249,
30
Even
origin
from
is
not
quite
sion admislection, colment treat-
Tpijj.epovs
certain;
into
but,
the and
its
fj.4w)s
is also
K.O.TO. an
HXarcava^ indication
the
"c. of
a
There
later mons dae-
Aristotelian
Its
whole
it
period
parents
c.
in between in
mention
the
of
of
that
the it
subject,
emanated
is
bable profrom
gods
1250,
tinder
and
c.
4,
a,
",
20;
the
;
Peripatetic
the cannot may
school,
;
and and if
not its
7,
1251,
of
31,
and
the
Academy
be
head
piety
after
godlessness precedent
Golden Poem
of
precisely
it,
the
fixed,
perhaps
the
assign
to An
generally period
of
Pythagorean
speaMng,
Eclecticism.
(v. ft).
earlier
Peripa-
146
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
VI.
CICERO.
VARRO.
CHAP. VI.
Eclecti-
cism of tJie
first
century
B.C.
how, precedingchapters it will be seen in the first century before Christ, the three scientifically most important schools of philosophyhad less strongly developed in coincided a more or This mode of thoughtmust eclecticism. have commended to those itself the more readily who, from
FROM
the
the outset,had
Its practical
cha-
concerned
themselves
rather with
the than
Such falls in
was a
the
case
with
Cicero.1
not
fied
in
Cicero.
only Eoman the influence on philosophy culture, and partialblending of but also the approximation schools had alreadybegun to develop the philosophic themselves quainted acstrongly.2He himself had become various systems, partly from with the most of their founders and representatives the writings and
of Greek Concerning philosopher,cf
.,
Cicero's
youth
period in which
Cicero besides
as
Ritter M. T.
Kuhner,
1825
Allg. Mncycl. sect. i. 226 17, s$q. ; Bernhardy, Rom. Litt. 769 sqg. ; and the treatises named in the passages quoted
Gruler's
infra, pp. 148,5; 149, 1. PMlo"opMcwn 2 Cicero, as is well known, (this is be to ious laborborn the 3rd January, was on regarded as a only collection of materials); 648 A.U.C. and (i.e. 106 B.c,), concerning his philosophical therefore some years after the
Merita, Hamb.
works,
cf. Hand
in
Ersch.
uncl
death
of
Panaetius.
148
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
into
YI-
with
a
which
he
had-
Koman
dress,and
countrymen.1 He only arrived, however, at this literaryactivityin his he had been compelled to advanced more age, when
made his
renounce
and thus his manifold public service,2 works are philosophical tolerablyextensive of a few years.3 But into the space
and
pressed comour
astonishment
at
the
rapidityof
we
his work
more
will
be
look
at closely
the
one
compilation of his
works. philosophical
does
not
In
directly express his schools to each of the most important philosophic of their adherents,4 explain theirs through one
and
to
he
use
seems
almost
several
to
throughout
expositions
confined
free
to to
of
the
and
which himself
hand,
the
:have
elucidation
merit himself often Ms which in this
of their
he
re-
Of
the for
ber
a
claims
spect
works Fin. Tmc.
2
Cicero
speaks while
only
defending
philosophical
De
As
in
Academica,
De
Finibus,
5
Natiwa
Deo"rwniy
Divinatione.
l s%. 1^ '
Cicero himself
1; 4,
7 ; N.
3
passage labor e
that (irreof in spite Fin. (Non spective of his two political this, intcrpretwn fwigimw mwiere, Consolatio, the works), the "c.),is no exaggerated modesty, ffbrtensius,and the firstversion is sufficiently fall in the of the Academic", proved by the into the As recent 45 i.e. B.C. investigations 709 A.U.C., year of his expositions. In Decemsources murdered Cicero was on earliest of these abwndo f[niJ"m affero,
HIS
OWN
STANDPOINT.
149
where
lie
speaks
so
in
his
own
name,
he
frequently
his
CHAP. TL
allies himself
own
to closely
older
writingsthat
works these.1
our
are
scarcely more
this is
no
than
reproductions
he his his
of
Yet
great disadvantagein
his
since standpoint, views
regard to
can own
knowledge of
the with agrees
of
; and
others
even
as
them
a
in
the
theories
he
standpointmay
he had that of borrowed
be
described generally
served Mm
as
a
as
an
His
scepti-
cism.
model
(vide PJdl.
the The
which,
in in and
d. Gr.
II. ii.
ConsonevQavs
version, he
in the month
placed
Lucullus,
latio, H. (ibid.
of have the
Grantor's
?repl
afterwards
of Varro
cipal printo
first book
seems
(vide supra,
p. 86, 3) ; the tical scephe had dissertations bably profrom PMLo well taken as Clitomachus fifth book be found
TusGidante Grantor
writings
of
Posidonius
; of the
as
from
(ride Phil,
sonrce
d. Gr. III. 1
of the is the to
Finibits that
same
Antiochus in the
second, Panastius (ride supra, p. 41, 3 ; Heine, Font. Tusc. Msthe of fourth, put. 11 sf[.}-, Posidonius (as Heine, I. c. p.
13
(ride supra,
rest
p. 86,
no on
3), and
doubt.
sq.,
supposes),or
De the in Fato The work of
Antiochus
originated
(videPkil.d. Gr.
the treatise
to
For
the d.
Epicurean
which
treatises
repeat
Clitomachus.
De
to
cf. Phil
2 ;
Ojfieiu keep
Pansetius'
name
573,
for tius the half
(vide supra,
substance been of the
41, 3) ;
of Posidonius
.
of Panse-
the
has Topica,
probably
Antiochus
It may that it other
was
furnished be
by
(ride supra,
the
not
same
p. 86, 3).
first,Clitomachus
IK. i. 505, is worked
reasonably
whose
supposed
with the totypes pro-
d. (PJiil. Dwinatione
3).
De
out
from
works have
Greek
Posidonius, Pansetius,
337,
1
and
tomachus Cli-
hitherto been
1 ;
For
(vide ibid. III. i. p. ascertained,though Cicero may have been and supra, 41, 3). not in all of them his predecessors totle's dependent on Ms Ifortensiiis, Aris-
probably nporpeTpriKbs
to the
same
extent.
150
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
"
eclecticism
founded
upon
scepticism* The
of
very
habit
statingargualready mentioned, ments for and against,without clusion, drawing any confor this indicates a tendency to scepticism, the indirect be compared with procedure cannot developmentof thought in the Platonic dialogues, with which from the Socratic or conversations, Cicero himself derives it ; l its true analogy is 2 of Carneades and it can with the colloquies only ; originatein the fact that the philosopheris not but objects to somethingsatisfied with any theory, in every given system. however, expressly Cicero, himself as avows Academy/ belongingto the new the arguand name brings forward in his own ments of it had with which denied the possibility of the great reasons, one knowledge.4 For himself, for his doubt, seems if not the greatest, to lie in the disagreement of the philosophersconcerningthe most important questions ; at any rate, he not only this subject with but pressly expredilection,5 pursues
we
have
remarks
value
to
that
to
he
attaches
has
much said
greater
it than
all that
been
senses
by the
the ideas.6
I think it
of the
and
definition
4
of
v.
4, 11
11:
; N. D.
Acad.
il 20 sq$.
to
unnecessary
specify these
in this be been
Of.
TUSG.
cum
v.
4,
Quern
acittis-
arguments
as
further
place,
morem
sime
Carneades
considered.
quoted,
sqq.
fecvmis
in
alias
scope et mtper
earn con-
Tusonlano,
3
iut ad
suetiidinem
Acad.
dtsjputwr"wus.
J\r.D.
8
Git. 33, 107 ; c. 36 sq. ; i. 1, 1; 6, 13 ; iii. 15, 39. ii. 48, 147 : PostJiao Acad.
ciim
LOG.
tamen, yatAm
luce
de
dissenswnibm
Qitaremusr tantis
ACTION
BASED
OS
PROBABILITY.
is therefore,
not
so
much
the
CHAP. VL
independent enquiry as the consequence of the uncertainty in which the strife of philosophic theories has placed him ; it is only the reverse side of his eclecticism, only a sign of the same dence indepenof his Greek expresses
:
which predecessors
far
as
that
cism eclectito be
so
the
philosophers are
from,
reconciled, the
are
common
elements
;
so
their
at
tems sys-
co-ordinated
far
as
they
are
strife,
is spaired deone
debated
points
the
authorities neutralise
it is that
doubt
in Cicero
or
cannot
have
by
it
the
in in for
importance
new
that significance
;
had
see
had
the
Academy
and
we
therefore
two
to
spects re-
him,
:
greater
worth
the
from knowledge derived the probabilitythan Academy, and he makes hardly any use of certain
derived from his sceptical parts of the philosophy principle. If he is within the principlesof the Academy in replying,like Carneades,to the objection
that
"
scepticism makes
fall
all
action
not
impossible
necessary,
that
for action
certainty is
*
but him
summorum
disserawius,
natures
d"
error
obscwritate
e
tot
jjliilosopkorum, qui de
tantcum
et
de
sorite avt
p$"iido-~
cmtra*
ae
guas Acad.
plagas ipn
II. 31
; c.
ojpere
uno
discrepant,ut
rerum esse twn
plus
pos"it,
Stoici teseuemnt.
33, 105.
jacere necesse
152
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP, VI"
disputation. This method to enable was him, by testing the various theories., had the most in its the theory which to find out Doubt favour.1 only the preparation is, therefore,
the aim of his method
of for
a
conviction positive
not
; and
even
does
reach
the
full
and
aim
of
philosophy. There
elements of
mistaking
sophy, philoassertion
the fact
the
of
a
knowledge, and
that doubt
knowledge
relation
; for
stand probability,
in
ferent dif-
from
Carneades
him,
which
judgment, had been the proper aim of philosophic was only in the enquiry; the theory of probability the consideration second rank, and resulted from from remained of that which over doubt; but to
Cicero the
discovery of
the
probable appears
as
the
has value and doubt problem of philosophy, original of the condition solution of and a only as a means therefore clares this problem. Cicero himself plainlydethat his scepticism was properlyonly in regard
to
the
Stoic
demand
for
an
absolute
knowledge ;
with the
claim
1
so
TUSG. de
id aut
jiibevellet:
autem
disserendi.
Nam simillimum
ita
faeillime
esset inve-
bam ad
quo
quis
. .
quid
veri
ambulans vellet
est
arliitrabatur.
disgutabam
ita, ut
dixisset $go
cum
fieb"t
is qui audire
sibi
quid
vAderebwr, tuwi
Hce.c
et Socratica
Similarly (v. 4, 11) this procedure claims the advantage, ut nostram sententia/ni ipsi tegeremus,
error e
contra ut
dicereon. alterius
alias
veri
levaremust
et
"nim,
sdis,vdtus
in
omni
quid disputatione
queerer emus.
esset
ratio contra
opinionem
simillimum
OBJECTION
TO
DIALECTIC.
153
scepticism CHAP. receives still further limitations. Though our philo- ___!_ the subject, on sopher expresses himself hesitatingly
even
mentallyagreed*1
But
this modified
is
that enquiries
he
is
and
the contrary on principles Academy : practical and religious the philosophic convictions directly
with
same
connected
in
them,
He real
he
does
not
wish
to
question
that
it
the
way.
not
objects to
dialectic
only formal knowledge but of propositions rules on the construction and inferences 2 his judgment on physics, exclusive of ; to say theology,is that it is far easier for physics what thingsare not, than what they are ; 3 it would be presumptuous to arrogate to itself a knowledge,even 4 human of its most universal principles no ; eye is keen enough to penetrate the darkness with which 5 and even if we of thingsis concealed the nature ; logy, of theoto the have to limit these expressions case balancing counterfind no we opposite declarations in them regard to natural enquiries the contrary,though he finds In ethics, on proper. the philosopherson discord considerable among 6 he himself, and the most ; important questions
guarantees
1
2
Fin. Aca-d. N.
in
v.
26, 76.
cf. Phil, Omnibus
i*i
ista
ut
omula^
et
JJuculle, crassis
circumfmatenelwis,
Jtuniant intrare
no-n
d.
3
occultata nulla
tanta
a"ies
ing"mi
in
fere
quam
4
mascime
ecelum,
jpossit.
"c.
ea
yJiysfasiSy Quid
sit qitiil Acad.
sit
116:
dtius,
JSstne
Corpora*nostra
not'imm,
dixerim,
"
124
Satisne
tandem
noia"
ii. 36,
mntnoffistftv^nervorwmnatura
?
"c.
c.
sit, gute rencvrum errore, ? sit ? animus flit S'iM se ilia stire jpersiiaserit q\ti"
quisqua/nitanto
3
inftatm
122
:
Ten"nmme
Acad.
ii. 39,
Latent
Acad.
ii. 42 ;
48, 147.
154
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
cannot avoid fluctuadiscover, presently tion in replyingto them; soon yet we perceive that here he is far from admitting the same tion justificato doubt in the purely theoretical as sphere. "What he occasionally ing says in his discussions concernthe Laws, that he does not intend to examine
as
we
shall
Academy,1 he seems rule in his moral philosophy; to have made a general of his writings this subject for in none does he pay on which he himself any regard to the considerations the doubt raised ; but as soon had previously in as of the Academy has had space to express the enquiries treated of the highestgood and duties 2 are itself, discussions in a wholly dogmatic tone, in the moral without time fixed plan* though at the same any therewith also find our In connection we sopher philobringingforward opinionsabout (rod and the human thing somesoul, which are manifestly for him than uncertain more conjectures, though even ledge. here he despairs of absolute certainty of knowlowing He constantly says that he is merely folprobability and expressing his own sonal peropinion.3 But that he was reallya consistent
of the
new
"
Legg. i. 13, 39
autem
Perturbaomniwn
maxime
mimes
reri
simile
natura at
est
et
qiio
tricem
rentm
harivni
duce
esse
venimits,
the conclu:
Aeademiam
et
Jiano Nam
. .
ab si
and
Areesila
exoremus
recentem,
of the
invaserit
in
nimias ego
non
ed"t ruinas.
Quam guidem
submovere
writatis
tur 7:
esse
mdereTuso.
iv.
ylacare
audeo.
2
cwpwt
4,
Sed
Proof
of this will
presently
:
sentit
nos
. .
be
8
given.
So .ZV. D. i. 1, 2
Quod
maxime
defendat
156
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
human know no doubt, mistrusts philosopher, to be the and holds greateror less probability ledge, to himself highestthingattainable ; but he reserves the power of making an exceptionto this rule in all the
cases
where
a more
pressing moral
confident with
or
mental
necessity
demands
Practical
more
This
tions
of
so
practical questhe
more
has,however,
Cicero
much
because, according to his view, the significance, is exclusively contained whole problem of philosophy
in them.
knowledge is a that it secures and further, good in and for itself, the purest and highest enjoyment ; * and though he includes physics in this admission,2yet expressly but its effects on life appear not knowledge itself, of philosophicenquiry. aim to him the ultimate Though
he
admits
that
Knowledge completes itself only in action ; action than knowledge ; 3 the a higher value has,therefore, enquiry concerning the highest good is the most the whole of and determines important of all enquiries, 4 is that of Socrates, the best philosophy : philosophy lie which does not trouble itself with thingswhich beyond our sphere of vision,and, being convinced of the uncertainty of human knowledge, applies itself entirely to moral problems.5 The proper aim
1
Fin. i. 7, 25 ; Tusc.
v.
24 $g. ;
c.
21, 71.
4
following
Fin.
v.
6, 15
JECoc (sumtno
in
enim 'bono}
constitute
sunt
pliiloomnia,
ii.
41, 127 ; Tusc. v. iv. 5, 32; 3, 9; 24, 69; Fm. from Hortensius, ap. Fragm. Augustin. 3 Off.i. 43,
De
Acad.
ii.
sopMa
"c.
5
constituta
Acad. Tusc.
Trin.
xiv. 9.
c.
1,1;
;
153 ; cf.
9, 28
PHILOSOPHICAL
INCONSISTENCIES.
157
therefore, philosophy, may be attained In spite of the restriction of our knowledge: we know nothing
with
most to
of
CHAP.
TL
absolute
certainty ; but
we
know
that which
is
as we important with as much certainty require is here know lying it; scepticism merely the under-
base
upon
of
mode
of
which thought,
is founded
because useful; and this practically the practical best harmonised tendency towards of the Eoman with the disposition and the statesman, Cicero was to the doctrine of more susceptible the Cameades than he would
otherwise
have
been
cause be-
purely theoretical enquiriesalready appeared and worthless to him he abandons transcendental, also the scientific proof of their impossibility ; but interests come his practical in contact as as soon
with
content
doubt
he
makes with
a
retreat, and
bad
would
rather
admit
himself
than expedient,
of
the
Inevitable
consequences
his
own
sceptical
to
statements.
If
our
we
whence
we
are
derive
His eclec-
positiveconvictions,we have alreadybeen told ticim" that the probable is best discovered parison by the comof different views : the positive and testing in Cicero's scepticism is that eclecticism, element shall presentlyhave an which we opportunity of in order But to decide beexamining further.1
1
It will
33
Tit
giMem
me"um
tabellis
et
natis
agis
obsigtestificarls
Academia
mat/nam id
licen-
tiam liceat
dat,
lit
maxime quodcunque,
Quid dixerim aliquanda aut s"ripserim. Cum aliis isto modo, qui legibus impositisdispictant ;
nositidiem que
nostros
occurred probabile
nostrojvre
v.
virimus
guodevn-
defendere.
Tusc.
11,
158
ECLECTICISM.
we opinions, opposite
our
CHAP,
T[-
tween
must
as
have
the
standard
of decision in
consists
hands,
and
philosophic enquiry
proving of different views, such a standard must be already given before every scientific then to be directly Two thingsseem investigation.
in this very
present:
of
many "not
the evidence
of the
the
senses
and
the evidence
consciousness.
Even
in first,
spite of
senses,
his is
despisedby Cicero
to
; he must
says that
make
be
and
contrary
action
nature,
and
conviction
those
us
victions con-
which
force
themselves
assurance
upon
with
the
the greatestprobability,
of
l
the
senses reason
occupiesone
he
of the foremost
places ;
for this
employs sensible evidence as an example of the ings highestcertainty; 2 and he himself in all his writto experience and historical generally appeals
matters
of
fact.
In
accordance
is forced
with
to
his
whole
tendency, however,
stress
us
he
lay the
external
chief
to
on
the
other
side, on
the witness
to the
internal
belongs not
even
but
to the
world, and
in his ethical
doctrine
vercumt,
]
1
id
dicimus;
:
ttaqiie
risum
ut
sit
viswn iilla re
illud
pro'babile
-
liberi. Tale
ut ut
neque
impeditum
III. i. 515 enim robore est
e saoso
Acad.
ii. 31, 99
me, awtem
cnraa-Tov,
s#.)
nullwm,
pevceptioconcontra niUl
. . .
moreMtur.
Habet
movetur
probatlo, sculptus
natiuram
dolatus.
:
corpus,
liabet animum
movetur
senw-
esset,si probaMte
esset, et
eversio.
mente,
sequitur oninis
Itaque
eimi
vita
Ms:
"c.
-ut
fft
senzibus
probanda
res
Quacunque
aliter
-
sie [sa/pientewi]
attinget,
LOG.
37, 119.
INNATE
KNOWLEDGE.
159
lie who
throughoutallies himself
have
made
over
with
of
those the
philosophers CHAP.
external and
VI*
independence
their watchword. All our sensuality conviction, therefore, accordingto Cicero, depends
dominion in the last resort upon direct internal
certainty, upon
the natural
and this
in
feelingfor truth,or
gained
so
innate
knowledge ;
an
Doctrine
theory which
the
was
important
Christian
in-
ff
fluence
sophy, philo-
he
l for definitely;
and
with
shown
that
of
taught
cence reminis-
be awakened fixed ;
we
by methodical
attain
to
study, and
their
content
the
according to
;
svvoiai
beyond proof, principles that are duction Aristotle, by the scientific road of in-
of Epicurus and the xowal TTpokrj^r^s from of the Stoics are perience. exonly abstracted the Here
on
the
contrary there
to
is
an
tion asser-
of
and
knowledge
antecedent
all
experience
concerning the most important inborn in us, of morality are The truths. germs if they could undisturbed, develop themselves be unnecessary; would science only through the
science, and
of perversion
our
natural
of
1
technical
Is
training to
that have how
now
The
consciousseniina
si
It
indeed, possible,
herein
; but cannot
ingeniis nostris
mrtutum;
natura
innata,
vitam-
he
followed
far this is be Sunt
ascer-
qucB
ad
adokscere
nos Iiceret,ip8"
beatam
;
case
$"rduceret
only
the and
tained.
Tusc. iii.
1,
2:
enim
conscioushabits
160
ECLECTICISM.
GHAP. YI-
ness
of
right
it.1
a
is
subsequently a
obscures
implanted tendency to
has
in
man
by
nature
evil is formed
our
which
endowed
spiritnot
the any
only
with
fundamental
instruction, as
originaldowry
innate reason,
men
2
it is
only
the
development
on
of
us
these
:
notions
which
is incumbent
are
with
those
to
impulses
moral
directlygiven
with
which
prompt
and
munity com-
others
the
of investigation
truth.3
The
essence
of moral
activity may,
from the
therefore, be
of
deduced
not men,
merely
but
intuition
guished distin-
also from
the universal
from any
ness, conscious-
with
definition
to in
to
of ideas ; the
the
individual will
still stands
nature, the
him
:
more
keenly
from
in
a
this be what
rests
reflected
we
learn Belief
children
is
according
the
same
nature.4
false and
1
the
doctrine
Deity
nostrum
upon
opinions makes
science necessary. i. 13, 33 : hoc
Legg.
omni
Atque
Tioc
in
nihil amplius. Itaque cJioavit, est (quod nostrum, dico3 artis esf), ad ea principia quat accepimus consequentia exquiquod sit id quoad volumus rere, effectum.
ratio
Fin.
Eademque
Jwniimim
. .
eadeni
natura
homini
:
Fin.
v.
21, 59
talem
(Natura
Jiocpice
Further
4
mini)
omnem
dedit
mentem"
positions is easily to
LOG. cit. 14, 45
sit
non :
virtutem
acclpereposset,
doctrina
re rum
[Honestum~]
quale
qua
.
tarn
sum
.
usiis
et
quasi
in
instituit
.
quawi
communi
et
indusrit virtutem
ea
giue
vir-
judieio atque
studiis
same
'tanquawi elementa
Sed
ttctis.
ipsam
in-
CRITERION
OF
TRUTH.
161
basis
by
virtue
of the
human
CHAP. ^
God, the
with
consciousness
of Grod is
:
immediatelygiven
only to
remember
self-consciousness
own
man
has
origin in order to be led to his Creator.1 Nature, therefore, herself instructs us concerning of God,2 and the strongest argument the existence
his
for this
in
must
truth
all
which
without
an
The these
soul must
likewise
we are
belong to
convinced
same
truths, of which
consent
4
through universal
Cicero
Indicant
1
and
in
the
way will
seems
to presuppose
in
the
id
enhn
freedom
vltioso here
mos
of the
more
pueri
quibus
Animum Deo
;
lit in
Jierisolet
distinction
natura speculis
cernitur.
:
. . .
(observe
between
omnes ram rero esc
the and
esse
esse
rere
Legg. i. 8, 24 ingeneratum
rel
natura,):
et natu-
quo
cum
tamen
Tim
agnatio
rel genus
nolis rel
divinam
ceelestibus
stirps
tot
Itaque ex
est
consensus
non
imtitutis
eomenslo
nature
animal kabeat
opinwestconjirmata.nonlegi'bus.
Omni
(minium autem
quod
Dei. gens
hi
re
notitiainaliquam
inliominibusnulla
Ijtsisgue
est neque
gentium
est
lex
putanda
consensus
also
s?^.note
makes
else-
deceat,
Ex
tarn^n
where
Academic this
Jiabendum,
cltur unde
ac
illud, ut is
ortus ?wscat.
gui
2
effi- philosopher (3".D. i. 23, agnoscat Deum, the consensus sit quasi recsorquo
claim
proof
1) from
is
62 ; iii.4, 1
gentium
month
which the
detur
put
cnrean
in
the
as
of the
as
BpiStoic
TUSG.
natura-
well
{N.
he
D.
i. 16, 43 is
1, 2.
3
implies here
doubt
(i,23,
TUSG.
hoc
esse
Flmum-
placed beyond
mum
Deos
gens tern
non
other
express
by works,
Ms
tarn
omnium mentein
opinion
the
sub-
sit immanis,
eujus
Deorum
ject.
4
inibuerit
opinio.
sentiwnt;
Fuse.
i. 12 sq. ; 15, 35
sq.
Hiilti dc DUs
pra/ca
162
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
VI.
simply as
direct
an
internal well
as
:
matter
of fact.1
In
wordy
on
as philosophy,
is here morality,
founded
conscionsness
this is the
fixed
point from
which
the
to which
it returns.
The
material
results of Cicero's
philosophyhave
be therefore can only nothing distinctive, and shortlydiscussed in this place. As to the chief sciences,dialectic is regarded merely in philosophic In the the sceptical manner already mentioned. and of physics,theological domain psychological alone have any value for Cicero ; questions enquiries for instance, of other kinds concerning the number
"
of the
elements, whether
the material and upon
there
are
four
or
five ;
cerning con-
"
are
only touched
a
historical notices^
sceptical comparison of different doctrines. In the chief thing is the estimation of this philosopher, I commence. With ethics. ethics, therefore, his ethical principles, Cicero develops as, indeed^ his whole of doctrine,in the criticism of philosophic ethics in the Epicurean,Stoic, the four contemporary theories, Ms philosophy. Academic, and Peripatetic. Of these four systems, the first alone. himself to he opposes definitely to him The Epicurean doctrine of pleasureappears the natural to contradict so destiny and strikingly
or
in
ence
natural
necessities and
sciousness con-
of moral
more
have
no
need
to enter
with which
De
he
c.
opposes
Fato,
164
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, YI
bability of
that But
even
time
without
regard
he
seems
to
conse-
qnences.1
in this
for himself
unable
discussion
to find any
fixed
standpoint. So
agree
"
far, indeed,as
in
the statements
the
universal
in
of principles the
nature, and
unconditional
according to of appreciation
as soon as
virtue,he
the roads follow. the Stoic
to
is
quite sure
of himself; 2 but
no
divergehe
The ethics nobler
knows
longerwhich
; it
he shall
severityof
appears
his
admiration
regard virtue as sufficient for the good between happinessand not to distinguish than to assent to the oppositeview the useful, and sion he finds the Stoics' admisof the Peripatetics;3 of the affections weak, and their moral ciples prinis faulty in its hazardous, since that which should not merely be nature, like the affections, regardedas a help to virtue, restricted, or, still less, He but wholly eradicated.4 reproachesthem with the inconsistencyof assuming goods with which the
him
happy
endure
man
may
and dispense,
evils which
he
may
; and
thus
as
of the
from
more
virtuous
the than
the nobler
life that is a perfectand complete life, to follow therefore, complete.5 He prefers, of thought, to call the wise man mode
all
happy
1
under
circumstances,even
p. ; sru/pra,
in
the
bull
of
Tuso.
v.
11, 33
Bitter,iv.
*
157, 1. 2 Acad.
3
Tusc.
,
Tuso.
1,
1 ;
25,
71 ;
Off.
88 ; cf 5 Fint
134 sgg., 157 sq$. iv. 18 8#$. ; Off.i. 25, Acad. i. 10, 35, 38.
v.
27
*q. ; Two.
v.
8-
the
following,
12,
15
SQ.
ETHICS
OF
THE
STOICS.
165
Phalaris
he
desires
to
adopt, at
Paradoxes.2
this
so
any
rate
tenta-
CHAP.
'
tively,the
we
famous
more
Stoic
enquire
our
closely into
not
clear that
as we man
is philosopher
about
might
of himself
for
men
have the
from
much
too
man
exalted is not
not
they are,
found
in of
morality does
wise alike
admit
being
transferred that
daily life;4 he
are
cannot
possibly
alTthe
is
no
allow
all the
happy, and
that there hardened
But
unwise
difference in value
and
can
wickedness
the
most
offence.5
he believes he
show
that the
of the severity
Stoics is not
that it contradicted
if
the
first
principleis
life
among
the
also to be
from
nature are things according to human dom counted sensible well-being, health, free-
pain,
is
to not
and
to
an
untroubled
mind
"
even
pleasure
be
wholly despised.
to
To
live
according
These
nature
is not
to
nature, but
rather
encourage
our
it.G
arguments
the
draw side
eclectic
so philosopher
strongly to
declares himself
1 2 3 4 5
to be
Tusc. Lai.
v.
26.
Fin.
Iv.
11-15
Cato, 14,
of De
Paradoxa.
5, 18 ; cf. Off. iii.4, 16. Fin. Iv. 9, 21. Fin. Iv. 9, 21 ; 19, 55 ; 28,
Finibus,
who
It Is
Cicero
77 *#. Cf.
Off.I. 8.
27.
166
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
^'
the
consideration
of his
own
nesses, weak-
human
laxer
weaknesses
clines generally,in-
him the
thought of
the
majesty of
him
for
to
himself
therefore
can
his
no
that it
exercise
the
even
must
be
to assigned
than
to
all else.2
in
It would any
be
new
difficult to discover
these propositions
the Ciceronian and in principle, other characteristic than that ethics generally any the of an eclectic and popular philosopher ; for even viz. that with Eitter which trait on lays stress,3 the honourable Cicero, Qionestum)takes the placeof the beautiful he Greeks and (/eaXoz/) that in connection
value
to
mere
ascribes
greater
this is
glory
did, even
partlya
difference
having no influence on the content of the language, to the moral principle ; and partlyit is a concession Eoman which, being devoid of any scientific spirit, foundation,can only be regardedas a further proof
of the
uncertainty of Cicero's
All the less
reason
manner
of
to
ing. philosophisfurther
is there
enter
into
already been
on
many
of his remarks
too
these
with
show
1 2
little connection
political ciples prindone.4 Strikingas be, they subjects may definite philosophic
162 sqg. d. 0r. III. i. p. 276
Tuso.
1, 3. Off.iii. 3, 11.
v.
3 4
TV. PHI.
*".
THEOLOGY.
167
principlesto
importance
theories
nature in
allow the
us
to
attribute
of
to
them
any His
_____
CHAP.
history
the
philosophy.
concerning
of the
Deity and the essential soul must, however, be shortly tioned. men-
The
pears
belief in
to
our
ffi*
ieo
w*
merely by
moral and
immediate
consciousness, but
Without
all and justice,
also
by
"thinks, truth
life would
for
social
be the
end.1
of he
But
the
are
ments argu-
existence
God
entirely
the the
its
to
repudiated by
criticism of
him,
and
brings
meets
forward
argument teleological
the Stoic the
in
in especially,
spite
it In
of in
Academy
which
form,2 with
nature
fall conviction.3
regard
mouth
of
God, Cicero
which he
is,no
doubt,
that
in earnest of
can
the
remark
places in the
his be
so
Academic asserted
far
as
viz. philosopher,
nothing
it ; 4
with the
about perfectcertainty,
but,
probable
venture to
may
be
determined, he
not
thinks
he may
of God5
presuppose
only the
unity
but
also His
6 this,howspirituality ;
i. 2, 4; cf. ii.61,153. 7, 22 ; Samn. Seip.(Rep. vi. 17) (N. D. iii. 2, 5; Legg. 3, B et pass. 6 I. 27, 66: Tuse. Nee on vero ii. 7, 15) the observations a the political necessity of relig- Deifs ipse qui intelligitur nobis olio modo ion. iaitelllgi patest,
1
N.
D.
Hence
N.
D.
Dirin. D.
nisi i. iii.
mens
solirta
queedam
omni
et
28 sg. 4 ^
con-
sentiens
40, 95.
5
TitSG. i. 23 ; 27 ;
Legg.
i.
ipsague pradita, vtwtu sempiterno. Jfap. vi, 17, 8 ; Legg. ii. 4, 10, "c.
168
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
apprehend in a very strict sense,. 1 that the for he admits the possibility Divine Spirit be conceived, according to the Stoic view, as may air or fire ; or with Aristotle, far as Cicero understood so in the dream of him,2 as sethereal essence: the supreme heaven, in agreement with this Scipio, misconception of Aristotle is declared to be itself the highestgod.3 But this closer definition of the for value conception of Deity had scarcelymuch
ever,
he does not
Cicero himself.
is of far
For
him
the
belief
in Providence
philosopher.4 from the practical Since he chiefly regardsreligion of it is in his point of view, the whole significance opinioncomprehended in a belief in a divine government and morals of the world : 5 the law of justice
this to
.
he allows
even
is for him
wisdom.8' world-ruling this standpointonly a negative or external From to the popularreligion, relation was possible unless,, of the Stoic orthodoxy indeed, the violent methods Cicero desiresto be followed ; when, therefore, were that the
existingreligionand
c.
even
the
existing
1 3
Tusc.
I. 26, 65 ; cf.
29. 1 13,
for
face in
we
are
not
of
so
many
N.
explanations(vide JV. D. iii.40),. identifying Cicero's own opinion with that here brought
forward.
5
Cicero
Many
Providence,
Natural
on
Cicero I
treats
opposed
God the but
the
to
one
quoted by Eoihner,
p. 199.
Divine, setting
the
without Nature, and, on other,Nature without God; Legg. i. 7 : iii. 1, 3. * I cannot with this, Legg. ii.4, 8. agree
VIEWS
OF
HUMAN
NATUME.
189
in the
State,he
is
CHAP. ^"
considerations ; ] speaking entirely from political he not only makes no personally, attempt to justify of the polytheism and its myths after the manner
Stoics, but
above the
he
shows
by many
utterances,and,
to which
he
subjects
popular
De
belief
in and
Natura book
from
Deorum;
Divinaiione, how
with
the national
is consistent
Eeverenee religion.
a
Deity,
the
which
true
view to be
of nature, and
coincides
with
true
is morality, be
required;
for the
maintained
good
other
in
a
on superstition,
2
"
the
be
torn
is Cicero's
such,
of faith. Cicero's of
With
the
we
belief have
God, accordingto
seen,
view,
the nected. with
as
already
the
is
conviction
dignity of
This upon him
human
conviction inner
on
nature also
intimatelyconfar
moral
more
depends
experience and
any
nature
self-
consciousness
than
the consider
of
reason
essential
number
of
the
soul.
If
we
the
our
of
our
endowments,
shall become
the
ness lofti-
confers upon
conscious
of
our
higher
nature
and
descent.3
Accordingly
6h-. III. i. p.
JV: D. iiL 2, 5 ; Legg. ii.7 s$. ; ii.12, 28 ; 33, 70 ; 13, 32 ; DM*, 72, 148. 2 ii.72, 148 Sf[. Dimn, ; N. D.
1
it 28, 71
(Phil. d.
7
311, 1).
3
1*00. I.
17, 8.
*$., 22 sq. ;
Rep.
vt
170
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
with
soul
the
as an
Stoic
and
Platonic
of
emanation
the
of
to
himself troubling
or
to
define
the the
as
relation
between
this
supernaturalorigin of
of origin the
nature
soul, and
he
the
material about
the
body.
of
But,
so
is uncertain
God,
that
he
the
expresses
himself
tatingly hesihis
an
about
inclination
of
soul,
to
unmistakablytends
substance,or,
the
at any
though explain it as
a
and
immaterial
rate, as
substance
not
terrestrial matter,2 he
that possibility
will
it consists
fire; it
that
is
only
the
coarser
materialityof
in
the
body
at
he The
denies unconditionally
respect to
defends
the soul.3
immortality
the
of the soul he
on length,partly
and
universal
Platonic
arguments
is
if he
also
tries
to
silence
supposing
that
souls
perish
of the would
death,6 this
and
Academician
Fuse. i. 27
terris
AnimowmmtUa inveniri
Two* Tuso.
i. 27;
29, 70.
60
:
in
"c.
origo
cit.
%"otest,
ma-
LOG.
:
i. 25, certeneceordisnec
s
Non
est
sangidnis nee
Anima,
8, 24 mani,
JZxstitisse serendi
yuandavi
generis
in
aiictum
cerelri
sit animus
nee
atomorwn.
turitatem
Iwt-
qiiod sparswn.
divino
mnnere.
terras sit
atqiiesatum
animorum
ignisveneseio; nee rne fateri me nescire pvdet^ tft istos, 29,70. l.c.2Q,65; guodnesciam;
4
Cunigue
homines
e
Tuse.
i. 12
sgg.
; L"%1.
c.
4 ;
Cato, c.
5
smipserint, giice genere f rag ilia essent et cadiica,, a)ii~ tamen a mum, esse 'ingen"ratum,
Deo. Of.
21 sqq. Tusc. i. 22
sqq. ;
;
JS^A vi.
^
Goto, 21,
77.
J$p. act
172
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
Yet
a
the
direction philosophical
l
by
so
famoussarily neces-
scholar
and
so
well
known
an
must
have Cicero
assures
been
influential.
of in
direction
was,
us,2 that
had
attended
on
Antiochus, whose
Athens
3
tures lec-
Varro in
and
Varro
his
treatise
gather
in
from
sense
the
of
Antiochus.5
The
sole
aim
of
and
he here tells us, is the happiness of philosophy, of doctrine distinctions man ; consequently those alone to be the schools of philosophy are among
considered of
1
important which relate to the definition is the the highest good.6 Great, therefore, as
Romanorum, Ad he Ad
tore et
3
Doctissimifs
again
very
Jffelv. 8, 1 ; Hojustly,mr
i. 3, 12 ; 1, 1, 3 ,8 j August. Civ.
JD. xix.
3, 2
Varro
asserit, auc*
(Quintal, x. 1, 95. Cicero (Acad. Fr. 36). says of him (ap.Augustine, Civ. omnium D. vi. 2), Homine facile
eruditissimus
acutissivno et sine
suo.
4 5
xix. 1-3.
what
with of In
follows, the
to
ulla duMta-
account
Antiochus
p. 94. be to i. 2, 4 made
regard
to
observed
is sc[C[.-)
that Cic.
later
refertus that
of
as
in
book, according
respect
has
to
matters
as
fact
he
achieved
as
a
much
Cicero illam
\
expositions
use
of
Cicero
one
did
2
stylist. Mrgo
mnt
of, only
cit.
of which of Varro.
is
put
6
into
the mouth
Varrmern
LOG
1, 3
transferamus.
I the the what
e.
JEtenim 25. of In
existimat
tarn
esse
a
ullam
QUGB 19; 1.
i
is
c.
Varro's
distet
mouth
is
placed, as
edition from
doctrine
second
we know, Antiochus, in
habeat
rum.
fines
causa
maloest
Quandoquidem
ut
nulla
of
the
AcaVide
nisi
demica
(Acad. is quoted
i. 4; s^.).
"beatus sit
est
autem gi.iod
Antiochus,
facit,ipse est
nisi
pfiandi,
qiiat
cum ex
eontineantur
materia, ea, "c. effeetio,
et effectimie
finisT)oni: %"Jviloso-
et format gritamfingit
THE
HIGHEST
GOOD.
number
indeed sects Yarro, sometimes possible grounds of distinction, adopting very superficial all fewer than 288 ! enumerates no they may chief classes,if putting aside to a few be reduced relate to the conception of the not does all that
of
" "
CHAP.
'
good highest
But first
we
confine ourselves
concerns
to the
main
this
pends thing accordingto nature/ on which again deand therefore its relation to all included herein, freedom
nature
from to be
pain.
of
Is
the
sake
of virtue,
or
virtue
or
sis etjiwi*
for their
is
Yarro,
the
iunda-
In
their
derivation, Yarro
:
There
are, he says, four natural objects sence of desire : sensual pleasure,abtion of pain, the combina-
merely Academy.
of them
Since,
can
moreover,
adopt
manner
the
ordinary, or the
of
a
these
two,
which
yrvma include all beside these of natural advantages other the of Each and soul body.
four added
can
fourth, the
and, as nature,
Cynic,
et
(k-aMtus
result of
in
consuetudo}
sections, regard
the theoretical
be desired
to
for the
sake
be had
of virtue
(the excellence
nature
super-
the practical (negotlo(otlosus), life of to or a compounded m$\ this treble must ber, numwe both, and thus this
we
may
be
or
desired both
may
for
be
its
own
arrive
at
sake,
288.)
2
That
case
with
the named
majority
by Mm,
1.
c.
divisions himself
each
own
of
them
or
shows,
3
3,
c.
2, beginning.
merely
for that four
are
of others. The
twentyinto
one
The
jynma
-nature
=
TiMturce, ]m,mira
ffenia 309,1;
irfwra
Kara,
Q"ffiv (of.Phil,
257,2;
d. Gr. HI.
i. p.
pursue
their
end
true,
253, 1).
174
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP, VL
mental
questionof
back
to
all
It, he goes
is
only on this basis we can decide what is the is neither But man body highestgood for man. but consists of both soul exclusively, together. nor His highestgood must, therefore, consist of goods
of the
body
as
well
as
goods
of
the
soul ; and
he
desire for himself the first things must consequently But the highest and virtue.2 to nature according of these goods is virtue, the ait of life acquired by
instruction.3
As
it includes
which
is
present before
desires all for
of virtue
in
"
virtue
sake, and
good, it enjoysalso all other goods,and ascribes to each the value belonging to it according to its does not hesitate, relation to the others ; but equally
on
so
it must
be,
the how
do
greater. "When
many
not
virtue
matter
other
kinds
be, they
not
profittheir
is
goods,because he makes a bad use of them. of the bodily and of virtue and In the possession mental advantages conditioning it,lies happiness; virtue other goods with which this increases when added ; it is perfected are in itself could dispense,
his
1 2
Loc. C.
tit.
c.
is
an
inaccuracy
ascribe
which
we
3, 1.
in
gri^a,
has natural
must
to Yarro
himself,
natura
which
and
3
previously
included
of advantages and dispositions with here identified mind, is the totalityof corporealgoods,
inserit
velut
arteim
ars
vivendi
"
virtus, i. e. I. c.
agendce
HAPPINESS.
175
when
and
all
goods of
to
soul and
complete.1
for
But
and sociability,
body
found
CHAP. yi'
wishes
sakes the
same
goods as
not
itself ; and
must disposition
extend
only to
the
family and
state
to
which
to
each
man
belongs,
realisation
and
the whole
Its
world,heaven
external
is to be
sought neither in the theoretical nor in the life as such, but in the combination of the practical But it must be absolutely of its principle two. sure : the principles concerninggoods and evils must not be considered merely probableby us as by the philosophers
of the
Academy, they
the
doctrine like
must
be the
able. unquestion-
Academy his master which Yarro, Antiochus, professes.3 find no remarkable In this discussion we philosophic what and no new : it contains peculiarity thoughts, belongsto Yarro himself in the views of Antiochus
transmitted
acuteness
This
is
of
old
by
of
at
him
is
characterised
nor
neither
by
at
judgment
least
see
by vivacity of style.
Yarro had
arrived and reflection,
But
we
can
that
these
1
views
by his
awn
that
further
the
on).
Hcee
virtute
ris
sima
2
(c. 3, 1,
Varro with but the
c.
is therefore
one
nmyotest
he deduces from it the ism; belong, as feel is afterwards can explained, life, proposition that man at home everywhere: memory), fruitur, beata, himself reason,
(to
these
esse
sine
allis, exile, he says, (ap. Helv. 8, 1) is not in evil, %uod qiiooumgue rel ullis vel pluribus, leatior : eadewi -ut natitra, omnibus, rerum si autem gworsus
didtur
:
si
vero
et
Ad
an
qmtnis
esse
virtus
yotest,
utendum
owmino
fto-iium
desit
est.
3
vel
beatiscoryoris,
Aug. L
tf.
2.
176
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
whole
"
tendency
of it
to
of
Antiochus
which
to
corresponded
must
to
mended recom-
his
i
-
way
thinking:that
him the
to
have
and
his
countrymen,
was
no chiefly
doubt
and
that
regard
in
the necessities
of life which
is
prominent
its theories
constituents of the
value of them. But Chus
t0
various
relative
the
greater the
by
Antio-
the less can wonder we doctrine"1 other quesif Varro approached it in regard to some tion than his If in he ethics.2 still more closely is breathed in the soul to be air which explained in in the breast, and warmed through the mouth the Stoic order
to
through the
body,3
he allied himself with by reducingit to the Pneuma to which also is Antiochus the Stoic materialism, no stranger.4 He further discriminated with the three gradationsand forms Stoics the well-known
of
soul-life.5 of
But
his
connection
with
In or,
the
Stoic
is theology
importance. especial
universe
as
agreement
more
with
it,he
explained the
cisely, pre-
the
\ Cf.
-
sup. p
92.
to
m(,ne,
temperate
in
v-
corde,difVarro
is L
"*
He
himself, according
the
fusus
Lat"
corpus.
:
'
59
2, 8) had
.
animalism
anima
*
ignis
auk
ac
Vide
Lactant.
O^f.D.17:
Varro
see
Augustinef Civ.
followingnote
p. 95 saa
D.
vii
2
*
THEOLOGY.
177
gods
of
are
shipped wor-
CHAP. VI.
to
the
genii and
he
drew
a
heroes.1
marked
But,
like Panaatius
and
Scsevola,
and if
distinction and
between
natural
mythical philosophical,
1
civil
and theology,2
and
water
Varro
antur
D.
iv. 31
esset
esse
mit/i-
soli el mde-
heavens
sether and
quid
eum
tone
and
Deus,
animam dum
vii. 6 ergo
\_quas~\omnts
esse acre
quatuor
rat
Cartes aninturum
"ftJiere et
at
ph'tms^ i n,
u?n,
imma-rfali
in
Varro
e$$e
Deinn
. .
se
terra
arbitrari
.
animam
mundi
mundum
far
as
to
Jiwic
:
ipsum
sit ab
ex
moon,
et
extend
between
esse
Deum
corpora
Deum
ex
gods; region
atiimas
this
et rocari
the
ess"
of
.
.
clouds
.
aereas
animo
did
lares
c. :
animo 23
Also
Jteroas et in Z. c.
can
"be
corpore.
in the Dii
Loc. book
eit.
vii.
intended)
Tiabens
in
calls
Jupiter,
Deus
(Yarro
the animce
concerning
potextatem
11, and
to
c.
qitibusallqitidJft
c.
causa/rum, in mwndo
13, he
priates approfrom
in saque not lira, those discussed Phil d. 6-V. III. i. 192 : Nature, the irrational soul, and reason.
himself have
(for Augustine
this
must
taken
Hand
gartem
(their rational
diclt fj.oj/LKbv) autem genium tem
. .
.
of Soranus him) the verses in which n. end), 74, (sup. p. progenitor Jupiter is called
Deujn,
vocari.
itt
in
noUs
aitam
genltrixque
28 the he derives from active Juno female
or
Defim
and
in
c.
JSsse
err
the male
ties divini-
in mundo tit
ossa,
lapides act
iingites
heaven
Dei.
Solem
vero,
lunam,
stellas, qitfs
sent it,
divinities
as
from
sentimiis
sensus
essa
qiiibusyueipse
the
passiveprinciple,
denotes That either the
ejus.
esse
JEtliera parro
:
while
as
Minerva
animwm
ejus
in
ex
eujusvi
ipsam
makes in
prototypes.
or
qitce into
pervenit
astro,
are propositions
directly
Stoicism,
qiioq'ue facere
Deos
eat
(it qiwd
inde
Stoic,
is evident
Deam
Telperlarly Simi-
quod
mare esse
antem
atque
oceamtm^
d. Gr. IH. i. p. 138 315 6 146, sqq. 325. ; sqq. ; 2 Aug. Z. c. vi. 5 : Tria genera
in Phil.
Deiim, in
Neptunim..
6,the world
dicit the
N
esse
(in
the
last books
"x
of
. . .
c.
is divided
cf. Antiquities,
3)
178
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
YI.
the absurd
mythology of
and
the
he gods,1 blame
in
did not
conceal
had
also much
to
clared de: for example, he public religion that the worship of images was defilement a of the true worship of (rod ; that,for his part, the doctrine of the Deity would and philosophic suffice,3 that he regarded the religion of the State merely civil institution, as a which, in the interest of the commonwealth, must make the most important concessions
2
the
to the weakness
of the masses.4
In
there
is
as
the
mythicon
The third
is
ap-
tribuuntur, qua:
Jwmin"m tissimum
2
non
modo
in
in
pellari,alterum,
civile.
sed
etiam
hominem
cit. iv. 31. the
cadere
poets, the
the In that the
second
LOG.
'The
puli}.
much and
first
to
Komans,'
without hue Dii
tetur
opposed
the
(vide
nature
following note)
"
dignityof the Deity ; to the second belong 2Hi qui sint, ubi, quod genus, quale, a qiioan a tern/pore sempiterno ex an fuerint ; igne sint ut credit Heraclitus, an ess
forma
ita
eos
humana
delectari
Deos
hu*
nam
fecerunt,
manis
3
nitmeris atomis
ut ut
ex
Sic
pa-
found
natures
in
aures.
potius formula Deos nominaque eorwn sefuisse dedieaturutn. 4 That he regarded the religion
I. c. vi. 4, where Varro says, if he had to treat de omni natura Deorum, he would first have to of the
as
Loc.
cit.
ut
note)
enim,
with
the
In
ex
hoc
ca-
of the
political
from
estt
Deus
pite alius exfemore sit alius ex guttis sanguinis natus ; in hoc, ut Mifurati sint, ut adulteraspeak
verint,
ut
homini
Diis
men
; but
denique in
at-
with
the
of do he
180
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
VII.
THE
SCHOOL
OF
THE
SEXTII.
CHAP.
THE
among
F.
School
"f
^f.
school.
independent of the contemporary Greek its achievements nor were so important, philosophy,
was
History of
tUe
long Its founder,Quintus Sextius, duration. was a Eoman, later contemporary of Q" g00(^fam-Qy? a somewhat in career Augustus,1who had rejecteda political order to devote himself whollyto philosophy.2After
as or
to obtain
for it any
extensive
influence
Sen. JSjy. 98, 13 : Honores it a pater Sextius rejpj)ulit qm deberet natuSy tit remp/ul)Uca"ni
1
,
quoted by Ott,
indicate 7 ; refer been
or
p. 2, 10, rather contrary. Jfy). 59, 64, 2 sift. ; De Ira, ii. 36, 1, the treatise. either written taken In
an
latwti
non
ctawni occurred
divo As
at
recepit.
De
have
work
have 43
in have old
from
JSp.73,
from. of after
12, may
such the
2
Ej). 108,
account
des
17, Seneca
gives
of he the
must
what some-
be
doctrines
as
Sextius,
says. Virt. kv
placed in
Chron. dates the
at
zu
earlier. the
70 B.C. or When
Sotion,
and 77:
himself
in
Eusebius,
Vide Plut.
preceding note,
5, p.
rbv
Prof,
Pythagorean
that
our
philosopher
is too late That
'
rfjTrJ-
period, he
Sextius
was
if
Seneca
personally
; the
quainted ac,
with
Sextius
o\.lyov
e/c
js
not
probable
passages
rivos
MEMBERS
OF
TMJS
SCHOOL.
181
his death
Ms
of the
son
appears
to
have
undertaken
its
the
we
CHAP. VII.
guidance
school.1
of
Among
been
adherents
find mention
of Sotion
Alexandria,whose
in his
3
astic enthusi;
2
Seneca disciple
had
earlyyouth
It
For this the
Lucius
Crassitius
Tarentum,4
This
and
Fabianus
from
in Piin.
Papirius*5
Tac. and
name,
became,
the tinction disSotion
same
transition
Ann. the
practicalactivityto philosophy
seems
to
be
referred
to
J\Tat. xviii. 28, 274. Pliny relates how Democritns enriched himself with his of Gr. his
and
ch. 'infra, of
traffic I.
766) gains to
Sextius
rations
"
shared
the theory that the Seneca, and not the the author of PeripatetiCjwas the treatise vcpl OPJTJS, Diels, Doxogr. 255 s$., rightly appeals
support
teacher
in it j and
he adds
sectatori'bus
;
to
the
not
that
he
the that
merely
himself
OPJTJS (ap. Stob. Flor'tl. 20, 53) mean Seneca, De Ira, ii. 10, 5. Also the repeated quotation of same he silenced of Seslius, De utterances Iraf
and him ii. 36, 1, points to this
3
blamed
to
source.
:
devoting
in his There of
a
QuintiL
s.
1, 124
multa, For
Scrips/it
Cornelius
non
similar
manner,
part
renounced
secutus,
sine
profits.
is no express this j but as the is universally described school of the Sextii
cultU' details
jiitore.
further
and
sician phyBern-
the the
hardy,
4
(see
grammarian,
had
for himself already won following note), and the elder siderable conSextius tinguished fame as a philosopher is disa as teacher,, from his son in Smyrna, when he by the especially addition of Pater dimissa, scJwla tranm.it (Sen. "Jp. repente 98, 13 ; 64, 2), it is extremely ad Quinti Septimii [1. Sextii'] Sueton. De probable. jsMlvsopM sectam. 2 Sen. Mp. 108, 17 sqg_.; 49, 2. Jllustr. Gr"mm. 18. The heard at which he This philosopher (of whom age Seneca, Hrevit. Vit. 10, 1 ; Ep* Sotion, Seneca designated by the word juvente, in Mp. 108 ; 11, 4 ; 40, 12 ; 100, 12, speaks in JEp. 49, by jpuer. It may, as of a deceased contemporary
5
therefore,have
20 A.D. This
occurred
date
in 18cf.
whom these
he
had
himself
a
known
to
is also
heard)
was,
according
man
by
passages,
of
excel-.
182
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VII.
applausewhich
years it
at
had
already long
since
died
out.1
with lost,
of
the
Fabianus.2
and of Sotion
character,non
ex
Ms
catlie-
Florilegiim. philosopMs, sed ex veris Moreover, a collection of maxims et antigids (JSremt.Vit. 10). His exists in the Latin translation also are lectures and expositions first was greatlypraised by Seneca (JEp. of Kufinus, which in quoted by Orig.e. Cels. xiii. 30, 40* 12; 58, 6; 100); and the with as designation 2e|Tou Ep. 100, 9, he is described is often used in regard yv"fji.ai, author to whom, an by Por" to style, phyry, Ad Mareellam, without only Cicero, Pollio, and of the writer, and be of Livius to preferred, mention are which there in is deficiencies a certain Syrian edition, though also Seneca him are admitted. ap. Lagarde,.4w#fe0fe"Syr. Lpz.
drariis
in the same says wrote he nearly
by Seneca, by Stobseus
also,
in the
place
as
that
on
1858.
(On
of
the this
two
Latin the
censions re-
much and
and
philosophy as
mentions IA~bri Artiiim
to
Cicero;
(I.
e.
he his The
editions, cf.
the which I
now
Gilclemeister
edition cite ;
recensiones
besides the
to
1)
preface to his
Civilmm. in
are
ectnres alluded
to
seem
have
which
Sententiarum
Grr"Gam
Bonn. esoJi.
Syriaeas c"Yijunc1873).
This lection, colcalled the
character.
sometimes
or
jv^ai
ridion, enchitime
was
Seneca,
Cantrovers.
Prcef."
sententicv,sometimes
and, since
also
use
of
Kufinus,
much named in
annuliis,
among
the
tians. Chris-
Its author
is sometimes
rhetoric. Some
to
of
writing, Seneca
utterances
is less of Sen.
partial. or
his
are
writers
in him
describe him
be
found
ap.
Marc.
23, 5
; JSrwit.
13, 9
1
more
Sextwrum,
roloris
cum
et
Homcml
sua,
secta
inter
initia
escwipetu ccepisset,
120 A.D). Of writers,many (#.#. Lasteyrie, Sentences de Sextvus* Par. 1842 ; and Mullach, Fraym. ii. 31 sg.) regarded the PUlos. recent maxims
as
(or Xystus,
about
the
work of the
of
more
three
philosophers
heathen
and philosopher,
one
something has
been
preserved especiallyof
two
DOCTRINES.
Whatever
can
be
deduced
from of the
his
these
ances utter-
CHAP YII.
respecting the
Sextii. discovers first Bitter
to
doctrine
serves school, *
own
(How
this On
Ott, 1.
do
not
c.
opinion
the other
edition, I
hand,
terated,
nevertheless untenable. In the
accer ana"
hypothesis is
5,
place
the
presupposition
Sextii
was tences, sen-
one
of
the
two
author
be
Christian
work
tion rehabilitaa
uncertain such
belonging to
authorship,
appearance But we have that wished
two
is interwoven
reason
to think sentences
become
the writer
to appear
of the
as
one
(G6U.
Sextii.
The
most
authorities Sextus
; to
always
later
call
writers,
quent subse-
have Ruiinus, as we of sayings to be the true seen, also Sixtus,or Xystus, but ginal, never oritranslation of a Christian Sextius (of.Gildemeister, he Latin I.e. lii."g".) the value of which ; so likewise iISS, cannot (1. c. 33v. "?".) and the sufficientlyexalt, and he the Syrian revisers (I. c. xxx. ^.), authorship of which Eoman Sixtus. who both say Xystas. We to the ascribes can, that Meinrad therefore, only suppose Ott, lastly, in three called himself tus, Sexthe author discourses {Gharakter imd ""-
Syrian
recension
sprung Die
der
SprucJw
*
des
Pldlo1861
;
and
not
Sextius.
Ott's
sopJtenSextius, Eottweil,
theory
a
would
oblige
between
Stjrische
'
Auserte"enen
; Die
radical
to pose supdifference to
us
SprmlieJ Syrische
ibid. the the been sentences
have
to
was
existed of the
the
trine doc-
SprucJie?
that the
elder Sextius
one
(who,
1863), maintains
were
composed
Sextius, in whom
of
by
the have
"
opposed
of p. Ms
to
younger school
monotheism
the
sentences,
he calls and
all the
ception, ex-
infra,
the that of
186, 4, that
son,
Sextian
is said to
highest god
Jupiter)
modified
whereas
partly by Pythagorean, partly ancient fluences inand especially by Jewish and placed on a purely of the
"
authorities, without
speak only of
Sextii
must
;
one
and
equal
to the
monotheistic
as
But
pletely com-
be done
sense
he
proved against
Syrian
sion recen-
and 32
the
in
expressionof
Seneca,
Nat.
the
Ewald is which
that
a
Qu.
Nora
passage vii. in
the its
(vide
preceding note)
in the
order
twnim
to rind
Se%-
by
and
Eufinus, is watered
originalcharacter
younger
184
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VII.
to confirm
the
judgment
ethical
of Seneca
that it and
possessed vigour
to
Indeed
from
that
as
great
of the his
importance
aliis;p.
i. 12. 60
the
father, especially
harmonises elsewhere Sextius
. . .
(cf.p. 58)
certain, but
John,
theless never-
stand-
point.roloris
with says
acrem,
predicate Romani
Seneca elder
Less
entirely
what the
:
probable,is the
between
tion connec-
of
("fp.
viriwi
59, 7)
moribus
Sextium
pp. 233 and Matt. andCMatt. 28 273, v. 29 v. ; pp. 13, and 30 8 1 xviii. John, s%. ; p. s%. ; i. 5. 133
to
Grtecis verbis,Momanis
and pJiilosoflkantem),
on
Also
the him
homo
Dei, p. 2,
first
(Rufinus'
the Christian
translation
at p.
would,
introduces
3) belongs
nomenclature
dogmas.
the
makes
further
references and
are
conceptions
in the have For
Testament
passages sentences,
suppose been
or
cannot to
origin
Roman. echoes
purely Roman,
of
Judaic
(vide 1 Tim. vi. 11 ; 2 Tim. iii. 17) ; likewise films Dei (pp. 58, 60, 135, 221, 439); verbum, Dei 277, 396, "1$);juMciim (pp.264, (pp.14, 347);sceculiim (pp.15, 19, 20) ; electi (p. 1) ; salvandi (p. 143). Note further,the angels (p.32) ; the prophet of truth (p.441) ; the strong emphasising of faith (p. 196 et pass.}. In
many have passages substituted
though
(cf Gildemeis.
expression and modes of thought (as Gildemeister shows, p. xlii.)are duced intromerely apparent, or Christian translators by
and
Christian
ter, I. c.)the
for other
Christian
revisers
200, 349
the revisers,yet in the case of the admits, writer as others, same the reference
to
falling away
seems
be alluded
in expressions
it sentences, have can therefore, stands, only book of been and latest
The
is undoubted. the
prospect
who shall be
p. 39 to
composed by
as
it refers
to
some our
those
live
they
usque
can
writings of
canon,
tament Tesno
and
their death
q\w novisftinmm
by the evil spirit, proof of its own ab els etiam about the middle estigat
be
until third
case
only
20 refers
to
x.
guadrantem. explained
of
to
This
as a
long
before
reminiscence
p.
Matt. Matt.
v.
26;
second
century,
to
p. 110 p. 193
to Matt.
xv.
xxii. 21 ; 11 ; 16 sqq. ;
doctrines
peculiar
Matt.
to Matt.
28, where
xix. 23 ; p. 242 sent are Christianity thoroughly ab8 ; p. 336 to Matt. xx. of from it,and the name the Sia.KovriBriva.i is not responds Christ coronce mentioned,
to
the
ministrari
ab
this
only proves
PREDOMINANCE
OF
ETHICS.
185
of
ancient
Kome,
but
that
it contained
nothing
The
CHAP,
VII.
different from
the doctrines
of Stoicism.1
only
Sextians
from
the Stoics
selves they confined themin this they agree with to ethics ; but even the later Stoicism and with the Cynics of Imperial times. to have absolutely Though they do not seem condemned physical enquiry,2 they soughtand found their strength elsewhere. A Sextius, a Sotion, a
which
Fabianus,
influence
did
not
were
men
who
exercised
wide
moral percase
by their personality;3and
his work
to
their
is the
intend but
only for
more
ingenuitythan
the
for non-Christians
with
attempt
of J. R. Tobler
(Annulm Rujini,i. ; Sent. Sext. Tub. 1878). 1 the universal 2fat. Qit. vol. 32; Ep. 59, principles of monotheism and of Christian 7 (vide p. 677, 4 ; 679) ; Ej). he himself 64, 2 : Liber Qu. Sextii jsatns, morality. Whether called Sextus, or whether was magni, si quid miki credis, tin, he falselyprefixed the name of et, licet neget, Stmci. 2 In regard to an Sextus Fabianus at imaginary philosopher from see Sen. Nat. (who in that case no doubt was rate, we any Qu. iii. 27, 3, that his opinion already described by himself as
Pythagorean), cannot
As before
not
as seem
be
to
(PMl.d.
of
Grf
observed,
nounce an-
#f.) was
that
somewhat Seneca.
the
work
does itself
different
from,
composi- He must, therefore, have held tion of one of the Sextii. Still, the general Stoic theory on the It is certainlyprobable that the subject. 3 Cf. concerning Sextius,beauthor borrowed the sides greater the Ms of sentences from 1 quotation supra, p. 82, part 1 (Sen. JBjp. 64, 3) : Quantum in philosophers;but as he never he derived any Dl tells us whence illo, tioni, est, quantum t-iffor ! Other animi of them, Ms collection, as Bitter philosophersinless stituiint, disputant, cai'illantuT^ rightly decides, is wholly usenon an as fadunt aniwum, quid non, authority for the "habent : eum, The legeris Seoctium, history of philosophy. dices ; vivit^iget, U6eregt,*upr" attempt to separate from it a garded homimm est,dimittit me plenum, genuine substratum, to be rethe work of the two as concerning ingentis Jiducits ;
the
bextii, would
even
be
purposeless,
with
Fabianus
if it
were
undertaken
183
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, VIL
much
must not
greater value
fight against
with subtleties learned
and
concerning
purpose
in be
labours
which
is
moral would
view, his
better
a
judgment
pursue
no
it
perhaps
to
science,than is, as
strike
press of
sciences
of such
kind.2
The
life of man,
Sextius he
can
battle with
in readiness
folly;only
to
who
us
round
him
and
on
all sides.
If
Stoicism
especiallyof the
is period,the resemblance still more strikingin the propositionof Sextius than achieve nothing more that Jupiter could a man.4 this Stoical character,two virtuous With of the
Eoman
Sextius
seems
to
have
borrowed
are Pythagorean school, quite in harmony : the principle of rendering account to oneself viz., 5 of every and at the end day of the moral profit
results of it ; and
the renunciation
was
of based
animal
food. latter
the
:
the
transmigration of souls
on
Sextius
inculcated
1
only
:
.
the
4
ground
Sen.
that
by the
Solenon-
bat
tra
Sewtius
won
discussed,PMl.
d. Gr.
yrobam
contundi
cavillationes
de-
fra, iii.36, 1,
lere,
2 ^
,
non
vellicari.
Pythagorean
sgg.
Ibid.
13, 9.
Golden
7.
Poem,
v.
40
Ap.
Sen.
Ep. 59,
388
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
definitions
'
from
find
the
Platonic-Aristotelian
doctrine. school
it is
We
therefore
and
nothing
noticeable
in
their
that "branch
to
is of
new
scientifically
which
of its for
Stoicism,
doubtless
founder
is
indebted
it
merely
had
an
the
personality
existence
that
but
dent indepensee
time
we
can
in
its
points
nism
of
contact
with
in
Pythagoreanism period
systems
and
Platostarted
how
easily
that
which
from
entirely
coalesce
different
the
speculative
basis consider of
presuppositions,
when theoretical
similar
once
could
on
morality,
distinctive than
men
had
begun
of
less and
to
doctrines aims
consequence that
of
tical pracin
there
Stoa
was
inherent
natural
the
to
ethical
the views
dualism which
the
most
tendency opposed
to
"
were
strongly
their
the
to
materialistic
monism
of
metaphysics,
and
their
anthropology.
PHILOSOPHY
IN
THE
IMPERIAL
ERA.
189
CHAPTER
Till.
THE
FIRST
CENTURIES
OF THE
AFTEK STOICS.
CHRIST. SEXECA.
THE
SCHOOL
TEE
mode
dominant the
thought which tad become preduring the first centnrj before Christ in
philosophy, maintained
itself
far
were
of
CHAP.
Grreco-Eoman
in
Section
II.
JEtelerti-
likewise
the
succeedingcenturies.
or
By
the
cu
ad- "
nes
after
The
"
herents
of
one
other
of the
four
great schools
was
into which
of Greek
science
divided
A.
after
the
centurv.
*
The
G-entral
schools
confirmed
one
by
two
circumstances
on
the
hand
by the
learned
the with
im
devoted
of
themselves
;
on
the
time
Andronicus
the
Zeal
for
other, by the
cbief after
sects
institution
of
"*"
publicchairs
in the era.1
___
OftkeanOe
which
took
place
of
our
second
This
,
century
,
.
the
beginning
have of the
learned
must activity
tended
different
to make
the
more
racteristics chaspecial
systems
AJiad.
distinctly
1
.
Cf. 0. Muller,
ap.
.
Quam
Rom.
citmm
resp.
. .
Grtec.
et
liter-Is Sckr.
impenderit (Gott. Mint- demia CJir. comtituta, 1837), p. ~L"$qq.; semdo securido^. ladungsschrift, the quotaand (Marb. 1858), Zurnpt, Ueb.".Bestandd.pTiilos.
Atlien* A~bh* d. Berl. tions
at p. I.
190
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
to
an
refute
the
idea upon
and Cicero
the fallen
were
VIII.
Endow-
Antiochus
ment of
"piiblio chairs
back,
viz
that the
between divergences
founded
rather upon
it
ters mat-
of
of fact ; and
might
much
form
to the counterpoise
more
philo-
sophy.
eclectic tendencies
it
was
of the time
to
the
since easily,
as
directed
as
the
defence,
to
the
of explanation,
the heads
of the ancient
schools and
of their doctrines.
not
In Borne, where
was
only Stoicism, but philosophyin general, mistrust, quarters with political regardedin many and had had to suffer repeated persecution,1
of
were philosophy
publicteachers
1
first established
The
banishment
from
of Attalus
Borne
under
Nero)\ and
Seneca
(^?. 5,
the
Stoic
Tiberius
that of
were
Claudius,
a
not
dislike
forward
at
all
principleto
philosophy. conspicuous
Nero,
or cause
hand, under
had
offence
more as
were
multiplied against
the
who
acquired
their in the school
Plautus
to many, prejudicial
was
strengthened
of mind
Stoics
were
Thrasea
.
Psetus, Seneca,
;
Lucanus, and
Rubellius
sophy philotrust. regarded with misfaction dissatisThe political displayed by the Stoic Cynic philosophers after
of all Helvidius
put
to
death
Helvidius and
Musonius,
Priscus
execution
Cornutus,
were
Priscus
occasioned
from Borne
Vespasian to
teachers
tion excepof them ported transthe be
banished
later
on);
first
philosophy,with
of Musonius
even
persecutionsmay
the
instance
; two
politicalor
a
he
and
caused
to
personalreasons,
had
itself
trust generaldisStoic
already manifested
against the
sophy philoStoi-
(Dio Cass. Ixiv. 13) ; this precedent was wards afterfollowed Domitian. by
irritated
of Junius
which especially,
comm,
Being
by
the
gyrics paneon
adrogantia sectaqite qnoe and turftidos et negotwrum adjveten- Tbrasea caused tes faciat (as Tigellinus, only ap.
Tac, Ann.
xiv.
Rusticus and
he Helvidius,
Busticus
to be
not the
57, whispers
to
son
of Helvidius
executed,
IMPERIAL
PATRONAGE
OF
PHILOSOPHY.
191
as
it
seems
"by Hadrian
Pius
:
2
and
in. the
provinces, "by
larly simiVIII.
Antoninus
rhetoric
had
alreadyteen
Alexandrian
provided
and
for
by
some
of their of the
predecessors/
seum,, Muthe support
the ancient
and
institution
its maintenances
men
designed for
various
of learned
continued
but
out
of the exist in
most
sorts,had also
to
the
Eoman
period.4 Public
T"
all
"nraviovs
3;
$tXo(ro(j""vyTa$1
we
Thus
hear
of
Vespasian,
iii.11 ; DIo Cass. Ixvii. 13). JEp. and But these isolated rary tempomeasures
have
to
done
any
especially (Sueton. Vtsp. IS), he jwimus that e fisco laftnis do not seem to grcechqite rhetoribus (perhaps lasting injury in the first place only to one
rhetorician
16:
anmta
for
each
speech)
torician rhe-
centena
(100,000 sestert.)
first Latin in 89
itiJiaMles
qiii profestdoni STUB vldebantur^ ditatos dimia-professione honoratosqiie would only have $it, which been possibleif they had before Still less is possessed them. text proved by the previous conesetJwno: Omnes professor etdivites fecit. That these yamt relate not statements merely to rhetoricians, grammarians,
Doctor
conxtitmt.
so
The
endowed,
was,
the
to
year
69,
according
Ckron.
second
Hieron,
Eus.
a
Quintiiian;
xiii. 22). 4 Of. Das
A.D., under
Zumpt,
Alexandria.
I. c. ; Museum
Farther, (Berl.
"c., but
is shown
2
also
to
philosophers,
connection. P. 11: per JRhe(mines
91 gqq.; O. Mnller.Z./?. 29 the statement From p. gq. Cass. Ixxvii. (Bio 7) that Cara-
1838), p.
by
the
Ant. Capitolin.
et honores
the
Peripatetics
of hatred to
(out
torilnis et
prorindas
Aristotle, on supposed poisoning of their detulit. Syssiria and other Moreover, teachers of fers and sciences Parthey (p. 52) Inprivileges, physicians were This with probability that there exempted from taxation. favour, however, in a rescript also (though perhaps only in
philosopMs
account
et
solaria
of
Antoninus
to
the
Commune
Modest-in. xxvii in
a
time
of
Hadrian
to
or
one
of
had
Asics Exous.
(quoted
it ,*
was
from
successors)the philosophers
the
into
museum
Digest,
to to
1,
belonging
similar
6, 2)
to
restricted
regard
certain
divided the
the
physicians
institution in
number of the
the
the
size founded
Athenasum,
.
192
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VIII.
teachers
from
the
four
most
important Schools of
Aurelius
in
were philosophy1
settled
by Marcns
but arch need that of if the
a
existing scholwas
school such
was
not
in
a
35),
That
of
assistance,
named
so
learned
attached
admitted
second
teacher
to it,is not by side with, him, have school the may expressly stated ; whether of Tertullian words {Apologet. simultaneously one the school, and one 46), statuis et salaribus remualso
"
had chosen
by
nominated
nerantur
(the
to
we
philosophers), by
or
relate
Rome
do
to
the
not
know,
to
they
western
1
probably
Marcus
refer
passage is not in however, Lucian, provinces, view. to this As favourable but the the the philosophers whom the
are
the
Emperor.
The
That
Aurelius
our
with endowed Emperor drachmas of 10,000 salary appointed are first spoken of,and we schools with
then
"
the
told Stoic,Platonic,Peripatetic,
"
and
teachers drachmas
v.
"%os
each,
ii. SopTi,
"rbv ol/jLai
manifestly
is plainfrom
2 ;
Philostr.
presupposes
who there which'
must
were were
that
ing 3 : accordLucian, SunuoJi. Ixxi. Cass. Dio to 3, it was in while he was Athens, after
case
schools
sentatives repre-
tion insurrec-
each have
of these
Marcus to
Cassius
(176
choice
AJD.)
mankind whom
that in he
endowed
yearly
soon over
stipend.7 At
after, Tatian
the
time,
have
or
to Herodes to
Atticus
Ewi.
;
c.
ing accord-
Lucian,
"EXK-nvas in which x6jos irpbs philosophers (p.19) he mentions the Emperor receive from who annual an salary of 600 XPUO"""According to Lucian, I. c., each
of the schools
brought
before the
2 "/., forward
"PKTTOL
we
K"l Trpecrfivrarot
mentioned
seems
to have
had
we
two
are
public
there of the
'
tors, instruc-
told
one
how,
of participation
death
of the
concerned,
an
two Peripatetics,'
candidates
presidency of
if
an
disputed before
for with its the
electing
drachmas.
sembly as-
official) ; but
could the be affair
was
vacant
place
the
perial im-
not The
be
10,000
sent
to Rome
Zumpt
decided.
was,
imperial
; and
suggestion that
only
four
salaries had
been
given ;
in
all
cases
in par-
PAID
TEACHERS
OF
PHILOSOPHY.
103
Athens,1 which
seat
was
thus
declared
anew
the
chief
CHAP.
of
of these
studies ; and thus the division philosophic schools was not merely acknowledged as an
a
A^Ll.,
existing fact,but
future which
support
then
In the
was
given
of
to
it for the
no
in the
condition
things was
of the
slightadvantage.
of teacher, the
appointment
of
office for
express
to be
avowal
the
system
which
the
he
desired
candidate.2
remained
sharplyseparatedin
this
period as
fore. hereto-
As
however, separation,
the way of their
had
rise of eclectic
continued
ferent dif-
in spite of schools,
feuds,
approximated internallyto
not
each
other.
actuallyabandon
many
their distinctive
of
they propagated
them,
and
these
as a merely historically striking, without concerning themselves them they postponed them ; or
learned
more
tradition,
with
deeply
the
to
essentially
ticnlar
was
instances
the
teacher named
of the
in the
second V. of of the
probably directly
the
Philostr.
time
Soph.
by
be
speaks
ruck
either
sense,
"when,
e0v"v
in the timius
dedication
"ap0dpcov"vveppv7iK6ratwhomt'he
Athenians
2
he Trepl etpappewis,
Sever M"
as
Sepson,
for money,
4
:
ret.
and
TTJS
Cf. Lucian,
per
Caracalla.
vperepas
avrys
flap-
rvptas
pvy/uevos.
1
5t"5a"77caAos
(the
KC/CT?-
o$v rSsv Xoycav Trpoyy"viffro aitroTs Kal TTJV efiireipiav Tttiv eKarepos
eTreSefteiKTO ^oyfidrasy
Aristotelian the
philosophy)
repute
in and the
Kcd Sn
r"v
rov
"Apta"TaT"\ovs KaL
Athens popnmiddle
$QKovyT"v
On
larity of
194
ECLECTICISM. and principles, in which, the different aims practical schools approached more nearly to each other; or tions, changes and modificathey readily admitted many and without renouncing on the whole their distinctive character, they yet allowed entrance to on which, having originally definitions, grown up not another soil, strictly speaking, altogether were, The Epicurean compatible with that character.
CHAP. VIII.
School
;
alone
held persistently
aloof from
this
ment move-
all scientific
activity
this
some
worthy of on schools,
form
or
Among
did not
the
none
three
remaining
the contrary,there is
time
in which itself in
tendency of the
other.
manifest
it is their Peripatetics restriction to criticism and of the Aristotelian explanation of independent in which the want writings, is chiefly shown ; with the scientific creative activity it is the restriction to a moralityin which Stoics, of the original the asperities system are for the most the former severity gradually part set aside and in the : gives place to a gentlerand milder spirit Academy, it is the adoption of Stoic and Peripatetic an inr elements, with which is combined increasing clination
"With
the
towards
that
belief in
revelation became
which
in
the third
School of
tlu Stoics
of these traits predominant. That none belong to either of these schools will appear on a of them. more thorough investigation If we begin with the Stoics we find that from the till towards the middle of the beginningof the first,
1
wholly exclusively
from tlie
Cf. PMl.
196
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
most to
us
those
who
represent
Xoyos
123
He
6""v (Tzetz. in H. p. TT"pl of. 1. Hist. 146 v. 403). G. ; ; is also in harmony with the
Stoic
theology when
on
in
by Nero, on of an objection he made account that these about it came nomenato the poetical projectsof the pheforetell sometimes Emperor, in 68 A.D. according ever, Porphyry, in to Hieron. in Clwon. (Cf howhappy events. the passage Reimarus on De Abst. iv. 8,end, calls him ei/ in Dio j he conjectures 66 A.D.) (according to he 1. Origen, ":*.) explained how
comets
bouring
"eVTis)
in
(Steph. Byz.
who
was
Africa,
banished
to
(according
to
the
correct in-
tise trea-
statement
of
Suidas,
put
death)
.,
s.
He
was
In
the
epitome
III. the
of
Diogenes
in
Alexandria who
by
is 'AA.
disciple (Part
by
closes the
Dionysius,
Suidas and
more
was
Aiovvcr.
by
probably, therefore,
a
theoretical works
ical philosophto
of
learned
man
attributed
philosopher.
fully treated
members
were
nus
be
of later
of
"?".);this
treatise abstract in
as
is and
doubtless
not
a
been
of
it. Vita
to
He
is
erroneously,to
with the Goer xiv. 59 ; the
most Stoic),
an
described
the
De
Perm which
Deor. his Further and
Sueton.
Osann details works
tragicus^
Greek
us,
(on Corn.
Nat.
Tac.
was
xxv.) rightlyobjects.
latter
concerning him
will be found
likely
Seneca's
in Martini
lativeAnngeus
Serenus(Sen.
Const, i. 1 ; De
"
Ep. Trangu. An. 1 De Otio}, his friend Passienus Crispus iv. (Nat. Qu. ; Prcsf. 6 ; Bmef. cf i. 15, 5 ; Epigr.Sap. Exil. 6), Persius, Prolegg. viii. sqq. his adherent and Metronax of Cornutus Among the disciples in Naples (Ep. 76, 1-4). He dius were (vide Vita Perm) Claualso tries to include Lucilius of Agathinus Sparta the Stoics, in the letters from (Osann, I.c. xviii., differing among to him. dedicated rary ContempoJahn, p. xxvii.,writes the name is Serapio, from with Mm thus, following Galen, Definit. the Syrian Hierapolis 14, vol. xix. 353 K), a celebrated (Sen. Up. Url). Petronius 40, 2; Steph. Byz. De physician, and Anand Lucius Aristocrates of 'lepa-Tr.); Magnesia, of Cornutus nseus et sanetisswii Leptis 'duo doctissimi neigh- viri,'and the two Roman (Said. Kopv.) or the poets
.
63, 14 ; De
(DeL. Ann. Cornuto, Lugd. Bat. I am 1825, a work with which third at only acquainted hand), Yilloison, and Osann, I. G. ; Praf. xvii. sqq.-, 0. Jahn on
SENECA,
are
EPICTETUS.
HIT
Seneca, Musonius,
on Heracleltns,
Epictetus,
tlie other
without of Plantus
and
Marcus
Is rather
a
CHAP. VIII.
Aurelius.
A, in Persius
hand.
Flaccus 62
(bom
some
reason,
Vespasian.
also
was
by order Enbellius
xiv.
to
as
(Tac. Ann.
Is described
sqq.'}and
Lucanns
nephew
A.D., died
death
of 65 for
spiracy con-
Seneca,
A.D.,
Stoic. his
Lastly,
successor?, Eufus
Xero Ms
gether to-
having
canus
and
there lived
and
Musonius
Lu-
discipleEpictetus,
with Pollio and Musonius' and
who,
the has
lives
which 1856
disciples,
Weber
edited, Marb.
Artemidorus,
sq_.; the Vita Persii,Tacit. Ann. other xv. 49, 56 sq, 70, and
statements
compared
whom he Flaccus
says
by
ber), We-
the pupil of Arrianus, will come before us Epictetus, later on. the Euphrates,
of
as
himself
Pliny,
him
on
regarded his master with the highest veneration. Stoic school To the belonged
Sat.
v.,
of his of
discourses
a
and lived
Ms
character, was
rary contempoand
Epictetus
further, besides the contemptible Celer P. E gnat ins xvt 32; Hist. iv. (Tac. Ann.
10, 40; Juvenal,
two
Dio
iii.
Cass.
114
ML
26;
the
in Syria and afterwards Rome (Plin.JSp. i. 10 ; Euseb. c. Hierocl. c. 33). He is the whom same Philostratus, person
in
first in
$#.), (Tac.
the
life and of
as
of the
Apollonius
author
of
magnanimous
Paetus sgg. ; cf
xv.
.
Republicans
Ann. siii. 49 ; xiv. Cass. bd. Dio Ixvi.
Tyana,
letters
of the
sents repre-
Thrasea xvi. 21 48
Apollonius,
chief
the
opponent
of
sq.f9
23;
Ixii.
"Epictetus
expression of his 10 iv. Domit. Sueton. Nero, 37 : (Diss. 8, 17*^.) and praises ; his discourses Plin. JEp.viii. 22, 3 ; vt 29, 1 : (I. c. iii. 15, 8; Enchir. Pint. Pr"e. Ger. vii. 19, 3; 29, 4). Marcus lius Aurehim. (x. 31) also mentions Help. 14, 10, p. 810; Catolfm. to Apoi25, 37; Juvenal, v. 36; Epict. His passionatehostility lonius is alluded to by PMlostr. Jahn, Diss. L 1, 26 et pass.; same" his F xxxviii. 1. c. Soph. i. 7, 2. The *#.)" and
15, 20;
quotes
an
26;
12;
son-in-law
cus
Helvidius
Ann. xvi.
Pris-
writer
calls him
a
here
and
I. 0.
(Tac.
iv, 5
28-25;
i. 25, 5,
Tynan,
sq. 9, 53 ; Dial, de Sueton. Or at. 5 ; Tesp. 15 ; Ixv. Ixvi. 12 Dio Cass. 7), of ; executed first the was whom Hist,
to
Syrian according
a
of
to
an
Eunap.
in 118 his
F. old
PMlos.
p.
6,
order, and the second who had been already banished by Nero, was put to death, not by
Nero's
Egyptian.
A.D.
poison
(Dio
Isis. 8).
198
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. Tin.
arranger
of traditional of Cleomedes.
material,and
good
Ti
mo-
Concerning
in several but
not
of Ms
of
to
in
Pontus
cording ac-
astronomers,
he follows
at says
(Demon. 3,
Ptolemy;
as
in it
chiefly,
same
57, De
Saltat.
he
the
conclusion,
the tors instruc:
Posidonius.
teacher
an
period
lonius Dio Ant.
fall
cynic, and
famous
of Marcus
Aurelius Aurel.
Apol-
opponent
con'
(M.
Ca?s. Philos.
Abonutei-
Ixxi.
i. 8,
Demonax,
2,
3 ; Ant.
Lesbonax,
Mm
is Salt. and
mentioned
by
Under
Eutrop.
(J)e
69).
Trajan we find the following names given by Plutarch i. Com-, 9, 1 ; vii. (Qu.
Domitian 7, 1):
viii. 12 ; Lucian. Demon. 31 ; Hieron. Chron. zn 01. 232 ; Whether he Syncell. p. 351. from Nicomedia whom
came or
Chalcis
we
or
need
Themistocles,
and
we
Phithe C
r
enquire).
to
Junius Ms
Busticus,
lippus,
to whom
Diogenianus,
two
imperial pupil
always
Aur. imus
in
is
(Epict. Diss. iit 2, 15; Diog. L. vii. 62, 68,76). Also Junius
Rusticus,
executed
by
mitian Do-
; Sueton. Domit, 10 ; Dio Cass. Ixvii. 13 ; Plin. Z. 0.; Plut. Ciwiosit. 15,
2 (Tacit. Agric.
Claudius MaxAnt.PJiil.fy; (M. Aur. i. 15, 17 ; viii. 25; Capitol. 1. c.); Cinna Catulus (M. Aur. i. 13 ; Capitol.
I.
c.); among
to
them
was
cording (ac-
p. the
522),
whose
trial
gave
casion oc-
the
of
meant,
his teacher
to
painting ;
Aur,
an
Plinys,
cannot
on
according
first who
to
be
gave
him
i. 6, clination in-
school, semblance1 i d though they have points of rewith the Stoics, and by
and the
this
e s
of
Hieron.
on
a
Ol. 232,
teacher of
Sync. p. 351,
Aurelius
who is
same
Marcus
Math.
and
probably
Sext. d. Gr. person
quoted by
not
Marcianus
M. he
Aurelius
says, i, 6, at
them,
instance
N. (Gell.
A. ix. 5, may
of
To
Diognetus)
these
Mar-
written
be added.
CORNUTL'S.
Cornutus
also, we
to
Antoninus allied Under Ms of is
know
that
his
activitywas
historical
is
a
CHAP.
chiefly devoted
cus
grammatical
that
no
and
l'_
Aurellns
"T7rou3aTos and
"pa"\o$
himself
and similarlyan ayaavriKetrai, Bbv Tynan, aryoBtfy e.g. the tppoviu.^ srepi whom have is opposed to the tppoviu.?] Philostratus, lived, V. Soph, ii. 1, 8 $c[." describes as d. "9r.'lII.'i. (el PMl. Mend of Herodes the Atticus, 213, note) ; as also in the terms
disciple
said
to
and the he
representsas meeting
Aurelius
was
with when
;
Marcus
in Home
latter
was
already emperor
same
the
doubtless, from
whom
person, Stobaus
\6yOt QjlQTlKOl, O.VOjJLQ'TLKn^ ""KTtK"l (1. C. 108 BaVfACLCrrLKQl, But ibid. III. i. 103, 4. a) zrf/fe
the
Mnsonius teacher
who
musb
is
called either
7, 46, vol. (Floril. Jo. Damase. iv. 162, Mein.) quotes an account
of
a
Lucius' distinct
or we
be
from
Musonius
even
Bnfus,
irre of
to
conversation conversations
are
with
must
(Ms
spectively
be inexact
Tvptos
Musonias first
also in
mentioned
by
he
is
Philostratus, his
;
narrative
as
Philostratus);
called
AVKIOS
for
though
our
test
of
sequence. con-
scarcely survived
it is not Ms
to
seems
the
tury, cen-
Stobseus, that
is of little
as
conceivable
that
come
Here,
Philostratus, he
Stoic doubt
or
well
as as
in
a no
discipleshould
Borne
to
have
A.D.
Cynic,
same
after
me
161
most
It is
was
probable
no
the
who
is
of Lucius
Musonius
Kufas, and
Brandis d. Arist.
( Ueber
d.
Awsleger
that the anecdote, ap. Gell. .V./l. is. 2, 8,refers to him; while the
AWi. d. JSerl. Altad. 1833 ; Orff., Hist. PML El. p. 279) and Prantl (Gesch. d. Log. i. 618) both to have belonged consider
to
predicateTvpios arose
mistake
even
through
self him-
mistake):
of Aurelius
and
the
in
from
are
the named
way
meeting
take
before Musonius
Lucius either
by
Marcus
not
did
place
he
at
all,
or
became
peror em-
; of
partly because
we
when
we
naturally
celebrated the
evidence;
for
of
most
foundation their
statement,
of the
name,
and
to
us
only
objections quoted by
"., from
Musonius because
in that
Prantl, Z.
and
especially
Lucius
the
against the
Aristotelian
which
with
puts
into the
of his Musonius
entirelyagrees
quota-
200
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. Tin.
works, and
himself with
lie therefore
more philosophy
seems
as
"to
a on
have
occupied
an
scholar than
dependen in-
thinker.1
itself with and
His -work
the
gods contents
of his school ;
tradicted con-
reproducingthe
a
doctrine
if,in
2
treatise
on
the
he categories,
has
not
tion from
nothing as to the dates Arisfollowing men: Stob. 29, 78). toclesof third (Suidas, Lampsacus the half of century first hear, through Longinus (ap. sub woe, mentions an exposition we of his, of a logical treatise of Porph. V. Plot. 20, of a number namesakes Chrysippus),trietwo of philosophers, contemporary
Museums
(ap.
the
know of
Jnortt.
In
the
with
somewhat
are tions mena
Theodorus(Diog.
whom the
one
ii. 104), of
earlier,and
good
known
many
as
probably composed
of the
abstract
writings
of
Stob. Florll. also Teles, from which Stoics who were 164 Hem. 7,47,T.iv, activity Jo.Dam.i. for their literary goras Protaa to s fragment Themistocles give ; (according
(Diog.
bins and
ix.
Eubius,
of Hierapolis (n"forlong Publius Aios) ap. Steph. Byz. De Url. died (l**XPLirptfiiv "K/jLQi(ra.vr"s~), two sakes, nameMedina and Annius phyry, 'Aer/caA..'lepewr (Por; the of in Mall os Prod us according to Proclns 1% Cilicia (ap. Snid. n/""te\." one Plat. Remy. p. 41 5,note, in his who had not
of these Proclus
latter is mentioned In
Tim. 166
by
conversation
with
Longinus,
doctrine the
B, with
in which
he
the
defended
Stoic of who
Longimis
the
apx^on
is here
eight parts
those
to
(Part
himself
hack
case
39,
3),
Among
themselves
confined
be
as Panffitius,
Suidas
(rosier-
Mnsonins.
At
the
same
fjidrav, no
1
doubt the
written
by
to
him.
Of.
references
his
rhetorical
and Jahn's xiii.
2
writings,
his
sition expo-
17,
as
2rau":"fcre
K"L
IlXaa
of the
ram/cbs)was
Athenian
residingin by Porph. ap
3, 1, came
260
A.D.
Home. Euseb. We
Callietes, Stoic,
somewhat
Prolegg.
; Osann.
Persittm,
mentioned
Uv,
x.
sffff.
Of. PHI.
earlier, about
note.
CORXUTUS.
AtnenodoniSj1
that from
an
we
can
see
from
the
its
fragments preserved,
objectprincipally
It Is
THAP. mi.
this treatise
regarded
of the from
the
standpoint
that
grammarian.2
Stoic dies
important divergence
the
tradition, if
he with it
really taught
the Is
the
soul
simultaneously
certain,4 though
the
body ;3 this,however,
in with Panaetius. Perslns who
to
Is not
possiblethat
himself
are
his views
of
subject
he
allied
discourses
praised by
on
on
account
of their
we can
good
Influence
venture
those
ascribe
heard him
them,
In this
hardly
any
to
sphere
on
Important
Slmpl.
C; 91,
a
or Individuality,
striking
of
one
effect
Cat eg.
5,
"
15, 8 j
a,
form
in
3
expression is
case
different other.
47
in Arist. (ScJiol.
b, note;
47, t",22;
57,
SO, 16;
;
the
from
the
Iambi, the
Cater/. Does
", 12)
r
in
the
withholding
air,
21
; cf. Ami.
Brandls,
d. Arist.
Uele
die
extinction
of
Qrg. A bh.
PJtil. the in treatise
the
vital e!
Akad. 275.
1883, Hist.
In
to
cessation aAA'
OUT"JS
p.
this be
yiyveTai
"
Ba.va.TQS,
probably
Schol.
found
statement
qnoted by Syrian
in AT.
Metajph.
from Boethus dnced
2
Cornntns,
the
that
POUT-OS
4
oterai. For
though
of
it is to
probably
the
this
Cornntns
whom
statement
lamblichns relate
not
refers,
that to the to
it is nevertheless
possible
Porph.
of
him
what animal
he
and
Athenodoras
^Tou/zem
\"%"i$, ola
KaL
ovv
may and
XQeasv
Kal
...
Ka8b
TpcnriKa
Toiavra
soul.
Kvpia
TO TO:
ocra
lamblichns agree
Stoic
roiavra
irpo-
his assertion
"f""povre$KaliroiasUffTl
a.Tropovjn-fs
KaTyyopias
doctrine
school,
death sues enp^i Gvpitneovres according to which %TCLV vcLVT*X"as eTi/at fj T^V Siaipetnv. "\XLTT7] (paffiv yevrirai favecrts cf. al(r0TjrtKov -jn/etJ/taros rov 91, Similarly Simpl. 5, a, a, where Cornutns would (Plut. Plac. i. 23, 4). separate Kal the time
place
from
from
xore,
TTOV,
and
the the
Sat.
v,
34
*##., 62 sqq.
because
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VIII.
.
: philosophy
had
this been
the
case,
he would
have
of it behind
him.
Seneca.
is different
with
which
Seneca.1
This
philo-
The
extensive sub
literature is to be found
in
Sotion,
Stoic
the
disciple of
181, 2), and
(vide supra,
him. He
concerningSeneca
in
Sextius the
(vide supra,
Attalus
Bahr,
woe,
Pauly's
Alterth.
Klass. Of.
195, 1) introduced
the
an
sgg.
189
likewise, finallyembraced
advocate
the
calling of
respectingSeneca's philosophy,
Bitter,
itgg. ;
Baur,
to
Paulus (1858, now Seneca, und in Drei AbTiandl. "c., p. 377 pline Discisqq.} ; Dorgens, Seneca
Moralis
cum
of qusestor (ad 19, 2), married (cf. De Ira, iii. 36, 3 ; Ep. 50, 2 ; and child, Marcus, concerning a Helv.
office
Antoniniana
:
Epigr,3
another
; ad
ConteMio
1857
et
Comparatio
zig, Leip-
died
shortly
was
before, I. 0.2, 5
18, 6),and
5,
happy
external
G.
stances circum-
Concerning the writings, besides many older works, Biihr,I. c. ; Bernhardy, GFrundrins der Rom.Litvr. 4, a, p. Sllsgg.; Teuffel,GeseJi.
der Rom. Born famous
at
and
Threatened lix.
by
19), and
under
S. jEpigr.
2 ;
was
ad
13,
he fall He Nero Ann.
18, 9
; ad
15, 2
Polyb. $#.)"
her
A.D.
order,the second son of the M. Anngeus rhetorician, S. Eml. Seneca 8, (Sen. Jilpigr.
9 ; FT. 88 ; ad Melv. 18, 1 sqq. ; Tacit. Ann. xiv, 53 et pass.},
only
after
made of
prgetor, and
xii.
confided
(Tac.
cession ac-
Lucius
a
Annasus with
Seneca his
came
as
8).
the
After
Nero's
child
Rome
(ad
to
birth must
Ifat. in the
occurred,
statements 3
:
in
Qu.
era.
1,
Hj}.108, 22,
the tian Chrisyears
stantly con-
first years
of
gether throne, he, towith for Burrhus, was a long time the guide of the Eoman empire and of the young sovereign (Tac. xiii. 2). Further details as to Seneca's public life to
his
early
he
character of
will
be With
found the
and
even
afterwards
from
infra, p.
suffered
ill health
however,
to
an
(ad Hell). 19, 2; JBp. 54, 1 ; 65, he 1; 78, 1 sqq.; 104, 1), and
devoted himself
with
to the
influence
; Nero
discarded had
to
the
sellor coun-
sciences
who
burdensome
him
especiallyto
7),
to
204
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
that
L_
human, based upon immediate universally and life the consciousness important for moral the endeavour universalistic development of ethics after a system more and generallycomprehensible
is
"
"
more
side
from still
this
more
thoroughlydevelopedin Seneca and his followers, to give up the doctrines of and little as they wished their" school, boldlyas they sometimes express the the whole, Stoicism with them Stoical doctrines, on
takes the and form
more
and
more
of universal
moral
of their conviction ; and in the matter religious of doctrines, side by side with the inner freedom of universal the principles love of the individual, towards human mission weakness, submankind, forbearance
to the
Divine
appointments
freer
have
ent promin-
place.
In doctrine
1
Seneca, the
of his school
Seneca is and
professes school, and unreservedly to apno to be a proof, propriate anything that he finds requires of its Of. the use beyond no8"nd.nostri,JEp.serviceable, even limits (Ep. 16, 7 ; De Ira, I 6, 113, 1 ; 117, 6 etpass. ; and the 5). He very frequentlyapplies panegyricshe bestows on StoicHelv, in this manner sayings of Epiism, De Coiist. 1 ; Cons, ad he judges in regard 5, 3; Ep. 83, 9. curus, whom 12, 14 ; Clemen1;,ii.
That Stoic
He
expresses
himself, however,
to
his
personal
merits
with
of fairness that is most surprising very decidedly on the right from a Stoic (videPHI. d. Gr. III. independent judgment, and on i. 446, 5); and if in this he may, the task of augmenting by our inheritance the perhaps, be influenced, by the own enquiries his friendLucilins have derived from our prede- predilectionof we for it V. 2 B. De Otio,3, 3, is,nevertheless, cessors Epicurus, ( ; that he wishes to unmistakable 1 j Ep. 33, 11; 45, 4 ; 80, 1 ; show his own 64, 7 ###.)" He does not hesiimpartialityby this shall to treatment find, of a tate, as we appreciative oppose tenets and
customs
of
his
much
-abused
opponent.
SENECA.
20
is shown
In his views
of
philosophy. If
there
over
CHAP.
VIIL
Stoicism
already lay
the
preponderance of the
Seneca that he
#/*
foe-
interest practical
with theoretical,
lamin
tf*e
this
was
so
greatlyincreased by
constituents
regarded manv
jm^
things considered
to
$"?
*'^-
be
essential
and
necessary
general manner
the
conception and
aim
greater stress
and
;
the
in
concerned
not
game
cure
of
and
of grave
and act,*5
teaches
man
not
to
talk,but
to
learns
moral
is
his
to this
ultimate to be
of every
scientific
is activity
our
judged :
in
which
does not
effect
moral
Of.
regard
to
the latter
Ep. 117,
33:
Adice
mine,
Phil. d. Or. III. i. 51, 2, and to the former, 1. c. 61, 1 ; 64, 1 ; 67, 2 ; 207 ; and Up. 94 ; -47 sq. ;
delectare
et
philo* faeere,
docet
95, 10.
-
remedium
5
sit.
2
:
Ep.
89, 13.
that the is the and
not
Aristo
mainthe
Ep,
20,
Facere
tailed
nan
of Ethics
philo-
Ep. 89,
mores
:
IS:
Quicqitidlestatim
sit
fferisad
Loc. onmia dam ad
rffarag.
tit. 23
fft"c aim
ft ad
lie
. . .
pesdagogus.
d. 6fr, III.
mores
sedan-
PMl.
;
54? 1
JSp. 117,
12 ; 94, 39.
206
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
condition
is
and useless,
to
adequatewords
those who the warmth
conversant
meddle of his
find cannot philosopher of the follyof express his sense in with such things ; though even zeal he cannot help showing how
the is with all the
he himself
them.
What
are
we
he profited,
Uselessmss
asks,by
enquirieswith
?
which
ever
the
antiquarians occupy
the better and
appears
we
themselves the
Who them
?
has
*
become
small when
for juster
How
the value
of the so-called
it is virtue
our
liberal
arts,
is
remember
that
alone
that
important,that
it claims
whole
2
soul,and
that
much But how philosophy only leads to virtue ! admitted into has even that is superfluous philosophy and unprofitmuch how word-catching able trifling itself, ! Even subtlety thingsof this kind in the Stoic have
School,3how
entrance
many
found
Seneca
even
nothing to
do with he
them,
where
complains
ao
"revit.
after
ex-
snientia
ftonorwn
malorum ulla
the
citation
of
immutMli,
amples
torical thus
:
oompetit :
alia de
soli philosopliiee
ars
lonis
malls
et
Cwjw
"niinu"-
illi loeo entycujuscupiditates prement? est sapientia. Vacua de divinis humanisqne est : opus Quern fortiorem,qiiemjustioreTn,
facient ? quern liberalwrem 2 at length This is discussed here shows in Ep. 88. Seneca
that grammar,
de discendwm est, de prtzteritis, futuris, de caducis, de "%ternis, Hcec tarn "c. multa, tarn magna
ut Tia'bere possintliberuwi
ex
music, geometry,
astronomy
are
arithmetic, and
at most
a
hospitium, mpervacua
tollenda, has
sunt.
animo
se
preparationfor the
in themof subordinate
Non
virtus
daUt
:
in
angustias desiderat. spatiimi res magna Totum, omnia. linea sit : JExpellantur pec(p.20) : Scis qufe recta tu$ illi vacet (p. 33-35). quid tibi prodest)si quid in vita 3 Of. Ep. 88, 42, rectum sit, ignoms ? "c.(p. 13). higher instruction,but
selves
are
laxum
value
Una
re
consummatur
aninws,
SENECA.
with the evidently connected presuppositions of the Stoic doctrine,1 in the same and he way of the dialectical objections of their easily disposes
are
CHAP. VIJI*
opponents
worth the
he
considers
of
trouble
so
fallacieswhich
and Chrysippus
Ms
discussions
ancient
which sceptics,
; and
gave
the
Stoa
so
much
employment
sensible among
the eclectic
arguments
Swrjiu-
merely
necessary
to
us
divert
to
us
"*"""
thingsthat
are
for
know.3
Up. 117,
both
cases
In
of
nor
us
which
does
not
the
exposition
Stoic the and
refutation
of
in
of the
definitions
long
accuse
broad
order
rance
knowledge
me
of
them
harm, profit
.
Quid
defines
in eoy gruem
the
tu
.?
.
to
Ecce
"c.
meittttur,
48 ; 49
and
himself time
Similarly Ep,
of with in
having
their
5, *M.
3
Ep: 88, 43
faciat
says
Audi, qitautvm,
suteilita* et sit. tagoras Pro-
mali $uam
nimia
ventati
can
iufesta
dispute for ride infra, p. 208, 1. and et passim against everything; Nau2 predeces- siphanes, that everything is J"p. 45, 4: His sors, the great men, have left as it is ; Parnot, justas much that Et im-enissent : menides, nothing is except problems many
we
the universe ; Zeno, of Elea, forsitan neeessaria, nisi et superittis Circa eadem fere Pyrnihll Jfultum esse. vacua quaesissent.
temporis
eripuitet
gu(g
cent. not
acumen
camllatw
rJwnei
verxantur et
captiosw disputatwnes^
.
JEretrlei
ram
exer-
mkil indusseruntseiejitiam,
Jieee omnia studi"rum in ilium super
We the
"
search
out
sdre
vacuum
words,
but the
IVberalium
the evil ;
gregem
fence
with
sophisms
acetabula the
nlhil scire wliieprcBstiglatorum fcf. illis qui non of Arcesilaus, riint,an illis, qui ne hoc quidem^ fy-nQoirouKrai 'jwMs reliquerunt, i. 495, 4) ignontfdl scire. Phil. d. Gr. m.
208
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
Wisdom,
1__
he says, is
it is
great learning:
which
so
extends
the
simplething and requires no of moderation want only our sphere of philosophy; for life,
for the most
the School
are questions
part worthless
for they render rather than benefit, theyinj ure, indeed, small and weakly, instead of elevatingit.2 the mind have and We already seen certainlycannot, as we shall see later on, take Seneca exactlyat his word in
regard
that moral
to
such
declarations
to
but
it is undeniable
he
wishes
limit
problems,and with those as they stand in manifest connection problems. must This principle separate our philosophe inevitably from that portion of philosophy to which the older Stoics had originally paid great attention, but which they had ultimatelyregarded as a mere outwork of their system viz.. Logic. If, therefore,
"
Seneca
includes
it under
the three
chief divisions of
occa-
Ep. 47,
36
2 :
Plus
In
Ep.
dis-
that sa"cussing the statement vaoaneis siibtilitas teritur : non pientia,and not sapvre, is a good: circa sapiential-nan faeiioit ~bo)ios ista, sed doctos, Omniaista in ipsa at noHs in swit imnw : est ipsa apertior res sapere, .Latrunculis
ludimus,
in, super-
Pauds siniplieior.
tern
exb ad
mennot
comnwrandum de
est
h"G
. .
.
vero,
dieebam, quibus paulo et inimiwit lit cetera in depmmunt, nee, ut supervacaneum diffimdimus, ita, pliilosopTdam 3)utatis,eccacii,urit,sedexte7i'U" Similarly,Ep. 82, 22. ipmm. Quemadm,odum omnium
lonam
uti
literis : sed
ante
reruw,,
sic sed
literarum laboramus
quoque
: non
Vide
PkiLd.
intemperantia
vita
64, 1 ;
67, 2.
soholcB
discimus.
01
LOGIC
AXD
PHYSICS.
20:
upon
in
In his
writings.
with
He
expresses
re-
r-HAP.
agreement
of
his school
the
_JLllL_
conceptions,and
strative demon-
general opinion;1 he speaks of the highest conception and of the most nniver-al conceptionssubordinated to it ; he shows general": that he is well acquainted with the logical tions defini-
he himself
more
has
no
ation inclinin
into
them
deeply, because
too
his
region lies
him
in
far from
resort
"
that
the
alone
the
last
value
which
he
ascribes
to
as Physics,
writingsalso he has devoted to it He praisesPhysics for imparting to greater space. the mind the elevation of the subjects with, -which 4 it occupies itself; in the preface,indeed, to Ms writingson Natural History,5 he goes so far as to
vided,
into
as
with
the
animate
is partly mortal
practical philosophy ; and in Ep. 94, 45, 124, 14). 3 Besides virtue is similarly divided (as
with Pansstins, This obvious ascribed
to
theoretical
and
partly immortal
the
(of. Ep.
sn-
quotations
xide
48).
more
division
to
no a
who value
1 2
philosopher independent
74,3; 75,2.
PlnLd. Gr.
102, 6 sq.
*
3'at.
logic.
8 sq^.j
PUld.G7-.lILi.
118,
4.
'Deornm,
giderum
JSp. 58,
i. 92. is that
nafur"
de
IIL tion
The of
highest concep-
Being ; this is vecespartly corporeal, partly tncor- jam a formation? moritm et poreal ; the corporeal is partly sernnt : sed lerani an jmum lifeless the ad and tratiant partly living, ipsarum qua* rerum, ; with a magjiitudinem adtollunt. livingis partly animated Cf. vi, soul and partly inanimate (tf/ux^ s ^ot- Qu- i- ProL
and vide (pv"ri$,
iUd,
IEL i. 192,
P
4,
Quod? inquu,
""
erit j)re-
210
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VIII.
maintain
that
Physics are
the
higher
which
than
Ethics, in
with
His
Jrigh
from
us
higher than
earthly darkness
cerned they are conlead Human ; they alone into the light of heaven,
show
the things,
Author
be
and
arrangement of the world ; it would not if physical while to live, were investigations
us.
worth
forbidden
greatness of combating if the from of freeing ourselves evils, our passions, ledge not were prepared by Physics for the knowspirit
Where
would be the
of the with
tion and brought into communicaheavenly, if we God were only raised above the
"
and external,
we soon
not
also
above
ourselves,"c.
these
while, Mean-
perceive that
a
declamations
than the personal passing mood Seneca elsewhere reckons opinionof the philosopher. have we just heard enquiries,to which physical the things him assign so high a position, among and are which go beyond the essential and necessary, of philosophical than rather au affair of recreation work though he does not overlook their proper; morally elevatingeffect on the mind ; l he declares
express
rather
tium
opera
'
Quo
null-urn
natura
qu"?ramm,
de
siderum
The alimento, "c. Similarly in JUp. magis ext,nosse naturam. of this ultimate a discussion on 65, 15, enquiry gain greatest is defended follows : as magnificetitia causes is,quod Jiominem mereede, sed Ego quidem prior a ilia ago et sui detinet, nee eolitur (.Ep. 95, 10, tracto, quibus pacatnr miraculo animus, et in e prius scrutor^ deinde Jiii "c ) n c 1 mundum. 19 Ne 209, nu?ie 117, (cf. quidem Ep. sup. p. ut existimas, perdo. tempm, 4) : Dialectic is only concerned
. .
with
the si
outworks
of
wisdom.
1st
enim
nee
omnia,
in
si
?wn
conci-
quid evagari adtollunt distrahaiitiir, amplos Jiabet ilia [sapientia] imdilem Deorum levant et de In the cona-nimuni. : secessus spatiososgue
Etia/in hanc
libet, dantur
sitbtilitatem
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VIII.
history.
answer
Meanwhile
the
contents
of
the
work
very
* to imperfectly
the
it opens
; it
contains
natural of
discussions
of isolated in
the
manner
learned
independent and
Seneca's
them,
the
and
material
were
alteration
if
even
part of greater
what
different totally
from
they are.
since their
mostly
to
have
been
taken
It is the
from
same
other
cessors.2 predenatural
physical meta-
with other
on writings
His
are
attributed
to Seneca.3
The
and
theo-
and
logical enunciates,
he occasionally
doctrines.
philoregard to sophy. But even here, no importantdeviations from, the Stoic traditions are to be found. Like the Stoics, the corporeality of all the Eeal ; 4 Seneca presupposes
more
1
of
value in
In
read
proof of this let anyone tise, the beginning of the treaand he comic the will
According
to
Plin. H.
N.
i.
9, 36
water
scarcely
be
an
able when
to resist the
feeling of
after
animals
and
stones. Servius
a
almost
disappointment,
the declamations of
natural
quiry, entence concluding sen-
author,
on
treatise,
vi.
above-mentioned
on
the
dignity
after the Si niMl
omnia,
154, De
torum.
JEgyp-
sol am,
metisus
certe esse,
Dcuin, continues
2\runc
CtJEp. 117,2;
106,4;
some
106,
ad Audi QUOS
2
5 ;
where
Seneca,
sions concluself. it him-
transversos
on
materialism,
Cf.
this
subject,and
the
expressly teaches
content
of Nat.
Qu.,Phil.
d. Gr.
III. i. 191, 2, 3.
GOD
AND
MATTER.
21
like them
he
in
discriminates
the
matter
from
matter
as
the force
;
]
CHAP.
VllL
working
does
it,and
Deity from
same sense
and
:
he the
this in
exactly the
the spiritus,
forms
the
holds
Deityis
as
substances.2
Even
incorporeal essence,
whole
manner.
hut
the TTvsv/Jia
permeating the
extended
So relation
also
he
follows the
God the and
Stoic
doctrine
:
of the
between
God
world
is not
world, but
of merely the reason of the the whole itself, Seneca, however, things.4
more
emphaticallythe
;
moral and in
with
Gr. of
this he
Ill, i.
1.
Cf. Pldl.tl.
131,
3 ;
rialistically ; that
even
visible
177,
Proofs
God, 131,
161, 2
2
135,
5.
as parts of things are described the Deity (Phil.d. Gr. III. i. U6, 6) ; that only a corporeal god
Seneca's
will he
can
take
back
into
himself
the
conception
discussed nection
3
of by means the world's conflagration (Z,e. 141, 1). If, therefore, Seneca,
corporeal
world
Seneca
here,
but,
everything body ("Jp. 117, 2), it follows he what that (Up. 102, says of the 7) must hold good even
world
"
very explicit (ad Helv. 8, 3) places the Plathat the fact* tonic conception of Deity as the and be- a efficient must incorporeal reason, which side
Stoic
viz., that
the
unity
upon it the
"
of the tohe
discriminating
only
correown
them,
second
spends
4
.
opinion,
the be
soul which
of
same
with of
Deity
in fact,
Cf PMl d. Gr. III. i. 146, 6 ; 148, IjalsoJV. 16(ap.Lact.I"2s". i.5,27) : guamr4s ipsep"r totum
as Deity" is, as we part shall presently find,conceived by Seneca, in agreement with Stoic school, matethe whole
seaorj)us("Q.mundi)inte}iderat;
and also the and Stoic doctrine of Pneuma
r6vos.
214
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, VTTT
under
and
arrangement
the world
aspect. God is the highest teleological science, whose the perfect Spirit, wisdom, omnireason, His beneficent goodholiness, ness, and, above all, are continuallyextolled.1 He loves us as a and desires to be loved by us, and not feared ; 2 father,
and
Creator and
the
course
ruler
He
is,is
world
perfectand beautiful,and
blameless Since
in
;
of the in many
which
Seneca
proves
ways.4
his the
generaltheory of
moral the
the universe
so
has
ception con-
its centre
life of man,
in his
element physical
:
is less
nent promi-
ethical
it is the
care
of the
Deity
goodness and wisdom, in. which His to Seneca; and revealed perfectionis principally therefore it is inevitable that the personal aspect of the Deity,in which, as reason forming and governing the world and working according to moral ends, should from the world itself, He is distinguished as preponderate, compared with the Pantheistic aspect, in which the Deity is not only the soul,but the substance of the world. It is going too far, ever, howHis
to
abandoned
a new
and
thus
to
ethics
whereas
1
Stoicism given
in
Gocl
3
and
in
Authorities
d.
Pkll
348, 1.
found:
*
26
4
Inst. i. 6, III. i. p.
5.
Of.
j
Phil, d, @r.
171, B
8
178, 2
135,
j
15 X"fl P-MV. 8$.; 2, 6; ii. 29, 4-6; iv. 19, 1; Eawf. De Ira, ii. 27, 1; cf. p. 313, 1.
Holzherr,i. 33
36;
ii. 5 8$$.
FORCE
AND
MATTER.
215
one,
in
Seneca
is to
they appear
him
as
CHAP.
VIIL
the incor-
will, by His freeand that his god is no longerthe god of the but of the Platonists. Our previousarguStoics, ments will rather have shown that the conceptionof is peculiar God, which according to this exposition to Seneca, is in no way foreign to the elder Stoics ; that they,too, laid great stress on the goodnessand of God, and on His benevolence to man; wisdom they, the Spirit that guides all as too, regarded Him the reason that has ordered and adapted all things, thingsfor the wisest ends ; by them also the belief
in
the world
and the
of
coincides morality
also
of God.1
on
the
have
shown
Seneca,
those the
is far from
definitions
school
distinction between
a
is
only
derived
in
and consequentlyis often annulled distinction, of the world's development; 2 the course God
in the irvsvfia, conceived
of the Stoic and
as
that
1
the doctrine
to
school,
ex-
which Prov.
Seneca,
;
indeed,
when
mere
8q.
pressly appeals
Seneca
as
in qttes-
De
5,9
(the
exactly the
from
III. i.
is
quoted
d.
Phil, Chrysippxis,
143, 2.
the
proposiartist is
herr's chief
proof
that
Divine
not
between
God
and
seen
dependent
follows but also Phil.
his material, he
65),as (23p.
Phil.
will be
herein
only Plato,
is shown
from
as Chrysippus,
216
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
.
and .corporeal,
not
in the
1__ the
_
God
the
world
to
be
the
same
identifies
the
law
of the
universe, and
of difference elder
any
unalterable
concatenation certain
natural
exists
causes.4 between
If,
his
therefore, a
theologyand
consist in
that
of the
up
this Stoics,
does not
his
giving
essential definition of
new
theirs,or
introducingany
the he
definition ; of the
it
is
constituents
Stoic the
therefore
to
sometimes
is
the
Socratic-Platonic of the
a primarily
consequence
the moral
as
and
elements speculative
to
the
latter is subordinate
the
former, so
the
metaphysical and
Stoic than
are theology
the ethical.
all the
easier
on
this
account
of
the
upon
his
and theology,
it is undeniable
1 2
Vide Phil.
supra, 213, 3.
d. ("}?.III. i. 146, 6; m 92, 30: Totwn ; J8p.
et umrm
Dei
wa
4
9iom"i)ia"sunt
wa/rw
ntentis
14$, 1 ; 140
ct
gfft"stafa
hoc,quo contincmur,
Daus:
cst
et sooil summ
qfus 0t
140
: m.
membra. 3 Pkil
LOG. tit. and Phil. S. G"r, III. 157, 2; 168, 2; of. 108, 1, 2. Tihe same results from Be'ncf. vi. 23, though Seneca
at first exif the will
d, Gr.
III. 1 iv. 8, 2
148, 1
tura
Henef.
Ke" idem
sine Bco
est nee
natura, di"tat
as presses himself of the gods were the author est utritMgve, of the laws of the universe.
Nw
"na-
Dots
siM
("fficio
. .
naturam,
NATURE.
THE
WORLD.
217
oppositionof God
with
more
and
matter, in
sense
CHAP. VIIL
the
ethical
oppositionof
asserted strongly
on
by
him
than
their
original
the
'
unity.1 If,however,
limits
of the
Stoic
he did doctrine,
step overreally
them.
Nor and of do
we
find in
Seneca's that
theory of
contradicts
Tkeorintf
tJie m"rld nature.
nature
anything
His
new
prin2
of ciples
the Stoics.
utterances
concerningthe
of the world
out ;
the
formation
its
of contradictions,4
maintaining itself in the ceaseless change of things; its beauty 5 assertingitself in the of its productions; the perfectadaptamultiplicity tion
of
means even
7
and
to
ends
in
its
arrangement/
not
cause us
as
to
which
doubt
accounts
;
the
evil in
serve
it should
to
any
"
all these
we
complete and
sources
verifythe'
have
from
other
To
respectingthe
super-
doctrines
1
of his school.
Vide
23.
and
8
27, 3 SQ. : V. Be. 8" 4 sq. ; Jgp. 107, 8 ; and Phil. d. Gr. III. i.
In
Seneca
doctrines
the
theory
in
179, 3 ; 18S, 1. 5 J^c.ett.l71,3;j?d""/.iv.23. 6 J8p.118, 16; I"e PromdA. 1, 2-4 ; Nat. Qu. i. PTOCGDI. 14 s$.
Of. "with these
that in
nearer
the
un
world
general
corrupted
Benef.
iv. 5 ; ad
proportion
first
He
however,
notions of
wiunis9 in
is
the
latter
aggerated
Posido.
eminently Stoic.
d. Gr. III. 1. 285, 1 ; 286, 2 ; S61 sq* 7 Concerning the Stoic Theo-
FT.
13, and
dicee, and
tion i. 173 in it
Seneca's
participa-
might
10, 1,
3 ; \ii.
be
sg$.
218
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
had already teleology he opposes the propositions an earlyperiod, created world was not merely for men : it
which, the Stoic
its purpose
an
carries
l
in
follows
we
its
laws ;
under
it is
undue
limitation
place
it
the
its
miring aspect of the useful, instead of adglory as such.2 Pie does not, however,
deny
was
that
in
to
the
the
paid
welfare the
gods
universe
and
their
parts- the elements, their qualities transition into each the other;4 on
its
heavenly bodies,
nature,5 their
their
revolution, their
on
divine
influence
earth, and
the
spiritthat
animates
it ; 7
on
the
interconnection of the universe,8 regular interrupted by no empty spaces," all this onlydeviates from the do Stoic tradition in regard to certain details which whole;9 not affect his theory of the universe as a Im" 27, 2; Nat. Qu.viL vi. 20. Eetief. 2 JRenef.iv. 23 sq. 3 Benef. I. e. ; vi. 23, 3 ."?#. ; i. 1. 9 ; ii. 29, 4 sq. ; iv. 5 ; Nat, 18 "tpa8S. v. Qv".
1
Be
JBcnsf. t
iii. 29, the it in the
c.\
Nat. he
30, 3
2),but
manner
his
the
school pro-
theory of
as
natural
gnosticationthrough
which,
the
stars,
(Nat. Qit.ii. 32, 6 3$. j ad Marc. 3 and iUd. 185, 18, Qu. 3). (Nat. 10) ; 7 vi. 16); Nat. Qn.il C; J"".31,*5. Nat. Qu. vi. 16; ii. 6. On 5 Nat. Qu. vi. 16, 2 ; vii. 1, 6 ; the repose of the earth, wide D" Pnmd" i 1, 2 ; l$p.93, 9; Nat. 2.1,4 ; J3ew"f.iv. 23, 4; vi. 2123.
6
1. 179, 3 (Nat. Q%. iii.10, 1 ; 3) ; ibid. III. i. 183, 2; 184, I (Nat. Qu,. ii,
4
PMl.
d. 6fr. III.
confined
to
influence
Qu. i. 4
In
; of. vii.
2, 3.
regard
to
this influence
natu-
Nat.
Qu,
ii. 2-7
(cf.Phil.
comets,
Seneca
4).
ral influence
(0.ff.
Bo in
regard
to the
220
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VIII.
be the however,certainly
even
warm
finest of all It
substances,finer
a
than
fire and
air.1
in consists,
word,
of
breath,or Trvev/Aa? This theory had not prevented the divine the elder Stoics from recognising nature to the fullest and dignityof the human spirit by it possessed extent, and Seneca is so completely
that
more reason
there
is
no
other
theorem
which
he reiterates
more
effluence
a
Divine has
Spirit implantedin
up his
taken
abode
this
our
to relationship
ii. 47) (Holzherr,
is
Grod he
that
bases, on
lie
hand, his
is modo
to say
affection
only
se
arguing
from
Stoic himself
premiss
share.
quodaMi
which On
he the contrary, he is speaking if he in his own name ; and gation investithe declares ultimately of the
is
did not
(Phil.
and work
must
as
d. Or. III. i.
120,
the
poreal, cor-
3) ;
can
if the upon be
corporeal alone
the
body,
had
soul shown
1
something
i.
question whether
to be
Cleanthes As be
already
flame
or
(ibid. III.
194, 1).
the
]3p.57, #.
air cannot
or a
does
not
to
the
subjected to
sio animus, oonstatj de.
pressure
blow,
in earnest
is
as
qui
cis
toMiisxiwo
which proposition
to
animo, noti potcst brought jjreh"njl'l a"liiic tenuwr est igtw, jpvr enquiry, qm
. .
quiteindependentof
a
it
"
omne
2
body.
of the
JSp. 50,
man
can
affections soul
bodies, and
for
crooked
et
/ oibseqwMtior aliud
$6
reason cause
given
the
Quid
est
aniw.tis
they
changes
and
pression, exqu(im"
ftuodamimodo
esse
Jtfibens
tanto
Vides sjtiri.ttts?
atttem
s/riritum
alia Of. Phil
accounted
'Mtas
for
Tom
muni-
fextas
ff.
corpori imprimi
This his the also Seneca
own
corjww.
to be
declares
opinion.
are
d. "r. III. i. 196, 2, and 142, 2,where definitions entirely versal similar are proved to be uni-
If, however,
affections
among
the Stoics.
so something corporeal,
is the
VIRTUES
AND
VICES.
221
demand
for the
for
elevation
the
of
the
soul
above
the
CHAP.
VIIL
and earthly,
mankind
in
every
internal freedom
of the
who
is conscious
of his
This
thought,
makes
on
Seneca
Stoic
in
man
which
doctrine
the
Divine
is his reason,
to
reason
that
alone ; but
opposition
stand
the irrational
impulses,the affections ; and in combating the affections Seneca, as we shall find,in with the whole Stoic school,finds the accordance problem. The elder Stoics had weightiestmoral
not
allowed
oneness
them
in their belief
as
to
the
essential nature.
But
already
of
Posidonius
be
the soul
admitted
must
as
well
as
the reason.2
more
Similar
on
reflections
have
had
the
influence
of human
nature.
With
human
beingwas
all
men
implanted in
nor cease
that the
a
superiorpower
would
never
of evil in human
as society
whole
be of
broken,
manners
the
;
3
complaints of the
and
corruption
that
even
Some
of
his
utterances Phil
on
12 ;
so.*
this
subject are
2
quoted,
d.
vide
V"B" ad Helm.
Cf. PML
i. 253
Qu. i.Prcef.
*%. ; JSenef,vii. 27 ;
Hj).94,
54 ;
222
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP Yirr.
"
time
"^ innocence
would
oniy Of short duration.1 Such a universal phebe regardedas accidental : cannot possibly nomenon none or if a few only sustain the conflict with sin,
^e
next to
none are
it ; and therefore
must
in man,
an
side
by
side with
not
Divine, there
and side
sin
also be
element from
element
Divine
error
by
and
side with be
reason,
which
and
is
cannot
derived, an
which
This finds
to
irrational
strives
against
nature
reason.2 Seneca
irrational element
of human
which
of in the body, the opposition primarily more the Spirit he emphasises much
stronglythan the ancient Stoics appear to have The body, or, as he also contemptuouslycalls done. is something so worthless that we cannot the flesh, it, 3 it is husk of mere a think meanly enough of it :
the
a
soul :
tenement
can
into which
never
it has
entered home
for
:
feel itself at
burden
for the
and
elsewhere.
in
like Expressions
natural and
are
destiny
not
and
vocation,
in us;
those
JBp.11, 1-7; 57, 4, are ot less importance. 1 Nat. QM. iii.30, 8 ; cf. PJdL
d. Gr
'
inherent themselves
they develop
gradu-
III. i. p. 156, 3.
ally. But that does not exclude the theory that they develop
natural
:
Seneca
to admit
this.
from himself seems freely themselves 8 lie says, lNrms' /#". 05, 22 si cxistwws
euro
. . .
causes. we
NuMgwwi
in
Ep.
04:, 55,
istft
ineftwn,
noluenwi
vitito nasti:
sunt inyesta,
. .
wwermt,
nos
sttjwnulli
.
WMnqunM
Jwjus
W.WM
Cum cor/Htwulimtittttor.
ritio
nfituracmoiliat
Ufa
But
wit, di"traJiam
tatvm
.
. .
nm
Ulo
sooift-
inteqrostac
this* utterance
accordinfx
the Stoic
contemptm
eat.
oorporis
Concorn.Ma/ro.
j arid
"ni corta
libertds
to
standard
of
fatalism,
Vices stand,
our
iadeed, in
opposition to
the expression cf. (id ing1 5 24, ; Kp. 74, 16 ; 02, 10 Phil, d. 6V. III. i. 445J, 8.
IMMORTALITY.
223
sarilylong;1 with
its
flesh
it
must
do
and
battle,
suffer-
CHAP. YIIL
through its body it is exposed to ings, but in itself it is pure exalted the body, even above
above
attacks
and
as
invulnerable,2
Grod
is exalted soul
matter.3
The the
true
life of
the
therefore,with
departure from the to exchanging the Platonic though Seneca is averse belief in immortality4 for the Stoic theory of a
limited continuance of existence after
death, he
approximates to the latter 5 (ashas already closely been shown) in his idea of the close relationship the present and future life, and existingbetween
also in
respect
strictest
to
to
the
duration
of future him
term
existence
a
expressionsinvoluntarily escape
in
which
would
Stoic have
the
sense
of the
6 even
not
ventured
employ
as
the
of the pre-existence
soul,which
personal existence
finds body
cum
certainlyhad
no
place in
1
his
system,
33
:
countenance
2
in passages
24,
5
:
The
Ad kac
ne
Marc.
came
Omne
illi sidat.
is
a onus
the
est,
is
:
grave abstrahatur
certamen et
102,
The natalis.
day
?
Ad
ceterni
Depone
120, 14
Helv.
Quid
domum
cunGtaris
esse
Nee
atque
est
Ulna
et
pitium
tium.
et
Jwe
sed Jios-
animus
after tius
quidem
vnamis.
hospi-
65, 16
ae
inici
8
pondus
illo acoessit cit. 21
:
prcvnente
Loo.
in
Ep. 65,
24
Quern
in
lioo
urgetur, in
vinoulis est,nisi
be
a
mundo
"c. pMlosopliia,,
I will not
slave to
non
Prof.
4
Phil. d. Gr.
1. 203 Ibid.
III. i.
154,
1 ;
202,
5
G
sq.
aeternus
hoc
Iwimortalis,
; and ;
(J$]j".
cilio
animus
;
57, 9
Phil.
d. 6fr. III. i.
Ep. 102, 22
ad Marc. III
Polyl.9, 3
5 Part
24, 5 ; ad i. 203, 3.
154, 1
203, 3).
224
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, yni'
where
the
recollection
of its
high
descent
is
en-
joinedupon the soul,and its elevation to heaven is to its original as a return home, when it represented the soul found it.1 leaves the body behind, where different parts But as with Plato the psychologically with the anthropocombined of the soul had been logical of soul and body, so Seneca cannot opposition
entirelyescape
and
this
inference.
With
Posidonius of
a
discrimination
in
rational irrational
and
the
soul, the
them
to
far adheres
the
doctrine there
still remains
Chrysippus the
assumes
important
centre
a plurality personality while Chrysippus makes of original faculties, one fundamental and the same faculty, generate reason, affections and desires through the changesthat take
in the very
cannot
24, 5; Up. 70, d. 12; 102, 22; 120, 14; Phil 65, 16 : "r. III. i. 203, 2 ; 3 ; $]".
Ad
Marc, The soul will rflrerti ad ilia
rationale : Hind Mtio s"ntiti. (02,30 ##.). git-orionfit/it 2 "oc. oit. 8 : Zrratwnalis Supra, p. 64 $q$. pars 8 anwii habet duns 94, 1 : Pnto inter mfl partes, alteJUj). amHtwrnm^ mconrcniet, externa corpori raw, aMwiosam, tecfuv in honor in a,m" ew, poteritem, adftfatwni" posit adtjitirij corpus
a-niwi coli,in animo wityistras, per QUOM
ess"
Cartes
mwtmtur
aUMMrgiw, pro/tieripyunifwin*
(tlieseven
Vide Phil
d,6
OCCASIONAL
SCEPTICISM.
225
eclecticism
in these
deviations
from
CHAP. YIIL
which
he
matic dogfrom
perhaps,
his mother
in
epistleto
concerning
of all
afforded
secures
by
Grod
the
dependence against
But
it
God,
he
himself
every has
things attack by
an
not
deciding what
sceptical
is.1
sound
when
of the
he
elsewhere,
causes,
highest
declares
fj^^"
all speGulatwn-
man
must
be the
content
among
to
of conflicting
to
choose
most
our
"
probable:
In and up
determine
same
the he
one
truest, exceeds
says
can
powers.2
What
sets
can
the
way
of
the
soul
where
it
is, no
and
is not other
One how
this
definition
another
clear
the
to
soul, which
about
in justified
attain itself,
certainty
be
things?
1
2
We
should
not
calling
Plato,
has
con-
Of. Z.
c.
145, 1.
echoes Tim.
the
jBp. 65, 10 (cf. 65, 2, and 65, 23) : jFer ergo judex sententiawi
et
29,
in
from Seneca
quoted
text.
preceding
pronuntia,
verisimillimttm
quis
Meat.
est
tiM
videatitr
awn
qitisverissimttm
tarn
dicer e, Id
enim
ipm
veritas
swjvra ; and
nos
after
qiia/m he has
sunt,
animum
ignovamus.
. .
Habere
nos
:
omnes
fatebuntur
ille rector
set forth
Stoics theories
qididto/men
si-tanimus
he
proceeds
thus
Aut
for sententiam aut, quod faciU'us eoncentum in ejustnodi rebus est, nega tifri turn, esse, aMus qu-enet Dei dwinam dam, alius vim ligueve et nos r"verti jufie. In this we pa,rtem,a,limtenvmsimuma"'refni, estimating passage it clearly aMus that must rememher incorporalem potentiam,.
nostri^ non magis dominusque tiU qui$q%a"m easpediet, gwam alius illim, dicet $j)iriidbisit:
"26
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. vm.
Seneca
to
which
otherwise he is not
because of such isolated utterances, sceptic method is the dogmatism of his whole opposed,but they,at any rate, prove that and attacks of scepticism, free from severe Cicero
and it is,above other eclectics,
that, as
all
with
theories which things,the strife of philosophic the dogmatism of the Stoic to waver. causes The Stoicism of Seneca is purer in the sphere to which he himself attaches the greatest importance
"
EtTiics.
namely, ethics.
doctrine
in its
The
idealism
of the
also in
Stoic
moral
grandeur, and
a
its
asperities,
finds
in
him
zealous with
and
eloquent representative.
Stoics that there is
alone the
no
He
declares
the
good
Essential agreement
mtk the
but
virtue, because
nature
:
virtue
can
is,for
man,
to according
he
paint
satisfaction
which
it secures,
principles
of the
fortune,the
the
Staics,
glowing
that
and
colours glaring
man
the virtuous
"
is in
no
way
indeed, is even superior; Deity, in a certain respect, not in he requires from us merely moderation eradication ; emotions,1but their unconditional our
he reiterates
the the
well-known
remarkable
ments state-
about the
Non
unity and
perfectcompleteness of
sanguinem dicat, deerit,qiii
calorem:
adeo animo
non
the
upon
on
qui
somnium
this is
tant. unimpor-
Vide
PMl.
1 *#., and
Ep.
12,
still
less. is
Up.
102
quid,
Deum
timet
:
(beginning) a belief
which
in immortality, rather
based
mo
228
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
wicked these
nature
and
weak
he
as
Seneca
so
maintains,
and in
have
our
as evils,
also says,
deeply rooted
by
is conditioned happiness of the wise man by his wisdom, the autarchyof the virtuous virtue which correspondsto the Stoic demands.
The
if this virtue and wisdom us are profit or hardly ever, to be found in the actual never, world ? 2 By these arguments the older teachers of have seen, been duced inthe school had already,as we demands to modify their original by important still more likely to concessions, and Seneca was him not see procedure. Thus we adopt the same which his predecessors only approving the concessions human made to had in weakness, but of his utterances deviatingstill further from many the original severity of the system. Like the
What
does
it
he older Stoics,
attributes
certain
value
these
to
other
virtue;3
in
and
reckons
sense.4
things longer
that two procircumterntwo
the
wider other
This
is
shows similar and not connection
no
is unimportant.5
the
hand, he
dence kinds
Phil. of
and
ances
d. Gr. III. i. 252 $$$., utterThe supra,, p. 221. Seneca those there almost of the
only
of from
expositionwere
quoted
word for
duced
stances, experiences,and
with
on
Apostle
peraments,
writers immediate
to agree,
even
that
need
stand
in any in order
of strikingbetween
points of
which of and
con-
them
to the
given rise
personal
which p.
legend
intercourse of.
An.
3
7, 4
J$p.4,
2 ;
90,
44.
correspondence;
377
E.g.,yyro"ucta, (vporj-y^va,
cerning
AbMndL
Baur, J)rei
A. St.
*##., and
et
Paul, Fleury, Seneque Paris, 1853 ; i. 269 sq$. Hisally regarded, this coinci-
concerning which cf. Ep. 74, 17: ; Vita Beat. 87, 29; 22, 4). Seneca calls them also yotwra
and
4
oommoda,.
In
Benef*
v.
13, 1, he agrees
EXTERNAL
GOODS
AND
ILLS.
229
he
sometimes
for the
extravagantly OHAP.
necessaries of
'__
counsels
compliance with
of all that patetic of the Perimore
customs, existing
can
and
careful But
we
avoidance
attract
notice.1
language
nature
than
the
when the
Seneca,
in
self-satisfying
to
virtue, and
more
indifference
things
can
ternal,2 ex-
is once
no
of
opinionthat Fortune
than gifts
find
man
better
steward alone
a
for her
can
the wise
;
folding un-
since riches
giveopportunityfor
of
to
the
of
may add
number
virtues,and
the
is the
external
goods
which with
something
virtue.3 of says
cheerfulness
same
springs from
what
It
thing
he
evil.
It
sounds
nimous magna-
enough
Fortune of
to
an
challenges philosopher
he
the
to
encounter, when
which spectacle affords
extols the
wise
man
the
gods ; but this lofty tone changes only too completely into a feeble and querulous sound, when Seneca (topass
20, 9 ; 62, 3. And, on the other hand, dc. Fin. iii 20, 68 ; JEJp. animi, corjporis" fortunes. Else14, 14. 2 Vzt. 74, where, however 17; Mg.9 Mp. 92, 5; De (Ep. he 5 SreSeat. 2. 8 62, 124, 22, 76, 13) expressly ; Ep. ;
with the
with
misfortune
the
Academy
and
the Peri-
named
view is
ad dimtias (to everything except wssima improperly (precario} riches) per cmtemptum Further The former via est. tiarwn good. be
the
true dim-
proofs
to
found
in
Ohrys-
Phil.
d.
Gr.
III. t
215, and
ippus
1
and
8, 4 *q". ; Trangu. An. Senef. v. 4, 3 ; 6, 1 ; JBp.29, 1 ; 90, 14; Senef. vii. 8 *".; tip. 178,2; 215,2.
swpra, p. 227, 1. 3 Vit. Seat. 21 1$. ; J0p.5. 4 Promd,. 2, 6 *q$. ; JBp.64, d. Gr, III. i, 4 : 85, 39 ; PMl.
230
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
over
other
constantly assuring us
and
is
no
evil, man,2
his
that
every
land
home
wise
over
breaks
own
forth
into
unmanly
lamentations
when or exile,3
we
he enforces the
a
courtlyprinciple
wrong
must
put
in
those
doings
;
4
themselves that
he argues
no
more
with
there
who
citizens or more jects subobedient peaceable and when than the philosophers;5 even Cato, for sacrificing is blamed is elsewhere so idolised,
himself time,6
on
Though
we
must
allow
this
subject are
and
question whether
utterances
excuses
his
general
He
Stoics.
himself
a
cases,
nor
it is
ever
true, by avowing
will be ; he
that he is not
man,
on
only
is
regards himself
1
the
road
to
wisdom,
master
and
As
in
Ep. 53,
troubles
where
the short
man
and
4
his
incredible
(incrediHlia
a
10).
De also
.
Ira,
the
ii. 33 ;
voyage Not
are
described.
in
cf
later 2 ;
admonitions
to
only
in
his vi.
as Benef. 27, writings, EJJ. 24, 3 ; 85, 4 ; but also and exile during his own especially
prudence, Ep. 103, 5 j 14, 14. Elsewhere, indeed (as in De Ira, iii. 14, 4), Seneca's judgment
5
was
quite different,
where
to
his
;
Ep. 73,
he
among
that
was
other the
8,
3 sqq. ; 10, 2 ; 12, 5 $([%. 3 Ad Polyl. 2, 1^ 13, 3; 18, and in the Epigrams from 9
-,
Nero)
honoured
philosopherswho
to them
6
exile. bius
The Seneca
to to
to
Polyhave
Ep. 14,
of the
the
subsequently
press on account ies it contained
of the this
supnatter-
sake
freed-
FREE
WILL.
23
content
if
l
things
his
with
him
are
going
hnman
somewhat weakness
_
CHAP.
better ;
but
concessions
to
his avowal relate to the wise, and leads us expressly back to the question as to the real existence of the which Stoic wise man, Seneca, as before remarked, has But the scarcely
if he thus for
courage
to
answer
in the
man
affirmative.
is progressing
substitutes
the
who
the
on
man
wise
as
man,2 the
he is in whereas
requirements of the
sarily therebynecesas
system
are reality
lowered
; and
it at first seemed
if
and virtue he would and through perfect wisdom that we could be like God, it ultimatelyappears be must satisfied to imitate the gods, so far as human weakness allows of it.3 In other places, easier again,Seneca speaks as though nothing were than to lead a life according to nature and reason, and as if such a life were and entirely a matter solely of will and not of power ; 4 but this homage which the philosopherpays to his school and to himself
cannot
conceal
earlier
from
us
from
the
on
spirit
the
of the power
proud reliance
of moral
he
could
express and
himself
so
weakness
wickedness defects.
of
We
and
the unavoidableness
of these
Vlt. Beat.
3 j
16
6
57,
2
89,
ad "elv.
s^.j cf. 5, 2.
Ep.
Vit. imbecilUta"patitwr,
Beat.
quo-
18,
modo
*
Cumpotuero,
9 ;
mvam
Cf.
72, JEtp.
s$$. ; 75, 8
vportet.
Mp. 41,
13,
116,
8 ; Be
Ira,
ii.
1 8%q.
duces, gua/n"uan*
232
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. YIII.
Seneca,
in
spiteof
of
utterances
about
the blessedness
the
and
Divine
of human
consideration
all life is is the
a
that
death
onlyplace
to conclude
refuge.
It
would
assuredlybe
in earnest
so
wrong with
from
the
which principles
frequentlyand
influence
of
in his life he
the
a
from
of which
he
to belongs)
vacillations and
:
.
contradictions
life
He
as
Ad
vita tarn
sq.
. .
Omnia
in Twc navi2
Seneca's
blameless.
no
altogether
made of
himself he studia
mari
such anni
claim;
inter
vana
speaks
gantibus
mortis The
est.
mdlus LOG.
jporti($ nisi
cit.
the
con-
4,
of
rhetorical
nature
acknowledges plainly
was
makes
from
wise
the
man,
valuable.
same
find Thus
where. else-
was
clogged with
were
epistlead
:
Marc.
11,
Tota
fleUlis vita
37 j 102, 22 detineor car^
possessionswere
and rious luxupatible com-
est,"c.
Gram
cere.
2
Ep. 108,
terrenoqm
greater, and
manner
his
of life much
than
were
properly
Seneca's
character,
has been in both times
as
is
quentlyBeat. frethe
with
17 ;
his
principles ( Vit.
well
known,
defamed
strongest
and
on
manner,
in
;
cient an-
his deadly enemy xiii. 42, Suilius,ap. Tac. Ann. often and Dio Cass. (if he is speaking extravagantly glorified. This is not the place for a comin his own plete lowing name) Ixi. 10, folthe other
modern
and,
examination
the
same
or
an
equally
question,
or
for
of its literature
sesterces),
would to
his avarice,and
his
luxury, we
that
mistake
regard
OF
SENECA.
233
so,
as
not
so
alive
to
the
we
tencan
(
CHAP.
deneies
the
*
over-rich and over-powerful minister of Nero, ascribed to external possessions a far and perhaps greater value, unavoidable beyond what was
'
part is ascribed to by Dio, Ixi. 2. Meanwhile is censured Seneca by Tacitus, xiv. 52, for precisely the opposite
conduct.) "Whether
were
they
for Bio
not can-
in have
his
position
use
made
more
accessory
to
the
plan
(as
it,than
Agrippina's
maintains,
say.
was
murder
Ixi. When
12)
Tacitus
Concerning
houses and
riches of Ms been
their
counsel
to have
and
splendour
except silent gardens, for the 2 saving of cf Nat. Qu. iii. Prcef* ; Ep. acquiescence; had been if it Tacit, xiv. Agrippina, even 77, 3 ; but especially would to have seem effected, 52 sq". According to Dio, Mi.
country
.
he loan
was
been
own
millions the
causes
of sesterces
of the Nero in favour courtier
may
death
Seneca
the
speaks
had crime
;
of
rection insurof
under
he had
Britannicus.
be
it Similarly,
as a
that
he,
reproach himself
did
not
mean
he it dark his
pressly ex-
empire,
lent
a
oppose
it,and
xiv.
even
silent, or
to many
once
his
aid When
defended
a
(Tac.
11)
mains re-
regard
had tMs
wrong.
committed
himself
So of
also
spot on unworthy
and Ms
his life.
flattery
freedman
hardly
don to abanSeneca
Claudius
post,
course,
even
if
had
a
the moral
like the
it
a
from
ment, banishhe
and
despondency
failure is
duty
to
displays
are
under
misfortune,
blame-
commonwealth.
difficult
justly considered
with Ms
they
are
judgment.
Seneca and
Nero's
If,for
equally
Burrhus
for
unworthy
de
favoured
inclination
acting (Tac. xiii. 12 8$. j cf. c. that avers 2; xiv. 2), Tacitus
tMs could
was
mockery
valiant
to protestations
Helvia On Mm
the
best
thing they
to the
do
according
tion posi-
(4
230,2).
reproach of
immoral
conduct
and
14)
the
(L #.)are proof,but to (xiv. not only without circus, Tacitus tions. invenall appearance that gratuitous they had not us
by
Suilius
to
Mnder
it.
(An
Tacitas
describes
the
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. VIII.
expect from
his views.
him
perfect logicalconsistencyin
addition
to
If in
this
we
how him
side
in
or
the
we other,,
well
understand
a
even
questionsas
to
he had
clear
opinion he
is not
sistent alwayscon-
further
development
and Burmoral
are
of his
as ethics,
we
influence
rhus very
on
of Nero
Seneca
(Tac.
xiii.
2) as
tion, convicthrow
in
salutary. Seneca
himself
likewise
displaysparticular
a
61) to Ms appeals (I. c, xv. independent bearing towards gives Nero, of which. Tacitus an example (Tac. xv. 23), and
likewise
traits
favourable We school of know
which
that he
adopted
Plutarch, Goh. Ira,, 13, the habit of daily minute selfexamination lates I)io, Ixi. 18, also re(De Ira,, iii. 36 p. 461. in which he instance an *#.); that in his youth, from enthusiasm for philosophy, he restrained Hero's cruelty by a
bold word.
of him The
same
author
abstained
from
meat
during
to
(notwithstanding many years, according lix. tion's precept; and hatred in elsewhere),
Se Kal "\.\ovs
So-
many
/xafowTroXAota
'Paj- respects carried out the simple of life enjoined on cro^la mode him the and of the Stoic at by Attains, judgment even a virepapcis; this. ripeage (Ep. 108, 13-23). TaciTacitus far outweighs even tus Tacitus
to (xv. 23) calls him a vir (xv. 63) bears witness egregius; in xiiL 2, praises his his moderation (corpussenile et Jionesta ; in xv. oomitas victu 62, he parw the tentatwTTi) ; his he 1. to xv. where c. bequeathed he 45, says passage friends
uimm
before
his
et
jam
in
c.
guod pidoherrimum
sues
death
follows transfer
that Piso
conspiracyof
him
""
cannot most
destined
virtutum, his that of
for
the
clariself, him-
swnimwn
adduced evidence.
as
dictory contra-
One
fastigium deteoto.
much
not is
Seneca
his
admirable
wife 4 s%, ;
Mp. 104, 2,
63 s%.
only gives us
a man
sion impreshis
to
whom
"36
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
VIII
social conditions
time
must
have
need
evoked
of
lively feelingof
Stoic
weakness
and
help ;
degree given placein some the failures of humanity, and to sympathy with to the claims of philanthropic Stoic self-sufficiency sympathy and assistance; the cosmopolitanism of have been developed on the the school must chiefly of universal form side of feeling, in the love, of mankind. Finally, the less that circumstances in the way of afforded opportunity to individuals
must severity
with
the
course
of the
world,
fate pressed upon all, heavilythe common it fulfilled itself and the more the relentlessly the inclination for public life have been must more for the repose of private and the predilection lost, life have gained ground, but the more stronglyalso the necessityfor submission and for to fate, must
"
the
conduct
with
had
never
made
tMngseseternal.
perceived in Seneca's moral writings. The independence of external things, and virtue, *s assured to us wni"n is by by wisdom commended than by him. one no more energetically No to seek one our pressingly requires us more and to happinesspurelyand entirelyin ourselves,1
may
1
this
be
Numerous
authorities
in
for
30, 4
Beat. 21 ;
8g$. ; 77, 11
Marc.
Cons, ad
4, 3 85, 18
3 ;
," J@p.66, 14 ;
decided
9 sqq, ; De
declara:
; 39 ; 87 ; 11 sq. ; 44 ;
tions
this
subjectbelong
De
120,
92,
14
sg$. ; 72,
Provid.
2,
Const. 3,
ETHICS
OF
SENECA.
237
encounter
bravelywliat
fate may
send
us.
But
since
man
CHAP,
'_
it is his moral
constitution insists
alone which
most
gives to
this
freedom, he
attached, and
on emphatically
the
conscientious it is
fulfilment he
more
of the
conditions
the
more
to which earnest
on
becomes he
won
the
subject the
is
convinced
man's
that
the
be
over
inclination to
All
are,
as com-
severe
conflict,1
need of
he
Strictness
in
healing; the
bating of our faults is the chief problem of philoof this, the first condition of sophy ; the recognition in his old age he says of improvement ; 2 and even another he now himself that he is visibly as man, what his defects are.3 He, therefore,cannot sees
4= ; 8, 2 sq. ; 19, 4 ; tive of Christian conceptions, 4, 2 sq. ; Hrevit. v. Ep. 6, 1 : InteUego^ Ludli, non 2 ; ad Helv. 5 ; JBenef. Hi. 20, em"ndan me tantuni, sed trans1; Mp. R3, 11; 59, 8 ; 64, 4; figwari. Much, Indeed, is alin need of improvement : 74, 19 ; 75, 18 ; 85, 39. ways 5 ;
4,
2 ;
5,
Vita
Beat.
Cf.
Baur,
Drei
AbJiandl.
p.
Et
Jwc
ipsum argumentum
transla-ti
est in
40
2
ipsi cegros se esse Concerning the esmalum intra nostrum: seGus pression transfigurari (fjuzracf JSp. in visceribus 94, 48, where sedet, n"s est, popfyova-Qai) ipis words these are ad swnitatem et idea difficulter quoted from et fadenda, didioit Aristo : Qid quicu nos eegrotare pervenim/iis, mtanda nescimus. Initinm 9 percepit, nondwn, ac J2p. 28, : nisi in ea, qua didiovk salutis mtitia, est est, peccati (ac- sapiens ideo animus to Epicurus) ejus transfiguratus est. cording The expressiontherefore signiquantum potes te ipse coargue, of the inner transformation fies Vita Beat. 1, inquire in te, "c.
senserunt.
.
quotations in PHI. cL. Gr. III. i. p. 253 ^., and supra, cf. Mp. 50, 4 : Quid nos deeipimus? J"on est extrinthe
sqff. Besides
meli'us
animi,
guod
vitia, sua-, qua adTvue igvwrabat, videt. gratis Quibvadam cegris latio
eiim fit,
One
infects
another
Sana"
the
as
whole
disposition,
from the
accetu. T)imur,simodo separemur Similarly, ,%. 49, 9 j 7, 1 ; 94, 52 s#". ; 95, 29 s%.
3
distinguished
the
merely
on
conviction
and
hand,
and
on
merely
im-
In the is
remarkable
so
passage
temporary
which
strikingly sugges-
provement
38
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
too
stronglyimpress
self-examination
l
upon
and
a
us
the
necessity of
what
1_
severe
ourselves ; made
a
he
recommends
he himself
duty,to take preciseaccount every evening to our of the day past ; 2 he refers us conscience, hidden ; 3 from which nothing that we do can remain of the he reminds us gods, the ever present and deeds,4 of the day of words of our witnesses it will be death, that great judgment day when in man is genuine or false ; 5 in how much shown should regard the happithat we a word, he desires ness
of the wise moral side
all
as
the reward
he
and activity,
of the most
and life,
to which
great
part
of
his
writings.7
But
the
also
more
completely the
5 *#".,
individual
4 s$g. ; PUL
corre-
Of.
Ep. 50,
51,
GOT
Ep. 26,
He
d. @r.
6, 13 (nobis qiioqm
e$t
tmm
2 3
. . .
militandum
III. i. 204, 3.
6
proioe qii"eungue
.
into this
the
minutely
and 95th
2 ;
Ep.
a
43,
manner
live
in
letters, in the
former
such
universal
(deereta). In principles anyone both he made maintains conduct to be that, conpublic, the recorder autem e sidering greatness of human Qwld prodest the overwhelm and ocidos hominum et se corruption, auresqtte influence of Bona conscientia twwtcvre ? ing society, no bam advooat,mala etiam in soli- counteracting means should be left ext sollicita, tudine anxia unemployed ; 94, 52 $g. ; atgiw
could bear
.
. .
te
mi^er-um^
!
si contemnis
kwic
4
testem
Vita Beat.
20, 5
JBp.83, 1.
LOVE
OF
MANKIND.
239
sponds
to
Ms
moral
destination,the
connected with
more
closely
more
CHAP.
the others,
L_
and the purelywill he apprehend this relationship, will he extend it to all men. The more entirely Stoic principles respectingthe natural kinship of mankind, and the disinterested help which we owe to all without exception,have found in Seneca one of their most eloquentassertors ; * in his conception element of this relation, however, the political throughout recedes before the universallyhuman of the moral judge before element, and the severity which bears witness not only to a lovinggentleness the benevolent dispositionof the philosopherbut also to his accurate knowledge and impartial judgment In political of human life Seneca nature. which is not surprising feel no confidence, considering can
^
Universal
he lived,and
mass
his
personal
so
he
finds
the
of mankind
evil
that
we
cannot
without
moral
injury make
to
ourselves of the
our
dependent on
Commonwealth
their favours,and
too
the condition
us
hopeless for
waste
strength upon
too
it ; the individual
state
seems
to him
small
beside
polityof mankind
statesman,
and
of
of the activity
race
beside
fining con-
to allow of his
himself him
a
Those
2
connections
are
have upon
for free
far
greater charm
which
based
As
is shown
in Phil. d. Qr.
Clement,
cannot
III. L286,
2
Cf.
i. 3, 4 sgg., where we that what suppose says of the importance of the commonroler
some
ex-
Seneca
of the
(cf.mpra, 230, 7), J3p.14, De wealth, apart from also, and, concerningpolitics
4 sgq.
240
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP, YIII"
choice and
are
to regulatedaccording
the needs
To
we
and
of the
entire
marriage
have every
on
to
from held
told
the
married
of which life,
he
A- taste
a
degree, and we have already seen his need in reconciling of that he has difficulty of this relation and his noble conception friendship for himself.2 with the wise man's But sufficiency
very
marked
the
real
crown
of his
moral
the
doctrine
lies in
the
universal which
love
of man, itself
on
bestows
the meanest
slave does not
and
most
interest purely human all without even distinction, which in the even despised,
man
gentlenessof is so which disposition especially antagonistic to and which anger and hatred, tyranny and cruelty,4
;
the forget
in that
travagances of expression, is merely the language of a courtier ; it was not only quite true
roust
lost
its cliarm of
for
this
the
l
best of them,
fragments
treatise which, however, consist for the most part of quotations from cf. other authors and and
exam-
personal conviction
that
in
the Roman
empire as
the
it was
then
pies of good
wicked
women,
constituted,
Haase, iii.428 $qc[. On the of marriage there view enuncf PML d. 6fr. III. i. 203, ciated,
.
Romana,
was
:
the enim
urMs,
induit duci
linked Olim
with
second
do
vide
not
servation
even
n.
her
name)
sup.
aMerum
p. 234,
*
utriusque pernicie ;
wribiis
ut
illi
syq.
8
capite.
was
Ample authority for this is republic quoted,Ibid, III. i.29 9 ^.286, 1. 4 A mode of thought which abandoned, public service
opus But et if the
est, ita
kivio
FORGIVENESS
OF
INJURIES.
241
ing accordand more nothing worthier of man and benevolence to nature, than forgivingmercy, that is unselfish and disseminates happiness in secret,
considers
CHAP. VIII.
imitating the divine goodness towards the evil and of human the good; which, mindful weakness, would
rather
punish, does not exclude and will not return its goodwill, from enemies injury with injury.1 Seneca's dissertations on
spare
than
even even
these
subjects are
to
among of
the
moral
most
beautiful
testimonies
at
the
purity
conceptions
arrived
by
antiquity. In their content, as has already with the Stoic harmonise been shown, they entirely they have manifestly arisen from a principles ; but
classical
somewhat
also
different
itself in of
idea
the the
milder
it
temper
expresses
cided deand
lust
of For
on
the the
Roman
same
for and of
reason,
ought, the punishing has regard to all really available grounds of extenuation ; it desires only out to carry complete justice,
in De
where
also
account those
of
his
want
Clem.
passionate
sentences
and disposition
were
10,
not
1 "0. 28 be
self-control,
the such
severe
weakness
passed
Great which
upon
angry
with
error,
but
Alexander for
nished fur-
iv. 25
to
welcome
material
Seneca's rhetoric, Benef. i. i. 25 ; De Ira, 3 Clement, 13, ; iii. 17, 1, 23, 1 ; Nat. Qu. vi.
should
on
ungrateful ?) ;
gods,
23, 2, et -passim. 1 Of. Ep 95, 52; Vlt. Beccb, i. 1, 3 ; Delra, Clem. De 3 24, ; Otio* i. 4 ; 'Zte Ira, ii. i. 5 j De
32, 1;
Clem.
De
fulness, continue
i. 18, 2 ; ii. 4 ; JEp. 31, Beat. Wt. 24, 3. In De 11; Clem, ii. 4, he speaks of the of uniting mildness possibility with
with
the
error
of
so
those
also
misconceive
we
them, benefits,
act, and
conquer
as
by
husbandman 9
justice
between the
and
the and
tion distinc-
conquers
ful unfruitc.
this
one
culpable
does not
neglect;
242
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
than
of
were
found
among
The
need
vin;
than with community is stronger with Seneca them, and though the social nature and vocation of
man
is in both
cases
the fulfilment
of
duty, in Seneca
chief
more
as
affair of
inclination,
; and
of human
and affection,
stress
on
hence
he
laysthe
the
sense
philanthropic of disposition.How closelythis softening is connected Stoic severity with Seneca's deeper has already of human been dicated. inimperfection
the
same source we
of the
From
His reiitern"
must
y
also derive
7
the
cast religious
of his the
common
ethics.
Here, too, he
of his
follows school.1
perament.
throughout
The and
tendency
him the
most
will of G-od is to
to imitate
highestlaw
claim
reason us
4
; to
obey
mand,2 com-
universal
synonymous
to nature
;
with
the
of life according
and
he
perceivesin
on as
the
divine
spirit dwelling in
all
men
he
of equality
take up
the
well
;
on
his abode
of
a
slave
in that
nobleman
and
of the
dividual in-
with
humanity belong to
the
thought of
and
the
gods
it ; 5
who, with
1 2
us,
the universe
govern
emplum
V. Be.
sequi. L,
;
e.
vii.
31,2;
5 ; of,
with
laws
3
Nature, and,
will of of nature.
Mp. 16,
also the
Gfod with
1:
PUl.
1.
320,
Proposirerum
ex-
tf"
noUs
mere
seeundum
et
De i. p.
naturam
Deorum
296,
3.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
therefore, Seneca's
the elder Stoicism
on no
is
account
be
that
he
was
thereby carried into radical deviations from the Stoic by system, but only that the importance assumed in relation to the philosophical element the religious
characteristic of him ; his distinction peculiarly from the earlier Stoics is merely quantitative. That the religious point of view, however, acquired with must attribute such great preponderance, we him and popularcast of his philosophy partlyto the practical of human to his lively ness weakand partly sense
is
which must have imperfection, naturally frequentlyand more disposed him to point more the moral to the support which life of emphatically
and
guiding spirit. How power in the world, and in the human is Seneca's conception of religion ; pure, moreover, he keeps clear, not only of the belief of the how
man
finds in
the
belief
in
(rod
and
his
but of the fallacies of Stoic orthodoxy; how people, in the of gods is cancelled the plurality unity of the divine nature, and external worship in the cultus of the knowledge of Grod, and the spiritual have alreadybeen imitation of his moral perfection,
shown.1
Here
also
Seneca
appears
as
worthy
a
presentative re-
of Roman
in which Stoicism,
purer
human a body in the of man. nature spiritual 1 PMl.d. "9r.III.lp. 312$"#. ; with
the
power
of
atonements
are
conditionelsewhere
315, 5
340 last
324,
Even
1 ;
326, 1
in the
337, 3
2.
quoted,
absurdities
SENECA
AND
PANJETIUS.
21
and
freer view
of
had religion
been
implanted by
and which it
CHAP.
'
commencement,
is
seen
by
the
Cicero.1
in
To
example Pansetius,
mode trines doc-
Seneca
of
great resemblance
Both
his whole
thought.
of their the
postpone
the
fruitful
the
theoretical
school to
as
and practical,
as
seek to
a
make
latter
possibleby
an
ment treat-
and generallycomprehensible
to
application
individual
no
details
and
in
this
endeavour
they
have
about recurringto other than Stoic scruple from the Stoic tradition or predecessors, departing
on
certain
points.
other
But
departures are
than Seneca the
far
;
more
considerable
on
with
with Seneca
the of the
hand,
ethical
in
earlier of man,
Stoicism, confidence
is much human than
;
more
the
power the
deeply shaken,
and
feelingof
more
weakness
seems
defecbeen
tiveness the
case
vivid
to
have the
with
Pansetius diseased
and
while
race
healing
fusion
of the
morally
human
is
regarded as
there philosophy,
arises the
philosophy with
on
ethical dualism
Stoicism
1
approximatedmore
d. "r. HI. i.p. 340,
to Platonism.
Cf
.
PMl.
partlyby Ms
Stoic book of the from
expositionof the
the
some
j 170 syr. ; 176 If in above I the sentences """. Scsevola and Cicero beside name
1, and
sup. p. 49, 2
theology in
treatise
second
De Natwa strik-
Deonm,
which
are
Varro,
this
is
quoted, Phil.
by
with
his
connection particular
the
Stoic
246
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
IX.
THE
STOICS
CONTINUED
MUSONIUS,
EPICTETUS,
MARCUS
AURELIUS.
CHAP. IX.
STOICISM
maintained
entire
on
the
course
whole
the
same
ter charac-
history, The Stoic except that the traits by which Seneca had already school condirection tinued. of his school, diverged from the original asserted themselves more strongly. The ultimately fore, known to us may thererest of the Stoic philosophy be discussed more concisely. Mtisoniits. Musonius A younger contemporary of Seneca's, in the reigns of Nero Rufus,1who resided in Eome teacher of philoand Vespasian,2 a distinguished was sophy,3 held in the highestestimation and was on
Hufi Edid. c.Annot. etApophthegwiata Venhuizen J. Peerlkamp lem, (Har1
during the
of its further
C. Musonii
sonius
of whom
Pliny (JEp.iii.
honourable
was
11,
5,
7)
makes He
mention. Ann.
of
good
Etruria iii.
1822)
are
; the
taken
from
pages Nieuw-
from family,originally
(Tac.
;
landii
Dimrtatio in
Musonio
Studien
von
AnthoL
Creuzer, vi.
74 sg[q.
Tac.
and
3
xiv. 59 ; xv. 71, Ann. The elsewhere. Vide the lowing folnote.
Burm).
is
known, un-
Musonius'
Rufus,
son
of
already jealousy
as
a
by
of
71)
EUFUS.
247
account
of his
personalcharacter.
even more
TMs
philosopher
Seneca
is said
'
CHAP.
IX.
confined
himself
then
decidedlythan
letters which
to
filled
Musonius
*
adherent of
we
exchanged with Apol20-30 lonius. How the A.r". sonius Tyrian Muof the Stoic school, is related 1 o 'our philosopher Eubellius cannot be clearly Plautus, tained, ascerfind him year and he in Asia 53
A.D. as we
hardly be
have
have
seen seem
(sup.
to be
in. the Minor Psetus Thrasea whose death the his of miserable
p.
199)
; but
they
was
Soranus, identical.
afterwards
the recalled
.
He
probably
by
Galba
from
exile
revenged by
Bgnatius
Celer
(Tac.
Hist.
iii.
59 ; Hizt. iii. 81 ; iv. 10, 40 ; Epict. Diss. L 1, 26) banished was by Nero, 65 (Tac. Ann. Huson.
xv.
Ann.
xiv.
71 ; Dio ap Stob.
27 ;
( Or. long
but have
c.)
with
we
he
had
40, 9,
Titus.
not
sonal perHow
;
do
know person
must
if he
Kopvovros, instead
him but this is
a
of this,
presents re-
mentioned
really by Pliny
the
the he
as
put
to
death,
survived
reign
him
;
of
as
palpable error, Justin. arising perhaps from ii. 8)j according to (Apol.
Philostratus, I. o.t his place of banishment was Gyara, which
was
Trajan. Nothing
to
is related
any
writings by
Stobseus
seems
that
which
from
communicates like
an
him and of
account
given
of his
lectures
by
the
visited
all sides
same
on
indicates
his account.
author
Memorabilia,
such
(ApoL
Lucian that
one
v.
19)
his
the
pseudomention
ployed em-
those
in
Nero,
of
Arrian Suidas
airopvrj-
Musonius
was
fioyevfiaTa
to
Asi-
46)
mentions
a
Musonius,
whom
contemporary of Eidiculous as this is, 35, Pompey. it is probable that Pollio a Babylonian one wonderful sopher, had composed them ; but he is philo(I.
c.
nius
Pollio, a
iv.
threw
our
into and
not
to
be
identified
(as
and
has
dern mo-
prison.
But is
done
by
ancient
Claudius writers) with of Philostratus who the 'Bafti"\cbj'io$ Pollio, according to Pliny vii. 31, 5) had should be altered to Boi/Tur^oy, (^Ep. written a de Vita discarded ing Anni (vide JNieuwland, Liber or (olderreadthe more material imseems Mus"mi) JBassi,but rather p. 30 sgq.") meant, since
are as
these
as
statements
with
valueless
the absurd
248
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
to moral
problems.
not
He
too
starts from
even
the
general
por-
system, and
its theoretic
Epictetus relates neglected by him. of logical that he Practised MS scholars in the use "oflispUwith demanded ,losoj)7iy. forms, and scrupulous accuracy regard to them ; ! a remark as to the originof moral conceptionspoints to the Stoic theory of knowledge
Practical
and
manner
its
empiricism.2
certain
He
mentions
in
similar
physical doctrines; speaks of the unchangeable necessity of the universe, of the ceaseless change of all things to which everything, and earth,is subject both in heaven ; of the regular
transition
of the
four
elements
same
one
into
another,3
and
stagesupward
of the
of
the
divine
nature
heavenly
Qeocitie'tsajv6-
Hadrian,
and
was
called
avrobs
Oeiovs Kal
is
a
the
philosopher. According to descriptionof the younger Pliny (J3p. iii. 11) his son-inthe Artemidorus
whom
pa"oj/. There
cf.
3
similar
claration de4 ,*
of Beneca,
Ej),120,
Ep. 120,
Stob.
11.
law,
This
others praises, fragment bears with some Pliny so enthusiastically is to be considered his disciple. (FLoril. 19, 13: 20, 60, 61; 1 Diss. i. 7, 32. When JBcl. ii. 356) the Bufus inscription: him blamed for not knowing how to find what That was wanting "pt\ia.$. nothing more, in a syllogism, he excused self himhowever, is meant by this than thus : fdjy"p rb KaTnrdJAiov taken from account an tetus Epicto which the lost portion other (i.e. from a 6^eVp?7"ra, eV0a5e rb of Arrian's replied,av"pcbro"oj', cerning condissertations)
"
an
utterance
of
Muon
(*here
2
you Ftoril.
can
have
looked, over-
sonius
thing '),
117, 8, 89
attain
to
less
open
is and
doubt,
Euf
since
Musonius
ycip
eTf-pcodw
in
rafacis
(Ml. he is
JV". 4. the
v.
1,
that intended.
shows
person
JETIS
PRACTICAL
CHARACTER.
249
l bodies";
and
as
these
are
by
vapours,
so
CHAP.
with
the
the Heracleitus)
Ixy
is nourished
by
be
the
evaporation of the
food
lighterand
purer will
purer,
our therefore,
is,
the
soul.2
Some with
other ethics
connection
respectingthe goodness and moral of Grod,the natural with perfection kinshipof man (rod,3the divine omniscience,4the divine law, the
such
as
those
effluence imitation
of which of Grod
to
6
"
is moral
we
duty,5 or
had
virtue
as
an
should
have necessarily
even no
supposed pre-
belong
on
to
him,
decided down
utterances
to
us.
these
subjects been
handed
the
To
the
These
from L
are
the earth
gods for
the evapoand from the
such
as
we
conceive
Him
(Phil.
also
nourishment the
d. Gr. III. i. p.
man,
*
140), so
conduct
for is
virtuous Stob.
alone
waters
is sufficient.
e.
according to
ii. 13, 125 Musonius omniscience
;
nature.
Stob. Phil.
Concerning
Stoic
Floril. Exc.
J3d. iv. 218 infers the of
no
Jo. Dam.
corresponding
vide
doctrines
(Mein).
from the that in of
here
(Floril.
has
as-
gods
signed the
the
best
facultyof
thought
to
demonstrative
he
applies
discussed the
this
protected place
in the
infra"
body, is of
252;
but
thought
mean may breast (cf ibid. III. i. p. 197, 2). 3 Fl"ril. 117, 8, p. 88. Man
.
of God admits the omniscience of very forcible application in the way of ethical admonition,
5 6
Loo.
Cf.
note
De
is
virtue
in God
Aere
a
7, 1, p. 830, where
to
Musonius,
money
:
enumerates
who
borrow
mental
virtues)as virtue alone him makes the perfect being, beneficent, friendlyto man, and
exalted above
all weaknesses,
a-cor^ bv "r" /UJMJical and' the fy\oist ov Saj/effercu, other laughingly replied,ouSe Sam'fei.
"5 Zevs
250
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
IX.
without
with apparently troubling himself any of it.1 But or interpretation speculative justification with scientific enquiry as such, with a knowledge that carries its end and purpose in itself, Musonius this alreadyfrom the fact has no concern. We see that among the many sayings and discussions of his that have been preserved to us,2the theoretical doctrines in a casual of his school are only mentioned But he has himself spoken and superficial manner. this subject. Men be to most are on definitely regarded as sick,from a moral point of view ; in cured order medical to be they require continual treatment.3 supply this need. Philosophy must
1
In
respect, however,
to
the
same
way
(JFloril.
against
the filment ful-
there from
little
be
quoted
The the Zeus the and of
85, 20,
end)
of
fragments.
Zeus,
law the
luxury that
deity
divine
is called
(Wloril. 79,
stars
are
51, p.
as
94);
service There
are
to the
gods.
than these
treated
gods (sup.
in and
all,more
fiftyof them
many inVenhuizen
3
among of considerable
135
length;
offence
Peeiikamp'swork
pages.
:
they occupy
Pint.
KCU
Coll.
ye
ev
uh\v "v
children, that it is a crime against the TrarpQai Qeol and Zebs 6^6yvios (Floril. 75, 15)
and says in favour have of
it
viov KU\$)V
SeTv ael ;
marriage
Eros,
under the
he
A.
that
Hera,
and their
ffc"fecrdai. jji"\\ovrcts. Gell. N. v. 1, 2, and infra p. 252, 3. This pointof view, under which
tion observa-
the
i. 285, 3) becomes : Qeol yap "irirpOTr"Ti"ovo"w austrikingly tcadb vo/jiifyvrat T"J', Trap'a,v"p"a~prominent everywhere after the
irois,
(teydhoi, even
and voftlfcrai less
if
we
stitute sub-
the assertion
the
beginning of the first century A.B. already j examples have before us (sup. come p. 77, 3 ; 237,
2) and
we
distinction
shall meet
with
others
of the
252
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IX'
to virtue, habits.1 The disposition the germ opposite of virtue, is implanted in all men by nature ; 2 if we have before us an unspoiledpupil of a good disposition, it needs no lengthy argument to convey to and the rightestimation moral him right principles of goods and evils ; a few convincing proofs, indeed,
are
better
than
many
the
main
point
is that the
conduct
of the
teacher
should
correspond with
his
the disciple and that similarly should live principles, To this practical to his conviction.3 end, according should to Musonius, all instruction then, according of philosophy should teacher work. The not duce pro-
applause but
require ;
not
improvement
the moral this
he
should that
minister ad-
to his hearers
if he does time
to
have
admire
medicine
science, occupiedwith themselves and their concompletely with feelings of shame, repentance, and
exaltation.4
to work
In this
manner
Musonius
himself
so
tried
upon hearts
his that
spoke disciples ; he
each individual the entrance
from
to forcibly
as
their
felt
if personally
struck ; 5 he made
1
to his school
all
LOG.
the
statement
lay
claim
to
of it (of. Phil.
Floril. Exc.
d. 6h\ Jo.
Jo. Dam.
*#.
Mein.)
Stob. ii.
entirelyagrees.
2
Dam.
13,
125
(iv. 217
V.
sq$.
Tldvres cScrre
"s ry
. . .
ireQvKa/JLevo#"j"infet
M.)
1 ;
T(os
Qv
Kal avafjLapT-fjTcas
Epict.
5 Epict. I. c. : rotyapovy oifrcas avdp"irov^u%^ vrpb* Kal oKwyaQiav /ca* (nrepfjia aper^s "\ey"y} o5cr0'e'/catriw TJJLLCOJ/ tin.ris irore this aurbv Q^psvov fftecrda.1. Tjp.(av evewai, where ii. 426 is proved (ap. Stob. Ed. o^rccy ^TTTCTO r"v 8ia/3ej8AT?/cey yivo^vtav, ofrreu sq.)by the argument that the
rov
laws
demand
moral
conduct
PROBLEM
OF
PHILOSOPHY. to
33
more
in difficult,
order
separate the
more
stronger
;
l
CHAP IX"
natures
from
the weaker
and
effeminate
he
soughtto
may
brace
by the thought of
them
2
bring
to
and
we
influence
of such
and
tion instruc-
have
been
important
on lasting
the character
enjoyedit. But we cannot who dinated so decidedly suborexpect that a philosopher scientific problems to practicalinfluence,
should
of those who
originating new
establishment and
logical development of a doctrine alreadyexisting. in most of the fragments of Musonius If, therefore, must and corwe rectness acknowledge the purity of mind of moral we judgment which they exhibit,
cannot
estimate
we
their
scientific value
is
very
an
highly.
What of the
becomes
mostly find
minute
in them
merely
application
sometimes
that
the
after philosopher,
not
even
the
to
example of Chrysippus,does
disdain
give precepts on the growth of the hair and beard.3 the Stoic principles On certain points are exaggerated;
Musonius exceeds the bounds of Stoicism the and
proximates apto the partly
to partly
of simplicity
Cynics and
pure
Neo-Pythagoreans ; at
from
other times
1 2
thence, such
this
LOG.
Loc.
/caXcS
ovr(0
(to treat
better)
MusoMm
Kal
crov
s
avra
Xafieiv Swduevos.
JFloril. like
6, 62, where
ffvfL^creral
"roi
rovro
Kal #rt
rovro
nms,
Chrysippus before
urrb cwrbv
wtva-
rov
$""nr6rov.
airoKptvafjievov,
ri
irpbs (Athen. av6p"- himself strongly against the iicearov napa""TJ, cutting of the hair and beard. oSi/,
Ka.fj.ov
254
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IXt
and the
yet humane
Stoic school of
precepts as
itself.
man.
were
not
universal
in
His
leadingthought
to two
is the
ditions, con-
inner freedom
But
this is linked
of that which
to
is in
is not
power,
our our
and
(2) submission
In
and
our
that which
use
we
in
power.
power this
is the
make and
of
ideas,
on
depends
all
virtue
happiness. All the rest is out of our power ; that we of the universe, leave to the course must, therefore, it be satisfied and happy with whatever and must Musonius this standpoint judges brings us.1 From the value of things; in harmony with his school he declares virtue to be the only good, and wickedness the only evil ;. everything else,riches and poverty, 2 pleasureand pain, life and death,are indifferent ;
he that requires of
we
should
defend
ourselves
means
the troubles
not life,
by external
should
against but by
as no
elevation above
the
regardexile
at home
in the whole
Stob.
ra
$vBebs
einrptyai r$
rcav
Kal KScr/JLcp,
efrre rrjs
e"re
va-
row Ta
psv
e$3 ytuv
"0ero
TraiScev Secure)
etre rov cn^uaros1 cfrre rptfios e'4"' TI/JUV jj,evrb KaX\iffKal (TTTQuScucW-aTOj', $" 5^ Kal drovovv, aar[jL"vovs 7rapax""peTj/. TOV Of. Floril. 7, 23 (^ Svo-x^pa^e aMs ecrrl, evtiaifjLW TTJV Xpyffiv rats Trepiffrdo-ecTLj/) TOVTO opdajs ; I, c. 108, 60, T(av tpavratriSiv. yap the where from of the $"rrlv thought etfpoia eXevQepia yiyrfpevov Kal of the the of 8e course T OVTO necessity evo-rddeLa, evevfjila world and of the of all Kal Kal Iffrl change v6pos ffutypoSiKr; is moral 5' deduced the Kal ra things, |^7rao-a apeT^. "rvvn trdvra OVK "\\a eVoi^- applicationthat the condition fjfjuv "!"/"' 8' oit;.
ffaTo. OVKOVV
Kal
Tjfjias
of crvfj^^)2
harmonious
life is
the
8ie\6vTas
TO.
r"v irpdyuaTa
Floril.
p.
15;
cf.
ty (jt."v
TfdvTa Tip.1v
Ta
5e
^j?.
p.
GENERAL
PRECEPTS.
255
that world,1
we
should
neither this
seek
death
nor
shun
CHAP. IXt
needs
not
only the
continual
moral
to practiceand the most unremitting attention himself,3but also bodily hardening.4 Musonius,
admonishes therefore,
us
to
learn
to endure
bodily
desires
and exertions,deprivations,
to lead
us
5 hardships ;
he
back
as
much
as
in regard to possible,
domestic goes
arrangements,
with
to
of nature
he
and further,
Sextius
counsels us to avoid the Neo-Pythagoreans, eating of flesh,because this is not according to and because,as he thinks, it enfor man, nature genders thick and cloudy evaporations which darken
and
the
the the
1
soul
and
weaken he
the
cannot
power
of
thought.7 On
many quite
in
"
other
hand
agree
runt
ance
'
with
of the
accord-
is also
with
finallycomes
that
as
to
the
conclusion robs
a man
prevented
from
of neither
four
of
an
death
with
virtues, it robs
of
real is inand
which
3
Nero
threatened
Floril.
him.
good;
man,
Cf. Stob.
the
jured by
not
2
wickedness
zviii.
4
by banishment.
Cf. Phil. d. Gr.HI. It is in entire Musonius he i. 306,4, with
quasi amittere
For
the
body, he
be of soul tool
5.
agreement
Stob. and be
5
I. #.),must
with it the
(ap.
the
(ap.Epict.
serviceable
mind,
"7.) blames
we
because
than
also will
exile ; for
ther, he
easier but
0cu
instead^
T$
(st^.p.246,3,end),besidesother
moexcellences,Ms hardiness, deration, and abstemiousness. Stob. Floril. 1, 84 ; 18, 38
6
instead it
the
harder,
apKetcr-
regard
duty
The SeSofiLevcp.
Tacitus with
a
story
"
which relates
(Ann. xiv.
qualifying
*
59)
f e-
8, 20
7
94, 23.
256
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
Stoics who
man
carry
the
__J_1__
to the
point of
a warm a
he
is himself
connection
so
so
and, natural,
and
in
moral
point of view,
beneficial ;
precepts on the givesvery good and wholesome himself sets still more decidedly subject.1 He the elder Stoics which courses againstthe immoral had not unconditionally excluded,for he condemned
all
unchastity in
of the
or
out
of
as marriage,2
also
the
of children,3 and exposure repudiation and justified in antiquity, even so common by Plato which The and Aristotle. gentle disposition guides in the proposition in all this is also shown that him to revenge it is unworthy of man partly injuries, custom
because
such
faults
as
rule
arise
from
ignorance,
because the wise man partly but and not the suffering
cannot the
be injured, really
doing of wrong is to ever, be regardedas an evil and a disgrace.4When, howthis principle the he condemns on judicial of offences, indictment we recognisethe onesidedelevation above external of a standpoint where ness indifference to them, and has things has become degeneratedinto a with thingswithin.
With Musonius denial
of their
interconnection
is connected
his famous
disciple
1 Loc. Git. 67, 20 ; 69, 23 ; 70, d. Or. III. i. 293, 2, 14 ; cf PMl He himself and sup. p. 246, 3. Artemidorus for married, was
.
himself
cretus
2 3
Mmoni
sololes, lare
75, 15
84, 21
was
3, end), and
Anthol.
Git. 19, 16 ;
40, 9
; Sohl.
20,
Burm.)
Testus
calls
DATE
OF
EPICTETUS.
257
Epictetus, a
Nero and Domitian
to
Phrygian
who
lived
went
seems
in in
to
2
Some the
have of this
Tinder
CHAP. TX.
his
successors,
reign
died
of in
Nicopolis,and
In
that of
1
Trajan.1
the
discourses
Even
philoment state-
himself
was
of
of IN ero
sible.
(Hadr. 16),that
him
Spartian's
Hadrian
associated
with
in summa
is somewhat
picious, sus-
accession
i. 19, 19:
G-ellius,N.
Sat.
A.
to the
throne
50 years when
than the
to
Simpl.
and
time have
Epictetus
Musonius last
body
cf.
(Simpl. ; 9; Celsus, ap. Epict. Emliir. Orig. c. Cels. vii. 7 ; Suid. and others : according to Simplicius lame from his yonth ; he was to Suidas he became according sickness so through ; according
to
Rome
years
nevertheless
extended
or
to
reign
of
this emperor
may
become before He he
acquainted
came
with
to
the
throne.
himself
makes
iv.
mention
Celsus,
indeed
through
of his have from
the
ill-
treatment
master,
used the
who him
tation quo-
may
Trajan (Dm. 5, in consideration 13, 9). The held which was by Epictetus later his contemporaries and
authorities
is
17 ; cf. iii.
attested, among calls others, by Gellius, who him in great poverty (Simpl. I. c. and (ii. 18, 10) philosopJius nofiili$,"nd(inxviii. 194) maxic. 33, 7, p. 272; Macrob. on I.e.'). cus While he was inusphilosoplioTU'ni ; also by Maryet a slave he
harshly, judging
lived
heard
i. 7,
Musonius
(Epict.
Diss.
Aurelius thanks
even
laur. (irp.
i. 7),who
32;
In
29).
have
Ms
teacher,
Rusticus,
in mature
age, for
having
;
beeome he must
(sup.
p. 190, 1,
end)
cf
.
likewise
Lucian, Adv.
relates
If. A. Qther philosophers (G-ell. xv. 11, 5 ; Lucian, Peregr. 18) : he betook in where himself heard
to
c.
13
(who
of
Epictetus bought
candlestick
his
for
Mcopolis (Epict.
.
Epirus (G-ell.I.
Arrian
Suidas), 3,000
drachmas)
Prof.
are
him
These the
the
Aiarpipaland
wrote says in the
as
Themistocles (Or. v. 63, the lived until reign of ever, Aurelius Marcus : this, howis chronologically imposS
the
sE7%"/""5wy. Arrian
former,
he
down
the
preface,after
Epictetus as
faithfullyas
possible, in
260
ECLECTICISM:
them the had
CHAP,
on
deep
moral
himself
received
manner
scholars in like
Inferior
theoretical
which Epictetus impression from his Musonius, and received from Epictetus.1
From
course
a
of point of view Epictetus could ascribe to theoretical knowledge,as such,only subordinate of that
in value
; and
this
very
this
must
especially
festly mani-
hold
good
stood
the
distant
connection
with
The chief thingin philosophy is ethics, namely logic. the the of application proof of them
its doctrines
; ; next
to
this stands
rank
comes
only
in
the
third
were lanicus ; but if somebody GXevOepovs,eupoowray, TOVS, els rbv Qebv of these disciples $aifj.ovovvTa5, to remind one
eu-
a"po~
puvras
" iravrl
Your ri
death
and
not
as
evils,he would
an
rV fjLot
you,
ovv]
cdriav.
or
It
me,
can
or
only lie
in both.
regard
such
show who prove
a
it
outrageous
use,
in
mockery. Of what
to
then, is
must
OeXere
a.p^ff"fjL"8d wore
philosophy1 Deeds
what most
"belongs. But
call
v,
Tntrrccrare
/U.QL
themselves
or,
be the
rather
Epicureans,
"SrcatKbv 5e Kal
most,
sort.
TLVOL
of Peripatetics
the
laxest
ef
Sei^are poi,
evrv^ovvra,
A further example 1fy"ff6e. of the manner in which tetus Epicadmonished his pupils is given in Diss. L 9, 10-21. 1 Concerning Musonius, vide sup. p. 252; concerning Epictetus,
ffovvra.
Arrian, Dm.
avrbs
Prcef. 8 sg.
vebovra
rtav a.KOv6vT(av
irpbsrh
Qzbv
. .
fieXTLcrra. If
as
his
courses, dis-
fiovvra
did
not
aAA.'
OVK
e^cre. j "c.
ri Kal
ofiv atrdis
vvv
Ttocrav
ira/"
aurov, avrbv
ftirep
TOUS,
LOGIC.
261
the is
are
doctrine
of
the proof,
on
scientific of the of
methods
for that
CHAP.
'
only necessary
account
on
only necessary
useful
in order
account
However
and to and
may
be
protect
us
from
and fallacies,
though accuracy
necessary in its in itself ; the
to
thoroughness are
not
undoubtedly
be
an
end able
questionis
should
we
should
be
explain Chrysippusand
that
we
difficulties,
the will what of
we
but
know
follow
nature, that
do and
;
should
3
attain
the
rightin
avoid ;
the
a
virtue
dialectic is
help, which has speech is merely a subordinate ance nothing to do with philosophyas such.5 In accordto have with these principles, Epictetus seems occupiedhimself
at any rate
a
very
questions ;
tain con-
the written
records
of his doctrine
not
singlelogicalor
refutation of
dialectical discussion.
little
Even
concern
the
;
he declares
it to be the
ness stubborngreatest
not
to
Man.
c.
52.
trouble
ourselves
we
about
are
this last
"where sq. 29
(Zfe.
point
the
2
unless
clear about
two
first,
most set
should
7; c. 17; ii. 25; vide sup. p. 248, 1. 3 2"i$s. I 4, 5 "qq. : ii. 17, 27
Zto. 1 sqg. ; iii. 2 ;
1 sgg.i c.^21,
passions
; the
us
second, that
ii. 19
c.
it should
make
18,
46. 17 sg[.; Man. with our 4 1 ; Jf"m._52. i 2Hss. 7, ourconvicit should strengthen 5 4 i. Diss. 8, ; ii. 23. "g_g/. tions with irrefragableproofs ,* should not and he insists that we
262
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
time
to
contend
never
with taken up
a
such hold
objections;for
of
a
his
part he has
wished the
and to
broom
when
he
take
loaf of bread ; he
act
finds that
same
sceptics themselves
in and
the
not
way,
eye ;
1
into
the
with
the
old
reproach
of knowledge deny the possibility without Of maintaining its impossibility.2 the proper of scepticismand of the signification of its scientific refutation he has no idea. necessity He is just as little concerned about the investigations
they
cannot
philosophy; indeed, he expressly with the saying of Socrates,that enquiry agrees into the ultimate constituents and causes of things and could have no value passes our understanding, in any case.3 If, therefore, he generallypresupposes the Stoic theory of the universe, he not only
institutes
no
of
natural
in independent inquiries
that
sphere,
are
but
very Stoic
even
in the
"
doctrines
of his
school
there
few
points only the universal bases of the the conception of the world, and especially
"
definitions which attract his attention. theological He is full of the thought of God, who knows our
1
Diss. 28.
^
5 ;
27,
15
sq$. ; ii.
Gpcairivr) yvc"w
Xiffra
el 5e
Kal
ra
pd-
20,
2 8
flefy TIS
etviu Kara\yirra,
rl
aAA' ovv ri 8(j""\o$ KaraX-qfyBwThis "c. (Stob.Flov. 80, 14) : rw, discussion pro/te\H, 077"rl, e'" fesses to be a commentary ir6rcpQv on e" "5/iot(yiepwi", $ "c the Socratic theory, as we see word ffvve"rrr]Ke r" fora; by the which is "j"T)a-l, ^yys^ ovcriav /*a0e?j" rty afterwards but it is apjce'i repeated; 75
KO.KOV,
rov
ayaeov Kal
s
^
"c.
ra
5'
nevertheless
unmistakable the
that
same
GOD
A$D
TKE
WORLD.
263
words
in
and
intentions, from
service
whom
comes
all
good,
CHAP.
'
whose
the
philosopher stands,
not
without
whose he the
commission have
he may
go to his
work, whom
proves
should
guidance
of Providence
interconnection
universe;2
the
praises the
paternal care
which
in the for the and
of
Grod
a
for men,
perfection
recognises
ordered
all
Him the
:
work
Grod,who
has made
the whole
formed
ness happiof it ;
4
furnished
them
with
the
conditions
he
of
to
so an
ends
in
the
every
he
says
meets
at clearly
whole
life
5 unceasing song of praise to the Deity ; to point out and, like his school, he condescends
should
be
this
adaptation
even
in the
not
smallest
and
most to be
ternal ex-
things; 6
in
he does
even
allow himself
turbed dis-
his
faith
injusticesin the
Stoa Grod
to and
the
reconcile his
the
in
of perfection
works.7
in
This the
belief
true
Providence,
of the
fashion the
refers
to
primarily to
later
4 5 6
universe,
shall
recur
this JHss.
Mss.
iv. 7, 6 ; iii. 24, 2 sq. ZHss. i. 16,9 HI. *$g. and i. 172, end.
on
Meanwhile,
cl
2*
23, 53; 21, 18; 18, 19 ; 19, 29 ; i. 16. 2 Diss. i. 14, 16 ; Man. 3 i. 6, 40 ; 9, 7 Zto.
PMl.
7
III. i. 175, 4;
178, 2;
and
infra,p. 271, 1.
264
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
and
to
the individual
only
to
so
far the
as
is determined
;
_____
by
the
interdependenceof
submission his
sense
whole
when
he
cides, coinman
counsels
in
the
will of the
(rod,this
that
with
order cannot
demand
should
conform
to the
of nature.1
Things,he
than ourselves
says, with
as
Musonius,
the law of
happen otherwise
withdraw
they do happen
under
; we
cannot
from
change to which the heavenly 2 are bodies and the elements subject against the ; all things serve and obey we universal order which mentions ought not to rebel.3 So also he expressly which doctrine most the that strongly asserts
nothingindividual
in
is
more
"
transient
moment
flagration con-
doctrine
as
of the
world.4
the
on
religious
this
side
conviction
to
of
Epictetus
the the
other
it allies
itself,
Stoic
popular religion.
also includes
are
pantheism
the derived from
1
with divine
him
natures
to
5
be and
the
primal
divine
nature
Diss. i. 12, 15 S$. 28 $".; 1L 5, 24 sgrg. ; 6, 9 s$q. 2 In the fragment mentioned sup. p. 248, 3,which begins thus: #ri rota^TT? Kal %crri Kal
re
Kala^tvov
rat,
virep
pera
r"v
$LOLK$"V.
as
Epictetus also,
school, Grod
universe.
the
with
4
whole
rov
ecrrai.-
oUv
Diss.
"KXca$
vvv 8
^ "s
66
:
Fr.
in Sen. Ep. 9, 16, the conas ra yiyri/Meva, yiyvecr6ai dition of Zeus after the %x"l136 (Stob. Moril. 108, universal conflagrationis deviraKovei
ifdvra.
Kal
Our be Kal
he
says
5' "%""
in
Diss. iv.
ju." 5et
plants,animals,
bodies.
12,11:
"y"
rivt
T(VI viroreraxQai, rivt cannot apeV/cetp, judgment alone in opposition to it. 7re"0e"r0ar r$ 6e$ Kal rots psr* set up ecrriKal Kpetcrffow, ^KCIVOJ/(ii. 17, 25) : rep Ait yap Iffyvptis
, . ,
SOOTHSAYING.
265
are
full of divine
daemons.1
powers,
so
are
they
from
full
of
we
gods
con-
CHAP.
and
The
beneficence
we
of these
gods
__H_
enjoy tinually
from
other the,
cause men
in all that
j to
receive
nature
and
deny
is
them
is the that
more we
fiable, unjustithereby
greater
the
injury
the
to
so
many,2
Yet
relation
to
the
the
of
the mentions accordingly he seldom further without popular gods,and then only casually, interpretations committing himself to the allegorical
of
manner
his
school, but
of the
prefers
or
to
speak
in
even
general
of Zeus
;
he
retains
gods indeed,
of
the
deity,or
with
Socrates, the
our
principle of
power,
honouring
the well
manner
the
after
very
also
knows
that and
the
true
;
of
God about he in
consists the
ledge in know-
virtue
the
fables
underworld,
;
5
the he
worship
does not that
of hostile attack
men
beings
belief
be
blames
and
if
he soothsaying,
to
use
demands
able
dispense with
of it without
in
make
desire, being
should
previously
not
harmony
the result,and
first
enquire of the
; but
reserves
rots
"\Aois
Pluto self
tion
are
named
the
to
Stoic
him-
unmistakablythe of these
traditional
do of
not
survive world,
Qf-cav
gods
5.
conflagration
the
:
(ruths
s 4
\6yos.
31, 31,
d. 1 ; cf. Dfas.
irdyra
Man. Man.
petfra
2
ii. 18,
where,
denial
; PML 5 Diss.
Gr.
of
whom
by
and
22, 16.
Euripides, Demeter,
Kore,
266
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP
'
Man
an
fulfilment of
duty
is
in
belief in of the
rt
the
kinship
*
of
the
emanation
from God.
highest value ; man should be aware of his higher nature ; he should of God, as a regard himself as a son part and of the deity,in order to gain from this emanation
ataman
is
to God spirit
..
dignity,of his moral his independence of all things external, responsibility, and the brotherlylove to his fellow men, in the universe;2 of his citizenship consciousness after the manner and in the same sense Epictetus, elso employs the conception of daemons, of his school, merely the divine in man.3 understandingby them for more On the other hand we vainlyseek in him the question minute enquiries anthropological ; even of immortalityis only mentioned and if casually, the subjectwe from his utterances on gather that
from (departing
in
a
his
the
Stoic
dogma)
which
is the
he
disbelieved
of
to
personal existence
are
after
death,
utterances
his the
1 2
also
to
be
found Nor
lead logically
oppositetheory.4
Diss. ii. 7; Man. Diss.
i. 3 j c.
question of the
commencement,
to
32. 9 ;
c.
from
the
alien leave it
12,
26
to
the
to
body, longs
return to
syg. ; c. 13, 3 ; c. 14, 8, 11 s%q. ; iv. 7, 7 s%. j cf. Phil, d. Gr. III. i. p. 200, 2. Diss. i. 14, 12 sqq. ; cf. Phil, d. Gr. III. i. p. 319, 2. 4 Epictetus'view of the des3
5 sqqr.; ii.
and
state.
Thus
iv. 41) "
in Jfy. 176
:
Aurel. 27
its
(rrafoyvutptv;
:
T"
c.
"rw
parly ro^ry
T$
veicpQ,1.
tiny
not
of
the
to
soul
is
hand
easy he
state. the be
an
treats
soul
(this
his
spoken
essence
which
268
ECLECTICISM.
to be
CHAP,
good.1 by
our
How
with
moral
precepts
in
exigencies is
must not
nowhere
indicated But
philosopher.
ethics
more we
even
expect from
Epictetus any
who
and useful,
investigation.He searching
to the practically philosophy theoretic enquiry only as an on in is necessarily, to this, even
confines himself
carries
in
of any
proper
; it
scientific
foundation
for
and
mode
of treatment that
consciousness.
Musonius,
that
are principles innate in all men, and that all are agreed about them ; the strife relates merely to their application in Philosophy has only to develop given cases.
conceptionsand
these the
under
or
us
to include
for
instance,
ledged acknowsuffice for
the idea of
so
good
forth.
innate
we
are
not
to
placepleasure
it is indeed do in
not
the
application deceptive opinion is intermingled;2but since, as Epictetus believes,there is no strife concerning end he hopes to put an the universal conceptions,
1
themselves
alone ; and
their
Dm.
contradiction
to
when
Epictetus
free will ; for the Stoics, their fatalism, notwithstanding the same, maintained 3 Hiss. i. 22, 1 sg. 9 ; ii.11
of
our
"
c.
17, 1-13.
TRUE
WISDOM.
269
to the
in the simple presentations Socratie that is which starting from manner, of short dialectic by means universally acknowledged,
discord
of moral
CFAP. IK"
scholastic
systematic treatment
they
same
serve
to not
conviction, but
enter
the
time
indispensable.
If
we
would
the
content
point out, as
to
into closely of Epictetus' ethical doctrine, we may its fundamental the endeavour feature,
more
somewhat
Inde~
make
man
free and
from
happy by
which
events
restriction
to his double
moral demand
nature;
to bear
proceeds the
all
all external
to
renounce
with unconditional
and wishes appetites This, accordingto and
sum
submission,and
directed towards
the
external.
Epictetus,is
wisdom what
power
"
the
we
commencement
of
all
that
in
should
power
a
know and
how what
to discriminate
is
;
2
our
is
not
in
our
he
is
born
to
philosopherwho
live may
desires
not to
absolutelynothing but
afraid of any
event
free and
be
happen.3 Only one will, or what namely,*~our thing is in our power the employment of our and notions is the same, it may be called, ideas ; everything else,whatever is for us a an external, thing that is not in our power.4 Only this should have, therefore,any
"
that
LOG.
(M.
especiallyii. 11,
quoted by
mouth of
1.
Mnsonius
from
the p.
and
Ii. 12, 5 sg. Of. sup. p. 261, 1. 3 i. 1 ; 48, 1 3 JMss. Man. 1 ; 21, 22, 0 *#. ; cf. what
2
Epictetus, mp.
254,
i. is
*
Cf.
sup.
note
3,
270
CHAP,
ECLECTICISM,
value
for us,
only
in
it should
we
seek
and
goods
this
we
2
and
can
our
unhappiness; l
do not
concern
ourselves
proper
even
essential
nature,
nothing in
3
the
the
depends our
that make
; things
such of
only on the ; deity,can coerce happiness; it is not external things us happy, but only our conceptions
and the
are
question employ
fortune what
to
our our
is not
how
our
external
circumstances
to
shaped,but whether
notions.4
to
we
know
how
we
we
govern
or
and
So
selves our-
long as
desire
avoid
upon and
anything external
; if
we
depend
is
ours our
have
we
ceived per-
is
own
not,
restrict
wishes
rational nature
direct
our
efforts and
not
counter
on
to nothing efforts,5
:
which
does
depend
ourselves
then
we
are
free and
us;
that
more
happy, and no fate can have any hold affect us happen what will, it can never which our on depends.6 And well-being completely we
in
our
upon and
the
have minds
; ii.
made of
6
ourselves
thus
independent
6 ; Piss. i.
the
external, the
19
"
*$.;
1
111.
5, iv. 1,
and
;
sqg.-, 21
preceding
note
19 ; Diss. iii.
22, 38 sgg.
c. c.
Mss. i. 1, 7 18, 17; 19, 7: sgg.; ii. l, 4 22, 10 m. ; 25, 1 m. 5, 4; 23, 16 sqq.\ iii. 22, 38* iv. 4, 23 et pass, ; Gell N. A xvii. 19, 5, where there is a
c.
.
Mm.
1, 2,
29, 24
3
18, 17 9, and
quotation from
effect that
Epictetus to
worst
the
the
elsewhere. i. 1, 23; 17, 27; ii. 23, 19 ; in. 3, 10. 4 Man. 5, 16, 20 ; Diss. i. 1, 7 sgg. ; ii. 1, 4; c. 16, 24: iii. Diss.
impatience towards .of others,and intemperance in enjoyments and in all things the art of living happily and
without
two
faults
is contained
and
in
and
elsewhere,
words, aWvou
d. Or. III. i. p.
224,
1.
COURSE
OF
THE
UNIVERSE.
271
it will in
become
that
all
that
happens
is
so
CHAP.
^
the
according to
each that
event
even we
we
shall
acknowledgethat
be
as
a
moral
activitymay
may
linked,
means conditionally un-
and of
be used
reason
training;
to
this
submit what
to
destiny
than
and
we
hold
Grod feel
wills
be
better
what
will, and
we
are
ourselves
free
as
herein,that precisely
satisfied the
we
with
all
it is and
universe
will
have the
man
received
wills.1
Even wise
hardest
in this
experiences will
temper;
not
disturb
the
only Ms property, his but even his friends, his person, his health,and life, his fatherland, he wiE consider as something belongings,
that and
nature
is
not
given,to him,
his
inner
to be
the
;
2
loss and
does
not
affect
he
permit himself
in
by
the
others
his
peace
of
he will not
should
PHI.
be free from
he
d.
304,
37 24
1 ; Man.
Man.
1 ; c.
3 ;
c.
; 10, 4 sq. ; 16, 42 sq$. ; iii.20 IV. i. 99, 131 j 7,20, ; ; *gtg[.
and with
elsewhere.
this
It is consistent
Mtm. natural be
12
1,
14.
Still less
as
principlethat
Ms
as
Epicre-
can
compassion
to the other
school the
external
men
misfortunes
is hnman and
of
refnge
permitted,though Epicinconthe
ex-
kept
only
stances
tetus
unequivocally
demand
;
sistent
{Man.
it
9, 16
272
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. IX.
that he
no
wrong the
and
should
be committed
to
himself: against
be
he
holds
greatest criminal
deluded
man
merely
dares
most
an
unhappy
be
with
whom
not
men
for he finds that all about angry,1 is grounded in the excite themselves,
does
man
which
nature
win
freedom
endeavour the
of
Inclina-
tion of
Jfyictetus to Cynicism.
contraryall external events unavoidable with perfect an as destiny. resignation the cannot We on deny that these principles acceptson
whole
are
Stoic,but
at
the
same
time
we
cannot
pervades the help feeling that the spiritwhich that as moralityof Epictetus is not quitethe same
of the earlier Stoicism. On
the
one
hand
we
our
inclines to Cynicism,when, as philosopher of theoretic seen, he speaks disparagingly when he carries his indifference
to
have
;
science
to the
external
so
and
submission
the
course
of the
is
world
far that
nature
accordingto
is desirable
and
jectiona ob-
which
was
the
doctrine the
morality from
its
loses entirely
meaning
i *6\ov
,
when
he
1
2
Diss. i. 18
That
; c.
28.
vvv
Diss.
vvv vvv
$" Tr\"v"rai
KLV$V-
vevcrcu,
5*
airopTjQrlvcLi, 7rp5
ri
;
.
.
good
so
for himself
is
"pas
ofiv ayavaKreis
afivvarov
of interconnection yap ev roiovrcf rt el nature et ; j "vQp(airos. (j.ev rq" irepLe-^ovrtj "s "ir6\vTov a'Koire'is, Karh fyvffiv ""rrl (rjcrat pexptyfjpas, irXovreiv, rotavra.
place in
cfv-
vyialveivel 5' "s "v6po)irov "r"oircTs Kal fiepos tt\ov nvbs, 5i'
66vra
lA.ravra
"s,brt0d\\"i.
falls to
CYXIC
TEXDEXCZES.
273
finds
it
dignifiedto
fate offers exaltation
disdain
us
even our
those
external
*
CHAP. IX.
goods which
when
in
without
above
2
co-operation;
emotions
his
to
mental
he
us
advances
feel
insensibility ;
and
when
he
forbids
to
tures, sympathy for onr fellow-crearate in regard to their outward at any dition con3 when he believes that the perfectedwise ; will keep himself from man marriage and the begetting of children in the ordinary condition of human him from society,because they withdraw his higher vocation, make him dependent on other
compassion
men a
and
their of
and necessities,
have
no
value
for
teacher
his
humanity,
said in
:
as
compared
deterred from
with
action
his
man
as
lot
'
(as was
not
by
c,
3 ; cf. c.
6, 1) is immaterial
their
v.
In such
things ;
among
without
no action, consequently whom he would be possible (Cic. Fin. Mi. quotes these words is (Dm. ii. 6, 9) : fJ-*xPLS "v a^Xa 15, 50). If that conclusion ael r"v ra % in "%rjs, "v"pv"ffT"- more prominent Bpictetus, so P.OL that he irpbs T?" Tvy)(a.V"iv approximates to the ptav e^ofiat rcav Kara
them,
tyvcriv"airrbs yap
TOLofirav
6i
\L
complete
and the the whole
indifference character of
of
6ebs
T"V
Cynics, this
only
of Ms
5e
ye
vo-
/xoi
KaOeifMaprai vvv,
ITT* avr6. yap
Kal
6
theory
Stoic world
withdrawal
nobs,
so
to
world,
tends
and
strictlyfatalistic
Stoics, only
be of
'
as
that
of
submission inactive
1
2
to
destiny
becomes
to it.
the
relative
to
valne
or sufferance,
could and
the
allowed
*
the
to
'
sition oppo3
Man.
15.
contrary
nature
; from
according happens
to nature
ZH$s. iu. 12, 10. Accustom to bear thyself injuries: eW ofira} tva KOV irpoj8^"n7, wA^r? ere avrlts e^Tnjs ns irpbsavr6v 8rf $6}-ov avdpidyras irepieiXqQevai.
8
standpoint of
nature,
as
the
that
to
appears because
But
the ancient
Stoics
Vide
my.
p.
271,
3.
274
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
l he dissuades when us spiritual ; posterity for him because life, takingpart in political
from
every
His
gentle human
community
in
comparison
with
the
great
is too
small ;2 when,
he finally,
the name ideal under and developshis philosophic of Cynicism.3 But, on the other hand, in the form there unquestionably reigns in Epictetus a milder
gentler temper than in the older Stoa : the does not oppose himself to the unphilophilosopher sophicalworld with that haughty self-confidence it to battle; resignation to the unwhich challenges avoidable forward is his first principle.He comes who the angry preacher of morals not as reproves
and the
of perversity
men
in
the
bitter
tone
of
the
as
well-known the
Stoic
fools,but
indeed
to
heal
sympathises with
of life demand
than
and inde-
d. 6rr.IlLi.2QQ.
self
was
according to
nature
society
unmarried
55 ; cf
.
(Lucian,
feimilylife ; the
Simpl. in JEpiet. pendence and self-sufficingness forbid it. Iniii.7, of the wise man J"fo"5Mr.c.33,7,p.272). he reproachesthe With 19 ; i. 23, 4 sgr. Epictetus, however, the Epicureans that their repudia- latter point of view manifestly of potion of marriage and predominates, and thus there
Detnon. litical life undermines
human
results that
doctrine
similar
at
to
society,and in Lucian
admonishes Demonax
subsquently in the Catholic Church to found a : family, tr^i^iv jap marriage is tealTOVTO but "pL\off6"i"tp avSplerepov recommended, celibacy is ttwraXiireiv rrj Qtarei, avB" avrov considered better and higher, Demonax (to which replied: and is advised for all those who in the Very good! G-iveme then one profess to be teachers of your daughters 1 '). But this service of God.
'
which
prevailed
this
time, and
is
only the
we
same
contradiction
2 s
which find in
might
everywhere
the
276
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
father
or
brother.1 the
How
this dispositionis
con-
nected
and
the
temperament of Epictetus religious how from this starting-point a divergencefrom in the theoretical is inevitable, older Stoicism even
with
will part of philosophy,
be
discussed
further
on.
Marcus
.s
The
greatest admirer
of
Epictetus was
his
Marcus
Antoninus
Aurelius
Antoninus,2 and
iii. 22, 54
:
in
apprehension of
p.
lonius;
the
197, note).
whose
were,
5e? avrbv
(the Cynic,
"s
avrovs
truly
The
philosophers
above
struction in-
wise
man)
ftvov Kal
TOVS
}j."vov "pi\"iv
mentioned, Stoics us (/."?.) a5eA"""oz/ ; Sextus, the Pla; ras, "$"irarepa irdvrcav, cf Fr. 70 ; ap. Stob. Moril 20, tonist,of Chaeronea, nephew of nics Plutarch (M.Aurel.i.9; Capitol. 61 ; and concerning other Cy.
Saip6besides fiaipov-
attended
who the
same
express
themselves PMl.
in
3 ; Dio
and viii.
Philostr.
1. c. ; Eu-
d. Gr.
trop.
12;
Suid.
Mc"p/c.);
i. 12 ;
2
a
(for so he born was was called) originally the 25th of April,121 A.D., on inEome(Capitolin. Ant. PMlos.
M. Annius Verus
s#.),
later
only
at
1),where
his
family, which
had
emigrated
out
a
with of
Sevems, period; and Claudius the Peripatetic (Capitol. 3). Among the earlier philosophers made none a deeper impression
him have than
Epictetus,
as
high
his
(I. "?.).
was
we
His
careful
education
own
warded for-
(sup. p. already seen 738, 1 ; according to M. Aur. i. 7. Adopted by order of Hadrian for (concerning his predilection
vide MX. Cass.
him,
Capitol, 15) by
i. 4 ; Dio Antoninus
garb
which
of
philosopherand
himself of his of
to
of Marcus Pius, he took the name prescribed abstinences Aurelius after he had borne
at the
he His
only curtailed
mother he his teachers
that
of
his
maternal for
to
a
entreaties
c.
(I.c.
loaded he
; cf,
surname
while.
2).
the
proofs
gratitude
of Antoninus
added
Cass.
(Capitol, i. 5, 7 ; Dio I. "?.).His later life belongs to Roman tory, imperial hiswhich exhibits of
"
to
us
on
the
more
throne
the
Caesars
powerful
princes,
many but
MARCUS
AUEELIVS.
277
Stoicism,as well
he
as
in
his whole
mode
of
approximates very closelyto him. the Stoic doctrine, resembles tetus he generallypresupposes
but
CHAP. IX.
only those
interest
a
determinations
of it which
Ep'tctetus
in
his
and
He
a
does not
practical vien" of
to be
dialectician
the
physicist;
sciences in
and
admits
value
of these
though he general,2
Aurelius the
he
is
jp/iilosophy.
none
of
nobler
no
man
and of
purer
A.D.
Marcus
died
position, at gentlerdisto
Tienna
stricter and I
ness, conscientious-
faithfulness Dio
duty.
to refer,therefore,
Cassius
33. of had
to
be
administered
Ant.
Pius.
Ver.
Imp.},
the for that and in
monument
Vulcatius well-known
and
in the
part
this
of Roman
history;
only
and Marcus and
to
his
place
the
shortly
peculiar
Aureco-
later years, which in the MSS. bear the title els eavrbv or KO."
in which Caesar
tavrbv, but
under p. other
regent
excellent
stood
father
equally
and
to
6). More
:
also
father-in himself
concerning
N. Anton.
him
are
adopted
whom he
(136-161),
Bach,
De
Avr.
(i.16
has
; vi.
30)
so
Leipzig,1826
Dorgens,
raised
monument.
was
His
i-ide sup. p. 202, 1 ; Zeller, Vortr, uncL Abliandl. i. 89 $g". ; Cless M. ubers. 1866, Qrunfo.
1
reign
and
by
great public
6
mine (fa165,
the Mar-
plague
in 162
A.D.), difficult
wars
(with
i. 228.
:
Parthians
comanni,
vii. 67
^y
S$Y.)"
Kas
SioAe/CTi/cbs Kal
TOVTO
eirecr(pwiicbs
8ai,Sia
aTroyvys,
$"pOS Kal
al^fLtaV Kal
6eq". bittered Kal euTrei^s1 Syria, 175) ; and em2 So he says in viit 13, in the indolence of his by Stoic triple with the 172 A.D.), agreement colleagueVerus(died of division his wife of the philosophy : immorality Faustina,
and modus.
excesses
and
the of his
wickedness
son
V"KU)S
Kal
"7Ti
Corn-
On
the
17th of March
278
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
nevertheless proper
of
opinion that
without
not
man
may
attain
his
destination
much
knowledge.1 The
search
out
important thingis
that
he should the
all he
and
things above
should
serve commune
and
earth, but
within
are
daemon
him
in
greater
to the
a man
culties diffi-
which
of the
themselves should
investigation
hold
to
Keal, the
in the
that
which
can
alone
nothing can
the nature
us
of thingsand of opinions changefulness to the conviction that give us calm happen to us which is not accordingto
"
of the
universe, and
that
none
can
to
act
against our
in
conscience.3
It is
these
concerned
must
give us
Vide
fixed
the
flux of
pheno-
277,
the and
1 ; cf. i.
17, where
benehe did in
Svo-KardXyirra5o/ce?
TTOV
Kal
iraa-a
TJ
he
not
reckons make
among
the that
tits of
gods
aperdTrraros;
with all external
If
we
greater
oratory
studies have and from
go further
they
even
are
which when
might
worthless the
:
; if
we
best eV
are
scarcely
o$v
.
self to
he
durable Kal ri
row^ry
fy$y
.
Kal frvTrq
aTTOKaBifrai eirl
crvy-
iror
8Xcos ffTrovSacrdTJvat ypatyets, ^ ffvKKoyLff^ovs aya^vvd^vov eiu\6etv, ^ irepl It only remains ra /j,"T"a)po\oyiKa you. to await in KaraylvearBat. his natural dissolupeace ii. 13 ; cf. ii. 2, 3 : a^es ra until then tion, but rovrois
iravecrOar
3
evl /xey
"v irpdy/jiara ot"%i Kara rfyv r""v rptirov nva tyKaXfyei. i"rrtv erepcp 5e, $n "|""TT/JULOI arly, fto-re "j"i\ocr6"t"ot$ 6\lOVK pijtev vpd"r"r"Lv ijj"v irapa rbv TO?S- rvxova-tv, oLs, ov5e eSo^e 6(-bv Kal Salpova. ovSels yap 4
V.
:
TO;
10
fjiey
oLavry
iv
auroTs
rovrov avayKdcrcay
PROBLEM
OF
PHILOSOPHY.
279
mena,
and
supply a
an
defence
of
CHAP. IX-
all finite
A dream in
a
things. 'What
and
is human
life?5 he asks.
wandering
us
strange land.
Only
in
daemon
within
us
pure
and
clear,
pleasureand pain,independent of the of others ; in our receiving all that happens by (rod,and
with
sent
awaiting the
natural
end
of The
existence
cheerfulness and
forming of
his mind
;
man's
character
and
the
calming of
to
only accordingto
value of estimated. there
are
their relation
this
problem is the
scientific
dogmas
For
to be
this purpose
three
HU
o^-
Stoic
eyes of
system which
our
eon' reti"!
chiefly important in
the
^xtf
things.
passingaway,
in
which
nothing individual
has
ii. 17
"
f
V*v
cKeiBev
Tro6ev
5e rbv 0afafcir eVl iran crvvsXtwri. "5e elireiv, varov yvt"fjiri ?\eq" Treptpevovra, ry 2UAo "fo ou5"y fy Xvtrtv rtev fro"rdfjc.aro$ jitej/ rov d-
ra/iJi^
ra
5c
Kal
Tvtyas.
Kal
vanity and. %4vovbriSiipia' TJ vffrepoQyfjLfa concerning the of and life rb transitoriness 5e X'fiBif]. ovv irapair^at ri^ of the Kal worthlessness (piXoa-opivots, SwdfjiGvov every; ev to found in Se ev r" rt\p"iiv external rbv are thing rovro "fa. d\3 iv. /col ii. 12, 15 ; (d K6ffpos "j/5oy Salpom a,j"6ftpi"rrov ^ri 5e ra ovfifiai-Xoieacrir d 0los fa6\i$is) ; iv. affunj, "c. Kal airovefjttfjLeva lex^ei/ov, 48 ; v. 33 ; vl 36 ft vovra
280
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
permanence,1but
the ceaseless
are
even
all returns
in
course
of time
even
of
transmutation of the
to which
the
ments ele-
3 subject ;
change which
the universe he
to
its future
dissolution.4
:
these doctrines
unimportant part of the whole, what a transitory of universal life, is each phenomenon in the stream
individual the
as an we
how
wrong
desire
it is to set it
as a
our
hearts upon
to fear it
to perishable,
good, or
to disturb
little we
ought
to
ourselves holds
the
if
exception
hold
are
the
law
which
must too
hastening to our dissolution.7 the more But of the livelyis his consciousness changeableness of all the finite,the greater is the importance he attaches to the conviction that this change is governed by a higher law and subserves the end of the highestreason this is ; and of those propositions the conclusion the deity on and providence, and the unity and perfection of on
the world, to which The belief in the
not Marcus
Aurelius
so
so
often
recurs.
man
gods
is
indispensableto
to
be worth
while
live in
we
world
gods ; 8
;
v.
and
justas
little can
know of whom We
we
doubt
that
of the
see,
iv.
36, 43
13,
23 ; viii.
the
existence
we
gods
Marcus
do in but
not
Aurelius
believe
answers
(xii.
beeffects
we
ii. 17,
v.
end;
iv. 46.
28):
cause
them that
13, 32.
23 ; ix. 32. v. 23 ; vi. 15 ; ix. 28.
experience the
see
v,
of do
their
not
is not
x.
7,
we
(i.e. a
in
our
quite portion
;
them,
we
are stars)
visible souls
ask
how
and
believe
ORDER
OF
THE
WORLD.
281
the
Divine all
l
Providence
ordered
manner
thingsin
whether
as
all
CHAP.
IX'
this
care
the
indi-
Belief i
vidual
means
immediately
of the
such, or
is related to him
by
t?ie uni~
The
same
of nature.2 general interdependence divine spirit permeates all things ; as the world
is one,
so
substance
one
of the and
is its soul ; 3 it is
rational
efficientforce which
goes
bears in itself the germs of things, bringsforth all thingsin fixed and The forms world, therefore, whole, the parts of which are living
well-ordered maintained
in
harmony
and
and
interconnection
by
;
an
internal
bond,5
is made
all in the
it is
regulatedfor
the
best,the fairest
worse
and
most
the
the
without
seeing
Mem.
them
(cf. "iraKo\ov8r}(ny
"#re
rb
. .
5e
Xenoph.
0ebs, eS e^ei vdvra tfre 1 ii. 3 : ra r""v BeSsv irpovoiaseiKTJ, p)jKCU "rv titty. Therefore, iii. 11, 8*5 ""i e"p3ettd(rrov AefJL""rrd KOL (xii. 5) ; irdvra KaXws
8, 14).
Qeoi
yetv
rovro
ot dtard^avres (pLXavQp"iras
rovro
pzv
Kara
irapa
8eov
7jK"i.
(ii. 4,11
2
; vi.
4:4:, "C.).
Aurelius allows these he
us
5e
Marcus
choose third
T^\V
"c.
to the
not
between
two
theories,whereas
"
that
the
repudiates gods do
about and subholds
care
direct diG-od
causation, between
we destiny,
trouble
as
find PMl.d."r.
anything"
versive
even were
man
i. 143, 2 ; 339, 1.
of
religion; though
case
he
that
Ibid. in.
vavr'bs
i. 159, 2, 3 ;
v.
32
of himself 44 (vi.
welfare
rbv
S^/coj/ra \6yov
ai"vos
Karci
; vide
Phil.
ical 5f^
163,3.
"(j? "Ka"rrov
vota, then
%roi
it
KO.T
icepi6$ovsT"'raryfjL"yasoiKovofJLovvra
ri" Tray.
5
cfAou did:
satisfied with
Xonra
5e $ cwra" 8pjLty(r", ra
p. 140
Gfr. III. i.
282
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, IX-
Even
that
which
its
seems
to
us
and
good
end
for
economy
to
are
of the with
the
evils which
and
conflict
in
divine
goodness
wisdom of the
nature And
course
part merely the inevitable reverse good, and in part things by which the
and
true
side inner
even
untouched.2 are happiness of man with not content recognisingin the usual of thingsthe traces of Divine Providence,Antoninus, in the spiritof his school, does not deny the extraordinary revelations of God in dreamst
believes himself relation connection of these
to have
and
had
tions revela5
the
course
and
as
of nature
he of
says,
however,
the
170,
little
concerningthe
6
relation
his
1
gods to
Loo.
Phil.
;
:
popular deities
1 ,* v.
and
so
in other
pas-
cit.
16, 30 2;
;
old
6
Stoics Marcus in
a
d. greatly (PJiil.
and
2
$#.)"
"
Aurelius
always
manner
175, 2
ii. 11
176, 3
177, 1
178, 1, 2
speaks
the he in
general
the the substitutes
of whom Zeus
'
/car*
aA4)0eicw
T"V
6 col or
6eb$,for
*
KaKo'ts Tva
d fydpvfj"i TrcpmiirTr}
irw
often
fy Kal he doubtless followed, as EpicTOI/TO en-f? tetus did,the universal theories r b " of his school, but held to the Trdvrfi /JL^J irspnrLirTSiv ctirtp' Se %efy"ftj iroi"i ircas existing public worship the fj.)) faQpuirov, "v rovro frlov av6pc^irov steadily,since for him as xelpca more
Kaicbv
edevro'
regard to
popular
deities
"v
"iva. wpo'foovro,
iTQLT}ff"iev ; xii.
3
5, and
elsewhere, Kal ot
head
a we
of the
Roman
it
was
ix. 27.
must
Even be
to the wicked
political necessity;
can
we
friendly :
understand
6eol $e iravrolco? avrots ftoyQovcri,tianity appeared to him bellion against the laws Si* bvelpwv, 5i" fjLavT"i5"v.
4
of
the
i. 17, where
the
^o-nQ^aTa
State, and
the
constancy
of
Christian the which mentioned a ca v are oyeip martyrs as defiance were (^tX?) napdimparted to himself, wanton other be must things, against ra^is, xi. 3), which among his and giddiness. crushed by severity. Under blood-spitting 5 Which had occupied the reign,as is well known, great
5i}
284
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
'
Antoninus
man,
said,in the
moral
life of
Epictetuscomes
out most
MMcs.
and strongly ; but the difference of their nationality social position made it inevitable that the Eoman
emperor
should
in display
his
theory of
the
the world
strongercharacter
individual
and
maintain
duties of the
towards
societymore
For
the him
Phrygianfreedman.
also that
are
the
the
fundamental
determinations
man
his ethics
dependence of
'
upon
himself,
and
to resignation
most
the will of
Grod,and the
warmest
boundless
Why
says thou
dost thou
to
man
dis-
into
be careful of the thyself; daemon within thee; loose thy true self from all that clings to it in a merely external fashion ; consider that nothing external affect thy soul, can that it is merely thy presentationswhich trouble thee, that nothing can injure thee if thou dost not think it injures thee ; consider that all is that only within thee streams changeableand futile,
1
turb
he
; retire
dost
find
rest
and
Marcus
himself
these
in
v.
33 ; the
{re-
often
brings
thing
ev^petv,
is 0eota fj.ev
virtues, sometimes
sometimes the chief
only two
three, them, as
pas-
point.
So in the
sage quoted sup. p. 278, 3 j 279,1, he mentions purity and freedom of the inner the
and life,
course
submisthe uni-
8e avdptiirovs e3 voieiv, /cal aye'xe"r0cu avr"v "oi a-7re'xe"r0at (of. p. 270, 6). oVa 8" e'/crtagpajz/ rov KpeaSiov Kal rov ravra irvevfAartov, ^ueuvrjo-daip^re "r" Svra, ^re M
j8eu"Kal
sion to
verse,
of
"roL
But any
we
as
he
does
not
at-
these
tempt
ration,
and the duty ship of all men of caring for all. The same is
consistency from
respect.
this
PHILOSOPHY
OF
LIFE.
285
an
inexhaustible
fountain
is the if he
of
happiness,that
in which be
the
man
CHAP.
'
reason passionless
only citadel
would
must
take
refuge
reason
invincible.1
a
His
rational endowed
being
stand
with
has
to
seek his
happinessand
of man,
his
goods ; 2 everythingelse,all
with the
nor
in connection is neither
a
moral
an
constitution
good
evil.3
He
who
to his
internal
nature, and
has
all
moment
present,he accommodates
submission that
to the
course
himself
of the
ie
unconditional
;
he believes
of Grod ; that
whole
him
and
lies in
that
its nature
be
also;
he
nothing
make himself he
can
happen
material
no
man
which
cannot
into
for
rational
activity.4 For
than
to
knows
higher task
the
fillhis
follow
the
law
of the
whole, to honour
god
the
by
as
strict
a
man
to morality,
place5
to the
serene
at every
(and
or
as
Roman, adds
forward
to look
end
1
of his life, be it
sooner
8, 18 ; v. 19, 34 ; vii. 28, 59 ; Tiii. 48 ; xii. 3 et passim. 2 Phil. d. Or. III. i. p. 210,
i. p. 177, 2 ; 178, 1. Hence the cf. 40 that principle (x. v. 7) ; should not men ask external
2, 3
3
212,
4.
but
only
is
ex-
neither
Ib.
HI.
i.
216,
1 ;
218,
1 ;
nor
fears what
viii. 10 ; iv. 39. 4 x. 1 ; iii. 12 ; ii. 3, 16 ; iv. 23, 49 ; vi. 45 ; x. 6 ; viii. 7, 35 d. ffr. III. et passim. Cf. PML
ii. 5, 6,
13, 16,
17 ; iii. 5,
16. "c.
286
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
IX"
cheerfulness
thought of
how
can man
with the simply content that which is according to nature.1 But feel himself part of the world, and
is
which
himself the
same
to
the
law
of
the
universe
as
time
of
humanity
not all bestow
and task ?
work
for humanity
his worthiest
and
how his
can
he do this immediate
if he
does
upon
more
fatherland
Lore
m
the ?
3
attention Not
even
which the
his
position
mem-
to
n'
demands
bers
of him
unworthy
it befits
of human
his love.
even
society are
He
excluded
us
by Antoninus
man
from love
reminds
and
that
to
even
the weak
to erring,
in the that
ungratefuland
men
are our
hostile ; he
consider
same
all
kindred,that
;
all the
divine
no
dwells spirit
in
that
we
cannot
expect
that
even
to find
wickedness
sin
the
world, but
the
and because they do only involuntarily what is reallybest for them not perceive ; that he who harms does wrong own only himself; our be harmed essential nature of can by no action another's wrongdoing ; he requires,therefore,that should be hindered we by nothing in doing good,
sinning
that and
we
should
of
either
teach
men
or
bear with
them,
instead
being angry or surprised at their them.4 only compassionateand forgive himself Antoninus acted consistently
.
For
further
details cf Phil.
sg.
Ib:III.
vii. 22
"c. ; (pi\"7vKal robs irralovras, I o. c. 26 ; ii. 1, 16 ; lit 11, "c.; iv. 3; v. 25; viii. 8, 14, 59 j ix. 4, 42; xi. 18; xii. 12, et
passim,.
CHARACTER
OF
LATER
STOICISM.
287
Tip
to
these
there
precepts.1
comes
From
"his
life,
of
as
from
Ms
CHAP.
words,
of
to
us
nobility
a
soul,
to in
purity duty,2
a
'
mind,
conscientiousness,
a
loyalty
which
mildness,
and
piety,
the
and Koman
love
of
man
that
tury, cen-
on
imperial
the
throne,
we
must
doubly
of
the
admire.
That
Stoic
of
philosophy
morals could
in
deepest
an
degradation Epictetus,
to
a
Musonius,
Marcus
Aurelius,
always
made
no
its
imperishable through
the
Stoic the
love
to
glory.
these moral
men
it
progress of
though
modified and them the
severity
them,
was
by
though
feelings
man
self-sacrificing strength
and
attained do
not
with find
it is
reality
yet
which
we
in
in
ancient cannot
Stoicism,
this for
gain,
the
great
want
as
itself,
methodical
compensate
and
of
more
exhaustive
philosophic
enquiry.3
Zeller,
sgr. ;
As
Vovtr.
und
:
Abhandl.
s%.
mand tion. in
3
for
strict
self-examina-
i.
96
2
98
seen,
sq.
101
is
for
example,
of
In
regard
and
to
the
repeated
satisfaction 37
j
v.
expressions
with
dis-
logy
theology something
said
later
on.
himself and
in his
(iv.
de-
Aurelius,
will
be
x.
8)
238
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTER
THE CYNICS OF
THE
X.
IMPERIAL
ERA.
FROM
" " "
the contemporary
the
it
Cynicism
and
same
is
only distinguishedby
with which had Stoicism
the
onesidedness followed
the
B.
The
thoroughness
direction. of
for Cynicism,
of the
of
a more
virtuous
had
and
furnished
the
basis
of
comprehensive
in
truer
a
the
world, and
in
consequence relation
itself of
placed
nature
with
the
claims
and
of human
life.
If this theoretic
basis
neglected,Stoicism reverted to the was standpoint of Cynicism, the individual to himself and his restricted for his moral activity after virtue : instead of creating personalendeavour
morality were
the rules of his conduct
nature
to
of
from
he
his
was
knowledge of
the
and and
mere
obligedto resort his immediate consciousness, his personal tact moral impulse ; philosophy, instead of a science,
a
of
thingsand
of men,
rule
of life founded of it
was
upon
science,became
not
an
determination
if character,
entirely
sided one-
it subjective acceptation
seldom
be
LATER
at strife with mate
CYNICS,
custom
289
general
We
and
even
with
legiti-
CHAP. x
moral
claims.
towards Musonius
may
observe
in
this
Cynicism
and
the
Epictetus; indeed,the
also
and describes the expressly designates On the same road we as a Cynic. philosopher
encounter
so
the
we
school did
.
of
not
the
Sextii,though these,
far
as
know,
Cynics ;
tinguish dis-
and
it is undeniable the
that
which
Eoman
Republic
"
and
the
first of
Imperial Government
and
the
universal
immorality
upon all
"
luxury, and
a
the
pressure for in
weighing
meeting
the much
and
same
gave
and
sufficient
opening
the time
the
way
distress
as
corruption of
done under
analogousbut more by Diogenes mitigated circumstances after the beginning of the Soon Crates.1
had
era we
been
Revival
of
Christian
under of
again
hear
a
of
the
Cynics, and
J
3
"^ni^m
won
Gjjt"r
"?-
that
name
is united
numerous
t^Ckril philosophers, genuine, partly of merely nominal "rawho, with open contempt for all purely scientific tia"lfl their only task the as activity,set before them
liberation
of
man
from
unnecessary
wants,
emotions;
idle
endeavours, and
herein
far
more
who
the
Stoics
set
themselves
in opposition, even by their dress and definitely of men and their customs, to the mass of life, mode forward as and came professedpreachers of morals
and mask
moral
a
3
overseers
over
the rest.
That
were
under
this
number
Cf,
of
impure elements
Litcian
und
U
hidden,
Bernays,
die
Kymker,
27 *g.
290
.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, x'
that
ancient ness,
coarse
and
and charlatanism, through their shamelessness, and rude behaviour, through their extortions their beggarlylife, even and, despite impositions,
its adhe-
of through their covetousness, brought the name philosophyinto contempt, is undeniable,and may be l provedfrom Lucian alone; but we shall find that the had neverlike its predecessor, theless new Cynicalschool, But the even a nucleus worthy of esteem. of little importance in a scientific better Cynics are
point of
1
view.
De
inorte
E.g.
Piscat. 44 sq. 48 ;
"c. ;
and
about
the
Fugit. by
16 ; also
Nigr.
complaints had
others. Seneca Lucilius
been
warns
his
period Dio Chrysost.(Or. 34, p. 33 E.) says, with refeto the philosophic dress, rence
he
are
knows
seen
well
that
strange
of life of those
in
it call
qui
per,
non
proficeresed
the mtonsum
conspici
cultus
as-
Cynics and
as
cupiunt, against
the
cajmt, the the "ba/rba^ indiotum negligentior argcnto odium, the ctibile Tiumi
aliitd
am-
Kal
echoed
by
the
his
positum, et quicyuid
"bitio perversa traits and of
via,
new
the
p. 397
Lucian
100 Dial.
there
is also reference
14
^.)-
it,no
(cf. sapiens
in
to which
populwn
Dig ii.
we
vitce novitate
convertet.
see
tetus
also
discriminates freedom
moral
the and outer the of true qualities and that for Kal
iray
Cynic life consisted the in : mantle, of ten very by these philosoragged, worn phers,
the
uncut
tokens
beard
and and
Cynic;
Kal
which
:
many
hair, the
staff and
wallet,
substitute
i-v\ov
the whole irv\pi$iov rough mendicant life, the ideals of which were yvdBoi /u.eyd\ai' b "av 8""s, ^ cwroa Crates and a Diogenes.
cLTravruffi
these
3}TO?S
Xot-
292
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. X.
ever,
as
this
is philosopher
admired
from
mention
by Seneca,1and
wants him, contrasts
as as
a
as advantageously
his freedom
who
his
life
of poverty and Ms manner from date Beat. 183) (Vit. time this QIOG pauperiorem, quod,cum qua/m ceteros Cynicos, siU dixit
certe
Cynic.
to
Nothing
is known
any
ing Accordwritings left by him. to Eunap. V. Soph. Procem. p. 6, Musonius well as were, and
as
interdixerit
Carneades
Menippus,
Demetrius.
however
contemporary
Two of these and
with
names,
Demetrius
ilium
vidi
quam tem),
nudum, quanta minus, in xtramentis, inciibanHip. 62, 3 (he lives, nan contempserit omnia, tamquam
the word of
(Menippus
doubtless Philostratus how much
Philostratus
tion foundawe as
Epic-
historical
tetus
i. 25, 22), and the (JDiss. anecdote in Lucian, Saltatory 63. When
to
Carneades
nowhere
were
can
form that in
no
judgment,
he
Thrasea friend he in 34
Psetus
was
mentioned
there is Rome
put
Cynics
going forethe from
intimate raised
he
at
the
voice xvi.
the
(Tac.
opposition s#.)"anc^
tage, disadvanof
plain
from
still more
to his own
quotations
Seneca.
name
accession
of these
Cynics,
on count ac-
Isodorus, who
of Ms
biting words
had
exiled from been by Nero mentioned is Sueton. Italy, by injurious pasian (Nero, 39). expressions concerning Ves1 vii. 1, 3, he calls banished he JEtenef. was (71 Vir but his him to island, meo : tinued conan judicio magnus A.D.) iv. 40 ; cf of Ann. his xvi.
.
32),
insults Sueton.
were
not
further
etiamsi and
maximis
comparetur ;
:
punished (Dio
Cass. In
Ixvi.
13;
Vesp. 13).
Lucian,
tura ut
tulisse
temporibus^
a
ilium ab illo
noHs
corrigi
62. iv.
posse,
eocactce,licet neget
by
Titus of
Apollonius.of
(vi.31), and
was
had He
also appears
in
greatly
in what from tonius. Suea
Domitian
still in
necromancer
company
42 (vii.
;
of that viii.10
are
just
been
light quoted
s##.); but
these
Tacitus, Dio
Cassius, and
statements He
DEMETRIUS.
203
with, the
value
luxury of
be
the Roman
estimated
come
cannot
rate, there
have
down
remarkable
importance
not to to
known.
He
recommends with
in
a
his
scholars
trouble
exercise
use
themselves themselves
much
knowledge, but
practical
their
he
moral rudeness
consciousness
contemptuous
with
bitter
opposes the
a
himself
scorn
the
threats of
as
despot;4 he
of
welcomes
outward
misfortunes
means
moral
and training,
resigns himself
and willingly
there
said ;
In all to the will of Grod.5 joyfully also is nothing that a Stoic might not his light estimation of learning and even Demetrius time. lies
knowledge
Stoicism
shares,at
The
in
any
rate, with
his
of his
peculiarityof
the his life.
Cynicism
which
1
therefore
only
severity with
he
stamps
his
on principles
What
"
ances
concerning- Vespasian,
Sen. him
and from
voces
quotes
esse
Eod"m,
loco sioi
cpio
*
dissertation.
: res
imperitorum,
crepvtwt.
gonent
centre
8, 2
He
was
eloin
redditos deormm
Quid enim,
isti If Seneca
matter
swsvm refert,
co7icinnat"z
solliettte, sed
vngenti applies
res tuttt,
the
word this
to elega/nter
these
4
words,
is
proseqfitentis.
Cf
.
of taste.
Lucian,
takes of
a
Indoct. book
out
19,
of
Li
Epikt. Dus.
:
where
the
tears
he it in
hand
reader, and
rav,
5
""tScns.
3, 3
j 5 j 5 ;
Promd.
14.
67, J$j).
294
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. X.
Of
the
Cynicsof
of
the
the
some
details have
come
respecting
lived under
(Enomaus
(Enomaus
1
who Gradara,
Cynics
are tioned men-
is said to have
even were
of Gadarci.
Besides supra,
names
it
otherwise, the
lived
cluded con-
p. 291, 2, the
when
Demetrius
connected
only be
from
approximately
c.
with
ever, this school, of which, howbulus perfect. our knowledge is very imUnder
Vespasian lived
and
34.
Diogenes
whom,
abuse the the Ixvi.
on
Heras,
of
of their and
also
the
account
Cynics
Antoninus
period.
Under
cessor suc-
of the former
was
imperial family,
his
scourged
Pereshall
latter beheaded
(Dio Cass.
also
was
grinus,
genes,
pupil Thea-
15);
and
with Domitian
Demetrius.
we
it
place
surname was an
the he
Trajan clothed in a bearskin, and with that Didymus called him of Planetiades therefore, Demonax, (if
historical
person),in
Def.
drian, Haa sarcasm
whose Orae.
mouth
c.
Plutarch, De
oracle
; under (Enomaus
7, 413, puts
Crato,
the who
on
the
against the
besides
of
(Luc. De
Saltat. i.$##.)
period of
infra\ perhaps
whom 27
that it is
to
trius Deme-
likewise and
in the
belongs
lived in
related
he of
a
Pancratius,
Athens lostr. F.
(Lucian, Tax,
came
###.) that
Corinth
i. 23,
accuser
(Phi1), and
of Justin
to Alexandria
devote
Soph.
Martyr
himself
a
under
the the he
guidance
(or of
tended
Crescens,
the
certain
Bhodius
(Justin.Apol.
Rhodian
?) to
that
Cynic philosophy,
his
ii. 3; Tatian, Adv. Gent. 19; Hist. Ecel. Eus. iv. 16, "c.) ;
to
the
period of Severus,
theesteemed
an
An-
tiochus,
he
set
Cilician, whom
because
prison,and
When
himself
fate.
was
in order
to
his soldiers
their the
cence inno-
brought
lighthe
siderable con-
gave he
over
to his friend
compensation
received, and
himself
to the Brahmans. historical truth of this to India
und Bernays, Lucian After this time Xyn. 30). there is a gap in our knowledge of the Cynic philosophers extending
over
a
hundred
and
tain however, is as little ceras the authenticity of the treatise which affirms it; and
who,
(ENOMAUS.
295
the
Mm for Julian reproaches reign of Hadrian.1 destroyingin his writingstlie fear of the gods,for and tramplingunder foot 2 human despising reason, he says, and divine ; his tragedies, all laws,human
are
CHAP.
beyond
;
3
all
descriptionshameful
this verdict the
no
and
terous prepos-
and
if in for
the
horror the
of the
pious
emperor
despiser of
small
must
popular
must still
has religion
suppose
perhaps
GEnomaus
share,we
have
that
the the
"
which Eusebius againstthe Jugglers,' find a polemic as violent as for us,5we has preserved in the it is outspoken against the heathen oracles,
Ad
through
cow;
or
LOG.
tit. p.
210
D.
When
distant Athen.
of tragedies, (Enomaus is quoted by a writer also Diogenes, was 5, with a ri'xy'nwhose name lived in Athens and who after the Cynics named epariicf) ; or of the the fall 5 Phot. Cod. 114, 23, Thirty Tyrants, 167, p. ap.
Sphodrias,
iv. 162
among baeus"
the
authorities
of
StoPo-
this
statement
on
a
seems
to
be
viz.,Hegesianax,
Xanthippus,
"
founded
confused
lection recol-
lyzelus,
Theomnestus
know.
1
of
not
this
are
passage, where
we
do
tragedies
to
(Philiscus, placed in that period disciple Philistus The cf. vol. ii. a, 244, 2), and by Syncellus,p. 349 B. then tragediesof (Enomaus are of Suidas, Qiv6p.that statement phyry, spoken of. than Porhe was a little older 4 The title of this book runs is perhaps inferred from that Eusebius the circumstance thus, according to Eus. Prcep. v. definite account, MJ. 18, 3; 21, 4; vi. 6,52; more (with whose Theod. Cur. Gr"r"zc. Affect, (par. however, Syncellus was 1642) vi. p. 561 : yofyrwy (fxapct., acquainted) Pr"p. EG. v. 19
He is $$$., discusses him
immediately
and
named
5
less
accuratelyby
:
Julian
before
2
calls Mm
B.
rb KO,T"
x/wjtrrTjpW.
v.
Prcep* Ekang*
c.
19-36,
draft, vii.
A.
p. 209
Spanh.
296
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
X.
l of cynical spirit on freethinking no ; but it is based properly philosophic arguments ; and in connection
likewise turns
the to
foundation
an
it life, declaring
much
incontrovertible
fact of consciousness
cilability and expoundingthe irreconitself, of foreknowledgewith freedom, and of with moral In these utterances fatality responsibility.2 the self-dependence of the man we recognise of his Cynicism, would be a follower who, in spite of Diogenes;3 but he neither of Antisthenes nor existence
was
doubtless
neither
deeperstudyof
The esteemed famous
in
Athens,
and
extolled
in
treatise
c.
3) had
enjoyed
the
tions instruc-
are
put
into the
mouth
of the
of the
Cynics Agathobulus
of the
of Cynicism by representative
and
Orac. 7, p. 413.
Demetrius
d. Gr. II. i. 280 s##. ; Ber1. c. 30 $%%. nays, 2 LOG. dit. vi. 7, 11 a#. (The-
the
death
on
r"v But
ev
with
intercourse Herodes Atticus (c. 24, 33) this latter period, he may,
% cruj/a""r07j"m re
avrwv,
teal
have lived till160 perhaps, A.p., or even longer. The treatise said to be
by Lucian
shows
(as
Kwitfiibs otfre 3AvTi"rO"i/i"r]j.6s Bernays, Z. c., remarks), by the ktfTW 01JT" A.LOy"VtfffJl.6s. in which Herodes is alluded way
d
Born
in
to, that it
was
not 176
written
A.D.
till
DEMONAX.
297
bearingLucian's name,1 Is much more distinguished CHAP. x* QEno From by his character than, by his science.2 he differs chiefly in that he tried to mitigate maus the severities of the Cynic mode of thought,and to
reconcile
it with is
life and
respectshe
QEnomkns
definite
tific scien-
system
nor
troubled
himself
at all about
any
knowledge, so Demonax, according to the of his biographer,3 carried his eclecticism assurance
to
such his
an
extent
that
it is difficult to
say
which
philosophical predecessors he preferred. He himself,to all outward proclaimed appearance, himself a Cynic,without,however, approving of the
of exaggerations he
and
of
the
a
party;but
model
in
his
own
ter charac-
chose
for
the
mild, benevolent,
was
moderate
temper
to
hearted with
were
enough
directed
to
Socrates
and
of
and Socrates,4
the
of
mankind
is
from
all
things external:
is
who
free,said
he, alone
1
happy;
denied
he
only is
free who
hopes
has and
that
it
is
dan
Bernays (Luhas Kyn. 104 sg.*) def ended this opinion with very important arguments. But that
its
Lucian's,
for suspicion as to its credibility. 2 Concerning his gentle, huand amiable mane, character, his imperturbable cheerfulness, his efforts for the moral of those around
author,
himself
out
who
nowhere
welfare
and the
be
him,
.
had
intercourse years
with
5-11
Demon. LOG.
; 57 j 63 ; 67. 5.
doubt,
reason
nor
is there
dt.
5-9
s
; cf
19 ; 21
any
internal
in his work
48 ; 52.
LOG. dt.
62.
298
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
nothing and
nothing,being convinced of the of all men.1 In order transitoriness and paltriness to resignnothingof this independence he abstained
to have marriage; 2 but he seems specially of Cynicism, in the true spirit included in it, freedom from the prejudices of the popular self religion ; he himhe never offered sacrifices, indicted because was
fears
from
and
despisedthe
neither in the
Eleusinian
his
and mysteries,
nor
he
ceals con-
defence
elsewhere
his low
opinionof
worship.3 In his suicide and existing the disciple his indifference to burial,4 we recognise and Zeno ; and though the departure of Antisthenes must to the Stoic doctrine, from this life, according to a higher life, entrance Demonax, like an open disclaimed this view.5 As Pansetius and Epictetus, to any scientific enquiry, however, we hear as little other. The this point as on on philosopher any exercise of be solelythe his task to considers
1
Lucian, Demon.
20 ; cf
"
c.
4: :
make
them In
a c.
acquainted
27 he
to
with
to
rl *6Xov "X\ov
*
ejue/teA^/cet avr$
the anecdote To not the
them. jUTj"ej/bsenter
refused
eB/at. Trpoo-Sea
Cf.
quoted
com-
God,
he in
for
just as
and sacrifice he had
70^
well
37
plaintthat
to
he he
did
soothsayer with
either
to
Athena
replied
T"V
he must the
himself
hitherto
$"?"r0c"
refrained,
avrfyv
in
ovSe
have
6v"uS"v
the
was
* s
decrees worthless,
of power of fate, or
altering
his art
censured
5e
irore
it would him
not to
for
tyon"ov, el bOdvaros avrQ 77 be impossible T^WX^ So/cei eT^ai;bOdvaros, e^"^, a\\* "s irdvra. Cf. c. 8, where speak to the
he says that
Kal
in
KUKUV
word, x^07? ns
Kal
hyaQ"v
bad, them,
to
warn
them
and
if
they
were
fr
300
ECLECTICISM.
.CHAP,
at
the
Olympic
serious
l
games
in
the
year
165
A.D.
But
ciently insuffi-
the
.
most
of these
charges are
too
attested of
to allow
by Lucian's
which of
our
he himself
of
account
Peregrinus.
a man
separate
from
his
all that is
as
appears
after
who
sincere
in his endeavours
was, at
virtue
and
austerity,but
the
same
and pushing forward his time, always exaggerating absurd to an extreme,2 finallyinvesting principles
even
suicide
"
in
regardto
which
"
he has with
so
many
allies
Cynic school
most
theatrical pomp,
produce the
evidence
is other
to show
some
he asserted
the but
of his
school with
exaggeration; 4
and
steadiness usefulness
of his
and
of
his
tried
Attlcus, he is said
to raise
an
to have
insurrection
against
sg.).
suicide
in Krit.
the
s
(Luc.
fact of been
18
this 8tud.
of
stood
1
in
the
his native
which of
(which
A.
disputed by
; and
Planck, Theol.
834
1811,
sg.;
$g., 843
Baur,
Cf.Zell"c,Vwtr.
52 sqq.
was
Bernays,
2
If
he
thrown
as
MrehengescJi. ii. 412), according to all the above quotations, is beyond a doubt.
4
Christian
into
prison
while
his
un-
Luc.
Demon. said of
to
When
Pereon :
fellow-Ohristians
remained
grinus
account
Demonax,
cheerfulness
given
behafrom abuse the
his
ofac
replied, riepeMpcairlgeis.
him in his
Italy on
of the besides Eleans
account
of
his
He
calls
eb
(Z. "?.)mr
whom hut lectures
Emperor;
his and ii.
in
Greece,
quarrels with
constant,
whose
he
before
visited
'mentioned
Soph.
city,and
he
attended.
THEAGENES.
301
discourse of
Ms, in winch
he
CHAP.
s_ .......
should not
avoid wickedness
to the
through
good ;
and
action
would
do from
this
even
though his
men
remained
hidden made
so
gods
and in
has not
much
progress
morals
be restrained
all
from
wickedness
by the
thought that
to lightin the end. \Ve are wrong-doing comes acquainted,however, with no scientific achievement
either
of
Peregrinus or
of these
Theagenes,2 or,
indeed, of any
But far
it
more
Cynics.
this
for the
a
was
able
Cynicism was mode of life than a scientific conviction, to outlast the vicissitudes of the philosophic
very
reason
that
systems, and
latest
to
maintain
to the
periods of Greek
half found
of
philosophy.
for
in
the
second Julian
the
fourth
century the
those
us a
Emperor
discourses
favourable, un-
occasion
two
give
same
pictureso
the
of
time
probably
at
not
untrue, essentially
1
this
Kvvas.
school
that
time.3
'
Zoc.
ewn
cit.
MultOf
Ji"rcle diau-
Or. vii.
"jr""s
.
irpbs
204,
C. sq.,
cere
"KwiKby,
223 B
Kvvi.a"r4ov. For
authority
Lucian
example, cf
sqq.
Or. vii.
Julian
besides
This
Cynic,
the
whom
mentions,
(c.
3 sqq. ; 7 ; 24 ; 30 sg. ;
36)
ma-
treats
with
lignity, is
Metfi. Med. Z.
described
greatest by Galen,
he
mentions
(as as a philosopher of shown) repute (8m rty M"v rwQp"xov) who gave lectures daily in Rome of Trajan. in the Gymnasium
3
Iphicles of spoken
the year mian. named in
Epirns,whose
expressed
Valentinian
notions
Emperor
375
are
related
xxx.
by
A
Marc.
5, 8.
age,
Demetrius
Or. vi.
extreme
old
tor-
302
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
X.
Further
traces
of the
which recognition
to be met
Cynicism
both in the
stillfound
in this
periodare
with
heathen and
Christian
authors.1
About
ning begin-
the
Augustinetells us that all century, schools of philosophy, except the Cynic,Peripatetic, and Platonic, had died out ; 2 and even in the
of the fifth of the
first decade
a
find in Athens
the overthrow
of
to
heathenism
tured but
under
on
and political
was
religionscharge,
tioned men-
by Amniian.
another in of
tas if
Peripatetieosaut PlatoniM Cynicos guidem, quia vitce quGdcwn, delevtat liberatqm licentia. Later on,
19, he remarks
that
a
Civ, D.xix.
spoken
anonymously
by
change
does
not
this
connection
Themis
to
-
the
Church of
panegyric which
pronounced
its
on on
itself about
the
an
Cynicism
his
example
a
and
founders
in
by
Christian
retained
is
name, in
long
1. c,, from
ix. 2, 796
3
Rliein.
Damasc.
Zsidori, 89-92,
greater
(Somil. 17,c. 2 ; Chrys. Opp. ed. has voce\ who taken the first of his articles, Migne, ii. 173) upon the philosophers described as and probably also the second, (clearly
length
Cynics) who
the
left
Antioch
on
from
Damascius.
as
That
tius, Sallus-
of
but
city.
2
observed, exaggerated the Cynic severityas well as the irai^Lv "rl rb y"\oi6r"is confirmed by Simplicius, pov, in Epiet.Man. p. 90 H j according
he laid burning coals upon his leg to see how long he could endure it.
to
is here
Cicero, Acad.
iii. 19, 42
a,ut
whom
Itagruenwio
now, ghilosoplios
DISAPPEARANCE
OF
CYNICISM.
303
an
end
the
only
mode
element
of
which the
in
was
peculiar
Church
to
it,
had
CHAP. X'
the
Cynic
since
life,
Christian
long
appropriated
Monaehisin.1
Julian,
I.
c.
224 Cvaics
A,
already
with
the
airoTaKriffrai f)ii.nria.rrrnnr\
qui
s"culo
re-
the
nf
t"i"mhi-io""-no
304
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
XI.
THE
PERIPATETICS
OF
THE
FIEST
CENTURIES
AFTER
CHRIST.
CHAP.
XI.
-
THE
direction
taken
by the
Christ
Peripatetic school
was
in it
maintained existence.1
are
by
C.
The
Those
Peripa-
tetics members of
1
acquainted,2
sqq., believes
attribute
we
In
regard to
follows, teorol.
should
i. xvi.
Gr.iii. 458 sqq. ; in and Zumpt Harl. ; Brandis the treatises mentioned sujara, der GescJi. 1 Prantl, 112, ; p.
cf. Fabric. MU.
perhaps
the
to
on
Alexander
Khz"
commentary
the
name
has been
of and
handed
Alexander
Logik,
*
545
of
to his
Aphrodisias;
Our
knowledge of
school
patetic he Peri-
seems
Sosigenes whom
as
*#"., we
of the
famous of
astronomer
Cassar.
"We
shall, however,
first
Alexander
of
A*7.), from
a,
the Aphrocentury, find that Alexander disian had a structor the inof ^aSgae, Sosigenes for his Towards the end of Nero (Suid. *AAe", teacher. the same encounter we whom century Simplicius, in Arist. 29, (ap. Plut. Qn. Gonvvu. ix. 6 ; (Sclwl. out
14,
head and
5)
of
commentary
and Alex. De
a
on
the
Menephylus,
of the
ibid. of
was
Aphr.
on
in
Athens,
Simpl.
28, from
Books
Ccelo,Scliol. 494, 5,
commentary
6, here
Frat.
'
16, p. 487,
Apollonius
one
Peripatetic,
of the Heavens.
",
(Kars-
the his
later
philosophers,'
sisted as-
ten, 194,
substitutes
who
brother Sotion to Aspasiusfor Alexander, whether attain than greater honour cording conjecture,or acby Ms own himself. This to perhaps, may, manuscripts, does be Apollonius the Alexandrian, not appear.) Ideler, Arist, Me-
PERIPATETICS
OF
THE
EMPIRE.
305
so
far
as
we
have
any
details in
concerning
connection
Galen
v.
their with
CHAP,
XI.
are writings,
mostly
mentioned
first
whom
in
as
(De
Cogn. an.
his
centuries
B"c"
Morb.
teeiith
8, vol.
or
42), in
B.C.
fourfore therehis
treatise
Sotion,
has Phil.
another
come
Categories. Peripatetic,
before of
man us
fifteenth
in 145-6, teacher
a
already
in
pupil
of this
pher, philosowas
(videsit}),
the be
who
apparently
still
181, 2), as
there
same
author
Repay
I have the
3AfjLa\6elas,This conjectured
from whom
to
Alex.
Aphr.
of
in
Top. 213, apparently out of a the Topica, and on commentary Simpl. Categ. 41, 7, Schol. in AT. 61, a, 22, from a commentary the Categories, on or quotes one
two
30, a,
9 ; Anon.
Simpl. Categ.4, 7,
Tat. who
vol
is named De
six.
unimportant
seems
and His
be
erroneous
observations.
to
tion compilareferred
to
by Pliny, Hist.
In of this the
case
Nat. Sotion
Prwf.
must
24.
have would
lived
in the
well
was
Propr. c. 11 ; Porph. V. Plot. moved 14) -was probably not far rein point of time this ; the above partly from appears juxtaposition, but more cially espesq. ; from him the
use
(Galen,
made
of
first harmonise
that
century,
the
by
Theo
Smynueus
Theo
was
(infra,
a
with
p. 309, p. the
the
4)
; for
temporary con-
theory
of the the
he of
author
of
Hadrian
(infra,
he
is
on
Ai6K\eioi
"\ejx"L)
His
335).
author Ethics
If, however,
of
a
brother
Apollonius
commentary
Aristotle
by
brother described ii. 2, 2 ; ; he friend
Plutarch.
of
and
Theophrastus (Phil d G-r. II. ii. xv. 855) mentioned ap. Athen,
673,
c
(where
our
text
likewise
describes
his
the
grammarian
from
Egypt (Qu.Conv. i. 9, 1, 1 ; viii. 8, 2, 1), theo (vide, concerning Luna, 25, 1 3 s#.)De him, DeFao. Ei. 6 ; Pytli. Orac,. 3 sg., as a of Peripatetic tendencies. man
On who the
is
other
hand,
of 1.
"?.
Favonius,
viii. 10, 2,
is Pergamus, (sub voce} placed by Suidas under Hadrian: Trajan and Philostratus, V. according to a contempoSo2)h.ii- 3, he was rary of Herodes fore Atticus, therehad
spoken
somewhat earlier,but 'ApicrroTeXovs dai[j.ovi"TaTos is probably only the only occupied himself with tyaa-rtys well-known Platonist, whom Peripatetic philosophy in In later on. shall discuss youth. What Synes. Dio, we
1, as
the his
the
second
half
of
the
must
second have
R,
of
says
of
Aristocles*
p. 12 desertion
must
century
Aspasius
philosophy
for Rhetoric
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
'
first century
is very
unimportant.
of
In
the
second
tf
century we
hear
on
of several works
Aspasius :
mentaries Com-
the treatise Trspl on Categories,2 4 the Books about the the on Physics,' spfji^vsias? Metaphysics; 6 but though he Heavens,5 and the 7 to have expounded the writingsof carefully seems to have paid attention to the and especially Aristotle, down of various readings, nothing has been handed of his that indicates any independent investigation mation preciseinforquestions. We have more philosophic From his treatise on concerningAdrastus.8 the arrangement of the Aristotelian works,9 there their on are order, titles, quoted observations A commentary on the Categories and genuineness.10 the
' c
'
tonist, and
the
a
whether
a
refers to Boolts
on
quotation on commentary
this
23
10 ; Bon,
;
543,
on
",
31 ;
The
Scholia
and ninth and
four
the of the
parts
books
of
cannot
passage. 1 Alexander
of
JEgae
Sotion, vide sujpra, p, 304, 2. 2 Galen, De Lilr. Propr. 11 ; vol. xix, 42 8%.
8
JVicowMdhfian /#/wt#, which Haso has published in the Gorman Classical Journal, vols. xxviii.
and from
c.
xxix.,claim to a commentary
bo extracted of
Aspawius ;
of
no
Boet. the
DB
cf Interpret, of
In,
but
8
they
arc
otherwise
edition
Meister. expresses
groat value,
repeatedly
dissatisfaction
14 ; 87, 17
4
Meis.)with
Simpl. Phys. 28, 5; 96, 0, Pkys. 1, 5; Cate.ff. Jj 99, #; 127, A, J; 130, a\ 4, f. The designation is leas specific of Gatey* 4, 132, "; 133, a; 185, a; 188, "; 172, : TT. 168, 178, 5; 151, a; a; a; 7 10 192, I ; 199, a ; 214, a\ 219, a; According to Simpl. C"teg. I b, 223, 4, 7, he wished to place the 222, a ; 239, a, " Simpl.fit* Cwlo, 194, a, 6 ; (fattgorin (of which I. c, 4, " 23 ; 240, a, 44 ; Karst. MM, in cf. tioM. in Arixt. 33, b, 80 j Arist. 494, ", 31; 513, 5, 10. 39, ", 19 ; 142, /", 38, ho mentions 6 Alex. Metaph. 31, 23 ; 44, a second roocusiou) before all
',
ADMASTUS.
309
is also
mentioned,1 and
from
commentary
on
the
CHAP. XI.
2 gives us a detailed statement Simplicius Physics, of and concerning the conceptions of substance plains accidental essential and quality,which well exand the Aristotelian definitions expressions.
He and
also
perhaps
wrote
on
the
ethics
of Aristotle
Theophrastus.3 If we add to this all that we told concerning his mathematical knowledge, are his writings on harmony and astronomy, and his has been the Timseus, and what on Commentary that allow must we preserved of these writings,4
however, does not seem writings of Aristotle, plicius, had the to have commentary theTojtiea; and he never others, itself,which quotes, he, therefore,like some entitled the Categories : 7r/"b in his possession, but to have phyry, the passage from PorT^TTWJ/ (Anon. Schol 32, ", borrowed TWV
the and other
next to them
36, whose
as
account
who,
mentioned
Adrastus words
:
as
he
observes,
The
extract
to that
it.
ou"5e
probably refers
\4yerai 'direp
306 *#. and
a
statements the
same
pseudo-Archytus).
treatise had of
Of. Phil
4
tioned men-
forty
books which
Analytics, of
are
only
genuine (Phil d. 6Fr. II. ii.70, 1), and expressed his opinion
the title of the
; cf
3
the four
6 5e
supra,
p.
matician mathe-
by Claudian
Statu An. he i. 25, From the mentions
Mamert.
if
De
the
Adrastus
same
is the Ms
mentary com-
on
Physics and
person.
on
its
principal divisions
;
(SimpL
d. Or.
Phys. 1, "
II. ii.
1
2, a
Phil
.
Opp.
; six.
on
iii.
Wallis,
tion definimony, Hariii.
42
2
*#.
in three
Phys. 26, 5.
is taken
on
MS.
(Fabr.
From
mentary com-
459,
these Procl.
653).
the
Physios is
:
clear
from
"
the
words
which
Simplicius introduces
"bv'
3 ;
198, E
Ach.
and
c.
probably also
;
a
ap.
on
Tat.
186,
ft,
taken
Sun
c.
is mentioned
Sim-
by Lastly,
Ach.
310
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP, XI"
to
have
and
deserved
it rather
for his
faithful
transmission
doctrines As in
than the
down
isolated
as
which
have
been
handed
his
he
almost
entirelyfollows
and The
so Aristotle,
in his
is
generalview
him. he
of the universe
of Gk"d, he construction
allied with
universe,the
accordingto the is formed by the highest pattern of Aristotle,2 for the best,and is moved essential nature thereby in the manner belonging to it,namely, in a circle.
A
of which
describes
consequence
elements
of the
and
contrast
between influences
the terrestrial
which the
spheresin planetary
exercise
world ; 3
but
of their movements multiplicity them, is the change in our upon in saying this, Adrastus expressly the
heavenly
which
is
created
for the
sake
of that
and
is
has
perishable ; they have, on the contrary, in themselves,and their influence on the only .an effect of natural necessity.4All
shown that {7. "?.) of
r"v 8i"nefo, avtyp
greatest part
of Adrastus
is
Theo's
from
a
astronomy
treatise this TimfGus Uliein. sgg. that The is the
is borrowed
; and
on
that
the 582
commentary
JV, F. has
TTJTIK"V yeyovds. 2 Vide the dissertations on the spherical form of the universe and of the earth, the place o-f
the earth the in in in the
centre
proved by Hiller,
xxvi.
same
of
the
Miis.
whole,
earth
smallness
of
the
writer
shows
a
Ohalcidms
adopted
whole,
c.
3
this commentary
1-4. L.
c, c, c.
4
own.
M"
4,
-7:
L.
the
moon
HEEMINUS.
311
sought likewise to maintain in principle the Aristotelian theory of the which he connected of ingenious spheres, by means
modifications He and therefore other with
seems,
this
is Aristotelia,n.
Adrastus
CFAP. XL
learning,to
and
merely
skilful
expounder
Not
even
defender
as
of the Aristotelian
can
theories.
as
much
this
be
said of Herminus.
the
a
from
(Adrastus), atria
"av,
Kal
ravra rcav
riftKarepow
tends
hollow
that of the turns stars.
east
upper
to
sphere,
This
sphere
teal
re
to west
in the
direction
Geiwv r6vcav rb
Kal
Kal
aiSiuv
ayevy^rcav
the than
stars
more
slowly
fixed says in
eAar-
Bvrir"v Kal
Kal
apicrrov
Adrastus, it is drawn
Kdhhicrrov this direction
by the
sphere of
r"v
Se
"j/ravQa
Kara
(TVfji
motion fixed stars, while its own is from west to east); at the
same
circular
time the
the
of
the
universe
the
central
an
point
of
Epicycles
itself
so
a
rest, and
the
was
therefore
motion the must of
element which
;
chus,
hollow
moves
natural towards
sphere,
of
centre also be
was
but
one
planet describes
diameter
a point boundary of the
there
motion the
elements two.
which
on
extends
outer
which
circumference,
and
hollow the
tary planeopposite
lying
between
are
sphere
point
; the
on
to
These
nature
elements is
its
inner
boundary,
their
changeable
really
sioned occa-
centre
variation
from, that
by that of the seasons, hand, is, on the other the conditioned by changing
of the
sun
position
of the
Phil. d.Or.
1
*q.
which
fore, planet. Adrastus had, therein his theory taken count acof the hypothesis of The eccentrics. theory, apart
its
In
c.
cf.
32, with
other
deficiencies,
the the parent apsun
Adrastus each
only
moon,
as
explain
of Martin
revolution
planet
of
observes,
surface
globe,
which
p. 119.
312
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
we
are
on
XL
_
writingsof
an"i sometimes treatment
is sometimes
logical unimportant,
the
Her
minus.
the
1
displaysan external and formalistic with much of logical standing misunderquestions, of the Aristotelian propositions.2He derives of the heavens infinityof the motion
the
tary commen-
Among
on
these
the
Categories is
most
commonly
quoted
mde
the
only
so
many
highest
(Simpl.
that the
It is observed
De
by
the
same
in
not
case
would in that
be
possible to
pret.
edition De 1.
(cf. the
of
Index
take I.
different
c.
16,
a,
6, instead
#, 5.
c.
following note,
Alex. Anal.
tary commen-
iracn
Pri.
'raSra' ii. p.
"b
39,
sgq. ; Meis.
De
Analytics-, and
m,
101,
; Ammon.
Schol. Interpret.
Alex.
2
in
the
$([%.
is
as
Logic
on
sidered con-
21, a-, SohoL 101, ?;, 6). In regard to the so-called infinite propositions, he distinguished three the cases: predicate or the subject,or both, might be
infinite notions
; but
pressed) (negativelyex-
the
which Categories^
as
foundation
of
compared
not
he
class, bat also the second and the third, with corresponding-
(David,
Arist. he
81, J,
thus of the
negative judgments
275 Pri.
(Boet.
a
25, according
doctrine
c
to whom
M).
He
instituted
p. fruitless
explainedthe precedence
of
opposites, Categ.
neither of
Anal.
ception con-
10), treats
of the
logicalmanner
kinds of the of the
ontbthe highest
in
an
second and
parts of
conception
(Alex. Anal.
designationsproper for 23, #, mj Schol. each class of the Beal (Porph. Prantl,555 $#.).
7.
4, "
SOSIGUNZS. not
313
but
in
CHAP. XI.
approximation
Alexander had
the
Platonic
already
AcJiaicu*.
contradicted.2
on
commentary
little has
of Aehaicus been
the
to
Categories very
us, and
handed
down has
that
little is
of
much
been
but
we
preserved get
to
a
4 writings ;
very
of
his
mathematical he
knowledge
the and
the
with
which
from
appliedit
elucidation criticism
his commentary
sophy, philothese
tion observa-
of
Simpl. De
(169,
a
Ccelo,ScJiol. 491,
could
on
not
decide. Anal. De
An Pr.
1, 45
to
I, 45
K), according
of
seems
a
Analyt.
Pr. L 9 is
given
statement
Alexander,
to
by Philop.
"
xxxii. ly
which, however,
referred but mimis sqq."
an
have
not
to
commentary,
of Herc.
Ap. Simpl.
a,
ScJiol. Ccelo,
40
a,
to
;
the
as
discourses
in
I. p.
498,
41
45
-7
494, J, 31
Ashis that
utterance
of Herminus
500, a, 39 ; 223,
where
504, ",
29 ; 228,
seems
follow
merely
in that
wherein
to
appeals
however, find,
not
a
him,
but
shall
"this
to
extend fixed
to
particular
of
Br.),who
at
also
names
soul
stars.
8
the
conclusion
discussion. passages
relating
Such
enquiries concerning
and
natural in
this
4
given
a
mathematics
were
science
tise trea-
From
the of
Themistius
something shining of
dark
;
and
116, a) quotes
observations
314
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XL
Aristocles and Alexander are Peripatetics have left us discussions of Aphrodisias ; for they alone the details of logic from and which, starting the whole, physics, proceed to enquiries affecting younger
theoryof
Aristocles
fragments
of
an
historical work
of
his
from
the
eighth book
round the
ing concernsun
p.
307
and
(2)
that
a
it
is
the halo
moon.
1 2
and
highly improbable
should
scriber tran-
have
unknown
changed
name
name
the of
Suid. That
'AjDioTo/cA..
he
was
universallyknown
for the
of Aristotle
so, is asserted
in the
(that
Simplicius Aristocles,whereas the converse the from might very easily happen, and
has often happened. For exy Latin), De Ccelo,p. 34, I ; and has lowed folHist. Gr. Muller, 25, 5, ample, JFragm. Karsten, p. 69,
it.
But
in the
collection
that, ap.
we
of Academic
we
read,
on
find
'Api"TTOT"'A.i7s j whereas
Ftoril. 64, 37, and
also ap.
Arsen.
Stobgeus, p. 385,
ii.61, 1) : give correctly 'Apta-rotthys c. Mian. Cyrill. (the ^5 "Apf"r- historian of larly, *ypafy*iTQfivvv Ehodes). Simi*AA.e"aj/8po" and similarly the Scholiasts on Pindar, "rore\Qvs /uadyrtys, in Alex. JDe An.
144,
a, sq. (wde
Olymp.
that
rect.
vii. 66,
fluctuate
tween be-
the two
names,
of which
printed text
as
Aristotle of
is named
of Aristocles
only is
cor
the
teacher
to suppose
Alexander.
Nevertheless, there
reason
text
of
is right,and Simplicius
not that
that of the
even
Academy
two
Hoche, According to Prcef.ii. two manuscripts have instead of 'Apurro'A/Herrore'A^y and in Boet. De Interpr. /eA.f/$, ii. Meiser the (p. 56, 2) was
first to correct
in the
other
sages pas-
the
statement
of the Basel edition (p. 309, m) is to be read, 3ApicrTOK\"ov$ For (1) that Plato was and not 'Apiffrorehovs. at first called there is no trace of any PeripaOn the other Aristotle. hand, tetic called been to the
the various where who, according in Aristotle, cases Eose, Arist. Pseudepigr.615 $#., dates,could have
of Alexander of
assumes
the teacher
the
same
mistake, the
matter Heitz
is very
shows
nothing,has
been
observed
Arist.
295"
316
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
that
in order
to
escape
from
Aristotelian
comes
doctrine from
to
man
the
is in
stantly con-
theory. The divine reason, he says, following all things,even in terrestrial bodies, and is working in
its
the
manner
proper
not
to it.
From rational
of
only the
and
capacityin
the
universe
but
also
all union
division
the whole
conformation
of
whether
in
it affects this
immediately,
with the
for itself
alone, or
combination
fluences in-
nature heavenly bodies, or whether termines primarilyfrom those influences,and deoriginates with vovs. all things in combination If, of vovs, in itself universal,finds then, this activity in any particular body an organ adapted to it,vovs works in this body as its inherent intelligence, and
of the
second
a
book
a,,
; must
145,
and,
even
have
wepl^vx^"
seem our
strange
doubts
are
in
themselves,
increased
by
what
follows,and
especiallyby
Alexander
De Ann. (Arist. p. 186) is right in asserting that the second not writwas we pi book, fax/is,
ten
case
be
to
ascribed
a
teacher
by him;
it
for
even
in the
that
re-
could the
only
work.
be
his himself
this
clwMffee of
Alexander's
second
,
half of
agreeing with
teacher
can
them.
be
no
Torstrik,
however,
for
not
his
seem
has
Alexander the
passive
intelli-
than that conseshould be quently *Api"rroK\"ovs substituted for 'ApurroreXovs has already been shown (p. 314, 2). Brandis ( Q-esck. der J"n-
Aristocles,
and
of Aristotle, twicbelung der in the sense Gtriechischm gence he thus continues, according to Philos. ii. 268) declares himself
printedtext : ^Kovcra 5e vepl in agreement with the observations on this subject in my first QvpaQev irapk*ApKrroT"s\ovs $ 5i""raxrcfyn?y. If these words edition.
our
vov
ARIST
OGLES.
317
there
arises
an
individual
intellectual
activity.This
CHAP.
for the reception of vovs is,as Aristotle capability conditioned believes, by the material constitution of the bodies, and depends especiallyon question less fire. The whether or they have in them more which affords an organ for active mixture corporeal is named and potentialintelligence, intelligence the operationof the active divine intelligence upon human the potential whereby the latter intelligence, is raised to actuality, and individual thought is consists only in this : that the all-pervadrealised, ing manifests itself in a of the divine vovs activity in particularbodies.1 Alexander specialmanner himself
observes
L
_
respectingthese they
have
3
theories with
of
his
master, which
he seeks to reconcile
the Aristotelian
text,2 that
with the Stoic that ourselves
considerable
can we
affinity
from
doctrine ;
vovs-
nor
conceal
world, and
is at the
in
the
whole
approximatesto
same
reason
world,which
as
such, the
the Hera-
shaping force
of the Stoic
As
hylozoismwas
concerning
the
rendered
appearance
Aristotle
in
system by the
so now we
vovs,
see
that doctrine
Loc.
Kal
cit.
145,
avrtiriwrbv
eivai
proas
rty
roiS
rV
5e
TOW-
reiy VQVV
TOVTOIS,
rots
^avXoraroLs
rots
irpo"roiKOVV
(-etowj eAeye
Qeiov
ovra,
"s
airb TT/S
$eo".
$$olcvt"c.
318
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XI.
into
combination
with
prepares
the the
Stoic
way
theory of
for the
the
universe, which
union of these
later
systems
and
in JSTeo-Platonism.1 of Alexander
Alexander
The
Aristotelian
doctrine stricter.2
of Apliroealled the
disias is purer
This
celebrated
names
Commen-
tator and
of the Commentator
Of. Sd. sup. p. 137 from Aristocles was How
the
of
down fixed
to
us.
be De
far
tlie
being
that
by
his
the
statement
in
period who
also
sup. p. 304, 2.
city, Aphro-
theology is
his
of by an utterance Athenagoras. contemporary This apologist, well who so was with Greek
81,0; 168, l\ 28
surname
K),
his
invariable
acquainted
says
22
(Supplic, c. 5,
is
8; Bon.
the Xevicbs
olovel
'AtypodLcriebs) ; but
which
pJevavrov
rovs
re ir
"
Aphrodisias is thereby meant ouQlpiov does not appear. Concerning his writings,vide Fabric. MbL
Gr.
v.
acrrepas
650
sqq, and
the passages
farXavuv
KvK\o(j"opr)ri- there
"iri ry
5e rbv K""S,"fyvyfyv
TOV
quoted. Kiviiffei 3 Cf. Syrian and David in the ov [jikv quoted p. 307, w.; Simpl. passages
rovrov
KLVOV^VOV
DO
A)l.
13, "
"
TOV
*A/3JO"T0T"r-
If this does Aous Kivijffstas yiv6jj."vov. Quiwriis 5AAe'". ; Themist. not DeAn. precisely correspond with 94, a : 6 ^Tjy-rjT^s 'AXe|. ; the conception of Aristocles, Philop. Gen. et Corr. 15, /"; the Deity is here treated in a 48, a; 50, " ; Arnmon. De InStoic
manner,
as
the
worldof the
terpr. 32,
"b
'AtypoSio-Lebs ""77-
not by all parts of the world, but merely by the heavenly spheres. But
body
j-nrts. He is also called 6 ^77yr)r)]$ simply ; e.g., as Olympiodor. Meteorol. On L the 185 other
59,
of
hand, by
(iMd.
makes earlier of the the
^"17a
Alexander
himself
did the
not seat
yyrfys spoken
on
a a
12,
some
Id.),who
far from
of Deity outside the furthest remark sphere, but in it (vide infra, p. 329, 1). meant,
2
Alexander's
man
mentary, com-
is
teacher
author,
of
sonal percome
as
we
see
mode
quotation, ^
(not ^o-ly).We
ALEXANDER
OF
APHRQDISIAS.
319
has
his
won unquestionably
commentary
which
on
the
CHAP. XL
portion of
he has
with
he Se-
carefullyentering planations,1
cannot, therefore, infer
that the
into
the
rather
or
words
point
it is
a
from
this
would
to
our
tinct text. Meteorologyis disphilosopher of r%$ mentaries Aphrodisias. Alexander's comfrom the
were
tator commen-
to gaps
in
tion ques-
by
i. 187 and
the
""17777the
Alexander
read
by
Plo-
is
meant,
whether
together with those of Aspasius, Adrastus, "c., to his pupils(Porph. V. Plot. 14).
tinus
1
passage
third
which
him
Olympiodorus
(evidentlyat
in his
rate
quotes from
hand)
really stood
;
The
now
still
Meteorology; at any
(Ve
Simpl.
492, b,
pends, dethe
of
Cceld, '95, a,
on
ScJwl
refers
1),
which
Ideler the
also
to
edition
on
of and
the
certainly
on
and Aristotle,
a
appeared commentary
the heavens
;
books
of
in
new
test, works
embrace
:
Alexander
(1) Book I. of the First Analytics ; (2) on the Topica Brandis, (partly revised, mde
p, 207, of the treatise alluded to suj". p. 112, 1) ; (3) on the Ite-
(JDe JLw/133,0; Qu". Nat. i. of 2, end, p. 19, edition Thurot, 1875). On the Meta-
pJiyaics,the
Books
entire
commentary
been
in
a
on
i.~v. has
;
preserved
shortened
tracts ex-
teorology.
was
That
this been
tary commen-
the
rest
not written
has
by another
form
already second, are the Scholia, in stated (*?//?. of Brandis, 8,8). printed p.304,2,and31 a,nd both at length in the Also the citations of Olympiomonise separate edition of Bonitz. An dorus from the Aphrodisian harthe with of almost our exactly explanation cro^LcrrLKol likewise Alexandrian bears commentary lAeyxoi, which ; cf
Alexander
.
part, and
Olymp.
a"
01.
a
i. 133, Id. ; Alex. 126, Ideler i. 202, where difference that is the
the
name
of Alexander,
is
tainly cer-
finds
quite
tion citaour
groundless, between
of
01.
Brandis, 7-.^. spurious(cf. Lost commentaries 298). p. the are on following works : (1) The Categories, quolecl by Bimpl. (Gafafl. 1, a; 3, a. e. ;
23,
%
100, 5 ; 01. ii. *#. ; Alex. 157; Alex. 124, "; 01. ii. 200; Alex. 132, 0). If, therefore,
and K
;
often
De-
Ccelo, 76,
;
#, 26
40, 23
6, 16 Dexipp. Catcg.
something
to
is here the
and there
in
G.
latter which
our
Speng. ; David, Schol. 51, ", 8; 54, ", 15, 26; tributed atis 65, ?;; 47, 8.1, 7",33. (2) ttepl
55, 13
not
to
be
found
I (Ideler,
I.
DB Tnte-r^ret. veifas^Ammon. mentary comIP/XT? xvii.), 12, " ; 14, a ; 23, I ; 82, " ; 4(5,
320.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
*
well
as
the
thoughts
are
of
no
the
more
author.1 than
12
His
own
however, writings,2
5; 54, 5; 81,
Boot. De
";
explanations
799,
b ; 1 Fr. ;
"
161, J; 194, 5;
1.
G.
645,
Bon.
quently] title to Alex. Interpret,[very freQu, Nat. ii. 22 j Index. Philop. 6fenu. et Corr. 14, a, ; cf the Meiser Mich. 15, a ; 18, Z",et passim). Ephes. Sehol. in Arist. (8) book De Ammo, 100, a). (3) The second (Simpl. De An,. 18, of the First Analytics ( Philop. a, ; 25, 1); 27, 5, *tf pamm ; Themist. D0 J.w. 94, a ; Philop SchoLinAr. 188, ft, 3; 191, a, Dtf J.W. A Paris [a commentary 10 ; 16, B, I. ; Ps.47 ; Anon. Alex. Alexander's but under Metaph. 473, 6 ; 405, 28 ; name, much 410, 20 ; 560, 25 Bon. [734, a later, concerning which cf. Brandis, I.e. p. 290] ; Sehol. 28; 735, a, 32 ; 783, 1"923 Fr.; the first passage 28^ is wanting 188, a" 19; 191, a, 10, ft, The Second lytics Anawith him] ; cf Bonitz, Alex. passim. (4) in Metapk. 442y Comm. in Metaph, xxii. (Ps.-Alex. mentaries Comthe smaller 9 Bon, 745, ", 7 Br. ; Philop.in on thropological anPostAna.lyt.Sclwl.ISS, a, 33 ; 200, writings are not
.
~b
with mentioned J, 30; 203, ft, the exception 18; 211, ft,34 ^ in Lilr. ii.; of the still existing passim; Bustrat. commentary Anal.
0;
Post,
1,#
;
c.
5, ",
666
11, #,
De
8ensu.
and
Concerning
commentaries
on
some
Z.
; Prantl
supposed
Rhetoric
d. (Sksc/A. On
Poetics,vide
That of
from
665, 687.
Alexander
3, #
4,
5, fr; 6,
a,
and
expounded
those
cannot
other
writings
Aristotle
the
other passages,
first 16 ; 4.; 9.
to
especially
Phys. B,
T, 1;
seems
books; Philop. M, 28 ; N, 13 ;
This have from of
tary commen-
infer of
absurd
statement Ar.
28," %
been
the Aristotle
;
that and
David in (Scliol. 24), that he commented, not only the works of the Stagirite, but
those
name
fragments
the
philosophy, especially, give such great value to of the work of Simplicius,would Philop.(DcAn. D 6) must have to have been altogether, been found in the commentary appear
which
.
Socratic
of the other men of that ; also the discussion concerning the harmonic numbers the Slmffitit mentioned by
from or chiefly,borrowed it). on the Treatise of the Soul, 1 Cf (6) The treatise on the heavens on this point and against Bittor'a (iv. 264) depreciatory 76, a-, Ps.(Alex. Meteorol. Alex. Mefaph. 677, 27 ; 678S 7 judgment of Alexander, BranBon. [807, 0; 36, ", 11 Fr.]; dls, I. G. p. 278 j Schwegler,
Metaphy"k
s,
viii. ;
a ; 485, a ; 28 i. ; Prantl, Oesrh. Mefaph. JPrtstf. De et Generatier i. passim. 621. (7) $$$, Log. 2 tiane et Covruptione(Ps.-Alex. We possess four of those
ALEXANDER
OF
APHRODISIAS.
CHAP. XI.
321
and
apologies
in
for
Aristotle's
doctrines.
In
this
manner,
treated
of
his
still
Writings
the
B.
commentaries
^VXTIS, 2,
(ap.
p.
Themist.
123
Opji.
w.
the
author
1534,
ed.
SQQ.} ;
commentary, printed with the on Simpl. De Amma^ treatise Trepl /ca0' tiirvov T^S p.avtise treariKTjs, p. 148, b) : another
the Epiagainst Zenobius curean d. Gr. i. 377) III. (Phil in which, according to Simpl. he had PJiy. 113, 2", sought to prove the distinction of
to
of
Munich,
I.
c.
1842, who
with s#.,
in
the
face, pre-
together
661
Fabricius,
tion gives all informathe title and respecting earlier /j"eo"s editions) ; -jrepl
the
a
Above,
natural
Below,
on
"o.,
be
distinction.
The
tise, trea-
(attached to
of the
in
edition
however,
the seat to
of the in the
Meteorology,
the
fect imper-
alluded rjyefjLovLK^v,
the work commencement). commentary on -repi the Probl"nis, On the other hand "jW Kw^crecus, 154, b, 155, a, is doubtless from distinct not larpLK"v Kol QvffiK"v TrpojSATj^cialso Fabric. Alexander's B 662 2 X"e dissertation, (cf. rcoi/, and the in to BaseAn. i. 140 and, respect ; sqg. p. s^fjf. maker volume
No.
*s edition of
in
the
fourth
lAovofiipXlov, quoted by
in Mh. is that
N.
as
Eustrat.
Didot's
Prantl, Munch.
179,
does
a,
in which
it
proved
virtue
against the
not
Stoics the
25) and a treatise on Fevers (Fabric. 664), certainly do not Among belong to Alexander. lost writings are mentioned : A
treatise
on
suffice for
as
the
happiness, is the same portion of the work the same independent between 156 $%{[. Concerning
on
bearing
title, p.
an
Aristotle
with
ciples dis-
in regard to syllogisms dality premisses of unequal mo(Alex. Anal. Pr. 40, 1, 83, d. "r. II. ii.224) ; this ; cf PML
.
in
on
essay still exists the virtues, which treatise MS., a very doubtful the of stones quoted powers the pretations interallegorical ; i.
by Psellus
Probl.
is no to
doubt
the
work
referred
vo"l"\"i), on
83,
be "v
seem
a
the
other
hand Anal.
the Pr.
must
169,
",
14)
something
rols
to
distinct
from, it ;
the words
"rni irheoj/
f^ral
poi
"rxoA.ioi" TOIS
me
Xoyticois
of myths (Ps. Alex. are tainly cer87) which some spurious, and mentioned Arabic treatises by Casiri,all,erroneously no doubt, to Alexander attributed (vide Fabric, 667 .?#, 658). v. 1 Concerning his logic, vide Prantl, Gcsoh. der JLogW, i. 622 s$$. But, except his definitions
_
to be
gloss. Also
on
the relation
of the individual
322 two
ECLECTICISM,
CHAP. XI.
consist
concerningthe soul,and in into natural science,he of enquiries of and the anthropology psychology
books the first three books has discussed
many
many
passages
has
developed
; in
wholly of
for
Aris-
of the
last mentioned
he
totle's and
on
commen-
fourth many
taries opposition to
them.
i. 18, world
the
necessityand
; in
eternityof the
of the treatise mutual
on
Platonists
the .treatise
/ufscos* Trspl
inter-
of bodies penetration
he destiny,1 Stoic
are
defends
fatalism.
the
freedom
of the will of
against the
adversaries
and
The
weaknesses
his
pointedout
but
we
acuteness it
a
skill,
cannot
expect
to
find
in
thorough and
will. Alexander enquiry into the human searching results of fatalism,2 layschief stress on the practical not he does which forgetthe theological among arguments which for himself are not exactlyfitting, namely, that fatalism does away with Providence and the hearingof prayer ; 3 he also repeatedly and
the universal, to be spoken of of, infra ; there is not much derived from be to importance and it. be and Pr. 13
on
js,
cf.
De
An.
ay. ;
Qu.
Mit.
i. 4 ; ii.
Tennemarm
(v.
The found
most
noteworthy
in fact
(though
portion this is to
and, more *'##.) concisely, Hitter (iv. 265 *#.), give extracts
is the distinction
already in Aristotle) from the former treatise. It is of the analytic unnecessary to enlarge further methods (Anal, upon ic in this place, as the treatise synthetic contains no 3, 5 ; cf Nat. Qu. i. 4 ; p. sentially thoughts es.
new
and
has been
Orelli.
2
made
generally
158
through the
j"
edition
of
only the categorical are syllogisms mate pure and legiti(Toj". 6).
Fate, c.
16 w.
324
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XL
but stantial,
at
the
same
time
he
had
declared
the
to be the proper
objectof knowledge; he
the
not
Aristotle's
doctrine
conceded
reason
forms, with
are deity,
oftheparticular
and uni;
matter, but he
essence
nevertheless them
alone.
sought
versal
and
of
thingsin
form,
definitions that conflicting the higher reality belongsto the individual and the How he gives up the second treated T)y highertruth to the universal, Alexander.to save the first. The individual,he maintains from Aristotle1), is not only for us (herein departing but in itself, vidual prior to the universal,for if the indi'matter.
were
step further.
Of the two
not, the
universal
could
not
be ;
and
he not onlyincludes incorporeal consequently natures, such as the Deity, under the conception of individual
substance,3 but
be the
in
1
also holds
universal
the
individual
to
object of
Simp.
evravda *AAe"aj/5pos
this, cf. Dexipp. Cat. c. 12; 54, 22 zqq. Sp. (Sdlwl, in ^ueVrot Ar. 50, #, 15 sqg".) who pares com-
with
^"i5"rei
with We
Alexander BoSthus
in
titrrfpa ra
Ka66\ov
KaQeKacrra
in this
David,
rb 5e ovde/jitav KO/mtfav "r%"$bj", ftrav Xey?;, Xa/mftdvcav, a/"Xf? "?vcu Kal TV
T"V Ka63
ev
Cat. ScJwl.
no
have
to
right
1.
refuse
rb
credit Prantl
these also
in
utterances
overlay ra
KOtvairapa
. . .
does
m) ; for the aro/jLov is not necessarily something corporeal Kowhv, "#ye r6 KOW"V iirl7roAAo?y. (vide next note), and as BoeLoc. cit. ": (JAAe|.) Kal rfj"j"6a""i thus (Z."?.) says, quoting from etvai ras arofrom the corirporspas $Qv\6fJiGvo$ Alexander, even poreal OVG"V the conception of incorjj.^ IULQVS ovcriasrQv KQIV"V. poreal form can be abstracted. yap rS"v ardpow,ovSkv elvai S^i/arai, 8 In agreement a\\ow. l,rwy Simpl. Cat. 21, ": 6 ^vroi.
p. 56,
Xafj,fidv"iv "VTQS,(f}7}fflv, avdyKy yap Kal rb aropov elku, " yap ro?y KOLVQLS ra "ro]jia ire 5e cWos, ov irdvrcos ar6fjioi)
e/cacrra KOIVOV
Alexander
incorporealityof (cf.Boot,
a JPorpk.
Trausl.
FORM
AND
MATTER.
325
tions
are
broughtunder
tion considera-
CHAP. XI.
equallypresent in several individuals universal are or conceptions may be present.1 The telligence he observes,universal as therefore, only in the inwhich
soon
abstracts
to
them
from
individuals ;
cease
as
as
:
this
ceases
think
them, they
releases
to
exist
it is
onlyour
with
thoughtwhich
from
the forms
bound them
up
matter
matter, and
existence
gives to
(fursichmatter
form
from
voyrbv 23,
y
:
Kal
"^97 ou"6
%ffriv avrobv
ri
vovs
eTSos
'
aro/u,ov
ov"iav "s
Aeyeerflcu (priori.JBM.
iv rep voeTcrflcu avrols y rov tlvat VTrocrravis. vorjro'is ra, yap Ka66\ov Kal KOLVOL rfyvfitv vitap^iv
e^ye
ev
ro'is Kad"Kao~rd
re
KLVOVV
%v at
avrfj
KOivd
re
repcu
1
airoplaL.
shows The here
Kal
KaddXov
Alexander
i. 3. he
Nat.
r6r"
Se
"crri
vovs
fj.^
VOO'LTO
%TI.
voovvros
""rr"
neither
an
to
individuals, nor
ei"rlv ol
avra
absolute
self-subwistent KaQ^Kao-ra
perai,
e^ye
r"p
voslffQai rb
rovrois
universal, aAA'
rcav
opicr^olelvai avrols.
KOLVCOV,
ra ra
8e S^aota
Kal
"fv rols
rcav
Ka6eKao~ra
.
"rar"
.
$v
auroTs Kowd
.
hcyovrat
5e T""V
biroid ecrn e^ a"pai.p"(r"cas, ra jua^^/xari/ca.LOG. c-it. 143, " ra fj,%v sYS?}virb rov yap %vv\a
Kal r"v ol fipicrKOLV"V VQVj/jLdrcav vov ylveraL 8vra tivvd/Afi voyra rbv avQpa)- vorjrd. -^(apl^(av pol, *6n vov rb xcaptcrai. avra rys yap of 6 nature icrrus ?)$ essential ifov (the ij\7]s VQVS, fJi^O avrys mail) farb r""v ffbv ols {KpeffryKev (1. auTOiV) rb etvat,^vepysta, $AAft"jf Kal Ka6' avrltv Xaftsiv' 6 Cf. "c. TTOLS?, vofira aurbs- avra "" rov v"p"crrS"TOS aXXcav, also Metaph. 763, 1", 37; Br. ftev /-ter' Se xwpls %K.t:(v"av The discussions voQV}j".4vov [/cai493, 30 Bon.
'
ahhuv,
Kal omitted],
in Nat. Qu. i. 17, 26, refer to of the ei$?} %vv\a v"p"(rrr)K"v, this relation elz/aiSo/eel Kal to their substance. Alexander vo'ft/Aaros 6pHTfAbs
no
doubt,
oux
shoiilcl be
KOIVOV. 2
De
Cf. An.
yimpl.Phys. 1G,
131), t" :
rwv
b,
here
shows not
that Form
ecy
is in substance,
"
yap
?",
not
as
avrwv
which
existed
it, and
rbv airb rys ttXys ^(apiff^v to which it ia 'crav }J,fy not rotavra VQVJTCLL ra Kara
326
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XL
must
hold
good
is
also of the
soul,the
more
decidedly
that the
so
maintains
the Aristotelian
definition
of
nothing else than the form organicbody.1 As the form of the body, that it cannot exist bound closely up with it
it,its originand
constitution is conditioned
it is
without
by the
soul is the
to the
meaningbecame
first of
of
this
(the parts of the body) KCLL yivo^ivv}. Kal eVrl rb ara"ju.a 77 rovrov Kpacris alrta rf) "fyvxfj
we
through
can
Form,
on
the which
from
the of that
fact
our
that souls
the
constitution
to
sponds corre:
only
form
that
the
of
our
bodies
of this
body.
Similarly
in
Alexander
explained Time,
with II. ii.
eivaijOVK
avr'fiv
.
. .
etVl
rr)$
"$"v)(ri$ avrys
401) as something existingonly in idea, and he called man our rov TTOLyrtys xpdvov(Themist.De An. 220, 26 Sp.) 1 De An. 123, a, ; 124, ", et
pass ; cf. Qu. i. 26, p. 83."
2
totle Arisiracrat
y"p
Cf.
at
rrjs
(rvva/uLtyorepov
Qa.
a
j\ra,t.
; and
ii. 2 ;
concerning
doctrine
Aristotelian
Alexander
ii.
here
G.
i. 17, p. 61 j t\rat.
a.
follows,
On
account
/;,597,
indivisibility
will
to
De
An.
126,
The
tinuation con-
of soul
not
and
body Alexander
relation, to the
of the
proposition
125,
a" :
allow
be
apprehended according
ou "ffri
the
tist ar-
tyvxti.Ibid.
soul is not
a
analogy
and
between
that of
the
self-sub-
his tool
(PMl.
d. "r.
II.
sistent the
ii. 487), for the artist is separate his tool ; but the soul is from the
body,
and
in especially
the rivet. yevecrdai xojpls* ^v%t/c}/j/ is This and Kiv^crews. {Tca/jLariK^s then tan
proved
rl
in
detail, and
"$
the
other
can
only
inference
drawn
(namely p"rriv yfcp 13, /";Alex. ""itu ^ "$ "pydv"p ax"pLVfos avrov. rrj tyvxf}'M 7"P ytvc"retV; xtaPLO''T^J ^S^iaz/ r"v vlKelwv Xp?i"rQou Ka6* avr^v ^vepy^cfat 9ai "v ri "?/c rov ^vspyeiSiv xp"^vov Kal TOW Loo. olt. 14B, d : The Sui/afteV^f. opydvov.
soul is 8vva/At$ rts Kal ovcrla Hirl
rov ff6^aros be regarded as organs : J)" An. its form) /ml 127, i, J; cf. 8impl. J)e An.
THE
SOUL,
CHAP.
32
no
of the
1_
,
by Alexander;1
that the
he
insists
strongly
exist soul
higher
the
faculties of the
and
soul cannot
without
lower,
that
the
unity of the
Aristotle had
depends upon
vovs
this ; 2 and
as
whereas
tinguished disvery
ordinates co-
to its
decidedly from
it in in
man
all
one
with
the
rest.
Intellect
"
exists
V\LKOS
teal the
Through
arises
an
development
of
this
there disposition,
"
the
real
activityof thought
"
as intelligence
power,
that
"1
j
the
"
vovs
"C
J.
The
MWi
soid
VOVS.
e/o
T-"
1.
WHICH,
effects
the
potentialintelligenceand the as the light bringscolours, bringsit to actuality TroL'TjTitfcbs, is, accordingto Alexander, not a vovs
development
of
part of
our
divine
reason
ing operatoperation
upon conceived
1
in
consequence the
of this
by
it.
Thus
D$
An.
2
3
Loc.
the Arabian
a.
Perhaps
may
be in
con-
An.
vovs
no
pure
to
such
; for
he
taught
acqni*?itu$. Loo. cit. 130, 1)\143, b, ^.; 130, b: cnradfa 5^ "v ("5TTQM?"abs vovs) ical ^ fj.ejj.iyju.4j/os v\rj nvl teal ftpOaprds ^ffnv,Ivepyeia
tm
5
that
Kal "v KO.I elSos XUP^S5vi/(f/a"c"js conceived directlythe re 8% ~bv /CCCT^ SeSeiKTcu and itself rotovrov $Xr)$. only ; r" far' 'A/ucrroTe'Aovy far as it is one so irp"rov (rvjuLfieftyKbs,, 'aYnov 5 Kal Kvpios ""rrlvovs, "fcc., with the "^77. alone etor}
4
In these der
p.
re
114,
a:
TOVTO
5^
TO
rf)
avrov
tyvcrsiKO.I war'
afriov
vorjro'v """"
from
which
ytiav
vovs,
yiv6u.evovry
328
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XI.
reason
with the
and The
divine
on
is here
broken the
on
the
one
the
other soul
deityoperating
an
human
;
is therefore
lutely abso-
essence
the
souls of the
souls in
improper
this
our
sense
In accordance (opwvviMtosr).
philosopherplaces the seat of denied to which Aristotle had any corporeal reason, versally like the Stoics, in the heart,3 and says, uniorgan,2 of the human and unconditionally soul, what Aristotle had said only of one part of it,that with the body.4 The attempt which it passes away
with
6 "j/"p"(TTt TOV O"nfJ.CW"6fJiGv6v VOV 6 ZffTiv 6 yela TOLOVTOV ava"popkv x"apifciv vovs, Ovpadej/, 6 Kal Tb Kal Kal T""V voelv "jraj/reAetos fjiifj."Lff6ai Kv/Bepvuv T" $
TOV
/carcfc
"?8o$
'6
Traj/.
""TTI Ae OtipaQev Aristotelian passages concerned, iroL^TLKbs, OVK fMevos vovs Kal Svvatiis ns cf iMd. Q. 4, 5, 8 ; also Simpl. TTJS ^/ic /j,6piov aAA' "|""0"j/ yivdfJLe De An. 64, #. pas if/v^s,
voyrbv
avTo,
"5
avro
vo"^v
1
.
D"
An.
.
128,
a.
Se
"v "tK6rcas.
2 8
Cf
De
141,
a.
Observe
yye/AoviKov
assertion, Alexander
attacked i cf. Themist.
also
the
Stoic
by later
De
and
the Platonic
stead XoytorTiK^vinvovs.
An,.
of the Aristotelian
4 Loo. ^ cit. 127, a, o : ovcra though not eldos TOV crdjuiaTOs named, he is evidentlyalluded 7) t//i"x^ etvcu TOV to) ; Simpl. Plvys.I a; 59, a ; T"" ax^p'-o'TOV crtiofjiaTOs r"i elSos Kal crvjuL"j"6"ipoi De An. 11 roiovTov F, G-, Philop. ;
89,
(where,
7 ;
H,
from
vovs
8 ; Q, 2 3 Ammonius)
(quotation
;
10,
view up
:
vov
Alexander's is thus
general
summed
"?., 0,
sg. of
TOV
Nat.
by
'
Philop. I.
t
Q, 2 Ae'yeirov
irpuiroy
ii. 10: 97 ^v%^ ofiv "?5os "bv aSvvaTov avTb ttaO* a^rJ) elvai. % y"p 0A??s 5e?rat irpos rb "by
vovv,
(namely
here
its
aurb
elvai.
fjLGVov
rov
Alexander
vow] d
rfav
that
the
soul
for
cannot
KaQ1
ej-tv vovs,
6 girl ttsirep
in and itself,
jtself ; but it
exist
T"\ei(ov cwQod)ir"av
rpirov
GOD
AND
THE
WORLD.
329
is
seen
in
these
definitions
to
refer phenomena
to
CHAP.
XI
'
natural tural
causes
by
also
rejecting everything
perceived
relation
in in
superna-
may
be
of the
of world
the world.
like
Relation
the
derives,
diffuses and
the
influence the
which
itself "f
ana
"".^
the
from thence
the
into
Deity
the
first into
heavens,
1
from
elementary
elements
bodies
a
but
this whole
of nature
or or or
process
in
is conceived of the
entirelyas
process is
more
each
there
as
animate
force, according
its
higher
position in the universe, and its coarser further to the or nature, places it nearer
without of This denial body. der immortality, which Alexanthe in
An. also
first bearer
Alexander the 55
his
commentary
prove mentioned
to
tried
cf,
in
is often
by later in Sclwl.
o
ingly
on
again
refers ical
Aristotelian) e^eVei
must be moved
to
De
totle, Aris-
their
a
sphere)
in
direction
the
fixed
same
", 13; ; B, 8,
the
round which
by
was
it
"
double
motion because
not
Q,
1
4. The motion
necessary,
of the
heavens
otherwise be
moon
there world
could
beneath alternation
itself, Alexander
like
of by and generation passing away KVKXofyQpyriKbv (rwjuo Alexander i. 25). bad as (Qu. Nat. a longing to become like as possible to the highest, also (herein differing from soul to substance a Aristotle) attributes eternal, and unmoved the in which the to ovpavbs, however, irp"TOs according (which, had Aristotle Simpl. P/iys. 319, 6, he did not, longing, which itself (PHI. ascribed to matter side outlike Aristotle,conceive as have its herentd. 6V. II. ii.373 *#.) inmust the heavens, but as to Herin the outermost sphere seat ; his contradiction minus since a longsists (vide s^t"pra,p. 318, 1) coning as a whole) ; and a soul, he only in this that Herniinua says presupposes
Aristotle,
the
explained, supposing
in
a
the
the
regular
that
that
/caret
the each
Q"uov
from
to
the
soul
what is the
KLVO^^VOV. tyvxfyv
of
according
effect of
Alexander,
tary planeaccord-
ciple. prin-
330
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, XJ"
__
sky; and it is likewise divided the bodies compounded of these elements in among less a more or ; they have greateror lesser measure soul,according as they consist of purer or perfect and, particularly, according as impurer substances less of the noblest is mixed more element, fire, or
of this force
"
the
up
in them.1
In
2
this but
divine
power
or
the
essence
of
nature
cides destiny coinwith nature.3 Therefore, though Alexander does not admit destinyin the Stoical sense, he is as the ordinary belief in Providence. little inclined to favour to him not only irreconThis belief seems consists ;
Providence
cileable with
free
cannot
the
freedom he
of the
human
will
"
for
actions, as
foreknow,since His power does not extend to 4 but the impossible is also opposed to right conceptions
"
of God
be
and
the world.
For
it cannot
meaner
end,
is
and
activity of
means can we
the
God of
"
merely
1 2
existingfor
say of
the
it
5 ;
#
,
former;5
Qu.
Nut.
nor
the
that
p. 90 ; J)e.An.
ws
^TT!
as
rotirovS.
r.
0,
crti)/a.ari J-yytvo^vys
HO
far
the
deityis combined
r" Oe'tov [sc.cTw/ua]with the jtjthcr,* irpbs 3 J)tf Pfltf^ KO,\QVfyv 6 : AefTrercu 5^? yeirvidcrews, Kal tyvfftv C, to l)t*" AOITT"J/ " ro?s r^*/ "tfjt,apfji,4vr)v According1 JSimpl. fM"v. Aloxanelvat Karston, "$ (JcelO) tyi'icrei yivo^vois 54,a, 23, A^ycij/, der Identified the Deity even for it ishere "nid with the aether, eTwu
raur^
re ^l^aip^vfiv
Kal
which "/"^(rof,
(ap.Arist.
JDe
6M0,
i.8 ; 270
//, 8)
he referred
the
""dvarov
to the
is then further discunsod. J)"t An, 102, XefTr^rat "pa rtyv ^apiu.^' "\Ko fy rfyvotKetav ^"rty iteo. l/cc(WoiA * Iki JPbto, c. 80,
*
Qelov crw^aa, "$ rodrov ftvrosrov 060v. But only the reading of
Brandis
is
compatible with
with
context, and
the Alexander's
Qu. W"it"
ii,21, p. 128
332
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XL
acquainted. Of
him
the
few
who
are
mentioned
after
From second
the
exception were
half of
seems
From insignificant.2
the
half of the
third
cen-
third
century the
Peripatetic school
-twry the
lost itself in the school of to have gradually the which the Neo-Platonists, in knowledge of Peripatetic School also zealously Aristotle's writings was maintained ; is gra3 and there were still hear of Peripatetics dually not we ;
merged in that of the
JVeo-Platonists.
wanting
men
who
commented
on
the
Aristotelian
writingsand followed their doctrines in particular and psychology; 4 such as logic, branches, physics,
Longinus ap. Porph. V. Plot. the philosophers of 20, among
1
in
the that
his
time
whom mentions
he
there
three
of
Heliodorus Ammonius
andria, Alex-
self
his
merates, enu-
Peripateticphilosophy
native
city
wished
to
only
the
have displayed his chief A strength in mathematics. his from Ktx,K4v"s fragment ir"pl is quoted by Eusebius, TO v ird"rxa 1. c.j 14 siffl. wise, ; a fragment likeap. 462 him Fabric. Mbl. Gr. Hi.
they
were
indeed
knowledge, especially Iambi. Theol. Philostr. index) are from (of whom
this
(ride
lanabli-
earlier Anatolius, of
I. o. confirms
testimony),
and clamatory dechus.
8 4
the
teacher
only
wrote
poems
orations, to
which
Thus, following Plotinus, have attributed much value so came Porphyry, lamblichus, to be known to posas to wish Themistius, Dexippus, Byrianus, terity the two by these productions. Ammonius, Sirnplicius, Porphyry, ap. Bus. Pr. JSfo.x. 3, named Olympiodorus, and other his conwhom as 1, also mentions temporary Neo-Platonists, to we
in
they
themselves
would
hardly
Athens, Prosenes
head
must
add
Philoponusj
in
the
the
a
Peripatetic, perhaps
there.
of Even who Anatolius became
of the school
dria, Alexan-
Vegetius Projtextatus.
men,
so
Of
bishop
270
of
Laodicea
via.
about
to
according
Eus.
far
him32, 6, so distinguished
shall
have
to
EXTINCTION
OF
THE
PERIPATETIC
SCHOOL.
333
but
with
regard
to
any
philosophers
in their
who
adopted
CHAP. XL
the the
Peripatetic
world,
there
doctrine
whole
allusions.1
theory
of
are
only
incidental
We
meet
even
with
at
such the
in
Periof
the
Vers.
Xsid. Isidorus
to
131,
from the
was
patetic
fifth
end
Dorus
by
telian Neo-
century
who,
ap.
the
to vooe,
Platonic
the
Arabian,
Damasc,
according
Suid. ml
Platonic
"
system.
cf
.
334
ECLECTICISM.
CHAPTEE
THE PLATONIC
AFTER
XII.
IN THE
SCHOOL
THE
FIRST
ERA.
CENTURIES
CHRISTIAN
CHAP. XII.
OUR
knowledge
we a
of
the
Academic
school1
so
at
the
point where
that for half
its teachers decades
in upon
can
fragmentary,
of any in of
D.
century
known
first
not
even
the
name
Platonuts
is
to
us.2 does
Only
some
the
last
'-e"-rs
of the
century
lightbreak
onward
we
Platonic
1
series of
of Neo-Platonism.3
to
Zumptr
2
Greece
quoted supra,
Seneca,
be
must
p. 112, 1.
testimony
any
as :
Athdat.
c.
TlieniistoU.
valid, at
rate for
:
32, end
Rome,
et
to say Academiol
Protein.
connected,
more
whom
veteres
et
minores
nullim
we
fcihall speak
on. was
a
length
Aristpdemns,
friend
Adr. of
we
that of
JEgium, disciple
Plutarch
calls,
2,
Plutarch,
school,
vap-
and
there,
after
having
TlXdrowos, and to opytacrrfyv in this place,and in the treatise against Epicurus (JVr. P. fhwv. v.)he has given a part
whom in
the Hadrian
the
Under lived
men-
Syrian Apollonius,
LATER
PLATONISTS,
335
of
thought it remained
tendency which
by SparGains,
heard in
CHAP.
eclectic
it had
XII.
as
Platonist
Peloplaton,
in
JEfadr.
2,
and
pupil
Galen
and who taught Antioch, Rome, Tarsus, and other places,and also stood in favour with
"J""
at *".oot
Pergamum
An. Coffti. vide m/m,
about Morli. of
145 B.C.
(Galen.
Marcus
Aurelius
tfm
eighth year
pupil
of
Gains
(the
title of
( Chro-n. JEvs.) treatise spoken of inf.p. 337, 3, (145 A. D.) Jerome of describes him as such) whose structions inTaurus, places Oal visius Galen in attended Berytus (Eus. 1. c. ; Suid.TaSp.). De or Tyrus (Philostr.F. Soph, ii, Smyrna 151, 2 A.D. (Gal. Lilr. Propr. 2 vol. xix. 16 ; for 1, 34) ; but as, according to further details concerning AlGellius, JV. A. i. 26, 4, he had for his teacher, and, binus, vide inf. Plutarch p. 338 #7.); D e-
according
Herodes
to
Philostr.
I.
"?., metrius
(M.
of
us
Aurel.
viii. 25);
sul con-
Apuleius
Maxim
have
of
come
time
(Zumpt,
p.
70).
know
from
the fact
that of
astronomical the of
observations Hadrian
.
20 ; ii. 2, 1 ; vii. 10, 1 ; 13, 1 at xvii. 8, 1, that he was tfg1.; the To head of the school.
him
(cf Eossbach
der
Westphal, Metrik.
6ftr.
the
same
period belong
who is Lucian
Nigrinus, us through
as a
76). He is described known to as a Platonist by Procl. in Tim. (Nfyrin.')26, A, and in the title borne by his
Rome Cha"~ and work principal
VOL
Platonist
such
c.
residingin
describes
(as
in
he
himself
of
/caret
18).
a
Sextus,
of
ronea,
nephew
of Marcus
Plutarch's, avaryvoxnv
Antottin. ; 3; Suid. Bullialdus
teacher
Verus
Aurelius
(Capitol.
3;
Vwm.
the
cond, se-
Philos.
'Astronomy,'
edited
by Martin;
books
seems on are
remaining
Procl. (L 0.)
his
Sextus transcriber's,
and Sextus
Em-
of
Chaeronea
piricusare
Dio
12 ; p.
confused
F. 1 ;
; M. Aurel.
i. ") ; Philostr.
Sojph.ii.
Butrop.
of
Cass. bod.
9 ; viii.
a commentary work, perhaps the Kepublic (cf. Theo, Astro n. c. 16, p. 203, and Martin, p. 22 ^. a
to refer to
Platonic
the
reign of
cus Mar-
26, cf,
Secalled
Aurelius, besides
of
Marcus;
176,
A.D.
336
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XII.
Philo
and
Antiocims.
But,
in
the
first
united
in
with
medley
doctrines philosophic
increasing measure
the of
that
of
stronger growth
an
Antiochus
and
Porph.
V. Plot. U
further
tails de-
third
century there
lived
in
-
Ephesus, Athen.
pocrationof
of Atticus
school,of
was
whom after
still alive
(Longinus ap. Porph, 20; Porph. himself, I. c. 35, B s$. Suid. sub wce\ according where the few and -unimportant Kalcrapos, to Suidas, "rwfij8t"T%$ sake also writings of Eubulus are perhaps the grammarian, nameteacher of Verus, so and mentioned). To them Longinus
described by Capitol. Ver. 2. written by Suidas mentions as
him els TLXdrtova in vird^vrijua and books, \"%*is twenty-four
a
(Procl. in Tim.
93,
V. Plot.
had
in two
books.
no
In the
(I. c.) who much, Eu elides inf.337, 3), Democritus, (cf. and Proclinus, in Troas ; of Democritus, also mentioned by
as
adds
Platonists
written
contained
doubt-,
Olympiodoms
in Ph"don,
hear
on
p. 159, SofwL 38 ; F. in Alcib. p. In him. 48 Cr. quotes from Marcus of Aurelius, the time also
to
seem
commentaries
(Olympiodorua
Cr.) and
oil),p. 105,
to have
lived Nu
e-
nius,
be the end
Cronius,
and
later
Celsus,
on
spoken
of the
of
; at
Origen,
and to
Oensorinus,
Nat.
shall have
(Aphr. Qu.
cerning con-
statement
When 'A/c^AAas lived (quoted by Procl. in Tim. 319, F. in connection with a theory on
whether he later than Plobe ascertained ; tinus, cannot nor are the dates of Maxim us
was
Tim.
earlier
phanes,
19, 8) as
writer, philosophical
Numenius,
In the of
of Nicjea
(ride inf.
ever
us
p.
337, 3)
and
of 8
(iVP- 339^.)
Cronius, and
first half and
Longinus.
middle
exactly known.
the
COMMENTATORS.
337
his The
successors
was
developed
the
into
Neo-Platonism.
CHAP.
oppositionto
with nourished
ancient
intermingling of
doctrine,was
more
other
points _1
1"
__
of view
the Platonic
by the
records.
As
period turned
Aristotelian
their
attention
and
more
to the
now
so writings,
do
we
see
the Academics
Plato
;
applying themselves
with the
zeal and
as
to the
writingsof
and
if
throw
itself of
exclusiveness
into
the works
its founder
the
works
nevertheless
extent.
prevailed to Among
writings
connection
:
r.
an
important
with the
as
.
and
Comment-
considerable
stands in
later writers
the
closest
of Platonic expositors r
inasmuch
"$* "f
Plato and
merely in
in
a
numerous
passages
refers
to sayings
study
"^
m'
also and
thoroughlydiscussed
certain sections of his
works.2
As and
commentators
of Plato,
are
Graius, Albinus,
3
Taurus,
1
Maximus
likewise
mentioned
among
Kal Hirlira"rivTlop"ptipLos. A 610 Scholium, (ride. .?#.). ap. Fabric, iii. 158, .s?/j?;. p. 2 TlXarcaviK^. rbv the HXdrcava in : (JL" Especially says virofj.vriand the treatise trepl fjLari^ov(ft TrXeivroi. {"TjTTJjUara Xpfjari/j.^$v Ti/tiat(p 'AKfitvos, tywxvyovias, TLpia-Kiavbs rv}s repoi 5e Tatosf, 3 the In (contemporaries of Simplicius), fragment of the JE/U- Eu/cAc^s, DeroyUid"$\ T/iraSf/lllfS,
dowis
commentary
ap. the
rS"v
on
the
Republic
I. xiv.
Gaius Plot.
commen-
also
14
A.
Mai,'Glass.
names as
Ant.
Porphyry
those Plotinns
V. had
Proclus
mythus
in
among taries
whose
i-ead ;
an
Kopvtycuot, exposition of the Timseus is no referred to in Procl. in doubt 'AAjSTvos (as,accordNovfji'fivt.os, ifaUenist. A Tim. 104, from. to Freudenthal, Taurus, ; ing Gellius A. vii. 14, 5) quotes St-ud. 3 H. p. 300, the MSS. give ; (JV. substitutes Mai 'AXKIVOS^ td'ios,the first book of a commentary 6 "NiKasbs, the Gorgias and also (xvii. on ^ApTroKparicav,
H\arc")VLKcav
338
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XII.
others.
an
Of
Albinus
to
we
in
later
revision,
an
introduction of the
the
and dialogues,1
2
epitome
Platonic
hitherto
falsely
20) his oral exposition of the the first from Symposium ; and book of an exposition of the
Timseus,
the extracts Scholia
are 011
given
De
in
(by the moderns for It part) ehaywy^. been has now placed beyond rough thoquestion by Freudenthal's
the
most
Beltker
Plato, p.
JEtern,.
same
examination
(I.
is
no
c.
43 G sq. and
by Philop.
From
no
s##.)
than
that
Mundi,
source
vi. 21.
comes,
the
Albinus,
'
whose
and of
doubt ap.
what
is
entirely
form many
quoted
Eel.
by
Iambi,
Stob.
and
both to
whom
the
by by
of
now
doctrines
the among them
brought
some are
forward
that
by
and very attributed. binus AlFr.
supposed
Alcinous,
are
edition
Plato,
remarkable,
The into
p. 300,
more
expressly
was
subjected to a thorough investigation,and newly edited basis of more the perfect on Freudenthal by manuscripts and the Albinus (the Platonic
false pp. in
"IS
alteration
of
Alcinous
(as
much
320
our
scripts manu-
derived copy
may
from
; and
Alcinous,
the
best
TOW
Stud. "f-Tellen,
Its title
runs
3 H. thus
same an
ancient 'AXKivov
in
241-327).
T-^V
have
MSS.
eisay"y))
fttfiXOV
HXdrCdVQS
'AXfilvov
may the have
been
was
text, however, in its present form, has Freudenthal shown, as p. 247 cuted sqq. is only a badly exeand The
same
changed,
even
when
book
transcribed,
possess
into
'AA/cfvoou.
of Albinus
But
we
this treatise
mutilated writer
extract.
which
the
dence according to all the evionly in a later revision, considerably shortened work
original
it not
; a
and
some
have
source,
without
Paris
Codex third
(Z.
names
6*.
which
lus p. 1 02,
earlier than
whom
Thrasylride
(concerning 2). As to
HJiein. Some Phil, work
sup.
vide, xiii.
imperfect),
Albinus' Tixdrcavt.
in
use
book
TrepI
But
T"JV
hpeffK^vrc^y.
his treatise
of
more
Alberti,
that
Albinus works
7"sqq.
be found
2
further
d is without
details will
in the
made ancient
word
plentiful
we
see
from
moat
the
This
agreement"
for the
the of
part
MSS.,
almost
*A.XKw6ov
in
fiifiao'KaXtKbs (or
of
exception, X6yos
some
his
twelfth
chapter
Arius J"v. which
more
Didymus
xi.
; Stob.
transcripts them also elsaycay^els r^v "piXo~ U\dr. UX. or iirirojud) rwv troQtav
of
,
the
i.
330),
has
340
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XII.
Numenius devoted
to
and
the Timceiis
Democritus of
Longinus, besides other treatises commentaries the Platonic writings, on 1 and from Longinus' contemporaries, ; and cussions disEubulus, explanations and dialogues.2The
school
oral instruction
a
several
to doubtless, consisted,
extent, in the
works.3
sources
of the Platonic
examination
of the
must
in later times
Platonic
from
the
and
hear
of several
individuals
protested
the
various
against the
confusion prevailing
wrote
Opposi-
systems.
Platonic the
"
Taurus and
upon
the
difference
of the
Aristotelian
as
and philosophy,
own
against
to
Stoics;4 but
noticeable
Ar. the
to
his
conception of the
handed down:
us,
are
alien doetrines in
Platonic
been
the writ-
and
no
or characteristics5 peculiarities
in Syrian (Solwl.
seems on
multitude from
of commentaries
and also
to refer
to
the
and TimcBi(s,
to
passage Procl. in, Tim. 87 B. 1 to Prod, Vide the Index Tim. his
out
the
indeed, discussed by
in
like
those
quoted
on
the
Gaius, and
Taurus also
Porph.
read
He
seems
to have
taken
quotations from jSTumenius, writingswith his scholars GeH. xix. 6, 2 j xx. 4, the of a commentary, and not
the other
(ap.
Pro-
from had
not
writingsof
this
blems).
4
Platonist. written be
Whether commentaries
Oronius
can-
The
former, according- to
the latter
according toGellius,JO.xii.5,5. He also, "^0** 14according to Suidas, composed a 2 Kal "cro"Concerninga-afjidrajv Democritus, treatise ir"pl other works. vide 8uj).p, 336, n, ; concerning /mdrtw and many 5 mde We learn from his disciple, Eubulus, Longinus, ap. Plot. V. 20. who Gellius, Porph. frequently men8 infer This from tions him, that he required a the we
raup,
Suid.
decided
from
Porph.
V.
TA
UR
US"ATTICTIS.
341
exhibited
in it.
Atticus
set himself
CHAP. XII.
againstthe tendency to amalgamate the Platonic and theories. In the fragments of a Peripatetic he devoted this purpose1 he treatise which to
appears
anxious
as an
Of $nffs
enthusiastic the
admirer
of
Plato, who
is
about
purity of the
Academic
doctrines ;
attacks
the
and
passionateprejudice,
it with the lowness especially reproaches of its moral standpoint, and its denial of Providence and of immortality.2 Of the remaining doctrines it is the theory of a fifth element and the Aristotle,
which
so
move particularly
him
as
opposition,the
and
latter
much
the
the
more,
senses
thorough
five
to
endure
the and
four air
of
xvii.
of smell
:
midway
and that
between
in
water
spise to de-
Aristotle's
dialectic
sions, discus-
to consist
specialphysical
he did
not
From
we
Iambi,
Eel. i. 906,
were
ap. that
6)
; that
wish
agreed
sent
to eradicate
moderate condemned
of anger
upon
earth
the
or
the
manifestation
Ens.
c.
of
Ev. the xi.
the
Epicurus' doctrine
denial
of
over
sure pleac.
Pr. In is
1,
xv.
Providence
4-9,
13, and
the
rovs irpbs
probably
first of
points of
12.
; vii. 10, 14, 5 ; viii. 6 ; xii. 5; xviii. 10; xx. 4). It further appears from
importance (ii.2
subject
indicated
Stct,r"v
'Apicr-
the the
fragment
JKtwnl M.
Philop.
IJv
rk HXdrcovos
he, with
What
in
to
xv,
we
inricrxvovfind in the
majority
contemporary
a
superscriptionof
and Plato
course
many
;
ters chapto
Unionists, denied
of the world ad
beginning
from
5, 1
6, 1, as
and
and
Moses Etiscbius
belongs,
of
lia Schoap. he
his
Philop. I.
transcribers.
a
xv.
4, 5, 9.
U2
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
he
has
here
to
contend
with
portion of his
own
XIIt
Together with the Aristotelian doctrines the statement that he also contests on immortality the soul as such is unmoved, in order to uphold in Platonic the its stead conception of the Selfschool.1
moving
to the
as
but
he herein
limits
existence
after death
rational
represents this
into the
uniting itself
the
now
each
entrance
with
is
irrational soul
dwellingin
in
no a
first
that he conceived
similar
to
the that
doubt, also opposed the Aristotelian conception of Grocl,but of this tradition tells us nothing ; as to his own theory,we
He,
are
told
that
he
made
the
Creator
of
the
world
(rood,but discriminated
of
the other
things from Him.4 particular the other quotationsfrom his commentary Some on 5 Timceus of no are importance ; from his tions objeccreators to
1
the
Aristotelian
aither
definitions
whole,
at
a
concerning
formed
in
Against tlie
the
of Aris-
and
its
soul,were
views
connected
definite
epoch (Prod,
concerning the stars, Tim. 84 F; 87, A; 110, B F; he appeals to Bus. xv. 7, 8; 119, B; of. 00, 0; 170, A; 250, B ; Iambi, ap "Stob. JfoL i. 804:) against the eternity of the ; but they may he be But nevertheless world, to L G. c. 6. admit not would nevertheless imperishable (of, Tim. 41, A) the end to we as world, through the will of the Creator any
shall views the matter
presently find.
forward his The here the in
He
had
same on
brought
commentary
unordered
a
"'
Eus, xv. 0, 4 ,sv/(/. Procl. HI 1,A; Iambi, /U'. 910. Procl. of. I.
o.
TiHiwiix.
OB, 0
0.
111, G
(he ways, the ing Plutarch) and soul that moves perfect
are
followimit
111) B;
ft
181,
certainlyindeed
the world
as
uncreated,
an
Ap.
Procl.
but
ordered
in Ar.
802, b, 31.
ATTICUS,
343
Homonyms l we see that lie extended his polemic to logic also. But no important results are to be stood nearer because he himself expected from this,
to
CHAPXI*-
the
eclecticism He is angry
which
he
combated
than
he
was
aware.
at the admixture
of the Platonic
he himself mingles inter-
doctrines
with them
the
but Peripatetic,
with
those
of
the
Stoics
of
when
he
an
opposes
to
the
Aristotelian
doctrine
goods
only differs in words from however, that of the Stoics.2 Still more clearly, he betray the standpoint of the later popular does that the happinessof in the proposition philosophy is unanimously recognisedby the philosophers man end of philosophy.3It was the ultimate precisely as this onesided standpointwhich, together practical with the indifference to a stricter scientific method,
had called forth the eclectic doctrines.
to have
amalgamation
does
of contradictory
not
seem,
Atticus,however,
His objections proceededvery scientifically. have seen, in complaints we as to Aristotle chiefly consist, of his about the moral and religious corruption doctrines; to Aristotle's deepestand most thoughtful discussions he opposes arguments like that by which he tries to reconcile the with
reason
its of
eternal
his
come
Omnipotence
into
what
has
existence
destruction,4
7, 5. 8, a, and Sirnpl.Cateff. 9 SoJiol, 42, ft, 9, "^T. a, Porph. 2 i. d. Loci, (xcsch. 618, (Prantl,
1
on
a 8 4
the
Categories.
xv.
Bus. Loc.
4, 1
; 7
"s^.
; of. 5, 1.
"rit.xv.
4, 1
soom a
to
have
been
separate
treatise
14
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP.
^
'
The
and
who philosopher
derived
treated
argument
decision
no
his
ultimate
from
indeed
to objections
of the
several
systems,
of
which
cause.
that very
necessityhad
been
the
determining
its
This
majority
of
the
Academics.
Plutarch, Maximus, Apuleius, Numenius, has indeed, Platonists, but their Platonism
so
like
absorbed
many
foreignelements
As
that
they appear
introduced
merely as
by
tendency
Antiochus.
the forerunners again engage our attention among them of Neo- Platonism,other details respecting may be omitted for the
present.
In
respect
to
Theo
of
that,as we Smyrna also it will suffice to remember have already he found the free use of a Peripatetic noticed,1 with his Platonism, treatise not incompatible while, at
the
same
time,
in
the
first book
of his
to work, he prefers
new
in
there is, Pythagoreans.2 ConcerningNigrinus, spiteof the Nigrinusof Lucian, little to say ; the him shows
us a man
of description
of excellent
who
took
Sup. p. 309, 4.
made
c. use
Adrastus
De MM.
is
writcris and
doubt
also
c.
of in
6 j
2
13,
;
p.
22, p. 117
What
on
c.
lie indicates in De
12, etpamni.
Theo
numbers
philosophy,
rean
book,
element
in
c.
especially proc,
generally quoted
minent
De
AritL
4j De
88 sqq*
NIGRINUS"SE
VER
ITS.
345
and
immorality
and
of his
time,
; but
and
found
in
it inner
CHAP.
satisfaction Lucian
freedom
him
the
which
been
assignsto
the mouths
still to
might just as
of Musonius
or
put
have
into
Epictetus. We
Sever us,
speak of Severus
we can
and
Albinus.
whom,
the
as
indeed,
half
second
of the
second
in
century,1is described
the
sense
of the of his in
on
totelian Aris-
treatise
a
the
soul the
Eusebius
Platonic
has
preserved
that
fragment
human
which
pounded com-
doctrine
the
soul is
substances, one
capable of suffering,
with
the
other
that
is attacked incapable,4
the
vation obser-
this
theory
soul,
would
annul
two
imperishdifferent
ableness
constituents unnatural
not
seem
of the
must
because
such
necessarilyagain dissolve
their
combination.
to
have
real
opinion. Severus
first to mention and
as
soul,
Mm
38 ;
are
lamblichus
are
Eusebius.
no
But of the
yet
traces
period
him.
in in
quotations
to
Pro-
in material ing to Plato, was bodies; but this is irrelevant, since such
: was
clus, Tim.
B., observes
not
Plato's
$)"\Xos ^eftrjpos opinion quoted opinion respect of 346, TIS ruv ^arrepov 8, Beverus, Atticus, ^yTjffajnevcav ra in/,p. n\drcavos "K rrjs wap' avr$ ?$ oband Plutarch, that many raised rots by ^ApicrroreAet /car??;^ crews jections to it were which the also juad^uxtn Karaxp^vrat irphs rh$ Peripatetics ; that fact to the Severus ot7ro5ei|eis ru"v fyvcrtK"v alrtuv, points
was
e! S"
older
than the of
of
ouSei/
8
rovro
rovs irpbs
ctpxalovs.
Aphrodisias,
known
to
us
author
Prop.
Peripatetic
school,
3
4 Tim. 41 sgg. ; G9, C ,^. ; of. P7ril. d. Gr. II. i. 690 5^7.
.346
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
''
'
and
primarily the
world-soul,
as
an
incorporeal
of which he the constituents figure, while of the to be the point and the line, represented from which Plato compounds the worldtwo elements the indivisible with the point, soul,1he connected and the divisible with the line.2 A beginning of the he did not admit, even if world in its proper sense mathematical the present world
thought with the Stoics that the world, eternal in itself, changed and he appealsfor in certain its condition periods, this doctrine to the mythus in the Platonic dialogue
had been
begun ;
he
of the
Statesman.3
There
is
reminiscence
of the
Stoics also in
to (rt)
be the
stand these
Being
statements
However
nevertheless
departed
But
we
many much
respects from
more numerous
have
proofs,especiallyin striking
Platonic
his
abstract
of
the
doctrines,5of the
the
eclecticism
treatise
of Albinus.
we
Quite
at
beginning of this
as
find the of
things and divine (c. and the Peripatetic division human 1), into the theoretical and the practical of philosophy (c. 2),preceded by Dialectic as a third division
science
1
the
Tim.
35, A
; ride
^
Part
^
ii. a,
through
3Oi
the
was
will
of
God
(I.e.
C46, 3. 2 Iambi,
Procl. in *""
8
B)
doubtless
to
only
i, 802 ; 187, A
concession of Plato.
the
expressions d.
Procl. That
c.
88, D
world
be
"0. ;
not
168,
D.
the
with-
* Procl. 70, A ; of. Phil. 6V. III. i. p. 1)2,2. s Vide sity.p. 338, 2.
standingmight
imperishable
348
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, xn'
creative
or principle, manner
the
Deity ;
the
as
Deity is
active
de-
scribed in the
of Aristotle thinks
Reason
which,unmoved, (c.10)?
way way
are
is assumed
to the
the the
to
analogy,and elevation ; l ideas emancipation, explained as eternal thoughts of God, but, at same time, as substances ; their sphere,with or things contrary exceptionof artificialthings,
of
nature, is restricted
side
to
natural
classes,and
side
by
with
the
forms
inherent
find
place.2
use
In
an
regard to matter,
Aristotelian which is neither
Albinus
says,
definition
familiar
making to him,
of
it is
that
but is in nor incorporeal, corporeal, the body potentially (c. 8, end). The eternity of maintain the world, he also thinks, he can as a other philosoPlatonic doctrine, since, like some phers, he describes the world as having had a beginning onlybecause it is involved in constant Becoming, and thereby proves itself the work of a higher 3 concludes from this that the and he rightly cause ; also has not been created by Grod,but is world-soul eternal. It does not, however, agree very similarly that the world-soul should be adorned well with this, from a deep sleep, in as it were by God and awakened
1
In the
in
second the
forms
3
imitated
from
or
them
a
clftij.
the
67
has the
view
To
this passage
a or
similar
on
Plato's
ItejwMic,vi.
one,
of
commentary
the
in Tim..
Twiains Proclus
Jlyyotypoms
0.
the
are
refers
like
Precursors
some
others (md"PML,d.
"9r.ll.
theory
named
in Phil
ALBINUS.
349,
order from
by turningto Grod,to
Mm;1
from
and
receive
cannot
the
ideal forms
CHAP,
that Albinus of
a
himself
universe the the
the notion
Divine
having once
taken
existence
of inferior
to whom
guidance of
and
as
the world
is
fided, con-
that he
regardsthese beingsin
the Stoic
in
a
manner, Platonist
us surprise
of that
It is also in accordance
with introduce
the
into
eclecticism the
of his age
that he
should
ethics
the
Aristotelian he should
definition of virtue
fjisaor^s
virtues the Stoicplace among the four fundamental Peripatetic prudence in place of the Platonic the Stoic doctrine that wisdom,3 and appropriate virtue is
capable of
no
increase
or
diminution,4 and
Stoic
with the
1
certain
passions.5Some
instances
defined
as
theoryof might be
quite in the
tutecl)and
Stoic
manner
lioerr^u^ a-yaWS?
eternity of
d. Gr.
in disputing the logical the world (cf.PMl before for III. i. 168 #7.) ;
Kal KO.K"V KO.\ odHcrtpuv ; inc. 30 of Qpfoycris the relation to the virtues soul is of the lower
parts of
the that
the of
2
world-soul
had
world
awaked
as
out such
sleep, the
Aris-
could
been in L
existed,
N. vi.
(vide Phil, d.
already
*##.).
stated,we
c.
Cf.
c.
30, and
concerning
doe-
the : TTJS corresponding- Stoic 3, Herm. ^/crow /ueVou trine, lUd. III. i. 246, 2. VTJS T"x0e""n7S 5 Albinus C. 32, where rb "rfy*arod riffpov p.
170,
...
re-
rby
3
peats
Zeno's the
to
definition i. 225,
of vdOos he the I.
c.
(IbicLIII.
opposes
emotions 226
same
2), while
of
ds iTTrctK^K\OVS
In
c
reduction
enumerates
29
(wide Kptffeis
chief
emotions
c.
called the
Ti/coO
rttedrys
\oyur-
5^.)
Stoics
but
the
as
(for which
subsequently
is substi-
four
the
Stoic
JiywovtKbv
the
held
(I
230).
350
ECLECT1
CISM.
CHAP,
adduced,1
show
elements
but
the
previous
Albinus
quotations
was
will combine
suffice alien
to
how
inclined with he
to
the followed
clear
old
in
Academic the
doctrine,
a,nd
which,
deficient
however,
he
was
main,
how
the
in of
consciousness
of
We
peculiar
told
character
Albinus of
the
Platonic of
system.
most
are
that
was
one
the
and
important
we
tives representainfer
of of
his
school,2
to
if what
may
we
anything
his his
master
in
respect
with
him whom
from
know
Grains,
he
agrees
in
one
the
Platonic
philosophy,
the
mode in the of
it
becomes
he
more
that
thought
Platonic
of
was
very
prevalent
of the
second
school
the
century
our
era.
Cf. Cf
.
Frettdentbal,
sup. p. p.
278
sg$.
;
JSitjj.
p.
339,
1.
337,
243.
and
Freudentlial,
351
CHAPTEE
ECLECTICS WHO
XIII.
BELONG
TO
NO
DEFINITE
SCHOOL
"
LUCIAN,
GALEN.
we philosophers
have
one
hitherto of the
discussed
reckoned
themselves
under
existing
many de-
CHAP.
themselves
The number doctrines. original F Eclectics is much smaller of those who belong to no particular school, but, assuming a more independent attitude,particular borrowed them
true.
from For
each
and
seemed
to scllo"l-
though the internal unity of the schools and the logical consistencyof the systems were greatly relaxed, yet the necessity for some much standard of authority too strong in that was ture periodof scientific exhaustion to allow many to venwhich on freeingthemselves from the custom nected required every teacher of philosophyto be conwith tradition.
some one
of the ancient
schools and
its
even philosophers sought to shield with the authorityof antiquity, themselves where porary they were conscious of divergence from all contemof the Neoschools,as we see in the case when tion they claimed to be a continuaJPythagoreans, and in that of of the ancient Pythagoreans, the the Scepticswhen they professedto continue
The
52
CHAP, XIIL
Pyrrho.
There
are,
therefore, but
who
stand
few
side outare
of philosophers
that time
the traditional
men invariably
pale of
had not
these
who
made
philosophythe
other art
or
sole with
task
of their
it merely in connection An
with
some
science.
opportunityfor such
afforded
incidental
at
occupation
with
was philosophy
that
period partly
by the natural
rhetoric
l
which
was
and
especially by vated, cultiand zealously constantly was included in the public education.
learned
from the rhetoricians the and exposition
content
were
When
ornate
man
had of
form
an
discourse,he
then
could
only find
branches the
adequate
for it,as
the different
of
instruction
was,
divided, with
It philosophers.
to advance
of rhetoric beyond the merest outworks without in some way taking a glance at philosophy, done in most cases and though this,no doubt, was
hastilyand
but
enough,2yet superficially
that
some
it could
not
happen
individuals
should
occupy
themselves
1
more
seriouslyand
the
permanently with
details
are
How
numerous
schools
of rheof the
in-
Further
in the
to be found
of rhetoric
and how
teachers times
writings quoted
svj". p.
who
toric
terest
were
in the
;
189,
2
1.
Emperors
lively the
To students
of rhetoric
in the
achievements
and
only studied something of philosophy by the way, the cenTaurus, for refer example, (ap. (ML N. A. i. 9, 10 ; xvii. 20, 4 ; x. 19, 1 ; the last passage, compared with
sures
of
Calvisius
pupils streamed
all
to
see
sides,
we
them from
Philostratus' Vitas
Soplmtarwn,.
of
has
appointment
of rhetoric
public
been al-
i.
9, 8, proves how
common
this?
teachers
was.
DIO
CHEYSOSTOM.
353
the claims
end
of
philosophy. In
went
this way,
about from
men
towards
the
CHAP,
XTII.
and,
over
the
middle
to
of the
second, Lucian,
rhetoric
is
philosophy. But neither of these to detain enough as a philosopher surnamed after his Chrysostom,1
indeed but before the
to
be
no
assumed
all
things
Dio
simple,and
confines
as were
itself
at
to exclusively
such
moral be
considerations
1
that
time
not
far-
only to
as
The of
sources
for
our
ledge know-
countries,
returned Domitian
as
the
Getse,
of
Dio's
his
own
after
the Or.
murder and
v.
to Rome
to Themist.
F.
high
in the
favour
not to
of
not
often
are
Synes. Dio;
Suid. sul) sq. 248
voce
Phot.
Cod.
209;
every
graces
true to aim
"
(85
philosopher
he
their moral
Paras. 2;
SopJi.
later
Kay-
ser's PMlostr. V. Soph. p. 168 sqq. and in Dindorf's edition of Dio, ii. 361 $qq. The results have after up 122 sqq. by Kayser (Z.0.). In this place it will suffice to say that he was Fabric. Bi"bl. F. born and
to at Prusa
to be a physician (Or. 33 ; Or. 34, p. 34, R. ; Or. 35) : he comes forward, generally speaking, as a man whom to God has given the
of
souls
vocation the
of
doctrines
been
summed
(Or. 13, p. 431; Or. 32, 657 He himself S4$- Gt passim). dates this vocation from his
exile
in
under
Domitian De
Emper.
Dindorf's
"
(Or. 13, 422^.) ; likewise Synesius (IMo, 13 sqq.) shows (according how his destiny led him from JUxil. Dion. Sophisticism (i.e.Rhetoric) to Bithynia,
p.
5
Braunschw. in xxxviii,
1840,
the sqq. banished where
*##. is
"
philosophy, which
I. attacked
manner
he in
a
had his
edition, Dio,
date
or
vigorous "piXQcr6"pa)v
;
82
bad
in
some
of
r"v
A,D.) was
from
escaped
he and
9
(Kara
Rome
cf
.
354
CHAP, XIIL
found outside
not
to
even
them.
With
theoretical enquiries he
Ms
did
concern
himself;
whole
endeavour and
is rather readers
impress upon
the hearts
of his hearers
the
His notion
"* """
to
long acknowledged by the best, and principles Philosophy has, he to given cases.1 apply them
*"
*"
says
the
;
task
it
man.
of curing
in
men
ol
-i
-,
tneir
moral
firmities in-
consists His
the
endeavour
to
be
Righteous righteous
man.
conceived
as an
by the
excellent
teacher
of morals, but
with
whom
scientific thoughts and purposes are not specifically 3 after him tion Diogenes, whose emancipain question ;
from
needs
he admires
to what
so was
pays
no
attention
distorted
in his
character,and
that
are
finds
even
things
is also
1
told with
of
him
demonstrates
that he
virtue
given ; 6
describes
the virtuous
in his
with the Cynics, PMl,d."r. II. i. Synes., p. 14 s#., says very truly : d 5* olv Aicav "u/ce flew- 285, 3 ; Philo, "ttp. p. 77 $qq. ; and Epictetxia, Musonius "v tyiXotfotyiq tWp. p. p'ti/jLacri pej" T^viKols /xi?5" u?h irpoffraXaiiruipvia'ai irpo"f- 250-272. 8 Cf. Or. 13, 423*tf#. ; Or. 12 avwxtiv Qvffutots Sityaaow, "r" 374 sytj. : Or. 54, 55, 60, p. 312 jU"rar606ijU,"Vos o4/e TOW Kaipov irpbs "^"tAo(ro- and elsewhere, (sc. cwrb croc^iffriK^s * the Cf. Or. 6, 8, 9, 10, and %"ra ovaffdai 5e rr)S ffroas "f"ia,v)' of his description els %Qo$ reivei Kal %pp"vS}"r6atcoarse supAlexwith conversation r"v "iawov, "VTIVOVV posed ^ irap' ander, Or. 4. In Or. 6, p. 203, "vQp"!""n0e"r0ai 8^ r$ vovQertw
TTOVS
. . .
Diogenes
the d
5
is admired mentioned
even
for
K"ifj.4vyj vapaffKevy
2
r^s yX"rrys.
excesses
in PJiil.
Or. 13, p. 431 ; cf. Or. 70, The same 71, and sup, 353, 2. of the definition problem of
philosophy has
under
our
already
come
notice
in connection
Or. 23, especially p. 515^.; the Or. 69, 868 *q. where ^/jrfdisthe and are tiuppoves vi^oi cussed in the Stoical sense.
ECLECTICISM.
to be found ; as philosophy cases beyond actual and particular
CHAP,
dent
soon
as
Dio
goes
monplaces com-
he falls into
was
of a modified spirit Stoicism or of the ethics of Xenophon.1 Plato indeed, next to Demosthenes, his pattern of
are
which
treated in the
2 style ;
and
in Dio's moral
and philosophy determinations of Plato's but of the speculative and in system we find only a few scattered echoes,3 regardto the Platonic Republic,Dio is of opinion of
his
that
it contains
too
much
that
is irrelevant
to its
proper
question of justice,4We more commonly meet with Stoic doctrines in his writings : the kinship of (rod to the he says about what the knowledge of God that is human on spirit, the natural interdependence of all innate in us, on men,5 next to the Socrates of Xenophon reminds us most of the Stoics ; this is still more the definitely with the proposition that the world is a comcase mon house for gods and men, a divine state, a nature and with the tracing of the by one soul,6 governed
theme
"
the
dsemon Stoic
to
man's
of
own
internal
nature.7
Even
the
doctrine
the
it is manifest
that
nothingis
12;
of.
of real
He
expresses
Ms in
adrniraOr.
Or.
especially p,
tion 481.
"
for
Xenophon
18,
i.
Fto
%A.
7, 3.
3
as
*#, ; 891 sg. ; 397 ; Or. 7, 270. s Or. 30, 557 ; Or. 36, p. 83, 88 ; of, Or. 74, p. 405 ; 12, 390, "o. 7 Or. 4, 165; of. Or. 23, 25. 8 Or. 36, 97 s$.
384
LUC
IAN.
357
value
men
he claims
CHAP.
"XTTT
'
their inborn he
so
the Epicureans ] severely reproaches for mankind. the belief in the gods and their care His standpoint is throughout that of the popular in a practical which to account turns philosopher, of which
manner
scientificresults which
have them
become
common
property, without
enriching
to
by
new
and
enquiries. original philosophyis assumed by character Lucian,2 though for the rest his literary and is widelydifferent from that of Dio, and in mind him. taste he is far above Moreover, it was only
A
similar
attitude
1 2
All
older of Luwe
man
he
and
lucrative
at court
office
cian's
owe
personality
secretary
writings.
most
deputy (Apol. 12. ; cf. c. 1, 15). entirelyto his own find him resumWe afterwards them ing From ing (confinwhat is of his find that courses long interrupted dis(Here. 7). Nothing is known concerning Suidas' of
he
born
in Samosata
{Hist, farther
was
19),'and
merited
punishment
mad
more
subsequently devoted
Christianity,was
to learned studies (Sonm. 1 sgg. 14) and had traversed part of with dominions the Boman
pieces by
no
dogs,
worthy trust-
doubtless than
most
of the similar
of the mortes persecurhetorician, accounts profit It is possiblethat this when at about forty years of tonvni. account, story (as Bern ays conjectures, by his own age, and nnd die Kyrdker, p. 52) Iwoimi 334,3), through Nigrinus(,s-?/y;. p, have to directly arisen from over philosophy, may was won
gloryand
as
began to write philosophic his conflict with the philosophic he says himself 27 sq. KiVes, of whom dialogues (Bis Acmts. 4 : bxiyov "5eTv tf-rrb 2) 30 sgg.'j Apol. 15; Nign"n". sq. (JPeregr.
and 85 s$"j. Hermot. 13). The time be correctly of his birth cannot stated, nor that of his death.
-,
rwv
KVVIKUV
ffoi lytcj
T"V
KVVUV.
Among
are or
Lucian's
writings there
that he Ale". 48, we see cus composed this work after Mardeath. As an Aurclius' From
"8
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP, XIIL
in
his
more
mature
years
that he
he
went
over
from
rhetoric
to
appropriated from
to him
the
new
form with
tageous might prove advanconduct either for his personal for or of his writings which chieflyharcharacter. his True
monised
his individual
philo-
Ms
of
and bent
system ; philosophical
and
the other
and
io
no
is tied ays-
h^A
*
other
peculiar!-
tem.
appeared to him unimportant, and pride themselves and, so far as men upon them Thus he assures about them, ridiculous. us quarrel him that has made to that it is philosophy disloyal and rhetoric,that he has always admired praised
ties
himself and nourished philosophy upon the writings that he has fled from the noise of of its teachers, of justice to the the courts Academy and the Lyceum ; l yet he has exempted no school and no chooses espehis mockery,2 and from philosopher cially for the
target of his
customs
wit and
those
that
through
character
their remarkable
excite the most
obtrusive
attention
and But
ing tempthimself
material
almost
errors
own
for satire.3
he confines
entirelyto the
of others and
satirical
exposition of the
forward brings be
very seldom
his
indeed
generally
the
32, and
2
Eu'Ep/^rt/xos-, ^iKapo/j.^ynnros,
vious note.
References
his
are
Among
this kind
the
290,
1 ; 344.
LUCIAN.
369
determined, but
cannot
be
explainedby
any
more
CHAP,
If the treatise on preciseaccount of his convictions. he was at firstmuch impressed Nigrinusbe authentic,1 and insight with the independenceof the external, into the hollowness
L_
of the the
ordinarylife of
of this
the world,
Stoicising the impression but we to cannot Platonist, suppose the since in his description have been very lasting, the rhetorical phraseology is patent enough. Even whom in the sequel he opposed with sach Cynics, out he treats for a time not withbitterness, passionate and puts his satires and especially kindliness,
his attacks upon their mouths.2 the
In
which
characterised
discourses
gods of
the
popularbelief
he bestows
into
high praiseupon Epicurus for his freedom from religious and his relentless war against superstition.3 prejudice to his own But he gives utterance opinion doubtless only where he maintains that he honours philosophy the true but that among the indeed art of life, as schools philosophy itself multitude of philosophical token of be found, since there is no cannot possibly it which does not requireto be proved by a further
1
see
no
sufficient for
reason
in
genuine,
as
has
been
already
its contents
even
such,
have had transient Lucian may fits of disgustwith the world. 2 So in of the funeral many discourses (No. 1-3, 10, 11, 17,
avro?s
aX^Oeiav eiS^n.
C.
61 ;
aKyQus
tep$
r^v 4"tW Kal i*.6vy 18, 20-22, 24-28), in the MenijJ- ical eearvea-ltp /XST' aXyQelas TCL /caX" eyj/eo/cdn ; Cat"pl. C. jtwa, Zevs ^Ae7%"J/x.
7 ; cf.
Bernays, Liwian
$g. discourse
to On
on
und the
di"
46 JSjyniTtw*
other
Demo-
hand, the
nax
is
not
be
considered
360
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
token ; that
and
waste
they
he
for
visionary treasures,
their
time
useless
things ;
of his
the best
is philosopher
who,
to
conscious
a
abandons of
any
claim
the
moral
there
sceptical
of knowledge.We shall find faculty still more element this sceptical strongly developed in Favorinus, who must, therefore, be discussed of the human among the
adherents
of the
sceptic school.
The
the rhetorical schools were from semi-philosophers of them none distinguishedby any independent but investigations,
are
the
tendencies
in
of
the
period
the
duction re-
nevertheless
of
shown
them
"
namely,
and
to philosophy
the
useful
and the connection of comprehensible, philosophy with the mistrust of all philosophic systems which was spread abroad by scepticism. dius Far greater is the scientific importance of Clauand though it is primarily the art of Gralenus,2
of the Sermotvnvus
c.
especially appeared
cf. Ms
characteristics
of
as
first which Fabric. JBW. Gr. in the v. 377 sgg. HarL, revised first volume of Kiihn's edition of Galen, s. xvii-cclxv. To
Liter aria
OaUni,
in
given by
2
Bernays, I
the
42 *#0.
this
even
history
in
will
also of
refer,
All be his
information
that
respect
Galen's
can
Galen's
from
gathered concerning writings,passing over the rest literature life, almost entirely of the voluminous is to be Born him. at Perown writings, concerning
Ackermann's Hist, gamum in the
year 181
found
in
A.D.,
GALEN.
361
healing to
and
which
he he
owes
his
extraordinaryfame
how
to
CHAP.
influence,yet
also
knows
acknow-
L_
and ledge to the full the worth of philosophy,1 His fame to take his "\ occupiedhimself with it deeply enough,2 the philosophers of his century.3 He place among
a
.
.
himself
indeed
stands
nearest
to
the
Peripatetic
87 ;
Galen,
a
whose
father
had
was
self him-
lived he
A.D.
1
to the
age of
Suidas,
so
or
great architect
education,
introduced
in
and and
to
thematician, maa
however,
received
that 201
careful
had
already been
when year of medicine.
losophy; phira"v
his the
teenth seven-
calls
he
began
study
(vol. i.
Smyrna,
other from
to
and
medicine
in
places,especially
Alexandria
Galen
chief
learned
in
his
home,
the
as
while
practise his
city.
won
as a
art in
his
native betook he
year
it then the
existed ; from
the and Platonist,
pupils
of
164 he
himself
where
Ms in 168
gamum,
of
Philopator
the
Stoic,
Gaius
from
of As-
success
physician,and
to
pasius
again
but and for
returned
was soon
Percalled re-
after When
Peripatetic, and Epicurean philosopher {Cog%. an. Mori), vol. v. 41 $#.), later At a period he heard
an
Albinus
in of
Smyrna
Budemus
(ride supra,,
the
patetic, Peri-
the
and
no
second
from
time
this
337):
who
his teacher may De
connected
his of life whatever. record in the delivered discourse A mentioned reign of Pertinax is
Propr. c. 13 ; De K); he wrote Antidotis (i. 13 ; vol. xiv. 16) in the reign of Severus(2%0n#0.
by
him
(De
Libr.
vol. xix. 46
be a mere title of respect, Prtenot. ad Ej)iff. c. 4, vol. xiv. 624), he says that he had from him in regard gained more to philosophy than to medicine
ad
Pis.
c.
;*butthe greater
is lost.
ness nothing against the genuineing of this treatise),Accordaccount to one (that of the
anonymous
part
8
of
them
person
Z.
c.
by Ackermann,
JSeitr. 117-195.
z,
Gesoh.
d.
Medicin^
i.
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XITT.
Character of
much from others so but he has also taken school, that we can only designate his standpoint on the a on that of eclecticism Peripatetic whole as foundation. Galen the
is at
once
JZrlecii- eclectics
d#m,
on a
by
and
fact that
he
the
entire
Peripate-
tic "basi-s.
Theophrastus,Eudemus,
the
same
Chrysippus,
that
none
time
he
declares
of
all these
To Epicurus alone he him.2 satisfy is thoroughly antipathetic (as were the eclectics of and expressly without exception), that time almost The him.3 scepticismalso of the New opposes
schools
Academy appears to him an error, which he combats in for his part finds man, He with great decision.4 Xlis theory sufficiently of kncnvspiteof the limitation of his knowledge,
ledge. endowed sensible
1
with
means we
for the
attainment
of truth ; the
senses,
phenomena
discern
seldom,
through
and with the
almost
always
in
connection
great number
named.
c.
of
points;
names
on
are
(De Lilr.
48)
no
Zoo.
"it.
against Epicurus and his of pleasure. He doctrine of doctrine the proof. 4 the In treatise irepl the counsel on subject sought 8L$a(rKa\la$ but the (vol. i. 40 from philosophers, other Favorinus, in divisions here Gagm. an. found against as He Peoo. c, 6, vol. v, OB s$$. strife among of logic so much also the wrote within and Clitomachus, them even upon D" Libr. Propr, c. 12, p. 44. several schools, tjiathe would His chief complaint against the have fallen back upon ism Pyrrhonof the if the certainty scepticsis that they could not out establish their standpoint withsciences had not mathematical to the judgment appealing kept him from it.
with
immediate works in of others, and his of those of deciding them the capability prewritingswhich have been served, between true and false. mentions Epicurus but
3
vol. xix.
fewer
than
six
Galen,
in
presupposing
364
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP. XIII.
enquiry. He himself has composed a great number of them 2 does but what remains of logical treatises,1 not cause to deplorevery deeply the loss of the us
remainder. he with In the doctrine others declares
to
of the be
which categories,
the
to
beginningand
have
foundation
a
attempted
Stoics ; 4
reconciliation
and
the
have for him only a logical categories and and not a real importance.5 In the syllogistic apodeicticpart of logic,which are to him of most of the importance,he tries to attain the certainty geometricmethod ; 6 in regard to matter, he places
otherwise the
For
the
of. Gal. De
Zibr.
15.
4
Prantl
David
different
*"""
29)
n,
ascribes
:
him
five
gories Cate-
wpdsri
the
xiv. 582
quoted
ovcrla, irocrbv, iroibv, irp6s which TTWS does %xoj/" indeed altogether agree
division mentioned
ii. 7 ;
by
But
Alex.
8, ", 45, a
are
(Sclwl 298, b, 14
nowhere mentioned
commentators
elsewhere
(Therap. Mcih.
else
logicalwritings and
by the
Greek
(with the exception of the passage quoted infra, hardly be a mere invention;of. Pufo. Di/f.ii. 10; viii. 682. 365, 1). 5 8 He discriminates very decidedly Therap, Metlt, ii. 7; x.
145; 148;
himself his to PuZ*.
"0. ; 146 ; 156) of the oMu and the cri/^e^/c^ra ; and of the latter division into tvfyyeiaL, and 8 tad fasts ; but it can TrdQij,
Dlff.
on
Whether
written
between the y"o$ and the which category; that falls under the same category
Categoriesis not
own
Propr. 11, p.
seems me
belong to separate genera quite may ii. 9 $q. ; 622 M, ; expressions (Zibr. (Puts. JDljf. 632. What The Prantl, p. 665%, 42). meaning
be that he did
to
not
species
tetics. Peripa89
sa.
observations
the
difficult
6 Mir. This questionsthey contained. of. Met. would explain the i"iroju.vfi/j.ara the Categories mentioned 702, c. on
Propr, 11, p.
Worm,
c.
;
;
6 ; iv, 696
GALEN.
365
himself
and
on
and
l Theophrastus
CHAP.
against Chrysippus; but that he himself out forms which Theophrastushad of the five syllogistic first figure,2 formed Aristotelian to the added a
fourth of figure been
is to
_1_L
What
has
otherwise
imparted to
be
us
logic of
in
Galen, or
so
found
in
in his
so
is writings,
part
it
unimportant, and
part
may
reader
details to
Prantl's careful
Also
as
a
digest,
-5S*
t
Galen even physics and metaphysics follows Aristotle and naturalist chiefly physician
in his
andmetc
without
He
however
the
being "
entirely fettered
J
him, by J
the four
4%*^*
based
time
on
repeats
but
Aristotelian
doctrine to
of
of
causes,
increases
their number
cause
five
by the
the
of the
middle
says, which
important: 5 the knowledge of them forms, he that science the groundwork of true theology, ing far surpasses the art of healing.6 In followtraces
the
of the
creative
wisdom,
which the
has
sideration con-
formed
all
is at the
same
time
convinced
that
if here
in
the meanest
v*
ii. 2 ; B.
footAc/m/c^p.
exhaustive
v,
213.
2
investigation
Part.
'
PML
De
um
Corp.Hum.
the is
Zoo.
1; vol. iv.
8$g.
et
by
confirmed explained 7 LOG. Greek fragment of Minas the Elcrayayti passim. in his edition of and
a
360.
p,
358
333
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
*
in
a
these
reason
base
and
un-
is at
work,
in the
more
be
in
overflowingmeasure
are
so
stars, which
In
much
manner
gloriousand
inherent
in
what
not
it
more
is
does
enquire
a tendency to closely ; but his expressionsindicate the Stoic conception,accordingto which the substance is permeated by the of the world divine He is opposed, however, to the Stoic matemind.2 rialism
; for
are
he
;
3
shows he
that
the
of things qualities
not
on
bodies
likewise
contradicts
the
Stoic when
views
the the
constitution original
doctrine
of matter
and
of Plato
ancient
and physiologists,
these, especially,
one
primitive told of his objections matter.4 What we are againstthe Aristotelian discussions concerningspace, time, and motion, is unimportant.6 Galen's devia^KrerdcrQat 50/ceT vovs, for how it otherwise be heated and illuminated 86vajj.iv TWO. ^veOv^difj vovv by the sun ? a 1-irtfrdvTa, eavfiaa-r^v ry$ Quod Qualities Sint In* cxovra Trdvra ra Kara corporew. B. xlx. 468 sqq. yris ^KrerdcrQai 4 to the De Const/It. Artis Med. c. 7 comes rfpia;this vovs
ri$ 2 OVK 1
the against
theoryof
5fo"ev6vs
could
earth
"
rov
from
the
heavenly
bodies:
,"?#.; B.
i. 245
a.
sqq,
"
Ue
Me-
j" ypiva
Though sqq. the Stoics are not "oiKeiv named those combated among fft"fjuvra here,the Heracleitean doctrine
of
mentis, 1.
413
ica re
even
in the how
And of primitive aKpi""(rr"pov. matter which Galen all thing's, opposes is also theirs (De M, i. here, before human body, J*/ "opj8rf/"y 4, p. 444) ; cf. also Bftppoor' et
roa-ovry,
thereisavovs1
more,
much
then,
In
o\iyos fends
respect
to
"
GALEN.
367
tion
from
Aristotle of
more
in
respect to the
consequence,
soul but
and
its
CHAP.
-\TTPT
seems activity
even
we
here
his utterances
see
sound
so
clearly
a
how
completely he
the
attain
fixed
opinions. As to what the soul is in its essence, whether corporeal, or incorporeal he not transitoryor imperishable, only to propound no ventures definite statement, but not even which lays claim to probability; a conjecture and he omits every sound argument on the subject.1 The theory of Plato,that the soul is an immaterial
standpoint in
strife of
to body, seems him corporeal questionable; 'for how,' he asks, could insubstances be from each distinguished other ? how nature can be spread an incorporeal such a nature the body ? how be affected over can by the body, as is the case with the soul in madness, drunkenness, and similar circumstances.' 2 So far
essence,
and
can
live without
the
defi-
D"
Feet.
Form.
c.
6 ; iv.
controverted
by Aristotle
between
it is the limits
ception
sgr.; De Hipp. et. Plat. vii. 7 ; v. 653 : the soul, accordis either rb o!W ing to its ovcrla, Kal cu0"pw8e*"rai,ua afryoetSes re aM)v JJLCVao-^arov virdpxew ou"rfco", ^ tfx7?/"* [5^] r" irpurov rovri rb "r"jfta,5i o5 efj/cu afrrTjs /ucVou rfyv vp^s r"xxa, o-^/Aara
or,
'
701
tains
of time mentioned
167
con-
by
Z"; Phys. Simplicius, a] a 46, Pkys, 45, #; and 20 an ft, (SckoL 388, ; 26) ; objection against Arist. Phys. vii. 1 ; 242, a, 5 ; in Simpl. Phys. 242, ". Simpliciushere (p. 167, a} refers to the eighth book of it is Galen's Ajpodewtic, and
169
Kowwtav
Themist.
hand,
its 606
the Pneuma
substance
only
3 ; p.
Corp.
sq. ; 785
probable, therefore,
these remarks in this work.
were
viii. 127
308
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
we
L_
might be inclined to endorse the Peripatetic doctrine, accordingto which the soul is the form of lead to the view the body ; but this would certainly maintained by the Stoics and shared by many of that the soul is nothing else than the Peripatetics, and as to its of corporealsubstances, the mixture immortality there could then be no question.1 this point, to decide on and Gralen does not venture to affirm or to deny immortality little does he purpose as It is the same with the question as to He the origin of living creatures. knowledges candidly acthat he has not
this
made
up he
a
upon the
a
subject. On
of
the human
cannot
one
hand
formation power
the he
body
attribute
;
on
wisdom
to
and
which
the
irrational
soul vegetable
of the
embryo
from
the
other
hand
him obliges
further
its
we own are
that soul
soul
; if we
that
are
the
rational
builds
up
body, we
most
confronted
with
the
fact that
stitution imperfectly acquainted with its natural conto assume ; the only remaining alternative, with many that the world-soul forms the Platonists, bodies of living to him almost impious, seems creatures, since we ought not to involve that divine base occupations.3 Gralen declares soul in such himself more for the Platonic doctrine of decidedly
c.
3 ;
4;
rb
OVK
l"mj/ 6 Iv
fXo"twnbwrtat.
c.
*y" 5*
and
GALEN.
369
soul
and
their with
abodes,1which
the
he
______
CHAP.
corresponding doctrine of Aristotle ; 2 his uncertaintyin regardto the nature of the soul necessarily, however, casts doubt also upon this theory. Nor will our sopher philodecide, he says, whether plantshave souls,3 but in other places he declares himself decidedlyHis
for the Stoic
doubt
combines
con-
distinction
between
the
f"i"^ and
the
t^^or
tlieoretlcctJ, and out
"bvori$*^
We tion and
we
surprisedat the
these attributes
to
vacilla"f
definitions when
hear what
Galen
theoretical
in general. The the enquiries question concerning not it had a beginor unity of the world, whether ning, and the like, he thinks worthless for the are
practical philosophers ; of
and
the
existence
we
of the
must
Gods
the
to
we
or
guidance of
convince
Providence
indeed of the
try
Gods
a
ourselves,but
the
:
nature
do not
not
can
requireto know
have
no
whether
on our
they have
conduct;
body
a
influence of
in
moral
and
political point
the world
was
view
it is also indifferent
whether
or
formed
by
deity
by
ledged working cause, if only it be acknowblindly that it is disposed according to purpose and
the this nine treatise De
by Galen,
2, and
2
De
Hijjp.et Plat.
vi.
et Ptatonis "K$)jr"0cra,tis
Placitis,
with
1. c,
which
no
subjectin
books
In
Hypgoor.
fewer
wearisome
diffusiveness,
Qu.
10 ; xv. ECumor.
3
not
one
of
De Substaait. Faoult. Nat. c. 1 ; B. iv. 757 s$. ; cf in SZppode JEJpidem. Lilr. cratis vi. ; Sect. v. 5 ; xviil ", 250.
.
distinct
substances, is asserted
B B
De
3tt)
ECLECTICISM.
CHAP,
which of the
he
has
so
fully
of
soul,is only
to
the
while
the nature
of the
only necessary
to
to theoretic
nor
philosophy, and
We
neither
no
medicine
ethics.2 that
a
certainlyrequire
measures
further the
evidence
value of
philosopher who
enquiries so
demonstrated uncertain
scientific
advance shall
beyond
an
eclecticism.
But
greatly deceive
him
ourselves
if
we
therefore
expect from
numerous
dent indepen-
ethical
on
enquiries. Galen's
are we
writings
exception of
utterances
this
4
subject3
but
all
lost, with
the
Ms
ethical
two
;
one
what
learn from
occasional
in
"but two
P*ace
or
ethical
contains opinions,
merely echoes
find
of older doctrines.
of
not
Thus
very
we
sometimes
the
division Peripatetic
external doctrine
;
5
important,
lut prove himto have
goods
,
into
and
in
four
another
connection
of the
l^otio fundamental
also in
virtues,6 and
all virtue virtue
again the
consists
is
a
Aristotelian
the
or
propositionthat
^Q
1
in
mean.7
some-
question whether
De
v.
2
science
Hippoer.
et Plat.
ix. 6 ; B.
ro
In
Hippoor.
xvi.
do
$fo(m,0r. i.
B.
779
De De De
13, end;
Nat. 13 ; 17. otfroj/colrb
104:
"o"irep ykp
iv. 764.
3 4
Propr.
animi torum
5 8
morMs.
De
awimi
pecca-
$"a)
refer
rov
^crov.
indeed
These
words
cor-
directly to
application.
universal
sg.
v.
594.
INDEX.
CADEMICS tury
of the B.C., first 75
of sQq.
the
first
cen-
Alexander
of
Aphrodisias,
n.,
jOL
"
306,
A.D., 344 Commentator
318 and
called
centuries
Second
s"M-
319;
the New and the times in of his and the 81
of,
and trines doctrine docand
Academy,
80
"
Old,
321
various
Philo,
New,
of,
of
;
in tends
Imperial
tolbelief
increasingly
revelation, 34,
355
on
Particular,
his doctrine 326 relation
329
"by,
soul and and 331
324 and
vovs,
eclecticism
the,
Achaicus,
commentary
313
body,
327; world,
tne
"
the of
categories,
Adrastus of
G-ocl
the
Aphrodisias,
n.
a taries commen-
patetic, Peri-
Providence,
305,
on
his
last
important
of
Peripatetic,
patetic, Peri-
Aristotle,
the
308
310
sq.
331
views JSlius
on
universe,
Boman
Alexander of Alexander
Damascus,
??..
Stilo,
L,,
11
disciple
his
306,
of
Pansetius,
JEmilius Greek
Seleucia,
Platonist,
?".
Paulus,
instructors,
22
a
gave
8
sons
called
Peloplaton,
of of
3 ;
335,
New
Ammonius,
teacher
the
Academy,
102,
2 ;
Plutarch,
n.
disciple
341,
a
of
Oarneades, the,
1
n.
334,
Anatolius of
336,
of
theories 133
;
concerning5
;
Alexandria,
about himself
Bishop
A.B., the
2
342, 294,
335
;
Laodicea
270,
in
Agathobulus,
Albinus,
a
Cynic,
his
;
Platonist,
346
;
his
ec-
philosophy,
Andronicus the 113 115 116 of
332,
clecticism,
on
ries commentahis
;
Rhodes,
school work from
on
head in
of
Plato,
337
Peripatetic
; ; ;
Athens, by,
of
philosophy,
347
;
347
Aristotle's
edited
concerningworld,
the the
Matter,
world347the
diverged
but
was
Aristotle,
the 117 whole
a
the
Deity,
demons,
;
the
soul,
349 later
virtues,
among
genuine
Animal
Peripatetic, food,
to of
to
his
importance
350
be
avoided,
225
;
Platonists,
a
Musonius,
Sextius
a
Alexander,
first
Peripatetic
B.C.,
of 1
the Annseus
against,
Stoic, 196,
169
186
n.
century
of of
124,
a
Serenus,
Alexander
instructor
-"32gse,
Nero,
Peripatetic,
304,
2
Anthropology,
219
Oicero's,
neca's, Se-
374:
ANT
INDEX.
ATH
Antibius, 200, n. Antidotus, instructor of Antipater of Sidon, 54, n. of Ascalon, disciple of Antiochus called the founder of the Philo,
fifth
from of
the
Academy
2 ; 121
a
to
the
Peripatetics,105,
Messene, 314;
Aristocles
tetic, Peripaof
fragments
his
truth, 88
to
; dicta
of the
;
not
he self
discarded, 89
that all
are
scepticism
90
;
-contradictory,
the tually vircalled three ledge, know-
great historical work preserved by Busebius, 315 ; his admiration for Plato, 315 ; his conception of Reason, human and divine,
317
; was
a
maintains of in
precursor
a
of
Neo-
schools
philosophy
9t
a
Platonism,
Aristocles of
318
agreement,
pure
,*
Pcrganms,
n. a
tetic, Peripa-
by
Cicero
Stoic, 92;
divides
305, Aristodemus,
Aristodemus,
75,
304 91
7i.
teacher
93 ; his ethics, 95 ; doctrines of life according to 96 ; the highest good, 96 ; virtue and happiness,97; his
Aristotle, commentaries
sqg.
;
nature,
assertion
positionin regard to the Stoics and school Peripatetics, 98: of, 99 ; other disciples of, 1 00 Antiochus the Cilician, a Cynic,
294,
n.
with Plato, by Antiochus, by Cicero, 163 ; by Severus and Albinus, 346, 347 and Aristus, brother of successor
Antiochus
at
in the 1
Hew
Academy
Athens, 100,
Antipater of Sidon, poet and philosopher,54, n. Antipater of Tyre, 71, n, Apollas of Sardis,of the school of Antiochus, 100, n. Apollodorus of Athens, leader of
the Stoic school
"5
Arius
Didymus of
Alexandria, the
a
Meteorology,
Peripatetic, 307,
n.
in
the
first
Apollodorus
with
Asclepiades,
name,
two
n.
294,
Cynics 301, 3
of
that
Asclepiodotus,a Stoic,71, n. ple Asclepiodotus of Nicaea, a disciof Paniotius,53, n. Aspaaius, a Peripatetic, 305, n. ;
his
Stoic, 53,
n.
commentaries
son
on
Aristotle,
n.
308
Athenodoraa,
Athenodorus, 71, n.
of
Saudon, 72,
surnamed
Cordylio,
of the
treatise
irepl
Athenodoraa the Bhodian, 124, 1 Athens visited 13 ; by Eomans, proposal by Gellius to the philo-
INDEX.
ATH CBA
375
| Cicero,
his
writings
14 ;
on
on
the
philosophy
established
in,
by
25 ; his
Marcus Aurelius, 193 of Seneca, 195 Attalus, teacher Atticus, his zeal for the purity of Academic doctrines, 341 ; the nition opposition to Aristotle's defiHomonyms, concerning
philosophicstudies, philosophicalworks,
151
scepticism,149,
; Cicero
152,
157;
opinions,154 theological
342, 343
Atomistic
s%. 167 ; 156 of philosophy, his view ; his trine 158 ; doctheory of knowledge, of innate moral his doctrine
theory
of
31 Asclepiades,
"pALBTJS, L.
Jj
Basilides, 54,
Basilides Boethus
of of
of a moral sense, 161 ; of truth, criterion his ; the immortality of the soul, on dialectics and physics, 161,170; 160 162
; his
Scythopolis,198,
n.
criticism
of
ism, Epicurean-
162
11.7 ; his
the
Peripatetic,
; his the of
discipleof Andronicus,
commentaries
divergences
from
uncertainty
166; in, 162
168
; ;
and
of
nature
G-od
the immortality
soul, 120
nature
Providence,
;
on
anthropology,
Cicero
world, 37,
M.,
n.
a
Brutus,
freewill, 171 ; sentative repreof eclecticism, 157, 171 Cinna, Catulus, a Stoic, instructor of Marcus Aurelius, 198, n. Claranus, a Stoic, 196, n.
Claudius
100,
of
Sparta,
n.
196,
nALLIOLBS,
75,
;
\J
his his
predilection
influence
at
Carneades, the Cynic, 291, 2 end Cato, Seneca's opinion of, 230 the Elder, 15, 1 Cato Cato the Younger, 74, n. Celsus, a Platonist in the time Aurelius, 336, n. Marcus Censorinus, 336, n.
Chseremon, Hadrian,
teacher
189
on
tor Stoic,instrucMaximus, Aurelius, 198, n. of Marcus cus Claudius Severus, teacher of MarAurelius, 306, n. Clitomachus, 5.
Claudius
Commentators
Criof
Khodes,
of
"
Cornutus,
Annasus,
Stoic,
; 198
of Nero, 195, 1
of
banished by Nero, 196, n. sg. disin 76 B.C., ciple Gotta, 0., consul
and adherent of
Chairs, institution
public, by
100,
n.
Hiilo,
Chrysippus,
127 K(J"rjuou,
the
treatise
3
Crassitius, Lucius,
member
of the
Chytron,
Cynic, 301,
Sextii, 181
376
OBA
INDJEX.
ECL
TreplKdcrjuov,
full of
265
;
gods
Cratippus,
first the
Peripatetic
accuser n.
a
of
the
(Epictetus),
349
Albinus
ber mem-
Crescens,
Cynic,
of Justin
102,
Stoic, 196,
n.
Destiny, submission
to, man's
284
of
the
duty, (Marcus
in
the
second
century
n.
Dio, 100,
Dio of
??,;
121,
Cronins,
the
era,
Platonist, 336,
revival
Cynicism,
289
of,
of
soon
after
be
beginning
the
Christian
Chrysostom, 353 ; Ms notion to philosophy the endeavour a righteous man, 354; approximatio of Stoicism, 355 ;
next to
Plato
Demosthenes
; Ms
his-
Cynics,
"
the, of the
Imperial
era,
pattern
;
of
style,356
general
tator, commen-
288, 290
mentioned
,
last traces
Diodorus,
(Marcus
n.
53,
Pangetius, 53, n. Diogenes of Tarsus, an Epicurean, of a Demetrius, Cynic, friend 28,2 moral Seneca, 291 ; Ms ciples, Diogenianus, a Peripatetic,307, n. prinfor 293 ; Ms contempt Diognetus, 198, n. knowledge, 293 Dionysius of Cyrcne, a geometrician, Demetrius, an Epicurean, 28 53, n, Demetrius, a Platonist, 335, n. Dionysius, Stoic of the first century Demetrius Chytras, a Cynic, A.B., 196, n. 301, 3 Dionysius, Stoic philosopherof the of Byzantium, Demetrius patetic, Perifirst century B.C., 71, w. a 307, n. Diotimus, of the school of Panscthe Bithynian, a Stoic, Demetrius tius, 54, n. 53, n. Diphilus, a Stoic, 53, n. Divine Democritus, a Platonist, 336, n. assistance to how man, a understood Demonax, Cynic, 294, n. ; his by Seneca, 243 eclecticism, 297 ; his efforts to
liberate
297
men
from
things
from the
"E1CLECTICISM,origmandgrowfcli
JD
racter of, in Greek philosophy ; chaof, 17; presupposes an individual criterion of truth, the philoand 18; eclecticism sophy of revelation, 20; scop-
; abstained
and sacrifices,
298
; his
ready
wit
mysteries, and
INDEX.
ECL GAL
377
ticism,
among
the 189
21 ; contained the
germs 24 246
of
l^eo-Platonism,23
Stoics,
31
; eclecticism
Epicureans,
$#., 75
sg. ;
"#., $g., 335 Peripatetics, 112 sq., s#. ; the 304 ; in Cicero, 146 ; in Seneca, tics 224, 225 ; of Galen, 362 ; Eclec; the
Academics,
108 ; of Cicero, 163; of Yarro,. 173; of the Sextii, 185; of Seneca, 226 ; of Musonius, 251 ; of Epictetus, 268 sg. ; of Marcus Aurelius, 286 ; of Galen, 370 Eubulus, a Platonist, 336, n. Euclides, a Platonist, 336, n. a Eudemus, 306, n, Peripatetic, Eudorus of
belonging to no particular school, 351 Eclectic School, the, 111 Egnatius, Celer P., a Stoic, 197 his Ennius, acquaintance with philosophy, Epictetus, 197, n. ; date
7
Alexandria,
; his
his of
Plathe
tonism,
103
digest
his of the
Categories, 104;
104
pedia, Encycloyounger
view
; Demo-
Greek
sonal perception history of, ; his conof philosophy, 258 ; trines, doc257 259 sg. ;
men are
and
external, Seneca's
;
of,
Epictetus
on,
on,
270
297
; Marcus
Aurelius
to
be
on,
284
made rather
philosophers in behaviour
than of
opinions,
260
; his
logic and dialectic, 261 ; natural philosophy, 262 ; religiousview of the world, 263 ; belief in the perfection of the
opinion world,
265
;
to ; of
popular,50
244
; of
Cicero,169
Seneca,
265
; of Marcus of ;
a
263
opinion
;
of the
lar popu-
Fannius, C.,
Fatalism
religion,264
of
the
266
soothsaying, ; immortality
Pansetius, 55,
of the
innate
dence principles,268 ; man's indepenof things external, 269 ; to submission duty of absolute of inclination 271 destiny, ; his to 272 cynicism, Epictetus ; mild by Ms cynicism modified disposition, 274; his love of
mankind,
12 275 the the 26 ;
Stoics
241 ; Epictetus, 274 ; Marcus Aurelius, 286 Freewill, Cicero's treatise on, 171 ;. Seneca 231; Epictetus on, on,
267
Epicureanism, Epicureans,
to
later,at Borne,
first two Cicero
turies cen-
in
B.C., relation
of the later
on
UT
Epicurus,
averse
the,
Galen
25, 162
"
the,
Equality
Ethics of
of
men
physician, 368
is
philosophy Peripatetic basis,362 ; theory of knowledge, 363 ; high opinion of logic,363 s%. ; his physics and metaphysics,,,
eclecticism
on a
; his
-378
GAL
INDEX.
LAM
soul
Herminus,
his 312
commentaries
a
of his
Herminus,
Hermodorus
Stoic,200, n.
the
ethical
writings,most
of
lost,370
'Gellius the
his proposal proconsul, i n philosophers Athens, 16 Oeorgius of Lacedsemon, 53, n. God, nature of,according to Boe-
thus, 36; Cicero, 160, 167; 263 ; Seneca, 213 8$. Epictetus,
,
by by ;
Au-
Marcus
by Marcus
Galen,
Gods,
see
161, 170
on,
of Roman
character
view of, 223 ; Epictetus Aurelius on, 283 on, 266 ; Marcus o f Iphicles, Epirus,a Cynic, 301, 3
Seneca's
epoch of, 23
HAPPINESS,
his
sought in ourselves (Seneca), 236 ; (Epictetus)270; (Marcus Au282, 284 relius) Harpocrationof Argos, a Platonist,
to
be
77"INSHIP
of mankind,
to God
Seneca,
A
"
239 of
man
336,
n.
commentaries
on
Plato,339
of the Hecato, of Rhodes, member of school Pansetius,53, ?*.,65 Hegesianax,a Cynic, 295, n. 322, 1 Heliodorus, a Peripatetic, Heliodorus of Prusa, 115, 5 Helvidius Priscus, a Stoic, put to death by Vespasian, 197, n.
266 ; (Epictetus), (Marcus Aurelius) 283 ; (Dio Chrysostom) 350 Knowledge of God, innate in man 160, 161 ; (Dio Ghryso(Cicero),
stom),
356
temporary Stoic, 52 ; con52 Pansetius, a Stoic, Heraclitus, 195, 1 of Tyre,member of the Heraclitus, on the theory and faculty New Galen's theory of, 362 n. 99, of,347; Academy, 8 Heraclius,a Cynic, 301, T AMPEIAS, broHeras, a Cynic in the reign of a Peripatetic, JU of ther n 294, Vespasian, Plutarch,305, n.
Heraclides, the
of
; Philo's, 79, 83; Cicero's, 158; Cicero's doctrine of innate, 159; Antiochus' theory of, 97 : proper the universal, Alexander of, object binus of Aphrodisias, 324; Al-
380
NES
INDEX.
PHI
Nestor
of
Tarsus, the
2
Academic,
Nestor
the 125
; distinct from
the treatise, its origin, K.6"rju.ov, ; Ohrysippus on, 127 ; Posinot of the
donius
n.
the
nature
Nicolaus
affinity Peripateticand
; his
the with
author
;
;
in date than of
it, 137;
its
Posidonius,
the
clusively ex-
devoted
of
to
G-adara,
of
Cynic
on
"
taries commen-
'reign
Hadrian,
the
Aristotle, 194
after
of the firstcenturies
his
treatise
against
Christ,
304 s$.
PeripateticSchool
half
from
the second
A.D.
of,
in
Greek
of the
third
century
in that
gradually merged
of the
Orion,
282
of
Rhodes,
Neo-Platonists, 332 Persius, Flaccus A., a Stoic, iw. 197, Petronius, Arislocrates, of Magnesia, a Stoic, 196, n. Phanias, a Stoic, 71, w. Philo,of Larissa,at Eomc, 88 B.C.,
12 ;
"
47 ; work on duty, 48 ; ethics, intheology,49 : his allegorical of terpretation myths, 50; rejection of soothsaying,58 ; relation 5 1 ; contemporaries to the Stoics, and of, 52 ; school of, disciples
the
founder
of
the
'Fourth
Academy,'
84;
pupils
Hadrian,
Rome,
398, n.
53 st{. Seneca, 245 ; and Pancratius, a Cynic, 294, n. of the Fabianus, member Papirius, school of the Sextii,181 of Tarsus, discipleof Paramonus Pansetius,53, 2 Paulus, the Prefect, a Peripatetic,
Philosophers banished
7
"
from
sects
of, enumerated
by Varro,
of, tend
to estimates
173
; Koman
306,
%.
Pausanias
of
Pontus, discipleof
n.
Panastius,53,
Peregrinus,
Lucian's
Cynic,
294,
n.
of description
him,
"
of,
regarded
in
INDEX.
PHI SBL
381
190
chairs
191
of,
;
established relation
by
and
Rhetoric,
Hadrian,
; theoretical
practical, 205
rhetoric, 352
of,
to
period,
of, 352
;
352
; numerous
schools of
appointment
public
of,
on
Physics,
of, 210
"v"ns
Seneca's
high
from
estimation
effect
14
distinguished
47
;
^vx$j by
369
Pansetius,
by Galen,
philosophy, disciples of
estimate students
11
Pan^etius,
15
Piso, 55, n. Piso, M., a disciple of Antiochus, 101, n. of, 337 Plato, commentators of Ehodes, 53, n. Plato
55,
Roman
n.
of of
philosophy,
Greek
Roman
sophy, philo-
Rome,
Platonism,
Platonists
A.D., 337 334
revival of the
by Philo,
first
82
centuries
Greek philosophy at, 6; from, 7 ; philosophers banished Carneades at, 9; Greek sophy philo12
Plutarch,
his commentary
on
Plato,
Panaetius
at, 9
a
a
; Philodemus
Syro, the
first
tury cen-
Polyzelus, Polyzehis,
Posidonius
Cynic, 295,
at
n.
Epicureans
n.
at, in the
Peripatetic,
Rome
at
295
B.C., 13
the
ning begin-
at, in 88
Rubellius death
; Philo B.C., 12
Platonist
"
Panaatius,
relation love of
doctrines
59
and
sq, ;
to
Stoicism,
and
rhetoric
erudition,
pology, 62 ; natural science, 62 ; anthroof the soul, 64 ; doctrine 64 sg. ; ethics, 65 ; psychology, of author the not ire pi 68 ; 128 K^fffJiOV,
Plautus, a Stoic put to by Nero, 197, n. Rusticus Junius, Stoic instructor of Marcus Aurelius, 198, n. Rutilius Rufus, Q., Roman disciple of Panratius, 55, n. Platonist, 8AKKAS, Sallustius, Cynic
a
336,
n.
ascetic
of
in the
Potamo
of
111
Alexandria,
109 s$. ;
302, 3
truth,
ciple disGreek
Premigenes
306,
of
n.
Mytilene,
tetic, Peripan.
on
Proclinus,
Platonist, 336,
a
philosophy,
eclecticism,
Protagoras,
Providence,
Marcus
Stoic, 74,
on,
n.
Cicero's
belief 285
in, 168";
of
according
Seneca,
225
Antiochus,
90 ;
Aurelius
a
Ptolemy,
Ptolemy,
name,
two
Peripatetic,317, n. Epicureans of
that
28, 2
a
Schools
to
Publius,
n.
Pansetius, 54,
Self
-
n.
examination,
238
necessity
of
(Seneca),
"DBLIG-ION,
Seneca's
conception
Philo,
382
SEN
INDEX.
STO
n.
ethics, 204
; his
tion concep-
philosophy, theoretical and practical 205 s#. ; contempt for merely theoretical inquiries, of logic,208 ; his high his view of physics, 210 ; his estimation meteorology, 211 ; physical and doci rines, 212 ;nature theological ism of G-od,according to, 213 ; Stoicin, 215
world,
219 217
; ; nature ;
Sereniaxms, a Cynic, 301, 3 Severus, a Platonist, 336, n. ; his the Timceus, 339 ; on commentary
his the from
eclecticism, 345
soul, 345
; treatise
on
Platonism,
of
-
sq. ; 348
deviations
Sextii, school
the, advocated
nounced re-
daily
self
examination,
theories
of
the
his of the
anthropology,
ing soul, accordof
;
;
food, 186 ; its and doctrines, 183 s^. ; character of Stoicism, 187 was a branch Sextius, Q., his school, 180 ; question
as
animal
to
his
authorship of the
2 ; relation ; succeeded
and
human for
passions frailty of
book
of
Sentences, 182,
222 222
;
as
by his
a
son,
181 Sextus
his
of
of
n.
Chgeronea,
Platonist,
335,
224
on
; Stoicism external
evil, 229
ethics
;
n.
of, 226
his
"
opinion
the
about
Cato, 230
man,
on
wise
231
his
;
of
n. n.
of
a
rhetoric
"
of, 234
of his time, 235 in
selves, our-
Sotion,
the
influence bids
us
"
find
236
;
happiness
238
necessity of
self-
examination,
of
mankind,
of
kind, man-
; view
of
marriage,
Sextii, 181; of Seneca, 181 instructor of the, according to Soul, nature Asclepiades, SO ; Antiochus, 95 ; Alexander of Aphrodisias, 326 ; 170 Cicero, Posidonius, 64 ; ; Seneca, 219 ; Marcus Aurelius,
283
;
of
on
the 241
forgiveness of
j view
ries, inju;
the, an
;
emanation
from
the
of
suicide, 243
Deity, 176
defended
342
of the
assistance
to man,
given by
243 242
; ; his
j
on
the
Deity
the
ception conpared com-
equality
of
men,
Galen, 367
n.
of
religion,244
Pantetius, 245
their
with
Naples,called
Borne, 9 later, 34
by Oicero
1
Peripatfftioua, 122,
at
; of
Stoicism
chus, 89
; o"
Cicero, 158
Stoics, the
the first
INDEX.
STO
ZEN
383
century Sextius,
centuries
B.C., 71 $$. ; the, and 186 ; the, in the first A.D., 189 ; criticism Cicero, 164 ; their
to
Tubero, Q. JElius,
of
Roman
n.
disciple
Pansetius, 55,
a n.
of
striction re-
the, by
ethics, 194
; under
TTARRO, V 100,
friend of
of Antiochus, disciple
; a Roman
eclectic
:
Hadrian,
later sq.
a
of
Cicero, 171
his view
of the
to
sects
Stoic, Stoic,
ethics
the
Stratocles
%.
of
Rhodes,
Strato, the
"07,
Alexandrian
n.
dition highest good, 174; virtue a conof happiness, 174; hispsychology and theology, 176 ;" his opinion of image worship,. and theo178 ; of State religion logy,
Suicide, Seneca's
the
view
of,243
178
Yespasian,
his
measures
1 ; to rhetoricians, 191, 3
190, philosophers,
Roman
n.
against payments-
Vigellms, M.,
CALVISIUS BERY-
discipleof
a
Pangetius, 55,
Virginias Rufus,
307,
Virtue
to
n.
Peripatetic,,
TUS,
and
knowledge, according
the
Antiochus
a
Academic,
of
88,
n\
ciple dis-
96
Virtue,
174
*
Theodotus, a Platonist, 336, n. Theomnestus, a Cynic, 295, n. New demy, Acaof the Theomnestus, 102, 2
Theo
Theo
n.
(Varro) ; 238
Musonius
tion
to
condition
of Alexandria,
of
; his
73,
n.
Smyrna,
the
Stoics,,
339
Theopompus,
iThrasea friend
of the
n.
school
1
of An-
tiochus, 100,
theories of the (Treatise 134 irepl /c"fff"iou), ; (Seneca),217 ;; (Marcus Aurelius), 281 ; (Attiof cus), 342 ; final conflagration
97,
n,
Cynic, 295
totle's Aris-
.A. Xenarchns,
controverted
124
102,2
of Cnidus, 54, n. Truth, criterion of, according to Antiochus, 88; according to Potamo, 111 ; Cicero, 153, 156, 161 ^ according to Galen, 363 Ximocles F7ENOof
IJ
Physics,
SIdon,27 of Tarsus, successor Chrysippus, 34; opinion as to the destruction of the world, 34
Zeno of
SpQttiswoode"
Square, London.
TJBJ"
ENGLISH WORK OF
TRANSLATION ON THE
PHILOSOPHY
TJfJS
GRJ"JSJKS.
The
PBE-SOCRAT1C
Greek
SCHOOLS.
from, Translated the Earliest
Being
Period 3?. SARAH
a to
History
the Time
2
of
of vols.
Philosophy
80s.
SOCBATES,
crown
by
ALMSYNB.
8vo,
HISTOBY
price
10*.
of
ECLECTICISM
by
SARAH
in
F.
G-BEEK
AL"EIYNKJ.
SOPHY. PHILOCrown
8vo.
Translated 6d.
SOCBATES
by
Queen's
and
O. J.
the
BEICHEI,,
SOCBATIO
M.A. Second Author. B.C.B.
SCHOOLS.
sometime' Edition^ Crown
8vo.
10*.
Oollecre,
Oxford.
enlarged
Qd.
materials
supplied
by
the
PLATO
.SASUH
and
F.
tlie
AI^BYNB,
Balliol
OLBEB
and
ACADEMY.
AI-VBKII^'O-OODWIIN-,
Oxford.
Crown Bvo.
Translated
B.A.
18*.
by
and
Follow
Lecturer,
College,
The
STOICS,
by Queen's
O.
EPICUREANS,
J.
and
M.A. Second
B.O.Xi.
SCEPTICS.
sometime
lated TransScholar
revised. of
K.BICHCBL,
Oxford.
College,
8vo.
15*.
Edition,
thoroughly
Gr^wn ABISTOTI.E
Translated Crown
and
by
8vo. volume of Dr. announced ZEiLiiBR's B. F.
the
C.
ELDEB
COSTBLLOE,
will
on
PEBIPATETICS.
Balliol
College,
the of
Oxford.
lation TransGreeks.
tXnjK"r"ptx,ra,tion,
above Work
***
The
complete
English
tlio
the
FhiloBOphy
London,
LOJSTG-MAKS
"
CO*