The Pseudo-Hippocratic Tract Peri hebdomadōn Ch. 1-11 and Greek Philosophy

't"lj::; c~p7J~ ( !) -f) vr)ucro<; ti IJ.il.i,ov ~ oimv i'l'l !J.lj otxd7J wx-r& n -rrm-re<•>V 'fl. 35 Diocles fr. 35 Wcllmann (sec also Littre J,3R9-90). Cf. further Dioclcs fr. 34 vVellmann, a 'quotation' in Stephanus of Athens' Comm. in llipp. A ph. II, Dietz II, p. 326 (verbatim according to \Vcllmann, hut this was refuted by W. Jacger, Diokles von I<arystos, Berlin 2 1963, 27 n.l ). Diodes argues here that K<XucrrJ<; is worse in summer than in winter, because its typical symptoms are much worse when the weather is warm. 36 Wellmann, o.c. 56. For the topic of allopathy cf. C. \V. Mi.iller, Gleiches zt~ Gleichem, Wiesbaden 1965, 142 ff.

10

His reference to Diodes agrees with what is known about this physician from another source. 37 The reference to llebd. is also correct, d. /lebd. Ch. 46,14 ff.R. r;•j3iv yocp &r;wt;V ... eocv [.L'~ CXUT~ "{'<- -~ 'iflp't) T4i voucr-~[.LOC'r~ ~'J[L;Locz~cr·n, as :md esp. Ch. 50, l3 ff. R. the situation grows very d.angemus, .;lv rt.•'rr·f; ·~ l{>pY) ~!J[LfLOCX.fi -r?j vm)rr<:J, oiov x w~ cr cp Oipo~, {i~p(o)7tDti.}' zztru~,v· •)r;zpv~x~ yocp "(; rp•>m.r.rSv. Moreover, the general theory mxpo;.Jv~::crOcu tt€v >:mo -r<.iv /;p.o(cdv ,.z vcJIT'f;(l.rt:r:iX, :A•)zcrOocr. ;>j~ •jrto -r:i.~w svctV't'Lntal to tht• pathological and therapeutical doctrines of the second part of Hcbd. 39 Consequently, Galen was familiar ·with the whole of our present rt~::p\ k[33o[..t&o<.·:.v and knew it by just this name. He refers both to the first a·nd to thr. second part of Hebd. by the same title:10 The reference in the Commentary on theAph. is to part II, andgivrsagoodcharacterization of its doctrin{:s couched in general terms. The first reference in the Commentary on the Epid. applies to Hebd. part I, and shows that Galen knmvs the idiosyncratical division of the year as given in Ch. 4. The second reference in this Commentary appears to characterize the elementary psychological ideas of the whole treatise, though it might be argued that i1. applies to those of part I only. Apart from the first hook of the minor books on diseases and the truncated separate edition used by ps. Galen and twice referred to in G<.tlen's Glossary, also the existence of an edition containing the whole of Hebd. under its present name must be assumed. It may be asked which of these editions is closest to the original work: we have to decide heb:een a m:pt €~~op.&:ouw in one book and the first book 7tzpl. vo•kt·lV -:-o p.tzpf)-rz?ov. If it can be shown that Hebd. and Fr. 35 \\ieJlmanu, cf. above, p. l 0 n. 35. Adduced by Littre, 1,3S9-90; 'Vellmann's par;:!.lkl (o.c. 132) is les~ fortunate. 39 These doctrines are stmlied at some length below, Ch. VII, p. 213 ff. 40 Littre !,392-3 mention~ two more references to lfebd. in Gal en, v;here, however, tl1e treatise h not designated by its title: (1) - reprodnced VIII,o44 n.l -· 'lt. (.l.:>:piXcrfL'>>3 Ch. 3 (Vli,67 5-6 K.) '.krr. zh&, X(l(t &rrf:z-r:tw<:t i;!.1.i~ "'' 6tp(LOV,

37 38

8;r~p f.:(p,Jae ~et fl'([)~.t~"':~- np<";'y·r:ov (J.EV 8-lj ~ ..f;t:JO[J..ZV ... 'TC~'V "('rr,o((,l'J 0'.)X ~U~t\J rirtrt'lXp&:'t'OlJ~

ill c~ -:-oii-:-o Hy(;:n~t v..":.i" The work referred to is said not to be genuine (Galen, as '\Ye have :;een, said that Hebd. was not genuine); the reference is correct ·when we :vlduce HelJd. 20.1 ff. R. '~ lkPiJ),v o:15;:;l -re: -.:&.crC:JtLrt.'t'o: z:>:l 96£vzt·J 7t'Ol£t (and cf. Ch. 19 general1y). (2) r.. -rp0f1.01) x:>:t ;-.o:).p.r,\; Ch. 6 (VIT.61R K, printed lly Littrc VIU.647, n.l and by Roscher, p. 40, nA5): "Hippocratc-; says man is healtl1y as long as the hot and the cold are mixed in a just pr!)portion", which corresponds. Littn5 says, to Cl1. 24.2 ff. R.: caliclmn et frigidmn quamtliu qniclnn equaTes su.nt incolr.tmis e<s>t homo. i3~BI.(<•>V,

1.1

M orb. Ill are indeed the two volumes of what was intended by its author as a single treatise, the separate edition of Hebd. is merely secondary. If, on the other hand, the connection between llebd. and Morb. Ill is only a superficial one and due to the editorial activities of people who were guided by certain points of resemblance between two originally unrelated works, the conclusion that llebd. existed as a separate treatise prior to its being conjoined to llforb. Ill would seem to follow inevitably. Littre argued 41 that llebd. and Morb. Ill are by one author, because these two works correspond in certain details, and that this treatise in two books is of Cnidian origins, or rather 'une composition intermediaire entre Cos et Cnidc'. 42 The relations between JV!orb. Ill, Hebd. and Cnidian medicine were studied in some detail by]. Ilberg. 43 Ilberg argued that in M orb. Ill individual diseases are discussed after the pattern of a Cnidian tripartite scheme, which is also applied in other works in the Corpus !!ippocraticum. 44 Such a tripartite scheme 41 VIII, p. XXXVII ff. His arguments include: (l) the remarkably prognostic character of both Hebd. and M orb. Ill; (2) the importance of the tongue in semiology, common to both treatises, and (3) the long list of refreshing potions to be given to patients suffering of causus (Morb. Ill, Ch. 17), which agrees with what is said about this disease in Hebd. (however, it is not certain whether Ch. 17 really belongs to J1orb. III). -The 'major' treatise on diseases (M orb. II + Int.) which, according to Littre. is likewise of Cnidian descent, has a much less prognostic character; though 1\1orb. II and l'.forb. Il I are, in some ways, related (Littre VII,116; Vlll, p. XL), this important difference (i.e. in respect to prognosis) should not be minimized. The same point is made (for Hebd. only) by L. Bourgey, Observation et experience ches les medecins de la Collection Hippocratique, Paris 1953, 70, who ackmnvledges the affinity between Morb. TII and Morb. Il and Int. L. Edelstein, II. LIXL yvw{J-IXL, lliz. the description of the symptoms of m:),(7J, has been preserved by Galen, Comm. I in llipp. Epid. VI, CMG V,10,2,2, p. 55,10 ff. This same description occurs almost verbatim in Morb. II, Ch. 68, and is likewise quoted by Galen, o.c. p. 55,7; moreover, not only (a) the symptoms, but also (b) the therapy and (c) a prognosis of this disease are given (Galen, I.e., explains the term "&ALol "up&To(, and so needed only the description of "&Ad) 11oucroc;). It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that the tripartite scheme of M orb. II, Ch. 68 is Cnidian; this scheme

12

is characteristic of H ebd. as well: etiology (Ch. 13-23), therapy (Ch. 24-39) and semiology (Ch. 40-52). Furthermore, the programme announced at Hebd. Ch. 53,1 ff. R. superest mihi singulas acutas egritudines dicere, (a) quaeque sit et (b) quatenus oportet curari et (c) qualia ex unaquaquc veniant (note the tripartite division) is executed in Morb. Ill.4 " Finally, a few sentences in Hebd. and M orb. Ill are almost literally iden tic al. 46 However, the inlernal evidence in favour of an original connection between Hebd. and M orb. Ill is insufficient for the differences between these two works are much greater. The parallel between the microcosm and the macrocosm which is all-import<mt both to the general and to the special medical theory of Hebd. is wholly absent from Morb. Ill. The explicit theory of the hot and the cold and the wet and the dry, upon which the etiology, the therapy and the semiology of Hebd. are based is absent from Morb. Ill as well. The psycho-physiological idea of Hebd. that fevers and other acute diseases are caused by the condition of the hot of the soul47 is also missing. If Morb. Ill really were the continuation of Hebd. one would expect to find at least cl few references to the general etiological theories contained in that work. It is true that in 1vforb. Ill occasionally (and certainly if we add its last chapter, on l}ux't'~pLiX prescribed bd l@JO'OL<;;) it is advised to prescribe refreshing or refrigerating aids and appliances. 48 It is also true that El:::pf.LML'YJ is mentioned as the cause of an ailment of the lungs, 49 (but the author of Hebd. would have spoken of -rb O:::pwSv), and that the number seven

is applied in M orb. 11 from Ch. 12 onwards (cf. also Bourgey, o.c. 50 ff.): 1Vlorb. ll is Cnidian. }liforb. Ill also adopts this scheme in its analysis of diseases. Int. and Morb. Il,l-11 omit the therapy, discussing instead the etiology of diseases; etiology is one of the subjects of fl ebd. as well. Cf. also I. M. Lonie, Cnidian Treatises of the C01·pus llippocraticum, Cl. Qu. ::\.S. XV (1965) 1 ff., esp. p. 2; for his proposed reconstruction of a common Cniclian etiology cf. below, Ch. VII, p. 220-1 n. %. 4~ llberg 18~-1-. 34-5. 4 6 ibd. 39, n.l. Particularly interesting is the comparison of the kettle of boiling water to which cold water is added, 11Iorb. Ill, Ch. 17, VIII, 156,5 ff. L.,..., Hebd. Ch. 34a,15 ff. R. (butMorb. III,l7 alsosays'r) d. 122), Oc:pp.:xtvtLV is prescribed.

13

plays a certain role in determining the course and duration of diseases.'•0 But such resemblances are far outweighed by the differences indicated above. It is also curious that Jirforb. Ill, Ch. 6 discusses the r:Ot)JGW~'rjt; (se. 7tupa:-:-6c;), which has been amply treated in llcbd., and does so after having announced in its first sentence that, all fevers having been spoken of, attention will now be tnmecl towards the other diseases !51 The similarities in medical doctrjne between Hebd. and .Morb. III which have been indicated above explain one thing, viz. why ;md how these two treatises came to be connected. But the irreconcilable differ·· ences prove that they cannot be by the same author. The arguments of Littre and Ilberg merely explain the motives of an ancient editor. Ilberg's principal argument, based upon the structure of Hebd. which is considered to represent a Cnidian structural pattern, is vitiated by the fact that in Cnidian medicine this pattern is applied to individual diseases which are discussed one after the other, while in Hebd. it is applied to a whole group of diseases, and not to individual chapters, but to a whole treatise. Furthennore, as is apparent from both the announcement in Ch. 12 (quoted below) and from the concluding words of the first two individual sections5 2 the author of Hebd. was fully conscious of the fact that he availed himself of a
° Cf. e.g. Ch. 1, VII,ll8,11··12 L.; Ch. 2. ihd. 1.20,1. However, the seventh day as a critical day is by no means found m "Hehd. only (cf. bdow, Cl1. Vl, p. 172 n. 98). 51 This shows that. the first sentence (which is also the final sentence of Iiebd). has been added a.s a tra.nsitional device in an edition in which so1ne other work was placed before A1"orb. ILL Wh•)n Jl.'fo-rb. III was placed in its actual position (after lYforb. Il), the sentence was not struck: out. as it eould still serve this same purpose (though aJ~;o Jlfm·b. II, Cli. 68, is on .cG.uaw&1Jt,; nupe1'6.;). 62 Ch. 23,117 ff.R. Umle ergo et quatentts febt·es nascuntur diximu.s; Ch. 39,5 ff. R. curare .-uttem s·ic oportet omnes jebres. Cf. Ilberg, 1894, 26, 28. >a Cf. below, Ch. VU, p. 2J3 ff. '-« So Bourgey, o.c. 69. Cf. also the scepticism of L. Ed.cl3tein, o.c. 163, n.l, which is based upon a discussion of Cnidian medicine in general (ibd. 154 ff.) His conclusions differ from tho::;e of llberg (cf. also Bourgey, o.e. 52, n. 1). For 5

14

superficial. If Hebd. 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 27 55 ) were treated, this must be considered to be lost. I wish to add a few words on the copy used by the anonymous commentator translated into Arabic, 56 which stops midway Cl1. 17, though including Ch. 18-20, 67 and which, as we shall see, because of this affords grounds for ~t reconstruction of the original order of Hebd. Ch. 14-20. The therapeutical and semiological sections ()f Hebd. part II were not contained in this text. Now tlw announcement at Hebd. Ch. 12,23 ff. ipsas fd;res et aUas causas et q'ltidern acutas egritT-tdines omnes q·uomodo jiant docet (se. natttralis ratio) et factas quomodo oportet cohiberi aut non fieri et nascentes quomodo debeant curari recte puts the emphasis on therapy and etiology. 58 Though it is true that also in the etiological section therapeutical ideas occur from 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 /,~(LfLOC, but a sentence in the commentary to Nr. 60 Bergstr. exactly corresponds to it, 60 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. Lommer61 by following the lead of ps.. Galen 62 was able to shmv that Lonie's proposal concerning tracts which should be assumed to be Cnidian cf. below, Ch. VH, p. 220-1, n. 96. 5 " This throws suspicion on Ch. 53 as a whole. ss Cf. above, p. 4-5 and n. 9. 67 Cf. above, p. 4-5 n. 10. 58 For Ilberg':' incorrect interpretation of this pa;;sage cf. below. Ch. Vli, p. 225, n. 122. • 9 Ch. 19,44 ff., 60 ff.; 20,13 ff., 19 ff. R 80 p. 125,39 v d-e Bergstr.: 'sie' (i.e. 'die Kenntnis der Definition der Natur jedes Dinges') "unterrichtet uns n;).mlich iibcr die l\10oliratische·n :·ichrift rr. i i'> lh y. :1: ;~ w v, Phi!. 94 (1941), 79 ff. 6 ~ Cf. ahove, p. 4-5 n. 10.

15

the copy used by the Latin translator suffered from a 'Blattversetzung der Form a c b cl': 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. aliwius tunc ff.) + Ch. 18 R. + Ch. 19 R. + Ch. 20,1-33 R. (minus the concluding words toto mundo est) upon which page d, containing Ch. 20,33 R. toto mundo est + Ch. 21 ff. followed, but page b, containing Ch. 14,4 al-ias ff.R. + Ch. 15 R. + Ch. 16 R. + 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 \vhich 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 precedes64 and what follo·ws: Ch. l3 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 Cnidian character of the medical section, he suggested that Hebd. had been composed in the time of the

XIV Lo. = 14,1-4(R.) + 17,48 -the end(R.) + lS(R.); XV Lo. = 19(R.); XVI Lo. + 20,1-28 factae (R.); XVII Lo. =' 20,28 Initiurn - 33 et in (R.) + 14,4 alias ventrls - the end (R.); XVIII Lo. = 15(R.); XIX Lo. = 16(R.); XX Lo. = 17,1-48 quae in + 20,23 toto rmmdo est (R). See Lommer, o.c. 84-5. u Lommer, o.c. 85 includes Ch. 1-11 ('einleitende Kapitel iiber das Grundprinzip der Siebenzahl im Makrokosmos und Mik:rokosmos'), but tlus does not al>olish the problem of the connection between the two parts of the treatise. 66 Littre 1,407 held that Hebd. is 'beaucoup posterieur a Hippocrate'. 63

16

Peloponnesian war. 66 For, as he said, the· 'in vielen Punkten der Phantasie eines Aristophanes wiirdigen Offenbarungen'67 ~ apparently made no exception. However, when Roscher's pioneering studies on Hebd. part I had been published, he granted that llebd. is a 'der Einheitlichkeit ermangelnder Traktat' .68 The contribution to the interpretation of 1-lebd. of W. H. Roscher is of fumlamcntaJ importance. 69 He was the first scholar to have pointed out the unique character of Ch. l-11 and its apparent lack of connection with the treatise on fevers which foilows.:. The first part of Hebd. is concerned with the number seven in both· macrocosm and microcosm, while the medical work is based upon an entirely different theory, viz. that of the 'hot' and the 'cold'. 7 Consequently, Roscher

°

1894, 39. This was accepted by C. Fredrieh, Hippokratische Thtlersuchungen, Berlin 1899, 226 ff., who also pointed out a number of whrJ.t he tennecl 'extraordinary resemblances' bctW
17

assumed that the two parts of Hebd. thus distinguished are by different hands.n He accepted Ilberg's date for part II,' 2 and concentrated upon part I, thereby setting an example \Vhich was to be followed by the great majority of scholars. According to H.oscher, Ch. 1-11 are 'das bei weitem umfassendste Brucksti.'!ck der ti.ltestcn Ionischen Philosophie' 73 ; it could have been ·written by a younger contemporary of Anaximenes. In all essentials, he stuck i.o this theory till the end of his life, though he conceded later that the physician who 'WTote Hebd. had copied 'ziemlich w6rtlich' the much older work of a Ionian philosopher. 74 In favour of this evaluation of Ch. 1-ll he put forth several arguments concerning the contents of this part of the treatise. He argued that the cosnwlogical theory of Ch. 1-2, \Vith its unmoved earth at the centre of a system of heavenly spheres, is no other than that of Anaximander,75 with admixtures from the world-picture of Anaximenes (correct order of moon- sun- stars, earth supported by air) and other early philosophers. 76 He further argued that the author of Hebd. part I does not distinguish between planets and fixed stars77 which, also in this respect, agrees with the cosmology of the early Ionians. These observations were quite stimulating: although few scholars at present would be prepared to defend Kapiteln Jiegt iiberall der dualistische Gegensatz der \Varme und Kalte (lkpf1.6v-calidum und •Jnzp6v-frigidum) zugrunde'. However, to the hot and the cold (which are certainly 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. 12 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 Hebd. from Pythagoreanism (which Roscher had also upheld in his earlier studies), and does so in great detail. 76 Especially in his earlier publications, Roscher resolutely brushed aside analogies to later Presocratic thought and refused to consider their implications for the date of Hebd. \·Vhenever this question of priority arose, his solution was to make the follower of the earlier Ionians an original philosopher in his own right, who to 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 Democritus' 'pupil' Metrodorus of Chios (VS 70A9; see also below, p. 27 n. 129). Roscher comments, 1911, 61: 'er steht also in dieser Beziehung auf dem selben Standpunkt wie spater (sic) lVfetrodor'. 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. and the ideas of younger Presocratics which can be pointed out, 78 there appears to be universal agreement tllat the first part of the treatise indeed reflects Presocratic thought. 79 Roscher's other argument for a very early elate was concerned with the quaint anthropomorphical map of the world of Ch. 11, which features the Peloponne,;us, the Isthmus, lonia, the Hellespont, both the Thracian and the Cimmerian Bosp(n·us, 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. 80 Indeed, the extreme old age of tlus map gradually became Roscher's principal argument81 for attributing
Kranz, however, to some extent emulated H.oscher in this respect (see below, Ch. HI, 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 COITectecl him on a number of points. E.g. 1911, 71 and 1919, 72 ff. he assumed (1) that the earth in H 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. 80 1906, 51; 1911, 10 ff.; 1913, 118; 1919, 1 ff. He defends the age of the map against Diels' criticism in his article in Memnon, 23 ff. and 41. 81 1919, 85. He is followed by W. H. S. ]ones, Philosophy and Medicine in Ancient Greece, Supplem. Bull. Hist. l\led. 8, Baltimore 1946, 9 ff., and C. ] . De Vogel, Pythagoras and Ea1·ly Pytltagoreanism, Wijsgerige Teksten en Studies 12, Assen 1966, 171. 8 ~ \Ve 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 criteria! value. 83 Die uenneintliche Entdeckung ei1ter Incunabel der griechischm Philosophie, DLZ. 1911, 1fl61-6. He was followed by Th. Gomperz, GYiechische Denker I. Berlin-Leipzig 4 1922. 470-1. 84 Diels' arguments against this particular pillar of Roscher's structure are not convincing; see the reply by Roscher, refeiTed to above, n. 80 and C. J. De Vogel, Pythclgoras 171. 18

19

thing. He proposed a date between 450-350 B.C. 85 Although Roscher vigorously defended his position against Diels, his later concession that the first part of Hebd. was copied round-about 400 B.C. from an older source is quite close to Diels' position86 ; the only difference being that Dicls thought of a plurality of sources, while H.oscher believed in a single source. F. Boll 87 in all essentials sided with Diels: Hebd. is an eclectic compilation, but composed, he thought, about 450 B.C. For the map of Ch. 11 he adduces a rather late parallel in a Hermetic treatise, 88 thus .Diels e.g. argued that the sphcricity of the earth as assumed by H.oscher (cf. above, p. l'J n. 79) made a much later date than 1\.u:peve:.;,...., intelligence is not explicit. At Ch. 6, § 1,31 ff.R. it is the moon which is connected with sensus ... iudicium; note that in Ch. 6 the moon is fourth in the order of spheres ,....,parts of the body, while in Ch. 11 Tonia 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, verstandig, einsichtig und \veise'. However, ps. Galen also discourses on the character of the inhabitants of the Cimmerian Bosporus and of those of 'die Insel (sic), die J\IaLw·n~ genannt wird' (the latter are said to be.cowardly etc.). Consequently, his pronouncement on the inhabitants of Ionia is also an interpretative addition. 85

20

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 qnestion, to which ,,,,.e shall return bel0\v, 89 but Boll's hypothetical interpretation which is (in part) based upon a few attractive emendations90 is certainly very plausible. K. Mrass91 tried to reconstruct the very poorly transmitted text of Hebd. Ch. 3 ('on \·vinds'). On the basis of this n~construction he pointed out stylistic influences of Gorgias, and so arrived at a date around 400 B. C. These 'gorgianische Spidereicn ', hmvcvcr, arc for the most part due to the emendations. BoB's pupil Pfeiffcr92 tried to reinforce his teacher's conclusions by arguing that in Hebd. one finds influences of Pythagoras ;md his school. These arguments are not entirely· convincing. Pfeiffer accepts Boil's (in itself uncertain) thesis that H ebd. speaks of the 7 planets, and follows this np by ascribing this astronomical discovery to the early Pythagoreans. 93 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 invcntion, 95 etc. He is, of course, right in insisting upon the affinity between the arithmology in Hebd. and that of the Pythagoreans.96 Furthermore, Pfeiffer97 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 thi!' 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 lib, 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, :E-rotxera~: 2, Leipzig 1916 (repr. Amsterdam 1967), 30 ff. He was criticized by Roscher, 1919, R4 ff. 93 O.c. 35. For the introduction of the 7 planets in Greek astronomical science see below, p. 29-30 n. 148. 94 O.c. 33, n. 1. 95 O.c. 34. 96 O.c, 37 (see further below, Ch. Ill, p. 65). 97 O.c. 36-7. 08 Persische Weislteit in griechischem Gewande, St. Indol. Iran. 2 (1923 ), 60 ff. Cf. also R. Reitzenstein-H. Schaeder, Studien zum antihen Synkretismus, Stud. Bibl. Warburg 7, 1926 (repr. Darmstadt 1965), 9 ff., 121 ff. 89 90

21

proposed a date around 480 B. C. He compared the microcosmmacrocosm-theory of Hebd. Ch. 6, § 1 with that in Ch. 28 of a Persian work, the Greater Bundahisn. 09 Now the doctrine of the Greater Hundahisn is, according to Goetze, clear and explicit, while that of Hebd. is confused; the Persian version therefore has to be the earlier one. How-· ever, the premisses of this argument are incorrect. Goetze based his comparison upon § 1 of Ch. 6 only, 100 while the microcosm-macrocosmtheory becomes quite clear and consistent when we take the whole of Ch. 6 into account.l01 Goetze also wrongly assumed that the theory of Hebd. Ch. 6, § 1 has no parallels in early Greek thought, 102 which, if 99 The Greater (i.e. Iranian) Bzmdtthisll has been transmitted to u" in the. furm it had attained in the ninth Ceut. A. D. Parts r:•f this work (among which the cosmology of Ch. 2H) go back to a lost Avestan treatise, the l>amdet-.Nask, as we learn from t11e description of the eontents of this and other lost A vesi.;m tracts in book Vlll and IX of the Denhart (cf. G. vVidengren, lranisr:he Gtlisteswelt, Baden-Baden 1961, p. 12, p. 49}. wl1ich itself is from the tenth Cent., cf. ]. P. de Menasce 0. P., flne P.nrvclopMie Jl!fa::dhmnP, Le /Jenkart, Paris l 058, p. 4, p. 10. The microcosm-macrocosm-theory of the Greater Hundahisn therefore could be old. Unfortunately, the Avestan corpw; is composed of works which range in time from tlwGathas of Zarathustra (prohahly sixth Cent. B.C.) to additions worked in in the time o{ Shnl1puhr I (r. 2·H -272; d. below, p. 23, n. 104) and later, d. J. Ducllesne-Guillemin, Persisrhe Weisheit in GriechischemGewrmde?, Harva.rd Thcol. Hcv. 49 (1956, p . .115-122), 115. Goctze o.c. assumed that Persian influences in l:lebd. were not improbable, given the Cnidian eharacter of the medical section and the relation between the Cnidian school of medidne and Persia. For this connection he refers to Democecles (bnt is Democedes a 'Cnidian' in this sense? his father came from Cnido:>. Cf. M. Michler, Das Problem der westgriechischl'n Heilku.nde, Sudh Arch. 46, (1962, 137 ff.), esp. 141 and 147). ·--However, Greek inflnenees upon Persian literature are well-attested, cf. below, p. 23, n. lO'l and F. E. Peters, Arit>totle and the Arabs, N.Y.--London 196~, 41 If. 100 Goetze ignored Pfeiffer's objection and stud: to Huscher's ~nhdivision of Ch. 6. Boil too, A~ts der Offenbarung johannes, ~·o~xe:roc I, Leipzig/Berlin1914, 60 ff. only studied Ch. 6,§1. 101 As was proved by Kranz, Rosmos urul iHcnscle (:.cc below. p. 25, n. 113). p. 165 ff., who apparently did not realize that this argued against Goctze's assumption of the priority of the Persian model. Sec Duchesne-Guillemin, o.c. 117 ff. 102 He called it 'ein erratiscl1er Block in Hellas', o.c. 79. But C. Fredrich, Hifip. Unt. 227 and Th. Gomperz, Griechische Den/u;r 1,243, had already referred to the microcosm-·macrocosm-thcory of Vict., as d.id \V. Theilcr, Zu.r Geschichte der teleologischen Naturbetrachtung bis auf A·ristoteles, ZilriclJ/Leipzig 1925 (Berlin 21965), 55 ff., who says the coincidences are 'hardly accidental'. Cf. further below, Cl1. IV, p. 104 ff. and p. 10.5, 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 obvions. 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 \V. ] . W. Koster, Le mythe de Platon, de Zaratknstra. et. 'des Chaldeens, Leideu 1951, p. 29 ff. n.4, pointed out that "le:; identification;; se suivent dans un ordre tout different: une seule identification est ... la me me (viande ,..._,terre): ... pour trois autre:; I'acc<Jl'cl est globetl ... dan'; Jes atJtn:c' i
23

himself used the parallels with and the assumed priority to H ebd. in order to fix a date for the Avestan prototype of Bund. Ch. 28, and we cannot reverse this argument. 106 \Ve 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 1o7 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 H ypomnemata of Alexander Polyhistor ap. Diog. Laert. VIII,25 ff. \Vellmann dated this work in the fourth Cent. B.C.,Ios but was definitively refuted by A.-J. Festugiere, who proved that the llyj1. arc: a Hdlenistic composition.wn His second argument is based upon the vvind-rose of Ch. 3. He argues that the Hebdomadist lived in Cyrene, for Cyrene 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. (N. 7.pxTo~, N.-E. ~opE1J~) are explained by him as local Cyrenaean wind-names. In attributing a rose of 8 petals to Eratosthenes W ellmann followed Kaibel, whose theory about the history of the wind-rose had become completely irrelevant by 1933. 110 Nothing is known about &pxTo~ (which will be corrupt m) or F>opE()(~ 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 Koster, o.c. 29, n.3. Die pseudohippokratische Schriit J1e:pl e~Sf)v&ilw1, Quell. u. Stud. z. Gesch. d. Naturwiss. u. d.Medizin, 4 (1933), 6-10. 108 Eine PJ•thagoreische Urkunde des IV. ]ahrlmndcrts r. Clw., Hermes 54 (1919), 225 ff. \Vellmann (1933) also quotes other Pythagot·ean sources, but here either his references do not bear him out, or concern a theory which is not exclusively Pythagorean (the 7 planets), or (loosely) apply to the medical section of H ebd. Unfortunately, \Vellmann's arguments concerning the Pythagorean character of Hebd. were accepted by Duchesne-Guillemin, o.c. 117. 1 09 Les 'lW:emoires P:ythagoriques' cites par Alexandre Polyhistor, REG SS (1945), 1 ff. See also C. J. De Vogel, Greek Philosophy III, Leiden 1964-, p. 3+l ff. and W. Burkert, Heltenistische Pseudopythagarica, Phil. 105 (1961), esp. 23-26. More about this Pythagorean document below, Ch. IV p. 98 ff. (and esp. ibd., n. 163). no For oetails about this and about the wind-rose of Hebd. see below, Ch. VC, p. 146 ff. m Ibd., p. 151 ff. 112 The fragment &v&!J.wV 6t<m; r.·:xt 7tpory1)yop£cu (fr. 250 Rose. cf. also V. Hose, 10 6

107

24

\V. Kranz 113 argued in favour of a relatively early date for the first part of Hebd. He refutes some of H.oscher's argumcnts, 114 corrects others,u5 and adds new ones. The Ionian who wrote the whole work was, he thinks, a contemporary of the anthor of VZ:Ct.,U 6 with whom Ari;toteles psewlej)igraphicu:;, Leipzig 186:~. :!47 ff.) mentions two local Cyrenaean wind-names: t!Je anlJA~r()-r'l]l; in Cyrenc was cali<~d 'E:AA'Y)crrronlac; (p. 200. 5; we also hear that it [J.cr),,cr-rot. .. ~vr,z/,d' 't'WII l<.up·tjve>:[(,)\1 ALf!.Eva); e:upor, bore the name !Gp[~a<; (p. 200,13-4). · . ll3 Kosn1os -und J\.1ensch in der Vorslellu,ng friilwnCrlcchentums (fir"t publ. 1938, repr. in:) \V. 1-\:ra.nz, Studicn zur nntiken Utcmtur unrl ihrem. Fortwirken, hrsg. v. E. Vogl, liei~.kliwrg :t.9m, 1(,5 lf. 114 He (n.c. 179-80) accept:s Boil's parallel (cf. ahove, p. 19, n. 82). Hr. Roscher had argued that the earth .in flebd. is spherieal, hut Kranz proved (o.c. I 82-3) that we may legitimately apply the wonls of the Hcbdomatlist to AnaximandCl-'s cylindrical earth. CL also C. J. De Vogcl, Pythagoras, 172 and below, Ch. UI, p. 60 ff. \Ve have already noticed how Kranz corrected Boil's, HosclH:>r's and Goctze's estimation of the macrocosm .. microcosm-passage (above, p. 22, 11. 101). JLG lt is impo~sihle to enter into the complicated problem of the date of Vid. here. H. Joly, in his excellent recent monograph Rechcrc!tes sur le traite pseudoHippocratique Du Rf:gime, Li(~ge 1960, esp. p. 203-9 (cf. also the introduction to his edition of Vict. in lhe Bud6-series) dates Vict. around 400 B.C. Kranz, o.c. 176 has tlw last decade of the fifth Cent. B.C. in mind. W. Jaeger, Paideia 11, Berlin 2 1959, 43, 45 ff. argued that it should be dated ea. 350 B. C. H. Diller, Der innere Zusammenhanfi der hippokratischen Schrijt de victu, Hermes 87 (1959), 38 ff., esp. p. 55, is inclined to follow Jaeger_ Now A. 1\ehm in his Jeamed Parapegmastudien, Ahh. Bay. Ak., Phil.-hist. KL, N.F. Heft.19, Miinchen 1941, 38 ff. argued that the divisi011 of the year in Vict. Il1.68 is tlJat of Eudoxus' parapegma: "Die angestrcbtc Symmetric der Hauptabsdmittc des Jahres, insbcsondere die Zcrlegung des J ahres durch die zwei Frijhphascn der Pleiaden in gleiche Halften, weist a.uf Eudoxos" (Helun p. 38). Already Fredrich, T-I-ipp. Unters. 225 ha.d noticed this similarity, but (following Maass) did not believe the attribution of the Eudoxus-parapegma to be trustworthy. But even if we should follow Eratosthcnes in not attributing the Octaifteris to Eudoxus (and it is not certain that the OctaiJteris and the parapegrna arc identical; see for the evidence F. Lasserre, Die Fragmente des Eurloxos von Knidos, Textc u. Kommentare Bd. 4, Berlin 1966, 214), we still have to assume that at least part of its subject-matter is derived frnm Eudoxus (so also Lasserre, ibd.). Rehm, o.c. 30 ff. did not douht the authentkity of the Eudoxus-pampegrna. Joly, who o.c. 132-3 gives a table of the division of the year as in Vie!., apparently ignored Rehm's arguments. Lasscrre, o.c. 225, rejects Hehm's proposal on the insufficient grounds tbat for some periods the nmnbtor of days is not exactly the same; but surely such a discrepancy is less important than the resemblance in general outline. If Rehm is right, 370 U.C. (his approximate elate for the Eudoxus-parapegma) is the t.p.q. of Vict._ I think Rehm is right

25

he shares a detailed microcosm-macrocosm·-thcory.l 17 Kranz poshtlates a common ancestorus for the theories of both Hebd. and Vict. and attempts to date this archetype even earlier than the cosmology of llebd. by referring to Bund. Ch. 28, in which the microcosm-macrocosm-theory must be considered as an 'older relative' of this archetype.119 W<~ have already seen, however, that the reference to Bund. Ch. 28 is illegitimate. 12o More important is Kranz' very careful discussion of Presocratic parallels for llebd. Ch. l-11 121 : he concludes that the cosmology of H cbd. shonlu he dated 'not long after 500 B. C. ' 122 We shall return to his arguments in one of the following chapters of the present study, 123 but it may, perhaps, already be remarked that this conclusion was reached only d.l the cost of some amount of special pleading. 124 llebd. as a whole, Kranz thinks, was composed by a compiling physician, wJ10 conjoined ancient cosmology with contemporary pathology.t25 A most important contribution to the interpretation of Hebd. is

anyway iu rejecting Frectrich\ hypothesis of a 'popular' calendar imitated in Vie!. A possible consequence of refusing to attribute the above-defined division of the year to Eudoxus wonld be an even later t.p.q. for Vict. However, for a possible t.a.q. for Vict., cf. below, Ch. IV, p. 105, n. 195. 117 To he more exact, Vict. contains two related but slightly different theories: I,lO ff. and IV,R9 If., ;;ee Kran~ o.c. 173 ff. The so-called macrocosm-microcosm-'theory' of Choerilus of Athens (the tragedia.n, Kranz o.c. 176, Koster o.c. 31) is not of a theoretical natur<~. cf. below, Ch ..IV, p. 107, n. 209. 118 Joly, Recherchrs 45, 185 holds that Vict. 's'inspimit cles Semaines' (Hebd.) 'en cc qui concerne la doctrine dn rnicrocosmc-macrocosme'. This rlepends on the relative date one is willing to attribute to these two treatises (for the date of Vict., see abo•:c, n. 116). lfebd. could just as well be 'inspired' by Vie!., as was suggested by Gompen, Grieclt. Denlwr I, 243 and \V. Theiler, Gesch. teleol. Naturbetr. 56, who prefers a relatively .late date for llebd. (cf. above, p. 22, n. 102); cf. also below, Ch. IV, p. 104 ff. and ibd., n. 195. 119 O.c. 188. 1 2 Kranz assumes that Goetzc proved that this part of the Greater Bundahisn Ch. 28 is old-Persian. This is wrong, cf. above p. 2l ff. and p. 22, n. 99. Kranz also adduces (o.c. 187 ff.) Oriental parallels for other theories in Hebd. (e.g. for the hcptadology itself). 121 O.c. 180-3. 122 O.c. 180. 128 Below, Ch. Ill, p. 56 ff. 124 E.g., a theory of &v-roc•.Jyl!X is known to have been held by Empcdocles, P!Jilolaus, Democritus and others. 1\ranz says, 182: 'es ware verwunderlicl1, wenn nicht auch sic schon in fri.1hercr Zeit einmal vertrcten ware'. us O.c. 184.

°

26

that by H. Gehr, 126 who st•rious]~, challenged Roscher's position by attempting to prove that the two parts of the treatise are by one hand and that the echoes of t'f>ocratiwm. - To these arguments Gehr added another and indeed crucial thesis: he argued that Roscher did wrong in separating the two parts of the treatise, for the contradictions which he pointed out are only seeming ones. Conscqnently, Hcbd. as a whole would not l)l: mrlier than its secon
27

that the peculiar theory of Ch. 1 concerning the water as the 'Aufbewahrungsort der \Varme'I 33 is also found in Ch. 6 and Ch. 15. 184 However, his affirmation that the arithmo1ogy of part I is also valid for part li because of the theory of critical days in Ch. 26-27135 is unconvincing, as the number seven and its sway are absent from all the other chapters of part II. Finally, Gehr put forth an argument which is, as I believe, both right and wrong: both in language and in content, 186 so he says, Hebd. does not differ from the other works in the Corp-us Hippocra#c·um. However, this is dubious. If one thinks of the great majority of these works, it is wrong1 37 ; if one thinks of a small minority, 138 it may be right. In that case, however, the date proposed by Gehr is not tenable. All the same, Gchr's countering of some of Roschcr's arguments is invaluable. As we shall see, this points the way towards a better understanding of the medical part of the treatise.U~9 We shall also see which conclusions may be dra'Wil from a study of the peculiar theory of the water as the 'Aufbewa.hrungsort der Wiirme'. 140 Miss J. Kerschensteiner141 accepted the opinion of Ilberg, Kranz and others that the medical section of Hebd. dates from ea. 400 B. C. The first section, however, makes an old--fashioned impressionJ42 Although she admits the differences between part I and II, she points out that at least the theory of hot and cold in part II also plays a

133 Gellr also states (o.c. 213) that the theory that 'die Warme sci mit dem Wasser verbunden' is typical of Hebd. 104 O.c. 213. Gehr did not pursue this further; for an interpretation d. below, Ch. IV, p. 78 ff. He also pointed out (o.c. 212) that the psychology of Ch. 13 based on the hot and the cold does not contradict that of Ch. 10 (c.f. further below, Ch. VII, p. 205 ff.). For Roscher·s views on Ch. 13 cf. above, p. 17-8, n. 70. la& O.c. 213. 136 Ibd. 187 For the language of part l, cf. below, Ch. II; for that of part H, below. Ch. VII, p. 212-3. 13& Cf. below, Ch. II, p . .32 ff. For the contents of part I, cf. below, Ch. III-VI; for those of part II, Ch. VII. m Cf. below, Ch. V I I. uo Cf. below, Ch. IV, p. 78 ff. 141 Kosmos. Quellenkritische Untersuc/;ungen zu. den Vorsokt'atikm·n. Zetemata 30, Miinchen 1962, 54 ff. 142 Not only is the world--picture oJd .. fashioned, but the 'primitive schematisnJ' (o.c. 55) as well. For this schematism cf. however below, Ch. V A, p. 130 ff.

28

(minor) role in part 1, 143 and that in part II the relation between man and the xoO"fLO~, so prominent in part I, is constantly taken into account. The important Milesian elernents 144 in the cosmology of part I are fused with later Presocratic thcories.l
29

to a sphericial earth or not is uncertain. 1411 On the other hand, !Jebd. Ch. 2,64 ff. R speaks of Cia'!poc ... erc-roc zovw; and of various fixed stars and constellations which are connected \Vith the order of the seasons. Burkert argues that while Sirius, the Pleiads etc. have been connected with seasonal changes from times immemorial, the rdatio11 between the seven planets and the seasons remains obscun·. 150 He th<•refore opts for an early date for H ehd. part I.

4. From the above survey it will be clear that we are facing a difficult problem. There appears to be a consensus about the discrepancies between the two parts of the treatise, though not always the same conclusions are drawn from a recognition of these differences. That part I in one way or another reflects Presocratic thought seems to be universally agreed, but the exact identification of these reflections is disputed, and the question is further complicated by the distinction between the age of these reflected ideas and the time of composition of the treatise (c.q. of its first part). For instance, Roscher, Kra.nz and Miss Kerschensteiner advocate both a rather late date of composition and the extensive use of early sources. However, are we to assume that the first part of Hehd. informs us of an early Presocratic worldpicture only slightly contaminated by later ideas, or are we committed to emphasize the importance of later admixtures and to insist upon the eclectic character of the cosmology?

was first introduced into Gre(;ce hy the astronomer 1\Teto of Athens, active ea. 430 H. C.: he refers to Tzetzes, Chit. 10,53·J ff.; 12,219 ff.; 12,283 ff. (according to Meto a Great Year ends whenever the seven j;lanets mc•et in Aquarius). \Vc then find the seven planets with Philolaus (VS ·HA16) and Democritus (VS 68B56 and A92). I would Jike lo remark, Jwwever, that even if /Xm:p(l. gn;,(l. means the seven planets, Hebd. still could have been written well before 400 B.C. I may further be allowed to point ont that 1 see no reason to he sceptical about Theophrastus' attribution of the discovery of the sphericity of the earth to Parmenidcs (see VS 28A44, together with Al, p. 218,1 and my Die Ojfenbarung des Parrnenides und die menschtichc Welt, Assen 1964, 245). If Theophrastus' information is accepted as trustworthy, llehd. could be referring to the sphericity of the earth and still be quite early. HD Pace Kranz, see above, p. 25, n. 115. 150 O.c. 291, n. 78; so also already Gehr, o.c. 210, n.2. Nevertheless, Burkert cautiously admits that it remains an 'open question' wl1et.her the seven planets are understood or not. For an attempt to solve the problem of the relation between seasons and planets see below, Ch. V B, p. US ff.

30

The road towards a solution of these problems is by means of a thorough examination of the most enigmatic part of Hebd., viz. Ch. 1-11. Because of the discrepancies between the two parts of the treatise, each part should be tackled separately; part I, though being the most difficult, affords the best opportunities for detailed research. We shall look for criteria which are helpful in establishing a t.p.q. Up till now, scholars have confined their efforts to a questioning of the Presocratic parallels. However, such parallels in themselves are by no means productive of a solid t.a.q. , 151 and we shall moreover see that we need not stop at ea. 400 B. C. in our search for relate(l ideas.l 62 There are also other kinds of evidence which may be used. One type of evidence, i.e. that afforded by the language of the Greek fragments, has been utterly ncglected. 153 We may also expect some results to be deriveable from an investigation of the structure of Ch. 1-11. 154 In the pagt•s which follow, these investigations will be undertaken. Only when th(:-y have been executed, we shall retum (briefly) to the problem of the interpretation of the second part of the treatise . 15~'~

Cf. Burkert's remarks in connection with the Pythagorean Hypomnemata, Philol. 103, 1961. 26 n. 5, where he points out that there are Presocratic elements in the Stoa, in Epicurus, etc., as well. Also Theiler's remarks a propos the interpretation of the Hypomnemata as given by Wellrnann and A. Delatte (La Vie de Pythagore de Diag<'ne Laifrce, Bruxclles, 1922, 198 ff.) in his review of Delatte's book, Gnomon 2, 1926, 1.55: "Schon die Tatsache, dass zur Erklarung des Systems zicmlich jeder Vorsokratiker herangezogen werden muss, ohne dass die divergenten Bcstandteile in eine neue Synthese eingehen, mu~s aus methodischen Gri.inden bedenkcn erregen". m See below, Cb. Ill (incidentally) and espcci.ally Ch. IV; abo Ch. VI. 153 See below, Ch. II; Cb. VLI, p. 212-3. 164 See below, Ch. V A; .for tlu• structure of Ch. 1-2, s. Ch. lV, p. 113-20. m See below, Ch. VII. 161

31

CHAPTER II

THE VOCABULARY OF THE GREEK TEXT OF CH. 1-5

No analysis of the remains of the Greek text has as yet been attempted. Two explanations of this neglect are possible: (1) the material for analysis offered by Hebd. has been thought to be either too corrupt or too slender. 1 I hope, however, to be able to demonstrate that this pessimistic attitude is unfounded. (2) Apparently, in the earlier part of our century (the heyday of interest in Hebd.), no later date than the fourth cent. B. C. was assigned to any work of the Corpus. During the last thirty-five years, hovvever, several Hippocratic treatises have been proved to have been written in late Hellenistic and even GraecoRoman times. Before giving the results of my analysis of the vocabulary of Hebd., I will first summarize the results of these researches on late treatises in the Corpus. Such a summary perhaps is not easily found elsewhere, and it gives us the kind of background we require.

In 1935 L. Edelstein, in his article Hippokrates in Pauly-Wissowa, wrote that he considered 300 B.C. to be the t.a.q. for the treatises constituting the Hippocratic Corpus, although some of them possibly might be of a somewhat later date. 2 This caution has since been amply justified. In the same year (1935) K. Deichgraber, in a short article, remarked upon the Hellenistic character of the language of Praec. (rtoc?ocyye/,L:r..~). Medic. (n. ~1J"?ou) and Decent. (n. euaz1J!.l.OO"')V1J~). 3 Praec. Cf. Koster, Mythe de Zaratlmstra., 29 n. 1. W. H. S. Jones, Phi!. a.nd 1'11Ied. 7 says: "the few fragments in Greek may be, probably are, adaptations or paraphrases of the original; and so, as the rest of the work is known to us only in translation, the linguistic test for date and provenance cannot in this instance be applied". Jones' supposition of adaptation or paraphrase is unwarranted. But he has at least recognized that the Greek is unusual. : RE Supp. Bd. VI (1935), 1331. 3 Original und Nachahmung. Zn Ps.Aristoteles NI.M. und Ps.Hippokrates 1

32

moreover contains unmistakable Epicurean reminiscencies (as was already observed by Littre), and is padded with ill-disguised quotations from various treatises in the Corpus. Deichgraber dated Praec. and Decent. in the second Cent. A.D. 4 Then H. Diller was able to prove that Alim. (1t. -rpocp'fj~). considered by Galen to be a genuine work of Hippocrates, could not possibly be early5 : it unmistakably belongs to the sphere of influence of the Pneumatic School and exhibits affinities with Stoic (Posidonian) thought. Its language moreover has a Hellenistic colouring. 6 Diller dated this work around 50 A.D. 7 It is mentioned by Nero's contemporary Erotian, but cannot be earlier than Athenaeus of Attalia, the archegete of the Pneumatic School, whom Diller assumed to be a contemporary of the emperor Claudius. 8 Dt;!ichgraber's views on the three works mentioned above received extensive and convincing support in a thesis by his pupil U. Fleischer. 9 Fleischer

TI
33

also studied the theories contained in these treatises, but based his conclusions mainly upon the linguistic evidence which he collected. The language is not a pure Ionic, but interspersed with Hellenistic words and Ionicising neologisms. Fleischer dated Praec. and Decrnt. in the firstjsecond Cent. A. D., and Med£c. in the third Cent. B. C. In 1958 K. AbeP 0 proved that Cord. (n. xctp8hv;} must have been written in Hellenistic times. In its grammar as well as in its vocabulary Hellenistic elements are unmistakably pre:sent.u The work furthermore presupposes a state of medical knowledge which is only possible after Erasistratus of Alexandria (third Cent. B. C.): it refers to anatomical dissection of the human body 12 and is familiar with the ventricular system of the heart, which according to Galt>n was discovered by Erasistratus. 13 The position of Diller and Abel was further strellgthencd hy F. KU(Uien.H His earlier date for Athenaeus of Attalia kaves room for the composition of Alim. between the time of Posidonius and that of Erotian, i.e. between ea. 50 B. C.- 50 A.D.l 5 On the other hand, he was able lo point out Stoic (Posidonian) and Pneumatic influences in Cord. This would make the latter work contemporary with or even later than Alitn. (it is not mentioned by Erotian). l
brrpou ?.t·nd ne:pt e:ur;zll!J·ocr\l'riJ<; (Neue deutsche Forsch. 240, Abt. Klass. Phil. Bd. 10), Berlin 1939. It was reviewed by H. Diller, Gnomon 17 (1941 ), 23 ff., who there maintained his earlier dating of Medic. ami who is, I think, somewhat too sceptical about linguistic criteria. for dating purposes. 10 JJie Lehre wm Bl·utkre-islauf im Corpw; Hippocraticum, Bermes 86 (1958), 192 ff. 11 lb•l. 194-6. 12 Ibd. 198 ff. Cf. also F. Kudlien, Anatomie, HE Supp. Bd. XI (1968), 41 and 44. 13 Abel, o.c. 201 ff. 14 Cf. above, p. D, n. S. 15 Kndlicn therefore partly agrees with Abel (above, p. 33 n. 7). 16 Mutmassungen iiber die Schrift nept ~1)-rpou, Bermes 94 (1966), 55 ff.

34

writers started using the Ionic dialect again. A well-known example of t'b.is is furnished by the work of Aretaeus of Cappadocia, which we still have; Aretacus has generally been dated in the second Cent. A.D. However, as we have noticed, Diller had to assume that Ionic was used as a vehicle for medical doctrines already a century earlier because AUm. is mentioned by Erotian. F. Kudiien moreover was able to demonstrate that Aretaeus should be dated in the first Cent. A.D. 17 'Ein nenerstii.rktcr Hippokratismus (ist) spatesten...;; im 1. Jh. n. Chr. unverkennbar .... An~te schreiben zu dieser Zeit~ ..• schon wieder Ionisch'. 18 The above survey shows (a) that linguistic considerations are a trustworthy touchstone for the dating of Hippocratic writings. The material collected by Diller, Abel and especially Fleischer (who has extensive word-lists) is quite convincing in itself. Once the analysis based upon linguistic evidence had pointed the way it has gradually become possible to find supporting evidence among the theories contained in the works which have been studied so far. It is also evident that {b) at the latest in the first Cent. A.D., but almost certainly a century earlier, medical writers turned again to the dialect of Hippocrates. The first Cent. B.C. is the most likely time of composition for at least AUm. and Cord., both of which belong to the sphere of influence of the Pneumatic School. In itself, this return to the classics of medical w1iting agrees very well with other classicistic trends in the first Cent. B.C.t9

The words I have selected from the Greek text of the first section of Hebd. are given below, in alphabetic order. The Greek vmrd is followed by the corresponding word (f') in the Latin translation(s) and (if possible) in Bergstrasser's German translation of the Arabic ps. Galen. 20 The list is not exhaustive (I have not checked the history of every word). Words deriving from scholarly conjecture have been excluded (i.x8oy;ft, E:·n:pot!J)mt;, x•)xA(t}vt~}. The list contains 3 verbs and 24nouns,

U·ntersuc:h.ungen .m Aretaios von Kappadozien, Abh. Mainz, Geist.-Sozw. Kl. 1963, 11, Wiesbaden 1964, p. 7-4-0. 18 Hermes 1966, 57. Cf. also his Untersuch., p. 30. 19 For which see below, the Conc:lusion, p. 229 ff. 20 The Arabic p:>. Galen does not give the full text of Hebd. a.s A~p.p.omr.. but in some ca'!es a translation of parts of the text has been fused with the commentary. 17

35

the latter constituting about 20% of the about 120 different nouns found in the Greek text of Ch. l-5, which is a fairly high percentagc. 21 I have tried to trace the history of the words in the list by making use of general and special lexica, indexes in text-editions of various authors and :;o on. I have deeply felt the lack of a Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, and accordingly have no pretensions of completeness. The old Thesaurus, for whatever it is worth, was used for a final checking; the conclusions I had reached turned out to be in agreement with what it had to offer. I have neglected to make a special study of the style, but I think Littre's characterisation quite apposite: 'le style ... a de la recherche et de l'obscurite, sans manquer cependant d'une certaine c.legance'. This obscurity and artificiality are in themselves a sign that the language of the old physicians was difficult for our author; the style of the late Praec. shows the same kind of pompous awkwardness.

1. &. y wy-i] (1,87 R.; &.ywy~ ... 't'~<; ix[L.ioo.;; tr. ducatio) ; 'conveyance' (se.

of moisture). 22 'Aywy+, in this sense is unparalleled before the second Cent. B. C. (in classical Greek 'brin1:,:r:ing' of persons and things, or 'education', 'culture' etc.; cf. also ps. Plutarch's title n. noctowv &.ywy~-;). l.G. 12(5), 872 (from Tenos): a certain Autolycus bought some property, including uooc-ro:; &.y<.:ry&.c,; -r&.:; oumxc,; -cwv X<>)p(wv, 'irrigation-channels' or '-ducts' ; tlus inscription is dated by its editor in the second Cent. B. C.; Dion. Hal. III,67: "among the three most magnificent works of Rome I put ....&.:; "wv ua&Twv &ywy&::; (aqueducts)"; d. Mon. i\.nc. Graec. 19,5 &ywyo:; uooc"t'oc;. The use of the subst. &y. in Ilebd. probably is a catachrestic extension of this technical meaning; in our text, &y. is connected vvith &poEum:; (q.v.). The subst. &3pocywy£oc ('conveyance of liquids') occurs in Plato, Tim. 77e8, in the description of respiration as the driving power of the irrigation systiO'm The language of Hebd. part II is studied below, Ch. VII, p. 212-3. There is a lacuna in the text: xct! (<~\leov> Kalbfleisch, Hoscher) 't"QUTOic:n 8epfL6v, b should be con·· jecturcd. llpoa2:116w is late Hellenistic: Jos. A] VIII,3,6 (:fitting in'): pass. c. dat. Corp, Herm. X,11,17 (ed. Bud6) &cra o?iv 7tpocr~vwTXe:\1. The simplex t116w occurs earlier, and was a favourite term of Posidonius; d. Sextus, M. IX, 78 ff. (in Posidon.ius, 'united' things are distinguished from other types of composita).

21

22

36

of the blood in the body; also Arist., PA III,5,668al2 uses u3pocywy(oc~ when describing the flow of blood (on the analogy between the bloodsupply and an irrigation system cf. I. M. Lonie, Bull. Hist. :VIed. 38, 1964, p. 426, who also refers to Galen. Nat. Fac. III, Ch. 15, Cl. Galcni Scripta Minora Vol. III, cd. G. Hclmreich, 1893, 2 1967, p. 254,1 ff.) The subst. uopuywy6c, = 'aqueduct', 'irrigation-channel' first occurs in the third Cent. B.C., cf. LSJ s.v. II,2b (cf. also the meanings li:;;ted ibd. II,l and II,2a); it also occurs in one of the later hooks of the Epid., VII,l22, = 'dropsical person'; the adjective uopot.ywy6c,, = 'bringing water', is Gracco-H.oman, cf. LSJ s.v. I. -The verb &y<.~v is only rarely used with moisture; Eur. Ale. 1081, with Mxpu ('elicit a tear'), is not technical but analogous to the other examples mentioned LSJ s.v. &yw I,6. A good example is Arat., Phaen. 217 xr:t.).iJv \Jawp '(pOv bq.Liooc, X.T.A., cf. also 14,89 R., and 19,15 R. OAX"~V zo"A.~c, ~ r_p"A.ty[.LOCTOC,. However, in Ch. 14 the heat exerting a motive influence is exterior to the snbstance moved, while in Ch. 1 it is interior to it. 2. &.xo"Aouflew (2,72 R.; &.xo"Aou6e<.~ oE: ''Apx1:oc, 1"<{) 'Apx1:oupcp; 2,77 R.: oct aE: Il"A<.~&.a<-c, 't"?j<mv 'Y,)ocmv> &.xo"AouOeolJa~; tr. secutioncm ha bent, folgt): 'follow Hpon'. Not used in this astronomical sense before Autolycus of Pitane (ea. 350-300), De ost. II,2, p. 239,24 Mogenet, -ro &xoA0'>6ovv, of that part of the Zodiac which follows the rising sun; also called 1:0 bt6f1.<.Vov, ibd. II,2,17, cf. also Hipparchus, in Arat. 1,11,5 (p. 114,10 Manitius): the feet of the Great Bear are distinguished as o ~yov[.Le:Vo~ and 6 bt6f1.<.voc;. This use of E7tO(.LOC~ is technical;~- in the myth of Plato's Phaedrus may be compared, but is not technical. 3. &xoJ..ou6("fJ (2,74 and 83 R.; tr. sequentia<m>): 'sequence' in which heavenly bodies follow one another, cf. above s.v. &.xoAou6€w. No parallels in this astronomical sense; probably derived directly from &.xo"Ao1J0ew sensu astronomico. 'A. occurs in classical Greek, but in the abstract sense of 'sequence' it is Hellenistic, cf. LSJ, s.v. 1,2. 37

4.

ocv6l)tH~

(4,15 H; tr. floritio, bclauben): 'flowering, blossoming', of plants. Not before Theophr.: 8 times in CP according to Wimmer's index, e.g. VI,8,2, VIII,3,3. Otherwise a rare word: once in Plutarch, Q1taest. conv. 647 f.: 'people sleeping in the shadow of a yewtree (c!J-'i:f..ocl;) may be killed by its smell, lhocv opy~ p.
ocv6·1JOW.' 5. ocv"Tocuy(a (1,51 H.. ; Tijv -r<"'i)v ocG-rp<•N &v-rauy(ocv; tr. splendorem, Licht): 'reflected tight' of the stars. The Houn oc. first in Xen., Cyn. 5,18, of the contrasting colour of a hare when sePn against the background of freshly ploughcye:i:). Also of the sun of Philolaus, VS 44A 19 (AH. II,20, 1.2) and. in the explanation of the eclip~;es of the moon by 'older Pythagoreans', i.e. Philolaus, Aet. II,29,4: the reflected light of the central fire is intercepted by either earth or counter-earth. The verb &.v"t'IZuydv is used in the chapter on vision of Cam. (Ch. 17), which echoes Alcmeon's theory (cf. ·vs 24AS = Tlwophr., Sens. 26, where Th. say~ &vn<pa£v'f'l); we find it already e.g. Eur., Or. 1519, of a flashh1g sword; then again ps. Arist., Probl. 932a27, of the sea. Arist. himself spt~aks of dvclx!-ctm~ and o~t~ ocVC(.XA<•)!J-EV't) (Mete. 373a32,35, of the rainbow-). For the reflected light of the rainbow Anaxagoras uses a synonymous expression, Bl9 ocv"t'tAa!J-7tOV (verb!) ":
28

38

notion (not the term) in the Stoa (Chrysippus) SVF II,471 (= Arius Did. fr. 28 Diels), p. 152,32 ff. e:!viX~ To ov 7tve:up.1X xLvoiJv z!XuTo 7tpo.:; ZIX1Yt"Q XIXL e~ OtUTOU, ~ 7tVE:UflOt EIXU't"O x~vouv 7tpocrbl XIXL lm((j(l) and SVF II,413 (= Arins Did. fr. 21 Diels), p. 137,2 ff.: the First Element (·I] &low.:; .,., ) h·as SUCh a na t lll"C <•l(j't":i: " ' ' 't"E: XLVEL'I .. XIXT<•l ' \ TfjV \ -rp07tYjV \ oUVIX(.L~<:; O(U't"YjV 7tpn.:; xett &7to T~<:; Tporr~.:; aV(o) 7t&VTYJ XlJXA<:>- For the term cf. SVF II,988 (p. 287,40 Tr) 1tiJp whoxlvYjTov), SVF II,499 (on cliffen~nt kinds of (self-) motion) and the passage from Sextns, ltf. IX,76, qnoic~(l SVF IT,311, p. 113,4 ff., on the Stoic concept of Divinity, which is the nuse moving and shaping the UlliVerse: IXi.\-r'tj OUV ·r, 1\•~VCt[U<:; '~TO~ IX'J't"OXLv"fj70£; EO""tW ~ urr' aAAYj<:; xwe:L"t"IXL ouv&fle:<•ll;; the latter cannot be right: ecrn ·ne; l£poc xiXO' ECI.'JT~V etu-roxL'IYj't"O<:; OUVIX!J. L<:;, ~Tv; ocv dYj OdiX xcd ci[~wc;.

The term

occurs in the Placita: Aet. IV,2, 1
Hippolytus, Philos. 19 (Dox. 568.12 ff.) quotes this sentence from the Phaedrus with tX€tl
39

Phoen. 163 ~p6[J.OV 'Js:c:pt>. .occ;. 'A•J-t"6~pop.oc; 'selj-·moved' also leans upon one of the meanings of "Pizw, v£z. 'to move quickly' (LSJ s.v .. I,2). -The ptc. oc.j'toapotJ.&>V (of backwards-flowing water) occurs once, Dion. Byz., Bosp. nav. p. 53,9 Wcscher (prob. second Cent. A.D.}. For the 7trU.w8potJ.tY.~ x.lvYJcrLc; of the sea (Strabo 1,3,8, from Posidonius) cf. Reinhardt, Poseidonios 108 and H.E s.v. Poseid. 647. 8. &c:poc(pecru; (1,67 R; crz'A~v1Jr:; ... 7tp(Hr0eao:L xd ... &c:por.t. 118bl0 and 17, Caet. 299a16, Met. 1077bl0. For the doxographical use of this pair cf. the definition of one kind of Aristotelian x.ln)mc;, A et. 1,23,2 X!X.-t"
4.0

variance with'); d. for this 'logical' sense also Plat., Rep. 454a8, 607c2; SVF II,29,17 and 50,7. Arist., Met. 986bl the plur. is used for the Pythagorean contraries; E. is used frequently by Aristotle. In Theophr., CP IV,4,8 (plur.) 'objections'; Schol. Horn. B on 1l. XX,67 = Theag. Rheg. 2, VS I, p. 52,3 and 6: the 'enmities' of the gods (elements). For the doxographical use cf. Dox. 570,4 (Hippo!., Phil. 19,23) and ibcl. 570,31 (ibd. 20,6), both times in an ethical context. The meaning of this part of the sentence quoted from Hebd. (see also above s.v. &zo),o~J(i£-rJ) apparently is: 'the stars follpw one another but also move in contrary directions'. \Vhat contrary movements are meant? In Geminus, E:van(oc; and &~.o:v&v·no,; are technical terms for the movement of sun, moon and plands throngh the Zodiac from West to East, Elem. eeL Manitius p. 10,4-5; 136,8; 140,11. Geminus, however, adds words like Y..LVY)(nc;. In H ebd. the idea of motion is not expressed, but may perhaps be supplied from &:v.o),ou0(7Jv. Boll, who thought the movements of the planets were understood, 24 quotes Eur., fr. 861 2 N., &cr'l:'pulV ... EV.XV'l'LCX.V oaov, explained by Achilles p. 48 l\Iaass as E:vO'.v-rL!ZV 'l:'o'i:c; ocit),ocvc:cn cpopav ... 'r;;lV rr).oc·r~7C•>V (note that also in the Euripides-fragment the idea of motion is expressed). 'Evav-r((t)crtc; sensu astronomico is, as far as I know, only paralleled in the Hermetica, II,6-7, a very difficult passage: "I have heard you say that the planetary spheres are moved by the sphere of the fixed stars. - Oux ecr-rtv od)Tl), ir> 'Acrx:kl)mE, cruyxLV'YJO"LC: &AA' cXV-rtx£v·IJcrLc;. o•) y:ip O[LOL6)t; XWOUV't".XL, &_),),' EVCX.'I't'LOCL &'1-.'A·hA.rxtr,. ·~ ()€ ev CX.V" L(t) () L<; "t'~V &v-r:!:pwnv T~c; , • ,, · ·f)'yap ' 'e
24 25

Lebensalter 221. Ch. VB, p. 138 ff.

41

formations in -(J.t.p~<; mentionf~d by Kretschmer-Locker none is prePlatonic: e.g. OC[Le:p·~c; is Platonic, fJ[tOW[l.Ep~c; Aristotelian. 13. x6crr.1.oc; I (1,43 ff. R. ...z~w -..Ylv -.ou &.xphou xocr[J.Ot>, tr. inscparabilis mumli; 1,71 ff. R ~ ·mu ~epor; m)l)-rM~c; xocl. x.6crw,c; (Hosclwr, -[.tr''J ms.); 1,9h ff.R. oi -ri;)v ~D[J.nin<•lV XOI)[J.OL, tr. omnium (P, ··nia A) mundi; 2,3 fLR. ot urc(; -.=n yiJ xfJcr[LOL, tr. snb terra circuli ( !) ; 2,15 ff. R. aml 2,42 ff. R. clf..,)[Lmoc; x6crp.oc;, tr. olympus mundns): 'cosmic region'. II (2,24 ff. R. x.cr-r.X p.krmv 6E: -rov xocr(J.OV, tr. In medio munrlo (A, Mcdio mnndi P): 'the universe'. - \Vho was the first to say that the world is a xocr[J.. OC: is a thonl)' fJUestion into which I cannot enter here; i.t may l1ave been Pythagoras or one of ltis early follovvcrs. 26 Anyhow, the attested early uses of x6cr[-Loc; show sfweral shades of the same meaning: 'world-order', 'arrangonent of parb', 'strtictured whole', etc. (cf. Heracl. B30; Anaxag. B8, Emp. 1326,5, Diog. Ap. H2, Philol. Bl, B2, B6). The first instance of x6crp.oc; =" (simply) 'world' may be Emp. Bl34,5. In Hebd. 2,24 ff.H. the emphasis is more on the whole than on its order. In Hebd. x.6crtL'J~ also means 'cosmic region', no less than 4 (5) times; the outer haven ('OMp.moc; x6cr[-Loc;) is such a region, the air is, indeed all seven regions of 1he universe arc called x6cr[-LOL (1,96 ff. R.). I do not think this meaning is early. The second half of Philo1. Al6 is often qnoted .in this context: here we have a tripartite division of the world into ''()),u[-tnoc; (outer heaven). x6cr[-Loc; (the 5 planets, sun and moon) :1nd ')upocvoc; (the •'.rrrocrsf..Y)vov -re: xocl. ne:p(ye:wv [..tspoc;). It has been proved, however, that this part of Phil. Al6 is not authentic; a tripartite universe ic; post- Platonic. 27 The meaning of xocrr..to<; in Phil. A16 therefore cannot be an early example; it never was ne Vogel, .1-'ythagoras, 21 R, 278, mentions t.he term among those part.iculady connected with Pythagoras. Our most reliable gnid<~ is Plato, Gorg. 508a3 ff., who says that oi ~o>po~ (i.e. the Pythagoreans, cf. Dodds ad l.) call the universe of heaven and earth, gods and men ax6ap.o~. Aetins Il,l,l has it that Pythagoras was -the first to give the name of xocrrw.;; to the -r(;)v oAt:.lV 7tepLO)(~- which probably does not mean 'the universe', but 'the encompassing outer sphere'. Cf. Diog. Lacrt. VJH,48: 'according to Favorinns, Pythagoras was the first t~J call the oupet.v6.; (heaven) x6cr[Loc;, and the earth round', where the distinction between o,)pocv.Jc; and yrx.i.<~. makes it certain that o>)pocvoc; = 'heavt•n' (cf., on the other hand, the report in Plato, where the Pythagore
42

an exact parallel for meaning I in Hebd. anyhow. A better parallel is provided by Plato, Tim. 55c-d, where the suggestion is made that maybe there are 5 x6oym instead of one, if, that is to say, we are willing to look at the problem from a point of view "~Nhich is rejected by Plato himself.Z8 It is not dear what Plato is thinking of: the 5 regular solids, or the 4 dements + encompassing hcaven? 29 Plutarch (de E 389 f, Def. or. 420a ff., 422e ff.) thinks that the 5 sphcrically arranged cosmic regions ot earth, water. air, fire and ether (or 'Olympus', 'light', 'heaven') are meant. This interpretation probably goes back to the discussions on the Tint. within the Early Academ_v. 30 There is some evidence for this. Epin. 987b7 states that primarily the outer heaven deserves the name of x.6o-t-to<;:n (ibd. 977b2 xocr[J.ot;. "OI.uttno.; and o•jpo:.v6.; are used synonymously); thi:~. by the way, comes very dose to flebd.' use of oMp.mo<; xo(j!J.o.;;. Aristotle in Cael. and Mete. usually has x6<1f.LO<; in the sense of 'universe' (e.g. Cael. 276b3 -.o 1tiiv 6[1-<JlVIJ[.tulc; rlv MyoL-.o x.ocr[J.o<;), but in 1lletc. he also uses it in a more restricted sense, distinguishing between (1) the m:pt -.a,:; 'l.%) cpopocc; x6cr[l-fl<;, which is filled by ether, 32 339b18) and (2) the m:pl -;-~'.1 ·rY;v f5'AG<; x.Scr:-toc; which consists of the 4 other elements, 339al9). 33 In Aristotle's opinion, the universe (xucr:;.r,:;) may be grosso modo sub(livided into two z6cr[J.ot. 34 This use is not exactly p;1rallel to the seven xC.·; = 'adormn.ent', and (probably) Pltaedr. 246cl-2 (cf. below, Ch. IV, p. 122, n. 288}. 3 ~ Cf. also the use of x60'(.toc; (mtmdus) in Arist. :r. tptA. according to Cic., ND I,3J ( "" fr. 26 Hoss) and Festugiere's comments, La ReFClation rl' !!emu's Trismegiste, 11, Le Die11 Cosmique, Paris 1949, 244-.5. 33 Cf. Kerschensteiner, ibd. 45 ff., where also other Aristotelian references may be found. 34 Cf. the Early Academic tripartite divisions of the cosmos quoted by Burkert (above n. 27): Heraclides Ponticus fr. 95 \Vehrli (Zeus ~' heaven -'- fixed stars, Poseiclon ~c: 5 planets and sun, Hades = moon and what is below the moon) and Xenocrate~. fr. 5, fr. 15, fr. IS Heinze (highe;;t hea\·en and what is outside it; stars; what is below the moon). On these theories d. also P. Boyance, l.a religion astrale de Platon rl.Ciceron, REG 65 (1952), 331 ff., 335. 28

43

the differences between the ether and the other elements are of paramount importance. Another trace of this Early Academic and Peripatetic conception may possibly be found in Eudemus' interpretation of the meaning of m:v-re(Luzo~ in Pherecydes (AS, from Damascius, = Eudemus fr. 150 \Vehrli) as 7tev-rexocr(J.o<;, but this remains uncertain. 35 I have reserved for the end the use of the plural x6cr(Lo~ in Simplicius' testimony on Anaximander, VS 12A9 (= Simpl., £n Phys. 24,14ff., from Theophr.) z; ~<; (se. from the ocpx.+, = the -X1tz~pov) ·hocv-.occ; y£vzcr0a~ 't'0 J<; oupocvoiJc;; xoct 't'I)'J<; EV ocu-ro~c;; XOG(LOUc;;. 36 It is clear that subdivisions of the one universe must be meant by -.oiJc;; ev ocu-ro~c;; x6a(Louc;;. 37 Some scholars have thought that the uncommonness of this expression makes the assumption at least probable that Theophrastns here is actually quoting from Anaximander's book. 38 Perhaps, however, we should begin by trying to understand ·what Theophrastus meant when he wrote this sentence. \Vhen \Ve remember xocr(J.o<; = 'part of the universe' in Arist.' NI ete., it is possible to interpret the x6cr(1.oL of Anax. A 9 as the two chief subdivisions within the one world, i.e. the earth 1

Kerschensteiner, o.c. 53 advocates the copy-right of Eudemns. It is not clear what is to be understood by the '5 hidden corners' of Pherecydes. For further examples of x6~t.Lo~ in a 'regional' sense cf. Diog. Laert. VIII,48: Pythagoras was the first to call the o·)pocv6~ (heaven) x6crrto~. Diog. Laert. VII,137 has as one of the Stoic definitions (meanings) of Y.ocriJ.oc;: ocu<~v Sz '~" Svxx6crw1Jcrw TW'I occrT~p6>V XOO'fl0\1 A.~youcrt (cf. also Philo, Aet. mu. 4, VI p. 73,9-10 Cohn-\V.). In the Corpus Hermeticum (Stob., Hermet. Exc. XXIII,60 and 36), a distinction is made between o ~mx66'J\''; :-.6crtw~ and 6 (J.Edpcno<; x6crtLoc;, while the hymn of Cleantbes (SVF 1,537, p. 122,3-4) has crot 13·~ ?tic; 88e x6criJ.o;, &A.\crcr6[J.eVo~ m:pl ·rocrocv, I m;;lee7:x\, fl xEv &yn; (but d. beiow. Ch. IV, p. 112-3 n. 24·-1- in fine). 36 On the other, more unreliable versions of this doxa see the excellent comments of Ch. H. Kahn, A naximander and the Origins of Greek Cosmology, NY 1960, 34. 37 G. S. Kirk, lferaclitus, The Cosmic Fragments, Cambridge 21962, 31.2 suggests that the distinction of the two terms depends on Aristotle's discussion of the meanings of oupocv6~ atCael. I,9,278b11 ff. (1. outer sphere; 2. outer sphere +sun, moon and some of the stars; 3. the \vhole universe). But this does not explain the meaning of the plural form x6cr!.LOt in Theophrastus. I believe that the matter can be settled by referring to the first chapter of De igne, ·where Theophrastus distinguishes between the 'first sphere' and that 'around the earth' (see below, · Ch. IV, p. S2-3 and p. 83 n. 80). Moreover, it should be remembered that the 1\fete., in ·which the double meaning of :v..6crwJ~ occurs, were much more important for T11eophrastus than the De Caelo (cf. the article by Steinmetz referred to below, Ch. IV, p. 82 n. 77: Theophrastus abandoned the ether-theory of Gael.; his own theory of elements is rather close to that of Nlete., etc.). as E.g. Kahn, o.c. 49. 35

44

and sea and air on the one hand, the heavenly 'wheels' on the other. 39 The world as a whole is here called oupocv6.; 40 by Theophrastus to avoid confusion with x6crfLO<; in its special sense. The logical consequence of our interpretation is that we have to assume that, according to Theophrastus, Anaximander taught that there was an en(lless succession of worlds (oupocvol), all of which arose from the Oircnpov, and all of which contained the same main divisions (x6crfLoL), i.e. (a) the rings (or what preceded them cosmogowiculty, d. ylvr::crOor.L) and (b) the earth etc. I conclude that the special meaning of x:61)!J/l<; in Hcbd. cannot be early, but is post-Platonic. Those who assume that x:6crfLot ('cosmic regions') was already in Anaximander refer to llebd. as the only Presocratic parallel. I would be guilty of circular reasoning if I accepted that on this basis the use in H cbd. is early as well. On the other hand, Theophrastus' words in 12A9 can very well be explained when we think of what this early and often faithful pupil of Aristotle could mean by Y..OufLOL sv oupocvij). 14. AOCfL7t1J8wv (1,57 R.; tr. splendorem Littre, -idum ms.): 'flashing brightness' of the stars. The first certain instance of ),. is Epicurus, Ep. Pyth. (3),101,5 Arr., the theory of &cr'Tpoc7t~: brightness results when 7tVEUfLOC forces the finer cloud-particles to emerge. Epicurus here follows a theory of Theophrastus. Perhaps he also took the term A. from him 41 : (1) in Aet. III,3,8 = VS 64 (Diog. Ap.) A16 we read that lightning is the A. caused by fire falling upon a wet cloud; (2) Aet. III,S 1t. tptooc; is an (in this context at least) extensive and systematic treatment of the rainbow, to which three doxographical notices have been appended. This chapter impresses me as possibly being a fragment of the 1t. ik des Tlteophrast, Pa-

45

373,8 and 12) in what is presumably Theophr.' own explanation of the various colours of the rainbow, which are caused by the reflection of the A. of the sun in different kinds of water-drops, e.g. JJox. 373,7 ff. ~ AIX[L7:p0't"1Jc; -rou -~A(ou rcpocrm:croucr~X. x.cx.t ~ &xp~XL(jN~c; ),IX.[J-7t1J8<~v x..-r.A. A. does not occur in Arist., who instead once has Aap.r.p•)-r·fjc;, il1de. 370a15, in his refutation of Cleidemus' theory of lightni11g( !). AIX[L7tpi1T'YJc; (first in Hdt., e.g. Il,lOl) almost always has a metaphorical meaning, the literal sense apparently bci11g reserved for A. (but d. ])ox. 373,7 quoted above, ps.Arist., Mu. 395a36 and Hipparchus, i'll A rat. p. 42,2 Manitius ). Ark[L7te•) and AIXp:n:poc; are used of the brightness of heavenly bodies ( !), of armour, eyl'S de. since Homer. AIX[.L7t·fj8<:>V is a common word in Hellenistic (;reek: Uiod. ~ic, lll,3'l A. licr-rp~Xrc'(i ( !) 7t1Xp1X7tA'YJO"[IXc; proj<~de1l by the eyes of gigantic snak<•s; Arh'm., Ou. V,90 (gold); Sext. Emp., Pyrrh. l;l5 (Pyes); Plut., Acm.18 (bronze). Common also i11 Patristic Greek, in literal as well as in mt•taphorical significations; cf. also Corp. Hcrm. X,4 (vo'YJT~ A. comparecrL:; (5,21 R.; yo:vdou A.): 'first growth' of the beard. Only liere. The verb AIXJ.Vo\r;IX~ in Solon, fr. 19,6 Diehl (cf. also above, s.v. ex~oA·~. N.B. this is Solon's hepta> ll1: Gr.): the Theophrastean 'experiment' (a rainbow i~ visibly produced 'wenn man \Vasser auspustet', Steinmetz 202) is also found Aet. lll,5,9 (Dox. 373,1G ff.) For this tvpe of 'experiment' cf. Steinmetz 323 (but already .\ristotle knew hl)w to produce an artificial raiulHlW in a very simple way, cf. 1\.lete. 374bl ff.). 43 Cf. further l>E"low, Ch. Vf, p. 161 ff. and p. 17-ln. 10-.J..

46

A7 = Aet. !,3,6, r.uxv6r!j'riX XIX~ p.. fluxvUH.n.c; alone Theophr., CP II, 9,2, IV,12,4, V,8,3, V,11,3; p.;Xvc.ucr~~ alone IV,14,2 and V,lt3. In Arist. and in Theophr.' doxographical work f.L. has the dynamit'sense 'rarefaction'; in CP V,11,3 it apparently has a static sense, = p.ocvo't"YJ<;;. As far as I know, it is nowhere used (as in Hebd.) for the light of the stars. Ps. Galen (p. 9,3 v b ff. Bcrgstr.) explains that the fine light of the stars, by reflecting that of the sun, lessens the compactness of the night, which shows that he takes (L. in the dynamic sense. 17. (.LZ0o3rJt; (2,9 R.; the heavenly hoJies have oc4~_6Spop.ov xux'Ac.uaw -rYJ.:; -re m:pL6oou xa:l. p..; tr. itincris): 'foll6wirw after'. In this literal sense only in an anonymous quotation in the Suda, see LSJ s.v., the beginning; pwbably influenced by that of r.epv)/1ou in the context. 18. p.et6; tr. lunae minuentis defectionem, Herabsteigen): 'wani-ng', of the .moon. The verb (.Le:~QucrOcx.t (Med. !) not in this sense before Plato, (once), Crat. 409c5 0 p.E:v p.d.:; &no 't"OU p.etoGaOa:~ ~x'l) ocv !J.EL'YJ~ op6c7>; XcxA1J(.l€vo.;;, possibly the fons et origo of this usage, but note that Plato speaks of the month. Also ps. Arist., Mu. 399a7; Act. II,29,4 in the explanation by 'younger Pythagoreans' of the eclipses of the moon, i.e. in a somewhat different, but related, context. These Pythagoreans are later than Philolaus, which may or may not imply that this note is a later addition to the body of Theophrastus' work. Hippo!., Phil. 6,5 (Dox. 560,5 ff., on the phases of Anaximander's moon) may (but need not) go back to Theophr.; d. also Aet. III,l7,3: the tides acconling to Pytheas of Massilia are due to ?t)djtJ<.UO"t.r; and (J.dwcrt<; of the moon. Ant. Diog. 4 IXO~op.e:twmc; 'waxing and waning of the moon'. For later instances c.f. Philo, Op. mund. 101 (quoted below) and Spe.c. leg. Il,57 (Je:'A.Y;vrJr; cx.ul;op.ev7jt;; "e x:rx.t !JZtoU[Lev'Y)c;, Arrianus, l!pict. I,14,4 and the t.Let.c.u't'!.xt;v crx,'i)(J.a. of the moon in Vett. Val. 1,35 (p. 41,6 Kroll). In Poimandres 25 the ascending soul gives up its oo)~'Y)'m~~v hepyr::~ctv XIX~ p.etu>'t'~x~v to the sphere of the moon. The verb p.. does not occur before Xenophon (Eq. 5,9 'moderate', Cyr. VI,3,17 'disparage'): for the middle voice C. Hi_pp., l!..pid. I,26,y' (II,690,2 L.), of the spleen, cf. Xen. Mem. IV,S,l. The subst. p.dw;~c; is used in a more general sense by Arist., GC 320b31 (= ~"p0£crL~, of natural phenomena), Cat. 15a14 (one of the d?hJ xw~cre:w~. cf. also Sextus, M. X,38 and Aet. 1,23,2 = Dox. 319,8.); 111eophr., CP IV,4,11; Ar. Did. Epit. Fr. 20 (Dox. 458_,5, on Chrysippus) and Fr. 27, ibd. 462,20 ff. (on Posidonius}. Hippol., Phil. 19,16 (Dox. 569,8 ff., 5 times); Nicom. Geras., lntrod. p. 3,13 Hoche

47

-roc E:v yev€creL xod <:pOopif xoct w)~-YjcreL xoct [.leLwcreL; of the bones C. Hipp.,

Mocht. 24 (IV,368,10 L.). -To my knowledge, the use of the active voice !-lewucret. as in Hebd. is unique (cf. also below s.v. -rekL6o); perhaps analogous to cre"A:~V1J <:p0£voucret. (Arist., Cael. 291b20)). O£crL~ 'waning' Arist., HA 582b2, CA 767a4. The verb cpO. with !-l·~v ('month') current since Homer (Od. 14,lb2, cf. e.g. Thuc., V, 19). Note that Galen's Glossary (XIX, p. 151 K.) explains <:pOlvs:L by [.LZLOihocL and 3 other synonymous expressions. Sec further below s.v. Ts:kd,cu. 19. [.tloc (1,41 1{. [.LL~v ... ev niicrL -:-&~w; tr. unum, crste): 'f'irst'. The unum of the Latin transl. makes it a certainty that [.LLocv is not a copyist's error. The ordinal instead of the numeral sense is only found in the Septuaginta, cf. LSJ s.v. d~ l,h and Schwyzer 1,595 4 , where this use is explained as a Scmitism. It is in any case unclassical. That the ordinal is meant is clear from Ch. 2,50 R. ~euT€p1Jv, 58 H.. T(JL't"1JV etc. N .B. For [.LLOC in the Septuaginta, cf. Genesis 1,5 xocl E:y€veTo ~crnfpoc xoct ey€ve-ro npw£, -~[.tfpet. [.LLOC. It is interesting to read Philo's comment, 44 op. mund. 15 (I, p. 4,15 ff. Cohn- \V.) &x&crTJj ~E TWV -~[.tzpwv &nfveL[.LS:V EVLOC 't'WV 't'OU 71:\t.VTO~ T[.l"f)[.l
was something special. 20. n
48

in Philo, III p.108,18-9 Cohn-W., metaphorical: &.yeuO"'t'OL.. 't'oiJ 7tocv't'p6rpou yeufLoc-roc; O"orp£occ;. Universally rejected varia lectio for Aesch., Sept. 294 mX.v-rpofLoc; (see e.g. Groeneboom ad l. and the foolish explanation of Schol. Dindorff p. 334). Twice in the Orphic hymn-book (not earlier than the second Cent. A. D.), 10,12 and 26,2 Quandt, both times of the earth. Transliterated. in ps.-Galen's comm., p. 19,5 v d Bergstr. 21. 7tZ7tct. vrnc; (4, 18 R.; tr. maturitas, reifen tlie Friichte, p. 57 Bergstr., 17 v c): 'maturing', of plants. Not before Arist. (twice, Mete. 380all and 21, in a botanical and a medical sense respectively); once in Theophr. HP, III,4,1; 6 times in CP, e.g. I,l4,3. Philo, 1, p.227,12 Cohn-W., in a metaphorical sense. lle7toc£vw, of fruits, is Ionic (Hdt. I,193; IV,199) and Attic (e.g. Aristoph., Pax 1163); for its use by authors of the Hippocratic Corpus see LSJ s.v., 3. N.B.: no clenominatives in -ocvmc; occur before Aristotle, the only exception being (according to Schwyzer I, p. 505) Plato, Crat. 405b2 m:plppuvcrLc;. In Erotian, p. 69,8 N achmanson the word 7te7tOCO"fL6c; occurs; the reference is to de Hum. 3, V,480,2 L. 22. 7tEfH7tOAL'IJ (2,19 1<..; o~ov ... 7t.-c;; tr. iter circueuncli, kreisen (in the paraphrase)): 'revolution' of (at least) the stars, sun and moon. Only here; the usual form is 7te:pm6A'IJcrtc;: Heracl. Pont., fr. 89,9 Wehrli = Diog. Laert. VIII,4; then Graeco-Roman, e.g. Philo I, p.14,15 Cohn-W., IV, p.l48,14, V, p.9,12. An interesting parallel is the sentence on the quadrivium (in Ionic) quoted Nicom. Geras. Introd. 1,3,3 (p. 6,11 ff. Hoche) from' Av~poxu81jc; b IIu6ocyoptx6c;, which mentions x,)xAwv 7tepmoA~me:c; as the subject-matter of astronomy. Androcycles, who wrote on Pythagorean symbola, lived about the end of the fourth cent. B.C. The fragment is hardly authentic, 46 but this does not diminish its relevance. Nicomachos himself, o.c. I,3,2 (p. 6,7) defines the subject-matter of astronomy as -ro rpep6fLt:Vov xor.t 7te:pL7toAoiJv. The verb 7tt:pmoAE<•) does not occur in the here required sense before Plato, Tim. 41a3 m:pmoAouow (of the heavenly bodies; in Crat. 405c (etymology of 'Apollon') the verb JtoAdv and the subst. 7t6Al)O"tc; are found); cf. Arist., 1t. cpLA. fr. 12a I<.oss; Epicurus, Ep. Pyth. (3),112,4 Arr. 'to make a complete revolution', i.e. to vanish out of sight -rpocpo~.

said by Gow-Page to be Aeschylean, is only doubtfully so: Aesch. fr. 192 N. = 323,14-5 lVIettc is printed by ~1ettc ),lfL\Ie
49

every 24 hours. Common in Philo, e.g. II, p.248,l0 Cohn-W., IV, p.281,.17. - Possibly 7!.-i'IJ seemed more Ionic to our author than -1)0'~£;; Fki!-icher instances partly parallel neologisms in Praec. 47 : ~uyxu>pt·l'), &-mq.wcrxv7tL1J, and in Decent. 48 : &€>e~maoc~[LOVL1J, O:-rocpocx-ro7to~L1J or -no~·fJ<>l1J. The verb (see also above) occurs l:lcbd. 2,10 H.. ; here the heavenly bodies arc said to 'make the earth revolve' (TI)v y:~v 7te:pmoMe:w mm:u[L<:VoL). BHt 2,14 K ff. this leads to the conclusion that the earth is stationary! The hest version of the Latin translation (Ambr.) has terrae circuitmn facientes. Harder proposed to change -r·~v y~v into -:-~c; yYjc; and to read 7tt::pmof..L1JV for 1te:pmoA:tew, which is a most likely emendation. 4v It is also possible that after -r-~v y~v the gen. -r~c; y'~c; has dropped out, which in its turn could have caused the change from substantive into verb. If this is correct, -rc. would occur twice. 23. 7tp6crfl:::<; oWJ[Lii~oucrw (cf. above, p. 9 ). Other meanings: Aesch., A.g. 1392 'sown corn'; Xen. HG IV,6,B 'so\ving of corn'. The same semantic change as v,.jth cpu-r~l..(rt., q.v. 26. ':"E:A<:~ow (1,65 R.; a:::t..11v1)c; ... 't"e:Ae:~ouo-l)c;; tr. crescentis): 'to wax full', of the moon. The intr. is curious (cf. also above, s. v. [..tZLou>), but cf. ArisL, CA 757b24; the pass. GA. 776a31, 'to bring into ripeness'. I have found no other instances of the verb predicated of the moon. For the expression cf. perhaps Aet. 11,29,4 -r~v -re:J..docv 7tocvcref..YJvov. T. in temporal expressions: Plat., Pltc. 272d7 €rce:~a~ ... O.c. 20. pt) ·d;v y'ijv m:pmlA"I)vW rto~o::op.€'1101, but printed the ms.-text in his 1913-edition.

47

50

xpovoc, h·z:Ae01J, the solemn language of the myth; for -re:A€w cf. LSJ s.v. 1,7. For the waxing of the moon Arist. uses tXu~cX.vw APo. 90a3, Cael. 291 bl9. For the full moon Homer has 7t),~floucra, ll. XVIII,484. It is difficult to resist the temptation of explaining this somewhat catachrestic use of -re:Aet6u> by means of a reference to the vocabulary of aritluuetics. A 'perfect number' (&ptO(J.oc, -ri:/,ewc,) is equal to the sum of its divisors. Now 28 is such a perfect number: 14 7 4 2 1, cf. Nicom. Gents. Introd. 1,46,2, p. 34,14-40,10 Hoche. This number is also that of the days of the month: 4 x 7 days, 'J;'heo Smyrn., Exp. 102,19 ff. Hill er i.l.~\1 0~ XIXO' e~OO(J.rt.lb..; -rfcrcrOtpOlC, CfU(J.ftA'I)pOU't'OCL; it is otxtrro(J.o<; in the first week, full in the second, olxo-ror.Lo<:; again in the third and Starb allC\V in the fourth: -rfj -re-rtfp-r-n !!UVOOOV 7t0LOU(J.~V"f)<; 7tpb<; 1/j'Awv XOlL &px·i;v h&pou p:t)VO<;. Philo, op. mund. 101, Cohn-W. I, p. 35,2 ff.: OCitO (J.
+ + + +

1.1.dwGw &vo:xoc(J.7t•m'>o-rlc;· a.\l~e-rOt~ (J.EV y.Xp &.7to -r'ij:; 7tpw't'l):; (J."f)Voe~oou:; ~mf. '' ";'£V ( ,:X(J.'f'E:(l}:; a.zpt oLXO";'Of.l.v'J Yj(J.E:po:t:; e;-;:,,x, ELV Z'!'<:p1Xt<; 't'OO'OCU't'O:t<; ltAI)O'l1pO:'fj:; yLve't'OCl XIXL 1t~/,w 1Jn00'':'perpe:t StiX'Jf.oO'potJ.OiJO'IX rljv Ol!J't'~\1 oMv, &.1to (J.EV -r'ijc; 7tkfj
)

I

1

~

I

f'

I

(

I

I

I

..

\

in which, moreover, the number 7 is discussed; the phases of the moon are an instance of the universal power of this number. 5° 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 ordinem septinari·1~m). If this interpretation is correct, the use of the (among other things) arithmet£cal terms 7tp6
° Cf. further below,

Ch. VI, 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. rpu't"cx:A(cx {4,5 R.; tr. 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. XII,314) 'planted place'; Ap. H.hod. II,1003 'planting'; Arat., Phaen. 332 (plur., quoted above s.v. ~McrTYJ
The conclusion must be, I think, that this section of Hebd. 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 (cxu-r6apo{-to~, Mx_vwm~ and the seemingly archaic 7tepmo:A(Yj) are &1tcx~ dpYj{-tevcx. Five words (&xo:AouO(Yj, evcxv't"(wcr~~.
61

52

Peripatetic technical terms are relative] y frequent; they occur in the cosmological and botanical parts of H ebd. A possible explanation is that the author used Theophrastus' doxographical work (ora later revision) 52 c.q. works by philosophers ·influenced by Theophrastus' systematical andfor 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 t~at of other late works within the Corpus Hippocraticum.

See further below, Ch. V .A, p. 130 ff. and esp. p. 1.37-8 n. 36. See below, Ch. IV, p. 84 n. 9; p. 86 and ibd. n. 102; p. 108 ff. an
52

53

53

CHAPTER Ill

THE PRESOCRATlC PARALLELS

The Presocratic charactt:r of the cosmology in Chapters l. 2 and 6 of Hebd. constitutes what is perhaps the principal argument pro the 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-pictun~ its author takes for granted is that of this period. 3 This last observation is of fu.ndament
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~pictnre would not only be Presocratic, but even early Presocratic.fi Admittedly, however, the wording of Hebd. in these crucial passages is ambiguous. Also, it can noi: be proved that the world-picture as a whole is exclusively Presocratic, let alone early Presocrd.tic. 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 non est itla#o. I believe that thto Presocratic parallels can be explained without our having to assume that the first section of Hebd. is itself a prodnct 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, I shall confine myself mainly to a study of those Presocra.tic 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, ho·wever, I shaH briefly snmmarizc the cosmology of the first section of Hebd. The universe of Hebd. is (of course) divided into seven parts, (1) the 'inseparable' and colu x6cr[Lo<;, encompa.ssing the whole, along which 'summer and winter pass'; (2) the stars, shining with subtle and reflected light, the warmest 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 subdiv--ided into sea, rivers, sources and stagnant waters; (7) the allnurturing earth at the centre of the universe, subdivided into (a) hard stony parts, (h} earth proper and (c) humid and wmm parts. ·- 111e portions of the universe below and above the earth are equal in character (1.3eYJ) and in number and revolve in a circle around the earth, moved by themselves. Both the outennost encompas·;ing heaven and the earth are stationary. The moon from its central position connects the other portions of the universe. Except for onter heaven and earth things are moved by themselves as well a.s by the 'eternal bdngs'. The &

6 7

See above, Ch. I, p. 29, arrd p. 29-30 n. :148. See further below, Ch. V A, p. 130 ff. See below, Ch. IV.

55

stars cause the sequence of the seasons, and move in the same as weil as in opposite directions. Taken as a whole, tl:t.is picture of the universe is, of course, a descendant of the cosmologica.l model of Anaximander - stable earth at the centre, enveloping heavenly bodies. This was pointed out by, among others, H.oscher 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 uot discarded. 9 In Hebd. we have such a modified model, as Kranz10 and others have duly pointed out: Anaximander's order of cosmical bodies was earth, stars, moon, sun. The right order, which we find in flebti., presumably already was introduced by Anaximeues. 11 But this again does not imply that Hehd. is directly influenced by Anaximenes himself, because his correctjon became universally accepted by the overwhelming majority of ancient cosrnologists. 12 Moreover, there is no evidence that Anaximander's universe was dosed by a surrounding outer sphere (although some scholars have argued that his &m:Lpov had that shape and function,1 3 this is at best no more than an implausible guess). Anaximenes, it is true, closed the heavens by a solid and probably frozen xpu{T"t'oc.!..J.oe:Lae.; (cf. the cold outer heaven of Hebd.). Roscher 1911, 61, 68 ff. etc.; Kranz o.c. 180. Cf. Kahn, A·naximander. esp. p. 199 ff. Although Kahn's claims are perhap!:i somewhat exaggerated, no one. I think, will object to my more modest rephrasing. 10 O.c. 180. 11 VS 13A14. D. O'Bricn, Derived Light and Eclipses i-n the Fifth Century, JHS 68 (1968), 114--127, argues (116-7) that Anaximcnes stnck to Anaxima.nder's sequence, because 'earthy bodies' lv -r(j> -r61t

e:poJLtvoc.; txe!·1ot.; are the cause of eclipse;; (13.A7 = Hipp., Ref. I,7. VS I, p. 92,15-6), and because an eclipse would he caused by the Ohtitruction of our vision of moon and sun by the interposition of such a body. Probably. however. these licrTpCL include sun and moon {this is also suggested by auy.rre:p!.q>epofLevo>:o; !:xdvr.>to;). In Aetiu!;' report (13Al4), which Iike·wise mentions the 'dark bodies' (U,l3,10), the &o"t#e; which do not turn below the earth (II.16,6) must include at least the sun, as is clear from Arist. Mete. 354a28 ff. (also quoted at 13A14). This is confirmed by Hippolytus: although &a
8

56

Curiously, though, there is no explicit evidence that Anaximenes' universe 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 xpurr't-rt./,/,ostiH~ is only half a sphere. 14 If this is correct, the earliest evidence for the idea of an encompassing outer sphere is in Parmcnides although even here our data arc not wholly unambiguous. Usually Bll ,2-3 Of·.1)(.1.7t0~ I ecrxrJ.-rO~ (·~o· tLmo~ x6cr!LO~. But the idea that the outer heaven surrounds the whole is expressed in B10,5: o>jpiXVOV &p.!'f'k exovTIX, which has the tac;k of ndprJ.T' if.zstv ocmpwv (BJ0,7). \Vholly unambiguous is only the doxugraphical statement of ABius 11,7' l (28A37 ,5-6) "rQ m:ptezov ~z n:fcr!Xc; TzLX(j'Jc; I)[;~'Y)V uTsps(;v un&pzstv. The cnvelopi11g outer sphere became a standing feature of Greek cosmology, 15 just as did Anaximander's earth at the ce11tre of the universe smTounded by the heavenly bodies and Anaximcnes' idea of the correct sequence of these bodies. Some scholars have assumed that Hebd. 2,15-6 H. is a direct quotation from Parm. Bll,2, but (a) Parmenides' wording is different; (b) the 'Pythagorean' parallel adduced by Kranz proves that (to say the least) the name r)/,u!L1to~ could also be used in later times. 16 Another of Kranz' arguments in favour of the Milesian character of the cosmology of Hebd. is that Hebd., just like the early Ionians, assigned the same (astronomical?) 'sphere' to both the fixed stars and the planets.U This is not correct: Hebd. Ch. l does not speak of 'spheres', but subdivides the universe into 'regions' which are in a certain order, using the \vords x6cr[Loc;, !Lo!:prt., (Lzpoc; and -rli~t~ to refer to these regions. In the same \Yay sea, rivers, sources and pools together occupy the sixth [L£po~ (1,78 ff.R.). This leaves sufficient room for a plurality of astronomical 'spheres' within the one TtX~tc; of the stars even if this has not been explicitly said.I8 Guthric, 1IGPh 1, l3il. The Atomists, Heraclirles l.'onticus etc. are, of course, excepted. 16 Kranz' parallel, o.c. lRJ, is Philolau>' A16 (A et. II,7, 7 ), which has bePn proved by \V. Burkert to consist of two mutually contradicting parts, the latter of which, containing the word i.l:A•JtL7tO~. has heen appended in later (i.e. Hellenistic) times. Cf. above, Ch. II, p. 42 and ibd. n. 25. The first: exact parallel (IJAurmr,c; = outer heaven) is z.-:;pin. 977b2. Cf. further helnw, Ch. IV, p. 121 ff. 17 O.c. lRl. (Kranz assumes that Ilebd. 2,6-1- ff. H.. refers to the seven planets; for this problem, s. below, Ch. VB, p. 138 ff.) 18 Cf. Gehr, Entst. u. Entw. d. wiss. Weltb, 209.

H

16

57

The light of the stars is characterized, among other things, by [J. of Chios, who lived somewhat later than Kranz' proposed date for Hebd. Kranz begs the question by assuming that this theory must be older than our evidence permits ns to conclude. 23 At the beginning of Hebd. Ch. 2 we learn that the x6cr[J.o> around the eatih are self-moved, while 2,47 ff.R. states that 'all other things' ... (i.e. except earth and outer heaven) 'are easily moved by themselves and by the eternal beings'. 21 The rnoon 25 occupies the centre between 19 O.c. 182. Kram; admits that it is not easy to understand this passage when one tries to supply a connection with the theory of Anaximenes. Roscher 19U . 61. argues that the author of l-lebd. 'Anha.nger der Lehre von m'n(vcocrtt; und (J.&.vwcn<;; gewesen ist', and p. 66 has the earth arise from the w<Jter by a process of m):v.'JWO'L~. I shall return to this point later (s. below, Ch. IV, p. 107 ff.). 2o Ch. II, p. 46-7. 21 Ch. IT, p. 38. 2Z O'Brien, o.c. 122 ff. <'lrgucs that we should distingui!;;><;. There is, ho·wever, no direct evidence that the 'kindling' of the moon's light by the sun is a fifth-century idea. o·'Britm argues (o.c. 120) that Eudemus is a trustworthy witness. The extract from his work ap. Theo ( = Fr. 145 Vvehrli), however, contains gro::;s inaccuracies; it attributes e.g. to Anaximander the theory that i] yY) (tcr't't) ;tE:'tt
58

the . ·TOC1J't'"l)\l <.zr:;w o:t&ov cpl)ow. It is Diels' \mzp which, by implication, introduces the idea of a stth-lunary world into the text. His supplementation is very probable, but takes us no further than a late report on Alcmeon, which probably projects later ideas upon the ancient thinker. ·For these ideas there is, to my knowledge, no explicit evidence in Akmeon, although, of course, he did attribute divinity to the heavenly bodies (24A12) 28 ; (2) Empedocles (3l)A62 (= Hippol. 1,4,3) 29 : "our world is full of evils, and (:pace Diets). But it i;; doubtful that Empcdocles l.c. has the heavenly bodies in mind, cf. Eranz, r·s J.319. ad l., where he prders to identify &fLf~r'l~'·X with the air. On the H~t:x see below Ch. lY, p. 77 n. 62, p. 127 if. and the pages and notes of Ch. IV referred to ibcl. p. 129 n. 31::!. 25 Kranz and H.oscher do not say much about the conception of the ~un in lfebd. Note, however, that Ch. 2,69 ff.R. tell'> us that sun and moon folio''' one another. It appears that i\.naxagoras was the first to teach that the pathways of sun and moon are connected: Prod. in Tint. III,63,26 ff. D. ( '·= 59:\75) IH&:-rwv ... -r·~'J ztc; 7?'J :-t6cruov ;cp6o8ov 7::)-:i.:)'J (s('. of sun and moon) (~)::; ~;··J'J·t1 :,.;.... €v-r;'J n:J.r:z;)eO(J)xe:, y;.-xt. t)~J3Z t'ct.l~rtlj; ~p~ev ct.O~.::,~ r~~ ~j1t'r;6~ae<,>;, f).J: '.A'Jrt~,xyOp":; -;o~J-c-o n:pi'~-ror; 1)i'C'S/.e
Eudemus' History of Astron01ny as the quotation in The<) (s. p. 58 n. 22 abcwe), which may throw some doubt upon its credibility). 26 These are said to 'pa->s through one another', ~t' &nT)I.V!'rx, which could he interpreted as an incomplete reminiscence (of a sort) of Heraclitus' formula. for elemental change (B36, B72, and especially the Stoicizing versions collected by D.-I<. as B76). See further belo·w. Ch. IV, p. 76 ff., p. 89 ff. 27 This is not a Presocratic idea; see below. Ch. IV. p. 7fi ff. 28 Cf. Bnrkert, WW, 227 n. 36, who also argues against Kranz' next parallel. See also ihd. 310 (on Eudoxus). 29 Also quoted by H.oscher, 1911 p. 73 (whose second parallel is Philolaus B2l. from r-. t)J'>X'ii~. a Hellenistic pseudepigraphon; cf. Zeller, Ph. d. G-r. I. 369 ff. and J::lurkcrt, o.c. 225 ff.).

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. Bll8 says the e1tb &.lpo~ q>epet)'(}cx~ -r~v y~v {cf. also Aristoph., Nub. 264, VS 64C2, vol. II, p. 68,5-6). In the passage from Flat. printed in DK as 64C2 (VS II p. 67,28) we read ou-roc (se. o&~pfy~c;·ISX"'JiJ.OC"(cCalso'Eurip., Troad.884, ibd. p. 67,30llific; ao See above, p. 57 n. 16. 81 Roscher, 1911, p. 63-·~ is more explicit, quoting evidence for meteorological theories of A.naximander 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. Cl1. 1. Cf. further below, Ch. TV, p. 117. 32 Kranz 182. Cf. also 13A7,12-13.

60

The syncretising of Anaximander and Anaximenes which we find in Hebd. is also a feature of the thought of Diogencs; and though e7tox.dcr0ocL is not attested for Diogcnes, OX'fJ[.LOC occurs in passages influenced by him.33 We are also informed that the earth is 'aus dem \Vasser entstanden',34 Ch. 1,94 Re~ Moc't'oc; &oucroc; Kranz refers to 'Thales and his pupils'. 35 However, llebd. 1,90 ff.R. not only speaks about the earth as being i~ uooc't'oc;, but tells us that it bears animals and plants upmt its surface xoct Ecr't't 7tOCV't'po<:poc; e~ u3oc-roc; eoucroc. The last three words may mean (a) 'originated from water' or (b) 'consists of water'. 36 To make a distinction of this kind in relation to an early Presocratic philosopher is, perhaps, captious, since to Thales the ~PXYJ (origin) of the earth continues to be the stuff of which it 'really' consists. In Hebd., however, a conscious or positive ambiguity may be involved. I do not want to deny that ps. Hippocrates intends to say that, originally, the earth came into being from water. 37 On the other hand, I am under the impression that an ambiguity is involved in so far as e~ uooc't'oc; eoucroc also elucidates the epitheton 7tocv't'porpoc; - 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 H ebd. and one of Aristotle's comments upon Thales. At Met. A,983b17 ff. (11A12) he puts forth several motives which, as he assumes, may have motivated Thales in choosing water as &px.~· After suggesting the connectiun between moisture and sperm and the relation between moisture and heat 38 as possible motives he continues: ),IY.~~>'J tcrwc; '!'~V \moA'Yj'fV 't'OCU't'"I)V ex 't'OU 7t.XV't'WV op~v T~V -rporp·~v u·rp?t.v oi'icrocv. Aristotle appears to believe that his interpretation is corrcct. 39 But it is an interpretation, no more and no less, and it is surely a remarkable coincirlence that the vestiges OX.'YJfLOC x:r.A.).

On bro;cdcr(ku in llebd. cf. further below, Ch. IV, p. 109-10; on the earth at the centre of the universe ibd., 119-20. 34 Kranz 182. 3 5 So already Roscher 1911, p. 66. 36 Cf. LSJ, s.v. ~x. 111,1. a1 Cf. below, Ch. IV, p. 107 ff. ss H.ebd. 6, § 1,20 fLR. mentions sperm and calidum humidum. 39 tcrw~ in Aristotle often non dubitantis est, sed cum quadam rnodestia asseve-rcmtis (Bonitz, Index Aristotelicus 347b32 ff.) Theophrastus appears to have omitteu the (crwc;; cf. 11A13, esp. Al3,17 ff. Presumably, this information was incorporated into the doxography. 33

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. 40 The earth is at the centre of the universe, and does not move: . >'i ' ' •. ~ 1> ' ~ ' 2, 24' f.f • R • Y.Wt"Cl.\ [LE:GOV u<: -rov XOGfLOV 'tj YYJ 'l<.E:t[J--V'tj'.' '<.V 'rfp YJ~pt oxee't'O:t, rt "• ; ' .~' ·~ ~ B 11) 'r T ' ~' Z•VC
I

1

(

t

1.

,

,

1

&vw. oikw 't"Z o•.sx.ew (6·~ ~xer.v Boli) 't'tX '\E: h oel;,r.'!Jc; ;o.:al '\'cl. e~ &pLO''re:p'~~. nep1. 1riicro:v "~v y~v o\J·n•)t; ~xer.. The stability of the earth is not proved by its equidistance to the other bodies w:ithin the universe or to

XcX'\(t)

x.oc~

the circumference, as in Anaximander and others, but taken for granted. From its stability together with its being at the centre follows (cf. ciHJ'l:e) that up and down, left and right are relative concepts. The existence of antipodes (">oia~ x.X'T(u) is assumed. This theory has been thought to derive from that of Anaximander. The problem is: did Anaximancler speak of antipodes, and did he consider up and do-vvn, left and light to be relative concepts? In regard to the antipodes Anaximandcr (12Al1,(3)) thought that -rwv 8e emm~8Cilv Cj} !Jlv trn~e:~~xocp.ev, o3e &.v,.HJs:-rov urd.pX,e:L. TilC reference is to the flat surfaces of the cylindrical earth. The doxography only tells us that there is a second flat surface, but not that it is assumed to be inhabit(~cl. Nor is there any evidence at all that Anaximander spoke in terms of the abolition of an absolute high and low. The only documentary evidence which has been quoted in this connection is the passage from H cbd. we are considering at present ..n Kahn says that the idea in Hebd. must be primitive, because Hcbd. refers to our side as 'up'. 42 But this reference has been introduced into the text by Boil's emendation, 43 -r&8::: p.ev -roc &vw for ms. -.oc 8£ !J.fv1:ot !f.vw, which is unnecessary in itself and destroys the balanee between ..a 8e !J.enor. &.vco XOC't'(J). • • ..<X ae x&:rw .&vU>. \Ve should therefore keep the text as transmitted. Burkert44 saw a reff.'rence to antipodes in Philolaus

° For the interpretation of l.J;

ilil:x-ro<; ioucr:x d. further below, Ch. IV, p. 81 ff. Kahn, A naximander 84 ff. ·· Arist. Cael. 295bl0 if., in spe3.king of Anaximander's earth, says nothing about the relativity of th~' concepts 'up' and 'down', but only that a body like this earth has no 11eed to move in either of these (or any other) directions. •t Ibd. 85, n. 3. 43 Lebensalt. 219. 44 WW 248-9. I have followed here the text of B17 as reconstructed by Burkert, a reconstruction which i> pc•ssible but far .irom certain. As printed by D-K., Bl7 (a) does not refer to antipodes at all, (h) presupposes a central earth, Le. cannot be by Philolaus. 4

41

62

(44)B17, from the Bacchae (but not in Doric!):

)

I

I

,,

-ra <-rE> Ot\ICo J •.., \ -rou tJ.ecrou u7te\ICY.\I't"L(o<; xet(leVot -rot<; x:x:rco. 'TOt<; jotp xot:'t"Ctl 'rO xoc·rco-roc't'u> f.Ltpo<; ecr-rtv c~cr7tep 't'o &vco-r&..co, xocl -r&..!J...r~.. wcrwhCt)<; z .... l •. , where the relativity ""'

I

(

I

J

-

I

••• EO"'rt \

I

I

of 'up' and 'down' is also demonstrated. Bnrkert is in favour of accepting this fragment as genuine, because of (a) the parallel with Jlebd., which he thinks is characterized by the same 'miihsame Darstellung' as Philolaus B17, and because (b) Plato in the Timaeus 'mit dem gleichen Prublem viel eleganter fertig geworclen 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 \Ve are told (44A17, Aet. III,l1,3) that the people on our earth never see tlw inhabitants of the counter-earth, and vice versa, because both earth and counter-earth al'ways 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 the counter-earth cannot function as antipodes on Burkert's interpretation of Phil. Bl7 for our 'highest' also is their 'highest'. B17, already suspect because not written in Doric, apparently speaks in t6ms of a central earth (it puts a great emphasis upon the !J.Euov of the universe), and in this way agrees more with the unauthentic second part of Phil. Al6·l6 than with the true worldpicture of Philolaus. The earliest locus which without any possible doubt argues in favour of the relativity of spatial concepts like 'up' and 'down' is Plat., Thn. 62d-63b, on the spherical earth at the centre of the spherical universe. Of course this passage (which is not the first in Plato to treat the question why the spherical earth is at rest at the centre47) continues the line of thought originating in Anaximander and Parmenides. But the conceptual analysis will be Plato's own. The relativity of 'up' and 'down' is not a feature of the earlier account in the Phaedo, \vhile his definition of ocvw and x&-rco in the T£maeus is part of a larger exposition, beginning 61c, in the course of which a number of concepts is explained. 61d5 ff. 'hot' is explained by reference to the mathematical properties of fire-particles; 62a5 ff. explains 'cold' in a similar way, and so does 62b6 ff. for r;y../:r,p6v and fLi7.t. Otx6v. 'Heavy' 45 46 47

Ibd. 249. See above, p. 57 n. 16. The first is Phaed. l08c-110b, esp. l08e4-l09a6.

63

and 'light' are elucidated in 62c2 ff. and 63b2 ff. These qualities derive from the properties of the elements \\
64

things for granted', we almost automatically are led to a discussion of later thought. In our discussion, we have purposively ignored the hebdomadic disguise in which the cosmology is wrapped. But this is a very important aspect of this theory, for it points at something else the author of Hebd. Ch. 1-11 (the first section as a whole) apparently takes for granted, viz. that all things are governed by number. The theory that all things are dominated by one number is nothing but a variation of the theory that all things are governed by number in g{meral. It has been remarked that theories about and belief in the magical properties of the number seven are found inside and outside Greece from 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 u-n-iversal explaining power of number was Pythagoras. 63 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 ocpLS!li!J ~e 't"E 7tocv•' e7teoLx<:v 54 which \'I'C 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 Number-speculation 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 Kranz and disputed by Roscher (1919 ! )57 points to a date for H ebd. Ch. 1-11 which may be much later than thedatesomewherewithin the Presocratic period which has been generally assumed up till now. sz Kranz, o.c. 187 ('die Sieben ist Orientalin'); De Vogel, Pythagoras 173 ff.

and the evidence refeiTed to ibd., 174 n. 1. " 3 E.g. Arist. Alet. A, 987bl0 ff.; b28. Aristoxenus, fr. 23 Wehrli. 5 ~ Quoted Sextus 1\1. IV,2 and VII,94, 109. Cf. also the properties of the -re:'t"pxxTut; as defined in the Pythagorean Oath (number 10 as the source and root of everlasting nature). 55 In Early Pythagoreanism, 7 represents xx1po.;: A.rist. 11iet. 985b30 and Alexander's comment, p. 38,16 Hayduck; cf. De Vogel, Pythagoras 115 ff. and 174 (Pythagoras did not introduce the number seven everywhere). 66 Philo's Op. mund. is a case in point. Cf. further below, Ch. VI. 57 Roscher completely overlooked the crucial point made in the text, viz. that number is considered to have universal explaining power.

65

CHAPTEH IV

LATER ELEMENTS IN THE COSMOLOGY OF HEBD. CH.1-11; POSIDONIUS?

1. Our study of the Presocratic parallels in Ch. Ill did not yield a satisfactory t.a.q. fur the composition of llcbd. 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 fallen for granted in those chapters of Hcbd. which arc the subject of our investigation. Ch. 2,1 ff. R we hear that the x6cr!J.OL above and below the earth move around it by a self-moved circular motion (<XuT6apo!J.ov 1 xux/..wmv). What exactly is meant by these x6cr!J.oL 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 (uq:/ hvuTwv ... xwe:"iT<XL) and by the 'eternal beings"'. \Ve 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 his 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 Charmides, 2 made this idea into a corner1 Explained by Galen as meaning IX>hox!vlJh6i>pof.tO<;. 2 Charm. 168e9-10 ... x[\ll)O:H<; IXIJT-/j eiXUT'~\1 xwe:i:v. Cf. H.. Dieterle, Platons Laches und Charmides. Untersuchungen zur elenktisch-aporetischen Stmktur der platoni-

66

stone of his later philosophy. We first hear about it at some length in the Phacdrus, 3 where it is proved that self-motion4 is the specific quality of Soul, without which the revolution of the heavens and all becoming would come to a stand-sti11. 5 Substantially, this is still Plato's doctrine in his latest work. Soul is a self-moving principle, 6 which is the cause of all change and all movement for all things 7 and which steers the heaven. 8 In the Timae~ts, 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 Soul. 9 Already iu the Timaeus, it seems that at least some of the heavenly bodies are attributed with a soul of their own in order to account for their power tu cuuuteract lite movement of the circles of the Different. 10 Anyhow, N am. 898d explicitly attributes an individual soul to each of the heavenly bodies, and though Plato does not make it 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 Epinornis 13 which, if not schen Fr·iihdialoge, diss. Freiburg i.Dr., 1966, 244 (with references to other literature, to which add H. Cherniss, Aristotle's Criticism of Plato and the Academy l, Baltimore 19++ (21964). 435). 3 245c ff.; cf. also G. J. De Vries, Cumm. on the Phaedrus, 121. - The Phaedruspassage is translated by Cicero, Somn. Scip. 27 and Tusc. I,53-54. Cf. below, p. 89, n. 120. 4 Plato uses terms like -ro <X1h·<J au-ro x~vouv, which he distinguishes from -ro im' :ii\i,ou xtvOU[LE'Iov. These terms continued to be used, cf. e.g. the quotation from Sextus, below, p. 7~, n. 68. ;; 245e1; 'I] rr:i'l't"<X TE oupcxVO'J rriact\1 TE ye\leow t11J(J.7tEt10Ut1<XV cr•'ij\I<X~. Cf. J. B. Skemp, The Theory of j1,[oliuu ·in Plato's Later Dialugues, Cambridge 1942 (Amsterdam "1967), G. De Vric~. o.c. ad 245d8 (p. 123) takes o•Jpa'lo<; to mean 'the universe', which is perhaps less likely. Cf. also below, p. 122 n. 288, the quotation of ?haeclr. 246c1-2. 6 N um. 896a1 -r~\1 ouvcx1J.EV7JV au-r~\1 cxu-r·r;v x~'IEI:v x~'l~a~'l. 7 Nom. 896b1 [LET<X~o:A'ijc; n: x<Xt x~v~aew<; ocrrcia·l)c; oct-r(a ocrrormv. 8 Nom. 896e1 -rov oupcx'IOV OLO~XELV. e Tim. 35b ff., 38c-d. See further F. M. Cornford, Plato's Cosmology, London 5 1966, 72 ff. Plato does not state that the motions of Soul and those of the heavens are identical. 1 ° Cf. Cornford, o.c. S7 and the ancient commentators quoted by him, ibd. 107, n.3. 11 Three possibilities are suggested in Nom. 898e; cf. Skemp, o.c. 86-7. 12 Cf. G. E. R. Lloyd, Polarity and Analogy. Two Types of .1rgumentation in Early Greeh Thought, Cambridge 1966, 257. 13 981e.

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 his 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 Receptacle14 which causes the random movement of 'like to like' 15 and (b) by the revolution of the heavens, which counteracts to a certain extent the effects of the 7tAO:V(J)(J.eV"fl o:h(o: by forcing the elementary particles inwards, 16 so that they pass through one another. Some particles are resolved by this process into their constituating triangles, which can combine again to form nevv elementary particles of the same or of other elements. Fire has the greatest power of penetration (58b17tup ... de; &7to:V'!o: ~&£A1j/,u0e (J.&Aw>cx), that of the other elements is in proportion to their relative degree of /..en-r6'!"fl<;. 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 Tim. 52d ff. In the 'precosmic' condition, elemental 'forms' shake the Receptacle and are in their turn shaken by 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: '\Vhat is really meant is that the T:A<XVW!Lt'JO'] oct·rtoc has command of all that is in the u7to8r,xi) and sets up this form of motion' (Skemp, o.c. 59). That necessity involves motion is unambiguously stated Tim. 48a6-7 TO 't''i)<; ,;),OCVW!Lib·ljc; e:!/)Q; ocl-doc<;, <jJtpe:~v n&cpuxe:v ('in what manner it is its nature to make things move'); cf. Cornford, o.c. 160 n.2. I need not enter into the difficult problem whether this Errant Cause is itself of the psychic order, as seems to be consistent with the Platonic principle that Soul is the cause of all movement (cf. above, p. 67, n. 7). See Skemp, o.c. 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 (Platons 1mgeschriebene Lehre, Stuttgart 2 1969, 196), ·which from this viewpoint would be an ultimate source of motion. 15 Tim. 52e5-53a7. Cf. Cornford o.c. 199. 16 Tim. 58a4 ff.; cf. H. Cherniss, Arist. Grit. Plat., 449 and F. Solmsen, Aristotle's System of the PhysicallVorld. A Gomparis01~ with his Predecessors. Comell Stud. in Class. Phil., Vol. XXXIII, N.Y. 1960, 64 ff. 17 Tim. 54b6-d2. For ,\ristotle's criticism see Gael. 306a2 ff. This aspect of the theory of Plato was very well known, cf. Aet. I,17 .4 ID.&-r(,)V 'l'·i 11-ev 't'ptcx aw!Lcx't'cx ... 't'p&7t-r&. de; ff.).I.O')I.a, r.Gp, rHpcx, 68wp, 't'~V 8~ y'i)v de; T~ Tr;•J'\'wv li~Lt'~'~[9.0')'t'QV. For

14

n

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. 19 It should be kept in mind, however, that Aristotle in some cases did not abandon an earlier point of vie·w, even though it conflicted with his more mature thought. 20 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. 21 For our purposes, it will not be necessary to enter into this extremely complicated question. I shall outline certain typical features of Atistotle'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

Hebd. and the Plac. cf. 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. Solmsen, Platonic Influences in the Formation of Aristotle's Physical System, in: Aristotle and Plato in the Mid-Fourth Century, Stud. gr. Iat. Gothob. XI, Gi:iteborg 1960, 213 ff., and his book referred to above, p. 68 n.l6. 19 See e.g. Vol. K. C. Guthrie, in the Introd. 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. Moraux, Quinta essentia, HE XXIV, 1209. In this article. 1197 ff. and in the introduction to his edition of Cael. in the Bude series, XXXIV H., Moraux 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. VII,l; VIII,4-5; Met. XII,6 ff. 23 This is the meaning of 'First' in 'First Unmoved 1\:lover', cf. I. Dtiring, A ristoteles, Darstellun.g und I n.terpretation. seines Denkens. Heidelberg 1966, 330-1.

69

within the universe is sustained by the eternally moving outer heaven, which is itself moved 24 by the Eternal First Unmoved .Mover. In Met. XII,8 Aristotle speaks of a plurality of Unmoved Movers, connected not only with the First Heaven, but also with the spheres of planets, sun and moon. As all heavenly natures arc eternal, the Unmoved Movers must necessarily be of the nature of an &ti)~oc; o?m£1)(. 25 In this way, though refusing to have soul serve as an ultimate principle of motion, 26 Aristotle still strives to be faithful to the Platonic postulate of the assumption of such a principle. 27 But this is not all. On another level, the function of the Platonic kinetic son] is taken over by a second principle, nature (rpumc;). 2A In the earlv books of the Physics and in Cad. Aristotle undoubtedl_y leaves us with the impression that 'nature' is an autonomous cause of motion. Phys. IJ,1, 192b8 f£. 29 defines what arc to be considered as !f'lJITEL ovTa; natural

Some passages in Cat!. do not go further than this ouler heaven itself: ),'), 279a33 ff., which says tl1at. the eterna llv moving outer spllere is the higll<·s1 divinity and that there is nothing which is xpd'-rrr,•J aTHl so cau,;es it to move; II,2,285a27 ff., which says that the outer heaven is zw~uzr,~ 'l xtVl)G~v \mo &~S!ou x~vdcrflou) is repeakd ibd., 8,1 073a27 ff. But also llw movements of the 'planets' arc &t/J!r,•Jc; (ibd., 1073a30 If., with r<'ference to Cad. I 1,3 and Phys. VIIT,i~: i.e., these movements are eternal because dl1er hy nature eternally moves in a circle). Therefore each of U1cse planetary motions must also be caused by an &£S~o~ 'Jucr(oc (ibd. 1073a32 ff., 38). - Cael. II.3,2R6a9 ff. we read that the Heaven, being a divinity, of necessity has x(vl)<WI &!/Jwv; ibd. 1,9,279a18 ff. it is stated that the heavenly bodies are eternal, cf. lhoc-:E),z\ -:ov obtocv-:-x oclf>voc. The word oclc7w, according to Aristotle, is a divinely inspired invention of the ancients, for it derives etymologically &:1to Toi3 -x!et dvx~ (ibd. 279a2il-9). Cf. Cael. II,1,284b2 on the &:t8~6't'l)~ of the Heavens, etc. That to Aristotle, the o>)prb~oc (cf. also Dox. 336,15) are &:£8~"' passed into tlw Placita, d. Aet. 11,17,5 'Ap~'>T. f.LTJ llEtcr6ctt Toc oupckv~ct -:porf>'i;~ · o•) yocp '?flocpTtf, &:!..!.' cH/Jtx. On the &:Ullx in ll ehd. cf. below, p. 77, n. 62. 2 6 Explicitly Cael. 11,1,284a27 ff. (cf. below, p. 74). 27 Solmsen, A rist. Syst. 222. 28 Cf. Solmsen, o.c. 92 ff. Cf. also E. Crnmach, Physis rmd Agrrtlwn in dcr alten Stoa, Problemata H. 6, 1932 (2 1966), 47. 29 Cf. also Cael. III,2,30lbl7 ff. rp•)m~ f.Ltv eGTtv -IJ kv oc•h<;') ('the thing itself') ... xw.JjGEwc; &:pz.J); Phys. II,1,192blil nature is defined as op11.-f)v ... [LE":x~ot..'ij~ ltt-trpuTov. 24

70

. t S are (a ) 'TO!:' -re: ~<}IIX y' !J.ep)'] ' ' (j)U,OI:, ' an d (b) 'TO!:' b )CC :V.IXL\ 't"IX OW><•>V XIXL' TO!: OCitAOC -rwv O'(u[L&-rwv, otov y~ xcd rcl.ip xoci Ot"~p xa:l uawp.!iO Both these categories, living beings as well as elemental bodies, have b &oni'to 'Le; 31 0

'

\

OI:PX'IJV •••

1

X~V-IJO"CW<:;

\

I

\

\

\

XOI:L O"'rO:uE6l<;, 'rOI: fl.i:;\1 XOC'rO:

,a oe xa:r' &'A!t.OL(t)O"Lv. 32

I

't"OitOV,

\

~\

'

,,,.-

\

'TOC OE: XIX':" OI:U<;,1JOW XIXL

The four subhmary elements are impelled towards their proper and natural places by their own natures. 33 At this stage, Aristotle does not distinguish sharply between elements and ~
This Aristotelian definition of ql)(Jt~ is given at lt.·ngth by Aetius I, 1,2 (Dox. 274,24275,12). which mentions elements. living beings, meteorological phenomena ( !), .in all of which

Jcrtc; ipz1; xt,rf.a<:w-; lw;l f;pefJ.tci.;. Cf. also Sextus, Al. X,46, which refers to Aristotle's arguments against tho Eleatics, which l1e described as thput1£xo~)~ ... O't'r. ~PXlJ xr.vTJae'~~ Za":"tv Tj rp~.lat~, Y;v &vetAov tp&~J.evo~ !J.~OZv X!.vercrerx~o (= rr. 9tA. fr. 9 Ross). Cf. also Arius Did. fr. 2 Diels (Dox. 4+8,1-2) -~ [J.ev q;•)m<; xrx't' irdvotcxv &:p;.fh. ·ri.o:; Ecr-:-t xr..vl)ue:(Uc; xo:t a-rirrsco<;. 30 The ether is not mentioned here. It also mnves by nature, cf. e.g. Gael. I, 2,269a6 ff. 3 1 For f:v e-xu-ro't.; cf. Plato's analysis of bodily motions in relation to regimen and exercise, Tim. 89al ff. -:iin1 ~· O(iJ xtvf;aecuv (of the human borly) ~ b ~(I(UT{i> u<:p' 'X'l'tQU ip!crTl) :t.iv·ricrtc; - (.LifAta"C"cr; yap T?j at'XVO'Ij't"tX'ij xotl T?j '\"(/) 'lt·X\I't'O<; xwf;cret cruyye:vf;c; - -~ ae: urr' &/,:Aou (e.g. a drug) xdpwv. a2 FOl' the (later) reduction of these motions cf. Phys. \'IIl,6,259bl-20, which derives most motions, even in living beings, from environmental causes. For the problem:; connected with OflZ~t.; cf. Grumach, o.c. 51 ff. and below, p. 72, n. 40. sa Cael. I.8,276a23 ff.; IV.3,310al6 ff., etc. 34 Cf. HA VIII,l,588h4 ff.; PA JV,5,681al2 (it is impossible to draw the exact distinction between 'living' and 'dead'). 3 6 Cf. ] . M. le Blond S.]., Aristote pkilosophe de la 11ie (Le lh·re premier d1t traite Sttr les parties des Animmtx), Paris, 1945, 11 ff., who. however, in my opinion overemphasizes the vitalist aspect of Aristotle's theory. \Ve should not forget the o(o'.l. Le Blond's other reference, Phys. VIII,l,250bl4 does not bear him out: 'if movement is a kind of life belonging to all natural objects' is a question, not a statement, and a question which Aristotle answers in the negative Phys. VIII,4,255b5 ff. Lloyd, Pol. Anal. 257 ff. cautiously speaks only of an analogy b0tween nature and life in Aristotle. 3 6 Cael. IV,3,3llall ff. approvingly refers to this passage in the Physics, and thereby introduces an idea in Cael. which does not fit in the general theory of this work (cf. above, p. 70, n. 24).

71

nected with life and with living beings. 37 (If the elements were self.-moved), xocl. tcr..-oc v oct &v €Mvoc't'o ocu"t'oc ocu't'oc" .3R This passage unambiguously states that elemental bodies and living beings are different3 9 ; the same feeling is given vent to in An. I,5,41lal4 ff. ":~ Mym ~v Ecr't'£. Motion cpucr<:t is to be distinguished from self-motion, which is the exclusive property of the ~i}lov as a oA.ov. 40 It is not an active force, but (ocp;c~) "t'OU noccrzetv. 41 Motion of elements depends on elemental change;12 i.e. upon a process which is caused by forces outside the elements themselves, viz. here, in Phys. VIII, by the Unmoved First Mover. This re-interpretation of 'nature' is to be explained as an attempt 43 to subordinate the motions of the elemental masses to the way things are mafk to go. In thi:s way, nature still plays a modest role, but one which is rather different from its relative autonomy as apparent in Gael. and Phys. IL 4' \Ve should not, however, forget that even in Gael. the motions of the sublunary elements in the ultimate analysis depend on the circular motion of the Divine Heavens.45 The ambiguities of Aristotle's theory of motion are brought out T6 't"e ycip ctUTO:. &q>' r~Jy~{Ov (se. x.tveta.O.IXL) q:>cv t~~ov. 88 It would, Aristotle continues, on this account even become possible for an element to move itself in a direction contrary to its natural one. 39 Phys. VIII,4,254b14 says that everything which moves itself moves by nature. It is apparently the converse which is not true. 40 Phys. VIII,4,254b14 ff. To -re y<Xp cd-ro \vp' <X(m>G :.<~vo•jiJ.~'mv
o!ov !xocaTov "':tvv ~<~(l>v· xtvtt''to:~

yap

"t"O ~c~O'J ct')'t'b {.up] et~~rroG · Or;wv 0~ -~ c
IXU-ro'Lt; "t'T,;; xr.v+,ae:wc;, -T::xU-ra. q>Uae:t rp~!J.€V xtveir:rOctr.. £lr.O TO :1.Zv ~<{)OV Oi,cN ~~)a~t cx,)~b &oco;'t'~J xtve:i. lbd. 254b27 ff.: in living beings, we must distinguish between principle of motion and that which is moved. The living being can be said to 'move itself' only if we do not care to make this distinction (254b32 -:IJ &rr-xv o:?l't'o oc•ho x~verv). Another passage even further restricts the possibility of selfmotion in living beings: VIJI,6,259bl-20 (see above, p. 71, n.32 and Solmsen, Arist. Syst. 245). Cf. also A. L. Peck, Aristotle, Generation of Animals(Loeb), London 3 1963, App.B., p. 576 ff., on the analogy and the difference between the animal's being moved by the opex't'ov and the Heaven's being moved by the First Mover. 4 1 Phys. VIIJ,4,255b31. 42 Phys. VIII,4,255b9, 18 ff. 43 Vv'hich is often only verbal: 'why natural motion? ih~ 1r€qmxev r.ot' (Phys. VIII,4,255bl5; here the old ?..)crt~ rears its head). 44 Cf. Guthrie, o.c. XIX; Solmsen, A1·ist. Syst. 233 and n.37. 45 Gael. II,l,284a7-12. In I,9,279a28 ff. it is the 'sum of existence of the whole heaven' 86e:v X'X~ -:o't,;; OCAAOL~ ~~1jp't''IJ't'<Xt ... 't'o dv<Xl -re: x:xl qv.

72

with particular vividness when \Ve concentrate upon his statements about the heavenly bodies. The theory of the early work 7t. 'tJ~Aocro­ 'tJ£rx~46 does not attribute natural motion to the stars, as is done in Cael., but explains their motions in terms of volition: omnia quae movcntur aut natura moveri aut vi aut voluntate. 47 Natural motion is Fr. 21 Hoss'' Cic. SJJ !1.44 (cf. also Pea~<', ad£.). 'No good :\ri~totelian parallel to the present three-fold cli·,•isJon Ins been adduced'. to q 11ote Pease, ad!., p. 644, who himself adduce•)Di:v 0'.-J,<';Jv (!;c. of the stars). In the De c:ael. this remark excludes t\n' kitH.b of motion to the benefit of a third. the motion ?'JGzt of t.he cther.ia.l spheres which is proved at length in this treatise. If I am correct in adducing this parallel, we would ha •,•e the equation coluntas -.. tfl'i-'l)z()<; Cjl'JFX (but not necessarily). Perhaps also tl1e distinctions in Ph_ys. Vlli (between (a) motion 1to:pdt fJ''JOW ,= vi, cf. Phvs. Vlll,4,254b21 ff., (bl) motion o:) may be adduced (for further references see above, p. 71.-2 and notes). The restrictions regardingself-motioninJ>hys. VI£l,6, 259bl-20 do not include voluntary action. \V. K. C. Cuthrie, o.c. XXVll opts for the exclusion of a transcendental mover from a reconstructed :t. qn).. , because this idea is almost irrelevant in the (later) Caet. But ibd. p. XX VI he concedes that in fr. 21 H.oss only 'an eternal mover which exerts a compulsion contrary to nature' is excluded. It is, however, certain that Aristotle spoke in his 11'. qni... of a divine highest principle of motion. In Cic., SD I,33 (=fr. 26 Ro;;s) one of the divinities in tertio de. philoJsopftia libro is alhon quendam (other than mens and the n1undus itself, 1vhich are also divine), whom Aristotle praeficit numdo eique eas partes tribuit ut reptica,tione qHadarn mun.di motwn regat atque tw:atur. Divine is also the caeli m·dor (~' ~ther. cf. ND II,41 in ardon: caelesti qui aether vel caelum nominatur). Whether the mens mentioned by Aristotle in this context is a Divine illind is not certain; it rna.y be the human vou~ (d. ND 1,35, where the deification of ·mens -and of the heavens and the stars -is also attributed to Theophrastus, who, as it seems- cf. below, p. 84, n. 89 -- abandoned the theory of an Unmoved Mover). Ou the highest God in "· qliA. cf. C. J. De Vogel, Greek Phi!. II, p. 33 ff. (Nr. 430 ff .. with the notes on p. 33 and 34); E. Berti, La Filosojia del primo Aristotele, Padova 1962, 375 ff.; and H. J. Kriimer, Der Ursprunr; der Geistmetaphysik, Amsterdam 1963, 131 ff. Both De Vogel and Kra.mer argue in favour of mens = Didne Spirit. Perhaps some speculative light may he shed on this extremely difficult questilln by examining the implications of voltmtas which presumably translates ,;., exO>JuLOV (cf. ;\L Untersteiner, Aristotele, Delta Filosofia, Temi e Testi 10. Roma 1963, 234 and Diiring, Arist. 186). In the theory of 7tpiX~\~ in Ari,totle'~ ethical theory, -ro houcnov (ancl not compulsion, ~(ot = vis) is involved in 1-hc attraction of external pleasant and good objects, EN 1110b9 ff. (for more dc:tails on ,\.ristotle's theory of voluntary action see the second of D. J. Furley's Two Studies in the Greek Atmnists, (Princeton N.J. 1.967), viz.: Aristotle and Epicurus on Voluntary Action, 46 ' 7

73

movement in terms of pondtts and le1Jitas; this motion upwards and downwards is (of course) not that of the heavenly bodies. 48 In Cael., where the eternal circular motion is explained as the natural motion of a natural body, the role attributed to ether appears to abolish the distinction between naMtra anV tmOA£X.(l.~cXVELV r.poc~E!fit;. The r.poc~L.; of the stars is analogous to that of animals (including man) and plants (ibd. 292b 1-2). Aristotle, at some length, but not very clearly, elucidates how this kind of r.poc~t.; is to be understood. 50 A plurality of 'acts' accounts for the complicated esp. Ch. 2, p. UH ff.) If this (L<:-r<Xfhm~ to the YEV'J<; of ethics is legitimate (and I think it is, cf. Aristotle's own procedure in Cael. ll,12), the voluntas which makes the stars move could he interpreted as either (a) a voluntary and fully conscious assent to a course of action. vh. to move in the most perfect way (cf. on this point E. Berti, o.c. 370, who, however. in his analysis of the role of the ether in 1r. 'PL).. tencb tq forgrt tha.t a natural cthere<1.l movement is explicitly excluded by the trilcmma of Fr. 21 Ho~s). a. conrse which is the stars' eternal choice, or (b) their voluntary desire to follow what is good, i.e. the exampk of perfection set by a highest principle, which is not mentioned in fr. 21 l(m;s, but could be the alius quidem or perhaps the mens (which is not necessarily unmoved) of fr. 26 Ie Caclo, \Vijsgerige Teksten en Studies 13, Assen 1966, 234.

°

74

movements of each of the planets, 292b30 ff.; a.nd this 7tpoc;~~ is a striving after what is good, 292a23; the best would have the Good without 7tpa~~~ (ibd.).s1 It is perhaps not too far-fetched52 to connect this 'action' \';ifh th<: \'ohmtary a.ction ascribed to the heavenly bodies in r.. 9t·A. fr. 21 Roso:. The divergence between this passage aud others in Gael. denying the influence of soul cannot, however, be explained away. It is dearly impossible to smoothe out all the divergences; think also of the statement that there is nothing xp:;:~-r-rov than the First Heaven.s:~ Nevertheless, it is at least correct to ~;ay that the main emphasis in Gael. is placed upon the 'natural' aspect of the motions of the heavenly bodies, while Phys. VIII and especially iHet. XII,6 ff., as we have already pointed ont,:i·l strongly bring out the otherdircctedness of the astral motion, including that of the First Heaven. The different emphasis of Gael, is almost forgotten· here. Now the First Mover moves by being an object of Love, 55 which implies that the heavenly bodies, or better, the spheres in which they are set, are sentient and follow voluntarily (?), which in some ways reminds us of the theory in rr. (1nl.. "6 J;[et. XII,8 introduces a plurality of Unmoved Movers, which, pr·rhaps, in this way, makes the plurality of 7tpoc~elt; of Cael. II, 12 more explicit. As we have already had occasion to point out, the theory dominating in Gael. is that the heavenly motion is the ultimate source of all 51 This ln-pothctical mo"t pc·rfect Bein~ is superior· tn the Fin;t He<wen. Guthrie, o.c. XXIII ff. does not .indude this passage among those unambiguously implying a transcendental Mover (but cf. J1is diagram, ibd. 208). A First ·Mover, however, is not very far away. 02 Diiring, Arist. 186, n.l7, and l87, argue5 that the crucial pas~ages about the life and rcp.i~tt:; of the stars in Cael. II.l2 reproduce the thought of~. q>t),. •~ See above, p. 70, n. 24. The inconsistencies fonnd their way into the Placita: cf. the definition of qJUcR; referred to above, p. 71 n. 29. with Aet. II,3 (e1. £p.yuzo!; 0 )(.6a~o~ x~X.i 7tpl'lvoi~ ~t.or.x'.l>p.Evot;), 4·, '.::\pta-r. O':iT' E.p.~uzov Oi. .ov St.' Q)~(J'-" (note the Stoic formula) olhe voep6v OU":e rrpovol.'[. 0\0!l{O'j!M:\IOV. TtX vi:v y;1;p oupaV\~ (d. AH. I, 7 .32, refened to below, n. 56) To•htc>V :r'lv":ov xotV(•JVdv, Cli<; vnexe:w. which j,; correct as far as it goes. Cf. also Arius Did. fr. 9 Diels ( Dox. 450,12 ff. i: there are as many spheres as there are XL'IOU\IT()(~ 6e0•!.:; ... wv fJ-fytcrTov -rov ~:Y.crac, ~eptEzovToc; the ether is ~w~uzo~ and eternally moves in a circle. 54 Above, p. 69 ff. 55 ]}[et. XIT,7,1072b3 xtv;;'i ... 6>; Zf)(:Jf.Lt'IIOV. 56 Cf. Guthrie, o.c. XXX, XXXV. The Unmoved Movers are called 'souls' of the spherical bodies Aet. 1,7,32.

75

other movements. Elsewhere, Aristotle is more specificY GC II, 10,336a32 ff. we arc told that the cycles of becoming and perishing are caused by the movement of the sun xocd -rov Ao~ov xux/.ov (which accounts for the seasons), 58 while~ x{n~/,
3. This necessarily superficial account of the theories of motion in Plato and Aristotle and of their physical and cosmological ramifications is, within the context of the present chapter, perhaps a rather wordy digression. Some amount of informative detail, however, is indispensable to a correct understanding of the cosmology of Hebd. 61 It will be remembered that Hebd. Ch. 2,1 ff.R. speaks of x60"[LOt above and below the earth, equal in form and number, which move around

57 Cf. Solmsen, Arist. Syst., 379 ff. (the chapter on 'The Moving Cause of all Genesis'); A. L. Peck, Gener. An., App. A., p. 569 ff. 68 GC II,10,336hl7-8 ye'lem~ and 9lfimc; are connected with the approach and withdrawal of the sun. '• 9 Cf. the lucid exposition of G. E. H.. Lloyd, Aristotle, The Gro·wth and Sll'ucture of his Thought, Cambridge 1968, 159 ff. That the moon is in-between does not seem to have bothered Aristotle. In GA IV,l0,777b24 ££. the moon is a cause (&pzlj) of change on account of its association with the sun, from which it derives both its motion and its light. .'Vfete. I,2.339a21 ff. we hear that the sublunary world of necessity is auvex.·~c; ... >o:rc; &v6:J tyopo:'t<;, so that the elements are nothing hut the material causes of change, which, in the final analysis, itself is 'otherdirected'. The cause of motion is to be found in the
76

the earth in self-moved circular orbits. Outer heaven and earth are unmoved, we read a few lines further on (2,14-17 R.) "vhile the 'other things have a course of revolution' (-roc il' &"A"Aoc oilov ~xe~ 7tepmo"A£lJc; 2,1819 R), and again: earth and outer heaven are unmoved (2,39 ff.R), while 't'CXAAoc miV't'OC f:.v &/,"A~Awn ~WV't'OC XOCL o~· &A"ATjJ...wv ilu6v't'oc OCU't'tX [1'!1.] ,j~' €wu't'(;)v xl1-L {mo 't'WV L
&e:l i:v·rc:uv, which is not Ionic, is suspect, and probably is a gloss on tXLolwv which has got into the text (cf. the idiomatically correct eoumx, Ch. I, 95 l{., and eovTtX, Ch. 2,66 H.). Hoscher keeps these words in his text ami amends &Lolwv into p1Jo[w~. 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 I have quoted in full above: cetera 0111-n-ia in (in not in P) invicem vivent-ia et per se (se not in A) transeuntia correctly reproduces <&l),tX ... au6vTtX, and up to this point the translations are in agreement with one another. For all of what follows, A gives Facile semper moventur (starting a new sentence with Facile), while P reads !tee eadem et per mumli partes transezmtia facile semper mouentur: the three words at the end of the sentence are the same as in A, while /tee eadem et per mundi partes transeuntia at first sight looks like an attempt at translation of the all-important passage tX•:mx •)<;>' e~l'J't'c~v ... ch~lw•1. l t is, of course, possible that the Greek text which served as the basis for the translations was already corrupt at this point. l{oscher, as we have noticed, appears to read F·r.at~,c; in order to reproduce facile, but fails to give an explanation of semper: is it, perhaps, possible that he thinks this translates the &et before ·~nc.,v? l''s !tee eadem then perhaps corresponds to ccemx {,cp' eW'JTWV, but this is not very likely, and the repetition of transeuntia from 2,49 J{. as well as the inexact per mundi partes for the Greek equivalent of 'by the eternal beings' demonstrate the helplessness of the translator: per mundi partes transeuntia as a whole is nothing but a repetition of the idea which the Greek text expresses a few lines earlier (2,50 fL R.) by OL' &.'A'AfiA~)V ou6v-r~! I therefore prefer to believe that 2,53 R. semper is an attempt at translating aL3lwv; facile may represent an attempt at translating IX'h&. ucp' E:wuTwv. 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 interpretation of .facile, cf. Cic., ND U,3l sed per se ipse ac sua sponte nwueatur (Cicero's text is more amply quoted below, p. 89, n. ll9). 62

77

cosmological, make it certain that the author thinks of elements. 63 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 motion q.ucreL and other-directed motion hy &:r,oLoL oua£oc~. 64 It will be remembered that the idea of a self-moved element is un-Platonic; elemental motion is directed by Soul a.nd Errant Cause. 65 But self-motion of the elements is an idea which is found in Aristotle, especially in Cad. and Phys. IJC6 ; in due course, however, he subordinates this self-motion to the influence of Eternall\iovers. 67 To put it bluntly: the idea of an elemental body which has it both ways, viz. which is muved both by itself and by an eternal something,as is impossible before Aristotle. The t.p.q. derived from the occurrence of the originally Platonic concept of self-motion69 is in this way replaceu by an even later t.p.q.

4. This is not all. The elements arc said to 'live within one another', ev &.M~A.maL ~wno: (Ch. 2,48-9 R). This vitalist idea is absolutely unPlatonic, and not less foreign to Aristotle. We have noticed the latter's carefulness in pointing out that the behaviour of the elements is only analogous to that of ~<{)o:, and his scorn in rejecting the thought that the elements themselves may be considered as living beings.7° This difference between the theory of the elements in Aristotle and in llebd. is substantial. It invites us to envisage the possibility of moving our t.p.q. even further dovvn, and to look out for points of agreement 63 That the dements are meant is also the opiPJon of ps. Galen, comm. on Nr. 22 (p. 33-4 Bergst.r.). C4 For the eternal substances in A.tistotle d. abOV(\ p, 70 n. 25. os Cf. above, p. 67-it ee Cf. al>ove, p. 70-1. 6 7 See above, p. 70. The quotation from Acth1s (above, p. 'iS, n. 53) appositeiy smmnarizcs Aristotle's final thoughts on 'vitalism' ·-and, by the way, shows that information on this topi'- was easily accessible via the handbook-literature. os Some did not accept this, cf. Sextus, M. X,70 (from the chapter d ~c-.~ x(v'lj(H<;): drto:p ouv xw:::i-rcd "Ct 11:pw-rwc; ('has a primary motion'), oiov a-rotx:elov (n.b. !), 'ij-roL u<;>' cx.u·rou xw~i:"Ct:tt ~ u'l':' &AJ..ou (Sextus' critique does not apply to the Aristotelian solution), This quotation, moreover, shows that the problem of the cause of motion continued to be discussed, m.ld even in the same terminology. 6 9 See above, p. 66-7. 7 0 Cf. above, p. 72.

78

between the cosmology of Hebd. and that of a post-Aristotelian philosophical school. First, however, we have to take a closer look at some details of the cosmology of Hcbd. itself. Our point of departure will be the xpiav:; of the elements. Hebd. Ch. 1,78 ff. R. says that the sixth part of the universe consists of the wet element (sea, rivers, sources etc.) blended with the heat which is responsible for the motion of the liquid substance: xd (adunatum )7 1 ~ 'flUS . 't"Oll1'0LIH SC. sea e t.C. ) 0epp.ov, 0~ OlY<•J'(fj XOCL .xpoE'JO"L<;; e;cr-;~ -r·r.c; ~X.(l<XoO~. heat is also preseut in the earth, H ebd. 6, § 1,19-20 R. £n terra calidum; 6,§2,3 ff.R est quiddam ex solis splendor£bus congregaltim terrae. The wording (adzmatum, congregatum) makes it abundantly clear that the heat which is to be found in w homin£s, q~wmodo in mundo, in duobis locis: est quiddam t!X solis splendor£bus congregatum terrae, hoc quod in v£sceribus hominis et quod in venis calidum est; quod autem in superior£ bus partibus est 1mmtli, quod stellae et sol, quod sub cute est. On the cosmic level, there are two supplies of heat, viz. (a) the celestial bodies, (h) the heat blended with earth and water. Although it is not repeated explicitly in this passage also that heat is present in water as well, this follows from the reference to venae: for in the macrocosmic comparison, the rivers 72 are an 'imitation' of the human veins, cf. Ch. 6,§ 1,22 ff. R, aqua . . . jlumimmt £mitatio est ve·nae et qu-i in venis est sanguinis. From this cosmic distribution of heat we may further conclude that that portion of the universe which is between the two hot 'places', viz. the region of air, is cold, or, a.t least, much colder than what is above it and beneath it. Now the heat, which is blended with earth and water, is, as we have noticed, in the last analysis derived from the 'splendors of the sun'. I take this to mean that the heat in the upper regions of the universe is in some sense primary compared to that near the centre. This is confirmed by the desniption of the stars and the snn (cf. Hebd. 6, 1

(

. .

1

'

'

'

"

1

'

...

'

1"'

For a possible Greek equivalent, see above, Ch. II, p. 36, n. 22. This idea has no parallel in Presocmtic (or 'Hippocratic') thought. .At Vict. I,4, the wet element participates in the 'dr;,mess' of the fiery element, not in its heat (•o
79

§ 2,11-12 R. quod steltae et sol) in an earlier chapter of Hebd.: Ch. 1,5+ ff.R. says that the stars possess the warmest brightness within the universe, H:::pfLo.-cf-.lJv73 ••• AIX[L7t'Y)Mvoc, while 1,58 H. R. tells us that the sun possesses O:::pp.occrLrt.'l. Stars and sun possess heat to a remarkable degree. And while the heat near the centre, viz. that in water and earth, is only to be found in combination vvith other elements, that portion of the heat which is to be found in the upper regions apparently is unmixed, pure heat. Thi& is revealed by a careful reading of the beginning of Ch. 6,§2,9 ff.R.: (calidum), quod in sttperioribtts j>artibus est mundi, qttod stellae et sol: stars and sun consist of nothing but heat. That this is in fact true, can also be derived from other considerations. The enumeration of cosmic strata in Ch. 1 proceeds from the circumference of the universe toward:; its centre, and gives its seven parts in the following order: (1) the outer heaven, (2) the stars, (3) the sun, (4) the moon, (5) the air, (6) the wet element and (7) the earth. This implies that the cr{m·'Tocav; xa:l. x6o-fLO~ of the air is located below the moon. Now if the air is restr£cted to the sublunary portion of the universe, some other element must be assumed to be filling the spaces above the moon. This must be heat. This heat is pure: it cannot be mixed with air, for air, as we have just noticed, is only to be found below the moon. Already in Ch. 1 that heat was to be found in the upper regions was indicated by the ej>-ithcta ornantia of the heavenly bodies which we have just quoted. It will, of course, be clear that the general world-picture which is taken for granted in this description of the cosmos is a descendant of that of Aristotle. For Aristotle, the subdivision of the universe into two different parts separated by the moon is axiomatic.74 Above the moon is the region of ether, eternal and unchangeable, moving in a circle. Below the moon are the other four elements, which arc eontinuous1y moving up and down tmvards their proper places. This If thi:; reading (of Ka!bfleisch) is correct, for in Ch. 6, §2,3 ff. R it is the sun which furnishes the heat blended with earth and water. Perhaps the stars are said to be 'hottest' in order to indicate that tJw nearness of the cold outer heaven does not interfere. Cf. also below, p. 185 n. 300, in fiJL.e. 74 See above, p. 71 H. and Ch. H, p. 43. Aristotle's location of the moon is part of the information on his system in the Placita (Aet. II,25,7 arild;v~;v ~" !L~fl6ptot~ iepo<; "\'<:TO:YfLtvr.v x.:xt Tij.:; 1t~fL1tTIJ<; oua(OI:<; i.LE:Te;(O'.lGO:V). So is hi;; distinction between the subluna..-y world of change and decay and that above the moon (Aet. 1,3,22; 11,4,12 'Ap1aT. Ti> {mi; ·r+,v cre),~v-')'1 p.f.po~ 't'oi) x6a~w•J 7t01:61)-r6v, tv <;:. xxt Ti m:p(yete~: Y.1)p1Xl'l:;:'t'e~:t; H,7,5}. '8

80

Aristotelian model of the universe was of paramount importance for most of the subsequent cosmology. 75 In itself, this confirms the t.p.q. which we were able to derive from the comparison of the theory of motion of the elements in llebd. with that of Aristotle. Again, we have to look out for a post-Aristotelian. system which, while heavily depending ou the world-picture of Aristotle, in certain respects went its own way. Though impossible without the Aristotelian example, the world-picture of Hebd. is clearly not that of Aristotle. Below the moon, we do not find, as in Aristotle, fire, air, water and e~rth" but only the latter three elements, while above the moon we d
81

5. The fle:pf.t6v-theory of llebd. which we have outlined above closely resembles the physical theory of Aristotle's friend, collegue and immediate successor Theophrastus. It appears that Theophrastus made substantial changes in the physical system bequeathed to him by Aristotle. 77 From the list of elements he removed both ether and fire, which he replaced by a new element, the Ue:pf.t6v or Oe:pfLO't''YJ~, which is active and both warm and light, while air, water and earth are in themselves passivt: and both cold and heavy. 78 The terrestrial fire of our daily experience is nothing but a manifestation of this elemental heat.7 9 In the upper regions of the universe, this heat is to be found in a pure state, but in the vici11ity of the centre it is no longer pure. Cf. the important book by P. Steinmetz (Die Pllysih des Theo,bhrast, cf. above Ch. 11, p. 45, n. 42), who has earned the gralit.udc of all students of ancient philosophy :for his admirable and detailed reconstruction of Theophrastus' system of the physical world. A convenient summing-up of his results is given by Steinmetz, ibd. p. 325 ff. and iu his article A nsatzpunkte der Elementenlehre Theophrasts im IVel'k des AJ'istoteles, in: Naturphilosophie bei .thistoteles und Tlteophrast, hrsg. v. I. Diiring, Heideluerg 1969, (224 ff.), t:sp. 244 ff. 7d De igne, Ch. I. Cf. Steinmetz, Physik 116 ff., 160 ff., 169 ff.. In doing this, Theophrastus is following a trend set by Aristotle in some of his later works (cf. Steinrnetz, Ansatzp. pas5im). ln PA Il,2,M8b12 ff. Aristotle discusses the various meanings o.f the term 'hot', without making a connection with the fire of his elemental theory. In GC and llfete. there is a tendency to use the term 6o:w6v instead of 'fire'. In the famous passage GA II,3,736b29-737a7 (on which see also F. Solmsen, The Vital Heat, The lnborn Pneuma and the Ether, JHS 77 (1937), 119 ff. == Kleine Schrijten I, Hildesheim 1968, 605 ff.), Aristotle writes that in the seed a 6€pf.L6v is present, which makes it y6v~!J.O'I. This 6tpfL6'1 is not to be confused v;ith fire, but is a hot substance analogous to -.q, Ti.~v &crTpw'l cr-ro~xdov otxe:iov •6o.o'l o:r•dx~~) in an orthodox Aristotelian manner, cf. esp. Theophrastus' account of the formation of mountains 7tpo; o!;e:iav ... lwp•)cp·~v as a 1·esult of vulcanic phenomena, ap. Pl1ilo, A et. mund. 135-6, VI p. 114,2 ff. Cohn-\V. (=fr. 30 W.) Earth is pushed up-wards by the subterranean fire, but grows heavier and heavier on the way up: the balance of power is such that mountains turn out to be conical in shape, as both elements struggle to get to their proper place (7tpoc; -r·/;11 o!x<:[IX·~ hcr.t>ipou z~>p:X'I ~7t&L"(
77

82

crcpocr~oc, the element is of such a nature that it is &!ltx-.ov... Ozwonrroc xoc~ xocOocpocv • ..• ~ npw-.'Yl (se. tp•)mc;) is xot6TIJ aq;oc'Lpll. represents the ·whole of the supraiunary universe. 80 The Aristotelian division of the universe into two parts divided by the moon is still fundamt~ntal to Theophrastus' world-picture, though, as we have noticed, with a difference: above the moon, pure heat, below the moon heat mixed with the other elements. The chief representative of this pure heat is, to Theophrastus, the :mn, which is the moving cause of changt~ within the sublunary world,8 1 De igne p. 351,28 ff. W.: -~ ;{.tV'l')crtc; -~ 't'Otoc3e xotl. &JJ..o(wcnc; etc; -r~v 't'OU OepfLoiJ 1twc; :iv&:ye-r:et.t tpuatv · b ·rap ~/..we; o 't'oclhot n&v't'oc il'Y)fLLOupywv. The sun is also said to be the source of the productive heat in animals and plants: &no To•),ou ltocl ·f; yovt!lo~ lv To'Lc; ~0o~c; xoct cpu't'o~~ 6ep!l6TI)c;. 82 But also the heat present in other elements is derived from the sun. The hot substance mixes 'vith other substances. 83 If the structure of the substances 'vith which it is mixed is favourable, it can be contained.81

De igne l, p. 351,19 ff.W: in the 7tpJJ-r'Yl

80 Steinmetz, Physih llG n. 4, 162 ff. argues that -~ rrpw·n1 O''f>ct.rpoc means the sphere of the sun, because in Theophrastus' physics the sun is all-important. Though I do not wish to deny this, I cannot see how the astronomical sphere of the sun can be called 'first'. It is, moreover, clear from the wording of 'the sphere around the earth, which i;; the realm of xp'it11~ and y~ve:crLc;', that Theophrastus is not speaking of astronomical spheres at all, but roughly subdivides the univer;;e into two regions. The interpretation o:£ Zeller, Ph. d. Gr . .fl, 1,833 is un-reet in this respeet, though wrong of course in not bringing out clearly the fundamental differences between Theophrastus and Aristotle. The sphere of pure heat is called 'first', because the heat is 'first' in the sense of being &:pz·~. cf. D,J igne p. 351,42 ft.W. This interpretation of the 'two spheres' agrees with the interpretation of Theophrastus' information on Anaximander's x6af!.o~. for which see above, Ch. II, p. 44-5. Cf. also the distinction between ..,x xux>..ud and d: m:p! -ro fLEcrov, Theophr., Met. 5bll-12. 81 .As it is for Aristotle, d. above, p. 76. On the sun see also Theophr., 111et. 7b2 ff. Note that Theophrastus did not abandon the theory of the 'proper place' of an element, above p. 82, n. 79. 82 De igne p. 351,34 ff.W. Cf. also p. 358,21 ff.W.: ~ ... TO~~ e(J.<)I6xo~<; O'Wfl.CI:G~\1 ev>Jrdp)(O'JO'G£ 6e:p;.L6-r·r,c; ... otovzt C:wa(l( xod y6n!J.O~ ·~3·1) '(L\1!:'1'()(\ ._;;"' O!J.Olwv. h~ a~ r.p6npa: ";"c.:{vny; ·~ &;tl; •oG ·~/.[ou · xocl y-Xp o&n'J y6vq.~.,,; xoct ~~lWV x:xl
83

It is unnecessary to point out in detail in which respects the theory of Theophrastus corresponds to that in Hebd. The main similarities are that the pure Oe:p[.L6v (note the identical term!) is above the moon, the mixed Oe:p[J.ov is around the earth, and that the sun is considered to be the source of the heat within the other elements. There is also an important correspondence in another respect: in Hebd., the elements are said to be moved by the &£aLoc (as well). 85 According to Theophrastus, the principal 31J[.LLOupyo<; of change is the sun. But he echoes Aristotle in calling the moon a lesser sun,86 and we know that he, as Aristotle, was convinced both of the eternity of the world 87 and the divinity of the stars. 8s The stars are ensouled beings, their souls apparently consisting of the Oe:p[.L6v in its most perfect form, cf. Theophrastus' definition of soul as 'TS:Ae:L6-r1J<; 'TC.u Oe:'i:ou aw[.LOC'Toc;. 89 There is, however, an important difference between ps. Hippocrates and Theophrastus: as we have already pointed out repeatedly, the elements in Hebd. are alive, ev iXAAYJAOLO"L ~WV'TOC. In Theophrastus' physical theory, the world below the moon is necessarily connected with the supralunary world in that the heat in the sublunary world is derived from the heat up there. It is not, as in Aristotle, the accidental result of the motions of the sun, but the immediate result of its motion and its nature. 90 We have moreover noticed that heat, according to Cf. above, p. 66 and p. 77. De ventis, p. 380,10 ff. W.: ... ~ ae:A.~v·'l ... o!ov ... &a6e:v~c:; ~A.wc; ean (also the moon, therefore, is a cause of winds, though to a much lesser degree than the sun); Arist., GA IV,10,777b25-6, cf. above, p. 76. 87 Fr. 30 Wimmer = Philo, Aet. mund. Ch. 23 ff., VI, p. 108 ff. Cohn.-W. 88 Cic., N D 1,35 signis sideribusque caelestibus (se. divinttm tribuit principatum ). 89 Iambi. ap. Stob. 1,366,26 ff. W. It appears that Theophrastus abandoned the theory of an Unmoved Mover or Movers, cf. Met. 10a9-21 (and 6a5-14). The power of self-movement belongs by nature to the heavens and to living beings (cf. esp. 10a15-6 otov yap ~w~ ·ne; 1j 1t£p~<popc1 -rou mtv-r6~). Movement is involved with soul (ibd., 5b3). A quotation from Theophrastus' 1t. oupa;vou (ap. Proclus, In Tirn. lii, vol. 11, p. 122,10 ff. Diehl) tells us that he held that soul is the principle of motion, and that, therefore, also the oupa:v6~ is ensouled, and so 6e:i:o~. ouiHv yd:p 'T([LLOV G.v~u uxlj~. On Theophrastus' abandoning of the theory of the Unmoved Mover cf. Grumach, Physis ttnd Agathon, 63 ff. Grumach further argues (p. 64), that to Theophrastus the universe is a self-moved organism, but, perhaps, this goes a bit too far. Theophrastus is not a Stoic, although his reinterpretation of Aristotle's system certainly paved the way for the Stoa (cf. Grumach, I.e.). ··· Eudemus (fr. l23a+ b Wehrli) did not abandon the theory of the Unmoved Mover. 90 Steinmetz, Physik 160 ff., 325 ff. For Aristotle's theory cf. above, p. 76. 8>

86

84

Theophrastus, is a moving and life-giving power. But he never speaks of air, water and earth as being, even to a very slight degree, themselves alive. 91 On the contrary the heat which elemental bodies take from the sun is only temporarily borrowed. Aristotle was still willing to grant the cosmic mass of the earth an o~xd1J 6zp[L6TIJ~92 which is responsible for the dry exhalation even during the night. But according to Theophrastus, earth is cold; the dry exhalation is nothing but reflected heat from the sun. 93 In what remains of Theophrastus' statements about the xp&m~ of fire with other elements, vve shall look in vain for terms as strong as the adunatum and congrcgatmn which we have found in Hcbd. As in Aristotle, 94 the cycle of change in Theophrastus is caused by the sun, but in a definitely mechanistic way. 95 The heat from the sun penetrates the lower sphere and causes the cycles of air and water. While the sun moves, its rays also push away the air on both sides of its path, indirectly causing it to flow back afterwards. 96 On the other hand, the sun not only gives heat to the lower sphere, but also extracts fiery particles from below which are added to its own mass. 97 In this way, a cosmic equilibrium is eternally maintained. 98 The hot and the cold interact in a purely mechanistic way. 99 Our conclusion has to be that the cosmology of Hebd. is impossible without the example of Theophrastus' physical theory. But again, we cannot say that we have reached our goal. The vitalism of Hebd. does not come from Theophrastus. Cf. also M et. 11 a.16-7 oA[yov yap Tt To ~IJ.<j;uzov, &1Tetpov 8~ To &<j;uyov. and the distinction between animals and plants on the one hand and lifeless thing!:\ on the other, M et. 9a 14-15 !LezpL ~~~>v x~t cpuT<7>v x~i. E:crz&-rwv -rc7>v &y<>:t.WI ('right clown to animals and plants and finally to inanimate tl1ings', tr. IpLcrr.<.tv·l)v nv' 91

~J(O!JC!L Cfl'JC!L\1.

Mete. 362a3 ff. Cf. Steinmetz, Physik 33, 71, 180, 327. u Cf. above, p. 76. 95 And in a way which is much more satisfactory than that suggested by Aristotle (cf. on the unsurmountable difficulties of this part of Aristotle's physics above, p. 76 and ibcl.n. 59). os This is how winds originate, cf. Steinmetz, Physik 37 ff. 97 Steinmetz, Physik 166, commenting upon ACt. II,20,3 (Dox. 348,14-349,3). 98 By &vTom68ocrt~. Cf. Steinmetz, Physik 31, 44 ff., 57 ff .. 70 ff., especially 164 ff., 327. 99 By &:vTmep[crToccrtc;: the predominating power surrounds and comprimates its contrary, thereby heightening its effect. Cf. Steinmetz, Phys. 123 ff., 220 ff., 288 ff., 327, and H. Strohm, Studien zur Schrift von der Welt, MH 9 (1952), 92

93

85

6. Notwithstanding its affinities with the thought of the Early Peripatus, the physical theory of H ebd. cannot be explained on the assumption of influences from that quarter only. Both its vitalism and the idea that heat is an essential property of other elements are foreign to Aristotle and his school. It is possible to in(licate the source from which these convictions have been derived. The theory of Hebd. is, in as far as some of its most characteristic features are concerned, a Stoic theory. Its vitalism is Stoic. Its theory of xpocm~ is Stoic. In the physical theory of the Stoa one CVf'll encounters the puzzling combination of ideas which were first formlllated by Thales and Anaximencs, 100 viz. that the earth has risen from the water and rides upon the air, and which, because of its cosmogonical aspect, conflicts rather harshly with the essentially Peripatetic notion of eternal beings as a subsidiary cause of motion. 1 0 1 I do not doubt, moreover, that other ideas which we have discussed so far, vi::. the concept of self-motion and that of the distribution of the Oepf.LoV through the universe, did reach the author of Hcbd. mainly via Stoic channels. This need not surprise 11s when we consider the heavy debt of the Stoa to earlier thought, and, particularly, to Aristotle and Theophrastns. 102 However, I shall not start by enumerating parallels from the remains of the Early Stoa. Instead of this, I prefer to adduce the rather extensive and systematical account of Stoic physics which is to be found embedded in the theological speculations of the second book of Cicero's De natma deorwn. This passage, ND II,23-32, which has to be combined with II,30b-41, does, inclr~<·d, afford a dose parallel to the theory of Hebd. The ultimate authorship of the arguments in Cicero is disputed: Reinhardt attributed this theory to Posidonius, 103 others p. 148 n.41. Theoplmtsius uses tllis theory to explain why e.g. the water of sources is warmer in winter than in sumrner, De igne p. 353, '25-27 \V. lOO Sec above, Ch. Ill, p. oO ff. 101 See above, p. 73-6 and p. 70, n. 25; helow, p. 127 ff. 102 Much of the work on tl1is aspect of the origins of the Stoic system still has tn be done. Occasional references, of course, arc to be found in l\1. Pohlcnz, nic Stoa, Gottingen 3]964, e.g. Vol. U, p. 41, notes on the dependence of Zeno's definition of the primary <]Ua!ities of the elements upon that of Aristotle's GC and on the theory of (J.'i:~~c; in GC (T ,1 0) as a forerunner of tl1at of the Stoa. Cf. also the remarks of F. Solmsen, Cleanthes or Posidonius ?, 23. On 'Iheophrastus' influence see Steinmetz, Physili, 193-4, 208, esp. 330, and abovP, n. 89. Of the older literature, H. Siebeck, Unt. z. Phi!. d. Griechen, Freib. i. Br. 2 1888, p. 181 ff., is still valuable. 103 Poseidonios, Miinchen, 1921, 225 ff. Cf. also his final summing up, RE XXII

86

to Cleanthes. 104 I shall for the moment refrain from commenting upon this extremely thorny question, of which one may even ask if it ever will finally be solved, and for reasons of economy simply treat the Ciceronian account as a piece of anonymous Stoic placita. Taken as a wholC', the arguments in Cicero on the all-important role of the heat within the universe have a fairly coherent structure. First, it is stateartes Jlllltuli maximae, i.e. the elemental masses, arc sustained by heat. 108 This thesis is proved in the same way as the <"arlier statement about ~<X, viz. by an appeal to observational evidence, for earth, 109 water, 110 and (even) air111 successively. For the fourth elemental mass, things are s.v. Poseidonios (also as 'Sondenlrucl:), 700-1. Heinhardt excepted NLJ ll, 29-30 contincri. He was followed hy l'ohlenz (d. below, p. 9·~ n. 139), who thinks that 21J-.l0a have been interpolated by Ciceru himself (Stoa und .Stoilwr, Zi.irich-Stuttgart 2 196+, p. 37H, n.2H2/1). 1 04 H.. l'hilippson. Cicero. De natura deorum Hucli ll mul I I I, Symb. Os!. 21 (1941), l l ff. (in part; cf. below, p. ~l4-5, n. 148); .\.]. Festugierc, Hcrm. Trism. U,3HO ff. (29-30a possibly are by Chrysippns: on the question of Cleauthes' authorship F. is not certain). F. Solmsen, Cleantlies or Posidonius? argues that NLJ II,23-32 (29-30 excepted) + 39b-41 forms a coherent whole; Cleanthes is extensively quoted in 40-41 (~.= SVF 1,504), anrl also in 24 (~' SVF 1,513). A. J. Kleywegt, Cicero's Arbe.il>weise im C:lf'eiten und dritten Buch der .Schrift De natura deornm, Groningcn 1.961, 39 ff. in the main argues in favour of H.einhardt's analysis, hut defends the unit.y of the (Cleanthean) arguments on vitalis calor etc. Cf. also the arguments contra Posidonius' authorship in P. Bnyanc6, Les preuves stoiciennes de !'existence des Dieux, Hermes 90 (1962), csp. 53 ff. fbd., p. 56 ff. Boyance argues that 29-30a are nrganically connected both to what precerles and to what follows; however, his reasons for holding this view differ from those given below, p. 88 n. 118. See further below, p. 93 ff. 1M ND IT,23. 106 ND H,24. For at least one of these observational proofs (cf. helow, p. 103 and ibd. n. /l8) Cleanthcs is quoted. 1o7 ND II,24, the end. 108 ND JI,25. 109 ND II,25-6. 110 ND II,26. 111 ND I 1,26-7. :\ir is maxi1ne frigid us, which corrPsponds to orthodox Stoic doctrine (cf. below, p. 100 n. 171). That it is also the coldest element in llebd. follows from the distribution of cosmic heat in two places, see above, p. 79.

87

slightly different; it is itself tota natura fervida and the source of salutaris . .. et vitalis calor for the other elements. 112 No observational proof for this statement is adduced at this point. But a few pages further do\\'11,11 3 we are informed that the pure heat gives birth to the stars, and here Cleanthes is quoted as the authority for the common Stoic theory 114 of the two kinds of fire: that which burns and that which sustains. Cleanthes proves the truth of this statement 115 by appealing to the different effects of the heat of the sun as are to be registered by touch and sight -i.e. again (as in ND II,24) by referring to observation. 116 But, to return to the order of arguments as given by Cicero, the fact that the various parts oJ the universe are sustained by heat entails that the whole universe is sustained, in tanta diurnitate, by this calidum ... atque igneum as well. 117 When we skip 29-30a, 118 the argument of 22-28 is summarized in 30 atque etiam ff.-31. The heat present in living things is also present in the universe as a whole. This heat is self-moved, because there is nothing which is more powerful

ND II,27, the end. ND II,39b-41. 11 4 Cf. Zeno, SVF 1,120 ( ~-~ Arius Did. fr. 33 Diels), p. 34,24 ff. 3:Jo y&p i'~V'f'; 7tt>p6c;, '1'0 !J.~V &'t'tXVOIJ xocl fJ.E:'t'oc[:l't'O 'l'ljv 't'?o<;d)V, 'I'~ o~ 't'EX'I~ZOIJ, oc>J1;1)~~x6v 't'E xocl '1'1JP1J~~x6v. o!ov ev 't'Ot~ t:pt>'I'O!~ ~<j'l'~ x~l ~
113

't'o~ou-.ou ~-~

7t'J?O<; e:!voc~ 'I'~V Ti'~v ?icr'l'pwv o>jcr(!Xv.

Or, more exactly, of the thesis that the heavenly bodies are tota ignea (ND II,40, the beginning). ne In itself, this method of exemplification as found both in SD Il.23-27 and II,40-41 is an argument in favour of a connection between these two passages. 11 7 ND II,28 (this section concludes the first part of the argument on calor). 118 Cf. above, n. 103, n. 104. It should, however, be noticed that 29-30 contineri is the piece de resistance of this whole section in Cicero. It is here, not before or after, that the existence of a divine principle is proved (though in II.32, on Plato's self-moving ·world-Soul, that which is self-moved is said to be d·ivinins than that which derives its motion from elsewhere). In this way, the physicae rationes are subordinated to a proof for the existence of God. By whom? Pohlenz {cf. above, p. 87, n. 103) suggests by Cicero. Others (among whom Reinhardt and Solmsen) think that Cicero took over the arrangement which he found in a Stoic manual. Festugiere thinks that the manual is Academic (Berm. Trism. II, 405 ff.). Boyance, Preuves stoic. 56 ff. argues that 29-30a should not be separated from the arguments before and after it. However this may be, it is, I think, beyond doubt that the theories of the Early Stoa in this section of Cicero reached him by way of an intermediate source or sources, and it is only reasonable to suppose that he made use of fairly up-to-date literature of this kind. 11 5

88

than the whole.H 9 In 32, thcrt~ follows a short summary of Plato's theory of the World-Soul and of his theory of motion in general.l 20 Then the argument is concluded by the resumption of the calor-theme, which culminates in the equation ardor-anintus, with S<'lf-motion as middle term. Now, even a superficial look at this piece of Stoic n. Boya•lc<\ f::tudes sur le Songe de Scipion, Paris 1936, 121 ff.). Furthermore, the translator of Plato's Timaew; must have been familiar with the cosmological aspects of Plato's theory (Ciccro worked on this translation contemporaneously with his work on ND; the passage on the creation of the \Vorld-Soul is still extant). In any case, I sec no reason to assume that the reference to Plato goes back to Cleanthes, as Solmsen, Cl. or. P. 20, seems to believe. For Cicero's veneration for the divine Plato (which was shared by Panaetius and Posidonius) cf. the long list of parallels quoted hy Pease ad!., p. 619-20, and further \V. Burk(~rt, Cicero als Platoniker und Skeptiher, Gymnasium 72 (1965, 174 ff.), p. 177-H. 121 For Zeno, cf. SVF 1,102 (= Arius Did. fr. 3S Diels), p. 28,20 ff.: -r·~v ilt 119 •••

xpiiaw y(veaOou

'~ d~ !}),). :~). 'f.

":WV O'"t"f)Lxdwv !.lf:"ro:(3oJ..7j. cr0>:L'f."rOc; o).ou

ot'

OAO\l nvoc;

hepou lhe:pxop.E'IO'J (with the last words cf. J-lebd. 2,50 ff. H. ilL' a). )..~),Ul'l onov-ro:). For Chrysippns and Stoic theory in general cf. SVF Il,470 ff. A very clear account of the Stoic theory o[ [J.r~~~ anrl xpiXm<; as comp<~red to that of Aristotle is to be found in H. A. \Volfson, Philos. of the Churc!t Fathers, I, Cambr. (Ma.), 1956, p. 374 ff. It appears that in Aristotle, a mixture of the elements (resulting in the formation of the world-masses of air etc., cf. GC II,3,330b23 ff.) implies

89

In llebd., heat (the Oepp.ov or wtidmn) is fused with water and earth: adunatum, congregatu.tn. 122 Cf. ND II,26 aquae etiam admixlum esse calorem, and, a few lines further or, sed ex £ntumis maris j)artibus . .. cxcitat·us. In llebd. we read that this heat is &ywy·~ }r.cd &po:::umt; ... ·djc; ixp.rl.oo£;. There is an exact parallel in ND 1I,27 (even air is mixed with heat:,l 23 for ipse ... oritur ex respimtionc aquarum, carum enim quasi vapor quidam acr habendtts): this vapour rises out of tlw water b<•cause it is moved by the heat within the liquid ekment, exisW motu cius caloris qui aquis continehtr.- For the references in llebd. to the warmth within the earth 122 Cicero's long development ll,25-2(j on the terrena natura and the calorem ittsUum in terris may be adduced. Cf. further the general t.hat these substances lose, at lea.:;t in part, some of their original characteristics. According to the Stoa the original qualities except in the case of cr6yx•jcrLc;, are preserv~:>d within the mixture (d. SVF 11,473, p. 154,1.5 ff., from Alexander of Aphrodisias' De mi-rtiont'). 'l'his also holds true for S(:•conclary cflmpounds. An interesting illustration is given by A lex. /)e.mixt. p. 218,1 Bruns (S VF U, p. 155,30 H.): TO r.up OAOV lh' OAO•J xc.updv TOU mll~pou, a<J>~oV'>;f)<; cxu-r(,)v exa.Tepo•J -rl}v otxdcxv oucr[cxv. Among the examples nf this Stoic xpiimc; given by Alexander are the elemnzts fire and air, which pas:; through water and earth (SVF U, p.l55,32 ff). For Aristotle's theory of mixture cf. further J. P. Anton, Aristotle's Theory of Contrariety, London 1957, p. 216 ff.; F. Solmsen, Arist. Syst. 368 If.; and the important discussion of t11e gradual devdopmer1t of an ontological concept of the element in Aristotle, wl1ich entails the definition of the elemental worldmasses as mixtures, in P. Steinmetz, Ansatzfntnlite 225 ff. 1~2 See above. p. 79. 123 This is not unambiguously paralleled in 1-!ebd. But among the products of air (Ch, 1,70 ff. R) we find ch:r;pomccl. Further, we read in th0enigmaticc:hapter on winds, 3,10 ff. H.. &px·~ fL~V ouv &vt(l<'•>V, i;Oe:v o'i·mt ne:cpuxa.crw, &n/) -rou Oe:pf1.0U · -r1J<; and to bracket l)f)~v (,t)·m~ r.e:'p•ixa TOU Oe:pfLOU, 't'O<;:' OC7'1)A\<; before tX'lTI)ALWTI)<;: tlw assumption would be, that rx' ( ~-·· np<;>'l''lt;) would have dropped out before the&- of the following word. If this interpretation is correct, the presence oi Oe:pw)v within the air would be guaranteed by the evidence of the text. though not in the sense of a.dunatu.mfcongregatum. It is perhaps more reasonable to suppose that the O<:p(.l.6v which is the cause of winds is that of the upper region, i.e. especially that of the sun. Theophrastus held t11at winds are r:aused by the sun. But the &cr-rpom,z( arc probably caused by the l1eat within the air, which nevertheless, in the orthodox Stoic fashion, still remains t11e coldest of the elements (cf. below, p. 100, n. 171).

statl:'ment of II,28 calidum illud atqnr ir;ne/U/1-. .. in omni /ttsmn rssc natura. In addition, the presence of a pure £lep!.1.6v in the upper cosmic regions, which is the ultimate source of the heat within the other elements, 124 ic; exactlv pa.ralleled by NJ) II,27 rcliqua quarta pars 1n1mdi: ea et ipsa tota natura ftrvida est et ccteris uatnris (i.e. the other denwnts) omnihus salutarem inpcrtit et vitalcm calorcm. The stars and the snn 12fi are mentioned in this connection in thr:

Cleanthc:~-fragment

of ND II,30hff.: JlCIJIIe utla jmwterea sunt ad111ixta natura, totaqw: stmt

calida atquc pcrlucida. The sequel there tell·> us that it is the sun which hdps to sustain life (nf ;mimals and plants) 011 <'arth. But this Cleanthcs-section does not contribute a parallel for the notion in H cbd. that it is the sun which is the source of the lv·at within the other elenwnts or for the notion in the earlier chapter of ND Jl that it is the ether which is tlw ultimate source 126 of the vital heat fount converted into water though all other things arc, and which starts tlw ;;;,,u.\rriU)rrL~, in SVF f,497 (= Arius Did. fr. 2R Dicls). The evidence for Clcanthes' theory nf the sun as ·rrre:tLovtx.Sv is collected SVF [,499 (no refercn<:e to cosmogony), ;'o;otc that in Sl'F f,497 the elements (the 'parts' of the universe) are said to grow from seerx. X'-'l :pud are cxplicitlv mentioned anwngthe 'parb' of the uni\·crse. The universe as a whole is a ~''i'''V containing smaller ~(i'>!X, i.e. animals and plants. For the cosmic 'sperma' in Zeno, Cleanthes and Chrysippus cf. SVF 1,512 (o= .\rius Did. fr. 36 Diels). 124

t25

91

can be paralleled from Hebd. The universe itself is held together by £ntegro ... et pu,ro eodemque acerrimo et mobitissimo ardore, 128 viz. the pure heat of the upper regions. A few pages further down we read that the stars are born from the purest part of the purest element and are, therefore, perlucida. \Ve also read that the solis calor et candor illustrius est quam ullitts ignis etc.1 28 a. This is paralleled in Jlebd. by both the motion and the brightness of the calidum around the flesh of the human body (Ch. 6,§2.12 ff.I<.), which on the macrocosmic scale corresponds to stellac et sol. This calidum is said to be per celeritatem sptende1ts. So much for the zpiimc; of heat with other elements in llebd. and ND II. Not oniy this notion, but also the vitalism of Hebd. is paralleled in the account given by Cicero ND II,23 ff. In fact, it was precisely the vitalist conception of the elements which was one of the main reasons which motivated Reinhardt in attributing the authorship of this section to Posidonius. The calor within the elements is a calor vitalis, and is characterized as a vim . .. vitalem per omnem mundU'm pertinentem. 129 It is the cause of their motions, because it is self-moved.. We have already quoted one certain instance from Hebd. in which the heat which blends with another element proved to he the cause of its movementlso -a passage, mnreover, which was exactly paralleled by a passage in ND. I do not believe that it is too bold to combine this hint in Hebd. with the other statement at the end of Ch. 2, where we read that the elements, which live within one another, an~ moved (both) by themselves (and hy the eternal beings) : the presence of the 6epp.6v within the wet element causes it to move, i.e. makes it 'alive'. That self-motion is not the only source of life and motion, but that 'eternal beings' operate as subsidiary causes of motion can also be paralleled in Cicero: ND II,27 it is the unmixed heat of the fourth element which is the ultimate source of the sustaining vital heat for the other elements, a statement which is aptly though only partially illustrated by the quotation from Cleanthes (II,41), where we read that also131 (n.b. !) the sun efticiat u(omnia floreant etin'suo.quaequegenerepubescant. It is true that, to the a.verage7Stoic/''the heavenly bodies themselves are not eternal, and that the plurality of &(otrx in Hebd. forbids us to 128

ND II,31.

128aNn'II,40,

41.

ND 1I,24 the end. This is then proved hr each of the tao See above, p. 79 and p. 90. 131 l.e. cooperating vrith the corpo·reus mlor . t2D

92

element~

successively.

think of the divine and fiet)' ether only, which to a Stoic would indeed be eternal. This is, however, a difference which can easily be accounted for in view of the eclecticism of the author of Hebd. -a point, to which we shall return.l32 The elements in Hcbd., on this account, would be alive because of the fire present within them. And in so far as there is xp&m:;;, they can indeed be regarded as living ev &M.·~j),mcrL: in the Stoic fashion, they are completely mixed, without, however, losing their identity. 133 Nt)te, moreover, that there is also water in the earth -i.e., that water 'lives' within the earth. Finally, the concept of self-motion as in Hcbd., the history of which we have traced from Plato to Aristotle, 13 ·1 is also paralleled in the Stoic theory transmitted by Cicero. At the beginning 135 we hear that omnc quod est calidum et £gncwm cietur et agitur molzt suo. There is moltts connected with heat in ~(j>oc, and although the word motus does not occur in the section on the elements, it is clear that the relation between heat and motion is never forgotten. It is explicitly formulated again in II,31: is ardor qui est mundi non agitatus ab alio neque externa pulsu, sed per se -ipse ac sua sponte tnovcatur. The author here speaks of the vVorld-Soul, 136 which he equates with heat, as is apparent from II,32. The ardor mun-di contains the heavenly bodies (II,39b ff.). We have already noticed that the ether and the heavenly bodies in Cicero cooperate with the heat present in the beings existing in the sublunary world. This is parallel to the cdrd: urp' E(I)U't"WV X.OCL {mo 't"WV oc~l3(c,)v x.wd-rocL of Hcbd. Ch. 2,51 ff. R. On the other hand, only selfmotion is spoken of at the beginning of this Chapter (H ebd. 2,3 ff.): the x6cr(J.OL above and below the earth move around it in 'self-moved circles'. This presents no problem in so far as the heavenly bodies are meant -but the circular motion of the other elements is, perhaps, not immediately understandable. \Ve shall return to this question below. 137 At this moment, the formidable question 'Cleanthes or Posidonius?' can no longer be avoided. The theory in Hebd. as a whole Cf. below, p. 127 !f. Cf. also ih' &i..f.:lj'Awv 3\\6VTO(. Stoic terminology, though not exclusively Stoic. 134 See above, p. 66 ff. 136 ND II,23. Cf. also Solmsen, Cl. or Pos., 10 ff. 136 For the \Vorld-Soul in the Early Stoa, cf. J. l\Joreau, L'Ame dte monde de Platon aux Stoi.ciens, Paris 1939 (Hildcsheim 2 1965), p. 158 ff. On it,; identification with etherial fire cf. Solmsen, o.c. 12, 18. m See p. lll ff.

132

133

93

exhibits such a far-reaching affinity to that in Cicero, that the question of the ultimate authorship of the latter is of immediate relevance to our search for a t.p.q. pertaining to the former. K. Reinhanlt, 138 followed by M. Pohlenz 139 argued that the section in Cicero derives from Posidonius, who \Vould only he quoting Cleanthes for an archaic piece of ·w~i.rmdchrc' which he workt•d into his own theory. One of his most important arguments is afforded by the notion of universal vis vitalis. 140 The exposition on the dc·m~..~nts as living lwings woul(l certainly have to be Posillunian. The notion that the elcments 141 are living lwings occurs in other passages as well, where its presence must be attributed to the influence of Posidonius 142 : Sen., Nat. V,5,2 est aliquid in aquu vitale; \' ,b,l habd ... aliyuam vim talemH:~ ai!r. The earth is alive (Sen., Nat. III,15), 144 tlw sea is a living being.H,; H.einhardt further stated quite correctly 14(; that the concept of vis ·vitalis itself is not found in texts of or about the Early Stoa. 147 It has, however, he(·n pointed out that it occurs in texts deriving from the medical literature of the third Cent. B.C. 14H aJHl that it dot·s not occur in one fragment or Poseidonios 2-12 ff.; 1\osmos und SymjJatkie, Mi.mchen 192(>, 129; h~E s.v. Poseidonios 700. The relevant texts can b(• Pxcellently studied in C. J. I >e Vogel, Greek Ph-ilosophy Ill, 251 ff. (1\r. 117(> ff.), cf. abo, and especially, the notes, ibd. p. 256. For l'osiuonius' influence upon han(lbook--literature cf. vV. H. Stahl, Human Science, Origi-ns, /}f1•clopment and lnflunw· tu lite Lafn' il1iddlt' Agl's, Madison (U.S.A.) 1%2. -IS ff. 139 Die Stoa 11,137. 140 ND 1 1,2·+ the end. Tlti:; i~ not externus et aduenticius (NlJ ll,2(>); according to Reinhanlt I<E s.v. l'us. 700, f>47-K, this is typical of the demental theory of Posidonius (d. Sen., .Vat. V,.'i, I: the air has naturalem vim mounuh se, nee aliunde concipere, sed incssi illi etc.) On l'osidonian vitalism see also\\". Theiler, l>ie Voruereitung des Neuplatouis~~tus, Problemata .1, Berlin 1930 (repr. 1964 ), 70 H. 141 Cf. De Vogel, u.c. 25!). For a general statement reflecting probably the ideas of J'osidoilius cf. Varro in Isodorus oi Sevilll\ l:t. Xll1,1,1-2 .~fundus f.r~tine a philosop!tis dictus, quod in sempiterno motu sit, ut caclmn, sol, luna, acr, maria. Nulla enim requies eius elementis concessa est, ideoque sellljier in motu est. Unde et animalia l'arruni 1•idl'ltlur l'lemenla. qu•>uiam j>er semi'/ ipsa inquit ·moventur. w Cf. RE 625, ti-17 ff. 143 I.e. vital force; cf. also Cic., iVD Il, 83. 144 RE 682. Cf. also ND I I,S3 and f{einhardt's commPnts. l\·osm. u. Svmp. 100 If. 145 RE 647: Sen., Nat. Ill,2G,7 ff.; Strabo, f.3.S. 146 Cf. De Vogel, o.c. 251, note on Nr. 117f>a. 147 RE (>48. 148 W. Cr6nert, review of SVF IV, Gnomon 6 (1930), 152 11.l; R Philippson, o.c. 26-7. (Piiilippson, ho\\"ever, p. 29, refuse,; to attribute the vital heat of t!H" 138

94

piece of secondary evidence explicitly connected with the name Posidonius.149 To this Reinhardt replied that the medical authors used the term in a much more restricted sense than 'Posidonius'. This is correct because there is no evidence of its being used in these medical authors to refer to objects other than living beings in the narrower sense of the world. 150 It is, of course, true that the Early Stoa operated with a concept of vital heat, 151 hut this is not the same as a universally valid vis v-italis. F. Solmsen, however, tried to prove that the -whole section on vitalis calor goes back to Cleanthes. His chief arguments are: (1) Cleanthes is not a philosopher who can be assumed to have only been intcrcstetl in the item of trivial physiological information for vvhich he is quoted .ND II,24. It is, therefore. more than likely that the cosmological sequel to the physiological argument also goes back to him. 152 (2) The (admittedly also Cleanthean) concept of vital heat occurs again and again in the whole section: is there such a difference between calor vitalis and vis vitalis? 1" 3 (3) the calor is characterized in the same way both in ND II,23-4 and in II,40-1, where Cleanthes is the author of the whole passage; in both places we find the same relationship between calo·r, sensus and vita. 154 Solmsen's case is not convincing. elements to the Early Stoa and argues that it was probably Posidonius who, in taking over the concept of vital heat, gave it this wider application); Soltnsen, o.c. 7, 11.17: Aristotle calls the 6ept.UJ'J a \;un:v.·~ apz_~ (cf. above, p. 82, n.78, the passage fromGA); Boyancc, Prezttt. stoic. 54, and esp. p. 55, n.2. Cf. also Solmsen, o.c. 13 ff., on the vitalist functions of the f:kp[J.6v in Aristotle. lt should, however, not be forgotten that in Aristotle (as later in Theophrastus) this vita.lism was definitely not conceived to include ihe elements. 149 L. Edelstein, The Philosophical System of Posidonius, AJ Ph 57 (1936 ), p. 324. The importance of v.italism for Posidonius, howe,·er, is apparent from his definition of philosophy, Sextus, Adv. log. 1,19: the parts of philosophy belong together like the parts of the human organism. 1 ~ 0 RE 649. m Philippson, o.c. 26. Cleanthes ap. Cic., ND TI,24 and 40-1. 162 O.c. 5. 1 53 O.c. 5-6, 8, 11, 12. Cf. also Boyanct\ Preuv. stoic. 55 ff. IM O.c. 5-6. _VD II,23 a/ere and crescere are effects of heat. The fire in II,40-1 which is salutaris and vitalis is characterized in the same terms: omnia conservat, alit, mtget, sustinet etc. Already Zeller, 1!1,1,137, n.l and V on Arnim, SVF I, p. 155,7 ff. gave 1VD II,23-24 to C!eanthcs. The two kinds of fire of Il,40-·1 derive from Theophrastus and formed part: of the Stoic theory as professed by Zeno (SVF 1,120, cf. above, p. 88 n. 114). This fire is said by Zeno to be 1"7)fl'IJ't"lY.6v, cf. sustinet; it is (a) proper to plants anJ animals, being their
95

The cosmic significance of vital heat may have been expressed by Cleanthes to his own satisfaction by establishing a connection between the vital heat in animals and plants and the vital heat of the heavenly bodies, 155 esp. the sun. It should be pointed out, moreover, that the concept of vis vitalis, which Solmsen wants to attribute to Cleanthes, occurs in Cicero exactly at the point oj transition between the treatment of ~C}>o: and that of the elements, and that, as it stands, it is slightly out of context, for we recall that the universal validity 156 of vis vitalis is made to follow from 157 what has been said about animals and plants! But, in fact, this universal relevance is only proved in the pages whicl1 follow. Although it is possible that Cicero was somewhat careless in transcribing his source, it •vill ncvcrtlwless be clear that the arguments on ~<'i'>o: (for which Cleanthes is quoted) arc somewhat forced, in order to serve as a preliminary for the argument about the elements. Separate proof is needed for demonstrating the vitalism of the elements. Another argument in favour of the authorship of Posidonius is afforded by one of the physicae rationes in ND ll,25: atque etiam ex puteis iugibus aquam calida1n trah£, et £d maxime lieri temj•oribus hibernis, quod magna vis terrae ca·vernis contineatur caloris eaq·ue hieme sit densior ob eamque causam calorem insitam contineat artius. The heat within the earth is more concentrated during the vvinter; therefore its effect is greater, as can be seen when we dra\v water during that season. Behind this is a theory of Theophrastns, viz. the physical law of &v't"me:p(cr't"o:
(note that he does not speak of the elements!), and {b) the oua(oc -rwv This is not far from what we find in ND IJ ,23-4 + 40-41. Jos Cf. Zeno, above p. 88, n. 114 and p. 95 n. 154. 156 per cmmem m.undmn pertinentem, 11,24 the end. 157 ex quo (!) intellegi debet eam caloris naturam vim habere in se vitalem per omnem mundum pertinentem. The lack of connection at this point is overlooked by Boyance, Preuv. stoic. 33 ff. 158 Cf. Steinmetz, Physik 124 ff., and above, p. 85, n. 99. m De igne, p. 353,25-27 W. 160 Physik 68-73, 170, 182-3, 223, 227, 247, 331. Cf. already the important and

ia•p~)V.

96

characterizes Posidonius' system as that of Theophrastus with vitalism added. 161 Although this is perhaps a somewhat simplistic chat:<:tcterization, there can be no doubt about its general appositeness, and we are therefore not surprised if in the passage of ND which we have studied, this blend is occasionally apparent.l62 We are now facing the following dilemma: either the vitalist theory of the elements is Posidonian, and then I-lebd. must be postPosidonian, ur llebd. is earlier than Posidonius, and the vitaiist theory of the elements no longer is typical for tha_t philosopher. In the latter case, I-lebd. would be undeniable proof thaJ a Stoic philosopher who lived before Posidonius designed a theory in which the elements are living beings though no proof is forthcoming for the earlier occurrence of the term vis vitalis in its 'Posidonian' sense. I may be permitted to state that I prefer the first possibility although it does not lend itself to definite proof. Perhaps, however, adducing another article by H. Strohrn, Theophrast und Posidonios, Drei Interpretationen zur 1\lleteorologie, Hermes 81 (1953), 278 ff. (see also below, n. 161). 161 O.c. 73, 247. Cf. Strohm, o.c. 295, who speaks of 'Die Umbildung dtJS peripatetiscben Kosmos' -- Strohm has Theophrastus in mind - 'in ein von K.riiften durchfiilltes, von Leben durchflutetes einbeitliches All' as being the 'Erneuerung' of Posidonius. Cf. also ibd. p. 294, a propos Posidonius' restating of Theopl1rastus' explanation of the regular succession of land- and seawinds: 'Auch hier ist das Mechanische durch die E!ementarkraft ersetzt'. Cf. also below, p. 1.01-3. 162 The example of fire, produced by lapidum confl·ictu atque tritu (ND II,25) was given by Thcophrastns too. cf. Steinmetz, o.c. 115. Note that Cicero omits most of the p!tysica.e rationes. Solmsen, o.c. lR ff. (but cf. ibd. 21) argues that in Po:;idouius' days the 6,;;pfLO'-', though still a valid concept, was old-fashioned compared to that of the me:U!J.(X. In view of Posidonius' general dependence on Theophrastus, in whose physical theory the 6s:ptJ-6v is the most important principle, this argument does not weigh too heavily. Moreover, the allegedly obsolete concept of the llo:pfL0\1 was reinstated by Athenaeus of Attalia (first Cent. B. C.) and the Pneumatic School of Medicine, cf. M. \Vellmann, Die pneuma.tische Sckule, 133 ff. (on the role of the Oo:ptJ-6v in the etiology of diseases ibd., p. 163). It is hardly a coincidence that Athenaeus of Attalia 'conversatus ... fuit Posidonio' (cf. above, Ch. II, p. 33, n. 8, and below, Ch. V A, p. 130 n. 4, and Ch. VII, p. 213 ff.). Edelstein, Phil. Syst. Posid. 301, n.61 argues against Posidoniu;; as the author of the '\Varmelehre' because of his dependence on Aristotle and Theophrastus, but he does not acknowledge the 'vital' difference between Theophrastus and Posidonius. His argument (ibd.) that the Stoic definition of the air in Posidonius as a cold element forms an obstade, is likewise not valid: (1) already Theophrastus defined the air as cold; (2} the air is maxi-me jrigidus, i.e. not absolutely cold, but still the coldest element.

97

theory of cosmic heat adds some plausibility to this preference. "Alle diese Teile bilden zusa.mmen ein festgefiigtes System. Das geht aus verschiedenen Einzelheiten hervor, erha.J.lt aber namentlich daraus, class ein Gedanke dcr gan:t.en Darlegung zugrundelicgt: die Erkenntniss von der einzigartigen Bedeutung der \Varme" .163 This pronouncement is 11ot a characterization of Cic., ND 11,23 H., as it well might be, but a (I believe, correct) description of the general strnctun.: of tht' main body of the 'Pythagorean' HyjxHnnemata of Alexander Polyhistor ap. Diog. Lat~rt. VIII,25 ff., viz. of Ch. 26-30. Heat indeed 16a J quote from vV. \Viersrna, D(1s Rcf,rat ,z,,_, Altxandcr l'olykistor -iiber die jJytftagoreische l'hilosophie, Mnemosyne J 942, 97 ff. (the quotation is from p. 99). \Vicr!>ma's word~;; arc true, Holwithstanding t11e fact that he defended a Preso·· cratic date for the Hypornn. (except Ch. 25, which is dearly pl)st-Platonic) by the untrustworthy method of quoting incidental Presocratic parallels (cf. W. Tlleiler, rev. Delatte, Cnomon 2 (192()), 155, quoted above, Ch. I, p. 31, n. 151 ). A.- J. Festugiere (see above, Ch, 1, p. 24, n. 109) established a sati~;;­ factory t.p.q. by pointing out that the distinction in Ch. 31 of veins, arteries and Derves presuppose,; the discovery of Herophilus and Erasistratus (s. KEG 1945, 57: cf. also F. Solmscu, Greek Philosophy and the Discovery of the Nerves (reprinted J{leinc Schtijten I, 536 ff.), MH H> (1961), esp. 184 ff.) On the Platonist theory of Ch. 25 see Festugierc, ibd. 10 ff. and Theilcr, I.e. C. J. De Vogel, Greelt Philosophy IIJ, 342, note on Nr. 127Ya shows tltat the derivation of the ci{,p~crTo<; Su&.:; from the Clne in Alexander is not Plato's, and, in her book Pythagoras, 208, argues that the monistic interpretation of Plato's unwritten doctrines can ltardly be older than the second Cent. B. C. (cf. also A.- J. Festugiere, Herm. Trism. IV (J954), p. 38 and, in general, p. 32 ff.) However, H. J. Kramer, Geistmetaphysik 49-50, esp. n.93 (though admitting that VIII,26 ff. may be later) argues that Diog. Laertc. VIJ1,25 does not contain anything specifically Academic since the term &.6plaTo.:; ou&c; itself may just as well be Early Pythagorean. I cannot convince myself, lwwever, that this is correct. Does the 'Pythagorean' identific<1.tion of ouocc; with tnWe:mc; and XtV1)GI~crToc; Su.Xc; to 'Plato and the Pythagorean:;'; this conjoining of names sufficiently shows which kind of 'Pythagoreans' are meant. Kramer also attempts (o.c. 332) to prove that the rnonism of the H yporrm. is quite early; but this is highly speculative.

98

plays a prominent role in this 'Pythagorean' theory: (27) "the sun, the moon and the other stars are gods, emxprx:re't:v yocp -.-o 6eptJ.oV tv ll.frc-oir;, onep il1Tl. ~(\/~,; rt.tnov. ( ... )xoct &.v6p<:l'lt(j> c:rv~~.~ npo<; OeoU'~ O'U)"' '{<-VC:~II.V,

XCt:t'!X\

\ TO

' (J.O:'!O:j(C:tv

l' L\ u.Vvp(oiCOV

0 ep fl.OU- ( .. . )

'

~ <>~'fjXO:tv

> l ~· T 1 11.1t'v 't'OU

·wu

·fit..(ou &.x-rC:v11. ~t.oc 11.tfl£(:>o<; -rou -.e o/uxpou xrd. -.-oi.i 7t1XXzo.; (xoct..oucrt. - se. ·t p y.<J·mgoreaus ·- i~~ ' IJ.EV ' oce:p11. '' I, ' 'fl' ' oe "' (:) 11.1111.crcr11.v ,.., t.w :>e: ·cov trUXJlOV 11.WO:f)(X., "tYJV x11.t.' 't'O uypov 7ti1.:J..UV ocWep11. 164 ). 't'I1.U'l:YjV -ri)v OCX't'LV11. xd d.; Tc( ~evO"I) Mecr611.t. 1 ' '0- \ )" (28) \ y.~ ' I O·' 1{uiJ11. (J.I!;'t'EX,E:t. I Xl1.t. ot.l1. 't"OU't'O -.cuO'ItO~Z!.V 7COCV'tl1.. . XII.~ <.,'IJV !J.E:V 'ltOCV 't'OU 6:q:qJ.ou· ~t6 x11.t -r~Z cpuT
ae:

we read that the germ of l!J.~UX11. contains Oe:p(J.oV &-r~ov.within itself:ho o~ -rou &.-r!J.OU ~ux.~v xocl !X~a!}fjcrtv. The point about 11.La6'tjcrt.c;is specified in Ch. 29: Tijv ... oc~cr01JOTII x.o~vw<;; xoct X11.'t'' doo.;166 • • . &-rfJ.ov 't'tv' rl.yrxv dvcx;t 6eptJ.6v.

Now this 'Pythagorean' theory exhibits unmistakable signs of Stoic influence: (1) Ch. 25 the elements are said to f.L<:'t'IX~~~.Ae~v xoc' -rp~1tecr611.t 3t' gl.wv 167 ; (2) Ch. 27 df.L11.f1f.LeVl) is the cause of 8toLx~o-t.;, i.e. is a positive principle: this is Stoic.168 (3) The soul is said to consist of fire and air, which is Stoic doctrine. 169 A fourth sign of Stoic influence tM

This 'foobwte' is by Alexander Polyhistor.

l&o See below, n. 169. Ko~vwt; xocl xoc-r' d/So~ -· can this distinction be Presocratic? Cf. ]. Moreau, CAme du mvnde 155; A.- J. Festugiere, o.c. 17; De Vogel, Gr. Ph. III,342, note on Nr. 1279a: 'this is Sto.ic Heracliteanism'; ibd. she appositely refers to parallels in Ocellus and Philo. 168 Moreau, J.c.; Festugicre, Le.; De Vogel, o.c. 341 and esp. 343, note on 1279d. Cf. Zeno, SVF 1,87, p. 24,31-3; 98, p. 27,19-23; 176. p. 44,38-45,2, and Chrysippus SYF II,913 (from the 71:'. d[L~P!J.S'I'r)<;): e!p.o:pp.iv'r) tcr-rtv 6 -rou x6cr1J.Ou Myo~. '7) ~.6yo<; -r€1v ~v -.<j) Y.60'(L<§l r.:povo(q StotxOU(Lb.twv. -- I would like to add that the idea vf ellJ.a.pfLlVYj also seems to be present in the embryology (cf. below, Ch. VI, n. 134): Diog. Lacrt. VIII,29 "the child, when born, has in itself all the relations {viz. the ...-~.;; .Xpf.A.ovLa.~ ).6yo~) constituting life, and these, forming a continuous series (iliv dpol'.evw11), keep it together ... , ea.eh appearing at regulated intervals". For the e:i!tiXpfJ.~Vl) as e:!pop.iv'l) -rt<;, as dpoucroc and as dp[L6.; cf. SVF II, 914 (p. 265,12}, 913 (p. 265,6), 917 (p. 265,36), 918 (p. 266,1) and 920 (p. 266,10). m Diog. I.aert. VI.U,28 dvoct Si: -r·~v tjl•Y.(~V &1t'ot77t'M!'·"' oc!6tpo.; xocl, TOU 6:tpp.o\i xcx£ ·mG lj.uxpou, ':'C{l cru!LlJ.n~xew •.fuxpo\i octOspo<;. Wiersma, o.c. 111, admits that this is a Stoic idea. Cf. e.g. SVF 1,135 ("'~ Diog. Lai!rt. VII,J57): Zeno says the sonl is me:Gf!.a; ~vtlepfLOV ('luftgt)st.altige Feuernatm·', F. Riische, Das Seelenpneuma, Stud. Gesch. Kul.t. Alt. 18,3, Paderbom 1933, repr. New York 1968, 11); SVF H,7R6 (~-~ Alexander Aphr., De anima p. 26,16 Bruns): the soul is ou'(Y.et(l.ev6v ~{vt; ~x -re n'>p?J~ xtXl &epo<; (cf. also SVF IJ,787, p. 219,4 and SVF III,VI,lO (=~ Macrob., in Somn. Scip. 1,14,20} animam ... Boethus ex aere et igne. For Posidonius cf. below . Ch. VII, p. 211, n. 39. -- In the account of ~'\lexander 1 GB

1 &7

99

is, I believe, the theory of Ch. 27, where we read that the air is 'cold' ether (ether itself is warm), and that the sea and the 1)yp6v are 'thick' ether. The identification of 6ep!J.6v and ether is Stoic, 170 the derivation of the other elements from the ether171 is Stoic as well. This derivation is presupposed by the terms 'cold ether' and 'thick ether'. A simple theory of 7tOwum:n; and fL&:vw<:nt;; plays a role in Stoic cosmogony and in the Stoic theory of elemental change. 172 Festugiere has shown in which ways the theory of Oepp.6v in Alexander Polyhistor is foreshadowed in Aristotle and Diocles. 173 Not surprisingly his arguments largely coincide with the arguments of Solmsen in favour of attributing the theory of the calidum in Cicero to Cleanthes. 174 The para.lld between the account in Alexander Polyhistor, the soul i<' saiu to be (a) immortal, i.e. to originate from the warm and cold ether and (b) to originate from the sperm. The comments of vViersma on these contradictory views, o.c. 106, and of Theill~r. o.c. 155, are worth reading (cf. also R. M. }ones, Posidonius and Solm• Eschatologj•, Cl. Ph. 27 (1932,113 ff.) 129-30). Festugicre, o.c. 47, glosses over the difficulty. 170 Or of ether and fire. Cf. in the Ciceronian account (ND ll,23) the significantly coupled terms calidum atque ignewm (Theophrasius only mentions the 6tw6v, see above, p. 82 ff.) For fire= ether, d. ZenoSVFI,102 (= Arius Did. fr. 38 Diels), and further SVF II,580 (= Diog. LaerL Vll,137), general Stoic theory ; avw-r.:tione p. 218,4 Bruns, SVF II,473, p. 155, 34) both earth and water are said to be 1tttXUfL<:fl~· Cf. also Philo, A et. m·u. llO, VI, p. 106,12 ff. Cohn-W. cruv(~ov-co.; t-t~v nupo.:; xocd ri)v a~imv de; &epoc, cruvl~ov-ro.; 8' on;6-r& ouvOi..l~ot-ro e~ M
100

Polyhistor ap. Diog. Laert., which contains a few unmistakable traces of Stoic influence,l71' and that in Cicero affords a basis for seriously considering the possibility that the whole 'Warmelehre' in Diog. Laert. is a Stoic theory. However this may be, the theory of the Hypomn. is certainly akin to that in Hebd. and in Cicero. The passage in Diog. Laert. VIII,27 (quoted above), which describes the passing of the sun's ray through air and water (earth is not mentioned) which has the effect of ~worwLc:'i:v is especially important for the interpretation of Hebd. This is the best parallel I have been able to find for the theory in Ch. 6 of Hebd., according to which qu·iddam ex soUs splendor-ibus has become united to earth (and water)J7 6 But with an important difference: contrary to the ideas which we have encountered in Hcbd. and ND, the 'vitalism' of Alexander Polyhistor's source does not apply to the elements, but only to ~<j)C£ in the narrower sense of the word; i.e., it is exactly parallel to that of Cleanthes as quoted in ND II,23-24, and II,40-41.177 It is distinctly expressed that 1"~V ;r h y~~ yEvc.rm &Mvoc't'ov D(f/t<>-rM0C£L 1i 8 ; contrast the 'Posidonian' idea of ND II,26, where the power of spontaneous generation is explicitly attributed to the earth. 179 In Diogenes Laertius we have a 'Warmelehre' which shares almost everything with that in Cicero,180 but not its vitalist conception of the elements. It is probably a Stoic theory, or at least a theory which leans heavily on Stoic examples. It is, no doubt, pre-Posidonian181 175 It is, of course, also dependent on Theophrastus (cf. above, p. 85, esp. for the 8ep[.L6v of the sun). But the Stoic ideas in Diog. Laert. are blended with the theory of the fle:p[.L6v (that on d[.LOtPiLZ'I'IJ = providence is worked into the passage on the kinship behYeen man and the Gods on the basb of man's share in the divine heat: the Gods look after us, because we are their relatives). The theory of the soul according to the Pythagorean •y rro[.Lv-i):.Let't'ct can not be attributed to Theophrastus, who defined soul as the 'perfection of the divine body', i.e. of heat only (see the quotation from Iamblichus, above p. 84). 178 See above, p. 79. 11 7 See above, p. 96. 178 Diog. Laert. VIII,ZS. 179 quaeque ipse ex se generata ... contineat (cf. also ND II,28). For the Aristotelian and Theophrastean ( !) antecedents of this idea cf. Pease's note ad l., p. 609 ff. 180 The relation between sensus and calor of ND II,23 and 41 is paralleled by that between 01:!crflr.crt:; and fle:p(J.6v in Diog. Laert. VIII,29. 181 E. Zeller, III,2,104 ff. was more certain than most scholars would care to be at the present moment in attributing a Stoic origin to the whole Hypomn. He certainly erred in as far as the theory of principia in Ch. 25 is concerned.

101

and shows us what a pre-Posidonian and possibly Cleanthean theory of universal heat could resemble. Although the argument to be derived from such evidence is not very strong, it certainly strenghtcns the case of the Posidonian 'authorship' of ND II, 24h-7, and thus indirectly that of a post-Posidonian date for Hchd., where the action of the sun is described in the 'Cleanthean' 182 terms of Alexander Polyhistor, hut where the effects of the action of the element of the sun, viz. that the elements are alive, arc more in the spirit of Posidonius. The special role of the sun in the system of Posidonins is well-known. 183 It cannot, however, be denied that Cleanthes made the' sun play a V('ry important role as well. 1B4 Posidonius will be to some extent dependent on Cleanthes, and it is, of conrse, \\Tong in principle to attribute a But his comments on the '\Varmelehrc' arc, 1 think, sound. He adduces 1hc account of calor vitalis in ND IT ,23-24 and quotes tl1c Hymn of Cleanthes, line 4 for the affinity between the human soul and the \Vorld-Sonl. The passage on the 'ray of the sun' (Diog. Laert. VIJI,27) which sustains life is compared to Cleanthes' well-known theory of the snn as 'welterhiUtenclc Kraft'; he quotes SVF !,499 and 530 (sec also above, p. 91, n. 127). The rPlationship between the account of the sun in the llyponm. and Cleanthes' theory was also noticed by P. Boyancc, l~tudes 101 ; he holds or held that the f fypomn. is an early document and that Cleanthes was influenced by this particular doctrine. But his exposition of the position of the sun within the system of Cleanthes (o.c. 87 ff.) is excellent. 183 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 1,49R ('·'' Aetius, !,14,5) K:A. p.6vo<; Twv ~T(>)~Y.<~iv Tl> 1t\ip &m:cp~w~To X<•>vos:~ilt;. He also said that the heavenly bodies are xc.woe:~ild<;, cf. the passages collected as Sl'F l,50R (the moon apparently is an exception: it is m:Ao~;~/11)<;, SVF 1,506 ~~ Ariu~ Did. fr. 34 Diels); this shows that the 'technical fire' is no exception. We arc rcmincled of the shape of fire in the Timaeus, where the fire-particles arc of a pyramoid shape in order to better penetrate the other elements (cf. above, p. 68) and in Theophrastus (cf. above, p. 82, n. 79). The conical shape of fire agrees very well with the penetrating power of ihc sun's ray in Diog. Lai'rt. VIII,27. Now, the idea that this ray penetrates the whole universe is explicitly attributed to Cleanthes: SVF !,502 ( = Clement, Strom. V,R,4R, 1, p. 358,11 ff.St.) K:A. 7tl:ijx•pov Tov )\Atov X<XA~>i · ~v yocp T<Xi<; &vo:ToAo:i<;, €pdii<•>V T<X<; <X•'>yoi<;, r,Iov 7tA+,cr<:r(•JV TQV x6crrmv de; T~v iv<Xpp.6vwv 7topdi7.v [,;, cp<71c;] &ye:~. This refers to the daily course of ihe sun. 188 Reinhardt, RE s.v. Pos. 692 ff. and the passages collected by C. J. De Vogel, Gr. Ph. III,252, Nr. 1176c and 254 ff., Nr. 1179. Cf. also below, p. 126ff. 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-.'i and p. 96-7, and esp. p. 79, n. 162 for the concept of Oe:piJ.oV. - On the parallel sun ,.._, heart in Cord. (IX 88,10 ff.L.) cf. F. Kudlien, Posid. u. d. Arzteschule d. Pneumatiker 425-6. 184 See above, p. 88, p. 91, p. 92, p. 87, n. 104 and p. 91, n. 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,l86 we will do wise to seriously ponder the possibility of its derivation from Posidonius_ls7

7. In Cic., ND II,24, two examples arc given as proof for Cleanthes' thesis that in every living body there is great vis caloris, viz. (l) negat (se. Cleanthes) enim esse ztl{um cibum tarn gravem qztin is nocte et die concoquatur, cuius etiarn in reliquiis incst calor iis quas natura respuerit. This phrase certainly is a quotation from Cleanthes.l 88 Possibly, but not certainly, 1R9 also thl' next i'Xampk ilcrive~; from him: (:2) imn vern venae et arteriae micare non desimmt quasi qu.odam igneo motu, animadversumqtte saepe est cum cor ani-mantis alicu.ius evolsnm ita mobiliter palpitaret ut imitaretur igneam celeritatem. In themselves, these examples 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 receptacles of the heat within the boJy. This parallels Hebd. Ch. 6,§2,5 ff. R.: the heat in one of its two cosmic 'places' ,190 viz. in tlw earth, corresponds to hoc quod in visccribtts hominis et quod in vcnis calidum est. The point about the venae has been illustrated some lines before, Ch. 6,§1 ,22 ff.R.: aqua autcm fluminurn imitatio est venae et qui in venis 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 191 ; the rivP-rs are here understood as parts of the earth's body. 192 Cf. KM. Jones, Posidonius and Solar Eschatol·>gy, 126 ff. Cf. De Vogel, o.c. 256, note on Nr. 1181. 187 I may be excused in saying something about Heinharclt"s nften-clerided 'innere Form'. The term is opaque. \Vhat H.einhardt re;dly mc:tns is what nowadays would he called 'structure', i.e. a whole of parts which arc defined both by their mutual relations and their relation to the whole. The structuralist approach can be a very fruitful heuristic device. Reinhardt was fully justified in employing it, and did so in a wholly admirable way. He achieved results which are the more astonishing in that he himself had no clear insight into its methodological nature, though his last attempt at a description (RE s. v. Pos. 612) leads to some degree of clarification. 188 SVF 1,513; note the oratio obliqua. 189 No oratio obliqua. 190 See above, p. 79. 1 91 Ch. 6, §2,5 ff. R. congregatum terrae. 192 Ch. 1,80 R. the rivers are said to belong to the sixth portion of the universe, 1ss

18 ~

103

This parallel use of entrails and veins in Hebd. and in Cicero can hardly be accidental, particularly in view of the general parallel which we have established between the cosmological chapters of the Hippocratic treatise and the Stoic theory in ND II,23 ff. It should, moreover, be noted that (again) the author of Hebd. apparently is taking something for granted. He expresses himself ·with such brevity, that our understanding of his meaning is greatly enhanced by adducing the parallel in Cicero. On the other hand, it should not be forgotten that the macrocosmic application as found in Hebd. is lacking in Cicero; it may have been one of the physicae rationes which he omitted. However this may be, the comparison venae"' flwmina is also to be found in a 'Posidonian' 193 chapter of Sencca, Nat., III,lS,l: placet natura rcgi terram, et qztidem ad nostrorurn corporum exemplar, £n quRms et venae szmt et arteriae, illae sanguinis, hac spiritus receptacula. In terra quoque sunt alia itinera per q~tae aqzta, alia per quae spin:tus currit; adeoque ad similitudinem illam humanorum corporum natura formavit, ut etc. The arteriae, mentioned in Cic., ND II,24, are not explicitly mentiom'o in the account of Hebd. Ch. 6, but in other respects the correspondence could hardly be closer. The 'veins' of the earth 194 have been formed after the example of the veins conveying the blood in the human body. The same chapter in Seneca mentions also other liquids within the organism of the earth, Nat. III,l5,2 .. .qztemadmodum in nobis non tantum sang~tis est sed m~tlta genera umoris, alia necessarii, alia corrupti ac paulo pinguioris - in capite cerebrum, in ossibus medullae ... - sic in terra quoque sunt umoris genera complura etc. This corresponds to Hebd. Ch. 6, § 1,19 ff.R. quod autcm in terra calidum humidum medulla et cerebrum hominis semen. The comparison with the description of the 'earth-animal' in Seneca allows us to bring out another important point. In Seneca, it is unambiguously stated that the human body serverl 'nature' as a model when the earth was formed. The same thought is also characteristic of the whole microcosm-macrocosm-comparison in Hebd. Ch. 6. When we compare this to the microcosm-macrocosm-theory of V ict. i.e. to the water. The author of llebd. wavers between the concept of the element and that of the cosmic body; this is apparent from his treatment of earth in Ch. 1,90 ff R. and 2,24 ff. and 47 ff. R (see also below, p.l16-7 and p.l16n. 260). 193 See above, p. 94. 19• Seneca first speaks of hidden veins, but makes it clear that rh·crs arc a continuation of these: Nat. III,l5,5 in terra solutis ac patefactis venis rivus aut flumen eftunditur.

104

I,10, 195 an important difference which has been neglected by earlier commentators catches the eye. In Vict. the human body is arranged as a copy of the universe (&7totJ-t[L"I)OW ·roG or.ou) .196 The xotA('YJ has the 'power' of the sea. A concretion of cold and moist water around the body is a copy of the earth (&.7totJ-tf.1.1JOW y'~c;). Circuits of fire within the body have the 'power' of the heavenly bodies. Though it is correct to say that I.Lt(D!Icr8oct in the PresocraticlB 7 period, in general, does not imply an ontological difference between model and copy (as in Plato), but is sometimes the expression for a reciprocal relationship between interchangeable comparata,198 it would be, I think, correct to say that in most cases the starting-point of the comparison (the comparatum) is and remains different from the comparandum. This is certainly the case in Vict.: cf. the long development on a.rt imitating (human) nature, Vict. Ch. 11 ff. It is nature which points the way here, as it is nature which is prior to the human body, ibd. Ch. 10. In Hebd., however, as ·in Sencca, Nat. 111,15, this order is reversed: the model of Vict., viz. the 19 ~ I do not doubt, bv the way, t1utt the author of Hebd. was familiar with Vict. and that the microcosm-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. It reveals the general background against which the author of Flebd. designed his picture of the world and the body - it reveals what he tooh for granted. That the universe as !locxpivflp(.>n:o,; is not a primitive or even an early philosophical idea is argued by I<. Allers, 1'1,ficrocosnms from A naximander to Paracelsus, Traditio 2 (1944, 319 fi.), 323 If.. 351 if., 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, Vict. will certainly be older than the Tim. (or at least pre-Timaean in the sense in which Democritus is Presocratic). 196 The next words, !J.Lxp.X ;rpo<; fLEy:l./.a xO!:l t.Lo:y.Xi,oc r.po<; fL~xp&, may mean 'the small after the manner of the great and the great after the manner of the small' (]ones, Loeb transl.), i.e. they may pertain to the mutual correspondences between the parts of tl1e cosmos (p.eyii.oc) and those of the human body (t.m~p*). It is, however, abo possible to interpret 1t'po<; differentlv ;tnd 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': xo~A('I)v -r~v f.t&y(<1")V. 197 Note, moreover, that Vict. is not Presocratic in the literal sense of that term, if the t.p.q. of ea. 370 B.C. established for this work by Rehm is correct (s. above, Ch. I, p. 25, n. 116). m Cf. Burkert, Weish. tt. Wiss. 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 Hcbd. 6,§1 R. we read that the corpora et arborcs 199 on the earth naturam similem habent mundo quae minima et quae magna. 200 necesse est enim ·1nttndi partes, 201 cum sint omnia similiter, comparari m-undo; ex equalibu.s cnim partibus et similibttsmundo 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 II,23, otnnia quae alantur 203 et quae crescant. 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, ll is the humau skeleton wltich serves as the mollel for the stony 'bones' of the l~arth, Hebd. 6,§1,11 ff.R terra quidem stabilis et mobilis media lapidi quidem ossa imitationem habcns. Another clear example of this relationship is Ch. 6,§1,22 ff. R.: the water of the rivers is an imitation (imitatio est) of the vein and the blood within the veins. 204 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. K stagna autcm. vesicae et longao (imitatio), maria vero qui in visceribus est humoris ltominis (imitatio), aer vera spiritus (im-itatio) qui est in homine. The human body and its parts are the points of reference; it is not the reverse. 'Ve then read that the moon corresponds to the location of sensus, and, in § 2,3 ff. R. 205 that the heat in the universe is that (est ... hoc quod) what is hot in the human body. 206 The universe imitates the human body. \Vhat else does this mean but that the universe as a whole is a ~<7lov? Of course, that the universe 19 9 crc;;[J.IX't':X (se, ~c(lw1) X'ltl
° Cf.

the quotation from Vict., above p. I 05, n, lfJ(J, The corpora et arbores. aoz This is another difference with Vict. 203 The corpora et arbores are in terra; earth, bearing plants and animals (llebd. 1 ,91 ff. R) is said to be 7t'ltV't'po<po~, H ebd. l, <J4 R. 204 Quoted in fnll above, p, l 03. zos Fully quoted above, p, 79. 20 6 At the beginning of Ch. 6, § 1, hrnvever, the order of compared objects is reversed, This is nothing but an announcement of what is to follow. That the changing colours of the human body arc explained Ch. 6,§2,13 ff. R. by a reference to celestial phenomena is no contradiction. This is an easy step, once the general frame of reference has been established. Cf. also below, Ch. V A, p. 137. 20

201

106

is a ~cf'lOv is an early, even a Presocratic idea, and one which we can follow down to Plato and Aristotle.20 7 As far as I know, however, the point is neither brought out with the same force which it has in Hebd., nor with the same careful interest in matters of detail hdore we come to late Hellenistic and Gra('CO- Roman times. 208 The theorv in H ebd. breathes the same spirit as the 'Posiclonian' ideas which we have quoted from Scncca. 209 The same vitalist world-picture which, as I hope to ha vc shown, lies at the bottom of the theory of the elements in Hebd., is also partially responsible for the microcosm-macrocosmtheory of this treatise. In this way, the concl11sions from the presence of vitalist ideas within the theory of the elements arc further strenghtened. On the other hand, the arguments of Parlier commentators in favour of an early date for at least the microcosm-macrocosm-theory of Hebd., which have been seriously undermined already hy such scholars as ] . Duchesnc-Gnillemin, 210 are further invalidated. The vitalist approach JWcnliar to the microcosm-macrocosm-theory of Hebd., which is apparent both from the whole theory and from some of its dt>tails, is foreign to earlier thought in general aJHl to the theory of V ict. in particnlar.

8. We have not finished yet with adducing Stoic parallels. It will be remembered that what has been called the 'eclectic Presocratic theory' of Hebd. combines a theory first put forth by Thal<~s. viz. that water is the origin of the earth 211 with one first put forth by Anaximenes, viz. Cf. the excellent expositinu .,f (;. 1':. l\.. Lloyd, .Polnrity a11d A nalogv 232 If. Perhaps th(~ most interesting parallel is to be found l'lut., Fac. ()27e ff.; d. below, Ch. VI, p. 20-J., n. 264. 209 See a hove, p. 94, p. 1 tH. It is tnw that the tragedian Chocrilus of ;\then:-:, an earlier contemporary of Acschylus. called tlw stones the hones an
208

107

that the earth rides upon the air. 212 Both ideas occur together in one cosmological system, that of the Stoa. 213 Every time the cosmos is reborn, the fire first passes into air, then into water, from which the earth develops. 214 Such was the theory of Zeno and Chrysippus. Zeno and Chrysippus together are mentioned in Diog. Laert. Vll,l36 215 and 142. 216 We know that Zeno thought he could already find this theory in Hesiod 217 and also that he explained the poet's Chaos as being exactly this pre-cosmic moisture. 218 For Chrysippus we have, besides the testimony already referred to, an actual quotation from the first book of his 1t. rp,)cr€wc;, 219 from which I ~ ' e<epoc; ,' , U,, o"' (!) p -rpe7t€'t'C<~ ' ' 't'OU't'OU , - U(jl~(j't'OC(J.€Vl)c; ' ' Cl't e: (f'Ire ) o~ e~c; XC<X Y'IJc; ••• 220 212 Ch. 2,25 ff. H. 1) '(~ ... iv T -i)Ep~ r)zteTC(\. Cf. above, Ch. lli, p. 60-l, especially

for the 'Anaximenean' term irroze:LcrOot~. 213 On the rdation between the Stoa. and Presocratic thought in general cf. Grurnach, Physis und Agathon, 48: "Heraklit, Diogenes, ... Anaxirnenes, wenn rnann die Lehre von &.pC(((>)m~ und JTl))m<; des \Velt;;toffs in Betracht zieht, haben sie grundlegend beeinflusst ocler sind von ihr aus einer gewissen Wahlverwandtschaft wieder aufgenommen und der eignen Lehre anverwandelt worden". In the following pages, Grumach 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, Spiithellenistische Berichte iiber Welt, I<.ultur und Cotter, U nters. z. Diodor von Sizilien, Schw. Beitr. Alt. Wiss. 9, Base! 1959, 38 ff., 88 ff. 214 Cf. also above, p. lOO, n. 171. 210 SVF 1,102 = Il,580. 216 SVF 1,102 = II,58l: y(ve<JOC(\ lE: Tov Y.ocrw}\1, oT·xv ix rr•)p;,~ ·~ o,)cr(oc Tpocn'ij 8t' &.€poc; et<; •)ypoTlJTIX ( Diog. Lai~rt. V IJ ,131) and Arius Did. fr. 38 Diels, both quoted SVF 1,102, speak of !)owp), ehoc Tl) JTC(;(')p.epi:~ oc>hoG cr•)cr-c
o'h~

220 It is to be noted that the account of the cosmology according to Hippasus and Hcraclitus in Act. 1,3,11 uses the Stoic ideas and terms which we have encountered above (seep. 100, n. 171): Dox. 284,2 ff. T01hou (se. the fire) oi:XC(TM~e:v­ \IU(J.t\101) (i.e., having become water) xocrtJ.orro~,i~crOoc~ T
108

That the earth rides upon the air is a Stoic notion too. According to the Stoics, the earth generally remains fixed in the centre of the universe 221 because all bodies move towards the centre, SVF II,550 222 mea.vov 7tOCcrL -ro!:s O"W[Li)(CfL\1 dva.L "t"")v 7tflWT'YJV xa.-roc cpvcrLV x.(V1JcrLV npo.; TO -rou x6cr[Lou fLEo-ov. The elements, so to speak, exert a kinct of centripetal

pressure, which keeps the earth where it is. For the role of air in this process, an interesting experimental illustration is given by Chrysippus, SV F II,555 223 : o-rL 3E xoct ~crTfJX£V -1) y~. n:apoc3dy[LOC7L x.pii:.v7ocL I 't'OUT
(

\ ) ' , I (J. 11. CflOCOW £Le; CflUO'Xa.\1 x:eyzpov l:'ot/\OL

)

'YJ

f ""' lWXX:0\1 tpa.XCJU, XOCL'

cpuo-YjcrELE xa.t l[Ln'A~ac:L<:v ocuT~V cHpos, crufL~·~crE-rocL fLE-rewpLcrOsnoc -rov x6xxov ev [LEO"

[LEO"

this idea is similar to that in Hebd., where the earth, having upon itself and within itself the water, stands at the centre supported by air, needs no further elucidation. Moreover, even the formula €v -ri{'> ~ipL li)(.EE't'IXL can be paralleled from a Hellenistic author, although it is not certain that our first example goes back to a purely Stoic source 226 : Philo, Vit. Mosis II,122 (IV, p. 228,15-16 Colm-W.) &n:' &€poc; -rp6nov ·nv~ y-Yj xocl. uawp EXXflE[LIX\I't'IXL, 't'O yocp ~X'YJfLIX TCJVTWV EO"'t'LV &~p. But a Stoic origin 7tot)(UfLe:pecrTotTov otuTou (se. of the quenched fire ·~ the moisture) d<; cx>~Ho crucrn::AAOfLe:vov y'ij ylyve:Tott lCT.A. 221 Also this idea is to be found in llebd., cf. above, Ch. III, p. 62 ff. m P. 173,31 ff., a quotation from the second book of Chrysippm;' rr. :wJ~cre:<>><; ap. Plut., Stoic. rep. Ch. 44, p. 1054e. For Zeno, cf. SVF I,99 (Arius Did. fr. 23 Diels), p. 27,27 ff. 6p017><; :A:!:ye:crtlott JtavTot Ta fLEP'tJ -rou x6afLou t7tl To fL:I:cro'J Tou x6crfLOU Tljv cpopdtv ~zo:w, r.d).~cr,;cx lli: TOt ~&poc; lizonrx. TotUTOV 8' cxt,;~cv e:!vott xcxl -r'ijc; Tou x6cr[LOU fLOV'ij<; l:v cX7tdp(j) xe:vc}> xcxl T'ij<; y'ij<; 7totpot7t:1.:r,cr[w; iv ,;<;> x6crfL(j), mpl TiJ TOUTou xevTpov xQ(EltSpufLEV1)c:; lcroxpotTwc:;. Fire and air, though :X~otp'ij, nevertheless tend to the centre of the universe: -re:lve:crEl<Xt 3~ :ot[pcxc; -rou XOClfLOU fLEcrov, T·t,v SE cr•)crTotcrtv 7tpr)<; TlJV 7te:pt
Doubtless, air and fire are centripetal because they possess 'weight' when compared with the void outside the universe. See further Pohlenz, Die Stoa II, note to p. 76,11 (to the passages quoted by Pohlenz, add SVF Il,646). AH. 1,12,4 (on the Stoic theory of light and heavy) is incomplete. 223 P. 175,36 ff., from Achilles, !sag. 4, p. 34,3 ff. lVlaass. 224 This term occurs also in Sextus' discussion of the various possible (or rather, in his view, impossible) elemental motions, 1\d. X,82 e:h' oc1ti. Tl7>v 7te:paT<>>V {moxlioLT'J C:>c; E7tl Tll !Lecrov crwo6ou1Le:voc (se. the elemental bodies ... ) X.T.A. 225

226

Earth and water together are the 'heavy' and 'central' elements. For Philo's knowledge of the Vetusta Placita. cf. below, Ch. V A, p. 130-1, n. 4.

109

is plausible for some of the expressions in Philo, Aet. mu.nd. 115227 (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 cosmcJs, v·iz. 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: ou yocp ino;c~()!i; .. l'/.t 11:01"€ ou·n: uafX·n 7tEiO"tX y1j ouO' {)~cop &tp~ ou•e &·~p 7tupi, for what is heavy (i.e. earth and water) tends to the centre, what is light (i.e. air and fire) goes up. But air and fire do not go Up equa.lly high (ou:x_' rJf.i.O~Wc;J: a~p y.J:p 7tUpoc; ox:flfl-1)( yeyove, -ro 8' ~1!0:;(0U(.Lt::Vov z~ &.vcf:yx'Y}c; urce:p
it'. 22ll Another cosrnogonic reference may be implied in lJebd. 1,71 ff.R. -rou -~Epoc;; crucr't"tXGLt; xcd x6cr!.wc;; (only possibly; for, of course, crva-rct:crL.:; may mean no more than 'substance'); cf. SVF 1,99 (p. 27,33): air and fire tend towards the centre of the universe 230 but 'materialize in the direction of its circumference', •~v M a6 er'' oc a Lv 7tpoc;; -::·~v ne:pL
this context a locative connotation, which is parallel to what we find in Iiebd.. We have already seen that in Stoic texts air generally is the first cruG-roccrLc; ('concretion') of fire. 231 In isolation, +, -rou f;tfpoc;; GUGTocm<; 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, 23 2 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 23 & (think of the role of the fire in Stoic cosmogony234 !) Not in Leisegang's Index. Cf. Philo's polemics against the Stoic theory of change and cosmic progression (quoted above, p. 100, n. 171), which nses the Stoic terrn o-uvl~e:w. 229 That the earth is supported by air is also found in the description of the cosmos of Pliny ll.5,§10 lmius (s.,;. ai!ris) vi su-sf>ensmn ... telhwem (cf. below, p. 114, n. 252). ~o Cf. above, p. 109, n. 222. 2n Cf. ahove, p. lOO, n. 171. m To say nothing about the other Stoic influences we have discussed so far. m Cf. above, p. 81. 23 4 Cf. above, p. 91, n. 127: p. 100, n. 171.. 227

2:•

110

9. Our information on the motions of the elements in the universe according to Chrysippus is not without inconsistencies. There is SVF II,527 (Arius Did. fr. 31 Diels) which gives the theory of the x.6crr.Loc; according to Chrysippus; not, however, in a pure form, but padded, as is Arius' habit, >vith bits of general Stoic theory. 235 In this fragment (to which I shaH return presently236 ) the elemental spheres are given in the sequence earth, water, air, ether. In regard to the motion, the spheres behave in a different way: -r(; !J.EV ~Ivv:.~ rcqncpsp6f1.svov rczp~ 1'0 !J.EGOV, 't'O /)' t>TtO!J.EVOV' rcsp~cps:po[.LE'JOV {.L~V '!OV o:t0fp~, 1JTtQ!J.EVOV i)€ 't'~v '(~V

xo:t 't'oc ere' ~\n'ijc; &ypcX. x1:1.l 't"ov cH:po:. 237 The ether has a circhlar movement 'Nhich earth, water and air do not have. In itself, this is perfectly clear. However, the picture as given in SVF II,555 (= Achilles, !sag. 4) is different. Here we do not read about four, but about five spheres, though perhaps two of these, viz. o:Le~p and oupocv6~, may be counted as one: heaven, ether, air, water, earth. And then238 : EV oi 'T(Jl fl.E:O"C -r·f,v y~v dvo:t, XEV't'pou ..&~tV xoct (.LZ'(S:Oo,:; z·,·tl:.zouaocv, 6}~ iv acpor.£?~. X<X.L 't'cX!:; !J.EV &.1\J.or.t:, -rpdt:, o-r.poc£pcx:; ·~ -rfrscrocp1Xc; m:ptowz~crOo:t, . . . -r,v 8e -njt:, y!fjc; !J.OV'f)V S:rs..~'lloct. 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 SVF II,555 gives us a picture of Chrysippus' system which contains a greater amount of historical exactitude than that of Arius Didymus. We happen to know that Zeno defined the oupatvo.:; as e<:l6~po; TO ecrx.c.nov, 239 but he does not appear to have made a real distinction between ouprxvoc; and IXW·f,p. \Ve know also that Zeno and Its first two definitions of x6crp;o~ are ascribed to Posidonius ap. Diog. Laert. VII,138. Posidonius, however, can hardly he the ultimate author of the whole fragment, because the order of the planets is nut his (see 'vV. L. Lorimer, Some Notes on the Text of Pseudo-Aristotle 'De 1lfttndo', St. Andrews Univ. Publ. 21, Oxford etc. J. 925, 50 ff., 127 ff. and J. P. !IJaguire, The Sources of PseudoAr-istotle de Jlundo, Yale Clasc;, St. 6 (1936), 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 tcmtis = rxtJy}j, cf. below, p. l:L2) and a separat(' sphere for the fixed stars (cf. Cic., ND II,54 and below, p. 112; see also p. l15, n. 256). But perhaps a 'doxographical' passage in one of Posidonius' works is behind Arius' extract. In favour of a Posidonian redaction is perhaps the comparison, at SVF II, p. 168,19-20, of the supporting function of the earth to that of' the Oa-r€ct of a ~()r;v. 23 6 See below, p. 113 ff. 237 P. 168,16 ff. Arnim. us P. 175.27 ff ..Arnirn. Cf. also.-\. lHibler, Zur Kosnwgonie der .Stoi!ier, Jbb. Cl. Phil. 39 (1893), 298 H. 239 SVF 1,115, from Ad1illes (hag., 5), just as SVF II,555. 236

111

Cleanthes distinguished between two kinds of fire, the destructive and the productive24o kind. To these Chrysippus added a third: tlw rxuy~, the finest, thinnest and most superior kind of fire, to which the universe will revert in the end. 241 Cf. SVF II,668 (= Plut., Fac. Ch. 15, p. 928c) Myoucn iH: (the Stoics) -rou or.Wepo<; TO (l.EV rxuyoed)E:t; xrxt Az7tTOV {)1t0 (1.1XV0'1."1JTOc; 0 up IX V0Vye:yovevoc~. TO a~ nuxvwOE:v ... &cr-rpoc. The idea that the or.uy~ is finer than the stars was taken over from Chrysippus by Posidonius; Act. TII,l,S lloa. (states that the Milky Way is) nupoc; (jUO"Tor.aw &aTpou p.ev (l.IXVu>'repocv, rxuy~<; ~e: 1CUY..VOTepocv. In Chrysippus the ocu·r~ functions, so to speak, a:-> a filth element, and this explains why Achilles, in reporting on his theory (SVF II,555), hesitates between three or four spheres. Js, or is llOt the rxuy}) to be distinguished from the stars? This hesitation, onJy to be explaim;d on the assumption of a difficulty inherent to the rxur~-theory attested as being held by Chrysippus, shows that Achilles lJScd an excellent source (maybe Posidonius, who, as we saw, took the !Xi)y~ 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 wa.s actually held by Chrysippus.242 At any rate, the circling of ether, air an
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 x6crt.Lo; in H ebd. Ch. 1. This will become clear when we cite as proof Arius Didymus fr. 31 Diels (SVF II,527), reference to which has already been made, 245 the second Chapter and part of the third of ps. Arist., De Mundo 246 and Cic., ND II,91-92 and 98-104. 247 In Cicero the description starts with the centre of the universe. In Mu., after the general definitions of x6crf1.o~ have been given, 218 the earth is the first of its parts to be mentioned, but the description proper starts with the heaven and proceeds inwards. In Arius Didymus the description again starts with the earth and proceeds in the direction of the circumference. In Hebd. Ch. l, the order is as in Mu.. We have already noticed that the order in 11ebd. Ch. 6 is the opposite of that in Ch. l, 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 these catalogues the parts of the universe are br-iefly clu~racterized; a brevity, however, which does not exclude the possibility of more or less extensive embellishments. Both Cicero and the author of i"vlu. avail themselves of this opportunity, as can only be expected. Arius Didyrnus' catalogue is very sober249 ; also that of around which this x6crtJ.o; whirles -as. roughly, the whole universe minus the earth. 2 ~• Above, p. lll. ZH The over-all resemblance between SVF II,527 and J1"u. Ch. 2 has been often studied: see :VIaguire o.c. 120 ff. and H. Strohm, Studien zur Schrift von der JYelt, NIH 9 (1952, 137 ff.), 140 ff., who both refer to earlier literature. Cf. also the succinct statement of Lorimer, Some Notes 52. Festugiere, Herm. Trism. Il, 492 If. usefully prints Arius fr. 31 and Alu. 2-3 in parallel columns. 247 ND li,91-2 is a 'partial doublet' of 98-104 (so Pease ad/., p. 775). A summary of the contents of 98-115 is given by Festngiere, J-Ierm. Trism. II,399. 24 ~ A statement on the x6cwoc; in general forms the proem (Ch. 1, §1 R.) of Jlebd. 'Die Betrachtung des Gesamtaufbaus der Welt ist alt, aber ihre ausdruckliche Betonung ist spezifisch helleni5tisch' (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 'Gesarntaufbau' with special emphasis. 249 It contains very little descriptive detail. Those details which have been left agree with 1\lu. (esp. the theory that the 'land' consists of islands piercing the sphere of water, SVF Il,p.l68,21-25 ~ Mu. 3,392b20-33, and the lists of the heavenly spheres which mention the planets by name, SVF II,p.169,1-6 ,.., 11Ju. 2,392a20-29). As Hebd. i5 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 concen1ed.

113

Hebd. is quite matter-of-fact with only occasional lapses into a grand style.2so For the purposes of comparison it would be both convenient and, I think, convincing to print these parallel accounts 251 in parallel columns; but this is, for reasons of economy of space, not possible. I will restrict myself to pointing out their most salient features. In all these accounts the order follo-..ved is that of the elemental spheres: earth, water, air, fire 252 (or the reverse). Afu. adds the The same structure as in Cicero, ps. Aristotle, Arius Didymusandps. Hippocrates can be recognized in Diog. Lacrt. Vli,137 -156 (though other subjects have been worked in, since Diogenes purports to give a survey of Stoic ph_vsics, cf. VII,l32 and VII,160). In this \Vay, we succe,;sively have: 137-8, definitions of x6a[w.;; 1.44--6, stars, sun, moon; 15:1 b-154a, air; 154b, earth (viz. TOC xo~I-C:>fMXTOt ff,~ y'ij;). Earth does not receive extensive treatment in Diogenes; the 6yp6v is not studied at all. 2ol The order in Hebd. and .4ht. also corresponds to the order in which these subjects are treated in the Plac. See below, Ch. V A, p. 130 ff. Z5a The notion of concentric elemental spheres (to which add that of ether) goes back to Aristotle, cf. Gael. II,4,287a30-b14, esp. a32 ff. d y<Xp To fJ.tV 68rop ia·..t m:p~ -r7jv y'i)v, 0 13' &:-~~ m:pt TO ullcvp, TO 8€ mip ;rep~ TOV &€p~. xcd T
Graeci nostrique eadem vocabulo aera appellant, vitalem hunc t?t per cuncta rerum meabilem totoque consertum; huius vi suspensam cum quarto a.quarurn elemento librari media spatii tellurem. On the traditionally Stoic order of the elements in this passage, d. \V. Kroll, Die Kosmologie des Plinius, Abh. Schles. Ges. f. vaterl. Kult., Geisteswiss. H.eihe, 3. Heft, Breslau 1930, 6; on the general character of Pliny II,l ff. see Reinhardt, RE s.v. Pas. 684 ('Nicht rein, vielfaltig gefarbt, gebrochen und zersplittert sind die Spiegelungen poseidonischer Kosmologie bei Plinius'). Reference should also be made to Seneca, Nat. ll,l,l ff. (the proem), which divides the 'study of the whole' into that of caelestia, sublimia and terrena. The first part studies na!-ttram siderum ... et formam ignium quibus mundus includitur, the physical nature of the caelum, its motion, if it has infra sese sidera ... an in contextu sui fixa, in what way it sustains the change of the seasons, makes the sun return etc. The second part contains a study of the meteorological

114

Aristotelian ether as a fifth elemental sphere, a special feature of this work which we need not enter into here. In all of these descriptive passages the contents of the elemental spheres are enumerated in greater or lesser detail; this means, that the astronomical spheres constituting the sphere of the heavenly element are indicated. In Cicero, 253 Arius Didyrnus and ps. Aristotle, the fixed stars are carefully distinguished not only from sun and moon, but also from the 'other' planets. As we knOVI', this ui.stinction between the 'other' planets and the fixed stars is lacking in Hebd. Ch.1. 2.54 I shall return to this problem below, 255 but may be allowed to point otit that absolute faithfulness in following the analysis which we see reflected in the ~arallel accounts, would have possibly disagreed with the hebdomadological fancies of ps. Hippocrates. Certainly, the explicit adoption of a separate 'sphere' of the 'other' planets would have left no room for the encompassing ocxpvw~ x6crfLO~. But then the universe would have been left without a skin, and the microcosm-macrocosm-comparison of Ch. 6 would have been ruinecl. 256 phenomena in the air. The subject-matter of the third are waters, earth, plants and everything contained by the earth. Seneca's distinction of caelestia, sublimia and tenena corresponds to that of the Ptac. (see below, Ch. V, p. 131 ff.); it probably derives from Posidonius (roughly corresponding to that between his 'Astrophysik', Meteorology and n-. '.clx£avoG, cf. Reinhardt, RE s.v. Pos. 684), as was argued by Reinhard t, Poseidonios 54-·6. 263 Cicero, ND II,l02 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. Il I, p. Si. m Cf., on the 'planets' in Hebd., Ch. VB, 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. Il (d. above. n. 252, in fine). Among the problems studied by the science of caelestia are (Nat. II,1,1) solidum ne sit caelurn ac firrnae concretaeque tnateriae (cf. &xpt-ro<; x6cr!J.O<;, Hebd. 1,+4-5 R.) an ex subtili tenuique nexurn (a reference to the oclrr~. cf. above, p. 111, n. 235 and p. 112. Posidonius appears to have chosen the second alternative), agatur 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 contextu sui fixa (Hebd. opts for the first possibility), quemadmodum an-ni vices SM"vat (cf. Hebd. 1,44 ff.R. &.xpl-rou x6crfLOU ... tl:;oll~ lzov-. O~peo~ xoct zet(J.c7>vo,;;). If Reinhardt is right in his assumption (cf. above n. 252, in fine) that Sen., Nat. If,l 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: ... ~ y~, er.p' 1i "t'rX "t'e ~a. XOCL "t'wv ecr"t'L(X. "t'e oOcroc xoc.L [.L~TYJP· Cic., ND II,98 speaks of terra ... vestita floribus, herbis, arboribus, frugibus, adding (II,99) quae vero et q1tam varia genera bestiarum etc. 257 It appears that the earth has to be characterized as bearing animals and plants. Both in Hebd. and in Mu. y~ receives a choice poetic epitheton. 258 The chances are, that one or the other of these epitheta is traditional. It should, moreover, be noticed that the laudes terrae are repeated, in somewhat different terms, in Mu. 3, 392bl4 ff; 5,397a24 ff. antl6,399a27 ff. 259 In 392bl4 ff. we encounter the ~oc and tpu"t'oc of H ebd.: y'~ ... r.pu"t'o~c; ~puoucra. xoct ~otc;; in 397a24 If. we read y~ ... r.pu"t'o~c; xo[.Lwcroc 7ta.v"t'o~oc7to~c; ... xoct 7teptozou[.LEV"f) ~otc;, XOC"t'OC xoctpov exr.puoucroc "t'e 7tOCV":'OC XOCL -rper.poucroc X."t'.A.; in 399a27 ff. we have, among other things, a reference to ~ivapwv exr.pucretc;, xocp1twv 7te7trXVC1eL<;, yovod

~wv,

ex-rpor.poc( "t'e 7tOCV"t'WV X."t'.),,

In Hebd. 1,78 ff. the cosmic manifestations of the wet element are catalogued: -ro T~<; OocMT-r"f)<; \;-rpov [.Lepoc; xoct 7tOTCi'.fLWV xoct xp"f)vee:ptcr~to~: cf. Hes., Theog. 693. For 7t1X'I't'p6cpoc; cf. above, Ch. ll, 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' "Hp'IJ cpe:pecr~toc; (VS 31B6,2, cf. A33). Against this hypothesis see Maguire, o.c. 123, 11.1 (M~t. 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 "Hp'IJ q;e:pecr[1to~ to mean the 'earth' because he was familiar with the life-giving earth as a philosophical idea. Festugiere, Herm. Trism. Jl,497 counts cpe:ptcr~toc; among the 'fleurs de rhetorique' of Alu. 259 Cf. Strohm, Stud. Schr. 11. d. Welt, 143 ff. Also the description of the area of air and fire is repeated (2,392b7-13 ~ 5,397a19-24 ~ 6,399a24-26; Strohm, o.c. 144). 2eo Elsewhere in Hebd. (cf. above, p. 81) the uyp
116

ND II,98 mentions jontium gelidas perennitates, liquores perlu,cidos amnium, riparum vestitus viridissimos (the sea is described II,lOO). Afu. 392bl4f£. 261 mentions y'Yj x.oct O&AIXO'croc ... tpu-ro~c; ~puouo-oc x.oct ~<{loLc; 7t'Y)yoc~c; -re xoct 7tO't'()(fLO~c;; cf. 397a24 ff. y'fj ... VocfLIXO'L ('springs') m:pL~M~ouo-oc (the sea is described 392b22 ff., 393al7 ff.). Cf. especially 3,393a5 ff. ()(U't'ou yz fL-~v -rou-rou (se. of the cosmos as a whole) -ro (.Lev uyp6v EO''!L'J, 0 XIXAS:~'J 1tO'!()(fLOUc; xoct v&fLIX't'()( X()(L fl&AocO'O"()(c; d0(cr(.LS:0()(. It appears that a specification of various types of wat
....,

'

I

f

I

(

'

\

)

\

XOCL 7trXXVOCL Xrt.L 'J.tXArt.~OCL 7t'JO(I.[ 't'S: liVEfLWV XOCL -rurpc~VWV, e-rt 't'Z (3pov-rocL xocl. &a-r p oc mY.l. xocl. 7t-rwaetc; xe:pocuvwv fLUp(wv -re yvorpwv O'U(.LTIA'Yjyoc~e:c;. 263

The et ceteras ca~tsas of H ebd. easily covers those phenomena which are explicitly mentioned in Afu. Part of this meteorological information is also given by Cicero, ND II,lOl aer ... tum fusus et extenuatus sttblime fertur, tum autem concretus in nubes (cf. ]l,fu.) cogitunmwremqtte colligens terram auget imbribus (cf. Hcbd., 1'v!tt.), tum effluens hue et illuc ventos (cf. Mu.) elficit. Not only the coincidences of detail, especially between Afu. and Hebd., are striking, bnt 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' (:X.vw,)0'1)c;), i.e. joins the sun again to start its course anew, 265 and has phases, Cf. above, p. 116. The lacunae have been supplied from the translations. 263 These phenomena are explained at length J;fu. 4,394a9 ff., the contents of which may ultimately go back to Theophrastus (see M. Strohm, Pas. u. Tlteophr., above p. 97, 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 D. J. Furley, On the Cosmos, in the Loeb Aristotle, On Sophistical Refutations ed. E. S. Forster, London etc. 2 1965, 353 n. c). 264 Cf. also the survey of aerial phenomena ap. Diog. L
117

't"&Ae~ou. Cf. Cicero, ND II,l03 luna ... tum congrediens cum sole, tum degrecliens... varias ipsa lucis mutationes habet. Mu. speaks about the nature of the moon not in Ch. 2, but in Ch. 6, 399a6-12, where the list of the planets as given in 2,392a.23-29 is repeated 26G (in reversed order) and the times of their courses are given. Here the moon is characterized as follows, 399a6 H. cre:X-f)V'l) ... EV [-L'fjVL 't'OV &ocu-r~<; ~Loc m:: p cd ve:'t'ocL x 1h:Xov oc u~o [-LZ V'f) 't"e xocl.

[-LELOU [-LE V"') xocl. tp6LvOUf11X.

For the other heavenly phenomena enumerated in Hebd. (sun, stars, unmoved outer heaven), the parallds in the accounts which we have been adducing up till now are much less convincing. This is only to be expected for the omission of the 'other' planets a.JI(l ilw assumption of a separate outer heaven are peculiar to llebd .. 261 The fiery nature of sun and stars in Hebd. 268 is paralleled in Cicero: ND Il,101 aether ... in quo ... igneae format>, viz. sol (102), luna (103), 269, eae stellae quas tJagas dicinms (103), stellant1n t'nerran#um maxima multitudo (104). In ps. Alistotle, where the ether is taken as a fifth element in a rather orthodox 270 Aristotelian sense, the lw
167

118

Hebd. is strengthened in this way, but the peculiarities of the descriptive catalogue of H ebd. Ch. 1 become more visible as well. The planets are not mentioned and the outer rim of the universe is conceived in a way which has no parallels in the other accounts. I have already referred to the probable motive for the introduction of the unmoved OA'JfL7W>c; xocr[J.oc;, 273 and I have every reason to believe that the sphere of the 'other' planets has been left out for the same reasons for which ps. Hippocrates was obliged to sacrifice one wind out of the eight 'petals' of the Hellenistic wind-rose. 274 A few comments on Hebd. Ch. 2 may be added at this point. Ch. 1 is a purely rlescriptive enumeration of the parts of the universe, where the nature of each is briefl.\: Jormnlatecl. Ch. 2 treats tlw universe from a different point of view, 1!iz. as a whole which is working in a certain way. The emphasis here is upon tlw spatio-physical relations between the parts and upon cosmic mechanics. In the parallel accounts of Arius Didymus, Cicero ND 11,91-2 and 98-104 and ps. Aristotle, which we have studied above, information of this kind is not given separately, but tnrns out to be part of the descriptive catalogne. 275 Which of these arrangements, that in Hebd. or that in the other sources, is the original one is not easy to affirm. 276 I prefer to think that it was ps. Hippocrates who, to a certain extent, went his own way. Posidonian definitions of x6crp.o; (cf. above, p. 111, n. 235), though Festugit•re, Herm. Trism. 11, 512 n.9 wants to attribute the Posidonian definitions to Chrysippus. De nmndo is a rather late treatise (it can hardly be earlier than the first Cent. B. C., but I think that Furley, Introd. (I.oeh) 337 ff. has made out a fairly good rase in favour of this date), and its author used th6 sa!lle source as Arius Didymus. 273 Above, p. 115. 27 4 On the wind-rose see below, Ch. V C. p. 146 ff. Note that Pliny II,5,§10 (cf. above p. 114, n. 252) lumps stars and planets together as stellae: the obvious distinction is only made at § 12. 27 5 Cf. the formal announcement of the treatment of the 'cosmos and tlw greatest features of the cosmos' (x6cr[L01) ... xod ... &v ev "i{> x6cr[L

; ('nature') x-xlflkcre:(•>·; ('p0sition' in the order of things) x<x.t x~v-Y)cre:
It is, however, remarkable that the account in Cic., ND JI,9l-2 +- 98-1.04, which is essentially descriptive, stands in about the same relation to li,l15b-llR (cf. above p. 114, n. 252), which puts the emphasis on cosmic and celestial mechanics, asHebd. Ch.1 toHebd. Ch. 2. Cf. also Pliny, JI,5,§ 10(descriptive) §11 (cosmic mechanics).

276

119

It is unnecessary to enumerate all the parallels between H ebd. Ch.2 and the accounts of Arius Didymus, ps. Aristotle and Cic. ND II,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 xor:r.X p.ecrov ... "t'ov

+

XOO'[J.OV ••• &cr"t'z "t'ol:m x~"t'W "t' 1t~VT(J. The

relativity of 'up' and 'down', 277 though not expressed in the 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 urcotJ.zvr:.v M -;-·f)v y-~v. The same idea is found lvfu. 2,391b12 If. "t'et.{mJ<; (se. '!~<; "t'a~e6><;, the orderly arranged , p.ecrov, , , , O,V "t'e Xet.L, zr,pi)(LOV ( . . ov, ,, lJ( (j)<:pecrl"'w<; , P.. eL"lJXZ ' "'..1. u nl·verse ) oe "t'o, [J.ZV et.X.LVlJ"t' y'lj; in Cicero, ND II,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 bl3 ff. (the earth is at n~st, the heave11'> move; H cbd. is different: the outer heaven and the earth are at rest, the other parts are in motion). -The central position of the moon (Hcbd. 2,44 ff. 7) creA~VlJ [J.eO'lJ
~

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 the underlying stellar sphere. 279 We have also seen that inCh. 1,45 ff.R. the idea that an outer heaven 'contains the passing of summer and winter' (<~~>c:~oo €zov-;-
278

120

Oepzoc; xcd xe~p.wvoc;) can be paralleled. 280 As \Ve have seen, its motion was also a topic of investigation. 28 1 The idea that the circular movement of the heaven (the x.•hi,cp r.pop&) is the cause of the changc!''of the seasons etc. is, of course, Aristotelian,2sz but in Aristotle, the First Heaven is in motion and it is not distinguished from the stellar sphere. In Hebd., the why and ho'\'i of the relation between the 'inseparable world' and the change of the seasons is not explained. Now this outer heaven, exerting an enigmatic ini1uence upon what happens below, is said to be unmoved. 283 It is, I think, a plausible guess that the unmoved outer sphere of H ebd. is a descendant of the :Aristotelian First Unmoved Mover 2~4 which is interpreted in a spatial sense. Some support for this supposition may be derived from the attributes with which it has been invested, attributes which pertain to the realm of the divine. It is called Olympic and Most High: 2,15-6 R. OAUf.1.7tW-; x6ov.oc;; 2,41 ff.R. 0 OAU!Lmo.; XOO'f!Oc;, ihcoc.'r()c; ewv. 285 These ideas can, in part, be paralleled in ps. Aristotle De mundo. It would, perhaps, be rash to try to reconstruct a common source for Iicbd. and Mu., but 3. certain family resemblance is unmi~;f;a.kable. It is generally accepted that the God of De mundo is a descendant of Aristotle's First Unmoved M:over.286 We are told that he resides in aM CL above, p. 11.5, n. 256 (Seneca); p. 118, n. 267 (Mu.) Cf. ibd. zsa Cf. above, p. 76. asa Ch. 2,14 ff., 39 ff. R. (earth + Olympic world}. 284 Cf. above, p. 70 .ff. 28 " Boll's conjecture {rns. {yr;b -rocri~JvSe:l is undoubtedly right, cf. the Latin translations, which have olympus tm-mdw; summitatem tenens. 'For •');:~X·roc; as epitheton of Zeus and other gods cf. LSJ s.v. Ll. Though u'l':-x-ro<; is also used in a strictly local and a temporal sense (LSJ s.v. 1,2 and 3), its being conjoined to oAUt-t71:!o<; is, I think. in favour of the interpretation adopted in the text. Cf. also Xen.ocrates fr. 18 Heinze (·= Plut., Qu.aest. p!a.t. 1007f) -ro ycl:p &vw xod 71'p&-ro'J

281

U1tonov ol

71'XAXLOt

itpOO'l]jr)p;;uov· 11 XotL E. 6(rt.

t:locdm:.)~

't'OV (J.CV

e\1

't'Ot<; :V..<X't'cX 't'<XUTOC

xotl

lzoumv {)n:ry;-rov xO>./,;;i (quoted by Str(Jhm, Studien 159, n. 75). Xcnocrates seems to have advocated a spatial interpretation of the realm of the Ideas, cf. fr. 5 Heinze, where the o•jcrla vo1)'t'~ is piar:ed out~ide the o•)pocv6.:;. P. Boyance, La relig-ion astmte de Ptaton aux. Sto'iciens, 331 ff. has plausibly argued that these ideas are derived from a literal exegesis of the iJr:e:pO'Jp&'lto.:; 't'07to•; in the myth of Plato's Pltaedr. (247c3); cf. alrea.dy H.. M. Jones, .Posidon·ius and the Flight of the Mind through the Unitwrse, Cl. Ph. 21 (1926, 97 ff.), esp. 101 ff. 28 ~ Ze!Ier Ill.1,660; Capelle, Schrift uon der Welt 566; Fcstugiere, Herm. T1·ism. II,512; Maguire 1'1·8 ff.; Strohm, Siudien 1.59-60.

121

the highest and first place, and is called Highest for just this reason, 11-fu. 6,397b25 ff. rijv [LEV oi')v OCV(J)'t"ti"t'(J} XIXt 7tpl:l'rYJV eop!XV IXU"t'O~ tAIXxev, u mu6 ~ Te o~!X -roiho &>V6[LOCI1-riX~, [xoct] xocToc Tov 7WLYJriJv '&xpoT.XT7j 287 xopupup.svoc; oupocvou. 288 From this it is apparent that the God is said to have his home in the highest place of the universe (cf. also 398b8-9 ... IXU'rOV p.S:v EitL -.Yjc; &vco~-rct'!(t) x X6>pcJ) ~€p1JZ&l<;, ov h'J!H•>c; 289 x.x),OUf.LeV OUpiXVO'I OC7t0 -roiJ opov dV(I.L -rov &v(1), 290 ''0/..>)(J.itOV ~e: o!ov of..rJAOC[L1t'~ x.-r.)._291 The language used by ps.Aristotle implies that he is unmoved: i~pocv, 292

topucrOoct, eyJ{IXOtopur.Levo.;, ~e~7Jxw~ - this is, in any case, unambiguously stated 4-00b12-13 &·; rhr.v·h-rq} y!Xp [~pup.ivoc; itOCV1'0C xLve:~ xoc.t Hom., ll. 1,499. Cf. the story of how the upwards voyage (Phaedr. 247a8 ff. Cixpocv &rrt Tljv \mepoupivtov - cf. De Vries, Conmz. ad l., p. 132 - &:~i:ll'X ... rrpoc; &vocv>e:<:;) o! the souls of the Gods in Plato's Phaedrus ends (2+7b7 ff.) Y;vlx' &v rrpo; ocxp~ yt\1(>)\/TQ(t, e/;<•l l':'Jpe:•Jtl:i\crat, er:JT'/)rfC£\1 htl 't TOU o>ipocvoG VOOT<:l, O'TOCa:tc; 0€ oc>hac; m:ptocye:t -~ m:pt<pop& x.T.A. (cf. also De Vries, o.c. 135). ~ote that the souls of the Gods do not have a moving function when they feast upon the sights outside heaven. Hut in general, the 'perfect: (kind of) soul travels on high and administers the universe', 246cl-2 u),toc ... oi'>a:x ... ~u~•e:c,>por:op<:i >c: xoct rrcivT<:t >ov x6afto'.l owtxei: (cf. also above, p. 67 and ibd., n. 5). K6ap.o.; here probably means 'the heaven', cf. above, Ch. 11, p. 42-3. 289 The etymology of "0).U[.t7tfl<; also occurs Stob., Eel. 1,22,2 (I, p. 198 W., ps. Plutarch.) and Plut., Vit. Hom. II,95 (cf. Diels, Dox. 95-6 and l...orimer, Some Notes 109). Diels' argument (o.c. 88-99) that a Stoic Allegorizer is the original source wa~ accepted by Lorimer. Lorimer argued that also the Homeric quotations .in .fl'ftt. (which, with one exception, it shares with the various sources reflecting the Allegorizer) derive from this same source (o.c. 11 0), which was reconstructed, in as far as possible, by Diels, I.e. 29° Cf. also 2,39lh14 ff.: 'the region above the earth, which as :1. whole and in every direction has a highest upper limit (n:sr;zpct't'C•l[t:fv')V de; TO &v(t)>cl>
288

122

oz

7t:::pdy:::L, and csp. 400b31-2 ~yo'JI.t.zvo•J chtw~T<•>c; au-rou. Now, it should be noted that ps. Aristotle seems to waver between the concept of a transcendent and tlut of an immanent 293 God: He is said to be both 'in' the Heaven (but the Heaven moves 29·1 ) and to be ~'' ax.Lv~-r~> etc. It will he cllcar how close the affinity between these ideas in 11fu. and the irl.eas about the unmoved outer heaven in Hebd. really is. In Mu., God is put now in an unmoved place which has to be imagined as sitnate 7t&pl tp•)o-~<•); o•)o-[:xv o~ou ··~v T<~iv a7tAOCVi.>V cr<po:tpocv (-' ST F Ill, VI,3; according to Ael. 1,7,25 == S!'F 1JJ,VJ,2, however, he said that the ether is God). Cf. Zeller 1II,2,574. 296 The ambiguities inherent to a ':<patial' interpretation of transcendence presu nw.hly derive from the mvth in 1'la to's Phaedr. ;wd its interpretation in later times (cf. above. p. 12ln. 2X5). l'lato himself certainly did nothing to render such a spatial interpretation impossible (Boyance, ll'clir:- astralc 324 ff., who adduces the aslr;tl 1lwolng1· of Tim. 4le--J.2b. 90a and .V"n7. X,90-J.c-e). This interpretation, 11 hi eh probably starteowY.~oc (the region of the 7 planets) x.T),. The concept of the oy~o.X:; is foreshadowed in Xenocrates (Cic., ND !,34 =:.fr. 17 Hcinze), who said there were 8 (stellar) Gods: the five planets, the sphere of the fixed stars, the sun, and the moon. For a related conception cf. Cic., Somn. Scip. 9: here we have 293

123

of the cards is needed in order to produce an outer sphere which is to be distinguished from the stellar sphere, a sphere which is unmoved and to which some divine attributes and a vague suggestion of intramundane influence have stuck. 'OM[J.mo~ and urcoc't"o~ arc not thl' only divine attrihutf's to be found in the cosmological chapters of 11 ebd. 1n Ch. 6,§2,13 ff. H. bodily heat below the skin around the flesh is compared to the heat below the outer heaven surroumling the universe: hom£nis calidmn circa carnem q·uod per celeritatcm spleudens mutat calores, sicut et illic Iovem aegioctuu 297 invenies essc. 2911 The next sentence is desperately corrupt: Arcturius (A, ero. l!os P) autem ftrvoris (-cs P) in hmnine (in omncm P) uperalionem quaestutu cnutrila (que e sole nutrita P). In Ch. 6,§2,9 ff. R, i.e. a few lines earlier \Vl' have been informed that the heat in the upper regions of the uniVl'rse which is 'compared' to that below the skin is that of stellae et sol. 299 Although the sentence Arcturius ... enutrita is corrupt, it is at lc•ast certain that it mentions a star or stars, 300 which isfare related to heat (fervores), and that these arc, 9 sphereo;, quorum unus est caelestis extumus, qui reliquos omnes complectitur, summus ipse deus, arcens et continens Ulllnia. Cf. also the references quoted by Maguire, o.c. 155, n. 89. For the concept of the highest Divinity in the llermetica cf. also Ascl. 27, deus supra verticem summi caeli consistens ubique est omniaque circum inspicit. [sic] est enim ultra caelum locus sine stellis ab omnibus rebus corpulcntis alienus (this region sine stellis- cf. the outer sphere of He/nl.- is in the tradition of the interpretation of the Phaedrus-myth). Especially interesting is the discussion of motion and space in 1/erm. II,l-12, culminating in a definition of the Divine: space, in which the world is moved, has to be greater than the world; space is God; God is unmoved, but the ultimate cause of motion. Now this spatial concept of God is (even to a mystic) not without difficulties, cf. ibd. 11,6 (1 quote the text without the emendations which have been proposed) e:t 1)€ VOl]TO:; 0 T6rtf)~, olJz' b Oc;O~, &AA' Q -r6nv~. zt oe: Jt.~t 0 Oerl~, rJ,'Jz' 00; T6rc0~, &AA' We; ivipye:~e~. zwp·r,•~Y.·~. For the concept of motion cf. ibd. Jtiv ... •o xwo'Jil.evov o\>x ev

Xt\10 1J!J.€vcp xr.ve'LTIXL

&A)~' F_,, Ecr't'ClTL.

X!Xl -rO

Xf.'VOiJ'J

0~ Eo"t'"1}X€V,

and 8, 7t0Ccr!X ...

>'mo cr'l"i<7<=<·>~ x~vzhe~.~. In .'I set. 27 the hi~hest, transcendent God is distinguished from a Zeus 'between heaven and earth'. For the dependence of the theology of Mu. from that of Plato and Aristotle cf. Strohm, Studien 158 ff.; however, (if l have understood him correctly), Strohm does not enter into the problem of transcemlence vs. immanence. 297 A standard epitheton of Zeus, cf. LSJ s.v. e~.tylozo~. 298 So A. P has calorem and omits im:em. 299 Cf. above, p. 79-80. 300 Arcturiu.s cannot be right as it stands (possibilities: Arcturus, -i, -um). Ps. Galen "Nr. 41 (p. 79 Bergstr.) translates 'die beiden Kalbssterne'; for the meaning of 'Kalbssterne' cf. "Nr. 24 (p. 37 Bergstr.) '"Apx•o~, d.i. das Kalb, folgt ~(v1J<:n~ iv a~icre:\ x01.l

124

in one way or another, related to a phenomenon within the human body. It is, therefore, a reasonable assumption that, where Arcturus or "ApxToL represent the stellac, I ovem al'giocum will stand for sol. Indeed, ps. Galen Nr. 40 Bergstr. speaks of 'Saturn' and interprets this as 'Sonnc' ! The changing colours of the skin arc explained as the effects of the, by reason of its velocity, resplendent subcutaneous heat. The same changes can be observed 'up abon:' when we look at the 'aegis-bearing Zcus' and (one of) the stars. TILe general point of comparison is clear although somewhat marrec1 by tlw fact that we

dem Stern, der '.\;;%-rr)j~r,c; gcnannt 11·it\l, d.i. cler Schw:tnz des Kalbcs'. l'o~3ibly, therefore, the ot·iginal of ps. Galen had ".\p%ToL, of which the unintelligible 6 letters ero.llos of P may be a remnant (cf. \V. Capelle, A !teste Spurn/ der A strologie bei den Griechen, Berm. 60 (l'l25,373 ff.), 3::-;0 ff.). Kranz not very conscientiously preferred the fancies of Harder (cf. above, Ch. 1, p. ·l, n. 9) to the text of ps. Galen as evidence for his reconstruction of vYhat ps. Hippocratcs actually wrote (Hosmos ~md Mensclt 157-~); hi~ defence of Arcturus against the 'Kalbssterne', however, is not unacceptable, for Arcturus perhaps is a better 'symbol' of the effects of heat upon the skin than the Hear (o.c. 169; ibJ. n. 7 refers to F. lloll, Anti!w Beubaclttungen farbigcr Sterne, ,\IJlJ. Bayr. Ak. 3(1 (1018)). An attempt to emend the whole sentence wa:> made by l'feiffer, S'tud. =· ant. Sterngl. 36 ff.; this is wholly speculative. His suggestion that fervurcs ut cans 'anger' (o.c. 37) was adopted by Kram: (o.c. 169); 'passions' is just as good a guess, but we cannot be certain. Ps. Galen, at any rate, translates '1 )ie beitlen 1\:albssterne gleichen der IViirme, die im :\lcnschen ist' (Xr. -il Bergstr.). f can find no support in the text for the supposition of Pfeiffer and 1\:ranz (which, as l believe, ultimately goes back to a guess of Harder) that .\rcturus direclly influences anger; indeed, Kranz himself has to admit thatCh. 6 as a whole only compares bodily an<.! cosmic phenomena. Furtl1ermore, it should be pointed out that both Pfeiffer and Kranz edectically coml>ine those readings of the translations which they can understand. This method, on the whole, amounts to putting the first half as in A before the second half as in P. Xow P's que e sole nutrita cannot refer to man, as Pfeiffer thought, for que is not = qui, but = quae. Kranz (o.c. 170) helJ that the bodily heat is the antecedent of qu(a)e, and that this heat is, in the last analysis, derived from the sun. \Ve cannot, however, be sure about the antecedent, and not ultimate derivation, but only maintenance is implied by nutrita. My own guess is, that it may be Arcturus (or the Bear) which is 'sustained' by the sun, just as the fervores (outbursts of passion?) within the human body are sustained by the subeutaneal heat. This would at least agree with the earlier theory of the derived light (heat?) of the stars (cf. above, Ch. 11, p. 38, s.v. &\ITIX•Yylrx) and, perhaps, makes it easier to understand why the stars in general are said to be hottest (cf. above, p. 80, n. 73). I do know that in the prologue of Plautus' Rudens one should take the role of Arcturus (splendens stella candida) as a special ,;ervant of Iuppiter (cL Iovem aegiocurn !) seriously.

125

observe the bodily phenomena from the outside and the celestial ones from the inside. This identification of Zeus is not the only possible one. If one completely despairs of getting anything worth-while out of the corrupt sentence Arcturius ff., Zeus has to be i{lentified with all of the calidum within the upper regions of the nuiverse, i.e. wilh both steUae and sot. 301 This amounts to the identification of Zeus and ether in the Stoic302 sense. For this itlt~Jltifica.tiou our evideJJC{~ is quite sufficient: SVF II,1077 (= Cic., ND I,40) idemque (se. Chrysippus) disputat aethera esse eum qztem homines Iovem appellarent; SVF II,l176 (= Philocl. De piet. p. 79 Gompcrz; Diels, JJox. 546) ~(oc oe -rov orWepoc. 303 An interesting parallel is afforded by Achilh.:s, I nlr. (p. 82,8 ff. l\laass:JM) ~(oc oe ot f!EV 'TOV oupocv6v' o·~ OE 'TO V cxWipoc, (jt OE 'TO V ·~t.LOV ... e~eoi~IXV't"O. Cf. also joannes Diaconus, AUeg. in Thcugoniam p. 381, 305 Z'~voc -rov cxWipcx ot"Yj-teov, "!OU"te
Kranz, o.c. 168 ff. thought Iovern applied to the planet Iupiter. This is incompatible with his proposed date (the names of the Gods did not begin to serve as planetary names before the beginning of the first Cent. A.I>. Cf. F. Cumont, Les noms des planetes chez les Grecs, Ant. Cl. 4 (1935), 5 ff.). But even if this proposal is rejected, the interpretation is still highly implausible. The planet Jupiter is nut the first luminary which comes to mind when one searches for heavenly 'symbols' for the colour-phenomena of the human skin. H.oscher's suggestion (1911, 97): Zeus = ether or sky, is much better. The 'sky' as a whole (I-'resocratic parallels have been collected by Burkcrt, Weish. u. IYiss. 327, n.72), however, is impossible because ofps. Hippocrates' distinction between the cold ocxpt"tot; r.ocrtJ..fJt; and the realm of the calidum below it: Zeus is the moving calidum, not the unmoved 'inseparable heaven'. so2 The Presocratic examples for Zeus ~= ether, collected by Kranz, Index VS p. 188a7ff., are doubtful. Empedocles, it is true, called his fiery element by the name of Zcus (B6,2; cf. \V. I<. C. Guthric, /JGP!t. IT,l44-6). However, in view of the outcome of our study of the calidum (sec above, p. 79 ff., p. 87 ff.) it is not necessary to go back to the Presocratic period once it can be established that the Stoic calidum was called Zeus by certain Stoics. 3 0 3 Cf. further J. H. Waszink, A ether, H.AC 1, 1960, p. 152 ff. 304 This may have been derived from Posiclonius. 305 (Gaisford, Poet. min. graec. Ill). Quott•d by Ferguson, in: Scott-Ferguson, llermetica IV, Oxford 1936, 412. 301

126

Zeus and sun. This appears to be a Posidonian idea. 306 Macrobius, Sat. 1,23 quotes Cornificius Longus (second half first Cent. B. C.) as authority for Posidonius' interpretation of certain Homeric and Hesiodic lines, 307 which mention Zeus' trip to Occanus, the all-seeing and all-hearing Sun, and the all-understanding eye of Zeus. Also the interpretation of Plato, Phaedr. 246e (Zeus in the myth) is important. For a discussion of the evidence a reference to H.einhanlt's succinct statement in his HE-artidc 306 may suffice. \Ve had reason to assume that Jovem aegiocum in llebd. really is the sun because the stars (represented by either Bear or Bear-Ward) are separately mentioned. If this is correct, and if H.einhardt's theory about Posiclonius identification Zeus = suu is abo right, as I believe it is, this would add up beautifully to the results of tlw earlier parts of our investigation 308 the more so, because the 'aegi~;-bearing Zeus' represents the calidutn, which earlier in this Chapter \\'e fuund to be related tu a Posidonian 'Warmelehre' .309 The last point which I ·wish to discuss in this chapter is that of the contradiction between the assumption of cHo~IX (Ch. 2,55 ff.R.), 31 o 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 has originated from water etc. In a great thinker a contradiction of this kind wuuld be a very serious matter, Cf. H.einhardt, J{usm. u. SymjJ. 353 ff.; and H.E s.v. Pos. 695-7 ('Sonne gleich Zeus'), where ah;o other evidence is quoted. See further al.Jove, p. 102-.3.

306

ao1 It. 1,423-5; III,277; Hes., Op. 2CJ7. aoa Cf. above, p. <)3 ff. 3°9 Cf. above, p. ltl
Highest Heaven and a Zeusjcalidurn below this heayen can, to a certain extent, be paralleled from the llenNetica. Ascl. 27 mention,; (a) a Highest, transcendent God (cf. above, p. 123, 11. 29Ci) and (l.J) (vitae?) dispensatur qui est, inter caelum et terram obtinet locum, quem Iovem vocamus. (Ascl. 19: caeli vel quicquid est, quod eo nomine conprehenditur, oucn&ppJ~ est luppiter: per caelum enirn Iuppiter omnibus praebet vitam is different, because Iupiter here appears to be a transcendent power which uses caelum as his instrument; cf. Festugiere, Les dieux ousiarques de l'Asclepius, in: Herrnetis·me et mystique paienne, Paris 1967, 120 ff.: the idea in the A scl. is derived from the Orac~tla Chaldaica, not from Stoicism. Scott, Hermetica Ill, Oxford 1926, 109 ff., 122 argues in favour of a Stoic background. Festugicre's arguments have convinced me, but Scott may Le right in holding that tl1e exceptional mentioning of Zeus in the flermetica may be a rudiment of Stoic lheology). alo Cf. above, p. 77, p. 84, p. Y2, p. 93. a11 Cf. above, p. 107 ff.

127

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 of the Tirnaeus continued to be discussed in Hellenistic times. Philo, Aet ..LV!zt. 7 (VI, p. 75,1 ff. Colm-W.) 312 distingubhes three points of view: (a) the universe is eternal, unborn and imperishable; (b) the universe has come into being and will perish again; (c) though it has come into being, it will not perish: 13, p. 76,16 ff. yc:V't)'t'OV ae x.cd &qi:J!X.p't'OV <:fi!X.ULV tm:6 HA<X.'t'wVO~ ev T~tJ.!X.L

vwc; xoct li!X.v!X.[·no<; went over to the Peripatetic side, Aet. nm. 76, p. 96,19 ff. Some editors read Bo1)96:; x!X.t Ilccre:L~<~vw:; x7.l. Ticm.t.L·no:;, but there is no need to change the text; besides, Posidonius appears to have spoken about the dissolution of the world. 316 It has, hov\'ever, been a.rguecP 17 that Posidonius may have thought that the problem can not bl~ solved and that he considered

This interpretation of Plato was also incorporated into the Plac., cf. Aet. II,4,2 (Stobaeus) nx.. ?6~p-riw p.c\1 't'O'I XOQ'[LO'I I.Jcrov ~7tt ·;-(.
m Cf. Diog. Laert. VII,l+2; Aet. II,9,3. By L. Edelstein, Philos. Syst. Pos. 294-5.

317

128

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 les~. entl'ibusiastic about the destruction of the world than the members of the Early School had been. We may assume that the &low. 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 i_n:t1uence of a kind on the cosmic processes. The heavenly bodies, e~p·. 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.

sta 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.

129

CHAPTEH V

VARIOUS QUESTIONS

(A). llEBD. CH.

l-11

AND THE PLACITA

1. In discussing the description of the universe as found in Hebd. Ch. 1, we arrived at thl: cowJnsiuu il1at ps. llippucrates 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 Placita as well.2 The resemblance behveen Hebd. and the Plac., howevn, is not restricted to Ch. 1 only. Diels assumed that the Plac. of Aetius, 3 which he so admirably Above, Ch. 1\", p. 113 H. .\bove, Ch. JV, p. 114, n. 251. 3 Probably first half second Cent. A.n. 4 Dox. 22+. Diels detected traces of the influence of Posidonius, who is also the latest philosopher mentioned by Aetius (IJox. 100). Some years later he wrote (Ober das p!tys-ihalisclze System des Straton, Sb. Ak. Berlin 1893, 102, repr. Kleine Schriften ,:ur Gesc!tichte der antiheu J>hilosophie, hrsg. v. W. Burkert, Darmstadt 1969, 2·+0): "eiu Sammelbecken ... , das ich mit dem Namen Vetusta Placita helegt ha be, jetzt aber genauer als l'osidonianische 'Ap~crxovTrJ: (d. h. als Sammlung eines Posidonianers) uczeichnen wiinle". The latest physician mentioned in the Plac. is Asclepiades, cui~ts jama ipso vivo tanta erat ut ab homine medicinae 1uriosu nullo nwdo posset praetrriri ( Diels, ibd. 232); Dicls places the beginning of ;\,~ciepiades' jloruit in the first years of the first Cent. B. C. (ilJd. 1S5, n. 3). He is mentioned just before Athenaeus of Attalia in the list of lcadiug Dogmatist physicians in Galen, De caus. cont. p. 8,1-4 Kalbfleisch (cf. above, Ch. II, p. 33, n. o) and he is said to have emigrated to Rome around 90 B.C. (cf. e.g. G. Sarton, A History of Science I I, Hellenistic Science and Culture in the Last Three Centuries H.C., Cambridge Ma. 1959, 404); he is, therefore, a somewhat older contemporary of A thenaeus, who himself was a (possibly l>Omewhat younger) contemporary of J'osidonius (Calen, Le. cunversatus enim juit Posidonio). See F. Kudlien, UntersuchungMt zu Aretaios 38. - Diels' date for the Ptac. was confinned when \Vendland was able to demonstrate that l'hilo, IJe somn. I (cf. Ill, p. 209,8 ff., p. 211,10 ff., p. 21(),11 ff. Cohn-W.) must have used the Vet. ptac. {the information as given by Philo largely coincides with that of Aetius, bui is richer in sr!llw points), see P. \Vendland, Eine doxographiI

2

130

reconstructed, have been derived from Vetusta placita. He dated these Vet. plac. in the first Cent. B.C. 4 The table of contents of this work as given by Diels5 contains the following main divisions: I. de principiis, II. de nzundo, Ill. de sublimibus ('on meteorological phenomena'), IV. de terrestribus, V. de cminza, VI. de corpore. In Aetius, these subjects are treah~d in 5 books. 6 We may assume that \Vi thin each of the sections the subdivisions "\n~re roughly the same as \vell, though a complete correspondence chapter by t:hapter 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' fiJUO'lx(.)v M~cu. 7 A.-]. Festugiere has pointed out tltat the chief outlines can already be reGognized in Plato's Timaeus.8 Festugiere further pointed out that the order of the Plac. is also followed by the Pythagorean llypomnemata of Alexander Polyhistor9 and by the 'physical' section of Albinus' Didascalicus, 10 a work written ·in the second Cent. A.D. As I have already said, Hebd. Ch. 1-11 should, in my opinion, be counted among the members of this family·. It is, both in general outseize Q·uellc Pltilo's, Sb. Ak. Herlin 1897, 1074 f£. Therefore also Philo, De prov. [,22, assumed by Diels to be an interpolation (Dox. 1 ff.). is an excerpt made by Philo himself (\Vendland, o.c. 1079 ff. and d. Philo, TVerke in dt. Ob. VII, Berlin 1964, 290). - For Varro and the Vet. plac. cf. below, Ch. VI. p. 159, p. 185 fi., p. 187 (R<"1'. rust. and Tubero as t.a.q.) 5 Do:>:. 181-3. 6 The first two are identical ·with those of the Vet. plac.; Vet. plac. Ill = Aet.

lli,J-B; IV'= Aet. IIJ,9- IV,l: V'~ At~t. IV,2- V,2; VI = Aet. V,3-30. Cf. e.g. Door. 218. How<:ver, P. Stcinmetz has recently challenged Diels' po;;ition (cf. above, Ch. Il, p. 45-6, n. 42). Though much of the contents of the Plac. will have been derived from Theophrastus, it is not absolutely certain that the overall structure of this manual was already that of Theophrastus' work. ' .illemoires pythagoriques 6 tf. Sorn.e sort of order, of course. also reigned in the average Presocratic 7t.rp! qnl~ot>)<; (the Timaeus continues a Presocratic tradition). E.g., Parmenides first treated the \Vorld of Being, then the World of Seeming; in B8,53 ff. he defines the elements before embarking upon cosmogony and cosmology. Probably, he described the formation of the world before that of ma.n. The procedure followed by Empedocle::; will have been similar: after the proem, first of all the elements are enumerated (B6 -.:tcrcrct.poc y.Xp r:&v-rwv p~~w!J.a"t'a. 7tpt7l-rov &Y.CJ'J~). For an attempt to determine the order of subjects in Empedocles' :-:. 9'.)crecvc;, d. J. Bollack, Empi:docle T, Tntroduction 'l l' ancienne phys·ique, Paris 1965, 324 ff. 9 O.c. 6 ff. On tl1e Hype;11m. d. above, Ch. I, p. 24, n. 109 and Ch. IV, p. 98 ff. and p. 98, n. 163; p. 99, n. 167, n. 168, n. 169. 10 O.c. S-9. 7

131

line and in a number of details, very close to the Plac. with which we are familiar. I shall not, ho'\vever, 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 t11at it is, indeed, very likely that ps. Hippocratcs knew and used a work which, for convenience's sake, I shall continue to call V etusta placita. H ebd. Ch. 1,§1, on the properties of the number 7 in general and on the hebuomauic structure of the tllli verse with all that it contains, roughly corresponds to Aet. I,1 -r[ €cr-rt cpum<;; I,3 TI. &pzwv ,[ dmv and II ,1 1t. x6cr[Lc.1P: both these sections are on first principles. H ebd. Ch. l, §2,41-68 R. (on heaven, stars, sun and moon12 ) in the same way corresponds to Aet. 11,11-30, 13 viz. the m:pl. -rwv oupo:v[wv Myo<; (d. Dox. 364,10). After the o•)pifvw. of book 11, Aet. Ill treats the [L<:-r&:pmo:, viz. -r~ 1ho -rc.u x.ux),ou -r'tj<; crr;;),·~v-fJ<; xo:O~xov-ro: fl.EZ.PL 7tpo<; -r·r1v Otfcrtv -r'ij<; y'ij<;. 14 H ebd. 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 etcP ,..., Aet. III,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. Ill, p. 55; Ch. 1V, p. 80. 13 II,ll-12 on the oupocv6;; II,13-19 on the stars; II, 20-24 on the sun; Il,25-30 on the moon. 14 Dox. 364,12 ff. For this order (caelestia - sublimia - terrestria) cf. also the proem to Sen., Nat. II, quoted above, Ch. IV, p. 114, n. 252. 1s Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 117. 16 III,5-6, on meteorological phenomena x!X-r' ef.tcpoccnv (Dox. 372,2) are not paralleled in Hebd. Act. III,7-8 ('on winds'; 'on summer and winter') are also absent from Ch. 1, if one does not want to adduce what is said about the 'inseparable heaven' in Ch. 1,44-8 1<. The subjects treated in Act. JII,3-4 are: 3 lt. ~pOVT(7)V &.cr-rp!X1tWV Y..€p!XUVWV 1tp7)cr-r1)pwv Te: Y..!Xt TUq>WVWV; 4. lt. VE:q>WV ue:•wv z~6vwv zocl,o:~(;,v. Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 117, and note the verbal similarities. It should be noted that neither the l!yponm. (above, p. 131, n. 8) nor the Didasc. (above, p. 131, n. 10) contain a meteorological section ! 17 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 116-7.

11

12

132

two items the order in the Plac. is just the reverse of that in Hebd. 18 In our discussion of some descriptions of the main parts of the universe which are parallel to that in H ebd. we arrived at the conclusion that H ebd., in one respect, probably is original 19 : 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 thePlac., those subjects which arc treated in Hebd. Ch. 2 have not been separated from the items which in H ebd. have been collected in Ch. 1. Therefore, if we arc at all correct in adducing the Plac. as a parallel, the probability of our earlier suspicion of the originality (in this respect) of ps. Hippocratcs is enhanced. However, the affinity between H ebd. 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 "' Act. IV,ll and V,23 21 ; and Hebd. Ch. 6 and Ch. 7, on the microcosm-macrocosm and the parts of the human body in general, ·which correspond to the whole of Act. 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 Aetius. 2 2 Hebd. Ch. 8 treats the seven functions of the head: 1. and 2. respiration"' Aet. IV,22; 3. sight"' Aet. IV,13-l5; 4. hearing"' ACt. IV,16; 5. smell "' Aet. IV,l7; G. transport of food and drink towards the stomach "' (fails !) ; 7. taste "' Aet. IV,l8. Ch. 8 is follnwcd by the very short Ch. 9 (only one sentence), on the seven vowels belonging to the vox, "' Aet. IV,19-20 7t. c;Huv~c;. I.e., H ebd. treats four of the senses 23 in the same order as the Plac. but puts respiration which is

18 On sea and earth in the parallel accounts discussed in Ch. IV, cf. above, p. 81, p. 116-7 and p. 116, n. 260. 19 Above, Ch. IV, p. 119. 20 This reversed order is paralleled in Albinus, Didasc. Ch. 17-22, on the human body and on perception, Ch. 23-25 on the soul. The 1-lypomn. have the order: soul (Diog. Lacrt. VIII,28), body and perception (VJII,29), and soul again (VIIT,30). 21 Cf. below, Ch. VI, p. 169, n. 69. 22 'Original' in Hebd. is also Ch. ll, the human body as a map (at least to a certain extent; cf. below, Ch. VI, p. 200). 23 There is no chapter rr. oc'ijc; in Aetius. Of course, touch had to be omitted

133

treated after sensation in the Plac., first. 2 ~ The appendage (Ch. 9) on the voice, on the other hand, occupies the same relative position as in Aetius. 25 It is further to be remarked that Aetius treats respiration, perception and speech in his section on the soul, while in Hebd. Ch. 8-9 form a link between Ch. 6-7 ('de corpore') and Ch. 10 ('de anima'). Hebd. Ch. 10, on the seven parts of the soul, con·esponds to Aet. IV,2-7; cf. esp. IV,4, rr. !.tepc-;lv -r~<; tJ!ux.ljr;. The comparison between H ebd. and Aetius dearly brings out the fact that ps. Hippocrates was familiar with a type of literature in which the subjects treated by philosophy IYere neatly ordered. The treatment of cosmology, psychology and physiology in separate chapters, as in Hebd., is, moreover, ibelf a sign of a rather late date of composition. At this point, mention should also be made of Hebd. Ch. 3 {1t. &ve{-twv) and 4 (rr. c~p&v). Again, a tidy arrangement. The same subjects, in the same relative order, are treated by Aetius: III,7 ('on winds') and III,8 ('on summer and wintf~r'). 26 They are placed by him immediately after the chapter on meteorological phenomena and before the section on the earth. Apparently. Hebd. postponed the treatment of these subjects until the cosmology proper had been completed. anyhow in a chapter rl.ealing with the specific functions of the head (on touch in Vict. 1,23 cf. below, n. 25). 24 Possibly because the breathing-in nf cold air and the breathing-out of warm air was important for a follower of a '\Yarmelehrc' (cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 78 ff., 89 ff.). On Hebd. Ch. 8 cf. also below, Ch. VI. p. 200-L 26 It should be noted that IJebd. Ch. 8-9 also, and very closely, correspond to Vict. 1,23 (cf. Roscher 1911, 1<)1). which first treats the sewn vowels (
134·

We may conclude, therefore, that by and large both Hebd. Ch. 1-11 and the Plac. are built accon.l.ing to the same structural 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 Aetius 27 (V,29 nw<;; ytvz·rocL nupe-roc; xoc\ d emylwflflrk el1't'W) is on /etlers. The medical section of Hebd. is a treatise on fevers 28 ; febres are also among the subjects announced in Ch. 12,23 ff. R. The last chapter of Aetius (V,30 n:. uydac; xoct 'J6ferred to (cL above, p. 130, n. 4) dnes not donht Hwt the information about Polybus, Diodes, Herophilus, Era..sistra.tns etc. comes ex veh,sto thesawro. But most of the physicians mentioned by name are later than Meno, the pupil of Aristotle who wrote a History of 1Vledhine. 'Vhen D.iels published his Doxogra.,bhi graeci, the papyrus containing such a History which (at least in part) appears to be based upon Mono's Iatrica hystem.. atical division of Theophrastus (i.e., of the Plac.) and the distinction in the Anonymus between dietetic and 'somatic' physi.cians and a third, 'r,Tixed class·. It is, perhaps, n<)t unlikely that the influence of Posidonius is responsible for the incorporation of medical doxai into the body of Theophra~'tus' work (for Posidonius' interest in and influence upon medicine d. K. Reinhardt, Kosm. u. Symp. 167 anrl Pos. 52; in Diog. Laert. VII,132, both mathematics and mBdicine are counted among the ancillary sciences of philosophy; see further F . .Kud!ien, Poseidonios und a~:e Schule der Pnetnnatiker, 419 ff. and Unt.~rs. z. Aret. 35 ff., and E. Schoner, Das Vi,;rerschema in der antiken !Imnoralpathologit:, Sndh. Arch., Beih. 4, \Viesbaden 196-1·, 79-81; l10wever, Kudlien's suggestion that the Posidonius quoted hy Actius of Amida. is identical with the Stoic philosopher has been refuted by H. Flashar. .Melanclwlie tmd Nlelancholiher in dr.n medizinischen Theorien der Antil1e, Berlin 1966, 121 ff.). At the least, this poo;sibility deserves to be seriously investigated. Cf. also below, Ch. VI, p. 181, n. 141. 98 Cf. above, Ch. I, p. 1 ff.; below, Ch. VII, p. 213 ff. 21

135

and. illness in general. The announcement m Hebd. 12,23 ff.R mentions 'other diseases and acute diseases'.

2. So much for the similarity in overall structure between H ebd. 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~ :ue, howeV('r, also a few quite remarkable parallels. It will he remembered that our search for parallels for the 'inseparable' outer heaven of Held. 1,42-8 resulted in the reconstruction of a kind of background for this concept. 2" On thjs occa:;ion I suggested that ps. Hippocratcs' motive for this construction was that he needed a 'skin' for the universe. A related idea occurs in tlw .Plac. Aet. 1,6 (on the origin of man's belief in the Gods 30 ), 5: the 7tepLixov of the universe is here compared to that of living objects, Dox. 293,23 ff.: xocl. E:x 't"ou [J.eyWouc; ;tG'.AOc; (1Jiz. the sky). r.ri.vTwv y,Xp 't"6>V o~wye:vwv -ro 7tC:pL€xov xocA6v, C:.lc; ~(i)ov Y..IY.l o€v€lpov. The outer heaven is, furthermore, not only said to be solid, but also to be cold and to have 'coagulated', H ebd. 6,§2,21 ff. R. inseparabilis... soUditas quae mundum continet omnem cutis31 coagulatio frigida. Presocratic ideas transmitted by a handbook like the V et. plac. may have been among ps. Hippocrates' sources of inspiration, cf. especially the opinion attributed to Empedocles in Aet. II,l1,2: 0'1'e:pe[J.VLOV32 (cf. soliditas) dva~ -rov oupotvov e; u Above, Ch. IV, p. 115 n. 256, and p. 120 ff. ao This cha.pter begins with quoting a Stoic (lefinition of divinity, which is that of Posidonms as given Ai':t. 1,7,19 (cf. Re.inhardt. K')Sm. u. Symp. 156 and 0. Gigon, Die Erneuemng der Philosophie in der Zeit Ciccro's, Entret. Hardt HI, (Vandoeuvres-Geneve 1955, 25 ff.). 38). This does not imply that Aet. 1,6 as a whole (cf. also the reference to Plato, Dox. 293, 1.4-16) gives us the actual thought of Posidonius, but it is in any case very probable that much of its (of course revised) contents go back to what Gigon has called a 'doxographische Zusammenstellung' of Posidonius. For such a 'Posidonian' doxngraphkal survey in the Comm. in Aratwn cf. Diek Dox. 231-2. If this hypothesis is correct, the coincidences between llebtl. and Aet. £,6 are truly significant. 31 Se. imitatio est. 32 Cf. also Act. II.7 (rr. -r&~e:<•)<; -ro\i x6crf1.ou), 1 (on Parmenides), Dox. 335,.1.1 ff. xotl -r;o ;npt~zov IH: rrciaotc;; -r:dxouc; il!xYj'l cr.-e:peiJv •)rr&pzew. Aet. IT,7,2 speaks of the zt-r:hl\10( xox/.<;> XC
136

Ote:po<; crU[L7tciye:v"C"o<; (cf. coagulatio) x.purr't"OtAJ,oe:d~c':i,:; (d. frigida). 33

Hebd. 6,§2,13 ff. discusses the changing colours of the heavenly phenomena.:H Ad. 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 Hcbd. (about the skin of tlw nniverse aiHt the colour of the uppc:r regions) correspond to two very similar notions within one chapter of Adius. The third remarkabk coincidence between AH. l,h and Hcbd. concerns the opening S('ction of Ch. 2,1 ff. R: trrot ?If: "C"r;v
-re: 7te:pt6~o1J x.oci. p.e:06()ou, -:'lj

m:pmoA 7tOtEU[LEVoL. Cf. Ad. (i:M[~0!L<:v of: ix. T0U"C"rJu swwxv Os0u·) <7.::[ 'TE yc/.p ·~i,tor, xoci. crs/.-ljvYJ xcr.l -rli Aumli -r<.w &cr-rpc.w "t'~V u7t 6y e L o v cp o p li v E:vezOl:v"t'IX o!L o L IX fLEV &va"C":LIJ,zt -ro~r, X pc;> fL IX a Lv, tcriX oz -ro ~c; iJ.zyEOe:crt, xoc!. XIX"t'OC -r67tou<; x.oc~ XC("t'li X p 6 V 0 l) ~ "t'OU(, OlU't"01k

1,6,8

The idea in Hebd. that the stars have reflected light (Ch. 1,52-3 R) may have been suggested by Act. II,l7,l-3, which ascribes this theory to Metrodoms, Strato and Diotimus of Tyrns. Oth(~f parallels from the Plac. have been qnoted in the word-list of Ch. I t.3 5 The assumption that ps. Hippocrates knew and used the Vctttsta Placita solves two problems: (1) it helps to explain the presence within Hebd. of ideas ultimately derived from a number of individual Presocratic thinkcrs 36 ; (2) it also helps to explain the relative frequency, in ophers on (<~) the outer sphere (b) the order of the elements (c) natural places (d) the differences between the supralunary and the sul>lunary world. 33 vVendlancl, o.c. 1075 (cf. above, p. 1 :~0-l, n. 4) comp,tn.•s Act.li,1.1,2 with Philo, De Sonm. I, TIT, p. 209,R ff. C"ohn.-\\'.): 6 3' o•)po:'ll>c; &x!X-r&l:r,n-rr'" ~zet -r·);v '{l'Jcrt•J, oUOZv ~OClJ't'oU acxrpE:c:; yv(~pL<:r[l.tX 1t'pf>:; ~p.i~ x~ou-:-e(),x~. -d y&.p iv el7tfJL!_I.e\l; O't't 1t' e: 1t' "lj "'( w~ X p ,_J O'TCX A).rJ ~~ w~ ~~[(J)O'&v ':'LVZ~; ·~ r).o;L rrGp Tt) Y.!XOocpGl'TC(.Tf)\1; for the alter-

icr·n

native cf. also Sen., Nat. II, 1,1 solidumne sit caelum ttc f"irmae concretaeque materiae an ex subtili tenuique nexum (cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 115, n. 256). 34 Cf. ahovc, Ch. IV, p. 124 ff. as Above, Ch. ll, p. 3R, s.v. :X""'ot'JYlox. 86 lt is not tno broad a generalization to say that the Hellenistic philosophers saw the earlier tl1inkers in the light of Theophrastus' interpretation and -as is only natural - heavily leaned upon his great historical work and the work!; derived from it. For the relation between the Stoa and Heraclitus this has heen proved in an exemplary fashion hy J. Kerschensteiner, Der ncric/!1 des Theophrast ii.her TTeralilit, Hcnn. 83 (1955), 385 ff. (cf. esp. p. 411). Tlw hypothesis that ps. Hippocrates used the Vet. plac. also helps (but no more tha11 that) to explain the reminiscencies of Plato and especially Aristotle "·hich we have studied in

137

what remains of the Greek text of the philosophical introduction, of words deriving from the doxographical vocabu1ary. 37 From this survey I have deliberately omitted one of the most striking parallels between Hebd. and Plac.. I propose to deal with this parallel in the next section of this chapter.

(B). THE SEVEN HEAVENLY SfARS

Whether or not ps. Hippocrat.es \Vas familiar with the seycn planets is one of the most hotly debated problems in the history of the interpretation of 11ebd. E.o~;chcr to the la:;t stuck to his opinion that the planets were unknown to the author of Hebd. 1 Boll, however, plausibly argued that J. the fact that Ch. 2,64-5 I?.. speaks of 'seven heavenly stars' and 2. that Ch. 2, the end, speaks of the &xo/,o•.~0£1J and the ~v~v-r(­ wcrLc; 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 \vith the order of the seasons, with which. from time immemorial, (the majority of) the fixed stars mentioned by name in this passa.ge have been associated. Moreover, of the seven planets only sun and moon are named. This is indeed the crux of the problem. If it can be shown in Ch. IV. In this connection, it should be emphasized that. the Platonic- Aristotelian elements in Hebd. (eternity of t11e world, heavenly bodies as ::H3t.:x) which we have discussed Ch. IV, p. 127 ff. anJ a!sn prominent in the Plac.: d. aqove, Ch. IV, p. 70, n. 25 and p. 75, n. 53, where the relevant passages from Aetius concerning Aristotle's theory of th<:: &l8L<X are quoted, and p. 128, n. 312, which quotes the reference .in Aetius to Plato 'g theory that the worlrl wil.l not perish. The concept of :oelf-motion (for which ahnve, Ch. IV, p. 86 ff., p. 106) is also to be found in tbe Plac., cf. above. Ch. II, p. 39, 5.'\'. w)-.:;i;ipo!l-o,;;, where some relevant passages are quoted. Though I hope to hav(~ shown that this concept was an integral part of the Stoic theory followed by ps.-Hippocrates (above, Ch. IV, p. 93), its occurrence jn the Plac. should also be taken into account. For the ambiguities of Aristotle's theory of motion (esp. regarding the elements) cf. the passages from A.etius quoted at Ch. IV, p. 71, n. 29 and p. 75, n. 53; fot the (Platonic) theory that earth does not pass into one of the other elements (d. above, Ch. IV, p. 68) cL the passage from AHius quoted at. Ch. IV, p. 68, n. 17. 37 Cf. above . Ch. II, word-list passim and p. 53. 1 B 3

Cf. above, Ch. I, p. 1.8 and ibd, n. 77; also (at length) 19t9, 63 ff. Cf. above, Ch. 1, p. 21; Lebensalt. 220 ff. Cf. above, Ch. I, p. 29-30 and ibd., n. 148; p. 30. n. 150.

138

which way the se11e1Z plancts4 may be assumed to be associated. \\ith the change of the seasons, the problem may be said to have been solved. .'r First, let us turn to the text, which is, occasionally, a.lmost incomprehensible. I Jll'<}pose to read as follows, Ch. 2,64 ff. H.: roc 't'OtVI.I\1 & p.e\1 o ~),toe; <-r1j Q'&).:fj'•JYi>, &.xcl.ou0£e:r. ~E: "i\ px-roc; -r(i) •Apx-r<;Up()l &xoi\<;:;(J(IJV !< mrv>, C:ltrne:p xrx). rJ!.lCJl creA~'~~''l · ad Hl-.zt&oer;; T)1<m.v 'Y c.:batv &:xof..ouOeoum, 1:~ lH: '!lpt(•)\lt 0 K1)(!W, 1'1'iU't'IJt oS: ":'OC &rnpcr. ..X:v.o).ou6hJV f:t.~t &i\Af;t,QLO'L :V.ti:L f.!£<(J.E:pL[J,f•r~

~i\kp

!3E:

ae};~V''fj.

t\laV'rt(!)(H\1.

xe<.t

oe

yocp E<~ Ex>~·~.; 6 rljc;

, ~ , ,, \ ,j.. ' \ ooeuoucrr.v, <:Uo·rz fl'l) <'r·,1-y cxu:>'t"IJ\1 n·ta<;w J

·'

TW\1

<:.X,<.~

~lpew..

~ t.. .... V ooou -:x'

e[ o']npL<W>crwc;7 1't;US . IS .J1: lte

~~

~rn-poc

~

text as proposed by J3oll,8 except for the first part (Ch. 2,66-71 R.), where he suggested ... 't'oc~w 'Lxz~ ...-;~ -ri::N ~;p!(llV b:~oxfl !'-Ef!.S(nofdv'Tlv, <W0'7tZp XCX't'~ wprt.t; (~fl~O'fLevli'.c; OCXOAOU0er::t cr<.AYfJYJ> !Lb ~AtOt;, -~AL(p ~e crr::A.-r,vfl, which is supposed to mean ''Die Gestirne ... habcn ihn~ Ordnung durch (lie Aufeinanderfolge dcr Zeiten im Jahre eingeteilt, (wie in gemessenen Zeiten folgt) dem Monde die Son ne nnd der Sonne der l\fond". This reconstruction is, I think, unacceptable: (1) also in this place, we have to follow the guidance of the Latin transla.tio11s and of ps. Galen. They translate ordinem ... tentporum lrade-~tdomm and 'sie sind die Ursache der Jahreszeiten'. 8 That is to say, not the order of the seasons determines that of the appearance of the stars, but the other way round: the snccession of the stars determines that of the seasons. (2) Boll's interpolation of wcmfi'.p ... wpLcrfLboc": is un1 'The seven _planets' is the unl y ra ti•.md transla t.io.n of ?i.mp~ -rtt oi)p{v,.1( i:lr-rd: l6v-r<X. The heavenly bodies mentiowod in the text cannot be meant, for sun + moon + 3 pairs of fixed stars give a total of eight (fur this simple sum, cf. BrJll, o.c.. 220). It is irrelevant to argue in favour of the deletion of one or the otl1er of these eight from the list (c:f., howeveT, the attempts of H.oscher, 1919, 67 ff.). l:hukert, o.c. 291, n.78 suggests that by 'seven' the stan; composing the r;onstcllations arc meant; indeed, "A.px•o.; ;~.nd the Pleiafts consist of ~:even stars each; but wimt about Siriu,; and Areturns? 5 Ms. iv~ozi'j<;, which is mcaningle<>s. A and P have !·radendorum; therefore 8to:8ox'li~ is also possible. 6 Ms. ~ll: Be~t'i):;. A and P ad e:!!:pecta.tionem (cf. Boil, o.c. ~24. n.4). 7 Ms. e'l"t'<:p£o-•.rv; (meaningless). A and P immutationenr. 8 Lcbensall. 222. Boil cousi;,tently followed the Latin translations iu several of his emendations (cf. above, n. 5, n. 6 and n. 11), but not in his reconstruction of Ch. 2,68-70 H.. 9 Nr. 23, p. 35 Bergstr.

139

warranted, while his change of the 'vords [Lev [LL~<; of the manuscript into cr~;;/,-f]v·n 10 cannot be right in vie"v of A, which translates [LE<[L<:pLcr>[LeV1J<; [J.sv [LL'i;t; by divisum est, ttnttm qttidem. Translated back into Greek, this gives [J.C:<[J.epLcr>fte'rfJ ~lE:v, p.(Yj 11 rtE:v o ·~J,.Lo<; <-r?i cre:J,.·~vYJ>, tjA£<)>

oz cr<:A~V1).

Now, the basic idea in this chapter appears to be, that the change of the seasons depends on the celestial 'clock', i.e. upon (at least) the motions of snn (and moon) and the contrary motion of the fixed stars. The following fixed stars are mentioned: the Bear, Arcturus, the Pleiads, the Hyads, Orion and the Dog-Star. Among these, "Apx-ro<; has no relation whatsoever to the changes of the seasons or to the weather in genera1. 12 It is, therefore, an important question to ask why "Apx.-ro<; is mentioned. The answer is, as I believe: to indicate a point fixe in relation to the fixed stars. 13 One group of 'stars' consists of members, viz. (explicitly) sun and moon, which follow one another14 ; in the same way, the (explicitly mentioned) members of the group of fixed stars follow one another: 'The Bear follows Arcturus in the same way as the moon follows the sun', and the Pleiads follow the Hyads, the Dogstar follows Orion. Within each of these groups, the stars follow one another, but the motions of the groups a<; such are contrary (cf. 2,82O.c. 222, n.3. Cf. also Boil's emendation (in A and P it IS represented by sequitur). For &xo),ou6~e:~ a.t the beginning of a clause, cf. Ch. 2, 72 R. 12 Cf. Boll, o.c. 220-1. The .Pleiads are already mentioned in the farmers almanac of Hesiod, Op. 383 ff.; 609 ff. mentions Orion, Sirius and Arcturus; 615 ff. the Pleiads, Hyads and Orion, cf. e.g. W. Sontheimer, Zeitrechnung, RE IX A (2455 ff.) 2456, and esp. J. H.ohr, Beitriige zur antiken Aswometeorologie, Phi!. 78 (1928, 259 ff.), 281 ff., esp. 283 (the principal stars and constellations connected by the ancients with seasonal change are Zdp~o<; (Canis), IT>·.ed~
11

140

92 R.). ·when combined, these motions make a division of the year possible. Now the point of the TrX~tV f..L.<:[.Le:ptcrfLEV"IJV [.LEV, (.LL'YjV aE kept by the 'seven heavenly stars' seems to be that the order of the seven stars, though divided into (of course seven !15 ) parts (seven stars), should be considered as a unity. 16 I.e., for a consideration of the celestial clock we have to acknowledge the effects of seven planets, but these stars constitute a unity in so far as their motions are 'one'. One is immediately reminded of the motions of the Different in Plato's Timaeus, 17 especially of his theory that '~'A~o~ xc.d ae:'J..f;v'Y) xcx:l 7tEV't'<: OCJ..),cx: O((j't'poc, erttx/,'YjV {1J..OVTCX: 7tA~VYJ't'rX 18 Were created in order to measure time, and his remark 19 that the role of the other planets (in distinction to that of the sun and moon) is generally if:,rnored by the majority of mankind. 20 The exact interpretation of Plato's astronomy and time-reckoning 21 is irrelevant at the present moment. 'Vhat is important, is the form this theory received when it was incorporated into the Plac .. Aet. II,l9 22 is entitled 1t. em<TIJfLcrTou -rwv f1-e:p€wv

16

€7t"~1XlJ.!::pi:tX).

All seven planets traverse the Zodiacal belt. For the unit of tht• seven planets in contradistinction to that of the fixed stars cf. also e.g. Philo, Op. mmul. 113, I p. 39,22-40,1 Colm-\V. 'jr "{£ fL'iJv r.Mv·r,-:E<;, 1j .:Xv-rlpp(mo<; O"rpor:n~ -r'ij 't'<:"w ,i;r).avi."lv, ir.-r~ OL<XY.OO'[LOUV't'OCL -r&!;sm x.-..1", and Corp. Herm. XI,7 rta: xoct 't'O'J~ tl'rtOXE:L[Levo•;:; €:1t~~ x6cr~ouc; XtXOOlJ..~i}l!kvou:; "t' ci ~ e ~ Cd(UV~':l XtJ:t 3 p6 tJ. c~ at CX 9 ~J p ~ 't'0v cdWvrt. .:XvarrJ.·IJpr,uvT!X<; (see also ibd., IT,6-7, from which I have quoted above. Ch. II, p. 41). 17 36d, 38c ff. 16 Tim. 38c5-6. 19 Tim. 39c6. zu Plato also makes some remarks about the duration of the orbits of the planets and about the Great Year. 21 For this, d. Cornford, Plato's Cosmology, 105 ff., 115 ff. 22 The last chapter of the section on the stars in Aetius. 23 Aet. II,19,1. In 19,2 we are told that according to :\naximt>nes only the sun is instrumental in bringing :mmmcr and winter. 2 4 'signs of the seasons' LSJ s.v. III. 25 Diels brackets ~i.!ou ... &rri.o:vwv, which fails in Stobaeus. But the same idea 16

l41

This is, undoubtedly, not a correct reproduction of what Plato really meant. The same idea, 'l)iZ. that all stars, both planets from the PhaMI. 27 It is to be noleLl i.l1at Ad. J,G (for which d. alJll\'e, Ch. V i\, p. 136-7 and p. 136, n. 30), which begins with a Posidonian definition of Cou, quotes Arat. Phaen. 545-9 (Dox. 294,.') ff.). [,6 is omitted in St.obaeus. The quotatii)HS from Aratus in Ai~t. l ,6 rt.IJ(l li ,19 are the only ones in ihe Ptac. " 8 A et. 11,19 is the parallel whid1 was hirtted at ahove, p. UH. Perhaps we may also adduce J\(;t, IT,32. 'fhis curious chapter treats of <JHCstions which, properly speal>ing, do not helong togetlw.-. 32,1 fir~;t dcJi,1es tlw 'years' of the planets: the year of Saturu '= 30 stm-years, tlmt of !upiier '-= 12 years, that of Mars '~ 2 years. Then the year of the sun i::; de-fined, which ,=- 12 months; the years of MP.rcury and Venus (whiclJ arc tcr,'>ap'>[Wt with the sun) an' of equal length a:> the sun-year. The month cons.ists of lhirty t.lays. The 'Creat Year' is finished whenever all of the seveu piauds return tC> lhe same places (this I:J.si. piece of information is only in Stoba.eus). In 32,2 we suddenly ht,ar that some people identified the Great Year with one or 1he other oi the wdl--knovm year-cycles: that of 8 years, that of 19 yeam o.r that of 59 year:; (d. also Censorinus, De die natal-i Ch. lR). This is a. <_;reat Year whid1 IS different from the Great Year as defined in 32,2; l>ut suddenly (n.b. only in Stubaeus) t!H: Jormer type of Great Year (a:; in 32,1) is again spoken of, aml we are told that some pcople said that a new Great Year starts whenever 'the seven planets retun1 to the "Apwt'ot:;

142

For it is altogether possible that influences of the planets upon the weather were something he believed in quite innocently. This part of astrometeorology has been studied by J. H6hr 211 and R. Boker. 30 Rohr31 established that no traces of this doctrine are to be found in the Presocratics, Plato, Aristotle or Theophrastus. 32 His earliest paralleP3 is a passage from Philo, Op. mund. 113, I, p. 39,22-40,6 CohnW. on the influence of the seven planets3": -rov p.zv ·rO:p (se. the air) d~; Tlic; &TI)GLOll~

bctx.o),(JtJ(-LS\10:<;

wpocc; -q::.bn;!J(jL Y.CI.t (.tZTIX(:>ci.i'.i,o•Jm

(-LU!JL<Xc:; G!JIX<;

E(-LTCOWUV't'<:c:; (-LS"rocf~oA.Iic:; x.-r.A.

To this I would like to add Spec. leg. II,56-7, =-== Y, p. 100,18101,4 Cohn- w.: ~VLOL i5e OCLI'rTjV (se. 't'')p z~~O(-L&&a.) XCX:Lpov 35 rcpOcr1jy6pzuaa.v J.JtiJ 1'(71\1 cx:to-Ol)'t'{;jv 'T:£Y..(-L'tjPOCfLI::VO~ ";f,'/ VO'tjT~V rx.u-rijc:; OtJO'LIY.'I. (57) ocrrt. y ca.lendar-systems. It is interesting to note that Cic., ND II,49-56, which speaks of the sun and its influence upon the seasons (49). of the moon and its similar influence (51) and of the 'other planets' (52-54) which, by the regularity of the1r courses are, together with the fixed stars (49, 54-5 ), instrumental in sustaining all things (56), mentions both the (;reat Year (51) and the 'years' of the 'otht>r planets': Saturn 30 year,; (52), Iupiter 12 years (52), :'liars 2 years (53), Mercury and Yenu,;, which are keeping pace with the sun, 1 year each (53). Much (lf the information which in Actius has been divided over two separate chapters (II,l<J and II,32) is given by Cicero in one connected section. The ideas of this section have been attributed to Posidonius by Reinhardt (cf. RE s. v. Pas., 701; cf. also Fe:stugiere, Herm. Trism. ll, 418 ff.), cf. also below, Ch. V I, p. 183. It should be noted that I\'D 11,54-5 contains the idea that the sphere of the fixed stars 1s to be distingui·:;hed from the ether (cf. above, Ch. IV, p. l 11, 11. 235 and p. 115, n. 256). 2 ~ O.c. csp. p. 269 if. (Kap. 2. 'Die Pianeten und die Atmosphare'); 277 (Kap. 4. 'Das Zusammenwirken der Tierkreisbilder und der .Pianeten bei der Beeinfhissung der Atmosphare'). ao Wetterzeichen, RE Supp.-Bd. IX (1609 fL), csp. 1617 ff. (3. 'Geschichte der Wetterkalendarik von Meton bis Aristoteles'); l 640 ff. (11. 'Planetarische \Vahrsagungen': 12. 'Langfristige Voraussagen'). 31 O.c. 269-70. 3 2 \Vith the exception of ps. Theophr. De signis p. 396,24-:l W., where Mercury is mentioned: '0 -.c.;j 'Epp.oi) &crTI;p ... G7J[LCXboc,, (n.b. nut r:o~e·\ I). On Mercury as the only planet ·wltich in older time'; is asc:umed to influence the weather see B6ker, o.c. Hi,H. 33 O.c. 270. 34 The earlier part of this q1wtation has been given abov12, p. 141, u. 16. s& Early Pythagorean arithmologv, cf. above, Ch. III. p. 6.5 and ibd., n. 55. :: 6 Se. the heavenly bodies.

143

oe

m:p(o~o~ 'l:'E:'t'OC.)'fLE\Iwc; &:n;on:AOUV't'OCL, fLE't"Zu;('Y)Y.e:V Z~OOfLOCOvc;, i-tyw 7tAOCV1JTOC.c; bcT.X xcd ''Apx-rov xocl llA.e:Lci3oc xocl ue:/..~v"')c; ~Xu;o!J.ZV'IJc; 1'E XOC.~ !J.EWUfJ..t\l"tjc; ti.VOC.XUY.A~ueLc; xod '7:C~lV IJ.M.CJ)V 't"ch; EVOCfl!J.OvLOUc; Y.Gd 7tCX.V't"O<; Myou xpekrouc; 1tzpq;;op&c;. This pa->sage leaves no doubt whatsoever that the seven planets influence the seasons of the year, and also in other

ways constitutes a very interesting parallel to Hebd. Ch. 2,64-92 R It is, however, somewhat vague. The moon is, of course, included among the seven planets, but receives separate treatment all the same. 37 The Pleiads and the Bear are mentioned because they consist of seven stars, which, within Philo's arithmological context, is quite consistent,38 but the Bear has nothing whatsoever to d(1 with the change of the seasons etc. Its presence within this context is much more mystifying than its presence in the passage of Ilebd., though it may be used as a parallel, of a sort, for Hebd. Ch.2,74 R The impressive but confused words which conclude Philo's sentence perhaps betray that he is no longer trying to be reasonable (it is at least trne that it would have been impossible to prove that the revolutions of the other heavenly bodies besides the moon (and the sun 39 ) or the numbers of other constellations are dominated by the number seven). But - to return to the planets and the seasons - Rohr also mentions parallels from Pliny: II,8,§33 40 : the movement of the planets, contrary to that of the fixed stars, is necessary to keep the air in motion. This parallel is also interesting in that it refers to the contrary motions of planets and fixed stars, which are a feature of the account in Hebd. as well. 41 Elsewhere42 Pliny has the planets inBecause the month consists of 4 x 7 days; cf. the quotation from Op. muml., above, Ch. II, p. 51. 88 That Philo, in Spec. leg. 1I,56-7 really sins by brevity becomes clear when we compare the sequel to the pas~age from Op. mund. quoted immediately before it. Here the general theme is the power of the number seven. First the planets are treated- because they number sepen (113). Then the Bear, the sailor's beacon in the sky, is praised, for it consists of sepen stars (114). Then the Pleiads are described, useful to the farmer. also seven in number (115). Finally, the sun is mentioned: the year may be divided into two halves; each to-fJ[Le:pLoc falis in a sePenth month (116). In Opif. munrl., I.e., the order seven planets, Bear and Pleiads is exactly the same a.<; in Spec. leg., l.c. 39 For the sun, cf. above, H. 38. 46 For the possibility that Pliny follows Posidonius cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 114, 11. 252). 41 And of Philo, Op. mund. 113, d. above, p. 141, !L 16 (contrary motion) and p. 143-4 (the planets and the seasons). 42 N at. II,39, §106.

37

144

fluence 'many of the fixed star;:;' quotiens errantium accessu impulsa aut coniectu radiorum e;"Cstimulata sunt, qual-iter in Suculis ( = 'Y &oe.;;) sentimus accidere, q·uas Graeci ob id pluvio nomine appellant.43 This idea perhaps makes it easier to understand why ps. Hippocrates first mentions the seven planets and then, without explicit justification, goes Oil to enumerate stars and constellations (among which the 'Y J.;)e.;;) which have been known to stand in a special relation to the \\'(•atlwr :;inu; till' ultkst times.H Baker has argnccl that the connection between the fixed stars and the signs of Zodiac (which is presupposed in this theory) goes back to the astronomer Callippus, 45 who also appears to have assnmctl that the degrees of the Zodiac connected \vitlt U1,: fi;.,.c(l stars were influenced Ly the planets. 46 In this way it is p(>ssiblc to give a satisfactory answer to the question how the 7 planets arc related to the changes of the seasons. The astrometeorology of Hebd. turns out to be heavily tinged with astrology. If l~oker's rcnmstruction of the theory of Callippus is right (I am not qualified for attempting either a verification or a falsification), the second half of the fourth Cent. 13.C. would constitute a t.p.q. for Hcbd. (at least, for Ch. 2,64 ff.) However, our sources only become eloquent abunt the 7 planets and the seasons in the days of Philo (who, as will be remembered, provides us with a t.a.q. for Hebd. by quoting from it 47 ) and in the centuries which follow. It is, on account of this, reasonable to say that the presence of a theory of the seven planets which makes them influence the order of the seasons, as in Hcbd., is more in favour of a date somewhere in the first Cent. B.C. For ps. Hippocrates speaks with snch brevity, that he is clearly (again) taldng something for granted. This he could only do when the ideas he

43 Acconling to Hohr (o.c. 282), Pliny's theory is unique. But cf. below, and, for the cooperation between planets and fixed stars, the quotation from Rhetorius, Boker o.c. 1622. 44 More parallels for the influence of the planets upon the atmosphere, esp. from l'tolemy, but also from Lucanus (X,206-7) and Pliny are quoted by Rohr, o.c. 271 ff. ·15 O.c. 1()21 ff. CL his Die Entstekung der Sternsphdre A rats, Ber. Verh. Siichs. Ak. Wi~s. 99 (1952), H. 5, 52 ff. Callippus divided the signs of the Zodiac in one-day-degrees anll indicated the length of a fixed star in relation to such a degree. This made possible the change from astrometeorology to '\Vetterhoroskopie', i.e. from a·~:.Lx['Jzw to rt'JLEtv, cf. o.c. 1622. 46 On the xpoc1n<;; of the planets cf. Baker, ibd. 16H-2. -17 Above, Ch. I, p. 3.

145

reflects were quite commonplace; and those ideas seem to have bec01ne current only in the Graeco-Homan period. The same brevity is responsible for the obscurities in the account as a whole. But, once it has been acknowledged that two main notions, viz. (1) the idea of an astrological meteorology, and (2) the theury of the motion uf the fixed stars as opposed to that of the plauds, are treated together in this passage, most of its difficulties, it is hopc(l, \\·ill disappmr. The contrary motion results in 1he ever differc·nt positions of the planets upun the celestial globe, i.e. in a whole series of relations between the scvt'n pl:uwts and the signs of the Zodiac and other fixed stars, which, from a certain time onwards, \\·ere tlwliglt t to be import
(c).

THE WIND-ROSE

Ch. 3 of H ebd. lists 7 winds, vvhich can be mapped out in a wind-rose. The history of the wind-rose in antiquity is relatively well-known. 'vVe have knowledge of various types which succeeded one another or co-existed. The wind-rose of 11 ebd. is to be identified with one of these types. I give a brief outline of the development. 1 The Homeric epics know four winds, ~ope'Yj,;; (North), ~e({)upoc; (West), vrhoc; (South) and e:0poc; (East). 2 The first wind-rose we know of 3 is in Aristotle, Mete. II,6, which lists 104 vvinds, 4 x 2 of which are opposite to one another

The fundamental study on the subject is A. Hehm, Griechische Windrosen, Sb. Bay. Ak., l'hil. Kl., 191h, Abh. 3, Miinchen 1916. K. Nielsen, Rf'marques sur les noms grecs et Iatins des vents et des regions du ciel, Class. Med. 7, (1945), 1-113 is especially important for the history of wind-names and for the Latin equivalents of Greek names. Equally indispensable is H. Bc>ker, Winde, f{E VIII A 2, 1958, 2211 ff. ('\Vindrosen' p. 2326 ff.). See also ]. F. Masselink, De Grieks-Rorueinse Windroos, diss. Leiden 1956. Of the earlier literature G. Kaibel, Antike Windrosen, Hermes 20, 1885, 579-624 must be mentioned honoris causa; some of its faults were corrected by D'Arcy \V. Thompson, The Greeh Winds, Class. Hev. 1918, 49-56, who (presumably because of war-time circumstances) ignored Rehm's work. The short survey in r;. Aujac, Strabon et la science de son temps, Paris 1966, 25:': ff. is insufficient. 2 Od. 5,295-6 names them all. 3 If the traditional early date of Hebd. is accepted, its >vind-rose is the first. 4 Or 11 (Jl!Jete. 364a3-4 lll('Jltions the 'flOWm(<:c~ -· between dipo~ anu v6-ro~ -·rejecting it as a local and unimportant wind. Cf. Nielsen o.e. 39: 'ces dix vents places, Arisiote a en verite fini sa rose des vents'). 1

146

on geometrically constructed diameters of the horizon, while two winds are without opposite wind: ~opeoc~

xoct &:7tocpx't'(att;

N '

, (O/\U[J.mor.~, '"' ,

OLpye:cr't"Y)~

crx(pwv) ~eqmpo~

w

E

&rc·IJAL
s

v6Toc;

Compared to the Homeric system and the vague systems in between, the geometrically constructed rose of Aristotle has besides other advantages that of precision and exact localisation. Six names (and regions) have been added to the epic ones. Ei5po~ has been shifted southwards to make room for &rc"Y)),L<~'t"Y)<;, which may be a scientific name. The new name for the (pure) North-wind, :ircocpx.-r(oc:;, possibly also is of scientific origin 5 ; the old name ~opew:; is still synonymous to it. After Aristotle, Timosthenes6 constructed a rose of 12 winds. He added 2 new winds, At~6v01"o<; (or Ae:ux.6vo-ro.;) and e:up6vo-roc; (or <po(vt;), by filling in the vacant spots in Aristotle's diagram to the left and the right of v6-roc;. He moreover reserved the name &mxpwr(or.~ for the pure North-wind, giving the old name ~opeocc; to Aristotle's fi.€0'"Y).;7 , as we 5 This is the hypothesis of Rehm, 22-3. The form :bn;At(~T1)~ testifies to a Ionian origin. 'Arrcxpx·dcx~ means '(wind) from the Ofpx-ro.;', i.e. the North. If this is correct, we may perhaps assume the existence of an early Ionian scientific wind-rose. 'A7t1)).~w-r·IJ<; (four times in Ifdt., see below n. 29) is thought by Buker, o.c. 2336, to be originally a local name, which may be correct. Boker, o.c. 2341 deriYes >irrcxpx-rb:~ from an earlier form *ipY.-r[:x; (which is what he wantJ; to read forms. t &px-ro~ in Hebd. 3,16 R; on this see below, p. 151 ff.) Anyhow l{ehm's o!Jsc1Tation that &:rrcxpx·doc~ and &:7nJ).Lw-r-1); are analogous formations is correct, which renders a common scientific origin for both names at least plausi!Jle. c Classium praefectus (Pliny, N at. VI, 183) under Ptolerny Philadelphus. On Timosthenes see I<ehm 47 ff.; Nielsen 41 ff.; Boker 2352 ff., who argues that with Rhodes as centre this rose is correct and useful. l{ehm 49 calls this 'die einzige wesentliche Abweichung'.

147

know from the geographer Agathemerus (third Cent. A.D.) r~f.LOt:rfleV'1)(;; ... npo()··neel..; !LZaov &;cocpx-r£ou >tr.:~ xco.x£ou popeocv. s This wind-rose is the one behind that in ps. Arist. Mu., 394bl9 ff. 9 It was also described by Varro (possibly in his ora. marit-ima10 ), as we know from Seneca, Nat. V, 16-7. \Ve also encounter it in other Latin authors. 11 Timosthenes' system was used by Ptolem.y in his great geographical work. 12 Two roses in stone from the first Cent. A.D. (or possibly somewhat later) also testify1 3 to its continued use. In H.ellenistic times another rose. consisting of 8 winds, also came to be used. This rose occurs for the first tirne in connection with the 'Egyptian parapegmatists', which are dated by Rehm at about the end of the third. Cent. B.C. 14 The names of their winds are ~opca.<;, &;n;Atw..-fJ;, s:opo.;, v6~o<;, J...(t;;, ~eet'upo.; and &pyea"t'1jt;; fiop€oc..:;, according to Rehm, designating both the pure N.-wind and the N.~E. v;findY' It certainly is used by the astronomer Hipparchus of Nicaea (active between ea. 160-125 B.C.), i.e. in his parapegma.. Hipparchus reserves ocmr.px-cEo:.:; for the pure N.-wind as opposed to v61'ot;; ~op€cx.:; 8 GGJvi II (ed. C. Miiller, Paris 1861), p. 473,1 ff. =Fr. 6 Wagner (E. A. Wagner, Die Erdbeschreib-ung des Tinwsthenes von Rlwdos, Leipzig 1888, p. 65). Agathemerus' inccrrect phrasing ('he added Boreas between Aparktias a.nd Kaikias') probably is due to the fact that he wants to derive Timosthenes' rose from the anonymous rose of 8 winds oi. Helleni<>tic times, which be describes GGAf II, p. 472,22 ff. (for which see below). See however Masselink, o.c. 76. It is interesting to note that a rose of 12 winds also occurs in the 'scientific treatise' incorporated into the a.pocryphal Book of Enoch, Ch. 76. 9 Nielsen, 58 ff.: Boker, 2377. 1 o Cf. R. Reitzenstein, Die geogt·ajJhischen Bucher Van·os, Berm. 20, 1885, esp. p. 518 if. (the article which inspired that of Kaibel mentioned above, p. 146. n. l); Nielsen, 96 ff. For Seneca and Timosthenes cf. also Boker, 2371 ff. 11 Pliny, Nat. II,ll9 ff. and Gellius II,22,3 ff., ln a. historical survey treat the Homeric system (4 winds), the system of Timosthenes (12 winds) and tlw anonymous rose of 8 winds (in the order 4-8-1.2). Suetonius fr. 151 (Suetonii reliquiae ed. Reifferscheid, p. 228 ff.) has a rose based upon Timosthenes, as has Vegetius, Epit. rei milit. IV,38. In some cases, there are slight variations in the wind-names. 12 See Nielsen's analysis, o.c. 62. 1 a G.I.G. 14,1308 2 = C.I.L. 5, suppl. 204; C.I.G. 14,906 = C.I.L. 10,6119. On these bilingual inscriptions see Nielsen, 102-3. 14 A. Rehm, Para.pegmastu.dien, (cf. Ch. I, p. 25, n. 116) 35 and 104. Rehm points out, however, that it is no more than probable that the 'Egyptians' are earlier than Hipparchus. 16 ParajJ. 103. Boker, 2370, observes that the formula ocv't';J(,; 6 Bopf>ii.; with these para.pegmati.sts may imply a differentiation between N. and N.-E.

148

with him is N.-E. 16 This rose is the one described by Vitruvius, 1,6,4-5 17 and recommended by the Roman architect for the purposes of practical town-planning (1,6,6-8 and 12-1.3). It is described by Pliny, Nat. V1,33l ff. and recommended by him for practical agricultural purposes. The general surveys of Gcllins, II,22,3 ff. and Pliny, Nat. II,l19 ff. describe it, giving both the Latin and the Greek windnames. Agathemerus, GGlVI IJ, p. 472 describes it before describing the rose of Tirnosthenes. In the first Cent. B. C., i\ndrmiicus of Cyrrhus, mentioned by Vitruvius 1,6,4, built his fanwus T(rwei' of the Winds at Athens, of which eHough survives to be certain that hi~; win(b were ~OflEIXc; (N.), xomdou; (N.-E.), ~qri)AtC:l'!'l)c;, dipoc;, VOToc;, A(~, sz~oupoc; and mdf>WV (N.-W.). We also have a late H.oman wind-rost~, which has the singularity of calling N.-E. Borcas and N.-W. ( !) Aquilo.l8 As to the wind-names of this rose of 8 winds, there are some divergences. 19 The N.-\V. wind is always called &f>yea-djc,fcortts, except on Andronicus' Tower, where it is called eocc,. Koctx(occ, is not used by either the 'Egyptian' parap(~gmatists or Hipparchus, while our Homan sources invariably have aquilo21 Jboreas for N.-E. A possible explanation is that also X
17

1.49

putting of Y.e<~x(w;; at N.-E. made it possible for him to give the old name ~oppii~ to the pure North-wind. Note that Agathemerus Le. likewise calls the N.-E.-v.i.nd xoc~x(oc~. With him, however, this is due to his desire to derive the rose of Timosthenes from the rose of 8 winds. 23 We arc therefore justified in regarding the following diagram as representing the anonymow;24 Hellenistic rose in its most usual form25 :

septentrio f «~rxpx"t"(occ; N

s auster / v6't'oc; It is clear that this rose is a simplification of Timosthenes' amplification of Aristoteles wind-rose: it eliminates xoc~xfo::c; (Arist., Tim. ), 6pocmv, X \'I p. 403 K., the invention of this windrose was forrm~rly ascribed to Eratosthenes. Kalbfleisch, having accepted to edit this work for the CMG, discoYered that it is a fake (see the Berichte on work in progress tor the CMG by lL Diels, Sb. Ak. Berl. 1913, 115 and 1916, 138). H.ehm, Winth. 74 and 76 if.,g.ivesanextractofKalbfleisch's analysis of the sources of this compilation (see also Boker, 2364). Most damning was the discovery that 'zahlreiche Stellen ... aus der zuerst in Bologna 1489 erschienenen la.teinischen l.!hersetzung der Aphorismen des i\'loses !-.laimonides entnommen sind'. 25 Cf. the diagrams of Hehm, Windr. 70 and Nielsen, 48. 26 Ha bier's summing-up of the history of the name Boreas (Boreas, RE 1V, 1899, 720 ff.) is still correct.

23

150

before Aristotle's wind-rose. Thrasyalces of Thasos developed a twowind system, \\:i.th (3opeou; for northerly and vo"t"o~ for southerly vvinds. 27 The Hippocratic treatise n. &.epc.w ,)/M:·uuv "t"Omuv only names the N.and S.-winds (~opf1)~ and vo"t"oc;;). 28 In Herodotus the four (Homeric) cardinal vvinds are mentioned, \Vith ~opf·tJc;; invariably designating the N.-\vind. The names i,h)i and &nYJALW-r1Jc; make their Iir:.;t appea.rance in his Histories. 29 :\.i~ also occurs in a fragment of Democritus, Bl4,8. 30 Komdac;; is first found in a text of Aristophanes, as wt have already seen. 31 In Xenophon ~oppic; and v6-roc; always mean the N.- and

S.-\ll.'inds. 32 The general line of the development of the '"ind-rose is clear. Up to Aristotle, tht~re is no certain evidence a.bont wind-ro:>es although there is some information about wind-names and wind-S)'Stems. Aristotle's rose counted 10 winds. In Hellenistic times two wind-roses \Vere in use, one of 12 and one of 8 winds, of which that of 8 apparently was the most practical. The ·wind-rose of Hebd. is no other than this practical wind-rose of 8 winds, minns 1 wind. Ch. 3,14 ff. lists these winrls as follows, starting at the East and proceeding counter-clockwise: q:p6)'t'oc;> 33 ~ cxpx-.o.:; S1-C , <E:L>'t"Ot c,E:'fWpoc;, (.l.E:'L' OC1hov 8' (; t..£·~, ilm:~-r:Ct. v6't'oc;, iz6!J.e:'IO<; eopoc. The names of the wind~

)

.,

t

Ot7tYJALW"n)<;,

'

I

$;(0flS:VOt;

1 1opE:'Y)~. <:7i:E:L'L'Ot

("

I

''

(

•

)

.,-

.,,

correspond to those of the anonymous rose of 8 winds, as does their order of succession. t "Apx-roc;, however, instead of &nxpz-r£<Xc:; presents a special problem, to which we must turn first. There can be no doubt dvO(L ~·jo 't'o•)~ xupLCtl't'i-.o•J~ .X•1ip.ou~, ~optr.t'J xxi v6-::n~. Strabo I, c. 29 ='= VS 35,2. Posidonius a.p. Strabo XVII, p. 790 (VS 3.'),1) calls him a forerunner of Aristotle. It is very doubtful H the olher wind-names in Strabo's historical accountcan be assigned to Thrasyalces' system; to me at le;tst this interpretation seems a bit forced. B6ker's reconstruction of a complete windrose for Thrasyalces is doubtful, and the more so as he bases this reconstruction (o.c. 2343 ff.) upon the assumption that Thrasyalces modified the rose of Hebd. 26 Rehm, fVindrosen 18 ff.; Nielsen, 23 ff.; Bppi; env,(oc; isa 1'\.-E.-wind. This probably is correct, but does not imply that we may adduce this use as a parallel for ~opt'l')<; (the N.-E. wind) in the wind--rose of Hebd., which Nielsen thinks it is: Xenophon does not distinguish betwl"en ~·Jpbj<; an cl. another (pure) N.-wind. 33 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 90, n. 123. z·i

151

t

&p:wror, designates the pure N.-wind in contradistinction to which designates the N.-E.-wind. Boll supposed t ocpx:roc; to be a corruption of &pyzcr"T~c;, 34 but if there is a corruption, that of oc7tocpx"'t'£occ; is of course much easier. The J ,atin translations have septentrio for t &px"'t'rJc;. Some confusion has been caused hy the fact that ~op:f't)c; is translated by ufricus (A, africantts P). H.eltm assumed that the order of the winds in the Latin translations (subsola-n.us, africus, septen.trio, favonius, tij>s, austcr, curus) originally was subsolanus, septentrio, africus, etc. and that africus originated from a transliteration oft &px-ooc;. 35 He points ont that lips and eurus are also transliterations. For curus this is ill correct: this word occurs in nuscientific Latin as a nunn;tl ~~t[uivalent to vrtlhtrnus.:lti Lips, on the other hand, does not occur except in scientific Latin prose.:n Its current Latin name, since the days of Cicero and Caesar, is afr-ictts. Now the Greek text Ch. 3,18-9 R [J.E"'t' OCU't"OV o' 0 AL~ is translated post hunc qui appellatur Lips, in which qui appcllatur i~> an addition of the translator, ·who thereby indicates he is transliterating andfor using an unusual ·word (n.h.: no q11i appellatur with either africtts or eurus). The only motive for not translating A.£tj! by africtts has to be that africus had been nsed up already. Therefore Rchm's hypothesis of a transliterated and later corrupted arctus is rdutcrl. This still leaves us with the difficult africus (instead of aquilo 38 ) as the equivalent of ~op:£-rlc;. This admits of an explanation: the translator misinterpreted ixor.Levot;; ~op~'t)c; as meaning: 'the wind connecterl with Boreas'. Now the wi1;.d connected with Borea~~ on the diameter of the wind-rose is no other than c~fricus. This mistranslation had the automatic consequence that africus could not be used again, this time for translating A.t~. Consequently, the translator had to transliterate later on in the text. R•~hm's sub:>idiary hypothesis that the order of wind-names in the Latin translation is at one point wrong is un-

that

~ope't)c;,

84 Boil, Kl. Schr. 218, n.l. This proposal was uns11t:cessful. l{oscher (1911, p. 81-2) assumed that &pytcr-r1y; had been left oat, which hos been llllivcr-

sally accepted. His .reasons for making Boreas N.-E. and Arktias N. arc, however, not convincing. 36 Windr. 31. 36 Cf. tl1e material collected by Nielsen, o.c., 82 ff. and Sen., Nat. V,16,4 ab oriente hiberno eur,us exit, quem nostri 11ocauert< vulturnum ... sed et curus iam ciuitate donatus est p.t nostra sermoni non tarnqua:m alienus intt•r7•enit, 37 Cf. Nielsen, o.c., 92. 38 See above, p. 149, n. 21.

152

necessary. It even complicates matters furtlwr, for on this hypothesis scptcntrio would tram;late not t &px-co<;, but ~opel)c:;, which, as we saw, is usually translated by aq1tilo. 30 Septentrio, originally equivalent to Greek &px.-coc; "'"' the North, already in Cicero designates the N.-wind, and is also equivalent to &:7tocpx-rb:c; in later times. 40 Of course septentr·io iu A and I' can translate both t ocpx-.oc; and .Xmxpx-clca;: the Latin translations hold no dw: to the original rc;l,ling of the Greek text. \Ve mtL>t suppn::.e, howz'Ycr, that t :Xp•r:roc; i~' the cotTuption of a windtumze. I<ehnr11 corn~ct<:
'

3 &pwn0c; (or &7tocpx't'Lu:;)

N

s 6 v6't'oc;

153

I

"\

(

As ha.s already been remarked, this corresponds exactly to the anonymous Hellenistic wind-rose of 8 winds, N.-E. being omitted for numerological reasons. The names of the winds and their order arc the same in both cases. This was of course acknowledged by Rehm. 44 Rehm argued that the wind-rose. the hebdornadic heart of the windchapter in Hebd., cannot be a later interpolation. 'Das ganze Hebd. aber so spat anzusetzen, dass es unter dem Einfluss jener hellenisti·schen \Vindrose stehen konnte, ware schlecht\veg phantastisch'. 45 The resemblance between the rose in lfebd. and the HelJenlstic rose, which cannot be fortuitous, has to be explained, he suggests, by making the latter an imitation of the former. 411 That in Hcbd. (3orbJc; is N.-E. instead of N., as up to and including Aristvtle, did not bother l{elnn, 4·; but it bothered Nielsen and motivated his unlikely interpretation of a passus in Xenophon as a para.llel for Hebd. 48 ln B{)ker's survey the rose of ll ebd. is put before that of Atistotle and treated as genuine Presocratic testimon_y-4 9 ; its resemblance to the Hellenistic rose is not explained. On our hypothesis of a Hellenistic date for Hc.bd. all these diffi· culties vanish ..V'v'e do not have to search for pre-Aristotelian parallels for (3ope1)<; as N.-E. 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 rlate for Hebd. part I. To this may n0\'1,' be added the Hellenistic wind-rose ~u

See above, p. 149, n. 21. Nielsen, 86 ff. 41 Wi·ndr. 31. 4Z P. 51, 16 Y a Bergstr. 43 2340-L 4t Windr. 32 ff. Also B\:iker, 2364 (quohJd below, p. 15+. n. 46). 4 ~ Ibd. 33. Rehm does not want to accept Roscher's very early date, but; puts !Jebd. at ea. 450 B.C. 46 Wi·ndr. 33; also Masselink, o.c. 87 give~ tbe priority to lJebd.; H6ker 2364· 'die Namensreil1e Iehnt sich in der Form ihrcr An!olge an Hebd. an'. But why should the inventor of the practical windrose of 8 winds turn to an obscure Hippocratic work! n lbd. 48 Sec p. 151, n. 32. Nielsen, of course, <1cccpted the traditional date of Hebd. 49 O.c. 2339 ff. This in its tum leads to a very forced interpretation of the rose of Thrasyalces, see above. p. 151 and ibd., n. 27. 40

154

of Ch. 3, -- a piece of evidence which is completely independent from the other evidence which we have discussed up till now. The author of H cbd. simply took the wind-rose as current in his own day, deleting one wind. An adclitional gain is the elimination of Hcbd. Ch. 3 from the pre-Aristotelian history of tlw wind-rose, which in this way no longer has to account for an otherwise uncxplicable exception to the general line of development.

155

CHAPTER VI

HEBD. AND ARITHMOLOGY; POSIDONIUS AGAIN

1. The history of ancient arithrnology still remams to be written. 1 Around the turn of the present centur_y, nobody, so it seems, doubted that the role of Posidonius in this history had btoen a major one. Schmekel had been able to prove that a part of Sextus' exposition on the criterion (.M. VII,9l-109), chiefly dealing with number as the source of knowledge according to the 'Pythagoreans', was ultimately derived from Posidonius.2 The information on 'Pythagorean' number1 The term was introduced, or rather re-introduced, by A. Delatte, Etud. lift. Pyth. 139, who also (ibci. 139 ff.) gives a brief outiine of the history (as he sees it) of arithmology from the Early Pythagoreans onw::trds. ~ Die Philosophie der mittleren Stoa in ihrem gesrhichtlichen. Zusamme11ha·nge, Berlin 1892, 404 ff.; cf. also I. Hcinemann, Poseidonios' metaphJISische Schriften I, Breslau 1921. Hildesheirn 2 1968, 206. Schmekel assumed that Sextus, M. VII, 91 ff. derives from a Cornn1entaty on the Timaeus of .Plato writh1U by Posidonius becau!;e ibu., 93 we read w:; ... 'Pl)Oh• 0 IIo(l'ei.I)C:>vwc; 't'OV ll/.6.-n,)'\10~ T(!J.!Y.LO'J t~l)YO'J" fLevr..:;. He further pointed out that ibd. 102 Posidonius' distinction of auvx7t·r6f.te:'.!<X, Tj'Jt.llf.te'n and 3tecr->•~'""' occurs and that 10'7 ff. quotes details connected with the construction of the Colossus of 'R.hodes wltich are nowhere else to be found (108; for other evidence in favour of a Stoic handling of tl1is passage cf. below p. 157, n. 3 and p 194, n. 212). The assumption of the existence of a formal Commentary on the Tirn. has been aptly criticized by Reinhardt, .Pos. 414 ff., cf. also RE s.v. Pos. 569, though even he admitted that Posidonius cannot but have commented upon certain asped;s of Plato's dialogue (cf. also L Edelste.in, Phys. Syst . .Pos. 304 and u.72), Schmekel's arguments concerning the unity and consistency of the reasoning at M. VII, 91-109 have been reinforced by W. Burkert, llleish. u. Wiss. 48-Sl, who also added arguments in favour of the ultimate authorship of Posidonius (among othei" things by adducing M. VIJ, 119, which takes up the theme of 93; cf. also SVF 11,859, which will echo Po-sidonian ideas, and the similar theory of t.lte .Pneumatics described by Wellmann, .Pneum. Sch. 142); cf. further W. Burkert, Cicero als Platoniher... 179-80. Reinhardt however argued that the 'Pythagorean' pas:m.ge iu M. VII,93 ff. has been in;;erted by Sextus himself but this hypothesis has been refuted by Burkcrt, I.e.: the number-theory should not and cannot he extricated from the epistemo-

156

theory as given by Posidonius-Sextus3 also occurs in the works of a number of authors dealing with arithmological subjects.4 Therefore, Schmekel argued, also other materials shared by this same group of writers but not in Sextn:; (viz. pronouncements upon the powerful manifestations of individual numbers) had to be traced back to Posidunius.:; This condusiun, of course, goes too far. IJ Posidonius spoke of a6 and another group of writers speaks of a b, it does not follow that also l'o:.;illonius treated a+ b. It was, therefore, only to be expected that Schmekel was st~verely criticizell.7 The . most important contribution to this criticism, perhaps, is that of F. E. Hobbins, who tried to prove that Posidonins (ap. Sextnm) based himself upon an

+

logical pas~age, and its exemplificution hetrays the hand of l'usi ae: -re: rr&:v-r' btsOLY.S\1, which was quoted at the beginning (94 ), is repeateJ. 4 Philo, Nicumachm; of Ccrasa, Clement, Theo of Smyrna, Anatolius, loan. Lyuus, Varro, Gellius, Censorinus, Calci, 90 ff., and in especially H. J. Kriimcr, Gcistmet. 47 ff. 5 The ideas of Schmekel became the starting-point of much subsequent research, e.g. B. \V. Switalski, Des Chalcidius Kommentar zu Plato's Timaios, Beitr. Gesch. Phi!. l\littelalt. llf ,6, i\'Iiinster 1902, esp. 85 ff.; (~. Borghorst, De Anatolii Fontibus, diss. Berlin 1905; G. Altmann, De Posidonio Timaci Platonis commentature, diss. Berlin 1906. 6 It should be pointed out, however, that Sclnnekcl o.c. 424 ff. discussed possible references to Posidonius and to a Timaeus-Connnentary in the /;-section c,f arithmologicalliteraturc. Cf. further below, p. 17'J ff. and p. 192, n. 203. 7 Cf. above, p. 156, n. 2 (Heinhardt) and below, p. 15". 11. 8: R. l\1. Jones, The Platonism of Plutarch. cliss. Chicago 191 (), 77 n. 77, fnllowi ng Zeller 1 U, 1 ,599, esp. n. 3 and 4, tried to reduce the contribution of Posidoniu:; to Sextus V1T,91 ff. to the absoluh' minimum.

157

earlier treatise from which also the other arithmological writers would depend in various ways. 8 He argued that this anonymous 'Pythagorean' treatise would have to be placed earlier than ea. 100 B.C., as not only Posidonius, but Varro as well appears to have made use of it. 9 Robbins also tried to lay the foundations for a reconstruction of this anonymous \Vork and for a history of its influencc, 10 hut this undertaking, as he himself acknowledged, remains highly speculative, aJl(l its results have not \Yon general acceptance. 11 l
Posidonius aud t/;e Souncs of Gre'h lfritll1nalogy, Cl. Ph. J 5 (1 920), 309 ff. His idea of an Anonymns was anticipated by Delatte, I.e., who speaks of 'un grand Heceuil d'epoque alexandrine, qui fut utilise par une foule d'anteurs de la decadence'. l{obbins based his arguments mainly upon Sextus IV!. IV,2-10, which is a doublet of 1¥1. VII,91-109, without the epistemological implications of the latter passage. He argued that the argument as in IV,Z-10 is clear, while that in VII, 91 ff. is confused. However, Robbins only adduced M. VII,91 ff. up to 104, and quite inadequately sumnmrizecllOS-J 09, which is essential to the section as a ·whole. Therefore, his claim that IV,2-10, because cogent and clear as compared to VII,91 ff., must be the original version, is unfounded. H.obLins went on to compare IV,2 ff. with passages in Theo of Smyrna and Anatolius and concluded (o.c. 31.4) that the subjects as treated in "H. JV,2-3 and by Theo and Anatolius originally formed the introduction to a ('Pythagorean') treatise on the fir~t ten numbers. He then compared the sequel to 111. IV,2-3 (treating the derivation point-line-surface-solid and harmonic ratios) with corresponding passages in various arithmological writings, \vhich subsequently he attributed to this same Anonymus. 9 O.c. 319-20. Varro i~; quoted by Gellius (I,20, without book-title, gives scientific information comparable to that of Posidonius ap. Sextum; III,l 0 is an abstTact of his Hcbdurnades vel de imaginibus, and contains arithmologi<:al lore about the number sE·vt,n). Varro is also the principal source of Censorinus, De die natali Ch. 4-15 (Ch. 2,2 refers to his Atticus de nmneris, Ch. 9,1 to the Tubero de origine Jmmana, and his name is mentioned a number of times; cf. Diels, Do:r:. 186 ff., esp. 188). See further below, p. 185 ff. 10 The Trad·ition of Greek Arithmology, Cl. Ph. 16 (1921 ), 97 ff. 11 In this article, he explicitly assumes (p. 98) that Posidonius quoted from the Anonym us and tl1at this work therefore must have 'existed by the last half of the second cent. B.C.' Cf. the doubts expressed by Ph. l\'ferlan, From Platonism to Neoplatonism, The Hague 1953, 49 n.l, \V. Burkert, Weish. u. Wiss., SO n.22 and H. J. Kra.mer, Geistmet. 47, n.82, and especially the detailed criticism of V. de Falco, Sui trattati aritmologici di Nicomaco ed A natolio, H.ev. Indo-GrecoItalica 6, 1922, fasc. 3-4, 51 (211) ff. However, Kramer accepts Robbins' t.a.q. and p. 331, n.S51 assumes that Posidonins (wht), as he argue;;, o.c. 55, n. 120 did not write a 'Commentary' on the Timae-us, but only wrote about itj made use of a 'Pythagorean' tradition. 8

158

treatise is, as I believe, untenable, and is so for two reasons. (1) The fact that Varro appears to have used it in no way implies that this

source must have been as old as that. Diels has proved that Varto (ap. Censorinum 12 and ap. other later writers) made extensive use of the Vetusta placita. 13 On the basis of l~obbins' hypothesis, this would mean that the Vet.j;lac. \Vot!ld have been vvritteu ea. 100 B. C. However, since Diels the Vet. plac. have been dated somewhere between Po;;idoniu~; and Varro (who aH~ separated by abolli one generation).H Diels saw no objection against Varro's use of the Vet. plac.: constat nov-iss-imo cuiqu.e libro inh-iasse polyhistoris curiositatenz. (2) As has already been remarked above, the arithmology as found in the arithmologicallitcrature contains both (a) gcn.::ral ·Pythagorean' numbertheory16 and (b) arithmologicallore about the numbers 1-10.16 Posidonius ap. Sextum indeed di~;cusses the scientific theory and some of the applications of the implied epistemology for practical life; but he is not quoted by Sextus for arithmological information as S$tb (b). Now, Robbins appears to have made a mistake analogous to that of Schmekel. If Posidonius spoke of a and another group of writers speaks of a + b, it does not follo\v that both Posidonins and these other writers follow a source which contained both a and b. In combination, these two arguments appear to entail that Varro affords a t.a.q. for the arithmological Anonymus (as for convenience's sake I would at this moment prefer to call this source) somewhere about the middle of the first Cent. B.C. It has already been pointed

In Censorinus the information deri1'ed from (a) the Vet. plac. alternates with (b) arithrnological information and general 'Pythagorean' number-theory. Diels deliberately excluded (b) (Dox. 197). 13 Dox. 188 ff. For the evidence of Rer. rust. cf. below, p. 2-l-3. 14 Dux. 101. Cf. above, Ch. V A, p. U0-1. 15 In as far as individual numbers are treated in this section, it is in a scientific way (theory of dimensions, musical harmonies etc.). The only numbers mentioned are those of the tetractus (1 +2-t-3+4=10). In the main, these ideas have been borrowed from the Early Academy (cf. Burkert, o.c. 46 ff.; Kramer, o.c. 48 !f., chiefly concentrating on Xenocrates; for Posidonius as mediator between the Early Academy and Neoplatonism cf. Merlan, o.c. 30 ff., and already Btitrage zu.r Gesrhithle des anm~en Platonisnzus, PlJil. 84 (1934 ), esp. 197ff.). 16 Here all the numbers 1-10 are treated ("eine Fiille von Anwendungen, Symbolen, A llegorien und Theologumena. der Zahlen von 1 bis 10 suwie arithmologische Spekulationen iiber ihr Yerhii.ltnis zneinander schliessen sich an", Krii.mer o.e. 47-8). 12

159

out that the number-doctrine which is discussed in Posidonius-Sextus should be assumed to have been derived from the circle of Plato's immediate pupilsP \Ve have other evidence of Posidonius' interest in the theories of the Early Academy. We know that he is said to have stated that in Plato's Timae:·u.s the Soul is intermediate between intelligibilia18 and sensibilia. and that he defined this Soul in mathematical terms. 19 Ph. Merlan has argued tha.t this defiii.ition, which identifies Soul·witl! three ].;inds('f mat1wmaticals (vi::. with (a) number, (b) the geometrical and (c) mathematical harmony) prc:suppo~es the combination of the definitions of Xenocrates20 and Spcusippl1i>~ 1 and a third one, \vhich may either be or not be original with Posidonius. 22 Merlan's conclusion, which to mt: :;eem:-; ine:;capable, i:; that Posidonius, in explaining the Timaeus, continued the Ene of interpretation which begins with the Early Academy. It is only natural to suppose that he studied the original works of Speusippus and Xenocrates, and not a handbook reporting their ideas on the snbject. 23 In my opinion, this even further diminishes the possibility that he derived the number-theory as contained in Sextus, -~1. VII,91 ff., and which is mainly based upon ideas current in the Early Academy, from an arithmological Anonym us. 2 ~ Above, p. 159, n. 15. 'Ini:elligibilia' (and 'sensibilia'): it is not absolutely certain whether or not Posidonius expressed himself in these Platonic terms. If he did, the interpretation of what is meant with these intelligibilia (and of their ontological status) presents a difficult problem. The use of these terms in an explanation of the Timaeus need not, of course, imply that Posidonius himself fully or even at all adopted Plato's point of view. CL further belo·w, p. 193 ff. and notes. 19 Plut. De an. p·rocr. in Tin1. Ch. 22 (1023b). The definition: •·f)v <jlu·y);'l !8iocv d''et" 't?:::i rri11r1; 8:et.cr•:x•o:::i x:;df &.in6fLi:)\l (JUV'ZO'Twaocv &flil.<J'Jl·xv r.zptexr,v-:-::.:. Cf. further below, p. 193 ff. and De Vogel. Gree/1 Pliil. Ill. Nr. ll93a. 20 \Vho said that Soul is a self-moving number, fr. 60 Heinze. 21 Who defined Soul in geometrical terms, fr. 40 Lang. 22 From Flat. to 1',/eopl. 34 ff. (cf. also Phi!. 193+, 204 ff.) As to the third part of the definition, Merlan suggests, o.c. 35, that this is clue to '11oderatus (if he preceded Posidonius) or some member of the .\cademy'. For Posidonins and Speusippus cf. Jones, Platonism of Plutarclt 76. The identification of Soul and harmonic ratios is . of course, inspired by Tim. 35b-36b (cf. als(J below, p. 196). 23 For an analogon cf. his study and adaptation of Theophrastus (aho1re, Ch. IV, p. 82 ff., p. 196-7 and e'>p. ibd., n. 160-2. 24 At Sextus AI. I V,S-8 and .Anatolius, rr. oezi!h; p. 32 Heiberg ( = [Iambi.], Theol. ar. p. 30,2-15 de Falco) we have the identification of 't with both body (the last term in the derivation point-line-surface-body) and soul (as harmony, 17 18

160

These considerations are important to us for several reasons. In the first place, Hebd. Ch. 1-11 is an arithmological exposition on the powers of the number 7, and as such falls within the class of '~rith­ mological literature. There are, indeed, a number of undeniable parallels between Hebd. Ch. 1-11 and those sections in the arithmological literature which 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 arithmological writers (among whom is Varro) together with Solon fr. 19 Diehl,' If it could be established that this quotation goes back to an Anonyn'l.us 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 Ifcbd. Ch. 5 only occur 'With one group of arithmological writers, while another group at this point in the exposition, though treating the same subject, does so in a different way. This clivergence, which is of fundamental importance, was first pointed ont by Robbins. 2s 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), d. l\1erla.n, From Plat., 47 ff. 1t has been argued by V. de Falco, o.c. 54 ff. that the treatment of 4 in the arithmological authors goes back to Positionius. Merlan, o.c. 48 acceptti de Falco's conclusions and attempts (il)d., 49 ff.) to establish that Posidonius must have found the equation 4 ~=-: soul ''"' pyramis with Speusippus. On the role of the number 7 in this context cf. below, p. 192 If. •• Roscher, wlw followed Schmekel c.s. in deriving the arithmologicalliterature from Pusidonius' supposed Comm. on the Tim., of course assumed that Posidonius >vas largely influenced by Hebd., cf. 1906, 99 ff. and 1913, 104 ff. See further below p. 196 ff., where some of the parallels mentioned by Roscher will he discussed. 26 In Ch. IV, I have tried to establish that flebd. cannot be earlier than Posidonius. 27 Above, p. 156-9. 2 8 Tradition 102, n.l, 112 ff. ('a test passage upon which the S' ( = Anonymus) 'family as a whole divided into two camps', ibd. p. l13j. Robbins' account is marred by a few inaccuracies pertaining to the classification of arithmological authors on the basis of this test-passage, which for the most part have been corrected by de Falco, o.c. 57 ff,

161

(1) Varro ap. Censorinum, 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. Ch. 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 elegia Solonis is mentioned and paraphrased (14,7). (2) Philo, Op. mund. 104 (full quotation of Solon fr. 19) and 105 (quotation of li cbd. Ch. 5, the first smtt'l1Ct· of which has been slightly altered); (3) Anatolins, 1t. OEx<XI')oc; p. 37,5-22 Hcib. (Solon) and 37,23-38,5 Heib. (ps. Hippocrates). 32 - Probably, the onkr of quotations as in Philo and Anatolins is the correct one. 3 a 2'1

Ch. 11,6 l1as a passing refNcnce to Solon in connection with the number 7,

quv tvta vita httmana Jinitur. llippocrntes ... aliique medici are mentioned here as well, but only for the doctrine that each seventh day is a critical day. lt is therefore incorrect to say that Ch. 11 iu mentioning Solon + Hippocrates anticipates Ch. 1-f; this is only true in as far as Solon is concerned. Cf. below, p. 187-8, n. ltW. 30 Jncorrectly! The third period is said to extend to 2K years, the sixth to 56, tlw seventh to the last year c,f life. 31 Solon is said to have (livided the third, sixth and seventh period of Hippocrates into two halves of seven years each, in order to arrive at ten hebdomads. The anachronism may ue Censorinus' own contribution (cf. at 7,5. quoted below, p. 166, n. 53, the analogous misplacing of Euryphon). 32 This passage (without Solon fr. 19) has been incorporated into [Iambi.], Theol. ar. p. 55,13-56,7 de Falco. 33 Solon, not p~. Hippocrates is quoted by Clement, Strom. VI,l6,144, p. 505, 13-506, 6 St. His source is the 1t. €~3o!J.&3o<; of Hermippus of Beryt.us (Strom. VI, p. 506,9-10 St.), a contemporary of Hadrian. Favonius Eulogius Ch. 14 (Favonii Eulogii lJisputatio de Sunmiu Scipionis, 6<1. et trad. H.. - E. van \Vedclingen, CoB. Latomus XXVll, Bruxclles 1957, p. 29,5 .ff.) quotes Hippocrates Cous ... in libris quos ;r~pt €~3otJ. little treatise by heart and without using his library, cf. Ch. 20, p. 37,15-16 van \V.; Habes de numeris quvd sine lib·ris in agello positus potui reminisci. That this remark is the plain truth was proved by M. Sicherl; (1) Favonius' incorrect quotations from Cicero's Somnium Scipionis clearly indicate that he was quoting by heart, cf. Sicherl, De Somnii Scipionis textu constituendo li, Hh. M. 102 {1959), esp. p. 353 ff.; (2) his expo-

162

The authors of the second group do not have the quotations of Solon fr. 19 and Hebd. Ch. 5. (1) Moderatus34 ap. Theo, p. 104,1 ff. tells th 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 crn:~pr..toc is produced and ~~'YJ arrives in the second hebdomad, that the heard begins to grow and increase in length is effectuated in the third, antl increase in breadth in the fourth hebdomad. (2) Varro ap. Gellium I II,lO (i.e. the abstract from the first book of his H ebdomades, published 39 B. C.) agrees with Theo in speaking of the fetus (III,lO, 7), of the growth of the first teeth with seven months and of shedding lhem at o11e's seventh y1~ar (lll,10,12; he also tells us that 'real' teeth appear during the second hehdomad). 36 The two quotations are also absent from (3) Nicomachus of Gerasa, ap. [Iambi.], Theol. ar.; (4) Macrobius, In som11. Scij>.; (5) Calcidius, In Ti-m., and (6) Martianus Capella. 37 Nicomachus and Macrobius give substantially more information than l\loderatus ajJ. Theu, an
163

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 Diocles. 39

2. Before commenting upon Diodes fr. 177, ho·wever, I want to adduce three other passages. The first is fr. 175 Wellmann (from Athenaeus~ 0 of Attalia via Oribasius). The heptadic scheme of Diodes' embryology has been altered by Athenaeus in order to fit into an enneadic one. 41 Here we read (among other things which can be paraJleled from Diocies42 ) that about the third ennead, we; Cfil)CrL'\1 0 .:lwxi,·ljc;, ev ufliv~ fJ.u:;wos:L ylve";'o:~ cpotvepw~ cirmaprjc; o Tu7toc; "~c; pcX.zs:atetil1ers Diokles von J{arystos, (Abh. Preuss. Ak. Wiss. 1938, phil.-hist. Kl. 3, p. 1 ff. = Scripta minora II, Roma 1960, 185 ff.; the texts ibd. p. 209 ff.). P. Wendland's suggestion (Berl. Phil. \Vochenschr. 1889, 987 and 1892, 872) that Nicomachus was Macrobius' source has been recently reaffirmed by \V. H. Stab!, Nlacrobius Commentary on the Dream of Scipio, transl. with intr. and notes, N. Y.-London 1952, 2 1966, p. 28, n.13 (here he says that l\lacrobius translated part of the Theol. ar.; at p. 38, where he tells us that he accepts the arguments of Robbins' Tradition, he suggests that l\Iacrobius either directly or indirectly followed Nicomachus, or else followed a Ncoplatonic source which in its turn would be drawing upon Nicomachus' Theol.). However, Jaeger o.c. 216 ff. appositely refuted this hypothesis, which does not explain why ~\lacrobim; left out the arithmological interpolations ma.de by Nicomachus. The problem of 1\Iacrobius' immediate source for his arithmological chapters appears to be still unsolved. P. Courcelle, Les lettres g1'ecques en accident de JVlaC1'obe a Cassiodore, Paris, 1942, 2 1948, who wanted to derive most of Macrobius' commentary from the works of especially Porphyry and Plotinus, made a single exception (p. 25): In somn. Se. 1,5 and 6 would be derived, through an anonymous 'commentateur latin', from Varro, i.e. ultimately from Posidonius; K. l\frass, J.11acrobius' Kommentar zu Cicero's Somn-ium, Sb. Preuss. Ak. Wiss., Phil.-hist. Kl. 1933 (232 if.), 238 ff. assumed that Porphyry's Commentary on the Timaeus was Macrobius' source for these subjects. 4° Cf. above, Ch. II, p. 33 and ibd., n. 8; Ch. V A, p. 130, n. 4; Ch. \TI, p. 213 ff. 41 Jaeger, V erg. Fragm. 207. Cf., however, below, p. 165, n. 50. 42 Cf. below, p. 167, n. 59.

164

oTijc; xe:rpoc/..~c; (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 d<~'Velops faster than the female, but also starts to move earlier, as is said explicitly by Hippocrates43 and Diodes. The third is from Varro ap. Gellium, III,10,7: post deinde quarta hebdom.ade, quod etus (se. of the fetus) virile secus futurum est, caput et spina, quae est in dorso. -injormatu,r. The conclusion is obvious: Varro quotes (ind.in~ctly, no donbt) from 'Diodes' and gives his views upon the development of the male fetus, omitting14 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 r) ..,)7toc; ..~c; f>ocxe:cuc; xat 6 ..-~c; xe:rpoc/..~c; ,...., caput et spina, quae est in dorso. 45 It should be kept in mind that 'Diocles fr. 177 Wellmann' is not just a report on a theory of Diodes: the parallel passages in Nicomachus and Macrobius ~:,rive an exposition of the views of a number of medical authorities upon the import:anc0. of t1H~ number 7 for humm1 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., 46 while in the Nicomachns-version 47 Diodes' calculation48 of the gestation-period (the 210 days of the seven month's child) is compared49 to that of Carn. Ch. 19 and Epid. V,ll6 L., from the latter of which a sentence is quoted. - Further, Nicom. p. 62,8-9 speaks of 'Strato, 50 Diodes xoct 7tof..Aot ~1"epoL 't"WV t~X-rp<";iv'. 51 Nat. Puer., Ch. 21 (VII, 510 L.). The omission may be due to Gellius. ts Cf. 'Nellma.nn, p. 201, n. at 16. 16 VU,490 L. Quoted by Nicom., p 61,15-62,7, paraphrased by Macr., ln somn. Se. !.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. ~ 0 The extent of Strata's contribution is not easy to gauge. Perhaps he largely agreed with Diodes, perhaps he is an intermediate source (so \Vellmann, o.c. 201, n. at 12; Jaeger, o.c. 215 ff., 221). \Vehrli, Schulc d. Arist., .5. Straton, only prints the embryology (fr. 97-9) and does not want (p. 71) to take the treatment of life after birth into account; for Diodes, he prders the enneado of fr. 17.'> \Vcllmann, which leaves Diocles (in Nicomach.us a.nd Macrobius) with next to nothing. For tile present writer's guess about Strato, see below, p. 177-8. 51 Macrob. 1,6,65 only mentions Strato and Diodes. 43

41

165

These 'many other physicians' may he followers of Diodes . whose I'uvoc.Lxe:Loc. 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 ap. Nicomachum-Macrobium as compared to the version given in fr. 176 Wellmann, but this assumption is not necessary. 52 It is also possible that such authorities as the early physician Hippo are meant (cf. for hh theories Cens. 7,2-3 and below, p. 174),53 whose theories in part agree \vith those of Diodes /Strato. Further, the account of gestation etc. in Nicomachus and Macrobins should rea.Uy start at Macr. 1,6,62 ,..., Nicom. p. 61,1 de Falco. 54 Macrobius says (1,6,62) hie (se. 7) denique est numerus qui hmnincm con.cipi, formari, cdi, v-ivere, ali ac per omnes aetatum gradus tradi senectae atque o·n-mino constarc facit. A reference to menstruation follows, and then we hear that sperm not rejected within seven hours

is pronounced effective. Nicomachus' version is completely paraBel, but fuller, and contains proof that the ideas about the first seven hours of the sperm really belong to the theory of Diodes and Strdto, for in Nicomachus these first seven hours of the sperm in the womb are explicitly compared55 to the crucial first seven hours n Wellmann omitted Macr. 1,6,66 (cf. Nicom. p. 62,20-63,4 de Falco), because it is said here that male embryos develop slower than female, cf. Jaeger, o.c. 221, n.Z. Howevm·, DioclesfStrato are speaking here about nine month';: children (females complete in the sixth, males in the seventh ·week). Probably the embryonic development of these children was assumed tu differ from that of seven month's children, for the (male) fetus which is fonned with the ;;;eventh week is said to he viable with seven months (Mac.r. 1,6.65-6; Nicom. p. 62,16-20). See further below, p. 163, 11. 60. ~ 3 It is tempting to connect Nicomachus' r;o'Ah•~ f:Te:pot -r(iov tcx-;:pwv with Cens. 7,5: .. . septimo mensr: parere mulierem posse phwimi adji1·mant, ut Thea·no Pythagorica Aristoteles Peripateticus, Diodes (f1·. 174 \Vellmann) Ettenor Straton Empedocles I:.pigenes multique p1·aeterea, quorum onmium r.onscnsus Eur_vphontern Cnidium non deterret id lpswm intrepide pern.egantem. However, Cens. 7,2-6 has been derived from the Vet. plac. (Dic.ls, Dox. 195). At most, therefore, both Nicom. and Vet. plac. go back to the same source, to which the Vet. plac. may have .made substantial additions: e.g., Epigenesis not a physician. lt is interesting to find Empedodes in Censminus' list, since he is also referred to (though for the seventh week of the embryo) by Theo, d. below, p. 170 and ibd., n. 75. 54 Jaeger begins at 1,6,63 "' p. 61,13 de Falco. 61 P. 61,6 ff. de Falco: t-rrroc 3e &p!Xt~ -:C£1:~ r:l.el.cr;:o:~;; ·i]-rot npocrr.-).Jcrcre-rcr.t de; (u.oy6v7JCftV -to YOCI't'tfJ-fu't'e:pov txu-ro\i l) ~:zt
166

of the ne\vborn infant, 56 which likewise determine life or death. 57 The embryology of Strata and Diodes (from now on, I shall refer to the portion of the text printed by Jaeger58 ) continues as follovi'S. 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 and Strato, in the second week; these specks of blood penetrate into the liquid mass in the third week; in the fourth week, the moist me coagulates into something intermediate between blood and flesh; during the fifth week (i.e. up to 35 days) the embryo grows into the sit;e of a bee, and already has, in outline, head, neck, thorax and limbs (Nicomachus) ~ m-embra omnia et designata to/ius corfJoris lineamenta (Macrobius). I.e., by the 35th day the (male) embryo is complete in out1ine.~9 At oGx lv-roc; 8t!Xa"tlJ[LOt &vor:i..ut"tatL, i:v od<; a•>[LfLE"tpw' tXOt'IOV &.v-.£xetv -.o "'J'!J!J.Ot, ol).-e .Y, &.7T:o -.oti (,!L~a:/,ou -.porp1j 8ta:v.patntcr6cxt lf.xov ht C:).; '!'nov ~ !J.ipo<;, o\ln rr:w Tf, f.lUpetOev e!arr:vof. ~<;; l;(i>ov -1\8'!) &7tpoactp't"'!)•ov xoct a:•j-ro-rei.f:.; z.-r.A. The parallel (but not its implication) was acknowledged by Roscher, 1906, 147. 56 Of which we explicitly hear well within the Diodes-passage: J\Jacr. 1.6,67 ~ Nicom. p. 6-1,20-65.3 de Falc.o. Cf. below, p. 168 and ibd., n. 65. 57 Nicoma.chus (see abo1·e. p. 166, n. 55) in speaking of the unborn baby calls it
167

seven months it is viable (y6vL[.Lov). 60 Jaeger61 has tightly insisted upon the importance of the number 35 for Diodes' computation of the gestation period (6 x 35 = 210 days). 6 2 After the embryology, the hebdomadic history of life from birth till death is given. The first seven hours after birth decide about life and death63 : non-viable infants cannot breathe more than seven hours (Macr. 1,6,67). Nicomachns has the additional information64 that the seventh hour decides npr.c; ... -r~v ·rou &.v!Xrcv~o[.t~Vo\J &.zpoc; nocpctS()x'fJv, uq/ ou 't'OVOUTIXL 't'Q 't''tjc; ~utt,c; dooc;. Unmistakably Stoic language, and not derived from either Diodes or Strato. 65 Macrobius then gives physiological and psychologica] information about the first seven months, which need not concern w; here.!'~ Then we hear (from buth sources again) that the infant starts teething with seven months, sits with fourteen, speaks its first words with twenty-one months etc. After seven years, it sheds its first teeth and bef,rins to grow 'real' teeth; it learns to speak during the first hebdomad. 67 Nicomaclms says that the 7tpo<popmoc; Myoc; develops in the first, GB the ev~LocHhoc; A6yoc, in the second hd>domad, the latter with the help of the 'seven

°

6 Cf. also Cens. 7,5··6 '~' Diodes fr. 174 \\'ellma11n (partly (JUOted above, p. 166, n. 53), where we read that according to Diocles, Strato ant! many otlwrs seven month's children are viable, and according to Aristotle and Diodes also eight montl1's children. For Diocles, this is confirmed Ai~t. V,l 1:!,3 (abo quoted by Wellmann at fr. 174). This shows that Diodes' theory was not t!Xclusively hebdomadic, and may o[fer a clue as to the contribution (or selection) made by Strato. 61 O.c. 222. 226. Cf. also already J<; and that of the evlltaOho<; A6yr)c. (to which nothing in Macrohius corresponds). Cf. also below, p. 170, n. 74 and n. 75. 88 xaeo AO'(tXI)\} (cf. Act. IV,l1,4, quoted below, p. 169, n. 69) 'i\~1] {m:ipxe:t (p. 65, 14-5 de Falco).

168

senses', viz. the orthodox five Stok doctrine again.69

+

'P'.l)'JYJ't'~x-f)

and

mczpp.ct:nx~ et:rcr6·r,aL~:

1'. 65,11 ff. de Falco. Cf. Roscher, 1906, 151 and esp. ihd. p. 105. n.l65 ff., where Stoic paroJlels are 14'iveu for the development of speech in these hebdomad::: of yea.rs: Diog. La£·rt. V U,55 'man's voice is articulate and, as Diogenes says, an utterance of reason, which' (se. the voice) 'comes to m6!J.d)(J. Aoytxo[ (cL above, p. l(i8, n. C58) ... aut.trc};r,pouoOOtt Mye:'t'iXt K~'!OC 'rt)V rrp(:l'n')V r~OOfdoa:; Ai:\t. V, 23,1 ( -~' Sf'F JU:i'~): J:'Ierac1itn.s and the Stoics say that upxea6:t.t -rou<; &\16pwn;ou.; •:-ijc; -re;•,etOn)'t'O<; ·J;e:pt ~·~\1 00:\>dp()(\1 ~~Oo(.L.fa.~. rre:pt 't)v 6 arr<:pilli:.nxo.:; ;mst't"at' opp6~. xai yocp ·rO: U"lipo: &.pzH·:t.t ,6,·e T:>Aeto't'7J't'~.~J~ in the second hebdomad, because now the number of senses reaches eompletion by the addition (If the reproductive power at 14 years. In Aet. IV,ll.l ff. we read that the senses are already instrumental in producing 6 X(l('!'a t\laLcHlecrt\1 1.6yoc; during the Hrst hebdomad, but the remarks about reproduction and the distinction between good and evil in AH. V,23,l show that their development is only completed dnring the st>cond hebdomad. Nevertheless, Nicomachus' phrasing pl'{.Jbably is somewhat careless (he puts the ev8trx6&-roc; ).l,yo~ and the becoming ),oyLxl\-; in the second hebdomad, d. above, p. Hi8, n. 67 and n. 68). In f~wour of this assumption is the fact, that Philo, Ler;. all. I, Ch. IV,lO (=I, p. 63.15 if. Cohn.-'v\'.) sa:ys: 'they say that man becomes i,oytx6<; during the first seven years, ... and that during his second period of seven years he reaches complete consummation; for at the age of 14 we are able to beget offsjJring like ourselves'. The parallel in Philo is, moreover, in favour of tlw assumption that this Stoic: theory ultimately belongs to the orig.inal account of the ages of man nsed by Nicomachus: cf. below, p. 182-3, n. 148. Macrobius speaks of t:he seven vowels (I,6, 70), whic.h are also referred to by Philo, OjJ. mt~1kl. 126 (I. p. 43,11 ff. Cohn-\\'.j, while the seven serJSe'> of Nicomachus (cf. SVF II,827-833) are mentioned Op. 11nmd. 1.17 (p. 41,14 ff. Cohn-\V.). Jaeger, o.c. 224 (aad n.2) attributes the seven senses and the npoq>. and E\18. 1.. to PrOI"us n. -r~~ t[3()oft&1loc;, because Nicomachus refers to this work p. 57,13 ff. de Falco for the etymology of bn·a~. Because this etymology (tlt'dc;, a~>7t-r.Xc;, hilo. About the date of this psendo-Pythagorean wot·k nothing is known with any certainty (Nicom. provides tbe t.a.q.), so it may have been earlier than Philo. It should be noted that the etymology z7tdc;- am-.o':r, also occurs Macr. 1,6,45. The correspondence between Philo and Prorus is more in favonr of a common source than of the assumption that Prorus was Philo's source. The reference to septemma.y have been added, however, by Philo himself, who presumably was ahle to connt to ten i11 Latin. But one may also be permitted to think 0f an ultimate sonrce, e.g. a well-known philosopher of the first Cent. B. C. who received many Homan visitors a.nd appears to have been fond of etymologies. 69

169

With fourteen years, the child ~~iaxzt (pubescit) and moveri incipit 'Uis ge·nerationis in masculis70 et purgatio feminarum. In the third hebdomad the beard appears, 71 and the child grows in length; in the fourth hebdomad the increase in breadth is finished, while in the fifth hebdomad the increase of all forces is finally completed: at 35 years, the physical optimum is reached. This perfection of man with 35 years is clearly parallel to that of the embryo with 35 days. The doctrine of the ages of man in 1\Iacrobius and N icomaclms must be that of Diocles and Strato. 72 Up to 42 years, the ph~rsical forces remain intact, but an imJwrceptible decline sets in towards the 49th year. At 49 (only in .Macrobius 1,6, 75) th<~ perfect age is reached (7 >< 7): a man of 49 et consilio aj1tus sit nee ab excrcitio virium aho1u.s ltabeatur.n At 10 >~ 7 years, the span of human years has been completed. From now on, people may retire from work and liw~ the life of the mind. If we now return to the passage of Moderatus ap. Theo which has been paraphrased above, we immediately percieve that, with one exception, it contains nothing which is not found in Diodes and Strato74 : ()';~ -re w)~-~tjzt~ Y..o:fl' zB3ovoci'lo;. -r>J youv Bpeq;o<; ~Q;{!;;~ -re),z~oucrOa~

tn-;oc

i~?lO(..I.icrw,

we;

'E{..1.7t<:~ox/,~c; cdvh·-rz-roc~ ev 't'O~c;

Koc0
" 76 o€ ~I (j>IX11~ 1:'!.1.: \ " 7~' <:V ' I 1 ~ 0OCL ZVWL OCfl(J€\10': 7':ZV't'.,; Z .JOO(J.'l.aL 'rZ/\ZWIJI'r

(C f . l\,f" l'J.aCrO b •

EV

'r)"

1,6,65-6, Nicom. p. 62,16 ff. de Falco 78), y6v~!..I.OC ~e yLv:::aOa.t ev ir.Tdc (..I.'YJcrL (cf. Macrob. 66, Nicom. p. 62,2079 ), yev6!1.ev
(cf. Macrob. 69, Nicom. p. 65,380 ),

ex~iAA<:W 't'C:

't'OU<;

Mono;c;

° CL the 'spermatic :;ense' in N icnmachu~.

Macr. !,6,72 ~;enas flore vestit i1wenta.. Omitted by :--lieonJachu-;. o.c. 225-6. Cf. again Dioclcs' computation of !he gcst,ttion-period (6 X 35 days), ahove, p. 168. 73 In the embryology of Diodes and Stral.o ap. ?-
?2

Jaeger,

170

• c.v

' • z-re:0l ., <:7i:'t'<X

-o

··n'·1 acro 1)_ I , N. .. JconL P- b),

( 11

s· ££ .81 ) · r:meprvx I

'~-' oc.

' ·Is't) c.v •

xet..~ 1) 1

~et>-rzp~

e~oo[J.ci.o~ (Macro b. i1, :N'icom. p. 65,18-66,1()8 2 ). yevc.ut. (1\Iacrob. 7283 ) ~E: c;)c; hr.l.n:CI.v lv -rpkfl zed ..-~v <:~.:; [J.'Ijxo:; cd)/;'t)v &rro'-d..[.L~&vc.~ . l ..,,) N''' 1'l84) ITJ'I ' ()"' Et<; ' 'IT).C'I..'t'O<; 1::'11 '\"!::'T(Xp'r'() e:'(."> '" (l\I !' <J.C['O). 1~, l'lCOill. p. 6t''J') ">, ( -.. 11oO(J.CtoL (Macroh. 72, Nicom. p. 6(),128 "). On account of this close correspondt•uce, it is, I believe, incorrect to say that Moderatus ap. Theo (who, like Nicomachus and Macrobins, speaks of the growth of the fir::.t teeth ·with seven months and who does not have the quotations of Solon and -Hebd. Ch. 5), in characterizing the sccm1fl lwh(1omad combines86 Solon fr. 19,4 D. (puberty) with Hcbd. Ch. 5,16 ff.R (spcrm). 87 If such a combination was mad•~ at cdl, it was made by Diocle'i or Strato, but l believe that Diodes and Strato only knew Solon. Solon states that the child grows his first teeth when it is still v·f,mo.;88 (unable to speak) and that it sheds them vvith seven years (fr. 19,1-2) 89 ; also the beard in the third hebdomad is in Solon (fr. 19,5-6). Solon puts the increase of the limbs 90 in the third hebdomad (fr. 19,5) and the full development of manly lrrxJ.;c, in the fonrth 91 (fr. 19,7-8), which corresponds to respectively the increase in length and that in breadth as with Moderatus ap. Theo92 and Strato and Diodes. Martianus Capella VII,739 and Calcidins in Tim. Ch. 37 93 closely agree 94 "''ith Moderatus ap. Theo, Nicomachus and l\Iacrobius in mentioning the first teeth with seven months, the shedding of teeth 1

81

I

,

I

lbcl.

s2 Abon~.

p 170.

Omitted in 1\icomachus, cL above, p. 170. n. 71. 8 '1 .\br•ve, p. 232. 85 Ibd. "" So de Falco, o.c. 57 . . \!so r~obhins, Trad. l·H holds 'that tlw Solonian and Hippocratic passages are the bases upon which are founded all the accounts of the second group' (viz. that which does not have the two quotations). However, both Robbins and de Falco admit that the accounts of N'icomachus and Macrobim> are closer to 'the' original source ... 87 Cf. below, p. 174, n. 103. 68 Not in He.bd. 89 Also Hebd. 5,15-6 R 90 Not in Hebd. 91 Hebd. 5,24-5 R. speaks of the rt;1)~1)~n.; OA'JU -r'lu !1til;~<J:--:-IJ~ in this period. 92 In discussing this passage of Theo, de Falco o.c. 57 adduces ps. Hippncrates, though the agreement ·with Solon is much closer. 93 P. 85,21-86,6 Waszink (Corp. Plat. Med. Aevi IV, London-Leiden 1962). 94 Cf. Robbin~. Trad. ll +. 83

171

with seven years, and in holding that seven month's children are viable. In their account of the ages of man Capella and Calcidius go as far as the fifth hebrlomad, i.e. speak of one more hebdomad than Moderatus, but their inform~1tiou is by· no means as full as that of Nicomachus and Macrobius. Puberty and sexual ripeness occur with fourteen yea.rs, 05 the beard arrives in the third, 96 the incrementa staturac in the fourth, 97 the iuvenalis aetatis pcrfectio in the fifth 98 o;; Cf. Diocles--Si.rato, Moderatus aj>. Theo (lfebd. Ch. 5, 17-S 1{. only mentions sperm, Solon fr. 19,'1 only puberty). 06 Cf. Diocles-Sh·ato, Theo, !Iebd., Solon. 97 In spite of Rohbins, Trad. 114. tl1i~; is t1w ""!" difftnence hctwel'll Capella i· Ca.lcidius and Theo + Nicomachus + .1\lacrobius, and so de Falco, o.c. 57, is right in regarding it as a minor one. (TJJCo, Nkoma.chus and Macrobius put. the increase in length in the third hebdomad, while Capella. and Calcidius are silent about tl1e increase in breadth in the fourth hebdomad). 98 J. H. Wasz.ink, Stu.dien :mm Timaios!eomrnentar des Ca.lcidius I, Phi! os. ant. 12, Leiden 1964, argues that Calc. Ch. 1-25, 32-50 and 56-118 have been derived from the commentaries on the Timaeus of Ailrastus and Porphyry (Hiller ·-cf. above, p. 163, n. 34 -and Switalski -·d. above, p. 157, n. 5 ··have e:; .. tablished beyond doubt that Ch. 44A6 and .'55-91 have been derived, either directly or indirectly, from the commentary of Adrastus, which is reproducer!, in part, by Theo of Smyrna), and that it is unlikely that Calcidius knew Adrastus' commentary only through that of Porphyry. \Vaszink follows Borghorst (cf. above, p. 163, n. 34) in assnming that Then p. 99,2·1--104,1.9 Hiller has been derived from Modcratus, and argues that. Theo reproduces the text of Moderatus without modifications (o.c. 17-~). Now Calcidins Ch. 37 contains some elements which are not in Moderatus (different description of tl1e thinl a11d fourth hebdomad of human life-years, the fifth as an extra over Theo). Since Adra.-;tus is Calcidius' source for most. of Ch. 35-8 (so \Vaszink, o.c. 15-19), he probably is also his ;;ource for the aGC0tmt of the ages of man which is diffen'lnt from that of Morlerai.us. However, these differences are much less important than \Vaszink, who does not adduce the parallels in Capella, Nicomachus and Macrobius, holds tl1em to be. Moreover, though it is possible that Theo rhd not abbreviate Moderatus' account by omitting the fifth hebdomad, it is certainly possible that Moderatus abbreviated his own source. If Adrastus' (snrmised) account of the ages of man differed from that of Moderatus, it did so only in the way outlined above, n. 97. - A much more significant difference between Calcidins (Adrastus?) and IHoderatus ap. Theo is the puzzling re[oronce to Ilebd. in p. 86, 6-8 \Vaszink: ln aegritudinibus quoque iu.xta eundem numerum motus fieri usus experientiaque docuit et llipj>ocrates ettm. saepe alias in plerisque libris suis tum etiam in his evidenter quos de hebdomadibus instituit. The reference to the Corp. Hipp. in general is correct (cf. the wealth of evidence collected by Roscher 1906, p. 60 ff., 67 ff. and 1.913, R8 ff.); so is that to Jlebd. (Ch. 1,13-15 R., cf. below, p. 203, n. 263, in fine; Ch. 26-7). The remark about

172

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. 99 We may provisionally conclude that the two classes of arithmological writers distinguished by Robbins and de Falco 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 Vano ap. Gclliuml0° belongs to the second class, \vhilc

the number seven in relation to disc:ascs also in Thco (p. 104,9 ff. Hiller) follows upon the passag~ nu the age;; of man, and it can b~ parallelerl in oth~r aritll-· mologists (cf. the parallels collected by \Vaszink ad!.), but none of these, except Philo, mentions Hippocrates or Hebd. It is tempting to attribute the reference to lfebd. to Adrastus. It should be pointed out that the slight change in the account of the ages of man has the effect of bringing this passage into somewhat closer agreement with Hebd. 5,19·-26 R., which at the third hebdomad only mentions the beard, and which puts the increase of the body in the fourth hebdomad. Perhaps the most plausible explanation for both this change and the addition of the book-title of !Iebcl. to the remark on the seventh day as a critical day is that Adrastus (? j corrected and amplified the exegesis of the Timaeus which sm·ved as his source (and as that of Moderatus ap. Theo) by adducing an arithmologica\ treatise (for which cf. below, p. 181-2) which contained quotations from Hebd. Some confinnation of this assumption is forthcoming from the fact that Philo's introductory account of the age;·; of man in Op. mund. 103 (where Solon fr. 19 and Hebd. Ch. 5 f(>llow) is different from that in Leg. all. I, 10 (which is closer to Nicomachus-i\Iacrobius). Cf. below, p. 180-1, n. 140, where these two passages are compared, and p. 181-2, n. 145, where reasons are given for the assumption that Leg. all. I, Ch. 4 is in some respects closer to the orginal source. Op. mumi. also contains other traces ·which point at the use of a revised source: the announcement in 103 mentions the development of the embryo, but this subject is only treated as far away as Op.1mmd. 124 (cf. below, p. 181-2, n. 145). There, we find a quotation from llebd. Ch. 1 (cf. below, p. 203, n. 263) concerning the development of the embryo, upon which (as in llebd. Ch. 1, cf. again below, p. 203. n. 263) a remark concerning the role of the number 7 in diseases follows (125; cf. also 1/ebd. Ch. 26-7), to which, in Philo, the name of Hippocrates has not been attached, presumably because a statement on menstruation has been put between the dictum on embryology and that on 7 in diseases. Compared to the account of Nicomachus-Macrobius. that of Op. mund. is certainly secondary. Because the reference to Hippocrates and liebd. in Calcidius quoted above is parallel to the account in Op. mund. 125, I submit that Adrastus adduced the same (secondary) source as Philo. For other e\·idence that Philo used a secondary source cf. below, p. 199, p. 202. 99 For Theo, cf. above, p. 170--1. 100 Cf. above, p. 163.

173

Varro ap. Censorinum 101 belongs to the first. To the problem ofthese different strains in Varro I shall return below. 102 The disparity between the two families of a.rithmologists should be formulated, I think, as follows. The second family (Varro ap. Gellinm; Moderatus ap. Theo; Nicomachns ap. [Iambl.] Theol. ar.; Macrobius; Calddhts; J\Ia.-tianus Capella) has the Diocles-Strato passage (or an abstract of this passage) as its distinguishing mark. The first family (Varro ap. Censorinum; Philo; Anatolius) is charactedzed by the quotations of Solon fr. 19 Diehl and Hebd. Ch. 5. The features shared by the expositions in both families can he accounted for on the assumption that Solon fr. 19 Diehl is one of the sources of Diocles-Strato103 and, as I \vould like to add now, of lJef,d. Ch. 5104 as well. In addition to Solon, other predecessors of Diodes and Strato can be pointed out, such as Hippo (last part of the fifth Cent. B. C.), the author of Ca.rn., that of Oct. and that o( [Arist.] HA VII. Hippo (ap. Censor. 7,2 ;:,=o VS 38A16) said that the baby in the womb is viable with seven months, tl1at the first teeth of the infant grow with seven months, that they fall out with seven years and that puberty begins with fourteen.l05 Consequently, in Hippo we have a theory about the embryo which is combined with an account of the first two hebdomads Cf. above, p. 1G2. P. 185 ff. 103 Cf. above, p. 171 and Jaeger, o.c. 224. Aristotle approvingly refers to Solon's elegy in Poiit. VIT, 1.6, 1335b33 ff_ (,;&v ·r;ot'IJ'l:<-;}v -ewe.;.-. o[ fiE:'l'poGv-;e:~;; -red:; e~aotJ.a
102

N

174

of life-years as in Solon. 106 A similar theory is to be found in Carn. 107 : the embryo is viable \Vith seven months, the child gets his genuine teeth with seven years (Ch.19), when the milk-teeth arc shed (Ch.l2 11l8 ); the largest teeth and all the other teeth appear from seven to fourteen years; man continues to grmv during the third hebdomad1011 ; in the fourth, most people get their \Visdom-teethY° Conseqtwntly, also in Carn. an embryological theory and a hebdomadic division of human life have bef,ll juiued togetl1er. 111 This embryology also makes nse of the number seven, while the account of the agt·s of man is a kind of dentist's version uf part of Solon's elegy. - Ideas similar to those of Carn. also occur in Oct. (n. &x't"CI.fl.:~vwv) 112 though the arithmology of this treatise is by 110 nwaHs exdu:--ivdy hebdumatlic .I J:l Ch. ] (~r. vf tltis work draws a parallel between gestation and post-natal litem which is much more explicit than that of Carn. and, for this reason, much closer to Diodes and Strato: tl1e sevt'nth day of pregnancy is critical (Ch. 1,3) 115 ; with sevPn months the &pz~··· -;·f;c; -;e:/.w~awc; of the t'mbryo begins (Ch. 1 ,6) 11 H; with seven montlh, childn·n hegin to

The only difference heing that the time of the first teething is more exactly indicated. 107 The evidence has been conv<'nicntly cnllect<'<.l hy Hoscher 1913, Rl ff., RS ff. The view of the author of Carn. Ch. I<) on embryonic tlevdopment is strikingly different from that of Strato and Diodes (and that in i\!ut. puer., cf. above, p. 165, p. 167): he describes the embryo of seven days as a virtually complete homunculus (it is of flesh, has limbs etc.). 1<1 6 As in Solon, it is not specified exactly \\·lwn the .-rpc7JT''L ?,il!,n:;:<; appear. 1o9 CL Solon, fr. 19,5 1>. 11o H.oscher 1913, 85-6 correctly indicated tlw diff(•n•nn•s hetween the 'ages' in Carn. Ch. 13 and those in Hebd. Ch. 5, which exclude the pos~ibility of a din•d influence (the names of the· age-classPs are diffPn·Ht as WPII). m CL Jaeger, o.c. 222. 112 Also these passages have been collected by Hose her, 1913, 8f) ff. I have used Hippocrates, De octimestri partu, De septimestri partu (sj>.), ed., vert., comm. H. Grensemann, CJIIG 1,2,1, Berlin 1968. Grensemann follows Jurk (]. J urk, Rarnenta Ilippocratea, diss. Berlin 1900, 59 n.l) in his reconstruction of Oct. I will quote the cl1apters of Oct. after ( ;rensemann's numeration. 113 Oct. counts with tessaracontads (periods of 40 (lays) and puts special emphasis upon both first and seventh days (Ch. 1,3 Gr.). Tl1e periods of gestation and life, like those of disease, are computed in days, month,;, lessaracontads mHl years. 114 Cf. Grensemann's commentary, o.c. 98-9. 115 Abortions up to this day are called ?:xp-',r.-~P.c, not Tf-<•lr.-:.u,(, hc.·ctliSP, as y<'l, tilt> embryo tloes not live. 11 6 The embryo is viahle with 210 chys (Cl!. ~.3). 10a

175

teethe (Ch. 1,7)11i; \Vith seven years, children shed their milk-teeth and get a new set of teeth. 118 The resemblance of this account to that of Diodes and Strata is obvious. Finally, the embryology and division of human life of [Arist.] HA VII 119 have to he adduced, -·a work in which theories, borrowed from Carn., Oct. and other Hippocratic works, have been assimilated. \Vhen the seed remains in the womb, it is clear that conception has taken place, because the hpucret<; happen within the first seven days (HA VTI,3,583a25-7) l 20 ; the gestationperiod lasts seven (or eight, or ten, or even eleven) months (HA VII, 4,584a35 ff.)l 21 but no child born before seven months is viable (HA VII,4,584bl ff.); most infants which die, do so before the seventh clay (HA VII,12,588a8); children begin to teethe with the seventh month (HA Vll,10,587bl4 ff.); 9epew M: (jdpf-ltX rcp&l'rrJ'' ~Xpx:::-re~.t -ro C/.ppev Cf. Diodes and Strato, above p. l6R. Oct. l, 10 .ff. too states that male embryos develop faster than female ones: cf. Diodes, fr. 176 \\"eilmann, above p. 165. The description of the psychological and physiological development of the infant in Oct. 1,14-15 is in many ways parallel to that of Diocles and Strato ap. 1\lacr. 1,6,68. us Ch. 1,18. I have simplified this account by omitting the tessaracontads. 119 The relevant passages from HA have likewise been collected by Roscher, .1906, 92 ff. That HA VII is not by .\ristotle was first argued by H. AubertF. Wimmer, Aristoteles, Thierkunde (text., transl., comm.), Leipzig 1868, vol. I, p. 7 ff. (cf. also L. Dittmayer's Teubner-ed. of HA, Leipzig 1907, p. VII ff.); see further esp. the arguments of I. Diiring, Aristoteles 506 ff. The Hippocratic sources of HA VII have been studied and the parallels collected by H. Kiihlewein, Beitriige zu-r geschichte zmd bem·theilung der hippolwatischen schrijten, Phi!. 42 (1882), 11.9 ff., vtz. II, Die hippo!watisclte sammlung und Aristoteles' thierkunde buch VIJ, p. 127 ff. (parallels between Oct. and HA VII have also been indicated in the apparatus of Grensemann's edition). J. Tricot, transl. of HA, Paris 1957, vol. I p. 18-19 argued in favour of the authenticity of HA VII; also P. Louis, Bude-ed. of HA, Paris 196+, vol. I, p. XXVIII--XXIX appears not to doubt that HA. VII is by Aristotle; A. L. Peck, Loeb-ed. of HA .. 1965, Vol. I, p. LIV ff. briefly summarizes the arguments pro and co-ntra and appear;; to be moderately contra. However this may he, it is at least certain that the HA in our possession is not identical with the work left by Aristotle and that additions continued to be made (e.g. HA II,ll is by Theophrastus). Cf. 0. H.egenhogen, Z-ur Historia Anintatium des Aristoteles, in: J{leine Schriften, hrsg. \". F. Dirlmeier, l\1iinchen 1961, p. 274: "\.Vir habcn uns vorzustellen, dass die \"On Aristoteles binterlassene HA ein Grundbuch der peripatetischen Schule iiber diesen Gegenstand gewesen und geblieben ist, aber dass folgende Generationen von Peripatetikern in Zusatzen auf Grund eigener Beol>achtungen den Text vermehrt und erweitert haben" (on HA II.ll ibd, 272 ff.). 120 Cf. also ibd. 583b12-4 (and above, p. 175, n. 115). t21 Cf. GA IV,4, 772b6 ff. 11 7

176

C:)c; erct

-r()

reo M S\1 "0 t:.; hE 0" L "0 t:.; ~ t.; ~ 1t 't' a 't'E't'O:AeO'pZVOLc;. &tJ.oc ~e (HA VII,1,581a12 ff.); and a,t the

;w.~ -~ "?LzcuO'Lc; 't'~c; -~~·1Jc; 122 &pzs:-rocL

same age, females begin to menstruate (HA VII,1,581a32 f£.)123 Though most of these ideas can be paralleled from Carn. and Oct., the affinity to the theory of Strato and. Diodes is quite close, 124 and this may help to explain why Strato's name came to be associated with that of Diodes. Whether HA VII is by Aristotle or not, it is, in any case, a product of the Peripatus, and it may either reflect ideas held by Strato or else have set an example which he may _have followed. In other books of the HA a hebdomadic scheme is also occasionally applied to the gestation-petiods, though not to those of man, but to those of animals; these passages may be either Aristotelian or represent somewhat later Peripatetic interpolations. 125 In this way, we read that the time of development of most insects Em·&m tJ.<:-rps:t:-rocL -r;ncrl.v ~ "e'"ocpmv (HA V,19,553a2 ff.); that the gestation-peliod of all fishes takes place ev x_p6voLc; DLCt.LpOUtJ.ZVOLc; de; -rov TW\1 e~~Ofltl~(i)V &:p~Ow!,v (HA VI,l7,570a28 ff.); and that the kingfisher, which builds its nest in seven days, ev DE -roct:c; ),om!Xtc; E7t't'0: ~tJ.epcuc; -.£x't'S:LV 't'a VEO't"t'LIX x11.t h,pf~e:w (HA V,8,542b 13 ff.) From this it would appear that either Aristotle or his school or both applied the hebdomadic scheme to gestation (of man and. certain animals) and the first life-periods (of man). When we combine this with Aristotle's favourable references to Solon's hebdomadic elegy in the Politics, 126 the conclusion that a theory of gestation and life divided according to a hebdomadic scheme is not without precedent \vithin the Peripatetic school is justified. Strato may have borrowed a detailed127 embryology, possibly connected with views concerning the first hebdomads of years of human life, 12B from 122 Pubic hair. [Aristotle] compares this 't'pi;c
177

Diocles,l 29 and he may have extended the numerical scheme over the whole span of human years, 130 following Solon and Aristotle. On the other hand, it is not absolutely impossible that this extension is due to Diodes himself though it is perhaps less likely that this is so because of the fact that his embryology was not exclusively hebdomadic. 131 In view of the parallels between HA VII and certain Hippocratic works, 132 the quotations of Nat. puer., Car·n. 133 and EjJid. may also go back to Stra.to, but they may just as well have been added by the ultimate source of Nicomachus and Macrobius, which may have drawn a comparison between the views of the Hippocratic physicians and those of a younger generation. However thls may be, it should be clear that the passago;; from Nicomachus and Macrobins treating gestation and human life forms a unified and well-structured whole, and that the theory attributed to Stmto and Diodes in a sense unifies and crowns the thoughts of predecessors in the field. 134 129 Whom he, therefore, may have quoted. - I nefld not enter into the problem of the dates of Diodes' life here. Jaeger, Verg. :Fr. 198-9, believed in a close relation between Diodes and Strato, which, on the basis of his late dating of Diodes, is not impossible because he thought that he had proved. that Diodes was a contemporary and pupil of Aristotle, see his Diokles van Karystos, Berlin 1938, 9 1963 and Verg . .F1·. 195 ff. The late date was accepted by L. Edelst(~in in his review of Jaeger's book, AJPh 61 (1940), 483 ff. {repr Of,J.et xo:l -r1j\; ()cn-epov iJ.if:;:pt yljpw~ x.-r.i... (this formula is rather similar to that of Philo quoted below, p. 181, 11. 145). 131 Cf. above, p. 16/l, n. 60. 13 ~ Cf. above, p. 176, n. 119. 183 Cf. ab., p. 165. Jaeger thought (Verg. Fr. 222) thatCarn. Ch. 19 was quoted by Diodes himself, which is of course po~sible although not likely. He does not attribute tbe quotation from Na.t. puer. to Diodes.- At this moment, mention may be made of an untenable hypothesis of Roscher (1913, 81 n.132; 85, n.l38; Sfi; 105). who thougllt that the hebdomadic ideas in Carn., Oct. and the Diodes + Strato-family of arithmologists which cannot be paralleled from Hebd. have been borrowed from lost portions of a fuller version of this treatise. 134 The embryology of the Pythagorean Hypumnemata (Diog. Laert. VIII, 28-29)

178

3. At this point, I want to return to another member of the Diocles-andStrato family of arithmologists, viz. to Moderatns ap. Theo of Srnyrna. J nst before his account of the embryology and of the ages of man, Theo gives the following information (p. 103,16 ff. Hiller): em)[J.SVO~ 8e >" ' - 135 O'UVLO'T1JaL TIJV 'rUX,'l'jV f. (the 't'"n fj)Utr<:l, Y.~L 0< 1'111\0C'rwV <:(:, Zit'l:OC or.p~.0!J.CUV World-Soul) ev ";"(!) TLp.C!;t'{l (35b-c).l36 i)~pa p.tv yocp xo:t 'JU~, &~ ({''l'jCJL 1l OO'O:LO<{JVLO~, :ip"t"~OU XIX~ m:pL't:'t'OV fj)UCJW ex_oum. (J.~V OS l
'

I

I

I

,

I

I

I

opw(.dVl]t;, 'T"fi 0~ /)eu't"tpq. rr),1JO'LO'€A~VOU, -c1J (iE; -rpkn i)LX?
the point of Posidonius' explanation is not wholly clear, an interpretation may be attempted along tht' fullO'\·Ving lines. Posidonius appears to have made a connectjon between the division of the World-Soul into harmonic intervals measured (or rather constituted) by seven numbers and the function of the \Vorld-Sou1 in regard to the division of Time. Now, day and night, the week etc. are produced by the revolutions of the Same anct the Different. Seven days + nights together constitute the week, the smallest unit of which is the natural is also an off-shoot of this tradition: the male seed is a drop of brain-substance, which, when introduced into the womb, throws out txwpoc xd ,:,ypov xo:t ocifJ-a. ... , S:~ &v cr.Xpzo:c; -re x:li.i ve:\ipa ;.w.l ocr-riX XIX! ·tpt;(IX<; xoct ,.t; o'A<>v ouvlcr-r<XcrOoc' crwfLor. ••• {29) p.apq;oiicrOo:t l'ic -rh :1.tiv rtp~)TOV7r.Xytv ElllJ!Ltpo:Lc; Tecrcrap.XxoVTo: (cf. Oct., referred to above, p. 175 and n. 113), x.oc-r.X U Touc; -r'ijc; &.piJ.aVloct; i.6youc; ~v h:-rdt ·~ lwe!X ~ .1.tr.:IX '!:<) 1tA<:i::<; '\"OUt; 1.6yoi;o; ·dj~ ~wij~. W') dpo(le'Vwv cruvsxea6.xt xoc-rd: TOO<; .. 'ijt; Ctpf.tov(a:,; 1.6you;;.• i!:x&cr-ru>V i:v -re:-Too;Yfl.tVoL<; xottpot<; tm"(tVOiJ.tVf>lV. This last sentence, about thi~ 'harm.onic blueprints' coutained in the newborn infant, which dete·rmine (is it too bold to tbink of the -Stoic - e:twxpfLtV"I) in connection with d?o!Livwv? cf. above, C11. IV. p. 99, n. HiS) in advance what is going to happen during life, is, I believe, a reference to the life-periods of man. These are not specified, but it is possible that periods of seven years are meant: the text has i:v -.e:-rocyiJ.lvot<; XQ;tpoi'<;, and to the Pythagorean, xottp6c; = 7. (Note that also the periods of embryouie development are unspEcified: in both cases, we have to be content with th•: general formula xa:-roc >o•),; r~; &p(.tovLQ;<; :A6youc;. Also note, tl1at the te,saracontad does not exactly fit with a counting iu weeks). For the possibility that a computation of the 'rijc; d:f'(J.O'Iia.~ /.6you<; has been preserved in Varro's Tuber"o cf. below, p. 190-l, n. 198 (n.b.: the tessaracontad is mentioned by Varro in connection with the development, dominated by the number 7, of ten month's children, but he is silent about the weeks after the first week of this category). m 1,2,3,4,8,9,27. l'lc Cf. Cornford, ad. l., 66 ff.

179

day consisting of clay and night. The number one (= clay +night, in this context) is both odd and even. 137 A week, consisting of seven such natural days, is measured by a phase of the moon, i.e. by phenomena caused by the revolutions of the Same and the Different. A complete lunar cycle of 4 X 7 natural days constitutes the month. Consequently, the abstract from Posidonius in Theo goes, as I believe, at least as far as the !-:lentcnce about the lunar cycle, in which the number seven plays a dominating role. Does the abstract in Then from Posidoruus' discussion of a passage in the Tim. also extend as far as the passage on embryology and the year-hebdomads of human life which we have discussed above? On general grounds, this is quite plausible, at least for the embryology, for pre-natal life is reckoned in weeks and months, and the week and the month are discussed by Posidonins. However, it is also probable that the hebclomads of years were adduced by Posidonius, for it is only natural to suppose that in discussing number, the World-Soul and time he spoke about the year as well. Because he appears to have defined the natural day multiplied by seven as constitutive of the week, he may, along the same lines, have assumed that the year multiplied by seven constitutes a natural period of seven years. While we discussed the much fuller version of the embryology and the theory of the ages of man in Nicomachus ap. [lambl.], Theol. ar.ps we observed undeniable indications of a Stoic handling of this material139 : (1) the embryo considered as cpvr6v; (2) the tension of the soul caused by breathing; (3) the r.pocpopLx6~ and the z'\loLcHh:-ro.; Myo.;, and (4) the seven senses, i.e. the traditional five + speech + reproduction. I cannot make myself believe that these Stoic ideas are an addition for which Nicomachus is responsible.140 That 1 is both odd and even was an Early Pythagorean doctrine {cf. Arist., Met. I,986a17 ff.), which continued to be held in later times. 1as Cf. above, 1). 168-70. 13 ft These have been omitted in the Macrobius-version. though he speaks of (1) the first seven hours as being cntcial in regard to the sperm within the worn b; (2) the effects of breathing during the first seven hours of the infant's post-natal life; (3) of speech L'l the first hebdomad of yean;, and {4) of reproduction. Possibly, the Stoic ideas had been purged away in a source intermediate between Macrobius and the original source of Nicomachus. 140 Pbilo, Leg.all.I,Ch.4 (an obviously much shortened account) treats the power of the number 7. The Stoic theory concerning speech, reason and reproduction which occurs in Nicomachus also occurs here (cf. above, p. 168-9). Now, in this passage this theory is interwoven with an account of the ages of man (up to the 137

180

The simplest explanation, I think, is offered by assuming that the original abstract from 'Strato, Diodes and many other medical authors' was the work of a Stoic, and that this Stoic is no other than Posidonins, 141 whose name is mentioned in Theo immediately before that writer's (i.e. Mo(leratus') exposition of the importance of the number seven in prc- and post-natal human life. Robbins also acknowledged the probability that the embryology etc. in Theo is derived from Posi(lonius, 142 bnt he accounted for it> occurrence in Thco, Nicomachus, Macrobius etc. by explaining it as an interpolation by Posidonius in the original anonymous arithmological tre:ttise which he assumed to have been used by him.113 The original anonymous treatise would have contained the quotations of Solon fr. 1<) Diehl and Hebd. Ch. 5 which we still find in Philo and Anatolius; Posidonius would have replaced these quotations by the Strato-ancl-Diocles material. However, as has been pointed out above, the assumption of an anonymous arithmologist prior to Posidonius is unfounded. w Consequently, the opposite conclusion, viz. that the version represented by the family of Philo and Anatolius rcprcsenb a revision 115 of an original exposition third hebdomad of years) which is preceded by a remark on the being viable of seven month's children! Philo says, o.c. I, p. 63,13 ff. Cohn-W.: ,,-;,v ~pzcpwv ,,x !1.~\1 b~T-±(1.7JVX

y6vL:.L1X ... • ),oyt;t/,v Te cpocow iv6pwrt''lV Y.XTi T~v rrpv O''.Jvl)O<.•lV ;iV01LiT(J)V xcx:t P·l)f'·:X:n•)V T-I)'J Aoyr.x~v ~!;w rre:pme:rroL'IJ!.LSVIl<;, X1X-rx 3e ,-~v ~e:u·n\prxv ~rrTcxe:Tbv :Xxp
of man during the third hebdomad is put in the third hebdomad by Theo, Nicomachus and Macrohius as well (cf. above p. 17Q .. J, and, on thb same chapter in Leg. all., also below, p. 182, n. 148). - Philo's introduction to Solon and Hebd., Ch. 5 (Op. mund. 103, I p. 35,25-36,8 Cohn-W.) i-; different and closely follows Solon: teeth in the first, sperma in the second, the heard in the third and tcrx_u<; in the fourth hebdomad. Cf. also above, p. 173, n. 98 in fine. 141 For Posidonius and medicine cf. above, Ch. V A, p. 130, n. 4, and'especially p. 135, n. 27; below Ch. VII, p. 226-7. August., Civ. D. V, 2 (cf. Cicero, Ober das Fatum eel. K. Bayer, Miinchen 1963, 94) tells us that Cicero said that Posidonius explained a passage in 'Hippocrates' in an astrological way; cf. Fat., Ch. 3, the beginning. m Trad. 113 ff. 143 Cf. above, p. 157-8. u4 See p. 1.56-9. 145 Evidence of revision is apparent from Philo, Op. mttnd. 103 (J, p. 35,24-25 Cohn- vV.) ex[ h ~ p t tp 0 ut; rXY.P~ yf:pw<; &v6p(;)1't'(ol'/ ~A•.xf,tn !.LE:TP'l'\!J.S'I'X~ T:XUT'!J (se. T'li ~~~'l(l.cilll), where, in other words, a treatment of both embryology and life posterior to birth is announced. However, no embryology is given in I 03-5, but only the account of the ages of man; some brief emhryological notes are

181

of Posidonius is entirely possible. 146 However, before entering into this possibility I would Hke to adduce some neglected evidence from Nicomachus pointing at Posidonius 147 as the ultimate source of much of the information about the number seven given by both this writer and by Macrobins. Nicomachus, just like Moderatus ap. Theo, speaks about the moon, the week and the month before discussing the periods of human life; the exposition in Macrohius is largely paralleL Both authors speak about the lunar periods, and do so in much more detail than Theo. 14" only given as far away as Of>. mund. 124 (I, p. 42,18-43,3 Cohn·-W.), cf. further below, p. 203, u. 263. For ihe possibility that :\Jrao;tu;; not only used a 'Commentary' on the Tim. but adduced an arithmologic:al treatise a.<; v;ell d. above, p. 172-3, n. %. ua De Fa.lco, o ...:. 5H aHsnmes that Varro ap. Censorinum, Philo and Clement (i.e. Hermippus of Bcrytus) go back to I'osidonius, who would have quoted Solon fr. 19 and llebd. Ch. 5 anrJ nothing besides. On this hypothesis, the Diocles-and-Strato mat(>rial would have been borrowed from a post-Posidonian secondary source. De Falco explains the Stoic ideas in Nicomachus' version of this material by assumi!Jg that Nicomachus occasionally did use Posi<.lonius (but this a.ssumptitm d•)es not account for th(~ fact that the Stoic ideas in :"ricomachus are closely int::nvoven with the Diocle:Htnd-St.rato material). Theo (i.e. Theo's source), on the other hand, would have ma.do little use of the secondary source and much use of Posidonius (but Theo's account of the em·bryology and of the ages of man is that of de Falco's secondary source). Fnrther, it should not be forgotten that Varro belongs to both families (cf. below, p. 185 ff.) 14? G. Altmann, De Posid. 54 ff. discusses this passag<~. but neglects its specifically Stoic character. us Nicom. ap. [Iambl.], Theol. a.r. p. 59,5-60,6 "' Ma..:rob., In somn. Scip. 1,6, 48-60. The lunar cycl.e is also treated before the ages of man by Philo, Op. mmzd. 101. I, p. 35,1-10 Cohn-\V. Philo here does not speak of the sea; however, .ibd. 113 (cf. also above, Ch. VB, p. 143), I, p. 39,22-40,13 Cohu-W. he speaks at length of tl1e crUf.I.TrocOet~ between the sen~11 planets a.nd air earth, instancing among other things the rivers, the sea.s and ~cTloc -r:e . .. xiXL 'Y. (p. 40,10-11). In /,eg.all. I, Ch. 4,8 (l, p. 63,9 ff. Cohn-W) which in somf.' respects appears to be closer (cf. above, p. 180-.1, n. 140) to the original Pm;idonius-version than Op.mund. which, a.s I believe, is dependant on the anonymous arithmologist (according to L. Cohn, Einteilung und Clzronologie d.er Sthriften Philos, PhiJ., Supp.-Bd. VU, 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, O'>fL7tet6e:<:rT&Tou n:p6,; -roc E.dy:::~x r,(">pou, 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 tl1is influence is attributed to the seven planets), and also the phenomena coniJected with birth etc. are

+

182

Both authors also discuss the hebdomadic cycles of the tides of the ocean, which run parallel to the hebdomadic periods of the moonu9 (not in Theo). In Nicomachus the moon is considered to be intermediate between the 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 not in Macrobius; all the same, Ja.eger152 wanted to attribute this comparison to Diodes. However, the idea tha.t the moon influences the development both of animals and plants occurs in a passage of Cicero (ND II,SO), which has been attributed to Posidonius 1·'3 : multaque ab ea (se. the moon 151 ) manant et fluunt qu.ibus et animantes alantu.r augescantque et pubcscant nwturitatemquc adsequantur quae orittntur e terra. It is, therefore, perhaps better to attribute the aside on plants to Posidonins; the brief remark in Cicero about the augcscerc (1Xu!;iw:Lv) and pubescere (~~:Xcrx:::Lv) of anirnantes (~ct)IX) should, I think, be conregulated l>y 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 earth which depend upon the seven planets (c.f. Nicomachus on its intermediate position, below, n. 150). - Also Va1TO ap. Gellium III,l0,6 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. \Ve!lmann, Pneztm. Sclt. 147-8 (for the Pneumatics and the Stoa, esp. Posidonius, cf. below. Cl1. VII, p. 213 ff.). 149 Nicom. p. 60,6-20 de Falco ~ Macrob. I.6.61. ao The circle of the moon is the eighth counted from above and th~ third from below (p. 59,6-7); i.e., astmnomical and elemental sphere<; are not differentiated, the order being 1. outer heaven, 2-8. planets, 9. air, 10. water and earth. The sphere of the moon is said to ~-t.v -cci>v rre:pt y~v &rro-cril.ta!J.(h~ t7thta.v -r!l rt).eLcrt'tt yLve't'oc~. "t'::l.. -re (3pi:'.P1l x.. ~.}~. Hi~ V erg. Fragm. 222. However, the chances that Strato made this comparison are greater, cL HA VII,l. 581a15 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 cpu-r6v (cf. above, p. 167, n. 57}. For a Stoic parallel to this comparison cf. Aet. V,23,1, quoted above, p. 169, n. 69. Roscher, 1906, 137 quotes parallels from Pliny, Nat. II. 153 Cf. above, Ch. VB, p. 143, n. 28. 154 N.b.: Cicero in this paragraph (ND II,50) discusses the lunar cycle.

183

nccted with the Diocles-and.-Strato section in Nicomachus and Macrobius. The tides of the Ocean are also influenced by the lunar cycle. I 1: is a well-known fact that Posidonins was greatly interested in this phenomenon, which he interpreted in the sense of his theory of cosmic sympathy. 105 In Cic., ND II,19, a paragraph on cosmic sympathy which goes back to Posidonius, JM the aesltts maritimi jretorumque angustiae151 are said to ortu aut obitu lmzac commovrri. In Nicomachus also, the moon is said to regulate the height of the waters of the ocean (p. 60,6 ff. de }'ako a~IX't'L0ep.evov oe xocl. 't'O'V 'fheocvrJV158 urc' ocuTij~ (se. the moon) XIX't'OC ";01J~ &f:$~o[Lcd)Lxou~ 'V KOCL [LUE:AW'V t 160 [LLV•)fhjnW xocl. 't'c";w 7rAeLO'·'t'(v'V ~(;lC.)'V 'r"~V t1 ') [L re oc 0 € LIX 'V E1t€~LZVIXL TI]v rcpo~ 'TO occr't'pov ";Oiho, O'lrO't'<: i~ w'nwv 't'i.;w ";OL~ ocvOpwrcoL~ 11U[L~IXLVO'V't'WV oc1hocpxw~ ~uvoc(.Le:Ooc rce:LpocO~vocL rcepl -.(;w f...q6t.t.evcvv. 161 The evidence in favour of attributing this thought to Posidonius is quite strong: his favourite idea. of 11U!.t.1toc0eLoc 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 Posidonius' own motives for speaking about the preand post-nataJ162 life of man (cf. also below, p. 196). Cf. H.einhardt, Pv.~. 121 ff.; Kosm. u. Symp. 58 ff.; l<E s.v. Pos. 671 (esp. on the &a-rpott3~t; 7t&p(r,llo~ of the sea, which occurs aup.7t0(0(;',.; •n ae:).i;•rn). 108 Reinhardt, T\osm. 111 H.; d. also Pease's notes a.d.l. 1 " 7 This can pcrlmps be paralleled: the Euripus' seven changes within each 24· hours are mentioned by Stmho (1,3.12; IX.2,8), who may have taken this from Posidouius. Eilpmot are also mentioned in the arithmological literature: Theo p. 104,18 Hiller, Anatolius p. 36,24 Heiberg. Cf. further Pease's note at Cic. ND III,24, p. 1012-3 anrl Roscher, 1906, p. 15S n.l72 (who does not refer to ND II,19). 158 The word ooxeQ(v6~ itself is revealing: Posidonius wrote 7ttpl '!.lKe:ocvou, not m:pl OQ(AllTTlJ<;. Hoscher, 1906, 107-K attributed this passage in Nicornaclms to Posidonius, but did not comment upon the notion of cosmic sympathy. 159 Cf. also Cic. ND II,50, quoted above. p. 183. 180 Apparently corrupt. Roscher (1906, 147) thought of ixivo~ ~WJ.).ot and f.J.U&<;, which de FaJco in app. cr. qualifictl as fortasse recte. 161 The reference to menstruation and ihc Strato-and-Diocles passage follow. 162 The hehdomacls of years of human life are not an example of au(l.mWe:tct with the moon only, but of OU(.J.mHle:toc ·with the sun ai> well. No reference to the sun 166

184

4. At this point l want to return to the problem of the relative date of Posidonins' Comme1tts upon certain passages in the Timaetts wlJ.ich I believe to have been the source of .Moderatus ap. Theo, Nicmriachus ap. [larnbl.J Theol. ar. and Macrobius, In Sonm. Se., and to that of the anonymous arithmological treatise which I believe to have been followed by Philo and Anatolius. As has been pointed out above, 163 Varro belongs to both these families of arithrnological authors: the abstract ap. Gellium belongs to the Theo-family, while the abstracts ap. Censorinum belong to the Philo-fan,' . _ . The Hebdomades, from which Gelliu:; III,10 gives'us an abstract of book I, was published in 39 B. C., when Varro had entered upon his. 78th year.JM It >vas a majc•r work, wh:ich he undoubtedly had been working at for some years.H5 · - c embryology etc. of this work ha.'Y been discussed ahove166 ; it belongs, 1mrnistakahly, to the Theo-family. The date of the work (m works) by Varro pilfered by Censorinus has not been transmittcct What's more, it is even problematical which work or works by V[cro are at the basis of De die natali Ch. 4-15: the logistor-icus Atticus de numer-is is quoted Cens. 2,2-3, 'vYhile the Tubero de origi-ne hutnana is quoted ibd. 9,1. Diels assumed that the whole of Cem;. 4-·14 has been borrowed from the Tubero. 167 The problem of the probable content of the Varronic logistorici is inextricably bound np with the interpretation of the logistOYicus as a literary genre. I follow Dah1mann16S in assuming that the logistorici169 and the year is to he found .in Nkomachus' account, but Macrobius, ln somn. Se. 1,6,57-60, speaks of the hebdomactic nature of the sun and the year after ltis section on the moon and before that on the Ocean. For the present writer's g·uess about Posidonius' possible treatment of time in connection with his explanation of the seven r.umbers constituting the \Vorld-Soul, cf. above, p. 179SO. Cf. also above, p. 183, n. 150, on the implication of the fact that the moon,. being the nethermost of the seven planets, transmits their influence to what is below. 163 See p. 158, n. 9 and p. 161-3. 164 Gellius 1Il,l0,17: tum 1:bi addit (se. Va.rro) se quoq'ue iam duodecimam annorum hebdom.adam ingressum esse. Van·o wa,; born i.n 117 B.C. 165 Cf. H. Dahlmann, Ilf. Terentius Var·ro, RE Supp.-Bd. VI (1935, 1172 ff.), 1227-·8. 136 P. 165 and p. 167, n. 59. 187 Cf. above, p. 159, n. 12. 168 H. Dahlmann-R. Heisterhagen, Varrotlische Studirm I. Zu den Logistorici, Ahh. Ak. Mai!lZ, geist.-sozw. l(l. 1957, Nr. 4, p. 15 ff. In his RE-article (cf. above, n. 16.5 ), 1262 ff. Dahlmann was less positive ahout this identification, which was first proposed by L. H. Krahner. 18 s The term logistorici has been explained by Heisterhagen, o.c. 9, as meaning

185

are identical with the laudationes 170 referred to by Cicem, Ac. po. 1,8 and Ad Att. VITI,48,2, and that Varro usuaJly wrote a laudatio of this kind in order to honour a recently deceased personality, 171 as can be made almost certain for some of these works. 1 72 Dahlmann has argued (and so have others) that the Tubero de orig-ine hu.mana was written in honour of L Adius Tubero,1 7l1 a friend of Cicero, a supporter of Pompey like Varro himself and like most of the people commemorated in the za,udationes, and an appropriate figure to hold forth on the subject of the origin of man, because he was interested in philosophy (Aenesidemns dedicated his Myot Hupp~>vetor, to him). As far as I know, the year of his
'scientific lectures', 'IJialogc, in c.leno;:n der Titeltriiger einen Lehrvortrag hielt', 'Mono&rraphien in Dialogform' (ibd. p. 14), cf. Cicero'sCato de senectute, Laolius de arnicitia. An important peculiarity of Varr0's logistorici is 'jcne Tatsache, dass der Hauptun.terredner - durch sein Wissen, durch sein Beruf oder durch sein Schicksal --· in einer ganz be~onderen Beziehung zu dern Thcma seines Lehrvortra.gs steht' (.ibd., p. 11). 170 Which were of a philosophkal nature, cf. Cic., Ac. po. I,S. 171 Cic., Ad Att. VIII,48,2, speaks of the Laudatio Porciae (the sister of Ca.to Uticensis, probably deceased in the first ·half of 45 B.C.). Dahlmann, o.c. 140 assumes that Varro only at the end of his life collected all his laudationes under the name of logistm·ici. 172 Dahlmann, o.c. 37 ff.: (Pius de pace was pmbahly written in c::omrnernoration of Q. Caecilius Q.f. Fabius :\ietclh1s Scipio, who committed suicide in 46 B. C.); ibd. 49 ff. (the M anell1~s: M. Claudius Marcellus was murdered in 45 RC.) Cf. further H. Dahlmann-W. Speyer, Vanon.-ische Studien H, Abh. Ak. Mainz, gcisi.-sozw. Kl. 1959, Nr. 11, p. 8 ff. (I\.farius d11 fortuna, probably wti.ttt1n on the occasion of the violent death of t.he so-called Pseudo:marius, 44 B. C.); ibd. 18 ff. (the J_aterensis: l\1. Juventius Laterensis committed suicide in 43 B.C.); ibd. 19 :ff. (Messalla de valetudine, probably written in honour of M. Valerius Messalla Niger, who appears to have died just before the civil wa.r). Consequent!~', most of the logistorici which can be dated appear to have been written between 50-40 B.C. (cf. Dahlman.n, Varr. Stud. II, p. R, p. 12.) t73 RE I, s.v. Aclius, Nr. 150, 174 RE I, s,v. Aelins Nr. 156. Dahlmann suggests that this Tubero is identical with the Catus to whom the Catus de liberis educandis was dedicated (Catus oder Cato? Noch einmal der Titel van V arras Logistoricus, in: NaviculaChiloniensis, Studia philologica F. jacoby . .. oblata, Leiden 1956, 117 ff.) Dahlmann admits that this is no more than a guess. There is, as far as I know, no evidence that this Tubero was called Catus.

186

B. C., and afterwards retired from public life, devoting his time to the writing of several works on civil law in an old-fashioned style and to the composition of a History of Rome. Since he must have been working at these tasks for a nnmbr:r of years after 46 B. C., his death may have preceded that of Varro by only a few years. A historian cannot be said to he unfit for the role:> of protagonist in a discussion about the origins of man. 1t is. however, difficult to be certain about these things. If Tubero the f
T. Pompunius Atticu;; died in 32 B.C. Fnr the date of the Alticus cf. Dahl-

mann, Van·. Stud. II,21 ff.: it i~ the latest known fogistoricus. 176 Cf. below, p. 191-2, n. 198, in fine. 177 l·' arr. Stud. I, 20 ff. 178 Hippo, mentioned Ch. 9,2 (where thf' Tuhn·o is explicitly quoted) rs also referred to in Cens. Ch. 5, Ch. 6 anf{ Ch. 7. Heisierhagen argues, p. 24 ff., that also Ch. 10 (onmu!.- chapter is indi~pensahle to the unrlerstaudin::;- of the Pythagorean theory discussed in Ch. 11. Also Ch. 8, on the Chaldaeorzmz ratio must he from the Tuberr.J, because of the backwards reference to this chapter in Ch. 11,8 ff. (ibd. p. 25). I would like to add th
1.87

division of life into periods of 15 years is given; (2) Ch. 14,6 his name is mentioned again, in connection with the Etruscan libri jatales (cf. 11,6). However, the subject of Ch. 14-15,3 is different from that of Ch. 4-11 : the theme of the ages of man and of the anni climactericoc is not connected with that of the origo humana. 181 Therefore, if this material has been borrowed by Ccnsorinns from the Tttbcro, the contents of this work are not wholly covered by its sub-title: Varn> would have treated, not only the origin of man, but human life as a whole. Because Ch. 15,1-3 give the computation of the death-years of several philosophers, Varro would even have discussed a subject which is the exact contrary to that of the origo humana. 182 Therefore, Heisterhagen's final, aml cautious, coBclnsion 183 is that Ch. 4-lJ certainly and Ch. 14-15 possibly go back to the Tubero. However, the assumption that the Tubero would have treated of the death-years of philosophers is not very plansibk Though Ch.4-ll appear to derive from the Tubero, the Atticus de nzmzeris is a much more likely source for Ch. 14-15,3. T. Pomponius Atticns184 died in 32 B. C., cum septcm et scptuaginta annos complesset (Nepos, XXV,21), i.e. in his 78th year. The only quotation from the A tticus is found in Cens. 2,2-3: on the dies natalis a bloodless sacrifice is offered to the gcnit~s. for it is improper to kill on the day qua ipsi lucem accepissent and Timaeus 185 says that no-one kills a sacrificial animal at the altar of Apollo Genitor at Delos. Dahlmann 186 has argued that this brief fragment offers no clue for a hypothesis about the probable contents of this logistoricus: we have to start from the connection between Atticus, the great captain of finance, and the nttmeri mentioned in the sub-title; the numeri discussed by Atticus must be the nu,meri aes significantes. 187 However, since the concept of numerus is connected with the sciences of mathe-

day is a critical day. Solon is mentioned together with Judaei and 1-:'truscorum libri, which perhaps entails that this particular reference to the elegy is a fruit of Varro's own erudition. 181 Heisterhagcn, o.c. 27. However, he emphasizes the fact that the number 7 is all-important both inCh. 14 and in Ch. 9 ff. 182 Heisterhagen, o.c. 2H, n.l. 183 O.c. 2R. 184 RE Supp. Bd. VII, 503 ff. 185 Fr.1.47 Jacoby. Cf. DcVogcl,Pythagoras IHl. 188 Varr. Stud. II, 21 ff. 187 Ling. lat. IX,81 ff.; cf. also ibd. V, 169 ff.

188

matics, wHh chronology etc., Attieus may have touched upon these subjects as well.l88 But Dahlmann does not want to accept, that Atticns spoke about numbers in a 'Pythagorean' way189 : he must have spoken, first and foremost, as a financial expert. To me, this seems highly doubtful. Is a discussion of moneymatters a proper subject for a laudatio with philosophlcal pretentious? Possibly, Atticus took the numeri aes significantes as a starting-point, but he will have undoub'le1lly pursued his exposition in a philosophical way. In an article published many years ago, M. -Sc.l).anz190 argued that the numeri are the years of human life (for in Cens. 2,2, Varro speaks of the birth-day), and more especially the climacterical years discussed De dt·e nat. 14.1!11 Dahlmann 192 rejected these conclusions: Die Jahre des menschlichen Le bens, speziell die klimakterischen, stehen dem Begriff der n-wmeri fern, und ebenso der Person des Atticus als etwaigen ausgewiesenen Sachkenners dieser Lehre" .198 It is, indeed, incorrect to define the concept of 11/ttmeri exclusively in Schanz' narrow sense. But Dahlmann errs in alleging that the 1wmeri are foreign to the years of human life. This contention is not only refuted by the actual contents of Cen:::. Ch. 14, but also by the abstract from the Imagines in Gellius III,10,17: tum ibi addit (se. to his exposition on the number 7} se quoque iatn duodecimam annorum hebdomadam ingressum esse. Now, Atticus died at 78, when he was just as old as Varro at the time of the publication of the Imagines: the coincidence must have struck Varro as it strikes us. Furthermore, the relation between the protagonist and the subject of the logistorictts may also have been more or less accidental, e.g. it may have been furnished by an incident in his 1ife.lll4 Atticns died after having completed 11 hebH

Varr. Stud. II,24 Dahlmann refers to Varro's De prindpiis numerontm in nine books, which probably treated Pythagorean num !.>er-doctrine, and to the fifth book of thl" Disciplinae, on arithmetics, i.e. the science of nume1·i. Gellius, XVIII,14,2 refers to qui de mtmeris lati11e saipsenmt: according to Dahlmann the reference ls not to De princ. or to Disc. V, but to the Atticus, because the subtitle de numeris is identical with Gellius' fonuulation. no Ibd. However, the quotation irom Timaeus is 'Pythagorf'an.', cf. above, n. 185. Joa Beitriige mr r6mischen Literalurgeschichte, RhM 54 (1S99), 19 ff. (3. Varros Logistoricus: A tticus de nume1·is, ihd. 25 ff.). 191 Schanz concluded that the A tticus was offered to Atticus on the occasion of his 63nl birthday, which is riglrtly rejected by Dahlmann. 192 O.c. 22-3. 198 O.c. 23. 1° 4 Cf. above, p. 186, n. 169. the quotation from Varr. Stud. p. l1 ('durch sein Schieksal'). l6H

189

domad.s of years. Surely, this makes him the proper protagonist of a learned discussion on the subject of the computation of the periods of human life. Only when viewed against this background, the discussion of the death-years of various philosophers and men ofscience in 15,1-3 becomes understandable. Atticus and Varro ask: \vhich is the proper time t.o die?19" Therefore, I prefer to assume that Cens. Ch. 14-15,3 have been derived from the Atticus, not from the :Tubero. In favour of this assumption are the following considerations, summarized from the discussion above: (l) The abstract from the Tubero stops at Ch. 12, where an abstract from the Dt: musica begins up to the end of Ch. 13; (2) Ch. 1+-15,3, if from the Tubero de originc humana, discuss a topic (viz. death and the proper time to die) foreign to the subject of that logiston:cus 196 ; (3) if Atticus' death at 78 years is taken as the motive for dedicating a laudatio to him, the topics treated in Cens. 14-15,3 naturally belong within the sphere of interest of that 'vork. 197 Of course, Atticus may have also spoken of other subjects connected with m~meri (Varro loved to repeat himself, and numbers are a favouritP. subject with him). If these conclusions are correct, the Imagitzes, which belong to the Theo-family of arithmological writings, arc earlier than the Att-icus de numer£s, which because of the quotations of Solon fr. 19 Diehl and H ehd. Ch. 5 belongs to the Philo-farnily of arithmologka1 works. 198 1 ij 5 And, perhaps, also: what is the proper attitude towards death? The proper attitude towards birth is touched upon in the quotation from the Attic1,;s in Cens. 2,2. For Atticus' attitude in the face of death d. Nepos, XXV.21-22. ua Cf. above, p. 186, p. 188. 197 While the Tubero is restricted to the origin of mankitHl and to the origin of man a;; an individual (embryology!). 198 The T14bero, which has to be dated about 40 or about 30 B.C. (cL above. p. 186-7) belongs to the Theo-family. In Cens. Ch. 7, the tempora quibus pa-rtus soleant ess-e ad nascendum matwri are discussed, and the opinions of Hippo (cf. above, p. 1.74) and many others (cf. above, p. 166, n. 53) are referred to. These theories (in as far as the number 7 plays a rQle in them) are typical of the Theofamily: seven-month's children viable, first teeth with seven months, change of teeth with seven, pulJerty with fourteen years. Ch. 8 gives the Chaldaean theory conceming viable infants. Ch. 9 quotes the embryological computations of various authorities, and especially of 'Pythagoras·, who has two different computations, which are given at length in Ch. ll: the development of seven month's children (210 days) is dominated by the number 6, that of 9 month's children (21H days) by the number 7. Seven month's children develop as follows: in the first 6 days a hwmor lacteus i~ fornwd. in the next 8 day;; a kumot·

190

The Im. have been written before 39 B.C., the Att. was written after 32 B.C. On my hypothesis, Varro would have used Posidonius' Comments on the Timaeus for the first book of the Im., while he would have adduced the anonymous arithmological treatise, which, as I believe, was written later than Posidonius' Comments, for his Attiws de nztmeris. In view of the relative dates of [m. and lltt., this is entirely possible. In the Att., Varro again availed himself of the most recent: sanguineus, in the next 9 caro; in the next 12 days (i.e., al\er 35 days) the formRtion of the embryo is completed. The influence of the number 6 is apparent from the fact that 6:1>. 6:9 antl6:l2 represent quart, C]Llint and octave respectiv<•1y (this has ht:l'll explained Ccm. Ch. 10), and that the whole period of gestation la:;is 6 x 35 days. This theory is obviously based upon that of Strato and Diodes: hum or lacteus, ltmnot' sanguitwus, completion of the embryo with 35 days and the gestation·-period of() X 35 days can all be paralleled (cf. above, p, 167 ). The formation of ten month's children is as follows: alter 7 days, semen turns into blood, while the embryv is fully developed at ea. +O days (tlH: intermediate stages are not given). Quare in (;1·aecia dies habent qua.dragesimos insignes etc. (11,7): undoubtedly an echo of the tessaracontad-theory of Oct. (cf. above, p. 175, 11. 1.13). The ten-month's child is viable after 7 >< 40 ( !) = 280 days, or 40( !) •veeks; l10wever. as it i::; horn on the first day of the last wf~ek, the gestation-period lasts 27-1- day,;. Thus, it would appear that Varro for the Tubero not only used the Fet. plac. (cf. above p. 159), but also either the original source which he used when composing the first book of the Imagines, or this book of the Im. itself. The 'Pythagorean' theory of Cens. Ch. 11, though obviously based upon that of Strato and Diodes and of the Hippocratic writers mentioned in the Strataand-Diodes-passage, is as a whole unparalleled, though the computation of the two different gestation-periods can l.>e paralleled in other sources (Burkert, H'eish. u. Wiss. 224, n. 128); d. also what has been saicl above (p. 166, n. 52) about the possibility that the Strato-and-Diocles passage contains traces nf the computation of the de\·elopment of other than seven month's children. Possibly \'arru adduced a pseudepigraphic Pythagorean treatise (as he appears to have done for the part of De musica quoted by Censorinns in Ch. 13. Now, in the 'Pythagorean' Hypumn. ap_ Di.og. Laert. ·viii,29, d. above, p.l78-9, n.l34 we read that 'according to the ratio's of harmony, in seven. nine, or at most ten months, the mature child is brought forth'. V alTO may ha ye used such a source, which may not have spoken of nine month's children (or Varro himself may have left out this category), and which may have given the actual computation of the 'ratio's of harmony'; howeYer, he may have also executed the computations himself on the basis of a hint such a:; that given in the Flypomn.) Possihly, he also worked out other hints given by his source (cf. Hobbins, Trad. 117 and n.2 and 3, who says that 'a noteworthy characteristic of Varm's arithmology is its independence', and who quotes some additions apparently made by \'arro. However, Robbins 117 n.3 has overlooked the similarities between Cens_ Ch. 11 and the Strato-and-·Diocle;; passage).

191

iiterature. 1119 Additional evidence is offered by the sub-title of the logistoric·us, viz., de numer£s = m:pl. &pL8fL(;)v, an apt title for an ari thmological treatise (it was also used hy Philo). 200 Thus, the evidence offered by Varro is in favour of the assumption that Posidonius' Conunents upon the T·imacus arc prior to the anonymous arithmological treatise which was used by Philo and Anatolius.2o1 The above considerations amount to a return to Schmekel's hypothesis, though in a modified form. It \vould be tempting to speculate about the fmm which Posidonius' comments upon the Ti1ttaeus may have taken, bnt this extremely difficult undertaking, involving a complete re-evaluation of all extant ancient arithmologica1 literature and of all ~mcient post-Posidonian comments and commentaries on the Timaeus. cannot be attempted here. This undertaking would also be complicated by tl1e likelihood that post-Posidonian commentators adduced arithmolo&>ical treatises as well, 20 2 and that arithmologists may have continued to make excerpts frmn comments or commentaries on the Timaeus.2os It is, however, permissible to try to answer a few questions. First, it is, I think, indef~d unlikely that Posiclonins wrote something

The closeness of the Tuhero to the Hebdom.ail,•s (i.e. to the Theo-family of aritbmologists) is in f;,vour of ea. 40 B. C. as a da.te for this treatise, i.e. in favour of considering L. Aelins Tu hero as the protagonist of this logistoricus. 199 Cf. the quotation frorn Diels, above p. 159. 200 Cf. above, Ch. II, p. 48 n. 44. 201 .For Philo, see above, p. 173 n. 98, p. 180-1, n. 140, p. 182-3, IL 148. 202 Cf. above, p. 172-3, n. 98, on the possibility that Adrastus used an adthmologieal trP.atise. 203 Though all the vestiges of a commentary on the Timaeus in the arithmological literature may have been derived from Posidonins' Cwmnents by the fin>t wholly arithmological writer. The remark in Theo quoted above (p. 179), that. Plato construcied the \Vorld-Soul in the Tima T~!J.::C(q>; in Lyd., Mens. II.12, p. 35,16-17 Wuensch this becomes xcd y.Xp 1-ljv tyux_~v o Tt!iiXlO<;; e~ C1tTcl
192

in the nature of a full and formal commentary on Plato's Timaeus.204 The evidence suggests that he wrote about numbers, soul and sensibilia, taking the Tinu~eu,s as his starting-point. (This is why I have pre'ferred to speak of Comments instead of Commentary; concievably, these Comments may have been part of a more general work). It should be pointed out that the evidence concerning his explanation of the Platonic \Vorld-Soul2° 5 agrees with the exposition on knowledge in Sextus, M. VII,9l ff.2° 6 The definition of the World-Soul in Plutarch defines this entity in the terms of the three kinds of mathematicaJs. We are also told that Posidonius assumed that the World-Soul (j'ust like mathe·· maticals) is intermediate between 'intelligibilia and sensibilia'. 207 But it is only likely that Posidonius assumed that this definition is also applicable to human souls, for in the Timaeus these are forged out of the same mixture as that which was used by the Demiurge in creating the World-Soul, 208 and after the same pattern; therevolutionsofthehuman soul too are said to be those of the Same and the Different.2°9 In Sextus M. VII,91 Jf., number is involved both with human Myoc, and with reality: it is constitutive of both the agent and the object of eop1ition, for like knows like. The reality of the sensibilia, which is permeated by number, we may say, can be known by soul210 because soul itself is of the nature of number. Though intelligibilia in the Platonic sense are not mentioned by Posid.onius ap. Sextum, he distinguishes between body and the incorporeal, by stating that together these constitute all that there is (VII,99, -:6 't'e:
193

' I I e1wpocvetoc

1'L~

'P (jll)t;, emcpocv<:Loct; , ' ~· pue:La'ljt; ' ' \ OCtA( oz crnpe:ov

' 1 ey~::ve:To

O'W!J.OC. W'th 1 N

the stereom~::trical we are in the realm of solid body, but with point, line and surface apparently not, d. rpcxv-racrwup.e:Ooc ('we form a notion)', enot~crap.ev ('we concieve'): point, line and surface are products of the mind, &cr!i>[-<.oc't"oc. Both awv.et and &crcil!J.e<'t"ov are said to be conceived by means of number. 211 ln JYJ. VII,104 the topic of the cognition of incorporeals is resumed: time 212 is mentioned and, as in VII,lOl, again point, line and surface, which, 'just like the other things213 which we discussed a moment ago' are perceived by munber. 214 The ontological status of these incorporeals presents a difficult problem. According to the orthodox Stoa, the r.lpa::-oc ... -r;wv o·ultJ.iTwv merely exist x~.:r' entvow.v '}tA.1)v. 215 Po:;idonius, 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. 216 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 mathematkals. The accOlmt in M. VII,99 and 104 (cf. also the a{;')!-lOC ••• Tfl~X1i a~oc<:rToc-r6v in M. VII,lOl) appears to indicate that sensible reality only begins with the fourth term of the sequence point-linesmface-solid. Now we happen to know that Chrysippus218 compared certain geometrical theorems to ideas (&.ndxoc~e:v. • . Toc'i:c; l8£et~~ 219 ) : 2li The incorporeals are represented by the numbers .l, 2, and 3, the solid budy by 4 (or 3, cf. J'Yl. VTI,101). 212 According to orthodox Stoicism, time is one of the four kinds of &.ac:>!J.Ot'!tt (cf. the list in Sext. M. X,218 =o SVF H,331: J..sx1:6v, xev6v, -r(mo.; and xpovo<;:). The fact that time is explicitJy qualified as an .incorporeal proves that the 'Pythagorean' number-theo:ry was discussed by a Stoic. Cf. further E. Brehier, La tneorie des incotportels dans /'ancien Stoit:isme, Paris 3 1962, esp. p. 54 ff. m Presumably, bodies (VII,lOl-3). 214 The final sentence of VH,104. which lumps incorporeals and bodies together, takes up tbc announcement of VII,lOl. Further, also in VH.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. Euct. comm. p. 89,16 ff. Friedlein = SV.F ll,488. 216 Diog. Lacrt. VII,135 Em~&vrwx at ~a·c. crwvcno<;: 7t&p1Z<; 'i) TO f1'fjxor; xocl r.t.cho;; p.ovov lx.r)v, f:i&.Oo.; 8€ o\.1 (cf. 111. VJI,99). Toclh'l)v St Iloac:t8wvtor; e., -rptTCjl m:pl t.LG;TC:<~p!Uv xoc\ xocT' &7ttvotocv (cf. text at n. 215) xoct xoc6' vn6cr-rcX!nv &:r.ot.dm:L. Zl' Edelstein, Philos. Syst. Pos. 303; Merlan, Platonism to Nt'oplatonism 36. 2 18 Gemirms ap. Prod., in Eucl, p. 395,13 ff. = SVF II,365. 219 Zeno and his followers said that the 'ideas' of earlier philosophers are nothing but svvo-(jp.Ot
194

'for just as these' (se. the ideas) 'comprise the coming-to-be of infinite things within finite limits {rtepatcnv), also in those' (se. theorems) 'infinite things are comprised within finite places'. 22 0 According to Chrysippus, therefore, the figures of geometry are ewo-~[.tat't"oc. To Posidonius, on the contrary, they would both be ewo~(.I.Ot't'at and subsist in a certain \vay. 221 Presunw.bly his incorporeals not only subsist within the mind, but in some sort of objective fashion as well. His explanation of the Platonic \Vorld-Soul222 points in the same direction. According to Plutarch, An. procr. 1023b, Posidoniu~ and his followers assumed that the Soul is a mixture of the ..&v rtept.i't'wv ouO'toc223 and the V01)'t"6v or vo·IJ-r&. 'vVe do not learn from Plutarch what is understood by these vo1)-r&. HO\vcver, as the Soul is defined in terms of three kinds of mathematicals it is perhaps permitted to think, among other things, of the &awp.Ot-ra mentioned in Sextus, viz. point, line and surface, which, consf•<.piently, 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 (M. VII,l01-2) and for the qualities of body perceived by scnse-perception22 4. (103) as well as for the practice of ordinary life (105-6) and for the arts and crafts (106-9). 220 The number of individ11als corresponding to an 'idea' is infinite, just as the number of geometrical figures corresponding to a geometrical definition. Chrysippu:s continue~: 'For if, the height of' (i.e., the distance between) 'the parallels remaining t>qual, one imagines (voo•J(:Levwo~) an infinity of parallelograms upon the same base, all of these turn out to be equal.' :m Cf. also Posidonius' definition of the geometrical figure, whkh (by Proclus, ibd. 143,6 ff.) is contrasted to that of Euclid: b Se Il. 7tep<Xt; pl~wv -r'ij~ lt'.IO'OT'I)TO<; X<XI rtt·nov <Xtrrov dvocL -rttle(:LE:VO<; -ro\i wp[aOoct X<XL n£1tepcio, it must have a subsistence of a sort. 222 Cf. the, dt::fiuitiou quoted above, p. 160, n. 19. 223 Merlan, o.c. 34 wants to take this as a subjective genitive and translates "the kind of being whieh 'has' or 'accepts' limits", i.e. matter. 224 Cf. the explanation of sensible qualities on the basis of the geometrical (1\lalities of the object percievecl and the percieving sensorium, Tim. 64c ff.

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 above2 26 in mind, for the arithmeticals 1,2,3,4,8,9,27 also constitute the harmonic ratios (1 :2, 2:3, 3:4 etc.) and the four dimensions, i.e. point, line, geometricals and stereometricals (1,2,2 2,2 3 and 1,3,32,33 ). 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,22s animal life in general229 and prenatal and post-natal human life in particular230 which are to be found in the arithmologicalliterature 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 his 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 22s 22s

23°

Cf. above, p. 179 (and p. 192, n. 203). P. 160, n. 19. Cf. above, p. 182 ff. 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-Diocles 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): arcl3. yzvrx. b:-.&, yA.wcrcrct., xct.p3tct., ;t'le.:U!LWV, ·~reap, crrc'A~v, ve.:cppo\ 3•)o. The same organs are mentioned by Nicoma.chus ap. [Iambi.], Theol: ar., p. 67,19-20 de Falco (who calls them mcA&yzvct. p.ef...ocv\1.); by Macrobius (1,6,77 nigra membra ... lingua, cor, pulmo, iecur, lien, rmes duo), by Mart. Capella (VII,739), and by Calcidius (Ch. 37, p. 86,10-11 Waszink). Philo, Op. mund. 118 (I, p. 41,21-3 Cohn-W.) mentions as iv-.o.:; (p.ep'l')) the same crrc'AOCyzvoc, but begins with cr-r6p.oczo.:; instead of yA.wo-o-oc. 232 Anatolius (p. 36,11-12 Heiberg233 ) 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 rr-r6!J.ax.oc; for y'A(;lcrcroc. 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 Nicomachus not only the seven vital organs have been listed, but also p. 68,1 ff. de Falco (1) the 7 xoc8oA\x<X !J.Ep'l'J, viz. xe.:cpocA.~, 6wpoc~. zdpe.:~ 8!'JO, rc68e.:.:; 8uo xoct oct8o~ov; (2) the 7 atoc-rp-~m::t.:; iv ... -rij> rcpoO'W1t
Nicomachus 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 (I,6,80); (2) et quia sensus eorumque ministeria natura in capite velut in arce constituit, septem foraminibus sensuum celebrantur officia, id est oris ac deinde oculorum, narium et aurium binis (I,6,81); (3) septem alia ... ad cibum m Cf. Robbins, Trad. 113. See also Leg. all. U2 (1, 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 Nicomachus, which begins with y/..l;:,acra., not with cr't'O(J.«)(.O<;. In Philo and Anatolius, the (r't'
197

et spirihmt accipiendwm reddendumquc sunt dcputata; guttur, stomachus, alvus, vesica et intestina principalia tria: ... unum dissiptum ... , alterum .. . quod Graeci {J.l;crev-n;pov dicunt, tertium ... hiran·t (1,6,77). Theo has an abbreviated version: he only mentions, but does not specify (2) the 1topo~ ... xeq.aA.ljc; eit'!oc, anrl (3) of the bowels etc. he only mentions the ~vTepov though with the a<'hlitional information that according to Herophilus it measures twenty-eight yards. Philo, Op. mund. 118 (I, p. 41,20 ff. Cohn-W.) has a list of (1) the parts of the body wl1ich are ev q.,zvepq> which differs from thd of Nicomachus: he mentions xerpu.A.-Ij, cr-repv,z, 23 5 yu.crT-ljp, 236 ~Lnoct ;t,e1pc~. 3L-r'Toct ~occre~c; 237 ; (2) his list of the 'seven indispensables' used by the xeq.aA.-fJ is identical to that of Nicomachus238(except for a comment 011 the function of the mouth, which receives food and drink and utters specch239 ); (3) he has no list of organs transporting food and breath. 240 Anatolius' list of &Mx"Atjpoc (.tep"fJ -rou crcJ>(.tu.Toc; looks like a combination of Philo's two lists: xeq.rx),-1], TPOCX.'lJ"Aoc;, 241 ()Tepvoc, 1t60'e<; W. x.e~pec; W (p. 36,10 ff. Heiberg); (2) his list of the seven openings (1t6po~) of the xe~poc"A~ (p. 36, 14-15) is identical to that of Nicomachus and Philo; (3) he has no list of organs transporting food, drink and breath, but, instead of this, a not(~ on the length of the l!v-repov according to Herophilus, just like Theo. 242 Consequently, the difference between the two f;lmilics at this point not only consists in their having either y"A&crrroc or crro[J.oc:x_oc; at the beginning of the list of critMy:x_wx, 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. Nicornachus' Owpoc~. With Nicornaclms, this organ is on tlw li:;t of organs transporting foou a.n(l breath. 287 The list in Leg. all. 1,J 2 (I, p. 64,3--4 Cohn-W.) is uiJferent: xe:cp.x:>.:~, -rp&x'IJI,o..;, GTtpvov, xe:i:ptc;, xotA(.x, ~Tpov, rr68e:s. Apparently, xot).£.x and ~'t'pov (which arc no !J.tA'I)) have been added to an original lisi. Tlu~y may 11a'.e been tal< en from a list of organs connected with the transport of food et~:. 288 The same list (but w itJ10ut the comment on the fnnd.ion of the moutl1) is given in Leg. all. I,l2 (I, p. 64,5-6 Cohn-\V.: ·rt>- .. rrp6crwn-Q'I b:-r.xx.7i xoc't'oc't'
288

198

distinguished in a really proper way, i.e., according to type and function. In Philo, 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 ~V'tepov, which has been preserved by members of both families. From the fact that both families have preserved these lists, and that in 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, I think, conclude that Posidonius, in his Comments on the Timaeus, spoke of these subjects after his discussion of the ages of man. Anyhow, these matters are not foreign to the physiological context which we have tentatively assumed to obtain for this section of Posidonius' work. With the above lists, the analogous lists at flebd. Ch. 7, 8 and 11 should be compared. 1143 First. At Ch. 7, the following septem partes are listed: (1) caput; (2) manu.s opcrwm ministratix; (3) interior a viscera f't jwaecordiorwm definitio 2 H; (4) the veretri ... (pars) urinae profusio; (5) (veretr·i pars) seminis ministratura ; (6) longao, id est intestinum ma,fus, cibis sedt'minis m Roscher 1913, p. I 07 ff. only compares the arithmological li•.;ts beginning with 'lU:<poc):~ with those in Hebd. Ch. 7 and 11. In p. 105 he quotes Philo's list of openings of the head, comparing it with Ch. S. His explanation of the coincidences is that Posidonius follows Jlehd. (cf. above, p. 161, n. 25). -The list of bodily parts which can be abstracted from Ch. 6 (the microcosm-macrocosm-parallel) is different. This implies that inCh. 7 and 1l adiffereni 'source' is used. Roscher lahoured in vain to make Ch. 6 fit with Ch. 7 and Ch. 11. m The meaning of praecordiorum definitio is difficult. Ps. Galen (Nr. 44, p. 91 Bergstr.) comments: "die Scheidewand, die
199

exitus; (7) crura ambulationes. 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 x.crpoc/..1}, ze'Lpec; and 7tooec; of Nicomachus and Philo, Leg. all. l.c. (in Oj). mtmd. l.c. he has ~&aetc; instead of 1to~ec;) and the caput, manus pedesque of Macrobius. The veretrum is mentioned among the outer parts of the body by Nicomachus (oct3oiov) and Macrobius (pudend1.(,m). In Hebd., however, its two organic245 functions have been listed. 'D1e £nteriora viscera and longaO id est intestinum maius correspond to several items of the lists of orgm1s

transporting food and drink of Nicomachns and Macrobius (it is, perhaps, also possible to identify the interiora viscera with some of the cr7t'Aiyzvoc listed by Nicomachus, Macrobius, Theo and Philo as well), viz. with o--:-6f.Locxoc;, ~v-.epov etc. The list of Ch. 11246 is slightly different: (1) caput. et fades; (2) medulla, cervix; (3) tertia pars inter viscera. et praecordia; (4) crura; (5) pedes; (6) venter; (7) 11enter inferior et longao, i·ntestinum maiu.s. Items not found in Ch. 7 are (2) medulla, cervix, (3) the organ which is between bowels and lungs, (4) cmra, (6) 1.'enter, (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 '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 infaior. Now, the list in Ch. ll introduces an exterior part of the body, viz. the neck (n.b. together with the m.edulla, i.e. the organic substance contained within this part) which is not on the lists of bodily parts of Nicomachus and Macrobins, but which occurs on that of Anatotius. 247 The tlenter (yocmfiP) occurs in Nicomachus' list of organs transporting food etc. Second. [n Hebd. Ch. 8, the cap·ut is said to have a septinarium auxilium ad 11itam: (1) the introduction of cold (air); (2) the exhalation of heat from the whole of the body; (3) t~isus ittdt:cium248 ; (4) auris

245 It should be noticed that Nicomachus' list of organs transporting food and drink mentions the xl.cr-n;;, that of Macrobius the vesica (above, p. 198). 246 Ch. 1l contains the curious map of the ·world, the parts of which are compared to tlmt 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. I,J2; cf. above, p. 198, n. 237. :us Judicium: 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

auditus; (5) nares respirantes odorem intellectus; (6) umoris bibitionis et cibonmt transmissio, arteria et sthomacus; (7) linguae gustus sensus. In four of these functions of the head (viz. (1.), (2), (6) and (7)), the mouth plays a major rok. 249 Mouth, eyes, ears and nose constitute the seven openings of the head in the list of these openings of Nicomachus, Macrobius, Anatulius and Philo (Op. mund.) However, Philo, as we have seen, adds that the mouth is the dcro3oc; of food and drink (and the \·xit' of words), as Plato stated: on account of the reference to the Timaeus, 250 this remark may ultimately go hack to Posidonius' Comments. The introduction of liquid and solid foodstuffs is mentioned as a separate function of the head in Hcbd. Ch. 8. Arteria(= cp&puy~2 " 1 ) and sthomacus are mentioned in N icunMchus' list of organs which transport food 252 (and breath). Breath is mentioned at the beginning of the list of Hebd. Ch. 8. 253 Finally, y"Awcrcroc occurs as the first item on Nicomachus' and Macrobins' lists of crTCAIXyx.voc. 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 1ists in the arithmological 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 arc clearly visible, each list containing Cohn-\V.). The emphasis upon the cognitive function of the senses (visus iudicium, nares ... intellectus. linr:uae ... sensus) is perhaps not accidental: cf. Posidonius-Sextus on the cognitive function of the senses, JYI. Vll,93, 103 and 119 (cf. above, p. 193-5). 2 '19 In the first two, of course, the narfs cooperate. 25 ° Cf. above, p. 198 and p. 192, n. 203. 251 The ancients used -:papuy~ both for wind-pipe and oesophagus. Macrobius has guttur, stomachus among the seven organs which serve ad cibumet spiritum accipiendum reddendumque. 252 Cf. above, p. 197. 253 Both breathing-in and breathing-out. For the breathing-out cf. Macrobius' reddendum (above, n. 251). 254 llebd. 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 I 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. V 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 llebd., these principles have been abandoned. To me, the most likely conclusion to be drawn from this difference between Nicomachus Macrobius and H ebd. is, that the author of Jlehd. 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 his source. The confusion which reigns in the lists of Philo (at least in somr~ 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 Anatolius (who both quote Hebd. Ch. 5) depend on the anonymous arithmologist who revised and completed Posidonius' arit1unology. 2" 7 It is possible that the anonymous arithmologist revised the lists of the parts and the organs of the body under the influenc«~ of the lists of Hebd. Perhaps, this would not only explain part of the confusion, but also offer an explanation for the fact that both2 h8 Philo (Leg. All.) and Anatolius mention the neck among the exterior parts of the body. Both Philo (Op. mund.) and Anatolius used a source containing the quotations from H ebd. Ch. 5. The neck is mentioned at Hebd. Ch. 11,9 H.., 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 arithmologica1 writers, we have concluded that Hebd., a quotation 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 m Cf. above, p. ] 1\l-2, p. 185. 2 >8 Cf. above, p. 198 and ilxl. n. 237. 269 The apparent dependence of the various parts of the body listed in flebd. Ch. 11 upon the original lists of parts and organs is in favour of rejecting Hoscher's hypothesis that this map is original and 'very o.ld'. Furthermore, it should be recognized tl1at it is by no means certain that the author of llcbd. only mentions those parts of the world which he knew or which he thought especially important. On the contrary: also in this case the hebdomadic 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 an
202

human body, which are to be found in the arithmologicalliterature, 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 \Vhole arithmological approach predominant in Hebd. has been inspired by the section on the number 7 in PosidonitL;' Comments. Consequently Hebd. Ch. 5, on the ages of man, was modelled not only after Solon fr. 19 Diehl, 262 but after the whole Strato-and-Diocles passage, 263 which has been preserved by one class of a.rithmological authors, as well. However, ps. Hippocrates surpass('d Posidonius in as far as he introduo~d the number seven everywhere, eYcn when this necessitated no small amount of juggling: think of the way in which he arrives at 7 winds or at 7 parts of the universe. A connection between Hebd. and Posidonius' Comments 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. [Iamhl.], 261 262

Cf. a] >0\T, p. 197 ff. Cf. above, p. 17-1. n. 1IlL

263 Knowledge of this pa~sagr' explains the eml.H·yology of lfcbd., which, in the account of ps. Hippocrates, has been separated from the exposition of man. In Ch. 1 ,S ff. H.. we read septcm dient:u coagulationem se~-ninis humani et inde formationem naturae hmninis. The wagltla.tio of the se<~d.; however, the next item, on therole of the number seven in diseases is paralleled by the sequel to the embryological statement of Hel>d. Ch. l, viz. by Cl1. 1,13 ff.R. etdeterminationum egritudinum. In PJ1ilo, the embryo logical details (Op. mund. 124) have been put a few pages away from the account of the ages of man (Op. mum!. 103-.5), whicl1 only mentions the f3p€<po~ in passing (I, p. 3.5,24 Cohn-\V., cf. above, p. 173, n. 98 in fine and p. 181-2, n. 14.5).

203

Theol. ar., p. 59,5 ff. de Falco, a passage which we had occa.<>ion to attribute to Posidonius.264 Moreover, as we have noticed before, 26l> Hebd., in describing the phases of the moon uses arithmological language, and the cliscription of the phases itself is exactly parallel to that of the arithmological writers. 266 Furthermore, the connection with a work related to Plato's Timaeus perhaps helps to explain (1) why the analysis at Hebd. 2,30 ff. of the concepts 'up' and 'down' is so remarkably similar to that of the Timaeus, 267 and (2) why the earth is excepted from motion at Hebd. 2,40 f£.2 68

In the course of our analysis of the cosnwlogy of llebd., 269 we came to the conclusion that the vitalism of the elements and the theory of heat of our treatise must be explained on the assumption that ps.Hippocrates was influenced by Posidonius. If also, as we have thought reasonable to assume, the arithmology of Hebd. is dependant on that of Posiclonius, the main ideas which went into the composing of H ebd., part I, have been adequately explained and traced back to a single historical origin. This source, viz. Posidonius, affords a link between the arithmology and the cosmology of H ebd. which cannot be established, as far as I see, on any other basis.

Cf. above, p. 1~2-4. Note, however, that ;\licomachus-Posidonius (cf. above, p. 183, n. 1.50) speaks of ten spheres, not of seven. The parallel was noticed by Roscher, 1906, 147 n.2l2. For Hebd. and the lunar cycle cf. also above, Ch. IV, p. 117-8. - The mediating function of the moon is also a feature of Plutarch., Fac. (927e ff.). 928c. H. Cherniss, Plut. M aralia VII (Loeb), 94-5 (cf. also P. Boyance, Etude sur le Songe de Scipion 85, n.2) adduces Hebd. Ch. 6, § 1 at this passage of Plutarch. It should be noticed that Fac. 927e ff. has a comparison between the structure of the universe and that of the human body which is (as far as the general idea is concerned) parallel to that of Hebd. Ch. 6. It has been argued that a related passage in Fac. may reflect Posidonian ideas, cf. De Vogel, Greek Phil. Ill, Nr. 1192d and the references quoted there, p. 269. zss See Ch. II, p. 60 ff., word-list s.v. n/.e:t6<~. 266 Ibd., p. 51, parallels from Philo and Theo have been quoted. 267 Cf. above, Ch. Ill, p. 62 ff. 2 6 8 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 68, p. 77. 269 Cf. above, Ch. IV. 264

204

CHAPTER VII

HEBD. PARTII (CH. 12-52) AND ITS RELATION TO PART I (CH. l-11)

1. In the preceding chapters our investigation, for the methodological reasons outlined inCh. 1,1 has been restricted to the first part of Hebd. As will be remembered, it was Roscher who distinguished between the two parts of the treatise because (1) the arithmology of part I is not applied in part li and (2) the theory of 'hot' and 'cold' of part II only plays an insignificant role in part 1. 2 On the other hand, even Roscher postulated some kind of unity to obtain for the whole treatise in as far as its first part is an 'adaptation of older materials' incorporated into his work by the author of part II. 3 However, H.oscher's second argument has been opposed by Gehr, 4 who argued that the theory of 'hot' and 'cold' in part II is more relevant to part I than H.oscher assumed it to be. He further observed that the singular theory of Ch. 1,85 ff.R. involving the liquid element as the 'Aufbewahrungsort der Warme' occurs also in Ch. 15,18-9 R, while Ch. 15 as a whole is very similar to Ch. 6 (minus the detailed and extensive microcosmmacrocosm-parallel). To do justice to the second part of Hebd. would entail an interpretation as detailed as that of the first part attempted in the preceding chapters. This cannot be done within the frame-work of the present study. Moreover, the author is convinced that an interpretation of this kind should be left to specialists in the History of Greek Medicine. However, some points may be made. On the one hand, the theory of 'hot and cold' can indeed be proved to be common to both parts of the treatise. It has been established before 5 (or so I think) that the 1

2 3 4

5

Above, p. 30-1. Cf. above, Ch. I, p. 17-8 and ibd. n. 70. Cf. ibd., p. 18 and ibd., n. 74. Cf. ibd., p. 26-8. Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 78-103.

205

'Warmelehre' of part I dates from the first Cent. B. C. If a variation of the same theory can be pointed out in part II, the same consequence would seem to be valid. On the other hand, some of the expressions and theories contained in part U point in the direction of a rather late date of composition. These theories, especially those of a purely medical natnre, are not connected, or not necessarily related. to those of part I.

2. The 'theory of hot and cold'. Ch. 15 may be our starting-point. Roscher 6 'vas wrong in speaking of a 'Tetradenlehre im Gegensatz zu Kap. 6', for the four elements of Ch. 15 correspond exactly to those of Ch. 6, 7 the only difference being that the arithmologicai classification of Ch. 6 is not repeated. There are, moreover, correspondences between Ch. 15 and Ch. 1 and Ch. 2. Though the text of Ch. 15 is not wholly intelligible, 8 this much, at least, is clear: we are to]d that the earth contains portions of the other elt'ments, Ch. 15,5 ff. R.: 'the earth contains a warm part of sun.: all its moisture consists of water; all what is cold breath (in the earth) consists of air; while \\'hat is bony and fleshy consists of earth.' 9 Kpiicr~.; of the elements, just as we found in Hebd. part J.l 0 Also details can be paralleled: 15,5-7 R. terra habet calidam qu.idem so lis partem corresponds to Ch. 6,§2,3 ff. R. e<st> quiddam ex so lis splendoribus congregatum terrae, hoc quod ... cal-idum est. 11 For the liquid element within the earth cf. Ch. 6,§1,20-29 R. 12 The presence of the cold element (air) within the earth is not mentioned

8 1913, p. 24 (cf. above, Ch. I, p. 17, n. 70). In Ch. 15,9 H.. the ms.-reading aqtta.e should be retained, cf. 15,7 sulis; 15,11 aeris; 15,13 terrae (below, n. 9). 1 On the .four elements in Ch. 6, cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 78-81. 9 The opening sentence of Ch. 15 is opaque; perhaps Quae autem mundus tradet( ?) corporibus, ea tam se (eatenus A, actetms P) habent quam (qu1'm P) atdmalia et quae nascuntur ( = tp\l-rck) omnia. It is clear that the composition of the bodies of living beings is compared to that of the universe, as al the beginning of Ch. 6 (cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 106). The A~[.l!J.a: of ps.··Galen, Nr. 94-5 Bergstr. is not very helpful, as it is more like a paraphrasis than a translation. 8 Terra habet calidam quidem solis pat"lem; licorem autem onmern aquae; quod autem frigidum flatwm aeris; quod ossosum et carnosmn terrae. •o Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 79, p. 81, p. 90, esp. for the presence of heat and water within the earth. 11 Ibd., p. 79, p. 90-l. 12 Ibd., p. 81.

206

in Ch. 6, but the identification of earth in the proper sense of the word with bones and flesh (Ch. 15,12-13 R. quod ossosum et carnosum terrae) is exactly parallel to Ch. 6,§1,14 R. ossa 13 and 18 caro. ·-The next sentence, 14 again, is not wholly clear; however, that the earth is mundi nutrix... ex licore reminds one of Ch. 1,94-5 R. 7tOCV't'p6qJoc; ~~ \J~o:'t'oc; ioucro:, while ad statum animal£um et quae nascunter may be compared to Ch. 1,91 ff. R er.p' fJ "6. 't'::: ~ij)o: xo:L 't'. The sentence following upon this onc 1 " can a] so be paralleled from part 1: \Vith aqua ... nutrime·ntum cf. 7to:v..-pf!rpoc; i~ \J~O('t'oc; ioucro:, with aqua as vas calitlum cf. Ch. 1, 78 ff. R., 011 the Ele:pf1.6v blended with the liquid dt~ment.1 6 Next we read (Ch. 15,19 ff.R.) quod autem solis calor17 est, <est> crementum et motus omnib·us. 18 This goe,; much further than Ch. 1,85 ff.R, where it is only said that heat is the cause of the ·mot·ion of the liquid elementl9 ; however, d. Ch. 2,51 ff. R., where it is said that the elements are self-moved. 20 It will be remembered, moreover, that we had occasion to argue that in part I heat must be assumed to be the cause of motion not only of water, but of the other elements as well.21 Last but not least, we hear that the 'cold irrigation of the air' coagulates the water, making it into an earth-like substance. 22 This recalls the solidifying effect of cold responsible for the constitution of both ;;kin and the outermost heavenly spher(;:, Ch. 6,§2,21 ff. R. Consequently, the theory of the elements of Ch. 15 corresponds to that of part I: both the xp~crL<; of the elements and the idea that heat ultimately borrowed from the sun23 is the cause of motion, a correct recognition of which is of lbd., p. 106. Ch. 15,14 ff.R. Est autem terra mundi nutrix ad stat-um a-nimaliwm (adstatio ani-malibus P) et quae nascuttl11-r ( =' <:yu-r:i) ex licore. The commentary of ps. Galen (Nr. 94 Bergstr.) has it that the earth 'dauernd und stehend ist und nicht von ihrer Stelle weieht' and that 'alle Vegetation nimmt die Nahrung von der Feuchtigkeit'. 16 Ch. 15,18-19 R. Aqua vero nutr-imentum et 11as calidum. 16 This was already pointed out by Gehr, o.c. 213: cf. further above. Ch. IV, p. 79 ff. 17 Cf. 15,6 ff. R. calidam. so lis partem, quoted above. 18 The living beings and the elements. 19 Cf. above, on aqua ... vas calidu·m. See further Ch. IV, p. 90, p. 92. 2° Cf. above, Ch. rv, p . .105, for the connection bet\YCC!l this statement and the theory of the 6£Pfi.0v. 21 Ch. IV, p. 92 ff. 22 15,22 ff.R Cf. also a.bove, Ch. IV, p. 107 ff. on the (Stoic) theory of earth as originating from the liquid element. 23 Cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 79, p. 92-3. 13

14

207

paramount importance for the interpretation of Hebd. part I, are to be found in part II of the treatise too. Next, let us turn to Ch. 13. Roscher spoke of a 'dualistischc Auffassung der Scelc, im Gegensatz zu Kap. X'. 24 However, as will be seen, the contradiction between Ch. 13 and Ch. 10 is only apparent. 2 ~> The text of Ch. 13 as printed by H.oschcr is largely unintelligible; it can, however, be reconstructed with the hdp of ps. Galen's A~f.lf.l<>:Toc, Nr. 62-74 Bergstr. 211 1913, 18 (cf. above, Ch. l, p. 17-8, n. 70). Cf. Gehr, above Ch. I, p. 28, n. 134. 26 I propose 1o read as follows: Ubi ergo dico 'liominis animmn', illir me dicere originate calidum (5) frigidum (for frigido?) concretum. 'Originate' cmtem dico 'calidum' quod manavit de patre et de (10) rnatre, quando convenerunt adinvicem ( = &:AA.1fAoL~, d. Ch. 2,48 K) ad injantum generationem; 'calidum et jrigidurn' (se. dico), quando constiterunt (15) adinvicem ( occ &J.I:fJI.oL~) in matrice, quam [eo] quod vacatur semen a patre (ms. parentibus, but cf. ps. Galen Nr. 64 Bergstr., '\Venn <.las Spenna vom Erzeuger ejakuliert winl un<.l so <.len Uterus trifft') manans cecidit in (20) matricem. lit ubi clixero 'aninwe calormn', et non 'oumem animam ltominis', !toe dico originate calidum. lit (25) cetera calida omnia aut de temporibus facta dicam et sole, aut ex qwibus manducamus aut bibimus, t (et ms.) ex poculis (30) multa habentium vocabula aut de conviviis contrariorum ciborurn ad salutem. l::t quando dic 'aer<e>m (35) jrigidunz' aut 'aridum spiritum', non originate aut ipsius anirnae hominis frigidum dico, sed totius (40) nmndi aninzae. Et quando ab his quae eduntur et bibuntur dico frigidunz, aut ex utrisque quae in superioribus (45) dicta sunt (se. the ltabentia multa vocabula drunk ex poculis and the cibi contrarii ad salutem consume<.l de conviv'iis) jrigidum dico, [et] non oportet me existimare multa jrigida dicere, sed loc (is ms.) in quibus constitut·um (50) frigidurn diviswm est actenus differri arbitror (or: me arbitrari?). Translation: "Consequently, whenever I 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 I mean the heat which has flown from the father an<.l the (10) mother at the time at which they came together in order to produce offspring; I (only) speak of heat and cold, when these powers have (15) united within the womb, when what is calle<.l seed an<.l what flows from the father has fallen into the (20) uterus. An<.l whenever I speak of the heat of the soul, and not of the human soul as a whole, I mean the original heat. All (25) the other hot things of which I will speak I 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, <.lrunk from goblets, or from unhealthy foo<.ls consumed at large <.linners. And whenever I speak of cold (35) air or <.lry nvt:U!J.IX, I do not mean the original col<.l, i.e. that of the soul of man himself, but that of (40) the Soul of the whole universe. An<.l whenever I speak of the cold derive<.l from what is eaten or drunk, or from the (unhealthy) foo<.lstuffs and <.lrinks (45) which have been mentione<.l above, you are not invite<.l to un<.lerstand that I mean a plurality of cold things: no, I am (only) of opinion that the 24 2•

208

The purpose of this chapter is not 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, undoubteclly, 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 calidum is almost unintelligible. 27 However, ps. Galen's commentary on Nr. 47 Bergstr. 28 says: "Hippokrates sagt: der erste Teil der Seele istdie urspriingliche Warme, die im Anfang der Schwangerschaft ist. Und wisst, dass das Spern1a 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, places over which what has become (50) cold is divided differ in the respects which I have indicated". The text of ps. Galen has two J.·~fl!J.IX't'et to which nothing in our translations corresponds (Nr. 65 and Nr. 69 Bergstr.) I do not know how to explain these extra's; though Nr. 65 looks like an anticipation of the beginning of Ch. 20 combined with ideas of Ch. 14, it is, of course, entirely possible that our Latin translations 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. 27 Ch. 10,1 ff.R. Anima[m?] itaque septinarium habet calidum septe forme septenarium (c.s.f.s. fails in A) constitutum, et inde jaciens (indeficiens P) facillime in (eis P) septem dies quod in aere (Roscher proposes to read matre) et quod in animalibus. Ps. Galen Kr. 47 Bergstr. has 'Auch die Seele wird in sieben Teilen geteilt', which corresponds, more or less, to A's anima[m] itaque septenarium habet constitutum, to which perhaps P's septe forme (P's second septenarium may be omitted) may be added. 28 P. 103; cf. also ibd. p. 105: 'der erste Teil von den Teilen der Seele ist die Warme'. 29 Perhaps: calidum, et inde ji[ci]ens facillime in septem dies quod in aere et quod in animalibus. Fi[ci]ens and j[ac]iens could have been caused by anticipation of jacillime. Translation: 'first the hot, from which quite easily develops

209

that ps. Hippocrates spoke of the originate 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 pain31 ; 6. all 'sweet food' of the blood32 ; 7. the salt parts33 • Perhaps these other parts of the soul mentioned in Ch. 10 may be connected with the general theory of Hcbd. 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 'ttmor, however, bearing many names and showing diverse characteristics under the influence of the hot and the cold (Ch. 18; examples: chole (= xo'A~), flemnata (= cp'Aey{Loc'toc), 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 xo'Aw~ec. ~~ocXExocufLevov x:oct €.xov xufL&v <7tocv>"':o£wv txfL~Oc., Ch. 19,15 R of a o'Ax-ljv xo'AY)c. ~ cp'Aey[Loc'to~). 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. 35 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' cf. the originate frig·idum which unites with the seed when it has been introduced into the womb, Ch. 13,13 ff.R. (above, p. 208, n. 26). 80 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, under meint damit das, wovon er gesprochen hat von dem mit einer geringen Feuchtigkeit feuchten Teil der Erde; und er meint darnit das Fleisch und Blut. Und weiss, class das Fleisch (der) Nahrung bedarf. .. ". But the sentence in Ch. 10 remains difficult. at Cf. ps. Galen, Nr. 48 Bergstr. 32 Cf. ps. Galen, Nr. 49 Bergstr. 3 3 I.e., possibly, the 'f>AEY[!.c;t. (so ps. Gal en, 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 strenghtens 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 flebd. part II.

3. Indications for a late date of Hebd. part If. In Ch. 13,33 ff.R. the cold within the human soul is rnstinguished from the (frigidum) ... totius mundi animae. 31 Harder'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 (pneuma, cf. aridum spiritum ). 39 It is likewise a Stoic doctrine that the composition of human souls is analogous to that of the Soul of the universe. 40 36 It should be pointed out that Ch. 40,23--4 R. speaks of quod in anima e.st umoris, i.e. undeniably counts umor among the constituents of the soul. Cf. also Ch. 42,14 ff. colorem vero eius qui est animae l'eceptorittm id est sangttinis. 37 Cf. above, p. 208, n. 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. A me dtt il!onde, 164 ff., esp. 177 and 177, n. 9; see further F. Riische. Das Seelenpneuma 6 ff. 1 ° Cf. SVF 1,124; 1,495; II,633; Il,634. It should be recalled that Posidonius in this respect followed the Early Stoa, cf. Aetius I, 7,19 Hocre:t8wvtoc; ~e:iJtJ.oc voe:pov xocl 7t~p<7)8sc; (se. 1:ov 6~ov srvoc( q>1Jcrtv. Cf. also De Vogel, Greek Phi/. Ill, Nr. 1196a-d) and Diog. Laert. VI1,157 Hocre:t3~mo~ 7tVE:U[tOC ~v6e:p[.LOV e:tvoct 1:~v tjlu;cf;v. However, this is not all, for Posidonius was also influenced by the psychology of Plato and Alistotle (Galen, De Plac. Hipp. et Plat. p. 432,9 ff. and p. 476,2 Miiller), and appears to have advocated a (subdued) dichotomy of

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. and20,1 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 1tup nxv~x6v 41 and a destroying force (think of the exm)pwcn~ !) ; cf. esp. Cleanthcs, SVF 1,504 (= Cic., ND II,40);12 where the fire of the sun, though of the nature of the 1tup -.zxv~x6v of living beings, not only makes things grow, but is also capable of burning them up (etiam saepe comburat). Furthermore, the vocabulary of part li (at lea~t in some chapters) is also indicative of a late da.te. 43 In Ch. 14,11 R 1tepmecre'i:v means 'come to grief, 44 a sense for which Liddell and Scott quote no parallels earlier than Polyb. VIII,36,4 (cf. also Lampe s.v., 1); Ch. 14,40 R. -rlj~~~ occurs once in Aristotle, ilrfete. 382b30, then in Theophr., De lap. p. 341,13 ff.W., then in Hellenistic times; Ch. 14,68-9 (-.&v voucrwv) ocveow, 45 'remission': though &vem~ 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.: o-xeuoccr("t) appears to be not a genuine Ionic word: Lidclell and Scott quote no instances of crxeuocrr(oc( !) earlier than Plato; it is also Hellenistic. 46 higher and lower powers (13uvct[L£t<;) of the soul. Cf. Verbeke, L' Evolution . .. Pneuma 14 ff. and De Vogel, ibd., Nr. 1184 ff. We have studied the higher part of the soul according to Posidonius above, Ch. VI, p. 160, p. 192 ff. u 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 that of part I. u II£pm£cr£!v is used absolutely. Translation of the opening sentence: 'Whenever an abnormal quantity of moisture enters the heart and the arteries and the hollow veins', ocvocyx'l) T<~V 7tp0£1P'l)(JiVWV 1t'£pm£cr£f:V T~VO:, '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 voucro~ as antecedent and to translate 1t'tpm£ac:'Lv by 'occur', a..<> is done by F. Lommer, Zur J
212

Ch. 19,34 exx~uO'~~; 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 ~ rp~p[J.XXO~CJL'Y eu~ywyoLO'L'Y &~~y&y~!J 't't~ -roc~ &.x!X01X.pO'[IX.c;47 : it appears that e:Mywyoc; is used catachrestically ('medicines which are easily handled' 48 ); at any rate, the word - according to Liddcll and Scott - does not occur before Plato, and even there not in a medical sense. 49 Ch. 19,71 Dui~ux_po~ is not(!) in Liddell and Scott, while 19,74 R atocxo)..oc; apparently occurs only here (n.b.: these two terms occur in the vicinity of at&Oe:pfJ.oc; 1 which is a good Ionic word, and so may be analogous formations). Ch: 28,11 &xfJ.~XO'-rL­ x6c; is Hellenistic, 5° Ch. 50,17 R. um:p'YLX~ even Graeco-Roman (Liddell and Scott mention, apart from llebd. Ch. 50, Galen XIX, 645 K.; Ep. Ram. 8,37; Lib., Descr. 30,9,4 (cf. also Lampe s.v.)), while Ch. 46,36 and 47 R. has the word ~ve:a~c; in the same sense as Ch. 14,68-9 R The Greek fragments of part 11 of the treatise therefore exhibit the same linguistic characteristics as those of part I. 51

4. Affinity with Pneumatic Medicine.. Though Hebd. part. II 52 is independent in many details, its doctrines (both general and particular) recall those of the Pneumatic school of medicine. 53 health (cf. on the unhealthy foods and drinks of civilization Ch. 13,29 ff.H., above p. 208, n. 26). 47 'Axrtf.locpcrtat (note the plural) in the concrete sense of 'filth' appears to be Hellenistic. 48 The term tixrtO. occurs also Ch. 19,39 and 19,47 R Cf. also below, p. 220. 49 LS.f s.v. 1,2 quote Galen XV, 78 K. eua.ywyo-roc-ro<; xuf.1.6~, 'easily purged'. 60 Though the Greek text of this passage has been derived from Aetius of Arnida and cXXfL«anx6~ has not been translated into Latin, I do not think that it has been added by Aetius. 51 Cf. above, Ch. II, p. 35, p. 52. 62 For earlier interpretations of part II, cf. above, Ch. I, p. 6 ff. ~ 3 No up-to-date history of this school exists, let alone a collection of fragments of those of its members which have been less fortunate than Aretaeus. A recent synopsis of Pneumatic theories can be found in F. Kudlien, Pneumatische Ante, HE Supp. Bd. XI (1968), p. 1097 ff. M. Wellmann's Die pneumatische Schule bis auf Archigettes in ihrer Entwicldung dargestellt, Phil. Unt. 14, Berlin 1895, is still indispensable. Cf. also G. Verbeke, l' z~·volution de la doctrine du Pneuma 191 ff. and (for the theory of 'elements') E. Schoner, Das Viererschema in der antiken Humoralpathologie p. 80 ff. Wellmann emphasized the dependence of the Pneumatic school upon the Stoa in general, Kudlien (cf. also above, Ch. Il, p. 33, n. 8 and Ch. V A, p. 130, n. 4 and p. 135, 11. 27) that on Posidonius in particular; cf. also H. Diiier, Eine stoisch-pneumatische Schrift 193-4.

213

In Ch. 24,10 ff. R. we read calidum et frigidum et humidum et siccttm utraque in febribus talia efficiunt et patiuntur etc. Roscher said "hier tauchen plotzlich neben dem calidum et frigidum noch die Prinzipien des humidum et siccum auf, von denen bisher keine Rede war. \Valuscheinlich handelt es sich hi er urn eine spat ere Einschicbung". 54 However, Roscher's observation is incorrect: the uypov (humidum 55 ) plays 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 arc active, wet antl dry passive 57 'qualities' or 'substances'.~8 This (ultimately Stoic) theory was also adopted by the Pneumatic school: the hot, the cold, the wet and the dry are chosen as <1To~xe;r:oc; of these, the hot and the cold are 1tcmrnxoc oct.. ~oc, ihc wet and the dry ui..~x.oc ochw~.'''J Aihenacus began with the 3uVOC(J.E:~<; Of which living beings60 are Composed (Toc yocp 1tpocro:x.~

TWV

~<J>wv AIX[.L~OCVW,

oux.t TOC

xo~voc

'TtOCVTWV <1W(J.OCTWV

crTo~x.doc 61 );

the point of departure is the microcosm, which is projected upon the 1913, p. 40, 11.46. The translations have umor. In Ch. L-~ (and the following chapters) UII/Or is coupled with Otp(J.oV (calidum). 56 •• • tunc umorem et siccitatem. lJico siccum quidem quod terrae pars est. Cf. Ch. 15,22 ff. H.: the cold coagulat licorem et simulat terram et facit aliqnid fieri speciem et corpus (cf. Ch. 43,1 fLH. corporis autem hominis ex umore coagulati); Ch. 21,20 ff.R.: the heat of summer dries the moisture (aestas ... calefaciens et siccans umorem). Cf. also Ch. 13,3() H.. , aridum 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. 1-l-20 is accepted (cf. above, Ch. 1, p. 15-6). 57 Efficiunt et patiuntur: cf. the action of the fl<:p(J.ov upon the uyp6v in Ch. Hand the activities described in the quotations given n. 56 above; see also e.g. Ch. 41,9 ff. H.. carnium umores quae ex calido solutae sunt; Ch. 50,32 H. umor praevalet ignem. For the effects of cold upon t~mor cf. Ch. 17,12 fL 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, TO uyp6v is both a. quality and a substance; so is To Otp(.l-6v; Ch. 18 speaks of umor, but could equally well have spoken of umidum. For the (identical) point of view of the Pneumatic School, cf. Wellmanu, Pneum. Sch. 134, n. and 135, n.l. 59 \Vellmann, o.c. 133 ff. Athenaeus of Attalia refers to predecessors (nv:b; «i>v lipX,~Xl
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' in the sense of 'macrocosmic elemental bodies' are characterized by xpiiaL<;, i.e. by the presence of several 'qualities' (cr-roL:x.e:'i:oc 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 frigidum of the soul, then that of the universe63 ; and Ch. 50,22 ff.R, 64 where the prevailing of umor or siccitas 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 xpiicrL<; of primary 'qualitic,;' ,65 cf. e.g. Ch. 24,1 ff. R: animae autem partes, calidwn et frigidum, quamdiu quidem aeqales sunt sibi, incolmnis est homo. Si autem praecesserit calidum frigidum in aequalitate, tunc quidcm inflammatur jrigidum; quanto magis caluerit frigidum, tanto magis acgrotat corptts 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 Pneumatic67 ; it occurs also Hebd. Ch. 14,60ff.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. \Velhnann, o.c. 1+7 ff., on the 'qualities' of the seasons (and also Galen I, 522 K., quoted ibd., p. 144 ff. n.6). o3 Cf. above, p. 208, n. 2(l. '; 4 Quoted below. r.a Wrong xpiicrt<; 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>thargos', 'peripleumonias' and 'epaticas'), andperipleuntonia and pleuritis, discussed at length in Ch. 27, are, in IIebd., 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.c. 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.c. 158). On diseases of the lungs caused in similar ways (n.b.: xa:ucro<; and inflammation of the lungs have the same cause!) cf. Wcllmann, o.c. 159. 66 Wellmann, o.c. 144 ff.; 163 (according to Athenaeus, fevers are caused by an abnormal increase of the hot and the dry, according to Archigenes by an abnormal increase of the hot and the wet). 67 Wellmann, o.c. 145. 68 Cf. above, p. 212. 62

215

moisture which has not been used up the first time is now consumed; sic a-utem -in toto m-undo siccitas s-uper siccitatem veniens quae sunt perdit quidem et alia nasci prohibebit. 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 umor praevalet ignem, sicut ydropis quae vacatur ... (36) propter imbecitlitatem eius qui ·in homine est caloris similiter, sicut et in toto mundo si imbres su.per 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 R) is similar to the Pneumatic theories quoted by Wellmann. 7° Furthermore, the theory of Ch. 14 that the xcx.ucr6>~ee<; 1tUpe-.of. have a beginning, a middle and an end (Ch. 14,34 ff.R. &px-f); &xfL~··· xor.t fLecrov; ibd. 55 ff. fLecrov; "e/-a:u't"1} = ~vecrt<;) 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 xor.ucrci>oeec; 7Wpe-.o( are said to be caused by bile (Ch. 14,28 ff.R.), which corresponds to the Wellmann, o.c. 85; 163 ff.; 210 ff. ('insbesondere hat die therapeutische Behandlung der Fieberkranken in dieser Schule eine umfii.ngliche Literatur hervorgerufen', ibd. 210). For the ideas on fever of the early Hippocratics G. Sticker, Fieber und Entziindung bei den Hippokratikern, Sudh. Arch. 20 (1928), 150 ff., 22 (1929), 313 ff., 23 (1930), 40 ff. may be consulted (these are in many ways similar to those found in Hebd., but lack the systematical background of that work. N.b.: Sticker's survey also treats later theories than those found in the Corpus Hipp.). -llebd. part li distinguishes several kinds of fevers which are among those recognized by the Pneumatic physicians: xocucrwoe:e:~ -:tupe:-rol (Ch. 14; 33,1; 34a,21 R.), cf. Wellmann o.c. 167-8; cotidianae, tertianae and quartanae (Ch. 23,77 ff.; 26,13; quartanae (only) 29,2 and 30 (pass.); di~1turnae 31,1 R.), cf. Wellmann, o.c. 166; epialus (ljrrirt.Ao~) Ch. 25,22 R., cf. Wellmann, o.c. 167. The intermittent fevers are explained by the Pneumatic physicians as caused by dyscrasia of primary qualities (Wellmann, o.c. 166). For the :Aemup(oc~ of Ch. 26,12 R. and 31,1 R I have found no Pneumatic parallel. 70 O.c. 163. Cf. above, p. 215, n. 66. 71 V'lellmann, o.c. 163. Archigenes spoke of &:pxi). &:x(J.i), -:tocpocx!LfJ and &ve:crt~. But for 7tocp<Xx(J.i), which looks like a refinement, these terms correspond exactly to the terminology of Hebd. Ch. 14. Herodotus put a period of increase between &:pzij and &:xtJ.fJ, which could be interpreted as a deviation from an original model comparable to that of Archigenes. N.b.: Ch. 30,21 R. accessionem means 'attack' (= &:x(J.i)), 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 11 is akin to the theories of the Pneumatic school is its therapy: "die ~ilteren Pneumatiker (legten) mehr Wert auf die Regelung der Diat und auf mcchanische Hilfsmittel als auf medicamentose Stoffe. 73 Ihr therapeutisches Verfahren war naturgemass darauf gerichtet, die vorhcrrschcmlc QualiUi.t zu bckampfen, die iibermassigc Warme clurch klihlendc Mittel, die iibermassige Kalte durch warmencle, die iibermassige Fcuchtigkeit clurch trocknende und die iibermassige Trockenheit durch anfeuchtende Mittel". 74 I shall not give a full catalogue of therapeutical measures advised in H ebd. part II which illustrate this general maxim. Some examples, however, may be given: Ch. 19,54 ff. H.. the hot kills the body ... if [L1J3dc; -ro Oep[Lo\1 xoc-rcxcr~icr;l). 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: necessitas extinguere ignem umidis et frigidis c£bis. 7 " The same general idea occurs inCh. 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 mundi contestantes qui auxilium dant. 76 (It should be noted that the patient is not allowed to stop drinking, 77 otherwise the fever wil! consume the moisture of the body (Ch. 24,63 ff.R.)). But not only the hot is combated, but also the cold: 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 Vi'ellmann, o.c. 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 cp&pfJ.o::v.o: were used, however; cf. Wellmann, o.c. 136, 219 ff. and bel., p. 220. 74 \Vellmann, o.c. 201. A number of examples of therapy on the basis of general physiology is given ibd. 158 ff. (lethargy, caused by 9u~~~ £fJ.cpuTo~: heat the sick-room etc.) See further the detailed exposition ibd. 201 ff. 7 :> Cf. also Ch. 23,18 ff. R. 76 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.c. 228-9. 78 For corresponding Pneumatic theories cf. Wellmann, o.c. 166-7.

217

various ways, ante accessio1tem 79 (Ch. 30,21 R.): cf. Ch. 30,3 ff.R, the patient's legs and arms should be anointed multo calido aliquo and then be rubbed80 until the heat returns; his arms, legs and especially the head. should be warmed as much as possible, and his body should be anoi11ted with an oil containing various hot ingretlients81 ; aqu.am calidant should be 'giv·en' to the tibia, the body de. by means of \Vuol or from mugs which have been heated beforehand. 82 On the other hand, in case of diutumac and A<:~r.upLwo:::zc; fcbrcs, at a certain moment a watery soup made from cooked cold semina (corns of grain) has to be administereu in order to cool the fever (Ch. 31,34 ff. R )83 - Cf. further also Ch. 34a: the physician shouhl take care to cool the heat (ut ... refr·igeret catid-u·m, Clt. 34a,5 I\..) by makiug use uf mcdicamina ittfricdantia, the effect of wl1ich is compared to that of cold 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 tu talk in there, for voces calefaciunt aerem quod anhelamus (35,7-8 R 84 ); 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 lw 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 his temperature). Moreover, his legs and feet and arms up to the elbow should be anointed with hot pomade (cerotarium = cemt·mn), and they should be covered with soft and ""arm

Before another attack of the fever; cf. above, p. 216, n. 71. On rubbing cf. below, p. 21 9. ~ 1 For similar detailed prescriptions cf. Wellmann, o.c. 211 ff. 82 l.e., a compress of pre-warmed wool drenched in hot water has to be applied externally, ·while !JOt water should be drunk from mugs already heated. 83 In this same chapter, the author speaks of the kinds of foods which are allo'v1ed. \Ve are told which kinds of vegetables are hot, which cold, and which kinds of water, foodstuffs (cibi) and wine arc 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 be gathered from \Vellmann, o.c. 202 ff. In Ch. 31,61 H. H. we are told that the recuperating patient should avoid both the sun and the cold, both work and discussions and that sort of thing. However, he should bathe in warm water, and be massaged both in bath and after his bath (cf. Ch. 30,3 ff., paraphrased above). ' 4 For Pneumatic ideas concerning the effects of speech d. \Vellmann, o.c. 142-3; the theory that speecl1 'die innere \Varme vennehrt' (Wellmann, o.c. 143) is analogous to the idea quoted from Hebd. 79

so

218

blankets, or else his limbs will become stiff and cold, when the heat departing from them goes to the superiores partes of the body85 and stimulates the cattsos (Ch. 36). ·- In Ch. 37, means to stimulate breathing, i.e. the exhalation of the hot from the warm lungs and nonviolent ways of extracting hot moisture from the body are recommewlcd.. So much for the general etiological frame-work within which the tlterapeutic 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 Cclsus, De medic. II,l4 Asclepiades was the first medical author to treat rubbing extensively. 86 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 who in their therapeutical applications of this treatment were largely original. At any rate, the advocacy of rubbing in Hebd. part II constitutes u t.p.q.: rubbing became not popular before the first Cent. B.C. An interesting corrcspundcnce in detail is, that Herodotus

85 I.e., the regions near the heart ami the head, cf. Ch. 34b,3 ff. H.. (ad praecordia superioribus partibus). In Ch. 34b we arc told that the patient's head should be raised by pillo\\s 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 !tot has collected ad superiora tltoracis near the heart, while the rest of the body has l>ecomc culd; after the !tot has consumed the moisture of these regions, the spirit {'rC. 7t\IEU(~Q( "t"oG Oep!J.oG) is lm~at!ted out both through the flesh and the nose, and the soul departs, leaving the culd body behind. See also Ch. 39, where it i,; adviseu that catarlasmata 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 anJ kills the patient (ut nun permanens calor inhaeccolligat sanguinem et spasmos facien.~ occidat, 39,3 ff.H.) For the regions of thorax and heart in Pneumatic theory cf. \Vclhnann, o.c. l41l·l (esp. Galeu's criticism, o.c. 1-tl, n.l). kG Celsus says that Asclepiacles behaved as if he were the inventor of this practice, but thai Hippocrates (= II1,76 L.), already, had comprised the whole subject in a few words (Celsus II,14,2, Hipp . ... qui dixit frictione, si vehemens sit, durari corpus, si lenis, molliri, si multa, m·inui, si 1nodica, inpleri; the same attribution is made Oribasius Colt. Med. VI,17 (Daremberg I, p. 490,11 ff.) = Calen, San. tu. IT.+, V, 110-11 K). 87 Cf. \Vcllrnann, o.c. 211 ff. 83 :\scleriades probably is ;:l.ll older contemporary of Athenaeus, cf. above Ch. V A, p. 130, n. 4; for Aihenaeus' use of theories of Asclepiades cf. also \Veilmanu, o.c. 69.

219

gave the patient warm water after the massage. 89 - In Hebd., light90 purgatives are recommended in order to clean the body from filth 91 (Ch. 19,44 ff. R. =r; rpor.pp.axwn ~utXywyo~cr~ &~or.yocyn -rL~ -.ti~ &xor.6or.pcrLtX~ 92); this corresponds to the Pneumatic preference for harmless rp&pp.otx.tX. 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. 94 Bleeding is also recommended in Hebd. (Ch. 29,7 ff. interiores venas inddere); it is especially interesting to observe that in Ch. 30,22 ff. bleeding is said to be necessary afte-r an attack of the quartana, and when other measures have already proved successful (si autcm his quartanae medicarninibus sanos fecer-is, sine sanguinis et cholerum et flegmatis extractione, postmodum oportet purgare corpora et sanguinem detrahere, ut non wnwr qui in corpore lanxit et minime febre consumptus est, congregatus ad aliquam partem corporis malum adportet maius a 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 Gnmdsatze lassen sich nur aus den physiologischen Grundanschauungen ihres Systems verstehen". 96 I submit that the same \Vellmann, o.c. 212. Cf. above, p. 218 (on the giving of aquam calidam). The lightness of these purgatives can also be measured by the fact that they are placed on the same level as a spontaneous cleaning of &xa:6a:pcrla:1 (Ch. 19,38 ff. R.). Cf. also below, n. 92. 91 'Filth' is caused, according to the Pneumatics, by dyscrasia of the 'powers', cf. Wellmann, o.c. 163, and of primary importance in the pathology of fevers. 92 Cf. also Ch. 23,15 ff.R. Haec (se. imrnunditiae) autem febres increscere faciunt nisi quis (1) edttcat eas purgatione aut (2) cibis auxi!ium deferenti frigidis infrigidet aut (3) spordaneae erumpentes sursum vel cleo-rsunz 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 vVellmann, o.c. 219 ff., esp. 221. Cf. also ibd. 158 (castor as a purgative of phlegm in case of lethargy: purgatives of yellow bile in case of phrenitis). ~ 4 Ibd. 226. 95 Ibd. 228. 96 Ibd. 132. 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 Ilippocraticum, Cl.Qu.N.S. XV (1965), 1 ff. Lonie accepts as Cnidian works A//. (IT. ITo:6&v), M orb. (r.. voocrwv) I, M orb. II,1-ll, Nlorb. II,l2 ff., iVTorb. Ill and Int. (r;. -r&v iv-ro~ r.o:Owv): 'beyond these works, any ascription is uncertain, even, I should be inclined to say, un89

90

220

close relation between pathology and therapeutics on the one side and the physiological principles (i.e., the theory of the elemental forces) on the other is valid for Hebd. part II as well. 97 Because, moreover, both the physiological principles and the pathology and therapeutics of H ebd. in themselves correspond closely to those of the Pneumatic school, as has been demonstrated above, the conclusion that Hebd. belongs to the Pneumatic sphere of influence seems inescapable. This conclusion holds true, even though the rrvziJ[J.e<.98 itself is not very prominent. However, it makes a sudden appearance in Ch. 52: likely' (o.c. 3). Lonie rightly emphasizes that in these CnidiarJ. works, which in general contam three ingredients (symptoms, therapy and etiology, d. above, Ch. I. p. 12-3), etiology is by far the least important of the three (o.c. 3), but he assumes that an etiology common to all these tracts was contained in the lost Kvl3~0(~ yv<7){J.O(~ (o.c. 24 ff.) This is of course possible. However, the special and consciously scientific emphasis upon physiology and etiology as in I-Iebd. part II would appear to be Hellenistic (cf. also Lonie, o.c. p. 4 and n.l: 'It' se. the modem, scientific concept of the relation between cause, symptom and treatment- 'does not appear with full explicitness until the Alexandrian period'). 1 do not \Vish to deny that there are points of similarity between the Cnidian etiology reconstructed by Lonie and the theories of Hebd. part II; however, d. above, Ch. I, p. 13-4. 97 Also the third section (semiology) of part li is based upon and intimately connected with the general theory. Semiology i:.; possible because the quod in anima est calidum (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. lll), 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, cf. Ch. 41 (esp. 41,3-4 R., the eye shows animaquomodo<se> ha.beat, while ibd. 9-10 R. carnium mnores 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 calore fit (pathology); Ch. 45,3-6 R. anima .. . quaecumque patitur eius calor ex umoris victu and ibd. 1.4-5 R. incalescens anima imntt4nditiis (&x(l(!locpU 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-l R.; Ch. 50,28 ff.R. 98 For the 7tVEU(J.O( cf. \Vellmann, o.c. 137. I have the finer and explicit distinctions, as between n:veu[J.O( ~w-.~x6v, 7tVEuf.LO( O'{>:.Mpu-.ov and 7tve€if.LOt: 9ux~x6v

221

the hot of the soul has withdrawn towards the place above the diaphragm and burns up all the moisture 99 ·which is there; hczLMv b 1tAEUfJ.WV Y.IZL -~ xccpOLIX T·~v bqL&occ &7to~tXAW (xoct ~ xccpOtCJ.). If this is correct, w<; have found a reflection of the Pneumatic theory of the mechanism of

oe

o

breathing102 in which lungs an cl heart togdlwr are t]l(: opr~rativ<' org;1ns. Furthermore, if we arc allowed to read l1 ii:k:•)[J. ,;., ·T.~ ~)!)z'ijc; o~pi'.IJv &.rp'!j .,..;.,.., zr;,' g(,)'JTiJ fJ)x·J;v -o'ij~ TOU uypo\i hqJ.cX~'J<; xoct TO::i Y''Zf''';:; ·-and under the conditions ouilincd in Ch. 52, this o"Ax-f) is no longer possible --, TOT~ [ To::i ~'ijv] ~~&brn<;> T'/j<; Y'JZ'fi<; y(yve:'Y.~ ... V 1\1: xry). T·);·J r.1.f.Tlr;v raxEL 't'i)~ OAxi}~. ivl~c:t "'(lip ccU't'~(JI.) [.l.~rr~N crrc)JLyzvov Oep(J/lv, -~ %~p3£l]. z:c.)-i)c;; }(ctt &.vocrtvo'ij~ &.px-f)· Y;~e: xoc! T<7' rtve:•)wm T'ijr, 6/.z'ijc; Tov Y'J;(pfl::i ·i;epoc; T~v rtrA)·r;v ~vll~/lr,r · exq>Atye:t yocp oc•J-r6v· €).xe~ ~i: zocp~[1J ;rp6)TI)'J. Totyocpo\iv, 'f;v 11~'1 1j xocp/lb] rroc07j, ,,,)z e:t~ (J.ocxpnv Tou OocvciTolJ 1j &.v.[3o).1) (sec also KmUien's comments on this passage, Posid. 11. d .... Pneum. 427). Cf. also Aretaeus p. 22,26-23,3 Hncle. -· It should be noted that the condition 'l;v -~ xocpll[1J rrocO'i\ 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. R5) and consequently al~o that of life. On the heart as the seat of life according to Pneumatic theory cf. Kmllicn, Posid. u. d .... Pneum. 425 ff.; Unt. z. Aret. 34. 104 Cf. Ch. 15,22 ff.R. quod autem aeris frigida irrigatioconstituit ... facitaliquid fieri speciem et corpus; 20,1 ff. R ... To Oe:p[LO'J (se. Tij~ yuz'ij~) ocl)~e:~ ••. TOC crciJt.Lry.Toc. 105 TO o),ov _,TO OAov: again tile microcosm-macrocosm-parallel (cf. p. 221, n. 97, in fine). For the 'from which- into that'-formula cf. Athenaens ap. Gal. XIX, 356,6 ff. K. (quoted 'Vellmann, o.c. 135, n.2): "the hot and the cold etc., e; (;,v 7rpWTNV q>OCWO(J.€VNV xoci &rr"AoucrTcinuv xoci ~).ocx[crTcuv o &vOpt•>rro<; r:nJv,£crT1Jl<E xllti d ~ & EOXOCTOC tpOCtVO[J.EVOC XOI:L OC7t).r;!)crTOCTOC xoci EAcXX~OTOC T'/;V
222

originatedJOn This 7tvd'.i[.Lct must be assumed to partake of the cold, for otherwise it could not be called 7tVEU[.Lcx.107 though it is of course a 7tVZU[l()( S:vOe:p[.Lov. That it is a kind of blend of hot and cold is confirmcrl by the fact that what leaves the body is also called ry•;x_~.l 08 - The extensive prescriptions concerning respiration, which we have already encountered in onr survey of the therapeutic nwasurcs 11W a
Ultimately (through the parents) and during the course of life.

107

Cf. the definitions of Ch. 13,33 fL R. (above, p. 208-9, n. 26).

108 Cf. Ch. 13,1 ££.H.. ; ubi ergo dico lwminis animam, illic me dicere nriginale calidwn frigidum cancretnm. 10 " l{ecovcry may even nccnr spontaneously. if the fen;n; purify tile body ilL<X T6iv cl.voc7tvrH~J\I (Ch. 10,40 ff.H.) InCh. 28,45 ff.H. the ceasing o[ cN!
i~tX"t"tJ.(~()V &varrv£s~

zed t~(·)O€e't'CXL --rQ Uyp6v,

a 1tp'lrr·~y'Xye'J 't'O

8ep!L6'J. riVXJt'1Jfe:~ ~s zxt

Ptvt:>v (·:Hj7r:Zp xaJ. -rol3 cr-rQ!L'XTQ~ Tt'AfQv <~) Ox.0crr)v 1Jy~·'X.L'JWV Sx.&:o"t"O't'E: • oi)-nuc; &.7trJqrJxe~ca 1t,iv 't'O fJ(-;>[L!X). 11 ° For the lungs cf. above, p. 222, n. 102 and n, 103. 111 If he does not respond, this is a very bad sign (Ch. 51, l09 ff. R) For respiration in the semiological section cL also Ch. 40,0 ff. R. et ex uenhsitate qne~n­ admodum anhelant (because ventosus is a Latin equivalent of 7t'le:'J:tct-rt:-tl,~. the probable Greek word translated by ventositas is 7t'le:u!L!X'Wl'!Lo;, 'use of the breathing'); Ch. 46,.B fL R. To 11VZU[LIX [Mtvo't'e:po'l z~Xl ),e:7t-r6't'e:p!l'l is a good sign; Ch. 51,142 ff.R., on the respiration of a dving patient. 112 Cf. \Vellmann, o,c. 138: 'Die Atmung (ivoc1tvrn)) client. .. in crster Linie der inneren \Varme zur Abkiihlung'; cf. also Verbeke, o.c. 196. The theory of Ch. R,3 ff. H. (on the first two ways in which the head helps to sustain life) i,, similar: frigidi introitus per quem ubique patet; ... secunda fervoris r:xalatio ex omni corpore. That the function of breath is to cool the inner heat was alre;vly held by Philistion and Diocles (Diodes fr. 15 Wellmann), Plato (e,;~- Tim. 70e), Aristotle (e.g. PA 1IT,6,66Rb34 ff., De itw. 23 ff. = 487b22 fL) 113 •.• simul equidenz aerium spiritum quod abstracto quae aninwc habet et rcspirans naribus trahentcs A, simul quidem etherio spiritztm quod ad statu que anime habent et respirant naribus trahentes P. I propose to read simul rquidem ai!rio spirito abstracto quem animae habent et respirant naribus trahentes or something similar, for (1) the pneuma of the soul is distinguished from the pneuma which is breathed 3L.X Tc7>V

223

certain cases, the patient ought to be bled because the blood extra naturam has entered the entrails and the veins (venae) and causes disease there by pushing out both the airy 'breath' (aerium spiritum 7tVe:u[.toc) of the soul (quem animae habent) and the 'breath' which enters through the nose (respirant naribus trahentes). The distinction between the (if I may say so) 7tve:u(J.oc ~ux~x.ov and the 7tve:u[J.oc &voc7tve:6[.te:vov recalls the details of Pneumatic doctrine, the more so, because the two kinds of pneuma distinguished in Ch. 29,11 ff.R are in some way related.ll 4 That a disturbing of the pneuma causes diseases is also a Pneumatic doctrine. 115 The reference to the blocking of the pneuma in the veins is a little puzzling, for according to the Pneumatics both veins and art!~ries contain blood as well as pneuma, though it is the arteries which contain more pneuma than blood. 116 Perhaps the Latin translations are inaccurate, or perhaps venae comprizes both arteries and veins, which is, as I believe, the most likely hypothesis117 ; or, perhaps again, the author of Hebd. has pretensions to originality. In Ch. 6,§1,24-25 R. we find that there is blood in the veins. 118 Furthermore, in the semiological section the pulse is mentioned (Ch. 40,1 and 11 R. iudicare ... ex venis): in Ch. 46,26 ff. R. it is a good sign if oct in through the nose and (2) this pneuma can no longer enter the veins and reach the entrails, because the veins have become filled, extra naturam, with blood only. 114 For the 1tve:u1.Lot of the Pneumatics, d. \Vellmann, o.c. 137 ff., 141; cf. esp. 137 'das Pneuma ist das Eingeatmete, dass sich dem cr'Ji.tcpu-rov 7tVe:UiJ.ot assimiliert' (his theory that the 'inner pneuma' is the source of the inner heat is based upon a wrong interpretation of the two passages quoted o.c. 137 n.7). The 'breath' of the soul has the function of the 7tVe:UtLot ~(•>TLxov. 115 Wellmann, o.c. 141. 116 Wellmann, o.c. 70, 139-40; Vcrbeke, o.c. 195. 117 If he really means the veins in contrast to the arteries, this theory could be an inversion of that of Erasistratus, who held that disease is caused by a blocking of the pneuma when blood from the veins unnaturally enters into the arteries (cf. e.g. P. Diepgen, Geschichte der 1Vfedizin I, Berlin 1949, 97-8). However, the word venae, (not a1'teriae), occurs in Celsus' description of Erasistratus' theory, De med., proem 15 si sanguis in eas venas, quae spiritui accommodatae sunt, transfunditur et inflammationem, quem Graeci cp:f.e:y:.toV'I)V nominant, excitat eaque inflammatio talem mot-um efficit, qualio in febre (!)est, ut Erasistrato placuit. So venae could be used in a larger sense and include both veins and arteries, as is probably also the case in the other passages in Ilebd. concerning the venae which I am about to quote (a distinction being only made in Ch. 14,1 ff.R.) 118 aqua autem fluminum imitatio est venae et qui in venis est sanguinis (cf. above, Ch. IV, p. 79, p. 103).

224

e

··'

... 'o (t rans1a t e d venae) otL• tv · -men - xepr:n' xoct' ev ' 't'OLO'L - x.ocv OLt:n ~ tp"epe.; xoct E7tt "t"f)11w ocrtppu~IJO'LV ·i-JO'UX£1)\1 f-xwm, 7tpo-repov !J.~ YJ
pulse in the same veins is considered a bad sign (Ch . .51,9 ffR.) 119 Again, in Ch. 14,1 ff.R. disease ensues when too much moisture enters into the heart, the arteries ( !) and the venae cavae (-roc.;
However this may be, it has to be recognized all the same that Hcbd. part II is rather reticent about the pneuma. Another difference. perhaps, with the general trend of Pneumatic theo~y is the big place t:,-riven to semiology (Ch. 40-52); Athenaeus did not reco~ruze semiology

as a separate branch of medical science. 120 But other branches of medicine which he did recognize121 are amply represented: the tpu(no-· "Aoytxov and 7ttX6oyvwfLOVtx6v (Hebd. Ch. 13-23), and the 6epomw-rtx6v (Ch. 24-39, where also the ~LocL-r't)-rtx.6v is represented, cf. esp. Ch. 31,35 ff.R.) Moreover, Athenaeus by no means rejected semiology, but treated it as a sub-division of the 6e:pot7tau-rtx6v. In this connection, it should be recalled that the announcement of subjects to be discussed in Ch. 12,23 ff.R. only speaks of the etiology of diseases and of their therapy, i.e. formally inclu.des the semiology of part II in the tlterapet.dicat sec#on.1 22 Aretaeus, on the other hand, treated semiology together with etiology,128 and Archigenes \\'Tote a treatise in 10 books entitled 7t<::pt -rij~ -r&v 7rupe:-r<:'lv
et quod supercilia pulsantia solida et quae in angulis oculor·um et in cubitis

t'enae similiter. The importance attached to the pulse in Hebd. (though it is a far cry from Jlebd. to the refinements of tl1e later Pneumatics, for which cf. Wellmann, o.c. 70 ff., 169 ff.) is itself indicative of a post-Hippocratic date, for a theory of the pulse appears to have been first developed by Praxagoras (Wellmann, o.c. 169, who also speaks brieily of Herophilus: cf. F. Steckerl, The Fragments of Praxagoras of Cos, Phi!. ant. 8, Leiden 1954, 1.7 ff., who also briefly enters into the difficult problem of the first introduction of the distinction between veins and arteries). 120 Wellma.nn, o.c. 1.31., n.t. On the relation between the semiological section and what precedes cf. above, p. 22.1., n. 97. m Ibd., 131. 12 2 I psas febres et alias causas et q·ztidem acutas egritttdines omnes quomodo jiant docet (etiology) et {aetas q14ornodo oportet cohiberi, aut non fieri, et nascenfcs quomodo debeant curari recte (therapy). Ilberg (1894, p. 27) assumed that tlu; adverb recte announces the semiological section, but this cannot be correct. The reference to the doctrine of Athenaeus, on the other hand, explains why the semiological section needs not to be announced separately. l23 Cf. the title of his o!;ew'l 1to>:Or;)v o&nor. x:xl G'1J(.I.tL<X. 124 vVellmann, o.c. 85.

22.5

part II in this respect also stays close to Pneumatic doctrine. The theories of those scholars, who on the basis of the division of subjects in H ebd. attributed the medical part of the treatise to the school of Cnidus, 125 may be considered to be refuted by adducing the Pneumatic parallels. A proper recognition of the fad that Hcbd. part II belongs to the sphere of influence of the Pneumatic schooP 26 also helps to explain why it could pass itsplf off so sucn'ssfnlly as a 'genuine', i.e. early, Hippocratic treatise; the Pneumatic physicians consciously strove to be true Hippocratics! Athenaeus' theory of tlw moLx_Z~IX is a return to older medical thoughtl 27 ; the teachings of Alcxandrian medicine are, for the mo:;t part, rejected. l\Ioreovcr, with some Pneumatics the admiration for Hippocratic medicine was so extreme, that they endeavoure!l to use Ionic as tlw n'hiclc for scientific (i.e. medical) thought. Aretaeus is a case in point, but before Aretaeus' time, one already finds Alim. (1t. "t'pocp'fic;) and, probably, Cord. (1t. x1Xpal'tjc;). 128 Finally, the association of Hebd. part II with the doctrines of the Pneumatic school is also corroborated hy its rlependencr~ on tlw theories of the Stoa, 129 which shows itself in its theory of the souP 30 aml of the elemental forces, 131 its prcrlilection for accurate definitions ctc., 132 and its belief in the connection and overall resemblance between the microcosm and the macrocosm 133 ; more especially, the dependance on Posidonius' brand of Stoicism, with its strong emphasis upon the Cf. above, Ch. l, p. 12 ff. \Vithin this context, also the 'I >efinierlust' of llcbd. should be placed, which is apparent e.g. in Ch. 13, where several meanings of 'hot' and 'cold' are distinguished and defined. The sarnc aU.iturle is fnun'ij~ and Tt. Y.!XpiH'I)~ are written in a form of Ionic which, like the vehicle of thought used by the author of lJebd., betrays its origin in a Hellenistic milieu. 129 For the Stoics and the Pneumatic School, cf. vVellmann, o.c. 133 ff. and Kudlien, HE 1103: 'Konstitutiv ist zunachst einmal die engc und ausdriickliche Verbindung zur Stoa. als solcher, die sich in dieser Form bei anderen Arzten oder Arzteschulen nicht findet'. 130 Cf. above, p. 208-12. 1a1 Cf. above, p. 206-7, 214ff. 1a2 Cf. above, n. 126 and vVellmann, o.c. 132. 133 Cf. above, p. 211, p. 213 ff. and p. 221, n. 97 in fine, p. 222 n. 105. 1 "''

126

226

microeosm-macrocosrn-parallel and its theory of the elemental qualities as 'forc~s', 1 34 is also a feature of the Pneumatic system. 5. The rl'lation bdwccn the two parts of Hchd. The mHl(·niahl<: resembhmce -- at le<Jst to the :1nthor -- lwhVC!~n tlHe ideas and doctrines of llebd. part II (]Jld tlwse of the Pneumatic physicians allows us to date this part of !he treatise: -its t.p.q. is approrhnately lOO B. C. We have acknowledged ilH~ fact th8t Athenaeus of Attalia W
227

is studied almost exclusively in regard to its physiological functions, which is the same attitude as that adopted in Hebd. part II). Consequently, the evidence in favour of regarding the treatise 7te?t e[l8o[J.&I>(t)v as a unity is extremely strong. The only arguments in favour of a distinction of two mutually independent parts are: (1) the fact that in part I, the '\Varmelehre' is perhaps more important than in part II, with its theory of the hot and the cold etc. However, the hot is, also in part II, the most important entity. 139 (2) The fact that the arithmology of part I is not applied in part II. This is a serious argument, which undoubtedly will not be easily refuted. I, for one, can offer no other explanation for this discrepancy than that the arithmology of Ch. 1-11 was only needed to establish the general premiss of the structural unity of and connection between microcosm and macrocosm, while in the medical part of the treatise only the qualitative aspect of this parallel had to be considered. When vie·wed in this light, the opposition between the two parts of the treatise is another example of the clash between a quantitative and a qualitative interpretation of nature which is typical of much, and even of much of the finest, of ancient thought. What's more, this disparity is in our case certainly mitigated by the fact that, in the first part of Hebd., number itself is concieved in a purely qualitative way.

Cf. Ch. 15,19 ff.R. (quoted above, p. 207), Ch. 24,1 ff.R. (quoted above, p. 215), and the role of the calidum of the soul in pathology etc.

139

228

CONCLUSION

The results of our investigation may be summed up as follows: the ps. Hivpocratic tract 1t. €~oo[J.&owv has to be counted among those works in the Corpus Hippocraticum which have been added a number of centuries after the oldest works of the collection had been composed. The treatise consists of an arithmological introduction (Ch. l-11), which is strongly influenced by the theories of Posidonius. This influence is visible in many details, the most important of which are the typically Posidonian idea of the 'vitalism of the elements', the parallel between the microcosm and the macrocosm and the arithmology proper. A transitional chapter (Ch. 12) connects the theory of the elemental powers and the microcosm-macrocosm-theory of Ch. l-11 with those of Ch. 13-52, which form a treatise on the etiology, therapy and semiology of fevers and other acute diseases. This treatise on fevers explains the phenomena of disease by referring to a theory of elemental qualities and to the parallel between the microcosm and the macrocosm. Both its general theory and many details of its therapy are related to the doctrines of the Pneumatic School of Medicine (which was influenced by the Stoicism of Posidonins). The last chapter (Ch. 53). which announces a second volume, is probably spurious. II. €~8o[.L<X8wv admits of a consistent interpretation when ea. 60-30 B. C. is accepted as its date of composition (it is influenced by Posidonius and Pneumatic Medicine and was known to Varro). If it is put in the first Cent. B.C., the treatise strongly reflects a feature typical of this century, viz. the return to the Classics. 1 Plato and the An excellent impression of the classicistic trend in the philosophy of the first Cent. B. C. is conveyed by 0. Gigon, Die Erneuerung der Pkilosophie in der Zeit Ciceros, in: Recherches sur la tradition Platonicienm, Entret. Hardt Ill, Vandoeuvres-Geneve 1955, 25 ff. 1

229

Early Academy arc rediscovered by Antiochus of Ascalon and Posidonius, Theophrastus by Posidonius 2 ; the works of the founding fathers of the Peripatetic School are re-edited by Amlronicus; the Pneumatic School of Medicine, starting with Posiclouius' contemporary Athenaeus of Attalia, turns again to the Classics of medical literature, while some of its early adherents (the authors of Atim. aml Cord.) even revive the literary dialect of 'Hippocrates'. Hebd. partakes of this general orientation both iu its literary, its v1tilosophical and its more strictly medical aspects, though it can be proved that iL is a child of its time. If this proof is rejcctetl in favour of assuming an early date of composition for this treatise, li1e following auacltrunisms slwuhl be capable of being defelllled: l. Tlw author of Jlebd. part I, thougl! writing, say, ea. ·100 B.C. or e\'Cll earlier, expressed himsdf occasionally in the idiom of Hellenistic aml Graeco-I~oman times. 2. He anticipated Plato's theory of a self-moYed entity, Aristotle's theory of an entity which is both self-moved and moved by something else, the Stoic theory of xpicnc;, and Posidonius' theory of the elements as livi11g beings. 3. He anticipated the structural arrangement of the doxographicalliteratnre and of the general philosophical exposition of tht• first Cent. B.C. 4. He anticipated a wind-ruse of the Hellenistic period. 5. He anticipated the Graeco-Roman astrometeorological conception that the planets influence the seasons of the year. 6. He anticipatecl a number of arithmological ideas (including some minute points of detail) \Vl1ich were much later exponnded in Posidonius' Comments on the Tinzaeus. 7. The author of llebd. part II, writing ea. 400 or, say, even ea. 350 B. C., anticipated the Stoic-Posidonian theory of the xpiimc; of elemental qualities. 8. He anticipated the etiological and therapeutical doctrine,; of the Pnenmatic School of !VIedicinP. 9. Just as the author of part I, he occasionally· expressed himself in the idiom of Hellenistic and Graeco-ltoman times. 10. Notwithstanding these remarkable achievements, the author of H ebd. part II did not distinguish himself from other Hippocratics, whik the author of Jlebd. part I had a poor mind. To the mind of the present writer, these assumptions are unacceptable, and certainly so when taken together. Consequently, it would appear that llebd. has to be \vritten off as an (independent) sourn' for Presocratic thougltt. Howcn·r, this loss for Presocratic 2

P. Steinmetz. J>ie Physi/i rlrs Theop!mcst, 331 ff.

230

studies is compensated by gains in other fields, viz. that of the philosophic ko£ne of the first Cent. B.C. and that of Posidonian studies, while some extra light is shed upon the early years of the Pneumatic School of Medicine as well. In some cases, the information to be gained from Hebd. confim1s what we already knew or thought we had suJficient reason to belie\·e. Confirmation of views concerning the elusive Posidonius, however, is most welcome, and it is hoped that the present study will have achieved, among other things, a small contribution to the discussion of such vexing and well-worn problems as Posidonius' vitalism and his 'Comments' upon the Timaeus.

231

INDEX OF NAMES (modern names italicized)

Abet, K., 33 n. 7, 34 and notes, 35. Achilles of Alexandria(?), 11.1 and n. 244. Adra.stus of Aphrodisias, 163 n. 34, 172-3 n. 98, 182 n. 145, 192 n. 202. Aenesidemus of Cnossus, 186. Aetius of Antioch, 130 and n. 4, 131, Ch. V A (passim), 141 ff. Aetius of Amida, 4, 8 n. 27, 135 n. 27, 213 n. 50. Agathemerus (geographer), 148, 149, 150 and n. 23. Alcmeon of Croton, 38, 39, 59. Alexander of Aphrodisias, 65 n. 55, 90 n. 121, 98 n. 163, 100 n. 171. Alexander Philalethes, 135 n. 27. Alexander Polyhistor, 24 and n. 109, 64, 81 n. 75, 98 ff., 131. Allei'S, R., 105 11. 195. Altmann, G., 157 n. 5,18211.147. Anatolius of Alexandria, 157 n. 4, 158 n. 8, 160, 174, 181, 185, 192, 197 and n. 233, 11. 234, 198 and n. 242, 200, 201, 202. Anaxagoras of Clazomenae, 27 n. 129, 29 n. 145, 38, 59 n. 25, 60 n. 31. Anaximander of Miletus, 18 and n. 76, n. 77,25 n. 115,44, 45, 47,56 and n. 11, n. 12, 57, 58 n. 22, 60 n. 31, 62 and n. 41, 83 n. 80, 86. Anaximenes of Miletus, 18, 46, 56 and n. 11, 57, 58 and n. 19, n. 22, 60, 107, 108 n. 212, n. 213, 141 n. 23. Androcydes the Pythagorean, 49. Andronicus of Cyrrhus, 149. Andronicus of Rhodes, 230.

Antiochus of Ascalon, 230. Antcm,]. P., 90 n. 121. Aratus of Soli, 142 and n. 25, n. 27. Archelaus of Athens, 29 n. 145, 46. Archigenes of Apameia, 212, 215 n. 66, 216 and n. 71, 225. Aretaeus of Cappadocia, 33 n. 4, 35, 213 n. 53, 215 n. 65, 225, 226. Aristophanes, 17 and n. 67, 151. Aristotle, 40, 41, 43,44 n. 37,46 n. 42, 61 and n. 39, 62, 68 n. 17, 69 ff., 78, 80 and n. 74, 82 and n. 78, n. 79, 83 n. 80, 84, 85 and n. 95, 86, 89 n. 121, 95 n. 148, 97 n. 162, 101 n. 181, 107, 121, 122 n. 291, 124 n. 296, 135 n. 27, 137 n. 36, 143, 146, 149, 151, 154, 166 n. 53, 168 n. 60, 174 n. 1.03, 176 n. 119, 177 and n. 127, 178 and n. 129, 211 n. 40, 212, 223 n. 112, 230. Arius Didymus of Alexandria, 111, 113, 115, 116 n. 258, n. 260, 118 n. 271, n. 272, 119 n. 272, 120. Arnim, II. t•on, 95 n. 154. Arrighetti, G., 45 n. 41. Asclepiades of Bithynia, 130 n. 4, 135 n. 27, 219 and 11. 86, n. 88. Athenaeus of Attalia, 33 and n. 8, 34, 97 n. 162, 130 n. 4, 164 n. 39, 165, 167 11. 59, 170 11. 77, 214 and n. 59, 215 and 11. 66, 216, 219 n. 88, 222 n. 105, 225 and n. 122, 226, 227, 230. Atticus, T. Pomponius, 187 n. 175, 188-90. Aubert, H., 176 n. 119.

233

Aujac, G., 146 n. 1. Autolycus of Pitane, 37, 52. Baccheius of Tanagra, 9 n. 29. Bailey, H. l·V., 23 n. 104. Basilides of Alexandria, 123 n. 296. Bayer, K., 181 n. 141. Bergstriisser, G., 4 n. 9, 5 n. 10, 35. Berti, E., 73-4 n. 47. al-Bitrik, 4 n. 9. le Blond, ]. 1"11., 71 n. 35. Bollack, ]., 131 n. 8. Baker, R., 143 and n. 32, 145 and n. 43, n. 46, H6 n. 1, 147 n. 5, n. 6, 148 n. 9, n. 10, n. 15, 149 n. 16, n. 18, 150 n. 24, 151 n. 27, n. 28, 153, 154 and n. 44, n. 46. Boethus of Sidon, 99n. 169, 123 n. 295, 128. Bolt, F., 5 n. 11, 20-1, 22 n. lOO, 25 Il. 114, 11. 115, 39, 41, 58 Il. 24, 62, 121 n. 285, 125 n. 300, 138, 139 and n. 4, n. 6, n. 8, 140 n. 11, n. 12, 152 and n. 34. Bonitz, H., 61 n. 39. Borghorst, G., 157 n. 5, 163 n. 34, 172 n. 98. Bourgey, L., 12 n. 41, n. 42, 13 n. 44, 1+ n. 54. Boyance, P., 43 n. 34, 87 n. 104, 88 n. 118, 89 n. 120, 95 n. 148, n. 153, 96 n. 157, 112 n. 242, 121 n. 285, 123 n. 296, 204 n. 264. Brehier, E., 194 n. 212. Burkert, W., 24n.109, 29-30, 31 n. 151, 42 n. 27, 43 n. 34, 49 n. 46, 57 n. 16, 59 n. 28, 62 and n. 44, 63, 89 n. 120, 105 n. 198, 126 n. 301, 130 n. 4, 138, 139 n. 4, 156 n. 2, 158 n. 11, 159 n. 15, 191 n. 198. Caesar, C. Iulius, 152, 186. Calciclius, 157 n. 4, 163 and n. 37, 1703, 174, 197. Callippus of Cyzicns, 145 and n. 45. Capelle, W., 114 n. 252, 125 n. 300. Celsus, A. Comelius, 219 n. 86, 224 n. 117.

Censorinus, 157 n. 4, 158 n. 9, 159 n. 12, 162 n. 31, 185 ff., 191 n. 198. Cherniss, H., 67 n. 2, 68 11. 16, 204 n. 264. Choerilus of Athens, 26 n. 117, 107 n. 209. Chrysippus of Soli, 38, 47, 89 n. 121, 91 n. 127, 99 11. 168, 108 and n. 219, 109 and n. 222, 111 ff., 119 n. 272, 126, 167 n. 57, 194-5. Cicero, M. Tullius, 67 n. 3, 77 n. 62, 86, 87 and n. 103, 88 and n. 118, 89 n. 120,90 ff., 100, 101, 103 ff., 113, 115 and n. 253, 143 n. 28, 152, 153, 162 n. 33, 181 n. 141, 183 and n. 152, 186 and n. 169. Claudius (Tib.Cland.Caes.Aug.Germ.), 33. Cleanthes of Assus, 44 n. 35, 87 and n. 104, 88, 91 and n. 127, 93, 95, 96, 100 and n. 171, 101, 102 and notes, 103 ff., 112 and n. 244, 194 n. 219, 212. Cleidemus (in Arist.), 46. Clement of Alexandria, 60, 157 n. 4, 182 n. 146. Calm, L., 182 n. 148. Cornjord, F. NI., 43 n. 29, 45 n. 40, 56 n. 13, 67 n. 9, n. 10, 68 n. 14, n. 15, 141 n. 21, 179 n. 136. Comificius Longus, 127. Courcelle, P., 164 n. 39. Crates of Malles, 56 n. 11. Critolaus of Phaselis, 128 and n. 313. Cranert, JV., 94 n. 148. Cumont, F., 126 n. 301.

Dahlmann, H., 149 n. 17, 185 and n. 165, n. 168, n. 169, 186 and n. 172, n. 174, 187 n. 175, 188, 189 and n. 188. Darem.berg, C., 3 n. 3, 219 n. 86. Deichgriiber, K., 7 n. 21, 20 n. 86, 32, 33 and n. 3, n. 5, 34. Delatte, A., 31 n. 151, 156 n. 1, 158 n. 8. Democedes of Croton, 22 n. 99. Democritus of Abdera, 18 n. 76, 26

234

n. 124, 30 n. 148, 38, 136 n. 32, 151. Dercyllides (platonicus), 58 n. 22. Diets, H., 3 n. 3, n. 4, 17 n. 69, 19-20, 59, 122 n. 289, 130 and n. 4, 131 and n. 4, 135 n. 27, 141 n. 25. 150 n. 24, 158 11. 9, 159 and n. 12, 166 11. 53, 185, 192 11. 199. Diepgen, P., 224 u. 117. Dieterte, R., 66 u. 2. Diller, El., 25 n. lH>, 33 and notes, 34· and n. 9, 35, 213 11. 53, 226 n. 126. Diocles of Carystus, 10 and n. 35, ll, 164 ff., 174 and. n. 105, 1 n and n. 127, 178 and n. 129, n. 133, 181, 183, 203 and n. 263, 223 n. ll2. Diogenes Lacrtius, 114 u. 250, 169 11. 69. Diogenes of Apollonia, 27 n. l30, 29 11. 145, 60, 61, 108 n. 213. Diotimus of Tyrns. 137. Dirlmeier, F., 176 n. 119. Dittmayer, L., 176 n. 119. Dodds, E.R., 42n. 26. D'Ooge, M.L., 157 n. 4. Duchesne-Guillcmin, ]., 22n. 99, n. 101, 23 n. 103, n. 105, 24 n. 108, 107. Ditring, I., 69 n. 23, 74 n. 48, 75 n. 52, 82 n. 77, 176 n. 119. Edelstein, L., 12 n. 41, 14 n. 54, 32, 95 n. 149, 97 n. 162, 128 n. 317, 156 n. 2, 178 n. 129, 194 n. 217. Elders, L., 74 n. 50. Empedocles o.f Agrigentum, 26 n. 124, 27 n. 129, 29 11. 145, 38, 59 n. 24, 60, 116n. 258, 126 n. 302, 131 n. R, 136, 166 n. 53, 170 and n. 75. Epicurus, 31 n. 151, 45 and n. 41. Epigenes of Byzantium, 166 n. 53. Erasistratus of lulis (Ceos), 34, 98 n. 163, 135 n. 27, 224 n. 1.17. Eratosthenes o.f Cyrene, 24, 25 n. 116, 150 n. 24. Ermerins, F., 5 n. 11. Erotia11 (lexicographer), 4 n. 7, 7, 8 and n.26,33,34,35,49. Euclid, 195 n. 221.

Eud<~rnus

of Rhodes, 44 and n. 35, 58 n. 22, 59 n. 25, 84 n. 89. Eucloxus of Cnidus, 25-6 n. 116, 59 n. 28, 142 and n. 25. Euenor of Athens, 166 n. 53. Euryphon of C11idus, 1.(,2 n. 31, 166 n. 53. Falco, V. de, 158 n. ll, 161 n. 24, 163 n. 38, 171 n .. 86, n. 92, 172 n. 97, 173, 182 n. 14f~; 184 n. 160, 192 n. 203. Favonius Eulogius, 157 n. 4, 162-3 n. 33. Favorinus of Arelate, 149 n. 19. Ferguson, .A.S., 126 n. 305. Festugiere, A.-f., 20 n. 88, 24, 39, 43 n. 32, 81 n. 7.'i, 87 n.l04, 8811. 118, 98 n. Hi3, 99 n. 167, n. 168, 100 anrl n. 169, 113 n. 246, n. 247, 116 n. 258, 117 n. 272, 121 n. 286, 127 n. 309, 131, 143 11. 28. Flashar, H., 135 n. 27. Fleischer, U., 33 and n. 3, 34, 35, 50. Foesites, 7 n. 21. Fonter, L'.S., 117 n. 263. Fredrich, C., 17 u. 66, 22 n. 102, 25-6 11. 116, 29 n. 143, n. 145. Furley, D.]., 73 n. 47, 117 n. 263, 119 n. 272. Gaiser, K., 68 n. 14. Gaisford, Th., 126 n. 305. Galcn of Pergamum, 4 n. 7, n. 9, 5, 6, 9 and n. 29, 10, 11 and n. 40, 12 n. H, 33 and n. 8, 34, 37, 38, 50, 52, 66 n. 1, 130 n. 4, 153, Hi4, 219 11.

85.

ps. Galen (anonymous cornm. on 1r. d·dC(<; 7toc6&,v), 3; (an. cormn. on I-Jebd.), 4 ancln. 10, 6, 8, 9, 11, 15-6, 20 n. 88, 35 and n. 20, 47, 52, 78 n. 63, 124-5 n. 300, 139, 199 11. 244, 206 n. 8, 207 n. 14, 208 and 208-9 n. 26, 209 anti n. 27, n. 28, 210 n. 30, n. 31 n. 32, n. 33; (an. comm. on 1r. xu!Liiiv), 150 n. 24.

235

Geminus (stoicus), 41, 194 n. 218. Gehr, H., 27-8, 29 n. 143, n. 145, 57 n. 18, 205, 207 n. 16, 208 n. 25, 227 n. 138. Gellius, Aulus, 149 n. 17, 157 n. 4, 165 n. 44, 167 n. 59, 189 n. 188. Gigon, 0., 136 n. 30, 229 n. 1. Goetze, A., 21-2, 25 n. 115, 26 n. 120. Gomperz, Th., 19 n. 83, 22 n. 102, 26 n.118. Gorgias of Leontini, 21. Gow, A.S. F., 48-9 n. 45. Grensemann, H., 175n. 112,11. 114, 176 11. 119. Groeneboom, P., 49. Gronau, K., 120 n. 278. Grumach, E., 70 n. 28, 71 n. 32, 84 n. 89, 108 n. 213. Guthrie, W.K.C., 57 n. 1, 69 n. 19, 70 n. 24, 73 n. 47, 75 n. 51, n. 56, 126 n. 302.

Hiibler, A., 111 n. 238, 150 n. 26. Hadrian (imp. Caes. Trai. Hadr. Aug.), 162 n. 33. Harder, Chr., 4 n. 9, 5 n. 10, n. 11, 50, 125 n. 300, 199 n. 244, 211. Harder, R., 39, 113 n. 248, 128 n. 313. Heiberg, J.L., 3 n. 5. Heinemann, I., 156 11. 2. Heinimann, F., 178 11. 129. Heisterhagen, R., 185 n. 168, n. 169, 187 and n. 179, n. 180, 188 and n. 181, n. 182. Helmreich, G., 3 n. 6, 37. Heraclides of Pontus, 43 n. 30, n. 34, 57 n. 15. Heraclitus of Ephesus, 29 n. 145, 46, 59 n. 26, 60, 108 n. 213, n. 220, 137 n. 36, 169 n. 69. Hermias of Alexandria, 39 n. 23. Hermippus of Berytus, 162 n. 33, 182 n. 146. Herodicus of Selymbria, 29 n. 145. Herodotus (Pneumatic physician), 216 and n. 71, 219, 220. Herodotus of Thurii, 151. Herophilus of Chalcedon, 98 n. 163,

135 n. 27, 198 and n. 242, 225 n.119. Hesiod, 108 and n. 218, 128. Hiero II, 38. Hitler, E., 163 n. 34, 172 n. 98. Hipparchus of Nicaea, 37, 46, 148 and n.114. Hippasus of Metapontum, 46, 108 n. 220. Hippo of Rhegium, 166, 174 and n. 105, 177 n. 128, 187 n. 178, 190 n.198. Hippocrates, 9, 10, 11 n. 40, 16 n. 65, 33, 35, 162 n. 29, n. 31, n. 33, 165, 172 n. 98, 173 n. 98, 181 n. 141, 187 n. 180, 209, 219 n. 86. Hippolytus of Rome(?), 39 and n. 23, 56 n. 11, 60. Homer, 122 n. 289, n. 291, 146. Hunain ibn Ishaq, 4 n. 9. Iamblichus of Chalcis, 100 n. 175. Ilberg, ]., 3 n. 3, 5 n. 11, 6 n. 15, 7 n. 21, 8 n. 25, 12 and n. 43, n. 44, 13 and n. 45, n. 46, 14 and n. 52, n. 54, 15 n. 58, 16, 17 and n. 67, 18, 20 n. 86, 225 n. 122. Isidorus of Seville, 157 n. 4.

Jaeger, W., 8 n. 25, 10 n. 35, 25 n. 116, 164 n. 39, n. 41, 165 n. 49, 166, 168 and n. 66, 169 n. 69, 170 n. 72, n. 74, 174 n. 103, 175 n. 111, 178 n. 129, n. 133, 183. Joly, R., 25 n. 116, 26 n. 118. ]ones, R.M., 100 n. 169, 103 n. 185, 121 n. 285, 122 n. 296, 157 n. 7, 160 n. 22. ]ones, W.H.S., 19 n. 81, 32 n. 1, 33 n. 3, n. 5, 135 n. 27. ]urk, ]., 175 n. 112. Kahn, Ch.H., 44 n. 36, n. 38,45 n. 40· 56 n. 9, 62 and n. 41. Kaibel, G., 146 n. 1, 148 n. 10. Kalbfleisch, K., 5 n. 11, 36 n. 22, 80 n. 73, 150 n. 24. Karpinski, L.C., 157 n. 4. Kerschensteiner, ]., 28-9, 43 n. 29,

236

n. 30, n. 31, 44 n. 35, 45 n. 39, n. 40, 137 n. 36. Kern, 0., 41. Kirk, G.S., 44 n. 37. Kleywegt, A.]., 87 n. 104. Koster, W.J. W., 23 n. 103, 24 n. 106, 26 n. 117, 32 n. 1. Krahner, L. H., 185 n. 168. Kriimer, H.]., 73 n. 47, 98 n. 163, 157 n. 4, 158 n. 11, 159 n. 15, n. 16. Kranz, W., 19 n. 78,22 n. 101,24,25-6, 29 n. 145, 45 n. 40, 54, 56 and n. 8, 57 and n. 16, n. 17, 58 and n. 19, 59 and notes, 60 and n. 32, 61 and n. 34, 64 and n. 51, 65 and n. 52, 125 n. 300, 126 n. 301, n. 302, 174 n.104. Kroll, ]., 123 n. 296. Kroll, W., 114 n. 252. Kudlien, F., 33 n. 8, 34-5, 102 n. 183, 130 n. 4, 135 n. 27, 178 n. 129,213 n. 53, 222 n. 102, n. 103, 226 n. 126, n. 128. n. 129, 227 n. 134. Kuhlewein, H., 176 n. 119.

Lasserre, F., 25 n. 116. Lesky, A., 33 n. 3, n. 8.

Littre, E., 3 n. 3, n. 4, 4 n. 7, 6 n. 15, n. 17, 7 n. 21, n. 23, 8 n. 24, n. 27, 9 n. 30, 10 n. 31, 11 n. 38, n. 40, 12 and n. 41, 14, 16 n. 65, 33, 36. Leucippus of Mi.letus, 136 n. 32. Lloyd, G.E.R., 67 n. 12, 69 n. 19, 71 n. 35, 76 n. 59, 107 n. 207. Lobeck, C. A., 49 n. 45. Lommer, F., 5 n. 10, 15-6, 18 n. 70, 212 n. 44, 214 n. 56. Lonie, I. M., 13 n. 44, n. 48, 15 n. 54, 37, 220-1 n. 96. Lorimer, W.L., 111 n. 235, 113 n. 246, 116 n. 258, 122 n. 289. Louis, P., 176 n. 119. Lydus, Ioann. Laurentius, 48 n. 44, 157 n. 4.

1\faass, E., 25 n. 116. Macrobius, Ambrosius Theodosius, 157 n. 4, 163 and n. 37, 164 ff., 174, 178, 180 n. 139, 181 and n. 140,

182, 183, 184, 197, 198, 200 and n. 245, 201 and n. 251, n. 253, 202. ]'y[aguire, ].P., 111n. 235, 113n. 246, 116 n. 258, 121 n. 286, 124 n. 296, 128 n. 315. Maimonides, Moses, 150 n. 24. :!VIartianus Capella, 157 n. 4, 163 and n. 37, 170-l, 174, 197. Masselink,]. F., 146 n. 1, 148 n. 8, 154 11. 46. Meleager of Gadaf'a, 48. de Menasce, ].P., U. n. 99, 23 n. 103. Menestor of Sybaris(?), 40. Meno (peripateticus), 1.35 n. 27. 1\-Jerlan, Ph., 158 n. 11, 159 n. 15, 160 and n. 22, 161 n. 24, 194 11. 217, 195 n. 223. Meto of Athens, 30 n. 148. Metrodorus of Chios, 18 n. 76, 27 n. 127, 38, 56 n. 11, 58, 137. Afette, H.]., 49 n. 45. 1\II-ichler, Il·f., 22 n. 99. Moderatus of Gades, 160 n. 22, 163 and n. 34, 170-2, 173 n. 98, 174, 179, 181, 182. 11foraux, P., 69 n. 21. Moreau, ]., 93 n. 136, 99 n. 167, n. 168, 211 n. 39. Mrass, K., 3 n. 3, 21, 164 n. 34. Muller, C., 148 n. 8. Miiller, C. W., 10 n. 36. Mugler, Ch., 51. Abdalla b. al-Muqaffa, 23 n. 104.

Nachmanson, E., 7 and n. 20, n. 21, n. 22. ibn al-Nadim, 23 n. 104. Nero (N. Claud. Caes. Aug. Germ.), 33. Nicolaus of Rhegium, 33 n. 8. Nicomachus of Gerasa, 157 n. 4, 163ff., 174, 178, 180 and n. 139, 11. 140, 181 and n. 140, 182-4, 185 n. 162, 197, 198 and n. 235, n. 236, 200 and n. 245, 201 and n. 254, 202, 204 n. 264. Nielsen, K., 146 n. 1, n. 4, 148 n. 9, n. 10, n. 12, n. 13, 149 n. 16, n. 17, n. 20, n. 21, n. 22, 150 n. 23, n. 25,

237

151 11. 28, 11. 32, 152 n. 36, n. 37, 154 and n. 40, n. 48.

O'Brien, D., 56 n. 11, 58 n. 22. Ocellus Lueanus, 99 n. 167, 128. Oribasius of I'crgamum, 164.

Page, D., 48-9 n. 45. Panaetius of Rhodes, 89 n. 120, 128. Pannenides of El ea, 30 n. 148, 57, 131 n. 8, 136 n. 32. Pease, A.S., 73 11. 46, n. 47, 89 n. 120, 101 n. 179, 120 n. 278, HOn. 13, 184 n. 15fi, n. 157. Peck, A.L., 72 11. 40, 76 11. 57, 176 n. 119. Peters, F. E., 22 11. 99, 23 11. 104. Pfeiffer, E., 21 and notes, 22 n. 100, 29 n. 145, 125 n. 300. Pherecydes of Syros, 44 and n. 35. PMtippson, R., 87 n. 104, 94 n. 148, 95 11.149. Philistion of Locri, 223 n. 112. Philo Judaeus, 3 and n. 5, 41, 47 and n. 44, 99 n. 167, t09 n. 226, 110 and n. 228, 112 n. 241, 123 n. 296, 128 and n. 313, n. 314, 130-1 n. 4, 143-4 aud notes, 145, 157 n. 4, 162,169n.69, J73n.98,174,178 n. 129, 181 and n. 140, 182 n. 146, n. 148, 185, 192 and n. 201. 197 and n. 234, 198, 199 and n. 243, 200 and n. 247, 201, 202, 203 n. 263, 204 n. 266. Philolaus of Croton, 26 n. 124, 30 n. 148, 38, 47, 62 and n. 44, 63. Plato, 37, 43, 47,64 n. 49,66 ff., 74, 78, 89 and n. 120, 98 n. 163, 105 and n. 195, 107, 122n. 289, n. 291,1234n. 296, 128 and n. 312, 136 n. 30, 137-8 n. 36, 141, 142 and n. 25, 143, 156 n. 2, 160 and n. 18, l7S n. 129, 179, 192 n. 203, 201, 204·, 211 n. 40, 212, 213, 223 n. 112, 229, 230. Plautus, T. Maccius, 125 n. 300. Pliny, the Elder, 144 and n. 40, 145 n. 43, n. 44, 149 and n. 17.

Plotinus, 164 n. 39 Plutarch of Chaeroneia, 1.93, 195, 204 11.264. Pohlenz, M., 86 n. l 02, 87 n. 103, 88 n. 118, 94, 109 n. 222. Polybus of Cos, 135 n. 27. Pompcy (Gn. Pomp. Magnus). 181J. Porphyry of Tyrns, J64 n. 39, 172 n. 98. Posidonius of Apameia, 20 n. 88, 33 and n. 8, 34, 36 u. 22, 40, 4·7, 86, 87 n. 104, 89 n. 120, 92, 93, 94-.'5, 96ff., 111 n. 235, 112, l14-5n. 252, 115 n. 256, 119 n. 272, 126 n. 304, 127, 128. 129, 130 n. 4, 135 n. 27, 136 n. 30, 142 n. 27, 143 n. 28, 144 n. 40, 149 n. 47, 156 and n. 2, 157 and n. 3, n. 6, n. 7, 158 and n. 9, n. 11, 159, 160 and n. 18, n. 22, 161 and n. 24, n. 25, n. 26, 179-84, 191, 192 and n. 203, 192-6, 197, 199 and n. 24·3, 201. and n. 248, n. 254, 202-5, 211-2 n. 40, 213 n. 53, 226-7, 229-31. Praxagoras of Cos, 225 n. 119. Proclus Diadochus, 195 n. 221. Prorus (pythagoricus), 169 n. 69. Ptolemy, Claudius, 23 n. 104, 39, 145 n. 44, 148. Ptolemy Philndclphns, 147 n. 6. Pythagoras of Samos, 42 and n. 26, 44 n. 35, 65 and n. 55, 128 n. 312, 190 n.198. Pytheas of Massilia, 47. Regrnbor;en, 0., 176 n. 119. Rehm, A., 25 n. 116, 105 n. 197, 146 n. 1, 147 n. 5, n. 6, n. 7, 148 and n. 14, 149 n. 16, n. 18, 150 n. 23, n. 24, n. 25, 151 n. 28, 152, 153, 154 and n. 45. Reifferscheid, C. W. A., 148 n. 11. Reinhardt, K., 20 n. 88, 86 and n. 103, 88 n. 118, 92, 94 and n. 140, n.144, 102 Il. 183, 103 11. 187, 114-5 n. 252, 1.15 n. 256, 127 and n. 306, 135 n. 27, 13611. ~0. 1.43 n. 28, 156 n. 2, 157 n. 7, 184 11. 155, n. 156, 193 n. 204.

238

Reitzenstein, R., 21 n. 98, 123 n. 296, 148 n. 10. Robbins, F.E., 157 and n. 4, 158 and n. 8, n. 10, 161 and n. 28, 163 and n. 33, n. 36, n. 37, n. 38, 164 n. 39, 171 n. 86, n. 94, 172 n. 97, 173, 181, 191 n. 198, 197 and n. 231. Robin, L., 38. Rohr,]., 140 n.12, 143, 145 n. 43, n. 44. Roscher, W.ll., 3 n. 6, 4IL 7, n. 8, n. 9, S n. 11, 6 n. 18, 21, 11 n. 40, 16, 17-9, 20 and n. 90, 21, 24, 25 and n. 115, 27 and n. 132, 28 and n. 134, 36 n. 22. 50 n. 49, 54, 56 and n. 8, 58 n. 19, 59 n. 25, n. 26, n. 29, 60 n. 31, 65 and n. 57, 77 n. 62, 134 n. 25, 138, 139 n. 4, 152 n. 34, 154 n. 45, 161 n. 25, 164 n. 39, 167 n. 55, n. 57. 168 n. 61, 169 n. 69, 172 n. 98, 175 n. 107, n. 110, n. 112, 176 n. 117, 178 n. 133, 182 n. 152, 184 11. 157, n. 158, n. 160, 199 n. 243, n. 244, 202 n. 259, 204 n. 264, 205, 206, 208, 209 n. 27, 211, 214. Rose, V., 24 n. 112. Rosenthal, F., 23 n. 104. Rusche, F., 99 n. 169, 211 n. 39. Sarton, G., 130 n. 4. Schaeder, H., 21 n. 98. Schanz, M., 189 and n. 191. Schmekel, A., 156 and n. 2, 157 and n. 3, n. 5, n. 6, 159, 161 n. 25, 163 n. 34, 192 and n. 203, 193 n. 204. Schneider, C., 20 n. 88. SchOner, E., 135 n. 27, 213 n. 53. Scott, W., 123 n. 296, 126 n. 305, 127 n. 309. Seneca, L. Annaeus, 104 and n. 194, 107, 114-5 n. 252, 148 n. 10, 149 n. 17. Sextus Empiricus, 156 and n. 2, 157 and n. 7. Shahpuhr I, 22 n. 99, 23 n. 104. Siclterl, M., 162-3 n. 33. Siebeck, H., 86 n. 102. Sinnige, Th.G., 56 n. 13.

Skemp,]. B., 38 n. 23, 67 n. 5, n. 11, 68 n. 14. Solmsen, F., 68 n. 16, 69 n. 18, 70 n. 28, 72 n. 40, n. 44, 76 n. 57, 82 n. 78, 86 n. 102, 87 n. 104, 88 n. 118, 89 n. 120, 90 n. 121, 93 n. 135, n. 136, 95 and n. 148, 97 n. 162, 98 n. 163, 100. Solon of Athens, 40, 46, 161, 162 and n. 29, n. 31, n. 33, 171 and n. 86, n. 92, 174 and n. 103, n. 104, 175, 177, 178, 18.1 n. 141, 187 n. 180, 188 n. 180, 197 n. 233. Sontheimer, W., 140 n. 12. Speusippus of Athens, 160 and n. 22, 161 n. 24. Speyer, W., 186 n. 172, 187 n. 179a. Sprengel, K., 164 n. 39. Staehle, K., 48 n. 44. Staltl, rv. H., 94 n. 138, 164 n. 39. Steckerl, F., 225 n. 119. Steinmetz, P., 4+ n. 37, 45 n. 41, n. 42, 46 n. 42, 82 n. 77, n. 78, n. 79, 83 n. 80, n. 84, 84 n. 90, 85 n. 93, n. 96, n. 98, n. 99, 86 n. 102, 90 n. 121, 96 and n. 158, 97 n. 162, 131 n. 71. Stephanus of Athens, 10 n. 35. Sticker, G., 216 n. 69. Stobaeus, Ioann., 141 n. 25, 142 n. 26, n. 27, n. 28. Strabo of Amaseia, 151 n. 27, 184 n. 157. Strato of Lampsacus, 38, 40, 137, 164 f£., 165 and n. SO, 168 n. 60, 174 and n. 103, n.105, 177-8,181, 183 n. 152, 203 and n. 263. Strohm, H., 97 n. 160, n. 161, 113 n. 246, 116 n. 259, 118 n. 270, n. 271, 121 n. 285, n. 286, 122 n. 271, 124 n. 296, 128 n. 315. Switalski, B. W., 157 n. 5, 172 n. 98. Temkin, C.L., 178 n. 129. Temkin,O., 178 n.129. Thales of Miletus, 39, 61, 62, 86, 107, 108 n. 217. Theagenes of Rhegium, 41.

239

Theiler, W., 22 n. 102, 26 n. 118, 29 n. 145, 31 n. 151, 48 n. 44, 94 n. 140, 98 n. 163, 100 n. 169, 128 n. 313. Theano (pythagorica), 1o6 n. 53. Theo of Smyrna, 51, 58 n. 22, 59 n. 25, 157 n. 4, 158 n. 8, 163 and n. 34, n. 37, 166 n. 53, 170-1, 172 n. 96, n. 97, n. 98, 173 and n. 98, n. 99, 179, 180, 181 aml n. 1.40, 183, 192 n. 203, 197, 198 and n. 242, 200, 204 n. 266. Theophrastus of Lesbos, 29 n. 144, 30 n. 148, Ch. Tf passim, 52-3, 74 n. 47, 82 ff., 86 and n. 99, n. 102, 95 n. 148, n. 154, 96 and notes, 98 n. 163, 101 n. 175, n. 179, 102 n. 182, 128, 131 and n. 7, 135 n. 27, 137 n. 36, 143, 160 n. 23, 176 n. 119, 230. Thompson, D'Arcy W., 146 n. 1. Thrasyalces of Thasos, 151 and n. 27, 154 n. 49. Thrasyllus of Mendes, 163 n. 34. Timaeus of Tauromenium, 188. Timosthenes of Rhodes, 147 and n. 6, 148 and n. 8, n. 10, n. 11, 150. Tricot,]., 176 n. 119. Tubero, L.Aelius, 186 and n. 173, 187, 192 n. 198. Tubero, Q. Aelius, 186 and n. 174, 187. Varro, M. Terentius, 3 n. 5, 94 n. 141, 131 n. 4, 148, 149 n. 17, 157 n. 4, 158 n. 9, 159, 161, 162, 163 and n. 33, n. 36, 164 n. 39, 165, 167 n. 59, 170 n. 73, n. 75, n. 77, 173, 174, 179 n. 134, 182 n.146, 185-92, 203 n. 263, 229. Verbeke, G., 212 n. 40, 213 n. 53, 223 n. 112, 224 n. 116. Verdenius, W.J., 107 n. 209. Vitruvius (M. Vitruv. Pollio), 149 and n. 17. Vogel, C.]. De, 19 n. 81, n. 84, 24 n. 109, 25 n. 115,42 n. 26,64 n. 51, 65 n. 52, n. 55, 73 n. 47, 94 n. 138, n. 141, n. 146,98 n. 163,99 n. 167,

102 n. 183, 103 n. 186, 160 n. 19, 188 n. 185, 20-4 n. 266, 211-2 n. 40. Vogt, E., 25 n. 113. Vries, C.]. De, 39 n. 23, 67 n. 3, n. 5, 122 n. 288. fV agner, E., 45 n. 41. Wagner, E.A., 148 n. 8. Waszink, ].H., 126 n. 303, 172-3 n. 98. Weddingcn, R.-E. van, 162 n. 33. Wehrli, F., 128 n. 313, 165 n. 50. Wellmann, 111., 7 n. 21, 10 n. 35, n. 36, 11 n. 38, 24 and notes, 31 n. 151, 33 n. 8, 97 n. 162, 156 n. 2, 164 11. 39, 165 n. 45, n. 50, 167 11. 59, 168 n. 66, 183 n. 148, 213 n. 53, 214 11. 58, 11. 59, n. 60, 215 n. 62, 11. 65, 11. 66, n. 67, 216 and n. 69, n. 71,217 n. 72, 11. 73, n. 76, 11. 77, n. 78, 218 n. 81, n. 83, n. 84, 219 n. 85, n. 87, n. 88, 220 and n. 89, 11. 91, n. 93, 221 11. 98, 222 11. 100, n. 102, 11. 105, 223 n. 112, 224 11. 114, n. 115, n. 116, 225 11. 119, n. 120, 11. 124, 226 n. 126, n. 129, n. 132. Wendland, P., 130-1 n. 4, 164 n. 39. Widengren, G., 22 n. 99. Wiersma, W., 98 n. 163,9911. 169, 100 n. 169. Wimmer, F., 38, 176 n. 119. Wolfson, H.A., 89 n. 121.

Xenocrates of Chalcedon, 43 n. 34, 121 11. 285, 12:1 n. 296, 159 11. 15, 160. Xenopho11 of Athens, 151 and n. 32, 154.

Zaehner, R.C., 23 n. 104. Zarathustra, 22 n. 99. Zatspram, 23 11. 104. Zeller, E., 45 n. 40, 83 n. 80, 95 n. 154, 101 n. 181, 121 n. 286, 123 n. 295, 157 n. 7. Ze11o of Citium, 8611. 102, 88 n. 114, 89 n. 121, 91 n. 127, 95 n. 154, 96 n. 155, 99 n. 168, 100 n. 171, 108, 109 n. 222, 111, 194 n. 219.

240

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Academy, Early (s. also universe, tripartite division of; World-Soul). 43 and 11. 34, 44, 68, 74 n. 48, 98 n. 163, 159 n. 15, 160 and n. 19-22, 230. acute diseases (s. also fevers), 1, 13, 15, 136, 215 and n. 65. &l~w:, &lBto.; (s. also eternal beings), 58-9 n. 24, 70 and n. 25, 77 and n. 62, 78, 84, 93, 127-9, 138 n. 36. air (s. also elements etc.; meteorology), 60 and n. 31, 76, 79, 82, 85, 87, 90 and n. 123, lOOn. 171, 109 and n. 222, 113 ff., 117 and n. 263, n. 264, 120, 132, 143, 182 n. 148, 206; cold a., 10, 79, 82, 87 n. 111, 90 n. 123, 97 n. 162, 100 and n. 171, 134 n. 24, 206, 207, 208-9 n. 26, 209, 218, 222-3; a. supporting the earth 60, 86, 109-10, 114 n. 252. IXra01Jcn.; (s. perception) ; rpwv'f)-rtwf) and cr"ep[LtXTtx-1) et(a6., 169 and n. 69. allopathy, 10 and n. 36, 215 ff. animalia, animals (s. also ~ij>tX), 16, 61. 71 n. 30, n. 32, 72 and n. 40, 74, 85 n. 91, 95 and n. 154, 96, 106, 116, 183, 184, 196, 207 and n. 14, n. 18; heat in an., 83, 87. anonymous arithmologist, 157-9, 161, 172-3 n. 98, 181-2, 185; later than Posidonius, 191-2, 202. ¬n68ocrt.;, 85 n. 98. &v-rotvy(ot (s. also 'Apx-roi)po.;; light, reflected), 26 n. 124, 29 n. 145, 38, 125 n. 300, 137 n. 35. &v-rt"ep(GTIXGt<;, 85 n. 99, 96.

antipodes, 62-3. &r;xpx>h.; (s. also winds etc.), Ch. VC passim, 147 and n. 5. OCrrrjALW't"IJ<; (s. also winds etc.), 25 n. 112, 90 n. 123, Ch. VC passim. Aquarius, 30 n. 148. Arabs, 23 n. 104. archaising, deliberate (s. also Ionic, revival of), 2, 19, 230. ardor (s. also calidum; elements; fire; heat; hot; 6epf1.6v), 89 and n. 119, 92, 93; ardor caeli, a. caelestis = ether, 73 n. 47. arithmetics (s. also mathematics), 51. arithmology (s. also anonymous arithmologist; lists of organs and parts of the human body; number; periods of human life; soul; spheres; wind-rose), 1, 2, 17 n. 70, 21, 26 n. 120, 28, 41, 51, 65, 98 n. 163, 133, 134 n. 25, 143 and n. 35, 144 and n. 38, 154-5, Ch. VI passim, 205, 228, 229, 230; ari thmological writers distinguished, 161 ff., 173-4. 185, 197 ff.; arithmological writers enumerated, 157 n. 4-. &pwno.; (s. also winds), 153-4. "Apx-roc;, 24, 37, 124--5 n. 300, 127, 139 and n. 4, 140 and n. 13, 142 n. 28, 144 and n. 38, 147 n. 5, 151 ff. 'Apx-roupo<;, Arcturus, 37, 124-6, 127, 139, 140 and n. 12; as an example of .Xv-rotuylot, 125 n. 300. &a-rpet. (s. also heaven (outer); heavenly bodies; moon; planets ; stars;

241

sun), 30 and n. 148, 38, 40, 46, 56 n. 11, 57, 76, 82 n. 78, 96 n. 154, 118, 139, 153; astral theology (s. also stars, divinity of), 123 n. 296. &cr-rpcx7t~, 45 and n. 41, 9011. 123. astrology, 125 11. 300, 145, 146, 181 n. 141. astrometeorology, 138-146, 230. astronomy (s. also licr-rpcx; eclipses; heavenly bodies; moon; outer heaven; planets; spheres; stars; sun), 37, 38, 39-40, 41, 49, 138 ff. Atomists, 27 n. 129, 43 n. 28, 57 n. 15. cxuy~ (s. also spheres), 111 11. 235, 112, llSn. 256. cxu-r6/lpop.oc;, S. ClU'rOXtV1)Toc;. cxu-roxtv1)-roc; (s. also self-motion), 38-9, 66 n. 1. Avesta, 22 n. 99, 23 n. 104, 24. Basic concepts of natural philosophy explained by Plato, 63-4. Bear, s. "Apx-roc;. beard (s. also periods of human life), 46, 163, 170 and n. 71, 171, 172, 173 n. 98, 174 n. 104, 181 n. 140. bleeding, 220, 224. blood (s. also bleeding, venae), 210 and n. 30, 220; irrigation-system of the b., 37, 103. body, human (s. also lists of parts am! organs of), 104-6, 133 and 11. 20, n. 22, 134 n. 25, Ch. VI passim, Ch. VII pa.ssim; b. as a map, s. map; mathematico-physical b., 160 n. 24, 193-6. t3op€1)c; (s. also winds), 24, Ch. V C passim, 147, 150, 154. botanical subjects, 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. calidum, calor (s. also ardor; elements;

fire; frigidum; heat; hot; soul; 6e:p[L6v), 11 n. 40, 18 n. 70, 61 11. 38, 79, 80, 81, 87-8, 90-4, 95, 96 and n. 157, lOO and n. 170, 101 11. 180, 103, 124, 126 and n. 301, 11. 302, 127 and n. 309, 208 n. 26, 209 and n. 29, 214 and n. 55, n. 57, 215, 217, 218, 221 11. 97, 222-3; orr:irzale calidum, 10, 208-10, 2223; uis caloris, 103 ff.; vitalis calor, 91, 95, 102 n. 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 scheme, 12 ff. cold, s. air; s. hot, the, and the cold. classicistic trends in the first Cent. B. C., 35, 229-30. clock, celestial, 140 ff. cognition, s. epistemology. condensation, s. 7tuxv
Damdet-Nask, 22 n. 99.

242

death, causes of (s. also heat, destructive), 212, 215-6, 219 n. R5, 222 and n. 99, n. 102, n. 103. de/initio, definitions, 52 n. 51, 226 and n.126. Denkart, 22 n. 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 n. 296; d. in M re., 121 ff.; d. in Corp. Herrn., 123-4 n. 296, 127 n. 309. doxographicalliteratnre (s. also hamlbooks), Ch. II passim, Ch. V B

passim. Earth (s. also antipodes; counterearth; elements; xpicn.;), 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, 1G, 3S, 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 by the air, s. air. eclecticism, 2, 19, 20, 27, 30, 93, 107, 127 ff. ~xw)pwa~.;. 91, 212. e:i(J.IXp(.tev"l), 99 and n. 168, 101 n. 175, 179n.134. Eleatics, 71 n. 29. elemental bodies, 39, 71 ff., 78, 85, 1.04, 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 n. 121, 104 n. 192, 10910, 114ff., 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 A.ristotle, 70 ff., 78, 82 11. 78, 89-90 n. 121, 114 n. 252; th. in Plato, 67 ff., 78; th. in Posidonius, 92, 93-4, 114-5 n. 252, 230; th. in the Stoa, H6 ff., 108 ff., 114 n. 250, n. 252, 230; th. in Theophrastus, 82 ff. elements (s. also air; earth; ether; fire; heat; 6e:p(.l.6v; water), 41, 43, 59 n. 26, 60 n. 31, 64, 68 and n. 14, 71, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89, 90 ff., 91n. 127, 104 n. 192, 107 ff., 111 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; xpiia~.; of e., s. xpiim~; 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. 81; 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, 167 n. 59; in Corp. llipp.: Carn., 165, 174, 175 and n. 107, n. 110, 176, 177 n. 128, 178; Epid., 165, 178; Nat. puer., 165 and n. 43, n. 46, 175 n. 107, 178, 203 n. 263; Oct., 174, 175-6 and 11. 112118; in Diocles, 164-5, 165 ff., 167n. 59, 16S n. 60, 178; in Diodes and Strato ace. to Macrob. and Nicom., 164, 165 ff., 181, 203 n. 263; in Favonius Eulogius, 162 n. 33; in llebd., 203 n. 263; in Hippo, 166, 174 and n. 105; in Moderatus

243

ap.

Theo, 170, 181, 182 n. 146; in Philo, 173 n. 98, 181-2 n. 145, 182 n. 148, 203 n. 263; in 'Pythag'. Hypomn., 99 n. 168, 178-9 n. 134; in Strato, 165 n. 50, 177-8; in the Stoa, 167 n. 57; in Varro, 165, 167 n. 59, 170 n. 73, n. 75, n. 77, 1.79 n. 134, 183 n. 148, 185, 187, 203 n. 263. eV()(\ITtCUG~~ (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 &!otoc), 58, 59, 66, 86, 92,129. ether (s. also elements), 43, 44, 70 n. 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 = ocuyfj, 111 n. 235, 112. etiology of diseases, 1, 12 ff., 15, 97 n. 162, Ch. VII,4 passim, 229. eopo~ (s. also winds), 25 n. 112, Ch. V

Bpassim. 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 t•italis, 94, 96. Fetus (s. also embryology; periods of gestation; seed), complete in the womb, 163, 166 n. 52, 167 and n. 59, 170andn. 73. n. 75, 175n.107, 191 n. 198; development of f., 99 n. 168, 162 n. 33, 166 n. 53, 167 ff.,

173 n. 98, 174 n. 105,175 and n. 107, n. 113, 179 n. 134, 190-1 n. 198; d., enneadic, 164-5, 190-1 n. 198, hebdomadic, 163, 165-166, 167-8, 203 n. 263, tessaracontadic, 167 n. 59, 175 n. 113, 179 n. 134, 191 n. 198; male and female, different development of, 163, 166 n. 52, 170; f. as cpuT6v, 167 11. 57, 180, 183 n. 152; viability of f.: 7 months, 162 11. 33, 166 n. 52, n. 53, 168 and n. 60, 170, 172, 174, 175 and n. 116,176, 181 n. 140, 190 n. 198, 203 n. 263; 8 months, 168 n. 60, 176; 9 months, 166 n. 52, 176, 190-1 n. 198; 10 months, 176, 191 n.l98. fevers (s. also acute diseases), 1, 6 n. 17, 10 and n. 35, 11, 12 n. 41, 13, 14 and n. 51, 15 and n. 60, 135, 212, 214, 215 and n. 65, n. 66, 216-7 and n. 69, 218 and n. 79, 220 and n. 91, n. 92, 223 n. 109, 225 n. 122, 229. fire, ignis, w1p (s. also elements), 43, 68, 79 n. 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), lOO n. 170, n. 171; terrestrial, 82 and n. 79, 97 n. 162; two kinds of in the Stoa, 88 and n. 114, 95 n. 154, 112,212. 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. tppive<; (s. also Ionia), 20 n. 88, 199 n. 244. jrigidum (s. also hot, the and the cold); orginale f., 208-9 n. 26, 210 n. 29, 222-3.
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, 212n. 44, 222 and n. 102, n. 103. heat (s. a.Lo:;o ardr>r; calidum; elements; fire; hot; xpri.m<;; 6&p!J.6v), 28, 61, 81 . 82 ff., 106, 206 H., 208 ff., 214 ff.; destructive, lethal, 88, 210, 212, 215; distributi(m 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 n. 26, 218 n. 84; in man, 125 n. 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, n. 154, 126. heat, theory of; in Cicero's ND II, 86 ff.; in Cleanthes, 91 ff., 102, 212; in I-Jebd., 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, .'>5, 58, 77, 80, 111 and n. 233, 118-9, 127 n. 309, 1214, 137 n. 32, 199 n. 244; cold (s. also xp•Jcr-r~AJ.oe&Sec;), 55, 80 n. 73, 136-7 and n. 33, 207; enclosing, 42 n. 26, 56, 57, 115, 122 n. 290, 136; ensouled, 70 n. 24; inseparable (incl. &xpt-ro<; x6o-tw.;), 6, 55, 115 and n. 256, 126 n. 301, 132 n. 16, 136 n. 32; solid, 27 n. 129, 11.'i n. 256, 136 and n. 32; stars,

relation to, 41, 111 n. 235, 115 n. 256, 120 ff., 143 n. 28; unmoved, 55, 66. 77. 120, 121, 123-4,j26 n. 301, 129. heavenly bodies (s. also licr-rpo:; heaven, outer; moon; planet,;; stars; sun), 56, 57, 73 fi., 75, 92, 93, 105, 117, 118, 122n. 291, 129, 138 ff.; brightness of, 46; divinity of, 59 and n. 24; contrary motions of, 40-1, 138 ff.; ensouled, 67, 7-3 n. 47; heat of and in, 79, 88 n.li5; motion of, 37, 38-9, 47, 49, 50, 57, 67 ff., 73 ff. and n. ·l-7, 75, 92, 137; origin of, s. stars; sequence of, 37, 47, 56-7. heavens, changing colours of, 106 n. 206, 137; divinity of, 70 n. 25, 84 n. 89; motion of, 74, 75-6, 111, 120; remoteness of, 69; revolution of, 66, 67, 121. heavy and light, 64, 71 ff., 82, 109-10. History of Medicine, 135 n. 27. hot, the (s. ardor; calidum; elements; fire; heat; Oep!J.OV) ; hot, meaning of discussed by Aristotle, 82 n. 78; - (and cold). defined in Ilebd. Ch. 13, 208-9 and n. 26. hot, the and the cold (s. also elemental qualities), 1, 10, 11 n. 40, 17 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 Theophras.. tus, 82, 85, 96; the hot, the cold, the wet and the dry, l3, 1.'5-6, 18 n. 70, 206-10; the hot, the cold, the wet and the dry in Pneumatic Medicine, 214-5. humidum, (lt)umor (s. also moisture; uyp6v; water), 61 n. 38, 90, 104, 106, 190-1 n. 198, 210, 214 and n. 56,n. 57,n. 58,215,216,217,220, 221 n. 97. humours, 16, 37, 210 and 11. 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

7 5, 98 ff., 131 and n. 8, 178-9 n. 134, 191 n. 198

latrica, s. 11istoty of Medicine; s. physiology, history of. 'innere Forn1', s. word. Ionia (s. also cpptve~). J 9, 20 n. 88; Ionian origin of certain wind11a·· roes, 147 n. 5; Ionian philosophy, 18-9, 25; louic, revival of, 33··5, 50, 53, 226, 230. Jupiter, s. planets; s. Zeus. Ko.:uao<; (s. also fevers), 10-ll, 13. 215

n.65. x(v'ljil'ater, 28 and n. 133, 61 n. 38, 79, 80 and n. 73, 81, 90, 11.0, 205. xpua">o.:).Aoo:ti.le~. -8li>;, xpuau:\Ao;, 56, 57, 137 and n. 33. Life, s. vitalism; periods of human, s. periods. light, reflected (s. also &no:uy(o.:; 'Apx">oupo;), 46, 58, 137; derived, 58 n. 22, 125 n. 300. liquid element, s. water.

liRts of organs and parts of the human body, hebdomadic, 197-202; in Rebel., 199-202; in Hebd. and in other works, comparison of, 199202. living beings, s. animalia, s. ~4'Jo.:. A6yo<; and cognition, 193 n. 210; b!iltcx.6i:To.; ).., 168 and n. 67, 169 n. 68, 180; ·r.:FocpoptKc.; A., 168 and n. 67, 169 n. 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 note;;. Map, in Hebd. Ch. 11 (s. also microcosm-macrocosm), 19-20, 133 n. 22, 199 n. 244, 200 and n. 246, :202 and n. 259. !J.tXViilcrt<;, S, 7t'1lX\Iiilatl,;.

mathematics (s. also arithmetics; criterion; number-theory), ancillary science to philosophy, 135 n. 27; m. and epistemology, 156-7 n. 2, 157 n. 3, 193·6; mathematical realism of Posidonius, 193 ff.; philosophy of maU1ematics, 158 n. 8, 160-l n. 24. medicine (s. also acute diseases; allopathy; Cnidian School; Corpus Hippocmticum; embryology; etiology; fevers; Pneumatic School; Posidonius; prognosis; semiology; therapy} Ch. I passim; Ch. VII, 4 passim; ancillary science to philosophy, 13.5 n. 27; Greek, in Persia, 22 n. 99, 23 n. 104. mens in-.. qn).., 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. 3.1, 71 n. 29, 85, 117 and n. 263, n. 26+, 132 and n. 16, 134, 143, 182 n. 14-8, 214 n. 56. 215.

246

microscosm-macrocosm (s. also map), -parallell3, 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; in Greater Hwndahisn, 22-4, 26; in Hebd. part I, 1, 13, 17 and n. 66, 20 n. 88, 21, 22 and n. 100, 23 n. 103, 25 n. 115, 26 and n. 118, 79, 92, 103-7, 115, 124-5, 199 n. 244, 204 n. 264, 206-7 and n. 8, 228; in Hebd. part II, 1, 206-7 and n. 8, 211 and n. 3S, 221 n. 97, 228, 229; 1-lebd. and Vict. compared, 105-7; in Posidonius, 20 n. 88, 106-7, 211-2 n. 40; in Seneca, 104-5; in Plato':> Tim., 105 n. 195; in Vict., 22 n. 102, 26 and n. 117, n. 118, 105-6; in Plutarch, 204 n. 264. Milesians, 29, 54, 57. fLt!J.l)atc; etc. (:;. also microcosm-macrocosm), 29 n. 145, 105-7. fLi~tc;, mixture (s. also xpiir.n;), 83, 86 n. 102, 89 11. 121. model and copy, relation between, s. microcosm-macrocosm, Hebd. and Vict. compared; models, cosmological, s. cosmology. moisture (s. also elements; llumidum; water), 36-7, 61, 108, 206, 212, 217, 219, 225. month (s. also lunar cycle), 39, 47, 48, 51, 76 n. 60, 140 n. 14, 144 n. 37. moon (s. also lunar cycle), 115, 117-8, 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, sublunary and supralunary world), 20 n. 8:i, 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; cpuat;;), 40, 47, 55, 58, 59, 66 ff., 77 and n. 62, 86, 98 n. 163, 112, 11.9 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. 36; Plato's theory of, 66 ff., 78, 89, 138 n. 36, 204; Stoic theory of, 86 ff., 92 ff., 111 ff., 120, 138 n. 36; Theophrastus' theory of, 82 ff., 84 n. 89; theory of taken for granted in llebd., 66, 78. mountains, formation of according to Theophrastus, 82 n. 79.

Natura, natural, nature (s. also 'P''>ot~). 70 ff. night and day, 140 n. 14, 179-80. Neoplatonic, Neoplatonism, 159 n. 15, 164n. 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; n. conceived 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. abo sea), 184 and n. 158. Qy8<J.Xt;, 123 11. 296. OAU[l7ttO<;, oi,U!J.r.o.:; (s. x6a[Loc;; o6Fctv6~;

247

also heaven; 27 n.

Gm~:Toc;),

129, 42, 43, 57 and n. 16, 119, 121 and n. 285, 122 and n. 289, 124, 127 n. 309. ope:x-r6v, i)pe:~L~, 71 n. 32, 72 n. 40. Orion, 139, 140 and n. 12. oupocv6<; (s. also heaven; x6cr[Lo<;; i5AU[L7rO<;; fJ7rOCTO<;), 42 n. 26, 43, 445, 67 n. 5, 111, 121 n. 285, 122 and n. 290, 132, 137 n. 33. IIocv•p6cpo<;, 48-9,61,81, 106 11. 203, 116 and 11.258. miyo<; (s. also heaven, outer), 6, 27 n. 129. parapegma, parapegmatists (s. also calendar), 25 n. 116, 148 and n. 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 ff., 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 n. 72; in Oct., 175 and n. 113; in 'Pythag.' Hypomn., 99 n. 168, 178-9 n. 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. :Carn., 174, 175and n. 110, 176, 178 and n. 133; Oct., 17 5 and n. 112 ; in Diodes and Strato ace. to Macro b. 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 n. 33; in Hippo, 174-5; in Moderatus ap. Theo, 163, 170-1, 172 n. 95, n. 97, 181, 182 n. 146; in the Peripatus, 176-8; in Philo, 169 n. 69, 173 n. 98, 180-1 n. 140, 181 n.145, 182 n. 148, 203 n. 263; in Posidonius, s. periods of human life and of gestation, parallel and relation between; in 'Pyth.' Hypomn., 179 n. 134; in Solon, 171, 174n.103, 178,181 n. 140; in the Stoa, 169 n. 69; in Strato, 165 n. 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, 17 4-5; 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, 178n. 130; in Corp. Hipp.: Carn., 175; Oct., 175-6; in Diodes, 164 ff., 177-8; in Diodes and Strato ace. to Macrob. and Nicom., 164, 165, 166-7, 167 n. 59, 170, 175, 178; in Favonius Eulogius, 162 n. 33; in Hippo, 174-5; in Moderatus ap. Theo, 163, 170-1, 181; in Philo, 173 n. 98, 181 n. 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 Il, 87 ff., 97 n. 162, 104. physiology, history of, 135 n. 27. planets (s. also &cr•poc; 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 B passim, 202 n.

248

259; motion and orbits of, 41, 70 n. 25, 74-5, 142-3 n. 28, Ch. V B passim; p. and the seasons, 30 and n. 150, 139 and Ch. V B passim, 182 n. 148, 230; p. and the seasons taken for granted in Hebd., 145-6; the 'seven planets', 21 and n. 93, 24 n. 108, 29-30 n. 148, 30 and n. 150,42,57 n. 17, 1.23 n. 296, Ch. V H passim, 139 n. 4, 182-3 n. 148; Jupiter, 126 n. 301. plants, 16, 61, 71, 74, 85 n. <)J, 91, 96, 106, 116, 183 and n. 151, 207 and n. H; heat in, 83. Pleiads, 25 n. 116, 30, 37, 139 and n. 4, 140 and n. 12, 144. n-ve\i[J.IX (s. also spiritus; Pneumatic School), 39, 45. 97 n. 162, Zll 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, 231; 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; 6e:piJ.O'I), 214-5; etiology, 214, 215 and n. 65, n. 66, 216-7, 218, 223 n. 109, 225, 230; influence upon Hebd. part Il, Ch. VII,4 passim, 229; i. upon other treatises in the Corpus Hippocraticurn, 33 and n. 5, n. 8, 34, 35; microcosm-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 Index of Names; anonymous arithmologist; &v·nrre:plcrTo:cr~~; 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 and of gestation, parallel between; Pneumatic School; psychology; seed; self-motion; Stoic ideas in Nicomachus; Stoic handling of 'Pythagorean' material; sun; Vet. plac.; vitalism; World-Soul); Commentary (or Comments) on the Tima.eHs 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 Hebd. part I, 204; on lld,d. as a whole, 22931 ; Pos. on intelligibilia and sensibilia, 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 11. 256. 7t'flii~~<; in Aristotle's cosmology, 73 11. 47, 74, 75 and 11. 52; in Aristotle's ethical theory (s. also voluntas), 73-4n. 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 11. 127, 29 n. 144, n. 145, 30, 31 n. 151, 45, Ch. Ill passim, 79 n. 71, 98 n. 163, 126 n. 301, n. 302, 131n. 8. 136-8, 230-1. prognosis (s. also semiology), 12 n. 41, n.44. psychology of llebd. (s. also soul; World-Soul), 10, 11, 13, 28 n. 134, 37,134,208-11,221 n. 97, 227; of Posidonius, 193 ff.; in 'Pythag.' Hypomn., 99 ff.; Stoic p., s. Stoa. puberty, s. sexual maturity. n-u)(vcucr~~ and fl.&vwcr~.; (s. also O''JtrT<Xcr~.;), 46-7,58 and n. 19, 100 and n. 171, 107 ff. pulse, 221 n. 97, 224-5 and n. 119. Pythagoreanism (s. also Hypomnemata; Stoa), 18 n. 75, 21, 24· and n. 108, 38, 41, ·H, 49, 57, 64, 65. 98 n. 163, 98 ff., 156 and n. 2, 158 n. 11, 159, 188 and n. 185, 189 and

249

n. 188, n. .189, 191 n. 198; Pythagoreans, 21, 29 n. 145, 38, 42 n. 26, 47, 48, 98 n. 163, 156. Qualities, s. elemental qualities. Rarefaction, s. 7tU)(VW<JL; and (l.civu>
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 sense;; in the Stoa, 168-9 and n. 69, 180. sexual maturity (s. also menstruation; periods of human life; seed; senses, seven, in the Stoa), 163, 169 n. 69, 170, 171, 172, 174-5, 177, 180 and n. 139, 181 n. 140. siccitas, siccwn (s. also elemental qualities; spiritus, ar-idus; the hot, the cold, 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 11. 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 n. 20, 160, 193-6, 208-10; departing, 219 n. 85; heat (c.q. the hot) of, 10, 13, 37, 99 ff., 208-10, 221 n. 97, 228 n. 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 definitio), 52 n. 51, 214 n. 56. speech (s. also J.6yo<; 7tpo<pop~)(o<;; periods of human life), 133, 134 and 11. 25, 168 and n. 67, 169 and n. 69, 171, 180 and n. 139, .180-J. n. 140, 192 n. 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. 240, 115, 120, 122 ff., 123 n. 296, 132, liB n. 150, 204 11. 264; cosmological, 42, 43 and n. 34, 44-5, 55, 57, 80, 83 and n. BO, 85, lO<J- tO, lll ff., ll45 and n. 252, 132, 183 n. 150, 204 n. 264. spiritus (s. a,lso rrvevp.!X), 1!)4 ; aridus spiritus, 208 n. 26, 211, 214 n. 56; vitalis spiritus, 114 n. 252. stars (s. also &cr.-pa.; heaven, outer; heavenly bodies; motion; planeh; spheres), 18, 41, 55, 56, 74, 77, 80, 124 ff., 132 and n. 13, 134 n. 26, Ch. V B passim; brightness of, 45-6, 55; constellations (s. also Aquarius; "Apx.-oc;; 'Apx>oupoc;; 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 11. 34, 57, 111 11. 235, 11411. 252, 115, 123 11. 296, 138, 139 n. 4, 144, 145; heat of, 55, 79, SO and n. 73, 88, 91, 124; motion of, 74, 75, 111; origin of, 88, 91 11. 127, 92; 7tpii~t~ of, 73-5; revolution of, 49-50; reflected light of (s. also &v.-o-:uy(oc; 'Apx-roupoc;), 18 n. 76, 27 11. 129, 38, 58, 125 n. 300, 137. Stoa (s. also elements, theory of; embryology; fire, two kinds of; xpiicrtc;; motion; periods of human life, hebdomadic; PneumaticMedicine; self-motion; World-Soul), 31 n. 151, 33, 34, 39, 86 ff., 100 ff., 104, 116 11. 258, 127 n. 309, 168 and n. 65, 169 and n. 69; Stoic cosmogony, 100, 107-8; Stoic cosmology, 39, 86 ff., 108 ff., 114 n. 250, n. 252, 126 11. 302, 207 n. 22; Stoicizing versions of Heraclitus, 59 n. 26, 99 n. 167, 169 n. 69; Stoic conception of mathematics,

104-5; Stoic ideas in Nicomachus, 167 n. 57, 168 and n. 65, 160 and n. 69, 180, 182-4 (Posirlonius); Stoic physics, 114 n. 250, n. 252, 128-0; Stoic psychology, 99 ff., 211 anll n. 39, 11. 40; Stoic handling of 'Pythagorean' material, 156 n. 2, 157 n. 3, 194 n. 212; Stoic ideas in the 'l'ythag.' lfypomn., 99-100; Stoic theology, 39, 116 11. 258, 127 n. 309, 136 11. 30; Stoa and 1'heophrastus, 53 n. 53, 84 n. 89, 86 and 11. 102. sttl>l1111ary and snpralunary world, s. universe. summer and winter (s. also seasons); in the course of a month, 76 n. 60. cruf1.rr:X6e:Loc, sympathy (cosmic), 11)2 n. 148, 184 and n. 155, n. 158, n. 162. 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 11. 182, 140, 142-3 n. 28, 144; sustaining power of, 76 and n. 58, n. 59, 83 and n. 82, 84, 91 and n. 127, 101, 102 n. 181, n. 182, 143 n. 28; = Zeus, 127; in Aristotle, 76 and n. 57, n. 58, n. 59; in Cleanthes, 91 and 11. 127, 102 and n. 181, n. 182; in Hebd., 55, 79, 80, 82, 101, 127; in Posidonius, 102-3; in Theophrastus, 83-5, 102 n. 183.
251

170-1, 174 and n. 104, 175, 176, 190 n. 198. theories, use of, s. explaining power. therapy {s. also Cnidian School; Pneumatic Sehool). 1, 6 n. 17, 10, 11, 12 n. 41, n. 44, 13 and 11. 44. n. 49, 15, 217-9, 223, 224, 225, 22(/, 230. Oepp.ov (s. also ardor; calidum; elemental qualities; fire; heat; hot). l1 11. 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 n. 183, 207 and n. 20, 219 n. 85, 221. n. 97, 222 and n. 102, 223 n. 109; in Pneumatic theory. 97 n. 162, 214 ff.; in Theophrastus, 82 ff .. 97 n. 162. time-reckoning, s. calendar. transcendence vs. immanence in 111lu., 121-4. 'Yyp6v (s. also elements; lmmidum; moisture; water), 108 n. 218, 114 n. 250, 116 and n. 260, 117, 214 and n. 57, n. 58, 222 n. 99, 223 n. 109. universe (s. also cosmology; earth, central position of; x6o-fJ.ot;; spheres, cosmological), 42 ff.; centre of, 62, 63, 113; cosmic mechanics, 119 and n. 276, 120; distribution of heat in (s. also xpiio-t.;), .'i5, 79, 80, 81, 82-3, 86, 87; as t;(i>ov, 91 u. 127, 106-7; etemity of, 127 ff.; as f.lot.Xp&.v6pw7tot;, 105 n. 195; schematic descriptions of, Hellenistic, compared to Hebd. Ch. 1-2, 113 ff., 131; schem. descr. of, Hellenistic, taken for granted, 118, 133; sphcricity of, 19 n. 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 supralunary world taken for granted, 59, 80; univ., systematic description of in the Plac., Ch. V A passim; tripartite division of, 42, 43 11. 34. UJ'Cot.Toc; {s. also I>AUf.lltLO~; ouprx.vo,;;), 121 and n. 28.5, 122, 124, 127 n. 309. Varro's logistorici, nature of, VIS ff.; Atticus analyzed, 188-90;/l. dated, 188, 190; Cens. Ch. 14-15,3 attributed to the Atticus, 188-90; Tubcro analyzed, 186-8, 190; T. dated, 187. 190-2 n. 198. veins, venae (s. also microcosmmacrocosm), 79, 103, 104 and n. 194, 106, 107 n. 209, 116 n. 260, 212 n. 44, 224 and n. 113, 117 n. 118. Vetusta Placita (s. also doxographical literature; universe), 1.30 ff., 159, 191 11. 198. Vict., possible date of, 25-6 n. 116, 11. 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 n. 67, 85, 86, 87 ff.. 89, 91 ff., 94 and n. 140, n. 141, 9.5 and n. 148, n. l49,n. 154,96,97, 101,107,127 n. 309, 204, 230; vitalis calor, 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"· q>LA. (s. also ltpi~t.;), 73-4 and n. 47. vowels, the seven (s. also speech), 134 n. 25, 169 n. 69, 201 n. 254. Water (s. also elements; humidum; xpaatt;; moisture; sphere (s); uyp6v), 28, 61, 77, 79, 81, 82, 85, 87, lOOn. 171, 105, 107, 108 and

252

n. 218, n. 219, n. 220, 111, 113 ff., 116-7, 205, 206; liquid element, 55, 79, 80, 92, 104, 116-7, 206, 207, 210.

wind-names (s. also winds; wind-rose), Ch. V C, passim; scientific origin of certain w., s. lonia. wind-rose, 24 and n. 110, 119 and n. 274, Ch. VC passim, 202 n. 259, 230; Hellenistic, taken for granted in 11ebd., 154; history of, Ch. V 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. VC passim. word, a good, for Reinhardt's 'innere Form', 103 n. 187. word-list for Hebd, part I, 36 ff.: 1. &.ycuyf,, 36-7; 2. &.xo:AouOecu, 37; 3. &.xo:Aoufl("l), 37; 4. &vfl"l)(n~, 38; 5. &.v-rocuy(IX, 38; 6. &pl3wcn~, 38; 7. ocu-r613po[Lo~, 38-40; 8. &.
22. 7te:pmo:Al7J, 49-50; 23. 7tp6cr0e:cr~~, 50; 24. 0"7t0p"I)T6~, 50; 25. Te:Ae:t6cu, 50-2; 26.
Posidonius

'explaining'

Plato,

160 and notes, 179-80, 193, 195-6, 211-2 n. 40; in the Stoa, 102 n. 181, 211 and n. 39.

Year, division of (s. also seasons), 9, 11, 25 n. 116, 139 ff., 144 n. 38. Zeus (s. also planets; sun), 43 n. 34, 121 n. 285, 124 ff. Zodiac (s. also astrometeorology; planets), 37, 41, 141 n. 16, 145 and n. 45, 146. ~(i)oc (s. also animalia; elements as living beings; vitalism), 71, 72 and n. 40, 78, 83, 85 n. 91, 87, 93, 96, 101, 106 n. 199, 116, 117, 184,207,

253

214.

INDEX OF PASSAGES (p. refers to a page in the present study)

I ACHILLES

Introductio in Aratwn ed. ;vraass, P·34·3 ff., p. 109 n. 223; p.48, p. 41; p.82,8 ff., p. 126. AESCHYLUS

fr.192 2 N.

~~

323 Mette, p. 49 n. 45.

A ET! US

1 I, p. 132; 1,2, p. i1 n. 29; I,J, p. l32; 3,6, p. 4 7; 3,II, p. 108-9 n. 220; 3,22, p. 80 n. 7+; 6, p. U6 and n. 30, p. 137, p. 142 n. 27; 6,4, p. 137; 6,5, p. 136; 6,8, p. 137; 7,19, p. 136 n. 30, p. 211 n. 40; 7,25, p. 123 n. 295; 12,4, p. 109 n. 222; 14,5, p. 102 11. 182; 17.4· p. 68 n. 17; 23,2, p. 40, p. 47. ll 1, p. 132; I,I, p. 42 n. 26; 3,4, p. 75 n. 53; 4,1, p. 128 n. 312; 4,2, p. 128 11. 312; 4,12, p. 80 n. 74; 7,1, p. 57, p. 136 n. 32; 7,2, p. 136 n. 32; 7,5, p. 80 n. 74·; 7,7, p. 57 n. 16; 9,3, p. 128 n. 316; II-30, p. 132; II-12, p. 132 11. 13; II,2, p. 136-7, p. 137 n. 33; 13-19, p. 132 ll. 13; 13,10, p. 56 Il. 11; 15,6, p. 56 ll. 12; 16,6, p. 56 ll. 11; I7,I-J, p. 137; 17,1, p. 38; 17,5, p. 70 n. 25; 19, p. 134 n. 26, p. 141-2 and n. 27, n. 28, p. 143 n. 28; rg,x, p. 141 n. 23; 19,2, p. 141 n. 23; 19,3, p. 142 and n. 25; :-.o-4, p. 132 n. 13; 20,3, p. 85 n. 97; 20,12, p. 38; 20,13, p. 38; 25-30, p. 132 n. 13; 25,7, p. 80 n. 74; 29,4, p. 38, p. 47, p. 50; 32, p. 142-3 n. 28; 32,1, p. 142 n. 28; 32,2, p. 142 n. 28. Ill p. 132; 1,2, p. 39; 1,8, p. 112; 3·4. p. 132 and n. 16; J,8, p. 45; s-6, p. 132 n. 16; 5, p. 45-6; 5,9, p. 46 n. 42; 7-8. p. 132 n. 16; 7. p. 134; 8-15, p. 132; 8, p. 134; n,J, p. 63; 16-7, p. 132; x7,3, p. 47. IV (IV),2-V,2, p. 133; 2-7, p. 134; 2,1, p. 39; 2,2, p. 39; 2,5, p. 39; j,I, p. 39; 8,1, p. 157 11. 3; II, p. 133; II,1 ff.. p. 169 n. f:i9; II,4, p. 168 n. 68, p. 169 n. 69; 13-5, p. 1.33; 17, p. 133; 18, p. 133; 19-20, p. 133; 22, p. 133. V 3-30, p. 133; 8,2. p. 40; 18,3, p. 1.68 n. 60; 23, p. 133; 23,1, p. 169 n. 69, p. 183 n. 152; 29, p. 135; 30, p. 135. AGATHEMERvS S. TimostheneS ALCMEO~

24AI, p. 59; 24A5, p. 38; 24-Au, p. 59. ALBINUS

Didascalicus, p. 131; 17-22, p. 133 n. 20; 23-55, p. 133 n. 20.

254

ALEXANDER APHRODISIEXSIS

de Anima Liber ed. Bruns, p.28,x6, p. 99 n. 169. in Aristotelis Aletaphysica Commentaria ed. Hayduck, p.38,x6, p. 65 n. 55; P·39,I3·7. p. 98 n. 163; P·39,16-7, p. 98 11. 163. de lklixtione ed. Bruus, p.218,1, p. 90 n. 121; p.218,4, p. 10() 11. 171. ALEXANDER POLYHfSTOR

ap. Diog. Laert. VIII,25 ff., p. 98-102, lJ. 131; s. further Diog. Laert. ANATOLIUS

ae:x.:ioo~ e
ANAXAGORAS

59AJ5, I'· 50 n. 25; 59B8, p. 42; SfJB19, p. 38. AN AXIMANDER

12Ag, p. 44-5; 1ZA9,7, p. 29 n. 144; l2Aio, p. 45 12AII(3). p. 62; 12Ar8, p. 45 n. 40, p. 56 n. 12.

11.

40; 12Au, p. 45 n. 40;

ANAX!li1ENES

BA5,23, p. 46; 1JA6,29 ff., p. 60; 13A7, p. 56 n. 11; l3A7,12-3, p. 60 n. 32; 13AI4, p. 56 n. 11. ARATUS

Phaenomena, 25-6, p. 1+0 n. ] 3; 37-44, p. 140 n. 13; 217, p. 37; 332 ff., p. 40; 545-9, p. 142 n. 27. ARCHELAVS

60A7, p. 46-i. A RETAI,:US TC.

atnwv xal Cf1)[Ldc-)v o~Z:wv rra;Ol::Ov ed. Rude, I, p.15,9 ff., p. 222 n. 102;

I, p.22,6-23,3. p. 222 n. 102. A H ISTOPHANES

Equites, 437, p. 149 11. 22. A RISTOTELES

de Anima I 5.4IIai4 ff., p. 72 de Caelo I 2,26ga6 ff., p. 71 n. 30; 8,276a23 ff., p. 71 n. 33; 8,276b3, p. 43; g, 278bx I ff., p. 44 n. i; 9,279a18 ff., p. 70 n. 25; 9,279a28-9, p. 70 n. 25; 9,279a28 ff., p. 72 n. 45; 9,279a33 ff., p. 70 11. 24·, p. 89 n. 119. 11 I,284a7-12, p. 72 n. 45; r,284a27 ff., p. 70 n. 26, p. 74; 1,284b2, p. 70 n. 25; 2,285a27 ff., p. 70 n. 24; 2,285a29-30, p. 74; 3, p. 70 n. 25; 3,286a9 ff., p. 70 n. 25; 4,287a3o-bq, p. 114 11. 252; 6,288a27 ff., p. 70 n. 24; 7, p. 74; 8, p. 74; 9,291at8 ff., p. 7+ n. 47; 9,291a23, p. 72 n. 47; 12, p. 74 n. 47, p. 75 and n. 52; 12,292ax8 ff., p. 74; 12,292a23, p. 75; I2,292b1-2, p. 74; 12,292b30 ff., p. 75; IJ,295biO ff., p. 62 11. 41. Ill 2,301bi7 ff., p. 70 n. 29, p. 73 n. 47; 17,306a2 ff., p. 68n. 17. IV 1,3o8a2 ff., p. 71; 3,3Ioax6 ff., p. 71 n. 33; J,JIIa9 ff., p. 70 n. 24; J,JIIaii ff., p. 71 n. 36. Ethica Nicomachea Ill I,1110b9 ff., p. 73 n. 47.

255

de Generatione A nimaHum 11 3.736b29-737a7, p. 82 n. 78, p. 95 n. 148. IV 2,767a2 ff., p. 76 n. 60; 4,772b6 ff., p. 176 n. 121; 10,777b24 ff., p. 76 n. 59; I0,777h25-6, p. 84 n. 86; 10,777b27 ff., p. 76. de Generatione et Corruptione I 10, p. 86 n. 102. 11 3.330h23 ff., p. 89-90 n. 121; J,3JOb25, p. 82 n. 79; 14, p. 108 n. 218; IO,JJ6aJ2 ff., p. 76; IO,JJ6bi7-8, p. 76 Il. 58; II,JJ8b2 ff., p. 76. l-l istoria A 1timalium 11 II, p. 176 n. 119. VII x,sSxag ff., p. 178 n. 130; x,s8xa12 ff., p. 177; x,ssxaxs ff., p. 177 n. 122. p. 183 n. 152; x,s8xa32 ff., p. 177; x,s8zax6, p. 177 n. 123; J,sSJazs-7. p. 176; J,S8Jbl2-4. p. 176 n. 120; 4,584a35 ff., p. 176; 4,584bi ff., p. 176; xo,587bi4 ff., p. 176; I2,588a8, p. 176. VIII 1,588b4 ff., p. 71 n. 34. de I uventute 23 ff., 487b22 ff., p. 223 n. 112. ill etaphysica I J,903b17 ff., p. 61; s,g8SbJO, p. 65 n. 55; 5,g86ai7 ff., p. 180 n. 137; 6,987b1o ff., p. 65 n. 53. XII 6 ff., p. 69 11. 22, p. 75; 7, p. 70 n. 25; 7,I072b3, p. 75 11. 55; 8, p. 70, p. 75. M eteorologica I 2,339ai9, p. 43; 2,339a21 ff., p. 76 11. 59; J,JJgbx8, p. 43. II 5,362a3 ff., p. 85 n. 92; 6, p. 146-7; 6,364a3-4, p. 146 n. 4; g,J70a15, p. 46. Ill 4·373a32, a35, p. 38; 4.373b21, p. 46 11. 42; 4.374bi, p. 46 n. 42. de Part-ib14s Animalium li 2,648b12 ff., p. 82 n. 78. Ill 6,668b34 ff., p. 223 n. 112. IV 5,68Iai2, p. 71 n. 34. Physica I I,Igzb8 ff., p. 70-1; I,Ig2bi8, p. 70 n. 29. 11 p. 78; 2,194b13, p. 76 n. 59. VII I, p. 69 n. 22. VIII p. 7 5; 4-5, p. 69 n. 22; 4, p. 70 n. 24; 4,254b14 ff., p. 72 n. 39, n. 40; 4,254h15, p. 72 n. 43; 4,254b21 ff., p. 73 n. 4 7; 4,254b27 ff., p. 27 n. 40; 4.254bJ2, p. 72 n. 40; 4.zssas ff., p. 71-2; 4,255b5 ff., p. 71 n. 35; 4,255b9, p. 72 n. 42; 4,255b18 ff., p. 72 n. 42; 4,255b3I, p. 72 n. 41; s.zs8a2, p. 38; 6,259bi-20, p. 71 n. 32, p. 72 n. 40, p. 73 n. 4 7; 8, p. 70 n. 25. Politica VII x6,1335a29 ff., p. 174 n. 103; x6,1335a32 ff., p. 174 n. 103; x6,1335b3I, p. 174 Il. 103; I6,IJJ5b3 ff., p. 174 Il. 103. rr. -rwv 1Iu6o:yopdu)V fr.13 Ross, p. 98 n. 163. 11'.

q>~Aocrocp(ou;

p. 91 n. 127, p. 122 n. 291; fr.g Ross, p. 71 n. 29; fr.12aR, p. 49;

256

fr.21 R., p. 73 and n. 46, p. 73-4 n. 47, p. 75; fr.:z6R., p. 43 n. 32, p. 73-4 n.47. [ARJSTOTELES)

fr.250 Rose, p. 24-5 n. 112. de Mundo, I,Jgla26-7, p. 119 n. 275; 1,391b4 ff., p. 119 n. 275; :z-3, p. 113 and n. 246, p. 118 n. 271; 2,391b12 ff., p. 120, p. 122 n. 292; 2,J91b13 ff., p. 120; 2,Jglb1J, p. 116; 2,391bi4 ff., p. 122 n. 290; 2,3g1b1g-392a5, p. 122 n. 290; 2,392a6 ff., p. 11.8; 2,392a2o-g, p. 113 n. 249; 2,392a23-9, p. 118; 2,J92a32 ff., p. 81 n. 75; 2,392b3 ff., p. 117 n. 263: 2,392b6 ff., p. 117; 2,392b7-13, p. 116 n. 259; J,Jgzbi4ff., p. 116, p. 117; J,JgzbzO-JJ, p. 113 n. 249; 3,392b22 ff., p. 117; 3,393a4 ff., p. 81 n. 75; 3,393a5 ff., p. 117; 3,393a17 ff., p. 117; 4,394a9 ff., p. 117 n. 263; 4.394big ff., p. 148; 4,395a29 ff., p. 117 n. 263; 4.395a36. p. 46; 5.397a19-24, p. 116 n. 259; 5,397a24 ff., p. !Hi, p. 117; 6,397b25ff., p. 122; 6,Jg8b8-g, p.l22; 6,Jggazff., p. 118 n. 267; 6,399a6-I2, p. 118; 6,399a24-6, p. 116 n. 259; 6,399a27 ff., p. 116; 6,400a4 ff., p. 122; 6,400b12-3, p. 122-3; 6,4oobJI-2, p. 123. ARISTOXENUS

fr.23 Wehrli, p. 65 n. 53. ARIUS DIDYMUS

Epitome (ed.Diels, Do.vographi Graeci), fr.z, p. 71n. 29; fr.g, p. 75 n. 53; fr.zo, p. 47; fr.zx, p. 39, p. 100 n. 171, p. 108 n. 219; fr.:z3. p. 109 n. 222; fr.27, p. 47; fr.z8, p. 39, p. 91 n. 127; fr.31, p. 111, p. 113 and n. 246, n. 249, p. 116 n. 258, n. 260, p. 118 n. 271, p. 118-9 n. 272; fr.33. p. 88 n. 114; fr.34, p. 39, p. 102 n. 182; fr.36, p. 91 n. 127; fr.38, p. 89 n. 121, p. 100 n. 170, n. 171, p. 108 n. 216. ATHENAEUS ATTALENSJS

ap. Galen. ed. Kiihn, Vol. 1,457, p. 214 n. 61; Vol. 1,465.4 ff., p. 214 n. 61; Vol. 1,522, p. 215 n. 62; Vol. XIX,356,6 ff., p. 214 and n. 59, p. 222 n. 105. AUGUSTINUS

de Civitate Dei, V,:z, p. 181 n. 141. ed. Mogenet 11,2, p. 37. BOOK OF ENOCH, Ch.76, p. 148 n. 8. BUNDAHISN, Greater, Ch.z8, p. 22 and n. 99, p. 24, p. 26 and n. 120. AUTOLYCUS

CALCJDIUS

in Platonis Timaeum Commentarius ed. \Vaszink, Ch.I-25, p. 172 n. 98; 32-50, p. 172 n. 98; 35-8, p. 172 n. 98; 37, p.85,2r-86,6, p. 171 n. 93, p. 172 n. 98; 37, p.86,6-8, p. 172 n. 98; 37, p.86,ro-n, p. 197; 44-46, p. 172 n. 98; 55-91, p. 172 n. 98; 56-u8, p. 172 n. 98. CELSUS

de .ll,fedicina, prooen1.15, p. 224 n. 117; II,J4, p. 219; 14,2, p. 219 n. 86. CENSORINUS

de Die Natali, Ch.2,2-3, p. 185, p.188; 2,2, p. 158 n. 9, p. 189, p. 190 n. 195; 4•15, p. 158 11. 9, p. 185, p. 187; 4·14, p. 185; 4-11, p. 187. p. 188; 4. p. 187; 4,3, p. 187; 5-7. p. 187; 5-6, p. 187; 5, p. 187 n. 178; 6, p. 187 n. 178; 7-11, p. 187; 7, p. 187 and n. 1 iS, p. 190 n. 198; 7,2-6, p. 166 n. 53; 7,2-3, p. 166 and n. 53; 7,2, p. 174; 7,5, p. 166 n. 53; 8, p. 187 n. 179, p. 190 n. 198; 9 ff., p. 188 n. 181; 9, p. 190 n. 198; g,1, p. 158 n. 9, p. 185; 9,2, p. 174 n. 105,

257

p. 187 n. 178; xo, p. 187 n. 179, p. 191 n. 198; II, p. 187 n. 179, p. 190-1 n. 198; xx,6, p. 162 n. 29, p. 187 n. 180, p. 188; II,8 ff., p. 187 n. 179; 12-3, p. 187, p. 190; 13, p. 191 n. 198; q-x5,3, p. 187, p. 188, p. 190; 14, p. 3 n. 5, p. 162 and n. 29, p. 163 n. 36, p. 188 n. 181, p. 189; q,2, p. 162, p. 187-8; 14,3, p. 162, p. 187 n. 180; q,6, p. 162, p. 188; J4,7, p. 162; 15,1-3 p. 188, p. 190; 18, p. 142 n. 28. CHOERILUS ATHENIENSlS

fr.2 f.2N, p. 107 n. 209. CHRYSIPPUS, S. SVl1' CICERO

Academica Posteriora, 1,8, p. 186 and n. 170. ad A tticum, VII1,48,2, p. 186 and n. 171.. Cato de Senectute, 78, p. 89 n. 120. de Divinat·ionc, IJ,1 ff., p. 89 n. 120. de Fato, Ch.3, p. 181 n. 141. de Natura Deorum I 33, p. 43 n. 32, p. 73 n. 47; 34, p. 123 n. 296; 35, p. 73 n. 47; 40, p. 126; 103, p. 120 n. 278. Epist~tlae

11 19, p. 184 and n. 157; 22-8, p. 88; 23-32 ( + 39h-41), p. 86-96. p. 87 n. 104, p. 89 n. 120, p. 98, p. 104; 23-27, p. 88 n. 116, p. 92; 23-4, p. 95 and n. 154, p. 96 n. 154, p. 101, p. 102 n. 181; 23, p. 87 n. 105, p. 93 n. 135, p. 95 n. 154, p. l 00 n. 170, p. 101n. 180, p. 106; 24, p. 87 n. 104, n. 106, n. 107, p. 88, p. 92 11. 129, p. 94 11. 140, p. 95 and n. 151, p. 96 n. 156, p. 103, p. 104; 24b-27, p. 102; 25, p. 87 n. 108, p. 96, p. 97 n. 162; 25-6, p. 87n. 109, p. 90; 26-7, p. 87 n. 111; 26, p. 87n. 110, p. 90, p. 94 n. 140, p. 101; 27, p. 88 n. 112, p. 90, p. 91 and n. 126, p. 92; 28, p. 88 n. 117, p. 91, p. 101 n. 179; 29-30a, p. 87 n. 103, n. 104, p. 88 and n. 118; 30b-3I, p. 88; 31, p. 77 n. 62, p. 89 n. 119, p. 92 n. 128, p. 93; 32, p. 88 n. 118, p. 89 n. 120, p. 93; 39h-41, p. 87 n. 104, p. 88 n. 113, p. 91, p. 93; 39, p. 91 n. 127; 40, p. 88 n. 115, p. 212; 40-1, p. 87 n. 104, p. 88 n. 116, p. 92 n. 128a, p. 95 ancln. 151, p. 95-6 n. 154, p. 101: 41, p. 73 n. 47, p. 91 n. 127, p. 92, p. 101 n. 180; 44. p. 73 n. 46; 49-56, p. 143 n. 28; 49, p. 143 n. 28; so, p. 183 and n. 154, p. 184 n. 1.59; 51, p. 143 n. 28; 52-4, p. 143 n. 28; 53, p. 143 n. 28; 54-5. p. 143 n. 28; 54, p. 111u. 235; 56, p. 143 n. 28; 63, p. 100 n. 170; 83, p. 94 n. 143; 91-2, p. 113 and n. 247, p. 119 and n. 276, p. 120; 91, p. 1.20; 98-u5, p. 113 n. 247; 98-104, p. 113 and n. 247, p. 119 and n. 276, p. 120; 98, p. 116, p. 117, p. 120; 99, p. 11.6; 100, p. 117; 101, p. 11.7, p. 118; 102 ff., p. 115 n. 253; 102, p. 118; 103, p. ll8; 104, p. 118; I05·6, p. 140 n. 13; II6-8, p. 114 n. 252. Ill 24, p. 184 n. 157. Somnium Scipionis, 9, p. 81 n. 75, p. 123-4 n. 296; 27, p. 67 n. 3, p. 89 n. 120. Tuscttlanae Disputationes, I,SJ-4, p. 67 n. 3, p. 89 n. 120. c.t.G., 14,9o6, p. 148 n. 13; J4,1J08 2, p. 148 n. 13. CLEANTHES, S. SVl'

CLEMENS AI.EXANDRINUS

Stromateis ed. Stiihlin Ill p.201,23, p. 60; p.201,25, p. 60.

258

V P·358,II ff., p. 102 n. 182. VI p.so5,I3-5o6,6, p. 162 n. 33; p.5o6,g-xo, p. 1.62 n. 33. CORPUS HERMETlCUM

cd.

Asclepius, 19, p. 127

Nock-Fcstugil~re

11.

309; 27, p. 124 n. 296, p. 127 n. 309.

K6p1J x6cr~-tou, s. Fr. Stab.

1-'oimandres, IJa, p. 123 11. 296; 25, p. 47; 25-6, p. 123 n. 296. II, x-rz, p. 124 n. 296; 6-7, p. 41, p. 141 n. 16; 6, p. 124 11. 296. X, 4, p. 46; 11,17, p. 36 n. 22. XI, 7, p. 141 n. 16. XIII, 15, p. 123 n. 296. Fr. Stob. XII,I, p. 1.23 n. 296; XVI,I, p. 39; XXI,2, ·p. 123 n. 296; XXIV (= K6p7Jx•ScrfLou),II, p. 20 n. 88; XXXIll,36 and 6o, p. 44 n. 35. CORPUS HIPPOCRATICUM

Ajj., p. 220 n. 96. Alim., p. 33 and n. 5, n. 7, p. 34, p. 35, p. :226 and n. 128, p. 230. A ph., ll,34, p. 10 n. 34-; VIII, p. 4 n. 7. Cam., Ch.x2, p. 175; Ch.13, p. 175 11. 110; Ch.19, p. 7 n. 21, p. 38, p. 165, p. 175 and n. 107, p. 178 n. 133. Coac., p. '~ n. 7. Cord., p. 34, p. 35, p. 2:2G and 11. 128, p. 230; Ch.II (IX,88,xo-go,2 L.), p. 102 11. 1.83. Decent., p. 32, p. 33 and n. 3, n. 5, p. 34, p. 50. Dieb.Jud., p. 4 u. 7. Epid., Il(J),I7 (V,II6 L.), p. 165. Hebd., s. below, p. 268 ff. Int., p. 7 11. 22, p. 8, p. 12 11. 41, p. 220 n. 96. Medic., p. 32, p. 33 u. 3, n. 5, p. 34 and n. 9. Jl,forb. I p. 7 n. 22, p. 220 n. 96. 11 p. 7 11. 22, p. 8, p. 12 n. 41, p. 1.4 n. 51; Clu-II, p. 13 n. 44, p. 220 n. 96; Ch.12 ff., p. 13 n. 44, p. 220 n. 96; Ch.68, p. 12-3 n. 44, p. 14 n. 51. Ill p. 7, p. 9, p. 12, p. 13 and u. 44, p. 14 and n. 51; Ch.I (VII,IIS,I-2 L.), p. 8; Ch.I (VII,n8,n-2 L.), p. 14 n. 50; Ch.I (VII,n8,13-4 L.), p. 13 n. 48; Ch.z, p. 14 n. 50; Ch.5, p. 13 n. 49; Ch.6, p. 14; Ch.7, p. 13 n. 48, n. 49; Ch.IJ, p.l3 n. 48; Ch.q, p. 13 n. 48; Ch.17, p. 12 n. 41. Nat.Hom., Ch.6, p. 37. Nat.Puer., Ch.13 (VI1,490 L.), p. 165 n. 46, p. 167 and n. 59; Ch.21 (Vll,510 I..), p. 164 Il. 43. Oct., Ch.x Grensemann, p. 167 n. 59, p. 168 n. 66, p. 175; 1,3, p. 175 and 11. 113; 1,(1, p. 175; 1,7, p. 176; I,IOff., p. 176 U. 117; 1,14-5, p. 176 n. 117; r,x8, p. 176 n. 118; 8,3, p. 175 n. 1.16. Praec., p. 32, p. 33 and n. 3, n. 5, p. 34, p. 36, p. 50. Vict., p. 17 n. 66, p. 22 n. 102, p. 24, p. 25 'in. 116, p. 26 and n. 118, p. 29 n. 145, p. 10.5 n. 195, p. 106 n. 200, n. 202. I 4, p. 79 n. 71; IO ff., p. 26 n. 117; IO, p. 105; l i ff., p. 105; 23, p. 134 ll. 23, ll. 25. IV 89 ff., p. 26 n. 117.

259

CRITOLAUS

fr.12 Wehrli, p. 128 and n. 313; fr.13 W., p. 128 and n. 313. DEMOCRITUS

68A92, p. 30 n. 148; 688q,8, p. 151; 68856, p. 30 n. 148. IV, p. 23 n. 104; VIII, IX, p. 22 n. 99.

DENKART,

IOANN. DIACONUS

Alleg. in Theog. ed. Gaisford, p.381, p. 126. DIOCLES

fr.15 vVcllmann, p. 223 n. 112; fr.34 W., p. 10 n. 35; fr.35 W., p. 10 and u. 35, p. 11 n. 37; fr.174 W., p. 166 11. 53, p. 168 n. 60; fr.175 W., p. 164-5, p. 167 n. 59, p. 177 n. 127; fr.176 W., p. 165 and n. 50, p. 166, p. 176 n. 117; fr.177 W., p. 164 and n. 39, p. 165 ff. DIOGENES APOLLONIATES

64AI, p. GO; 64Ax6, p. 45; 64Ax6a, p. 60; G482, p. 42; 64C2, p. GO. DIOGENES LAERTIUS

Ill 24, p. 64 n. 49. VII 55, p. 169 n. 69; 132, p. 114 n. 250, p. 135 n. 27; 135, p. 194 n. 216; 136, p. 108 and n. 216; 137-56, p. 114 n. 250; 137-8, p. 114 n. 250; 137, p. 44 n. 35, p. 100 11. 170, p. 114 n. 252; 138, p. 111 n. 235; 142, p. 100 n. 171, p. 108, p. 128 n. 316; 144-6, p. 11411. 250; 148, p. 12311. 295; 151b-4a, p. 11411. 250; 152-4, p. 117 11. 264; 154b, p. 114 ll. 250; 155, p. 114 n. 252; 157, p. 99 n. 169, p. 211 n. 40; 160, p. 114 n. 250. VIII 4, p. 49; 25 ff., p. 24, p. 98-102; 25, p. 98 11. 163, p. 99, p. 101 11. 181; 26-30, p. 98; 26, p. 81 11. 75; 27, p. 99, p. 100, p. 101, p. 102 n. 181, n. 182; 28-9, p. 178-9 n. 134; 28, p. 99 and n. 169, p. 101 n. 178, p. 133 n. 20, p. 179 n. 134; 29, p. 99 and 11. 168, p. 101 n. 180, p. 133 11. 20, p. 179 11. 134, p. 191 n. 198; 30, p. 133 11. 20; 31, p. 98 11. 163; 48, p. 42 11. 26, p. 44 n. 35; 83, p. 59. IX 57, p. 60. EMPEDOCLES

31A33, p. 116 n. 258; 31AS6, p. 38; 31A62, p. 59; 3186,1, p. 131. n. 8; 3186,2, p. 116 11. 258, p. 126 n. 302; 31817,34-5, p. 59 n. 26; 31821,4, p. 58-9 n. 24; 31821,13, p. 59 n. 26; 31826,3, p. 59 11. 26; 31826,5, p. 42; 31844, p. 38; 318n8, p. 60; 318121, p. 60; 318134,5, p. 42; 318153a, p. 170 n. 75. EPICURUS

Epistula ad Pythoclem eel. Arrighetti, (3),101,5, p. 45; (3),1I2>4, p. 49. ed. Nachmanso11 18,18, p. 7 n. 21; 31,3, p. 7; 86,4, p. 7 n. 21; 86,5, p. 7 11. 21; 96,8, p. 49; fr.84, p. 7.

EROTIANUS

EUDEMUS

fr.n7 Wehrli, p. 59 n. 25; fr.123a W., 123b W., p. 84 11. 89; fr.145 W., p. 58 n. 22; fr.15o W., p. 44. EURIPIDES

fr.86 2 N., p. 41. FAVONIUS EULOGIUS

Disputatio de Somnio Scipionis, Ch.q, p. 162 n. 33; Ch.20, p. 162 n. 33. 241-3, p. 23 n. 104.

FIHRIST,

260

GALENUS

de Causis Contentivis, CMG Suppl.Or. 2, P·55A-7 and p.134,2-6, p. 33 n. 8, p. 130 n. 4. Comment. in Hipp. Aphor., Vol. XVIIB Ki.ihn, P·5JO, p. 10 and n. 34. Comment. in llipp. Epidem., CMG V,10,1, p.13,6 ff., p. 9 and n. 30, p. 50; C1UG V,l0,2,2, P·55,IO ff., p. 12 n. 44; CMG V,10,2,2, p.270,JI-271,5, p. 9-10 and n. 31; CMG V,10,2,2, p.273,7, p. 10 anu 11. 32. Glossary, Vol. XIX KLihn, p.7o, p. 7; P·73. p. 6; p.So, p. 6; p.85, p. 153; p.87, p. 6, p. 38; p.IIO. p. 6 n. 17; p.I2J, p. 6 n. 17; p.151, p. 48. 1t. [!OCpotcr[J.oG, Vol. VII Kiihn, p.675-6, p. 11 n. 40. de Placitis llippocratis et Platonis ed. Miiller, p-432,9 ff., p. 211 11. 40; P-476,2, p. 211 n. 40. de Sanitate Tuenda, 11,4 (Vol. V,no-I Ki.ihn), p. 219 11. 86. rr. 't"po;J.o•J xod 7toc).[J.oG, Vol. VII Kiihn, p.618, p. l1 n. 40. ps.<;ALENUS

rr. ochlocc; rroc6c;'>V, p. 3 and 11. 6. Comment. in llipp. Hum., p. 150 n. 24. Comment. in ps.Hipp. de llebdomadibus c. 1-20 ed. Bergstrasser p. 4-, p. 8; Nr.22, p. 78 n. 63; Nr.23, p. l39 11. 9; Nr.24, p. 124-5 n. 300; Nr.4o, p. 125; Nr.41, p. 124-511. 300; Nr.44, p. 19911. 24+; Nr.47, p. 209 and n. 27; Nr.48, p. 210 n. 31; Nr.49, p. 210 n. 32; Nr.so, p. 210 n. 33; Nr.6o, p. 15 and n. 60; Nr.62-74, p. 208; Nr.64, p. 208 n. 26; Nr.65, p. 209 n. 26; Nr.6g, p. 209 n. 26; Nr.74-93, p. 4-5 n. 10; Nr.g4-5, p. 206 n. 8; Nr.g4, p. 207 n. 14; p.g, p. 47; p.Ig, p. 49; p.33-4, p. 78 n. 63; p.51, p. 154 11. 42; P·55. p. 52; P·57. p. 40, p. 50, p. 52; p.103, p. 209 and n. 28; p.ros. p. 209 11. 28, p. 210 n. 30. GEMINUS ed. Ma11itius p.10,4-5, p. 41; p.136,8, p. 41; p.qo,II, p. 41. GELLIUS

Noctes Atticae I 20, p. 158 n. 9. 11 22,3 ff., p. 148 11. 11, p. 149. Ill 10, p. 158 n. 9, p. 163, p. 185; ro,6, p. 183 n. 148; 10,7, p. 163, p. 165, p. 167 11. 59; IO,g, p. 187 11. 179; IO,I2, p. 163; IO,I7, p. 185 n. 164, p. 189. XVIII 14,2, p. 189 11. 188. GENESIS, 1,5, p. 48. HERACLIDES PONTICUS

fr.Sg Wehrli, p. 49; fr.95 W., p. 43 n. 34; fr.g8 W., p. 43 n. 30; fr.IOo W., p. 43 n. 30. HERACLITUS

22B2o, p. 60; 22B3o, p. 42; 22B36, p. 59 n. 26, p. 100 n. 171; 22B72, p. 59 n. 26; 22B76, p. 59 n. 26. HESIODUS

Opera et Dies, 267, p. 127 n. 307; 383 ff., p. 140 n. 12; 609 ff., p. 140 n. 12; 615 ff., p. 140 n. 12. Theogonia, 693, p. 116 n. 258.

261

HIPPARCHUS

in Aratum ed. :Manitius, p.42,2, p. 46; p.II4,10, p. 37. HIPPASUS

18A7, p. 46. HERODOTUS

Historiae 25, p. 151 n. 29. VI 22, p. 151 n. 29; 99, p. 151 n. 29; 152, p. 151 n. 29. VII r88, p. 151 n. 29.

n

HIPPON

38Ar6, p. 174 and n. 105. HIPPOLYTUS

Philosophumenct, 6, p. 47; 19, p. 39 n. 23, p. 41; 20, p. 41. RefHtatio Omn·ium F!aeresium. 7,27, p. 123 n. 296. HOMER US

1/ias 1,423-5, p. 127 n. 307; 499, p. 122 n. 287; III,z77. p. 127 n. 307; XV,192, p. 122 n. 291. Odyssea, 5,295-6, p. I 46 n. 2; 6,42-5, p. 122 n. 291. (IAMBLICHUS]

Theologumena Ar-ithmctica ed. de Falco, P·55·IJ-56,?, p. 3 n. 5, p. 162 n. 32; P·57,I3 ff., p. 169 n. 69; P·S9.S-6o,6, p. 182 n. 148, p. 203-4; P·59,6-7, p. 183 n. 150; P·59·7-IO, p. 183 n. 1 50; p.6o,6-2o, p. 183 n. 149; p.6o,6 ff., p. 184; p.6I,I ff., p. 166; p.6I,6 ff., p. 166-7 ll. 55; p.6I,I3-67,2, p. 164 n. 39; p.61,13, p. 166 n. 54; p.6I,15-62,7, p. 165 ll. 46; p.62,8-9, p. 165; p.62,12, p. 167 n. 59; p.62,16-2o, p. 166 n. 52, p. 170; p.62,20, p. 170; p.62,20-63,4, p. 166 n. 52; p.64,II ff., p. 168 n. 62; p.64,17-9, p. 183; p.64,20-65,3, p. 167 n. 56; p.6s,r-2, p. 168 n. 64; p.6s.3. p. 170; p.6s,8 ff., p. 171; p.6s,n ff., p. 169 11. 69; p.65,J4-5, p. 168 n. 68; p.65,18-66,IO, p. 171; p.66,IO-II, p. 171; p.67,19-20, p. 197; p.68,I ff., p. 197. ISIDORUS HISPAL:ENSIS

Etymologiae sive 0-rigines, XIII,I,I-2, p. 94 n. 141. LUCANUS

Bellum Ciz•ile, X,zo6, p. 145 n. 44. LYDtJS

de Mensibus ed. \Vuensch, II.4, p.21,3 ff., p. 48 and n. 44; 7, p.24,20, p. 98 n. 163; 12, P·35,16-7, p. 192 n. 203; IV,16, p.78,r6, p. 151 n. 30. MACROBIUS

Comrnentarii in Somnium Scip·ionis I S-6, p. 164 n. 39; 6,45-6. p. 192 n. 203; 6,45, p. 169 n. 69; 6,48-60, p. 182 n. 148; 6,57-60, p. 185 n. 162; 6,61, p. 183 n. 149; 6,62, p. 166; 6,63-76, p. 164 n. 39; 6,63, p. 166 n. 54; 6,64, p. 165 n. 46; 6,65-6, p. 166 n. 52, p. 170; 6,65, p. 165 n. 51; 6,66, p. 166 n. 52, p. 170; 6,67, p. 167 n. 56, p. 168; 6,68, p. J. 76 n. 117; 6,6g. p. 170; 6,70, p. 169 n. 69, p. 171; 6,71, p. 171; 6,72, p. 170 n. 71, p. 172; 6,73, p. 164 n. 39; 6,75, p. 170 n. 75; 6,77. p. 197. p. 198; 6,8o, p. 197; 6,81, p. 197; 14,20, p. 99 n. 169. II 2,1, p. 192 n. 203; 2,14 ff., p. 192 n. 203.

262

Saturnalia, 1,23, p. 127. MARTIANUS CAPELLA

VI1,739, p. 171, p. 197. lv!ELEAGER

in Anth.Pal. VI1,476, p. 48. MENESTOR

32,4, p. 40. lv!ETRODORUS CHIUS

70A9. p. 38. ::.EPOS

de V iris Illustribus, XXV,2r-2, p. 190 n. 195; 21, p. 188. NICO~tACHUS

GERASENUS

Aritltmetica Introductio eel. Hoche, p.J,IJ, p. 47-8; p.6,7, p. 49; p.6,II ff., p. 49; P·34·I4-40,IO, p. 51; p.II7,20, p. 51; P-117,22, p. 51. Theol.ar-ithm., s. [Iambl.]. OCELLUS LUCANUS ed. Harder q, p. q,6, p. 113 n. 248; IS, p.q,ro ff., p. lOO n. 171; r8, p.rs,17 ff., p. 81 ll. 75; 19, p.I5,19-20, p. 39; 36-7, p.19,28-20,II, p. 81 ll. 75. ORIBASJUS ed. Daremberg Coll.Zvied., VI,17 (Vol.I, P·490,11 ff.), p. 219 n. 86. PARMENIDES

28AJ7,S-6. p. 57; Z8A44, p. 30 n. 148; 28B8,53 ff., p. 131 n. 8; ZSBro,s, p. 57; Z8Bro,7, p. 57; 28Bn,2-J, p. 57; 28Bq, p. 58 n. 22; 28Bxs. p. 58 n. 22. PHERECYDES SYRIUS

7A8, p. 44. ed. Cohn-Wendland de Aeternitate 1'.fundi (Vol.VI) 4, P·73·9-IO, p. 44 n. 35; 7, P·7S,I ff., p. 128; 12, P·76,IJ-S, p. 128 n. 314; 13, p.76,16 ff., p. 128; 17, P·77,20-28,J, p. 128; r8, p.78,6 ff., p. 108 n. 218; SS. p.90,S ff., p. 128; 70, P·94,I7 ff., p. 128; 76, p.96,19 ff., p. 128; 90-3, p.I00,20-IOI,I6, p. 112 ll. 241; 90, p.IOI,I-2, p. 112 n. 241; IIO ff., p.ro6,12 ff., p. 100 n. 171; IIS, p.107,20-108.4, p. 110; II7 ff., p.xo8,ro ff., p. 84 n. 87, p. 128; IJS-6, p.IJ4,2 ff., p. 82 n. 79. Legum A Uegoriarum (Vol.I) I 8 ff., p. 173 n. 98, p. 180 n. 140; 8, p.63,9 ff., p. 182 n. 48; 9-10, p. 63,13 ff., p. 181 n. 140; IO, p. 173 ll. 98; IO, p.6J,IS ff., p. 169 n. 69; II, p.63,23, p. 41; 12, p.64,2-3, p. 197 n. 232; 12, p.64,3-4, p. 198 n. 237, n. 241, p. 200 n. 247; 12, p.64,s-6, p. 198 n. 238. Ill 84, p.IJI,I8 ff., p. 123 ll. 296. de Opijicio Mundi (Vol.I) rs. P·4,IS ff.. p. 48; 69 ff., p.2J,9 ff., p. 123 n. 296; IOI, P·JS,I-IO, p. 182 n. 148; IOI, P·JS,2 ff., p. 51; IOJ-S, p. 181 n. 145, p. 203 n. 236; IOJ, p. 173 n. 98; IOJ, P·J5,24-S, p. 181 n. 145, p. 203 n. 263; IOJ, P·JS,2S-J6,8, p. 181 n. 140; 104, p. 162; lOS, p. 162; 105, P·37,I0-20, p. 3 n. 5; IIJ, P·39,22-40,6, p. 143, p. 144 n. 41; IIJ, P·39,22-40,1, p. 141 n. 16, p. 144 n. 41; IIJ, P·J9,22-40,13, p. 182 n. 148; 113, p.40,I ff., p. 182 n. 148; II7, p.41,q ff., p. 169 n. 69; II8, p.41,20 ff.,

PHILo JUDAEUS

263

p. 198; n8, p.41,2I-3, p. 197; n9, P-4I,25-4Z,I, p. 192 n. 203; uo, p.42,3 ff., p. 200 n. 248; 124, p.42,x8-43·3· p. 182 n. 145; 124, p.42,18 ff., p. 173 n. 98, p. 203 n. 263; 124, P·43,I ff., p. 163 n. 35; 125, P·43•3 ff., p. 173 n. 98; 126, P·43,ll ff., p. 169 n. 69; 126, ll-43. 17 ff., p. 169 n. 69. de .Providentia cd. Auchcr (not in Cohn-Wendland) I 22, p. 131 n. 4. de Smnniis (Vol.III) I 21 ff., p.209,8 ff., p. 130 n. 4. p. 137 11. 33; 30 ff., p.2II,IO ff., p. 130 n. 4; 53 ff., p.216,n: ff., p. 130 n. 4. de Spedalilms Legibus (Vol. V) I 207, p.so,r ff., p. 123 n. 296. II 56-7, p.roo,r8-ror,4. p. 140 n. 13, p. 143-4- and p. 144 n. 38. de Vita 1\Iosis (Vol.IV) Il IZI, p.228,15-6, p. 109. PHILODEMUS

de Pietate ed. Gomperz, p.79, p. 126. PHILOLAUS

44·AI6, p. 30 n. 148, p. 42 and n. 27, p. 57 n. 16, p. 60, p. 63; 44AI7, p. 63; 44AI9, p. 38; 44BI, p. 42; 44Hz, p. 42; 44B6, p. 42; 44BIJ, p. 6211.44, p. 63; 44B2I, p. 59 n. 29, p. 8l11. 75. PLATO

Charmides, I68e, p. 66 .u. 2. Cratylus, 405b, p. 49; 405c, p. 49; 409c, p. 47. Gorgias, 5o8a ff., p. 42 n. 26. Nomoi X, 896a, p. 67 11. 6; 896b, p. 67 n. 7; 896e, p. 67 n. 8; 898d, p. 67; 898e, p. 67 n. 11; 904c-e, p. 123 11. 2%. Phaedo, Io8c-nob, p. 63 n. 47. Phaedrus, 245c ff., p. 67 n. 3, p. 89 11. 120: 245c, p. 38; 245d, p. 67 n. 5; 245e, p. 67 11. 5; 246c, p. 43 ll. 31, p. 122 11. 288; 246e, p. 127; 247a, p. 122 n. 288; 247b ff., p. 122 n. 288; 247c, p. 121 n. 285. Timaeus . 35b ff., p. 67 11. 9; 35h-36b, p. 160 n. 22; 35b-c, p. 179; 36d, p. 141 n. 17; J8cff., p. 141 n. 1'7; 38c-d, p. 67 n. 9; 38c, p. 141 n. 18; 39c, p. 141 11. 19; 40a, p. 43 n. 31; 41a ff., p. 128; 41a, p. 49; 41d, p. 193 n. 208, n. 209; 41e-42b, p. 123 n. 2%; 43d, p. 193 n. 209; 48a, p. 68 n. 14; 52dff., p. 68 n. 14-; 52e-53a p. 68 n. 15; 54b-d, p. 68 n. 17; ssc-11, p. 4-3 and n. 28; ssa ff., p. 68 lL 16; S8b, p. 68; 6rc-6Jb, p. 63-4; 63a, p. 64; 64cff., p. 195 n. 224; 7oe, p. 223 n. 112; 89a, p. 71 n. 31; 90a, p. 123 11. 296. PLATO(?)

Epinontis, 977b, p. 43, p. 57 n. Hi; 981e, p. 67 n. 13; 987b, p. 42 n. 26, p. 43. PLAUTUS

Rudens,

1-12,

p. 125 n. 300.

PLINIUS

N aturalis H-istoria Il I ff., p. 114 n. 252; 5,§10, p. 110 Il. 229, p. 114- ll. 252, 1). 116 n. 260, p. 11911.274, n. 276; 5,§II, p. 1 J 9 n. 276; 8,§33, P- 144; 39,§106, p. 144 n. 42, p. 145; II9 ff., p. 148 n. 11, p. 149. VI 183, p. 147 n. 6.

264

PLUTARCHUS

Animae P-rocreat·ione in Timaeo, I02Jb, p. 160 n. 19, p. 195. Communibus Notitiis contra Stoicos, 1075d, p. 91 n. 127. Defectu Oraculorum, 42oa ff., p. 43; 422e ff., p. 43. E apud Delphos, 389f, p. 43. Facie in Orbe Lr.mae, 927e ff., p. 107 n. 208. p. 204 n. 264; 928c, p. 112. p. 204 11. 264. de Primo Frigid<), 952d, p. lOO n. 171. Quaestiones Platonicae, I007f, p. 121 n. 285. de Stoicorum Repugtiantiis, I05Ja, p. 108 n. Zl9; I054e, p. 109 n. 222. Vit.Hom., li,95, p. 122 n. 289. de de de de de

pS.PLUTARCHUS

ap.

Stob., Vol.l, p.198 Wachsmuth, p. 122 n. 289.

PROCLUS

in Plato·nis Timamm Commentaria ed. Diehl Vol.II, p.I22,IO ff., p. M n. 89. Vol.III, p.63,26 ff., p. 59 n. 25. in PYimttm Euclidis Elementorum Libr-um Commentarii ed. Fricdlein, p.89,16 ff., p. 194 n. 215; p.qJ,6 ff., p. 195 n. 221; P·395,I3 ff., p. 194 n. 218. PTOLEMA'EUS

epigr., p. 39. SENECA

Naturales Quaestiones 11 1,1 ff., p. 114-5 n. 252, p. 115 U. 256, p. 132 11. 14; I,I, p. 115 n. 256, p. ll7 n. 264, p. 137 n. 33. Ill IJ,I-2, p. 108 n. 217; 15, p. 94, p. 105; 15,1, p. 104, p. 107 n. 209; 15,2, p. 104; 15,5, p. 104 n. 194; 26,7 ff., p. 94 n. 145. V s,r, p. 94 n. 140; 5,2, p. 94; 6,1, p. 94; 16,4, p. 152 n. 36; 16~7. p. 148. SEXTUS EMPIRICUS

A.dverms 1'tfatkematicos IV 2•10, p. 158 n. 8; 2-3, p. 158 n. 8; 2, p. 65 n. 54; 5-8, p. 160-1 n. 24: 6, p. 193 n. 210. VII 19, p. 95 n. 149; 91-109, p. 156 and n. 2, p. 157 n. 7, p. 158n. 8, p. 192 n. 203, p. 193; 91-104, p. 158 n. 8; 93 ff., p. 156 n. 2; 93, p. 156 n. :2, p. 201 n. 248; 94, p. 65 n. 54, p. 157 n. 3; 99, p. 193-4 and n. 214, n. 216; 101-3, p. 194 n. 213; IOI-2, p. 195; 101, p. 193, p. 194 and n. 211, n. 214; 103, p. 195, p. 201 n. 248; 104, p. 194 and n. 214; 105-9. p. 158 n. 8; 105-6, p. 195; 106-q, p. 195; 107 ff., p. 156 n. 2; ro8, p. 156 n. 2; 109, p. 65 n. 54; II9, p. 156 n. 2, p. 201 n. 248. IX 76, p. 39; 277 ff., p. 51; 279, p. 40. X 46, p. 71 n. 29; 67, p. 39; 70, p. 78 n. 68; 77, p. 39; 82, p. 109 n. 224; 83, p. 39; 84, p. 34; 218, p. 194 n. 212. SIMPLICIUS

in A.r-istotelis Physica Commentaria eel. Diels, p.24,I, p. 46; p.24,17, p. 29 n. 144; p.xso,x, p. 46. SOLON

fr. 19 Diehl, p. 161, p. 162 and n. 32, p. 163 and n. 36, p. 173 n. 98, p. 174,

265

p. 181, p. 182 n. 146. p. 187, p. 190, p. 197, p. 203 and n. 263; 19,1-2, p. 171; 19,2, p. 40, p. 174 n. 104; 19,4. p. 171, p. 172 n. 95; 19,5-6, p. 171, p. 174 n. 104; 19,5, p. 171, p. 175 n. 109; 19,6, p. 46; 19,7-8, p. 171; 19,9·10, p. 174 n. 103; 19,13, p. 174 n. 103; 19,17-8, p. 174 n. 103. SPEUSIPPUS

fr.4o Lang, p. 160 n. 21. STEl:'HANUS ATHENIENS!S

Comm. in Ilipp. Aph., Vol.ll Dietz, p.326, p. 10 n. 35. STRABO

I 3,8, p. 40, p. 94 n. 145; 3,12, p. 18'-1· n. 157; 29, p. 151 n. 27. IX 2,8, p. 184 n. 157. XVII 1,5 (P-790), p. 151 n. 27. STRATO

fr.85 \Vehrli, p. 38; fr.97-9 W., p. 165 n. 50. SUETONIUS

fr.151 Reifferscheid, p. 148 n. 11. ed. Von Arnim I 65, p. 194 n. 219; 87, p. 99 n. 68; 98, p. 99 n. 168; 99, p. 109 n. 222, p. 110; 102, p. 89 n. 121, p. lOOn. 170, n. 171, p. 108 11. 215, 11. 216; 103-5. p. 108 n. 218; 103, p. 108 n. 217; 104, p. 100 n. 171, p. 108 n. 218; 105, p. 108 n. 218; II5, p. 111 n. 239; 120, p. 88 n. 114, p. 95-6 n. 154; 124, p. 211 n. 4-0; 135. p. 99 n. 169; 176, p. 99 u. 168; 494. p. 194 n. 219; 495, p. 211n. 40; 497. p. 91 n. 127, p. 100 n. 171; 498, p. 102 n. 182; 499, p. 91 n. 127, p. 102n. 181; 502, p. 102 11.182; 504, p. 87 n. 104, p. 212; 506, p. 102 n. 182; 508, p. 102 n. 182; 510, p. 91 n. 127; 512, p. 91 n. 127; 513, p. 87 n. 104-, p. 103 n. 188; 530, p. 102 n. 181; 537, p. 44 n. 35, p. 112-3 n. 244. 11 64, p. 169 n. 69; 83, p. 169 n. 69; 3II, p. 39; 331, p. 194 n. 212; 365, p. 194 n. 218; 413, p. 39, p. 100 n. 171, p. 108 n. 219; 429, p. 100 n. 171; 470 ff., p. 89 n. 121; 471, p. 39; 473, p. 90 n. 121, p. 100 n. 171; 488, p. 194 n. 215; 499. p. 39; 527. p. 111, p. 113 and n. 246, n. 249, p. 120; 550, p. 109; 555, p. 109, p. 111, p. 112; 558, p. 114 n. 252; 565, p. 100 n. 171; 579. p. 108 n. 219; 580, p. 100 n. 170, p. 108 n. 21.5, p. 114 n. 252; 581, p. 100 n. 171, p. 108 11. 216; 6II, p. 112 n. 2+1; 633, p. 211 11. 40; 634, p. 211 n. 40; 646, p. 109 n. 222; 668, p. 112; 677, p. 39; 786, p. 99 n. 169; 8o6, p. 167 n. 57; 827-33, p. 169 n. 69; 850, p. 157 n. 3; 859, p. 156 n. 2; 913, p. 99 n. 168; 914. p. 99 11. 168; 917, p. 99 n. 168; 918, p. 99 n. 168; 920, p. 99 n. 168; 988, p. 39; 1067, p. 100 n. 170; 1077, p. 126; II76, p. 126. Ill Vl,2, p. 123 n. 295; Vl,3, p. 123 n. 295; Vl,1o, p. 99 n. 169.

STOICORUM VETERUM FRAGMENTA

THAf,ES

llA12, p. 61; llA13, p. 61 n. 39. THEAGENES REGINUS

8,2, p. 41 ed. Hiller p.85,8-1o6,14, p. 163 n. 34; p.96,4 ff.. p. 192 11. 203; P·99,24-104,19, p. 163 n. 34, p. 172 n. 98; p.102,19 ff., p. 51; p.103,16 ff., p. 179; p.104,1 ff., p. 163,

THEON SMYRNAEUS

266

p. 170-1; p.104,9 ff., p. 173 n. 98; p.I04,15-I6, p. 197; p.104,I8, p. 184 11. ] 57; p.Ig8,g, p. 58 11. 22; p.Igg,I, p. 58 11. 22. THEOPHRASTUS

de Caelo (ap. Procl., ht Tim.), p. 84 11. 89. de .Tgne ed. Wimmer, Ch.I, p. 8211. 78; 1,4, P·35I,I9 ff., p. 83; 1,5, P·35I, 28 ff., p. 83; 1,5, P·351,34 ff., p. 83 11. 82; 1,6, P·35Io42 ff., p. 83 n. 80; 2,16, P·353,25-7, p. 86 11. 99, p. 96 n. 159; 4,33, P·356,I8, p. 83 n. 83; 6,44, P·35S,21 ff., p. 83 n. 82; 7,52, P·359,41 ff., p. 82 n. '79. Afetaphysica eel. Ross-Fobes, 5bu-u, p. 83 11. 80; 6a5-14, p. 84 n. 89; 7b2 ff., p. 83 11. 81; ga14-5. p. 85 n. 91; xoag-21, p. 84 n. 89; xoaxs-16, p. 84 11. 89; 10b21 ff., p. 85 11. 91; IIa16-7, p. 85 11. 91; 1Ia27, p. 98 n. 163. Meteorologica ed. Wag11er-Stei11metz, 351a27, p. 45 11. 41. de S!:'nsu (ed. Diels, Do:wgmphi G1·aeri), 26. p. 38. de Ventis ed. Wimmer, J,I7, p.JSO,IO ff., p. 84 11. 86. fr.Jo Wimmer, p. 82 n. 79. p. 84 n. 87, p. 128. ps. THEOPHRASTUS de Signis Tempestatum ed. Wimmer, 3.46. p.Jg6,24-5, p. 143 11. 32. TIMAEUS

fr.147 Jacoby, p. 188 11. 185. TIMOSTHENES

fr.6 '\Vagner, p. 148 and n. 8, p. 149. TZETZES

Chiliades, 10,534 ff., 12,219 ff., 12,283 ff., p. 30 n. 148. VARRO

Atticus de Numeris, p.158 n. 9, p. 185, p. 187 and n. 173, p. 188, p. 18911. 191, p. 190, p. 191. Hebdomades (= Imagines). p. 1.58 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. 191 and n. 198. de Ling~ta Lati·na V,169 ff., p. 188 n. 187; IX,81 ff., p. 188 n. 187. de Musica, p. 1.87 11. 179a, p. 190, p. 191 n. 198. Ora Maritima, p. 148. de Principiis Numerorum, p. 189 n. 188. Res Rusticae, ll,I,J, p. 187. Tubero de Origine Httmana, 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

Epitoma Rei Militaris, IV,38, p. 148 n. 11. VITRUVIUS

de Architectura, 1,6,4-5, p. 149; 6,4, p. 149; 6,6-8, p. 149; 6,12-13. p. 149. XENOPHON

Anabasis, IV,5,3. p. 151 11. 32. XENOCRATES

fr.s Heinze, p. 43 n. 34, p. 121 n. 285; fr,15 H .. p. 43 n. 34; fr.17 H., p. 123 n. 296; fr.I8 H .• p. 43 n. 34, p. 121 n. 285; fr.6o H., p. 160 n. 20. 7.ENO, S. SVF

267

II ps.GALENUS, Comm. in ps.lfipp. Hebd., s. above, p. 261. pS.HIPPOCRATES de I-Iebdomadibus ed. Roscher

Ch.I-20, Ch.l-17, Ch.I-II,

Ch.1-5, Ch.l-2, Ch.l,

Ch.2,

Ch.J,

p. p. p. p. p.

4·, p. 5, p. 8, p. 9. 4 n. 9. 1, p. 2, p. 9, p. 16 n. 6+, p. 17 and n. 70, p. 18, p. 19, p. 26, 31, p. bS, p. (J6, p. 131, p. 135, p. 161., p. 205, p. 206, p. 227, 228, p. 229. p. 3, p. 5 n. 11. p. 3. p. 18, p. 136 n. 32. p. 3, p. 28,p. 37, p. 54, p. 57, p. RO,p. 113,p. 115, p. llS, p. 119 and n. 275, p. 130, p. 132 n. 16, p. 133, p. 173 n. 98, p. 206, p. 226 11. 126, p. 227 11. 138; 1,§r, p. 113 11. 248, p. 132, p. 141 11. 15, p. 227; 1,6-8, p. 52 n. 51; 1,8 ff., p. 162 n. 33, p. 203 u. 263, p. 227 n. 137; 1,13 ff., p. 203 ll. 263; I,IJ-5, p. 172 n. 98; 1,18-21, p. 52 n. 51; 1,23 ff., p. l41n. 15; 1,25 ff., p. 51; 1,26, p. 41; 1,28, p. 52 n. 51; 1,31, p. 41; 1,41-68, p. 132; 1,41, p. 48; 1,42-8, p. 136; 1,43 ff., p. 42; 1.44-8, p. 132 n. 16; 1.44-5, p. 115 n. 256; 1,44 ff., p. 115 n. 256; 1,45 ff., p. 120-1; 1,51, p. 38; 1,51-2, p. 58; 1,52, p. 18 n. 76; 1,52-3, p. 137; 1,53, p. 46; 1,54 ff., p. 80; 1,57, p. 45: 1,58 rr., p. so: 1,63 rr., p. 51, p. 177-8, p. 2o3: 1,6 5 , p. 5o: 1,66, p. 47; 1,67, p. 40; 1,70-77, p. 132; 1,70 ff., p. 90 n. 123, p. 117; 1,71 ff., p. 42, p. 110; 1,78-89, p. 132; 1,78 ff., p. 57, p. 79, p. 116, p. 207; x,8o-1, p. 79 n. 72; 1,8o, p. 103 n. 192; 1,85 ff., p. 205, p. 207; 1,86-7, p. 81; 1,87. p. 36, p. 37; 1,88, p. 38; 1,90-5, p. 132; 1,90 ff., p. 61, p. 116; 1,91 ff., p. 81, p. 107 n. 211, p. 207; 1,94-5, p. 127, p. 207; 1,94. p. 61, p. 106 n. 203; 1,95. p. 77 n. 62. p. 54, p. 58, p. 92, p. 118, p. 119 and n. 275, p. 120, p. 133, p. 206, p. 227 n. 138; 2,1 ff.. p. 66, p. 76, p. 112, p. 137; 2,3 ff., p. 42, p. 93; 2,6, p. 6; 2,9 ff., p. 47; 2,10, p. 50; 2,J4·17, p. 77; 2,14 ff., p. 50, p. 121 and n. 283; 2,15 ff., p. 42; 2,15-6, p. 57, p. 121; 2,18-9. p. 77; 2,19, p. 49; 2,24ff., p. 42, p. 54, p. 62, p. 120; 2,25 ff., p. 81, p. 108 n. 212; 2,27 ff., p. 116 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. 121 and n. 283; 2,40 ff., p. 204; 2,41 ff., p. 121; 2,42 ff., p. 42; 2,44 ff., p. 59, p. 120; 2,47 ff., p. 58, p. 66, p. 77; 2,48-9, p. 78; 2,48, p. 208 n. 26; 2.49, p. 77 n. 62; 2,50 ff., p. 77 n. 62, p. 89 n. 121; 2,50-1, p. 81; 2,51 ff., p. 93, p. 207; 2,53, p. 77 n. 62; 2,55 ff., p. 127; 2,64 ff., p. 21, p. 30, p. 54, p. 57 n. 17, p. 138, p. 139-40, p. 145; 2,64-92, p. 144; 2,64-5. p. 138; 2,66-71, p. 1.39; 2,66, p. 77 n. 62; 2,68-70, p. 139 n. 8; 2,69 ff., p. 59 n. 25; 2,70-3, p. 140; 2,72 ff., p. 37; 2,72, p. 140 n. J.1; 2,73, p. 153; 2,74, p. 37, p. 1.44; 2,82-92, p. 140-1. p. 21, p. 24, p. 13+, p. 146, p. 155, p. 227 n. 138; 3,10 ff., p. 90

268

Ch.s,

Ch.6-u, Ch.6-7, Ch.6,

Ch.6,§1,

Ch.6,§2,

Ch.7, Ch.8-9, Ch.8, Ch.g, Ch.IO, Ch.II,

Ch.12-53, Ch.I2, Ch.13-53, Ch.13-52, Ch.IJ-23, Ch.l3•20, Ch.13,

Ch.q-20, Ch.14,

n. 123; 3,14 ff., p. 151; 3,16, p. 147 n. 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,II, p. 50; 4,15, p. 38; 4,16, p. 40; 4,18, p. 49. p. 3 and n. 5, p. 133, p. 161, p. 162 and n. 33, p. 163 and n. 36, p. 171, p. 173 n. 98, p . .1.74, p. 175 n. 110, p. 181 and n. 140, p. 182 n. 146, p. 187, p. 190, p. 197 and n. 233, p. 202, p. 203 and n. 263; 5.14, p. 162 n. 3:~; 5.15-6, p. 40, p. 171 n. 89; 5,16 ff., p. 171; s,l6, p. 174 n. HJ+; 5,17-8, p. 172 n. 95; s,xg-:z6, p. 173 n. 98; s,zo-x, p. 17+ n. 104; s,:u, p. 46; 5,24-5. p. 171 n. 91. p. 227. p.134. p. 21. p. 22 and n. 100, p. 27, p. 28, p. 54, p. 101, p. 104, p. 105 n. 198, p. 113, p.133, p. 199 n. 243, p. 205, p. 206 and n. 7, p. 207, p. 214 n. 60. p. 22, p. 204· n. 264; 6,§1,1 ff., p. 106 and n. 206; 6,§1,11 ff., p. 106; 6,§1,J4, p. 207; 6,§1,18, p. 207; 6,§1,19 ff., p. 104; 6,§1,19• 20, p. 79, p. 81; 6,§1,20 ff., p. 61 n. 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,§1, 26 ff., p. 106; 6,§1,31 ff., p. 20 n. 88. p. 21; 6,§2,1 ff., p. 79; 6,§2,3 ff., p. 79, p. 80 n. 73, p. 81, p. 206; 6,§2,5 ff., p. 103 and n. 191; 6,§2,9 ff., p. 80, p. 124; 6,§2,Il-2, p. 80; 6,§2,12 ff., p. 92; 6,§2,13 ff., p. 106 n. 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 n. 243, p. 201 11. 254. p. 134 and n. 25. p. 133, p. 134 n. 24, p. 199 and n. 243, p. 200-l and n. 254; 8,1 ff., p. 10; 8,3 ff., p. 223 n. 112; 8,12 ff., p. 10. p. 133, p. 134 and n. 25, p. 201. n. 254. p. 28 11. 134, p. 134, p. 208, p. 209, p. 210 and n. 30, p. 211; 10,1 ff., p. 209 Il. 27; 10,7-8, p. 10, p. 209; 10,12 ff., p. 10. p. 19, p. 20 and n. 88, p. 133 n. 22, p. 199 and n. 243, n. 2+4, p. 200 and n. 246, p. 227 n. 138; II,3 ff., p. 20 11. 88; u,8-9, p. 20 n. 88; II,9, p. 202; II,9•II, p. 199 n. 2+4. p. 1, p. 2, p. 205, p. 206. p. 10, p. 14, p. 229; 12,23 ff., p. 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 n. 134, p. 208 and p. 208-9 n. 26, p. 209, p. 210, p. 211, p. 215, p. 226 n. 126; 13,1 ff., p. 223 11. 108; 13,13 ff., p. 210 11. 29; 13,29 ff., p. 213 11. 46; 13,33 ff., p. 211, p. 223 n. 107; 13,36 ff., p. 222 n. 98; 13,36, p. 214 n. 56. p. 15, p. 16 and n. 63, p. 214 n. 56. p. 3 n. 6, p. 4n. 10, p. 5 n. 1.0, p. 16 and n. 63, p. 37, p. 209 n. 26, p. 214 and n. 55, n. 57, n. 58, p. 216 and n. 69, 11. 71; J4,I ff., p. 224 n. 117, p. 225; q,u ff., p. 212; :£4,22 ff., p. 210; 14,28 ff.,

269

p. 216; J4,29 ff., p. 210; 14·34 ff., p. 216; 14,40, p. 212; 14,47. p. 37; 14,55 ff., p. 216; q,6o ff., p. 215; 14,68-9. p. 212, p. 213; 14.74 rr., p. 37; q,s5, p. 212 11. +s; q,s9, p. 37; 14.95 ff.• p. 211 11. 38; J4,96, p. 212 11. 45. Ch.15-6, p. 5 11. 10. Ch.15, p. 16 and 11. 63, p. 17 11. 70, p. 27 and n. 132, p. 28, p. 205, p. 206, p. 207, p. 211 n. 38, p. 215; 15, I ff., p. 20G n. 8; 15,5 ff., p. 206; 15,5-7. p. 206; 15,6 ff., p. 207 11. 17; 15.7. p. 206 11. 6; 15,9. p. 206 n. (); 15,II, p. 206 n. 6; 15,IZ ff., p. 210 and n. 30; 15,IZ-3. p. 207; 15,13, p. 206 n. fi; 15,14 ff., p. 207 11. 14; xs,xs-9. p. 205, p. 207 n. 15; 15,19 ff.. p. 207; 15,22 ff., p. 210, p. 214 n. 5(l, p. 215, p. 222 n. 104. Ch.x6, p. 16 and n. 63, p. 17 n. 70. Ch.17, p. 5 u. 10, p. 15, p. 16 allll n. 63, p. 214; 17,Il. ff., p. 2H n. 57. Ch.18-2o, p. 4 n. 10, p. 15. Clu8, p. 4· n. 10, p. 16 and n. G3, p. 210, p. 214 n. 56, n. 57, n. 58; 18,3 ff., p. 210. Ch.I9, p. 3 n. 6, p. 5 n. 10, p. 1.6 ami 11. 63; 19,14 ff., p. 222 n. 98; 19·14-21, p. 217 11. 72; 19,14. p. 21.2; 19,15, p. 37, p. 210; 19,34. p. 213; 19,38 ff., p. 220 11. 90; 19,39, p. 213 11. 48; 19,40 ff., p. 223 n. 109; 19,44 ff., p. 1.5 n. 59, p. 213, p. 220; 19,46 ff., p. 215; 19,47, p. 213 n. 48; 19,53 ff., p. 212; 19,54 ff., p. 217; 19,60 ff., p. 1.5 ll. 59; 19,71, p. 213; 19,74, p. 213. Ch.2o, p. 3 n. 6, p. 16 and n. 63; 20,1 ff., p. lln. 40, p. 209 n. 26, p. 212, p. 215, p. 222 n. 104; 20,9 ff., p. 217; 20,13 ff., p. 15 n. 59; 20,19 ff., p. 15 11. 59. Ch.2I, p. 16 and n. 63; 21,15 ff., p. 217; ZI,2o ff.. p. 214 n. 56. Ch.22, p. 16 and n. 63. p. 3 n. (i, p. Hi and n. 63; 23,15 ff., p. 220 n. 92; 23,18 ff., p. 217 Ch.23, n. 75; 23,71 ff., p. 220 n. 92; 23,77 ff., p 216 n. 69; 23,II7 ff., p. 14 n. 52. Ch.24-39, p. 13, p. 225. Ch.24, p. 3 n. 6, V· 15, p. 214n. 56, p. 215 n. 65; 24,1 ff., !J. 210 and n. 35, p. 215; 24,2 ff., p. 11 n. 40; 24,10 ff., p. 214; 24,12 ff., p. 2.17; 24,41 ff., p. 220 n. 92; 24,63 ff., p. 217; 24,70 tT., p. 210. Ch.25, p. 217 n. 72; 25,18, p. 22011. 92; 25,22, p. 216 n. 69. Ch.26-7, p. 1 n. 1, p. 28, p. 172 n. 98, p. 173 n. 98. Ch.26, p. 4 n. 7; 26,12, p. 216 n. 69. Ch.27, p. 15, p. 210 n. 34, p. 215 n. 65. Ch.28, p. 3 n. 6, p. 4 n. 8; 28,u, p. 213; 28,38 ff., p. 210; 28.45 ff., p. 223 11. 109. Ch.29, 2, p. 216 n. 69; 29,7 ff., p. 220; 29,II ff., p. 223-4 and n. 113. p. 216 n. 69, p. 217 n. 72; 30,3 ff., p. 218 and n. 83, p. 219; 30,21, Ch.JO, p. 218; 30,22 ff., p. 220. Ch.JI, I, p. 216 Il. 69; JI,18 ff., p. 220 11. 92; JI,3J, p. 7; 31,34 ff., p. 218; 31,35 ff., p. 225; JI,6I ff., p. 218 n. 83; 31,68 ff., p. 219. Ch.JJ, I, p. 216 n. 69. Ch.34a, 5, p. 218; 34a,xs ff., p. 13 n. 46; 34a,21, p. 216 n. 69.

270

Ch.34b, Ch.35, Ch.37, Ch. 3 8, Ch.39, Clqo-52, Ch.4o,

Clq1,

Ch.43. Ch.44, Ch.45, Ch-46,

Ch.5x, Ch.52, Ch.53,

p. 291 n. 85; 34b3 ff., p. 219~n. 85. p. 218; 35,7-8, p. 218; 35,16-7, p. 218. p. 10; 37,10 ff., p. 223. p. 223; 3 s, 5 ff., p. 223. p. 219 n. 85; 39,3 ff., p. 219 n. 85; 39,5 ff., p. 14 n. 52. p. 13, p. 225. 1, p. 224; 40,5 ff., p. 221 n. 97; 40,9 ff., p. 223 n. lll; 4o,u, p. 224; 40,13 ff., p. 221 n. 97; 40,19-20, p. 221 n. 97; 40,23-4, p. 211 n. 3G. p. 221 n.97; 41,3-4, p. 2Zln. 97; 41,9 ff., p. 214 n. 57; 41,9-10, p. 221 n. 97. p. 221 n. 97; 42,14 ff., p. 211 11. 36; 42,24-5, p. 221 n. 97; 42,30-I, p. 221 n. 97. I ff., p. 21.4 11. SG. 6, p. 221 n. 97; 44,13-4, p. 221 n. 97. 3-6, p. 221 n. 97; 45,14-5, p. 221 n. Q7. p. 4 n. 7; 46,14 ff., p. 11 ; 46,26 ff., p. 224-5; 46,33 ff., p. 223 n. 111; 46,36, p. 212 n. 45, p. 213; 46,47, p. 21:?.u. 45, p. 213. 21 ff., p. 221 11. 97. p. 4 11. 7; 50,52 ff., p. 215-6; 50,13 ff., p. 11; 50,17, p. 213; 50,28 ff., p. 221 Jl. 97; 50,J2, p. 214 11. 57; 50,3(1 ff., p. 216. p. 4 11. 7; 51,9 ff., p. 225; 51,H>9 ff., p. 223 Tl. lll; 5I,J42 ff., p. 6-7, p. 223 n. 1ll. p. 4n. 7, p. 219 n. 85, p. 221-2 aml n. 99, n. 102. p. l.'i and n. 55, p. 229; 53,1 ff., p. 13; 53,9 ff., p. 8, p. 14 n. 51.

271