A History of Greek Philosophy: 6 Aristotle An Encounter [6]

Citation preview

A HISTORY OF

GREEK PHILOSOPHY VOLUME

VI

ORRADRELT

UNIVi

Y -.^

A

SANTA CLARA, CALIFOiviNlA

A HISTORY OF

GREEK PHILOSOPHY BY W.

K. C.

GUTHRIE

VOLUME

VI

ARISTOTLE AN ENCOUNTER

or

UN

\

/

E LX1

S

:RY

OF SANTA CLARA

SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS CAMBRIDGE

LONDON NEW YORK NEW ROCHELLE MELBOURNE SYDNEY

Published by the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge

The

Pitt Building,

Trumpington

Street,

Cambridge CB2 irp

32 East 57th Street, New York, ny 10022, USA 296 Beaconsfield Parade, Middle Park, Melbourne 3206, Australia

© Cambridge University Press 1981 First published 1981

Printed in Great Britain at the Alden Press, Oxford

British Library Cataloguing in Publication

Guthrie, William Keith

A

1

.

Chambers

history of Greek philosophy

Vol. VI Aristotle Philosophy, Ancient - History 1.

180

Title

B171

ISBN O

62-52735

521 23573

I

Data

ORRADRE

UNI V

/

OF

SANTA CLAR

LIBR .

CONTENTS

ix

Preface List

of Abbreviations

xiii

Obiter Dicta I

Discovering Aristotle (i)

Two

(2)

The

(3) II

xvi

A

encounters

i

genetic approach

general

4

comment

14

Aristotle's Life and Philosophical

Pilgrimage

III

18

Additional note: Aristotle and mathematics

45

The Written Remains

49

(1) Introduction: the surviving works

49

VII

lost literary

compositions

53

59

Eudemus, Protrepticus, De Philosophia

66

Eudemus

67

(2) Protrepticus

73 82

(3)

VI

The

(3) Early fate of the school-writings

(1)

V

18

Note on sources

(2)

IV

i

De philosophia

The Mind of Aristotle Abstraction and the Revelation of Form

Teleology and (1)

its

89 100

Defence: the Concept

of Potentiality

106

Teleology

106

hypothetical necessity

O

JL

8542

118

'

Contents and actuality

(2) Potentiality

119

definition o/~dynamisy objections

to the concept

of

potentiality

VIII

IX

125

Additional note: the meanings of physis

129

The Divisions of Knowledge

130

Tool of Philosophy

Logic, the Introduction

135

of the Organon' The Categories of Being: primary and secondary

138

substance

138

c

contents (1)

proprium, genus and accident

(2) Definition, (3) Inference

149

150

(b) the syllogism

156

to Knowledge

170

(1) Apodeixis (demonstration)

170

Preliminary note on the function of apodeixis

170

the relation between apodeixis

(2)

The

archai of

and definition

knowledge

175

178

(3) Induction

186

Biological note: the gall-less animals

194

(4) Syllogism, induction and the quest for knowledge

195

is progress from

particular to general or vice versa? a final

note: potential

and actual knowledge

Substance Is there

The (i)

question:

matter;

What

(ii)

Summary and

is

being?

99

204 207

the individual concrete object; (iii) the

209

appraisal of the substance-doctrine

Causes (1)

1

203

a single science of being as such?

universal; (iv) essence

XII

146

(a) dialectic

X The Road

XI

135

220 223

The Four Causes

223

material; 'intelligible matter ; the final cause; efficient

226

cause vi

Contents

Chance

(2)

2 33

Additional notes (1)

XIII

good and bad

241

luck; (ii) laws

and

exceptions

241

Theory of Motion and Theology (1)

Some

criticisms of the

2 43

Theory of Forms

2 43

and Aristotle's motive cause: self-mover and

(2) Plato's

unmoved mover

246

Unmoved Mover mode of action

(3) Aristotle's

252

(a) its

252

(b) his character

259

Additional note: the development of Aristotle's

theology

XIV

262

(4)

Unity in the Aristotelian universe

(5)

The

subordinate

263

unmoved movers

267

Introduction: the cosmic structure

267

Psychology

277

The genetic approach

277

(2)

The The

(3)

Functions of soul

(4)

The

(1)

preliminaries definition

ladder of

of soul and

its

relation to the

288

life

291

(a)

General theory

(b)

Common

(c)

How

291

sensibles

sensation

and the

common

sense

works

(d) Sensation in Aristotle's

(6)

2 95

301

philosophy

Comparisons

303

307

Thought

308

Preliminary note on nous (a)

General

(b)

The

Appendix:

279 282 285

(5) Sensation

(e)

body

308

309

creative (or active) reason

Comment on

a

few modern opinions Vll

3*5 3 27

Contents

XV The Philosophy

of

Human

Life

33 1 33i

Introduction: Ethics and politics

Additional note:

The

Politics, the Constitutions

and the

end of the Ethics

334

Ethics

335

Preliminary note: the documents

Human nature and The

336

Forms

338

the function of man

340

Ethical theory and the Platonic

intellectual virtues: phronesis

345

the practical syllogism

349

Virtue

352

The virtues (i) The voluntary and involuntary

358

(i) virtue (iii)

concerned with ends or means?

(ii)

Socrates;

Aristotle's exposition

Incontinence, self-control

The

357

358

and temperance

364

virtues (2)

368

magnanimity; justice

369

Pleasure

376

pleasure in book y; pleasure in book

378

1

Friendship

384

Climax: the happy philosopher

390

Additional note: the meaning of theoria

396

Conclusion

398

Bibliography

401

Indexes I

II

III

Index ofpassages quoted or referred General Index

425

to

437

Index of Greek words

The device on the

452

the front cover is

Kunsthistorische

a head of Aristotle from

Museum,

Archbishop V. E. Milde, 1846)

Vlll

Vienna

(the

gift

of

PREFACE

I

Aristotle that hath an oare in every water, and medleth with

all

things.

Montaigne

tr.

Florio

have chosen the sub-title of this volume for two main reasons.

it is

First,

not an encyclopaedic 'enquire within' for any information about

For one thing, much of

Aristotle.

original

his

contribution

to

philosophy took the form of criticism of his predecessors, and so his

name

will

example

be found frequently in the indexes to previous volumes; for thoughts on plurality and continuity,

his

still

of great value,

occur largely in his criticism of the Eleatics Parmenides, Zeno and Melissus, and so belong to vol. n, in

Democritus

criticism of

and

divisibility 11,

and

his

name

figures largely;

between

infinite in

remarks on Zeno, both in vol.

views on induction and definition, fully treated here in vol. more than a mention in his discussion of the contribution of

Socrates (vol. also

in Phys. 3, the difference

infinite in extent in his

his

vi, find

Ill,

426ff.

be found in vol.

have written

I

he

and the

is,

my

as

first

=

111

find

Aristotle as a thinker

me

which

views on infinity as potentially but not actually possible in his

his

Socr., io6ff.),

(pp. 123$".). Secondly,

intensely personal.

it

and particularly pages make

first

and Rhet. 1.10 and I

as a pupil

clear,

1.15 will

on re-reading what

I

have always admired

and

both the

critic

last

of Plato.

To

of the ancient

of the modern philosophers. The Hellenistic Age which

followed, also

known,

significantly, as the post-Aristotelian, did

not

produce another Aristotle, and represents, philosophically speaking, a falling-offfrom him.

I

hope

that this personal outlook does not

seem too

may have

said in a

misplaced in what purports to be a history, but as

I

is bound to be to some would not endorse everything of Harold

previous preface, any history of philosophy extent personal. Laski's,

I

am

philosophy

is

Although

with him really

I

when he

says,

no more than the

individual temperament/ ix

'I

am

pretty sure that every

brilliant hypostatization

of an

Preface Moreover, such an encyclopaedic work has been supplied Professor During, with his Aristoteles. Professor During

German

he

as

is

He

in English or his native Swedish.

by-

is

as fluent in

is,

besides, an

eminently fair-minded man, and after he had given us Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition and his edition of the fragments of the Protrepticus in English it was obviously the turn of the Germans, in whose language, unfortunately for readers of English only, Aristoteles appeared. In the body of a work such as the present, one tends to

mention a book only to argue with expressing the great debt which leading

me

this scale

owe

I

to passages in Aristotle

overlooked.

To

so

it,

I

take this opportunity of

work, especially in

to this

which

might otherwise have

I

quote Marrou's review: 'To have planned a work on

was a daring ambition, to have brought it to a successful is a magnificent and heroic achievement/ Nevertheless, as

completion

G. E. R. Lloyd has also said in a review, or use, and

it is

hardly one to

'this is

recommend

not an easy book to read

to beginners'. In particular,

the lack of an adequate and comprehensive index

This reminds

me

series feared that

that a reviewer of an earlier

it

may have

fallen

to be regretted.

is

volume

between two

in the present

stools,

being too

learned for the beginner and too elementary for the expert. This

cheered me, for

it

meant

that

I

was probably

hitting the target

the two.

namely the student, who is surely half-way between Although I would be the last to defend the breadth of my

reading in

modern philosophy,

primarily aimed

philosophers,

at,

'even

Descartes'

from general introductions student's library.

Another

dence, has appreciated the

but different, especially the trap,

which

reviewing

my

It will

lies

this also

as

accounts for

another

my quoting other

reviewer

complained,

to philosophy such as are likely to be in a class

work

which, to judge from

my

correspon-

has been that of colleagues in related,

literary, disciplines.

But

I

must not

fall

into

baited for writers of multi-volume works, of

reviewers; they have in any case been

all

too kind.

be assumed in what follows that the bulk of the writings

which have come down to us as Aristotle's are genuinely Aristotelian. For the extreme views on either side see those of P. Gohlke and J.

Ziircher (summarized

Forschung, 69^).

by

P.

Moraux

in Aristoteles in der neueren

Zurcher's mountain of proof

falls like

a house of

Preface cards, says

He

Moraux.

has been followed

now by

F. GrayefT (see

the Bibliography).

Translations, from both ancient and unless

otherwise stated.

hope

I

modern

is

it

authors, are

my own

excusable to put translated

quotations from foreign authors between quote-marks.

To end on summer of

a

1979.

complete but

I

the treatment

I

more personal note, I suffered a stroke in the My work" on volume vi was by that time virtually

still

have been unable to give the

would have hoped

to

had

I

Politics

and the Poetics

been well. The appearance

of any further volumes has been made impossible. That will be a as

I

pity,

had hoped to link up with the Neoplatonists and the beginnings of

Medieval and Christian philosophy.

both for the reason

I

It is,

however, of lesser importance

have given and because that period has recently

received considerable attention from English-language scholars.

This volume naturally owes more than the others to other people.

My thanks are due in publishing this

the

book and

first its

place to

Cambridge University Press

predecessors.

for

Proofs have been read by

Mrs Ann Buttrey and the bibliography and index compiled by Mrs Catherine Osborne.

Dr G.

E. R.

Lloyd has read several chapters of

book in typescript and has made useful suggestions. Thanks are owed to my wife, who has given me throughout 'supportive background' and whose knowledge of Greek has proved invaluable, and to Miss B. M. Gorse, who as before has done my typing and has shown herself as much an old friend to us both as a typist. the

also

W.K.C.G.

CAMBRIDGE DECEMBER 1980

XI

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Most works

cited in abbreviated

form

nizable under the author's or editor's

be however helpful to

list

in the text will

name

in the bibliography.

the following:

Aristotle's works An. Post.

Posterior Analytics

An. Pr.

Prior Analytics

Ath. Resp.

Constitution

Cael.

De

of Athens

caelo

Catt.

Categories

De De

De anima De interpretatione De philosophia De respiratione De divinatione per somnum

an. int.

Dephil.

De

resp.

Div. per somn.

EN

Nicomachean Ethics

Eud.

Eudemus

GA GC

De generatione De generatione

HA IA

animalium et corruptione

Historia animalium

Mem.

De incessu animalium De insomniis De iuventute De motu animalium Magna Moralia De memoria

Met.

Metaphysics

Meteor.

Meteorologica

PA

De partihus

Insomn. Iuv.

MA

MM

animalium Xlll

be easily recogIt

may

Abbreviations Phys.

Physics

Poet.

Poetics

Pol.

Politics

Protr.

Protrepticus

Rhet.

Rhetoric

SE

Sophistici Elenchi

Somn.

De somno

Top.

Topics

et vigilia

PERIODICALS

AGPh AJP CP CQ CR IPQ JHI

JHP

JHS PAS

PCPS

Archiv fur Geschichte der Philosophic

American Journal of Philology Classical Philology Classical Quarterly Classical

Review

International Philosophical Quarterly

Journal of the History of Ideas Journal of the History of Philosophy Journal of Hellenic Studies Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society

Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society

PR

Philosophical Review

Philol.

Philologus

Phron.

Phronesis

PQ TAPA YCS

Philosophical Quarterly

Transactions of the American Philological Association

Yale Classical Studies

OTHER WORKS (Full particulars are in the bibliography)

AABT

I.

ACPA

H. Cherniss,

During,

Aristotle

in

the

Ancient

Biographical

Tradition Aristotle's Criticism

Academy xiv

of Plato and

the

Abbreviations

DK

Diels-Kranz, Die Fragmenter der Vorsokratiker

Diogenes Laertius

D.L.

RE

Realencyclopddie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, ed.

Wissowa, Kroll

and Plato

et al.

Symp. Ar.

I

Aristotle

Symp. At,

II

Aristote et lesproblemes de methode. Proceedings of the

ceedings of the

in the mid-fourth century.

first

Pro-

Symposium Aristotelicum

second Symposium Aristotelicum

Symp. Ar.

III

Symp. Ar. VII

Aristotle

on

Dialectic.

Proceedings

of the

third

Symposium Aristotelicum Aristotle on mind and the senses. Proceedings of Seventh Symposium Aristotelicum

xv

the

OBITER DICTA touto S'oOSev

6vos octottov/ 8o6evtos tSAAoc ovu|3o:ivei.

xctAe'n'ov.

Phys.

One

absurdity having been granted, the rest follows.

about 616

i,

Nothing

185

an

difficult

that.

Koci

6 (piAouuOos 91X6(7096$

eori.

TTcbs

6 ydp |iO0os

ek

cruyKEiToci

Met. A, 982b 18

8ocu|jaaicov.

Therefore even the lover of myth

is

in a sense a philosopher; for

myth

is

composed of wonders. dvayKn 8f| aTfjvat. One must stop somewhere.

To

Siopi'jeiv

To make d ydp

ydp ouk

Met. A, 107034

EN n 72 b 3

eoti tcov ttoAAcov.

clear distinctions

is

not characteristic of most men.

SeI uocOovtocs ttoieiv, tocOtoc ttoiouvtes uocvOocvouev.

EN

What we must

learn before

we

1

can do,

103 332-34 and

we

learn

TpiTco tcov 'ApiaTOTeXous f}i|3Mcov. On Andronicus and his work see Zeller 3.1.642-6, During, 1

2

AABT,

420-5 and Lynch, A.'s School, 2021". Cf. also During's Arist., 39: 'He it was who through opened the gate to A. for posterity.' 'Mens addita videtur meis aedibus!' {Ad Att. 4.8a.) According to During he knew of Tyrannio's work on the newly-discovered corpus, but not

his edition 3 4

of the edition of Andronicus. This fine distinction results from his dating the edition between 40 and 20 B.C. {Transmission, 69, Arist., 40; Cicero was assassinated in 43). Moraux on the other hand, in Der Aristotelismus (1973), is satisfied that based on other mss. besides those from Skepsis.

6l

it

appeared before

50.

He assumes

that

it

was

The written remains from the dialogues. This need not surprise of the writings and the probable porary.

Two

effect

us, considering the nature

of their discovery on a contem-

arguments, both unsound, have been urged from time to

time in favour of wholesale rejection of Strabo's story. First comes the improbability of so outstanding a piece of philosophical literature, as

one

critic called

it,

ever being

lost; to

which the brief answer

from being an outstanding piece of any

sort of literature,

is

that far

what was

recovered would to a large extent not have been regarded as literature at all.

Secondly, philosophers of the intervening period

Peripatetics,

Stoics

-

the later

and so on - do occasionally (not often) show

acquaintance with the teaching of the lecture-manuscripts as well as the dialogues.

One may

1

readily admit that

Strabo was tempted to it

redounded to the

teacher (more probably teachers).

This, unlike the

exaggerate the importance of the discovery, since credit of his

own

improbable idea that he invented the story, goes the facts.

To assume

that the loss

far

towards explaining

of Aristotle's manuscripts for over

is incompatible with the fact that some philosophers in that show an acquaintance with their contents involves supposing the members of the Lyceum, free to discuss with Aristotle as well

200 years period that 1

Zeller indeed claimed to find evidence that

all

A.'s

works except De partibus, De generatione

and De motu animalium and the 'minor anthropological treatises' were known in the interval between Theophrastus's death and Apellicon's purchase (2.2.152), and his arguments so impressed Grant that having accepted Strabo and Plut. in the first edition of his Nic. Ethics he retracted in later editions. (See also Grote, PL 1, 1 5 if. n. m, on the work of Stahr.) To return to Z., three things, he says (I.e. 141), are undeniable: (1) Theophrastus left his library to Neleus; (2) of this collection the writings of A. and Theophrastus themselves came into the hands of N.'s heirs, who hid them from the Attalids in a cellar where they were found in a parlous state by Apellicon; and (3) the edition of Andronicus was of epoch-making importance for the study and preservation of A.'s school-works. All that he denies is that the manuscripts discovered were the only copies. Z.'s conclusions have been modified by the meticulous research of Moraux on the ancient lists of A.'s works. Relying on his attribution of D.L.'s list to Ariston of Ceos (3rd cent. B.C., successor of Lycon as head of the Peripatos), he shows that by no means all of those mentioned by Z. were known in the interval. The opinion of von Fritz in Entretiens Hardt iv, 86 is also valuable. In general the pendulum of scholarship has tended to swing the other way. Thus During (Arist., 35-7) gives a few probable instances of knowledge of the treatises in Epicurus and the Stoics, but adds, 'Altogether there is astonishingly little evidence that the school-writings were known in Hellenistic times', and Moraux commits himself to the statement that 'for nearly 300 years the treatises of the Stagirite remained unknown to most philosophers'. Even Critolaus, 'the only Peripatetic of any importance in the period, plainly uses the dialogues of A. and not his esoteric works'. Epicurus too directed his attacks against the dialogues. (See Moraux, Listes, 2f. It should be noted that Moraux's attribution of D.L.'s catalogue to Ariston goes against the opinion of many who have thought it the work of Hermippus. See Berti, Primo A., 160 n. 190. Lynch however, in A.'s School, 190, calls his case 'brilliant and plausible', as indeed it is.)

62

Early fate of the school-writings took a note,

as listen to his discourses, never

forgot

all

he had taught.

When

alone a copy, and

let

Strabo describes the intervening

by

generations of Peripatetics as being handicapped

manuscripts, his fault

lies

not in telling us that they had to do without

them, but in exaggerating the apparent

One

their recovery.

the loss of his

philosophical importance of

1

can understand that Theophrastus, the philo-

sopher's most intimate friend and colleague, and Neleus,

knew him, would

take pride in having his

their preservation as a pious duty.

personal considerations tioned, there

regarded as

little

weight.

was evidently a body of writing kept

common

As

already

would seem the important

own

writings.

thing.

On

this

men-

in the school

This, revised and added to

property.

also

But with most of the school these

would have

bers,

lectures

own

who

manuscripts and regard

and

by mem-

they would base their

They would include their own notes of Aristotle's and comments on them, and a world of discussion would

grow up nominally, and

to a large extent actually, based

on genuine

Aristotelian teaching.

Posidonius 2 described Apellicon as a dabbler, a taste for a great variety

of subjects. This

fits

man with

of him as a bibliophile rather than a philosopher, and kind of interest which the news of his

a dilettante

well with Strabo's picture

latest treasure

illustrates the

would

Cicero confessed that he had more respect for a philosophy

arouse.

if it

were

wedded to a decent prose style. He had no reason to be excited over the news that some moth-eaten lecture-notes had turned up by the man whose published dialogues he was already wont to read with pleasure: interesting, of course, to the curious explorer of the byways of literary 3

history, but to the serious student of either literature or philosophy,

scarcely a major event.

Such would be

Roman

The

1

intellectuals.

Apparent, not

rediscovery

his verdict, 4

preservation,

and

and that of many

subsequent

careful

One should not agree with Grant {Ethics, 9) when he opines that the of interest for bibliophilists rather than for philosophers'.

real.

itself 'is

and K. ap. Ath. 5.2i4d, AABT, 382: TTOiKiAcbTorrov tivoc xai ayiKopov j^aavTa (Andronicus in his tt. -rraSoov defines ay iKOpia as ^TnGuuia toxv £uTTip-rrAa|j£vr|.) 3 Tusc. 1.4.7: 'Hanc enim perfectam philosophiam semper iudicavi, quae de maximis quaestionibus copiose posset ornateque dicere'; 2.3.7: 'Lectionem sine ulla delectatione neglego.' This may do something to counteract Kerferd's remark in his review of Moraux (CR 1976, 213) that 'Cicero's silence must remain a considerable difficulty for those who argue for an early date' (sc. for the edition of Andronicus). 2

Fr. 253 E.

fMov.

•»

63

.

The written remains

we owe,

redaction of the school-writings

scientific literary curiosity allied to a

it

would seem,

to an un-

personal interest in Aristotle, for

Apellicon was a bibliophile and Tyrannio not simply a Peripatetic but

an enthusiast for Aristotle,

philaristoteles.

who

After Strato,

little interest.

from philosophy and science

The school

itself

succeeded Theophrastus,

and literature, so

to rhetoric

showed turned

it

that 'even if the

Peripatetics of this period possessed certain esoteric works of Aristotle .

they scarcely studied them.

them.

They were

easier to

better to their taste for fine style

The admission

.

was above all the dialogues that interested read, more attractive. They answered

It

and lack of philosophical depth.' contemporary

that Strabo exaggerated the

1

signifi-

cance of the discovery does something to confirm the genuineness of the manuscripts

represented

all

recovered.

that

If the

works had previously

literary

was known of Aristotle's philosophy,

would have writings based on his

been easy to produce any early Peripatetic

it

teaching and claim that they were manuscripts of the master himself.

They would

at

any

have been regarded with some reason as a

rate

much of his teaching had own day to Sulla's, and no one

revelation of his real mind. In fact, however,

been discussed and

criticized

from

his

could expect to attract attention by making public some Peripatetic papers which gave their substance over again. But the discovery of his

own was

manuscripts, including those written in preparation for lectures, still

a tale worth telling.

was already known,

made by

In short, since so

in the first place

pupils, there

was

less risk

much of his

teaching

from notes and commentaries

of confusion between pupils' notes

and those of Aristotle himself. This consideration may do something to support the justifiable faith,

individuality

which During based on an unmistakable

of expression, that most of what

ultimately from Aristotle's

and distortions from

own

careless or ignorant restoration,

authorities have been perfectly frank.

owe

we

to Andronicus, including

what he judged relevant

possess

came

pen, subject of course to corruptions

The form of

about which our the collection

we

division into treatises according to

its

to particular subjects.

2

As time went

on, the

Moraux, Listes, 241. On the decline of the Peripatos see Wehrli, Schule des A. x, 95-128; Lynch, A.'s School, ch. v. 2 Cf. Porph., V. Plot. c. 24 (AABT, 214). It has long been held that the Metaphysics owes 1

its

present composition (and indeed

its

title)

to

64

Andronicus.

The common

belief (strongly

Early fate of the school-writings superior philosophical value of these documents as Aristotle's

work came

to

own

be increasingly appreciated, with the result that the

dialogues were studied less and

and

less,

finally disappeared.

defended by During, Arist., 39 if.) is that under this heading (hardly a title, for it means no more than 'after the physica) Andronicus simply collected some miscellaneous papers which in his own edition he placed after the others.

But

alas!

works on the world of

Scholars can never agree, and

nature.

J.

'Buhle's fantastic hypothesis that the Metaphysics

So

also Ross, Aristotle, 13,

Owens (IPQ owes

its title

and many

1969, 300) speaks of passing on to its position in Andronicus's

This should not be done without warning that this late eighteenth-century fabrication completely lacks historical support.' Cf. Moraux, Listes, 314: 'The name "metaphysics", the first mention of which was thought be to found in Nicolas of Damascus, in fact long antedates Andronicus: Jaeger was quite right against Bonitz and Zeller.' For Jaeger see his Aristotle, 378f. A. H. Chroust in his article 'The Origin of Metaphysics' (R. of Metaph. 1960-1) pointed to a striking passage from Alex, (in Met. 171. 5-7 Hayd.), who says of oxxpia or 0EoAoyiKr|, f\v xai edition.

U6T& t&