by enlightening the public
generally
on certain
388-407.
388-407.
William Smith - 1844 - Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities - a
(Comp.
Still Alexander refrained from any expression of Eustath. ad Hom. Od. vii. 120. p. 1573, 12. ed.
hostility towards his former instructor (a story of Rom. 275, 20, Bas. ; Aelian, V. H. j. 36. )
this kind in Diog. Laërt. v. 10, has been corrected From Chalcis he may have sent forth a defence
by Stahr, Aristotelia, p. 133); and although, as against the accusation of his enemies. At least
Plutar expressly informs us, their former cordial antiquity possessed a defence of that kind under
connexion no longer subsisted undisturbed, yet, as his name, the authenticity of which, however, was
is proved bs a remarkable expression (Topicor. ii. already doubted by Athenaeus. (Comp. Phavorin.
1, 7, ed. Buhle ; comp. Albert Heydemann's German ap. Diog. Laërt. 1. c. , who calls it a logos dikavo-
translation and explanation of the categories of kós. ) However, on his refusing to answer the
Aristotle, p. 32, Berlin, 1835), Aristotle never lost summons of the Areiopaguis
, he was deprived of all
his trust in his royal friend. The story, that Aris- the rights and honours which had been previously
totle, irritated by the above-mentioned occurrence, bestowed upon him (Aelian, V. H. xiv. 1), and
took part in poisoning the king, is altogether un condemned to death in his absence. Meantime
## p. 321 (#341) ############################################
ARISTOTELES.
321
ARISTOTELES.
the philosopher continued his studies and lectures | adapted to produce conviction in his hcarers, a gitt
in Chalcis for some time longer without molesta- which Antipater praises highly in a letter written
tion. He died in the beginning of August, in the after Aristotle's death. (Plut. Cat. Maj. p. 354,
year B. C. 322, a short time before Demosthenes Coriol. p. 234. ) He exhibited remarkable atten-
(who died in October of the same year), in the 63rd tion to external appearance, and bestowed much
year of his age, from the effects, not of poison, but care on his dress and person. (Timotheus, ap.
of a chronic disorder of the stomach. (Censorin. de Diog. L. v. 1; Aelian, V. H. ii. 19. ) He is de
Die Nat. 14, extr. ; Apollod. ap. Diog. Laërt. v. scribed as having been of weak health, which, con-
10; Dionys. l. c. 5. ) The accounts of his having sidering the astonishing extent of his studies,
committed suicide belong to the region of fables shews all the more the energy of his mind. (Cen-
and tales. One story (found in several of the sor. de Die nat. 14. ) He was short and of slender
Christian fathers) was, that he threw himself into make, with small eyes and a lisp in his pronun-
the Euripus, from vexation at being unable to dis- ciation, using L for R (Tpavaós, Diog. L. v. 1),
cover the causes of the currents in it. On the and with a sort of sarcastic expression in his
other hand, we have the account, that his mortal countenance (uwaia, Aelian, iii. 19), all which
remains were transported to his native city Stageira, characteristics are introduced in a maliciously
and that his memory was honoured there, like that caricatured description of him in an ancient epi-
of a hero, by yearly festivals of remembrance. gram. (Anth. 552, vol. iii. p. 176, ed. Jacobs. )
(Vet. Intp. ap. Buhle, vol. i. p. 56; Ammon. p. The plastic works of antiquity, which pass as por-
47. ) Before his death, in compliance with the traits of Aristotle, are treated of by Visconti.
wish of his school, he had intimated in a symbolical (Iconographie Grecque, i. p. 230. )
manner that of his two most distinguished scholars,
Menedemus of Rhodes and Theophrastus of Eresus
II. ARISTOTLE'S WRITINGS.
(in Lesbos), he intended the latter to be his suc- Before we proceed to enumerate, classify, and
cessor in the Lyceum. (Gellius, xiii. 5. )" He also characterise the works of the philosopher, it is
bequeathed to Theophrastus his well-stored library necessary to take a review of the history of their
and the originals of his own writings. From his transmission to our times. A short account of this
will (in Diog. Laërt. v. 21; Hermipp. ap. Athen. kind has at the same time the advantage of indi-
xiii. p. 589, c. ), which attests the flourishing state cating the progress of the development and influ-
of his worldly circumstances not less than his ence of the Aristotelian philosophy itself.
judicious and sympathetic care for his family and According to ancient accounts, even the large
servants, we gather, that his adoptive son Nicanor, number of the works of Aristotle which are still
his daughter Pythias, the offspring of his first mar- preserved, comprises only the smallest part of the
riage, as well as Herpyllis and the son he had by writings he is said to have composed. According
her, survived him. He named his friend Antipater to the Greek commentator David (ad Categ. Prooem.
as the executor of his will.
p. 24, L 40, Brand. ), Andronicus the Rhodian
If we cast a glance at the character of Aristotle, stated their number at 1000 ovnypáupata. The
we see a man of the highest intellectual powers, Anonym. Menagii (p. 61, ed. Buhle in Arist. Opp.
gifted with a piercing understanding, a compre- vol. 1) sets down their number at 400 Bibaba. Dio-
hensive and deep mind, practical and extensive genes Laërtius (v: 27) gives 44 myriads as the
views of the various relations of actual life, and number of lines. If we reckon about 10,000 lines
the noblest moral sentiments. Such he appears in to a quire, this gives us 44 quires, while the writ-
his life as well as in his writings. Such other in- ings extant amount to about the fourth part of
formation as we possess respecting his character this. (Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Gesch. der
accords most completely with this view, if we Philosophie, vol. ii. pp. 307, 308. ) Still these
estimate at their real value the manifest ill-will statements are very indefinite. Nor do we get on
and exaggerations of the literary anecdotes which much better with the three ancient catalogues of
have come down to us. At Athens the fact of his his writings which are still extant, those namely of
being a foreigner was of itself a sufficient reason Diogenes Laërtius, the Anonym. Menag. , and the
for his taking no part in politics. For the rest, he Arabian writers in Casiri (Bill. Arab. Hisp. vol. i.
at any rate did not belong to the party of de- p. 306), which may be found entire in the first vo-
mocratical patriots, of wbom Demosthenes may be lume of Buhle's edition of Aristotle. They all three
regarded as the representative, but probably coincid- give a mere enumeration, without the least trace of
ed rather with the conciliatory politics of Phocion. arrangement, and without any critical remarks.
A declared opponent of absolutism (Polit. ii. 7. $ 6), They differ not only from each other, but from
he everywhere insists on conformity to the law, the quotations of other writers and from the titles
for the law is “ the only safe, rational standard to of the extant works to such a degree, that all idea of
be guided by, while the will of the individual man reconciling them must be given up. The difficulty
cannot be depended on. " He wished to form the of doing so is further increased by the fact, that
beau ideal of a ruler in Alexander (Polit. iii. 8, one and the same work frequently quoted under
extr. ), and it is quite in accordance with the different titles (Brandis, de perditis. Arist. libr de
oriental mode of viewing things, when the Arabian Ideis et de Bono, p. 7 ; Ravaisson, Métaphysique d'
philosophers, as Avicenna and Abu-l-faraj, some- Aristote, vol. i. p. 48, Paris
, 1837), and that sections
times call Aristotle, Alexander's vizier. (Comp. i and books appear as independent writings under
Schmoelder's Documenta Philosoph. Arab. p. 74. ) distinct titles. From Aristotle's own quotations of
The whole demeanour of Aristotle was marked his works criticism can here derive but little
by a certain briskness and vivacity. His powers assistance, as the references for the most part are
of eloquence were considerable, and of a kind quite general, or have merely been supplied by
later writers. (Ritter, Gesch, der Phil. vol. iii. p.
* He praised the wines of both islands, but 21, not. 1. ) The most complete enumeration of the
said he thought that of Lesbos the more agreeable. I writings of Aristotle from those catalogues, as well
Y
## p. 322 (#342) ############################################
322
ARISTOTELES.
ARISTOTELES.
of the extant as of the lost works, is to be found obliged to break ground for his newer philosophy
in Fabricius. (Bill. Gr. iii. pp. 207—284, and np.
by enlightening the public generally on certain
388-407. ) 'The lost works alone have been practical points. In this way originated writings
enurnerated by Buhle (Commentatio de deperd. Arist. like the “Eudemus," a refutation, as it appears, of
libr. in Comment. Societ. Götting. vol. xv. p. 57, &c. ) Plato's Phaedon; his book nepi Nóuwv, a critical
But the labours of both these scholars no longer extract from Plato's “ Laws;" farther, writinge
satisfy the demands of modern critical science. To such as that nepl Binalooúvns, &c. These were the
make use of, and form a judgment upon those ancient λόγοι έν κοινή εκδεδομένοι, 1nd Stobaeus quotes
catalogues, is still further attended with uncertainty from them quite correctly in his Florilegium, ék
from the circumstance, that much that was spu- TWv ’Aplototé Aovs KOINO'N biarpıbwv. (Comp.
rious was introduced among the writings of Aris Philop. ad Arist. de Anima, i. 138, c. 2. ) In Aris-
totle at an early period in antiquity. The causes totle himself (and this has not always been duly con-
of this are correctly assigned by Ammonius. (. Ad sidered) there occurs no express declaration of this
Arist. Cuteg. fol. 3, a. ) In the first place, several distinction. The designations esoteric, acroa matic,
of the writings of the immediate disciples of Aris- or epoptic writings, would alike be looked for in
totle, which treated of like subjects under like vain in all the genuine works of the philosopher.
names, as those of Theophrastus, Eudemus Rho- It is only in his answer to the complaint of Alex-
dius, Phanias, and others, got accidentally inserted ander, that by publishing his lectures he had made
amongst the works of the Stagirite. Then we must the secrets of philosophy the common property of
add mistakes arising già trio ouwvuulav, as in the all, that he says, that “the acroatic (acroamatic, or
ancient philosophical, rhetorical, and historico- esoteric) books had been published and yet not
political literature there were several writers of the published, for they were intelligible only to one
same name. Lastly, the endeavours of the Ptole who had been initiated into philosophy. " The ex-
mies and Attali to enrich their libraries as much pression eroteric, on the other hand, we find in
us possible with works of Aristotle, set in motion Aristotle himself, and that in nine passages. (Eth.
a number of people, whose love of gain rendered Nic. i. 13, vi. 4, Eth. Eudem. ii. 1, ii. &, v. 4, Polit
.
them not over scrupulously honest. (Comp. David, i. 4, vii. 1, Phys. iv. 14, Metaph. xiii. 1. ) These
ad Categ. p. 28, a. , 15, who assigns additional very passages prove incontestably, that Aristotle
causes of falsification; Ammon. I. c. ; Simplicius, himself had noi in view a division of this kind in
fol. 4, 6; Galen, Comment. 2 in libr. de Nai. hum. the sense in which it was subsequently understood.
pp. 16, 17; Brandis, Rhein. Mus. p. 260, 1827. ) | In one instance he applies the name eroteric to
It is very possible that the Greek lists, in particu- writings which, in accordance with the above-men-
lar that in Diogenes Laërtius, are nothing else tioned division, must necessarily be set down as
than catalogues of these libraries. (Trendelenburg, esoteric; and secondly, in several of those passages
ad Arist. de Anima, p. 123. )
the term is merely employed to denote disquisitions
As regards the division of Aristotle's writings, which are foreign to the matter in hand. Nay,
the ancient Greek commentators, as Ammonius the expression is used to denote the writings of
(aut Categ. p. 6, b. Ald. ) and Simplicius (ad Cut. other authors. The whole subject concerns us
pp. 1, 6, ed. Bas. ) distinguish-1. 'Trouvnuatiká, more as a point of literary history than as having
i. e. collections of notices and materials, drawn up any scientific interest. “ One sees at once for
for his own use. 2. Lurrayuatirá, elaborate works. one's self," says Hegel (Gesch, der Philos. ji. p. 310,
Those which were composed in a strictly scientific comp. 220, 238), “what works are philosophic and
manner, and contained the doctrinal lectures (akpo speculative, and what are more of a mere empirical
áoers) of the philosopher, they called arpoamatiká nature. The esoteric is the speculative, which,
(Gell. xx. 5, has åkpoatıká, which form, however, even though written and printed, yet remains
Schaefer, ad Plut. vol. v. p. 245, rejects), or else concealed from those who do not take sufficient
dowTepirá, éOTTIKá. Those, on the other hand, interest in the matter to apply themselves rigo
in which the method and style were of a more rously. It is no secret, and yet is hidden. " But
popular kind, and which were calculated for a cir- the same author is wrong in maintaining, that
cle of readers beyond the limits of the school, were among the ancients there existed no difference at
termed εξωτερικά. The latter were composed all between the writings of the philosophers which
chiefly in the form of dialogues, particularly such they published, and the lectures which they deli-
as treated upon points of practical philosophy. Of vered to a select circle of hearers. The contrary is
these dialogues, which were still extant in Cicero's established by positive testimony. Thus Aristotle
time, nothing has been preserved. (The whole of was the first to publish what with Plato were,
the authorities relating to this subject, amongst strictly speaking, lectures (šypaqa dóyuata, Bran-
whom Strab. xiii. pp. 608, 609; Cic. de Fin. v. 5, dis, de perd. Ar. libr. de Ideis, p. 25; Trendelenb.
ad Aul. ir. 16 ; Gell. l. c. ; Plut. Alex. 5, Advers. Ca | Platonis de Ideis doctrina ex Platone illustrata, p. 2,
lot. p. 1115, b. are the most important, are given &c. , Berlin, 1827). Hegel himself took good care
at full length in Stahr's Aristotelia, rol. ii. p. 244, not to allow all the conclusions to which his system
&c. ; to which must be added Sopater atque Syrian. conducted to appear in print, and kant also
ad Hermog. p. 120, in Leonhard Spengel, Euvaywon found it unadvisable for a philosopher “to give
TEXvwv, s. de Artium Scriptt. &c. p. 167. )
utterance in his works to all that he thought, al-
The object which Aristotle had in view in the though he would certainly say nothing that he did
composition of his exoteric writings appears to not think. "
have been somewhat of the following kind. He The genuine Aristotelian writings which are
wished by means of them to come to an understand. extant would have to be reckoned amongst the
ing with the public. The Platonic philosophy was acroamatic books. The Problems alone belong to
so widely diffused through all classes, that it was the class designated by the ancients hypomnematic
at that time almost a duty for every educated man writings. Of the dirloques only small fragments
to be a follower of Plato. Aristotle therefore was
All that we know of them places
are extant.
## p. 323 (#343) ############################################
ARISTOTELES.
323
ARISTOTELES.
3
them, as well as those of Theophrastus, for below touch to several. Nevertheless, it can not be de-
the dramatic as well as lively and characteristic nied that Aristotle destined all his works for pube
dialogues of Plato. The introductions, according lication, and himself, with the assistance of his
to a notice in Cicero (ad Att. iv. 16), had no interdisciples, particularly Theophrastus, published those
nal connexion with the remainder of the treatises. which he completed in his lifetime. This is indis-
Fate of Aristotle's writings. 1. In antiquity. -If putably certain with regard to the exoteric writ-
we bear in mind the above division, adopted by ings. Of the rest, those which had not been puh-
the Greek commentators, it is obvious that the so- lished by Aristotle himself, were made known by
called hypomnematic writings were not published Theophrastus in a more enlarged and complete
by Aristotle himself, but made their appearance form; as may be proved, for instance, of the phy-
only at a later time with the whole body of his sical and historico-political writings. Other scho-
literary remains. On the other hand, there can lars of the Stagirite, as for example, the Rhodian
be no doubt that the exoteric writings, particularly Eudemus, Phanias, Pasicrates, and others, illus-
the dialogues, were published by the philosopher trated and completed in works of their own, which
himself. But respecting the acroamatic writings, frequently bore the same title, certain works of
that is, respecting the principal works of Aristotle, their teacher embracing a distinct branch of learn-
an opinion became prevalent, through misunder- ing; while others, less independently, published
standing an ancient tradition, which maintained its lectures of their master which they had reduced to
ground for centuries in the history of literature, writing. The exertions of these scholars were, in-
and which, though at variance with all reason and deed, chiefly directed to the logical writings of the
history, has been refuted and corrected only within philosopher; but, considering the well-known mul-
the last ten years by the investigations of German tiplicity of studies which characterised the school
scholars.
of the Peripatetics, we may assume, that the re-
According to a story which we find in 'Strabo maining writings of their great master did not
(xiii. p. 608)—the main authority in this matterpass unnoticed. But the writings of Aristotle
(for the accounts given by Athenaeus, Plutarch, were read and studied, in the first two centuries
and Suidas, present orly unimportant variations), after his death, beyond the limits of the school it-
Aristotle bequeathed his library and original manu- self. The first Piolemies, who were friends and
scripts to his successor, Theophrastus. After the personal patrons of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Stra-
death of the latter, these literary treasures together ton, and Demetrius Phalereus, spared no expense
with Theophrastus' own library came into the in order to incorporate in the library which they
hands of his relation and disciple, Neleus of Scep had founded at Alexandria the works of the founder
sis. This Neleus sold both collections at a high of the Peripatetic school, in as complete a form as
price to Ptolemy II. , king of Egypt, for the Alex- possible. For this and, they caused numerous
andrine library; but he retained for himself, as an copies of one and the same work to be purchased;
beirloom, the original MSS. of these two philoso- thus, for example, there were forty MSS. of the
phers' works. The descendants of Neleus, who Analytics at Alexandria. (Ammon. ad Cat. fol. 3, a. )
were subjects of the king of Pergamus, knew of no And although much that was spurious found its
other way of securing them from the search of the way in, yet the acuteness and learning of the great
Attali, who wished to rival the Ptolemies in form-Alexandrine critics and grammarians are a sufficient
ing a large library, than concealing them in a cellar security for us that writings of that kind were sub-
(Katà rñs év druspuye tuvi), where for a couple of sequently discovered and separated. It cannot be
centuries they were exposed to the ravages of determined, indeed, how far the studies of these
damp and worms. It was not till the beginning men were directed to the strictly logical and meta-
of the century before the birth of Christ that a physical works; but that they studied the histori-
wealthy book-collector, the Athenian Apellicon of cal, political, and rhetorical writings of Aristotle,
Teos, traced out these valuable relics, bought them the fragments of their own writings bear ample
from the ignorant heirs, and prepared from them a testimony. Moreover, as is well known, Aristotle
new edition of Aristotle's works, causing the ma- and Theophrastus were both admitted into the
nuscripts to be copied, and filling up the gaps and famous “Canon,” the tradition of which is at any
making emendations, but without sufficient know- rate very ancient, and which included besides only
ledge of what he was about. After the capture the philosophers, Plato, Xenophon, and Aeschines.
of Athens, Sulla in B. C. 84 confiscated Apellicon's There can therefore be little doubt, that it is quite
collection of books, and had them conveyed to false that the philosophical writings of Aristotle,
Rome. [APELLICON. ]
for the first two centuries after his death, remained
Through this ancient and in itself not incredible rotting in the cellar at Scepsis ; and that it was
story, an error has arisen, which has been banded only certain copies which met with this fate : this
down from the time of Strabo to the present day. view of the case accords also with the direct testi-
People thought (as did Strabo himself) that they mony of the ancients. (Gell.
Still Alexander refrained from any expression of Eustath. ad Hom. Od. vii. 120. p. 1573, 12. ed.
hostility towards his former instructor (a story of Rom. 275, 20, Bas. ; Aelian, V. H. j. 36. )
this kind in Diog. Laërt. v. 10, has been corrected From Chalcis he may have sent forth a defence
by Stahr, Aristotelia, p. 133); and although, as against the accusation of his enemies. At least
Plutar expressly informs us, their former cordial antiquity possessed a defence of that kind under
connexion no longer subsisted undisturbed, yet, as his name, the authenticity of which, however, was
is proved bs a remarkable expression (Topicor. ii. already doubted by Athenaeus. (Comp. Phavorin.
1, 7, ed. Buhle ; comp. Albert Heydemann's German ap. Diog. Laërt. 1. c. , who calls it a logos dikavo-
translation and explanation of the categories of kós. ) However, on his refusing to answer the
Aristotle, p. 32, Berlin, 1835), Aristotle never lost summons of the Areiopaguis
, he was deprived of all
his trust in his royal friend. The story, that Aris- the rights and honours which had been previously
totle, irritated by the above-mentioned occurrence, bestowed upon him (Aelian, V. H. xiv. 1), and
took part in poisoning the king, is altogether un condemned to death in his absence. Meantime
## p. 321 (#341) ############################################
ARISTOTELES.
321
ARISTOTELES.
the philosopher continued his studies and lectures | adapted to produce conviction in his hcarers, a gitt
in Chalcis for some time longer without molesta- which Antipater praises highly in a letter written
tion. He died in the beginning of August, in the after Aristotle's death. (Plut. Cat. Maj. p. 354,
year B. C. 322, a short time before Demosthenes Coriol. p. 234. ) He exhibited remarkable atten-
(who died in October of the same year), in the 63rd tion to external appearance, and bestowed much
year of his age, from the effects, not of poison, but care on his dress and person. (Timotheus, ap.
of a chronic disorder of the stomach. (Censorin. de Diog. L. v. 1; Aelian, V. H. ii. 19. ) He is de
Die Nat. 14, extr. ; Apollod. ap. Diog. Laërt. v. scribed as having been of weak health, which, con-
10; Dionys. l. c. 5. ) The accounts of his having sidering the astonishing extent of his studies,
committed suicide belong to the region of fables shews all the more the energy of his mind. (Cen-
and tales. One story (found in several of the sor. de Die nat. 14. ) He was short and of slender
Christian fathers) was, that he threw himself into make, with small eyes and a lisp in his pronun-
the Euripus, from vexation at being unable to dis- ciation, using L for R (Tpavaós, Diog. L. v. 1),
cover the causes of the currents in it. On the and with a sort of sarcastic expression in his
other hand, we have the account, that his mortal countenance (uwaia, Aelian, iii. 19), all which
remains were transported to his native city Stageira, characteristics are introduced in a maliciously
and that his memory was honoured there, like that caricatured description of him in an ancient epi-
of a hero, by yearly festivals of remembrance. gram. (Anth. 552, vol. iii. p. 176, ed. Jacobs. )
(Vet. Intp. ap. Buhle, vol. i. p. 56; Ammon. p. The plastic works of antiquity, which pass as por-
47. ) Before his death, in compliance with the traits of Aristotle, are treated of by Visconti.
wish of his school, he had intimated in a symbolical (Iconographie Grecque, i. p. 230. )
manner that of his two most distinguished scholars,
Menedemus of Rhodes and Theophrastus of Eresus
II. ARISTOTLE'S WRITINGS.
(in Lesbos), he intended the latter to be his suc- Before we proceed to enumerate, classify, and
cessor in the Lyceum. (Gellius, xiii. 5. )" He also characterise the works of the philosopher, it is
bequeathed to Theophrastus his well-stored library necessary to take a review of the history of their
and the originals of his own writings. From his transmission to our times. A short account of this
will (in Diog. Laërt. v. 21; Hermipp. ap. Athen. kind has at the same time the advantage of indi-
xiii. p. 589, c. ), which attests the flourishing state cating the progress of the development and influ-
of his worldly circumstances not less than his ence of the Aristotelian philosophy itself.
judicious and sympathetic care for his family and According to ancient accounts, even the large
servants, we gather, that his adoptive son Nicanor, number of the works of Aristotle which are still
his daughter Pythias, the offspring of his first mar- preserved, comprises only the smallest part of the
riage, as well as Herpyllis and the son he had by writings he is said to have composed. According
her, survived him. He named his friend Antipater to the Greek commentator David (ad Categ. Prooem.
as the executor of his will.
p. 24, L 40, Brand. ), Andronicus the Rhodian
If we cast a glance at the character of Aristotle, stated their number at 1000 ovnypáupata. The
we see a man of the highest intellectual powers, Anonym. Menagii (p. 61, ed. Buhle in Arist. Opp.
gifted with a piercing understanding, a compre- vol. 1) sets down their number at 400 Bibaba. Dio-
hensive and deep mind, practical and extensive genes Laërtius (v: 27) gives 44 myriads as the
views of the various relations of actual life, and number of lines. If we reckon about 10,000 lines
the noblest moral sentiments. Such he appears in to a quire, this gives us 44 quires, while the writ-
his life as well as in his writings. Such other in- ings extant amount to about the fourth part of
formation as we possess respecting his character this. (Hegel, Vorlesungen über die Gesch. der
accords most completely with this view, if we Philosophie, vol. ii. pp. 307, 308. ) Still these
estimate at their real value the manifest ill-will statements are very indefinite. Nor do we get on
and exaggerations of the literary anecdotes which much better with the three ancient catalogues of
have come down to us. At Athens the fact of his his writings which are still extant, those namely of
being a foreigner was of itself a sufficient reason Diogenes Laërtius, the Anonym. Menag. , and the
for his taking no part in politics. For the rest, he Arabian writers in Casiri (Bill. Arab. Hisp. vol. i.
at any rate did not belong to the party of de- p. 306), which may be found entire in the first vo-
mocratical patriots, of wbom Demosthenes may be lume of Buhle's edition of Aristotle. They all three
regarded as the representative, but probably coincid- give a mere enumeration, without the least trace of
ed rather with the conciliatory politics of Phocion. arrangement, and without any critical remarks.
A declared opponent of absolutism (Polit. ii. 7. $ 6), They differ not only from each other, but from
he everywhere insists on conformity to the law, the quotations of other writers and from the titles
for the law is “ the only safe, rational standard to of the extant works to such a degree, that all idea of
be guided by, while the will of the individual man reconciling them must be given up. The difficulty
cannot be depended on. " He wished to form the of doing so is further increased by the fact, that
beau ideal of a ruler in Alexander (Polit. iii. 8, one and the same work frequently quoted under
extr. ), and it is quite in accordance with the different titles (Brandis, de perditis. Arist. libr de
oriental mode of viewing things, when the Arabian Ideis et de Bono, p. 7 ; Ravaisson, Métaphysique d'
philosophers, as Avicenna and Abu-l-faraj, some- Aristote, vol. i. p. 48, Paris
, 1837), and that sections
times call Aristotle, Alexander's vizier. (Comp. i and books appear as independent writings under
Schmoelder's Documenta Philosoph. Arab. p. 74. ) distinct titles. From Aristotle's own quotations of
The whole demeanour of Aristotle was marked his works criticism can here derive but little
by a certain briskness and vivacity. His powers assistance, as the references for the most part are
of eloquence were considerable, and of a kind quite general, or have merely been supplied by
later writers. (Ritter, Gesch, der Phil. vol. iii. p.
* He praised the wines of both islands, but 21, not. 1. ) The most complete enumeration of the
said he thought that of Lesbos the more agreeable. I writings of Aristotle from those catalogues, as well
Y
## p. 322 (#342) ############################################
322
ARISTOTELES.
ARISTOTELES.
of the extant as of the lost works, is to be found obliged to break ground for his newer philosophy
in Fabricius. (Bill. Gr. iii. pp. 207—284, and np.
by enlightening the public generally on certain
388-407. ) 'The lost works alone have been practical points. In this way originated writings
enurnerated by Buhle (Commentatio de deperd. Arist. like the “Eudemus," a refutation, as it appears, of
libr. in Comment. Societ. Götting. vol. xv. p. 57, &c. ) Plato's Phaedon; his book nepi Nóuwv, a critical
But the labours of both these scholars no longer extract from Plato's “ Laws;" farther, writinge
satisfy the demands of modern critical science. To such as that nepl Binalooúvns, &c. These were the
make use of, and form a judgment upon those ancient λόγοι έν κοινή εκδεδομένοι, 1nd Stobaeus quotes
catalogues, is still further attended with uncertainty from them quite correctly in his Florilegium, ék
from the circumstance, that much that was spu- TWv ’Aplototé Aovs KOINO'N biarpıbwv. (Comp.
rious was introduced among the writings of Aris Philop. ad Arist. de Anima, i. 138, c. 2. ) In Aris-
totle at an early period in antiquity. The causes totle himself (and this has not always been duly con-
of this are correctly assigned by Ammonius. (. Ad sidered) there occurs no express declaration of this
Arist. Cuteg. fol. 3, a. ) In the first place, several distinction. The designations esoteric, acroa matic,
of the writings of the immediate disciples of Aris- or epoptic writings, would alike be looked for in
totle, which treated of like subjects under like vain in all the genuine works of the philosopher.
names, as those of Theophrastus, Eudemus Rho- It is only in his answer to the complaint of Alex-
dius, Phanias, and others, got accidentally inserted ander, that by publishing his lectures he had made
amongst the works of the Stagirite. Then we must the secrets of philosophy the common property of
add mistakes arising già trio ouwvuulav, as in the all, that he says, that “the acroatic (acroamatic, or
ancient philosophical, rhetorical, and historico- esoteric) books had been published and yet not
political literature there were several writers of the published, for they were intelligible only to one
same name. Lastly, the endeavours of the Ptole who had been initiated into philosophy. " The ex-
mies and Attali to enrich their libraries as much pression eroteric, on the other hand, we find in
us possible with works of Aristotle, set in motion Aristotle himself, and that in nine passages. (Eth.
a number of people, whose love of gain rendered Nic. i. 13, vi. 4, Eth. Eudem. ii. 1, ii. &, v. 4, Polit
.
them not over scrupulously honest. (Comp. David, i. 4, vii. 1, Phys. iv. 14, Metaph. xiii. 1. ) These
ad Categ. p. 28, a. , 15, who assigns additional very passages prove incontestably, that Aristotle
causes of falsification; Ammon. I. c. ; Simplicius, himself had noi in view a division of this kind in
fol. 4, 6; Galen, Comment. 2 in libr. de Nai. hum. the sense in which it was subsequently understood.
pp. 16, 17; Brandis, Rhein. Mus. p. 260, 1827. ) | In one instance he applies the name eroteric to
It is very possible that the Greek lists, in particu- writings which, in accordance with the above-men-
lar that in Diogenes Laërtius, are nothing else tioned division, must necessarily be set down as
than catalogues of these libraries. (Trendelenburg, esoteric; and secondly, in several of those passages
ad Arist. de Anima, p. 123. )
the term is merely employed to denote disquisitions
As regards the division of Aristotle's writings, which are foreign to the matter in hand. Nay,
the ancient Greek commentators, as Ammonius the expression is used to denote the writings of
(aut Categ. p. 6, b. Ald. ) and Simplicius (ad Cut. other authors. The whole subject concerns us
pp. 1, 6, ed. Bas. ) distinguish-1. 'Trouvnuatiká, more as a point of literary history than as having
i. e. collections of notices and materials, drawn up any scientific interest. “ One sees at once for
for his own use. 2. Lurrayuatirá, elaborate works. one's self," says Hegel (Gesch, der Philos. ji. p. 310,
Those which were composed in a strictly scientific comp. 220, 238), “what works are philosophic and
manner, and contained the doctrinal lectures (akpo speculative, and what are more of a mere empirical
áoers) of the philosopher, they called arpoamatiká nature. The esoteric is the speculative, which,
(Gell. xx. 5, has åkpoatıká, which form, however, even though written and printed, yet remains
Schaefer, ad Plut. vol. v. p. 245, rejects), or else concealed from those who do not take sufficient
dowTepirá, éOTTIKá. Those, on the other hand, interest in the matter to apply themselves rigo
in which the method and style were of a more rously. It is no secret, and yet is hidden. " But
popular kind, and which were calculated for a cir- the same author is wrong in maintaining, that
cle of readers beyond the limits of the school, were among the ancients there existed no difference at
termed εξωτερικά. The latter were composed all between the writings of the philosophers which
chiefly in the form of dialogues, particularly such they published, and the lectures which they deli-
as treated upon points of practical philosophy. Of vered to a select circle of hearers. The contrary is
these dialogues, which were still extant in Cicero's established by positive testimony. Thus Aristotle
time, nothing has been preserved. (The whole of was the first to publish what with Plato were,
the authorities relating to this subject, amongst strictly speaking, lectures (šypaqa dóyuata, Bran-
whom Strab. xiii. pp. 608, 609; Cic. de Fin. v. 5, dis, de perd. Ar. libr. de Ideis, p. 25; Trendelenb.
ad Aul. ir. 16 ; Gell. l. c. ; Plut. Alex. 5, Advers. Ca | Platonis de Ideis doctrina ex Platone illustrata, p. 2,
lot. p. 1115, b. are the most important, are given &c. , Berlin, 1827). Hegel himself took good care
at full length in Stahr's Aristotelia, rol. ii. p. 244, not to allow all the conclusions to which his system
&c. ; to which must be added Sopater atque Syrian. conducted to appear in print, and kant also
ad Hermog. p. 120, in Leonhard Spengel, Euvaywon found it unadvisable for a philosopher “to give
TEXvwv, s. de Artium Scriptt. &c. p. 167. )
utterance in his works to all that he thought, al-
The object which Aristotle had in view in the though he would certainly say nothing that he did
composition of his exoteric writings appears to not think. "
have been somewhat of the following kind. He The genuine Aristotelian writings which are
wished by means of them to come to an understand. extant would have to be reckoned amongst the
ing with the public. The Platonic philosophy was acroamatic books. The Problems alone belong to
so widely diffused through all classes, that it was the class designated by the ancients hypomnematic
at that time almost a duty for every educated man writings. Of the dirloques only small fragments
to be a follower of Plato. Aristotle therefore was
All that we know of them places
are extant.
## p. 323 (#343) ############################################
ARISTOTELES.
323
ARISTOTELES.
3
them, as well as those of Theophrastus, for below touch to several. Nevertheless, it can not be de-
the dramatic as well as lively and characteristic nied that Aristotle destined all his works for pube
dialogues of Plato. The introductions, according lication, and himself, with the assistance of his
to a notice in Cicero (ad Att. iv. 16), had no interdisciples, particularly Theophrastus, published those
nal connexion with the remainder of the treatises. which he completed in his lifetime. This is indis-
Fate of Aristotle's writings. 1. In antiquity. -If putably certain with regard to the exoteric writ-
we bear in mind the above division, adopted by ings. Of the rest, those which had not been puh-
the Greek commentators, it is obvious that the so- lished by Aristotle himself, were made known by
called hypomnematic writings were not published Theophrastus in a more enlarged and complete
by Aristotle himself, but made their appearance form; as may be proved, for instance, of the phy-
only at a later time with the whole body of his sical and historico-political writings. Other scho-
literary remains. On the other hand, there can lars of the Stagirite, as for example, the Rhodian
be no doubt that the exoteric writings, particularly Eudemus, Phanias, Pasicrates, and others, illus-
the dialogues, were published by the philosopher trated and completed in works of their own, which
himself. But respecting the acroamatic writings, frequently bore the same title, certain works of
that is, respecting the principal works of Aristotle, their teacher embracing a distinct branch of learn-
an opinion became prevalent, through misunder- ing; while others, less independently, published
standing an ancient tradition, which maintained its lectures of their master which they had reduced to
ground for centuries in the history of literature, writing. The exertions of these scholars were, in-
and which, though at variance with all reason and deed, chiefly directed to the logical writings of the
history, has been refuted and corrected only within philosopher; but, considering the well-known mul-
the last ten years by the investigations of German tiplicity of studies which characterised the school
scholars.
of the Peripatetics, we may assume, that the re-
According to a story which we find in 'Strabo maining writings of their great master did not
(xiii. p. 608)—the main authority in this matterpass unnoticed. But the writings of Aristotle
(for the accounts given by Athenaeus, Plutarch, were read and studied, in the first two centuries
and Suidas, present orly unimportant variations), after his death, beyond the limits of the school it-
Aristotle bequeathed his library and original manu- self. The first Piolemies, who were friends and
scripts to his successor, Theophrastus. After the personal patrons of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Stra-
death of the latter, these literary treasures together ton, and Demetrius Phalereus, spared no expense
with Theophrastus' own library came into the in order to incorporate in the library which they
hands of his relation and disciple, Neleus of Scep had founded at Alexandria the works of the founder
sis. This Neleus sold both collections at a high of the Peripatetic school, in as complete a form as
price to Ptolemy II. , king of Egypt, for the Alex- possible. For this and, they caused numerous
andrine library; but he retained for himself, as an copies of one and the same work to be purchased;
beirloom, the original MSS. of these two philoso- thus, for example, there were forty MSS. of the
phers' works. The descendants of Neleus, who Analytics at Alexandria. (Ammon. ad Cat. fol. 3, a. )
were subjects of the king of Pergamus, knew of no And although much that was spurious found its
other way of securing them from the search of the way in, yet the acuteness and learning of the great
Attali, who wished to rival the Ptolemies in form-Alexandrine critics and grammarians are a sufficient
ing a large library, than concealing them in a cellar security for us that writings of that kind were sub-
(Katà rñs év druspuye tuvi), where for a couple of sequently discovered and separated. It cannot be
centuries they were exposed to the ravages of determined, indeed, how far the studies of these
damp and worms. It was not till the beginning men were directed to the strictly logical and meta-
of the century before the birth of Christ that a physical works; but that they studied the histori-
wealthy book-collector, the Athenian Apellicon of cal, political, and rhetorical writings of Aristotle,
Teos, traced out these valuable relics, bought them the fragments of their own writings bear ample
from the ignorant heirs, and prepared from them a testimony. Moreover, as is well known, Aristotle
new edition of Aristotle's works, causing the ma- and Theophrastus were both admitted into the
nuscripts to be copied, and filling up the gaps and famous “Canon,” the tradition of which is at any
making emendations, but without sufficient know- rate very ancient, and which included besides only
ledge of what he was about. After the capture the philosophers, Plato, Xenophon, and Aeschines.
of Athens, Sulla in B. C. 84 confiscated Apellicon's There can therefore be little doubt, that it is quite
collection of books, and had them conveyed to false that the philosophical writings of Aristotle,
Rome. [APELLICON. ]
for the first two centuries after his death, remained
Through this ancient and in itself not incredible rotting in the cellar at Scepsis ; and that it was
story, an error has arisen, which has been banded only certain copies which met with this fate : this
down from the time of Strabo to the present day. view of the case accords also with the direct testi-
People thought (as did Strabo himself) that they mony of the ancients. (Gell.
