The pseudo-Hippocratic tract Peri hebdomadōn. : Ch. 1-11 and Greek philosophy

J. H A M S F E L D

THE PSEUDOHIPPOCRATIC TRACT ΠΕΡΙ ΕΒΔΟΜΑΔΩΝ CH. 1-11 AND G R E E K PHILOSOPHY ctrvy)

ASSEN, VAN GORCUM DR.

Η. J .

PRAKKE

1971 & COMP.

& Η. M. G,

Ν. V. PRAKKE

Distributed in the U.S.A. by

© 1970 by Koninklijke Van Gorcnm & Comp, N.V., Assen, The Netherlands No parts of this book may be reproduced in any form» by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without written permission from the publisher.

ISBN. 9 0 2 3 2 0 7 0 1 7

Printed

in the Netherlands

by Royal

VanGorciim Lid.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

1 wish to thank Prof. De Vogel and Prof, Kuypers for permitting this book to be published in the Series 'Wijsgerigc Teksteii en Slut lies'; Ciiratoren of the Rijksimiversiteit Utrecht for making possible this publication b y their generous grant; the staff and printers of Royal VanGorcum Ltd. for bestowing more than usual care upon the technical aspects of this production; Mrs. G. De Boer for painstakingly typing out an almost illegible manuscript; Mrs. M. Oort for correcting m y English; Prof, De Vogel, Mr, A. Hageraats and drs. R, Volkers for invaluable assistance in reading the proofs; and, last but not least, m y wife and daughter for help in many ways, and for bearing up with m y period of gestation.

CONTENTS

CH.

ι - Introduction: The Ancient Evidence and the 'Status Quaestionis' (1. The Problem - p. 1; 2. The Ancient Evidence - p. 6; 3, 'Status Quaestionis1 - p. 16; 4. Object of the Present Study - p. 30).

1

The Vocabulary of the Greek Text of Rebel. Ch. 1-5 ,

32

CH. in

The Presocratic Parallels

54

CH. iv

Later Elements in the Cosmology of Η ebd. Ch, 1 - 1 1 ; Posidonius?

bb

Various Questions: (A) Hebd. Ch. 1-11 and the Placita (B) The Seven Heavenly Stars . . . . . . . . . . (c) The Wind-Rose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

130 138 146

CH. vi

Hebd. and Arithmology; Posidonius again

156

CH. vii

Hebd. Part II (Ch. 12-52) and its Relation to Part I (Ch. 1-11) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1, - p. 205; 2. The Theory of Hot and Cold' - p. 206; 3. Indications in Favour of a Late Date for Hebd. Part. II - p. 2 1 1 ; 4. Affinity with Pneumatic Medicine - p. 213; 5. The Relation between the Two Parts of

CH.

CH.

II

v

Hebd.

205

- p. 217.

CONCLUSION

229

INDEX OF NAMES

233

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

INDEX OF PASSAGES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.

241 254

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION: [ H E A N C I E N T E V I D E N C E AND THE 'STATUS QUAESTIONIS'

1. The 'problem. The pseudo-Hippocratic treatise Sevens (περί εβδομάδων, Η ebd.) is not among the gems of ancient scientific literature. It is, however, a curious and difficult work, which presents a number of problems to the historians both of philosophy and of medicine. To the historian of philosophy, because the first section of the treatise (Ch. 1-11) is an arithmologieal dissertation demonstrating the structural unity of the universe and its parts (among which is man, i.e. the body and the soul of man), a unity which is apparent from the surmised fact that all things are dominated by the number seven. In this section, several scholars have discovered parallels to Presocratic and even Early Presocratic thought. The second part of the work (Ch. 12-53), is, on the other hand, a treatise on fevers and acute diseases in general, discussing their etiology, therapy and semiology. In this section, the parallel between the universe and all living things, including man, is also presented as a scientific theory, but the arithmologieal speculations based upon the number seven, so prominent in the first part, are absent from the second. 1 Furthermore, the strictly medical part of Η ebd. is characterized by a theory of the hot and the cold, which are considered to be principles which are sufficient to explain both the universe and the living being, and which even play the part of unifying and explaining link between the microcosm and the macrocosm which is played by the number seven in Ch. 1-11 of the treatise. Differences such as these are truly remarkable, and the almost general assumption that the arithmologieal and the medical section of Hebd. must be, if not by different hands, then at least based upon different sources and/or be the respective outcome of separate traditions is in itself quite 1 With only Ch. 26-27, whicl\ treat the critical d a y s and periods of diseases, as a possible exception, for here the number 7 plays an important part. However, also the numbers 5, 9 and 11 are mentioned.

1

justified. It seems to be universally agreed that the medical section (Ch. 12-53) is in no way different from the great majority of the tracts which have been collected in the Corpus Ilippocmticum, and hence should be dated, say, somewhere between 430-370 B.C. Now, though there appears to be also a consensus about the time of incorporation of Ch. 1-11 into the treatise, which would have occurred at the time of composition of part II of Η ebd., there is no agreement on the nature of the sources of part I. fs this odd dissertation a revision of a very old treatise by an unknown natural philosopher, otherwise lost? Or is it a compilation made from various archaic sources? Or an imitation of the eclectic work of a late Presocratic thinker? These questions have been answered m various ways, but no wholly satisfactory solution has as yet been reached. It has also been argued that the disparity between the two parts of the treatise is only an apparent one; that the theory of 'hot' and 'cold' of part II is also valid for part I of Η ebd.; and that, consequently, the arithmologieal introduction was composed as an imitation of philosophical systems of contemporaries of the author of the medical section, systems which are either eclectic or betray the influence of a well-established tradition of natural philosophy. To these various points of view 1 shall return below, where they will be stated in greater detail. 2 From this survey of the status quaestionis it will become apparent that the first section of Hebd. (Ch. 1-11) lias received far more attention than the medical part of the treatise. This is only natural: we really know so little about the Presocraties, that prospects of adding a few precious pieces to our shattered and partly destroyed mosaic are quite alluring. The medical p a i l , on the other hand, has been little studied. Once it had been safely put away in the great store-house of Hippocratic medicine, it was almost forgotten. We have to go back relatively far in time if we want to pick up the threads of scholarly discussion. This neglect is to be excused, however, and not only on the grounds of the understandably greater fascination excercized by part 1, but also because of the almost intractable state of transmission in which it has reached us, Hebd. is completely extant onlv in two early mediaeval Latin translations, which are quite literal but also often quite corrupt or

2

p. 16 ff.

2

confused. 3 T h e Greek t e x t h a s b e e n lost e x c e p t for a n u m b e r of f r a g m e n t s . A P a r i s i a n m a n u s c r i p t , in w h i c h t h e b e g i n n i n g of Ch. 1 i s m i s s ing, g o e s a s f a r a s t h e m i d d l e of Ch. 5 1 ; b u t t h i s m e a n s t h a t in a n y c a s e a Greek v e r s i o n of t h e c o s m o l o g y of Ch. 1 - 2 h a s b e e n p r e s e r v e d , a piece of luck w h i c h a f f o r d e d a m p l e o p p o r t u n i t y for solid s c h o l a r l y c o m m e n t . 1 luvvever, tills t e x t is d u b i o u s in m a n y p l a c e s o w i n g to its d i s f i g u r e m e n t b y numerous corruptelae a n d to t h e poor c o n d i t i o n of t h e m a n u s c r i p t . T h e r e m a i n d e r ol the Greek t e x t of Ch. 5 h a s b e e n p r e s e r v e d in Philo's Op. mmid. (which q u o t a t i o n , b y t h e way, c o n s t i t u t e s o u r t . a . q . ) a n d other arilhmological w r i t i n g s . 5 So, on t h e whole, w e a r e n o t b a d off in respect to the Greek t e x t of Hehd. p a r t I - a l m o s t 5 of t h e 11 c h a p t e r s h a v e been (more or less) preserved in t h e o r i g i n a l i d i o m . T h e c o n d i t i o n of part i l is far worse. A l t h o u g h Greek f r a g m e n t s of p a r t I I h a v e s u r v i v e d (some h a v e been q u o t e d in ps. G a l e n π . αιτίας π α θ ώ ν , 6 o t h e r s an 4 to be f o u n d embedded in v a r i o u s w o r k s of t h e H i p p o c r a t i c Col-

Λ (Ambrosia mis C 108» discovered by Dareinberg, ed. princefs in K. Lit Ire's Oeuvres completes d'liip ρ aerate Vol. IX,433 ff.) and Ρ (Parisians hit. 7027, discovered by Li tin.', ed. prince pa ibd. Vol. VII 1,634 ff.). These manuscripts are described by J. Oberg» Die medizinische Schrift "Über die Siehenzahr und die Schule von Knidos, in: Griechische Studien IL Lips ins dargebracht, Leipzig 1894, 2 5 ff. CL also IL Diefs, Die Handschriften der antiken Arzte, I. Teil, Hippokrates bis Galenas, Abh. Lreuss. Ak., Pliil.-Ilist. Abt. III, 1905, p, 32 and ibd., II. Teil, p, 27. The Latin idiom of the translations is discussed by K. .Mr ass, Sprachliche und textkritische Bemerkungen zur spätlateinischen Übersetzung der Ilippokratischen Sehr iß von der Siebenzahl, W.St. 41 (1919), 61 ff., who explains and defends so;n-% manuscript readings wliidi had been emended by earlier editors. 1 Discovered by Li tire and printed for the first tunc Vol. IX,43 3 if. Smaller ffa^iiieiilrs of thv b not struck out, as it ruiikl still siave (his same purpose (though also Morb. 1 1, Ch. ON, is on καυσώο/,; πυρετός). 52 Ch. 23,117 ft. KV V'iuie ergo el quale wis f ehr es vascuutuy di ximus; Oh. 39, ·> ff. R. curare aulem sie oportet umnes fehres. Ci. ilberg, 1 <S(M, 2b, 2S. 53 Cf, below, Oh. VII, p. 213 ff. 54 So Bourgey, o.e. 09. (Ί*. also ike s c e p t i c i s m of L. J h b Lleiu, o.e. 163, μ J , which is based upon a discussion of Cnidian medic ine in geneiaf (ibd. 151 ff.) His conclusions differ from those of ilberg (cf. also Bourgey, o.r, 52, n. 1) For

14

superficial. If Η ebd. Ch. 53 is genuine and if this work once really had a sequel in which the individual acute diseases (which are subsumed under the heading 'fevers' in Ch. 24 and 2755) were treated, this must be considered to be lost. 1 wish to add a few words on the copy used by the anonymous commentator translated into Arabic,0(5 winch stops midway Ch, 17, though including Ch. 18-20,57 and which, as we shall see, because of this affords grounds for a reconstruction of the original order of Η ebd. Ch. 14-20. The therapeutical and semiological sections of Η ebd. part II were not contained in this text. Now the announcement at Hebd. Ch. 12,23 ff. iftsas j ehr es el alias c annus et quidem acut as egriludines υnines quomodo fiant doe et (sc. naturalis ratio) et facias quomodo oportet cohiberi ant non fieri et •nascentes quomodo debeanl curari recle puts the emphasis on therapy and etiologyJM Though it is true that also in the etiological section therapeutical ideas occur front time to time, 59 the real discussion of therapy (which agrees fully with the etiological ideas of the preceding chapters) only starts at Ch. 24; and so, we must assume that the announcement in Ch. 12 refers to Ch. 24 ff. The announcement as in Ch. 12,23 ff.R. is not translated in a ps. Galenian λήμμα, but a sentence in the commentary to Nr. 60 Bergstr. exactly corresponds to it, 00 which shows that it stood in the text used by the anonymous commentator. This indicates, I think, that the copy of ps. Galen represents a truncated edition, which, nevertheless, has preserved the original order of Hebd. Ch. 14-20, or at least sufficient indications upon which to base a reconstruction of this original arrangement. F. Lommer 61 by following the lead of ps. Galen112 was able to show that Louie's proposal concerning tracts which should be a·-; aimed to be Cniclian et. below, CI ι. VII, p. 220-L n. 90. 55 This throws suspicion < >n Oh. S3 as a wh« Ls 56 Cf. above, p. 4-5 and n. 9. 57 Cf. above, p. 4-5 n. 10. 58 Lor II berg's incorrect interpretation of this passage cf. below, Ch, V11, p. 225, iL 122. 5y Ch. 19,44 ff., 60 if.; 20,13 ff., 19 U.K. 60 p. 125,39 υ d~e Bergstr.: 'sie 1 (i.e. 'die Kenntnis der Definition der Natur jedes Dinges') "unterrichtet uns nämlich fiber die Modalität des Entstehens der brennenden Fieber und aller übrigen Krankheiten und lehrt uns auch, wie die Behandln!!^ der KnmklieibMi ihrem Wesen noch sein muss" 61 Zur J\Hif»r;itiu(i (Li hlppuknüisüicH /// i f i π. ί [jjSo ιΐάό ων, PhtL ο I (19-11), 79

ff.

β-

Cf. above, p. 4-5 η. 10.

15

the copy used by the Latin translator suffered from a "BlattVersetzung der Form a c b d': following upon page a, containing the opening words of Ch. 14 R. (which are not in the preserved Greek text of this chapter) at its bottom, it did not have a page b containing the end of Ch. 17 R (17,48 R. alicuim kmc ff.) + Ch. 18 R. + Ch. 19 R. + Ch. 20,1-33 R. (minus the concluding words Mo mundo est) upon which page d, containing Ch. 20,33 R. tot ο mundo est Ch. 21 ff. followed, but page b, containing Ch. 14,4 alias ff. R. · Ch. 15 R. +· Ch. 16 R. ~f Ch. 17 R. (minus the end). The hypothesis of the misplacing of one single page both solves the problem of the interpretation of the text which at its wrong junctures is completely unintelligible in Roscher's edition and restores an arrangement which exactly corresponds to the order of ps. Galen. On the basis of this reconstruction, Lommer proposes a new division into chapters. 63 The order of subjects in the improved text is, as Lommer says, a much more rational one, and also makes for a rational connection with both what precedes 04 and what follows: Ch. 13 R.-XIV Lo. the four elemental qualities + bile and phlegm; Ch. XV-XVII Lo. pathology based upon Ch. 13 R.XIV Lo.; Ch. XVIII Lo. the qualities and the earth; Ch. XIX^XX Lo. + Ch. 21-22 R. the qualities in. relation to the seasons and their effects upon animals and plants, and finally Ch. 23 R., the qualities and the seasons and their effects upon the physical condition of man.

3. Status quaestionis. We have already acknowledged the fact that the interpretation of Hebd. part II (Ch. 13-53) is an important element in establishing a t.a.q. for the composition of the treatise as a whole, or at least has been assumed to be so by earlier scholars. The first 65 serious attempt to date the work was that of J. Ilberg (1894): because he assumed that he had established the C nidi an character of the medical section, lie suggested that Hebd. had boon composed in the time of the

XIV Lo. - 14,1-4(R.) + 17,48 - the end(R.) + 1 « ( R . ) ; XV Lo. = 19(R.); XVI Lo. + 20,1-28 factae (R.); XVII Lo. = 20,28 Initium - 33 et in (R.) + 14,4 alias ventris - the end (R.); XVIII Lo. 15(R.); XIX Lo. = 16(R.);

63

X X Lo. = 17,1 -48 quae in + 20,23 tot υ mundo est ( R . ) . See L o m m e r , o.e. 84-5.

Lommer, o.e. 85 inclades Ch. 1 -11 ('einleitende Kapitel über das Grundprinzip der Siebenzahl im Makrokosmos und Mikrokosmos'), but this does not abolish the problem of the connection between the two parts of the treatise. 65 Littre 1,407 held that Hebd. is 'beaucoup posterieur a Hippocrate'. 64

16

Peloponnesian w a r . 0 6 F o r , a s h e s a i d , t h e 'in v i e l e n P u n k t e n d e r P h a n t a s i e eines Aristophanes würdigen Offenbarungen'67 he app a r e n t l y m a d e no e x c e p t i o n . H o w e v e r , w h e n Roscher's p i o n e e r i n g s t u d i e s on. Hebd. p a r t I h a d b e e n p u b l i s h e d , h e g r a n t e d t h a t Hebd. i s a 'der Einheitlichkeit ermangelnder Traktat".68 the c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of" Hebd. of W . H. R o s c h e r is of f u n d a m e n t a l i m p o r t a n c e . 6 9 H e w a s t h e f i r s t s c h o l a r to h a v e p o i n t e d o u t the unique c h a r a c t e r of Ch. 1-11. a n d i t s a p p a r e n t l a c k of c o n n e c t i o n with the t r e a t i s e on f e v e r s w h i c h follows. T h e f i r s t p a r t of Hebd. is concerned w i t h t h e n u m b e r s e v e n i n b o t h m a c r o c o s m a n d microcosm, while the medical work is based upon an entirely different theory, viz. that of t h e "hot* and the 'cold'. 70 Consequently, Roscher 1894, 39. 'JIiis was accepted by C. hredrich, / l i p p o k r a i i s c h e Untersuchungen, Berlin 1899» 226 ff., who also pointed ont a number of what he termed 'extraordinary resemblances' between Hebd, and VicL, ibd. 134-5, 226, As such he mentions the theory of hot and cold (but that in Hebd. is significantly different from that in Vict., cf. below, Ch. IV, p. 79 n. 71) and the microcosm-macrocos m-pa rail el, cf. below, p. 22 n. 102. 11 berg's views on Hebd. part II were also accepted by Roscher (191 J, 108), cf. below. 67 o.e. 27. The name of Aristophanes serves as a chronological pointer and also shows that 11 berg deemed pari 1 unworthy of serious consideration. 68 1925, 6. 69 Roscher began to study the treatise in connection with Ms works on Greek number-speculation, of which 1 mention * Die enneadischen und hebdomadischeη Fristen und Wochen der ältesten Griechen, Abh. Sachs. Ges. Wiss., Phil.-hist. KL 21 (1903),4; Die Sieben- und Neunzahl im Kultus und Mythus der Griechen, ibd. 24 (1904 ; Die Iiebdomadenlehren der griechischen Philosophen and Ärzte, ibd. 24 (19()()),(> (p. 44-53 of this work is on Hebd.). Of his special studies on Hebd. two have already been mentioned (above, p. 5 i i . i l ) . He further wrote Die neuentdeckte Schrift eines milesischen Nalurphilo sop hen und ihre Beurteilung durch Η. Diets, Meimion 5 (1912), Η. 3-4 (also as 'Sonderdruck 1 , Berlin 1912); Das Alter der Weltkarte in 'Tlippohrates' π. ε β δ ο μ ά δ ω ν und die Reichskarte des Darius II y st as pes, Phil. 70 (1912), 529 ff., and Die hippokratische Schrift von der Siebenzahl und ihr Verhältnis zum Altpyihagoreismus, Ber. Verh. Sachs. Ak., Phil.-hist. Kl., 71 (1.919), 5. 70 Cf. especially his note to Ch. 12 (191 3), p. 16 n. 3): "Dabei ist in hohem Masse beachtenswert, dass nun mehr (wenn man von der Lehre von den kritischen. Tagen Kap. 26-27 absieht) die originelle Hebdomadenlehre der vorausgehenden Kosmologie völlig ignoriert wird. Vielmehr tritt an ihre Stelle die d u a l i s t i s c h e Lehre vom Gegensatze der Wärme und Kälte. Daneben, kommen auch Triadenund l'etradenlehren vor: s. Kap. 15 und 16. Zugleich redet der Verfasser nunmehr wiederholt von seiner persönlicher Ansicht ('ego ipse' etc.), im Gegensatz zu Kap. I-XI. Das beweist zu Genüge, dass der Kosmologe mit dem Pathologe nicht identisch ist." Further ibd, p. 18, n. 6 (on Ch. 13): "Auch in den folgenden 60

17

assumed that the two parts of Hebd. thus distinguished are b y different hands. 7 1 He accepted Ilberg's date for part II, 7 2 and concentrated upon part 1, thereby setting an example which was to be followed by the great m a j o r i t y of scholars. According to Roscher, Ch. 1-11 are 'das bei weitem umfassendste Bruckstück der ältesten ionisclieu Philosophie' 73 ; it could have been written b y a younger contemporary of Anaximenes. In all essentials, lie stuck to this theory till the end of his life, though he conceded later t h a t the physician who wrote Hebd. had copied 'ziemlich wörtlich' the much older work of a Ionian philosopher. 74 In favour of this evaluation of Ch. 1-11 he put forth several arguments concerning the contents of this part of the treatise, l i e argued that the cosniulogical theory of Ch. 1-2, with its unmoved earth at the centre of a system of heavenly spheres, is no other than that of Anaximander, 75 with admixtures from the work!-picture of Anaximenes (correct order of moon - sun - stars, earth supported by air) and other early philosopheis. 76 He further argued t h a t the author of Hebd. part I does not distinguish between planets and fixed stars 7 7 which, also in this respect, agrees with the cosmology of the early lonians. These observations were quite stimulating : although few scholars at present would be prepared to defend Kapiteln liegt überall der d u a l i s t i s c h e Gegensatz der W ä r m e und K ä l t e (θερμον-calidum und ψυχρόν-frigid um) zugrunde'. However, to the hot and the cold (which are certain I ν primary) the wet and the dry should be added (cf. above p. 13; p. 15-16, Lommer's reconstruction; and below, Ch. VII, p. 213 ff.) 71 1911, 108. 72 Cf. above, p. 17 n. 66. 73 1906, 53. 74 1911, 14; cf. 1913, 127 'Bearbeiter zwischen 450-400'. 75 1906» 52; 1911, 54 ff. The study of 1919 sets out to prove the independence of Hcbd. from lYthagoreanism (which Roscher had also upheld in his earlier studies), and does so in great detail. 70 Especially in his earlier publications, Roscher resolutely brushed aside analogies to later Fresocratic thought and refused to consider their implications for the date of Hebd. Whenever this question of priority arose, his solution was to make the follower of the earlier lonians an original philosopher in his own right, who tu a surprising extent anticipated later thinkers. E.g. Hebd. 1,52 R. attributes "reflected light* to the stars. The earliest-known thinker who held such a theory is 1 )emocritus' 'pupil' Metrodonis of Chios (FS 70 A9; see also below, p. 27 n. 129). Roscher comments, 1911, 61: 'er steht also in dieser Beziehung auf dem selben Standpunkt wie später (sie) Metrodor'. 77 1911, 67 (but ibd. 60 he writes that Anaximander already made this distinction, which is of course wrong).

18

a date as early as that of Roscher or to brush aside the points of resemblance between Hebd. a n d the ideas of younger Fresocratics which can be pointed out, 7 8 there appears to be universal agreement that the first part of the treatise indeed reflects Presocratic thought. 7 9 Roscheids other argument for a va ry early date was concerned with the quaint anthropomorphical map of the world of Ch. 11, which features the Peloponnesus, the Isthmus, Ionia, the Hellespont, both the Thracian arid the Cimmerian Bosporus, Egypt and the Egyptian Sea, and the Black Sea with the Sea of Azov. Roscher pointed out that this 'world' is that of the early Ionian sailor. 8 0 Indeed, the extreme old age of this m a p gradually became Roscheids principal argument 8 1 for attributing a very early date to the whole of Ch. 1-11, and became so in spite of his later admission that the old Ionian work had been copied 'more or less verbatim' during tin; second half of the fifth Cent. B.C. 82 Roscher's book of 1911 w a s severely criticized in a review b y 11. Diels. 83 Diels argued that the m a p is not at all archaic 8 4 and that the treatise as a whole (i.e. inclusive of Ch. 1-11) is the eclectic and deliberate!y archaized product of a writer whose mind was but a poor

Kranz, however, to some extent emulated Koscher in this respect (see below, Ch. 1ΙΓ, p. 56 ff.). 79 The Presocratic parallels adduced by Roscher should be used with caution, because he is often inaccurate in detail and wrong in interpretation. Later scholars have corrected him on a number of points. E.g. 1911» 7! and 1919» 72 ff. he assumed (1) that the earth in 11 ebd. is spherical, (2) that this theory is very early, and (3) that the author of Hebd. was the first Greek philosopher to argue from the sphericity of the universe to that of the earth. (1) is not the only possible interpretation, (2) is wrong and (3) is an example of petitio principii. m 1906, 51; 191.1, 10 ff.; 1913, 118; 1919, 1 ff. He defends the age of the map against Diels1 criticism in his article in Mem no η, 23 ff. and 4L 81 1919» 85. He is followed by W, H. S. Jones, Philosophy and Medicine in Ancient Greece, Supplem. Bull. Hist. Med. 8, Baltimore 1946, 9 ff., and C. J. De Vogel, Pythagoras and Early Pythagoreanism, Wijsgerige Teksten en Studies 12, Assen 1966, 171. 82 We shall see (cf. below, p. 20-1 and p. 20 n. 88) that the map is hardly as old as Roscher assumed it to be, and is therefore devoid of eriterial value. 83 Die. vermeintliche Entdeckung einer Incu nabel der griechischen Philosophie, I >LZ. 1911, 1861-6. He was followed by Th. Gomperz, Griechische Denker I» Berlin-Leipzig 4 1922, 470-1. m Diels' arguments against this particular pillar of Roscher's structure are not convincing; see the reply by Roscher, referred to above, n. 80 and C. J. De Vogel, Pythagoras 171. 78

19

t h i n g . H e p r o p o s e d a d a t e b e t w e e n 4 5 0 - 3 5 0 B . C . 8 5 A l t h o u g h Roscher v i g o r o u s l y d e f e n d e d h i s position a g a i n s t Diels, his l a t e r concession t h a t the f i r s t p a r t of Hebd. w a s c o p i e d r o u n d - a b o u t 4 0 0 B . C . f r o m a n o l d e r s o u r c e is q u i t e close to Diels' p o s i t i o n 8 6 ; t h e o n l y d i f f e r e n c e b e i n g t h a t D i e l s t h o u g h t of a p l u r a l i t y of sources, w h i l e R o s c h e r b e l i e v e d in a s i n g l e source. F . Boll 8 7 in all e s s e n t i a l s s i d e d w i t h D i e l s : Hebd, is a n eclectic compilation» but composed, h e t h o u g h t , a b o u t 4 5 0 B . C . F o r t h e map of Ch. 11 h e a d d u c e s a r a t h e r l a t e p a r a l l e l in a H e r m e t i c t r e a t i s e , 8 8 t h u s Diels e.g. argued that the sphericity of the earth as assumed by Koscher (cf. above, p. 10 n. 79) made a much later date than Reseller's me citable. See, however, below p. 30 n. 148. 86 Cf. IIberg's judgment, 1024» 5 ff, Ilberg accepted Diels* arguments and pronounced the question of the date of Hebd. to be a res judicata. See also K. Deichgräber, Hippokraies über Entstehung, 45. 87 J He Lebensalier, first published Neue Jahrb. X X X I , 1913, 89 ff., reprinted in the Kleine Schriften zur Sternkunde des Altertums, Leipzig 1950, 156 ff. (the Anhang zur Schrift π. έ β δ ο μ ά δ ω ν ibd. p. 213-24). 88 Κόρη κόσμου, ap. Stobaeurn .1,49,45 (p. 411,3 ff. Wachsmuth) — Hermes Triswcgiste, IV, Fragments de Stobee, Ed. Bude (1955), Fr. X X I V , I L Κ. Reinhardt, Poseidonios, München 1921» who discusses this passage of the Herrn. at p. 382-3, remarks (p. 380): "Ohne das geographisch-kosmische System des Poseidonios, ohne seine Klimatologie und Rassenpsychologie wäre ί wohl dies Kapitel kaum geschrieben worden". A.-J. Fes tu giere, La Revelation d'Hermes Trismegiste, 1, L'astrologie et les sciences oceultes, Paris 21950, 93 treats the map of the Κόρη κόσμου-fragment in connection with other microcosm-macrocosmconceptions contemporaneous with this treatise: this whole section (ibd. p. 88 ff.) should be read. - It should be pointed out that the reference to the Spartans (Ch. 11,3 ff.R. Peloponnesum magnanmi animarurn habitationem) is just as possible in Hellenistic times, the idealization of Sparta being (also) a Hellenistic phenomenon, cf. e.g. C. Schneider, Kulturgeschichte des Hellenismus I» München 1967, 77, 239, The reference to Ionia (Ch. 11,8-9 R. inter viscera et praecordia Ionia) is perhaps not as significant as it has been made out to be, for the equation Ionia ~ φρένες ^ intelligence is not explicit. At Ch. 6, § 1,31 ff.R. it is the moon which is connected with sensus... indicium; note that in Ch. 6 the moon is fourth in the order of spheres ~ parts of the body, while in Ch. 11 Ionia comes third (but the comparisons of Ch. 6 and Ch. 11 do not exactly fit, cf. below, Ch. VI, p. 252 and n. 219). Too much has been made of the comments of ps. Galen, Nr. 55, p. 117 Bergstr., who interprets ps. Hippocrates as praising the ionians for the following reason: "die... Bewohner dieser Gegend sind stark, verständig, einsichtig und weise 1 . However, ps. Galen also discourses on the character of the inhabitants of the Cimmerian Bosporus and of those of 'die Insel (sic), die λίακντις genannt wird' (the latter are said to be cowardly etc.). Consequently, his pronouncement on the inhabitants of Ionia is also an interpretative addition. 85

abolishing Roscher's argument based upon its character. He further argued (contra Roscher) that Ch. 2,64 ff.R. clearly distinguishes between the (seven) planets and the fixed stars. This is a very problematical question, to which we shall return below, 89 but Boll's hypothetical interpretation which is (in part) based upon a few attractive emendations 90 is certainly very plausible. K. Mrass91 tried to reconstruct the very poorly transmitted text of Hebd. Ch. J ('on winds'). On the basis of this reconstruction he pointed out stylistic influences of Gorgias, and so arrived at a date around 400 B.C. These "gorgianische Spielereien', however, are for the most part due to the emendations. Boll's pupil Pfeiffer 02 tried to reinforce his teacher's conclusions by arguing that in Η ebd. one finds influences of Pythagoras and his school. These arguments are not entirety convincing. Pfeiffer accepts Boll's (in. itself uncertain) thesis that Ii ebd. speaks of the 7 planets, and follows this up by ascribing this astronomical discovery to the early Pythagoreans. 9 3 He wrongly assumes that the Pythagorean theory of a breathing universe is presupposed in the chapter 'on winds'. 94 The theory of reflected light in general, he thinks, is also a Pythagorean invention,95 etc. He is, of course, right in insisting upon the affinity between the arithmology in Hebd. and that of the Pythagoreans. 96 Furthermore, Pfeiffer 97 corrected Roscher on one supremely important point. Roscher had divided Hebd. Ch. 6 into two parts, of which only the first would contain a microcosm-macrocosm-parallel. Pfeiffer pointed out that this parallel is continued in Ch. 6, § 2. Another pupil of Boll, A. Goetze, in a very interesting article 98 Ch. V B, p. 138 ff. Which Roscher hastened to adopt, 1913, Anhang II b, 154 ff. Cf. also 1919, 64 ff. 91 In the article mentioned above (p. 3 n. 3), p. 70 ff. 92 E. Pfeiffer, Studien zum antiken Sternglauben, Στοιχεία 2, Leipzig 1916 (repr. Amsterdam 1967), 30 ff. He was criticized by Roscher, 1919, 84 ff. 93 O.e. 35. For the introduction of the 7 planets in Greek astronomical science see below, p. 29-30 n. 148. 94 O.e. 33, n. 1. 95 Ox. 34. 96 O.cx 37 (see further below, Ch. I l l , p. 65). 97 O.e. 36-7. 89

90

08

Persische

Weisheit

in griechischem

Gewände,

S t . 1 in l o t 1 r a t i . 2 (1 9 2 3 ) , 6 0 ff.

Cf. also R. Reitzenstein-H. Schaeder, Studien zum antiken Synkretismus, Bibh Warburg 7, 1926 (repr. Darmstadt 1965), 9 ff., 121 ff. "

21

Stud.

p r o p o s e d a d a t e a r o u n d 4 8 0 B . C . H e c o m p a r e d t h e uncrocosm» m a c r o c o s m - t h e o r y of Hebd. Ch. 6, § J w i t h t h a t i n Ch. 2 8 of a P e r s i a n w o r k , t h e Greater BundahisnNow t h e d o c t r i n e of t h e Greater Biindahisn is, a c c o r d i n g to Goetze, c l e a r a n d e x p l i c i t , w h i l e t h a t of Hebd. is c o n f u s e d ; t h e P e r s i a n version t h e r e f o r e h a s to b e t h e e a r l i e r one. H o w e v e r , t h e p r e m i s s e s of t h i s a r g u m e n t a r e i n c o r r e c t . Goetze b a s e d his c o m p a r i s o n u p o n § 1 of Ch. 6 o n l y , 1 0 0 w h i l e t h e m i c r o c o s m - m a c r o c o s m t h e o r y b e c o m e s quite c l e a r a n d c o n s i s t e n t w h e n w e take t h e whole tit Ch. 6 i n t o a c c o u n t . 1 0 1 Goetze also w r o n g l y a s s u m e d t h a t t h e t h e o r y of Hebd. Ch. 6, § 1 h a s no p a r a l l e l s i n e a r l y Greek t h o u g h t , 1 0 2 w h i c h , if

99 The Greater (i.e. Iranian) Buiulahtsn has been t ransmittrd to us in the form it had attained in the ninth Cent. A.D. Paris of this werk (among which tlie cosmology of Ch. 28) go back to a lost Λ ν es tan treatise, the Daimtct-Xask, as we learn from the description of the contents of this and other Jost Λ vest an tracts in book VIII and IX of the Denkart (cf. G. Widengren, iranische Geisteswelt, Baden-Baden 1961, p. 12, p. 49), which itself is from the tenth Cent., of. J. P. de Μ en a see O.P., I hie iincvclopcdie Μa ζ deem w he Dpnkavt, Paris 1958, p. 4» p. 10. The microcosm-macrocosm-theory of the Greater J hind α insu therefore could be old. Unfortunately» the Λ ν es tan corpus is composed of works which range in time from the Gathas of Xarathustra (probably sixth Cent, B.C.) to additions worked in in the time of Shahpuhr 1 (r. 241-272; cf. below, p. 23» η. 104) and later, cf. j , Duchesne-Guillemin, Persische Weisheit in Griechischem Gewände?, Harvard Theo!. Rev. 49 (195(>, p. 115-122), 115. Goetze o.e. assumed that Persian influences in Ilehd, were not improbable, given the Cnidian character of the medical section and the relation between the Cnidian school of medicine and Persia. For this connection he refers to Democcdes (but is Democedes a 'Cnidian' in this sense? his father came from Criidos. Cf M. Michler, Das Problem der west griechischen Heilkunde» Sudh. Arch. 4(>, (1962, 137 ff.), es p. 141 and 147). - However, Greek influences upon Persian literature are well-attested, cf. below-, p. 23, n. 104 and P. E. Peters, Aristotle and the Arabs, Ν. V.-London J 968, 41 ff. 100 Goetze ignored Pfeiffer's objection and stuck to Reseller's subdivision of Ch. 6. Boll too, Aus der Offenbarung Johannes, Στοιχεία I, Leipzig/Berlin 1911, 60 ff. only studied Ch. (>,§!. 301 As was proved by Kranz, Kosmos und Mensch (see below, ρ, 25, η. 113), p. 165 ff., who apparently did not realize that this argued against Goetze \s assumption of the priority of the Persian model. See Dudiesiie-Giiilleinin, o.e. 117 ff. 102 He called if 'ein erratischer Block in Hellas', o.e. 79. But C. Predrich, Hipp. Unt. 227 and Th. Gomperz, Griechische Denker 1,243, had already referred to the microcosm-macrocosm-theory of Vict., as did W. Theiler, Zur (beschichte der teleologischen Ν aturbeirach tu ng bis auf Aristoteles, Zürich/Leipzig 1 925 (Berlin 2 1965), 55 ff., who says the coincidences are 'hardly accidental'. Cf. further below, Ch. IV, p. 104 ff. and p. 105, n. 195.

22

true, would be another argument for assuming that a cultural borrowing has occurred. But there are Greek parallels. The differences between the theories of Hebd. and Bund. are, moreover, very important, while the actual correspondences are trivial and indeed obvious. 103 Whatever the relation between Hebd. and Bund, may be»104 the analogy between them by no means allows us to draw conclusions regarding the date of the Greek work. As yet no Iranian chronology exists 105 ; Goetze ίο» \v. J. W. Köster, Lc mythe de Piaton, de Zarathnsiva. el 'des C ha Idee us, Leiden 1951, p. 29 ff. n.4, pointed out that "ies identifications se suiveot clans un ordre tout different; one senile identification e s t . . . la ineme (via η de ^ trrre); ,.. pour t o>is a 111 res l'.no n d esl global,.. dan··. lc«·; aiitivs ideutifu at inns il y a cies divergences considerables". The most important difference is that in Hebd. the structure of the tinman body is equated with that of the universe, which is built according to typically Greek eosmological principles; Tien de tout ce systeme grandiose ne se retrouve en Iran' (Diichesne-Giiillemin, o.e. 119). 104 Cf. the translation of a passage of the fourth book of the Denkart in R. C. Zaehncr, Zur ν an, A Zoroastrian Dilemma» Oxford 1955» 8, from which 1 quote: "The King of Kings, Shahpnhr... further collected those writings from the Religion which were dispersed throughout India, the Roman Empire and other lands, which treated of niedecine, astronomy, movement , time, space, substance, creation, becoming, passing away, change in quality, growth (?)» and other processes and organs. These he added to the A vesta and commanded that a fair copy of all of them be deposited in the Royal Treasury" (the text is also translated by Widengren, o.e. 311); see H. W. Bailey, Zoroastrian Problems in the Ninth Century Books» Oxford 1943, 81 ff., 87 ff.; Zaehner, o.e. 10 and 33, who both comment upon the Aristotelian terminology of this passage; and Peters, o.e. 4h. Another passage in the same book of the Denkart identifies some of these works: among them was the Μεγίστη of Ptolemy, cf. Bailey, o.e. 86» Zaehner, o.e. 139 ff. and De Menasce, o.e. 27. The foreign works were not literally 'added', but excerpted and adaptated. See further Bailey o.e. p. 80 ff. on the literary contacts between Persian and Oraeeo- Roman culture (p. 80: medicine in general; p. 87; Persian terms corresponding to the Crc^k terms for macrocosm and microcosm; p. 104: the theory of the four humours in ZalspranTs chapter 'On the constitution of man'). - The evidence of the Denkart is confirmed in an Arabic source, Ibn al-Nadim, Fihrisf 241-3, translated by P. Rosenthal, Das Fortlehen der Antike im Islam, BibJ. d. Morgenlandes» Zürich-Stuttgart 1965, p. 68 ff. ('Wie die Araber mit dem griechischen Erbe bekannt wurden'). The rather confused story in the Fihrisi treats in its first part of the role of Persia as a connecting link between classical antiquity and the Arab world; a Persian king, Sabur, is mentioned a number of times, while this part of the account concludes with: "In alter Zeit hatten die Perser einige Werke über Logik und Medizin (my italics) ins Persische übersetzt, und diese sind dann weiterhin von Abdalla b. al-Muqaffa und anderen ins Arabische übersetzt worden". 105 Duchesne-Cuillemin, o.e. 115.

23

himself used the parallels with and the assumed priority to Hebd. in order to fix a date for the Avestan prototype of Bund. Ch. 28, and we cannot reverse this argument. 106 We shall see, however, that this was exactly what Kranz did, but before we turn to Kranz/ interpretation another attempt at dating Hebd. ought to be mentioned. M. Wellmann 107 proposed to date Hebd. between 370-355 B.C. His arguments for doing so, however, are incorrect. Against Roscher he defended the early and Pythagorean character of the cosmology by referring to that of the Pythagorean Η ypomnemata of Alexander Polyhistor ap. Diog. Laert. VIII,25 ff. Wellmann dated this work in the fourth Cent. B.C., 108 but was definitively refuted by Α.-J. Pestugiere, who proved that the Hyp, are, a Hellenistic composition.10ίϊ Iiis second argument is based upon the wind-rose of Ch. 3. He argues that the Hebdomaclist lived in Cyrcne, for Cyrenc was also the native town of Eratosthenes, whose wind-rose, he says, is the same as that of Hebd. The names peculiar to the wind-rose of Hebd, (Ν. άρκτος, Ν.-Ε. βορέης) are explained by him as local Cyrenaean wind-names. In attributing a rose of 8 petals to Eratosthenes Wellmann followed Kaibel, whose theory about the history of the wind-rose had become completely irrelevant by 1933. 110 Nothing is known about άρκτος (which will be corrupt 111 ) or βορέοος as local Cyrenaean windnames. If the rose of Hebd. was a local Cyrenaean one, one would expect it to feature some of the Cyrenaean wind-names which we happen to know. 112 It does not. As was observed by Köster, o.e. 29, n.3. Die pseudohippokratische Schrift Περί έ[Η£ομάδων, One!!, υ. Staid, ζ. Gesch. d. Natur wiss. u. d. Medizin, 4 (1933), 0-i 0. 108 Eine pythagoreische Urkunde des IV. J ahrhuudcrls v. Chr., Hermes 54 (1919), 225 ff, Wellmann (1933) also quotes oiher I "ythagorean sources, but here either his references do not bear him out, or coneern a theory which is not exclusively Pythagorean (the 7 planets), or (loosely) apply to the medical section of II ebd. Unfortunately, Wei lm arm's arguments concerning I lie Pythagorean character of Hebd. were accepted by 1 >uehcsnc-Gin!leinin, o.e. 117. 109 Les 'Memoires Pythagoriques' cites par Alexandre Polyhistor, REG 58 (1945), 1 ff. See also C. j . De Vogel, Greek Philosophy 111, Leiden 1964, p. 341 ff. and W. Burkert, Hellenistische Pseudcpythagorica, Phil. 105 (1961), es p. 23-26. More about this Pythagorean document below, Ch. IV" p. 98 if. (and esp. ibd., n. 163). 110 For details about this and about the wind-rose of If ebd. see below, Ch. V C, p, 146 ff. 111 Ibd., p. 151 ff. 112 The fragment άνεμων θέσεις και προσηγορίαι (fr. 250 Rose, cf. also V. Rose, 106

107

24

W. Kranz 113 argued in favour of a relatively early date for the first part of Hebd. He refutes some of Roscher's arguments, 1 1 4 corrects others, 115 and adds new ones. The Ionian who wrote the whole work was, he thinks, a contemporary of the author of I Vr/./16 with whom Aristoteles ρ semi e p ig raphic us, Leipzig 1863» 247 if.) mentions I wo local Gyreη a can wind-names: t tie άπηλιώτητ in Cvrene was called ' Κλλησττοντίας (p. 200, 5; we also hear that it μάλιστα... ενοχλεί των Κύρη ν?, ίων λιμένα); εύρος bore i he name Κάρβας (p. 200,13-4). 113 Kosmos und Mensch in der Vorstellung frühen (Iriechentams {first publ, 1038, repr. in:) W. Kranz, Studien zur antiken IJieratur und ihrem Fortwirken, hrsg. v. Ii. Yogi, I leideiberg 1 CK>7, 1 05 iL 1,4 He (o.e. 170-80) accepts Lolls parallel (cf. above, p. 19, n. 82). 115 Roscher had argued that the earth in Uehd. is splen ica I, but Kranz proved (o.e. 182-3) that we may legitimately apply the words of the Hebdomad ist: to Anaxinlander's cylindrical earth. Cf. also C, J. I )e Vogel, Pythagoras, 172 and below, Ch. I l l , p. 60 ff. We have already noticed how Kranz corrected Boll's, Koschcr's and Goetxe's estimation of the macrocosm-microcosm-passage (above, p. 22, n . 101). I , 6 It is impossible to enter into the complicated problem of the dale of Vict. here. R. Joly, in his excellent recent monograph Reeherches sur le traite pseud o1 lippocratique Du Regime, Liege I960, es p. p. 203-9 (cf. also the introduction to his edition of Vict, in the 1 hide-series) dates Viel, around 400 B.C. Kranz, o.e. 176 has the last decade of the fifth Cent, B.C. in mind. W. Jaeger, Paideia II, Berlin 21959, 43, 45 ff. argued that it should be dated ca. 350 B.C. It. Oilier, Der innere Zusammenhang der hippokratischen Schrift de vietu, Hermes 87 (1959), 38 ff., esp. p. 55, is inclined to follow Jaeger. Mow A, Rehm in his learned Parapegmasiudtem, Abh. Bav. Ak., Phil.-hist. Kb, Ν. Ε l i e f t 19, München 1941, 38 ff, argued that the division of the year in Viet. 111,68 is that of Eudoxus' parapegma: " 1 )ie angestrebte Symmetrie der Hauptabschnitte des Jahres, insbesondere die Zerlegung des Jahres durch die zwei Erühphaseii der Pleiaden in gleiche Hälften, weist auf Eudoxos" (Rehm p. 38). Already Eredrich, f l i p p . Unters. 225 had noticed this similarity, but (following Μ a ass) did not believe the attribution of the Ε11 d oxus-pa rapeg m a to be trustworthy. But even if we should follow Eratosthenes in not attributing the Octaetcvis to Eudoxus (and it is not certain that the Octaeteris and the parapegma are identical; see for the evidence F. Lasserre, Die Fragmente des Endoxos von Knidos, Texte υ. Kommentare Bd. 4, Berlin 1966, 214), we still have to assume that at least part of its subject-matter is derived from Eudoxus (so also Lasserre, ibd.). Rehm, o.e. 30 ff. did not doubt the authenticity of the Iiu does not occur in the here required sense before Plato, Tim. 41a3 περιπολουσιν (of the heavenly bodies; in Crat. 405c (etymology of 'Apollon') the verb πολεΐν and the subst. πόλησις are found); cf. Arist., π. φιλ. fr. 12a Ross; Epicurus, Ep. Pyth. (3),112,4 Arr. To make a complete revolution', i.e. to vanish out of sight τροφος, said by Gow-Page to be Aesehylean, is only doubtfully so: Aesch. fr. 192 2 M. 323,14-5 Mette is printed by Mette λίμναν f τταντο f τροφον AIO^ottcjv. Lobeck conjectured πάντων, alii alia. 40 Burkert, WW 151 ff., n. 9.

49

every 24 hours. Common in Philo, e.g. II, p.248,10 Colm-W., IV, p.281,17. - Possibly π.-ίη seemed more Ionic to our author than -ησις; Fleischer instances partly parallel neologisms in Praec,47: 48 ξυγχωρίη, έτοιμοσκοπίη, and in Decent. : άδεισιδαιμονίη, άταρακτοποιίη or -ποιησίη. I h e verb (see also above) occurs Hebd, 2,10 R.; here the heavenly bodies are said to 'make the earth revolve' (τήν γήν περιπολέειν ποιεύμενοι). Ριιί 2,1,4 Κ. if. this leads to the conclusion that the earth is stationary! The best version of the Latin translation (Ambr.) lias terrae circuitmn facientes. Harder proposed to change τήν γήν into τής γής and to read περιπολίην for περιπολέειν, which is a most likely emendation; 11 ' It is also possible that after τήν γήν the gen. τής γής has dropped out, which in its turn could have caused the change from substantive into verb. If this is correct, π. would oceur twice. 23. πρόσθεσις (1,65 R.; σελήνης . . . π . ; ir. anginen tum, Zunahme): 'increase', of the waxing moon. N.B.: 'Addition' not before Plato, Phaed. 97a 1, 1011)9, 101 c7; αύξησις κατά πρόσΟεσιν Arist., GC 333b 1; P/iys. 245a27 (in a general sense). 'Increase 1 : Vett. VaL 1,5 (20,17 Κ roll).. .γνωσΟήσεται, πότερον πρόσΟεσιν ή άφαίρεσιν ή ώρα έχει. Π. του ήλιου 'increase of the sun's heat', Pap. Mag. Leid. W. 9,48. See further above, s.v. άφαίρεσις, and above s.v. μειόοκ 24. σπορητός (4,4 and 11 R., -ατός ms.; tr. seminatio, Zeit der Saaten ps. Gal., p. 57 Bergstr., 17 r f.): (sowing-tin ι e'. In this sense apparently only here and in Galen's paraphrase, Comm. in lipid. / , CMC V,10,l, ]>. 13 (see also below, s.v. φυταλία). Galen speaks of both σπ. and φυτ. and adds, significantly: αυτοί (sc. the author of Hebd.) γάρ ούτως όνομάζουσιν (cf. above, p. 9 ). Other meanings: Aesch., Ag. 1392 'sown corn'; Xen. IIG IV,6,13 'sowing of corn'. The same semantic change as with φυταλία, q.v. 26. τ ε λ ε ι ό (ο (1,65 R.; σελήνης . . . τελειούσης; tr. crescent is): Ίο wax full', of the moon. The intr. is curious (cf. also above, s.v. μειόω), but cf. Arist., GA 757b24; the pass. GA 776a31, 'to bring into ripeness 1 . I have found no other instances of the verb predicated of the moon. For the expression cf. perhaps Aet. 11,29,4 τήν τελείαν πανσέληνον. Τ. in temporal expressions: Plat., Pltc. 272d7 επειδή... O.e. 20. « O.e. 66-7.

47

4H

R h . Μ. 1893, 437, n. 1. Roseher 1911, 67 proposed (περί) τήν γήν περιπόλησα

ποιεύμενοι, l)iil printed the ms.-text in his 101 3-edit ion.

50

χρόνος έτελεώθη, the solemn language of the m y t h ; for τελέω cf. LS J s.v. 1,7. For the waxing of the moon Arist. uses αυξάνω AP Ο. 90a3, Gael. 201 bl9. For the full moon Homer has πλήΟουσα, IL XVIII,484. it is difficult to resist the temptation of explaining this somewhat catachrestic use of τελειόω by means of a reference to the vocabulary til arithmetics. Λ 'perfect number' (αριθμός τέλειος) is equal to the sum of its divisors. Now 28 is such a perfect number: 1 4 - F 7 + 4 + 2 + 1, cf. Nicont. Coras. lnlrod. I, l(>,2, p. 34,14-40,10 Roche. This number is also that of the days of the month: 4 X 7 days, Theo Smyrn., Exp. 102,19 ff. Hitler μήν δέ καθ' εβδομάδας τέσσαρας συμπληροΰται; it is διχοτομος in the first week, full in the second, διχότομος again in the third and. starts anew in Oie fourth: τη τετάρτη σύνοδον ποιου μένη ς προς ήλιον και άρχήν ετέρου μηνός. Philo, Op. miind. 101, Cohn-W. ΐ, p. 35,2 if.: από μονάδος συντεθείς έξης ο έπτά αριθμός γέννα τόν οκτώ και είκοσι τέλειο ν . . . ό δέ γεννηθείς αριθμός άποκαταστατικός έστι σελήνης, άφ' ού ήρξατο σχήματος λαμβάνειν αυξη σιν αισθητώς, εις εκείνο κατά με ίω σι ν άνακαμπτούοης * αυξεται μεν γάρ άπό της πρώτης μηνοειδους έπιλάμψεως άχρι διχοτόμου ήμέραις επτά, εΙΟ' έτέραις τοσαύταις πλησιφαής γίνεται και πάλιν υποστρέφει διαυλοδρ ο μου σα την αύτήν οδόν, άπό μεν της τιλησιφαους επί την διχότομον επτά πάλιν ήμέραις, είτ' άπό ταύτης επί την μηνοειδή ταΐς ίσαις. Both quotations are from an arithmological context, in which, moreover, the. number 7 is discussed; the phases of the moon are an instance of the uni versal power of this number.50 Quite probably, therefore, the author of Hebd. is thinking of the hebdomadic nature of the month (Ch. 1,25 ff. R. he has told us that each part of the world has in itself or din em septinariurn). If this interpretation is correct, the use of the (among other things) arithmetical terms πρόσθεσις and άφαίρεσις (q.v.) can also be understood better; for πρ. and άφ. in an arithmetical sense cf. e.g. Nicom. Geras., Inirod. p. 117,20 and 22, Hoche; for προστιΟέναι and άφαιρειν in a geometrical sense cf. Ch. Μ u g l e r , Dictionnaire historiqiic de la terminologie geometrique des Grecs,

Paris 1959 (n.b.: Mugler lists uses of the substantive only as late as Proclus, but cf. Sextus, Μ. IX,277 ff., esp, 294, 298/301). The parallels from Philo and Theo also explain the opaque άνιούσης (Hebd. Ch. 1,63 ff.R.: σελήνης άνιούσης και τελειούσης κ.τ.λ.). A 'rising' moon does not make sense in our context, but a 'returning' moon does (cf. Tlieo's remark on the fourth week and Philo's άνακαμπτούσης and πάλιν υποστρέφει,.. την αύτήν οδόν...): the ever-repeated cycle is in our Cf. further below, Ch. Vf, p. 179 ff.. p. 183 ff.

51

author's mind, as is of course also clear from his reference to the moon's waxing and waning. 26. φ υ τ α λ ί α (4,5 R . ; ir. plantatio, eine Zeit, in der die Pflanzen gepflanzt werden): (-planting time , the season of late winter. Not elsewhere in this sense. Homer (e.g. IL XI1,314) "planted place 1 ; Ap. Rhod. 11,1003 'planting 1 ; Arat., Phaen. 332 (plur., quoted above s.v. βλάστη σις) 'planted places' or things'. For the semantic change and Galen's remark see above, s.v. σπα ρητό ς. Transliterated ps. Galen,, p. 55 Bergstr., 17 r e. 27. φύτευσης (4,13 R.; if. plantatio, die Pflanze, die. . gepflanzt wird p. 57 Bergstr., 17 ν b); 'planting . Hellenistic: not before Halle pap. 1,81 (third Cent. B.C.): ps. Arist. Mu. 399bl7. The verb φυτεύω since Homer. Xen., Oec. 7,20 has φυτεία in this sense, which also occurs later.

The conclusion must be, I think, that this section of Η ebd. cannot have been written before 400 or even 350 B.C. The language definitely has a postclassical colouring. The relatively great number of abstract nouns (of a "technical' nature) points towards a late date of composition as well 51 . Three words (αύτόδρομος, λάχνωσις and the seemingly archaic περιπολίη) are άπαξ είρημένα. Five words (άκολουθίη, έναντίωσις, σπορητός, τελειόω and φυταλία) have a meaning to which Hebd. has the exclusive rights. Hellenistic are άγωγή (in the sense used in Hebd.), άρδευσις, έπταμερής (if not coined by our author), μία, πάντροφος and φύτευσης; also λαμπηδών. if not from Theophrastus. From the Peripatetic vocabulary we have άνθησις (not in Arist.), άνταυγία ('reflected light', Theophr.), άφαίρεσις + πρόσθεσις (though used in a Hellenistic sense), βλάστη σις (once in Arist.), εκβολή (οδόντων, Arist.), λαμπηδών (Theophr.?), μάνωσι,ς and πέπανσις; these words, as we have noticed, also occur in later writers. The astronomical meaning of άκολουθέω (Autolycus of Pitane) is contemporary with Arist. and Theophr., while the Platonic use of the otherwise Theophrastean and Hellenistic μειόω is an isolated instance. 51

Also note, in the prologue, Ch. 1, §1,6-8 R. septinarium habere speeiem et

definitiones,

1.8-21 R . septinariam

natnram

habent

et speeiem

et

perfectionem,

28 R. oninem speeiem. Though it is hazardous to guess which Greek words are represented by species and definitiones, it should at least be clear that this arid, eoneeptual language can hardly be Presocratic. Cf. further below, Ch. V11, p. 226 n. 126.

52

Peripatetic technical terms are relatively frequent; they occur in the cosmological and botanical parts of Hebd. A possible explanation is that the author used Theophrastus' doxographical work (or a later revision) 52 c.q. works by philosophers influenced by Theophrastus 1 systematical and/or historical works 53 for the construction of his cosmology (this is also suggested by the parallels quoted in the word-list). He was in any case familiar with Theophrastus" botanical works or literature deriving from or influenced by these works when composing the chapter on the agricultural activities to be performed in the various seasons. The vocabulary as a whole (neologisms, fabricated Ionic forms, technical terms from the philosophical vocabulary and the intrusion of everyday Hellenistic idioms) exhibits the same characteristics as that of other late works within the Corpus Hi-ppocraticiim.

See further below, Ch. ¥ A, p. 130 ff. and esp. p. 137-8 n. 36. See below, Ch. IV, p. 84 n. 9; p. 86 and ibd. n. 102; p. 108 if. and p. 108, n. 21.3; p. 117-8; esp. Ch. V, p. 137, n. 36. For Theophrastus and the Stoa cf. Ch. IV, p. 84 ii. 89, p. 86 n. 102. 52

53

53

CHAPTER

111

THE PRESOCRATIC PARALLELS

The Presocratic character of the cosmology in Chapters 1, 2 and (> of Hebd. constitutes what is perhaps the principal argument pro tfie antiquity of the first section of this treatise. 1 Roscher and others have indicated a substantial number of parallels in Presocratic thought. The most thorough of all was W. Kranz, 2 who collected the parallels for almost every single item of the, cosmology and concluded from this survey that the (original of the) first section of Hebd. had been written not long after 500 B.C., because the world-pu lure its author lakes for granted is that of this period. 3 This last observation is of fundamental importance. If it could indeed be proved that the wo rid-pic tore of Hebd. as a whole is that of an earlier period (which if would be very difficult if not impossible to reproduce in later times), this would be a much more plausible argument than the enumeration of individual parallels.4 It is, however, not easy to define the Presocratic worldpicture, because the cosmological theories of the individual thinkers and schools of this period differ considerably. Ontf^ understandably, therefore, Roscher and Kranz have tried to concentrate noon the affinity between the theory of Hebd. and that of a particular Presocratic school, viz, the early Milesians. In order to achieve this, however, they were obliged to play down the allusions to theories of other Presocratic schools or individual thinkers. Another, and quite different w a y of proving the archaic character of the cosmology of Hebd. is to indicate a number of "not yets'. In this way it has been assumed that Ch. 2,24 ff.R. does not state, as yet, that the earth is a. spherical body, and/or that Ch. 2,64 ff.R. implies that its author was ignorant of the 1 2 3 4

Cf. the chronological exposition of the status quaestionis in Ch. 1, above, p. 16ff Kosmos und Mensch, 180 if. P. 180: 'einheitliches W e l t b i l d . . . als etwas Gegebenes vorgetragen'. Cf. above, Ch. I, p. 31 n. 151.

54

distinction between planets and fixed stars. If the author of Hebd. takes for granted that the earth is not a sphere and that there is no need to distinguish between planets and fixed stars, his world-picture would not only be Presocratic, but even early Presocratic. 5 Admittedly, however, the wording of 11 ebd. in those crucial passages is ambiguous. Also, it can not be proved that the, world-pieiui e as a whole is exclusively Presocratic, let alone early Presocratic. I do not wish to deny that the parallels to Presocratic. thought which have been intimated by several scholars are justifiable. This does not imply, however, that Hebd. is necessarily early, but at most that it may be so. Ab posse ad esse η on est illatio. 1 believe that the Presocratic parallels can be explained without our hav ing to azurne that ihe first section of Hebd. is itself a product of Presocratic times, 6 I also believe that it can be proved that the world-picture which the author takes for granted is definitely not that of the Presocratic period. 7 To these two points I shall return later. In this chapter, 1 shall confine myself mainly to a study of those Presocratic parallels which have been adduced by various scholars, in order to ascertain whether or not it is correct that these 'parallels* are exclusively or even undoubtedly genuinely Presocratic. First, however, f shall briefly summarize the cosmology of the first section of Hebd. The universe of Hebd. is (of course) divided into seven parts, (1) the 'inseparable' and cold κόσμος, encompassing the whole, along which 'summer and winter pass 1 ; (2) the stars, shining with subtle and reflected light, the wannest and thinnest brightness within the universe; (3) the sun, also warm; (4) the moon, with its phases; (5) the air, producing the meteorological phenomena; (6) the liquid element subdivided into sea, rivers, sources and stagnant waters; (7) the allnurtiiriiig earth at the centre of the universe, subdivided into (a) hard stony parts, (b) earth proper and (c) humid and warm parts. - The portions of the universe below and above the earth are equal in character (ίδέη) and in number and revolve in a circle around the earth, moved by themselves. Both the outermost encompassing heaven and the earth are stationary. The moon from its central position connects the other portions of the universe. Except for outer heaven and earth things are moved by themselves as well as by the 'eternal beings'. The 5 β 7

See above, Ch. !, p. 29» and p. 29-30 n. 148. See further below, Οι. V A, p. 130 ff. See below, Ch. IV.

55

stars cause the sequence of the seasons, and move in the same as well as in opposite directions. Taken as a whole, this picture of the universe is, of course, a descendant of the cosmological model of Anaximander - stable earth at the centre, enveloping heavenly bodies. This was pointed out by, among others, Roscher and Kranz. 8 It should be remembered, however, that Anaximander's model set the tone for the whole of subsequent Greek cosmology; it was modified, but not discarded/' In Hebd. we have such a modified model, as Kranz 1 0 and others have duly pointed o u t : Anaximander's order of cosmieal bodies was earth, stars, moon, sun. The right order, which we find in Hebd., presumably already was introduced by Anaximenes. 1 1 But this again does not i m p l y that Hebd. is directly influenced b y Anaximenes himself, because Ms correction became universally accepted by the overwhelming majority of ancient cosmologists. 12 Moreover, there is no evidence that Anaximander's universe was closed by a surrounding outer sphere (although some scholars h a v e argued that his άπειρον had t h a t shape and function, 1 3 this is at best no more than an implausible guess). Anaximenes, it is true, closed the heavens b y a solid and probably frozen κρυσταλλοειδές (cf. the cold outer heaven of Hebd.). Roscher 1911, 61, 68 ff. etc.; Kranz o.e. 1 80. Cf. Kahn, Anaximander, esp. p. 199 ff. Although Kahn's claims are perhaps somewhat exaggerated, no one, I think, will object to mv more modest rephrasing. 10 O.e. 180. 11 VS 13Ä14. 1). O'Brien, Derived Light and Eclipses in the Fifth Century, J HS 68 (1968), 114-127, argues (1 16-7) that Anaximenes stuck to Anaximander's sequence, because 'earthy bodies' έν τω τόπφ των αστέρων συμτεριφερομένας εκείνο ις are the cause of eclipses (13A7 = Hipp., Ref. 1,7, FS I, p. 92,1 5-6), a rid because an eclipse would be caused by the obstruction of our vision of moon and sun by the interposition of such a body. Probably, however, these άστρα include sun and moon (this is also suggested by συμπεριφερομένας έκείνοις). In Α et ins' report (13A14), which likewise mentions the 'dark bodies' (11,13,10), the αστέρες which do not turn below the earth (11,16.6) must include at least the sun, as is clear from Arist. Mete, 354a28 ff. (also quoted at 1 3A14). This is confirmed by Hippolyt us: although άστρα VS 1, p. 92,20 means the stars only, ibd. 92,12 speaks of ήλιον καί σελήνην καί τά άλλα άστρα; cf. also ibd. 92,13 and 16 ff., ού κινεΐσθαι δέ ύπο γήν τά άστρα λέγει. 12 Aetius 11,15,6 (VS 12Α18) mentions Metrodoriis of Chios and Crates as partisans of Anaximander's theory. 18 F. M. Cornford, Principium Sapientiae, Oxford 1952, 176 ff.; Th. G. Sinnige, 8 9

Matter

and Infinity

in the Presocratic

Schools and Plato, A s s e n 1 9 6 8 , 11 ff.

56

Curiously, though, then 1 is no explicit evidence that Anaximenes* imi verse is fully spherical. His earth is flat, his heavenly bodies set by disappearing behind high mountains at the Northern end of the earth. So possibly the κρυσταλλοειδές is only half a sphere. 14 If this is correct, the earliest evidence for the idea of an encompassing outer sphere is in Parmenides although even here our data are not wholly unambiguous. Usually Β 11,2-3 ολυμπος / έσχατος (ήό' άστρο)ν Οερμο ν μένος) is quoted, for 11 ebd. 2,1.5~(> I\. speaks of an ο λ ύ μ π ι ο ς κόσμος. But the idea that the outer heaven surrounds the whole is expressed in Β 10,5: ούρανον άμφίς έχοντα, which has the task of τυείρατ' εχειν άστρων (B10,7). Wholly unambiguous is only the doxographical statement of Actius 11,7,1 (28 A 37,5-(>) το περιέχον δέ πάσας τείχους δίκην στερεό ν ύπαρχε ιν. The enveloping outer sphere became a. standing feature of Greek cosmology,15 just as did Anaximander's earth at the centre, of the universe surrounded by the heavenly bodies and Anaximenes' idea of the correct s e q u e n c e of these bodies. Some scholars have assumed that. Hebd, 2,15-6 R. is a direct quotation from Parm. B11,2, but (a) Parmenides' wording is different; (b) the "Pythagorean 1 parallel adduced by Kranz proves that (to say the least) the name ολυμπος could also be used in later times.1·6 Another of Kranz' arguments in favour of the Milesian character of the cosmology of Hebd. is that Hebd., just like the early lonians, assigned the same (astronomical?) 'sphere' to both the fixed stars and the planets.17 This is not correct: Hebd. Ch. 1 does not speak of 'spheres', but subdivides the universe into 'regions' which are in a certain order, using the words κόσμος, μοίρα, μέρος and τάξις to refer to these regions. In the same way sea, rivers, sources and pools together occupy the sixth μέρος (1,78 ff.lv.). This leaves sufficient room for a plurality of astronomical 'spheres' within the one τάξις of the stars even if this has not been explicitly said.18 Guthrie, HGPh I, 1 J«s. J >n tie us etc. a,re, of course, excepted. The Atom ist s, Hera elides I < 16 Kranz' parallel, o.e. 181, is Philolaus Λ16 (Act. Π,7,7), which has been proved by W. Burkert to consist of two mutually contradicting parts, the latter of which, containing the word ολυμπος» has been appended in later (i.e. Hellenistic) times. Of. above, Ch. 11, p. 42 and ibd. n. 25. The first exact parallel (ολυμποε — outer heaven) is hi p in. 977b2. Cf. further b'dow, Ch. IV, p. 121 ff. 17 O.e. 1 S1. (Kranz assumes that Hebd. 2.04 ff. R. refers to the seven planets; for this problem, s. below, Ch. V B, p. 138 ff.) 18 Cf. (Sehr, Enisi. u. Entw. d. wiss. Welth, 209. 14

15

5?

T h e light of the s t a r s is characterized, among other things, b y μίνωσις a n d άνταυγία (1,51-2 Ε.), K r a n z s a y s t h a t μάνωσις is a n Anaximenean t e r m . 1 9 This is i n c o r r e c t : (I) t h e word itself does not occur before Aristotle, see above, word-list s . v . 2 0 ; (2) t h e idea b e h i n d the w o r d μάνωσις is b y A n a x i m e n e s not a p p l i e d to the l i g h t of t h e stars, b u t u s e d to describe one of t h e f u n d a m e n t a l properties of m a t t e r . A s for άνταυγία, see l i k e w i s e above, word-list s.v., 2 1 for the a t t r i b u t i o n of theories of reflected light. 22 For the special v a r i e t y f Hebd. tin re is n o e a r l i e r e v i d e n c e than M e t r o d o m s of Chios, who l i v e d s o m e w h a t l a t e r t h a n K r a n z ' proposed d a t e for Hebd. K r a n z begs the question b y a s s u m i n g t h a t this theory m u s t be older t h a n our e v i d e n c e permits us to conclude.- 3 At t h e b e g i n n i n g of Hebd. Ch, 2 we, learn that the, κόσμοι a r o u n d ttie e a r t h are self-moved, while 2,47 ff. R. s t a t e s t h a t "all other things'... (i.e. e x c e p t e a r t h a n d outer h e a v e n ) ' a r e e a s i l y m o v e d b y t h e m s e l v e s and by the eternal beings'. 24 The moon 25 occupies the centre between O.e. 182, Kranz admitb that it is not ν Λ'.ιόντ?. I-or this ( 'inception wo have an excellent Presoeratic p a r a l i d neglected bv both Kranz and Roscher; ban p. B1 7,3-1-5 (on the four elements) άλλ' αυτ(ά) ζητ'.ν τ αΰτα, δι' ά λ λ ή λ ω ν 'S έ 0 έ ο ν τ α / γ ιγνετα ι άλλοτε r/λλα -/μι ήνεκες y.izv \νλΊ. (1 U 7,3 \ occurs a,gain as ί >21,1 > and Γ>26, V), The 'other things' of Hebd, are also said to 'live in one another', έν άλλήλο'.σι ζωντα, winch could. I>e interpreted as an in complete reminiseence (of a sort) of ί ieracbi us' formula for elemental change (P>30, 1)72, and especially tho Stoicizing versions collected In* i) ~K, as 1-576). See further below, Ch. IV, p. 70 ff., p. 89 ff. 27 This is not a Presocratic idea; see below, Ch. IV, p. 76 ff. 28 Cf. lUirkert, WW, 227 n. 36, who also argues against Kranz' next parallel. See also ibd. Η 10 ion Faidoxusb 215 Also (juoted by Reseller, 191 ί p. 73 (whose second parallel is Philoldus 1321, from π. ψυχής, a Hellenistic pseudepigraphon : cf. Zeller, Ph. d. Gr. I, 369 ff. and Burkert, o.e. 225 ff.). 25

59

evil reaches as far as the moon, but no further; above the moon, all things are more pure, This is also the opinion of Heraclitus." Now Emp. B118 says the earth is a vale of tears, while Β121 sums up the evils of which our earth is full. Emp. Ill 18 is also quoted b y Clement, Strom, 111,14 (11,201,25 St.), who says that on this point Empedocles and Heraclitus agree. The reference is to Her. Β20, quoted by Clement two lines before, with the comment: Ήρ. γοΰν κακίζων φαίνεται τήν γένεσιν (fr. Β20 follows, in which no reference to the moon etc. is to be found). The 'agreement' between Empedocles and Heraclitus mentioned by Hippolytus perhaps does not go further than the point made by Clement. Τ can find no certain evidence in either philosopher that ί 1 ley divided the world into two parts separated by the moon. (3) Kranz' third parallel is the second part of Philolaus (44) A16. We have already seen that, this is a Hellenistic appendage. 3 0 About the meteorological phenomena produced by the air Kranz has no more to say than that all Presocratics thought about these subjects. 31 The earth is the last μέρος of the cosmic hcbdomas. As we have noticed before, it. is at rest at the centre of the universe, a feature which already occurs in Anaximander's model. It 'rides upon the air', 2,29 ff.R. έν τω ήέρι όχέεται, which looks like a reminiscence of Anaximenes,32 (13)A6,29 ff. τήν γ ή ν . . . έποχεΐσθαι τ ω αέρι. Diels-Kranz consider the word έποχεΐσθαι to be a quotation from Anaximenes' work, and so it possibly is. On the other hand, we need not think exclusively of Anaximenes; we have already had occasion to remark that the evidence that Anaximenes' universe is fully spherical is unsatisfactory. It is attested, however, that, according to Diogenes of Apollonia the (round!) earth is situated at the centre of the universe, Diog. Laert. IX,57 (64AI, VS TT, p. 52,5-6) τήν γήν στρογγύλην, ήρεισμένην έν τ ω μέσω. Also, that it is supported there by air, 64A16a υπό αέρος φέρεσθαι τήν γήν (cf. also Aristoph., Nub. 264, VS 64C2, vol. II, p. 68,5-6). In the passage from Flat, printed in DTK as 64C2 ( F S II p. 67,28) we read ουτοΓ (sc. ο α ή ρ ) ' γ ή ς όχημα ( c f / a l s o Eurip., Troad. 884, ibd. p. 6 7 , 3 0 ώ γ ή ς See above, p. 57 n. 16. Roscher, 191 I , p. 63-4 is more explicit, quoting evidence for meteorological theories of Anaximander and Anaxagoras. Such a theory, however, involving interaction between the elements and occasional references to the role of the sun, is not found in the section on air in Hebd, Ch. 1. Cf. further below, Ch. IV, p. 117 . 32 Kranz 182. Cf. also 13A7,12-13.

30 31

60

δχημα κ.τ.λ.). The syncretising of Anaximander and Anaximenes which we find in Hebd. is also a feature of the thought of Diogenes; a n d though έποχεΐσθαι is not attested for Diogenes, όχημα occurs in passages influenced b y him. 3 3 W e are also informed that the earth is "aus dem Wasser ents t a n d e n C h . 1,94 Κ. έξ ύδατος έουσα; Kranz refers to 'Thaies and his pupils', 3 5 However, Hebd. 1,90 f f . R . not only speaks about the earth as being έξ ύδατος, but teils us that it bears animals and plants upon its surface καί εστί παντρόφος έξ ύδατος έοΰσα. The last three words m a y m e a n (a) "originated from water' or (b) 'consists of water'. 3 0 To m a k e a distinction of this kind in relation to an early Presocratic philosopher is, perhaps, captious, since to Thales the αρχή (origin) of the earth continues to be the stuff of which it "really' consists. In Hebd,, however, a conscious or positive a m b i g u i t y m a y be involved. 1 do not w a n t to deny that ps. Hippocrates intends to say that, originally, the earth came into being from water. 3 7 On the other hand, I am under the impression that an a m b i g u i t y is involved in so far as έξ ύδατος έοΰσα also elucidates the epitheton παντροφος - the earth is capable of nurturing the plants and the animals, because it, in part or to a certain degree, consists of water. If this is correct, there is a close (and even verbal) affinity between the statement in Η ebd. and one of Aristotle's comments upon Thales. At Met. A , 9 8 3 b l 7 ff. (11A12) he puts forth several motives which, as he assumes, m a y have motivated Thales in choosing water as αρχή. After suggesting the connection between moisture and sperm and the relation between moisture and heat 3 8 as possible motives he continues: λαβών ΐαως τήν ύπόληψν ταύτην έκ του π ά ν τ ω ν 6 ρ αν τήν τ ρ ο φ ή ν ύγράν ο υ σαν. Aristotle appears to believe that his interpretation is correct. 3 9 But it is an interpretation, no more and no less, and it is surely a remarkable coincidence that the vestiges

On έποχεΐσθαι in Hebd, cf. further below, Ch. IV, p. 109-10; on the earth at the centre of the universe ibd., 11 9-20. 34 Kranz 182. 35 So already Roscher 1911, p. 66. 36 Cf. LS J, s.v. έκ 111,1. 37 Cf. below, Ch. IV, p. 107 ff.

33

Hebd. 6, § 1 , 2 0 f f . R . m e n t i o n s s p e r m a n d calidiim hiimidum. Ι σ ω ς in A r i s t o t l e o f t e n η on dubitantis est, sed cum quad am modestia asseverantis (Bonitz, hide χ Arislutelicus 347632 ff.) Theophrastus appears to have omitted

38

39

the 'ίσως; cf. 11A13, esp. Λ1 3,17 ff. Presumably, this information was incorporated into the doxography,

61

of the theory of Thales which can be pointed out in Hebd, show a close resemblance to the Thales which was reconstructed by Aristotle.411 The earth is at the centre of the universe, and does not move: 2,24 f t Κ. κατά μέσον δέ τον κόσμο ν ή γη κειμένη... έν τ ω ήέρι όχέεται. ώστε τοΐσι κάτω τά δέ μέντοι (τάδε μεν τά Boll) άνο> κάτω είναι, τά δέ κάτω άνω' ουτω τε δ ιέ χει ν (οή έχειν 1 μ >11) τα τε έκ βεξιης και τά ές αριστερής, και περί πάσαν την γήν ούτως έχει. 1 lie stability of the earth is not proved by its equidistance to the other bodies wiihio I lie universe or to the circumference, as in Anaximander and others, but taken for granted. From its stability together with its being at the centre follows (cf. ώστε) that up and down, left and light are relative concepts. The existence of antipodes (τοιοι /,άτω) is a^uiiiod. Ί his theory litis been thought to derive from that of Anaximandor. The problem is: did A naxi man der speak of antipodes, and did he ( onsider up and down, left and right to be relative concepts? In regard to the antipodes Anaximander (12A11,(3)) thought that των δε επιπέδων ώ μεν έπφεβήκαμεν, ο δέ άντίΟετον υπάρχει. 1 he reference is to the flat surfaces of the cylindrical earth. The cioxography only tells us that there is a second flat stirfe.ee, but not thai it is assumed to be inhabited. Nor is there· any evidence at all that Anaximander spoke in terms of the abolition of an absolute high ami low. The only documentary evidence which has been quoted in this connection is the passage from Hebd. we are considering at present. 41 Kahn says that the idea in Η ebd. must be primitive, because II ebd. refers to our hide as "up'.42 But this reference has been introduced into the text by Boll's emendation, 13 τάδε (Λεν τά άνω for ms. τά δέ μέντοι άνω, which is unnecessary in itself and destroys the balance between τά δέ μέντοι άνω κ ά τ ω . . . τά δέ κάτω άνω. We should therefore keep the text as transmitted Burkert 1 1 saw a reference to antipodes in Philolaus

For the interpretation of έξ ύδατος έοΰσα ef. further below, Ch. IV» p. <S1 ff. Kahn, Anaximander 84 ff. - Arist. Cael, 2951)10 ff., in speaking of Λ naxiniander's earth, says nothing about the relativity of the eonreots 'up' and 'down', but only thai a body like this earth ha> no need to move in either of these (or any other) directions, 42 Ibd." 85, ii. 3. 40 41

43

'Lehensall. 2 1 9 .

WW 248-9. I have followed here the text of 1Π7 as reUPJ M T L O H , AS printed b\ I > Κ HI 7 (a) does not refer to antipodes at all, (b) presupposes a central earth, i.e. can ι lot be by Philolaus. 44

62

(44)B17, from the Bacchae (but not in Doric!): . . , εστί τά άνω του μέσου ύπεναντίως κείμενα τοις κάτω. τοΐς γάρ κάτω το κατωτάτω μέρος εστίν ώσπερ το άνωτάτω, καί τάλλα ωσαύτως κ.τ.λ., where the relativity of 'up' and "down1 is also demonstrated. Burkert is in favour of accepting this fragment as genuine, because of (a) the parallel with Hebd., which lie thinks is eharacterized by the same 'mühsame Daras Philolaus B17, and because (b) Plato in the Timaeus 'mit dem gleichen Problem viel eleganter fertig geworden ist'.45 This is doubtful. Is it really possible in Philolaus' system for that side of the earth which is permanently turned towards the Central Fire to be inhabited? I think not, for we are told (44A17, Aet. 111,11,3) that the people on our earth never see the inhabitants of the comiter-eai tli, and vice versa, because both earth and counter-earth always turn the same side to the centre. But this implies that the side of our earth which is turned to the centre is not inhabited, otherwise the inhabitants of the counter-earth would see our antipodes. On the other hand the inhabitants of the4 counter-earth cannot function as antipodes on Burkert's interpretation of Phil. B17 for our 'highest' also is their 'highest'. B17, already suspect because not written in Doric, apparently speaks in terms of a central earth (it puts a great emphasis upon the μέσον of the universe), and in this w a y agrees more with the unauthentic second part of Phil. A16 46 than with the true worldpicture of Philolaus. S t e l l u n g '

The earliest locus which without any possible doubt argues in favour of the relativity of spatial concepts like 'up' and 'down' is Plat., Tim. 62d-63b, on the spherical earth at the centre of the spherical universe. Of course this passage (whieh is not the first in Plato to treat the qnestion why the spherical earth is at rest at the centre 47 ) continues the line of thought originating in Anaximander and Parmenides. But the conceptual analysis will be Plato's own. The relativity of Tip' and 'down' is not a feature of the earlier account in the Phciedo, while his definition of άνω and κάτω in the Timaeus is part of a larger exposition, beginning 61c, in the course of which a number of concepts is explained. 61 (15 ff. 'hot' is explained by reference to the mathematical properties of fire-particles; 62a5 ff. explains 'cold 1 in a similar way, and so does 621)6 ff. for σκληρόν and μαλακό v. 11 lea ν ν' 45

40 47

Ibd. 249. See above, p. 57 n. 16. The first is Phaed, HnV-1 10b, rsp. 10Se4-l 00a6.

63

and light 5 arc elucidated in 62c2 ff. and 631)2 ff. These qualities derive from the properties of the elements within their respective natural places, and these properties in their turn must be explained by the relativity of άνω and κάτω, 62c5 ff. Βαρύ and κοΰφον on this account are relative concepts as well (esp. 63d6 ff.). it is therefore most likely that Hebd. on this point ultimately depends upon the I iniaeus, for it takes for granted the relativity of 'up' and 'clown1, which Plato proves rather laboriously. There is another indication that this assumption is plausible. The account of the earth in Hebd. is concluded 2,37 ff. by καί περί πάσαν τήν γήν ούτως εχει. Kranz without reason separates this clause from what goes before it and connects it with the next section. 40 The most naftnal translation is: This holds for the whole circumference of the earth'. Could this apply to Anaximander's cylinder? 1 think not; this can only apply to a spherical earth (περί!); for the idea cf. Tim. 63 a2 ff., εΐ... π ε ρ ί αύτο (i.e. the earth) πορεύοιτο τις έν κύκλω, πολλάκις αν στάς άντίπους49 ταύτόν αύτού κάτω καί άνω προσείποι. Now, Kranz thought that the concept of a spherical earth inhabited all the way round and implying the relativity of Tip1 and 'down' was quite early, i.e. Early Pythagorean, and that for this reason Hebd. could not but reflect a still earlier level of thought. This 'Early Pythagorean theory' is not early at all; it occurs in the (Hellenistic) Pythagorean Hyponinemata of Alexander P o l y h i s t o r ap. Diog. Laert. VIII,25. 5 » There are, therefore, no sufficient reasons to vindicate the assumption that the earth in Hebd. has to be that of Anaximander, and rather serious grounds against this assumption. I do not wish to deny that the relativity of 'up' and 'down', which is valid for a spherical earth, is also valid for the surfaces of Anaximander's cylinder. 51 But even this is no proof of an allusion to Anaximander's earth. I conclude that the arguments pro the Presocratic character of the cosmology of Hebd. which have been put forth are not convincing. As soon as we try to work out the consequences of making precise attributions and seriously consider what if means to accept as a working-hypothesis the theory that the author of Hebd. 'takes certain O.e. 183 (or for a reason: for this division makes it easy to argue that Anaximander's cylindrical earth is meant). 49 According to Diog. Laert. 111,24 Plato was the fin-a to give the word άντίπύοα its technical meaning. 50 See above, Ch. I, p. 24 and ibd. n. 109. 51 As has been ably proved bv Kranz, o.e. 183» and by De Vogel, Pythagoras 172.

48

tilings for granted', we almost automatically are led to a discussion of later thought. In our discussion, we have ptirposively ignored the hebdomadic disguise in which the cosmology is wrapped. But this is a very important aspect of this theory, tor it points at something else the author of Ilcbd. Ch. 1-11. (the first section as a whole) apparently takes for granted, viz. that all things are governed by number. The theory that ail things are dominated by one number is nothing but a variation of the theory that all things are governed by number in general. It has been remarked that theories about and belief in the magical properties of the number seven are found inside and outside Greece front very early times onwards, 52 This is undoubtedly correct. But these early speculations about the number seven are about the powers of that number in isolated cases. The first philosopher to formulate a theory about the universal explaining power of number was Pythagoras. 03 Hebd, Ch. 1-11, which takes this theory about number for granted, therefore cannot antedate Pythagoreanism. It is one of the most illuminating illustrations of the Pythagorean dictum άριϋμω 8έ τε πάντ έπέοί,κεν54 which we possess. But does this imply that Hebd. Ch. 1-11 is influenced by Early Pythagoreanism? Hardly so, for the number seven does not seem to have been all-important to the early followers of Pythagoras.55 Νumber-speculatioη itself is not an exclusive feature of Early Pythagoreanism, but is also rampant in later times.56 I shall return to the arithmology of Hebd. later on. Let it suffice to conclude now, that also in this case a ' Presocratic parallel' neglected by Κ ranz and disputed by Roscher (1919 !)57 points to a date for Hebd. Ch. 1-11 which may be much later than the date somewhere within the Presocratic period which has been generally assumed up till now. Kranz, o.e. 187 ('die Sieben ist Orientalin'); De Vogel, Pythagoras 173 ff. and the evidence referred to ibd., 174 η. 1. E.g. Arist. Met. A, 987M0 ff.; b2S. Aristoxenus, fr. 23 Wehrh. 51 Quoted Sextns Μ. IV,2 and VI 1,94, 109. Cf. also the properties of the τετρακτύς as defined in the Pythagorean Oath (number 10 as the source and root of everlasting nature). 55 I η Early Pythagoreanism, 7 represents καιρός: Arist. Met. 985b30 and Alexander's comment, p. 38,16 Playduck; cf. De Vogel, Pythagoras 115 ff. and 1 74 (Pythagoras did not introduce the number seven everywhere). 56 Philo's Op. rnnnd. is a case in point. Cf. further below, Cli. VI. 57 Koscher completely overlooked the crucial point made in the text, viz, that number is considered to have universal explaining power. 52

65

C H A P T E R IV

LATER ELEMENTS IN T H E C O S M O L O G Y OF HEBD. CH. l - l I; POSIDON 1 US?

1. Our study of the Presocratic parallels in Ch. I l l did not yield a satisfactory t.a.q. tor the composition of Rebel. Ch. 1-11, but, hopefully, it did cast some doubt upon the claims which have been made on this account. In the pages which follow, I will argue that a t.p.q. can be established by adducing philosophical theories later than those of the Presocratic period. Platonic, Aristotelian and especially Stoic influences can, I think, be pointed out.

2. Our first clue is given by the theory of motion which is taken for granted in those chapters of Hebd. which are the subject of our investigation. Ch. 2,1 ff. R. we hear that the κόσμοι above and below the earth move around it by a self-moved circular motion (αύτόδρομον1 κύκλωσιν). What exactly is meant by these κόσμοι is, for the moment, irrelevant. The notion of self-motion occurs again later on in the same chapter (Ch. 2,47 ff.R.); all things except earth and outermost heaven are "moved both by themselves (ύφ' έωυτών.. .κινείται) and by the 'eternal beings"'. We may also leave aside for the moment the question of exactly what is meant by 'all other things' and by 'eternal beings'. Of primary importance, in both cases, is that the author of Hebd. betrays Iiis familiarity with the concept of self-motion and with the distinction between this notion and that of being moved by something else. This conceptual framework is not Presocratic. As is well-known, it was Plato who, after having introduced, en passant, the concept of a 'motion moving itself' in the Charm-ides* made this idea into a corner1 Explained by Galen as meaning αυτοκίνητος; see above, Ch. IT, p. 38 ff., word-list s.v. αύτόδρομος. 2 Charm. 168e9-l0... κίνησις αύτη έαυτήν κινεΐν. Cf. Κ. Dieterle, Platons Laches

und Charmides.

Untersuchungen

zur elenktiscJi-aporelisLhen

66

Struktur der

platoni-

stone of Ms later philosophy. We first hear about it at some length in the Phaedrus,3 where it is proved that self-motion 4 is the specific quality of Soul, without which the revolution of the heavens and all becoming would come to a stand-still. 5 Substantially, this is still Plato's doctrine in Ms latest work. Soul is a self-moving principle, 6 which is tiic cause oi all change and all movement for all things 7 and which steers the heaven. 8 In the Timaeus, this is made more explicit: the heavens and the heavenly bodies move because the circle of the Same and the seven unequal circles of the Different are connected with Sont. 9 Already in the Timaeus, it seems that at least some of the heavenly bodies are attributed with a soul of their own in order to account foi their power ίο counteract the movement of the circles of the Different. 10 Anyhow, Nom. 898d explicitly attributes an individual soul to each of the heavenly bodies, and though Plato does not make if clear in which way a soul of this type moves its star, 11 no doubt is left about its being a cause of motion.12 The doctrine of the ensouled heavenly bodies occurs also in the Epinomis12 which, if not sehen Frühdialoge, diss. Freiburg i. 1 >r., 1966, 244· (with references to other literature, to which add It. Cherniss, Aristotle's Criticism of Plato and the Academy I, Baltimore 1944 ( 2 1964), 435). 3 24Se ff.; cf. also G. j . L>e Vries, Comm. on the Phaedrus, 121. - The Phaedruspassage is translated by Cicero, Sown. Scip, 27 and Τ use. 1,53-54. Cf. below, p. 89, n. 120. 4 Plato uses terms like τό αύτο αυτό κινούν, which he distinguishes from τό υπ' άλλου κινούμενον. These terms continued to be used, cf. e.g. the quotation from Sextus, below, p. 78, n. 68. 5 245e.l : ή πάντα τε ουρανό ν πασά ν τε γένεσιν συμπεσοϋσαν ατήναι. Cf. J. Β. Skemp, The Theory of Motion in Plato's Laier Dialogues, Cambridge 1942 (Amsterdam -1907), 6. De Vries, ox. ad 245d8 (p. 123) takes ουρανός to mean The universe', which is perhaps less likely. Cf. also below, p. 122 n. 288, the quotation of Phaedr. 246cl-2. 6 Nom, 896al τήν δυναμένην αυτήν αυτήν κινεί ν κινήσιν. 7 Nom. 8961)1 μεταβολής τε και κινήσεως «πάσης αιτία άπασιν. 8 Nom, 896el τον ούρανον διοικεί ν. 9 Tim. 35b ff., 38e-d. See further P. Μ. Corn ford, Plato's Cosmology, London 5 L966, 72 ff. Plato does not state that the motions of Soul and those of the heavens are identical. 10 CT. Corn ford, o.e. 87 and the ancient commentators quoted by him, ibd. 107, H.3. 11 Three possibilities arc suggested in Nom. 898e; cf. Skemp, o.e. 86-7. 12 Cf. G. E. R. Lloyd, Polarity and Analogy. Two Types of Argumentation in Early Greek Thought, Cambridge 1966, 257. 13

9<S l e .

67

written by Plato, at least represents an Early Academic point of view. To pursue the topic of Plato's theory of motion somewhat further - we shall see later on how relevant this is to the interpretation of Hebd. - we must make some remarks on Ms views concerning the motions of the elements. It appears from the account in the Timaeus that the elements do not have a source of movement within themselves, but that they are moved (a) by the 'shaking' of the Receptacle 14 which causes the random movement of l i k e to like' 15 and (b) by the revolution of the heavens, which counteracts to a certain extent the effects of the πλανώ μένη αιτία b y forcing the e l e m e n t a r y particles

inwards, 16 so that they pass through one another. Some particles are resolved by this process into their constat ualing Ii iangles, which can combine again to form new elementary particles of the same or of other elements. Fire has the greatest power of penetration (58b 1 πυρ... εις άπαντα διελήλυθε μάλιστα), that of the other elements is in proportion to their relative degree of λεπτότης. Only fire, air and water participate in the process of inter-elemental change. The isosceles triangles constituting the cubes which are the particles of earth cannot be recombined into the right-angled scalene triangles constituting the other elements.17 14 Tim, 52d if. In the 'precosmic' condition, elemental 'forms' shake the Receptacle and are in their turn shaken hy it.. Probably this should not be interpreted as meaning that either the 'precosmic' elements or the 'precosmic' Receptacle have a source of movement within themselves: 'What is really meant is that the πλάνου μένη αιτία has command of all that is in the υποδοχή and sets up this form of motion' (Skemp, o.e. 59). That necessity involves motion is unambiguously stated Tim. 48a6-7 το της πλανωμένης είδος αιτίας, ή φέρειν πέφυκεν ('in what manner it is its nature to make things move'); cf. Cornford, o.e. 160 n.2. 1. need not enter into the difficult problem whether this Errant Cause is itself of the psychic order, as seems to be cons ist en t with the Platonic principle that Soul is the cause of all movement (cf. above, p. 67, TI. 7). See Skemp, ox. 76-7 and esp. his discussion in the appendix to Ch. 6, p. 147 ff. K. Gaiser, on the other hand, wants to identify the Errant Cause with Plato's 'second' principle, the Indefinite Dyad (Piaions ungeschriebene Lehre, Stuttgart 2 1969, 196), which from this viewpoint would be an ultimate source of motion. 15 Tim. 52e5-53a7. Cf. Cornford o.e. 199. 16

Tim,

5 8 a 4 f f . ; c f . H . C h e r n i s s , Arist. Grit. Plat., 4 4 9 a n d P . S o Imsen, Aristotle s

System of the Physical W or lei. A Comparison with his Predecessors. Cornell Stud, in Class. Phil., Vol. XXX1I1, Ν.Y. 1960, 64 ff. 17 Tim, 541)6-d2. For Aristotle's criticism see Gael. 306a2 ff. This aspect of the theory of Plato was very well known, cf. Aet. 1,17,4 Iίλάτων τά μέν τρία σώματα... τρεπτά εις άλληλα, πυρ, άέρα, υδωρ, την δέ γήν εις τι τούτων άμετάβλητον. For

68

As we see, Plato's theory of motion is inextricably bound up with his cosmology and physics. This Platonic line of thought is continued by Aristotle, though with substantial modifications. 18 To summarize Aristotle's theory of motion is not easy, for it would be better, in a sense, to distinguish between several theories of motion than to treat his views on motion as a systematical and unified theory. His statements on the subject to a certain extent contradict one another, and though it is often possible to supply a link of a sort, it would be true to say that we are left with a number of loose ends. These, divergences can be (and have been) explained as representing successive stages in a developing theory. 10 It should be kept in mind, however, that Aristotle in some cases did not abandon an earlier point of view, even though it conflicted with his more mature thought. 2 0 This is especially true for his cosmology, which involves thinking about the heavens, a region which because of its remoteness (remote in more than one sense of the word) to a certain extent remains inaccessible to man. 2 1 For our purposes, it will not be necessary to enter into this extremely complicated ({nestion. I shall outline certain typical features of Aristotle's theory, and shall do so from a modestly evolutionistic point of view. In what is possibly his most mature theory, Aristotle altogether abandons the Platonic postulate of a self-moved mover and tries to prove that an ultimate principle of movement cannot be itself in motion. 22 Thus, in the last (causal, 23 not temporal) analysis all motion

Iiebd. and the Plac. ef. below, Ch. V A, p. 130 ff. and the notes to Ch. IV listed below, Ch. V A, p. 138, n. 36. 18 Cf. in general F. Sehnsen, Platonic Influences in the Formation of Aristotle's Physical System, in: Aristotle and Plato in the Μ id-Fourth Century, Stud. gr. Jat. Gothob. XI, Göteborg 1960, 213 ff., and his book referred to above, p. 68 n.16. 19 See e.g. W. K. C. Guthrie, in the Γη trod, to his edition of Gael, in the Loeb series, p. XVII ff. See also G. E. R. Lloyd, Pol An. 257 ff. (Lloyd puts special emphasis on the vitalist aspects of Aristotle's theory). 20 See below, p. 70 ff. on the self-motion of the elements in relation to the First Mover. 21 Cf. P. Moranx, Quinta essentia, RE XXIV, 1209. In this article, 1197 ff, and in the introduction to his edition of Gael, in the Bude series, X X X I V ff.» Moranx argues that contextual influences, i.e. the subject-matter studied in a certain context, in some cases can be made to explain the divergences just as well as evolutionist considerations, 22 Phys. V I I J ; VIIΪ,4-5; Met. XII ,6 ff. 23 This is the meaning of 'First' in "First Unmoved Mover 1 , cf. Γ. Düring, Aristoteles, Darstellung und Interpretation seines Denkens, Heidelberg 1966, 330-1.

69

w i t h i n t h e u n i v e r s e is s u s t a i n e d b y the e t e r n a l l y m o v i n g o u t e r h e a v e n , w h i c h is itself m o v e d 2 4 b y t h e E t e r n a l F i r s t U n m o v e d M o v e r . In Met. X I I , 8 A r i s t o t l e s p e a k s of a p l u r a l i t y of U n m o v e d Movers, conn e c t e d n o t o n l y w i t h t h e F i r s t H e a v e n , b u t also w i t h the s p h e r e s of p l a n e t s , sun a n d m o o n . A s all h e a v e n l y n a t u r e s a r c eternal, the U n m o v e d M o v e r s m u s t necessarily b e of t h e n a t u r e of a n σΜιος ουσία. 2 5 In t h i s w a y , t h o u g h r e f u s i n g to h a v e soul s e r v e a s a n ultimate p r i n c i p l e of m o t i o n , 2 6 A r i s t o t l e still s t r i v e s to be faithful ί ο the Platonic p o s t u l a t e of t h e a s s u m p t i o n of s u c h a p r i n c i p l e . 2 7 B u t t h i s is not all. On a n o t h e r l e v e l , t h e f u n c t i o n of t h e Platonic k i n e t i c soul is taken o v e r b y a s e c o n d principle, nature (φύσις). 2 8 In t h e e a r l y b o o k s of the Physics a n d in Cacl. A r i s t o t l e u n d o u b t e d l y l e a v e s us with the impression that 'nature' is an autonomous cause of motion. Phys. 11,1, 1 9 2 b 8 ff. 2 9 defines what are to be considered as φύσει οντα; natural

Some passages in Cacl. do not go further than this onler heaven itself: 1.0, 279a33 ff., which says that ι he eternally moving outer sphere is the highest divinity and that there is nothing which is κρειττον and so causes i! to move; if.2,285a27 ff., which says 1 hat the outer heaven is εμψυ/ος and antokinei ic. On the other hand If,6,288a27 ff. and 1 V,3,3tla9 ff. (which refers to Phys, VIII,4) imply an ultimate unmoved source of motion; (hithric, o.e. XXIV treats these last two remarks as appendages. 25 The First Ilcaven is «ίδιος (Met. XI 1,7,1072a23). The divine First Mover likewise (ibd., 1072b2(>-8); it is an on σία τις αίσιος, ibd. 1 073a 1. That the eternal movement of the First Heaven is caused by an Eternal Substance (τ)4ν ai Cf. the lucid exposition of G. E. R. Lloyd, Aristotle, The Growth and Structure of his Thought, Cambridge 1968, 159 ff. That the moon is in-between does not seem to have bothered Aristotle. In GA 1V,1 0,7771)24 ff. the moon is a cause (αρχή) of change on account of its association with the sun, from which it derives both its motion and its light. Meie. 1,2,339a21 ff. we hear that the sublunary world of necessity is συνεχής... ταϊς άνω φοραΐς, so that the elements are nothing but the material causes of change, which, in the final analysis, itself is 'otherdirected'. The cause of motion is to be found in the άεί κινουμένα. That Aristotle took these ideas very seriously is, of course, demonstrated by his famous statement Phys. 11,2,1941)13 άνθρωπος... άνθρωπο ν γέννα και ήλιος. For Theophrastus' solution to this problem cf. below, p. 82 ff. 60 Cf, also GA IV,2,767a2 ff., on the "summer and winter in tlic- course of a month' caused by the waxing and waning of the moon. 61 Cf. also below, Ch. V A, p. 1 37-8, n. 36. m

76

t h e e a r t h i n s e l f - m o v e d c i r c u l a r orbits. O u t e r h e a v e n a n d e a r t h a r e u n m o v e d , w e r e a d a f e w l i n e s f u r t h e r on (2,14-17 11.) w h i l e t h e "other t h i n g s h a v e a course of revolution' (τά δ' άλλα 68ov εχει περιπολίης 2 , 1 8 1 9 R.), a n d a g a i n : e a r t h and o u t e r h e a v e n a r e u n m o v e d (2,39 f f . R . ) , w h i l e τάλλα π ά ν τ α έν άλλήλοισι ζώντα και 8ι α λ λ ή λ ω ν δωόντα αυτά [τα] ύφ' έ ω υ τ ω ν και υπό τ ω ν [άεί 6ντο>ν°2] ά ώ ί ω ν κ ι ν ε ί τ α ι (2,47 U.R.). There c a n be no d o u b t w h a t s o e v e r t h a t T h e o t h e r things" r e a l l y m e a n s all other t h i n g s e x c e p t o u t e r h e a v e n arid e a r t h , viz. 5 out of the 7 portions of t h e u n i v e r s e ; s t a r s , moon, sun, a i r a n d w a t e r . T h e s e a r e s a i d (2,47 f f . R . ) to b e (a) b o t h self- a n d o t h e r - d i r e c t e d in r e s p e c t to m o t i o n a n d (b) to p a s s t h r o u g h one a n o t h e r a n d to live w i t h i n one a n o t h e r . T h e s e r e l a t i o n s of ' p a s s i n g i h r o u g h ' a n d l i v i n g within* a r e s a i d to be m u t u a l , N o w b o t h these t y p e s of b e h a v i o u r a n d t h e whole 1 c o n t e x t , which is

02 άεί όντων, wliieh is not Ionic, is suspect, and probably is a gloss on άι8ίων which has got into the text (cf. the idiomatically correct έούσα, Ch. 1,95 R., and έυντα, Ch. 2,06 Κ.). Roscher keeps these words in his text and amends «ιδίων into ρτβίως, in order to get a text which corresponds to the Latin translations. But the translations are rather defective in their reproduction of the sentence which 1 have quoted in full above: cetera omnia in (in not in 1 \) invicem viventia et per se (sc not in A) transenntia correctly reproduces τάλλα... 81 ιόντα, and up to this point the translations are in agreement with one another. For all of what follows, Λ gives Facile semper moventiw (starting a new sentence with Facile), while Ρ reads hec eadem et per mundi partes transenntia facile semper moveniw: the three words at the end of the sentence are the same as in A, while hec eadem et per mundi partes transenntia at first sight looks like an attempt at translation of the all-important passage αυτά ύφ' έωυτων... άι^ίων. It is, of course, possible that the Greek text which served as the basis for the translations was already corrupt at this point. Roscher, as we have noticed, appears to read f-φίως in order to reproduce facile, but fails to give an explanation of semper: is it, perhaps, possible that he thinks this translates the άεί before όντων? P's hec eadem then perhaps corresponds to αυτά ύφ' έωυτων, but this is not very likely, and the repetition of transenntia from 2,49 R. as well as the inexact per mundi paries for the Greek equivalent of 'by the eternal beings* demonstrate the helplessness of the translator: per mundi partes transenntia as a whole is nothing but a repetition of the idea which the Greek text expresses a few lines earlier (2,50 ff. R.) by SC αλλήλων διιόντα ! I therefore prefer to believe that 2,53 R. semper is an attempt at translating αισίων; facile may represent an attempt at translating αυτά ύφ' έωυτων. In this way, there would be traces of both the idea of selfmotion and the idea of ("other-directed') eternal motion, (both of which are unambiguously present in the Greek), in the Latin translations, facile representing the former, semper the latter (and in the correct order). For this inter-

p r e t a t i o n of facile,

ef. Cie., Ν I) 11,31 sed per

se

ipse

ac

(Cicero's text is more amply quoted below, p. 89, n. 119),

77

sua

spornte moveatur

cosmological, make it certain that the author thinks of elements These are said to be both self-moved and moved by the eternal beings. From our long digression on Plato and Aristotle we have learnt that the concept of self-motion is Platonic, and we have also seen in what ways Aristotle continues the Platonic legacy: by splitting it up into ι notion φύσει, and other-directed motion by aioiot. ούσίαιΑ' it wilt be remembered that the idea of a sei [-moved element is mi-Platonic; elemental motion is directed by Son! and raj am Cause. 65 lint self-motion of the elements is an idea which is found in Aristotle, especially in CaeL and Phys. II 66 ; in due course, however, he subordinates this self-motion to the influence of Eternal Movers. 67 To put it bluntly: the idea of an elemental body which has if bulk ways, otz. which is moved both by itself and by an (denial something, 68 is impossible before Aristotle. The t.p.q. derived from the occurrence of the originally Platonic concept of self-motion09 is in this way replaced by an even later t.p., 1 habet,,.

aliquant vint kilenihr'1

aer. The e a r t h

is alive (Sen., Nat. Ifl/lS), 1 4 4 the sea is a living being.141» Reinhardt further stated quite correctly 140 that the concept of vis Vitalis itself is not found in texts of or about the Early Stoa. 147 If has, however, been pointed out that it occurs in texts deri ving from the medical literature of the third Cent, B.C. 148 and that it does not occur in one fragment or us J\jseidu)iius 2-12 ff.; Kusnios und Sympathie, München 102ο, 129; Κ Κ s.\. Poseidonios 700. The relevant texts can be excellently studied in C, J . ί >e Vogel, Greek Philosophy 111, 251 ff. (Nr. 1 I/O if.), of. also, and especially, the notes, ibd. p. 250. For Posidonius' influence upon handbook-literature cf. W. 11. Stahl, Roman Science, Origins, Darlopme nt and Infineone tu the Later 'Middle Madison (U.S.A.) 19o2, 45 ft. ,3y Die Stoa 11,137. NU 11,24 the cad. Ί ins is not externus el adventicius [ND 11,26); according to Reinhardt KM s.v. Pes. 700 047--S, this is typical of the elemental theory of Posidonius (cf. Sen., Nat. V,5,1 : flic air has naturalem vim movendi se, nec aliunde concipere, seil ine:,si Uli etc.) On Pusidoiiiau vital··.m «ee a!-,ο \Y. Theiler, hie Vorbereitung des Neuplalouisiuus, Problemata I, Fierlin 1930 (repr, 1901), 70 ff. 141 Cf. l>e Voi4»'l, o.e. 25b. 1 or a general statement reflecting probably the ideas of Posidonius cf. Varro in Isodorus of Seville, /;7. XI 11,1,1-2 Mund us La tine a philosophis d ictus, quod in sein piler no motu sit, ul caelum, sol, I una, air, may in. Nulla enim requies et us elernentir, ι ο nee s -7, a n d t h u s ind i r e c t l y t h a t of a p o s t - P o s i d o n i a n d a t e for Hebd., w h e r e t h e action of t h e s u n is d e s c r i b e d i n t h e Th^anthean' 1 8 2 t e r m s of Alexander P o l y h i s t o r , b u t w h e r e t h e e f f e c t s of t h e a c t i o n of t h e e l e m e n t of t h e s u n , viz. t h a t t h e e l e m e n t s arc» a l i v e , a r e m o r e in the s p i r i t of P o s i d o n i u s . T h e s p e c i a l role of t h e s u n i n t h e system of P o s i d o n i u s is w e l l - k n o w n . 1 8 3 I t c a n n o t , h o w e v e r , b e d e n i e d t h a t CI cant lies m a d e t h e s u n p l a y a v e r y i m p o r t a n t role a s well. 1 8 4 P o s i d o n i u s will b e to s o m e e x t e n t dependent on C l e a n t h e s , a n d it is, of course, wrong in principle to attribute a But his comments on the "Wärmelehre' axe, f think, sound. He adduces the account of color Vitalis in ND 11,23-24 and quotes the Hymn of Cleanthes, line 4 for the affinity between the human soul and the World-Soul. The passage on the 'ray of the sun' (Diog. L a c r t VI 11,27) which sustains life is compared to Cleanthes" well-known theory of the sun as 'weiterhälfen de Kraft'; he quotes SVF 1,499 and 530 (see also above, p. 91, n. 127). The relationship between the account of the sun in the Hypomn. and Cleanthes' theory was also noticed by P. Boy a nee, (it u des 101; he holds or held that the Ifypomn. is an ea rly document and that Cleanthes was influenced by this particular doctrine. But Ms exposition of the position of the sun within the system of Cleanthes (o.e. 87 ff.) is excellent. 182 An argument in favour of Cleanthes as the source of the theory of the sun in the Hypomn. is, I think, his theory about the shape of fire: SVF 1,498 (---· Aetius, 1,14,5) Κλ. μόνος των Στωικών το πυρ άττεφήνατο κονοειδές. He also said that the heavenly bodies are κωνοειδεΐς, cf. the passages collected as 5 F F 1,508 (the moon apparently is an exception: it is πιλοειδής, SVF 1,506 Arius Did. fr. 34 Diels); this shows that the Technical fire' is no exception. We are reminded of the shape of fire in the Timaeus, where the fire-particles are of a {»y ram ο id shape in order to better penetrate the other elements (cf. above, p. 68) and in Theophrastus (cf. above, p. 82, m 79). The conical shape of fire agrees very well with the penetrating power of the sun's ray in Diog. L a e r t V 111,27. Now, the idea that this ray penetrates the whole universe is explicitly attributed to Cleanthes: 5 F F 1,502 ( = Clement, Strom. V,S,4S,1, p. 358,11 ff.St.) Κλ. πλήκτρov τον ήλιον καλεΐ * έν γάρ ταΐς άνατολαΐς, έρείδων τάς αυγά·.:, οίον πλήσσων τον κόσμον εις την έναρμόνιον πορειαν [το φώς] άγει. This refers to the daily course of the sun. 183 Reinhardt, RE s.v. Pos. 692 ff. and the passages collected by C. J . De Vogel, Gr. Ph. 111,252, Nr. 1176c and 254 ff., Nr. 1179. Cf. also below, p. 1 26ff. One must also keep in mind that Posidonius may just as well have taken much of his solar theory from Theophrastus, cf. above, p. 84-5 and p. 96-7. and esp. p. 79, n. 162 for the concept of Οερμόν. - On the parallel sun ~ heart in Cord, (IX 88,10 ff.L.) cf. F. Kudlien, Posid. u. d. Arzieschule d. Pnenmatiher 425-6. 184 See above, p. 88, p. 91, p. 92, p. 87, n. 104 and p. 91, m 127.

102

passage to Posidonius merely because in it the sun plays a major role. 185 Nevertheless, whereever we find a theory of the sun within a universal vitalist setting, 186 we will do wise to seriously ponder the possibility of its derivation from Posidonius. 187 7. In Cie., NI) 11,24, two examples are given as proof for Cleanthes' thesis that in every living body there5 is great vis caloric, viz. (1) negal (sc. Cleanthes) enim esse ullmn cibum lam gravem quin is nock et die concoquatur,

cuius etiani in reliquiis in est calor

Us quas natura

respuerit.

This phrase certainly is a quotation from Cleanthes. 188 Possibly, but not certainly, lw> also the next example derive/·; from him: (2) iam vera venae el arteriae micare nom desinunt quasi quodam igueo motu, aniniadversumque saepe est cum cor a ηimantis a Ii cuius evolsum ita mohiliter pal pilar et nt imitaretur igneam celeritatem. In t h e m s e l v e s , t h e s e e x a m -

ples are rather trivial. What interests us at the present moment, is that according to Cicero (a) the entrails (active in the digestive process of the first example) and (b) the veins are exemplary receotacles of the heat within the body. This parallels Η ebd. Ch. 6,§2,5 ff.R.: the heat in one of its two cosmic "places', 190 viz. in the earth, corresponds to hoc quod in vise crib us hominis et quod in ν en is calidum est. The point about the venae has been illustrated some lines before, Ch. 6,§1,22 f f . R . : aqua autem f l um in um

imitatio est venae

et qui hi vents

est

sanguinis. This at the same time shows in what way the second 'place' of the calidum (entrails and veins) can be said to correspond to the earth 1 9 1 ; the rivers are here understood as parts of the earth's body. 192 Cf. R. Μ Jones, Posidonius

and Solar Fschatol·· a n i m p o r t a n t difference which h a s b e e n n e g l e c t e d b y e a r l i e r c o m m e n t a t o r s c a t c h e s the eye. In Vict, the h u m a n b o d y is a r r a n g e d a s a c o p y of t h e u n i v e r s e (άπομίμησιν του ολου). 19(ί T h e κοιλίη h a s t h e "power' of the sea. A concretion of cold and moist water a r o u n d the b o d y is a c o p y of t h e e a r t h (άπομίμ,ησιν γ η ς ) . Circuits of fire w i t h i n t h e body have t h e 'power 1 of t h e h e a v e n l y bodies. T h o u g h it is correct to say that μίμεϊσΟοα i n t h e P r e s o c r a t i c 1 9 7 period, in general, does not i m p l y an ontological difference b e t w e e n m o d e l a n d c o p y (as in P l a t o ) , b u t is s o m e t i m e s t h e expression for a reciprocal r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n t e r c h a n g e a b l e comparata,198 it w o u l d be, I t h i n k , correct to s a y that in m o s t cases t h e starting-point of t h e comparison (the comfiaratumj is a n d r e m a i n s d i f f e r e n t f r o m the com par and um. T h i s is c e r t a i n l y the case in Vict.: cf. t h e long d e v e l o p m e n t on art i m i t a t i n g ( h u m a n ) n a t u r e , Vict. Ch. 11 ff. I t is n a t u r e w h i c h p o i n t s t h e w a y here, a s it is n a t u r e w h i c h is prior to t h e h u m a n b o d y , i b d . Ch. 10. I n Hcbd., however, as in Seneca, Nat. 111,15, t h i s order is r e v e r s e d : t h e m o d e l of Vict.} viz. t h e 195 1 do not doubt, by the way, thai the author of Hebd. was familiar with Vict. and that the miVroeosne macrocosm-theory of that work is one of his 'sources'. The difference which I am going to point out is, because of this, even more significant, ft reveals the general background against which the author of Hebd. designed his picture of the world and the body - it reveals what he took for granted. That the universe as μακράνΟρωπος is not a primitive or even an early philosophical idea is argued by R, A Hers. Microeosmus from Anaximander to Paracelsus, Traditio 2 (1944, 319 ff.), 323 ff., 351 IT, who states (ibd. 323) This was the idea of Plato". He is especially thinking of the fact that in the Tim. the universe, just like man, has a soul as well as a body. If this is correct, Viet, will certainly be older than the Tim. (or at least pre-Timaean in the sense in which Democritus is Presocratic). ,9ß The next words, μικρά προς μεγάλα και μεγάλα προς μικρά, may mean 'the small aft er the manner of the great and the great after the manner of the small' (Jones, Loeb trans].), i.e. they may pertain to the mutual correspondences between the parts of the cosmos (μεγάλα) and those of the human body (μικρά). It is, however, also possible to interpret προς differently and to assume that the small and great parts of the human body exhibit the same mutual relationship as the small and great parts of the universe to which they correspond. In favour of the latter interpretation is the fact that the belly (corresponding to the sea) is said to be The greatest': κοιλίην την μεγίστην. is? Note, moreover, that Vict, is not Presocratic in the literal sense of that term, if the t.p.q. of ca. 370 P.C. established for this work by Kehm is correct (s. above, Ch. 1, p. 25, n. 116). las CT. Burkert, Welsh. u. UTss. 41 (note, however, that Hebd. Ch. 6 is his only example for the body as the model of the universe).

105

universe, has become the copy; what was the copy serves as model. At the beginning of Hebd. 6,§l R. we read that the corpora et arbor esim on the earth naturam si mite m hahent mundo quae minima ei quae magna.200 neeesse est euim tmmdi partes,201 cum sint omnia similiter, co mparari

mundo;

ex eqiialibus enim parti bits et siuiilibiis mundo consistunt.

Let us note in passing that the microcosm-macrocosm-theory of Hebd,, though exemplified for the human body only, is said to be valid for plants and animals as well 202 ; in regards to this aspect of the theory, cf. ND 11,23, omnia quae alanturtm el quae erescaut. The opening words of Hebd. Ch. 6 seem to state that the living beings imitate the world {comparari mundo), i.e. that the universe is the model. But this is not the case. It is the human skeleton which serves as the model for the s t o n y 'bones' of the earth, Hebd. 6,§1,11 ff.R. terra quidem stabilis et mobilis media lapidi quidem ossa im it alio η em Habens. Another

clear example of this relationship is Ch, 6,§1,22 ff.R.: the water of the rivers is an i m i t a t i o n (Unit alio est)

of the vein a n d the blood

within the veins. 20 ' 1 The description goes on in this way up to the end of § 1, as is clear from the genitives which must be dependent on imitatio est or sunt: Ch, 6,§1,26 ff. R. stagna ant em vesicae et longa4. 209 See a b o v e , p. 01, p. 1 0 1 . it is true ffiat the t r a g e d i a n Choerilns ef Athens, an earlier contemporary of Aeschylus, c a l l e d the stones the bones and the rivers the veins of the earth, fr» 2 f. 2Ν. καλν τους λίθους γη: οπτα, τους ποταμούς γης φλέβα·:. This is, however, onJ\ a specimen of p o e t i f m e t a p h o r b a s e d upon the generally archaic l a c k of ( l i s t i n H i o n b e t w e e n t h e living and 1 h e dead (ef, W. J. V e r d e n i n s , Archaische Deuh hair one· η, I , a m p a s 2 (1 0 0 0 ) , 96 ff.), and a far cry from a theory in which t h e stones l i t e r a l ! ν copy the b o n e s and t h e rivers copy the veins. A specimen of such p r e - p h i l o s o p h i c . n l and primitive t h o u g h t is cited by Seneca, Nat. II 1 , 1 5 , 1 : the resemblance b e t w e e n the vccrptacnla of wafer etc. in the earth to veins is such vl maiores e/uorpte nosfri ntjuarnm appdlaverint venas. 210 See above, Ch. I, p. 22 ff. and i b d . n . 9 0 - 1 0 3 ; p. 26 and i b d . m 1 1 8 . 211 Ch. 1,91 ff. R. ή γ η . . . έξ ύδατος έοΰσα. Cf. above, Ch. i l l , p. 61. 2"7 208

107

t h a t the e a r t h rides upon t h e air. 2 1 2 B o t h i d e a s occur t o g e t h e r in one cosmological s y s t e m , t h a t of t h e S t o a . 2 1 3 E v e r y t i m e t h e cosmos is reborn, t h e fire first p a s s e s i n t o air, t h e n i n t o w a t e r , f r o m w h i c h the e a r t h develops. 2 1 4 S u c h w a s t h e t h e o r y of Zeno a n d C h r y s i p p u s . Zeno a n d C h r y s i p p u s t o g e t h e r a r e m e n t i o n e d in JDiog. L a e r t . Vll,13(V 2 i 5 a n d f 42. 2 J ( i W e k n o w t h a t Zeno t h o u g h t he could a l r e a d y f i n d t h i s t h e o r y in Hesiod 2 1 7 a n d also t h a t he e x p l a i n e d the p o e t ' s Chaos as being e x a c t l y this pre-eosmie moisture. 2 1 8 For C h r y s i p p u s we h a v e , besides t h e t e s t i m o n y a l r e a d y r e f e r r e d to, a n a c t u a l q u o t a t i o n front t h e first book of his π. φύσεως,219 f r o m w h i c h 1 c i t e : (fire) 8ι αέρος εις υ δ ω ρ τρέπεται, κάκ τούτου γης υφισταμένης... 220 Ch, 2,25 ff.R, ή γ η . . . έν τ ω ήέρι οχέεται. Cf. above, Ch. t i l , p. 60-1, especially for the 'Anaximenean' term έποχεΐσϋαι. 213 On the relation between the Stoa. and Presocratic thought in general cf. Cr um ach, Fhysis und Agathon, 48 : "I leraklit, Diogenes, Anaximenes, wenn mann die Lehre von άραίωσις und πύκνωσις des Weltstoffs in Betracht zieht, haben sie grundlegend beeiiiflusst oder sind von ihr aus einer gewissen Wahlverwandtschaft wieder aufgenommen und der eignen Lehre anverwandelt worden". In the following pages, Grum ach. tries to answer the question as to which motives impelled the Stoics to return to the materialism of the early thinkers. - On the cosmogony of the Early Stoa cf. also W. Spoerri, Späthellenistische Berichte über Welt, Kultur und Götter, Unters, z. Diodor von Sizilien, Schw. Beitr. Alt. Wiss. 9, Basel 1959, 38 ff., 88 ff. 214 Cf. also above, p. 100, n. 171. 215 SVF 1,102 = 11,580. 216 SVF 1,102 — 11,581 : γίνεσΟαι Hz τον κόσμο ν, όταν έκ πυρός ή ουσία τραπη 81' αέρος εις υγρό τη τα (Diog. Laert. VI I J 36 and Arius Did. fr. 38 Diels, both quoted SVF 1,102, speak of ΰδωρ), είτα το παχυμερές αύτου συστάν άποτελεσθη γη. 217 In this way, he made him the predecessor of Thaies, SVF 1,1.03, p. 29,8 ff.; on Thales as a predecessor of the Stoa cf. also Sen., Nat. 111,13,1 -2. 218 SVF 1,103-105 (scholia on Virgil, Hesiod and Apollonius Rhodius; cf. also Philo, Aet. mund., VI, p. 78,6 ff. Colm-W.). For some detail, cf. esp. SVF I, 104... ύδωρ, ου συνιζάνοντος ίλύν γίνεσΟαι, ή ς πηγνυμένης ή γη στερεμνιοΰται and 105 έκ του ύ γ ρ ο υ την ύποστάΟμην γήν γεγενήσΟαί φησιν. From these passages it is clear that Zeno (whose order of elemental change is evidently influenced by Arist., GC 11,4) thinks of earth both as an element and as a cosmic mass. 219 A p. Pint. , Stoic. rep. Ch. 41, p. 1053a = SVF 11,579. Cf. also SVF 11,413, Χρυσίππου ( = Arius Did. fr. 21 Diels), p. 136,20 ff. πρώτης μεν γιγνομένης της έκ πυρδς κατά σύστασιν εις αέρα μεταβολής, δευτέρας δ'άπό τούτου εις ύδωρ, τρίτης δ'ετι μάλλον κατά το ά ν άλογον συνισταμένου του ύδατος εις γήν. 220 It is to be noted that the account of the cosmology according to Hippasus and Heraclitus in Aet. 1,3,11 uses the Stoic ideas and terms which we have encountered above (see p. 100, n. 171): Box. 284,2 ff. τούτου (sc. the fire) δέκατασβεννυμένου (i.e., having become water) κοσμοποιεΐσθαι τά πάντα' πρώτον μεν γάρ το 212

108

T h a t t h e e a r t h rides upon t h e a i r i s a Stoic notion too. According to t h e Stoics, t h e e a r t h g e n e r a l l y r e m a i n s f i x e d in t h e centre of t h e u n i v e r s e 2 2 1 b e c a u s e all bodies m o v e t o w a r d s t h e centre, SVF I f , 5 5 0 2 2 2 πιθανόν πασι τοις σώμα σι. ν είναι τήν πρώτην κατά φύσιν κίνησιν προς το του κόσμου μέσον. T h e elements, so to s p e a k , e x e r t a k i n d of c e n t r i p e t a l pressure, w h i c h keeps the e a r t h w h e r e it is. bor t h e role of air m t h i s process, a n interesting e x p e r i m e n t a l i l l u s t r a t i o n is g i v e n b y Chrysippus, SVP Ϊ Ι , 5 5 5 2 2 3 : οτι δέ καί εστηκεν ή γη, παραδείγματι χρώνται τούτω, ει τις (φασίν) εις φύσκαν κέγχρον βάλοι ή κόκκον φακού, καί φυσήσειε καί έμπλήσειεν αυτήν αέρος, συμβήσεται μετεωρισΟέντα τον κόκκον έν μέσω της κύστεως στη ν αι. καί τήν γήν δέ, πανταχόθεν υπό του αέρος ώθουμένην 221 Εσορρόπως, έν τ ω μέσω είναι καί έστάναι. Ί h e air which s u r r o u n d s t h e m a s s of e a r t h ( a n d w a t e r ) 2 2 5 k e e p s it in its p l a c e . T h a t t h i s i d e a is s i m i l a r to that in Hebdwhere t h e e a r t h , h a v i n g upon itself a n d w i t h i n itself t h e w a t e r , s t a n d s a t t h e c e n t r e s u p p o r t e d b y air, n e e d s no f u r t h e r e l u c i d a t i o n . Moreover, e v e n t h e f o r m u l a έν τ ω ήέρι όχέεται c a n be p a r a l l e l e d f r o m a Hellenistic a u t h o r , a l t h o u g h it is not c e r t a i n t h a t our first e x a m p l e goes b a c k to a p u r e l y Stoic source 2 2 6 : Philo, Vit. Mosis 11,122 (IV, p. 2 2 8 , 1 5 - 1 6 Cohn-W.) άπ άέρος τρόπον τινά γή καί υδωρ έκκρέμανται, το γαρ όχημα τούτων έστιν άήρ. But a Stoic origin

παχυμερέστατον αύτοΰ (sc. of the quenched fire = the moisture) εις αυτό συστελλόμενον γη γίγνεται κ.τ.λ. 221 Also this idea is to be found in 11ebd., ef. above, Ch. Ill, p. 62 ff. 222 P. 173,31 ff., a quotation from the second book of Chrysippus' π. κινήσεως ap. Plut., Stoic, rep. Ch. 44, p. 1054e. For Zeno, ef. SVF 1,99 (Arius Did. fr. 23 Diels), p. 27,27 ff. ορθώς λέγεσθαι πάντα τά μέρη του κόσμου επί τό μέσον του κόσμου τήν φοράν εχειν, μάλιστα δέ τά βάρος έχοντα, ταύτον S' αίτιον είναι καί της του κόσμου μονής έν άπείρω κενω και της γης παραπλησίως έν τω κόσμω, περί τό τούτου κέντρο ν καθιδρυμένης Ισο κ ρ α τ ώ ς. Fire and air, though άβαρή, nevertheless tend to the centre of the universe: τείνεσθαι δέ καί ταΰτά πως επί τό της όλης σφαίρας του κόσμου μέσον, τήν δέ σύστασιν προς τήν περιφέρειαν αύτοΰ ποιεΐσθαι. Doubtless, air and fire are centripetal because they possess "weight* when compared with the void outside the universe. See further Polilenz, Die Stoa II, note to p. 76,11 (to the passages quoted by Pohlenz, add SVF 11,646). Aet. 1,12,4 (on the Stoic theory of light and heavy) is incomplete. 223 P. 175,36 ff., from Achilles, Isag. 4, p. 34,3 ff. Maass. 224 This term occurs also in Sextus' discussion of the various possible (or rather, in his view, impossible) elemental motions, JVJ. X,82 εΐτ' άπο των περάτων ύποκέοιτο ώς επί τ ο μέσον συνοθούμενα (sc. the elemental bodies...) κ. τ. λ. 225 Earth and water together are the 'heavy' ami 'central' elements. 226 For Philo's knowledge of the Vetusta Ρ tacit a, ef. below, Ch. V A, p. 130-1, n. 4.

109

is plausible for some of the expressions in Philo, Α et. mund. IIS 227 (VI, p. 107,20-108,4 Cohn-W.), a chapter which reports the arguments of certain Peripatetics against those who deny the eternity of the cosmos, viz. the great majority of the Stoics, One of these arguments is about the interchange of place of the? elemental masses, which is said to be impossible: ο ο γάρ έ π ο χ η ο ε τ α ί ποτε οϋτε υό'ατι παοα γη ουϋ' ύδωρ αέρι. ούτε άήρ πυρί, for what is heavy (i.e. earth and water) tends to the con he, what is light (i.e. air and lire) goes up. I >ut air and lire do not go up equally high (ούχ' ομοίως): άήρ γάρ πυρός όχημα γέγονε, το δ' ε π ο χ ο ύ μ ε ν ο ν έξ ανάγκης υπερφέρεται. It is reasonable to assume that Philo, or his sou reo, in polemizing against a Stoic theory expresses himself in the language ol that t h e o r y . P h i l o ' s last remark, that the opponents wrongly use the term έποχείοϋαι is indeed a direct hit: one cannot say that something 'rides upon' what is in fact 'above it'. 229 Another cosmogonic reference m a y be implied in Hebd. 1,71 ff. R. ή του ήέρος σύστασις και κόσμος (only possibly; for, of course, σύσταση m a y mean no more than 'substance'); cf. S\ 'F 1,00 (p. 27,33): air and fire tend towards the centre of the universe 230 but f m a t e r i a l i z e in the direction of its circumference', την δέ σ ύ σ τ α σ ι ν προς την περιφέρε ιαν αύτοΰ ποιεΐσΟαι. The word σύστασις (and σύστασιν ποιε'ίσϋαι) have in this context a locative connotation, which is parallel to what we find in Ε ebd.. We have already seen that in Stoic texts air generally is the first σύ στα σι ς ("concretion") of fire. 231 In isolation, ή του ήέρος σύσταοις would not amount to much, but in combination with the Stoic theory of the origin of the earth from water and the Stoic theory of the supporting function of air, 232 the use of this term becomes significant, Possibly, the same holds for the idea in Hebd. that the heat in earth and water is derived from the sun 233 (think of (ho role of the fire in Stoic cosmogony 234 !) Not in Leisegang's Index. Cf. Philo's polemics against the Stoic theory of eiiange and cosmic progression (quoted above, p. 100, n. 171), which uses the Stole term συνίζειν. 220 That the eartli is supported by air is also found in the description of the cosmos of Pliny 11,5»§10 fmitts (sc. aerls) vi mspeusmn,,, telluretn (cf. below, p. 114, ii. 252). 230 Cf. above, p. 109, n. 222. 231 Cf. above, p. 100, n. 171. 232 To say nothing about the other Stoie influence, ]κιν· ν discussed so far. 233 Cf. above, p. 81. 234 Cf. above, p. 91, n. 127; p. 100. n. 171. 227

228

no

9, Our information on the motions of the elements in the universe according to Chrysippus is not without inconsistencies. There is SVF7 11,527 (Arius Did. fr. 31 Diels) which gives the theory of the κόσμος according to Chrysippus; not, however, in a pure form, but padded, as is Arius' habit, with bits of general Stoic theory. 2 3 5 In this fragment (to which 1 shall return presently- 311 ) the elemental spheres are given in the sequence earth, water, air, ether. In regard to the motion, the spheres behave ill a different way: το μεν είναι πε ρ (.φερόμενο ν περί τό μέσον, τό δ' ύπομένον' περιφερόμενον μεν τον αιθέρα, ύπομένον 8έ τήν γήν και τά έπ αυτής υγρά και τόν αέρα.237 The other has a circular movement which earth, water and air do not have. In itself, this is pel fectly clear. However, the picture as given in VΓ 11,555 ( = Achilles, /sag. 4) is different. Here we do not read about four, but about five spheres, though perhaps two of these, viz. αίΟήρ and ουρανός, may be counted as one: heaven, ether, air, writer, earth. And then 238 : έν δέ τω μεσαιτάτω τήν γήν είναι, κέντρου τάξιν και μέγεθος έπέ/ουσαν, ως έν σφαίρα * και τάς μεν άλλας τρεις σφαίρας ή τέσσαρας περιδινεισΟαι, τήν δέ τής γής μόνη ν έστάναι. The spheres of fire (ether -]- ouranos), air and water circle around the earth; only that of the earth is at rest. It can hardly be doubted that SI rF 11,555 gives us a picture of Chrysippus' system which contains a greater amount of historical exactitude than that of Arius Didymus. Wo happen to know that Zeno defined the ουρανός as αιθέρος το έσχατο ν , 2 3 but he does not appear to have made a real distinction between ουρανός and αίΟήρ. We know also that Zeno and Its first two definitions of κόσμος are ascribed to Posidonius ap. 1 >iog. Laert. VI I, I 38. Posidonius, however, can hardly be the ultimate author of the whole fragment, because the order of the planets is not Iris (see W. L. Lorinier, Some Notes on the Text υj Pseudo-Aristotle 'Pie Mundo', St. Andrews Univ. Puhl. 21,

235

Oxford etc. 1025, 50 ff., 127 ff. and J . P. IVlagture, The Sources of Pseudo-

Aristotle de Mundo, Yale Class, St. 6 (1930), 121 ff.) The theory of the fixed stars (which have been set in the heaven which moves them) is not that of Posidonius either, who appears to have distinguished between the outer heaven (aether tenuis — αυγή, cf. below, p. 112) and a separate sphere for the fixed stars (cf. Cic., Nl) 11.54 and below, p. 112; see also p. 1 15. n. 256). But perhaps a 'doxographical' passage in one of Posidonius' works is behind Alius* extract. In favour of a Posidonian redaction is perhaps the comparison, at SVP II, p. 1 OS,10-20, of the supporting tunc lion of the earth to that of the οστέα of a ζωον. 236 See below, p. 113 ff. 23' P. 108,10 ff. Arnim. 238 P. 175,27 ff. Arnim. CI. also \. Tläbler. Zur Kosmogonie der Stoiber, Jbb. CI. Phil. 39 (1893), 298 ff. 239 S P P 1,115, from Achilles (/*/·.'., 5), just as SVF 11,555.

Ill

Cleanthes distinguished between two kinds of fire, the destructive and the productive 240 kind. To these Chrysippus added a third: the αυγή, the finest, thinnest and most superior kind of fire, to which the universe will revert in the end. 241 Cf. SVF 11,668 ( = Pint., Vac. Ch. .15, p. 928c) λέγουσι δέ (the Stoics) του αιθέρος το μεν α ύ γ ο ε ι δ έ ς καί λεπτόν ύπο μανοτητος ο ύ ρ α ν ο ν γεγονέναι, τό δέ πυκνωΟέν... άστρα. 1 he idea t hat the αύγή is finer than the stars was taken over from Chrysippus by Posidonius; Aet. 111,1,8 Ιίοσ. (states thai the Milky Way is) πυρός σύστασιν άστρου μεν μανωτέραν, αυγής δέ πυκνοτέραν. In Chrysippus the αύγή functions, so to speak, as a fifth element, and this explains why Achilles, in reporting on his theory (SVF 11,555), hesitates between three or four spheres, is, or is not the αυγή to be distinguished from the stars? This hesitation, only to be explained on the assumption of a difficulty inherent to the αυγή-theory attested as being held by Chrysippus, shows that Achilles used an excellent source (maybe Posidonius, who, as we saw, took the αύγή from Chrysippus). If this is correct, it is a reasonable assumption that the information about the elemental spheres circling the earth will also be correct, and (strange though it may seem) that this theory was actually held by Chrysippus. 242 At any rate, the circling of ether, air and water around the earth as reported in SVF 11,555 is an exact parallel for Hebd, 2,1 ff., where we have encountered the idea that the κόσμοι above and below the earth (these must be the stars, sun and moon; the air; and the water 243 ) move around the centre (viz. the earth) in a circle. Again a Stoic text is found helpful for the interpretation of the ρ s e u d ο -- FT i ρ ρ ο c r a t i e treatise. 244 Cf. above, p. 88 and ibd. m. 114. 2« S V F J 1 ? 6 1 1 p h i l 0 f A e t m U f U j t go, VI p. 101,1-2 Cohn-W.) Cf. also Fhilo's discussion of the three kinds of fire, ibd. p. 100,20-101,16. 242 Cf. Boyance, Etudes sur le Sange de Scipion, 77 (I have greatly profited from the whole section on 'La theorie de ban^e etiez les Stoinens et Je probleine ein cieF, ibd. 65 ff.). 243 Cf. above, p. 77. 244 It is, of course, possible that Achilles' testimony on the περΆνεΐσΟαι of the 3 or 4 spheres is based on a misunderstanding. But then such a misunderstanding was possible, and Chrysippus was actually misunderstood in this way, which is all we need for a parallel. Cf. also Cleanthes' Hymn, SVF 1,537, p. 122,3-4 σοι δή πας βδε κόσμος, έλισσό μένος περί γαΐαν, / πείθεται κ.τ.λ.: it is possible to understand (or to misunderstand) κόσμος here not as 'heaven' (for which cf. above, Ch. Γ Γ, p. 42 tf., and ρ» 44, n, 35), hut - in view of the opposition κόσμος: γαία 240

112

10. Definitely Hellenistic and Stoic in as far as one can be certain about such things, is also the whole descriptive enumeration of the parts of the κόσμος in Hebd. Ch. 1. This will become clear when we cite as proof Arius Didymus fr. 31 Diels (SVF 11,527), reference to which has already been made, 245 the second Chapter and part of the third of ps. Arist., JJe Mundo**« and C L C . , ND 1 1 , 9 1 - 9 2 and 9 8 - 1 0 4 . In Cicero the description starts with the centre of the universe. In Mil., alter the general definitions οί κόσμος have been given, 248 the earth is the first of its parts to be mentioned, but the description proper starts witli the heaven and proceeds inwards. In Arius Didymus the description again starts with the earth and proceeds in the direction of the oil emu hats ice. i n Hebd, Ch, 1, the order is as in Mu.. We have already noticed that the order in Hebd. Ch. 6 is the opposite of that in Ch. 1, which means that it is the same as in Cicero and Arius Didymus. It is not so much the starting-point which matters as the sequence itself. In all those catalogues the parts of the universe are b r i e f l y characterized; a brevity, however, which does not exclude the possibility of more or less extensive embellishments. Both Cicero and the author of Mu. avail themselves of this opportunity, as can only be expected. Alius Didymus' catalogue is very sober 249 ; also that of 2 4 7

around which this κόσμο; whirles - as, roughly, the whole universe minus the earth. 245 Above, p. 111. 246 The over-all resemblance between SVF II»527 and Mu. Ch, 2 has been often studied: see Mag aire o.e. 120 ff. and H. Strohm, Studien zur Schrift von der Welt, MH 9 (1952, 137 ff.), 140 ff,, who both refer to earlier literature. Cf. also the succinet statement of Lorimer, Some Notes 52. Festugiere, Herrn. Trism, II» 492 ff. usefully prints Arius fr. 31 and Mu. 2-3 in parallel columns. 247 ND 11,91-2 is a 'partial doublet' of 98-104 (so Pease ad I, p. 775). A summary of the contents of 98-115 is given by Festugiere, Herrn. Trism. 11,399. 248 A statement on the κόσμος in general forms the proem (Ch. 1, § 1 R.) of Hebd. 'Die Betrachtung des Gesamtaufbaus der Welt ist alt, aber ihre ausdrückliche Betonung ist spezifisch hellenistisch' (Harder, comm. on Ocellus 14,6» p. 70; he quotes a number of parallels). It cannot be denied that the proem of Hebd, brings out this 'Gesamtaufbau' with special emphasis. 249 i t contains very little descriptive detail. Those details which have been left agree with Mu. (esp. the theory that the l a n d ' consists of islands piercing the sphere of water, SVF I Γ,ρ.168,21-25 - Mu. 3,392b20-33, and the lists of the heavenly spheres which mention the planets by name, SVF Π,ρ.169,1-6 ~ Mu. 2,392a20~29). As Hebd, is the starting-point of the comparisons which will be made in the following pages, the fragment of Arius Didymus will not be adduced. It should be kept in mind, however, that it is definitely parallel to Hebd. Ch. 1 in as far as the over-all structure is concerned.

113

Hebd. i s q u i t e m a t t e r - o f - f a c t with o n l y o c c a s i o n a l l a p s e s i n t o a g r a n d style.250 F o r t h e p u r p o s e s of c o m p a r i s o n it w o u l d b e b o t h c o n v e n i e n t and, 1 t h i n k , c o n v i n c i n g to p r i n t t h e s e p a r a l l e l a c c o u n t s 2 5 1 i n p a r a l l e l c o l u m n s ; b u t t h i s is, for r e a s o n s of e c o n o m y of s p a c e , n o t possible. I will r e s t r i c t m y s e l f to p o i n t i n g o u t t h e i r m o s t s a l i e n t f e a t u r e s . In all t h e s e a c c o u n t s t h e o r d e r f o l l o w e d is t h a t of t h e e l e m e n t a l s p h e r e s ; earth, w a t e r , air, fire 2 5 2 (01s the r e v e r s e ) . Μ η . a d d s t h e The same structure as m Cicero, ps. Aristotle, Arius Didymus and ρs. Hippocrates can be re cog η i zed in Diog. Laert, VIf, 137-156 (though other subjects have been worked in, since Diogenes purports to give a survey of Stoie physics, cf. Vlf,l.a2 and VI 1,100). In this way, we successively have: 137-8, definitions of κόσμος; 144-6, stars, sun, moon; 151b-154a, air; 154b, earth (viz, τά κοιλώματα της γης). Earth does not receive extensive treatment in Diogenes; the ύγρόν is not studied at all. 251 The order in Hebd. and Mu. also corresponds to the order in which these subjects are treated in the Viae. See below, Ch. V A, p. 130 ff. 252 The notion of concentric elemental spheres (to which add that of ether) goes back to Aristotle, cf. Cael. 1 i,4,287a30-bl4, esp. a32 ff. εί γάρ το μεν ύδωρ εστί περί την γην, δ δ' άήρ περί το ύδωρ, το δέ πυρ περί τον αέρα, και τά άνω σώματα κατά τον αύτον λογόν... (bl ff.) ή δέ του ύδατος επιφάνεια σφαιροειδής έστι,ν» το δέ τω σφαιροειδεΐ συνεχές ή κείμενον περί το σφαιροειδές και αύτο τοιούτον άναγκαϊον είναι. Parallels from Meie, are quoted by W. Capelle, Die Schrift von der Welt, N. Jahrb. f. d. Kl. Alt. 8 (1905, 529 If.), 537 n.2. The idea was taken over by the Stoics, cf. SVF 11,558 = Diog. Laert. VII, 155 (earth; water; air) and SVF 11,580 = Diog. Laert. ¥11,137 (fire/ether - with (a) fixed stars and (b) planets; air; water; earth). F o r a possibly Posidonian (Reinhardt, R E s.v. Pos. 702 ff.) version of this theory cf. Cie. ND 11,116-118, which mentions the 25υ

g l o b e s of e a r t h , s e a , a i r ( w h i c h vitalem et salutarem spiritum praebet

animantibus)

and heaven (in which the astra are to be found, which are naturae flammeae). Cf. a l s o P l i n y 11,5 ( § 1 0 ) : nee de elementis video dubitari quatluor esse ea: ignium summum, in de tot stellarurn Mos conlucentium oculos; proximum spiritus, quem Graeci nostrique eoclem vocabulo aera appellant, vitalem hunc et per cuncta rerum meabilem totoq-ue consertum; hums vi suspensam cum quarto aquarum elemento

librari medio spatii tellurem. On t h e t r a d i t i o n a l l y Stoic order of t h e elements in

this passage, cf. W. Κ roll, Die Kosmologie des Dlinius, Abh. Schles. Ges. f. vaterl. Kult., Geisteswiss. Reihe, 3. Heft, Breslau 1930, 6; on the general character of Pliny ΙΓ, 1 ff. see Reinhardt, RE s.v. Pos. 684 ('Nicht rein, vielfältig gefärbt, gebrochen und zersplittert sind die Spiegelungen poseidonischer Kosmologie bei Plinius'). Reference should, also be made to Seneca, Nat. 11,1,1 ff. (the proem), which divides the 'study of the whole' into that of caelestia, sublimia and terrena. T h e f i r s t p a r t s t u d i e s naturam siderum . . . et for mam ignium quibus mundus includitur, t h e p h y s i c a l n a t u r e of t h e caelum, i t s m o t i o n , if it h a s infra sese sidera...

an in contextu sui fix a, in what w a y it sustains the change of the seasons, makes the sun return etc. The second part contains a study of the meteorological

114

A r i s t o t e l i a n e t h e r as a fifth e l e m e n t a l sphere, a special f e a t u r e of t h i s w o r k w h i c h we n e e d not e n t e r into here. I n all of these d e s c r i p t i v e p a s s a g e s the c o n t e n t s of t h e e l e m e n t a l spheres a r e e n u m e r a t e d i n g r e a t e r or lesser d e t a i l ; t h i s m e a n s , t h a t t h e a s t r o n o m i c a l spheres c o n s t i t u t i n g t h e sphere of t h e h e a v e n l y e l e m e n t a r e i n d i c a t e d . I n Cicero,:2,13 A r i u s D i d y m u s a n d ps. Aristotle, the fixed s t a r s a r e c a r e fully d i s t i n g u i s h e d not only from sun a n d moon, b u t also f r o m t h e 'other' p l a n e t s . As we know, this d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e 'other' p l a n e t s a n d t h e f i x e d s t a r s is l a c k i n g in Hebd. Ch. I, 2 5 4 1 s h a l l r e t u r n to t h i s p r o b l e m below, 2 5 5 but m a y be a l l o w e d to point out t h a t a b s o l u t e f a i t h f u l n e s s in following t h e a n a l y s i s w h i c h w e see r e f l e c t e d i n t h e p a i a l l e l accounts, would h a v e possibly d i s a g r e e d w i t h the hebdomadological f a n c i e s of ps. Hippocrates. C e r t a i n l y , t h e explicit a d o p t i o n of a s e p a r a t e 'sphere" of the 'other' p l a n e t s w o u l d h a v e left no room for the e n c o m p a s s i n g άκριτος κόσμος. B u t then t h e u n i v e r s e w o u l d h a v e been left w i t h o u t a skin, a n d t h e niicr()(:osrn-macrocosm-comparison of Ch. 6 w o u l d h a v e been ruined. 2 5 6 phenomena in the air. The subject-matter of the third are waters, earth, plants and every thing contained by the earth. Seneca's distinction of caelestia, sublimia and lev vena corresponds to that of the Plac. (see below, Ch. V, p. 131 ff.); it probably derives from Posidonius (roughly corresponding to that between Ms 'Astrophysik', Meteorology and π. ' Ωκεανού, cf. Reinhardt, RE s.v. Pos. 684), as was argued by Reinhardt, Poscidonios 54-6. 283 Cicero, ND 1 ί ,102 ff. mentions first the sun, then the moon etc.: that is because he gives priority to the most conspicuous among the igneae formae in the ether or heaven (ibd., 101), 254 Cf. above, Ch. i l l , p. 57. Cf., on the 'planets' in Hebd., Ch. V B, p. 138 ff. 256 That the author of Hebd. is not original, but made a deliberate choice from the possibilities suggested by tradition may be concluded from the proem to Seneca, Nat. If (cf. above, n, 252, in fine). Among the problems studied by the science of caelestia are (Nat. 11,1,1) soliduinue sit caelum ac firmae concretaeque materiae (cf. άκριτος κόσμος, Hebd. 1,44-5 R.) an ex subtili ienuique nexum (a reference to the αύγή, cf. above, p. i l l , n, 235 and p. 112. Posidonius appears to have chosen the second alternative), agahir an agat (the solution, of Hebd, is original, but may have been in part inspired by the alternative), et infra sese sidera habeat an in context a sui fixa (Hebd. opts for the first possibility), quemadmodum α η η i vices s er ν at (cf. Hebd. 1,44 ff.R. άκριτου κόσμου... έξοδς εχοντ Οέρεος καί χειμώνος). If Reinhardt is right in his assumption (cf. above n. 252, in fine) that Sen., Nat. LΓ, 1 ff, derives from Posidonius and that it was he who formulated questions like these, another argument would be added to the arguments in favour of a post -Posidonian date for Hebd. put forth above, p. 93 ff.

115

In Hebd. 1,90 ff. the earth is characterized in the following words: . . . ή γή, εφ' ή τ ά τε ζ ώ α και τ· και εστί παντρόφος έξ ύδατος έουσα. MM. 2,391b 13 lias ή φερέσβιος... γή, παντοδαπών ζ ώ ω ν εστία τε ούσα και μήτηρ. Cic., ND 11,98 speaks of terra... vestita floribus, herbis, arboribus, Jrugilms, adding (11,99) quae vero et quam varia genera bestiarnm etc. 207 It appears that the earth has to be characterized as bearing animals and plants. Both in Η ebd. and in Mu. γή receives a choice poetic epi the ton. 258 The chances are, that, one or the other of these epitheta is traditional. It should, moreover, be noticed that the Landes terrae are repeated, in somewhat different terms, in Mu. 3, 3 9 2 b l 4 f f ; 5,397a24 ff. and 6,399a27 ff. 259 In 3 9 2 b l 4 ff. we encounter the ζω α and φυτά of Hebd.: γ ή . . . φυτοις βρύουσα και ζώοις; in 397a24 ff. we read γ ή . . . φυτοις κομώσα. παντοδαποις... και περιοχουμένη ζώοις, κατά καιρόν έκφύουσά τε π ά ν τ α και τ ρ έ φ ο υ σ α κ. τ.λ.; in 399a27 ff. we have, among other things, a reference to δένδρων έκφύσεις, καρπών πεπάνσεις, γοναι ζώων, έ κ τ ρ ο φ α ί τε π ά ν τ ω ν κ.τ.λ. In Hebd. 1,78 ff. the cosmic manifestations of the wet element are catalogued: τό τής Οαλάττης υγρό ν μέρος και ποταμών και κρηνέων και πηγέων και λιμνέων. As is only natural, some of these υγρά are, in the other accounts, mentioned in the description of the earth 260 ; Cic., 257

These a r e specified, a n d a reference to hominum gene re...,

qui quasi

cult or es

terrae constituti is a d d e d .

Φερέσβιος: cf. lies., Theog. 693. For παντρόφος cf. above, Ch. II, word-list s.v. (p. 48-9). Lorimer, Some Notes 110 thought that the epitheton in Mu. was not got from the Stoic source shared with Arius Didymus, but from allegorizing (and also Stoic) comments on Empedocles' Ή ρ η φερέσβιος (FS 31B6.2, cf. A33). Against this hypothesis see Maguire, o.e. 123, n.l (Mu. does not mention Hera and is not concerned with the allocation of parts of the universe to certain deities). I would like to add that the Stoic allegorizer of Empedocles took Ή ρ η φερέπβιος to mean the 'earth* because he was familiar with the life-giving earth as a philosophical idea. Eestugiere, Iierm. Trism. 11,497 counts φερέσβιυς among the 'fleurs de rhetoric]ue' of Mu. 259 Cf. St roh in, Stud. Sehr. v. d. Welt, 143 ff. Also the description of the area of air and fire is repeated (2,392b7-13 ~ 5,397al9-24 - (>,399a24-26; Strohm, o.e. 144). 260 Elsewhere in IJ ebd. (cf. above, p. 81) the υγρά are counted with the earth, which has them 'in and upon' itself (έν έωυτfj και φ' έουτη Ch. 2,27 ff. R. By the way, εφ', not ύφ' is the correct reading; the Latin translations have in se ipsam et super ipsam). For the rivers as veins of the earth cf. Ch. 6§1,22 ff.R. (above, p. 103). Arius Didymus affords a verbal parallel, SVP 11, p. 168, 17-1.8 τήν γήν και τά έττ' αυτής υγρά. Cf. further Pliny Ι1',5, §10 (above, p. 114,

258

ii. 2 5 2 ) cum quarto aquarum elemento...

tellurem.

116

ND 11,98 m e n t i o n s font tum gelidas perennitates, Liquores perlucidos am η i um, rip arum vestitus viridissimos (the s e a is described 11,100).

Mu, 392b 14ff. 2 6 1 mentions γή και θάλασσα... φυτοΐς βρύουσα και ζώοις πηγ αϊ ς τε και π ο τ α μ ο ΐ ς; cf. 397a24 ff. γη... νάμασι ('springs') περιβλύζούσα (the sea is described 392b22 ff., 393a 17 ff.). Cf. especially 3,393a5 ff. αύτού γε μην τούτου (sc. of the cosmos as a whole) το μέν υγρό ν εστίν, δ καλεί ν π ο τ α μ ο ύ ς και νάματα και θάλασσας είΟίσμεθα. It appears that a specification of various types of waters is a common feature in these accounts. In Hebd. 1,70 ff. the air is mentioned a n d its contents are summed up: ή του ήέρος σύστασης... παρέχουσα ύετούς και άστραπάς, β< ρ οντάς > (ei grandines) και χιόνας (et ceteras cansas) For this c a t a l o g u e of atmospherical phenomena peculiar to air, cf. Mu. 2,392b(> ff. ό άήρ... έν δέ τούτω... νέφη τε συνίσταται και ο μ β ρ ο ι καταράσσουσι, χ ι ό ν ε ς τε και πάχναι και χ ά λ α ζ α ι πνοαί τε άνέμων και τυφώνων, έτι τε β ρ ο ν τ α ί και ά σ τ ρ απ α ί και πτώσεις κεραυνών μυρίων τε γνόφων συμπληγάδες.263 The et ceteras causas of Hebd. easily covers those phenomena which are explicitly mentioned in Mu. Part of this meteorological information is also given by Cicero, ND 11,101 aer... tum fusus et extenuatus sublime fertur, turn autem concretus in nub es (cf. Mu.) cogitur unioremque colligens t err am auget imbribus (cf. Hebd., Mu.), turn effluens hue et illuc ventos (of. Ma.) efficit. Not only the coincidences of detail,

especially between Mu. and Hebd., are striking, but what is even more important, the air in all of these three accounts is briefly characterized by an enumeration of meteorological phenomena. 264 In Hebd. 1,63 ff.R. the moon is characterized: it. 'returns' (ανιούσης), i.e. joins the sun again to start its course anew, 265 and has phases, Cf. above, p. 11.0. The lacunae have been supplied from the translations. 263 These phenomena are explained at; length Mu. 4,394a9 ff., the contents of which may ultimately go back to Theophrastus (see M. Strohm, Pos. u. Theophr., above p. 07, n. 160). Note that the phenomena which are put in the 'fine and fiery substance' in 2»392b3 ff. are put in the air in 395a29 ff. (the inconsistency is pointed out. by I). J. Furley, On the Cosmos, in the Loeb Aristotle, On Sophistical Refutations ed. E. S. Forster, London etc. 2 1965, 353 n. e). 264 Cf. also the survey of aerial phenomena ap. Diog. Laert. VI 1,1 52-154, and the brief character]zation of the study of suhlimia Sen., Nat. 11,1,2 (cf. above, p. 114, n. 252): secunda pars traetat inter caelum terrain que versantia. Hie sunt nubila, imbres, nives 'et hunianas motura tο η i tνιιa menlcsquaecumque aer facit patiturve, haec suhlimia dicimiis etc. 265 Cf. above, Ch. II, p. 51, explanation of ανιούσης.

2ei

262

117

τελειούσης προσθέσει, καί με ιού σης άφαι< ρέσει>. Cf. Cicero, ND 11,103 luna... tum congrediens mm sole, turn degrcdiens... ν arias ipsa hie is mutationes habet. Mu. speaks about the nature of the moon riot in Ch. 2, but in Ch. 6, 399a6-12, where the list of the planets as given in 2,392a23-29 is repeated 266 (in reversed order) and the times of their courses are given. Here the moon is characterized as follows, 399a(> ff. σελήνη... έν μη ν l τον εαυτής δ ι α π ε ρ α ί ν ε τ α ι κ ύ κ λ ο ν α ύ ξ ο μ έ ν η τε καί μειου μένη καί φθίνουσα. For the other heavenly phenomena, enumerated in Hebd. (sun, stars, unmoved outer heaven), the parallels in the accounts which we have been addncing up till now are much less convincing. This is only to be expected for the omission of the 'other' planem and the assumption of a separate outer heaven a re peculiar to Hebd..mi The fiery nature of sun and stars in Hebd.26* is paralleled in Cicero: ND 11,101 aether... in quo... igneae formae, viz. sol (102), luna (103) ,260, eae stell a e quas vag as dieimus (103), stellar urn iuerrantiiim maxima multitude (104). In ps. Aristotle, where the ether is taken as a fifth element in a rather orthodox 270 Aristotelian sense, the heavenly bodies are of course not of a fiery natnre. It appears, however, that he is arguing against the Stoic theory of his 'source' in Ch. 2»3fl2a(i ff.: ουρανού δέ κ α ί ά σ τ ρ ω ν ούσίαν μεν αιθέρα καλοΰμεν, ούχ\ ώ ς τίνες, οιά το

πυρώ8η

ο ύ σ α ν α ϊ θ ε σ θ α ι . . . ά λ λ α δ ι ά τ ο α ε ί Οείν κ υ κ λ ο φ ο ο ο υ (ιέ ν η ν . 2 7 1

The coincidences both in general structure and in a number of details are too striking to be accidental. A strong fami 1 y-resemblance between the descriptions of the cosmos in these various authors cannot be denied. The advantages of comparing Hebd. Ch. 1 w ith the parallel accounts are obvions. Not only the case for a Hellenistic date 272 for For r e p e t i t i o n s of this kind, characteristic 4 f f . . . . ώς εκ χ στον έχει φύσεως ('nature') νΔ θέσεως ('posit ion' in the order of things) και κινήσεως. Hebd. Ch. 1 is about φύσις and Οέσιτ, Πι. 2 about κίνησις. 278 It is, however, remarkable that the account in Cic,, ND 11,91-2 Ρ 98-104, which is essentially descriptive, stands in about the same relation to 11,115b-118 (cf. above p. 114, n. 252), which puts the emphasis on rosmic and ceJesiia 1 mechanics, as Hebd. Ch. 1 to Hebd. Ch. 2. Cf. also Pliny, ll,5,§ 1 0(descriptive) §11 (cosmic mechanics). 131)

It is unnecessary to enumerate all the parallels between Hebd, Ch.2 and the accounts of Arius Didymus, ps. Aristotle and Cic. ND 11,91-2 + 98-104. Most of the information given in Hebd, Ch. 2 is quite commonplace though it has been given a somewhat original twist. E.g. Hebd. 2,24 ff. we read that the earth is situated κατά μέσον... τον κόσμο ν . . . ώστε mim κάτω τά δέ μέντοι άνω κάτω είναι, τά δέ κάτω άνω. Cf. SVF II, p. 169,9 ff. the earth lies περί τό μέσον ση μείον του κόσμου..., β δή του παντός έστι κάτω, άνω δέ το άπ' αυτού είς τό κύκλω πάντη. The relativity of hip' and 'down', 277 though not expressed in tiro same terms as in Hebd., is also found to be a feature in the account of Arius Didymus. Hebd. 2,14 ff. and 39 ff.R. it is said that the earth is unmoved ; cf. SVF II, p. 168,17 ύπομένον δέ τήν γήν. The same idea is found Mu. 2,3911)12 ff. ταύτης (sc. τής τάξεως, the orderly arranged universe) δέ τό μεν μέσον, ακίνητο ν τε και έδραΐον ον, ή φερέσβιος εΐ'ληχε γή; in Cicero, ND 11,91 terra sita in media parte mundi (cf. II,98). 278 The distinction between the moving and the unmoved parts of the universe, so prominent in Hebd. Ch. 2, is made SVF^ II, p. 168,15 ff., Mu. 2,391 b l 3 ff. (the earth is at rest, the heavens move; Hebd. is different: the outer heaven and the earth are at rest, the other parts are in motion). - The central position of the moon {Hebd. 2,44 ff. ή σελήνη μέση ούσα συναρμόζει αυτά) is, to a certain extent:, paralleled in Arius Didymus, cf. SVF II, p. 169,6 ff.: the sphere of the moon is the last of the celestial spheres; it touches the air; therefore it looks more like air than the other heavenly bodies, και μάλιστα διατείνειν τήν άπ' αύτής δύναμιν είς τά περίγεια. This leaves no doubt about the role of the moon as a kind of go-between for the suprahmary and the sublunary worlds.

11. Something has yet to be added in order to further clarify certain features in the cosmology of Hebd. We have already remarked upon the parallels for the idea of an outer heaven which is distinguished, from t he underlying stellar sphere. 279 We have also seen that, in Ch. 1,45 ff.R. the idea that an outer heaven 'contains the passing of summer and winter' (εξοδ εχοντ Cf. above, Ch. I l l , p. 62 ff. A host of parallels is quoted by Pease, at ND 1,103 (p. 474 ff.) and by K. Gronau, Poseidomos und die jüdisch-christliche Genesisexegese, LeipzigBerlin 1914, 53-4. 279 Cf. above, p. 115, n. 256. 277

278

131)

Οέρεος κ od χειμώνος) can be paralleled. 2 *" As we have seen, its motion was also a topic of investigation. 281 The idea that the circular movement of the heaven (the κύκλω φορά) is the cause of the change of the seasons etc, is, of course, Aristotelian, 282 but in Aristotle, the1 First Heaven is in motion and it is not distinguished from the stellar sphere. In Heid., the why and how oi the, relation bed ween the Inseparable world' and the change of the seasons is not explained. Now this outer heaven, exerting an enigmatic influence upon what happens below, is said to be unmoved.28:{ It is, 1 think, a plausible, guess that the unmoved outer sphere of Hebd. is a. descendant of the Aristotelian First Unmoved Mover284 which is interpreted in a spatial sense, home support tor this .snpposii ion unty bo d e r i v e d bom the attributes with which it has been invested, at tributes which pertain to tiro realm cd the divine It is called Olympic and Most High: 2,15-6 R. ολύμπιος κόσμος; 2/1J i f. R. ο ολύμπιος κόσμος, ύπατος έ(όν.285 These ideas can, in part, be1 paralleled in ps. Aristotle De mundo. It would, perhaps, be rash to try to reconstrurt a common source for Hebd. and Mu., but a certain family resemblance is, unmistakable. It is generali)'· accepted thai the God. of De mundo is a descendant of Aristotle's First Unmoved Mover.286 We are told that he resides in 280 281 282

283

Cf. above, p. 1 L I a. 250 ( S e n e c a ) ; p. 118, n. 207 Cf. ibd. Cf. above, p. 76.

Cii. 2,14 ft., 39 ft. R. (earth

{Mu.)

Olympic world).

Cf. above, p. 70 iL 285 Boll's conjecture (ms. ύτο τοσωνΗζ) is u n d o u b t e d l y right, cf. the L a t i n tnoisla ί ions, which hove olvnipn>· nuindns snmwitatcni lenem. Lor ύπατος as e pi the ton of Zeus a n d other gods cf. L S j s.v. 1,1. T h o u g h ύπατος is also used in a s t r i c t l y local a n d a temporal seilte ( L S ] s.v. 1,2 and 3), its being conjoined to ολύμπιος is, I think, in favour of the interpretation adopt cd in the t e x t . Cf. also Xenocra tes fr. 18 Ifenize ( - - Pint., Ouaesi. plat. 1 007 f) το γάρ αν ω καΐ πρώτον ύ π α τ ο ν οι παλαιοί προσηγορευον · η και Η. Δία τον μέν έν τοις κ α τ ά ταύτα και ω σ α ύ τ ω ς ε χουσιν ύ π ά τ ο ν καλεί (quoted b y Strohm, Studien 159, n. 75). Xenoe r a l e s seems to have a d v o c a t e d a spatial interpretation of the realm of the Ideas, cf. fr. 5 Heinze, where the ούτία νοητή is placed outside the ούρανός. F. 1 >oyance, La religion astrale de Plat on mux Stoiciem» 331 ff. h a s p l a u s i b l y a r g u e d t h a t these ideas are derived from a literal exegesis of t h e ύπερουράνιος τόπος in the m y t h of Plato's Phaedv. (247c3); cf. a l r e a d y Ii. Μ. Jones, Posidonius and the Flight of the Mind through the Universe. CI. Ph. 21 (192(3, 97 ff.), esp. 101 ff. 286 Zeiler 111,1,660; Capelle, Schrift von der Welt 566; Festugiere, Herrn. Trism. 11,512; M a g u i r e 148 iL; Stroinn, Studien 159-60. 284

131)

the highest and. first place, and is called Highest for just this reason, Mu. 6,3971)25 ff. την μεν ούν άνο>τάτο> και πρώτην εδραν αύτο ς έλαχε ν, ύ π α τ ο ς τε δια τούτο ώνυμασται, [και] κατά τον ποθητή ν 'άκροτάτη287 κορυφή'... εγκαθιδρυμένος ούρανοΰ.288 From this it is apparent that the God is said to have his home in the highest place of the universe (cf. also 3081)8-9... αυτόν μεν επί της άνωτάτω χώρας ίδρύσΟαι). This place is explicitly defined a few pages further down, 400a4 ff.... ο θεός... άνω καθαρός έν καθ α ρ ω χωρω 6 ν Ιτύμως 289 καλουμεν ουρανό ν ά π ό τ ο υ ορον είναι

τον ά ν ω , 2 9 0 " Ο λ υ μ π ο ν

δέ ο ί ο ν

όλολαμπή

κ.·τ.λ. 2 9 1

The language used by ps.Aristotle implies that lie is unmoved: εδραν,292 ίδρυσθαι, εγκαθιδρυμένος, βεβηκώς - this is, in any case, unambiguously stated 4001) 12-13 έν άκινήνω γάρ ιδρυμένος πάντα κινεί και 2«7

H o n e , //. J »409. Cf. t h e story of how the u p w a r d s vow ige (Phaedr. 247a8 ff. άκρα ν επί τήν ύπερουράνιον - cf. De Vries, Comm. ad /., ρ. 1 3 2 - ά ψ Τ δ α . . . προς άναντες) of the souls of t h e Gods in P l a t o ' s Phaedrns ends (2471)7 if.) ήνίκ' αν προς ά κ ρ ω γένωνται, ε!> ττορευΟε','σαί,, έ σ τ η σ α ν ε π ί τω τ ο υ ο ύ ρ α ν ο ΰ ν ώ τ ο , σ τ α σ α ς δέ αύτάς περιάγει ή περιφορά κ.τ.λ. (cf. also De Yries, o.e. 135). Note t h a t the souls of t h e Gods do not h a v e a m o v i n g function when t h e y feast upon the sights outside h e a v e n . B u t in general, t h e "perfect (kind of) soul t r a v e l s on high and a d m i n i s t e r s t h e universe 1 ,, 24 6 c 1 2 τ ε λ έ α . . . ου σ α . . . μετεωροττορει τε και πάντα τον κόσμο ν διοικεί (cf. also a hove, p. 67 a n d ibd., n. 5). Κόσμος here p r o b a b l y m e a n s 'the heaven 5 , cf. above, Ch. 11, p. 42-3. 289 The e t y m o l o g y of "Ολυμπος also occurs Stob., Eel. 1,22,2 (1, p. 19«S W., ps. P l u t a r c h . ) and Pint., Vit. Horn. 11,95 (ei. Diels, Dox. 95-6 and Lorimer, Some Notes 109). Diels' a r g u m e n t (o.e. SN -99) t h a t a Stoic Allegorizer is t h e original source w a s accepted by Lorimer. Lorimer a r g u e d t h a t also t h e Homeric q u o t a t i o n s in Mu. (which, with one exception, it shares with t h e v a r i o u s sources reflecting the Allegorizer) derive from this s a m e source (o.e. 110), which w a s reconstructed, hi as far a s possible, by Diels, I.e. 2 9 0 Cf. also 2,391 b l 4 ff.: "the region a b o v e the e a r t h , which a s a whole a n d in e v e r y direction h a s a highest upper limit (πεπερατο.»μένον εις τό ά ν ω τ ά τ ω ) , t h e dwelling of t h e g o d s ( ! ) , is called h e a v e n (ουρανός)'. T h e highest God, dwelling w i t h i n t h e upper limit, is not mentioned here, b u t w e h e a r a b o u t t h e 'divine bodies' of t h e stars. This whole h e a v e n , i.e. including its u p p e r limit, is said to be m o v i n g , e x c e p t for t h e poles (391.bl9-392a5). 291 This is further i l l u s t r a t e d b y q u o t a t i o n s from Homer (Od. 6,42-5 a n d //. X V , 1 9 2 ) a n d a reference to t h e u n i q u e c h a r a c t e r of t h e h e a v e n l y bodies. Strohm, Studien 159 a n d 160» n.76 points out t h a t t h e doctrine of Mu. is no p o p u l a r t h e o l o g y : the q u o t a t i o n s from Homer t e s t i f y to 'hochpliilosophische S p e k u lation 1 , which h a s its roots in Plato a n d Aristotle's π. φιλ. On t h e other h a n d , Festugiere, Herrn. Trism, 11,514 stresses 1 he o r i g i n a l i t y of Mu. a n d s a y s if foreshadows Gnostic ideas. 292 Cf. 2 , 3 9 1 b ] 2-3, w h e r e t h e e a r t h is said to be a t t h e άκίνητόν τε και έδραΐον. 288

131)

περιάγει, and esp. 4001)31 -2 ηγουμένου δέ άκινήτως αύτου. Now, it should be noted that ps, Aristotle seems to waver between the concept of a transcendent and th.it of an immanent 293 God: He is said to be both 'in' the Heaven (but the Heaven moves 291 ) and to be έν άκινήτω etc, It will be clear how close the affinitv between these ideas in Mu, and the ideas a,bout the unmoved outer heaven in Hebd. really is. In Mu,, God is put now in an unmoved place, winch has to be irna.gined as situated on the other side of the First Moved Mover (the1 stellar sphere), 205 now in this outer sphere itself. 200 Only a little reshuffling t h e eompat isons of 1he function of God to t h a t of ί b;/;. X,901e-e). This interpretation, which p r o b a b l y s t a r t e d with X e n o c r a t e s (above, n. 285) is reflected in a. number of passages in Philo» esp. Op. wund. 09 ff. — I» p. 23,9 ff. Cohn A V., Leg. alleg. I l l , Η·1, _= f, p. 131,18 ff.GolmAV., Spec. leg. 1/207 V, p. 50,1 ff.Cohn-AV. (also quoted by Jones, I.e.). 1 'oya.nee also refers to Platonists (o.e. 3 2 6 ) : M a x . T y r . X V I (X),0, Apul. De Plat. 1,11, and (o.e. 338) to t h e rhetor Menander, l)e encomiis p. -1 14,10 ff. S pen gel. 1 ti the Hermetiea, the solution seems to be t h a t the Upper Cod resides in a 'place* outside the universe, while the Demiurge h a s his seat in the sphere of the fixed stars, cf. A set. J 9 , Stole, Herrn et. Exe. X I I , 1 and X X ί , 2 ; and Ρ· -iiv. 25 e% where the ascent of the soid through the 7 p l a n e t a r y spheres, until it r e a d i e s τήν ογδοατικήν φύσιν ('the eighth and outermost sphere, t h a t of t h e fixed stars, is described. This is the δημιουργική σφαίρα spoken of in (J^rim.) 13a', W . Seott, / l e r m e t i c a 11, Oxford 1925, 63). W h e n also t h i s sphere h a s been transcended, the soul returns to God (cf. J . Kroll» Pie I.ehren des Hermes Triswcgistos, !>eitr. Gesch. Phil. d. Mit tela Η. X U (1914), I i. 2 -1. Minister i.W. 1014, 3 0 7 : the S u p r e m e God t r a n s c e n d s the ογδοάς). In Herrn. XI 11,15 the ογδοάς is 'revealed 1 by P o i m a n d r e s . For t h e ογδοάς in t h e Christian Gnosis cf. K. Reitzenstein, Poimandres» Stud. z. Griech.-A eg. u. frühchristl. Lit., .Leipzig 1904» 54; Scott, o.e. 63-4 a n d Kroll» o.e. 304 ff. E s p e c i a l l y interesting is Basihdes, ap. Hippel.» l i e f . 7,27 εστίν ό κόσμος διηρημένος είς (1) ογδοάδα, ήτις έστιν ή κ ε φ α λ ή του παντός κ ό σ μ ο υ . . . και tic (2) έβδοιχάδα (the region of t h e 7 p l a n e t s ) κ.τ.λ. The concept of the όγδοic is foreshadowed in X e n o c r a t e s (Cic., ND 1,34 fr. 17 Heinxe), who said there were 8 (stellar) Gods: the f i v e planets, t h e sphere of the f i x e d stars, the sun, a n d t h e moon. For a r e l a t e d conception cf. Cic.» Somn. Scip. 9 : here w e h a v e 2m

131)

of the cards is needed in order to produce an outer sphere which is to be distinguished front the stellar sphere, a sphere which is unmoved and to which some divine attributes and a vague suggestion of intramundane influence have stuck, 'Ολύμπιος and ύπατος are not the only divine attributes to be found 111 the cosmoiogicai chapters of Hebd. In Ui. b,§2,13 ff.R. bodily heat below the skin around the flesh is compared to the heat below the outer heaven surrounding the universe: hominis ealidum circa cam em quod per eeleritalem sftlcudens mulat calores, si cut el illic lovem aegiocunimi inveni.es esse.2m The next sentence is desperately corrupt: Arcturius (A, ero. Mos Ρ) aulem fervoris (-es Ρ) in ho mine {in omnem Ρ) ο per alio nc ni quacslula e nuhila (que e sole η u In la P). In Ch. 6,12,9 ff.R., i.e. a few lines earlier we have been informed that the heat in the upper regions of the universe which is 'compared' to that below the skin is that of stellae el solßm Although the sentence A returius... enutrita is corrupt, it is at least certain that it mentions a star or stars, 300 which is/are related to heat (fervores), and that these are, 9 spheres, quorum unus est caelestis extumus, qui rehquos omnes compleclilur, sum m us ipse de us, arc ens et continens omnia, Cf. also the references quoted b y Maguire, o.e. 155, n. 89. For the concept of the highest Divinity in the Jlermetica cf. also Asel. 27, de us supra ν er tic em sutmni caeli consistens ubique est omniaque circum inspicit. [sic] est enim ultra caelum locus sine siellis ab omnibus rebus corpulent is alienus (this region sine siellis - cf. the outer sphere of Hebd. - is in t h e t r a d i t i o n of t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Phaedr us-myth). Especially interesting is t h e discussion of motion ami space in Herrn. 11,1-12, c u l m i n a t i n g in a definition of the D i v i n e : space, in w h i c h the world is moved, h a s to be g r e a t e r t h a n t h e w o r l d ; space is God; God is ιι η moved, but t h e u l t i m a t e cause of motion. Mow this s p a t i a l concept of God is (even to a m y s t i c ) not w i t h o u t difficulties, cf. ibd. 11,6 (I q u o t e t h e t e x t w i t h o u t the e m e n d a t i o n s which h a v e been proposed) εl δέ νοητός 6 τόπος, ούχ' 6 θεός, άλλ' ό τόπο;, εί δέ καΐ 6 θεός, ου/' ως τόπος, άλλ* ώς ενέργεια χωρητική. hor the concept of motion cf. ibd. π α ν . . . το κινοΰμενον ουκ έν κινουμένω κινείται, άλλ' έν έ σ τ ώ τ ι · καΐ τό κινούν δέ εστηκεν, a n d 8, π α σ α . . . κίνησις έν στάσει καΐ ύπο στάσεως κινείται. In Asel. 27 the highest, t r a n s c e n d e n t God is distinguished from a Zens 'between heaven and e a r t h ' . For the dependence of t h e theology of Mu. from t h a t of Plato a n d Aristotle cf. Strohm, Studien 158 ff.; however, (if I h a v e understood him correctly), S t r o h m does not enter into t h e problem of transcendence vs. i m m a n e n c e , 297 Λ s t a n d a r d epitheton of Zeus, cf. L S j s.v. αίγίο/ος. 298 So Α. Ρ h a s calorem a n d omits invent. 299 Cf. above, p. 79-80. 300 Arcturius c a n n o t be r i g h t as it s t a n d s (possibilities: 1 returns, - i, -um). Ps. Galen Nr. 41 (p. 79 Bergstr.) t r a n s l a t e s 'die beiden K a l b s s t e r n e ' ; for t h e m e a n i n g of ' K a l b s s t e r n e ' cf. Nr. 24 (p. 37 B e r g s t r . ) ' "Αρκτος, d.i. d a s Kalb, folgt 131)

in one way or another, related to a phenomenon within the human body. It is, therefore, a reasonable assumption that, where A returns or "Αρκτοι represent the slellae, lovem aegiocum will stand for sol. Indeed, ps. Galen Nr. 40 Bergstr. speaks of 'Saturn' and interprets this as "Sonne1 ! The changing colours of the skin are explained as the effects ol the, by reason of its velocity, resplendent subcutaneous heat. The same changes can be observed 'up above' when we look at the 'aegis-bearing Zeus' and (one of) the stars. The general point of comparison is clear although somewhat marred by the fact that we dein Stern, del * \ρ>-:τουρος genannt wird, d.i. der S c h w a n z des Kalbes*. Possibly, therefore, t h e original of ps. Galen had "Αρκτοι,, of which the unintelligible 0 l e t t e r s em. Has of Ρ m a y be a remnant (cf. W . Capelle, Altere Spuren der Λ Strategie bei den Griechen, Herrn. 00 (1925,373 ff.), 380 ff.). Kranz not v e r y conscient i o u s l y preferred the fancies of Harder (cf. above, Ch. 1, p. 4, n. 9) to t h e t e x t of ps. Galen as evidence for his reconstruction of w h a t ps. Hippocrates a c t u a l l y wrote (Kosmos und Mensch 157-8); his defence of A returns a g a i n s t the ' K a l b s s t e i n e ' , however, is not unacceptable, for Arcturus p e r h a p s is a b e t t e r ' s y m b o l ' of t h e effects of h e a t upon t h e skin t h a n t h e P e a r (o.e. 109; ibd. n. 7 refers to P. Boll, Antike Beobachtungen jar higet Sterne, Λ bh. P a y r . Ak. 30 (1918)). An a t t e m p t to emend the whole sentence w a s m a d e by Pfeiffer, Stud. z\ ant. Sterngl. 36 ff.; t h i s is w h o l l y speculative. His suggestion t h a t /encores m e a n s 'anger' (o.e. 37) w a s a d o p t e d b y K r a n z (o.e. 169); 'passions' is j u s t as good a guess, but we c a n n o t be certain. Ps. Galen, a t a n y rate, t r a n s l a t e s 'Die beiden Kalbssterne gleichen der Wärme, die im Menschen ist' (Nr. 41 B e r g s t r . ) . I can find no support in the t e x t for t h e supposition of Pfeiffer a n d K r a n z (which, a s I believe, u l t i m a t e l y goes back to a guess of H a r d e r ) t h a t A r c t u r u s d i r e c t l y influences a n g e r ; indeed, Kranz himself h a s to a d m i t t h a t Ch. 6 as a whole only compares bodily a n d cosmic p h e n o m e n a . Furthermore, it should be pointed out t h a t both Pfeiffer and Kranz eclectically combine those readings of t h e t r a n s l a t i o n s which t h e y can u n d e r s t a n d . This method, on t h e whole, a m o u n t s to p u t t i n g the first half as in Λ before the second half a s in Ρ Now P's que e sole nutrita c a n n o t refer to m a n , as Pfeiffer thought, for que is not — qui, but quae. K r a n z (o.e. 170) held t h a t the bodily h e a t is the antecedent, of qu(a)e, a n d t h a t this h e a t is, in t h e last a n a l y s i s , derived from t h e sun. We cannot, however, be sure a b o u t t h e antecedent, a n d not u l t i m a t e derivation, b u t only m a i n t e n a n c e is implied b y nutrita. M y own guess is, t h a t it m a y be A r c t u r u s (or the B e a r ) which is ' s u s t a i n e d ' b y the sun, j u s t as the fervoves (outbursts of passion?) within the h u m a n b o d y are sustained b y t h e s u b c u t a n e a ! heat.. This would at least agree w i t h t h e earlier t h e o r y of the derived light (heat?) of the s t a r s (cf. above, Ch. II, p. 38, s.v. άνταυγία) and, perhaps, m a k e s it easier to u n d e r s t a n d w h y the s t a r s in general a r e said to be hottest (cf. above, p. 80, n. 73). I do know t h a t in the prologue of Planters' Eudens one should t a k e the role of A r c t u r u s (splendens stell a Candida) as a special s e r v a n t of 1 uppiter (cf. lovem aegiocum !) seriously. 131)

observe the bodily phenomena from the outside and the celestial ones from the inside. This identification of Zens is not the only possible one. If one completely despairs of getting anything worth-while out of the corrupt sentence A relurius ff., Zeus has to be identified with all of the calidum within the upper regions of the universe, i.e. vvim both slellae and soLmi This amounts to the identification of Zeus and ether in the Stoic 302 sense. For tins idenüfkation mir evidence is quite sufficient; 5 VF 11,1077 ( = Cic., ND 1,40) idemque (sc. Chrysippus) disputat aet herd esse eum quem homines lovem appellarent; 5 VF 11,1.176 ( = Philod. De piel. p. 79 Ciomperz; Diels, Dox. 546) Δία δέ τον αιθέρα.303 An interesting parallel is afforded by Achilles, hilr. (p. 82,8 iL Maass:MM) Δία Μ oi μέν τον ούρανον, ot δέ τον αιθέρα, οΐ δέ τον ήλιον... έξεδέςαντο. Cf. also Joannes Diaconns, Α lieg. in Theogonimn p. 381,3(,δ Ζήνα τον αιθέρα οίητέον, τουτέστι το πυρ στοιχεί,ωτικον του παντός* τούτο γάρ ζωής αίτιον, και δι" αύτοΰ ζώμεν, κινούμενοι τε και ύποθερμαινόμενοι. το δέ πυρ, ώς ζωογόνον μάλλον και συ στατικό ν κ.τ.λ. Zens-ethei -fire is here the cause of life - vital h e a t ! The quotation from Achilles also mentions the identification of

Kranz, o.e. 108 ff. t h o u g h t lovem applied to t h e p l a n e t l u p i t e r . This is i n c o m p a t i b l e with his proposed d a t e (the n a m e s ol t h e Gods did not begin to serve a s p l a n e t a r y n a m e s before the beginning of the first Cent. A.D. Cf. F. Cumorit, Les mm is des planetes che ζ les Grecs, Ant. CI. 4 (1935), 5 ff.)» -But e v e n if t h i s proposal is rejected, t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n is still h i g h l y implausible, T h e p l a n e t l u p i t e r is not the first l u m i n a r y which conies to mind when one searches for h e a v e n l y 'symbols' for the colour-phenomena of the h u m a n skin. R o s c h e r ' s suggestion (191 i, 9 7 ) : Zens ~= ether or s k y , is m u c h better. The "sky* a s a whole (Presocratic parallels h a v e been collected b y Burkert, Welsh, to JL?s\n\ 327,11.72), however, is impossible because of ps. Hippocrates* distinction between t h e cold άκριτος κόσμος a n d t h e realm of t h e t (didurn below i t ; Zens is t h e m o v i n g calidum, not t h e u n m o v e d "inseparable h e a v e n ' . 302 The Presocratic e x a m p l e s for Zeus — ether, collected b y Kranz, Index VS p. 188a7ff., a r e d o u b t f u l . Fmpedocles, if is true, called Ms f i e r y e l e m e n t b y t h e n a m e of Zeus (!U>,2; cf. W. K. C. Guthrie, JIG Ph. 11,144-6). However, in view of t h e outcome of our s t u d y of the calidum (see above, p. 79 ff., p. 87 ff.) it is not n e c e s s a r y to go b a c k to t h e Presocratic period once it can be established t h a t t h e Stoic calidum w a s called Zeus b y certain Stoics, 303 Cf. f u r t h e r j . H . W a s z i n k , Aether, R A C 1, I960, p. 152 ff. 304 This m a y h a v e been derived from Posidonius, 3 0 5 (Gaisford, Poet. min. graec. I I I ) . ( J u o t e d b y Ferguson, i n : S c o t t - F e r g u s o n , Hermetic a !¥', Oxford 1936, 412. 301

131)

Zeus and sun. This appears to be a Posidonian idea. 306 Macrobius, Sat. 1,23 quotes Cornifieius Longus (second half first Cent. B.C.) as authority for Posidonius1 interpretation of certain Homeric and Hesiodic lines, 307 which mention Zeus' trip to Oeeamis, the all-seeing and all-hearing Sun, and the all-understanding eye of Zeus. Also the interpretation οί Plato, Phaedr. 24üe (Zeus in the myth) is important. For a discussion of the evidence a reference to Reinhardt's succinct statement in his KE-aiticlc 306 may suffice. We had reason to assume that lovem aegiocum in Hebd. really is the sun because the stars (represented by either Bear or P>ear-Ward) are separately mentioned. If this is correct, and if Reinhardts theory about Posidonius identification Zeus = sun is also right, as 1 believe it is, this would add up beautifully to the results of the earlier parts of our investigation 308 the more so, because the 'aegis-bearing Zeus' represents the calidum, which earlier in this Chapter we found to be related to a Posidonian * Wärmelehre 1 . 309 The last point which 1 wish to discuss in this chapter is that of the contradiction between the assumption of αώια (Ch. 2,55 ff.R.), 310 which appears to imply the eternity of the universe, and the vestiges of cosmogonical speculation which are involved in the idea (Ch. 1, 94-5 R.) 311 that the earth lias originated from water etc. In a great thinker a contradiction of this kind would be a very serious matter, Cf. R e i n h a r d t , Kosm. u. Symp, 353 ff.; a n d R E s.v. Pos. 695-7 ('Sonne gleich Zeus'), where also other e vide nee is q anted. See f u r t h e r above, p. 102-3. 307 II. 1,423-5; 111,277; Hes SJ Op, Ihl. Cf. above, p. 93 ff. 300 Cf. above, p. 186 if. - The distinction, ia Hebd,, between a n O l y m p i c a n d H i g h e s t H e a v e n and a Z e u s / c a l i d u m below this h e a v e n can, to a certain extent, be paralleled from the tiermeiica. Asel. 27 mentions (a) a Highest, t r a n s c e n d e n t God (cf. above, p. 123, n. 296) a n d (b) (vilae?) dispensator qui est, inter caelum el tcrram obtinet locum, quem lovem ν ο cam us. (Asel. 19: cue It vet quicquid est, quod eo nomine conprehendilur, ούσιάρχης est lu ρ piter: per caelum en im / up pit er omnibus praebel vitam is different, because in piter here a p p e a r s to be a t r a n scendent power which uses caelum as his i n s t r u m e n t ; cf. Fesiai^iere, Les dieux ousiarques de Γ A sclepius, i n : I fermetisme et mystique pa'ienne, Paris 1967, 120 ff.: the idea in t h e Asel, is derived from the Oracula Chaldaica, not from Stoicism. Seott, Tiermeiica H I , Oxford 1926, 109 ff., 122 a r g u e s in f a v o u r of a Stoic b a c k g r o u n d . P e s t u g i e r e ' s a r g u m e n t s h a v e convinced me, but Seott m a y be r i g h t in holding t h a t t h e exceptional mentioning of Zens in the Hennetica may be a r u d i m e n t of Stoic t h e o l o g y ) , 310 Cf. above, p. 77, p. 84, p. 92, p. 93» 311 Cf. above, p. 107 ff. ao6

131)

but with an unoriginal thinker like ps. Hippocrates we can be more forgiving: some of the pieces which he glued together do not quite fit, But there is more in these contradictions than meets the eye. The idea that the universe came into being, but will nevertheless never perish, ultimately goes back to Plato's Timaeus. We have evidence that the interpretation of the cosmogony oi the / etuacus continued to be discussed in Hellenistic times. Philo, Aet.Mil. 7 (VI, p. 75,1 ff. Cohn-W.) 312 distinguishes three points of view: (a) the universe is eternal, unborn and imperishable; (b) the universe has come into being and will perish again; (e) though it has come into being, it will not perish: 13, p. 76,16 ff. γενητόν δέ και άφΟαρτύν φασιν ύπο Πλάτωνος έν Τ ι μα ί ω οηλούσΟαι. This depends, among other things, on the interpretation of the speech of the Demiurge to the Gods, Tim. 41 a(>if. (which is quoted by Philo). We also read (17, p. 77,20-78,3) that Plato was inspired by Hesiod. Philo's scholastic division shows that the three possible points of view probably featured as such in the handbook-literature upon which he depends. Now, the problem of the eternity vs. the birth and destruction of the world was often debater! between Stoics and Peripatetics: already Theophrastus up. Philo, Aet. mu, 117ff., VI, p. 108ff. Cohn-W. (fr. 30 Wimmer) defended the eternity of the universe. So did Critolaus (A el. mu. 70, p. 94 and 55, p. 90, = Fr. 12 and fr. 13 Wehrli). 313 The Peripatetic point of view is adopted by Ocellus314 and by the author of l)e mundo?1* Philo also tells us that ΒοηΟος γοΰν ό Σώώνιος και ΙΙαναίτιος went over to the Peripatetic side, Aet. mu. 76, p. 96,19 ff. Some editors read Βοηθός και ΙΙοσειδώνιος καί If αναίτιος, but there is no need to change the text; besides, Posidonius appears to have spoken about the dissolution of the world. 316 It has, however, been argued 317 that Posidonius may have thought that the problem can not bo solved and that he considered

T h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of P l a t o w a s also incorporated into t h e Ρ lac., cf. Aet. 11,4,2 (Stobaeus) ΙΙλ. φθαρτών μέν τον κόσμο ν ο σον επί ττ> φ ύ σ ε ι . . . ού μην φΟαρησόμενόν γε προνοία και συνοχή Οεου. Aet. Ii,4,1 (ps. Flut.) ascribes this t h e o r y to P y t h a g o r a s , P l a t o και οί Στωικοί. Cf. also ps. ( i a l e n , Dox. 609,14. sis Wehrli, comm. ad fr. 12-13 (p. 64-65) a r g u e s a g a i n s t Theiler's assumption (in his r e v i e w of H a u l e r ' s Ocellus Luc anus, Gnomon 2, (1926), 590 ff.) t h a t Philo m a d e e x t e n s i v e use of Critolaus. On Critolaus cf. also Strohm» Studien 150. 314 To which Philo refers Aet. mund. 12, VI. p. 76,13-15, C o h n - W . 315 Cf. Magnire, o.e. 137 ff. a n d Strohm, Stadien 1 17 ff. 316 CI Diog. L a e r t . ¥II,f42; Aet. 11,9,3. 317 B y L Edelstem, Philo*. Syst. Pos. 294-5. 312

131)

eternity and destruction as alternative possibilities. It is indeed likely that the alternatives were at least discussed by Posidonius. Anyhow, it is at least clear that the younger Stoics were less enthousiastic about the destruction of the world than the members of the Early School had been. We may assume that the άίοια mentioned by ps. Hippocrates will be the heavenly bodies,318 especially the sun. We have come to the tentative conclusion that the sun319 is called "aegis-bearing Zeus' and that also the Highest and Olympic heaven exerts an influence of a kind on the cosmic processes. The heavenly bodies, esp. the Sun (and presumably also the unmoved Outer Heaven), act as subsidiary causes of cosmic motions. This answers one of the questions which we posed at the beginning of this Chapter, 320 viz., that concerning the relation between the 'other things' and the 'eternal beings' which contribute to their motions.

1 13 ) 318 Cf. above, p. 70, n. 25 and p. 77, n. 62; and further p. 77-8, p. 84, p. 86, p. 92-3. 319 Cf. also above, p. 80, p. 101. 320 Above, p. 66.

CHAPTER

V

VARIOUS QUESTIONS

(A), 1IKB1). C i L

l - l I AND THE

PLACITA

1. In discussing the description of the universe as found in Hebd. Ük, 1» we arrived at tin: ι ojichision iiiat p>. Hippocrates followed a scheme which can also be recognized in related passages in other, roughly contemporaneous works. 1 On that occasion, I pointed out that the same scheme is to be found in the Placitu as well. 2 The resemblance between Hebd. and the Plac., however, is riot restricted to (Ί ι. 1 only. Diels assumed that the Plac. of Aetius, 3 which he so admirably • Above, Ch. IV, p. 113 iL Above, Ch. ί V, p. 114, a. 251. 3 P r o b a b l y f i r s t half second Cent. A. I >. 4 Uox, 224. Diels detected traces of t h e influence of Posidonius, who is also t h e l a t e s t philosopher men! ioned by Aetius (Dox. 100). Some y e a r s l a t e r he wrote (Über das physikalische System des Sir at on, Sb. Ak. Berlin 1893, 102, repr. Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte der antiken Philosophie, hrsg. v. W . Burkert, D a r m s t a d t 1069, 24 0 ) ; "ein S a m m e l b e c k e n . . . , d a s ich mit dem Namen Yetusia Placita belegt babe, j e t z t a b e r g e n a u e r als Posidonianische Άρέσκοντα (d.h. als S a m m lung eines Posklonianers) bezeichnen w i n d e " . The latest physician mentioned in the Plac, is Asck-piades, cuius jama ipso moo tanta erat ut ah homine rnedicinae • -ariosu radio modo posset pracleriri (Dieb, ibd. 2 3 2 ) ; Diels places the beginning el" A r d e p i a d e s ' floruit m the first y e a r s of t h e first Cent. B.C. (ibd. 185, n. 3). l i e is mentioned j u s t before Athenaeus of A t t a l i a in t h e list of leading Dogmatist p h y s i c i a n s in Galen, De cans. cont. p. 8,1-4 Kalbfleisch (cf. above, Ch. II, p. 33, η. 8) a n d lie is said to h a v e e m i g r a t e d to R o m e a r o u n d 90 B.C. (cl. e.g. ( b Sarton, A fHsi-ory of Science I i , Hellenistic Science and Culture in the Last Three Centuries P.C., C a m b r i d g e M a . J959, 4 0 4 ) ; he is, therefore, a s o m e w h a t older" c o n t e m p o r a r y of Athenaeus, who himself was a (possibly s o m e w h a t y o u n g e r ) c o n t e m p o r a r y of Posidonius (Galen, I.e. conversatus enirn fuit Postdonio). See F Kadlien, Untersuchungen zu A retaios 38. - Diels 1 d a t e for the Plac. w a s confirmed v»hen W e n d land w a s able to d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t Philo, De w v . 1 (cf. i l l , ρ 200,8 ff f p, 211,10 ff., p. 210,11 iL C o h n - W . ) m u s t h a v e used t h e Vet. plac. (the information a s given by Philo l a r g e l y coincides w i t h that of Aetius, but is richer in .some points), -,ee P. Wend land, Eine do vographta

131)

reconstructed, have been derived from Vetusla placila, He dated these Vet. plac. in the first Cent. B.C. 4 The table of contents of this work as given by Diels·* contains the following main, divisions: I. de pruicipiis, IL de mundo, 111. de sublim ihn s ('on meteorological phenomena'), IV. de terreslribus, V. de an im α, VT. de corpore. In Aetius, these subjects are treated in 5 books.Η We may assume that within cacti of the sections the subdivisions were roughly the same as well, though a complete coi re; »pull de nee chapter by chapter cannot, be proved. Since Diels' time, it has been generally accepted that the arrangement of subjects in the Plac, and much of their subject-matter go back to Theophrastus' φυσικών δόξα?,.7 Α.-J. Festugiere has pointed out thai the chief outlines can already be recognized in Plato's Timaeus* Festugiere further pointed out that the order of the Plac. is also followed by the Pythagorean Ilypornncniata of Alexander Polyhistor 9 and by the, 'physical' section of Albums' Didasc aliens™ a work written in the second Cent. A J ) . As I have already said, Hebd. Ch. 1-11 should, in my opinion, be counted among the m< nibers of this family. It is, both in general outsehe Quelle Tieilo's, Hb. Als F e i l i n Fs97, 1 074 Cf. Therefore also Philo, De prov. 1,22, a s s u m e d bv Diels to be an interpolation (Dox. 1 ff.), is a n e x c e r p t m a d e b y Philo himself ( W e n d l a n d , o.e. 1070 ff. and cf. Philo, Werke in dl. Üb. VIΓ, Perl in 196-1, 290). -- For Varro a n d t h e Vet. plac. cf. below, Ch. VI, p. 159, p. 1 Μ 5 ff., p. 18? (Iter. rust, a n d Τ über ο a s l . a . q . ) 5 Dox. 181-3. 0 The first two are identical w i t h those of the Vet. plac.; Vet. plac. I f l = Aet. l l l . F S ; IV Aet. 111.9 - I V.i ; V -- Aet. IV/2 - V . 2 ; Vf =-- Aet. V.3-30. 7 Cd. e.g. Dox. 21S. However, P. S t e i n m e t z h a s r e c e n t l y challenged Diels' position (of. above ; Ch. Ü» p. 45-6, n. 42). T h o u g h much of the contents of the Viae, will h a v e been derived from Theophrastus, it is not a b s o l u t e l y certain t h a t the overall s t r u c t u r e of this nia,final w a s a l r e a d y that of T h e o p h r a s t u s ' work. * 'Me nude es f> ythagoriques 6 tf. Home sort of order, of course, also reigned in the a v e r a g e Presocratie περί φύσεως (the Timaeus eontinues a Presocratic tradition). K.g., Parin enides first t r e a t e d t h e W o r l d of Being, then the W o r l d of S e e m i n g ; in HS,53 ff. he define»·; t h e elements before e m b a r k i n g upon cosmogony a n d ro.-unology. Probable, he described the formation of the world before t h a t of man. The procedure followed b y Empedocles will h a v e been s i m i l a r : a f t e r the proem, first of all the elements a,re e n u m e r a t e d (1 »(.> τέσσαρα γάρ π ά ν τ ω ν ριζώματα rrp ω τ ο ν άκουε). For an a t t e m p t to d e t e r m i n e t h e order of s u b j e c t s in E m pedocles' π. φύσεως, cf. j . P>ollack, Empedocle /, ί ntr ο due lion ä Vancienne physique, Paris 1965, 324 ff. ® Ox. 6 ff. On the II y pom τι. c I above, Ch. I, p. 24, n. 109 and Ch, IV, p. 98 ff. and p. 98, it. 163; p. 99, n. 167» n. 168, n. 169. lu

c >.r. 8-9,

131)

line and in a number of details, very close to the Plac. with which we are familiar. 1 shall not, however, make a list of all the parallels which can be cited as evidence, but restrict myself to quoting only the most striking resemblances. The outcome of this comparison constitutes an argument in favour of the late date which we have arrived at in Ch. IV; and this argument is largely independent of the earlier parts of our investigation. I believe that it is, indeed, very likely that ps. Hippocrates knew and used a work which, for convenience's sake, 1 shall continue to call Vetusta placita. Hebd. Ch. 1,§1, on the properties of the number 7 in general and on the hebdomadie structure of the universe with all that it contains, roughly corresponds to Aet. 1,1 τί έστι φύσις; 1,3 π. άρχων τί είσιν and II,1 π. κόσμου11: both these sections are on first principles. Hebd. Ch. 1, §2,41-68 R. (on heaven, stars, sun and moon12) in the same way corresponds to Aet, II J 1-30, 13 viz. the περί των ουρανίων λόγος (cf. Box. 364,10). After the ούράνια of book II, Aet. I l l treats the μετάρσια, viz. τά άπο του κύκλου της σελήνης καθήκοντα μέχρι, προς τήν Οέσιν τής γής, 14 Hebd. Ch, 1,70-77 R. describes the air and the meteorological phenomena. 15 The same phenomena (and some more) are the subject of Aet. 111,3-4.16 - Up to this point the order in Hebd. is exactly that of the Plac. For the last two sections of the universe, however, the order in Hebd. is different: Ch. 1,78-89 R. sea etc, 17 - Aet. 111,16-17, and Hebd. 1,90-95 on the earth - Aet. 111,8-15; i.e., for the last

Cf. also above, Ch. IV, p. 113, n. 248. Cf. above, Ch. I l l , p. 5 5 ; Ch. IV, p. 80. 13 11,11-12 on t h e ουρανός; 11,13-19 on the s t a r s ; II, 20-24 on t h e s u n ; 11,25-30 on. t h e moon. 14 Dox. 364,12 ff. For t h i s order (caelesiia - siiblimia - ter re stria) cf. also t h e proem t o Sen., Nat. II, quoted above, Ch. IV, p. 114, n. 252. 15 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 117. 16 111,5-6, on meteorological p h e n o m e n a κατ 5 έμφασιν (Dox. 372,2) a r e not paralleled in Hebd. Aet. 111,7-8 ('on w i n d s ' ; "on s u m m e r a n d w i n t e r ' ) a r e also a b s e n t f r o m Ch. 1, if one does not w a n t to a d d u c e w h a t is said a b o u t t h e I n s e p a r a b l e h e a v e n ' in Ch. 1,44-8 R. The s u b j e c t s t r e a t e d in Aet. 111,3-4 a r e : 3 π. β ρ ο ν τ ώ ν α σ τ ρ α π ώ ν κεραυνών πρηστήρων τε xal τ υ φ ώ ν ω ν ; 4. π. ν ε φ ώ ν ύ ε τ ώ ν χ ι ο ν ώ ν χ α λ α ζ ώ ν . Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 117, a n d note t h e v e r b a l similarities. It should be noted t h a t neither the Ilypomn. (above, p. 131, n. 8) nor t h e Didasc. (above, p. 131, n, 10) contain a meteorological section ! 17 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 116-7.

11

12

131)

two items the order in the Plac. is just the reverse of that m Hebd.18 In our discussion of some descriptions of the main parts of the universe which are parallel to that in Hebd, we arrived at the conclusion that Hebd., in one respect, probably is original1-9: the other accounts which we were able to adduce did not give separate treatment to (a) the nature and (b) the motions of these parts. Also in the Plac., those subjects which are treated in Hebd. Ch. 2 have not been separated from the items which in Hebd. have been collected in Ch. 1. Therefore, if we are at all correct in adducing the Plac, as a parallel, the probability of our earlier suspicion of the originality (in this respect) of ps. Hippocrates is enhanced. However, the affinity between Hebd. and Plac. is not restricted to the cosmology only. Aet. IV,2-V,2 ( = Vet. plac. V) treats the soul, perception etc.; V,3-30 Vet. plac. VI) the body. Also Hebd. treats these subjects, but in reversed order 20 : first the body and (among other things) perception, then the soul. Thus, we have Hebd. Ch. 5, on the hebdomadic nature of the ages of man ~ Aet. IV, 11 and V,23 21 ; and Hebd. Ch. 6 and Ch. 7, on the microcosm-macrocosm arid the pails of the human body in general, which correspond to the whole of Aet. V, 3-30 ( = Vet, plac, VI) in so far as these two chapters are de corpore. The microcosm-macrocosm-parallel itself of Hebd. Ch. 6 is not paralleled in Aetins. 22 Hebd, Ch. 8 treats the seven functions of the head: 1. and 2. respiration ~ Aet. IV,22; 3. sight ~ Aet. IV,13-15; 4. hearing ~ Aet. IV,16; 5. smell ~ Aet. IV, 17 ; 6. transport of food and drink towards the stomach - (fails !); 7. taste - Aet. IV, 18. Ch. 8 is followed by the very short Ch. 9 (only one sentence), on the seven vowels belonging to the vox, ~ Aet. IV,19-20 π. φωνής. I.e., II ebd. treats four of the senses23 in the same order as the Plac. but puts respiration which is 18 On sea a n d e a r t h in the parallel accounts discussed in Ch. IV, cf. above, p. 81, p. ] 16-7 and p. 116, n. 260. 19 Above, Ch. IV, p. 119. 20 This reversed order is paralleled in Albinns, Didasc. Ch. 17-22, on Hie h u m a n body a n d on perception, Ch. 23-25 on t h e sonl. The Hyponm. h a v e the order: soul (Diog. L a e r t . V I I I , 2 8 ) , b o d y a n d perception (VI 11,29), a n d soul a g a i n (VI 11,30). 21 Cf. below, Ch. VI, p. 169, n. 69. 22 O r i g i n a F in Ilchd. is also Ch. 11, the h u m a n b o d y as a m a p (at least to a c e r t a i n e x t e n t ; cf. below, Ch. VI, p. 200). 23 There i s no c h a p t e r π. άφής in Aetius. Of course, t o u c h h a d to be o m i t t e d

131)

treated after sensation in the Plac., first. 24 The appendage (Ch. 0) on the voice, on the other hand, occupies the same relative position as in Aetius. 25 It is further to be remarked that Actios treats respiration, perception and speech in his section on the soid, while in Ilebd. Ch. 8- c ) form a link between Ch, 6-7 ((dc corpore/) and Ch. 10 ('de anima). Hebd. GL 10, on the sewn parts of the soul, corresponds to Act. IV,2-7; cf. esp. IV,4, π. μερών της ψυχής. The comparison between Hebd. and Aid ins clearly brings out the fact that ps, Hippocrates was familiar with a type4 of literature in which the subjects treated by philosophy were neatly ordered. The treatment of cosmology, psychology and physiology in separate chapters, as in Hebd,, is, moreover, itself a. sign of a rather late dato of composition. At this point, mention should also be made of Hebd. Ch. 3 (π. α ν έ μ ω ν ) and 4 (π. ωρών). Again, a tidy arrangement. Tht same subjects, in the same relative order, are treated by Actios: 111,7 ('on winds 1 ) and 111,8 ("on summer and winter'). 26 They are placed by him immediately after the chapter on meteorological phenomena and before the section on the earth. Apparently, Hi od. postponed the treatment of these subjects until the cosmology proper had been completed, anyhow· in a c h a p t e r dealing with tiie specific functions of the h e a d (on touch in Vict. 1,23 cf. below, n. 25). 24 P o s s i b l y because the breath intr-in of cold air anil tla> brcai iiine~ouf of v a m » a i r w a s i m p o r t a n t for a follower of a ' W ä r m e l e h r e ' (cf. above, Ch. 1V. p. 78 ff», 89 ff.). On Hebd. Ch. 8 i f . also below, Ch. VI, p. 200-1. 25 I t should be noted t h a t llebd. Ch. S-0 also, a n d v e r y closety, t o r n s p o n d to Vict. 1,23 (cf. Roscher J 91 J, 101), which first treats the seven vowels (σημεία φωνής ανθρωπινής) ~ ilebd. Ch. 9, and then lists the seven 'figures* through which sensation comes for man : h e a r i n g ; s ^ h t (in Hebd. and Aclins, sight is f i r s t ) ; s m e l l ; t a s t e ; 'the body for touch'; 'passages o n t w a i d s or im·, a r d s for hot or col··} b r e a t h ' . It h a s been argued before t h a t the miercosm ~ m acn)cnclnoes, 64 ff. R., w i t h a discussion of t h e s t a r s a n d t h e seasons. For "summer a n d w i n t e r ' cf. also Hebd. 1,47-8 R . See f u r t h e r below, Ch. V B, p. 138 ff. 131)

We may conclude, therefore, that by and largo both Hebd. Ch, 1-11 and the Plac. are built according to the same struct oral pattern. This is further confirmed, by a truly remarkable parallel between these two works, which is, however, perhaps too good to be true. The penultimate chapter of Aet ins27 (V,2 r ) ttcVc γίνεται πυρετός κ od ci έπ^έννημά εστίν) is on fevers. The mcdicai section of Hebd. is a treatise on m wm- 8 , fehres are also among the subjects announced in (Tt, 12,23 ff.R. The last chapter of Actios (¥,30 π. ύγαας es/X νόσου ϊ'ήρως) i > · <m health 'Πιο medical theories listed in the, Plw. (e ψ. part ol, book IV a n d book V of Act ins a r e rich in medical doxai) present a speeiai p r o b l e m : the h i s t o r y of m e d i e i a e was not Th;*ophrastu~3 s u b p v l , !)! 2 \7, I houyh !". ι !ί y ί · »u-rlou , of t h e iinphca/fions of Asclepiades* being the latest phvsieian referred to (ef\ above, p. 130,11 4) docs not doubt t h a t 1 hi* information about Polvbns, I )lo'dos. Herophihis, E r a s i s t r a l u s etc*, conies ex vetusl·> fhaouro, B u t most of the p h y sicians mentioned b y n a m e are l a t e r t h a n Mono, t h e pupil of Aristotle who wrote a History of Medicine. W h e n Diels published his Dox>> has h e m b r o u g h t up to d a t e (Χ Χ ί, 9 - Χ Χ X I X . 3 2 t r e a t s the development of p h y s i o l o g y a f t e r ca, 300 li.C., i.e. from Herophihis down to A l e x a n d e r P h i l a l e f h ' s ) in a w a y which is p e r h a p s not u n l i k e the w a v in which tho Plac. u l t i m a t e l y d e r i v e d from T h e o p h r a s t u s m a y h a v e grown. Cf. Diels, Kl. Sehr. 238-13, who d r a w s the parallel between t h e H i s t o r y of Medicine (basing himself upon t h e n e w l y discovered I Ulrica) a n d t h a t of Philosophy, a n d further in Tiber die Excetp?e von Menons /atrika in dem Londoner Papyrus 137, Herrn. 2H (1893, 407 ff.), esp. 411, where he a s s u m e s that the e x c e r p t s from Mono's w o r k were incorporated into the Alio m i n i s via A l e x a n d e r Philalethes; i!>4. Diels also d r a w s the parallel between the s v d e m alical division of T h e o p h r a s t i i s (i.e., of the Plac,) a n d the distill·dion in t h e A n o n y m u s between dietetic a n d ' s o m a t i e ' p h y s i c i a n s a n d a third, ' m i x e d class', It is, perhaps, not u n l i k e l y t h a t the influence of Posidonius is r-'soonsible for the incorporation of medical doxai into the b o d y of T h e o p h r a s t u s ' work (for Posidonius' interest in a n d influence upon medicine cf. K. Rein hard!:. Knsm. a. Symp. 167 a n d Pos. 5 2 ; in Diog. Laert. V i 1,132, both m a t h e m a ι ies a n d medicine are c o u n t e d among the a n c i l l a r y sciences of p h i l o s o p h y ; see furl her P. Kudlien, Poseidonios und die Schule der Pneumatiker. 419 ff. a n d Unters. A ret. 35 ff,, a n d E. Schöner» Das Vieretschema in der antiken Ifumoralpotholü^ic, S u d h . Arch., Beih, 4» W i e s b a d e n 1964, 7 9 - 8 1 ; however, Κ u d l i e n ' s suggestion l h a f t h e Posidonius q u o t e d b y Aetins of A mid a is identical w i t h the Stoic philosopher h a s been r e f u t e d b y H. Plashar» Melancholie und Melancholiker in den medizinischen Theorien der Antike, Berlin 1966, 121 ff.). At the lea«t, t h i s possibility deserves t o be seriously i n v e s t i g a t e d . Cf. also below, Ch. VI, p. 1 s 1, n. 141. 27

28

Cf. above, Ch. 1, p. 1 ff.; below, Ch. VIT, p. 213 ff,1 131)

and illness in general. The announcement mentions 'other diseases and acute diseases'.

in Hebd.

12,23 If. R.

2. So much for the similarity in overall structure between Hebd. and Plac. There are, of course, also quite a number of parallel details. Most of these, perhaps, are not very significant, and only to be expected whenever similar subjects are treated. Then* are, however, also a few quite remarkable parallels. It will be remembered that our search for parallels for the 'inseparable' outer heaven of Hebd. 1,42-8 resulted in the reconstruction of a kind of background for this concept. 29 On this o c c a s i o n I suggested that ps. Hippocrates' motive for this construction was that he needed a 'skin' for the universe. A related idea occurs in the Plac. Act. 1,6 (on the origin of man's belief in the Gods30), 5: the περιέχον of the universe is here compared to that of living objects, Box. 203,23 ff.: και εκ του μεγέθους καλός (viz. the sky), πάντων γάρ των ομογενών το περιέχον καλόν, ως ζωον και δένδρον. The outer heaven is, furthermore, not only said to be solid, but also to be cold and to have 'coagulated', Hebd. 6,§2,21 ff. R. inscparahilis... soliditas quae mundum continet 31 omnem cutis coagulatio frigid a. Presocratic ideas transmitted by a handbook like the Vet. plac. may have been among ps. Hippocrates' sources of inspiration, cf. especially the opinion attributed to Empedocles in Aet. 11,11,2: στερέμνιον32 (cf. soliditas) είναι τον ούρανόν εξ

® Above, Ch. IV, p. 115 η. 256, a n d p. 120 ff. 80 This c h a p t e r begins with quoting a Stoic definition of d i v i n i t y , which is t h a t of Posidonius as g i v e n Aet. 1,7,19 (cf. R e i n h a r d t , KOSH Ι. u. Symp. 156 a n d O. Gigon, Die Erneuerung der Philosophie in der Zeit Cicero's, Entrot. H a r d t III, (Vandoe u ν res -G ene ve 1955, 25 ff.)» 38). This does not i m p l y t h a t Aet. 1,6 as a whole (cf. also t h e reference to Plato, I)ox. 293.14-16) gives us t h e a c t u a l t h o u g h t of Posidonius, b u t it is in a n y case v e r y probable t h a t m u c h of its (of course r e v i s e d ) contents go b a c k to w h a t Gigon h a s called a 'doxographisehe Z u s a m m e n s t e l l u n g ' of Posidonius. For such a 'Posidonian' d o x o g r a p h i e a l s u r v e y in t h e Comm. in A ratum cf. Diels, Dox. 231-2. If this h y p o t h e s i s is correct, t h e coincidences b e t w e e n Hebd. a n d Act. 1,6 are t r u l y significant. 3 1 Sc. imitatio est. 32 Cf. also Aet. 11,7 (π. τάξεως του κόσμου), 1 (on P a r nie Iii des), Dox. 335,11 ff. και τ ο π ε ρ ι έ χ ο ν δέ π ά σ α ς τείχους δίκην σ τ ε ρ ε ο ν ύπάρχειν. Aet. 11,7,2 s p e a k s of t h e χιτώνα κ ύ κ λ ω και υμένα of P e m o c r i t u s and Leucippns, but this is no p a r a l l e l for a n ά κ ρ ι τ ο ς κόσμος. This c h a p t e r of t h e Placitei as a whole is an i n t e r e s t i n g p a r a l l e l to Hebd. Ch. 1-2, for it discusses the opin ions of the philos131)

άέρος συμπάγεντος {cf. coagidalio) κ ρ υ σ τ α λ λ ο ε 18 ώ ς (cf. frigida).33 ifcM. 0,§2,13 ff. discusses the changing colours of the heavenly phenomena. 34 Aet. 1,6,4 does not speak about the changing colours of the sky, but it does discuss, and at some length, its beautiful colour. In this way, two important ideas in one chapter of Hchd. (about the skin of tin* univeise and the colour of the upper regions) cot respond to two very similar notions within one chapter of Aetius. The third remarkable coincidence between Aei. 1 ,(> and Hchd. concerns the opening section of Oh. 2,1 ff.R.: ϊσοι δέ τον αριθμόν ομοιοί τε τήν Εδέην οί ύπο τη γ Υ) κόσμοι τοισιν υπέρ γης, καί αύτόδρομον κύκλω σιν περιέχουσι της τε περιόδου καί μεθόδου, τή γή περατολ ποιεύμενοι. Cf. Act. 1 ,(>,8 (έλάμομεν δέ έκ τούτου Ivvotr/.v θεού*) αεί τε γίρ ήλιος καί σελήνη και τά λοιπά των -ίστρων τήν υ π ό γ ε ι ο ν φοράν ένεχΟέντα ο μ ο ι α μεν ανατέλλει τοις χ ρ ώ μ α σιν, Ισα οέ τοις μεγέΟεσι, καί κατά τόπους καί κατά χρόνους τους αυτούς. The idea in Hchd. that the stars have reflected light (Ch. 1,52-3 k.) may have been suggested by Aet. 11,17,1.-3, which ascribes this theory to Metrodorus, Strato and Diotimns of Tyrns. Other parallels from the Plac. have been quoted in the word-list of Ch. iL 3 5 The assumption that ps. Hippocrates knew and used the Vetusta Placita solves two problems: (t) it helps to explain the presence within Hebd. of ideas ultimately derived from a number of individual Presocratic thinkers 36 ; (2) it also helps to explain the relative frequency, in ο pliers on (a) the outer sphere (b) the order of the elements (e) n a t u r a l places (d) the differences between the supra luna r y a n d t h e s u b l u n a r y world. 33 W e n d l a n d , o.e. 1075 (cf. above, p. 1 30-1, n. 4) c o m p a r e s Aet. 11,1 1,2 with Philo, De Sonin. I, i l l , p. 209,Η ff C o h n . - W . ) : h Κ ούρανυς άκατάλη-τον ε/ε ι τήν γ')πιν, ουδέν έαυτου σαφές γνο>ρισμα προς ήμσ,ς άποστείλας. τί γαρ άν ειττοιμεν; οτι π ε π η γ ώ ς έστι κ ρ ύ σ τ α λ λ ο ς , ώς ήξιωσάν τίνες; ή ο τι πυρ το καΟαρώτατον; for t h e a l t e r n a t i v e cf. also Sen., Nat. 11,1,1 solidumne sit caelum ac firmae concretaeque mateviae an ex suhtili tennique nexum (ef. above, Ch. ί Υ, p. 115, n. 256). 34 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 124 ff. 35 Above, Ch. Ii, p. 38, s.v. άνταυγ»'α. 86 It is not too broad a generalization to s a y t h a t the Hellenistic philosophers s a w t h e earlier t h i n k e r s in the light of T h e o p h r a s t u s ' interpretation a n d - as is o n l y n a t u r a l - h e a v i l y leaned upon his g r e a t historical work a n d the works d e r i v e d from it. For t h e relation between the S t o a a n d Heraclit ns this has been proved m an e x e m p l a r y fashion b y j . Kerseheustcmer, Der Bericht des Theophrasi über J ί er akl it, Herrn. 83 (1955), 385 ff. (cf. esp. p. 411). The h y p o t h e s i s t h a t ps. H i p p o c r a t e s used t h e Vet. plac. also helps (but no more t h a n t h a t ) to e x p l a i n t h e remiriiscencies of P l a t o a n d especially Aristotle which we h a v e studied in 131)

what remains of lite Greek text of the philosophical introduction, of words deriving from the doxographical vocabulary/ 17 From this survey 1 have deliberately omitted one4 of the most striking parallels between Ilebd. and Plac,. 1 propose to deal with this parallel in the next section uf this chapter.

(ii). T i l l . SKVKN" U K A V K N C Y

STARS

Whether or not ps. Hippocrates was familiar with the seven planets is one of the most hotly debated problems in the history of the, interpretation oi Ihi id. Roscher lo fin4 la .1 cluck to his opinion that the planets were, unknown to ί he author of IfehdJ Boll, however, plausibly argued that 1. the fact thai Cic 1-5 R, speaks of "seven heavenly stars' and 2. that Ch. 2, the end, speaks of the άκολουΟίη and the έναντίωσις of the 'stars' is in favour of the contrary assumption. 2 Burkert, 3 on the other hand, asked the pertinent question what, if anything, have the seven planets to do with [he order of the reasons, with which, from time immemorial, (the majority cd) the fixed, stars mentioned by name, in this passage have been associated. Moreover, of the seven planets only sun and moon arc4 named. This is indeed the crux of the. problem. If it can be shown in ( Ί ι. IV. In this connect ion, it, should be e m p h a s i z e d t h a i the I 'Li tonic Aristotelian e l e m e n t s m Heini. ( e t e r n i t y of the world, h e a v e n l y bodies a s aUrx) which we hove discussed Ch. IV, p. 127 ft', a n ; also prominent in t h e Plac,: ef. above, Ch. IV, p. 70, n. 25 mid p. 75, n. 53, where t h e relevant p a s s a g e s from Act ins connerning A r i s t o t l e ' s t h e o r y of t h e yJAiy. are1 q u o t e d , a n d p. 128, n. 31 2» which t|tiofes t h e reference in A ('tins to P l a t o ' s tlmory t h a t t h e world will not perish. T h e concept of self-mot ion (for which a b o v e , Ch. I \\ p. 86 ff., p. 100) is also to be found in t h e Plac., cd. a b o v e , Ch. 11, p. 3f.i, s.v. αυτό^ρομυς, w h e r e s o m e r e l e v a n t p a s s a g e s a,re q u o t e d . T h o u g h I hope to h a v e shown t h a t this c o n c e p t w a s a n i n t e g r a l p a r t of t h e Stoic t h e o r y followed b y p s . - H i p p o c r a t e s (above, Ch. IV, p. 93), i t s o c c u r r e n c e in t h e Plac. should also be t a k e n into a c c o u n t , bor t h e a m b i g u i t i e s of A r i s t o t l e ' s t h e o r y of motion (esp. r e g a r d i n g t h e e l e m e n t s ) cf. the p a s s a g e s from Act ins q u o t e d at Ch. 1V, p. 71, n. 29 a n d p. 75, n. 5 3 ; for t h e ( P l a t o n i c ) t h e o r y that e a r t h does not pass into one of t h e o t h e r e l e m e n t s (cf. a b o v e , Ch. ΙV, p. 6 8 ) cf. t h e p a s s a g e from Aetius cpioied at Ch. IV, p. 68, n. 17. 37 Cf. a b o v e , Ch. II, w o r d - l i s t passim and p. 53. 1 2 3

Cf. a b o v e , Ch, I, p. 18 a n d ibd., n. 7 7 ; also Μ l e n g t h ) 101 ο 63 ff. Cf. a b o v e , Ch. 1, p. 2 1 ; Lebensalt. 220 ff. Cf. a b o v e , Ch. I, p. 29-30 a n d ibd., n. 1 bS; p. 30, n. 150. 131)

which way the siuk'ii j »Ιη,,'Ί s 1 tna \ be, assumed lo be associate«! with the change ot the seasons, flic problem may be saul ίο have been sol veil. First, Ie1 ns liini to t l··' Ρ \ t, which is. oeeauonally, almost incomprehensible, I pumn^e to read as follows, Oh. 2,64- ff.R.: τά τοίνυν varpe. τά ovpv.'tw. επ ν κ ζυντν. τσ,::,ιν ε/ει τ^ς των ώρέυιν εκοο/^ς (r με< ο.ερισ>ηενη< ν> (?4ν, μίη< ν file ακολουθίες μεν ό ήλιος , ηΛίω λ ε ucA/jVfj' ίχολουΟεει el "Αρκτοι το> Άρ/.τούρω ίκολοηΟί^ν ί [Λεν ήλιος, ήλίω δέ σελήνη, whi'ii is >npposed to mean "Die Owdirne... haben ihre Ordnung clnrrli die Anicinaiuh rfolgc der Zeiten im Jahre eingeteilt, (wr% in gemessenen Zeiten folgt) dem Monde r]ie Sonne und der Sonne der Mond". Ulis reconstruction is, Γ think, unacceptable: (1) also in this pla.ee, we have to follow the guidance of the ί .atin inundations and of ps. Galen. Thee translate oniinem... iemporum tradendorum and 4sic sind die Ursache der Jahreszeiten'/' That is to say, not the order of the seasons determines that of the appearance of the stars, but the other wav round.: the succession of the stars determines that of the .season:··». (2) lanFs interpolation of ώοπεο.., ώρι^μέναε is iin1 * I 1·ί· • f * ν' 11 ! p'aii( > -•* is 111«·· ο;; b »-ι o* m a ! j r.msla t io;, n| y_r-,·- ^ ν : > 'C,y*>yf f h τ y ΐύντ'/ "the h e a v e n l y bodies u i e n t i " · ! ' d in the l e x t t <mnoi ho ok,rat, for sail b in» Mil» ; 3 pairs of fixed U ars vive a pipil of eiijjhi ί for this simple sum, ί ί Holl, ο.r 220). Η lb irrelevant 1.> aixom in fa vd s Poii of nut* or fit·1 ο Ρ κ τ of these emju from t h e IPi (ef., however, the a ί ι empt ; nf !\osrb'; ι. 1 0 - 1 2 a n · ({noted 2 7 }.

Λ( Inn tteC 5,00, Philostr. Ρ I 0, I (pi.), Arte in. 1,3 (pi.)') ; (b) ' 1 n den Werken Piatons findet sich nichts ähnliches'. In p, 270, he calls the A e t i u s - p a s s a g e *vc rdäeMic;'. Ί he question is not, however, if A e t i u s is correctly reporting P l a t o ' s t h o u g h t (n.b.: the p a s s a g e in lite Tinnitus u l t i m a t e l y responsible for the Atfjaii doxa lias been quoied above), but if the a t t r i b u t i o n to d a t o of the<e ideas is historically uadeivaaiidable, T h a t it is so indeed, h a s been a d m i r a b l y demons!rated by Kohr marsch", o.e. 200 ft., 273 ff.» 277 ff. CI", f u r t h e r below, p. 143 ff. 26 S t o b a e u s (ct. p. 141, ο. 25) s i g n i f i c a n t l y omits κοινώς and πάντας, but quotes t h e s a m e lines from the Phaen. 27 I t is to be noted that Act, 1,0 (for which cd. above, Οι, V A, p. 1 3o-7 a n d p. 136» ii. 30), \\ liich begins with a 1}< e idoni.Mi definition of Clod, quotes Λ rat. Phue-n. 513 -9 (Dax. 20-1,5 if.). 1,6 is omitted m SioOaeiH The qu the "years* of t h e planets; t h e y e a r of S a t urn 2 years,

-- 3 0 s u n - yeaiw, t h a t of ί a ph.er

- 12 y e a r s , t h a t c d ' M a r s —

t h e n t h e y e a r of the 1 s u n is do fined., w h i c h

-· 12 m o n t h s ; t h e y e a r s of

Mercury a n d W a n s (winch arc wiih the sun) are of equal length as the sun-year. The mouth consists of f l i n t y ι lays. The ' ( T e a t Y e a r ' is finished whenever all of the seven planets return to the s a m e places (this last piece of information is oitfv in Stobaeus). In 32,2 we s u d d e n l y hear that some people i d e n t i f i e d t h e ( T e a t Y e a r w i t h o n e o r t h e o t h e r of t h e w e l l - k n o w n y e a r - c y c l e s ·

that of 8 years, t h a t of P) y e a r s or that of :V) y e a r s (cf. also Censorious, De die

η at ali

C h . IS),

T h P i s a ( n e a t Y e a r w h i c h is d i l f e i e n t i r o m t h e G r e a t

a-; d e f i n e d i n 3 2 , 2 , b u t s u d H e u h

( a . b . o n l y in S l o ! - a m e . )

the

Year

f'Hiner t y p e of

( T e a t Y e a r (as in 32,1) is a g a i n spoken oi, «and we a r e told t h a t some people said that a new ( T e a t Year s t a r t s whenever 'the -.even pfan 111 > t fu I, a n d t h e m o r e so a s h e b a s e s t h i s r e c o n s t r u c t i o n f o x . 2343 f f . ) u p o n t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t T h r a s y a l c e s m o d i f i e d t h e rose of Hebd, 2H R e h r n , Windrosen J 8 f f . ; Nielsen, 23 ff.; .Höker, 2333 ff.

27

λ ί ψ Ϊ 1,25; ά π η λ ι ώ τ η ς ¥ 1 , 2 2 , 1 5 2 ; Vi 1,18*. VS I i , p. 144,23 I o a n n . L y d . , Mens. p. 7 8 , 1 0 W . ) 31 S e e p. 149, n. 22, 32 N i e l s e n , 25 ff., a r g u e s t h a t K e n . , A nab. TV, 5,3 t h e άνεμος 'ioopy.^ έν/.ντ'.ος is-*. N . - K . - w i n d . T h i s p r o b a b l y is e o r r e e t . b u t d o e s not. imp];/ t h a i w e m a y a d d u c e t h i s u s e a s a p a r a l l e l for βορέης ( t h e N . - E . w i n d ) in t h e wind-a ose of ilebd,% which Nielsen t h i n k s i t i s : X e n o p h o n d o e s n o t d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n βορΙης a m ' a n o t h e r (pure) N.-wind, 33 CL a b o v e , Ch. I V , p. 90, n. 123. 29 30

131)

that f άρκτος designates the pure N.-wind in contradistinction to βορέης, which designates the N.-iL-wind. Boll supposed f άρκτος to be a corruption of άργεστής,34 hut if there is a corruption, that of άπαρκτίας is of course much easier. The Latin translations have septentrio for f άρκτος. Some1 confusion has been caused by the fact that βορέης is translated by africus (A, ajriamm P). Rehm assumed that the order of the winds in the Latin translations (;subsolanus, africus, septeutrio, favonius, lips, a us!er, cunts) originally w.is subsolanus, septentrio, africus, etc. and that africus originated ί renn a transliteration of j άρκτος.35 He points out that lips and eurus are also transliterations. For earns this is incorrect: this word occurs in unscientific Latin as a normal equivalent to vidlurhiisrύ Lips, on the other hand, does not occur except in scientific Latin prose.37 Its current Latin name, since the clays of Cicero and Caesar, is africus. Now the Greek text Ch. 3,18-9 R. μετ' αυτόν W ό λίψ is translated post hum qui appellatur Lips, in which qui appellatur is an addition of the translator, who thereby indicates he is transliterating and/or using an unusual word (n.b.: no qui appellatur wiili cither africus or eurus). The only motive for not translating λίψ by africus has to be that africus had been used up already. Therefore Rein it's hypothesis of a transliterated and later corrupted arctus is refuted. This still leaves us with the difficult africus (instead of aquilom) as the equivalent of βορέης. This admits of an explanation: the translator misinterpreted εχόμενος βορέης as meaning: The wind connected with Boreas1. Now the wind connected with Boreas on the diameter of the wind-rose is no other than africus. This mistranslation had the automatic consequence that africus could not be used again, this time for translating λίψ. Consequently, the translator had to transliterate later on in the text. Rehm/s subsidiary hypothesis that the order of wind-names in the Latin translation is at one point wrong is unBoll, Kl. Sehr, 218» m l . This proposal w a s unsuccessful, Roseher (UU 1. p. 81-2) a s s u m e d t h a t άργεστής h a d been left out, which h a s been u n i v e r s a l l y accepted. His reasons for m a k i n g Boreas Ν. - Κ. and A r k t i a s N. are, however, not convincing. 85 Windr. 31. 36 Cf. t h e m a t e r i a l collected b y Nielsen, o.e., 82 if. and Sen.» Ν at, V, 16,4 ab Oriente hiberno eurus exit, quem nostri vocavere vidtumum.. sed el eurus iam eivitate don at us est et no sir ο sermont 11 em tarn quam alienus intemenit, 87 Cf. Nielsen, o.e., 92. 88 See above, p. 149, n. 21.

34

131)

necessary. It even complicate·; matters further, for on this hypothesis seftcntrio would translate not f άρκτος, but βορέης, which, as wo saw, is usually translated by 'upi/ilo.3IJ Septentrio, originally equivalent to Greek άρκτος --- the North, already in Cicero designates the Ν .-wind, and is also equivalent to άπαρκτίας in later timers.40 Of course sepic ntno in A and i> ι an ι·,ausiate both \ άρκτος and άπαρκτίας: the Latin translations hold no clue to the original reading of the Greek text. We, mud :-.ujyoM , however, ihat γ άρκτος ί.> Idu- on motion of a windrvime. Rellin'11 corrected it into άπαρκτία/:, which also occurs in the Arabic translation. 12 Böker suggests *άρκτί«ς/ί:* which is an easier con 111) I ion, but unfortunate!)* would be άααξ είρημννον. The corruption itseii is ea ·ι! ν ex pj a m e d

» eu ]i\

13it: pi·· siivs ι,Γίϊο

ot vp^aoc.

Ch. 2,73 1\. (in the passage on the άστρα, only a few lines away). Another possibility perhaps is άρκτιος, which could become corrupted even easier into f άρκτος than *άρκτίας or άπαρκτίας. "Αρκτος (a rare word, not before post-classical times) means "northern' according to the didionaries 1 hav^ consulted. In Galen's Glossary, XIX p. 85 Kulm, Imwewr, 1 found the I olio wing gloss: άρκτιος* a ά::ο της άρκτου π ν έ ω ν

cvioi οέ άρκτιον άντνκρυς γράφοοσν;, of which ί do not

entirely understand the kilter part, but which, in am/ case, shows that there was in antiquity some textual evidence for αρκτιος — άπαρκτίας. About Galea's source for this note Γ can hazard no opinion, it may have been an earlier lexicon. All in all, there is some justification for correcting Hebd. 3,17 iL f άρκτο; into άρκτιος, more in any case than there is for a hypotheticnj *άρκτί-'.ς. Those1 who lik" to play safe will maybe continue to prefer the correct ion άπ?ρκτί'/ς This allows us to draw the following diagram hw the wand-rose of Hebd.: 3 άρκτιος (or άπαρκτίας) Ν

(omitte 4 ζέφυρος

ψ

£ 1 άπηλιώτης

5 λ

S 6 νότος 131)

As lias already been remarked, this corresponds exactly to the anonymous Hellenistic wind-rose of 8 winds, N.-E. being omitted for numerological reasons, The mimes of the winds and their order are the same in both cases. This was of course acknowledged by Rehm. 44 Rehm argued that the wind-rose, the hcbdowadic heart of the windehapter in Hebd., cannot be a late* interpolation. ' Das ganze4 Hebd. aber so spät anzusetzen, class es unter dem Einfluss jener hellenistischen Windrose stehen könnte, vfne st hlerhiweg phantastisch'. 45 The resemblance, between the rose in Hebd. and the Hellenistic rose, whieh cannot be fortuitous, has to be, explained, he suggests, by making the1 latter an imitation of the former.46 That in Hebd. βορέης is N.-K. instead of N., as up to and in* hiding Aii.Totle, did. not bother Rehm, 17 but it bothered Nielsen and motivated his unlikely interpretation of a passus in Xeiiophon as a parallel for fIebd.[H In Böker's survey the rose of Hebd. is put before that of Aristotle, and treated as genuine Presocratic testimony 49 ; its resemblance to the Hellenistic rose is not explained. On our hypothesis of a H e l l e n i s t i c date for Hebd. all these: difficulties vanish. We do not have to search lor pre-Aristotelia n pa ra liehfor βορέης as N.-K. distinguished from N., als Nielsen did, or reluctantly to explain it away, following Rehm. We have already seen that there are serious reasons, both from a linguistic and from a philosophical point of view (think also of the influence of the Plac. and of the astrometeorology), for the assumption of a Hellenistic date for Hebd. part I. To this may now be added the Hellenistic wind-rose S e e d b o v e , Ρ f.fo Π. 21. Niels(;ii, «so iL Winde. 3 b 4 - P. 51» iO r a B e t g s t r . 43 2 3 4 0 1. 14 Windr. 32 ff. A l s o B b k e n 2 3 0 1 ( q u o t e d bebnv, p. 154, u. 10). 4 5 I b d . 33. R e l l i n d o c s not w a n t to a c c e p t R e s e l l e r s v e r y e a r l y d a t e , but p u t s Hebd. a t c a . 4 5 0 B . C . 4e Wifidr, 3 3 ; a l s o M a s s e l i n k , o.e. 87 g i v e s the p r i o r i t y to f f c h d . ; B ö k e r 2 3 0 f ' d i e N a m e n s r e i h e lehnt, sich in d e r F o r m ihrer An folge an Hebd. an'. B u t w h y s h o u l d t h e i n v e n t o r of t h e p r a c t i c a l wind rose of 8 w i n d s t u r n t o a n o b s c u r e Hippocratio work? 47 I b d .

:v> iri

48 s 0 0 |) |5p n 32. Nielsen, "f our^e, accepted the 1 radii lonal date of /lebd. 4 9 O.e. 2 3 3 9 ff. T h i s in i t s t u r n l e a d s to a very f o r c e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e r o s e of Ί hrasyalces, see above, p. 151 and ibd., n. 27. 131)

of (Ίο 3, ~ a piece of evidence whicli is completely independent from tliο other evidence which we have discussed up till now. The author of Hebd, simply took the wind-rose as current in his own day, deleting one wind. An additional gain is the elimination of Η ebd. Ch. 3 from the pre-Aristotelian history of the wind-rose, which in this way no longer has to account lor an otherwise nnexplieable exception to the general line of development.

131)

CHAPTER

VI

Η Β Bf). A N D AR IT Η Μ Ο LOG Υ ; POSIDONIUS AGAIN

1. The history of .uu ient aritlnnology still remains to be written, 1 Around, the turn of the present century, nobody, so it seems, doubted that the role of Posidonius in this history had been a major one, Schmekel had been able to prove that a part of Sextus' exposition on the criterion (Μ. ¥11,91-100), chiefly dealing with number as the source of knowledge according to the 'Pythagoreans', was ultimately derived from Posidonius.2 The information on 'Pythagorean' number1 ' t h e term w a s introduced,, or r a t h e r re introduced, by Λ. I >ebitte, litiul, litt. Pyth. 139» who also (ibd, 139 ff.) gi\es a brief outline uf the h i s t o r y (as lie sees i t ) of a r i t h m o l o g y from the E a r l y P y t h a g o r e a n s onwards. 2 Die Philosophie clef mittleren Sioa in ihrem geschieht,lichen Zusammenhange, Berlin 1892, 404 Cf.; ef also 1. Heinemanu, Poseidoni> metaphysische Schriften I, B r e s l a u 1921» Hildesheim U90S. 206, Schmekel a s s u m e d t h a i Sextus, Μ . VLI, 91 ff. derives from a Commentary on the Timaeus of Plato written by Posidonius because ibd., CCS we read ω ς . . . οησιν ό 1 Ιοσει^ώνιος τον .Πλάτωνος Τίμαιο ν έξηγούμένος» H e f u r t h e r pointed out Chat ibd, 102 Posidonius' distinction of συναπτόμενα, ηνωμένα a n d διεστωτα occurs a n d t h a t 107 ff. quotes d e t a i l s connected with t h e construction e an, procr. in Tim. Ch. 22 (1023b). The d e f i n i t i o n : τήν ψ υ χ ί ό ' έ α ν siwj, του ίζ6ύιία 3ιαο :α καθ' άριΟμο; γοίζπ rt-j.j'zv άρμονί'ΐν ;: "t~L£//>vr /.. (Τ. further below, p. 103 ff. and De Vogel, Greek Phil. I l l , Nr. 1 Ρ) >m . 20 W h o said t h a t Soul is a self-moving number, fr. 60 Heinze. 21 W h o d e f i n e d Soul in geometrical terms, tr. 40 bang, 22 From Plat, to NenpL 34 ff. (cb also Phil. 1931, 20+ ff.) As to the t h i r d part of t h e definition, Merlan suggests, o.e. 35, t h a t this is due to ' M o d e r a t e s (if he preceded Posidonius) or some member of the A c a d e m y ' . For IV«sidoniusand S p e u s i p p u s cf. Jones, PtaUmiam of Plutarch 70. The identifier f ion of Soul a n d h a r m o n i c ratios is, of coarse,, inspired b y Tim. 35b-3bl> (cf. also below, p. 196), 23 bor an analogon cf. his s t u d y and a d a p t a t i o n of T h e o p h r a s t o s (above, Ch. IV, p. 82 ff., p. 190-7 a n d esp. ibd.» η. lo0-2. 24 A t S e x t u s M , IV.5-S and Anafolms, π. feyjfo- p, 32 Helberg (.-- [Iambi.], Theol. ar. p. 30,2-15 de Falco) me h a v e t h e identification of 4 w i t h both body (the last term in the derivation pouitdiiie-surfacw-body) and soul (as h a r m o n y , 17

18

131)

These considerations are important to us for several reasons. In the first place, Hebd. Ch. 1-11 is an arithmologieal exposition on the powers of the number 7, and as such falls within the class of arithmologieal literature. There are, indeed, a number of undeniable parallels between Hebd. Ch. 1-11 and those sections in the arithmologieal literature winch deal with the. number seven.2·' In the second place, a passage from Hebd., viz. Ch. 5 (on the seven ages of man) is quoted or paraphrased by a group of aritlmiological writers (among whom is Varro) together with Solon fr. 19 Dich). If it could be established that this quotation goes back to an Anonymus antedating Posidonius, the whole of our foregoing investigation would be seriously discredited. 26 However, we have seen that the assumption of this date for the Anonymus is based upon insufficient foundations. 27 Moreover, the quotations of Solon fr. 19 and II ebd. Ch. 5 only occur with one group of arithmologieal writers, while another group at this point in the exposition, though treating the same subject, does so in a different way. This divergence, which is of fundamental importance, was first pointed out by Robbins. 28 Solon ps. Hippocrates are quoted by the following authors:

because the perfect harmony consists of the fourth (3:4), the fifth (2: 3) and the octave (1:2), so that: the ratios contained in the number four suffice to constitute the soul), cf. Merlau, r'/οηι Plat., 47 ff. 11 has been argued by V. de Kaico. o.e. 54 ff. that the treatment of 4 in the arithmologieal authors goes back to Posidonius. Merlan, o.e. 48 accepts de Falco's conclusions and attempts (ibd., 49 ff.) to establish t h a i Posidonius must have found the equation 4 = soul = pyranus with Speusippus. On the role of the number 7 in this context cf. below, p. 192 ff. Roscher, who followed Sehmekel c.s. in deriving the arithmologieal literature from Posidonius' supposed Comm. on the Pun., of course assumed that Posidonius was largely influenced by Hebd., cf. 1906, 99 ff. and 191.3, 104 ff. See further below p. 196 ff., where some of the parallels mentioned by Roscher will be discussed. 2(5 In Ch. 1V, 1 have tried to establish that Hebd, cannot be earlier than Posidonius. 27 Above, p. 150-9. 28 Tradition 102, η. 1, 112 ff. ('a test passage upon which the S' ( = Anonymus) "family as a, whole divided into two camps', ibd. p. 113). Robbins* account is marred bv a few inaccuracies pertaining to the classification of arithmologieal authors on the basis of this test-passage, which for the most part have been corrected by de Kalco, o.e. 57 ff. 131)

(1) Varro ap. Censoriiium, De die natali Ch. 14,29 where first Varro \s own division of human life in periods of 15 years is given (14,2); then Hebd. CI). 5 is paraphrased (only the numbers being given, 30 not the phenomena related to each period; 14,3); Solon and ps. Hippocrates are compared (14,4) 31 ; Varro's name is mentioned again (14,6); then the e leg la Solutus is mentioned and paraphrased (14,7). (2) Philo, Op. ni'imd. 104 (full quotation oi Solon tr. 1 ( )) and 105 (quotation of lleud. Ch. 5, the first sentence1 of whieh has been slightly altered); (3) Anatolius, π. δεκάίος p. 37,5-22 lieib. (Solon) and 37,23-38,5 Heib. (ps. Hippocrates). 32 -- Probably, the order of quotations as in Philo and Anatoli us is the correct one.3:1 Ch. 11,6 h a s a passing reference ίο Solon in connection with the n u m b e r 7, quo iota vita ham a a a jinitur. Hippocrates... a Hi que me did are mentioned here as well, but only for the doctrine t h a t each seventh day is a critical d a y . It is therefore incorrect to s a y t h a t Cli. 1 I in mentioning Solon |- Hippocrates a n t i c ipates Ch. 14: this is only true in as far as Solon is concerned. Cf. below, p. 187-8, li. 180. s o Incorrectly ! The third period is said to e x t e n d to 28 years, t h e sixth to 56» t h e seventh to t h e l a s t y e a r of life. 31 Solon is s a i d to h a v e divided the third, sixth a n d seventh period of Hippocr a t e s into t w o h a l v e s of seven y e a r s each, in order to a r r i v e a t ten h e b d o m a d s . T h e a n a c h r o n i s m m a y be Ceiisotiiius* own contribution (cf. a t 7,5, quoted below, p. 106, n. 53, the analogous misplacing of E i n y p h o i i ) . 32 This p a s s a g e (without Solon fr. 19) h a s been incorporated into [ I a m b i . ] , Theol. ar. p. 55,13-56,7 de Faleo, 33 Solon, not ps. Hippocrates is q u o t e d by Clement, Strom. V [ , 1 6 , 1 4 4 , p. 505, 13-506, 6 St. His source is t h e π. εβδομάδος of ITermippus of l ' e r y t u s (Strom, VI, p. 506,9-10 St.), a c o n t e m p o r a r y of H a d r i a n . F a v o n i u s Eulogius Ch. 14 ( F a voiiii Euiogii 1 Jisputatio de Sumreio Scipionis, ed. et t r a d . R. -E. v a n W e d d i n g e n , Coll. L a t u m us X X V I i, B r u x e l l e s 1957, p. 29,5 ff.) q u o t e s Hippocrates Cous... in Vibrio quos π ε ο ί ε β δ ο μ ά δ ω ν ap pelt at, for (1) the theory t h a t the seed turns into blood w i l h seven d a y s (cf. Hebd. 1, §1,8 f f . R . ) ; (2) the t h e o r y t h a t seven m o n t h ' s children are viable (not in Hebd.)] (3) t h e t h e o r y t h a t t h e first teeth a r r i v e w i t h seven m o n t h s (not in Hebd.) a n d (4) t h a t t h e y are shed with seven y e a r s (cf. Hebd. 5,14 R. ); (5) then Hebd. Ch. 5 is p a r a p h r a s e d up till and including t h e fourth h e b d o m a d ; (6) quid am philosophi a r e q u o t e d for t h e t h e o r y t h a t t h e intellect does not increase a f t e r 35 years. Consequently, F a v o n i u s a p p e a r s to combine the a e c o u n t s of the two f a m i l i e s of a r i t h m o l o g i e a l w r i t e r s (cf. below, p. 163 ff.). However, F a v o n i u s wrote his little t r e a t i s e by h e a r t a n d w i t h o u t using his l i b r a r y , cf. Ch. 20, p. 37,15-16 v a n VV.: Ilabes de numeris quod sine l ihr is in agello posit us potui reminisci. T h a t this r e m a r k is the plain t r u t h w a s p r o v e d b y M. S i c h e r ! : (1) lei von ins' incorrect q u o t a t i o n s from Cicero's Somninm Scipionis c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e t h a t he w a s q u o t i n g b y heart, ef. Sieherl, De Sonmii Scipionis text-it constituendo If, Rh. Μ. 102 (1959), esp. p. 353 i f , ; (2) his e x p o 2a

131)

The authors of the second group do not have the quotations of Solon fr. 19 and Hebd. Ch. 5. (1) Moderates 34 ap. Theo, p. 104,1 ff. fells us that the fetus in the womb is complete in 5 (males?) or 7 weeks; that it is viable with 7 months 35 ; that the child grows his first teeth with the seventh month and sheds them with seven years; that στυερμα is produced and ήβη arrives in the second hebdomad, that the beard begins to grow and increase in length is effectuated in the third, and increase in breadth in the fourth hebdomad. (2) Varro ap. Gellium 111,10 (i.e. the abstract from the first book of his Hebdomades, published 39 B.C.) agrees with Theo in speaking of the fetus (111,10,7), of the growth of the first teeth with seven months and of shedding i hem at one's seventh year ( l i t , 10,12; he also tells us that 'real' teeth appear during the second hebdomad). 36 The two quotations are also absent from (3) Nicomachus of Gerasa, ap. [Iambi.], Theol. ar.; (4) Macro bins, In somn. Seif).; (5) Caleidius, In Tim., and (6) Marti anus Capella. 37 Nicomachus and Μ ar robins give substantially more information than Moderates up. Theo, and their extensive accounts are to a large degree identical, a fact which has, of course, been acknowledged by both Robbins and de Falco. 38 However, both these scholars are silent sit ion contains m a n y m a r c a nicies, Mie ihm bei d i r e k t e r Benutzung schriftlicher Ouellen sicher nicht unterlaufen waren' ( Sicher], Beiträge zur Kritik und Erklärung des l*avonius Eulogius, Abh. Ak. Mainz, Geist.-sozw. KL, 1959 Nr. 10, p. 4. These inaccuracies are t r e a t e d a t l e n g t h ibd., p. 38-45, One such m i s t a k e was a l r e a d y pointed out b y Robbins, Trad. 119, w h o concluded t h a t Favonius cannot be used a s a source for V a r r o ) . On a c c o u n t of this, F a v o n i u s cannot be used as independent evidence for t h e π'construction of the a r i t h mologieal ί radii ion. : n t h e o used a c o m m e n t a r y on P l a t o ' s Timaeus by Ad rast us (first half second Pent. A.D.), cf. E. fliller, De Adrasti Peripateliei in Platonis Timaeum commentary^, Kii.M. 2b (bS/'l), 5S2 ff * lo whieh he m a d e a d d i t i o n s from other sources. Schmekel, o.e. 409 ff., n.3 a r g u e d t h a t Theo p. 85,8-106,14 Hiller is from Ί hrasvihis, b u t Borghorst, o.e. 16 ff. p e r s u a s i v e l y a r g u e d t h a t p. 99,24-104,19 Hilter h a v e been derived from Moderatus. A l r e a d y Hiller (o.e. 584 a n d 584, u . l ) h a d pointed out t h a t t heo's observations on t h e n u m b e r 7 cannot h a v e been d e r i v e d from Ad rast us. Cf. Philo, Op. mund. 124 (1, p. 43,1 ff. C o h n - W . ) a n d V a a t o l i u s p. 35,26-7 Heib. 315 < >ii the basis of this passage, R o b b i n s p u t V a r r o in t h e second group, forg e t t i n g Censorinus Ch. 14, where id ebd. Ch. 5 and Solon fr. 19 Diehl are quoted. 37 Cf, Robbins, Trad. PI2 and de F a l c o ' s corrections, o.e. 37. Caleidius a n d CapeOa ( R o b b i e 1 1 1) disagree w i t h Theo, Nico in ach us and Macrobius in one minor d e t a i l (cf. below, p. 171-3 and p. 1 72 3, n. 97 and n. 98). *IH h'obbins, o.e. 114, 11b; de Falco, o.e. 58, 131)

about the fact that the parallel treatment of gestation and life in Macrobius and Nicomachus is said by both these sources to be a doctrine of Strato and IModes.311

2. Before commenting upon Diodes tr. i l l , however, ί want to adduce three other passages. The first is fr. 175 Wellmann (from Athenacus 10 of Attalia via Oribasius). The heptadic scheme of Diodes1 embryology lias been altered by Athenaeus in order to fit into an enneaclic one.41 Here we read (among other things which can be paralleled from Diodes 42 ) that about the third ennead, ώς φησιν 6 Διοκλής, έν ύμένι μ υ ξ ώ δ ε ι γ ί ν ε τ α ι φ α ν ε ρ ώ ς αμυδρός δ τ ύ π ο ς τ η ς ρ ά χ ε ω ς κ α ί 39 Lr. 177 W e l l m a n n (1901). W e l l m a n n only quoted the Macrobius-version (up to In somn, Sc. 1,0,73), which was discussed a l r e a d y by K. Sprengel, Versuch einer pragmatischen Geschichte der Arznei künde, 1, Leipzig, 418-16, 465-6. Koscher (1913), 02 ff. (cf. also 1906, 99 if. a n d 148 ff.) printed Nieom. ap. [ I a m b i . ! , Theol, ar. p. 61,13-67,2 de Laleo a n d Maer. 1,6,63-76 in parallel columns, o m i t t i n g most of t h e arithmological e x t r a ' s which p r o b a b l y h a v e been a d d e d b y Nicomachus. The s a m e portions of b o t h t e x t s h a v e been p r i n t e d in t h e s a m e w a y b y \V. J a e g e r , Vergessene Fragmeide des Peripaietihers IHohles von h'arystos, (Abh. Preuss. Ak. Wiss. 1938, phi I.-hist. Kl. 3, p. 1 ff. = Scripta minora If, R o m a 1960, 185 i f . ; the t e x t s ibd. p. 209 ff.). P. W e n d l a n d ' s suggestion (fieri. Phil. Wochensehr. 1889, 987 a n d 1892, 872) t h a t Nicomachus w a s Macrobius 1 source h a s been r e c e n t l y reaffirmed b y W . H. Stahl, Macrobius Commentary on the Dream of Scipio, trans]. with intr. a n d notes, Ν. Y.-London. 1952, 2 1966, p. 28, n.13 (here he s a y s t h a t Macrobius t r a n s l a t e d p a r t of t h e Theol. ar.; a t p. 38, where he tells us t h a t he aceepts t h e a r g u m e n t s of Kobbins' Tradition, he suggests t h a t Macrobius either d i r e c t l y or indirectly followed Nicomachus, or else followed a Neoplatonie source which in its turn would be d r a w i n g upon N i c o m a c h u s ' Theol.). However, J a e g e r o.e. 216 ff. a p p o s i t e l y r e f u t e d this hypothesis, which does not e x p l a i n w h y Macrobius left out t h e arithmological i n t e r p o l a t i o n s m a d e b y Nicomachus. T h e problem of Macrobius' i m m e d i a t e source for his arithmological c h a p t e r s a p p e a r s to be still unsolved. P, Coureelle, Les lettres grecques en Occident de Macrohe ä Cassiodore, Paris, 1942, 21 948, w h o w a n t e d to derive most of Macrobius' c o m m e n t a r y from t h e w o r k s of especially P o r p h y r y a n d Plothens, m a d e a single exception (p. 2 5 ) : In somn. Sc, 1,5 and 6 would he derived, through a n a n o n y m o u s ' e o m m e n t a t e u r l a t i n ' , from Varro, i.e. u l t i m a t e l y from Posidonius; K. Mrass, Macrobius* Kommentar zu Cicero's Somnium, Sb. Preuss. Ak. Wiss., Phil.-hist. Kl. 1933 (232 ff.), 238 ff. a s s u m e d t h a t P o r p h y r y ' s Commentary on t h e Tim actis w a s Macrobius' source for these subjects. 40 Cf. above, Ch. 11, p. 33 a n d ibd., n. 8 ; Ch. Υ Λ, p. 130, n. 4 ; Ch. V I I , p. 213 ff. 41 J a e g e r , Verg. Fragm. 207. Cf., however, below, p. 165, n. 50. 42 Cf, below, p. 167, n. 59,

131)

ο της κεφαλής (it should be kept in mind that 3 x 9 about equals 4 x 7 ) . The second passage is fr. 176 Wellmann (Galen, XVIIA p. 1006 K.) : according to almost all physicians, the male fetus not only develops faster than the female, but also starts to move earlier, as is said explicitly by Hippocrates 43 and Diodes. The third is from Varro ap. Gellium, 111,10,7: post deinde qiiarta hebdomade, quod ems (sc. of the fetus) virile secus futurum est, caput el spina, quae est in dor so, inforniatur. The conclusion is obvious: Varro quotes (indirectly, no doubt) from ' Diodes' and gives his views upon the development of the male fetus, omitting 44 to speak of that of the female, which (according to Galen) is slower. The excerpt from Athenaeus therefore also speaks of the male fetus only. The identification of the doctrine as quoted by Varro is made certain by the correspondence of ο τύπος της ράχεως και 6 της κεφαλής ~ caput el spina, quae est in dor so It should be kept in mind that 'Diodes fr. 177 We 11 mann' is not just a report on a theory of Diodes: the parallel passages in Nicomachus and Macrobius give an exposition of the views of a number of medical authorities upon the importance of the number 7 for human life from conception till birth and from birth till death. Most of this exposition indeed reports the views of Diodes (and Strato), but there is also a quotation from Nat. puer.fm while in the Nicomachus-version 47 Diodes' calculation 48 of the gestation-period (the 210 days of the seven month's child) is compared 49 to that of Cam. Ch. 19 and Epid. V,116 L., from the latter of which a sentence is quoted. - Further, Nicom. p. 62,8-9 speaks of 'Strato, 50 Diodes και πολλοί έτεροι των ιατρών'. 51 Nat. Piter., Ch. 21 (Υ Η, 510 F.). The omission m a y be due to Gellins. 45 Cf. Well mann, p. 201, m at 16. 4β VII,490 L. Quoted by Nicom.. p. 61,15-62,7, paraphrased by Mac v., In somn. Sc. 1,6,64. 47 P. 64,4-17 de Falco. 48 Cf. below, p. 168 and ibd., n. 61 and n. 62. 49 Cf. Jaeger, Verg. Fr. 226. 50 The extent of Strat.o's contribution is not easy to gauge. Perhaps he largely agreed with Diodes, perhaps he is an intermediate source (so Wei!mann, o.e. 201, n. at 12; Jaeger, o.e. 215 ff., 221). Wehrli, Schule d. Arist., 5. Straten, only prints the em bryology (fr. 97-9) and does not: want (p. 71) to ta ke the treatment of life after birth into account; for Diodes, he prefers the enneads of fr. 175 Wellmann, which leaves Diodes (in Nicomach us and Macrobius) with next to nothing. For the present writer's guess about Strato, see below, p. 1 77-8. 51 Macrob. 1,6,65 only mentions Strato and Diodes. 43

44

131)

131)

These 'many other physicians' may be followers of Diodes, whose Γυναικεία was an important and influential book. Jaeger thought that these disciples of Diodes were responsible for what he took to be inaccuracies in the account of Diodes' theory a f t . Nicomadmm-MacroMum as compared to the version given in fr, 176 Wdlrnaim, but this assumption is not necessary. 02 It is also possible that such authorities as the early physician Hippo are meant (cf. for his theories Cens. 7,2-3 and below, p. 1.74)/'3 whose theories in part agree with those of Diocles/Strato. Further, the account of gestation etc. in Ν icon i; trims and Macrobius should really start at Macr. 1,6,62 ~ Nie one p. 0.1,1 cie hah o.:>l Macrobius says (1,6,62) hie (sc. 7) den/que est numerus qui hcmimcni coneipi,

formari,

edi,

vivere,

all

ac

per

ouines

a datum

gradus

tradi

senectae atque omni no eon si are jaeit, Λ reference to menstrual ion follows, and then we hear that sperm not rejected within seven hours is pronounced effectives Nicomach us' version is completely parallel, but fuller, and contains proof that the ideas about the first se\ui hours of the sperm really belong to the thcor\ cf Diodes cud Stiato, for in Nicomachus these first seven hours of flic sperm in the womb axe explicitly compared 55 to the crucial first seven hours 52 W e l l m a n n o m i t t e d Macr. 1,6,66 (cf. Nicotin p. o2.20-o.M- de h'aleo), because it is said here t h a t m a l e e m b r y o s develop slower t h a n female, cf. j a e g e r , o.e. 221, n.2. However, 1 )ioeles/Strato are s p e a k i n g here a b o u t nine month'!; children (females eompk-ie in the sixth, m a l e s in the seventh week). P r o b a b l e t h e e m b r y o n i c d e v e l o p m e n t of these children w a s assumed to differ from that of seven m o n t h ' s children, for the (male) fetus which is formed with Ihr. sevent h w e e k is said to be v i a b l e with seven inont lis (Maer. 1,0,05-0; Nieoin. p. 02,10-20). Sec f u r t h e r below, p. l b s , n. 00. I t is t e m p t i n g to connect Nicomachus' πολλοί ετεροι τ«' >v ίατρών with Pens, 7,5; ..,sepiinio mense ρ are ιό mulierem posse phtrinn a:ijirmant, ui Thea ν ο Pytiiagorica Aristoteles Peripaleiicus, Diodes (fr. 174 W e l l m a n n ) Enenor S trat ο η limpedoeles Epigenes m ultique praetere a, quorum omnium consensus limyphoniem Cnidium nan deterret id ipsum intrepid,e perneganlem. However, Pens, 7 , 2 - 6 h a s been derived from the I V/. plac. (1 hels, J)ox, 105). At most, therefore, b o t h Niconi. and Vet, plac„ go b a c k to t h e s a m e source, to w h i c h the Vet. plac. m a y h a v e m a d e s u b s t a n t i a l a d d i t i o n s : e.g., Epigenes is not a, p h y s i c i a n . It is i n t e r e s t i n g to f i n d Empedocles in Censorinus' list, since he is also referred to (though for t h e s e v e n t h w e e k of t h e e m b r y o ) b y Theo, cf. below, p. 170 a n d ibd., n. 75. 54 J a e g e r begins a t 1,6,63 ~ p. 61,13 de Falco. 55 P. 61,6 tf. de F a l c o : επτά ώραις τ%ϊς πλείστα ι ς ήτοι πρυσπλάσοεται ύς ζοογονησιν το νοστιμώτερον αύτου ή άπολισΟαίνει, κ α θ ά π ε ρ ά μέλει κ7.1 αντιστρόφως άπο τ η ς φυσικής του εμβρύου ομφαλοτομίας εις την της εξόδου έπίΒειίιν επτά ωρών 58

of the newborn infant, 56 which likewise determine life or death. 57 The embryology of Strato and Diodes (from now on, I shall refer ίο the portion of the text printed by Jaeger 58 ) continues as follows. Nat. puer. is quoted for the formation of a membrane, containing a liquid mass, in the first week; little drops of blood appear upon the surface of this membrane, according to Diodes ami Strato, in the second week; these specks of blood penetrate into the4 liquid mass in the third week; in the fourth week, ihr moisture ι oagulatcs into some tiring intermediate between blood and flesh; during the fifth week (i.e. up to 35 days) the embryo grows into the size of a bee, and already has, in outline, head, neck, thorax and limbs (Nicomaehus) ~ membra omnia el destgrmia lolius tor ports lineament a (Mu.en »I au->). i.e., by the 35th day the (male) embryo is complete in outline./'9 At ούκ εντός διάστημα αναλύεται, έν α!ς συμμέτρους Ικανόν άντέχειν το κύημα, ούτε τη άπο του ομφαλού τροφή διακρατεΐσθαι έχον ετι ως φυτον ή μέρος, ούτε π ω τ ν] θύραθεν εισπνοή ώς ζ ω ο ν ήδη άπροσάρτητον και αυτοτελές κ. τ. λ. The parallel (but not its i m p l i c a t i o n ) w a s acknowledged b y Roscher, 1906, Η 7 . 56 Of which we e x p l i c i t l y h e a r well within the 1 b o d e s - p a s s a g e : Macr. 1,0,67 ~ Nicotin p. 0 1,20 (>5,3 de Falco. Cf. below, p. 10S a n d ibd., n. 65. 57 Nieoma.eluis (see above, p. J66, n. 55) in s p e a k i n g of t h e unborn b a b y calls it φυτόν - Stoic terminology, cf. SVF 11,806 (p, 222,18 ff.) το βρέφος έν τη γ α στ ρ I φύσει τρέφεσθαι νομίζει (sc. C h r y s i p p u s ) καΟαπερ φυτό ν (cf. Roseher, 1906, p. 148, n.216).

Cf. above, p. 161, n. 30, t i p to this point, this closely agrees math Diocles fr. 175 Well mann (cf. Wei I m a u n , o.e. 201, n. at 14, 16, 18; tub,: A t h e n a e u s a l t e r e d Diocles' s c h e m a in order to get an cm ι cadi c e< imputation, el, above, p. 164 a n d ibd., n. ί 1 ): until a me d a y s , 'hoes' of blood; a r o u n d 18 d a y s θρόμβοι (cf, Nicotin ρ» 62,1 2 de Falco ΟρομβούσΟαι) σαρ /.ώΛ'εις (for the sequel cf. above, p. l e t ί ) , the em ο ρ ό b complete a t J 6 (Diocles: 35) to 40 d a y s ( u n d o u b t e d l y , t h e i e s s a i a c o u t a d o r Oct. Ch. 1, cf. below, p. 175, n. 113)). V a r r o ap. Gellium 111,10,7 (cf. also above, p. 229) supplies some e x t r a in formation a b o u t the first w e e k : nam cum in ideruui... mulieris genitale semen datum est, priniis septem diehus con gl ob at uν c 8) . σ^μπληρουσΟαΛ λέγεται, τ/(ν π ρ ώ τ η ν εβδομάδα: /Vet. V, 23,1 ( - S l l ; I 1,64); 1 i e n i e l i f t i s a n d t h e S t o i c s s a y 1 hat άρχεσΟοα τους ανθρώπους τ η ς τε> ε'.ότητος περί τ ή ν δευτέραν εβδομάδα» περί ην ο σ π ε ρ μ α τ ι κ ό ς κ ι ν ε ί τ α ι ορρός, κ α ι γαρ τ ά δένδρα άρχε τ« ι τότε τελεί,ότητος, όταν άρ/ηται γεννών τ ά σ π έ ρ μ α τ α · περί οέ τήν δευτέραν έβδυ[/άδα έννοια γ ί ν ε τ α ι καλυ"; τε κ α ί κ ά κ ο υ και τ'ή ς διδασκαλίας οιύκλν. M c i - v i r h u s say:·; t h a i m a n 1/-; ejop.» f h o u g h ί a n d b e c o m e s λογικός hi t he s e c o n d h e b d o m a d , b e c a u s e n o w t h e n u m b e r of s e n s e s r e a c h e s c o m p l e t i o n b e Hit1 a d d i t i o n of t h e r e p r o d u c t i v e p o w e r at 14 y e a r s . In Aet, I \ \ 1 1,1 ff» w e r e a d t h a t t h e s e n s e s a r e a l r e a d y i n s t r u m e n t a l in p r o d u c i n g ό κ α τ ά ένδιάΟεσίν λόγος d u r i n g t h e f i r s t h e b d o m a d , but t h e r e m a r k s a b o u t r e p r o d u c t i o n a n d t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n g o o d a n d e v i l in Act. V»23,1 s h o w t h a t t h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t is o n l y c o m p l e t e d d u r i n g t h e s e c o n d h e b d o m a d . N e v e r t h e l e s s , N i c o m a c h u s ' p h r a s i n g p r o b a b l y is somew ha t c a r e l e s s (he p u t s t h e ένδιαΟέτος λόγος a n d t h e b r o o m i n g λογικός in t h e s e c o n d h e b d o m a d , ef, a b o v e , p. 168, n. 67 a n d n. 6 8 ) . I n f a v o u r of t h i s a s s u m p t i o n is t h e f a c t , t h a t Philo, Lcg. all. Ϊ» Cli, 1 V, 1 0 (----- I, p. 6 3 , 1 5 ff. Cohn.AY.) s a y s : "they s a y t h a t m a n b e c o m e s λογικός d u r i n g t h e f i r s t s e v e n y e a r s , . . a n d t h a t d u r i n g h i s s e c o n d p e r i o d of s e v e n y e a r s h e r e a c h e s c o m p l e t e c o n s u m m a t i o n ; for a t t h e a g e of 14 w e a r e a b l e t o beget o f f s p r i n g like o u r s e l v e s ' . T h e p a r a l l e l in Philo is, m o r e o v e r , in f a v o u r of t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t t h i s S t o i c t h e o r y u l t i m a t e l y b e l o n g s to t h e o r i g i n a l a c c o u n t of t h e a g e s of m a n u s e d b y \ i e < » m a c h u s : e l . b e l o w , p. 182-5, n. 148, 69

M a c r o b i u s s p e a k s of the s e v e n v o w e l s (1,6,70), w h i c h a r e a l s o r e f e r r e d to b y Philo, Op. mmid. 126 (1, p. 43,11 ff. C o h n - W . ) , w h i l e t h e s e v e n s e n s e s of

Nicomach us (cL SVF 11,827-833) are mentioned Op, wand.

117 (p. 41,14 ff.

C o h n - W ). J a e g e r , o.e. 22A ( a n d n . 2 ) a t t r i b u t e s t h e s e v e n s e n s e s a n d t h e προφ. a n d ένδ. λ. t o P r o r n s π. τ η ς εβδομάδος, b e c a u s e N i c o m a c h us r e f e r s to t h i s w o r k p. 5 7 , 1 3 ff, d e P a l c o for t h e e t y m o l o g y of έ π τ ά ς . B e c a u s e t h i s e t y m o l o g y ( έ π τ ά ς , σ ε π τ ά ς, σ ε β α σ μ ό ς ) a l s o o c c u r s in Philo, Op. imtml. 126 (1, p. 4 3 , 1 7 ff. C o h n - W . ) J a e g e r (o.e. 21 0 - 2 0 ) a r g u e d t h a t , s i n c e Philo a l s o m e n t i o n s t h e L a t i n w o r d seplem in t h i s c o n n e c t i o n , Prorus» w h o s p o k e of σ ε π τ ά ς , m u s t l i k e w i s e h a v e r e f e r r e d to septern. T h u s , h e t h i n k s , P r o r u s w o u l d be e a r l i e r t h a n P h i l o . A b o u t t h e d a t e of t h i s p s e u d o - P v t h a g o r e a n w o r k n o t h i n g is k n o w n w i t h a n y c e r t a i n t y ( N i c o m . p r o v i d e s t h e t . a . c p ) , so i t m a y h a v e b e e n e a r l i e r t h a n Philo, f t s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t t h e e t y m o l o g y έ π τ ά ς - σ ε π τ ά ς a l s o o c c u r s M a c r , 1,6,45. T h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n P h i l o a n d P r o r u s is m o r e in f a v o u r of a c o m m o n s o u r c e t h a n of t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t P r o r u s w a s P h i l o ' s s o u r c e . T h e r e f e r e n c e to septern· may h a v e been a d d e d , h o w e v e r , b y P h i l o h i m s e l f , w h o p r e s u m a b l y w a s a b l e t o c o u n t to t e n in ' L a t i n . Pa it one m a y a l s o b e p e r m i t t e d t o t h i n k of an u l t i m a t e s o u r c e , e . g . a w e l l - k n o w n p h i l o s o p h e r of t h e f i r s t C e n t . IPC. w h o r e c e i v e d - m a n y R o m a n v i s i t o r s a n d a p p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n f o n d of e t y m o l o g i e s .

131)

with seven years, and in holding that seven month's children are viable. In their account of the ages of man Capella and Calci dins go as far as the fifth hebdomad, i.e. speak of one more hebdomad than Moderatus, but their information is by no means as full as that of Nicomachus and Macrobius. Puberty and sexual ripeness occur with fourteen years,1J& the beard arrives in the third,1,6 the incrementa siainrae in the fourth, 97 the iiivcnalis aetatis ficrfectio in the fifth 98 05 Cf. Diocles Strato, Moderatus ap. Theo (Hehl. Ch. 5, 17-8 R. only mentions sperm, Solon fr. 19,4 only p u b e r t y ) . 96 Cf. Diocles-Strato, Theo, Hebd., Solon. 97 In spite of Robbies, Trad. Il l, tlnV, is lie- '-olr J i f f e i e n c e between Capella j Calculi lis a n d Tlieo ρ Nicomachus f Macrobius. and so de Falco, o.e. 57, is right in r e g a r d i n g it as a minor one, (Theo, Nicomachus and Macrobius p u t the increase in length in the third hebdomad, while Capella a n d Calcidius are silent a b o u t the increase in breadth in the fourth h e b d o m a d ) . 98 J . H. W a s z i n k , Studien zum Timaioskonimentar des Calci diu $ I, Phi los. a n t . 12, L e i d e n 1964, a r g u e s t h a t Cale. Ch. 1-25, 32-50 a n d 56-118 h a v e been derived from the c o m m e n t a r i e s on the Timaeus of A d r a s t u s a n d P o r p h y r y (Hiller - cf. above, p. 163, n. 34 - a n d S w i t a l s k i - cf. above, p. 157, n. 5 - h a v e est a b l i s h e d b e y o n d doubt t h a t Ch. 44-46 a n d 55-91 h a v e been derived, either d i r e c t l y or indirectly, from the c o m m e n t a r y of Adrastus, which is reproduced, in p a r t , b y Theo of S m y r n a ) , a n d t h a t it is unlikely t h a t Calcidius k n e w Adrastus 1 c o m m e n t a r y only t h r o u g h t h a t of P o r p h y r y . W a s z i n k follows Borghorst (cf. above, p. 163, n, 34) in a s s u m i n g t h a t Theo p. 99,24-104,19 Hiller h a s been d e r i v e d f r o m Moderatus, a n d a r g u e s t h a t Theo reproduces the t e x t of M o d e r a t u s w i t h o u t modifications (o.e. 17-8). Now Calcidius Ch. 37 contains some e l e m e n t s w h i c h are not in M o d e r a t u s (different description of t h e third a n d fourth h e b d o m a d of h u m a n life-years, t h e fifth as a n e x t r a over Theo). Since Adrastus is Calcidius' source for most of Ch. 35-8 (so W a s z i n k , o.e. 15-19), he p r o b a b l y is also his source for the account of the ages of man which is different from t h a t of Moderatus. However, these differences are m u c h less i m p o r t a n t t h a n W a s z i n k , w h o does not a d d u c e the parallels in Capella, Nicomachus a n d Macrobius, holds t h e m to be. Moreover, t h o u g h it is possible t h a t Theo did not a b b r e v i a t e Moderatus 5 a c c o u n t b y o m i t t i n g the fifth h e b d o m a d , it is c e r t a i n l y possible t h a t M o d e r a t u s a b b r e v i a t e d his own source. If A d r a s t u s ' (surmised) a c c o u n t of t h e a g e s of m a n differed from t h a t of Moderatus, it did so only in t h e w a y outlined above, n. 97. - A much, more s i g n i f i c a n t difference between Calcidius (Ad r a s t u s ? ) a n d M o d e r a t u s ap. Theo is the puzzling reference to Hebd. in p. 86» 6 - 8 W a s z i n k : In aegritudinihus quoque iuxta eundem numerum niotus fieri usus experientiaqiie docnit et Hippocrates cum saepe alias in pier is que Ii bris suis tum etiam in his evidenter quos de hebd om a dibits instituil. T h e reference to t h e Corp. Hipp, in general is correct (cf. the w e a l t h of evidence collected b y Roscher 1906, p. 60 ff., 67 ff. a n d 1913, 88 f f . ) ; so is t h a t to Hebd. (Ch. 1,13-15 R., cf. below, p. 203, n. 263, in fine; Ch. 26-7). T h e r e m a r k a b o u t

131)

hebdomad. Presumably, both passages in the last analysis go back to the same source which is ultimately at the basis of the account in Theo." We may provisionally conclude that the two classes of arithmological writers distinguished by Robbins and de Palco have been, indeed, correctly divided, it is, however, preferable to formulate the differentia specifica in a more exact way, and also better to take into account that Varro a/>. (lell'mm100 belongs to the second class, while

t h e n u m b e r seven in r e l a t i o n to diseases also in Theo (p. 104,9 ff. U d l e r ) follows upon the passage on the ages of man» and it can be- pa ralleled in oil km" arith ~ mologists (cf. the parallels collected by W a s z i n k ad /.)» but none of these, except Philo, mentions Hippocrates or //ehd. ft is t e m p t i n g to at tribute the reference to 11 ebd. to Adrastns. It should be pointed out t h a t the slight c h a n g e in the account of the ages of mail h a s the effect of bringing this p a s s a g e into s o m e w h a t closer a g r e e m e n t with 11 ebd. 5,19-26 Κ.» which a t the third h e b d o m a d only mentions the beard, and which p u t s the increase of the b o d y in the fourth h e b d o m a d . Perhaps the most plausible e x p l a n a t i o n for both this c h a n g e and the addition of the book-title of Jlebd.io the r e m a r k on the seventh d a y as a critical d a y is t h a t A d r a s t n s (?) corrected a n d a m p l i f i e d t h e exegesis of the Tiniaeus which served a s his source (and as t h a t of M o d e r a t n s up. Theo) bv a d d u c i n g an arithmologieal t r e a t i s e (for which cf, below, p, 181-2) which contained q u o t a t i o n s f r o m Hebd. Some confirmation of this assumption is forthcoming from t h e f a c t t h a t Philo's i n t r o d u c t o r y account of t h e ages of m a n in Op, mund. 103 (where Solon fr. 19 a n d Πebd. Ch. 5 follow) is different from t h a t in Leg. all. 1,10 (which is closer to Ν i co m a c h u s - Μ aero b i us). Cf. below, p. 180-1, n. 140, where these t w o p a s s a g e s a r e compared, a n d p. 181-2, n. 145, where reasons are given for t h e ass u m p t i o n t h a t Leg. all. 1» Ch. 4 is in some respects closer to t h e orginal source. Op. mund. also contains other traces which point a t the use of a revised source: the a n n o u n c e m e n t in 103 m e n t i o n s t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of the e m b r y o , b u t this subject is only t r e a t e d as f a r a w a y a s Op. mund. 124 (cf. below, p. 1 81-2, n, 145), There, we f i n d a q u o t a t i o n from Π ebd. Ch. 1 (cf. below, p. 203» n. 263) concerning the dev e l o p m e n t of the embryo, upon which (as in ilebd. Ch. 1, cf. a g a i n below, p. 203, η. 263) a r e m a r k concerning t h e role of the n u m b e r 7 in diseases follows (125; cf. also Hebd. Ch. 26-7), to winch, in Philo» the n a m e of Hippocrates h a s not been a t t a c h e d , p r e s u m a b l y because a s t a t e m e n t on m e n s t r u a t i o n h a s been p u t b e t w e e n t h e dictum on e m b r y o l o g y and t h a t on 7 in diseases. Compared to the a c c o u n t of X ie< >m ac h us - λ 1 aero bins, t h a t of Op. mund. is c e r t a i n l y secondary. Because t h e reference to H i p p o c r a t e s a n d Hebd. in Calciclius quoted a b o v e is parallel to t h e account in Op. mund. 125, 1 s u b m i t t h a t A d r a s t n s a d d u c e d the s a m e ( s e c o n d a r y ) source as Philo. For other evidence that Philo used a second a r y source cf. below, p. 190, p. 202. 99 For 'theo, cf. above, p. 170-1. 100 Cf. above, p. 163. 131)

Yarro ap. Ceiisorinnm 101 belongs to the first. To the problem of these different strains in Varro 1 shall return below, 102 'the disparity between the two families of arithmologists should be formulated, 1 think, as follows. The» second family (Varro af>. < Tellium; Μ ode rains ap. Theo, Nieomaehus ap. [iambi.] TheoL ar.; Mac robins; Calridius; Martianus Capeila) has the l)ioeles-M rato passage (or an a t t r a c t ol this passage) as its distinguishing mark, The first family (Varro ap. Censoiiniim; Philo; Anatoli ι is) is elianteierized 1)) Ute quotations of Solon IV. I Diehl and Held, Cli. 5. The features shared by [he exposiüoiis in both families can be accounted for on the assumption that Solon fr. 10 1 Hehl is one of the sources of Diocles-Strnto 103 auch as f would like to add now, of I lei>d. i h. 5 101 as well. In addition to Solon, other predecessors of Diodes and Strato can be pointed out, such ris Itippe» (last part of the fifth Cent. B.C.), the author of Cam,, that of Oct. and that of [Arist. j IIA ViL flippy (ap. Censor. 7,2 ~ I '.S 38ΛΚ») said that the baby in Hie womb is viable with seven months, that the first feHh of the infant grow with seven months, that they fall out with seven years and. thai pubei iy begins with fourteen, 105 Consequently, in Hippo we h a w a theory about the embryo which is combined with an arc omit of the first two hebdomads Cf. a b o v e , p. 162, 1\ 185 if. 103 Cf. a b o v e , ρ» 171 a n d picker, o.e. 224. Aristotle approvingly- refers to Solon's e l e g y in Ρυί'ίί. Χ f 1,16,1 J 1:3bJi ff. (τών ;ϊοιητ material). Theo (i.e. Theo's source), on the other hand, would have made little use of the secondary source and much use of Posidonius (fait Theo's account of the embryology and of the ages of man is that of de 'Falco's secondary source). Further, it should not be forgotten that Varro belongs to both families (cf. below, p. 185 ff.) 147 G. Airmann, De Posid. 54 ff. discusses this passage, but ncgPcP its specifically Stoic character. 148 Nicom. ap. [Iambi], T/ieol. ar. p. 50,5-00,0 .v, Macro!»., in sown. Sap. 1,0, 48-60. The lunar cycle is also treated betöre the ages of man by Philo, Op. mnnd. 101, I» p. 35,1-10 Cohn-W, Philo here does not speak of the sea,; however, ibd. 113 (cf. also above, Ch. V B, p. 143), 1» p. 30,22-40,13 Cohn-W, lie speaks at length of the σ υ μ π α θ ε ί α between the seven planets and air !- earth, instancing among other things the rivers, the seas and ζωά τ ε . . . και φυτά καρπούς γενν^ντα (p. 40,W-11 )· In Leg,all. 1, Ch. 4,8 (I, ρ, 63,9 ff. Cohn-W) which in some respects appears to be closer (cf. above, p. 1 80-1, n. 140) t< > the original Posidonius-version than Op.mnnd. which, as Τ believe, is dependant on the anonymous aril htnologist (according to L. Cohn, Einteilung und Chronologie der Schriften Ρ hi los, Phil., Supp.-Bd. VII, 1899, 431 ff., Leg. all. is earlier than Op. mund.), the periods of the moon are mentioned before and in connection with the embryology and the account of the ages of man (for which cf. above, p. 180-1, n. 140): here we read that 'the changes of the moon, συμττν.Οεστάτου TTGQC τά επίγεια άστρου, occur by sevens'; nature effects the changes in the atmosphere by dint of this number (cf. Op. mund. 113, I, p. 40,1 ff. Cohn-W., where this influence is attributed to the seven planets), and also the phenomena connected with birth etc. are 131)

Both authors also discuss the hebdomadic cycles of the tides of the ocean, which run parallel to the hebdomadic periods of the moon149 (not in Theo), In Nicomach us the moon is considered to be intermediate between tlu' supralunary and the sublunary worlds and to be capable of influencing what occurs on earth because of this mediating position.150 A few pages later on (p. 64,17-19 de Falco 151 ) the development of the embryo is compared to that of plants. This is riot in Macrobitis; all the same, Jaeger 152 wanted to attribute this comparison to Diodes, However, the idea that the moon influences the development both of animals and plants occurs in a passage of Cicero (NI) 11,50), which has been attributed to Posidonius 1 » 3 : midtaqne ah ea (sc. I he mou,:V1) •manarit ct jiuunl quihus et a η im a tit es alantiir auges cant que et pubescant matiiritatemqiie adseqnantur quae or i until r c terra. It is, therefore, perhaps better to attribute the aside on plants to Posidonius; the brief remark in Cicero about the augcscere (αύξάνειν) and pub esc ere (ήβάσκειν) of anim antes (ζωα) should, 1 think, be conremulated by 7, The role of the moon appears to be that of mediator between the seven planets, of which it is one, and the phenomena, on eartli which depend npon the seven planets (cf. Nicomachus on its intermediate position, below, n. 150). - Also Varro ap. (Sellinm I [1,10,6 treats the lunar cycle before the human embryology and the hebdomads of life-years. - For the ideas of the Pneumatic physicians on the relation between the moon and the atmosphere cf. Wellmann, Pneum. Sch, 147-8 {for the Pneumatics and the Stoa, esp. Posidonius, cf. below, €h, VII, p. 213 ff.). 149 Nieom. p. 60,6-20 de Falco - Macrob. 1,0.01. 150 The circle of the moon is the eighth counted from a b o v e and the t hird from below (p. 59,6-7); i.e., astronomical and elemental spheres are not ditTv-ent iafod, the order being 1. outer heaven, 2-8, planets, 9. air, 10. water and earth. The sphere of the moon is said to τήν των περί γην αποτελεσμάτων άπ'.τέλεσιν και έξουσίαν άποφέρεσθαι, μεσαί/μιον νοουμένην των τε άνωθεν και των κάτωθεν (ρ. 59, 7-10). It does this by dint of the number seven, employing the number four {4 χ 7 ---- 28 - the lunar cycle) as a secondant. 151 οτι και τά σπέρματα πάντα ύπέρ γη ν αναφαίνεται οι έβδομης μάλιστα ή μέρα; έκφυόμενα, και έπτάκαυλα ώς επί παν τά πλείστα γίνεται» τά τε βρέφη κ.τ.λ. 15-j Ycyo. Freien. 222. However, the chances that Strato made this comparison are greater, cf. IIA VII,I, 5Klal5 ff.» cited above, p. 177, n. 122. The Stoic who handled this material must in any case have adhered to this view, for he called the fetus a φυτόν (cf. above, p. 167, n. 57). For a Stoic parallel to this comparison cf. Act. V,23,l» quoted above, p. 169, n. 69. Roscher, 1906, 137 quotes parallels from Pliny, Nat. ΙΓ, 153 Cf. above, Ch. V B, p. 143, n. 28. 154 N.b.: Cicero in this paragraph (ND 11,50) discusses the lunar cycle.

183

nected with the Macrobius.

Diocles-and-Strato

section in Nicomachus

and

The tides of the Ocean are also influenced by the lunar cycle. It is a well-known fact that Posidonius was greatly interested in this phenomenon, which he interpreted in the sense of his theory of cosmic sympathy. 155 In Cic,, ND IT,10, a paragraph on cosmic sympathy which goes back to Posidonius,156 the aestns maritimi fretommque angustiaelh1 are said to orin aid ohiln lunae commovert. In Nicomachus also, the moon is said to regulate the height of the waters of the ocean (p. 60,6 ff. de Pal co διατιΟέμενον 8έ και τον Ώκεανον158 υπ' αύτη ς (sc. the moon) κατά τους έβδομαδικούς άριΟμούς ορώ μεν; the actual process is depicted in detail). Now. the moon which influences the Ocean apparently also influences the lives of the animals living in it; it even influences the lives of all animals. 159 But these instances of cosmic sympathy are brushed aside: τί γάρ δει νυν οστρέων τε και f εγκεφάλων και μυελών f 160 μινύΟησιν και των πλείστον ζώων τήν συμπάΟε ιαν έπεξιέναι τήν προς το άστρον τούτο, όποτε έξ αυτών τών τοις άνθρώποις συμβαινόντων αύτάρκως δυνάμεθα πεφαΟήναι περί τών λεγόμενων.161 The evidence in favour of attributing this thought to Posidonius is quite strong: his favourite idea of συμπάθεια is explicitly formulated in a context which explains the increase and decrease of the Ocean by the influence of the moon. If this inference is correct, we probably also have found one of Posidonius1 own motives for speaking about the preand post-natal 162 life of man (cf. also below, p. 196). 155 Cf. Reinhardt, Pos. 121 ff. ; Kosm. u. Svmp. 58 ff.; RE s.v. Pos. b71 (esp. on the άστροειδής περίοδος of the sea, which occurs συμπαθώ? rfj σελήνη). 156 Reinhardt, Kosm. I l l ff.; cf. also Pease's notes ad J. 157 This can perhaps he paralleled: the Ruripus' seven changes ma thin each 24 hours are mentioned by Strabo (1,3,12; IX,2,8), who may have taken this from Posidonius. Ευριποι are also mentioned in the arithmologieal literature; Theo p. 104,18 Hiller, Anatoli us p. 36,24 Heiberg. Cf. further Pease's note at Cic, ND 111,24, p. 1012-3 and Roscher, 1906, p. 158 n.172 (who does not refer to ND 11,19). 168 The word ωκεανός itself is revealing: Posidonius wrote περί Ωκεανού, not περί θαλάττης. Roscher, 1906, 107-8 attributed this passage in Nicomachus to Posidonius, but did not comment upon the notion of cosmic sympathy. 159 Cf. also Cic. NT) 11,50, quoted above, p. 183. leo Apparently corrupt. Roscher (1906, 147) thought of έ/Ινοι έναλοι and μύες, which de Palco in app. cr. qualified as fortasse recie. 161 The reference to menstruation and the Strato-and- i >iocJes passage follow. 162 The hebdomads of years of human life are not an example of συμπάθεια with the moon only, but of συμπάθεια with the sun as well. No reference to the sun

184

4. At this point 1 want to return to the problem of the relative date of Pos ido nius' Comments upon certain passages in the Τ im a cits wrhich i believe to have been the source of Modemtus ap. Theo, Nieomaehus up. I Iambi.j TheoL ar. and Macrobius, In Somn. Sc., and to that of the anonymous arithmological treatise which I believe to have been followed by Philo and Anatohus. As has boeni pointed out above, Va.no belongs to both these families of arithmological authors: the. abstract up. (.ellinni belongs to the Theo-famih, while the abstracts ap. Censorinum belong to the Philo-fam . The Hebdomad es, from which Gell u s 111,10 gives us an abstract oi book I, wa.s published in >') ! >.C.. when Yarro had entered upon his 78ih year. M ; l It was a majoi woi k, v/luch he undoubtedly lia.cl been working at for some years»1'55 ' e embryology etc. of this work has· been discussed above 160 ; it belongs, unmistakably, to the Theo-family. The (kite of the work (·»? works) by Yarro pilfered by Oensorinus has not been transmitted What's more, it is even problematical which work or works by λ a το are at the basis of De die natali €h. 1-15: the logisloricus Alliens de Immerts is quoted Cons. 2,2-3, while the Tubero de origine humana is quoted ibd. 9,1. Diels assumed that the whole of ('ens. 4-14 has been borrowed from the Tttbcro.ul The problem of the probable content of the Yarronic logistorici is inextricably bound up with the interpretation of the logt star icus as a literary genre, i follow Dahlmann 168 in assuming that the logisioriciim and the year is to he; found in Nieomarhus' account, but robins, in somn. Sc„ ί,(),57-(>0, speaks of 1he hebdomadie uaiurc; of the sun and the year after his. section on the moon and before- that on the Ocean. For the present writer's guess a,bout IYvsidonius' possible treatment of time in connection with his:, explanation of the seven number* constituting the World-Soul, cf. above, p. 1 7980. Cf. also above, p. 183, n. J 50, on the implication of the fact that the moon, being the net her most of the seiurn planets, transmits their influence to what is below. 163 See p. 158, n. 9 and p. lb!-3. ?r»4 ON MIS f 11,10,17: tum ibi add.il (sc. Varro) se ηη-η-μιο ia-m duoda imam mi novum Jiebdomadam ingvessum esse, Varro was born in 1 1 7 B.C. 165 Cf. H. Dahlmann, Μ. TenmNus Varro, HE Supp.-Bd. VI (1935, 1172 ff.), 1227-8. 1611 P. 165 ami p. 167, n. 59. ,β7 Cf, above, p. 159, n. 12. 188 If. Dahlmann- R. Heisterhagen, f 'avvomscfw Stud in ι, /. Zu den Logistorici, Abh. Ak, Mainz, ceist. -so/w. ΚΊ 1957, Nr. 4, p, 15 ff, in his RF,-article (ef above, n. 165), 1262 ff. Dahlmann was less positive about this identification, wliich was first proposed by L. Η. Κ rah η er. i m The term logisfonci has been explained by Heisterhagen, o.e. 9, as meaning

185

axe identical w i t h the. Umdatiertes11® referred to b y Cicero, Ac. fio. 1,8 a n d Ad Ali. VII Γ,48,2, a n d t h a t Varro u s u a l l y w r o t e a laudatio of this k i n d in order to honour a r e c e n t l y d e c e a s e d p e r s o n a l i t y , 1 7 1 a s c a n be m a d e a l m o s t certain for some of these works, 1 7 2 D a h l m a n n h a s a r g u e d (and so h a v e others) that the Tubero de uridine hum-ana w a s w r i t t e n in honour of L. Aelius I ubero, l 7 a a. friend of Cicero, a s u p p o r t e r of P o m p c y like Varro himself a n d like most of the people c o m m e m o r a t e d in t h e laitdationes, a n d a n a p p r o p r i a t e figure to hold forth on the s u b j e c t of the origin of m a n , b e c a u s e he w a s i n t e r e s t e d in philosophy (Aenesidenuis d e d i c a t e d his λόγοι ΙΙυρρώνε'/π to h i m ) . As f a r as I know, the y e a r of h i s d e a t h a p p e a r s to be u n k n o w n . However, I a m not a b s o l u t e l y .-aire t h a t this T u b e r o is a more likely c a n d i d a t e t h a n his son, (). Aelius Tubero, 1 7 1 who w a s also a s t a u n c h s u p p o r t e r of P o m p c y . He prosecuted L t g a r i u s before C a e s a r in 46

'scientific led π res', 'Dialogic in denen der Titelträger einen I .ehrvortrag hielt*, 'Monographien in DialogfonW (ibd. p. II), cf. Cicero's (dito de sencctnle, La et ins de amicitia. An important peeuhantν of Yarro's logistorici is 'jene Tatsache» dass der Haiiptnnterredner - durch sein Wissen» durch sein Beruf oder durch sein Schicksal - in einer ganz besonderen 1 ieziehiing zu dem Thema seines Lehrvortra.gs steht' (ibd., p. 11). 170 Which were of a philosophical nat ur Posidonius, however, appears to have deviated from this theory by assuming that the limits of the solid body' appear not only in thought, but also exist in reality. 210 On account of this he has been called a mathematical realist, 217 Presumably, we have to interprete the word 'realism' here in the sense that Posidonius attributed intelligible reality to (at least some of) the mathematical. The account in M. ¥11,99 and 104 (cf. also the σώμα... τρί,χη 8ιαστατόν in Μ. ¥11,101) appears to indicate that sensible reality only begins with the fourth term of the sequence point-linesurface-solid. Now we happen to know that Chrysippus 218 compared certain geometrical theorems to ideas (άπείκαζεν... ταΐς ίδέαις 219 ): 211 The incorporeals are represented by the numbers 1, 2, and 3, the solid body by 4 (or 3, cf. Μ. VI 1,101). 212 According to orthodox Stoicism, time is one of the four kinds of ασώματα (cf. the list in Sext. Μ. X,218 -- S P P 11,331 : λεκτόν, κενόν, τόπος and χρόνος). The faet that time is explicitly qualified as an incorporeal proves that the 'Pythagorean' number-theory was discussed by a Stoic. Cf. further E, Brehier, La theorie des incur parcels dans fanden Siotcisme, Paris 31902, esp. p. 54 ff. 313 Presumably, bodies (VII, 101-3). 214 The final sentence of VI 1,104, which lumps incorporeals and bodies together, takes up the announcement of VI 1,101. Further, also in V 11,99 the solid body follows upon the sequence point-line-surface; ibd. this statement is preceded by a reference to number as means of cognition of both categories similar to that at the end of 104. 215 Proclus, in prim. Lud. comm. p. 89,16 ff. Friedlein =·= SVF 11,488. 216 Diog. Laert. VII,135 επιφάνεια δέ έστι σ ώ μ α τ ο ς πέρας ή το μήκος καί πλάτος μόνον ε/ον, βάθος δέ ού (cf. Μ, V 11,99). ταύτην δέ IJ οσειδώνι,ος έν τρίτω περί μετεώρων και κατ' έπίνοιαν (cf. text at ιι. 215) καί καθ' ύπόστασιν απολείπει. 23 7 Edelstein, Philos, Syst. Pos, 303; Merlan, Platonisrn ΐο Νeoplatonisrn 36. 218 Gemimis ap. Procl, in Euch p. 395,13 ff. - SVP 11,365. 219 Zeno and his followers said that the 'ideas' of earlier philosophers are nothing but έννοήματα ημέτερα, devoid of reality (SVP 1,65; for Cleanthes cf. 5 VF 1, 494).

194

'for just as these' (sc. the ideas) 'comprise the coming-to-be of infinite things within finite limits (πέρασιν), also in those1 (sc. theorems) 'infinite things are comprised within finite places1.220 According to Chrysippus, therefore, the figures of geometry are έννοήματα. To Posidonius, on the contrary, they would both be έννοήματα and subsist in a certain way. 221 Presumably his incorporeals not only subsist within the mind, but in some sort of objective fashion as well. His explanation of the Platonic World-Soul 222 points in the same direction. According to Plutarch, An. procr. 1023b, Posidonius and his followers assumed that: the Soul is a mixture of the των περάτων ουσία223 and the νοητον or νοητά. We do not learn from Plutarch what is understood by these νοητά. However, as the Soul is defined in terms of three kinds of mathematical^ it is perhaps permitted to think, among other things, of the ασώματα mentioned in Sextus, viz, point, line and surface, which, consequently, would have some sort of intelligible subsistence. However this may be, it is, at any rate, an undeniable fact that Posidonius ap. Sextum applies the theory of number to bodies and to empirical phenomena in general, and that he taught that cognition of these objects takes place by means of number. This holds for the cognition of the structure of bodies (Μ, VII, 101-2) and for the qualities of body perceived by sense-perception 224 (103) as well as for the practice of ordinary life (105-6) and for the arts and crafts (106-9). 'l he number uf individuals corresponding to an 'idea' is infinite, just as the number of geometrical figures corresponding to a geometrical definition. Chrysippus continues: "For if, the height of (i.e., the distance between) 'the parallels remaining equal, one imagines (νοουμένων) an infinity of parallelograms upon the same base, all of these turn out to be equal.' 221 Cf, also Posidonius' definition of the geometrical figure, which (by Proclus, ibd. 143,6 ff.) is contrasted to that of Euclid; ό Ηε ίί. πέρας συγκλεΐον άφορίζεται το σχήμα, τον λόγον του σχήματος χ (ορίζων της ποσότητος και αίτιον αυτόν είναι τιθέμενος του ώρίσΟαι και πεπεράσθαι και της περιοχής (consequently, Posidonius' definition of the circle only mentions the επιφάνεια and not the area contained by it). I.e., πέρας, though not being of a bodily nature, is a cause and acts in a certain way (the orthodox Stoa attributes the power of acting or being acted upon to body only). In order to be able to do so, it must have a subsistence of a sort. 222 Cf. the definition quoted above, p. 160, m 19. 223 Merlan, o.e. 34 wants to take this as a subjective genitive and translates "the kind of being which lias' or "accepts1 limits", i.e. matter. 224 Cf. the explanation of sensible qualities on the basis of the geometrical n nah ties of the object pen ieced and the percieving sensorium, Tim. 64 c ff. 220

195

Second. Posidonius ap. Theo comments upon the fact that the World-Soul in the Timaeus is constituted of seven numbers. 225 He may easily have done so with the definition of the World-Soul which has been quoted above226 in mind, for the arithmeticals 1,2,314,8,9,27 also constitute the harmonic ratios (1:2, 2:3, 3 : 4 etc,) and the four dimensions, i.e. point, line, geometricals and stereometricals (1,2,22,23 and 1,3,3 2 ,3 3 ). I have argued above that the exposition of the importance of the number seven for the lunar cycle, 227 the swelling and decrease of the tides of the Ocean,228 animal life in general 229 and prenatal and post-natal human life in particular 230 which are to be found in the arithmological literature can also be traced back to Posidonius, All these phenomena belong to the realm of sensibilia. If Posidonius, in discussing the Timaeus, spoke at some length about the importance of the number seven in regard to the realm of sensibilia, this exposition would be exactly parallel to Ms remarks ap. Sextum on the importance of number in general in relation to sensibilia. The abstract ap. Theo tells us nothing about cognition. But the fact that both the soul and a certain amount of sensible objects are said to be constituted according to the same number (i.e., 7) is exactly parallel to the principle that like is known by like which is adhered to by Posidonius ap. Sextum. Moreover, because the seven numbers constituting the Soul together encompass all kinds of mathematicals, Soul can be said to be indeed capable of embracing the whole of sensible reality. I therefore conclude that Posidonius, in commenting upon certain passages of the Timaeus, really devoted some space to the importance of the number seven within the realm of sensibilia. The passage on the pre- and post-natal life of man, which made it possible to quote a number of medical authorities, was, moreover, quite apposite in the context of a discussion of certain topics of the Timaeus, for this dialogue is to a large extent concerned with physical man.

5. How much Posidonius actually wrote about the number seven is a problem which may be insolvable and into which, at any rate, I cannot 225 226 227 228 229 230

Cf. above, p. 179 (and p. 192, n. 203). P. 160, n. 19. Cf. above, p. 182 if. Cf. above, p. 184. Cf. above, p. 183, p. 184. The Strato-and-Diocles passage. Cf. above, p. 184 and p. 165 ff.

196

enter here. Nevertheless, it should be emphasized at this point that the two classes of arithmological writings which, after Robbins, we have been at pains to distinguish on the basis of their having either the Strato - and- Diodes passage or the quotations of Solon fr. 19 and Hebd. Ch. 5, also differ as to one other item, which follows immediately (or almost immediately) upon their accounts of the ages of man. Theo lists the seven vital organs, as follows (p. .104,15-16 Hiller): σπλάγχνα επτά, γλώσσα, καρδία, πνεύμων, ήπαρ, σπλήν, νεφροί δύο. The same organs are mentioned by Nieomaehus ap. [Iambi.], TkeoL ar., p. 67,19-20 de Falco (who calls them σπλάγχνα μέλανα); by Macrobius (1,6,77 nigra membra... lingua, cor, pulmo, ieciir, lien, renes duo), by Mart. Capeila (VII,739), and by Calcidius (Ch. 37, p. 86,10-11 Waszink). Philo, Op. muni. 118 (I, p. 41,21-3 Cohn-W.) mentions as εντός (μέρη) the same σπλάγχνα, but begins with στόμαχος instead of γλώσσα.232 Anatolius (p. 36,11-12 Helberg 233 ) agrees with Philo. It is tempting to assume that Posidonius gave a list of the seven vital organs as in Theo etc., and that the anonymous arithmologist substituted στόμαχος for γλώσσα. However this may be, it seems, at least, very plausible that Posidonius continued his account of the importance of the number 7 for the development of the human body with a list of the vital organs; within this context it was not inappropriate. Now, in Nieomaehus not only the seven vital organs have been listed, but also p. 68,1 ff. de Falco (1) the 7 καθολικά μέρη, viz. κεφαλή, θώραξ, χείρες δύο, πόδες δύο και αίδοΐον; (2) t h e 7 διατρήσεις έ ν , , , τω προσώπω, viz. οφθαλμών β', ώτών β', ρινών β', στόματος α'; (3) t h e seven

organs which transport food and breath (τά τε πνοήν και τροφή ν διαφέροντα), viz. φάρυγξ, στόμαχος, 234 γαστήρ, εντερον, μεσέντερον, κύστις και το προς τη εδρα, ο τίνες άρχόν καλουσιν. M a c r o b i u s a g r e e s w i t h

Nieomaehus though he gives the lists in a. different order (and has a few more of such lists, which I omit): (1) in aperto... septem... corporis partes: caput, pectus, manus pedesque et pudendum (1,6,80); (2) et quia sensus eorumque ministeria natura in capite velut in arce constituit, septem foraminibus sensuum celebrantur o f f i c i a , id est oris ac deinde oculorum, narium et murium hints (1,6,81); (3) septem alia... ad cibiim Cf. Robbins. Trad. 113. See also Leg. all. 1,12 (I, p. 64,2-3 Cohn-W.) 283 In Anatolius, this list is placed before the quotations of Solon and Hebd. Ch. 5. 234 This is consistent with the list of 'black organs' in Nieomaehus, which begins with γλώσσα, not with στόμαχος. In Philo and Anatolius, the στόμαχος is one of the 7 σπλάγχνα. 231 232

197

et spiritum accipiendum reddcndumque sunt deputata; guttur, stomachus, alvus, vesica et intestina principalia tri a: ,.. unum dissiplum..., alteram ... quod Graeci μεσέντερον dicunt, t er Hum... hi ram (1,6,77). Theo has an abbreviated version: he only mentions, but does not specify (2) the πόροι... κεφαλής επτά, and (3) of the bowels etc. he only mentions the έντερον though with the additional information that according to Herophihis it measures twenty-eight yards. Philo, Op. mund. 11.8 (I, p. 41,20 ff. Colin-W.) has a list of (1) the parts of the body w hich are έν φανέρω which differs from that of Nicomachus: he mentions κεφαλή, στέρνα,235 γ αστή ρ,230 διτταί yzlozc, 8 m m βάσεις 237 ; (2) his list of the 'seven indispensables' used by the κεφαλή is identical to that, of Nicomachus 238 (except for a comment on the (Huelion oi the mouth, which receives food and drink and. utters speech 239 ); (3) he has no list of organs transporting food and breath. 240 Anatolius' list of ολόκληρα μέρη του σώματος looks like a combination of Philo's two lists: κεφαλή, τράχηλος,241 στέρνα, πόδες β\ χείρες β' (ρ. 36,10 ff. Heiberg); (2) his list of the seven openings (πύροι) of the κεφαλή (p. 36,14-15) is identical to that of Nicomachus and Philo; (3) lie has no list of organs transporting food, drink and breath, but, instead of this, a note on the length of the έντερον according to Herophihis, just like Theo.242 Consequently, the difference between the two families at this point not only consists in their having either γλώσσα or στόμαχος at the beginning of the list of σπλάγχνα, but also in their having or not having a separate list of organs which transport food and breath. In Nicomachus and Macrobius, four different kinds of bodily parts have been

Cf. Nicomachus' Οώρας. With Nicomachus, this organ is on the list of organs transporting food and breath. 237 The list in Leg. all. 1,12 (I, p. 64,3-4 Cohn-W.) is different : κεφαλή, τρά/ηλο-. στέρνον, χείρες, κοιλία, ήτρον, πόδες. Apparent!ν, κοιλία and ήτρον (which are no μέλη) have been added to an original list. Ί hey may have been iahen from a list of organs connected with Hie transport of food etc. 238 The same list (but without the comment on the function of the. mouth) is given in Leg. all. 1,12 (I, p. 64,5-6 Cohn-'W.: το... πρόσωπον έπταχη κατατέτρηται). 239 Quoted above, p. 192, n, 203; cf. a J so below, p. 201. 240 In part, these functions are ascribed to the last item of the list of the seven indispensables, cf. n. 239 (and also the 'mixed' list quoted above, n. 237). 241 Cf. Leg.alL 1,12 (above n. 237). 242 With a difference: according to Theo, this length is 28 yards, according to Anatolius (cf. above) 21 yards. 235

236

198

distinguished in a really proper way, i.e., according to t y p e and function, In Pliilo, who (as we had reason to assume) used an intermediate source, the distinctions are blurred. The list of the seven organs transporting food and breath appears to have contained (originally) a reference to the length of the έντερον, which has been preserved by members of both families. From the fact that both families have preserved these lists, and that iu one family (which we have had occasion to connect with an intermediate source on other grounds) the principle underlying the division has been blurred, we may, 1 think, conclude that Posidonius, in Ms Comments on the Timaeus, spoke of these subjects after Ms discussion of the ages of man. Anyhow, these mat fers are not foreign to the physiological context which we have tentatively assumed to obtain for this section of Posidonius1 work. With the above lists, the analogous lists at. II ebd. Ch. 7, 8 and 11 should be compared. 243 First. At Ch. 7, the following Septem partes are listed: (1) caput; (2) manus ο per urn mini strati χ; (3) interior a viscera et praeeordiorum 2U definitio ; (4) the veretri... (pars) urinae profusio; (5) (veretri pars) seminisministratiira; (6) longao, id est intestinum ma jus, cibis sediminis Roscher 1913, p. 107 ff. only compares the arithmological lists beginning with κεφαλή with those in Hehd. Ch. 7 and 11. In p. 105 he quotes Philo's list of openings of the head, comparing it with Ch. 8. His explanation of the coincidences is that Posidonius follows Hehd. (cf. above, p. 161, n. 25). - The list of bodily parts which can be abstracted from Ch. 6 (the microeos;n-macrocosm-parallel) is different. This implies that in Ch. 7 and 1 1 a different 'source' is used. Roscher laboured in vain to make Ch. 6 fit with Ch. 7 and Πι. 11. 244 The meaning of praeeordiorum definitio is difficult. Ps. Galen (Νr. 44, p. 91 Bergstr.) comments: "die Scheidewand, die φρένες genannt wird... Und er hat schon und richtig daran getan, dass er die Scheidewand an dieser Stelle stellte; denn dadurch, dass er von der Scheidewand spricht, weist er hin auf das, was über ihr und unter ihr ist von den Gliedern". I.e., ps.-Galen ignores the interior a viscera and tries to make sense of the φρένες by making this organ divide the whole body. He is perhaps thinking of the function of the φρένες in the map of Ch. 11, and also of the microcosm -macrocosm - parallel: at p. 92 Bergstr. he compares the head (the upper part of the body) with the outermost cosmic sphere, which is, of course, incorrect. His interpretation is therefore not reliable at this point. However, he was followed by both Harder and Roscher, who translate 'Zwerchfell'. Perhaps praeeordiorum def initio means no more than praeeordia, cf. Ch. 11,9-11 R., where Ionia lies inter viscera et praeeordia. However this may be, the fact that viscera + praeeordia (?) count as one item is an indication of juggling. 243

199

exitus; (7) crura arnbulationes. Two different types of partes have been combined in this list, viz. outer and inner parts of the body. Caput, manus and crura correspond to the κεφαλή, χείρες and πόδες of Nicomachus and Philo, Leg. all. I.e. (in Op. mund. I.e. he has βάσεις instead of πόδες) and the caput, manus pedesque of Macrobius. The veretrum is mentioned among the outer parts of the body by Nieomachus (αίδοΐον) and Macrobius (pudendum). In Hebd., however, its two organic245 functions have been listed, The interiora viscera and longao id est intestinum mains correspond to several items of the lists of organs transporting food and drink of Nicomachus and Macrobius (it is, perhaps, also possible to identify the interiora viscera with some of the σπλάγχνα listed by Nicomachus, Μ aero bins, Theo and Philo as well), viz. with στόμαχος, έντερο ν etc. The list of Ch. II 246 is slightly different: (1) caput et fades; (2) medulla, cervix; (3) tertia pars inter viscera et praecordia; (4) crura; (5) pedes; (6) venter; (7) venter inferior et longaoy intestinum maius. Items not found in Ch. 7 are (2) medulla, cervix, (3) the organ which is between bowels and lungs, (4) crura, (6) venter, (7) venter inferior. Two things are clear: (a) the number 7 is only reached at the price of some smuggling, (b) In Ch. 7, pedes means legs', in Ch. 11 4 feet' in contrast to crura = legs". This fine distinction was, no doubt, made in the interest of the comparison between a map and the human body, A similar distinction is made between venter and venter inferior. Now, the list in Ch. 11 introduces an exterior part of the body, viz. the neck (n.b. together with the medulla, i.e. the organic substance contained within this part) which is not on the lists of bodily parts of Nicomachus and Macrobius, but which occurs on that of Anatolius. 247 The venter (γαστήρ) occurs in Nicomachus' list of organs transporting food etc, Second. In Hebd. Ch. 8, the caput is said to have a septinariiim auxilium ad vitam: (1) the introduction of cold (air); (2) the exhalation of heat from the whole of the body; (3) visits iudicium2m; (4) auris

245 It should be noticed that Nicomachus' list of organs transporting food and drink mentions the κύστις, that of Macrobius the vesica (above, p. 198). 248 Ch. 11 contains the curious map of the world, the parts of which are compared to that of the human body. Cf. above, Ch. I, p. 19-20, and p. 20 n. 88. 247 And on the 'mixed' list of Philo, Leg, All 1,1.2; cf. above, p. 19«, n. 237. 248 Indicium: it should be noticed, that in some arithmological authors 7 items known by means of vision are listed (e.g. Philo, Op. mund. 120, I» p. 42,3 ff.

200

audit us; (5) naves respir antes odor em intellect us; (6) umoris bibitionis et cibontm transmissio, arteria et sthomacus; (7) linguae gustus sensus. In four of those functions of the head (viz. (1), (2), (6) and (7)), the mouth plays a major role,249 Mouth, eyes, ears and nose constitute the seven openings of the head in the list of these openings of Nicomachus, Macrobius, Anatoluis and Philo (Op. mund.) However, Philo, as we have seen, adds that the mouth is the είσοδος of food and drink (and the 'exit' of words), as Plato stated: on account of the reference to the Timaeusthis remark may ultimately go back to Posidonius1 Comments. The introduction of liquid and solid foodstuffs is mentioned as a separate function of the head in Hebd. Ch. 8. A rteria (— φάρυγξ251) and sthomacus are mentioned in Nicomachus' list of organs which transport food252 (and breath). Breath is mentioned at the beginning of the list of Hebd. Ch. 8.253 Finally, γλώσσα occurs as the first item on Nico mach us' and Macrobius' lists of σπλάγχνα.254 On the basis of this comparison we may conclude that there is not one item 255 in the lists of Hebd. which cannot be paralleled from the lists in the arithmologieal literature. This coincidence cannot be accidental. As we have already noticed, 256 the lists of exterior and interior parts of Nicomachus and Macrobius have been drawn according to principles which are clearly visible, each list containing Cohn-W.), The emphasis upon the cognitive function of the senses (visus indicium, mares... in le 11 edits, linguae... sensus) is perhaps not accidental: cf. 1 , osiilonins-Sextus on the cognitive function of the senses, Μ. VII»93, 103 and 119 (cf. above, p. 193-5), 219 In the first two, of course, the nares cooperate. 250 Cf. above, p. 198 and p. 192, n. 203. 251 The ancients used φάρυγξ both for wind-pipe and oesophagus. Macrobius has guttur, siomachus among the seven organs which serve ad cibum et spirit ton accipie ndum redd end urn que. 252 Cf. above, p. 197. 253 Both breathing-iti and breathing-out. For the breathing-out cf. Macrobius* reddendum (above, n, 251). 254 Hebd. Ch. ,S mentions 4 of the 5 senses, Ch. 9 mentions speech. It is perhaps permissible to think also of the 'seven senses* mentioned by Nicomachus (cf. above, p. 168-9); Nicomachus took this from Posidonius, as 1 believe. Hebd. Ch. 9 also mentions the seven vowels. It is a remarkable coincidence that Macrobius, who lacks some of Nicomachus' finer distinctions, at this point mentions the seven vowels (cf. above, p. 169» n. 69). For the parallel between Hebd. Ch. 7 and 8 and the Vet. plac, cf. above, Ch. Υ A, p. 133 and notes. 255 Except for the ad hoc differentiations of crura-pedes and venter-venter inferior. 256 Cf. above, p. 198-9.

201

parts or organs of a different type. In Hebd., these principles have been abandoned. To me, the most likely conclusion to be drawn from this difference between Nicomachus + Macrobius and Hebd. is, that the author of Hebd. was familiar with the lists as we have them in both these authors, and that he put forth lists of his own making, basing himself upon the materials offered by Iiis source. The confusion which reigns in the lists of Philo (at least in some of them, esp, in Leg. all.) and in Anatolins (also only in some cases) may be explained in the following way. Earlier in this chapter, I have argued that Philo and Anatolins (who both quote Hebd. Ch. 5) depend on the anonymous aritlimologist who revised and completed Posidonius' arithmology.2·17 It is possible that the anonymous aritlimologist revised the lists of the parts and the organs of the body under the influence of the lists of Hebd. Perhaps, this would not only explain part of the confusion, but also offer an explanation for the fact that both 2b8 Philo (Leg. A11.) and Anatolins mention the neck among the exterior parts of the body. Both Philo (Op. mund.) and Anatolius used a source containing the quotations from Hebd. Ch, 5. The neck is mentioned at Hebd. Ch. 11,9 R., undoubtedly because of the Isthmus on the map. 259

6. On the basis of exterior evidence, viz. the different treatment of human embryology and of the hebdomadic periods of human life in the two classes of arithmologieal writers, we have concluded that Hebd., a (]notation from which work is to be found in the members of one of these groups, is later than Posidonius' Comments on the Timaeus of Plato. 260 From the comparison of the lists of parts and organs of the Cf. above, p, .181-2, p. 185. Cf. above, p. 198 and ibd. n. 237. 259 The apparent dependence of the various parts of the body listed in If ebd. Ch. 11 upon the original lists of parts and organs is in favour of rejecting Roscher's hypothesis that, this map is original and 'very old'. Furthermore, it should be recognized that it is by no means certain that the author of Hebd. only mentions those parts of the world which he knew or which he thought especially important. On the contrary: also in this ease the hebdomadie principle of selection will have prevailed (cf. the omission of one wind from the wind-rose, above Ch. V C, p. 1 50 ff., and the lumping-together of planets and tixed stars, above Ch. I l l , p. 57, Ch. V B, p. 138 ff.). 260 Cf. above, p. 161 ff., p. 173-4, p. 181-2, p. 185 ff., p. 190-2.

257

258

202

human body, which are to be found in the arithmological literature, with those of Hebd., we have concluded that ps.-Hippocrates used the original lists contained in Posidonius' work. 261 On the basis of this evidence», we may conclude that probably the whole arithmological approach predominant in Hebd. has been inspired by the section on the number 7 in PoMdonms' (Comments. Consequently Hebd. Ch, 5, on the ages of man, was modelled not only after Solon fr. 10 Dicht,262 but after the whole St raio-and-Dioclos passage, 263 which has been preserved by one class of arithmological authors, as well. Ilowever, ps. Hippocrates surpassed Posidonius in as far as he introduced the number seven cvervwhere, even when this necessitated no small amount of juggling: think of tlie way in which he arrives at 7 winds or at 7 parts of the universe. A connection between Hebd. and Posidonius' ('omments would also help to understand other peculiarities of the pseudo-Hippocratic treatise. For instance, the intermediate and mediating function of the moon (Ch. 1,63 ff.R.) is exactly parallel to that in Nicom. ap. [Iambi.], 2fil

C f . a h m e , p . l r ) 7 if.

Cf. above, p. 171. n. KM. 263 Knowledge of this passage explains the embryology of I fehd. t which, in the account of ps. Hippocrates, has been separated from the exposition of man. In Ch. 1,8 ff.R. we read septem die ruin enagulationeiu sem in is hum an i et inde fovmationem naturae hominis. The eoagulatio of the send is parallel to that of Nat. puer. quoted in the Strato-1 Socles passage (cf. above, p. 167, the formation of the membrane) and that, of Yarro (above, ibd. n. 5C)), The anonymous arithntologist, who appears to have ieplaced the St ra to-a tub Dioclrs passage bv the quotations of Solon fr. 19 and Hebd. Ch. 5, seems to have worked ίο this fragment of ft ebd. Ch. 1 i n t o his own treatise, for thquam [co] quod vacatur semen a paire (IDS. parentibus, but cf. ps. Galen Nr. 64 Bergstr., 'Wenn das Sperma vom Erzeuger ejakuliert wird und so den Uterus trifft') man ans cecidit in (20) mat rice in. Ei tibi d ix er ο *animae caloremei mm 'oninem animam hominiss, hoc dico originale cahduni. Et (25) cetera calida omnia aut de temporibus facta dicam ei sole, mit ex quibtis mandncamiis mit bibimus, i (et ms.) ex p υ cutis (30) midta habeutinm vocabula aut de conviviis contrarioriini cihorum ad saluiem. Ei quando dic 'aer<e>m (35) frigidmu' aut *aridum spirit um non originale aui ipsius animae hominis frigidum dico, sed totius (40) mundi animae. Et quando ah his quae eduntur ei bibunt u-r dico frigidum, aut ex utrisque quae in superioribus (45) dicta stmt (sc. the habentia mult a vocabula drunk ex poculis and the cibi contrarii ad salulem consumed de conviviis) frigidum dico, [et] non oportet me existnnare mult a frigida dicer e, sed loc (is ms.) in quibus constitutum (50) frigidum divisiim est acienus d i f f e r r i arbitror (or: me arhitrari}). Translation: "Consequently, whenever 1 speak of the human soul, you must take me to mean the original heat (5) grown into one with the cold. However, by original heat 1 mean the heat which lias flown from the father and the (10) mother at the time at which they came together in order to produce offspring; 1 (only) speak of heat and cold, when these powers have (15) united within the womb, when what is called seed and what flows from the father has fallen into the (20) uterus. And whenever I speak of the heat of the soul, and not of the human soul as a whole, 1 mean the original heat. All (25) the other hot things of which I will speak 1 understand to have been heated by the seasons or by the sun, or to be contained in what we (usually) eat and drink, or to be derived from drinks (30) with many names, drunk from goblets, or from unhealthy foods consumed at large dinners. And whenever I speak of cold (35) air or dry πνεύμα, I do not mean tlie original cold, i.e. that of the soul of man himself, but that of (40) the Soul of the whole universe. And whenever J speak of the cold derived from what is eaten or drunk, or from the (unhealthy) foodstuffs and drinks (45) which have been mentioned above, you are not invited to understand that I mean a plurality of cold things: no, 1 am (only) of opinion that the 24

25

208

The purpose of this chapter is riot only to give a definition of soul, but also to distinguish between the various meanings and connotations of the terms 'hot' and 'cold'. The author distinguishes (1) the 'original' hot and cold which constitute the human soul, (2) the (additional) hot and cold derived from what is eaten and drunk, and (3) the cold of the air and the heat of the seasons and sun, connected in some way with the Soul of the universe. Both (2) and (3), we are to understand, influence (1). All the same, what is cold (and, undoubtedly, also what is hot) is one, the only distinction being one of place. Now, in Ch. 10 the soul is said to have seven parts, while Ch. 13 only mentions two: original heat and original cold. But the opening sentences of Ch. 10 also mention both the hot and the cold as parts of the soul. The sentence concerning the cold is unambiguous: secundum aetherium frigus utile (Ch. 10,7-8 R.); but that concerning the calidtim is almost unintelligible. 27 However, ps. Galen's commentary on Nr. 47 Bergstr. 28 says: "Hippokrates sagt: der erste Teil der Seele ist die ursprüngliche Wärme, die im Anfang der Schwangerschaft ist. Und wisst, dass das Sperma sich verfestigt und so wie das Lebewesen wird (?) in sieben Tagen". Though I would not know how to reconstruct the Latin text of the beginning of Ch. 10,29 this much, at least, is clear, (50) cold Is divided differ in the which I have indicated". The text of ps. Galen has two λήμματα to which nothing in oui corresponds (Nr. 65 and Nr. 69 Bergstr.) I do not know how to extra's; though Nr. 65 looks like an anticipation of the beginning of Ch. 20 of Ch. 14, it is, of course, entirely possible that our Latin are abridged at these points. Nr. 65 Bergstr. strongly emphasises the vital importance of the inborn heat; Nr. 69 Bergstr. says that its effects are contrary to those of the heat outside the body. in (eis Ρ) septern dies quod in aere (Roscher proposes to read mcitre) et quod in Ps. Galen Nr. 47 Bergstr. has "Auch die Seele wird in sieben Te to which perhaps P's septe forme (P's omitted) may be added. 28 P. 103; cf. also ibd. p. 105: 'der erste Teil von den Teilen der Seele ist die et inde fi[ci]ens Fi[ci]ens and f[ac]iens could have Translation: 'first the hot, from which

209

that ps. Hippocrates spoke of the originale calidum as the first part of the soul. Ch. 13 mentions no more parts of the soul than these two; Ch. 10, on the other hand, true to the hebdomadic principle of enumeration of the first part of the treatise, adds five more parts: 3: the umor which is to be found in the whole body; 4. the "earth'30 which has to be fed by the blood; 5. bile, colera amara, causing disease and pain 31 ; 6. all 'sweet food' of the blood32; 7. the salt parts 33 . Perhaps these other parts of the soul mentioned in Ch. 10 may be connected with the general theory of II ebd. part II in the following way: The "hot of the soul' nourishes itself by drawing 'water' unto itself (Ch. 14,22 ff. R.) There is only one umor, however, bearing many names and showing diverse characteristics under the influence of the hot and the cold (Ch. 18; examples: chole (= χολή), fleu mat a (= φλέγματα), aqua salsa etc.) In abnormal conditions, these humours also are assimilated by the hot of the soul (Ch. 14,29 ff. R. speaks of a χολώδες διακεκαυμένον και έχον χυμών < παν >το ίων ίκμάδς, Ch. 19,15 R. of a όλκήν χολής ή φλέγματος).34 The flesh is an earth-like substance formed under the influence of the cold (Ch. 15,12 ff., 22 ff. R.; Ch. .18,3 ff.R.); it 'melts' - dissolves under the influence of excessive psychic heat (Ch. 24,70 ff.R.; 28,38 ff.R.) Properly speaking, these substances drawn unto itself by the soul during illness are not 'parts' of the soul, cf. also Ch. 24, the beginning, which as such mentions only calidum et frigidum. However, the moisture used up by the soul both in illness and health becomes part of the soul, the excess of heat contained in certain moistures disturbing the balance between the original hot and cold of the soul in favour of the calidum.^ Therefore, I submit that it is not improper to speak of seven parts of the soul, as in Ch. 10, within seven days that which is in air and within living beings'. For 'in air' of. the originale frigidum which unites with the seed when it has been introduced into the womb, Ch. 13,13 ff.R. (above, p. 208, n. 26). 30 Probably, the flesh; cf. Ch. 15,12 ff.R. (above, p. 207). See also the comment of ps. Galen, p. 105 Bergstr.: " Denn er sagt: der vierte Teil ist die Erde, und er meint damit das, wovon er gesprochen hat von dem mit einer geringen Feuchtigkeit feuchten Teil der Erde; und er meint damit das Fleisch und Blut:. Und weiss, dass das Fleisch (der) Nahrung b e d a r f . . B u t the sentence in Ch. 10 remains difficult. 31 Cf. ps. Galen, Nr. 48 Bergstr. 32 Cf. ps. Galen, Nr. 49 Bergstr. 33 I.e., possibly, the φλέγμα (so ps. Galen, Nr. 50, p. 109 Bergstr.) 34 Cf. also e.g. Ch. 27. 35 Ch. 24,1 ff.R. (quoted below, p. 215).

210

adding to the two primary parts those substances which are used up by the hot of the soul both in normal and in abnormal conditions (n.b.: cold moisture straightens the hot of the soul in as far as it is moisture, and adds to the cold of the soul in as far as it is relatively cold). 36 If this interpretation is correct, Ch. 10 is an anticipation of the general physiology of Η ebd. part IL

3. Indications for a late date of Hebd. pari II. In Ch. 13,33 ff.R. the cold within the human soul is distinguished from the (frigidum)... to tins mundi animaeß7 I larder's translation printed by Roscher ('ich meine damit nicht..., sondern die Seele ( = Luft?) der ganzen Welt') is misleading, for the text explicitly defines "cold air or dry breath" as part of the World-Soul and does not identify the two. We can easily supply the other part of the World-Soul, viz. the heat, for the similarity obtaining between the cold of the soul and that of the universe is of course also valid for the heat of the soul and cosmic heat. 38 The term World-Soul (which, on the basis of the comparison with the human soul made in Ch. 13, should be taken seriously) is indicative of a late date. We should not think, however, of the Platonic, but of the Stoic World-Soul, which, just as that of Hebd. Ch. 13, is of a material nature and which, also just like that of Hebd. Ch. 13, consists of heat (fire) and air ( p n e u m a , cf. aridum spirt tum) Ρ It is likewise a Stoic doctrine that the composition of human souls is analogous to that of the Soul of the universe. 40 It should be pointed out that Ch. 40,23-4 R. speaks of quod in an una est umoris, i.e. undeniably counts umor among the constituents of the soul. Cf. also Ch. 42,14 ff. color em vero eins qui est anunae receptorium id est sanguinis. 37 Cf. above, p. 208, m 26. 38 The structure of the universe and that of human body and soul being the same (cf. Ch. 14,95 ff.R.; Ch. 15, quoted above p. 206, n. 8, etc.) 39 For the Stoic conception of human soul cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 99, n. 169. For the Stoic World-Soul (pneuma, fire, God) in general cf. Moreau, Arne du Monde, 164 ff., esp. 177 and 177, n. 9; see further F. Rüsche, Das Seelenpneiima. 6 ff. 10 Cf. SVF f, 124; 1,495; 11,633; 11,634. It should be recalled that Posidonius in this respect followed the Early Stoa, cf. Act i us I, 7,19 Ποσειδώνας πνεύμα νοερον και πυρ ώ δες (sc. τον Οεόν είναι φησιν. Cf. also De Vogel, Greek Phil. I l l , Nr. 1196a-d) and Diog. Laert. VI 1,157 Ποσειδώνας πνεύμα ένΟερμον είναι τήν ψυχήν. However, this is not all, for Posidonius was also influenced by the psychology of Plato and Aristotle (Galen, De Plac. Hipp, et Plat. p. 432,9 ff. and p. 476,2 Müller), and appears to have advocated a (subdued) dichotomy of 36

211

This affinity between the psychology of Hebd. part II and the ideas of the Stoa also helps to interpret the (in itself curious) doctrine of Hebd. Ch. 19,53 ff. and 20,1 ff. R., that the heat within the soul is both beneficient and lethal, i.e. that it makes the body grow as well as shrink by consuming all its moisture. We are reminded of the ambiguous nature of the cosmic fire according to the Stoa, which is both πυρ τεχνικό ν 41 and a destroying force (think of the έκπύρωσις !); cf. esp. Cleanthes, SVF 1,504 ( = Cic., ND II,40), 42 where the fire of the sun, though of the nature of the πυρ τεχνικόν of living beings, not only makes things grow, but is also capable of burning them up (etiam saepe

comburat).

Furthermore, the vocabulary of part II (at least in some chapters) is also indicative of a late date. 43 In Ch. 14,11 R· περιπεσεΐν means "come to grief1»44 a sense for which Liddell and Scott quote no parallels earlier than Polyb. ¥111,36,4 (cf. also Lampe s.v., 1); Ch. 14,40 R. τήξις occurs once in Aristotle, Mete. 382b30, then in Theophr., De lap. p. 341,13 ff.W., then in Hellenistic times; Ch. 14,68-9 (των νούσων) άνεσιν,45 'remission': though άνεσις is a good Ionic word, the earliest parallel for its use with diseases (fevers!) which I have been able to find is in the Pneumatic physician Archigenes, ap. Galen VII, 424 K. (cf. also ibd., 427 K.) We pass on to Ch. 19,14 R.: σκευασίη appears to be not a genuine Ionic word: Liddell and Scott quote no instances of σκευασία(!) earlier than Plato; it is also Hellenistic. 46 higher and lower powers (δυνάμεις) of the soul. Cf. Verbeke, L' Involution... Pneuma 14 ff. and De Vogel, ibd., Nr. 1184 ff. W e have studied the higher part of the soul according to Posidonius above, Ch. VI, p. 160» p. 192 ff. 41 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 88, p. 92 and ibd. n. 114, p. 95-6, n. 154. 42 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 88. 43 I have not investigated the language of part II as extensively as t h a t of part I. 44 Περιπεσεΐν is used absolutely. Translation of the opening sentence: 'Whenever an abnormal q u a n t i t y of moisture enters the heart and the arteries and the hollow veins', άνάγκη των προειρη μένων περιπεσεΐν τίνα, 'as the natural heat is moved and is collected in the innermost recesses of the belly' etc. The Greek words quoted should be translated: 'then, of necessity, some of the aforementioned (organs?) come to grief'. It is wrong to take νοΰσοι as antecedent and to translate περιπεσεΐν by 'occur', as is done b y F. Lornmer, Zur Komposition der hippokratischen Schrift π. ε β δ ο μ ά δ ω ν 82 (on his proposed arrangement of the order of chapters in this part of Ilebd. for which cf. above, Ch. I, p. 15-16, 'humours' or even 'qualities' is the obvious antecedent). 45 Cf. also Ch. 14,85 and 96 R. and Ch. 46,36 and 47 R. 46 The curious expression 'φύσιος σκευασίης' m a y mean 'a dressing-up of nature', i.e. special w a y s of preparing natural foodstuffs, with results damaging to our

212

Ch. 19,34 έκκαυσις; the first instance quoted by Liddell and Scott is Arist., Mete. 342a2; then Hellenistic and Graeco-Roman (cf. also Lampe s.v.) Ch. 19,44 ff.R. ή φαρμάκοισιν εύαγώγοισιν εξαγάγω τις τάς ακαθαρσίας47: it appears that εύάγωγος is used catachrestically ('medicines which are easily handled' 48 ); at any rate, the word - according to Liddell and Scott - does not occur before Plato, and even there not in a medical sense. 49 Ch. 19,71 διάψυχρος is not(!) in Liddell and Scott, while 19,74 R. διάχολος apparently occurs only here (n.b.: these two terms occur in the vicinity of διάθερμος, which is a good Ionic word, and so may be analogous formations). Ch. 28,11 άκμαστικός is Hellenistic, 50 Ch. 50,17 R. υπερνικά even Graeco-Roman (Liddell and Scott mention, apart from Iiebd. Ch. 50, Galen XIX, 645 K.; Ep. Rom. 8,37; Lib., Descr. 30,9,4 (cf. also Lampe s.v.)), while Ch. 46,36 and 47 R. has the word άνεσις in the same sense as Ch. 14,68-9 R. The Greek fragments of part II of the treatise therefore exhibit the same linguistic characteristics as those of part L 5 1

4. A f f i n i t y with Pneumatic Medicine. Though Hebd. part. IF 2 is im dependent in many details, its doctrines (both general and particular) recall those of the Pneumatic school of medicine. 53 health (cf. on the foods and drinks of civilization Ch. 13,29 ff.R., above p. 208, n. 26). (note the plural) in the ense of 'filth' appears to be 48 49 50

51 52 53

The term άκαθ. occurs also Ch. 19,39 and 19,47 R. Cf. aiso below, p. 220. LS J s.v. 1,2 quote Galen XV, 78 Κ. εύαγωγότατος χυμός, 'easily purged'. Though the Greek text of this passage has been derived from Aetius of Amida has not been translated into Latin, I do not think t h a t it has b y Aetius. Cf. above, Ch. II, p. 35, p. 52. For earlier interpretations of part II, cf. above, Ch. I, p. 6 ff. No up-to-date history of this school exists, let alone a collection of fragments

R E Supp. Bd. X I (1968), p. 1097 ff. M. Wellmann's Die pneumatische Schule bis auf Archigenes in ihrer Entwicklung dargestellt, Phil. Unt. 14, Berlin 1895, is still indispensable. Cf. also G. Verbeke, Γ Involution de la , 191 ff. and (for the theory of 'elements') Ε. Schöner, Das the Pneumatic school upon the Stoa in general, Kudlien (cf. also above, Ch. II, p. 33, n. 8 and Ch. V A, p. 130, n. 4 and p. 135, n. 27) t h a t on Posidonius in particular; cf. also H. Diller, Eine stoisch-pneumatische Schrift 193-4.

213

In Ch. 24,10 ff.R. we read calidum et frigidum el humidum el siccum utraque in febribus talia efficiimt et ftatiiintur etc. Roscher said "hier tauchen plötzlich neben dem calidum et frigidum noch die Prinzipien des humidum et siccum auf, von denen bisher keine Rede war. Wahrscheinlich handelt es sich hier um eine spätere Einschiebung". 54 However, Roscher's observation is incorrect: the ύγρόν ( , h u m i d u m p l a y s an important role in the etiology of Ch. 14 (and elsewhere), while the siccum occurs at the end of Ch. 17.56 Hot and cold are active, wet and dry passive 57 'qualities 1 or 'substances'. 58 This (ultimately Stoic) theory was also adopted by the Pneumatic school: the hot, the cold, the wet and the dry are chosen as στοιχεία; of these, the hot and the cold are ποιητικά αίτια, the wet and the dry υλικά αίτια. 59 Athenacus» began with the δυνάμεις of which living beings 60 are composed (τά γάρ προσεχή των ζώων λαμβάνω, ουχί τά κοινά πάντων σωμάτων στοιχεία 61 ); the point of departure is the microcosm, which is projected upon the 1913» p. 40, n.46. The translations have umor. In Ch. 14 (and the following chapters) umor is coupled with Οερμόν (calidum). 56 ..June umorem et s i c c it at e m. Dico siccum quid cm quod terrae pars est. Cf. Ch. 15,22 ff.R.: the cold coagulai li cor em et simulat terrain et facti aliquid fieri speciem et corpus (cf. Ch. 43,1 ff.R. corporis autem hominis ex um ore coagiilati); Ch. 21,20 ff.R.: the heat of summer dries the moisture (aestas... calefaciens et sic cans umorem), Cf. also Ch. 13,36 R., avid um spiritum, and the exposition on umor in Ch. 18. It should be noticed that the importance of the 'qualities' in the chapters prior to Ch. 24 stands out much better when Lommer's rearrangement of the text of Ch. 14-20 is accepted (cf. above, Ch. I» p. 15-6). 57 Efficiunt et patiuntiir: cf. the action of the θερμόν upon the ύγρόν in Ch. 14 and the activities described in the quotations given n. 56 above; see also e.g. Ch. 41,9 ff.R. carnium umor es quae ex calido soluiae sunt; Ch. 50,32 R. umor praevalet ignem. For the effects of cold upon umor cf. Ch. 17,12 ff.R., for that of both cold and hot upon umor the whole of Ch. 18. 58 'Qualities' or "substances': the distinction between these categories is (in Hebd.) unimportant. In Ch. 14, το ύγρόν is both a quality and a substance; so is το Οερμόν; Ch. 18 speaks of umor» but could equally well have spoken of umidum. For the (identical) point of view of the Pneumatic School, cf. Weltmann, Pneum. Sch. 134, n. and 135, m l . 59 Wellmann, o.e. 133 ff. Athenaeus of Attalia refers to predecessors (τινές των αρχαίων) for this conception of the στοιχεία (Galen XIX, 356,6 ff.K., quoted by Wellmann p. 135, n.2). 60 In the microcosm-macrocosm-parallel of Hebd. Ch. 6, the living being likewise is the point of reference; cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 104 if. 61 Ap. Galen 1,465,4 ff.K. (quoted Weltmann p. 135, n.2). Cf. also 1,457 K. (quoted ibd. 133, n.6). 54

55

214

macrocosm. 62 To this aspect of his theory the outlook of Hebd. Ch, 15 may be compared, in which the organic point of view is likewise primary, and in which the 'elements 1 in the sense of hnacrocosmic elemental bodies' are characterized by κρασις, i.e. by the presence of several 'qualities' (στοιχεία in the sense of Athenaeus) within each of them. Furthermore, note that 'earth' is formed by the action of the cold (Ch. 15,22 ff.R.). Cf. also Ch. 13: first the calidum and frigidnm of the soul, then that of the universe 63 ; and Ch. 50,22 ff.R., 6 4 where the prevailing of umor or sicciias in the human body is compared to certain meteorological phenomena. Now, in Hebd. part II fevers (and acute diseases generally) are caused by a wrong κράσης of primary 'qualities', 65 cf. e.g. Ch. 24,1 ff.R.: animae aiilem paries, calidum et frigidum, quamdiu quidem aeqales sunt sibi, incolumis est homo. Si autem praecesserit calidum frigidum in a equal it ate, tunc quidem inflammaliir frigidum; quanto mag is c alu er it frigidum, tanto magis aegrotat corpus hominis causodis et acutis febribus. This is a Pneumatic doctrine as well. 66 The idea that the unnatural increase of a quality may even result in death is likewise Pneumatic 67 ; it occurs also Η ebd. Ch. 14,60 ff.R., Ch. 19,46 ff.R., and Ch. 20,1 ff.R. (in each of these places, this quality is the hot 68 ). Especially clear are the examples given Ch. 50,22 ff.R. (in the semiological section): a repetition of the fever is lethal, because the Cf. Wellmann, o.e. 147 ff., on the 'qualities' of the seasons (and also Galen I, 522 K., quoted ibd., p. 144 ff. n.6). 63 Cf. above, p. 208, n. 26. (14 Quoted below. 65 Wrong κρασις is, according to Pneumatic theory, not only the cause of fevers, but also of other diseases. This, perhaps, helps to explain why such acute diseases as those mentioned at the end of Ch. 24 (cf. 'freneticos', 'l<e>th areas', 'peripleumonias' and 'epaticas,)t and peripleumonia and pleuritis, discussed at length in Ch. 27, are, in Πebd., subsumed under the fevers; Aretaeus, in his treatise on the causes and signs of acute diseases, treats both the fevers and these other diseases. Lethargy is caused by an excess of the cold and wet, i.e. by phlegm (Wellmann, o.e. 157-8; on phlegm in Hebd., cf. also above, p. 210, n. 33). Phrenitis is caused by the hot and the dry, i.e. by bile (Wellmann, o.e. 158). On diseases of the lungs caused in similar w a y s (n.b.: καύσος and inflammation of the lungs have the same cause !) cf. Well mann, o.e. 159. 66 Wellmann, o.e. 144 ff.; 163 (according to Athenaeus, fevers are caused by an abnormal increase of the hot and the dry, according to Archigenes b y an abnormal increase of the hot and the wet). 67 Wellmann, o.e. 145. 62

Cf. above, p. 212.

215

moisture which has not been used up the first time is now consumed; sic autem in Mo mundo siccitas super siccitatem veniens quae sunt perdit quidem et alia nasci prohibebii. Death also ensues in the opposite case (when the moisture prevails), as is to be seen in a recurring of the dropsy: hoc idem et in quibuscumque morbis um or praevalet ignem, si cut ydropis quae vacatur... (36) propter imbecillitatem eius qui in homine est caloris similiter, sicut et in toto mundo si imbres super imbres fuerint. Hebd. part II constitutes a treatise on fevers; and fevers were amply discussed by the Pneumatic physicians as well. 69 There are points of similarity: e.g., the theory that fever is caused by an excess of the wet causing an excess of the hot (Ch. 14 k . ) is similar to the Pneumatic theories quoted by Wellmann. 70 Furthermore, the theory of Ch. 14 that the καυσώδεες πυρετοί have a beginning, a middle and an end ( C h . 1 4 , 3 4 f f . R . άρχή; α κ μ ή , , , καί μέσον; i b d . 5 5 ff.

μέσον; τελευτή

=

άνεσι,ς) corresponds to the Pneumatic conception that all fevers are characterized by a similar development, though Herodotus and Archigenes appear to have distinguished 4 periods (Athenaeus* division seems to be lost). 71 Moreover, the καυσώδεες πυρετοί are said to be caused by bile (Ch. 14,28 ff.R.), which corresponds to the Wellmann, o.e. 85; 163 ff.; 210 ff. ('insbesondere h a t die therapeutische Behandlung der Fieberkranken in dieser Schule eine umfängliche Literatur hervorgerufen', ibd. 210). For the ideas on fever of the early Hippocratics G. Sticker, Fieber und Entzündung bei den Ηippokratikern, Sudh. Arch. 20 (1928), 150 ff., 22 (1929), 313 ff., 23 (1930), 40 ff. m a y be consulted (these are in m a n y w a y s similar to those found in Hebd,, but lack the systematical background of t h a t work. N.b.: Sticker's survey also treats later theories than those found in the Corpus Hipp.). - Hebd. part 11 distinguishes several kinds of fevers which are among those recognized by the Pneumatic physicians; καυσώδεες πυρετοί (Ch. 14; 33,1; 34a,21 R.), cf. Wellmann o x . 167-8; cotidianae, tertianae and quartanae (Ch. 23,77 ff.; 26,13; quartanae (only) 29,2 and 30 (pass.); diuturnae 31,1 R.), cf. Wellmann, o.e. 166; epialus (ήπίαλος) Ch. 25,22 R., cf. Wellmann, o.e. 167. The intermittent fevers are explained by the Pneumatic physicians as caused by dvscrasia of primary qualities (Wellmann, o.e. 166). For the λειπυρίαι of Ch. 26,12 R . and 31,1 R. I have found no Pneumatic parallel. 70 O.e. 163. Cf. above, p. 215, n. 66. 71 Wellmann, o.e. 163. Archigenes spoke of άρχή, ακμή, παρακμή and άνεσις. B u t for παρακμή, which looks like a refinement, these terms correspond exactly to the terminology of Hebd. Ch. 14. Herodotus put a period of increase between άρχή and ακμή, which could be interpreted as a deviation from an original model comparable to t h a t of Archigenes. N.b.: Ch. 30,21 R. aeeessionem means ' a t t a c k ' ( = ακμή), not, I think, 'increase'. 69

216

Pneumatic explanation of this kind of fever: "sein Krankheitsstoff ist die gelbe Galle'. 72 Another important aspect in which the doctrine of Hebd. part II is akin to the theories of the Pneumatic school is its therapy: "die älteren Pneumatiker (legten) mehr Wert auf die Regelung der Diät und auf mechanische Hilfsmittel als auf medicamentöse Stoffe. 73 Ihr therapeutisches Verfahren war naturgemäss darauf gerichtet, die vorherrschende Qualität zu bekämpfen, die übermässige Wärme durch kühlende Mittel, die übermässige Kälte durch wärmende, die übermässige Feuchtigkeit durch trocknende und die übermässige Trockenheit durch anfeuchtende Mittel". 74 I shall not give a full catalogue of therapeutical measures advised in Hebd. part II which illustrate this general maxim. Some examples, however, may be given: Ch. 19,54 ff. R. the hot kills the body... if μη δεις το Οερμον κατασβέσ/j. This is made more explicit in Ch. 20,9 ff.R., where the author fulminates against his less enlightened collegues, who are unfamiliar with the value of dietetics in the treatment of fevers: uecessitas extinguere ignem umidis et frigidis cibisP The same general idea occurs in Ch. 21,15 ff. R., where, in a discussion of the diseases (fevers) accompanying the seasons, we are told that doctors in summer fight against the heat of this season, which is instrumental in bringing about the disease: calorem miindi contestantes qui auxilium dant.7G (It should be noted that the patient is not; allowed to stop drinking, 77 otherwise the fever will consume the moisture of the body (Ch. 24,63 ff. R.)). But not only the hot is combateel, but also the cokl: in some kinds of fevers, attacks of the hot and attacks of the cold accompanied by perspiration alternate, cf. Ch. 24,12 ff. R. 78 Now such colds have to be combated in 72 W e l l m a n n , o.e. 168. In Ch. 19,14-21 R. fevers in general are said to be caused by the attraction of bile or phlegm. Furthermore, in Ch. 25 causus is caused by bile (cf. also Ch. 30). 73 Such φάρμακα were used, however; cf. Wellmann, o.e. 136, 219 ff. and beb, p. 220. 74 Wellmann, o.e. 201. A number of examples of therapy on the basis of general physiology is given ibd. 158 ff. (lethargy, caused by ψΰξις έμφυτος: heat the sick-room etc.) See further the detailed exposition ibd. 201 ff. 75 Cf. also Ch. 23,18 ff. R. 70 The Pneumatic physicians gave elaborate prescriptions on how to live and what to eat during the various seasons (Wellmann. p. 205 ff.: on precautions against the heat of summer ibd., p. 209). 77 Cf. Wellmann, o.e. 228-9. 78 For corresponding Pneumatic theories cf. Wellmann, o.e. 166-7.

217

various ways, ante accession-cm™ (Ch. 30,21 R . ) : cf. Ch. 30,3 ff.R., the patient's legs and arms should be anointed multo calido aliqito and then be rubbed 80 until the heat returns; his arms, legs and especially the head should be warmed as much as possible, and his body should be anointed with an oil containing various hot ingredients 81 ; aquam cakdcmi should be 'given' to the tibia, the body etc, by means of wool or from mugs which have been heated beforehand. 82 On the other hand, in case of diutiiruae and λ ζ ι κ υ ρ t ω / t b r c s , at a certain moment a water)· soup made, from cooked cold semina (corns of grain) has to be administered in order to cool the fever (Ch. 31,34 ff.R.) 8 3 - Cf. further also Ch. 34a: the physician should ta ke care to cool the heat ( a t . . . rejrigeni calidum, Ch. 34a,5 R.) by making use οί niedicmnina in jricdanlia, the effect of which is compared to that of void water which is poured into a kettle in order to prevent it from boiling over. Further Ch. 35, where prescriptions regarding the sick-room of feverpatients are given: one is not allowed to talk in there, for voces calefaciiiut acrem quod anli damns (35,7-8 R. 8 4 ); the patient should be dressed and kept under the bed-clothes, or he will get an attack of shivers which is a prelude to a rise of temperature (35,16-17 R.). But both what lie wears and the bed-clothes should be soft and clean, in order to make the patient comfortable (if uncomfortable, he will turn about, which again raises Iiis temperature). Moreover, his legs and feet and arms up to the elbow should be anointed with hot pomade (ceroiarium = ceratum), and they should be covered with soft and vvarm

Before another attack of the fever; cf. above, p. 216, n. 71. On rubbing cf. below, p. 219. 81 1 "or similar detailed prescriptions cf. Weltmann, o.e. 211 ft. 82 l,e , a ioiiipress of pre-wai med wool drenched in hot water lias to be applied externally, while hot water should be drunk from mugs already heated. 83 In this same chapter, the author speaks of the kinds of foods which are allowed. We are told which kinds of vegetables are hot, which cold, and which kinds of water, food staffs (cibi) and wine are relatively colder or hotter. This is Pneumatic dietetics, even though the actual examples given in Ch. 31 do not correspond to the details which may he gathered from Well mann, ox. 202 ff. in Ch. 31,61 ff.R. we are told that the recuperating patient should avoid both the sun and the cold, both work and discussions and that sort of tiling. However, he should bathe in warm water, and be massaged both in bath and after his bath (cf. Ch. 30,3 ff., paraphrased above). η·ι {.·,>r Pneumatic ideas concerning the effects of speech cf Wellmann, o.e. 142-3; the theory that speech 'die innere Wärme vermehrt' (Wellmann, o.e. 143) is analogous to the idea quoted from Hebd. 7y

60

218

blankets, or else Iiis limbs will become stiff and cold, when the heat departing from them goes to the superiores paries of the body 85 and stimulates the causos (Ch. 36). - in Ch. 37, means to stimulate breathing, i.e. the exhalation of the hot from the wann lungs and nonviolent ways of (extracting hot moisture from the body are recommended.. So much for the general etiological frame-work within which the tlieiapeiitic measures which are taken are imbedded. Many points of detail also agree with known Pneumatic prescriptions. We have already observed that Hebd. (Ch. 30,3 ff.R.; 31,68 ff.R.) puts special emphasis on rubbing. According to Celsus, De medic. 11,14 Asclepiades was the iusi medical authoi co treat rubbing extensively. 811 It became very popular with the Pneumatics, 87 who probably followed88 Asclepiades in as far as a recognition of the importance of massage is involved, but wiio in (heir therapeutical applications of this treatment were largely original. At any rate, the advocacy of rubbing in Hebd, part 11 constitutes a l.p.q.: rubbing became not popular before the first Cent. B.C. An interesting correspondence in detail is, that Herodotus

85 I.e., the regions near the heart and the head, cf. Ch. 34b,3 ff.R. (ad praecordia superioribns par Ulm••). In Ch. 34b we are told that the patient's head should fie raised by pillows in order to prevent the blood to collect and the hot to constitute itself in mortalibus locis. Cf. the definition of death in Ch. 52: the hot has collected ad superior a thoracis near the heart, while the rest of the body has become cold] after the hot has consumed the moisture of these regions, the s p i r i t (το πνεύμα του θερμού) is breathed out both through the flesh and the nose, and the soul departs, leaving the eold body behind. See also Ch. 39, where it is advised thai cataplasmata of lentil-seeds be put on the praecordia, in order to stop the heat from remaining in this place, i.e. from collecting the blood, which causes spasms and kills the patient (id η on permanens calor in haec colli gat sanguinem et spawios faeiens oeeidat, ,19,3 ff, R.) bor the regions of thorax and heart in Pneumatic theory cf. Weltmann, o.e. 140-4 (esp. Galen's criticism, o.e. 141, m l ) . 8(5 Celsus says that Asclepiades behaved as if he were the inventor of this pract ice, but that Hippocrates ( = 111,76 L.), already, had comprised the whole subject in a few wonts (Celsus 11,14,2, Hipp, ...qui dixit frictione, si vehemens sit, day an corpus, si lends, molhvi, si mult a, niiniii, si mo die a, inpleri; the same attribution is made Oribasins Coll. Med. VT,17 (Daremberg 1, p. 490,11 ff.) r= Galen, San. tu. If,4, ¥,110-11 K.). M7 Cf. Wellmann, o.e. 211 ff, Asclepiades probably is an older contemporary of Athenaeus, cf. above Ch. V A, p. 130, n. 4 ; lor Athenaeus' use of theories of Asclepiades cf. also Wellinarm. .e, 69,

219

gave the patient warm water after the massage. 89 - In Hebd., light 90 purgatives are recommended in order to clean the body from filth 9 1 (Ch. 19,44 ff.R. η φαρμάκοισι εύαγώγοισι έξαγάγη τις τάς ακαθαρσίας 92 ); this corresponds to the Pneumatic preference for harmless φάρμακα, 93 The body may also be purged by bleeding, for according to the Pneumatics both too much blood and corrupted blood have to be dealt with in this way. 9 4 Bleeding is also recommended in Hebd. (Ch. 29,7 ff. interior es vetias iucidere); it is especially interesting to observe that in Ch. 30,22 ff. bleeding is said to be necessary after an attack of the quartana, and when other measures have already proved successful (si ant em Ms quart anae medicaminibus sanos fee er is, sine sanguinis et cholerum el flegmalis exir actione, poslmodiim oportet pur gare corpora et sanguinem detrakere, at η on urn or qui in corpore lanχ it et minime febre consumplus est, congregatus ad aliquant partem corporis malum adportet mains α quartana febre). This corresponds to the practice of Herodotus, who preferred to postpone bleeding until after the attack or even until the fever had wholly subsided. 95 Wellmann characterized the doctrine of the Pneumatic physicians in the following words: "ihre pathologischen Principien, ihre therapeutischen Grundsätze lassen sich nur aus den physiologischen Grundanschauungen ihres Systems verstehen". 96 I submit that the same Weltmann, o.e. 212. Cf. above, p. 218 (on the giving of aquam calidam). The lightness of these purgatives can also be measured b y the fact that they are placed on the same level as a spontaneous cleaning of άκαθαρσίαι (Ch. 89

90

19,38 ff. R.). Cf. also below, n. 92.

'Filth' is caused, according to the Pneumatics, by dyscrasia of the 'powers', cf. Wellmann, o.e. 163, and of primary importance in the pathology of fevers. 92 Cf. also Ch. 23,15 ff.R. llaec (sc. immunditiae) antem febres increscere faciunt nisi qitis (1) e due at eas purgatione aid (2) cibis aiixilimn deferenti frigidis infrigidet ant (3) spontaneae erumpentes sursiim vet dear sum secedant. Cf. also Ch. 23,71 ff.R., 24,41 ff.R., 31,18 ff.R. The medicamina of Ch. 25,18 R. include rubbing etc. 93 W e l l m a n n , o.e. 219 ff., esp. 221. Cf. also ibd. 158 (castor as a purgative of phlegm in ease of lethargy; purgatives of yellow bile in case of phrenitis). 94 Ibd. 226. 95 Ibd. 228. 96 Ibd. 1 32. In itself, this peculiarity both of Hebd. and of Pneumatic medicine constitutes a decisive difference with the Cnidian doctrine reconstructed by I. M. Lonie, Cnidian Treatises of the Corpus Hippocraticum, CLQu.N.S. XV (1965), 1 ff. Lonie accepts as Cnidian works A f f . (π. παθών), Μ orb. (π. νούσων) I, Morb. 11,1-11, Μ orb. 11,12 ff., Morl). III and Int. (π. των εντός παθών): 'beyond these works, any ascription is uncertain, even, I should be inclined to say, un91

220

close relation b e t w e e n p a t h o l o g y a n d t h e r a p e u t i c s on t h e one side a n d t h e p h y s i o l o g i c a l principles (i.e., t h e t h e o r y of t h e e l e m e n t a l forces) on t h e other i s v a l i d for Hebd. p a r t I I a s well, 9 7 B e c a u s e , moreover, b o t h t h e p h y s i o l o g i c a l principles a n d t h e p a t h o l o g y a n d t h e r a p e u t i c s of Hebd, in t h e m s e l v e s correspond closely to those of t h e P n e u m a t i c school, a s h a s been d e m o n s t r a t e d above, t h e conclusion t h a t Hebd. belongs to t h e P n e u m a t i c sphere of i n f l u e n c e s e e m s i n e s c a p a b l e . T h i s conclusion holds true, e v e n t h o u g h t h e πνεύμα 9 8 itself is not v e r y p r o m i n e n t . H o w e v e r , it m a k e s a s u d d e n a p p e a r a n c e in Ch. 5 2 : likely* (o.e. 3). Louie rightly emphasizes that in these Cnidian works, which in general contain three ingredients (symptoms, therapy and etiology, cf. ahove, Ch. I, p. 12-3), etiology is by far the least important of the three (o.e. 3), but he assumes that an etiology common to all these tracts was contained in the lost Κνίδιαι γνώμαι (o.e. 24 ff.) This is of course possible. However, the special and consciously scientific emphasis upon physiology and etiology as in Hebd. part II would appear to be Hellenistic (cf. also Lonie, o.e. p. 4 and n.l : 'It' sc. the modem, scientific concept of the relation between cause, symptom arid treatment - 'does not appear with full explioitness until the Alexandrian period'). I do not wish to deny that there are points of similarity between the Cnidian etiology reconstructed by Lonie a.nd the theories of Hebd. part 11; however, cf. above, Ch. I, p. 13-4. 97 Also the third section (semiology) of part 11 is based upon and intimately connected with the general theory. Semiology is possible because the quod in anima est ealidum (Ch. 40,19-20 R.) determines the colour of the body as a whole and of its parts, especially the tongue and the eyes; it further determines the colour of the bodily secretions, influences dreams, the voice, the ventositas {cf. below, p. 223, n. I l l ) , respiration and the pulse (ibd., 5 ff.) Accordingly, a black colour (or a colour approaching black) is throughout interpreted as a bad symptom, as it is assumed to be caused by burning, i.e. by an unnatural and unhealthy domination of the hot of the soul. For the colours of the eye, of. Ch. 41 (esp. 41,3-4 R., the eye shows anima quomodo <se> habe at, while ibd. 9-10 R. carnium umores quae ex calido solutae sunt recalls the general pathology); for those of the tongue cf. Ch. 42 (in which the word anima occurs three times, cf. esp. 42,24-5 R. animae caloris). See further Ch. 44,6 R. and esp. ibd. 13-14 umoris desudationem quae de calove fit (pathology); Ch. 45,3-6 R. anima. . . qiiaecumque patitur eius cat or ex umoris viciu and ibd. 14-5 R. incalescens anima immunditiis (άκαθοφσίαι cf. above, p. 213, and p. 220, n. 91.) aut eibo (cf. above, p. 217) conturbata; Ch. 49,21 ff. R. celerius umor qui in corpore est... consumitur de flamma caloris (etiology and pathology); Ch. 52, on death (the concentration of the calor animae in the chest and the departure of the πνεύμα του θερμού etc.). The microcosm-macrocosm-parallel which dominates the general theory of the pathology and therapy is also found a. number of times in the semiological section: Ch. 40,13 ff. R.; Ch. 42,30-1 R.; Ch. 50,28 ff.R. 98 For the πνεύμα cf. Wellmann, o.e. 137. 1 have the finer and explicit distinctions, as between πνεύμα ζωτικόν, πνεύμα σύμφυτο ν and πνεύμα ψυχικόν 221

the hot of the soul has withdrawn towards the* place above the diaphragm and burns up all the moisture" which is there; έπειδάν ό π λ ε ύ μω ν και ή κ α ρ δ ί α τήν ίκμάδα αποβάλω σι, του θερμού άΟροοΰντος έν τοί'σι Οανατώδεσι τοποις, αποπνέει άΟρόον το π ν ε ύ μ α του θερμού, όθεν περ ξυνέστη το ολον, είς το ολον πάλιν, το μεν δια των σαρκών, το δέ δια των έν κεφαλή αναπνοών, 100 όθεν το ζην κάλου μεν.101 άπολείπουσα δέ ή ψυχή το του σώματος σκήνος κ.τ.λ. The subject of αποπνέει is, I think, ο πλεύμων (και ή καρδία). Ij iIns is correct, we have found a reflection of the Pneumatic theory of the mechanism of breathing 1 0 2 in which lungs and heart together a re the openitivc4 organs Furthermore, if we are allowed to read δ πλευμων και ή καρδία, όθεν το ζην καλού (λεν, the para, lie! with Pneumatic theory is complete; according to Aretaeus, the heart is the seat both of breathing and of liie. lp:l That which leaves the body is called το π ν ε ύ μ α του θερμού; it is that from which the ολον (i.e. the individual living being) came to be what if was, 104 and it returns to the ολον (i.e. the universe) 105 from which if in mind. However, for the πνεύμα ψυχικόν cf. Πι. 10,14 ff.R. (discussed below . p. 223-4, n. 1.1 3); for the πνεύμα σύμφυτον cf. Ch. 1 3,36 ff. 1 \. originale.. .calidum (and frigidum !) 99 Cf. Ch. 14,72 ff.R.: ΧΊΊ> το της ψυχής Οερμόν αφη τήν iq' έωυτο όλκ/jv ζ η ζ του ύγροΰ Ικμάδος και του ψυχρου - and linder the conditions out lined in Ch. 52, this ολκή is no longer possible —, τότε [του ζην] διάλυσης> της ψυχής γίγνε< τ >Ύ'.... άν μεν τελείως, θάνατος. 100 Αναπνοή and διαπνοή (through the pores of the skin) were distinguished by the Pneumatics, cf. Well mann, o.e. 138, 101 1 suggest that όθεν το ζην καλουμεν be put immediately aft ex καρδί'/. los Well mann, o.e. 137-tf, of. Are! ο ens, p. 15,0 ff. Hude: πνπύμο.ν δέ κ ν l r'ry αίτίην ισχει της ολκής * ένίζει γαρ αυτέ ο υ μέτον σττλάγχνον θερμον, ή καρδίη, Ζω~ήα κα». αναπνοής άρχή' ή δε και τ ίο πνευμόνι της ολκή- του ψυχρου ήέοος τήν ττοΟην ζνΠιοοί" έ κ φλέγε ι γαρ αυτόν* έλκει δέ καρδίη πρώτον, τοιγαρουν, ή ν μεν ή καρδίη ::αΟή, ουκ εις μακρόν του θανάτου ή άμβολή (see also Κudlien's comments on this passage, Posid, u. d.... Pneum. 427). Cf. also Aretaeus p. 22,26-23,3 Hude. - It should be noted that the condition ήν ή καρδίη παθή is fulfilled in Hebd. Ch. 52. 103 Cf. above, n. 102. The region of the heart and lungs is the 'region of death' (cf. the passages quoted above, p. 219, n. 85) and consequently also Hi.it of life. On the heart as the seat of life according to Pneumatic theory ef. Kudlien, Posid, u. d Pneum. 425 ff.; lint. z. A ret, 34. 104 Cf. Ch. 15,22 ff.R. quod a it tern acris f r i g i d a irrigatio constituii... facil g liquid fieri speciem et corpus; 20,1 ff. R ... το Οερμόν (sc. της ψυχής) αυςε».... τά σώματα. 105 το ολον ολον: again the microcosm-macrocosm-parallel (cf. p. 221, n. 97, in fine). For the 'from which - into that"-formula cf. Athena/uis ah. Gal. XIX, 356,6 ff. K. (quoted Wellmann, o.e. 135, n.2): "the hot and the cold etc , εξ ων πρώτων φαινομένων και απλούστατων και ελαχίστων 6 άνθρωπος συνέστηκε καΐ εις ά έσχατα φαινόμενα καΐ απλούστατα και ελάχιστα τήν άνάλυσιν λα;/.βάνει."

222

originated. 10 * This πνεύμα must be assumed to partake of the cold, for otherwise it could not be called πνεύμα 107 though it is of course a πνεύμα ένθερμο v. That it is a kind of blend of hot and cold is confirmed by the fact that what leaves the body is also called ψυχή. 108 - The extensive prescriptions concerning respiration, which we have already encountered in our survey of the therapeuti« measiuW 0 " advm aied in Hehd., undoubtedly should be placed within this context as well: cf. Ch. 37,10 ff. k . el de pulmoniim call do respiratioiicni ο he del fieri. This respiration is stimulated by inducing the patient to sneeze 111 ; the importance of this treatment is analyzed in Ch. 38 (again, the hot is exhaled, cf, 38,5 ff. R. per as et naves educens quod pracbei color cm visccribus). The function of respiration is ίο cool the body. 11 " Quite important is an opaque passage in Ch. 2 ( ),11 ff.R, i l 3 ; in Uli iinately (through the parents) and during the course of life. Cf. the definitions of Ch. 13,33 ff. K. (above, p. 208-9, n. 2b). 108 Cf. Ch. 1 3» 1 ff. R.: tibi ergo dico hominis an im am, illic ν (Ch. 10,40 ff. R.) In Ch. 28,45 ff. K. the ceasing of certain fevers is exphuned by the fact that a sick man breathes harder than a healthy man and is therefore able to exhale the (impure) mixture which had been attracted by the hot (υπό της του θερμού Βίης τε και άκμης ένδον αυτό το θερμόν Η Ά της αναπνοής έ ξ α τ μ ι ζ ο ν άναπνέε'. καI έΕ'·>0έεται το ύγρόν, ο προσήγαγεν το θερμόν. αναπνέει δε και δια τ ω ν ρινών ώσπερ και του στόματος πλέον '^τν'.- the probable Greek word translated by veniosifas is πνευματισμό-, 'use of the breathing'); Ch. 46,33 ff. R. το πνεύμα μανότερον καΐ λεπτόΤΗΡον is Ί ifood sign; Ch. 51,142 ff. R., on the respiration of a dying patient. 112 Cf. Wellmann, o.e. 138: 'Die Atoning (αναπνοή) dient... ίο erster Linie der inneren Wärme zur Abkühlung'; cf. also Verbeke, o.e. 196. The theory of Ch. 8,3 ff.lv. (on the first two ways in which the head helps to sustain life) U similar; frigidi introüus per quem ubique pat el: ... secunda ferr oris c.\< h^abitin ex omni corpore. That the function of breath is to cool the inner heat w,is already held by Philistiou and Diodes (Diodes fr. 15 Well mann), Plato (e. Tim. 7(>e), Aristotle (e.g. PA III,6,668b34 ff., De iuv. 23 ff. = 487b22 ff.) 113 ... sirnid equideni aerium spiritum quod abstracto quae animae habet el res pi vans naribus trahentes A, simul quidem etherio spiritum quod ad statu que anime ha bent et respirant naribus trahentes 1 \ I propose to r- physi cal b., 160 m 24, 193-6. βορέης (s. also winds), 24, Ch. V C passim, 147, 150, 154, botanical subjeets, 38, 40, 49, 50, 52, 53. Bundahisn, (Greater), 22-4, 26 and n. 120.

Calendar, calendar-systems (s. also parapegma; year), 25-6 n. 116, 141-5, 142-3 n. 28. ealidum, calor (s. also ardor; elements;

fire; frigidum; heat; hot; soul ; θερμόν), 11 n. 40, 18 n. 70, 61 n. 38, 79, 80, 81, 87-8, 90-4, 95, 96 and ii. 157, 100 and n. 170» .101 n. 180, 1 03, 124, 126 and n. 301, n. 302, 127 and n. 309, 208 n. 26, 209 and n. 29, 2.14 and n. 55, n. 57, 215, 217, 218, 221 n. 97, 222-3; orginale ealidum, 10, 208-10, 2223; vis caloris, 103 ff.; Vitalis calor, 91, 95, 102 ii. 181. Cnidian School of Medicine, 12-3, 14 and n. 54, 16, 22 n. 99, 220-1 n. 96, 225-6; elemental theory, 12 ff.; tripartite sehe me, 12 ff. cold, s. air; s. hot, the, and the eold. elassicistie 1 rends in the first Cent. B.C., 35, 229-30. clock, celestial, 140 ff. cognition, s. epistemology. condensation, s. πύκνωσις. constellations, s. stars. Corpus Hippocraticmn (s. also embryology ; Ionic, revival of), 2, 3, 4 n. 7, 6, 8 ii. 25, 1 3 n. 44, 27 and n. 130, 28, 32-5, 49, 53, 172-3 n. 98, 174-5, 178, 226, 229; chronological questions, 28, 32-5. cosmogony (s, also earth, origin of; stars, origin of), 45, 58 n. 19, 61, 81, 91 and n. 127, 100 and n. 1.71, 107 ff., 110, 131 n. 8. cosmology (s. also elements; heaven ; κόσμος; microcosm-macrocosm; motion; nature; self-motion; spheres; universe; World-Soul), 3, 18, 23 η. 1 03, n. 104, 24, 26, 28 ii. 142, 29, 30, 42-5, 53, 54, 55, 56, 64, 65, Ch. IV passim, 131 n. 8, 227 n. 138; cosmological models (s. also universe), 56, 57, 81. and n. 75; Seneca's division of c., 114-5 n. 252, 117 n. 264, 132 n. 14. eriterion, logos from mathematics as a, 157 n. 3. eounter-eartli, 38. 63. Damdet-Nask,

242

22 n. 99.

death, causes of (s. also heat, destructive), 212, 215-6, 219 n. 85, 222 and n. 99, n. 102, n. 103. definitio, definitions, 52 n. 51, 226 and

n. 126. Denkart, 22 τι. 99, 23 n. 104. digestion, 37, 103, 133, 197 ff,, 210-1, 218. divinity, of the heavens, s. heaven; of the stars, s. stars; spatial interpretation of, 123 η. 296; d. in Μ u., 121 ff.; (1. in Corp. Herrn., 123-4 n. 296, 127 n. 309. doxographical literature (s. also handbooks), Ch. II passim, Ch. V Β passim. Earth (s. also antipodes; counterearth; elements; κρασις), central position of, 18, 55, 56, 57, 60, 61 n. 33, 62 n. 44, 63, 109, 119-20; characterisation of, 116-7; cylindrical form of, 25 n. 115, 62, 64; earth, the, 16, 38, 48, 49, 58, 60-4, 106 and n. 203, 113 ff.; as living being, 94, 104 ff.; motion of, 50, 58 n. 22, 62 n. 41; nature of, 55, 57, 60, 61, 68 n. 17, 79, 82, 85, 87, 100 n. 171, 109, 138 n. 36, 206-7; origin of, 61, 81, 86, 107, 108 and n. 218, n. 219, n. 220, 207 and n. 22, 215; sphericity of, 19 n. 79, 20 n. 85, 25 n. 115, 29-30 and n. 148, 63, 64, 111; stability of, 18, 50, 56, 60, 62, 66, 77, 109 and n. 222, 111, 204, 207 n. 14; stability of, taken for granted, 62, 64; e. supported b y the air, s. air. eclecticism, 2, 19, 20, 27, 30, 93, 107, 127 ff. έκττύρωσις, 91, 212. ειμαρμένη, 99 and n. 168, 101 n. 175, 179 n. 134, Eleatics, 71 n. 29. elemental bodies, 39, 71 ff., 78, 85, 104, n. 192, 215; elemental change, 39, 59 n. 26, 68 and n. 17, 72, 76 and n. 58, n. 59, 99, 100 and n. 171;

elemental masses, 43, 72, 76, 79, 85, 87, 90 ii. 121, 104 n. 192, 10910,114 ff., 215; elemental qualities (s. also hot, the, and the cold), 13, 16, 18 n. 70, 37, 79 ff., 82 ff., 90 ff., 206-11, 212 n. 44, 214-5, 226-7; elementary particles, 63, 68. element, first, in the Stoa, 39, 100 n. 171; elements, theory of, in Aristotle, 70 ff., 78, 82 ii. 78, 8 9 - 9 0 n. 1.21, 114 n. 252; th. in Plato, 67 ff., 78; th. in Posidonius, 92, 93-4, 114-5 n. 252» 230; th. in the Stoa, 86 ff., 108 ff., 114 ii. 250, n. 252, 230; th. in Theophrastus, 82 ff. elements (s. also air; earth; ether; fire; heat; Οερμον; water), 41, 43, 59 n. 26, 60 n. 31, o f , OS and n. 14, 71, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89, 90 ff., 91 ii. 127, 104 n. 192, 107 ff., I l l ff., 113 ff., 131 n. 8, 137 n. 32, 206, 226-7; e. as living beings, 72, 78, 85, 87, 92-4, 94 n. 141, 95 and n. 148, 96, 97, 204, 229, 230; κρασις of e., s. κρασις; motion of, 59 n. 26, 68 and n. 14, 71, 76, 78 and n. 68, 80, 92 ff., 110, 111 ff.; proper place of e. in Aristotle, 71, 72 n. 38, in Plato, 64, in Theophrastus, 82 n. 79, 83 n. 8.1; self-motion of e., 70-1, 78, 207. embryo, s. fetus. embryology (s. also fetus; periods of gestation), in [Arist.], HA, 174, 176-8; in Athenaeus of Attalia, 164-5, 1.67 ii. 59; in Corp. Hipp.: Cam., 165, 174, 175 and n. 107, n. 110, 176, 177 n. 1.28, 178; Epid., 165, 178; Nat. puer., 165 and n. 43, n. 46, 175 n. 107, 178, 203 n. 263; Oct., 174, 175-6 and n. 112118; in Diodes, 164-5, 165 ff., 167 n. 59,168 n. 60,178; in Diodes and Strato acc. to Macrob. and Nicom., 164, 165 ff., 181, 203 n. 263; in Favonius Eulogius, 162 τι. 33; in Hebd,, 203 n. 263; in Hippo, 166, 174 and n. 105; in Moderatus

243

ap. Theo, 170, 181, 182 η. 146; in Philo, 173 η. 98, 181-2 η, 145, 182 η. 148, 203 η. 263; in 'Pytliag'. Hypomn., 99 η. 168, 178-9 η. 134; in Strato, 165 η. 50, 177-8; in the Stoa, 167 η. 57; in Varro, 165, 167 I L 59, 170 I I . 73, n. 75, n. 77, 179 n. 134, 183 n. 148, 185, 187, 203 n. 263. έναντίωσις (s. also heavenly bodies, contrary motion of), 40-1, 138, 139. epistemology, 156-7 n. 2, 157 n. 3, 158 n. 8, 159,193-5. eternal beings (s. also aiSm), 58, 59, 66, 86, 92, 129. ether (s. also elements), 43, 44, 70 m 25, 71 n. 30, 74 and n, 47, 80, 81, 82 and n. 78, 91 and n. 127, 92, 100 n. 170, 111, 115, 118, 123 n. 295, 126 and n. 301, n. 302; in "Pythag/ Hypomn., 99,100; aether tenuis = αυγή, 111 n. 235, 112, etiology of diseases, 1, 12 ff., 15, 97 n. 162, Ch. VII,4 passim, 229. εύρος (s, also winds), 25 n. 112, Ch. V Β passim. evaporation, caused by the heat intrinsic to the water, 90. experiments, simple, 46 n. 42, 109. explaining power, of elemental theory, in Pneumatic Medicine, 216 and n. 69, 220, 221 n. 97; - in Hebd. part II, ibd., 13, 221 n. 96; - of number, universal, 1, 17, 65 and n. 57, Ch. VI passim; explaining power of number taken for granted in Hebd., 65; - of microcosm-macrocosm-theories, 1, 13, Ch. VII,·4, passim, 228, 229; - of vis Vitalis, 94, 96. Fetus (5. also embryology; periods of gestation; seed), complete in the womb, 163, 166 n. 52, 167 and n. 59,170 and n. 73, n. 75,175 n. 107, 191 n. 198; development of f., 99 n. 168, 162 n. 33, 166 11. 53, 167 f t ,

173 n. 98, 174 n. 105, 175 and 11. 107, n. 113, 179 11. 134, 190-1 n. 198; d., enneadic, 164-5, 190-1 11. 198, hebdomadic, 163, 165-166, 167-8, 203 m 263, tessaraeontadic, 167 n. 59, 175 n. 113, 179 n. 134, 191 11. 198; male and female, different development of, 163, 166 n. 52, 170; f. as φυτόν, 167 n, 57, 180, 183 n. 152; viability of f.: 7 months, 162 n. 33, 166 m 52, n. 53, 168 and n. 60, 170, 172, 174, 175 and I L 116, 176, 181 n. 140, 190 n. 198, 203 n. 263; 8 months, 168 n. 60, 176; 9 months, 166 11. 52, 176, 190-1 11. 198; 10 months, 176, 191 n. 198. fevers (s. also acute diseases), 1, 6 11. 17, 10 and n. 35, 11, 12 n. 41, 13, 14 and 11. 51, 15 and n. 60, 135, 212, 214, 215 and n. 65» m 66, 216-7 and n. 69, 218 and n. 79, 220 and n. 91, n. 92, 223 n. 109, 225 m 122, 229. fire, ignis, πυρ (s. also elements), 43, 68, 79 11. 71, 82 n. 79, 100 n. 171, 109 n. 222, 111, 113 ff., 126, 216, 217; shape of, 68, 82 n. 79, 102 n. 182; = ether (s. also ether), 100 n. 170, 11. 171; terrestrial, 82 and n. 79, 97 n. 162; two kinds of in the Stoa, 88 and n. 114, 95 11. 154, 1 1 2 , 212.

First Unmoved Mover (s. also motion), 69 ff., 72 and n. 40, 73 n. 47, 75 and n. 51, 121; spatially interpreted, 121 ff., 123-4 n. 296. φρένες (s. also Ionia), 20 n. 88, 199 n. 244. frigidum (s. also hot, the and the cold); orginale f., 208-9 n. 26, 210 n. 29, 222-3. φύσις (s. also nature), 9-10, 70 ff., 72 and n. 43, 73 n. 47, 78, 95 n. 154. Gestation-periods, s. periods of gestation. Gnosticism, 122 n. 291, 123 n. 296.

244

Great Year (s. also calendar), 30 n. 148» 141 n. 20, 142-3 n. 28. Handbooks (s. also doxographical literature), 78 n. 67, 88 n. 118, 94 n. 138, 118 n. 272, 128, 130 ff., 135 n. 27, 142, 160. head, functions and 'openings' of, 133, 134 n. 25, 197, 200-1. heart, 34, 102 n. 183, 212 n. 44, 222 and n. 102, n. 103. heat (s. also ardor; calidum; elements; fire; hot; κρασις; θερμόν), 28, 61, 81, 82 ff., 106, 206 ff., 208 ff., 214 ff.; destructive, lethal, 88, 210, 212, 215; distribution of, s. universe; in animals and plants, s. animals, s. plants; of heavenly bodies, s. heavenly bodies; inborn (s. also calidum, originale), 10, 208-9 η. 26, 218 η. 84; in man, 125 η. 300; motive power of, 36 n. 22, 37, 79, 83, 85, 87 ff., 93 ff., 207; primary, 79, 83 n. 80, 89, 91; pure, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 88, 91, 92; in the seed, s. seed; of the soul, s. soul; of the sun, s. sun; vital, 88, 91, 92, 94-5 and n. 148, τι. 154, 126. heat, theory of; in Cicero's ND II, 86 ff.; in Cleanthes, 91 ff., 102, 212; in Hebd., 28, 79 ff., 89 ff. and Ch. IV passim, 134 n. 24, 204, 228; in Posidonius, 92 ff. and Ch. IV passim; in the 'Pyth.' Hypomn., 98 ff.; in Theophrastus, 82 ff. heaven, outer, 27 n. 129, 42 and n. 26, 43, 44 n. 37, 55, 58, 77, 80, 111 and n. 235, 118-9, 127 n. 309, 1214, 137 n. 32, 199 n. 244; cold (s. also κρυσταλλοειδές), 55, 80 η. 73, 136-7 and η. 33, 207; enclosing, 42 η. 26, 56, 57, .115, 122 η. 290, 136; ensouled, 70 η. 24; inseparable (incl. άκριτος κόσμος), 6, 55, 115 and η. 256, 126 η. 301, 132 η. 16, 136 η. 32; solid, 27 η. 129, 115 η. 256, 136 and η. 32; stars,

relation to, 41, 111 η. 235, 115 η. 256, 120 ff., 1.43 η. 28; unmoved, 55, 66, 77, 120, 121, 123-4. 1 26 η. 301, .129. heavenly bodies (s. also άστρα; heaven, outer; moon; planets; stars; sun), 56, 57, 73 ff., 75, 92, 93, 105, 117, 118,122 n. 291,129,138 if.; brightness of, 46; divinity of, 59 and n. 24; contrary motions of, 40-1, 1 38 ff.; ensouled, 67, 73 n. 47; heat of and in, 79, 88 n. 115; motion of, 37, 38-9, 47, 49, 50, 57, 67 f l , 73 ff. and n. 47, 75, 92, 137; origin of, 5. stars; sequence of, 37, 47, 56-7. heavens, changing colours of, 106 n. 206, 137; divinity of, 70 n. 25, 84 ii. 89; motion of, 74, 75-6, 111, 120; remoteness of, 69; revolution of, 66, 67, 121. heavy and light, 64, 71 if., 82, 109-10. IIistory of Medicine, 135 n. 27. hot, the (s. ardor; calidum; elements; fire; heat; θερμόν); hot, meaning of discussed by Aristotle, 82 n. 78; - (and cold), defined in Hebd. Ch. 13, 208-9 and n. 26. hot, the and the cold (s. also elemental qualities), 1, 10, 11 n. 40, 1.7 and n. 66, 17-8 n. 70, 28 and n. 134, 205, 206-8, 208-9 n. 26, 209, 210, 228; in Aristotle, 76; in Plato, 63; in Posidonius, 96-7; in 'Pyth'. Hypomn., 99-100; in Theophrastus, 82, 85, 96; the hot, the cold, the wet and the dry, 13, 15-6, 18 n. 70, 206-10; the hot, the cold, the wet and the dry in Pneumatic Medicine, 214-5. humidum, (h)umor (s. also moisture; ύγρόν; water), 61 n. 38, 90, 104, 1.06, 190-1 ii. 198, 2.10, 214 and n. 56, n. 57, n. 58, 215, 216, 217, 220, 221 n. 97. humours, 16, 37, 210 and n. 33, 212 n. 44, 215 n. 65, 216-7, 220 and n. 93. Hypomnemata, 'Pythagorean', 24 and n. 108, n. 109, 31 n. 151, 64, 81. n.

245

75, 98 ff., 131 and η. 8, 178-9 η. 134, 191 η. 198 latrica, $. History of Medicine; s. physiology, history of. 'innere Form', s. word. Ionia (s. also φρένες), 19, 20 n. 88; Ionian origin of certain wind names, 147 ii. 5; Ionian philosophy, 18-9, 25; Ionic, revival of, 33-5, 50, 53, 226, 230. lupiter, s. planets; s. Zeus. Καύσος (s, also fevers), 10-1 1, 13, 215 ii. 65. κίνησις, s. motion. Κνίδιαι γνώμαι, 12 ιι. 44, 221 n. 96. κόσμος (s. also cosmogony; cosmology; heaven; universe), 29 n. 144, 42-6, 111 and n. 235, 113 and n. 248, 119 n. 272, n. 275, 122 n. 288, 123 n. 296, 132; 'region of the universe', 42 ff., 83 n. 80, 121; two κόσμοι: in Anaximander aec. to llieophrastus, 44-5; in Aristotle, 43; in Theophrastus, 83 and n. 80. κρασις (s. also elements, theory of; μιξις), 79, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 90 and n. 121, n. 123, 91, 92, 93, 2067, 230; of earth and water, 93, 103 and n. 192, 116-7 and n. 260, 109; of the elements, 79 and n. 71, 81, 85, 89 and n. 121, 90 n. 121, 215; of heat and earth, 79, 80 and ii. 73, 90-1, 103 and n. 191, 110, 206; of heat and earth and water, 80 n. 73, 81, 90, 93, 103, 206 and n. 10; of heat and water, 28 and n. 133, 61 n. 38, 79, 80 and n. 73, 81, 90, 110, 205. κρυσταλλοειδές, -δώς, κρύσταλλος, 56, 57, 137 and ιι. 33. l i f e , 5. vitalism; periods of human, s. periods. light, reflected (s. also άνταυγια; Άρκτοΰρος), 46, 58, 137; derived, 58 n. 22, 125 n. 300. liquid element, s. water.

lists of organs and parts of the human body, hebdomadic, 197-202; in if ebd., 199-202; in Hebd. and in other works, comparison of, 199202.

living beings, 5. animatia, s. ζωα. λόγος and cognition, 193 n. 210; ένδιαθέτος λ., 168 and n. 67, 169 n. 68, 180; προφορικός λ., 168 and n. 67, 169 ii. 68, 180. lunar cycle, 47, 51, 117-8, 144 and n. 37, 179-80, 182-4, 196, 204 n. 264; influence on the tides of the Ocean, 184 and notes. Map, in Ilebd. Ch. 11 (s. also microcosm-macrocosm), 19-20, 133 ii. 22, 199 n. 244, 200 and n. 246, 202 and n. 259. μάνωσις, s. πύκνωσες, mathematics (s. also arithmetics; criterion; number-theory), ancillary science to philosophy, 135 n. 27; in. and epistemology, 156-7 n. 2, 157 n. 3, 193-6; mathematical realism of Posidonius, 193 ff.; philosophy of mathematics, 158 n. 8, 160-1 ii. 24. medicine (s. also acute diseases; allopathy; Cnidian School; Corpus Ilippocratic um; embryology; etiology; fevers; Pneumatic School; Posidonius; prognosis; semiology; therapy) Ch. 1 passim; Ch. VII, 4 passim; ancillary science to philosophy, 135 n. 27; Greek, in Persia, 22 n. 99, 23 n. 104. mens in π. φιλ., 73-4 n. 47.

menstruation (s. also sexual maturity; periods of human life), 166, 170, 173 n. 98, 177, 184 n. 161, 203 n. 263. meteorological phenomena, meteorology (s. also air; winds), 39-40, 45-6, 55, 60 and n. 31, 71 n. 29, 85, 117 and n. 263, n. 264, 132 and n. 16, 134, 143, 182 n. 148, 214 n. 56, 215.

246

microscosni-macroeosm (s. also map), -parallel 13, 17 n. 66, 20 n. 88, 21, 22-4, 79, 103-6, 115, 133, 199 n. 244, 205; -theory (s. also explaining power), 20 n. 88, 107 n. 209, 133; in Choerilus of Athens, 107 n. 209; m Greater Bundahisn, 22-4, 26; in Hebd. part 1, 1, 13, 17 and n, 66, 20 n. 88, 21, 22 and n. 100, 23 η. 103, 25 η. 115, 26 and n. 118, 79, 92, 103-7, 115, 124-5, 199 n. 244, 204 n. 264, 206-7 and η. 8, 228; in Hebd. part II, 1, 206-7 and ii. 8, 211. and ii. 38, 221 n. 97, 228, 229; Hebd. and I 'let. compared, 105-7; in Posidonins, 20 η. 88, 106-7, 211-2 n. 40; in Seneca, 104-5; in Plato's Tim., 105 n. 195; in Vict, 22 n. J 02, 26 and n. 117, n. 118, 105-6; in Plutarch, 204 n. 264. Milesians, 29, 54, 57. μίμησις etc. (s. also microcosm-macrocosm), 29 n. 145, 105-7. μΐξις, mixture (s. also κρασις), 83, 86 n. 102, 89 n. 121. model and copy, relation between, s. microcosm-maerocosm, Hebd. and Vict, compared; models, cosmological, s. cosmology, moisture (s, also elements; hum id urn; water), 36-7, 61, 108, 206, 212, 217, 219, 225. month (s. also lunar cycle), 39, 47, 48, 51, 76 ii. 60, 140 n. 14, 144 n. 37. moon (s, also lunar cycle), 115, J17-8, 132 and n. 13, 138, 139 and n. 4, 140, 141, 142 n. 25; eclipses of, 38, 47, 56 n. 11; influence upon the development of animals and plants, 183, 184; mediating function of, 58-9, 182-3 n. 148, 183-4, 185 n. 162, 203, 204 n. 264; motion of, 39, 41, 49, 59 n. 25, 76 and n. 59, 77, 117 140, 144; nature of, 22 n. 88, 47, 58 n. 22, 76 and n. 59, 84, 106; phases of, 40, 47, 50, 51-2, 55, 76 n. 60, 117-

8, 144, 179, 180, 204; position of (s. also universe, sublunar ¥ «Mid supralunary world), 20 n. 8 \ 43 n. 34, 47, 55, 56, 58-9, 60, 76 and n. 59, 80 and n. 74, 81, 83, 106, 120, 132. motion (s. also moon; natura; planets; self-motion; soul; stars; sun; φύσις), 40, 47, 55, 58, 59, 66 ff.. 77 and n. 62, 86, 98 n. 163, 112, 119 and n. 275, n. 276, 120, 124 n. 296, 129, 207; caused by heat, s. heat; Aristotle's theory of, 69 ff., 78, 138 n. 30; Plato's theory of, 66 ff., 78, 89, 138 n. 36, 204; Stoic theory of, 86 ff., 92 ff., I l l ff., 120, 138 n. 36; Theophrastus' theory of, 82 ff., 84 n. 89; theory of taken for granted in Hebd,, 66, 78. mountains, formation of according to Theophrastus, 82 n. 79. Natura, natural, nature (s. also φύσις), 70 ff. night and day, 140 n. 14, 179-80. Neoplatonic, Keoplatonism, 159 n. 15, 164 n. 39. number (s. also arithmology; epistemology; explaining power; lists of organs and parts of the human body; mathematics); numbertheory, 156-7 and n. 2, n. 3, 158, 159 and n. 15, 160 and notes, 193-6; number, cognition and perception in Posidonius, 193-6; ii. eonceived in a qualitative way, 228; number and Soul (c.q. the World-Soul), 160, 193-5, 196; World-Soul consisting of 7 numbers, 196. Observational proofs (s. also experiments), 87 and n. 106, 88. Ocean (s, also sea), 184 and n. 158. ογδοάς, 123 n. 296. ολύμπιος, ολυμπος (s. also heaven; κόσμος; ουρανός; ύπατος), 27 n.

247

129, 42, 43, 57 and η. 16, 119, 121 and η, 285, 122 and η. 289, 124, 127 η. 309. ορεκτόν, δρεξις, 71 η. 32, 72 ίι. 40. Orion, 139, 140 and η. 12. ουρανός (s. also heaven; κόσμος; δλυμπος; ύπατος), 42 η. 26, 43, 445, 67 η. 5, 111, 121 η. 285, 122 and η. 290, 132, 137 η. 33, Παντρόφος, 48-9, 61, 81, 106 ίι. 203, 116 and η. 258. πάγος (s, also heaven, outer), 6, 27 η. 129. parapegma, parapegmatists (s. also calendar), 25 n. 116, 148 and m 14, n. 15. pathology (s. also therapy), 11, 16, 26, 37, Ch. VII,4 passim. perception (s. also epistemology; senses), 99, 133, 134 n. 25, 157 n. 3, 193 if., 197, 200-1 and n. 248. periods of animal life, hebdomadic, in HA, 177. periods of gestation, computation of (s. also embryology; fetus; periods of human life and of gestation, parallel between); in [Arist.], HA VII, 176; in Diodes, 165, 168, 170 η. 72; in Oct., 175 and n. 113; in 'Pythag.' Hypomn., 99 n. 168, 178-9 η. 134, 191 n. 198; in Varro, 190-1 n. 198. periods of human life, hebdomadic (s, also beard; menstruation; seed; sexual maturity), 133, 162 ff., 168-70, 171-3, 174-8, 180, 184; in Aristotle, 174 n. 103, 177, 178; in [Arist.], HA, 174, 176-8; in Calcidius, 163 n. 37, 171.-3; in Mart. Capella, 163 n. 37, 171.-3; in Corp. Hipp.: Cam,, 174, 175 and n. 110, 176, 178 and n. 133; Oct., 175 and 11. 1.12; in Diodes and Strato acc. to Macrob. and Nicom., 167 n. 59, 168-70, 171, 172 n. 95, n. 96, n. 97, 174, 181, 182 and n. 146, 197; in Favonius Eulogius,

162 η. 33; in Hippo, 174-5; in Moderatus ap. Theo, 163, 170-1, 172 η. 95, η. 97, .181, 182 η. 146; in the Peripatus, 176-8; in Philo, 169 η. 69, 173 η. 98, 180-1 η. 140, 181 η. 145, 182 η. 148, 203 η. 263; m Posidonius, 5. periods of human life and of gestation, parallel and relation between; in 'Pyth.' Hypomn., 179 n. 134; in Solon, 171, 174 n. 103, 178, 181 n. 140; in the Stoa, 169 n. 69; in Strato, 165 η. 50, 177-8; in Varro, 162 and n. 30, n. 31, 163, 183 n. 148, 187, 189; (periods of human life), of 10 years, in Hippo, 174-5; of 15 years, in Varro, 162, 187-8. periods of human life and of gestation, parallel and relation between, in [Arist.], HA, 176-8, 177 n. 124, 178 η. 130; in Corp. Hipp.: Cam., 175; Oct., 175-6; in Diodes, 164 ff., 177-8; in Diodes and Strato acc. to Macrob. and Nicom., 164, 165, 166-7, 167 n. 59, 170, 175, 178; in Favonius Eulogius, 162 η. 33; in Hippo, 174-5; in Moderatus ap. Theo, 163, 170-1, 181; in Philo, 173 η. 98, 181 η. 145; in Posidonius, 180-4, 196; in 'Pythag.' Hypomn., 179 n. 134; in Strato, 165 ff., 177-8; in Varro, 163. Peripatus, 44, 52-3, 86, 97 n. 161, 110, 128-9, 176 n. 119, 177, 230. Persia and Greek culture (s. also Bundahisn, Greater; medicine), 22 n. 99, 23 n. 104. physicae rationes in Cicero ND LI, 87 ff., 97 n. 162, 104. physiology, history of, 135 n. 27. planets (s. also άστρα; spheres, astronomical ; stars), 42, 43 n. 34, 70, 111 n. 235, 113 n. 249, 114 n. 252, 115 n. 255, 118, 126 n. 301; p. and fixed stars, distinction or lack of distinction between, 18, 21, 30 and n. 148, 55, 57, 115, 118, 119 and n. 274, Ch. V Β passim, 202 n.

248

259; motion and orbits of, 41, 70 n. 25, 74-5, 142-3 n. 28, Ch. V Β passim; p. and the seasons, 30 and η. 150, 139 and Ch. Υ Β passim, 182 ii. 148, 230; p. and the seasons taken for granted in Hebd., 145-6; the "seven planets', 21 and n. 95, 24 n. 108, 29-30 τι. 148, 30 and n. 150, 42, 57 n. 17, 123 n. 296, Ch. ¥ Β passim, 139 n. 4» 182-3 n. 148; lupiter, 126 η. 301. plants, 16, 61, 71, 74, 85 n. 91, 91, 96, 106, 116, 183 and n. 151, 207 and ii. 14; heat in, 83, Pleiads, 25 n. 116, 30, 37, 139 and n. 4, 140 and n. 12, 144. πνεύμα (s. also spiritus; Pneumatic School), 39, 45, 97 n. 162, 211 and n. 39, n. 40, 219 n. 85, 221-5. Pneumatic School, 33, 34, 35, 97 n. 162, 156 n. 2, 213-27, 229, 230, 23 L; development of fevers, theory of, 216 and n. 71; dietetics, 217 ff., 218 n. 83, 225; division of medical science, 225-6; elemental qualities, theory of (s. also explaining power; Οερμόν), 214-5; etiology, 214, 215 and n. 65, n. 66, 216-7, 218, 223 n. 109, 225, 230; influence upon Hebd. part II, Ch. ¥11,4 passim, 229; i. upon other treatises in the Corpus Hippoeratictim, 33 and n. 5, n. 8, 34, 35; microcosni-macrocosm-theory, 214-5 ; pneuma-theory, 221-5; P. and Posidonius, 213 n. 53, 226-7 and n. 134; respiration, theory of, 222-3; semiology, 221 n. 97, 225 and n. 122; P. and the Stoa, 213 n. 53, 226 and n. 129; therapy, 2179, 223, 224, 225, 230. Posidonius (s. also 1 ndex of Names; anonymous arithmologist; άντιπερίστασις; classicistic trends in the first Cent. B.C.; elements; elements as living beings; heat, theory of; hot, the and the cold; lunar cycle; mathematical re-

alism ; microcosm-macrocosm; number; periods of human life .aid of gestation, parallel be. een; Pneumatic School; psychology; seed; self-motion; Stoic ideas in Nicomachus; Stoic handling of 1 Pythagorean' ι naterial; sun; Vet. plac.; vitalism; World-Soul); Commentary {orComments) on the Timaeus of Plato, 156 and n. 2, 157 and n. 6, 158 n. .11, 161 n. 25, 185, 191-2, 199, 201, 202-4, 231; decisive influence on ί I ebd. part I, 204; on Hebd. as a whole, 22931 ; Pos. on intelligibilia and sensUnlia, 160 n. 18, 193-6; Pos and medicine, 130 n. 4, .135 n. 27, 181 n. 141, 196, 226-7; on outer heaven and fixed stars, 111 n. 235, 112, 115 n. 256. πραξις in Aristotle's cosmology, 73 n. 47, 74, 75 and n. 52; in Aristotle's ethical theory (s. also voluntas), 73-4 n. 47. Prescocratic(s), 1, 2, 18, 19, 27, 29, 30, Ch. Ill passim, 105, 107, 143, 154; Presocratic parallels, 1, 18 n. 76, 19 n. 79, 26, 27 n. 127, 29 n. 144, n. 145, 30, 31 ii. 151, 45, Ch. I l l passim, 79 n. 71, 98 ii. 163, 126 n. 301, n. 302, 131 n, 8, 1 36-8, 230-1. prognosis (s. also semiology), 12 n. 41, n. 44, psychology of Hebd. (s. also soul; World-Soul), 10, 11, 13, 28 τι. 1 34, 37, 1 34, 208-11, 221 n. 97, 227; of Posidonius, 193 ff.; in 'Pythag.' Hypomn., 99 ff.; Stoic p., s. Stoa. puberty, s. sexual maturity, πύκνωσις and μάνωσις (s. also σύστασις), 46-7, 58 and n. 19, 100 and n. 171, 107 ff. pulse, 221 n. 97, 224-5 and n. 119. Pythagorean! sm (s. also Hypomnemata \ Stoa), 18 n. 75, 21, 24 and n. 108, 38, 41, 17, 49, 57, 64, 65, 98 n. 163, 98 ff., 156 and n. 2, 158 n. II, 159, 188 and n. 185, 189 and

249

11. 188, 11. 189, 191 η. 198; Pythagoreans, 21, 29 η. 145, 38, 42 η. 26, 47, 48, 98 η. 163, 156. (,J ιι all ties, s. elemental qualities. Rarefaction, s. πϋκνωσις and μάνωσις. relativity of 'up' and 'down' (s. also earth), 62-4, 120, 204; taken for granted in Hebd,, 64. respiration (s. also soul), 10, 133, 134 and n. 24, 197, 198, 200, 201 and ii. 253, 219, 221 n. 97, 222-3. rubbing, 218, 2L9-20; as t.p.q., 219. Saturn, 125, 142 n. 28. Same, the, and the Different, s. WorldSoul. sea ($. also elemental bodies; elem. masses), 100; as living being, 94; in Posidonius, 40, 184, 196; region of the universe, 55, 117, 132; tides of (s. also moon), 47, 184, 196. seasons (s. also planets), 9, 10 and n. 35, 11, 16, 30 and n. 150, 50, 52, 53, 55, 56, 76, 86 n. 99, 96, 115 n. 256, 118 ii. 267, 120-121, 132 n. 16, 134 and n. 26, Ch. ¥ Β passim, 209, 214 n. 56, 215 n. 62, 217 n. 76. seed, sperm, σπέρμα (s. also embryology; sexual m a t u r i t y ) , 61 and n. 38, 100 ii. 169, 104, 176, 177 n. 123, 179 n. 134, 181 n. 140, 208 n. 26, 210 ii. 29; development of, in the womb, 162 n. 33, 166, 176, 179 n. 104, 203 n. 263; first seven hours of, 166 and n. 155; heat in, 82 n. 78, 99, 208 n. 26, 209; of plants, 169 n. 69, 183 n. 151. self-motion (s. also elements), 38-40, 55, 66 ff., 78 and n. 68, 88 n. 118, 89, 92 ff., 138 n. 36; in Aristotle, 69 ff., 73 ff., and n. 47, 78, 230; in Hebd., 38 ff., 55, 58, 59 and n. 27, 66, 77, 78, 86, 92 ff., 207, 230; in Plato, 38 ff., 66 ff., 78, 230; in the Stoa, 39, 87 f t , 92 ff.; in Theo™ phrastus, 84 n. 89.

semiology (s. also Pneumatic School; prognosis; pulse), 1, 4 n. 7, 12 n. 41, 13, 15, 221 n. 97, 229. sensation, s. perception, senses, the, 133, 201 n. 254; cognitive function of, 193-5, 201-2 and n. 248; seven senses in the Stoa, 168-9 and n. 69, 180. sexual m a t u r i t y (s. also menstruation; periods of human life; seed; senses, seven, in the Stoa), 163, 169 ii. 69, 170, 171, 172, 174-5, 177, 180 and n. 139, 181 n. 140. siccitas, siccum (s. also elemental qualities; spirit us, aridus; the hot, the eoltl, the wet and the dry), 214 and n. 56, 215. Sirius, 30, 40, 139 and n. 4, 140 and n. 12. skin (s. also microcosm -macrocosm), 79, 115, 124, 125 and n. 300, 126 n. 301, 136, 137, 207. soul (s. also psychology; World-Soul), 9-10, 39, 47, 67, 75 n. 56, 84 and n. 89, 89 n. .120, 96 n. 154, 101 n. 175, 122 n. 288, 123 n. 296, 133 and ii. 20, 160, 193-6, 208-10; departing, 21.9 n. 85; heat (c.q. the hot) of, .10, 13, 37, 99 ff., 208-1.0, 221 n. 97, 228 η. 139, 222-3; the hot and the cold of, 208-11, 215, 222-3; s. and motion, 37, 67 ff., 75 n. 53, n. 56, 78, 84 n. 89, 122 n. 288, 160 and n. 20; s. and number, s. number; nurturing itself, 37, 210; seven parts of, 209-11; tension of, caused by respiration, 168, 180. Sparta, 20 n. 88. species (s. also de/initio), 52 n. 51, 214 η. 56. speech (s. also λόγος προφορικός; periods of human life), 133, 134 and n. 25, 168 and n. 67, 1.69 and η. 69, 171, 180 and u. 139, 180-1 ii. 140, 192 ii. 203, 198, 201 n. 254, 218 and n. 84. spheres, astronomical (s. also cosmol-

250

ogy; universe), 18, 39, 41, 57, 70 and n. 24, n. 25, 73 n. 47, 75 and n. 53, 83 n. 80, 113 n. 249, 115, .120,122 ff., 123 n. 296, 132, 183 n. 150, 204 n. 264; cosniological, 42» 43 and n. 34, 44-5, 55, 57, 80, 83 and u. 80, 85, 109-10, l.Li ff., 1 145 and n. 252, 132, 183 in 150, 204 η. 264, Spiritus (s. also πνεύμα), 104; aridus spiritus, 208 n. 26, 211, 214 n. 56; Vitalis spiritus, 114 n. 252. stars (s. also άστρα; J leave η, outer; heavenly bodies; motion ; planets; spheres), 18, 41, 55, 56, 74, 77, 80, 124 ff., 1 32 and n. 13, 134 n. 26, Ch. V 1> passim; brightness of, 45-6, 55; constellations (s. also Aquarius; "Αρκτος; Άρκτουρος; calendar; Orion; Pleiads; Sirius), 30, 37, 138, 140, 144, 145; divinity of, 84, 122 n. 290, 123 n. 296; ensouled, 67, 74 n. 4, 84; fine light of, 47, 55, 58; fixed stars (s. also planets), 18, 21, 30, 41, 43 n. 34, 57, 111 n. 235, 114 n. 252, 115, 123 n. 296, 138, .139 n. 4, 144, 145; heat of, 55, 79, 80 and n. 73, 88, 91, 124; motion of, 74, 75, 1 11 ; origin of, 88, 91 n. 127, 92; πραξις of, 73-5; revolution of, 49-50; reflected light of (s. also άνταυγία; Άρκτουρος), 18 η. 76, 27 η. 129, 38, 58, 125 η. 300, 137. Stoa (s. also elements, theory of; embryology; fire, two kinds of; κρασις; motion; periods of human life, hebdomadic; Pneumatic Medicine ; self-motion; World-Soul), 31 n. 151, 33, 34, 39, 86 ff., 100 ff., 104, 116 n. 258, 127 n. 309, 168 and ii. 65, 169 and n. 69; Stoic cosmogony, 100, 107-8; Stoic cosmology, 39, 86 ff., 108 ff., 114 η. 250, n. 252, 126 n. 302, 207 n. 22; Stoicizing versions of Heraclitus, 59 n. 26, 99 n. 167, 169 n. 69; Stoic conception of mathematics,

194-5; Stoic ideas in Nicomachus, 167 n. 57, 168 and n. 65, 169 and n. 69, 180, 1.82-4 (Posic· nius); Stoic physics, 114 n. 250, n. 252, 128-9; Stoic psychology, 99 ff., 211 and n. 39, n. 40; Stoic handling of Pythagorean' material, 150 n. 2, 157 n. 3, 194 n. 212; Stoic ideas in the 'Pvthag.' IIvponui., 99-100; Stoic theology, 39, l i b n. 258, 127 η. 309, 136 n. 30; Stoa and Theophrastus, 53 n. 53, 84 n. 89, 86 and n. 1 02. s u b l u n a r y a n d supra,binary world, .s\ universe.

summer and winter (s. also seasons); in the course of a month, 76 n. 60. συμπάθεια, sympathy (cosmic), 182 n. 148, 184 and n. 155, n. 158, n. 102. sun, 38, 43 n. 34, 55, 56 and n. 11, 60 n. 31, 80, 115, 124 ff., 129, 132 and n. 13, 138, 139 and n. 4, 140, 141 and n. 23, 142 n. 25, 206, 207; (reflected) light of, 38, 46, 47, 92; heat of, 50, 55, 76 and n. 58, n. 59, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85, 91, 92, 101, 110, 118, 206, 207, 212; motion (and orbit) of, 39, 41, 49, 59 n. 25, 76, 77, 85, 102 n. 182, 140, 142-3 n. 28, 144; sustaining power of, 76 and n. 58, n. 59, 83 and ri. 82, 84, 91 and u. 127, 10.1, 102 n. 181, n. 182, 143 n. 28; = Zeus, 127; in Aristotle, 76 and n. 57, n. 58, n. 59; in Cleanthes, 91 and n. 127, 102 and n. 181, η. 182; in Hebd., 55, 79, 80, 82, 101, 127; in Posidonius, 102-3 ; in Theophrastus. 83-5, 102 ii. 183. σύστασις, 42, 80, 108 η. 216, η. 219, 109 η. 222, 110, 112, 117. Teeth, 40; teething, 162 η. 33, 163, 168, 170, 171, 1 74, 175 η. 106, 176, 181 η. 1 40, 190 η. 198; growth of 'real' teeth, 163, 168, 175; shedding of first teeth, 162 n. 33, 163, 1.68,

251

170-1, 174 and η. 104, 175, 176, 190 η, 198. theories, use of, s. explaining power, therapy (s. also Cnidian School; Pneumatic School), 1, 6 n. .17, 10, 11, 12 ii. 41. n. 44, 13 and n. 44, n. 49, 15, 217-9, 223, 224, 225, 229, 230. Οερμόν (s. also ardor; calidum; elemental qualities; fire; heat; hot), 11 ii. 40, 18 n. 70, 36 n. 22, 79, 80, 81, 82 and n. 78, 84, 86, 90 and n. 123, 97 n. 162, 98 ff., 100, 101 n. 175, 102 η. 1 83, 207 and n. 20, 219 n. 85, 221 n. 97, 222 and τι. 102, 223 τι. 109; in Pneumatic theory, 97 n. 162, 214 ff.; m Theophrastus, 82 ff., 97 n. 162. time-reckoning, s. calendar, transcendence vs. immanence in Mu., 121-4. Ύ γ ρ ό ν (s. also elements; humidmn; moisture; water), 108 n. 218, 114 n. 250, 11.6 and n. 260, 117, 214 and n. 57, n. 58, 222 n. 99, 223 n. 109. universe (s. also cosmology; earth, central position of; κόσμος; spheres, cosmological), 42 ff.; centre of, 62, 63, 113; cosmic mechanics, 119 and n. 276, 120; distribution of heat in (s. also κρασις), 55, 79, 80, 81, 82-3, 86, 87; as ζωον, 91 η. 127, 106-7; eternity of, 127 ff.; as μακράνθρωπος, 105 η. 195; schematic descriptions of, Hellenistic, compared to Hebd. Ch. 1-2,11.3 ff., 131; schem. descr. of, Hellenistic, taken for granted, 118,133; sphericity of, 19 η. 79, 56 ff., 60, 114 n. 252; structure of particularly emphasized in proem of Hebd., 113 n. 248; sublunary and supralunary world (s. also moon, mediating function and position of), 39, 43-5, 59, 60, 71., 76 and n. 59, 79, 80 and n. 74, 81 and n. 75,

83, 137 n. 32, 183-4; sublunary and supralu nary world taken for granted, 59, 80; univ., systematic description of in the Plac., Ch. V A passim; tripartite division of, 42, 43 n. 34. ύπατος (s. also ολύμπιος; ουρανός), 121 and η. 285, 122, 1 24, 127 η. 309. Varro's logistorici, nature of, IN5 ff.; A Hie us analyzed, 188-90; A, dated, 188, 1.90; Cens. Ch. 14-15,3 attributed to the A tticus, 188-90; Tuben> analyzed, 186-8, 190; T. dated, 1 87, 1 90-2 n. 198. veins, venae (s. also mierocosmmaerocosm), 79, 103, 10 4 and n. 194, 106, 107 n. 209, 116 n. 260, 212 n. 44, 224 and n. 113, 117 n. 118.

Vetusta Ρ tacit a, (s. also doxographical literature; universe), 1 30 ff., 159, 191 n. 198. Vict., possible date of, 25-6 τι. 116, n. 118, 105 n. 195. vis Vitalis (s. also vitalism), 92, 94, 96 and n. 157, 97. vitalism (s. also elements as living beings; vis vitalis), 69 n. 19, 71 and n. 35, 72, 74 n. 48, 77, 78 and η. 67, 85, 86, 87 ff., 89, 91 ff., 94 and n. 140, n. 141, 95 and n. 148, n. 149, n. 154, 96, 97, 101, 107, 127 n. 309, 204, 230; vitalis color, s. calor. vocabulary of Hebd. part I (s. also word-list), 36 ff., 52-3, 138, 230; of part II, 212-3, 230. voice, vox, s. speech. voluntas in π. φιλ. (s. also πραξις), 73-4 and η. 47. vowels, the seven (s. also speech), 134 n. 25, 169 n. 69, 201 n. 254. Water (s. also elements; humidum; κρασις; moisture; sphere (s); ύγρόν), 28, 61, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85, 87, 100 η. 171, 105, 107, 108 and

252

η. 218, η. 219, η. 220, 111, 113 f t , 116-7, 205, 206; liquid element, 55, 79, 80, 92, 104, 116-7, 206, 207, 210. vviiK I-names (s, also winds; wind-rose), Ch, V C, passim; scientific origin of certain w., 6, Ionia, wind-rose, 24 and n. 110, 119 and n. 274, Ch. V C passim, 202 n. 259, 230; Hellenistic, taken for granted in 11 ebd., 154; history of, Ch. Y C; 12 petals, 147-8, 152-5; 10 petals, 146-7; 8 petals, 148-151, 154; 7 petals, 151. winds, 21, 24 and 24-5 n. 112, 76, 84 n. 86, 85 n. 96, 90 n. 123, 97 n. 161, 132 n. 16, 134, Ch. V C passim. word, a good, for Reinhardt's 'innere Form', 103 n. 187. word-list for Hebd, part I, 36 ff.: 1. αγωγή, 36-7; 2. άκολουΟέω, 37; 3. άκολουθίη, 37; 4. άνΟησις, 38; 5. άνταυγία, 38; 6. άρδευσις, 38; 7. αύτόδρομος, 38-40; 8. άφαιρεσις, 40; 9. βλάστη σις, 40; 10. εκβολή, 40; 11. έναντίο^σις, 40-1.; 12. έπταμερής, 41.-2; 13. κόσμος, 42-5; 14. λαμπηδών, 45-6; 15. λάχνωσις, 46; 16. μάνωσις, 46-7; 17. μέθοδος, 47; 18. μειόω, 47-8; 19. μία, 48; 20. παντρόφος, 48-9; 21. πέπανσις, 49;

22. περί,ττολίη, 49-50; 23. πρόσθεσες, 50; 24. σπορητός, 50; 25. τελν.ύω,

50-2; 26. φυταλία, 52; 27. φύτευσις, 52. world-picture taken for granted (s. also universe), 54, 55, 59, 64, 65, 80-1, 104; Presocratic -, 54 ff. World-Soul (s, also number); in Cicero's ND, 89 and n. 120, 93 and n. 136; in the Early Academy, 160 and notes; in Hebd. part I I, 211, 215; in Plato, 67 and notes, 68 n. 14, 78, 88 n. 1 18, 89 and n. 120, 160, 179, 192 n. 203. 211; in Posidonius 'explaining' Plato, 160 and notes, 179-80, 193, 195-6, 211-2 ii. 40; in the Stoa, 102 n. 181, 211 and n. 39. Year, division of (s. also seasons), 9, 1.1, 25 ii. 116, 139 ff.. 1.44 n. 38. Zeus (s. also planets; sun), 43 n. 34, 121 n. 285, 124 ff. Zodiac (s. also astro meteorology ; planets), 37, 41, 1.41 n. 16, 145 and n. 45, 146. ζω« (s. also animalia; elements as living beings; vitalism), 71, 72 and ii. 40, 78, 83, 85 n. 91, 87, 93, 96, 101, 1.06 n. 1.99, 116, 117, 184, 207, 214.

253

h

in to

oo CO oe μ r* ce κ ~ §> I ζ» vO Μ ON sO Μ s; •ro p« 00 ΓΪ ? 04 Μ 00*' du r Ό cn ο CI d 5 ic Ρ iß" CO C\ I -d § ο jO S X κ 1 υ > •υ Γ Ο J Η ο Ο^ /r) CO Η cd £ § Τ di r—; Ρ ν
Ο, Ν^ ψ £ > οι C© OΌ

α

^ ^ Ν Μ • - ^ lO d. „ i> •- η Γ2; Λ ά.

Μ Ο ο ρ: Μ < ιΌο 3 Ο οι «C "Ό C„L m„ Ο co , m Χ ρ ω , ^ ρ Ρ 'Ό Η Κ ι> ά Ä 'Χ

ρο ΙΓ>

Ο

ΙΟ -φ Λ

c

C Ό

Γ - Η 00

Μ < «Μ -χι ·-

Ο

νο Λ co ν Μ |>

t>
ο
« _ ,+. .- ΓΟ οο " Ν 00 Ζ sC ^Ö Ρη. ^ ι-«. S ä

•φ |> , η, -

-tΙ Ο

-Φ

^ Ρ-

^ s

Η t>« pQ Μ Μ Η ^ ON « Λ ce α -ο pO Ο^ Η 00 Μ ·«Λο Ν Ο Ο Η> - CO CO CO CS Μ CO

-φ ρ*

(Ο ^ Ο ΓΟ^ VO ÄS Cu Νο" Μ ο ΙΟ Μ^ ΟΙ ΓΟ ΓΟ t^ CO _·

Qu Η , Γ σ* ΙΟ λ . to ? ® CΜO ο d Γί , - ι> Ο 1Γ) 01 fi ·

, ο

ΟΙ Ο ι> ι> ΜC ^ VO of CO ^ ο α·4· • λ

-γ" ο ci ο' toΙ 0£ d C·O, , Ο W ^ ^ 11 . « 1 · t"- CQ 2 1 ^ο ^rL00 rf «, ΓΜ Η COώ « ^ t Ι> rt- i Oζ CJ Η ^* C3^ m cd οι C »ο ^ -φ rt JO 00 ι> Μ Η ί> οο μ οο OS g ^ w μ Ν . ^ γ- "Φ .. "Φ ιο -φ p.;

ö C O

d ώ ( !οι >· ^Ι> . Ν 1 •Φ α, «β 4 pH. Γ ΙΟ « ™ 11I r ia Η iö 00 & « vO mm * ~^ m ττ σ^ 00 οι < Il> Q O μ£ ^ Ν α co ρ

Ml iO CM

de Gener atione Animaliiim II 3,736629-73737, p. 82 n. 78, p. 95 n. 148. IV 2,76732 ff., p. 76 n. 6 0 ; 4,7721)6 ff., p. 176 n. 121; 10,7771124 ff., p. 76 n. 5 9 ; 10,7771)25-6, p. 84 n. 8 6 ; 10,777627 ff., p. 76. de Gener atione et Corruptions I 10, p. 86 11. 102. II 3,330623 ff., p. S9-90 11. 121; 3,330625, p. 82 11. 7 9 ; 14, p. 108 n. 2 1 8 ; io,336a32 ff., p. 7 6 ; 10,336617-8, p. 76 11. 5 8 ; 11,33862 ff., p. 76. Hisioria A nimalium II 11, p. 176 11. 119. VII I,58ia9 ff., p. 178 n. 130; i , 5 8 i a i 2 ff., p. 177; i , 5 8 i a i 5 ff., p. 177 n. 122, p. 183 n. 152; 1,581332 ff., p. 177; 1,582316, p. 177 11. 1 2 3 ; 3»5§3&25-7, p. 176; 3,583612-4, p. 176 11. 120; 4,584335 ff., p. 176; 4,58461 ff., p. 176 ; 10,5871)14 ff., ρ 1 76; 12,58838, p. 176. VIII 1,58864 ff., p. 71. η. 34. de luventute 23 ff., 487622 ff., p. 223 11. 112. Metaphysial I 3,903617 ff., p. 6 1 ; 5,985630, p. 65 11. 5 5 ; 5,986317 ff., p. 180 11. 1 3 7 ; 6,987610 ff., p. 65 11. 53. XII 6 ff., p. 6 9 n. 22, p. 75; 7, p. 70 11. 2 5 ; 7,107263, p. 75 n. 5 5 ; 8, p. 70, p. 75. Meteorologica I 2,339319, p. 4 3 ; 2,339321 ff., p. 76 11. 5 9 ; 3,339618, p. 43. II 5,36233 ff., p. 85 n. 9 2 ; 6, p. 146-7; 6,36433-4, p. 146 n. 4 ; 9,370315, p. 46. III 4,373a32, 335, p. 3 8 ; 4,373621, p. 46 11. 4 2 ; 4,37461, p. 46 n. 42. de Partibus Α nimalium II 2,648612 ff., p. 82 11. 78. III 6,668634 ff., p. 223 11. 112. IV 5,681312, p. 71 n. 34. Physica I 1,19268 ff., p. 70-1; 1,192618, p. 70 11. 29. II p. 7 8 ; 2,194613, p. 76 11. 59. VII 1, p. 6 9 ii. 22. VIII p. 7 5 ; 4-5, p. 69 n. 2 2 ; 4, p. 70 11. 2 4 ; 4,254614 ff., p. 72 n. 39, n. 4 0 ; 4,254615, p. 72 n. 4 3 ; 4,254621 ff., p. 73 n. 4 7 ; 4,254627 ff., p. 27 11. 4 0 ; 4,254632, p. 72 n. 4 0 ; 4,25535 ff., p. 71-2; 4,25565 ff., p. 71 n. 3 5 ; 4,25569, p. 72 n. 4 2 ; 4,255618 ff., p. 72 11. 4 2 ; 4,255631, p. 72 n. 4 1 ; 5,25832, p. 3 8 ; 6,25961-20, p. 71 11. 32, p. 72 11. 40, p. 73 n. 4 7 ; 8, p. 70 n. 25. Politica VII 16,1335329 ff., p. 174 n. 103; 16,1335332 ff., p. 174 11. 103; 16,1335631, p. 174 11. 103; 16,133563 ff., p. 174 n. 103. π. τ ω ν Π υ θ α γ ο ρ ε ί ω ν fr.13 Ross, p. 98 η. 163. 7Γ. φ ι λ ο σ ο φ ί α ς p. 91 η. 127, p. 122 11. 291 ; fr.9 Ross, p. 71 η. 2 9 ; fr.i23R., p. 4 9 ;

256

fr.21R., p. 73 and η. 46, ρ. 73-4 η. 47, ρ. 75; fr.26R., ρ. 43 η. 32, ρ. 73-4 47.

η.

[ARISTOTELES]

fr.250 Rose, ρ. 24-5 η. 112. de Mundo, 1,39^26-7, p. 119 η. 2 7 5 ; 1,39104 f£, p. 119 η. 2 7 5 ; 2-3» ρ. 113 a n d η. 246, ρ. 118 η. 2 7 1 ; 2 , 3 9 l b l 2 ft, Ρ· 120, ρ. 122 η. 2 9 2 ; 2 , 3 9 ^ 1 3 ff., ρ. 120; 2»39ibi3» Ρ- 116; 2,391^14 ff., Ρ- 122 η. 2 9 0 ; 2,39ibi9~392a5, ρ. 122 ιι. 2 9 0 ; 2 » 3 9 2 a § f £ , ρ. 118; 2,392220-9, ρ. 113 η. 2 4 9 ; 2,392023-9» ρ. 1 1 8 ; 2,392a32 ff., ρ. 81 11. 7 5 ; 2,3921)3 ff., ρ. 117 η. 2 6 3 ; 2,392b6 ff., p. 117; 2 , 3 9 2 b 7 - i 3 , Ρ· 116 η, 2 5 9 ; 3 , 3 9 2 b l 4 p. 116, p. 117; 3 ? 39 3 b 2 0 ~33> Ρ· H 3 n. 2 4 9 ; 3 , 3 9 2 b 2 2 ff., p. 117; 3 , 3 9 3 a 4 ff., p. 81 11. 7 5 ; 3,393ms ff., p. 117; 3>393 a I 7 ff·, P· 117; 4,394*9 P- 117 n. 2 6 3 ; 4 , 3 9 4 1 1 1 9 ff., p. 148; 4,395*29 ff., p. 117 11. 2 6 3 ; 4>395"3 Η ο"

d

^ φCO ο d

οΜ m 0* U IO Ö ri «vO ft o"

rH Φ 00 C O ΙΟ J> ft C O rii Ο Ι r H CO 8 1 d •rf. ft OJ ft IN ft Μ ϊ Λ Φ T^ ft•COΦ Ι Ο in rd in Ο U ft t H CO ΡΦΦ § ? τΗ d • *Φ U «X) ft ft ίο" d d ft IM d ( CO ο ο φ S W μ VD 00

Ol d CO

Ol

ft ft

οΙ Ο

ΤΗ

£ Η 5 *

in- ^ . 00 © Ö

Η

Μ

τ-Η

d2 s

^

ft

TH

(i 8 "a I

φ «η

d w 3 sg ω4J Ρ £ >"0 * ο to Τ-4 ο ft τΗ to ft ΌO ^d α C CO iO VO ft Ι Ο t>· T H οΝ T H ΟΙ ο ft Μ " co ft ft σ\ cC VD CO m d ^ iO oo" rH d oc f-j Λ «Μ VO Η rH τΗ m Ο ft Η d d 1-ί iO o ^ οι d" ΓΗ δ οι ft CO ft CO ο oo •J) iO Η ft 'νΟ ft HT Η* d ^ d ^ ^ of w CO C O j>. * OS ^ 0*4 Ν^ TH »d • a^ u d d vi ft Ö oo >

Vi

Ο

rf OD τ ι · m oo oo vo f Η Ο σ^ to οΙ oo ü ^ ^ ο « S 0\ η σ ^ « Ο Ο in m οι Ο ft ft g o^ Η Η > ft ft 00 ft 00 ° ft Ö ^ a o" oo" 00 Ö ft ^ ö m VO f , 00 σ^ Μ οTT 9 fO 2 & ± i αΦ ο ft ft ^ vi « Ol ^ «3 · - d ^ d ^ ft of φ" r_· , ft rH ö· Ä ft O^f ο » vo" O ^ vo ft Λ ft o\ 00 Ν Ö ON^ ft rH CM • Ν ö CO Λ ö· . σ\ ^ rf& « g ^ ^ Λ ft ^^ ft w Ol ö . ^ »η« ft^ vo m »o , _ ft Ο w ο r — ! , „ J > TH l> oo ilvo ι Γ Ο < N ^ , 00 00 . » ο τΗ , ο o^ ο § ft »Äσν r H. ft . . ö Ol ft ^ ~ ft Ol « co α rH 0% d* ο + 00 ^ d w 00 so ^ r^ ft 5 2 00 Η IN VO W ft d Η ft d 00 x Os 00 0\ d d ft TrH -H Ol ö tH r H ft ft tC t> Ol ^ "Φ ,Λ ο « ο 2 ^ !f TH ft ft ft 5 H3 O CO Ol CO ö τΗ ^ft Oin d O" d vO of CO CO ' 00 ft ^ ο C H V O Ol « ft Λ ο fN. Ö νο ft 0 0 ft CO 1 - σ\ TO Ol m όο οι Ol Σ> d . -Φ οι ; in ft Ö Ν IN ο . cr> öc d ft O οι ^ ft ο ^ ft ^ Ol ^ τof Η IN ft ά IN Ο d » OC CO CO d °f ft t^ et tC R- ft Η "Φ oj 7 VO τ04 Η d Ol 00 k, m d T-i „ i C 8 8 •φ S 00 Ο " » »a Η eo _ τΗ d Ο Φφ ft ft ι IφO "s ft ν O" 00 00 d CO ft o\ σ» ft Γ d ^ ο d ^ 00 ο ft 1 , 00 IN νο ^ OS « ft _ m ft !>· dri th^ Q\ v Λ d 1-» ' ft ο ft ft οο" rH . O* rH ι> Μ1 CO "Φ w" ι > Γ in w T F — I . „ co Ol 1 * ft Μ 1 CO τΗ ft CO CO φ 00 · ο d Ο 1 CO Μ cö a\ . IO _ Μ Η-4 m ρOTΦ! -o D χ χ χ fa

>

*

Ο

ο

rH COCO ft CO c> Ν η ft Ή •Ν~ of ΙΟ_i Ν ft ι>» Η σΓ Ο ft vp d σι cf 1—i IN ft d 00 ft Η IN rH οο" Ch IN ^ oo rH ft 00 00 Ν r H ft its ft ft «5 CO Η TH TH N 00 Μ ΗΗI00 rH ft 00 00 τΗ of VO τΗ TOft d rH r H 00CO d ft COTH ft m o" Η ( ft vO rsH oo "Φ Φr H Η vo" Ν ft d CO * 00 Ο IN τσ^ d 00 00 Η CO rH 00 . Ol Ö Ό d ft ^

ft

ft

ft

^ o\ ' ft 00 CM 5 ^ rH τ-i. tH^ . σΓ ft , ο ft ft Ol „ ft o^ co d 01 νο 00 M a τΗ Η s S fto - σ\ rH L· vq . vo m rH 3 ft rH s

Ν 00 I w CO CO D MH m |> TH Η et ft Ö ft d 00

00 ••δ-q > Vi ^ vO" m ft § Ο to 'φ Η in §Vi Ν W m κ Η < q Μ JΗ u Ο

OL Ν

%o I Λ

f

s

TO"

•Φ

Ο M . -ICO ,

FT . Ο

. CT)

Ö

s "p

EÖ Ö Ο ^

FT

«. CO

(

Α.

FT OO

its

s^

d ΟΙ

Υ

^ o\ Α ft ΤΗ > ® FE^tiS CO in ^ ΝΟ

:D

I

>>

I ft ft § S l Ο

ft? UD R>*

00

d Η m ö 5

^

Ο Ί"

^O

O

V

^ ΓΟ OL EO Η *> D Λ • - F> Ι |> TH 1> FT Ö Ό * ·> VO Ο . i> ft ft

Ο I *

VC

>Ο ft.

(fl

D

W

i

CO

Iß

ft

S

D

m -

Ö

.

00 VO

ö

VO

£m 3

CC M » « VO ΤΗ

Ρ.

VO

oo

CT) T-J <M

TH

m

Ρ £ Η

ο VD

3

d κο Η

ft

ο" VO

S

m m

Ol

U

ft

Ν

8

RL

g

& i s

ft oo" Μ -D

μ ν

Ο

RS ,

FT Η R D ? 5 I G

> £

Ν

d d

ft ςι,^ „

6 « Η

..

OO RP OL m Ν M d m Η ft Ö tH m Τ—I ΤΗ CO co m CO

Ö

VO ^ ft <M FFL «

m O^ in VO οι ft ö EO σ\ t n S «Η τΗ Ο VO

^ ft

ft OO ft CO

M

CQ

, ^ F CO O ·-

Ö

«Μ

Ο VO

CO VD

ft d in

ft GO Μ Μ

CO

fflm

ft ^ 00 Μ IN

d

VO ^ 00

..

00 ^

eo μ

^

^ d hh Μ <M , CN ^Ο rH I

•S S ft CO rf ^ CO £ ο

S νθ ^ ^ ^s

ρ

ίί

ft

Ο ^ Ν ft

ft

ro Ο Η CO © Η COΟ « Ο ^ ΜΜ Η ^ in d ft• C οO O^ rH ro w*~ • ft d Ο Ν mft OJ Η < tH , ft ·; ΓΟ ft

Μ

$ η < »o α Η h Ο . τ Η mΓΟd ^ CM ft W 00 O τΗ Λ * C ft Η ft ft ft

- ιη VO ^Γ ο -Φ is ONin «ι rö , Ν ^ Φ ft wΟ ^ö · ~rH00Sft 3 . ^- 0C . ft ft Μ ΓΟ ο α^ S νο

Ο ft Η

Ch Η ftH Ο τη m Λ ΙΟ ι -

CM ö » m Ö QQ2 m ^ ' ^ χft rH Υ>00

£

Ο vo in Ο Ο Ν ^ δ 00 ^ « ^ d . ^ Η VD ^• ·»οt-ONVCON . . , . cf V O T-4 T^ ON VO-Φ , . vO . ft ft ö oi Ο p ONin m ^ ο ^ ^VP Ρ· νθ. 0 COvO VO rVO r> ft co ft Ή _ OO vO rin T"1 T?· ft ft ON ^ , VOVO vO νθ TH p .« w co vO V© c m ft CO. 00 o ^ ο ΓfN| CM d vo • Tl Oi vo in rH t—· vo ρ d d e00 rH CM T-J P. ft tn r- 0r- T-J ON TH . 10 ft 00 ΓΟ P, ^ ft ft ft τ~< VC ΓVC m ON. CM in I r—-C ' , v O 00' v O m vO ^ „ 0 ft «Η ON vD νθ ^ CO . a τΗ Ο 00c^ m d ΓCO TH ^ r^ yH Ο vO C -Φ M vo ft ft ft d go rH Ol νθ" Ν in VO ^ ft m m l> VO ΟΪ VO d ^ 2 vrT - Ρ ο ι> ο ί> ft t^» C•OΡtH Ρ^ vO νθ m ft vo ft ft ft ft ft

C O Umt Γ Γ U* ζ\| ft o. r H Ο ^J ^ , vo ο . ο ο* η α ftoo ft ft t> v O σ^ ο KD IftÄ? I ι & ft Tf ft r?«S ve d ι « Γ. 5: ο Ο oo ^ 00 00 Η CM ft oo ft w w ft CO Uf) „ <M rH H^ . ο Η Λ Λ Ο & Μ ft V? 00· ft ft σ\ oc »ο νθ" ^ 00 -Η m uΝ ft • ο " Ν ο^ vO TO vfiιT in ft ^ 0C ^ 5a" £ ά ζΜ vO η ά g. . CO ft Κ ϊ Γ » ft. Ο ο ft Ο Γ- CO « - 00 · ρΛΓ. b N ft . Γο Ο • -φ οΗ ^ oo W ft I Ν d ; Ρ ο" -τ ^•Γ ^ ft ft § oo" ^ ^ ft ft "' ^ ^ Q, ο ο Ο Η ί . νο : ft m 2 Ä • ; cL • ~ 00 ο Ο cm « c Γ- ft Γ Ν ; ο 5 J fO C ' ρ ^ ft « ν© ' ^ Ö 00 ^ . ^ μ ΓΟ ft S ft CO S r52 H ^CM CO Ν τ}- ρ ft ft d η G0 SO Ν ρ %Μ

• - fO -φ, r^ ^t VO CO Η CO οff) 2Ν » fOH η vo . ft 1 έ * ft « in ^o Ο tv ^ft ft \θ ^ I ti s ^ ft Ο» ft ι Ο . m O ft . ir< ft ^ ft PC « ί> ΤO ft « ,Η V • ft ft ?• - ^JC> »ONft α) «ö ο " Η s «ο rH 00 0 η Q, Ο - CO ^ , \0 « · ^ s ft ο τ m 00 ft^ ft oo in in ö "i min öJ m ~ , id Tf r H ft 0\ ft oo C vO ^ ΡΌ ^ ft co cL ^ 1Κ γ- ft fO Ό ^ VO · VP ίΡ s ? ο« in ρ .. « ο ρ. Ο i d ft 00 VO οoo io 8 « ° «χ m

ρ

Ä ft H d vT m ^ ^ \D m 0Q Ν ft -r oo % ο t-» ^ Ο V O οO ·§ C ft• -t" in ε ft , m ft ο ft \D ο Ν S ON ο \0 v O » - ά 7 r^ 3 Η , \£> m < 7 - « »| · 3 vO " ' σ^ c» ft oC " η on w § 5 i Ü ^ O N ft to νθ · . ^ § ftci ft Ö ft co i ο q r • ^§ co ft JM CO d ON IT iCO* CM§CO* Ρ•S Η Ο Η Η rΦ ^D ^ 3 Ι ο κ^ιη Μ* Μ* VO m m ^ ft ρ I £ I ^ ft^ νθ V0 ft ft Ρ ft ft I ^ Μ ft Ο Μ% ^ ft Ρ ft ft ft
ii ft Η Ν ^Ο ft ΜI Ü 0 τ-* Λ CO ο κ ο ft ft ^t* ft 0 θ" , κ η " w «Ν 0" Tt- d Ρ "φ Η Φ C ftO g ρm ρ, ζ . οΥ. -< ^ "φ ^s> < ν© υ ^ φ ^ ρρ Μ ft ΙΟ ΓΗ α ο

m Ρ Ζ Ρ cß g Ρ Ο (Λ Ρ w ο ^ s ο υ

ft - co ΓΟ

Ρ ft d m

ί

ft^ ο ^

m ρ ^ö ^ C?p 2 Ο Ρ

vC ii CI

ο Ο Ό ο§ VC -φ ft Μ ft ^00 (Λ Ο ζέ «.r oo sO D i i w Η Η^ ^ Λ . ^ Η -S a 5 ^ < ρ < < >* α ^ ν μ Ρ > ^ Cß 0 0 η S ι - ^ Μ g ^ 5 > > Ο 00 ft M ο Μ Μ O οto C Th Ο TO

oi τΗ

ft

TH

C*

tS 0©

Ö

^ Ό OL

ft

TH O OL

00* ο OL

d L> οτΗ

ft

sP β SM CO Ti 1 Οm ft Β Μ OH TF" «Μ

^

Λ ° si

S * CO Ν d 00 CO νθ IN d d I m Ο ΤΗ co m Η in vo σΓ rH σΓ P, d Ό CO t- CO » ft 0\ Os ^ Μ ο^ ^ο Ο τΗ • - ft ft ft ft Ο ft ft_«7 Ο Γ- , ' — Γ ™ Ο ' m ° Ö CO 4h ο ft οι ο /-« CM pfi O 00 CO ·rH- 'Ο Οϊ

Μ >H Μ Ο >

Ο tN Ο ft 00 ^ d co Ο (Β φ

H"

ft ft ft

^ m νθ" < ß, Ρ ρ ορ

S

Α

m νθ <M

-Φ VD CM

p. 181, ρ. 182 η. 146, p. 187, p. 190, p. 197, p. 203 a n d n. 2 6 3 ; 19,1-2, p. 1 7 1 ; 19,2, p. 40, p. 174 IL J 0 4 ; 19,4, p. 1.71, p. 172 n. 9 5 ; 19,5-6, p. 171, p. 174 n. 1 0 4 ; 19,5, p. 171, p. 175 n. 1 0 9 ; 19,6, p. 4 6 ; 19,7-8, p. 1 7 1 ; 19,9-10, p. 174 n. 1 0 3 ; 19,13, p. 174 n. 1 0 3 ; 19,17-8, p. 174 n. 103. SPEUSLPPUS

fr.40 L a n g , p. 160 n. 21. STEPHAN ÖS AT11 ENI EN SIS

Comm.

in Hipp.

A ph.,

Vol. II Diel/, p.326, p. 10 11. 35.

STRABO

1 3,8, p. 40, p. 94 η» 1 4 5 ; 3,12, p. 1 8 4 a . 157; 29, p. 1 5 1 n. 27. IX 2,8, p. 1.84 n. 1.57. XVII 1,5 (p.790), p. 151 n. 27. STRATO

fr.85 W e h r l i . p. 3 8 ; 6- 97-9 W . , p. 165 11. 50. SUETONIUS

fr.151 Reifferscheid, p. 148 n. 11. C(l. ¥()I1 A r n i m I 65, p. 194 n. 219; 87, p. 99 11. 68; 98, p. 99 n. 168; 99, p. 109 n. 222, p. 110; 102, p. 89 n. 121, p. 100 n. 170, n. 171, p. 108 11. 215, 11. 216; 103-5, V- 108 11. 218; 103, p. .108 11. 217; 104, p. 100 11. 171, p. 108 11. 218; 105, p. 108 11. 218; 115, p. I l l n. 239; 120. p. 88 11. 114, p. 95-6 n. 154; 124, p. 211 n. 40; 135, p. 99 n. 169; 176, p. 99 11. 168; 494, p. 194 τι, 219; 495, p. 211 11. 40; 497, p. 91 11. 127, p. 100 11. 1 7 1 ; 498, p. 102 n. 182; 499, p. 91 11. 127, p. 102 n. 181; 502, p. 102 11. 182; 504, p. 87 11. 104, p. 2 1 2 ; 506, p. 102 11. 1 8 2 ; 508, p. 102 n. 1 8 2 ; 510, p. 91 n. 1 2 7 ; 512, p. 91 n. 1 2 7 ; 513, p. 87 11. 104, p. 103 11. 1 8 8 ; 530, p. 102 11. 181; 537, p. 4 4 n. 35, p. 1 1 2 - 3 n. 244. II 64, p. 1 6 9 11. 6 9 ; 83, p. 1 6 9 n. 6 9 ; 311, p. 3 9 ; 331, p. 1 9 4 n. 2 1 2 ; 365, p. 1 9 4 n. 2 1 8 ; 413, p. 39, p. 1.00 n. 1 7 1 , p. 1 0 8 n. 2 1 9 ; 429, p. 1 0 0 n. 1 7 1 ; 470 ff., p. 89 n. 1.21; 471, p. 3 9 ; 473, p. 90 n. 121, p. 1.00 n. 1 7 1 ; 488, p. 1 9 4 n. 2 1 5 ; 499, p. 3 9 ; 527, p. I l l , p. 1 1 3 and 11. 246, n. 249, p. 1 2 0 ; 550, p. 109; 555, p. 109, p. I l l , p. 1 1 2 ; 55«» p. 1 1 4 n. 252; 565, p. 100 IL 171 ; 579, p. 108 n. 219; 580. p. 100 n. 170, p. 1 0 8 11. 215, p. 1 1 4 IL 2 5 2 ; 581, p. 1 0 0 n. 171, p. 1 0 8 n. 2 1 6 ; 611, p. 112 n. 241 ; 633, p. 2 1 1 11, 4 0 ; 634, p. 2 1 1 n. 4 0 ; 646, p. 1 0 9 n. 2 2 2 ; 668, p. 1 4 2 ; 677, p. 39; 786, p. 99 n. 1 6 9 ; 806, p. 1 6 7 n. 5 7 ; 827-33, p. 1 6 9 n. 6 9 ; 850, p. 157 11. 3; 859, p. 1.56 n. 2 ; 913, p. 99 n. 1 6 8 ; 914, p. 9 9 11. 1 6 8 ; 917, p. 99 11. 1 6 8 ; 918, p. 9 9 11. 1 6 8 ; 920, p. 99 n. 1 6 8 ; 988, p. 3 9 ; 1067, p. 100 IL 1 7 0 ; 1077, p. 126; 1176, p. 126. III VI,2, p. 123 n. 2 9 5 ; VI,3, p. 123 n. 2 9 5 ; VI,ίο, p. 99 11. 169.

STOICORUM VETBRUM F R A G M E N T A

THALTCS

I I A 1 2 , p. 6 1 ; I I A 1 3 , p. 61 n. 39. THEAGENES REG IΝ US

8,2, p. 41 ed. H i l l e r p.85,8-106,14, p. 163 n. 3 4 ; p.96,4 ff., p. 1 9 2 n. 2 0 3 ; p.99,24-104,19, p. 1 6 3 11. 34, p. 172 n. 9 8 ; p.102,19 ff., p. 5 1 ; p.103,16 ff., p. 1 7 9 ; p.104,1 ff., p. 163,

THEON S M Y R N A E U S

266

p. 170-1; p.i04,9ff., Ρ· 173 n. 98; p.104,15-16, p. 197; 5.104,18, p. 184 n. 157; p.198,9, p, 58 n. 22; p.199,1, p. 58 11. 22, THEOPHRASTUS de Caelo (ap. Procl., in Tim.), p. 84 n. 89. de Tgne eel Wimmer, CI 1.1. p. 82 n. 78; 1,4, p.351,19 ff., p. 83; 1,5, 9.351, 28 ff., p. 83; 1,5, p.351,34 ff., p. 83 n. 82; 1,6, p.351,42 ff., p. 83 11. 80; 2,16, p.353,25-7, p. 86 11. 99, p. 96 n. 159; 4,33, p.356/18, p. 83 n. 83; 6,44» p.358,21 ff., p. 83 n. 82; 7,52, p.359,41 ff., p. 82 n. 79. Metaphysial eel. Ross- Pobes, 5bn-i2, p. 83 11. 80; 6a5-i4, p. 84 11. 89; ff., p. 83 11. 81 ; 9a 14-5, p. 85 n. 91 ; i o a 9 - 2 i , p. 84 11. 89; 101115-16, p. 84 11. 89; i o b 2 i ff., p. 85 11. 91; n a i 6 - 7 , p. 85 11. 91; n a 2 7 , p. 98 n. 163. Meteorologiea ed. Wagner-Steinmetz, 35^27, p. 45 11. 41. de Sensu (ed. Diels, Doxogvaphi Craeei), 26, p. 38. de Vent-is ed. Wimm er, 3,17, p. 380,1 ο ff., p. 84 11. 86. fr.30 Wimmer, p. 82 η. 79, p. 84 11. 87, ρ. 128. PS.TII EOPHRASTUS

de Signis Tempestatuni ed. Wimmer, 3,46, p.396,24-5, p. 143 11. 32. TIM A Ε US fr.147 Jaeoby, p. 188 n. 185. TIMOSTHENES fr.6 Wagner, p. 148 and n. 8, p. 149. TZ LCTZES

Chiliades, 10,534 f£, 12,219 ff., 12,283 ff., p, 30 11. 148. VARRO Attieus de Numeris, p. 158 n. 9, p. 185, p. 187 and n. 175, p. 188, p. 18911. 191» p. 190, p. 191. Hebdomades ( = Imagines), p. 158 11. 9, p. 163, p. 165, p. 167 n. 59, p. 183 n. 148, p. 185, p. 187 n. 179, p. 189, p. 190, p. 1.91 and n. 198. de Lingua Latina V,i§9 ff., p. 188 11. 187; IX,81 ff., p. 188 n. 187. de Musica, p. 187 11. 179a, p. 190, p. 191 n. 198. Orα Maritima, p. 148. de Principiis Numerorum, p. 189 11. 188. Res Rusticae, II,1,3, p. 187. Tubero de Origine Humana, p. 158 n. 9, p. 179 n. 134, p. 185, p. 186, p. 187 and n. 178, n. 179, p. 188, p. 190 and n. 197, n. 198, p. 191 n. 198, p. 192 n. 198. VEGETIUS

Epiioma

Rei Mi tit avis, IV,38, p. 148 η. 11.

VRTRUVIUS

de Arehiteetura,

1,6,4-5, P· 149; 6,4, p. 149; 6,6-8, p. 149; §,12-13, p. 149.

XENOPHON

Anabasis, IV,5,3, p. 151 n. 32. XICNOCRATES fr.5 Heinze, p. 43 n. 34, p. 121 n. 285; fr.15 H., p. 43 n. 34; fr.17 H. t p. 123 n. 296; f r . i 8 IT., p. 43 n. 34, p. 121 n. 285; fr.6o H., p. 160 n. 20. ZENO, $. SVF

267

II ps.GALEN us, Comm. ps. HIPPOCRATES de Hebdomadilms Ch.i-20, CI1.1-17, CI1.1-11,

Ch.1-5, Ch.1-2, Ch.i,

Ch.2,

Ch.3,

in ps.Ilipp.

ΓΙebd.,

s. above, p. 261.

ed. Roscher

p. 4, p. 5» p. 8, p. 9. p. 4 11. 9. p. 1, p. 2, p. 9, p. 16 11. 64, p. 17 a n d 11. 70, p. 18, p. 19, p. 26, p. 31, p. 05, p. 66, p. 131, p. 135, p. 101, p. 205, p. 200, p. 227, p. 228, p. 229. p. 3, p. 5 11. 11. p. 3, p. 18, p. 136 n. 32. p. 3. p. 28, p. 37. p. 54, p, 57, p, 80, p. 11 3, p. 115, p. 118, p. 119 and 11. 275, p. 130, p. 132 11. 16, p. 133, p. 173 n. 98, p. 206, p. 226 11. 126, p. 227 n. 138; x,§i, p. 113 n. 248, p. 132, p. 14J n. 15, p. 227; 1,6-8, p. 52 n. 51; 1,8 ff., p. 162 11. 33, p. 203 11. 263, p. 227 11. 137; 1,13 ff., p. 203 η. 263; 1,13-5, Ρ· 172 η. 98; ι,ι8-2ΐ, ρ. 52 η. 51 ; 1,23 ff., ρ. 141 η. 15; 1,25 ff., ρ. 5 1 ; 1,26, ρ. 41.; 1,28, ρ. 52 η. 51 ; 1,31, ρ. 41 ; 1,41-68, ρ. 132; 1,41, ρ. 48; 1,42-8, ρ. 136; ι,43 ff·, Ρ· 42; 1,44-8, ρ. 132 η. 16; 1,44-5» Ρ· H 5 η. 256; ι,44 ff·, Ρ· 115 ιι. 256; 1,45 ff·. Ρ· 120-1; 1,51, ρ. 38; 1,51-2, ρ. 58; 1,53, ρ. 18 η. 76; 1,52-3, ρ. 137; ι,53, Ρ· 46; ι,54 ff» Ρ· 80; 1,57, ρ. 45; ι,58 ff., ρ. 80; 1,63 ff, Ρ· 51, ρ. 177-8, ρ. 203; 1,65, Ρ· 50; ι,66, ρ. 47; 1,67, Ρ- 40; 1,70-77, Ρ· 132; 1,70 ff., ρ. 90 η. 123, ρ. 1 1 7 ; ι , 7 ΐ ff., p. 42, p. 110; 1,78-89, ρ. 132; 1,78 ff., p. 57, p. 79, p. 116, p. 207; 1,80-1, p. 79 11. 72; 1,80, p. 103 11. 192; 1,85 ff., p. 205, p. 207; 1,86-7, P· 81; 1,87, p. 36, p. 37; 1,88, p. 38; I,90-5, p. 1 3 2 ; 1,90 ff., p. 61, p. 1 1 6 ; 1,91 ff., p. 81, p. 107 n. 211, p. 207; 1,94-5, p. 127, p. 207; 1,94, p. 61, p. 1 0 6 n. 203; 1,95, p. 77 n. 62. p. 54, p. 58, p. 92, p. 118, p. 1 1 9 and n. 275, p. 120, p. 133, p. 206, p. 227 n. 1 3 8 ; 2,1 ff., p. 66, p. 76, p. 112, p. 1 3 7 ; 2,3 ff., p. 42, p. 9 3 ; 2,6, p. 6 ; 2,9 ff., p. 4 7 ; 2,10, p. 50; 2,14-17, p. 7 7 ; 2,14 ff., p. 50, p. 1 2 1 and n. 283; 2,15 ff., p. 4 2 ; 2,15-6, p. 57, p. 121 ; 2,18-9, p. 77; 2,19, p. 4 9 ; 2,24 ff., p. 42, p. 54, p. 62, p. 1 2 0 ; 2,25 ff., p. 81, p. 108 n. 2 1 2 ; 2,27 ff., p. 1 1 6 n. 260; 2,29 ff., p. 60; 2,30 ff., p. 204; 2,37 ff., p. 64; 2,39 ff., p. 77, p. 120, p. 1 2 1 and II. 283; 2,40 ff., p. 204; 2,41 ff., p. 121 ; 2,42 ff., p. 4 2 ; 2,44 ff., p. 59, p. 1 2 0 ; 2,47 ff., p. 58, p. 66, p. 77; 2,48-9, p. 78; 2,48, p. 208 11. 26; 2,49, p. 77 11. 6 2 ; 2,50 ff., p. 77 11. 62, p. 89 n. 121; 2,50-1, p. 8 1 ; 2,51 ff., p. 93, p. 207; 2,53, p. 77 11. 6 2 ; 2,55 ff., p. 1 2 7 ; 2,64 ff., p. 21, p. 30, p. 54, p. 57 n. 17, p. 138, p. 139-40, p. 1 4 5 ; 2,64-92, p. 144; 2,64-5, P· 1 3 8 ; 2,66-71, p. 1 3 9 ; 2,66, p. 77 n. 6 2 ; 2,68-70, p. 139 n. 8; 2,69 ff., p. 59 11. 25; 2,70-3, p. 1 4 0 ; 2,72 ff., p. 37; 2,72, p. 140 11. 1 1 ; 2,73, p. 1 5 3 ; 2,74, p. 37, p. 1 4 4 ; 2,82-92, p. 140-1. p. 21, p. 24, p. 134, p. 146, p. 155, p. 227 n. 1 3 8 ; 3,10 ff., p. 90

268

Ch.4, Ch.5,

Ch.6-11, Ch.6-7, Ch.6,

Cli.6,§i.

C1I.6,§2,

CI1.7, Cli.8-9, Ch.8, Ch.9, Ch.ίο, Cti.il,

eii.12-53, Ch.12, Ch. 13-53, Ch. 13-52, Ch. 13-23, Ch. 13-20, CI1.13,

Ch. 14-20, Ch.14,

Ii. 123; 3,14 ff., p. 151; 3,16, p. 147 11. 5 ; 3,17, p. 153; 3,18-9, p. 152. p. 9, p. 134, p. 227 11. 138; 4,4, p. 50; 4,5, p. 52; 4,11, p. 50; 4,15, p. 38; 4,16, p. 4 0 ; 4,18, p. 49. p. 3 a n d n. 5, p. 133, p. 161, p. 162 a n d 11. 33, p. 163 a n d n. 36, p. 171, p, 173 11. 98, p. 174, p. 175 n. 110, p. 181 a n d n. 140, p. 182 11. 146, p. 187, p. 190, p. 197 a n d 11. 233, p. 202, p. 203 a n d 11. 263 ; 5,14, p. 162 11. 33; 5,15-6, p. 40, p. 171 .11. 89; 5,16 ff., p. 171 ; 5,16, p. 174 11. 104; 5,17-8, p. 172 11. 95; 5,19-26, p. 173 n. 9 8 ; 5,20-1, p. 174 η. 104; 5,21, p. 4 6 ; 5,24-5, p. 171 11. 91. p. 227. p. 134. p. 21, p. 22 and n. 1 00, p. 27, p. 28, p. 54, p. 101, p. 104, p. 105 n. 198, p. 113, p. 133, p. 199 11. 243, p. 205, p. 206 and 11. 7, p. 207, p. 214 ii. 60. p. 22, p. 204 11. 264; 6,§1,1 ff., p. 106 and 11. 206; 6,§1,11 ff., p. 106; 6,§1,14, p. 207 ; 6,§1,18, p. 207 ; 6,§1,19 ff., p. 104; 6,§1,1920, p. 79, p. 81; 6,§1,20 ff., p. 61 11. 38; 6,§1,20-9, p. 206; 6,§1,22 ff., p. 79, p. 103, p. 106, p. 116 11. 260; 6,§1,24-5, P· 224; 6 , § i , 26 ff., p. 106; 6,§1,31 ff., p. 20 11. 88. P. 21; 6,§2,1 ff., p. 79; 6,§2,3 ff., p. 79, p. 80 11. 73, p. 81, p. 206; 6,§2,5 ff., p. 103 and 11. 191; 6,§2,9 ff., p. 80, p. 124; 6,§2,11-2, p. 80; 6,§2,12 ff., p. 92; 6,§2,13 ff., p. 106 11. 206, p. 124, p. 137; 6,§2,21 ff., p. 136, p. 207; 6,§2,21-2. p. 6. p. 133, p. 199-200 and 11. 243, p. 201 n. 254. p. 134 and 11. 25. p. 133, p. 134 11. 24, p. 199 and 11. 243, p. 200-1 a n d 11. 254; 8,1 ff., p. 10; 8,3 ff., p. 223 n. 112; 8,12 ff., p. 10. p. 133, p. 134 and 11. 25, p. 201 11. 254. p. 28 11. 134, p. 134, p. 208, p. 209, p. 210 a n d 11. 30, p. 211; 10,1 ff., p. 209 n. 27; 10,7-8, p. 10, p. 209; 10,12 ff., p. 10. p. 19, p. 20 a n d 11. 88, p. 133 n. 22, p. 199 and 11. 243, n. 244, p. 200 a n d η. 246, p. 227 n. 138; 11,3 ff., p. 20 11. 88; 11,8-9, P- 20 11. 88; 11,9, p. 202; 11,9-11, p. 199 11. 244. p. 1, p. 2, p. 205, p. 206. p. 10, p. 14, p. 229; 12,23 ff- Ρ· 15, p. 135, p. 136, p. 225. p. 16. p. 229. p. 13, p. 225. p. 9. p. 16, p. 17 n. 70, p. 28 11. 134, p. 208 and p. 208-9 n. 26, p. 209, p. 210, p. 211, p. 215, p. 226 11. 126; 13,1 ff., p. 223 11. 108; 13,13 ff., p. 210 11. 29; 13,29 ff., p. 213 11. 46; 13,33 p. 211, p. 223 n. 107; 13,36 ff., p. 222 n. 98; 13,36, p. 214 11. 56. p. 15, p. 16 and 11. 63, p. 21.4 n. 56. p. 3 11. 6, p. 4 n. 10, p. 5 11. 10, p. 16 a n d n. 63, p. 37, p. 209 n. 26, p. 214 and 11. 55, 11. 57, 11. 58, p. 216 a n d 11. 69, 11. 71; 14,1 ff., p. 224 11. 117, p. 225; 14,11 ff., p. 212; 14,22 ff., p. 210; 14,28 ff.,

269

C O Of OO N co r-' ν C Ο. «Ν τCO Η d CO Η ^ fe rf» Η _4 τΗ -Γ Ol ΙΛ ^ © ι> §* ΰ ά rj\D Ö ^1 JaVh ΟΙ ον 1 m OJ Ol rσ^ H νοΝ ν© OJ «Ν Γν| ^ m υη Tf s O Ol Ol. ro in ft « ΟΙ ft in o r ft . . PO λ η f Γ «3 . m ei Η Η ΙΛ χ iö ^ rH 00 Ol μ m ^ cm ΊτΗ * * 7 ( CO » r H 3 ft Μ Ρ Ο m, ft ft CO i n « Ν S 2 .n d d ο OI CO l> βο α « Ο Ν CO Ol ^ ο OI r-4 m oi Η , in m jn ΙΟ t> ι> ο^ -+•—i d d OD OJ ο ί ft Ol ft Ö S Si CO ΙΟ 00 ~ O I O I τι* Η Oi ^ \, ,. Π r^· ft ft Ol α r? ,„d Ο ^ Ol N · rt d co 3 „ ^; ^ Ο Ι - Η 00 d Ν Η (Τ) · £ rΟ Ι Ο! C M Ο Ι τΗ W Ν VO "Φ τΗ Μ Η ft Ο! Ν W Μ W Η ft Μ ο ft ft ft ft ^ ft 0, Α Ä Η ft CI ft m ft ft ft ft Μ m JS „ „ * ι H" cf CO m Ό t in« d 1Λ i>00 Ο» Ο Ο TJ. in m m in CO CO 00 PO CO ^ Q rd xi Λ Λ A J A xi xi -d U Ο Ö U ο w· Q Ό Ό Ο Ό Ό Ο U

ft ft

Ο Μ Ö

ο Λ U

ο m Λ U

Η d CO m m m & rd pd Ο Ο υ

C1O Tf. c< ei Ö U

i n « c> t^ oo CI CI CI Μ CI ,0 rd rd rd U U Ο U U

Ν ο" CO pd a υ

Μ" PO pd υ

j. CO yCS CO CO xi rd υ u

CO CO οι Ol τΗ - sa" Τ ^ Ρ, oj o^ οι OI σ^ σ-» CO ο ft Ν ft Ν ft. Ν Ol ^ ft ^ CO _ Λ r\ ft w ο Γ ^ Tf Jm ο 2 ^ ^ 2 53 kD Sa in Ο ο^ rH in Ji-J r-4 ΟΙ Ol ο pn in & Ξ Ο in Ol . ο S ft TF CVJ V» Μ rh -aö ft P ö CI Ol ft ft & Ö ft ft m ο in ft O , OI Μ Μ . . ο C Ö 00 Μ ft Μ ft ft ^ Ν rf- co Ο uj -r oo Ν d . -ι σ> CO Sm ι> ι ΟΙ « .Λ 3. c^ Ν 0s CI Cb Ol C O («η 00 ο ,« χ S + J oo Ό ^ ο Ol d Τ 1 l> ft C O Η Γ- Η of ο ft d ιη OJ t> Ol in oi . ^ ft ft q co ^ s ft s © Η vo O I 0 ^Μ οÜ ftΓ . cä CI ft ts ft ft οι in 00 t + 4 Γr-τ H ΟΙ f Η Ο 01 OJ V ^ Ä Ol Η ft sd « , r H ^ «_« C T · in rH ο Jh I> Ο Ι ^ ft cf ft' Η οι m rH Ol Cl ftOI Η 1 l> -Γ Ol CO Ν Ol Ι r-4 ft in * . ΛΟ d Ol in ft fd; -co ©* - ft Ol |> ι> ft ft CI Ο 00 ' ν CO Οί ft ο Η Ol CO CO «a ~ -φ ft in rCl Ν Ν Γ rH οι d en w ' rH eo Η Λ Η a3 ^ Ν .. Η OI in r-4 Ol ä 2 Ol H* in w Ο Ν Ols CO S M oj in Ol Ol o^ Ο 0 V m » «(Η ft ft ft Η i> ft rH ft Ν Μ .~ K D οι C„O o^ ft Ol Ο PI Ol οι ο ft ο οCO rH οο· ΟI ο H ^oi CO ^ Ο C . CO ΟΪ Ο o\ m o" ft . . - Η l> ft Ol ft in m d J M ft w IM ft Ο _ ft. tr^: ^ οι CO -Φ d in ΗΓ d PI Ol Μ Ol d d d ο" ο ο d ^ ^ . ft d Μ in Η ft Ol th α rH rH Ol oo" vO d H rH a^ ft rH O^ Μ ^ · ι> Ö cn d Cl d -η O I Η m -d oo" τΗ cL ft ή CT> ft U CO ia in ο ο ft ö Λ Ö ft Μ Οί *θ ft 00 m ^ w ^ ^ S d d ·1 »n ιη d Ν Ol d u^U j«Γr-% * - ft « 5J, <J " «Ο in Μ rH CO rH ο* - ^^ s « oo Ö OI Ο ^ Ο in cn < M z2 ^ Ο ft ° s ^ Φ «β . . O I ft s ^ « s ^ 4ΟΪ Ρη ft % ο Ol ^ . . Ό rf i « ,Η m ft S^ ο ο CJ |> ft ^« in in ft. VfT d Oi Ol Η" οι . CO . ft 0 ö ft c CM Pft ^ ^ C O ^ Η 4· I ί' Ρ; d . . C O I Ol ft <M Ä ft ^ t-T Ο»' ^ , Η d α Ο « V OΙ 00 s TH |> vd ΜΗ η Ö . ^ .- ^ τ— — rI in' ^ ^ ι> t^ d ^ ^ τΗ |> CO I • ΟΙ ^ CO td Ο I ^ in . Ο Ι ο •V: ΐ CO ö Ol CO *>•00 ^ Ν ι τ Η C O C O ro ιη τ Η < μ ιη , *n C O Η ^ co , r H r H C O O I CO τΗ^ νο oo ΟΙ ^ CM ΟΙ 1 04 ft Ol - . ft. ft. «ο ft. ft. ft ft ft ft ft Η ft OJ ft ft ft Μ ft ft ft. Ηιη ' in ft 00 . ft d ft CI ft ft ft d Cl ftΙ Μ*"ft COft Ηin ft Ο νΟ m in ΛΛ Ό Ο