Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos (Rutgers University Studies in Classical Humanities) [1 ed.] 0887382711, 9781138508156, 9780887382710

Cicero is best known for his political speeches. His Catilinarian orations are regularly studied in third or fourth year

154 85 278MB

English Pages 292 Year 1989

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos (Rutgers University Studies in Classical Humanities) [1 ed.]
 0887382711, 9781138508156, 9780887382710

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Title Page
Copyright Page
Contents
Preface
Contributors
1. Beobachtungen zu Ciceros philosophischem Standpunkt
2. Aristotle and Theophrastus Conjoined in the Writings of Cicero
3. Cicero's Knowledge of the Rhetorical Treatises of Aristotle and Theophrastus
4. Cicero's Topics and Its Peripatetic Sources
5. Constitution and Citizenship: Peripatetic Influence on Cicero's Political Conceptions in the De re publica
6. Das Problem Theorie-Praxis in der Peripatos-Rezeption von Ciceros Staatsschrift
7. "Naturrecht" bei Aristoteles und bei Cicero (De legibus): Ein Vergleich
8. Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero?
9. Theophrast in Cicero's De finibus
10. Die Peripatetiker in Cicero's Tuskulanen
11. Aristotelian Material in Cicero's De natura deorum
12. Cicero and the Aristotelian Theory of Divination by Dreams
13. Cicero und die 'Schule des Aristoteles'
Index of Ancient Sources

Citation preview

CICERO'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE PERIPATOS

RUTGERS UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN CLASSICAL HUMANITIES

Volume IV

CICERO'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE PERIPATOS

Edited by

William W. Fortenbaugh and

Peter Steinmetz

I~ ~?io~!!~n~~:up LONDON AND NEW YORK

First published 1989 by Transaction Publishers. Published 2019 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 First issued in paperback 2019

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an iriforma business Copyright © 1989 Taylor & Francis All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Catalog Number: 88-28792 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Cicero's knowledge of the Peripatos / edited by William W. Fortenbaugh and Peter Steinmetz. p. cm. - (Rutgers University studies in classical humanities ; V.

4)

Includes index. ISBN 0-88738-271-1 1. Cicero, Marcus Tullius-Philosophy. 2. Theophrastus-Influence-Cicero. 3. Aristotle-Influence. 4. Peripatetics. I. Fortenbaugh, William W. II. Steinmetz, Peter, 1925- . III. Series. PA6320.C54 1989 88-28792 185-dc 19 CIP

ISBN 13: 978-1-138-50815-6 (pbk) ISBN 13: 978-0-88738-271-0 (hbk) Publisher’s Note The publisher has gone to great lengths to ensure the quality o f this book but points out that some imperfections from the original may be apparent.

Contents Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vn Contributors ....................................... 1x 1. Beobachtungen zu Ciceros philosophischem Standpunkt Peter Steinmetz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2. Aristotle and Theophrastus Conjoined in the Writings of Cicero David T. Runia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 3. Cicero's Knowledge of the Rhetorical Treatises of Aristotle and Theophrastus William W Fortenbaugh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 4. Cicero's Topics and Its Peripatetic Sources Pamela M. Huby .................................... 61 5. Constitution and Citizenship: Peripatetic Influence on Cicero's Political Conceptions in the De re publica Dorothea Frede . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 6. Das Problem Theorie-Praxis in der Peripatos-Rezeption von Ciceros Staatsschrift Reimar Muller ................................... . 101 7. "Naturrecht" bei Aristoteles und bei Cicero (De legibus): Ein Vergleich 114 Klaus M. Girardet 8. Gibt es Spuren von Theophrasts Phys. op. bei Cicero? Jaap Mansfeld ................................... . 133 9. Theophrast in Cicero's De finibus OlofGigon ...................................... . 159 10. Die Peripatetiker in Cicero's Tuskulanen C. Joachim Classen ................................ . 186 11. Aristotelian Material in Cicero's De natura deorum David]. Furley ................................... . 201 12. Cicero and the Aristotelian Theory of Divination by Dreams Jose Kany-Turpin and Pierre Pellegrin .................. . 220 13. Cicero und die 'Schule des Aristoteles' Woldemar Gorier .................................. . 246 Index of Ancient Sources 265

Preface Rutgers Studies has reached four volumes. The first concerned Arius Didymus, the court philosopher to Caesar Augustus. The next two focused on the philosophy of Theophrastus, the successor of Aristotle as head of the Peripatetic School. This volume deals with Cicero, orator and writer of the late Roman Republic. Interest in Cicero arose out of Project Theophrastus, an international undertaking based at Rutgers University and dedicated to collecting, editing and translating the fragments of Theophrastus. Since Cicero is an important source for understanding Hellenistic philosophy, and since his own treatises contain numerous references to Theophrastus, it was decided to hold a conference that considered Cicero in relation to the Peripatos. The University in Saarbriicken, West Germany presented itself as an ideal place to meet, for the work being done by its faculty on Peripatetic philosophy and on Cicero himself was well known to the members of Project Theophrastus and to the academic community at large. The Institut fur Klassische Philologie there accepted the role of host with enthusiasm and put on a most successful conference. All the papers contained in this volume were written for the conference, which took place July 21-24, 1987, and all but one were in fact read on that occasion. None of the papers appears exactly as it was in its initial form. Most have undergone significant rewriting, while others have been improved in more modest ways. The order in which the articles appear in this volume is only one of many possible arrangements. It has, however, a certain intuitive attractiveness and can be said to respect the principle of "first things first." The opening piece offers an overview of Cicero's own philosophical orientation, and in so doing, it provides a background against which reports concerning individual philosophical schools can be better understood. The second article considers Cicero's acquaintance with the historiography of philosophy and, at the same time, turns our attention toward Aristotle and Theophrastus. There follows a series of articles in which Cicero's knowledge of the Peripatos is elucidated through specialized study. Two pieces focus our attention on a subject that interested Cicero from the beginning of his literary activity to the very end: namely, rhetoric, including matters of style and effective argumentation. Next come eight studies of individual works, arranged chronologically and concerned with a variety of subject matter: politics, physics, ethics and re-

viii

Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos

ligion. The concluding essay shifts our attention to Peripatetics other than Aristotle and Theophrastus, that is, to those philosophers whom Fritz Wehrli has brought together under the label "die Schule des Aristoteles," and asks how Cicero made use of them. Along the way we come to appreciate Cicero as someone who worked on large issues, having little patience for detail, but nonetheless deserving of our thanks for passing on so much of Hellenistic thought. Our thanks should also be extended to various individuals and organizations that made possible the Saarbriicken conference. The members of the local Institut fur Klassische Philologie were most cooperative and giving of their time; we want, however, to single out Frau Gerda Meyer and Frau Rosalinde Dier for their help in preparing our conference and seeing it through three days of intensive scholarly exchange. In addition, the President of the Universitat des Saarlandes, Professor Dr. Richard J. Meiser, offered significant support and greeted the participants at a most enjoyable reception. The Ministerium fur Kultus, Bildung und Wissenschaft des Saarlandes and the Stiftung Volkswagenwerk both made substantial contributions, which helped defray the costs of travel and housing. Finally we should mention the National Endowment for the Humanities in the United States. This organization's recognition and continued support of Project Theophrastus created the conditions which in time led to our conference on Cicero and Peripatetic philosophy. To the NEH, then, and to the others named above as well as many more who made efforts on our behalf, we here express our sincere thanks. W.W.E and P.S.

Contributors C. JOACHIM CLASSEN, Seminar fur Klassische Philologie, Georg-August-Universitat, 3400 Gottingen, West Germany WILLIAM W. FoRTENBAUGH, Project Theophrastus, 428 Alexander Library, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903, USA DOROTHEA FREDE, Department of Philosophy, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, Pennsylvania 19081, USA DAVID J. FuRLEY, Department of Classics, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, USA OLOF GIGON, Seminar fiir Klassische Philologie, Universitat Bern, 3012 Bern, Switzerland Kr.Aus M. GIRARDET, Institut fiir Alte Geschichte, Universitat des Saarlandes, 6600 Saarbriicken, West Germany WOLDEMAR GoRLER, Institut fiir Klassische Philologie, Universitat des Saarlandes, 6600 Saarbriicken, West Germany PAMELA M. HUBY, Department of Philosophy, The University of Liverpool, P.O. Box 147, Liverpool L69 3BX, England JAAP MANsFELD, Filosofisch Instituut, Rijksuniversiteit, 3508 TC Utrecht, The Netherlands REIMAR MULLER, Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR, Zentralinstitut fiir Alte Geschichte, 1080 Berlin, German Democratic Republic PIERRE PELLEGRIN, Centre de Recherches sur la Pensee Antique (C.N.R.S.), 1 rue Victor-Cousin, 75005 Paris, France DAVID T. RuNIA, Faculteit der Wijsbegeerte, Vrije Universiteit, Postbus 7161, 1007 MC Amsterdam, The Netherlands PETER STEINMETZ, Institut fiir Klassische Philologie, Universitat des Saarlandes, 6600 Saarbriicken, West Germany Josi KA.NY-TURPIN, Departement de Langues anciennes Universite de Champagne-Ardenne, 51100 Reims, France

1 Beobachtungen zu Ciceros philosophischem Standpunkt Peter Steinmetz I Ciceros Bekenntnis zur skeptischen Richtung der Akademie gilt allgemein als eine Konstante in seinen philosophischen Anschauungen. 1 Diese Opinio communis zu iiberpriifen ist das Ziel der folgenden Uberlegungen. Sollte sich aus diesen Uberlegungen eine Revision dieses Cicerobildes als notwendig erweisen, wird dies auch Konsequenzen fur die Quellenanalyse von Ciceros philosophischen Schriften und damit auch hinsichtlich seiner Kenntnis des Peripatos nach sich ziehen. Doch der Behandlung dieses Themas seien zwei Vorklarungen vorausgeschickt: 1. Es ist zu beachten, da~ sich mit dem Begriff philosophia im hellenistischen Griechenland und in Rom drei Konnotationen verbinden . a. Philosophie dient zur Kennzeichnung eines menschlichen Verhaltens. Der Begriff bezeichnet so das Streben nach dem wahren Wissen, das in seiner voll entwickelten Form die Erkenntnis des Wesens und des Zusammenhangs aller Dinge, die Prinzipien ethischen und theoretischen Verhaltens, die. menschliche Selbsterkenntnis und die Einsicht in die Stellung des Menschen in der Welt umfa~t. b. Philosophic dient eher inhaltlich zur Bezeichnung des Ergebnisses dieses Strebens nach Wissen, sei es generell (Philosophie = die Lehren der Philosophen), sci es auf die Lehren bestimmter Philosophen und Schulen bezogen (z.B. die peripatetische Philosophie, die stoische Philosophic). 1

2

Cicero's Knowledge of the Peripatos

c. Wahrend diese beiden Konnotationen auch der deutschen Sprache vertraut sind, ist die 3. Konnotation nur in den antiken Sprachen dem Begriff philosophia eigentiimlich. Hier wird Philosophie auch verstanden als Bezeichnung der Formen, in denen Philosophie im Sinne der 2. Konnotation zur Darstellung gebracht wird. Demnach ist Philosophie ein Gattungsbegriff der Literatur und meint die dritte Gattung der Kunstprosa neben der Rede und der Historiographie, und zwar insbesondere die Kunst des Dialogs in den verschiedenen Auspragungen. Wenn Cicero erklart, er wolle die Philosophie nach Rom iibertragen und in lateinischer Sprache zur Darstellung bringen, versteht er den Begriff Philosophie zunachst als Gattungsbegriff der Literatur. Demgemaf3 ist es sein Ziel, eine romische philosophische Literatur hervorzubringen, die unter asthetischem Aspekt der griechischen philosophischen Literatur entspricht. Daher will er die lateinische Sprache zum Ausdruck philosophischer Sachverhalte geschmeidig machen und eine lateinische philosophische Terminologie entwickeln. Daher will er insbesondere unter Nachgestaltung romischer Lebenswirklichkeit und unter Ubertragung von Anregungen der griechischen Literatur die Kunst eines romischen Dialogs schaffen. Diese Seite der philosophischen Schriftstellerei Ciceros sei in diesem Vortrag beiseite gelassen. Unsere Untersuchung konzentriert sich auf Philosophie im Sinne der 2. Konnotation. Denn indem Cicero die literarische Gattung Philosophie fur die romische Literatur gewinnen will, muf3 er Philosophie im Sinn der 2. Konnotation darstellen und dabei einen philosophischen Standpunkt einnehmen. 2. Seit den Zeiten Chrysipps bedeutet in Griechenland und infolgedessen auch in Rom Philosophieren zugleich, sich an eine bestimmte Philosophenschule anzuschlief3en, genauer, sich einer der vier hellenistischen Schulen zuzurechnen, der Akademie, und das heif3t der Schule Platons, dem Peripatos, und das hei~t der Schule des Aristoteles und des Theophrast, der Stoa oder der Schule Epikurs. Der Anschluf3 an eine bestimmte Schule schlief3t freilich niche aus, da~ man die Dogmen anderer Schulen zur Kenntnis nimmt, sei es aus den kritischen Auseinandersetzungen der eigenen Schule mit den Lehrmeinungen der anderen Schule, sei es