TRANSLATOR'S

THIS

is

Philosophic

tf

edition

The

the

been

Stoics,

has

of

the

second

first

by

been

from

made

German

Dr.

Seirfeniber

of

section

Reichel.

1883.

volume,

The

third

the

work.

14

the

has

Sceptics,

and

Dr.

Theil,

Dritter

S.

CLIFTON

of

section

Gbriechen,

Epicureans,

translated

translation

the

der

Abtheilung/

concerning1

already

of

translation

Zeller's

Erste

PREFACE.

present

and

latest

Errata.

83,

Page

line

15
:

26

95,

belonged

for

belongs

read

fundamental

for

impulse

impulse

read

"

"

116,

their

for

read

its

:
"

"

162,

19
:

"

read

for

for

effects

we

"

205,

31

affect

read

:
"

"

206,

enquires

for

read

asks

:
9,

"

207,

substitute

semicolon

:
"

for

'doctrine,'

after

comma^

"

210,

substitute

13

note

:
"

of

interrogation

for

after

comma

"

'ourselves.'

294,

under

for

read

in

:
"

"

357,

lines

and

for

that

universal,

which

claims

he

for

all
men

as

"

their

inborn

conviction

universal

that

read

viction
con-

which

he

claims

for

innate

all
men

as

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER

I.
PAGE

ORIGIN

CHAKACTEK

AND

ECLECTICISM

OF

Gradual

of

causes

this,

philosophy

of

sg.

the

philosophy,

scepticism,

21

the

INT

BEFORE

THE

Relation

of

the

of

ades

later

29

STOICS

Successors

of

Character
43

sff.

Panaetius,

III.

century

34.

Boethus,

philosophy,
47.

His
before

Pansetius,

35.
Deviations

42.

Chrisfe,

H^s
64.

anthropology,
7O

39.
ism,
Stoic-

from
and

Contemporaries
56.

34:

POSIDONIUS

PAN^ETIUS,

Posidonius,

52.
50.

first

his

Ethics,

Aeclepi-

24.

Epicurus,

sq.

Ohrysippus,
of

24

ASCLEPIADES

to

BOETHUS,

CENTURIES

FIRST

CHAPTER

THE

the

22

EPICUREANS

Epicureans

Bithynia,

of

germs

II.

AND

THE

that

character

Neo-Platonism,

SECOND

CHRIST

Greek

of

and

Principle

CHAPTEB,

ECLECTICISM

of

Reaction

6.

of

and

diffusion

Contained

17.
;

Romans,
14.

Internal

philosophy:

causes

philosophy,

upon

eclectic

later

schools

External

among-

diffusion
of

the

of

blending

disciples

philosophic
Other

Stoics

of
dencies,
ten-

of

the

vi

CONTENTS.

IV.

CHAPTER

PAGE

CENTURY

of

Pbilo

Larissa,

.75

CHRIST

BEFORE

His

75.

FIRST

THE

IN

PHILOSOPHERS

ACADEMIC

THE

Modification

practical bias, 77.

the
79.
Academy,

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

and

Physics

Antiochus,
Potamo,

94.

metaphysics,
99.
Eudoras,

Ethics,
Arms

103.

SCHOOL

PERIPATETIC

Siclon, 117.
and

Xenarchus,

theories

various

treatise,
Treatise

132.
on

THE

IN

of

The

121

s%.

to

its

origin,

Origin

and

others,
as

and

virtues

.112

date

vices,

113.

Boethus

Cratippus, Nicolaus,
treatise
irepl/cdo-yuou
;
125.
of

of

Nature

composition,

the
138.

145

VI.

CHAPTER
CICERO

Rhodes,

Staseas,

Aristo,

CENTURY

FIRST

CHRIST

Andronicus

Commentators:
of

106.

Didymus,

V.

BEFORE

The

of

109

CHAPTER
THE

School

95.

VARRO

.146

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

Cicero,

146.

His

CHAPTER,
THE

History

of

the

school,

standpoint, 183

SCHOOL

80.

OF

Its

THE

SEXT1I

philosophic character

.180

and

CONTENTS.

Tii

CHAPTER

VIII.
PAGE

CENTURIES

FIRST

THE

SCHOOL

AFTER

OF

CHRIST

STOICS

THE

THE

"

SENECA

"

.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.
third

the

to

of

Uselessness

Seneca,

problem of philosophy, 205.

theoretic
Opinion
inquiries,206.

merely

209.

Physics,

dialectic, 207.

of

199.

Cornutus,

SQ.

of the

conception

His

202.

194

century,

and

Metaphysical

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

doctrines,

moral

external, 236.

of

Love

235.

of

Independence

mankind,

things

Religious

239.

perament,
tem-

242

CHAPTER

CONTINUED

STOICS

THE

MARCUS

His

246.

Musonius,

and

Epictetus
philosophy, 258.

destiny

and
to

mankind,

the

of

practical

opinions
order

; flux of

of the

Ethics, 284.
to the

of

view
all

world,

Withdrawal

will of God,

285.

universe,

philosophy,
sgr*

Aurelius

things, 279

280

Man,

Gentleness

272.
Marcus

275.

; the

Kinship
into

ethics,
end

knowledge,

external

the

His

248.

of

Practical

268.

things
of

course

Cynicism,

274,

246
.

256.

value

world,

the

Independence

268.

His

Arrian,

Inferior

of

EPICTETUS,

AURELIUS

-practical standpoint,

255.

Religious view

MTTSONIUS,

266.

260.

Ethics,

resignation to
270

and

sq.
love

Antoninus,

277.

of

His

clination
In-

of
276.

theoretic

Deity, Providence,
of

man

self, 284.

I^ove of mankind,

to

God,

283.

Eesignation
286

CONTENTS.

viii

X.

CHAPTEB

PAGE

Revival

of

Cynicism,
291.

grinus,

OF

CYNICS

THE

Later

299.

Cynics,

PERIPATETICS

CHRIST

of

Commentators

second

Aristotle's

works

century,

The

Achaicus,

and

Particular
The

324.

Extinction

and

soul
of

the

the

Universal,
God

324.

vovs,

Aristocles

PLATONIC

Platonists

of

writings,
"by

Taurus

this
.

and

334.

Dio

world,

329.

340.

BELONG

CENTURIES

ERA

Commentators
of

alien

of

334
.

Platonic

doctrines

Eclecticism

CHAPTER
WHO

FIRST

CHRISTIAN

Introduction

Atticus,

THE

Theo^ Nigrinus, Severus, Albinus,

ECLECTICS

Matter,

XII.
IN

THE

period,

337.

and

the

322.

them,

Peripatetic School, 332

SCHOOL

AFTER

on

of

Apologies

318.

Form
and

CHAPTEB
THE

304%

Aspasius, Adrastus,

306.

Sosig-enes,
Alexander
314.
of Aphrodisias,
Messene,
for Aristotle's writings and
commentaries

Herminus,

.304

first and

the

of

CENTURIES

FIRST

THE

OF

Peripatetic school

Pere-

XI.

AFTER

The

metrius,
De-

sq.

301

CHAPTER
THE

296.

Bemonax,

294.

(Enomaus,

290

adherents,

Its

289.

.288

ERA

IMPERIAL

THE

opposed
exemplified, in

344

XIII.
TO

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

ORIGIN

of

beginning

of

the

of

course

fected

itself

three

schools

each

striving

merely

philosophy

mental

the

third

and

three

principal branches.

in

its

hitherto

had

itself

cannot

school

and

in

the

immediate

which

is

peculiar

to

they

see

their

opponents

their

truth

have

not

same

zeal, and

later

sought

their

therefore

the

on

peculiar
have
B

not

^f^s.
totetiau

things

that

from

dred
kin-

this

ally
mutu-

the

of

from

with

grasped

fervour

contrary,

element

Of the

defensive

thought

deviations

@m.

^ald.

towards

weight
of

mode

only

members,
this

in

excessive

side,

founders

successors,

original enquiry, usually lay

that

or

in

first

per-

by

and

sprung

continue

in

purity, and

of

nature

The

position.

their

its

others,

have

long

very

in

CHAP.

These

side

aggressive

an

which

tendencies,

exclusive

the

towards

it lies

centuries,

existed

maintain

to

had,

period

second

the

about

appeared

post- Aristotelian

But

soil,

which

the

adopting

attitude.

ECLECTICISM.

OF

previous philosophy,

the

of

CHARACTER

AND

form

THAT

I.

it

of this.

upon
;

in

this
who
the
with

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

"

the

rigidityand

same

and

subordinate

akin,and

easily
which

statements, that

in adverse

perceive,even
common

one-sidedness,more

are

ready

more

their

of
peculiarities

is

sacrifice

to

standpoint;

own

obligethem to repel
nations,
unqualifiedcondem-

the strife of schools will itself

exaggerated accusations and

of that
in
by the stronger enforcement
with others,to give up or put
which they coincide
aside untenable
and

to soften offensive propoassertions,

sitions,

break

to

their

from

off

the

systems

of the adversary
sharpestangles; many an objection
maintains
its ground, and in seekingto elude
it by
another

it is found
interpretation,

that

the

positions
presup-

of the

ceded,
objectionhave been partiallycontogether with the objectionitself. It is,

therefore,a natural
in the

conflict of

and

universal

parties and

experience that

schools

their

blunted, that
graduallybecome
which
underlies them
all is
principle

in

clearlyrecognised,and

and

attempted. Now,
is still

livingand

either

never

alreadyin

are

on

have

the

more

fusion

people,the

cieations,is

is

its

will

case

only temporarily,that

infected

by

youthful

this

course,

decidedlybegun

contrary, as

exhausted,and
the

time

eclecticism,
tions
direc-

new

attempted before those immediately

them
soon,

is

in

arise

or

science

common

long as philosophic
productivity

active

arise

its whole
because

so

mediation

the

tions
opposi-

long space
merely filled
a

existingschools, the

the
of

to

grow

scientific

time, devoid

with
natural

old.

As

spiritis
of

discussions
result

ceding
pre-

new

among
of

these

ORIGIN.

ITS

discussions, the

of

partial blending

the

hostile

parties,will appear to a greater extent, and the

that eclectic character
whole philosophywill assume
is always the prewhich, in its universal diffusion,
monitory
either

deeply seated revolution,

of scientific decay. This was
preciselythe position
Greek
in which
philosophyfound itself in the
sign

or

of

Christ.

before

last centuries

the

led,generallyspeaking,to
culture,had

had

also

the

All

dissolution

fourth

century

no

already

systems
the

lost

contemplation
to

the

life and

discontinuance

to dull

the

beginning

arose

and

in

and

for

purely theoretic
things, and by

of

aims

of

of men,

scientific

marks
of

the
third

the

if the

post-

themselves

had

interest

the

their

had

in

restriction

the

announced

endeavour, the

long

productioncould only serve

philosophic

of

cessation

system

new

Aristotelian

the

and

on

the

after

philosophic spirit; for centuries

of
transformation
philosophy, whieh
of the

cal
of classi-

paralysinginfluence

the

end

which

causes

scientific

still more,

sense

and

to call in

of scientific knowledge in
possibility
This, state of things found its proper' expression
in scepticism,which
opposed the dogmatic
The
and more
signal success.
systems with more
which
since the beginning of the first
eclecticism
had
Christ
repressed scepticism
century before

question
general.

and

the

united
of
side

dencies
together the previouslyseparate tenverse
thought, was, however, merely the reof scepticismitself.
Scepticism had
B

ECLECTICISM.

placedall dogmatic

CHAP,

as

to

neither

one

This

'

in eclecticism

One

als-aucli)
; but
had

for that

paved the

rest

in

negation,and
set
probability,

of

conviction
not

transition

very

had

as

to

but

from

Arcesilaus,and
it

further,to

fail to

cannot

we

with

forward

come

of the

positive

claim

to full

velopmen
perceivein the de-

of the

knowledge of probability:

only necessaiy to advance

one
step
bring forward practicalnecessitymore
was

decidedly as against the sceptical

theory,and
of the
probable would receive the significance
scepticismwould

"

be transformed

acceptance of truth

system
the

such

exercise
as

such
of

accordingto

the

and

opinion.
of

the

all

would

be

that

no

recognisedas

systems

the
true

dogmatic

this

matism,
dog-

inevitablycontinue

influence

would

be

individual

true, but

separated

of

measure

This

the

probable;

an

would

out

true

into

In
(Furwahrhalten*).

however, doubt
to

its

scepticaltheory,from Pyrrho to
Arcesiiaus to Carneades,a growing

of the value

estimation

more

to

practicalpostulate. This conviction

indeed

certainty;

able

therefore,in

once

up

scepticism

been

not

had

pure

doctrine

was

'

for it

way;

all alike.

to

(Weder-noch)became
the other
as
{Sowohl-

well

as

such

'

another

nor

equalityin

an

on

scientific truth

deny

__

manner

theories

had

subjectivenecessity
been
exactly the procedure

sceptics in the

ascertainment

of

they develop their doubt in the

criticism of existingtheories,
do they seek the
so
in the existingsystems,
probable primarily
among
which they have reserved to themselves the
rightto
as

ITS

Carneades,

decide.
the

ethical

ORIGIN,

as

we

questions to

opinions,he

so

treated

CHAP.

Tl

told,aban-

for combating hostile

predilection

former

doning his

know,1 had
which, we are

and

more

himself

restricted

more

with

advancing years.2 Similarly Clitomachus, while

to
contending with the dogmatic schools, seems

sought a positiverelation to them ; 3 and we

of Carneades,
that ^Eschines,another
disciple

have
learn

ing.4
only of his master's teachThus
scepticismforms the bridge from the
one-sided
dogmatism of the Stoic and Epicurean

adhered

that

to

side

; and

philosophyto eclecticism
cannot
regard it as a mere
followers of Carneades

the

with

connected

Epicureans
even

that

and

emanated,

had

in

this respect

we

that from

the

accident

of

this mode
them

point

it

which

on

their

sustained

thought chiefly
immediately

was

the

Stoics

and

dogmatism,

and

the Platonists,in the last resort,their doctrine

viz.
probability,
life.
for practical

of

the
the

in

necessityof

It was,

definite

theories

however, generallyspeaking,

philosophyat that time, and

philosophicschools,which first

of

condition

strife of

the

the

spreadof scepticism,and in
sequel,the eclectic tendency in philosophy.
most
The
important est-ernal impulse to

caused

rise and

the

the

this

der Grie/ta^r^r aXXa. r6re ye, cTrev,eyik

Zeller, Philosojrftie
-rty
ehen, 3CT Theil, le Abttieilung, Kapj/ea"ou SL^KOVOV ore
1

p. 517 sq.
2
An,
Pint.

13, 1. p. 791

seni
5 p*v

s.
ovy

ge-v. resj?.

'A/caS??-

"ro$ta'T"vTivcav
puiiKbsAto-x^TjSj
8ri
tey6j"T"avt

viva*

TrpoffiroieLrat yeyo-

Kapj/ea5ov,^

yeyov"s,

faxtav Kal rbv $6(pov atyetK"s6

S*a T" y^pas els rb
x6yos avrov
a-vvrjKTO
^p^crt/J-ov
3

PHI.

der

p. 524, note
4
Vide note

Kal KOLV^VIK"V.

Grieclim, III. i.

2.
2.

ii.Ester

ECLECTICISM.

stood

culture

and

science

relation in which

the

given by

cliangewas

CHAP,

the

to

Greek

Eoman

world.1

philosophydoubtless
from Lower
Italy: the founder
is the first philosopher
(Pythagoras)

first knowledge of Greek

The

to the

came

Romans

of the Italian School

whose
the

of Green
mg

But

Eome.2

in

beginning of the
second
century before Christ. This state of things
chancre(i however, when, after the second
j^g
mus"
before the

manner
fragmentary

77

07

')iiiu)sophy
the

in

philosopherscan
only
an
entirelysuperficial

Greek

of there

heard

been

and

Diffusion

of the

doctrines

have

is mentioned

name

policyand Eoman

PunicWax, the Eoman

the

Eomans
the

while,on

other

and
prisoners,3
more
commonly

state

and

tinguishe
Syria brought disin great numbers
to Greece,
and
hand, Greek ambassadors
also slaves,
soon
appeared more
and

'with Macedonia

wars

the east ; when

farther towards

forwar(j farther and

pressed

arms

in

Eome

| when

of the

men

T. Quinctius
importanceof the elder ScipioAfricanus,

Paulus, appliedthemselves

Flamininus, and JEmilius

!

For

follows,cf Hitter, suppositionthat

what

given

in Phil, der

I. pp.

287, 3

313,

to the Eomans

2 ; and

for this
Griech.

450,

Part

axe

of

1 ; cf. ibid,

III. ii. p. 77

who
the

for the presence

the

Hermodorus
assisted

drawing

tables

celebrated
tus,

we

decemviri
of

up

the

have

friend
no

of

in

twelve

indeed

were

but
the

as

who,

the thousand

Heraclei-

ground

for the

Achse-

168

carried
B,c," were
into Italy,and kept there

away
for seventeen

of

men

the

been
if

physics of

philosopher.
Such

ans

in

the

on

years, all of them

and
culture

repute

in Eome
(among them
Bphesian, Polybius),whose

(Part I. 566, 2) :
if he

even

the

that

Part

"%. A still earlier date (ifthis

is historical)
be
must
statement
fixed

he discoursed

iv. 79 sq.
2
The
arguments

country

without

even

of them
in that

we

know

was

long residence
could

not

have

the

influence on, Borne

least considerable

had

their

city.

actual

abode

PHILOSOPHY

GREEK

with

Greek

delightto

of

and

their

poetry

more

Pacuvius, Statins,Plautus,

; and

Eoman

language by Fabius Pictor

The
philosophic literature

annalists.

far too

in

stood

close

other

and

of

with

connection

related

historywas

Greece

the other

philosophyoccupied far too important a

place in the whole Hellenic sphere of culture,as a
and objectof universal interest
of instruction
means
found
had once
it possiblefor such as
to make
pleasurein Greek intellectual life to shut themselves
it very
small the need for
long,however
up from
We
scientific enquiry might be in them.
find,then^
branches

"

"

of the second

before the middle

even

and

various

of

traces

adopts from
181

B.C.

an

of
the

philosophy among

Greek

shows

Ennius

century,many

of the commencement

that

he

it isolated

attempt

was

ledge
know-

Eoraans.

acquainted with it,and

was

propositions. In the year

made, in the so-called Books

dogmas of Greek philosophy

into the Eoman
religion.2Twenty-six years later
(accordingto others only eight)the activityof the
their
Epicurean philosophersin. teaching caused
of Numa,1

banishment
of the
the
1

to introduce

from

Borne.3

senate, residence

philosophersand
PUl.

Cf

der.

161

In

B.C., by

Eome

in

Grieoli. III.

This

decree

forbidden

was

rhetoricians

and this

decree

to

always

of the senate

is

ii. p. 8B.
"

Cf. 1. G. III. ii. p. 85.

Cf. I.e. III. 1 p. 372, 1.

found

to

be

CL

Rhetor.

in

Suetonius,

I ; G-ell.JV.l.

(cf.also Clinton,

Fasti

xv.

CHAP.

^_

was

less free

or

Greek

the

in

the

soil in

the

from

century, Greek

Ennius,

successors

ItOMK

literature ; when,

beginning of the second

transplantedto Eoman
imitations

IN

DG
11

Hellen.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
'

that

proves

their

to

there

influence

his

Greek

sons

him

with

dorus.1

he

But

all these

movement

second

century manifested

Greek

with

of

ment

to

These
edict

of

the

with

of this

account

the

consuetude

not

to

mention

Latini, who

by
to

on

departure from
ma/jorwn. But,
that the
alone

were

the

95

we
B.C., as
of Cicero,
i. 7, 24.
loe. eit. with
Clinton,
Fasti Bellen., dates it in 92 B.C.
1

Perseus
from

painter and

year

comparison

Plin. Hist.

Nat.

xxxv.

135

37

and

Plin. Hist.

foretold
the

detailed

more

authorities
event

one

person.

III. i. p. 525.
praises his know-*

astronomy, Cic. Off.iAccording to Livy, xliv.

before

sun

Metrodorus,
in

of

6, 19.

53, he

d. Gr.

Cicero

ledge

him
both

was

good
philosopher.

able

an

sent

They

the

Athenians

the

Cf. PMl.

until

information,
victory over
(168 B.C.) he requested

affected

decree

from

surrounded

j^Emilius

after

who

only indirectlyconnected
Greek
philosophy, the
not
was
promulgated

see

Greeks

definite

more

that

rJietores

decree, according also

Cicero, De Orat. iii. 24, 93 sg.,

with

the

try

latter

The

6.

among

whom

the

this

were

P.

to

his sons, grammarians, sophists,

and
rhetoricians.
Pliny gives,

and

of rhetoricians

schools

order

in

cf. Pint. Mm.

censor

they express their serious displeasure with the teachers and

frequenters of the newly-arisen
Latin

the interest

now

Borne

mentions

Crassus, in which

Licinius

occupied

universally diffused.

enact-

Ahenobarbus

Domitius

L.

tell

authors

similar

the

greater

had

few

signs
of

much

philosophy;

philosopherscome

an

On.

itself to

comparatively
Greek

isolated

middle

the

from

more

another

astronomical

merely

are

philosophy was

B.C.).

161
us

which

Hitherto

that

the

paign,
cam-

distinguished,
may,
haps,
pertheories of
adopted certain philosophic

also

themselves

Macedonian

was

of the

extent.

toot

purpose

expeditionsthe philosopherMetro-

for which

Greeks.2

in

for that

companion in the
Sulpicius Grallus, besides

have

of

youth.
Macedonia, gavc-

of

conqueror

His

knowledge
the

anxietyin regard

education

and
instructors,

his

on

the

upon

the

Paulus,

for

reason

was

is

in

an

Nat.

ii. 12,
the.

eclipseof

battle

of

account

regard

Pydna.
of
to

the
this,

given by Martin, Revue

ArcUolog. 1864, No,

3,

GREEK

PHILOSOPHY

their fortune,,or

Eomans,

Young

men.

ROME.

for thither

sent

are

IN

desirous

"bydistinguished

of

playinga part in

of

gaining distinction in cultivated

do
without
the
society,think that they cannot
of a philosopher,and
instruction
it soon
became
usual to seek this not only in Borne, but in Athens
the

state,

or

school

the chief
itself,

of Greek

deputation of philosophersin the year

B.C.1 showed, by the extraordinary influence

156
which

Carneades

especiallyobtained, how

Greek

philosophy

though

we

should

passing event,
it gave

circles.

of the

influence

not

we

prolonged as
years, in the

in

impetus

More

Gracchus,3 who
authorities

friend

the

through
for

this

are

him

of Gracchus
in

p. 498, 1.
2
Further

Minor

to

whose

fall

infra,chap-

also

himself.
Til.
Max.

Lcel. 11, 37.

6fracc7i.

8, 17,

iv. 7, 1 ; Cicero,
After the murder

tion

Blossius

Stoic,
of

of him

was

Tiberius

likewise

must

his

among

Caius

counsellor

and

details

of

for Stoicism

Eome,

ter iii.

for many

character

after him

and

the

empire, he being

was

Plut.

been

have

d. GT. II. ii. p. 928,

cited PMl.
1 ; cf, p. 498, 1 ; cf. Part III. i.

20 ; Val.

previously

disciple of Antipater the

Borne, the

that

doubt, was

no

Eoman

Soon

auditors.2

in

this

during his residence,

to

seem

capitalof the

Cumse,

the

to

permanent,

Stoic Pansetius

it would

of

The

effect of

and spread it abroad

philosophy,

peculiarlyfitted by
philosophyto effect an entrance
a

favourably
and
Kome;

nevertheless,suppose

man

his Eoman

in

the

overrate

may,

interest

in wider

regarded

was

considerable

awakened

Already

famous

the

science.

have

(133 B.C.) Blossius

danger. He left
into

Asia

Andronicus,
(130 B.C.) he

after

went

thorough
is to

be

killed

exazninafound

in

Kal Aio"pdEXocraiov
irepl
'Peviepy
vovs
(Leipzig, 1873). Mean-

CHAP.
"

ECLECTICISM.

10

CFTA.P.
I

And

Stoicism.1

acquainted with

become

that

now

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
learned

Greek

immigrationof

men

Philus
and
Laelius,L. Furius
Tiberius
Gracchus, took philosophicstudies under
connected
"With them
their protection.3
are
Scipio's
the

friend

wise

Tubero,4

nephew

disciple of

Pansetius, who.
homines

eruditissimos

calls his work

he himself

while

Grcccia

ex

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
Kal

and
eiKaa-tat,

the

ter
lat-

Gracchus, through the

guished
his
of
mother, had distin-

That

care

(Cic.
Plut.

Tib.

doctrinam

Cicero

runt.

Brut.
27, 104 ; cf.
GraecJi. 20) is well

Polyhius (xxxii.
10),however,
much
earlier,when
only eighteen (166
Scipio was
and
his
B.C.),he said to him
relates that

there puts the

he

heard, into the

Furius

of

Philus,

him

makes

the

follow
in

the

at

self
him-

mouth

while

he

time

same

Academic

the

stance
sub-

discourse

against justice,which
had

ad-

adMbue-

of Carneades'

known.
2

Jianc, a Socrate

etiam

v"nticiam

tors
for his instruc-

Greeks

tnorem

pher
philoso-

consmtudo

contra-

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
brother:

(rol Ka.K"LV(f'

Kal

7TOA.T/

PanEetius

yap

fyvKov cbrb TTJS eE,\\d$o$

speak

rb irapbvT"V
"pu Kara
which
avOpdaircov,
agrees

with

what

p.

is

J^t

sugra,

7,

4.

note
3

quoted

to

had

oerte
aut

"uctoritate

non

tulit

ii. 37, 154

ullos

Jicec

gloriaclariores,aut
gramores,

a/at

Jiu-

politioresP. African,
L"liOi Z. FwrWj qui secum,

Cic.

presence
156 B.C.
4

his

Fiti.

also attended

doubt,

Q. JSlius
mother

manitate

JEmilius

.C.

zealous

the

which

to

Home

must,

with
in

cording
ac-

ii. 8, 24,
lectures
we

connect

in

have

Laelius,

on.

Diogenes,

no

Cicero,De Orat.

cwitas

of

shall

we

later

the

his
year

Tubero, through
a

Paulus,

Stoic,who

grandson
was

carried

of
very
out

PHILOSOPHY

GREEK

Caius

Sesevola,1and

principlesin his life, not

cerning
without
exaggeration. Cf. conCic. Brut.

SI, 117

104, 21

Lucull.

89

120,
Pompon.

19 ; Pint.
De
Omg.

Juris, i. 40 ; Gell. N. A. i. 22,

vii
7 : xiv.
2, 20 ; Yal. Max.

5/1.

Off.iii- 15,

Cic.

him, and

to

Pansetius,
; Tmo.

135
which

iv.

18, 3, is

d. Arist.
the

of

not
; cf

Bernays,

ancient

for

jurists

On

of Asia

equites,

to

him,

passed upon
with

the

He

went

Cf.

Bvvt.

offered

was

this

on

Sen.

him

subject

; ^T. D.

Pison.

iii.

95;
Balbo,
iv. 43) ;

39,

Post. 10, 27 ; Pv"

(cf.Tacit. Aim.
Ep. 24, 4 ; 79, 14

11, 28

and

Smyrna,

to

30, 115
in

80;

he
of

died, having refused

he

Sulla.

32,

which

cheerfulness

return, which

by

Eoman
less
shame-

banishment

of

sentences

habitants
in-

against

the

of the most

one

as

the

Minor

of

extortions

sage.
where

of the

which,

defended

he

proconsul,
the

Sallust,

account

with

impartiality

Rabir.
celebrated

most

ii. 3, 2 ;

long

but
pally
princisg1.),
the
purity of his

character.

torical Cic.
his-

any
.

140.

of the

One

against

4 ;

2,

testimony
Dial.

ii. 44,

pseudo-Plutarch,2"e

the

Nobilit.

of

the

I.

56

54,

dressedbore
ad-

another

Acad.

ibid.

Jug.

was

tions
men-

of Hecato

treatise

63,

(Yal. Max.

war

CHAP.

Eufus,3

others/ open

Or at. iii. 23, 8T ; Pro Mur.

ii. 44, 135 ;
36, 75 s%. ; Acad.
Tusc. iv. 2, 4 ; Sen J^p. 95, 72 sgf.;

De

98, 13

Mucius

Fannius,2 P. Kutilius

his

him

11

Laelius, Quintus

Stilo,4and

./Elius

Lucius

of

sons-in-law

the

with

ROME.

IN

; 82, 11 ;

jurispru- Benef. vi. 37, 2, "c. ; Yal.

dence
the
Romans
ii. 10,
Cicero
(Bern- Max.
5, "c.
among
d.
Rom.
him
doctus
Lit.
calls
GrTundr.
(Bviit.30, 114)
hardy,
Leelius
Greeds
of
rir
et
literis
son-in-law
eruditus,
676, "c.),
ing
Pancetii
auditor, j)rop" perfec(Cic.De Orat* i. 9, 35). Accordheard
tiis in Stoic is.
had
he
to
Cicero,
Concerning his
admiration
teacher
of
his
and
Pansetius
(I.c. 10,
lecture,
his
Pansetius
and
Stoici
Stoics
tance
acquain43) he calls the

founders

of

scientific

with

nostri.
2

C.

Fannius,

by Lselius
(Cic. Brut.

Pansetius
and

Lselius,

of

son-in-law

brought

18)

Stoic.

Cicero

often

mentions

work

composed by

Similarly
With

Plut.

regard

to

cf. id. C. Gracck.

3

was

This

famous

is

the
for

Til.
his

him.

Graech.

4,

Vide

consulate,

8, 11, 12.
Rutilius who
his services

in

teacher

also

historical

Cicero, Fin.

i.

concerning this philosopher,

the predecessor and

torical
his-

an

and

vide Bernhardy, Loc. cit"

203, 506
3,7.

Cicero

31,

left behind

He

10.

memorials

works

26, 101),

(Brut.

as

him.

was

hear

to

designated by

is

Off. iii. 2,

of Marcus,

son

cf. Cic.

Posidonius,

of

Yairo,

Cic. Bnit.

sq. ; also Acad.

iv. 12 ;
Herenn.

205

56,

i. 2, 8 ; Ad

Bernhardy,

loo. tit. 857.

5

Such

(Cic. Qrat.

as

Marcus
iii. 21,

Yigellius
and
Sp"

78)

ECLECTICISM.

12

CHAP,

of

series

time, obtained

same

"books

through
at

had

is known

Eome

of

to

works

dedicated

himself,we

patetic
Peri-

have

not

of Panaetius,were
in Eome.

first whose

Among
in

presence

But

period,Clitornachus had
Carneades
Eomans
;3 and

earlier

to

two

Athens

in

sought out

told,was

are

cation.1
edu-

Staseas.2
Peripatetics,

the

much

and

even

of the deputation
(irrespective

us

; of
philosophers)

already,at

Academic

hearers

is the

Philo

Greek

teachers

representedby celebrated
Platonists

principlescould

to the

unknown

systems,

received

not

schools,whose

the

other

the

later the

Somewhat

remained

Latin, gained entrance

in

written

who

those

among

period than

earlier

an

Epicureanism, at the
still wider
diffusion,
having,

Stoics.

Eoman

by

the

beginning of
the first century before
(vide
Christ, Posidonius
infra) visited the metropolisof the world; before
Soon

travellers.4

Eoman

of the

the middle

the

also have

must

his Stoicism

owed

Vide

102
L.
in

poet Lucilius

the

To

(148B.c),
previously to
consul
Censorinus, who was
149 B.C.; Cic. Acad.
ii. 32,
and

102.

to Pansetius.
1

con-

queror of Corinth, who, to judge

by the date (Cic. J3rut. 25, 94),

there

encounter

century we

same

of

brother

Mummiiis,

after

Cic.

iv.

Fuse,

Itaque illius

6:

3,

much

So

derlie

the

truth

may

un-

of Cicero
eUgantisque
iii.
Orat.
(the Stoic, Peripa- (JDe
18, 68) even
jphilosophiof
nulla
itself
supposing the statement
teticjand Academic)
vercs

fere

aut

sunt

Latina

monumenta
.

termi

Further

Philo

there

as

we

i. 22,
in 92 B.O.

Orat.

cum

C.

to

inAma-

be

that

untrue

(Numidicus)
listened

as

find

in 88

B.C.

Carneades,

from

Cic.

the

104, appeared

Q. Metellus
young

man

to the

aged Carneades
days in Athens.

for
several
dicens,"c,
details, infra. Respecting Catulus'

to Eome

came

Btaseas,
De

illis silentibus

finius extitit

admodum

yoauca

statement

relation

cf. the last pages

to

of

chapter on Carneades. Phil

". 6V. Part

III. i

PHILOSOPHY

GREEK

the

Epicureans

Awhile,it
^''Roman

youths to seek

and
tjiead,
^

Philodemus

themselves

ROME.

and

this time

alreadyat

was

IN

Greek

Syro.1

science

the

sake

to

the

principalseats

Mean-

CHAP,

for

common

very

for

13

_____

at its fountain-

of their studies

betake

to

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
;
while contemporaneouslyin various placesof the west
of Greece became naturalised together
the philosophy
and

with other

sciences,and

itself still further.5

that of
philosophy,
in hand, and
hand
Cicero
1

"
Xare
"rf^

best

but

shall

we

Of others later on.

ir
ral practice, cf.

knowledgeof Greek
literature went naturally
of Lucretius

of

the

For

the geneCic. Fin. v. 1,

of

side,5

Augustus

Tiberius, residingin Rome,

before

come
5

many

time

its

at

up

and

The

these

us

further

the

will

on.

important

most

was

and

ancient

of

Greek

life in Athens
in

Kal fyiXoffo"fTw. An
Tpe'-nwrcu

Cicero

describes

his

own

with companions
study (77 B.C.); and in relater time,
gard to a somewhat
YaiTO

i. 2, 8, where
Sed
meos
:

quibus est
mitto,

ut

ea

Jiawiant, qitam

Qr

t"ntwr.
8

The

he

says

amicos,

to

early colony of Greek

culture
in
Gaul, this city had now

in

made

stiidium, in Grcec-iam

X*

andAtticus,

spread

city Massilia, of which Strabo

(iv. 1, 5, p. 181) says: irdvres
irpbsrb Xeyew
ycc,p of "x.apiwrss

where

Aead.

fi

i. 374.

examples

centres

the

the time

from

with

meet

Greek

IH.

known

of Cicero

those

With

literature sprang

Phil. d. Gr. Part

The

Roman

these

from

fontibitspotius
rivulos

consec-

such

Eomans
here
6

is notorious

; for

pursued

instead
That

first
fact

advances

that noble
their

studies

of in Athens.

these

two

noteworthy
philosophyin the

were

writers
Latin

the
on

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

ECLECTICISM.

14

CHAP.

I.

scarcelyinferior to the contemporary

Greek, though not to be compared with the earlier,
either in scientific acumen
creative individuality.
or

which

was

the

At

beginning of

related

were

to the

Greeks

merely

and

much
Inevitable
reaction

of that
diffusion
upon

discipleswho

as

of their teachers

adopted and imitated the science

and, to a certain degree,this
throughoutits whole course
; for
genius

the Eomans

this movement,

relation

continued

in Eome

the

attained

spiritnever

tific
sciento

even

so

force and

it had
in Greece
as
self-dependence
still preservedin the latter period. But in the end
this influence of Greek philosophycould not remain
without
itself. Though Eomans
reaction
a
on
by
birth,like Cicero and Lucretius, might rehabilitate

Greek

science

for

their

countrymen

Greek

and

like Panaetius
and
Antiochus, might
philosophers,
it was
lecture to the Eomans, in both cases
able
unavoid-

that the character

be

or

more

and

of their

less determined

requirementsof

presentationsshould

by regard

their Eoman

hearers

to

the

and

spirit

readers.

the

Even

schools of philosophy in
purely Greek
could not free themselves
Athens, Ehodes, and other places,
from
of the

this

determining influence,on

great number

who

visited

claim

for

them

of young
; for it

themselves

this

was

habuit

Eomans

of

account

position

naturallyfrom
lumen*

literamm

these

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

honour

that

scholars

these

than

must

of the

Eoman

upon

the

Romans

upon

the

Greek

influence

from

astuteness

and

was

of

will

value

the

of

eyes

consistent

with

the

the

worth

of

estimate

the

receive

which,

as

great

influence

this

From

them.

on

source

Cf.

necessarily

subject what
(Cato Maj. 22) relates

Plutarch
of

Cato's

bassy

behaviour

of

philosophers

he feared from

whom

to the

the

-rb "f"t\6TL[jt,oi/
evravda
fji^j
res

ot

v4oL

rfy

eirl T$

as

em-

to

outset

life

those

of

contents

quickly

edict
supra,

to

of view

their

was

lectures, he

be sent

possible.

as

terial
magis-

as

away
Also

id.

iiL

7, note 43 which
p
the rhetorical schools

sures

epycav Kal T"V

after he
whom,

TTJS airb
and
ffTparetuv,

homines

had

desidere*

the

no

xviii. 7, 3 ; Nepos ap.

the
15, 10 ; and
of
the
censors
quoted

ap. Gell.
Lactant.

Xeyeiv

no

prejudices

even

should

advised

ascribe

perceptible in

point

same

to

of practical

such, when

at first led

rptyav-

heard

It

of all other

was

86"av ayaTT'ficr'"a'i
paKkov
r"v

that

however,
spirit,

sprang

this

on

spite of

subjugated nations.

opinions as

human

the

compared with

philosophy,as

againstphilosophy,which
The
interposition.1
1

spiritual

in

should

Eoman

scientific

to

was

that

things,primarilyaccordingto the standard

utility; and, on the contrary, to
importance

culture

conquered, it

to

succumbed,

in the

science

also

empire

proud scholars,and

considerable

acquire

merely

superiorityof Greek

upon

force
had

___'__

complete the literary

dependence

her

science, she

CHAP.

scious
uncon-

not

the Eoman

Greece, too, should

that

the

spirit;

in
philosophers

of the conquerors
inevitable

be rated

pursued philosophy,but

however

Eoman,

over

who

great the

for,however

15

profitmostly accrued to
higher importance, however,

considerations

influence

JtOMU.

and

still

Of

teachers.

the

IN

adolescentulos
To

the Eoman

totos

cen:

ibi
dies

states-

ECLECTICISM.

10

CHAP,

___!_

also,however, maintained

study

of

philosophy.

So far

the

in

even

pursuit

philosophywas

as

cerned
con-

merely with scientific questions,it

than
be regarded as
anything more
scarcely
to
recreation ; it only attained
serious
as

it

value

proved

the

in

itself

eyes

Eoman,

of the

of

instrument

an

and

could
a

spectable
re-

more

inasmuch

tion.
practicaleduca-

strengthening of moral principlesand

of orator and statesman,
the trainingfor the calling
and principally
these are the aspectswhich primarily
The

philosophicstudies to his attention.

he was
this very account
inclined
necessarily
them with reference to these points of view.

recommended
But

on

to treat

He

little for the

cared

scientific establishment

and

logicaldevelopment of a philosophicsystem ; that

him was
which alone, or almost alone, concerned
its
practical
utility
;

the

turned

non-essential

mostly on

could not
various

strife of

schools,he thought,

things,and

hesitate

therefore

systems, careless

to

of the

he himself

select from

deeper

the

tion
interconnec-

that which seemed

to him
definitions,
particular
The
who made
serviceable.
the
proconsul Grellius,
in Athens
well-meaning proposalto the philosophers
that they should amicably settle their points of

of

and offered himself

difference,

the

trulyEoman

somewhat

too

standpointwould

man

and

even

than

soldier

naturally
greater
rhetoric.

mediator,1expressed

conception of philosophy,though
candidly. Though the influence of

this

must

as

have
waste

doubtless

philosophy
appeared
of

time

was

B.C.

have

Cic.

L"gg. i. 20,

consul
Vide

for that

affected Greek

in

682

53.

Clinton, Fasti

year.

Gellius

A.u.O.

72

H"llen.

'

PRINCIPLE

ITS

period, it

internal

and

the
especially

the

"

only the

the

at

when

philo-

which

When

nature.

philosophic schools,

of Carneades

"

in this

already led to
developed itself

successfully
through the
with

motives

eclecticism

external

fluences.
in-

primarilyappears
'

to the

rather conduced

external

than

connection

till then

of the

all

had

what

different systems

agreed;

were

limited

to

universality.
could

theories

to

But
not

the

way

be

standard
be

would

was

question
and

as

the

in

the
c

itself

then

was

which

have

indefinite

final
of

mark

mankind,

main

object
therefore,by what
a

relations

This

determined?

required that

was

we

practical utilityof

practical
problem

ultimately sought

If it be

the

considered

practicalaims

in

propositionsof

of its solution

strife ; the

of the

few

find it

we

doctrines

eclectics

even

of their truth ; for the

be

those

If

the doctrines

view

chosen,

were

for the
very

in this form.

point of

sufficient to maintain

been

and

existed

not

accordingto

enquire

not

L''lfl
of edeet'w

harmonisingof different standpoints,it

characteristic
a
wholly without
principle,

not

which

B.

cliaractcr

the internal
is

'_

ally
especi-

important phenomenon

internal

CEAP.

an

product of historical relations,which

the

as

Eoman

of

although this

merelyJ

the

speedilyand
of

But

direction

necessarilyhave

must

more

concurrence

last

doctrine

eclecticism,it

exerted

the

condition

the

it been

17

quite otherwise

was

sophy had itself taken

corresponded with

sphere

CHARACTER.

little had

philosophyvery
earlier

AND

standard

immediate
individual

should
could

selves
them-

only

consciousness.

shall choose

ECLECTICISM.

18

CHAP,

systems that which

out of the various

own

for decision

standard

the

himself

each

that

this presupposes

use,

and that truth

false,

is

is true

for his

carries in

man

between

directlygiven to

true
man

and

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

self-consciousness

and

by nature ; but
had thereby intended
man

in the

strict

it

Plato

neither
to teach

sense

immediate

an

of the

the

nor

term

Stoics
ledge
know-

for the

miniscence
re-

tic
of ideas coincides in Plato with the dialec-

forming of conceptions,and
him, by

means

of the moral

arises,according to

and

scientific activities

stagesof philosophy
regardsas preliminary
of the Stoics are not, as
and the natural conceptions
tific
has alreadybeen shown, innate ideas ; but, like scienthoughts,are derived merely in a natural manner
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 subwhich

he

bases.

of the

"

But

if in this way,

truth,but only belief

in

this belief takes the

established,

knowledge
probabilitycan be
place of knowledge
not

ITS

him.

in

there

PRINCIPLE

has

who

results,as

reliance

AND

despaired of knowledge : and so

the natural
product of scepticism,

that which

on

is

self-consciousness, and

enquiry ;

and

others,is

the

this,

the
is

shall

we

as

merely

is at bottom

Cicero

eclectic

this

can

immediate
tains
it main-

the final decision

that

we

What

value.

and

tion
fluctua-

Now,

principleof

very limited

knowledge only a

all scientific

in

theories.1

this

to

find

the

in

CHAP.

in his
directly

man

before

is certain

various

true,

to

given

last foot-hold

among

ascribe,it

CHARACTER.

concerning the questions of philosophy belongs to

versal
unphilosophicconsciousness ; and though the uni-

thought that
to human

self-consciousness

yet this thought

of

aspect,

shows

entirelyestablished,
under

the

and

whole

verted
persupposition
pre-

knowledge is untrue ;
mediate
that these
supposed im-

ideas have

innate

and

is

itself

to approve

introduced

immediate

an

observation

closer

is here

one-sided

and

has

truth

every

likewise

been

formed

by manifold intermediate
processes, and that it is only
a
deficiencyof clear scientific consciousness, which
makes
them
as
immediately given. This
appear
return
to the directlycertain is so far to be regarded
primarilyas a sign of scientific decay, an involuntary

The

century
respect
that

B.C.

to the

bore

the last
this

in

preceding sceptirelation

similar
in

modern

philosophy of

school

of

stands

to

the

Hume

thought.

aspect which

presents one

eclecticism

in a
which

cism
the

it

time

same

of

of the exhaustion

evidence

not

be

the

Scottish

mere

the

times
Scottish

; it canc

at the

is not

with-

any
regarded,
reaction

against

to

But

product

of

than

a
philosophy,
of
dogmatism
as

doubt,

Scottish

more

hut

it

is, like

philosophy, itself
doubt,

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

importance for the further

out

T'

truth
in

the

placewhere

the

the interior of

As

development.

has
originally

to
opposition

knowledge

man

of

philosophic

is

regarded as

of the most

essential

maintained

its seat, it is herein

Epicurean sensualism,
of knowledge
source
specific

the Stoic and

that in self-consciousness

given: and though

something actual, a fact
is

is

course

higherknowledge

this

of inner

experience
"

rationalism, so far,again resolves itself

though this

empiricismof direct consciousness,yet it is

perceptionfrom which all truth is
no
longer the mere
derived. This appealto the immediately certain may?
into the

therefore,be regardedas
sualistic

it does

because
as

empiricismof
not

scientificestablishment

from

the hnman
on

man

thus innate
form

are

of

against the

reaction

sen-

precedingsystems. But
beyond the internallygiven,
the

go
is nevertheless

such, and

convictions

and

wanting in any deeper

development,philosophic

in their origin
recognisedactually
stowed
mind, but appear as something beby a power standing above him ; and

not

knowledge

which
philosophy

forms

the transition

only goes back

to

that

to self-consciousness,

in order to receive in it the revelation

God.

How

the belief in external

revelations

and

of
the

religionare allied
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
Plutarch,an Apuleius,a Maximus,
the
Platonists
generally among
after Christ,eclecticism
centuries

of revelation

went

hand

in hand.

of

Numenius,
the

and the

and

first two

philosophy

But

21

CHARACTER.

in this

eclecticism

as

aspect

within

bore

it

CHAP.

thought which so powerfully

subsequently in Neo-Platonism
; i.
of

of the mode

the germ

itself

point of

another

scepticism,to which

in

great part
in

peace

basis in this

its ultimate

it owed

its

own

system, has
come
fullyover-

that it has not

dogmatic systems, that

of

recognisedoubt as to certain
even
though it does not approve of it
particulars,
in principle. Scepticism is consequentlynot merely
refuse

it cannot

the

of

development

to

which

of

eclecticism;

continually within
and

its

the

systems

is

as

truth,the
The

scientific theories.
stilled

was

of

devoid

for

be

could

found

be

mode
less

was

no

different

and

it to be
If

individual

the truth

system

"

definite

that

was

which
to be

systems,it required only moderate

perceivethat the fragments

united

various

expected that

attention

not

are

however,
superficially,
of philosophising
so

of all

systems would

original

of which

gleaned out
to

sceptical

in the

of the many

it

keep

of

unrest

it

tence;
exis-

own

between

belief

silenced.

ever

in

to

utterances

more

by. a

the
principle,

it should

tends

by

broughttogetherout

doubt

its

the

than

little moderated
of

phase of

vacillation

eclectic

consciousness

has

eclecticism

behaviour

own

nothing else

thought,a
to be

itself

the

conditioned

have

causes

allow themselves

to be

of various
so

directly

eaxsh. philosophical
propositionhas its

meaning only

in

its interconnection

Edec-

germs

allow

will not

definite

any

truth

in the

doubt

awake

"

^"^'tfo

the

contained

it also

view

dissatisfaction which

origin. For that

thought to be at

one

"__

__.

developed
from

AND

PRINCIPLE

ITS

with

of

ECLECTICISM.

22

imp.

definite

some

system; while,

the

on

other

hand,

propositionsfrom different systems, like the systems

another : that
one
themselves, mutually exclude

the

contradiction

and
authority,
of the

opposite theories annuls

of

the attempt to make

that

harmonisingpropositionsof

the

their

basis out

philosophers^

the fact of their

on
recognisedtruth,is wrecked
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
as

with
third century, simultaneously
in

Neo-Platonism

and

no

all other

argument

theories,

has

greater

weight with these new

scepticsthan that which the
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
the

itself into

ii. And

their

mutual

however, as the renewal

Justifiable,

of

imtm"'

perception of

in relation

aPPears

to

the

of

uncritical

patibility.
incom-

scepticism

eclectic

ment
treat-

of

philosophy,it could no longer attain the

importance which it had had in the school of the
exhaustion
of thought which
new
academy, The
can

be shown

even

positiveconviction
return

the

to

pure

truth

shaken, and
not

too

this later
necessary,

doubt.

of the
if

in

even

scepticism,made
to allow many

to

If, therefore,the belief

systems hitherto

in

strengthwas

in

was

vogue

their eclectic combination

while
entirelysatisfy,

could

wanting

for

ITS

the

PRINCIPLE

AND

result

general

of

production

independent

that

only

was

CHARACTER.

23

system

new

the

CHAP.
*"

thought

began

long

to

and

more

itself

outside
which
the

and

sought

was

and

Deity

the

next

opened

the

partly

period
last

epoch

knowledge
hitherto

as

in

in

entered

of

source

science

partly

was

way

the

in

for

more

the

inner

religious

upon,

of

Greek

existing
revelation

tradition.

which

definitely

more

lying
;

of
Thus

Neo-Platonisrn

pursued,

philosophy.

and

so

ECLECTICISM.

CHAPTEE
IN

ECLECTICISM

of

CENTURIES

FIRST

AND

ASCLEPIADES.

EPICUREANS.

THE

the schools

OF

SECOND

CHRIST.

BEFORE

CHAP.

THE

II.

philosophywhich

tained
still main-

had

II.

themselves

middle of

the
ticism

I. Eclec-

in

tJte two

of the

by the

centuries

the

on

the

theatre

of history

century before Christ,that

second

to all appearance,

Epicureanswas,

to

up

of the

scientific movement

least affected
time.

Though

B.C.

its
A.

Tlie

with
juxtaposition

jEpieu-

had

reans.

have
a
no

left upon
been

it

influenced

which
objections
all

the

traces, it does

some

deeper and more

doubt, suppose

on

by

any

that

system perhapswas

manner.

We

the

subordinate

to

some

tJie

of it ; that

and

one

later

Epi-

all the

traces

which

cureans
individual
to

JSpicurm.

when

might

another

them

have

we

to

seem

in

of its

have

may

in

the

developed or modified

pointsby

But

phases

new

thoroughlyinvestigatedby

Epicurus"himself.
of

of the

Epicurean doctrine

adherents,and that alien doctrines

more

in

must,

refutation

establishment
further

to

seem

the

occasion

sides,gave

not

tendencies

even

encountered

tendencies

of these

permanent

conception and

certain

other intellectual

been

than
followed

indicate

by
up
that

of Epicurus had departed,either

disciples
from
their master,1the sum
formallyor materially,
1

tion

collection
of

these

"

and

examina-

the

value

which

of

we

but

cannot

ledge, though

we

acknowmay

not

THE

EPICUREANS.

total of such

departures which,

proved is so
judgments of
orthodoxy of

inconsiderable

the

Seneca
the

them.

independent value
virtue

; but

be

found

to

Numenius

We

Cicero
in

seldom

not

if he

as

himself

conceived

by

this

an

and

of

us

to

opinion is

of
representative
tells

Epicurean philosophy.3 He

ascribed

culture

adds, that

scientific

no

that

had

intellectual

to

Cicero

learn from

was

compatriots

Eoman

well-known

the

concerningthe
Epicureans1 scarcelysuffers any
and

theory of Epicurus

his

that

from

limitation

historically CHAP.

be

can

the

cureans
Epi-

some

separatedthemselves from
Epicurus 4 by their theory of a disinterested love to
this
It
is doubtful, however, whether
friends.
who

of his time

should

be

regarded

only

asserts

but this does

is based

upon

not

the

them

"

has

been

undertaken

Hirzel, Tfntermehungen

zu

by
Cio.

with
165-190, in connection
vita et
Diining, De Metrodori
scriptis,p. 18 sgq.
1
Phil. (Lev 6fr.III. i. p. 379, 4.

i.

Fin.

Phil, der

i. 7, 25; 17, 55;

Gr. III. i. 4:45,2.

cf.

Quos quidem (he makes

Torquatus, i. 17, 55, observe
video
esse
respecting them)
3

multos

sed

iniperitos.

Qr, III. i. 460, 2.

Hirzel,loc. cit. 170 s#., supposes
4

Phil,

der

us

the

tion
ques-

for their

be loved

advantage ; 5

no

the idea that love to them

pleasure secured

with, all the inferences

agree
from
and conjectures deduced

in

statement

they bring

exclude

from

radical deviation

that friends may

when

sake, even

own

Epicurus ; the

of

Eudaemonism

as

these
be

philosophers'

'later
and

Siro

intercourse

by

Philodemus

though this idea is not

it cannot
able in itself,
it has

whether

taioed

to

; but

improbbe

any

ascer-

foun-

dation.
5

Cic. Fin.
it

presses

20, 69, thus

Primos

ex-

conyressus

(and so
forth) fieri propter
autem
itsus
wlwptat"m,, cum
famiMaritatem
effeyrogrediens
cerit,

turn

efflorescere

amorem

tantitm, lit, etiam

utilitas
amioi

ex

amidtia,

propter

se

si

milla

tamen

ipsosamentw.

sit

ipsi

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

II.

Such

them.1

with

much,

of

difference

we

are

of the

alteration

ascribingan

justifiedin
Epicurean theology

Nor

importance.

be considered

cannot

Philodemus, though he may, perhaps,have carried

self:2
than Epicurus himfurther in certain particulars

to

it

from
deviations
pure
though many
perceptible3in Lucretius, on
Epicureanism are
and

inspectionthey will

closer
which

merely
but

the

In

nothing

the

of

calculation
based

on

To

this

argument

only

of

sure.
plea-

further

the

be

can

applied :

loca,sifana, si wbes,
si
gymnasia, si campum,

J"tenim, si
si

canes, si dc[iws ludicra, escercendi

adcon"uetudine
venavidi
ant

id

consMetudine

Jiomimtm

Phil, der

Hitter,iv.

Kitter

parts

are

vivid, and
more

at times

detailed

the lifeless and

of the

in

122

v.

that

component
tius
by Lucremuch
in

manner,

uniform

What

only the
Epicurus (ap.Diog.

he

is

says

in

expresses

of

one

reference

that

112)

x.

his"

really

same

explanations
with

be

sqg., cannot

opinion.

own

his

also

thetical
hypo-

of Nature

to earlier theories

remarks
of

be

(p. 94)

her

described

at times

This
to

himself

89-106.

thinks

and

Nature

living beings he does

aside
(v. 523 *#".)"
however,
last,
according

are

cast

not

III. i. 435, 1.

6V.

the

in

jieripotuerit etjustius!
8

world;

(Phil,der Gr. 1. 245). Concernfacilius ing^theremaining points,Bitter

soleniiis,quanto

amare

generates

the

stars

be

also

can

motive

of

births

is described

sun

which

But

benefits.

affection
the

of
on

sentation
pre-

ception
con-

person

The

essence

an

the

poetic

scientific theories.4
all.

over
as

of the

earth, in animated
language, as
of living creatures
the mother
;
the
even
conjecture that the

based

merely

not

se

lies

the

affection

an

delight in

an

the

love

the

to

than

more

friend, and
such

affect

utility,there

of
upon

form

gropter

amare

of

because

do not

opposed

ijjsos,

as

the

concern

to refer to traits

found

be

more
a

much
than

physics

seem
Epicureans would
is
to have
permitted. Nature
conceived
as
a
by Lucretius
rules absolutely
Unity, which

this

intended
is the

that

scriptions
de-

poet can only

figuratively; and
with

case

which

the

the

perhaps

the
would

passages
be

surprisiDgto an Epicurean
Lucretius
s^.)" where
defends
the
Epicurean theory

most

(v.

that
the

534

the
air

earth

(Diog.

observation
earth

piece with

x,

that

oppressed by
the

is borne

was

the

74)
the

up by
with the

air is not

earth, because

originallyof

one

it,justas the weight

THE

The

same

be said of other

may

the later

EPICUREANS.

philosophersamong

Epicureans concerning whom

CHAP.

tradition has
__

told

something.

us

It may

appropriatedto himself
a

dialectic

more

acutely

more

find in

Epicurus

of

our

of

and

is

that

or

burden

no

of

details

than

we

superior

was

knowledge and

interest

departing from

Epicurus,

to

this

argument going

Apollodorus3

minds
strongly reof the Stoic sympathy
us
universe, Lucretius will

the

mode

__

of Sidon

Zeno

the school of Carneades

thoroughlyinto

in historical

limbs

Though

"us.

method,

Epicurus

to

in

that

be

as

many
of the atoms
as

sumes
as-

original figures
there

are

atoms

(Bitter, p. 101)
decidedly a
tradicted
misapprehension, expressly conii.
theory, and consequently designates
by the passage
the
of
world
the
478
Bitter
understands).
misparts
sqq. (which
In any
How
little the
only as quasi mewibra.
this thought is without
ethics also of the Roman
case
curean
Epihave

nothing

for

result

the

of

as

sense

as

of

sense

of

rest

rather

opinion,

own

Nature

in

Epicurus

an

brought about
of
physical

that

his doctrine

He

his

of

unity

same

the

with

Nature.

maintains,
the

do

to

"

the

i.e. in

interdependence
by
and

is

the

identity

mechanical

Moreover, the doctrine

of the
spontaneous movement
of the atoms
(Lucr. ii. 133, 251
sqq.} is Epicurean; and if,on
is
other
the
hand, Lucretius
from
Epicurus
by
distinguished
firmly the
maintaining more
law
of
to
natural
conformity
(Bitter, 97), we
phenomena
hav"
already heard
(PML der
6V. III. i. 397, 1) the explanation

differed
the
be

ancient

easy to show

adduced
The

Epicurus, which
by

that
rules
even

his

whole

unconditional
In

universal

individual

admit

of

That

Lucretius

various

is

necessity
causes,

if

phenomena
constructions.

(ii.333

"?#.)"

the

points

by Bitter,

agreement

p. 104 s$.
of Lucretius

been
Epicurus has now
expounded in the most thorough
tise
manner
by Woltjer in the trea-

quoted, Phil,

der

Gr.

III.

i. 363, 1.
1 Of. I.
e. III. i. S7S, 2.
2
As
Hirzel
conjectures,loc.
cit.

176

appealing to
s^.,
i. 9, 31 ; Tusc. Hi.
i. 18, 46 s#.

Cicero, Fin.
17, 38 ; N,D.
8

The

in Phil,
4

in

discussed
KvjTrorvpavvos
der Gr. III. i. 373.

Hirzel, 183 s^who

asserts,
lodorus
support of this, that Apol-

(accordingto Biog. viL

firmed
con-

system,

from

of

it would

with

laws.

of

those

from

Epicurean

13) had composed a

and perhaps
SoyjudTew*,
crvvaytoyfy
the
it
in
had
ment
judgjustified
181

x.

of Epicurus on Leucippua
(Phil, der Gr. I, 842, 6).

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
II.

with

Cameades

meeting

Demetrius

find

also

we

leads

which

answer

an

objection of

an

to

us

suppose

gained in logicaltraining
through the dialectic of the Academy.1 But that
definition of
in any
either of these philosophers
doctrine
materiallydiverged from the doctrine of

that this

their

certain
cataloguementions
called Sophistsby the genuine Epicureans
were
these Sophists
to consider
have no reason
we

who

offshoots of the

isolated

than

more

their appearance

from

argue

quarter.

any

his

Diogenes in

men

in

maintained

not

is

master

When

as

had

Epicurean

within

it,or

deeply

any

any

school,or

change

seated

in its

to

agreement
dis-

general

character.2
3

tioned
exposition (men-

the

In

Sext

L 371,

in.

in Part

4)

NatTi.

maintains, in oppositionto
discussed

harin mony
of

504, and

at p.

distinction

the

with

the

argumentation

about

statement

"yevLKT] and

e2?u/C7)
owo""i"is,that

whenever

valid

is adduced,
the

argument

To

him

what

is

separate

proof

admissibilityof

the

is at

once

shown.

also, perhaps, belongs

quoted by Sextus, viii.

what
it shows
330 ; in any case
of Carinfluence the objections
had made
neades
even
upon the

Epicureans.
2

of
of

words

in

25 ceed
prothus: (afterthe enumeration

The

several

Diog.x.

immediate

Epicurus) KCU

OI"TOI

6* 6
Z'fji/cav

Kal 6 tevK6s.

ap.
he

viii. 348, where

disciples
^kv e\\6yi-

0' 6
Aioye^s
exiAe/crovs1
crxoAas

eVz/cArffisis
AaKow,

Tapcreiis6

ras

Kal 'Qploov
Kal a\\OL
crvyypd^/as,
ots oi yvficriOL
'ETTLKotipeioi
cro"J!"icrras

aTTO/caAoiJcriv. Hirzel
believes

(lew.
that

cit.

180

those

Sophists by the
include
Epicureans must

true

all

sqq.)

named

the

here

men

from

tioned,
men-

wards,
Apollodorus ontherefore
lodorus
Apol-

and

himself, the two Ptoleof Sidon, "c.

Zeno
But
msei,
this
from
Had
the
have

is very
improbable, even
the mode
of expression,
such

been

writer,
said

the

he

meaning

must

irdvras

8e

at

of

least

rovrovs

ol

A.LOVUCTLOS,%v BatnAet 8775-.yvficrioi,

"5i"5e'"aro
'EiriKovpeioi
ffQfyicrr"s
airo$' 6 KyTrortipavif he wished
Mai iA.iroXX6^ct}pos
to
KaXovtriv
; and
yos

yeyovev

ttsvirep
eAA^yiyUOS,

ra

fii"Aia,'dvo
T"ETpaK6ffia
ffuysypafye

express

himself

this would

have

clearly even
been

insuffi-

ASCLEPIADES.

The

famous

physician,
Asclepiadesof Bithynia,1 CHAP.
II.
another
relation to the Epicurean school,
its members
expresslyenumerated
Ascleamong

in

stands
He

is not

by

any

of the

authors

who

him, but his jriadesthe

mention

yltt/sioian
would

theories
had

rby

He

have

must

avrbjs

ffofyLcrras

a.iroK.a\ov(nv.

we

can

only refer

ovs

cbro/mA-outru/

"XX.OL alone,
names

genes.

As

the

the

to the

is,

same

and

aAAoi

tioned
men-

person

case,

does

Strabo

as

Diogenes

as

in

and
of

rean,
Epicu-

an

the

tion
enumera-

philosophers of
Epicurean Diogenes
over,

as

celebrated

more

But

Zeno.

the

positive

against the

arguments
of

passed

far

the

as

to

those

who

he

is at

one

number

predicate

same

ledged
acknow-

not

were

genuine Epicureans
belonging to their

This

is in itself very

Hirzel

sition
suppostill more

are

Sophists are two of the most

distinguished leaders, Apollodorus

and

Zeno.

Hirzel
shown

has
that

(p. 170)
ooly Epicureans of the purest
selected as overseers
type were

of the

school

we
; and
to him

the less concede

Apollodorusanda

Zeno

"

can

all

that

an

the former,

his

designation proves,
head of the
highly- esteemed
school ; the latter regarded by
as

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,
decisive.

"

whom

he

himself

calls

who
as
men
were
"\\6yifj.QL
the
named
genuine
Sophists by
consequently
Epicureans, and
of the

members
become

school

unfaithful

to

who

had

its true

are

in the

constantly mentioned
Placita,

ascribed

and

the

in

Galen, is counted
one

of

mentioned

marchus,
word, the

Metrodorus,

20 "?., ne
was
of Antiochus

in a
Polysenus, "c.
most
loyal disciples p. 30, note
"

by the pseudo-

the

spirit.How is this conceivable ? logical school

As eAA^iaoi, he had previously According to
Her-

tarch,
to Plu-

writings of

Galen, Isag.c. 4, vol. xiv. 683

as

1.

leaders

of

K,

the

of

physicians.

Sext.

MatJi. vii.

an

Epicu-

rean,

likely
affi/iith'$
immediately with the

by the
as

n'"t

but shows

is it

and

scribe just before

de-

not

the

Tarsus, the
been
have
may
Stoic

He

Epicurus;

the

to

Strabo, xiv. 5, 15 ;
is not
necessarily the

this

well

of

suppose

school.

words

either

or

it

by
but

the

that

the
immediately
ability
improbceding improbable, but
preand
Biobecomes
them, Orion
greater still
when
find that among
in this
these
we
Diogenes may

be

case

written

to

us

would
that
he
/ecu
*A.iro\\6$capojf
rovs
per
ot
after apply the
yvfjcriOL 'ETHKroiJpeioi

5e

the

with

connection

some

cient.

certainlylead

contemporary

of Ascalon.

Vide

school.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
II.

Epicurean sensualism l in
sensible perceptiongives a

"with the
that the

his

statement

true

image

of

trary,
thing perceived,but that reason, on the conof knowledge,
is not an
independent source

the

all

borrows

this he found

soul, he
all the

4
collectively
;

senses

there

also

were

That

vii. 201.

Sext. Math.

only the whole

said, was

who

some

sensations

he

principale,dum

the

esse

of

in

as

gave
animo

ipso

sensus,"

mnquorum
principals, in favour of

dicatur

of
criterion
truth, Antiochus
5e
in these words
shows
: "\\os
ovdzybs
larpiKri
tv
vis
fJ.ev
ry

the

compounded

which

to

clared Tolunt
de-

be

to

integralpart

going beyond Epicurus

soul, herein

the

of

with

connection

as
an
superfluous,3

reason

has

perception,and

from

content

by perception.2In

verified

be

to

its

which

Asclepiades

animals
many
without
head

argues
for a

live

heart

or

that
time

(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"SsayriA^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

be referred

alone
2

real

the

be

and

This

still more

to.

else

nothing

of

opinion

which

distinctlyfrom

Aurel.

can

piades,
Ascle-

De

(quoted

the statement,

Math.

Mori),

by

vii.

aciut.

Fabric,

380)

on

Gal.
i. 14
Sext.

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)
X6ycp eewpyrol(infra,p. 31 n. 5), negat. JEtenim niJiil aliud esse
on

and

also believed

knowledge
of
by means
perceived.
3

"Vide

ou"Je 0Ao"s

omnium

sensmtm

intellectual

autem

4.

fierimotum
qui ab accidentifa(s
sensilili'bus atque awtecedenti
rerum

avatpovvra

an.

quam

costum

the

380,

virdpx*ivn
De

'dieit animam

'AcrK\vj-

Ibid.
7]yefj.oviK6v.

Tert.
v)j"/jLoviK6y.
Messenius

from

vii. 202
.

he says

hidden

infra,note

rbv larpbv
TTidSrjv
pet?

tual
intellec-

inferences

Sext. Math.
rb

an

the

in

of

15

vel latentium

soluUlem

sensuitm,

m
perspectioneperfcitur

i:ero
:

occitltarum
per

alterno

Plut.

Plao.

iv. 2, 8

aliquis Dictzarcktis, 496) expresses

Andreas
autem
et
ex
m edicts
followingwords
abstulerunt
Ascleyiades ita

emoriam

exerdtio

eorum

the
:

dic.it.

(Stob. Eel.
same

'Acr/cA. 6

i.

in the

tarpbs

ASCLEPIADES.

the

substratum
round

consistingof

Trvev/jia

particles.1He

si

also

the

traced

light

and

CHAP.
IJ"

activities of
__

of

intellect to

and

memory

piades 3 is
Pontus,4 it

lastlythe atomistic theory of Ascleprimarilyallied to that of Heraclides of

is not

be

to

theory without
which

system
The

supposed that he

the

tradition

of all

constituents

which

bodies

arrived

the

of

stillliving
in the

was

primary

small

organs

If

sense.2

this

the

in

movements

at

atomistic

Epicurean school.

thingshe

held to be

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

vao-iav r""v

from,

the

tain motions

whether
alffO^arecav,
mean
crvyyvfj.vacria.
may
'common
or
practice,
"practice,'
work
in

otherwise

sense

whether

or
together,'

done

"rvyyvfjiva,"6iL"voi.
1

Chalcid.

guceda/m

213

vide
(J"yKoi,

moles

eniwi

Tim.

in

sunt

leves

et

Aut

spirttm
ypiadtis putat, "c.
analogous, though
and

Democritus,

Gr. III. i. 418

2

His

motus

4, p.
points

Epicude-r

from

the pass-

The

solubilis

the

in

with

idea

that

Lass-

it in

his

Daniel

Bennett,
fur
{VierteljaJtrscJir.
PMlos.
iii.408 sqq.},

German

of the

restorer

Asclepiades.

PMl.

The

d.

ii. i. 886

sq.

complete account
theory is given by Cgel.
loo. cit. : Primordia

poris primo

are

pmcula

wnstituerat

inaccurate

call them

they

GT.

most

(thisis
of

arise

philosophy (he died

1637) allied himself
chiefly

of this

cf PMl.

these

discusses
on

p. 425
sq.
wissensch.

Aurel.

quoted

to

treatise

of

Aurelius
30.

On

cer-

themselves,

through

witz, who

somewhat

conception

clear

Cselius

the

also I. 808.

exact

this is not
age of
in note

On

definitions

different
rus

Ascle-

est, ut

motions,

detach

presentations.
this subject cf.

infra) for this

globo"ce atomistic

delicate ex
admodimi
ecBcLemqiie
anima
sufisistit,
quod,
quibus
totum

de-

not

that

abstract

monstrable, corresponding with

denote
a society
cactus, it may
of

and

of

complex

so

for the

not

he

cor-

atomus
did not

reason

that

corindivisible)

intellects

setwa,

sine

qualitate solita (without

colour,and so forth) atque ex

ulla

ECLECTICISM.

continues, so that nothing in

less motion

CHAP,

__^1

of time,

If

unchanged.1

the smallest,remains

even

section

any

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 par(?)

comitata

initio

moventia
mutuis

solvantur

fragment"

tium

aeternum

quce
adjeeta vel

niutationis Jiabentia
ant

dinem

aut

words

the

shattering

7(5
:

698

witz
Lass-

quoted by

Introd.

Galen,

ca-

of

confirmation
the

from

(p. 426)

per

Nec" ingulf,ratione

ordinem.

from

and

Caelius

What

says of the
receives
the atoms

wiagnudtitu-

speaks

vorjrol UJKOL

apatcapara.

VOTITO.

Sext.

by

also

Aurel.

semet

in

autper

sui met per

schema
per

mtudincm

omnia

conjunct"

faoiant sensiMlia, vim

He

of

(viii.220)

sibi

eundo

rursiim

told

are

avnp"[j.r)Toi, we
Hi. 5.
Math.

mag-

entia,
differ-

atqiiescJwmate

nitud'me

se

pseudo-

9, vol. xiv.

c.

"e -r'by^AffKXrjTTid^T]^

videtur quod mdliusfaGiant

rere
quiditatiscorpora (that being
without
generate bodies
quality,

Kal TTopoi; and

of definite quality); silver is

is
which
that
white, whereas
is
black
it
off from
rubbed
;

350, according to which the predecessor

of Asclepiades (Herato be
elides)declared Opada-para,

the

goat's
of

sawdust

is black, the
These
white.

horn
it

avQptairovtiyicoi
Qpavtrrol
(TroL-^ela

the smallest
in

called ampftoi

oywi

quoted, Phil,

(of. the

passages
ever,
der Gr. II i. 886, 3 ; where, howin Eus. Par. ev. xiv. 23, 3,

Stob.JSbZ.

from

bodies

ascribed

also

primeval bodies Asclepiadesjike

Heracleitus,

Kara

(the theories
Heracleitus

to

foregoing,and

the

i.

in

the

cf.

Placita, i. 13, 2
TLVCL
eAaxzcrra Kal

^y/xarxa
atuep7) seemy
however,
originally to belong
to Heraclides). This divisibility
"

"

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
instead

"

divisible ; but I must

that the
to Lasswitz
this.
f

(therefore capable

loose'

unordered,'

imgeordnet,

oyvos

other

is

therefore,

the
"vapfj"os

not

combined

'

(so that

separated

and

ever,
how-

to

another

one

me,

the

with

yuev

moves

from

each
the

itself for

side

are

oyKoi,

and

the atoms,

by

Pis.
1

c.

the

the

void

Math.

true

sensible

to

alone, because
things are always in a

Becoming:

ad.

K.

viii. 7.

Being

tioned
men-

Theriac.

11, vol. xiv. 250

Sext.

ascribes

Galen,

by

also

are

The

side

have

significance as

same

beside

language, questionable.

should,

prefer to give
signification,
with

to

seem

'in point of

of

contrary,

TraBrjrSiySe KaQd-

aydpju.(ay
oytttav.

r"v

irep

which
loclte)\Trdpot.,
The interpretations

separation), and
e

not

are

the

Asclepiades, on

primitive """avo{JLQitov

Asclepiades

of

atoms

concede

Plato

the

not-

sensible
state

of

A8CLEP1A"ES.

these

theories

had

member

of

been

attributed

to

acknow-

an

CHAP,
IL

ledged
no

doubt

contain

described
individual

the

Trjs
TOUS

^77^6

that

viz.,

probable,
of

what

case

other

limits

of

Qvtr'ias,

the

Sxrre

Tavrb

KaQdirep

sTTLdexecrdaL,

Ka.rA.fftth.7j7r

idfi

7]$,

5vo

of

strictly

not

not

in

one

natural

and

Epicureanism,
confined

as

within

school.

xp6vovs

eAa^icrrous"

influence

was

itself

the
is

show

only

would

from

Asclepiades

in

seems

the

systems,

as

they

Epicurean,

they

departure

but

master,

an

as

school,

Epicurean

noteworthy

the

of

doctrine

the

["%

5uo

"\eje

eTriSei^eiS

r^jv
of

imo^v^iv

5xa

o^vrTjra
tlie

nothing

rrjs

swiftness
can

sliow

pays

(on
of
itself

account

tlie

flow

twice),

ECLECTICISM.

34

III.

CHAPTEE

STOICS

THE

CHAP.

the
B.

TJie

Stoics.

the

AMONG

Stoics

teachers, admitted

occurred, however, subsequently

before

century

The

eclecticism.

have

to

them,

among

the

school

ipjrus

its
tion

of

names

been

beginning

/-XT

of

successor

school
some,

in
even

bination
com-

rise of eclecticism

Boethus,

Pansetius,

school

tlie world"

of

truth

the

"

that

so

undecided

second
"

Zeno
to

as

the

of

one

Tarsus,

of

the

doctrine

of

left

the

ne

and

century

of

is

said

distinctive

the

destrucof

question

similarly, after

him

of the

icorld.

whole,

standpoints.

,-,

Cnrysippus,

perplexed

of his

doctrines
tion

other

of

seat

eclectic

an

Stoics,the

the

the

at

p.

have

to

of the

that

find

towards

with

their

of

the

from

the

on

seem,

more

Posidonius.

,~"

tjie

shall

we

still

chief

the

was

tradition

inclined

with

Already

Supposed

but

school

is connected
and

the

were

of that
In

Christ,

to

/which,

Academy

Peripatetics

preserved

greater purity

the

in

elements.

foreign

This

extent

of

partial divergence

in

its older

first

tionofthe

which,

first

the

that

philosophy,

of

from

considerable

vaciUfi-

schools

remaining
was

POSIDONIUS.

PAN^ETIUS,

BOETHUS,

18,

Numen.
2.

ap.

Zeno,

Chrysippns

Eus.

Pr.

Cleanthes,

taught

the

ev.

xv.

and

doctrine

of
world

r^v

the
:

Kal

conflagration
p.(-v yhp TOVTO
SidSoxov rtj$

rbv

of

the

BOETHU8.

of

Diogenes

Seleucia
this

about

doubtful

his

in

dogma,

Neither

defended.1

later

which

years

became

IIL

he had

previously
statements, however,

of these

__

attested ; 2 though the thingis possatisfactorily

sible
and we can
in itself,
easilyexplainit,especially

is

Diogenes,if the objectionsof

of the world
disciplesagainst the conflagration
the

in

of

case

him

embarrassed

the

nounced

other

him

to

opinion on

the

caused

he

that

know

tradition

Stoic

not

had

from

subject.

only openly

this

on

refrain

his

point,but

As
reon

more

purity of his Stoicism.

before us
An example of this has already come
in his doctrines concerning the theory of knowledge :
criteria

he not

only

side

by

set

and
(z/o"s)

Eeason

described

if he

for

side with

and

Perception

the Aristotelian

up

Desire

Treplrrjs regard

Zyvctiva (pacriv ^Tncf^lv

$\"v.
r"v
eKTrvpcixreajs

c.

15,

thor

5e

Kal

not

%v o-vvt-jri'
yviKa. veos
Atoysvns
ypa^d^evosrip SSyparLri)s eKirvp-

any

JEtern.

Ps.-Philo.
Bern.

248

p.

dxrevs

m.

\tyerai

tye rris fanc'ias"v$oiOL"ras omitted

3

Neither

speaks from
they

know

their

the

of
his

own

themselves

knowledge,
us.

not, therefore,
based.
assertions are
on

We
what

650.

In
D

Tarsus, the
treatise

acquainted
of his from

would

to appeal to
Concerning whom

not

aucan-

with
the
have

him.
cf. Pliil.

"#. G-r. III. i. 46, 1.

4
Ibid. III. i. 71, 1 ; 84, 1.
5
Tbid. III. i. 74 ; 84 sg. ; and
Hid. II. li.
concerning brurrfmij,

witnesses

tell

he

to

consistent

well-instructed

divergence
or

the

ledge,
of know-

of

Zeno

been

have

Science,

to it and

of the Philonic

school,

eVt^xeTv.
2

to

otherwise

as

kTrwrripr)in

but added
place of the Stoic TrpoKrityisf
Perception two other independent sources
not
the recognitionof which was

BoWtus.

important questions approximated

Peripatetic doctrine, so as to imperil the

and

the

to

and

decided

expressingany
to Boethus,3 we

as

CHAP.

nis

dvria

^"^TOW
Stoicism.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
III.

with

the

Stoic

harmonised

with

is still

he would

-of

abode

to

as
upej-ts

presentations
and

practicalends
natural

to

partly

partlyto the

desires,and
of

of

source

cognitions;

or

traces

aims

indeed,

nowhere,

the

Is

this

vovs

stitution
con-

the will, on which

consider
what
we

must

depend

to be

good (La. 582,

3 ; 586,

1098, ~b,3).
Stob.

Ed^Qos rbv

aldepa Qebv aire^yaro. In

opinion of the soul also
faithful

the

to

his
he

Stoic

materialism.
3

The

143.

Se 3v

be understood
as

rfyv

cLirX".vS)vcrQcfipay,
which

Ttov

is to

in the

same
way
definitions
corresponding

the

of other

Stoics

(Phil, d, Gr. III.

i.137, 1, 2),the ^^oviKlv

of the
world is said to have its seat in
the

purest

This

would

not

clude
necessarilyex-

the

ancient

Stoic doctrine

It

spreads

that

part of

through

the

world.

the

world

which

Stoics

from

case

living

be

did

allow.

not

be

conception

there

of

that

Deity its soul",

the

Boethus

ether.

the^parts

in

would

if this

the

itself

all

But

and

creature

But

Diog. vii.

the

determined

Diog. vii. 148 : HOTI"OS

*f-ri Trepl
Overseas ovtriav deov

thence

Mel. i. 60

remained

describe

to

2 ;

JV". i. 7 ;

631, 2 ; 653 ; cf. Mh.

which

reasons

d. 6fr. II. ii. 190

in Phil

he

to the

As

Aristotle

sqq.
describes

as

3
livingbeing ; he rather assignedthe
presented
rethe Deity to the highest sphere, and
the
Him
as
working from thence upon

respect

sLown

world

as

universe.4

In

the

dwelt in

held,

substance,2

ethereal

an

He

he

although

consequentlyrefused

he

its sonl; and

the world

that

admit

not

was

theology

to the Stoic

antagonistic.For

more

others,that (rod

with

but

doctrine.1
Peripatetic

the

the attitude of Boethus

But

empiricisn^ though it perfectly

remains

jected,
re-

only

'

declare

the

living and
$t](nv

OVK

world

animate
*Tj"cu

Philo, JEtern.
Bern.

6 Bets

the

"

be

c.

m.

sense.

to

and

far

so

Philo
with
the

16, p.
rov

excerpt from Boethus, which

now

of the world

given by

Zo |o vi/ras
if these words
belong to
a

motion

Bo^fos

""o

fyvxfy "e

r'obs

K'ara

to

Stoic

me

the

(I

out,
withextract

c.)

view

sponds
corre-

of

out

[_6

oTa
real

KvBepj/'firov

most

i Kal
probable,
at least according to the
re
iraj/ra, ri\ie^

appears

from

Kal creK^vr),
"c.
Kal
floret,
irapiarrdfjisyos
(TvvSpwv

BOETHUS.

this

philosopherto
tells

tradition

Stoic

rejection of

nothing: the

us

have

doubt

no

the

lain in

decisive

fear

of

sublimity and

unchangeablenessof

according

His

to

school,agreed

his

opinion

that

.to the

denies
world.3

Boethus

the

between
of

of

part

every

Deity

oppositionto
he essentially

materialism.,and

activitydirected

every

is therefore

pantheism of

from

in

the

in the

not

Aristotle; like

attempted

Boethus,

in his

with

only directs and guides the

the ruling point, but
stands
beside
Aristotle
it, ready to help ; whereas

God

from

universe

both

him

differs from

the

that

_.__!_.

imperillingthe
Grod, if He were,

Aristotle,but

with

CHAP.

must

cause

connected

substance,
theories

these

In

world.

pantheism,

seekinga

the

to

middle

*"

course

Stqicsand the theism

which
was
subsequently
the

Peripateticside

Book

of

contradiction

of

in the

"

the Universe.92
this is connected

With

the doctrine
the

the

must

the

world.

he opposes

this

of
conflagration

arguments by which

four
the

world

of

Boethus'

first shows

that

result without

the
a

destruction

cause,

for

Of
trine,3
doc-

of the
the

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,

world

there is

that of

all the

different

kinds

of destruction

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

Kal airXavtffiv,%ri
vhdvijcrt

rys

Kal rots fjiepecrtrov

K6crp.ov the
Kal crvvSpcav
(Philo, Kara
-jrapicrrd/jievQs
8* aepi

loc. eit.}.
Vide infra, chapter
*

eTre^oi/crsjs irotdTTjTOS(as ill

of
a
destruction
figure),
(rvyxycrw

ture, of. PML

v,

1).

(chemical
cL

Gr.

mix-

III. i. 127,

ECLECTICISM.

;J3

could

CHAP,

TIL

third main-

The

world.1

the

to
applicable

be

of the world the

tains that after the destruction

Deity

have

would

and
objectfor his activity,

no

sink
the

inaction

into

world-soul,

he

contends

Lastly,the fourth

of the

annihilation

must

only that

the

it had

beginning ; 3

no

theory,the
his

transition

That

this not

from

also that

Stoic

eternity of the

dogma is
Peripatetics.

likewise

Boethus

impossible.

be

Stoic

that of the

to

the

mology
cos-

but for the Aristotelian

of the

the

then

and

but
imperishable,
he exchanged the

was

doctrine

departurefrom

concluded

the Platonic

for

not
/

world

itself be

tire must

would

world

doubtless

had

Boethus

But

Deity be
be
himself
destroyed.
that,after the complete

of nourishment

of the

formation

new

sequently
con-

if the

; nay,

world, this

extinguishedfor want

must

opposed the

world

here

also

belief in

Stoic

utterances
on
prophecy is not asserted ; 4 his own
to an
confined
this subject are
enquiry concerning
similar
and
the prognosticsof weather
things,the
1

For

division
or

"K

weakly
is

that

only

united

entire

quality

of

l/c

is

not

"

that

which

all else in force.

superiorto

An

capable of

Is

dieo-rdr^y,
or
only
ffvvaarroiJLev"v,
which

the

him

not

sition

simultaneously abolished
there would
through trfryxvffis,

were

be
"

transition

of the oj/into the

#y.
(JL)J
2

be

Because
neither

as

pure

avQpa.%nor
only avyl](on which

fire it could

4"Ab",but
cf PMl.
.

d.

body,

especiallyfrom
the third argument;
thepseudoPhilo also (p.249, 4) represents

is

finallyall elements

luminous

presuppose
3
This appears

of

by the other view, for

subsist in the form
still
to
this is
of fire.

world

the

this would

annihilation

maintained

If

G"r III. i.153, 2),and

attacking the
yevijThs KOL
K^or^os.
4

as

presuppo-

el

The

contrary would

6
"{"6aprb$

rather

Cic. Divin.
seem
ii. 42, 88, according1to which
Panastius
units
" Stolois astroloto result

from

prcedicta rejecit
; but
goruin
this only implies that
Boethus
did

expressly

not

belief,
shared

not

it.

that

the
oppose
himself
he

PANJETIUS.

sought

he

which

of

connection

with

Boethus

the

the

o"

Stoicism,
3

Ehodes,

Cic.

born,

and

was

igitur
sionum

i"otest?
Stoieutri

effit,itt

niari

in

nostieorum

et prog

the

is

both,

the

death,
facts

sub

of

either

they

that

B.C.

as

be

from

attended

the

of Seleu-

of Diogenes
143

birth

only

can

determined
he

the

nothing
his

an

openly-

recognised philosopher,
Scipio to Alexandria,
panied
accom-

and

B.C.

Col. 51
i. 33,

2)
father,
his

mentions

That

brothers.

family,

I.e.

Pansetius

know

we

Suidas,

When

from

distinguishes

roce,

celebrated

places

his

as

55

Strabo,

after

living
185-112

younger
of good

the

second

the
Panastius,
younger
of Scipio, this is merely

friend

place

On

told

are

we

and

discourses
; in

the

Strabo,

(vide

655).

p.

year

on

Pa.ncQtio

native

his

approximately

cia

was

a
proof of his ignorance,
shown
by
abundantly
Lynden,
p. 5 sgg.
4
is mentioned
Diogenes

Ms

Dii'in.
wards

Ind.

these,
statement

Ind.

the

is

as

Van

as

Here.

and

Suidas,
by
Cicero,
by
; Antipater,
His
i. 3, 6.
piety to*
latter
is praised by
the

51,

Tlavair.

the

in

teacher

Col.

to

went

""r. III.

Col.

in

B.C., in

Camp.

Hero.
d.

-and

Koman

Lynden

Nicagoras

between

doubt

no

2, 13,
other hand,

the

he

1802.

Leiden,

Concerning

xiv.

or

allow

longer

between

Ind.

from

falls

of

two

In

prognostic and result.

De
Van
Lynden,

there

life

The

and

connection

Rlwdio,

no

his

-ZV"m

jyrognosticorwm,

causce

was

Van

in

philosophy

Stoic

afterwards

B.C.

^Si^es

to

180

He

110

coslove

Stoicus

emphasis

th.e

natural

and

passages

the

to

the

tion
tradi-

of

about

seem,

Panc?tiu":

the

founder

names

perse-

Posidonius.

et

CHAP.

co-

also

chief

rerum

causas

Boetlius

cutismitet

47

ii. 21,

Ibid.

to

readiness

far) aliquid, (of. Phil.

so

rationem

cxplicaret, qiice
Jierent.

c[ui,

oonatum^

esse

earwn

Quis

prfssenBo'evideo

Etsi

{only

hactenus

world, hut

to

distinguished

Antipater.4

causas

opposition

This

it would

8, 13

Divin.

his

introduced

and

elicere

tJiuvi

the

celebrated

assumed

in

views.

was

by Diogenes

he

and

philosopher,

influential

his

in

of the

attitude

other

to

entrance

only

not

school,

his

his

associated

destruction

independent
of

portended

'"

Is

disciple Pansetius,2
doctrine

phenomena

discover.1

to

With

the

2;

Besides

Hero.

Col. 60.

according

to

his

Strab.

siv.

(ap.

heard
676), he
p.
in
Mallos
Pergamus.

own

5, 16,

Crates

also, thePeriegete,is, on

of

Polemo
clirono-

ISO

B.C.

ECLECTICISM.

40

CHAP.
III.

Mu

dence
resi-

household
and

Lselius

over

Appointed
head

of

ike Stoic

his friends

were

him

won

Scipioalso
youths to Stoicism.4
in 143 B.C. he
his companion when
head of a deputationto the East,

for
at the

was

sent

and

to Alexandria.5
particularly

After

apparentlyhe

of which

Athens/

in

death

the

leadershipof

the

Antipater,Pansetius undertook
school

hearers,and he

and

zealous

many

chose

lie

of

ill
Home,

of the
inmate
an
long remained
ScipioAfricanus,the younger.2 Scipio

Kome,1 where

of
the

the

was

school
in

Athens.

logical grounds, regarded

his

teacher

disciple. The
which

Ms

(EoAe^.

seems
Ei/Tjy.)
corrupt. Of.
Van Lynden,
hardy in loc.,
1

Whether

the

whether

Pansetius

visited
was

inform

PriiiG.

PMlowpJi.
that

presupposes
in

Kome

him

(O.

i. 12, p.
Pansetius

when

to

does

But
have
Scipio must
already well acquainted
him

to
have
invitation.
3

the

Vide

and

Cic.

Veil.

Paterc.

Mur.

Ind.

31,

Of.
JV.

A.

xvii.

21,

4
5

Vide supra, p. 10 s$.

Cic. Acad.
ii. 2, 5 ; Position.

ap. Prut.

I. c.} and Apophthegm.

imp. Scrip. Min. 13 s#.

xii. 549,
d.
200; Athen.
(where JHoffei^c^viosis in any

case

slip of

the

Justin.

that

he

died in Athens

journey,therefore

that

he

did

in 142
that

B.C., and

journey,

other
who
to

probably

hand,
died

have

as,

Rutilius

after

heard

and
81
him

before

on

the

Eufus,

B.C., seems
in

(supra, p. 11, 3), which

scarcelyhave happened

Kome
can

before

Ind.

is
Gf.

Hist, xxxviii. 8.
Here. Col. 53 : StdSoxos

the

after

for

memory

HavairLos, which, however,

repeated xiv. 657 $#.).

thither

latest

Suidas

1.

Cf.

at

8, 24.
Gell,

TLavair. Tlo\v@ios.

i. 13, 3.
How
long Pantetius was in Eome
we
do not
know
but
he
as
came
;

Alexandrian

panied
accom-

the

army.
Cic. Mn.
iv. 9, 23 ; ii.
i. 26, 90 ; ii. 22, 76.

p.

66;

Col. 56, 2,

if he

Scipioto

been

an

Here.
as

years.

Scipio had
niUitiaque"

dond

speak

to

seems

Teg. et

following note,

Pro

him

the

him.

such

given

with

was

with

of

that

and

suppose
for a considerable

here

says

him

777)

vited
Scipio in-

accompany

must

we

number

Kome

Plutarch

us.

B.C.,
he worked

Vellejus

and

invited

accord,or
by others,tradition

there

not

36 s%.
after

journey,

of his own

not

Bern-

this occurred

Alexandrian

135-130
that

Suidas

of

text

the latter

asserts

as

than

rather

these

further

not

(Cic. Tmo.

that

was

of
did

that

offered

return

to

37, 107)
the

right

citizenship in Athens, but

noc
accept it (Procl. in

Hesiod.
no

v.

(Suid.);

again

Ehodes
he

statements

Kal

'H,u. 707,

after

Plutarch) ;

SE.

doubt

there

was

in

Athens

PANJETITTS.

head

until about

been

active

in

That

B.C.1

110

he had

previously

CRAP.
III.

similar

capacityin his native cityis

and
teacher
author/ scholar and

likely.2As

not

41

HlS

ing
for

society
called

meals

common

(Athen.

Pansetiasts
The

186, a).

pig, De

1869),

Panaatius

SchepAgain. (Son-

3 sq. to make
of
the
head

p.

the
and

Khodian,

of

not

school

and

foregoing,

by

the

by

proofs

the

"iven infra,p. 42, 1, and

( Mnesarchus

nian
Athe-

the

settled

is

v.

of

attempt

Position.

dersh.

Posidonius

We

and

written

cannot

he
when
was
very
for 30 years ; but especially
could
because
Posidonius

young),

otherwise
his

scarcely

disciple;nor
much

occurred
who

came

found

Mnesarchus

the

had

filled this

end

of

have

there,

(Cic. De

and

Orat,

the

Lynden,

The

best

at

and

school, and
towards

post

second

Van

been

Rhodian,

Athenian

Concerning

the

century.

his

writings vide

p. 78-117, 62 sqq.
known
of these are

the books
Phil

had

the

not

ireplravKadriKOvros (cf.
*#.)"

d. Gr. in. i. 273, 3, 27G

acknowledged,
Cicero,to
work
of

according to
profound
subject,the model

be the
that

on

Cicero's

also

most

There

own.

quoted

work

are

the

on

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

to have

seems

his

taken

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
and

11, 45)

have

not

become

quasstor

B.C., but
after
that

110

long
Zumpt,
Hist.
3

also

not

fore
be-

Alfi. d. BerLAead.

his

treatise

"1

1842;

Suidas

1878).

Hirzel

treatise

to

he

right,while

says

cr%oA^v5J %"rxw fur

Uavairiov.

among

v.

Cicero,
him
37, 107, reckons

those

g%i

do'immi
nungwwri
and on the other

manifestly

Nat.

But

semel

egressi

revertemmt

hand

presupposes

Suidas
that

Tubero
Cicero
the

book,

Qe"v.

probably
(Jahrb*
135
*".)"

from

The
been

have
may
for the second

Tiiseulana

(cf Zietzschmannj
.

p.

ii. 30t

section, with

the
v.

is

1879,

this

of

rest

he

source

DC.

Schwenke

PJdlol.

derives

that

supposes
also the

be

S. 104

this when

Quellen wti
Freiburg,

Dnin.

of Cicero's
De
(80).
and
'Aira/i.)75-61, 154,
(IlocreiSitjy

PJdl

presupposes
of Posidonius

Two.

Die

Cic. ; Biich, De

very
Vide

date.

tioti.

according to
only be possible

if Pansetius
of

mediate
im-

of Panagtins

successor

the head

the

schools

been

it

later,for Crassus,
quasstor to Athens

as

Pan?etius

not

have

can

been

in Ehodes, which
the dates
would

p. 52, 3

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
1

had

the
donius
Posi-

letter

to

used

by

book

of

Disputationes
De

ICHTi
and

Tusc. J)is~

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

and
enjoyed great reputation,1

he
philosopher,

I?L__probable that
with

for the

greater success
The

i* did-

Chrysippus had

since

one

no

had

undergone

con-

Panaetius

Though

alteration in his hands.

siderable

worked

Stoicism.

spreadof

system, however,

Stoic

it is

agreed with its principlesand found no part of it

interest,consistentlywith
yet his own
superfluous,2
the spiritof the period,was
chieflydirected to the
3 and
he therefore endeavoured
practicalside of philosophy
;
the

(hereindeparting from

when

scientific

the

always involves
Font.

put.

Halle, 1868) ;

hand

other

(De

whose

Pansetius,

rectlyopposed
biit,as
H7wd.

Corssen

Bonn,

tise of

view

to that

says

1878),

is

di;

(De Po^id.
a

Athens

in

and

of

has been
This, after what
said, scarcely requiresa special
proof. Cicero, e.g., calls him
(Divin. i. 3, 6) vel prineeps
1

and

princess
by

to

number

have

we

been

quota-

'the

handed

the

but

us;

and
that

the

III. i. 61, 3.

teristic of the
him

his

from

Stoicorum.,

physical propositions

Pansetius

down

coni-

Chrysippus.

is evident

in Part

A few

trea-

Posidonius,

of

tions

Col,

with

Posidonius

is confirmed

and

; in

Seneca, Ej).33, i,

Which

title

com-

told of his honourable

him

pares

of

of Gieero
in

held
are

s^.)* Zeno,Cleanthes,

treatise

we

burial

thinks

Disp. p.

in

sought

be

to

71

it,

to

and

to harmonise

"hiewas

of

Titsculan.

Heine

is not, as
Font. Tuso.

Disp.

the

on

source

of the

first book

the

chief

the

subordinated

objects are

attempt

an

to

this

But

form.4

attractive

the

general
a more
intelligible
practicalinterest,

to bring that aspect nearer

school)
comprehensionby presentingit in

and

of his

usage

most

greater
charac-

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

Gimp.
sided

the

Ind.

Hero,

dialectic

Col. 66, praiseshis manyknowledge, and mentions

been

68) the

2, 7

esteem

in which

definition

quoted
Cic. Fin.
; ii.

from

has

iv. 28, 79 ;

10, 35.

ever

him.

Off, i.

PAN"TIT7S.

bine

of view.

differingpoints

assumed

freer attitude

**

Pansetins,therefore,
the

towards

doctrine

not
withhold
predecessors: he would
philosophers the recognition due to them
r

Aristotle,Xenocrates, Theophrastus,and

Dicsearchus;

his

and

great that it might

follow him, rather
of

adhere

who

one

admiration

seem

he

than

Zeno.1

of

Plato

have

would

It

was

preferredto
be

cannot

appreciated the

pected
ex-

of

merits

the

'

he

of Panastius

the

treated

from

the Stoic
his

authorityof

dogmas show
spect
school,in re-

philosophy,with the same

independence of
judgment that he displayedin regard to questions
He
of literaryand historical criticism.2
disputed,
28, 79 : semhabuit in ore
Platonem,
perque
ThcoAristotelem, Xenocratem,
plirastum, Dictparohum, 'litip-

Proclus

Tusc. i.
scripta declarant.
1,). Jnd.Herc.
82,79(yi^djp.4:4:,
Col. 61 : %v yap
iffxvp"s 0iAo-

to the

Cic.

iv.

Fin.

sius

rS"v
7rap"[v65]a"["]"
a[AA"]
'A"a5m
r^v
7xiwv[ciw]v [ri
Of
S^fcu/ [KOIrbv Uepi~\ira.rQV.

ica!

treatise

Grantor's
he

(Cic.

it should

word

be

for

Acad.

word.

Proclus

in Tim.
written

of

Plato's

Kal "\\ot
do

not

135)
by heart,
According to

50 B, he
a

TimcBMS

Proclus,

ii. 44,

learned

to have
on

seems

commentary
; the

however,

words
riai/ccrr.

TtXarcoviKav.,
necessarily imply that
rives

the

rtav

Platonists

may

also be translated

tins

and

he

Posidonitts
remarks

is meant

vi.

by
Ehodes,

Parmenides
Proclus

in

25, cannot

be

by

vi. T.

belonging

from

on

mentioned

Parm.

'Panae-

school.' Whether

philosopher

are

they

;
:

others

some

Platonic

or

the

ascertained.
2

Affliction

on

himself

reckoned

among

whose
"pLKoapicrrQT"X.r}s^

Kal

TrA^T"jy

said

Stoic doctrine*.

so

to

*" tki'

philosophersso impartiallythat he should

trines
scrupulouslyto the traditional docvery
of a single school : and, in fact, the many

deviations

that

Relation

esteemed

earlier

other

he highly
"
J

"

IIL

of his

from

CHAP.

careless

of

accustomed
tradition.
the

cerning
dialogues
name

of

respect

exception
in

manner

majority

this

is in

ParuBtius

remarkable

the

to the

which

ancients

to deal with

the
are

learned

opinion congenuineness of the

the
passing under
His

Socrates,

judgment concerning

and

his

the

writ-

ECLECTICISM.

44

CHAP.
III.

like

Boethus, the doctrine

the

world;1

ings

of

of

Ariston

discussed

though

and

Chios

Phil.

in

he

iil 2,9, p. 1090, D

III. i. 35, 1.
II. 1, 206, 1, and
from
We
Plutarch, Artst.
see

27, and

Athen.

that

was

he

the

bigamy

from

Plut.

corrected

he went

his

and

{Sclwl.in

in

as

(cf,Phil.
have
his

opinion

but

the

another

that

fact

Socrates

felt

Pansetius

nation,
necessity of critical examirarely felt in his time,
On the
is not affected by this.
the

other

hand

it is in the

rests

highest

than
have

authorship of thePhado

that

upon

any

the

had

in-

that there
admirable

so

no

does

Cic.

ever

or

lay the

to

durability.

its
JV. D.

whether

would

world

occasion
on

the

assumed

offer any contradiction

Stoic do.es not
here

ii. 33, 85,

: if the
to

come

the world

only for

5'

long
notprove that he had no
about it,but only that
necessary

c.

is

the

to

will

definitel
in-

an

period,this does

Momm-

seniants, p. 407 sq.',cf. 405.

1
Dwg. vii. 142 : Havainos
m.

it

of the

stress

last for

Philo,

in

philosopher who
destruction

length

Mtevn.

universe
view

nmndi, and

nothing

decision

at

pro-.

qiwciita stabilis est mimguam

dus atqiie ita eoliferet ad permane-ndim, tit niltil UB excogitcLri quide-mpossit aptius, for a

misunderstanding, as I
shown
concisely in Part

II. a, 384, 1, and more

in the
Commentationes

universe

whole

with

colwmatas
is

Nor

ground

other

the

on

bably emanating from Pansetius

ii. 45, 115, 46,
(ap. Oic. N. D
is
asserted
it
emphatically
119),

sertion have
degree improbable that the aschief
of his having denied

Plato's

the

upon

it is also quite consistent

; and
disthat in a sertation
therewith

framed

1493

Ran.
AristojjJi.

speaking of

guardedly

been

sqq. ; cf. Hirzel, Unters. zu Cic.

i. 234) that Aristophanes,I. c.,
is

manner

's

conjecture

writings,
respecting Archelaus
d. Gr. I. 860) may

expressed

had

after his
himself

too

of Ariston

matter

unfounded,

we

investigation. point

closer
the

Aristides

""

fyrfyv TU"V
K6cr/j.ov

TOV

els Trvp /zeraj8oA7?v),

though
learn from it that Pansetius

oAwy

of

agrees
i. 414

elvou vo/Aifci
(TLav. IT iday are pav
Kal IJLO.X.XQV
apeffKovffav avrq" TTJV
aWiOTyra

he

1, that

possiblethat

in

of

statement
wrong
Phalerius
ing
concern-

through
It is

it

as

Socrates, and

of

x"P^y^a

first,

Arist.

Demetrius

far

the

ttavair.

Eel.

Stob,

substance

this

With

Z", in

556,

dispute the story

to

seems,

xiii

the

r}VTO/jL6\"r)(rcw.
Epiph.

avrbs

are

that

said

only

6fr.

d.

of
conflagration

of the

35, p. 24-8, purpose,

for
the

his

proof

opinion
it is not

immediate
of

world

"

yovv
"ray

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

eternityof the
can
able? we
Platonic

world

soul's

with

Pancetium

quo

of

original,the

which

word
as

of

to be

are

account

them

; nor

that

can

he

was

real

this

represent

have

may

Balbus

oral

of

(cf. Comment.

communications

defenders

the

among

as

that

But

school

(cf PML
.

and

sq.\

as

the

of the Stoic doctrine

since Zeno

(PMl.

the

as

rule admitted

II. i. 876

d. Or.

the

were

tetics
Peripa-

Gr.

d.

II. ii. 836,

probable that

to me
929)rit seems
he
had
once
Paasetius, when
given up the Stoic dogma, did

half

remain
to

over

the

that

at

went

generally

was

alternative.
is

This

Tusc.

but

way,

Peripatetic,which

perk "I

the next

clear

i. 32, 78.

doctrine

That
40'3 sq.
Moitvnmen.
p.
Adv.
Nat.
ii. 9, names
Arnob.
Pansetius

end.

no

was

by the Platonic

speaking

as

recollection

his

ployed
em-

language

of

form

of

space

aiStoTTjs
(nor in

having

not

tain
uncer-

Panaetius's

meaning*, for he

from

infer from

we

even

about

to

to Cicero's

laid

the

is also stated

chief opponents

learned

merely by hearsay that Pangetius was

sceptical concerning
the world's conflagration. The
words

certain

former

Cicero's

have

cannot

only limited

to

di-

author

more

that of the Stoics.1

not

pression
ex-

taken

be

from

Pansetiusnor

Greek

probhe decidedlypreferred the

entirely/2 It

mode

neither

can

from

it

opinion

death

addubitare
this

but

cebant)

in his

this, he

after

denied

but

STOICISM,

theoryto

Aristotelian

or

existence

time,

was,

that

see

connection

In

TO

of

soul

Cicero

continued

Cic.

the Stoic

limited

has been

of the

est
iffitiir

from

After

duration

repudiated,
Nwrnguid,

M.

causes,

amicns

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
is

the

of

of these

For which

decided

he had

ries
theo-

two

he

whether

"

Stotcos

nostros

A.

non

semper
JiT. Send

Istos rero,

rep'relienclAs

repudiated
world
are

if

beginning of
an
as
ending

"

told.

not

aal

varov

well

as

The

they really

ayripcav

do

even

not

beyond

o:0a-

from

emanate
us

of

Plato's

Kal tidvotfov
{Tiwi.33, A) j
the further statements
carry
the

us

the

of

having

with

certainty

question of the end

world,

of

so

we

ayfjpa in Epiphanras,

Pansetius, remind
and

words,

the

no

completely

since

the

beginning
included

notion

damns
suo

igiturPanaatio
dissentienH
locis

omnibus

"c.
ore-

Platone

enim

quern

divininn,

g/uem,
sanetis-

sapientiss^mium^ quern

simwiij quern Somernm

pMlosopTiorum appellat^ Jiujushanc
imam

tate

Vult

sententiam

enim,

quicquid
nasci

de immortali-

animorum

autem

probat.

non,

quod

natum

anivnos

negat*

nemo

sit
.

interire
.

is not

autem

adfert rationem

in the

esse,

quod doleat,quin

alterant:
:

nihil

id (egrum

CHAP.

__._IIL_

ECLECTICISM,

40

CHAP.

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

he reckoned
the
the

qitoqiiepossit: quod autem

in morbum,
cacLat, id etiam, intwiturum

ergo etiam

mos,
as

dolere

1863, p. 8 sq.\

existence

an

choice

sarily
neces-

and

of

doctrine

the

oppose

death, but

eternal

an

had

merely,

meaning
from

the

tinuance.
con-

this
see

them.

which
He

in

manner

Thes

absolute

i. 18, 42, it would

believed
Paneetius
of the

the

the

denial

that
appear
in the lution
disso-

immediately

soul

death.

after

it is here

Is

autem,

animus,

said, qui, si

est Jiorum

g_uatuorgenerum^

quibus owi-

esc

i%dieuntur, ex
anima
constat, ttt
flammata,
video
videri
Pana'tio,
potissimvm
nia,

Pansetius, indeed,
distinguishes
quite clearlyfrom those Stoics

only

had

he

between

tions
objec-

not
can

we

introduces

Cicero

the

that

But
of Pansstius

doned
aban-

conflagrationof

unlimited
acceptance of
Tusc.
From
immortality.

its

immortality so far as this main*

tains not
merely continuance
after

force.

motive
for
world, he had
no
attributing to the soul a limited

(He

even

would

Stoic

orthodox

the

mar,
Disput. Wei-

Tuscul.

Fontibw*.

Heine

to

external

to

solution
dis-

and

last,Panastius

at

Now,

interire.

concede

I must

but

When,

ani-

autem

disease

to internal

not

exse

const

are

swperiora cajjessatnecesse

eat*

are

JVi7i.ilenim

diM

and

petunt. Ita,
procml a terris

qui ajnnt animos

manere.

previouslydisposed of, and

remain
there ~?H en
only two
that
of Plato
possibleviews,
that
Pansetius
endless
maintains
an
of

that

which

"

duration

of

and

which

that
it.

The

death,

nies
altogetherde-

turn

suum,

cesse

est

evident

When

'the

is

$roni)

permanent

objectionswhich

same

the

from

even

after

life

genera,

the

Heaven

base

must

not

their

unlimited

the

existence

that

argument

therefore

diseased, and
also

they

die,but
are

able

not

themselves
the whole;

the

on

the

they

according

view

may
that

to

fate

would
his

cumb,
suc-

theory,

id

evenit

cons

here

of

magis

in

Pansetius

whom

he
of

had
such

soul
must

we

exalted

the

to

of

event,

after
is that

himself
found

cerning
con-

of the

being annihilated
death/ the inference
was

that

remarks

is

ne~

ccelitm,.

Pansetius

it

even

liahi-

in

nature

that

sire,

ant

erv

its

the
of

super a semper
siv-e dissipantur,

being presupposed,

it

to withdraw

from
for

on

they become

et

IIOG etiam

the
admit

JICPC

ferantur

Cicero

Panaetius,
quotes from
especially the second : he who
represents souls as lastingtill
the world,
his denial
of

et

view

Cicero

of
conflagration

habent

with

the

trine
doc-

dissolution

of

soul.
Nemes.
96

De

Nat.

Iffom.

$6 "5

: Tlaz/ainos
p.
rb /iev $wr)riK.bv ryjs itaQ*

c.

15,

RELATION

The

first of these
l

theories

the

but

TO

second,

STOICISM.

is not

of

the

in

47

much

tance
impor-

CHAP.
II L

discrimination

of

duala psychological
(j"vcrt,$"
presupposes
Panseforeignto Stoicism.2
ism5 which is originally
tius here follows the Peripatetic
doctrine,as in his
of
theory of immortality. "We are again reminded
it in his ethics,,
"bythe division of the virtues into
he also departed
theoretical
and practical.3That
from the severityof 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.

TTJS

14

in

(pva-ecas.

Tertull.

Dimditur

autem

partes
in

mine

nunc

the

from

205,

this

dependence

Stoic
of

notion

that

follows

of

here

he himself
this

given

meaning

the

to

the

un-

truly

dominion

\6yos (ratio)

the

it is

details, and

first have

may

which

(to

in what

Stoical

duas

quingue

Biels, Doxogr.

and

An.

De

\_anima\

in

to

perfectlyconceivable

TTJS fyvxris j"epo

ov

far

extends

Se

nbv

how

able

pepos

the

over

in
Theodoret, dpfjify
(temeritas).
1
Bitter (iii.
698) undoubtedly
Aff. v. 20, adds : ah
in it.
Aristotele}et in sex a Pancetio, seeks too much
2
old
The
Stoic psychology
storation
reThrough Diel's luminous
derives all practical activities
the
of
text, those

parallel
passage
CUT.

Or.

are,1 set

conjectures

Zietzschmann

which

Disp.
with

Font.

the

infers

in

ration-is

est

ethics

of

with

that

Pansetius
the

him.

distinction

I
Even

holds

throughout, it

in

has

no

of

distinction

in its

occasion

^v%^

and

to

former

be

changed

afterbirth

supposed
into the

Phil,

d. Gr.

III. i. 197, 1).

3
Diog. vii. 92.

Diogenes indeed maintains

(vii.128) : "5 /leVroiTlavalnos
4

his
of

part

cannot

agree
if Cicero in
to Panastius

is still

and
Tjyt/jLovLKbv,

Platonic

irrational

and

soul,

this section

altera

pa/rticeps^ altera

Aristotelian
the

in

jpartes

giiarum

followed

rational

in

the

materialism

"f"vfri$
; the latter is rather

ii. 21,

Tusc.

from

for the

scripts
manu-

et
qiiingiie

animus

enwi

duos,

and

the

this author

Cic.

tributus

expert}

of

When

from

(est

47

Mine

Pan.

Tusc.

sgq.')connects

20

reading

:
sex

rest

at

(De

question-

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

1) is decidedly

{GeschicJite

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

stronglythe
perhaps emphasisedmore
desirable thingsand things to be
between

he

though

_^__distinction

rejected;and similarlythe

the

to

traceable

be

wise,,1
may

of the

fadeeta

the

that he denied

statement

clearlythe difference
brought out more
pain and the
the Stoic
superiorityover

he

fact that
between

nevertheless,

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
possibleviews of their propositions,
many
least into
him
preferenceto those which brought

ordinary theory.2 The

the

collision with

brated
by the tendency of his cele-

is also evinced

work

iv.

Phil

sayino- that
in

382)

Accord-

to Pansetius.
Plutarch {Demosth. 13),

regard

ine

to

he tried

to

:
atperbv

pleasure according

to

all the

when

narrower

the

sense

we

in

the

emotion

ot

by pleasure

understand

is

to nature

; but

inconsistent

not

every emotion
Of. ibid. III.
nature.
to
contrary
218, 3.
1
10:
am\A. (Ml.
xii.
is like

$5"w^, it

Demos-

Katin* alone

the

81* autb

that

prove

held

thenes

be

in

trust to it

cannot

we

right

is

perfected

for the

expresslydesigned,not

is

for this

that of Cicero

Duty, the prototypeof

on

deavour
en-

same

less

doubted

Cicero

it; and

5%

have

himself

he

would

yntria enim

ex-

says
that

airaGeia

atgue

non,

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
Sext.
is not

only

there
73) that
pleasure contrary
"

xi.

Math.
a

to nature, but

pleasureaccord-

ino- to nature,'a'manif est de viaolder Stoicism,

the
tion from
both
questionable,
this seems
from

the

passage

itself

tantum,

he

and

fadicioPanatfo

vnyprolxtia

est.
abjec-kaque
2

is

This

Cicero, Fin.
to

cir-

that, according to
iv. 9, 23, in the

cumstance
letter

the

from

seen

de

Tubero

paticndo, he

did

not

dolore,

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
in

Phil.

d.

Gfr.

declare

that

esset ali"ni,
isathingindifferent(a5*a"j"ojooi/},

with

which

the

theory

of

esset

deinde

perferendi.

qiue

ratio

'

PANMTIU"

wise

RELATION

but

man,

only

for those

49

STOICISM,

TO

who

making

are

CHAP,

pro'

the

of

treat

told

however,

the

Varro

moral

them.2

at

three

contains
we

later

otherwise

are

of

not

real deviation

no

doctrines
His

scholar,Mucius

the

of

Panastius

able.
consider-

more

Pansetius

of

Scsevola,puts forward

period),when

he

says

is

the

divergences from

theology of his school were

can
only be the doctrine

It
his

the

with

traditional

which

all this

does

it

reason

ethics,and what

Stoic

concerning

harmony

in

this

but
only
/caropdcoj^a^

Meanwhile,
from

for

; and

wisdom

in

gress

(like

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
are

This

of

classes

results

least

at

from

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

such

that
to
an

they

as

will

man

further

the

treatise
d.

not

are

For
Phil.

fall in

love, he

do
they will both
from
keep themselves
agitation of the mind,

yet

details
of

wise

Panaetius

see

Ap.

Clem.
Stob.

Alex.
Ucl

he
with

Strom,

ii.

life

particular duties
aiming from
standpoints at the

compares
marksmen

different

What

mark.

same

Cicero

quotes

(Off. ii. 1-4, 51) has also an

analogy (Pliil.d. 6rr. III.i. 263)
the

ancient
in

utterance

truly

Stoics.

Off.

Zenonian.

According

Civ. D.
was

The

ii. 17, 60, is

**CLi"fra,
chapter

273, 276

ii. 114, he

of

clares id solutti lornim,,qiwd esset

ap. Stob. _BuZ.ii. 112,

sq.
2

claim

nature;
ap. Cic.
11 $q. ; 7, 34, he
cleto

Jwnestum;

416, B;

the

according
Off. iii. 3,

with

men.

concerning

6rr. III. i. p.

forth

sets

iv.

to

27, whose

doubtless

Varro.

His

vii.Varro.

Augustine,
authority

'

ECLECTICISM.

50

CHAP,
IIL

for it contains
things the
many
public religion),
dicial
knowledge of which is either superfluousor prejuthe latter category,
the people; under
to
of
Scsevola places the two
propositionsthat many
honoured
as
the
gods as Heracles,
personages
"

Dioscuri
the
.ZEseulapius,
beings,and the gods are not
for
represented,

are

and

that the authors

comprehensionin

of

know

do not

the

in

of it must

selves
regulatethem-

the first to

was

of

threefold

of

service

gods accordingto
the masses.
Though

this discrimination

forward

age,

naturallyresulted 2
only be regarded as

Pansetius

whether

no

sex,

of the

in their doctrine
power

no

they

as

this it

public institution

convenient

order, and

has

God

could
existingreligion

that the
a

in appearance

true

From

members.1

no

the

human

merely

were

"

the
we

bring

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
: though
religionfound expressionand was justified
either of them, in the
that
known
it is not
so
interpretationof myths, which was
allegorical

of the

"

"

much
1

in

Among

favour
those

portions

philosophicaltheology
are

cone

the

with

of

which

for the people,

unnecessary
^Mch
Augustine is
era ing

silent,

we

reckon

must

the

purely philosophic doctrines,

incomprehensibleto him.
2

Varro

says

this

more

defi-

nitely.
3

In the

Placita

(cf Phil, d.
.

Scoics
6fr.

IIL

treated

as

Stoics
Stoic
of

and

from

i.

317, 3)

which
this

belonging

universally;
from

the

whom

Plaeita-

but

the
here

to

is
the
the

author

takes

his

only have belonged

to the
later period, which
is
also indicated
by the appeal to
Plato, i. 6, 3.
excerpt

can

PAKMTIU"

Stoic

no

the

most

himself

RELATION

could

seems

ades.3

We

of desertion

Stoa

of that

His

the

main

another

quite
later
its

to

the

tends

accustomed

d.

quotations from
chap. vi. end.
2

Even

as

that

of

one

the
its

less,
is,nevertheof Antiochus

philosophers he

of.

had

mistakably
un-

hitherto

been

purely hostile position.6

"r.

III. i. 3-10,1, and

supra,
he alone
p. 42, 1) that
among
the Stoics positivelydiscarded,

d.

the

infra

rate, astrological sooth-

at any
not

are

him

Stoicism

III.

Varro,

this

on

testimonies

convict

understandingwith points of

an

Gr.

which

with,

325,

p.

to

maintain

to
Phil

Yide

Carne-

since
principles,4

from

earlier

regarding which

view

kind

of

this account

his school

to

sider
con-

true
in the
Academy : he remained
doctrine; yet in his theories,and his

towards

attitude

criticism

acknowledged
relation

to

belief
namely, in his disabove:2
herein,

"

the Stoic

from

time

members.5

to

accustomed

mentioned
soothsaying,
to have
accepted the
cannot, however, on

him

of

51

beyond
Pansetius
general determinations.
placed
in open
oppositionto the Stoic tradition,on

of
he

STOICISM.

entirelyescape,1went

ever

the school was

point which
of the highestimportance

TO

the

saying.

point
quite unani(vii. 149)

Of

Cic.

Divin.

QIICLTB oniittut

i. 7,

12:

Car-

Diogenes
itrgere
etiam
simply : a,vvir6"rrarov avT-fiv neades, quod faeiebat
Pancetius
requirens,Jupplter-ne
[rty fj.avTiK^v~]
"pT](n. JEpiphan,
ab
a,
III. 2, 9 : rys
larva, corvum
/j-avreiascornicem
G. Hcrr.
dextera
the
canere
On
ouSey
jussisset.
KO.T
eTreff-rpe^ero.
4
other
hand, Cicero says, JDivin.
Epiphanius is entirely in
mous.

says

''

i. 3, 6
negare
dubitare

Nee

vim

tamen
esse

se

ausus

dimnandi^

dixtt.

est

the

sed

the
vious

wrong

Similarly

words
note

he adds, after
in the prettal ra
QeS"v
-n-epl

when

quoted
:

we

see

propounded his
and
decidedly,
pretty

that

XeydftevaavtfpGi.
eteye yap fyX-tiva"pov zlvai,rbv ireplOeov \6yov.
5
Supra, p. 42, 2.
6
other opinions quoted
Some
from Panaetins are unimportant

Meanwhile
33, 107.
i. 7, 12,
Du'in.
from

ii.

Avad*
he

Divin.

ii. 42, 88 ; 47, 97

doubts

from

(cf Phil,
.

_,

o
A

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

52

III.

Contem-

Pansetius,in adoptingthis

That

CHAP.

is

only by what

proved,not

poraries
the deviations
and

the

alone among

stand

did not

we

of Boethus

from

of

mode

thought,

Stoics of that time,

of

above

have

seen

the

Stoic

doctrine,

disci-

jplesof
Pancetius.

Heraelides.

told of his fellow

disciples,
Heraclides and Sosigenes. The former
opposed the
Stoic propositionconcerning the equality of all
faults ; ] the
latter,like others, is said to have
by what

also

but

are

we

inconsistencies,to combine

attempted, not without

theoryof the mingling of substances

of Chrysippus.2 But
know
we
nothing
either of these contemporariesof Pansetius.

the Aristotelian
that

with

further of
his

In

school

own

and

here, again,
the

of

have

to

historical tradition.
with

the

his

character

philosopheris

far

concerned.

as

Lyndon

is

as

we

are

of his

quainted
ac-

numerous

only

one

to the

mixture, for which

concerning

gard
cf Phil, d, "r. III. 126

Van

mentions

s^O

But

meagreness

(72

ception
con-

doctrine,

predominant.

regret the
Though

the

the

Stoical

of many

names

Posidonius
disciples,3
so

the

of

favoured, was

we

that

suppose

may

treatment

he himself

which

we

Tives

avr"v,

rris

sgq.)oi 5e

^ApLcrroreXovs

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

these

among

his

comets

"

that

the

inhabited
1

Diog. vii. 121.

Alex.
m.

Aphr.
Of

Chrysippus,

is

zone

Isaq.
iii.
96).
Temp.

(Ach. Tat.

JPetav. DoctT.

a,

torrid

the
ol

follow

in

the
into

IT.

/J"e"s 142,

Stoics

after

names

Aristotle

tirely
en-

the sense
of
(this seems
fell
imperfect text), they

contradictions.

Among

these

should

be

the

following

mentioned

"Xpvffitrircp
of
(1) Greeks:
Mnesarchus,
in
ffvfjufrepovrat
Athens, who
(especially reJaad also heard
ftev

SCHOOL

whose

OF

opinionswe

53

PAN^TIUS.

details.

possess any

Of the

snc-

only

con-

CHAP.
III.

of

cessor

Pansetius,Mnesarclms,

De

Orat.

2nd.

78, 5

Pansetius

of

successor

Here.

i. 11, 45 ; of. 18, 83 ;

Com-p. Col. 51, 4 ;

cf
tyit.Dioff.

III. i. 33,

2), who

Phil

thynian(l)?o^.v.
Col. 75), with

d. Or.

Diphilusis

heard

likewise

in Athens

Antiochus

can

of Messene
Antipater, the
73), Damocles
(Cic. (ibid.76, 4).DemetriustheBi-

and

Diogenes

we

Stoic.

Here.

his

father

also mentioned

To him

the

(Cic.Acad.

84 ; Ltd.

whom

belong,

as

as

it pears,
apin An-

epigrams
thol.6rr.ii.$"tJac. Dionysius
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,
nus'
Off.iii.15, 63 : 23, 89 sgg. From
Dioff.,it follows that Dardalikewise

was

and

disciple

was

the

at

to

school

Diogenes,

in

with

common

archus.

Their

probably

(as Zumpt

AM.
Kl.
rus

of

the

was

supposes,

the

distinguished

I), i.
Col.

Here.

Ind.

34, 93)
53, names
among
of Pansetius, but
before

(N.

Epicurean
the
who

is to be
Seleu-

mentioned,

with

Zumpt confuses him. His

leadership of the school must
the
in
fallen
have
beginning
whom

of the first century, and

even
began before the
the

second.

perhaps
end

Apollonius

of his own
on
separate work
Seneca
t
seems
Benevolence,
have
the greater part o"
taken
what

he

Senef.

i.

quotes
3,

from

9 ; ii.

him

(Sen.

18, 2, 21, 4;

of them
comprehensive,
quoted by Diogenes (see
Ms
Index), who, according to
the
Rose
(in which
epitome
'E/car. for
rightly substitutes
some

are

dedicated
had
Keforwv),
own
biography.

his

disciples thynians

the

from

from

treatise, if not

same

iii. 18, 1 ; vi. 37, 1 ; E$. 5, 7 ;

6, 7 ; 9, 6. Several other works,

Mnes-

successor

Cicero
Athens, whom
of
a
as
contemporary

and

cian

he

d."j3erl.Acad.Hist. Phil.
1842, p. 105) Apollocio-

describes
Zeno

As

called the

time

same

of Pantetius, he would
the
have
conducted

successor
seem

of

Panaatius.

Antipater,and

the

Athenian

an

two

of
of

Jjjco(Tnd.

Nicander
Here.

onus

Here.

of

74, 77).

Pontus

75, 5 ;

Tarsus

him
Bi-

and

76, 1).

(JUpit.D).

Mnasagoras
r am

to

The

Pa-

(Ind.

Pausanias

of
Plato

(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.),
of

Ehodes

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,p. 86, 2). Perhaps
further is known.
Asclepiohe
of Panaetius
after the death
d o t u s, of Nicosa (Ind. Here. Col.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
III.

jecture that

(vide infra)found
had
of

it

(which

and

Antiochus
older

as

an

of

Paphos

(Ind.

Stratocles

p. 655) as
Ind.
Here.

Panjstius

of

on

work

dot

also

us

belonged
Panaitius

was

quite

Cni-

fellow

have

to

school

of

to Ind.

as,

Col. 79,

Here.

and
the

after

him.

two

the

Dardanus

Also
of

39),

contains
Jacob.

Sidon

whom

of

many

according

Gr.

had

xiii.

generation after
According to Cicero
iii. 50, 194) he was

(JDe Orat.
about
already known
still living ; and
and
refers

author

846),

to

92

B.C.,

the

same

in

event

an

life

(De Fato, 3, 5), which

would
Posidonius
to have
seem
quoted. Diotimus,
timus,

have

must
or

same
x.

with

21, the

or

been

temporary,
con-

little later ; the

who, according
3, forged immoral
the

Theo-

of

name

Biog.

to

Epicurus

xiii. 611, ", he

this at the

was

instance

Epicurean (Phil.

executed
of Zeno
d.

for
the

G-r. III. i.

(discussed
Epitome 01!
'by side with

the other

Nestor

the

ninety-two

attributed

to

disciples

Seleucia,before
hand,

Macrol).

Lucian,

to

Stoic

been

of

Tarsus,

teacher

he

Lucian

had

mistaken

Ne'stor

for

the

berius,
Ti-

life here

years

him,

of

contemporary
in
spite of

possibly have been.

conjecture that the

could
"We

not

might

so-called
the

Stoic

philosopher of
Academy of the same
name
(mentioned infra, p. 102, 1),the
teacher
of
Marcellus
(who
the

may

also have

letters

(perhaps also the same

person
that is quoted by Sext. Math. vii.
140) ; for, according to Athen.

before

the

which, as a
of Pansetius,
the

Antipater

other

and

Anthology
epigrams (ride

to the

Pansatius

his

of

tipater of Diogenes of
poet An(Dioff. iii, Antipater. On

the

Anthol.

belongs

disciple
the

later

Athenodori

Stratocles.

been

was

and

afterwards

have

at

Archedemus

infra, p. 71) ;
Diogenes, side

to

he

(xiv. 514, p. 674)

at first
Tyre, seems
his disciple and

of

regard
it is not

disciple of

lived

or

Strabo

mentions

Stoics, is
In

Tarsus,

discipleor

time.

belonged

whether

clear

Panaetius,

76, 2). Anti-

opponent

he

said.

of

Nestor

an

the

of

not, however,
to

an

politician, we

That

school

the

school.
or

Mnesarchns,

or

according
Antipater

Stoic

Knosos

appears
the

to

he

astrology.

to

author

and

the
of

(Itid. Hero.

dus

of

Stoic, and by the

17, 8, cf. 79, 'as a

discipleof
Timocles

75, 1). that

of
as

Cic. Divifi.ii. 42, 88,

of Pansefriend
a

from

learn

Rhodes,
(xiv. 2, 13,

Strabo

the

Scylax

scribedtius,and, like him,

de-

of

by

and

astronomer

Sotas

Hero.

Concerning

402).

visited),

also

with

Halicarnassns, celebrated

Dardanus,

member.

combine

to

easy

school

still belonged to the

Mnesarchus

so

pupil Antic-elms

which, his

Stoicism

the

and
a

instructed

that

contemporary

Between
the

Nestor

the

Stoic

of
and

rius),
Tibewas

Pansetius.
Dardanus

introduces

sil
Baa
Epitome
This, however, was
teacher
of
probably not the
Marcus
Aurelius
(iwfra, ch.
ides.

viii.)butanotherwise

unknown

SCHOOL

the

of

doctrine

PANMTIUS.

OF

already approximated

Academy

to

CHAP.
III.

in his

that doctrine

those

resembled

his views

expositionof

o\vn

not

have

been

was

no

doubt
of

source

of

Greeks, there

Pansetms

whom

Rome,

in

The

in Athens.

Tubero,
c

se

Vi-

M.

10

Piso, of

A certain

nothing more
ing
(Jnd.Herc.Col.li,6),but accordof
to the theory
Comparetti
he
Pi

know

we

the

was

who

Frugi,

so

Sextus
B.C.;
Or
JDe
at. L
(Cic.

was

in

consul

c.

and

i. 15, 67 ;

47, 175; Off. i. 6, 19;

guished
Pktityj).12, 11, 27), a distincivil
law,
on
authority

Brut.

geometry,

and

42, 154)

; for

their

owed

tius is most
other

that

the

Stoicism

young

JBnct.

last

to Pange-

probable.

hand, Q. Lucilius
(Cic.2V. D. 6, 15)

too

sophy;
philo-

two

for this.

On

the
Bal-

seems

Besides
Col.

Here*

latter

"r7rov$ai6TaTot

the

from

74

Marcius

which

(in distinction from the

as
a separate class.
ctLot)
1
Nothing else has ever
him

o-trovS-

been

except

an

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).
contain
passages
the
from

These

nothing
general

divergent
Stoic

doctrine.

Galen, H. Phil. 20 (Diels,

DOXOCJT. 615) : Mvfio-apxos$e rrjv
add. D.) rb arTreptywilTiKbv(/cai
OL7)6ei$ TTJS
pCLTLKbv TT"pl"'l\."V
a,l"jQr\rLK.ris
(^
Svya^uews ravra

add. D. p. 206) ^m-^iv

reckon
did not

tius

Bal-

(Be Orat.ui. 21, 78

bus

be

Stoic

Lucilius

andL.

bus

the

Samnites

third

~2,r"aiK.S)V
VTT^XTI^LV
eirLKpivavTO

Pompejus

133

the

must
a

Calpurnius

L.

these

name,

the

91

who

utterance

named
already
Further
we
""?#.).

mention:

of

one

JSFysius

Orat.

elate

Balbi

Ind.

quoted

Rutilius

Mummius,

Sp.

{supra, p.

important

in De

two

introduced

afterwards

P.

been

may
whom

and

JSlius,

L.

gellius,
have

names

of

Fannius,

Rufus,

ciples
dis-

some

most

Mucius

C.

for

and

JElius

these, Q.

Q.

of the Stoics

(supposed

same

these

Romans

expressly

together with

the

had

perhaps

also

them
of

the

were

other

considerably

hear

we

Stoics,

be meant
of

the

Besides

"

therefore,

were

biographies

Stoic

the

he

iii. 21, 78
B.C.), of

placed here, and

the
than
earlier

Laertian.

the

genes;
Dio-

could

former

the

for

of

school

the

of

member

that

that

and
on

this is

strict ethical doctrine

the

master

which

points besides psychology,of

know
Of Hecato, we
stated.2

departedfrom

his

of

it ;

to

"When,

to

p. 46,
to the

(Panseit according

1, siqwa,,

as

longing
be-

$"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

which
with
five senses,
Pansetius'
to
back

faculties of the

soul.

we

six

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
III.

details ; ] in this
applicationto individual
certainlyanticipatedby Diogenes ;
respect he was
but tradition tells us nothing further of these philosophers.
in

its

Bather

Posidonins.

has

more

to have

long activityseems

Phil.

III. i. 263, 2.

d. Gr.

to

one,

or

over,

century.4
the

or

us

specting
re-

whose

Apamea,3

extended
first

the first half of the

over,

of

Syrian

Posidonius,2 a

communicated

been

nearly
disciple

known

most

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
2

Tdrra,-

O-entium
Apam. JZerum
rum
Soriptore: Sondersh.

Strabo, xiv. 2, 18, p.

2, 10, p. 753; AtUen.
252, e. ; Lucian, Macrob.
Suidas, sub voce.
3

655

we

possess.
the
made

of

basis

imperfectly

find

written

that

of

(2) that he
lived
to be
eighty-four years
L
old (Lucian,
c.); and (3) that,
according to Suidas, he came
;

the

under

Famil.

however,

the

league

with

Borne

(Lentulus, in Cic.
xii.
15) possibly,
clerical
merely
"

have

error"may

journey

consulate

haps
Perthat

which

caused

occurred

the
in

the

Marcellus

all the

almost
believe
135

B.C.

But

the

that he

and

died

ties,
authori-

was

in

51

B.C.

Suidas

of

statement

in

born

(notwithstanding Scheppig, p.
lo
me
10) seems
suspicious;
is not probable
it
because
partly
of

ad

time.

Marcellus
Bhodians

renewed

was

later

letters, were

circumstance

M.

the

his

last consulate
cordingly
of Marius
(51 B.C.). Ac(infra,,
quently
subseto
and
be
Bake,
placed under
p. 57, 2)

of M.

that

at

the

an

calculation : (1)
the ciple
disPosidonius
was

Borne

of

great part

under

to

of his presence
trace
in Cicero, all of whose

some

in Borne

approximate

of Panastius

to

as

partly because
necessarily expect to

should

we

informed

and

philosophical writings, and

data

Three

do not
be

20;

precise information

More

may

vi.

xvi.

be

Posidonius

1869.

Posidonius

journeyed
Borne;

as

than

more

an

to

man

eighty
second

partly because

speaks as

old

years
time
to
Suidas

if this visit of

-Borne

were

the

donius
Posi-

only

that

of Marcellus.
believes

p. 245)
have
been

(I.c.
to

years

younger
is represented according

he

than

ten

Miiller
Posidonius

to the

bases

ordinary theory. He
the
partly on
tion
asserof Athen. xiv. 657, /., that
this

Strabo,
had
on

B.

known

vii., said
Posidonius

Strabo,

xvi.

that
:

he

partly

2, 10, p.

753

T"JV KaO3
(no"rei".
Tj/nas
(f)i\oo"6"p"v7roAu/tta06cTTaTosi)
; partly
on

Plut.

Brut,

i.,where

some-

POSIDONIUS.

Pansetius,1lie also

of

West,
is

thing

far

as

which

is

last

contains

infer

touched

have

also

if Posidonius

Bake,

sense.

Strabo

with

that

seldom

in

in

the

wider

of

without

or

days.
places his

Scheppig

his death

in 46

this

on

birth

therefore

is

It

whether
the

statement

occurs

where

place

(aujwa,

p.

founded

upon
Athensens.

of

also maintains
with
had been
be

questionable

statement

This
same

Panastius.

depend

can

we

for

nius
Posido-

from

received

Even

found

which

instruction

at

the

Athenseus

that

Posidonius

have

Cic.

mistake

as

Posidonius
51
to

and

B.C.,

Piome

his meeting
both

are

possibilityis

died

before

iii.

Of.

i. 3, 6; Suid.

not

2, 8

vide

51 B.C.
;

Mvin.

sujjra, p. 41,

2.
2

The

of this journey
Strabo 's quotations

traces

in

preserved

are

Posidonius.

from
here

long

especiallyat
138

Posidonius

that

see
a

c.

in

time

Gades

We
mained
re-

Spain,

(iii.1, 5,

5, 7-9, p. 172, 174

;
;
p.
thence
xiil 1, 66, p. 614^) ; from
he coasted
along the African

Italy (iii.2, 0 ; svii.

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),

shores

the

Scipio in Egypt
40, 5), and
may

upon

some

the

sioned
occa-

that he may
have been
years before 135 B.C.

may

c.

sufficient

be

not

fore
there-

B.C.

the

represented
oral

if

visit

Stiabo,

excluded
and

of

Marcellus
with

born

an

before

or

his

concerning

his

in

in 130

assumption

would

time
the

B.C., he
the
seen

philosopher

Ehodian

and

48

have

possibly

might
later

in

even

placed in

uncertain,

much

as

But

death

the

placing

Posidonius

have

which

statements

an

period

inaccurate

an

might

communication.
two

under

may

in his

Athenseus

to

to be

46-7,

office, which

50

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)
in

that occurred

used,

Posidonius

of

death

the

in

^uaintance

ac

held

still be

died

donius
Posi-

quoted concerning

is
event

to

efore

8, p.

5,

C.

report of

of

Strabo

The

316, where

of

part

hook, but
(e/cre "v

or
UoffeiSc"vios'),

recollection

case

Wyttenbach

is not

expression
even
by

seventh

to

not

east

Sea
did
of

to

coast

of

the

Adriatic

(vii.5, 9, p. 316). That he

not neglect this opportunity

visitingEome

may

be

CHAP.
III.

his

statement.

last

3, 4, p. 297

been

the

the

in

passage
Btrabo's

Strabo, which

sq., shows

p. 263

had

latter

relates, perhaps,

C.

we

of the

spherefor

the

as

that

most

had

Meantime

B.C.

^uas

Posidonius

of

that

would

at

of

lifetime

the

Caesar's

to

the Katf

From

only

can

correct

Posidonins

allusion

no

murder.

It

death.

not

from

quotation

well

been

Csesar's

after

the

But
the

have

to

seems

countries

to seek

not

Posidonius

from

quoted

written

but
Grades,2

as

the

visited

taken

58

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
III.

teaching; l this lie found

so
completelynaturalised
a

Ehodian.3

and

His

taught

reckoned

spread of
for

the

from

of

45), while,

hand,

the

51

year

shown,
1

the

visit in the

me,

rate,

any

this

far

in

purpose
rather
sisted,
con-

as

we

and

geographical

historical

with

the

Cimbri

vii. 2, 2, 293.

Ehodes

and

to settle

but

what

the

further

induced

there, we

the

of the

first

jectures,
con-

are

journey

in

not

the

him

told ;

the

the Eomans

him, treating

his

to

as

readers

44,

trum
nos-

himself

He

in Rhodes

him

i.

omnium

Positioning.
heard

well

man

JV". D.

Familiaris

Eoman

cf., for example,

123

in which

manner

mentions

known

(Plut.

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

Diogenem,
familiarem
niwti). In
of

with

his

Posido-

nostrum

the

59

year

the

consulate

Posidonius

the

revise, but

to

the sition,
propocould

memorial

gain nothing by it (Ep.

ii. 1). This is the
last
date

in the

he

B.C.

memorial

declined

as

him

tamen
Legwms
"c., in jprimisqiie
:

Posidonius

sent

war

Scheppig,p. 4 sgg.
time
he went
to

what

At

seems

cf. Strabo,

For

vide
2

date

after

soon

the

gather, (JFin. 1. 2,

can

investigation. The
to be the beginning
century,

of such

chief

journey
as

not

for

most

throughout

had
have

we

The

Cicero
him

I have

as

slightestintimation

of

other

the

improbable.

At

design.

to

did

this from

the last

(86 B.C.)
(Plut.

on

supposed

seems

second

Rome

to

who

men

never

certainly be

must

philosophyamong

under

Marius

business

Mar.

came

Rhodes

consulate
on

Stoic

He

granted.

time

he

Eome5

the

among

was

frequentlycalled
numerous
scholars,

therefore,,
althoughhe

in

he

that he is
attracted

name

Eomans
especially

himself

Rhodes,2 where

in

life

of

ad

Att.

definite

Posidonius.

west

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

have

must

Athen.

consumed

vi.

252,

several

Luc.

Maerol).

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,

public offices
Prytanis.
4

We

can

"

even

that

of

the

42; Cic. T'uso. I. c.

vii.

112).

visit
of

once

perceive

1.

was

Stoic

tilius

also

Plin. H. JV.

story of Pornpey's

which
him,
0.) cites as

is
sufferings,
older

at

to

(Tusc.

The

Cicero
a

fortitude
well

known.

proof
under
He

the
acquainted with
of
Budisciple Panfetius,
Eufus
(Cic.Off.iii.2, 10).

POSIDOXI17S.

at

even

the

later

first Stoic

ings were
in the

lie

regarded

was

and
authorities,1

as

the

tendency

his

of

CHAP.

writ-

numerous

read.2

most

conception of Stoicism,Posidonius

main

of

one

IIL

his

the scientific works

among

his

In

period

teacher

follows

His

j:Mfo~

t("n"
*?-PJi"t?

Pangetius.

d(niGi""*

In

critical acuteness

indeed

far behind

as

erudition

in

and

Pansetius
he

and

freedom

repeatedly names
(JEp. 33, 4; 104,
21; 108, 38), together with
PanajZeno, Chrysippus, and
in Ep. 90, 20, he says
tius ; and
such

as

of

Mm

Posidonius

tit

mum
2

ojrinio,eas Ms, cpiipluricontulenint,

'pliilosopldcs
the
Concerning
writings

known

to

MtUler,

us,

248

and

cf

15

than

more

s^me

of

What

them
mine

learning

There

sqq.

extensive

works.

knowledge

later

them,

in

pig (p.

we

authors

and
sessed
pos-

s"ee from

is

and

me,

excelled

when

facilitywith
narratives

the

not

he
the

nseus,

Galen

et Platonis

Stob?eus.
much

besides
without
to

as

we

other

Posidonius
shall

But,
has

no

he

forgets that a
accepts the most
without

been

who

person

improbable

competent

thority
au-

possibly be a
investigator of history,
cannot

critical

There
the

among

is

but

ancient

one

voice

authorities

concerning the comprehensive

Strabo
learning of Posidonius.
(xvi. 2, 10, p. 753) calls him

and
says
1 ;

Galen

("e Hippoer. et Plat. viii.

vol. v. 652 jfc)
""
: TLo"r*i"d"vi("s

ferred
trans-

himself,

pLerpiav.
G-alen

are

His

of
knowledge
praised by
(iv. 4, p. 390). Stray portions
of his geometrical works
is

geometry

find,very credulous,

of
merely in his defence
soothsaying* but in other cases
where
he
accepts fabulous
too easily,for which
statements
Strabo
occasionally censures
him
(ii.3, 5, p. 100, 102; iii. 2,
9, 147; iii. 5S 8, 173 ; cf. also

not

phecies
pro-

signify much,

not

doubt,

acknowledgment
expositions.
shows

fabulous

fulfilled

in

{De ffippocrafts
Placitis},Diogenes,

"c.

oppose

most

about

Cicero,
Strabo, Seneca, Plutarch, Athe-

quotations

numerous

him

says that the

Posidonius

which

does

stands

Too). What
fichepobserves
in his
,"?#.)
not
convincing to

42

defence

fifty of them,

of

the

xvi. 2, 17, p.

the
stories
sq. ; on
graphical
geohistorical
writings,

Scheppig,
are

Bake, 235 sqq.

he

as

appropriates

mea

,,

fart

spirithe

consequently did

Seneca

Mm

of

to

be

also

found

in

Proclus

p. 178
s$$. ; FriecQein's
tronomical
Index'}. A proof of his as-

(Bake,

knowledge
globe
Cicero
Of

his

is

the

heavens, which
describes, N. D. ii. 34, 88.
of

the

geograpMcal

enquiries

ECLECTICISM.

BO

CHAP,

the tradition

of Ms

his

master

III.
as

to the

returned

ytrabo's

the

Concerning

he

of

book

which

of

in

treated

work

(146

A.

88

to

B.C.)

p.
in
the

This
books

the

Poly bias's

of

to the world,
for the

quoted

two
fifty-

from

period

the

is

iv. 168

byAthenseus,

clusion
con-

vii.

TTJS

Diog.

sgq.

irepl5r? ovv

*y"V"CT"ca$ Ko.1 T7J$

by

fire ; l

external

space
would

as

be

sary
neces-

world's

eKirvpcacris.
in
statement

contrary

where,

Mimdi,

^Stern.

the

passage

in

ascribed

he

quoted

supra,

read

p. 44, 1, was
to Bernays'

(previously
correction),instead

of "BoyQbs 6

SiSc^iosr,Bo7]8. Kal
nullified

is
Tloffiddvios,
of

restoration

which

the

does

also

by

this

text,

true

with

away

objections (Uiiters.zu
i. 225 5^/7.)to my
tion
exposiof the
nius.
theory of Posido-

Hirzel's
Oie.

For

B.C.

142:

so

The

history

details, vide Bake, p.

133 s%q., 248
sqq. ; Mailer, 249

Scheppig,24

world

Philo,

further

sqq. ;

held

much

allow

historical

lain
have
knowledge must
the great historical work,

49th

He

for

in

bined
com-

ift/ra,

of

mass

to it.

of the

15

geographical

vide

descriptions,
3.

evidence

his

with

62,

Scheppig,

which

history

natural

old

arguments and theories

invented by his predecessors

quotations.
enquiries into

mimerous

portant
im-

the

deserted

Pansetius

ingeniousdevices
2
:
for the defence of soothsaying
sqq. ;
have

several

further

some

to the

(Bake, 87
$"".) we

dence
indepen-

same

regard to

In

of destruction

dogma

he added

and

did.

pointsin which
doctrine,Posidonius

Stoic

the

school with

"pdopasTOV

Z^vtiiv p.sv ev re?

K6crfJLOv
(p-rjcrl
vspl 'oXov, Xpixwnros 53 Iv r"$

details

Further

found

in

PUL

d. Gr.

there

learn

treated

of

the

2nd

in

be

will

quoted,

the

passages
HI. i. 337, 1.

We

Posidonius

that

not

prophecy

of his

book

had

only
"j"vtfiKbs

\6yos, but also in a separate

comprehensive book; that

and
iv

vios

he sought to establish belief in

wfK"TtpirzplKOffftov, "C.
5' "$"Qa.pTQV
it,and to explain its possibility
airety'fji'aro

Jlavairios
TOV

not

the
and

merely

this

to

words

discussion,

but

beginning

of the

world

is

particularly by

more

confirmation

of

we

have

the

(Pint.Plao.

ii.9, 3

par.}

Posidonius, deviating from

predecessors,would

only

343, 5)
dreams

uncritical

(IMd.

III. i.

indeed, is
ibid.

II.

to

was

his

as

Antipater

; that

fulfilled

of

and
as

other

(ibid. III. i. 339,

arguments
1 ; 341, 3
acceptance

Posidonius, is self-

In

statement

remark

in these

of the

destruction

evident.

Ms

the

assertion,

ascribed

that

That

KOO-JAOV.

and

i. 337,

phecies
pro-

just

predecessors
Chrysippus

339, 5).
be

his

To

referred

1) the

him,

(cf.
en-

DOCTRINES

to this belief that

value
him

OF

merely

not

in

had

Pansetius

belief

immortalityof
But

opposed.

consider

the

the

on

The

his protection

under

of

support

likewise the

to

us

Syrian Hellenist.

also taken

was

utilised

and

61

incline

might

Stoic but

demons

belief in

POSIDONIUS.

in

phecy
pro-

which
soul,2

whole

he

is,in

of

thought,unmistakably the discipleof

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

his mode

tire

representation of the Stoic

of prophecy
in
the

existence

doctrine

of Cicero's treatise

1st book

immortal.
Gr.

Phil.d.

Cf.

320, 3 ; Cic.Z"m^.i.
modis

homines

that Posidonius

somniare
animus

quod promdeat
quippe qui
sese,

Cicero

from

Trilus

is

ipseper

JDeorum

souls

(/.c.

c.

63

gift of

the

that

sq.}
that

(for

there

this

ment
argu-

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,
2

'

Cio.L
(U'lrters.zu

Hirzel

that

thinks

indeed
sq.')

like Pansetius
in the
so

que

donius
Posi-

as

om-ttitw

disbelieved

the

doctrine

never

Posidonius
the

shown

been

has

it

when

entertained
Posidonius'

demons

would
him

future

world)

no

of

conflagration

world.

life

he

who

in

of the

allows

the

As, moreover,
in

said

been

Posidonius
of

morte

soul

the

Itaniulto
it has

any quarter
doubted
the
after

death,

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
asCicero

him

to

doctrine

dispose soul
prein

believe
end

adpropinquante

the

belief

already
to

(untilthe

j for

that
doubt

to

excesserit.

norj)ore

though

were

the
unnecessary,
excluded
wholly

is

conjecture

tality.
immor-

if this

even

itself

in

of

belongs

eat divinior.

that
the world,
have entirely life

he must

like him

But

of

231

conflagrationof

denied

not

cog-

conloquantur.

dormwnti'bvs

cum

also

31,

be

learn

maintained

doubt

no

for

to

also

we

had
dying persons
because
prophecy

WIG

souls

ground

no

But

319,2;

(Posid.')Deorum

censet

adpiilm

III.

30, 64

immortal

fenerally
enying human

De

JMvinatione.
1

of
has

will

p. 67, 4.
3
Phil.

of

the
be

the

Platonic

eternity of the
infra,

discussed

d. Gr. III. i. 62, 1,

CHAP.
III.

ECLECTICISM.

62

itself was

CHAP,
IIL

His

lave

of

Natural

certain

indiffer-

The
adornment
of
dogmatic controversies.
of
disthe
speech, and
general intelligibility
had

course

had

Erudition,

cause

to

ence

rUetoriG.

alreadylikelyto

for Posidonius

also

for the

not

Stoics ; he

older

which

value

is not

they

merely

in his scientific
but a rhetorician^and even
philosopher
If,
expositionhe does not belie this character.1
lastly,be excelled most philosophersin learning,
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
philosophicenquiry
ignore the difference between
in natural
and erudite knowledge.2 If the interest
science

stronger

was

in him

than

usual

was

in

the

Stoic school,this circumstance

the

tarnish

to

him

to

nearer

might also contribute

purity of his Stoicism,and to bring
the Peripatetics.3 His
admiration

Of. Strabo,iii.2, 9, p. 147:

rb irh.r)Qo$r"v
5e

TloffeiddvLos

eVcuz/""j"teal

(in Spain)

jueTaAAaw

OUK
r^v ape-7-V
oare^Tai
'ftdovspriropeias, oAAa

rrjs

ffvv-

vwevdov-

vireppoXeus. Even the

fragments we possess are sometimes
in
ornate
style, but
always well written, and show
"na

no

of

rais

tasteless

of the

trace

the

in

of

form

scholastic

ference

employed by
Chrysippus.
-

According

88, 21, 24, he

to

under

philosophy.
7

statement

tried

all

sgq.,

which
to

inand

Seneca, Ep.

and

13p. 90,

Zeno

reckoned

matics

had

mode

expositiondelighting mostly

mathe-

liberal

arts

Seneca,

combats

the

Posidonius

establish

"

that

the

even

mechanical

invented
the

the

by

Golden

i. 1, that

says,

Perhaps

age.

responsible also
the

knowledge

and

di vine

arts

were

philosophersof
for what

he

philosophy
things human

as

of

is

Strabo
is

III. i.238,
(Pjiil.el.Gb*.

3), so 7ro\vpddeiacan
no

one

except

to

belong to
philosopher ;

geography is consequently
part of philosophy,
3

Strabo,

TTOTU)

ii.

yap

3,
rb

e"m

8, p. 104:

a.lrLoKojLKbv

Trap'avr" (ytrabo is speaking

primarily of his geographical
work) icalrb apLffroreXifo^tinep
eiwXivQvffiv

ot

Stoics) 5i"

r"v
r^v e-nlKpv^iy
particulars bor*

alriw.
rowed

stotle

Some

by
are

T^ue'repo:(the

Posidonius

from

Ari*

given by Simplicius

Plato

for

just

was

and

Panaetius);

of

Timsgus,

combine

the

his

Stoic

his
him

doctrine

with

Phys. 64, #.

in
ccelo, 309, ", 2 K ; SchoL
Aphr.
Ariat. 517, ", 31 ; Alex.
Meteorol.
116, a, o.
1
Galen, Hipp, et Plat. iv. 7,

De

421

K.a.1

TlXdrrcavos

rov

aL

T^JS
[jLcifov

Ka\"i,

"v$pa

Kal

ws

Belov

Procr.

An.

Smyrn.
Bull.;

Hermias

Mus.

H-ijAst., if

Pksedrus

of

referred

to.

wrote

c.

commentary
own

he

That

has

on

is not

on

ra

in

quotes
d

Phil,
to

the

Gr.

Posidonius

II. i. 659, 1)

exposition

of the

here
the
been

and

directly
the

Smyns. Z. c.,
night correspond

the

and

even

therefore

can

the

to

His

Greek

Oriental

however,

is

universal

of

said

of

the

he

but

was

so

merely
Ms

taken

Phoenician

supposed

to

This,
in

that

atoms

I.

belongs

correct

sense

c.,

the

says,

tradition.
not

(vide

765),

have

philosophy

Democritus

doctrine
from

would

if Posidonius

Hitter, iii. 702,

philosopher Mochus

Timseus,

32.

eclecticism

derived

from

own

Patter iii. 701.

23jp.90.

really, as
had

nothing

Pythagorean

still further

gone

utterances,

prove

Posidonius'

system.

Sen.

mentary
com-

Timseus, can
give a physical

to

adhesion

the

the
to

regard

uneven,

from

v.

to his own
theory ;
opinion
Pythagorean
the comparison
Z.
as
Sext.
"?.,
ap.

not

day

Also

in Theo
and

number

the

to

Posidonius.

on

and

p.
the

observed, siipra, p. 43, 1.

3
Galen, I. c. iv. 7, p. 425 ;
What
Plutarch, L
6, p. 478.
from

from

lation
re-

iv. 2 sqg.

belong

manifestly taken

TO.

the

in Math.
not

remark

with

earlier

it is mani-

to the Platonic

perhaps

already

Hence

serve

46, p. 162,
Pheedr.

commentary

Parmenides

of

sense

Theo

1023;

in
his

account

that

; Plut.

93

vii.

22, p.

De

on

only

avrov
Trpecr/Beuaji'

Math.

the

the

65i'5a"e.
fjfjLas

Best.

by

6av-

"c.
fivj/duetov,
Trepi r""v rTJs^v^s
Posid. ibid. v. 6, p. 472 : Sxrirep6
riAarwj/

is reckoned

OLTTO-

Kal
Tradcav So'yfj.a.Ta.

TrsplTWV

re

Kal

in

to which

citation

to

Even

Kal

?s

tried

consequence

shows, does

bis

Kairoi.

he

of the passage

(from Gnminius'
Meteorology.)

OT.

of

abstract

Is of

Epicurus.5

to

of Democritus

CHAP.

the

on

Platonic.

himself

demurred

have

Stoics would

that
the

Pythagoras

philosophers;

the

among

commentary

suppose

Democritus

and

eyes

example

III.

his

well

with

agreement

great (after the

as

in

may

we

POSIDONIUS.

OF

DOCTRINES

(Phil. d. Gr.

this tells

nothing

as

philosophical tendency
of Posidonius, but
only as to
his
historical
deficiency in
is abundantly
criticism, which
attested
by Cicero and Strabo.

ECLECTICISM.

64

CHAP,
IIL

fest that
other

have

afforded

been

him,

to

his

to

as

this

for

specialopportunity

systems.

to the

Stoicism

Stoicism,, and

to

systems

the

approximated

necessarily have

tie must

other
to

seems

contemporary

(vide infra), by the polemic against

accusations
In
order
to
repel the
scepticism.
conflict of the philothe
from
derived
sophic
which
were
Antiochus

it

systems,

they

rate, only mention

any

trine, in opposition
denied

all the

reduced

and

faculties

pluralityof

the

passions; 3

this

To

sage
5o/cet

which

of that

cause

he

jU^-re

5ia

a""("/rao-0cu
r^v dicxpcDviav
(pi\ocroQias, eVel r"$ h.6yq"rovro)
-rrporbv
(3iov,"s ical
Aefyeiz/ o\ov
rols

Uo(rei5("vt.6s fytiffiveV

irpo-

mentioned

observation

The

p. 60,1, concerning empty

space

outside

otherwise

the
:

and

and

is

what

of his

know

astronomical,

world

quite
we

physical,

geographical

are

the

that

less

contain
and

tions

earlier
of

any

the

with

be

to

He

found

the

be

and

fact

of

of
our

they doubtamplifica-

many
rectifications

of

the

theories, tell us nothing

from
the
departure

his

in

connection

philosophical view

universe.

It

suffice

Galen,

(where

of

not

to

this

De

of

will, thereindicate

quotations, Phil. d. Gh\

given in the account
Physics of the Stoics,
3

one

was

reason

doctrine

Stoic

soul,

should

reason

definitions, though

fore

supra,

unimportant

that

the

TpeTTTiKoIy.
'-

to

principle.

believed

following pas(Diog. vii. 129) :

O.VTOLS

soul's life

doc-

Aristotle,

to

life

of

is contrary to

the

refers
8'

and

and

faculty,Posidonius

opinion that the facts of the

to
one
explained in reference
it, like Plato, inconceivable
the

Stoic

belonging

phenomena

fundamental

intellectual

Plato

of

at

sources,

the

Whereas

that

to

material

divergence, his

important

Platonising anthropology.2

in

our

main

however,

appear,

Stoicism

one

the

in

departures

many

ancient

the

respects from

""$

himself

allowed

he

that

not

does

It

agreed.1

were

that

asserted

was

Hipp,

the
III.

of

et

i,

the
Plat.

subject is treated

65

POSIDONIUS.

being frequently at strife with, our will

could only be explained by an originaloppositionof
he
showed
that
the faculties
working in man
;
affections

of the

passionatemovements
from

merely
for

these

as

soon

as

they

do

have

they

manner

exclude

and

even

worth

the

theory

for

things

is not

Stoic

"

of

all these

time.3

For

himself

for the Platonic

and

length)

at

from

desire,as

iv. 3, p. 377

Loc.

LOG.

416

6, 473

; v.

5,

v.

some

Bitter, iii. 703, repre-

Posidonius

sents

order

to

trine

of
is

there

this

find

Galen,
donius

v.

as

saying

understand
the

the

passive

and

In

in

Posi178, ch. (502 jfc).

here

blames

appealing
poets in

to

Chrysippus

passages

regard

to

more

declared

that the

soul but

questions

emotions

from

the

as

courage

As

an

from

such

in

regard

to

decided

be

may

the

immediate

per-

self-consciousness.

or

of

instance

forward

brings
tions, and

of

seat

only

from

simply
ception

the

latter

mental
of

says

he

condi-

them

that

they require ov peuepuv^\6yuv

ov5' ouroSeQ-ewi/,
n"vr\s Se arafjurfi"v l/ecwrrore

this does

Tracrxo/uey. But
In order to
mean,

not

there

them

understand

cannot

utterance

stance
circum-

Posidonius

(reas

lengthy

proofs,I
the

in

doc-

emotions

of

need

no

arguments

the

sg.

L.c.

however,

for

7,

c.

I pass over
iv. 7, 416s"2'.
When,
further arguments.

the

presuppositions

soul, and not

points which

*#.
5, 397;

iv.

of

which,
particularfaculties,4

cit. iv. 7, 424

(At.

not

judgment concerning
of
changed by duration

doctrine

two

s%. ;

does

the mind

the

reasons,

461.
1

our

rational

the

from

not

arose

that

remarked

explained on

be

stronglycannot

same

opposite activity

and

he

nor

the

in

all persons

impressions affect

fresh

that

evil

existing emotion

an

Finally

the

with

simultaneous

of

are

things,
rational kind,

and

good

arise

not

passionate movement,

this result

reason.2

of

notions

produce

not

about

notions

our

could

mind

proof ;but,Their actual

tion is known

through
4

nriros

to

us

needs

no

constitu-

immediately

self -consciousness.

Galen,
/xey

"

1, 429

v.

c.

o%v
.

Xp"r-

CHAP.
"

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
III.

being

distinct from
the

of

constitution

body

determined

are

reason,
:

have

would

he

by

the

these

regarded,however, not as parts of the soul

the same
and
but only as separate faculties of one
the seat of which, accordingto the prevailing
essence,
opinion of his school,he placed in the heart.2
and
must
Desire
also,he thought, belong
courage
to all ; the latter only to
to the animals ; the former
indicathose capable of changing their place: 3 an
forces

KoyiffriKOv
yiyvop."Vct,s

rov

iraQy, 7A\v"*vS5 oil

ra

auras
Kpiffeis

ra$

elvat

rivet,*
Kpicrets

iretparai

aXAa

ras

(rvffroXas

avrcus

CTTL-

Kal

qui

duolus

eceorsii-s
titulis,
principali, qiiocl
ajunt yye/ji.ovikbv, et a rat'ionali,guod ajunt
KoyiKbv,in duodeoim
exindegroa

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! irpocrie-

eTrdpffeisKal

Xvcreis

T"

ras

ovre

Kal avri$6yju.a
ireplrbv Xp-ucmnrov
5eiKelvcu. ra, irddr}
Kpiffsts

vvtav

ovre

rb TiXdrcavos

rai

\4yei

aXXa

rols

his

KLvf](rei$
nvas

erepow

regard

found

in

to what

his

conjecturesas to
misunderstanding,
Diels, Doxogr. 206.
this

^3Galen,

Z.

o.

6,476:

v.

he

authority.
the origin

For

"iri'ytyv6fj."va
/cptn'scrt, of
dvvd-

in

own

had

vide

tea

tcai fluftoeiST?.
re
GTriQvfjiTirLK^v
^cpw fiverK[vr\r*e"rrl
juez" o?"v r"v
Kal irpOffiretyvKora SlKrjv (j)vr(av
Ibid. iv. 3, 139, et passim.
crev

1
LOG. cit. v. 2, 464 : "$ rfav
rrjs tyvxnseiroiraSyrLK"vKivf}ff""av

/j."VO)V aei

rf,5ia06"r6i

rov

Loo.

eiSr) ju.ev ^ fJLepT]"fyvxysou/c

fj.dfova'n/
(which
done

in

irerpais

tfriffiv

erepois rowi)SioiKe'io'Qai

eTTLdv/LLia
fi6vy

rois,

5' aXAa
ra
"rcafJLaros. Xeyei aura, ra
a\oya
5'
515 : o
rats
(rti/j.irai'rci
$vvdfj.e(riv
a/u."po-

cit. vi. 2,
Kal 6 TloffeiScavLOS
re
'Apio-TOTe'ATjir
2

rcus

he

has

inaccurate

bvo-

rf)r1 "Tn8vjjL7]rLKf}
xpvjcrdaL
rbv av"ptairov
5e
rfj6v/ULoeide"i,

repaLs

Kal

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,

Dividitur
in

paHes

autem
.

(sc.
decem

qiiosdam Stoicorum,
amplius apud Posidonium,
et in

duas

the

observation

latter must

have

desire, is

first

Aristotle

even

sensation
met

(cf PMl.
", 498).
.

II.

that

with

the
and
in

d. 6fr. II. ii.

67

that

and

Posidonius,in agreement with Pansetius T

held that the faculties peculiarto the
Aristotle,2

less

perfectnatures

tion

in the

retained

were

only completed by the addition

Whether
Posidonius, like Plato,

of

were

III,

higher,and
faculties.3

new

the

drew

CHAP,

further

opposition of the rational and

its entrance
irrational soul,that the former, before
the body, existed without
the latter,and
will
into
4
but if he
it after death, is uncertain
exist without
;
held

the

from

inference

requiredby the
destruction,his deviations

world's

of the

doctrine

the modifications

with

this,even

anthropology would
multipliedthereby to a considerable
from

These

Vide
Phil.

Cf.

influence

fuerint fvturiqiie
mnt, \_q\iid
estj
ii quid esc quoque
cur
eveniat
et
/
rem
quid qiiamqiiB
sigmfcet
non
possint ? If 'this
*#.)" yperspie"re

Plants

are

sensum

lesde-Ait

omni
cum

omnia

sunt,

But

the

ester nitate

exist

QUOB

natura

videt,

"c.

; and
to the

world

It is all the
Stoic

hominwn

c.

the
has

not

which

subject:

quoted
have

from

been

definite

sewiper

souls

the
end

to

ning
beginof

the

they belong1.
questionable
exposition of this
beeo here amplified

more

by Cicero, or

57,

for

account,

which

to

whether

the

ab

then

even

admit

before

after

nor

rervm

in

could

neither

and

semper
must

laid to Cicero's

Posidonius

ceternitate versaiusque est

innumerabiWbus
animus,

131, he returns
Cumgue animi

there.
omni

in

contents

of

Posidonius,
pre-existence of the soul
(Corssen,"tePosid., Bonn, 1878,
have
been
found
p. 31) must

be

Jioc liomini
(sc. natura)
addidit
ration"m.
amplius, qiiod
4
remarks
Cicero
(De Divin.
i. 51, 115) in order
to establish
: The
foreknowledge in dreams
ab
in
li"ber
lives
sleep
spirit
ab
vixit
s"nsibus.
Qui quia
.

other

the

et matum

the

first book

of the

endowed

192, 3) witha^^m/

tiis autem,

with

servation
obagrees

cf PJlil. d. CrT.
crvvexecrQat,
("j"vcr"L
in.i.

of Posi-

supra, p. 47, 2.
d. Gr. II. ii. 499.
Schwenke
(Jakrb.

of Cicero, apparently
from
Posidonius, N. D.

ii. 12, 33

had not,

the other doctrines

on

Class. Pliilol. 1879, p. 136

here
who
appeals to the
derived

extent.

the Stoic tradition

from

deviations

indeed, the

necessarilybe

Stoic

the

sense.

he

whether

hypothetically

Plato
taken

thing
some-

may
in

not
more

His
et't"ic8-

ECLECTICISM.

68

CHAP,

_L_

which,

donius

utterances

might have expectedfrom

we

though

nothing told

the

theoryof

the

ns

emotions,1

of his ethics

which

doctrine

for the

moral

the Stoic

clash with

own

pendence
decidedly recognisesthe de-

he

of ethics upon
there is

his

would
ment
state-

Diogenes,2that he did not hold virtue to

sufficient for happiness,we
be the only good, and
to be untrustworthy; 3 and
if he
have already seen
for the preof opinion that many
was
things,even
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
of

as

considered

be

may

amendment

an

harmony

in

spiritof the system.5 Nevertheless, we

cannot regard the Platonisinganthropologyof our
admission
of alien
a merely isolated
as
philosopher
elements into the Stoic system ; for in this alliance
with

the

with Plato

and
internal,historical,

the

part,abolished
and

dualityof form
1

Loc.

tit. iv. 7,

421;

Vide supra,

Cic.

Even

6,

v.

does
the

Stoic

touch

p.

the

definition of the

/cal

T"%LV

af/rbv
ovcevafaz/

159.

Kara

contradiction

theory,

Aristotelian
matter

(ap. Clem. Strom, ii. 416, B) :

fijvBewpovvra rty r"v e6\uv

aA^emz/

(G-alen,I. c.
not

and

47, 4.

v.

6, p. 470)

nucleus

and

his

Kara

of
own

highest good

pspovs ry$
formal
extension

definitions.

The

Posidonras

tween

ippus (mentioned
III.

teal crwyKararb Svvarby,

fj.ri""va^pevov

a\6yov

given by Posidonius to an inadequate explanation of the

requirement of life accordingto
nature

Platonic

rb

Off. i. 45,
the

ation
unimportant transformretical
system had, in its theo-

substance,spiritand

; 471 S$.
vii. 103 ; 128.

light an

to

comes

not

This

of Stoicism.

469

there

Aristotle

and

i, 232,

diseases

of

2),
the

unimportant.

inrb

tyv^s,

is

rov

only

of the older
difference beand

Ghrys-

Phil,

d.

in

6V.

regard to
soul, is also

POSIDONIUS.

and

in

the

At

of

same

it had

therewith

connection

existence

the withdrawal

externality,and

such

neither

as

nor

denied

the

CHAP.

ethical dualism

an

Aristotle

of these two

itself felt ; the moral

makes

also

of self-consciousness

founded

Plato

contradiction

The

had

of spiritual
faculties in man.
plurality
time, however, in the practicalsphere,

demanded

from

69

had

recognised.

determinations

dualism, which

now

marks

fundamental

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
the

to introduce
an
anthropology,
oppositionof principles;
for we
easilysee that it is not the Platonic
may

of reason,

tripledivision

twofold

the

rather

in

is concerned.1

Our

their

principaluse
from

rational
follow

the

This

not

expressed
Plutarch,

eorj). s. (Bgr. c.
Posidonius
that
an

human
into

and

rational
ir-

Posidonius

activities
ff(a~
tyvxtKo.,

and
ffa/JLariKci vepli|/v%V

tyw%tKaTT"plcrw/xa.
2
Ap. Galen, v. 6, p. 469 : rb
^ r"v TTft^wy c"nov, rovrecrri

TT\S

divine

animal,

and

the

not

Iirecrdatr"p

e^ovn

Trore

Se
rots

to

KO!

ev

avrcp

KCUC"-

rov

Karct.

Salmon

irav

crvy-

%VTI teal r^v

dpoiay "pv(rw
5toifc6a"fjt,ov
Ka^
x"^Poyi
""*"$**

rbv

r"p

ttovvrt.,

and

evil and

r"b ^
SaL^ovos J3iov,

yevei re

and

dualism
psychologic
av^oXoyias

re

to recognise

us

of the

and

the

he exalts

reason,

they teach

us,

onlyis

in

all

with

irrational
within

Here

rational

which

distinction

is

conditions

partita,

that

notice

F"r. 1, Utr. an.

6, which
says
and

"

dualism,

also in the

divided

the

demon

un-divine.2

the

ourselves

in

soul,with

their connection

and

emotions

of

desire,but

philosopherhimself clearlyinwhen, in his doctrine of the

this connection

cates

as

distinction

human

the

and

courage,

r"$

'6\ov

2""

ffvvettK\ivovra$(pepecrdai.ol
rovro

ovre
iraptlSdvres

fieXnovcri

iradoay,ovr3

ey

ev

rotv-

rfyv alriav

r"v

ro7s

ireplrrj$

ECLECTICISM.

70

CHAP*

in.

Psycho-

logic
dualism.

of the

Platonisingtripledivision clearlyenunciated
chieflyappears
is also said that this dualism

but it

for
philosopher

to the

necessary

of this bias

and

sense

in

development
find,later
the

the Stoic

doctrine
and

Neo-

one

on,

and

tyvxy

the

Panaetius

in

; in its

foe is

Stoa

the

ethical

first symptom

Epictetus and Antoninus

of the phenomena which

from

transition

The

reason.

that it is

reason

alreadynoticed

have

we

in the distinction of

between

the

presuppositionof
anthropological

oppositionof

link

nucleus

constitutes with. Posidordus

the

the proper

which

"

further
shall

we

prepared

NeoPlatonism.

to

psychologyof Posidonius therefore appears as a

it was
not
link in a great historical nexus
; that
without importance for the later conception of the
The

Platonism.

Stoic doctrine,we

may

(Men,1 that he had

met

objections

Stoics
the

of

first
century^
B.C.

had

who

his time

of

of

with

none

known

Posidonius

the

from

see

the Stoics

among

how

of

statement

to

the

answer

against the

old

Stoic

theory.2
Posidonius the
In the periodimmediatelyfollowing
spreadof the Stoic schoolisindeed attestedbythe
great
ical ofjLoKoyias
evSaifLoviasr
opdotioj-ovtrLV.ov

irp"r"v sffnv

yap
sv

virb
"y"crOa.t
firjSev

avrfj rb
rov

real
KOKodaifj.oi'OS

Kal

K."T"

a\oyov
aBeov

re

TTJS

$VXTJS.
*#., and
what is quoted "vpra", 68, 5, from
Of. ibid. p. 470

Clemens.

In

has

opposition to

the

been

shown

what

to Posidonius

fiKtirovcrtv'fai
with
the

the older

points

evidence
has

for

Stoic

on

repeatedly
enumerated

is peculiar

compared
doctrines

which

them,

earlier sections
are

as

and

been
of

by

he
as

such

quoted
this

Bake.

is
in

work,
In his

dignity of the spirit, collection,completed by Mxiller,

PosidoniuSjap. Sen. Ep, 92, 10, Fragm, JBRst. Gr. iii. 252 sg$.,
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
moral

LOG.

In

ait. iv. 7, end

the

preceding

402

tg.

pages

it

theories

of this

philosopher.

STOICS

numbers
but

OF

THE

FIRST

with whom

of itsmembers

only

of these

portion

CENTURY

we

B.C.

acquainted ; l

are

to have

seem

71

occupied

and even
independently with philosophy,
that portionthere was
certainlynot one philosopher

themselves
of

with Pansetius

to compare

those

Beside

p.

be

here

may

Greeks:

(X)
according
26), must

to

already

$""., the

52

merated,
enu-

ing
follow-

mentioned

still have

been

"

ing
teach-

in the year 50 B.C.,

in this treatise represents
heard
him
as
by his

Cicero

young
In that

in that

interlocutor
case

city.

guished
be distin-

he must

from
the

Cyrene,
(p. 53)

of
Dionysius
of
Pansedisciple

tins

but

he

is

in scientific

all the
is,therefore,

In the

Ind.
Here.
col. 52, 1) ;
whom
Leonides,
Strabo,
2, 13, p. 655, describes as a

and

Stoic from
a

pupil

the two

Pihodes
of

teachers

Cordylio,

whom
from

Pergamum

kept
(Strabo,

to

him
Min.

the

sus,
Tar-

with

him

Borne

till Ms

xiv.

Cato

Plut.

from

took

Cato

with

Also

of the younger
with
the

Cato, Athenodorus
surname

probably

was

Posidonius.

and
death

5, 14, p. 674.
10, 16; Epit.

Dioy.}, previously

no

the

doubt

It

xiv.

who,
Dionysius,
Cicero (Tiisc.
ii. 11,

in Athens
as

Posidonius

influence.

and

importance

and

of

overseer

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

at

of

cit.,Apollodorus is
between
have

them.

the three

to

be

Further, we
donius
disciplesof Posi-

Asclepiodotus
(Sen. Nat. Qu. ii. 26, 6 ; vi. 17,
(Diog.
3, et passim'); Phanias
:

vii.
his
him

as

Bhodes
on

the

41) and Jason,

daughter, who

the

shown,
48, he

head

of the

school

hand,

other
d.

of

seem,

of

treatise
and

in

G-r.

in

while
as

III.

is

i.

cannot
be, as Compathe anonymous
retti supposes,
discipleof Diogenes alluded to

vii. 139
two

Antipater they
(supra,
perhaps

p.
two

2nd.

tises,
trea-

to which

belong.
Hero.

cording
Ac-

col. 79

54) he had
disciplesof

for his instructors.

tius

etpass.;

other

it is uncertain
to

it

written,

Duties; a
upon
is
his ireplK6(r/mov,

Diog.
respecting

quoted

succeeded

(Suidas,sufi vocc
PUl

son

would

had

and

placed Athens,

one

or

Panse-

Apol-

ing
accordTyre seems,
to Strabo, Z.0.,to have been
of

lonius

somewhat
under

his

younger;
name

are

treatises

quoted by

CHAP.
III.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
ill.

probable that

more

direction

which

the school

these

them

of

most
two

followed

had

men

given

the
that

period held in the main to the

doctrine
and
of Zeno
Chrysippus,but repudiated
than before ; and
alien elements
less strictly
partly
Strabo,

that

at

and

Diog. vii. 1, 2,

ap.

Phot.

also

6, 24, perhaps
ap.
Cod. 161, p. 104, 5, 15.
Dioinstructed
dotus, who
Cicero,
and

who

lived

afterwards

and

B.C.

heir

made

(Cic. Brut.

his

Cicero

; Acad.

90, 309

ii. 36, 115 ; N. JD. i. 3, 6 ; ad

JDiv. xiii. 16, ix. 4 ; Two.
v.
39,

ad

be

must

From

xiii. 16.

Fam.

distinguished

Apollonius

the

Ptolemais

of

Here.

in

the

Ind.

78, whom

the

compiler of that catalogue

(pixos
7)fj.caj"
; for this man,

col.

of

as

Dardanus

stated, had
and Mnesarchus

23

21,

Dio

xiv.

Or.

Chrysost.

^Elian.

R;

p. 24
Plut.

33,

V. "T. xii. 25 ;
17, and Apopti-

c.
Pojjlic.

Cm.

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^.
;

tliegm. jReg.

Fragm.

Hist.

Whether

the

sayings

Athenodorus

it

but

probable

that

with

the

by

the
tainty,
cer-

to

seems

me

dorus
Atheno-

mentioned

who

iii.

instances

most

discovered

be

cannot

of

person

in

name,

Gr.

writings
from
quoted
him
belong to

another

to

or
same

heard

cf. Strabo,

whom

5, 14, p. 674 ; Lucian, Macrob.

calls

is there

ciple
dis-

Posidonius, the teacher

cerning
Emperor Augustus, con-

and

Mm

the

or

of
the

113; ad Att. ii. 20); a disciple

freedman
of
the
his, a
Muller.
triumvir
Crassus, Apollonius
485
mentioned
is
Cicero,
by name,
by
8%.
of

Tarsus

from

neighbourhood, perhaps

with

him, finally having become

blind, died at his house about
60

Sandon,

of

Sen.

in

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
were

of

of

Cicero,

as

house, long

enjoyed
Diodotus

his

in

date,

this

instruction

the

of

and

accompanied
(though not probably in

Caesar
extreme
war.

boy

after

age)

Home
the

547) wrongly
Apollonides,
was
Cato, who

about

friend

of

him

in

days (Plut. Cat.

65 *#. ; cf. Phil.

Min.

d. Gr. III. i. p.
the son

48). Athenodorus,

man

against, the
and

p. 470,
identifies them.
the

was

; that
who
same

to the Alexandrian

Comparetti (1. c.

his last

he

time
known

on

certainly the
of
he

the

likewise

about, i.e.

Aristotelian
who

in

name

was

wrote

best

gories,
cate-

opposed

was

particularpoints by Conutus,
find from

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.
we

Arist.
Abhandl.

48, 5, 12)
d. Berl.

; cf

Brandis,

Akad,

1833

OF

STOICS

in

of its

points with

many

the

showing

other

to which

extent

will

individuals

in

be

Prantl.
275;
GeseJi. d. Log. i. 538, 19. Some
of

fragments

historical

an

schools.

by Miiller, I. c.
quoted in Diog. vii.
also belong to the

ethics

The

68, 121,
of

son

may

and

Sandon;

is

he

Athenodorus

the

doubt

no

Calvns,

inspired Cicero's treatise

xvi.
(Cic. ad AU.

who

Duties

on

11, 14) ; while

the
hand
author
which

irarat,

the

on

other

them

of

name

To

under

of

besides

ric

work

voce,

and

Augustus

author

the

cording
ac-

sub

Suidas.

to

lived

who

Alexandria,

of

Theo

was

Eheto-

on

epitome of
Perhaps

an

Apollodorus'Physics.

one

name,

Antioch,

tioned
men-

Suidas, 0eW
^pvpv^
tioned
Tithora, menis.
we
82,
by Diogenes,
the
but
know
dates,

by

the
do

not

the

from

other

sidered
geographer, conhimself
as
belonging

famous

to the

Stoic

must

be

placed,

Hasen-

as

Strab.

D"

says,

in 44

B.C.

Vita
13

s$.

various

before

or

he

58 B.C.,
P. Servilius

saw

in his ninetieth

died

Isauricus, who

birth

His

school.

theories),in
as

than

Lastly, Strabo,

JEnesidemas.)
the

older

be

must

latter

probably

more

same
Peripatetic of the
of
infray
spoken
p. 124:.
this same
period belongs

the

Arms

in

quentlyDiss.* Bonn,
fre1863, p.
(who also discusses the

Diogenes

cites,is

attained

us

from

icspi-muller

the

of

example

of this

Stoics

other

collected

been

An

this eclecticism

and
have

character

geographical

B.C.

presented to

Kl.

t.

CEXTUUY

FIRST

cation
partlyin the practicalappliactivity,
into amicable
contact
came
principles,

its learned

on

THE

(Strabo, sii

year
saw
p. 568), and
Strabo
whither

in

him

6, 2"
Ptome,

scarcely

can

gone before his fourteenth

native
Bis
city was
year.
in Pontus
Ainasea
(Strabo,sii.

have

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

he

the

be

may

in

to

the

Speus,

to

Dio

be

of

Academy

the

(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

have

can

If

Augustus.
Arms
says
fjiera

lived
master

under

fallen

survived

he

Tiberius
and

as

the

Germanicus
must

this passage
written
have been

present ruler
as

his

son

accordingly
between

14

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
1

to

great age

Stratocles.

like

(Of

Ms
two

xvi. 4, 27,
i. 2, 34, p. 41, and
p. 784 5 vide mj)ra, p. 62, 3*

CHAP.
III.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP

who

Didyrmis,

himself

counted

indeed

Stoic

the

Alexander
of

Perhaps
him

Stoicism

to

calls

-ri/juv

p.

779),

he

shows

674).

the

Oii.

3,

(xiv.

had

had

4,

the

Boethus

either
or

4,

2, 24,

interpretation)
third

he

demus,
1, 48,

650,

p.

belonged,

not

what

to
in

or

him.)

("")

Bonaans

this

of

following
adherents

of

Q.

of
the
M.

this

(JV:
the

treatise

he

representative
Porcius

already

as

trine
doc-

Balbus,

praises
in

the
us

Stoic

Lucilius

Stoic
whom,

to

the

Cicero

the

period,

known

are

is

56,

Among1

as

D.

i. 6,

15)

considers
of

the

as

school.

described

by

Cicero

Octav.

to

of

who

later

older

46,

D.

vii.

his

are

have

13),

treatise

on

Rom.

belonged

to

Some

occasionally

among

the

Brutus,

will

on.

by

11,

Pansetius.
also

169),

quoted

(Bernhardy,

229),

and

Also

an

Brut.

(Civ.

school

Dio

14.

is

from

10,

acquaintance

what

Gods

others

of

ii.

(Cic.

Augustine

Varro

OatoUticensis,

Sueton.

and

from

reckoned

Brut.

Cfesar,

Soraiius,

Cicero's

the

113,

Cato's,

46;

7, xxxix.

xxxviii.

Valerius

Lit.

of

Plut.

32,

73

probably

book

second

Min.

Max.

tinguished the
dis-

30,

contemporary
of

vii.

cf

Pomp.

seems

us.

vide

Favonius,

admirer

Valer.

Nat.

whom

Cato

13

before

M.

passionate

Cass.

tioned
men-

ix.

Diogenes,

by

of

Apollonides
Stoicism

92.

respecting
34;

teachers,

come

Hist.

8,

one

(PJiil.

Athenodorus

his

Pliny,

structed 21
in-

date

Stoic,

unknown.

whom

he

what

he

school

The

Protagoras,

also

His

3).

friend

Concerning
xxxiv.

death

Stoics

and

his

of

earnestly

his

the

i. 254,

III.

already

xiv.

in

say

of

and

Aristo-

instructor,
does

after

and

leader

the

writings

(iii. 27)

ideals

the

in
on

asperities,

the

Cato

which

have

teacher.

as

Flnibus

the

this

also

permits

757,

p.

Stoical

De

school,

as

and

attacked

of

ciple
dis-

(for

xvi.
in
crvj/e"f"i\ocroct"'f)(ras.i."i'

word

and

fellow

as

prohably

more

his

of

118

31,

61

29,

in

perfectus

as

Stoieus

Antipater

famous

more

Mur.

d. ffr.

and

670)

p.

still

Pro

of

Xen-

2,

Brut,

perfectissimus

studied,

Tyrannic
and

548)

p.

(xiv.

p.

also

had

he

in

account

14,

to

preferable

seems

Procem.

(Parad.

called

rately
accu-

5,

Peripatetic
16,

archus

be

to

Meanwhile

heard

whom

concerning
himself

21,

4,

closely

so

philosopher.

Stoicvs',
he

(xvi.

eTcupos

and

of

son

whom,

informed

(Of

the

introduced

have

may

it

that

that

after

him

Athenodorus,

Sandon,

approximates

Academician,

the

speak

to

who

but

school,

of

member

III.

Stoics,
be

spoken

as

THE

75

ACADEMY.

CHAPTEE

THE

IN

PHILOSOPHERS

ACADEMIC

THE

IV.

BEFORE

FIRST

CENTURY

CHRIST.

approximation and
schools of philosophy,as
THIS

partial blending
has been

of

the

alreadyobserved,

decisive manner
in caccomplishedin a still more
how effectively
the way
We
have seen
the Academy.
cleared for eclecticism,
was
partlythrough the scepticism
of the Academy, and partlythrough the theory
with that scepticism; and
connected
of probability
was

how

in

certain

consequence

thought

even

appear

It

Carneades.1
after the

this

first

of

mode

disciplesof

developed
definitely

of the first century before

commencement

Antiochus.

and

Christ,by Philo

the

among
still more

was

of

traces

was
Philo,2 a native of Larissa,in Thessaly,3

and
disciple
1

PHI.

supra,
2

d.

Lariss.
j

Academica,
ii. 126-200,

PMlo

awnos

PMlone

ibid. D"

disputatio al-

Erische

on

Cicero's

for fourteen
school
had

G-otting"rStudien,
1845.

to

vester

of

869), col. 33,

he

years

and

here

attended

the

Clitomachus,

native

he

about

was

previouslybeen
his

In

after he

instructed

city (according

for
emendation,
from
eighteen years ; therefore,
:

operavi

dedit; Pint.

when

twenty-four to Athens,

in

Stob. JEcl. ii. 38.

Cic. Acad. ii. 6, 17

maclw
tos

De

G-ott. 1851

in Athens.4

ler Griefsw.
came

C. F. Hermann,

PMlone
t"ra, 1855

III. i. 526, 2 ;

"r.

p. 5, 2.

Lwrissceo

of Clitomachus

successor

the

Clito*
mul-

Oic. 3;

his

Biicheler's
sixth

or

seventh

year

; I

conjecture : irepl
or
something
o/c[rcb
ovceSbj']^,

should

rather

similar)by Callicles,a disciple

Stob. 1. o. According to the JiM.
According to the
JIerc.Academic"rum(ed..'Bviche-of Carneades.

Tfo

ECLECTICISM.

76

CHAP.
IV.

the Mithridatic

with others
lie fled,

war

here

side,to Borne,1 and

esteem,2 both
him

Cicero

Academy,
he

Roman

the

Stoic, at
text

least

53) or the
(Phil. d.

Gr.

mentioned

III. i.

leadership of

own

as

vide
2

47)

Qwv

Sia

KoL

Philo's

the

school

and
3

Plut.

The

Herd,

and

from

Cic. Brut.

the
Ind.

Bus. Pr.

J"v. xiv. S, 9
(accordingto Numenius) ; and
the most

was

of the

89, 306, that he

important philosopher
Academy of his time

(princepsAcademice} ;
6, 17 (PMlone
In

Athens

ii.

vivo patro-

autem

Academics

einium

Aead.

88

Philo

Antiochus

was

pupil (videinfra 86, 1).

his

Besides

there

in

instructions

Cicero

Lucullus

he cannot

87.

to Athens

came

have

been

mentioned
Brut.

there, as
have

in Plut.

91, 315

no

more

Kome, or,
probable,

longer living.

he

his life is to be

be

haps
1, 1. Per-

v.

in

to me

as

he

been

Cic. 4 ; Cic.

Fin.

he remained
seems

When

in 79 B.C.

otherwise

statement

philosophy and

mann
84, according to Her-

ing
Concerngave
rhe-

of
while

(Cic.Aoad.

I. G. 1. 4, in

was

the

with

was

in the year

as

89, 306.

hear

composed

ii. 4,
11), which, according to Zumpt
d.
Berl.
Acad.
(AM.
1842;
Hut.
Phil. JZl.p.
fall
67),would

28, 110).
Cic. Brut.

broke

war

and

We

he had

in Alexandria

philosophy he taught rhetoric

very zealously(Cic.De Or tut. iii.
1

Borne.

treatise

I. c. ;

totum
I.e.,

probably
immediately after

B.C.,

came

to

deficit}.would

non

Cic. Tusc.

Mithridatic

in

out

Antiochus

of
the

I. o. ;

JV".D. i. 7, 16 ; Brut.
ei me
tradidi.

Glitomachus

head

\6yav sQcLVfjiaa'av

also Stob. Eel. ii. 40.

this

from

KAeiro/m^ou orvvii-

"rbv

rp6irov Tiydir-ricra.v.
Acad.
i. 4, 13 : PMlo,
magvir.
Cf the following note,

the
teacher
Mnesarchus, was
pupil Antiochus
(vide
infra,86, 1). That he followed
as

$iXa"vos SrfiKova-e

rbv

5ia

KCU

of

find

in

as

of Philo's

we

T"V
'Pajjjicuoi

mis

Athens, and
the predecessor of the latter,

school,

; but

ii. 3, 9 ; 11, 26.

Tuso.

Plut. 6^.

Cic.

seems

(sujpra, p. 53) can

scarcely
have
begun later than that of

Apollodorus

know

toric,

this ;

(supra,^.

doubtful,

more

enjoyed

mean

Seleucian

"Whether

it.3

long survived the

we
philosopherhe at first,

Apollodorus is the
mentioned

new

to have

seem

As

of the

doctrine

do not

we

great

Through

man.

as

apprehended

Apollodorus
the imperfect

to

Athenian

the

not

also

of

seems

whether

but

to the

to Athens

does

he had

Here,

instruction

over

had

journey.4

the

and

won

for himself

gained

teacher

Philo

as

he

case

Ind.

was

returned

ever

any

as

the Koman

on

How

the

the

length of
not
completed can-

to

ascertained.

Biiclaeler

PHILO.

defended
told,zealously

are

whole

its

in

in

unsettled

became

in

content;

77

the doctrine of Carneades

the

regard

CHAP.
IY*

sequel, however, he
this

to

doctrine,and

expresslyabandoningit,he sought greater

the principles
than
of his prefixityof conviction
decessors
without

afforded.1
the

to

it

Though

spirit of

not

was

in itself contrary

that

scepticism

he

should

regardphilosophyfrom the practicalpoint of view,2

timl
of treatingit received
him
from
an
yet this mode
applicationwhich went beyond scepticism: he was
of
not
satisfied,like Pyrrho, by the destruction
moval
dogmatism to clear away hindrances,with the re-

philosopher)

of itself;but in order to attain

happinesscame

this

complete directions for right conduct

The philosopher,
he says, may
be
necessary.

he found

end

be

to

physician; as health is for the latter,

happinessfor the former, the final end of his
with

compared
is

so

that

to
(according

which

of

whole

activity; 3

and

prefersej-rjKOvrarpla,for
is

there

no

room

in the

from

lie says

eiredv^e^ ev

lacuna

6vr"av rvxew,

(Inci. HeTC.
epfiojj.'fjKOj'ra
Aead.
33, 18).
for

Numen.

xiv. 9, 1
his career
was

the
leal

full

At

as

of

doctrine

Pr.
Uv.
ap. Bus.
the beginning of
a

zeal

of the

i?v"e Kal

rots

Philo

defending
Academy :

"""o7,ueVa T$

ra

flaxy

teacher,
in

KAem"-

STou/coTs

v"po-jri
e'/copvo-crero
x^A/c^. Subsequently, however,

this definition of its aim,

ouSev

olcrfl'5Vi,ra"v
eiva

eS"c

v"ra

jSaAAooz/avrtis CK"J'

That

Philo

.
"

the

had

Academic

at first professed

scepticism

unconditionally than
wards
Acad.

he

more

after-

Cic.
did, follows from
ii. 4, 11 sg. ; vide infrat

p. 80, 2.
2

Pyrrho had alreadydone this

(cf.Pliil. d. 6rr* III. i. 484, 3).
3

Stob. Eel. ii.40 sy.

eoucevat

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\Treplr)jv
dpo^oyta.
ry "f"i\0(TO"plq
evdpyetdre

Kara

avra

ra

'

ms'

ECLECTICISM.

73

CHAP.

philosophywhich

of

the six divisions

lie derives

he

IV.

he himself

assumed,1 and according to which

of ethics in its whole

Where

extent.2

treated

the interest

systematicform of doctrine, though primarily

so
only in the sphere of practicalphilosophy,was
tific
of scienstrong,there also the belief in the probability
have been strengthknowledge must necessarily

for

According to Stobseus,
the
following.
they are
firstthing that is necessary,
1

is
says,
be
should

to

other

that

should

counsels

"

had

separate

of

Peripatetics,

and

occasion

no

the

from

himself

all

those

with

essential

Zeno

Stoic

the

entirely in

so

Academy

to

demy,
Aca-

The fourth part treats

and
fixes the Qecap^(Slav,
TTspl

opposed
\6yos irporpeTrriKbs
rov
"irlrty aperV), which
(jrctpop/JLcay
be

agreed

things
the

man

that

and

treatment,

ethics

to
upon
medical

prevailed

himself

submit

sick

the

that

to

The
he

that

maintain

I. c.,

is the

this

partly to prove
(or,perhaps

has

worth

the

r4\ov$,

conduct

of

primarily

for

the
The

individuals.
is undertaken

by
fifthpart, the TroAm/eds,in
philosophy) and
partlyto confute the objections regard to the commonwealth.
againstphilosophy. (The irpo- In order to provide not only
of virtue

the

of

of

rpeirriKos

is

Philo

thought

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

secondly,

must,

applied

be

remedy
hand,

the

on

"

problem

curately,same
ac-

more

one

for

wise, but

the

for

also

the

SiaKel/j.evoi
Mpcairoi,who
vestigation
to follow
unable
are
logical inthe
sixth
part is
required, the viroQ"-riKbs \6yos,
peffcas

which
into
2

coins the
rules

This

results of ethics

for individual
is evident

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
"
Treplaya6tav KCU
imparted
and

cases.

from
of

the

Stobseus,

Arius

Didy-

ofiv

"

KaKtov

third is the

The

rfaos.

In

x6yos TT"plreXcav.

's -ethics Hermann

of Philo

(ii.7)
the
JDe
not

4th book

not

the

part

cannot

source

proved, but

improbable,
Antiochus, was

Trepl

rot.

as

"c.

of

This, however,
be

avrf)

jectures
con-

of Cicero's treatise

Finibus.

only

it is also
and

this

Philo,

the first

Any

one

who

agrees

with

mann's
Her-

conjecture respectingthe less right to

Fin-, iv. has

dispute this,as
5).
(ii.

Hermann

does

PHILO.
ened

and

and

the

inclination

79

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

If'tlT*

doctrine

Academy-

so

we

of

Carneades

that

the

truth

Stoics

of

cognition,he
is

sensible

which

reasons

given ; 3

argued with

co-exist

with

all notions

his

timi

constituted

so

perception from

little

and

notion

no

not

may

ultimatelyderived

all the

there

false notion

that

had

intellectual

Modifier

it

and

which

he

the

denied

for

predecessorsin the Academy

as

he

could

agree

with

the

This

connection
Is,indeed, impre"wm
effietumqueex 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
frfmara"rt 0fov),and by a whole
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

is
true

inevitable

sary, and
maintain"at

that
be

opinions
consequently
to

neces-

did

the
practical sphere
of
doubt,
point
pure
what

shows

know

we

that

this

was

Acad.

ii. 6, 18:

the
Cum,

follows
the

ita

negwet, qutequam esse

eompreliendi posset,
illud esset sicut Zeino dejmiret

quod
tale

If

from
Cic.

enim

si

msum

visum

igitw

with

what

book
Priora

of

Acad.

of

Car-

i. 501 sq.
direct
in-

no

point,

it

great probability

the

of

gather

can

of

the

Cicero's

the Academica

cone-'

the

this

we

and

by

(infra,p.

d. 6V.IU.

on

contents

the

is made

235
to

as

have

we

formation

case.
2

Of.

neades, PMl.

him

not

PyrrJi. i.

81, 2).

was

of

that

spending propositions

probability;

mere

statement

Sest.

not

nor

nothing comprehensible;

same

stand-

"

and

be

rate, for the

any

satisfied with

he

lost

Academies

2nd

book

Posterior

ii. 25, 79, and

1st
of

\ from
from
the
a

"f^

ECLECTICISM.

80

CHAP,
IY"

understood, he

been

had

therefore be

could, therefore,be

look

of the

union

we

Academy

new

Academy,

new

his
subtletywhich even
fail to rebuke.2
Scepticism,

only to be attained by

contemporariesdid

the

to

when

But

doctrine.1

Plato, as that of Philo with the

with
is

return

there

entirely of maintaining the

genuine Academic
this
closely,
more

one

this demand,

Academy,

new

the

to

the old, and

question of

no

solelyand

latter,but

the

from

distinct

not

he declared,was

the

must

Academy

new

statement

and to the whole

of

there

that

oppositionto

liveliest

raised the

old,Philo

the

from

return

school

vanced
ad-

tendency
original

its

of Arcesilaus, and

since the time

the

renounce

the

to

untrue

to

hitherto

as

discipleAntiochus

his

When

propositionthat

the

Academy

little desired

as

itself.

doctrine

doctrine

Academic

the

of

adversaries

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
tiocftitnagisterPMlo
negcct tiochus) arreptis tterum
.

quod

in Wwis,
mias

eorum,

esse, erroremque

ex

Ac"de-

duas

ijpsoaudiebawius,

new

etiwn

coram

the

Nonius

fragments preserved by

qui

armis

infm'),coarguit.
maintained
by Cicero
Philo's

of

adherent

same
as

is
an

doctrine

(he has justbefore directly acknowledged himself a follower

of the
In

Academy),

new

Cicero

says

Pldlone
Academics

Academy

this

to

relation

(Acad.
non

noster

oppres"it.

which

he

Philo
the

rived

all other
2

Cicero

defends

de-

Cicero

schools,

When

(as

is

of

(ap. August, iii. 7, 15) on the

to
superiorityof the Academy

subject
17) :
The

probably

are

arguments

the

defuit.

reli*

q'ttiasTullivs

into

ii. 6,

donee

ejus

12, 46.

patrooimum

vivo

autem

c.

restitit

owinen

From
itaputarimt("sA.ntioclcms,vidl#

The

Pkilon

et

morervtur,, et

Philo's

treatise

hands

of

relates, Acad.

11) he

was

asked

Heraclitus

came

Antiochus
ii. 4,

quite startled,and
of Tyre, for

years the
many
and Clitomachus

discipleof Philo
:

Viderenturne

PHILO.

believed, was,

Philo

available

not

knowable

from

things;

of

this

with

pressing,he
back

of

Tel

"num

Academico

aliqiiando? to which
repliedin the negative. In

audivisset
lie
the

Philo "s statement

work

same

the

concerning
new
Academy

this

untruth,
repeated, 6, 18.
1

described

is

and

an

ot Be

), Tovrecrn

TT?

aitardtyavracriq,
fiffov
irpd'yfJi.aTa,Se

LKy
a

is

'6ffov fj-ev exl

vt

elvai

as

TCL

But

in

cf.
2

Cic.

Acad.

arguments
enim

he
acer

expression

here

be

wider

somewhat

inf. p. 82,

Philo

the

must

taken
sense;

it

4, 12.

of Antiochus

The

against
minus

will

pass over,
est is,qui
adversariiis

ista" qiLcs sunt

lieri

defensa (the

was,
; it

sense

Stoic

school.4

opportune

an

rion,3
criteas

As

the

time

to

be

to

go

professed by the

Carneadean
pure
scepticism,
the representative
of which
in
the
first edition
of the
Academica
was
Catulus), negat
omnino

ibid. 6, 18).
3
Thus
the
of

dicere

rise

and

the

(cf.

design

the Academy
scepticism
is represented by Augustine
(C.Aead. ii. 6, 14), who no
doubt
derived
this conception
from
Philo
as
explained by

of

Cicero.
4

Cf. sitpra, note

This

statement

(vide PML
it
493, 4) ; that

derived

from

partly from
with

3.

tained
main-

knowledge

of
not

1.

meets

often

'

un-

maintained

Academicos

the

censure

i. 235

Pyrrh.

Sext.

of

doctrine

not

opposition to

the

was

originaldoctrines

ilia Pltil"nis, aiit ea

Philotie vel eos ullo

such

longer appeared

no

it

this

in

to

the

as

Academy

every

only

Platonism

considered

the

to

all and

reference

Stoics

the

from

danger

'

this,he

in

meant

denied

doctrine

esoteric

the

deny

to

genuine

while

with

d. Gv.
is

Philo

ultimately
probable,

is

its inter-connection

presuppositions
partly because it is
found
in Augustine,

C. Acad.
in

c.

us

III. i.

all other

Ms, and
only

iii. 17, 38 j 18, 40 ; but

20, 43, Augustine expressly

appeals

to Cicero

CHAP.

concep-

things are

connection

was

Stoics, and

the

rational

scepticism of the

design
2

for the

the criterion,was

beginning, only

its

not

was

made

in

the

that

in themselves

but

and

the

had

they

tion, which

against the Stoic arguments,

as

established

perfectlywell

81

for it.

His

theory

ledge.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

Platonic

IV.

the

school ;

of the

old

Academy had

if

Eut

the

genuine Platonism,
the

ask

the

new

original

consisted

what

is not

answer

of

that the

all from

in

storation
re-

abandonment

since he held

we

this

in

see

any

departed at

not

Platonism.2

not

Academy

of the new,

tendency

On

lie could

but

this
factory.
satis-

very

hand, Philo,in agreement with

one

of the new
Academy, denied the
predecessors
of a complete knowledge, of comprehending
possibility
merely in regard to the Stoic theory
; not

his

; for like those

knowledge, but quite universally

of

lacked

he
predecessors,
of

false.3

and

true

less
August, iii. 18, 41 (doubtafter
Cicero) : Antioohus

qui jam
dentibus
et ad

rat

he

(as

legesque
the
had
of

the

auctoritatem

Platonis

he

the
had

which
the

been

in
to

to

So

J3rut.
head

far

(Luc. 42

2) may
of the new

the

Academy,

and

old ; and
Antiochus
similarly Cicero (Acad. i. 4, 33 ;
chus
describe Antioii. 22, 70) may
who
through
the man
as
that of the

the

renovation
fell

while
in

Ms

away

he himself

of

the

old Academy

from

Philo

conversely sees

from
retrogression

An-

Cic.

of

old sceptical argument,

the

and

true

the

discrimination

false, he

here

of
tinues
con-

Sed

cum
priiis pauca
AntiocJio, gui TICSG ipsa, yMt? "
me
defenduntur, et didicit apiid
Philonem
tain diu, itt const aret

establish
re-

Philo

call

from

After

rion
impossibility of findinga critefor

previous order
interruptedby

Plutarch

is evident

adherent

open

war).

in

remigrare

vetere.

ii. 22, 69.

an

the
treat,
re-

city they

the

Cicero,
Philo, has
defended
the proposition,niJiil
esse
gwocL percipi possit, with
as

revocare

enemy

begun

gates
besieging, and

were

This

aperire oeTiostibus portas ccepe-

saw

to Philo

yuan-

veluti

Academiam

Notwithstanding.,

domum

novam.'

Acad.
oircutnspectissimiy

arbitror

tutn

criminati
dis-

tiochus

auditor, hominis

PMlonis

for the

criterion

sure

didicisse

diirtim
etidem

licecnon

in senectute

quam

neminem,

et

acriiis accusavit
antea

defensi-

taverat

qitisenim iste dies

inlitxerit,
qucero, g\ii illi osten.

derit
esse

earn,

giiam

multos

negitavisset,veri

notam?
note.

Vide

the

et

awnos

fain

following

ECLECTICISM.

84

CHAP,
IV'

part with

Ids

discipleCicero.

find that he did not

the full

When,

however,

we

to ascribe to this knowledge

venture

and
certaintyof intellectual cognition,

consequentlyassumed
conviction,the

manifestness

certainty of

to be

kind

transcends

which

of

mere

but does not reach the unconditional

tainty
cerprobability,
of the conception this is very characteristic
of the middle position of our
philosopherbetween
"

without

his

Antiochus,1

and

Carneades

no
predecessors,

it

fourth

his

from

Academy;

hand, this appellationtells

between

opinionthat

was

far

so

not

from
distinguished

was

less than

of the

the founder

other

Philo

that

reason

and

successors,2
as
while, on
favour

in

of Philo

the doctrine

of

and

the

the

that of

important divergence had reallytaken

place.That directlycertain element, Philo,like Cicero
ances
after him, might seek before all things in the utterCarneades

an

of moral consciousness, and

might serve him as a

the necessityfor
philosophy,
his

be

determining influence

This
opinion I believe to
notwithstanding
justifiable,

contradiction

Hermann's

ii. 1 3), for I cannot

Philo's
with

the
the

intellectual
Stoics.

Philo's

he

in

fywraffia

cer-

to

possiblyhave
versallyas

he

truth

knowledge

Had

meaning

in

this
he

could

maintained

of

been
not

veri

nota

at

Stoic

the

A^n/c^

the

ledge,

and

nota

veri et

discovered
that

falsi,he
it all the

knowledge

ascribes

missed

is

no
esse

the
even
Kara-

sign of true knowconsequently the

such

to

must

have

more

which

in
he

unconditional

certainty.

uni-

Of

(vide sugra,

Sit/pra,
p.

PML
.

does

there

79, 2; 82, 3) that

contrary, when

according
excels

ideas, and

the theory.3
originating

in

that

Plato, is presentin the intuition

of

to have been

seems

(I.c.

admit

unconditioned

tainty, which,

which

falsi, niMl
qitod yercipi possit. On

perspicuitas coincides
the

ledge
theoryof knowfoundation
for practical
his

so

d. Grr. III. i. 526, 2.

77 sg.

85

PHILO.

itself Philo's

in

But

scientific

long be maintained.
Philo

as

did

token

sure

assumes

of the

doctrine

not,without

manifest, could
every

his

in

who

He

position could

not

CHAP.

certainty.

self-evident

or

inconsistency,
deny that
the true

of distinction between
could

he

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

us

no

of

Antiochus2
disciples,1

Philo's

of

important

to

Ascalon.3
This

philosopherhad

had

and
Philo's instructions,

advocating the

works

he

began

have

been

when
may

Of

us

are
2

whom
mentioned

to

infra,,
p. 99s^.

Concerning

him,

mde

160-170;
~K.iische,6rott.Stud.ii"
and

C.

Asc.

Chappins,

vita

et

De

AntiooM

doctri.na,

Paris,

does not
; who, however,
beyond what is well known.

1854
go

literal copy of this dissertation appeared in D'AHemand's

and
Marb.
Asc.
J)e Antioclw
A

enjoyed

embarked

upon

not

many,
death
3

Pint,

This

it.4

result

of his

only of Philo,but

Par. 1856; but, as the

unknown
Chappe was
was

AntwcTm*

Academy,

about
the

measure

lectures

known

those

himself

uncertain

great

the

having attended

time

long

scepticism of the

to grow

in

for

treatise of
in

Ger-

this flagrant plagiarism

after the
only discovered
of its author.

Strabo, xvi.
Luc.

2, 29, p. 759

42 ; Cic. 4 ; Brut.

2 ;

JElian, K.JET.xii.SS. 'AffKaXoivlrys

usual appellation,
Sitjpra,
p. 80, 1; 82, 1, 3;

is his most
*

Cic. Acad.

ii. 2,

4; 19,

63.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
1

Mnesarchus,1 who,

of tlie Stoic

Pansetius,had
the
the

that

for

way

in the

discipleof

scepticism
time

same

things come

did

to

Pr. Ev.
Kumen.
ap. Ens.
xiv. 9, 2 ; Augustine, C. Acad.
from
taken
iii.18, 41, doubtless
ii. 22,
Cicero j cf. Cic. Acad.
1

Quid ? eum
pcenitebat? quid?

Mnes"rcM

Athenis
giii erant
He
Stoicorum,
oipes

turn

69

rated

himself

later

date.

Philo

at

Mne-

Concerning

vide

Dardanus,

the

ii.

whose

the

name

of Antiochus

bore, p.

in this work

53, %.). Either

in the Kav"w/ca, from

of which
book
a
Sext.

in

and

at the

stood

Stoic

treatise

or

the second

passage

Math.

is

vii. 201

30, 1), but

prohave
former,
we
bably
the source
of the whole
polemic
the
scepticism of the
against
Cicero (Acad.
Academy, which
(vide sup.
in

ii. 5

siipra, p. 52, 3.
2
Cic. Acad.

tween
rupture be-

open

quoted

prin-

only sepa-

from

and

sarchus

Dardani?

an

afterwards
ing

war,

Alexandria

in

He

Philo.3

and

him

the

-completed

sequelwas

'

only then

with

first Mithridatic

the

of

prepared

Stoicism

of

Lucullus

with

him

find

the

blending

During

Antiochus.

we

at

doctrine which

Platonic

by

opposed the

indeed

Academy, but

new

the

as

p.
the

Lucullus

$##.)represents
from

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,

first

tiochus

Philo, which
to

the

saw

he

was

of Philo

trines
to him

that

believe

he

the

would

to

it, called Sosus

-ZVID. i. 7, 16), to which
seems

again

(vide sup.

p.

be

p. 80, 2); and

a work

to have

80, 1, and

Cicero also made

use

of Antio-

chus

the

books

(vide
Philo

responded
concern-

in

by name
JFinibw, the
taken

to write

against

repeating

from

fifth

him.

of

Also, in

is
re-

Topica,Wallies (Zte
Topic. Oio.,Halle, 1878)

Font.
shows

it to

Cicero

be

probable

follows

Antiochus

But
chapters 2-20.
rapid compilation of
treatise he had
and

DG

which

to the

scarcely gard

treatise
him

doc-

already known

genuine (w^sz^.
this induced

unable

those

with

reconcile

of

work
so

as

no

consequently

as

that
in

in

the

this short

books
wrote

at hand

from

87

ANTIOCHUS.

79-78

in
ten

diverted

the

from

whole, returned
he

Carneades, he

of the

fifth

himself

from

made

his

of

The

life.4

own

i.

(Top.

which

of

heard

he

nothing

with

the

help
this
on

C'w. 4:; Gic. Fin.

Plut.

1,

v.

L
91,
; cf. Acad.
L
113
ii.
21,
13
35,
4r, ;
; Legg.
his
Atticus also had made
54.
Athens
in
(Legg*
acquaintance
315

1 ; Brut.

this

Z. c.). To
be referred

must

is said in the

what

misAcad.
34, of sions
and
Rome
to
(7r/?"flrj3etW)
the

to

time

later

Hero.

Ind.

generals

in

the

ii.

We

see

2, 4:,and

from

fere

c.

19, 61

et Alexandra

tis annis

post

severantius, in
mecum,

p^ulo

more
:

Hcec

ante

must

have

lived

other
Ind.

Sere.

died

in

28,

cording
ac-

battle

the

years
Antiochus

see

the

from

the
he

Brutus

Tusc.

Cf.

Aris-

for

the

not

8, 21,

v.

More

disagree).
it is

some

longer

no

(Cic. JSntt. 97,

which

not

cise
prelife of tiochus
An-

possible to fix.
i. 526, 2.

d. Gr. m.
Cic.

Augustine,
quam,

till

On

his brother

but

332, with

Nihil

6, 685

that

5,

heard

Athens

in

battle

least

at

expedition.
later

tus

an

as

Antiochus

year.

34,

at

sequence
Mesopotamia in conof the
hardships of

distinctly

est

if

Antiochus

B.C.)

following
hand, we

Antiochus

qztam

for

October

on

Phil.

essst

the

Luc,

the

place
(69

cum

special

Tigranocerta, perhaps
eye-witness). Since this

does
provinces.

turn et muladwmtlto etiam

Syria

the

which

to

AJJ.C.

Antiochus

mentioned

had

Cic. Acad.

this from

as

is,therefore,

(cf. Pint.

dates
2

it had

to which

maintained;

the

Topwa*
1

"

certainty, even

took

away;

besides

of Antiochus

treatise

the

it

in

lecture

brought

is known

About

Academy.3 When
the scepticismof

mortuus

may

while

notes

of written

we

with

and

Antiochus,

of any

5)

discover

perhaps
substance

CHAP.

decidedlySis

sceptic,as

himself

he

probabilitywhich

the

so

polemicagainstit

believes, abolishes, with

also

was

Antiochus

it ; and

to

freed

once

memory

Academy

tendency
sceptical

founder

the

had

task

year.

itself since Arcesilaus, that it never,

abandoned

called

the

Antiochus

Through

Cicero,

died.2

later he

years

for half

pnpil l

his

was

B.C.,

when

school in Athens

Platonic

of the

head

tamen
verum

Aead.

C.

ii. 6,

Acad.

6,

12

15:

magis defendebat*
percipere

ECLECTICISM.

83

CHAP,
IV

_____J

the true does not

allow

itself to be known

such, it

as

anything appears to be true;1

consequentlyhe not only contradicts the natural
all action,
necessityfor knowledge,2 but also makes
impossible; for Antiochus, like Chrysippus,rejected
in action,
the notion that we might follow probability
without knowledge and assent ; partlybecause,
even
have

we

as

that

be said

cannot

assent

to refuse

which

of

and

assent
a

the

conviction, or, on

to

the
of

portion

be

can

it is impossible to

and partlybecause
probability,
without

there

truth

without

seen,

other

the
self-evident,

act

hand,

possibility

adversaries

the

no

conceded.3

practicalinterest is just what is,in his eyes, of

of virtue
the highestimportance : the consideration
is,as Cicero expresses it,the strongest proof of the
This

of knowledge,for how
possibility
make

man

had

no

wisdom
practical
of life

had

were

be

possibleif the
?

The

But

of his adversaries
whole

tokens

Cic.

LOG.

and

problem

in the

even

turns'

he

sphere
the

on

had

Carneades

"

Acad.

cit. 8, 24 ; 10, 32 ; 12,

the

In

first of

Lupullussays,
Philo's
tional

2)

37 B$q.
4
LOG
5

would

chiefly
that true conceptions have
his attacks
tinguish
in themselves,by which
they may be diswith certaintyfrom false.5 Against this

ii. 11, 33, 36 ;

17, 54 ; 18, 59 ; 34, 109.
2
LOG. oit. 10, 30 sg_t
1

he

also believed

question here

statement, against which

directed

and

aim

he

duty, if

? how

conviction

unassailable

unknowable

the better

theory.

of

of

sacrifice to his fulfilment

fixed and

the virtuous

could

objections against

Omnis

miam

Cic. Acad.

quern PMlo

13, 40.

ra-

79,
conceptions (sitjcra,

cit. 8, 23 ; cf. 9, 27.

Phil. d. 6fr. III. i. 501 sgg.
ii. 6, 18 ;

these passages
reference
to

in

oratio contra,

susoipitiura

retineamus

earn

wluit

Acade-

noMs,

ut

definitionem,,
evertere.

ANTIOCHUS.

scepticshad

the

of these

existence

he believed

but

the

discard

the

that

to

be

observed,

to

be

valid.1

is

not

of

if the

of true

account

to

that

kept healthy
"

are

and
foresight

be

to

all

ished,
ban-

prudence

testimony of the
the

deny,

merely follows

; it

themselves

In

The

not

that

CHAP.

cases

errors.

does

on

senses

be

-various

similar

observation

correct

all rules

and

the
to

are

to

source

of

the

Antiochus

ought

we

senses

and

senses,
errors

dicta

hindrances

chieflyurged

deceptionsof the

of

80

senses

are

is

senses

for

are

conceptions; for though

us

sensation

primarilyonly a change taking placein ourselves,

it also

reveals

to

that

us

effected.2

change is

"We

make

not

all

impossible.3 But

of which

means

this

likewise,as Antiochus

must

readilyadmits, allow truth

would

by

generalconcepts,if we

to

thought,and

all

and
crafts,

arts

if, as

against this,the tions

imaginaof dreamers
lunatics are brought forward by
or
his opponents, Antiochus
repliesthat these are all
in that

wanting
true

that from

if

and

LOG.
Sext.

is

no

vii. 162

*#.

Oic. I, c. 7, 21 8$.
cit. 15, 47
*##, ; 16, 51
According to 16, 49, Anmust

have

discussed

objectionat great length.

Of. Phil

we

d. Gr* HI. i, 503.

are

need
That

7, 19 sg_q.

Math.

to

things it does not

distinction
between
them;

judgment,,6 we

Loc.

sq.
tiochus
this

cit.

is proper

many

particularcases

our

which

conceptions; 4 and if they seek

with
their
sorites,5he answers

of
similarity

there

in

suspend
3

us

the

that

follow

and

intentions
embarrass

to

self-evidentness

obliged

to

not, therefore"
Antiochus

precedent

after

the

of

Chjysippns (Phil.
d. 6^.111. i. 115, 2) adopted this
in
regard to
expedient even

purely dialectical
such
we

as

see

95 s%^

the
from

so-called

objections,

^ewJ^evas-

Gic. Acad.

ii. 29*

iy-

ECLECTICISM.

90

CHAP,
IVt

all claim
permanently renounce
tics themselves,however, are
so
their principlesthat they
out
the

in

of

firm conviction

Can

it ? 3

to

that there
and

true

carry
themselves

involve

of the

be

can

allows

no

definitions

use

error,

not

impossibility
who

person,

it

or

difference?4

that

false notions,and

are

there

false notions

the first of these

is

between

since
difference,

no

this very

propositionspresupposes

We

that

allow

must

of

some

these

especiallythose last quoted, are not

subtlety,but others must
certainlybe
rather postulates than
and
superficial,

arguments,
deficient in
called

seep-

logicaldemonstration, of
is absolutely
ignorantwhether truth belongs
tained
Lastly,how can it be simultaneouslymain-

or
even
classifications,

he

truth and

distinction between

which

The

little able to

convinced

to be

and

maintained,

it.1

Is
striking contradictions.
that nothing
to maintain

most

contradiction

to

very

proofs.
In

case,

any

justified
by
that

demand
;
1

LOG.

such

in

16,

17, 54

SQg.
2

Loo.

Loc.

LOG.

tit. 9, 29 ; 34, 109.

oit. 14, 43.

where

that

was

tion

which

most

embarrassment.

caused

objeo

Philo

the

Cic. I. o. 21, 67 8%. He thus

the relation of Arformulates
5

"cesilaus,Carneades,

and

An-

all

Arcesilaus

inference

autem

Si

times

ulli

unguani,

drew
rei

this

sapiens

alflqucmdo

opinabitur; tmnquam
opindbitw ; nulli igitu.r

rei adsentietivr.
mitted

cence
acquies-

dogmatic knowledge

tiochus.

etiam

vation

the

adsentietur

cit. 14, 44 ; 34, 111,

there is also the obserthis

refrain from

strivingafter

49 sq. ;

self
him-

believed

reasoning in repudiatingthe

should

we

and

tit.

however, Antiochus

that

Carneades

the wise

man

adsome-

therefore
agreed, and
had an opinion. The Stoics and
Antiochus
deny this latter ; but
they also deny that from agreement
opinion necessarily fol-

ANTIOCHUS.

91

of

But
he was
not
scepticalnescience.
creative enough to produce an
independent system ;
he therefore turned
to the systems alreadyexisting,
of them
but to
not
to follow
exclusively,
any one
all ; and
true from
it was
as
adopt that which was
contradiction
of
mutual
the
the
philosophical
theories which
appeared to give to scepticism its
Antiochus
believed
that
he
greatest justification,
instead

by assertingthat this
did

exist, and

not

essential
of

points; that

himself, indeed, as
desired

other

from

the

this,in his opinion, did

with

not

and

Zeno

counted

which

to

the

he

his predecessors

abandoned,

exclude

are, he

un-

only

Academy
and

old.1

to

But

simultaneous

Aristotle.

Peripateticdoctrines

and

the

Platonism

Academy

new

He

words.

had

only

agreed, and

belonging to

Arcesilaus

since

alliance

in

went

cases

important schools

main

re-establish the

to

return

the

some

concerned

all the most

in

each

from

others

in

The
says,

Academic

the

and

one

philosophybearing different names

;
their diversitylies not in the fact but only in the
with
is the case
the Stoics :
expression.2The same
philothey also adopted the Academic-Peripatetic
form

same

lows

false

for
and

of

man

distinguish

can

true,

knowable
The

unknowable.

ultimate

question, therefore,
this
which
with

and

is

whether

there

is

always
anything

lets

itself

be

known

certainty,

Qavra"ia

f sup. 87, 4; 88, 5).

.

Sup. 82,

2 ;

Cic.

Acad.

i.

12, 43 ; Fin. v. 3, 7 ; JBrut. 91,

315 ; Augustine, "7.Aead.
ii. 6,
15 ; iii. 18, 41.
2

Cic. Acad.

IV'

than

conviction

own

contradiction

in

philosophy were

differed

his

establish

better

could not

CHAP.

i. 4, 17 ; 6, 22 ;

ii. 5, 15 ; 44, 136 ; Fin. v.

5, 14 ; 8, 21 ; cl iv. 2, 5.

3,

7 ;

of all

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
IV.

Sophy, and

that

admitted"

also,2this

substance

in

the

that

kind,

Stoic

be considered
of the

Cicero

the

show,

of

call him

such

of
as

little

; and

in

thought

of

Stoic

of

but

was,

Stoic.'

pure

doctrine

his

that

we

truth
patetic
Peri-

or

of his mode
spite of the affinity
be considered
Stoicism, he must

with

will

in

can

Academician

an

as

desired, indeed,

points,a

importance

that

doctrines

Academy,

review

philosophy
system.3 Antio-

he

the

few

nevertheless,

Stoic
:

new

of the

new

many

member

points,as

are

so

him

exception

these

Yet

as

was

subordinate

may,

form

concerning

called

with

not

adopted

says

to be

and

Academy,

himself

chus

philosophy

amended

an

as

that

such

of

was

if it be

or,

much

introduced

Zeno

the words

only changed

of
an

Jlis eclec-

eclectic.
ticism.

Antiochus
into

three

value

same

Cic. Acad.

Fin.

parts ;
each

to

25,74;

JO. i. 7, 16 ; Legg. i.
Sext. Pyrrh. i. 235.

N.

Acad.

i.

Ibid.

1 2, 43

nostro

9,

35
:

not

that he

veteris

did

is clear from

Of. Plut.

29, 88;

heard

20, 54

left

Cic. 4.

the
eV

Xojov

AntiocJw

ascribe

the

the

posiCicero

he had

already
rbv
Academy:
fj.eraftoh.'rjs
depaireiLKav

new

roTs

Pijrrli.i. 235

esse

ner,
man-

When

Antiochus.

2rauVc")j'GK

famttiari placebat,

rectionem

the usual

of these

"%.
Verum

ut
a?'fiitro7',

autem,

philosophyin

ii. 5, 15 ,* 6, 16

S, 22;

v.

divided

irK^liTTOLs.
:

Sext.

5Avr/o%oy rfyv

cor-

real
rea
zprja'"a.i

a?s

Academic

potim qiittm aligruam viovam

dplinam pirtandam \_St

dis-

August.

C. Acad.

iii.

18, 41.

5
4

ii. 43,

Acad.

132:

Antio-

Cic.

Acad.

36, 116).

That

efiiis,c[ui appellabatur Acadevvieus, erat

gid"em

si perpaitca,

Stomntavisset, germanissimus
ious ; or, as it is said in 45, 137,

Stoicus

perpawa

T}aibutien".

i. 5, 19
these

(cf. ii.
two

reproduce
views

Mn.

of

v.

presentations
re-

the

pressly
exAntiochus, Cicero
i. 4, 14;
states, Acad.

3, 8.

ANTIOCHUS.
tion

lie

the

most

assignedto them;

83

for he

placed ethics,as
important division,first,
physics second,

logic third.1 He paid most

theory of knowledge and ethics.2
and

said

is

the

Cicero

by

essential

most

theory

of

have

to

the

of

been

in

his

opinion

principalthing

he

rest

'

Ethics,especially,

scepticism which

for the

mentioned;

the

to

part of philosophy.3 In

knowledge

refutation

attention

CHAP.

we

is

his

Hi*

that

already

nave

adhered, according

to

to the principles
of Chrysippus
Cicero,4strictly
; and
this is not contradicted
by the fact that he also held

the Platonic
the

as

with

that

of

the
the

was

So at least

i. 5 ###., not

ration, but
the

in

we

only

Stoics:

ii.

the

maxima

in

etenwi

Acad.

Acad.

aidem

omne

qiiitur

duo

three

Acad.
JKBG

esse

"bonorum, "c.

i. 9, 34.
ii. 46, 142

judicium

veritatemgiie ipsam,

ant

?
.

niisguam.
is
tiochus

in

ipsitm

Aristo-

Chrysippopedem

So, in

28-30,

c.

An-

throughout opposed

the

assumption that he
cognises the dialectical rules

re-

of

Chrysippus.
5

indicium
pJdlosop7iia,j

I'eri etfinem
3

Gic.

knowledge proceeded,

telem,

enume-

also

perception, but

ap.

agreed

understanding.5The

on

Antiochus,
9, 29,

the

repeatedly,

exposition of

latter those

Platonism

all

sensible

divisions.
2

that

find in Acad.
in the

also,and

regarded

Peripateticdoctrine,but

affair of

an

the

of

in which

indeed, from
itself

have

to

seems

element

determinations

only

with

for he

essential

most

universal
not

theory;

Acad.i.

8, 30:

Tertia deinde

sic tracphilosophiespars
ab ittrisQiie
tabatuv
(Plato and
.

Plato

veritatis
dbductam

Aristotle) ;
a

sensibus

cium

quanguam
tamen
non

veritatis

in

oriretur
esse

judi-

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
gitidemsnwwtm,
ab

ubi

enim

aut

^enocraten

se-

theory

ECLECTICISM.

04

CHAP,
IV.

of ideas,on

doctrine
_and

to him

appear

Plato

Topica^

physics.

those

with

he,

the

in his

Varro

or

are

force

and

this

an

tent
ex-

and

sions
expres-

in

Cicero's

see

account

Stoics ; for

of the

also

name,5 represents the

matter, but
which

is

Aristotle

and

natures, the

two

That

other.

logic,we

of Plato

identical doctrine
there

his

Aristotle,but

of

what

To

of

really follows
Antiosame
superficial
manner,
Platonic
metaphysics not only

In the

combines

closer definition

Stoic definitions

and

mingled in
supposing

Antiochus.4

abandoned,1

unity, it might well

ledge
Stoic theory of know-

Aristotle.2

and

he

hand,

and

extension

Aristotelian
were

the

at last that

theoryof

chus

efforts for

only an

was

the

his

in

thus,

the other

neither

is

of both

passive,

without

ever

compounded

follows

as

the

and

active

supposed

the

is called

quality.6 Among these qualitiesthe

simple and the compound are to be distinguished
;
the former
consistingof the four,or, according to
Aristotle,five,primitive bodies ; the latter,of all
body

or

category,fire and air are the

active,earth and water the receptiveand passive.
Underlying them all,however, is the matter without
which is their substratum, the imperishable,
quality,
the rest ; of the first

with
3

Vide
As

sup. p. 93, 4.
i. 11, 42 sq.

tas

himself

Acad.

Cicero

as

by
i. 6, 24

sqq.

were

expressly says, qiiali- the

this occasion, 99,
as
on

word

translation

his

must
not

troduces
in-

of the

Greek

have

found

iroibv,employed

predecessor. Qualities

declared
Stoics

to

(cf PMl.
.

111X

he

qualitas
language

into the Latin

newly

and
-JTOI^TTJS

Top. Cic.

remarks,

the

Font,

"##.).

and

he

he
7roi(Jr^s,

',

as

sup. p. 86, 3.
"Wallies
demonstrates

thoroughly (De
23

pared
com-

9, 33 and

Of. Acad.

i. 8, 30,

Acad.

Vide

be

bodies

by

d. Gr. III. i.

ANTIOCEUS.

95

but

divisible elements, producingin

yet infinitely

the

constant

All
(qualict).

these

eternal

which

reason

the

is called

Deity
of the

and, because
sometimes

of

change

its

definite bodies

togetherform

the

and

moves

animates

world

; the

the world

Providence,also Necessity
;
of
its workings,
unsearchableness
or

Chance.

even

forms

the

To

who

man

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,
the

Stoic system to
could

longer

no

in the work

and
(aether),

the

far

How

real.

this
not

mind

expressly confounds

to

with

sense

with

certaintyassume

that

he

alone

and

He
says

consisting

fire.3

did

tends,
ex-

suspect.

spiritsas

substituted

Zeno

sether,for which

bodies

distinction

one

seem

of Aristotle that he represents

of

of Aristotle

distinguishedfrom

that he held

even

does

eclectic

the

Aristotle

fifth element

likewise

was

philosopherin

the earlier
to be

so

discarded

Zeno

said that

and

important ; and so
specially
often mentioned,1 it is only

appear
have

we

of Plato

system

not

We

may

enter

into

specialphysics.
In

regard

to

true

his

to

morals

eclectic

Stoics,from

also, Antiochus
He

character.

starts,like the

and the fundamental

self-love,

the fundamental
as
self-preservation

of

nature, and

human

LOG.

Acad.

says

attains

cit. 11, 39.

ii. 10, 30, Lucullns

Mens

enim

remained

i^satgw

sen,-

from

this

smimfom
sensus
3

impulse

impulse

startingpoint

est, atque etiam

est, "c.

Acad.

of

i. 7,

27; 11, 89.

ipsa

CHAP.
IV"

ECLECTICISM.

96

ground principleof the Stoics and Academics,

It is as much
that of life accordingto nature.1
a
doctrine of the Stoics,however, as of the Academy
that that which is accordingto nature is determined
for each
creature
particular
according to its own
nature, and that therefore the highestgood for man
the

CHAP,
'

is found

in

all sides.2

on

Indicated

the

Antiochus

the Stoics

element

rational

says that

in

man

had

point is already

recognised only
his

as

also

sensuousness

nature, that

human

nature, perfected

philosopherdiverges from

our

Whereas

Stoicism.

the

herein

But

which

at

human

life according to

true

belongs to
of

consists

man

essence,
fected
per-

soul and

body,and though the goods of the noblest part have

the highestworth, 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,accordingto him, consists
in the

of human
in regard to
nature
perfection
of the highest
soul and
body, in the attainment
mental
and bodily completeness; 4 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

CIc. Fin.
Vivere

ex

9, 11.

v.

hominis

joorisper
n"ttira

niMl

undique perfeota
qwvr"wbe (Cic.I. c. 9, 26).
et

re~

i. 5, 19 ; 'Mn. v. 12,
34 ; 13, 38 ; 16, 44 ; 17,47. Beanty,
desired
health, strength, are
natwa

suis

as

natura.

will

be

shown

So

also

later

on.

Acad.

for themselves

Varro,

ipsum expetit qui

$e

est maxime

Fin.

v.

13, 37

16,

44 ; 17,"

47.
s

Acad.i.

in the
5, 19, 21 ."?#,,

Quoniam enim
description of the Academicomnibus
expleri Peripateticphilosophy
:

Jiunc statum

cor-

07

ANTIOCHUS.

"equalworth
value, and

endowments

these,moral

among

have

the

highest

but

slight influence on our well-being,it would

2
and if
to deny all importance to them
;
wrong

only
be

it be conceded

suffices for

alone
of

with

happiness,
yet

for

virtue

for the

old

Academy,4

strike the true

necessary.3
he

the

his

the
too

little ; 6

in

it is undeniable

but

expositionfails in
The

Zeno

observation

same

If Aristotle

exactness

nature.7
Fin.
Fin.

Acad.

consistency.
appliesto other particulars.

i. 6,

tetic

22

positam.

In

ima

; Fin.

v.

Gf. Phil.

Fin.

Aristotle

v.

81

from

beside

him
with

5,
his

25,

75.

is thus

certain

Fin.

Fin.

aictem

sepaschool, and

scurentur

to

v.

limita-

prtmuni
H

unity,

as

an

the

so

au-

Peripa-

that

even

to the Academic

respect

wishes
be

his

regarded

resuscitation
doctrine

of

of
the

24, 72.

v.

21, 58:

getiera
etlam

ilust. Maxima*

Theophrastus only
a

doctrine

merely as a
the
original
Academy.

24, 71).
881, 5.

12;

of

school, Antiochus

d. 6V. ILL

himself

rated

(though

27,

recognised

innovations

et

corporis
qucB supra, dicta simt
*ad virtutis iisum
idonea (ii.43,
4

the

source

here in

'beatam.

"beati"wmam,

tamen

nee

is

thentic

ft cetera,

134

maintained

tion)

adjungerentnr

nisi

had

Stoics

originalimpulses of

upon

13, 88; 21, 58, 60.

24, 72.

v.

esite

vitam,

whole

had

If the

v.

virtute

ascribed

his

that

to

and

by side, since both depend

value

given precedence to knowledge,and

action,Antiochus placed the two ends side

to

to

Peripateticschool

opinion, ascribed too much

external,5and the Stoic school which

which,

agrees

philosopherhopes

our

between

mean

itself

higheststage

things are likewise

determinations,in which

these

the

Stoics that

other

happiness

Through

the

to

consi

CHAP.

(volun- ______!___

endowments

higher place than merely natural

although corporealgoods and evils have

tarice)have
gifts; l

mental

Actlonvm

plura,,
minora
autem

irt

ol-

majorwrit

ECLECTICISM.

98

of virtue,Antiociius
plurality
virtues
inseparablyconnected
are

the
and tlie Peripatetics

CHAP.
IV.

declares that all

_

with
in

of them

other,but that each

one

presents itself

l
he does
not, however^
activity
;
Plato did, to give any deeper account

individual

an

attempt,
of their

as

If the

difference.

quite agreed whether

or

schools

Stoic

not

were

community with

not

other

something to
for itself Antiochus
here again
be desired in and
ledges
seeks to mediate ; for while he most
fullyacknowhe
the value and necessityof this relation,2
distinction among
makes
things of value
a double
which are directly
in and for themselves
: viz.,those
of the highest good (the endowmentsa constituent
of the soul and the body),and those which are to be
in the strict

good

were

men

sense

"

"

T"nvni

tratio

adminisyMiemwm
vlrtvtes
vellqiiffiqiie
.

mrtuti'bws Gonqru"n-

Of. 18, 48 ; 20, 55 ; 23, 66.

Fin. v. 23, 66 s$.
3f\n. v. 23, 65 sqq. ; Acad.
both

In

i. 5, 21.

of

community

passages
with

men

is treated

in human

nature

it

is shown

in the former

feeling

for

first appearance

spreadsitself
circle
universal

in

and
love

as

this, from
an

ever

ing
widen-

finallybecomes
mankind

the natural

of men,

was

pendence
interdenot

alien

as

way
has
nature

Of.

it is shown

by

in the-

Antiochus

that

implanted the love

parents to children
(^A/a)

of

of members

of

the

to each

other,
'66ev
avdpcairOLS,

TOLS

added

tSot. 5* "v

same

Ka

rovs

OpdirovscicaLvov/jiev,

its

family love,

in the spiritof the

particularly
later Stoicism; but the thought
of a universal love of mankind,
upon

same

and

in

of

16 sqq,, where

race

(caritas generis liAimani). This

is essentially Stoic, and more

based

and

one

; and
how

Peripateticschool.

d.Gr.II^ii. 693; 851, 1; 865,

Arist. Mil. -ZV.viiLl,
1155, a,

PMl

the

something-

another
inherent
the

the

to

et actiones
tes.

Delude

ccelestiuvi,"c.

v"rum

ns

and
Kal

it
*v

is

rcus-

aTras
frvdpanro?
"pl\ov. The same
developed (by Arius
Didyws

OIKGIOV

Kal

is

mus) in the account

Peripatetic ethics,

of

the
Stob.

ap.
J2ol. ii. 250 "#., in a discussion
which
so
distinctlyrecalls the

of

manner
we

from

may
this

Theophrastus

doubtless

derive

that
it

Peripatetic,of whom
something similar is observed,
Phil.

d. Gr.

II. ii. 851.

SCHOOL

desired
latter

the

like

apathy ;

right

no

statements, considering Ms

equalityof

of the

show

likewise

scientific

about

he

that

us

all

such

to

qualified
un-

opinions

own

find

,.,.,

the

us?

only

of

Carneades
Mn.

v.

the

in

the

the

trait

may

scrupulous

the
duo

quality on
i

to the

held

AntwcJvus*

"

time

of
to

doctrine

generation,on

of Tyre, who
through. Cicero
u

that

mentioned

are

younger
t

at

contemporaries

who

to have

seem

Itafit ut

-T

philosopher

Among

among

Academy,

elder

23, 68

not

"".",

of

success

chiefly depended.
Antiochus

very

was

,.

the

not

position
pro-

consistency.

Consistency, however,
which

faults,3this

was

he

older

we
highest good. But when
violentlyopposing the closely connected

him

that

the

respecting

to

wise

the

of

doctrine

himself

had

and

Aeademy5

the

notwithstanding

the

contradicted

thereby

unwise

from

demands

and

mad;

complete

man

declares all the

he

them

slaves, and

be

regarded as rulers, as free,rich,

to be

wise

noble

and

the

Like

fatherland.1
allow

he

does

class

activity: only in the

place friends, relations, and
would
Stoics,Antiochus
only
moral

of

object

an

as

09

ANTIOCHUS.

OF

is known

to

us

ii. 4,

(Acad*
genera propter se expetendorvni
11
*#.) as a disciple of long
giiod est in
reperiawtwr, unum,
and
standing of Clitomachus
iis, in quibus comyletur illud
etvtremum,

aut

c^u(s sunt

aut

corporis:

swt

eaitrinsecus

hcee

animi

avtem,

ict

%uce

amid,

parentest ut Uteri, ut propinqui, lit ipso, patria, swot ilia

sed
swz
sjponte eara,
quidem

ut

eodem

in

sunt, "c.
2
Acad.
3
4

IHd.
This

genere,

quo

ilia, non

a
distinguished reAcapresentative of the new

Philo, and

is cerAcademy
the
pfoilosopMo,,
by

the

; for

demy

tainly meant
qua

tur,
shown.

be

will

as

Through

43, 135
is true

sq.

of

Heraclei-

misunder-

expression,
standing
der
^Zumpt (JJeb"rcLenBestand
Phil*

sq.

revoca-

immediately

the

of

ii. 44, 135

dimissa

grope

nunc

SGML

fieri. AJtad.

Athen.} Abh. d.
3842; H-isrt.PMlol.
in

100

ECLECTICISM.

the

contrary,1Anti.och.us
the

accordingto
sg.)has

Kl. 67

successful,that,
testimony of Cicero,the doctrine

"been misled

was

so

besides

into

his

brother.

sophers
Plutarch

Cli-

(Brut. 2) places his

character
tomachus
and Philo
patetic. moral
Perias
a
higher than his
less
is perhaps the
He
"%is tv\6yoi$.Also Dio, doubtthe
of
who
whom
is
said
it
same
same
(according
person
consideringthe discipleof

in

the

that

2nd.

he

Here.

the

Among

Romans

philosophy,0.

who

Gotta

(who
B.C.) by Cicero
but

of

adherent

Philo.

Alexandrian

tioned
men-

in

76

i. 7, 16

He

and

cises
criti-

Epicurean (I. o. i. 2J
the Stoic
"#".)and (iii.1 sgg.")
the
standpoint
theology from
of
the
As
new
Academy.
of Philo, Cicero
also
hearers
{Aead. ii. 4, 11) mentions
Caius

Selius,

and

Tetrilius
a

rus,

DiodoBogus.
partisan of Mithridates,

is also mentioned
who

in this

held to the Academic

(Strabo,xiii. 1, 66, p.
he
can
scarcely be

school
; but
counted

614)

philosophers.
among
1
their
Pre-eminent
among
of
him

the brother

isAristus,
succeeded
Antiochus, who
in his position of instructor
Athens
at
(Cic. Brut.
97,
Acad.

ii. 4, 12 ; i. 3, 12 ;
Tusc. v. 8, 21 ; Plut. Britt. 2 ;
2nd. Here. 34, 2 sq.
In 51 B.C.
332

Cicero

(ad

Att.

8,22)

met

him

him
who

formed

there, and

an

generally

state

of

10 ; Tusc.

philosophyin

According
heard

to

the
many

of

author

Athens.

an

Rome

to

is the
56 B.C., and
mentioned
Plutarch
by

person
the
as

conversations

table

Pro.

according to the
6 sgg. (where by

3). Also,

Ind.

Here.

34,

other

any
Antiochus

avrov

can
philosopherthan
scarcely be intended), Apol-

las, of Sardis; Menecrates,

of

M n a s e a
Methyma
j and
Tyre. Concerning Aristo

of
and

who

Cratippus,
the

over

to

vide

infra

whom

Athens

in

Aristus

followed

been

i.
$0jp7i.

6).

the

is

of

court

(v.

Ptolemy

Calwim.

at the

XII.

Demetrius

sus)
(Diony-

(Lucian, De
of

16),

know, however,

no

whom

worthier

than

Philostratus

at

the

by

to
later

Tnd.

Here.,

other

philo- by

disciple of

Brutus
Aristus

;
a

school
tioned
men-

(Anton. 80).
besides
Bomans,

the
have

was

Plutarch

Cicero, Varro,
shall

we

further
tiling

rate, he
any
of the
member

but,

tioned
men-

date

same

lived in Alexandria

there

Brut.

(Plut.

At

by

Brutus

in 44 B.C., and who

by Philostratus

24)

went

121, 2.

p.

heard

Peripatetic school,

to have

seems

scribes
deAmong

only man
exception to
unsatisfactory

of

embassy

in

v.

the

as

the

lie had

v.

member

period, Theopompus,

the

number

as

of Antiochus,
(Plut.Qu. Com.

the

Publius,

Strabo, xvii. 1, 11, p. 796 ;

Coel. 10, 23; 21, 51)
Pro

perished

disciple

Cic.

pied
occu-

is

(IV.D.
acquaintance

to

old.

Oreek

consul

was

an

33, 4,

with

themselves

$".)as

Acad.

seventy years

was

had

of

whom

speak

more
was

on,

Antiochus.
been

we

particularly
also
M.

instructed

(Cic.Brut.

97, 332

SCHOOL

of the

Academy

new

abandoned.1
Acad.

OF

lie

his

opinions. Cicero (Acad.

ad

Att.. xiii.

follower

with

in

Par

he

enumerates

40, 149,

followers

the

Pro.

him

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
with
acquainted
all the

Greek

philosophers,but

himself

was

old

and

talent

and

His
are

xiv.

I)h\
20 ; ad
ix. 14 ; Brut.
6,
iii. 2, 6 ; his writings
22 ; Fin.
in Acad.
i. 3, 12 ; Tusc. v. 1, 1 :
i. 3, 8 ; vide

Fin.
to

his

Heh\
x.

also,in regard

writings, Sen.

9, 4
1, 123

Mp. 95,

Priscian, vi.
On

p. 378.

Consol. ad

45 ; Quintil.
p. 83 ;

Charisius,

p.
the

679

Diomed.

St.ud.ii. 163

M.

heard

Pi

with

so

also

Cicero

sq$.)

Antiochus
Cic.

to

ii. 4, 11, Cicero

we

have

the

Tynan

as

observed,

dlmlssa

jyrope

Homo

-pltilowpltia*
qua*
revocatur,

That
this
prolattiset woHlis.
the
philosophy can
only mean
new
Academy, is clear from the
context.
For when
a
disciple
of

Clitomaclras

mentioned,
that
he

the

the

we

and

Philo

philosophy in

distinguished
philosophy of
Cicero

is

conclude

but

can

which

himself

was

these

men;
expressly that

says

opposed Antiochus,
of

rival

the

Academy

(of

Carneades, "c.),dispassionately

indeed, but zealously. The

therefore, which
Academy,
Cicero's time

had

been

him

revived.

Cicero

thing

same

new

in

almost

universally abandoned,

was

says

by
the

distinctly,

most

i. o, 11 : JVec Tero
deserrelict arum
tawnn
rerum
giie
patroehiium
smcepimiis (through
_T. D.

the

preceding,vide

Krische, Gott.

De

ista,

the

Att.

(ad

in

nunc

livingwhen
Finibus).

not

was

Acad.

to the

knowledge
Cicero

praised by

In

mentions,

Heracleitus

Academy.

new

he

entirely

thing; and

same

wrote

of the

opposed

as

of Antiochusand

adherent

an

Academy,

later

admirer

an

and

Cicero

sane

2,

31, 120

of

almost

Heracleitus

as

with

ad.

In Brut.

time

to which

in

I.c. ;

Antiochus

himself.

with

sembled
re-

him

classes

25)

of

and

Yarro,

8 ;

3,

v.

101

says the

personallyand

both

in Ms

was

JSnesidenms

i. 3, 12 ; Fin.
v.
8, 21), whom

Tusc.

ANTIOCHUS.

defence

of the

new

Itom i n

urn

of

doctrine

the

Academy)
mteritu

enini
; non
sent entice-

qiiocpie occidunt, sed lucem, awctoris fortasse denderant^ lit IICKG

(according
in pliilosopliiaratio
contra
owi~
acknowledged
sg?([.}"
his disciple
himself
dmer"ndi
7
nia
(I.c. 3, $#.),
nullamque rem
and expounded his ethical principles aperte judicandi grofecta, aSocrate, repeMta "b Arcesila,
(c.4-25), bnt in such a

Fin.

v.

that

manner

retain

his

he

still wished

loyaltyto

school

into

the
which

to

his

Staseas, of Naples,
him
had introduced
(I.c. 3, 8 ;
Orat.
i. 22, 104).
25, 75; De
housemate

Cf. ad

Att.

xiii. 19

confirmat

patetic ywstram
Peri-

(according

Carneade

mgue

"tatem
trigitit

orbam
esse
yrope
Acedia,
intelligo. If these

nunc

are

by
C.

considered
the

Acad.

saying

ad

; gitam
in ipsa"

to be

of

dences
evi-

proved
dis-

tine,
Augus-

iii. 18, 41

vide-

CHAP.
IT.

102

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
IV.

these

with

everything that

testimonies

regardingthe tendency of
nearly the

school

the Academic

until

the first century coincides.

of

end

know

we

Our

knowledge of this school at that time is certainly

but that the eclecticism of Antiovery incomplete,2
chus

p. 79, 2), according to

would
Cicero
only have

supra,
which
had

finish

to

raUquia
of

of

the

suppressing

false doctrines

the

Antiochus

This

itself there,is

still maintained

Hiilo.

opposed by

is to ascribe

an
importance
Augustinian
phrase
which
clearlydoes not belong
it is plain that the
to it,since
of Cicero's refuting the
notion

the

to

of Antiochus

eclecticism
1

14

who
than

rrjs vvv,

ra

Procl.

2rwi-

from

find
Plat.

in

Tim.

in

but

earlier

7, B.

4 ;

Porph.

Simpl. Phys. 54, ", ; 56,

had
a
composed

ap.

he
5, that
great work

the

on

philosophy, from
the extensive
in

is false.

KCU

lived

Introd.

(quoted

Platonic

which

astronomical

Theo

Cod. 212, p. 170, c. 40 8Q., and

a7r" TTJS 'A/ca$7ftu.fas,
in
Proclus

of 8s

have

Thrasyllus, we

Albinus,

the

definitelyfixed,
to

seems

perhaps
ment
frag-

Smyrn.

Astron.

the smaller

Phot.

Ap.
:

be

cannot

plain from

from.

excerpt

Plat.

in

A.

Hemp.

Mai,

Class.

"(f"cus,Aiiot. i. 362, by Martin on 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
related,however, as to the proofs
ez/iore

ai

Theomnestus

between

mi-pro) and

(vide
the

Ammonius,

of his art in Tacit.

Ti7)er.

Sueton,

Ann.

14;

vi. 20;
still

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,

teacher

of

Plutarch

of the

members

name

"

Stoic

vide

other

of, the

supra,,

same

54

p.

of

Octavia)
of in

and

the

PMl.

the

former, according to him,

the teacher
of Marcellus,

spoken

was

Of

we

are

before Tiberius,
a year
(Dio, Iviii. 27). He is
to
us
chiefly known
through

Tubero

d. 6V.

told

very

Dercyllides, whose

36

A.D.

his division

III.,

little.
date

of the

into

son

ii. 7, 5, only Dercyllides

and
of
Even
Thrasyllus.
these

died

previously- and

the

from

Nestor
mentioned

of

Academy,

Phil.

d. Or.

mentioned

II. i.
as

Pythagorean
Plot.

Thrasyllus
seem

to

Platonic

logues
dia-

tetralogies {vide

have

428).

He

Platonist

tendencies
20.

But

and
been

by
as

is

with
phyry,
Porboth

Dercyllides
gramma-

EUDORUS.

of Eudorus,1

example

philosopherof Alexandria,2
the Emperor Augustus.3

contemporary of
This philosopheris

and

the

well

as
Aristotle,5

denominated

had

he

but

Academy,4

member

expounded the
of Plato,6and

those

as

108

of
of "f

works
had

coursed
dis-

lengthon the Pythagoreandoctrine,which

of the later Platonising
he apprehended in the sense
Pythagorism.7 This many-sided occupation with
at

than

rather

Did.

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.
is also
Miiller, Fragm. JHist. GT. iii. Temj).Hi. 96 ; Endorus
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

it

phers,
philoso-

suffice

here

may

vii.
Eoper, Pliilologus,

Stob.

534

81

Diels, Doicogr. 22,

et

sq.

in-

be

of his life cannot

date

The

legerdes

Aristot.

derS"fl.

Acad.

Organons,AbJi.
that

he

Ehodian

the

from

dronicus,
which

; Hist. Phil

1833

p. 275) infers
the
earlier than

XI.

manner

61,

other

46

sqq.

also to

Anin

PHI,

Metaphysics

with

the

is

hand,

Stob.

taken

from

Eel. ii.
Arins

"q.,

3, 2;
seems

commentary
quoted in
Simpl.
only are the

fragment
a,

not

Platonic

principles,the

Matter, attributed

and

Pythagoreans,

but

to

these

themselves

principles are

ferred
re-

with

the

Neo-Pythagoreans, cf iMd.
One
ii. 113 "".) to the
or

HJ.

(in agreement
.

Bidymus (on this subject,ride

have
written
infra), he must

Deity

before

ascribed

him.

Procr.

1019

to

Son.

d. Gr. I. 331, 4, from

Pliys.39,

a, 26 ;

from

Timtsm.

In the

two

One

pares
73, ", 18) comAndronicnSj and

refer

the

on
7

at any rate,
latter passage,
conclusive.
to me
If,on

the

16, 1, p. 1013,

was

Simplicitis{Scltol.in
him

seems

the

certainly follow
3Ifftaph.44, 23;

not

accuracy.
scribes
Schol. 552, b, 29.
(xvii.i. 5, p. 790) de"
A}).
Pint. De
him
as his contemporary.

( TJeber die Grieali. Au$-

the

61, a, 25 sqq. ; 63, ", 43 ;

66, ", 18 ; 70, ", 26 ; 71, Z",22 ;
73, I, 18 ; 74, ", 2, and Cat. ed.
Basil. 44, e. 65, e). That he also

Alex.

Brandis

Arist.

Arist.

does

with

determined

Strabo

"

rov

expounded

,Jra,p. 104,1.
3

(Ar.

to

sq. ;

Tide

Eel. ii. 46.

The

as

same

their

uniform

the

basis.

theory, however,

by

Eudorus

even

is
to

CHAP.
'

ECLECTICISM.

104

CHAP.
IV.

would
categories,

Aristotelian

the

that

to suppose

the

i.e.he
:
problematically

science

not

was

by the

ments
state-

the whole

treated

he

told

are

us

work
encyclopaedic

concerning an

we

lead

once

this is confirmed

of Stobseus

his,in which

at

of Eudorus

Platonism

; and

entirelypure
of

his digest of
especially

and
philosophers,

the older

of

summary

gave

of

the different parts of

questions with which
philosophyare concerned, and compared the answers
the

by the most important philosophers.1

has been
the epitome of ethics,which
preserved
them

given to
In
to

this work, the

from

us

than

is rather Stoic

Plato, when, according to Alex.

(uLMetaphA. 6, 988, a, 10),after
ri
the
words
ra
efttyrov
yap
ctfna

ecrrtv

efSecri rb ev, he

this

On

added

theory,

the

with

a\\oi$, ro?s S*

rois

in

Stoic

classification and
Platonic

rb KaXbv

are

KO! rp vXy.

Eudorus
whom

its materialistic
even

the

from

the

pov

have
the

Deity or

Eel. ii. 46

ev

Kara

scribing.
tran-

Having divided the whole

sics,
philosophy into ethics,phy-

of

tinguishes
dislogic, Eudorus
parts in ethics :

and

three

irepl
rrjs
rr/v Qzcapiav

above

parts

results

""""" w^1"re
he has given

ethics,

(2) the
from

p. 54
the
author, after
Eudorus'
division

continues,

apKreov

and
then
"7r/"o#A'fyuctra"j",

gives the views

philosophers
"

the

TeAos,

goods

then

/ca0'

GKOLcfrov

and

of

the

ous
vari-

first concerning

then

ing
concern-

of

we

these

two

for their

ment,
attain-

of these

each

tions:
sec-

life,and

of subdivisions

number
which

into

ends

means

and

of

first
falls

(1) the

explanation of this

expression

rtav

riit6v).The

Tracrav
(j"

rty
irpofi\ii{J.artK(os

3e

here

rov

\6yov,

of

is

odv Ei^-

rov
Siaipetfis
"$"iXoff6$ov

The

Didymus

Arius

by

sprung

primal One.

frriv

p. 88,
from

as

borrowed

Stobseus

interpretation,

must

vXy

far

as

(on
without

$#.) though

also,
doubt

no

doubt

no

question el TTOLV
atperbv.These

Si' aurb

extracts

138, 145

and

concerning the

agreement

monism

logy
termino-

into

among-

find the truly Stoical

ire pi rQv
vpo'riyovfji.Gvwj',
Trepl ffvjj.iroo'i"virepl epcaros,
(cf PMl. d. Gr. HI. i. 260 sq. ;

titles

241,

1 ;

the

doctrine

the

273, 7

sections

evils, lastly division

(for

283, 2).

Even

of virtue, one
of
of
the
second
this

must

be-

EUDORUS.

it

the

was

with

same

that Endoras

the

details of Ms

this respect

in

precedent of Antiochus.
himself

How
divided

from

from

certain

the

by

words,

confine

not

has been

already

the second
be taken

half of the last

from

from

Eudorus,
60

p.

cially
espetbroreAis 8'

T"5

been

trp"TQjsOLKG'IQV rov (j/j"ov

crvvaifflost) Trades,a"p'ov KaT'fjp^aro

the

Stoic

or

roiirov

probably
primarily indicates
view, though among

did

what

apeT"v, "C.,

have

may

50,

p.

he

the

other indications.2

widely spread,in

rb fj.ev ear i vepl rcav

whicli
before
ov

ethics,1so

entirelyfollowed

That

to ethics appears

quoted, and

105

5e

the

four

ecFTi

Qa.vearQa.1

fapovTTJS

TO

Ao-ytK^v

ovTrca

aurou,

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
cardinal

robs

virtues, (ppovyo-istakes

xa077, which
in the

defined

are

Stoic

and
irAeoz/a^bvtra
third

The

appcaffr^fjia.
is

of

means

classes

into

in this

by a comparison of
ing
immediately follow-

shown
words

the

8'

"7T6peffrly wrorcAls, Keirai

ordinateev
sub-

eight

Antiochus

allied with

was

^pfrJ?is

division

main

separated by

quite

into

manner,

$
rpicav* fyyap ev Tjfiovrj
rots
Kara
sv
ei/
fy
aoy^kficria.
vptarois
with what
Cicero, JFYw. v.
fpvcnv}
TIVI

rcoy

nra0oA0'jrapajJLvdirj'TiKbs,
III. i. 518. 1),
ire
pi
Kadij- 6, 16 (vide iUd.
s, ireplacr/d?crews,
Antiochus.
from
Karopdafidraiv,
irepl quotes
"av, irepl
ireplfticav,
Treplydfj.ov. 2 According to Strabo, xvii.
rcav,
and
Aristo
cation
1, 5, 790, ludorus
closely this whole classifithat
the
resembles
of the
cused
Peripatetic mutually ac:

TOVOL

How

Stoics will be
Gr. HE. i. 206

completely
what

is so

either

passage
Seneca

Eudorus,
have
and
1

followed
in that
This

section
before

case

regard

with

Nile

from

Sen.

is in the

of

Seneca, that

must
or

some

have
both

lowed
folmust

common,

Stoic,source.

is clear from

the

next

Stobseus, which,
also
observed, seems
of

in

agreement

quoted

ment
84, 14, and the commenceJBfp.
cation
especiallyof Ms classifiStobseus
quoted by
bears such strikingresemblance

to the

each

Phil, d,

Bucloras

sq.

in

is there

from

seen

as

to

other
to

(Strabo

of

plagiarism

treatise

right,but

he

the

on

will not decide

who

says that

language of the treatise is

Tat.
like Aristo's).AchiL
more
that
Isag. 96 (169), mentions

the

Eudorus,

agreeing with

Panse-

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

mathematician,

Diodorus

bv

and

Posidonius.

CHAP.
IY.

ECLECTICISM.

106

century before Christ,was

CHAP.
IV.

have

we

as

Ii. Arius

Didym

Antiochus

seen,
is also

which,

the foremost

was

the

from

clear

of

this eclecticism

sentative,
repre-

of Arius

example

m*

with
1

the

He

Stoic

is

known

doubt

no

of

"ApeTos

the

Alexandria

to

sq. ;

Aug.

3,

Ger.

Reip.

5,

who

is

Prcec.
207;
3, p. 814 ;

p.

18,

Consol.

same

M"rc.
4 sq. ;
Oass.
89 ; Dio
Ii. 16, lii.36 ; ^Elian. V. 3. xii.
25; M. AureljViii.31 ; Themist.

Sen.

Sueton.

Didymus this does not justify

with Heine
in distinguishing
us
Phil.

Plut.
(Jalirl. f. Class.
(from
Reg. Apoplith. 613) the friend

us

80

Anton.

though this philosopheris reckoned

school,2his views approximate so

For

Didymus.1

ad

Octav.

from

Arius

and

Stoic.
of that

instance

an

1869,

Augustus
the

Didymus

It is rather
which

of

Diels, Doxogr. 86, asserts,

of which

same

he

adduces

many

in this

examples

period,that the
designated sometimes

is

man

by his own
times
some130, ", Pet. ; Julian, 23j".
name,
of his
by the addition
51, p. 96, Heyl. ; cf. Or. viii.
265, C ; Strabo, xiv. 5, 4, p. father's,to distinguishhim from
Or.

2.

670)
a

as

friend
so

teacher of

confidant
of

of

philosophy,

Augustus

Maecenas.

He

highly esteemed

that, as
Dio, and
the

to

that
their

was

together:

by Augustus

in Plutarch,
Julian, he declared
people of Alexandria,

fellow

Arius.

citizen

From

Arius

to

of Drusus
Li via,after the death
Arius
must
(9 B.C.), whom

survived,

have

quotes

It is true that

of

none

in

none

of these

to

mus,
Didyhand

by

Apollonius
'A-TroAAdmos
'ATTOAA.CC$-

sometimes

Wi6\caj/

name,
names

well-known

called

"5 MoAwj/os,

describe

him

friend

none

as

of

an

who

have

Alexandrian

Augustus.

of these

occasion

to

VLOS

"

the

and

authors
enter

personalcircumstances

even

Stoic

into

is

by Epictetus, Rufus only,

sonius
by others, as a rule, Muonly {ride infra, ch. vi.).

and

in the
the

the

case
name

of

Arius

and
stands

surname

be

cannot

certain

times
some-

sometimes

first,we
whether

the
or
Ai8v[j,oswas
"ApeLOS
of
this
name
original
philosopher
; but

show

to

that

Diels, 1. c.3
the

latter

seems

is the

probable.
Epit. Diog. (vide PMl.

more

But

The

had

d.

the

Arius

of Arius

Rufus

Musonius

called

fragments

us

AiSv/Aosor "Apsios
AiSvpos,

from

any

is sometimes

fragment.

the authors

transmitted

as

same

both

e.g. the
rhetorician

Ehodian

I. "?., As

Seneca,

considerable

called
is Arius
passages
while
the other
on

the

that

consolatory epistleof

or

sometimes

by Ms
place, discipleCicero, Apollonius (Cic.
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
of

after the
sake

bearing

and

read

we

others

and

6V,

III. i. 33,
between

2)

mentions

Antipater (the

Tyrian, concerning whom

vide

DIDTMVS.

ARIUS

closelyto those

of Antiochus
his

him

to consider

tempted

107

that

should

we

be

CHAP.
IV'

if there
disciple,1

were
_

express testimony as
only acquainted, indeed,

not

the

his,of

of

the

and

one

older

sujyra, p. 71, n.) and

the contemporary of

his

Stoicism.

historical

with

We

are

expositions
from

doctrines,probablytaken

work

same

to

Comutns,

but

these there

among
is

which

quoted

is

anonymously

Xero.

bv
myself shared this opinion row TlXdrcavi (rvvrera.'yfLfV^v^)
(supported by the Mpit. ZHoff.) Eusebius, I. c. xi. 23, 2 sg. ; and by
in the
second
of the
edition
Likewise
Stobseus,Eel. i. 330.
and
in contwo
maxims
nection
on
present volume:
(4) the remarks
with it the supposition of the seven
quoted by
sages
that
in the
notice
of Suidas, Clemens, Strom, i. 800, B, from
AiSujuos'Ai-fjios(^ "ATTZOS)XP7!" Bidymus ; and (5) a statement
jjiaricras
"piX6aro"pos
'A/caS^/taZkbs,
respecting Theano, I. c. 309, C,
had been subthe word
stitutedfrom AidvfioseV r"pirepl
'A-rtji'os
TlvBayofor vAp"ios. I must
Lastly (6) a
pLK?is"ptXo"ro"j)las.
1

that

abandon

now

books

theory.

who

Atejus Didynms

KO!

iriQavSiv

wrote

The

passage

two

103,28 (e/cT^?AiStfioveViTOft^s),

is quoted in Btob.Moril.

"ro"f"iaij.dTcev
concerning

trine
Peripatetic doc-

the

this passage,
of evdaifjLovta
however, is found, as Meineke
"

be the

more

probably

the

Alexandrine

double

of

discovered
(MiitzelTs Zeitsokr.
quoted, fur cL 6ri("inasialm.lS5y, p. 563
viBava
are
sgd-J in the exposition of the
too is quite
Peripateticethics,ap Stob. Eel.

grammarian

AiSvfjLos
veos, afterwards
also

whom

'to

this

ascribed ; but

ii. 274

uncertain.
-

from

this

under

its

.author.
"

Stoic

work
and

Such
An

quoted

are

name

(1)

fragments

of

number

the

are

of its

that

ing
follow-

exposition

theories

of

God

of the

and

the

that

(from

p.

15). (2)
Hid.

the

20, chap,

c.

of

renewal
be taken
doubt
the

To

conflagration
the

same

from

borrowed

the

and

the

has
four
same

is

epitome

of

We

very
the
from

which

it contained

of

all

of the
survey
the
earlier

of ideas

The

proved

source

fore
there-

considerable

philosopher,

no

the

on

probably taken
preceding sections
(sixth) chapter,

at p. 32.

possess

fragments

section
also the

90-242,
same

our

to

source.

account

doctrine

cerning
con-

the

From

Arras.

the

that

seems

treatise

same

belongs
Platonic

world,
the

from

the

xviii. $q.,

section

doctrine, p.

Stoic

psychology', of

but

242-334),

sTri.rojj.fy
'Ap"touAiStiftou,beginning
the

"3)

Stoic

The

only this whole

corresponding

world, cbrb TT)S emrofiris 'Apeiov Stobseus

also the
Afitfjiov(ap Eus. Pr. Er. xv.
from

it is shown

thus

; and
,s-#.

not

or

work

of

show

sive
comprehendoctrines

of

philosophers.

supposed frag-

ECLECTICISM.

108

CHAP.

review

IV.
so

ethics,which
Peripatetic

of the

approaches

nearly to the ethics of the Stoics,and

so

entirely

opinionsof Antiochns as represented

to mistake
its
by Cicero,that it is scarcelypossible
l
ultimate
and though the work is ostensibly
source
;
the

agrees with

of this

ments

relating

treatise

physics have bean, collected

by Diels, Doxogr. ^45-472, with

d. Gr. HI.

conjectures. The
of Arms

treats

Meineke's

of

limitations

some

writer

same

his works,

and

1. c. p. 69-88.
1

(which

Academy), pursued
of defending

the

double

the

Platonic-Aristotelian

end

against
Stoic

the

with

coincided

for him

of the

Stoics, and

count
ac-

Peripateticethics

of the
those

his

in

Antioclms,

As

of

trine
docof the

the attacks

combining

doctrine

i. 258, 3). Like

he then

to

seeks

chus,
Antio-

to show

that

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
from

this

natural
other

love

of all

for each

men

(already mentioned)
reminds

pecially
es-

of

his decessors
prein the Academy.
Like

it with

(vide supra,

us

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
Stoic acceptation. The
^VO-LK^ him, he distinguishestwo kinds
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
such
as
thing
only contribute some(of the atperbvitself a definition
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
first,but the

p. 95
Arius.

"

acknowledged

as

mental
funda-

the

impulse : ty-bcrei
yap
qucei"ffdaL
irpbssavrbv (Stob. 246
sq. ;
Phil.

is quoted,
; cf what
d. Gr. III. i. 209, 1, about

252, 258

second

class:

'6n

TJ fj.ev

"eew:r
"ru^7T"7rX^/3curai
(p. 266
cf p. 274
.

for the

distinction

and

avcry/ccua,

Ka\a

S$. ;
tween
be-

the

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

airenXoy^
suffering;also

the

irapa "pv"nv (p.250

cf

Phil.
.

the

concerning

Stoic
the

position
pro-

POTATO.

chieflya

and

reproduction of the Peripatetic

mere

still it
"doctrine,

109

is clear that

Anns

could

CHAP.

have

not

brought that doctrine so near to that of the Stoics,,

"or
adopted an older expositionwhich, did so (thatof
if the distinctive doctrines of the different
Antiochus),1
as

for the

the

Stoic

ancient

the

shared

had

had

schools

of

mode

importance

same

if he
authorities,

for him

had

not

which

thought

inspiredthe
expositionof Antiochus, and had not been disposed,
like Antiochus, to disregard
the opposition
of Stoics,
as
Academics, and Peripatetics,
compared "with their
conviction.2

common

With

and

Anus
of

Potamo

Antiochus

connect

must

we

m.

Alexandria, who, accordingto Suidas,was

mo'

and
virtue, and the impossibility /CQTTJ]. In Ms (Economics
the
Politics
he
of losing it; and
keeps entirely to
that there is nothing Aristotle,only that he calls the
statement
of

neia

intermediate

between
ness
happinnhappiness (p. 282 ;
self
cf.'p. 314) ; thus
showing himin these
particularsless
and

third

right constitutions

of the

Polity,but Democracy, and

cracy,
its defective counterpart Ochloand introduces,beside the
not

(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

.strictthan

On

Antiochus

other

the

Peripatetics1 For

the

of virtue, Arlus

especiallyof
ibid.

the

makes

use

Theophrastus (jride

Il/ii.860, 1)
and

as

well

the

ethics of the

uses

the

Stoic distinction of

and
KofiiiKQVTCL

and

an^
""?#.)"

imports

(III. i.

264

(p. 280) the Stoic

Tpo-

plain
ex-

Arius

expounding

the

Stoics,use the very

(cf.ibid, HI. i. 226,

227, 4; 232, 2).

6 ;
-

to

Cicero

He

seems

forget that
an

account

at

entirely

times

he is

merely giving

of the doctrines

KaropBcajmara of others, for he passes

into

it

words

same

this

perhaps

philosopher may

of

of

use

common

why
Didymus, in

disciple
Aristotle;
(Cic.Fin*v. 5) quotes
these
two
sophers
philoonly from
97, 5) ; but in
(siijjra,
expounding the doctrine (p.314 )
the

Their

as

Antiochus

he

trine
doc-

direct
in-

from

to direct narration

III. i. pp. 256, 270, 276,

(cf rib.
322).
.

p0ta-

ECLECTICISM.

110
CHAP.
IV.

contemporary of Arius,1while

speaksas though,lie had

lived

towards

time, therefore

own

Diogenes Laertius
not
long before hisof the

the end

Christian

he

here

of

century;2 perhaps, however,

merely transcribingthe statement

writer.3

which

That

his

in itselfthe true

of all the

out

also avowed

schools of the time, Potamo

little

the

his

of

know

we

actually

his express

as

eclectic ; 4

as

doctrine

chosen

this

should

philosophical

design ; for he designatedhis school

and

older

an

system which

be

may

predecessorshad

attempted, the settingup of

combine

second

certainly

shows

that

he

had

cause;

for

it

apparentlycombines, regardlessof

#iib.

Said.

voee

not

reconcile

to

or

discover
real

Trpb Avyovffrov

fter' avr"v

the

is here

Potamo,

(probably /car1 avr'bv

be

read).
PTOcem.

oXtyov

21:

Kal tKXGKTLK'f]ri$

but with

same,

of

omission

expression still

the

more

suitable
un-

Mm,
Kpb ohiyov, is
S. II.
Suidas, a'ipecfLS,

to

found
48

in

This theory, advanced

by
Nietzsche
(RJiewi. Mus. xxiv.
3

sg.; JBeitr.

others by Diels

among

81,

ascribes

4),

Diogenes greatwant
but
than

not,

on

might

the
be

Concerning
attempts to decide
him.

accounts

of

of

more

expected
the

to

thought,

whole,

in

different

between

of

Bibl.

the

Diogenes anciSuidas,

these

In

of

review

of this

men

the

the

6V.

tnere

other

known

name

to

rhetorician

us

"

of

Potamo,
Mytilene,who, accordingto Suidas,,
sub.

wee

(cf. "eJ5.

Atff"dbvaZ,where
under

Tiberius

Potarno, the
the

Polemo.

r"x5. and

rhetorician

the

""iA(4cro""os),
taught

called

vocated
ad-

Diogenes Jj"ertws, 9), and

(Doxogr.

drie, i. 199 sqq.

Qnellmli.(I, (Porph. v.

".

circumstances

cf. Fabric.

is also

is

B.).

205

to

about

more

irpb C?-it.PMLii.

fab noTctjU-covos'AAc"rov
eifffixQy
TO. apecr/covra
avtipews$KX"%a(j.4vov
e| "/cacTT7]S T"V atpeffsuv.(The
the

life and

and

them,

something

iii.184 sgi.Harl. ; Brucker, Hist.

193 sqq. ; J. Simon,
JFIistoire de
VJEoole d'Alexana'lpecfts

8e

en

to

without

name

in

ward

Rome;
of

Plot. 9), whom,

new

There

editions
is

and

Plotinus

also

from
whom
mathematical
observations
Potamo

ever,
howcall
the
someare

quoted, according to Alexander,

in Simpl. D" Ccelo, 270, a, 42 ;
289, a, 23 K ; Sclwl. in AT.
i, 8 ; 515, a, 42.
4

Vide

precedingnote.

513,.

POTAMO.

logical

with

and

Stoic

essentially

an

Platonic

consistency,

ments

Ill

Peripatetic

ele-

foundation.

In

CHAP.

the

L_
_

question
Stoics,
he

the

of

criterion,

that,

only

substituted

added

quality
the

the

and

Scarcely

external

this

superficial

older

doctrines
the

for

goods

and

of

mention

one

has

followers,

Byzantine

left

in
dition
con-

however,

in
poreal
cor-

indispensable.2
found

be

to

in

modification

of

school,'

Eclectic

by

not

Academy,

are

it

is

consisted

which,

and

the

so

like

reduced,

essential

found

were

combination
;

he

older

thoughts

original

any

the

and

efficient

and

most

for

virtue,

Aristotle

he

thought,

the

life,

in

metaphysics

substance

to

he

notion,'
the

that

itself

good,

the

lay

with

agreement

force

of

which

of

principles

highest

perfection

his

the

expression,

substance

to

with

intellectual
of

In

space

efficient

The

stated.
the

and

form

vaguer

highest

Stoics,

the

of

himself

allied

notion.'

accurate

as

instead
a

'most

force

he

except

Diogenes

and

further

trace

no

his
in

history.
1

According1

wrote

he

Snidas,

to

treatise

the

on

Repnblic.
2

Diog".

1.

S'

"?.)"

KaOd

fikv

"$

(j"i](nv

rb

Kpicris,
Se

"s

ov,

olov

yiveTai

TjyefjiQviKbVy

i-b

v"p
r"b

TOUT6CTTI

8?

a"rot-

ev

ov

5e

elvai

OVK

"VGV

iroiep

l^"*

re

TUSV

Kal

iroi6-

TTOLOVV,

e" o"

T6irov

KO!
Kal

rb

ev

yap

Kal
reAos

"y.

irdvra

etvai

-re

""'

(continues

avry

Kal

%XT]V

re

TTJTO

sAp""r/cei

ap^cis

fyavracriav.
rfo

Platonic

ov

"Kr6s.

rcav

TOV

ar^aros

Kal

rS"v

ECLECTICISM.

112

CHAPTER
PERIPATETIC

THE

V.

SCHOOL

IN

BEFORE

CHA

P.

troduced
intendency which was
by Antiochus, the school

V.

into the
D.

The.

Peripate-

tic
School
Its later
direction.

CENTURY

FIRST

CHRIST.

the

with

SIMULTANEOUSLY

THE

Academy

also received a new

impulse and
Peripatetics
As
Antiochus
pursued a partiallyaltered course.
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
the

of

for whole

centuries, down

works

to

which

times

of

JSTeo-Platonism,their
in which

directed,and
characteristic

of

and

formal

of which

expression,the

necessityto

return

them.

No

upon

to

more

the

other

connected

has

none

line of

old

'wide

been

obvious

becomes

masters

and

on

produced

Zumpt

as

the

to

work

such

own

the
the

school, however, has

commentators

Concerning these,

of its

mistrust

scepticismhas

zealouslyand carefullycarried
and

strength is

their

lassitude,and the stronger the

scientific power,

the

task consists.
principal
is displayed the phenomenon
so
this whole
mistakable
unperiod: the more
pressingis the feeling of mental

also there

Here

entire

to

of

long

lean
so
position,
ex-

and

that of the Peripatetics.1

(Ucb"r

d.

13estand

"le"r

THE

The

113

scientific activity of this

middle
we

PERIPATETICS.

of the third

century, had
the

"judge from

can

school, since

already,so

accounts

have

we

Itself to the

far

'

J/*e Cmnwent

CHAP.

as

received,

confined

the

tors.

propagation,exposition, defence,

of Aristotle
and
popularisingof the doctrines
portant
imeven
Critolaus, its most
Theophrastus ; and
representativein the second
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
and

has

the

handed

been

of

successors

nearly

,1

This

school.
third

the

of

school

the

first

Athens.4

in

ScJtuL
PJiilosopJi.
AbJiandL
1 842

Arixt.

des

ibid. 1833, 273

1

Top.

i. 3.

the

Organons,

minime

him

to
SUM

of
with

time

were

Aristotle's

Quod

was

un-

ibid. II. ii. 934,

Cf

Andronicus

ewm

sopTtisprater admodum
ignorcLTctur. Though

1); and as
have only

Peri-

was,

according

Plut.^ZZ^,25, a contemporary
of Tyrannio (vide infra, p. 115,

to

the

Peri-

In the passage quoted, Phil.

d. "r. II. ii. 139, 2.

esse
vhilosqphum rhetori non
pMlocoanitum,
qui ab i_psis

paucos

the

itself.

quidem,

admiratus,

unacquainted
writings,if they

neglected in

not

distinguished patetic school

that

mentioned,

supposed that the

of the
philosophers

mass

the

of

Aristotle's

here

not

head

be

it cannot

great

of

nis

second

in the

Christ,

pateticsare

ol

Tyrannio appears
come

to

Kome

in

Atidron'tcvs

-L-

.c

iiie

was,

of

first

T.C

edition

were

declared

Topica of Aristotle

known

sq. :
Griecli.

sq.

had

rhetorician

93

die

TJeber

Ausleger

AJtade-mie,
"2.

Phil.

Hist.

Brandis,

."/"

before

His

Athen.)

in

JBerL

der

century

Ehodes

scientinc

of

any

period

of

impulse to the
distinguishedman

new

from

us

Andronicus
-,

gave

to

Critolaus, during

century.

down

to
66

of

ECLECTICISM.

114

CHAP,

works,1for which. Tyrannio the grammarian furnished'

V.
B.C., and

Andronicus

transcripts of
for Ms
this

placed

certainly be

must

after

ings
writ-

of them,

edition

own

60

el?6dio$

surname

invariable

His

B.C.

Ms

used

Aristotle's

designates

himself

arranged the writings

:
/J.tfj.r)ffd/j.evos
-rbv
'A.v$p6viKov
TrepiTrcmjTi/cbz'j
Plotinus

of

who

/cal "eora
'Apio"rore\ov$
els Trpayfj-areias
"ppdffrov
SieiAe^

oiKeias vTrodeareis els ravr'bv

ras

crvvayay"v. This statement, as

birthplace; Strabo mentions
well
the
celebrated
him
(Sulla,
losophers as that of Plutarch
phiamong

Ms

(xiv. 2, 13,

26)

head
655). That he was
school
the
(in
Peripatetic
Athens) is asserted "by David,

with

of Rhodes

"

avrov
-Trap'

p.

of

Scliol. in Arist. 24, a, 20 ; 25, 5,

42 ; Ammon.
De Interpret. Z. c.
#, 21 ;

94,

called

97,

the

19.

a,

is here

He

evfiettaros

a.irb

following
'ApicrroTeXovs
;
in

Scholium

eleventh
as

45),

other

Aristotle

self,
him-

will

be

number

of the

of

school

the

one,

three

found

are

should

them,

three

or

with

not

G-r. II. ii.927,

gap
Andronicus.
most

only

Zumpt (JPML
Aristo
1) between

to

seems

probable, however,
are
wanting, and

two

or

called

as

we

Boethus

the

that

had

When

the

the

dered
wan-

with

Ms-

writer

same

words

already

Kal

avaypdi^atrovs
(pspofjievovs irivaKas,we

understand

these

by

edition

which

confine

of

enumeration
embraced
their

the

to

did

probably

itself

to

the

also

of

lists

writings a supplement
not

vvit-

must

mere-

but

works,

enquiries

as

to

genuineness,contents, and
In any

arrangement.
had

enquiries,

as

dronicus
case, An-

instituted

such

is shown

condemnation

of

by

the

his

so-called

and
the
Post-'prcecLiGamientaj
book vcepl
PJtil.
d.
sp/j,r)V"ias
(cf
.

II. ii, 67, 1 ; 69, 1), and

the reasons
he gives for it. The

Gr.

that, proposition (cf. David, SchoL

in Arist. 25, 5, 41) that
dronicus
the
reckon, Anthus
study of
might
philosophy should

eleventh

after,but from

me

(counted
Aristotle

"

GCTT^'ApICTTOT"A.OUS).
1

Peripatetics

acquaintance

scanty

insert

to

d.

It

according

not

deficient, I

Critolaus,but in the evident

and
between
Erymneus

and

be

If

names.

inclined

be

the

Andronicus

preference adds to
ment,
statequoted,

the

(Aristotle,Theophrastus, Strato,
Lyco, Aristo, Critolaus, Diodorus, Erymneus, Andronicus)
two,

Plutarch,

works.

ing
Accord-

him, there

heads

known

his
this

was

the

the

to

to

is

Ammonius,

reckon

omit

or

wanting

the

works, especially
that, according

remember

we

which

or

and

if

edition

i.

to

one

rov

actual

an

from the doctrine of their

founder
account
of
their
on

give

we

of

of Aristotle's

however,

philosopher.

the

to

eis

understood

Waitz,

Boethus

disciple

transcripts by Tyrannio)
Be'ivat,
can
only be
^"ffov

before

(Aristot.Org.
also ascribed

a.VTiypd"pGw
(supplied

rSsv

cravra

Porphyry (Plot.24)

says he

begin
been

with

logicmay
brought forward

connection.

On

what

says

David

the

also have
in

other

this

hand,

(Z.c. 24, a, 19)

ANDRONICUS.
him

-with,the

promoting

115

means,1 did them

their universal

inestimable

service

by

CHAP.
V.

diffusion and

matic
syste-

more

time by his enquiries

study.2 At the same
into
their authenticity and
arrangement.3 and
by his
4
several of them, he showed
commentaries
on
the
the

on

of

division

writings
from

Andronicus

TreplKofffLov

and

(Boet. De
have
the

Dims.

dealt
books

the
De

treatise

come

treatise

received

638)

copies (cf.preceding

ceived
note, and
Whether

Divisione

p.
the

with

his

taken

of the

the

Andronicus

of

telian
Aristo-

be

because

from

quotation

the

cannot

to

Eome,

or

copies

of

recension,
2

cannot

division

Phil. d. ffr. II. ii.139).

Andronicus
had
also

of

This,

is not
at

conceded,

of Aristotle.

statement

This

great scholar was

in Amisus
in Pontus.
When

born

works

that

the

principal
lutely
abso-

were

in the

wanting

"s

be
rate, may
the further

even

of Aristotle

the

merely

Tyrannic

stated.

any

if

had

tetic
Peripa-

school before the time of

place was
conquered by Luhe
the slave of
became
Andronicus
cannot
cullus,
be
tained
mainMiirena, was then set at liberty,
(Phil.d. Gr. II ii.139 "?.)"
3
and taught in Eome
Vide supra, 114, 1.
(cf. Phil,
4
d. Gr. II. ii. 139, 1). Here
he
Of these
his exposition of
gained considerable
property, the
quently
frecategories is most
collected a famous
library,and
quoted. It is mentioned
died
at
a
great age
(Suidas,
by Dexipp. in Cat. p.
sub
Lucull.
voc"
19). 25, 25 Speng. (Svhol. in Arist.
; Plut.
Strabo
(xil 3, 16, p. 548) says
42,^,30): Simpl. in Cat. Sclwl
that

heard

he had

That

he

belonged
school

is

his

but

writings
like

so

serted,
as-

study
shows

that

totle's
Aris-

he,

grammarians,
wifch it.

distinguished from
and
disciple,the

his namesake
freedman

40, 5, 23; 61,

patetic
Peri-

of

connected

is to be

lecture.

nowhere

other

many
was

He

him

to the

of

Suid. Tvpav.

Terentia.

besides

to

works

(Strabo, xiii. 2,
Through

and

made

the Aristotelian
him

e.

p. 6

42,

as

the

had

mere

other

which

himself,

afterwards

to

seems

of Andronicus

KarrjjoptSiy
we

statements,

task

set

entered

as

see

those

below, that
only a part
Andronicus
and

that

into the

of words, criticism

texts, and

copies of

"+

paraphrase ('AvSp.

quoted
paraphrase was

many

he
planation
ex-

of

questions
genuineness of particular sections

therein

54, p.
Andronicus

work

are

the

in

passages.
7, 5. (Schol. 41, 19 25

rb r"av
irapcuppdfav
Meantime
"i$\ioy).

of

s$$. ; and

other

10), Simplicius

a,

describe

the

Eome;

himself

At

which

Cf.

Tyrannic had found

tunity
opporof Apelof making use
Sulla had
lico's library,which

brought

thirty

from

vecor.

a, 25

about

609).
re-

as

to

the

(cf Phil. d. 6V.IL ii.67, 1 ;

69, 1) and philosophicinvestiga.

116

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

school
Peripatetic

the way

in which

from

henceforth

v.

their criticism

and

exegesiswas to proceed. He did

not confine himself
to mere
explanation,hut sought
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 altogetherunimportant determinations
by which in the doctrine of categorieshe
Aristotle,1and still more
diverged from
clearly.
contents. 1 Of. Bran-

lion of the

dis, I.e.273 S". That Andronicus

had

commented

also

the

on

from

probable

the

first of

ii.

Andronicus

212.

possibly have

cannot

low
Physics does not certainly fola ;
from
101,
Simpl. Phys.
although it
103, "; 216, a;
is

Hermes,

with

either

been

cerned
con-

of

them.
to Simpl. Cat. 15,

According
(Sclwl.47, ",25),he regarded
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 irp6sTL (the Aristotelian
his own
hands, or he would
quently.
fredefinition of which
it more
have quoted from
he expounds,
these

passages.
does
however,

observations

The
Arist.

De

not

on

An.

i. 4, 408, 5, 32
the Xenocratic
tion
defini-

ap.

66,

Simpl.

Cat. 51, j8. y.

39 ;

a,

ScJiol.

Porph. '""777."f. r.

/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
soul (vide infra,p. 117, 2). The
(cf.Phil. d. Gr. II. ii. 269, 2) a
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

$gq., and
of the

on

the

soul there

Of

Ethics.

the

two

treatises still in

itself

be

reckoned

under

ing
existence,bearthe name
of Andronicus, one,
the treatise
Animi
De
Affec-

iradfiTLKalTtWr^res

"

only with

to

is the work
tionibits,

division

iiicus Callistus

century,

the
on

in

of Androthe

the

mentary
com-

Nicomachsean

that

can

", 41;

cf. 60, a,,

to be the
ultimate
all.

of

also mentioned

by Heliodorus,
(1367); cf. Eose,

he

(Simpl. 40

Ethics, is written
Prusa

from

arising

fifteenth

other, the

reference

Observations

the

and

f ;
38)

the

it

is

gories
cate-

further

have
SoJwl

serted
as-

59,

Relation

category of
of

his

concerning

are

the

117

Ms

from

and

Aristoxenus

the

in

spiritof

the

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

%"ts (Simp!. 55, ". ; SchoL

59, 6 sqq. Sp.) the well-known
and
65, a, 7), TToieiy,
trdtrxetvdefinition of Xenocrates
(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

Space

to reckon

Time.

87,
a,

these
and

TTOV

88,

a.

a.

24: ; 58,

Time

and

mixture

Tore,

and

Kara,

categories

irore,

but

of

determinations

other
and

and

irov

under

only

not

substitute

to

for the

all

Place

with

is called

(aurT? yap

79, ", 1

30,

sq.

Qit. Animl

Galen,
vol.

sq. K.

iv. 782
he

freely

MOT.
As

4,
cus,
Andronic.

earn?

the

soul

or
en^uaros)

(sc. TOV

plainly

to be

the
the

Galen's

place
and

ing
statement, accordit

to which

he

same

explains (accordingto

Themistius,

De

An.

"Svvaju.i$
p.

"Trofj."V7irfjKp"ff"i.In the

ii. 56, 11;

rov

reap
\6yov Kal rrjs fjiil~"(0$
irp"rtov
this does
not
(rroixeiuv),
agree

clares
de-

Kpaa-is

^i"%7?

atria Kal

in the

was

of the

product
questionable

it is

Strabo

of

native

his teacher

(ap. Zumpt
was

also

Sidon,

Ammon.
I. c,
follower

ing
mean-

rvi.

Andronicus

757;

94)

was

2, 24,
as

names

in

Kpacns

that he

mentions

first

whether

the

Galen
has not missed
to speak
wont
says, was
obscure
cumlocutions,
cirof Andronicus.
and without
he

sense

self- moving

Tijs Kpdcrecas
TavTys

by

maintained

soul

harmony of the body.

when
he "adds that
this

number

16

main

the

of

the

to

But

a,

api6jjLovs
;

in the

reduction

number

is

This

it coincides

the

with
2

Ktd

Simpl. 34, ft.36, ft.

i. 537

that

so

formed

elements

\oyovs

ft. 91, ft.; Seliol. 57,

37 ; 80, Z",3 ; cf also Brandis,

l.o. p. 273 sq. ; Prantl, Ge*c7i. d.

Log.

of the

rivas

Categ.5
that

of his

he

seems.

CHAP
V.

consequentlyin
Stoic materialism,he held to
bodily organism.2 His whole

the

of

product

soul, which

and
Dieaearchus,1

approximation to
be

the

of

view

8idon-

118

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

with. him.

V.

He? too, acquiredconsiderable

expounder of

an

known

of his works
2

the

but

is

are

the

Physics and

De

'

found

Prior

as

the

on

ries
catego-

of commentaries

on

Analytics perhaps also

"

Anima

writings: the best

commentary

traces

some

the treatise

on

the Aristotelian

fame

the Ethics.3

and

his

In

is frequentlyquoted in
the
Sclwlion,,
in
that
of
4.
But,
113,
Simpliciusand also that
su_pra, p.
of Dexippus.
In
opposition to this theory, we
it, perhaps,

to

from

result

quoted

that

find

44

the

in

Cicero

B.C.

45

years
himself

mentary
and

1,1) and Trebonius

(in Cicero's
Fam.
xii.
ad
Ep.
16) mention
of
only Cratippns as teacher
the
in
Peripateticphilosophy
Athens.

is

Eoethus
whereas
whom

not

a,

893,
Metaph.
7, contests, that the Platonic

ideas

Sehol.

the

are

conceptions.
of

same

his

mentioned

tioned,
men-

which

statement

in

on

class-

as

separate

tise
trea-

the

irpos

is

by Simplicius,42,

a,

Sclwl. 61, b, 9.
pher,
philoso-

this

Strabo,

the

was

(Off.i. Syrian,

1. "?.,designates

That

there

was

mentary
com-

the
($""TUl'"(f)t\QG'0"pri(ra,ljL"V7][Jt,"t$011
Physics is
his
shown
own
TO,
'ApLcrroreXeia)as
by the
quotations in
this date
teacher, survived
by Tliemistius,PJiys.145, 14 ; 337,
least

at

doubt, have
therefore,
of

teacher

in Athens.

23;

341, 9

no

heard

from

been

three

quotes

have

may
of his instructions

Eome.

him

181, 5),as

Sp. ; which

(PJiys.46,
in the

last

he
passages
the
words
of

and

plicius,
Sim-

doubt, has borrowed

no

Boethus,

have

must

himself

in

perhaps

would,

philosophyelsewhere.
Strabo

Perhaps
availed

also

said if he had

lecture

him

decade,

one

Strabo

several.

only

Boethus

; and
anything from

ISO,

of

these

expressly
tius,
Tliemis-

in them

those

nowhere

adduces

Boethus'

of

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.
doctrine

"yGfjLoyra,.
2

According

of those

(L a)

one

Tepcus

veplavro

book) swoiais
the

to

of

the

syllogism;

an

Simplicius exposition of the books on the

which
fiadv- soul
(though less certainly)

(the Aristotelian
GxprjcravTO,

but

at

time (7,c. 7, 7. ; ScJwl.

same
a continuous
42, a,'S*)
exposition
Ae^ty, This com-

from

what

Simplicius (De

69, 1) tells

An.

concerning his
objections against immortality ;
an

us

exposition of the

chsean

Ethics

from

Nicoma-

what

Alex-

BOETHUS.

doctrine he likewise,
Peripatetic
judge, shows much
independence,

of
"apprehension
far

so

and

as

we

the

can

Inclination

an

that

to

and

Platonic

the

which

naturalism
had

of Aristotle

followers

Immediate

in the

already

Idealistic

powered
over-

element,

and

especiallyprominent in Alexander
Aphrodisias. This also appears in the fact that
"wished the study of philosophyto be commenced
with
logicbut with physics,1When, moreover,
which

the

that

would

but
Is

the

only matter,

and

of

compounded
a
theory

approaches

matter

and

form

of the

the

of

thought is apparent

materialism

who

those

of

ander
Ms

(De

observations

self-love

on

Trp"rov oltceiov;
Aspas. (ScJtol. ui

and

the

what

'Classical

of

154, #.) says

An.

xsix.

Journal,

rather

the

on

the

waives

over/a, but

JStlt.

does

106)

connection.

VOTJTTI and

enquiry
cr(a/j.a.riK^

to

the

desired

He

PJtys. 145, 14
Sim.pl.PJtys.46, ci) that

"ndRose(Arutot.Pseuflo-I!pi"/r.Themist.
of his and

109) says

of the

definition

"

David,
For

41.

Gesch.
.

been
2

irdBos.
25

Ar.

SeJtol. in

what

ter

follows,

",

Loc/ik,i. 540 sqq. has

of.
use
gratefully made
der

in, Arist.

50, ",

Simpl. Categ.

20

15

sqc[.

^8 gg.

At
the begin.SeJiol. 50, ", 2.
Boethus
this
of
oring
passage,

should

in relation
it

Prantl's

Dexfpp.inCWfcy. 54:Speng.

Sohol.
3

Andronicus'

has

not

it

because

only

belong

not

side

doctrine

Aristotelian

entirely

The

in his utterances

concerning

and

matter

Stoics.

place him

the

understood

the

which

and
Aristotle,

divergesfrom

he

this presupposes

"

priorityof

and

not

la),

over

aspect, that

value

he

regarded

one

concerning immortality,which

to be

(737x0
TT;

sense

to

mode

same

in

of the

things,which

In

strict

priorto

was

allow form

not

in

substance

of nature

universal

and
particular,2
as

of

was

denied

be

called

to

the

same

(vide

Sp. ;
mat-

{'AT?only

form

yet assumed,

which
and

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

J;HAP.

small

importance.

Y-

ECLECTICISM,

120

CHAP.
v.

as

simple denial

with, these
of Ethics

tendencies

self,and

own

only because

to one's

then

and

now

self.2

Simpl.
cos

De

6 Boijdbs

determinations,3 and

An.

69,

T" : *iva

N.

a,

the

names

other

sometimes

fended
de-

Stoics ; 4

viii. 1, 1155,

rfyvT|/U- 8, 1168,
olydJa/jLev

In

sought to justify

them, especiallyagainst the

?

the

in

was
(theirp"rovol/csiov)
naturally
everythingelse must be desired

instances, Boethus

agreement

sphere
the primary object of"

that

of its relation

the Aristotelian

that

learn

we

he maintained

desire for everyone

his

in further

of it ; 1 and

",

35

sqq.

9th

and

but

16 sqq. ; ix*
Our
text
10th

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.(Pseudo- Galen. EiVay,
treatise of Porphyry, Trept ^i/%r}s-,
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

that

attacked
from

the

the

proof

kinship of

spiritwith

God

had

Boethus
the

also

derived

the

human

(P7i"$do,78,

*"??")"
2

This

Alex.
archus
in

view

De

is ascribed

by

An.

154, a, to Xenand Boethus, who appeal

support

of it to

number

Arist. Etli.

or

whether

it

soul

a
even

that

measure,

existed
reckons

and
without

it, ap.

Themist.

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,

";

Sokol.

62,

a,

18, 27)*

ARISTO.

what

has

down

come

little importance

his

to

121

this

In

us

connection

is of

the specialcharacter
affecting

as

of

philosophy.
interpreter of

third

.to the

of

same

period, is

who

afterwards

Antiochus,

the

Academy

Aristotle's

the

to

longing
writings,beAristo,1 a disciple
went

from

over

Peripatetics.2But

know

we

Peripatetic doctrine of tlie iii. p. 277 Hi Id. (where he is

for this)added
trine
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

the
iracrxeiz'

of Trouiiv and

division

distinct

two

as

ries
catego-

" ; Schol. 77, J, 18

(Simpl.77

sqq.\ and also the category of

he
examined
Having, which
particularly(Simpl. 94: e; Schol.
81,

He

41,

well

4") as

a,

7. ;

with

ScJwl.

by Simpl.
25, together

a,

Boethus, Eudorus,

jTjral,and,
doubt

He

of

Peripatetic

the

ascribed.

Alexandrian

the

is likewise

of

instead

whom

Aristo

Bio-

mentions
(vii.1G4 ; also
genes
ride siij)7'a,p. 105, 2).
2
Tnd.
Acad.
Hercul.
col. 35:

[Antiochiis

disciples]

for

had

nicus,
Andro-

consequently,

the

author
this

on

TI,

61,

MSS.

the

account
Aristotle),an
syllogisticfigures is

Athenodorus
and
SpeTs Kal KparfTTTTOv TL
among
Kal
TraXaiol r"v
I^TJ- aiv 'Api(TTOov
[/lev]
TS-arriyopiav

the

of

founded.

is mentioned

of

Arista

mere

him

in- this

48, a
63, ", 10; 66, a,
as

at p.

allows.

the

In

TL

and

v"as

37

as

to

the

SeJiol.

qmlus

alone

dum

ille

12)
at

us

shows

dria
Alexan-

of Ancompany
the
observation

(Antiochus) secuntri^lurimum
Seneca
(Eg. 29, 6)

fratrem

luebat.

If

resorted

to
in

he

Mm,

in

Borne

must

have

the

latter

is

Andronicus

same.

He

is

to

in

Dio

tiochus, with

of the

Boethus

that
of

ii. 4,

(Acad.
and

tion
men-

place

51, 0

remark
Aristo

his

Cic.
him

taught
life; meanwhile,
quoted primarilypart of Ms
the lepidus philosophic A*risto"
the
him, with

GXOV

from

not

irp6$

the

s$g.
latter passage
given also by

the

definition

Andronicus
TTpos

on

Simplicius in

of

no

mentary
com-

book, and

treatise

which

well

of

no

has

doubt

Alexandria,

who,

the
that
cording
ac-

Apul. Doffm. Plat.

of

another
name

here

Seneca

whom

certain

anecdotes,
person

; not

only

of

must

the

because

relates
mean
same

Seneca

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

322

CHAP.

little about

V.

the
first

the other

philosophyof

reckons

this

man

Christ
the

among

of the
Peripatetics
Staseas,1Cratippus,2

"

the

In

50-46

years

but

Julius

Gfrsecinus,from

remark

under

discipleof
with

was

the

because
whom

of

reign
rate

cannot

it. The

the

time

induced

B.C.

must

of Cos

xiv.

Aristo

at any
survived

2, 19,

(as Zumpt

658,

p.

for

our

supposes,
1842 ; Hist.

Eoman

2,

remain

to

time

Cicero's

(Cic. Off.

5 ; ad

head

of

i.

son

1,

1 ;

iii.16

Fam.

; xvi.
visited
him

Brutus
21) and
Brut.
(Plut.
24).
the

Areopagus

him

this
him

heard

same

(Plut. die. 24). Here

in Athens
about

the

at

the

request

iii.

mentioned

taken

be

not

the

of

to

in

settled

Cicero

Cffisar,but

84

after

got for
citizenship

where

him

about

71. 250

Soon

have

must

from

beginning
Augustus, or
long have

Strabo,

by

he

we

Mytilene

Brut.

75).

Antiochus, who

Mm

Aristo

this

Pwip.

Athens,

vived
(vide sity. 76, 4), scarcely sur-

the

Plut.

is

quoted, only
Caligula; whereas

him

on

died
the

also

B.C.

in

with
him
meet
circulatores
giti 2)liilosoj)ltiam
De
Univ.
1
Jionestius -neglexissent
von(Cic.
quam

dunt,

lead

not

ing
great philosopher. Concern-

century before

2)us.

does

little

that

and

him

to suppose

us

Cratij)-

him,

the

That

he

school

was

is not

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 praiseis scarcely altogether
resided
of Piso, who
with him
Orat. i. 22,
impartial, As to his views,
(Cic. De
Alh.

d. IJerL

Alad.

the

104

; Fin.

v.

former

3, 8, 25,

75

is

; rifle

nothing

but

is

much

fortunes

external

to

for
by him
importance

censured

ascribingtoo

and

real
corpo-

conditions

(Fin. v. 25, 75).

unimportant theory of his
quoted in Censorinns, Di.

An

is
Nat.

14, 5, 10.

him

lecture

De

Orat.')he

at least
2

This

as

As

about
old

must
as

Piso
92

heard

(I.c.

B.C.

have

been

philosopher, born

in

been

transmitted

us

that

he based

this

theory

upon

the

Peripatetic doctrine of the

divine originof spirit,
and upon
the

numerous

prophecies.
presupposed

by

num

Aristotelian:

quadami

of

cases

The

the

Andronicus.

has

told
are
except what we
Cicero,JDivin. i. 3, 5 ; 32, 70
An. 46) :
SQ. (cf.Tertullian,De
that
he admitted
prophecy in
dreams, and ecstasy (furor},and

to
suj}. p. 100, 1, end) is also called
by Cicero,noMlis Peripateticiis;by

ex

anthropology
him

in

animos

parte

likewise
from
Pergamus, was
nally secus( 0*Jpa0ej/,
origiof
Antiochus.
a
tractos
spirit) esse
disciple
"

fulfilled
this is
homiextrin-

the divine
et

haustos

NICOLAUS

Nicolaus
Is too

of

OF

to detain

unimportant

too

information

others,our

and

Damascus,1

scanty, and

DAMASCUS.

CHAP.
T.

with

us

is. ~(lf
gods. He
concerning the
jjarte?n,qitte sen sum,
Damtts
vi.
Athen.
252
in
called
/. : ~us
-gu(B mot urn, C[iiceadjjetitum kabeat, non. csse ab actione coiyjoris 266, e\ x. 415, e\ xii. 543, a"\
adherent
of t-iic
iv. 153
f., an
sejiigatam; the sequel,however,
-

earn

"*

rather

sounds

qiice antem

animi

pars

Peripateticdoctrine

Pi atonic:

more

about

Damascus

in

born
""?#.),

(therefore
iv.
Athen.
AafjLaa-KTivbs,
64

B.C.

called

f et

153

father

Antipater, a

respectableroan
at the

years

and,

company

B.C.)

for

Ms

he

gained

he

Great

Archelaus

this
have

in

his

Kofffjua

/.

time,

Qe"v,

tus.
Augus-

of Herod

thither,and

journey he
returned,

his

from.

but

to

c.

in

In

Ni/cdA. :
Suidas, AvTLTrarpos and
from
Nicol. Frag in. 3-6, taken
the
Escceryta de Yiitutilus',
.Joseph. Antiquit.xii. 3, 2 ; xvi. 2,
3; 9,4; 10,8; xvii.5,4; 9,6; 11,
-3,who also, like Suidas, follows

was

Jew,
Tie

Renan,
at

read

(ap
an

that

theory
shared
de

refuted

once

in

statements

The

also

by

Suid. 'Aj/rfrr.
)

offering to

as

he

Iv

ro7s

Epicurus, what
(Diog.

x.

passages,
from

here
of

asserts

of these

none

however,

said

Diogenes
In

4).

him.; and

doubtless

by

ing
respectZeus, and

c.

have

is any

losophical
phi-

proposition quoted

calls him

is

by "Simpl.
194,

perhaps

may

than

we

mentioned

Ejjict.JSncldr.

he

Jesus, p. 33,
what

statements

Treplr"v

work

ethical

juareia,

Miiller).

which

from

have

the latter part of his life

Rome
(vide the references in

own

Iv Ttjp

TWV

/car'

Xenoplianes and
concerning
ported,
reDiogenes* of Apollonia are
is mentioned
by Simpl.
(Phys. tJ,a, I ; 32, a, 1) ; an

passed

Nicolaus'

Trep!wdvToiy

to

seems

never

Theo-

(not /cat)eTo-3?
; Id.
*40t",
6; a third, itepl
a,

later,

accompanied

"pv"iKa.

to

Brand.). A second
Tlavrbs, which
Treplrov

work,

where

of

6etapia

TO,

p. 323,
treated

Rome,

death

the

in

be taken

hih

quotation
'ApiffroreXovs
/xera
the
inscription

r"v

his

years
second

favour

the

After

son

some

the

affairs, to

on

the

came

perhaps

may

from

of

one

and

confidants

(8

was

ment,
phrastus' metaphysical frag-

prosperous
lived many
,

of the Jewish

court

Herod,

King

of which
the

XT.
1, 72, p. 719),
_pa$s. ; fcstrabo,
and carefullybrought up by his

and

devoted

writings. Himpl.

his

(JJe C'telo,tit'JwL in Ar. 41)3, a,

his treat.ite
Kepi
23) mentions
'ApiCTTOTeAouS "plAO(T0"plQ:S(OUt

lii. 343

Gr.

Miiller, Hist.

vide

pore.

he

which

portion of

(concerningwhom

Nicolaus

cor

he

himself

atque iHteUiyentiasit jjartieeys,allied

and
to
majciine
turn
cam
rigere, cum

jjlurimtonaJjait

(nepxTrcmjhad
early
(siuid. NZKQA.J

which

TIK^S-)to

rationis

far

Xicolaus
of

more

philosopher.

was

scholar
Suidas

IlepnraTTjTf/c"s
T? IIAa-

reovucbs,which

might point

to

his combination

of the views

of

Plato

and

Aristotle, if any
could

be

pendence
de-

placed upon

ECLECTICISM.

124

CHAP,
V.

chus.

them.1

As

historian

an

lie

by Joseph as {Anof
tiquit.xvi. 7, 1) on account
his partiality for Herod
; and
his
life of Augustus
no
was
doubt
only a panegyric. For
the
rest
yule, concerning' his
Miiller ; cf
Jalirbueli"r filr Clans.

historical

works,

Dindorf.

his treatise

and

respectingthe aether

Aristotelian theories

the passage.
is censured

Xenarehus

But

againstthehere be

may

Ithodian, named
by Quint illian,,
Inst. ii. 17, 15, with Critolaus as
the

of rhetoric

enemy

d. G-i\

II."
ii. 930, 2)

the author
in

quoted

Diog.

be later than

of the

Phil.
haps
per-

nepiVaroi

iii. 3 ;

v.

he

When
vi. 81 ; ix. 42.
do
not know, but
we
to

(cf
; and

he

36 ;
lived

seems

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 Peripateticphilosophy
warrant,
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
doubt
in c. 14, 59, that
rightly,calls
609), no
Antonius
not
was
him
"piX63)
acquainted,
fj.a\\ov
""iAdj8i/8A.os

Phllol

H,

xcix.

vol.

Quintillian

107

2,

that

In

A th

fro""os. As little does

(cf.PhiL

Aristio

or

ii. 934,

he

supposing
Peripateticphilosophy.
later

have

we

and

the teacher
M.

Crassus,

Crass.

3);

leucia
Ctesar

in

e 11

io

G-r. III.

deserve
a
place
pliilosphers,even
really taught the

3)
the

among

d.

what
Someander,
Alex-

friend of

time

of

(Strabo,xiv. 5, 4, p. 670) ;

of
friend
the
Demetrius,
with him in his
was
Oato, who
last days (Plut. Cato
Mm.
65,
67

sq.};

D io d

Boethus

of
xvi.

2, 24,

doubt, At

; and
certainly have
with
Catulus,

Sidon

p.

757).

in the

Pi

s o

hen

the

us,

the

-Greek

it may
otherwise

been

adherent
of

whom

of

first century B.C.

of whom
have
we

this
hear

we

is that

spoken,

supra, p. 100, 1, end; "but, as

is there shown, he also attended
the
instruction
of
Antiochus,
whose

(Strabo, puts
To

with

though

we
are
hardly
justifiedin ascribing to him an
accurate
of
that
knowledge
literature, and
particularly of
the Peripateticphilosophy. The

eclectic

of

Peripatetic school
no

the brother

knew,

he

of

At h emeus,

Oillcia,in the

as

(Plut. only Roman

Sephilosophy

Triumvir

the

far

so

literature

into

his

principlesCicero

mouth.

Xenarchus, of Seleucia, in
passed the greater part
belong also, Cilicia,

odor

of his life

as

teacher

in Alex-

TItEATI"E

mentioned

ON

THE

COSMOS.

125

for this

polemic againstso integral

a portion
of the Aristotelian
physicsaffords a further proof
that the Peripatetic
school was not so absolutely
united
by the

of its founder

doctrine

that

departuresfrom,
But
in

there

of Aristotle

many
its members.

among

the

"

authenticity of this

work

of this

from

fact

the first

transmitted

book

of the

cen-

to

us

Cosmos.2

and

antiquity/

andria, Athens,
in the

was

that

patronised
in

cities
heard

by Arius, and

by

he

Augustus,

Piome

at

gTeat

age

(cf Strabo, xiv. 5, 4, p. 670).

.

Tide

concerning

and

the
in

it

in

Bamasc.

Arist.

De

456, ",

6 ;

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^ST$]V

IT.

OVCT.

were

pus*
ap,
His

the

same

to

be

treatise

found

the

c.

129,

",

IS

K.

concerning the
"jrp"Tov otKe'tov (sKjjra, 120, 2),
and Ms (Aristotelian)definition
of the soul
(Stob. Eel. i. 798)
are

opinion

also

bei

dtr

von

Welt, 1829,

sqq. ; 8tahr,

Aristoteles

Momcrn,
1834, p. 163
(frieefi,
Osann,
cu
Seitrb'ge
sS$'i
den

und

jRom.

sqq.

ZMeraturgegch.i. 143

Petersen

in

the

this

of

review

f. icissensefi*
sqq. ;

JfeteoroL

Ideler,

ii. 286

sq. ;

F.

Gieseler, iib. d. Verf.d. SucJis

r.

(L W.

1838,

Nr.

A'rist.

ZtscTir.f.Alterthumsn*.
346
sq.-t ISpengel,De

Libra

Heidelb.

Hist.

X.

1842, p.

Anim.
sqq. ; Hil-

debrand,
?qq* ;
Or dine

Apnlej* Opera
Arist.
fiose, De

Adam,

et Avct.

DeAuet"re

i. 44

Li'br,

p. 36, 90 sqq. ;
Lilri Pseudo-

sqq. ; Goldbacher,
Oesterreicli.
Gymn.

p. 88

f.

against Chrysip- (1873), 670

of empty
Apul"jus De
space,

doctrine

Simpl.

373

p.

der

von

to it*

Anstotelici
Berl. 1861;
K.
-*.
irpbs Barthelemy Saint-Hilaire, Meteorologied'Aristcte, Par. 1863.
7J7TOp7JjU6I/a01" *y"-

perhaps

observations

und

in

TO.
aTropfai,

In

ypaftjuLzva.

"Weisse, Aristateles

Seele

treatise,Jahrb.
developed
Erit. 1836, 1, 550,

tise
trea-

460,

TrejjLTTTTjv ovcriav

"

objections
totelian Arutot.
against the Aris-

doctrine

Casio,8c7wl.

this

Tkeofies

by Melanehthon

It

these

probably

Befriended

died

Rome.

first of

Strabo

him.

and

denied

l~arhlUS

already questioned

was

-1

in

V.

preclude

is still stronger evidence

perhaps dates
Christ,and has been

the work

The

doctrine

which

treatise

tury before
as

to

as

CHAP.

quoted elsewhere.

Procl.

in

sq. ; Z.

Ztsclw*
xxrv.

Rritil

MvndOj "c.
Tim
322, B

TOTeATjs,

efwep

GKCLVOV

rb

ran

;Aptcrire

pi

KOCT/JLOV jSijSAfoz'.
4

ed. Bretsclnu
Physica, Q]?]?.

xiii. 213

*$.

126

ECLECTICISM.

modern

CHAP,
'

it has found

times

nevertheless

quite

advocates,1but

some

As

untenable.

can

the treatise be ascribed

the

or
regarded,not
Peripatetic,

Aristotle,but

upon

which

modern

did not

the

even

or

"

as

little,however.,
other

to any

work

as

of

itself claim

elaboration
its

times

the

school than

writingfoisted
sopher,
philoyounger

to be Aristotelian

such

of

is

authorship has

work.

been

In

assigned

sometimes
to Posidonius,3
Chrysippus,2
sometimes
to April
eius,4but against each of these
there are most
important objections. In
conjectures
regard to Chrysippus it is highly improbable that
sometimes

to

he

have

should

name,

and

forth

sent

purpose

authenticity

finallymaintained

has

most

been

confi-

the
I am
dently by Weisse.
to
more
willing
spare myself a
detailed
nesses

of the weakexposure
of this attempt, as that

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

followingpages.
2

Osann,

tablish

this

to esI. "?., seeks

at length.

theory

Ideler, 1. #., followingAlclobrandinus, Huetius, and Hem3

sius.
4

Adam.

way,
Hilaire

in another

Barthelemy

Saint-

follows
the
former,
naming him,
5
Osann,
indeed, declares
himself, p. 191, very decidedly

without

borrowed

that he should

have

for itselfis incontestable/

the

against
work

supposition that

designedly

was

the

foisted

Both
in manner
npon Aristotle.
of exposition, he
says, and
its
unlikeness
substance,
Aristotle

is

unmistakably

so

in
to-

evi-

dent, that

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

which

much.

too

the

are

can

Stahr, I. "?.,and,

under

that of Aristotle ; but that the

work claims Aristotle's name

Its

work

quite inconceivable

adopted for the

the

at

wet

detect

the

this

it

does

they
they

are

not

are

How

many

forged writings

not

first

forgery ?
not

in.

glance,
From

follow

that

but that
forgeries,
clumsy forgeries,

In the present case, however, the

forgery was not clumsy enough
to

prevent

numerous

persons

OEIGIX.

ITS

-when

Osann

Alexander1

from

and

would
the

12T

its dedication

separate
rest

the

of

work,

to

this is

CHAP.

__.H_

an

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
it is

ground

less,however,is

and

doctrines

transplanted into the

been

this

shown,

work

and
for

time

own

our

example

from

"

would

that

evidently not

Aristotle

by
for
than

his

under

his
the

Alexander

is

of

the

reader

no

that

it

is

of

(p. 246 sy.}

proof to give than

dedication

is

of

author

from

this

either

trace

no

school

the

Apart

in

no

that

incompatible

C.

6, 398, ", 10, the

is such

language

empire

be

to

originallyabsent,

was

in

still
in

to

what

we

see

Ms

every
is
from

his work
Cf

he

Per-

supposed

existing,and

if the

necessarily
has

philosophers,
avoided

that the

must

references

inerous

name

has

most

inthe
evidence
or
of the passage
character

writer,

this Alexander

Osann

further
the

anonymous

Osann's
(p.24 6) will easilybelieve,

known,
2

there

Even

nothing further

whom

book

book.

sian

G-reat ; for that

another
man
was
of

easily

Naturally

the

Stoic

theory

of the

ternal

written

more

forth

immediatelybe

of the
Ms

indeed

external

work

were

if it went

name
1

pass

if it

de-

being

And

school,is

will

with

Welsse,

"

ceived.
was

and

philosophers

even

criticsof

of

had
Chiysipptis,

Stoic

doctrines

important distinctive

Stoic

some

entirelycontradicts

so

Chry-

many

expresses

after

nevertheless,as

undeniable;

it to

adopted

which,

formulae

this

on

theoryexcluded

definitions,and

the

these in

such

it has

That

its contents.

by

even

attribute

quite impossibleto

No

sippus.

that

so
oppositequalities,

to

nu-

older

carefully

definite allusion

post-Aristotelian,

this that he wishes

to pass

p. 42.

as

Aristotelian,

128

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
'

with

compared

as

ascribed

to

for the
that

observe

to

of at

consisted
made

the

writing
hold

who
of

in

good

to him

the

to

Chrysippus
in

probably
direct
should

indeed,
a

have

that

unlikely as

shall

Cosmos

found

same

ments
argu-

been

the

author

Its

ornate

probability

more

and

there

approximate

find

than

to

that

the

much

that

of

But

that

Aristotle

Chrysippus should

have

of

author

part of his work

work

in

against those

far

philosopher.

forged

be

The

Posidonius

we

it

quotations

Chrysippus ;

to

considerable

of this

use

of

time

that

treatise.

particulardetails which

many

more

than

more

book,

the

to

have

with

be

hypothesis,

on

measure

to
conjecture Posidonius
the
pseudo-Aristotelian

attributed

are

great

can

of this

nowhere

considering.1

are

we

language, however,
be

date

Chrysippus's work
least two
books, and
are

might

Chrysippus.

to

of Osann's

refutation

it which

from

are

it

anticipate the

of the

particulardemonstration
is sufficient

here

will not

we

than

rather

author

any

Lastly, though

Peripatetic,that

the

made

Posidonius
is

done

wholly

as

so

; and

in him
certainly remark
though we can
concerning
and Peripatetic
specialpoints, a leaning to the Academic
makes
him untrue
philosophy,this never
(like
the author of irsplKoay^ou) to the fundamental
trines
doc-

of

his

God

of

presence

school

conflagrationof
1

Stob.

Eel.

ApTir. Anal.
Phil.

d.

Or.

i.

Pr.

"

in

the

180

so

the

to

as

world, the

world,

Alex.

58, I (supra,
III. i. 158,
1).

deny

or

to

Against
554

Adam,

sag.

I.

the

substantial

destruction

and

distinguishaether
Osann, of. Petersen, p.
Gieseler,
SpeneeL
;
c.

THEORIES

.and

all

objection,It

treatise

merely

not

how

But

Cosmos
of

are

before

Apuleius,2In

which

we

As

has

Apu-

to

hold

not

good

entirelyappropriated

so-called

Aristotelian

reviser,but

or

work

If the

the

129

In regarding him
justified

we

latter

he

the

the translator

as

of the

author

true, would

Is

contents

the
treatise.

the

on

IT.

whatever.1

bodies

elementary

leius this
in his

RESPECTING

follow

not

the

as

mentioned

is not

of ancient

remains

possess. It does

also

literature

this that

from

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

exist

and

the

authorship

on

which

his

work

these

reasons

For

thesis

Cohort

0r.

ad

earlier
the

treatise,

opposition
cisive
3

to

the end
from

that

omissions:

TheopUrastum

*"#.) in

MSS.

best

the

than

sides
matters

alterations

Eudemus,

Quare

[-nos

is

strict

on

this

have

we

well

less

; and

with

Physics'

on

et

edition

surprising laxity,
nowhere

e.ff.,seems
said that

have

et

pWosojJwrum']

to

I. xlvin. sq.
as

others
bemany
such
in
Apuleius behave

snbject

Alexander

vrwleniiwiMtm

in
the

c.

much

had

ideas

in

genuine,
p. 690.
Hilthese, mde
1.

ancients,

The

Jiae

words
neverthe-

are

debrand,
5

omnl

considered

Concerning
A}ml. Opp.

known,

it.

of

de

The

; but

be

to

secuti,

cogitatlom

wanting

Of. Goldbacher,

cle-

has

auctorem

parenthesis are
less

by

Aristotle's.5

from

quantum
yossiimus
contingere, dlaemns

been

is distin-

to
pseuclo- Aristotle
only by unimportant

and

this

of the dedication
which

Fanstinus,

"ndshed

(p.
against

reasons

At

Aptdeius,

Semisch,

to

be

5, cannot

than

additions

and

coekstl ratime^c.

Justin,

authenticity of
has
lately
as

by Adam

shown

c.

sq. ;

p. 32.

in

quotation

placed

opposed
237

p. IT ; Adam,

The

since

the hypois

Rel.

Position.

by Bake,

Spengel,

distinguished4

is

Posidonius

of

alterations

minor

of

was

his

only

Aristotle's

nor

work
a

new

does

ECLECTICISM.

ISO

CHAP.
Yt

Closer investigationleaves
work

the Cosmos

on

and

Barthelemy

the model, but only a

assert)

Saint-Hilaire
of the

(asStahr

is not

that his Latin

doubt

no

Greek

found

is to be

which

work

revision

in

lection
col-

our

writings; for the latter has

of Aristotelian

originalform
throughoutthe conciser,sharper,more
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

comparison with the Greek

which

is nothing in the Latin

paraphraseor
on

Lave
have

the

from

arisen

which

could not

Latin, but

must

before the eyes of the Latin

been

this,and

to admit

regarded as a
Greek, the Greek,

the

the contrary,has passages

the Greek

make

to

which

book

he

Apuleius
then

possibly
evidently

writer.1
the

But

author

himself

of

translated

Latin,2is equally impossible. For

into

there

be

cannot

of

translation

while

; and

text

the first

in

the onlyground on
which
placewe thus abandon
of his authorshipcould even
the hypothesis
plausibly
of his
be maintained
viz., the credibility
own
"

he

so

say

of

his

He

Ethics.

where

speaks,even

adheres

he

quite closelyto Aristotle,

independent
name

of the

; and

so

in his

author
does

the

as

an

own

Moralia.

at

rate, transcribed

any
sive portions in

from

the

Greeks,

the

Ms

of

sources

Stoic

authors

taken

so

and

Stoic

from
doc-

trine ?
l

are

5 j

Some

of

these

325,

#, 7

the most
striking
vepl K6"r/u.ov
392, a,
:

398, b, 23

400,

#,

6 ; #, 23 ;

men-

which

1, 12, 27, 33, 35, p. 291, 317,

For
the rest I
362, 368 Oud.

c.

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.
sources

treatise

much

compared with the

writings correspondingApul. De Mundo,

without
from

exten-

the
has

writer

Cicero,
too, notoriously translated, or,

Magna,

named
which

38 sg%. ;

APULEIUS

NOT

THE

AUTHOR.

131

impossible that he
regard it as
should
have represented his writing as an
indepenwork
if it were
dent
merely the revision of the
work
of another, but we
unhesitatinglycharge him
in
work
with
its Greek
having foisted his own
In
Aristotle.1
order
to clear him
original upon
attribute
from the imputation of boastingwe
to him
a
forgery.2 But in the second place this theorylead
would
to the improbable conclusion
that
us
self
Apuleius? the Latin rhetorician,had expressed himfar better, more
simply and to the point, in
the Greek
language than in his own ; and that, in
spite of his being himself the author, he had not
confused
and
unfrequently in the Latin version
that which
obscured, nay, completely misunderstood
is perfectly clear.3
in the Greek
Finally,passing
assertions;

from
difficulties,

over

other

by

his other

writings of
scarcelyascribe

can

we

of

the

anthor

treatise

asserts

That

Greek

we

shown,

p.

2.

127,

designates

it

to

the
be

to

already
Apuleius also
such

as

the

in

supra, p. 129, 3,
and
c. 6,
Prooemium,
where
he
300
Oud.,
says, in
p.
to irepl
reference
K6fffj.ov,
3, 393,

passage

27:

a,

giiMem
maliAt
2

quoted

the

from

Nor

\_Mare'}Afrimim,

answered

his

declared

the

his

book

to

Aristotle, and
be

his

own,

would

forgery

purpose
Greek
the

be

the
these

have

; for if he

number

the

of

Greek

but

text,

also

misunderstandings
him

the

in
of

some

most

that

Adam,
Ms

679

is

untrue

of

to

work

of

habit

Latin

to

treatise

own

of

on

the
one

of

which

arise from

are

p.

of

reproduction

which

shows,

version

statements

each

by

striking proofs, not only

dependence of Apuleius

writer
his

nullified

be

other.

bacher,

dlcere.
would

philosophicalcapacity,
Apuleius so important a

quoilreadings,

Sardinimse

Aristoteles

furnished

evidence

his

been

has

Aristotelian

it

the

the
beset
of

it,

false

given

by

Gold-

sgq.
p. 674

The

same

the

s$., how
of

statement

Apuleius, according
assertion, was

composing
in Latin

and

the

in the
same

Greek,

CHAP.
^*

ECLECTICISM.

132

CHAP,

Cosmos

undoubtedly is ;
have expectedto find in this
and we must
necessarily
from him, much
more
writing,if it had emanated
distinct traces of those Platonising
metaphysicsand

work

the

as

treatise

the

on

v*

of that demonology, which

theology,and especially
shall presentlydiscover in Apuleius. This third
we
find

attempt, therefore,to
book

question for

character.

probable

Peripateticsseems
it

claims

is

its

confirmed, however, by

conceptionof the

the

of

one

world

was

the
"

of

name

by that
the

contents.

which

it

among

of the school.

doctrines

of the

records

considered

be

to

the

its author

the

irom

bears ; for

work

the

Aristotle,which

school

himself

reckoned

this author

That

point and

for the

by whom

not

period and

to what

composed, but
belonged.
Its stand-

only be,

can

us

author

and
unsuccessful,

considered

be

also

must

definite

name

genuine
The

same

Though

it advances

is far

enough from the truly Aristotelian conception, and

though it is full of foreign constituents,yet its
features

fundamental

as

the

taken

from the Aristotelian

approximates at least as closelyto

philosophyof Antiochus, for example,

doctrine,and
it

are

it

philosophy. The
approximates to the Platonic
metaphysicalfoundations of the Aristotelian system,
the author leaves,indeed,in the spiritof his time,
unnoticed, but
and

with

in

its relation

to

Aristotle.

He

distance

of

our

his presentation of the universe

God, he
does

world

changefulnessand

from

so

chieflyallies himself
when
the

he

asserts

the

higher world, its

imperfectionin

contrast

with

DOGTRISES

CONTAINED

IS

IT,

133

the

of the heavenlyspheres,1
purityand invariability
and when
he makes
the perfection
of Being graduallydiminish with the distance from the supreme

CHAP.

_._

heaven

when

and

between
bodies

he

aether,of which the heavenly

the four elements, in unmistakable

contradiction
the

the Stoic doctrines.3

to

divine

the

Further,
the

according to

essence,

doctrine,permeates
smallest

the distinction

the

consist,and

while

expresslymaintains

whole

world

Stoic
the

to

even

and

ugliestthings,our author finds this

presentation of the Divine Majesty altogetherunworthy
the contrary,most
; he declares himself, on
for
decidedly

the Aristotelian

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

C. 6, 897, 5, 30

5, 8%. 21 sqq.
3 C.
6, 397,

*#. ; 400, a,

1),27 s$%.

C. 2, 392, ", 5, 29 sq. ; c. 3,392,

35
5, ; cf.Phil, d. ffr.II, ii,434, s$.

closely this work

How

Aristotle's

to

expositions has

already observed,

heen

437,

adheres

(392, 5, 35

8) of

a,

/,

should

it

That

6.

c.

p.

speak

five "rro#e*a,

sether,fire,"c., is unimportant,
Aristotle himself
asther
d.

"rroixetoy
(cf
irpfoTov

PJtil.

fc".H.ii.437,7),andifhe

scribed
repo?

tise

de-

/col0""Jerepov crto/na
/caXov/ieVwvcrror^e W

it as
rcev

(Gm. An.
as

had called the

means

ii.3,736,",29)the treathe

(rroix"overepo*'

re
atcfipardy

in

same
rav

392,

a,

theory of the treatise v*pl

K6"riJLQv
concerning the asther
is Aristotelian ; it is,therefore,
all the more
astonishing that he
can

believe

also

advanced

for

p.

allows that

Chrysippus to have
the

treatise

our

of

theory

same

declares

expresslyagainstthe
tification

see

from

this

Cic.

was

Stoic iden-

sether

with

fire

notorious
tetics.

of

points
The

the
of

Stoics

between

i 11,

(Aead.

one

and

we

39),

most
contest

Peripa-

question
for

itself

(I.c. in. i. 185, 2, 3) ; and, as

is

not

the

discriunimportant,
mination
of the aether from the
four

rerrdpoty^the

Kal Qelov. Osann,

moreover
168,203 sc[.,

8,

the

below

elements
antithesis
and

the

on

Aristotle
of

world

the

bases
world

above.

Y"

134

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
v.

However

manifold

world.1

Still

the

less, of

in

assume

he

can

course,

identification of Grod and

which

it may

forms

the world

admit
Stoic

the
the

tion
defini-

he

this

only adopts after

having altered its pantheisticlanguage.2 Finally,
the author shows
himself
to be a
Peripateticby
defending3 the eternityand unchangeable
expressly
expresses

of

ness

this

school)against Stoicism.

written

by

Stoic

school,such
it the

the
the

the

that

all this

from

as

Posidonius

endeavour

is very

occupies the whole of

chapter. Here again
polemic against Stoicism is
TMs

(cf. p. 397 ,5, 16

1
398,
a,
sqgi. ;
sg. 5, 4-22 ; 400,
5, 6 *".)and the theory (Osann,
unmistakable

divergence from

207) that the

only

have

leader

any

of

it is clear

cannot

been

of the

Stoic

Chrysippus,yet in
perceptibleto unite the
or

it shows
in which
K6fffjt.o$,
semblance
renot only to the Stoics
in general, but more
larly
particuto that exposition of their

doctrines

from

i.444

which
6-V.III.

(PULd.
given us extracts.

to the

concession

doctrine

Though

work

by

or

sixth

it is

distinctive

(alsoa

world

the

which

Stob. JEel.

i.!47,l)has
The

found

are

in the treatise
admissible;
popular religion is quite inof note
the
ligion worthy
popular re-

are
:

tions
altera-

necessary

all the

more

we
K.6fffj.ov
"5',

here, but the Aristotelian

if Chrysippus, however,

Stob., elvai tyyviv 6 XpvKal

ffunros
ffvarryiLia e" ovpavov
yrjs Kal rfav eV rovTOis
^(reajv,$)

wished

rb

is not

all in

at

question
logy;
theo-

support the popular

to

religion,he

was

do

have

this,as

we

quite
seen,

able

to

without

contradictingthe fundamental
principlesof his system. We
tion
quote as a specialindicamay
of the Peripateticorigin
of

read

in

XeyeraL 5' erepajy

rcav.

the

second;

701, ",

rd"tsre

The

1 sqg.

treatise

begins, after
c.

that

1, with

the

substitutes

wepl K6cr/j.ov,re
introduction,

definitions

of

the

treatise

first of these

and
literally,
the

treatise

7670^6
K^CT/JLOS

Our

r"\"iovrat.

takes

the passage
to have
16
seems
398, ",
sqq.
reference
to I)e Motu
Anim.
7,
our

avdp"ircav
(TiKTryfjia

eVe/ca ro^rcov

T"V

e/c

Kal

Kal

Qe"v

e/e

Kal

for

these

tions
defini-

passes
the

words

over

third
:

it

Aeysrat

Kal dia.K6crfj.7ja'
is, v^rb 0ea"y
Kal Sia Qefov ^vXaTro/xe^.
3
0. 4, end ; c. 5, beginning ;

I. c.

397,

"", 14 s$.

5, 5.

AFFINITY

Stoic

with

doctrine

admit

to

WITH

the

those

even

and
Aristotelian,

determinations

the

to

of

merely

an

even

trines
doc-

this may

extent; and

considerable

employed, and
appiopriated Stoic

also

CHAP.
^'

the Stoic

has

author

has

transcribed,1he

partially
which

to

TVith

unqualifiedrecognitionis denied.

writingswhich

STOICISM.

be

the

astronomical,
eosmological,
ward,2
and
meteorologicaldetails which Osann bringsforthe
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 spiritand after the precedent of
said

not

"the Stoic

system, that
the

between

preciselythe

it is

elements

and

contrast

parts of the world, on

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

which

shall not

escape

us, the author

does

hesitate

not

to

behalf,6
"quote,expresslyas a witness in his own
In
the great authorityof this school,Heracleitus.

theory of the elements, he allies himself with

Aristotle in
the Stoics, though he divergesfrom
quality of air.7 He
making cold the fundamental

his

-adoptsthe Stoic
1

This

will

Page

208

be

doctrine

proved

later

on.
2
3

C.

vide

2, beginning;

my.

C. 2, 392, b, 5 : d %
""v teal irayer"STisT^V
(o(j"("'8T]$
.

Likewise, as is shown
p.
the
2,
Stoics,against whom
183,

(cf.Phil

444)

maintains

C.4, endjolrwywaflwy 6poi6- fundamental

C. 5, 396, ", 13 ; cf

which

Aristotle

water,

"nrres.
6

with

"pv"nv.

*##.

p. 134 2.
4
C. 5.
5

of the Trvsvpa,

c.

6, end.

air.

and

d. Or. H. ii.

cold

to

be the

determination
moisture

that

of
of

ECLECTICISM.

186

CHAP,
v*

there

of

points

are

doctrine.1

contact

his

But

in the

even

approach

Stoic

divine

Pantheism

While

substance
of

approves

its

applied,not
2

force

influence

propositions

he

accordingly teaches

divine

spreads from

universe, but

is transmitted

so

are

but

the

divine

that

the

active

Deity only extends,,

outermost
sphere of the

the

to

quite

the

from

emanating

the-

they

as

essence,

of

author

soon

the

indeed, primarily
and

as

most

repudiating

world, the

to

and

the

through

is

diffusion

the

such,

as

Stoicism

to

strikingin regard to theology.

the

Peripatetic

this to the
the

through

inner

spheres,

whole.3

Grod

is,
,

therefore,the

law

of the

whole

the

the

world

by

of

order

classified

into

through

their

bears

the

of

this, his

the

manifold

with

stamped

are

the

name,

here
1

0.

4, 394,

in

the

Trvet/jaa

the

in

the

#Ti
ra

eiTreTy

Trdyra
Kal

rives

ravrd

ecrr*

r$"v

?rAea

"5i' o"t"6a\fj,wv
lv"a\\6/j."va

/cai 5*' aKorjs

fjjULtv

Kal

alffirda"r)s

rfj jjikvOslo. Swapst

077"re"w",
TTQj/Ta

/cara/SaXAoVevoiXoyov

pfyvTTJ y"

ovcrta.

and

cause
be-

Trpeov

Grod
and

irsplKScrj"ov

0.

of

The

Zeus

6, 398, 5, 6 sg$.

ception

of

of

universe

known,

d.

sg. 303
5

C.

Is,

The
the
as

6fr. III.

sq. ;

con-

order
is

pre-eminently

Phil.
.

222

v6p.osfor

20

v6/j,osy"p

IffOKXiv^s6 Beds.
"fytuV
the

are-

sense;

cf. 396, #, 24 $q.

4
C. 6, 400, #, 8

7rpo^%077"ray Cf
dewy

origin

Stoic
3

5e

fywrols
Si^Kovcra

1 ;

TraAcucDj/

treatise

is

existences,

enumeration

the

ev

191, 1; 331, 3.
0. 6, 397, ", 16 : Sib Kal

of

it

genuine Stoicism.

tealSiot,iravrvv
"c*"oi$
K"d ytvLfj.os
ovcria. Of.
T"
fy-fyvxts
the quotations, PJdl.d. 6rr. III. i.
Kal

p. 138,

the

most

\cyertu

tfre

proceeds

which

seminification

predicates,and

5,

of

species

names,

explained quite

Kal erepcos

Him

all-governing influence,

which

explanation of

from

means

various

individual

i. p.

well
Stoic.

140,

sq.

6, 400,

5, 31

sg.

This

exposition likewise
reminds
us
of the
Stoics, in the doctrine
of the \6yoi or7T"pfj.arLKot.

"

THEOLOGY.

187

Nemesis,
Moirse,

to him

referred

are

by

Adrasteia, the
of Stoic

means

for the
confirmation
ologies; and
doctrines, the sayings of the poets
after

the

of

manner

the author

wishes
but

doctrine,
Stoicism

That

proposition
the

of
approving citation
Laws'
(IV., 715, E.), and we
of Plato, when
Grod is extolled

by

and

of

beauty.3

Eternal,
But

but

this,

also

finiteness; and

thus

Kocr/^ou, side by

side

we

with

the

work,
the

reminded
the

as

prototype

eclecticism,

was

the

of

relaxation

philosophic

de-

writing rrspl

the

in

his

from

the

and

see

the

merely

as

all

interest

of

again

not

naturally only possible by the

strictlyphilosophic

sistency.2
inconwith

passage
are

like

much

as

absolute

that

Peripatetic
it

close

Almighty

the

agrees

the

at

is clear

with

likewise

Plato
indicated

is

possible without

was

as

combine

to

interspersed

It

maintain

to

etym-

philosophic

are

Chrysippus.1

indeed

also

of

CHAP.

played
dis-

erudition

cheap

especiallyin Chapters II. to IY., the popular

decidedly preponderating over
theological element
the

on

this

essence

tinge
1
2

when

religiosityeven
the

dignity

7 ; cf. Osaxm.
p. 219 sqg.
That
he, therefore, ceased
C.

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

to

be

quently

(rod

trines

of

and
the

belonged
belong.

he

KO!
p.ev
5e
TOU,

divine

mystic

assumes

of

sions
discus-

the

of

character

transcendental

the

In

purely philosophical element.

the

His

exalta-

school

and

to

xpfy
SwcC/iei
faros
IcrxvporaTov, /caAAet
eunr/jewetrrarau, C"j? 5e a0co/aC.

6, 399, ", 19

which

to

desired

irepl Qeov

ravra

Siavo"iar8cu

apery

5e

"c.
Kparlcrrov,

ECLECTICISM.

138

CHAP.
V.

tion above

with the

all contact

chief

argument

divine

essence

against the

in the

is made

world
immanence

We

universe.

the

of
here

see

the

how

eclecticism

accomplished the transition from pure

philosophyto the religious
speculationof the neoroad
Platonists and their predecessors. The
of
strict enquiry being abandoned, and those results of
which
commended
speculation alone maintained
themselves
and

universal

the

to

consciousness

expedient, metaphysics

true

necessarilybe
kind
majorityof manif,at the
; and

must

the

replacedby theology,in which

as

their theoretical wants

satisfy
based on the Aristotelian
time this theologywere
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

Peripateticdualism

Pantheism

school

of the Stoic

the

and

substantial

reconciled

were

in

system of dynamic Pantheism.1

To

Probable
date

of

what

period the attempt

in the

contained

book

at such

have

we

tion
reconcilia-

ing,
consider-

been

com/posi-

tion.

assigned,is not certain,but it *may be

The
revision of the
approximately determined.
in circulation
treatise by Apuleius shows that it was
be

may

as

second
The

of

the

view

been

developed,

above

character

of the

had
my

own

treatise

also

advanced

(I. G. p. 557
already been

sen

about

century after Christ.

has
Ktar/jLov,
"jrepl
main

work

Aristotelian

an

by

PeterAs

it

result

of

"?#.)"
the

the

in

investigation,in

the

the

The

middle

of the

only question is,

first preparation of this work,

independently of Petersen, to
whose

book

first drawn
be

in

my

attention

by Adam,

favour

of

its

was

this will
ness.
correct-

EVIDENCE

A3

TO

DATE.

139

therefore,how long before this date

posed ? That we cannot placeit earlier

it

was

than

CHAP.

com-

the first

-centurybefore Christ,is probable from the evidence

of external

testimony.
with

If the first trace

tence
of its exis-

Apuleius; if a Cicero and an

Antiochus
to whom, by its intermediate
tween
positionbethe Peripatetic
and Stoic doctrine,its distinct
and rhetorical
arrangement, general comprehensibility,
language,it would so greatlyhave commended
itself
never
betray by any indication that it was
known
to them, we
can
scarcelysuppose that it was
earlier than
written
the beginning of the first century
is met

in

"

"

Christ.

before
lead

still

us

before

the

the

into

its whole

character

would

to assignit to this century

definitely
century immediately following. For

more

the

or

But

attempt

mouth

of

could

the

have

been

founder

made

to

put

of the

Peripatetic
to the Stoics,
.school,such important concessions
the individuality
of both schools must
already,in
have disappeared,
and the knowledge
great measure,
of them
become
obscured ; in a word, philosophic
attained
have
eclecticism
must
a
development,
which, accordingto all other traces,it did not attain
before the time
of Antiochus, the Academician.
When, therefore, Eose1 would
place the date of
this work
before
"very

before

De

middle

Christ,the proof for

strong
But

the

to

this

this is

so

assertion

little the
2

third

the

the

counterbalance

ATist.lilr. Ord. etAuct.

-36, 97 s##.

of

case

Eose's

following:

century
must

opposite
2

that

arguments
(1) The

we

are

be
bability.
proare

the

passage

'

ECLECTICISM.

140

GHAP.
V.

rather

by decisive
KOCT/AOVmust be
Trspl

the work
or

one

facts to suppose

constrained

c.
irepl~K.6criJ.ov
6, 399, ",

Posidonius,,

writings the author

of whose

more

later than

33

to

himself

employs,,

that

says

that

others

even

Hipparchus set up other

in the
computations : Artemidorus, for
telian
pseudo-Aristotreatise
example, in agreement with the
TreplGavfj-acricav
K"r/xou,gives the length of
aKovcrpdrav (c. 155, p. 846), trepl

"400, #,

which

3,

already

was

be

cannot

than

died

which
has

about
of

of

comparison

passage

be copiedin

passages;
in the

believes

Bose

to

KScrpov,
belongs
irepl

to be

himself

he

which

section

considers
.

argument,
can

terrestrial

therefore,

thing
no-

plain

as

more

stadia, and
its
than 39,000 (Plin.
breadth more
Sfat. Nat. ii. 108, 242 sq.
Of

than

68,000

Posidonius

know

only

the

length

we

reckoned

he

that
at

70,000 (Strabo, ii. 3, 6, p. 102);

what

said

he

tradition
How

of

does'

of the

is to

see,

breadth
inform
us.
the

treatise,therefore,

deduced

be

from

from
and

the

not

anything concerning

date

later addition

d. Gr. II. ii.109, 1). On

(cf PMl.
this

CLKOVCT-

which
fjidrav,

other
from

Trepl6av/jia(riuv

treatise

to

the

the

the

moreover

works

discovered

be

But

B.C.

two

from

borrowed

cannot

Carystus,

220

the

after

the

recent

more

of

Antigomis

who

scribed
tran-

its

vergence
di-

Eratosthenes

Hipparchus, it is hard
(3) According to c.

to

3,

be based.

that

in

serves 393
Bose
5, 23, as
asserts,,
(2)Eose obthe Caspian and Black
Kutr^ov (c.3, between
irepl

393, ", 18) the

of the

breadth

Seas

is crrev^raros

there

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,

habitable

before

for

Eratosthenes;
reckoned

its

tosthenesthis
Era-

length

of

he

the

says,

Europe

boundaries

yuv^ol

are

its breadth
at
77,800, and
and
stadia
38,000
Hipparchus,
;

H6vrov"

at

whom

the later

writers

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

must
to

he

were

these

$##.)" But
that

our

have

kept precisely
predecessors if

later than

they

Bose

els
i.e. the
5r#/ce*,
the

place

between

H6vrov

Caspian

where

it

rbv

and

the
the

Sea

at

isthmus
Pontus

designated as
the boundary between
Europe
and Asia, according to Dionys.
Perieg. Orl). Desor. v. 20) is
(which

narrowest.

was

also

The

of Bose

further
I venture

servations
obto*

THAN

LATER

from

and

they
only
not

contact

are

; and

find

we

32, the

at

non
phenome-

all consideration.

deserves
Thus

imparts to us.1

in

it.

K.

ot Se
Kal

yovres

yijv

?/ns

KoiXcg

(Twe^e! irpbsfyav~

KOU

Tacriav

This
Tr"pi"f""p"tav.
is
definition
quoted by
singular
the
Diogenes, vii. 152, with
KVKXOV

KaTa

and

words

same

slight and

with

only
ences
differ-

unimportant

from

Posidonius,
poXoyLK*].In c. 4, 394, b, 21
treatise maintains
that,
sqq. our
of the
wind
of

Merew-

winds,

east

that
the

blows

sun's

/ecu/das is the

from

rising in

the

place

summer,

which
uirriXLtJOT-nsthat
from the Iffyuepwal,
zvpos
the

Cf.

(T"L{r]J.ovs 5e

TOVS

KaBd

TOS,

JlOff"l$d0VlOSIv T7J
(pTjffl

eivai
oyfioT}'

5' avr"v

(Teicrfj-artaSf
Se KXiftaTias,
TOVS
ftarias,

and

dry

avaToXal
x"ifjL"pival

comes

from

TOVS

juev

%a"r/iarias,
5e fipacr-

Nat.

kinds
; from

vi.

Qu.

that

read

-i we

moist

TOVS

5e

Sen.

albO

iv K.a.TO'RTpq} $eo)povjj.4vri
arise

ws

avoi-

av

Biog. vii.
yivea-Qai
els ra
KoiX"fiaTaTTJS
irvevf^aros
yrjs evfivovTQS ^ [/cai]
/caSefp%0eV154

21, 2. In c.
there are two
Kal

5e

KQXa.

a;

TOVS

4"

c.

definition

The

ol
jSpacrrai,

y"vias

KaXovj/rat.
ffiKTai.

other

struck

the

greater

Ttt

many

with

Posidonius

895,

they

points of
presented by our
the fragments of

how

the

would

and
possibility
truth
probability or

theory.
already

treatise

he

the

It has

"writers

science

supposing

even

correct,

are

prove
tlie

his

of

natural

as,

over,

pass

141

lie has,perhaps,
borrowed

whom

part of the

POSIDQNIVS.

of vapours,
the latter

hoar-frost,
dew,
the
rain, "c. ; from
winds, thunder, lightning,

fog,

clouds,
former,

"c.

Seneca,

Compare with
Qu. ii. 54 :

~Kat.

ad

opini"nem

tor

terra

Pasidonii

this,
J\Tune
rever-

terrenisque

on-

m'bits j?ars Jiumida t\$latui\par"

mcca
etfmnida: Itrecfulminibus
alwientwm

(which
must

much

est, ilia, i-mbribus

Posidonius

himself

naturally have
at length).
more

vapours

are

shut

of the

up

given
dry

If
in

the

break

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 de4, 395, a, 11) : "tXr)6evSe 7n/eu/ia
XGifAeptvT] Svcris.
are
quoted by Strabo, ev V""f"GiTra^e? re Kal voTepip Kal
i. 2, 21, p. 29, from. Posidonius.
Si* avTov
fitaicas
fayvvov
read:
In c. 4, 395, ", 33, we
iX^]p,araTOV 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
winds,

west

"

apyecrrys

blows

7r\dyia creiovres "rar'

o|efa"ryawlas eTriKXipTat. KO.XOVVot JAW

Taty

els

ol 5e "vca

KOU
finrrcvvres

/carw

doubt

abbreviated
the

detailed

from

somewhat

account

in

ire

donius,
Posimore

CHAP.
V.

ECLECTICISM.

142

CHAP.
V.

cannot, according

work

to

harmonises

(c.4,394,0,32).

definition

of

the

The

written

find

again

we

of the treatise

those

beyond

it says

all that

in

concerning
the character

subjectsbears

those

irepl

the latter book

; whereas

(ap. Kocrpov

creXas

is most
Diog. I. #.)" which
of
most
like
taken,
probably
the meteorologicalportions of
his
expositions of Stoicism,

Posidonius,

been

of the first century before Christ ;

before the middle

from

this,have

not pursuing
summary,
but
only comparing
enquiries,

of

results ; how

think

then

we

can

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

Stobasus

forpov, which
518)
(jEfcZ.i.

can

is manifest.
suppose that

should

As

to

their

mony
har-

of

ancient

attested

case

nothing less
than a complete meteorology ;
for in the first placePosidonius
in these matters
enjoys great
cannot
we
reputation, and
such
ascribe
dependence to
him
would
and

; and
be

our

Hose,

source,

of Aristotle

if

gard
disre-

we

theory

will

the

save

that

assume

we

exposition of

the

Stoic

mology
cos-

JEcl. i.

444)

the

(ap. Stob.
likewise

was

lable
syltheir

originality
and
higher authority
treatise
unless, with

it
he

inexplicablethat

not

followed

closely if

very

theory (I. c.

96)

p.

from

borrowed

in

passages

resembles
Posidonius

works

geography,
result of his
contents

We

it.

wrote
on

and
own

of

that

donius
Posi-

the treatise

which
know

Who

he

word.

is Eose's

untenable

more

the

for

word

him

copied

the

second,

the

in

of

all

to

this, the

suffice to

not

them

name

even

plicable
ex-

taken

from

it.

this exposition,
That
however,
his predecessorshould
contradicts
such a
the
thority,
auas
altogether
be named
will
shown
be
diately.
immehave
must
he
theory
whom

always

Still

But
all

it

without

well-known

by the

of
had

writers

referred

and

their

is

allusion

of

been

have

could

how
later

Posidonius,

rowed
bor-

work

if this

And

have

third

that

in

which
exposition,

have

the

that

dental
acci-

dependence on

from

occurred,

ever

in
little

result

the

is
common

his

Posidonius?

our

merely

is not

cases

we

of

Posidonins

with

treatise
these

from

should

compendium

quotes

Posidonius.

agreement

the

That

the

of

description

the

of

he

of the

instead

being foisted
out

Stoic

Aristotle

upon

Stoic doctrines

the
Peripatetic,
have

that

doctrines

Stoical writings by the

of

been

taken

himself?

that

believe

can

out
I

of Aristotle

have,

ever,
how-

dwelt
too
comprehensive
long upon this
is manifestly
which
meteorology, hypothesis,

astronomy,

the

only

device

to

escape

difficulty. The
investigations,a
far
went
which
quoted above place

from

passages
it

beyond

ABOUT

THE

probablyit
to

doubt

of

copied
certain,

and
If

him.

we

even

is

great

all his

from
also

this

with

may
probability derive

of

abundant

Posidonius,
from

B.Q.

cannot

we

143

assign it

treatise

our

wanting

the second

and
definitions,
I. c.} is

the

shown

which

manner

com-

in it there

is

of these

third

(as is

conceived

in
be

only

can

es-

plained
graphical
geo-

by the design of the

tions
meteorological Peripateticto bring the definifrom
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
and

the

detailed

discussion

especially

sea

nius

had

work

on

the

on

points; Posido-

written

separate

and

therein

asserted, what

our

treatise

(c. 3, 392, ", 20)

also

had

the

sea,

of the

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

I should
pose,
supits contents, to be
Posidonius.
from

from

borrowed
shown
the

$"#.)has already

(p. 211

section

the

that

beginning of

392, 5, 34,
point the same

from

with

Stob.

quoted ap.
$g. (which Stobseus
Arius
from
borrowed

Osann

himself

ascribes

first definitions

two

to
K"j"r/*os

of

the

Chrysippus.

But

he

also

this

statement

owe

to

third

it is

work.

supposes,
than doubtful.

more

me

Stobseus
the

places

Chrysippus'sirepl

was

K6ff]j.ovy
to

ment
agree-

that

such

that

it is

so,

and

writer

was

no

sition
expoi. 144

three

is

Posidonius,
reasons

may

writer, and

third

3,

c.

point
the

as

from

as

seems

it is

treatise

doubt)

this

But
its

(and

our

beyond

That

work.

clear

clearly
literally

we

taken

for

2 to

c.

is almost

Stoic

equally
it

and

it is not

which

treatise

Osann

from

of the

account

an

doctrine,

that

see

abstracted

is surrounded

earth

to be

Stoic

strongly

enforces, that the whole

inhabited

claims

that

this

other

than

probable
first,the

for
same

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

that
be

must

and

copy

originalis evident
is quoted p. 134, 2.
excerpt

as

the

also

not

For

source

as

them
no

doubt

the
for

definifirst of its three tions

this quotaof the jc4"r/xo?,
tion
taken
been
have
cannot

connected
which

of

with

Thus
treatise

our

with

Stobseus
the

sippus
Chry-

author.

coincides
of

in

their

section

which

the two

mentioned

have
as

the

names

peated
therefore, have rehere; he would

must,

an

what

from

Stobseus

in

Chrysippus

here

treatise

our

doubt

no

is

the
so

CHAP.
V.

the first century after the

author

has made

CENTURY

later ; but

than

the

that

the treatise
use

is rather

later date

FIRST

sage
pas-

closely

the following,
employment of

ECLECTICISM.

144

CHAP,
^-

of

mencement

handed

down

our

era

Apuleius as

to

it had

since

work

alreadybeen

of Aristotle,and

found
have
false
some
Apuleius in his copy must
is that it
readingsl which still exist,the probability
was
composed a longer or shorter time before the
of

end

this

However

first century, B.C.2

the

may

of the
memorial
be. It is,at any rate, a remarkable
this time, had found
eclecticism which, about
trance
en-

Posidonius

school.
Peripatetic

into the

even

transformation

proved, that

be

can

compre

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|^
the islands, KaXovfjievri,instead of Ao"^ irpbs
the dissertation
on
that
the
assertion
the
and
r)]i'oiKOV}jLev'nv('ir.K.3,S9$)
1",15).
break

no

between
perceptible

is

is borrowed

what

supposed mainland

also

is

the

of

nius
Posido-

from
which

of

name

an

fix the

To

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

island

already observed) exactly. It

therefore, probable that
seems,
it is the

work

same

which

Stobseus

mus)

gives

an

Arms
(i.e.
Didyexcerpt, and

author

the

extent, in which

which

the

to his own
1

c. 7, p.
first of these

unnatural

by
IT.

have
MSS.

the

K.

placed

302

Strabo's
is the

author

shows

(p.

p.
In the

Oud.).

his work

and

suppositionthat

1, 391,
with

uepovs

ovf

second,

the

0,

22

some

he
of

may
our

oliertffftev
; in

otherwise

in-

sea

(c.

precise

(ii.5,

19 s$. p.
this ence
infer-

unsafe

if the

geographicalpart

has

simply followed
$p6vr\(ri$is

The

apportionedto
the

is less

more

in the

Posidonius.

to

the

Meantime

"?.).

the

6v/j.o"t^"$the

avbpeia,to

the

"T

ffuxppQcrvv'nand

to the whole

soul the

Sucaiocrvvr],

and
ju-eyaXotyvxta
GXsvdepLdrifis,
likewise the opposite failings.

these
passages Apuleius' Of
somewhat
is
translation
plained
ex-

the

read

122

the

JLpul.Procem.

$#")from

288,

in

be

he

account.

G-oldbacher

As

681

much

not

case

knowledge
parades (c.2-4) can
of

its whole

in

of

description
3, 393, a, 26)

his

-n-eplof

of the

used

has
K6"r{j.ov

of

first section

the

probable,because

seem

o"roi%e"-than
/jLtrGcapoXoyLKTi

Ms

rwcris, from

which

nius,
Posido-

of

would

are

duties

sub-kinds

faults

definitions
superficial

given; lastly, it

conduct
by what
manifested; and

are

and

of

is shown

they

many
virtues and

brought forward.

are

other
faults

TREATISE

Another
the

short

VIRTUES.

that

of

remnant

in

possess

OST

145

eclecticism

treatise

on

probably

we

virtues

and

vices,

CHAP
V".

also
~

be

to

found

trine

of

in

virtue

nation

of

chief

virtues

the

of

tokens

later

ethics,

With

phrastus.
external
is

of

IFor

and

ejrcuyeTck
2

into

from

Its

the

the

date

cannot

we

may

speaMng,
Eclecticism.

its

lection,
col-

whole
it

is

from

be

it,
the

to
An

if

and

its

fixed,

precisely

assign

not

earlier

of

Peripa-

have

of

matter

the

that

way

c.

allied

tingly,
unhesita-

so

1249,

1,

30

",

Tpijj.epovs

is

K.O.TO.

also

an

HXarcava^

"c.

indication

of

parents

in

7,

1251,

c.

of

head

perhaps

1250,

31,

piety

and

after

the

Pythagorean

(v. ft).

4,
a,

later
mons
dae-

and

gods

the
c.

There
a

of

mention

the

in
between

the

generally
period

in

even

longer.2

were

the

does

bable
pro-

and

school,

Academy

in

period

ment
treat-

it

if

as

Theo-

treatise

us

Plato

to

course,

ally
especi-

hardly

would

fj.4w)s

sion
admis-

emanated

it

Peripatetic

from

quite

not

subject,

that

the

the

Aristotelian

the
and

of

voted
de-

manner

short

detain

to

ferent
dif-

after

this

himself

is

passes

scarcely

are

writer

is

origin

but,

certain;

school

soul

the

been

have

But

the

^e/CTa.

its

Even

he

descriptive

there

of

the

time

tetic

end

to

of

of

to

the

ing
correspond-

parts

Peripatetic

treatise

opposition

the

to

the

in

an

and

four

reduce

the

and

doe-

the

to

same

importance

whole

beginning

and

tries

seems

perhaps,

the

that

soul,

the

harmony.1

sufficient

Instance,

remark
from

of

the

the

Stoicism

points

not

the

discrimi-

manifestation

vices

in

customary

Platonic

at

as

the

of

and

and

The

author

nature

while

collection.

of

Aristotle

evil

virtues

the

on

the

by

them
the

review

these

to

the

to

based
faculties

of

to

relating
in

three
;

vices

here

is

treated

virtues

Aristotelian

our

",

20;
the

tinder

godlessness
Golden

of

precedent
Poem

virtues

rl"es*

ECLECTICISM.

146

CHAPTEE

VI.

CICERO.

CHAP.
VI.

Eclecti-

cism
of tJie
first
century
B.C.

the

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
itself the more
readilyto those who, from
FROM

the outset,had
Its practical

with strict
racter,

fied
in

Cicero.

themselves

concerned

rather with

fruits of philosophic
studies
applicable
practically

cha-

exempli-

VARRO.

Such

science.

Cicero's

youth

falls in

was

the

case

with

period in which

the
than

Cicero.1

only
the influence
philosophyon Eoman
culture,
but also the approximationand partialblending of
schools had alreadybegun to develop
the philosophic
themselves
quainted
acstrongly.2He himself had become
various systems, partly from
with the most
the writingsof their founders and representativesand
a

not

of Greek

Concerning
philosopher,cf

Cicero
besides

as

Ritter

.,

(iv. 106-176), Herbart, Werke,

xii. 167

*"#.;

Ciceronis

Kuhner,

M.

T.

Gruler's

Allg. Mncycl. sect. i.

226
17,
s$q. ; Bernhardy, Rom.
Litt. 769 sqg. ; and the treatises
named
in the passages
quoted

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.
(i.e. 106 B.c,),and
concerning his philosophical therefore some
years after the
in

Merita, Hamb.

works,

cf. Hand

1825

in

Ersch.

uncl

death

of

Panaetius.

EDUCATION.

CICERO'S

147

Ms
In
partly from Ms teachers.
the Epicurean doctrine had commended
through the teaching of Phasdrus

PMlo

of Larissa

introduced

Mm

whose

adherents

he

among

at the

himself;

close

period in

later

Greece,

attended

Phaedrus

and

with

those

at the

his

being

ad

Up.

called

Vide

Vide

In

Philonem

Phil.

77
and

d. Gr.

to

B.C.

30th

HI.

_..

reading,though

his

on

The

writers
he

and

quotes

are

i.

on

most

He

self
him-

most

philosophy
commonly

frequently

Plato, Xenophon,
however,
(of whom,

only to have known

rhetorical
popular and
works), then Theophrastus and
seems

some

373, 2;

Dicsearchus, with their political

writings, Crantor, Panastras,
Posidonius, ClitomaHecato,
chns, Philo, Antiochus, PMlo-

'

Supra, p. 87,
Sitpra,p. 58,

to warrant

enquiries

own

whom

refers

he

thereyear

cannot

we

of that literattire is

Aristotle

Cic. 3 sa.

Pint.

piieri

cum,

that

survey

much

siipra, p. 76, 2, 3.
p. 70, 3.
mpra,
and

rature
litephilosophical

in

so

into

tillthe

continued

great erudition.8

i(tgMlosophus

valde

in his 29th

fore

78

teacher

of

probabatur.

374

not

sili. 1

Fam.

PJifsdro, q\ii nobisy

antequam

old

thorough enough

man

"essemtts,

coanovimus,

Ms

of

knowledge

Ms

fame

Ms

based

of

wide

independent nor

neither

visited

the praiseof wide

Mm
time

same

such

the

he

eclecticism,and he entered

taken

from

withhold

before

Epicurean/ "but
Antiochus,6the cMef

philosopher.7Also

he had

at

career4

with Posidonius,wMch

of that

this

the

of Zeno,

of Academic

connection

death

public

those

after

new

him

the instructions

specialeagerness

founder
a

Ms

also remained

proximity to

of

commencement

CHAP.

Academy 52
persistentlyreckoned
tion
enjoyed the instruc-

who

Diodotus

Stoic

of the

youth,

itself to him

to the

he

time

same

earliest

demus

1.
4.

1,2

(or Zeno).

ECLECTICISM.

148

CHAP,

YI-

which

with

philosophyas on the art

clothed
Greek
philosophyin

into

Koman

he

had-

dress,and

countrymen.1 He only
arrived, however, at this literaryactivityin his
he had been compelled to
advanced
more
age, when
it accessible

made

his

to

and thus his manifold

public service,2
works
are
philosophical
tolerablyextensive
of a few years.3 But
into the space

and

renounce

astonishment

lessened when
considerably
of procedure in
his mode
In

works.
philosophical

look

we

our

will

his work

rapidityof

the

at

pressed
com-

be

closelyat

more

compilation of his

the

portion of these he
own
views, but allows

one

directlyexpress his
each of the most
important philosophicschools to
of their adherents,4
explain theirs through one
does

not

and

for this purpose

made

have

to

which

lay ready
mainly

himself

Of

merit

the

claims

for

himself

spect

Cicero

often
Ms

defending
works
Fin.
Tmc.

to

the

hand,

and

the

to

he

this

re-

speaks while

against censure,
e.g.
1 3, 10 ;
i. 2, 4 s$t[.; Acad.
i. 1 sgq. ; N. D. i. 4 ; Off.i.

expositions

:have

to

confined

And

even

3rd, 43 B.C., his activity as

philosophicalwriter occupies

only
4

three

abont

As

in

Finibus,

the

De

years,

Academica,

Natiwa

De

Deo"rwniy

Divinatione.

De
5

'A^-ypaQa sunt, confesses

in a ranch-quoted

Cicero himself
1. G. ; Tuse. i. 1,

Acad.

7 ; N.

several

contents.5

ber
a

philosophical

l s%.
1^
'
2

throughout

tion,
comparison, representa-

of their

which
in

almost

seems

of

use

elucidation

and
1

free

he

D.I.

c.

1; 4,

passage
labor e

O# Att.
fiunt :

xii. 52), minors

rerl)d

tantuni

that
(irreof
(Non
spective of his two political this,in spite Fin.
intcrpretwn fwigimw
mwiere,
Consolatio, the
works), the
"c.),is no exaggerated modesty,
ffbrtensius,and the firstversion
is sufficientlyproved by the
fall in the
of the Academic",
As
recent
investigationsinto the
709 A.U.C., i.e. 45 B.C.
year
of his expositions. In
Decemsources
murdered
Cicero was
on
3

The

earliest of these

abwndo
f[niJ"m
affero,

; and
i. 2, 4

HIS

where

lie

speaks

allies himself
own

works

of

these.1

regard to

OWN

STANDPOINT.

his

in

own

this is

Yet

he

when

own

expository dialogueshe, as
of

which

the

his

the
with

agrees

CHAP.
TL

his

reproductions

great disadvantagein

knowledge of

our

frequently

writingsthat

than

no

only bring forward

can

older

scarcely more

are

he

name,

closelyto

so

149

them

theories

others

of

views

he

since
standpoint,

; and

even

as

his

in

his

cates
indirule, sufficiently
he

discussion

under

"approves,
His

standpointmay
he had

ths Academica
from
the

version, he

first

the

borrowed

that

Antioclms
mouth

of

afterwards

be

which,

in

placed

in

Lucullus,

in the month

and

Clitomachus

d. Gr. III. 1

of the

fifth book
be

to

Epicurean

half

and

(cf supra,
third, and
of

Dwinatione

the
Gr.

one

1 ;

For

of Panse-

p. 41, 3) ; for
second
for the

first,Clitomachus
IK. i. 505,
is worked

Posidonius, Pansetius,

III. i.

Gr.

374, 1) are employed

the
second, probably one

d.
(PJiil.

337,

For

2 ;

the

d.

3).

out

and

as

of

the

have

the

cipal
prin-

first book
to

seems

the
and

Posidonius

nevQavs

The

3).

TusGidante
been

Conso-

the

?repl

latio,
(ibid.H.

His

(vide PJdl.

model

63); for

Grantor's

13

same

gods two
(concerning

treatises

of Posidonius
tius

that

in the

the

cf. Phil

which

Finibits

Antiochus

doubt.

no
on

II. ii.

an

as

of

writings

; of the

Grantor

second, Panastius
(ride supra,
p. 41, 3 ; Heine, Font. Tusc. Msthe
of
fourth,
put. 11 sf[.}-,
Posidonius
(as Heine, I. c. p.

sonrce

3), and

p. 86,

of
way, admits
the first book

for

in

originated

rest

573,

in De

found

(ride supra,
the

(ride Phil,

501, 3). The

is

Mm

d. Gr.

of Varro

p. 86, 3) ; the tical

scephe had
dissertations
bably
profrom
PMLo
well
taken
as

from

served

L 899,
of
source

(vide supra,

as

generallydescribed

De

from

Antiochus

supposes),or

sq.,

(videPkil.d. Gr.

HI. i. 517, 1). In

the treatise

Fato

to

De

he appears
of
inferences

the

repeat

Clitomachus.

The
in

Ojfieiu keep
Pansetius'
the

of

work

the

(vide supra,

name

p.

probably
Antiochus

(ride supra,

other

tomachus
Cli-

reasonably
was

works
have

the

be

same

by

p. 86, 3).

supposed
with

Greek

whose
not

41, 3) ;

furnished

been

It may
that it

to
same

Topica,has

of the

substance

De

books
substance

the
totypes
pro-

hitherto been

(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-

nporpeTpriKbsprobably

to the

same

extent.

scepti-

cism.

ECLECTICISM.

150

CHAP,
"

eclecticism

habit

founded

scepticism* The

upon

very

of

have

statingargualready mentioned,
ments
for and against,without
clusion,
drawing any conindicates a tendency to scepticism,for this
the indirect
be compared with
procedure cannot
developmentof thought in the Platonic dialogues,
with
the Socratic
or
conversations,from which
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
satisfied with any theory,but objects to somethingin every given system.
Cicero,however, expressly
himself
as
avows
Academy/
belongingto the new
the arguand
name
brings forward in his own
ments
of
it had
with which
denied the possibility
knowledge.4 For himself,one of the great reasons,
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

value

to

he

that

remarks
it than

to

has

all that

Tuse. i. 4, 8 ;
i- 5, 11.
2

morem

sime

TUSG.

Of.

4, 11

to

11:

Quern

arguments

et

alias

suetiidinem

acittis-

scope et mtper

iut ad

earn

con-

dtsjputwr"wus.

ii. 20 ; 22, 69 ; i. 4,
13 ; 12, 43, 46 ; N. D. i. 5, 12 ;
iii. 4, 20.
Qffic.
Acad.

of

I think

in this
be

it

place,

considered.

been

PJiil. d. 6fr. III. i. 500

5

ideas.6

specify these

further

as

the

and

il 20 sq$.

they are not to

and have
temtisset, original,
oopiasissMiiegite
Tusonlano,

Acad.

by the

said

definition
4

; N. D.

greater

senses

unnecessary

4,

Carneades

cum

fecvmis
in

v.

v.

been

of the

Academy on the deception

fixed
impossibilityof any
1

much

attaches

quoted,
sqq.

LOG.

Git. 33, 107 ; c. 36 sq. ;

i. 1, 1; 6, 13 ; iii. 15, 39.
ii. 48, 147 : PostJiao
Acad.

J\r.D.
8

tamen,
yatAm

ciim

de

luce

dissenswnibm

Qitaremusr
tantis

ACTION

BASED

OS

Scepticism -with Mm,

fruit of

PROBABILITY.

therefore,is

not

much

so

the

independent enquiry as the consequence

of the uncertaintyin 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
indepenan

of his Greek
expresses

predecessorswhich
far

so

reconciled, the

far

so

knowledge respecting the

of, because

the

cism
eclecti-

philosophersare

elements

common

co-ordinated

are

the

as

that

as

from,

they

debated

to be

their
at

are

tems
sys-

strife,
is

points

authorities neutralise

spaired
deone

another.
Thus

it is that

the

doubt

in Cicero

importance

have

cannot

that
significance

any

means

had

had

in

the

him,

in

his scepticismin
fact,limiting

see

for

he

or

Academy

new

attributes

by

and

greater

it

therefore

we

two

worth

to

spects
re-

the

from
knowledge derived
the
probabilitythan
Academy, and he makes hardly any use of certain

parts of the philosophyderived from his sceptical

principle. If he is within the principlesof the
Academy in replying,like Carneades,to the objection
that

that

"

but

for action

certainty is

impossible

not

necessary,

tot

ojpere

disciplines,giiam/i de oeulorum
deqiie sensuumque
"reliqiwru?nmen-

disserawius,

mrorum

obscwritate

natures

jjliilosopkorum,
qui de

fionis contrariisqiierebus
uno

action

cannot
consider
we
only greater probability
;
in the
so
explanation he gives concerning

summorum

error

fall

all

him

d"

scepticism makes

discrepant,ut
rerum

jacere necesse

esse

twn

cum

tant-

plus
pos"it,

sit tot ta-ni nobiles

daciis
mew,

et

guas

de

sorite avt

plagas ipn

p$"iido-~
cmtra*

ae

Stoici teseuemnt.
*

Acad.

II. 31

108 ; IV. D. i. 5, 12.

c.

33, 105.

CHAP.
VL

ECLECTICISM,

152

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
is, therefore,only the preparation
of his method

the aim

for

of

; and

positiveconviction

does

reach

not

certainty of knowledge
certainty,it suffices,as

full

the

if this conviction

even

approximate
only an
alreadyknow, for practicallife,the
the

the fact

; for

him,

of

aim

the
here

sophy,
philoassertion

in

ferent
dif-

which

that

from

relation

Carneades

stand
probability,

of

knowledge

we

mistaking

no

knowledge, and

of

denial

is

and

of the Academic

elements

the two

the
of

philosophy. There

Ciceronian

end

but

they occupy with

the suspension of
itself,

doubt

judgment, had been the proper aim of philosophic

only in the
enquiry; the theory of probabilitywas
the consideration
second
rank, and resulted from
from
remained
of that which
over
doubt; but to
the

discovery of

Cicero the

probable appears

as

the

has value
and doubt
originalproblem of philosophy,
of the
condition
solution of
and
a
only as a means
therefore
clares
this problem. Cicero himself
plainlydethat his scepticismwas
properlyonly in regard
the

to

bam
ad

so

TUSG.
de
id

1, 4, 7

dixisset
$go

"nim,

aut

fieb"t

sibi

autem

vellet

vAderebwr, tuwi

dicereon.

sdis,vdtus

ratio contra

jiibevellet:

ambulans

is qui audire

quid

contra
ut

Ponere
audire

sedens

disgutabam
cum

quis

quo
aut

ita, ut

absolute

an

knowledge ;

the other hand, who do not

on
Peripatetics,
in respect to knowledge,he is fundamuch

with the
claim

for

demand

Stoic

Hce.c

est

et Socratica

alterius

opinionem

disserendi.

quid

veri

Nam

ita

simillimum

niri posse Socrates

faeillime
esset inve-

arliitrabatur.

Similarly (v. 4, 11) this procedure

claims
the
advantage, ut
nostram
sententia/ni
ipsi
tegeremus,

in

error

omni

simillimum

alias

levaremust

disputationequid
veri

queerer emus.

et

esset

OBJECTION

TO

mentallyagreed*1

But

DIALECTIC.

153

this modified

scepticism CHAP.
receives still further limitations.
Though our philo- ___!_
the subject,
on
sopher expresses himself hesitatingly
even

yet, all things considered, it

enquiriesthat

theoretical

he

is

is

only as to purely
in harmony with the

Academy : practicalprincipleson the contrary

and religious
the philosophic
convictions
directly

new

and

with

connected
the

in

same

them,

he

He

way.

does

wish

not

objects to

question

to

that

dialectic

it

only formal
knowledge but
of propositions
rules on the construction
and inferences
2
his
judgment on
physics, exclusive of
;
theology,is that it is far easier for physicsto say
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 theohave to limit these expressionsto the
case
balancing
counterfind no
we
opposite declarations
in
them
regard to natural enquiries
In ethics,on the contrary,though he finds
proper.
the philosopherson
discord
considerable
among
6
the most
important questions; and he himself,
guarantees

1
2

d.

Fin.

v.

cf. Phil,

fere

Aca-d.
N.

D.
in

yJiysfasiSy
Quid
quam

sit
qitiil
Acad.

Omnibus

i. 21, 60:
rebus

et
noti

mascime

sit

i*i

dtius,
JSstne

circumfmatenelwis,

a"ies

Jtuniant

Corpora*nostra
124

intrare

terram

Satisne

no-n

Acad.

122

Latent

ea

"c.

noia"

mntnoffistftv^nervorwmnatura

inftatm

ii. 39,

in

jpossit.

not'imm,

tandem

sit, gute rencvrum

errore,
?
flitS'iM se ilia stire jpersiiaserit
q\ti"animus sit ?

quisqua/nitanto

ing"mi

sit, qiic? pen"trare

ecelum,

"

116:

et

nulla

tanta

dixerim,

ii. 36,

occultata
ut

JJuculle, crassis

omula^

ista

26, 76.

ii. 28, 91;

Grr. III. i. 503, 5.

real

not

Acad.

ii. 42 ;

Ten"nmme

"c.
c.

48, 147.

154

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
'

shall

presentlydiscover,cannot avoid fluctuation 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

Academy,1 he seems
rule in his moral philosophy;
to have made
a general
of his writings
this subjectdoes he pay
for in none
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

further the doubt

of the

new

"

Legg. i. 13, 39

tricem

autem

Perturba-

harivni

exoremus

Carneade
tit sileat.

invaserit

in

Areesila

ed"t ruinas.

ylacare

cwpwt

JICBG

Nam

si

nimias

Quam guidem
submovere

ego
non

audeo.
2

be

Proof

of this will

presently

So

.ZV. D.

esse

Quod

of the

est

natura

and

at

et

qiio

venimits,
the

conclu-

treatise,iii. 40, 95

discessimw, ut VellejoCottcs
dispirt"tioverior, miJii Balbi ad
similitudinem

writatis
tur

esse

Sed

sentit
nos

i. 1, 2

simile

Ita

7:

given.
8

Deos
sion

recentem,

et

reri

duce

mimes

ab

Jiano

Aeademiam

rentm

maxime

omniwn

maxime

prop

ensior.

defendat

mdereTuso.

iv.

4,

qmd qiiisqiie
; sunt enwijudicia liftera :
quid sit in quaq^ie re
reproftabilesemper
.

THEOLOGICAL

such

utterances

with

them.

convictions

conld

procedure corresponded
His
This, however, is not the case.
not

fixed and

so

that he does

probabilityof having,
the

about

opinion

enough
superficial
But
from

him

would

Academy

have

explicitly.Though he
belief in

the

be

have

said if that belief

value

of

he

founds

gods

its

on

we

argument,
logical
the

on

soul.

magnus
enim
non

so

the
that

had

could

not

justice,
possibly

merely the

for him

This

name.4
his

belief in

without

any

is also the case,

development

of the teleo-

concerning the unity

his utterances

the divine

of

government of the universe,

and the immortality of the
here

not

in

question:

aeademiker.
Oldenb.
1860
29, 82 8%. ; Acad.
Ego vero
progr^
ipse et {G-yuiin.
2
Tusc. v. 11, 33 ; vide infra,
opinator,
qmdeni sum
Vide
1.
"c.
157,
"iwi
sapiens,
p.
V.

66:

infra, p. 157,
1

had

he

dignityof man,
A logicalscepticismis

quiremug.
ii. 20,

own

shall find,with

of Grod and

new

probableconjecture.Moreover, when

limitation,in his
as

adds

and

community

argument for the truth

universality,he does so

an

of

existence

immediately

destroyed; 3 which

even

deter

providence abolished,all piety,

fear of Crod, all human

would

the

to

advance

to

is

ness.2
fickle-

of the

ventured

calls

Ms

on

member

gods merely probable,he

were

the

time, another

shallow

is too

which

not

so

subjects; indeed, he

doubt

statements

never

before him

another

at

he

that

he is

and

pride himself

to

his

even

decided

keep

not

same

1.

Burmeister,

Cic. als

Neu-

CHAP.
VT

if his whole

are

of them

and

only be inferred from

unconditionallyto them,

trusts
sure

of Carneades

adherent

155

OPINIONS.

N.

D.

Vide

i. 2, 3 8%.

infra,,
p. 161, 1, 167.

'

156

CHAP,

ECLECTICISM.

human
know
no
doubt, mistrusts
philosopher,
to be the
ledge,and holds greateror less probability
to himself
highestthingattainable ; but he reserves
the power of making an exceptionto this rule in all
the

where

cases

demands
This

Practical

tions

pressing moral

necessity

fixed conviction.

more

more

mental

or

confident

has,however,

of

treatment

with

Cicero

so

practical
questhe

much

more

because, according to his view, the

significance,
contained
whole problem of philosophyis exclusively
that

knowledge is a
and
further,that it secures
good in and for itself,
the purest and highest enjoyment ; * and though he
expresslyincludes physics in this admission,2yet
but its effects on life appear
not
knowledge itself,
of philosophicenquiry.
aim
to him
the ultimate

in them.

he

Though

admits

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,
philosophy: 4 the best philosophyis that of Socrates,
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.

JV. D, ii, 1, 3 ; of. the

v.

24 $g. ;

following

21, 71.
4

Fin.

v.

'bono}enim

note.
2

c.

Acad.

ii.

41, 127 ; Tusc. v.

iv. 5, 32;
3, 9; 24, 69; Fm.
from
Hortensius, ap.
Fragm.
De

Augustin.
3
Off.i. 43,

Trin.

xiv. 9.

153 ; cf.

c.

9, 28

sopMa

JECoc (sumtno

constituta

sunt

in

pliiloomnia,

"c.
5

1,1;
;

6, 15

constitute

Acad.
Tusc.

i. 4, 15 ; of. Fin,,
v. 4, 10.

ii.

PHILOSOPHICAL

INCONSISTENCIES.

157

of

therefore,may be attained In spite of

philosophy,
the restriction of our
knowledge: we know nothing
with
most
to

absolute

certainty; but

know

we

that which

CHAP.
TL

is

important with as much certaintyas we require

know
lying
it; scepticismis here merely the underof

base

of

mode

thought,which

is founded

because
this
practicallyuseful; and
the practical best harmonised
tendency towards
with the dispositionof the Eoman
and
the statesman,
Cicero was
more
susceptibleto the doctrine of
the

upon

than

Cameades

he would

otherwise

have

been

cause
be-

purely theoretical enquiriesalreadyappeared

and
worthless
to him
transcendental,he abandons
also the scientific proof of their impossibility
; but
his practicalinterests come
in contact
as
as
soon
with

he

makes

himself

with

doubt

content

the

Inevitable

retreat, and

a
a

bad

would

rather

expedient,than
of

consequences

his

own

we

are

admit

sceptical

statements.

If

ask, then, from

we

whence

to

derive

His eclec-

positiveconvictions,we have alreadybeen told ticim"

that the probable is best discovered
parison
by the comand testingof different views : the positive
in Cicero's scepticism is that eclecticism,
element
shall presentlyhave
an
which
we
opportunity of
in order
But
to decide
beexamining further.1
our

It will

liere suffice to recall

observations

tlie characteristic
in Off. iii- 4, 20 : JVWs
nostra

tiam

Academia

dat,

lit

licen-

maxime
quodcunque,

probabileoccurred
liceat

mat/nam

autem,

defendere.

id

nostrojvre

Tusc.

v.

11,

33

natis

Tit

giMem

agis

me"um

tabellis
et

obsigtestificarls

Quid dixerim
aliquanda aut
s"ripserim. Cum aliis isto modo,
qui legibusimpositisdispictant
;
nositidiem
que

nostros

virimus

guodevn-

ECLECTICISM.

158

CHAP,
T[-

of decision in

hands,

our

have

must

we
oppositeopinions,

tween

and

the

standard

philosophic
enquiry

as

proving of different views, such a

standard must be alreadygiven before every scientific
then to be directly
investigation.Two thingsseem
in this very

consists

present:

the evidence

and

senses

the

Even

consciousness.

of

of the

the evidence

spite of

first,in

complaintsof the deception of the

many

despisedby Cicero

"not

and

nature,

to

contrary

says that

; he

all

admitted
if we
no
impossible,
and that among
(probare,not assentiri)
themselves

force

the
greatestprobability,
of the foremost

occupiesone

and

victions
con-

with

us

of

places;

life

those

upon

assurance

be

conviction

action

which

is

senses,

it would

make

must

his

the

the

senses

for this

reason

employs sensible evidence as an example of the

ings
highestcertainty; 2 and he himself in all his writappealsgenerallyto experienceand historical
he

he

tendency, however,
stress
us

Acad.

nullwm,

liberi.
ut

me,
ut

semieretiir,
Utenim
multa.

Itaque

fft

Tale

risum

pevceptioconnatiuram

contra
niUl

esset, et

moreMtur.

Habet
Ms:

probanda

"c.

Quacunque

sie
[sa/pientewi]

res

attinget,

aliter
-

but

doctrine

pro'babile

mente,

III. i. 515
enim

est

robore

s#.)
saoso

dolatus.

liabet animum
movetur

senw-

eimultamravidecmtwr,
Neque iws contra
sensus
didmus, ae Stoici,"c.

-ut

Non
aut

corpus,

movetur

to

impeditum

cf. Part

cnraa-Tov,

eversio.

vita

internal

illud

iilla re

chief

external

viswn

sit

probatlo, sculptus

senzibus

mutta, sunt, "c.

eimi

awtem

esset,si probaMte

sequitur oninis

ut

whole

lay the

to

to the

neque

ii. 31, 99

his

in his ethical

even

ttaqiie

dicimus;

id

vercumt,

with

the witness

belongs not

world, and

moral

to the

forced

is

side, on

for his interest

other

the

on

accordance

In

fact.

of

matters

LOG.

cit.

c.

37, 119.

INNATE

KNOWLEDGE.

throughoutallies himself

lie
who

made

have

159

with

independence

those

philosophers CHAP.

the

of

external

VI*

and

All our
sensualitytheir watchword.
conviction, therefore, accordingto Cicero, depends
dominion

over

in the last resort

feelingfor truth,or

the natural

theory which

this

and

in

fluence

direct internal

upon

he

the

gained

certainty,
upon

innate

important

so

the
later,especially

though Plato
preceded him

and

Aristotle,Zeno

with

similar

shown

enquiries have

and

by methodical
attain

study, and

previous

taught

the

cence
reminis-

be awakened
fixed ;

content

we

beyond proof,
principles that are
duction
Aristotle,by the scientific road of in-

the

to

according to

of Epicurus and the xowal

TTpokrj^r^s
from
of the Stoics are
perience.
exonly abstracted
the

;
svvoiai

Here
of

the

on

knowledge

contrary there

antecedent

to

is

all

tion
asser-

an

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

and

perversionof
of

technical

It

Is

he

may
Antiochns
the

case

our

natural

training to

possible,indeed,
herein
; but
cannot

that

have

followed

how

far this is

now

be

ascer-

tained.
2

Tusc.

iii.

sophy,
philo-

these

of

none

their

ff

Epicurus had

:
knowledge in the strict sense
of ideas,accordingto Plato, must

innate

Doctrine

l for
definitely;

doctrines,
yet our

that

in-

an

Christian

the first to enunciate

was

knowledge ;

1,

2:

Sunt

enim

dispositionarises the need

virtue.2

The

ingeniis nostris
mrtutum;

seniina
ad

innata,

adokscere

si

qucB

nos
Iiceret,ip8"

natura

conscious-

beatam

$"rduceret

obscuring of natural
ness
through evil

vitam-

only

the

conscioushabits

and

ECLECTICISM.

160

GHAP.
YI-

right

of

ness

implanted
tendency to

subsequently a
with

only

notions

instruction, as

with

of ideas ; the

nature, the

false
and
1

in

the

the

Belief

the

in

opinions makes

Tioc

Atque

disputatwne sic
intelligivolo, jus quod dicam
esse, tantam

autem

esse

mini)
omnem

dedit

talem

virtutem

maxim
docere
inerant

ttctis.

arum

et

Jio-

(Natura

mentem"

et

cpice

re

in

rum

Further

to

the

upon

same

vir-

ipsam

evidence

in-

Jwniimim
.

sit

sum
.

same

eadeni

quawi

be

prefound.

[Honestum~]

tarn

non

usiis

definitions
intelligipot est

communi

judieio atque
studiis

for these

LOG. cit. 14, 45

instituit

'tanquawi elementa

Eademque

positions is easily to

qua

giue

virtutem

according

cupiditatem ingemiit
veri
inveniendi, "c.

quale

ea

Sed

in

doctrina

quasi

indusrit

is

to

reflected

Fin.

natura

acclpereposset,

ingenuitqiie sine
notitiasparvas

still stands

rests

homini

21, 59

v.

definition

any

ratio

vitia contraria,
Fin.

ness,
conscious-

ii. 14,46:
fecit Tiominem
apjyetentem, "c.

corruptelammalteconsuetudinis,
ut ab ea
igniculi esctanquam
dati
natura
stinguantiiT a
exorianturgue et cmfirment-ur
2

guished
distin-

nostrum

necessary.
i. 13, 33 :
hoc

naturam

truth.3

cJioavit,nihil amplius. Itaque

est (quod nostrum,
dico3
artis esf),ad
ea
principia quat
accepimus consequentia exquiquod sit id quoad volumus
rere,
effectum.

science

Legg.

from

what

Deity

doctrine

munity
com-

of

intuition

this be

children

from

are

therefore, be

individual
will

the

is incumbent

moral

the universal

keenly

more

any

impulses

to

men

the

only

investigationof

from

nearer

learn

omni

those

greater certainty than

with

nature.4

the

also from

but

which

which

activity may,

merely

not

we

prompt
and

it is

spiritnot

our

notions

reason,

of moral

men,

with

others

essence

endowed

innate

which

directlygiven

him

us

on

deduced

these

of

development

nature

evil is formed

originaldowry

an

by

man

disposition,but also with

of morality preceding

moral

fundamental

The

has

Nature

it.1

obscures

in

is

omnium,

optimi cujusque
On
the
faotis.
atque
subject, vide v. 22, 61 :

CRITERION

basis

by

God, the
with

OF

of the

virtue

TRUTH.

human

with
spirit's
affinity

of Grod is

consciousness

self-consciousness

CHAP.

immediatelygiven

has

man

161

only to

remember

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

own

truth

for this
which

in

is its universal

all

immortality of the

The
these

Cicero

rel

rere

Animum
Deo

ceelestibus

rel genus

rel

stirps

Itaque ex

prceter kominem

quod

notitiainaliquam

tot

animal

est

inliominibusnulla

quo
cum

appellari potest.
generibus nullum

Dei.

esc

nolis

agnatio

id

Jiabendum,

illud, ut is

cltur

gui

unde

detur
2

ortus

Ex

mum

Omni

Deos
gens
tern
non

esse

tarn

i. 13,

30

Flmum-

aff"wi ridetur, cur

credawms, quod nulla
fera,

sit immanis,

inibuerit

Hiilti dc DUs

nemo

eujus
Deorum

pra/ca

40, 95) what

a

doubt

other
express

ject.
4

is

by
works,

mentein

sentiwnt;

i. 16, 43

implies here

omnium

opinio.

gentium
well

as

Ms

Fuse.

this

proof
1) from

which

of the

month

else-

Academic

62 ; iii.4, 1

the

D.

{N.

his

claim

quo

cnrean

If Cicero

1.

makes

in

nature

(cf." 35; omnium

natures
"rox
est}. "Vide

s?^.note

where

put

lex

est

consensus

also

eomenslo

re

gentium

putanda

he

hoc

imtitutis

non

hi

autem

(minium

i. 16, 36: Deos

esse
opinainur. Cf. N. D. i.

TUSG.

et natu-

opinwestconjirmata.nonlegi'bus.

1, 2.
3

:
effeeit

consensus

TUSG.

natura-

natura,):

Tim

arUtrantur.
Nee
id collocutio
Jut-mimim aut

rero

?wscat.

ac

distinction

and
esse

will

Jierisolet

more

the

mos

effi- philosopher
(3".D. i. 23,
agnoscat Deum,
the consensus
sit quasi recsor-

stiat.

way

divinam

ram

tarn^n

deceat,

Dewai

same

of the

here

tamen

omnes

tavnim'niansuetanequetam.fera,
quas n"ns etiamsi- ignoret qualevi
liabere

the

vltioso

between

kabeat

est neque

convinced

freedom

enhn

nature.3

belong to

are

in

and

the

Ijtsisgue

gens

we

(observe

cernitur.

Legg. i. 8, 24
ingeneratum

esse

lit in

quibus

in

pueri

speculisnatura

to presuppose

seems

Indicant

likewise

soul must

consent

of

utterance

an

truths, of which

innate

through universal

without

agree

always be regarded as

must

recognition; for that

previous persuasion,

the

as

is

BpiStoic

sq. ; ii. 2, 5)
62 ; iii.

(i,23,

placed beyond

from his
passages
that Gotta did not

opinion

on

the

i. 12 sq. ; 15, 35

sub-

sq.

ECLECTICISM.

162

CHAP.
VI.

simply as

internal

an

well

philosophy,as
direct

which

The

this is the

In

wordy

founded

fixed

on

point from

opinionssets out, and

testingof philosophic

the

to which

morality,is here

as

conscionsness

of fact.1

matter

it returns.

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.
of physics,theologicaland
domain
psychological
enquiriesalone have any value for Cicero ; questions
for instance,concerning the number
of other kinds
"

of the

only touched

are

are

four

five ;

or

cerning
con-

and the like

efficientprinciple

and

the material
"

there

elements, whether

upon

in cursory

historical notices^

sceptical
comparison of different doctrines. In
the chief thing is
the estimation of this philosopher,
With
ethics.
ethics,therefore,I commence.
Cicero developshis ethical principles,
as, indeed^
his whole
of
philosophicdoctrine,in the criticism of
ethics in
the Epicurean,Stoic,
the four contemporary theories,
Ms philosophy.
Academic, and Peripatetic. Of these four systems,
himself
he opposes
definitelyto the first alone.
to him
The Epicurean doctrine of pleasureappears
the natural
to contradict
so
destiny and
strikingly
or

in

ence

natural

necessities
and

no

need

to enter

with which
De

Fato,

he
c.

of man,2 the facts of moral

of moral
more

opposes

experience,that

into
particularly
it in the second
Fin.

we

sciousness
con-

have

the remarks
book

of De

i. 7, 23, s$, ; ii. 14, "c.

ETHICS.

Finibus,

elsewhere

and

in the tone

of

generally speaking,ratter

"

rhetorician

IBS

than

in the

CHAP.

strain

severer

philosopher. On the other hand, his judgments

the three
on
remaining systems are far from being
Even
to the
consistent.
as
reciprocalrelation of
these systems, he is never
quite clear. For though he
of

remains
ehus

regard

in

the

to

especially coincide
is

doctrines
shall

the

their

in

explain

these

"

the

schools

two

the

original
whether

the

between

Stoics

unessential,

essential,or

as

moral

the

from

is uncertain

difference

While, on the
divergence in fact or in words.
hand, he repeatedly maintains
distinctlyand in
a

as

own

and

the other, he
in which

Academy

Zeno

that

name,

the
and

morality differs

Stoic

use

of
of

its

Academy,

Acad.

from

he

importance.

very

his

his predecessors,

that of the

has

of

Cicero

the
full
tainly
cer-

expedient to justify
member
a
says that, as

poor

he

i. 6, 22 ; Fin. v. 3, 7
cf
12
25, 75 ; Tuse. Iv.
5,
;
sq. ;
3, 6 ; v. 30, 85 ; Off.lit 4, 20.
2
JFin. ill. 3, 10
##. ; iv. 201

with

and
he speaks
Peripatetics,3
shall presently find,with
we

this contradiction, when

of the

one

one

only changes their expressions; 2 on

gives a tolerablylong list of the points

opposition, as
acknowledgment
makes

reallyat

is

the

of later Peripatetics

from

than

yet he

that

ethics,and

removed

Academy

of Aristotle

Antio-

Academy and the Peripatetics

schools,as they agree generally,

further

not

of

doctrine

and

his master

morality of Theophrastus and

feebler

he

of

assertion

these two

viz. that

"

the

to

true

right
26

; v.

Off.i.
3

to follow

the

pro-

8, 22 ; 25, 7i ; 29, 88
2, 6 ; Tuse. v. 11, 3i.

Acad.

i. 10.

'

ECLECTICISM.

164

CHAP,
YI

bability of

qnences.1
in this

that
But

the

in

virtue,he

is

the roads

divergehe

grandeur,consistency,and

The

follow.

excite

ethics

the Stoic

his

as

longerwhich

no

agree

"

according to
appreciationof

of himself; 2 but

knows

unable

seems

standpoint. So

unconditional

quite sure

conse-

life

principlesof
the

to

of both sides

the statements

universal

nature, and

he

fixed

to find any

discussion

regard

for himself

even

far,indeed,as
in

without

time

admiration

soon

as

he shall

severityof
; it

appears

regard virtue as sufficient for

the good
between
happinessand not to distinguish
the useful,than to assent to the oppositeview
and
sion
he finds the Stoics' admisof the Peripatetics;3
of the affections weak, and their moral
ciples
prinis faultyin its
hazardous, since that which
nature, like the affections,should not merely be
restricted,
or, still less,regardedas a help to virtue,
He
but wholly eradicated.4
reproachesthem with
the inconsistencyof assuming goods with which the
nobler

him

to

happy

man

of the

the

more

than

the nobler

happy
1

Tuso.

157, 1.
2
Acad.
3

thus

virtuous

from

Tuso.

as

may

from the happiness

distinguishing
such,a supreme
happiness,and

all

11, 33

; sru/pra,p.

i. 6,22 ; Fin. iv. 10, "c.

1,

1 ;

iii.4, 20 ,*cf. with

25,

the

in

circumstances,even

71 ;

Off.

following,

the

bull

of

134 sgg., 157 sq$.

iv. 18 8#$. ; Off.i. 25,
Acad.
i. 10, 35, 38.

Bitter,iv.
*

v.

he

perfectand complete life,a life that is

to follow
therefore,
complete.5 He prefers,
of thought, to call the wise man
mode

under

v.

evils which

dispense,and

may

; and

endure

to

Tusc.

88 ; cf
5
Fint
,

12,

15

SQ.

v.

27

*q. ; Two.

v.

8-

ETHICS

Phalaris

he

tively,the
clear that
as

for

exalted

that there
hardened
But

they are,

as

is

he believes he

the

the

also to be

their

is
to

nature, but
These

principleis

strongly to

nature

rather

Tusc.

Paradoxa.

Lai.

v.

an

be

to

that the

most

offence.5

trivial

most

severityof the

presuppositions
; for

own

life

according to nature,

draw

to be

and

eclectic

even

"

To

live

it.G

sustain

philosopherso

Peripatetics,that he
The truth,
of their number.7
of the

27.

mind

separate oneself from

to

our

26.

Off.I. 8.

untroubled

encourage

5, 18 ; cf. Off. iii.4, 16.

Fin. Iv. 9, 21.
Fin. Iv. 9, 21 ; 19, 55 ; 28,

77 *#. Cf.

the

between

wholly despised.

is not

side

the

declares himself

to

not

arguments

and

pain,

according

alike

are

nature
are
things according to human
dom
counted
sensible well-being,
health, free-

from

pleasure

show

can

wise

scientifically
justifiable,
and, moreover,

first

among

all the

the

and

wickedness

daily life;4 he

to

difference in value

no

man

absolutely wretched, and

unwise

that it contradicted
if

that

allow

too

morality does

Stoic

transferred

being

alTthe

Stoics is not

it

much

are

that the Stoic wise

that the
reality,3

in
of

happy, and

it is

about

certain

so

that the Stoic demands

possibly

cannot

Stoicism,

supposed from these utterances.

conceal
world, like Cicero, cannot

men

admit

not

If, however,

this

not

tenta-

rate

any

Paradoxes.2

closely into

the

found

is not

adopt, at

to

165

have

himself

from

STOICS.

philosopheris

our

of

man

THE

Stoic

more

might

we

desires

famous

enquire

we

OF

Fin.

Iv.

11-15

Cato, 14,

46 ; Tusc. II. 13, 30,

7
book
In the fourth

Finibus,

It Is

Cicero

brings forward
pateticview.
who

of

De

himself
the

Peri-

CHAP.
'

ECLECTICISM.

166

CHAP,
^'

expressed in his confession

however, is only finally
and

him
the

to the

thought of

laxer

doctrine,and, at other times,

majesty of

the

him

to

therefore

for

his

that it

vacillation,
by the conviction

exercise

can

practicalconduct, since
Peripatetictheory,a far higher value

essential influence
the

be

inclines

virtue

himself

the stricter ; l he comforts

on

nesses,
weak-

own

clines
generally,in-

weaknesses

human

of

of his

consideration

the

that sometimes

It would

be

even

on

virtue

assignedto

than

no

must

all else.2

to

these propositions

in

difficult to discover

the
Ciceronian
and
in
principle,
other characteristic than
that
ethics generally
any
the
of an eclectic and popular philosopher
; for even
Eitter
which
trait on
lays stress,3viz. that with
Cicero,the honourable Qionestum)takes the placeof
any

new

the beautiful
he
Greeks

that in connection

and
(/eaXoz/)

ascribes

did, even

greater
this is

value

to

partlya

glory

with
therethan

difference

mere

the
of

language,having no influence on the content of the

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

than

has

is there

already been

of his remarks

many

show
1

reason

to

ing.
philosophis-

enter

further

the details of Cicero's ethical and

into

less

of

manner

too

little connection

1, 3.
Off.iii. 3, 11.

Tuso.

v.

on

these
with

political
ciples
prindone.4
Strikingas
subjectsmay be, they
definite philosophic

TV.

PHI.

162 sqg.
d. 0r. III. i. p. 276

*".

THEOLOGY.

allow

principlesto
importance

in

attribute

to

us

the

167

of

history

them

to

CHAP.

any

philosophy.

His
_____

theories

Deity and the essential

soul must, however, be shortly
tioned.
men-

concerning
of the

nature

belief in

The

to

pears

Deity,as already observed,apphilosopher to be required, not

our

immediate

merely by
moral

the

"thinks, truth
life would

and

be

at

the

for

him,

repudiated by

and

of

nature

the

in

his

Academy

form,2 with

Stoic
the

the

of

asserted

so

far

as

he

he

which

thinks

he may

unity

of God5

not

which

it

In

doubt,

places in the
that

probable
to

venture

but

also His

may

be

presuppose

entirely

spite

meets

is,no

ments
argu-

the

forward
of

the
its

in

regard

to

in earnest

mouth

nothing

perfectcertainty,about

with
the

are

brings

philosopher,viz.

Academic

be

God

fall conviction.3

God, Cicero

remark

other

in
especially,

argument
teleological
criticism

of

existence

social

the

But

end.1

an

human

all

justice,and

by

religion,he

Without

interest.
political

and

also

consciousness, but

it ; 4

of
can

but,

determined, he

only the

not

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
the politicalnecessity of relig- Deifs
ipse qui intelligitura
nobis olio modo
ion.
iaitelllgi
patest,
1

N.

D.

Hence

N.

D.

Dirin.

28 sg.
4
^

D.

iii. 10, 24 ; 11,37.

ii. 72, 1487 Tusc.
i. 21, 60 s#. ; cf

nisi
i.
iii.

40, 95.
5

TitSG. i. 23 ; 27 ;

Legg.

i.

mens

solirta

queedam

libera, segregate, ab
eretione
mortaM, (mmia

omni

et

con-

sentiens

ipsague pradita, vtwtu

sempiterno. Jfap. vi, 17, 8 ;
Legg. ii. 4, 10, "c.
et men-ens

ffi*
ieo

w*

168

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
'

he does not

apprehend in a very strict sense,.

1 that the
for he admits the possibility
Divine Spirit
be conceived, accordingto 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,

Cicero himself.

him

For

the

in Providence

belief

greater importance,though
be doubted
by his Academic

is of far

he allows

even

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
of the world : 5 the law of justiceand morals
this to

is for him

the type of the divine

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

Tusc.

existingreligionand

I. 26, 65 ; cf.

N.

D. iii.10 ; 25-39.
deduces

1 13,

passages
in
believed

opposed

the

that

Hitter
from

God
the
but

Cicero

Providence,
Natural

Divine, setting

on

the

we

are

of

face

not

so

many

the

existing

in the
justified,
contradictory

explanations(vide JV. D. iii.40),.

identifying Cicero's own
opinion with that here brought
in

(iv. 147, 150)

these

for

29.

c.

T-usG. i. 10, 22 ; N. D.
i. 7, 22.
33 ; Acad.
3
Hep. vi. 17, 4.
3

even

to
one

forward.
5

disand
the
side

Many

Cicero

in which
passages
of Providence
are

treats

quoted by Eoihner,
I

c.

p. 199.

merely refer in this place to

T-usc.i. 49, 118; N. 2). i. 2, 3;

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.

superstitionsshall be maintained

189

in the

State,he

is

speaking entirely from politicalconsiderations ; ]

he not only makes
no
personally,
attempt to justify
of the
polytheism and its myths after the manner
by many

all,by the sharp criticism

above
the

shows

he

Stoics, but

belief

popular

Deorum;

Natura

and

the national

from

which

with

with

word,

be

is to

the

With

view,

have

we

as

dignity of

the

with

him

upon

consciousness

consider
of
reason

of

our

for the

human

also

the

number

in

Cicero's
of

conviction

intimatelyconfar

depends

moral

more

self-

cerning
philosophictheory con-

any

of

nature

of

other

of faith.

experience and

on

essential

is

the

good

such,

"

the

seen,

nature

inner

than

the

God, accordingto

already

Deity,

required;

maintained

the

soul.

the

endowments,

our

If

we

ness
lofti-

vocation, the high prerogativewhich

confers upon

higher

nature

us,

shall

we

become

descent.3

and

JV: D. iiL 2, 5 ; Legg. ii.7 s$. ;

ii.12, 28 ; 33, 70 ;
13, 32 ; DM*,
72, 148.
2
ii.72, 148 Sf[.; N. D.
Dimn,
1

to be

on
superstition,

in

the

our

be

stands

of nature, and

view

true

conviction

This

nected.

subjects

for the

up

belief

he

himself

by the roots
confession
theological

torn

is Cicero's

morality,is

true

existingreligionis to
of the
commonwealth;
hand,

far he

religion.Eeverenee

is consistent

coincides

to which

gods in his third book De

soothsayingin his second

Divinaiione, how

De

book

in

utterances,and,

it 28, 71

conscious

Accordingly

(Phil. d.

6h-. III. i. p.

311, 1).
3

vt

1*00. I.
17, 8.

*$., 22 sq. ;

Rep.

CHAP.
^"

170

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

Deity,an

soul

troublinghimself

as

Stoic

to

the

relation

supernaturalorigin of

the

soul, and

the

originof
the

body.
of

nature

But,

he

as

God,

so

he

that

of

the

about

immaterial

substance,or,

fire; it

or

body

is

he

that

at

arguments

death,6 this

in

Fuse. i. 27
terris

"c.

LOG.

8, 24

cit.

animorum

%"otest,

divino

in

Iwt-

terras

aiictum

sit

Cunigue

mnnere.

homines

mortali

smipserint, giice
genere
f rag ilia essent et cadiica,, a)ii~
tamen
mum,
esse
'ingen"ratum,a
Of.

Goto, 21,

tries

that

77.

the

respect to
defends

silence

to

i. 27;

Two*
Tuso.

nee

perish

souls

i. 25,
certeneceordisnec
s

cerelri

ma-

generis

co)K"rent
alia giiibiis

Deo.

also

yuandavi

qiiod sparswn.

atqiiesatum

materialityof

supposing

25, 60; Legg. i,

serendi

of air

it consists

the

of

merely the prudence

of the practicalman
who

inveniri

JZxstitisse

gether
alto-

not

of the soul he

if he

AnimowmmtUa

origo

turitatem

mani,

will

is

and

Academician

substance

in

an

ness
ground of direct consciousagreement,4and partly by the

the fear of death, even

in

his

the

universal

Platonic

rate, as

coarser

immortality

tatingly
hesi-

though
explain it as

to

at any

about

himself

unconditionallydenies

length,partlyon
and

the

material

and

that
possibility

only

The

the soul.3

the

terrestrial matter,2 he
the

this

is uncertain

soul,

unmistakablytends

exclude

the

of

between

expresses

inclination

from
differing

Platonic

emanation

an

define

to

or

and

supernaturalorigin; l without
developthis notion more
ticularly,
par-

of

essence

the

with

Cicero,in agreement
doctrine,regards the

would

29, 70.
60

Non

est

sangidnis nee
Anima,

atomorwn.

ignisveneseio; nee rne

pvdet^ tft istos,fateri me nescire
guodnesciam; l.c.2Q,65; 29,70.
sit animus

Tuse.

i. 12

sgg.

; L"%1.

c.

4 ;

Cato, c.
5

21 sqq.
Tusc. i. 22

sqq. ;

17, 8 ; Cato, 21, 78.

6
Tuse.
i. 34 5^.
Famil.
v. 16.

JS^A vi.
^

J$p. act

VARRO.

make

the

tries

in the

to

which

transmitted

to

fall of

us

CHAP.

as

presuppositions.

'

generallyunderstood

as

and which
sttbject,1

to the

he devoted

far

as

immortality,"but the

as

manner

discourses

of all theoretic

free will

prove

same

Ms

effect of

moral

possibleindependent
He

171

treatise

has been

lacunse,contains

pendent
inde-

no

psychological
enquiry*
which

will

traits

These

have

we

justifythe position

assignedto Cicero,and

together with

his teacher
of

to prove

Antiochus5'the

philosophiceclecticism

century before

our

standingalone

in

that

But

era.

he

him?

truest

the

in

presentative
re-

last

far from

was

respectto this kind of philosophy

his countrymen and
contemporaries will be

among

clear from

thought,M.

Yarro,3the learned friend

Terentius

after Cicero

of

adherents of this mode

the Roman

Among

Cicero was,

of the school

previous examination

our

Antiochus.2
of

suffice to

himself,the

most

of

important.

V0rro9

lie indeed
in another
principalachievements
sphere; as a philosopherhe did not exercise anything like the widespread influence of Cicero,friend
sophy
philothough his historical knowledge of Greek
was
thorough and complete.
perhaps more

His

principal

The

Fato.

De

propositionsof this treatise (c.

11) are taken from Carneades.
2

Suj)ra,p.

99.

The

life

of

between

and

116

"the

rest, ride

the

histories

ture

"

encyc.
1688

27

For

B.C.

Bahr,

in

d.

Slass.

*#"., and

litera-

Eoman

Pauly's

Meal-

Alterth.
the

Mm

vi.

authori-

there

quoted,

Cfott. Stud.

1845,

Kritsche,

ii. 172

*#. ;

ties.
Bitschl,*J"/" Schriftstellerei
M.

falls

Yarro

concerning
of

ties

Ter.

JVT.F.

vi.

BSm.GescJi.

Tarro,' jRkein.

Mm.

481-560; Mommsen,
in. 602

sqg., 624*0.
(Aead. i. 2, 4 *00.)
as
represents him
saying of
himself, though he has previonsly praised his knowledge
of philosophy.
4

As

Cicero

of

ECLECTICISM.

172

scholar

and

have
Cicero

and

attended

from

the

famous-

so

must

sarily
neces-

direction

This

was,

Antiochus, whose

of

Athens

in

and

tures
lec-

Varro

can
philosophy,so far as we
Augustine,4 expressed himself quite

treatise

gather
in

had

by

author

an

influential.

us,2 that

assures

his

known

well

so

been

Varro
in

taken

direction
philosophical

the

Yet

CHAP.

on

sole

The

Antiochus.5

of

sense

of

aim

philosophy,he here tells us, is the happiness of

of doctrine
distinctions
man
; consequently those
alone
to be
the
schools of philosophy are
among
important which relate to the definition
the highest good.6 Great, therefore,as is the

considered
of
1

Romanorum,

Doctissimifs

and

again

Ad

very

(Quintal,
x.
1, 95. Cicero (Acad. Fr. 36).
says of him (ap.Augustine, Civ.
omnium
D. vi. 2), Homine
facile
eruditissimus

manorum

acutissivno

ulla duMta-

sine

et

tione dofftissimoiand Augustine

(Z.#.)says he is doetrina atque
sententiis

respect

ita

to

achieved

did

as

JD. xix.
tore
et

mouth

is

doctrine

the

second

demica
what

much

Cicero

as

Mrgo

illam

Civ. D.
Gf

mnt

is

In

25.

c.

Varro's

we
know,
Antiochus, in

of

(Acad.
is quoted

of

the

i. 4; s^.).

ex

of
In

p. 94.
be
to

Antiochus

is
sc[C[.-)

expositions
is

from

Antiochus,

eontineantur

cum

effectimieet

ex

et format
gritamfingit

materia,

ea,

"c.
effeetio,

siifpra^
this it is

that

Varro's

into

LOG

Cic.

to
later

the
there

of which

one

the mouth

cit.

Acad.

than

Cicero

of

of, only

use

put
6

to

regard

observed

of Varro.

Negate enim
secpJiilosopMce

1, 3

existimat

ullam

tarn

dicendarn, git"cenon
ceteris, quod diver

esse

distet

habeat

fines

rum.

Quandoquidem

AcaVide

follows, the

what

account

Varrmern

JEtenim

edition

qiiat

xix. 1-3.

with

asserit, auc*

suo.
4

made

which
Acad.
i.
sup. p. 94, with
Nostra,
tu
:
2, 6, agrees
physica,
nosti:

Varro

book, according

fact

placed, as

the

Antiocho, magistro Oiceronis

e.

3, 2

i. 3, 12 ; 1, 1, 3 ,8 j August. Civ.

i. 2, 4

Ad Att. xiii. 12 :
ad
cLKaSyfiLKfyv

ix.

he

QUGB
19; 1.

Famil.

of

as

transferamus.

Cic. Acad.

in

stylist.
.

Ad

refertus that

matters

has

he

Jffelv. 8, 1 ;
Hojustly,mr

is called in Sen.

bonorum

et

eo*
'sos

"

malo-

nulla

est

causa

nisi

"beatus sit

ut

leatum
nulla

autem
gi.iod

facit,ipse est
est

pfiandi,

finisT)oni:
%"Jviloso-

igitur causa
finis boni

nisi

: quamfioni fiviem,
qiice nulluin
secta
seetatur,nulla $"Jiilosoj)7iia".

o~brem

"

THE

HIGHEST

GOOD.

indeed
Yarro, sometimes
possiblesects
adopting very superficialgrounds of distinction,
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

number

"

CHAP.
'

"

highestgood

this

But

main

tion.2
ques-

concerns

the relation of virtue

to the

pends
thing accordingto nature/ on which again deits relation to all included herein,and therefore

first

to pleasureand
especially
the first thing accordingto

of virtue,

sake

the

derivation, Yarro

their

In

(Z.c. 1, 2) proceeds thus

these

of

yrvma
include all
beside these
of
natural
advantages
other
the
of
Each
and
soul
body.

which

four

be desired

can

of virtue
added

nature

to

be

may

sake,

or

super-

mentality
by the instruof teaching) or virtue

both

its

for

desired

be

may

iT"a.Ti

merely
for that

desires
for

his

of others. The

half

are

pursue

their

end

the
as

merely
Academy.
of

them

life

(k-aMtus
result

there

of
in

sections, regard

these

the

to

theoretical

the practical(negotlo(otlosus),
of
to
or
a life compounded
m$\
this
treble
must
ber,
numwe
both,
thus

arrive

we

at

288.)
2

majority

shows,

is the

this

That

by Mm,
1.

c.

case

with

the

divisions

Yarro

himself

of

3,

c.

2, beginning.

or

twenty-

divided

again
forty-eight,of which
four

of

be had

may

named

them

iunda-

each

manner

of

each

These

welfare

own

ordinary, or the

the

into
one

true,

The

ffenia

TiMturce, ]m,mi-

jynma
-nature

Q"ffiv(of.Phil,
309,1;

257,2;

ra

irfwra

d. Gr. HI.

253, 1).

sis
etjiwi*

ninety-sis divisions instead

forty-eight. Lastly, because

far

as

as

new

consuetudo}

the

of

each
own

Cynic,
et

and

obtain

the

moreover,

adopt

the

phers;
dogmatic philoso-

probable,like

own

desired

independently. Thus we
four possibledivisions.
become
twenty-four, so
a

sake

for the

(the excellence

the

other

the

and, as
nature,

two,

fourth, the

like all other

Since,

of

sake

is

Yarro,

can

desired for

for their

both

or

There

are, he says, four natural objects

sence
of desire : sensual pleasure,abtion
of
pain, the combina-

for the

Is

pain.

to be

nature

virtue

or

from

freedom

thing according to nature,

sakes?
This, according to
1

to the

confine ourselves

we

Kara,

i. p.

ECLECTICISM,

174

CHAP,
VL

back

It, he goes

philosophy.1For a replyto
the conception of man,
it
as

all

questionof

mental

to

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
is

of the

body

well

as

of

goods

as

the

he

soul ; and

consequentlymust desire for himself the first things

But
the highest
and virtue.2
accordingto nature
of these goods is virtue, the ait of life acquired by
accordingto nature, which
of virtue

the existence
its

sake, and

own

in

"

which

in itself that

it includes

As

instruction.3

also
virtue

is

was

present before

now

desires

all for

pal
consideringitself as the princi-

good, it enjoysalso all other goods,and ascribes

to each the value belonging to it according to its
relation to the others ; but equallydoes not hesitate,
this account, to sacrifice the lesser,if

on

be,

to

matter

the

greater. "When

how

many

be, they

do

other

not

virtue

so

it must

is

wanting, no
of goods there may
they are
possessor,

kinds

profittheir

goods,because he makes a bad use of them.

and
of the bodily and
In the possessionof virtue
mental
advantages conditioning it,lies happiness;
virtue
other goods with which
this increases when
added ; it is perfected
in itself could dispense,are
his

not

Loc.

C.

natura

tit.

3, 1.
in

previously

c.

is

2.
That

which

included

the

gri^a,

Varro

has

natural

of
advantages and dispositions
with
here
identified
mind, is
the totalityof corporealgoods,

inaccuracy

an

must

and
3

ascribe

which

to Yarro

we

himself,

merely to Augustine,
doctrina
Virtutem, guam
not

inserit

velut

virtus, i. e.
I. c.

arteim
ars

vivendi

agendce

"

HAPPINESS.

when

all

and

goods of

and
sociability,

wishes

body

to

this

sakes the

and

each

the whole

to

earth,gods and men.2

Its

CHAP.

goods as

same

extend

which

to

state

but also to mankind

and

are

dispositionmust

family and

found

together
to this happinessalso belongs
virtue
the
which
disposition

others for their

for

itself ; and

the

soul and

But

complete.1

175

only to

not

belongs,

man

world,heaven

external

realisation

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

is to be

of the

This

Academy, they
the

is

doctrine

be

must

of

the

able.
unquestion-

old

Academy
his master
which
Yarro,
Antiochus, professes.3
find no remarkable
In this discussion
we
philosophic
no
new
: it contains
peculiarity
thoughts,and what
belongsto Yarro himself in the views of Antiochus
like

transmitted
of

acuteness

But

we

views

least

see

by his

awn

characterised

that

ergo vita hominis, qiice

et corj)0et aliis animi

banis, sine quibus virtus

esse

neither

by

by vivacity of style.

nor

Hcee

virtute
ris

is

judgment
at

can

these

him

by

Yarro

had

arrived

and
reflection,
sima
2

(c. 3, 1,
Varro
with

one

c.

that
further

at

the
on).

is therefore
the

quite at
Stoic cosmopolitan-

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

nmyotest

but

these

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

esse

didtur

sine

qmtnis

nullnm
rel

animi

si

esse

owmino

vel

vero

virtus

et

yotest,

fto-iium

desit

coryoris,beatis-

est.
3

Aug. L

tf.

2.

Sen.

Ad

itself
wnimm
utendum

an

yi'

176

ECLECTICISM.

whole

CHAP,

i
-

"

of

way

Antiochus

to

him

no
chiefly

doubt

the

that

regard
in

prominent

and

have

must

his

to

mended
recom-

countrymen,

was

practicalaim of this philosophy,

of life which

the necessities

to

concerningthe
highestgood, and the

its theories

constituents of the

his

to

corresponded

which

thinking:that
it

and

of

tendency

is

various

relative

value of them.

influence allowed

greater the

the

But

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
explainedthe soul to be air which is breathed in
in the breast,in
and
warmed
through the mouth

Chus

the Stoic

t0

order

spread itself thence

to

through the

body,3

he allied himself with

by reducingit to the Pneuma
also is
Antiochus
the Stoic materialism,to which
no
stranger.4 He further discriminated with the
three gradationsand forms
Stoics the well-known
soul-life.5

of

theologyis
with

it,he

of

But

his

especialimportance.

explained the

universe

the soul of the universe

the parts of this

\ Cf.
-

sup. p

92.

m(,ne,
to

fusus
Lat"

2, 8) had

i
of Pansedisciple
Stilo (si(jp.
JElius
p.

the

Jj.
tins,
,
11, 4), for his instructor.
.

Lactant.

or,

more

anima

Varro

O^f.D.17:

est aer
condejinit: anima
inpuldefervefactiis
ore,
ceptm

see

cisely,
pre-

Deity: only
rulingin the

temperate

in

corde,dif-

in

Ci

Varro

corpus.

59

animalism

'ita

v-

Stoic

agreement

the

as

the

In

the souls
world-soul,

himself, according

He

with

connection

ac

"*

'

semen

ignis

is

auk

mens

Vide

Augustinef
Civ.

mv.

p. 95 saa

followingnote

D.

vii

2
*

THEOLOGY.

177

different parts of the world,

the

in

he

drew

D.

Augustin. Civ.
says : Quod hi

antur

animadvertisse

Deus,

git I credlderunt

animam

motu

vii. 6

Varro

idem

arbitrari
.

esset

eum

esse

tone

Deum

Deinn

mundi

ipsum
sit

did

animo

in the

ex

animce

book

in mundo

ejus.

essa

animwm

qiioq'ue facere

in

astro,

Gods) ; et per
terrain
permeat,

quod

lurem,
meat

in

Deiim,

mare

esse

in

c.

antem

atque

inde

or

Juno

while
as

as

the

and

in

c.

ties
divini-

all these

That

propositionsare
Stoic,

is evident

the ideas

denotes

Minerva

prototypes.
or

the earth

from

passiveprinciple,

ipsam

either

allied with
from

the

directly
Stoicism,

duced
proofs ad-

d. Gr. IH. i. p. 138

315
6
146,
sqq. 325.
;
sqq. ;
2
Aug. Z. c. vi. 5 : Tria genera
in Phil.

per-

oceamtm^

Neptunim..
6,the world

divinities

female

or
Jupiter as
principle, and the

active

makes
in

from

heaven

from
the

sent it,

Tel-

this

the male

derives

he

28

am

Deam

priates
appro-

(for Augustine

taken

Defim

genltrixque

Dei.

eat

into

himself
have

causa/rum,
in
mwndo

13, he

c.

Deus

of
Soranus
him) the verses
in
which
n.
end),
74,
(sup. p.
progenitor
Jupiter is called

ait-

(it
qiwd

Deos

11, and

c.

"be

can

Jupiter,

potextatem

to

eujusvi

ex

Also

calls

ess"

Jteroas et
in Z. c.

et rocari

the

and

aereas

et

must

stellas,qitfs

this

genios.
9, he (for only Yarro

in

JEtliera parro

ejus

esse

pervenit

err

iingites

qiiibusyueipse

sentimiis

qitce

itt

lunam,

vero,

sensus

lapides act

ossa,

Solem

JSsse

vocari.

sphere of the
heavenly

clouds
.

in

u?n,

the

qitibusallqitidJft

noUs

in

Deujn,

diclt
fj.oj/LKbv)
autem
genium
tit

of

Tiabens

untndi
anivifB
their
-rjyepart,

gartem

(their rational

tem

between

intended)

concerning

in
saque not lira, those discussed
Phil
d. 6-V. III. i. 192 : Nature,
the irrational
soul, and reason.

Hand

moon,

c.
:

the

gods;
region

animo
23

imma-rfali

extend

lares

quatuor

niortaliiini ; from
circle of heaven,

to

as

atiimas

tres esse affirmat

sttlecti]
unieeri*
o-mni
gradus

Dii

far

Deum

vii.

eit.

earth:

ph'tms^ i n,

esse

acre

terra

Loc.

corpore.

the

as

et

corpora

ex

ab

and

water

aqua,
the outermost

mundum

sapientem ; ita, mundum

Kit
did
ab animo, cum

(Yarro

at

if

earth, the
air,the

\_quas~\omnts

"ftJiere et

se

into

quam

and

sether and

Cartes aninturum

sect sic tit liomimm

eum
sap lent em,
tamen
animo,

et

earth

Scsevola,

and

into

VI.

the

to

natural

heaven

CHAP.

shipped
wor-

theology,2and

heavens

mit/i-

animam

e$$e

Jiwic

et

esse

quid

civil

into

LOG.
cit.
gubernantem.
Dicit
9
:
repeatedly)
(c.

dum

ergo

iv. 31

soli el mde-

rat

ac

and

are

and

between

distinction

mythical
philosophical,

Varro

like Panaatius

But,

marked

of

gods

heroes.1

genii and

they who
polytheism,down
are

larly
Simi-

dicit

is divided

the
N

esse

(in

the

of

last books

Antiquities,cf.

"x

3)

178

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
YI.

lie censured
the

the
absurd

most

gods,1he
blame

the

mythology of

poets for relating

unworthy things about the

and

did not

that

conceal

had

he

also much

to

the

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 religionof the State merely
civil institution,
as
a
which, in the interest of the
commonwealth, must make the most important concessions
in

to the weakness

there

is
as

mythicon

pellari,alterum,
poets, the

puli}.
much

that

first includes

tissimum

third

the

philosophers,
states
(pothere

opposed

following note)

the

to

a
tern/porean
sempiterno
ex
an
fuerint ;
igne sint
ut
credit
Heraclitus, an
ess

nam

Pythagoras, an
ait Epicurus.

ut

alias, QUGB facilius intra

extra
rietes in scJiola,
quam

foro ferre possunt

1

Loc.

note)
enim,

cit.

with

estt

ut

Sic
pa-

in

aures.

addition

Deus

alius

LOG.

ut

denique in

servierint
hoc

omnia

cadere

In

hoc

ex

ca-

homini
Diis

cit. iv. 31.

sunt.
pos-

'The

cient
an-

shipped
says Varro, worgods for 170 years,

the

images: Quod, si adinqitit,mansisset, castius

o"bservarentur "(vi.
7). Fa-

hue
Dii
tetur

sicut

fecerunt,
manis
3

at-

forma
ita

eos

humana

Deos

delectari

hu*

voluptatibuscredidisse.

LOG. cit. iv. 31.

confesses
found

State

Varro himself
that if he had to
anew,

ex

natures

potius formula Deos nominaque

eorwn
sefuisse dedieaturutn.
4
That
he regarded the religion
of the

State as
is
institution, evident

political

from

I. c.
vi. 4, where
Varro
says, if he
had
to treat
de omni
natura
Deorum, he would
first have to

pite alius exfemore sit alius ex

guttis sanguinis natus ; in hoc,
ut Mifurati
sint, ut adulteraspeak
verint,

in

contemp-

Komans,'

ex

(vide the previous

the

in

hominem

the

modo

non

etiam

trine
doc-

without

"

atomis

sed

(vide
nature

dignityof the Deity ; to the

second
belong 2Hi qui sint,
ubi, quod genus, quale, a qiio-

ut

is

and

nitmeris

all this

the

first

is

tribuuntur, qua:
Jwmin"m

second

the
In

ap-

pliysicon, ter-

The

civile.

tiwn
the

In

nothing which goes beyond the Stoic

taught by Pansetius,but nothing on
unum

eorumque

of the masses.4

men

with

of the

; but

the

gods, and then

has only to
gods of the State
as

he

of
do
he

THEOLOGY.

that

hand

other

of

eclecticism

follows

the

For

plctor

res

tabula

civ

it at

worth

177,

in

scribunt

qiifB

ut
autem

qiuz
ea

QILCB

po'"tcs

vulgiis
SIG

segiii

pTi ilosopM
sorutari

abhorrent^

CHAP.

it,

{sup.

makes
of
over

ut

v.)

Antiochus,
to

the

a-

is

masses.

(I.

c.

gq.)

172

against

assertion
s.

delect

understand

maintains,

expediat.
inquit,

Lat.

esse

quam

the

as

teaching

who

it

utllitatis

poet

this

their

(7. c.)

phyticos

Krische

Muller's

by

far

so

those
for

As

rightly

ea"

debeant

plus

for
not

that

minus

and

But

only

"i/it

philosophers,
teach,

to

scrij)$isset

causa

religion

emm,

The

said,

be

ad

geiiere

assumpta

desire

tionis.

religion,

much

it
Ait

populi

Stoicising

utroque

pauea-.

may

gods

seen

rationes

enquiries,

phical
philoso-

public

mythological.

quam

ut

already
2).

ex

civiles

indeed,

qu"

the

public

include

must

is

as

have

we

p.

of

tamen

iwn

prio-

institute.

doctrine
was

ea,

quam

real

the

prior

it

sunt

little

How

picta^

es

cii'itatihus

inqult,

est,

cedificium,

quam
su?it

the

VI.

order.

contrary

quam

with

incompatible

Antiochus.1

an

-prior

sieut

falter

is

179

0.
L.

(Varro,

that

Cicero

Varro
whereas
Sroics,

rectly
incorfollower
he

went

ECLECTICISM.

180

VII.

CHAPTEE

SCHOOL

THE

CHAP.

school of the Sestii

THE

School

"f

^f.

independent of the contemporary Greek

its achievements
nor
were
so important,
philosophy,
not

was

tUe

school.

so

extensive

for it any

to obtain

influence

long
Its founder,Quintus Sextius,was
duration.
a Eoman,
later contemporary of
Q" g00(^fam-Qy? a somewhat
in
Augustus,1who had rejecteda politicalcareer
order to devote himself whollyto philosophy.2After
as

History of

occupiesa peculiarposition
But even
this school
philosophers.

the Eoman

among
F.

SEXTII.

THE

OF

Sen. JSjy.98, 13 : Honores

it a
pater Sextius
rejpj)ulit
qm
deberet
natuSy tit remp/ul)Uca"ni
1

quoted by Ott,

p. 2, 10, rather
contrary.
Jfy).
59,
64, 2 sift. ; De Ira, ii. 36, 1,

indicate

capessere,
Julio
dante
tMs

latwti

old

years

SprucJie
birth

70 B.C. or
When

even

the
at

if

that

Seneca

the

be

Eusebius,

was

with

either

been

gives

as

Vide

he
the

of

is too

be meant.
older

JSp.73,

In
an

Ej). 108,

Sextius,

himself

not

probable

; the

of

account

after

says.

preceding note,

and

Plut.

77:

Ka6dir"p"j"a.crl
^Qnov

Prof,

in

ras

Virt.
kv

5, p.
rbv

rfjTrJ-

late

quainted
ac-

Sextius
,

js

from.

That

personally
the

work

taken

tradition.

De

have

written

'

period, he
Sextius

have

doctrines

Sotion,

what
some-

philosopher

Pythagorean
our

from

treatise.

oral tradition.

17, Seneca

des

must

from

or

01. 195, 1 (1 A.D.),

prime 'of Sextus

zu

the

taken

such

earlier.
Chron.

been

(cf. Ott, Character

Urspr. der
Sextius^. 1),his

placed in

only to his
Ira, iii.36, 1, may

12, may

imd

dates

at

7 ;

the

refer

Sextius
B.C., and
at least 25-27
been

43

have

must

As

occurred

have

in

divo

recepit.

non

must

latest

ctawni

or

passages

o\.lyov
e/c

rivos

MEMBERS

his death

Ms

guidance

OF

son

of the

find mention

TMJS

of Sotion

of

discipleSeneca

have

to

appears

school.1

SCHOOL.

had

been

in his

This

Fabianus

and

Tarentum,4

transition

from

Ann.

Tac.

referred

be

to

Hist.

in Piin.

to

J\Tat. xviii. 28, 274.

Pliny
relates
how
Democritns

here
had

enriched

himself

with

his

(this is also related

Thales) in oil (ride Phil. d.

of
Gr.

I.

his

traffic

766)
gains to

those

in it j and

Sextius

had

but

"

that

shared

Hoc

postea
sapientieeadAtkenis fecit eadem

which

he

does

carried

in

who

part

to

him
and

renounced

is no
express
this j but as the
is universally described
school

support

of

of

the

of

Sextii

tinction
dis-

Sotion

the

same

II. ii. 3,
xi. note
2.
In

the theory that the

Seneca, and not the
the author
of
PeripatetiCjwas
the treatise
vcpl OPJTJS,Diels,
Doxogr. 255 s$., rightly appeals
the

a
similarity between
Sotion's
vepi
fragment from

to

ii. 36, 1, points to this

3

all

QuintiL

tion
tradi-

as

the
the

source.

Scrips/it

Cornelius

secutus,

jiitore.

dc

details

1, 124
multa,

par-urn
CeUus, Sextws

school

(see

s.

nan

cultU'

of

the

this

Phil. d. Gr.

'infra,ch.

teacher

sophy,
philo-

manner,

There

For

Peripateticof
ride

and

became,

OPJTJS(ap. Stob. Flor'tl. 20, 53)

mean
Seneca, De Ira, ii. 10, 5.
Also the repeated quotation of
same
he silencedutterances
of Seslius, De
Iraf

profits.
1

the

and

and

blamed

similar

his

that

himself

devoting

not

the

on

merely

those

for

had

he adds

but
traffic,
for

who

JRomams

sectatori'bus
rations

returned

It

between

name,

Crassitius

ii. 85.

practicalactivityto philosophy
seems

earlyyouth

Papirius*5

For

non

concerning this
polyhistor,vide

hardy,
4

sine

further

and

sician
phyBern-

jBoi/a. Litt. 848.

grammarian,

who

had

for himself
already won
following note), and the elder
siderable
conSextius
tinguished
fame
as
a philosopher is disa
as
teacher,,
from
his son
he
by the
especiallyin Smyrna, when
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

by

occurred
date

in 18-

is also

JSp. 108, 22;

whom

and
dicated
incf.

these

he

had

heard)

himself

was,

passages,

known

according
man

of

CHAP.
VII.

we

astic
enthusi-

Lucius

the

adherents

Alexandria,whose

Cornelius Celsus,a prolific

writer
of

undertaken
its

Among

181

to

excel-.

ECLECTICISM.

182

CHAP.
VII.

livelyas was
first greetedit,in Seneca's

however, extinct with these

applausewhich
had

it

years

at

men

already long

died

since

catlie-

Ms

ex

The

lost,with
of

utterances

the

Fabianus.2

elder Sextius,of Sotion, and

character,non

later

out.1

all been

writingsof this school,too, have

scattered
the exception of some

lent

the

and

by Seneca,
by Stobseus

of Sotion

also,

in the

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,only Cicero, Pollio, and
phyry, Ad Mareellam, without
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
besides

mentions

ectnres
alluded

to

are

have

to

Seneca,

people
JBj?.52, 11, nami
of a philobeen
sophicaltim

character.
Cantrovers.

ii.

Prcef."

Ms

To

writing, Seneca
Some

of

utterances

be

to

Marc.

found

23, 5

ap.

Sen.

; JSrwit.

Sextwrum,
roloris
cum

vtiagno
stinota est.
2 Of
these

sua,

escwipetu ccepisset,

something has

philosophers

been

use

jv^ai
ridion,
enchi-

the

time

annuliis,
among

lection,
col-

the

of
was

tians.
Chris-

is sometimes

Sextus,sometimes
Sixtus,
while
most
Xystus; and

in him

describe him

as
a Pythagorean
philosopher,others see
the Eoman
bishop Sixtus

about

120 A.D). Of
writers,many
(#.#.
Lasteyrie, Sentences de Sextvus*
Par. 1842 ; and Mullach, Fraym.
ii. 31 sg.) regarded the
PUlos.

more

recent

maxims

three

also

(or Xystus,

Homcml

initia

inter

called

Its author

writers

are

Vit. 10, 1 ;

et

nova

secta

in

Con.s. ad

Qu. iii.27, 3.
; Nat.
Sen. Nat.
Qu. vii. 32, 2

This

1873).

named

13, 9
1

much

partial. or
his

Sessti
Lati-

sententicv,sometimes

Kufinus,

in

from

Syriaeas c"Yijunc-

Bonn.
esoJi.

and, since

of

manner

is less

or

edition

recensiones

sometimes

older

censions
re-

later

cite ;

now

Grr"Gam

in

self
persuaded to devote himof
to philosophy instead

rhetoric.

the

Gilclemeister

Sententiarum

The

and

preface to his

which

The
which

Latin

two

this

editions, cf.
the

his

a
discipleof
says that he was
he
Sextius (theelder)by whom

was

the

(On
of

he

1)

the

to

seem

(I.

1858.

on

and

e.

Civilmm.

Artiiim

that

much

Cicero;

philosophy as
IA~bri

place
as

heathen

as

the

work

of

philosopher,and

preserved especiallyof

one

of

the

more

two

DOCTRINES.

Whatever

be

can

respecting the
Sextii.

Ott, 1.

(How
this

discovers

opinion

edition, I

first

do

not

of

nevertheless

stand.)
under-

first
that

them

the

is Christian

that

it has
as

(G6U.

that

wished

be most

authorities
Sextus

the

uncertain
such

for it only made

its
in the third century.
no

to think

reason

of the

to appear

side

was

tences,
sen-

itself claimed

Sextii.

two

Sextii

two

of the collected

the writer

Aug. 1859, 1, 261

d. V. Isr. vii. 321

In the

accer

presupposition

the

of

one

author

appearance
But we
have

is interwoven

declares

untenable.

authorship,

less
entirelyusehistorical
authority.

sqq. ; Gesok.
sqq.')on his

hypothesis is

the

place

would

become

an

Ewald

YII.

school,serves
own

if this work

Sextos, arid possibly to our

much
so
Sextius, but in which
that

CHAP

ancient

most

call

always

;
to

later

and

not

of the

one

as

The

sentences

writers,

him

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

SprucJw

der

sprung

of

the

tion
collec-

des

Pldlo-

sopJtenSextius, Eottweil,

Stjrische

Die

SprmlieJ
Syrische

'

original tendency
school

Sextian

of

is said to

essentially

been

by

of the

the
have

modified

to

"

infra,
the

of

he

that

Ewald
is
which

by
and

the

basis.
has
the

But

Syrian

rechauffe,in
original,translated

Eufinus, is watered
its

originalcharacter

down,
obli-

Ms

in

32

sentences,
calls

he

and

Jupiter)

all the

whereas

twnim

younger

and

be done

Seneca,

(vide

order

ception,
ex-

school

one

lence
vio-

equal
to the

expressionof

the

and

son,

Sextii

sion
recen-

later

the

186, 4, that

must

pletely
com-

proved against

passage,
strict
the

speak only of

"

as

one

authorities, without

partly by Pythagorean, partly ancient

fluences
inand
especially by Jewish
and placed on a purely of the
monotheistic

of

p.

trine
doc-

(who,

to

highest god

that

the

between

opposed

so

us

elder Sextius

quote only this

was

Ott's

to pose
supdifference
to

radical

existed

have

Sextius.

oblige

monotheism

Sextius, in whom

younger

the

the

that

would

theory
a

; Die

composed

were

SprucJie?

Auscrlesenen

sentences

1861

Auserte"enen

"c., ibid. 1862

1863), maintains

ibid.
the

5,

terated,

hand,

belonging to

work

ances
utter-

his

tion
rehabilita-

Christian

the

be

these

of the

i. 10,
in my

(IF. 178) believes

Bitter

from

doctrine

other

the

On

to

c.

deduced

Nat.

sense

the

Qu.

passage
vii.

preceding note)

to rind

in the

Nora

in

Se%-

Sehola the school of the

distinct
Sextius
as

ana"

ECLECTICISM.

184

CHAP.
VII.

the

to confirm

Indeed
that

from

point.roloris

what
of

59, 7)

elder

("fp.

Sextius

viriwi
.

and
pJiilosoflkantem),

moribus

would,

applicableto a mixture of StoicPythagorean philosophy with

Jewish
this

further
the

unnecessary,
Christian
New

Lastly, and
argument

dogmas.

makes

references

conceptions

Testament

in the

cannot

we

origin

purely Roman,
of

either

Judaic

or

For

echoes

their

suppose
been

have

to

Roman.

to
so

passages
sentences,

unmistakable
that

to

and
are

though

and

to

expressionsin

definite

the New

ment
Testa-

is undoubted.
the

prospect

those

who

live

they

shall

be

q\w
novisftinmm

usque

guadrantem.
explained
of

20 refers

p. 110
p. 193

to

to Matt.

28, where

nomenclature

(cf Gildemeis-

passages

ter, I. c.)the
have

Christian

Matt.

v.

This
as

26;

Matt.
xv.

xxii. 21 ;
11 ; 16 sqq. ;

revisers

substituted

jtes andfid'etts
expressions.At pages

for other

sq.t 387, the

of Christians,and

200, 349

tianity
Chris-

from

falling away

be alluded

to

seems

persecutions
at p. 331

The

book

been

composed by

to.

it
sentences,
have
can
therefore,
stands,
only
and

as

it refers

as

latest

of

to

writings of
canon,

and

the

end

possiblynot

If

the

of the

of

some

New

our

there

existence
of

century, it cannot
have been written
and

Christian

in

any

long

second

doctrines

the

the
tament
Tes-

is

no

until
third
case

before

century,

until the third.

peculiar

to

Matt.

to

to Matt.

wickedly that
plagued after

be

only

reminiscence
p.

p. 39
to

out

first

3) belongs

at p.

by the evil spirit, proof of its own

about the middle
estigatab els etiam

their death

can

At

is held

him

(vide 1 Tim. vi. 11 ; 2 Tim. iii.

17) ; likewise films Dei (pp. 58,
60, 135, 221, 439); verbum, Dei
(pp.264,277, 396, "1$);juMciim
(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

the
revisers,yet in the case of
the
admits,
writer
as
others,
same
to

Dei, p. 2,

translation

Christian

the

and

reference

homo

the

introduces

many

many

Christian

expression
and
modes
of thought (as Gildemeister
shows, p. xlii.)are
duced
intromerely
apparent, or
Christian
translators
by

the

Also

(Rufinus'

133

the contrary, he little

on

tion
connec-

pp. 233 and Matt.

andCMatt.
28
273,
v. 29
v.
; pp. 13,
and
30
8
1
xviii.
John,
s%. ; p.
s%. ;
i. 5.

Grtecis verbis,Momanis

acrem,

theless
never-

between

elsewhere

Sextium

John,

to

certain, but

probable,is the

harmonises

Seneca

the
:

Less

vigour

(cf.p. 58)

60

aliis;p.
i. 12.

predicate Romani

possessed

the

and

importance

father, especially

entirely

with
says

his

of
the

as

stand-

ethical

great

that it

of Seneca

judgment

x.

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

that the author;

PREDOMINANCE

of

ancient

that

but

Kome,

different from

OF

the doctrines

with

185

it contained

nothing

of Stoicism.1

the
thingthat distinguishes
is the exelusiveness

ETHICS.

Sextians

The

from

only

the Stoics

which

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
physicalenquiry,2they soughtand found
their strength elsewhere.
A Sextius, a Sotion, a

Fabianus,
influence
did

not

were

who

men

exercised

by their personality;3and

intend

his work

only for

for non-Christians

Christians,
as
well, and wishes
by
of
it chiefly to
means
mend
recombut

more

with

wide

their

to

ingenuitythan
the

attempt

moral

is the

percase

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
Fabianus
at
imaginary philosopherSextus
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

As
the

does

work

before
not

certained.about
as-

be

Pythagorean), cannot

observed,

seem

to

nounce
an-

III.

the diluvium
ii. 156

different

#f.) was

from,

that

(PMl.d.

Grf

somewhat
of

Seneca.

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
ingentis Jiducits; concerning
itself

bextii, would
even

if it

were

as

be

the

purposeless,

undertaken

with

Fabianus

ing
sup. 181, 5 ; concernSotion, Sen. J8p. 108, 17.

CHAP,
VII.

ECLECTICISM.

183

CHAP,
VIL

the

they attached
to scientific enquiry : we
emotions, says Fabianus,

but

with

sonal
than

enthusiasm

which

labours

The

that

life of man,

battle with

the enemies

strike

who

press

in

view, his

be

perhaps

better

of such

to

kind.2

argues,3a constant
who
perpetually stands
successfullyencounter

he
can

him

round

all sides.

on

If

especiallyof the

and

Stoicism

of

us

learned

Sextius

is, as

to

this reminds

subtleties

concerning

sciences

folly;only

readiness

with

purpose

would

it

fight against

not

moral

no

greater value

must

and

science,than

no

pursue

have

is

judgment

in

much

influence

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

Stoicism

Eoman

which
other traits,
from

Sextius

have

to

seems

borrowed

the

Pythagorean school,are quite in harmony :

to oneself
viz.,the principleof rendering account
of every
at the end
day of the moral profit5 and
the renunciation

results of it ; and

Sotion, however,
precept

inculcated
1

bat

the

upon
it

only

Fabiamis

the

on

:
.

Sole-

subadfeotus impetu non

tilitate pugnandmi,
'necminutis
avervolneribus, sed incursu
atiem

cavillationes

lere,

yrobam

non

emm

contundi

vellicari.

non

food.

the

latter

based

de-

that

ground
4

Sen.

Ibid.

Ap.

Sen.

Ep. 59,

the

discussed,PMl.

sense

III. i. p. 252, 1, 2.
5
Vide Sen. De
which

Golden
7.

by the

'bomim
virwn,
posse, quwm
which
Seneca carries further in

with

13, 9.

Sextius

won

Poem,

v.

d. Gr.

fra, iii.36, 1,

cf the
.

Eg. 73, 12 : Solebat

Jovem
dicere,
plus

Sewtius

non-

tra

tendam

animal

transmigration of souls

Sen. Brer.it. Vit. 10, 1

dieere

the first who

was

of

40

Pythagorean
sgg.

ARGUMENT

AGAINST

ANU1AL

FOOD.

accustom
slaughter of animals
ve
cruelty,and by devouring their flesh

that

superfluousand

are

Nothing

else that

the

ethics

individuality.2
from

vas

Stoicism

if

stated,3maintained

to

enjoyments

to

handed

been

Sextius

It

ourselves

incompatible with health.1

has

of

187

down

ing
respect-

displays any

important

remarkable

more

the

Sextii,

tion
devia-

has

as

been

the

of the soul ;
incorporeality
but
this, after all,would
only show that, while
followingthe eclectic tendency of their time, they
able

were

Sen.

to

Up. 108,

17

by

Seneca

was

of Sotion,
for
time
a
abstain,

to

here

are

said

Hie

credebat

contrakendam

teriam

lutmtrits.

esse

~bonce valitudini
varia

anything by
recognise

can

which

to

their

Our

is

alimtnesse
coti'

forward

collection

equally
other

ma-

be

found

aliena

et nostris

this the

sage
pas-

the

tion

the

in

the

utterances

our

of So-

Florilegium

Stobseus, which
to

Sotion

doubt

no

the

of
long
be-

Claudian.

is not

in

many

"SLaLmext. De Statu

Animee,
qiiiunt (the

ii. 8

sine
et

Incorporalis,itiSextii),omnis

two

spatio capax
The

Gontinef.

reminds

of

us

that

the

brotherly love
17, 18); the say(84, 6-8;
ings against flattery(M, 10),
(20, 53 $#.)"about grief
anger
(108, 59), and on consolatory

(113, 15).

None

corjnis Jiaurit
last
clause

the

Stoic

soul

trine,
doc-

holds

the

body

is
together. Mamertus
worthy
not, indeed, an altogethertrustto

regarded
of
his

Sextii
we

to

tries

also

the

soul

as

immortal,

he

because

But

he

Q. c.}that Chrysippus

prove

mendation
recom-

of

exhortations

brings

writers.

witness;
Vide

of
be

est anuna
ef illocalls clique inColligeljat,
esse
depreltmsa ru
qucedam ; qit^

sayings of Sextus,
109, agrees
(ap. Oiig. c.
p.
Cels. viil 30) : ^v-^u

may

nothing which
to

the

author

contraria

With

corjwribus.
in

it

laceratio,

Adidebcct)

contain
we

however, it
incidentally remarked,

fieri,iifii in rolupaddncta

these

Stoics,

sentences,

more

crudelitatis

esset

alimenta

of

which

eating belonged.

sanguinem

et

metudinem
tatem

from

satis

the ethics of the

school
persuaded

Sextius

Jiomini

citra

tonim

which.

expotmded

Of

length.

at

The

sqq.

discussions

meat,

with

combine,

must

required the conquest

sensuality by reason.
utterances

are

so

rather

the
that

necessarilyrefer

tradition

inference

about
definite
than

of this kind.

them

to

any

CHAP.
VII.

388

ECLECTICISM.

definitions

CHAP,

'

We

from

the

therefore

find

which

Stoicism,

for

existence
of

points
how

from

entirely

had

of
aims

views

materialistic

their

less

were

monism

anthropology.

of

consider

that
of

which

basis

can

the
most

of

which

Platostarted

when

similar

natural

strongly

once

theoretical

inherent

was

their

its

presuppositions,

than

in

and

distinctive

Stoa

the

to

see

morality,

there

of

dent
indepen-

an

systems

consequence

and

dualism

ethical
the

to

we

speculative

the

on

begun

doctrines

period

different

coalesce

had

is

"branch

merely

it

but

that

Pythagoreanism

that

in

easily

is

indebted

that

with

school
it

is

time

contact

nism

men

noticeable

founder

its

doctrine.

their

in

doubtless

of

personality

could

nothing

scientifically

and

new

Platonic-Aristotelian

tical
prac-

the

in

tendency
opposed

metaphysics,

to

and

to

"

the
to

PHILOSOPHY

THE

IN

IMPERIAL

CHAPTER

CENTURIES

FIRST

THE

OF

Till.

AFTEK

CHRIST.

STOICS.

SEXECA.

THE

SCHOOL

thought which tad become

preduring the first centnrj before Christ in

dominant
the

189

of

mode

TEE

THE

ERA.

Grreco-Eoman

CHAP.

itself

philosophy, maintained

II.

Section

JEtelerti-

likewise

the

in

of its representatives,indeed,
greater
part
*
*
"
^
r

of

herents

one

the domain

into which

after

other

or

third

the

of the

science

schools

circumstances

the

on

hand

one

nes

divided

was

afresh

confirmed

had, indeed, been

by

zeal

such

other, by the
cbief

the

since

sects

of

time

of

institution

which

devoted

took

Andronicus

publicchairs

place

A.

"

G-entral

two

the

im

on

the

for the four

second

The

with

themselves

in the

after

learned

by the

study of the writingsof their founders,to which

had
especially
Peripatetics

cu

ad- "

of these
separation
r

The

centurv.

were

the

great schools

four

of Greek

far

By

succeedingcenturies.

century

Zeal

for

OftkeanOe

"*"
___

after

the

beginning
have

activitymust

of the
1
.

Cf. 0. Muller,
ap.

resp.

Grtec.

et

Quam
Rom.

of

tended
different

citmm

era.1

our

to make

systems
AJiad.

liter-Is Sckr.

This

the
more

learned

racteristics
specialcha-

distinctly

"1.
1842 ; JERg6.-PML
4.4:sgg. ; Weber, De AeaAtheniendum
IMeraria,

impenderit (Gott. Mint- demia

1837), p. ~L"$qq.; semdo securido^.CJir. comtituta,
ladungsschrift,
Zurnpt, Ueb.".Bestandd.pTiilos.(Marb. 1858), and the quota-

Atlien* A~bh* d. Berl.

tions

at p. I.

ECLECTICISM.

190

perceived,and

CHAP.

VIII.
Endow-

ment
of
"piiblio
chairs

sophy.

viz

back,

of fact ; and

might

it

directed

was

form

fallen

them

were

much

the

the heads

the

to

as

schools and

of the ancient

in the first century

In Borne, where

of their doctrines.

since
easily,

more

defence,

the

to

ters
mat-

counterpoiseto the

of the time

as

of
explanation,

the

differences of words, than

eclectic tendencies
it

had

Cicero

and

divergencesbetween

that the

which

idea upon

the

Antiochus

an

rather upon

founded

of

philo-

of

eclecticism

refute

to

only Stoicism, but philosophyin general,

mistrust,
quarters with political
regardedin many
and had had to suffer repeated persecution,1
not

was

(Sen. Suaso?: 2), and

Tiberius
that of

the

hand, under

strengthened
of mind

put

on);

later

first

had

Priscus

had

was

Priscus
banish
of

he

trust
generaldisStoic

especially,which

and

sophy
philoStoi-

occasioned
from

to

son

all

teachers

the

; two

to

be

tion
excepof them
ported
trans-

(Dio Cass. Ixiv. 13) ;

this precedent was
wards
afterfollowed
Domitian.
by
irritated
Junius

adrogantia sectaqite qnoe

and
turftidos et negotwrum
adjveten- Tbrasea
caused
tes faciat (as Tigellinus,
only
ap.
57, whispers

Borne

caused

even

of

xiv.

Helvidius

Vespasian to

philosophy,with

Being

comm,

Tac, Ann.

of

of Musonius

in

already manifested

against the

and

execution

politicalor
a

as

and

have

instance

personalreasons,
itself

all

calculated
to
and
much
so
;
this had
been

or

to many,
prejudicial

of

(furtherdetails
though these

and

persecutionsmay
the

more

at

manner

any

offence

cause

the

Psetus, Seneca,

Rubellius

banished

were

in

the

school

Helvidius

Cornutus,

philosophy against coming-

of

forward

Plautus

in the

death

Musonius,

dence
indepen-

Thrasea
to

or

their

Lucanus, and

(^?. 5,

it
sqq. ; 14, 15 ; 103, 5) finds
the disciple
fco warn
necessary

sophy
philotrust.
regarded with misfaction
dissatisThe
political
displayed by the Stoic
Cynic philosophers after

acquired

had

who

were

Nero,

multiplied against

were

Stoics

dislike

Seneca

Nero)\ and

philosophy. conspicuous

principleto

men

of

result

upon
On the other

Claudius,

under

Seneca

not

laws

under

Borne

from

Stoic

were

of Attalus

banishment

The

the

first established

were
philosophy

of

publicteachers

by

the

gyrics
pane-

Rusticus

on

Helvidius,he

not

Busticus

the

of Helvidius

to be

and

executed,

PATRONAGE

IMPERIAL

it

as

Pius

Antoninus

the ancient

of learned

men

continued

to

of Rome

3;

Sueton.

had

rhetoric

by

exist

the

in

alreadyteen

of the

Alexandrian

various

Eoman

elVcu
3

seum,,
Mu-

the support

sorts,had also

period.4 Public

philosophers good absolutely$ia

(Gell. N.A. xv. 11,

D"ndt.
10; Plin.

larly
simi-

predecessors/

designed for

most

191

provinces, "by

of their

some

of the

PHILOSOPHY.

in. the

and

institution

all

ordered

out

its maintenances

and

but

for

provided
and

"by Hadrian

seems

OF

T"

"nraviovs

$tXo(ro(j""vyTa$1

TQUS

Thus

hear

we

of

Vespasian,

JEp.iii.11 ; DIo Cass. Ixvii. 13).

and
But these isolated
rary
tempo-

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

measures

done

have
to

any

philosophicstudies.
1
Of.
Spartfan. Hadr.

rhetorician
16:

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 con: Omnes
professoresetJwnoetdivites fecit. That these
yamt
relate not
statements
merely
to
rhetoricians,
grammarians,
Doctor

es,

also

is shown

by

philosophers,

to

the

connection.
JRhe-

P. 11:

Ant.
Capitolin.

69,

Hieron,

speech)

in

Ckron.

Quintiiian;

the

according

was,

Eus.

torician
rhe-

first Latin

endowed,

so

year

each

(100,000 sestert.)

The

conxtitmt.

itiJiaMles

"c., but

for

centena

anmta

89

second

to

A.D.,
under

Hadrian, Castricius (Gell,.V. A.

xiii. 22).
4
Of.
Das

Zumpt,

Alexandria.

I. c. ;
Museum

Farther,
(Berl.

91 gqq.; O. Mnller.Z./?.
29
the statement
From
p.
gq.
Cass.
Ixxvii.
(Bio
7) that Cara-

1838), p.

calla took from

of Alexandria

the

Peripatetics
of hatred

(out

to

Aristotle, on
supposed poisoning of
their
detulit.
Syssiria and other
Moreover, teachers of
fers
and
sciences
privileges,Parthey (p. 52) Inphysicians were
This
with probability that there
exempted from taxation.
favour, however, in a rescript also (though perhaps only in

torilnis et

philosopMs

prorindas

et honores

of

(quoted
it ,*

Exous.

6, 2)
to

was

the

Hadrian

the

time

his

successors)the philosophers

Digest,

restricted

physicians

of

Commune
Modest-in.

the

from

(mines

solaria

et

to
to

xxvii
in
a

1,

regard
certain

the

belonging
been

to

divided

similar

the
into

institution

the

size

according
city; but in regard to
to hold
philosophersit was

number
of the
the

to

Antoninus

Asics

per

the
der)
Alexanof

account

or

of

one

had

museum

A
schools.
to the museum,

Athenasum,

was

Rome
by Hadrian
(Aurel.Victor. Cces. U ; cf Dio

founded

in

VIII.

ECLECTICISM.

192

CHAP.
VIII.

the

from

teachers

settled

philosophy1were
Cass. Ixxiii. 17 ;
tin. 11 ; @ord.
Sever.

Capitolin.Per3 ; Lamprid.

That

35),

of

arch

Aurelius

if the

that

but

teacher

named

was

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 remu-

relate

Rome

to

had

do

we

know,

not

refer

chosen

our

teachers

Epicurean
salaryof 10,000
"

with

drachmas

Philostr.

is plainfrom

each,

SopTi,ii.

v.

"%os

must

AJD.)

in
he

whom

Marcus

that

tion
insurrec-

Cassius

endowed

with

stipend.7 At

this

after, Tatian

may

have

soon

or

"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
had

to have

mentioned

for

two
are

we

death

after the

public
there
of

disputed before
for
with

Zumpt

its

the

the

seems

tors,
instruc-

told

'

one

(1.c. p. 50) offers

suggestion that

only

salaries had

four

been

the

the candidates
their

Atticus

Ewi.

c.

Lucian,

to

brought
before

claims

understand

may

with

the

the

participationof

presidency of

official)
; but
could
the
be

affair

not
The

decided.
was,

in

all

be

sent

was

we

the

a
/8ouA^, or
council, perhaps

concerned,

schools

under

"PKTTOL

ffotpcararot
either

Areopagus, the
separate elective
the

2 "/.,
forward

rfj 7r6\"i (by which

eV

r"v

ing
accord-

the

TrpecrfivrarotK"l

Kal

perial
im-

given ;

cording
Aurelius, acPhilostr., I.e., gave

to Herodes

over

place

drachmas.

sentatives
repre-

Marcus

electing

10,000

two

reign. The
salaried philosophers,

of these
to

sembly
as-

vacant

had
this

in
choice

schools

other

the

case

each have

how,

of the

candidates

Peripatetics,'two

which'

written

the

of the schools

were

yearly

time,

paid by
in
two
Peripatetics,

were

(176

'gave all
instructors,

Athens

who

those
among
the Emperor

that

presupposes

the suppressionof the

Avidius

are

then

manifestly

erepoz/, this

"rbv
ol/jLai

there

mankind

the

KO.I Tii/a
avrcav
"pa"fi.v
ewyaTTodaveiV,rS"v Tlspnrar'fiTiK"v

ing
3 : accordLucian, SunuoJi.
Ixxi.
Cass.
Dio
to
3, it was
in
while
he was
Athens, after
2 ;

of

The

Emperor.

with
endowed
Emperor
drachmas
of
10,000
salary
appointed
are
first spoken of,and we
schools

told
Stoic,Platonic,Peripatetic,

the

and

by

nominated

Aurelius

Marcus

That

alike for thef

"

to

countries.

western

the

two

passage
is not
in
however,
Lucian,
provinces,
view.
to
this
As
favourable
but
the
the
the
philosophers whom

the

to

or

probably

they
1

philosophers), by

(the

side
that

so

"

nerantur

in

not

was

assistance,

such

attached

also

was

in

existing schol-

school

of

second

admitted

man

by Marcns

need

maintenance

learned

for the

important Schools of

most

four

if

and
an

perial
im-

an

ment
agreearrived
at,

to Rome

imperial

to
tification
ra-

sary
doubtless, neces-

cases

; and

in par-

PAID

TEACHERS

Athens,1 which
of

seat

thus

was

existing fact,but
which

then

in the

the

of teacher,
he

the

given

was

it little in the

way

this

of their

of

many

teacher

the

named

probably directly

of
Emperor ; the words
of Aphrodisias may
Alexander
the

in the

in

either

dedication

Sever
M"

Caracalla.

rvptas

as

of his treatise
thanks

and
TTJS

Ms

Sepson,

vperepas

5t"5a"77caAos

Aristotelian

"when,

sense,

Trepletpappewis,he
timius

flap-

(the

avrys

philosophy)

KC/CT?-

On

larity of

the

repute

Athens

in

office
for

previouslydone
tendencies, so was
The

them,

of the

and
the

popnmiddle

ferent
dif-

feuds,

They did
doctrines,but

these

and

the most

learned

the

to

second
V.

with

essentially

century, cf. also

iL 1, 6, who

Soph.

time

of

of

the

speaks

tradition,

deeply

more

Philostr.
in the

and

continued

other.

each

ruck

fore.
hereto-

period as

Herodes

Atticus

"paKia xtd
fieipdKia/ca| "AA"J"

Hoy-

e0v"v

"ap0dpcov"vveppv7iK6ratwhomt'he
Athenians
2

received

Cf. Lucian,

Z.

for money,
c.

ret.

per

o$v rSsv Xoycav Trpoyy"viffro

aitroTs
Kal TTJV
efiireipiav
Tttiv
eKarepos

^oyfidrasyeTreSefteiKTO

"Apta"TaT"\ovs KaL

pvy/uevos.
1

A^Ll.,

no

system

continuance.

as
a
merely historically
striking,
without
concerning themselves
them
they postponed them
; or

taken

the

their distinctive

actuallyabandon

be

of the

all divisions

approximated internallyto

instances

things was

had

rise of eclectic

schools,in spite of

they propagated

of

of

avowal

separation,however,
the

by

CHAP.

to be

little to hinder

was

chief

it for the

to

appointment

sharplyseparatedin
this

ticnlar

the

employed was required from

Externally, therefore,the schools

desired

remained

not

103

anew

condition

In the

express

candidate.2

As

declared

support

slightadvantage.
which

PHILOSOPHY.

philosophicstudies ; and thus the division

schools was
not
merely acknowledged as an

of these

future

OF

$QKovyT"v

Kcd Sn
r"v

rov

ECLECTICISM.

194

CHAP.
VIII.

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
definitions,which, having originallygrown up on
another
soil,were, strictlyspeaking,not altogether
The
Epicurean
compatible with that character.

School

alone

held
persistently

aloof from

but it also refrained from

worthy of
schools,on

mention.1

Among

all scientific

the

the contrary,there is

tendency of the

time

did not

other.

"With

towards

that

this

three

none

manifest

ment
move-

activity

remaining

in which
itself in

this
some

the

Peripateticsit is their
restriction to criticism and
totelian
explanationof the Ariswritings,in which the want of independent
is chiefly
shown ; with the
scientific creative activity
Stoics,it is the restriction to a moralityin which
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
elements, with which is combined
increasinginr

form

or

clination

the third

School of
tlu Stoics

belief in

revelation

century through Plotinus

which

in

became

wholly
exclusively

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,

from tlie
1

Cf. PMl.

d. Gr. III. i. p. 378, andswp. p. 24 $##.

STOICS

tMrd

century, we

number
1

of

THE

belonging

men

known

are

Heracleitus

us,

with

learned

This

p. 71.

III. i. 322

have

to

considerable

than

Seneca

school.

VIII.

The

lirst to tfitt

into

the

third

.soorhsaving1of

On
he

Sejanns,

CHAP.

the

instigation
forced

was

to

(con- leave Home

cerning
(Sen. Jftket. Suaswr.
later is C h ae T eries
allego2). Somewhat

seems
sacl-}

of

105

tills school.1

to

the

supra,

man

d. Gr.

PMl.

superstition and

tion
connec-

Homeric

whose
cf

in

named

those

ERA.

deeply

mnst

mentioned

first be

IMPERIAL

acquainted with

are

the Stoics that

Of

to

OF

lived

at the

the

latest

n, the teacher

of S

(Snld.

ero

'AAc'f.Alj,), subsequently (as

must
we
suppose) head "of a
*

of

time
of

the

Augnstiis, as

he

Alexander

is

Ephesus

whom

authors

many

mentions

(Alleg.

Horn.

priest of

is apparently alluded
to
yedSrepoi,
ii.
Ad
Att.
and
22,
by Cicero,
Victor, De
quoted by Aurel.
of

Mom.

9, 1,as
the

of

War

history
(91 $qq. B.C.)

have

flourished

or

the

about

in the

before

Tiberius.

At

Rome

as

he

Seneca
his

taught
sq.9
whom,

23)

and

mired,
ad-

employed

whom

from

and

in

by

13

teacher

Stoic

zealously

first

Under

mentioned

is

he
he

quotes in this and other places

(vide Index)
sayings which
especiallyinsist,in the spiritof
the Stoic
ethics, on simplicity
of

life

and

doctrine

independence
With

character.
we

declamations
and

follies of

shall
as
men

this
also
to

that

the

and

the

mentioned
i.

Abstinen.
lordus

of

moral

the

ills

the

he

was

i"poso,

Chseremon,
Snidas, Origen

51), Porphyry (JJe

iv. 6, 8) and *ApolBekker's

in

distinct

Aneed(tfat

from

mentioned

the

lepo-

by

phyry,
Por-

Pr. JSV.'v.10;
ap. Ens.
Tzetz.
Hut.
403 ;
v.

iii.*
4^;and
in Iliad,

ler

p. 123, Herm., as JIiUmaiEtains

(Hi*t. {?r. iii.

495), but
the

that

same

taey

person

considers

and

are

one

as

Bernays

(Theopltr.

von

der

Frommiglteit* 21, 150), 1 have

3d.
explained in the Sermes,
403 sq. In his Egyptian history
are
given
(fragments of which
I. c.} he explains,
by MuUer,
according to Fr. 2 (ap. Ens.
J5V. iii. 4), the
Pr.
Egyptian
ries
gods and their mythical histoin

find his
faults

Egyptian

of

Stoic

by

(c. Cels.

first half

Christ.

(Ep. 108, 3,

That

must

of the

talus

and

("M/L

an

order

the

ypafifMrets.

is not

Marsian
and

middle

century

author

Alexandria

3AAe|.)and

p.

26) who is reckoned

by Strabo
the
25,
(xiv. 1,
p. 642) among

Orig. Gent.

in

Awi'ucr,

12,

c.

school

of

Stoic

reference

to

stars, the

with

manner

the

sun,

moon,

and

sky,

and

the

Mle,

oElife

icoi HAc^s

in

?""*" fep"v ypajj,in his Si5c"7/iOTa;

arav
(ap. Snid. Xaip. cIejooyAv^"-

(1.G. 108, 13) reproduced

disciple Seneca ; what
(Nat. Qu. ii.
Seneca, however
to
us
48 ; 2, 50, 1) imports
Ms

enquiries concerning
portentsof lightning,shows
he
more
that
plunged much

from
the

his

vavrt

Qva'tKa ; and

a) he declares, in agreement
this,that the hieroglyphics

with
were

cients

symbols
laid

in which
down

the

the
-1

anv~

cen-

A"D"

ECLECTICISM.

196

CHAP,

to

us

6""v (Tzetz.in H. p.
TT"pl
of.
1.
G. 146
;
; Hist. v. 403).
is also in harmony with the

Xoyos
123

He

Stoic

in

theology when

who

those

important of them, and

the character
most
clearly

most

represent

of this later Stoicism

Thestis

(Steph. Byz.

bouring

in

"eVTis)

banished

Africa,

who

(according

of

statement

tise
trea-

to

was

the

correct
in-

Suidas,

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

on

death)

to

put

.,

s.

in

He

Alexandria

Suidas
and
more

learned

nus

been

of

than
will

of later

fully treated
were

the

man

Seneca

philosopher.
members

closes

by

called

on.

erroneously,to

Greek

the

with

Goer
xiv. 59 ; the

an

us,

latter

likely

Stoic),most

bably
proidentibe cal

Tac.
was

sopher
philoAnn.
also

Seneca's

a
re-

Serenus(Sen.

lativeAnngeus

Const, i. 1 ; De

63, 14 ; De

this writer.
and

Of

ical
philosoph-

attributed

him

to

by Suidas, one on the gods

been preserved (sup. Part
his

has

by

works

i. 301

school
Clara-

the following:
(Sen.Ep. 66, 1, 5; he
conjectured,though
"

be

Diogenes

i. 33, 2) Cornutus
series of the Stoics

theoretical

Other

Stoic

the

the

of

epitome
III.

probably, therefore,

was

the

disciple (Part

mentioned
7payujaari/cbs,

'AA.

Aiovvcr.

of

his

is

who

Dionysius,

In

succeeded

was

by

"?".);this

described

Sueton.
Osann

and

of

abstract
in
as

doubtless

is

treatise

own

mere

the

not

is

Perm

Vita
De

He

it.

tragicus^

(on Corn.

has
III.

which

to

Nat.

Deor.

xxv.) rightlyobjects.

Further

details

and

works

concerning him
will be found

his

in Martini

(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

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(Sen. Up.
14, vol. xix. 353 K), a celebrated
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
"

SENECA,

Seneca, Musonius,

are

Aurelius.
A,

EPICTETUS.

Heracleltns,on

Persius

Flaccus

in
34, died
Vita Pergii, and

in

sqq.'}and

Annseus

3Iarcus

Lucanns

the

Seneca,

A.D., died
death

both

A.D.,

the

canus

lives

two

has

65
for

put to
joined in Piso's
(vide concerning

having

Weber

of

nephew

39

bom

(bom

A.D., vide
Jahn, 1. c. iii.

62

spiracy
con-

Lu-

1856

sq_.; the Vita Persii,Tacit. Ann.

other
xv.
49, 56 sq, 70, and

compared

statements

of

whom
he

as

ber),
We-

by

Flaccus
himself

says

Epictetus,
tlie other
without
of

also

Stoic.

and

with
Pollio

48

$#.),

Paetus

Thrasea

sgg. ; cf

xvi. 21

sq.f9

23;

xv.

Ixii.

Ixvi.

gether
to-

disciples,

Artemidorus,

Ms

of his

on

discourses

character, was
of

Pliny,
him

Epictetus

and

rary
contempoand

lived

the

in

siii. 49 ; xiv.
Cass. bd.
Dio

son-in-law

(Tac.

cus

Helvidius
Ann.

xvi.

12;

the

life

Tyana,

and

letters

of

Apollonius
author

chief

of

of the

Apollonius,

the

as

of
the

sents
repre-

of

opponent

"Epictetus

this miracle- worker.

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
20;

15,

26;

Ms

who,

26;

Ann.

(Tac.

and

in
Syria and afterwards
Rome
(Plin.JSp. i. 10 ; Euseb.
c. Hierocl.
c.
33). He is the
whom
same
Philostratus,
person

Republicans

magnanimous

two

ML

114

Xero

there lived

the pupil of
Arrianus,
before us
Epictetus,will come
later
on.
the
Euphrates,

first in

Cass.

under

to
as

and

further, besides the contemptible

Celer
P.
E gnat ins
xvt
32; Hist. iv.
(Tac. Ann.
iii.

Is described

Musonius'

and

xiv.

also put

was

discipleEpictetus,

account

Dio

(Tac. Ann.

successor?,
Eufus

Musonius

by order
Enbellius

teacher
of the younger
especially,
in
who
equally admired

v.,

10, 40;
Juvenal,

VIII.

Is rather

Lastly,

his

CHAP.

reason,

22, 57-59) who

death
by Nero,
a

Marcus

Vespasian.

Plantus

regarded his master

with
the
highest veneration.
Stoic school
To the
belonged
Sat.

and

hand.

some

which

edited, Marb.

HIT

Pris-

28-25;

quotes

an

calls him

writer

i. 25, 5,

he
was
3Ewi(j)d,v.,
and
Epiphania,

order, and the second

who had been already banished
by Nero, was put to death, not

in

by

to

iv, 5

Nero's

F.

Eunap.

Egyptian.
118

his

old

A.D.

and

I. 0.

whereas, according
Steph. Byz. De Urb.

sq. 9, 53 ; Dial, de
Sueton.
Or at. 5 ;
Tesp. 15 ;
Ixv.
Ixvi.
12
Dio Cass.
7), of
;
executed
first
the
was
whom
Hist,

here

Tynan,

Syrian
according
a

PMlos.

p.

6,

of
to
an

Having fallen sick

age,

(Dio

he took
Cass.

poison

Isis. 8).

ECLECTICISM.

198

CHAP.
Tin.

collector and
the

same

One

of Ms

holds

Heraclea

Ti

Lucian

Alex.

57, De

of

(Demon. 3,

69), who
great respect of
himself

Demonax
of

the

famous

of
}uror, Alexander
chos.
A discipleof
Mm

Salt.

(J)e

con'

and

to whom

by
Under

Phithe
C

two

is

in

(Epict. Diss. iit 2, 15; Diog.

L. vii. 62, 68,76). Also Junius
executed

by

mitian
Do-

(Tacit.Agric.2

; Sueton.
Domit,
10 ; Dio Cass. Ixvii. 13 ;
Plin. Z. 0.; Plut. Ciwiosit. 15,

522),

whose

the

trial

of

The
two
a( Stoic.
other
tne
hand,
reckoned

Plinys,
cannot

lonius

or

Aur.

MaxAnt.PJiil.fy;Claudius
(M. Aur. i. 15, 17 ; viii.
25; Capitol. 1. c.); Cinna
Catulus
(M. Aur. i. 13 ; Capitol.

imus

I.

to

the

same

taught
8),and

may

have

medes
Cleo-

written

his

was

according
first who

e s

of

Aur,

him

gave

Cliron.

Sync. p. 351,

an

i. 6,
clination
in-

who

is

Ol. 232,

on
a

and

teacher

quoted by

others

not

of

probably

via. 25S,vide PMl.

III. 1 87, 1 ; but

heard

as

Aurelius

same

Math.

must

painting ;

philosophy); B a s iScythopolis(described

Hieron.

Marcus

the

in
M.

to

to

and
the

cording
(ac-

Capitol, c. 4, where
is most
man
likely

his teacher

meant,

Marcianus

A. ix. 5,

them

c.); among

probably also Diognetus

of

(Gell.N.

Busticus,

imperial pupil

,(M.
gave his confidence
i. 7. 17; Dio, I.c ; Capitol.

mentioned

may

here

not

always

the

Athens

10 ;

Chalcedon

or

Junius
Ms

this

in

PL

need

we

whom

teacher
G-alen's
disciple was
(G-alen,
Cogn. an Mori, 8,vol. v,
41 K) ; in the same
reign,or that
have

17;
35; Capitolin.

Chalcis

Nicomedia

enquire).

be

Pius, Hierocles

Apol-

i. 8,

3 ; Ant.

2,

same

tors
instruc-

Aurelius

Ixxi.

from

came

on

Philopator
probably lived
(Pkil d. GT. III.i.166, 1),whose

the

Stoic

Aurel.

(M.

chiefly,

conclusion,

viii. 12 ; Lucian. Demon.

31 ; Hieron.
Chron. zn
01. 232 ;
Whether
he
Syncell. p. 351.

but

had Euphrates for

the younger
Hadrian
his teacher.
Under

Antoninus

the

not

Eutrop.

school,
semblance1 i d
though they have points of rewith the Stoics, and
by
under

the

of Marcus

casion
oc-

gave

the

persecution
doubtless
was
philosophers,
to

fall

period

to

Diogenianus,

but

in it

Within

Posidonius.

Philos.

add
may
philosophers called

p.

at

says

Ant.

we

Rusticus,

he

as

Demonax,

Themistocles,

7, 1):

Ptolemy;

he follows

in

several

astronomers,

Ca?s.

Trajan we find
the following names
given by
Plutarch
i.
Com-,
9, 1 ; vii.
(Qu.
lippus,

earlier

Dio

69).

Concerning

this treatise he mentions

Abonutei-

and

Domitian

Cleomedes.

an

mentioned

is

Lesbonax,

teacher

cynic, and

the

opponent

cording
ac-

Saltat.

speaks with
iim ; and was

material,and

KVK\LK^JQstapia
fj."T""p"av
; for

mo-

Pontus

in

(Philostr.F. Soph. i. 25, 5)

to

of

good

pupils was

of

crates

of traditional

arranger

the

Sext.
d. Gr.

person

54), and some

(Bacchius, Tandasis,
mp.

them,

;
as

instance
be added.

p.

M.
he

of
To

Aurelius
says, i, 6, at

Diognetus)
these

Mar-

CORNUTL'S.

Cornutus

know

also, we

chiefly devoted
Aurellns

cus

the

his

grammatical

to
Antoninus

that

activitywas

Under

"pa"\o$

(Simpl. 102, a),

I L c.
104,
reign
a) an aSiafpapoydBia"6op^j

Ms

disciple

is

"T7rou3aTos

no

CHAP.

historical

and

himself

allied

subsequently
(vide infra).
Lucius,

that

of

that

and

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
the

sonius

and

Mu-

said

is

representsas meeting
Aurelius

Marcus
the

latter

he

in Home

with

the

same

doubtless, from

whom

ture,
belongingtoTthe Stoic nomencla-

when

already emperor

was

was

to

person,
Stobaus

\6yOt QjlQTlKOl,
O.VOjJLQ'TLKn^
""KTtK"l (1. C. 108
BaVfACLCrrLKQl,
a) zrf/feibid. III. i. 103, 4. But
Mnsonius

the

7, 46, vol.
(Floril. Jo. Damase.
iv. 162, Mein.) quotes an account

distinct

of

or

conversation

with

conversations

(Ms

with

sonius
Mu-

mentioned

also

are

Musonius

Philostratus);

for

though

called

in

our

AVKIOS

Stobseus, that

Here,
Philostratus, he
Stoic

Cynic,

or

the

doubt

appears
he
and

as

Awsleger

in

the

Academy,
which
they

from

in
a
no

who

is

Arist.

are

the
named

way

by

Simplicius (Gateg. 7, $, 1, a)
Atticus
and
together with
Plotinus
that
that

this

it seems
to me
; but
be proved on
cannot

evidence;
for

foundation
in

their

there
the

is

more

statement,

objections quoted by

Prantl, Z.

"., from

against the

inexact

for

it is not
Ms
to

Borne

gories
cate-

of the Stoic type,namely

in the assertions of Nicostratus

the

after

to

than

tury,
cen-

that

have

161

that the teacher

other

first

come

It

A.D.

probable

most

me

to

Musonias

discipleshould

seems

of

Tvptos

conceivable

of Lucius

Musonius

is

no

Kufas, and

that the anecdote, ap. Gell. .V./l.

is. 2, 8,refers to him; while the

predicateTvpios arose
mistake
even

that

Philostratus

did

man

place

before

he

Musonius
of

the

of the

Musonius

either

because

that

into the

month

when

we

naturally

and
to

and

which

entirelyagrees

or

peror
em-

celebrated

most

name,

all,

became

we

known

and

Lucius

at

partly because

;
of

think

of

Aurelius

take

self
him-

mistake):

meeting

Marcus
not

occurred
hear

the

the

with

Tvppijvbs(supposing

made
that

through

from

Simplicius, period; partly

Aristotelian

irre

even

scarcely survived

AWi. d. JSerl. Altad. 1833 ;

Orff.,
Hist. PML
El.
p. 279) and
Prantl
(Gesch. d. Log. i. 618)
both to have belonged
consider
to

Bnfus,

suppose,
of
the

of

as

d.

either

as

Brandis

Nicostratus.

d.

Musonius

be

Phil. d. Gr. HI, i.48,

note, with

called

be

is

sequence.
con-

was

Lucius

same

mentioned

( Ueber

well

as

spectively

is

musb

narrative

he

test

from

must

we

who

teacher

Philostratus, his

by

is of little

Lucius'

the

us

only

in that

especially
Lucius

puts

of his Musonius
with

the

quota-

l'_

ECLECTICISM.

200

CHAP.
Tin.

lie therefore

works, and

more
philosophy

with

himself

if,in

and

treatise

of his

school ;

has

tradicted
con-

also his Stoic rival

only Aristotle,but

not

dependen
in-

an

gods contents

he
categories,

the

on

the

on

doctrine

reproducingthe

itself with

occupied

scholar than

as

His -work

thinker.1

have

"to

seems

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
Chrysippus),trietwonamesakes
of philosophers,
contemporary
Kufus

Museums

tion from

them
among
He
Stoics.

earlier,and

good

many

are

know

the

of

the

ii. 104), of

Theodorus(Diog.

somewhat

this writer, and

with

(ap.

In

Jnortt.

tions
men-

whom
the

probably composed

one

of the

abstract

writings

of

Stob. Florll.
also
Teles, from which
Stoics who were
7,47,T.iv,164 Hem.
for their literaryactivity Jo.Dam.i.
goras
Themistocles
(according to gives a fragment ; Protaas

known

Syncell. Clironogr. p. 361 B,

228
about
A.D.), Phoebion,

(Diog.

56) j Antiof Ascalon;

ix.

Eubius,

and

bins

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

and

had

who

two

not

mentions
SujUfuKTa npo"A^juara3
a

with

conversation
the

Longimis
the

defended

he

in which

Stoic

those

Among

against Philonides among

of
if the pupil of

the

apx^on

Zeno

is here

intended

III. i.

soul).

confined

to

At

the

same

period as Plotirms, Trypho

(described by Porphyry, v.
Plat.

17,

2rau":"fcre

as

The
Pr.

Uv,

x.

Home.

by Porph. ap
3, 1, came

earlier, about

260

Euseb.

somewhat
A.D.

We

(Part

Proclus

himself

further

hack

in

case

any

as
Panffitius,

39,

placed
may
he cannot
; but
older
than
be

Suidas

doubt

fjidrav,
no

mentions

rhetorical

written

writings,

an

(rosier-

by

references

the

Of.

3),

be

ratv
Aioyevovs
vir6fiiviifj.a

to

his

him.

his

sition
expo-

of the

IlXa-

Stoic,Callietes,

Athenian

mentioned

K"L

residingin

ram/cbs)was

by

B, with

the

who

Mnsonins.

and

In

166

givinginstruction
areHerminus,Lysimachus,
(accordingto Porphyry, I. c. 3,
probably in Kome),Ath e n sens,
themselves

latter is mentioned

Proclus

doctrine

of

eight parts

of these

Tim.

Longinus,

and

Jahn's
xiii.
2

note.

Yirgilian poems,
in
grammatical work

Prolegg.

sffff.

Persittm,

xxiii. sqq.
d, Gr. III. i. 520,

; Osann.

Of. PHI.

in
I.

c.

CORXUTUS.

AtnenodoniSj1

we

the

he
with
it

from

possiblethat

Is

discourses

47

venture

C; 91,

5,

(ScJiol.in Arist.

47, t",22;

b, note;

57,

a,

80, a, 22) ; Porph. in

4, I (ScJi"l.in Arist. 48.
c.

; cf.
Ami.

21

Griech.
d. Serl.
in,,

d. Arist.

Akad.

probably

was

Metajph.

Schol.

in

found

AT.

that

Cornntns,

Boethus
dnced

be

to

PJtil.

treatise

form
3

one

the

the

Peripatetic, rethe ideas to general conceptions.

Porph.

and

ireplT(av
ret.

4, b,

Athenodoras

roiavra

...

TO

TO.

Ka8b

XQeasv
Kal

Kvpia

says
:

TpcnriKa

cessation

TO:

Toiavra

"f""povre$KaliroiasUffTl

of

yiyveTai

OUT"JS

"

Ba.va.TQS,

oterai.

POUT-OS
4

For

this

it is

though

Cornntns

to

him

what

he

\"%"i$, ola

rational

ocra

irpo-

KaTyyopias

theories
derives

said

the

may
and

and

human
which

from

refers,

possible

soul

his assertion

doctrine

the

probably

whom

lamblichns

of

statement

animal

KaL

mating
ani-

the
or
(TC^FOS),
power
warmth?
of
-vital

vital

^Tou/zem

ovv

the

in

893, a. 9,
he, like

of

other.

extinction

the

it is nevertheless
2

different

the

of

withholding

e!

on

I. 922.
ap. Stob. Ed.
of
death
lie
cause

Iambi,

aAA'

effect

from

case

can

sphere

this

In

air,
the

we

expression is

of

the

in

them,

striking

the

in

of their

the

qnoted by Syrian

statement

from

this

In

he

subject

account

on

him

to

die

Qrg. A bh.

1883, Hist.

275.

p.

the

heard

Cater/. Does
", 12)

Uele

Brandls,

SO,
16;

certain,4though

of

who

15, 8 j

"

tradition, if

If, lastly,his ethical

ascribe

It Is

simultaneously

Is not

Individuality,or

Cat eg.

Slmpl.

Stoic

dies

Perslns

those

to

Important

any

soul

Panaetius.

on

objectprincipally

grammarian.2

his views

praised by

are

Influence

hardly

in

with

himself

good

the

that

fragments preserved,

its

the

body ;3 this,however,

the

allied

I.

of the

standpoint

really taught

the

regarded

important divergence

an

from

see

this treatise

that
from

can

of the

relate
not

that

to the
to

soul.

the
The

lamblichns
agree
Stoic

with

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
a.Tropovjn-fs

the
time

place
from

Kal

from
xore,

TTOV,

and

because

the
the

Sat.

v,

34

*##., 62 sqq.

THAP.
mi.

ECLECTICISM.

VIII.
.

this been

had

philosophy:

CHAP.

left stronger traces

The

case

The

extensive

Seneca.

sub

Bahr,

1037

of it behind

him.

with

literature

Pauly's

in

Klass.
Of.

sgg.

Alterth.

iv.

189

Baur,

itgg. ;

Paulus (1858, now

Seneca, und
in Drei
AbTiandl. "c., p. 377
pline
sqq.}; Dorgens, Seneca DisciMoralis

ConteMio

zig,
Leip-

PJii; Holzherr, Der

und
A.
Seneca
East
L.
:
losoph.
1857

Tub.

Stoic

the

and

life

Concerning
the
writings, besides
many
older works, Biihr,I. c. ; Bernhardy, GFrundrins der Rom.Litvr.
4, a, p. Sllsgg.; Teuffel,GeseJi.
der Rom.
at

Liter. 2, a, p. 616 sgq*

Corduba, of the equestrian

Attalus

advocate

Helv.

before, I. 0.2, 5
in

happy

his

Helv.

(ad

Rome

have

birth must

the

to

Qu.

Ifat.

as

occurred,

cording
ac-

in

statements
3

1,

first years

in the

and

came

parents to
19, 2). His

Hj}.108, 22,

of

his

the

tian
Chris-

early

years

era.

In

even

afterwards

suffered

from

he

stantly
con-

ill health

(ad Hell). 19, 2; JBp. 54, 1 ; 65,

he
1; 78, 1 sqq.; 104, 1), and
devoted

himself

to the

with

sciences

cf. 58, 5), and

dour
great ar(Ep. 78, 3 ;

especiallyto

philosophy (Ep. 108,

7),

to

died

shortly

18, 6),and

external

(I.
Threatened

was

stances
circum-

4; 14, 3).
Caligula (Dio,

5,

G.

by

sica
banished
to CorClaudius
in 41 A.D.

19), and

lix.

under

of the affair of
in consequence
Messalina
(Dio, Ix. 8 ; IxL 10 ;

jEpigr.S.

Sen.

13,

2 ;
was

18, 9

prgetor, and

Seneca

had

who

9 ; FT. 88 ; ad Melv. 18, 1 sqq. ;

Tacit.
Ann.
xiv, 53 et pass.},
his

Helv. IB, 4 "%%.; and

; ad

another

fall

with

He

calling of

49, 2),attained
(JEj).

he

Annasus

him.

the

office

the

order,the second son of the

rhetorician,M. Anngeus
S. Eml.
Seneca
8,
(Sen. Jilpigr.

child

(vide supra,

of qusestor (ad
19, 2), married
(cf. De
Ira, iii. 36, 3 ; Ep. 50, 2 ; and
child, Marcus,
concerning a

to

famous

Lucius

181, 2), and

195, 1) introduced
an

philo-

disciple of

the

(vide supra,

1858, 1859 (Gymn. progr.}.

Seneca's

Born

Sotion,

Epigr,3

Antoniniana

cum

Comparatio

et

which

have

This

likewise, finallyembraced

respectingSeneca's philosophy,
Bitter,

he would

Seneca.1

Sextius

is to be found

woe,

Rfialencyld.d.
vi. a,

case,

is different

concerningSeneca
in

the

JExilio

; ad

Helv.

recalled

only

ad

Polyb.
$#.)"

15, 2

after

by Agrippina in 50
was
immediately

He

the

was

Ann.

xii.

of

to him

After

8).

made

education

confided

Nero

her
A.D.

(Tac.

Nero's

cession
ac-

the

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

character

and

infra, p.
death
his
end

of

will

232, 3).
Burrhus,

influence
; Nero

who

burdensome

had
to

the

however,
to

came

discarded

found

be
With

the

an

sellor
coun-

long become
(Tac. xiv.

him

52 sqg.},and
seized
first
the
opportunity of ridding himself

SESECA.

20;)

sopher not only enjoys a high reputation] with his

and possesses for
contemporaries,and with posterity,
of the Stoical writings
us, consideringthat most
have
been
destroyed,an especialimportance, but
he is in himself a reallygreat representativeof his
school,and one of the most influential leaders of the
tendency which this school
world, and
especiallyin
He

Emperors.

is

took

the

in

the

Eoman
of

times

the

not, indeed, to be

regarded as its
first founder : imperfectly
the historyof Eoman
as
Stoicism is known
to us, we
can
clearlyperceivethat
from the time
of Pan setins, with
the growing restriction
the tendency also to the softento ethics,
ing
of the

other

Stoic

systems

doctrine
rendered

the

also feared.
in

mandate,

conspiracyof
65

year

pretext

for the

submitted

sopher
Paulina

(Ej). 104,
to

die

in

her

bloody

philo
manly
wife

second

wished

hindered

the
with

His

fur-

A.D.

-which

to

fortitude.

*#j.)"who

with

him,

purpose

was

after

already opened her

(Tac. Ann. xv. 56-64).
Concerning the favourable
had

arteries
1

verdicts
tilian

many

of

antiquity
(who, indeed,

Seneca, Inst.

"

x.

again

Sextians,

of

Quin-

censures

1, 125 sqq., for

time
"

lect
neg-

emphasisingof
things

as

author

an

the

at

testifies to Ms

ingenium facile

to

moral

was

of the

code

the

and

hated

he

The

the

nished

she

hand

other

45, 46) and, perhaps, philosopher, but

(cf. xv.
Piso

theories

whom

man

the

if the

; and

increase

on

approximation

Cynicism (vide infra),the

revived

of school

of

the

on

stringentin the

more

of the

and

is

Stoicism

of

the

severityand

all

and
same

great merits
eopiosuw,

et

plurimitm gtvdii, mwlta rerum

cognitio and the extraordinary
reputationhe enjoyed) ; Plinins
(J21 J\~at. xiv. 5, 51) ; Tacitus
(R.
(Ann. xiii. 3) ; Columella
Cass. (lix.19) ;
B. iii. 3) ; Dio
writers
and
the Christian
(cf.
"

Holzherr,

i. 1 $f .)"

deed,

Gell. N. A.

as

Fronto,

ad

Anton.

Otters,

in-

xii. 2, and

4,

gg.9 123

with
sgg., speak of him
little appreciation.

very

ECLECTICISM.

204

universallyhuman, based upon immediate

and
life the
consciousness
important for moral
the endeavour
universalistic development of ethics
after a system more
generallycomprehensibleand

that

CHAP,

L_

is

"

"

demanded
efficient was
practicably
also. These
traits, however, are

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
with them
Stoical doctrines,on the whole, Stoicism
takes the

form

and

more

of universal

more

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,
mission
mankind, forbearancetowards human weakness, sub-

and

to the

Divine

appointments

have

ent
promin-

place.
Seneca, the

In
doctrine

freer

of his school

positionin regard to the

which he claimed l for himself,

is and

professes school, and unreservedly to apto be a

requiresno proof, propriateanything that he finds
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.
1

That

Seneca

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
have derived from our prede- predilectionofhis friendLucilins
we
cessors
( V. B. 3, 2 ; De Otio,3, for Epicurus,it is,nevertheless,
that he wishes to
unmistakable
1 j Ep. 33, 11; 45, 4 ; 80, 1 ;
not
show
does
hesihis
He
7
own
64, ###.)"
impartialityby
this appreciative
treatment
of a
tate, as we shall find,to oppose
tenets

and

customs

of

his

much

-abused

opponent.

SENECA.

is shown

of

In his views

20

concerningthe end and problem

in the
original tendencies of

philosophy. If

CHAP.
VIIL
__

Stoicism

there

already lay

practicalinterest
this

was

essential

be

greater stress
aim

morals, the endeavour

concerned

are

teaches

learns

man

with

to

philosophy
quick-witted-

in

of

game

of grave

cure

talk,but

3
:

to

evils ; 4 it
all that

and
act,*5

is

only useful when he appliesit

condition.6
According to its relation

moral

ultimate
to be

not

not

us

ity,2
pedagogue of humanof life,
the doctrine of
a

after virtue

but with the

skill,

and

ness

the value

end

that

judged :
in

Of.

regard

to

of every

which

scientific

does not

the latter

effect

33:

Ep. 117,

cum

Ep.

tailed

that

of Ethics

the

sit

Jiwmani
3

not

54? 1

affair of
of the

the

philo-

quicquam
sapiens quam generis

d. 6fr, III.

JSp. 117,

Ep. 89,

fferisad
Loc.
onmia

l"pp.51,2

12 ; 94, 39.

et

philo*
faeere,

Facere

docet

dicere, "c., 24}

15.

pesdagogus.

PMl.

Ep,

mine,

delectare

sit.

20,

panenetic part pldlosopMa,

pedagogue,
Tamquam
sopher :
aUud

remedium
5

nan

is the
and

main-

moral

Adice

95, 10.
Aristo

his

to this

our

quod adsnescit animus

sanare
sepotius quam
sopJiiam oWectamentum

89, 13.

to

activityis

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. ;
-

*'^-

parts of

philosopheris
philosophy is the art

we

$"?

of

the

jm^

respecting
he layseven
philosophy,1
than his predecessors
its moral end
on

conception and

and

tf*e

regarded manv

the older teachers of the school

constituents

Quicqitidlestatim

mores

tit. 23
ad

IS:

fft"c aim

mores

ft

ad

rffarag.

lie
.

sedan-

rdbiem adfectuum referens.

Similarly 117, 33.

dam

foe-

lamin

Seneca

the Stoic determinations

general manner
the

by

that he

#/*

unphilosophy,
as
superfluous.Though he repeats in a

and

necessary

with
theoretical,

greatlyincreased

so

things considered
to

the

over

preponderance of the

ECLECTICISM.

206

CHAP,

adequatewords
those who

of his

the warmth

the

is with

them.

asks,by

all the

enquirieswith

small

appears

when

the

the better and

that

important,that

it claims

whole

our

which

ever

How

liberal

arts,

that

alone

it is virtue

we

has

them

of the so-called

the value

remember

we

justerfor

are

Who

themselves

antiquarians
occupy

become

What

he himself

profited,he
Uselessmss

to

meddle

conversant

find
cannot
philosopher
of the follyof
express his sense
in
with such things ; though even
zeal he cannot
help showing how
the

useless,and

is

condition

is

that

soul,and

much
But
how
philosophyonly leads to virtue !
has even
that is superfluous
philosophyadmitted into
much
how
word-catchingand unprofitable
trifling
itself,
2

! Even
subtlety
thingsof this kind

for his part will have

in

Vit. 13, where

"revit.

citation

the

amples
torical
thus

after
ex-

numerous

antiquarianand hisenquirieshe concludes"

ista

found

do with

"niinu"-

errores

immutMli,

oompetit :
de

Seneca

he

even

complains
malorum

ao

soli philosopliiee

qua
niJiil autem

lonis

many

them,

ftonorwn

snientia

alia

entrance

nothing to

of

Cwjw

of

have

the subtleties of which

where

cases

School,3how

in the Stoic

ac

(p. 28). Magna

ulla

ars

malls
et

qucerit
spaiAosa res

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
music, geometry,

that grammar,

arithmetic, and
at

most

astronomy

are

preparationfor the
in them-

de
discendwm
est, de prtzteritis,
futuris, de caducis, de "%ternis,
Hcec
tarn
"c.
multa, tarn
magna

ut Tia'bere possintliberuwi

hospitium, mpervacua
tollenda,
has

sunt.

Non
virtus

ex

daUt

animo
se

in

laxum

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

Una

are

re

of subordinate

consummatur

value

aninws,

SENECA.

with
the
evidently connected
presuppositions
of the
Stoic doctrine,1and
in the same
he
way
easily
disposesof the dialectical objectionsof their
are

opponents
worth

he

the

considers

fallacieswhich

so

Chrysippusand

Ms

Stoa

ancient

of the

much

so

as

readilyoccupy the Ingenuityof

but also those comprefollowers/
hensive

discussions

against the
simply reckoned by him
trifling
enquiries which

In

thingsthat

the

Up. 117,
both

the

sensible

long
accuse

Stoic

and

with

and

broad

their authors
such
of

and

wasted

to

himself

their

for

of

divert

to

to

us

which

does

us

time

stead
questions inemploying themselves
useless

and
something necessary
profitable.Similarlyin Ep* 106

in

knowledge

nor

Quid

of

not

defines

them

in eoy gruem

tu

ipse if/ev$6jjL"jfov
adpella"

Ecce

ndJd

iota

nta

.?
.

meittttur,

Similarly Ep,

"c.

"*"""

harm,
profit

us

me

Swrjiu-

know.3

rance
the

order

in

the

gave

the eclectic

serve

necessary

refutation
of

; and

phenomenon are
the superfluousand

merely

are

definitions

the

having

among

13 ; Ep. 113, I $gq.

he embarks
on

exposition

of the

of

cases

which
sceptics,

employment

arguments

from

VIJI*

not
trifling
juggleries
not
only the
Investigating,

of

trouble

CHAP.

48 ;

49

5, *M.
3

Ep: 88, 43

mali

faciat

iufesta

$uam

Audi, qitautvm,

nimia

suteilita* et

ventati

sit.

tagoras
Pro-

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
says

we

can

"

the
universe ; Zeno, of Elea,
forsitan neeessaria, nisi et superittis
Circa eadem fere Pyrnihll
Jfultum
esse.
vacua
quaesissent.

temporis
eripuitet
gu(g

ver'borum

captiosw disputatwnes^
inritum,

acumen

We

cent.

the
"

and

not

fence

with

exer-

search

should

meaning
things the good
not

camllatw

of
and

words,

out

but

the evil ;

sophisms

the

rJwnei

verxantur

JEretrlei
ram

et

Megarici et
Academic^, gui noet

mkil
indusseruntseiejitiam,

sdre
vacuum

Jieee omnia
studi"rum

in ilium

super

IVberalium

JV"w" fam,le
cornice,"c.
dixerim, uiris magi* ira$car"

gregem

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.

acetabula
the

ECLECTICISM.

208

he says, is

Wisdom,

CHAP.

1__

it is

great learning:
which

extends

so

the School

the

simplething and requires no

of moderation
want
only our
sphere of philosophy; for life,
part worthless

for the most

questionsare

theyinjure, indeed,rather than benefit,for they render

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

wishes

he

that

declarations

such

to

but

it is undeniable

philosophy in principleto
only admits other things so far

limit

to

problems,and
with those
as
they stand in manifest connection
problems.
must
This principle
losophe
inevitablyseparate our phifrom
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,
moral

"

includes

Seneca

it under

the three

chief divisions of

and
the subjectis only cursorily
philosophy,3
After
a
Up. 106, 11.
thorough discussion of the propositionthat the a;ood is a body
(Part III. i. 120, 1, 3 ; 119, 1) :
1

Ep. 47,
36

Plus

occa-

sg.; 87, 38 $q. ; 88,

sit
scire velle giutm

satis, intemperantice genus

2

In

Ep.

est.

117, 18, after

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,

siniplieior.Pauds

in, super-

exb ad

men-

comnwrandum

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
tern

lonam

sic

reruw,,

literarum

intemperantia
vita

sed

literis : sed

uti

quoque

laboramus

soholcB

not

discimus.

non

01

de

ante

Vide

64, 1 ;

PkiLd.

67, 2.

G-r. IILi. 61, 1;

Elsewhere, however

(Ep, 95, 10),philosophy is

di-

LOGIC

sionallytouched
himself

AXD

upon

In his

in

agreement

at times

specting the origin

force

PHYSICS.

of

20:

writings.
with

He

his school
the

conceptions,and

r-HAP.

expresses
re-

strative
demon-

of

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 logicaldefinitions
-

of his school ; 3 but

to

his

into

enter

them

opinion this whole

which

alone

occupied
problem of man.

moral
Far

Physics,as

him

ation
inclin-

no

far from

too

the

in

value

has

deeply, because

more

region lies

is the

greater

he himself

last

which

resort

he

in

that
the

"

ascribes

to

in his

writingsalso he has devoted to it

He praisesPhysics for imparting to
greater space.
the mind
the elevation
of the subjects with, -which
it occupies itself;4 in the preface,indeed, to Ms
writingson Natural History,5 he goes so far as to
vided,

with

as

the

Peripatetics, 3): the

and

into

theoretical

and

with

Pansstins,

xide

animate

practical
philosophy ; and in Ep. 94, 45, 124, 14).
3
Besides
virtue
is similarly divided
(as
48).

This

more

obvious

who

ascribed

value
1
2

IIL

to

to

no

and

JSp. 58,

Phil

8 sq^.j

The

74,3; 75,2.
PlnLd.

sn-

PJdl. d, Gr.TLl, i. 97" 2 ;

102, 6 sq.

logic.

i. 92.

quotations

pra,pp,

philosopher
independent

PUld.G7-.lILi.

the

(of. Ep.

207, 1 ; 208, 1, 2, cf. in

regard to this, Ep. 118, 4 *".,

p,
supra,
all the
-was

division

is partly mortal

partly immortal

Gr.

3'at.

EJJ.
Qtt.II. 2, 2, and

d. GT. III. i. 967 2

Ep. 117, 19: De

nafur"

qii"ramii*+

de

118,

4.

'Deornm,
giderum

aKrnento, de Jds tarn rariig gfellarum,

disctiraibii*,"zc.
Igta,

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
tion

and

is that

of

vide
(pv"ri$,

iUd,

IEL i. 192,

4,
P

Quod? inquu,

""

erit j)re-

_JLllL_

ECLECTICISM.

210

CHAP.
VIII.

His

that

maintain

is
from

us

show

us

the

higher than

earthly darkness

than

Ethics, in

which

cerned
they are conlead
Human
; they alone
into the light of heaven,

with

proportionas the Divine

Jrigh

higher

Physics are

the internal part of

Author

things,the

arrangement of the world ; it would not

if physical
while to live,
were
investigations

be

and

worth

forbidden

greatness of combating
our
passions,of freeing ourselves from evils,if the
ledge
not
prepared by Physics for the knowspiritwere
be

would

Where

us.

the

tion
heavenly,and brought into communicaif we
God
were
only raised above the

of the
with

"

external,and

ourselves,"c.

above

these

perceive that

soon

we

also

not

while,
Mean-

declamations

than
the
personal
passing mood
opinionof the philosopher.Seneca elsewhere reckons
have
just heard
physicalenquiries,to which we
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

tium

rather

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

outworks

of

wisdom.

1st

enim

libet, dantur

omnia,

si

?wn

conci-

sitbtilitatem

quid evagari
adtollunt
distrahaiitiir,
amplos Jiabet ilia [sapientia] imdilem
Deorum
levant
et
de
In
the cona-nimuni.
:
spatiososguesecessus
Etia/in

si

nee

in

hanc

PHYSICS.

the

essential

Interrupt from time

natural
history by moral
to

laxer

with.

than

has

Seneca

treated

devoted

of

teniplation
its author,
the

learns

to know

the

and

himself

high origin
despise the body

corporeal,and
it.

from

himself

free

to

Lofty

is

as

position here assigned to

speculative enquiries, Seneca

the
in

the

justify
effect
1

last

resort

them

by

on

Quid
nianis

can

their

men.

Qu.

Vitia

est?
.

and

all that

low, and

because

thought

thus

favourable

that

Cf. Xat.

of

part

call

to

of his

life

natural

iii. IS

Qn.

to

iv. 13;

; vi. 2, 32 ; but, especially

ii. 59.
After
Le
has

15, 18

v.

of

treated
he

lightning
that

remarks

more

these

in

so
rocas

am

it

to

necessary
of it, and

fear

l^ncrtL,

at

is

ixoieli

the

remove

proceeds

words

it I7;us

to

Sffnuir

i at

relt us

c"t.

CUM

en

inixceiidum

tare

om

do
quo
it i-

ynalis

animvs

suis

Jirmandus,

doinuuse

it/tus

ot'culia, naiurcp) cum

tilr hi
per
vinfl'tcattdux
ext
tracfamus,

This

from

down

enquiries into
2

be

to

seems

a
a,

mtiinde

ac

":c.

sujira minas
erlgere animum
Hoc
et promisza fortun"i "c.
rerum
noMs
inspicere
pTodent
because
we
thereby
natitram,
the
loose
spirit from the body
.

Stoic

onl}moral

iii. Prtrf. 10, 18 :

hitrebus
in
p'Tcec'lj)muii

JXat.

the

accustomed

flesh,

the

of
his

destiny, to

the

come

only

were

and

-world

raises

man

burden

above
and

the

between

It

have

detail

of

books

seven

reference

of

but

of

practical

have

this In the last years

To

Meteorology.
he

in

duty

his followers.

writingsthat

the ancients

which

Physics

by him,

it

and

interconnection

Chrysippus and

of Ms

those

In

reflections

abandoned

is not

system

CHAP.
a

expositions

practical doctrines

and

theoretical

us,

The

welfare.2

our

his

things must

all

because
applications,

enquiries as

tie considers

time

moral

ViJI.

natural

to

the

be

to

this ; ! and

to

211

man

admits

only

help to

and

means

of

problem

and

problem,

ETHICS,

is base
the

and

habit

eng-endered

to moral

of
is

convictions.

and

from

frnm iii.Prerf.,
appears
the description of the

earthquake which
63 A.D.
destroyed
Herculaneum,
had

in

the

year

Pompeifand

vi. i. 26, 5.

Seneca

already composed a treatise

earlier
on
earthquakes in Ms
(Sat. Qu, vi. 4, 2).
years

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

history.

Meanwhile

the

of

contents

the

work

VIII.
answer

*
to
imperfectly

very

which

it opens

number

; it

contains

of isolated

rather

the

in

discussions

concerning a
phenomena, conducted

natural
of

manner

loftypromises with

the

learned

than

pastime

of

independent and

thorough physical investigation.

philosophical
standpointis little affected by

Seneca's

them,

and

would

suffer

greaterpart of

the

what

from

For

they are.

meta-

they are of
subject-matterseems
Posidonius

It is the

same

with other

and

theo-

attributed

and

of

mostly

other

and

cessors.2
predenatural

writingson
The

to Seneca.3

to

physical
meta-

he occasionally

value in

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
are

doctrines.

even

the less importance,

theological
opinions which

logicalenunciates,

if

totallydifferent

us

from

are

alteration

were

taken

been

historywhich
physical

His

material

their results

since their

have

no

more

read

proof of this let anyone

tise,
the beginning of the trea-

able

to resist the

and

he

will

comic

almost

the

when

after the
:

sol am,

after

author,

Si niMl
omnia,

tence
concluding sen-

Dcuin, continues

metisus

certe
esse,

2\runc

Audi

propositum veniam
opus.
nidus sent lam,
Quid de iff

QUOS

a"er

ad

Cf.

content

transversos
on

this

of Nat.

III. i. 191, 2, 3.

9, 36

Qu.,Phil.

animals

De

situ

154, De

the

stones.
Servius
a

et sacris

on

treatise,

Indies ; Serv. J38n.

situ

vi.

JEgyp-

Art.
Cassiodorus, De
Lib.
c.
7, speaks of another
treatise,De forma mwidi.
torum.

CtJEp. 117,2;

5 ;

113, 1 sqq. ;
indeed, opposes
of

d. Gr.

and

Pliny,vi. 17, 60, and

J"n. ix. 31, mention

subject,and

i.

N.

water

quiry,
en-

aliud, hoc
angusta

Plin. H.

be

the

natural

to

an

declamations
of

According

; ix. 53, 167, he consulted

Seneca
about Ms statements
on

disappointment,

dignity

the

scarcely

feeling of

above-mentioned
on

In

but

Stoic

106,4;

where
some

106,

Seneca,
sions
conclu-

materialism,

expressly teaches

self.
it him-

GOD

he

like them
in

working

the

Deityis

same

and

Stoic

follows the

doctrine

the world

God

and

the

world, but

God

as of the invisible
visible,

bringsforward much
side of
and spiritual

Cf. Pldl.tl.

4 ; 134, 1 ; also
of the existence

161, 2
2

135,

Gr.

discussed
nection
3

of

but,

here,

131,

God, 131,

3 ;

5.

of:

Seneca's
will

he

spirit
infra, p. 219, in conwith his psychology.

Seneca

us

"

he

between

relation

of
merely the reason
of the
the whole
itself,
things.4Seneca, however,
moral

and

in

rialistically
; that

visible

even

as
parts of
things are described
the Deity (Phil.d. Gr. III. i. U6,
6) ; that only a corporeal god

back

take

can

into

the

himself

of
by means
the world's
conflagration (Z,e.
141, 1). If, therefore, Seneca,

corporeal

world

very explicit (ad Helv. 8, 3) places the Plathe fact*that

tonic
conception of Deity as
the
and
be- a
efficient must
incorporeal reason,

viz., that

gether ; that
represents to

the

the

with

be

of

unity
upon
it

the

soul which

he

of

Deity

the
"

to-

same

in fact,

as
Deity" is, as we
part
shall presently find,conceived
by Seneca, in agreement with
Stoic school, matethe whole
a

of the

also

So

manner.

is not

everything depends
holds
sjrirituswhich

substance

poreally
universe,3 cor-

from

everything
body ("Jp. 117, 2), it follows
he
what
that
(Up. 102,
says
of the
7) must hold good even
world

hut

prefersto place the efficient

Proofs

1.

Ibid. III. i. 118, 4.

conception

incorporeal
essence,

the Stoic idea of God

Ill, i.

177,

forms
the

whole

VllL

the

Even

emphaticallythe

more

this he

with

accordance

he

and

CHAP.

is not

world

the

as

substances.2

extended

an

they do
breath,which

the
spiritus,

permeating the
in

the force

matter

sense

togethermaterial
the Spirit,
not as an

the TTvsv/Jia

from

matter

holds

and

21

Deity from

exactly the

active force is the

as

MATTER.

discriminates

it,and

this in

does

AND

of

Stoic

conception, according to
the Deity is the universally diffused spirits*,side by

which

without

side

discriminating

second

them,

the

spends

with

his

own

only

corre-

opinion,

Cf PMl
d. Gr. III. i. 146, 6 ;
148, IjalsoJV. 16(ap.Lact.I"2s".
i.5,27) : guamr4s ipsep"r totum
4

seaorj)us("Q.mundi)inte}iderat;
and

also

Pneuma

the
and

Stoic

r6vos.

doctrine

of

214

ECLECTICISM.

activityof Grod in the world

CHAP,

the idea of Provi-

under

VTTT

L_

dence, and the order

and

the world

of

arrangement

aspect. God is the highest

teleological
science,
the perfect Spirit,whose
wisdom, omnireason,
holiness,
ness,
and, above all,His beneficent goodare
continuallyextolled.1 He loves us as a
father,and desires to be loved by us, and not feared ; 2
the

under

Creator and

therefore the world, whose

and

is,is

perfectand beautiful,and

so

world

blameless

so

Since

ways.4

its centre

the

the

the universe

it is the

ception
con-

nent
promi-

of the

care

has

in his

is less

physicalelement

ethical

in many

proves

so

He

of the

course

life of man,

moral

the

of God

Seneca

which

generaltheory of

his

in

than

the

ruler

Deity

goodness and wisdom, in. which His

perfectionis principallyrevealed to Seneca; and
therefore it is inevitable that the personalaspect of
the Deity,in which, as reason
forming and governing
the world and working accordingto moral
ends,
should
He
is distinguishedfrom the world itself,
preponderate,as 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,however,
for men,

His

to

thus

and

whereas
1

say5 that Seneca

gave
in

Authorities

Pkll

true
are

to

abandoned

ethics

Stoicism
given

in
26

348, 1.
found:

Cf. Holzhonr, i. 90 SQ.

171, B

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.
*

and

matter

are

Fr. 26 j b. Lact.
; F. 2to. 8, 4.

ffr. III. 1
139, 1 ;
Others may
easily be

d.

direction ; that

new

Gocl

the Stoic idea,

Of.
j

Phil, d, @r.

178, 2

135,

Holzherr,i. 33

ii. 5 8$$.

in

Inst. i. 6,
III. i. p.
5.

36;

FORCE

AND

their essential nature

MATTER.

one,

215

Seneca

in

different ; that God

essentially
porealnature, who has formed

they appear

CHAP.
VIIL

him

is to

as

the incor-

the world

will,
by His freeand that his god is no longerthe god of the
Stoics,but of the Platonists. Our previousarguments
will rather have shown
that the conceptionof
God, which according to this expositionis peculiar
to Seneca, is in no way foreignto 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
that has ordered and adapted all
things,the reason
thingsfor the wisest ends ; by them also the belief

and

is most

regarded as of the highestvalue,

vigorouslydefended; and the law of

the

universe

and

Providence

in

of God.1

of

definitions

his

of

derived
in

abandoning
according to which

in the

God

sg.;

Seneca

S/p.6, 16, where

143, 2.

herr's chief

is

says

d.

for the

between

(23p.65),as

essen-

God

will be

and
seen

d. Qr. III. i. 131, 4

with
entirelycorresponds
*#".,

from

Phil.

only

irvsvfia, conceived

the doctrine
to

which

of the Stoic

De

Prov.

5,9

school,

indeed,

Seneca,
;

as

and

(the

when
mere

ex-

in
qttes-

$w.L JrW/116,can
Grr. prove nothing)he bringsforward

quoted

Similarly Holz-

proof

tial difference
matter

as

same

Phil,
Chrysippxis,

III. i.

the

is

matter

pressly appeals

8q.

from

those

and consequentlyis often annulled

distinction,
of the world's development; 2
the course

Of. Phil. d. Gr. III.l. 139, 1 ;

exactly the

Seneca,

is far from

159, 1; 161; 163, 1; 171

505

that

shown

efficient force and

he, too, seeks

that

have

also

school

distinction between

with the will

moralitycoincides

They will
other hand,

the

on

is

tionsin

Nat.

for the

Theodicee
the

that

tion

dependent

herein

follows
but

also

Phil.

on

the

Divine

proposiartist is

his material, he
not

only Plato,

Chrysippus,as

is shown

d. "r" III. i. 177, 1.

216

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
.

and
.corporeal,

1__ the

Spirit; l declares
incorporeal
to be parts of the Deity,and

in the

not

-partsof the world

God

the

and

world

the

be

to

the

law

of the

unalterable

therefore,a

certain

theologyand

that

consist

his

in

theirs,or

of the

giving

ethical aspects,and

sometimes

to

primarilya

is

the moral
the

as

and

his

Vide

Phil.

Daus:

148, 1
tura

to

This

relation in which
stand with

the

him

former, so

the

it

all the

was

of

the

easier

this

on

Stoic ethics to react

that

it is undeniable

the

supra, 213, 3.
d. ("}?.III. i. 146, 6;
m
; J8p.92, 30: Totwn
et umrm

d, Gr.

Henef.

III. 1
iv. 8, 2

Ke" idem

("fficio
.

140

m.

Dei

9iom"i)ia"sunt

wa/rw

ntentis

gfft"stafa

wa

LOG. tit. and Phil. S. G"r,

III. 157, 2; 168, 2; of. 108, 1,
2. Tihe same
results from Be'ncf.
4

vi. 23, though Seneca

at first exif the will

as
presses himself
of the gods were
the author
est utritMgve, of the laws of the universe.

est nee

cst

qfus 0t

et sooil summ

sine Bco

natura,
di"tat

But

theology,and

hoc,quo contincmur,
membra.
3 Pkil

the

of the
physical determinations
in his exposition
less prominent

for the dualism

14$, 1 ; 140
ct

of the

latter is subordinate

account

Stoic

doctrine.

speculativeelements

theologyare

upon

the

consequence

the ethical.

than

of the

is

bringsthat conception
ordinary presentation,

Socratic-Platonic

metaphysical and
Stoic

it

lays greater emphasis on

to

the

does not

definition ;

new

therefore

sometimes

his

between

Stoics,this

constituents

the

If,

essential definition of

any

up

introducingany
he

exists

elder

to the

causes.4

natural

of

difference

merely that among

conceptionof God
nearer,

Providence

universe, and

concatenation

identifies

the will of God

nature, fate,and God,3 and reduces

to

same

Nw

Dots

naturam,

"na-

siM

NATURE.

THE

oppositionof God
with

the

and

ethical

matter, in

oppositionof

stronglyasserted

more

unity.1 If,however,
limits

of the

WORLD.

Stoic

direct connection
and

sense

him

by

217

than

original

this side he has reached

on

doctrine,he did

not

VIIL

is

reason,

their

CHAP.

the

'

step
reallyover-

them.
Nor
and

do

of

find in

we

nature

ciplesof

the end, and

origin,
;

its

His

the

theory of

that

anything

the Stoics.

its form

Seneca's

contradicts

the

Tkeorintf

prin-

concerningthe

utterances

formation

new

the world

of the world

itself
unity establishing

of contradictions,4

out

and

maintaining itself in the ceaseless

change of things; its beauty 5 assertingitself in the
of its productions; the perfectadaptamultiplicity
tion
of

which
doubt

doctrines

and

Vide

have

we

in

serve

from

other
To

ISp. 65, especially 2

23.

PML
d. Gr. III. i. 149, 3 ;
144, 1; 152, 2; 154, 1; 155; 156,
8

3.

In

connected

that

and

had

He

their
opposes,

aggerated

the
the

been

proportion

nearer

doctrines

these
with

mankind

general
in

Seneca

as

first

un

in

corrupted

of

the

ex-

Posido-

nlus on this subject. Gf J2p.

90, especiallyfrom s. 36, and
.

PJtil. d. Gr.
8

FT.

III. i. 269, 6.
PMl.
d. 6fr" III.

13, and

i. 146, 6, end.
4
JV. Qu. iil

not

cause

as

us

to

any

verifythe'

respectingthe

sources

the littleness and

super-

27, 3 SQ. : V. Be. 8" 4 sq. ; Jgp.

107, 8 ; and Phil. d. Gr. III. i.

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

iv. 5 ; ad

Benef.

Sen,
passages
Mcvre. 18. The

conception of the world as an

they were
beginnings, itrls Dis
comJiomini'biisgve

however,
notions

theory

world

arrangement/

complete and

to

of his school.

are

its

it should

evil in

all these

"

accounts

the

even
7

ends

to

means

10, 1,

3 ; \ii.

the

wiunis9 in
is

latter

eminently Stoic.

passage
Vide PML

d. Gr. III. 1. 285, 1 ; 286, 2 ; S61 sq*

7
Concerning the Stoic Theo-

Seneca's

dicee, and
tion

in

it

participa-

much
(about which
quoted) vide ibid. III.

might

be

i. 173

sg$.

tJie m"rld
nature.

218

ECLECTICISM.

teleologyhad already
an
earlyperiod,he opposes the propositions
created
world was
not
merely for men
: it

into
ficiality

CHAP,

L_

fallen at
that the
rather

carries
l

laws ;

own

it

which,

its purpose

it is

that

paid

to

place

we

welfare

the

that the

and

gods

the

to men.3
greatest benevolence
likewise concerningthe system of the

its

"

heavenly bodies,

their

influence

nature,5 their

earth, and

of man,

parts- the elements, their qualities

transition
into
each
the
other;4 on

and

their

and

when

its

arrangement of the world regard

the

in

he says

universe

follows

itself and

limitation

undue

an

unceasinglyshow
What

in

miring
aspect of the useful, instead of adglory as such.2 Pie does not, however,

its

was

Stoic

the

under

deny

the

the

revolution, their

divine

earthly things; 6 the

on

spiritthat

it ; 7

animates

on

the

of the universe,8
regularinterconnection
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
Eetief.vi. 20.
2
JRenef.iv. 23 sq.
3
Benef. I. e. ; vi. 23, 3 ."?#.
; i.
1. 9 ; ii. 29, 4 sq. ; iv. 5 ; Nat,
Qv".v. 18 "tpa8S.
1

Be

30, 3

JBcnsf. t
iii. 29,

it in the
the

which,

as

confined

23.

Qu. i. 4

d. 6fr. III.

of

manner

his

school

natural

gnosticationthrough

the

PMl.

Qu. ii. 11;

couples with

he

theory of

1. 179, 3
(Nat. Q%. iii.10, 1 ; 3) ; ibid. III.
i. 183, 2; 184, I (Nat. Qu,. ii,
4

Nat.

c.\

2),but

the

pro-

stars,

he believes,is as little
the five planets as

to

influence

above

mentioned

(Nat. Qit.ii.
32, 6 3$. j ad Marc.
3
and
iUd.
185,
18,
Qu.
3).
(Nat.
10) ;
vi. 16); Nat. Qn.il C; J"".31,*5.7 Nat. Qu. vi. 16; ii. 6.
On
5
Nat. Qu. vi. 16, 2 ; vii. 1, 6 ; the repose of the earth, wide D"
Pnmd"
i 1, 2 ; l$p.93, 9; Nat.
2.1,4 ; J3ew"f.iv. 23, 4; vi. 216

In

Seneca

regard

to

this influence

alludes first to the

ral influence

of

the

stars

natu-

; of. vii.

Nat.

Qu,

2, 3.

ii. 2-7

d. Or. III. 'i.

187,

(0.ff.

Bo in

regard

(cf.Phil.

4).

to the

comets,

He

also adheres

to

be

found

natures

to that tradition in the few passages

his

works

his

in

mentioning terrestrial

CHAP.

L_
_

of man.1

exclusive

In

219

NATURE.

HUMAN

human

of

views

he

nature

farther

is

ology.

removed

the doctrine

from

of the elder Stoics.

The

groundwork of these views is formed by the Stoic

psychology with its materialism; but the dualism
of

the

ethics, the

Stoic

theoretical
felt in
direct

of the world

view

theology,acquires a strongerand
influence on
his anthropology,
in which
tendencies

hand, he wishes

whole

life of the

Stoic doctrine
him

to

is

the

it; and

upon
monism

the

and

thus

ceived
simpleprincipleconother, the ethical opposition

nature

against the
introduced,which

in the

even

of man,

transferred
based

and

Stoic

ancient

over

dualism, is

the

the outer, which

essential

sequently
con-

school,the

his

sharplyaccented, is

so

more

On

another.

one

derive,with

to

on

the inner

of

cross

soul from

materially;

by

itself

alreadymade

had

his

on

his

two
one

of which

reaction

approximates

anthropology,and depends upon it.

The
soul, says Seneca
(in general agreement with
it could not
is a body, for otherwise
the
Stoics),
possiblyhave any effect upon the body,2 It must,
to the

which

Platonic

he

dering
orbits
1

considers

stars

(Nat. Qu*

Seneca

crimination
fee. (PML

by
of

with

virtue
essential

to

very
vii. 22

be

wan-

distant

*"",)"

ag%rees with the disand

of i'"ts
Averts,
d. Gfr. III. i. 192, 3)
of his classification
natures

mentioned

8upra,j). 209, 2; like Chrysippus

(PUL d. Gr" III. i. 193, 1) he,

to the animals

indeed, ascribes
a

prinoipale,but

on^y
(De Ira,

no^

cides

re"son,

i. 3). With

what

cerning the
(JEp.121, 5
2

He

denies

is

them

but affections
this coin-

remarked

con-

soul life of animals

sqq. ;

expresses

unequivocallyon
JBp. 106, 4, and

124, 16 sqq.).
himself quite
this

point

it is not

in

true

220

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

finest of all

be the
however,certainly

substances,finer

VIII.

than

even

fire and

air.1

consists,in

It

word,

of

breath,or Trvev/Aa? This theory had not prevented

the elder Stoics from
recognisingthe divine
nature
to the fullest
and dignityof the human
spirit
extent, and Seneca is so completelypossessedby it
warm

there

that

is

other

no

frequentlyand

more

more

effluence

reason

is to him

Divine

Spiritimplantedin

taken

has

his

up

(Holzherr,ii. 47)
arguing

is

abode

Grod he

to
relationship

from

an

himself

did not

lie

premiss

Stoic

share.

he
the contrary, he is speaking
if he
in his own
name
; and
gation
investithe
declares
ultimately

which
On

does

he himself

not

regardthe good as such, stillless

that he
the
but

was

is

soul

the

soul

is

it

"

the

the diseases
of

and

bodies, and
for

given
the

it" that

changes

of

turning
blushing
cannot
that
and
they
pale,"c.,
accounted

fextas
"to*

ff.

'Mtas

corjww.

declares

soul

to be

If, however,

for

muni-

Tom

corpori imprimi
This
his
the

also Seneca

own

the

As
be

air cannot

pressure

qui

or

i.

194, 1).
flame

the

or

subjected to

blow,

toMiisxiwo

cis

poreal,
cor-

already

had

Cleanthes

]3p.57, #.

the

the

body,

something

(ibid. III.

shown

120,

corporeal alone

upon
be

must

sio animus,
oonstatj de-

opinion.

affections

so
something corporeal,

are

is the

est.
ftt"gti
corjnt"!t
If a
6.

omne

JSp. 50,

can

man

wood, and make

it
straight, quanto faeilius
(t'liim
fiendMUs
us ati(?jj)itfflW9iff"M"
crooked

bend

et

ovi-rbi hit more

Quid

pression,
exqu(im"

and

be

work

body.
of

are

reason
cause

and

se

d. Or. III. i.

if the

3) ;
can

only

modo

quodaMi

(Phil.

Mb"tu

is

affection

an

animus

our

hand, his

one

holds

affections

they

soul ; for
the

this

on

animo,
noti potcst
brought jjreh"njl'l
a"liiic
tenuwr
est
igtw,
jpvr
enquiry, qm

good
proposition(I. c.) that

the

the

to

as

quiteindependentof

further
of

is

assist tins

to

viz., that
The
same
the

in earnest

not

which
proposition

forward

the

as

worthless
the good
a body
does
not
1
it
(s-itjpra,
p. 207, ),
to be

is

follow

there ; and

question whether

of the

that

he reiterates

emphatically. Human
of Deity, a part of the
human
body, a god who

bases, on

that

to say

which

theorem

est

enwt

aliud

ftuodamimodo

Vides
sjtiri.ttts?

aniw.tis

$6

atttem

Jtfibens
tanto

faoiliore^i omni
mat"ria""qua/ttotenttior est.

s/riritum
alia

/
oibseqwMtior

esse

d. "r. III. i. 196, 2, and

142, 2,where definitions entirely
versal
similar
are
proved to be uniOf. Phil

among

the Stoics.

VIRTUES

for the

demand

mankind

in

the

every

internal freedom

that

who

man

direction with
the ancient

side of Platonism.
and

the

soul

above

is conscious

This

essential nature.1

from

deviate

of

221

the

recognition of the dignity of

the other, the
and, on
man;

of the

high origin and

however, takes a
him

VICES.

elevation

for

and
earthly,

AND

The

alone ; but

Seneca
Stoic

Divine

in

in

thought,

which

makes

doctrine

the

on

is his reason,

man

opposition

of his

to

stand

reason

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

the

oneness

this to confuse
of man's

them

in their belief

But

essential nature.

explained,unless,with Plato,irrational

the soul

admitted

were

reflections

no

human

manners

this

Some

cease

his

subject are

all

men

that

utterances

quoted,

Phil

on

d.

Gr. III. i. 200, 2 ; 201, 1 ; and

2

influence

more

With

vide

216, j
mpra"
6, 7 ; 11, 6 $". ; Nat.

on

all the greater

weakness

that the

and

whole

superiorpower
would

complaints of the
and

Similar

he was
convinced
absolutely
without fault;that all vices

more

societyas

the

nor

of

nature.

beingwas

of evil in human

broken,

the

of

powers

the reason.2

as

vividlyhe felt its moral

more

implanted in

were

had

of human

imperfection,the
that

well

as

have

must

Seneca's view

force,the

already

had discovered that the affections couldnot

Posidonius
be

to

as

V"B" ad Helm.

Qu. i.Prcef.

even

12 ;

corruption

of

after the renovation

JSp.41, 5

120, 14, "c.

2
Of. supra,
a

be

never

Cf. PML

44, 1

65, 20

p. 64.
d. Grf. HI.

*%. ; JSenef,vii. 27 ;

so.*

i. 253

Hj).94,

54 ;

CHAP.
VIIL

ECLECTICISM,

222

CHAP
Yirr.

"^ innocence

time

"

would

oniy Of short duration.1 Such a universal phecannot

possiblybe regardedas accidental :
nomenon
or
if a few only sustain the conflict with sin,none
^e

next

to

side

by

Divine

not

which

which

element

This

reason.2

and

error

be

and

irrational

is

also be

must

cannot

sin

in man,

side with

by

side

and

it ; and therefore

Divine, there

the

side with

element
from

free from

are

none

reason,

derived, an

strives

against

of human

irrational element

an

nature

in the body, the oppositionof

primarily
more
the
Spirit he emphasises much

Seneca

finds

which

to

stronglythan the ancient Stoics appear to have

The body, or, as he also contemptuouslycalls
done.
is something so worthless that we cannot
it,the flesh,
3 it is
husk of
mere
a
think meanly enough of it :
the

soul :

short time, and

burden
for the
and

Expressionslike

JBp.11, 1-7; 57, 4, are

ot less importance.
1
Nat. QM. iii.30, 8 ; cf. PJdL
in

d. Gr
'

III. i. p. 156, 3.

in

Ep.

04:, 55,

inyesta,sunt

inteqrostac

accordinfx
Stoic

cxistwws

they develop

to

the

standard

opposition to

causes.

NuMgwwi

in, fwnorcn

WMnqunM

"ni corta

nm

contemptm

libertds

eat.

we

ineftwn,

Jwjus

Cum
cor/Htwulimtittttor.
tatvm

our

natural
:

(id
omnjM'llflt

istft

wit, di"traJiam

Vices stand,

us;

gradu-

ally. But that does not exclude

the
theory that they develop

Ufa

of

in

themselves

But

lilwros gen nit.

be judged
must

fatalism,

iadeed, in

vocation,

inherent

not

are

euro

sttjwnulli

nfituracmoiliat

this*
utterance
the

si

vitito nasti:

wwermt,
ritio

and

this.

noluenwi

nos

for

home

and

destiny

natural

from
himself seems
freely themselves
8
lie says,
lNrms'
/#". 05, 22

Seneca

to admit

feel itself at

never

can

entered

by which it is oppressed: a fetter,a prison,

loosingand opening of which it must neces-

elsewhere.

those

it has

into which

tenement

Ulo

W.WM

sooift-

oorporis
Concorn.-

ing1the expression cf. (id

24, 5 ; Kp. 74, 16 ; 02, 10
Phil, d. 6V. III. i. 445J,
8.

Ma/ro.
j arid

IMMORTALITY.

sarilylong;1 with

223

flesh

its

it

through its body it is exposed to

ings, but in itself it is pure
exalted
the body, even
above
above

The

matter.3

therefore,with

must

do

battle,

attacks

and

suffer-

and

Grod

the

life of

true

YIIL

invulnerable,2

as

is exalted

soul

begins,
body, and

the

departure from the

to exchangingthe Platonic
though Seneca is averse
belief in immortality4 for the Stoic theory of a
limited

of

continuance

existence

after

death, he

closelyapproximates to the latter 5 (ashas already

been
shown) in his idea of the close relationship
the present and
future life,and
existingbetween
also

in

the

to

respect

duration

of future
him

expressionsinvoluntarily
escape
the

in

strictest

ventured

employ

to

soul,which

is

the

soul,

Quid

cunGtaris

domum

esse

pondus

death

of

Depone

urgetur, in

sed Jios-

hospi-

est

vinoulis est,nisi

pMlosopliia,,"c.

cit. 21

I will not

be

cum

Loo.

slave to

body, quod equideni

my
vinclum
aliter adspicio quam
oircunidaaliquodlibertati tnece
cilio

in
.

hoc

o"bnoxio domi-

24,

came

hue*

atque

animus

est

after tius

inici
8

Ulna

liber
ad Marc.

Ep. 102, 22

Polyl.9, 3

5 Part

III

habitat.

24, 5 ; ad
i. 203, 3.

Omne

illi

certamen
et

sidat.

jactatur
et
ipse sacer
cui
non
jpossit
.

quidem
et

vnamis.

Ep. 65,

24

Quern

in

lioo

locum Deus obtinet, hunc

Jiomine animus.
JVa".
Qu".

mundo
in

Prof.
4

14.

Phil. d. Gr.

202,

III. i.

154,

1 ;

1.

Ibid.

Iwimortalis,

203

sq.

animus

grave
abstrahatur

Helv.

non

turn

in passages

Marc.

ne

no

11, 7: Corpmculmi
hoc, custodia et vlnculum
animi,

prcvnente

acoessit
:

Nee

certainlyhad

kac

est,

COTJJUSJWG anwii

'pwna

ae

Ad

Ad

have

not

pre-existenceof the

countenance
2

is

onus

120, 14

corpus,
quidem breve

65, 16

tium.

day

Jwe

et

pitium

the

body

necessarium.

onus

an

The

vela/nie'iitwn of

natalis.

ceterni

illo

33

The

26:

102,

even

finds

system,

%p. 92, 13,

garment,

Stoic

would

term

personal existence

as

his

place in

of the

sense

existence

which

57, 9

154, 1

; and
;

Phil.

203, 3).

aeternus

CHAP.

(J$]j".

d. 6fr. III. i.

ECLECTICISM.

224

CHAP,
yni'

the

where

high

of its

recollection

descent

is

en-

joinedupon the soul,and its elevation to heaven is

home, when it
representedas a return to its original
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
this

entirelyescape

discrimination

he follows the Platonic

Posidonius
of

irrational

desire ; 3

being again divided into courage

and
though he expresslyincludes

all under

the qryspovucov,

element

doctrine
there

and

so

rational

soul, the

the

in

irrational element

and

With

inference.

far adheres

and

them
to

the

againstPlato and Aristotle,

his theory and that of
between

of his school

still remains

Chrysippus the

important

in the very

difference

that

Seneca

of

a plurality
personality
of originalfaculties,while Chrysippus makes
one
fundamental
and the same
faculty,reason, generate
affections and desires through the changesthat take

assumes

placein it.4
Though we

centre

the period of
help recognising

cannot

24, 5; Up. 70,

d.
12; 102, 22; 120, 14; Phil
"r. III. i. 203, 2 ; 3 ; $]".65, 16 :
1

The

Ad

soul

Marc,

will

rflrerti

ad

ilia

dcri ved powers

of the soul \PMl.
III.
i.
(h.
d,
198, 1] or analogous
ext

them) in, koo princijmli

atignid irrationale, ext et
to

rationale : Hind
Mtio
s"ntiti.
(02,30 ##.).
git-orionfit/it
2
"oc. oit. 8 : Zrratwnalis
Supra, p. 64 $q$.
pars
8
anwii
habet
duns
partes, alteJUj).94, 1 : Pnto inter mfl
amHtwrnm^
mcorpori raw, aMwiosam,
tecfuvconrcniet, externa
in
honor
in
a,m"
ew,
poteritem,
adftfatwni"
posit
adtjitirijcorpus
a-niwi coli,in animo
wityistras, per
QUOM

ess"

Cartes

mwtmtur

aUMMrgiw, pro/tieripyunifwin*

oipale no'bis datas

(tlieseven

bu$,altrraMhumilew,)lm{jwidam
voluptatlbm deditam
("Jp. 71,
27).
4

Vide Phil

d,6

OCCASIONAL

eclecticism

SCEPTICISM.

in these

doctrine, yet the

is also exhibited

deviations

225

from

the older Stoic

language respectingthe same

elsewhere
speaks in the tone

he

conviction.
the

fact that

the

comfort

God,

on

in

We
his

sceptical

Grod
sound

cussing the question

that

views

the
he

choose

to

says

one

another

about
'

things?
1

Of. Z.

What

"

One

sets

how

should

and

to

not

be
echoes

enim

tarn

ipm

veritas

set forth

Stoics
theories

swjvra
; and

tiM

dicer e,
Id

Meat.

nos

est

after

qiia/m
he has

objections of the
the
Platonic
against
the

he

proceeds

thus

Aut

to

all spe-

the

Tim.

determine
same

way

it

is, no

29,

the

is not
other

about

passage
o9 which

in

and

definition

soul, which

the

quoted

quis

verisimillimttm

Assertion

fj^^"

declares

justifiedin

text.

qitisverissimttm

dis-

in

conflictingof

certainty

tiawi

awn

niably
unde-

an

where

this

up

jBp. 65, 10 (cf. 65, 2, and

65, 23) : jFer ergo judex sentenvideatitr

things
attack
by

causes,

In

the

can

itself,attain

pronuntia,

of all

among

powers.2

et

concerning

has

probable:

145, 1.

c.

from

elsewhere,

highest

most

soul

We

argue

every

it

he

content

our

that ; but

But

when

the

fathom.

can

clear

the

matic
dog-

Gulatwn-

truest, exceeds
of

is.1

be

must

man

against

of the

of full

his mother

dependence

himself

secures

deciding what

not

the

by

subjectsof

perhaps,

cannot

epistleto

afforded

he

YIIL

scepticalside of this eclecticism

by Seneca in the occasional uncertainty

of his

which

CHAP.

calling

from

Plato,

Seneca

preceding

has
con-

s
JVat. Qu. vii. 25, 1 : Midta
sMwt,g[fit""%esseconGedi'ni'us,qua"lia"

sunt,
animum

ignovamus.
.

qididto/men

omnes

si-tanimus

Habere

nos

fatebuntur

ille rector

nostri^ non
magis
dominusque
tiU
qui$q%a"m easpediet,gwam
alius illim, dicet $j)iriidbisit:

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,.

ECLECTICISM.

"26

CHAP.
vm.

Seneca

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

which

to

otherwise
he is not

with

that, as

and

Cicero

other eclectics,it is,above

things,the strife of philosophictheories which

the dogmatism of the Stoic to waver.
causes
The
Stoicism of Seneca is purer in the sphere to
which he himself attaches the greatestimportance
all

"

EtTiics.

in its

doctrine

him

in

finds

agreement
mtk

the

principles
of the

Staics,

accordingto
which

asperities,

eloquent representative.

the

he

its

moral

Stoics that there is

virtue

alone

paint

can

is,for

the

no

man,

satisfaction

independence of all external

invulnerabilityof the wise man, with

fortune,the
that

also in

Stoic

the

it secures,

and

glowing

with

nature

of the

and

zealous

virtue, because

but

good

idealism

grandeur, and

declares

He

Essential

The

namely, ethics.

glaringcolours

even

the virtuous

is in

man

no

he is convinced
inferior to the

way

Deity, in a certain respect,indeed, is even superior;

not
in
he requires from
us
merely moderation
eradication ;
emotions,1but their unconditional
our
"

he

the

unity and

the

about

well-known

the

reiterates

deerit,qiiisanguinem dicat,

qui

calorem:

adeo

animo

non

potent Uquere de ceteris rebus,

De
adhiio ipse se gw"rat.
ut
Clement,

taken
little,
still

3, 5, would
prove
alone, and Ep. 121,

less.

In

(beginning) a belief
which

is

Up.

102

in immortality,

based

rather

ments
state-

equalityof all virtues,

the

perfectcompleteness of

Non

12,

remarkable

upon
on

wise

man

the

wishes and authority than

a
fiettum
proofs is named
; but

somnium

Vide

1 *#., and

quid,

PMl.

Ep.

this is

tant.
unimpor-

d. Gr. III. i. 252,

53. 11 : Est
ali-

sapiens anteeedat
quo
ille leneficio
natwce
non

Deum

timet

mo

sapiens.

OF

MORALITY

THE

the

of
misery, defectiveness,and madness
which
in fact, all the principleson

stamped

all the
can

we

opposed by
The

kind.

the

Stoic

The

on

have
I

morality

few

might

us

these

of life

On

of

from

of
for

natures

how

can

and

all

it be
are

the chief

75,

18

and

so

stituent
con-

stant.
Con-

Ep. 29, 12.

reprehensi-

emotions, Be Ira, ii.

116, 1 sqq.

origin

of

virtue, Ep. 113, 2; 117, 2;

Otio, 1, 4 ; Ep. 65, 6 ; Ep. 108,
De

his

8 ;

ciple
printhe

JSp.94,

29.

On

wisdom

and

the

principal virtues,JSp. 89, 5 ;

95, 55; 120, 11; 115, 3 (the

division

of

the

virtues, Vita

cf
Beat.
impulse of self-preservation,
25, 6 s%. is of less importance)
Sen.
67, 6 ; 10 ; 88, 29 ; Benef.
Up. 121, 5 "%%. ; 10, 11 ;
Vita
Beat. 3, 3 ; Mp. 118 sqq. ;
ii. 34, 3.
On
the
disposition
the
will
of all
seat
as
Wp. 121, 14; 92, 1; 76, 8; 89, and
15 ; Vita, Seat.
the
8, 6 ; Mp. 120, virtue; on
equality of all
22 ; Benef. iv. 25, 1 ; JSp. 122,
and
vices
of all
virtues
and
the
Good
5
and
vi. 11,
Concerning
evils,
Benef.
goods
sgr.
and
goods, Benef. vii. 2, 1 ; JEp. 3; i. 5, 2; ii.31,1; Ep. 71, 18;
.

11 ;
On
wise
66, 5 ; 71, 4 ; 74, 1 ; 76,
66, 5- sqq.; 66, 32.
Conand
men
85, 17 ; 120, 3 ; 118, 10.\ cerning
fools,Benef. iv. 26,
the autarchy of ./irtue
27, 2; v. 12, 3; 15, 1 ; vii. 3,
of exand against the admission
ternal
2*#. ; 6,3; 8,1; -2^.8
and
corporeal things, 73, 11, 13 ; Prov. 1 5; 6,
pleasure and pain, among
goods Be Const. 8, 2; Be Ira, ii. 8-10;
d. Gr. III.
PMl.
and evils, wde
Be Const. 2, 1 ; 7,1; J^.9,14 et
i. 215-221

; Benef. vii. 8 sgg. ; J"p.

7", 76, 20 "#".; 71, 17 sqq.

On
Q

he

are

another

2, 1 ; JBp.75, 11 ; 85, 5 ;
On
the
nature
and

places
the

must

happiness,De

5 ;

the

even

him

to

as

the nature

bilityof

with

accordingto nature,

derivation

of mind

13,
On

one

of

tions
quota-

them

in innumerable

its

who

peace

others, though many

added, since Seneca

doctrine.

doctrine

tions
ques-

these

completing

But

which

reasons

is intended

men,

already quoted.
myself, therefore,

leading thoughts

ethical
and

to

'

orator.1

perfectvirtue

be

declares
the

all

referringto
and

and

CHAP.

the

inclinations

been

content

with

and

definite utterances

most

Seneca

the

Stoic

reflections

capable of a pure
applied unaltered
1

of the

perceive that

recommended

have

of

full decision

pathos

unwise

peculiar
been
most
clearly
of personal conviction,

had

Stoics

the

with

"

and
here

the

of

character

227

STOICS.

and

quali*

ECLECTICISM.

228

CHAP,

these

also says,

and

maintains,

Seneca

as

he

evils,as

have

deeply rooted

so

in

our

is conditioned
happiness of the wise man
by his wisdom, the autarchyof the virtuous
virtue which
correspondsto the Stoic demands.

nature

by

weak

and

wicked

The

are
profitus if this virtue and wisdom
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 originalseverity of the
system. Like the

What

does

it

older Stoics,he

things besides
goods
among

attributes

virtue;3

d. Gr. III. i. 252 $$$.,

utterThe
supra,, p. 221.

Phil.

and

with

Paul

on

of man,
contact

personal

the

points of

them

between

given rise

their

Apostle

the universal sinfulness

of the
this is one
and

striking-of

most

have

of the

those

for

word

almost

offcen coincide
word

quoted

there

Seneca

of

ances

to the

which

legend

written

correspondence;

cerning

which

AbMndL

of

and

intercourse

con-

p.

of.
377

Baur, J)rei

*##., and
St.

A.

Paul,
Fleury, Seneque
Paris, 1853 ; i. 269 sq$. Hisally regarded, this coinciet

value

reckons

and

wider
other

the

On
1

the

in

certain

these

sense.4

This

hand, he

is

dence
kinds

only
of

duced

other

to

things

is unimportant.5

longer

no

shows

that

expositionwere

from

similar

procircum-

stances, experiences,and
and

peraments,
need

writers
immediate

not

that

stand

connection

to agree,

two

terntwo

in any
in order

as to their words,
in many
propositions,
2
As Seneca
admits, Trcwqu.

An.
3

7, 4

even

J$p.4,

2 ;

90,

44.

E.g.,yyro"ucta,
(vporj-y^va,

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

AND

GOODS

quite consistent when

he

life and

other

at

existingcustoms,

careful

and

notice.1

attract

can

language

But

than

the

of

virtue, and

is once
better

no

steward

since riches

of
add

may

alone

he

of

to

of

an

the

with

compliance with
of all that
patetic
of the Peri-

more

when

Seneca,

to

things

opinionthat Fortune

giveopportunityfor
the

to

external
when

evil.

the

with

nimous
magna-

philosopherchallenges

encounter, when

spectaclewhich
misfortune

sounds

It

folding
un-

goods

thing

same

which

cheerfulness

is the

It

man

the

external

virtues,and

ternal,2
ex-

find

can

the wise

giftsthan

in

self-satisfying

the

indifference

of

virtue.3

enough
Fortune

can

something
says

about

for her

number

springs from
what

of

more

Stoic

of

necessaries

avoidance

hear

we

spiteof all his declamation

nature

for the

counsels

times

extravagantly OHAP.

sometimes

praises the Cynic contempt

229

ILLS.

he
the

extols the
wise

man

mity
sublipling
grap4

gods ; but
this loftytone
changes only too completely into a
feeble and
querulous sound, when Seneca (topass
affords

to

the

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

Academy

and

the Peri-

pateticsin distinguishinglona

that
says
virtue is

named
view

is

ad dimtias
(to
everything except wssima
improperly (precario} riches) per cmtemptum
Further
The
former
via est.
tiarwn
good.

to

and

be

found

in

Ohrys-

others, Phil. d. 6fr.

III. i. 262, 3,

ippus

Phil.

d.

Gr.

true
dim-

proofs

215, and

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.

8, 4 *q". ;
Trangu. An.
Senef. v. 4, 3 ; 6, 1 ; JBp.29, 1 ;
90, 14; Senef. vii. 8 *".; tip. 178,2; 215,2.
1

III. t

the

'__

ECLECTICISM.

230

CHAP,

other

over

though elsewhere
unimportant examples),1

and

that

breaks

land

every

forth

when
or
exile,3

that

we

must

which

those

when
are

in

is

for the

home

good face upon the

high places permit

themselves
that

earnestness

Though

this

partiallytrue, yet

subject are

there

it is another

with
they harmonise
with the principles
of the

and

utterances

himself

excuses

that he is not

in such
wise

regards himself
As

in

incredible

voyage
Not

the

(incrediHlia

only

later
2 ;

Benef.
27,
writings,as
EJJ. 24, 3 ; 85, 4 ; but also and
exile
especiallyduring his own
to

consolatory letter
mother, cf 4, 2 ; 5, 4 ; 6, 1
in his

8,

3 sqq. ; 10, 2 ; 12, 5 $([%.

3
Ad
Polyl. 2, 1^ 13, 3; 18,
and
in the Epigrams from
9
-,

exile.

The

dedication

to

Poly-

is said

to

have

Seneca

subsequently
press on account
ies it contained

tried

to

of the

supnatter-

this

freed-

of

He

his

master

only

and

is

(Dio, Ixi.

10).
4

De

Ira,
the

also

ii. 33 ;

Ep. 14, 7

admonitions

to

prudence, Ep. 103, 5 j 14, 14.

Elsewhere, indeed (as in De
Ira, iii. 14, 4), Seneca's judgment

his
;

Stoics.

wisdom,

to

vi.

general

will be ; he

and

man

cf

his

in

in

road

his

true, by avowing

ever

short

described.

are

nor

the

on

where

Ep. 53,
troubles

it is

cases,

man,

as

sunt, guce tiderym} of

bius

that his observations

allow

must

we

question whether

uselesslyin the politicalstruggles of his

time,6

"

doings

wrong

more

himself

sea

his

over

jects
subobedient
peaceablecitizens or more
and when
than the philosophers;5
even
Cato,
for sacrificing
is blamed
is elsewhere
so
idolised,

who

man,2

courtlyprinciple

much

evil,

no

wise

lamentations

he enforces the

with

he argues
no

on

put

is

unmanly

into

own

banishment

that

constantly
assuring us

quite different,

was

Ep. 73,

where

he

honoured

are

other

among

assures
things
us
rulers (the then ruler

that
was

the

Nero)

fathers by the
indebted
are
for their leisure,
as

philosopherswho
to them
6

sake

Ep. 14,
of

the

12 sggt.; cf. for

the

contrast, Ejp. 95,

Const. 2, 2 ; De

69 sg@. ; De
JProvid, 2, 9 "qc[.

if

content
l

better ;

his

but

him

with

things

23

WILL.

FREE

concessions

to

CHAP.

somewhat

going

are

hnman

weakness
_

expresslyrelate to the wise, and his avowal leads us

back to the question as to the real existence of the
which
Stoic wise man,
Seneca, as before remarked,
has

the
scarcely

courage

But

if he thus

substitutes

the

for

system

on

as

he is in

the

who

man

affirmative.
is progressing

requirements of the
sarily
therebyneces-

are
reality

whereas

; and

lowered

in the

answer

man,2 the

wise

man

to

it at first seemed

if

as

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 accordingto nature
and reason,
and as if such a life were
solelyand entirelya matter
of will and
not
of power ; 4 but this homage which
the philosopherpays to his school and to himself
his deviation

cannot

conceal

from

of the

earlier

Stoicism.

The

will and

of moral

power

us

Stoics' ethics started,is

it otherwise

Were

he

57,
2

Vlt. Beat.

89,

3 j

Cf.

not

16

s^.j cf.
5, 2.

Ep.

ad "elv.

JEtp.72,

s$$. ; 75, 8

duces, gua/n"uan*

express

weakness

s$g. ; 42, 1, and p. 268-271.

*
Benef. i, 1, 9 : Hos seqttamur

proud reliance

and

spirit
the

on

himself

wickedness

of these

the unavoidableness

and

men,

the

from which the

intelligence,
with Seneca deeply shaken.

could

stronglyrespecting the

from

defects.

Vit.
imbecilUta"patitwr,

18,
modo
*

ii.

Cumpotuero,

so

of
We

Beat.

mvam

quo-

8 ; Be

Ira,

vportet.

Mp. 41,
13,

9 ;

1 8%q.

116,

232

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
YIII.

perceivea similar deviation when

his sublime
wise

Divine

and

man

all life is
is the

onlyplace

of

wrong

to conclude

from

refuge.

from

Pjlyl. 9, 6
supplicium est
procelloso

Ad

vita
tarn

gantibus
mortis

rhetorical

The

cit.

Marc.

11,

the
Tota

the

anni

well

has

was

strongest
and

the

manner,

modern

both

in

times

cient
an-

and,

wise

clogged with

was

of

con-

greater, and

his

were

with
17 ;

his

perfection
and

possessionswere
household

of life much

manner

the
man,

that

faults ;
many
stricter than

were

his life ; that his

:

from

the

that his words

quentlyBeat.
fre-

in

vana

still far

is

as

been

speaks
studia

acknowledges plainly
of

epistlead

37 j 102, 22
detineor car^

defamed

made

he

he

than

known,

he

this
where.
else-

character,

Seneca's

himself

claim;
inter

altogether

as

He

"

sumpti (Nat. Qti.iii. Preef. 1) ;

cere.
2

life

sg".
this

fleUlis vita

terrenoqm

such

valuable.
same

in the

Ep. 108,

est,"c.
Gram

of

makes

less

find
Thus

no

preserve

contradictions

blameless.

navi-

4,

nature

consolatory
testimony the
we

his

of

period (to the best

Seneca's

Twc

in

mari

treatise

But

Omnia

so

did not

influence

vacillations and

jporti($ nisi

LOG.

est.

the

belongs)to

mdlus

in his life he

nevertheless

sq.
.

in earnest

his character from

death

frequentlyand

so

as

that

assuredlybe

the faults of

he

of which

men

would

he

emphaticallyexpresses \ but
free from
keep sufficiently
positionand

It

its storms

this that he is not

principleswhich

the

with

the

of

to complain l
sufferings

torment, and that amidst

spiteof

Providence,is forced by the

of human

consideration

in

the blessedness

about

utterances

Seneca,

and
rious
luxu-

more

properly

patible
com-

principles( Vit.

JEp. 6, 1 et pass. ;
though much
exaggerated

vide p. 231,2),and
be invented
or
may
in that which

his deadly enemy

xiii. 42,
Suilius,ap. Tac. Ann.
often
extravagantly glorified.and Dio Cass. (if he is speaking
This is not the place for a comin his own
plete
lowing
name) Ixi. 10, folon

the other

hand, it has been

examination

question,

or

for

of this vexed
the

of its literature

shortly mention
points.
be

the
It

mistake

the

; but I will
decisive
most
be

would
to

same

or

an

equally

hostile authority, says

of his
colossal income
(supposed to

tion
enumera-

tainly
cer-

regard

300

millions

his avarice,and

of

his

sesterces),

luxury, we

must, nevertheless, suppose

that

he was
philosopher,
of his people and

as

so,

deneies

over-rich and over-powerful

minister of Nero, ascribed
to
external
possessions a far
and
perhaps
greater value,
unavoidable
beyond what was

the

'

his

in

position

luxurious
have

might
a
expected from

use

Concerning
the

and

of

splendour

Ms

to

the

ten-

we

can

CHAP.

L
(

unwortMer

part is ascribed to
by Dio, Ixi. 2. Meanwhile
is censured
Seneca
by Tacitus,
xiv. 52, for precisely the opposite

them

conduct.) "Whether
accessory

Tacitus

not
can-

counsel

their

to have

asked, little seems

was

for
Bio

(as

12)

When

say.

they

plan

murder

Ixi.

maintains,

the

to

Agrippina's

riches

Ms

alive

so

of his age, that

were

more

it,than

of

been

Stoic.
*

made

not

233

SENECA.

OF

INCONSISTENCIES

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.
and

houses

country

been

left to them

been

with
synonymous
destruction.
certain

severity with which

demanded
repayment of a

he

2, the

of sesterces

millions

of ten

the

of

one

that

Similarly,it

he,

empire,

official of the
to many

regard
he

had

his

post,

such

like

seemed

it

MeanwMle
form

the

towards

failure

favoured

Nero's

duty

of

commonwealth.
difficult

is

If,for

judgment.
Seneca

Seneca

strength for
might have

course,

don
to aban-

if

even

the moral

had

and

was

could

do

the

to

to the

tion
posi-

they
things. "When
admission
Nero's
in
acquiesced
of

into

the

14)

tells

the

power

his

also

mean

xiv.

even

11)

mains
re-

his life.

spot on
unworthy
and

pressly
ex-

it,and

(Tac.

dark

Claudius

had

crime

flattery
freedman

Ms

Polybius (in the Consolatio ad

he sought
PolyMum?) by wMch
to effect Ms

and

the

despondency

blame-

justly considered
with

he

misfortune,

tMs

able, especially when

they

Ms

are

equally

of the deceased
l*udus
despot (in the
morte
Claudii) and Ms

unworthy
de

ment,
banish-

from

return

under

displays

for

thing they

according

of

the

not

oppose
it

defended
So

did

he

contrasted
stance,
in-

Burrhus

inclination

best

that
to

are

acting (Tac. xiii. 12 8$. j cf. c.

that
avers
2; xiv. 2), Tacitus
tMs

but

speaks

he had

reproach himself

to

hardly

tMs

had

in

himself

position it was
possible to avoid it ;
to

wherewith

fore
Be-

Seneca

(Tac. xv. 62) as if

no
complicity with

When

committed

once

aid

wrong.

death

Ms

have

may

his

lent

silent, or

been

of

may
and

courtier

as

own

was

rection
insur-

in favour

Nero

Britannicus.
be

the

of

causes

under

loan

their

valiant

mockery

protestationsto

sqq. et jpas*.; ,mp.

the other hand, the

(4

immoral

conduct

Helvia

230,2).

On

reproach of

cast upon

Mm

(L #.)are
proof,but to
(xiv. not only without
circus, Tacitus
tions.
all appearance
that
gratuitousinventhey had not
us
to

Mnder

it.

(An

by

Suilius

and

Tacitas

Dio

describes

the

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
VIII.

expect from
his views.

him

If in

perfect logicalconsistencyin
addition

the

exaggerationson
well

may
which

opinion he

clear

how

effect led

him

the

or

in

even

consider

we

side

one

that

understand

he had

this

after rhetorical

easilythe endeavour
into

to

we
other,,

questionsas

is not

to

sistent
alwayscon-

in his utterances.

further

In the

of

influence
rhus

on

and

Seneca

Nero

(Tac.

Bur-

xiii.

2) as

are

of

matters
but

61) to Ms
appeals (I. c, xv.
independent bearing towards
gives
Nero, of which. Tacitus
an
example (Tac. xv. 23), and

ethics,as

we

and endeavours
principles

moral

himself

salutary. Seneca

very

of his

development

likewise

traits
favourable
of

displaysparticular

which

throw

ter.
light on his characknow

We
school

tion,
convic-

earnest

that

Sextius

he

in

the

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
likewise

The

word.

bold

of

says
all his

author

same

from

abstained

meat

him

(notwithstanding many
years, according
hatred
elsewhere),lix. tion's precept; and in

during
to

So-

many

irdvras fjt,ev/ca0' eavrbv

'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

19

/xafowTroXAota

Se Kal "\.\ovs

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
Tacitus

before

friends

jam

uimm

death

his

guod
pidoherrimum

et

Tictbebat,
imagines, vitce
in

and

65

c.

in the

many
had

he

Piso

for

the

him

clari-

throne, gitasiin sontibm

""

virtutum,

fastigium deteoto.
his

in

that

much
not

man

swnimwn

Seneca

tions,
prudential considerain
the
as
contemplated

transfer

of his property to Nero

(xiv.53 $g. ; Sueton. Nero, 35)
be

adduced
evidence.

cannot

is

to

the

sion
impres-

whom

his

dictory
contra-

of the
features
of his
pleasing
life is finallyhis beautiful relation

self,
him-

declamatory,

as

One

most

with

writings, despite Paulina, cf

only gives us
of

that

relates

conspiracyof

destined

tudine

sues

follows

Tac.

xv.

his
.

admirable

Mp. 104, 2,

63 s%.

wife
4 s%, ;

should

expect, the

which

'

already pointed

out

Stoics

the older

their

Without

ciples.

of their school in
stress

greater
their

It has,

that Seneca

such
the

determinations
and

conditions

most

important

In

period

of these

minations
deter-

of such

terrible

of

the

fixed

for himself

found

the
to

power

mind

own

he

If

Fate.

external

have
earnest

himself, and

in

to

impregnable
surroundings

an

his

corruptionof

of

others, all

basis

his

in

refuge against the

and

for

first consequence

of

necessities

been

gain

his attention

turned

distinctions

men

among

lost their

when
each day
significance,
the most
beheld
abrupt vicissitudes of fortune,1
and
historical oppositions disappeared
when
all national
the most
when
in the generaldegradation,
with the highestfavours
often endowed
abjectwere
the best succumbed
of fortune,and
to wrong ; and
that all men
such are to be
thus far the principle
as
held equal,and worth is only to be attached to their
have gained fresh support.
moral inequality,must
must

have

But
1

on

Seneca

the
from

(Trcunqu. An.

hand

other
this

irit and

applica-

chiefly

as

it must

to

and
from

corruptionand despotictyranny,

thinker

*__
s

somewhat

moral

the

CHAP.

acceptationof these prin- ^ai docabandoning or alteringthe ethics trine*.

any important point,they yet lay

three.

are

prominent

closer

The

times.

235

whole.

differ
generally,

on

with

correspond

Stoicism

as

the,.yonnger
in

STOICS.

principlesare

same

characterise

however, been

LATER

THE

OF

ETHICS

the

moral

as

experience ciallyin regard

11, 8 sqq.

16,

1 ;

"fy. 74, 4, et passim} deduces

the
moral
application,espe-

own

conduct,

attach
ternal.

any

well

value

each

to

that

as

he
to

the
man's

dares not

things

es"

"36

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

of the

social conditions

VIII

Stoic

have

must

weakness

human

livelyfeelingof

time

and

evoked

need

of

help ;

have

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
the school must
chieflyhave been developed on the
of universal
form
side of feeling,
in the
love, of
mankind.
Finally, the less that circumstances
in the way
of
afforded opportunity to individuals
severitymust

with

effectual interference
the

the

of the

course

world,

fate pressed upon all,

heavilythe common
it fulfilled itself
and the more
the
relentlessly
the inclination
for public life have been
must
more
lost,and the predilectionfor the repose of private
life have gained ground, but the more
stronglyalso
the necessityfor submission
to fate,and for
must
more

"

the

interdependenceof moral
which the Stoics
conviction,
this

never

religious
denied, have

be

perceived in Seneca's moral

writings. The independence of external things,
and virtue,is by
*s assured
to us
wni"n
by wisdom
commended
than by him.
one
no
more
energetically
No
one
pressinglyto seek our
requires us more
happinesspurelyand entirelyin ourselves,1and to
All

ternal.

had

with

itself felt.

made

tMngsese-

conduct

Numerous

may

authorities

this will be found

30, 4

8g$. ; 77, 11

Cons, ad

Marc.

21 ;

4, 3
85, 18

120,

3 ;

Beat.

for

in

J$p.82, 2 ;
*#. ; 8 sqq. ;

19, 3 sq". ; Vita

," J@p.66, 14 ;

71, 18,

; 39 ; 87 ; 11 sq. ; 44 ;

92,

14

sg$. ; 72,

7 ;

Benef. iv. 2, 2, 4 ; Vita Seat.

11, 2 ; 13, 5 ; 14, 1 ; De Ira, 1,
9, 2 *#.; of. JBjp.
85, 10; Phil, d.
Or, III. i. 234, 252, supra
226, 1.
To

the

tions

on

Provid.

decided

more

this

2,

declara-

subjectbelong

9 sqq, ; De

De

Const. 3,

OF

ETHICS

bravelywliat

encounter

it is his moral

this

fate may

insists

attached, and

the

subject the

he

be

sick
believes,

won

and

in

the

is

man's

conflict,1
of

need

'_

man

the

earnest

more

CHAP,

to which
on

that

convinced

over

severe

since

gives to

conditions

becomes
he

But

us.

emphaticallyon

of the

more

victoryis only to
evil by the most

send

most

fulfilment

it is

237

alone which

constitution

freedom, he

conscientious

SENECA.

the

inclination to
All

he

as

are,

healing; the

com-

Strictness

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
he now
himself that he is visiblyanother
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 ;

2 ;

4,

Vita

40

5,

Beat.

Cf.

Baur,

Drei

AbJiandl.

p.

Jwc

sqff.
Besides

the

est in

ipsum argumentum

meli'us

quotations in
PHI.
cL. Gr. III. i. p. 253
^.,
and supra, cf. Mp. 50, 4 : Quid
nos
deeipimus? J"on est extrin2

Et

transla-ti

animi,

guod

vitia, sua-, qua adTvue igvwrabat,

videt.
Quibvadam cegrisgratis
latio

fit,eiim

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
peccati (ac- sapiensest,
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.

One

infects

another

Sana"

accetu.
T)imur,simodo separemur
Similarly,,%. 49, 9 j 7, 1 ; 94,
52 s#". ; 95, 29 s%.
3

In the

which

is

remarkable
so

passage

strikinglysugges-

the
as

distinguished

merely
on

disposition,

will and

whole

the

theoretical

hand,

one

temporary

and

provement

on

from

the

conviction
and

merely

occasional
the other.

im-

ECLECTICISM.

38

too

CHAP,

1_

stronglyimpress

upon

self-examination

and

severe

ourselves ;

he

the

us
a

recommends

necessity of

ceaseless labour within

to

what

us

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
made

of the wise

the reward

as

he

and
activity,

moral

and
life,

those

to which

he

counsels

the

But

Of.

also

5 *#".,

Ep. 50,

2 ;

Ep.

such

43,
manner

Men

GOT

great

so

part

of

individual

Ep. 26,

4 s$g. ; PUL

live

in

He

into this

goes
very
in his 94th

letters, in the

his

d. @r.

whole

minutely
and

95th

former

proving
indispensabilityof special
precepts for practicallife,and
the

scarcely in the latter that

that

corre-

III. i. 204, 3.

militandum

proioe qii"eungue

51,

lawiant*).
De Ira, iii.36 ; cf p. 186, 5.
Ep. 28, 9 ; 41, 2 ; sup. p. 237,

tmm

devoted

completely the

more

6, 13 (nobis qiioqm
e$t

of

designed for specialcases,

has

himself

circumstances

writings.7

his

unceasing
consequentlyfinds necessary,6
of virtue,
universal principles

by side with the

those enquiries into individual

side
all

of the most

of

universal

ethical

principles(deereta). In
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

kwic
4

te

mi^er-um^

testem

si contemnis

Vita Beat.

20, 5

JBp.83, 1.

68 sgg. ; 95, 14 "%%. ; 29 sqg.

7
Especially in the treatise
De

Benefciis and in the letters.

LOVE

sponds

Ms

to

OF

239

destination,the

moral

will he find himself

MANKIND.

with

connected

closely

more

others,the

L_

more

and the
purelywill he apprehend this relationship,
The
more
entirelywill he extend it to all men.
Stoic principlesrespectingthe 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
element, and the severityof the moral judge before
which
bears witness
not only to
a lovinggentleness
the benevolent
dispositionof the philosopherbut
also to his accurate
knowledge and impartial judgment
In politicallife Seneca
of human
nature.
is not surprising
feel no confidence,which
considering
can
^

he lived,and

the age in which

experiences:
that

he

without

cannot

we

dependent on

too

the world, and

that of

As

far

is shown

Cf.

state

activityof the

in Phil. d. Qr.

1; 287, 2; 299, 3.
ibid. III. i. 295 sgg. ;

are

Clement,
cannot

Seneca
of

statesman,

the

based

and

of

beside

have
upon

fining
con-

for
free

i. 3, 4 sgg., where
we
that
what
suppose
says of the importance
of the commonroler

(cf.mpra, 230, 7),

J3p.14,
wealth, apart from
also,De
and, concerningpolitics
4 sgq.

to him

seems

connections

which

our

to allow of his

race

Those

of the

waste

polityof mankind

the great

to them.

to

us

evil

ourselves

the condition

it ; the individual

the

so

injury make

hopeless for

greater charm

III. L286,
2

moral

personal

of mankind

mass

teacher of the human

himself
him

too

beside

small

the

their favours,and

Commonwealth

strengthupon

finds

his

some

CHAP.

ex-

Universal

ECLECTICISM,

240

CHAP,
YIII"

choice and

peculiarcharacter
he has devoted
to

reason

what

from
held

Seneca

To

and
treatise,1

entire

suppose,

had

individuaL

of the

an

subjectthat
himself

the needs

regulatedaccordingto

are

marriage
have every

we

told

are

we

and

the

on

life,of which

married

he

tion.
experience,in the highestestimafor friendshipalso appears in him in

full

A- taste

degree, and we have already seen

in reconcilinghis need
of
that he has difficulty
and his noble conceptionof this relation
friendship
for himself.2
with the wise man's
But
sufficiency
a

very

the

marked

real

universal
which

of his

crown

itself

bestows

and

lies in

the

the

on

most

forgetthe

slave does not

doctrine

interest
purely human
all without
even
distinction,
in the
despised,which even

of man,

love

the meanest

moral

in that

gentlenessof
is so
dispositionwhich
especially
antagonistic to
and which
anger and hatred, tyranny and cruelty,4
man

travagances of expression, is
merely the language of a courtier ; it was
not only quite true

the

according to the existingstate

of things, but
his
doubtless

treatise which, however, consist

for the most
part of quotations

own

empire as

constituted,

the

it was

pax

urMs,

was

servation
induit
duci

th

linked

with

Olim

enim

utriusque pernicie ;

nam

est, ita

ut

illi

kivio

other

fragments

authors
and

and

wicked

of

this

exam-

women,

Haase, iii.428 $qc[. On the

of marriage there
view
enund. 6fr. III. i. 203,
ciated,cf PML
.

4 ; concerning Seneca's
wife
(of the first we

his preita
se

Ctesar, ut sereipublicce
sine
non
jyossit,

for

cf.

aMerum

wribiis

know

even

p. 234,
*

her

name)

second

do
vide

not

sup.

n.

Vide Phil. d. Gr. III. i. 289

syq.
8

Ample authority for this is

republic quoted,Ibid, III. i.29 9 ^.286, 1.
4 A
mode
of thought which
abandoned, public service

capite.
was

that

the

For

from

dominatio

the

its cliarm

best of them,

pies of good

then

(as
emperor
the uniting

he says in c. 4) was
bond of the state ; and

Romana,

in

that

personal conviction

the Roman

lost

have

roust

opus
But

if

the

et

241

INJURIES.

OF

FORGIVENESS

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

punish, does not exclude

and will not return
its goodwill,
from
enemies
injury with injury.1 Seneca's dissertations on

rather

than

spare

subjects are
the

to

the

among

moral

of

purity

beautiful

most

even
even

these

testimonies

arrived

conceptions

by

at

antiquity. In their content, as has already

with
the Stoic
been
shown, they entirelyharmonise
principles; but they have manifestly arisen from a
classical

different

somewhat
also

itself

expresses

in

in

and
lust

passionate
of

the

For

also

reason,

same

of

account

on

dispositionand
those

self-control,

sentences

the
such

severe

which

Great

his
want

passed

were

Alexander

Roman

upon

nished
fur-

material

welcome

Seneca's
rhetoric, Benef. i.
i. 25 ; De
Ira,
3
Clement,
13,
;
iii. 17, 1, 23, 1 ; Nat.
Qu. vi.
for

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;

JBenef. iii. 18-28;

De

i. 18, 2 ; ii. 4 ; JEp. 31,

Beat.
Wt.
24, 3. In De
11;
Clem, ii. 4, he speaks of the
possibilityof uniting mildness
Clem.

with

justice

neglect;

and

this

between
the

one

the
and

tion
distincnot

temper

it

ought, the
punishing has regard
to all really available
grounds
of extenuation
; it desires only
out
to carry
complete justice,
in

De

Clem.

10,

1 "0. 28

i. 6 ; De
Ira, ii. 9, 4 ;
iii.
3 (on the
27,
;
of man
should
we

weakness
not

"

be

with

angry

error,

pardon it) ; JBenef.

iv. 25

far, according
of the
Gods,
example

(how

favours

be

to

but

sqq.
fche

should

bestowed

on

the

vii. 31 sq. (vincit

yertinax bmitas). As the
in spite of all unthank-

ungrateful ?) ;
malos

gods,

fulness, continue

unweariedly
the
worthy
upon
and the unworthy, and patiently
rain

to send

with

bear
who

the

we

husbandman
9

them,

act, and

by

of

error

misconceive

should

culpable
does

milder

where

punish

human other
in-

the

of

war.

and

cided
de-

repudiation
gladiatorial shows
censure

for

the
the

of

of life and

idea

so

those
also

gratitude
in-

conquer

benefits,
conquers

as

the

ful
unfruit-

ground by tillage; L
s%. (hidden benefits).

c.

ii,

ECLECTICISM.

242

CHAP,

vin;

than

found

were

the elder Stoics.

among

than
with
community is stronger with Seneca
them, and though the social nature and vocation of
is in both

recognisedwith equal decision,

cases

in the older Stoics it appears

of

duty, in Seneca

of human

he

as

chief

From

the

the

on

virtues

source

of his

ethics.

will of G-od is to

and

to imitate

to nature

the

divine

up

in that

he

all

of

with

men

us,

the

on

well

as

nobleman

humanity

on

belong to

with

Nature, and,
will of

Gfod with

est

naturam

noUs
mere

1:

in
and

et

he

Deorum

ex-

mand,2
com-

bases

soul of

the

union

and

the

PUl.

De
i. p.

can

slave

of the

as

dividual
in-

the

gods

govern

it ; 5

sequi. L,

V. Be.

thought of

emplum

the

rerum

obey

; to

conscience

the

the

Proposi-

seeundum

school.1

propositionthat God

320,

JBenef. iv. 25,

his

and

reason

15, 4-7
vi. 23, 1
therefore, JEtenaf.

of nature.

laws

of

of life according

the universe

Phil. d. G"r, III. i. p. 130.

The
Deity here coincides

also the

claim

us

follows

universal

most

the

with

the

highestlaw

perceivesin

his abode

who, with

the

spiritdwelling in

equalityof
take

him

that will,is the

synonymous

tf"

of the

Here, too, he

tendency

common

The

hence

; and

the

throughout

inclination,

also derive

must

we

"

affair of

an

of benevolence

stress

same

religiouscast

tern-

the fulfilment

as

more

philanthropic
disposition.How
closelythis softeningof
Stoic severityis connected
with Seneca's deeper
of human
dicated.
imperfectionhas alreadybeen in-

sense

perament.

more

and
affection,

laysthe

the

reii-

need

of

man

His

The

e.

vii.

Mp. 16,

31,2;
5 ; of,

; Provid,. 5, 8.
A, G-r. Ill.i. p. 319, 2

1.

Ep. 31, 11 ; Tr. JBe. 20, 5 ;

Otio, 4, 1 ; PMl
d, 6V. III.
302, 2

296,

3.

SENECA'S

he

RELIGIOUS

pressinglyinsists

quiescencein the
this

at the

last

and

on

decrees

dispositionthe

freedom

have

would

of the

Stoic

one

doctrine.

he claims

is

of

use

system

Cf.ibid.
Ibid.

HL

Qw.

Deorum

nee

with
the

and

Seneca

divine

clai
Iw-

nee

i"bm

tranqnilledegere

et ipsisDls

in

expedito

the

agere,

admittunt

comparison
this

vanced.
has said

In

of the

nothing
thus
sine

there
is

ad-

dwells

nemo

he

est

an

venit

ad
est
:

15

and

homines

propius,
nulla

sine

divina
"bonus

renit,
in

in

JioDeo
cor-

dispersa

eultor

ess-

origini prodeunt
paria Ms, ex quibusorta, sunt,
The help of God
sivrgunt,"c.
must, therefore,consist in this :
that an
effluence of the Deity
et

vero

as

poB

in-

(through
mind

Semina

gii"B si
tipit,mmilia

but

JBoniis

D"us

quod

ire

of the

poribus Jiumanis
sunt,

in

conscience),
:

Deos

ad

~bona est*

mem

which

meant

man's

proceeds
Deo

is

spirit(by

else

and

in

JSp.41, 2, after

that

mines

passages

proposition

divine

reason

from

plainly results

erecta.

et adscendent-

elevation

immo,
This

Hie

porrigunt. Miraris

manum

will)?

kabenda,

est

nisi
?

Similarly, JEJp.73,
Dl
fastidiosi'non

Iwmin"m

de

"c.

mr

powers.4 If,

sunt

vidi:

si whimus

felicitate controversiam

he

with

coincides

adjutiis exsurgere
concilia magiiificaet

Deus.

renmi

levia, minitantem,

which

assistance

In, itnoquoque
virorvan
"bonoruwi
Deus
incertum
(quis
esf)Jiabitat

vo-

nee

the

aliqms supra fortunam

test

Non

us

of the

wholly in

its natural

veseari, si

which

spirit

assistance

despicerefortunam.swpervacKapromittentem,

the true

the

i. p. 306, 1.
vi. 32, 5 : Si

felices, si

esse

minum

anima

there

ab illo

Nat.

timore

all these utterances

no

without

III. I. p. 304:,!;

litmus

says,

propositionthat

1.

all to

which, he

flow from

as

the

reason

our

us

and
life,2

above

supernaturalaid,but

no

to

but,

Even

to be understood

of that

sense

good

from

in

for the

man

open

ourselves

death, without

be

can

deityis

305,

leave

CHAP.

ac-

sees

foundation

of the wise

happinessis possible.3 In
is nothing which
does not

Providence,and

secure

accustom

us

for

contempt

the

of

refuge the voluntarydeparture

would

no

willingand joyful

of mind

peace

24S

most

time, he

same

TEMPERAMENT.

is combined
\6yos(nr"pfiaTucbs

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

therefore, Seneca's
the elder Stoicism
on

distinguishedfrom
this must
character,
by its religious
understood

be

account

no

is

doctrine

to

that

mean

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

peculiarlycharacteristic of him ; his distinction

from the earlier Stoics is merely quantitative. That
the religiouspoint of view, however, acquired with
must
attribute
such great preponderance,we
him
and popularcast of his philosophy
partlyto the practical
of human
ness
weakand partlyto his livelysense
is

imperfection,which must naturallyhave

frequentlyand more
disposed him to point more
the moral
to the support which
life of
emphatically
and

belief

the

finds in

(rod

in

and

his

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

people,but of the fallacies of Stoic orthodoxy; how

in the
the pluralityof gods is cancelled
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,
Here

shown.1

Seneca

also

of Roman

human
a
body in the
of man.
nature
spiritual
1 PMl.d.
"9r.III.lp.
312$"#. ;
;

324,

1 ;

340

2.

last

quoted,

Even

326, 1
in

the

337, 3

passages
soothsaying and

as

worthy

Stoicism,in which

with

315, 5

appears

the

power

of

atonements

only defended
very
Seneca
ally; and
treats

such

absurdities

presentative
re-

purer

are

conditionelsewhere

things simply as
(Nat. Qu. iv. 4, 6).

freer view

and

religionhad

of

Pansetius in its very

had
of

Seneca

Both

thought.
of their
the

make

been

is

fruitful

as

by

To

individual

have

details

and

trines
doc-

seek to

possibleby
this

in

mode

theoretical

generallycomprehensibleand
to

example
Pansetius,

and
practical,
as

it

the

his whole

in

the

the

which

and

Cicero.1

postpone

school to

latter

implanted by

seen

great resemblance

bears

21

commencement,

maintained,as
constantly
a
a Varro, and
Scsevola,

of

PANJETIUS.

AND

SENECA

ment
treat-

application

an

endeavour

they

scrupleabout recurringto other than Stoic

or
predecessors,
departingfrom the Stoic tradition
no

certain

on

considerable

more

and

the

on

base

of

moral

the

tiveness
the

the

than

Pansetius

morally

diseased

ethical dualism

Stoicism
1

PMl.

Cf
.

1, and

on

by
with

his

d. "r. HI. i.p. 340,

the

is

and

been

healing

regarded as

arises the

more

partlyby Ms
Stoic
book

fusion

school, and

to Platonism.

expositionof the

theology in
of

Deonm,

the
from

justifiedpartly ing passages

particularconnection
Stoic

the
is

race

defec-

have

while

and

the

in

and

to

seems

human

approximatedmore

j 170 syr.; 176

If
in
above
I
the
sentences
""".
Scsevola
and
Cicero
beside
name

Varro,

ethical

religionand the reaction of

metaphysics,
by which the later

sup. p. 49, 2

this

weakness

deeply shaken,

more

there
philosophy,

philosophy with

the

Seneca

is much

vivid

with

with Seneca

than

Stoicism, confidence
human

the chief task of

of

with

feelingof
more

case

of the

earlier

far

departures are

Pansetius

hand,

of man,

power

and

with

other

these

But

points.

the

treatise

which
are

second

De Natwa
some

strik-

quoted, Phil.

d, 6fr* III. i. 811, 1; 314, 2.

CHAP.
'

ECLECTICISM.

246

IX.

CHAPTEE

CONTINUED

STOICS

THE

EPICTETUS,

MUSONIUS,

MARCUS

AURELIUS.

CHAP.

STOICISM

IX.

maintained

during the

the

on

entire

whole

the

ter
charac-

same

of its further

history,
The Stoic
except that the traits by which Seneca had already
school continued.
diverged from the originaldirection of his school,
strongly. The
ultimatelyasserted themselves more
fore,
thererest of the Stoic philosophyknown
to us may
be discussed more
concisely.
Mtisoniits.
A younger
contemporary of Seneca's,Musonius
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
course

Hufi
etApophthegwiatac.Annot. Edid.
J. Venhuizen
Peerlkamp lem,
(Har1

C. Musonii

1822)
taken

are

landii

; the

from

Petri
do

pages
Nieuw-

also, Moser,
Da/iib und
2

and

in

Studien

Creuzer, vi.

von

74 sg[q.

Rufus,

son

of

was

Ann.

of

Capito (Suidas),is apparently

identical with the Cajus Mu-

good
Etruria

xiv. 59; Hist.

iii.

(Suid.cf. the epigram

AnthoL

Lat.

Burm).

xiv. 59 ; xv. 71,

Ann.
The
elsewhere.
Vide
the lowing
fol-

Musonius'

honourable

He

81 ; Philostr. Apollon. vii, 16),

and
more
especially Volsinii

Tac.

note.
3

7)

5,

mention.

(Tac.

Musonio

Rufo (which appeared in 1783)

11,

Pliny (JEp.iii.

makes

family,originallyfrom

first 137

Dimrtatio

of whom

sonius

i. 79 ; vol

i. 57,
of his birth

year

but

in 65 A.D.
of
Nero
teacher
Ann.

xv.

as

he

aroused

by
of

71)

his

had
the
fame

is

known,
un-

already
jealousy
as

philosophy (Tac.
and
according to

EUFUS.

of his

account

confined

personalcharacter.

himself

Julian, ap. Suid.

even

then

public office, it can

supposed later than
An

with

of

whom

death

A.D.

afterwards

judicialprosecution

his

the

accuser,

Bgnatius

Celer

(Tac.

xiv.

as

199)

p.

Hist.

iii.

leave

Borne

27 ;

him
but

this

of this,

put

as

is

to

presents
re-

death,

palpable error,
Justin.
arising perhaps from
ii.
8)j according to
(Apol.
a

Philostratus, I. o.t his place of

banishment
was
Gyara, which
was

visited

his account.

(ApoL
Lucian
that

The
his

in

the

Nero,

Musonius

one

pseudomention

was

ployed
em-

whom

here

c.

threw

Nero
whether

But
is

(I.

also

mentions

prison.

lived

really
by Pliny

Stobseus
him

given

seems

of his
and
of

those

of

reign
him

as

that

communicates
like

account

an

lectures

by

Memorabilia,

of

ascribes
(TLcaXicayy

Such

Wtovcrccviov

ciple,
dis-

the

tence
exis-

such

Xenophon, or
concerning Epictetus.

nius

must

is related

indicates

fioyevfiaTa

person

he

the

writings by

which

sonal
perHow

know

not

the

Trajan. Nothing
any

had

Titus.

do

we

survived

from

he

c.)
with

is

mentioned
have

to

to

as

Arrian
Suidas
airopvrj-

to

Asi-

Pollio, a

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-

Philostratus

Musonius,

he

on

in penal labour in the

proposed cuttingof the isthmus.

46)

xiii. 173

if he

author

same

and

19)

v.

all sides

from

but

ordered

by

relations

long

Galba

by

iii.15, 14 ; Tac.
and
when
the

Vespasian he
was
excepted (Dio Cass.
16) ; according to Themist.

40, 9,

Or. vi. 72, d. ;

p. 75 ; Themist.
vii. 94, a\ Suid., Movcr"j/ and

Kopvovros, instead

alone

be

probably

exile

81);
philosophers were

( Or.

Cass. Mi:
Floril.

from

to

seem

was

Ann.

71 ; Dio
ap Stob.

He

(sup.

seen

they

(cf Epict. Diss.

Ixvi.

xv.

is said
'

have

we

; but

recalled

59 ; Hizt. iii. 81 ; iv.

10, 40 ; Epict. Diss. L 1, 26)
banished
was
by Nero, 65 (Tac.
Huson.

Musonius

have

to

Soranus, identical.

he

of

Ann.

letters which

in Asia
53

year
and

the

revenged by
miserable

our

iv.

into

not

sonius been
Mu-

to

be

done

identified

by

ancient

(as
and

has
dern
mo-

and

Claudius
writers) with
of Philostratus
who
the 'Bafti"\cbj'io$
Pollio,
according to Pliny
should
be altered to Boi/Tur^oy, (^Ep.vii. 31, 5) had
written a
de
Vita
discarded
ing
Anni
(vide JNieuwland, Liber
or
(olderreadthe more
material
imseems
Mus"mi) JBassi,but rather
p. 30 sgq.")
since
are

as

meant,

these

valueless

as

statements

the absurd

with

CHAP.
IX.

Seneca

find him

we

in. the
Minor
Psetus
Thrasea
whose

filled

philosopher

decidedlythan

more

hardly be

TMs

exchanged with Apol20-30

lonius. How
the
A.r".
sonius
Tyrian Muof the Stoic school,
is related
1 o 'our philosopher
Eubellius
cannot
be clearlyascerPlautus,
tained,

adherent

the friend

247

the grammarian
Valerius
MUSONIUS
who
Pollio,
(Suid. I. e.) lived

ECLECTICISM.

248

CHAP,
'

to moral

problems.

bases of the Stoic

He

the

starts from

too

system, and

general

its theoretic

even

por-

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

tions

and

not

were

its

He

empiricism.2

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; of the regular
both in heaven
certain

manner

of the

transition

four

elements

itself through the

fulfilling
downward
under

of

Hadrian,

the

and

was

called

philosopher. According to
descriptionof the younger
Pliny (J3p. iii. 11) his son-ina

Oeiovs Kal

avrobs

pa"oj/. There

the

law,

the

Artemidorus

the

of

nature

heavenly
Qeocitie'tsajv6-

is

of Beneca,

cf.

whom

Ep. 120,

and

stagesupward

same

divine

another,3

into

one

Stob.

similar

claration
de-

Ej),120,

4 ,*

11.

This

Flaril. 108, 60.

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
was
wanting "pt\ia.$.That
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
dissertations)con"

is what
the

Ap. Stob.
(Mein.) : Man
virtue

ov

you

chief

looked,
over-

thing '),

Ftoril.

ycip

have

can

(cf. Schweighauser
Epictet. iii. 195) is the

open

attain

is
and

eTf-pcodw

rafacis

to

doubt,
Euf

23, 29, with

av-

roioZcrSe ncriy, o'/ovs$VTOLS

since

on

less

Musonius

in

us
Epictetus ;
always
a
comparison of Diss. iii.

shows

Opwiretas
svrv^VTGS
(^TLXTCCDS,

Mu-

sonius

117, 8, 89
to

of

utterance

an

(*here

that
intended.

(Ml.
he

is

JV". 4.
the

v.

1,

person

PRACTICAL

JETIS

l
bodies";

and

nourished

are

the

with

(in agreement
soul,he says,
blood ; the

these

as

lighterand

the

be

definitions,
standingin close

Ixy

the
Heracleitus)

our
therefore,

purer,

CHAP.

so

vapours,

evaporation of the

the

by

will

purer

by

Stoics and

is nourished

the drier and

249

CHARACTER.

food

is,

soul.2

Some

other

connection

with

ethics

respectingthe goodness and moral

with
perfectionof Grod,the natural kinshipof man
(rod,3the divine omniscience,4the divine law, the
such

"

those

as

effluence

of which

imitation

of Grod

to

These

whose

To

the

are

the

from

evapoand from

is sufficient.

waters

Stob.

Phil.

vide

gods for

earth

the

d. Br. III. i.189. 4 and

196, 2. The observation

79, 51, p. 94) that God

facultyof

signed the
best

down

thought

to

in the

Musonius

here

little importance; this

the

the

/4u7?/Aa0eou upon the

earth (similarly17, 43,p. 286); as

there
than

is

nothing higher
(Musonias expressly

virtue

the

enumerates

four

funda-

virtues)as virtue alone

him
makes
the perfect being,
beneficent,friendlyto man, and

mental

exalted

above

all weaknesses,

is

Jo. Dam.

of

the

the

gods

that

demonstrative

no

he

(Mein).
from

applies
discussed
the

this

in

infra"

thought

of

of God admits
the omniscience
of very forcible application in
the way
of ethical admonition,

in God

alone

infers

but

252;

p.

conduct

J3d. iv. 218

manner

for

also

Floril. Exc.

they require
proof; and

as-

(Phil.

140), so

nature.

ii. 13, 125

has

mean
may
breast
(cf ibid. III. i. p. 197, 2).
3
Fl"ril. 117, 8, p. 88.
Man

is

Stob.

omniscience

either the header

alone

virtuous

man,

Him

conceive

we

(Floril.

protected place

body, is of

as

d. Gr. III. i. p.

the

doctrines

Stoic

such

according to

Concerning

e.

corresponding

the

supposed
pre-

decided

no

handed

subjects been

the

nourishment

ration
2

had

even

an

as

have
necessarily

him,

to

virtue

popular religionhe also accorded

by the Stoic principles,
recognition allowed

the

the

duty,5 or

should

we

"

these

on

us.

belong

to

utterances

is moral

Loo.

Cf.

cit. 79, 51, p. 94.

Pint.
1 and

note

Aere
a

Alieno,
capitalist says

who

De

7, 1, p. 830, where

wishes

to

to

borrow

Musonius,
money

a-cor^ bv "r" /UJMJical

and' the
fy\oist ov Saj/effercu,
other
laughingly replied,ouSe
Sam'fei.
"5 Zevs

ECLECTICISM.

250

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 preservedto us,2the theoretical doctrines
in a casual
of his school are
only mentioned
But he has himself spoken
and superficial
manner.
be
to
most
are
definitelyon this subject. Men
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

is

from

these

deity

is called

divine

little

Zeus,

the

(Wloril. 79,
stars

Zeus

with

the

says

of

favour

that

marriage

Hera,
have

Aphrodite
protection ; while

it

Eros,
under
the

(JFloril.
against
the

filment
ful-

KCU

and
their

tion
observa-

gods.
than
these

uh\v "v

viov KU\$)V

he

in

among
of considerable

Pint.

SeTv ael

to the

all,more

are

and

length;

Peeiikamp'swork

they occupy

other
urges,
among
things,against the exposure of
Musonius

in

There

many
inVenhuizen

against Zeus Gramelios (PML d. Gr. III. i. 293, 2) so

and

service

fiftyof them

offence

children, that it is a crime

against the TrarpQai Qeol and
Zebs 6^6yvios (Floril. 75, 15)

argues
it hinders

duties ; among
our
the
duties
connected
others,

p. 249, 1) ; and as Chrysippus had

blamed
the unmarried
state as
an

end)

85, 20,

gods (sup.

as

Musonius

way

of

the

94);

51, p.

same

luxury that

The

and
of

law

treated

are

quoted

be

to

fragments.

law

the

respect, however,

this

there

135

pages.

ye

Ira, 2, p. 453
Moucrw[AejLLvfj/j.eda

ev

forty, " 2v\\a, rb

Coll.

fiiovv robs
depairevo/Jievovs

ffc"fecrdai.
jji"\\ovrcts. Gell. N.
v.
1, 2, and infra p. 252, 3.
This pointof view, under which

A.

the

Cynics first represented

philosophy (vide Pliil. d. Gr. II.

i. 285, 3) becomes
: Qeol yap
"irirpOTr"Ti"ovo"w austrikingly
T"J',tcadb vo/jiifyvrat
Trap'a,v"p"a~prominent everywhere after the
irois,

(teydhoi,even

if

and
voftlfcrai

the assertion
the

less

notion

stitute
sub-

still
startling,

distinction

points
the
popular and

we

thus render

the

of the

between

beginning of the first century

A.B.
already
j examples have
before us (sup.p. 77, 3 ; 237,
come
2) and

we

shall meet

with

others

Stoics, Platonists, and

philoso- among
phical
gods. In Neo-Pythagoreans.

ETHICS

OF

Philosoplijis the only

fore occupation with it

251

JSlU"OyiUS.

to

way

there-

virtue,1and

for every

is necessary

g'

one,

conversely virtue is the

of
sophise
philosophy; to philoonly end and content
to learn and to practisethe principles
means
of conduct
according to duty.3 A philosopherand
virtue
therefore synonymous
are
a righteousman
;
and
philosophy are only different designationsfor
the same
thing. But whereas Socrates and Plato
this proposition in the sense
that virtue
understood
is merely the fruit of a real and fundamental
ledge,
knowMusonius, on the contrary, agrees with the
be attained
without
can
Cynics that true wisdom
of moral
much
endeavour.
knowledge by means
Philosophyrequiresfew doctrines,and may dispense
the Sophiststake
such
light
dein which
with
theorems
for

even

but

women;2

; what

is necessary

well be learned

may

the occupations of the spade and

is far

more

thing of

habits of

the vicious

of

only to

are

men

in

plough.5 Virtue

the

than

custom

even

instruction,for
be

overcome

by

faus QiAtravrai /caA"s,"Vep

20
^iXocro^etVetm
; Floril.Q7t
ere'
^LKaiO(f6miv end : ov yap 5^ "$"iXcxro"piiiv
"m
fify eirKTTdfJLevos
this is im6voi6v rl effri ; but
pov TI ^aiverai*ov % rb a vpeirei
1

Stob.

read

we

Ftoril.

in

TTCOS

efy

"av

ireiv

rb

"al

X6yq"pev bvafrretv
fcirpoo-^/cei
regard to Gca"$"po"r"vT}
cpyij? 54 irpdrreiv.

without

possible
Likewise
the
and

48, 67, where

St/caios- 5e

philosophy.

rj" 51 7e etva*
:
ayaebv r$ ^iX6ffo^oveB/cu raMv
"v
j8a"n\6i;cr"zi^ ftttavai earn.
rts
vaLTQ
Similarly 48, 67 : the
el
fj.^)
/coASs,
"pi\o"rofyfiffcicif. good prince is necessarily a

fore

Floril.

123, 126

virtues.

other

TT"S

riva

Kal

Jo.

FkriL

793 51

rp6irov 8u-

Damage,

(iv.212

There-

s^.

ii.
220

13,

*^.

philosopher, and the philosopher is necessarily fit to be a

prince (?),(cf.sup. note 1).

5
LOG. tit. 56, 18, p. 338 "q.
13, 123, end,
Musonius
here shows
that the
216
:
Ka^oKa-yadlas
"j"L\oa-o"j"ia
p.
Kal ov$ev erepoy
is
cVrlv "7riT^5ewo-ts
calling of a husbandman
1.
best
ii.
fitted
for
JfloriL
a
c.
philosopher
48,
67)
;
(thus
13, 126, p. 221 : CIJTCIVKal ovco-

^eil1)3

Loc.

Git.

ii.

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

252

CHAP,
IX'

to virtue,the
habits.1 The disposition
opposite
germ
2
of virtue,is implanted in all men
by nature ; if we
have before us
an
unspoiledpupil of a good disposition,
it needs
no
lengthy argument to convey to
him rightmoral
principlesand the rightestimation
of goods and evils ; a few convincingproofs,
indeed,

than

better

are

many

is that the

point

main

should

teacher

of the

conduct

the

his

correspond with

the discipleshould live

and that similarly
principles,
accordingto his conviction.3 To this practicalend,
then, accordingto Musonius, all instruction should
of philosophy should
teacher
work.
The
not
duce
pro-

applause but

improvement

to his hearers

not

this

if he does

require;
have

time

the moral

admire

to

should

he

medicine

minister
ad-

that

they
in the rightway, they will
his discourse,
they will be

science,
completelyoccupiedwith themselves and their conwith feelingsof shame, repentance, and

exaltation.4
to work

their

upon
hearts

In this

his

spoke
disciples
; he

that

each

the entrance

oit. 29, 78, with which,

of Lucius
(sup.

LOG.

statement

p. 199) in the Exo.

i. 7, 46 (vol.iv. 169

e.

Jo. Dam.

*#.

Mein.)

T(os

ireQvKa/JLevo#"j"infet

Tldvres

Stob.
ii.

all

lay

claim

of it (of.Phil.

to

d. 6h\

2).
Floril.

13,

125

Exc.

(iv. 217

Jo.

sq$.

M.)

4
Grell. N. A.
Diss.
iii. 23, 29.
elvcu.
inrofioQvcriKfyv

Qv

cScrre
"s

if personally

as

to his school

all, and

III. i. 224,
Dam.

entirelyagrees.
2

from

the honour

tried

to
forcibly

so

felt

individual

struck ; 5 he made

the

himself

Musonius

manner

Kal
avafjLapT-fjTcas

V.

1 ;

Epict.

5
Epict. I. c. : rotyapovy oifrcas
avdp"irov^u%^ vrpb*
Kal
oKwyaQiav
(nrepfjia aper^s "\ey"y} o5cr0'e'/catriw TJJLLCOJ//ca*
tin.ris irore
this
aurbv
Q^psvov fftecrda.1.
Tjp.(av evewai, where
Stob.
Ed.
ii. 426
is proved (ap.
o^rccy ^TTTCTO r"v
8ia/3ej8AT?/cey
yivo^vtav, ofrreu
sq.)by the argument that the

ry

laws

rov

demand

moral

conduct

fridei rk. eKderov

PROBLEM

OF

in
difficult,

more

from

natures

soughtto

PHILOSOPHY.

order

and

have

must

the character

bring

that the

well believe

been

he

CHAP
IX"

by the thought of
2

them

to

influence

of such
and

important

very

stronger

effeminate

more

their force of will

brace

the difficulties life would

may

separate the

to

the weaker

33

and

we

tion
instruc-

lastingon

of those who

enjoyedit. But we cannot

dinated
expect that a philosopherwho so decidedly suborscientific problems to practicalinfluence,

distinguishhimself by
by the firmer
thoughts or even
should

originating new
establishment

and

logicaldevelopment of a doctrine alreadyexisting.

If, therefore,in most of the fragmentsof Musonius
must
and corwe
rectness
acknowledge the purity of mind
of moral
judgment which they exhibit,we
their

estimate

cannot

What

mostly find

we

scientific value

in them

is

merely

very
an

application

which
recognisedStoical principles

of the
becomes

that

minute

so

the

highly.

sometimes

after
philosopher,

the

disdain

to

example of Chrysippus,does

not

even

give precepts on the growth of the hair and beard.3

On certain pointsthe Stoic principles
are
exaggerated;
the

exceeds

Musonius

bounds

partlyto the
partlyto

LOG.

Loc.

of
simplicity

the asceticism of the

other times

he deduces,

tit. iii. 6, 10.

tit. i. 9, 29 :

/caXcS
ovr(0

Kal

"roi

urrb

rov

rovro

$""nr6rov.

Kal

rovro

crov

nms,

proximates
ap-

Cynics and

thence, such

(to treat

avra
s

the

and

Neo-Pythagoreans
; at
from

even

*Pov$os ireipdfav
fj."et""0et\"yeur

ffvfL^creral

of Stoicism

better)

Xafieiv Swduevos.

JFloril.
like

this

pure

6, 62, where

Muso-

Chrysippus before

Mm

siii. 565, #), expresses

irpbs (Athen.
av6p"- himself
strongly against the
cutting of the hair and beard.
oSi/,""TJ,iicearov napa-

cwrbv

airoKptvafjievov,

wtva-

ri

Ka.fj.ov

#rt

ECLECTICISM.

254

CHAP,
IXt

and

yet humane

the

Stoic

precepts as
itself.

school
of

inner freedom

leadingthought

His

this is linked

But

man.

in

our

of

our

(2) submission

and

power,

In

power.

ideas,

our

and

to

that which

is the

power
this

on

to two

of that which

(1)the right treatment

onr

universal

not

were

all

depends

is the
ditions,
con-

is in
is not

make

we

use

in

and

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
this standpointMusonius
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 ;
requiresthat

he

the troubles

of

elevation above

should

we

life,not

defend

by external
should

Eel.

row

e$3 ytuv

psv

ra

ii. 356

means

"0ero

r"v
6

$vBebs

regardexile

at home

evil,but should feel ourselves

Stob.

against
but by

and indifference towards

external,

the

it; 3 that,for example, we

ourselves

einrptyai r$

no

in the whole

Kal
KScr/JLcp,

TraiScev Secure)

rcav

as

efrre rrjs

e"re
va-

cn^uaros1 cfrre
rptfiosetre rov
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
yiyrfpevoveXevQepia
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
"!"/"'
Ta

8' oit;.

ffaTo.

OVKOVV

8ie\6vTas

ty
(jt."v

Kal

TO.

TfdvTa
Tip.1v
Ta

5e

Tjfjias

of
crvfj^^)-

irpdyuaTar"v
Tpfaov avTi*"!"'yj"v
^

life is

harmonious

Floril.

29, 78,

G-ell. 2V. A. xvi. 1.

3

^j?.

p.

253,

2.

p.

15;

the

cf.

world,1that

should

we

255

PRECEPTS.

GENERAL

neither

seek

death

shun

nor

CHAP.
IXt

this

it.2 In order to attain

needs

man

ever,

strengthof mind, how-

only the

not

moral

continual

most

to
practiceand the most
unremitting attention
himself,3but also bodily hardening.4Musonius,

admonishes
therefore,

us

learn

to

hardships; 5

exertions,deprivations,and
to lead

back

us

much

as

of nature

state

he

goes

bodily

he

desires

possible,in regard to

as

domestic

food, clothing,and

to endure

to

arrangements,

further,and

Sextius

with

the

Neo-Pythagoreans,counsels us to avoid the

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

soul

the

other

the

weaken

and

the

he

hand

cannot

Of. the lengthy discussion

Stob.
Floril. 40, 9, which
ap.
1

that

the

to

finallycomes

robs

banishment

as

him

virtues, it robs

of

man

real

no

it cannot

man,

and

the

bad

jured by

his

wickedness

is in-

man

and

5.

Cf. Phil. d. Gr.HI.

It is in entire

this that

he

because

ther, he

with

(ap.Epict.

Thrasea
desired death rather

"7.) blames

exile ; for

than

should

we

nei-

says, choose the harder

the
of the easier, nor

instead^
easier
but

T$

harder,

duty

apKetcr-

The
SeSofiLevcp.

story

regard

0cu

the

of

instead
it

which

Tacitus

relates

with

as

(Ann. xiv.
a

quite

the

qualifying

59)
*

f e-

in

accord-

"

from

which

of the

many

his spirit that he

Rubellius
Plautus

prevented

of

means

death

Nero

threatened

Cf. Stob.

Floril.

an

with

him.

29, 78, and

expression (ap. Gell. N. A.

2, 1), remitters animunl

zviii.
4

i. 306,4,

agreement

Musonius

Diss. i. 26

is also
with

quasi amittere

by banishment.
2

'

ance

injure the good

good;

not

with

agree
runt

thought.7 On

escaping,by
principal insurrection, the

four

of the

of neither

conclusion

of

power

the

For

Stob.

I. #.),must

serviceable
with

and

est.

body, he
tool

it the

be
of
soul

says
made
the

(ap.
the

mind,

also will

be

strengthened.
Stob.
I. c. ; Pliny, Ep. iii.
11, 6, praises in Artemidoms
5

(st^.p.246,3,end),besidesother
excellences,Ms hardiness,moderation, and abstemiousness.
Stob. Floril. 1, 84 ; 18, 38
6

8, 20
7

"

94, 23.

Zoc. tit. 17, 43, sup. 249, 2.

ECLECTICISM.

256

CHAP.

__J_1__

Stoics who

the

carry

man

to the

he

is himself

self-dependenceof the wise

dissuadingeven from marriage ;

point of

natural,and,

in

of

advocate

warm

connection

point of view,

moral

so

beneficial ;

so

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
and

all

unchastity in

of

out

or

also

marriage,2as

the

repudiationand exposure of children,3

in antiquity,and justified
even
so common
by Plato
which
The
and Aristotle.
gentle disposition
guides
in the propositionthat
in all this is also shown
him
to revenge
it is unworthy of man
partly
injuries,
of the

custom

such

because

faults

as

rule

partlybecause the wise man

and not the sufferingbut

arise

from

ignorance,

reallybe injured,

cannot
the

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

is connected

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

was

3, end), and

(sup.p. 246,
in the Program.
i. 79 (vol. i. 57,

Anthol.

Lat.

Burm.)

Testus

Avienus

calls

his famous

Mmoni

disciple

sololes, lare

Vokiniensi.
Zoo. Git. 6, 61.

cretus

his son-in-law

interconnection

2
3

Zoo.

tit.

75, 15

84, 21

cf. sup. p. 250, 1.

4

20,

Zoo.
61.

Git. 19, 16 ;

40, 9

; Sohl.

DATE

Phrygian

Epictetus, a
Nero

his

and

Domitian

that of

lived

who

the

In

Trajan.1

i.

was

of.

in

p. 102, Heins.), weak

Z.

cf.

of his

treatment

indeed

master,

have

used

the

time

to

have

came

himself

He

have
of

with

the

drian,
Hahave

may

to

of

years

reign

the

to

he

in

nevertheless

acquainted

before

seems

Musonius
last

the

this emperor

become

from

Epictetus

heard

or

picious,
sus-

accession

removed

years
when

extended

him,

throne.

mention

makes

of

17 ; cf. iii.

iv.

Trajan (Dm.
5,
in
consideration
13, 9). The
held
which
was
by
Epictetus
later
his contemporaries and

ill-

the

through

Celsus,

may

in summa

(117 A.D.) is more

; but
his life may

body

c.

50

Rome

(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

him

with

throne

to the

than

Sat.

lame

ment
state-

Hadrian

is somewhat

i. 11, 45;
in JHjriet.
EncJwrid.
c. 9,

Simpl.
and

(Hadr.

associated

1, 20;
ii. 18,

A.

G-ellius,N.

26,
10; Macrob.

philo-

16),that

Epaphrodltus,
familiaritate
Hadrian's
as
(Said.,Epict.

of IN ero

11 ;

in

sible.

himself

i. 19, 19:

Diss.

died

Spartian's

the

of

freedman

of

of this

Even

Epictetus'native city was

Hierapolis in Phrygia (Said.
slave

discourses

CHAP.

reign

have

to

'ETrOcr.). He

the

in

seems

Tinder

Some

in

went

successors,

Nicopolis,and

to

257

EPICTETUS.

OF

who
him

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
from

harshly, judging

heard

lived

Musonius

Diss.

32;

29).

In

(Epict.

free.

he must

(sup.

him
mitian made
Dothe Memorabilia
left Rome
.

he betook

himself

of

c.

Suidas), 3,000
(Epict.

JUncMr.

Diss. ii. 6, 20 ; 1, Prcef.; cf iii.

22, 52). According to Suidas

others.

and

Themistocles
(Or. v. 63,
the
lived until
reign of
ever,
Aurelius
Marcus
:
this, howis chronologicallyimpos-

the

he

down

where

Arrian

heard

him

having

acquainted with
of Epictetus

relates

that

Iiid.
mirer
ad-

an

Epictetus bought
candlestick

earthenware

Mcopolis

to

Epirus (G-ell.I.

(who

13

Rusticus,

age, for

Lucian, Adv.

likewise

cf

the

with

end)

If. A.
Qther philosophers (G-ell.
xv.
11, 5 ; Lucian, Peregr. 18) :
in

teacher,

in mature

even

Under

have

p. 190, 1,

Ms

i. 7),who

laur.
(irp.

Aurelius
thanks

9, 29: iii. 6, 10; 23,

the
sequel he must

beeome

is

authorities

tation
quo-

sup. p. 253, 2), and

i. 7,

have

the

his
for

; Simpl. in
6
p.
sq. and many

drachmas)
Prof.

the

These

are

Aiarpipaland

sE7%"/""5wy. Arrian
the

former,

preface,after

faithfullyas
S

the

as

he

wrote
says

in

Epictetus as

possible, in

the

TX.

259

HIS

to whom
the sick come,
is a physician
philosopher
not
the healthy ; l he must
and
not
only instruct
them ; of what use
his scholars,but help and
cure
is it to displayhis learning before them, to develop
true
be, or to provoke
they may
dogmas, however
The
their applause by proofs of his cleverness ?
and
most
important thing is rather that
necessary
he should
speak to their consciences,that he should
and
bring them to the feelingof their wretchedness

The

ignorance ;

he

that

should

of amendment

first resolve

their behaviour

in

their

word, that

them

in

he

that

in

not
philosophers,

them

call forth

should

should

and

make
in

produce

to applaud thy
TTJS only in order
avrvjs (TvvafoBiiffts
a,irrojj.ivois
Kal
fine
?
CLffQevdas
advvafj.ia$
(Similarly iii. 21,
oratory
avrov
FT.
3
TOVTO
(Stob.
TOVTO
8.)
2aj/cpc"r^s
eiroiei;
ire pi TO.
avayKOia.
Floril. 1, 48) : el jSouAei aya"ls Z^vcuv",
rovro
KXedvQqs. And also
fin KctKbs e?. Cf.
other utterances),
Tr/oTeuow
("passing over
elz/ai,
ii. 19.
Seneca, sup. p. 273, 2.
Bpictetus is here asked
he thinks
of the Kvpietccy
what
Diss. iii.23, 30 : iarpeTJi/
ecmv,
(Phil. d. Gr. H. i. 230, 4),and he
he has as yet come
5e? ycrdevras J"eA.0e?y, replies that
Xeiav*
ov
aAA*
a,\yf}"ravras."pxeor06 jfy to no opinion thereupon ; but he
has been
that very much
Of. Fr. 17 (Stob. knows
oi"x vyteis, "c.
1

JLtusonius, written about

9i), and
the
treatise
734,5
733,2;
^
sitp-P2
Ittss. iii. 23, 31, Epicfcetus the subject?

Mor.

continues

not
come,
" fi*v

You

wish

not

as

healthy people, a\.x*

the

"5 S3 amJc
^/cjSejSA^/ccbs,

pdrepos

" 5e

a-hpt-vya.
e%"y,

ie'iS eiraLVecravres

TjTe, 6

elo"fi-Calypso.
doctrines
"c.

leave

men

their
and

shall

the

same

on

does
does

it ?
a

things
much

"are
the

as

the

grammarians

and

the

island

with

even

of

ethical

generally the

is

relate to one
of
a

principles

and
a

he

what

so:

from
Kal

the

long journeys,
Chrysippus
ings,
parents and belongspend their property, they relate
s

do

Men

thing.

another

make

; and

as

But
it

read

No

Such

Helen

about

he

Antipater

eorrat

Icrrt.

vvv

Has

of

gain

just
learning of

pe

And

to

reader

worth

elr' "y" Kadicras

young

it.

Iv.

Cleanthes,

history from

as

Hel-

pro-

sop}

the

opinions, but
he

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM:

260

CHAP,

the

them

on

had

himself

received

scholars in like

manner

impressionwhich Epictetus
from
his
Musonius, and
received from Epictetus.1

this

course

of
point of view Epictetus could
ascribe to theoretical knowledge,as such,only

subordinate

From

Inferior
theoretical

moral

deep

very

hold

value

the

in

stood

must

especially

part of philosophywhich

of that

good

this

; and

most

distant

festly
mani-

connection

with

ethics,
namely logic.The chief thingin philosophyis
its doctrines

of
application
proof of them

the
the

only

; next

the

in

this stands

to

third

rank

comes

were
lanicus ; but if somebody
GXevOepovs,eupoowray,
TOVS,
of these disciples $aifj.ovovvTa5,els rbv Qebv
to remind
one

philosophers during a
shipwreck or a trial before the
of

the

that

emperor,

are

regard

it

not
as

evils,he would

outrageous

an

mockery. Of what
such

use,

then, is

philosophy1 Deeds

show

ri

is to learn
this.
purpose
ofiv OVK
biderai; tfirare

fjLotrV

in

you,

ri

ovv]

cdriav.

It

in

me,

or

OeXere

school a man
of those
themselves
Stoics

call

prove

themselves

Epicureans,

or,

Peripateticsof
"SrcatKbv 5e

a.p^ff"fjL"8d
wore

Kal

be

to

rather

the

at

the

most,

laxest

Sei^are poi,

ef

sort.
TLVOL

v,

Tntrrccrare

Arrian, Dm.

evrv^ovvra,

Prcef. 8 sg.

l" avQp"irov
5"|are.
yevecrQai

Qzbv
.

fiovvra

OVK

e^cre.
j "c.

ira/"

TOUS,

/U.QL

avrbs

irpbsrh

aAA.'

in both.

or

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,

vebovra

only lie

can

must

most

who

a"po~

Kal fJLeydty.
/u.LKp$

what

to

"belongs. But

ffovvra.

Your

ishment 5i"
ban-

and

death

" iravrl

puvras

eu-

ri
Kal

as

did

ofiv atrdis

not

rtav a.KOv6vT(av

fieXTLcrra. If

his

Ttocrav

ot

vvv

My pure/jLo Trateea'de.
pose
is,cttroreAeVcu vfMcis

aurov,
avrbv

courses,
dis-

reported by Arrian,
accomplish this,

ftirep

261

LOGIC.

the
is

of

doctrine

only necessary

only necessary

are

be

may

in its

necessary

that

but

nature, that

avoid ;

and

do

virtue

should

we

should

we

follow

and

the

attain

an

end

be

able

difficulties,

rightin

of

will

the

what

we

end
is
only unconditioned
the art of
tool in its service,4

the

dialectic is

be

solve dialectic

know

should

we

that

not

explain Chrysippusand

to

undoubtedly

yet logic cannot

pursuit,2

questionis

in itself ; the

and
fallacies,

from

us

thoroughness are

and

though accuracy

protect

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
not

the

Even
concern

Man.

"where

he declares

to

refutation

of

tain
con-

dialectical discussion.

singlelogicalor

questions;

of his doctrine

records

the written

rate

at any

little with dialectic

very

little

scepticism gives him

it to be the

ness
greateststubborn-

deny self-evident things ; he says he has

52.

c.

(Zfe.

Epictetus else-

iii. 2 ; ii. 17;

15

s".) distinguishesthree
problems of philosophy: the

trouble

point

ourselves

unless

we

about
are

not

this last

clear about

first,

sq. 29

the

first and

7; c. 17; ii. 25;

vide sup. p. 248, 1.
3
2"i$s. I 4, 5 "qq. : ii. 17, 27

it
our

should

most
set

passions

it should

is that
necessary
from
free
us

; the

make

us

second, that

two

Zto.

sqg. ; iii. 2 ;

1 sgg.i
c.^21,

acquainted $%%* (videpreviousnote) ;

ii. 19
c.

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

duties ; the third that

CHAP.

proof,and proofs
their application.1

therefore,logic
indispensable,

to

order

in

of

account

on

and

useful

However

of the

account

on

for that

methods

scientific

proof,the

'

262

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
'

time

contend

to

part he has
wished
the

taken

never

take

to

with

up

such
hold

of

broom

and

put food into the mouth

them
finallyhe encounters

the

in

act

and

with

the

he

finds that
same

into

not

his

when

loaf of bread ; he

sceptics themselves

that

objections;for

way,

the

old

eye ;

reproach

ledge
deny the possibilityof knowwithout
maintaining its impossibility.2Of
the proper
of scepticismand
of the
signification
necessityof its scientific refutation he has no idea.
He is just as little concerned
about the investigations

they

of

cannot

natural

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

but

in the

even

very
Stoic

in
independent inquiries

few

doctrines

of his

that

school

sphere,

there

are

points only the universal bases of the

conception of the world, and especiallythe
"

definitions which
attract his attention.
theological
He is full of the thought of God, who
knows
our
"

20,

rl

5 ;

27,

15

sq$. ; ii.

Gpcairivr)
yvc"w
Xiffra

flefyTIS

el 5e

Kal

ra

pd-

etviu Kara\yirra,

Diss. ii.20, 1 sqq.

Fv.
fj.oL

rov

Diss.
28.

aAA' ovv
ri 8(j""\o$
KaraX-qfyBwThis
"c.
(Stob.Flov. 80, 14) : rw,
discussion pro/te\H, 077"rl,
ir6rcpQve'" fesses to be a commentary on
e" "5/iot(yiepwi",
$ "c the Socratic theory, as we see
r" fora; by the word
ffvve"rrr]Ke
which
is
"j"T)a-l,
^yys^
ovcriav
/*a0e?j"
rty
afterwards
but
it
is
apjce'i
repeated;
75

ayaeov Kal
s

KO.KOV,

"c.

ra

5'

xalpew e$v ; arwa

aKardKirn-rdforty av^

nevertheless

unmistakable

Epictetus adopts
standpoint himself,

the

that
same

GOD

words

and

whose

in

whose
he
the

the

of

paternal care

of

which

makes

Him

in the

world

and

the

Grod

the

he

recognises
ordered

has

Grod,who

all

less
perfectand faultcorrespondwith the

the whole

has made

all its parts to

furnished

proves

perfection

He

them

with

the

all men

to

ness
happiof it ;

conditions

extols,in the spiritof his school, the adaptation

of

meets

ends

to

means
us

so

clearlyat

he

universe, which

the

in

step that

every

says

whole

our

life

5
unceasing song of praise to the Deity ;
to point out
and, like his school, he condescends

should

this

be

an

adaptation

he does

things; 6
in

his

faith

and

smallest

in the

even

allow himself

not

injusticesin the

world, having learned

Stoa

to

these

Grod

and

reconcile
his

Stoics, always
1

on

shall

recur

Meanwhile,

refers
to

cl

this

belief

This
in

the

in

to be

turbed
dis-

later

22,
ii. 14, 11,

Mss.

JDiss. i. 16.

Of.

31, 1.
; ii. 14,

and

of

the

universe,

iv. 7, 6 ; iii. 24, 2 sq.

ZHss.

d. Gr.
lUd.

Providence,

the

PMl.

the

from

fashion

true

primarily to

JHss.

23, 53; 21, 18;

18, 19 ; 19, 29 ; i. 16.
2
Diss. i. 14, 16 ; Man.
3
i. 6, 40 ; 9, 7
Zto.

2*

ternal
ex-

perfectionof

the

also with

works.7

however, Epictetus,

most

by the apparent evils and

even

i. 16,9
HI.

*$g. and
i. 172, end.

III. i. 175, 4;

infra,p. 271, 1.

CHAP.
'

praises the

moral

the

necessityof the whole, has destined

and

without

work, whom

he

pattern for us.3

of

good,

unity, order, and

universe;2

work

formed

by

for men,

the
:

go to his

not

of Providence

interconnection

best

all

comes

always before his eyes.1 He

have

guidance

263

philosopher stands,

he may

commission

for the

whom

intentions, from
service

should

WORLD.

TKE

A$D

178, 2;

ECLECTICISM.

264

CHAP,

_____

and

to

by

the

the individual

submission
his

in

to

to the

they do happen

whole

will of
the

(rod,this

demand

that

he
cides,
coinman

Things,he

happen otherwise
withdraw

cannot

; we

when

of nature.1

order
cannot

Musonius,

is determined

as

the

the

with

sense

conform

says, with
as

far

so

interdependenceof

counsels

should

only

than

ourselves

change to which the heavenly

are
bodies and the elements
subject; 2 against the
all things serve
and obey we
universal order which
ought not to rebel.3 So also he expresslymentions
which
doctrine
most
the
that
strongly asserts

from

of

the law

under

nothingindividual

is

than

more

the flux of the whole

in

the

of
of

conviction

Epictetus

physics,so on
like
Stoicism, to
with
divine

the derived
the

from

the

also

natures

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:
y

Kal %crri Kal

ecrrai.-

"KXca$

re

^ "s
8

66

Kal

vvv

Fr.
:

rov

be
Kal

Kala^tvov
rat,

as

oUv

with
4

8\cw

With

$LOLK$"V.

his

Diss.

Stoic

virep

r"v

pera

itself,

polytheism;
distinguished
if all things

and

side

Kal T)p.as

vvv-

Epictetus also,

whole

with

the

school, Grod
universe.

iii.13, 4 sgg., where,

ra
yiyri/Meva,as in Sen. Ep. 9, 16, the conyiyvecr6ai
dition
of
Zeus
after
the
%x"l136 (Stob. Moril.
108, universal
conflagrationis de-

ifdvra.

viraKovei

rqi K6(r^cp scribed.

5
Hence
.

earth, sea, stars,

vTrrjpere?"

plants,animals,
Our

ou%

it allies

be

to

are

coincides
K6"T/j.ov
"pTLJ"rt$
Kal

this

on

includes

nature

#ri rota^TT?

side

flagration
con-

religious

popular religion.

divine

primal

allies itself

moment

of the

the

as

other

the

him

doctrine

And

world.4

to

pantheism

the

"

transient

our

own

bodies.

12,11:

he

"y"

says
5'

"%""

in

Diss. iv.

rivt

ju." 5et

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
,

265

SOOTHSAYING.

full of divine

are

and

The

daemons.1

other
the,
to

cause

the

to

injury

Yet

many,2

so

the

is

greater

the

from

gods
and

nature

that

CHAP.

__H_

con-

we

fiable,
unjusti-

more

thereby

we

of

Epictetus
dependent
whole, very in-

relation

the

popular religion is, on

of

gods

is the

them

deny

j to

men

of these

receive

we

full

they

are

so

beneficence

in all that

tinuallyenjoy
from

powers,

the
mentions
accordingly he seldom
popular gods,and then only casually,without further
interpretations
committing himself to the allegorical
;

prefers

school, but

his

of

of the

manner

gods
indeed,

retains

he

the

honouring
the

of

manner

well

that

the

and

he

does

the

men

belief

should

be

"\Aois

rots

besides
"?.),

0eo?s, and iii. 13, 4

Zeus, Here, Athene,

Apollo, and, generally speaking,

the
the
1

gods,

do

conflagration
JHss.

petfra
2

who

denial

of

iii. 13, 15

the
:

survive
world,

irdyra

ii. 20, 32
*"#.,
examples of gods the

as

of

whom

is censured

Euripides, Demeter,

Kore,

by
and

are

the

tion

of

(ruths

\6yos.

19

Man.

Man.

; PML
5
Diss.

22, 16.

and

if

of it without
in

harmony

enquire of the

named

self

Qf-cav

tit.

underworld,

dispense with

to

first

Pluto

very

ledge
in know-

soothsaying,he

unmistakably-

/col Scufj,6vc0v.

LOG.

where,

not

the

use

not

knows

also

previously

should

the result,and

with

after

power,

blames

able

principle of

our

in

make

should

of Zeus

consists

he

general

even

about

beings

desire, being

and

God

the

attack

prophecy, that they

fear

of

fables

of hostile

that

demands

in

Socrates, the

with

service

true

not

deity,or

gods according to
antiquity,3but he

virtue

worship

the

the

or

speak

to

; but

the

Stoic
him-

to

reserves

traditional

interpreta-

these

in

31,
31,

gods

the

"""v-

5.
1 ; cf. Dfas.

Gr.

ii. 18,

Ill, I. 311, 1.
iii. 13, 15 ; i. 19, 6 ;
d.

266

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP
'

Man

an

soothsayer,where the
question.1
To
Epictetus the

fulfilment of

belief in

duty

kinship

the

is

of

in

the

emanation

from God.

-i

..

spiritto God

rt

of the

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

thought the feelingof

his

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
and in the same
sense
Epictetus,after the manner
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; even
anthropological
of immortalityis only mentioned
casually,and if
the subjectwe
from his utterances
on
gather that
from
(departing
in

be

to

found

oppositetheory.4

the

also

are

Diss. ii. 7; Man.

Diss.

i. 3 j c.

12,

c.

to

the

the

body, longs

Diss. i. 14, 12 sqq. ; cf. Phil,

d. Gr. III. i. p. 319, 2.
4
Epictetus'view of the des-

(rrafoyvutptv;

tiny
not

hand

of

the

easy
he

to

treats

aspect will
later on) as

is

after death

soul

state.

On

the

the

soul

one

(this

Thus

Aurel.

iv. 41)

to

return

state.

27

"

T"

veicpQ,1.

c.

to

his

spoken

of

an

essence

which

it

original
(ap M.
^VX^PLOV"I, fa

in Jfy. 176
:

"rw

cf.

Diss.

ii. 19,

parly ro^ry

T$

i. 19, 9 ; but espei. 9, 10 sgg.

He
here

says

^inyv6vres rfy
disciples)

again irpbsrov?6eobs a-vyyevetav,

TIVOL
ravra
is, 5ecr/xc"

be

leave

its

ciallyDiss.
thought that they (he
to

to

alien

commencement,

syg. ; c. 13, 3 ; c. 14,

8, 11 s%q. ; iv. 7, 7 s%. j cf. Phil,
d. Gr. III. i. p. 200, 2.

to

of

utterances

question of the

and

5 sqqr.; ii.

disbelieved

lead
logically

is the
from

26

death,

which

Nor

32.
9 ;

he

dogma)

after

personal existence

his

Stoic

the

nal e6ri
'

"

FREE

freedom

of the

WILL.

will discussed

depart from

the

would
robs
say
rov
.

wish

shake

to

desire

vSdriov.

off

soul

P."V

that

rovruv,

part, would

rcav

he,

have

eATjAvfor

Secr-

Ms

remind

to

the

among
or

ma

would

Pneuma

transferred

to

God.

ever,
passages, howit doubtful whether

by

meant

existence.

this

He

grants to a
in life,we
called to
the
the

longer

no

should

opened
to

regard
the
come

door
;

and

doctrine

scribed
de-

expressly

ii. 23, 3, as a
inherent
in the eye.
theory results from

same

Diss. iii. 24, 93

Bdyaros,

rovro

i/c rov
/xerajSoA^juei""jy,
OVK
vvv
ftvros els rb ^
ftp,aAA' els rb

fry.
OVK.

eo"7)j

Kofffjios

o$v

ovKert

aAA*

"AAo

TI,

xpe'iay*X"L-

not

personal

the
it

; it is

his

SAAo

nt

plain from
Epictetus places the

animals

not

man

in

is

of

It is also
of

is

man

existence

; he becomes
individual.

that

of

vvv

but

continuance

another

ov

Here

existence

certainly asserted,

substance

Kal orvyye86ev eyevov, els ret, (f"i\a

els rot. crroi%eTa.'6"rov"f\vIv "rol
vfi,

the

of

Diss.

in

merely

' whither
? ' this is
els ovftev SetvSv, oAA1

of

Stoic

the

emanation

an

is
TjyefjLovLKbv,

The

faculty

and
to

Epictetus
diverged

have

this

question
answer

sight,

was

Pneu-

as

; the
according to

(JHss. iii. continued

his subsistence

man

"hrm

personal

says
God

13, 14), when

as

life

better

was

herein

air;

soul

described

his school

Other

render

if He

death

after

soul

the

the

fire, and

as

not

have
should
we
supposed that
Epictetns believed with Plato
and the majority of the Stoics,

that

of

and

fire

Stoics

universally

from

he

of the

not

elements,

await the
they must
when
that
and
God,
he
should
have
to
came
them,
to say, r6r' cmoXveffde
irpbsavr6v.
According to these utterances

with

becomes

learn ; but as, on

supposition of its personal
we

eA^Avfla/zey, the
o6ev

\v87jvaiirore
crafjisv "tpes

that

holds

ecrp-ev Kaicetdev
aireXdeiv
""j)"S
yuMS

call

What
do

he

since

man

this
periority
su-

the

over

free will but

consciousness
els vvp fareurur 8crov %v 77?(the 5tW/us
irvpbs,
%(rov irvevfiariov,jcoAov0?7Ti/c7?)
5tou, els yjjtiiov
j Diss. i. 6,
8"rov iffiarlov,
els irv"vfj,driov
els ii. 8, 4 *"".

CHAP.
IX.

not

involuntary
notions, for

are

what

burden, Kal aireXBe'iv Trpbs the

that they would
to
this was
be
ffvyyevets,
continuance,
to him, OVK"TL
can
perk said before all things, we
avex6jJ-e8a
that
crcafJLariov
rovrov
Se"Je/-ceyoi
only conclude
Epictetus
made
the
soul also pass into
OVK
rives
rov
ffvyyeve'is

6eov

them

school1

of incorrect

this

exactitude

any

faults

all

Kal rty Krrjffiv avrov

ff"fjia
.

his

of

fatalism

constantlyinsists that
and
merely a consequence
to
it is impossible not

with,

however, probablethat Epictetusdid

it seems,

rb

267

in

irapa-

ECLECTICISM.

268

CHAP,

to be

with

moral

indicated
But

by

even

our

philosopher.

in

ethics

must

we

carries

and

philosophyto the practically

theoretic enquiry only as an
on
in
to this,is necessarily,
even
of any

last resort, upon

like
Epictetus,

only remains
doctrine,in the

that

Thus

consciousness.

immediate

his teacher

scientific

proper
; it

of treatment

mode

him, therefore,to found

for

expect from

not

in

accessory and means

his moral
doctrine,devoid

foundation

nowhere

searchinginvestigation.He

more

confines himself

useful,and

exigencies is

and

precepts

Epictetus any
who

this fatalism is to be combined

How

good.1

Musonius,

assures

us

that

conceptionsand

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.

moral

the universal

these
the

conceptions and teach

them:
individual rightly under

under

natural

the idea of

riches,and

or

that

themselves

so

the

good

we

forth.
innate

alone ; and

Here

do
in

to include

instance,

placepleasure

it is indeed

ideas
that

for

to

not

are

us

not

ledged
acknowsuffice

for

their

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

Dm.

ii. 26 ;
forms
above

18, 1-7 ; 28, 1-10 ;

It
iii. 3, 2 ; iii. 7, 15.
i

no

contradiction

when

to

Epictetus

the
says
xix.

again (.#".180 ; ap. Gell.

1) that acquiescence is an affair

free will ; for the Stoics,

notwithstandingtheir fatalism,
the same,
maintained
3
Hiss. i. 22, 1 sg. 9 ; ii.11
of

our

"

c.

17, 1-13.

TRUE

to the

discord

269

WISDOM.

of moral

presentationsin the simple

Socratie
that
is
which
starting from
manner,
of short dialectic
universally
acknowledged,by means
discussions ; l the
the

argumentations,
of ethics,seem
to him,
far

not, indeed, worthless, so

conviction, but

our

IK"

scholastic

systematic treatment

confirm

CFAP.

they

as

the

at

to

serve

time

same

not

indispensable.
If

the

would

we

content

point out, as
make

to

moral

closelyinto
of Epictetus'ethical doctrine,we
may
its fundamental
feature,the endeavour
free and

man

all external

to bear

submission,and
directed

the

that

"

what

is

power

in

external.

should

we

is

all

double

of

sum

to

is

in

not

that

free and

live

all

to discriminate
our

desires

philosopherwho

born

absolutelynothing but

how
what

and

power

to his

appetitesand wishes
This, accordingto
and

know

Inde~

with unconditional

events

commencement

our

he

restriction

proceeds the

renounce

the

towards

Epictetus,is
wisdom

to

more

happy by
which

from

nature;

demand

somewhat

enter

not

to

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
an
external,a thing that is not in our
power.4 Only this should have, therefore,any

afraid of any

event

may

"

LOG.

(M.

especiallyii. 11,

Ii. 12, 5 sg.

Of. sup. p. 261, 1.
3
i. 1 ; 48, 1 3 JMss.
Man.
1 ; 21, 22, 0 *#. ; cf. what

quoted by
of

mouth

and

254,

i.

is

Cf.

Mnsonius

from

Epictetus, mp.

the
p.

1.

JHss. ii. 17, 29;

sup.

note

3,

cf. 1, 4, 18.
and
Man.

ECLECTICISM,

270
CHAP,

value

for us,

it should

in

only

unhappiness; l

evils,happinessand

do not

do, for thingsexternal

will, our
world, not
will

long as

to

what

is

ourselves with
direct

we

does

which

employ

what

and

wishes

to

; if

is

our

we

that

have

completely we
in

independent
6 ; Piss. i.

*$.;

111.

10?"
"c:
V'tde
1

; ii.

25, 1 ; 12, 34
3, 1; 14 sgg.;

then

we

5,
iv. 1,

note

and

22, 38 sgg.

18, 17
9, and

ii. 1, 4; i. 20, 7 "c.

2

Dis$. i. 1, 21 sgq. ;
; ii. 5, 4 ; Man.

29, 24

c.
c.

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.
3

Diss.

3, 18; 26, 34 s$.

PUl.

the

of
6

ourselves

Mm.

are

upon
and

the

thus

external, the

1, 2,

19

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

sqg.-, 21

"

c.

,.

preceding

19 ; Diss. iii.

Mew.

made

minds

our

ceived
per-

to nothing
efforts,5

happy, and no fate can have any hold

affect us
happen what will, it can never
which
our
on
well-beingdepends.6 And

more

selves
our-

restrict

free and
us;

So

rational nature

ourselves

on

we

to

have

we

not,

own

counter

depend

our

notions.4

our

fortune

efforts and
not

the

how

is not

anything external

upon

ours

our

our

our

shaped,but whether

are

avoid

or

depend

we

question

and

govern

desire

we

nothing in

nature,

the

circumstances

how

know

can

and

things;

external

we

ourselves

concern

and

only on the
;
deity,can coerce
happiness; it is not external things
us
happy, but only our conceptions

that make

of

goods
this

and

the

even

depends our

such

as

essential

proper

seek

we

and

elsewhere,

d. Or. III. i. p.

224,

1.

quotation from
effect

that

Epictetus to

the

worst

the

vices are
the
faults

impatience towards
.of others,and intemperance in
enjoyments and in all things
the art of living happily and

without
two

faults

is contained

words, aWvou

and

in

COURSE

clearer

OF

it will

become

the

in

necessary
far

according to

to

each

of

event

that

and

free

with

all

have

destiny

our

than

be

be used

this

as

hold

and

linked,
a

means

submit

reason

what

hardest

it unaltered

conditionally
un-

what

Grod
feel

will, and

we

into

experiences will

we

satisfied

are

this

wills.1

our

we

Even

the

disturb

not

the

wise

only Ms
property, his
but even
his friends,his
person, his health,and life,
thing
belongings,his fatherland,he wiE consider as someman

that
the

and
nature

and

troubled
mind

by

merely lent, and

of which
as

PHI.

d.

does

little will

the

faults

he will not

should

him

is

loss
2

not

temper;

of

be free from

Gr. III. i.p. 303, 1 ;

; 10, 4 sq. ; 16, 42

sq$. ;
iii.20
IV.
i. 99, 131 j 7,20,
;
;
*gtg[.

6, 10

24

and

elsewhere.

with

this

kept
only
stances

it

others

Ms
as

the

refnge

demand
;

9, 16

of

peace

belonging to
will not require

he

24, 95

Man.

1 ; c.

3 ;

c.

11 ;

c.

14 ; Digs, i. 15 ; 22, 10 ; iii. 3,

5, and elsewhere,
can

Mtm.

12

natural

men

be

tetus

sistent

1,

14.

Still less

compassion

misfortunes

external

re-

last resort,
in the
open
when
circumit
allows

(vide Diss. i. 24, 20

his

in

to be

$%%.

Epic-

school

unequivocally

inner

ii. 15, 4 sg$. ; 6, 22 ; iii.

It is consistent

principlethat

with
tetns, who
suicide
garded

his

permit himself

faults ;

8, 10, 53 ; Diss. i. 6,
4
sqt[.; 12, sqq. ; 24, 1 ; ii. 5,

37

affect

expect that those

1 ; Man.

304,

given,to him,

not

not

he

as

of

to the
other

permitted,though Epicis

hnman

and

enough to allow
pression of sympathy
16).

CHAP.

so

of
happens ; the course
correspond with our wishes,because

will

in

activitymay
may

is

acknowledgethat

preciselyherein,that

received

the

happens

it is and

as

universe

271

that

all

shall

we

moral

better

be

ourselves

nature

shall for

to
to

that

misfortune
we

UNIVERSE.

and
interdependence of things,-

even

training;

wills

THE

inconthe

ex-

{Man.

ECLECTICISM.

272

CHAP.
IX.

that
he

no

should

wrong
the

holds

unhappy

greatest criminal
deluded

and

againsthimself:

be committed

whom

with

man

angry,1for he finds that all about

excite themselves,is grounded in the

be

Thus

does

with

his will and

tion
of
Jfyictetus
to Cynicism.

endeavour

merely
he

dares

which

most

an

not
men

of

things.
here by withdrawing
into himself,
absolutely
nature

contraryall external events

unavoidable
with perfectresignation
an
as
destiny.
cannot
We
deny that these principleson the
he

while

Inclina-

freedom

win

man

be

to

whole

acceptson

the

Stoic,but

are

at

the

time

same

cannot

we

pervades the
help feeling that the spiritwhich
that
as
moralityof Epictetus is not quitethe same
the

of

earlier

Stoicism.

On

the

hand

one

philosopherinclines to Cynicism,when, as
of theoretic
seen, he speaks disparagingly
he carries his indifference

when

submission

the

to

of the

course

the distinction of that which

is

contrary to it, that which

and

"

which

the Stoic
him

almost

Diss. i. 18

That

Diss.

good

the

was

so

far

for himself

place in

is

regarded
irrespectiveof his

as

man

doctrine
the

meaning
i *6\ov
,

vevcrcu,

"pas

vvv

the

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

vyialveivel 5' "s "v6po)irov

"r"oircTs Kal fiepos tt\ov nvbs, 5i'

66vra

jectiona
ob-

"

when

he

(j,ev ffoi vocrricrai

KCU

KLV$V-

airopTjQrlvcLi,
7rp5

5' Zarrtv #re atroQavetv.

ofiv ayavaKreis

""rrl (rjcrat
pexptyfjpas,
irXovreiv, rotavra.

nature

tinguish
chieflydisCynic for

vvv

5*

and

and

$" Tr\"v"rai

vvv

ri

afivvarov

"r rovrcp
crc"fjiaTL,
rovrois

TOLS

ffbv ofiv epyov,

eliretv" 5eT,^laQecrBai

"s,brt0d\\"i.

far that

so

accordingto

28.

distinction,be says in
ii. 5, 24 $([., only holds

science

is desirable

its

have

we

external

world

morality from

entirelyloses
; c.

to the

our

What

cfv-

lA.ravra

falls to

CYXIC

finds

it

dignifiedto

goods which
when

advances

disdain

fate offers

his

in

feel

TEXDEXCZES.

those

even

without

us

exaltation

above
2

insensibility
;

to

273

co-operation;

our

mental

when

external

he

emotions

he

forbids

CHAP.
*

to

us

and

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

and

men

teacher

man

c,

their
of

his

as

lot

3 ; cf. c.

humanity,
said

(as was

in

6, 1) is immaterial
'

v.

have

necessities,and

compared

as

deterred

not
:

for

with

his

from

action

by

fatalism, neither did they

allow
it to interfere with tbeir

observations

of the

values

is
Epictetus to a certain extent
anticipated by Chrysippus, from

value

their

KO.I T6^"iriJJ,zXca$
rovro
Sr) efibv conviction

In such

no

which

of

different

things ;

choice

no

tive
rela-

without

them,

among

and

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

tyvcriv"airrbs yap

Kara

6ebs

6i

5e

complete
and

rjSeiv$TI

ye

ITT* avr6.

Kal

vo-

yap

the

so

the

Stoics, only

could

be
of

allowed
*

'

the

standpoint of

that
to

But

according
happens

nature,
as

to

to nature

the

appears
because

the ancient

of

sition
oppo-

nature
'

; from

whole, all
according
necessary.

Stoics

were

only

shows

character

of Ms

of

world

to

from

the

that

the
ternal
ex-

difference
total in-

world,

destiny

sufferance,or

Man.

cal
ethi-

life,in which
becomes

to

submission
inactive

valne

the

to

contrary

and

as

relative

Aristo

withdrawal

"j"pevas elxey, "p/J.a"ay

eirlrb TryXova-Oat. In a system
that

of

Cynics, this

theory
Stoic

"i

strictlyfatalistic

indifference

the whole

Kal

KaOeifMaprai vvv,

/xoi

nobs,

\L

TOLofirav

T"V

and

becomes

tends

to it.

15.

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 avdpidyrasirepieiXqQevai.
8

Vide

my.

p.

271,

3.

IX.

ECLECTICISM.

274

CHAP,

His

l
he dissuades
when
us
spiritualposterity
;
takingpart in politicallife,because for him

gentle human

in

community

state of the universe

comparison

is too

from

every

the

with

small ;2 when,

great

he
finally,

and
developshis philosophicideal under the name
of Cynicism.3 But, on the other hand,
in the form
there unquestionablyreigns in Epictetus a milder

gentler temper than in the older Stoa : the

philosopherdoes not oppose himself to the unphilosophicalworld 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

perversityof

the

Stoic

well-known

men

in

propositionsabout

loving physician who

rather
their diseases,but

the

Diss. lit 22, 67 sg". ; cf PMl.

Epictetushim.

d. 6rr.IlLi.2QQ.
self

(Lucian,

unmarried

was

desires

fools,but
indeed

according to

than
and

nature

the necessity of human

demand

as

heal

to

sympathises with
of life

the

of

tone

society

feimilylife ; the

inde-

Simpl. in JEpiet. pendence and self-sufficingness

forbid
it.
Iniii.7, of the wise
man
J"fo"5Mr.c.33,7,p.272).
With
19 ; i. 23, 4 sgr.he reproachesthe
Epictetus, however, the
Epicureans that their repudia- latter point of view manifestly
of potion of marriage and
predominates, and thus there
Detnon.

55 ; cf

bitter

the

litical life undermines

human

society,and in Lucian

(L 0.)he
the Cynic

admonishes

Demonax

results
that

which

doctrine

similar

prevailed

at

to

this

time, and

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,considered
avB" avrov
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.
'

is

only the

which

we

the

same

might

contradiction

everywhere

2
s

PMl. d. 6r. III. i. 296, 3.

Vide Dm.
iii. 22 : iv. 8, 30:

i. 24, 6.
Stoic treatment
of
The
these questions.
principle
find in

TO

DUTIES

them,

who

greatest wrong,

but

accuses

AND

GODS

is

irritated

not

275

MEN.

the

by

even

CHAP.
IX

luntary

When

error.1

and

men

prefers to

these

Epictetus represents
the emotional
side, as
temperament:

should

we

with

other

Universal

it is in

question,
chieflyfrom

relations

affair of the

an

'.

invo-

an

as

connection

our

arising from

duties

the

it

excuse

fulfil

affectionate

duties

our

the

to

gods, to those belonging to us, and to our fellowfeeling,

citizens,for we ought not to be without
if

as

we

they
who

if

even

men,

they

all descend
ill-treat

us

of stone

made

were

are

ri

XcairoSvrcu.

Kal \OTTO$vrai

ayaQSov

Kal

o$v

avrols

There

than

5eT
is
to

the

most

and

not

with

Herri rb

without

being

of

Diss.

exclaims

passions or

tions
affec-

is the

ment
fulfil-

second

duty

elvat airaBrj"s

xaXeiraiveiv
avrovs

the

ydp
"c.
avSpidvra,
:

5"

ov

i. 13, where
to

first is

The

Epictetus
who

master

the

pe

is

slaves

Ms

towards
: avgreater unhappiness
in error
OVK
SpdiroSojr,
ave^y rov a8e\"f"ov
concerning
tts %X"i T^y ^a
^P^'
important questions, rov (ravrov
to have
stituted
a
""nr"p vibs CK rSav avrSiv
rightly conyovov,
Kal ry$ avrTJs
will ,* why
be
crirepfjLar"v yeyove
angry

no

be

those

who

have

this

should

them.
compassionate
finally,we are only angry
because

ourselves

violent

We

them

(T"avrtj"
fyfKeivois.
Diss. iii. 2, 4.

KXcirrai

3} "\eeij/

of

the love

refuse

to

to those

even

Kov

TreTrXdvyyTaL ir"pl

KaKtay.

Grod ; 3

equallyfrom
we
ought not

all

treat

brothers, for

slaves,as

our

Vide, besides the passages

quoted sup. p. 259, 1, the quotations
p. 268, 1 ; for example
(i.18, 3) : ri ert iroT^o'is xa^e~
elcrlKal
ircdvopev; K\eirrai, (pijcrlv,

should

we

we

cannot

happiness? "vo*""V
un-

KarafioXys

rls el Kal

rather

riv"v

ov

yue/t-

fin

"p%"ts;

And
with

rov

free

irov

from

dependence
the
on
they
things of which
o~ov
ret,
deprive us : fi^j6avfj,a"e
IfidnaKal rqi tcXeirrr)ov ^aAexarb uraAAos
j/e7r fjt.^
Oavjj,a("
rrjs
yvvaiKbs real

eh

$\"TreLs ; %n

v"povs

rovrovs

raXat-

TOVS

v6[JLovs
TOVS

V"KpS"v; els 5e rovs

0\eireis ; cf. Sen.

r"v

rSov

QeSav

ov

JBenef.iii. 18-

1 18, 2 ; JEJp.
Clement.
28 ; De
Beat.
24, 3 ; Mu31, 11 ; Vvt.
Stob.
Fl"ril.
sonius ap.
40, 9 ;
83
iii.
22,
; i. 9.
jEIp.44 ; ZHss.
2

ECLECTICISM.

276

CHAP,

father

or

brother.1

this dispositionis

How

con-

temperament of Epictetus
religious
how from this starting-point
a divergencefrom
in the theoretical
is inevitable,
older Stoicism
even
with

nected
and

the

the

will
part of philosophy,

be

further

discussed

on.

Marcus

greatest admirer

The

of

.s

Antoninus

iii. 22, 54

(the Cynic,

5e? avrbv

man)

wise

the

truly

The

apprehension of

cf. sup.

lonius;

ftvov Kal

"s

his

in

Antoninus,2 and

Aurelius

Marcus

Epictetus was

197, note).

p.

philosophers
he

Saip6fiaipov-besides

the

whose

struction
in-

attended

were,

above

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-

}j."vov "pi\"iv

avrovs

TOVS

who
the

themselves

express

in

d. Gr.

PMl.

manner,
III. i. 299, 4.
same

Verus

family, which

his

1),where

emigrated

with
of

out

rank

his

own

year

he

warded
for-

was

anxiety to
learn ; philosophy very
early
attracted him, and
already in
by

his twelth

garb

of

to

he

which

entreaties
c.

His

2).

the

assumed

last

only

at

i. 12 ;

s#.),

later

him

than

Epictetus,

as

have

(sup. p.
already seen
738, 1 ; according to M. Aur. i.
7. Adopted by order of Hadrian
(concerning his predilectionfor

we

him,

vide

Cass.

MX.

i. 4 ; Dio
Antoninus

Capitol,
15) by

of Marcus
Pius, he took the name
prescribed
abstinences
Aurelius after he had borne

himself

only curtailed

at the

mother

(I.c.

of his

teachers
of

his

he

loaded

gratitude

with

proofs

became

when
respect, even
Emperor (I.o. c. 3

Ant.

Pi.

as

Mc"p/c.);

philosopherand

and

he
; cf,

that

of Sextus
relates
of ApolCapitolinus
the

same

of

his

maternal

Catilius
his accession

Cass.

to

more

father
grand-

while.

On

the

throne

the
also

was

(Capitol, i. 5, 7 ; Dio
I. "?.).His
later life belongs
to Roman
tory,
imperial hiswhich

the

for

of Antoninus

surname

added

10; Philostr. V. Soph.

and
Dio
Cass. Ixxi. 1,

ii. 9 ;
relate
who

1. c. ; Eu-

Suid.

Sevems,
period; and Claudius
the
Peripatetic (Capitol. 3).
Among the earlier philosophers
made
none
a deeper impression

(I. "?.).

education

careful

His

this

his great grandfather

tained upon
atSpain, had

high

had

12;

(M. Aurel.
V. Soph. ii. 5,

Philostr.
but

Philostr.

viii.

Alexander

(for so he
born
was
originallycalled)was
the 25th of April,121 A.D.,
on
inEome(Capitolin. Ant. PMlos.
Annius

M.

and

3 ; Dio

trop.

throne

exhibits
of

"

the

powerful

to

Caesars

us

on

many
but

princes,

MARCUS

Stoicism,as well

AUEELIVS.

his whole

in

as

277

mode

of

thought,
Like Epic-

he

CHAP.
IX.

approximates very closelyto him.

the Stoic doctrine, resembles
tetus he generallypresupposes
but

only those

to be

dialectician

admits

nobler
no

and

man

and
I

sciences

racter, 180
cha-

duty.

to

Dio

Cassius

him.

place

history;
will

the

mention

peculiar

in which

lius

Caesar

and

stood

to

regent

father

adopted
he

his

has

and

plague

comanni,

so

by

in Eome,

wars

30)

(with

in 162

A.D., the
166 syq. and 178

c.
son

33. of
had
to

racter
his cha-

of

monument

his

tavrbv, but
under
p.

quoted
designations(Bach,
recent monographs
him

concerning
N.

Anton.

also

are

other

6). More

Bach,

the following

are

De

Mare.

Leipzig,1826

Avr.

Dorgens,

i-ide sup. p. 202, 1 ; Zeller, Vortr,

uncL Abliandl.
i. 89 $g". ; Cless
M.

Aurelius

165,

1866,

imd
And

Qrunfo.
1

Mar-

S$Y.)"

died

later years, which

in the MSS.
bear the title els eavrbv or KO."

ubers.

(the
dangerous insurrections
Bucoli in Egypt in 170 ; Avidius

is

mains
philosophy reranda,
aphoristicmemoin his
chiefly written

mine
(fathe

Cass.
his

administered

be

and

to

His

misfortunes

A.D.), difficult

Parthians

; vi.

raised

disturbed

was

great public
6

and

monument.

reign

equally

law

(i.16

in his meditations

own

co-

(136-161),

himself

beautiful

Aure-

actual

father-in

excellent

whom

Marcus

Kas

Selbstyesprciche
Stuttgard,
others in Ueberweg,
erlaut.

i. 228.

vii. 67

Kal

^y

SioAe/CTi/cbs Kal

8ai,Sia

TOVTO

$"pOS Kal

%TL cnr^tan-

eirecr(pwiicbs

aTroyvys,

al^fLtaV Kal

Kal "A.etJKOlV"VlKbs

bittered Kal euTrei^s16eq".

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

Cassius

in

and

excesses

modus.

the

and

Faustina,

On

of
the

his

wickedness
son

Corn-

17th of March

jp/iilosophy.

in the

in

and

relation
as

and

shortly

rare

the

only

Aurelius

he

V"KU)S

Kal

"7Ti

his

practical
vien" of

the

to

for that

authorities

of Roman

this

Imp.},

(Avid. Cass,)"and

well-known

part

Ver.

Marcus

according to Dio
poison, which

Philos.

Vulcatius

Ep'tctetus

during
tion
expediagainst the Marcomanni;

caused

Pius.

in

A.D.

(B. IxxL), Capitolinus (Ant.

Ant.

though
he
general,2

and

Tienna

ness,
conscientious-

faithfulness

feel called upon

physicist;

position,
at
gentlerdis-

refer,therefore,to
-,

in

life possess
religious

purer

of

stricter

or

and

does not

of these

value

the

of

none

He

for him.

interest

stand

in

close relation to the moral

any

of it which

determinations

278

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

nevertheless

of

opinion that

proper

important thingis

not

things above

beneath

should

and

him

serve

which
of the

the nature
to

of the

act

these

his

in

give us
Vide

277,

reckons

tits of

hold

man

that

none

conscience.3

that

to

oblige
only with

can

It is

the

studies

1 ; cf. i.

gods

support

17, where

the
that

benehe

did
in

greater

progress
such
poetry and

and
which

otherwise

the

in

flux of

Svo-KardXyirra5o/ce?
TTOV

yap

go further

they

; if

the

best

self to

applied himphilosophy he refrained

aTTOKaBifrai eirl

from

rovs

crvy-

Kal

iraa-a

TJ

even

durable
Kal
ri

eV

we

things,
transitory and
consider

we

are

men,

scarcely

row^ry

Kal
frvTrq

iror

If

external

all

are

might

he

pheno-

aperdTrraros;
with

exclusively occupied him,

when

is

^/zerepa
"ruy/caTc"0e"m
fj-eraTrrarTj'

worthless

that

he

study of philosophy.Philosophy

fixed

among

make

oratory

and

investigation

practical convictions, therefore,that

must

have

universe, and

against our

concerned

not

culties
diffi-

"

nothing can

he

the

and

changefulnessof thingsand of opinions

to the conviction
that
give us calm
happen to us which is not accordingto

alone

he

him

are

to the
a

that

within

greater

all

out

in the

can

us

daemon

should

more

search

earth, but

themselves

oppose

Keal, the

which

the

sincerity;2the

in

knowledge.1 The

he should

the

his

attain

may

much

that

with

commune

man

without

destination

'

o$v

en-

fy$y

rocra^rrj fiixrei
e"rrl rb eKTLfjLyBijvai,
fyrb
.

8Xcos ffTrovSacrdTJvat
ypatyets, ^ ffvKKoyLff^ovs aya^vvd^vov eiu\6etv, ^ ireplra /j,"T"a)po\oyiKa you.
It only remains
to await
in
KaraylvearBat.
his natural
dissolupeace
ii. 13 ; cf. ii. 2, 3 : a^es ra
until
then
tion, but
rovrois
iravecrOar
3

10

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;

fjiey

oLavry

iv

auroTs

elvai.
aKaraXTjirra
rots 2ro)iKo?$
ye

rovrov
avayKdcrcay

PROBLEM

and

mena,

all finite
A dream
in

OF

supply a

PHILOSOPHY.

defence

things. 'What
and

an

279

against the vanity

is human

Only

one

within

daemon

IX-

wandering

thing can guide

namely, philosophy.This consists

through it"
our
keeping the

CHAP.

life?5 he asks.

a strife and
exhalation,

strange land.

of

us

and

pure

us

in

clear,

exalted above
conduct

pleasureand pain,independent of the

of others ; in our receiving
all that happens

to

sent

as

us

of

our

The

by (rod,and

existence

awaiting the

cheerfulness and

with

courage.1
problem of philosophylies,therefore,in the

forming of
his mind

dogmas

character

man's

to be

there

chieflyimportant in

the

First,the doctrine of the

decay of all existence, of

"

passingaway,

V*v
f

peoutra,"c.
ic"VTO) ra

ra/iJi^
ra

Kal

enquiries and

three

points in the

in

Tvtyas.

system which

Stoic
of

are

which

has

nothing individual

cKeiBev

Tro6ev

($oy
tKaffrov
TT}S "pv%risfoeipos aroixel"v,e| wv
SimHar utterances
5e jSfas-Tr6X"fio$ a-vyKpiverai.

d-

vanity and.
%4vovbriSiipia'
TJ vffrepoQyfjLfa
concerning the
of
and
life
rb
transitoriness
5e X'fiBif].
irapair^at
ri^ovv
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

Kal

o^-

^xtf

our

5e rbv 0afafcir eVl iran

crvvsXtwri. "5e elireiv,varov
?\eq"ry yvt"fjiri
Treptpevovra,
2UAo
"fo ou5"y
fy Xvtrtv rtev
fro"rdfjc.aro$
jitej/ rov

5c

HU

eon'
reti"!

philosopher,
flux of all things,of the all
the rotation of becoming
eyes

: rov
avBpuvtvov fttov "s
% 5e ovffta aMs
Xpfoos ffrrypfi'

ii. 17

this

to

scientific

are

theoretical portion of the

calming of

estimated.

this purpose

For

of

value

the

and

their relation

only accordingto

problem is the

and

end

natural

things.

ECLECTICISM.

280

all returns

permanence,1but

CHAP,
'

the ceaseless

the universe

even

these doctrines

dissolution.4

its future

of

ments
ele-

conducts

couples these reflections

he

the

even

change which

of the

to

of time

course

to which

transmutation

subject; 3

are

in

With
what

an

unimportant part of the whole, what a transitory

of universal life,
is each
phenomenon in the stream
individual
the

how

desire

to
perishable,

as

an

if

we

evil ; 6 how
form

it

hold

must

as

to fear it

to disturb

the

to

hearts upon

our

good, or

ought

little we

exception

no

good, and
world,if we

it is to set

wrong

ourselves

which

law

holds

good, for all parts of

the

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
too

are

the world, to which

The

belief in

the

that it would
without
1

iv.

not

gods ; 8

36, 43

Marcus

v.

be worth

and

13,

is

gods

23 ; viii.

ii. 17,

v.

13, 32.

v,

23 ; ix. 32.
v. 23 ; vi. 15 ; ix. 28.

5
6
*

iv. 42 j
ii. 17,

iv. 46.

know

of

gods

whom

cause

x.

7,

ask

how

we

the

their
not

do

we

them,

not

in

(xii.

them

but

be-

effects

that

we

is not

(i.e. a

stars)are

believe

the
see,

answers

power
;
them
the

that
of

experience the

true, for they

we

world

existence

see

man

doubt

we

believe

we

do

and

recurs.

live in

Aurelius

We

of

of
we

to

little can

28):

end; viii. 18;

31 ; xii. 21.
8
ii. 11.
If

while

Marcus

often

so

indispensableto

so

justas

6 ; ix. 19, 28 et pass.

2
ii. 14: ; viii. 6.

end;

Aurelius

in

our

quite
portion

visible
souls

ORDER

Divine

the

all

manner

whether

WORLD.

embraces

this

all

extends

care

such, or

as

281

thingsand has
perfectand beneficent

the most

thingsin

immediately

the

to

indi-

is related to him

CHAP.
IX'

Belief i

by

of the

general interdependenceof nature.2

divine spiritpermeates all things; as the

means

The

same

substance

of the

rational

one

THE

Providence

ordered

vidual

OF

world

is one,

is its soul ; 3 it is

so

efficientforce which

and

throughall
all things,
and
sion.4
regular succes-

goes

things,bears in itself the germs of

bringsforth all thingsin fixed and
The
world, therefore,forms
livingwhole, the parts of which are
harmony

and

and

all in

and

the

it is

most

for the sake

without

interconnection

Mem.

them

maintained
internal

an

the

in

bond,5

best,the fairest

the

well-ordered

the

appropriateends
of the better,and

seeing

Xenoph.

by

regulatedfor

t?ie uni~

is made

worse

irrational for the

(cf. "iraKo\ov8r}(ny

rb

5e

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).

"#re

dtard^avresot
(pLXavQp"iras
(ii.4,11
2

to

; vi.

Marcus

Aurelius

choose

between
he

the

third

the

not

trouble

anything"
versive
even

that

of

all

and

; vide

163,3.

"(j?"Ka"rrov
vota, then

sub-

religion; though
he

case

holds

still take
his true

Phil.

cfAou did-

satisfied with
Xonra

it
KO.T

irapa

8eov

7jK"i.

r^jv "TV\XTI%IV/col

indirect

vine

and

direct di-

causation, between

and

destiny,we

HI.

i. 143, 2 ; 339, 1.

G-od

find PMl.d."r.

xii. 30 ; ix. 8 ; iv. 40 ; Phil.

d. 6fr. III. i. 200, 2 ; 140.
3

rbv

%roi

pzv
Kara

(firyKXoxriv^
ffv{jLfjL7jpvo/j.evT]v
The
distinction besame

tween

welfare

28:

T^\V

care

d. Grr. III. i.

5e
$ cwra" 8pjLty(r",
ra

5e

"c.

about
and

Similarly ix.
6pfj.%
TJ rov
be

us

two

repudiates
gods do

wicked

as

could

of himself

allows

themselves

it the

were
man

(vi.44

that

rovro

yetv
rovro

these

theories,whereas
"

Qeoi

4:4:,
"C.).

Ibid. in.

i. 159, 2, 3 ;

v.

32

S^/coj/ra
\6yov

5ia TTJS obcrias

ical 5f^

vavr'bs

rov

ai"vos

Karci

icepi6$ovsT"'raryfjL"yasoiKovofJLovvra
ri" Tray.
5

iv. 40 ; Phil. d.
j 169, 1, 2.

p. 140

Gfr. III. i.

ECLECTICISM.

282

CHAP,
IX-

sake of the rational.1

the

course

even

had

and

little

the

gods to
Loo.

cit.

and

course

however,

says,

evils which

goodness

believes himself
relation

and

side
inner

Phil.

175, 2

170,

1 ,* v.

old

16, 30

ii. 11

177, 1

j
ro'is p.ev

KaKo'ts Tva

Stoics

178, 1, 2

/car*

aA4)0eicw

d fydpvfj"i
TrcpmiirTr}

rb
TTOS, in* wry
8e Xonroov
ef ri

irw

edevro'

2;

T"V

in

relation

$#.)"

general

6 col or

the

he

often

substitutes

regard to

pas-

the

always
of

manner

the
in

of

"

Aurelius
a

he

greatly (PJiil.d.

so

Marcus

speaks

in other

and

6V. III. i. 339

d. 6V. III. i. p. 174,

176, 3

popular deities

tions
revela-

of nature

concerningthe

as

to have

of these

connection

elsewhere.

for

true

the

to

his

end

us

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
and

of which he
auguries,3
experience; 4 on the

and

the

divine

the

good

in

are

of the

And

its

; even

to

seems

part merely the inevitable reverse

good, and in part things by which the

wisdom

nature

with

conflict

to

whole

of the

economy

seem

purposelesshas

and

burdensome

which

that

Even

6eb$,for
*

popular

whom
'

Zeus

deities

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
existing public worship the
fj.))
faQpuirov,ircas
"v rovro
frlov av6pc^irov
steadily,since for him as
xelpca more
"v

wpo'foovro,"iva.

iTQLT}ff"iev ; xii.
3

ix. 27.
must

we

Kaicbv

5, and

Even
be

head

elsewhere,

to the wicked

friendly :

Kal

ot

we

of the

Roman

state

political
necessity;
can

understand

how

6eol $e iravrolco? avrots ftoyQovcri,tianity appeared to him

bellion against the laws
Si* bvelpwv,5i" fjLavT"i5"v.
4

5i}

i. 17, where

the

^o-nQ^aTa

State, and

the

it

and

was

thus
Chrisas

re-

of

the

constancy

of

Christian
the
which
a
oyeipca v are mentioned
martyrs as
defiance
were
(^tX?) napdimparted to himself, wanton
other
be
must
things, against ra^is, xi. 3), which
among
his
crushed by severity. Under
blood-spittingand giddiness.
5
Which
had
occupied the reign,as is well known, great

FUTURE

lie

sages
his

altogetherrepudiates the superstitionof

primal revelation of God he conbe the human
a
as
spirititself,
part and
within
of the Deity, the daemon
us,

siders to
emanation

"

which

alone

to Grod is the

universe.2

the

the

Deity,as

the

The

In i. 6, he says
Diognetus that he

in

referred

to him

owes

Vlib

TOLS

T6-

TU"V

this

which

subject,

often

he

quotations,Phil,

the

recurs,

Gr.

d,

to

III. i.

p. 200, 2 ; 319, 2.
3 Marc.
Aur. ii.1 7 ; iii.3 ;iv. 14,
21 ; v. 4, 13 ; vii. 32 ; viii.25, 58.
The

strikingof

most

is iv. 21
are

buried

then

As bodies

last for

decay,

these

ovrws

sages
paswhich

time,

at

eh

fiedLffrdu-evai
$v%al,

aidepa

Kal
5e

inrearTi,

the

die,

in

order

aldts yveffat,
answer

rovro

further

consistent

justice that
pious persons

not

aX\

is not
is

H-iii laBi

Of.
it

to

r"

that

\6yov
cnrepfiariKby
Kal rovrov
rbv
ava\afji^av6fj,"vai,l
TV*V

ftXtav

"ywpav

TpoTfov
r

Tats

irapexovffi.

"rav

the supposition
prerather

false,but

Kal ovroos
eftre/?
el
"$
#T",
(this

"v.

Also

e^eiy

^X"l?"^
is to

same

is

x.

be

replaced

e5et,^iroirj-

ii. 17, end

viii. 18; iz. 32 j

irpoffffwoiKt^o- 3 ; xii. 1, 21, 31.
The

vav-

which

to

5e

Tfoffbv crvfjifieivacratj
[j.era"dXXova'iomitted, or
Kal e^dirrovrai,
els by Trojy)
Kal xeovrai
erepcos

return

es

1
aweo'"TjKevai)

T"\es

the

els

"c.

most

"% al-

a"vvea'T7jKa'

TOVTCOV

xii. 5 ; how
is
the
with
divine
even

13

vXtKov

else to be

rbv

TOV

cnrep/jLariK^v

juerajSoA^j/
; v.

Kara

but
rbv

rbv

OVTOV

yQ'flT"V irepl
OTTOireplfiaifJi6vMV
r"v roio-inrfav
Xeyofj.4-

on

es

\6yov

ovros

Of.

to in iv. 14

T(p 5X

ev

praise of

vots.
2

or

the elements.3

into

KO.I

Kal
rrijs

paration
se-

soul

world

v.

33 ;

7, 31; xi.

to

0@"j,an

s^.)

ttbv

after the

time

into the

body, return
body returns

persecutions of the Christians

took
place (Zeller, Vortr. und
i. 106

after death

existence

Kin*Up

point,however, of the philosophyof

central

AJbh"ndl.

determine

diverges,however,

He

by the theorythat the souls,some

from

unhappiness
kinship of man

points which

the Stoic doctrine of man's

from

and

of the

of the

third

of the

view

happiness

our

this doctrine

and

depends ;
his

CHAP.

The

age.1

on

283

EXISTENCE.

284

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.

Antoninus
man,

moral

Epictetuscomes

life of

out most

and
strongly; but the difference of their nationality
social position made
it inevitable that the Eoman

should

emperor

individual

the

and

towards

his ethics

the

are

boundless

most

For

thyselfabout
into thyself
; only
wellbeing;reflect

others ?
within

'

find with

determinations
man

'

Why

he

says

dost

thou

of

himself,

upon

Grod,and the

love of man.1

duties of the

the rest, we

dependence of

turb

the world

emphaticallythan

fundamental

the will of

to
resignation

the

societymore

the

also that

theory of

maintain

Phrygianfreedman.

him

his

displayin

strongercharacter

into

said,in the

and here his likeness to

'

MMcs.

lies,as has been

warmest

and

dost thou

dis-

to

; retire

man

find

rest

and

thyself;be careful of the

daemon
within thee; loose thy true self from
all
that clingsto 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

Aurelius

Marcus

often

brings

sometimes

point.

these

all

only two

chief

himself

forward

virtues, sometimes
the

upon

of

three,
them, as

So in the

pas-

sage quoted sup. p. 278, 3 j 279,1,

he mentions
purity and freedom
of

the

inner

sion to
verse,

these

the

life,and
course

of

submisthe uni-

iii.4 ; and togetherwith

of the kina recollection

and
the duty
ship of all men
of caring for all.
The same
is

in effect asserted
essential

thing

j8eu"Kal

ev^petv,

in

v.

33 ; the

is 0eota fj.ev

{re-

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

"roL

But

tempt
ration,

any
we

as

he

not

at-

systematic enumecannot
expect any

consistency from
respect.

does

him

in

this

PHILOSOPHY

inexhaustible

an

fountain
is the

passionlessreason
take

must

with

endowed

with

from

the

good

to his

himself

nor

internal

with

unconditional

universe

whole

lies in

also;

which

he

at every

the

moment

law

by

he

man

of his life,
be it

sooner

ii. 13 ; iii. 4, 12 ; Iv. 3, 7,

8, 18 ; v. 19, 34 ; vii. 28, 59 ;

Tiii. 48 ; xii. 3 et passim.
2
Phil. d. Or. III. i. p. 210,

knows

4.

(and

216,

1 ;

218,

man

rational

fillhis

the

place5

Roman, adds
forward

later,with the

or

to the
serene

i. p. 177, 2 ; 178, 1.
Hence
the
cf.
40
that
principle (x.
v. 7)
;
should
not
men
ask external

prosperityfrom God,
the
dispositionwhich

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

i.

as

to look

desires

HI.

to

higher task

no

morality,to

ternal.

Ib.

of the

whole, to honour

1 ;

moment

himself

for

material

of the

strict
a

as

and

the best for

happen

can

and
imperialphilosopher),

212,

wish

course

be

must

into

himself

in his bosom

to the

its nature

make

cannot

follow

to

freed himself

nothing happens except ^ Of

that which
advantages the """""

nothing

that

activity.4 For

end

confines

that

of Grod ; that

and

him

god

who

has

nature, and

submission

he believes

will

than

He

stand

of man,

constitution

present,he accommodates

the

being

that does not

evil.3

an

His

happinessand

all

satisfied with

the

moral

man

invincible.1

seek his

CHAP.
'

in which

things external,in him every

he is every
appetiteis extinguished,

every

2, 3

be

goods ; 2 everythingelse,all

is neither

would

to

the

happiness,that

only citadel

has

reason

in connection

the

if he

refuge

of

285

LIFE.

activityis the only thing in which

rational

his

OF

nor

13, 16,

only

neither

fears what

ii. 5, 6,

16. "c.

but

is

ex-

17 ; iii. 5,

ie

ECLECTICISM.

286

CHAP,
IX"

cheerfulness

thought of
how

can

man

which

with
the
simply content
that which is according to nature.1
But
feel himself part of the world, and

subordinate

is

himself

without

at

the

member

of

humanity

does

fatherland
Lore
m

to

not
all

of him

demands

finding in

task ?

the

and

Not

how
his

upon

work

can

the

even

as

for humanity

he do this
immediate

more

which

attention

universe

regarding himself

and

bestow

the

of

law

time

same

his worthiest

if he

the

to

his

position

unworthy

mem-

n'

of human

bers

his love.

from
love

in the
that

are

men

and

our

spiritdwells

wickedness

no

reminds

ungratefuland

all

divine

He

the weak

even

excluded

society are

in

sinning

sin

that

should

us

that

erring,to

by Antoninus
it befits

take interest

hostile ; he

bids

kindred,that

in

that

the

cannot

we

world, but

us

even

consider

all the

expect
that

to

man

even

same

to find

the

only involuntarilyand because they do

is reallybest for them
not perceivewhat
; 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,
and

we

know

For

how

further

teach

details cf Phil.
.

Ib:III.

vii. 22

or

bear with

them,

being angry or surprised at their

only compassionateand forgivethem.4
himself
Antoninus
acted
consistently

d. @r. III. i. p. 286, p. 301

2
./". p. 297, 2, 3.
3

men

of

instead

should
faults,
We

either

sg.

i. 297, 2, 3.
ffiiov av6p""irov
ri"
:

"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

these

to

Tip

of

mind,

and

the

on

admire.

of

deepest

Musonius,

the

modified

self-sacrificing

them

i.

As

is

v.

example,
of

himself

with
x.

8)

and

in

gain,

mand

was

lence
benevowith

not

great

as

of

want

for

and

find

in

it

in

is

more

enquiry.3

strict

self-examina-

tion.

s%.

expressions

satisfaction
j

101

for

seen,

repeated

37

sq.

of

do

we

the

it

attained

philosophic

Abhandl.

und

Vovtr.

98

sgr. ;

But

doctrine

man

which

this

will

men

feelings
to

for

exhaustive

and

Zeller,

96

yet

compensate

cannot

methodical

reality

Stoicism,

ancient

itself,

and

strength

love

form

glory.

moral

the

times

Aurelius,

Stoic

his

in

dis-

logy

In

regard
and

(iv.

Aurelius,

de-

will

be

to

the

theology

later

ids
anthropoof

Marcus
further

something
said

must

in

these

'

tury,
cen-

we

could

Marcus

though

them,

morals

through
the

that

in

throne,

imperishable

of

duty,2

to

CHAP.

purity

philosophy

of

progress

severity

by
and

Stoic

its

to

scientific

though

the

soul,

which

man

imperial

Epictetus,

an

no

of

of

Ms

from

as

loyalty

degradation

redound

made

the

Koman

life,

nobility

love

That

doubly

always

us

and

piety,

the

"his

conscientiousness,

mildness,

to

comes

287

STOICISM.

From

precepts.1

there

words,

LATER

OF

on.

ECLECTICISM.

238

B.

The

"

thoroughness

with

Stoicism

direction.

Cynicism,for
of the

of

the

the

the

in

nature

and

in

followed

and

the

same

had

formed
itself out
originally
Cynic doctrine of the ence
independwill

had

of human

basis

scientific view

and

of this
with

relation

the

furnished

consequence

truer

Cynicism

onesidedness

it

comprehensive

world, and

ERA.

the contemporary

which

virtuous

more

placed
of

IMPERIAL

THE

only distinguishedby

is

of

OF

this later Stoicism

FROM
"

X.

CYNICS

THE

"

CHAPTER

the

itself

was

claims

If this theoretic

life.

of

of

basis

neglected,Stoicism reverted to
the
was
standpoint of Cynicism, the individual
restricted for his moral
activityto himself and his
after virtue : instead of creating
personalendeavour
morality were

the rules of his conduct

and
and
mere

thingsand

of men,

he

his

knowledge of

the

obligedto resort
his immediate
consciousness, his personal tact
moral impulse ; philosophy,
instead of a science,

nature
to

of

from

rule

of life founded

determination

external form, and

of
it

was

was

upon

science,became

character,if

not

an

entirely

inevitable that in this

subjective
acceptationit

should

not

seldom

sided
one-

be

LATER
at strife with

general

moral

claims.

of Stoicism

towards

mate

CYNICS,
with

even

Cynicism

Epictetus; indeed,the

and

expressly designatesand describes the

On
the same
road we
as
a Cynic.
philosopher
latter

the

encounter
so

far

as

know,

we

the

the

and

all

upon

the

meeting

the

and

which

conditions

Eoman

sufficient

done

"

the

pressure

opening
the

corruption of

been

tinguish
dis-

Republic
the

luxury, and

and

also

Cynics ;

Imperial Government

gave

"

distress

time

for
in

analogousbut
more
by Diogenes
mitigated circumstances
after the beginning of the
Soon
Crates.1

Christian

era

that

under

as

way

same

and

the

immorality

weighing

much

that

call themselves

not

true

Sextii,though these,

last century of the

first of

universal

the

of

did

it is undeniable

and

the

school

had

name

hear

again

we

CHAP.

tendency
later Stoics,

the

in

legiti-

this

observe

may

Musonius

in
especially

and

custom

We

289

under

the

of

Cynics, and
3

is united

Revival

"^ni^m
won

host, partly the

numerous

of

Gjjt"r
"?-

philosophers,t^Ckril
genuine, partly of merely nominal
who, with open
contempt for all purely scientific tia"lfl"ratheir only task
the
as
activity,set before them
of

of

liberation

endeavours, and
far

herein

from

man

disturbingmental
than

more

wants,

unnecessary

the

emotions;

Stoics

set

idle

who

themselves

by their dress and

definitelyin opposition,even
of men
and their customs,
to the mass
of life,
mode
forward
as
and came
professedpreachers of morals
and
mask

moral
a
3

over

overseers

number
Cf,

of

Bernays,

the rest.

That

impure elements
Litcian

und
U

die

under

were

Kymker,

this

hidden,

27 *g.

ECLECTICISM.

290
.

CHAP,
x'

that

ancient
ness,
coarse

and

its adhe-

great part,perhapsthe greaterpart, of these

mendicant
monks, through their obtrusive-

and charlatanism,
through their
shamelessness,
and rude behaviour, through their extortions
even
and, despitetheir beggarlylife,
impositions,

of
through their covetousness, brought the name
philosophyinto contempt, is undeniable,and may be
l
provedfrom Lucian alone; but we shall find that the
theless
new
Cynicalschool,like its predecessor,had neverBut
the
even
a nucleus
worthy of esteem.
of little importance in a scientific
better Cynics are

point of
1

view.
De

E.g.

Peregrini',
Symp. il s%. ;

inorte

Piscat. 44 sq. 48 ;

Fugit.

16 ; also

complaints had
Lucilius

strange

qui

his

warns

he

knows

are

seen

cupiunt, against

the

conspici
cultus

as-

cajmt, the
the
"ba/rba^ indiotum
negligentior
argcnto odium, the ctibile Tiumi

per,

the

mtonsum

positum, et quicyuid
"bitio perversa
of

traits
and

it,no

there

the

new

aliitd

contur"bal)it

to

(cf.
sapiens
14

in

populwn

nee

vitce novitate

also

am-

sequitur, all
Cynicism:

is also reference

mores
piiblieos

tetus

via,

doubt, in Up. 14,

103, 5): non

se

of life of those

proficeresed

convertet.

Kpic-

(iii.22, 50) sharply

discriminates
freedom

the

between

ner
in-

moral

the
and
outer
the
of
true
qualities

Cynic;

and

that

substitute

for

Kal

Kal

i-v\ov

iray

which

these

many

"c. ;

and

about

the

period Dio Chrysost.(Or.

34, p. 33 E.) says, with refeto the philosophic dress,
rence
same

(JEp.5, 1) against the

manner

non

lar
Simiraised

been

Seneca

others.

by

24.

Nigr.

that

well

in

it call

those who
themselves

Cynics and
as

Kal

regard themselves
avQp"Trovs
jMLiifOfjLevovs rivets
plaints
comraXanr"povs. The
of

by

Lucian

his

are

echoed

Aristides,
Quatuorv.
cf Bernays,
Kyn. p. 38,

contemporary
rhetorician (De

the

p. 397

Lucian
100

sqq. ; Bind,
'wnct, die
From

^.)-

to which

be

may

these passages,
added Lucian,

Dig ii.

Mort.
1, 1, 2 ; Galen,
An. Peec. 3, vol. v. 7l,

we

also wherein

Dial.

see

tokens

the external

of the

Cynic life consisted

the
in
:
mantle, of ten very
by these philosoragged, worn
phers,
the

hair, the

uncut

staff and

beard

wallet,

and
and

the
whole
irv\pi$iov
rough mendicant
yvdBoi /u.eyd\ai'life, the ideals of which were
b "av 8""s,
^ cwroa Crates and
a Diogenes.

3}TO?S

cLTravruffi

Xot-

DEMETRIUS.

first

The

mode

and

name

who
philosophers

of life are

the

century,1and

most

at this date

appears

of Seneca

and

as

to the

past

Of. i. 41,
tota

enim

inimica

be

Psetus.2

The

est

In

belonging
in

yet the passage

148

ratio

to

to

of Thrasea

phenomenon

(Cynicorum vero
est
ejitiefida,
;

verecundice)seems
against panegyrists
of the Cynic life. Somewhat
later Brntns
(Pint. JBrut.

Under

Augustus

lived

that

who

Menippus

the

whose

ad ventures

with

are

related

15), and

same

time
of

he

calls

Demetrius

(Ibid. iv. 39 ;
*

statements

second

much

too

first

having
(Dial. Mart. 10,

the

Cynic

early

who

Of these

the
did

of

Lamia);

will be named

often

Augustus,

that

he

called

Demetrius

is also

untrue,

had
;

even
a

but

though

Caligula, and

for

live in the

not

the

The

date.

following note.
2
This contemporary

ciple
dis-

43).
according
was,
only is the
manifestly false (irrespective11, already in
of

as

cal
Cynics capable of histori-

proof

the

him

v.

KWCOV

him

Ms

mentions

not

Demetrius

reign

; treats

The

Lamia
at

246, 3.
11), cf. Part II. a;
of
supposed contemporary
to
have
arisen
seems
Augustus
of an
tion
out
arbitrary combinaof this
Menippus with
of Philostratus,
the Menippus
who
assigned
was,
moreover,

is said

Philostratus

by
(Apoll. iv. 25), while

itaXaitav

rtav

ris

killed himself

Lycian,
a

written

of the events
contemporary
of the third century (Icavomen.

identical

with

is also

he

been

and

the

already

[j,d\avKoLKTiKos

Menippus

Jac.)"and
have

to

had

anr6s

plays so great a part in

Lucian
in Luc. Piseat.
(SeJiol.
26 ; Iv. 97

of

(Diog. vi. 101): Lucian

(Accvs. 33) also calls him Mey-

who

said

Lucian

Ne/cwa

M. Favonius
34) names
(who
mentioned, sup. p. 74, foot,
the Stoics)with expresamong
sions
descriptiveof the Cynics
but
(airXoKvuv and ^/evSo/nJojj/),
Infer
from
cannot
we
certainly
there
this that
a
was
Cynic
have

Menippus to whom
Icaromenippm

the

Dialogues
of the Dead
has given the chief
the
roles, is unmistakably
Cynic of the third
century
for
Ms
Satires,
B.C., famous

is

to

the

about

Greatly,how-

great portion

aimed

school.

with

met

of the school
prominent man
have been Demetrius, the friend

always treats Cynic-

Cicero

Ism

to be

Cynics'

the middle, of the first Christian

before

middle, and

the

assumed

Emperor

of

to

neca,
Se-

him,

mentions

Benef,

Rome

was
a

in the

vii.

under

offered

by

giftof 200,000

he
posing sesterces, which, however,
supRome'
We
Mm
in
declined.
find
disciple

the first
it

under

Nero

(Sen. JSenef. vii

14; 91,19).

1,3; 8, 2; ^.67,

was

formerly universally accepted. The

TJ

utterances

of Seneca

on

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

292

CHAP.
X.

is
philosopher

this

as

ever,

his freedom

advantageouslyas

of
poverty and Ms manner
from
date
Beat.
183)
(Vit.
time
this
QIOG pauperiorem,
qua/m ceteros Cynicos,quod,cum

his

life

liabere,interet posoere'),
JEp.20, 9 (ego
(Licit
aliter audio, qua

interdixerit

siU
dixit
certe

Demetrius

noster,

admired

ilium

cum

by Seneca,1and

from

who

wants

mention

Nothing

p. 6, Musonius
well
as
were,
of these

Two

(Menippus

Epic-

(JDiss.i. 25, 22), and the

anecdote
in Lucian, Saltatory
Thrasea

When

friend

intimate
raised

Ms

(Tac.

Ann.

he

was,

in

voice
xvi.

34

tage,
disadvan-

after

accession

the

Carneades

Menippus,

as

Demetrius.
however

names,

Musonius), he
from
merely takes

much

of what

form
that
in

we

judgment,

no

there
is

else.
other

were

the

at

plain

can

he

as

nowhere

Rome

tion
founda-

Carneades

to

; as

Philostratus

historical

says has any

opposition
s#.)"anc^

to his own

still more

he

and

and

mentioned

was

(67 A.D.),whose

death

to

put

Psetus

any

(vide sup. pp. 291,

know
not
1; 246, 3), and we

tetus

63.

to

Philostratus
how

of

Cynic.

as

with

contemporary

doubtless

word

as

ing
Accordwritings left by him.
to Eunap. V. Soph. Procem.

quam
tem),

the

him,

is known

vidi

nudum,
quanta minus,
in xtramentis, inciibanHip. 62, 3 (he lives, nan
contempserit omnia,
tamquam

contrasts

Cynics

time

of

from

metrius
De-

the

going
fore-

and
statements,
(p. 290, 1)

the
from

quotations
of

Seneca.

the defence by
Vespasian undertook
of Egnatius Celer (Tac.

of these

One

Cynics,

Isodorus, who

name

of Ms

is
But

on

count
ac-

biting words

had

exiled
from
been
by Nero
mentioned
is
Sueton.
Italy,
by
injurious
pasian
(Nero, 39).
expressions concerning Ves1
banished
he
JEtenef.vii. 1, 3, he calls
was
(71
but
his
him
to
island,
meo
: Vir
tinued
conan
judicio magnus
A.D.)
Hist.

iv. 40 ; cf
of

xvi.

Ann.

On

insults
Sueton.

not

were

punished (Dio

32),

his

account

Cass.

Vesp. 13).

further

Ixvi.

In

13;

Lucian,

Adv.
2nd.
in
19, he appears
Corinth ; in Philostratus, ApolL
with
iv. 25 ; v. 19, we
meet
him
in the reign of Nero
at
Athens

and
he

Apollonius.of

by
Titus
of

(vi.31), and

Domitian

42
(vii.

was

of that

company
;

viii.10

to
Tyana
reign

in the

still in

the

necromancer

s##.); but

these

untrustworthy.
is described by most of those

statements
He

quently
Corinth ; subserecommended
was

are

etiamsi

maximis

comparetur ;

in I. c. 8, 2, he says of him
naQuern,milii videtur rerum

and

nostris

tura

tulisse

ostenderet,nee
corrumpi nee nos

ut

posse,

temporibus^

ilium

ab illo

noHs

corrigi

eocactce,licet neget

mrum

Cf. Ep.
"c.
ipse,sapientitB,
Philostr.
to
According
ApolL
had

25, Favorinus
praisedhim.
less

brilliant

has

just

He

iv.

greatly

appears

light
quoted
in

been

Tacitus, Dio

also

62.

Cassius, and

in

what
from
tonius.
Sue-

203

DEMETRIUS.

with, the
value

the Roman

luxury of

estimated

be

cannot

rate, there

world, his philosophic CHAP.

highly. At any _1_L__
very

have

down

come

to

us

thoughtsof his,and the meagreness

of
renders
it probable that none
known.

were

He

trouble

themselves

exercise

themselves

use

he

moral

opposes

himself

not

to

knowledge, but

to

practical
their

cynical
opinion of others;3 he

of

bitter

with

the

to

scorn

threats of

misfortunes

outward

welcomes

as

resigns himself

training,and

moral

with

expresses

contemptuous

despot;4 he

means

scholars

few rules of life for

;2 he

consciousness

his

in

much

importance

any

appealswith impressive eloquenceto

rudeness

the

with

of the tradition

his

recommends

remarkable

no

In all
to the will of Grod.5
joyfully
also
is nothing that a Stoic might not
his lightestimation
of learning
and even

willinglyand
this

there

have

said ;

and

knowledge

the

Stoicism

Cynicism
which
1

What

"

he

of his

therefore

dissertation.

own

8, 2

:
res

He

co7icinnat"z

deceat,

non

solliettte, sed

nee

in

where

Lucian,

he

hand

Adv.

Indoct.

19,
of

takes

the

book

of

bad

reader, and

out

pieces. Further, his

utterpreviously mentioned
tears

it in

from

Mp. 91, 9, who

him

Eod"m,

imperitorum,

redditos

these

cpio
*

crepvtwt.
gonent

the

word
this

words,

esse

centre

Quid enim,
isti

refert,swsvm

deormm

an

quotes

loco sioi

If Seneca

to
elega/nter

is

matter

of taste.

proseqfitentis.
.

concerning- Vespasian,
Sen.

vngenti applies
tuttt,res

animo, prcnct inpetm

Cf

his life.

ances

and

voces

elo-

was

his

severity with

the

in

foriissimOrS inquit, mea

eQer~b"

su as

only

rate, with

any

peculiarityof

principleson

Benef. vii. 1, 3 *#.

from
follows, however,
well
as
c. 9,
as
onwards, is,

q\ienti(B
ejus,quce

the

lies

his

stamps

The

time.

Sen.

10, Seneca's
2
In I, e.

shares,at

Demetrius

Li

Epikt. Dus.

says to Nero
"rol 8s %

rav,
5

Sen.

67,
J$j).

1 25, 22, he
awei\ets
poi 8"va-

""tScns.

Promd.
14.

3, 3

5 j 5 ;

ECLECTICISM.

294

the

Of

CHAP.
X.

details have

some

(Enomaus

the

Besides

darci.

Cynics

names

and

whom,

imperial family,

of the

abuse

their

of

account

on

of

Heras,

former

the

latter beheaded

was

Hostilius
banished

with

15);

Domitian

must

place
surname

Orae.

Demetrius.

besides

that

whom

(Lucian, Tax,
under

27

Rhodian

?) to

the
he

fate.
was

gave

over

he
of

(or of

his

of

whom

cessor
suc-

Pere-

pupil Theashall

we

him

of

that

he

it

his

tended

their

When

brought

to

to his friend

cence
inno-

lighthe
the

himself

to the Brahmans.
historical truth
of this

Crato,

(Luc. De

siderable
con-

which
went

rence,
occur-

the

Pancratius,
and

Athens

period of

the

who
in

Soph.
the

Crescens,

belongs
lived

Corinth
i. 23,
accuser

in

(Phi1), and
of Justin

(Justin.Apol.

Martyr

ii. 3; Tatian, Adv.

Gent. 19;
Hist. Ecel.
Eus.
iv. 16, "c.) ;
to

the

period of Severus,
the-

tiochus,
he

set

An-

Cilician, whom

esteemed

his soldiers

of endurance

because

example
(Dio Cass. Ixxvii.
an

cf.

und
Bernays, Lucian
After
this
time
Xyn. 30).
there is a gap in our knowledge
of the Cynic philosophers extending
19 ;

die

The

tain
however, is as little ceras the authenticity of the
treatise which
affirms it; and

To

the

on

Saltat. i.$##.)

likewise

that emperor
cused
finallyacto share

was

and
'Ap/cecr/Aaos)
Herophilus
torical
to be his(Icaromen. 16) seem

Cynic philosophy,

in order

received, and

to India

and

genes,

Under

his

onax,

grinus,

lostr. F.

devote

compensation
he

and

Dem

Antoninus

guidance

prison,and

himself
his

the

among

period.

Pius

Antoninus

contrary
(vide imaginary.

related

to

the

that

in

this

persons,

unjustly-accusedfriend Antiphilus with the greatest selfdenial

Cynics

drian,
Ha-

###.) that

Bhodius

certain

Def.

trius
Deme-

it is

to Alexandria

came

himself

of

sarcasm

; under
(Enomaus

infra\ perhaps
of

oracle

against the

person),in

7, 413, puts

c.

counted

be

is related

we

Plutarch, De

mouth

whose

also

speak later on; also Honoratus

(Luc. Demon.
19, where

was

or

historical

an

was

cluded
con-

Agatho
in Egypt
mon.
(Lucian, De3; Peregrin. 17) must

Trajan
clothed in a bearskin, and
with
that
Didymus
called
him
of Planetiades
therefore,
Demonax,
(if

Under
the

also

lived

34.

c.

lived

(Dio Cass.

and

probably
(7.c. 13),who

Ixvi.

otherwise, the

approximately

from

and

scourged

the

lived under

Demetrius

only be

Vespasian lived

Under

Diogenes

he

when

can

respecting

us

it

were

even

lowing time
fol-

ever,
this school, of which, howbulus
perfect.
our
knowledge is very im-

with

to

is said to have

connected

are

down

come

tioned
men-

p. 291, 2, the

supra,

ing,1
periodimmediately follow-

Gradara,who

of

(Enomaus

of Ga-

the

Cynicsof

over

hundred

and

fiftyyears, but the continuance

of the school is beyond question.
When

who,

lived,
Asclepiades
according to Tertullian,

295

(ENOMAUS.

for
Julian reproachesMm
reign of Hadrian.1
destroyingin his writingstlie fear of the gods,for
and tramplingunder foot 2
despisinghuman
reason,
he says,
and divine ; his tragedies,
all laws,human

the

pious

descriptionshameful

all

beyond

are

religionhas

perhaps
GEnomaus

that

suppose

from
strikingmanner
of thought. In
mode

of the

the

popular

share,we

small

no

the

must

still

have

departed in a
and
prevailingcustoms
lengthyfragments from

must

the

terous
prepos-

horror

despiser of

the

for

emperor

the

this verdict

if in

and

and

againstthe Jugglers,'which Eusebius

find a polemic as violent as
has preservedfor us,5we
it is outspoken against the heathen
oracles,in the
travelled
Nat. ii. 14:,

Ad

distant

"

his treatise

lands

with

through
or

cow;

LOG.

tit. p.

When

D.

210

Suidas, Aioyerrjs fy Olv6fi.calls

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.
who

Sphodrias,

Athen.

iv. 162

among
baeus"

the

of

authorities

viz.,Hegesianax,

Sto-

this

Po-

founded

statement

Theomnestus

"

do

we

this

of

Xanthippus,

lyzelus,

not

tragedies

to

seems

confused

be

lection
recol-

passage, where

cated
mentioned, dedihis
to
or
Diogenes

are

to

know.

on

(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
1

He

is

$$$., discusses

him

immediately
and

Porphyry,
(C.18, 3) ris T"V vewv.

before
2

draft,
vii.

cf. vi. 199

A.

p. 209

calls Mm

named
5

B.

Spanh.

less

vii. 209, B

accuratelyby
:

rb KO,T"

Prcep* Ekang*

vi. 6.

Julian

x/wjtrrTjpW.
v.

c.

19-36,

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

296

CHAP.
X.

l
of cynicalfreethinking
spirit
on
no
; but it is based
properly
philosophic
arguments ; and in connection

with it QEnomaus
of the

and
Stoics,

rudder

and

be

as

much

againstthe fatalism

likewise turns

exalts in its stead free-will

foundation

of human

it
life,
declaring

to

fact of consciousness

incontrovertible

an

the

as

cilability
and expoundingthe irreconitself,
of foreknowledgewith
freedom, and of
with moral
In these utterances
fatality
responsibility.2
of the man
we
recognisethe self-dependence
who, in spiteof his Cynicism,would be a follower
of Diogenes;3 but he
neither of Antisthenes
nor

as

existence

our

neither

doubtless

was

deeperstudyof
The

famous

and

similar
Expressionsentirely

put

are

Athens,

in

esteemed

adaptedfor any
philosophic
questions.
Demonax4
also, who was
highly
inclined

into the

mouth

Orac. 7, p. 413.

Plutarch, Def.
Moreover, cf.m/ra,p,298, 3,and

d. Gr. II. i. 280 s##. ; Ber1. c. 30 $%%.

nays,
2
LOG. dit. vi. 7, 11 a#. (The-

PMl

doret, I, c.) with

extolled

c.

3) had

of the

representativeof Cynicism by

nor

avrcav
ev

(supra,p. 291 ;
Stoics Epic294,1) and
tetus and Timocrates
(#gpra,pp.
197, 256); he afterwards

Julian, Orat. vi. p. 187

of the

to

death

on

ness
advancing weak(Z,c. c. 63 *"".),

of old age
he still had

intercourse
Herodes Atticus (c.24, 33)
this latter period, he may,
as

in

teal

perhaps,have lived till160 A.p.,

or
even
longer. The treatise

said

avrwv,
8

himself

with

it was
of self-consciousness
"\\o
tKavbv
said:
OVK
previously

% cruj/a""r07j"m
re

lived

Athens, and died there when

almost
a
century old, having
in

a.vreiX'hfJLju.eOa,
TOTL"T"P teal
fiiaicw* but
KOI
avQatperuv
Tjfjuv

cos-

Cynics Agathobulus
of the

the

But

ovrcas

tions
instruc-

the

Demetrius

proposi- starved
tion:
ISoi/ 7"p, $ rp6irq"^JMOOV account

r"v

treatise

enjoyed

of the

and

in

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

Cyprus of a good
family,Demonax
(accordingto
*

Born

in

to, that it

was

after his death

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
it with

reconcile

respectshe
QEnomkns

system

life and

its necessities ; in other

is

in harmony with
considerably
had neither
held
to
a
strictly

himself

troubled

nor

at all about

it.

As

definite

any

tific
scien-

knowledge, so Demonax, according to the

of his biographer,3
carried his eclecticism
assurance
to

such

of

his

that

extent

an

it is difficult to

say

which

philosophicalpredecessors he preferred.
He
himself,to all outward
proclaimed
appearance,
himself a Cynic,without,however, approving of the
the

exaggerationsof
he
and

chose

moderate

hearted
with

enough
directed

to

is

the

is

happy;

has

Bekker

Lucian's,

its

und

denied

and

that

it

and

really a
hero, and
him
TQV
no

any

die

nowhere

who

gives
Lucian, was
contemporary of his

author,

himself

out

had

to

be

intercourse

with

of

he

was

mankind

who

man

only is

is

from

free,said

free who

hopes

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

welfare

him,

and

the

he
extraordinary veneration
thereby acquired, cf Lucian,
.

/djf""r~Z. c.
(eirl
3
have
"rvv"ryev6fji'r)v,
c. 1), we
for many

reason

mild, benevolent,

liberation

Bernays (Luhas
Kyn. 104 sg.*)
def ended this opinion with very
important arguments. But that

dan

ter
charac-

own

and
Socrates,4

for the

things external:

he, alone

his

largeesteem
Aristippusside by side
Diogenes.5 His principalefforts

to

and

of

in

the

model

temper

Socrates

were

all

for

party;but

to

internal

years

doubt,
reason

nor

is there

in his work

c.

5-11

Demon.
LOG.

48 ; 52.

; 57 j 63 ; 67.
5.

dt.

5-9
s

; cf

19 ; 21

LOG. dt.

62.

ECLECTICISM.

298

CHAP,
'

nothing and

fears

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,freedom
in the true spirit
included in it,
from the prejudices
of the popularreligion; he himself
he never
offered sacrifices,
indicted because
was

from

despisedthe

and

neither

in

Eleusinian

mysteries,and

defence

his

he

elsewhere

nor

ceals
con-

his low

existingworship.3 In his suicide and

his indifference to burial,4
we
recognisethe disciple
and Zeno ; and though the departure
of Antisthenes
from this life,accordingto the Stoic doctrine,must
to a higher life,
entrance
Demonax, like
an
open
this view.5
As
Pansetius and Epictetus,disclaimed
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
the

opinionof

20 ; cf

Lucian, Demon.

rl *6Xov

ejue/teA^/cet
avr$

to

Athena

he
he

To

did

quoted
the

com-

sacrifice

not

he

had

ovSe

70^

replied

refrained,

hitherto

wap* e/uou
vir"\dppavoj/
; and when
avrfyv

$"?"r0c"

6v"uS"v

censured

in

make

God,

he

T"V

respect

to

it would

cause

him

not

to

either

bad,
them,

and

warn

if

have

to

c.

temple
said, could
to

well
c.

he must
the

pray ;
hear
him

the

dilemma

believe

of
power
of fate, or

was

worthless,
*

to

for

in any other place ;

he confounded
a

decrees

with

refused

37

the

the

Loo. cit. 65 sg.

"\\ov

LOG. oit. c.32:

himself

altering
his art

5e

irore

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

about
them
uninitiated
; in
the
if
were
mysteries
order,
to

in

he

27

soothsayer with

mysteries, he said that he did

not
get himself initiated,befor

In

enter

and

acquainted

them

just as

supra, p. 274, 1.
3
LOG. oit. 11.

plaintthat

4: :

"

anecdote

the

Cf.

c.

them.
jUTj"ej/bs-

eB/at.
Trpoo-Sea

"X\ov

them

they

were

he

says

hyaQ"v

that

in

Kal

KUKUV

against /zawp^ irdvras

good, to A^ercw.

word, x^07? ns
Kal

fr

^\ev9epta
o\lycp /cara-

209

PEREGRINUS.

practicalinfluence
not

much

so

end

this

to

means

those

on

is with

instruction

around

him,

and

Mm,
with

as

CHAP.

Diogenes,

counsel, and

as

the

before all

of
things,ready and trenchant wit, the old weapon
he in most
the Cynics,which
cases
employed very
skilfully.Cynicism appears, indeed, in his person
in

its most

interestingand
still with
the same
essentially
alreadybeen long familiar to
In

who

bears the

which

have

us.

picturewe

find

Peregrinm'

Lueian's

in

shape, but

features

to this ideal

contradistinction

caricature

attractive

descriptionof Peregrinus,1
of Proteus.2

According to
him, this Cynic escaped from a reckless and profligate
then
and
to Cynicism,
youth first to Christianity
the most
and
of
absurd
disgustingexcesses
which he adopted, until at last the wish of making
himself talked about induced
him, half againsthis
will and in constant
strugglewith the fear of death,
himself

to throw

Of

cognomen

the

into

TTJS UepeyptvovreXevTTJs.

n.

writers

modern

Peregrinus and

literature

Lucian,

xvi.

sub

wee

Zeller, Vortr. u. Afihandl.

173
u.
sq. ; Bernays, IMC.

Kynik"r, 21,
the

treatise

d.

Z. "?.,p. 65, the

and

and

translation

ii.

of

commentary

bearing

the

name

of Lucian.
a

He

according

to

11, 1, after
author
what
3

this name,
Gellius, 2V".A. sii.

first received

made
it

means

Further

the

time

his
we

when

that

acquaintance ;
are

details

not

told.

will

be

excesses

the

in the

already

the

iii. vol.

found

of

concerning

relating to him, cf Eckstein,

EncyHop. v. Ersch. it, Gniber,
sect.

flames

treatise

he

quence,
duction

of

Zelle

of
is

his father, of
accused, c. 10, 14

sg.; his relation

the
tians, and
which

pyre

quoted. In that of
ride, concerning the
imputed to him, c. 9 ;

murder

which

funeral

he
c.

to

suffered
11-14

the

Chris-

imprisonment
;

in

cpnse-

Ms

intro-

through Agathobulus
Cynic philosophy(supra,

to

the

p.

294, 1); his arrival in Italy,

18 ; his

burning himself to
(which is also mentioned
in Athenag. Suppl. 23 ; Tert*
Ad
4 ; PMlostr.
Mart.
V. Soph.
ii. 1, 33), c. 20 $##.
Some
few
c.

death

ECLECTICISM.

300

.CHAP,

the

at

the

Olympic

of these

serious

most

the

in

games

charges are

which

of
to allow

of

of

unconditionallyendorsinghis judgment
If

Peregrinus.

account

all that is

appears

as

after

his

in his endeavours

sincere

was

austerity,but

and

from

separate

we

internallyimprobable,this Cynic

who

man

virtue

ciently
insuffi-

too

tainty
testimony,the uncercannot
entirelyconceal,

he himself

our

But

A.D.

by Lucian's

attested

165

year

the

at

was,

same

time, always exaggeratingand pushing forward his

absurd
to an
extreme,2 finallyinvesting
principles
suicide

even

"

in

produce the

is other

There

of his

claims

which

Cynic school

in the Stoic and

in order to

regardto

he has
with

"

to show

school with

praisesthe earnestness
character,5and the value

lar statue

in

the

stood

Peregrinus
market-place
city.

his native
1

If

he

thrown

was

into

Christian

prison

fellow-Ohristians

as

while

remained

have
molested, he must
occasion
to this by his
banished
viour ; he was
account

Italy on
of

the

Emperor;

besides

his

Eleans

and

'mentioned

Soph.

ii.

of

his

in

his
un-

Attlcus, he is said
to raise

an

Eomans

the
s

fact

The

834

$g., 843

his attacks
(also
by Philostratus, F.
Herodes
1, 33) on

against
suicide
in Krit.

; and

Baur,

MrehengescJi. ii. 412), according to all the above quotations,

is beyond a doubt.
Luc.

grinus

When

Demon.
said
of

ofac

ypwf9
5

his

grams
often
the

eb

him

constant,

visited

city,and

attended.

on

cheerfulness

replied,riepeMpcairlgeis.

calls

He

Pere-

Demonax,

to

oi" KVVO.S, the latter

the

tried

sg.).

8tud.

behaabuse

his

disputed by

Planck, Theol.

A.

18

this

of
been

has

given
from

to have

(Luc.

but

of

insurrection

account

Greece,

quarrels with

usefulness

and

1811,
sg.;

52 sqq.

Bernays,
2

ii. 175

Cf.Zell"c,Vwtr.

of

the

of his

steadiness

and

(which

which

he asserted

exaggeration; 4

Orellius

of

theatrical pomp,

that

some

years after his death, previous

to the year 180 B.C., Athenagoras
(I.0.),in agreement with Luc.
oracuc. 27 $([".41, speaks of an

allies

many

effect possible.3
striking

most

evidence

so

in

his

whose

(Z. "?.)mr
whom
hut

he
before

lectures

he

THEAGENES.

and quotes a
doctrines,1
says that

discourse of

should not

man

301

Ms, in winch

avoid wickedness

he

through

CHAP.
s_

fear of
the

punishment, but from love

wise

hidden

remained

has not

would

man

made

from

from

and

men

in

progress

wickedness

action

but he who

morals

by the

and

good ;

though his

even

gods

much

so

be restrained

this

do

to the

still

may

thought that

all

to lightin the end.

\Ve are
wrong-doing comes
acquainted,however, with no scientific achievement

either

of

indeed, of any
But
far
it

able

was

of these

for the

more

his scholar

Peregrinus or

later

that

reason

to

of

half

Julian

found

the

fourth

at

untrue,
essentially

cere

cit.

MultOf

Of. the

for what

follows.

This

Cynic,

(c.

same

the

with

lignity, is

school

au-

Lucian

3 sqq. ; 7 ; 24 ; 30 sg. ;

treats

this

authority

36)

greatest
by Galen,
ma-

described

xiii. 15, yoL x. 909

Bernays, p. 14 sqc[., has

"KwiKby,
B

besides

Or.

vii.

198

spoken

els robs awatSeinovs

C. sq.,

204,

(p.
C.)
Heraclius, as
224

Cynics of his time, Asclepiades,

Sereniarms; and
Chytron. In

(as
as
a
philosopher of
shown)
repute (8m rty M"v rwQp"xov)
who gave lectures daily in Rome
of Trajan.
in the Gymnasium
Or. vi.

irpbs

Julian

sqq.

mentions,

time.3
'

Or. vii.

not

Kvvi.a"r4ov. For

"jr""s

example, cf

Iphicles of

that

Or. vii.

Kvvas.

favourable,
un-

probably
at

Metfi. Med.
Z.

discourses

pictureso

time

223
whom

us

the

in

Emperor

two

same

Ji"rcle di-

utiliter "t lioneste

ewn

divimus.

give

the
of

those

to the

Even

century the

for

occasion

but

itself down

philosophy.

againstthe Cynics,which

Zoc.

this

maintain

periods of Greek

second

Cynics.

Cynicism was
mode
of life than a scientific conviction,
to outlast the vicissitudes of the philosophic
very

systems, and
latest

Theagenes,2or,

the

named

375

mentions

expressed

freebefore

Valentinian

related

are

Marc.

xxx.

Demetrius

extreme

he

Epirns,whose

notions

Emperor

year
mian.
in

a,

old

5, 8.

in the

by

Am-

Cynic
Chytras, who,

age,

was

tor-

.......

ECLECTICISM.

302

CHAP.
X.

Further

of the

traces

stillfound

in this

heathen and

which
recognition
to be met

periodare

authors.1

Christian

Cynicism

with

About

both in

the

ning
begin-

century,Augustinetells us that all

schools of philosophy,
except the Cynic,Peripatetic,
and Platonic,had died out ; 2 and even
in the
of the fifth

the

of the

first decade

sixth century we
With

Cynicascetic,Sallustius.3

this

heathenism

Con stan tins

under

tured

and
political
but

school,as

religionscharge,

finallyset free,is

was

on

tioned
men-

another

in

xix. 12, 12 ;
Julian's time
is

spoken

of

anonymously

by

the overthrow

such, naturally
came

cos.

tas

Civ, D.xix.
if

19, he remarks

alludes

Church

connection

the

panegyric which

tius

pronounced

and

its
on

founders

to

Themis

Cynicism

on

in

his

that

philosopher goes over

to
it
is
not
Christianity
required
he should

this

to

David, Sehol in AT. 14 a, 18.

1
Bernays, I. c. p. 37, 99 s#., that
in

of

Peripatetieosaut PlatoniM
Cynicos guidem, quia
vitce quGdcwn, delevtat liberatqm licentia. Later on,

aut

eos

by Amniian.

find in Athens

the

does

itself about

example

Virtue, especiallypp.

the

of

course Maximus
dis-

change

an

by

his dress

not

Cynic garb. An
Egyptian Cynic,

name,
in

who

Christian

trouble

370
his dress a

came
beA.D.,

(preserved in the
Syrian language,and translated
into German
by Grildemeister

time,

1. c,, from

quoted by Bernays,
Tillemont,MSmoires,

and

ix. 2, 796

*##.

444:, 417

Biicheler

in

the

Rliein.

also
vol. xxvii.);
the
Mus.
violent attack
of Chrysostom

and

retained
is

Damasc.

V.

250 ; and
at
Suidas
(sub

long

Zsidori,89-92,
greater

length

(Somil. 17,c. 2 ; Chrys. Opp. ed.

has
voce\ who
taken the first of his articles,
Migne, ii. 173) upon the philosophers
and probably also the second,
(clearlydescribed as

Cynics) who
the

left

Antioch

from

on

but

of

approach
danger,
who enjoyed, it would
appear,
a certain degree of reputation
among

the inhabitants

of that

city.
2

Cicero, Acad.

Itagruenwio

iii. 19, 42

now,
ghilosoplios

fere videmus, nisi

a,ut

Damascius.

That

tius,
Sallus-

is here

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
as

whom

he laid burning
coals upon
his leg to see how
long he could endure it.
to

DISAPPEARANCE

end

an

the

the

mode

since

Julian,

element

only

CYNICISM.

which

303

peculiar

was

to

it,

CHAP.
X'

Cynic

long

OF

of

in

appropriated

I.

the

c.

224
Cvaics

A,

the

life,

already
with

the

Christian

Church

had

Monaehisin.1

airoTaKriffrai
f)ii.nria.rrrnnr\

nf

qui

s"culo

t"i"mhi-io""-no

re-

ECLECTICISM.

304

XI.

CHAPTEE

CENTURIES

FIEST

THE

OF

PERIPATETICS

THE

AFTER

CHRIST.

CHAP.

by the

taken

direction

THE

Peripatetic school

in

XI.
-

C.

The

Christ

the first century before

of its further

during the whole

Peripa-

tetics
members
of
1

of

regard to

In

whom

with

it
what

are

follows, teorol.

i. xvi.

Gr.iii. 458 sqq. ;

in
and Zumpt
Harl. ; Brandis
the treatises mentioned
sujara,
der
GescJi.
1
Prantl,
112,
;
p.
545

sqq.

very
the writers

in this

of

the

first

of

A*7.), from

commentary

Simpl.
28, from
Books

the

on

Aphr.

Alex.

commentary

of the Heavens.

ten, 194,

out

gories,
Cateap.

Ccelo,Scliol. 494, 5,

De

",

to

seems

famous

has been

the

of

name

and

that
the
suppose
Alexander
tions
menteacher
of

astronomer

"We

Cassar.

on

Aphrodisias;

his

as

to

commentary

is
the

the
time

shall, however,

the Aphrocentury, find that Alexander

disian had
a
structor
of ^aSgae,the inSosigenes for his
Towards
the end
of
Nero
(Suid. *AAe", teacher.
the
same
encounter
we
whom
century
Simplicius,
(Sclwl.in Arist. 29, (ap. Plut. Qn. Gonvvu. ix. 6 ;

Categ. 3, a
40) quotes observations
and

of

we

Christian

a,

attribute

under

Sosigenes whom

of

sqq., believes

the

down

it

Those

which
Meteorology,

handed

to

named

Alexander

of

is

supra, pp. 113

find, about the middle

*#"., we

Khz"

by

acquainted,2

perhaps

Alexander

patetic he
Peri-

the

period
According
imperfect.
school

should

Alexander

knowledge of

Our

existence.1

we

cf. Fabric. MU.

Logik,

maintained

was

6, here

on

the

(Kars-

substitutes

14,

5)

Menephylus,
head
and

Peripatetic named
perhaps the

of the
ibid.

school

Frat.

Apollonius
one

who

of
was

the

Am.
tne

'

later

in

Athens,

16, p. 487,

Peripatetic,

philosophers,'

praised for having

his

sisted
as-

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

far

so

as

OF

have

we

writings,are

any

THE

details

concerning

their

connection

with

CHAP,
XI.

mentioned

mostly

305

EMPIRE.

in

the
from

whom

Selwl.

Simplicms,i?iCateg. taught,

in

the

on

already

Phil.

Categories.
Peripatetic,

another

Sotion,
has

63, Z",3, quotes

Arist.

treatise

before

come

d. Grr. II. ii. 931, 3

author

181, 2), as

3AfjLa\6elas,This
conjectured
from

I have

man

there
same

Repay

be

to

whom

Alex.

the

Aphr.

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

and

unimportant

His

observations.

by Pliny, Hist.
In

this

of

the

would
of

described
ii. 2, 2 ;
; he
friend

the

was

which

"\ejx"L)

the

His

an(i

describes

the

grammarian

On

the

other

who

is

spoken

from

hand,

Favonius,
viii. 10, 2,

of this

still

was

30, a,

9 ; Anon.

Tat.

I. e. 32, 5, 36 ;

Isag.c. 16, 19, p. 136, 139),

togetherwith him

who

is named

(Galen,

De

Libr.

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
espevol

six.

him

by

p. 309,

42

sq. ;

from

the

Theo

4)

; for

Theo

of

335).
author

made

use

Smynueus
was

Hadrian

Ethics

second

half

of

Aspasius

the
must

temporary
con-

(infra,

If, however,
of

of

(infra,

he

commentary

of

Aristotle

is
on

and

Theophrastus (Phil d G-r. II. ii.

xv.
855) mentioned
ap. Athen,
673,

(where

our

has

text

he
"ASpacrroi')
still alive
Pius.
rhetorician

have
may
in the time
of
Ari

st o cle

been
ninus
Antos, the

of

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, there-

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

century

of
in

Z. "?. 45 ; Ach.

1, as

the

his

pher,
philoso-

apparently

Simpl. Categ.4, 7,

the

of 1.

"?.

Ar.

own

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

year,
had
for

quotes from him. Adrasttis

Aphrodisias (David, Schol.

p.
the

his

four-

alive ; and Herminus(ap. Simpl.

De
Ccelo,Sohol. 494, I, 31 $##.)

tioned
men-

is
also
Lamprias
by Plutarch, Qu.Conv.
cl i. 8, 3, as
a
tetic
Peripa-

likewise

who

his

fore
there-

B.C.

pupil

Cogn. an.

42), in

v.

in 145-6,
teacher

(De

fifteenth

or

author

Apollonius

Plutarch.

by
brother

bably
promiddle

with

well

he
of

must

century,

Ai6K\eioi

brother

24.

in the

harmonise

the

the

lived

that

to

Prwf.

Nat.

first

theory

referred

Sotion

case

have

tion
compila-

be

to

seems

erroneous

8, vol.

teeiith

(videsit}),
the

of

in

us

Morb.

Galen

as

of

Aristocles*

second

R,

says

have

of

philosophy

had

the
his

p. 12
desertion

for Rhetoric

must

first

centuries
B"c"

of these

the attention

FIRST

But

the

307

CENTURY.

commentators.

respect about

told in this

are

THE

OF

PERIPATETICS

what

CHAP.

we

XL

the

of
Peripatetics

Or. 5, 17, would

Indeed
Cat. ScJiol. 28, a, 21, Alexander
agree
his
with
ward
named
sceptical bearing towas
Aristotle, oTov 5eusides
Benite
defiMore
soothsaying.
ovra.
3Apicrror"\7iv.
T"pov
whose
Peripatetics,

these

be

dates may

fixed,

named, of
can
scarcely say more
belong to
they must
others

are

than

that

whom

first

Alex,

the

commentary
the

from

commentators

the

is
mentioned
on

Also

the

cus,
Androni-

Diog. vi.
trius
following : Deme-

An.

De

Aphr.

Socrates

ably
(prob-

Bithyniaii Peripatetic
Diog. ii. 47); Vir-

cf

Phil.

G-r. II. ii. 54 ;

d.

totelian
Aris-

Artemon,thecollectorof
Letters

chaicus
Ar-

is

562),who

person
of a
author

in

in

whom

same

the

as

ethics

work

"

altered

and
Rufus,
ginius
perhaps
also Polyzelus
(L c. 162, "b,
note); Ptolemy,
concerning

cient
an-

Perhaps

"c.

Boethus,

o-y

the
named

the

",

154,

work
; in
he
passages
and
Archaicus

distinguishes
Sotion
as
disciples of

had

Ales.

quoted by

that

on

he
the

MetajvJiysics,
also probably living in the
was
first century.
The philosophers

these

first of

and

in

reading

Categories,doubtless

as

in

Eudorus
bric.
Fa-

6fr. iii.536, Harl.

MUwtli.

was

Plutarch

Aspasius blames
(ap.
Metapfi. 44, 23 ; Bon.
because
552, J, 29, Bekk.)

Stobseus
Stoic),from whom
(Cat. SeTtol. 61, a, 22; 66, a,
42 ; ", 35 ; 73, I, 20 ; 74, I, 31)
the
on
quotes observations

as

by

Peripatetic. Enarmostus,

Christ.

is Archaicus
these
Among
by
regarded
(erroneously

Diogenianus

described

we

ever,
how-

wanting,

are

that

whom

after

centuries

two

signs

approximately
good many

least

at

Andronicus

99.

according

older than

probably

; N ic a
to Suidas

about

wrote

the

II. ii.

(1H".
d

e r

who,

(AiVxpiW),

disciples of

andrian
the AlexAristotle; Strato,
metrius
Peripatetic (Diog. v.
83), if he is not the other DeAn.
61; in Tertullian, De
15,
named
sujprafp. 124, 1 ;
not
this
but
the
is
whom
it
from
Strato,
Diogenianus,
Erasi stratus, also
Eusebius
(Pr. Ev. iv. 3 ; vi. 8) pupil of
named
tended).
directed
by Diogenes, who is inquotes long fragments
the
of
two
Concerning
against Chrysippus' doctrines
philosophers,it is
Prophecy and Destiny, perhaps last-named
whether
certain
not
they lived
;
from
-jrepl
eifutpfievris
a treatise
of

he

may

Byzantium (Diog. v.

the

be

of

Diogenianus
appears
in

Qu.
at

his

as

one

Plutarch, De

person

same

before

as

who

Pergamos,
the

speakers
Or devils.

vii. 7, 8 ; viii. 1, 2 ;
is put into
rate, what

Conv.

any
mouth

this

nothing
theory, and

has

to

Pyth.
x

Christian

Tralles,
Julianus,
the
of
movement
theory
of the heavens
by the Platonic
is discussed
world-soul
by Alex.
De
Coelo,
169,
Aphr. ap. Simpl.

whose

1, 42

tradict
con-

the
of

era;

Pyth.

of

after

or

he
2

;
was

ScTwl. 491, ",43.

a

Whether

Peripatetic or

Pla

ECLECTICISM.

first century

CHAP,
'

of several works

hear

century we

of

the

In

unimportant.

is very

Aspasius :

second
tf

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
carefullyexpounded the writingsof
seems
to have paid attention
to the
and especially
Aristotle,
handed
down
of
various readings,nothing has been
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

on

'

'

tonist, and

refers to

quotation
on
commentary

the JEFearens,or to
the Timtmts,
on
commentary

the
a

this

whether

Boolts

passage.
1
Alexander

from

of

the
and

JEgae

Sotion, vide sujpra, p, 304, 2.

2
Galen, De Lilr. Propr.
11 ; vol. xix, 42 8%.
8

DB

Boet.
the

dftx to

Interpret,cf

edition

of

repeatedly

Boethns

dissatisfaction

much

14 ; 87, 17

; 340,
552, ", 29

Meis.)with

c.

In,

Meister.
expresses

10 ; Bon,

The

on

be discovered

cannot

23

543,

",

31 ;

704, 7;,11 Bokk.

Scholia

first books

and

seventh

ninth

and

the

on

parts
books

four

of

the

of the

JVicowMdhfian /#/wt#,which Haso

has
published in the Gorman
Classical Journal, vols. xxviii.
and
from

xxix.,claim to
a commentary

but

they

arc

bo extracted
of

Aspawius ;

otherwise

of

no

groat value,
8

Concerning him ride Martin

Theo.
Smyru. Astronomy,

(it p. 41, on
his pretations,
interp. 74

8ff.

Simpl. Phys. 28, 5; 96, 0,

Pkys.
1, 5; Cate.ff.
Jj 99, #; 127, A, J; 130, a\
4, f. The designation
is leas specificof 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
4

',

309

ADMASTUS.

is also

mentioned,1 and

from

commentary

the

on

CHAP.
XI.

Physics,Simplicius2 gives us a detailed statement

of
and
concerning the conceptions of substance
plains
accidental
essential and
quality,which well exand
the Aristotelian definitions
expressions.
perhaps

also

He

wrote

of Aristotle

ethics

the

on

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
and

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

other

and

next

to them

36, whose

is to be preferred

account

of David, I. c. 30,
David, or perhaps his

to that

a, 8,
transcriber, evidently confuses
as

the
and

pseudo-Archytus).

the

the

he

treatise

same

Analytics, of

had

the

on

title of

Physics and

the

; cf

2, a

42

(in Ptol. Harm.

270) quotes

That

is taken

from

the

on

from

words

the

cussionin
this disa

Physios is

mentary
com-

459,

clear

these

which

with

Simplicius introduces

it

MS.

5e

198, E
Ach.

"bv'
3 ;

186,

ft,

(ap. Arist. PJiyn.i.

33) vap*$n\9"V v*v
tav, "o.

Sim-

Tat.

and

Tat.

doubtless
the

Wallis,
tion
definimony,
Har-

Bill
the

From

Or.

iii.

first of

books, the quotation ap.

in Tim.
192, C ; 127, 0 ;

Procl.

"

;
a

books, still exists

(Fabr.

653).

mentary
com-

His

Consonance.

*#.

is the

phyry
TWTUBUS, Por-

iii.

on

the

if

Ms

From

in three

Phys. 26, 5.

Mamert.

i. 25,

the

on

; six.

matician
mathe-

mentions

he

person.

same

Opp.

86).
Galen, Lilr. Propr. 11

An.

Statu

De

Adrastus

d. Or.

Phil

*#. and

306

p.

by Claudian

II. ii.
1

\4yerai 'direp

ou"5e

supra,

(SimpL

principal divisions

Phys. 1, "

extract

probably refers

d. 6V. II. ii. 855.

as
He is described

four

genuine (Phil d. 6Fr. II. ii.70,

1), and expressed his opinion

are

its

Of.
Phil

the

only

which

In

tioned
men-

of

books

forty

words

to the

The

it.

Adrastus

from

observes,

he

as

Adrastus

of

statements

who,
mentioned

had

Sun
c.

c.

probably also

ap.

19, p. 136 (80), are

taken

treatise

is mentioned

19, p. 139 (82).

on

Ach.

by
Lastly,

ECLECTICISM,

310

CHAP,
XI"

praise accorded by Simplicius to this Peripateticl is entirelyjustified.But he nevertheless

the

have

to

seems

and

transmission

than

doctrines
As

the

in

faithful

elucidation of Aristotle's
intelligent
and
for any new
originalenquiries.

he

his

as

so
Aristotle,

in his

of Gk"d, he

is

which

definitions

isolated

down

handed

for his

it rather

deserved

almost

of which

he

been

entirelyfollows

of the universe

generalview
him.

allied with

have

The

and

universe,the

describes

accordingto the
by the highest
pattern of Aristotle,2is formed
for the best,and
is moved
essential nature
thereby
in the manner
belonging to it,namely, in a circle.
construction

of the

consequence

the various

and

elements

world ; 3

but

influences

earth

is

Martin

has

shown

is the

Uliein.

Miis.

JV, F.

same

Ohalcidms

great deal from

M"

from

that

on

the

proved by Hiller,

is

The

Theo's

; and

commentary

TimfGus

into his

of

is borrowed

of Adrastus

treatise

{7. "?.)that

greatest part

astronomy

sgg.
that

for the

sake

the

of that

heavenly
which

is

perishable
; they have, on the contrary,
in themselves,and
their influence on the
only .an effect of natural necessity.4All

their end

this

the

and

meaner

the

created

are

which

of their movements
multiplicity
them, is the change in our
upon
in saying this, Adrastus
expressly

guardshimself againstthe opinionthat

bodies

the terrestrial

the

planetaryspheresin
exercise

between

contrast

xxvi.

writer
has

582

shows

adopted

this commentary

8i"nefo,
avtypr"v
TTJTIK"V yeyovds.
2
Vide the dissertations on the
spherical form of the universe
and
of the earth, the place o-f
the

whole,
earth

whole,

-7:

*A5p. "5 3A"fy"o-

in

the

in
in

the

centre

smallness

of

of

the

the

comparison with the

Theo
Smyrn, Astron.

1-4.

c.

own.

4,

earth

L.

c, c,

L.

c.

22.
Beneath

the

moon

HEEMINUS.

this

is Aristotelia,n.

311

Adrastus

sought likewise to
maintain
in principlethe Aristotelian
theory of the
of ingenious
spheres,which he connected
by means
therefore

He

other

and

of his mathematical
irrespective

seems,

have

learning,to
and

expounder
Not

the theories of later astronomers.1

with

modifications

much

as

even

defender

(Adrastus), atria
r"v

atrrpav.
""$
oi"x

"av,

Kal

Geiwv

TO,

5"

ravra
rcav

Kdhhicrrov

rb

Se

r"v

"j/ravQa

Kal

of

movement

rest, and

therefore

natural

motion

was

towards

the

the

of

motion

in

two.

These

their

nature

their

variation

elements

of the

Phil. d.Or.
1

cf.

sun

Theo,
18, and

c.

really

planet

surface

of

globe,

sphere,
of

sphere
point
;

*q.
which

to the

which

ex-

the

on

centre

is distant

sioned
occa-

is fastened

moves

radius

its

Hippar-

within

the

that

the

circle

the

so
a

extends

which

a
point
boundary of the

planets, especially
and moon
(cf
32, with

itself

diameter

and

of

Epicycles

one

Martin, p, 117 sq.

that
here
assumes

Adrastus
each

c.

the
the

hollow

are

II. ii. 440, 468

In

sphere which
planet,corresponding

planet describes

by that of the seasons,

hand,
is, on the other
the
conditioned
by
changing

position

the

time

chus,

which

of the

sphere of

by the

but

changeable
is

this direction

between

lying

elements

also

round

wards from
to-

was

circumference,

the
the

which

be

also

says
in

Adrastus, it is drawn

with

at

which

centre

must

fixed

sphere of the
(or perhaps also,

same

element
of

of

slowly

more

the

holds
supposed
pre-

point
an

the

there

circular

universe

central

ecliptic,but

from

direction

in the

the

fixed

turns

motion
fixed stars, while its own
is from
west
to east); at the

(TVfji

the

sphere,

that of the

sphere

to west

stars

apicrrov

Kara

the

to

upper

hollow

east

than

eAar-

efce^ois- eiro/Jievcav. The

then

re

Bvrir"v Kal

Kal

the

This

stars.

teal

ayevy^rcav

a"p6dpra"veVe/cct r"nv

Kal

r6vcav

theories.

tends

AC'YOITIS

riftKarepow

aiSiuv

from

lower limit of
5e, "p7]"rlv
irXav^^eva concentric with

rovr"v

skilful

said of Herminus.

be

can

reigns change, generation, and

destruction

merely

of the Aristotelian

this

as

been

to

the

on

hollow
the

outer

tary
planeopposite

boundary,

inner

of which, therefore,
of the concentric

from, that

spheres as far as the

the
sphere bearing

of

fore,
planet. Adrastus had, therein his theory taken
count
acof
the
hypothesis of
The
eccentrics.
theory, apart

the

from

other

its

would

only

deficiencies,

explain

the

of

the

revolution
and

moon,

p. 119.

as

Martin

parent
apsun

observes,

CFAP.
XL

ECLECTICISM.

312

XL

told of his commentaries

are

we

CHAP.

writingsof

Aristotle

the

logical
unimportant,

on

is sometimes

Her

minus.

an"i sometimes

displaysan external and formalistic

with much
of logical
standing
misunderquestions,
of the Aristotelian propositions.2He derives
of the
heavens
infinityof the motion

treatment

the
1

these

Among

the

tary
commen-

Categories is

the

on

most

there

are

following note and Simpl. in

Categ.Schol. inArist. 40, a, 17;

kinds

as

(14,
a, 13; 46, a, 30; J, 15
S Basil.) 47, 19 1 ; 56, 5, 39,
and
p. 3, e Bas. ; Porph. 6^7.
Also
33, a, Schol. 58, 5, 16.
the commentary
the treatise
on

It is observed

quoted

commonly

the

Z. 22 ; David, ScJioL
He leaves it undecided

mde

42,

Boet.

pret.

What
Inter-

De

Index

(cf. the

of

the

of

edition

Meiser); Ammon.
Interpret.43, a, SchoL 106,

De

#, 5.
1.

the

Also
and

c.

following note,
Alex.

ap.

Anal.

28, #, concerning his

Pri.

that

so

De

Interpret. 1
psychic processes designated

the

words

by

would

take

are

the

senses.

I.

a,

16,

iracn

'raSra'

Analytics-, and

Alex.

Top. 271, 274,

Tojpioa.

Prantl, Ge"ch. ci.Log. i. 545

|The substance

$([%.

The

follows.

as

the

of the

Herminus's

from
is

the

in

m,

treatise

which
Categories^
as

the

tations
quo-

Logic
he

on

6, instead

of

of

Dialectic, and, therefore,with

rS"v r6itwv
7rp2"

entitled

Adrastus

ScJwl.

(David,

25, according

in

Arist.

to whom

explainedthe precedence
of

doctrine

neither

logicalmanner

of

kinds
of

of

the

the

thus

25

39,

sgq. ; Meis.

ontbthe highest
in

; Ammon.

101,

Schol.
Interpret.

infinite

Real, nor
merely
discourse, but

of the

notions
; but

compared

not

pressed)
(negativelyex-

he

erroneously
merely the first

class, bat also the second

and
the
third, with
corresponding-

negative judgments
275
Pri.

M).

He

instituted

4, "

; ScJiol. 31, I ; cf. 1. c.

p.
fruitless

Anal.
ception
con-

in

second
and

syllogisms of the
the primary
figurewas
which

conception

the

subordinate

(Alex. Anal.

designationsproper for 23, #, mj Schol.

each class of the Beal (Porph. Prantl,555 $#.).
7.

(Boet.

enquiry concerning
26, ", 37, as to which

an

parts of

De

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

of the

opposites, Categ.

10), treats

81, J,

he

Taurcfc

ira"fifMTOf
tyv^s, reads
(Boet. De Interpret.

sidered
con-

foundation

case

possible to

"b

the

on

not

in that

expression in
He, therefore,

same

different

in

same

would

be

not

the

c.

highest

many

all ; but
Herminus
admit
this,because
it

whether

Aristotelian Categories
Schol. 47, ", 11 sgg.).

(Simpl.

ii. p.

tary
commen-

only

28, ", 14).

Pri.

153, ", 27;

SOSIGUNZS.

313

from the operationof the first

not

but

from

the

from

Aristotle

Platonic

soul

the

down

been

writings; 4
he

from

little

little is

but

get

we

of

his commentary

the

and

elucidation

and

criticism

Simpl. De

1, 45

(169,

to

statement

Ccelo,ScJiol. 491,

I, 45

K), according
of

which, however,
referred
but

the

to

mimis

;
an

sqq."

to

not

as

Alexander,

I.

have

to

seems

of Aristotle,
of the Aristotelian

c.

utterance

p.

of Her-

494, J, 31

of Herminus

concerning a reading of
pasius is also quoted from

Ashis

Analyt.

by Philop.

"We

"this

opposition did

the

to

soul

in

that

find,however,

theory
the

of

heaven

not
a

extend

particular
of

"

this
4

the
him

45

a,

tion
observa-

Pr.

De

given

xxxii. ly

(219, a,
", 15 3L),

where

follow

to

seems

in that

merely

Ccelo,ScJiol.

500, a,
39 ; 223,

-7

41

40

504, ",

29 ; 228,

a,

Simplicius
Sosigenes, not

wherein

he

him,

to

pressly
ex-

but

throughout. Of. ps.-Alex.Me677, 25 *"#. ; Bon. (807, a,

tapli.
Br.),who

29

names

genes
Sosi-

conclusion

of his

also

the

at

are

From

passages

given
a

relating

on

enquiries concerning

after

Bexipp. in Categ. p. 7, 20
Speng. gives his reflections

of
Themistius

something
shining of
;

and

natural
in

science

the

tise
trea-

Sosigenes, ireplfycots,

the

from

dark

and

contained

were

Categories,Porphyry, ##7.

the

Such

mathematics

infra, p. 327.
commentary

to

the
question whether
is a "t"cav)i
or
a irpayiJ.a
tey6[JiGvov
or a v6ri(jLa3
on which, however, he
on

these

discussion.

The

2, " (SoJiol 31, "), and

sqq.

An

Anal.

Ap. Simpl.

498,

fixed

stars.
8

of

Pr. L 9 is

appeals

shall

sophy,
philo-

to

Sffhol.158, 1 28, after Alexander.

discourses.
2

of

with

care

decide.

not
on

commentary,

discourses
in

could

idea

theory of the spheres.6 In regard

considerable
however, the most
1

AcJiaicu*.

handed

been

the

to

of Aehaicus

favourable

very

third

book

of

(Phys. 79, a)
concerning

which.
takes
the

bodies in the
many
Alexander
(MeteoroL

116, a) quotes

some

XI.

already

unimportant.3 Nor
Sosigenes' logical

knowledge

appliedit

has

CHAP.

the

to

had

commentary

preserved

mathematical

which

approximation
Alexander

the

that

us, and

much

his

which

From

in

an

Categories very

to

has

and

doctrine

contradicted.2
on

inherent

moving principle
tion
them; 3 a devia-

observations

ECLECTICISM.

314

CHAP.
XL

Aristocles and Alexander

are
Peripatetics
have left us discussions
of Aphrodisias
; for they alone
which, startingfrom the details of logicand
physics,proceed to enquiries affectingthe whole,
younger

theoryof

the universe.
the teacher
Sicily,1
is chieflyknown
to
Aphrodisias,2

Aristocles of Messene,

Aristocles

of

Alexander
the

from

eighth book

the

from

fragments

the halo

an

historical work

ing
concern-

the

round

of

in

p.

and

sun

307

Suid.

'AjDioTo/cA..

That

he

universallyknown
for the

so, is asserted

was

in the

older texts of

(that

retranslated

and

it

(2)
a

us

his

of

that

have

should

moon.
1

highly improbable

of

is

scriber
tran-

changed

the

of Aristotle

name

unknown

of

name

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.

read,

we

in the

But

of Academic

collection

SGJwUa,"n, cu, 30,

the
contrary: 6

on

ii. 179 ; iv. 330, shows

that, ap.

ps.-Plut. Parallel, 29, p. 312;

and

Apostol. xiv. 70,

'Api"TTOT"'A.i7s
j whereas
Ftoril. 64, 37, and

we

find

Stobgeus,
p. 385,

Arsen.

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,

also ap.

in Alex. JDe An.

144,

a, sq. (wde

Olymp.

infra,p. 315, 4),according to the

printed text

Aristotle

teacher

the

as

of

that

is named

Alexander.

Nevertheless, there
to suppose

reason

text

of

Simpliciusis right,and

that of the

not
that

even

is
every
that the older

in the

Academy
two

; and

other

sages
pas-

fluctuate

vii. 66,

the two

names,

of Aristocles

tween
be-

of which

only is

cor

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
rect.

first to

correct

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

the
various
where
cording in
Aristotle,who, accases
Eose, Arist. Pseudepigr.615 $#.,
dates,could have

to the
been

the teacher

of Alexander

of

Aphrodisias; that the supposed

of him in Syrian comes
mention
to

nothing,has

been

observed

assumes

matter

the

same

is very

Heitz

shows

Arist.

295"

mistake, the

questionable, as
( Verlor. SbJw. d.

ARISTOCLES

315

MJBSSENE.

OF

preserved by Eusebius ; 1 and these contain, as

might be expected in a work of the kind,no original
enquiriesinto philosophy. Aristocles criticises and
of other schools

the doctrines

combats
and

the

and

even

the Eleatics

"

Sceptics,the Cyrenaicsand the Epicureans,

of the Stoics ; while,on
the materialism

the other

hand,

charges;

the

he

defends

whole

Aristotle

work

contained

have

must

systems of the Greek

cerning
language of this Peripateticconof the

complete critical review

philosophers.The

is nevertheless

Plato

against many

calls

He

remarkable.

and, as well
genuine and perfectphilosopher,
can
as
we
judge from the scanty escerpts in our
possession,in expounding his doctrine, himself
him

with

agrees
Platonic

to

alone

not

work

J",5

ing

combines

Stoic, in

Alexander

17-

The title of this

2, 14.
to Bus. xi.
according
is,

accordireplQvcrLoXoyias,

to

Id.

xiv.

17, 1

; xv.

2 ;

are

of this work

and eighth books

;
the sixth
in Suid. SooraSay from
Se'jcaPi"xta TT. QtXoThe
book.
are
ffofytas

mentioned

by Philop,

the universe

him

he

elsewhere

in
to

of

told

are

nine

work

Suidas
Ethics

on

What

books.

ascribes

him

to

belong partly to ArisPergamos and partly

Khodian.

Of. Phil,

2 ; 43, 3.
3
Eus. xi.

hand, "
*

sage
pas-

Scfiol. 15.

names

by
seems

was

remarkable

"?., and

: vepl"f"t\o- tocles
*Api(rroK\.
to the
Eusebius
In
(Z.0.)there
c-o"f"{as.

the seventh

shows

we
Aphrodisias,4

14: ; Suid.

quotationsfrom

school.

which

on

In

quently
fre-

trine
Peripatetic doc-

manner

further

main

more

Platonic

the

treatise

of

the

period

the

in

tendency.

Ufa. xi. 3 ; xiv.

Prop.
xv.

also

this

in

from

with

of the

the author

that

that

the

that

assume

philosophy in

met

the

with

21 ;

be

Aristocles

But

at

statement

to

seems

Aristotelian

and

coincide,

He

it.3

d. 6fr. II. ii.8 ; 37,

3, 1

2 relates

This passage

on

to

the

other

Socrates.

is found

in

the,

CHAP.
'

ECLECTICISM.

316

CHAP,

in order

that

to

Aristotelian

from

escape

the difficulties of the

respectingthe reason
without, Aristotle set

doctrine
from

which
up

the

followingtheory. The divine reason, he says,

all things,even
in terrestrial bodies, and
is

is in

to

comes

man

the

working in
its

manner

operation in things arises

capacityin

but

man,

also

substances,and therefore
the

whether

universe

for itself

not

only the

all union

the whole

From
rational

division

and

of

conformation

it affects this

of

immediately,
with

combination

in

alone, or

to it.

proper

stantly
con-

the

fluences
in-

nature
heavenly bodies, or whether
termines
primarilyfrom those influences,and deoriginates
with vovs.
all things in combination
If,
then, this activityof vovs, in itself universal,finds
in any particular
body an organ adapted to it,vovs
works in this body as its inherent intelligence,
and

of the

second
a

;
must

wepl^vx^"

book

145,

P- 1^4,
in my
opinion,
derived
from
been

and,

a,,

have

Alexander

if

even

Torstrik

(Arist.De Ann. p. 186) is right

in asserting that
the second
not writwas
we
pi
book,
fax/is,
ten
case

for

by him;
it

could

clwMffee of

only

the

Alexander's

in

even

for

his

not

seem

Alexander
the

re-

half of

second

work.

Torstrik,

however,

the

be

that

has

given no reasons
judgment, and it does
After
to me
justified.
has

passive

and

here

treated

active

of

intelli-

our

in

strange

seem

doubts

what

themselves,
increased

are

follows,and

by

especiallyby

the
p. 145 #, whether
exposition
which
they introduce
should
and

not

be
to

ascribed
a

to Aristotle

teacher

took
them
der, who
mouth,
though not

agreeing with
teacher

them.
be

of Alexanfrom

his
himself

That

this

other

than
that
conseshould be
quently *Api"rroK\"ovs
substituted
for
'ApurroreXovs
has already been shown
(p. 314,
2). Brandis
( Q-esck. der J"ncan

Aristocles,

no

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 observaQvpaQev irapk*ApKrroT"s\ovstions on this subject in my first
$ 5i""raxrcfyn?y.
If these words
edition.
our
vov

ARIST

there

arises

intellectual

individual

an

317

OGLES.

activity.This

for the reception of vovs

is,as Aristotle
capability
believes,conditioned 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
corporealmixture
and
potentialintelligence,
intelligenceis named
the operationof the active divine intelligence
upon
human
the potential
whereby the latter
intelligence,
is raised to actuality,and individual
thought is
realised,consists only in this : that the all-pervading
manifests itself in a
activityof the divine vovs
in particularbodies.1
Alexander
specialmanner

respectingthese

observes

himself

doctrine ;

Stoic
that

world, and

vovs-

approximatesto

the Stoic

time

same

artistic and

the

Aristotle

concerning

in

from

conceal

can

we

the

whole

of the

reason

world,which

of nature.

so

As

the Hera-

fruitful at the

more

now

such, the

as

system by the

vovs,

affinity

corporeal
fiery element, closely

rendered

of the Stoic

appearance

considerable

nor

his

of

the Aristotelian

primevalfire and,

shaping force

hylozoismwas

clitean

working
in the
especially

ourselves

is at the

have

they

text,2 that
the

with

he seeks to reconcile

master, which

with

theories

we

doctrine

of

that doctrine

see

in so
Peripateticschool itself,even
as Aristocles,
a representative
entering
distinguished
in

rty
roiS

$eo".

the

LOG. cit. 144, I, Med.

LOG.
*v

rV

xQw
Cit. :
irepltyv^s
rpircf)
fcal r}\v

irpo"roiKOVV

5e
TOW-

(-etowj eAeye

Loc.

cit.

145,

reiy

es8o/c"ifAOi r6re

VQVV

Kal

Qeiov

ev

ovra,

$$olcvt"c.

rots

"s

avrtiriw-

TOVTOIS,

^avXoraroLs
rots

airb TT/S

rbv
eivai

proas

CHAP.

L
_

ECLECTICISM.

318

CHAP.
XI.

into

universe, which
of these

union
Alexander

of Apliroealled

The

Aristotelian

celebrated
names

down

to

fixed

by

being
that

Stoic

theology is

of
by an utterance
Athenagoras.
contemporary
This apologist,who
well
so
was

his

acquainted

with

Greek

sophy,
philop.
the

olovel

disias

ir

farXavuv

be

can

in

De

sup. p. 304, 2.

city, Aphro-

his

K),

invariable

is

scribes
'AQpoSia-iebs.
(he dehimself
in MetapJi. 501,

surname

8; Bon.
the

768, a\ 20, Br. 132, by

predicates icrxvbs
(f"i\6"ro"f"o

'AtypodLcriebs)
; but

which

Aphrodisias is thereby meant

ouQlpiov does not appear.
Concerning
his writings,vide Fabric. MbL
Gr.

v.

sqq, and

650

the passages

KvK\o(j"opr)ri- there

Kivov^va

5e rbv
K""S,"fyvyfyv

"iri ry

crd^fj-aros
\6yovr, avrbv

KLVOV^VOV

date

statement

native

81,0;
168, l\ 28

r\\v crtycupav ru"v

acrrepas

TOV

"

re

rovs

the

cf.
(not Aphrodisium,
De
Interpret, 12, 5;
161, 5; Simpl. De
Coelo.

Arnmon.

Xevicbs

pJevavrov

His

us.

his

(Supplic, c. 5,

says

P.) of Aristotle and

Peripatetics: eVa "JOVTCS

22

later

of

mentioned
Jfy'to,

totelian From
Aris-

shown

also

the

How

with

the

AphrovigorousPeripatetic,
the distinguished
Second Aristotle,3

This

and

only philosopher of
intermingled

tlie

the

of Alexander

of the Commentator

period who

for

way

by posterityunder

Sd.
sup. p. 137
from
Aristocles
was

far

theory of

in JSTeo-Platonism.1

stricter.2

Of.

Stoic

the

doctrine

and

Commen-

tator
and

the

prepares

systems

disias is purer

the

with

combination

ctfrLOv Se

rys

quoted.
Kiviiffei 3 Cf. Syrian and David in the
ov
[jikv
quoted p. 307, w.; Simpl.
passages
rovrov

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

soul ; only that the

world-soul
is formed

"b

the

world-

terpr. 32,

body

of the

j-nrts. He is also called 6 ^77yr)r)]$

simply ; e.g., as Olympio-

'AtypoSio-Lebs
""77-

not by all
parts of the world, but merely
by the heavenly spheres. But

dor. Meteorol.

59,

On

hand, by

Alexander

yyrfys spoken

himself

(with Aristotle)place

did
the

not
seat

the
185

of Deity outside
the
furthest
remark
sphere, but in it (vide infra,
p. 329, 1).
meant,
2

Concerning Alexander's
history nothing has

sonal
percome

as

we

other

of

Id.),who

ii. 157, Id.

the

(iMd.

far

makes

teacher

see

quotation, ^

from

earlier
of the
the

^"17-

12,

some

Alexander's

on

mentary,
com-

is

man

author,

mode

of

(not ^o-ly).We

ALEXANDER

OF

has

won
unquestionably

his

commentary

portion of

for himself

the

on

furnished

carefullyentering
planations,1
therefore, infer

cannot,

the

that

this passage
the
on

this

from

read

Plo-

by

together with those of

Aspasius, Adrastus, "c., to his
pupils(Porph. V. Plot. 14).
tinus

still

The

existing
Alexander, which
are
collected in the Academy

edition
in

and

new

embrace

test,

form

it is

in

01.

passage
third

really stood

which

on

Ideler

improved
the
following quoted by

the

in his

Simpl.
492, b,

also

refers

the

on

the heavens

rate

ScJwl

certainly
of

tion
ques-

(evidentlyat

Cceld,
'95,a,

1),

our

Olympiodorus

him

(Ve

he Se-

""17777-

quotes from

hand)

to

whether

which

to

pends,
dethe

of

books

cuo-^crews,
(4) irepl

Alexander

himself

(1) Book I. of the First

Analytics ; (2) on the Topica
Brandis,
(partly revised, mde

(JDe JLw/133,0; Qu". Nat. i.

of
2, end, p.
19, edition
Thurot, 1875). On the Meta-

p, 207, of the treatise alluded to

suj". p. 112, 1) ; (3) on the Ite-

pJiyaics,the

works

teorology.
was

this

That

not written

tary
commen-

by another

commentary

Books

i.~v. has

entire

form

the

XL

Alexander

i. 187
and

CHAP.

as

in

the

by

appeared commentary

have

and
Aristotle,

on

point

to gaps

or

Meantime

commentaries

the

of

rather

whether

meant,

ex-

words

Meteorology; at any

taries
commen-

of

now

is

detailed

the

into

would

tinct text.
Meteorologyis disphilosopher of
r%$
mentaries
Aphrodisias. Alexander's comwere

with

later revision

tator
commen-

the

from

319

great merit by
works, a great

Aristotelian

he has

which

APHRQDISIAS.

rest

first
; the
the
from

been
in

on

preserved
a

shortened

part, and

tracts
ex-

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

been

has

Olymp.
a"

01.

finds

i. 133, Id. ; Alex. 126,

Ideler
i. 202, where
difference

is

that

quite

the

groundless, between

tion
cita-

Olympiodorus and
commentator
(Alex. 82 a\
of

our

01.

100, 5 ; 01. ii.

*#. ; Alex.
157; Alex. 124, "; 01. ii. 200;
Alex.
132, 0). If, therefore,
i. 298

something
to

not

to

be

is here
the

found

and there

latter which
in

(Ideler,I

our
G.

I.

the

of Alexander,

name

is

tainly
cer-

spurious(cf.Brandis, 7-.^.
commentaries
298). Lost
p.
the
are
on
following works
quolecl: (1) The Categories,
by
Bimpl. (Gafafl.1, a; 3, a. e. ;
23,

#, 26
40, 23

and
K

often

De-

Ccelo,76,

Dexipp. Catcg.6, 16

55, 13

Speng. ; David,
Schol. 51, ", 8; 54, ", 15, 26;
tributed
atis
65, ?;; 47, 8.1, 7",33.
(2) ttepl
;

DB Tnte-r^ret.
veifas^Ammon.
mentary
comIP/XT?
xvii.), 12, " ; 14, a ; 23, I ; 82, " ; 4(5,

ECLECTICISM.

320.

CHAP,
*

well

the

as

thoughts

however,
writings,2
5; 54, 5; 81,

of

the

no

more

are

161, J; 194, 5;

";

1.

author.1
than

645,

G.

own

explanations

Bon.

12

His

799,

b ; 1 Fr.
;

De

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
is wanting
188, a" 19; 191, a, 10, ft,28^
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
Boot.

"

~b

with
mentioned
J, 30; 203, ft,18; 211, ft,34 ^
the exception
in Lilr.
ii.; of the still existingcommentary
passim; Bustrat.
Anal.
0;

Post,

1,#

Z.

cf. Fabric.

5, ",

666

c.

11, #,

; Prantl

Log, i. 621, 18). (5)

Physics (Simpl. Phy*.

(Sksc/A.d.
On

3, #

the

4,

"x ;

5, fr; 6,

other passages,

many
the
three

first

Phys. B,
T, 1;

16 ;
4.; 9.

seems

to

This

been

principal source
of
Simplicius is

Rhetoric

of

cannot

infer

statement

That
of
from

the
bric.
Fa-

Alexander

writings
Aristotle
the

sides
bewe

absurd

of

David
in
(Scliol.
24), that he commented,
not only the works
of
the
Stagirite, but

28," %

Aristotle

pre-

some
on

Poetics,vide

other

those

the

which

the

and

665, 687.

Ar.

taken

Concerning
commentaries

expounded

tary
commen-

have

fragments

8ensu.

especially

that

the

and

books; Philop.
M, 28 ; N, 13 ;

from

and

a,

De

supposed

those
name

Socratic

of the other men

of that
; also the discussion concerning
the harmonic
numbers
the Slmffitit mentioned
by

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

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,
.

Simpl. De Coelo. Selwl. 468, a ;

11 sqq. [Damasc. I. c. 454, ft,
11] ;
470, ft,15-473,

Metaphy"k
s,

viii. ;

de# Arist. i. ; Torr.

Bonitz, Alex. Comm. in

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.

321
CHAP.

and

in

manner,

of

treated

besides
Venet.

his

B.

vrfpl

Themist.

SQQ.} ;

123

p.

Opji.
;

Orelli, Zur. 1824);

Kal
fyQiK"v aTropi"v teal
"f"v(riK"v
ed.

\v"recavs 4, B. (qutpstionesnatuof Spengel,

rales, "c., edition

Munich,

1842, who

together

in

with

the

face,
pre-

Fabricius,

tion
gives all informathe
title
and
respecting
earlier
editions) ; -jrepl/j"eo"s
I.

661

c.

s#.,

-the Aldine

(attached to
of

Meteorology,

the

a
or

treatise

fect
imper-

may

be

author

the

this

commentary,
printed
with
the
on
Simpl. De Amma^
treatise TreplT^S /ca0' tiirvovp.avtise
treariKTjs, p. 148, b) : another
the Epiagainst Zenobius
curean
d.
Gr.
i. 377)
III.
(Phil
in which, according to Simpl.
PJiy. 113, 2",he had sought to
the

prove

distinction

Above,

Below,

natural

distinction.

edition

and

-Trepi
^ai^vtav (Michael

whoever

of

w.

et pass.
(ibid.163 8C[c[,
elpapfjiev'ris

latest

this

In

existing commentaries, he has

meteorology, and metaphysics; in
logic,1

(ap.

1534,

doctrines.

however,

of

"o.,

on

to

The

the seat

alluded
rjyefjLovLK^v,

the

be

tise,
trea-

of the
in

to

the

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.
the

in

*s edition

maker

the

in

fourth

Didot's

of

volume

Aristotle,
Gel. A?iz. 1858,

Prantl, Munch.

25) and a treatise on Fevers

(Fabric. 664), certainly do not
Among
belong to Alexander.
lost writings are mentioned
: A
No.

treatise

on

the

and

ciples
dis-

his

in regard to syllogisms
dality
premisses of unequal mo(Alex. Anal. Pr. 40, 1, 83,
d. "r. II. ii.224) ; this
; cf PML

with

the

doubt

is no

work

referred

Pr. xxxii.
by Philop. Anal.
ft; Snlldl. 158, bt 28 (HvruHfioto

other

hand

the

Xoyucb (Alex.
"rx"iA.ta

Anal.

Pr.

vo"l"\"i),on
83,
be

; Sohol.

something

seem

rols
to

169,

",

distinct

"rni irheoj/

the words
"v

the

"rxoA.ioi" TOIS
me

to be

14)

lAovofiipXlov,
quoted by
in Mh.
is

N.

proved

that

virtue

179,
as

a,

must

from, it ;

f^ral

poi

Xoyticois

gloss. Also

Eustrat.

in which

against the
does

not

it

Stoics

suffice for

happiness, is the same

portion of the work
the same
independent
between
156 $%{[.
Concerning

difference

Aristotle

XI.

still

commentaries

the

^VXTIS, 2,

Aristotle's

for

apologies

as

the

bearing
title, p.

in

essay
still exists
the virtues, which
treatise
MS., a very doubtful

on

the

on

an

of stones
quoted
powers
the
pretations
interallegorical
;

by Psellus

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

Probl.

i.

on

the relation

of the individual

Writings

ECLECTICISM,

322

consist

concerningthe soul,and in
science,he
of enquiriesinto natural
the anthropologyand
psychologyof

wholly of

the first three books

CHAP.
XI.

for

Aris-

two

books

has discussed

totle's
and

fourth many

commen-

the

; in

the Stoic doctrine

penetrationof bodies

we

The

of the

of the will
of

weaknesses

he

to

i. 18,

find

inter-

destiny,1he

on

it

Stoic

adversaries

are

skill,

and

acuteness

in

world

against the

his

in this treatise with

expect

mutual

treatise

; in the

freedom

cannot

work

/ufscos*
Trspl

the .treatise

he combats

but

; in

eternityof the

necessityand

Platonists

pointedout

his master

last mentioned

of the

againstthe

fatalism.

developed

the cavils of the Stoics ; in Book

on

the

has

physicalquestions,and in the
in
definitions of the Peripateticethics,

them.

defends

passages

many

taries oppositionto
he defends

many

thorough and

will. Alexander
searchingenquiry into the human
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 repeatedlyand
the universal, to be spoken
of
of, infra ; there is not much
derived
from
be
to
importance
and

it.

The

most

(though
be

noteworthy
in

fact

portion
this is to

js,

ii. p. 159

ay. ;

Qu.

4 sqq. ; Hi. ,13.

cf.

Mit.

De

An.

i. 4 ; ii.

Tennemarm

(v.

18G

and, more
*'##.)
concisely,
Hitter (iv.
265 *#.),
give extracts

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-

found

is the distinction

and
Pr.

13
on

158

sq. Speng.) ; the discussion

the
tion
subcontrary opposi-

(Boet. De Interpr. ii. p.

the assertion
sq. Meis.); and
that

only the categorical

syllogismsare pure and legitimate
(Toj".
6).

new

has been

made

and

through the
Orelli.
2

j"

Fate, c.

moreover

generally

16 w.

sible
acces-

edition

of

THEORIES

ALEXANDER.

OF

323

emphaticallyinsists on the principlethat the universal opinion of mankind, and

the innate
ideas
which express themselves
in language,are
especially
sufficient and
irresistible proof of truth.1
The
a
sciousness
conPeripatetichere falls back upon immediate
in the

noticed

in the

Cicero.

More

by

same

that

way

have

we

often

so

popular philosophysince the time of

originaltheories are brought forward

Alexander

in the

discussions

of

other metaphysical,

some

and
psychological,
theologicalquestions.
The
doctrine
of Aristotle,of
mind, divine and
have seen, has much
human, as we
obscurity,and
his sayingsabout
the relation
of the deity to the

world,

well

as

those

as

reason

to the

of the

soul,labour

divine

of the
and

can

these.

and

reason,

under

this itself is connected

the

on

relation
to the

of human

inferior parts
But

mystic vagueness.

with the fundamental

system concerningform

without
hardly be removed
Therefore,while Alexander

minations
deter-

and

matter,

recastingof

is intent

upon

conceptionof the Peripateticdoctrine, which shall

much
the mystic element
set aside
as
as
possible
and establish an
altogethernatural interconnection
of phenomena, he cannot
avoid considerable
tions
deviaa

the doctrine of his master, however

from

confess

he may
declared
1

of.

Do
c.

it to himself.

individual

Fato,

c.

2 ;

c.

c.

8 ;

5, 12, end; 14, beginning;

161, a.
Speech,how-

De,

An,

ever,

itself inborn
of
faculty
speech is

the

is not

Wat. iii. 11 ; Boet.

De

to

essences

7 ;

only

Aristotle
be

the

had

indeed

truly Sub-

32, p. 35 sqg. ; 93, M). The

of Amcontradictory statement
monius
(D# IntiWjpr.32, \
in, Ar.
ScJioL
103, ", 28) is
"b

(Qu. rightlyrejectedby
Interyr. 624, 27).
so

little

Frantl

(I."j.

CHAP.
'

ECLECTICISM.

324

stantial,but

CHAP.
XL

Universal

Aristotle's

had

conceded

pure

reason

uni-

versal

of

essence

form,

and

had

thingsin

had

deity,are

the

the

exception of
separated from

not

nevertheless
them

declared

objectof knowledge; he

forms, with

the

and

matter, but he

ticular
and

that

he

time

same

to be the proper

doctrine

ofthepar-

the

at

the proper
Alexander
goes a

sought

alone.

Of the two

step further.

definitions that
conflicting
the higher realitybelongsto 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
is not only for us
(hereindepartingfrom Aristotle1),
but in itself,
vidual
prior to the universal,for if the indi'matter.

not, the

were

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

also holds

object of

the

individual

to

universal

conceptions; yet
these universal conceptions,
onlythose determina-

in

proper

Cf. Phil.

Simp.

d. 6V,

Cat. 21, /3: 6

Kal ry

evravda
*AAe"aj/5pos

titrrfpa
ra

II. ii. 197,

Ka66\ov

rcov

with

this, cf. Dexipp. Cat. c.

12; 54, 22 zqq. Sp. (Sdlwl, in
^ueVrot Ar. 50, #, 15 sqg".)
who
pares
com-

^"i5"rei

Alexander

with

KaQeKacrra

David,
rb 5e
ovde/jitav
KO/mtfav"r%"$bj",
ftrav Xey?;,
a/"Xf?Xa/mftdvcav,
"?vcu Kal TV

overlay ra

We

ev

rb

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)
T"V

KOIVOV

Ka63

e/cacrra

credit
Prantl

KOtvairapa
.

in

have
to

Cat. ScJwl.

right

no

these

does

Alexander

in this

respect
(suj".119, 2) ; and

BoSthus

refuse

utterances

(as
623) because

1.

also

51, #. 10.
to

maintains
the
the concept

incorporealityof
(cf.Boot,

in

a
JPorpk.

se"

Trausl.

m) ; for the aro/jLov is not

necessarilysomething 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,

AND

FORM

of the individual

tions

325

MATTER.

are

tion
considera-

broughtunder

CHAP.
XI.

equallypresent in several individuals

universal
or
conceptionsare
may be present.1 The
telligence
therefore,as he observes,universal
only in the inwhich

are

which
soon

as

exist

this

it is

bound

from

think

to

ceases

from

matter

matter, and

realityin their absolute

of
sein}.2 This indivisibility
Kal

rb

Kal

voyrbv

ov"iav

aro/u,ov

Aeyeerflcu(priori.JBM.

23,

"s

'

KLVOVV

at

repcu
1

this, Qu".
ceptions,
generic con-

The

he

here

KaQ^Kao-ra

"fv rols

rcav

to

self-subwistent
ei"rlv ol

universal, aAA'
rcav

relate

says,

individuals, nor

to

absolute

an

ri

vovs

iv rep voeTcrflcu avrols y rov

vorjro'istlvat VTrocrravis.
ra,
yap
Ka66\ov
Kal KOLVOL
rfyvfitv vitap^iv
ro'is Kad"Kao~rd

KOivd

shows

i. 3.

neither

matter

re

Kal GVV\OLS

avrfj

airoplaL.

Alexander

Nat.

from

e^ye

ev

%v

gives to

%ffriv avrobv

"^97 ou"6

to

cease

(fursich-

existence

form

as

the forms

releases

them

eTSos

individuals ;

them, they

thoughtwhich

onlyour
with

up

them

abstracts

Se

Kal

re

"crri

fj.^

%TI.

KaddXov

vovs

""rr"

voovvros

rov
"x.capicrQ^vra
vov
tpQel-

avra

e^ye

perai,

KOLVCOV,

hcyovrat

$v

ra

5e T""V

yivsrai,Kal

ftrav vortrai,
"i
HffTtv
oi"8e

VOO'LTO

opicr^olelvai avrols.

"rar"

Ka6eKao~ra

auroTs Kowd

r6r"

r"p

S^aota8e

voslffQai rb
rovrois

Kal

biroid ecrn
e^ a"pai.p"(r"cas,
ra
jua^^/xari/ca.LOG. c-it. 143, "
ra
fj,%vyap %vv\a sYS?}virb rov
ra

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.
'

doubt,

shoiilcl be

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

ahhuv,

no

omitted],Kal
KOIVOV.
2

De

Cf.
An.

oux

yimpl.Phys. 1G,
131), t" :

rwv

b,

here

avrwv

that Form

not
?",

fJidvov,
r"p "pQopav

shows

yap

which

not

as

existed

rbv airb rys

ttXys ^(apiff^v to which it ia
'crav }J,fy
not
rotavra
VQVJTCLL ra
Kara

is in substance,

iv vTroKGtfievcp
if in
something

ecy

"

without

it, and

therefore
superadcled,
crv^"l37)Kos(of.

ECLECTICISM.

326

CHAP.
XL

hold

must

Alexander

soul,the

also of the

good

definition

the Aristotelian

maintains

decidedly

more

nothing else than the form

organicbody.1 As the form of the body,
closelybound up with it that it cannot exist
the

soul

to the

of

meaning-

this

became

substance

first

this definite

and
Form;
other
hand, is

of

Form,

only

the

on

which

that

of this

form

it is,

body.

partial agreement
(Phil. d. Gr.

De

An.

with

ou

in

II. ii.

the

sistent

(the parts of the body)

yivo^ivv}. Kal eVrl rb ara"ju.aKCLL
77 rovrov
Kpacris alrta rf) "fyvxfj

126,

The

a.

tinuation
con-

constitution

avr'fiv
.

125,

a" :

the

proved

tan

in

detail, and

drawn

rl

of

we

can

that
souls

the

sponds
corre-

bodies

our

rr)$

"$"v)(ri$
avrys

the

at

y"p

iracrat
.

Cf.

the

concerning

of soul

and

allow

ii.

of this

account

; and

Aristotelian

cf. vol.

follows,

j\ra,t.

Qa.

Alexander

which

doctrine

rrjs

(rvva/uLtyorepov

Simpl. Phys. 225,

ii. 2 ;

here

/;,597,

body Alexander
relation,

their

will
to

f that

the

and

his tool

between

(PMl.

be

the

to

analogy

G.

indivisibility

apprehended according

d. "r.

tist
ar-

II.

ii. 487), for the artist is separate

his tool ; but the
soul is
from
the

rivet.
yevecrdai xojpls*the
^v%t/c}/j/
is and
Kiv^crews. This
{Tca/jLariK^s

then

our

rov
"fyvxysKivfjffets
rov
(tovroseiVi^.

self-sub-

substance, but the form

inference

etVl

eivaijOVK

body, is plain from its

activityj ov yct,p ol6v re Hvepyeidv in
of

of
that

to

not

proposition

soul is not

fact

the

from

see

On

tyvxti.Ibid.

"ffri

that

the

totle
Aris-

t\rat.i. 17, p. 61 j

of the

possiblewithout
highestactivities of

Similarly

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."

by the

soul is

the

as

explained Time,

Alexander

without

strumentality
inrijs e" ap^Tjs 'yei/ecrecus,as

the

through

so

rovrois
pression,
ex-

Phil. d. 6rV. II ii.308, 1 )

for matter

the

it is

is conditioned

constitution

body, and no activityof the

Even
motion.2
a corporeal
as

of

is

it,its originand

that

other

body,

and

especiallyin

its form
as
.central organ,
tho force inherent in it ; the

parts of the body

can

only

rov
ff6^aros be regarded as organs : J)" An.
its form) /ml
127, i, J; cf. 8impl. J)e An.

"$

(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
^vspyeiSivKa6* avr^v ^vepy^cfat 9ai "v ri "?/crov xp"^vov Kal TOW
Loo. olt. 14B, d : The
Sui/afteV^f.
opydvov.
soul is 8vva/At$
rts

Kal ovcrla Hirl

the soul form

the

the

without

this ; 2 and
as

vovs

it in
in

Through

whereas

Aristotle had

tinguished
dis-

origin and its essence

other
faculties,Alexander
series

one

the

with

very
ordinates
co-

Intellect

rest.

"

the

the

arises

soul

"

teal

V\LKOS

unity of the

primarilyonly as a disposition vovs

merely potentialthought.3
(frvcrifcbs

exists

man

exist

to its

all

decidedly from

strongly

more

soul cannot

the

that

and

lower,

depends upon

the

insists

faculties of the

higher

1_
,

he

but

is also defended

soul

of the

parts

by Alexander;1
that

CHAP.

exceptionto this. The Aristotelian

no

of the

doctrine

32

SOUL,

THE

development

there
disposition,

this

of

as
intelligence

activityof thought

real

"

operativequality,as an active
vovs
Qi
fcau
sgtv. But
STTLKTTITOS
i

e/o

/"

"

T-"

the

power,

an

"1

that

1.

"

vovs
"C

J.

The

soid

MWi

VOVS.

effects

WHICH,

potentialintelligenceand
as the light
bringscolours,the
bringsit to actuality
TroL'TjTitfcbs,
is, accordingto Alexander, not a
vovs

the

part of

souls,but only the

our

it, and

upon
conceived
1

of

development

D$

by

in

consequence

Thus

it.

sqq. ; 146, ".

tit. 128, a, 1); 141,

An.

Loc.

Perhaps

the

may

be in

a.

con-

with
nection
this, that Alexander, according to Simpl. DC

An.

64, ", would, admit

no

pure

self -consciousness, related

vovs

such

as

; for

he

reason

ing
operat-

of this

operation

mystic unity of human

the Arabian

128

it

divine

to

taught

and Scholastic phiderived

their welllosophers
doctrine
of
the
known
intelkc-

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

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.

that

vovs

etor}alone

der

188, a, sg.; 143, b.

definitions of Alexan-

Z.QG. cit.

In these
He

the

source

from

which

p.
re

114,

a:

rf)

ytiav

avrov

vovs,

TOVTO

5^

TO

vorjro'v
""""

tyvcrsiKO.I war'
afriov

yiv6u.evovry

ECLECTICISM.

328

CHAP.
XI.

with the

reason

side is man,
him.

upon

finite

souls in

The

human

soul
the

improper

an

the

on

one

deityoperating

is therefore

lutely
abso-

an

souls of the

no
gods (i.e.
only be called l

heavenly bodies)could

the

doubt

on

the

other

the

and

essence

broken

is here

divine

sense

In accordance
(opwvviMtosr).

philosopherplaces the seat of

denied
to which Aristotle had
any corporeal
reason,
versally
organ,2in the heart,3like the Stoics,and says, uniof 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

this

our

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"
$

T^JV irpbsr"

/carcfc

TOV

'6

"?8o$

Traj/.

Concerning his explanation

of the
particular in the

OtipaQev""TTI Ae
Aristotelian passages concerned,
iroL^TLKbs,OVK
fMevos vovs
Kal Svvatiis ns
cf iMd. Q. 4, 5, 8 ; also Simpl.
TTJS ^/ic
/j,6piov
"|""0"j/
yivdfJLe De An. 64, #.
pas if/v^s,aAA'
voyrbv

avTo,

"5

vo"^v

avro

Se

"v "tK6rcas.

kffriv T\\JM"Vrotovros
On account
of this

assertion, Alexander
attacked

D"

Cf

An.
.

De

quentlyhere
fre-

was

by later

cf. Themist.

1
2

128,

mentators,
com-

De

and

a.

Plitt. d. 0r. II. ii. 568, 3.

An.

also

141,

the

the Platonic

Observe

a.

Stoic

yye/AoviKov

stead
XoytorTiK^vin-

of the Aristotelian

An,.

vovs.

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 ;

8 ; Q, 2 3
Ammonius)

H,

from

Alexander's
vovs

10,

general
"?., 0,

vovv,

view

sg.
of

up

by

summed

is thus

Philop. I.

(quotation

Q, 2
Ae'yeirov

irpuiroy
'

vov

^crnv fal rfijv

ftswep

TOV

ii. 10: 97 ^v%^ ofiv

"?5os "bv aSvvaTov
avTb ttaO* a^rJ)
elvai. % y"p 0A??s 5e?rat irpos rb

Nat.

TarJr^s-ri
"?yat,
form) aSiWroj/
elvai.

fjLGVov

KaQ1

rov

5vi/4aei[ley.
TOV

ej-tv vovs,

vow] d

6 girl
ttsirep

T"\ei(ov cwQod)ir"av
.

rfav

rpirov

that

"by

Alexander

the

soul

itself,in and

(namely

aurb

for

its

/ca0* avT^

here
cannot

infers
move

jtself; but it

also follows that it cannot

exist

GOD

is

these

in

seen

AND

329

WORLD.

THE

definitions

refer phenomena

to

to

CHAP.
XI

natural
tural

be

may

also

perceived

Aphrodisianon the
All
that happens

relation
the

in

the

Aristotle, from

'

rejecting everything

by

causes

superna-

in

the doctrine

of

God

like

derives,

which

influence

the world.

and

he

world

of the

Relation

itself "f

diffuses

ana

the

from

Deity

first into

the

elementary

thence

into

process

is conceived

each

in

the

of

entirelyas

is

higher

its

This denial
body.
der
immortality, which Alexan-

of

in

his

is often

on

in

to

prove
mentioned

Q,

De

totle,
Aris-

by later
in
Sclwl.

David,
writers,
Arist.
24, ", 41 ; 26,
Philop. De An. A, 5,
cf,

", 13;
; B, 8,

4.
1

The

of the

motion

itself, Alexander

finer

first bearer

refers

again

ingly

commentary

tried

also

An.

lower

or
or

Alexander

the

heavens

explained,
supposing

the

Aristotelian) e^eVei

55

less

or

more

position in the universe, and its coarser

further to the
or
nature, places it nearer
without

of nature

process

as

this whole

but

there

elements

force, according

animate

bodies

from

and

heavens,

the

ical

ope"ei Tij/bs over/as (the spiritof

their
a

sphere)

direction

fixed

the

the

same

by

which

was

of
contrary
at
but,
heaven,
be carried
time, must
it

"

double

necessary,

there

otherwise

world

the

in

in

that

to

star

round

be

be moved

must

motion
because

could

not

beneath

the

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 *#.)must
inthe
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

like

Aristotle,

that

the

that
/caret

the

Q"uov

of

cnS^a fyufwxovKOL\ derives

tyvxfyvKLVO^^VOV.
each

moon

the

seven

spheres (to which

larly
Simi-

tary
planeaccord-

regular

from

according
effect of

to

alternation

the

soul

Alexander,

the first moving

what
is the

ciple.
prin-

"".^
the

ECLECTICISM.

330

sky; and it is likewise divided

the bodies compounded of these elements
in
among
less
a more
or
; they have
greateror lesser measure
perfectsoul,according as they consist of purer or
and, particularly,
according as
impurer substances
less of the noblest
more
element, fire,is mixed
or
of this force

CHAP,
XJ"
__

the

"

in them.1

up

this

In
2

but

divine

the

power

Providence

of

essence

cides
destiny coinwith
nature.3
Therefore, though Alexander
does not admit
destinyin the Stoical sense, he is as
the ordinarybelief in Providence.
little inclined to favour
to him not only irreconThis belief seems
consists ;

nature

cileable with
free

freedom

the

he

actions, as

or

of the

human

will

for

"

points out, the Deity Himself

foreknow,since His power does not extend to

4
but
the impossible
is also opposed to right conceptions

cannot

"

of God

the

and

merely

is

former;5
1
2

means

nor

can

Nut.

e.

we

p. 90 ; J)e.An.

crti)/a.ari
J-yytvo^vys

the

the

of

say

it cannot
meaner

higher"-of

existingfor

Oelas SwdjuLetav
ryjs

159, # : TTJS
Jy T$ 7"w?r$

the

activity of

Qu. Na"t, ii. 3.

Qu.

For

supposed that the mortal and

be

end,

the world.

and

sake
world

sibly
posis the

God
of

"

the

that

it

theory (w/tf #tf/wr" p. 327,

329, i). Bmndin, Mwl
475,
45:
l

^TT!

ws

far

HO

as

the

rotirovS.

r.

5 ;
#

0,

deityis combined

irpbsr" Oe'tov [sc.cTw/ua]with the jtjthcr,*

3
J)tf Pfltf^C, 6 : AefTrercu 5^?
fyvKal tyvfftvKO,\QVyeirvidcrews,
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/,
ct7r"" TTJS

der
Identified the Deity
even
with the aether,for it ishere "nid

(ap.Arist.

JDe

he referred

6M0,

the

i.8 ; 270

""dvarov

//,
8)

to the

Qelov crw^aa, "$ rodrov ftvrosrov

060v.
But only the reading of

Brandis

is

compatible with

context, and

with

the
Alexander's

eTwu

raur^

re
^l^aip^vfiv

which
"/"^(rof,

Kal

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,
*

Qu. W"it"

ii,21, p. 128

OPINIONS

ON

requiresa providence
tenance
dition

is

the

on

;
a

does

confines

contrary,

for this world

itself which

is

only

considers

design,but

just

these

telian ; but

only

the

on

naturalism
of the

the

as

an

of

that

its

planets; 2

Providence

the

of

consequence
it.3

by

We

known
Nature, forecall

cannot

entirelyun-Aristo-

follow the

they

it in

Deity, he
activityworking with

Providence

on

world

operation of

because

maintain

to

notion

fore-ordained

opinions

If,therefore,

side
by somethingout-

little

as

only as

and

'

is taken

is destined

accidental
it

CHAP.

con-

the moon,

care

also opposes

an

and

beneath

order, throughthe

and

if he

and

its existence

main-

wholly deny Providence, he

world

alone

and

of its nature.1

not

it to the

existence

for its constitution

consequence

Alexander

331

PROVIDEXOE.

Aristotelian

doctrine

physical side, they give proof of the

of the philosopher,
whose
explanation

life of

the

soul

approximates

to

the

Stoic

theory of the universe

to the standpointof Strabo the physicist.
of Aphrodisias
Alexander
is the last important
teacher of the Peripateticschool with whom
we
are
Materialism,and

his whole

Peripote0". the

quotationsfrom

Adras-

more

tus, stymi, p. 310, with

whom,
does
not
however, Alexander

whole

wholly agree j for

tho planetsto have

131

motion

for

the

he
sake

earthly sphere, vide

#29,
1

supposes

their double
of

the

sujjra, p.

1.

Loo. olt. ii. 10.

fao. cU. and i. 25, p. 79 $$.

According to the second passage

conception of Providence
can
only have been applied in

the

remote

material

sense

to

the

world,

J\rttt.ii. 21, p. 124

sg.,
Alexander
here
otasq.
that the questionwhether

Qu.

serves

Providence
or

/car"

been

proceeds /ca0' "M

has never
"rv/*0"j8ij""s

closelyinvestigated
predecessors; he
himself givesthe above decision
it
only hypothetically, but
manifestly expresses his own
opinion.
by

more

any

of

his

"^-

ECLECTICISM.

332

CHAP.
XL

From

the

half of the

few

who

the

century the

third

after

all without
century,1

From
insignificant.2

exception were
half of

mentioned

are

in the firsthalf of the third

him

second

the

acquainted. Of

the

second

Peripatetic school

graduallyto have lost itself in the school of

the
which
the Neo-Platonists,in
knowledge of
Peripatetic
School
also zealouslymaintained
Aristotle's writings was
;
is gra3
and
there were
still hear of Peripatetics
dually
not
we
;
third

cen-

seems

-twry the

merged in
that of the

wanting

JVeo-Pla-

writingsand followed their doctrines in particular

branches,such as logic,physics,and psychology; 4

tonists.

commented

who

men

in

Longinus ap. Porph. V. Plot.

the philosophers of
20, among
1

his

whom

time

merates,
enu-

Heliodorus

andria,
Alex-

of

Ammonius

(accordingto
Philostr.
V. Soph. ii. 27, 6, he
was
probably in Athens), and
Of these

Ptolemasus.
first left
of

the

Peripateticphilosophy

only

the

philosophical
writings;
other
two, Longinus
indeed

his

that

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 liketo

ap.
462
him

Fabric.

full

knowledge, especially Iambi. Theol.

Philostr.
index) are from
(of whom

of

Ammonius

this

I. o. confirms
but

only

wrote

and

themselves

would

Hi.

Arithuwt.

(ride

earlier Anatolius,

an

teacher

lanabli-

of

clamatory
dechus.

which

orations, to

they

the

testimony),

poems

Gr.

Mbl.

sg.9 may, perhaps,belong to

the fragments
,* but
ap.

that

were

city

him
head
to make
of
school in that place, seems

remarks

they

native

wished

patetics:the
Peri-

three

mentions

the

Aristotelian

self

there

he

the

on

Vide suflra^ p. 302, 2.

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

the

Even

Laodicea

became

about

according

to

head

there.

Anatolius

who

via.

Athens, Prosenes

Peripatetic,perhaps

of the school
a

hardly

of

dria,
Alexan-

bishop
270

Eus.

of

A.D., and,
JFfist. JScoL

32, 6, so distinguishedhim-

add

must

Philoponusj

in

the

East, Boethus, and the philosophers

quoted by him, Victorinus
and

Vegetius Projtextatus.

these
within

far

Of

they come
the scope of the present

men,

so

exposition,we
speak later on.

as

shall

have

to

EXTINCTION

OF

but

with

the

Peripatetic

the

regard

We

patetic
fifth

to

at

even

such

century

the
in

end
Dorus

whole

incidental

Periof

who

adopted

according

who,

Vers.

the

by

the

telian
Neo-

to

ap.

Suid.

ml

vooe,

cf
.

of

allusions.1

Xsid.

131,

Isidorus
to

the

converted

was

from

the

Aristo-

Platonic

Platonic
"

Damasc,

CHAP.

theory

i.e.
"

Arabian,

333

XL

their

in

only

SCHOOL.

philosophers

any

are

with

meet

PERIPATETIC

doctrine

there

world,

THE

system.

the

ECLECTICISM.

334

XII.

CHAPTEE

AFTER

CHAP.
XII.

D.

Platonuts

'-e"-rs

OUR

of

point where

century

its teachers

is

not

first

century

of the

in upon

this darkness, and

does

through a
to the times
philosophers

sgq.) in the

p. 59

quoted supra,
2

be

must

p. 112, 1.

testimony

valid, at

rate for

any

far
so
goes
JVa"t. Qu. vii. 32, 2

Rome,
et

c.

whose

Seneca,

veteres

et

to say
Academiol

as
:

nullim

minores

we

the

tioned
Platonists, men-

p. 100 sgg,, the next

of is Aminonius
know

Egypt, the teacher

who
as

and

of

that
of

last

onward

continuous

we

series of

of Neo-Platonism.3
to

Greece

Def. Orac.
4; 9; 20; 33; 38; 46; De

Athdat.
c.

31, p. 70

32, end

Protein.

5 ;
is

we

TlieniistoU.

connected,
more

of
at

whom

length

Aristpdemns,

on.

JEgium,
disciple

was

Plutarch

V. Soph*
; Eimap.
tarch
8). With him Plu-

fcihallspeak

later
After

of

lightbreak

some

visit
59 ,"?#"/.; during Nero's
63 A.D. is narrated,
tise
trea-

Cf. Fabric. MU.iii.l

Zumptr

the

in

from that time

follow the school

Platonic

of any

name

Only

us.2

to

the

at

fragmentary,

so

the

even

known

decades

can

school1

Academic

last left it becomes

we

that for half

the

CENTURIES

ERA.

CHRISTIAN

THE

knowledge

FIRST

THE

IN

SCHOOL

PLATONIC

THE

of

of
and
coPlutarch, whom

friend

calls,

Adr.

Plutarch,

Col.
ov

2,

vap-

taught in Athens, probably

head

of

died

the Platonic

school,

after

having

there,

repeatedly filled the office of

Hi.
Strategus (Pint. Qu. S'ljtnp.
1; viii. 3; ix. 1, 2, 5, 1,5; De
a supc. 1 sff.p. 385, where
posed

Si.

conversation

with

him

to
opytacrrfyvTlXdrowos, and
in this place,and in the
treatise against Epicurus (JVr.
P. fhwv. v.)he has given a part
whom

in

the
Hadrian
the

conversation.
to
have
seem

Syrian Apollonius,

Under
lived
men-

LATER

of

In its mode
to the

tendency which

Platonist

as

JEfadr.

tian.
whose

and

2,

Peloplaton,

in

(Galen.

8, vol. 5, 41 ;
p. 337, 3). In the
Pius

Antoninus

of

eighth year

struck out

in

Morli.

Coffti.An.
vide
m/m,

it had

Gains,

145 B.C.

about

Pergamum

true,on the whole,

by Sparheard

Galen

pupil

335

thought it remained

eclectic

tioned

PLATONISTS,

with

Marcus

XII.

since

and
who
taught
Antioch, Rome, Tarsus, and
other places,and
also stood in
favour

CHAP.

"J""

Aurelius

(Philostr. F. Soph. ii. 5; M.

i. 12); /Ibinus,
Aurel.
the
of

pupil

Gains

title of

(the

*".ootat
tfm

( 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.p. 338 #7.); D ePlutarch
I.

Philostr.

to

according

Atticus, who was

in 143 A.D., he must

Herodes

forward

come

(Zumpt,

have

time

some

his pupil, often mentions

from .A7".
We
A.
him.
see

also

20 ; ii. 2, 1 ; vii. 10, 1 ; 13, 1

at
tfg1.;xvii. 8, 1, that he was
of the

head

the

Apuleius

of

Maxim

of

as

he

such

18).

c.

ronea,

teacher
Verus

is

Lucian

that
of

of

nephew

3;

of

Cha"~
and

Antottin. ;
3; Suid.

Vwm.

MdpK. and 2e"r. ; by whom,

take
mishowever, through his own
or

his

Sextus
transcriber's,

Chaeronea

of

piricusare

and

i. ") ; Philostr.

Dio

Cass. bod.

1 ;

observations

of

Hadrian

him

are

(cf Eossbach
.

Westphal, Metrik.

6ftr.

der

ed. 1,

2nd

principalwork

in several manuscripts,
rb n.aQrifjia.rLKbv

/caret

VOL

els T^V
Xfrfjo-Lfia

HXdrcavos
TOV
the firstbook of this

is the

work

Bullialdus

which
'Arithmetic,'
first edited

the

'Astronomy,'

by Martin;

the three

books

lost.

are

the

cond,
se-

edited

remaining

Procl. (L 0.)

to refer to

Sojph.ii.
Butrop.

79). Under

Em-

; M. Aurel.

Porph. Qu. Homer,

276, 2) j Alexander

12 ;
p.

the fact

a commentary
work, perhaps the
Kepublic (cf. Theo, Astro n. c.
16, p. 203, and Martin, p. 22 ^.

Sextus

confused
F.

Astwn.

from

12th, 13th, 14th, and

Plutarch's, avaryvoxnv

(Capitol.

Philos.

Rome

Aurelius

of Marcus

Madaura, and
TJnder
Tyre.
h e o of Smyrna

astronomical
the

himself

describes

Sextus,

viii. 25);

76). He is described
known
to
as a Platonist
by Procl. in Tim.
(Nfyrin.')26, A, and in the title borne by his

residingin

Platonist

(as
in

period belong
who

Nigrinus,
us
through

Aurel.

know

we

16th
years
cerning1quoted from
Con-

school.

same

us

$##.),as

his writing'sTide infra. and

the

To

(M.

Hadrian
lived T
previously
lius, (cf. Martin, Theon.
Gel-

70).

p.

"?., metrius

sul
con-

who
leucia,in Cicilia,

was

9 ;
viii.

seems
on

26, cf,
of

Se-

called

Platonic

the

reign of

cus
Mar-

Aurelius, besides

(Jerome,
year

of

Atticus
Cfvron J"us.of the 16th

Marcus;

176,

A.D.

ECLECTICISM.

336

Antiocims.

and

Philo

XII.

did not prevent individuals

the

in

first

place,this
from protestingagainst
Platonism; and, in the

But,

CHAP.

overcloudingof pure
second place,after the commencement
such

century, there

in

philosophicdoctrines

of

eclectic Platonism

the

V. Plot. U

Porph.

the

tails
de-

further

be
placed
infra), must
of
physician
(a
Daphnus

pocrationof

that

Antiochus

an

century there

of

and

lived

in

and E u
Athens, Theodotus
tonic
bulus, two SidSoxotof the Pla-

still alive

was

whom

the latter

after

263

93,

(Procl. in Tim.

of

stronger growth

school,of

i. 1, "?);HarArgos,a scholar

Ephesus, Athen.

third

first

medley

increasing measure

mysticism,through
religious
which

this

with

united

was

of the

A.T".

V. Plot.

(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
of Atticus

described by Capitol. Ver. 2.

written by
Suidas mentions
as

In the

doubt-,

Syrian in Metaph. Sdhol.

books.

n\dra)vo$

in two

first

contained

was

in Ph"don,

Olympiodoms

what

no

and

Cronius,

nius,
to

lived Nu

to have

seem

spoken

be

the end

of

Oensorinus,

contemporary
i. 13) for

e-

Celsus,

later

on

; at

second
century
attacked by his

of the

Nat.

Alex.
a

(Aphr. Qu.

statement

cerning
con-

Epicurus' theory of
colour; perhaps also A polio
-

phyry
mentioned
by PorjEecl.
vi.
Hist.
Eus.
(ap,

phanes,
19, 8) as

philosophicalwriter,

with the Platonists

Cronius, and
first half

and

Numenius,

Longinus.
middle

In the
of

as

written

892, ", 31,

p. 159, SofwL 38 ; F. in Alcib. p.

In
him.
48 Cr. quotes from
Marcus
of
Aurelius,
the time
also

Platonists

(I. c.) who

much, Eu elides
(cf.inf.337, 3), Democritus,
and
Proclinus, in Troas ; of
Democritus, also mentioned
by

els TLXdrtova in
vird^vrijua
and
books,
\"%*is
twenty-four

him

adds

had

the

wrote

hear

we

commentaries

cihictdes

on

in AT.
that he
the Al-

(Olympiodorua

oil),p. 105,

Cr.) and

in, Al
the Phatlv

(ttid. in Pt""
p. 159, end,
38, F), Of Ammonius,
Sakkas,
we

Origen,

shall have

and

Longinns
speak further

to

When 'A/c^AAas lived (quoted

by Procl. in Tim. 319, F. in
connection
with
a
theory on
on.

Tim.

41, D), and

whether
he
later than Plobe ascertained ;
tinus, cannot
nor
are the dates of Maxim
us
was

earlier

of Nicjea

and

of 8

or

(ride inf.
ever

exactly known.

us

p.

337, 3)

(iV-P- 339^.)

337

COMMENTATORS.

his

successors

The

the

oppositionto

of view

forth and

nourished

of its most

ancient

Aristotelian

chieflycalled
accurate
knowledge
the Peripatetics
of this

more

records.

As

attention

so
writings,

do

and

more

writingsof

Plato

of the school did not

the scientific activity
with the

its founder

the

as

considerable
stands

prevailed to

closest

of Platonic
expositors
r

merely in

writings

As

Taurus,

passages

Maximus

important

an

with

of

and

Plutarch
the

inasmuch

refers

Comment-

earlier
he not

as
.

to sayings

"$* "f

are

thoroughlydiscussed

and

certain

likewise

and

TV

of Plato

also

of Plato,

commentators

and

itself

Plato
r.

numerous

works.2

if

and

the works

into

connection

but has
generalmanner,
certain pointsof his doctrine

in

throw

later writers

Among

extent.

the

in

now

Peripateticsdid, the study of those

nevertheless

works

exclusiveness

zeal and

same

to the

more

the Academics

see

we

to the

applying themselves

1"
__

doctrine,was

by the

their

period turned

CHAP.

points _1

other

intermingling of

the Platonic

with

Neo-Platonism.

into

developed

was

sections

study
"^

m'

of his

Graius,Albinus,
3

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
1

JE/U- Eu/cAc^s,
DeroyUid"$\T/iraSf/lllfS,

dowis

commentary
ap.

A.

Proclus
the

on

the

Mai,'Glass.
names

mythus

as

in

Republic

Ant.

I. xiv.

expounders of
"Rep,x. 614 xq.

Tavpos, Up6K\os, "c.

names

Porphyry

among
taries

those
Plotinns

V.

whose
had

Gaius

also

Plot.

14

commen-

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
St-ud. 3 H. p. 300, the MSS. give ;
(JV.A. vii. 14, 5) quotes
substitutes
Mai
'AXKIVOS^ td'ios,the first book of a commentary
6 "NiKasbs,
the Gorgias and
also (xvii.
on
^ApTroKparicav,
rS"v

H\arc")VLKcav

ot

ECLECTICISM.

338

CHAP.

Of

others.

XII.

Albinus

introduction

an

of the

epitome

Platonic

the

to

extracts

Timseus,

doubt

no

comes,

source

Iambi,

by

quoted

the

From

vi. 21.

Mundi,

JEtern,.

De

same

what

],906.
1
This
treatise, included
in the
sixth, and
Hermann
in

the

edition

of

his

third

examination

s##.)

that

than

Albinus,

of

Plato,

Its title

241-327).

pp.
in
"IS

the

best

T-^V

TOW

Stud.
"f-Tellen,

3 H.
thus

runs

eisay"y))

HXdrCdVQS

fttfiXOV

MSS.

sAXj8"i/ov irp6Xoyos. Its

text,
however, in its present form,
has
Freudenthal
shown,
as
p.
247
cuted
sqq. is only a badly exeand
The

mutilated
writer

same

sq., that c. 1-4

and
Diog. Laert.
from

emanated

which
lus

iii. 48-62

earlier than

was

whom

(concerning
2). As to

p. 1 02,

Alberti,

7"sqq.
be found
2

This

MSS.,

HJiein.

Some
Phil,
work

almost

*A.XKw6ov

ride

sup.
vide,

Must.

xiii.

N". F.

details will

Gr. II. i. 427, 3.

is

called

without

it not

in the

exception,
X6yos

fiifiao'KaXtKbs (or

But

the

of

transcripts
them
also elsaycay^els r^v "piXo~
U\dr.
rwv
troQtavUX. or iirirojud)
,

some

of

that

Albinus

which
more

(Z.

for

with

third

the

28

; Stob.

has

more

from
moat

his

the

part

twelfth

from
passage
JPr.
(ap. Bus.

Didymus
Diels

of

see

of

book

his treatise

in

the

6*.

names

hpeffK^vrc^y.

use

we

for word"

xi.

rections
cor-

Codex

Albinus'

works

chapter

duced
repro-

some

imperfect),

agreement"

J"v.

and

plentiful

ancient

Arius
in

we

Tixdrcavt.

T"JV

made

word

But

Paris

p. 244, now
in its index

TrepI

was

of Albinus

without

; a

Thrasyl-

book

'AA/cfvoou.

work

original

have

its contents

further

which

source,

one

read

been

dence
according to all the evionly in a later revision,
considerably shortened

possess

the

this
been

have

may
the

this treatise

extract.

proves,
p. 257
of the prologue,

the

in

have

into

transcribed,

scripts
manu-

'AXfilvov

when

Fr.

the

from

may

an
found,
or
'AX/cIyov, and

even

our

; and

copy

binus
Al-

(as
much

derived

'AXKivov

very
attributed.

of

was

320

changed,

by

are

alteration

Alcinous

ancient

same

the

and

expressly

are

are

an

that

shows) so
possible as all

more

tent,
con-

of

Alcinous,

The
p. 300,

sponds
corre-

and

forward

some

into

troduction
'in-

many

brought

remarkable,

now

subjected to a thorough
investigation,and newly edited
basis
of more
the
perfect
on
Freudenthal
by
manuscripts
and
the
Albinus
(the Platonic
Alcinous,

whom

them

other

whose

form

supposed

among

275

c.

no

entirely

in

to

been

false

it

both

doctrines

is

with

'

the

(I.

its author

and

by
by

falsely

(by the moderns

for
It
part) ehaywy^.
been
has
now
placed beyond
rough
thoquestion by Freudenthal's

is

volume
has

hitherto

an

most

Eel.

Diibner

Stob.

ap.

revision,

drav

the

Plato, p.

011

by Philop.

43 G sq. and

in

given

are

Scholia

Beltker

later

dialogues,1and

doctrines

Platonic

20) his oral exposition of the

the first
from
Symposium
; and
book
of an
exposition of the
the

in

possess,

we

JPel

i.

330),

proved
minutely (JDoxogr.76,447).
now

ALBINUS-SEVER

put forth under

the

The

of Alcinous.

name

but

commentaries,

through Proclus.2
;

also

the

Among

writings, Albinus
in the

337,

and

his

how

us

perhaps

number

explained a
passages

in

probably

that

index

of

the

named

in

the
of

books

Platonic

summary

of

De

does

nine

or

are

of the

he

there,

wrote

Albinus

copied
other

as

later centuries

accustomed
himself

they

particulartreatise,

in those

writers

tionally
uncondi-

that

this

unlikely that
repeated and

he

and

28 (cf. Freudenthal,
and
though

follow

not

have

may
what

104

s$.\

from
it is not

note

Tim.

An,

refer to that

Codex

previous

doctrines

discourses

the

it

does

in the

(Freudenthal, p. 244),
ten

Tertull.

merely

Paris

from

ficient
amply sufsupposed
exact
lels
paral-

less

in Procl. in
299

of Platonic

mentioned

have

Alcinous, and

dogmatic work,

one

and

Atticus;4

taries
commen-

he

already

parallelsin the

reckoned

made, tradition

were

tell

not

is

Har-

Timceus

citations

these

Platonic

quoted siip. p.
pounded,
writings he ex-

passages
What

3.

from

quoted

know

and

been

the

on

celebrated

more

of the

commentators

have

Plato

posed
com-

them.1

we

writings of Theo

The

commentaries

are

the Timceus

on

pocration in explanationof
mentioned

also

He

nothing of

know

we

of Severus

commentary

839

US.

do,

to

and

as

from

transcribes

his

according to predecessors. Moreover, though

that three of
G-aius
('AA.- the circumstance

of Albinus
relate
$LVQV [add.UK] rSiv Tcilov cr^oX^v the utterances
virorvTrdxrecav Tr\asr"aviK(av
the
Ti
and
to
of
Soy/J.d- passages
waits
rcav

"

this

work

same

is alluded

in

quoted

are

corarnentary

on

to
by Priscian, Solitt. p. 553, 7;, that dialogue, might serve
that
the
scliolis
corroborate
Lamni
ffaii
as
32,
ex
theory
to

stood
doff- they originally
yet I
commentary,

Platowieorum
exemfilaribits

mat'itm, for the translator read

instead
of
"AAB.'
AABINOT,
Freud.
246.
According to its
contents,
Tim.

quotes
a

which

that

104, A;
may

commentary

the

passage
JDfi An.
28

taken

from,

67, C;

have

been
the

on

Prod,

iti

311

A,

part

of

Timseus

find ap. Tertull.

have been
s@. may
we

an

exposition

to Freudenthal

In

Vide

Index

of

other

Meantime

most

*#.)

rendered

63, A

168,

I shall

philosopherlater

on

cede
con-

; 70, A : 78,
D;
186, B;
192, B D ; 198, B E sq ;

Tim.

B; 88, D;
187, B ;
304, B.

similar

(p.243

thereby
probable.

more

must

that this is not

the Pliwd'O ; and that in Iambi,

have
ap. Stob. JEJoL i. 896, may
from an expositionof the
come

Republic.

in

recur

this

to

on.

^"2?ra,pp.

337, 3

335,

336.
4

Concerning
to

cf the
the first,
Tim,, \ the
.

Procl. in

is mentioned

I, c.

15, A.

CHAP.
XII.

ECLECTICISM.

340

XII.

Longinus, besides other treatises

the Platonic writings,commentaries
on
1
and from Longinus' contemporaries,
;
and
cussions
disEubulus, explanations and

and

Numenius

CHAP.

devoted

to

the Timceiis
Democritus
of

dialogues.2The

several

works.3

of the Platonic
of the

examination

Opposi-

tionthe
introduction
of
to

Platonic

"

in

the writ-

and

noticeable

no

Ar.

Syrian (Solwl.in
to refer

seems
on

to

the

as

to

the

He

892, b, 31)

his
out

from

difference

of the

against

handed

down:

to

to have

of commentaries

multitude

the

other

written

us,

taken

writingsof

Whether

this

Oronius

commentaries

and
also

statements

quoted

supra, p. 337, 3 ; 331),1,

of Taurus
lectures
and

the

on

in

are

from

Gaius, and

Porph.

also

Taurus

read

like

those

V. Plot. 14.
Aristotelian

quotations from jSTumenius, writingswith his scholars

GeH.
xix. 6, 2 j xx. 4, the
of a commentary, and
not

Platonist.
had

various

expository writings, and

tary
commen-

indeed,
discussed
by

seems

the

conception of the

own

been

and

or characteristics5
peculiarities

passage
Procl. in, Tim. 87 B.
1
to Prod,
Vide the Index
Tim.

was

protested

philosophy,and

his

to

and
TimcBi(s,

the

of

the

upon

system, little has

Platonic

and

wrote

Aristotelian

Stoics;4 but

the

alien doetrines

Taurus

systems.

who

individuals

prevailingconfusion

against the

Platonic

opinions .of Plato,

real

of several

hear

we

the

from

far removed

doctrine
that much

arisen
to be

claimed

in later times

had

thus

certainlyhave

must

the conviction

of the Academic

sources

tion
reading and interpretaThrough this thorough

extent, in the

considerable

which

consisted,doubtless,to

school

also in the Platonic

oral instruction

(ap.
Pro-

blems).
4

The

Suid.

former, according- to
the latter

according
toGellius,JO.xii.5,5. He also,
"^0** 14according to Suidas,composed a
2
Kal "cro"ConcerningDemocritus, treatise ir"pla-afjidrajv
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
not

be

decided

from

can-

Porph.

V.

raup,

TA

exhibited

UR

US"ATTICTIS.

Atticus

in it.

341

set himself

like Taurus,
also,

againstthe tendency to amalgamate the Platonic

and
Peripatetictheories. In the fragments of a
he
devoted
this purpose1 he
treatise which
to
enthusiastic

an

as

appears
anxious

about

attacks

the

the

admirer

purity of the

Plato, who

of

Academic

Peripateticsystem with

opposition,the

to

latter

passionateprejudice,

could

and

endure

not

20, 4 syr.)
; that
subtle
and

did

he

dialectic

of

merely rhetorical treatment

it (JV. A. i. 9, 8; x.
19:

xvii.

sions,
discus-

specialphysical

6)

; that

to eradicate

moderate
condemned

wish

not

the emotions, but to

them, and therefore

(i.26, 10)

red
that he abhorof

Epicurus' doctrine
and

denial

(ix.5, 8),to pass

points of

over

the

importance (ii.2

JKtwnl M.
the

Philop.

fragment

ap.
vi. 21 that

majority

of

Unionists, denied

he, with

ad

and

the heavens

his

of

Iambi,

the

agreed

not

souls

earth

ap.
that

learn

we

were

the

for

sent

were

universe

manifestation

tion
complefor the

or

the

of

divine

life.
1

Ens.

4-9,

In

12.

c.

irpbsrovs

and

in

and
to

xv,

the

in

the

'Apicr-

inricrxvovfind in the

we

Etiscbius

4, 5, 9.

ters
chap-

many

5, 1

Moses

transcribers.
xv.

these
of

Stct,r"v

superscriptionof

xv.

also in

first of

subject

What

/JLGVOVS.

course

2 ;

rk HXdrcovos

ToreXovs

lia
Scho-

1,

indicated

is

xi.

probably

the
the

passages
treatise
words

Ev.

Pr.

13, and

c.

Plato

ap.
he

of earth

to consist

whether
the

water

in

From

scholars

upon

to

opposition
aether, he made

Eel. i. 906,

to

as

as

senses

between

that

Aristotle's

Stob.

five

midway

air

from

Plfit. p. 430
sq. and
xiii. 15, that
c,

Philop. I.

the

more,

elements, putting that

of smell

beginning

in time; and
the fragments in Bekker's
of the world

IJv

contemporary
a

four

and

sure
plea-

Providence

of

; vii. 10,
14, 5 ; viii. 6 ; xii. 5; xviii. 10;
xx.
4). It further appears from

less

the

vestigations
inand
fire.

ances
passionatedisturbsuch
the feelings,
as

of
anger

did

he

the

spise to
de-

not

(vii. IB; xvii. 8;

xix.

much

phy,
training for philosoapportioned

thorough

him

move
particularly
so

$nffsOf

doctrines ;

especially
reproachesit with the lowness
of its moral standpoint,
and its denial of Providence
and
of
immortality.2 Of the remaining doctrines
Aristotle,it is the theory of a fifth element and the
which

XII.

is

and

eternityof the world

CHAP.

6, 1, as

to

belongs,
and

of

his

ECLECTICISM.

U2

CHAP,

XIIt

here

has

he

with

contend

to

portion of his

own

Together with the Aristotelian doctrines

that
on
immortalityhe also contests the statement
the soul as such is unmoved, in order to uphold in
Platonic
the
its stead
conception of the Selfschool.1

moving
to the

uniting itself

as

is

first

now

at

each

in

earthlylife
body, which

the

that he conceived

brought into order,3so

originof the individual

the

into

entrance

dwellingin

irrational soul

the

with

represents this

part of the soul,and

rational

after death

existence

limits

he herein

but

similar

to

manner

doubt, also opposed

the Aristotelian
conception of Grocl,but of this
tradition tells us nothing ; as to his own
theory,we
of the

that

that

told

are

He,

universe.

the

made

he

no

of

Creator

the

the other

(rood,but discriminated

identical with the

world

particularthings from Him.4

the
other quotationsfrom his commentary
Some
on
5
Timceus
of no
are
importance ; from his tions
objec-

ideas

Against tlie

totle and

the

definitions

Aristotelian

the

to
1

of

creators

as

aither

views

of Aris-

connected

and

whole,
at

its

definite

concerning
formed

soul,were

epoch (Prod,

in

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
therewith

He

presently find.

shall

brought
views

in

the

the

forward
his

TiHiwiix.

commentary

are

but

the

world

as

imit

uncreated,
an

a
"'

follow-

certainlyindeed

(Procl.I. "-t. 304, B).

-

on

unordered

The
here

(he
ways,
the
ing Plutarch) and
soul
that
moves
perfect
matter

had
same

ordered

Eus, xv.
0, 4 ,sv/(/.
Procl. HI 1,A; Iambi, /U'. 910.
Procl.
of.

111) B;
ft

Ap.

I.

o.

181,

OB, 0

111, G

0.

Procl.

87, B; 315, A;
HO, D ; 63, 0, I) ; 129, D j
187, B; 234, I) j Syrian
7, C

in Ar.

802, b, 31.

343

ATTICUS,

Homonyms l we see that lie extended his polemic to

logic also. But no important results are to be
expected from this,because he himself stood nearer
the

to

which

eclecticism
He

aware.

with

doctrines

them

he himself

but
Peripatetic,

those

with

the

of

was

of

mingles
inter-

when

Stoics

doctrine

Aristotelian

the

to

opposes

the

he

of the Platonic

at the admixture

is angry

than

combated

he

he

goods

an

only differs in words from

that of the
Stoics.2 Still more
clearly,however,
he betray the standpoint of the later popular
does
philosophyin the propositionthat the happinessof
is unanimously recognisedby the philosophers
man
end of philosophy.3It was
the ultimate
precisely
as
this onesided
practicalstandpointwhich, together
with the indifference to a stricter scientific method,

avrdpxscaof virtue,which

had called forth the eclectic

amalgamation

Atticus,however,

doctrines.

of contradictory

does

not

seem,

His objections
proceededvery scientifically.
have seen, in complaints
to Aristotle chieflyconsist,as we
about the moral and religious
corruptionof his
doctrines; to Aristotle's deepestand most thoughtful
discussions he opposes arguments like that by which

to have

temporal originof the world

existence ; namely, that God
by

he tries to reconcile the

with
reason

what

its

eternal
his

of

has

into

come

7, 5. 8, a, and
Sirnpl.Cateff.
SoJiol,
42, ft,9
9,
"^T.
a,
Porph.
i.
d.
Loci,
(xcsch.
618, 2
(Prantl,
soom
a

to

have

separate

been

treatise

the

on

preserve

from

existence

$q. These
taken from

could

Omnipotence

even

destruction,4

Categories.

Bus.

xv.

Loc.

"rit.xv.

4, 1

; 7

4, 1

"s^.
; of. 5, 1.

Loo. ait. C, 5 sqc[.; of. Frocl.

in Tim. 304 B.
4

CHAPXI*-

ECLECTICISM.

14

CHAP.
^

'

The

philosopherwho

and

derived

from

practical
necessity,had

his

the

objectionsto
which

that very

treated

argument
decision

ultimate

indeed

of the

fusion

lightly
so
recklessly
rightto raise

no

several

the

been

necessityhad

so

systems,

of

determining

cause.

This

eclecticism,then, constantlymaintained

"wtolx
ascenc:ieilcy
Men

majority

the

of

Academics.

like

Plutarch, Maximus, Apuleius,Numenius,

has
indeed, Platonists, but their Platonism

are,

absorbed

so

Antiochus.

that

foreignelements

many

the promoters of the

merely as
by

the

its

As

these

they appear
introduced

tendency

however, will
philosophers,

the forerunners
again engage our attention among
them
of Neo- Platonism,other details respecting
may
for the

be omitted

present.

In

respect

to

Theo

of

that,as we
Smyrna also it will suffice to remember
have alreadynoticed,1he found the free use of a Peripatetic
with his Platonism,
treatise not incompatible
the

while, at

work, he prefersto

the

in

first book

of his

follow the tradition of the old and

Pythagoreans.2 ConcerningNigrinus,there is,

spiteof the Nigrinusof Lucian, little to say ; the

new

in

of
description

who

made

took

6 j

c.

13,

What

book,

on

shows

us

Adrastus
De

is

MM.

94, 97; c. 19, c.

40, p. 169.

p.

c.

Theo
numbers

tions of tones,
under
the two

man

of excellent

disposition,
the luxury

refugein philosophyfrom

of in

use

22, p. 117
2

him

Sup. p. 309, 4.

also
c.

time,

same

says in his first

and the rcla-

generally quoted

writcris and

is no
ireplJLLOVCTLK^S
chiefly Pythagorean, as

doubt

Mm.
c. I,c.
In regard to his
the Nco-Pythago-

lie indicates in De

12, etpamni.

philosophy,
rean

element
in

minent

titles,irepl
"pie~ Mm,

c.

is

De

88 sqq*

especiallypro-

AritL

c,

4j De

NIGRINUS"SE

of his

immorality

and

satisfaction
Lucian

indeed,

whom,

we

doctrines.2
soul

Eusebius
Platonic

the

of two
and

But

there
the

pounded
com-

capable of suffering,
with
the

because

two

such

himself

yet

as

quotations

clus, Tim.

traces

no

period

Noo-Platonio
from

him.

in

Pro-

B., observes

304

38 ;

Eusebius.

and

are

Mm

mention

first to

lamblichus

of

soul is

annul

opinion. Severus

are

the

which

the

vation
obser-

imperishdifferent

their

According to this,he does

recognisedthis doctrine as Plato's

have

to

The

human

the

on

in

fragment

totelian
Aris-

combination.

seem

real

the

his

necessarilyagain dissolve

must

unnatural

soul,

of

would

theory

of the

constituents

not

substances, one

this

that

ableness

that

of the

sense

incapable,4is attacked

other

the

Sever us,

Albinus.

treatise

preserved

doctrine

been

century,1is described
the

in

From

has

and

have

Epictetus. We

or

second

having explained Plato

as

well

only place conjecturallyin

can

of the

half

second

the

speak of Severus

still to

have

which

discourses

might just as
of Musonius

mouths

the

the

; but

him

assignsto

into

put

freedom

and

it inner

in

found

and

time,

345

ITS.

VER

in

described

the

soul,

Aristotle, M"tapJi. xiii. 2)

the
opposes
mathematical

doctrine

that

element

the

accorcl-

in material
ing to Plato, was
bodies; but this is irrelevant,
since

such

the

was

Plato's

not

e! S"

^eftrjpos$)"\Xos
opinion quoted opinion
respect
of
346,
TIS
ruv
^arrepov
8,
Beverus,
Atticus,
^yTjffajnevcavra
in/,p.
n\drcavos
"K rrjs wap' avr$ ?$
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
to

Aphrodisias,
known

to

Alexander

than

older

was

us

the
of

the

last

of

author

Peripatetic

school,
3

Syrian (Solwl.in AT. 880, ft,

ouSei/
8

rovro

Prop.

irpbsrovs

ctpxalovs.

JSv. xiii, 17.

4
Tim. 41 sgg. ; G9, C ,^. ; of.
P7ril. d. Gr. II. i. 690 5^7.

CHAP.

ECLECTICISM.

.346

''

primarily the

and

CHAP,
'

world-soul,

as

incorporeal

an

figure,the constituents of which he

representedto be the point and the line,while of the
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

he

thought with
the Stoics that the world, eternal in itself,
changed
in certain
its condition
periods,and he appealsfor
this doctrine to the mythus in the Platonic dialogue
had

the present world

been

There

Statesman.3

of the

begun ;

is

of the

reminiscence

this,that he declared the Something

below which
highestgeneric-conception,

Stoics also in

(rt)to

be the

stand

Being

these

statements

and

that Severus

departed
But

Platonism.

in

have

we

much

doctrines,5of the

Quite

Stoic definition of wisdom

nevertheless

more

his

prove

and

of

abstract

the

of Albinus.

treatise

the

strict

numerous

eclecticism

beginning of this

the

at

isolated

respects from

many

strikingproofs,especiallyin
Platonic

However

Becoming.4
be, they
may

find the

we

of

things
and divine (c.1),and the Peripatetic
division
human
of philosophyinto the theoretical and the practical
(c. 2),preceded by Dialectic as a third division
1

Tim.

C46, 3.
2
Iambi,
Procl. in

35, A

; ride

ii. a,

Part

D.

Procl.
That

through
3Oi

ap. Stob. Ed,

Tim.
186, Ej
^

c.

the

standingmight

88, D
world
be

"0. ;
not

B)

science

the

will

168,

with-

imperishable

concession
of Plato.

of

God

doubtless

was

i, 802 ;
187, A

*""
8

as

to

the

(I.e.

only

expressions

*
Procl.
70, A ; of. Phil.
6V. III. i. p. 1)2,2.
s
Vide sity.p. 338, 2.

d.

ALBINUS.

347

(c. 3). Albinus then, like Aristotle,divides theoretic philosophyinto Theology,Physics, and Mathematicp, without, however, himself keeping to this
arrangement (c.3, 7) ; 1 and practical
philosophyalso,
like

the

into
Peripatetics,

Politics

(c.3).2Under
knowledge which

of

definitions

with

of the

swoia

In

regard

doctrine

active

the

the

Instead

vision
-

of

at

c.

the

their

di-

mathematics.
the

ii. 170
of

no
8

0.

further

'

Introduc-

vide Phil. "l.Or. II.

makes
${"({. Albinus
divisions.
Platonic
4.

pass
observations

not

the

and

Stoic

minology
ter-

the

In

causes

very clear, concerning

and
aMya-Ls, \6yos

"ris

fwwK"s,
C.

d.

over

which

use

and

xq.
Of.

fi

281.
tull.

De

gument

610

also in
A"n.

for

some
are

Freudenthal,

29

c.
a

ing

the

o.

279,

25 ; of. TerPlatonic
ar-

immortality(Phe#do9

71, C $##.)is defended

Aristotelian

v6-n"

Prantl,

#g. ;

Freudenthal,

So

the

So"ffriKbs.

5 sg. ; vide

Log. i.

280

tion,' c. 6, spoken of sujp. p. 338,

the
J ; concerning
Peripatetic
classification

with

logic

Aristotelian

JRepullio

and

Similarly

sequently
super-sensible.3 Sub-

Matter, the primary forms, and

from

Plato's

mathematics

sensible,and

philosophythree primary

find

we

of

the

to

Aristotelian

expositionof

an

extract

an

utterances
on

mathematics

only

of

double

passive vovs] a

unscrupulously employed.5

enumerated

are

the

to the

the

and

theoretical

on

of ideas.

the ten

is
section

"j"vcrLtc7)

categorieswith various later

the Peripateticsand
Stoics,is foisted

of

Plato

the

unites

is directed

whole

syllogismsand
upon

theory

Aristotelian

the reminiscence

and

is directed

additions

and

and

and

guishes
facultyof knowledge, he distinwith the Aristotelian
(corresponding

which

which

that

Stoic

~:
"

the

man

that

combines

Platonic,

of the

reason,

Dialectic he first gives

Stoics with

to

in

Ethics, (Economies,

CHAP.

definition

^vavrla

II. ii. 215, noieX

with

an

conceni-

(cf.PliiL

d. G'j\

"

ECLECTICISM.

348

CHAP,
xn'

the

or
principle,

creative

scribed in the

of Aristotle

manner

way
are

the
the

to the

is assumed

the

Deity is

Reason

active

as

de-

fold
only itself. A threeknowledge of Grod : the

thinks

(c.10)?which,unmoved,
way

Deity ;

l
emancipation,analogy,and elevation ; ideas
explained as eternal thoughts of God, but, at
same
time, as substances ; their sphere,with
exceptionof artificialthings,or things contrary

of

to

nature, is restricted

by

side

the

with

forms

natural

classes,and

side

telian
ideas, as their copies,the Aristoin

inherent

regard to matter,
Aristotelian

to

Albinus

find

matter

says,

familiar

definition

making
to him,

place.2
of

use

In
an

that

it is

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
well with this,that the world-soul should be adorned
from a deep sleep,in
as it were
by God and awakened

which

has

is neither

In the
in

Plato's

view

second
the

the
passage
508

ItejwMic,vi.

author
from
B ; in
the

from
third, another
208, 3 sgq.
jSyinposluM;
'"*0. 9, c. 10, Albinus,

the

some

others (md"PML,d.

imitated

forms
3

To

one,

of

Twiains
Proclus

"9r.ll.

i.552, 2),calls the ideas tSccu ; the

or

named

the

refers

clftij.

similar

the

on

Jlyyotypoms
in

Tim..

67

of Albinus
in
mentioned
above

Precursors

theory

them
or

commentary

like

from

this passage

in Phil

0.
the
are

d. Q*r, II. i. 6CC, a.

ALBINUS.

order
from

349,

by turningto Grod,to

receive

that Albinus

cannot

Mm;1

himself

and

from

of inferior

the

existence

the

guidance of

manner,

Divine

of that

with

ideal forms

free
altogether
formation of the

place.2 That he
gods or demons,
beneath

the

period(c.15).

the

eclecticism

into

the

definition of virtue

as

is

fided,
con-

the Stoic
in

It is also in accordance

ethics

fjisaor^s

to whom

surpriseus

of his age

Platonic

assumes

moon

regardsthese beingsin

cannot
elementary spirits,

as

Platonist

the world

that he

and

introduce

taken

having once

universe

of

the notion

the

that he

the

should

Aristotelian

(c.30) ; that

he should

virtues the Stoicplace among the four fundamental

Peripatetic prudence in place of the Platonic
wisdom,3 and appropriatethe Stoic doctrine that
virtue

with

is

capable of

increase

no

modifications also the

certain

other

passions.5Some

the

C. 14, Albinus here follows

was
Plutarch, who, however,
1

logicalin disputing the

the world
(cf.PMl
III. i. 168 #7.); for before

more

eternity of
d. Gr.

world-soul

the
of

sleep, the

awaked

had
world

not possiblyhave
has
what
Besides

stated,we

in L

c.

out
such

as

could
been

diminution,4 and

or

instances
defined

tutecl)and
Stoic

manner

as

theoryof
might be
quite in the

lioerr^u^a-yaWS?

Kal KO.K"V KO.\odHcrtpuv; inc. 30

of Qpfoycris
the relation
to the
of the lower

virtues

parts of

spoken of in a way
reminds
us
altogetherof
soul is

existed,

totle's Eth.

already

"h\

find these words

Stoic

N. vi.

II. ii. 502

Cf.

*##.).

concerning

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,

...

rby

Xtycu and : 7) ^v yhp "o

"(rx"rrosfyetvtv,rj Se ^by

ds iTTrctK^K\OVS
3

In

called the
Ti/coO

the

29

"?7"d}07?.

(for which

Stoic

"J"p"^"nsis

the

rttedrys

rov

\oyur-

subsequently

JiywovtKbv

is substi-

peats

(IbicLIII.
emotions

same

the

i. 225,

5^.)

four
Stoics

of

enumerates

chief
held

(I

re-

2), while

(wide
Kptffeis

to

but

doe-

of vdOos

reduction

the

opposes
226

definition

Zeno's

Aris-

(vide Phil, d.

30, and

c.

the
that

emotions
c.

230).

he
the
I.

c.

the
as

CHAP,

CISM.

ECLECT1

350

CHAP,

show

how

with
he

however,

character

his

him

with

Grains,

still

was

the

Cf.

Cf

he

the

Frettdentbal,
sup.

p.

Freudentlial,

p.

243.

in

the

in

second

the

one

JSitjj.

of

p.

that

anything

of

his

of

his

he

Platonic

and

told

master

tions
exposi-

becomes

it

century

sg$.
;

peculiar

tives
representa-

thought

of

mode

deficient

are

know

we

which,

infer

philosophy,

278

337,

the

may

agrees

prevalent
of

of
We

we

what

from

that

very

middle

if

Platonic

evident

more

how

important

most

and

whom

the

of

a,nd

system.

the

of

school,2
to

respect

main,

to

alien

doctrine,

consciousness

Platonic

one

was

of

in

the

of

Albinus

clear

the

in

suffice

combine

to

was

Academic

old

followed

in

was

Albinus

the

will

quotations

previous

inclined

elements

he

the

but

adduced,1

school

our

339,

era.

1.

the
exhibits
about

351

CHAPTEE
ECLECTICS

WHO

BELONG

DIO,
ALL

the

TO

themselves

DEFINITE

NO

LUCIAN,

philosopherswe

reckoned

XIII.

schools,though they allowed

"

GALEN.

have

under

SCHOOL

hitherto

one

of

the

themselves

discussed

existing
many

CHAP.

de-

their

partures from

The number
doctrines.
original
F
is much
smaller of those who belong to no particularEclectics
school,but, assuming a more
independent attitude,particular
borrowed
them

from

each

and

all that which

seemed

to scllo"l-

For

though the internal unity of the

schools and the logicalconsistencyof the systems
were
greatly relaxed, yet the necessity for some
much
standard
of authoritywas
too strong in that
ture
periodof scientific exhaustion to allow many to venwhich
on
freeingthemselves from the custom
nected
required every teacher of philosophyto be contrue.

with
tradition.

some

The

one

of the ancient

schools and

its

philosopherseven
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,
of the ancient
Pythagoreans,and in that of
the
the Scepticswhen
they professedto continue

ECLECTICISM:.

52

CHAP,

of

among

the

XIIL

There

Pyrrho.

school

of
philosophers

the traditional

who

invariablymen

pale of

the schools,and

had not

made

with

it merely in connection

and

When

was

only find

adequate

an

sole

science.

occupation

period partly

discourse,he

philosophers.It

then

were

was,

the

could

the different

for it,as

content

instruction

of

branches

or

are

with

rhetoricians

the

expositionand

of

form

ornate

that

at

from

learned

had

man

these

especiallyby
vated,
constantlyand zealouslycultiwas
included in the public education.

which

rhetoric

side
out-

sciences, partly and

by the natural

the

other art
incidental

afforded

was
philosophy

with

stand

philosophythe

some

opportunityfor such

An

who

that time

few

life,but had occupiedthemselves

of their

task

therefore, but

are,

divided, with

hardly possible
therefore,

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

to advance

enough,2yet
superficially

hastilyand
themselves
1

that

happen

but

How

and

toric

Emperors
terest

the

schools

Further

teachers

of rhe-

in the

of the

189,

in the

were

in the

how

times

lively the

and

achievements

rivalry of celebrated rhetoriand

cians (now called ffofurral)
how
from

pupils streamed
all

sides,

we

Philostratus' Vitas
The

appointment

teachers

of rhetoric

to
see

them
from

Soplmtarwn,.
of
has

public
been

in-

al-

ready noticed {sup.p. 190, sqq").

should

not

occupy

permanently with

seriouslyand

more

numerous

of rhetoric

individuals

some

it could

details

are

to be found

writings quoted

svj". p.

1.

To students

of rhetoric

who

only studied something of philosophy by the way, the cenof

Calvisius

Taurus, for
refer
example,
(ap. (ML N. A.
i. 9, 10 ; xvii. 20, 4 ; x. 19, 1 ;
the last passage, compared with
sures

i.

9, 8, proves how

was.

common

this?

DIO

the claims

of

CHEYSOSTOM.

philosophy. In

of the first century, Dio,

end

of the

353

second, Lucian,

this way,

and,

went

before

but

all

simple,and

The

his

things

as

at

ledge
know-

our

life are, besides

writings, Philostr. F.

Soph. i. 7 (the statements

quite untrustworthy in his
Apol.v.

time

Phot.

Suid. sul)

Cod.

Domitian

to Rome

high

in the

209;

Paras. 2;

Schol.inLuc.

every

to aim

p. 117;

Jac. ; Eunap.
F.
Procem.
some
p. 2, and
biographical notices in
248

been

later

Kay-

born
and

under

De

Braunschw.

1840,

xxxviii,

A,D.) was
from

the
sqq.
banished

Rome

sires
de-

their moral

provement
im-

of

doctrines

declaring to all,
of
philosophy

exile

Bithynia,

p.

*##.

edition, Dio,

Dindorf's

like

(Or. 13, 422^.) ; likewise

Synesius (IMo, 13 sqq.) shows
(according how his destiny led him from
JUxil. Dion.
Sophisticism (i.e.Rhetoric) to

in

Domitian

Emper.

to

he

(Or. 13, p. 431; Or. 32, 657

He
himself
S4$- Gt passim).
dates
this vocation
from
his

F.

Prusa

at

at

rical
rheto-

souls

vocation

summed

Bi"bl.

him

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

the

after
up
122
sqq. by
Kayser (Z.0.). In this place it
will suffice to say that he was
Fabric.

seek

to

from

"

SopJi.

ser's PMlostr.
V. Soph. p. 168
sqq. and in Dindorf's edition of
Dio, ii. 361 $qq. The results
have

v.

of

of

(according
63) stood
Trajan.

philosopher

true

Getse,

repeats that his

not

graces

voce

and

Or.

often

be

murder

favour

are

the

as

Dio

moral

only to

the

to Themist.

F.

81
; Plin. Mp. x.
sq.y,Lucian. Peregr. 18;

(85

far-

as

after

are

such

not

returned

2
27 sgi.; V. Soj)k.
i.7,4, also
Dio
to be
hearers
historical)
;

Synes. Dio;

in

that

not

seems

sq.

exclusivelyto

countries,

Dio's

own

is

men

itself

were

for

sources

of

to

important
very long. Dio,
sired
banishment, delonger merely a rhetorician,

no

confines

considerations
1

XTII.

2
he
also
philosopher
;
Cynic garb ;3 but his philosophyis very

the

assumed

be

to

CHAP,

middle

rhetoric

from

philosophy. But neither of these

enough as a philosopherto detain
surnamed
Chrysostom,1after his
indeed

the

about

over

the

towards

"

where

date
or

is

philosophy, which

"

I.

82

attacked
manner

escaped
he

in

of

some

(Kara

bad

he
in

r"v

had

viously
pre-

vigorous
his

courses
dis-

"piXQcr6"pa)v
"

and

TcpbsMov(r"""viov^.
Or. 72 ; Or, 34, p. 33
Or. 1, p. 60.

for
taught rhetoric, wandered
distant
through
many
years

cf
.

ECLECTICISM.

354

CHAP,
XIIL

notion

whole

Ms

is rather

endeavour

of his hearers

the hearts

did

and

readers

to

impress upon

the

principleslong acknowledged by the best, and

Philosophy has, he
to given cases.1
apply them

to

*"

"""

Righteous
righteous

moral

endeavour

firmities
in-

be

to

ideal is Socrates, as
philosophic
later popular philosophy namely,

by the

"

with

of morals, but

teacher

excellent

an

as

the

-,

-i

tneir

His

man.

conceived

ol

men

in

consists

it

of curing

task

the

says

man.

even

theoretical enquiries he

himself;

concern

*"
"*

schools,but
philosophical

With

them.

outside
not

His

alike in all the

found

whom

scientific thoughts and purposes are not

specifically
tion
Diogenes, whose emancipain question; 3 after him
from

he admires

so

to what

was

attention

no

pays

needs

finds

character,and

in his

things

that

demonstrates
is also

told

are

that

given ; 6

he

of

with

unconditionallythat he
unsound

even

him

virtue

the

and

revolting
praiseworthy.4 He
and wisdom
happiness
most

the virtuous

describes

distorted

man

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
1

TTOVS

eist" xphffa.Q'Qai
irpwiro-

K"ifj.4vyj
vapaffKevy

r^s yX"rrys.

Or. 13, p. 431 ; cf. Or. 70,

The same
71, and sup, 353, 2.
of the
definition
problem of
2

philosophy has
under

our

notice

already

come

in connection

Diogenes
the
d

excesses

is admired
mentioned

even

for

in PJiil.

Or. II. i. 274, 3.

5

Or. 23, especiallyp. 515^.;

the
Or. 69, 868 *q. where
^/jrfdisthe
and
are
tiuppoves
vi^oi
cussed in the Stoical sense.

his

greatness and

moral

for others ;

he

coin-

freedom

true

slavery with

reasonableness, and

with

cides

working

Stoics,that

the

with

points out,

355

CHRYSOSTOM.

T)IO

reason
un-

appetites,passions, and
vices of men,
luxury, avarice,love of glory,and of
tions
"c.,he makes reflecpleasure,anxiety, faithlessness,
;

such

the

to

in the schools ; 3 he recalls his

usual

were

as

the

from

readers

with

regard

in

in
of life prevailing

mode

in

the

as

advantages 8

the

advice

in the Aristotelian

relative forms

and

the distinctions

all

short,he expatiateson

in

morality

practicallife.

and

for

and

intentioned, verbose,

in

the

most

Or, 78, 428

s#.

had

Or. H,

80.

Bssenes

genes,
of
the

an

the

Socrates

happy

and

village history,'as
purpose

##.),

In

the

Jahn

of which

correctly estimates
same

well

Dio-

natural

innocent

6
7

life in
*

Greek

calls

these

15

respect

Dio
A

very

indepenthe

(Synes.

well-

part

Jewish

16).

p.
So in Or. 7, 268 sgq,, where
degradation and
danger

exposed,
Or. 36, 81 sq, 33.
Or. 36, 83 *#.
Or. 33 $q. 38, 40, et

Or.

3,

115

$$.

as

passim.
On

the

distinguishedfrom

monarchy
the tyranny (cf.Of.

Synes.

(Dio, p

of
the
public immorality so
universally tolerated, is very

description

Ei"j8oi/cbs
(Or. 7) that

it ; the

the

already quoted

passages

concerning

commended

Or. 5, 192 ; Or. 16, 17,

66-68, 74, 79.
this point, besides
Of. on

E.g.

the

government

But

32,

of

possiblequestions of

15,

the

manner

discussions,there is little real and

sensible

againstthe

cutting of the beard ; 6 he exalts

of civil institutions,7
gives useful

discusses
states,8

to

he

Stoics, against things so

the

of

punctiliouszeal

words

rational

also,with
time,5 occasionally

his

immorality of
indifferent

and

earnest

of nature

of the state
wants, to the simplicity
discourses

artificial

corruption,its

its moral
follies,

its

society,

1" i, 62).

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,

to be found ; as
philosophy
cases
beyond actual and particular

dent

which

soon

as

Dio

he falls into

goes
monplaces
com-

treated in the

fied
spiritof a modiStoicism or of the ethics of Xenophon.1 Plato
indeed, next to Demosthenes, his pattern of

was

style; 2

are

the influence
disquisitions
writings are unmistakable
;

in Dio's moral

and

philosophyand
of Plato's
but of the speculativedeterminations
system we find only a few scattered echoes,3and in
regardto the Platonic Republic,Dio is of opinion
his

of

it contains

that

too

much

that

is irrelevant

to its

question of justice,4We more

commonly meet with Stoic doctrines in his writings:
the kinship of (rod to the
he says about
what
human
spirit,on the knowledge of God that is
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
governedby one soul,6and with the tracingof the

proper

theme

dsemon

to

the

"

man's
of

doctrine

Stoic

own

the

of the world is at least

But

tion

for Dio

He

for

internal

Ms

Xenophon

in

adrniraOr.

18,

481.
"

Of. Philostr.

Fto

%A.

i.

7, 3.
3

Such

as

Or.

PJusdo, 62 B, and
*
Or. 7, 267.

30, 550; cf.

elsewhere,

Even

the

and
formation
conflagration
tentatively
broughtforward.8

that

it is manifest

expresses

nature.7

384

Or.

nothingis
12;

of.

of real

especiallyp,

*#, ; 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$.

LUC

357

IAN.

for all

he claims

except that Universal, which

value

CHAP.
"XTTT

conviction,and with the

their inborn

as

men

denial

severely
reproachesthe Epicureans ]
for mankind.
the belief in the gods and their care
His
standpoint is throughout that of the popular
in a practical
philosopher,which turns to account
of which

he

so

"

scientificresults which

manner

property, without

have

become

them

enriching

common

by

and

new

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

Or. 12, 390 sq.

know
that we

All

cian's

life and

almost

owe

writings.

was

born

to

older
of

personality

filled the

man

he

and

lucrative

Luwe

the

at

secretary

tant
impor-

office

court

of

of
the

deputy (Apol. 12. ; cf. c. 1, 15).

entirelyto his own
find him resumWe
afterwards
them
ing
From
ing
(confin-

myself here to
importance) we

most

he

attitude

similar

what

in Samosata

Soril. 24; Piscat.

first destined for a

{Hist, farther

19),'and

was

but
sculptor,

subsequently devoted

courses
long interrupted dis(Here. 7). Nothing
is known
concerning

his

is of

find that

himself

to learned studies (Sonm. 1 sgg.

14) and had traversed part of
with
dominions
the
Boman

his life.
in well

Suidas'

merited

his

abuse

torn

to

is

of

story that he,

punishment

for

Christianity,was
mad

pieces by

doubtless

no

than

most

more

dogs,
worthy
trust-

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
30 sgg.'j Apol. 15; Nign"n". sq. (JPeregr.2)
and

85 s$"j. Hermot.
13). The time
be correctly
of his birth cannot
stated, nor that of his death.

rwv

that he
Ale". 48, we
see
cus
composed this work after Mardeath.
As
an
Aurclius'

are

-,

From

KVVIKUV

lytcjffoi

6 'AtcTaitav fab
o"tTTrep

Among
or

Lucian's

T"V

KVVUV.

writings there

several which
are
spurious,
at any rate doubtful.

'

ECLECTICISM.

"8

CHAP,
XIIL

in

his

mature

more

to

the

form

new

of

and
io

no

tem.

is tied

his

sophy consists,accordingto
wisdom, in a temper of mind
is attached

to

no

True

philo-

theory,in practical

and bent

system ;
philosophical
and

the distinctive doctrines

h^A

from

over

appropriated from

character.

his individual

with

monised

went

tageous
might prove advaneither for his personalconduct
for
or
of his writings which
chieflyhar-

to him

Ms

he

philosophy,and
as
philosophyonly so much
rhetoric

he

that

years

of will which

the other

on

other

peculiar!-

ays-

appeared to him unimportant,

and
pride themselves
and, so far as men
upon them
us
quarrelabout them, ridiculous. Thus he assures
him
that has made
to
that it is philosophy
disloyal
and
rhetoric,that he has always admired
praised
schools

of the

ties

philosophyand nourished himself 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
target of his

for the

their remarkable
excite the most

material

attention

for satire.3

entirelyto the

almost

of others

errors

customs

and

and
But

32, and

satirical

References

Among

his

this kind

are

are

chief

the

ing
tempthimself

exposition of the

bringsforward

indeed

be

his

generally

the
fyaWrcu,the "Tv/u,Trd"rtov,

Eu'Ep/^rt/xos-,
^iKapo/j.^ynnros,

and
w")%osr *AA.i6t)s,

vious note.
2

character

he confines

as

the

through

offer the most

very seldom

t, 5 sq. 29 ; JBis ACGUS.

elsewhere
; cf. the pre-

that

obtrusive

and

views, his standpoint may

own

those

wit

several

superfluous, funeral orations.

8
Above
all the Cynics,SK^.
writings of
$l(av irpa"n$,

p,

290,

1 ; 344.

369

LUCIAN.

determined, but

be

cannot

explainedby

more

any

CHAP,

If the treatise on
preciseaccount of his convictions.
he was
at firstmuch
impressed
Nigrinusbe authentic,1
with the independenceof the external,and insight
into the hollowness

of the

which

the

characterised

ordinarylife of

discourses

the world,

of this

Stoicising
Platonist,but we cannot suppose the impressionto
the
since in his description
have been very lasting,
the
rhetorical phraseology
is patent enough. Even
in the sequel he opposed with sach
Cynics,whom
out
passionatebitterness,he treats for a time not withkindliness,and puts his satires and especially
his attacks upon

the

their mouths.2

In

gods of

the

popularbelief

his later years

into

he bestows

high
praiseupon Epicurus for his freedom from religious
prejudiceand his relentless war againstsuperstition.3
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 philosophyitself
multitude
of philosophical
cannot
possiblybe found, since there is no token of
it which
does not requireto be proved by a further
1

see

sufficient

no

its contents
even

such,

in

reason

denying this ;
as
man
superficial
for

have had transient

Lucian may
fits of disgustwith the world.
2 So in
of the funeral
many
discourses (No. 1-3, 10, 11, 17,

genuine,

as

has

been

already

mentioned
sup. p. 297, 1.
8
Alese. c. 17, c. 25 : sE7Ti/coiJp^,
r"v
avtiplr^v (j"{icriv
irpay^drav
teal
jj.6v(p
KadewpaKfin
rfyv "

avro?s

aX^Oeiav eiS^n.

"s
*EirLKotpq"
avfipl

C.

aKyQus

61 ;

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

46
JSjyniTtw*

hand, the
nax

is

not

On

$g.
discourse
to

be

und
the

on

di"

other
Demo-

considered

Kal
ical ircLpaSetiaKtri

^Xeuflepom?
dfjt.LXrio'dvrtav
avrtp 761/0p"tp,
rtav

L_

ECLECTICISM.

360

CHAP,

token ; that
and

their

waste

all strive

they

philosopheris

he

abandons

claim

any

who,

visionarytreasures,
of his

conscious

to

ignorance,
stead
wisdom, and, inspecific

keeps
speculativecogitations,
advantagesof philosophy.1
of

of

limitation

The

ethics,in which

there

the

to

moral

philosophy to a system of
is no
question of any deeper

foundation,is here based

scientific

the best

things;

useless

with

time

for

sceptical

upon

of knowledge.We shall find

faculty
still more
element
this sceptical
stronglydeveloped
in Favorinus, who
must, therefore, be discussed
of the human

view

of the

adherents

the

among

sceptic school.

The

the rhetorical schools were

from
semi-philosophers
of them
none
distinguishedby any independent

the

but
investigations,

shown

nevertheless

are

of

of

tendencies
in

philosophyto

them

the

the

period
the

namely,

"

useful

duction
re-

and

generally
this popular

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 primarilythe art of
Gralenus,2

c.

24.

Aoous.

characteristics

given by
can

be

Galen's
from

found

Bernays, I
the

All

his

of

first
which
Fabric. JBW.
Gr.
in the
v. 377 sgg. HarL, revised
first volume
of Kiihn's edition
of Galen, s.
xvii-cclxv.
To

especially appeared

15, 25 S"L"[.52 s$. 70 *##. 84

cf. Ms

Liter aria

Piscat. 11 ,29, and the whole

of the Sermotvnvus

Of. also the

Lucian
o.

as

42 *#0.

information

that

this
even

OaUni,

in

history
in

will

respect

also
of

refer,

Galen's

gathered concerning writings,passing over the rest

literature
life, almost
entirely of the voluminous
is
to
be
Born
him.
at Perown
writings,
concerning

in

Ackermann's

Hist,

gamum

in

the

year

181

A.D.,

361

GALEN.

and

he

which

healing to

he

influence,yet

extraordinaryfame

his

owes

also

knows

how

CHAP.

acknow-

to

L_

ledge to the full the worth of philosophy,1and His fame

occupiedhimself with it deeply enough,2to take his "\
the philosophers
of his century.3 He
place among
a

himself

father

whose

Galen,

stands

indeed

had
careful

self
him-

was

and

great architect

when
he

year
of medicine.

had

study

other

several
returned
year

158

native
betook

where

he

as

but

the

art in

year

Per-

to

after

called
re-

When

Yerus.

for

second

the
and

from

he

time

connected

no

Propr. c. 13 ;
De
K); he wrote
Antidotis
(i. 13 ; vol. xiv. 16)
in the reign of Severus(2%0n#0.
(De

Libr.

vol. xix. 46

ad

Pis.

c.

2, vol. xiv. 217, proves

ness
nothing against the genuineing
of this treatise),Accordaccount
to one
(that of the
anonymous

person

by Ackermann,

the

in another

53

Z.

c.

mentioned
xl. ##.)he

learned

in

his

while

still very young,

forms
of philosophy

chief

existed ; from

it then

as

had

Galen

home,

the

Philopator

Gaius

the

pupils

Stoic,

Platonist,and

of

of As-

the

Peripatetic, and
Epicurean philosopher
{Cog%. an. Mori), vol. v. 41 $#.),
later
At
a
period he heard

from

an

Albinus

337):

in

Smyrna

of

(ride supra,,
the

Budemus

who

this

his
of
life whatever.
record
in the
delivered
discourse
A
mentioned
reign of Pertinax is
him

201

or

sires
$#.) he defellow
physicians to
on.
ftpivros
larpbsKal

his

pasius

soon

Italy
is not
known;
is
point there

by

(vol. i.

remember

physician,and

was

and

left

Qeitov ayadccv,
and

ra"v

of

afresh to Italy by Marcus

Aurelius

that

so

Protract.I. vol. i. 3, he
philosophy rb peyiffTov

Rome,
fame
by
great
to

returned

again

gamum,

the

himself

won

success

in 168

in

in

In

city.

164 he
Ms

thence

practise his

to

In

treatise

(151 $##") and

from

his

Suidas,

places,especially

Alexandria

in

medicine

and

Smyrna,

87 ;

A.D.

calls

After his father's

death, he pursued both studies
in

he

teenth
seven-

the

began

age of

says 70 years ;
probably died in 200

losophy;
phi-

to

his

in

to the

Peripatetic

however,

and

introduced

the

to

lived

thematician,
ma-

received

education,

already been

nearest

his teacher

patetic,
Peri-

also
perhaps was
(SiScfo-waAe,
however,

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
may
De

(I c. c. 2, p. 608). Galen's
philosophical writings were
very

numerous

part

of

;*butthe greater

them

is lost.

Concerning Galen's philosophic

opinionscf K. Sprengel,
.

JSeitr.
117-195.

z,

Gesoh.

d.

Medicin^

i.

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP.
XITT.

Character
of

school,but he has also taken so much from others

that we can
only designate his standpoint on the
a
on
that of eclecticism
Peripatetic
whole
as

JZrlecii- eclectics
d#m,

Galen

foundation.

on

the

by

at

fact that

placed among
compiled an

once

he

the
entire

expositionsand excerpts from

and
also from
Aristotelian writings,1

series of continuous

Peripate-

tic
"basi-s.

is

and

Platonic
those

of

Theophrastus,Eudemus,

while

at

the

same

he

time

and

Chrysippus,
that

declares

none

of

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

all these

Academy appears to him an error, which he combats

in
for his part finds man,
He
with great decision.4
Xlis theory
of kncnvspiteof the limitation of his knowledge,sufficiently
ledge.

with

endowed

phenomena

sensible

for the

means
we

discern

Galen, D" L%br. Pro}"r.c.

11; 14-16; vol. xix. 41 *0. 46
1

sg.t where
such works
2

Zoo.

great number

named.

are

"it.

of

c.

11, p. B9 *#.,
to
reference

through
with

connection

points;

on

the

48)

no

senses,

always

in

subordinate
other hand, he

(De Lilr.

vol. xix.

the

almost

and

seldom,

names

of truth ;

attainment

Projir.c. 17,

fewer

than

six

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

presupposing

in
of others, and
his
of
those
them the capabilityof deciding
prewritingswhich have been served,
between
true and false.
mentions
Epicurus but
3

Galen,

in

363

GALEN.

the deceptions of which,

well

may

with

avoided

be

CHAP.
XIII

the necessary

circumspection; the

super- sensible is

by the understanding;and as the sensible

of
perception carries with it an immediate
power
also the understandingis
conviction
so
(svdpyeia),
in possession
of certain truths which are established
immediately and prior to all proof; of certain
natural principles
which verify
themselves
sal
by univerdent,
agreement ; through all this,which is self-evithe hidden' is known
by logicalinference.
The criterion of truth,therefore,
for all that is clear
is the immediate
through itself,
certainty,partly
that of the senses, partlythat of the understanding;
and
the criterion of truth for what is hidden, is
which
is
certainty,
agreement with the immediate
clear.1 This appeal to the directly
certain,to the
the unanimous
and
senses
opinion of men, this
empiricismof the inner and outer sense, corresponds
with the standpoint of Cicero and of the
entirely
later eclectic popularphilosophy.
Among the three principaldivisions of philosophy, Galen ascribes a high value to logic,2as
instrument3
of all philosophical
the indispensable
discerned

De

Opt.

Disc.

c.

4, vol. i.

be

Opt. Secta, 2 ; i.
sq. ;
Pecc. 1. c.]
108 s$. ; Coffn.an.
De Hiypocr. et Plat. ix. 7 ; vol.
777
v.
sq. As principlesthat
48

immediately certain, Galen

(Tlierap.Metl^. i. 4; vol. x. 38)

either

"Me
559
3

are

that
"px"^ hoyiKat,
third
to
a
magnitudes equal
equal to one
magnitude are
another, that nothing happens
names

without

the

cause,

that

we

must

assent

to, or deny

thing,"c.
2
Concerning

Q-alen's

Prantl, Gesch.

der

logic

Logik.i,

sgq.
De

vol. i.

Elem.

Jffip^cr.i. 6,
460, Quod 0#t. Mad. Sit

Qn. Pltilos.
Art.

every-

Hed.

c.

et
H'ipjyocr,
1 j vol. v.

ex

i; 59

$g. ; Constit.

8 ; end, i. 253
Plat. ix. 7 j

782,

"

"q. ;

end,

L_

364

CHAP.
XIII.

ECLECTICISM.

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
he

others

with

declares

to

beginningand
have

attempted

the

and

Aristotle

between

reconciliation

which
categories,

the

be

to

he appears
of all logic,3

foundation
a

of the

In the doctrine

remainder.

Stoics ; 4

categorieshave for him only a logical

and
and not a real importance.5 In the syllogistic
apodeicticpart of logic,which are to him of most
importance,he tries to attain the certaintyof the
geometricmethod ; 6 in regard to matter, he places
otherwise the

the

For

of. Gal. De

*#""' 15
"^. ; cf
2
The
KO.TO,

xix-

*"""
.

is

$##.),which
Sophist.M.

(Sclwl 298, b, 14
nowhere

else

quoted

G-alen's
taries
commen-

by the

mentioned

David

r"v

312, ", 29).

logicalwritings and

29)

8, ", 45, a
are

Prantl

15.

different

47

sq. ;

T^V \i\ivffCKpi"fj."rwv
(vol.

Alex.

But

41

Prantl, p. 559 sq.

short treatise ir.

xiv. 582

by

catalogue of these
Propr. c. 11

Zibr.

Greek

(560, 79) is of a
opinion.
in AT. 49, a,
(Seftol.

ascribes

to

him

five

gories
Cate-

ovcrla,
irocrbv,
iroibv,
irp6s
which
TTWS
does
%xoj/"
indeed
altogether agree
:

n,

wpdsri

not
with

the

elsewhere

division

mentioned

(Therap. Mcih.

ii. 7 ;

"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,
129

(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.

commentators

145;

148;

PuZ*.

had

himself

Dlff.

Whether

viii. 622, 624.

written

ii, 9;
Galen

on

belong to separate genera

quite
may
expressions (Zibr. (Puts. JDljf.ii. 9 $q. ; 622 M, ;
632.
What
Prantl, p. 665%,
42). The meaning
clear

Categoriesis not
from

his

own

Propr. 11, p.
seems

not

to

me

the

to

be that he

did

taries
actually write commenon
them, but only some

observations

between
the y"o$ and
the
which
category; that
falls under
the same
category

on

the

tiating
quotes concerningthe differenof genera
into
belongs to the older

species

tetics.
Peripa-

difficult

6 Mir.
This
questionsthey contained.
of. Met.
would
explain the i"iroju.vfi/j.ara
the Categoriesmentioned
702,
c.
on

Propr, 11, p.
Worm,

c.

89

sa.

6 ; iv, 696

GALEN.

himself

365

Theophrastusl

and

the side of Aristotle

on

against Chrysippus; but that he himself out

forms which Theophrastushad
of the five syllogistic
first figure,2
formed
Aristotelian
to the
added
a
and

figureof

fourth

otherwise

been

imparted to

Galen, or

is to

be

Prantl's careful

writings,is

in

part

reader

for further

it

details to

digest,

in his

however

without
He

repeats
but

causes,

says,
which

Aristotelian

increases

him,
by
J

doctrine

their number

middle

of

the

five

to

four

traces

all

formed

time

of the

cause

creative

as

Vide

that

convinced

ii. 2 ; B.

if here

based
time

footAc/m/c^p.

the

has
sideration
con-

is at the

the meanest

in

v*

exhaustive
PML

ay., vide the

investigation

of

Prantl, p. 570 s$$.

d. 6fr. II. ii.

fourth
this
Concerning
which
was
Galen's,
of
figure
8

on
formerly only known
of
Averroes, but
authority

the
is

De

um

Part.

Corp.Hum.

vi. 13 ; vol. iii.465.

5
Loo. oit.
6

Zoo.

cit. xvii.

1; vol. iv.

360.

confirmed
explained
7
LOG.
Greek fragment of Minas
the
Elcrayayti passim.
in his edition of
and

4%*^*

the

'

by

andmetc

by the

which

wisdom,

things,he prefersto dwell on

of living creatures ; 7 but he

Hipj)oor.et. Plat.

now

(the St? ou).4 Like

cause

213.
2

-5S*

important: 5 the knowledge of them forms, he

that science
the groundwork of true theology,
ing
far surpasses the art of healing.6 In follow-

the

same

entirely fettered

being"

he regardsthe final
Aristotle,

Plato and
most

the

of the

addition

logic of

that
fragmentary,

so

_1_L

has

physics and metaphysicsGalen even

physicianand naturalist chieflyfollows Aristotle

Also

v,

part

suffice to refer the

may

as

in

What

the

from

us

in his

found

unimportant, and

so

doubtful.

his own,3 is very

CHAP.

cit.

p,

358

8$g.

et

on

of

333

ECLECTICISM.

CHAP,
*

portionof the universe, and

clean substances,so wonderful
this must
heaven

be

also

and

its

gloriousand
inherent

base

and

is at

reason

overflowingmeasure

stars, which

world

what

he

does

not

un-

work,
in the

much

so

are

In

admirable.1
the

in

in

these

in

more

manner

it

enquire

more

is

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

he

; for

bodies

not

are

views

the

on

that

he

likewise

qualitiesof things

contradicts

doctrine

of Plato

the

of matter
and

and
physiologists,

againstthe

when

and

the

these, especially,

among

Stoic-Heracleitean

Stoic

of
Aristotle,

elements, against the Atomists

four

ancient

the

originalconstitution

the

he defends
the

shows

theoryof

primitive
told of his objections
matter.4 What
we
are
againstthe Aristotelian discussions concerningspace,
time, and motion, is unimportant.6 Galen's devia1

^KrerdcrQat 50/ceT vovs, for how

it otherwise
be
heated
86vajj.ivand illuminated by the sun ?
TWO.
^veOv^difj vovv
a
eavfiaa-r^v1-irtfrdvTa,
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
2

LOG, cit,
P. 358 : vis 5'

one

from

earth
"
rov

heavenly

bodies:

ots "tK^"y,
%(rq"irep Icrn Kal ^

could

,"?#.; B.

cp

even

sqq,

"

Ue

Me-

413

Though
sqq.
the Stoics are not
"oiKeiv
named
those combated
among
fft"fjuvra
here,the Heracleitean doctrine

Kal

rbv

nark

j" ypiva

vovv

a.

of

Kal

ica re
in the

i. 245

mentis, 1.

ovcrta /ca^apcorcpa,the views

ff""/j.aro$

ov

And
of primitivematter which Galen
aKpi""(rr"pov.
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,

how

the

ri$

5fo"ev6vs

OVK

thereisavovs1

much

more,

Plat, viii, 2 sq.

irepirr"s',

then,

stars 1 through the air ofa

in

the

"

In

o\iyos fends

6S5 sqg,
space, he de(ap. Simpl.Phys. 183 "

respect

v.

to

"

GALEN.

from

tion

Aristotle

in

367

soul

respect to the

and

its

CHAP.
-\TTPT

activityseems

of

his utterances

sound

how

see

more

consequence,

has

failed to

here

even

hesitatingthat

so

completely he
the

but

clearly

we

attain

fixed

opinions. As to what
the soul is in its essence, whether
corporeal,
corporealor intransitoryor imperishable,he not 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

and

strife of

live without

the

to
body, seems
him
corporeal
questionable; 'for how,' he asks, could insubstances
be
distinguishedfrom each
other ? how
can
be spread
an
incorporealnature
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,

can

Pliys. 38, J) the

Themist.

controverted

nition
that
the

it is the

by Aristotle

interval

between

of bodies ; a misconof Aristotle's observa-

limits

ception

tion that time

is not without

mo-

tion; and the objectionthat Aristotle's

definition

tains

circle,are

of time
mentioned
167

con-

by

Z";
Simplicius,Phys.
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

Themist.

all
that
to be found

probable, therefore,
these remarks
in this work.

were

defi-

D"

Feet.

Form.

c.

6 ; iv.

701

sgr.; De Hipp. et. Plat. vii.

7 ; v.
653 : the
soul, according to its ovcrla,is either rb o!W
Kal cu0"pw8e*"rai,ua
afryoetSes
re
aM)v JJLCVao-^arov virdpxew
ou"rfco",
^
tfx7?/"*
[5^] r" irpurov
efj/curovri rb "r"jfta,5i o5
afrrTjs
/ucVou rfyv vp^s r"xxa, o-^/Aara
or,

'

Kowwtav

hand,

substance
its

Xappavei. On the other

the Pneuma
nor

is neither

its seat, but

vp"rov tipyavov
(I.c.

c.

its

only
3 ; p.

606

^.)*
Quod Animi
Temy. Se$. c.

Mores

Corp.

sq. ; 785

3 ; 5 ; iv. 775
9$. ; De LOG. A ff.ii. 5 ;

viii. 127

$g.

ECLECTICISM.

308

CHAP,

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,
of corporealsubstances,and as to its
the mixture
immortality there could then be no question.1
this point,and
to decide on
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 ac-

we

L_

that he has not

this

formation
power

the

subject. On
which

he

of the

vegetablesoul

body
attribute

cannot

embryo

his mind

up

hand

one

human

the

of

made

he
a

finds

and

the

irrational

the

the likeness of children to their parents

to derive the children
assume

body, we

that
are

the

from

rational

that soul
soul

with

confronted

other

hand

obligeshim

; if we

builds

the

the

in

wisdom
to

on

upon

up

further
its

fact that

own

we

are

stitution
imperfectlyacquainted 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,
creatures,seems
since we
ought not to involve that divine
base occupations.3 Gralen declares
soul in such
himself more
decidedlyfor the Platonic doctrine of

most

Qu. An. Afore*. "c.

773
tq. ; 780.
p.
2

Vidfi ytpra
otie* "s

*y" 5*

and

c.

3 ;

4;

rb

"$
Xoyta-riKM o"e''

l"mj/

OVK

fXo"twnbwrtat.

* De
Z. o. c. 3 :
Jfct.
%"rrtv [Mdvarov 683 *"".

fbrm.

c.

Iv

GALEN.

the parts of the

also

doubt

soul

369

their

and

abodes,1which

with

combines

he

CHAP.

the

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
no

______

for the Stoic

distinction

the

between

f"i"^ and

t^^or

the

"bvori$*^

tlieoretlcctJ,

shall be all the less

We
tion and

surprisedat the

fragmentarinessof

hear what

we

value

these

and

definitions when

attributes

Galen

vacilla-

theoretical

to

enquiriesin general. The question concerningthe

not
it had a beginor
unity of the world, whether
ning,
and the like, he thinks
worthless for the
are
practicalphilosophers
; of
and

the

try

to

Gods
a

in

guidance of
convince

not

or

moral

have

by

no

discusses

wearisome

the

treatise

than

this
nine

De

of

not
one

distinct

of

was

of

nature

whether
on

view

the

they have
conduct;

our

it is also indifferent

formed

by Galen,
2, and

Placitis,

subjectin
books

diffusiveness,

with

Qu.

by

deity

De

Hijjp.et Plat.

vi.

1. c,

Hypgoor.

de Alim.
iii.
293 ; In
JSippoor.de
i. 0 ; xvi. 93.

De Substaait. Faoult. Nat. c.

1 ; B. iv. 757 s$. ; cf in SZppode JEJpidem. Lilr.
cratis
vi. ;
Sect. v. 5 ; xviil ", 250.
.

merely three faculties

three
substance, but

substances, is asserted
B

In

10 ; xv.
ECumor.

That
Animi
Mores, "c., c. 3.
of the soul
the three divisions
are

the

Gods

indeed

must

we

influence

the world

et Ptatonis
"K$)jr"0cra,tis

fewer

no

of the

ledged
blindlyworking cause, if only it be acknowthat it is disposed according to purpose and

Of. besides

which

Providence

politicalpoint

whether
or

existence

requireto know

can

and

the

ourselves,but

do not

we

body

con-

De

Natur, Facult. i. ljii. 1

out

"f

ECLECTICISM.

3tt)

CHAP,

the question
design. Even
discussed,concerning the seat
interest
l

of the

soul

certainlyrequire

philosopher who

if

ethical
this

Ms

ethical

two

in
"but two

not

Thus

important,
lut prove
himto
have

what

into

goods

in

the

iv. 764.
3

De

De

all

et Plat.

ix. 6 ;

Nat.

B.

In

and

of the

in
four

Aristotelian
the

in

science

Hippoor.
xvi.

of

mean.7

or

do

104:

some-

$fo(m,0r. i.

"o"irepykp

^a-ov icrrlv atperbvfr 7rS"r"/,

"?A\"nr^
tirepBdKXovf)
QevKrfo, bperal ^
$v
iracrat
cognoscendisourandisgrtie^crcp (rwiffravrcu at 8k Katctat

Propr.

De

13 ; 17.

awimi

pecca-

Protrept. 11 ; i. 26 s$.
De Ilippocr. ct Plat. vii. 1
:

doctrine

is

ro

ethical

otfroj/colrb

Zibr.

digvatwiie atqwe tnodela,.

sg.

utterances

external

13, end;

morMs.

v.

exception of

of older doctrines.

consists

virtue

torum

the

again the

virtue

animi

dent
indepen-

Peripateticdivision

Platonic

virtues,6 and

$q.
Sitfost. Famlt.

De

the

an

writings

occasional

-r%

779

v.

him

numerous

lost, with

find

connection

Hippoer.

De

beyond

greatly deceive

expect from

merely echoes

question whether

B.

scientific

anotner? concerning his

or

propositionthat
^Q

shall

spiritual,bodily, and

l^otio fundamental
also

that

of

advance

we

learn from

we

another

value

not

But

all

are

sometimes

we

ethics.2

nor

evidence

enquiries. Galen's

opinions,contains

very

the

therefore

we

P*ace

one

further

no

measures

subject3
but

of

to theoretic

medicine

to

eclecticism.

ourselves

soul,is only

only necessary

utility,could

demonstrated
uncertain

fully

so

entirely according to their direct and

enquiries so

on

is

neither

philosophy, and
We

of the

has

physician,and not to the philosopher

conversely a definite opinion regarding

while

the nature

he

the

to

which

594.

$"a)
refer

^crov.

rov

indeed

These

words

directly to

cor-

poreal conditions, but tlioyhavea

universal

application.

S7i

GALEN.

thing else,Gralen decides thus:

in the rational

parts

CHAP.
KTTTT

of the
a

irrational

merely

qualityor disposition.1The

eclectic

soul it is

facultyand

tendency

of the

science,in the

thus

man

shows

itself in this

also of his doctrine.

De

Hippoer.

"t

Plat.

v.

5 ; vii. 1 ; v. 468

; 595.

portion

1_

INDEX.

CADEMICS

jOL

tury

B.C.,

the

first

of

first

the

of
75

Alexander

cen-

of

sQq.

centuries

80

the

tolbelief

tends

of
his

Achaicus,

Adrastus

the,

Aphrodisias,

the

on

jEschines,

Agathobulus,
Albinus,

346

concerning-

the

Deity,
his

importance

century

Alexander
instructor

B.C.,

of

-"32gse,
of

from

world-

116

347the

among

but

Animal

food,

of

Nero,

Annseus

124,

Peripatetic,
304,

of

the

in

avoided,
225

Stoic,

Oicero's,
219

whole
117

against,

Sextius

by,

Aristotle,

be

to

of

Athens,

edited

Musonius,

Serenus,

Anthropology,

the

on

was

patetic
Peri-

head

Peripatetic,

genuine

to

Peripatetic

work

diverged

113

350

Platonists,

Alexander,

school

Aristotle's

virtues,

the

demons,

Peripatetic
;

the

world,

332,

115

trines,
doc-

the

Rhodes,

of

tinguished
dis-

A.B.,

in

philosophy,
the

Bishop

270,

Matter,

his

about

Andronicus

division

his

347

Alexandria,

Laodicea

ec-

102,

himself

his

Academy,

n.

of

Anatolius

?".

New

Plutarch,

336,

n.

ries
commenta-

philosophy,

later

first

his

337

Plato,

347

349

335

Platonist,

clecticism,

soul,

294,

Platonist,

335,

the

of
3

334,

of

342,

Cynic,

on

the,

concerning341,

Oarneades,

Seleucia,

of

teacher

theories
133

of

patetic,
Peri-

??..

Peloplaton,

Ammonius,

of

Peripatetic,

Damascus,

306,

called

sons

disciple

of

of

22

JEnesiclenms,

the

gave

important

Alexander

his

the

331

331

Alexander

instructors,

310

disciple

Boman

Paulus,

JEther,

sq.

vovs,

and

Providence,

last

"

308

and

G-ocl

and

soul

soul
of

329

and
324

"by,

the

the

trine
doc-

treated
of

326

tne

taries
commen-

11

Pansetius,

of

his

universe,

L,,

Stilo,

JEmilius

124

n.

how

relation

world,

patetic,
Peri-

Aristotle,

on

Greek

body,

the

on

trines
doc-

Universal

doctrine

327;

305,

views

his

and

Aristotle's

the

Particular,

sg.

commentary

of

JSlius

355

34,

323

of

194

revelation,

stotle,
Ari-

of,

theories

of,

313

categories,

various

increasingly

in

eclecticism

321

Old,

81

New,

times

Imperial

the

and

and

Philo,

in

New

the

Second

commentaries

319;
the

called

and

s"M-

Academy,

patetic,
Peri-

318

n.,

Commentator

344

A.D.,

"

"

Aphrodisias,

306,

cording
acgument
ar-

186

196,
169

n.

neca's,
Se-

374:

INDEX.
ANT

ATH

Antibius, 200, n.
Antidotus, instructor of Antipater
of Sidon, 54, n.
of Ascalon, disciple of
Antiochus
called
the founder
of the
Philo,

Archaicus, a Peripatetic,307, n.
Aristo,a discipleof Antiochus, who
went

the

of

truth, 88

not

senses

to

self

scepticism
90

he

; dicta

of
in

by

that

all

philosophy
a

are

9t

agreement,

Cicero

-contradictory,

maintains

schools

of the

discarded, 89

,*

Aristocles

divides

philosophy into
parts, 92 ; his theory of

317

ledge,
know-

93 ; his ethics, 95 ; doctrines

of
life
according to
96 ; the
highest good,
96 ; virtue and happiness,97; his

nature,

positionin regard to the Stoics

and
school
Peripatetics, 98:
of, 99 ; other disciplesof, 1 00
Antiochus
the
Cilician, a Cynic,
294,

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

in

the

first

century B.C., 53, n.

Apollodorus
with

"5

K^iror^pavvos,
compared
Epicurus, 27, 28

Apollonides, friend of Cato, 72, n.

of Cassius,
Apollonius, a freedman
72,

n.

Apollonins, a Peripatetic,
304,
Apollonius, a Platonist,334, 3
Apollonius of Mysa,

Stoic, 53,

n.

Apollonius of Ptolemais, 72, n.

Apollonius of Tyre, 71, n.
Apollonius,

Stoic

instructor

Marcus
Aurelius,198, n.
Apuleius, on the Cosmos, 3 29
the

author
vt 131

of the

treatise

; was

Aristocles

fragments

tetic,
Peripaof

his

of

Neo-

Pcrganms,

tetic,
Peripa-

n.
a

Platonist, 334, 3
of
Strabo,

teacher

Aristodemus,
75,

of

precursor

318

305,
Aristodemus,
7i.

Aristotle, commentaries
304

sqg.

assertion

112,
on,
of his agreement

with
Plato, by Antiochus,
by Cicero, 163 ; by Severus
and Albinus, 346, 347
and
Aristus, brother
of
successor
91

in the

Antiochus
at

n.

to

2 ; 121

great historical work

preserved
by Busebius, 315 ; his admiration
for Plato, 315 ; his conception
of Reason, human
and
divine,
Platonism,

three

Academy

Messene,

314;

the

Stoic, 92;

pure

of

tually
vircalled

the

Peripatetics,105,

fifth

Academy, 87 ; his doctrines :

virtue
and
terion
knowledge, 87 ; cri-

from

over

Athens, 100,

Arius

Academy

Didymus of

Academic, 106
of
Arrian, author

Hew

Alexandria, the

Meteorology,

258, 1

Arrian, the Stoic, 258

Artemon,

Peripatetic, 307,

n.

Asclepiadcs of Bithynia, relation

to Epicureanism, 29 ; atomistic
theory of, 81

Asclepiades,
name,

294,

two
n.

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

commentaries

on

Aristotle,

308

Athenodoraa,
of

; not

irepl

Athenodorus,
71, n.

son

of

Saudon, 72,

surnamed

n.

Cordylio,

Athenodoraa
the Bhodian, 124, 1
Athens
visited
13 ;
by Eomans,
proposal by Gellius to the philo-

375

INDEX.
CBA

ATH

sophers in, 16 ; public teachers

of the four
principalschools of
Marcus
Aurelius, 193
of Seneca, 195
Attalus, teacher
Atticus, his zeal for the purity of
Academic
doctrines, 341 ;
the

147

his

148

scepticism,149,

s%. 167 ;
156
of philosophy,
his view
; his
trine
158
; doctheory of knowledge,

knowledge, 159 ;
disposition innate, 160;

of innate

of a moral
sense,
161 ;
of
truth,
criterion
his
;
the
immortality of the soul,
on
dialectics and physics,
161,170;

his

Lucilius, 55, n.
Balbus, Q. Lucilius,55, n. ; 74,n.

Boethus, Flavins, 306,

Peripatetic,
11.7 ; his

from

Boethus, the Stoic, 35 ; his deviation

Stoicism, 35 ; attitude
from
pure
Stoic theology, 36 ; to the
doctrine of the conflagrationof

to the

the

Brutus,

100,

and prophecy, 38
discipleof Antiochus,

world, 37,
M.,

n.

166;

ism,
Epicurean-

cism
ethics, 163 ; critiStoics, 164; his

and

of

want

to, 167;
belief in

in, 162
168

Providence,

anthropology,

75,

Carneades,
for ethics, 5
Borne, 9

predilection

his

influence

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.
teacher

Chseremon,

Chairs, institution
on

on

Sparta,

of

196,

n.

tor
Stoic,instrucMaximus,
Aurelius, 198, n.
of Marcus
cus
Claudius
Severus, teacher of MarAurelius, 306, n.
Clitomachus, 5.

Aristotle
tolaus, Diodorus, Andronicus

treatise

Cynic, 301,

"

Criof

113, 306
of Plato, 337 $$.

Khodes,
of

"

L.

Cornutus,

Annasus,

Stoic,
; 198

banished by Nero, 196, n.

sg.
disin 76 B.C., ciple
Gotta, 0., consul
adherent

and

of

Hiilo,

n.

Crassitius, Lucius,
member

of

Commentators

100,
the

freewill, 171 ;
sentative
repreof eclecticism, 157, 171
Cinna, Catulus, a Stoic, instructor
of Marcus
Aurelius, 198, n.
Claranus, a Stoic, 196, n.

public, by

of

127
K(J"rjuou,
a

at

of Nero, 195, 1

189

Hadrian,

Chrysippus,

169

Cicero

Claudius

his
;

cording
ac-

nature

human

Agathinus,
discipleof Cornutus,

nALLIOLBS,

ality,
origin-

G-od

of

nature

Claudius

\J

Chytron,

uncertainty

soul, 120

of the

the immortality

of

criticism

; his

; his
the
of

Aristotle, and
him, 119 ; on

on

divergences

162

162

discipleof Andronicus,
commentaries

n.

n.

the

Sidon,

of

Boethus

doctrine

160

n.

Scythopolis,198,

of

Basilides

; Ms

theologicalopinions,154

"pALBTJS, L.
Basilides, 54,

his

157;

Carneades,
objection to dialectic, 153

moral

Jj

; Cicero

151

152,

Asclepiades,31

of

Greek
losophy,
phiEpicureans,

philosophicstudies,
philosophicalworks,

and

342, 343

theory

on

the

on

25 ; his

his

nition
opposition to Aristotle's defiHomonyms,
concerning
Atomistic

writings

his

14

by

in,

established

philosophy

| Cicero,

of

Sextii, 181

the

of Tarentum,
the
of
school

INDJEX.

376

ECL

OBA

Crassus, Cornelius, a prolificwriter

of the school of the Sextii, 181

132

the

and

Cratippus,
first

Peripatetic

of

61 ; in the treatise
; all things are

century B.O., 122

Crescens,

Cynic,

the

Martyr, 294,
Crispus Passienus,
Critolaus, the
in

School

the

Stoic, 196,

Cynicism,

second

revival

beginning

era,

289

Cynics,

Dio, 100,

century

of,
of

of

n.

the

be

after

soon

Christian

mentioned
,

last traces

Imperial

divine

DAEMON",
266 (Epictetus); 278

in

man,

(Marcus

Aurelius)
of Messene,

Damocles

53,

n.

"Daphnus, a Platonist, 336, n.

Dardanus,
disciple and successor

??,;

next

pattern

era,

by Julian, 301, 3
of the, 302
the

284

duty,
(Marcus

121,

Chrysostom, 353 ; Ms notion

to
philosophy the endeavour
a
righteous man,
354; approximatio
of Stoicism, 355 ;

Plato

the, of the

of

to

Demosthenes

style,356

; Ms

standpoint, 357
a
Peripatetic

288, 290
"

to, man's

presentative 271
important re(Epictetus);
Peripatetic
Aurelius)

Dio

the

ber
mem-

102,

the

Platonist, 336,

gods

Albinus

349

Destiny, submission

n.

B.C., 113

Cronins,

265

Dercyllides,the grammarian
of the New
Academy,

n.

most

of

on,

of Justin

accuser

(Epictetus),

TreplKdcrjuov,
full of

Diodorus,

his-

general
tator,
commen-

113

Diodotus, instructor and friend of

Cicero, n,
Diogenes, a Cynic, in the reign of

Vespasian, 294, n.
Diogenes of Seleucia, his opinion
to the conflagration of the
as
world, 35

of

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

; abstained

sacrifices,and
298

; his

nal,
exter-

from

ready

the
wit

riage,
mar-

mysteries,
and

practicalinfluence, 299
in regard to,
Demons, Posidonius

"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-

INDEX.

377

ECL

ticism,

GAL

21 ; contained

l^eo-Platonism,23
the

among
the

24

Epicureans,
31

Stoics,

of

germs

; eclecticism

sg. ;

246

"#.,
$g., 335
Peripatetics, 112 sq.,
s#. ; the
304 ; in Cicero, 146 ; in Seneca,
tics
224, 225 ; of Galen, 362 ; Eclec189

; the

$#.,

Academics,

75

belonging to no particular
school, 351
Eclectic School, the, 111
Egnatius, Celer P., a Stoic, 197
his
Ennius,
acquaintance with
Greek

philosophy,
Epictetus, 197, n. ; date
7

and

sonal
perception
history of,
; his conof philosophy, 258 ; trines,
doc257

259

sg. ;

men

to

are

be

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,
Peripatetic,306, n,
Eudorus

of

tonism,

Alexandria,

103

; his

his

digest

Categories, 104;

of

Plathe

his

pedia,
Encyclo-

of the

younger

104

Euphrates, teacher
Pliny, 197, n.
Evil
229

external, Seneca's
;

nax

on,

Epictetus
on,

297

270

on,

; Marcus

of,

view
; Demo-

Aurelius

284

philosophers in behaviour

made
rather

than

opinions,

; his

260

logic and dialectic,

261 ; natural
philosophy, 262 ;
religiousview of the world, 263 ;
belief in the perfection of the
of

opinion

world,

263

opinion

religion,264
265

of

the

moral

innate

lar
popu-

soothsaying,
; immortality

266

daemons,
soul, 266

of the

; freewill, 267 ;
conceptions and

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,

275
the

Epicureanism,

181
PAPIEIUS,
FABIANUS
Faith, attitude of Pansetius
the

Seneca,
265

; of

popular,50

Cicero,169

to
; of

; of
Marcus
of
;

244

Fannius, C.,

Epictetus,264,
Aurelius, 282
Roman
disciple of

Pansetius, 55,
Fatalism

n.

of the

Stoics

opposed by
Diogenianus, 307 ; by Alexander
of Aphroclisias,
322
Forgiveness of injuries, Seneca,

241 ; Epictetus,
274 ; Marcus
Aurelius, 286
Freewill, Cicero's treatise on, 171 ;.
Seneca
231; Epictetus on,
on,

267

Friendship, Seneca on, 240; opinion

of some
Epicureans on, quoted
by Cicero, 25

later,at Borne,

12

Epicureans,

the

in

first two

B.C., relation
to

Epicurus,

26 ;

turies
cen-

of the later

Cicero

on

the,

25, 162
"

the,

averse

Equality

of

men

to science, 194
(Seneca), 242

PansQtius, 47; of Posidonius, 67 ; of Antiochus, 95 ; of

Eudorus,104; of Anus Didymus,

Ethics

of

r\ AITJS, a Platonist, 335, n. ; his

commentaries
Plato, 337
on

UT

Galen

of
his personal
Smyrna;
as
a.
history, 360, 2; his fame
; his

philosophy
Peripatetic
basis,362 ; theory of knowledge,
363 ; high opinion of logic,363
s%. ; his physics and metaphysics,,,

physician, 368
is

eclecticism

on

INDEX.

-378

LAM

GAL

365 $#.; doctrine of matter, 366;

and
"body,367 ; contempt

Herminus,
his

soul

for theoretical
ethical

them

ethics, 370

writings,most

Herminus,

proconsul,his proposal
in Athens, 16
philosophers
Oeorgius of Lacedsemon, 53, n.
God, nature
of,according to Boethus, 36; Cicero, 160, 167;
263 ;
Seneca, 213 8$. Epictetus,

Aristotle's
definition
Homonyms,
to
concerning, objected
by Atticus, 342, 343
Honoratus, a Cynic, 294, n.
treated
nature, how
Cicero,169 ; by Seneca, 239

Human

Gods,

see

by
by
;

by Marcus

Au-

relius,286

369
Faith

-Good, the highest,according to

Antiochus, 96 ; Cicero, 164 s#. J
Varro, 172
*Greek

Epictetus,260

ander
Aurelius, 280-282 ; Alexof Aphrodisias,
330, 342 j

Galen,

Stoic,200, n.
the

Bphesian, 6, 2
Herophilus,a Cynic. 294, n.

lost,370

to the

Hermodorus

of

'Gellius the

Marcus

Peripatetic,306, n.\
on
Aristotle,

312

enquiries,369;

of his

eclecticism
his

commentaries

doctrine of, accordingto

TDEAS,
JL Albinus, 348

Images, worship of (Varro),178

Immediate

certainty, its nature

accordingto the Eclectics,19

decline of originality
philosophy,
effect
of
3
in, j
scepticism Immortality,Cicero

the
4 ; among
Roman
students

on,

of Roman

Romans, 610;
of, 11 ; effect

character

on, 14 ; last

on,

161, 170

Seneca's

view of, 223 ; Epictetus

Aurelius on, 283
on, 266 ; Marcus
o
f
Iphicles, Epirus,a Cynic, 301, 3

epoch of, 23
sought in
ourselves
(Seneca), 236 ;
(Epictetus)270; (Marcus Aurelius)282, 284
Harpocrationof Argos, a Platonist,
to

HAPPINESS,

336,

n.

his

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.

Heraclides, the

a Stoic,71, n.
TASON,
Julianus,of Tralles, 307, n.

be

of mankind,

77"INSHIP

Seneca,

239
to God

266 ;
(Epictetus),
(Marcus Aurelius) 283 ; (Dio
Chrysostom) 350
Knowledge of God, innate in man
160, 161 ; (Dio Ghryso(Cicero),

"

of

man

stom),

356

Knowledge, theory of,311

; 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-

temporary
Stoic, 52 ; conPansetius,52
Heraclitus,a Stoic,195, 1
of the
Heraclitus,of Tyre,member
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.

of

379

INDEX.
NEK

LEO

Leonides,

of Bhodes,

Stoic

71,

Menephylus,

n.

321

Aphrodisias,

of

of Pansetius, 53

Menippus,

by Galen,

century

323

JLonginus, 336,

n.

275

of

Seneca,
Lucian, his personal history, 357
a

philosophy

considers

conception

the

philosophy as

true

of

359

358,

tied

satirises each

but

system,

no

turn,

as

Paulus

lius

by

warlike

his

on

peditions,
ex-

;
to

Metronax,

in

Mnasagoras, disciple of Pansatius,

53,

of

Stoic, 196

n.

of

Mnaseas

art

true

mentioned

B.C., 291,

Meteorology,

Marcus

Annseus, nephew
Stoic, 197, n.

M.

third

Philostratus, 291, n.
Seneca's, 211
and
Metrodorus,
philosopher
jEmipainter,8, 1 ; accompanied

(Seneca), 239,

; (Epictetus)
Aurelius), 286

the

of

Cynic

Lycian,

240

Lucanus

the

"

mankind

of

Love

Peripatetic,304, 2
sor
disciple and succes-

Menesarchus,

by Seneca, 208 ;
Logic, how
by Epictetus,261 ; by Alexander
treated

Tyre,

Antiochus,

life,360

Mnesarchus,

Lucilius, 12, 3 ; 196, n.

Lucretius, Epicureanism of, 26
Lyco, a Bithynian, 53, n.

of

Cynicism,

from

Church

tian
Chris-

the

adopted by

Monachism

of

school

the

100, n.
the Stoic, 86
303

tius,
Scasvola, discipleof Panse-

Mucius

49

Mummius,
Sp., Eoman, discipleof
Panastius, 55, n.
1YJL public teachers of the four
the Alexandrian, 191
Museum,
of philosophy in
chief schools
Musonius, a Cynic, 766, 2 end
to him
Athens, 193; references
tury
Musonius, a Stoic of the third cenhis
and
199, n. ;
instructors,
n.
200,
A.D.,
semblances
rehis personal history, 276;
of
instructor
Musonius
Rufus,
to
Epictetus, 278 ;
tory,
hisn.
197,
of
and
personal
life
;
Epictetus,
conception of human
to practical
246, 3 ; devoted
the problem of philosophy,279 ;
his

s$. ; belief in
of the universe,

order

in

281;

existence, 283;
;

resignation

God, 285
nobility and

of

will
j

auguries,

and

dreams

282; future
ethics, 284

; love

to

purity

to

philosophy
to

his
the

man,
of his

Musonius

on,

of,

view

256

240

; Epictetus on,

thought,

254

marriage
children,

ing
for avoid-

; reasons

; views

food, 255
the

and

256;

leading

his

man

exposure

on

of

disapproval of

256
public prosecutions,

273

of

Maximxts

336,

of

animal

Marriage, Seneca's

only

the

way
fluence,
inhis
251
personal
virtue,
;
Stoicism
253 ;
gerated
exagby Musonius, 253 ; inner

freedom

life,287

be

to

asserted

248;

ethics,

doctrines, 279

the Divine

286

settled

AURELIUS,

]\/fAKCUS

Nicssa,

Platonist,

Musonius

the

Tyrian,

99,

n.

Maximns

of Tyre,

Platonist, 335,

1M

n., 337

Menecrates
school

of

Methyma,

of Antiochus,

100,

of
n.

the

forerunners

"VTEO-PLATONISM,
of, among

Nero, influence

philosophy,

the
of
236

Platonists, 344
the

time

of,

on

INDEX.

380
NES

of

Nestor

PHI

Tarsus, the

Academic,

; distinct from

54, n.
Stoic, 102,
Nicander
a

"

125

the

Bithynian, 53,
Peripatetic,307, n.

Nicolaus

the

Nestor

of Damascus,

n.

his

of

of

G-adara,

'reign

of

treatise

against

than

Posidonius,

Greek

Rhodes,

53 st{.; and Seneca, 245

Pancratius, a Cynic, 294, n.
of the
Papirius,Fabianus, member
school of the Sextii,181
of Tarsus, discipleof
Paramonus
Pansetius,53, 2
Paulus, the Prefect, a Peripatetic,
%.

12 ;

Lucian's

83 ;

of
description

after

Christ,

from

third

century
in that

A.D.

of the

structor
personal history, 75 ; inof Cicero, 76 ; practical

the

was

founder

Academy,'

of

84;

Philopator,a Stoic under

the

pupils

Hadrian,

398, n.

Philosophers banished

from

Rome,

7
"

sects

of, enumerated

by Varro,

173

Philosophy, schools
amalgamation, 1

of, tend
; Koman

to
estimates

of, 15
of revelation,allied with
20 ; schools of,are

eclecticism,
all in
Antio-

agreement, according to
elms, 91 ; general character
in Imperialtimes, 189

him,

299, 3 ; his voluntary death by

fire,
299; praisedby Gellius,300

the second

Of, 100, 'M.

n.
n.

of the

'Fourth

"

294,

clusively
ex-

taries
commen-

basis, 77 ; his revival of Platonism, 82 ; theory of knowledge,

Pontus, discipleof
Cynic,

the

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.,

on
duty, 48 ;
ethics,47 ; work
theology,49 : his allegoricalinterpretationof myths, 50; rejection
of soothsaying,58 ; relation
to the Stoics,5 1 ; contemporaries
and
disciplesof, 52 ; school of,

Panastius,53,

to

gradually merged

Stoicism, 42 ; denial of the

soul's existence
after death, 45;

141 ; about

Aristotle, 194

on

half
in

bined
com-

probable
composition, 138 ; later

PeripateticSchool
of,

its

it, 137;

of

of his

Peregrinus,

ideas

304 s$.

school in Athens, 40; learning

and
reputation, 41 ; character

of

Stoic

of the firstcenturies

the

30 ; at
JL
Rome, 9 ; friend of Scipio and
of the Stoic
Lsalius,40 ; head

Pausanias

of, 128
treatise, 132
Stoicism, 135

date

Cynic

Hadrian,

282

of

306,

author

the
with

devoted

Jugglers,'295
Origen, 336, n.
Originality,decline
philosophy, 3

"

the

first century B.C., 143

Peripatetics,the later, 112

"

Orion,

nature

in

"

295

not

; his

eclecticism,344
Nurna, the books of, 7
Numenius, 336, n.
nriNOMATJS
vJU
the
of

donius

affinity
Peripateticand

122

Nigrirms, a Platonist, 335,

the treatise,its origin,

K.6"rju.ov,
; Ohrysippus on, 127 ; Posi-

"

trust
with
political misthe first century B.C.,

regarded
in

of,

381

INDEX.
SBL

PHI

190

chairs

Hadrian,

established

of,

by
and

; theoretical

191

practical, 205

relation

of,

to

Boman

of, 210

distinguished

"v"ns

Pansetius,

47

^vx$j by

from

Piso, 55, n.
Piso, M., a disciple of Antiochus,
101, n.
of, 337
Plato, commentators
of Ehodes, 53, n.
Plato
revival

Platonism,

of

Platonists
A.D.,

by Philo,

the

82

centuries

first

his commentary

Plato,

on

Polyzelus,
Polyzehis,

Roman

Rome

at

at

295

Roman

of the first century B.C., 12

Syrian of Apamea, disciple of

relation
love

to

Stoicism,

rhetoric

of

doctrines

56 ; his

Panaatius,

59

and
sq, ;

erudition,

and

pology,
62 ; natural
science, 62 ; anthroof the soul,
64 ; doctrine
64 sg. ; ethics, 65 ; psychology,
of
author
the
not
ire pi
68 ;

of

Potamo

s$. ;

111

truth,

of

Premigenes
306,

Proclinus,

Mytilene,

Platonist, 336,

Stoic, 74,

Providence,

Cicero's

Aurelius

Marcus

tetic,
Peripa-

belief
on,

12

Ptolemy,

two

at, 10 ; Epicureanism
at,
at, 9 ; Stoicism

; Philodemus

at, in 88

; Philo
B.C., 12

tury
cen-

Platonist

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

sixth century A.D.,

in the

302, 3

Sandon, 72, n.
SciBvola, Q. Mucius, Roman
of Panaetius, 55,
Scepticism, its effect

ciple
dis-

n.

on

Greek

4 ; relation
of, to
tory
12 ; self -contradic-

according
Seneca,

to

Antiochus,

90 ;

225

of Philosophy, the, tend

approximate, 193
Scylax of Halicarnassus, friend of

Schools

that

n.

to

Pansetius, 54,
-

conception

n.

examination,

(Seneca),

Jtl of, 244

the

death

Self
Seneca's

Syro, the
first

Rubellius

of

disciple of Philo, 100,

"DBLIG-ION,

and

at, in the

eclecticism,

28, 2
a

sophy,
philo-

Panaetius

in, 168";

285

Greek

15

Greek
philosophy at, 6;
from, 7 ;
philosophers banished
Carneades
at, 9; Greek
sophy
philo-

philosophy,

n.

n.

Peripatetic,317, n.
Epicureans of

Ptolemy,

Publius,

n.

Protagoras,

name,

ticism,
eclecMs
of
criterion

Alexandria,
109

Pan^etius,

Rome,

Athens

128
K^fffJiOV,

on

11

B.C., 13

ning
begin-

of,

philosophy,

of

students

n.

the

of

estimate

Epicureans

n.

Peripatetic,

Posidonius

Cynic, 295,

effect

public

n.

at, 9

337

of, 352
character,

philosophy,
disciples of

334

Plutarch,

"

55,

of

14

Roman

369

by Galen,

Greek

schools

; numerous

appointment

teachers

estimation

high

Seneca's

352

period,
of, 352

rhetoric, 352

Physics,

an
important part of
public instruction in the Imperial

Rhetoric,

necessity

of

238

Selius, Caius, disciple of

100, n.

Philo,

INDEX.

382

STO

SEN

Serapio, a Stoic, 196

Seneca, 196, n. ; his reputation and

influence, 203 ; practicalnature
; his

ethics, 204

of 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
theologicaldoci rines, 212 ;nature
ism
of G-od,according to, 213 ; Stoicof

in, 215
world,
219

217

anthropology,

of the

ing
soul, accord-

to, 219 ; theory

affections, 221

and
human

hody,
spiritopposed,
the

of
;

221

222

nature,

for

the

his

; nature

of

theories

222

contempt
body and

his

; Seneca's
chology
psycompared with that of

Chrysippus,
225
on

"

; Stoicism
external

"

wise

the

231

man,

"

"

bids

236

238

examination,

mankind,

of

politicallife,239

; view

239, 240

of

of

selves,
our-

self-

kind,
man-

marriage,

forgiveness of

the

on

j view

241

of the

assistance

Deity

to

equality

man,

of

of

with

Senses, the,
discarded ;

chus, 89

men,

of

ries,
inju-

suicide, 243

given by
243
242

on

;
; his

religion,244

; o"

the

ception
conpared
com-

dicta not to bo
of Antiodoctrine

Cicero, 158

the

Pantetius, 245
their

authorship of the

to the Stoics, 186

head
of the school

of

Sextus

335,

2 ; relation

; succeeded

by his

son,

Chgeronea,

Platonist,

n.

Sextus, the supposed Pythagorean,

182,2

Socrates, a Peripatetic,307, n.
Sosigenes,the Peripatetic, 306,

n.

313

Sotas

240
"

his

Sentences, 182,

ship
kin; natural
of
239 ; view
; love

to

of

book

of

n.

Paphos, a Stoic, 54,

Peripatetic,805, "..

of Alexandria,
of the
school

Sotion
in

happiness

nounced
re-

food, 186 ; its

and doctrines, 183 s^. ;
character
of Stoicism, 187
was
a branch
Sextius, Q., his school, 180 ; question

235

necessity of

the, advocated

examination,

animal

Sotion,

of his time,

find

us

self

daily

Pansetius, 52
Soson of Ascalon, 53,

of, 234

influence

of

on

deviations

sq. ;
348

of

his

from
deviation
Stoicism, 231
vacillation in his character, 232

rhetoric

Platonism,

Sextii, school

; treatise

Sosigenes, the Stoic,contemporary

Cato, 230

about

opinion

on

ethics

; Peripateticism of, 229

of, 226
his

; scepticism of,
of, 226, 242

evil, 229

soul, 345

181

immortality, 223
224

eclecticism, 345

from

as

of

view

his
the

as

passions
frailty of

n.

Sereniaxms, a Cynic, 301, 3

Severus, a Platonist, 336, n. ; his
the Timceus, 339 ;
on
commentary

the

n.

member

of

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

the, an

Deity, 176

emanation
;

from

the

the, immortality of,

defended

by Cicero, 170 j is air

(Varro),176; opinions of Atticus,

342

Galen, 367

Sphodrias, a Cynic, 295,

Staseas, of
nolMs

Stoicism

n.

Naples,called

by Oicero

Peripatfftioua,
122,
at

Stoics, the

Borne, 9
later, 34

; of

the first

INDEX.

383

STO

ZEN

century
Sextius,

B.C., 71 $$. ; the, and

186 ; the, in the
first

centuries

A.D., 189 ; criticism

Cicero, 164 ; their

the, by

] 98, n, ; inclination

73,

friend

Stratocles

54,

striction
re-

of

later

Rhodes,

ethics

%.

Strato, the

Alexandrian

"07,

tetic,
Peripa-

n.

Suicide, Seneca's

view

of,243

by
Cynics, 298, 300
and
Sulpicius Gallus, astronomer

Cicero, 171

and

fended
; de-

the

his

Yespasian,

measures

1 ;
to rhetoricians, 191, 3
Roman

Platonist, 335, n.;

Theagenes, a Cynic, 294,

of Peregrinus, 301

n\

Theo

of Alexandria,
of

Theo

ciple
dis-

n.

; his

73,

Virtue,

n.

of the

174
*

tiochus, 100,
iThrasea
friend

97,

the

Academic,

88,

condition

of

happiness,.
(Seneca) ; relaof,;tophilosophy,according
a

Musonius

Rufus,

251

the

Stoics,,

World,

theories
of the
(Treatise
134
irepl
/c"fff"iou),; (Seneca),217 ;;
(Marcus Aurelius), 281 ; (Atticus), 342 ; final conflagrationof

the, 34, 35, 44

n,

ber
Thrasyllus,the grammarian, memNew
the
of
Academy,

knowledge, according

the, of
WISEand MAN,
Seneca, 231

n.

Psetus, a Stoic,
of Seneca, 291, 2

Peripatetic,,

(Varro) ; 238

tion
to

of An-

school

discipleof

96

339

Theopompus,

and

Antiochus

to

Platonist,335,
commentaries
Plato,
on

Smyrna,

307,

against
payments-

n.

Virtue

Theodotus, a Platonist, 336, n.

Theomnestus, a Cynic, 295, n.
New
demy,
Acaof the
Theomnestus,
102, 2

his

n.

Virginias Rufus,

commentaries
on
Plato, 340
Tetrilius Rogus, 100, n.

the

the

of

philosophers,190,

Pangetius, 55,

TUS,

and

his view

doctrine

Vigellms, M.,
BERY-

178

philosopher,8

CALVISIUS

eclectic

; a Roman

dition
highest good, 174; virtue a conof
happiness, 174; hispsychology and theology, 176 ;"
his opinion of image worship,.
178 ; of State religionand theology,

Stoic,

n.

philosophy, 172 ; and

of philosophers,173;

sq.

Stoic,

discipleof Antiochus,

of

sects

n.

of

disciple

n.

of

; under

of the

Roman

Pansetius, 55,

Hadrian,

to

Platonism, 42 $#., 62
Strabo
the geographer,

of

TTARRO,
V
100,

ethics, 194

to

Domitian, Trajan, and

Tubero, Q. JElius,

.A. Xenarchns,

Physics,

102,2

Cynic, 295

controverted

totle's
Aris-

124

Ximocles

of Cnidus, 54, n.
Truth, criterion of, according to
Antiochus, 88;
according to
Potamo, 111 ; Cicero, 153, 156,
161 ^ according to Galen, 363

SpQttiswoode"

F7ENOof
IJ

SIdon,27
of
Tarsus, successor
Chrysippus, 34; opinion as to
the destruction
of the world, 34
Zeno

Co. Printers, New-street

of

Square, London.

AUTHORISED

TJBJ"

OF

WORK

ZJELLJER'S

DR.

from,

Philosophy

Greek

SOCBATES,

by

O.

and

Second

O.

8vo.

Crown

8vo.

Bvo.

B.

Dr.

lated
TransScholar

thoroughly

revised.

C.

PEBIPATETICS.

ELDEB

the
F.

COSTBLLOE,

College,

Balliol

Oxford.

tXnjK"r"ptx,ra,tion,

8vo.

of

18*.

sometime

Edition,

by
and

Follow

SCEPTICS.

B.O.Xi.

Second

B.A.

Crown

and

Oxford.

Qd.

Translated

Oxford.

M.A.

10*.

of
from

enlarged

15*.

by

Translated

lated
Trans-

AI-VBKII^'O-OODWIIN-,

K.BICHCBL,

and

volume

8vo.

Scholar

sometime'

ACADEMY.

College,

J.

ABISTOTI.E
Crown

Crown

Edition^

Author.

the

and

College,

Gr^wn

of
vols.

SOPHY.
PHILO-

AL"EIYNKJ.

B.C.B.

EPICUREANS,

STOICS,

The

by

Balliol

by

***

Oxford.

AI^BYNB,

Lecturer,

M.A.

OLBEB

tlie

F.

Queen's

ALMSYNB.

SCHOOLS.

SOCBATIO

BEICHEI,,

supplied

materials

The

J.

Oollecre,

.SASUH

F.

SARAH

by

the

and

PLATO

of

Time

6d.

SOCBATES
Queen's

the

G-BEEK

in

Translated
10*.

3?.

SARAH

ECLECTICISM

of

price

Period

Earliest

by

History

a
to

80s.

8vo,

HISTOBY

Being

the

Translated

crown

GRJ"JSJKS.

SCHOOLS.

PBE-SOCRAT1C

THE

ON

TJfJS

OF

PHILOSOPHY

The

TRANSLATION

ENGLISH

above

announced
ZEiLiiBR's

London,

Work

will
on

LOJSTG-MAKS

the

English

the

complete

of

FhiloBOphy

"

CO*

tlio

lation
TransGreeks.

of