Metaphysics — Aristotle (trans. W. D. Ross)

IETAPHYSICS

— *

APISTOTEAOTS TA META TA ®TSIKA

ARISTOTLE’S METAPHYSICS

A REVISED TEXT WITH INTRODUCTION AND COMMENTARY

BY Wr Dr ROSS

FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE

DEPUTY PROFESSOR OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

ST. AL REO TC PAIT ECE 1 WOARY

VotumeE II

$f. ALBERT’S COLLEGE LIBRARY

OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 1924

Oxford University Press

London Edinburgh Glasgow Copenhagen New York Toronto Melbourne Cape Town Bombay Calcutta Madras Shanghai Humphrey Milford Publisher to the University

Printed in England

CONTENTS

METAPHYSICS, BOOKS Z-N Text he

Commentary . : : § ‘

INDEXES

Index Verborum . . F ;: :

Index to the Introduction and Commentary .

MLAS

PAGE

APIZSTOTEAOYS

TA META TA ®Y3IKA

SIGLA

E = Parisinus gr. 1853, saec. x J = Vindobonensis phil. gr. C, saec. x ineuntis A> = Laurentianus 87. 12, saec. xii f= Gulielmi de Moerbeka translatio, c. 1260-1275 Al., Asc., Syr., Them. = Alexandri, Asclepii, Syriani, Themistii commentaria Al.!, etc. = Alexandri, etc., lemmata Al.¢, etc. = Alexandri, etc., citationes

Raro citantur

recc. = codices recentiores

S = Laurentianus 81. 1, saec. xiii T = Vaticanus 256, anni 1321

F> = Parisinus gr. 1876, saec. xiii i = Bessarionis translatio, c. 1452

= editio Aldina, anni 1498 ® = Aristotelis Physica A = Metaphysicorum liber A

2578-2

APISTOTEAOTS TON META TA ©YZIKA Z

By n

To dv Aéyerar TohAaxGs, Kabdrep SdierdducOa mpd- 1028* Tepov ev Tois Tepl TOU Tocaxds: onpaiver yap TO pev Th 2 \ , X X\ \ x x Xv lat By oi] eore Kal TddE TL, TO S€ ToLdY 7) TOTdY 7) TGV GAAwWY ExacToV TOV OvTw KaTHYOpoLMEvaV. TooavTaxds Se AEyouevou Tod évtos pavepov Gr. TovTwY mpSTov dv TO Ti eat, STEP onpat-

a xX ver THY ovotay (Oray pey yap elm@pev Toldy TL TddE, 7) Aya- 15 Xx x \ Gov r€youev 7) KaKdv, GAN’ ov Tpianxv 7) GvOpwrov: Grav Se rl €atw, ov AEvKOY OSE Deppov OddE TplaNXV, GAAG avOpwToV BY a na XX 7 Ody), TA 8 GAAa héyerar GvTa TH Tod otrws dvTOs Ta X\ 4 My \ X J ‘ SS / \ SS pev moodryTes elvat, Ta S€ ToLOTHTES, TA SE TAaOn, Ta dE dAdo TL 010 Kav amopnoele Tis mdoTepoyv TO Bad{lCew Kal TO bylaivey Kal 70 KaOjoOa exaoroy abrdv dv onpaives, Caney, nN CE a a os ¢ a a 7 INS dpotws d€ kal emt Tov GAAwy drovody Tév ToLovTwL: oddeY x ew SRE x ) eras \ + ee yap avrdv éorivy ovre kal avrd tepuKds otre ywpicerda duvarov THs ovotas, GAAX paddov, elmep, TO Badicov TOV OVvToV Kal TO KaOyuevov Kal TO tyiaivor. Tatra be 2 c v2 y 4 a \ e 4 > al paddrov daiverat Ovra, didte ote TL TO BroKeiyevoy avrois c / an > 5: 4 € > 4 ‘ X Sal ig @pispevov (robro 8 early 7 ovcta Kal TO Kab’ Exacrov), O7ep E TA > na a a / AS b) AN XX Xx eupaiveras ev Th Katnyopia TAH ToLadTy: TO ayabov yap %) \ , > 4 7 / Le Ly 4 S TO KaOnpevov ovK Gyev TovTOV A€Eyerat. SyAov ody Sti Sia TavTny Kakeivay Exactov toTw, woTEe TO TpdTws dv Kal ov Tl 30 BN a 3 a

dv GAN dv amas H otola dv ein. TohAayds pev ody éye- Tat TO mperov: Syws dé TdvTws 7 ovola TpGTov, Kal Adyw Kal yvdoe: Kal xpdve. Toy pev yap dddwvy KaTnyopnyd-

i=) 1e)

SyAov ody Sti Sia TavTny Kakeivay Exactov toTw, woTEe TO TpdTws dv Kal ov Tl 30 BN a 3 a

dv GAN dv amas H otola dv ein. TohAayds pev ody éye- Tat TO mperov: Syws dé TdvTws 7 ovola TpGTov, Kal Adyw Kal yvdoe: Kal xpdve. Toy pev yap dddwvy KaTnyopnyd-

i=) 1e)

1028812 d¢ AP Al.: d¢ dre EJT 16 kaxov EJT Asc. : caddy AP Al. rpimnyxv 7) codd. Fr Al, et ut vid. Asc.: @cov 7 Shute: secl. Susemihl 19 moodryres . . . moudrnres AP Al.: moodrntas .. . moubrnras EJ 20 tt] re ToLodTOv EJT kay] Kat AP 21 on- paver} 7) py ov EJ Al. Asc. 25 kal pr. AP Ale: 7m kai EJT 29 Touro J 32 mavras A® yp. E: mavrov EJT Al.) Asc. kat] kal duce: kat Asc.® 33 xpore] xpdve kal pice ia

1028>

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

Tw ovdery ywpioTov, atTn O€ povn: Kal TO Adyw b€ Todro Xp os ) ov : oS mparov (avdykn yap ev TG Exdorov Ady Tov THs ovolas eve- mapxew) Kal eld€var 58 Tor oldueba Exactov pddLora, Ora Wi >. cy, n By X\ a c x si ‘ x x ti éorw 6 dvOpwros yuOpuev 7) TO Top, waddov 7 TO ToLdy 7 TO \ Ny lal Toooy 7 TO Tov, emel Kal ad’T@v TovTwY TOTE EkacToV topeED, eo ih ees X \ Dy \ eG a \ ‘ \ A éray ti éoT. TO TOcOY-7) TO OlOY yvopev. Kal 57 Kal TO

i f \ an A 3 / \ Page 3 4 mada, Te kal viv Kal del Cyrovmevoy Kal del amopovpevor,

= on

> sf

/ N+ LR A by vd € a BS € SS a “aah fa ti 7d dv, Tobrd éott Tis h ovoia (rotro yap of pev ey elval \ / gacw ot 6€ mAclw 7) Ev, Kal ot pev Temepacpeva ob be dmretpa), 1d Kal juty kal pddtota Kal mpOrov Kal jdvov lad a / as elmety repli Tod otrws dvTos Oewpynreov tl ear. val ef € eee € d VA S tal / Aoxel & 7 otola imdpyew gaveporata pev Tols oo- \ ~ ‘ \ ~ \ ‘ t an pacw (81 rd te Ga Kal Ta urd Kal Ta pdpia adrdv 3 & f Af S XX , Ug fal \ ovolas cival dapev, kal Ta hvoikd oopara, oloy mop Kal a a Xx tdop Kal yiv kal TOy Tovwovrwy ExacToy, kal bra 7) pépia BY ON oN o ToUTwY 7) ex TOUTMY eoTiv, 1) Moplwy 1) TdvTwY, olov 6 TE ovpa- \ \ ‘ / 3 ay BA ‘ / ‘ ev , vos kal Ta popia adrod, dotpa Kal oeAnvn Kal 7ALos): TO- S @ / > 9, 28) A \ \ / s Tepov dé atrat povar ovotar eiciv 7) Kal GAAaL, 7) TOVT@Y TIWeS N Noy BN 4 X babs ef / 4 7 Kal GAAaL, 7) TovTwy pev odOev Erepat S€ TIVES, TKETTEOD. doke? O€ TLcL Ta TOD TdpaTos TEpara, oloy emMUpdvera Kal ypapysn in a N n kal orTvypn Kal movds, elvar ovotat, Kal paddov 7) TO cOma Kal \ , yw \ mS by x ¢ Xx > 4 i) INS TO oTepedy. ett Tapa Ta aicOnra of pev odK olovra: elvat ovder Towodrov, of d€ Trew Kal paddroy évta aida, womep IIAd- i y \ Se, > + Darks t x Toy Ta Te €ldn Kal Ta pabynpatiKa Svo ovoias, Tpitny dE TH TéY alcOnTav cwHpatwyv ovclay, Smevountos O€ Kal “A > 7 b} x ACN 2 if Xe \ Loew! mAclovs odvoias amd Tod évds apédpyevos, kal apxas Exdorys ovolas, GAAnv pev apioyav GAAnv be peyeOOv, emetTa Wo- Xijs* kal rodrov 81) Tov Tpdmoy émexTelver Tas Ovolas. Evior de Ta pev €ldn Kal Tovs dpiOuods Tiv adriy exew acl ptow, x \ By ns / ~ \ 3 14 / A Ta O€ GAAa €xOueva, ypaypas Kal eénimeda, pexpl mpos THY TOD ovpavod otclav kal Ta aicOnra. Tepl dy TovTwY Ti

Evior de Ta pev €ldn Kal Tovs dpiOuods Tiv adriy exew acl ptow, x \ By ns / ~ \ 3 14 / A Ta O€ GAAa €xOueva, ypaypas Kal eénimeda, pexpl mpos THY TOD ovpavod otclav kal Ta aicOnra. Tepl dy TovTwY Ti

435 ovoias] ovaias Néyov EJT 36 de et 37 ro pr. om, AP b2 eon AT Asc.: ear i) EJ yrepev AP Al, Asc.: efSdpuer EJT 8 7... per] Kuplos dy eivar i) ovola, havepmrata pev ev ut vid. Al,

11 7 EJT Asc.¢: 67 AP 12 popioy codd. TAl.: rwéav vel evier ci. Bonitz 14 atra APY Al. Asc.t¢: atrai EJ 7), alte ene 15 chk Ti... Gddov EJ Asc.: 7 rovrwy ries Kal GAdwov AP; om. I Al. 16 d¢] 67 Bywater 21 xat EJT Asc.¢; om.

. I. 10284 34 — 3. 10297 22

a XK a ery > Zi A€yeTat KaAGS 7) pr) KAAGS, Kal Tives ciciv ovoial, Kal TorTe-

XN s a pov eioi tives Tapa Tas alcOyntas 7) ovK eici, kal abrar mas eiol, Kal morepov Eats Tis XwpioT? ovoia, Kal dia Ti Kal TGs, 30 bal 7 ovdeuia, Tapa tas aic@ntds, ocKenTéov, broTuTHoapevols Thy ovoliay mpOTov Ti éoTwy.

n , 3 \ 4 \ , Tapot ye pddwora: Kal yap TO Ti iv eivar Kal Td KaOdAov kat TO yevos ovota doxe? elvat Exdorov, Kal Téraptoy TovTwy \ e 7 % > c 4 , > > bg x ¥ / TO UTOKEimevovy. TO O VToKEiwevov eoTt KAO ov Ta GdAQ d_E-

w on

2 ~ X ets , > + \ fal \ Ps yetat, Exetvo S€ avTo pyKeTe Kat GAXov' 610 TP@TOY TeEpt TOv- Tov diopioTéov? jiddtota yap doKel elvar ovcia TO broKElpevov 10293

a 2 XX 4 Ne e of 4 x Tp@tTov. Tovovroy € TpoTOV wey TiVa 7 DAN A€yeTat, GAAOV d& tpdmov 7 popdy, Tpiroy b& TO ek TovTwy (Aéyw Se Ti

S LA = \ 7, X S Xx \ fad a fev UAnv otov Tov yxadKkdy, THY S€ popdyy TO cya THs 7 Ae 5 , A ’ X s or ace N id€as, TOS ex TovTwy Tov GvdpidvTa TO cUVOAOY), woTE «i TO

eidos Ths tAns mporepoy Kai paddAov ov, Kal Tod e€ auoiv i wv > x bet , a X be fe » mpérepov éotat dia Tov adrov Adyov. viv pev ov TUT €lpy- — r 4) > > x ¢€ / 3 ‘ Tat Ti mor éortiy 7 ovata, dtr TO pr) Kal” broKeysévov adAAA Ka® ov Ta adda: Sef Se pu) pdvov ovTws: od yap tkavdv:

a ae cay ¥> \ y, LS iA > ta ny ’ auTo yap TovTo adnAov, Kal ETL 7 VAN ovota ylyveTal. € 10 ps x 4 > , 7 3 Cs 4 f yap pa avTn ovoia, Tis €oTw GAAy diadevyer TEpLarpoupe - ~S a ” > 7 ION c / = ~ vev yap Tov GrAwy ov datverar ovdéy Brouevoy' TA pev yap Gd\a Téyv copdtwv Ta0n Kal Toujpara Kal dvvdpers, TO 5 pAKos Kal mAdtos Kal Bdabos mocdrnrés Twes GAN > eas X x \ > be ar ee) > x fal ie d ov ovoia (Td yap rocdy ovK ovoia), GANG paddov © irdp-

- on

xe Tatra mpeT, exeivd eotw ovcla. dda pajy adpa- t ? \ lA \ , INN aX € povjevov pKous Kal TAdTovs Kal Badovs ovdey SpGmev brode- , we .4 | a 4 c 4 c \ , 4 X\ Topevov, TAI eb Th e€oTL TO SpiCouevoy 7d TovTwY, BoTE THY lA > t 7 , > , 4 , DAnv avayxn daivecda. povnv ovciav ott cKkoToupevois.

eyo © DAnv 1) kal adriy pare th pare moody pajte GAAo 20

pndev A€yerat ols Gpicrar TO ov. Eoti yap Tu Kal ob KaTnyo- petra TOUT@Y ExacToV, © TO civat Erepor Kal TOY KaTHyopLOV

povnv ovciav ott cKkoToupevois.

eyo © DAnv 1) kal adriy pare th pare moody pajte GAAo 20

pndev A€yerat ols Gpicrar TO ov. Eoti yap Tu Kal ob KaTnyo- petra TOUT@Y ExacToV, © TO civat Erepor Kal TOY KaTHyopLOV

b28 rives EJT Al.!: rivwy AP Asc. 33 7 ovola, ef py) EJT Al.: om. A> 1029" 2 Néyerat EJTAI.: Gaiverar AP Asc. 3 éeyw dé et 5 Tov om. AP 6 rod E4JPAsc.: ro E? Al. et fecit A IO atré te yap E II avr) AYT éorat ci. Bonitz 16 radra AP Al. Asc.: ratra aira EJT mpata A Al.: mpores EJT Asc, exetv@s J ovcia AP Asc.: 4 ovoia EJ pany] pajy kat AP 20 pyre tt] pnxere yp. E 22 @] dote A

bo or

1029? 3

fe)

TQN META TA ®YSIKA Z

éxdoTn (Ta pev yap aGdAa THS ovoias KaTnyopetral, adr ( yep , fal ied \ a bs FAN: yY \ LA \ be tis DAys), ore TO Exxarov Kal avtrd ovre Tl ovTE ToodD ovre GAO ovdev eo: ode 57 al dmopdces, Kal yap avrat c / ~~ ta Si X be) / na tmap€over Kata ouuBeBynkds. ex pev odv To’TwY Oewpodot ig Lea OD ‘\ os PENA / \ 3 bY ovpBaiver ovciay ecivar tiv trAynv: dddvarov dé Kal yap TO \ PANT eS a Xwplorov Kal TO Téde TL dmdpyew OoKel pdALoTa TH ovola, 010 TO €ld0s Kal TO e€ duoiv ovola ddfevey dv etvar pard- lal la) f Aov ths Ans. tHyv pev roivey e€ dudoty ovolay, rAEyw be ~ yy es ey \ a a > / € , x THY &k Te THs VAns Kal THs popdijs, aperéov, borepa yap ‘ ye x / | c of «= ‘ lal sf kat dndAn gavepa d€ mws Kal 7 An? Tepl d€ THs TpiTys oKemTéov, altn yap amopwrdtn. dpodroyodvra, 8 ovolat Wg n n / nn. elvar TOV aloOnTdv TEs, BoTE ev TavTats CyTnTEov TpOTov. \ \ ¢ T™po Epyov yap TO peraBalvew els TO yvwpyssrepoy. 1 yap panos otrw yiyverar Tao bia TOV Hrrov yvwplyov dpioer eis Ta yoopysa padrdov: kal Tobdro épyov éotiv, damep ev lal \ lal DI ny © / 2 na \ iA tats mpd&eo. TO Toihoa ek Tov ExdoTm dyaldy Ta bdrws > > c / Py cf 3 a > ny / Xx ayada Exaotw ayabd, otrws ek TOV ailTe yvopyswrepwv Ta fot , / > n 7 \ r c / 1A TH Pioet yropyma advTe yvopyma, Ta 0 Exdoros yodpysa lal * kal mpOta moAAdKIS Apeua €oTl yroepiwa, Kal puKpoy 7 ovdey €xet TOD dvTos: GAN’ Guws ex TOY Hatrws pev yvo- oTGv ait b& yrwoTéy Ta 6AwS yrwoTa yvdvaL TeELparéor, petaBalvovtas, @onmep elpyntat, did TOVTwY adiTar. 9 x bak) 2. lol , 4 Ce \ > 4 Ene & év apyf) dvewddueba Técois opiCopev Ties Seat ‘ z el a \ Y date: LS \ Kal TOUTWY ev TL eddKEL ElvaL TO TL HV Elvat, Oewpnreoy TEpt atrov. Kal mpOrov elnwpev Evia TEpt adtod AoyiKOs, Ori earl \ eee: ~ Paes A a t > yee! 2 > o \ \ TO TC ap elvar Exaortou 0 A€yerat KAW abrd. ov ydp €oTL TO ToL S n a a A elvat TO MovTlK® Elvat od yap KaTAa TavTOV Ef MovotKds, 0 apa \ f PANS ‘\ cal Tx 2. SS \ vs 2 Lat kaTa cavTov. ovde 5) Tov’TO TaV* ov ydp TO OTws Kal’ adro c 2 4 4 4 > yo \ > Mp Ls BS ws émupavela devkdv, STL ovK EoTL TO emupaveia civar TO

423 exaorn EJ 28 70 EJ Al.c: om. A? 31 re om, EJT >3 apo... 12 avréy hic codd. I'Al. invitis ponenda censuit Bonitz yap pr.] yap ets EX] 5 to avrd E ev tats] eviars AP 7 avrav

A? 31 re om, EJT >3 apo... 12 avréy hic codd. I'Al. invitis ponenda censuit Bonitz yap pr.] yap ets EX] 5 to avrd E ev tats] eviars AP 7 avrav

8 adte yreptpa om. AP 9 éori A> Al.¢: om, EJT Asc.¢ Io dvros JAPY, ex dvras fecit E II avrg d€ yroordy om. E} 12 peraSaivoyras EJY Al. Asc. : peraBaivovra A» 2 édoxet ex Soxet fecit E: Soxet T 14 €xdorov 0 Néyerat Scripsi: ékaoroy 0 héyerat codd. 1: éxaor@ 6 Néyerat Bonitz: 6 Aéyerat exacroy fort. Al. 15 6 ...16 cavrdv EJT et ut vid. Al.: om. AP 17 émpaveia EJT Al. ae emupavera AP entpaveia E®JT Al. Asc.o: emipavera APE

3. 1029%23 — 4. 1030%9

AevKG elvar. GAAG pay ovde TO eE audoiv, 7d emupaveia Aevkh, Ort mpdceotw atro. ev @ dpa pa) evéotar Adyw

Al. 15 6 ...16 cavrdv EJT et ut vid. Al.: om. AP 17 émpaveia EJT Al. ae emupavera AP entpaveia E®JT Al. Asc.o: emipavera APE

3. 1029%23 — 4. 1030%9

AevKG elvar. GAAG pay ovde TO eE audoiv, 7d emupaveia Aevkh, Ort mpdceotw atro. ev @ dpa pa) evéotar Adyw

oF Us ’ / Ks € 4 a Py >. € if avro, éyovTt avTd, odTos 6 Adyos Tov Ti Hv elvar ExdoTo, er > , %. b) - oe a 7 3 wv =) ye a wor el TO emipavelga evKy clvat éoti TO emihavela clvar dela, TO AevKG kal Aeim elvar Td adrd Kal &v. emel 8 + \ \ at BA IA "¢ + / €oTt Kat xara tas dAdas Karnyopias otvOera (€or. ydp TL bmoxeluevov ExdoT@, oloy TH TOW Kal TH Tood Kal TO MOTE KAL TO TOY Kal TH KwWHoEL), TKETTEOV Ap eat. Adyos Tod ti jy e€ivat Exdor@ adirdv, Kal dmapxet Kal Tovro.s TO Th Hy > PN) , , > ; me , yt \ elvat, olov AcvK@ avOpadrm [ri iv evKe avOpdTe]. eoTw by y Saas ae ee SABI: NP Ve tS 2 a ‘ Ovoua avT@ ivariov. ti €or TO ivarlm etvat; adda pH ION fat > eX I PANGS fay x \ > by ek ovde TOV Ka?’ adTO Aeyouevay OvdE TOdTO. 7)-TO ov Ka” adro A€yerat dixGs, kal rovrov éotl Td pev ex Tpocbécews TO be ov. TO pey yap TO adTd GAAw TpocKEicOaL A€yerar 6 Cpl- ; ev yap TG » Tp y p > % oy > ¢ % f Loe) erat, ofov ei TO Aevkw elvar dpiCouevos éyou evKod dv- Opdmov Adyov: Td dé TO GAAO aire, ofoy ei onpalvor 7d ipdtiov AevKov dvOpwmov, 6 de dpiouro twdriov ws AevKdY. TO 8n AevKds dvOpwos Ear. pev AevKdv, ov pevToL (rd) TL jv eivae AEvK® elvat.—adAdd TO iuarim elvar Gpa €or. Ti jv elval rr BN o BN x 4 I Jd “ LYS oD co [j] OAws; 7 ob; Sep yap ti éore TO Th Hv elvarr Grav & dAdo kar GAAov A€yntra, ovK éotw STEP TddE TL, olov 6 Aevkds dvOpwmos otk éoTw Omep Téde TL, ElmEep TO TddE Tats ovotais tmdpxer pdvov' wate TO TL ip elval €or boy 6 , 9) ‘ \ ’ x + 4 Adyos €oTiv dpisuds. dpioyos O° eoTly ovK dy dvopa Adyw oN / t DS x > c 4 a A Ba TavTO onpuatyyn (mdvtes yap dv elev of Adyou Gpouwr &orat x wy ¢ lal , cv \ Ce Ors \ ¢ \ oo yap dvona drwotv Adyw, doTe Kal 7H "LAids dpicpos eorat), b 18 Nevxd EJ Al. Asc.¢: Aevxov APT emupavera hevkn A? et ut vid. Asc.: émiaveia Aevky eivar E?J? Asc.° et fort. Al. 19 ort APAI. : Ota ri; Oru EJT yp. Al. atrd AT Al.: abré J?: abrir E: atry J‘: at’ry yp. Al. 20 airé pr. EJT Al. : om. AP 21 éemipaveia Nevan EJT Al. : emidvera ev AY emipaveig E°T AL.: emupdvera E1JAP 22 heia recc. Al.: Xeia APE? et in marg. J: def E*JT 25 TH OM. Ab 26 ctvat éxdorm avtav AP Al.: éxdorov adréy civar EJT 27 ri... avOpmme om. AP Av) iv iva ci. Bonitz 29 ovde pr. om, AP 30 eori tt 70 EJ 33 onpaive T 34 6 de om. J dptCorro JA” Asc. et fort. Al. : épi¢orrd E*: dpiforro rd E? 103041 be rece. ro addidi etvat codd. T'Al.: incl. Bonitz 2 ante -d\ha interpunxerunt Asc. Bonitz, ante dpa ceteri_ rd codd. r AL: . . . : , ed a 76 Bonitz 3 incl. Bonitz ri pr.A? yp. E Al.®: ri ny ely EJT: 700e tt Bonitz 4 oiov...5 re EJT Al. Asc.e: om. AP 5 T00¢

alt.] rdde ru recc. et ut vid. Al. Asc. 9 Adyw AP Al. : Adyo radrdv EJ?

10308

35 1030»

TOQN META TA ®YSIKA Z

r AL: . . . : , ed a 76 Bonitz 3 incl. Bonitz ri pr.A? yp. E Al.®: ri ny ely EJT: 700e tt Bonitz 4 oiov...5 re EJT Al. Asc.e: om. AP 5 T00¢

alt.] rdde ru recc. et ut vid. Al. Asc. 9 Adyw AP Al. : Adyo radrdv EJ?

10308

35 1030»

TOQN META TA ®YSIKA Z

GAN eay mpdrov Twos i Toadra 8 early boa heéyerat un TO ado Kar’ dAdAov A€yerOa, ovK Era dpa ovdevi TOv pH yevous «lddv tmdpyov TO Th Hu eivar, GAG Todrous povov (radra yap doxel ov Kara peroyny A€yerOar kal mdG0s ob8 os crpPeByKds) GAN Adyos pev Korat Exdorov kal tév dddwy th onpatver, cay 4 dvoya, bri Tdde THdE eT A 9 bY y € cate S) / € \ ? > bTapyXel, 7) avTL AOyou GmAOD aKpiBEeoTEpos* Optoyos 6 OVK Ba OX A -, tJ Xx Tis. “ae \ [4 si A , éorat ovde Td Ti iv eivar. 1 Kal 6 dpiopos Bomep Kal TO Th > a / \ x \ aoe) ss x €orTt TAEovayds AéyeTar; kal yap TO Ti éorw eva pev Tpd- X > sf ‘A as , XX ed mov onpalver thy ovotay Kal TO Tdde TL, GAAOY S& ExacToV TOY KaTnyopoupevav, Toodv Troy Kal doa Adda To.adra, 4 x \ » € l2 c > , 3 c ee domep yap kal ro éotw trapxes Tacw, add odx duolws b) bs at S , ca) pjtee, 3 / 4 \ \ FS GAAG TO pev TPOTWS Tois & ETOMEVWS, OUTW Kal TO TL EoTW ‘4 Sf > ta A \ > \ \ amAGs pev TH ovola mos 5€ Tois GdAoLs* kal yap TO ToLOY b] / > 1 eee Lcd ~ \ x n ane | > ’ €poiued” dy ri éorw, Bore Kal TO Tody TOv Ti eat, GAA odx amAds, GAN domep el Tod pi) dvTos AoyiKOs acl ts BN Ni a > c a b) s Noy v4 \ ‘ Twes eva TO pr Ov, Odx ATAGS GAAA pi} dv, OUTw Kal TO / a ~ a lal NY \ n fal ¥ \ moldy. — det ev ody oKoTeiy Kal TO TOs Set AEyew TeEpl Exa- bY \ fal , BD Ni a ot ns \ a 2 \, \ oTOY, Ov pry parrdv ye 7} TO TOs exeur 510 Kal vOv emel Td Aeydpevov davepdv, kal TO Ti Hv elvar Spolws bmdpfer Tpe- ss ‘ 14 “ \ tal Lcd Tws wey Kal amrAGs TH odola, efra Kal rots dAdo, woTEp \ > y A age} > « las Pe LA > ‘ a & a kal TO Ti eri, ox AmAGs Ti hp elvar GAAA TOG 7} TOTO Pas fe a X A ae 4 a / i. y ti Ww eva. def yap 7) duovdpws tatra pdvar elvar dvra, x a mpooriOévras Kal apaipodytas, Gomep Kal TO pu) eTmLOTHTOV emuotnrov, emel TO ye OpOdv eort pte Spwvdpws avat ie LS -, > ? tA S 9 \ lal \ \ te: eyTe @cavtws ad\N Gomep TO latpikoy TS mpds TO avTd XN \ ed. > A fe taps ‘\ Sey, > / Or € tA Mev Kal €y, ov TO adrd d€ Kal ev, od pevTor ode duwvdpas* ovde yap iarpixkdy apa Kal épyov Kal oKedos d€yeTa ovTE Opwvtpos ovte Kad? éy Gd\Aad ampds ev. GAAG Tabra per OmoTépws Tis COeAer Aeyew diadeper ovdev: exelvo 5& havepov ig ¢ / \ cS n c ss \ \ La * a Sr. 6 mpdtws Kal amdAGs dpicpos Kal 7O Ti jv etvar Tov > lal an otvoiay early. ov pv GAAG Kal Tov dAdwv bpolws eort, TARY

®10 7 om. AP II kar’ d\dov EJT Asc.: om. A? Al. 18 yap om, AP 21 76 ri eorw AP Al. 23 trois... yap EJT Al. Asc. :

rai AP 24 avd’ AP AL? Asc, : pév ddd’ EJ 32 ravra J 34 76 te AP b2 ovdé AP Al.: oddev EJT Asc.2 3 adda mpos ev in marg. J a@\Aa tadra pev AP Ale: raira péev ody EJT 4 Siapépor A 5 mpatas EJT Al.©: mpdros AY Asc.¢ 6 ob

A? Al. 18 yap om, AP 21 76 ri eorw AP Al. 23 trois... yap EJT Al. Asc. :

pny] kal ot povovT dpoiws secl. Christ : duos AP et ut vid. Al. éori, mAnv ov mpatas EJT Asc.: om. A? et fort. Al.

ST. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY

A, 1OZ0%10 —— 5. 1O3E* 2,

> , > Xx 9 / ny nan Si € Sy ov TPOTwsS. ov yap dvdyKn, dy TodTo TLOGmEY, TOUTOU Opirpov a a , X SraN. , 2 \ ‘ , 3 fal elvat 6 dy Ady 1d aitd onyaivy, GAAA TWt Ady@* Toro \ AN 4 Se n a BN b€ édy Evos 7}, mi) TO ovvexe? Gorep 7 “TKids 7H boa ovv- / a d€ou@, GAN’ eay doayds Aéyerat 7d ev: Td 8 & Aeyerau t x t Q ‘ @omep TO ov? TO dé dv TO pev TddE TL TS 5& ToTdv TO Se mov TL onpatver. 810 Kal AevKod avOpedrov ~orat Adyos Kal Opioids, GAAov b& TpdmoVv Kal Tod AEvKOD Kal ovolas. ” 3. 7, Sif. X\ na ¢ x ue Xx I 5 “Exe. 3 dzopiay, éay tis pw pi spiopdov elvar tov ék / 4 a x € \ an 7 € a 5] x mporGerews Ndyov, Tivos €arat Opiopos TOY odx ATAGY GAA avvdedvacpevav? ék mpocbécews yap avayxyn Sndodv. A€yw d& ofoy eari pis Kal KowAdrns, Kal cysdtns TO ex TOY dvoiv Aeyopevov TH TddE ev TOdE, Kal Ov KaTa TLMBEBNKES ye ov0 7 KowWdrys ot@ 7 oiudrns Taos Tis pods, GAAd Kal? , ON atv: ovd as TO evkdy KaddAla, 1) dvOpdre, bru Kaddias AevKds © TYMBEBHKEY avOpdm@ civat, GAN os TO appv TO t a nr o (oo kal 7d tcov tO TooG Kal TdvTa doa héyerar Kal? CASS Oe UP fa) S45 \ 2 ov ef We 4 HN avTa tmapxew. tadra 8 éorly ey doors bmdpxet 7) 6 Adyos 7} Tovvoua ob atl Todro Td Taos, Kal pi) EvdexeTrar dNAGoAL xXwpis, @omep TO evkdv dvev Tod avOpemov evdexerar GAN ov TO OHAV dvev Tod Cwour dare ToUT@Y TO Th iv €lvar Kal BN Opiopos 2) ovK oT ovdevds 7}, ei €oTiV, GAAwS, KaOdTeEp elpryKa- mev. €or d@ dropia kal érépa wept adrav. el pev yap TO adrd 2 \ cy \ Td ce Ni SALE \ bY aN x €OTL oLuay pls Kal KotAn pls, TO adTd €oraL TO oLOoY Kal TO ~ > Sy / x \ baw iS > ~ \ X Kothov' «i O€ pj, Sia TO advvaTov elvat elmEity TO TYyLOV dvev TOO Tpdypatos ov éotl mdO0s Kad’ adrd (ort yap TO o1- NY , > (eye Xen By ? a > x XN \ fov KolAdrns ev pi), TO piva oiuny ecimety 7) ovK oT 7 dis AY eA ? / ey ey Me € \ ey € Ne eh TO avTo €orat elpnuevor, pls pis Kothyn () yap pls 7) oy) pls pis xothy ora), 610 Gromov To tmdpyew Tots Towovrous TO Th oo > \ wy >] c \ \ c \ lol x yy elvarr ef O& pj, els Greipoy ciow: pil yap pit oA err GAXo evecrat. dfdrov rolvey ori pdvyns Tis odclas early 6 Opiopes. el yap kal Tov dAAwy KaTnyopLov, avayKn éK Tpoc-

fe}

bg 7 om. AP doa E 10 heynrat ro EJ 13 O€ et rov EJT Asc.°: om. AP 1§ 6 dptopos AP 17 roi dvoww J 18 r@ om. E 19 ov6’ alt.] odd’ J 26 kat AP Ale Asc. : | kat 6 EJ 27 «i EJT Asc.: om. AP AI. adda ut vid. Al. 31 gore yap] kal gore EJT 33 pis pr... .34 KoiAn EJ Al. et (omisso pls 1. 34) T Asc. : otpy pis e¢ AP 35 pw A piri on AP: puns ef py J: pevds ei wy I ere om. AP 1031% 1 éora

E 19 ov6’ alt.] odd’ J 26 kat AP Ale Asc. : | kat 6 EJ 27 «i EJT Asc.: om. AP AI. adda ut vid. Al. 31 gore yap] kal gore EJT 33 pis pr... .34 KoiAn EJ Al. et (omisso pls 1. 34) T Asc. : otpy pis e¢ AP 35 pw A piri on AP: puns ef py J: pevds ei wy I ere om. AP 1031% 1 éora

A> povys EJT Al. Asc.® : pdvov A yp, E yp. J 6 om. J

tb or

30°

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

Oérews €ivat, olov Tob trovodt Kal wepittod: ov yap dvev apid- na a 7 pod, ove TO OAV dvev Coov (Td de ex TpoTberEws Eyw ev ots 4 ‘: \ 2S t ¢ 2 /, 2 X\ a ovpBatver dts TO abrd d€yew Honep ev Tovrois). i 5& TodTO > / IQOXr / y oe > fal an adndes, ovd€ ovvdvaopevwy EoTat, oloy apiOuod mepiTTod: lal / > GAAa avOaver Ott odK akpiBGs Aeyovrat of Adyo.. et 6 . a‘ / elol kal TovTwy 6por, iro. GAAov TpdTov eloly 7 KabameEp 2 4 fal / > \ M \ \ A , ey €hEXOn ToAAAXGs AeEKTEoy eElval TOY OpLTMoV Kal TO TL HV > eo €g\ x > \ yx = \ IQXr A ae. 2 L: eival, Bote Gd) pey ovdEVds CoTaL Sptopos OVdE TO Th HV Elvat > \ € / X a > rd « \ ? Ba 4 x , \ \ Spee tp xX €otly 6 dpiapos 6 Tod Ti Hv etvar Adyos, Kal TO Th HW elvar 7 , an ’ an SI) x. XN / \ , Ne re Movwv TOV ovoidy early 7) padtoTa Kal TPOTwS Kal ands, ojAov. , / e if > > + tal > ca ovotas oKeiw Exaotdv TE yap ovK aAAO doKel ElvaL THs Eavtod ovoias, kal TO Ti iv elvat A€yerar elvar H ExaoTov ovata. emt pev on T&v AEeyouévwvy KaTa ovpBeBnKos Sdgeev av ® e ct a €repov eivat, otoy AevKds avOpwmos Erepovy Kal TO AEVKO av- > > \ Opdr@ civar (ei yap 1rd adrd, Kal 7d dvOpdT@ elvar Kal TO AEvK> GvOpST Td gitd: TO abrd yap avOpwros Kal dev- lo \ Kos dvOpwros, os pacity, dote Kal TO AevKe avOpdrw Kab TO GvOpdér@: i ovK dvayKn Ooa KaTa ovpB_EBnKos elvat pdmo: 7) ok avayKn pB€Bn > / > XX / 3 > Tara, ov yap wcattws Ta akpa ylyverar Tavtas adr + U2 ~ , x F XX + 7 lows ye exeivo ddgeey dv ovpBaivew, Ta akpa yiyver@at TavTa Ta KaTa TvUBEBNKOs, olov TO AEvK® elvar Kat TO jov- ou doce 5& ob) emt O&@ Tov Kal’ atrd deyouévwr ap dvaykn tavro elvat, otov ef tives eloly ovolar ov erepat X\ r aes > vA X\ /, ed , ¢ \ \ ua elolv ovotar pnde picers erepar mpdrepat, olas daci ras > / > , , ‘ x ad ’ A + = A 4 id€as civat twes; el yap €otar Erepov adTo Td ayabdv Kai

43 mood codd. T Asc.: mocod Al.: adptiov ci. Bonitz, modAod Goebel 4 70 Opdv AP Asc.e: 6 rod Ondeos EJT héyouev ois Ab 7 NapBaver fecit E 12 6 pr. om. EJ Al Asc. 13 povov JAYT, ex pévey fecitE 17 reom.E 21 cat ro APAL: om. EJT Asc. 7o AP Al.: om. EJ Asc. 22 TO avro sup. lin. J 23 éore EJT Al. Asc.: etvar AP 70 JA», ex ro fecit E 24 10 ex To fecit E: ro J 25 ov yap om. A>? 26 7 AP d@yvom. AP -yevéoOar AP 27 ra APAL.: om. EJP Asc. povarko EJA®r Al. Asc.¢: eivat add. E*J sup. lin: eiva os add. E 29 ap’ INS Al. Asc. :-det EJT Asc.) 30 mpodrepat olas EJT Al : rpdrepov otoy A

5. 103173 — 6. 1031 26

A>? 26 7 AP d@yvom. AP -yevéoOar AP 27 ra APAL.: om. EJP Asc. povarko EJA®r Al. Asc.¢: eivat add. E*J sup. lin: eiva os add. E 29 ap’ INS Al. Asc. :-det EJT Asc.) 30 mpodrepat olas EJT Al : rpdrepov otoy A

5. 103173 — 6. 1031 26

a n > ~ ze} TO aya0e ecivat, Kal (Gov Kal 7d (8m, Kal TO dvTL Kal TO a » ov, €covrat GAdat TE ovoiar Kal dvoews Kal idéar Tapa Tas L on 5 ie Aeyomevas, kal mpdrepar ovolar exeivar, «i TO Ti qv elvar b) / n ovoia early. Kal ei pey amoAcAvpevar GAAHAWY, TOV pev b) of 4) ovK €oTar emuoTHN TA O ovK ora dvTa (A€yw O& TO amo- 7, rd If a ° lol DVN € / x > p) la AehvoOar ef pte TH Aya0G adirG imdpxe TO civar dyad , es Mare TOUT® TO elvat ayabdy): emoTHyn TE yap ExdoTov éoTw af > a n lot an érav TO Th Hy exeivm elvat yvOpev, Kal em ayaod Kal Tov 7 x oe Gov opolws exer, Hore i pnde TO ayad etvar dyaddy, ode Nay EN PENS NS SOUEN 4 16), € , aN ! of BS babs ‘ TO OVTL OV OvdE TO Evi Ev* Guotws Sé TayTa EoTW 7 oOvOeY TA Ti Wp etvar, Sor ei pnde TO dvTe dv, Ode TGV GAAwY OddEv.

yo \ € / e) 06 > > > 06: eae 4 BA ert @ pa tmapxe. aya@ civar, ok dyabdv. avayKyn apa a GC x 2 \ ‘ b) n > > \ ¥ bi év ecivat TO ayadov Kat ayab6 ecivar Kal Kaddv Kal Kadr@ eivat, (Kal) dca py Kar’ GAAO A€yerat, GAAG Ka” attra kal a “) a mp@ta: Kal yap rotro tkavov dv trapxn, Kav pr) 7 €ldn, lad ? \ > > lol paddrov 8 tows Kav 7 €ldn (Gua de dAov Kal bru elnep EEN Leds SS I A og / b) y \ € 4 eioly ai idéar olas Twés daocw, ovK gota. TO broKelpevov > 7 X tal > ovcia’ tatvras yap ovolas pev dvayKatoy civar, py Kal? c ff / x \ X / yy X\ / dmoKesevov dé EcovTar yap ara weOckw).—e€x Te dy TovTwY a , a st aN > X \ et TOV NOywV EV Kal Ta’TO Ov KaTa oUUPEBNKOS avTO EKacTOV

\ \ 2S a So Nn ee 8/2 o at KaL TO TL VY ELWAL, KAL OTL YE TO emloracOa, ExacToy TOUTO :

3 x ea) > > f va XN XX X yx

€oTl, TO Ti nV elvar enloracbal, Bote Kal KaTa THY EKOeoWw

° / 4 =

avaykn €v TL etvar Gppw (7rdo S€ Kata cvpBeByKos Aceyd-

frevov, olov TO povolKoy 2) AevKOV, Oia TO SiTTOY oHpalveLY

> a > >

ovk adnOés eimety os TadTo TO Th Hv civar Kal adTdor Kal @ , . y

yap © ovpBEBnxe AevKdv Kal TO cupBEeByKds, Bor ort

S c 2 ee x ae > Bl IN \ faa . \ Sy:

Mev @s TavTOV, €oTL O€ ws Ov Ta’TO TO TL HY Etvat Kal ado:

232 roJA, ex rafecitE xaialt. om. J TO dvTt Kal TO oy] dv (sup. lin.) rd dvr J b2 ovciar| kal ovcia AY et fort. Al, «i om. 3 ovoia AP AI. Asc.¢: ovoias EJT 6 re om. AP Ale

eotw orav APAl.: attn EJ: atrn cori T 7 eat exeivo AP yopev AP AL: om. EJT 8 roT Al. et fecit E: 7a JA Q ro ...70 JAI. et fecit BE: 76 ...7@ A> Asc. éorat ci. Bonitz 12 kat pr. AP Al.° Asc.e: xal rd EJ 13 «at Al! Joachim: om. codd.T xaé’ atra kai mpora AP Ale: mpara kai kaG? atta EJT Asc. 14 dy APAL.: éay EJ Asc.) imdpxovut vid. AP 7 eldn EJT Asc:

ein 7) AP 15 7 om. AP 17 dvaykaiov EJ Asc.®: dvdyxn Abr 20 roird AP Al.¢ Asc. et fecit E: rovrov JT 21 kat APAL: om. EJT 22 1 EJ Asc. et ut vid. Al.: om. A> 23 EJT Asc.¢: kai AP 25 ovpBeBnke EJ Al. Asc.: ovpBaiver

AP 7 eldn EJT Asc:

_Ab Nevkov om, AP

1031»

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

a x S > 6 , \ ial Xr Lad ° 6 , ry ’ T > , lal TO Mey yap avOpaTw Kal TO AEvK@ avOpdrw ov TavTd, TO mabe. d€ tadrd). dromov & dv gavein Kav ef tis Exdorw dvoua Oeiro TOv Ti iv. Elva eorar yap Kal Tap ekelvo

30 ddA, ofov TO Th qv civar inmw ti jv elvan [ine] Erepov. /, i id \ a b. » ot bay Pe: a

kairo. Ti KwAver Kal viv elvar evia evOds Ti Hv eivat, elmep

ovola TO Ti vy elvar; GAAG pHv ov pdvov Ev, GAA Kal 6 1032" Adyos 6 avros adtév, os dhdrov Kal éx Tov elpnuevwv' ov yap kara ovpBeBynkos ev TO évi eivar kal ev. ert ef GAO F. a \ €orat, els amreipoy elow: TO ev yap eorat Th iy etvat TOD Evos TO 6& 76 év, Hote kat em? exelvwy 6 adros Eotat Adyos. rt XS » SemN a vA % ? CLS ‘ , Ne a 5 wey ody emi TOY TPSTwV Kal Kad atta eyouevav TO ExaoTH =» aed \ 9 SON War 2 oJ lon € S eivat kat €xacrov TO adrd Kal éy earl, dpAovr of 5& codioTt- Kol €deyxor mpos THY O€ow tatrnv davepov OTL TH adTn YX PD } 7 p ™ HI ) \ / a» AvovTat AVoeL Kal ef TadTd SwKpatrns Kat Lwxparer e€ivate ovdev yap diadeper ore €€ Gv epwrnoeey av Tis ovTe e€ Ov

id 2 vA lot XS a BN oS o 5) EN \ n 10 Avwv ETLTUXOL. TOS MEV OVY TO TL VY ELWAL TAVTOVY KAL TWS

1°)

ov TavTov ExdoTo, elpnrat Tév 8& ytyvopevwv Tra pev toe ylyverar Ta 6€7

/ BS S aN by L \ \ , Leg A Texyn Ta S€ amd Tadroudrov, TdvTa O& TA yryvdueva tmd / 4 Xo of: x / = SS ‘ t 2 Te TiWos ylyvetat Kal €k Twos Kal Tir TO dé TL AEyw Kab Cy , BN SS , BD \ xX \ x 4 © ExdoTnVY KaTnyopiav: 1) yap Tdd€ 7) TOTOY 7) ToLOY 7H Tov. ab

~ or

Ss , € ‘ ‘ ea / P we € 2 d& yeverers at pey pvowxal atrat elow ov 7 yeveois Kk / ie. 2 \ 23 e 7 ay i cf 3 XS pioeds eotw, TOO e€ ob ylyverat, iy A€yopev VAnv, TO d€ e a x dp’ of Tév ioe: TL ovT@y, TO Se Tl AvOpwros 7) uTov XN a 7 GAO TL TOY ToLovTwY, & 1) pddtoTa A€yowev ovoias elvat 20-_dmavra d& Ta yryvdpeva 1) p¥oe 7) Texvy exer DAnv: bv- YEYE oes ] TEXKDTIREX 7 A > \ X lal a > varov yap kal elvar Kat py) elvas exacroy avTay, TodTo 6 early 7) ev Exdotw TAn—Kaddrov de kal e€ ob pois Kal Kad a oe a o~ d pvors (7d yap yryvopevoy exer pvow, otov urdv 7 Gov)

b27 70 Al. to alt. EJT Asc.¢ : 76 AP Al. 29 Ocitro EJ Al. Asc. : riOetro AP 30 otoy A et fort. Al.: om. EJP Asc.e rd Tet fecit E immo JA» Al. Asc.°: inm@ aire T: 16 yap E sed yap postea additum ti...inm@ om. J immo codd. T Al: secl. Bonitz 1032°2 kai om, AP 3 Tod évos] ro evi etvae EJT 4 6 adros €orat EJ Asc.°: gora 6 adros APT 6 kai alt. om. AP 8 «i] ets AP Sexpare: EJT Al. Asc. : S@xpatny AP Q épern- Geis AP: éepwrndein Asc.& 12 dé om, AP ywopevov J 15 moody EJT Al. Asc. : roadvde AP 16 votkal airai secl. Bywater 18 ri] 16 EJ 22 70m. APAsc, évom, E xa@’ secl, Cannan

Gy 103027 7. 1032) 19

om. AP 8 «i] ets AP Sexpare: EJT Al. Asc. : S@xpatny AP Q épern- Geis AP: éepwrndein Asc.& 12 dé om, AP ywopevov J 15 moody EJT Al. Asc. : roadvde AP 16 votkal airai secl. Bywater 18 ri] 16 EJ 22 70m. APAsc, évom, E xa@’ secl, Cannan

Gy 103027 7. 1032) 19

Kal tp ov Kata TO e€ldos eyouern iors 1) Suoesdys (atirn d¢ év GAA) dvOpwros yap avOpwTov yervg:—otro pev 25 » xX , s S 4 € > »¥ ovy ylyverar Ta ylyvopeva dia THY ddow, ai 8 adda ye- Tal BN véwets A€yovTar Toincels. Tacat de eloly af Tomoers 7 amd y AS LRN t ery 90 TN , , t TEXYNS 1) ATO Svvawews 7 ATO SLavoias. TovTwY S€ TIVES yiyvovrar kat amd ravrowdtrov kal dmo ttxns TapamAn- glows womep ev Tols and ptoews yryvouevois: evia yap 30 Kakel TavTa Kal ek omepyaros ylyverar kal dvev onép- paros. ep uev ody TovTwy torepov emiocKemréov, amd TéxvNs 7. Vv \ > a a ™ / A d& yiyverar Sowv 7d cidos ev TH Wryh (eldos BF A€yw 7d 1032» Tl Wp elvar Exdorov Kal Thy mporny odciav) Kal yap Tdv évay- tlav tTpdmov TiWad TO adTo Eidos: THs yap oTepnoews ovoia 7 ovola n dyrikeevn, olov byleia vdcov, éxelyns yap anovola s s € ea Seg C35 a a Y} Wis fae! i véoos, ) Se dylea 6 ev TH ux Adyos Kal H ém- ua 7 S Nag es BS / A 2 SS \ oTnpn. ylyverar O€ TO VyLes vonaaVTOS oUTMs* ETELO7 TOOL € > > € S x \ 3 lA eo c byleva, dvdykn «i dyes Cora Todi tmdpa, ofov sya-

horynta, ef 5€ TodTO, Oepydrnra: Kal otrws del voel, ws dv

b) , ’ an A LAM 4 x a b> RA ayayn els TobTo 0 avros dvvaTar EoxaTov Tovey. elra 7d

c >] \ 4 A / ta) AS BAN: \ id vA

i Gd tobvrov Kiynows Toinois Kadelrar, 7 emt TO Bytaivery. 10 a / , \ N coy ND) € 7 y

wore cup Balver tpdmov Twa THY vyleay e€ Hyretas ylyverdat

\ X\ es, 2 ee a BA es ‘ af A 1 kal ti olxiay e€ oikias, Tis avev tAns THY exovoay tAnv nH yap larpuxn éote kal % olkodousKn TO eldos Tis tytelas kal THs oiklas, A€yw dé odolav dvev tAns TO Ti HY etvar.

Tév 3) yeverewr kal Kiwhoewy f ev vdnows Kadeiras h dé toto, 7 pev amd THs apxis Kal tod eldovs vonos » 8 amd Tod Tehevtalov Ths vonoews Toinots. Spuoiws b& Kal Tov drwy toy peragdy Exacrov ylyverar. A€yw 8 ofoy el tyia- 5 an / c Lge - » > ‘ Nee Lal / vel, deo Gv opadrvvOjva. ti ody earl TO OuadvvOjvat; Todi,

= on

497 i) EJ Asc.c: om. APT: ai Joachim 28 ao alt, om. EJ Asc.¢ 30 awd APAI.;: trod EJ Asc. = 2 exdorov EJT Asc.°: éxdor@ AP 3-4 ovola 7 ovoia 7 Al.: ovcia 7 rH ovaia A” (sed rit expunctum) EJT: 77 otcia 7 yp. E 4 drovoia Al.: amovcia dnhovrat EJT Asc. 5-6 kal ev 77 emortnay ET 6 d¢ AP Asc, : 6) EJT Al. 7 écta om. AP 9 tovro.... dtvarat EJT Ase. : 70 avrd Suvacbat ro AP: 76 aitos SivacGa 76 Cannan II typ bylevay e& vyreias AP Al, Asc.¢: e& tysetas thy bylecay EJT 13 7) alt, EJ Asc.?: om. AP 14 oikias JA*T Al. Asc.©: oikodopias E 15 6) Bywater: de codd. I 17 trav AP ALS: ent tov EJT et fort. Asc. 18 byaive: T 19~dcor av] Set EJT Asc? et fort. Al.

we on

1033"

“on

TQN META TA &YSIKA Z

{

AP 14 oikias JA*T Al. Asc.©: oikodopias E 15 6) Bywater: de codd. I 17 trav AP ALS: ent tov EJT et fort. Asc. 18 byaive: T 19~dcor av] Set EJT Asc? et fort. Al.

we on

1033"

“on

TQN META TA &YSIKA Z

{

robro 0 éorat el OepuavOnoerar. Todro de rl eor1; Todi. bmdp- \ S\ J . cat be no 29 oA Ere) \ Dyy a xee be Tod Svvdwer’ Todro dé 7dn ew adrG. 1d di} ToLody \ 4 ¥ € / a « - \ pee cal S0ev adpyerar 7 Klynois Tod dyiaivew, dv pev amd Téxyys, TO €ldds ert. TO. ev TH Woyxh, edv 8 amd radro EXS S i Voxi, - , , a tal ¥ a a A parov, ard TovTov 6 Tore TOU ToLEty apyeL TO ToLodvTL amo Téxyns, eomep Kal ev r@ larpedew tows ard tod Ocpuatvew * b) / “ \ tal lol 7 € / Yd c ef 7 dpyxy (rodro 8& wovel TH Tphper) 7) Oepudrns rolvyy H ev ral , BN t a € , \ ¢ / betes a TO gwuart 7) pépos THs bytelas 7) Emeral TL avrf rowdrov a an) f cel € x‘ \ , a ? & ore pepos tis vyvelas, 1) did mAEWdvar: Todro 8 ecya- Tov éoTl, TO ToLody TO pépos THs vyrelas,—Kal THs olklas (ofov of Aldor) Kal TGv ddrAAwv: Hore, KaOdwep €yerar, adv- vatov yevérbar el ndtv mpotmapyor. Stu wev ody Te pepos e& dvdywns brdpEer avepdv: » yap An pépos (evuTdp- xee yap Kal ylyverat atrn). GN dpa kal tov ev TO Adyw; duhorépws SY A€yosev TOs Xadkods KUKAOUS Th elo, \ \ a7 / ic4 / 2X \ aN iA fal kat rip vAnv A€yovTes Ort XadKds, Kal TO eldos OTL oXTMA , ‘ a / I) SS / > ‘A a /, ¢ ‘\ ToWLde, Kal TOTO éoTL TO yevos els 6 TpGrov TiMerar. 6 d) Xadrkods KUKAos Exet ev TO Ady Thv BAynv.i—eE ob FE ws 4 / ¥ / 4 / > 2 a > ’ vAns ylyveTar Evia AeyeTal, OTaV yevyntal, OUK EKelvo GAN éxelvivov, olov 6 dvdpids od ALOos GAAA ALOwos, 6 SF dvOpw- c c / > / bi tal >] Lad y¥ _ ig / tos 6 byiaiver od r€yerat exeivo €€ ob alriov d& Sri ylyve- Tat €k THs oTEepjrews Kal TOD roKkepevov, 0 A€youev THY BAnv (otov Kal 6 avOpwros Kal 6 Kdyvov ylyverar dyus), Maddov pévtoe A€yerar ylyverOar ex Ths cTEpHoews, oloy ex « \ Xx b) > , \ / \ ea x > Kduvovtos byujs 7) e€ dvOpdrov, 510 Kauvev pev 6 vyujs ov A€yerat, dvOpwros d€, Kat 6 dvOpwros byujs' Gv 8 h or€épyors

b20 ti om. A> Asc.¢ 21 rodt AY? yo, EJT Al. : r@dt EAP Asc. 22 ro AP 24 6 wore] rep Al.°, ci. Bonitz apxi) rst Al.° et ut vid. Al. 26 towvy EJ Asc.l: ody AP 7 om. Ab 27 jvalt....28 byetas EJT Al. Asc.: om. AP 28 eoyarov eott] €oyaroy EJP Al.&: éeariv éoyarov Asc.° 29 7d pepos AP Al. et ut vid. Asc. : kal rd otras pépos eort EJT: an 10 peéepos Kal 7d ovras Képos?: Kat adré mes pépos ear Ci. Bonitz, kal 1d otras pépos Shute, kal 7d otras pépos early BAn Christ, kadro ovrws pépos eori Bullinger

31 re APAIL, Asc.: 7d EJT 1033°1 dpa Asc.i: apa codd. I 2 5) Bullinger; Sé€ codd. 1: ye i xadkovs AP yp, ET Al. Asc. : moddovs EJ 3 ry] ei ryy A: of rhv Ab? 4 kat... riOera an spuria? 5 xadkds AP ev] kal ev fort. Al, de Ejr All; 8) Ab 7 €xetvov J 6 om, EJ AiOos EJT Al. : AiBor Ab 8 60m, A? Asc. Il yiyvecOa post orepjoews EJ

12 60m, A? Asc.° 13 6 om. rece. Asc.°

7. 10325 20 — 8. 1033P 10

Asc. : moddovs EJ 3 ry] ei ryy A: of rhv Ab? 4 kat... riOera an spuria? 5 xadkds AP ev] kal ev fort. Al, de Ejr All; 8) Ab 7 €xetvov J 6 om, EJ AiOos EJT Al. : AiBor Ab 8 60m, A? Asc. Il yiyvecOa post orepjoews EJ

12 60m, A? Asc.° 13 6 om. rece. Asc.°

7. 10325 20 — 8. 1033P 10

v \ . , oe 3 na / {? fal x adydos Kal avevupos, olov ev YaAK@ oxIpatos droiovody 7) ev tAOols Kal EVdols oikias, €x TovTwY SoKel yiyverOat ws 2 oa 3 A Ns et >> 2 Cae en a 2 cal > €xel €x Kdpvovtos 10 domep ovd® exe? €€ ov Todro, éxeivo ov A€yerat, govd evradda 6 avipias EdAov, GAAQ Tapdyerar &bdwos, od Ebdov, Kal yadxots GAN od xaAkés, Kal ALOwwos GAN ov diOos, Kal 7 oixla tAWOivn GAN od TALvOoL, eel OddE x @s ex &dov ylyverar avipids 7 ex TAlyOwy oikia, édy Tis 20 emiBrérn opddpa, ovk av amd@s etreev, bid TO Sely pera- BddXovtos ylyverOar e€ ob, GAN ody trouevovtos. bid pev ody TodTo ovTws A€yeTat. 8 Emel 8& tnd Twds Te yhyverar Td yryvopevor (Totro be a v eyo Sev % Gpxh Ths yevéoeds eott) Kal Ex Tivos (oTw de 25 ae ft cal > mS A ¥ \ , a 4 M7 oTEpnols ToOUTO GAN’ H YAH’ 7]5n yap SidpioTar dy Tpd- Ley , \ \ 7 lay > > x xX a tov Tobro Aéyouev) Kal tl ylyverat (rotro 8 early 7) cdaipa x 7 N oY ¥ Eas ¥ ef o> Soe e , 2) KUKAOS 7) 6 TL érvye TGV GAAwr), GoTEp Ode TO droKel-

a on

Lal \ , of IOr X ~ > XN fevoy Tolet, TOV XaAKdV, OUTws oVde THY oaipay, Et pi) Kara oupyBeBynkos Ore 7 yXaArKh odaipa chaipd éortw 30 exelyny S& Toret. TO yap Téde TL TOLEty ex Tod bAws roKeEL- / , a 3 ‘é ist > A 3 ni x vA Mévovu TOE TL TOLEY EoTiv (Acyw 5 GTL TOY XadKdv oTpoyyv- a xX > na doy To.ely Eotiv od TO oTpoyyvAov 7 TiVY Thaipay Tovety GAN’ a , X =p a > ” > > tal Mv érepoy tt, olov TO €idos Totro év GANw: ei yap Tovel, x x 7 ” a AS c / e o Twos ay ToLoin adAov, TOTO yap UTEKELTO* oloy ToLEt XaA- 1033” nm ral an XX cA ig 3 ta x 3 , Khv odatpay, rovto o€ ottws OTL EK ToVvdi, 6 €oTL XaAkds, ‘\ an > tal > > ‘ ~ a > , Neal Todl movet, 6 €ote odaipa): ei ody Kal Toto wove? adtd, dHAov ért @oattws Tooer, Kal Badvodyra ai yevéoets eis dret- \ ¥ o” IO \ eae / X val pov. avepov dpa Sri ovde TO Eidos, 7) bTLdHATOTE xpr Kadetv a n / an THY év TH alcOynTS poppiy, od ylyverat, ovd’ Eat adrod yeve- aus, ovde 7d Th iv elvar (rodro yap éorw 6 éy GAdw yiyverat mA. METS ces, Sa | / x» rs A TSS rod bm Téxvns 7) tnd Ptoews 7) Svvduews). TO SF YaAKiv opaipay civar more> Tort yap é€x yxadKod Kal odalpas:

eis Todl yap TO €idos Tole, Kal ott TodTO odaipa xaAkij. 10 214 ev] exJ 1p E xadkod yp. E drat ovv fecit E 17 mpod- yera T ov &vdov secl. Christ 21 ofddpa eniBhern Au Fico: etre AP: ctrore E: ein Al. Asc.¢ 27 Ti Al. Bonitz: 6 codd.T 31 moetv om. AP 32 te AP AL: om. Er 33 ovde J Dr moet APAL: rovety EJT 3 Todl EJ Asc.¢: 7éd¢ AP 6] drt AP 5 ovde APAL: odre EJ 6 ov om. AP et fort. Al. 7 eivat] eivat Tovrea Ejr: : elvat TodTO Al. 8 4 pr. EJT Asc.¢: om. A® Q kai opaipas EJT Al. Asc.¢: opaipay AP 10 10] rodi ro EJT

1034*

TQN META TA ®Y3IKA Z

Er 33 ovde J Dr moet APAL: rovety EJT 3 Todl EJ Asc.¢: 7éd¢ AP 6] drt AP 5 ovde APAL: odre EJ 6 ov om. AP et fort. Al. 7 eivat] eivat Tovrea Ejr: : elvat TodTO Al. 8 4 pr. EJT Asc.¢: om. A® Q kai opaipas EJT Al. Asc.¢: opaipay AP 10 10] rodi ro EJT

1034*

TQN META TA ®Y3IKA Z

A Vr , i) ig ney. / ow \ ” Tod b€ oaipa eivar GAws Ef EoTaL yeveois, Ek TIVOS TL EoTAL. NA ss \ Cy a 8, \ 2 \ @ s} denoer yap Swaiperov evar det TO yryvdpevov, Kal Elvat TO wey Tdde TO 5€ TOdE, A€yw O Sri TO peyv VAny TO bE Eidos. ei 64 eat odaipa TO ek TOB pecov oyHpa toov, TovToU TO Mev a) Knee A a an A 2 > ye \ ey te iN 4 év @ €oTat 0 Toei, TO O ev ExEiv@, TO bE Anav TO yeyovds, ofoyv 7) XaAKh odaipa. davepov dy eK TGv ecipnuevay Ort \ € > Rae a , mene) Caan / TO peyv os eldos 7 ovola AEyowevoy ov ylyveral, 7 5€ TvVOAOS ) Kara tavrny Xeyouern ylyverat, kat Ori ev mavtl TO / e/ 4 \ \ bs 4 \ SS 4 iy yevvopevy vAn eveoti, Kal €or. TO wey Tdd€ TO 5é Tdde.—TOTE- cos Da cal SS A Xx Beas: x x 7 pov ovy €or. Tis odhaipa mapa Tacde 7 olkia mapa Tas TAly- 6 iJ a bd? & Re A 2 of ms 48 2 ~ \ lovs; 7 ovd ay more éylyvEToO, El OUTWS VY, TOOE TL, AAAG TO rodvde onpualver, Tdd€e 5é Kal piopevoy ovK eoTLV, GAA TOLEL \ 3 na 4 A ov lol x” i Kat yevva éx rodde roidvde, kal bray yevvnOy, Eot. Tdd€ Xv roldvoe; TO dé Grav Tdde, KadAlas 7) Swxparns, eoriy domep yh ohaipa » xadrKh 70%, 6 8 avOpwros Kal rd Cov Somep cal Led ] lal VE! chatpa Xxadki OdAws. davepov apa ori 7 Tov €ldéy airta, c pla 7 4 x y > ae BY ‘ Xx > os eidOacl Ties A€yew Ta Eldy, El EoTW ATTA Tapa Ta Kad éxaota, mpds ye Tas yeveres Kal Tas ovolas odvdev ypnotyn’ 393 a / n ’ / ’ € / 9 oN XS '£ ovd ay elev dud ye Tatra ovoiat kal’ atrds. emi pev dy Twov Kal pavepov bri TO yevvGy ToLodroy pev oloy TO yevve- td J ol > J, Or a lal >) lal 3 > n Mevov, Ov PEvTOL TO avTO ye, OVdE EV TH AplOuG AAA TO wy a 3 cad = A nS BY a eldel, oloy ev Tols vorKois—AdvOpwros yap avOpwrov yervad— av py Te mapa tow yeévnrat, ofov itmmos jylovov (Kat a S ¢ i a és oN mi y PMT ee] isd \ ¥ Tavta d€ o-oimss 0 yap av Kowov ein ed Immov Kal ovov > b) /, \ = 4 / » > x BA wy ovK @VdpacTal, TO eyyvTaTra yevos, eln 0 av dydw tows, @ c , La SY ig AX ne / ” otov Hulovos): wate havepov Sri ovOev det as Tapdderypya. €idos katackevacew (udducra yap av ev rovrois éme(ntodyto: Mee x Asc.¢: 4) os EJTAI.¢ auvodos Jaeger: svvodos codd, 18 mavti AP Al.¢: davri EJ Asc.° 19 yevoneva AY: yivopéevo Al. Asc.e éveors EJT Al.® :Réo7u AP Asc.¢ 20 m7 J 8 Ttdde E 21 dyom.T ddda7o APA: GAN 6rt EY: Xo 1 J 22 d€ om. Ab 28 re EJ Asc. ras alt. om. EJ xpyoa EJT AL. 29 pev On] pi On AP: O€T 30 Kat om. APT 31 ada} ayn’ év ED: adn’ ev J 1034° 4 ai om. AP

8. 1033511 — 9. 1034? 33

TO Todvde eldos év ralode rats capél Kal darois, Kaddtas \ A ‘ of S Ss ‘ ee ee LA kal Swxparns: kal e€repov pev did tiv Ornv (érépa yap),

ras alt. om. EJ xpyoa EJT AL. 29 pev On] pi On AP: O€T 30 Kat om. APT 31 ada} ayn’ év ED: adn’ ev J 1034° 4 ai om. AP

8. 1033511 — 9. 1034? 33

TO Todvde eldos év ralode rats capél Kal darois, Kaddtas \ A ‘ of S Ss ‘ ee ee LA kal Swxparns: kal e€repov pev did tiv Ornv (érépa yap),

RY x na o4 ‘ X » TavTo b& TO elder (4Touoy yap TO €idos). 7A. / ? a X\ - ~ XS 7 \ / mopnoee 0 Gy tis dia Th Ta pev ylyveTaL Kal TEexVN Nt od \ > ” € / X ’ + eee x, kal amd ravToudrov, oloy tyleva, Ta 8 ov, ofov olkia. atriov n x c Sm cel / a ny a dé bru TOY pev 7 DAN H Apxovoa THs yevéocews ev TO ToLely Kat ylyvecOat te tT&v amd. Téxvys, ev bmdapxes TL Mépos Tod mpayyatos,—i pev Tovatrn eorly ola kivetcba dp adbris 7 & ov, kal ravrns fH pev wd) ofa Te SbF AdvvaTos* moAAA yap dvvara pev th avtrdv kweloOa. ddrX ody wdl, ofoy 2 14 4 bo) re 4 € 7, 3 tA épxjoacba. scowv oty rorattyn 7 VAy, oloy ot AlOo1, advva- Tov wdt KwnyOjvar ef py tw GAAov, wdl pévTor val—Kal Td

_ or

a >s a x \ > x a XN a mop. 1a Todro Ta pev odK éoTat Gvev Tod ExovTos Ti TEXVNV |

~ Noe (Sees x tA I a b 2 , Ta 88 €orauy bro yap TovTwv KwyOyjceTar TOY ovK eydvTwY S D a S t Cera (Wal tenes : Ty TéexvnV, KWwetcOa. de dSvvayevmv atTav va GdAdAwv > pee] BS t Xx 3 fe Lal bd 2 lal ovk éxdvTmy Thy Téxvnv 7} ex pépovs. Shrov 8 ek Tav elpnuevov Kal Or. Tpdmoy TWA TavTa ylyverar e€ Suwvdtpou, iA SS / BY > , c , € : 2 2 @onep Ta oer, 1) ex pepovs Suwvtpov (olov 7 olkia e& oiklas, } Umd yoo 1 yap Téxvn TO e€ldos) [7 ek pépovs] 7) » 7) AYRE TE Ke 7 ere i] / ‘\ \ \ €xovTds TL pepos,—eay pr) Kata ovpB_eBnKos ylyvnta To yap alrioyv tod movety mpOtov Ka abrd pépos. Oepydrns yap i éy TH Kuwnoe. Ocpudrnta ev TH odpate énolnoevr atry SE \ EN Say x I AD val bey , a d& éorily 7) dylea 7) mépos, 7) Akodovde? adrh pépos Te THs c r¢ x pe e © A y ‘ / o [4 2 a. tylelas 7 adri 7H bylevar 810 Kai A€yerar Toveiv, Ori exeivo

n AN Les cae) tal \ / , La movel [riv bylevav] 6 dkodrovde? Kal cvp,BEByxe [Oeppdrns]. Sore, @onmep ev Tols ovddoyiopots, TavTwv apyn 7) otola’ ex yap

a {te} ¢ > > a x € , Tob Ti é€orw ot avddoyiopol eiow, evratda dé al yeveoes. c a \ \ - d /, wy \ aS dpotws b&€ Kal Ta poe, ocvvicTdpera TovTols exe. TO MeV

88 ravra AP Q kal réxvn EJT Al. Asc. : om, AP II 7 alt. om. AP 14 &de AP 15 Owara T wot EJ Al. : de AP 16 ddvvaror AP 17 &de AP dj} iJ pévrou vai—xal] pévr’ eivat kal AP: pevro xeveirar Apelt 20 Thy APAI. Asc.®: ev rip Ejr kweioOar ... 21 réxynv om. Al.: an secludenda? tmn’] 4 tr’ ET 21 7) €k wépovs an secludenda? *22 mavra APAIL.: dravta EJ Asc. 23 7)... dpovipov EJATAsc.¢;: sec]. Christ 24 7 Robin: # codd. T: # ci. Schwegler, ris Bonitz 7) &k oe seclusi: pépovs om. AP: i) ek pépous dpavdpou Christ jom.A 25 rt EJY Al.e Asc.e: +d AP 26 airiov om, AP 28 i) pr. AP Asc.c: 7 Al.: fro. EJ 7 tert. codd. Al. Asc.®:; 7 Jaeger 29 arn vyleia J 30 Thy vyleav om. Al., secludenda ci. Bonitz Gepporns secl. Jaeger: 7 Oepydrns fecit E; 7 byleva ci. Bonitz 33 6€ APAL Ascl: 67 EJT

2678-2 Cc

&» wu

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

AP Asc.c: 7 Al.: fro. EJ 7 tert. codd. Al. Asc.®:; 7 Jaeger 29 arn vyleia J 30 Thy vyleav om. Al., secludenda ci. Bonitz Gepporns secl. Jaeger: 7 Oepydrns fecit E; 7 byleva ci. Bonitz 33 6€ APAL Ascl: 67 EJT

2678-2 Cc

&» wu

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

a ,

yap onéppa tovel womep TA and Téxvns (exer yap Svva-

> @ , , >

1034» wer 70 eldos, Kal ad’ of 76 omEeppa, eoTt THs uovypZov—OoDv

lal an \

yap mavra otrw del Cyreiv ws e& avOpdrov avOpwros: Kal

> >

yap yuvn e& avdpéds—eay pH mpwpa Hr 810 Hylovos ovK

2& jidvov)' 80a S& amd radroudtov womep exel ylyve-

5 Tal, dcwv 4% bAn Svvara Kal tp adbris KweioOar Tadrqy

lal 4 a /

Ty Konow hv TO onéppa Kwet? bowv S& yy, Tadra adv- Xx lol

vata ylyverOat GAdws ws 7) e€ adrdv.—od pdvov dé Tepl

Ths ovolas 6 Adyos SnAol Td pr) ylyverOa 7d €idos, adda

mept mavrwv duolws Tv TpaTwY KoWds 6 Adyos, oloy ToT

10 T0LoD Kal TOY GAAwY KaTnyopiOv. ylyverar yap GoTEp 7 xarkh oaipa ddAX od odaipa odd yXadxds, kal ént

an 3 4. boas \ a oe t x A XaArKod, ef ylyverar (del yap del mpovmdpxew thy Anv kal TO €ldos), otrws Kal éml rod Ti éoru Kal em Tod ToLOd Kal mocod Kal tév GdAwy duolws KaTnyopidv: od yap ylyverat

15 TO molv GAAA TO ToLdy EvAoV, ode TO TOTdY GAAG TO TO-

x TaN cad a cov &bdov 7) Gov. GAN iBioy THs odolas éx TovTwy aBelv éorw Ort dvayKatoy mpovmdpxew Erépay odolayv evTedexela

a a ~ ~ lal xX odeay 7) motel, olov CGov ei ylyverar (Gov: Toy 8 7) moody

RN ovK dvdykn GdAN.7) Suvdyer povov.

30 Emel 88 6 dpiopds Adyos eori, Tas S&F Adyos pepyn EXEL, c Nak 4 \ \ (ot \ N t a / x as d@ 6 Adyos Tpos TO Tpayya, Kal TO pépos TOD Adyou mpos TO pépos TOD mpdyparos dyotws exer, Amopeirar dn méTEpov det tov TOV pepdv Adyor evuTTapyew ev TO TOd brov Adyw Xx + D9) Se, S ~ 7. Ses F. ae 2 > »* Aces 7) ov. em evioy pev yap patvovrat évovres éviay 8 ov. Tod perv

N iA ¢ , > Bs S n PA € * na

25 yap KUKAov 6 Adyos odK exe TOY TOY TuNnaT@V, 6 OF Tis

a ) nN a 7 7 a We ce ovdAaBys Exel TOV TGV oTOLXElwY' Kalror dialpEetraL Kal O KUKAos els TA TunuaTa Bomep kal 7» ovddAaBy els Ta oTOL- xela. ere 8& ef mpdrepa Ta pépy Tod bdrov, Tis be dpOAs 7 434 ro E duvdper EJT Al. Asc. : dvvapuv AP bt mos AY”? EJY Al. Asc.: mpaoras A>? 3 éay...7 ante 010... 4 Hptdvov

transposui : sic fort. leg. Al.: post 8:0 .. . yuedvou codd. TAsc.: omnia haec verbasecl. Jaeger ¢éav APAl.Asc.: GdX eay EJT 5 Stvarac

om. AP 12 «/ om. fort. Al. dei] «i AP 13 ovTws om. py 17 dvayxaiov AY Al.: avayxn EJT Asc.¢ érépav A Al, Asc.®: del érépav EJT 18 ef yiyverar (Gov EJ Asc.: om. APT 19 GAX’ 7}] d\da AP AI, Asc. 20 6 AP Asc.le¢: om. E 21 Tov ...22 pépos om. AP 24 7) ov EJT Al. Asc.e: om. A em’ AYT Ale: om. EJ Asc. évovtos J: évdvta recc. em eéviov Tec.

25 rav] rov Ab® 26 kairo. EJT Asc.®: kairor cat A 28 apédrepa EY Al. Asc.l¢: mpdrepov JA» Ta pepn EJT Al. Asc,le : To pepos AP

20 6 AP Asc.le¢: om. E 21 Tov ...22 pépos om. AP 24 7) ov EJT Al. Asc.e: om. A em’ AYT Ale: om. EJ Asc. évovtos J: évdvta recc. em eéviov Tec.

25 rav] rov Ab® 26 kairo. EJT Asc.®: kairor cat A 28 apédrepa EY Al. Asc.l¢: mpdrepov JA» Ta pepn EJT Al. Asc,le : To pepos AP

9. 1034 34 — 10. 1035 23

ral a / X ray d€eia pepos Kal 6 ddkTvAOs TOD (sov, Mpdrepoy av ein 7 dela Tis dpOAs Kal 6 daxrvdos Tod dvOpdmov. doKe? O exeiva elvar 30 , ny re XX / b) > 4 \ cal *%. mpotepar TH Adyw yap heyovta e€ exelvwv, Kal TO elvac Xx fol de dvev GdAnA@Y TpdTepa.—i ToANaXGs Aé€yeTaL TO péEpos, Gv els wey Tpdmos TO peTpody Kata TO ToTdv—aAAA ToOdTO \ > s > &® Se + eee g c a a / pev adetoOw: e& dv 5% } odoia ws pEepSy, TOTO oKETTEoV. el oty éotl TO pev An 7d de cidos Td 8 ex TovTwY, Kal 1035% > 4 ef vA \ x _ \ Ae 2. 4 v “S c ovola | te VAN Kal TO efdos Kal TO €k ToUTwY, EoTL pev Os kal 7 UAn pépos twos AEyerat, eot. 8 as ov, GAN e& dv c a 4 a a id > Ba ,

6 Tod eldous Adyos. oloy Tis ev KoWWdTHTOS OK EaTL pEpos n odp& (atrn yap 7 tAn ef is ylyvera), tis d& oynd- 5 a /

TnTOS pepos* Kal TOD pev cvvddov avdpidvTos p€pos 6 xad- \ a ~ € y D 5) J ¥ ! Eg kos TOD 8 ws eldous Aeyouevov dvdpidvros ov (AeKTéov yap

TO eldos Kal 1) eldos exer Exacrov, Td 8 tALKOV ovdéTOTE xa’ atrd Aexréov) 81d 6 pev Tod KUKAOV Adyos ovK exeEL Tov TOV Tpnuatar, 6 de THs TVAAABAS exeL TOV TOV oTOLXElwWY" 10 Ta pev yap oToixela TOO Adyou pépy Tod eldovs Kal ody TAN,

= SS 4 A ¥ c vA > >| e “| f Ta O€ TuNMaTa ovUTwS pepn ws VAN Eh As Emylyveral 2 , A o y X\ € \ 4 b) 7x ne €yyvTépw pevtor Tod eldovs 7) 6 xadkos bray ev XaArKG 7) oTpoyyvddrns eyyevytat. eat. d ws ovde TA oTOLXEla TATA Tis ovddAaBhs ev TO Adyw evéora, ofov Tadl Ta KHpwa 15 UI U] : Y¢ 3 MPa 15 x x a 2/ x Sc \ ca) , a“

7 Ta ev TO aeper 7dn yap Kal Tadra pepos THs ovdAda-

Lay ,

Bis os trAn aicOynrH. Kal yap 7) ypapypi) ovK ed durarpov-

/ > x ne, / Aye) > Ne) 5 wevn eis Ta Huton POetperat, 7) 6 GvOpwros «cis TA dora kal vedpa kal odpxas, dua Todro Kal eloly ék TovTwy otrws « wv n > 2 na >) > « > vA \ cal XS @s dvray THs ovoias pepGv, GAN os e€ BAns, Kal Tod pev 20

, t no» N Keea ele , > ga) ee , 299 ovvddov: Mépn, TOD eidous 5€ Kal ov 0 AOyos ovKETL’ SLdTEp Ovd év Tots Adyos. TO wey ody eveoTa 6 TdV ToLO’TwY pEpOY Adyos, TH F od Sel evelvar; Av jut) 7} TOD cvveAnppévovs

b29 rod... 30 Saxrvdosom. APT = 33 rocotv AP ~—- 10352 4 pépos

n odp& EJT Asc.¢: 7 wap pépos AP 5 7 alt. om. AP ag’ E 6 pepos AP AI. Asc.e: pépos re EJT ody ddov J 10 éyeu om. EJ’ II as ovx vAn yp. E 12 ovtws| Tovtwy ovtas EJ : rovrov ovrasT: ovre Asc.® jis Jaeger: ois codd. Asc. 14 mavra EJ Asc.®: admarra AP 15 éveore T 19 eloty EJP AIL!: éxeiv’ A> 21 od] ovdev J: Kai AY 22 T@ Scripsi: ray codd. ovvomA?: odyotk EE tay... 23 éveivar] dSudmep rois pev evéorat 6 Trav TovovTay pep@v Adyos, Tois S ov Set eveivac yp. E 23 7@ scripsi: roy EJT: rois AP et fort. Al. ay... cvver\nppévou

secl, Jaeger 7) et 24 ws om, AP C2

ovvomA?: odyotk EE tay... 23 éveivar] dSudmep rois pev evéorat 6 Trav TovovTay pep@v Adyos, Tois S ov Set eveivac yp. E 23 7@ scripsi: roy EJT: rois AP et fort. Al. ay... cvver\nppévou

secl, Jaeger 7) et 24 ws om, AP C2

1035”

i y

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

dua yap todro eva pev ek TovTwy ws apxov eorlv eis & Pbetpovrat, évia O€ odk eoTw. Goa wey ody oUVEAnPpEVA TO ~ ay a eidos kat 7 UAn éoriv, oloy Td cmdv 7 6 XaAKods KUKXos, a a / > a \ / a= ih « A Tatra pev Oelperar els tadra Kal pépos atvrdav 7 An: 4 x \ 4 2 A 2 ‘ cy Eset ¢ doa 6€ pa) ovvEelAnnTal TH VAN GAdAa dvev VAns, OV ot a a BN x Adyo. Tod eldovs pdvor, tadra 8 ov POelperat, 7) dws 7) otro. otrw ye Bor exelywy pev apxal kal pépn Tadra a S ” x f / b) Pd \ x n Tod 6é eldovs ovTe pepn ovTe apyat. Kal 61a TodTO POeiperar 6 myAwos avdpias els mAdY Kal 7 catpa els yxadkov kal 6 Kaddlas els odpxa Kal dora, eri be 6 Ktkdos eis TA TuHuaTat €or. ydp Tis Os cuvelAnTTaL TH Medd Le yap i DAn dpovtpws yap A€yerar KUKdos 6 Te AmAGs eyd- i PODUy. ¥ep i ys \ c > e ‘ Q ‘\ > yy yy. ~ pevos kal 6 Ka’ Exacta dua TO pa elvat Ydioy dvoya Tots > ef + S mm \ oy Ar / ng 5), kad” €xaorov.—elpnrat pev ody Kal viv Td adnb€s, Guws 8 Ere / og 2 , 4 S \ fat , capeorepov cimwpev ETaVaAaBovTEes. Coa pEV yap TOD ADyoU a n x» pépn kal els & Ovaipetrar 6 Adyos, Tatra TpdoTepa 7 BN ” € \ 2 3 lal , > a 9 amdvra 7) éviat 6 be THs OpOns Adyos ov Svatpetrar els d€elas Adyor, GAN (6) Tis d&elas els dpOnv: xphrar yap 6 dpiCduevos Ti d€etav Th 6pOh “eAdtrwv” yap “‘dpOjs” 7 d&eta. an ny / a

ro eldos kal TO Ti Ww elvar TO TOLWdEe THMaTL (ExacToY

yoty Td peépos eay dpi(nrar Kad@s, odk dvev Tod Epyov dpte- > « / BA /, ef S uA t

tat, 6 ox trdpker dvev alcbijoews), Bote ta Tadryns pepy

225 dca EJT yp. APAILS: ema AP 28 vAns dy of AP AL. (dy ex oiov facto in AP): ris vAns otoy EJT 30 ovrot ovtw JT Ale: ov towoira AP: ovre ora EA>?® taira A? et ut vid. Al.: ra id’ avra EJT: ra td’ atrdv Asc.e: ra tdcKa ci. Bonitz 31 dpxai A> Al.: dpyal ratra EJT 32-9] ») xaAxy fort. Al., Bonitz 33 odpxa EJ©r Al. Asc.°: odpxas AP dé] d€ dpotws AP: dé kat E? 4 Tt d A> Al. TH VAN] ws VAn ut vid. Al. b2 6] of Er 7 avn 6 scripsi, fort. legit Al.: ada codd. 9 6 et ropr. AP ALS: om, EJ Asc.¢ 12 ws els VAny ET 16 rode AP AL. : rorovre Ey éxaotov EJT 17 kalés EJT Asc.: 1d pépos kadas AP; ka\@s TO pépos Al.¢

10. 10357 24 — 10367 12

mporepa 7) mavta i) évia tod cvvddov éov, Kal Kad’ éka- aTov OH dpolws, TO 5€ cHua Kal Ta TovTov popia borTEpa TavTns Tis ovolas, Kal Suaypeira els Tadra ws els VAnv ovx 7) ovola GAA TO cUvoAOV,—TOd Mev ody TLVdAOV TpPdTEpa Tair’ €oTw ds, €ott 0 as ov (odde yap civar dvvarar ywpl-

> €

Copeva: od yap 6 mdvTws exwv ddxtvdos eov, aAN £ , i? , yo ‘ d a / \ b] e Gpavuyos 6 TeOveds) Evia be dua, doa kipia Kal ev © mpeT@ 6 Adyos Kal 7 ovoia, olov ei Todro Kapdia i) éyke- gparos: diadéper yap ov0ey Térepov To.otrovy. 6 6 dvOpwros kal 6 tmmos Kal Ta otrws em tov Kad? Exacta, KaOodrov d€, ovK €oT ovata GAAA oUvoAOD TL ek TOvd! TOD Adyou Kal THodt Ths UAns @s Kabddov: Kal? Exactov 8 ek Ths eoxarns trys 6 Doxparns dy eoriv, kal emt TGV GAAwv bpolws.—pEpos pev ody éorl Kal Tod eldous (cidos 5& A€yw 70 Ti Hv €ivat) Kal TOD GuYdAOV ToD ex TOD eldovs Kal THs UAns (Kal THs Ans) adrijs. dGAAG Tod Adyov pépyn TA TOD eldovs povov eoTiv, 6 6 Aoyos earl Tod KaddAov' TO yap KUKA@ elya Kat KUKAoS Kal Woxf) elvat Kal wWuyxy TadvTd. tod 5& cuvddov ibn, ofov KdKAov Tovdt fa’ > of , Oy by ax a , X \ Kal TGV Kad ExaoTa Tivos 7 aicOnTod 7) VonTOO—A€yw be vorTovs gev olov Tovs pabnuarixovs, alcOnrovs d5& ofoy Tovs yadKobs ‘\ tp - \ > ot id , > SS \ kal Tous EvAtvous—rovrwv 6 ovK oti dpiopuds, GAAG jseTa / Xx > / s b) , SS 5) a vonoews 7 alcOnoews yvwpiCovrat, amedOdvTes OE EK THS 3 , > a , EA nN > ret ah > , evTeAcxetas ov OHAov ToTEpoy eEioly 1% ovK Elotv’ ddd aet €yovTat Kal yvwpiCovrat TH KaOddrov Adym. 7 8 BAN * > (says os bs = XS > , 2 € x ayvwotos Kal’ avtnv. wtAn b€ 7 pev aicOnTHn eoTW 1 OE / > is BS \ s / wed ‘ vontn, alaOnty pev olov xaXKos Kal EdAov Kal bon KivyT?) vA xX SITES b] cal > lal € / X ® > / tAn, vonth 6€ 7 €v Tots alcOnrots Irapxovea fi) 7) alcOyTa, olov Ta padnuarikd. mOs pev ody exer Tepl GAov Kal pE- bar cai] calor 22 ovk ovaiay AP 24 ov EJ Asc.e: ovde AT Al.¢ 6 mavrws EJT Al.¢ et ut vid. Asc.: dAdos mos AP 25 redvens EJ Asc.: reOvykos A Al, 26 mparos Tl 27 Towovrov EJ Al.¢: 76 rovodrov AP 28 6 EJT Asc.¢: om. AP Ale ra EJ@Al.¢: raira AP 33 kal pr. EJT Asc.: ws AP kal THs vAns add. Bonitz airs susp. Joachim, om. fort. Al. 34 Tov tert. EJT Asc.: 7d A? et fort. Al. 103692 76n] 7 EJT 3 kal .EJA’Dr Asc. : om. recc. 7) pr. om. E 5 Tovsom. EJ 6 post yvwpigovrat add. T rotro 6’ éray evepyeia dpavrar dre Odvras recc. 7 wétepov AP Asc.: mérepdy more EJT 10 don... 11 vonrn EJ Asc.: 60a kiveirat, 7 AP = 12 ofov Ta panuarixa EJT Asc. : dvra Te pa@nparixa A: om. fort. Al. kai EJT Al, Asc. : kai mept AP

10364

ww Or

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

T rotro 6’ éray evepyeia dpavrar dre Odvras recc. 7 wétepov AP Asc.: mérepdy more EJT 10 don... 11 vonrn EJ Asc.: 60a kiveirat, 7 AP = 12 ofov Ta panuarixa EJT Asc. : dvra Te pa@nparixa A: om. fort. Al. kai EJT Al, Asc. : kai mept AP

10364

ww Or

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

rs : \ N ‘ povs Kal rept tod mporépov kal torépov, elpntaw mpos de THY lal £ > X Epetynow dvayxn amavtay, drav tis epytat Torepov 7 dpOH ~ a fed kal 6 KUKNos Kal Td (Gov mpdrepov 7) eis & S1atpodvrar - . a . bs kal é&€ ov eici, Ta pépyn, Sti ox GmAGs. Ef pev yap EoTL \ c > ae a Mv a a 7 c ~ > nn ‘ ~ ‘ \ / oe ty ovoia 7 THs OpOjs, TL wey Kat Twos dareov voTepov, otov Tév ey TO Ady@ Kal Twds dpOjs (Kal yap 7 pera Tis a cal tal cal 3 DANS, 7) XaAKH 6p6y, Kal ev Tails ypaypais Tats Kae a va , col éxaora), 7) 8 dvev tAns Tév pev ev TO Adyw toTEpa TOP a 2 f 8 ev TO Ka® Exacta popiwy mpotépa, dads 8 ov Hatéov: » > c / x a M e X X a ‘ a ei 8 €répa kal pa) eotw % Woxy Gov, Kat otTw Ta wer , x b > / 4 »” gateov Ta 6 ov HhateEov, woTEp ElpnTaL. 9 tal % > , \ cal an my / X Amopetrar 6& eixérws Kal mola Tod eidovs pepy Kal II Tota ov, GAAG Tod cvveAnupéevov. Kaito. Tovrov pr SHAov dvros ovK éoTw dpicacbat Exacrov Tod yap KaOddov Kat Tod eldous 6 dpicpds' Tota otv éotl TGv pepOv os TAH Kal Tota ov, eay py 7H ep, ovde 6 Adyos ora arvepds 6 TOD , cay pi) 7 pavepd, obd8 y p A a .S = , 3 / 24? Lg mpaypatos. dca pev ow aiverar emryryvéyeva ed) Ere- pov TO elder, ofoy KUKAos ev XaAk@ Kal Aid Kal iA, a Xx tod > re ee Or con n ! . > PA Tatra pev onda evar dSoxet OTL ovdev THs TOD KUKAOV OVTLaS 6 xadkds odd 6 AlOos bia TO ywpiCerOar adirdv: boa de My Oparat yxwpiCopera, ovdey pev Kwdver duoiws éxew 4 4 Xx > 4 , , c can _— TovTols, @oTEp Kav € OL KUKAOL TaVTEs EwpOvTO yXaAKot IDr = x» ca 2 c \ Xr fal ¥ 4 ovdey yap av ArTovy Av 6 xadkods ovdey Tod Eidovs: YXadeTOV d€ adedeiv rotroy TH Siavoig. tov 70 Tod avOpsmov eidos del ev capét datvera kal dorois Kal Trois Tovovrois pepecw" ) a a a a» ap ov kal éotl tatra pépyn Tod eldovs Kal Tod Adyov; 7) Ov, GAN tAn, GAAG bia Td pry Kal ew GdrAwv emuylyvecOa p) cal rf 3 an Xx cal _ x 3 £ advvarotuev xwpioa; eémel 5€ TodTo doKed pev evdexerOar x a n GdnAov be wOTE, Amopotet twes dn Kal ent Tod KUKAOV Kal

215 mporepa ET - Starpetrar AP 17 7 EJAPYAL: om. recc.: 7 Christ ¢syvyosE 1 EA*TAL: J yp. E éxaoT@ r 18 cai pr.om. AP; xal EJ: et 20 kat pr.] an kat TOv? ny pep pera T 26 tod EJT Asc.: ora rod A®: €or roo Al. 29 rota pr.] 7 moia AP by e& EJT Asc.: om. AP 2 ovdey alt. om. EJT 3 rotvrov AP Al.: rodro EJT 5 tatta

pépn AP ALS Asc. : pépy tatta EJ: pépy rovrov I

10. 10364 13 — II. 103771

E éxaoT@ r 18 cai pr.om. AP; xal EJ: et 20 kat pr.] an kat TOv? ny pep pera T 26 tod EJT Asc.: ora rod A®: €or roo Al. 29 rota pr.] 7 moia AP by e& EJT Asc.: om. AP 2 ovdey alt. om. EJT 3 rotvrov AP Al.: rodro EJT 5 tatta

pépn AP ALS Asc. : pépy tatta EJ: pépy rovrov I

10. 10364 13 — II. 103771

ToD Tplyovov ws ov TpooHKov ypappais dpilerbar Kal To tal > x , 4 rn bd , - c 4 guvexei, GAAG TavTa Kal Taira dpotws rA€yerOar woavel capKes Kal dota Tod avOpeiTov Kal yadKods Kal AlOos Tod dv- dpidvtos: Kal dvdyovor mata els Tovs dpi Wyovs, Kal ypap- pis Tov Adyov Tov Tév bto civoi gacw. Kal Tov Tas Ign / ¢ x > x >. : /> ¢ >* 4 idéas AeyovTwv of pev aitoypappiy tiv 6vdda, of Be Td eldos Ths ypappis, Evia pkey yap elvat TO avTd TO eldos kal ov 70 eldos (ofov 6vdda Kal 76 eldos Svdéos), ent ypappas 6€ ovkérr. orvpBaiver 8 ev Te ToAAGY €ldos evar Gv TO cldos daiverar erepov (6mEp Kal Tois TvOa- yopetors avveBawev), Kal evdeyerar ev TavTwv Toreiv aiTd eldos, Ta 8 GAAa pH eldn’ Kaito. otrws ev mavTa éoraL. if x A y x 5 "s > 4 s c 4 4 Or. pev oby exer Twa Aroplay TH TEpL Tos picpots, Kal 61a ti airiay, elpyraw 610 kal To mavTa dvdyew otto Kal ahapeiy tiv thynv neplepyov’ evia yap icws Tos ev Tad’ Pp 7] nv TEplepy yop t > x. a HdL bl Mw. , ¢ ty ti Oe ~ , éorly 7 @d1 Tabi exovta., Kal 7 mapaBody 7 én) Tod Gov, a Vs / J 4 Ys > faa cs jv eldOer A€yew Zwxpatns 6 vewdTepos, ov KaArAGs Exel > big x > te a~ 3 = ~ ¢ J e anaye. yap amd tod} GAnOois, kal worel trodapBdavew as evdexopuevov eivar tov GvOpwrov dvev TGY pepGv, GorTep Gvev Tod xadkod Tov KUKAov. 70 8 ody Gyowovr aloOyrov > o~ ys vA > x” £'..f 4 yap te Td Gov, Kal dvev Kwyoews odk éotw dpicacba, 610 ov avev Tay pepGy exdvTwy més. ov yap TdYTWS TOD dy- Opemov pepos 7 xelp, GAN 7 Svvapevn TO Epyov amoreAciy, Gore Eupvxos ovoa pi Eyapvyos be oF pépos. epi be Ta s x 7 > 3 s € , r , pabnparika 61a ti ovx eiot pépn of Adyor Tov dAdyor, otov Tov KUKAov Ta TpiKUKALa; ov yap eat aicOnTa Taira. a n y ovOev biadeper; eorar yap tAn éviwy Kal pr aicOnrdr:

4 4 > cA w a Ss wt Ma 2 % Kal mavtos yap tAn tis €orw 6 pH Eotr Th iv clvar kal

49 rov APAI. Asc.°: ext rov EJT Io kat om, EJT II af odpkes AP cat pr. AYT Al. Asc. : 4 EJ Tov avépiayros AP Al.: i) avSpiaytos avSpidavros yp. E: xuxdov EJT 12 wayras JU: wdvtas yp. E 15 ro auto AYT Asc. : ravra EJ 16 roalt. EJ Asc.¢; om. A> 17 ovx eorw E 19-20 airdedos Joachim 21 twa dmopiay AP Alle: dropiav twa EJT Asc. 22 Kaito E

All: kat AP: 76JT 29 71 AP Al.Asc.: reiomsEJT = 30 05” om. AP 31 dAd’ 7 Joachim: adN’ 4 EJ Asc. : ddka AP 32 mepi— 103775 vonry cum loco 1034>24— 1035417 ‘primum coniuncta fuisse ci. Al. 33 paOnrixa J 34 rou APAI1: om. EJ 35 7 vAn J Asc.¢ 103771 yap... éorw A” et ut vid. Al.: om. EjfAse. «xat...2 7 AT et ut vid. Al.: om. EJ

TON META TA ®YS3IKA Z

: ddka AP 32 mepi— 103775 vonry cum loco 1034>24— 1035417 ‘primum coniuncta fuisse ci. Al. 33 paOnrixa J 34 rou APAI1: om. EJ 35 7 vAn J Asc.¢ 103771 yap... éorw A” et ut vid. Al.: om. EjfAse. «xat...2 7 AT et ut vid. Al.: om. EJ

TON META TA ®YS3IKA Z

eidos avTd Kal’ atro GAAG TOdE TL. KUKAOU [ev OY OUK ¥ Pet tala a, A x > y n a éora. Tod KaOddov, TOV O€ Kab’ Exacta EoTaL pepyn Tadra, ¢ ¥ , » N ¢ e y Ne donep elpnta. mpotepoy: eote yap vrAn H pev aloOnth 7 d& vont. dSfjArov S€ Kal Ore 7 pev Wx ovola TpOTy, \ LS lal c ¢ ’ BY \ la \ ~) 2 fa) TO 6€ cHpa DAn, 6 8 avOpwros 7) Td Gov To e€ auoiv ws KaddAov' Swxpdtyns dé Kal_Kopicxos, ef pev kal 7 Wox7 Swxparns, Sirrdv (of pev yap ws Woynv ot & ws Td otvodor), el 8 dmAds 7 Woy de Kal (7d) cGua tebe, aomEep TO ¥. \ \ ? e , ‘ x xaOddovu [re] kal ro Ka Exacrov. mérepov d& éoTt Tapa THY bAnv Tov TowdtTwy ovoi@y Tis GAAn, Kal del Cyrety ovoiay érépav Twa olov dpiOuovs 7 TL ToLodToY, oKEnTEéoV

-Uatepov. tovrov yap xdapw kal wept tdv alcOnréy odo.or

~ or

tb or

, 4 > \ 4 X a a 4 Treipoyeda SiopiCew, eel tpdtoy Twa THs vorkyis Kal devreépas irocodias epyov mept tas aicOyras ovolas Oewpta ot yap povov rept THs bAns Se? yvwpicew tov du- olKoy GAAG Kal THs KaTad Tov Adyov, Kal padAov. enh Xx an c n n / ~ 3 n , \ x de TéY dpioHOv TOs pepn TA ev TH Ady, Kal dia Th fs Adyos 6 dpiopds (S7jAov yap Or. TO Tpaypa ev, TO de c , o mpaypa tive év, pepn ye €xov;), oxenréov torepov. Ti pev otv éoti 7O rh jv elvat Kal ms atro Kal? € , 4 \ bY y \ x , lal X ¢ Sei baNSS Sy oy 5. la , los Fase as ty ovK evéotar—ovdé yap éorw exelvns popia ths ovoias >} XX a , Vd / “) y , \ > aGAha THs ovvodov, TavTns b€ y EoTL TwS AdyOS Kal OUK oy XX X\ = les v4 > by 27 / corw* peta pev yap ths UAns ovdK €oTw (adpicrov yap), xX sN ¥ ) > / » i >) , € col a KaTa THY TpOTHY 0 ovolay EoTLV, oloy avOpamov O Tis Wrxns , € x eee b \ \ o) \ / > o \ fol Adyoss H yap ovola eori TO eldos TO evdv, e€ oD Kal THs a

APAL: om. EJT 8 Swxparns om. EJT Asc. Woxny] bux Ab 9 kai om. AP To add. a tdde] ra dé AP ta Ab

érépav A» et fort. Al.: atray érépavy EJT Asc.¢ 14 metpoueba Ab i) eet Ab 16 vArkys ci. Christ 17 (rept ris ovcias) Ts Jaeger émt EJT Asc.: ef A>: ere ci. Brandis 19 60m, E} 20 rw EJA*D Asc.: rwiyp. EAl. de A 22 kaOddou om. I 23 60m. AP AL. 26 ovvddov Ta Al. : cuvddns EJAY 29 yap ovcia EJ Asc.°: ovoia yap A” Al.¢

ST. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY IE. 1037* 2 — 12. 1037" 25

Christ 17 (rept ris ovcias) Ts Jaeger émt EJT Asc.: ef A>: ere ci. Brandis 19 60m, E} 20 rw EJA*D Asc.: rwiyp. EAl. de A 22 kaOddou om. I 23 60m. AP AL. 26 ovvddov Ta Al. : cuvddns EJAY 29 yap ovcia EJ Asc.°: ovoia yap A” Al.¢

ST. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY IE. 1037* 2 — 12. 1037" 25

Bays | sivohos Aéyerat oivia, olor i Kouddrys (€x yap 30 Tunas kai vis pds ous fis ai i omdrys Zari (bis yap ér tours trapfer % sis)}—er 3 Ti} curdd@ oicia, ctor swi oul 7 Kadhig, tora wai j ty a ala iva: cai éxactor éxi TWOP wer Taira, Gewep xt Tar =pa- 1037" Tar ober, olor xauzudétys «al KauuuAorgT: ewat, Bary cory (Nya 3 apdrq 7 wy Aéyera: +S Edo & ie oe Se Sel oe & te ay 5 as qurethnppera 7a tAq, ob ratte, oid’ (ci) xara svp8cBn- Kos &, ctor ¢ Kal TO poveies- raira yas raiTa xara oupSeSnxcs. Ha Nop 8 Adyeper aparor eg door & rois Grader Kois Tepi doicuot uy cipnqrar- @ yap er éxcivors dxopia AexGciza apo Epyou rois acpi rijs oteias geri Adyots. AEY® 10 a¢ Tatra Thy dzopiar, ea ri wore & éotw ob ray Adyor Opicpor cirai gayer, eler tet daripézov te Gor dfxow- ore yap ares airoG Adyos. Sia Ti 3 rodro & éarw GAN’ ew wokAd, (Gor cai dézour: €ai per yap tot arépexos kat Aeuxie woAAa per éorw Gray ph tmdpyn Cardpe 1; Serper, te 32 Gra Sieg wal iby re rd trocciperor, & Gr@permos (ore yap by yéyera: cal Zor & Nevxds dv- @perzos) Gratfa ® ob pereyer Garépav Gérepor- rd yap yeros ot Boxct peréxew ray duagopar (Gua yap ar rar crareiaw Te aird percixer ai yap duspopai érarriat als 22 duadepar To ewes). e 4 xai BETEXEt, 6 auras Aeyes, by ee at 2 «kop muAdrys xai om. A> et Fet fecit E: 5 JA® 3 S¢ mparer AP y EFAl*Asc: FJA® 1 A® 42g] Ay JA® Aqcedd TAL: é fy at vid. Asc. 5 és EJ AL: és ra AP ar © Seripsi: ead¢ codd. F et ut vid. Asc. : oad dea Bonitz: of8 1a ci. Wisditiesnn oct" Se Christ 6 ater] acer ¢ EJ Al Asc. poveuss EJP AL: poveucds A® 7 va cere E To Ae

TON META TA ®Y3IKA Z

Asc. 5 és EJ AL: és ra AP ar © Seripsi: ead¢ codd. F et ut vid. Asc. : oad dea Bonitz: of8 1a ci. Wisditiesnn oct" Se Christ 6 ater] acer ¢ EJ Al Asc. poveuss EJP AL: poveucds A® 7 va cere E To Ae

TON META TA ®Y3IKA Z

° Se: cf CoE val > dp aN G / A els kal ovotas, dare évds Twos det adroy elvat Oyo" Kat ~ € Sey e iN 6 a £ t lal yap 7 ovola éy tr kal Tode TL onuaiver, os payev.—oet dé emickoTeiy mpGtov, wept TOV KaTa Tas Siaipevers Opt- opav. ovdey yap erepdv eoti ev TO Opiou@ TAY TO Os YER RETEDOY Vee ie A LO ee 1] lal / / A ¢ ‘4 ~ > BA 30 TpOTov Aeyouevovy yevos Kal at diadopaii tra 6 adda t 3 s / a ‘i LAS DN ¢ / yern eott TO Te TpGTov Kal. eta TovTOV at cvAdAapPavo- a a a r pevat diaopai, ofoy Td mprov (oov, TO d& €exopmevov (ov dimovyv, Kal madw (Gov dimovv amrepov dpolws bé X 1038 Kav dua mAEovav A€yntar. Ordos 8 ovdev Siadeper sia na \ LN TOAAGY 7) BV bAlywv A€yerOar, Gor ode bv” oGAlyov 7 d1a Svoty: rolv dvoty S& Td pev diahopa 7d Se yévos, otov a yal y NX S a L NY S lA Tod (Gov dimovy TO pev (@ov yevos diapopa be Oarepov. ry iN X } € a nN ox \ Sy c ia 5 el ody TO yévos GTAGS pr EoTL Tapa TA ws yevous Eldn, x I n el €or. pev os trAy & eoriv (h pev yap pwviy yevos Kat BAn, ai 5& Svadopal ra €ldn Kal Ta oTorxela ex Tavrns a \ oe cane / 2 Cotes an a Towdcw), pavepov Ort 6 dpicpos eoTw 6 ex T&V Siapopov / > \ SS \ tay a a fal oyos. GddAa pay Kat bet ye pialpsioen TH THS Siado- ~ sd eo Uf \ NY c / Lol 10 pas Siabopa, ofov (gov dvahopda TO brdmouv: maAwW TOD a / tal Ln @ / (gov tod trdmodos thy diahopay. det elvar 1 droTou, a > 3 / oye / ty X A \ X LA @oT ov Aexréov Tod broTod0s TO pev TTEpwToY TO O& AmTE- a lal / pov, édvmep A€yn KaAGs (GAAA bid TO Advvarely TonTEL a V1] 2 x A s / \ > BA ee totro), GAN TO pev oyidomouy TO 8 aoxioTov? avrar X\ \ / € \ / / \ 15 yap Siadopal odds: 7 yap oxiComodia, moddTNS TIS. Kal or aN / 4 el * » 9 Ne lA otrws del Povrerar Padice Ews av EAOH eis Ta ddLadopay / Pb) ov a y x ix4 € / Tote © €govTat Tocatta edn Todds doatmep ai Siadopat, \ \ c / ka) y tat vad > x a kal Ta trom0da oa toa tais diapopais. «i by TatTa 4 » BY oo € Ve pe eye lat otrws exe, pavepdv bru 7) Tedevraia diahopa 7 ovata Tod »/ ih tal 20 Mpdyparos €ora. Kal 6 dpiopds, elmep pi) Se? ToddaKLS Les i D) lal v4 V4 / 7 / TavTa Néyew ev Tols Gpoiss Teplepyov yap. orpBaiver dé a 4 \ yo igs GEE 7 PENDS 7 ye todro: bray yap einmn (oov tnomovy dimovv, oddév GAXO ~ BN lal / By 7, / ot a a elpnkey 7 (Gov modas €xov, Ovo Todas EXoV' Kay TovTO Siaipy TH olkela Siaipecer, mAEovaKis epet Kat lodkis Tats

b 26 ovcia EJT kai EJT Al. Asc.° : ef AP 29 ro AP Asc. et ut vid. Al. : 76 re EJ 30 7 Lo yp. E Al. Asc. aiom. JAP 103842 Ov pr. et 3 dua om. AP 4 rov] ro J 7 €k]

Oe E Q 7H... Svahopa Joachim: rv... diapopav codd. Al, Il eidévae EJT Asc.: dvedety ex Al. Asc, ci. Bonitz 13 es Ab 14 7) EJT 16 & de J 21 tadra EJ 7 Ejr Asc.&; ei py AP médas pr. om. EJ?

12. 1037> 26 — 13. 1038 19

E Al. Asc. aiom. JAP 103842 Ov pr. et 3 dua om. AP 4 rov] ro J 7 €k]

Oe E Q 7H... Svahopa Joachim: rv... diapopav codd. Al, Il eidévae EJT Asc.: dvedety ex Al. Asc, ci. Bonitz 13 es Ab 14 7) EJT 16 & de J 21 tadra EJ 7 Ejr Asc.&; ei py AP médas pr. om. EJ?

12. 1037> 26 — 13. 1038 19

duaopais. eav pev o7 Siadopas Siapopa yilyvnrar, pla a5 x c Ys ‘ a \ € ) a PS ‘\ XX €oTaL 7 TeAEUTALA TO cldos Kal 7) OVTia® Eady O€ KATA TUE- , @ eS) a a € /, A xX \ \ \ BeBnkos, ofoy ei diatpot rod dadmodos TO pev AevKOV TO Oe t a = meAav, Tocatra doar dy at Topal aow. Sore avepov Gru 6 dpiopos Adyos early 6 ek TV diahopdv, Kal TovTwY THs TE- Aevtaias Kara ye TO dpOdv. Sydov 8 ay ely, el Tis petara- 30 eve TOUS TOLOvTOVS Spicpovs, olov Tov Tod dvOpdrov, Aéywv Cov dizouv Imdmovy' Teplepyov yap TO bmdmovL eipnuevov Tod bI- if ’ > x 2 a See, la’ Ss ad a \ mooos. Tagéis 8 ovk oT ev Ti ovoig? TOs yap det vonoa TO pev vorepoy 70 dé mpdrepov; Tepl wey ov TOY KaTa Tas duaLpe- vEls Opiopev Tocatra elpyoOw Thy TpsSTHVY, Totol TiVEes elow. 35 o fol 1g “Emel 5& wep ris ovclas ) axes eoti, madw émay- 1038” , / > Xe Ya Shen BP GS x ehOmpev. é€yerar 8 Bomep TO bToKelwevoy ovota eivat Kat \ Vee Sey Ls \ Nu 3: + \ \ 4 \ S TO Tt Hp €ivar Kal TO é€x TovUTwr, Kal TO KaOdAoV. Tepl pev ovy Tot dvoty elpnrat (kal yap mept Tod Ti iv etvar Kal Tod. ¢ "4 oe lat ¢€ , x id wy 74 Nas vmokepevov, Sti dixOs brOKetal, 7) Tdde TL OV, BomEp TOS 7 ta 2 Xx t € of c 3 2 tal \ (Gov trois maOeow, 7) ws 7 bAN TH evreexela), dSoxed de \ ‘ /, y / > \ in LY ‘ kal TO KaOdAov alridy Ticw eivat pddtota, Kal etvat apx7 bs / koe. I / \ \ - a ~~ 2 , TO KaOdAov* O10 eTeAOMpEY Kal TEpL TOVTOV. EOLKE yap adv- varov elvat ovotay elvat 6riody TOV KaOdAoV AEyouevav. TpOTov S > 5h, (VWs iw! (Vac Ay > G 4 BA Mev yap ovoia ExdoTov 7 idios ExdoT@, 7) obX UTapXEL GA, 10 TO 6€ KaOddov Kowdy: TodTo yap A€yeTar KaOdAov 6 TAcloow > % nN bmdpxew Tepukev. Tivos oly ovola Tobr eoraL; 7) yap mdv- BN vd / / ’ b) Uwe LA > > ba \ TwV 7 ovdevds, TaVTHY O ovx oid Te Evds & et EoTaL, Kal > Seats 8s (Sy, ww 5S 7 € ay, SN \ (ie wen yr Tada Totr éora ‘dv yap pla 7 ovoia Kal TO Th iy elvat / €v, Kal adra ey.) ere ovola A€yeTar TO py Kad” HroKEpEvor, 15 > TO d€ KaOddov Kal droKeywevov Tivds éyerar del. GAA S 4 xX c yd t « \ - SS 3 b] hes X apa ovT@ pev ovK evdeyxeTar ws TO Th HV cival, ev TOITm é évuTapxew, olov To (Gov ev TH dvOpdTwH Kal tnmw; odKkody Lol na NS X djArov Ori EoTL Tis avrod Adyos. duadéeper 8 odOey ovd’ ed fur}

227 Statper Ab 28 rocavra AP 33 8 om. J De ij EJ? Asc.¢: om. AP 9 «ivat pr.om. AP AL® — zpérov APT Asc. et ut vid. Al. : mparn EJ IO ovoia éxdorov 7) SCrIpsi: ovela 7 éxdorov EJY Asc.: 7 ovoia AP éxdotm AP Al.: éxdorov EJT Asc. 4 T: «al fort. Al. 12 dmayrey recc. 13 dmdavroy AP Al.e Asc.¢ évos . .. 14 €orat codd. I Al. Asc.: primum afuisse ci. Christ . 8), ¢orw yp. E 17 dpa Asc.! Bekker: dpa EJA» tovra AP Al.: atr@ EJ: avrois yp. E 18 évumdpxer JT 19 ovd’ EJT Asc.°: om. A?

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

4 T: «al fort. Al. 12 dmayrey recc. 13 dmdavroy AP Al.e Asc.¢ évos . .. 14 €orat codd. I Al. Asc.: primum afuisse ci. Christ . 8), ¢orw yp. E 17 dpa Asc.! Bekker: dpa EJA» tovra AP Al.: atr@ EJ: avrois yp. E 18 évumdpxer JT 19 ovd’ EJT Asc.°: om. A?

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z

, ” a 3 lod ’ , XOX .s * > cA 20 TdvTwY Adyos Eat. TOY ev TH ovoigs ovdév yap 7TTTOV ovata nan) a / e e BA a b J , ’ 2 tobr éorat Twds, os 6 GvOpwros Tod advOpdTov ev @ AS ¢ Se DEER as t y x Se tmdpxel, BoTE TO ad’TO crvuBHoeTar Tad EoTaL yap éKelvov 3 , eo A lal 3 e c wy c / ” XN \ ovcia, olov To (Gov, ev ® ws tdiov tmapxer. ETL Oe Kal 3 4, \ BA \ LN \ > ne Che ” advvatov Kal dromov TO Téde Kal ovoiay, «i eoTW EK TWeV, 25 py @€ ovoldv eclvar pnd ex tod rdde Te GAN Ex TOLOd" mpoTepov yap eoTat pn ovoia Te Kal TO ToLWY ovoias TE Kal Lal / 4 > U4 » / ‘ wy / BA Tob} TOE. OnEp advVaTOV' OvTE Ady yap OUTE xXpOoVw OUTE yevéoe. oldy Te Ta TaOn THs ovoias eivat TpdTepar EoTaL yap kal xwpiotd. ert TO Swxpdrer evuTap$er ovcia, dare 30 Svolv €orar ovoia. Srws be ovpBaiver, «i Eat odoia 6 av- Opwmos Kat boa otrw A€yerar, pnbey Tov & TO Oyo elvat pndevos ovolay pnd yxwpls trdapxew adrév pnd ev BA / b ° > he vA ~ > x / 359 GA, A€ywo 8 oloy ovdk cival TL. (Gov Tapa Ta Twa, OvVd dAAo Tay év Tols Adyos ovdev. Ek TE 67) TOUTwWY BEwpotor % [74 IOr nm / c x 3 a2 3 / \ 35 pavepov OTL ovdey TGV KaOodov VrapYoVTwY ovTia EoTI, KAL fol an \ 1039 Ort ovdey onpalver TOY KoWwh KaTHyopovpévav TddE TL, GAAG rouvde. ei 5€ py, GAAa Te TOAAG orp Baiver Kal 6 Tpl- tos dvOpwros. ért dé kal Gde SHAov. ddvvaTov yap ovoiay ef > Ov a > lal ec b] x s é a \ vo e€ ovary elvat évyTapxovodv ws évredexeigs Ta yap o > 5 oUTws evTeAexeia ovdemoTe ev evTEdexela, GAA eay Svvapmer

dvo 7, €orar & (oloy 7» ditAacia ex dvo Hytcewy dvvaper € x 2 / va ied > > c Ce 4 ed > yer 7) yap évredéxeva yxwple), dor ei 7 odoia Ev, ovK

état €€ ovoidy évuTapyoveGy Kal Kara Todrov Tov TpdéToV, aA , , > lal IO 7 X a ‘/ 3 ov ever Anpoxpitos dpO@s: advvarov yap «ivat pnow eK , 8 oN / , » BS / <> Paar 10 6vo &y 7H e€ Evds bo yevérOar Ta yap peyeOn Ta Gropa Xx SD LSS, al € ie 7 5 a \ 3.57) ee a Tas ovolas Trovei. Guotws Tolvvy djAov Gri Kal em apiOuod e 4 > \ es - / ev / e€er, elmep eotlv 6 apiOuos otvOects povddwy, waomep Aéye- x s BS x Tat 07d TiWeY' 7 yap ody ey H Svas 7 OK EoTL provas ev 5. I / Ww ‘X bY o 3 , A atth évredexeig.—éxer 5€ TO cvpBaivov amopiav. el yap

b22 yap A> Asc.¢: yap ovata EJT: yap ovcias fort. Al., Joachim ev éxeivov T 23 ovoia I’: odoa Innes as JAP AL: cider ds ET: idiws fort. Asc. 26 re alt. om. A 27 tov 7d0e| Tovro 6€A> 28 yevécet] ywooe Lord 29 kat om. EJT Asc. evurrdp£et ovgia ovoia J: éevumap£e: oicia ovcia yp. E: éevumdp£er ovcia oveia T: ovoia évumapEe ovot recc. 34 ovdevds T: oddev yap AY 10397 3 yap om. AP 4 ws] ovras ds EJT: otras Asc. 5 ovres os Ei? 6 nl e@ AP Al. 7 «om, EJ 9 ov om. fort. Asc. : 6T 12 6 EJ Asc.¢: om. A cvvéeots EJT Asc.®: om. AP 13 éort AYA], Asc.: éveors EJ :

13. 1038) 20 — 14. 1039> 7

34 ovdevds T: oddev yap AY 10397 3 yap om. AP 4 ws] ovras ds EJT: otras Asc. 5 ovres os Ei? 6 nl e@ AP Al. 7 «om, EJ 9 ov om. fort. Asc. : 6T 12 6 EJ Asc.¢: om. A cvvéeots EJT Asc.®: om. AP 13 éort AYA], Asc.: éveors EJ :

13. 1038) 20 — 14. 1039> 7

, 3 a , os > a , ae, Pen 4 pate €k TGv KaOddov ofdov T civar pydeuiay ovoiay bia TO 15 Towvde GAAG py) TOE TL oHpaivery, pT e& ovoldy evdé-

3 y = , ee , es xeTar evtedexela civat pydeulay ovciav otvOerov, aovvbe- Tov av ein ovcia maca, war ovde Adyos av ein ovddeusas ovoias. GAAa pay doxel ye waot Kal éAexXOn maha 7j

, ee 2 > 4 -! f = > ION 7, peovov ovaias eivat Opoy 7 padiora: viv & ovde Tavrns. 20

a ovdevds ap ota: dpirpds* 7) TpOTOV pév Twa eoTaL TpdTOY d€ twa ov. Sfdov 8 ora 7d Acydpevov ex Tay toreEpor paddor. 14 @avepoy & e& aitév rotrwy Td cvpBaivoy Kai Tots

>s INA I 3 » 2 \ a

Tas idé€as déyovow ovclas te Xwpiords ecivat Kal Gya2

XA > a , na x lod cel > Xx TO eidos €x Tod yévous ToLlodc. Kal TOY Siadopay. ei yap éoTt Ta elon, Kal TO Gov év TS aVOpeTw kal inzw, jrot Ns @oV EV T® Pp + \T7T@, IT cal n a a ey kal tavTov TO apiOue éotly 7) Erepovs TO pev yap , s 4 , Xx SS iS / , € , ; Adyw Sprov Gre &" Tov yap adrév diéLercr Adyor 6 A€yar 3 c / a ae > / ¥ 2% > me > & €xaTep@. el otv EaTi Tis GvOpwros avTos Kab’ avroy Tdd€ 30 TL Kal Kexwpiopevoy, avayKn Kal @€ Gv, olov TO Gov kal TO Simovv, Téde TL onpalvew Kal elvat xwpioTa Kat odcias- @ote Kal TO (Gov, » ei wey ov TO abrd Kai & TO & TH into kal TO avOpdre, Borep od carte, TOs TO év Tois over xwpls ev éorat, kai dia Ti ov Kal ywpls avrod 1039* éotat TO Gov Totro; émeita ci pev pebé£er Tod dimodos Kal Tod ToAvTodos, advvatéy Tt cupBaiver, Tavartia yap Gua « La e Ey Be x AJ » > x , ‘4 c 4 tmapler air@ évi cal redé Tux dvte ef BF po, Tis 6 Tpd- fal 4

wos Grav ein tis TO GGov elvar dizovy 7 mEG6v; GAN’ tows F ‘ e xX / > X i ¥ OvyKEITaL KGL amTeTAaL 7 peutxTar’ GAAG TavTa arto7a. GAN Erepoy éy Exdotw: ovKody aweipa ws Ezos eizely ata

315 et 17 pndé piay i i, ourGerov Ab Al: om. EJ? Asc. 18 ovdé peas T 19 maca AP 20 ovotas eivar AP Asc. : eivat oicias Ejr 25 re AP Al: re xal Ejr Asc.¢ kal om. yp. E 26 76 ATT AL®: kai 76 EJ Asc.¢ 28 yap om. AP 29 6 Aeyor dréEeroe Adyor AP 30 atros ka@’ avroy AP Al.*: aité caf’ atré Ejr 33 @ore xai rd (@ov codd. I Asc.: om. fort. Al. »» SUSP. Christ oby om. — virgula post (Bor posita éy 0 om. Ejr: kat év add. yp. E 34 kai TO dvOpome Ae Al: om. Ejr

av gavr@] | atrés cavte ut vid. Al.: atrés attra A®: aités atta me Asc. és EJT Al. Asc. : om. A> 7d...™1 yopis pr. AP Al. :

xepis ovor EJT = 1 xepis avrov JT: aizvd A>, 2 sotro Ejr ree = €éavrod AP 4 tux E*A? et fort. Al.: om. evr Asc.° 6 EJ Al.: om. AP 5 tes rece. I: ris EJ: ri AY

TQN META TA ©OYSIKA Z

Al.: atrés attra A®: aités atta me Asc. és EJT Al. Asc. : om. A> 7d...™1 yopis pr. AP Al. :

xepis ovor EJT = 1 xepis avrov JT: aizvd A>, 2 sotro Ejr ree = €éavrod AP 4 tux E*A? et fort. Al.: om. evr Asc.° 6 EJ Al.: om. AP 5 tes rece. I: ris EJ: ri AY

TQN META TA ©OYSIKA Z

a To % / ef év } ovota Cov: ov yap Kata cvpBeBnKos ex Cwov dw- yy \ ) he Re \ lot ’ / I \ Opwmos. ert ToAAA EoTaL advTd TO (Gov odoia Te yap TO > Gel 53: > bs ees 4 y B: x I 2 1oéy Exdotw Gov (od yap Kar’ dAdo déyeraur ef SE pj, @E > lal lal éexelvov écrar 6 dvOpwros Kal yévos avrod éxeivo), Kal ere idéar dmavta @€ Sv 6 dvOpwros: ovKxody odK AAdov pev idea gota dAdov & ovola (advvarov yap) atrd dpa Cov év a a / n a éxactoy éoTat TOY ev Tois Gors. ere ex Tlvos TOTO, Kal n > > a ie Xx lat el ™ \ lat = 3.0 VP: 1g TOs e€ adrod ov; 7) TOs oidv Te elvar TO CGov, @ odota

cay 3 a > BN \ lal oy > > lal nf todro atté, map avTo TO Gov; er. O emt Tv aicbyTov nan / p 2 \ "A 2 74 ? nS > ia! Tatra Te ovpBaiver Kat TovTmy atomeéTepa. ei 07 advva- o va Le 4 oi yy te (v4 vy Tov obrws éxew, SAov bri ovK eat €Eldn aiTov otTwS Os Ties dacw. 30 4~Emel & 7% ovcia érépa, 76 Te otvodov Kal 6 Adyos 15 (Aéyw 8 ori i) wey obras éotly odela, obv TH UAH ovveEAnp- / © , € rhe ie of 4 4 X\ bi 4 Be pevos 6 oyos, 7 8 6 Adyos Gras), Goat pev ody ovrw He- 4 \ va if, \ ~ / an X\ yovtar, tovrwy pev eott POopd (kal yap yéveots), Tod be , > By A va ¢ IQr > / > Adyov ovk ory otrws Hore PbelpecOar (ove yap yeveots, ov * - \ eave ) ANA \ Ad a > (a) AAN 25 yap ylyverat TO olkia elvat GAAA TO Tide TH olKla), a A / \ tas Lea AN 2! Ce ota fy \ avev yeverews Kal pOopas eiol Kal ovKeeloiv: dedeukTar yap ig > \ cal an IOr na ‘ an XN \ an OTL ovdels TavTa yevva ovde Toret. Sia TOTO b€ Kal TOP ovorév tév alcOnrév Tév Ka Exacta obre dpiopos ovTE aTO- devs Eotw, Ore Exovow VAnv js 7 Pious Tovatrn ot ev- déxerOar Kal eivar Kal py 610 pOapra mdvra ra Kad” ed > n > Lo) a4 > 3 , lal >) P, ‘\ c éxacta avTav. el oby fT dndderéis TGV dvaykatwy Kat 6

w fe)

€ ‘ 3 , \ > 2 a vA 2o9 9 v4 Optopos emLaTHMOVIKOY, Kal OVK evdEXETAL, BoTEP OVD eTLTTH- aS ss 2 / {OES 2 ah Di fe) SS /, \ pny ore pev emuotrnpny ore & dyvoray elvat, ddda dd6€a TO

8 3 Tolotrov eotw, obtws ovd amdderEw ovd dpioudv, GAAG ddéa

nan / fal

10408 €or! Tod evdexouevov drAdAws exew, ShAov bre odK Av ely

>8 dvOpwmos scripsi: d&Opamos AP: 6 tvOpanos EJ Al.® Asc.° 9 eri] Sore Joachim IO @\dov J: adNov T 12 (déa] idéa yp. E

13 dpaEt évom, EJr 14 éora éxaorov EJT tovrov EJ 15 avro¢wov yp. E (gov AP: dou (dor fort, Al. Asc. bicie 16 (wov post dronorepa |. 17 legit ut vid. Al. 70 (@ov] ovcia yp. E @ fort. Al., ci. Bonitz: 6 EJT Asc. : om. AP 18 idéa EY Asc.¢ et fecit J éavtay AP 20 & 7] by J 22 Odas JT Al? et ex édos fecit E: om. AP: airés vel dadGs ci. Bonitz 23 €or EJ Asc.: gore kai AP 24 ov AY et ut vid. Al.: ovdé J : ovdev

E 32 emirtnpovixds EJT Asc. : 6 émornpovkds Joachim 33 Ore wee emuotnunv EJ Al. : om. AP Asc. 34 anddeé&ts ovd’ dptopds A

et ex édos fecit E: om. AP: airés vel dadGs ci. Bonitz 23 €or EJ Asc.: gore kai AP 24 ov AY et ut vid. Al.: ovdé J : ovdev

E 32 emirtnpovixds EJT Asc. : 6 émornpovkds Joachim 33 Ore wee emuotnunv EJ Al. : om. AP Asc. 34 anddeé&ts ovd’ dptopds A

14. 10398 — 15. 10408 31

avTav ovre dpirpos ovTe amddeLéis, GdnAa TE yap TA POe- a cy, lal / pojeva Tols €xovor THY emioTHunY, Gray ex THs aicOjnoews Sh \ J bdfat t 2 a a n an€éhOn, Kal owlowevay TGV Adywo ev TH ux Tov Ss > ? + € AN ot + > / & al avTGv ovk éorat ovre dpicpds ere ovre amdderkis. 516 Sel, n lol ‘ TOv mpds Gpov Grav Tis dpi(yral TL Tav Kab? ExacTov, ji) 2 cal tal Ba 4 s 2 f: ec +7 ayvoeiv bri del avawpeivy EoTiv' ov yap evdéyerar dpicacbat. Ovse b7) iddav ovdepuiav Eotw dpicacba. Tv yap Ka Exa- 3 / otov 7 idea, as act, cal ywpiory dvayxaioy d5& e€ dvo- patwy elvar tov Ddyov, dvoua 0 ov Tooer 6 dpiCopevos (dyvworoy yap €orat), Ta S€ KElweva KOWWa TaoW: dvayKn av € , \ a a, i + DS Rae apa vumapxew Kal addAw Tatras oloy el Tis oe OploaLTo, 6 a \ A N \ Ke Vek , A \ LON € 4 Gov épet loxvdv 7 AevKdv 7 Erepdy TL O Kal GAAw trdp- ? / M4 Ss /, \ BS A feu. ei d€ Tis gain pndev Kwdvew xwpls pev TavTa ToA- Aots dua d€ pdvm TovTm trapxew, AEKTéov TpHTov pey 4 \ 2 tal Ae ~ ra lal ie \ lod 7 drt Kal dudoty, ofoy ro (Gov dimovy TO Caw Kal TO Oi- \ a tee ON a IQs ‘; vl A GA mob. (kal rotro énl pev trav didloy Kal dvdyxn elva, , , 3’ wy x / fal f ) = ~ \ mporepa y ovta Kal pépn Tod ovvbérov: GAAG pV Kal t + ay RE , \ \ AN ea; XwpioTd, elmep TO dvOpwmos xwpioTdy* 1) yap ovdev 7) dude: > S a I > yi \ / ‘ \ + >? > el pev ody pnOev, ovK eatar TO yevos Tapa Ta etdn, el O # \ € / aA? ia / an > cas éoTal, Kat 7 Svapopa) «i bri mpdrepa TO elvat ratra d& ovK dvravaipetra. emera ci e€ idedv ai iddar (aovvOerdrepa yap ra e€ Gv), err emt aoddAOv defoe > cal tal b a € QO 7 eo 4 ~~ \ A Kakeiva Katnyopetoba e€ dv 7 idea, olov Td Gov Kal rd dimou. el OF uj, TOs yowpicOnoera; Eorar yap idea ris A Dawes Che i , a BE) gk > ca qv addvaroy emt mAEWWvav Katnyopnoa 7 évds. ov BdoKel dé, GAAd aca idea elvar pebexTH. omep odv elpyrar, AavOdver Gr. advvarov épicacbar ev Tois didiows, pddiora DN d& doa povaxa, oiov jAwos 7) ceAHVN. ov povoy yap d.a- Maptavovot TO TpooriOéva roiadra Gy adatpovpévwy ert y ev ev ist \ a aX Xx / .. XN €oTat HAvos, omep TO TEpt ynv lov i) vuKTiKpudes (Av yap

104082 7a om. AP 6 ékaora recc. 7 act om. E 12 otov A? yp. ET Al, Asc.: kai EJ 13 7) pr. secl. Christ, om. Al. Asc.¢ brdp&e EJ Asc. : tmapyee APT Al. 15 Aexréov AP yp. EAL: om. EJr 16 kai pr. EJP Al.: 7d AP 17 «iva. AP Al.¢ Asc.¢: ye civar EJ 21 Svadopa’ i br codd. TAsc.¢: Staopai, Kai éoovrat fort. Al.: Stadopa éorar, ore ci. Bonitz 22 émetra el] éretra b€ ei EJT: re & ci yp. E: ere Al. 23 €r] 6rv ci. Joachim 26 Katnyopeioba T 29 7] kai T pdvoy dé 67) auapravover E

31 dy yap orn] avdpes tht E

ie)

1040»

TQN META TA. OYSIKA Z

TAsc.¢: Staopai, Kai éoovrat fort. Al.: Stadopa éorar, ore ci. Bonitz 22 émetra el] éretra b€ ei EJT: re & ci yp. E: ere Al. 23 €r] 6rv ci. Joachim 26 Katnyopeioba T 29 7] kai T pdvoy dé 67) auapravover E

31 dy yap orn] avdpes tht E

ie)

1040»

TQN META TA. OYSIKA Z

a xX 2 Oieniy By e ») > ’ So ¢ NS oTh 7) part, ovKeTe €otar 7ALost GAA dromov el jun’ 6 yap ef Te > 7. 1, 4 Spee 3 , fAvos ovoiay twa onpatver) er. doa em GdAov evdexeTal, oiov éay €rEpos yevntar Tovodros, SHAov OTL HALos EoTaL KoL- vos apa 6 Adyost GAN iv Tov Kal Exacta 6 HAs, Somep

x a KAéwy 7 Swxpdrns: emel did Ti oddels Spov expeper adrdv idéas; yévoito yap. dy dhdrov Teipwpevay Ore GAnOes TO vov elpnuevov.

Pavepoy d& Ort kal Tv dSoKovody elvar odoidy at mAcel- atau duvdpes elol, Ta Te pdpta Tov Cawy (ovdev yap ke-

W ’ Hop : AGE . e) n lo Xwpiopevoy avtdv éorly: bray S& xXwpicOh, Kal rére dvTa « A d \ Ley Ss a SG Cee key? ION x 3 ex ws tAn mavta) kal yh kal wip Kal djp: oddey yap adray e 3 aAN ti , \ XN 64 ‘ , , éy eorw, & olov cwpds, mp 7 TmepOf Kal yevnral to e€ atrav év. pddwora 8 dy tis Ta Tdv euardxov dTo0- AdBor pdpia Kal Ta THs Wrxns mdpeyyvs dudw ylyre-

y: n

cOa, dvTa Kal eévredexelqg Kal dSuvaper, TH Gpxas zyew Kunoews amd Twos ev Tats Kaymatss O10 ema (Ga dva-

A ~ 3 2 ey, / , here 4 ig een ‘ potpeva (h. GAd’ Sums Svvdyer Tavr’ EoTal, Gray 7 Ev Kal

x / b) a \ 7 x a \ x ovvexes guoe, dddka py Bia 1 ovudvoe TO yap

a , 2. \ Ss ey, 5 / v4 \ \ v To.odroy TMHpwors. mel dé TO ev A€yerar Gomep Kal TO dy,

x € 3 4 c gone. eee. - \ Ya 4 > n S 2 n kal 7) ovola » Tod évds pla, kat dv pla apiOue ey apiOpa, pavepoy Ori obre 76 Ey ovre TO dv evdéxerar ovciay eivar TOV

id 4 IOS \ / > a a b) x Tpaywarov, dotep ovd€ TO ororxelw elvar 7) apxfr GAAQ (nrotuev tls ody 7 apxy, wa els yrwpiyudtepov dvaydyw-

as X Ss i) Jy, x= K Sok Nef mev. paddov pev ovy TOVTwY oVoia TO OV Kal Ev 7) T TE et N \ \ a) \ \ 7 S ION a apxi) Kat TO oToxeloy Kai TO alriov, ovmw Oe ovde Tadra, elmep pnd Addo kowvdy pndey ovoia ovdert yap trdapye 7

Lapeer? ° ci Bs ea \ wg f peed NS. \ Ry: ovola GAN 7) air te Kal TH Exovte adriy, ob éotly odola. ért TO &y TodAaxf odx ay ely dpa, Td 8& Kowov aya Tohdaxfi trdpxe Gore dijdov bre ovd tev Kabddov émdpxe. mapa Ta Kad’ exaora xwpls. GAN of ra €ldy A€yovtes TH pev GpOGs A€yovor. xXwplCovres adTd, elmep

9 32 7] 7) det Brandis bs etvat ovary AY All: otordy eivar Ejr 6 duvdper T 7 éorw ci. Joachim 9 owpds EJ Asc.c: é6aapds APAL.: 6 dppds yp. E yp. Al. 11-12 mapeyyus dvra, dipdw yiyverOa ci. Christ 15 7) EJTAI° Asc.°: 7) Kat AP 19 To JA», ex ro fecit E 7 dpyn E 24 7 om. EJT atry | avtn EX): tavtn I: atry Christ 25 év EJP Al. Asc.: dy AP yp. Al.: év dv Joachim 27 xwpis EJT Al, Asc.c: om, AP 28 ry EJT Asc.¢ et fort. Al.: eivat r7 AP All

Christ 15 7) EJTAI° Asc.°: 7) Kat AP 19 To JA», ex ro fecit E 7 dpyn E 24 7 om. EJT atry | avtn EX): tavtn I: atry Christ 25 év EJP Al. Asc.: dy AP yp. Al.: év dv Joachim 27 xwpis EJT Al, Asc.c: om, AP 28 ry EJT Asc.¢ et fort. Al.: eivat r7 AP All

£51040" 32> —— 17; TO4t® 23

>, Leg = a Q na ovoiae eiot, Ti) O od dpO@s, Ore TO &y em) TOAAGY Eldos Aeyouow. airiov 8 Sri odk exovow dmododva tives al 30 na > Towadrat ovoiat ai apOapror mapa ras Kal? éxaora xal , a a o a aicOntas* Towdow ody Tas adras TO cider Tols POaprots hs a (ravras yap tcper), abtodyOpwrov xa abréinmov, mpoot- £ a o los Gévres Tots aicOnrots TO phua 76 “aitd”. Katrou Kav ed pr c Ewpdxemev Ta Gotpa, ovdey av Frrov, otwar, Hoav ovolar Lo4I* 2L> > L3 a v av \ an > X v aidior map as hyeis deer Sore xal viv ei py exouev 7 > oa tives eloty, GAN elvat yé twas tows dvaykaiov. dru pev ody ovre TOv Kabddov Aeyouevwr ovdev ovota oir eotly odcia ovdeula &€ odoidy, dhdov. 4 lay 17 Ti 8& yxph A€yew Kal Sroidv te Thy ovoiavy, médrAw adAnv oloy apxjv Tomoduevor A€ywpev' tows yap ék Tov- x a fol Tov €orat djAov Kal wept exeivyns THs odoias ris éatl KEexw- pirpevn Tov aicOnrGv ovoiGy, ere odv H ovola apy?) Kal Poe > rss > n la Lal X »! XX 7 airta tis éotiv, evredOev petitéov. Cyreirar 5& TO dia Th10 dei otrws, dua Ti GAAO GAA@ Twi trdpxer. TO yap (- Tey Oia TE 6 povoliKds GvOpwros povcikds GvOpwTds eoTW, ¥ > ee he > Vs a x 7 EM S.¢ £ yTot €oTl TO eipnuevoy Cyreiv, bia Ti 6 avOpwros jpovotkds x éoTw, 7) GAO. TO pev ody did Ti adrd eoTW adTd, oOddéy EoTL (nrety (Se6 yap TO Ore Kal 7d clvar tmdpyew dSfdra dvta —)éyo 8 ofoy ori cedjvn éexdeiter—, adrd de dru adrd, eis Adyos Kal pia airia emt mdvtwv, dia ti 6 avOpwros ¥ A \ , \ oe / 4 > 4 GvOpmmos 7) 6 rovotkds povotkds, TAHY ef Tis A€you Ste ad.al- petov mpos abrd Exacrov, Todto 8 jv TO Evi elvaur AAAG TodTO , XX f SY A , > x Kowdv ye Kata mavTwy kal otvropov): (yrjoeve 8 ay Tis 20 dua th GvOpwmds eote (Gov rovovdi. Todro pey Tolvey djArov, Sti od Gyre? d1a Th bs eotw GvOpwros dvOpwrds éoTw: tl Gpa kata twos Gyre? dia ti tmdpye (br. 8 stmdpxe,

Ca or

b3r aiom. J 32 mowovow ody ras EJT Al. Asc.: rowodyres AP 33 tavras yap iopev EJT Asc. : ras airds. 1d pév yap AP kat EJT Asc. : ro d¢ AP 1041%2 a4 EJT noetpev| etdoner T exopmev EJAr Al. Asc. : éyoumev rece. 3 re AD 5 ovde pia T II del om, AP @do AY Asc.¢: ado te EJT 12 povorkds dvOpwanrés EJA*T Al. Asc.¢: advépwros povoikds recc. Tse Ola. «2s 14 eorwom. ut vid. Al.: dia ri 6 povorkds dvOpwros povorkds avOpards éorw Joachim 14 riom. J 16 ard b¢ AP AI, : adrod de EJY: avrod Asc.° 18 6 povaixds om. AP 19 évi AP Asc. : év EJP 20 ye] re EJ: rol 21 dvOpwros scripsi : av@pwros A; 6 dvOpwmos EJ Asc. 22 dia ri om. AP

2573-2 D

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z, H

ut vid. Al.: dia ri 6 povorkds dvOpwros povorkds avOpards éorw Joachim 14 riom. J 16 ard b¢ AP AI, : adrod de EJY: avrod Asc.° 18 6 povaixds om. AP 19 évi AP Asc. : év EJP 20 ye] re EJ: rol 21 dvOpwros scripsi : av@pwros A; 6 dvOpwmos EJ Asc. 22 dia ri om. AP

2573-2 D

TON META TA ®YSIKA Z, H

def Sov elvaur ef yap pi otrws, oddev Cyrei), ofoy bia Té 25 BpovTa; dua th woos ylyverar év Tots veperw; dAdo yap otrw kar’ dAdov ott TO Cyrovpevov. Kal dua Ti Tradl, olov mrAWOor Kal AlOo1, oikla early; garepov rotvey oti Gyre? TO airov: todro 8 éort TO rh vival; os elmety AoyiKds, 6 ém éviwy pév éore Tivos evexa, ofov tows én’ oikias 7 KAl- 30 uns, em eviwy be Th éxivnoe mpGrov: airioy yap Kat TodTO. GAAG TO pev Tovwdrov alriov én Tod ylyverOar Cyretrar Kat PbelperOar, Odrepov S& Kal em) rod elvar. AavOdver dé pa- Arora TO Cyrovpevov ev Tois pi KaT GAAHAwY AEyopEvots,

1041} ofoy dvOpwros th ear. Cyreirat bia TO Gmdds eyerOat

GAA py SioplCew Orr rdde rdde. GAAA del drapOpd- cavras Cyreiv: ef 8& pr, Kowdv Tod pnOev Cyreiv Kal Tod Cnrety tu ylyverar. eel 5 Sel exew Te Kal Sadpxew TO 5 eval, dfrov dH bre THY HAnv. Cyret Oia Ti (rt) eorw: oto oixla tradi Sid rl; Ore badpyer d i olkla eivar. Kal av- Opwros Todi, 7) TO TGua Todro Todl éxyov. GoTE TO alrioy

(nretrar ths BAns (rodro 0 earl 7d eldos) © rh éotw* Todro nan nan i,

& 7 ovola. avepdov tolvey bri emt TGv AmdAGv odk EoTt GjTn- 10 ois ovde Oidagis, GAN ErEpos Tpdmos Ths CyTHoEws TOV TOLOU- Twov.—éemel dé 7d &k Twos ctvOETOV obtws Hore tv civat TO TAY, div pi os copds GdAX os ovddkgaBj—p Se ovdAdafi)

b oy DS ta ION a Ava ON X a s+ = 29? ovK €oTL TA oToLXEla, OVSE TH Ba TaiTd TO B Kal a, ovd

224 det om, AP 25 did ti AMAL: Oudre EJT 26 Todi APT: raol rool, virgula post Ai@o. eiecta, ci. Christ 27 Vidor kal mriv- Oo. AP oixia| kala J = bre] OJ 28 rotvro ...oyiK@s codd, T Asc.: damnavit Al. 33 py Kar adAndov yp. E: pu) katad\dnAos AP AL: pp kar’ @ov péevois Es py kat Gov JI yp. E : Kar’ d\dnwv yp. Al. > 1 ofoy et Schwegler ri EJAPI'AI.: dca ri Asc. yp. E 2 rade AP Al.: rade i) EJ: réde 7 T dcapOpaoavras AP Al. : diopOa- cavras EJT 3 xai...4 71 EJT AI. Asc.: om. AP 4 Te om. A? Asc.¢ 5 Oia... 6 ri] dud ri eorwy (oiov olkia) radi ; Trendelen- burg dia ri ri fort. Al., Christ: dca ri codd. PAsc.°: radi dua ri Bonitz : da ri rodi ci. Joachim 6 rot Al. Sta ri; Ore] didre AP: Oia ri; Sua ri Al. brdpxet] radl brapyer EJT Al. : tape radi recc. 5 #vom. AP oikia APAL. ~~ etvae om. Al. 7 rodt APAI.: 684 EJr rourt fort. Al.: om, AP Todt] dt ex Al, ci. Bonitz 8 rovro...«idos codd.T Al. Asc.: incl. Christ, fort. recte 10 ovde dtdaks in marg. J 12 dy] adda EJT Asc.¢: om. ut vid. Al. de EJT Asc.o: re AP; om. utvid. Al. 13 gore EJP Al. Asc.?: éora A 7@ Ba AP Al.: 76 Ba recc.: ra Ba Asc.e: om, EJP radro 76 EJY Al.: ratvré 76 recc. Asc.: atro r@ AP

aioe 24 — 1,- 1042%.7

Asc.: incl. Christ, fort. recte 10 ovde dtdaks in marg. J 12 dy] adda EJT Asc.¢: om. ut vid. Al. de EJT Asc.o: re AP; om. utvid. Al. 13 gore EJP Al. Asc.?: éora A 7@ Ba AP Al.: 76 Ba recc.: ra Ba Asc.e: om, EJP radro 76 EJY Al.: ratvré 76 recc. Asc.: atro r@ AP

aioe 24 — 1,- 1042%.7

€ SS a \ fal x \ S yp: + } oop mop Kal yh (Ovadrvbevtoy yap Ta pev odkére EoTw, olov 7 cap€ kal 7 ovddAaBy, Ta be oToLxela ort, Kal Td cas Vo a a + € / > , x mip kal ) yn)’ €oTw dpa te} ovddaBy, od pdvov Ta oTOL- lal A lal ‘ DA > X ~ e Le \ c xela TO dwvijev Kat apwvoy adda Kal €TEpoy TL, Kal 7 x > , a \ Fal x x BN \ \ aapE ov pdvov mip Kal yh 7) TO Oeppov Kal wWoxpdv n A al GAA Kal Erepdv ti—ei Tolvey dvdyxn Kdkelvo 7 aToLxelov x a H €x oToxelwy civat, ei ev oToixelov, Tadw 6 adros ora Adyos (€k Tovrov yap kal mupds Kal yhs €orar ) odapé Kal ért GAAov, Hor «is Gmeipov Badietrar): ef S& ek orotyetov, a \ a djAov Ste ody Evds GAAA TAELOVMY, 7 ExEivVO adTd eoTal, ef t ae % Ay A 22 N > lal , \ 3.2.5 a Hote Tadw én rovrov Tov avTov epoduev Adyov Kal ent THs XK lot an capkos 7 ovddaBijs. dd€ere 8 dv ecivar ti Todro Kal ov tay \ wy t, a > \ ‘ J \ \ oToxXelov, Kal alriov ye Tov civat TOOL pev oapKa TOOL dé ovddaBnv: dpolws 5& kal ent Tav GrAdAwv. ovoia Se Exdortov bev totro (rotro yap airiov mpGrov rod eclvai)\—enel 8 evra > >, sf a , 3 ? iA > / > V4 OVK oOvVolal TOY TpaywaTwV, GAN oOoaL oVolal, KaTa vow kal ptoer svvertixact, pavein av [kal] arn 7) vous ovcia, Leen | > ~ 3 > ° 7 ~ a. 3: \ 7. A €otw ov arotxelov GAN apxj—* aroixeiov 0 éorly eis 0 dvaipetra. evuTdpxov ws tAyv, olov ths ovddaBHs TO a

kal TO B. H

"Ek «87 «6TGv eipnuévav ovddoylcacba del Kal ovva- yayovras TO Kepddawov TédAos emibeivat. elpnrar Oy Ore TOV ovoldy Cyreirar TH altia Kat ai dpxal kal Ta oro-

a Re 7 SS ¢ DS c ‘4 va 2 ee N / xela. ovolar be ai pev dpodroyotpeval ciow tnd mdvTwr, Tept de eviwy idia twes amepivavTo: suodoyovpevar pev

bi4 ra EJT Asc.®: 7d AP 15 7 pr. om. AP 16 dpa 7 7 ovAAaBn EJT Al. : 5¢ 77s ovdAdaBns AP 19 Case od sup. lin. E, om. JI 28 mp&rov rov ecivar EJT Asc.°: rod etvat mparoy AP 29 doa ciota| ai ovotat AP: ovata doa fort. Al. xara... 30 pvoe JV Al. Asc.: hice AY: xara piow E 30 kat secl. Christ, habent recc.: ére AP: ruot EJT 33 70 EJ Asc.¢: om, AP 10423 ovddoyioacOa AP Al.: ovd- Noyiferbar EJ cuvayaydvta AP: ovvayovras E sed s in ras. 4 8 yp. E 5 ta alt. om. A

D 2

Bons

1042

TQN META TA ®Y31KA H

Al. xara... 30 pvoe JV Al. Asc.: hice AY: xara piow E 30 kat secl. Christ, habent recc.: ére AP: ruot EJT 33 70 EJ Asc.¢: om, AP 10423 ovddoyioacOa AP Al.: ovd- Noyiferbar EJ cuvayaydvta AP: ovvayovras E sed s in ras. 4 8 yp. E 5 ta alt. om. A

D 2

Bons

1042

TQN META TA ®Y31KA H

at gvowal, olor mop yh Bmp ap Kal raddAa Ta ama TOpata, everra Ta guTd Kal Ta pdpia avrav, Kal Ta (a Kal Ta pdpia Tv Cawy, Kal TédAos 6 odvpavds Kal Ta 10 & Hsp Sov, p / fal > lal 9Q7 / > 4 / ) A ’ popia Tod ovpavod: Lota d€ TWEs OvTlas A€yovolw ElvaL Ta T eldn Kal rad pabnpaticd. aGddAas be 8) ovpBatver ex TOY Adywv ovolas eivar, Td Th Hv elvar Kat TO droKelwevovs ert dAA@s TO yevos padAov Toy €lddv Kal Td KaOddov TOV 15 ka €xaorat TO Se KaOddov Kal TO yéver Kal at Wea t ~ x Pain, x , b Nee’) a aN ovvdnrovow (Kara Tov adréov yap Adyov odotar Soxodow e€tvat). émel 58 7d Tél iv elvar ovola, Tovrou 5& Adyos 6 dpiopds, bid TodTo Tepl dpicpyod Kal wept Tod Kad’ atrd Sidpiorat errel de c c x , c ISS 4 / DA = a ‘ 6 dpiopds Adyos, 6 6& Adyos pepn exeEt, avayKatoy Kal 20 TEpl pepovs iv ideiy, Tota Tis ovoias mépn Kal Tota ov, Kal el Tadra Kal Tod épurpod. ert Tolvuy obre Td KaOdAov ovola ote TO yevos' Tept b€ TOv iWedy Kal TOV paOnyariKGY votepov oKentéov' Tapa yap Tas alaOyras ovcias Tatras A€yovot rwes elvar.—vpdyv d& wept TOY dportoyoupevwy oboL@y - / . ’ ESN c ’ / c ’ > A 25 emeAOaper. atta. & elo ai aicOyrais ai & aic@nrai > xh tal A o. a > ah iN € ovoia: macat btAnv éxovow. eat. 8 ovola rd droKelwevor, dAAws pev » bAn (Anv be A€yw 7 pH Tdd€ TL odo evepyela dvuvdper eorl réde TY), GAdws 8 6 Adyos Kal 7 ta A /, By cal / , 3 / S ‘ popgy, 0 réde TL dv TO Adyw XwptoTdy eoTw: Tplroy de Td 30 €k TovUTwY, o} yeveris pdvov Kal POopad ort, Kal xwpioror « a n ‘ s x t > a € EN © > A anh@s' TOV yap KaTa Tov Adyov ovTLOY al pev at O ov, ig Ad 'd' Ni > AL Le A -~ 2 f mS va ért & early ovola cat 7» bAn, SnrAov: ev Tacas yap Tals avrikempevars petaBodats eorl Tt TO DroKeluevoy tais pera- a oe \ , x a si b] a id by Bodats, ofov Kara tomovy TO viv pev evtadda madw 4d dddAoO, Kal kar avénow 6 vov pev tydrikovde maAw & ba x a“ \ > > A nn 1 c LN é\atrov 7 pelcov, kal kar dAdolwow dO viv pev tyles 1042) addw S& Kdyvov: duolws d& Kal Kar’ ovolay db viv wen ev

w =

28 anp om. JT 10 6 om. AP 11 tre AP reas fecit AP 12 6) om. T: de J 17 6 Adyos épiopds Al, 20 kal ef EJT Al.: ef AP 21 ravra Al. — dptopod 6) sed n in ras. E: éptopod Sef JL: optopevov yp. Ez épicpod cal rod wpicpevov fort. Al. ért| éort Christ 22 ray pr.om. AP 24 viv... 25 alcOnrai APT Al. : om. EJ 26 ovoiaa EJT Al.: odcat AP — ra brroxeipeva yp. E Al. 27, 28 diAdas & 6 Néyos et ante et post parenthesin A? et fort. Al. ; ante parenthesin yp. E 29 30m.A 32 xalom.I 7 erasum in E

I. 104278 — 2, 1042) 33

/ / > 2 a \ a s € / ¢

yevese. maw 6 ev pOopa, Kal viv pev vToKelwevoy as

: om. EJ 26 ovoiaa EJT Al.: odcat AP — ra brroxeipeva yp. E Al. 27, 28 diAdas & 6 Néyos et ante et post parenthesin A? et fort. Al. ; ante parenthesin yp. E 29 30m.A 32 xalom.I 7 erasum in E

I. 104278 — 2, 1042) 33

/ / > 2 a \ a s € / ¢

yevese. maw 6 ev pOopa, Kal viv pev vToKelwevoy as

4 / 3 > ad > x PEO A ¥ fla 7 Svoiy avtTn ovK aKodovbet: ov yap avaykn, €b TLS LA / ro} \ XN A ‘\ ot tAnv exer TomKyy, Toro Kal yevvnrnv Kal POapriy exew. tls pev otv diadopa tod amAGs yiyvecOar Kal pr) amAGs, ev Tots dvavkots elpnrar.

2 7Enel & 7 pév os troKkewevyn Kal ws bAn ovala dpo- Aoyeira:, attn 8 eorly H Suvayer, owTOv THY ws evepyeLay 10 ovolay Tov aicOnrav «cimeiv Tis ect. Anpdxpitos pev ovv

a x > / Do A ~ \ ¢ v Tpeis Siapopas €ovxey olopévm eclvar (7rd pev yap troxel- a X A a \ Sey, iN / s bid pevov oGpa, THhv UAnv, EV Kal TavTov, diadepew Se 7 ¢ fat (de J cad x a as / x a 7 pUoHO, O EOTL OXIA, 7 TpoTH, O ETL Oeows, 7 Siabryh, O éort Taéis)' atvovrat 5€ ToddAal diadopal otoa, ofov Ta 15 a 's 4 a oa A 4 / , ev ovvbece. éyerar THs Ans, OoTwep Goa Kpace Kaba- mep péAlkpatov, Ta d€ deouG olov ddxedos, Ta be KOAAH olov BiBAtov, Ta b& youd ofov KiBdriov, Ta be TAEiocL , \ S t e IO \ e fy a SS Tovrav, Ta b€ Oecer oiov ovdds Kal trépOvpov (Tatra yap n a la F \ > , ~ _ ‘ TG KetoOai mas diadéper), TH 5% xpdvm oiov déeimvov Kal 20 dpirov, Ta b&€ Témm oloy Ta TvEtpara Ta Oe Tols TOV aicOntév mdbecw oloy oxAnpornte Kal padakdrntt, Kal TUKVOTHTL Kal apatdrnrt, Kat nporynt. Kal) vypdérynti, Kal \ b> 4 - LI: vs > XS fs 4 \ of \ Ta pev eviows TovTwy Ta 6€ aot TovToIs, Kal brAws Ta pev vmepoxf Ta SE AACE. Gore OijAov Gre Kal TO EoTL 25 TocavTaxGs A€yeTar ovdds yap €oTrw 6rt ovrws KeiTat, Kal TO eva TO oUTwS adTd KeloOat onpaiver, Kal TO KptoTad- Aov iva. 76 otTm TeTUKVGcOu. eviwy.de TO Elva Kal Vad 4 £ / n x XS a. ‘ \

Tact TovTols dpiOnoeTal, TH TA pev peulyOar, Ta OE keE- kpacOar, Ta dé ded€o0a1, Ta O€ TeTUKVGTOAL, TA BE Tals 30 o ° x GAAats Siaopats KexpyjoOa, dowep yelp 7 Tovs. An- mréa ovvy Ta yern TéV diahopdv (atrar yap dpxai écov- a a o XK na Tat Tod etva.), oloy Ta TS PAAAOV Kal jrTov 7) TUKVo Kal

b2 pev EJT et fort. Al.: om. AP 6 exe VAnv EJ 10 evépyea Ab: évepyeia Al. 13 duapéper APT 14 Oiabryn E?JA? Al. : Siabnyy E} 16 écmep om. AP 17 daxeddos fecit E 18 8€ ev mAcioos APT: 8€ eumdeioow J 23 dpatdrytt] pavdrnre EJ Al, 27 Kpvara\do Bonitz 28 76 alt.] ro sed o in ras. E eivat] eiSos AP 29 ra dé kexpaoOa om. Al. 31 n xelp E: i xelpJ == Annréov E

TON META TA ®YSIKA H

Al. : Siabnyy E} 16 écmep om. AP 17 daxeddos fecit E 18 8€ ev mAcioos APT: 8€ eumdeioow J 23 dpatdrytt] pavdrnre EJ Al, 27 Kpvara\do Bonitz 28 76 alt.] ro sed o in ras. E eivat] eiSos AP 29 ra dé kexpaoOa om. Al. 31 n xelp E: i xelpJ == Annréov E

TON META TA ®YSIKA H

pave Kal tots dAdo Tols Tovovros: mavTa yap Tadra ie N ‘ PION gee > od , x x , 35 Umepoxy Kal édAdenbis eorw, ef SE TL oyHpare 7) AELdTNTL \ 7 > lal \ P. n % X kal Tpaxtrynti, mavta ever Kal Kkapitdho. Tols b& TO by 2) AN °. + 2 / \ Ss > 10432 €ivat TO peutxOar EoTal, avTiKeevws 6€ TO pa Elva. \ 57 bY / [4 y =e > , er an @ gavepov d) ex Tovtwy Ori elmep TP odola aitla Tod eivar éxacrov, OTL ev TovToLs (yrnTEov TL TO alrioy Tod elvat ToOUTwY e ae \ a be Y ION , oe éxaoTov. ovoia pev ody ovdey TovTwY ovde cvVdvaCopEVvoY, Buws d@ Td dvdAoyoy ev ExdoTw Kal ws ev tals ovolas TO THs

vA ie oN € Soils \ 3 al 7 . DAyns Katnyopovpevoy avT) 7 evepyera, Kal év Tots GAdows tal e BY dptopots pdducra. otov ei ovddoy dor dpicacba, EvrAov 7) AlOov wd Ketuevov epoduev, Kal oikiav mAtvOovs Kal EVAa @dt , \ \ \ @ peer Sg eee ot > \ 7 kelpeva (7 ért kal TO ob evexa én” eviwy éotw), i d& kpvorar- vA \ xX i? ic - 4 XS > / 10 Ao, Hdwp Temynyos 7) TEeTUKVapEvoY wd TUUdwvia dé d&€os \ / Tad sf \ oN \ / ND a Kal Bapéos pigis road: tov avrov d& TpoToy Kal emt TOV dddwv. gavepoy 57 ex Tovtwv bru 7H evépyera GAAy GAAns c x. ¢ / na aN x e / n > « a BAns kal 6 AOyos: TAY pev yap H ovvOcots Tov B 7 piéus cat Sy fal > ig ‘ la c / € SS TGv b€ dAdo TL TSV Elpnuevwv. 610 TOV SpLComevwv ob pe 15 A€yovres Th eri olkia, Ott AiOor TAiVOon EVAa, THY dvvape oikiay A€yovow, tAn yap Tadra: ot b& ayyetov cKeTacTLKOY \ Me + » an / xpyudrov Kal cwudrwv, % Te dAdo Tovotrov [mpocbévres], x = by / € 3° if, a , % vi Ti evepyevay €yovow: of 8 dudw tadra cvvribévres THY Tpl- THY Kal THY ek TovTwY ovotav (oie yap 6 pey dia TOV dia- lal , lal wy \ on 2 4 a £ > 3 na 20 mopav Adyos Tod eldous Kal THs evepyetas elval, 6 O ex TOY evuTapyovtav Tis DAns maddov) Suotws dé Kal olovs ’Apyv- Tas amed€xeTO Opovs' Tod cuvdudw ydp elow. otov Tl ear vy- v4 ? 7 > , ead ¢ Bx s dey ee pee 4 veula; npewia ev TANnOe depos: DAn ev yap 6 aip, evepyeva d@ kal ovola H jpewia. Th €or. yadjvn; Suaddrns Oadrdrrns* ‘ \ € re « A € y & XS SF \ 2570 pev broKkelwevoy ws UAn 7 Oddatra, 7 de evepyera Kal 14 E) \ \ n As X\ x © vA c x 7 aicOnti ovola éort Kat TOs* 7 pev yap os UAn, H 6 c \ LORE aw A € S /. TouaTe 7 Woxy atrn yap ovoia kal evépyea ooépards

> x \ ieee > / ~ Twos. «in 5 dv Kal én audorepors TO Gov, ody os Evt

, / > > c by ed > \ an EN /

Noyw AEyouevoy GAN ws TpPds Ev. GAAG Tatra mds pev

/ lol a tt GAAo biadeper, mpds be THY Grnow Ths ovolas Ths > nr > / = \ \ By ae = a“ 4 \ lel be aicOntjs ovdevs TO yap Ti nv evar TO elder Kal TH evep-

«in 5 dv Kal én audorepors TO Gov, ody os Evt

, / > > c by ed > \ an EN /

Noyw AEyouevoy GAN ws TpPds Ev. GAAG Tatra mds pev

/ lol a tt GAAo biadeper, mpds be THY Grnow Ths ovolas Ths > nr > / = \ \ By ae = a“ 4 \ lel be aicOntjs ovdevs TO yap Ti nv evar TO elder Kal TH evep-

4, © A ‘\ >S \ \ fol LJ ed / yela Umapxer. Wyn pev yap Kal Wuyi eivar radtrdv, BJ 0 / bY: x y 0 > m / rd ‘\ \ ¢ \ avOpdrw d& Kal dvOpwros od rairdv, eb ph Kal Hh Worx) avOpwmos AexXOnoerau otrw Oe Twh pev Twl 8 o}.—od dat- verat 33) Gyrotow % ocvddaBi ek TGv oTotxelwv odca Kal

t 7 ¢ era y, \ iA \ a auv0écews, 0d 7) oikia TAtvOoL Te Kal ctvOects. Kat TodTO > a ’ 9 « na 999 € n > 7 e 6pOGs: ov yap eorw 7 atvOeots odd 7 pits ex To’TwY Sv

Xx tal n

éotl otvbecis 7) pigis. Spoims d& ode Tév drwy ovdder, otov ef 6 ovdds Oéce1, odK ek TOD Ovd0d 1H Oars GAAA pGAAoV obros e& éxelyys. odd 07 6 avOpwmds éott Td GGov Kal di- mow, GAAd te det elvat 6 mapa Tadra éorw, ef Tadd’ HAn, ovre b€ oToLXElov obT ex GTOLXELlov, GAN 7) ovola: 6 eLaipodvTes \ LA / Ly a) nn a \ > 4 Tip tAmy A€yovow. «i ody Tobr alriov rod elvat, Kal ovola

an CAS xX \ > 8 / 2 / ‘\ iP DS TooTo, avTHy av THY ovolay ov r€youev. (dvdyKn 5H Tavrny 7) Dh a DN X\ A ny Vg be / alo.ov «iva. 7) POapriy advev Tod OeiperOar Kal yeyovevar dvev Tod ylyvecOa. déderxrar Se Kal dedjAwrar év GAdois bre Td eldos odMels Tore? OvdE yevvd, GAA Torelrar Tdde, ylyverat 0€ 76 ek TovTwY. «i 8 elol Trav POapTdy at odvoia

te baw lel S i > 3 if > 2 /

Xwpiotal, ovdey mw SHAOV’ TARY OTL y Evlwy ovK evdéxeTaL a o \ ar x \ xX oy @ beta Dy djAov, doa pa) oldvy Te mapa Ta TiVd elvat, olov oikiay 7

an yy X = 39) Gs if - Lath Y vy > bp pe lal LA okebos. lows pev ody ovd ovolat cioly ot adra Tatra ovre

% 32 Keipevov AP 34 dre secl. Bywater 36 ro om. E b2 Wuxi... Wvx7, omisso eiva, AP 4 6¢ EJT AL: & emi A 5 kat EJ Alt: kai ris AP 7 ov8’ AP AL: cal EJT 8 eo] éorip 7 AP 9 6 AP yp. E: ef Al.: om. EJT Il ravra] ra adda Ab vAns J 12 oUre de] 0 ovre EA yp, Eet fort. Al. = add’ 7 ovata codd. 'Al.: secl. Christ 13 €ivat kal ovctas, TovTo avrnv Bonitz, fort. legit Al. 14 ov E1) yp. EY: om, E?A> Al.

17 yervarar EJT rrovetra codd. V Al. : rovei ets ci. Bonitz 21 ovr Bekker: ovS¢ AP yp, E: ovd€é re EJT

1043

3°

10444

TQN META TA ®YSIKA H

= add’ 7 ovata codd. 'Al.: secl. Christ 13 €ivat kal ovctas, TovTo avrnv Bonitz, fort. legit Al. 14 ov E1) yp. EY: om, E?A> Al.

17 yervarar EJT rrovetra codd. V Al. : rovei ets ci. Bonitz 21 ovr Bekker: ovS¢ AP yp, E: ovd€é re EJT

1043

3°

10444

TQN META TA ®YSIKA H

TL TOY GAAwY Ooa pH ioe ovveoTyKE* THY yap vow , BA / NX. bp) a“ ta] > , cv AJ povny ay tis Oeln tiv ev Tots POaprots odoiav.) dare 7 amopla iv of ’AvricOveror kal of otrws amaldevro nmdépovv ow. os ig 4 "3 By ied ey x éxeu tid Kaipdv, Ort ovK ort Td rh éorw dpioacOa (roy yap Spov Adyov elvat paxpdv), GAAG Toloy pev Ti eoTW evdexerar kal bidabar, donep apyvpov, tl pev eotw ov, oe by e / ¢ by ely x ‘ - 3 / drt 8 ofov Katrirepos' dor ovolas oT. yey Hs evdexeTas o a / ‘ elvat dpov Kal Adyov, olov ths ovvOerov, edv Te aicOnTH af \ 3 e ? ivf , nee ‘ éay Te vontyn 7° e€ Gv 8 atryn mpadrwv, odxért, elmep Th ‘\ ‘x 2 c , £ € A \ lal bY X\ Kata Twos onmaiver 6 Adyos 6 OpioTiKds Kal det TO peD eonep tAnv elvar TO d& os poppyv.—mPavepdy Se Kal dudri, elmep ciol Tws apiOpuol ai ovoiat, otrws «iol Kal ovx kid / I 4 DS c x 2 , @s twes A€yovor povddav: & Te yap dpiopds apiOuds Tus* duaiperds te yap Kal els ddiaipera (od yap ameipos ot Adyo.), Kal 6 GpiOuds Se Towtrov. Kal womep ovd am a Xx ApiOuod aarpeOevros Tivds 7) mpoorebevros e& Gv 6 apiOuds 2 9) oa € 3, N > / > ? ae. eed €or, ovKeT 6 adros apLOuds eorw GAA’ Erepos, Kav TovAG- mn a ox a cf a A IOAN \ xiatov apatpeOh 7) mpooreOh, ottws ode 6 dpiopos ovde TO Th > m De we. a ye! / BY x / \ nv elvat ovKéTt €oTat apaipeOEvtos Tivds 7 TpooTEbEvTOS. Kal BS 2) x ey 4 OTR a a > wv I {sexe Tov apiOuov det etvat te @ els, 0 viv odk Exovor A€yew Tint 2 \ @ N \ > »” 2 2 , Xn els, elmep eorly els (i) yap otx ori add oloy ocwpds, 7 yy, 3 , / 7, \ fal > n ‘ £ £ elmep éori, Nextéov Ti TO ToLody ev ex TOAAGY): Kal 6 dpt- \ 3 a c / = XOX a A / Ms na opos els eoriv, duotws 58 ode TodTov Exover A€yew. Kal ToOTO 3 / f an , na \ ‘¢ A. € *) ig A elkdTws cupBatver Tod avrod yap Adyou, kal 7 ovala ev ovrTws, GAN odx ws A€ ( t d doa 7) ” X ws A€yovol Ties oloy povds Tis ovoa 7) oTLyMI, GAN évTeddxera kal vous tis Exdorn. Kal domep ovde 6 apiOuos €xet TO MaAAOY Kal jrrov, ovd 7 KaTa TO Eidos > / > > € ~ an A \ > a / ovoia, adr’ eltep, 7 weTa THS tAns. Tepl pev ody yeverews kat pOopas tev AEyouevwy odoidy, TGs T evdexeTar Kal m@s advvatov, Kal mepl rhs eis Tov adpiOudv dvaywyis, GoTo expt TOUT@Y Siwpiopevoy. -

b23 povoy yp. E tiv ia Al.: réy codd. T 26 pev 7] pevrot fecit E 27 evdéxecOar AP 28 ovcia E} 30 7] om. A? ovk éore EJT Al, 32 @s om, AP 36 rowwdros rece. 38 éorw alt. om, AP 10447 3 rov aptOuoy codd. T: T@ aptO.@ ex Al. ci. Bonitz Tt @] airiat AP: re ro évodp Kat & Ci. Bonitz 6... rim ets APTAL: om. EJ 4 etmep... yap] eis yap AP Il 4] ras ut vid. Al. 12 7 om. EJ 13 Tov

dptOuov E sed o utrumque in ras.

3. 1043 22 — 4.1044» 10

38 éorw alt. om, AP 10447 3 rov aptOuoy codd. T: T@ aptO.@ ex Al. ci. Bonitz Tt @] airiat AP: re ro évodp Kat & Ci. Bonitz 6... rim ets APTAL: om. EJ 4 etmep... yap] eis yap AP Il 4] ras ut vid. Al. 12 7 om. EJ 13 Tov

dptOuov E sed o utrumque in ras.

3. 1043 22 — 4.1044» 10

4 Ilepi 8 rhs tAtkis otoias det pr AavOavew Gre el 15 kal €k To} atrod mdvra mpeTov 7) Tév aiTGv os TpPdTHY Kat 7 avtTy tAn ws apxi Tois yvyvopuevols, byws eoTL TIS oixela Exdorov, ofoy préyparos [éor. tpo7y bAn] Ta yAvKea x n x ni Avrapd, xoAfs b€ Ta TuKpa 7) GAN Grrar tows be TadTa €k Tod atrod. ylyvovra: b& mAclovs tAat Tod adrod 20 drav Oarépov 7 érepa 7, olov pdréypa ex Autapod kal ydv-

t > x BY 2 a / 5] s 2 ree Keos el TO Atmapov Ex TOU yAvKEos, EK O€ XOATS TO ava- AverOar eis Tiv mpernv UAnv rij xodrjnv. bixas yap 70d’ 2 na x A € ny A > fd ? ‘ €k TOvOE, | OTL TPO 6000 EoTra 7 OTL dvadvOevTOS els THY b) / S. I XS lad nr CA DA o , apxnv.. evdexetar b€ pas THs VAns ovons Erepa ylyverOau 25 dua THY KWodcav aitiav, ofoy éx EAov Kal KiBwrds Kal kAivn. eviovy 8 érépa mn tAn e€ dvdykns Erépwv dvtwr, 4 > / 3 A Fae = h ”y - 7 olov mplwv odk dv yévorro ex Ebdov, ot8 éml rH Kwodton aria a x TovTo" ov yap Toimoe mplova e€ épiov 7 EvAov. ei & dpa TO avd evdexerar e€ GAAns FAs Torfjoat, Sfjrov sri 7 30 / \ i ’ ‘ € c cal iJ > ba > ‘ s € a TEXYN KAL ApX] nH oS KiWotca 7H avTH: ef yap Kal 7H TAH érépa Kal 7d kwodv, kal Td yeyovds—éray by Tis CyTi TO alriov, emel mAcovayds Ta alria déyeTar, Taoas bel Aéyew Tas evdexouevas airlas. ofov avOpdmov ris aitia os ” 2 x , Piso ef a = . s Bs tAn; apa Ta Katapyvia; tl Oo os Kwodv; Gpa TO onépya; 35 7 3: x ~ ‘ yw > if > € e a ‘ Tt 0 @s TO e€idos; TO Ti av elvat. Th O os ov EveKa; TO téhos. tows b5& Tatra dGudw TO adrd. bei € Ta eyyt- I044> yo 4 4 € lA X\ a x nr > 1 Tata airia Aeyew. Tis n An; pH Tip NH ynv adda ‘ x \ BS = x Sy are, ‘ BS Thy tdvov. epi pev ovv Tas gvoikas ovoias Kal yevnTas avaykn ovrw petievar et Tis pérecow dpOGs, ecinep apa aitia Te Tadra kal trocaira kat def Ta altia yvwpicew: emt 6€ TOV gvoidv pev didioy 6 ovoidy dAdros Adyos.

ey i ot > ot A x > 4 2 x 4 tows yap EVLa OUK -€xEL VAnY, 7) OV TOLa’THY GAAG povoy

% , a / 999 a ‘ A / ‘\ > / , Kata TOTOY KWWyTHY. ovd boca on hoe pev, pq ovolar OE, > ba “4 A ZJ pS Ry & ¢ > e s ovK €oTL TOUTOLS VAN, GAAG TO broKelyevov 7 ovola. oiov Tt aitiov éxdehpews, tis tAn; od yap éoTw, GAN 7 cEANVN TO 10

817 70m. AP 18 éegrt mporn VAn om. AP 24 mpd 6600] mparov T° 26 kal pr. om. AP z9Q ij] i) é« AP ei ©] rc AP 30 tAns om. A? Al. 31 7 os] ws AP 32 yevos J’ an d€?

33 TOAP AL: tivo EJT 2 ris» EJ? Simpl.¢: ri as AP: ris J': quaeT 3 ovolas EJAY*L Simpl.%: aizias yp. A, fort. AP! yevnras E‘JA> Simple: -yevynras E? Al. 4 apa om. AP et fort. Al. 8 ovoiat EJAY AI. : ovoig recc. TY Simpl.¢ 9 7 VAn AP 10 7E

taal toe

1045®

TQN META TA O&YSIKA H

taal toe

1045®

TQN META TA O&YSIKA H

4 lol val n ms macxov. ti & airiwv os Kwhoav Kat pOcipay TO pos; 7 Lan x t) e oe > + A > c o € im , GAAG Gdndros edy pu} peTa THs aitias 7 6 Adyos. oiov Tt by / , 3X Se uN a ee 4 Las 2 ekAelis; oTEepyos Poros. e€av 5€ TpooTEOH TO UTO yHs EV / an eo z Meow ylyvouevyns, 6 atv TO aitiw Adyos obTos. Unvov 6 adndov ti TO mpOrov macyov. ad Ore 7d Gov; val,

\ a an x »” a@AAA TodTO Kara Tl, Kal Ti mpOrov; Kapdia 7 GAXO TL. Ls) € ‘ cA S. , \ df \ >| 14 ».\ X\ fol eira t7d Tivos; eira Ti TO maOos, TO exelvovu Kal pa TOD , - \ dAov; bre akwyoia Toadi; vat, adr’ atrn To Ti TacxEW TO Tp@Tov; lal \ > °Emel & evia dvev yevérews Kal POopas Ect Kal ovK a a € / wy 3 'd \ ia \ a €oTw, otov al ortvypat, elmep ecici, Kat Odws Ta €ldy (od ydp TO AevKdv yiyveras GAAG TO Eddov AevKov, El . fal > t éxk twos Kal tl may TO ylyvomevov ylyverat), od TavTa av tavavtia yiyvoiro e@& dAdAjAwy, GAN Erepws AeEvKOs / dvOpwnos ék peAavos dvOpemov Kal AevKdv Ex pedavos* X\ ovde TavTos VAN €oTw GAN Gowv yeveris Eat Kal peTaBory} an X\ £ > eis GAAnAa? doa 8 dvev Tod peraBdddr\ew EoTW 1) py, OVK + (S a yw > re! 4 lot Xx 3 7 3 éort tovtwy tAn.—eyer 0 amopiay TOs mpds TavavTia 7 of € « t ov e 4 BS lal ~ € / vAn 7 €xdorov exe. olov ef TO capa Suvduer dyewor, 2 “A s , € 7 en x Jt \ ‘ evavtioy d€ vooos vylela, apa audw dvvayer; Kal TO 0 cy xX a Bop Svvdyer olvos Kal d€os; 7) Tod pev Kal ebw Kab > a be Kata TO e€ldos tAn, Tod d& KaTa orepyow Kal POopay THY 3 mapa pvow; amopia b€ Tis eort kal dia Th 6 olvos ovx tAn Tod d€ovs ode duvdper d€os (kalror ylyverar e€ adrod n BN d€os) kal 6 (Gv Suvaper vexpds. 7) ov, GAAA KaTa oUp- a ue BeBnkos at POopal, 7 d& Tod Chov An adri) Kara POopav nan v4 \ cf ‘ MY vA y+ / AS vexpod dvvauis Kal bAyn, Kal TO Bdwp d€ovs: ylyverar yap €x TovTwy domep e€ huepas vvé. Kal dca oi) otrw pera- Bare eis GAAnAa, eis THY UAnv bel emavedOciv, oloy «i lel ~ na 9», ~~ \ €x vexpod Gov, eis THY bAnv mpOrov, ef otrw COov' kal x. », > cf a bd v4 b. TO o€0s cis wp, «0 ots oivos. bit & om. EJF 14 ro om. EJ 16 aAN ore EJ?AYT Al.: @\Xo te fort. J', ci. Bonitz — vat] e¢zam primum T 19 rod?

», > cf a bd v4 b. TO o€0s cis wp, «0 ots oivos. bit & om. EJF 14 ro om. EJ 16 aAN ore EJ?AYT Al.: @\Xo te fort. J', ci. Bonitz — vat] e¢zam primum T 19 rod?

eivat AP 22 «iSn EJ et ut vid. Al.: Sy Kat af poppat APT 23 / a 2 \ A ra Ni BA \ \ M6 evos eva. Ti ody éotiy 0 moret ev Tov dvOpwrov, Kal dia Th év GAN ov TodAd, ofov ré Te Cov Kal Td dimovv, GAdAws 15 ‘ \ > Ba a - > , las \ Te 6 Kal ef oT, woTep act twes, adtd Te Cov Kat =! x 4 Da Me X\ 3 3 tal > \ ¢ »” / > auto dimouv; dia Ti yap OvK exeiva avTa 6 AvOpwros eat, \ wy X t € BA > > / 399 kal €covtat kata pébeéw ot avOpwror ovk dvOperov ovd \ a , 4 &vos GAAa dvoiv, gov Kal dimodos, Kal GAws 42 odK ay é \\ Tay ein 6 dvOpwmos ev GAdA TAciw, Cov Kal dSimovy; dave- 20 \ Nv hcg ey x a c bly c \ pov 69 Or. obrm pev peTiovtow os ciddacw opiCecOa kal / an fal Neyer, odk evdexeTat Arododvat Kal Adoar THY damoplav: > aN / ei 0 eoriv, omep r€yowev, TO pev TAN 7d OF popdy, Kal \ 8 I \ x ex f > 4 > y; iA x TO pev dvvaper TO O& evepyela, odKer. Amopla dd€evev av = A x elvat TO Cyrovpevov. eat. yap atrn 1 amopla 7H avr) Kav 25 > c 4 + € 7) ‘4 , Y, SS * ei 6 Opos eln tywariov otpoyytAos yadkds: etn yap av onmetovy Tovvowa TotTo Tod Adyov, wate Td Cyrovpevdv eore Te attiov tod év eivat Td otpoyytAov Kal Tov yxadkdr. t \ N fe ovkett 07) amopla datverar, bt. TO pev BAn TO O& poppy. “ an A » tt ody Tovrov alriov, Tod Td dSuvduer dv evepyela etvar, 30 Tapa TO Toujoav, ev boos got yéveois; ovdev ydp eotuy atriov €repov Tod Tv Svvdauer oaipay evepyeta elvar opai- > A aay ee \ oN Les s a Ba ~ led pav, adda todr iv TO rl i eivar ExaTépw. EoTL O€ THs oe c X\ \ ¢ BI) >) / \ 1% nN , Ni A vAns 7) fev vont 7 0 atoOyTH, Kal adel Tov AOyoU TO peEV vA x SY 3 2 t 3 ia ¢ / ~ 3 Y 5s ~ bAn TO 6€ evepyeid eoTw, ofov 6 KUKAOS oXHpa emlmedov. 35 o¢ 5S \ , WA is N / >) 4 >A ooa Oe pn ExeL DANY fanTE vonTHY pHTE atoOnrnv, evovs émep &y ri [etval] éorw Exacrov, donep kal omep ov TL, TO 1045?

88 mavtwv recc. 1: mavtra EJAY 9 may EJ Ale: dav AP 10 76 om. yp. E 16 67 om. AP Al.¢ 17 avtoavOpenos AP Al.&: atra airodvOperos fort. Al. 18 of EJT AI. : ofoy AP 18-19 ovdevds dAAG AP ALS 26 60m. AP ALS sé arpoyyidos AP Al.e 28 tov] royp. E 29 dy] 8 4 A» 30 Tovrov ro airioy AP tov JAY, ex rotro fecit E 35 evepyeiar E olov . . . émimedov om. fort. Al. 6 om. AP Dy etvai om. fort. Al., secl. Bonitz

ro om, E'T

TON META TA ©&YSIKA H, ©

AP ALS sé arpoyyidos AP Al.e 28 tov] royp. E 29 dy] 8 4 A» 30 Tovrov ro airioy AP tov JAY, ex rotro fecit E 35 evepyeiar E olov . . . émimedov om. fort. Al. 6 om. AP Dy etvai om. fort. Al., secl. Bonitz

ro om, E'T

TON META TA ©&YSIKA H, ©

: a iS TOOE, TO TOLOY, TO TOTOV—ObLO Kal ovK eveoTIW EV TOLS Opt- co > 9 »As a. sf opois ovTe TO Ov ovTE TO Ev—, Kal TO Ti HY elvat EvOUS EY TL >] A \ ‘\ \ > ” ef , cA a éotiw domep Kal dv Ti—d10 Kal ovK EoTLV ErEpdy TL aiTLoY TOU a \ e t év eivat overt TovTwy ovde Tod dv TL elvatr evOds yap ExaoToY i pee a x WSS serene éorw dv tt Kal ev TL, odx Os ev yevertO dvyTi kal TG évt, lol = Sree \ “4 ovd’ as xwpioTéy dvTwy Tapa Ta Ka Exacta. dia TavTnV , ¥, a a de tiv dmopiay of pev péeOeEw A€yovot, Kal aitiov ti THs an 14 mebekews kal ti TO peTéxeww Gmopotow of b€ cvvovelay [Wuxjs], Bomep Avxddpwv gynolv etvar rip emiorHpny Tod a \ va & enioracdar Kal Woxjs: of b& ctvOeow 7 cbvderwov Woxis lad t e \ compat. TO Gv. Kaito 6 avtos Adyos emt TavT@V’ Kal \ Be ye 7 x xX 7 x , «ak / 6 yap 76 bytaivew €orae 7) cvvovela 7 ocbvderpos 7) oUVOETLS a 5 , wWoxis Kal tyielas, Kal TO Tov XaAKOv Elval Tplywvor / a AN f \ A \ > uA 6 avvOects xadKod Kal Tpry@vov, Kal TO AEvKOY etval oUDOE- , os emupavetas kal AevKdTyTos. aitiov G6re Suvvapews a V3 ” kal évredexelas Gyroto. Adyov évoTrowdy Kal Svapopav. €oTt o..& \ 0, @onep elpyra, 7 eoxarn tAn Kal 7 poppy TavTo Kal év, duvapet, TO be evepyeia, Bote Gyuowv 1d (yreiv Tod fal a \ évos ti airiv_xal tod ev eivau ey yap te Exacrov, Kal TO

‘4 is ,

/ IAN duvdyer kal TO evepyeia ev Tos e€oTW, Hote aitiov ovdeEr

y a ! dANo mA ei TL os Kwhoav éx BSuvapews els evepyevav. a x No AS Cf / 2 a 4 of

doa O€ pay EXEL VANY, TavTA aTA@S O7eEp EV TL.

\G)

a a a ¢

Tlept perv otvy tod mpdétws ovtos Kal mpds 6 macat at

xy , a yy b) la »” \ fal

a\hat Katnyopiat Tov ovTos avadepovTat ElpyTal, mEpl TIS > , \ \ LS Lod > / , , &

ovcias (kata yap Tov Ths ovolas Adyovy éeyerar Taddra

b2 rdde] Tovro yp. E ante 6:0 collocanda ody... évi (1. 6) ci. Al., 6... &kaora (1. 4-7) Schwegler 4 kai alt. om. APT 5 overt EJT Al.: odd€ évi AY 8uTl Io Wuyis codd. I Al.: incl. Bonitz 14 TO sup. lin. J 15 TO] 7d thy emupaverav ex Al. ci. Bonitz ev eivat yp. EY 17 Adyov AP yp. E Al.: ro EJT dtadopay ev E?AP éort... 23 re om. yp. E yp. J 18 7 pr. ‘A? et fort. Al.: kai 7 Er 19 vom. EJT; & kat yp. E: ro pev Casaubon : ev, Té pev ci, Bonitz Suvapet ... 21 €oriv om. AP AI. 22 ei 70 ws EJT 23 &v AD Al: 2 ovra EJt: & Tl, domep. kal orrep éy ci. Bonitz 71] Te mepl pev oop Tov mpaTas dvros kal mpos 6 ai Gat Katyyopiat tod dvtos dvahépovrat etpyrat, wept THs ovgias AP

6. 10455 2 — 1. 10468 25

E: ro pev Casaubon : ev, Té pev ci, Bonitz Suvapet ... 21 €oriv om. AP AI. 22 ei 70 ws EJT 23 &v AD Al: 2 ovra EJt: & Tl, domep. kal orrep éy ci. Bonitz 71] Te mepl pev oop Tov mpaTas dvros kal mpos 6 ai Gat Katyyopiat tod dvtos dvahépovrat etpyrat, wept THs ovgias AP

6. 10455 2 — 1. 10468 25

OvTa, TO TE TOTOY Kal TO TOLOY Kal TaAAa Ta obTw Xe- 2 4 / \ e ‘ Lal > 4 iA ov youeva mavta yap e€er tov ths ovoias Adyov, domep ¥ 2 val / ¥ 5) \ aS / x BN x elmowev ev Tois mpérows Adyows)' eel SE A€yerar Td dv 7d aS \ ee.) x x ee aN N \ , No pev TO TL 7] ToLWy 4 TooOV, TO b€ Kara SdvaylW Kal év- t. € / x A3 6 Bovddycda viv emi mréov yap éorw 7H Sivayis Kal HX évépyea TGV pdvoy eyowevwv Kara klynow. adr elndv- Tes Tept Tatryns, ev Tols Tept THs evepyelas Siopiopois b1- Adoowey Kal Tepi Tov GAdwv. Ori pev ody A€yerar mokhaxGs 7 dSdvayws kal 7d dtvacOa, didpiotar Hyiy ev 5 ako totray 8 boca. pev dpwvdpws Aéyovtrar svvdpes apeloOwoay (ria yap spoidrnti tie éyovrat, Kabdrep ev yewmerpla Kal duvara Kal advvara éyopey TO cival x x . cy c Tos 7) pr eivat), boar d& mpds Td adrd ecidos, Maca dp-

xal twes lor, Kal mpos mpdrnv piav déyovTa, | or apxn petaBodhs ev dA@ 7) H GAAO. 7 pev yap Tod Tabety éort Otvamis, 7) ev ait TH TdoyXorTL apxi) peTaBodArs nadntixis tm addov 7) 7 Gddo’ 7) & ebis amabelas rijs emi

fas

x val \ a n ie 29 9 x Bo od = 2 re TO xeElpov Kal pOopas ths bm Gddov 7) 7 GAAO tr apxijs lal ‘ wy + lal lal fal peraBrnrikns. ev yap TovToLs éveott Tact Tots bpois 6 THs , t / > * A 4 mpotns Suvduews Adyos. TdédAw 8 attra dvvdpes dEyov- x a fal n a na a n Tat 1) ToD pdvov Tovfoar 7) [rod] Tabeiv 7) Tod KaAGs, dote kat ev Tois TovTwy Adyois EvuTMapxovol Tmws of TOY TpoTé- 4 a iv4 yy ‘ ¢ f uA pov duvdyewv Adyou.—davepdy ody bru ~oTe pev ws pla bv- vais Tob Tovy Kal mdoxew (Svvardv yap éore Kal T6 2 éxew ard dvvapw rod Tabeiy Kal To GAO tn’ adrod), €or. b& Os GAAN. 7 pkey yap ev TO TaoyxovTi (bia yap x x > / es \ ‘ A 2 A TO éxew Twa dpxnv, Kal elvar Kal rHv DAnv apxyv twa, maoxe. TO Tacyxov, Kal GAo bm GAdov' TO AuTapdy pev x + ‘ > € tal c ‘ /, c f a ‘ yap kavoroy TO 6 dmeikoy w0i OdacTdv, dpolws S5é Kal 2

> 33 roex rarfecitE: rac JI ri scripsi: ri vulgo Toor i) rrovdy AP 36 xpnouwrary AP Al.: xpnoipn EJT 1046* I mAéoy EJ Al.: mAcioy AP 2 povev AP 4-5 modd\axas Aéyerar AP 7 éua J 114j0om.AT Fom.J 13,14 70m. AT 14 fn’ alt. EJT Al.: om. AP 16 avrat eyovrat ai Suvdpers AP 17 Tov incl. Bonitz 19 Adyou duvdpewy JT 20 kairo JT 23 Kal tmhy...twaEJ©Al.: om. A>

te)

0464

fo}

TQN META TA OY3IKA. ©

AT 14 fn’ alt. EJT Al.: om. AP 16 avrat eyovrat ai Suvdpers AP 17 Tov incl. Bonitz 19 Adyou duvdpewy JT 20 kairo JT 23 Kal tmhy...twaEJ©Al.: om. A>

te)

0464

fo}

TQN META TA OY3IKA. ©

emt Tov GAdwr), 7 8 ev Te TowodvTt, oloy Td Oeppdy Kal € ) Fait NS 2 a iu Ee OS a 5 7 olkodomiKy, 7) Mev ev TO Oeppavtixe 7 8 ev TO oiKo- a yy Sone > 7 \ nN 7 éy yap kal ovk dAdo. Kal 7 advyauia Kal TO advvarov 307) TH TowatTn Suvdper evavtia atépnats eorw, wore Tod > a \ > X oN a / 2 ’ ¢ X avtod Kal kata ro-avTd aca dvvauis advvayia. 1 O€ / / cal \ oS a4 ays + SS x oTepnols A€yerat ToAAaXO@s* Kal yap TO pH EXOV Kal TO x x XN yo Ce ek / BY es mepuKos av pn EX, 1) OCAwWS 7 OTE TeEpvKED, kal 7) @dé, e a x oN € a IRE eye baal if \ 6 oloy mavreAGs, 7) Kav OTwCOdY. em eviwy de, Gy TEpuKOTA 35 €xew pa) &xn Big, eoreppoda rabra héyouev. > ‘ > Lt SS >} ta > ae ye i > ‘ Enet & ai pev év toils dapdxos evuTdpxovow apxat tovadrat, ai & ev roils euytyos Kal ev woxf} Kal rhs , MAYUX Xn Y/] cal fol 2 \ an 1046? Woxfjs ev TH Adyov e€xovti, ShArov Gru Kal rGv dvvdmewvy r € nN yy MY ¢ y N , \ 5 € at pev eoovrar aAoyou ai O€ pera Adyov' 610 TacaL at Téxvat kal al mountixal emornpar duvvdwers cio adpxal yap peraBdrntixal 7 € ~ + 5 mera Adyou Taca Tov evavtioy ai avrat, ai d€ ddo- , c 4, oe A x cal f , \ ec °° larpixi) vdcov Kal dyrelas. alriov d& Gti Adyos éoriv 7) em- /, ¢ X\ ff c / ee 2 « > lal ya ? / ~ \ a 2 , om, SS a BS > emloTHas elval pev TOV evavtioy, elvar € Tod pev Kab { Fam fal \ gh > t / \ \ c / an X avTas Tod 6€ py Kal’ adrds: Kal yap 6 Adyos TOD per ka? atrd Tob} O& tpdmov Twa Kata ovuBeBnKds: amodpa- x \ 2 a ° \ 3 7 € bY J ve yap Kal amopop& dndot To evavtiov: yap orépno.s AS , \ 3 “4 cr X > a Ie b ‘ ‘ 15%) mpoTn TO evaytiov, atrn d&€ amopopa Oarépov. emel Oe \ > 7 > 2 ig > at eal € 2 > he / Ta evavtia ovK éyytyverar €v TO avT@, H O emLoTHpyn dv- vauis TO Adyov éxew, Kal } Woxi) Kwhoews exer apynv, TO pev vyewov tylevay povoy moet Kal TO OeppavTixdy Oepudrnta Kal TO wWoKtikdy oxpdérnta, 6 8 emorhwwv BY % / 2 5) ~ i. > © 7 / 4.9 20 Gugw. Adyos ydp é€oTw apdoty pev, ovx Opolws de, Kal ev Wx 1) exer Kuvioews apxyv: Bote audpw and TH xi} & 7 pXt} is

230 7 APAL: katy EJT 31 ddvvapula recc, T; advvapia Ey AP AI. 33 9 tert. JIT Al: 7 AP: 7 E 35 py exe A 37 aiom. AP b2 ddoyor] Adyor yp. E 3 post moumrexal

ai Al.¢ 4 eiow APT AL: om. EJ JT: 6 Adyos E sup. lin., Al 9 aoav A” 21 4 je EJ? hh AP

add. kai recc., kat om. EAP 7 TECC MAL eT I:

I, 10468 26 — 3. 1047715

33 9 tert. JIT Al: 7 AP: 7 E 35 py exe A 37 aiom. AP b2 ddoyor] Adyor yp. E 3 post moumrexal

ai Al.¢ 4 eiow APT AL: om. EJ JT: 6 Adyos E sup. lin., Al 9 aoav A” 21 4 je EJ? hh AP

add. kai recc., kat om. EAP 7 TECC MAL eT I:

I, 10468 26 — 3. 1047715

be 2 al / \ SUN: 4 \ SS Xx auTns apxis Kwhoer Tpos TavTO cvvapaca: 610 Ta KaTa Adyov dvvara Trois dvev Adyov dvvarots move? Tavavria: > > fal 14 na , Ss XN \ A pla yap apy meptexeTar, TO Ady. avepov bE Kal drt lol a coy n a cad x TH pev Tod Dd Svvdyer Akorovde? Tod pdvov Toihoa 7) 25 ~ 4 iv > 3 lA > 2 / > / x \ madeiy dvvayis, taitn & exelvn ovK del> avayKkn yap Tov ed mowdvTa Kal movely, Tov 5& pdvoy ToLobvTa odK avayKn kal € movetv. 3 LEioi b€ rwes of facw, otov of Meyapixol, bray evepyi 4 (4 ig SS XN: = 2 > 7 an bY povov dvvacba, drav Sé pi) evepy ov dvvacAat, oloy Tdv 30 X 3 lal b | 4 eh tal 2 ~ oY ’ pn oikodopodyra ov dtvacbar oixodopeiv, GAAG TOV oiKodo- nan [4 r | lal ¢ / X ‘ a. lol ey oe MotyTa Oray olKodopi; opotws S€ Kal emt TOV GAdwy. ois bs 7. BA > iN > as a \ al € 4 \ Se re eivat 76 dvvaTe elval eorw olkodopmely), duolws de Kal emt 3 Tav ahdov texvav. ei ody advvaroy Tas To.atras éxew t X / XX \ , \ A my Téxvas pn padovra more kal AaBdvra, Kal pi exew * oN xX pH aroBaddvra mor€é (7) yap Anon 1) wader Twl 7) xpdve@: 1047° > = \ a f / SN ms oY ov yap 5) Tob ye Tpayywatos POapevtos, del yap eEorTwy), oe VA, > ed \ / A > baa hy ? érav Tatvontat, ovx eer tv Texvnv, TaAW 8 dds olko- dounoe. TOs AGBSV; Kal Ta dyrxa 47 dpolws: otte yap ‘ a+ x y Ss x 4 > \ AN Wouxpov ovte Oepudov ovte yAvKv ovre dAws aicOnTov ovdev x N\ > if 4 si , Md €oTat fi) aloOavouevwv: wote Tov IIpwraydépov Adyov cup- Bnoerou Néyew adrots. GAAG pv ovd aloOnow eer oddev dv pa) alcOdvnrar pnd evepyf. el ody Tupdrdv 7d pH exov ww, mepukds OF Kal Ore medvKe Kal et. dv, of adrol Tuprol Ecovrar moAAdKis THs Hepas, Kal Kwdol. ere el to Lawes BY 2 t ‘ NY , Dn 7 advvaroy TO éorepnuevoy duvdpews, TO fa) ylyvopyevov adv- ” / NEN DN? J € t Xx vatov €oTat yeverOary TO 0 advvaroy yevéoOar 6 A€Eywr 7) » x - x x 20/7 a LW elvar 1) €oecOar Weboerar (Td yap ddvvarov Todro éonpat- vev), BOTE OUTOL of Adyou e€aipodo. Kal Kivnow Kal yéveow.

del yap To Te éotnKds EotHEerar Kal TO Kabjpevov Kade- 15 b 22 7d adrd recc. Al.: aird EJATr 23 Tois . . Ouvarois an sporty ? 24 jd yap apxn ETAL. : ud yap apxy JAP 29 of om. Ab 30, 31 ov] py EJ 34 00d J éorat AP AL: eorly Ejr 37 pabdyra Al., ci. Bonitz: pavOavovta EJAb 1047* L_dmoBddXovra J 2 det] ei Al. 3 drav| ms dray ex Al. ci. Bonitz ev] 6 Pt syo) Jzcosil" 4 ros T 6 aicOayd- pevoy Tecc. 9 ov EJA*TALI.: as rece. ia 10 kal Kopol om. fort. Al., susp. Bonitz II yeyropevov AP Al, : yevdpuevoy EJ

14 ovre of AP

TQN META TA ®YSIKA ©

Bonitz: pavOavovta EJAb 1047* L_dmoBddXovra J 2 det] ei Al. 3 drav| ms dray ex Al. ci. Bonitz ev] 6 Pt syo) Jzcosil" 4 ros T 6 aicOayd- pevoy Tecc. 9 ov EJA*TALI.: as rece. ia 10 kal Kopol om. fort. Al., susp. Bonitz II yeyropevov AP Al, : yevdpuevoy EJ

14 ovre of AP

TQN META TA ®YSIKA ©

deiraus od yap dvaorioera ay KxabeCyrar advvaror yap gorau dvaoriva 6 ye wy) SUvatar dvacrnvat. ei ody pi) Ev- déxerar Tatra déyew, avepdv Sr. dSdvayis Kal evepyera ef , 3 | tal ’ eS , U4 \ 3 / > BS érepov ori (exeivor 8 of Adyou Svapw Kal évepyeray TavTd 20 TolodotW, 51d Kal ov puxpdv Ti Cyrodaw avaipelv), doTe evde- x i > X\ a t \ ‘ X\ xera duvaroy pev te elvar pr ecivar dé, Kal dvvaroy pH oa tJ / © 7 \ x XK lat n eivar elvar dé, Suolws S& Kai emt Trav GdAwy Karnyoplov dvvaroy Badilew dv ph BadiCew, Kal py BadlCew sv- varov dv Badicew. or. S& dSvvardy Totro 6 eav stmapéy 25%) évépyera ov A€yera exew THY dtdvauy, obey eorar adv- varov. éyw d& oloy, ei dvvardy Kabra Kal evdexerat kadjoba, Tovrm éav tmap§y Td xabjoba, oddéy Eorar adv- a A a A lal x cal xX varov' kal ei KivnOqvat 7) KWHoaL 7) oTHVaL 7) OTHoAL 7}

= aN , A \ cy aN \ y € , eivat 7 ylyverOar 7) pay eivar 7) pay ylyverOa, opotws. 30 €AnAvde 8 evepyera Tovvoya, 7 mpos THY évTed€xevay

a \ > EN \ ” 3 lad , , ouvTlOeern, Kal emt Ta GAAG EK TOY KIVYTEwWY padLoTa* doxel yap 7 evepyera padiota 7 xKivynois etvat, did Kal a ~ a > 3 / xX cal »” -

Tols py odow ovK aTodiddact TO KWeEicOaL, GAdas SE TWas Katnyoplas, oloy diavonra Kal e7iOvanta elvac Ta pH OvTa,

4 x » a \ 9 d wy 2 7 ” p] 35 Kivovpeva dé ov, TovTO O& STL OvK OvTAa evepyela EoovTaL EvEp-

1047> yela. Tov yap pi dvTwy éria duvdper eoriv: odk gate d€,

i4 > b] 4 > 7. Ort ovK evredexela Eoriv. Ei 3€ éori 7d elpnuévov Td dvvardy 7) aKkodovde?, pavepdy 4 > b] / ’ XS > x‘ > a 4 ‘ X Ort ovx evdéxerar adnbes civar 70 eivety 6ru duvardov pev 5 Todt, ovK éora O€, Hore TA advvata elvar Tadrn diaped- / S > » 7 x a if yew éyw Ge ofovy ef tis Gaim sSvvardy thy didperpov a 9 t , € \ , x petpnOjvar ov pevtor meTpnOjcecOai—s pr AoyiCopevos Td 3 4 > o AX , , x > x advvatoyv civat—ére ovdévy kwdver Suvatoy TL Ov eivat 7 yeE-

417 6... dvaoryva in marg. J 21 be ...22 O€ om. fort. Al. 22 émi om. Ab 23 xai] Oe kai Ab .24 Baditew Joachim: Bi) Badigov (Badi¢ew a) Suvaroy eivar BadiCe codd. T': Badigov Suvardy eivat wn Badifew Hayduck : Bi) Badifery Svvarov etvar Badicoy Bullinger

26 evdexecOa T 27 wmapxn AY 28 29 7) yeverOa EJ 31 cuvredeipern Al.le 329 r.om. fort. Al., omittendum ci. Bonitz 35 tovro Sé om. AP I ovk éort be, ore EJ@AL: diére AP 2 eiciv AP 3 ante ro foe et Spore eipn pe voy interpunxit Zeller rd alt. om. EJ Al jae AT AL: © adivarov py Zeller 4 ro APAL: m EJT

: nai Av 7 pev AP perpnOnoera EJT 6 EJAPAL:

om, TT 8 dune advvarov AP

3+ 1047" 16 — 5. 10484 2

Bonitz 35 tovro Sé om. AP I ovk éort be, ore EJ@AL: diére AP 2 eiciv AP 3 ante ro foe et Spore eipn pe voy interpunxit Zeller rd alt. om. EJ Al jae AT AL: © adivarov py Zeller 4 ro APAL: m EJT

: nai Av 7 pev AP perpnOnoera EJT 6 EJAPAL:

om, TT 8 dune advvarov AP

3+ 1047" 16 — 5. 10484 2

verOar pa) eivar pnd eoecOar. addr exeivo dvdyKn e&k Tov Keysevov, ef Kal troOoiueOa civar 7) yeyovévar 0 ovK €or pev duvaron d€, dru ovOev eora ddvvarov: cupBynoera d€ ye, TO yap peTpeloOa. dddvarov. ov yap dH éoTt TavTs TO Weddos kal TO ddvvarov: 7d ydp oe éoTdvar vov Weddos pév, otk ddvvarov bé. dua de SyArov Kal 6r1, e€i tod A évros avdyxn TO B elvat, kal dvvatod dvros elvar Tod A kal 76 B dvdyxn clvar duvardv: «i yap pH dvdykn duvarov civar, ovdivy Kwdrver pi elvar Suvardy eivar, éoTw dy TO A Suvarev. ovxody ore ro A dvvardyv etn etvat, et reOety 7d A, ovOey Advvarov elvar ovvéBawev: 71d 5€ ye B avaykn elvat. GAN Hv adtvarov. oTw 67 advvatov. i 83) addvarov [avayKn] civar rd B, dvdykn cal td A elvan. dAN

jv dpa TO mpGrov ddivarov: Kal TO dedrepov dpa. av dpa 7

70 A dvvarov, kal ro B éorat duvardv, elmep otrws cixov'

ote Tov A éytos dvaykn civat TO B. av 81) otrws exdv- tav Tov A B pa 7 dvvardv 7d B otrws, ovdt rH AB e€et ws éréOn Kal ef tod A dvvarod dvTos dvdykn TO B bvva- \ > \ Ss \ \ \ XQ Tov elvat, eb ote TO A dvdyKn elvar kal 7d B. TO yap dvvardv etvar e& dvdykns TO B civ, ei ro A duvardr, na 4 38 > \ \ 4 c S Totro onpatver, éavy 7 TO A kal Ore kal as qv Svvardv elvat, Kakelvo Tére Kal otrws eivar dvaykaiov. 5 ‘Anacdyv 8& rév duvdyewy otcdv Tay pe ovyyevdv n ] Ui n ™ a a > lal n olov Tov aicOjoewy, Tov dé Oe. olov ths Tod abAcy, TOV d& padjoe. oiov tis TOY TexvGv, Tas pev dvdyKn TpoEvEp- ue ot ‘ , s nS XN 4 ynoavras éxew, boar ee Kal Adyw, Tas be pi) Towad- \ i + EA, Y an J > > / 2 \ XN \ Tas Kal Tas éml TOU TdoxEW ovK avayKyn. emel S€ TO bv- \ A s S \ \ D4 BA b) / varov ti dvvaroy kal mote Kal mas Kal dca GAAa dvaykn Tporeivar €y TH dtopiou@, Kal Ta pev Kata Adyov ddiva-

29 pnd] de pnd El: 8 wy T to eirecc. Al.: ef ety AP yp. E: ein JT: eiva «i fecit E? Il ovpByoeta... 12 ddvvaroy om. Et 12 670m.A> 13 ropr.Jrére AT 15 etvat rov A] rod Acivaca: rod eivat A Brandis: rov AT 19 roinras.E:raJ AJABEJ 20 éorw . . . 22 dpa alt. om. A? et ut vid. Al.: in marg. J

Al.: ef ety AP yp. E: ein JT: eiva «i fecit E? Il ovpByoeta... 12 ddvvaroy om. Et 12 670m.A> 13 ropr.Jrére AT 15 etvat rov A] rod Acivaca: rod eivat A Brandis: rov AT 19 roinras.E:raJ AJABEJ 20 éorw . . . 22 dpa alt. om. A? et ut vid. Al.: in marg. J

21 dvaykn secl. Bonitz Bia e alk .Bonitz Ay... B codd. 22 mpatoy... devtepov] A duvardy kai TO Brecc. dpa post devrepov om. E 7 Bekker 25 ray scripsi: rov codd. I +A B om. A Ta] Td recc. 27 kai AP Al.: om, EJT 29 104 bis AP 30 / 2 3 ve kat at duvdpers GAoyou, Kakelvas pev avayKn ev euydym sear tatvras Se ev duo, Tas pev Tovatras duvapers avaykn, Orav ws ddvavrar Td TounTiKdy Kal 7d TaOnTLKOY TAnoiddwol, TO pev Toleiy TO SF macye, exelvas 0 OvK avdykn adrar per yap Tacar pla évds moinriKy, éxelvat S ca pk ALA iy / x b] 7 fay x de Tov eévavtlov, Sore Gya Toujoer Ta evavtias Todo oe > 7 > BA er , bd \ , if 10 Gdvvatov. dvdykn dpa €Erepdy tu elvat 7d KUpiovr €yw N ie RN R d& Todro dpeEw 7) mpoalpeow. SmoTépov yap av dpéynrat kuplws, todro moujoe bray os ddvarar bndpxn Kal TAy- lf a a ef iN \ iN , a addy TO Tanto Gore TO SuvaTov Kara Adyoy amay avdykn, Otay dpéyntar ob éxe THv Sdvauw Kal os exe, 15 TOTO Tovetys exer 5& TapdvTos Tod TaOyTLKOD Kal wdl Exor- a Bn , a 9 , N x N tos [woueiv|: ed 5& pn, Torey od dvvycerar (rd yap pnOevds Tav é£w Kwdvovtos mpood.oplcerbar ovOev eri det» tiv yap ddvauw exer ws Core Svamis Tod Tovey, éoT. 8 od TavTwS GAN exdvtwv TGs, &v ots aopicOjoera Kal Ta ew Kw- 20 Avovrat aatpeirar yap Tatra Tév ev TH dSiopiowa Tpoady- of MS 39 2 ¢ , X. 9 a n Tov via) 810 odd eav dpa BovrAnrar 7 émOvus sorely Te Se 7 > a by SN ¢/ By peers X dvo 7) Ta evavtia, od Toujoe ov yap otrws exer adroy THv dvvayiv ovd ort Tod dua Toveiy 7) Svvapus, wel Gv eorlv oUTws TOLNCEL. 25 “Emel 0& mepl rhs xara xklvnow dAeyouevns Svuvdpews 6 elpntar, mepl evepyelas Siopiowpev th Té eotw 1) evepyela \ at \ s \ BY ey rad x kal moltov Ti. Kal yap To dvvardy dua dnAov e€orar dia- pode, Ott ov povov TodTo A€yowev Svvarov 0 TépvKE Kiely tal BN na xX dAdo 7) KweicOar bmw dAdov 7) aTAGS 7) TpdTOY Tid, GAA 30 Kal érépws, 810 Cyrobyres Kal wept rovrwy dujpAOopev. ore 57) evépyera TO trdpyew TO Tpayya pr) ovTws @omeEp 4 tf SX / oe S a , héyouey Svvdwerr A€yopev OF Suvdper olov ev TH EtA@ c a a XX € Epyiy kat ev rH on tiv jyloeav, Ort apaipebein ay,

1048* 6 Sivavrar. . . ma9nrixdv APT Al. : Sivevrar td rabnrixoy Kal Td mounrixoy EJ II todro] etre AP 14 ob EJTAL: 67’ AP: od 7 recc. 16 roveiy om. fort, Al., secl. Christ moet AY 18 divaus EJP Al: Suvdper AP 19 €xovros J}: exydvras J? 21 emOupety AP 22 thy] dpa thy JT 23 dpa tov dua AP év codd. PAl.: as ci. Christ 26 ré om. J 28 Svvardy EJr Ale: om, A> 31 O) E et fort. Al.: & 4 JAY 32 Néyomev » «+ 35 evepyeia in marg. J 7 om. J

pA MYER ST a cee Poi” ace Me at

5. 10488 3 — 6. 1048 22

21 emOupety AP 22 thy] dpa thy JT 23 dpa tov dua AP év codd. PAl.: as ci. Christ 26 ré om. J 28 Svvardy EJr Ale: om, A> 31 O) E et fort. Al.: & 4 JAY 32 Néyomev » «+ 35 evepyeia in marg. J 7 om. J

pA MYER ST a cee Poi” ace Me at

5. 10488 3 — 6. 1048 22

kal emornova Kal Tov jn) Oewpodyra, av duvatds 7 Oew- phoav 7d dé évepyeia. Sifrov 8 emt tov Kad Exacta rh 3 a A Q 4 \ bh tal \ 4 emaywoyh 0 Bovdopefa A€yew, Kal ov det TavTds dpov Cy- lad b DS \ x bee 4 tal 4 c \ > Tety GAAG Kal TO adyvadoyov cuvopav, 6TL ws TO oikOdo- pody mpos TO oikodouiKdyv, Kal Td eypnyopds mpds Td Ka- Oeddov, Kal TO dpdv mpds 7d pdov pev ow de exor, Kal . > / 2 o A x \ ey sy x TO GmoKeKpysevov é€x THs Ans Tpos THY VAnV, Kal Td aneipyarpevoy mpos TO dvépyactoy. Tavryns S& THs diado- pas Oarépw popin éotw 1% evépyea adwpicnern Oarépw d& 7d Ovvarov. Déyerar & evepyela od TavTa dpolws GAN Xx Oe AT e a 2 “2 Xx N n 4Q) 9 7) TH avadoyov, ws TovTo é€v TovTw 1 pds TovTO, Td’ ey @oe 7) mpos Tdde TA pey yap ws Kiynos Tpds Sdvapu T@OE 7) TpOS sev yap @ yols mpos dSvvayw Ta 8 @s ovola mpds twa BAnv. Gddws SE Kal Td dreipor \ x if. \ ae Loy / % b) kal TO Kevov, Kal 60a Toiatra, éyerar Ouvduer Kal evep- n a i a K yela (7) ToAAOls Tv dvTwy, oloy TO dpSvTe Kal BadlCovTi Kal c / fay SS s 2 2 \ La lat 2 +4 OpwpEev@. Tadra pev yap eévdéxerar Kat amAds aGAnOEve- va BN ss SS Gr fe 4 Rees X \ 4 aOat more (TO pey yap dpemevov bru Sparta, 7d S& Src en re Q ay > ef We yx € dpacba dvvardv)> 7d 8 ameipov ody otrw Suvdper orw ws ] ,, b) , , > \ la ‘ x Ni evepyeia Evopuevovy xwpioTtov, AAAA yvdoe. TO yap jr © 4 N\ s > ys \ AN L te bmodeimew THY Statipecw amodidwa. TO civa dSuvayer Tavd- THY THY evepyeray, TO O€ yapiCerOau ov. > \ SS n / e Ba J 2) 2 / Emel d& rév ampdgewv Gv ote mepas ovdeula Tédos a a N GAAQ TOY Tept Td TéAOsS, oloy Td loxvaivew i) loyvacla > ve tS nt 4 > 7 v4 5 ¥ > / X\ [atrd], ara d& Orav icxvaivy otrws eorly ev Kwioel, pi) imdpxovra Ov evexa 7 Kivnois, ovK oT. Tadra mpagis 7} > yg > \ / ‘ 2 Dns s @ 2 / x ov Tedela ye (od ydp Tédos) GAN’ exelvn (Hf) evuTdpxer 7d 434 kai alt.| Tov Oewpovyta kai E Tov om. J 7 om. E 35 ro b¢ EJ Al: rdde APT a evepyela (SnAov . . . 37 auvopar) a@s Schwegler: évepyeia (Sjdov « . . cvvopav) 6 m os Bullinger evepyeta OnAov emt ci. Bonitz 37 kal] kara Bywater TO EJ dre om. A?, ante ov 1. 36 collocandum ci. Bywater D4 ravrns d¢€] gore ré te Kal ravtns EJT et ut vid. Al.: ad re add. yp. éort tovTo E 5 Oarepov pdpiov AP Ale éoro EJT Ale: gorae AP 6 evepyeia EJT Al. : evépyera AP 7 7@ APT'AI.: 10 J et fecit E 760] 70 & J 9 kai om. AP 10 ro Ab All; om. EJ II 7) addidi 12 ef radra AP 15 ro APAL.: ro EJT 16 vrodctrew E Al. : trodureiy APJ droduddacr T 17 70 Al, Christ : ro codd. T 18 eet... 35 xirnow A?, codd. plerique, Philop., cod. F. Alexandri: om. EJT, codd. ceteri Alexandri 19 roalt....7) Bywater: rovd.. .7 codd. igxvavoia AP 20 avré secl. Christ ovtas] od téAos F 21 vtapxdyTwy oy fort. Al., Fonseca 22 exeivn 7) Cl. Bonita: ekeivy codd. E 2

Som ls SERN

T 18 eet... 35 xirnow A?, codd. plerique, Philop., cod. F. Alexandri: om. EJT, codd. ceteri Alexandri 19 roalt....7) Bywater: rovd.. .7 codd. igxvavoia AP 20 avré secl. Christ ovtas] od téAos F 21 vtapxdyTwy oy fort. Al., Fonseca 22 exeivn 7) Cl. Bonita: ekeivy codd. E 2

Som ls SERN

1048)

TON META TA OYSIKA ©

rédos kal [9] mpagis. olov dpa dua (kal Edpaxe,) Kal ppovel (kal ve \ al ‘ / 2 3 5 t \ meppdvnke,) Kal voel kal vevdnker’ GAN’ ov pavOdver Kat pepd-

a5 Onkev ovd byid¢erar kal dylactar. ed Ch Kal ed ECyxev dpa,

Kal evdaovel Kal evdaydvnker. ed d€ pj}, Eder dv TOTE TaAve- A ig > vA lay —~y >) * ~ \ vba donep 8rav icxvalyn, viv 0 ob, ddA C7 Kal éCykev. A ‘\ ~ HS X\ , / ~ > 3 ff rovrwy di (det) Tas pev KUHoes A€yew, Tas d évepyelas. Taca yap kino dreds, ioxvacta pddnors Bddiois oiKodd-

e \ / \ 2 cal ’ Ss u 30pnots* avrar 81) Kwyoes, Kal aredeis ye. ov yap dua

Badicer kai BeBddicev, od oixodopet Kal o@KoddunKer, ovde ylyverat kal yéyovey 1) Kivetrat kal kexlvytat, add Ere- pov, Kal xiwet kal Kexivnkev’ édpaxe S€ Kal dpa dpa rd avTo, Kal voei Kal vevonkev. THY pev ody ToLadTnY evepyeLar

35A€yw, exeivny d5é kivnow. 70 pev ody evepyela th TE eort

1049"

Kal motov, €k TovTwY Kat TOY ToLovTwY SHrov Huiv €oTw. Tldre 5& duvdyer orw exacroy Kal mere ov, diopioréor: > N € cay e € RES 9, \ J x + od yap Ororeody. oloy } yij ap’ earl duvdper dvOpwros; 7) ov, GANG paddAov sérav On yéevynTar o7mépua, Kal ovde TéTE tows; Bomep ody odd b7d larpixns arav adv dyacbein otf b) \ / b) =} of a / P \ nan x amo tbxns, GAN €ore TL O Suvardy éoti, Kal Tobr eéoTW € A r ” N a rae es , 3 bytatvoy dvvayer. Opos S€ Tod pev amo dtavoias eEvTede- / / 2 a / 2 ig i , xela yryvopevov €x Tod dSuvdper dvtos, Gray BovdnOEevtos yi- yunta pnbevos Kwdvovtos trav éxtds, xed 8 ev TO byta- Comevw, bTav pynOey KwAvn TOV ev aT: 6polws Se dv Td t? Bn 7] * a - \ SEY 5 S / na >] / \ lod vajer kal olxiar ef pnOev Korver Tov ev TovT® Kal TH Lv na Ye tI PANS] a aA cal / x bAn tod ylyverOa oixiay, ovd EoTw 0 bet TporyeverOat 7) > / XN ca) a , Pe \ rye RS dmoyevéeoba. i) peraBadciv, totro dvvayer oixlas Kal ent lal yA « / A oy € > ‘ a / Tév dddwv aoatras bowv ewbev i) apxh Tis yeveoews. \ v4 g\ 8: > baa m x iA A lal yw kal dowy dH ev atr@ To exovTi, boa pnOevds Tov eLwberv

b 23 Kal ) mpagis| tn mpage F 7 incl. Bonitz dua Kal éopake

ci. Bonitz: adda codd., kat meppoynxe addenda ci. Bonitz 25 dua ci. Bonitz: ddd codd. 28 rovtay ... 35 kivnow expunxit Ab det addendum ci Bonitz éyo Schwegler 30 6) ci. Bonitz: dé codd. 31 axoddpunxey recc.: @koddunoey A> 32 Kweli re ci. Bonitz kekivnkey TECC. aN érepov post Kekivnker 1. 33 Jegenda ci. Christ 33 Kxextvnkev] kweirartecc, 35 évepyeia EJ Al.: evepyety AP ré om. E? 36 gorw AP AI; ora EJr 10499 1 Suvaper dvOparos EJT Al. : ayOpwros duvdjer AP 2 tore] toiTo yp. EY: rodré mas E: rovré ro J 3 obv om, Ji

Bonitz: ay ci. Bonitz dv] 67 A> 6 BovdnOevl 8 ray] rat E 9 «i... 10 otxiay EJTAl.: om. AY KoAUN TOY ev TovTas JT

E? 36 gorw AP AI; ora EJr 10499 1 Suvaper dvOparos EJT Al. : ayOpwros duvdjer AP 2 tore] toiTo yp. EY: rodré mas E: rovré ro J 3 obv om, Ji

Bonitz: ay ci. Bonitz dv] 67 A> 6 BovdnOevl 8 ray] rat E 9 «i... 10 otxiay EJTAl.: om. AY KoAUN TOY ev TovTas JT

6. 10485 23 — 8, 10496

2 4 ¥ b > an eo \ / + A \ eumodiCovros éorar ou avrod: oiov TO onépua ovmw (det yap ev ahr (receiv) kal weraBdddeww), dravy 8 Hdn bia THs atrod 15

apxis 7 Towdrov, n Todro Suvdayeu exelvo S€ Erépas dp- PXNS 7 2 HON [ p p lol a A ¢€ ny xfs deira, domep H yh ovmw dvdpias duvduer (uera- Badodoa yap éorar xaAkds). ouke 5 3 A€youen etvat od Tobe GAN’ exeivwov—olov TO KiBdtiov ov EtAov GAA LVAL- vov, ovde TO EVAov yh GAAG ynivoy, mddAw H yh El obTws a0 py GAO GdAG éxelvivov—del exetvo duvdyer GTAGS TO boTe- pov eotw. otov Td KiBer.oy ov yHivoy ovde yh GAAG EVAvov* Tovro yap dvvdpyer KiBodrtiov Kal An KiBwrlov atryn, amrAGs Mev TOD GmAGs Tovdl dé Todl rd EVAov. et S€ Th eori TpG- Tov O pykére kar dAdo A€yeTat exeivivov, TobTO mpeOTN 25 ey 7 > RS ieee) - ¢ Ca Ta \ a b SS 7, vAn* otov ei 4 yn aepivn, 0 d anp pn mip GAAG TUpLos, AM cal LA fe > 4 a - x‘ > TO mop tAn mpdtn ov Téde TL OvTa. To’Tm yap s.a- a lal XN pepe. TO Kal? od Kal 7d troxeiuevov, TO elvar TOdE TL 7) way elvat: ofov rots ma0eot 7d troKeluevov avOpwmos Kal cGua Kal wWoxy, Taos b€ Td povorkdy Kal A¢EvKdY (AE- 30 yerar S€ THs povoiKHs eyyevouevns exelvo od povotKy adda Kovolkdyv, Kal ov Aevkdrns 6 GvOpwros GAA Nevkdy, ovdE x BY Badiois 7 Kivyynows GAAG BadiCoy 7) Kwwovpevov, ws TO éxel- ° 4 \ iv or BY Jef 4 XS \ viwov)'—6oa pev ov otrw, Td €oyaroy ovota: dca be pi cf os te L ING as AS uo BN , x ovTws GAN cidos TL Kal TOdE TL TO KaTHyOpOUMEVOV, TO 35 écxatov UAn Kat ovola tALKH. Kal opOGs 317) cvpBaiver Td exeivivoy héyecOar xara tiv BAnv Kat Ta TdOy' dw 104g) yap aopiora, more pev ody AEKTeoy Suvduer Kal TdTE ov, elpnTat. 8 “Enel 8 1d mpdrepoy didpicTar Tocaxyds Aé€yeTal, x 4 14 eee I VA 2: t x avepov OTt mpoTepov evepyera Suvayews eoTw. AEyw OE 5 dvvdews oF povoy Tis wpiopevns 7) Aeyerar apy) peTa-

414 avrov AP Al.: avrov EJ 15 mecew addidi, fort. leg. Al. : eva. add. Bullinger = peraBadreiv fecit E avrod A> 16 4 AP exeivo AD Al.: éxeiva EJT 17 peraBaddovoa E7J A> 19 KiBwrov

21 aAha ekeivvov om. AP del exeivo Suvdpet] del exeivo dé duvdper E?: éxeivo APA: om. yp..E 23 yap om. AP 25 ado AP yp. EAL; addov EJT exeivvov EJT Al.: éxeivo dv AP 27 ov om. T'Al.: ef d€ AP: as E? ovca EJTAL.: otcia AP: kai ovata recc. 28 cal ov Apelt: xadedov codd. I Al. Te | TO J nl iJ 29 eva om. E'JT 31 eyywoperns fecit E exeivo AP 33 pr. EJ Al: ovde AP = ro] tre E b4 rocayas APT Al}: douyas EJ Al,

TON META TA ®YSIKA ©

T'Al.: ef d€ AP: as E? ovca EJTAL.: otcia AP: kai ovata recc. 28 cal ov Apelt: xadedov codd. I Al. Te | TO J nl iJ 29 eva om. E'JT 31 eyywoperns fecit E exeivo AP 33 pr. EJ Al: ovde AP = ro] tre E b4 rocayas APT Al}: douyas EJ Al,

TON META TA ®YSIKA ©

RAB Py) N 8 y > Ihe / 5) n BAntiky ev GAM 7) GANO, GAN Grws Taons apxis Kuvn- nr x n LN Fo Pe. 6 TUKHS 7) oTaTUKHs. Kal yap 7 dows ev tadvTd [yiyverau b] > EA X\ | / lod Py / e b) x bs 4 aA’ év tavT® yap| yever TH Svvdpe apy yap KiWNTLKH, 4. 10 ovK ev GAAMW GAN ev adte 7 adtd.—ndons oi} THs ToLad- / \ (Soe fod > i. Ts Tpotepa eotly 1) evepyera Kat Adyw Kal TH ovoigs xpovw aA / ~ 8 ori pev ds, Eats SE ws ot. TO Adyw pev ody bre TpoTEpa, lol an lal , djArov (To yap evdéxerOar evepynoa duvardy éort TO Tpd- tws dvvardv, otoy Aéyw olkodopiKdv Td Suvdyevov oiKodo- 1g pelv, Kal dpatiKdy TO dpav, Kal dpardovy 7d Svvardy opa- cba 6 8 avrdos Adyos Kal eml TOv GAAwy, dot avayKn rov Adyov mpoimdpxew Kal THY yvdow Ths yvdoews) TO d€ xpdvm Tpdrepov Gde TO TO Elder 7d adrd evepyobv Tpdrepor, apie 8 ov. R€yw 6& TodTO bru TOvSE ev TOD avOpdrov Tod 20 10) OVTOS KaT évepyelay Kal Tod cirov Kal Tod dpavros Tpd- i M € oe . \ ‘ / \ BS ¢ , Tepov TO xpdvm i) An Kal Td oTépwa Kal Td dparikdv, & duvdper péev eotw avOpwros Kat otros Kal dpav, evepyela > + > \ V4 , ~ , ed wy pI d ovmw GaAAa TOVTWY TPOTEpA TH KpPOVH ETEPA OVTA EVEp- yeta e€ Gy Tatra eyévero: del yap ek Tod dvvdyer dvTos 25 yiyverat 76 evepyela dv tmd évepyela dvtos, olov dvOpwmos && avOpdrov, povotkds tT povoiKod, del KiWodvTds TiVOS TpPaTOv: 76 6& Kwwodv evepyeta fon eorw. elpnrar b& ev Trois TEpl THs ovotas Adyous bru wav TO yryvdpevoy ylyverat Ex TWWos TL kal 07d Twos, Kal Todro TM Elder TO adTd. 610 Kal doKet Ig 7 > > , “ue \ 7 / S x 30 advvarov elvat olkoddpov elvar pa} olKodopynoavTa pnOev 7) ~ XS ha c \ / 14 KiOaptoriy pnOev KiOapicayra’ 6 yap pavOavwv KiOapiCew KiOapiGov pavOaver KiOaplCew, dpolws 5€ Kal ot GAdou “7 © A a , ae a > Ww. bs d0ev 6 codiaotiKds EAeyxos eylyvero bri ovK exwy Tis THY eTLOTHNY ToUnTEL ov 7 emLoTHUN O yap pavOdvwyv ovK exe. ° \ \ 4 ny f Lad \ _ a 35 GAAa dia TO TOU yryvouevov yeyerncOal TL. Kal Tod 6dws Kiwoupevou Kekwhodat te (djAov 8 ev Tols Tept KwWHhoews 10507 Totro) Kal Tov pavOdvovTa dvdykn éxew TL THs emoTHpns lows. GAN ody Kal radrn ye oHArov bri H evepyeia Kal ott mpotépa ths Svvduews Kata yéverw Kal yxpdvoy.

»7 7 om. EA, 8 ylyvera.. -9 yap om. AP Al.*: yiyverat hk ey TavTae yap E 13 ré] TOE 18 Sd om, ET 21 dom. AP 22 éorar AP 23 mporepa 7 xpor@ APAL: TO xpivea mpéorepa EJT 25 TO om. Ab im evepyeig bvros EJT

Al.: om, AP 28 mav APAI.: dmav EJ reom. I: ore J

8. 10495 7 — 10508 33

"AAG ‘\ yp AY > if lal \ icf a a / yy Kal ovola ye, TpOTOV MEY OTL TA TH YEVETEL a >

lea Lal >" / Ne o aN uN vorepa TO elder kal TH odoia mpdrepa (oloy dvijp Taidds 5

Ab im evepyeig bvros EJT

Al.: om, AP 28 mav APAI.: dmav EJ reom. I: ore J

8. 10495 7 — 10508 33

"AAG ‘\ yp AY > if lal \ icf a a / yy Kal ovola ye, TpOTOV MEY OTL TA TH YEVETEL a >

lea Lal >" / Ne o aN uN vorepa TO elder kal TH odoia mpdrepa (oloy dvijp Taidds 5

kal dvOpwros omepyaros: To pev yap dn éxer TO eldos TO 8 ov), Kal Ore Anay én’ dpxiv BadiCer TO yryvopevov \ / > AY \ aX A a / \ ef € kat téAos (dpxi) yap Td 0} evexa, Tod TéAovs Be veka 7} x / >’ € ES 6 \ 4 / € 4 yéveois), TéAos 8 7 evepyeua, Kal Tovrov xdpw 7) dvvapis / hd NY o, x va Cale iN an b) 2 Nau Baverar. ov yap wa dw exwow dpGo. TA (Oa AAA a € an A » c \ \ eo] \ tA OTws OpGow oi éxovoew, duolws d€ Kat olkodomsKiy iva > a \ N \ ¢ na 5) ’ > oikodou@ot Kal THY Oewpynrixiy iva OewpGow AAA ov Dew- podow twa Oewpytixyy exwow, el pr) ob peAeTavTes* obroe de a XA a’ tal odx) Oewpodow GAd’ 7) di, TH dre oddey dSéovTar Oewpety T. ert » UAn ore Suvdyer Ste CAOor dv els 7d eidos* Gray d€ ye évepyela 7}, Tore Ev TH elder eoTiv. dpolws dé Kal emt Tav ddAwv, Kal Ov kivyos TO TéAos, 610 Bomep of bidd- 3 Loy > / wv AS / > oKxovtes evepyoivra emudelEaytes olovrar Td Tédos ATodEdw- / \ ‘3 A © 4 \ x a 7 ec Kevat, Kal 7 gvots duoltws. ef yap mi) ottw ylyveras, 6 Tlavowvos gota. ‘Epyis: ddndos yap kal 7 emothyn el v CN es of ber aka! \ \ Di , € aN €ow 1) &€w, omep Kakeivos. TO yap epyov TeAos, 7 be evepyeia TO epyov, 10 Kal Tovvoua evepyeia AéyeTar KaTa TO €pyov Kat ovvreiver mpds Tv evTedexevav. eel B ori n \ c lal oe wy € iva x AN TOV ev eoxaTov 1) xphows (oloy dews 7) dpacis, Kal odfev ylyverat Tapa tavtnv Erepov amd Tis dWews), am éeviov de ylyveral tu (ofov amd Ths olkodopiKfs olkla mapa Thy olkodopnow), Ouws ovdev rrov évOa pev rédos, evOa be Cc / oO / , > ¢ x , b) MaANov TéAos Tis Suvdyeds eat 7 yap olKoddunors ev T@ olkodopovmerm, kat awa ylyverar Kal éore Th olka. dowy pev ody Erepdv Th eoTL Tapa Tiv XpHow TO yyvope- ed \ A ran” Sr 4 na t > vA er voy, TovT@Y Mev 1) evépyea ev TH ToLovpévy eariv (olov i} TE >’ , > al / € 4 3 a oikoddunois €v TH olKodomovmerm Kal 7 Upavors ev TO 4 / ¢ / \ \ E boomy n BA \ iva « Dpawowev@, Opmoiws d€ Kat éml TOV GAXAwY, Kal dAwWS 1) 1050%8 7d of EJ Al.: drov AP 13 Oewpyrixyy om. A»

14 obxt AY yp, EY et ut vid. Al. et fecit J: oty7 E = APAL?: He ETF et fecit J i) alt... . Oewpety secl. Diels i?) EJ. Al.: om. AP

Apelt érc om. fort. Al: 6 7s Bullinger od dSvvayrae Apelt 16 Sé ye] de E sed ¢ in rasura maiore 17 60... 18 rédos JAYT Al.: in marg. E 19 yevynrat Al. 20 Hdowvos A? Al. et in marg. E: Ildoowvos I éorat ‘Eppas AP Al.c: “Eppns ora EJT kai om. AP 21 kakeivos EJT Al: Kaketvow AP 22 Néyera éevéepyea’ EJT 24 esxdroy AP 7 alt, AP Alt: om. EJ

25 dews APA: oipews epyov EJT er EAI,

TQN META TA ®YSIKA ©

Kiynols ev TO KivoupEeva)' Oowr b€ py) €oTW GAAO TL epyor nous peve ya) py

3 > ~ c mapa THv évépyerav, év avrois tmdpxer } evepyera (oloy 7 bpacis ev To dpGvti Kal 7 Oewpia ev TO OewpodvTt Kal 7

25 dews APA: oipews epyov EJT er EAI,

TQN META TA ®YSIKA ©

Kiynols ev TO KivoupEeva)' Oowr b€ py) €oTW GAAO TL epyor nous peve ya) py

3 > ~ c mapa THv évépyerav, év avrois tmdpxer } evepyera (oloy 7 bpacis ev To dpGvti Kal 7 Oewpia ev TO OewpodvTt Kal 7

1050° (wy év TH Wrxf, 010 Kal 7 eddaoviar (wi) yap mowd

/ tis éotw). ore pavepov br. 1 ovota Kal TO cidos evepyerd €oTw. Kata te 5% TodTOY Tov Adyov gavepdv Gt. TpdTEpov Th ovola évépyera dvvduews, kal donep elmopev, Tod xpovov det tmpodawBdver evépyera Erepa mpd Er€pas Ews THs Tod del KwwodvTos TpeTws.—ddda piv Kal KUplaTépwst TA MeV

as 3 , a HH fal a ” 2 AX yap aldia mporepa tH ovoia Tév pOaprav, Ect. 6 ovdev duvduer aidvov. Adyos be Ode Taca dStvamis Epa Tis avtipdoveds eotiv: TO pev yap pay Suvardyv drdpxew ovK x £ / >’ / \ A XX lal i.) t \ > dv brapevev ov0evi, rd duvardy d& may evdéxeTar pa) eveEp- ~ BN \ ey 3 if \ u \ x yeiv. TO Gpa dvvardy civar evdéxerar Kal civat Kal pay > A Se EN 7 \ 7 i ‘ ‘\ a. fon! 2 Kwynoews: 7) yap ovata tAn Kal dvvays odoa, ovK evéepyeta, > Nee 4 lal ‘\ as »” aN A > airla rovrov. juysetrar 6 Ta apOapra Kal Ta ey pera- Bod Ovra, olov yn Kal wip. Kal yap tadra del évepyei

235 7 pr.j7o AP 2 evépyedriséotrwT 10 imapégerer] imdp&y ey ovd’ AP Ir xat pr. EJ Al.: om. APT 15 room. EJ 16 POaprav EJ 17 éorw AY AL.: eoriy dy EJT kard om. E\Lr 18 mdvra] radra AP 19 avra J a’ra AP Ale 21 7 A» tovtro AP 23 dom. J 25 wept APA: imep EJ : eiva yp. E: mapa Chandler 27 duvaper EJ évoa OM. Ejr evepyeia EJT 28 pOapra AP Al.

8. 1050® 34 — 9. 1051924

> € \ \ \ 3 e tay o X\ ra c X Ka?’ avta yap Kat ev avrois exes THY kKivyow. ai dé 30 dAAat Ouvapes, @€ Ov dipioTar, macar THs dvTipdoeds > x BN / A yA ¢ > a > 19 \ boon 4 THs avTipacews Eoovra at avrai. ei dpa twes clot gv- geis ToLadrar 7) ovaiar olas A€yovow ot ev Tois Adyous Tas 35 id€as, TOAD paddrov emotHpov dv te ein 7) add emoTHuy aN a lal Kat Kwovmevoy 7 Kivnoiss Tatra yap eévépyevat paddov, 10514 exeivat O€ Svvdwers TOUTWY. OTL pev OdY TpdTEpoY 7H evEepyela kal duvdmews Kal mdons apyfis peraBAntikns, pavepov.

4 © \ ra \ , los tp

9 Ort 0€ Kat BeATioy Kal Tipwtepa THs arovdaias dvvdwews 7) evepyeia, ex TOvde SfjAov. Soa yap KaTa TO 5 dvvacOa. éyerar, Tavtdv éot. Suvatov TdvavTia, ofov Td dvvacOar Aeyowevov tytaivew tadrdv éot. Kal TO voceiv, Kal dpa 7 adr yap ddvvayis Tod tyiaivew Kal Kdpvew, Kal npewety kat KwweioOa, Kal oixodopeiy kal KaraBar- Aew, Kal olkodopetcOar Kal karaninrew., TO pev ody dv- 10

> A € Ie S > 3 7 IO 7 vaoOa. rdvavTia Gua ordpyer ra 8 evaytia dua adv-

Kal TO voceiv, Kal dpa 7 adr yap ddvvayis Tod tyiaivew Kal Kdpvew, Kal npewety kat KwweioOa, Kal oixodopeiy kal KaraBar- Aew, Kal olkodopetcOar Kal karaninrew., TO pev ody dv- 10

> A € Ie S > 3 7 IO 7 vaoOa. rdvavTia Gua ordpyer ra 8 evaytia dua adv-

\ SS > 7 BS ef PNA € / varov, Kal Tas evepyeias d€ dua advvaroy tmdpxew (olov vyiatvery Kal Kdpveww), Sor dvdyxn tov’twy Odrepov civar 2 , \ N te € 1 2 , x In / tayabov, To S€ dvvacbat cpolws ayuddrepoy 1) ovdeTEpor’ H dpa evépyea BeAtiov, dvdykn b€ Kal em Trav KaKGv 15 TO TeAos Kal THY evepyeray eEivar XElpov THs dvvdpewss TO 3 t Pi NK: ? 4 fad DA 4 > yap duvvdpevoy tatto dud tavaytia. dfrov dpa Gti ov« €or. TO Kakdv Tapa Ta Tpdypatas botepov yap TH pices TO KaKov THs duvdyews, ovK apa ovd ev Tos e€ apxijs

\ o De. > ba LA A + c d x Kal Tots aidlois ov@ev éoTw ove Kakdv ovTE GudpTnua OUTE 20 diepOappevov (kal yap 1) duapOopa trav Kaxdv early). evpt-

x \ x / 2 ee a x oKeTar O€ Kal Ta diaypdppata evepyeias SiaipodvTes yap ee ‘4 od pe 2 / XX x > aA > 3 eupicxovow. €. 0 av Sinpnyeva, havepa ay nv viv O° Evv-

/ / x‘ V4 4 > Ni iN 4 4 e Tapxer Ouvawer. dia th dvo dp9al 1rd Tplywvov; ori at

b 30 airo EJ avrois I 33 daa AY yp. E: doa EJ 34 €oovra abrar AP 35 of EJT Al.: om. AP 1051°4 kai pr. om. Ar Al.t 7 SvvacOat rd Aeyopevov AP To vooeiy ut vid. Al,, ci. Bonitz: 1d vorovv codd. T': voceiv scr. Bonitz 8 «ai pr. om. fort. Al. Il tmapxet dua AP dpa alt....12 dua AP AL: om, ET, expunxit J 15 BeAtiov AY Al. et fecit E: Bariov J 18 ro APAL.: rerd EJT 21 éoriv AP Al.: om. EJT 23 iV pr.] 7 AP

TQN META TA ©&YTSIKA ©

ree hy , X r ¥ ¢ > cal > a ~ ee 25 Tept play oTlypav yoviat toat dvo opOats. et oby aviKTo

om. fort. Al. Il tmapxet dua AP dpa alt....12 dua AP AL: om, ET, expunxit J 15 BeAtiov AY Al. et fecit E: Bariov J 18 ro APAL.: rerd EJT 21 éoriv AP Al.: om. EJT 23 iV pr.] 7 AP

TQN META TA ©&YTSIKA ©

ree hy , X r ¥ ¢ > cal > a ~ ee 25 Tept play oTlypav yoviat toat dvo opOats. et oby aviKTo

7) Tapa tiv wAevpav, iddvT. av aw edOds dSyAov Sia ti. > e 8 > X , XX a x EA a id EV 7pLtKUKAL@ pO KaOoAov bia TL; eay toat Tpels, 7 TE / , \ « 5 / 3 n > / S , cot Bacis dvo Kai 7) €k pecou emtoTabeica 6pOy, idovTt dHAov =. > a so Ca ve SS ¥ > TO exeivo elddtt. Gore havepoy br. Ta duvdper ova eis 30 €vepyevay aydpeva edpiocxerat: airiov b& drt 7 venots 2 f a cae Se > ‘4 c ee \ ww a ~ evepyea* wot e€ evepyetas 7 Svvayis, Kat dia TovTo ToLody- Tes yryvécxovow (boTepoy yap yevéoer 7 evepyeta 7 KAT apOyucv). Evel 3& TO Ov A€yerar wal TO pa) dv TO pev KaTa IO x a a x‘ Xx 357A oxXyyara Tov KaTnyopiav, Td b€ KaTa dvvauly 7) evEp- 3 oN xX 1051» yevay rovtwy 7) Tavavtia, 7d dé [Kvpidtata dv] GAnbes 7 A> a lol a a a Webddos, totro & émt rév mpaypdtor éotl TO ovyxeioOar 7 dinpnoOar, Gore GAnOedver pev 6 Td Sunpneevoy oidwevos Suy- nphoba, ore ddnBever pev nen be n ws \ BS , a ” x ce pica. Kal 70 ovyKeievov cvyxKetoOat, Eyevotar d€ O Eevay- ae i v x X z. ps3 if x > x” BS ar Ge 5 Tims €xwv 7) Ta Tpdypara, TOT E€oTw 7H OdK EoTL TO GANOES Xx =! , xX BO . a X t Fa dé > eyopevov 7) Weddos; Totro yap oKenTeov Tt A€yowev. Ov X\ X bY ees wy 3 lol x > > ~ yap dia TO muas olecOar adnO@s ce AEvKOY ElvaL EL aU Nevkds, GAAG Sia 7d ce clvar AevKdV Hels of aves TodTO > Vd ° aX X\ Xx 2% 4 - =! ra adnbedvouev. ei 01) TA pev Gel ovyKetTaL Kal advvaTa d1- cel \ 3 B58 La X 27 Le) ‘ 10 aipeOivat, Ta O Gel Sunpytar Kal advvata ovvTeOjvat, Ta o>? 6S , > ms x 3 = Y pa he Yor x ia) s 0 evdéxerar Tavavria, TO pev eival éote TO ovyKetoOar Kat a > x s ‘ = \ X‘ ° > X\ ‘4 év eivat, TO O€ pi eElvat TO pa) ocvyKetoOat GAA TAEiw — X — ba % > / ec : eX / ‘\ civau wept pev ov Ta evdexdueva 7 avTn ylyveTat Wevdrs kal GAnOijs d0€a kat 6 Adyos 6 adrds, Kal évdéxeTat Ore 15 ev GdnOevew dre € WedderOarr wepl d€ Ta advvata GA- Aws Exew od ylyvetar bre pev aAnOes Gre Be Weddos, GAN

226 post ri interpunxit Cannan, post dyXor ceteri 27 A TO clvar 7 pa) Elva Kal TO aAnOEs Kai TO Weddos ; ov yap €oTt atvOerov, Hote civar pev brav cvyKénrat, pn elvar be aN / z ON N €dv dinpnyevov 7}, oTrep TO A€vKdV (Td) EVAov 7) TO Govpp.eT pov THY Siduerpor ovde TO GANOes Kal Td Webdos dpolws er. dTap- Nee ee) tA \ ow INS Came} SS open’ / nN eu kal em exelvwv. 1 domep ovde TO GAnbes emt TobTwy Td x x a atrd, otrws ovde TO etvat, GAN éott TO pev GAnOEs 7) Weddos, TO pev Ovyely kal ddvar adnOés (od yap ratrd Karddacis ! x‘ ae: ~ \ , 5) a \ kal dows), TO 8 dyvociv ph Ovyydvew (amarnOqvar yap MN a 73 > My 2 aes eh: SS s © 14 TEpl TO TL EoTLVY OVK EoTLW GAA 7 KaTa cUPBEBNKOS* Opotws d€ Kal mepl Tas pr cvvOeras odcias, ov yap éotw anaTnO7- var Kat Tacat eioly .evepyeia, ov duvdwer, eylyvovto yap ap Kat €pOetpovro, viv O€ Td dv adrd ov ylyverar ovde POet- peat, €k Twos yap av eylyvero-—éoa by eorw drep elvat To \ \ a > Da > a > cones Kal évépyeiat, wept tatra ovK éorw dmarnOjvar GAN 7 tal x la > X " V4 2 ~ ‘ > mn > Lg) voety 7) pnt GANA TO Th eote CyTElrar TEpl adray, ei ToLad- A > xX la xX XS > c \ >) / NX Q ‘ Ta €oTW 1 wn) TO be evar ws TO GAnOés, Kat TO pH elvat TO @S TO Weddos, ev pév eat, «i oUyKelTaL, GAnOés, TO & el py obyxerrat, Weddos' TO de ev, elmep dv, otTrws eoriv: > \ XN os > Ba \ \ 7) XN Xx lal na BN ei O€ pu) OUTS, OK EoTW; TO O€ GANOes TO voEiv TadTa: Td d&€ Weddos ovK ear, ode Andry, GAAA ayvowa, ovy ola 7 / \ \ Tuphdrys: 7 bev yap TupAdryns early ws dy ei TO vonTiKov 4 X\ oy \ X\ \ 4 \ nN > / dAws pay Exo Tis. avepdv Se kal éru Tepl TOV akiWHTwY > of b) X\ xX / y € t > /. ovK €oTw andtn Kata TO Tore, et Tis UroAapBaver axivyta. e \ iA ‘ / ” > “4 otov TO Tplywvov ei pi petaBadrdrew olerat, ovK oinoeTar mote pev do dpOas exew more b& ov (ueraBadrAor yap ar), > x \ R&S \ , A @ BA > \ lal am GANG TL pev tl 8 ov, ofovy aptiov apiOuov mpGrov eivat t DN x XX Sy ? He 5) n N A. eh Od pnbéva, 1 Twas pev Twas 8 ov apiOug oe TeEpl Eva ovdE

b 17 ravta yp. Casaubon: tatra codd. I 19 éray] eav AP ovykeirar EJ 20 ro add. Bywater 21 roalt. EJ Al.: om, AP 22 emi] &v emi EJ 23 €ora fort. Al. 7] ro de recc. Al.¢ et fort. Al. 25 kat paois om. Et 27 py om a vifle ovvbérous E 28 évépyerat AP Al. 30 te] yap 7 31 evépyera scripsi: ¢vepyeta codd, T Al. 32 ri EJ Al.: om. AP ci] ov« ef ex Al, ci. Bonitz 33 de] 5y ci. Christ 34 10 ws TO JT et fort. Al.: ro @s AP: os 7d recc, Al. et fecit E 1052° I tavra AP Al.®; avra EJT 2 ota EJT Al. : otoy AP 3 7) pev yap tupddrns om. AP 4 kat 6ru EJT Al.l: dru kai AP 6 olerat] oinrar AY 9 pn eva J

cs)

3°

35 1052°

1052»

TON META TA ®YSIKA 6, I

~ ” xX , ’ Da TodTo* ov yap érTL Tia pev TWa Se Ov oinoeTat, AAA’ GAN- aN devoet 7) WedoeTat ws del oUTwS EXOVTOS.

: otoy AP 3 7) pev yap tupddrns om. AP 4 kat 6ru EJT Al.l: dru kai AP 6 olerat] oinrar AY 9 pn eva J

cs)

3°

35 1052°

1052»

TON META TA ®YSIKA 6, I

~ ” xX , ’ Da TodTo* ov yap érTL Tia pev TWa Se Ov oinoeTat, AAA’ GAN- aN devoet 7) WedoeTat ws del oUTwS EXOVTOS.

To é dru pev A€yerar moAAaXGs, ev Tols Tept Tod lol / 4 , lel X TogaxGs Sinpymevois eipytar mpdrepov' mAEovax@s Oe Ac- youevov ot ovyKkepadatovpevor tpdmo. elol rérrapes TOV , \ 3 CK: be b] SS A > mpetwv Kal Kal’ avra dAeyouevwy ev GAAG pa) KaTa

, , \ \ \ © n xX ! rf ovpBeBnkos. TO TE yap avvEexés 7) ATAGS 7) MadALoTa YE TO toe Kal pa) ahh pyde Seow (kal rovrwy paddrov ev

A / eo > / Ag \ lal £ a Kal mpdrepov ob ddiaiperwrepa 7 Klynots Kal pwadAov adh): Ww n \ la X iA AY ” X ~ ‘ €TL TOLOvTOY Kat adAov TO OAOV Kal EXoV TLWAa Bopd>nY Kal * , ? ” e a \ Ne , oe eldos, padiora 0 ef tL pvoer To“wodToy Kal pr Bia, @oTeEp ty, RY x a \ dca KdAAH 7) youpw 7) TrVdeTH@, GAAA exer ev atTG TO airtoy advt@ Tod cvvexés elvat. Towdrov S€ TS play TH Ké- now elvat Kat advaiperov témw Kal xpovm, ote avepdr, el TL ptoer Kiwyjoews apynv exer THS MpeTns THY TpeTHD, e 4 lan 4 oe a a / oloy A€yo opas Kvkrodopiay, drt Todro mpGrov peéyeOos Ev. A Ta mev dn obrws ey 9 orvExXes 7) Gov, TA dE Gv Gy 6 do- e > a XX e « / - a X\ Ld yos eis 7}, Towra S€ ay H vonols pia, Toladra b€ ov Gdvaiperos, advaiperos 5& Tod ddiaipérou elder 7) ApiOue: api- lal XN » AK > of 7 ig y XS ~. bol Ou ev ovv TO Ka” Exactov adiatperoy, cider 5 TO TO Yow- OT® Kal TH emiotHun, S00 ev dv ein Tp@rov 7d Tats ovofats airioy Tov évds, dA€yeTar pev ovv Td ev ToTavTaxGs, TO TE awvexes pvoe Kal Td Sdov, Kal 7d Kal? Exacroy Kal Td / / X\ fel n > 7 - > n ‘ KaOoAov, mavta d€ Tadra ey TH adialperov elvar TOV meV \ / lad \ ‘\ , BN A , ~ S THY Kivnow Tov d5€ TY vonow 7 TOV Adyov.—bet bé KaTa- ~ 4 > € Pd / / al i voeiy bt ovx @oatrws AnmTéov r€yerOar Toid TE ev Eye- \ Y eer ‘ ae LJ \ , 3 a / ti Tat, Kat Th €ore TO Evi elvar Kal tis avrod Adyos. A€yeTat a e Kev yap TO &y rooavrax@s, kal Exactoy ora ev TovTav, @

alo ére om. I: éore EJ od} AP yp. E: ovx EJ Ale 18 mpaétws Sylburg avto J et fecit E 21 éy Ab 23 tt APAL: te 77 EJ 24 ev EJT AL: re ev AP avt@ AP 25 avro 29 7 Christ: } E?APALC: om. EYL dy APT AL; om. EJ 32 70 alt. om. AP b3 é&t EJTAll: é Ab 4 To EJ Al.: om. AP év trav ovtwy fort. Al., quod scribendum

vel rovroy omittendum ci. Bonitz

TO. 1052% 10 — 1. 1052° 32

EYL dy APT AL; om. EJ 32 70 alt. om. AP b3 é&t EJTAll: é Ab 4 To EJ Al.: om. AP év trav ovtwy fort. Al., quod scribendum

vel rovroy omittendum ci. Bonitz

TO. 1052% 10 — 1. 1052° 32

x L Seay v4 fad , AN ee eae COS \ av brapxy Tis TovTay Tay tpdrarvr Td de évt elvar bre pev rovTwy Tw éoTal, Ore 5€ GAA 6 Kal paddov eyyds TO dvopart éort, TH dvvauer 8 exeiva, Gomwep kal Tept orot- 4 \ Tae > / / > 7 a , 4 xelov Kal airiov ei d€o1 rA€yew emi Te Tois Tpdypact duopi- at Covra kat Tod, dvduatos Spor amodiWdrvTa. ort pev yap ws a \ nan tue > a \ \ ¥ orowxetoy Td Tip (€or. 8 tows Kad attd Kal To Gmeipov 7 Tt GAAO ToLodrov), got. 8 ws ov: ov yap TO adTd Tupl Kal orotxetm eivat, AAN ws mev Tpayyd TL Kal dios Td Top Lal x SY +. 7. \ \ / oTotxeiov, TO S€ OvoMa onmaiver TO Todl cupBEeBnKEevar abt@, Sri €ori te €x TovTov ws TpeToV evuTapxorTOS. otTw \ t , ey XN Sa \ na 4 i / ‘ \ kal él airiov cal évds cal Tév TowtTwr aravtev, dd Kal N LEN * ae / > \ = og ’ ¥ \ TO évl eivar TO ddiaipérm eotlv elvar, Step Tdde dvTL Kal a x Xx x aX idlq xwpiorS 7) TOTw 7) elder 7) Siavola, 7) Kat Td SAM Kal dd.a- /, , \ \ / > , Cee / pero, padtora d€ TO péTpwm eivar TpeTw ExdoTov yevous \ ig a a > n ~ Ma iN \ A 2) / kal. Kupl@rata Tod Toot: evredbevy yap emi Ta GAAa eA?- 4 , 2 e \ \ ua 5 , AvOev. péTpov ydp éoTW @ TO ToTdY yiyVeoKETALY yLyVe- dt} évt 4 Apdusa ro EER SS Sy. 6 dé ApLtOuds oxerat d& 2) Evt 7) ApiOuG 7d Tocdy 7 Togdy, 6 dF aprOuds dmas évi, Bote wav Td TOTdY yryydoxetar } ToTdY TO Evi, kal © mpOTw Tord yryvscketal, TooTo ad’rd Ey bio TO ey > iia XX ey ab , a \ ‘ > cal Cy apiOuod apx7 7} eprenes evreddey 5€ Kal év Tots GAdols tA ip iss , , ‘ ‘ déyerat pérpoy Te @ ExaoTov mpeéTw ylyvdoxeral, Kal Td Mérpov éxaorov év, év prkel, ev mAdreL, ev Baber, év Bape, 2 if foo’ \ \ ‘ > ca 2 / éy taxet (ro yap Bdpos Kal Tdxos Kowdv év Tots évayrious: durrév yap Exdrepov adrdv, ofov Bdpos té re drocnvody éxov pom Kat td éxov tmepoxry poms, Kal tdyos To Te dém0- onvody Kiynow exov Kal TO brepox}v Kujoews: Eote yap TL LA \ a / \ / a / 2 2 Taxos Kal tod Bpadeos Kal Bapos tod Kovdorépov). ev Tacx 87) Tovrois pérpovy Kal dpx7 &v te Kal ddiaiperor, émel Kal

D5 per] pev ro AP 7 €ott, TH 7 A IO xai om. Christ 12 mpaypart kat dice EJT 13 dvopua GAoy onpaivecet sup. lin. rd Tov atotyetov E —s_ rd. A et fecit E: ro JT 16 ro alt. APJ, ex

rd fecit E rade AP 17 idta xopior@ A? et fort. Al.: adiayapioro fort. Al.: dywpiore EJT = kat om. A? et fort. Al. rd. ci. Bonitz: recodd.TAl. adiapérm APAI.: Stapiopers EJT 18 ro AP J? All et fecit E: ro JT pérp@ a: pérpoy JAYTAl. et fecit E mpor@ Christ: mporov codd. TAl. 21 }) alt. in marg. A> 23 méoa Al.: om, EJY. 25 Te... mpat@] & mpaore@ Te exacToy Ejr 26 é& EJTAL, in marg. AP 28 éroonvoty EJAL.°: éanvooy A> 29 rayxos] rd raxyos AP 30 re EJT Ale: om, Ab 32 0) APALI: 88 EJP dcauperdv Ei

TQN META TA ®Y3IKA I

et fecit E mpor@ Christ: mporov codd. TAl. 21 }) alt. in marg. A> 23 méoa Al.: om, EJY. 25 Te... mpat@] & mpaore@ Te exacToy Ejr 26 é& EJTAL, in marg. AP 28 éroonvoty EJAL.°: éanvooy A> 29 rayxos] rd raxyos AP 30 re EJT Ale: om, Ab 32 0) APALI: 88 EJP dcauperdv Ei

TQN META TA ®Y3IKA I

ev rais ypappais xpOvrar ws ardum Th Tmodiaig. TavTa- xod yap rd pérpoy & tu Cyrodor Kal ddialperov: Totro b€ a aN lal a oN, a fal 0 tal XN 35 TO amAody 7) TO ToL 7) TO Tod. Srov pev ody doKel pH fal XK lal an A elvar aedeiv 7) mpocOeival, rodro axpises Td peérpov (d10 na a = A 1053" 70 rod dpiO0d akpiBéotarov: Thy yap. movdda TiWeac. TavTH ddiatperov): ev dé Trois GAAOLs puypodvrar Td ToLodToy: amd n x yap otadiov Kal raddvrov Kal del Tod pelCovos AdOou av ° x kal mpoorebév tr kal ddaipebev paddov 7) amd éedaTTovos: @ote ap ov mpdTov Kata Tiv alcOnow pn evdéxeTat, TOdTO mavres Towtyra, pérpov Kal dypav Kal EnpGv kal PBdpovs ss / \ Lae) yf OS x Pa 4 3 kat peyeOous: Kal ror olovrar eldévar TO TocoV, OTay El- lan \ , an / \ ‘\ X z na c a dGo1 81a Tovrov Tod pétpov. Kal di) Kal Kivnow TH andj ih \ lal "Af 3 ds \ ivA yw 4 i Kwyioe Kal th taxlorn (dAtyoTov yap atrn éxet xpévov) \ na x an A X\ \ / 10 610 éy TH dotpodroyia rd Tovotroy ey apxi) Kal pérpov (riyv kiynow yap duadny trotievtra: kat taxtorny tiv Tod ovpavod,

\ ny 7. x Dh \ 2 lo / 4

mpos iv Kpivovot tas dAdAas), Kal ép Movolxh Sleows, OTL eAdxuorov, Kal ev povf oroixetov. Kal radra mdvta &y 71 er > € / Sie as Bb} Lees + 7 CES OUTWS, OVX WS KOLVOY TL TO EV GAN WoTEP ElpNTAaL.—OUK GEL a mn e ~ / 150& TO dpiue ev 70 pérpoy, GAN évlore Trelw, olov ai duE- tA € \ DS x b} \ } > apd va) 4 \ cers OVO, at pa) KaTa THY akonv GAN’ ev Tots Adyols, Kal

c % 7 a na \ € \ ai dawval wAclous als perpotuev, kal 7 Sidmerpos dvol pe-

a \ ‘¢ \ SS , 7. \ J Tpeirar kal ) mAevpd, Kal Ta peyeOn Tmdvra. orm di) Tay- / Neild. 4 Te > bd 2) \ Lg 2 ,

Tov peTpov TO ev, Sti yvwpiCowev e€ Gv eotly 7H ovcia dim-

a . , N a 20 poovTes 7) KaTa TO TOTOY 7) KaTa TO €ldos. Kal 1a TOUTO TO ey ddvatperov, Ort TO TpGTov ExdoTwv adiaiperov. ovx dpuolws d@ may dd.alperov, otov mots kat povds, ddAdka TO pep

J \ ? , > 4 ‘ \ x / Lz mavtTn, TO 6 eis ddiaipera mpds THY aicOnow OeTEov, BoTEp

+ + wy ‘\ m XS / pS Ss elpntar 7dn* tows yap nav ovvexés SiaipeTov. cael O€ ovy- 25 yeves TO perpovr peyeOGv pev yap péyeOos, Kal Kad? &xa- OTOY [KOVS pKos, TAGTOVs TAdTOos, hwvais pwr, Bdpovs b 33 rais EJ ALS: tais dAdas A> 35 dmd\dsT 36 mpoabeiva

AP yp. E Ale: mpooreva EJ 36-1053 1 10 rovs apiOyovs EJT 10537 rér otoyrat EJP Al.: 16 rotovdi AP tSaou AP 9 dXdiyorov

EJ{T: ddtyooroy APJ 10 rotovro pev AP 17 ai om. AP 18 kai 7 mAevpa secl. Goebel, fort. recte kal Ta... ovTa@| peyéOn twa dvra djdov AP Al.: Kai peyéOn tiva otoy rd And.ov. ovra Goebel 20 kai E7JT: om. EMAP 23 mdvrws AY: mdvtp ravras ut vid. Al. eis ddtatpera] adiaiperoy TY: etvat adcaiperov Bonitz Geréov Forster : déket AP: eOéher EJ: voluit TI: ridera: Goebel 26 paver

recte kal Ta... ovTa@| peyéOn twa dvra djdov AP Al.: Kai peyéOn tiva otoy rd And.ov. ovra Goebel 20 kai E7JT: om. EMAP 23 mdvrws AY: mdvtp ravras ut vid. Al. eis ddtatpera] adiaiperoy TY: etvat adcaiperov Bonitz Geréov Forster : déket AP: eOéher EJ: voluit TI: ridera: Goebel 26 paver

govn AP

I. 10525 33 — 2. 1053b a1

Bdpos, povddwy povds. otrw yap Set AapBdvew, GAd’ ody icf > lal > , iz BA 1, £ 14 > > > Ore apiWuev apiOuds: kairo. der, €f dpolwss GAA ody dpolms aéiot adAN damep ef provddav povddas akidcere

Mérpoy GAAQ a) povddar 6 8 apiOuds AROS povddar. -

Kal Thy emotHyny O€ péTpoy TOV Tpaypdtwr éyowev Kal ‘\ SS x veal 4 4 id 3 tal 2 \ Ty alaOnow dia 7d adrd, oti yvwpiCopev tu adtats, emet a fa x fal Pp) s 7 Been: vA peTpovvtat addov 7 feTpovowv. aAAA ovpPatver nuiv wo- oN > LS fay > 7 4 3 NY Tep av et GAovV Nuas peTpodvTOS eyvwpioayev mAiKoL EopeV T® TOV THXvY em TOTOU Hpev emuBarAav. Tpwraydpa f Thxuy emt Tocotroy nuov é7iBddrAdrAawv. Ilpwraydpas & avOpandy dyno. mavtwv civar pérpov, domep dy ei Tov Q y ematyuova eimav 7) Tov alcOavdpevovs Tovrous 8 dru €xovew « s € XX 2 / e - / lad 6 pev aloOnow 6 O& emotnunv, 4 ghayev elvar pétpa Tov id / IAN i Us x yA 7, / UToKElpwevov. ovOev 61) A€yovTEes TEpiTTOY hatvovTal TL A€EyeL. or BS a CLE N, a. / LAN 5 Xs Noe > 1p Ore pev ody TO Evi elvar pddiota eote Kata TO dvoya aopt- CovTt peTpov TL, Kal Kupldtara Tod Toc0d, eira Tod ToLOd, avepov: Eotat d€ Towodroy TO pev av 7 Adialperoy Kata 76 4, XX S x Sy \ , 4 > ie \ aA xX moody, TO 6& dv Kara TO Toy: SidTmEp ddvalperoy TO ev 7 3 an Nn Os ie, aTAO@S 7 H EV. ; ’ / Kara 6 tiv ovciay Kal tiv diow (ytnTéov ToTépws be / b] vay 14 Bia 7. , \ ef éxet, Kabatep ev rots dSuamopypacw enjdrAOopev ti TO &v €oTl Kal TOs Oe? TEpl adtod AaBelv, ToTEpov ws ovolas Twos »* > an a c o. I a rd , 4 ovens avtod Tod Evds, kaOamep ot Te TlvOaydpeol pac mpd- aN Co tepov kai IlAdtwy torepov, i) paddAov dtadxeiral tis vous ‘i an tal / lal \ lad a € kal [wGs] de? yropywrépws exOfvar Kal padrdov donep of Tept pioews exelvov yap 6 pév tis didtay eival dynou Td ev 6 & depa 6 b& TO dmepov. ef dy pydev TOY Kadddov dvvarov ovolay eivat, Kabdmep ev Tots mept ovoias Kal mept an , 29? SN a > 7 c ed X\ Tod dvros elpntat Adyo.s, OVS atrd TodTo odciay as év TL Tapa rm N Ta TOMA Svvardy ecivar (kowdy ydp) addr 7) Karnydépynpa , fal ¢ INN ins ie) \ SS BY \ mE , Hovoy, dfjAovy ws ovde TO Ev: TO yap dv Kal Td Ev KaOddoV Karnyopeirat pdducra mdvTwv. Bote ovTe TA yern doels

4 32 avrois Bekker 35 npyiv AP Al, DY toyovow AP 2 dom. AP 3 A€yov mepitroy daiverairecc. Al. et fecit E? 4 é€v A» yp. E All apopifovr. AP Al); 6 adopi¢ovor EJT Al, 8 7] 7 in marg. AP 10 €xew J 14 ms dei] mpoodet yp. E m@s inclusit Christ (cf. 1. 11): habent codd. © Al.: mos Schwegler kai] dpa Al. : 7) ci. Bonitz 16 év dyow 6 AP 67 EJT Al. : de AP 18 ovd'] dru od’ Bywater ovgia AP yp. ET as| TO @s AP 21 dices AP

w ur

1054*

TQN META TA ®YSIKA 1

AP 10 €xew J 14 ms dei] mpoodet yp. E m@s inclusit Christ (cf. 1. 11): habent codd. © Al.: mos Schwegler kai] dpa Al. : 7) ci. Bonitz 16 év dyow 6 AP 67 EJT Al. : de AP 18 ovd'] dru od’ Bywater ovgia AP yp. ET as| TO @s AP 21 dices AP

w ur

1054*

TQN META TA ®YSIKA 1

n a , TwWes Kal ovoiat ywpioral TGV GAdwy elotv, ovTE TO EV yevos a NM BY evdexerar elvar dia Tas adtrdas airias 0 domep ovde TO dv ovde THY ovoiay. eri 8 Spolws emt Tavrwy dvayKatoy éxew* , EL na X\ BY \ Se ee: oe b Paper 3 7 i) tal héyerar 8 loayGs 7d ov kal Td ev Gor éneimep ev Tots We se . 4 , HARTER OR Ny S 4, 93 a mowts éori Te TO ey Kal Tis Ptows, buolws S€ Kal ev Tots mocots, SyAov Ort Kal ddAws Cytntéov Th TO ev, womep kal - \ c 2! c 9 ig a bien Fit / > a > ‘ ti TO dv, @$ ody ikavdy br TobTO adTo 7 Piots airod. adda pay ey ye xpopacty éore 7d ev xpGpa, oloy TO Aevkoy, efra n \ Ta dAda éx TovTov Kal Tod pedavos daiverar yryvdpyeva, TO de peda orépyois AevKod wonep Kal pwrds oxdros [rodro > LS 8 éorl orépnois dwrds|: adore el Ta dvTa Hw yxpépara, hv av apes tis Ta dvra, Gd\Aa Tivwv; SiAov bi} Ort ypwpd- Twv, Kal TO ey jv dv te ev, oloy Td AevKdv. sSpuotws Se Kal Sy > / el pédn Ta Gvra av, apiOuds av Av, Siecewy jsevTot, GAN b 3 x « > 4 3 nN \ AP a + LS > Ps) r ovK apiOuos 7 ovota aitrGy: Kal rd ey Hv ay TL ov 7) ovola od TO éy GAAG Blears. Guolws b& Kal emt Tov POdyywv aro.- xelwy dv iy ra dvta apiOuds, kat Td ev aroxeioy pwvijer. \ ’ / a 4 j > 2 / kal el oxnpara edOtypaypa, oxnudtwr ay jv dapibyds, kal 76 ev 7d tplywvov. 6 8 adros Adyos Kal emt Ty adA- Awy yevOv, wor elvep Kal ev rols mabet Kal ev Tots ToLois kal év Tots mocols kal év kwwynoer apiouev dvTwv Kal evos Twos ev dnacw 6 Te dpiOuds Tidy Kal Td ey Tl ev, GAN odxl TobTo atré 7 ovela, Kal éml Téy odoldy dvayKn ocatTws éxewv: dpolws yap exer ent mavrov.—ére pev ody rd & ep dmavtt yever eri tis piors, kal oddevds Todrd y atrd } Pious x ef , b} a 2, , cad & TO &v, davepov, GAN Somep &Y Xpopwact xpGua Ev CyTy- , > SEN Asad, o A 2 coreg Shae 7 Pe nN téov avtd Td év, ottwm Kal év ovaia ovciay play abrd 76d e cg iN ae he ie oN \ ‘ ay a fol ev: bru b€ tadrd onpaiver mws TO & Kal TO ov, SHAY TH Te mapakodovbeiy ioays tals Katyyoplas Kat pa elvar ev pended (oloy ovr év rh tl éorw ovr éy TH Totoy, GAN duolws éxes @omep TO ov) Kal TO pr TpocKarnyopetobar

> 28 ovxi E 29 ro] me ro EJV AI. xpva om. Al. etra JTT i et ut vid. Al.: ef APE 31 rovTo...32 pards secl. Jaeger 32 6°] yap fort. Al. 33 twoy codd. T Al.: rwéy Christ 35 diécews AP 10542 hover i) ovpdevor fort. Al. 6 év om. E ev] ev ty J 7 ev) dy AP 8 avrd A” et fort. Al.: atrod EJI: atvro avrod i 10 dmavtt AY Al: ravri EJ 12 ovoiav piay EJY et ut vid. Ali: otcia pia AP yp. E aird EJ Al: avro re AP 13 70 dy] dv EJ 14-15 €y pate pug fecit E: ev py dead play (uiay expunctum) J 15 riom. A 16 76 ph]

ov ro Al, yp. E

“© ERT ET. ALBERT S COLLEGE LIBR

2. 10536 22 — 3. 1054) 10

Ali: otcia pia AP yp. E aird EJ Al: avro re AP 13 70 dy] dv EJ 14-15 €y pate pug fecit E: ev py dead play (uiay expunctum) J 15 riom. A 16 76 ph]

ov ro Al, yp. E

“© ERT ET. ALBERT S COLLEGE LIBR

2. 10536 22 — 3. 1054) 10

erepoy TL TO els dvOpurmos TOO dvOpwros one, ovoe Td elpar €/\ * mapa TO tt i) molov 7) mécov) kal (rO clvar) rd Evi etvar 7d > ExdoT@ elvat. 3 “Apvrixerrar d€ Td @v Kal Ta moAAA Kata TAéElovs Tpd- 20 tous, Ov va Td ey Kal Td TARO0S ws Adwalperov Kal dvaipe- 4 x s >S Xx / \ N aQ/ / Tov: TO pev yap H Sinpynmevov H Siayperov TAROdS TL dEye- Tal, TO b& dd.atperor 7 pn du évov éy. emel ody at dayti- Be: Pp U] il NENM. Oe : ; Oécets TeTpaxds, kal rovrwy KaTd orépnow A€yeras Odrepor, 2 4 a x » € rd 14 yx £ XX , évavtia dy ely kal ovre ws dytipacis otre ws Ta Tpds TL 25 Aeyoueva. dé€yerat Se ex Tod évavriov Kal dndodrat Td ev, ex Tod Siarperod 76 adialperov, dia Td waddov alcOynrdy Td TAH- Xx na Bos elvar kal 7d diaiperdv 7) Td ddialperov, Sore TS Adyw TporEpov TO TANS Tod dd.arperov Oia THY aloOnow. ori de rod pev évds, Gonep wal ev Th diaipéoe. Tov évavrioy d.eypa- Wawev, TO TavTd Kal Guowoy Kal toov, Tod de wAHOovs Td érepov kal dyduoiuov Kal dvicoy. deyopévov be Tod Tad- a an e ON b b] BY / ToD mo\Aax@s, eva pev tpdmov Kar apiOudv A€youev eviotre aitd, rd 8 dv Kal Adym Kal apiys ev 7, olov ov cavtG kal TO elder kal rH tAn evr ere D edy 6 Adyos 35 6 Ths mparns ovolas els 7, olov ai toa ypaypal edOeiar ai 1054” avrat, kal ta toa Kal icoydvia terpdywva, Kalrot melo 2 > 3 (4 ¢ ee Crh 4 S zs ‘ aX ev tovrois 7 iodrns evorns. Smoia d€ éay pH Ie: c na y S SS \ va Je ) t \ TaUTaG aTAGS ovTa, pyndé KaTa THY ovolay adiadopa THY x BY ape oe 3 4 BY a) f ovykempevny, Kata TO eldos Tabvrd i, Bomep Td peiCoy Terpa- 5 yovov TO piKpd Guowov, Kat at dvicor evOetar adrar yap Suoar pév, at adral 6& amdGs ov. Ta Se edy 7d adrd lal v4 eldos éxovra, év ois TO padAov kal frrov éyylyveral, pyre paddov 7 pare Arrov. Ta de edy 7 Td adrd mdOos Kal ev T@ €lder, olov 7d Aevkdv, opddpa Kal Arrov, Gyo pacw 10

fo}

218 7) 4 pr. om. AP r@ add. Christ, eva addidi évi EJ, ex

ev fecit A 20 7a om. AP All 21 kai Ovaiperdy in marg. J 24 Tovtav] ovre AY: oro. Schwegler 25 €vavtia dy ein kal omittenda ci. Bonitz 26 eydpeva om, A» et ut vid. Al:

heydpeva, evavtia dv ety ci. Bonitz 29 éort. EJYVAI.: ere AP

31 ropr.om.J 32 rod AP Al: om. EJ 33 &a ETAL: kal éva JA» apcBpov 3 Aeyopev EJT Al, 34 raité Al. 76] rodro AT:

TOUTO aut Todo" 70 yp. af : Tovro" To ut vid. Al. >2 Kal alt. AP Al. : kai ra EJ wed Hy J 5 ovykepevny AP yp. E Al.: ; brokeimevny EJT 7 as Ale pre A? et ut vid. Al.: otoy EJ 7 Oe pr. om. AP 9 7 pr.] 7) 10 70] 7@ AP

267362 F

TON META TA ®TYSIKA I

76] rodro AT:

267362 F

TON META TA ®TYSIKA I

evar ote ey TO Eidos adréy. Ta Se ey TAElw Ex7) Ta’Ta oN ee xX € a oN x , v. =) uA }) €repa, 7) amAGs 7) TA TpdxeEtpa, oloy Kartirepos apybpo 4 4 BY > NBS x \ , ev o } Aevkdv, xpvods SE trupt 7) EavOdv Kal muppdv. ote dpAov 4 x ‘ ef \ \ > , _ / \ drt Kal TO Erepoy Kal TO dyduoiov ToAAaxGs €yeTat. Kal oe 5 157d pev GAAO dyrikeyevws Kal TO Tard, 16 Gamay pos aay 7 tavrd 7) dAdo: TO 8 ay py cal » BAn Kal 6 Adyos ets, 816 ob Kal 6 TAnolov Erepos: TO d& TpiTov ws a a oy XN a Ta év Tols pabnparikots. TO pev odv ErEpor 7 TAITO b1a TOUTO may mpos wav déyerar, Soa Aéyera ev Kal dvr od yap 20 dvripacis éott TOO Tavrod, 610 ov A€yeTar emt TOV pa) OVTwY n x (ro 8 ph radTd Aé€yera), emt 5& TOv dvT@Y TdvTwY: 7 x x yap ey 7) oby éy Tépvx’ 6oa dv wal év. 7d pey ody Erepoy kal tavrov ottws dvrixerrat, duapopa d& Kal érepdrns GAXo. TO pev yap €repov Kal ob Erepoy ovdk avaykn eivar Tl Erepor a x BN ay ! 25 7av yap 7 €repov 7) Tabrd & tu dv 7} dv: TO dé Siadopor BY ‘ / 4 TEEN oe > ze f Twos Tiwi didpopoy, wate avayKn TaiTd TL eivar © diade- a s \ aE: J! A x = x , povow. Todro b€ TO TavTO yEevos 7 Eldos' TAY yap TO diadEpor x Xx diapéper 7) yéver 7) cider, yever mev Ov pr €or. Kown 7 BAH pnde yéveois eis dAAnAaG, olov dcwy GAO oXIwa THs KaTN- , S a x EES / / > td aA 30 yoplas, elder b& Gy Td adTd yévos (A€yerar SbF yevos 6 LA x SEIN / \ S ee aY g bs V4 x dupw TO adrd A€yovTar Kata Tiv ovoiay Ta Siddopa). Ta o évavria diddopa, kal 7 evavtiwais diadopd tis. sre Be KaA@s TodTo tmoréeucOa, SHAov ex THs emaywyhs' TavTa X a yap Siapépovta daiverat xal tadra, od povoy €repa 35 dyra GAAd Ta pev Td yevos erepa Ta 8 ey TH adiTH ov- t t Lp = > cal LS a 1055* crouxla tis Katnyoplas, dor ev raire yéver kal TavTa TO ¥ 7 Jo | x” lal n / bee Ee! yévet. didpicrar 0 éy GdAows Tota TS yéver Tavra 7) Erepa. ; . Emel d& duahépew evdéxerar GAAnA@Y Ta bvadepovta

bi2 i) ra €repa 7) dmhGs EJ: om. fort. Al. 13 7) Nevkdy ex Al.

scripsi: 7 Nevxds Schwegler: 4 xpvoé codd. I’: xadkds ypu ci. Bonitz xpvods d€ om. EJT mupi | mp 7) JT et fecit E kat]

kal ro EJ 15 drav AP Al,: way EJ 17 eis, dd od] idios A» yp. E yp. J Al. kal TO mAnotairepov’ ro AY Al, 19 mpos dray AY Al.¢ ov EJT AL: odd¢ AP 21 mavtev Tay dvrwy AP 22 mépvy’ doa scripsi: wépuke boa Apelt : mepuxds codd. T Al. dy] cal dy EJT AI, cai in ras. E; om. J 24 kai om. Tr 26 To tavTo J yp. E 27 tavto EJ Al.e: avro A 31 Aéyerar AY kata Thy bis E 31-2 ra 8 evartia Sudgopa in marg. J 34 yap]

yap 7a Al. gaivera APAL: re haiverat EJT: 7 haivera ci. Bonitz tadra om, A®; ratra E Al, 10552 yéve: pr. APAI.: cide EJT

3. 1054>11 —4. 1055" 37

E; om. J 24 kai om. Tr 26 To tavTo J yp. E 27 tavto EJ Al.e: avro A 31 Aéyerar AY kata Thy bis E 31-2 ra 8 evartia Sudgopa in marg. J 34 yap]

yap 7a Al. gaivera APAL: re haiverat EJT: 7 haivera ci. Bonitz tadra om, A®; ratra E Al, 10552 yéve: pr. APAI.: cide EJT

3. 1054>11 —4. 1055" 37

mAciov kal édarrov, éort Tis Kal peylorn diadopd, Kal rav- Ty A€yw evavtincw. br. 8 i peylorn earl dvadopd, Shadow éx THS émaywyns. Ta wey yap yever Siahéepovra ovK exer dddv eis GAAnAa, GAN améxer mr€ov Kal dovpBAnra: Tots 0° elder diahépovow ai yeveoers ex Tév evaytiwy eloly ns , ae \ 4 > 2 / drapxn adrois. totvrwy d& dvrwv pavepdv bri odk evdexerau ee 2 2 7 > + > xX _ / évl mArciw evavtia elvar (otre yap tod éoxdrov éoxarerepor etn Gv T1, ovre TOD Evds diacoTHyaros TAclw dvoly eayara), bdws Te ei Eat 1 evavTidtns diadopd, 7 5é diapopa dvoiv, ore kal ) Téedevos. avdyxn Se Kal Tovs GAAovs Spous dAnOets o n 2: We \ SS a / ¢: / elvas Tov evaytiav. Kal yap mAeloToy dvapéper TéAELos duaopa (rdv Te yap yéver diaepdvTwY ovK oT eEwTépw AaBeiv Kal rv cide dederxtar yap Gri mpds Ta ew Tod a 2 x / / > A 4 \ XX rd yévous ov« éots Siadopa, rovtwv 8 atryn peylorn), kal ra év TavTG yever Teiotov Siap€epovta evavtia (weylorn yap diaopa rovrwyv 7 Tédelos), Kal Ta ev TH adTS deKTIKG TAci-

/ > ty € \ oe € 2% a 2 ty otov diapepovta evaytia () yap tAn H avTH Tots évayrioss) 30

kal ta bd Thy adriy dvvayiw TA€loTov Siadépovta (kal bs Es 1 8 a \. J “3 € 7 v2 aN € i yap emuothyn mept ev yevos H pla) ev ols 4» TeAela dua- popa peylorn.—mparn 5& évaytlwois E€is Kat orépyots eorw: | Yad iN t an ‘ / ¢ / ov maca d&€ orepnois (moAAaxGs yap A€yerar oTépnois)

GAN ijris dv redrcla H. Ta 8 dAAa evayria Kara rabdra 35

x 6n oS ‘ a x de a a Xx xX EXUNOETAL, TA MEV TH EXEL TA OE TH TOLELY 1) TIOLNTLKA

eivat Ta 5€ TS AnWeis elvar Kal AmoBodal rovTwv 7) dAAwv

%4 gor EJT Ale Ammonius: kal gor: AP 6 otk EJT ALS: ovd’ AP 7 aovpBdnrov E*J) 18 rd pr.] tov AP 20 Tov om. E} 22 re] O€ AT ALS 26 yap om. AP 28 évavria E2A et ut vid. Al.: rdvavria E'J 30 evayria A® et fort. AL: om. EJI'

TON META TA ®YSIKA I]

XX 4 / ‘ evavtiov. et dy avrikerrar pev ayTidacis Kal oTEpyots Kat

E} 22 re] O€ AT ALS 26 yap om. AP 28 évavria E2A et ut vid. Al.: rdvavria E'J 30 evayria A® et fort. AL: om. EJI'

TON META TA ®YSIKA I]

XX 4 / ‘ evavtiov. et dy avrikerrar pev ayTidacis Kal oTEpyots Kat

povoy ey TO Sextix@ Tod ioov. el 37 ai yevéoers TH DAy €K Tov évartiorv, ylyvovtat 5é 7) ex Tod eldovs Kal THs TOD Eldovs oN a 2 a lo &fews 7) Ex oTEpHoEew@s Twos Tod Eldovs Kal THs pophys, dfAor o lal / = dre pev evavtinois atépnois av ein Taca, 7 b& oTEpnots las , n / 1g lows ov Taca evayTiorns (airiov 8 Sr. ToAAaxGs evdexeTat b] los x 3 / 3 eo Be « AK 3 / éorepnodat TO eorepnyevor): e& Gv yap at peraBodal eoxa- Tov, éevavtia tadra. avepov de Kal bia Tis enaywyis. maca yap evavtinois exer orépnow Odrepoy tov évavtlor, > ’ >’ ¢ ra / > he X\ Bs > , > GN’ ox dpolws TavTa avicdTys pev yap lodrntos dvo- 20 poLorns & dpowdTnTos Kakla dé dperijs, dvahéper d& Homep ¥ \ x x 2 , 5 eee , A: Ce ES x elpntau TO wey yap éav pdvov 7 eorepnpevov, TO 0 eav 7 Eee te o x 4 or , A a na Ng xX / ‘s mote 7 év Twi, olov dy ev 7Atkia Twi 7) TO Kuplo, 7 TavTH 816 Ty pey eorr petakd, Kal €orw ovbre ayabds GvOpwros ovTE , lat \ > y 2 eae es > x x x kakés, Tov 5&€ ovK Eotw, GAN avdyKn €ivar 1 TepiTTOY 7 A ¥ x X wy A c / £ / \ > a5 @ptioy. éTt Ta pey e€xet TO VroKelwevoy wpiopevoy, Ta d » A A 4 c Hae / cad > s / ov. ote davepdy bri del Oarepoy Tdv evavtiwy é€yeTat Kata orépnow: amdxpn 5 Kav Ta mpGra Kal Ta yevn TOY évavtiwy, oloy TO ev Kal Ta TOoAAa: Ta yap GAda cis Tatra avdyerau. > x n 30 «Emel 8 & &l evavtiov, amopjoeey av tis mOS5 avrixeirat TO ey Kal Ta TOAAd, kal Td ioov To pEyarA@ \ n o > x N 4 Wee Snes b) 7 Ls Kal T@ pikp@. €l yap TO wérepoy del ev dyTiOeoer A€yomer,

33 ee om. EJ© 14 @v AP et ut vid. AL: ay rs EJr 18 Oarepov AP AI.: Bar épov Ejr 21 i) ex Al. scripsi: 7 codd. © 22 dy et 24 7) pr.om. A 25 6r fort. Al. Bonitz e@pir evo bis E 30 ei AP All: é&i eorw EJT 32 7™@om. AP yap ro AP yp, E et fort. Al. : 1d yap EJT Aeydpevoy E}

4. 10552 38 — 5. 1056% 25

EJ© 14 @v AP et ut vid. AL: ay rs EJr 18 Oarepov AP AI.: Bar épov Ejr 21 i) ex Al. scripsi: 7 codd. © 22 dy et 24 7) pr.om. A 25 6r fort. Al. Bonitz e@pir evo bis E 30 ei AP All: é&i eorw EJT 32 7™@om. AP yap ro AP yp, E et fort. Al. : 1d yap EJT Aeydpevoy E}

4. 10552 38 — 5. 1056% 25

, Xx \ oloy méTepov AevKov 7) MéAay, Kat méTEpov AEvKOY 7 OV AEv- , nN ov (mérepov d& avOpwros 7) NevKdv od A€yomev, Cav py e€ © Ve a e > BN t vm0€cews Kal CyTodvTes olov moTepov AGE Kdr€wv 7 Daxpa- THS—GAN’ odk avayKn év oddevi yéever TodTO’ GAAG Kal TobTO exeibey eAnjAvOev? Ta yap dvrikelueva pdva ovK évdéxeTat Fy D ® A & A A Gua wmdpxew, @ Kat évradtda xpnra. év T@ mérEpos 7A- Oey: ei yap Gua évedéxero, yedotoy TO eparnua «i dé, Kal aN otras dpotws euminrer cis dvtidecw, eis TO ev 7) TOAAG, ° > aN a otov morepov audrepor HAOov 7 &repos)-—ei d7) ev Tols avTu- / a a Keysevous Get TOO ToTEpov 7) CATnous, A€yeTat S€ TéTEpoy Et- Xx oN a a Cov 7 €Xattov 7 toov, tis éotw 7 dvtieots mpds Tatra Tod wy + x‘ / / 2 ft | ee > tal vA ‘ (wou; ovTe yap Oarépw wdvm evavtiov ovr’ dyoiv: ti yap ° na x nm a pardrov TH pelCove 7) TO eAdtrom; ert TO dvlow éevavtiov 76 loov, wate mAcloow ora 7 évl. ei 5& TO dycoY on- Matves TO advTd Gua dyoiy, ein pev Gy dvtiKetuevov ayu- a lal lal / potv (kal % dmopia BonOet roils ddoxover Td dvicov dvada elvai), ad\AG oupBaiver ev dvoiv evavtiov: Smep ddvvarov. by \ S oy ‘ lA if ‘\ = 2 ért TO pey toov peta€y daiverat peyddou kal pikpod, évav- 14 \ \ > 4 »+ lA x 2 pe =e a timo dé peragd ovdeuia ovre dalverat obre ex Tod dpicpod \ a dwvarov ov yap dv ein Tedela pera&d Tivos otca, GAAG paddov a XN éxet Gel Eaurns Te weradv. Aelzerat dy 1) ws Amopacw avtt- tal Ne Se / f 38 x 3 b} I , \ keloOat 7) ws otépnow. Oarépov pev di odk evdexeras (rh yap MadAov Tov peyadov 7) puiKpod;): dudoty dpa andpacis oTe- a a pytiKy, 10 Kal mpos duddrepa TO mérepoy éyeTal, Tpos n \ d& Oarepoy ov (ofov mérepov peiov 7) toov, i} ToTEpoy toov 7 \ \ eharrov), adr’ det tpia. ov orepyors de e& avdyxns: od yap mav tcov 6 pH petcov 7 eAatrov, GAN ev ols mEepvKev Cees y N ce Beg cunt te) L , , exeiva.—éort 02) TO toov TO pre péya pyre piKkpdv, TEepv- \ a Ca Kos 0€ 7) meya 7 puKpov civaty Kal dvTikeita, apo ws > , , \ \ fe 3) \ \ te amdpacis orepytikn, 10 Kal petagv éoTw. Kal TO prTE

dyabov pnte Kaxdy dytikeitar dyudoiy, addX dveévepov"

b35 kal an omittendum? morepos AP 36 ov Kat’ dvdykny yp: E 38 ehdciv AP 105672 duos E 6 pdvoyv AP 7 tO pr.] i} to EJT 8 aore] Sor’ ev EJT i ev evi 9 apa om. A? et ut vid. Al. apoow alt.) audots AP 10 Bonbea AP 13 ovdepia om. EJT 15 del om. yp. E avrn AP poeraku twos oboa E 21 Opi} Ale 22 ékeival eivar JT 23 7) pr. om. EJr Al.¢ 24 arépacis| orépnots yp. Al. 25 dyabov

pyre kaxov A” et ut vid. Al. Kaxdv pyre dyaboy EJT

ne oo

10564

i) Or

to oO:

_30

1056»

TON META TA ®YSIKA I

EJT 15 del om. yp. E avrn AP poeraku twos oboa E 21 Opi} Ale 22 ékeival eivar JT 23 7) pr. om. EJr Al.¢ 24 arépacis| orépnots yp. Al. 25 dyabov

pyre kaxov A” et ut vid. Al. Kaxdv pyre dyaboy EJT

ne oo

10564

i) Or

to oO:

_30

1056»

TON META TA ®YSIKA I

mo\AaxGs yap éyerat Exdrepov Kal ovK eotw ev TO dexTL- Kov, GAAG padAdAov TO pyre AevKoY pte peday. ev Oe an yi; ovdé Totro déyerar, GAN wpiopeva Twos ef Gv dé€yerat n € 2 s oy Dre A \ KN \ x aTepyTiKOs 7 amddacis atrn: avayKn yap 7 gaov 7 b] Q 5 ON ee VA vA > > an 5) @xpov elvat 7) Towdrdy TL AAO. WoTe ovK dpOGs emtTL- poow ot vopulCovtes duolms A€yerOar mavta, Bote EoeoOar Ul Umodjparos Kal yeupos peragd TO pare Unddnua pare xelpa, emevmep kal TO unte dyabdv pare KaKoy Tod ayabod a a A kal TOO Kakov, Os TavTwWY eoopevou TiWds meTagY. ODK avay- kn 5€ TobTo ovpBalvew. 1 wey yap dvTiKeevwov ovvaTo- pacts éorw ov ott peta&d Te Kat Oudotywa TL TméepvuKev > n > > + L7 > BA ‘ , bd € elvaur Tdv 8 ovdk €oTL diapopd ev GAM yap yever GV al cvvaropdcets, Got ovy ev TO broKelwevov. © / \ \ \ OS CRON \ a fat 2 fe Opotws O€ Kal Tept TOU Evos Kal TOY TOAAGY aTOpT- LA > \ X\ ‘ cal [ ee c an > 14 oelevy ay Tis. eb yap Ta TOAAA TO Evi aMAGS aVTiKELTAL, / By 7 \ x & I x 2) 7, by oupBaive. evia advvata. TO yap ev oAtyovy 7» oAlya EoTal* x \ i \ lal > "4 2, v ” \ & Ta yap ToAAG Kal Tots OAtyois avTikeiral. ETL Ta OvO ToAAd, €itep TO dimAdoLOY ToANaTAdGLOY A€yerar SE KaTa Ta dvot Sore TO ev OAlyov' Tpds TL yap TOAAA Ta do ] X\ * ed \ \ > 4 »AX J pI] x ei pa) mpos ev TE Kal TO GAiyov; ovOev ydp eat €daTTov. wy “J € n) Ie \ \ \ +4 4 2 vA éru el @S ev pnket TO paxpoy Kal Bpaxd, otrws ev mANOEL TO TOAD Kal 6dlyov, kat 5 dy 7 TOAD Kal TOAAG, Kal TA TOAAG TOA (el py TL apa Siadeper ev ovvexel evopt- oTw), TO dAlyov TAHOSs Tu Cora. Gore TO ev TAHOdS TH, elmep kal dAlyov: Todto 8 dvdykny, el Ta SO TOAAG. GAN lows Ta moAAa déyerar pév Tos Kat [rd] moAV, GAN Os diahepov, otov Bdwp TorAV, TOAAG 8 ov. GAN boa diatperd, év rovtous A€yeTal, Eva pev TpdTov eay 7} TANO0s Exov bTEpo- prov yerai, éva pay Tp i} TAHO0s ex p « lal s /, \ x € a xiv 7) amdGs 7) mpds te (kal rd dAlyov aoatrws TAHOos €xov edreunpw), TO O€ os apiOues, 6 Kal dvTikerrat TO &vi x Mévov. otras yap r€youev ev 7) TOAAG, Gomep el Tis €lTror

228 ov EJT ras] tas ta xpopara EJT Al.¢ 30 ado EJT et ut vid. Al.: d@dXo wpiopévoy AP 31 ecco Our] NéeyerOar yp. E 33 elmep E 34 Tov om. AP 36 é€ort kai dy Al. D7 Kara EJT Al.: «ai AP 8 dvo pr.] dv0 dimdora AP 9 te kal ro EY,

ut vid. Al., sup. lin. J : te Kai mpds 76 AP to ei om, A’r Al.¢ 12 dopior@ yp. E Al. 13 tealt.] ri ore J: teeora EY 15 mas A’ et ut vid. Al.: os EJT room. Al., secl. Bonitz 18 ) pr.

EJY Ale: om. A®

5. 10568 26—6, 1057415

a \ isd x \ \ / \ \ nd \ ey Kal Eva 7 AevKoy Kal eEvKAa, Kal TA [ELETPNMEVA TpPOS ‘ 4 \ A / oe \ \ Mf 76 peérpov [kal TO perpyrdv]} obrws Kal rau moAAaTAdoLA c

13 tealt.] ri ore J: teeora EY 15 mas A’ et ut vid. Al.: os EJT room. Al., secl. Bonitz 18 ) pr.

EJY Ale: om. A®

5. 10568 26—6, 1057415

a \ isd x \ \ / \ \ nd \ ey Kal Eva 7 AevKoy Kal eEvKAa, Kal TA [ELETPNMEVA TpPOS ‘ 4 \ A / oe \ \ Mf 76 peérpov [kal TO perpyrdv]} obrws Kal rau moAAaTAdoLA c

i \ AEeyeTaus TOAAG yap ExacTos 6 apiOpyds bre Eva Kal bru pe- Tpntos évl Exaotos, Kal ws TO dvTixeluevoy TO Evi, od TO

Ohiy@. otrw pey ody éotl ToAAA Kal Ta S00, ws Se TAHOOS 2

oy € \ BN , Nar oie a > D4 2 BY na €XOV UTEPOXTY 7) Tpos TL 7 ATA@S OVK EoTLW, AAAA TPO- tov. OAtya 8 adds ta dvo* TAHOos yap eorw ddrEup 0 n \ \ > tt n ot rg > , , A, éxov mpO@rov (810 Kal odk dpOGs améotn ’Avagkayopas eimav br. duotd mdvra xphuatra iv Ameipa cal mANOEL Kal juuKpd- Y] Be ie > \ rn 66 \ , » ¢¢ Ree) , »” TyTl, ce. elmety avTi TOD “Kat puKpdryte” “Kal dAvyornTL” > Ss BA e) AN BY NW, zd \ NEC 4 / ov yap dmepa), emel Td dALyov ov did TO ev, Homep Twés 3 \ \ \ / > , \ \ A \ \ gacw, adda Oia Ta dvo.—avrixerta, dy TO ev Kal Ta \ \ a b} ad € / nn a x ¢ TOAKMA Ta ev apiOuots ws péTpov petpnTe: Tatra O€ os \ , ig \ > CEN a , ie > TA Tpos Tl, Ooa pn KAP’ avTa TGV Tpds TL. Oinpnrar 6 her + o a ‘9 \ , \ SS ¢ neiv ev GAdows OTL Siy@s A€yeTaL TA TpPOS TL, TA pEY Os a "4 x ae a) / \ b) ¥, nm us 7 evavTia, TA O ws ETLOTHUN TpOs ETLOTHTOV, TO eyeaOal TL »” \ > , \ \ a x a iP oe fal ahAo Tpos avTo. To 6€ Ev EAaTTOV Eivar TOs, oloy ToiY dvoiv, ovdey Kwmdveu od yap, ei Aatrov, Kal dAlyov. TO be mAIOos otoy yevos eotl Tod apiOuod> eort yap apiOyos TAROos évl perpyrov, kal avtixertat mws TO &v Kal apiOuds, ody ws ) 2. bs 2 oe a , yy e \ i evayTiov GAA’ woTep eipyTaL TGV TpOs TL eviar 7) yap pée- Tpov TO 0€ peTpyTdv, TavTn GvTikerrat, 616 od Tay 6 dv 7 ad > , p} i yf yt v, / b) ‘3 14 \ ev aplOuos eotw, oloy et TL adiaiperov eoTw. dpolws dé AEyo- Mevyn 1) emLaTHUN TpOs TO emLoTHTOV ody dpolws aTodiSwou. ddfere pev yap av pérpov % emrothyyn ctvar TO be emicTNTOV TO peTpovpevoyv, TvuBalver 5 emroTHNY ev TaCaY emLoTNTOV eivat TO 5 emLoTHTOY py Tav emLoTHNY, OTL TpdTOY TIWd 7 emoTiun pmeTpeira TH EmLoTHTG. TO Se TAHOoS otte TO b] if 3 4 bp) x / aS aN AY c ¢ / Lad OAty@ EvayTiov—dahAG TOUTM HEV TO TOAD wS UTEPEXOV TAT- « / / x CN / . 4. S \ S Gos Umepexopev@ TANOEL—ovUTE TH Evi TavTws’ GAAG TO peV A ig \ bs =) ra Ve \ > : anémortnrov? 11 an (mpds)éemotnunv? 14 pev ev AP yp, E 15 ro 8 pr.] dd’ E ro alt. sup. lin, J ©’ om, J, in marg. E

~ wm

1057"

TON META TA &YSIKA I

, v4 Cae 7 2 ox EDS Lee) \ 4 ef N Tpos TL OoTEp 7 ETLOTHUN eTLTTNTO, eav 7 ApiOuos TO O EV eTpoOv.

"Emel 0& TOV évavTioy evdéyerar elval Te peragd Kai a. 7, x Re of. 3 a b) 7 ae BS / d éevioy €oTw, avdyKkn éx TOV evavtiov elvar Ta peTagd. TdT

x SS eae ed fal be , > lac \ @ > \ ,

20 yap Ta peradd ev TO. aiTo yever eoTt.Kal Gv eori perakd. = a 4 !

peragy pev yap Tatra dA€youey els boa peraBadrdAew

2 / / X\ iA oe > A fol © / a

TdT

x SS eae ed fal be , > lac \ @ > \ ,

20 yap Ta peradd ev TO. aiTo yever eoTt.Kal Gv eori perakd. = a 4 !

peragy pev yap Tatra dA€youey els boa peraBadrdAew

2 / / X\ iA oe > A fol © / a

dvaykn mporepov TO peraBaddAov (ofov amd THs traryns emt

Thy vyTnv el peTaBaivor TO ddiyloT@, Héer mpdrepov els Tovs

peraey pOdyyous, Kat ev xpdpaow el [ijéer] ex Tod AevKod

, \ / /, ee >] \ ny \ A BN t)

a5 els TO peAav, mpdrepov ikeu eis TO Howikody Kat pa.ov 7 eis

TO pédav* dpolws b& Kal emt Tév dddAwy) peraBddlrAcqw &

ef GAXAov yevous els GAAO yévos odK oT GAN 7 KATA TUM-

BeBnkds, oloy ek xpepatos «is oxXijma. advaykn dpa Ta

peraéd Kal adrots kal Ov petadd clow ev TO adT@ yéver

ms : x X\ , As - 33 it) /

zo elvat. GAAQ pV TavTa ye Ta peTagd eoTW aVTLKELLEvOV lal > A X t > € \ Ba /

TWOV' €K TOUTWY yap povey Kal’ avTa eoTt peTaBadrAcw

x 7 , i“ \ X\ 5 ‘y \ x»

(81d ddvvarov elvar peraéd pr avtikemevav: etn yap av ‘ \ X\ 2 2 fe na > ) i

peraBody kal pn é€ dvrixeevwor). Tov 8 dvTiKeysevov

> J, \ > ot A n_ / Pp} > / dvripdoews ev ovK ot. peta’ (rodro yap éorw dvripacts, 35 avTiecrs Hs Orwody Oarepov pdpiov TapeoTuy, OvK exovons ovOeY a X fat Xx Xx , x S / \ pera), TGv O& NoiTGv Ta pev Tpds TL TA SE OTEpyoLs TA d& évavtia éoriv. rTév dé mpds TL dca pa) evavTia, odK exeL / y De key > 2 a 3S aN / > / "2 \ petagd: atriov 8 bru ovK éy TO adtT@ yever eoriv. Th yap 1057” €mioTiuns Kal emioTynTov peragd; GAG peyddov Kal ptKpod. > ? > \ > > al ie \ 7 A / \ ei 6 €oTlW ev TavTM yever TA peracv, Womep S€édeukTat, Kal peraéy eévavtiwy, dvayKn atta ovyKeiobar éx TovTrwy Tov 2 x 5S y / Rie Yer *» IAS \ > SS evavtlmy. 1) yap €orar TL yevos avrdv 7 ovdev. kal ei pev 5 yévos €orat ottws dor elvat mpdrepdy Tt TSv evayTiwy, ai d1a- opal mpdrepa. evavtiat Ecovrat ai mouoaca ta evaytia >s na / \ an an \ ” eldn ws yévouss €x yap Tod yévous Kal TGy diapopov Ta €ldn

ty) > x \ t > / ” xs \ ~

(ofov ei Td AevKdv Kal peAav evavTia, cot. Se TO pev SiaKpl- TUKOY XpGua TO S€ oVvyKpiTLKOY xpGpua, adrar ai d.adopat, 10 TO OvaKpiTiKOY Kal ovyKpiTiKéY, TpdTepal' Hote TadTa évav-

416 év] év cat Al. 18 — 105914 om. Al. 18 r.om, AP 19 ra pera€v om. T 22 mpdtepoy avayxn EJT 23 ddcyiorw Neyo EJT 24 née. incl. Christ 29 kal avrois] avrois AP; om. I 31 povoy AP 38 ra peraév ET bs eorw ci. Bonitz

6 mpdrepar A yp. EJT: mpdrepov E yp. J 8 ra evartia EJ

On 1057" 16— 8, 1058 7

Tia AAAjAoLs TpdTEepA—aAAA iy Ta ye evavTins Sdiaé- povra paddov évavtia): kal ta dowd kal Ta peragd éx Tod yevous éorat Kal T&v diaopév (ofoy doa ypepmara Tob AevKod Kal wedavds éote perakv, radra del ek Te TOD yevous NéE- yerOai—Eor. b& yevos TO ypOya—xai éx diahopGv Tiwdr * \ > x \ io 5 , y iS , Dy

avrar d€ ovK EcovTar TA TpOTa evaytia: ef Se pn, eoTar eo sh x x / ed Ba aX BA col Exagtov i) Aevkoy 7) péAay: ETEepar Apart peTagd dpa Tov TpeTwv éevavtioy atta eoovrat, at mpGtar S& diadopal ro dvaxpitiKoy Kal ovyKpitiKdv) Sore Tadta mpota CyTnTéov

4 > i AS 2 / 2 7 \ \ oe) Ely OOH EVAVTLA [71 EV YSVel, EK TLVOS TA peraey QUT@V (avayKn 2

AS a n a n a yap Ta év TO ait yever ex TOY aovvOray TS yéver ovyKEl- 5: Ae ea > \ SS Ss 2 / eee) 2 0a 7 dovvOera etval). Ta pev ov evavtia dovvOera e€ adAjArwr, Sore dpyat: ra dé perady 7) mavta 7) odd. ek 6€ TGV evavtioy yiyverat tT. dor Eotat peTaBoA? eis TotTo x XN > Sis of. c , SA EAN a4 \ c mplv 7) eis avra: éxatTépov yap Kal jrrov éorat Kal maddAov. N + y My fa) na b) 7 \ Cy BA meragd dpa éora kal Todro rév eévavtiwv. Kal Tadda apo. mavta ovvOera Ta petaéd: Td yap Tod pev paddroy Tod o a , f. 2 3 / re 4 i) a \ yTTov avvOerov ws e& exelvwy Ov dEyerar elvat Tod pev ES. fal > @ 3 \ ? > x ef / c Lgad HaAXov Tob 8 Arrov. émel O ovK EaTLV ETEpA TPOTEpA OpoyeEri) n 2 7 a > 2 a 3 4 +, x , Tav evavtiov, amavt dv ék tov évavtioy ein Ta perali, @ote kal Ta KdtTw mdvTa, Kal tavavtia Kat Ta peragd, €k TOV TpeTwY evavTioy Erovrar. OTL pev odv TA pETAsY eV Te TavT® yever TdvTa Kal petagd evaytiwy Kal ovyKeirar €x TOV evavtioy TavTa, dfdov. A a lal a To & érepov 7 elder twds Tl erepdv eott, Kal del TobTo > bes € @ 9 ~ a n y A lal aupow dmdpxew: olov ef ov Erepoy To cider, dudw Ga. / fal ca a a \ avayxn dpa ev yever TO adiTo civar TA Erepa TH Elder TO \ n / a A Ba a ce fe ‘ yap TowvTo yevos KaA@ 0 audw ev TavTO A€yeTal, 47) X x + KaTa ovpBeBynkds €xov diadopav, elre ws tAn dv elre ad- 2» 4 \ a \ OY € I e BA o Ros. ov pdvov yap det TO Kowdy trdpyewv, olov dudw (oa, 2 \ Nie: c id a SaaS BN tN @ N X\ GAAG Kal Erepov Exatépm Todro ard Td (Hor, oloy TO meV na Ys inmov 76 b& dvOpwmov, 510 Todro TO Kowwdv Erepov aGrAAHAwY €otl TO elder. Eorar dH Kad’ ara Td wey Tovovdl Cov Td dé f Nae TNS bY pes >} lA wa X Tovovel, oloy To yey immos TO 8 avOpwmos. dvayKn apa Thy > n \ / dvapopay ravrny érepdrnta Tod yevous civar. A€yw yap yevous bir mpdrepa A” yp. EJT: mporepovE yp. J 14 reom, E?A>

18 d€ om. yp. E 29 eel ody otk E i'34 dravra AP 37 dpa] kai AP 38 @ AP 105871 cirealt.] Jn A tolvuy éotat atrn (fAov S& Kal ex Tis emaywyhs) Tavra a al \ 9 tek 10 yap dvaipetrar Tols dvTiKemévois, Kal Ore TA evaytia ev TaiTo / / 3 \ 3 / Ly \ , e yéever, Sédeuktaur 7) yap evaytidryns iv diadhopa rTedela, 7 de dvapopa 7 elder maca- twos Ti, Bote TodTo TO adrd TE

\ / pe ae. tal \ WS. lol bel - 4 Kal yevos ém duoty (86 kal ev TH adr} cvoroixig mavTa

x 2 4 ~ 4 4 / \ \ / Ta evavtia THs Katynyoplas boa elder Siddopa Kal pa yevel, 15 €repd Te GAAHAwY pddAloTa—Tercia yap 1) dSiapopd—kal da ddAnAots ov ylyverat). % dpa diapopa evavtiwcts eorw. tobro dpa éotl rd érépous eivar TO clder, TO ev TadT@ yever

% dpa diapopa evavtiwcts eorw. tobro dpa éotl rd érépous eivar TO clder, TO ev TadT@ yever

cf 2 M4 . Bh LY See oN Ss a 4 4 dvta evavtimow éyew droua dvra (rata d& TO elder boa py éxet evavtiwow droua évra) év yap TH diatpéoe Kal 20€p Tois petagy ylyvovrar evavTidcers mpl eis Ta Groma eAdety: dore avepoy Ott mpos TO Kadovpevov yevos ovTE ravrov otte érepov TH elder ovOev eat. TGV ws yevous €lddv (mpoonkdvtws' 1 yap trAn anopdoet SnAodra, Td de yevos tAy ob A€yerar yevos—pr} os TO TGV “HpakAewddv GAN os TO 25 €v TH poet), OSE Tpds TA pr ev Ta’Te yevel, GAAA SLolceEL

val

/ b) tA y \ a b) an / 5] ve T@ yever exeivov, elder d€ TOY Ev TAVT@ evel EVAVTIWOWW

t \ 2

yap avaykn etvar thy Siadhopay ov diapéper elder atrn be / lal n Umdpxet Toly év TAa’TG yever odor pdvois. "Anopnoee & av tis did Th yuvr dvdpds ovK elder d1a- 30 pepet, evavtiov Tov OjdrEos Kal Tod dppevos dvTos THs de dia- 2 Sd /, Or “~ an \ By ed n~ popas evavtidocews, ode (Gov OndAv Kal Uppev Erepov TO xy 5 Me > (REE a Hi ey € \ x > © eldeu Katto Kal’ avrd Tod Cwov atrn 7 diadopa Kat ovx *e 4 e ~ La \ Aevkorys 7) jeAavia add’ 7 Gov Kal Td OAAV Kal TO ap- ] l l t € / ” r) € | / ivA nN AS fen \ \ pev vmapxet. e€ott & 1) amopia atrn oyeddv 7 avTi Kal dia oe ~ na na yy ed b] f £ ’ LA i A 357 1 Mev Tovet TO Elder ErEepa evavtimais 7 8 ov, olov TO Xx meCov kal Td mrEepwrdy, AevKdrns Se Kal pedavia ov. 7 Ste \ SS oe cal if fal fe N ode Vi Vas TQ ev olKeta Ta0n TOD yevous Ta 5 ArTov; Kal emeldn EoTL

1058» TO pev Aoyos TO 8 Grn, Goat pev ev TO Adyw elow evav-

Tides elder ToLodcr Siapopdy, dca. 8 ev TO cvverAnuperw

29 kai om. AP 12 eidet raca] rédevos yp. E 17 dpa] yap EJT 18 ratra... 19 6vra in marg. E? = raidra J 21 Ka\ovpevoy] ka- Novpevoy dv AP: KaOddov bv vel katnyopovpevoy ci. Bonitz 23 mpoon- kovroy JT 24 ov] 6 A? yp. EJT 26 exeva... Ta AP 27 ov E'r Siahépev E1JT 29 dvdpos yu) APT 32 Kal? aura A> as] ws 4 AP 36 70 om. AP 37 kaiom. E‘J@P: 7 E

8. 105828 — 10. 1058b 33

TH UAH ov ToLodoWW. 616 avOpaTrov AEvKOTNS Ov TOLE? ODE pLE- > nan an >

Aavia, ovde Tod AevKod avOpdsTov got duaopa Kar’ €idos mpds / oo a n

pedava avOpwrov, obd dv dvoua ev reOh. ws brn yap 6 BA c \ \

avOpwros, ot movet d& diapopay 7 An’ odd avOpdrov yap wy > re i \ fal e € 4 ‘

el6y elo of dvOpwmor dia TodTO, Kalrou érepat al odpKes Kai \ a @

Ta OoTa e€ av dd¢€ Kal Gde* GAAA TO GUVOAOV ETEpov pEV, EldeEL > > n lal

& ovx Erepov, Sr. ev TS Adyw ovK EoTW evavTinois. TodTo &

- ~ éoTl TO €cyarov arouov: 6 dé KadAlas éorly 6 Adyos pera THs Ans Kat 6 devKds 61 dvOpwmos, br. KaddAtas devkds: \ 5 a)

Kata ovpB_eByKkds ody 6 GvOpwmos. odd€ yadkods di) KUKAOS kal EvAwos: ovde tplywvov yadkoby Kal KUKAos évAwos, > a. X\ n

ov dia THv DAnv e€lder diapepovow GAN’ Ore ev TE AOyo DA I) 24 , ba v4 b) a n y

éveotw évavtimais. mdtepov & 7) UAn od Tove? Erepa TO €ldel, af eeu? es of c a \ y \ CRA, es e.

X\ n

ov dia THv DAnv e€lder diapepovow GAN’ Ore ev TE AOyo DA I) 24 , ba v4 b) a n y

éveotw évavtimais. mdtepov & 7) UAn od Tove? Erepa TO €ldel, af eeu? es of c a \ y \ CRA, es e.

ovod mms ETEepa, 1) coTW ws Toret; dia Ti yap Odi 6 Immos

rovd! (rob) avOpdénov repos T@ elder; Katto. oby Th tAn

ob Adyou adrOy. 7) Or. Evert ev TO Adyw evaytiwors; Kal \ val a ¢

yap Tod AevKod avOpdmov kal péAavos tmmov, Kal gor. ye

wy bed BI) Lj c X\ A c ‘ is >] \ XN ’ + elel, GAA’ ovX 7] 0 ev AEvKOS O OE peAGS, ETE Kal cl Guo en 3 a So a AevKa 1v, Gums av jv elder Erepa. TO S€ dppey Kai Orv lal , tal - > ToD (@ov oikela pev 740, GAN ov Kata THY ovotay GAd’ ev TH UAn Kal TO OG 810 TO advro : OnAv 7) Gppev fi DAy Kal 7G odpati, 510 TO adrd on€pua OHAV 7) app ylyverat mabdv tT. TAaO0s. Th wey ody eotl TO TO elder ETEpov i) \ elvat, Kal dua Th Ta pev Siadeper elder Ta O ov, elpynra.. > qn si Eze) 0& Ta évaytia Erepa TO elder, TO O& POaprov kal TO dbOaprov evavtia (orépnos yap ddvvaula diwpt- / > a \ opévn), avdykn €repov eivar TS yever TO POaprdy Kal ro BA lal XX a 5 p) 4 lal >] , lal , apOaprov. viv pev oby em avToy cipryKkayev TOV KaBOAOU aN ) ~ a Dy dvopdtav, bore dd€evey dv ovk dvayxaioy civar Sriody apOap- i fal »y o \ Tov kal pOaprov Erepa civat TH elder, Gomep ovde AevKOV kal pédav (ro ydp avro évdexerar elvar, kal dpa, edv 7 p yap xerar elvar, po, edv 7 nm NN y TOV Kabedov, SoTep 6 AvOpwros ein Av Kal evKdS Kal pE-

> 6 od’ J: ovK E: ovdey AP 7 €6n| vAn AP 10 70 om. EJ 12 dvOpwros Neveds EJT ovo’ 6 E (o sup. lin.) J 13 &vAuvos] EvAwov rpiyovoy ci. Bonitz 15 0’ ody J ov sup. lin. E 16 oto dmhas E* érepaom. ET ode A 17 Tov addidi 19 péAavosom. AP * 21 dpolas E! 24 ti] ore ie 26 6¢ alt. E?J : om. E1A 27 76 om. AP 28 To cide ci. Bonita 7d alt. om. AP 30 ore yp. E recc.: as de

EJA*T — deigerev J

fe}

iS) ur

3°

TON META TA ®YSIKA I, K

n \ Aas, kat tov Kad? Exaorov: ein yap dv, pr dua, 6 avros 35 Nevkos Kal péAas:. karo. évavtlov 1d AevKdy TO péAavi)* 24 x Sal 2 I \ ~ \ \ € td dAka Tov eévaytioy Ta pev KaTa oupBEBnKos vmapXeEL éviows, ofov Kat Ta viv elpnuéva_xal GAAa ToAAG, TA bE 1059* ddvvarov, dv earl Kal ro pOaprov Kat 7d dpOaprov: ovdev yap éott pOaprov Kata cvpBeBynkds: TO pev yap cvpEBEBn- \ b} a \ € , \ s \ lat 2 Penh 3 Kos evdéxerar ju) Umdpxew, TO be POaprov Tdv e€ dvaykns € , 2 \ ™ € I No \ Din \ brapydvrwy eotiv ols tmdpxeu 7) EoTat TO adTo Kal ev POap- \ \ BA ? s i ‘ € f baal \ tov Kal aOaprov, ei évdexerar pay wtmdpxew avTge TO f B)) \ > Da Ne fel Si a7) eens OA pOaprév. i) Tiv ovolayv dpa H ev TH ovola avayKkn Umapxew ‘ X Sent lat a ¢ a 3: EN , \ TO POaprov Exdotw Tov POaprov. 0 6 avTos AOyos kat a n 4 BA Tept TOO apOdprov: Tav yap e& davdykns trapxdvTov apo. e » \ \ fa, \ a \ x A \ >’ » dpa Kal Ka’ 6 mpOrov TO wey POaordy Td 8 apOaprov,

” 2 / a > / / ef a N - 10 €xeL avTiMecw, Bote avayKn yéver ErEpa Eival. avepov Tot-

e » \ \ fa, \ a \ x A \ >’ » dpa Kal Ka’ 6 mpOrov TO wey POaordy Td 8 apOaprov,

” 2 / a > / / ef a N - 10 €xeL avTiMecw, Bote avayKn yéver ErEpa Eival. avepov Tot-

vuv OTe ovK evdéxerar civar €ldn Toiadra ola €éyovol Ties"

éora yap Kal dvOpwros 6 pev pOapros 6 8 apOapros.

katro. TO elder Tadra A€yeras etva TA €ldn Tols TLol Kal

b SV A \ gy / ef val , x Ny

ovx Omevupa: Ta de yever ETEpa TAKioy SLegTHKEY 7) TA ELdEL. 15

"Or. pev 1 copia mept dpxds émiorypn tis eort, SHAov

€k TOY mpdTwv ev ols dintopntar Tpos Ta UTO TOV GAAwY 20 €ipnpeva Tept TOY apxav: amopnoee 8 dy Tis TOTEpoy play drodaBety etvar det THY coplay emothpny 7) TOAAdS* el pev yap play, pla y eotly det tov évavtiwy, at 8 dpyal ov« evavtiauy ei d&. pi) pla, Tolas det Ocivar ravras; éru Tas amoderktiKds apxas Oewphoar judas 7) mAedvev; el pev yap 25 plas, TE MaAAOY Tavrns 7) OmOLacodv; ei 5€ TAELOVwY, Tolas det ravTas TiWévat; ert méTEpoy TacGv TGV ovoldv H ov; el pev yap qa) TacGv, Tolwy yadendv arododva: «i b& Ta-

1059% 20-23, cf. B. 996218—» 26 23-26, cf. 996 26 — 997° 15 26-29, cf. 997% 15-25

10592 4 kai om. A» 7 6 autos de A» g 7 AP kal? 6 Bonitz: xa0o codd. 12 xaltom. EJT 13 ros rect Om. T 14 lder] cider dre dé 9 codia mepl dpyas emuarnun A” 18 émornuns i ris APAL.: om. EJT 22 y]0 Ejr 23 piav Ti

26 riOévat AP Al. : Ocivar EJ

ST. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY 10, 1058 34 — 1. 1059" 15

fa ip BA cal b / , NX bh tes 3 coy pia, Gdndov Ts EévdexeTaL TAELOVYwY THY avTHY é7- / Xv oTHpny elvar. e&rt wérEepov Tepl Tas ovalas pdovoy 7) Kal Ta ovpBeBnkora [dmddeEls eorw]; ef yap epi ye Ta cvpBEBn- 30 4 2 , 3 \ \ > , > Bd > aes ee? Kora amddeiEls eorw, mept Tas ovolas ovk eorw: el 8 Erépa, c / N, / & X \ b>) , tls Exarépa Kat morépa copla; % pev yap amodeikTiKy, oo € \ bt , ® \ \ & a AS na gla 4 mept Ta ocvpBeBnkdra: 7 de Tepl TA TpGTa, TOY 3 cat 9: >? INN \ NY ] cay ~ b t aa ovol@v. GAN’ ovdEe TEP Tas ev TOis Pvatkots elpnpévas aittas ‘\ 3. / b t4 / EA A \ \ ey; THY emeCnrovperny emioTHpynv Oereov* ovTE yap TEpl TO ov EveEKeEY 35 (rowdrov yap 76 dyabov, rodro 8 év rots mpaxrots tmdpxer Kal Tols ovowW ev KIVHoEL Kal TOOTO TpPOToY Kivel—rToLODTOY yap TO f NEISCS n fel > wa 2 re 3 / cg TéLoS—TO OE TPOTOY Kivicav odK EoTw ev Tots Akwirols)* 6AwS & amopiay exe rérepdv more Tepl ras alaOnrds ovctlas éorly H Gyrovpevn viv emiotipn 7) ov, mepl d€ Twas Erépas. ei yap 1059” mepl Gddas, 7) Twepl ra €ldn etn dv 7) Tept TA pabnwariKd, Ta pey ovy €ldn Gri ovK ort, SHAov (Guws de dmoplay éxel, as sf 9S tol \ BY > oe DIAN ca kav elvat Tis avra Of, dua th mor obxy Gomep ent TOV yaby- n ct \ [ lan ae yx wy MatikOv, otrws exes kal éml tév dAdAwy ov éoTw €ldy"

ei yap 1059” mepl Gddas, 7) Twepl ra €ldn etn dv 7) Tept TA pabnwariKd, Ta pey ovy €ldn Gri ovK ort, SHAov (Guws de dmoplay éxel, as sf 9S tol \ BY > oe DIAN ca kav elvat Tis avra Of, dua th mor obxy Gomep ent TOV yaby- n ct \ [ lan ae yx wy MatikOv, otrws exes kal éml tév dAdAwy ov éoTw €ldy"

eyo 0 Ore TA pabnpatika pev perady re TOY clddv TI- Béact kal trav aicOnrGy ofov rpita Tia mapa Ta edn TE ¥ \ a 2 ee L > x IQ of bd kat Ta dedpo, Tpiros 5 dvOpwros otk éotw ovd immos Tap > Ff a \ > ¢ > > a A. 4 c E avrév Te Kal Tovs Kal’ Exacrov: «i & ad pa €oTw ws A€yovst, mepl mota Oeréov mpaypareverOar Tov pabnyarikdy; od yap 10 di) wept Ta dedpo* TovTwy yap ovOév eat oloy ai paOnyuari- an nan n \ kal (yrodo. Tév emioTnpGv): ovde pry Tepl Ta padnpariKa ) Cnrovpern viv éorly emuotiwn (xwpiotov yap atray odOev): GAN 0dde Tv aicOnTGy otordv: POapral ydp. dws 8 aro- poe Tis Gy Tolas éotlv emuoTHuns TO dSiaTophoa Tepl THs 15

1059* 29-34, cf. 997 25-34 34-38, cf. 996" 21 —-P 1 30 14, cf. 997% 34 — 998" 19

228 avrny in marg. = 30 dndderkis € eorw EJT Al.: om. AP ye om. EJ 32 7 Luthe (cf, 996? Io): a codd, Al. aodia incl. Christ 33 7 om APALI, 7 Luthe: 4 codd. TAl. 34 add’... 38 dur ous susp. Bonitz 35 emnrovperny AP Al. : Cyroupevny EJ ovre codd. Al.: ovde ci. Bonitz TO ov evexev] Tov éevereyv twos A: 76 évexd tivos Al.: rd évexey rivos Eucken 36 Mine Noe AP SHE Leta Kove in marg. J D1 ov, kal mepi T 2 ein ayip...3 oe) om. Sa 7 ay 7... etn in marg. habet: i) el @s Tept Ta paOnuatiKa’ Ta pev yap etOn T 3 didre AP dos Ab 6 re om. EJ 9 €xaora E? 11-12 (nrovow ai paOnpwarikal AP 15 dy om. E}

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

J D1 ov, kal mepi T 2 ein ayip...3 oe) om. Sa 7 ay 7... etn in marg. habet: i) el @s Tept Ta paOnuatiKa’ Ta pev yap etOn T 3 didre AP dos Ab 6 re om. EJ 9 €xaora E? 11-12 (nrovow ai paOnpwarikal AP 15 dy om. E}

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

2 - Z 3 : Tov pabnpatikav tAns. ovTEe yap THs pvoikhs, did TO Tept » a / n Ta exovta éy abvrols apxynv Kuyjoews Kal ordoews THY TOD a ta ™ > X fal . YA voikod macay elvar mpaypareiay, ovd€ piv THs oKoTOvons / an mepl amobdelEeds Te Kal emuotiuns’ Tept yap avrd Todro TO tal ~~ / 20 yevos THY GiTnolv Totetral. AelreTav.Tolvuy THY TpoKErmevynV y x >A Noe i a , pirocoplay mept avrav tiv oKéeww Toreioa. dvamopHoete & dy tis ef det Octvar thy Cyrovpevny emiotnuny Tept Tas apxds, Ta Kadotueva tnd Twwv oroixeia Tadra dé waves evuTdpxovra tois avvbéros TiWeacw. padrdov 8 ay ddee n lal >. , ° 25 Tov KaOddov ely elvas Tiv Cyrovperny emioTHNY? Tas yap Aéyos Kal Taca émuoThun TOV KaOdAov Kal od TOY ecxXaTwr, vA 3 wv j\ iv na ‘4 na fa) XX 14 ’ or ein dv ottw Tav mpdtov yevav. Ttadra dé ylyvoir dv , BY \ NS of a x / 3h, AN € TO Te Ov Kal TO éy Tatra yap pddior av strodrynpbeln meplexel TA OvTa TavTa Kal pddiora apxais eouxevar bia 30 TO €ivat mpOTa TH pice POapéevTwy yap avrév ovvavat- aS \ SS a) \ BN \ me Ss x petra, Kat Ta Aourd: may yap dv Kal ev. 7 d€ Tas bia- a /, gopas airév avaykn perexew ef Onoer Tis adTa yevn, me >) > v3 a / / “4 3 > x , duapopa 6 ovdeula rod yevous peréxel, Tav’Tn 6 ovK av b0- tal 3 / 3 ’ lan fee dely atta riWevar yévn odd dpyds. éru 8 ef paddov 35 apX?] TO atAOveTEpoyv Tod iTTov ToLovrov, Ta 8 EvyaTa TOV €x Tod yévous amhovotepa TSv yevav (drowa yap, TA yevy 0 eis €ldn mAclw Kal dia€povra diaipetrar), wadrddrov dy apxy dd€evev eivar Ta eldn TOV yevOv. 7 Sé cvvavaipetrat Tols yeveot Ta Edn, Ta yevn Tats dpyats Eoue paddor 10608 apx7) yap TO cvvavaipody. Ta pev ody THY dnopiay éxovTa Tatra kal tovatr éorly érepa. y , a ’ XX x > ed DY BA Er. worepov det tievar TL Tapa Ta KaO’ ExaoTa 7 ov, 2 \ v3 € js 2 / r) \ a GvAAG TotTwv H Cnrovpévn emioTipyn; GAA Tadra drewpas 2 2 \ x N eae 7 a oY yee 2)? 5Ta ye pay mapa ta Kal’ Exacta yévn 7 €lidn eoTiv, add > / 7 € 4 an > U4 4, XS > oa ovderépov Tovrwy 7 Cyroupevyn viv emiothyn. didTe yap adv- vatov Tovro, elpytar. Kat yap bdrAws amoplay exe TéTEpoy

1059 21 — 1060 I, cf. 9988 20— 999% 23 1060° 3=27, cf. 999%

24— 24 > 17 avrois T 23 Tas Kadoupevas KE? 27 ylyvowr’ E 29 apxas T 31 wav A’ et ut vid. Al.: mavra EJT 32) elo

33 peréxer bis E 33 y’ ovk ci. Christ 37 «ldénom, E 38 ovvat- petra AP: ouvavaipet te J 1060% 4 detpa] pOapra Al. 6 dude AP Ale; dia iT: 8 6 EJ

I. 1059516 — 2. 1060) 2

999%

24— 24 > 17 avrois T 23 Tas Kadoupevas KE? 27 ylyvowr’ E 29 apxas T 31 wav A’ et ut vid. Al.: mavra EJT 32) elo

33 peréxer bis E 33 y’ ovk ci. Christ 37 «ldénom, E 38 ovvat- petra AP: ouvavaipet te J 1060% 4 detpa] pOapra Al. 6 dude AP Ale; dia iT: 8 6 EJ

I. 1059516 — 2. 1060) 2

def Twa broAGBEiv oioiay elval xwpioTiY Tapa Tas aicOnrds beer \ \ a XN + > Ns te) EN \ yy \ ovoias kal tas dedpo, 7) ot, AAA Tab? ecivar Ta OvTAa Kal \ na NX Dn € tal XN Ds i Sey A wept tadta tv codpiay timdpyew. Cyrely pev yap eolkapev ” t \ x / Co ae ae. con / XS GAAnv twa, Kal TO mpoKeluevoy Totr ~oTw hytv, éyw Oe A - nn A > CN \ \ lal > a TO ldety ef te xwpiotov Kad ard Kal pydev! rdv alcOyntov A Dy > by x iS > Ss Se By ere Drapxov. e710 ef Tapa Tas alcOnras ovoias gor. Tis Erépa ovola, mapa molas Tov aicOntGy det TiWWévar Tatrnv eivar; vA ‘ iy \ \ 2 / XN \ oe aS n Ti yap padrdov rapa rods avOpemovs 7) Tovs immovs 7) Tov BA / / Herb. BN \ nan > / v4 , drwy (wv Ojnoe tis adriy 7 Kal TOV aWixwv bros; Td \ y tay b] a x val tN Ee A Dens ye pry toas tats aicOnraits «al POaprais ovcias didiovs ey) lA a \ fas b) 4 Me * erépas kaTackevace exTos Tov etAdywv ddkevey av aiarew. el O& pa) X@pioTn TOV cHopdTav 7 Cyrovpuern viv dapxn, tiva dy tis GdAnv Oein paddov tis Ans; atrn ye pip evepyela pev ov« ort, Svvduer 8 EoTrw. padddv 7 ay dpyn Kupiatepa tavrns dd€erey eivat TO €idos Kal ) popdy* Todro de POaprdv, dc Sdws odk EoTW Aldi0s odcia YwpioT? Kal > ts 27 PH > YA of \ \ tal NX Kad’ avryy. add’ dromov: éouxe yap Kat Cyreirar oyxeddov imo TOV XaplecTAaTMY ws odTd TIS apX} Kal ovola ToLatTn: TOs yap otra Ta€is py Tivos dvTos didlov Kal xwpioTod Kal pevovtos; étt 0 elmep gore Tis ovata Kal apxi Tovadrn Thy ptow olav viv (yrodyev, kal atrn pla mdvrwv Kal 4 adrh a be \ an 9 / BA x f ” TOv didlwy te Kal POaprdy, amoplay yer bia th more Tis avTns apxis ovens Ta pev eorw didia Tov bTOd Thy dpyny Ta 8 ovk dldia (rotro yap dromov): «i & GAAn péev eotw apx}) Tav POapray GdAn Se Toy didiwv, «i pev aldios Kal , \ 7 ~ bf Sens h Tév POaprav, dpolms amopjoopev (dua th yap ovk didfov Bs a » \ He Ky N 2 N >) a > Ths dpxijs ovens Kal Ta vd THY apxiv ald.ia;) POaprijs 6 ovons GAAn Tis apx7 ylyverar ravrns Kaxelyns érépa, kal nd ’ 4 3 > on x 4 > tobr els dmeupov mpdcow. «i 8 ad tis Tas doKxovcas pdALoT apxas axwyrovs civa, 76 Te dv Kal TO ev, Onoel, mpOTov pev ei pn Tdde TL Kal ovolay Exdrepoy aiTav onyualver, TOs eoovrar xwpiotal kal Kad adrds; rovatras dé (ytobmev ras

1060% 27-36, cf. 1000% 5 — 1001% 3 36-109, cf. oor? 4 — 1oo2) II

412 dey AP 17 ovolas Christ 19 vodv eoriy apxn EJT 20 dAnv tg APT paddov Oe'n AP 26 kai alt. om. E 28 7 avr] avin AP 31 ovK didia] ov. kal AP 33 didva A»

34 apxny didia JT: apyxiy ovk aidia E: aidvoy AP

1060)

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

SeeQ/ \ / > / ” X 4 \ Deaf Gidtovs te kal mpdtas dpxds. eb ye py Tdéde TL Kal odotar éxdrepov adttrdy Syndoi, ravr early ovolar Ta dvTa: Kara

/ \ \ aA lal ’ 9 EF Ss \ \ a

kal AP 33 didva A»

34 apxny didia JT: apyxiy ovk aidia E: aidvoy AP

1060)

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

SeeQ/ \ / > / ” X 4 \ Deaf Gidtovs te kal mpdtas dpxds. eb ye py Tdéde TL Kal odotar éxdrepov adttrdy Syndoi, ravr early ovolar Ta dvTa: Kara

/ \ \ aA lal ’ 9 EF Ss \ \ a

g Tdvrwy yop TO dv Katnyopeira (kar? éviwy b& Kal TO €y),

ovolay & civar mavta Ta bvTa Webdos. eri S€ Tols THY TpPO-

SEs aN \ L \ AW 8. Ne 2 S 1. 16 \

THY apxnv TO ev A€yovor kal TodT odolav, ex 5€ Tod Evds Kal

ths tAns Tov apiOusv yevvGou mpOTov Kal Todroy ovclay > ny 3 / \ , b) XS a

pdckovow etvar, mds evdexeTrar TO Aeyopmevoy adyOes Elva;

1oTHY yap dvada kai Toy AoiTaV ExacToy apiOuav TOV ovP-

, an a& a Lad \ / \ + / ION

Oérwy TOs ey Sel vojoa; Tepl TovTov yap ovTE A€yovow oddev

id la \

ovre pddioy eimely. el ye way ypaypds 7) Ta TobTwy éxdpueva \ a

(Aéyw 8& emiavetas tds mpédras) Onoer Tis apxds, Tadra

¥ ovk eloly obolat xwpioral, roual S& Kal dvaipéoers ai pev

15 émipaverav ai d€ cwpdroy (ai d& orrypal ypayper), ere dé mépara Téy aitév tovTwy: mdvTa de Tadra ev addows a I \ BY SO / b) wy na > 4 € o. tmapxet Kal xwpiorov odvdey eoTw. eri THs otolav rodaBeiv eivat det Tod évds Kal oTiypns; ovolas wey yap Taons yeveois éort, ottypas 8 ovk €oTw* dialpeois yap 1) oTLypyH. Tapexer

208° dmoplay kat TO Tacay pev emuotHyny elvar TGV KabddoVv

\ cel / ‘ ’ > vd ‘\ cal , >. c kal Tov ToLovdl, THY 5 ovolay pr Tv KaOoAov elvat, HaAAoV d& Téde TL Kal xwpioTdéy, Bor ei TEpl Tas apxds eoTw em- , nt tal \ > XN € tal Bee o ot , oTHn, TOs Sel THY apxnv brodaBety ovaiay ctvat; ert md-

\ a Tepov éoTl TL Tapa TO ovvoAOY 7) od (Agyw SE THY BAnv kal \ a. , A ’ S x / J J a \ a5TO pera TavTns); ef pev yap py, Ta ye ev tAn pOapra mavrar el & éore Tt, TO eldos av ein Kal ) poppy: rodr be 32 2h 7 é \ , eet / + \ > / + sk.) ovy emt tivey gor kal éml tivwy od, yademov adopioau ér \ o rs

éviwy yap djdov odk dv xwpioTdoy Td €tdos, ofov oikias. ért LN an na mérepov ai apxal elder 7) dpiud ai airal; ei yap dpibye

30 €v, TaVT Eorat TavTd.

> \ 92 9 \ € a ja 2 , a x Seen. Enel 0 éoriv 7 Tod pioodpov émoriun tod dvros 7 dv 3

1060) 19-23, cf. 10037 5-17 23-28, cf. 999%24-24 28-30, cf. 999” 24 — 1000* 4 Capes; ch Dimi

>3 reom. A> ~~ ovaiay kai rdde re AP sg city AP: Zora ex Al.

ci. Bonitz ovoia JT 8 ray E} 10 dpOpov E1JT 14 y yp. J: & EJY: yap A» pev yap A» 16 dmavta AP 21 rotovdi APAI.: rovodde J: rood d€ E 6’ om. AP 28 ovk ov] kav AP 29 7) om. J 30 €y APA]: om. EJT ratra

A”: roaidra E: om. ut vid. Al.

2. 1060 3 — 3, 1061% 26

KaOddXov kal ov Kara pepos, TO 8 Ov ToAAaY@s Kal ov Kad’ éva éyerar tpdmovr ef pev ody Suwvipws Kata 6é Le eae | CaN 2 / > A a , Kowdy pndev, ovk Cot Ud play emiotHuny (od ydp ev yevos TOV ToLovTwr), ef 5€ KaTd TL Kowwdy, ein dv tnd pilav emioTH-

€olxe 51) Tov elpnuevov A€yeoOat TpdTmoV KabaTep TO te larpixoy kal dyewov' Kal yap tovrwy éxdtepoy modAa- XGs Adyouev. d€yerat dF Todroyv roy Tpdrov Exacrov TS Td

XX \ \ > XN 3 , > , la BS S x Mev mpos THY larpiKiy emiorhuny avayecOal mws Td Se mpds vyleay TO & GAdAws, mpds TaiTd 8 Exacrov. iarpixds yap , \ 7 L he x N WAN yg a Adyos Kal payatpioy A€yerau' TO TO pev amd THs larpixhs 3 /, x 4 > pd 3 Ki yveoOar. Kat yap «i pi) TavTov AAAo O eotiv, avriotpEeder / SS NR, + BY ¢ > \ ve ame) \ ~ ye: TO Te yap ey Kal dy Tws, TO Te Ov Ev.—erel 8 eat Ta évavtia mavTa THs aiths Kal puas emuothuns Oewpjoa, ré- yetar 8 €xaorov avrav Kata orépnow—kalror y evia amo- pyoere Tis Gv TOs eyera KaTa oTéepnow, ov eoTW dva pe- A e) ? DY 7 \ fe AS hes gov Tl, Kadamep adixov Kal dtkatov—7epl tavtra by Ta a \ / cal / X cal 4 / lal Tolatra THY oTEepnow det TiWEvar fun TOD GrAov Adyov, Tod redevtaiov dé eldovs ofoy ei éotw 6 dikatos Kal? &&w tia

Q lal , 2 yf (ae w a meapxikds TOls vduols, ov TavTwWS 6 AdiKos €oTaL Tod bAov , 16 \ \ X Md fal , b]

oTepovpevos Adyou, Tepl Se Td TElMerOar Tols vdpors exrelTav

b 37 re om. AP kat pr.] kal rd AP 1061° 1 )eydpevoy AP: om. T° 67 A» Tovtay Tov rpdrav Al.: rév rpdrov EJT 8 ra yap rod EJTAI.: rod yap A? 10 éyerat eivar AP II Kown dvaywyy AP All} 12 kat AP Al.: kat tas EJ 14 kai avopotdtns bis E 18 &] kai év E? 24 6¢ codd. Al.¢: om. Al. 6 Sikatos 6 Al. kara webeky AP 25 rov AYT Al.: 6 rod EJ

26 orepduevos J 2578.2 G

Io618

le}

To61»

pfe)

TQN META TA ®YSIKA K

10 éyerat eivar AP II Kown dvaywyy AP All} 12 kat AP Al.: kat tas EJ 14 kai avopotdtns bis E 18 &] kai év E? 24 6¢ codd. Al.¢: om. Al. 6 Sikatos 6 Al. kara webeky AP 25 rov AYT Al.: 6 rod EJ

26 orepduevos J 2578.2 G

Io618

le}

To61»

pfe)

TQN META TA ®YSIKA K

si Nd € / € ei % fal ‘ > \ 2S , 7, kal tatty 1) orépnows brapéer adr: rov avroy Se Tpd- mov kal ént Tv dAAwv.—xabatep 8 6 pabnuwartixds Trepl a I ra @& apapécews tiv Oewplay movetrar (mEepieddav yap mavTa Ta alcOntd Oewpel, oiov Bdpos_kal kovpdtnra Kal oKkdAn- '? \ 3. ‘3 at \ \ 4, \ 4 pornta Kal rovvaytioy, ert 8€ Kal Oepudrnta Kat Woxpdrnra kal tas GdAdas aicOyrds eévayTidcers, povoy d& KarTa- Nelmer TO Toody Kal cuvexes, TOV pev ef ey Tav F em dvo trav 0 én rpla, kal Ta TaOn TA ToUTMY 4 TOTd eoTL kal ouvexf, kal od kal? érepdv Ti Oewpet, kal Tov pev Tas mpos GAdAndAa Oéces okoTe? Kal ta Tatras tmdpxovTa, a ‘N x / \ >) - lel % \ / Tov S& Tas cuppetplas Kal dovppetpias, Tav d& Tods Ad- 3 > ia la 4 SN XN St he) eI yous, GAN spos play advrev Kal tiv adriy TiOewev em- TTHUNY THY yewpeTpLKyY), TOY adTov by Tpdmoy exEL Kal TEpl , ¥ ‘ ” 9: \ La \ TO 6v. Ta yap TotTw ocvpBEBnKdTa Kal? doov early dv, Kal \ by , Bs a My B IN b) lo ") eS tho Tas évarvTi@cers avTod 7 dv, odK GAANS emLoTHuNs 7) ptAoco- dias Oewpfca. TH voix pev yap odx 7 OvTa, paddov pra. Ti f) per yap odx 7 ,# ay / / \ 7 2 “4 x ey 0 7 Kuwyoews peréxer, THY Oewplay Tis amovelwerey ay 1 \ a \ c X ny 4 / ye pv Siadextix) Kal 7) codotixy TOY cvpBEBnKOToY pev 5 al a b ey) ¥ INN Ni Nem 8 Df IN + Nal clot Tots dow, ody 7} 0 dvTa ode TEpi Td dv adTO Kal? doo dv oT: wate delteTat TOV pirocdsdory, Kad” dcov dvT eoriv, ~ \ \ / 4 > \ s 4 By ef elvat mepl Ta AEXOEvTa Oewpynrikoy. Emel S€ TO TE OV aTaV ka@’ éy tL Kal Kowdv d€yerar ToA\AaXGs Aeydpevor, Kal tavaytia Tov airov Tpdmov (els Tas mpdtas yap evaryTioces \ ni a y 2 / \ Ss Lo} \ kal dtapopas tod évros dvdyera), Ta d& Tovadra dSuvaroy ie SN s > / AN. uA b) € 2 eee \ 3 b7d play emiotiyny etvar, diadvour dv 1 Kar’ apyas amo- pla exOeioa, Néyw 8 &y 7 SinTOpEiro Tos Evra TOAAGY kal duaddpwr ovtwrv TO yé la emrloTH} eTel O& Kal pépwv dvrwy TO yéver ula Tis emoTHpn.—emeEl dF Kal 6 paOnuarikds xphrar trots Kowots idlws, Kal Tas TovTwy \ lad a apxas ay ein Oewpioa tis mpetns pidocodias. bri yap 2d aN fal y ¥ 2 iy ” x , nN amo TOV icwy town apaipeOevTwy toa Ta ELTOMEVa, KOWOV

Cap. 4, cf. TP. 1005* 19 —”

497 » EJ Al’: om. A» imdp§er aite EJ Al.: aire imdp&er A:

Umapxer ad’to T 31 kai pr. om. EJr 32 ddXas] a\Xas Tas EJ et ut vid. Al. ba dhos Ab 3 6) om. EJt 7, éxet IND cirove petey £ Ab 8 7 A> Al. : : om. EJ 10 oy] é dvrws yp. E dvr’ E (duabus litteris post r erasis) TAl.: Gyros J: obros

Ab 14 dvdyerat om. T 20 icwy alt. EJT Al.: om. AP

3,. 10619 27 — 5. 10629 14

om. EJr 32 ddXas] a\Xas Tas EJ et ut vid. Al. ba dhos Ab 3 6) om. EJt 7, éxet IND cirove petey £ Ab 8 7 A> Al. : : om. EJ 10 oy] é dvrws yp. E dvr’ E (duabus litteris post r erasis) TAl.: Gyros J: obros

Ab 14 dvdyerat om. T 20 icwy alt. EJT Al.: om. AP

3,. 10619 27 — 5. 10629 14

/ i) aN / na nn e ‘\ > b ev €oTW eml TaVTHY TOV TOTor, 7 paOnuaTiKy OS amo- AaBodoca epi Ti pepos THs olkelas VAns Tovetrar Ti Oewpiav, ot sy ry BD 7 aby 8) \ BN a n olov mept ypappds 7) yovias 7 apiOyovs 7 TOV AoTGV TL

n B} se Ne 2 el \ TEN ef pi ie TOTOV, OVX 7} 6 ovTa ddA n VVEXES aUTaVY EKacTOoY Ep A a7. od Ha ISS z Nea Y , , @ év i) dvo0 7) Tpiat 7 S& idocodia wept TGV ev pepeL pev, 7

,. ey , > tal \ XX OK TOUTM@Y EKATTH TL TUM BEBNKEY, OV OKOTEL, TEpl TO OV de, 7) OV TOV TOLOUTwY ExacToV, Dewpel. Tov airoy d exer TpdToV Kal

\ X XN b] , an a \ Tepl THY pvoiKny emoTHnY TH PaOnuaTiKi Ta ocvpPBEBn- Kota yap 1 vorxi) Kal Tas dpxydas Oewped Tas TOY dvT@V ic , \ > @ y LN he as > / 2 ¥ Kwotpeva Kal ovx 7 dvta (Tiy be TpaTyY elpijKayev emt-

/ ryt ae) oThpny totrwy eivar Kka@ bcov dvtTa Ta broKeievd ect, y} > > @ ¢ / \ \ fe: \ ne X\ adr’ odx 4 Erepdv t1)* dd Kal radrnv Kal Thy padnparuKyy

/ Vd Lal a emuoTHuNY pepyn THs codias elvat Oeréov, 5 “Eoru d€ tis ev Tots odow apy) mept ty ov eoru due ed- w0at, rovavriov 5@ dvaykatov del Toelv, A€yw SE AANOevEW,

o > 3 / x ia 2S PBN. J ‘ A SSS , otov bru ovK evdéxeTat TO adTd Kal Eva. Kai Tov adrov xpd- vov eivat kal pH elvat, Kal TadAa Ta TobTov avrots davTl- kelweva TOV TpdTOY. Kal Tepl TOY ToLo’TMY aTAGS [MeV OK x 2 / \ / So > S yx > if éorw amdderéis, mpos TOVdE b€ CoTLY: Od yap EoTW ek TLTTOTEpas . lal ) nn - lg /, tal "4 > apxns avtod rovTov Toijocacda. avddoyiopov, det dé y

elmep Cota TO GmAGs Arodedelx Oar. mpds 5& Tov A€yovTa my b) ta / lal uA , n / Tas ayTikepevas paces TH OerKvdvT. didt. Weddos AnTTEoV tT Towodroy 6 TatTd pey ora TH pH evdexerOar TadTd evar kal pr eivar kal? éva Kal tov atrov xpdvov, py ddfeu > > rg 4 ~ , » pt Z \ \ elvat TavToy' ovTwM yap povws av amodetxJein pos Tov , >} J >s eae: / / b) 4 pacKovra evdexerOar Tas avTiKemevas paces adnOever Oat Kata TOO avrod. Tovs 6 peAAovTas GAAHAOLS Adyov KoOLWw- lal / n an moew det TL TvVLEVAaL adTOV" pH ylyvouevov yap TovTOV THs €orat Kowwwvia TovTors mpds aAArjAovs Adyou; de? Toivuy TOV dvowdtwv exacrov civat yvepysov kat dndody Ti, Kal jar

1061» 34 — 10622, cf. 1005> 8-34 1062? 2-5, cf. 10068 5 — 18 5-19, cf. 1006* 18 — 10072 20

bor émtiom. Christ rav rooéy fort. om, Al. 26 éxaorwy AP me Ti Al.: ri codd. 31 ra om. AP 32 70m. EYP érepa Tt yp.» J: érep’ drra yp. E 34 éore alt. EJTAI.: eora Ab 1062*1 atrois Brandis: avrots EJAT 4 avddoyiopdv AP Ale: Tov ovrdoyiopov EJ 5 éore J 8 d6&n AP: ddéete yp. E Q povos AP 12 avrdy Al.i: atréy codd. T 13 €or rece,

et ut vid. Al.; gore EJA*T G2

(e}

is) tn

E 34 éore alt. EJTAI.: eora Ab 1062*1 atrois Brandis: avrots EJAT 4 avddoyiopdv AP Ale: Tov ovrdoyiopov EJ 5 éore J 8 d6&n AP: ddéete yp. E Q povos AP 12 avrdy Al.i: atréy codd. T 13 €or rece,

et ut vid. Al.; gore EJA*T G2

(e}

is) tn

1062»

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

> > sf Toda, povor d€ Ev dv d= TAclova onualyy, pavepor Tovey a a an b ed’ 0 hépet rovvona rovrwy. 6 dF A€ywv evar ToBro kal pr) an a> eivat, Todro 6 gyow od dnow, BoP 6 onpatver Tovvoya TodT v v cal eA ue) / e > 4 7 ov nor onualvew: Trodro 8 advvaroy. war elmep onpatver TL . J TO elvar Tdde, THY dvTipacw Gdbvaroy aAnOcdew. ert BF Et TL onpalver Tovvoua Kal Tobr’ GAnOeverat, det Todr ef dvdyKns ‘\ > elvaue ro 8 e& avdykns dv ovK evdéxeral more pa etvat Tas dyTiKeévas Apa ovK evdexerar ddces Kal amopdces dAnbevew xara tod avrod. érr 8 ef pyOev paddrov 7 \ x gacis i) amddacis adAnOedverat, 6 A€yor dvOpwroyv 7 ovk GyvOpwroy od0ey padrdrov adnbevorer dSd€ere 5 Kav Odx i » A »” EN a XA > @ immov eivar ddoxwv tov dvOpwroyv 7) paddov 7) odx ATTOV \ ddndeve 7) otk GvOpwrov, Sorte Kal tnmov pdoxwy etvat Sts BIEN 2 / \ aye a y eer, a 4 Tov avrov adnOevoe: (Tas yap avTikeysevas dpolws jv dAn- deve) ovpBatver tolvey roy advroyv dvOpwrov elvar Kal tamoy A n I 7) TOV GAAwY TL @av.—amddelEis ev ody oddeula TovTHY eoTly amd@s, mpos pévto. Tov Tadra TiWeuevoy amdderéis. TaAXEws 0 dy tis Kal adrov tov “Hpdkdeirov totrov épwréy tov tpémov ivayKacey dpodroyeiy pndémote Tas avTiKeysevas J \ > \ a Chase b) 4 s > gaoes duvarov etvat xara tov atrév adnbeverOav viv d ov ovpviels Eavtod ti more d€yet, Tadrnv ehaBe THY dd€ay. bdws 0 ef TO Aeydpevov bm’ adrod éoriv ddynOés, odd av adrd tobdro ein adyOes, A€yw be TO evdexeoOar TO adTo Kal” Eva N et eX , Oy id \ \ LS t x kal Tov advroy xpdvov elvai te Kal py) elvarr Kabamep yap kal dinpnpevwr adtGy ovdey paddov 4 xatddacis 7) 7) ame- NPNM. PGAANOV 7 q 7 DJ / \ (Heh , a acts adnOedverar, tov adtov Tpdmov kal Tod cvvapyorepov kal Tod ovupmemAeypevov KabdTep juas Twos Karapdcews vad xX ovons obey padrdAov (7) H ardpacts [i] 7d GAov os ev Karapdcer

1062 19-23, cf. 1006» 28-34 23-30, cf. 1007” 18 — 1008* 2 31-35, cf. 1005> 23-26 36-7, cf. 1008* 4-7

815 melo AP 16 ravro Apelt 17 6 AY et ut vid, Al.: 5 ddos eivai EJT 17-18 rovrov gnoiy J 18 rovrov J 19 ddvvaroy adybevery] adn Bevery advvaroy Kata Tov avrod EJT 20 dei AP et ut vid: Al.: det kai EJT 21 wore... 22 evdexerat] Tore ... evdéxerat bis E 22 Kat dropaces om, AP 26 3) pr.] Kai jr 27 om. E} 32 eporay APAL: epornoas EJ 35 ovriels AY yp. E Ale: re EJ = avrov AP Dy eln ddynbés AY All: adn bes em EJT an)aJ 5 revos puas AP 6 an pide NTTOv andgaots 7p? ss "3 didi 7) seclusi

5. 1062415 —6. 1062» 34

22 evdexerat] Tore ... evdéxerat bis E 22 Kat dropaces om, AP 26 3) pr.] Kai jr 27 om. E} 32 eporay APAL: epornoas EJ 35 ovriels AY yp. E Ale: re EJ = avrov AP Dy eln ddynbés AY All: adn bes em EJT an)aJ 5 revos puas AP 6 an pide NTTOv andgaots 7p? ss "3 didi 7) seclusi

5. 1062415 —6. 1062» 34

2 a TWWeuevov GAnOevoera. ere 5 ef pnOev Eotw aAnOds KaTa- lol d SeeEN a a x A ff y pnoa, Kav avto todro wWetdos «ln To gavat pndeuiay 3 fed J c , > by ot , Sages \ adnOn Katapacw vnapxyew, ¢i 8 ot. TL, AVOIT GY TO Aeyomevoy t7d Tv Ta Toladra evioctayévwv Kal mavTeAds dvaipotvTwv Td diadéyeo Oat. TlapamAnowv d& Tots elpnuevors eoTl Kal Td AeyOev tro tod IIpwraycpov: Kal yap éxeivos épn mdvtwv civar xpn- / / Q cal Matwv meTpov avOpwrov, ovdev Erepoy A€ywv 7} TO SoKodY ExaoTH TovTO Kal elvat Taylws* TovTov O& yryvowevov TO abTd oup- Batver Kat eivar Kal pa) evar, kal Kaxdv kal dyaOdy civat, A Ly X \ \ > / , kal TaAAa Ta KaTad TAS GvTLKEemevas Aeyoueva doers, \ dua TO moAAdKis Todt pev daiverOar Tdde civar KaAdov \ ‘x > / / ? a \ Pf c y Towwdl b€ TovvavTiov, méeTpov O° Elva TO awdouevoy ExaoTY. v > of LD 4 ra , 2 / Se X Avoito 8 ay atrn 7 amopia Oewpnoac. Tdbev EAnAvOev 7) ApXr) THs DmodnWews TavTns: ore yap eéviow pev ex THS TOV , e lal lal ’ b) an ‘\ ) \ \ provwrdywv ddéns yeyerncOa, Tols 8 ex Tod pi) TavTa Tept fal a na ed uA > \ lal X « \ , TOV avTGv amavtas yryvdoKel AAG ToiTdE pEV dU TOE f tal X >) ys x X Ne i ‘ ” patverOat totcde d€ Totvavriov. +d ydp pndey EK pi] OVTOS f. va 2) 5S. x \ ia / 2 \ x Us yiyverOa, wav 8 e& dvtos, cyeddv amdvtav éotl Kowdv ddy- pa TOv Tepl pioews: eel ody ov AEvKdY ylyveTaL AEvKOD TeA€ws ovtTos Kal ovdayh pr AevKod [viv Se yeyevnuevov a) yeyernys x / / Lic 3 Ei yy. lal A , ON un Aevkov], ylyvour’ dv éx pa) dvtos AevKod Td yuyvdpevov [yi)] Aevxov: Hore €k pa) dvtos yiyvoir’ ay Kar’ éxelvous, ed i € Led DY x >’ A \ \ , b) \ ‘ umnpxe AevKoy TO avTd Kat pr AEvKdY. Ov yXadreTOv bE duadAvew THY Gmopiay ravtnv: elpntar yap ev Tols dvatKois TOs ek TOU pa ovTos yiyveras Ta yuyvopeva Kal TOs ef ovTos. TO ye pay dpoiws mpooéxew Tails ddé€ais Kal rats iA nr A t \ / LA lal pavtaciats TOV Tpos avrovs diaygioBynrovvTwy evnOes* Od7j-

1062 7-9, cf. 1012” 13-18 12-24, cf. 1009* 6-16, 22-30 24-33, Cf. 1009 30-36 33 — 1063* I0, cf. 1010” 1-26, Io 1 31-34

b7 dAnbes €ora EJr: adn Oeverat Alle adndes Al.¢ 13 ¢ha Ab 13-14 xpnpatop eivar AP 14 Tov dyOpomoy E17 aces Aeyopeva EJT 20 eAnhuGev ¢ om. A> Al! 23 dwavra A> roiade AP AL: rocdi EJ 24 tois EJ : rou di recc. 25 Kowoy éort Ab 27 tedkews AAI. : redeiws EJ vov...28 Aeukdy et 28 wy codd. T Al.: susp. Bonitz 28 AevKou EJA® AL. : pp AevKod YP. Er 30 Acuxdy .. . kal px) AYAL: pa AeuKov.. kai EJT 33 Tats

pr AP AL: pete tais EJT 34 avtots AX dua Bnrowvray AP AL

1063?

TON META TA ©YSIKA K

25 Kowoy éort Ab 27 tedkews AAI. : redeiws EJ vov...28 Aeukdy et 28 wy codd. T Al.: susp. Bonitz 28 AevKou EJA® AL. : pp AevKod YP. Er 30 Acuxdy .. . kal px) AYAL: pa AeuKov.. kai EJT 33 Tats

pr AP AL: pete tais EJT 34 avtots AX dua Bnrowvray AP AL

1063?

TON META TA ©YSIKA K

Aov yap br. Tovs Erepovs adrdy avayKn die\redoOat. havepov de Tobr ex TOY ytyvouevwn Kara THY aloOnow: ovdéroTE yap TO avro datvera toils pev yAvKY Tols d& Totvaytiov, pH s lal / diePOappevoy Kal AcAwBynpevov. tv. éErépwv Td alcOnTHpLov Kal KpiTipioy-TGv-A€XOevT@V XUUGV. TovTOV 8 dyTOS ToLOTOV \ € / x € / P > \ > » > Tovs ETEpous pev UToAnTTEOY pLEeTpOV Elva TOUS 6 GAAOUS OVX i Uf € i S fay t \ AN -5: fa) \ a broAnmTéov. dyolws d€ TotTo A€yw Kal éml dyabod Kal KaKod, \ lal \ , lal A a + an A Or kal Kadod kal aicypod, kal Tay GANwv TGV ToLodTwv. ovdev yap diaéper Todr aEwby 7) Ta hawdpweva Tois b7d THy ow dmoBdAdAover Tov SdxTvAOV Kal ToLodcw ex Tod éEvds aiver Bat dv0, do bety civar did 7d haiverOar Tocadra, Kal madw Ev:

10 Tots yap ja) KivodoL THY Ow ev hativerar TO Ev. GAws Be

dromov ex Tod daiverOar Ta dedpo petaBaddovTa Kal pnde- more Ovapévovta é€v Tots avrois, éx TovTov mepl Ths dAy- Oeias tiv Kplow movetcOar Set yap ex Tov del Kata Taira éxdvtwy kal pndeulay peraBodrjy Towvpevoy tarnbes On- pevew, Towra 6 éotl Ta Kata Tov Kdcpov' Tadra yap lal ‘ \ ovx Ore pev Toladl madAw 8 dAdAota dalvera, raira & aN \ an ’ a fay y+ ? rs 2 aet Kal peTaBoAns ovdemias KoWwvovyTa. ETL O EL KlVNOLS €oTl, Kal kivotpevov TL, Kwelrar 6€ wav €k Twos Kal els TL del dpa Td Kwovpevoy eivar ev exeivw e€ oF KivyoeTaL Kal OvK elvat év avr, kal els Todt KiwetoOar Kal ylyvecOar ev TovTo, x X \ x > r ‘\ 4 5 > / TO 0€ KaTa THY avTipacw pn ovvadnbeverOar Kat avTOvs. kal el Kata TO moody ouvexGs Ta dedpo pel Kal kiveirat, - al re i > > S y SS "2 \ x x kat 11s Todro Oeln Kaimep ovK aAnOes Ov, did TL KaTa TO ToLdY od pevel; dalvovrar yap ody Kita TA KaTa Tas avTipa- gels TavTod KaTnyopely ex TOD TO Moody Hrewynpevar py pe- ve emt TOY cwopudtav, 616 Kal elvar TeTpamnxv TO adTo \ > L. € ’ Me \ 4 , cal \ n € kal ovk elvat. 7 8 ovola Kata 7d moldy, TodTO b€ THS wpt- 10637 10-17, cf. 1o10# 25-32 17-21, cf. 1o10® 35 — 1 22-28, cf. 10102 22-25

pnde Ab 4 adXous] érépous EJ 5 kal kakov om.

10637 I Ab 7 tovr|rov AD 9 dvo semel JT dciv JT: OE A>: 7 i Bonitz: incl. Christ om. A? 10 dye eupaiverar AY 14 éydvrev EJT Al. : dvt@v AP 16 rodde EJ 19 év A>Al1-¢ et ut vid. Al: ere év EJT ovk] py) AP AI, 20 7dde A 21 ovvarynOevecOar AP Al.: adnOevecOa. EJT Al.° 24 pevet Richards, legit ut vid. Al.: péveccodd. daiverac J 25 ravrou

EJVAl.: avrod AP 26 dia ro kat EJ 27 de] ye J: yap A»

6. 1062» 35 — 1063 19

/ -, x aS X ced > , ¥ \ / opens pioews, TO b€ ToTdY THS dopiotov. ET. bid Ti Tpoc- rattovtos Tod iarpod Tod) TO citlov mpocevéyxacbar mpoode-

Al.: péveccodd. daiverac J 25 ravrou

EJVAl.: avrod AP 26 dia ro kat EJ 27 de] ye J: yap A»

6. 1062» 35 — 1063 19

/ -, x aS X ced > , ¥ \ / opens pioews, TO b€ ToTdY THS dopiotov. ET. bid Ti Tpoc- rattovtos Tod iarpod Tod) TO citlov mpocevéyxacbar mpoode-

lal a \ povtat; tl yap madAov Tobro dptos éotivy 7 ovK eoTWW; wor > a aA lal a ovdev dv duexor payeiy 7 wy hayeiv: viv 8 ws ddnOedvovres TEpl avTo Kat dvTos Tod mpooTaxOévTos citiov TovToU Tpoc- pépovtrat todro: kalro. y ovK ede. pi) Siayevovons taylws tt ft rs tal > cal LS > pe lol Mnoemias pioews ev Tots alcOntols GAN del macdy KwvoDv- / a Méevev Kal peovodGy. eri d ed pey dAdAolovpEOa det Kal pyndé- if € > 7 vA X ’ , > mote Otapevouey of avtot, ri Kal Oavyaorov ef pndem0d npiv raira galyera kabdmep Tois Kdyvovow (kal yap Tov- AS A ‘ € 4 tal AS e \ “7a? c 4 Tous Oia TO pi} Oumolws SiaKxeloOa tiv ew Kal 60 dyiawor, > 4 x \ \ ? / SN x bY ovx Gpota patverar Ta Kata Tas aicOyoes, aiTa pev ovde- pias bud ye Todro peraBoAfs Kowwvodvta ta aicOnrd, aicOnuara 8 erepa mowdvta trols Kdyvovot kal jy TA adra: Tov avrov oi) tpdmov éxew Kal rhs elpnuevns petaBorjs / 2 [awa 5) C) \ SS / ylyvouerns tows dvayxaidy éotw); et b€ pay peTaBdddopen b 2 ¢ 3 NX a wy yy » / \ x GAX ob avTot diaTEeAOdMEY OvTES, Elin GY TL MEVOY.—TpPOS EV > \ 2 4 = ? / 2 Vg wo. > e75 ovy Tovs &k Adyou Tas elpyuevas amoptas ExovTas ov pad.ov d1a- doar pn TWevtTwy Te Kal TovTov pynKéTL Adyov amatrovyTw: + x vad a \ ia We yp A N otTw yap mas Adyos Kal maca andderéis ylyverar’ pnOev \ / 2 an \ / Vo / iva yap TiWevTes avaipodor TO dvadeyerOat Kal GAws Adyov,—doTE Tpos MeV TOvS TOLOVTOVS OVK eaTL AdyoOS, TOs SE TOYS SiaTropody - Tas ek TOY Tapadedopevay amopidv pddioyv amavTay Kat d.a- Avew TA ToLodvTa THY amoplay ev avrois: dhAov 8 &k TeV elpnuevwv. ote havepov éx TovTwy Ott ovK evdexeTar Tas > f \ a = lal > ef. / o) uA avrixeipevas pacers Tepl TOO avTod Ka eva xpdvov ddnOevew, Dr A) f x \ J x / fa) 2 ovde Ta EvavTia, dia TO A€yerOat KaTa oTEpHoLW Tacay Evav- / -’~ X\ ot Se pot ae ‘\ \ 4 > vA \ Tidrnta: SjAov dé Todr’ én’ apxnv Tos Adyovs avadVvovor Tovs ny ss s PY / Od or TOV EvayTiov. opoiws d ovde TOY ava seo ovdEeY OioV TE 1063 28-35, cf. 1008» 12-27 35-7, cf. 10097 38 — » 33

b 7-16, cf. 10098 16-22, 1o11 3-16 17-19, cf. tori? 17-22 19-24, cf. 1011» 23-1012 24,

430 rovro om. EJT 31 ay mt ¢xo EJT GAnOevovros AP 33 y om. AP Ale 35 dei om. AP 36 dStapevopev E kal om. AP by ryy ef Siakciobar AP 2 ovde pias EJ 3 dua ye in ras, E tavta J! 4 kal py Ta ard et 5 Kai om. AP 6 yeyvopemns EJ Al.°: yevouevns AP 7 1 av EJ g tovrey T Adyov pnkere AP 17 nacav évavridrnta EJT: ra evavtia AP et fort. Al. 18 8 Or én’ AP dvadvovot AP Ale: Avovor EJ

by ie)

al or

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

Aov yap Ort Tovs Erepous adrdv avdyky die\edoOa. havepov ‘ a an , \ de Tobr ex TOY yryvopnevwy KaTa Ti alcOnow ovdéTOTE yap

1063 7d avrd dativeras trois pev yAuKd Tots S€ Totvayriov, fun

Al. 18 8 Or én’ AP dvadvovot AP Ale: Avovor EJ

by ie)

al or

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

Aov yap Ort Tovs Erepous adrdv avdyky die\edoOa. havepov ‘ a an , \ de Tobr ex TOY yryvopnevwy KaTa Ti alcOnow ovdéTOTE yap

1063 7d avrd dativeras trois pev yAuKd Tots S€ Totvayriov, fun

a f drepOappevev Kal AcAwBynuevov Tdv Erépwv TO aloOnTHpLov Kal KpiTnploy TOY AeXOevTwY yvEGv._TovToV 8 dvTOs ToLOvTOV

NS devas Sern a Sr a \ eee > Tovs éTépovs ev UroAnTTEoy.peTpov Elva Tovs 6 GAAovsS ovX sk an cal A lol bToAnTTEov. Guolws S€ TOTO A€yw Kal em! ayabod Kai KaKod, \ a \ by a \ lat Dy at , ION kal KaAOv Kal aicxpod, kal TGV GAAwY TOY ToLOUTMD. ovdev yap Siapéper Todr’ Aéody 7) Ta Hawdpeva Tots d7d THY Ow bmoBdddover Tov SdKTvAoV Kal ToLodow ex TOD Evds aiver Oat dvo, dvo deiv elvar dia TO faiverOar Tocadra, Kal maAw Ev

al a a X 4 10 Tols yap pa) KivodoL THY ow ev datverar TO Ev, Gdws bE

dromov ek Tod daiverOar Ta dedpo peraBaddAovta Kal pyde- mote Siayévovta év Tots avrots, €x TovTov mepl THs dAn- Getas tiv Kplow movetocOau det yap ex TOv del Kara ravra >] if XN / ‘ / 3 X €xovT@py Kat pndewiay peTraBoArjy moLtovyevwy tadrnbes On- pevew, Towatra 8 earl Ta KaTa Tov Kéocpov: Tadra yap ovx Ore pey Toladt madAw 8 dAdAota gaivera, raira & pI AN \ a by ° a ayy ? rd 12 aet kal peraBorAns ovdeuLas KoWmMvodyTa, ert d el Klyyots €oTl, Kal KWoUpeEvoY TL, KiVElTaL 5€ TAY EK TLWOs Kal Els TL al x > te def dpa TO Kiwovpevon eivar ev exelvm e€ 0} KwWHoETAL Kal OVK elvat év adr, kal els Todi KweloOar Kal ylyverOa ev TovTw, \ XX \ X\ b] / X\ vA ’ S, A TO O€ KaTa THY avTiPacw pa ovvadnOeverOar Kar avTovs. kal el kata TO moody cuvexGs Ta deBpo pet Kal kwetrat, ve a i 7 > > X ” \ la \ X\ x kal 11s Todro Gein Kalmep ovK ddnOes dv, bia Th KaTa TO ToLOY ov jevel; catvovra, yap odx Huta TA Kata Tas dvripa- gels TAUVTOD KaTnyopely ek TOD TO TOTdY HrELANPEevatr pa) pé- pew emt TOV TwopudTav, 616 Kal evar TeTpamnyv TO adTd \ A x rod kal ovk €lvat. 1) 8 ovola kara TO Toudyv, Todro Se Tis wpt-

1063* 10-17, cf. 1o10# 25-32 17-21, cf. 1010% 35-1

10631 pnde AP 4 addous] érépous EJ 5 kal kakov om. Ab 7 todr| rod AP 9 dvo semel JT dey JT: SE A>; 7 i Bonitz: incl. Christ é¢vom. A> — 10 dyuv eudaiverar AY 14 éydvrev EJT AL. : dvtav AP 16 rodde EJ 19 év AP Al.¢ et ut vid. Al.: ere év EJT ovk] py AP Al, 20 760e AP 21 avvadnOeverOar AP AI: ddndeverOa EJT Ale 24 pevet Richards, legit ut vid. Al.: pévercodd. aiverar J 25 ravrov

EJTAl.: avrod AP 26 dia rd kai EJ 27 O€] ye J: yap A»

6. 1062» 35 — 106319

: dvtav AP 16 rodde EJ 19 év AP Al.¢ et ut vid. Al.: ere év EJT ovk] py AP Al, 20 760e AP 21 avvadnOeverOar AP AI: ddndeverOa EJT Ale 24 pevet Richards, legit ut vid. Al.: pévercodd. aiverar J 25 ravrov

EJTAl.: avrod AP 26 dia rd kai EJ 27 O€] ye J: yap A»

6. 1062» 35 — 106319

/ / ‘ XN A an >’ / yo SeeN / ouevns pioews, TO 5€ Tod THS dopioTov. ETL bia TL Tpoo- t ~ an TaTTOVTOS Tod laTpod Tod! TO ciTloy TpocEveyKacbaL Tpoadhe- a a RN A povtar; til yap saddov Tobro dptos early H ovK €oTLV; wor > / cal \ lal A ovdey dv biexor hayeiy 7 wi) hayeiv: viv 8 os dAnOedovTes ’ ‘ a TEpt avTo Kal GvTos TO} TpocTaxOévTos oitlov TovTOU Tpoc- / ' an pepovrar Tovro: kairo. y ovk der py Siayevotons Tmaylws pndemias dtoews év Tots alcOntots GAN’ del TacGv Kwvov- / a pevav Kal peovodv. eT. 0 ei yey dAdolovpeda del Kal pnde- / € , / la \ \ 3 / > Tote Olayevowey ot avrot, ti Kal Oavyacrov ei pndém0d jp raira datveras Kabdmep Tots Kdpvovow (kal yap Tov- Tous 61a TO pa) Omolws SiaKxeloOar Ty e&w Kal 60 bylawov, > A /. S \ \ 2 / SES x “) ovx spo aiverar Ta Kata Tas alcOynoes, aiTa pev ovde- bias bua ye Todro peTaBoAjs Kowwvotvta Ta alcOyra, aicOnuata 8 eérepa mowdvta Tots Kdyvovot Kal pn Ta adra: \ a fa tov avroy 61 Tpdmov éxew Kal ths ecipnuevns peTaBodAjs f y ) at b) p) y \ / ylyvomerns tows avayxaidy éotw); «i 5€ pay) peTaBdddopyev > Steves far oN A ¥ vans ih \ . avr’ ot avrot diaTeAoduev ovTes, eln dy TL pevovy.—Tpos MeV my ‘ 2 ie SS > / > Tg yy Tg Oe ovy Tovs €x Adyou Tas elpnuevas Amoptas €xovTas ov padzov b1a- doar pn TWEevtwy TL Kal Tovrou pykért Adyov amattovvTwY* ottm yap mas Adyos Kal maca andderéis ylyvera’ pnbev >S t > a » is \o / ¢ yap TWevtes avaipovor TO diad€éyerOar Kal dAws Adyov,—doTE Tpos pev TOvS TOLOVTOUS OvK ETL Adyos, Tpds SE TOs SiaTropody- Tas €k TOV Tapadedopevav Amopiav padiov amavTay Kat b.a- Avew TA ToLodvTa THY amopiav ev avrois: dHAov 8 ex TSV elpnuevov. date havepov ex TovTwy Ore ovK evd€exeTaL TAs > é J \ a) 2) a 9) Ger, , > 7 avTikeysevas pacers TEpl TOD avTod Kad’ eva xpdvov adnOcveww, ION he) 12 x SN is x / tos > ovde Ta EvavTia, dia TO A€EyeTOaL KaTa oTEpNoLW Tacay Evav- , lon Xx PV me: lee Pit | ‘\ \ , > - ‘\ TuoTnTa* OnAoV OE TOvT ew Apx7V TOvS AdyoUS avadvoveL TOUS nr > , c / > > XN lal ph x / > ‘ eS. TOV EvavTiov. o-olws 6 ovdE TOY AVA ETO oOvOED OlOV TE

1063* 28-35, cf. 1008» 12-27 35-7, cf. 10097 38 —» 33 b 7-16, cf. 1009” 16-22, 1011” 3-16 17-19, cf. 1011? 17-22 19-24, cf. 1011» 23-1012° 24.

430 rovro om. EJT 31 av mt éxo EJT GAnGevovros AP 33 y om. AP Ale 35 dei om. AP 36 Stapéevopey E kat om. A> by ry efw diaxeicbar AP 2 ovde pias EJ 3 Sid yeinras,E raira J* 4 kal pr) Ta avrd et 5 kal om. A> 6 yeyvoperns EJ Al.°: yevouevns AP 7 1 av EJ g tovrey T Adyov pynkert AP 17 racav evavridrnta EJT: ra evavria A” et

fort. Al. 18 8’ Gr’ én’ A» dvadvovot AP Al.¢: Avovor EJ

3°

4 °

i) or

w or

3°

bie)

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

cal Tae Yet \ lol > _ na > y lel

A> 6 yeyvoperns EJ Al.°: yevouevns AP 7 1 av EJ g tovrey T Adyov pynkert AP 17 racav evavridrnta EJT: ra evavria A” et

fort. Al. 18 8’ Gr’ én’ A» dvadvovot AP Al.¢: Avovor EJ

3°

4 °

i) or

w or

3°

bie)

TON META TA ®YSIKA K

cal Tae Yet \ lol > _ na > y lel

karnyopetcOar Kad’ évds Kal Tod avrov: AevKod yap ovTos Tod € / / > x a oA a A \

dToKesevov A€yovTes avTd cival ovTE peAay ovUTE AevKOY Yev-

, lA X a \ i SX wf X\ » “

ooueba ocupBalve. yap etvat AevKoy avToO Kal py elva

n 7 a

Odrepov yap Tév cupTeTAcyyevav adnOedoerar Kat’ avTod, na a An /

rodro 8 éotly dvtipacis Tod AevKod. ove 57 Kal? “Hpaxdecrov

. b)

evdexerar AéyovTas GAnOevew, ore Kar “Avagaydpav: el

be py, -cvpByoerar tdvavtia Tod ad’rod Karnyopelv: Grav

- n i“ lal a ,

yap év navtl gy mavtds eivar poipav, oddév paddov eivat

x x fel a a pyoe yAvKd 7) miKkpov 7) TOV AoiTGy SroLavody évavTIdTEwD, 3 ad c € / ‘\ / , 3° tae

elmep €v G&mavti wav trapxer jy Svvaper povov GAA €vEp-

s Ae) 2 e a2 lol lol 39) > x A , ' - Wevdev pev ovoGv TacGv ovd advro TodTo Tis macKey ady- Oevoet, AdnOdv de Wevdets clvar mdoas rA€ywr ov Wed-

OETA.

Tlaca 8 émuorhun ytet twas dpyas Kat airias meply éxaotov Tov vp’ adriv émioTyTGv, olov LarpiKy Kal yowvaotiKy kal tOv AcimOv ExdoTn TOV ToinTiKGy Kal pabyparTiKOr. éxdoTn yap TovTwY TeEptypaayuery TL yevos avTi TEpl TovTO

s « € \ » > e \ + b) 9 lee Tpaypareverar @s tmdpxov Kal ov, ovx 7) S€ Ov, GAN’ ErTEpa Tis atrn Tapa tavras Tas émioTHuas eoTly emioTHN. TOV bE AexOevoGv emiotnpGv éxdotn AaBodod Tws TO Ti eoTwW EV

lat BN ExdoT@ yéver Teparar Seixv¥var Ta AowTa padak@Tepoy 7 > 2 t ‘ \ a b] € Ss ? axpiBeotepov. dAayBdavovor O€ TO Ti e€oTW ai pev OF aigOjcews at & troriWéeuevare 510 Kal dpAov ex THs Towad- THS emaywyhs Ot. THs ovolas Kal Tod Tl €oTW ovK eoTW aTe- devgis. eel O Eat Tis TEpl picews emLoTHuN, SHAOV Gre

x fod tat 6 kal Tpaxtixis érépa kal wouTikns €oTat. TouTiKHs pev yap : a a \ > cal / cal , « > , €v TH TowwvvT. Kal ov TS Towvpevw THS KUWHTEwWS 7) GPX, tN roa Wee 2 ¥ / ¥_> # A € 4 kal Tobr €orw elite Téexvyn Tis elt GAAy Tis Svvapis: dpolws d€ Kal THS TpaKTLKHSs oUK ev TH TpaKT@ paddov 8 ey Tois

1063” 24-35, cf. I. 1012*24-P18 - Cap. 7, cf. E. 1

21 péXap ovre Nevxdy AY Als Aeuxdy oifre péday EJr 29 map om. JI: mavra AP 33 tts Touro A» 37 im airny fort. Al. 106492 ad’ry JI: avr E'AY ALS 7 6¢ AVAL: dia tis EJ

12 ris touoews Christ

Gi, ALS 6. 10635 20 — 7. 1064» 10

4 € , € X a fal \ Se aoe Tpartovoelw n Kivynols. 71 O€ TOD votkod TEpl TA EXOVT EV Eavtois Kiwyjcews apxyy ect. Stu pev Toivey odTE TPAKTLKTY

Al. 106492 ad’ry JI: avr E'AY ALS 7 6¢ AVAL: dia tis EJ

12 ris touoews Christ

Gi, ALS 6. 10635 20 — 7. 1064» 10

4 € , € X a fal \ Se aoe Tpartovoelw n Kivynols. 71 O€ TOD votkod TEpl TA EXOVT EV Eavtois Kiwyjcews apxyy ect. Stu pev Toivey odTE TPAKTLKTY

+ Ny > X ‘ > tal > ‘ ovTE ToinTLKyY GAAG OewpytiKny dvayKaiov elvar THY dvot- Kyv émuoTnpnv, SHArov ex TovTwy (eis ev ydp TL TovTaY TOV yevev dvdyxn minrew) enet S& TO Ti eoTw dvayKaiov c V4 lol 3 lol DENA \ -, a ee ke. ExaoTyH Tws TOY eTmLTTHUaY Eld€vaL Kal ToUTm xpHobat apn; det pH AavOdvery TGs Spioréov TS HvoikG kai TOs 6 THs Se / , , c \ x x al € \ ovaias Aoyos AnmTEOS, TOTEPOVY ws TO oyLovY H MaAAOV ws TO KoiAov. TovTwY yap 6 pev TOD Tyod Adyos peTa THs tAns V4 Sad a a a Aéyerar THS TOD Tpdypyaros, 6 d& Tod KolAov xwpis THs VANS: yap oysdrns ev pit ylyverat, 610 Kal 6 Adyos adris peTa Tavtns Oewpetrat Td ody yap ore pls KoiAn. avepov ody 6rt Kal capkos kal dpOadpod Kal rv omy popiwy pera i es oN \ , > ie 3 \ a oy) b] re THS VANS Gael TOV AOyov amodoTEoV. Enel d ETL TIS ETLOTHYN

a aun aA Tob dvTos 7) Ov Kal XwpioTov, oKenTéov TéTEpdY TOTE TH pu-

a x SEEN tA = - x Tad co « oh THY adtHY Oeréov civar TavTny 7) MaAdoV éTEpay. 7) Mev ovy vowki wept Ta KiWnoEews exovT apxny év avTots

éoriv, 7 5& wadnparixy Oewpyntikyn pev Kal mept pevovTa Tis iA MA >’ > 4 \ \ NX BA A wy. 2D IA airn, GAN od xwpioTd. Tepl TO xwpioTov dpa ov Kal axi- yytov érépa TovTwv duotépwv TGV emioTnVaY EoTL TIS, ElmEp dmapxet Tis ovoia roia’Tyn, héeyw 5€ XwpioTi Kal aKivyTos, omep Teipacoueda Seixvivar. Kal elmep eote Tis ToLavTn pv- ots év-Tois ovow, évtadd’ dv ein mov Kal TO Oeiov, kal atrn ax ww , \ / > / lol vA a 7, av ein mpertn Kal Kupwwtdrn apxy. dHAov rolvuy br. Tpia Ve n n na / , yern TOv OewpyntixOv emotnuay EoTt, pvoixyn, paOnuaTiKy, Oeodoyixn. BéATLcTOY pev ov TO TOY DewpnTiKGY yevos,

4 > > lal ¢ y 4 tal os \ 7

TovTay 6 avtTay 7 Tedevtaia AEXOeioa TEpl TO TiLLw- / > a ” 7 s \ ff co

TaTov yap €oTt TOV oVTwY, BEATIMY bE KaL XELpwY EKAaTTH

A€yerat Kara TO olkeloy emioctyTov. amopyoee 8 ay Tis TO-

, \ a ON b] / / ca) lal BY TEpOV TOTE THY TOD OvTOS 7) Ov emLaTHUNY KAOAOD Set Geivar 7 ov. TOY pey yap paOnuatikGy ExdoTy TEpl Ev TL yEevos amw-

r f ¢ BS 4 ‘ \ / oI] Ss > plopevov éoriv, ) d€ KaOdAov Kown TEept TavTMY. ei ev ovv

€ A A ae a fal x 1 W) d e N at voixal ovoial mpGrar TOv dvrwy eioi, Kav 1H pvorKy ®19 mimteww] minrey avriy EJT 26 ‘Bewpetrar A» yp. E; eipnrar EJE == 30 tavrny etvar AP 33 xa AP et ut vid. Al. : xai ro EJ 34 71s om. AP br dy om, AP el J: ein 7) fort. Al. 3 pev om. AP 7o om, A}? yevos] emotnuayv yevos AY

4 7d kuptoratoy A» 8 pev om. AY 10 Kav] kat yp. E

is) or

3°

10645

3°

TON META TA OYSIKA K

fol A / , \ a ia

an ey / ,

"Emel 8€ TO GAGs dv Kara mAElovs A€yeTaL TpoOTOVS,

tess * , a

Ov els €otly 6 kara cuBEBHKOS Elvat AEyOpEvos, TKETTEOV TPO -

Tov mepl Tod otrws dvTos. br. pev ody ovdeuta TOY Tapadedo-

Mevav emioTnuGv Tpaypareverar mept TO oupBEBnKds, d7-

wy ~ , ‘ lal \ / o lot

Aov (ovre yap olKodomiKi) cKoTE? TO TYUBNnoOpEVOY Tots TH

/ eS n XK /

olkia xpnoouevors, oloy ef AuTNPas 7) TovavTloy oiknoovow,

x a? € = BA ‘\ A > 7, A a >

oP Spavtixy ore TKYTOTOMLK) OTE GYwoToWKy, TO d& Kad

avryy td.oy Exdotn ToUTwWY oKOTEL TOY. eTLOTHPODV [LOVvOV, TOTO

8 éotl 7d olkelov rédos [ovde povorkdy Kal ypappariKdy,| oddE

TOV OVTA MoVoLKOY OTL yeEevdOjEVOS ypappaTiKoS Epa eoTat TA > ’ , > ” a DS ‘ DEN UR y cee

auporepa, TpdoTepoy ovK Ov, 5 OF pa) Gel dv eoTW, eyeveTo

TooTO, WoO Ga povo.kds eyevero Kal ypaypaTikds,—rodro dé

ovdeuia Cyret TOY Spodroyovpevus ovoGy emioTnpGv TARY 7

copiotikn? mepl’ TO cupBeBnKos yap atrn porn Tmpaypa-

i \ lj 2) n a / \ ‘ Teveral, 610 IIAatwy ov KaxOs elpnxe dyjoas tov cod.oryy \

Trept TO yay Ov SiaTpiBew) Sti & od evdexdpevdy eorw elvar a - / SJ / \ ” a lal TOD TUUBEBNKOTOS ETLOTHUNY, Pavepov EoTar TELpabeiow ideiv , b) > \ \ , lal , > \ x Ti mor éoTt TO cupBeBnkds. wav by ayev elvar TO per

4 a » | 2 > I 2 / 3 > lal x \ /

det kal e€ dvdyxns (dvaykns 8 od Ths Kata TO Biawov A€yo-

/ e tal

mevns GAN Hy xpducOa ev Tots Kara Tas dmodelEes),

TO 0 ws em TO TOAD, TO 8 OVO ws em TO TOAD OUT del Kal / 3 me

e€ dvdykns aN omws ervyev olov én) Kuvl yevour dy Wo-

Xos, GAAG Todr’ oO ws det Kal e€ dvdyKns ov’ ws emi TO

\ TOAD yiyverat, cvpBaln d€ mor dv. €oTr bi) TO ocupBEBy-

1064» 15 —1065* 26, cf. E. 2-4

> 13 Tis... 14 mporepay in marg. J ™® EJT Al.: om. A> 15 Aeyerar EJT All: efvau Néyerar AP 16 eivat AP Al. : om. EJT 17 ovtas] dvtws E 20 xpnoapevors AP ei] E 21 dyfo-

mrountixn AP 23 ob0€... ypapparidy om. Al., susp. Bonitz post ovde pr. 7 JT et ut vid. E‘, ei ci. Bonitz, rd Christ, «¢ ro Bullinger 24-25 Ta auporepa dua éora A» 25 éyévero recc. I et fecit E: eyiyvero JAP Ale ‘26 eyévero recc. T Al.° et fecit E : eyiyvero JAP de om. Al.¢, incl. Bonitz : 6 ci. Bonitz 30 ovd'| ov« fecit E 33 kara Biavy APT Al.¢ 35 8 ovde AP 37 xatEJTAl.: om. Ab as om, EJ

7. 10645 11 — 8. 1065? 32

I et fecit E: eyiyvero JAP Ale ‘26 eyévero recc. T Al.° et fecit E : eyiyvero JAP de om. Al.¢, incl. Bonitz : 6 ci. Bonitz 30 ovd'| ov« fecit E 33 kara Biavy APT Al.¢ 35 8 ovde AP 37 xatEJTAl.: om. Ab as om, EJ

7. 10645 11 — 8. 1065? 32

Kos 0 ylyverat yey, odk det 8 odd e& dvdyxns od8 ws emt TO TOAV. Th ev ody eoTl Td TYUBEBNKOS, ElpyTat, SidTL O OK eoTW emloTHMN Tod ToLovToV, dHAOV: emLoTHUN pev yap Tada TOD det dvTos 7) as em TO TOAV, TO SE TYUBEBNKOS ev ovdEeTEpw TovTwy eotiv. Ort d& TOO Kata cupBEeByKds dvTos od«K cioly airia, Kal dpxal rovatras olaimep rob Kal? abro dvtos, b7- Aov' éota yap anavr’ e€ dvdykns. «lb yap rode pev EoTL ToddE OvTOS TddEe 5€ TOvSE, TOOTO SE pi) OTS ETvXEV GAN CE avayKns, e€ avaykns éorat Kal ob Tobr’ jv altiov ews TOO Te- Aevraiov Aeyouevov aitiarod (rotro 8 iv Kata cvpB_Bykos), dor e@& dvdykns anavr éorat, kal TO droTépws Ervxe Kal 70 evdexerOar Kal yevéoOar Kal py mavTedds ex TOV yL- yvopevav dvaipetra. Kav pr dv dé GAA ylyvomevoy Td aitioy dnoreOh, Taira crvpuByoceraur wav yap e€ dvdyKns yernoera. 1 yap avpiov éxdeuis yevjoerar av tdde yeé- vytat, Tovro & eay erepdv T1, kal Tobr’ av dAdo- Kal Todrov 87) Tov Tpomov and TEeTEpacpevov xpdvov TOD amd TOD voy pExpL avpiov aarpovpéevov xpdvov i€e wore eis TO badpxov, dor énel TobT eotw, dmavr e€ avdyKns Ta peTa TOOTO yevycerat, dote navra e& avaykns ylyvecOa. TO 8 ws ddnbes dv Kat Kata ovpBeBnkos Td pev oti ey cupmdoKf diavolas Kal mdOos év tavrn (610 mept pev TO obrws dv ov Ci rowvtat ai dpyal, mept d€ TO 2Ew dv Kal ywpiorov) 7d 8 ov«K ‘avaykatov GAN dédpiocrov, A€ywm Se TO KaTa cUMBEBNKOs Tod ToLovTov & draxta Kal dneipa Ta airia.— 7d dé EveKd Tov €v Ttois ptoer yryvouevois 7) amd diavolas éotlv, rbxn 6é€ €or Stray te TovTwy yévntat Kata ovpBeBynKds* Bomep yap Kal ov eoTe TO pev Ka adTo TO dé KaTa crvpBEBnKOs, otTw kal airiov. 7 Tvxn 8 airla-Katrd cupBeBnKds ev Tots KaTa Tpoalperiy TGV Evexd Tov yuyvopevois, 610 Tept TadTa TYXn Kal diavoias mpoatpesis yap ov xwpls diavolas. Ta 0 alria

1065” 26-30, cf. Phys. ii. 196” 21-25 30-35, cf. 197% 5-14

106572 et 5 vom, AP 10 ws] ws AP 12 démdrep’ A 13 yiveoOar AP 14 d€ om. EJT 15 tadra E 16 4] «i EJT Al. 18 rod... .19 xpdvov om. AP 20 elmep JT 21 ddnOas EJVAl. kal] cat py A” yp. EAl.: kai 76 vel kai pi kat 76 ci. Bonitz 22 rd pev Omittenda ci. Christ ~ Stavoias AP Al.: ris duavoias EJ

30 airia EJ®; airtov AP 31 tavta J: traits AP®

TQN META TA ®YSIKA K

&) 3 x xy > adpiota ad’ av av yévouro ta amd Tbxns, 810 GdnAos av- lal lol > Opwtive Aoyione Kat alrioy Kata orvpBeBnkds, anrh@s 6 XN a ovdevds. ayaby dé ruxn Kal kaki Otay ayabov 7 ile

1065> anoBf edtvxla b& Kat dvorrxia mepl péyeOos rTovTwr.

ayaby dé ruxn Kal kaki Otay ayabov 7 ile

1065> anoBf edtvxla b& Kat dvorrxia mepl péyeOos rTovTwr.

evel 8 ovdev Kara mupie Bros FEREEPER Tov Kal’ avro, ovd’ dp’ alria ¢f dpa t¥yn } TO avtopatoy atrioy Tod ovpa- vod, mpdoTepov vods altios Kal pots. aN ‘ "Eott 5& TO pev evepyela povoy Td be duvdmer TO bE duvder Kal evepyeia, TO pev Ov TO b& Tooov 7d b€ TOV AoinGv. ov oTL 8 Tis Kivnois Tapa TA MpdypaTa* peTaBar- = 9 bak a tk lal y. F PF x ’ 3 \ ew yap del Kara Tas Tod dyTos KaTnyopias, Kowdov 6 emt / Inf b) A ede ie as 7 er ~ aN TOUTWY OvdEV EoTLW 0 OVS’ EV pa KaTNyopig. ExacToV SE biX@s lal e ~ AN tmdpxe. Taow (ofov ro rdde—TO pev yap poppy avrod To f d€ oTépnots — kal Kata TO moLov TO pev AEvKOY TO dE pEAaY, kal kata TO Toocdv TO pey TéAELoV TO Oe ATEAES, Kal KATA Ss DN a gopay TO pev dvw TO dé Kdtw, 7) Kodpov Kal Bapv) dere KWWHoEws Kal weTaBoANS Tooadr edn 60a Tod dvTos. dinpy- , S > of , lay s / a 9? 3 / pevou 0€ Kad’ ExaoTov yevos Tod pev Svvaper TOD 6 EvTEAEXELG, THY TOB duvdpet 7} TOLOtTdY oT evepyeray A€yw Kivnow, OTL & adnOi A€youev, evOevde Sjrov' drav yap. TO olkodounror, oy ~ x 2 ToLodroy avTd Aéyouen eivar, evepyela 7, olxodometTaL, Kal €att TodTo oiKoddpunois Spoiws pdOnois, latpevois, Badiors, ef / d os cal 4 c dros, yypavows, Gdpuvois. ocrvpBalver d€ KwetcOar dtav 7

EVTEAEXELA 7) GUTH, Kal ov j vO torepov. % O° xX Hl }, Kal ore mpdorepov ov8 Bartepov. 1 dH

fal / y 4 b) sf BAY b) a > @ kes Tod Suvdper dvtos, Gray eévTedexela Ov Eevepyfj, ovxX 7) avTO GAN 7 Kwytdv, kivnols eorw. éyw SE TO 7H GbE. EoTL

1065* 35 - 1, cf. 197% 25-27 » 2-4, cf. 198" 5-13 5-7, cf. Phys. iii. 2c0? 26-28 7-20, cf. 200 » 32 — 201% 19 20-21, cf, 201°6,7 21 — 10664 26, cf. 2017 27 — 2024 3

433 roEJT® b 3 7) Kat ro AP 4 airtoy J 5 ro be Suvdper semel Ab 6 dp] bes we: 760c Te Ov Christ Pars E Simpl. le: 7 JI: om. AP o EJT@: om. A» 13 kal] ro Oe EJTS I5 Tov pev Ere, : om. AP 18 7 EJT@: 7 AP evepycvav 7 T 19 éort Tt rovrTo E Badeors] kal Fe Abo 20 mnpavois JI GSpvvots om. T a) BOAR a Ei @eunes

7 EXJAQT 21 évredexeig J: om.T avutn ® 7 Oy EJ. Al.: ion AYT: 7 06 ® 22 évros codd. T@: dvros evred€xeta ia evepyni} AP ody «..23 GAN EJY Asp. yp. Al. Phil. Them.: 4 adré 7) ddAo A> Al, Porph. 23 kivntdv] dAdo Phil. Them. 7 kivnows E

8. 10658 33 —g. 10668 17

A an yap 6 yxadKkds duvduer avdpidss GAN Gums odx Tod XaAkod évredexeta, 7) XaAKds, Konols eorw. od yap Tadrov 2 XAAKG elvar Kal dvvdwer rwi, eel ef tadrov jv amhOs

\ a a Kata Tov Adyov, Hv av H ToD xadkod évredéxeta kivynots tis. ov gor, de tadrd (dfAov 8 emi rv evavtlwy: 7d pev yap ddvacba tyiaivew Kal dvvacOar Kdyvew od Ta’rév — Kal yap

x N > av TO bytatvew Kal TO Kdyvew radrov iv—rTd 8 troxelwe- 30

ov gor, de tadrd (dfAov 8 emi rv evavtlwy: 7d pev yap ddvacba tyiaivew Kal dvvacOar Kdyvew od Ta’rév — Kal yap

x N > av TO bytatvew Kal TO Kdyvew radrov iv—rTd 8 troxelwe- 30

ve a. \ a vA? c , > eo > \ vov Kat vytaivoy Kal vooody, €t0 dypdérns «lO aiua, ravTd NOY ef: > \ \ > \ bi , wv IOr na > A ‘ kal év). émel 8& od TO adrd, GomEp ode ypGpa Tadrov Kal dpardv, 7» Tod bvvarod Kal 7 Suvardv évTedA€xera Kivnols eorw. 4 ~ » 2 a Ae A , tal a éru pev ovv éotw atrn, Kal Ori cupBalver Tore kweicOa. dray 7) @VTEAEXELA 7} adTH, Kal ovTE Tpdrepoy ovO torTepov, dShAov 35 (evdexerar yap éxacroyv 6ré pev evepyety dré Sé pj, olov Td 1066% 3 \ te ’ 4 ay Se an ’ ar 99) / e oikodounroy 7) olKodopnTdv, Kal i rod oikodopyntod évépye.a 7} \ a e olkodopnroyv oixoddépnois oti: 7) yap TOUTS eo, 7 olKoddMN- aN os, 9 evépyeia, 7) olxla GAN’ Gray oikla 7, odKéri olkodoun- Tov, olkodopetrat 5€ TO olKodomnTor dvayKn dpa oikoddunow X\ >) é a € P , , 7 7 c ’ 2 \ Ti evépyeray civat, 7 8 olkoddunors Kivnois tis, 6 8 adros Adyos kal emi TSv dAAwy Kiyocewy) sre Se KadGs eipyrat, djrdov e€ Gy of GAAou A€yovor Tepl adris, Kal ex Tod ju) paddwv etvar dwpica. ddAdws airyy. otre yap ev ado tis yever ddvair dv Oeivar adriv: dhdrov 8 e€ dv d€Eyovow"

° € a S c / \ 2 , % AR a wv ae ol pev yap érepdrnta kal dviodrnta Kal TO pa) Ov, ov ovdey avayKn KwelaOat, GAN ovd 7 petraBodrr ovr eis Tabra Mo 19y oS 72 c BE a b) / x, S fa) ovr ék TovTwy paddov 1 TOY dyTiKemevwr. alrioy dé Tod els Tatra riWévar Ori adpioroy Te Soke? elvar 7) Kivnots, Tis & ér€pas svaroixlas ai apyal bia TO orepytixal eivar adpi-

- tr

aro ovrEe yap Tdde OvTE ToLdVde Ovdeula adrGy obre THY AoL- m@v KaTnyoplOv. Tod dé Soxeiy adpioroy elvar Tiv Kiynow

b25 ravre J 27 ante kara add. kai T&F I Phil.!¢, 7 SE 28 rodro Cannan 30 ro alt. Ab®: om. EJ 33 kal om. EJTe@ 34 obv APD: yap EJT dru EJT@: dre AP 35 7 Abo: 7 EJT evredexeua AP @: evrehexeiar EJ: evredexeia T avry Christ: avrn codd. & 10662 3 7) AP yp. EJT@: i E TOUTO codd. T@FI et ut vid. Simpl.: rovrov ci. Bonitz: om. ®E éorw AFI: oikia éoriy EJ : om. ®E Jt: 1H J?: aut: om. ® 4 70m. E i) oikia recc, ®FI : rod oikodopnrov 7) 7 oikia PE: om. EJA’ post ofkodopnrdv add. éora EJTOFI, gor OE Il yap om. Ejr 13 3) EJ Simpl.¢: # ex APT 17 elva Tijy Kivnow

EJ®: tiv xivnow evar AP; om. T

TQN META TA ®YSIKA K

” 4 vy 2 Yj a y. +9 5) pas x airiov OTL ov? eis dtvamw Toy dvTwy ovr els evepyevay EoTL Ocivar atirnv: ore yap TO duvarov moody eivar kivelrar e&

29 avayKns, ovTe TO evepyela Toodv, } TE Klynows evepyera pev

i lal b) \ / A yey: ? XX ~ \ elvat OoKkel Tis, aTeEARS Oe: airiovy & Gri aTeAés TO Suvarov

mo 3 a 5) a \ XX let 3 ae tal 7, ov éotly evépyeia. Kal 1a Todro xadenov adr AaPeiv Ti > Bs ~ 3 / Jey A val BN 5) , \ 9 éoTw* 7 yap els orepnow dvaykn Ocivar 7) els Svvauw 7 els = Va c a / | ION 3 / a évepyevay atAnv, TovTwy 6 ovdev galverat EVOEXOMEVOV, WOTE

i N S > Ne See \ SN Lee 25 Aelmerar TO AexOev iva, kal evépyevay Kal [ph] evepyeray

Kal 1a Todro xadenov adr AaPeiv Ti > Bs ~ 3 / Jey A val BN 5) , \ 9 éoTw* 7 yap els orepnow dvaykn Ocivar 7) els Svvauw 7 els = Va c a / | ION 3 / a évepyevay atAnv, TovTwy 6 ovdev galverat EVOEXOMEVOV, WOTE

i N S > Ne See \ SN Lee 25 Aelmerar TO AexOev iva, kal evépyevay Kal [ph] evepyeray

A >] / ’ oO LN. XN ] / ? %. x THY elpnuevny, loely wey yadrenjy evdexopevyny OS eElval. Kab 4 5) \ c > a a a 2 A J bru €or 4 Klynow év To KuyTo, OHAoV? evTEeAeXELa yap earl TovTOU VTO TOD KIVTLKOD. Kal 7 TOD KLVNTLKOD evepyela ODK pA b) 1 va) S ss > b id b) a GdXAn €oTiv. det mev yap eivar evTehexelay auoivs KiWyTL-

\ S / I] Lad 4 a x oS) lal > ’

30 KOV Mev yap €oTL TH dvvacOal, KiWWoty Oe TH evEepyeiv, GAA got évepyntikoy Tod KwwyTod, bol spolws pla nh duorty evep-

Lcd \ BR d a BS 4 \ 4 \

yela Honep TO avtTd didotnpa ev Tpds dvo Kal dvo Tpos

e \ \ »y \ SS ! b) x x > + eae €v, Kal TO GvayTes Kal TO KdTayTEs, AAAG TO elvyar odx Ev dpoiws d& Kal emt Tod KivobvTos Kal KivoLpEevor.

7 ~ EN n a 35 Td & drepov 7) 7d advvaroy SiehOely TO pr) TEpuKeE- var dwevat, Kabdrep 1) wri) adparos, 7 TO dveEodov éxov dX Oe

Grededrntor, 1) 5 pddts, 7) & TeuKds exew pry exer dre€odov x \

1066? 7) mépas: ru mpotbere } adaipecer 7} dudw. YwpioTov pev dn) add Te dv odx ofdy 7 civatr ei yap pyre peyeOos pyre TAHG0s, ovoia 8 adro ro ametpoy Kal pr TvuBEByKos, advat-

BD DY a peroy ora: (TO yap Siaperov 7) péyeOos 7) ARGOS), ef 5 0@ ddualperov, ovK Ameipor, ef pr KaOdmep 7) pwr) adparos:

GAN’ obx otrm A€yovow otf Hyets Cyroduer, GAN os Bb) / yy an 3 , > CoN GS EA adeEodov. ert TOs evdexerar Kal’ atTo civar adreLpor,

> \ poe! \ \ , ® r \ + y, el pa) Kal apiOyos Kal péyebos, Oy TaBos TO AmELpoV; ETL ei Kata ovpBeBnkds, odvk dy eln ocro.xeloy To dvTwY

1066* 26-34, cf. 202% 13-21 35-7, cf. 2049 3-14 b 7-8, cf.

204? 17-19 8-11, cf. 204% 14-17

219 Oeivar AP&: riOeva EJ 23 «i yap E} 25 Kal pu) evepyeray om. AY: yy omittendum ci. Bonitz 31 7 EJ®: om. Ab 32 abto Sidotnua EJ: Sudornpa 76 aird AP 35 6’ om. Ab > 2 avtd] Tay aicOnrdy, ait ® by E® i: by, atcOnrdv dé JAYP: dy aicOnrév 7 ci, Christ: an dy, aicOnjrdv 8 ob ? 2 pare

alt.] €ore pyre EJTS 3 av’ro EJT®@: avrov AP 6 ov" ipeis EJ 9 «i sup. lin. J

9. 1066418 — 10. 1066? 36

e er IDX \ ee lal / 7 e 7) Umeipov, GoTEep ove TO Adparov Ths Siad€kTov, KaiTo. 7 avi) adparos, Kal Sti od« éotw evepyeta etvar Td ameELpor, dtjAov. eorar yap otidv advrob dmeipov pépos TO apBavope- vov (ro yap ameipm elvar kal ameipov 7d adrd, eltep odota rd La \ NS Si 28 , 24 CN id x b) dmeipov Kal pa) Kad’ troKeysevov), @oTe 7) adiatperov, 7) els dreipa Suaiperov, ei pepiotév’ moAAG & civar 7d adrd ddv- vatov dmeipa (domep yap dépos aijp pépos, otrws dmetpov > 91 13h eae af Na / E} / oy Ne ee la

atelpov, el éoriv ovata kal dpxy) dyepiorov dpa kal dd.atpe-

Tov. add dddvarov Td evTedexela dv ameipov (moody yap elvat avaykn) Kata ovpBeBynkds dpa tmdpyer. GAN el

add dddvarov Td evTedexela dv ameipov (moody yap elvat avaykn) Kata ovpBeBynkds dpa tmdpyer. GAN el

of > iA > 2 / oe 3 Ld Pa aS) al otrws, elpnrar Ori ovk evdéxerar elvar dpxnv, GAN exelvo @ 4 \ Pe BN S wy x yap adparos Adyos TO emiTed01s wplopevov, odK ely dv BA na yxy > J \ + , 399 9. A c anTElpoy Tua ovT aicOnrov ovre vonToV, ovd apiOuds ws t \ y >! A \ c ) \ x \ Kexwpiopevos kal amepos' apiOunrov yap 6 apiOpyos 7 Td BA 2 , n XX > na a y+ \ 4 €xov apiWuov. votk@s O€ Ex THVdE SHAOV* OUTE yap cIV- Oerov oidy T elvat ov8 amdovyv. octvOerov wey yap ovK éoTaL oGpa, «i TeTEepavTar TO TAHOE Ta oToLxeia (Sel yap iodcew pa, @f memép > my xe yup Ta évavtia Kal pn elvar ey adtdv amepovr. «i yap dtwody / a Aelmeran 1) Oarépov adparos dtvams, POapjoerar bro Tod ameipov TO TeTEpacpEevov: ekaoTov 8 dmeipov eivat advvaror, cya ydp éor. 7d mdvTn exov didoTacw, ameipoy Se Td amepdvtws duectyKds, dor el Td Amepoy cHya, TavTH eoTaL BA ION A iN Nae a 3 td Sy ot. i) dmeipov) ovde ev d& kal dmAoby évdéxeras TO Areipov eivar copa, O08 ws A€yoval TwWes, Tapa Ta oTOLXEla e€ OF yevYdot Tatra (ovK ear. yap To.dTo Toya Tapa Ta oToLyela amay

1066” 11-21, cf. 204* 20-32 21-26, cf. 204°34-—)8 26-36, cf. 204> 10-24 36 — 1067° 7, cf. 204” 32 — 2058 7

Yio 7 EJT@: i AY 12 oruovy avrod EJT®: avrod oriody AP 15 despa EJT@: dei duatpera AP 16 yap] & Christ dépos anp pépos AYT® Phil.l¢ Simpl.¢: pépos dnp aépos EJ 19 « EJT®: om. A? 21 ro] rovT 22 0 ovd ev AP 24 000] ovr’ EJ 27 oloy verevat J éora. EJT@EL: gore ®F Phil. Them.: é A> 28 ei EJT@: erewmep A” 29 omocmovy SE et ut vid. Simpl. : éroaotv APSF Phil. 33 ciom. EJT® 34 d€ om. AP

ca ATS: om. EJ 7d A» Phil.: om. EJ Simpl. Them. 36 yap EJ®: yap ro AP amay EJY-Simpl.: dravra AP

“ mn

b> (eo)

TQN META TA ®YSIKA K

yap, e& ob eori, Kal diadveras eis TobTo, od alverar d€ TovTo

1067® qapa Ta aTAa cdpara), ovde Tp odd’ GAO TY oToLYElwr

ovdey* xwpls yap Tod amepoy civat ti. atrdv, addvarov ef = / AN S A / Fee

TO Gnay, Kdv memepacpévor, 7 elvar } ylyveoOat Ey Tu

a’tév, domep ‘Hpdkderrés pnow travra ylyvecOat more

nop. 6 & adrds Adyos kal emi rod évds 6 ToLodor Tapa

a ° 14

Ta oTolxeia of gvotkol: av yap peraBddrAa e€ evayriov, Mie > a“ 5 / x \ > \ at , ofoy é€xk Oepyod els Woypdv.—éere TO alaOnroy copa Tov, he 94 , o \ e 5 a Y 5) > kal 6 avrdos témos bAov Kal poplov, oloy ths yns, aor eb SS © id Sah x xX PN y) a a Ss fey Opmoedés, axlyynrov eorat 7 adel olcOnoeTat, TovTo Oe

advvarov (ri yap paddov Kdtw 7 dvw 7) dmovoty; ofop el BGXos ein, Tod attn Kunhoerar 7 pevels 6 yap Toms Tod ovyyevots avty cépatos admeiposs Kabéfer ody Tov dAov Tomov; Kal mos; Tis ody 7 pov Kal 7 Kivyots; 7) Tavrayod pevet — ov KiwnOjoerar dpa, 7) TavTaxod Kwwn- Ojoerat — ovK dpa orncerat) ef 8 dvdpoioy Td wav, avoporor

MS c / \ cal Ss mn & \ lal lel \ 5 ’ kal ol Tomo, Kal mpOTov pey ovx ev TO TOya TOD TavTos AAA \ a XN / a) BN ) TO anrecOa, cira 7) meTepacpeva tabr ~orar 7) drewpa elder. mTeTEpacpeva pev ody ody ody Te (ora yap Ta per hl \ ’ » ,’ \ a BA @ fol XN fd dimepa ta 8 ov, ef TO Tay dreipor, oloy Tip 7 Bdwp:

x \ \ n~ tal . / > > Se oO o pPOopa d& Td To.odroy Trois evayrios): el & dmeipa Kal ama, kal ot tdmou depo. kat eorar dmeipa arotxeiar el Oe

an , is ft tobdr’ advvaroy Kal of Tomo. TenmEpacpEevol, Kal TO TAY avayKn memrepavOa. ddws 6 ddvvaroy dmeipov elvar cOpua kal al 3 al a \ 13

Témov Tols ceuacw, ef Tav copa alaOnrov i) Bdapos exe BY i BN SS BN Ny t ey) ? , 27 ) Koupdrnta: 7) yap em TO pecov 7) avw oicOncera, adv-

\ Nig BY ta BN Ne € a varoy 6€ TO AmEipoy 7 TaVv 1 TO HuLtov OTOTEpOVOdY TE- / fat S al \ la feng ed / \ TovOévarr mas yap diedeis; 7) TOs Tod amelpov ~orat Td

1067% 7-20, cf. 205% 10-25 20-23, cf. 205% 29-32 23-33, cf. 205 24 — 206*7

537 ov... rotropr. EJT@: Sv... tradra AY 10679 I rapa AP@: wept EJT Tov] te rév EJT Phil.) 12 rov cuyyevovs atry (adrns EPhil.*) ©: avrns tov ovyyevods codd, T 13 tpdrov E} 7 EJ Phil: om. AP ~~) EJ@: om, AP 14 kunOnoerar EJ; kunoerat AP kun Onoerat E®: om, JAYT 18 cidec om. Vp: E Temepag peva EJ Phill: kat wemepaopéeva A 19 ef EJT@; 7) AY 21 aretpa rd otoxeia EJ® 24 i) EJT@: om. AP 26 Huo

EJT@: fuov 7 A 27 dvéAns AY To pey EJTS: om. A

10. 10666 37 —11. 1067 18

, x a an Mev katw 7d 8 dvw, 7) €oxatov Kal pécov; eri Tay copa aic@nrov év témm, térov Se eldn &&, dddvvaroy 8 ev Td anelpo odpat. tadr eivat. dros 8 ef dddvvatoy Tdmov 30 x” a amepov ecivat, Kal cGua advvarov: TO yap év Tém@ Tov, a x XN \ a lal tovro € onpaiver } dvw 7 Kato 7) TOY AoiTeY TL, TOUTWY ’ & €xaoroy mépas Ti. 1O 8 admeipov ov radrov ev peyeber X v4 \ fi « "A / , \ \ A Kal KWWHoEL Kal xpovm ws pla Tis vats, dAAG TO boTeE- pov A€yeTa Kara TO mpdTEpov, olov Kivnows KaTa TO péye- 35 ta xX a BY Bos ef ov kuvetrar 1 GAdowwdrar 7) avGerar, yxpovos de bud THY Kivnow. 11 MeraBddrder 8€ TO petaBddAov TO pevy KaTa cvp- 1067 , ore d€ TL TO Kivoby mpOrov: oT. d€ TL TO KiWotpevoy, ETL ev @ / ‘ > a \ ? ic4 A > 4 \ x‘ / \ xpévm kal e€& ob xal els 6. Ta 8 edn Kal Ta TAOn Kal 6 témos, eis & Kivobvtat Ta Kwodpeva, aklyynta eotw, oloy 2 /, \ 4 Da 2 > € , 7 = > emoTHMN Kal Oepudrns' EoTL 0 ovX 7 Depyorns Kivnows AAA X\ » O€ppavors. 1% S& pa) Kara cupBeBynKds petaBodr ovK ev dmacw wtmdpxer add’ ev ois evaytiows kal peragd kal év avtipdacer: tovrov de miorTis ex THs emaywyns. peTa- / BY Bddrder Se 1d peraBdddrdov 7 e& BroKepevov els broKel- 15 x > > € J > > ¢€ v x € Hevov, 7» ovK @& troKeysevov els ovx broKelyevor, 1) e& br0- Keuevov eis odx broKelyevoy, 7) odK e& HmoKepévov els br0- ke(uevov (Agyw d5& troxefuevov 1d Katapdoer dndovpevor),

1067* 33-37, cf. 207? 21-25 by-9, cf. Phys. v. 224%21-P1 9-12, cf. 224? 11-16 12-14, cf. 224> 28-30 14 — 1068» 15, cf. 225% 3 — 226° 16

207? 21-25 by-9, cf. Phys. v. 224%21-P1 9-12, cf. 224? 11-16 12-14, cf. 224> 28-30 14 — 1068» 15, cf. 225% 3 — 226° 16

28 cdpa aicOnroy APP: aicOnriv copa EJT 32 d€ EJT@: dé 6) AP 35 76 alt. om. AP 36 xpdvo T b2 Badicew EAE 5 ri kal 0 av’ro mporov EJT 6 rom. i 7 de pr. AP®;: ney EJT 8 déalt.om.E eémuéevg EJT@: evr AY Q 6 xpdvos if: xpdvos Christ ra alt. AP Simpl. Them. : om. EJ 16 i) ovk... 18 O€ broKeipevoyv EJTS: om, AP

2673°2 : H

TQN META TA @YSIKA K

aor dvayxn tpeis evar petaBodds: 4 yap e€ obx bmoKxe-

20 pévov eis pi UroKelpevoy ox eat. peTaBody: ote yap évay-

4 LA > sf t > 4 > >. /, 4 s EA >

tla ovre dvtipacis éotw, Sri obK dvrifeots. ~7]) pe ObY OvK

€£ broxeisévov els inoxeipevov Kat avtipacw yéveois eorw,

Tal, GAA Gpws GAnOes einely OTL UaapyeL TO py OV KaTG

To} ytyvopevov Gmh@s) dpoiws be Kal TO npeveiv. Tadra

25 Te 67) ovpBaiver dbvoxepy, Kal ei Tay TO KWotpevoy ey TOT,

70 6& pa Gv ovK Eat ev Témw ein yap Gy Tov. ovbe dH 7

pbopa Kivgoss evaytiov yap Kunoe Kivnow 7 Tpeputa,

1068* POopa be yevéoe. enel 6€ aaca Kivnows petaBodn Tis,

petaBodal b€ Tpeis ai elpnpevar, Tovrwy @ ai Kara yeve-

ow kal POopay od kuwicets, atta & cic ai Kar dvtipa-

> x 3 © , ? € F 3

ow, avayKn Thy e€ troxeyévov cis broKeipevoy kivnow evar

4 § > -« 4 a - s 2 “ad 4 > t a. > / 3 , Px Se cal 4 ¥ s f pnOev eivar ovoig évavrioy, ovde Tob zpds Tt (€oTt yap Oar€épov

D21 Ort ovk avribecis ante ote 1, 20 ponenda ci. Bonitz 23 ries is recc. Ti: ris tds EJAYS 24 npev...257risom.T dry om. AP 24-25 tis twds AP 27 ovr. EJT®: om. AP 29 dy om, Ap 30 10 JT Them.: yap7ré EA*T® 34 tabra Jaeger 35 tre EJOFH: de A*SE Jaeger: om. rel 36 7 A®®: om. EJ 106842 8 aiEJT@: b€y7 A> 5 4 pr.EJT@: om.A® 7 yopvdr] tuphov i: Woxpéy ci. Bonitz vobov| hevxov APS kaito péhay EJ 9 tO et 7 EJTS: om. A 7 tert. om. AP Il rot] 76 OFHI Phil. : om. EJT®E Simpl.!

II, 10675 19 — 12, 1068» 2

rel 36 7 A®®: om. EJ 106842 8 aiEJT@: b€y7 A> 5 4 pr.EJT@: om.A® 7 yopvdr] tuphov i: Woxpéy ci. Bonitz vobov| hevxov APS kaito péhay EJ 9 tO et 7 EJTS: om. A 7 tert. om. AP Il rot] 76 OFHI Phil. : om. EJT®E Simpl.!

II, 10675 19 — 12, 1068» 2

peraBaddXovtos pi) GAnbeverOar Odtrepov pndev peraBdddor, @ore Kata ovpBeBynkos 7) kivnois adttGv), ovde ToLodyTos BY a Kal maoXovTos, 7) KiWOodvTOs Kal Kivoupévov, Ort ovK eaoTL Kunoews Kivnois ovde yeverews yeveois, ovd GAws pera- lod , lal x > a V4 J fe Bodns petaBodn. d1xGs yap evdéxeTtar Kiwynoews evar kt- * a mow, 7 ws droKepevov (olov 6 GvOpwmos kivelrar Ori ex Aevkod els pedAay petaBddrAe, wore otrw kal H kivyois 7 a BN / BY , 5) / BN + nm Oeppaiverar 7 WoxeTar 7 Témoy GdAdTTEL 7) aveTar TodTO \ 2s / > xX fal € -, € vA DN d& dddvvaroy: od yap Tov timoKeevwv TL peTaBodn), 7 ban d 4 13 VA o) lod / > T®) €TEPOY TL UTOKEiwEevoy EK peTaBoANs peraBadrdrew eis dAdo eldos, olovy dvOpwmov ex vécov eis tylevav. GAN ovde tobro duvaroy TAY Kata ovpBeBynkds. aca yap kivnows €€ GAdov els GAAO éorl peraBodryn, Kat yéveois Kal POopa acatrws Any at pev eis dvtixelueva wdl, 7 8 Gdl, 7 Kivyots. da ovy peraBddrdrdgc e& tyrelas eis vooov, Kal @& adrijs Tavrns THs peTaBorAns els GAAnv. dHArov by Ori dv voojon, \ * ¢ a > / \ ? la peTaBeBrAnkos ora els Smovavody (evddyerar yap Tpepetv) kal éru els pay tiv Tvxotcay dei KaKelvn &k Tivos els Tt GAO €oTta dol 7 dvtikeruevn ora, bylavois, GAAG TO oupBeBnkevar, ofov e€ dvapvjoews cis AYO 5 KPEPN 2 €€ avayvnoews ets AnOnv pera- Badrsa bre @ trapxer exeivo peraBddrdrAE, dre pev els 2 /, © be BA wy > DA La} eo] émothnuny ore d€ els Ayvovavy.—eri els Gmepov Badvetras, «i ba Led ‘\ S / ts > €orat peTaBoAns peTtaBody Kal yeveoews yéveois. dvdyKyn 87) Kal tiv mporépay, el m7 borepar olov ei amAq yéveors éylyverd mote, Kal TO yryvopevoy eylyvero: GoTe ovTH A 4, : n > lA Ve BY , qv TO ytyvopevoy aTAGS, GAAG TL yeyvouevov [i] yryvdpevov 12 peraBaddovros py ut vid, Al. Them., Schwegler: peraSad-

Novros pndev A: pnbev peraBaddovros EJT: peraBaddovros if Simpl. : peraBaddortos pnkére ci. Christ pndev EJT@: pndé AP 14 kai

pr. EJT@®: 7 A> 15 peraBodjs peraBory APT Simpl.¢: peraBody petaBorns E]® 16 ciyat know EJT®: kivnow etva A? 23 dmact AP yap] yap 7 AP 25 e€& avriketpevov JT 78

oi AP Simpl. : 7 ®di EJT Phil, @E?: om, ®@FHI — 4p xivnows APOE Simpl.: 7 d€ kivnows GH: 7 6€ kivnows ody dpoiws PFI: ov Kuyoes Ejr 27 o KIL voont E+ 28 €v 6motaody T an ovK éevdéxerar? 30 é€ora alt. om. EJ Simpl.°® 33 dyvoray Smith, legerunt ut vid. Phil. Simpl.: iyievay codd. Te 35 yeveots eyty- verd EJT®: yévero AP DY éyiyvero EJT®: dads eyltyvero AY 270... 3 40n] 748n Al.: dn adda yeopevoy ny yuwopevoy 75n yp. Al. : ywopevoy amdOs adda Te yuvopevov dn PH yp. Al. yp. Simpl. room. EJ re yeyvopevov yeyvopevoy Bonitz: re yryvopevoy f yevdpevov E: te yeyvopevov dmdas i yevopevov JT: re yeyvdpevoy kal yeyvopevoy OF I: yeyvipevor re i) yuvdpevoy AP: yeyvdpevov To BE : ywdpevoy ci, Asp. : H 2

1068)

a |

Al. : ywopevoy amdOs adda Te yuvopevov dn PH yp. Al. yp. Simpl. room. EJ re yeyvopevov yeyvopevoy Bonitz: re yryvopevoy f yevdpevov E: te yeyvopevov dmdas i yevopevov JT: re yeyvdpevoy kal yeyvopevoy OF I: yeyvipevor re i) yuvdpevoy AP: yeyvdpevov To BE : ywdpevoy ci, Asp. : H 2

1068)

a |

TON META TA ®YSIKA K, A

EA \ Cotte Je bts i2 , ed 3 iS > , , non. Kal todr éylyverd more, Gor ovK Iv TH TOTE yryvd- pevov. emel d€ TOV admelpwy obK EoTL TL TPOTOV, OvK + \ cas ev ’ Or \ 3 ‘A EA 7 co 5 €oTaL TO TpOToV, Bor ovde TO exdspevov. ovTE ylyverOar ody ovre Kweicbat oldv Te obre peraBdddAew ovdév. ETL TOD adrod nA € * / \ b] / 3 mK / \ knows 7 evavtia Kal npeunots, kal yéveots Kal Oopd, Sore TO yryvouevov, Grav yevntar yryvduevoy, Tore POelpe- + \ 39 4 +? a tal Tau ovre yap evdds ytyvopevov ov Bortepov civar yap det 1070 Oeipopevov. ere Sel TAnv treivar TO ylyvouev@ Kal pow . 0 Pry OEE: oN n x metaBdddovtt. Tis ody ora, domep TO GAAOWwWTOY copa 7 XN Wox — otra ri rd yuyvdmevov kivynois 7) yéveots; Kat ere Th eis 0 KwodvTar; de yap elva Thy Todde Ex Todde els TddE K n a / nr know 7) yeveow. Ts odv; ov yap eorat paOnots Ths / o Pp) IOr / / 3 \ > vy 9 a pe! «: PA 15 MaOnoews, WoT ovde yevEots yeveTews. ETELO OUT OvValaS OTE Tod mpds TL ovre rod Tovey Kal macyxew, AelmeTaL KaTa TO mowv Kal moody Kal témoy klynow civar (rovTwy ydp €Exda- 3 6 x / S \ os td Ae fel a, oT évavtiwcis éotw), A€yw 58 TO Toy ov Td ev TH ovola (kal yap % Stadopd mov) adda 7d TabyTiKdv, Kal” 6 / I a b) \ 5 \ Se eee ,

20 A€yeTal Taoxew 7 anabes eivat. TO Se akivntov TO TE ddws advvarov KkwyOfvar Kal TO pddts ev xpdv@ TOAAG 7} Wen Me Xpovg | Bpadéws apyduevov, kal rd TepvKds pev KivetoOa Kal dvvdwevov (ur Kwotpevov) d& Gre TépuKe Kal ob Kal ds: 6 KANG npewety TGV GxwyTwv pdovov' evavrtoy yap npesla

25 KWHoEL, Bote oTepyors av ein TOO dexriKod.

1068» 15-20, cf. 2268 23-29 20-25, cf. 226» 10-16

>3 #dyn Ab: ei 6) EJT tore EJT@: more AP an yyvdpevor

yeyvojevov 2 4 rtom. EJ Simpl. 4-5 ovk €orat 70 mpOroy EJT@: om. AP Simpl. 5-6 ovv avrat ovre E?* 7 yéveots EJTS: 1 yeveors AP 9 yryvopevoy EJ®: yevdpevoy APT: an yryvdpevoy yeyvopevoy ? I2 ovrw om. J ri JA°@F Simpl.: te T: re (sed

erasum) cai E: 5) @1 — kivnows EJTS: Fy Kinois AP aly yéveous JT érvom. EJY: rdkw® 13 ri] tetiy EJTS | 14 7) yeveoww PE?HI Al. Simpl. : pw) know codd.T yp. AL: xat py konow SE!: py kimow ) yeveow ®F : pu) Kivnow ams Lasson ris pabnoews, Sor ovdey yéeveors yp. J: om. J ths pabnrews| 7 THS paOnoews yéeveots AP 15 yevécews yéveois PEF I Simpl.° Phil. : ris yevéeoews AP 17 kal pr.] kai 76 AP Simpl. Them. 70 mov JT@ 19 yap JT®: yap kat E: om. A> 7 Scapopa EJT® : rH dtapopa AP Kad’? 0B: Kado codd. 21 poys AP =) AP Simpl. Them.: om, EJT 22 7d] émJ kal... 23 d€ B®: py Suvdpevoy dé codd. T 23 méuke A>: om. EJT

12. 1068) 3 --- 1. 1069% 20

: ris yevéeoews AP 17 kal pr.] kai 76 AP Simpl. Them. 70 mov JT@ 19 yap JT®: yap kat E: om. A> 7 Scapopa EJT® : rH dtapopa AP Kad’? 0B: Kado codd. 21 poys AP =) AP Simpl. Them.: om, EJT 22 7d] émJ kal... 23 d€ B®: py Suvdpevoy dé codd. T 23 méuke A>: om. EJT

12. 1068) 3 --- 1. 1069% 20

UN xX / =) CeAN , , s ‘ ba kara témoy doa ev evi TOTH TPOTH, Kal Xwpis doa év Gddw GmrecOar d& Sv Ta akpa Guar peragd 8 a a ‘ els 0 mepuke TpdTepov AdikvetoOar TO peTaBddAdov 7 Eis a lal 0 €oxaTov petaBddd\e. Kata iow 7d ovvexds peTa- 4 2 “4 \ , SN ’ b) tay Cee A a Baddov. evaytloy Kata témov TO Kat evOclay améxov TAét- la} io a‘ \ arov é€fs d& of pera Ti apxnv dvtos, Oéoe: 7) elder 1) GA- > / \ 7 > n 5 2A hos Twos aopicbévros, pnOevy petakd eotr Tdv ev TaITs , @ ie A aan , yévet Kal ob edefns eoriv, oiov ypaupal ypayphs 7) povd- BN des povddos 7 oikias vikia (4AAo 8 odOey KwAver peragd a \ \ ef \ 2 Ke Ne t > Ss \ eivat). TO yap é€ijs twos eefs kal Uorepdv Tu ov yap TO a e¢o a / 9) € 4 a / bees ev €€fs tav dvo ovd 7 vovpnvia Ths devtépas. eydopevov A x fal A (al ~ d€ 0 ay E€fs Ov Gmarnra. eémel 5& Taca peraBoAn ev Tots avTikemevois, Tadra d€ Ta evaytia Kal dvtipacis, dyti- i. a a pacews 8 ovdey ava péoov, djdAov ws ev Tots evayrios Td merakv. TO dé ovvexes Sep exduevdv TL €eyw de ovvexes drav TavTo yevnrar Kal ev TO Exarépov Tépas ols antovrTa kal ouvéxovtar, wate dfdov bru TO ouvexés ev Tovrols e€& av & tu Tépuxe ylyverOar Kara Tiv civayw. Kal drt mpOtov TO edegfs, SpAov (TO yap epeEhs ovx anrerat, toro 0 éeéns: Kal ei ouvexés, dmrera, ei 8 Anrerat, » VA 2 i X \ Ba c / > x 4 ovmw ovvexes: ev ols 6& pH Cot Ady, odK EoTL THuvaols év tovrous) or ovK éoTL oTLypyn povdds Tadrdv: Tals pev \ a » NS n yap tmdpxer TO dnrecOa, rails o ov, GAAG TO ede€iss Kat TOV pev peradd TL TOV 0 ov.

A Tlept ris ovcias 7 Oewpia: Trdv yap ovoidy al dpyxal kal Ta altia CyrodyTa. Kali yap ef ws 6dov TL TO Tay, 7) ovoia mpOtov pépos: Kal «i TO ee€is, Kav oUTws TpOTOV

26-30, cf. 226 21-25 30 — 10698 14, cf. 226 32 — 227% 31

b26 €v EJT®: om. AP rporm EJT Simpl.: mpdrov AY 27 dé EJT@®: om. A 29 room, EJ® 33 ob EJT@: o AP epeEns A>: é€fs EJ 35. revos| rwi Ab® 1069? 2 Oy anrnra EJTOFI Them. : avdmrnra A emel... 5 peraév ante pera€v 1068? 27 interp. Them., ante évavriov 1068 30 ponenda ci. Prantl 3 Ta EXJGE: tra 7 E°@F HI: om. AP 5 tt. Aéyw EJT®: re 7 drrépevov. éyerar AP 9 édesns alt. et 10 efeEns APB: Eis EJ 13 70 alt. AP®: mpos ro EJT 20 r@ EJT ALS; ro AP kav] kat EJ

TQN META TA ®YSIKA A

ad 333 cia, €iTa TO ToWY, EiTa TO TocdV. Gpa be ovd GrTa

Prantl 3 Ta EXJGE: tra 7 E°@F HI: om. AP 5 tt. Aéyw EJT®: re 7 drrépevov. éyerar AP 9 édesns alt. et 10 efeEns APB: Eis EJ 13 70 alt. AP®: mpos ro EJT 20 r@ EJT ALS; ro AP kav] kat EJ

TQN META TA ®YSIKA A

ad 333 cia, €iTa TO ToWY, EiTa TO TocdV. Gpa be ovd GrTa

= 3 x , - f a @s einely GmAGs tadra, GAAa ToLWTHTES Kal KUOES, 7 kal TO ov AevKoy Kal TO ovK evOd- A€yopev yoor civat Kal tabra, otoy éoTw ov Aevxdv. Eri ovdevy Tov GAAwY YwpioTOD. _ ‘ “ £3 o x ot a DS a Py as 25 mapTupotar b€ Kal of Gpxaio. épye Tis yap ovoias eGjrov _ @pxas Kal orotxeia Kal ait. of pev ow viv Ta Kabodov ovolas padrAov riléacw (ra yap yevn Kabddov, & hacw Gpxas kal ovoias elvar paddrov bia 76 AoyiGs yreiv) 6 waAat 7a Kal? Exacta, olov zip Kai yijv, GAN ov TO 3° Kooy, cGua. ovola be Tpeis, pia perv aicOyr— Ts 7 x -~ a pev Gidios 7 5 POaprh, qv aavTes 6uodroyodow, oloy Ta guta xal ra Ga [fh & aidws|— fs aGvayxn Ta oroyeia AaBeiy, cite vy cite wodAAG: GAAn 8 Gxivytos, Kal Tav- tTyv gaci twes civar xwpioThy, ot pev eis bvo bvarpoorres, 35 ot 6@ eis play diow rtiWértes Ta edn Kal Ta polnpariKd, ot 6& Ta pabnpariKa povoy TotTwr. éxeivar pev bn Gv-

rol ,

1069 oixjjs (wera Kujoews yap), airy de érépas, ei pndepia avrois Gpx7 Kown.

‘H & aic@nry ovoia peraBanry. ~ > tf 4 lad 4 3 * x %. €k TOY diTikeevov 7 TOV perakl, arTixemsévor bE pH

f > 4 BS s = >

3 mdvTov (ov Aevkoy yap 7% wry) GAX éx Tod évarriov, Gvaykn wneivai te To yserafadAoy els tiv évavtiocw oF

‘4 ‘ 3 s Fd at . x [3 t a % yap Ta evavTia peraBddAArAc. ert TO pev tropevet, TO 6 évavtiov ovx tropéver: Eotw Spa 71 Tpirov mapa Ta évay-

5 4 tia, % DAn. ef 8) at peraSodal zérrapes, 7] KaTa TO TL 3 4 > > 4 cou 107] KaTa TO TOioY 7) TécOY 7] TOD, Kal yeveois pev OmAq kai Oopa 7% Kata rode, avégows b€ Kal Pbicw 7% Kara TO wocov, GdAoiwois be KaTa TO wdBos, Popa bE 7

421 cira 70 alt. AP AL: 4 EJT 22 amhas cixew AT Tavra Ejr Ale; Tahha Aby YP. E Them. dda codd.T et ut vid. Them.: oiov Al. 4 J ALe: 7 EAT Them. 23 70 alt. A® AL: om. EJ 23-24 your Kat Tavra eivar AP 29 &xasra AP ALE: éxagroy Fj 30 is cael ei Spohoyoiow] 7 iv mavres 6po. meget s iis 4 pev Pbapry Als iy ee 6pohoyotaty, is 1) pev aibvos 7 Them. 32 4 cites codd. PAL, yp. Al. apud petit om. Them. Al. apud Averroem 33 Kai A» Al.:om.EJT 34 Ties etvat pact AP 35 pabnparixa of be ra A*T Al: pabnparia ot Be in marg. J: om. E 36 pabyrixa J b3 7 at] 3 5 yap xai 7 Essen 7 petraBarew E* 9 To sup. | ln. E Il 4 pr. om. EJ ALe 12 ro pr. sup. lin. E~ 6opa EJ*

I. 1069% 21 — 3. 107027

XX , > 3 iz Xx > X\ +) a t Kata Tomor, «is evaytidces dy ciev Tas Kad’ Exacroy ai petaBodrat. dvaykn 87) peraBadArAcw Thy Any dvvayevnv Gudew emel 5 durrdov 7d ov, peraBadAer Tay éx Tod dv- 15

| ln. E Il 4 pr. om. EJ ALe 12 ro pr. sup. lin. E~ 6opa EJ*

I. 1069% 21 — 3. 107027

XX , > 3 iz Xx > X\ +) a t Kata Tomor, «is evaytidces dy ciev Tas Kad’ Exacroy ai petaBodrat. dvaykn 87) peraBadArAcw Thy Any dvvayevnv Gudew emel 5 durrdov 7d ov, peraBadAer Tay éx Tod dv- 15

, yy > X 3 wv b> > nN I > vamet Ovtos eis TO evepyeia ov (ofov éx AevKod duvdpuer eis \ TO évepyeia AevKdv, duolws Se Kal ew ad&joews Kal POi- Ld > , x \ DI] f 3 Tews), @OTE OV pdvOY KaTa oUpBEBynKos evdéxeTar yiyverOat 2) x y b x \ 2 x 7 , 4 €k pa) Ovtos, GAAA kal e& dvtos yiyverar marta, dvva- / ¥ 3 ‘ y \ 3 tf % nA) fet pevTot OvTos, ek pr) ovTos dé evepyeia. Kal Todr’ ~ort 20 x n TO Avagaydpou év: BéAtiov yap 7) “‘ 6408 mavtTa” — kal ’Ep- medoxA€ous TO plypa Kal “Avakimavdpov, cat ws Anpo- , ae € a / f > , > ¥ >)? ” Kpirés pnow—“‘ jv duod Tavta duvdpet, evepyeia 8 ov” Hore Les oa 2» > a 7 4 THs VAns ay elev nupevor’ TmavTa 5 Any Exe Ooa pera- Baddvet, GAN Erépavy Kal Tdv didioy boa pi) yevyTa 25 Kwyta d& opa, GA’ od yevyntiv GAda Tobey Toi. az0- pyoee 8 dy tis ex rolov pr dvTos ) yeveoiss TpixGs yap

BN % yy 3 / ¥ , > #7 > cal ,

TO pa) OV. et Oy TL Core Suvapmet, GAN Spyws ov Tod TXOr- 2 > a > Loe 253 € ‘ of c col Ul tos GAN €Erepoy e& Erepov ovd txavdyv dri dyod TavTa

, , \ ae 4

Xpymara: dvapepe. ydp 7H An, wet Sid Ti Ameipa éeyé€- 30 > > > >] ~. c 4 4 veto GAN’ odx €v; 6 yap vods eis, dor ei Kai 7 BAn pla,

b ~ oR 4 > rg La eg A 4 x x

exelvo éyeveto evepyeia ov 7 DAn jv Svvaye. tpia dy) Ta airia xal tpeis at adpxai, d0o pey H evartiwos, 7s TO

> , © = 4 X / \ > 3 =.

pev Adyos Kal cidos TO Se oTépyots, TO Se Tpirov 7 BAy. \ = C4 > 7. ¥ Sy BA \ = 3 Mera ratra bre ov yiyverat ovre 7) DAN ovTE TO Eidos, 35 eyo 8 Ta EoyaTa. Tay yap petaBadrer Th Kal tad ) 4 ey? Be f a , _ aA a € Twos Kal els Tu bp od pev, TOD TpeTov KwWodvTos: D dé, 7) 1070% oe > a , Any AN ? x > > > ~ , BAn> cis 5 Se, TO cidos. eis Amepoy ody etowy, el fur) Udvoy 6 xadkds yiyverat orpoyytAos GAG Kal Td otpoyytdov x c , ee! rs cad \ a 4 Cee A 7» 6 xaAKds> avdyxn di) ornvat.— peta tratra Gri Exaory ek ovwervdpov ylyvetatovcia (ra yap voc ovola xals5 Ta GAAa). 7 yap Téxyn 7 ioe ylyverar 7} Tixn 7) TO me ¥SP TEXYH 1 Vly BUX I ee

€

> id X > , > XX 2 ¥ 34 To alt.... Ay om. J! 1070* I te] rt Kat eGod Ab djouJ 4 5€ Goebel 5 ovoia EJ Al.: 7 ovoia A

TQN META TA ®YSIKA A

7 yap Téxyn 7 ioe ylyverar 7} Tixn 7) TO me ¥SP TEXYH 1 Vly BUX I ee

€

> id X > , > XX 2 ¥ 34 To alt.... Ay om. J! 1070* I te] rt Kat eGod Ab djouJ 4 5€ Goebel 5 ovoia EJ Al.: 7 ovoia A

TQN META TA ®YSIKA A

> aS b) ee oY \ BA a 4 Ss apx) é€v atrdo (dvOpwmos yap dvOpwmov yevva), ai be \ } aay 4 / (4 SRE X a € aS ef Aowral airiar orepyoes TovTwy. ovoia. dé Tpels, 7 wey VAN , on an r/ a \ 3 lol \ \ to TddE TL ovoa TH aiverOar (boa yap apf Kal pa ovp- € / / dice, trn Kal droxelpevov), % S& vos Téde TL Kal e > A oy 4 A 2 es / « > e eis tis eis que ere tpitn ex-TevTwy 7 Kal’ ekaora, o x n ofov Swxpdrns 7 KaddAlas. emi pev oty twey To Tdde TL > + X mS ‘\ > 4 e Paes ‘\ AS ’ ovK &oTL Tapa THY ouVOeTiV ovolay, otoy oikias TO Eidos, et 15 MI) TexVN (oS eorr yéveots Kal POopa Tov’Twy, aAN GA- 4 pe,’ \ > Lean. > et I > ? 4 Ns n - tyleca Kal nav TO Kata Téxvyv), GAN elmep, ent Tov Pv- ce 810 OH OF KaxGs TlAdrwv edn bru eldn €orw dmdca pices, einep Eorw e€ldn Grd Totrwv *oiov rip capE Kepadn: ef CS o 5) , \ fal fe > Sa € 7 OK 20 UTavTa yap VAn €oTl, Kal THS paAdLoT ovolas 7» TeAEvTALA”. Ta pev ody KivodvTa alria ws mpoyeyeynueva ovta, Ta O c c , d ig \ € 7 c A , \ as 6 Adyos dua, bre yap byiatver 6 arOpwmos, Tore Kal 9 byleva €otiv, Kal TO oxHpa THS Xadkns ohalpas dua Kat ) XaAKh odaipa (el be Kal Borepdy Ti bmopever, oKEeMTEOY" 5 Pa > iN XOX uA e i Xe XN fal ZN 25em evlwoy yap ovdey KwdrVvel, oloy et 7) Wuxi] ToOLodTOY, [A = 2 > i la lal > baNwA y \ maca GAN 6 vods' macav yap ddvvarov tows). davepov x lal an dn bre ovdey del did ye Tadr civar Tas ideas: dvOpwros me x a ¢ > d \ / € S yap avOpwrov yevvd, 6 Kal’ Exacrov rov Twa dpolws de kal émt Tov TexvOv: 1 yap larpiKi) TExVvN 6 Adyos Tijs byvelas 30 eoTiv. Ta 0 air Kal at dpyal dda dddwy éoTw ds, eoTL 4 8 os, av Kadddov héyn Tis Kal Kar’ dvadoylav, Taira XN TavToV. amopnoee yap ay Tis TOTEpoy ETEpar 7) al avral apxal Kat oro.xela Tdv ovoidy Kal TOV mpds TI, Kat Kal?

28 avrg recc.T: air@ EJ : éavr@ A? dvOpwros ... yevva ad 1. 5 pertinere censuit Al. : an ex Il. 27, 28 inserta? 10 ovcia JT yap EX] Ale: ydp éorw E?AT IL vats kai rdde AP kal - +. 12 qv iet fort. Al.: els qv Kat es tus Codd. T'Al.¢: oda Kat efits ms Bullinger 12 7 alt.] 7 Kai AP 13 t7om. EJT 16 Te om. EJ 18 6) om. A> TlAdrov éfn EJ Al.: 6 Wddrev py AP: of ra etdn riOépevor Epacav Al. apud Averroem et ut vid. Them. 19 @dAa APT AL: dkda EAP Al. apud Averroem : dAdov J: did ¥ ov Christ ofov... 20 redevraia post iroketpevoy 1. 11 ponenda vidit Al. 19-20 xedhadn, arava vAn Al. apud Averroem 23 et 257 om. AP 28 Kabéxacros A» 29 6om. AP Al. 30 €otiv EJ© Al. : om. AP 31 ra 8'] €ore O€ ra AP = tat APAL! — fgrrey és om. AP 32 Aéyor AP 33 mavrov EJT Al.: mavtra AP yap] & Jr

3. 107088 — 4. 1070? 28

11 ponenda vidit Al. 19-20 xedhadn, arava vAn Al. apud Averroem 23 et 257 om. AP 28 Kabéxacros A» 29 6om. AP Al. 30 €otiv EJ© Al. : om. AP 31 ra 8'] €ore O€ ra AP = tat APAL! — fgrrey és om. AP 32 Aéyor AP 33 mavrov EJT Al.: mavtra AP yap] & Jr

3. 107088 — 4. 1070? 28

Chats X\ a a ¢ 4 b) > » > JS exaoTny Oo) TOV KaTHyopLGy Suotws. GAN Gromoy ei Tatra te n n TAaVT@V’ €k TOV a’TaY yap EoTaL TA Tpds TL Kal ab ovolaL. ve aN jes)! 9 \ \ Ss end nN ag \ Ti ovv TOUT eaTaL; mapa yap THY ovolay Kal TaAAA TA KaTN- a \ @ yopodpeva ovdév eats Kowdv, mpdrepov dé TO oToLXEloy 7) GY aToixetov? GAAG pay ovd 7 ovoia oroiyelov TGV Tpds TI, IOs U4 ION fal a eey of na b) f ovde TovTwY ovdey THs ovolas. ETL TOS evdexeTAL TAVTMV evar TavTa oToLXELa; ovdey yap oldy T civat TY oToOLXElwY A , \ ieee ® fal \ x T@® €K oTOLXElwv TVYKELMEVO TO avTO, olov T@ BA ro BH A “ a n a @ By XK ed (ovde 83) Trav vonTGv oroixeidvy eotw, ofov TO dv 7 TO ev ec £ ‘ an € v XN n / ION | ef Umdpxet yap Tadra éxdoTo Kal TéY ovvberwy). oddty dp éoraL on) x > al: BA 4 Fs cde) cad > + BA avuTév ovt ovcia ovre mpds Tu GAN dvayxKatov. ovK -€oTwW dpa Id lal \ TAVTMOY TAVTA TTOLXEla.—} woTEp A€yopuer, EoTL pev Bs, ore & as ov, oiov tows tév aicOyTGv cwoudtwv ws pev €idos TO Oepuov Kat dAdov Tpdrov Td Woxpov H oTEpyors, DAn de TO dvvdper Taira mpdrov kal? atrd, ovoia Se rabrd Te Kal See} / e b} \ a XN y 3 a ‘ a Ta €k TOUTM@Y, OV dpxal Tadra, 7 el TL ex OEpuod Kal Wuxpod ylyverat &v, olov capé 7 dototy: Erepov yap dvaykn éxelvwv elvat TO yevouevov. TovTwY ev ody Ta’TA oTOLXEla Kal apyal (GAAwy 8 GAdAa), TavTwv dé obrw pev eimelv odk Eat, TO dva- Noyov b€, Somep et tis elmou Stu apxat «lol rpets, 7d €ldos \ 2e / \ € vA vd] Pad vA ed ‘ Kal OTEpHnols Kal 7 VAN. GAA EKaCTOY TOUTWY ETEPOY TEPL if @ €xaoTov yevos éotiv, oloy ev ypepare AevKoY pédAav émL- tA nn 4 bls vi XX / ¢ / \ 4 gpavera, pos oKdros anp: ex d€ TovTwy jpepa Kal vvé. bl] a bs > , \ > wy > \ » n emet S€ OV pdvoy Ta evuTapxovtTa alria, dAAa Kal Tov extos oloy TO Kwwody, dijdov Oru erepov apxr Kal cro.xetor, ¢ ’ BA \ ’ a tal € ? , \ ’ atria & dydw, kal «is radra dvaipeirar apxy, TO 5d a Xx al s os Kwodv 7) toray dpxy Tis Kal ovoia, Bote oTorxela per ’ ° o Vg > SS ‘ > Ni f 7 kat avadoyiay tpia, aitiar o€ Kal apxal terrapes: dAdo & éy ddA, Kal Td mpOrov airy ws Kwodv dAdo adrdo. vylea, vooos, odpa 7d Kwvodv larpixy. eidos, daragia 435 57 Karyyopiay Ab 36 ra] 76 AP 7 ovaia AYT: ovata Ey D2 dy] dv éori ro EJT 6 ek APAL®: ex rav EJ TQ] TO J ula pipe i 7 an ovdey? —grotxetov EJT Al. eoTw om. Ejr Al. éy 7) ro dv EJT: dv kai 76 év Al.) 12 vAn APAL: 7 VAn EJ 13 ovoial 14 Oeppod Kat Puxpod EJTAL? Wuxpod kal Oeppod AP 15 €repov... 16 yevopevoy post Tt 1.9 ponenda ci. Al. 16 ravra ET 17 70 AP 18 etmovev A» 20 Xpopact AP 21 kai om. EJ 25 torav AY Al.

cat ovoia] ovva. EJT: kal airia ci. Bonitz pev om. J 26 aira Ab 27 mparov] munrixoy ci. Bonitz

1070”

3°

TON META TA ®YSIKA A

Wuxpod kal Oeppod AP 15 €repov... 16 yevopevoy post Tt 1.9 ponenda ci. Al. 16 ravra ET 17 70 AP 18 etmovev A» 20 Xpopact AP 21 kai om. EJ 25 torav AY Al.

cat ovoia] ovva. EJT: kal airia ci. Bonitz pev om. J 26 aira Ab 27 mparov] munrixoy ci. Bonitz

1070”

3°

TON META TA ®YSIKA A

roiadi, mAWOou TO Kwodv oixodouixy [Kal eis radra dva- tad € >) / pl \ Xx X a 3 A ™~ petra 4 apy). émel, d€ TO Kiwwodv év pev Tots dvatkois 2 , 5A b) \ ° aS 7 \ Go Xx x avOpoT@ avOpwros, év 5€ Tots a0 diavoias TO «Eidos 7) TO b) 7 4 \ 4 wy, » y eo S 4 évavtiov, tpomov Twa Tpia airia dv ein, wdl dS€ Terrapa. eg 4 , € > , \ , € ,’ U4 tylea yap mas 7 larpixy, «at olxias eidos 7 olkodoptKy, kat dvOpwnos dvOpwrov yevva: ert Tapa tadra TO os Tp@Tov TavTwY Kivody TdVTA. > x ? 3 \ \ XX \ \ ? > ! > 14 Eve 6 é€oTl Ta wey xwopita ta & ov xXwploTa, ovoia 5 éxelva. Kat did Todvro mdvTwv alria tattd, 6TL TOY OvoLoY dvev ovK €oTt Ta TAON Kalat kwhoes. eneita €oTaL Tadra an aN fal lol Wox7) tows Kal oGpua, 7) vods Kal dpe€is Kal cGua,— ert 8 addov tpdémoy TS avddoyov apxat ai avrat, otov évép- yera Kal dvvapiss GAG Kat Tatra GAAa Te GAAOIS Kal VA 5] >I SS bs \ 2 ON. OLS S >) 2 x GAdws. €v EVlOLS MEY Yap TO GUTO OTE MEV EvEpyeia EOTW eS x t e G2 BN x Le re DS dre dé Svvdper, ofoy olvos 7) cap€ 7 GvOpwmos (minrer dé kal tatra eis ta eipnueva altia: evepyela pev yap TO eidos, av 7} xwpioror, Kal TO e& dydot: tonots TE olov 5 7) XwploTor, pow, otepnols Te , x lA ! BS € 4 cat / 2 ‘ OKOTOS 7) Kapvov, Suvayer d€ 7H WAN? TOTO yap €EoTL TO f A BA v > 3 4 ‘ dvvduevoy ylyverOar dydw) GdrAdr\jws 8 evepyela Kat dv- @ x vaper diabéper Gv pj €or 7 avti bAn, Gv (eviwvr) ovk Eat TO avTd €idos GAN Erepov, BoTep avOpedmov airioy Td TE oTOL- tal a \ a € WA \ es x ‘ xela, Tip kal yh ws BAn Kal TO tduoy Eidos, Kat err TL » ” = > ‘ cal my \ oe tal ig nx ‘ Omoedes GAAG KWWodvTa. Ett S€ Opay det OTL TA pEV Ka- Oddov got cinely, TA 8 ov. TavTwY di) TpGTat apxal TO P29 Kat... 30 dpxn om. A? Al, kat &¢ eis J 31 avOpare avOpwnos Zeller: avOparos avOparos E Al. : avOpwros avOpwros et avOperos ayOperov E marg. : dvOparos (patos 32 de om. lg 33 vycia J 34 To ws ci. Bonitz: os ro codd. 36 ovcia yp. E 10719 1 éxeiva E?AY All: éxeivar EXJT kal Ejr Al.: om. A> — raira ci. Christ : ravra codd. DAI. 2 forat] eort Al, 3 i) 45:5 Capi om. Jt: : i}... oGpa, i) dpegis kai cpa fort. Al. 4 ai om, E! évépyeua so dddas 1 in marg. FE} : adore rors. Al. Them. 8 évepyeia EAL®*; evépyeta JA» TAI. 9 FEJTALS: 776 AP kat] j jyp.E Them. arépygis ... 10 kduvor damnavit Christ: orépnois re om. Them. te scripsi: d€ codd. © 11 &’ codd. rAl.: & ) Trendelenburg 12 &p éviey scripsi: ov codd. Tr Al.: kai ov be E Them. : #j &y Zeller 13 @omep... 17 kwovvra post mayta 1070? 35 ponenda ci. Christ 14 ére] ef

EjJr 17 6¢€ EJT Alt: om. AP 18 mavrwv... 19 duvdper post éorwv 1, 20 ponenda ci. Christ dé Al.¢

4. 1070 29 — 6. 1071 11

3 lol lal evepyela mpOrov rodi Kat GAdo & dude. exelva pev

Tr Al.: kai ov be E Them. : #j &y Zeller 13 @omep... 17 kwovvra post mayta 1070? 35 ponenda ci. Christ 14 ére] ef

EjJr 17 6¢€ EJT Alt: om. AP 18 mavrwv... 19 duvdper post éorwv 1, 20 ponenda ci. Christ dé Al.¢

4. 1070 29 — 6. 1071 11

3 lol lal evepyela mpOrov rodi Kat GAdo & dude. exelva pev

a fal oy Ta KaOdAov ovK Eat: apxi) yap TO Kad’ Exacroy Téy 20

bd ef ka@’ Exacrov: avOpwmos pev yap dvOpeTov Kaddov, GAN’

> ” > a ovk €oTw ovdels, AAAG IInAeds "AxwAd€ws ood S& 6 sarip,

\ \ a a ae kat Todt to B rovdt rod BA, bAws 8& ro B rod damA\Gs BA. émeira, ef 8) Ta Tov ovoimy, GAdAa Se GAAOV

oy, \ tal 1 2 , a \ en 2 / GiTla Kal oTOLXEla, WomEp EAEXON, TOV pH eV TATE yeE- a5 vel, Xpwopdrwov Wodwr ovoev Tocdryros, Thiy TO dvd- Aoyov' Kal T&v ev rabvr@ elder Erepa, ovK elder GAN Gre TOV KAW ExaoTov GAXo, } Te oH VAN Kal TO Eidos Kal TO KW gay cat 4 eur, T@ KaOddov 5& Adyw TadTd. TO dé CyTetv nx tal n an n tlves apxal 7) oroixeia Tov odoiGy Kal mpds TL Kal TOLD, 30

ig € 3 No REN lad oe a moTepov ai avral 7 €repat, SHAov Gre ToAAaXas ye deEyo- Mevov oT Exdorov, diaipeOevTwy O& ov TadTa GAN’ Erepa,

v € gy Ne A e€g\ bs ae s-Ss XN Ni 3 / 4 TAHY @dt Kal TavTwOV, @di EY TA’TA 7 TO avadoyor, OTL 4 , AN an \ et SS a > a vAn, eldos, orepnois, TO Kivodv, Kal @d. Ta TOV ovoLGV atria ws atria mavtwv, br. dvaipeirat dvaipoupevwr: ru 35

+ a b] , fe yh \ ef a 4 x TO mp@rov evtedexetg? dl be ETEepa mpGta boa Ta bp] - , « / 4 / ol / evavtia & pte ws yevn dé€yerar pate ToAd\axds déye- raw Kal ére at tAa. ives wey ody at dpyal Tév aloOnréy 1071» kal moat, Kal TOs ai avral Kal mOs Erepat, elpnrar

6 “Enel & joav tpels ovoia, dv0 pev ai gvorxal pia & dxivynros, mept radrns Aexréov Gru dvdyKn civar aldiov Twa ovotay akivynrov. al te yap ovolar mpGrar Tv dvTaY, 5 kat «i macat Oaprat, aavta pOaptd> GAN ddvvarov kivnow 7) yevérOar 7) POaphvar (det yap Hv), odd xpdvov. ov yap oldy Te TO TpdTEpov Kal torepoy eivat pi) dvTos xpo- vou: Kat » Kkivnois dpa otra ocvvexis aonep Kal 6 xpo-

x x N Seat CN be ms , 7 BI > vos* 7) yap TO abro 7) Kwhoeds TL ma00s. Klynois 8 ovK 10 x b KH € ~ 14 LY / c tA €oTt ovvexis GAN 7) 7 Kata TémoV, Kal TadTns 7 KUKAY.

219 rodt EJTAI.: 7@ cider AP: rd cider rece. 20 7a EJ Al.: om. AP 20-21 ray ka’ exaoroy EJ*T Al.: om. APJ 23 70 alt. om. EJ 24 ei dy Rolfes: ¢idn J7AP Al.: 7dn EJ'T: ra eidy Christ 6¢] an ye? 28 ray] ro Jet fecit E: oJ! rd Kevqoav kal ro eidos AP 29 roo) EAI. 31 ye Christ: re codd. 33 pev] dé AP 4 om. F? Bonitz 6 scripsi: to codd. 34 wd] érte Them. ci. Bonitz br ai alt. om. EJ 2 kal mooa bis E mos alt. om. AP 3-4 kal pia 7 JT: xai pia & 7 J? 4-5 twa didvov AP 9 apa] yap yp. E II ad’ 7 T recc.: add’ EJAY: adn 7 ut vid. Al.

Cl on

1072®

TON. META TA ®YSIKA A

33 pev] dé AP 4 om. F? Bonitz 6 scripsi: to codd. 34 wd] érte Them. ci. Bonitz br ai alt. om. EJ 2 kal mooa bis E mos alt. om. AP 3-4 kal pia 7 JT: xai pia & 7 J? 4-5 twa didvov AP 9 apa] yap yp. E II ad’ 7 T recc.: add’ EJAY: adn 7 ut vid. Al.

Cl on

1072®

TON. META TA ®YSIKA A

xX ‘\ a“ , "ANAG pay el EoTe KwyTLKdY 7) ToUNTLKdY, pa) Evepyody dE a ¥ \ Tl, OUK €oTae Kivnost evdexeTat yap 7d dSvvamiW EXov pr) , a b] / Je evepyeiv. ov0ev apa ddedos odd edy ovolas Tomorwpen ai- iy b] \ dious, Somep of ra edn, el pa} Tis Svvauévn eveorar px?) b / > > i peraBdddrew* od rolvey- odd’ atrn txar}, odd’ adAn ovota mapa Ta edn ed yap pr) evepyhoet, odK ora Knows. Ere a v ovd’ el evepyjoer, 7) 8 ovola adrijs ddvapiss od yap éoTat kivnows Gidios: evdéxerar yap TO duvduer dv pr) evar. det > if dpa elvar dpxiy Toratrny is 1 ovata evepyea. ert Tolvuv tavras det tds ovolas elvar dvev bAys: aidlovs yap dei, elmep ye kat GAXo Te dldioy. evepyera apa. Kalror dmo- Fh > tal \ \ \ > a c r 4 \ _ , pla doxet yap TO pev evepyotv wav dSvvacba TO dé duva- Mevov ov wav évepyeiv, Bote TpdTepov elvar THY dvvapw. b] \ \ > a babs 2 oa b / \ GdAAA pry el TobTo, ovdey ora. Tov dvTwy: évdéxETat yap dvvacOa pev civar pjmw 8 eivat. xalrou ef ws A€yovow

vAn KIWHOEL avT EavTIV, AAAQ TeEKTOVUKI, OVSE TA ETL- 4 »Q9 € ° b \ \ , si 2 / mjnvia ov’ 9» yi, AGAAA TA oTEppara Kat 7 yovn, 60 €vior Todo del evépyevav, olov Aevkimmos xat TlAar@v: del yap elvat gact kanow. adda did ri Kal riva od dé€- XX yovow, odd’, (el) adi (i) di, Thy airlav. oddey ydp os eTvXE KiVElTal, GAAQ det Te del UTapxew, Gomep viv pvoer mev Xv a xX @di, Bla d3& 7) td vod 7 GAdov di elra Tola mpdTn; diaheper yap aynxavov dcov. adda pay ode TlAdrwvi , / a v > > ‘\ ® ‘\ SB ye oldy re A€yew Hv olerar eviore apyrv eivat, TO adrd éavtd kwodv: torepoy yap Kal Gua Te ovpare H Wryxy, c f \ LN \ , 3 v4 , os dyno. To pev dy) dSdvapw olerOa evepyelas mpoTrEpov

€oTt pev os Kares éott 8 os ov (etpnrar S& Gs) bre 8

b12 com, J éort AY Al: éorar JT et fecit E i) mounrexdy om, J! 13 éora JT AL: eore EAY 16 ary) ATT 17 evepynon A> éora EJT Ale: gore AY 18 ef et yap om. T 21 ras et 22 ye EJ Al.e; om. A> 22 evépyea AP Al.: evepyeta EV: evépyetat yp. EJ 27 os A» yp. EJ*T: om. EJ?! of om. yp. E 28 6pod] Hy dpod J7AT advvarov] aircov ut vid. Al. 29 pndev A teom, A 34 000", ef bdi 7) wOi, fort. Al., Diels: otde wot ovdé codd. T 35 tedel EJP AL: alet re AY: ri det atriop Usener: te ia ri Jackson: an tw” dei? 37 dStabépev AP dcov om. A? mAdtwy ef AY 1072°1 jv om, A»

EJ?! of om. yp. E 28 6pod] Hy dpod J7AT advvarov] aircov ut vid. Al. 29 pndev A teom, A 34 000", ef bdi 7) wOi, fort. Al., Diels: otde wot ovdé codd. T 35 tedel EJP AL: alet re AY: ri det atriop Usener: te ia ri Jackson: an tw” dei? 37 dStabépev AP dcov om. A? mAdtwy ef AY 1072°1 jv om, A»

6. 1071512 — 7. 10724 32 [ Ta 4 , a 9 / c ‘ na Sa evepyeta mpdrepov, maptuper "Avagaydpas (6 yap voids évép- yeva) kal "Epmedoxdijs diAlay cal rd vetkos, kal of del dé- yovtes kivnow civar, domep AevKimmos: dot ovdK Hv AmeELpov Xx a xpdvov xdos 7 vvé, adda raira del } Tepiddw 7 GA- ws, eltep mpdrepov evépyera Suvdpews. i 8 TO adro Gel Tepiddm, det tr det pevew woatrws evepyotv. el dF medrer yeveois kal POopa elvar, AAO dei elvau del evep- yodv GdAws kal dAdAws. dvdykn dpa wdl pev Kal? adrd 2 ca ey\ iS 3) ay oy 1 EP Ics BN BS evepyety wot S€ Kat GdAdo* iro. dpa KaO’ Erepov 7H KaTa TO mpdtov. dvdyxn 1) KaTa Totro: médw yap éxeivo atr@ Te altiv Kdkeivw. odxody BéATLov Td TPGToV: «Kal Ms ek b] val (nk c / n_ bee ¢ yap atriov jv éxetvo Tod del @oatrws: Tod 0 dddws Erepor, Tod & del ddAws dudw Syrovdri. odxody otras Kal éxovew / a tal ai kwioes. Ti ody ddrdas de? (yreiy apxds; 4 ~Enel 8 otrm 7 évddxera, cal ef pu) ors, ex vu- x oy \ c a / \ 2 \ wy , : Kros €orat Kal uod mdvTwy Kal ex pi dvTos, vou’ dy Tadra, Kal €ore TL del Kwovpevoy Kivnow dnavotoy, atrn > € / \ 2, 2 4 , 2 ay oy La & 1 KoKA@ (kal rodro ov Adyw pdvov aN Epyw dHAov), a > 34 wy © ny > /, y” /. rarest dor didios av ein 6 mpGros ovpavds. ear. rolvuv ti kal 6 tal 3. \ S \ / \ a. \ / 7 ket. émel d& TO Kwvotpevov Kal Kwwodv [kal] wéoov, trofyuvt €ori TL O ov Kivotpevov kuvel, didioy Kal ovola Kal évépyera > AS, @ \ 9 \ Rg ON , he) , ovoa. kuvel d€ Ode TO dpEeKTOV Kal TO VonTéy: KLVEL Ov KLWOU- eva. TovTwy Ta mpGta Ta adrd. emiOvpnroy pev yap TO awdpevoy Kady, PBovdrntoy 5 prov Td dv Kaddy: a lal BN a Gpeyopeda S& Sidte Soxe? padrdAov 7 Soxel dudTe dpeydpeda: apx} yap 7) vonois. vods de d7d Tod vonTOd Kivetrat, vonTH dé H érépa ovoroixia Kad’ atryv: Kal tavryns 7) ovoia mpdrn, “A € tJ n \ roy ales oo \ \ & \ kal ravrns 7) Gadi Kal kar’ évépyevav (éore 58 TO bv Kal

%5 evepyeca alt, TT Al.: evepyetig EJAP 6 760m. AP kos J of dei] ota of J 8 xpdvov AP Io Sci om. J! II elvac det evepyorr] evepyody civac EJT 15 a’r@TAl.: attG codd. — kdkeivo a@\Xo Lasson 16 rov 6’] ovd’ A 17 ovkody ei ovras T 22 pdvoy Asy» AT Al, 2470 sup.lin. E kat punctis notatum in A>, om. ia pécov] pn, dv fort. Them., Jackson Toivuy éore codd. TAl.: €or roivuy ci, Bonitz: rpirov éore Case: an éart, vel Kuvovy Eat? 26 kwotpeva EJT Al. : kevovpevoy AP 27 pev yap EJ? (ev sup. lin. J): yap pev AP 29 Ore AP yp. E Al.: or E paddov AP yp. EJT: xaddy fecit E 30 yap EJTAL: dé A? yp. E i) vdnows] voroews Al. xweirat EJT AL: om. AP 31 jalt....327avrnsin marg.J om. A> 32 rairns 7 om. AP

_ nr

35 1072>

TON META TA ®Y3IKA A

(ev sup. lin. J): yap pev AP 29 Ore AP yp. E Al.: or E paddov AP yp. EJT: xaddy fecit E 30 yap EJTAL: dé A? yp. E i) vdnows] voroews Al. xweirat EJT AL: om. AP 31 jalt....327avrnsin marg.J om. A> 32 rairns 7 om. AP

_ nr

35 1072>

TON META TA ®Y3IKA A

a ‘\ TO dmdoby ov TO adté: TO wey yap ey peTpoy onyatvel, TO S& amdoby mas éxov adro). GAG pry Kal Td Kaddv Kal TO 80 abrd aiperdoy év Th adi ovororxiq: Kal éorw apiotov BN n a del 7) dvadoyov TO mpGrov. rt & ott 7d ob kvexa ev Tois axwirous, # dSiatpeois SnAot ort yap Tw To od Evexa (kal) TWds, OY TO pev éoT. TOS ovK ~oTL. Kiel OH GS epdpeEvor, xwovpeva dé Tada Kweli. ef wey ody TL Kwelrat, evdexeTat Kal i dddws €xew, dor ed [7H] Popa mpdryn H evépyerd eorw, H Kt- veirar tavtn ye évdexerar GAdAws exew, KaTa TéToV, Kal 3 x > 3 Fay > \ eee 4 na BEEN ei ae wy, el pn kat ovolav: émel 88 ore Te Kivody avr akiyynroy ov, évepyela dv, TodTo ok évdéxeTar GAAws exe oddayds. copa XX « , a cal 4 X\ Led y+ £ > A \ « uA ‘ ’ apa apxns iprnta. 6 ovpavds Kat 7 vols. dtaywyn 6 early ola 7 aplorn puKxpdoy xpévoy juiv. otrm yap del éxeivo Lata) iN DS baNWA > \ Ni axe AS € Sf , (juiv pev yap addvvaroy), éret Kal Hdor) 7) evépyera Tovrov (kal dua Todro eypynyopos aicOnois vonois HdioTov, eAmides d& kal prijyat dia radra) O& vonois? 7 Kad’ adryy fal > oor. ¥ + a4 ‘ € / na / CA Tod Ka’ avtrd dpiorov, kal 7 pddiora Tod pdAloTa, avTov 5 voet 6 vods Kara perddniv Tod vonTod: voynTos yap ylyverat Oryydvev Kal vody, dere Tavtroy vods Kal voynrdr. TO yap dextiKoy Tod vontod Kal Ths ovolas vobs, evepyel de By ee IS, | ia c a Pie ~ tal éxov, dor éxeivou madAov Todro d doxe?l 6 vods Oeiov exew,

® 33 ro pr. om. EJ Al.¢ yap om. AP 34 mos Scripsi: mas codd. r Al. 35 avro AP The roravTne KR? ovorotxia J : ovototyeia AP > # sup. lin. A®, in ras. J, om. yp. E 2. Kat twwds Al. apud Averroem, Christ: twdés AP: om, EJT' Al. 3 87 A> Them.¢: d6¢ EJT 4 k.vovpeva scripsi: Kwoupero AP’ EJT: kwovpevov A? et fort. Al. kai om. EJ et fort. Al. 5 el E*J*APAL: om. EXJ1T 4 om. Al.°, secl. Bonitz mparn A® yp, E: 7 mpotn EJT Al. 7 ex Al. scripsi: cal E'YJAPT Ale: ef kat E?: kai incl. Bonitz 6 ratty EJT AI: ratvrny AP ye (vel 4) ci. Bonitz: 5€ codd. T: incl, Bonitz 7 kivnroy E% 14 8 om. EY 15 olare EJ — ekeivo] exeivd eorw EJT 16 7 pev per Et 7dov7 7 yp. Ea Al. Them.: 77507 EJAY 18 kyjpa E 20 8) ci. Bonitz 21 kai alt. om. AP 23 aor... rodro ex Al. scripsi: So7 exeivo waddov tovrov codd. T Al.): éxeivo padXov, oare tovrov Rahilly

7, 1072 33 —8. 107321

At / a » ae 2 Pi a Lv ba) 7 kal 7) Oewpla To Hdworov Kal dpicrov. ei ody otrws ed éxel, @s nets Tore, 6 Beds dei, Oavpacrdy: ef S5& paAdov, ru 25 Oavpacidrepov. exer O& Bde. Kal Cw 5€ ye tadpyer 7 ny a / , Bi tal See pe ds ay) Kee yap vod évépyeva wy, exetvos 5€ 7 evepyeras evepyeia Se 7)

> ee oN 2 7 ‘ >) , \ 9h > ‘ QA Ka?’ avrivy éxelvov (wn aptorn Kal didios. gapev oi Tov

\ ~ fs Oeov civar Gov didioy dpiotoy, Bote (wr Kal alay cuvexis

exer O& Bde. Kal Cw 5€ ye tadpyer 7 ny a / , Bi tal See pe ds ay) Kee yap vod évépyeva wy, exetvos 5€ 7 evepyeras evepyeia Se 7)

> ee oN 2 7 ‘ >) , \ 9h > ‘ QA Ka?’ avrivy éxelvov (wn aptorn Kal didios. gapev oi Tov

\ ~ fs Oeov civar Gov didioy dpiotoy, Bote (wr Kal alay cuvexis

‘ 2h e / a a a \ € a, 4 SS Kal aldios vmapxes TH Oe: Todro ydp 6 Oeos. Goot dé 30 dmodapBdavovow, @omep of IvOaydperor kat Smrevounmos TO KdAAtoTOv Kal Gpiorov pr ev apyn civar, dia TO Kal

puorov pi pxi «iva,

n na AS a XX ‘9. ‘\ a ‘ Tov pvTav Kal tov Gwy Tas apxas airia pev etvar TO d& Kaddv kal TédAcEvov ev Tois ex TovTwr, ovK dpOGs olovTaL.

\ x. / 2 eo ) X / rg \ \ TO yap onépya e@€ Etrépwv oti mpotépwy Tedrelwy, Kal TO 35

a > / 3 ‘ Ls x x / 4 mpOtov ov omépua éeotiv GAAG TO TéAELov? oloy mpdrEpoy 1073* dvOpwmov dv dain tis civat Tob omépwaros, od Tov ek TovTOU yevouevov GAN Erepoy e€ oF TO oTeppa. Ore pev ovv eoTwY ovata tis didios kal dxivyntos Kal Kexwpiopern Tv aicOn-

” as 3 a ) / / XS Ne / TOV, pavepoy ex TOV elpnuevwv: SédeuxTar SE Kal Gre peye- 5 Bos ovdey eyew evdéxerar Tavrny tiv odciay GAN dpeprs

S zd ra 4 ‘>. nan AY LN A , IQOr ’ kal ad.alperds eorw (kweli yap Tov ameipoy xpdvoy, oddev d éxe. dvvapyiw dmeipoy memEpacpevov? emel O€ TAY péyeOos x oN a ) Gmeipov i) TeTEpacpevoy, TEMEpacpEvoY pev Sia TOvTO ovK x é 'y DA 7,” a > ba ION # ay exo peyeOos, amerpoy 6 Sti GAwS OVK EoTLY OVdEeY ATELPOY Io peyeOos)> GAAG pv Kal Sri dmabes Kal dvaddolwrov: maca. yap at dAAa Kwhoes torepar ths Kata Tdmop. Tadra pev ody dpAra dude ToOToY Exeu TOV TpdTOY.

, \ Z , BS Yj DP BN 14 8 IIdrepov dé plav Oeréov tiv Toiadtrny oiclay 7} maAciovs,

kal mocas, Set pa) AavOdvew, GAAA peuvyoOar Kal Tas 15 TOV GdAAwy amoddoes, StL TEpt TANOovs ovOev cipjxacw ia \ XS > tas is XN \ A \ >] / c , & tt Kal ocadés cineiv. pev yap mept tas idéas ta0- Ans ovdeuiay exer cxeww idlav (a4piOuors yap A€yovor Tas 2» / c / bINw4 \ SS a 2 a €-N\ BS ¢ ideas ot Eyovres id€as, Tepl 6€ TGV aplOuaY OTE EV ws

‘ > , / aS \ b S=%, a \ fal a > an ohéevav: ov iy 0 aitiay tocodroy TO TANOos TGV apiOuar,

cs) °

b24 adpictoy E ev om. J! 26 @di &de A> 27 €keivo EJr Al. 28 57 Them.°, ci. Bonitz: dé codd. 30 kai om. EY] 35 mpotépwy eort AP 1073* 1 otov] oidy re JIA; as otdy re J? 10 & ovx Ore dws ov0ev gor T 19 of A€yovtes ideas

om. T

TON META TA ®YSIKA A

J! 26 @di &de A> 27 €keivo EJr Al. 28 57 Them.°, ci. Bonitz: dé codd. 30 kai om. EY] 35 mpotépwy eort AP 1073* 1 otov] oidy re JIA; as otdy re J? 10 & ovx Ore dws ov0ev gor T 19 of A€yovtes ideas

om. T

TON META TA ®YSIKA A

ovdey A€yerar pera omovdhis aroderktiKis) Huiv 8 éx Tov broKkeevov Kal Swwpiopévwv exTéov. 7 pev yap apxy Kal TO mpOtov Tév ovtay dklynroy Kat Kal’ avTd Kal Kara B B KO fal de X\ -, ato \ 4 f. of 25 TuUBEBnKOs, Kivody b€ THY TpOTHY atdovov Kal play Kivnow evel 6€ TO KWwodpevov avdykn bad Tivos KiweloOal, Kal TO lol a ee 2 a b) € , \ X\ br i mpOtov Kwodv akivytov civar Kal adrd, kal tiv didiov Ké- 4 ‘\ deQs tal \ \ 7 c ’ € &. ¢ ca vnow td aidlov KwetcOar Kal THv play tp évos, dpOper an fal aA nn d& mapa rHy Tod TayTos Thy amARv opay, iy Kweiy pa- S ‘ /, > “A \ _ va wy \ + 30 MEY THY TP@THVY ovolay Kal akivyTov, adAas gopas oveas \ n / IeQs pra \ At ow , Tas TOV TAaITwY aidtovs (didioy yap Kal dorarov TO KVKAM na / > DI] cas cal \ 4 > / oGpa: déderxtar & ev tols dvowkois mepl rovrwr), avdyKn kal Tovrwy éxdatny TV hopdv tw aKxwihrov Te KweloOar Ka Se S dens Nets er x ad x” 7+ pes atriy Kat aidlov ovolas. i Te yap TGv dotpwv dvots aid.os 35 ovola Tis ooa, Kal TO KiWody Gidioy Kal mpdrepoy TOD KLWov- Mévov, kal TO mpdrepoy ovoias ovotav dvayKaioy elvat. dave- pov tolvey bru tocatras te ovoias dvayxaioy elvat Thy Te /, PeQ TZ \ > / > c / ‘ BA "A gvow didiovs kat akiwirovs Ka adbrds, kal dvev peyeOous 1073” dua Ti eipnucvyy airiay mpdrepov.—ért pev odv eioly ovotat, \ kal tovtwy tis mpeTn Kal devTépa Kara THY adrnv Tagw tal tal cal »” / QA X\ na + an Tats opais Tov adotpwv, davepov' Td S€ TANOos 7dn TOV popav ék ris oikewrdatns girocodla tdév pabnuatikor émioTnuav det oKomeiv, €k THs aotpodoylas: abrn yap tept 2 ea 2 > cad S IQs \ “ Ta pen e ‘ \ > \ \ GdAat TEpt ovdepwas ovolas, olovy H TE Tept TOdS apLOuovs Kal X\ 7 ig XN s v4 lal / c THY yewmeTplay. OTL Mev ovV TAELoVS TOV EpoMevwY at cho- pal, pavepdoy rots Kal perplws hupevors (mArclous yap Exa-~ oTov pépeTar pias TOV TAaVw-Evav GoTpwy) T7écar 8 avrat Tvyxavovew ovoa, viv pev pets & A€yovor TOY pabnpart- n SS > 7 / / ig ba a ‘4 kGv Ties évvolas xdpw éyouer, Srws 7 TL TH dtavola a lad A n~ TAHO0s @pirpéevov bToAaBElv: TO Se AouTOV Ta pev Cyrodv- a \ lol tas avrovs Sef ra d& muvOavouevovs Tapa TOY (nTovvTwr, 15 av te hatvnra mapa ta vov elpnueva trois Tatra Tmpayya- Tevoyevois, irciy pev audorepovs, TeiWecOar S& Tots dxpu-

& 32 avaykn Kal Tovrwy om. J* 33 «ad? JAYT yp. Al. Simpl. : kai kad E Ale 34 attyy EAL: atté JAP yp. Al. Simpl. kal aidiovs J b2 rs ut vid. Al., Christ: ris codd. 4 ohaipar Al.! oixerdtntos yp. J procogia Al. Them. Bonitz: dirocodias codd.T 14 Tay (yrotvtwy bis E 16 d¢ om. J?

ST. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY

8. 10738 22 — 10747 1T

f a Beortépors.—Evdo£os pev ody HAlov Kal ceAjvns éxatépov Tiv

\ a ma gopav év tpioly erider civar odaipas, dv THy pev Tpdrny TV TOV dtravdv dotpwy ecival, THY dé devTépay KaTa TOV

Bonitz: dirocodias codd.T 14 Tay (yrotvtwy bis E 16 d¢ om. J?

ST. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY

8. 10738 22 — 10747 1T

f a Beortépors.—Evdo£os pev ody HAlov Kal ceAjvns éxatépov Tiv

\ a ma gopav év tpioly erider civar odaipas, dv THy pev Tpdrny TV TOV dtravdv dotpwy ecival, THY dé devTépay KaTa TOV

\ / an dud péown Tav (wdlwr, Thy dé Tpirny Kata Tov AEdrokw- 20 mévov ev TO TAdTE TOV Cwdlwv (ey peiCov. S& TAdreEeL AE-

n \ a n NoEGoOar Kal? dy 7 ceAjvn péperar 7) Kad’ dv 6 HAwos), TOV d& TAavopévar dorpwav ev Térrapow Exdorov odatpais, Kal rovray d€ THv pey mpoTnv Kal Sevrépay tiv adriy etvat 3 f. M2 \ a > na AS « / Ua éexetvais (THY Te yap Tov amAavdv THY andoas épovear 25 LJ \ DN SE aN / J X \ \ x eval, Kal THY b7d Tabrn TeTaypévyv Kal Kara Tov bie

! n N a m Kéecwrv Tov Cwdiov thy dopav exovoay Kowiy amacGr €ivat), THs O€ Tpitns amdvrwy Tovs TéAovs ev TO bid pécwy TOV odiov etvar, ths d& TerdpT 7 av Kata Tov Nedo-

j » ptns tiv dopay Kara Tov Xe

/ > a Ewuevoy mpds tov pecov radvrns: elvar dé Ths tpirns opat- 3° pas Tovs TéAovs TGv pev ddrAdwv idiovs, Tods de THs ’Adpodt- TS Kal TOD ‘Epyod rovs adrovs: Kdddummos 8& Tiv pev Oéow

an nr S. oN SF ’ , ome. a 3 Tov opaipdv Tiv adriv eridero Evddéo [robr’ ort tév aro-

/ \ / x X a a Ss a \ \ oTnpdtwv tip raéw), rd de ARGOS TO pev tov Atos. Kat lal fal , \ =e > re >) v4 n a 8 x" na T@ Tod Kpdvov ro abrd éxeivm amedidov, TS 8 7Alw Kal Th 35 cedjvn 0o Gero ert mpooberéas civar oaipas, Ta gai- m0) : p pas,

4 > / 2 A tal XN tal lol voueva el peddAer Tis atod@cey, Tols b€ AoLTO’s TOY TAa-

4 Le - > tal / >) / ~ viTov exdoTw play. dvayKaiov dé, ef medAovor ovvTEbetoat Tara Ta pawdpeva anodécew, Kal’ Exactov Tv TAavw- 1074%

Ly ere iP ad b / i S b) uA Mevov érépas odaipas pia edAdtrovas elvar Tas dvedurrov- cas kal eis TO ard dmoKxabioTdcas TH Oéoe Ti mpdrTyv opaipay del Tod tmoKdTw TeTaypevov dorpov: otTw yap po- vos evdexeTar TY TOY TAarIiTov opav Amavta ToreiocOar. 5 émel ody ev als pev adra éperar ocaipas al pev dxTo € / \ 7. by v4 DS 4 > Came at 6€ mevte kat elxooly eiow, Tovrwyv S& pdvas ov Oe? dve- AixOjvar ev als ro Karwrdtw Tetaypevoy eperat, al pev = a / i“ > 7. a x € s X Tas TOV TpOTwY dvo dveditrovea *E EoovTal, ai SF ras

nm LA I c sf id AS c a 7) \ a Tov vaTepoy TeTTApwV Exkaidexa: 6 67) AtacSv apiOyos Tap 10

a an n , Te hepovody kal tdv dvehitrovedy tatras TevTiKovTd TE

> 26 «ivat om. Them.° tavrny recc. 7d AP 31 tov d€ E 32 Oéow] rdgv Al.° 33 Tor ... 34 Ta&w om. E: todr eon rev Stactnpatey Al.? 35 exeivo AP nAtov Kal TE oehi,V)s TECC, 36 rt mpooderéas in marg. J 37 pedo. E? Simpl. 1074°1 maca om. J? 3 dmoxafiataoas JA» Simpl. to 6¢ fecit AP

2573.2 ue

TON META TA ®YSIKA A

Them.° tavrny recc. 7d AP 31 tov d€ E 32 Oéow] rdgv Al.° 33 Tor ... 34 Ta&w om. E: todr eon rev Stactnpatey Al.? 35 exeivo AP nAtov Kal TE oehi,V)s TECC, 36 rt mpooderéas in marg. J 37 pedo. E? Simpl. 1074°1 maca om. J? 3 dmoxafiataoas JA» Simpl. to 6¢ fecit AP

2573.2 ue

TON META TA ®YSIKA A

S I ’ \ lod , \ a cys Ms 14 kal mévre, el 6& TH ceAjvn TE Kal TG HAl~ pr TpooTLBEty — r na ” , Tis as elmoyev kunjoes, al macat odatpar écovTar énTa Te kal Teccapdkovta.—rd pev oy 7ANOos Tév cHaipOv ErTw a = U4 15 TocobTOY, WaTE Kal Tas ovolas Kal TOs Gpxads Tas aKiwWHTovs [kat tas aicOnras|] tocat’tas etdoyov trodraBeivy (ro yap dvayxaiov adelobw tots icxvporépors éyew) ei 5& pnde- play oldv 7 eivar dopay pi ovvteivovray pds Gotpov opar, + S Cad 4 a. el > "4 3 ”~ ‘ > ért 6& Tacay gtow kal Tacav ovoiay anaby Kat Kad ri. a 3 4 cal / = a i 4 > 20 avTIV TOD apiaTov TeTvxyKviay Tédos eivar det voutCew, ovde- \ cal pia av ein mapa tavras éErépa pvois, GAA TodTOY avayKH Tov apiyov eivat TOV ovotGy. elite yap eiolv Erepal, Kwoter . ra xX. av @s Téos ‘ovoat dopass adda elval ye GAdas gopas 3 uA \ NX > f a S ¥ > na advvaror Tapa Tas elpnuévas. Todro b€ evAoyoy ék TOV 25 pepouevwr trodraBeiv. el yap mav TO hépov Tod pepopevov / / \ x c , , 3 > if xapw Téepuxe kal dopa maca epopevov Twos eat, ovdeuta oe 2 \ is dopa atris av evexa ein ovd GAAns gopas, aAdAa Tov »” ef ’ \ x” \ es css ys - dotpwv évexa. el yap éotar dopa popas Evexa, kat éxetyny as 7. /, / S. Man 5 X > er > »” érépov denoe xdpi elvar wor eed ovx oldv Te eis Gmet- 30 pov, Téhos €otar Tacns opas TGV Hepopevay Ti Oelwy cw- rf \ A b] , oe XS > > , Va patwv Kata Tov ovpavdv. O6rt be eis otpavds, pavepov. el \ 4 > mG cs x * 7 c x yap melovs otpavol aonep GvOpwro1, éorar cider pla H TeEpl e ) rd b) na / sf > > 4 > ”~ ExaoTov apxy, aplOu@ 6€ ye modAat. Gd Oca apiOue Se col moAAd, tAnv exer (els ydp Adyos kal 6 atros ToAAGr, 35 Olov avOperov, Swxparns de eis): Td de rl av eivar ovK exer i A a 3 / / & A A , ‘ tAnv 7d mpGrov evTedéxyerca yap. & apa xail Adyw kal 3 lal A lal a > r¢ wy % A Ps apiOuO TO mpOroy Kiwodv axivntoy ov: Kal TO Kwovpevoy apa n A del kal ovvexds: eis dpa ovpavds pdvos. mapadédorat 1074” 6& mapa tov dpxatwy kal raymadaioy ev ptOov ox7- part KataheAeypeva ois torepov bri Oeoi re elow o \ / % lal A 4 - \ Ss X ovTOL Kal Teplexes TO Oeiov THY OdAnv vow. Ta de AoLTA lol »~ lad x X\ ‘\ a n A pvOik@s 76 mpoonktar mpos Thy wel0e Tav TOAAOY Kal mpos Thy els Tovs vépous kal TO cuudepoy xpjou avOpw-

212 de rs AY 13 émra] évvéa ci. Sosigenes 14 ofatpav codd. TAl.: gopav Simpl.¢ Them.¢ 16 xal ras aicOnras om. Al., secl. Goebel ava Onrovs T 20 tédos I’ yp. E, fort. Al. : tédous codd. 22 eire JAY et fecit E: ei fort. Al. 27 avris AR ay om. E 29 érépov AP 3I eis] cis 6 E? 35 be ody ets yp. E 38 cuvexas] cuvexas Ev pdvoy EJT D4 apooy-

ara Bywater

8. 10742 12 —9Q,° 1075 1

Al., secl. Goebel ava Onrovs T 20 tédos I’ yp. E, fort. Al. : tédous codd. 22 eire JAY et fecit E: ei fort. Al. 27 avris AR ay om. E 29 érépov AP 3I eis] cis 6 E? 35 be ody ets yp. E 38 cuvexas] cuvexas Ev pdvoy EJT D4 apooy-

ara Bywater

8. 10742 12 —9Q,° 1075 1

a \ a , moewers Te yap Tovrovs Kal TOY dAAwy (eov dpotovs Tict Jt val héyovot, Kal Tovrois Erepa akddovda Kal Tapamdnowa Tots > 4 e + ve oN A o. \ na elpnuevois, Ov et Tis xXwpicas atts hdBour povov Td Tpd- 4 \ y \ 7, > 4 > , x Tov, 6Tt Geovs BovTo Tas TpadTas ovotas civat, Deiws av ecipy-

cOat vouiceev, Kal kara 7d elikds ToAAdKis evdpnuévns eis to TO Ovvatdv Exaoryns Kal Téxvns Kal dirocodlas Kal TddAWw POeipouevwv Kal ravras tas ddfas exelvwy oloy dehpava Tepicer@oOar péxpt TOD viv. 1 pev odv TaTpLos ddéa Kal ] Tapa TGV TPSTwY emt TocodToy juiv havepa jdvov.

9 Ta 8& wept rov vodvy éxer Twas dmopias: doKed pey

Cal on

\ a a / , nt Bs n

yap eivar Tov dawopevwy Oeiorarov, TOs 6 Exwy ToLodros \ a

dv elm, €xer twas dvokodias. lire yap pndev voel, ti av eln TO ceuvdv, GAN exer domep av ef 6 Kabevdwv: cite

tal / >» 4, > i pd cay ” 3 > na voel, TovTov 6 GAXo KUpLov, Od yap €oTL TOvTO 6 aT adrod 7 > 4 / >» \ y rl xX € P) 7 > ae wy \ ovolia vonos, GAAA dSvvayis, ovK dv H dplotn odoia ely did 29 yap Tod voeiy TO Tiwwoy ait@ bmapxe. ere SE elre vods 7) Sines > 2 oe. iQ s 2 ip ee nN \ SEEN cS x ovoia avrod elre vonois eat, ti voel; 7 yap adros abror 7) er / ‘ ly! (ep , XK \ Die NS 3 oP BA , €repov Tu Kal et Erepdv TL, 7) TO ad’To del 7) GAO. TOTeE-

xX las xX

pov oby diaéeper Te 7) ovdey TO voely TO KaAOV 7) TO TLX6V; a 4 Ni na Kees a a 4 Kal aromov TO diavoeiobar epi eviwv; SHdrov Tolvuy Ort 2

WO , \ , cad \ > / > TO Oewrarov Kal Tiysu@tatoy voel, Kal ov petaBdddrc is a \ 2 , \ / 4 x \ a xelpov yap 7) petaBodryn, kal kivnols tis dn TO ToLodTov. ral \ a > Nc , 4 2 b) \ Ve + mp@tov pev ody el pa) vdnols eorw adda ddvayis, evdoyov enimovoyv eivar TO cuvEexes atta THs vonoews: emerta djdov oY, x +, ss uA hae a \ i dru GAAo Te dv ein TO Tiyidrepoy 7) 46 vods, Td Vvoovpevor. 30 Kat yap TO voeiv kal » vdnots brdp€er Kal Td xXeElpioTov voobyrt, dor et devktov Totro (kal ydp pi) dpav eva Kpetr- BN en ’ + x »” € , 6.8 BA Tov 7) 6pav), ovk ay ein TO Apiotoy 7 vénows. adroy dpa voet, elmep eo TO Kpatioroy, Kal €oTW 7) VonoLs VOTEws VON- /. > ras € o eg Sa 4 4 \ ois. gatverar 8 del dddAov H emioTHyn Kal 7} alcOnors Kal y d0€a Kal 7 didvoia, atris 0 ev mapépyw. ere ei Gddo TO voeiv Kal TO voeioOa, Kata mérepoy ait@ TO &d trdp-

w on

INN SS Bhs \ o , \ / age a Se } XEly OVDE yap Tard Td civar vonoeL Kal voorpev@. 1) em evioy h emioThyn TO Tpaypa, em pev TOY ToNTIKOY dyev 10757

b17 pnd evvoet JAY 19 eore codd. TAl.° Them.®: éora: i Schwegler 20 ovcia pr. om. T 22 avtds adrov AP 32 ef E'AP Alc: om. JP: et €or E? 33 av] s¢T avrév AP 35.7 alt.om. E ~ 36 atrijs J Al.: adrjs EAT

TAl.° Them.®: éora: i Schwegler 20 ovcia pr. om. T 22 avtds adrov AP 32 ef E'AP Alc: om. JP: et €or E? 33 av] s¢T avrév AP 35.7 alt.om. E ~ 36 atrijs J Al.: adrjs EAT

is) ur

TQN META TA ®Y3SIKA A

Bans 7 ovola Kal TO rh Hw etva, em b€ TOV OewpyTiKGY 6 Adyos TO Tpaypa Kal 7) Vdnois; odx Erépov ody dvTOs TOU voov- pévov Kal Tod vod, doa pa) BAnv éxel, TO adrd erat, Kal 7 vonows TO voovpev@ pia. Ere diy Aelrerar amopta, et obvOeror - 3 a a rN TO voovpevov peTaBddrAor yap ay ev Tols meépeot TOD SAov. 7) 3 4 ° A \ yx A Lud c 3 / cal ddialperoy Tay TO pH exov VAnv—aoTep 6 dvOpadmivos vods Xo a / ” oo i / > DS By \ ba 7 6 ye Tév ovvderwy exer ev Tit xpovm (od yap exer TO oN a év T@dl 7 ev Todi, GAN ev rw Twi Td dpioror, dv Gddo TL)— otrws 8 yet adry airhs 4 vénows Tov dravta aidva; a \ ’Emurkentéov 5& Kal motépws exer 7) Tod brov vows TO ayaov Kal 7d dpiorov, mérepor Kexwpiopevoy TL kal adTd EN By xa’ abré, i) thy Taéw. 7 dupotépws omep oTpdrevpa; \ \ > a / \ s \ c , \ n kal yap ev rh tage. TO ed kal 6 otpatnyds, Kal paddov eee > SS Eo s ‘\ / b) > 3 o S Buss > ovTos' ov yap obros but Ti Tdéw GAN exelvy bia ToOrdv Eo. / s yi ip 2 ? 9 € 7 \ x mavta € ovvréraxtal ws, GAN ody dpolws, Kal mAwTa \ x \ d \ > oy > eo SS us kal mrnva kal urd: Kal odx otrws ever bore pr) etvar Oa- , \ l ! P) > » ix S nN Tépw mpos Odrepov pndev, GAN ot TL. Mpds pev yap ey dmavra ovvréraxtat, ad\dX’ Bowep ev olkla trols edevb€pous n oN lal ixuota e€eotw & tu ervye Tovely, GAG TavTa 7} TA TACoTA 4 a pe OE , \ ay iy, \ TérakTal, Tots d€ dvdpamddols Kal Tots Onplows puKpov TO els ss , \ XS \ 4 by rs \ ae Af TO Kowdy, TO d& TOAD & TL ervxev ToLatTn yap ExdoTov 2 X Sra es ie , > yy s > a ¥ x apxn abtrav n pbois éeoriv. Déeyw 8 olov eis ye TO diaKpi- Onvar dvaykn Gmacw edOetv, kal dAdAa otras €oTw Gv Kot- Ped ar > Amey, D4 X 2n /7 Ve x vavet dmavra els TO bAov.—boa O& addvvara ovpBalver 7) DA ta / \ val € / 4 droma tols dAAws A€yovol, Kal Tota ot yapiertépws A€yov- A ya 3 ¥ 2 , lal / tes, kal em molwv éeAdxuorar amopia, Se pr AavOdvew, mavres yap e& evavtiwy mowdor mavta. ovre dé TO TavTa OvTE AD +S 3 14 rs na be | a A. 9) 4 € if lol TO €€ évaytiwy dp0Gs, obr év Soros Ta evavtia bmdpxe, TOS ek Tov evaytiwy oral, ov A€yovrw: amabh yap Ta evavria cat pee vA ae \ uA a b 4 n 4 tm ddAdAnrwv. nyty b€ Aderat TotTo EvAdyws TO Tplrov TL civat. ot d€ TO erepoy TSv evaytiwy Any Towdtow, Bomep ot a oN a nan TO dvicoyv TO tow 7) TE Evl TA TOAAG. Aderat dé Kal Todro

1075°2 7 yup ovcia JT 3 Tod... 5 vdnows in marg. J 4 kal

pr.... 5 pia om. E! 5 T@ vooupevm Al. Bonitz: tov vooupevov codd. T 6 peraBado Al, et fecit AP 7 6] yap 6 E? et fort Al. 8 i) secl. Ravaisson 9 dy] vody yp. E Odov Tt Rahilly 10 8) Bonitz éyet 7 adr) E® —adrins AP 20 67

éruxe AP yp. EJT Ale: ériody E 23 atrav 7 pdats dpyn Zeller

9. 1075%2 — 10. 1075 26

5 pia om. E! 5 T@ vooupevm Al. Bonitz: tov vooupevov codd. T 6 peraBado Al, et fecit AP 7 6] yap 6 E? et fort Al. 8 i) secl. Ravaisson 9 dy] vody yp. E Odov Tt Rahilly 10 8) Bonitz éyet 7 adr) E® —adrins AP 20 67

éruxe AP yp. EJT Ale: ériody E 23 atrav 7 pdats dpyn Zeller

9. 1075%2 — 10. 1075 26

TOY avToy TpdTov' 7% yap An H pla ovdevt evavriov. ert dnavra Tod davdov pebéker €Ew tod évds: Td yap KaKOoy 35 avTd Odrepoy TGv arowxelwv. of 8 GAdou odd’ dpyds TO dya-

Oov kal rd Kaxdv: Katro. ev dmact pddtota TO dyabov apx7.

ot d& Todro pev dpOGs Oru apynv, GAA TAs TO ayabdv apy}

od A€yovtw, TOTEpoY ws TEAOS 7) OS KWAY 7 ws eldos. aTd- 1075> mos d€ kal EumedoxAns: tiv yap piriay move? TO ayabdr,

atrn 8 apxi Kal ws Kwotoa (ovvdyer ydp) kal ws bAn: KOpiov yap Tod plywatos. et Ot) Kal TO aiT@e orpBEByKev

kal ws tAn apx7 elvar Kal @s Kwodvtt, ddAG Td y’ elvat od 5 Tavrd. KaTa TOTepov oty dirla; dromoy b& Kal TO dpOap-

Tov elvat TO vetKos' Todro 8 eéotly avro h Tod KaKkod Pivots. *Avagayédpas & ws Kivody TO dyabov apxyv' 6 yap voids kuvel.

GAA Kuvel Evexd Twos, woTEe ErEepov, TAY Os Tels A€yo-

mev' 9 yap larpiky é€oti mws 9 tylea. adromoy dé Kal TO 10 évavtiov pa) Toujoa. TO ayaOS Kal TO vO. TdvTes 8 ot tavavtia A€yovres od xpOvTar Tots évavtiows, edy pr prOulon Tis. kab dia ti ta pev POapra Tra 8 adOapra, oddels A€yeu mavTa yap Ta dvTa ToLodow ex TOY adrdy apxav. ert ob pev eK TOO pu) ovTOS ToLodoL Ta dvTar of B iva pr) TovTO dvayxacOGow, ev mavta Towodow.—éru bid Ti del EoTaL yeve- ows Kal Ti aitiov yevérews, ovdels r€yet. Kal Tols dvo apxas Tovtow dAAnv avayKn apxiv Kupwwtépay civat, Kal Tols Ta edn ere GAAn apxi) Kupiwrépar bid Th yap peréoxev 7 meréxer; Kal Tois pev Gddous dvdykn TH copia Kal TH Tir 20 plwrarn emotipn eivat te evayriov, hyiv 8 ov. ov ydp éotw évavtiov TS TpdTw ovdev' TavTa yap Ta evavtia TAnv exe, kal duvdper tadra gor 7) Se evavtia ayvoua els TO évav- tlov, TS d& TpdTw evayTiov ovdey. ct TE pH EoTAL Tapa Ta alcO@nta adda, ovK éorar apxyn Kal tagis Kal yéveois Kal 25 TA ovpavia, GAN del Tis dpxfs apxy, Bomwep rots Oeoddyous

834 7 yap] Kal yap 7 yp. Al. 37 kaddv Robin 38 dpxnv] apxn EJT b5 Kai ws vAn i Al. Bonitz: os vAn kai codd. T 6 xara om. T 12 pabupnon yp. E Al. 14 mavra AP yp, EJD: wdvtes E 19 ért... Kuprwrépa fort. om. Al., secl. Christ ért fort. Them., ci. Bonitz: 671 codd. T': gota: ci. Bonitz 20 peri- oxet EJ 23 tadra JT: raita EAY Them. eis TO evaytiov] an cory evavtiov? 24 el re Christ: eve vulgo: err ei T

TON META TA ©YTSIKA A, M

an a las x kal Tols fuorkots maow. ef 8 Eras ra eldy 7) (ot) dpiOpot, 95 \ my b a i y 8 , » a ” 3 ovdevds atria ef d& pu}, ovTL KWHoEds ye. TL TOs eorar e& dueyeOGv péyeOos kat ouvexés; 6 yap apiOuds od Tourer

a Ns X > 30 OVVEXES, OUTE ws KiVOdY ovTE ws Eidos. GAAA pV oddED y

10762

ef 8 Eras ra eldy 7) (ot) dpiOpot, 95 \ my b a i y 8 , » a ” 3 ovdevds atria ef d& pu}, ovTL KWHoEds ye. TL TOs eorar e& dueyeOGv péyeOos kat ouvexés; 6 yap apiOuds od Tourer

a Ns X > 30 OVVEXES, OUTE ws KiVOdY ovTE ws Eidos. GAAA pV oddED y

10762

y n © id éorat TOV évavtioy OTmEp Kal ToUNTLKOY Kal KLWyTLKOL* EvdE- mak xX be > > \ x vA , \ lal / xoiro yap av ua elvat. dAAG pay borepdov ye TO Tovey Ouva- > BA 3h A b] oe 2 , DA pews. OUK Apa aidia Ta ovTa. GAN EoTW* avalpeTeoY apa , cay > a + a eee \ Ayn’ TovUTwy TL TobTo do elpnrar TOs. ETL Tivs ot dpiOuol Ev 7 7) Woxy kal rd céua kal bdrws TO e€ldos Kal TO mpaypa, Od I > ta EN} / 9 al aX Ns € al ” ovdev A€yes ovdEls* ovd EvdexeTat cimreEty, EaY 47 WS HMEls ELT, cs TO KWwodv Tove. of d& A€yovTes Tov apLOudv TpOrov Tov nv ms oe SON ot b] / % , ‘\ ite ry pabnuwatixoy Kal ottws del GAAnv exouevny ovolay Kal apxas éxdotns GdAas, émevcodiHdn THY Tod TayTds odolay ToLodow (oddév yap 7 érépa rH érépa ocrpBdddrerar odoa 7) fa) Ovca) yap q €TEpa TH ETEPY TUM, 7) #1 ™

kal Gpxas moAAds: Ta b& dvta ov PovAeTar ToAtTEvEerOaL

kaxos. ‘‘ovK dyabov moAvKoipavin: els Koipavos €oTw.”

Tlep) wev odv ths tév aicOyntGv ovdcias elpynrar ris éorw, €v pev TH peOddm TH TGV pvotkGv TeEpt THs BAns, torepov d€ wept ths Kat’ evepyeiav: emel 8 7 oKeWs eotl ToTEpov x \ \ By \ LN: bdr ae Be 4 xX > €oTl Tis Tapa Tas alaOyTads ovoias axlvynros Kal aldvos 7) ovK x AOE he pies na \ \ na y , EOTL, KA El EOTL TLS EOTL, TPOTOV TA Tapa TOY AAAwY eyo-

/ ir4 ” \ na / Ne a peva Oewpynteov, Smws elre TL pr KaAGs A€yovol, pi Tots avrois évoxo. @pev, kal et TL ddypa Kowdv Huiv Kdxetvors, Toor ldla py Kal? yuadv dvcxepatvwper’ ayamnrov yap Tis Ta pey KaAALOY A€yor Ta Se pr) xXElpov. dvo 8 eiot ddfar mepl TovTwy: Ta Te yap paOnuarika dacw ovclas elvat Ties, olov apiOuovs Kal ypaypas Kal Ta ovyyevh Tov- Tol, kal madw tas id€as. émel dF of wey dvo Tatra yévn

a / / x A \ 3 “4 ¢ ‘ Tovovol, Tas Te ideas Kal Tovs paOnpuaTiKkodvs GpiOuovs, ot bE 7 UA ° ¥ ed. / \ \ plav piow aydotépwr, erepor O€ Twes Tas paOnuariKds povov ovolas eival act, oxentéov mp@tov pev mepl Tay

> 27 of ex Al. add. Bonitz 28 otre AP; otro. Eucken 32 dy om. E 34 més Bonitz: ds codd. Tl: ras i 1076° 4 éoTw E? Asc.¢ Procl.: om. E*JA*Y et fort. Al. 8 riE 14 te AP 16 8] 6) Bywater 19 yevn taita AP

10, 1075 27-2. 1076» 18

add. Bonitz 28 otre AP; otro. Eucken 32 dy om. E 34 més Bonitz: ds codd. Tl: ras i 1076° 4 éoTw E? Asc.¢ Procl.: om. E*JA*Y et fort. Al. 8 riE 14 te AP 16 8] 6) Bywater 19 yevn taita AP

10, 1075 27-2. 1076» 18

pabnparikdOv, pndewtav mpooriOevras pvow GAAnv adrots, K olov mérepov ld€a Tvyxdvovew otoat 7) ov, Kal mérepov apyal \ arehe d an 4 x + 2 CaN ‘ a i kal ovota TOY GvTwY 7) Ov, GAN os Tepl pabnwariKGv jdvov ee \ yw \ Ve / > a2 Xx 6 4 x \ clr elow etre pry eiot, kal ei elol mOs eloiv: Emerra pera Tatra xwpis mepl tov ldeGv airdy amdGs Kat Goov vowov xdpw: teOptdntar yap ta moAAd kal td Tav é€wrept- KGv Adywv, ere 5& mpos exelyny bel THY oKEeWW dravTay \ ie, rn Tov TAelwm Adyov, Grav emoKoT@pev ei at ovolar Kat ai > aq y =) / / ie \ \ apxat tOv dvtwv apiyol kal ldéar elolys peta yap tds / » id€as arn Aclmerar tpitn oKéYis.—avdykn 0, elmep ott x x al lal Ta padnwarixkd, 7 ev Tors alc@yrois «lvat atta Kaddrep / N / n > n / X \ Aeyoual twes, 7) Kexwpiopéva Tov alcOnrdv (A€yovor 6& Kal oy , x a » > BN) x 4 > eg otrw Ties) 7) el pnderépws, 7) ovK eloly 7) GAAov TpdTov eiciv: > an ral \ BoP 7 appro Bytnow huivy €orar ov Tmepl Tod €ivar GAG wept TOU TpdTroU.

2 Or pev toivw ev ye rots aic@ytois adtvarov civat 5 qd Wy ¢ 4 s A > o kal dua mAacparias 6 Adyos, elpyrat pev Kal ev Tots duaTopnuacw Or. dvo dpa oreped civar dddvarov, ert Oe kat Ort TOO avrod Adyou Kal Tas GAAas duvdpels Kat pioes év tots aicOnrois eivar Kal pndeplay Kexwpiopéevnv'—raira x mn / co \ \ / : o pev otv elpntrat mporepov, GAAG mpos TovToIs pavepov GrL

lod cal nr \

adtvarov dvaipeOjjvat driwty cpa: Kar énimedov yap s.al- / lal iy, \ /, peOnoerat, kal Todro Kata ypappry Kal airy Kata otiypap,

- > na ‘ ‘\ v4 wor el tiv otiypiy diedciv Advvarov, Kal Tv ypappyy, et

XK 6 ravrnv, Kal TadAa. Th ov biadeper 7 Taras elvat ‘A uA BY > \ x / a Nghe 2 3 tal , Towavras dvoeis, 7) avTas pev py, elvar O ev avTats ToLav- if / ve tas toes; TO avTd yap oupByoerat Siaipoupevwv yap n n / BN Ed © , 2 2 \ \ TOV alaOnrSv diaipeOnoovra, 7 ode at aigOynTal. GAAa pHV \ ovde Kexwpiopevas y elvar pices ToLavtas duvatdv. ei yap éora oreped mapa Ta aloOnra Kexwpiopéva TovTwY ETEpa Kat rn lal lal \ \ mporepa tov alcOntGv, djAov br. Kal mapa ta énineda lal / \ \ érepa avayKaiov civar enineda Kexwpiopeva Kal oTLypas kal ypappds (rod ydp avro} Adyou) «i 6& Tatra, moAw lal lal lal lal \ \ Tapa Ta TOO orepeod Tod paOnparikod énimeda Kal ypappas \ n

kal otuypas €repa Kexwpiopéeva (mpoTepa yap TOV ovyKEL- 424 idea... morepov in marg. J 28 reOpvAnra Al.¢:

reOpvuAdnrat codd. 32 an 6n? by dpa dv0 AP 2 avrov om, A? 18 Kai ortypas om. JT

3°

1076)

20.

3°

w or

1O77e

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

morepov in marg. J 28 reOpvAnra Al.¢:

reOpvuAdnrat codd. 32 an 6n? by dpa dv0 AP 2 avrov om, A? 18 Kai ortypas om. JT

3°

1076)

20.

3°

w or

1O77e

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

péevov é€ott ta dovvbera: kal eimep Tov aicOnray mpoTepa cdpata py aicdntd, TO aiTe Adyw Kal Tov emimedov TOV év Tols akwytois oTepecis ta aita Kal aitd, woTE an cal a a nt érepa tatra eénimeda Kal ypappal_Tov Gua Tois orepeois Tols Kexwpiopevoiss Ta pev- yap Gua Tors panwariKois orepeois Ta 5&€ mpdTepa TOY padnuariKGy oTEpedv). TaAW tolvuy TovTwov Tay emimédav ecovTat ypappal, Gv mpeTEpov denoer Erépas ypappas Kal otvypas civar bia Tov avrov n tal lal A Adyov: Kal To’rwy (rdv) ex Tals mpoTepais ypappats erepas TMporepas oTLypas, OY ovKeTL TmpOTEpaL ErEpar. atTomds Te 7 yiyveran 7 ocdpevois (crpBalver yap oTeped pkey povaxa \ \ . / Ses 2 S \ \ \ > / Tapa Ta alic@nra, énineda S€ TpiTTa Tapa Ta aicOnra— Tad Te Tapa Ta aicOnTa Kal Ta év Tots pabnyariKois oTe- tal \ BS \ bed / \ x va ‘ peois Kal (rd) mapa Ta ev Tovrois—ypappal be rerpa€al, orvypal be mevtagal: wore Tmepl Tota ai emiotipar eoovta at pabn- parikal ToUTwY; ov yap OH Tepl Ta ev TH oTEpE> TO AkwyTo , enimeda Kal ypappdas Kal otiypass del yap Tepl Ta mpd- € 3 U4 c > > - , & A an >I an Tepa 4 emuoTHun) 6 8 avrdos Adyos Kal TEpl TGV apiOpav- map €ékdoTas yap Tas oTlypas erepar €oovrar povddes, Kal Sef ACT > ’ / “— A / 4 7+ map &xaota Ta ovta, (ra) aicOnrd, ira Ta vonTd, WoT eoTaL yern Tév paOnpatikGv apiOuay. ru Gmep Kal ev Tots > vy, Ss a 2 J 4 \ x Grropnuacw emprAOowev mas evdéxeTar AVeW; TEpl & yap € > 7 >] ‘4 c 4 a aN \ Pd © 4 aotpordoyla eéotiv, dpolws €orar mapa Ta aicOnta Kal mept & ) yewperpiar elvat 8 otpavdv Kat Ta popia adrod n , x + ¢ a x iA c 4 x \ ‘ m@s Suvaroyv, 7 GAO OTLoby Exov Kivnow; Opolws b€ Kal TA > \ ‘ \ 3 / Ly x , \ ba émtika Kal Tad Gpyovikas éoTat yap gpwvy te kal owes as \ -) \ \ x > of v [od ow \ mapa Ta alc@yta kal Ta Kad’ Exacta, wore OHAov STL Kal at dAAa aicOjoes kal Ta GAAa aicOnra: ti yap paddov Ud x / I] s a ‘ ~ + 4 tave 9 Tdde; ef 6€ Tatra, Kal (Ga EoovTal, ecimep Kal > Ps yy / a , c X\ lal aic@noes. eT ypaderat Evia KaboAov t70 TOV pabnpuart- n XN - ‘ 2: yy » 4 vA KOV Tapa Tavras Tas ovolas. eora otv Kal airy Tis GAA r pee \ / n | eo a s n vA &é ovota peragd Kexwpiopern Tdv 7 ldeGv Kal Tov perakd, 7) ovTE ApiOuos eoTW ovTE OTLypal ovTE y€yeOOs OUTE xpdvos. el b20 pn] ra py E 27 rotrey tay Ci. Christ: tovzwy codd. : ray Bonitz 28 ypappas JAY 30 éenimeda... aioOyra om. E 31 ra tert. EJ Al.: om. AP 32 raiAl.: om.codd.T oreypat d€ wevragal in marg. J 37 map... 39 dprOuev om. T 38 ta addidi 39 yen cmetpa Ty recc. ia et fort. Al. 107772 é€ora

ut vid. Al., Bonitz: éori codd. T 3 (ovpavov mapa toy aia@nrév) ovpavoy Jaeger 11 4% AP 12 ortypy recc.

2. 107619 — 10779

E 31 ra tert. EJ Al.: om. AP 32 raiAl.: om.codd.T oreypat d€ wevragal in marg. J 37 map... 39 dprOuev om. T 38 ta addidi 39 yen cmetpa Ty recc. ia et fort. Al. 107772 é€ora

ut vid. Al., Bonitz: éori codd. T 3 (ovpavov mapa toy aia@nrév) ovpavoy Jaeger 11 4% AP 12 ortypy recc.

2. 107619 — 10779

6€ Todo ddvvarov, bijAov Ori KaKeiva adbvarov eivar KEexwpt- tA la) n oY lal opéva Tov aloOnrav. bdAws b€ TovvayTioy cvpBaiver Kat TOD GAnOods Kal rod elwOdros trodapBdvecOa, «i tis Onoe otros eivar Ta pabnpaTiKa ws Kexwpiopevas Twas piceis. dvaykn yap ba TO pev otrws civar adras mporépas elvat tov aloOnrdv peyeOGv, Kata TO GAnOes be torépas: TO > > Y J / x / , > an > / > yap aredes péyBos yevéoes pev mpdrepdy éoti, Th ovoig 6 bortepov, oiov dpvxov eyiyov. ere tiv Kal mor ora ev Ta paOnparika peyeOn; Ta pev yap evradda Woyn 7) padnporics pe yeOn; pev yap xi 7 / an / ‘ péper Woxijs 7) GhAw Twi eddroyov (el be py, TOAAG, Kal dvadverat), exelvous b& b.aspeTois Kal Tocols ovat Ti alriov Tov ev civat Kal ovppeévew; ert ai yeveoess dnArodow. Tpd- Tov pev yap emt pijxos ylyvera, eira emt mAdros, Tedev- n > / ‘ / > be ol \ na t 7 & els ae Kal aos goxev. el oby 70 Th yevares a , A , ries vorepov tH ovola mpdrepov, TO cya mporepov dy ein emim€dov / 4 , y A os bd Kal pajkovs: Kal ravrn Kal réAevoy Kal Odov paAdov, bre pa 7 ‘ s ot x CIS ery nt Eupvxov yiyverauy ypappn oe eyrpvyos 7 énimedoy TOs av ein; tmép yap tus alcOjoes tas jyerepas av ein TO Ggiopa. rr TO pev cpa ovola tis (jin yap exer Tws x J € SS ‘ lad Dine f, + X 4 e TO TéAELov), ai b€ ypappat ms ovoia; otre yap ws Eidos / a € DS fa) oY c € kal poppy tis, olov ef dpa % Worx) Towtroy, otTe ws 7 ao wn nr AX x ) cal 399 5 / tAn, olov Td cGpar ovdev yap ek ypappav ovo émmédov ’ na vd - If ° a > ° 4 ove oTiypav halvera ovvictacba bvvdpevor, «i & iv obtoia Tis vALKH, Tobr ay edaivero buvdpeva mdoxew. TO pev thy p xew. 79 > 4 a 4 > > > J cA rn VA , ov Aoym €oTw TpoTEepa, GAA ov TaVvTA Oca TH OyYH TPpO- TEpa Kal Ti ovolga mpdrepa. TH pe yap ovola apdrepa boa , an > is lal , x A € Xopiopeva TH civar drepBddd\eL, TH Adyp GF Bowy ot Adyo. x TOV Adywv: Taira be oix Gua imdpxe. ei yap ae 2! >. x s > 4 - / , A pay Cott TA TON Tapa Tas ovclas, oloy Kiwovperdv TL 7 dev- KOv, TOU AevKod avOpemov TO AevKOY TpdTEpov KaTa TOY Adyov > 2 > X\ \ > Lh > x > f > GAN od KaTa TiVv ovoiav' od yap evdéxeTaL Elva, KEXwpt- opevoy GAN del dpa TS ovvdcm eotiv (cbvodoy be héyw tov GvOpwrov tov devkdv), Bote avepoy Ort ovte TO e&

420 post ér add. ev E et sup. lin. J kai mor’ Bonitz: kai ras T 22 evoyor Jaeger: evAdyw codd. © Al.: an etAdyws? 31 Tis TiAl.: ris codd. yer om. AP 33 7 alt. om. J 36 Suvapeva om. Al. >4 cx omittendum ci. Schwegler tmapxet det. €

Bywater 5 t1om.utvid. Al. 9 rdvalt.] cairo Al® 76 om. AT

1077?

10784

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

Bywater 5 t1om.utvid. Al. 9 rdvalt.] cairo Al® 76 om. AT

1077?

10784

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

3 / i) + \ 3 / A b) aaiperews TpdTepovy ovTe TO Ex TpoabEcews VoTEpoy: ek / sy na A ft A » / mpocberews yap TO AEVK® O AEvKOS GVOpwTos AEyeETal. 7 x 9 + nies ta) n ig + a + Ori pev ody ovte ovola, padAov TGV cHpaTwv eloly ovTE , fal a a 3 Yap oh \ n , / BA mpoTepa TH iva TGV aicOyTay GAAA TO Adyw MOVOV, OUTE Kexwplitpeva mov evar duvaror, eipyrat tkavas: eémel 0 ove? 3 a 5) val a t EJ EaGS > \ oe Nek €v Tots aicOnrots evedexero avTa eivat, pavepov OTt } OdAws ovk oT 7) TpdToy Twa eoTL Kal dia TodTO ovy amAdS EoTWW a bs \ oy / ef \ \ Ny / ToAAax@s yap TO civar A€yovev. GoTEP yap Kal Ta KaOd- ov ev Tois pabypacw ov Tepl KEexwplopéevev eotl Tapa NX, / \ \ . nN ra A \ / / > ee Ta peyeOn Kal Tovs apiOyovs GAA TeEpl TOUTMY MEV, OVX 7) a @ XN a d& tovatra ofa exew péyeOos 7) etvar diaipera, SHAov Gre evdexerar kal wept rév alcOnrdv peyeOdv elvat Kat Adyous \ b) 4 \ e s 3 x > > ze. %¢ vA kat amobetées, pr 1 S€ alcOnTad GAN 7 Tovadi. domep Ni VFS 7 a \ s eae \ a , yap kal 7) Kwovpeva povov Toddot Adyou elo, xwpis TOD TL €xacTov é€oTt TOY ToLovT@Y Kal TOV oupBEBnKOT@Y avTois, a xX kal ovk dyaykn dia Tatra 1) Kexwpiopevov TL eivar KwWov- pevov tov aicOntav 7H év Tovros Twa dow elvar adw- pirpevnv, otrw kal éml TOV KiWovpev@y EoovTar Adyo Kal 2 lel > e , SS ae , , \ eTLOTHMAL, OVX 7} KWovmEeva O€ GAA’ 7} ToaTA MovOY, Kal / a en 76 / \ e / , Nee x madw 7 éenlreda povoy Kal 7 pajKn povov, Kal 7 dialpera kal 1) ddwalpera €yovta b& Oéow Kal 7 ddiaipera povoy ni peta &x i peta pdvor, vA tee Ni Fe: ny / Pl XS XN / >S X\ > Oot emel aTAGS E€yew GANGES 7) povoy Ta XwpLOTa civar 5 \ \ oS \ ! oe Ve > \ x GdAAa kal Ta pi) xwpioTrd (oloy kwotpeva civat), Kal Ta S; ig x « na 3 XN > tal \ ~ / Mabnuatika OTL €oTw amAGS aAnOes cimeiv, Kal ToLatra i) / S Led \ \ BA si / 3 n ye ota N€youow. Kal @oTEp Kal Tas GAdas ETLOTHMAS aTA@S 2 XS > ~ 7 > b) \ a , 5x4 dAnbes eizety rovrov eivat, ody) Tod cvpB_eBynKdros (oloy dre Aevkod, ef TO Hyrewov Aevkdv, 7 8 €otw byrewod) GAN exelvou ob earl éxdorn, ei (7) byvewdv tyrewod, ef 8 7} dvOpwro n, eb Gh) tye yrewod, el 8 3} dvOpwros > , [vA A NX / > > f > xX avOpdrov, oUTH Kal TY yempeTplay: ovK ef cvUBERnKEV alcOnTa ~ or b) 2 Ny) NO / > a ? al ” € elvat Ov eorl, mi) €oTL Oe 7 alcOnTa, ov TGV aicOnTav EcovTat ab \ 2 2 > / PASS \ fa) cA paOnuarikal emuoTHpal, ov pevTor ovde Tapa Tadra aAAwv / x XS é / > c X a / KEXWPLOWEVOV. TOAAG OE TvUBEBHKE Ka’ avTa Tots Tpay-

al ” € elvat Ov eorl, mi) €oTL Oe 7 alcOnTa, ov TGV aicOnTav EcovTat ab \ 2 2 > / PASS \ fa) cA paOnuarikal emuoTHpal, ov pevTor ovde Tapa Tadra aAAwv / x XS é / > c X a / KEXWPLOWEVOV. TOAAG OE TvUBEBHKE Ka’ avTa Tots Tpay-

bio, 11 mpobécews AP II rod Aevkov ci. Bonitz 14-5 ovdey tois JAP 18 mapa Al.¢ Syr.!: mepi EJAY Syr.? 28 ovxi 7 E 30 dé om, AT 32 otoy] otov ra Syr.t 36 7O vytewop recc. Al.: iyewov r6 EJASyr.! Bonitz: 7 codd. Al. tyrewod yp. EAl.: iyewdv EJA> Syr.t 1078* I ov €otiv éExaorn recc. Al.: 7 eat éxactov EJAP ei J (sed in ras.) P Al. : om. EAP Syr.t 7 add. Bonitz 7 om. Al.: @v Rolfes

2. 1077) 10 — 3. 1078 2

pacw i Exacrov bmdpxe. TOy To.ovrwv, émel Kal F OHAv TO (Gov kal 1) dppev, tdia man orw (kalro. ovK eore Te OnAv od Appev KeXwpiopevoy TOV (wv) SoTe Kal H MHKN povov Kal 7 énimeda. Kal dom oi) dv Tepl mporépwy To hoy kal GmAovoTEpwr, ToToUTH paAAOv exEL TO AKpLBEes (rodTO d€ TO amdody eoriv), dote dvev Te peyeOovs paAAov 7) peTa MeyeOous, Kal pddtora dvev Kwiyoews, édv 5é xklvynow, pd- iota THY TpdTnv: amrovoTaTn ydp, Kal TavTns 7 Suadn. 6 8 avros Adyos Kal wept Gppovikijs Kal dartuKijs: odderépa yap i Aus i) 1) pwvip Oewpet, GAN 7 ypappal Kal dp.d- pot (oikela pevtor tadra mdOn exelvwy), Kal 7) pnxXaviK) d€ woa’Tws, dor eb tis O€wevos Kexwpiopeva TOV oLpBE-

BykéTov oKomel TL Tept TovTwy 7 Tovaira, covey did TodTo Weddos Wetoerar, domep ovd srav ev TH yh ypddn kal

. p erie

vA a bs X\ Y og > \ > tal / mobeaiay pi nie modiatay: ob yap ev Tats mpotdcect an > x A TO Weddos. dpicta O ay otrw OewpnOein ExacTov, et Tis TO Ma) Kexwpiopevoy Gein xwpioas, Omep 6 apiOunriKds Tote? kal 6 yewpéerpys. ev pev yap Kal ddiaiperov 6 dvOpwros 9) GvOpwmoss 6 8 ero ev addvaiperoy, cir’ eOedpnoe el Tu TO GvOpdsTH orpBEB yf adual, 5 be eT pNs Q pdme mBEBnxev 7) Gdiatperos. 6 S€ yewperprs +a? @ + —y? @ 3) 7 bs has EY id a \ oe 7 eee pemes ovd x ad.iaiperos GAN 7) oTEpeov. a yap > a la ¢ an > lal los “/ ni Kav el py Tov HV ad.atperos dmHpXEV avTG, SHAov StL Kab + “4 ) / . Ee ten € BS , 4 \ avev rovtwy evdexetar adtd tmdpyew [1d dvvardv], doTe dia TovTo 6pOGs of yewperpat A€yovot, Kal mepl dvT@V diadr€yov- 4.5 yy > ¥. \ \ X\ 2 \ i 3 f Tal, Kal dvra éoriv: dutrov yap TO ov, TO pev evTedexeia \ 2 2e na > \ XN X\ ) Ss \ \ iN ef N\ TO O VALK@s. mel 6€ TO Gyabdv Kal TO Kadodv Erepov (Td

x \ Be ND / \ ws \ Ny a > 14 mev yap del ev mpdger, TO d€ KaAdy Kal év Tots Akuwyrots), € me Oe / : XX \ ] /, ‘ ot pacKkovres ovdev A€yEWW TAS paOnuaTLKds emLOTHMAS TEpL

a oN lal

Kahod } ayabod Wevdovra. A€yovor yap Kal derxy¥ovor pd- huora: ov yap «i pn dvouddovor Ta 8 epya Kal Tovs Adyous derxvVovow, ov A€youct TEpl atrdy. Tod dé Kadod peyLora €ldn Tags kal ovpperpia kal TO wpiopevov, & pddioTa de- KYvovolw at padnparikal emuoThpar. Kal emel ye TmoAAGY

26 ereiom. T 8 Keyopiopevoy AP pnkn pdvov] pr Kivov= pevov Al. II re] rou JAP 13 arn Al. opadns EJ Al. Syr 15 77 A> 18 7 AP 20 rodtaiay dn thy i Al.

Tod dé Kadod peyLora €ldn Tags kal ovpperpia kal TO wpiopevov, & pddioTa de- KYvovolw at padnparikal emuoThpar. Kal emel ye TmoAAGY

26 ereiom. T 8 Keyopiopevoy AP pnkn pdvov] pr Kivov= pevov Al. II re] rou JAP 13 arn Al. opadns EJ Al. Syr 15 77 A> 18 7 AP 20 rodtaiay dn thy i Al.

Bonitz: rv rodtaiay py codd. 26 7 pr.| 7 6 AP 28 rovrov fort. Al. ~ 7d dvvaréy codd. Al.: om. T

°o

cs}

1078)

we or

TON META TA ®&YSIKA M

airia datvera tatra (Aéyw 8 ofoy H ra€éis Kal TO a@pt- / lal ao oN A ‘\ 4 , X opuevov), Sprov ott A€youev Av Kal Thy Toladrnv airiay TH os TO KaAddv alriov Ttpdmov twd. paddAov b& yrwplws ev dAXous Tept adtav epodpev. Ta Tlept pev ody Tov pabnparikev, ore Te dévTa éoTl Kal ms OvTa, Kal TGs TpdTepa Kal TGs od TpdTEpa, Tocadra | / \ ~ lal . n nr Sx 23: X X ie eipnoOm: mept d€ TOY ideGv TpPOTOV avTIY THY KaTa THY id€av dd€av emicxentéov, pnOev cvvdnrovras mpds THY TOV apiOpav vow, GAN @s trérA\aBov e& dpyns ot mpOrou \ PA f: a & / > € » 4 an PIN wal Tas ideas dyoavtes elvar. ocvveBn 8 7 Tept TOV €lddv dd€a Tois einodor bia TO TELOAVaL Tept THs aAnOelas Tots € 7 , c / n a) lal Pi Wi sae S Hpakderetous Adyous ws TavTwov TeV aicdOnTaV Gel pEov- Twv, aor elnep emuoTHuN Tivos eorar Kal ppdvnots, ETEepas dey twas dtoes elvar Tapa tas aloOnras pevotcas: ov yap evar tTév pedvtTwy emoripny. Lwxpdrovs dé wept Tas nOukas dperas mpayparevowevov Kal mepl rovrwy dptcerbar Ka0dAov (yrobvtos mpeéTov (Tdv pev yap hvoiky em piKpov Anmokpitos ipyaro pévov kal wpicard mws TO Oeppov Kat \ 4 c s , , ‘a Paws TO Woxpdv' of 5& IvOaydpero. mpdrepov wept Twev ddrtyar, év Tovs Adyous eis Tos apiOuods avnmrov, olov rl eorTL KaLpos x \ , N td > a ’ b) , by 44 Si Fate 7 TO dixavoy 7) ydpos: exelvos 8 etAdyws eyrer TO Th eoTw: ovdAoyiferOa. yap eter, apyn d&€ Tév ovdAdOyLoMeY TO iN ss \ Ps Ss »” R13 9S ef ““ tl éoriv: diadrextiKy yap loyds ovmw Tér Hv dore dtvacba kal xwpls tod rl éot. Tavaytla emucKonety, Kal Tov évav- es 5 Ve LAS b) / / / 3 ed i >. - tlov ef ‘ adrn emorhun dvo yap éotw & Tis dy amodoin Nv J /, 4 > b} a , \ \ eae Swxparer duxaiws, Tovs Tr emaxTiKovs Adyous Kal 7d dpiCe- , ny lA ©) + \ > ‘A b) / oOat kafodov' Tatra yap éoTw dyudw Tepl apxnv émoT?- 2 eden SS / \ , > p Snes 4 Bns)—aaArX’ 6 pev Lwxparns Ta Kabddrov ov xwpioTa errolet ovde Tors dpicpotss of 8 exdpicay, Kal Ta Towadra Tov dvtwy id€as mpoonydpevoay, wote SvvEeBawev adrots oye- ddv TH atte Adym TavTwv ideas civar TGv KabddAoV eyo= pevav, kal mapanAnowv donep av ek tis apiOynoa Bov- Aopevos eAatTOvov pev dvTwy oloiTo ju) SvvHoETOal, TrElw

1078” 34 — 1079? 3 = A. 990%2-9919 8

D8 Kal mds mpdrepa om. T kat mOs ov mpdrepa E*JAT: om. E? et ut vid. Al. 22 avnyov yp. E Al. 23 & om. recc. 26 Kat TOV... 27 éntornpy secl. Maier 27 i] 7 AP droégn EAP

35 dtvacOa a

3. 1078b 3 — 4. 1079 28

, n by

3 = A. 990%2-9919 8

D8 Kal mds mpdrepa om. T kat mOs ov mpdrepa E*JAT: om. E? et ut vid. Al. 22 avnyov yp. E Al. 23 & om. recc. 26 Kat TOV... 27 éntornpy secl. Maier 27 i] 7 AP droégn EAP

35 dtvacOa a

3. 1078b 3 — 4. 1079 28

, n by

d€ momoas apiOpoin mrelw yap eor. TOV Kal’ Exacta > (4) na = > cal Le 24 ® an ~_ > if 9, aicOntav ws eineiy ta eldn, Tept Ov CyrodvTes Tas airlas 1079" €x TovTwy exe? mpondAOov: Kal? Exactdv Te yap dpovvpov By \ BS Sy tA an ot a By 3) oN

€0TL Kal Tapa Tas ovotas, TOV Te AAAwWY Ev EoTWW ET TOA- AGv, kal emt roicde Kal él rots didiois. eri Kad? ods Tp6d- mous delkvurat bt. €ort Ta €ldyn, Kar’ ovOéva haivera TobTwr"

e€ evioy pev yap ovk dvdykn ylyverOar ovddgoyopov, e@€ évioy d€ Kal ody Sv olovra TovTwr eldn yiyvera. Kata TE yap Tovs Adyouvs Tovs éx TGV emioTHpaVv Cora eldn TavTOY 4 > red > Hs \ XS x a y ee, n \ an dcwv emiothua eloiy, kal Kata TO ey emt ToAAGY Kal Tov > vA s Ss \ a) 2 a a atopacewv, Kata dS€ TO voely TL POapevtos TGV POapTar* 10 pavracya yap ti to’rwy ori. eri dé of AkpiBeoraro. TOY Adywv of ev TOV mpds TL ToLodTwW id€as, Ov ov gacw ~ > TEN if € \ \ 7 » ty elvat Ka avro yevos, ot b€ Tov Tpirovy avOpwrov héyovow. ddws TE dvaipodow of wept TOV Elddv Adyou & Maddov Bod- Aovrat eivat of A€yovTes etdn Tod Tas ideas civarr ovpPBal- 15 ES \ > lal X lA b} x \ > , pe. yap pi) elva mpOrov tiv dudda GdAAG Tov apLOpor, kal tovrov TO mpds TL Kal Todro Tod Kal” atrdé, kal Tav0? ira ~ > 4 tal nt DA , e] bca tTwes akodovOncavres tats wept Tov clddv ddEais Hvav- / ~ b) a oi Xs x \ c , > TLWOOnTaY Tals dpxats. ETL KaTa pey THY UVroAnpwW Kal iA = \ > / > , n L an aN hv pacw eiva tas id€as od pdvov TGV odoiOy EcovTar Etsy GAAG Kal GAAwvy ToAAGY (7d yap vena kev od podvoy \ ‘ > , > \ \ ‘ > > n i / Ay rd TEpl Tas ovolas GAAG Kal KaTa pn OVTL@Y EOTL, Kal ETL- OTHal ov pdvoy THs ovolas oovTar orpBalver O& Kal adda prpla rovadra)» kara 5€ 7d dvaykaiov kal ras

iS)

fo}

is) 7

ddgas Tas wept adrd&v, ei ~ott peOexTa Ta €ldy, TOV ovoLdy 75 dvaykatov iddas etvar pdvoy: od yap Kata ovpBeBnKds / 2 \ cal , yee te = \ > meréxovra add del Tavrn Exdorov peTexew mH pi) Kad brokeyevov A€yovtra (Aéyw 8 ofov, ef tr adrod dimdraclov > 36 éxacroy E} 107972 ka6’] rap Syr. reom. A: ri Ci. Rolfes 3 te codd. TA(E Al.): om. A (A®), incl. Bonitz @\A@p codd. TA (ET Asc.) : @\\ov dv A (A” Al.) II m2 om. J ToUToy

APA: rotr EJ Syrt: rod iT 17 kal rovro mpés Ti Kal Ka?

iré yp. E t Lal A v Dd] r5 rod JT: 7d AY; QUTO yp. Tovrov et kavalt. om. A Tovro Tov] rd rod JT; rd ; tov A (ET AI. Asc.), quod hic conicio 20 ov povoy TOY ovTLaY AvA: om. EXJT: post ¢idn E? 21 dAAa E?APA et in marg. J:

om. EP cat E?A°TA et in marg. J: om. E? @ ov] dev re J: érépwv APA et in marg. J mohAa@y]| ToNA@y KaL J —-22 Kara] ra jP éori JAYTA: €srae Syr. et fecit EE «ai JA (EAL): cai ai E AP Syr.1 A (A>) 23 «lai A Bonitz 24 tov J 27 bei] dy J} tavtn EJTA: ravrnv AP 28 Aéyerar recc, A avrodimAaciov yp. EA

30°

J mohAa@y]| ToNA@y KaL J —-22 Kara] ra jP éori JAYTA: €srae Syr. et fecit EE «ai JA (EAL): cai ai E AP Syr.1 A (A>) 23 «lai A Bonitz 24 tov J 27 bei] dy J} tavtn EJTA: ravrnv AP 28 Aéyerar recc, A avrodimAaciov yp. EA

30°

1079”

TON META TA ®YSIKA M

fal \ ” t perexel, Todro Kal aidlov peréxer, GAAG KaTa cvpBEBn- kdst ovpBéBnke yap TO ditrAaclo didlo civai), dore Era Se XX y ON at 25 fay So , ° a. By ovoia Ta €ldn* Tatta 8 evravOa ovciay onpaiver Kael 7) > / — Le) BS tl €orat TO elvar ava TL Tapa radra, TO ey emt moA- Ov; kal ei pev-ravTd eldos rOv idedv Kal TOY perexdv- Twv, e€orar TL Kowdv (TL yap paddAov emt rév dbaprdv duddov, Kal Tov Svddwv Ttév ToAAGY pev Aldimv bé, Td a A ’ fal los dvas ev kal radvrév, 7) em adrijs kal rhs Tivds;) ef be pH x TN o € i, BN y, Ne Ave x 4 TO avro eldos, Sudvupa av etn, Kal Guoiov domep av et a

Tis Kadot avOpwrov tév te KadAlav kal ro Etdov, pnde- piav kowawviay emiBrEWas airov. ei O& Ta pev GAda pt \ ¢ > / , tal yy a Tovs KoWwovs Adyovs Eedapporrew Onoopwev Tots eldeoww, oloy ae 2 \ te na > ig \ on \ Z- €m avTov tov KUKNov coxa €Timedov kal TA AOLTA jLEpN an , \ ’ ud bl] \ Ua lal a x. \ Tod Adyov, TO 8 ob earl TpooreOjoeraL, TKoTEiVY Se? pH KEVOY

an an a aN } Tobro TavTeA@s. tive Te yap mpooTeOnoeTaL; TO Meow 1) n 5) / x lal / XX XX 5) n >’ i if TO e€mimedy 1) TaoWw; TavTa yap Ta ev Th ovola idea, Xi

1 ‘ x 4 2 a 4 ee! 2) AN otov TO (@ov Kat TO dimovy. Ere dHAov 6rL avayKyn adTo

> 2

e A 2 tg / \ a fal b] y cival Tt, BoTEp TO eninedov, ptow TWA i) Taw evuTTapéer Tois EldeowW OS YEVoS.

IIdvrwy 6& pddwcra Siatopyoeey dv tis th more oup- / x y Xx tal Dens a . a x tal Baddrovrar ta €idn 7 Tots didiots Tév aicOnTrdv 7 Tots ytyvopevots Kal [rots] pOepopévous: ovTE yap Kwiceds ear ovre petaBordns ovdemas atria avrois. dGdAG pry ovre mpos Tip emortnpny ovevy Bonbe? riv TOV Gdwyv (odde yap cep th 2 al A 9 , > \ > 7 > bd \ Me ovola exeiva tovrwy: ev TovTois yap av iv), or Els TO etvat,

/ lal ‘

pa evuTapxovTd ye Tols peréxovow' otrw pev yap tows yy , x oS GAN otros pev 6 Adyos Alav edkivynros, dv >Avagaydpas pev mpdorepos Evdokos be torepos edeye diaTopGv Kal Erepoi

1079” 12 — 10807 8 = A. 99128 —)g

231 ovaia codd. TA: ovaias vel ovoidy ci. Bonitz ravra Al, Bekker: ratra JA*TA (codd.): ravra E & évravéa] yap evravdd re Al.c 36 émt ravrns Syr.! A (codd.) : emi 7’ airns Bonitz b2 Kadoiot AP: kadoin A (AP Asc.°) Syr.} 5 xukdov]6 AP 7 ze om. E in loco eraso 10 7. damnavit Christ xal) piow Jaeger i) AP trapéet Al.¢ et ut vid. Al. 14 trois om. Syr.! A (A? Al.) 15 airia E ovre Bonitz: odd codd. A 16 ovde Bonitz: ovre codd. A 19 airia T av om. AP es recc, A (AP Al.) : om,

EJA?IrA (ET Asc.°) 21 vorepov] JTA

4. 1079 29 — 6. 10807 19

(4 \ \ lal \ b) A \ twes (fddiv ydp woAAd ovvayayety Kal addvara pos Thy Tovatrny dd€av)- GAAa phy ovde €x Tv €lddy Earl

1079 29 — 6. 10807 19

(4 \ \ lal \ b) A \ twes (fddiv ydp woAAd ovvayayety Kal addvara pos Thy Tovatrny dd€av)- GAAa phy ovde €x Tv €lddy Earl

n ~

Tadva Kar ovdéva tpdrov Tov clwOdrwy A€yerOat. TO fs n

de A€yew mapadelypara eivar cal peréxew aitdv ta Gdrda

ta J Kevodoyely éoTl Kal petadopas A€yew Tountikds. Th yap os X 5; / x \ bis b) J 2 J , €oTt TO epyaCdpuevoy mpds tas ideas amoBrAérov; evdéxetai Te kal eivat kal yiyverOar ériody Kal pa cixaGépevor, doTeE

Vw: ip \ Ns cy J a oh o / kal ovTos XwKparovs Kai py ovtos yevoit ay olos Lwxpa- Tys* dpotws d¢ SHArov Ore Kav ei iv 6 Twxpdrys ald.os. éorat te TAclw Tapadelypata Tod atrod, Bote Kal edn, oe a 2 , ‘ ~ \ si 7 ed aN \ olov tod avOpdmov TO (Gov Kat ro Sdimovy, dua o€ Kal avroavOpwros. er. ov pdvov Tév aicOntGv Tapadelypyara X ¥ 3 NX \ eo a A x a « /

Ta e€l0n GAAG Kal atrév, oloy TO yévos ToVY ws yévous

ID oe \ IN oa / \ bee wy , ei0@v* OTE TO AUTO ETAL Tapdderypa Kal ElKOV. ETL OO-

x PENA \ a \ eA 4 \ a & : SP feev Gy ddvvatov xwpls elvar tiv otoiav Kal ob 7 ovcla

n na J KA @ote TOs av at ldéar ovoia tév Tpayyatwy odca xwpis B °° XX cal / a v4 . , & XN elev; ev 0€ TG Daldwyi Toitov €yeTar TOY TpOTOV, ws Kal

a > \ ca s wy \ b4 > rg / las Tod elvat Kal Tod ylyverOa airia Ta eldn eotiv: Katro. Tov clddv dvtwv bums od ylyverar ay pH 7 TO KUHoOV, Kal

TOAAG ylyverat Erepa, ofov oikia Kal Oaxrvdvos, Gv ov

a ¥ ¢ a ” 2 of ao a

gacw ecivat etdn* wate SHAov Sri evdexeTaL Kakelva, dv

“i 2 / ca \ a \ i \ ee gacw idéas civat, Kal civar kal yiyverOar dia Tovatras airlas oias Kat ra pnOévra viv, GAN ov dia Ta edn. 2 \ \ x a > na \ a \ , \ x GAG wept pev TV ideGv Kal TovTOY TOV TpoTOV Kal bia Aoyikorépwv Kal akpiBeotépwv Adywv EoTL TOAAG ovvaya- a a / yety Suova Tots TeOewpnyevors.

"Emel 8& dudpictar wept Tovrwv, Kadds exer mdAW

na \ = lal Oewphjoa. Ta wep Tovs apiOpodvs crpBaivovta Tots r€yovoww ovatas avrovs elvat ywpiotds Kal Tév dvTwy aitias Tpdéras. >

avayxn 6, elmep eotlv 6 apiWuos dtois tis Kal py GAAH , 3 > “1 9: 7: 2 x rate} De. eo - tls €oTw avtod 7 ovata adda Tobr atrd, GoTEep paci Twes, qrow etvat TO pev mpOrdv TL adtod Td 6 exdpevoy, Erepov A a wy oe \ a Ke Dok n / >A» ov TQ elOEL ExacTov,—kat Tovro 7 emi TOV povadwy EevOds

/ a a tmapxet Kal éotw dovpBAntos dmovacdy povds dro.gody

Dion dmoBhérav AY 28 re] yap iA (ET Asc.®) — dreodv] Bporov ériody A Bonitz 29 otos A (A? AI.) : ofov codd. T 30 «i qv iA: et codd.T 6 om. E 10802 9-10 kat diadextikwrépwy

fecit E: om. T 14 avrois E

IO8o>

TON META TA ®YSIKA M

NK los tad a povddi, 7 evOds eeéns maocar Kal ovpBAntal dro.atody drovacoby, oloy A€yovew evar Tov pabnyatiKdy apiOudorv 73 AN a n INN La > / XN, {es (€v yap TS pabnuarixG ovdev Siaeper oddeula povas érépa

s NEA é Ee ! t € N \ ° Rare mera TO ey TpoTn 7 dvds, emerta 7 Tpids Kal otTw 7) O dAdros apiOuds, lot 5& ovuBdAnral at ev Exdoro Aapioud povades, oloy at ev TH Svdd. TH TpeTy avrats, Kal ai ev TH

, St} vd « a \ vA \ S.-X na A Tpidd. TH mpdétn adrais, kal otrw oi emt Tdv dddwv apOpyav: at 8 ev rh dvdd. adr mpdos Tas ev TH Tpiade fe 2 OP n Tp

A > - £ 4 XS * Poa n BA oN avTn aovpBAntot, Opolws S€ Kal emt TOY GAdwv TOV 3 fed > lal \ . € XX x b) n

epeeis apiOudv: S00 Kal 6 pey pabnuarikds apiOpyetrat pera TO ey d0o, mpds TH Eutpoobey evi Addo ev, Kal Ta tpla mpos tots dvai tovrois GAAo ey, Kat 6 Aoumds OF € , a s ns aS 7 el PA on 6 EN ey aoatrws: otros 6& peta Td ev vo erepa dvev TOD Evds TOU

/ \ ¢ \ x a / c / \ \ € TpeTov, Kal 7 Tplas avev THS Svaddos, Opmolws OE Kal O BA S. , s\ 4 DS O. a 9 at o € n dAAos apiOuds) 7) Tov pev elvar Tov dpiOydv olos 6 7pO- Tos eA€xOn, Tov 8 ofoy ot pabnparixol A€yovor, Tpirov dé

a Xx

Tov pnO€évTa TedevTaioy: ert TovToUs. 7) XwpLaTOs elvaL TOvS a oN ny J EN x \ > thet I tal Pd apiOmovs TOV TpayyaTwy, 7) OV YwpLaTovs GAN ev Tots aicOn- a ’ Cee Det 5 \ cal 3 a >) Dy re 3 toils (ody otrws 8 ws TO TpGrov éemecKkoTObpEV, GAN Os eK n ~ fas y) , y \ > rt EN \ S Tov apiOudy evuTapxévtav évta Ta alcOyntd) 7) Tov pe

Tas i XK avrav evar Tov d€ mij, TavTas €ivar—ol pev ody TpdToL

ed a b] / > \ a bn I ) b) 4 Nh Kal’ ods évdéxera adrovs elvat obrol elow e& dvdyKns pdvot,

x > \ ¢ / \ a > ‘ » \ > VA oxedov O€ Kal of A€yovTes TO Ev apxiy elvat Kal ovolay kal oTo.xeloy mavtwv, kal ex tovrov kxal®dAAov twos etvar Tov dpiOpdv, Exactos Tovrwy Twa TOY TpdTwY e€lpynKe, TIDY Tod maoas Tas povddas elvar dovpBAjrovs. Kal TodTo cvup-

/ > 4 > X\ 2 / x BA / o BeBnxev evAodyws* ov yap évdeyxerar ert GAAOV TpoToV €ivat

x \ > / € DS BS 2 if x ye int mapa Tovs eipnuevous. of yey odv duoréepovs pacly etvar Tods apiyots, Tov pev éxovta TO Tpdrepov Kal borepov Tas id€as, BN S \ x x BIN \ \ by J \ Tov O€ paOnuarikoy mapa tas ideas Kal tra aicOyTd, Kal

\ > Ie a vd a 2 & \ \ Xwpliotovs audotepovs TOY aloOyrov: of b€ TOV paOnwariKoY

220 émoiaa E'AY: 6roia J: dmoraodyT 21 érovaody JT 25 ai om. AP 26 povadss] ai povddes AP avrais fecit AP ai om. EJ Al. Syr.! 27 avrais fecit AY 36 of om. AP

b 2 émecxorotpev EJT AI. : emeckdrouyv AP 3 i) Trav J. 4 att ov E i) mavras om. Syr.}, secl. Bonitz: 7) mdvras etvar i) wavras joy fort. Al, 9 elvac om, EJT Syr.!

6. 10808 20 — 7. 10812 10

AP 26 povadss] ai povddes AP avrais fecit AP ai om. EJ Al. Syr.! 27 avrais fecit AY 36 of om. AP

b 2 émecxorotpev EJT AI. : emeckdrouyv AP 3 i) Trav J. 4 att ov E i) mavras om. Syr.}, secl. Bonitz: 7) mdvras etvar i) wavras joy fort. Al, 9 elvac om, EJT Syr.!

6. 10808 20 — 7. 10812 10

; \ a n pévov apiOpov etvar, Tov TpBtov Tdv dsvTwY, KEXwpiopevoV Tov aic@nrav. Kal ot IIvOaydpevo. 8 eva, tov padnpari- KOV, TAY ov KEXwplopevoy GAN ek TovTov Tas aicOnTds A ovolas cvvertdvar pacity: tov yap Sdov odpaydy xarackevd- Covow e& apiOudv, mrjv od povadikGv, GAG Tas povd- das tmoAauBdvovow exew péyeOos: Stas 58 TO mpGrov ev avveorn éxov péyeOos, amopety eofkaow. dAdos S€ Tis Tov a b) AN. \ cal INA e. oy By s \ \ Tp@Tov aplOuov tov rev €iddv Eva eivat, Evior dé Kal Tov padnparikoy Tov avtov Todrov eivat. spolws d& Kal Tepl ‘ t¢ x \ \ > 4 \ \ XX / c XS Ta pnkn Kal mepl ta enineda Kal ep) Ta oTeped. of pev x el x‘. \ \ ~ XX SS OF pe yap €repa Ta paOnuatika kal ra peta Tas id€as: Toy dé GAAws Acydvt@v of pev TA pabnuariKa Kal padnyua- TUK@S NEyovow, Boor pH ToLodor Tas iddas ApiOuots pnde J lA PING € ne x / > na ewal gacw ideas, ot b€ Ta pabypwariKd, ov padnuaTiKOs 4 \ / al dé ov yap TéeyverOar otre péyeOos Tay els peyéOn, 000 drotacoby povddas dudda eivar. povadiKovs d& Tovs dpiOpyors eva. mavres TWWéao1, TAN TOV TIvOayopelwy, Goo. TO ev aToixetoy Kal dpxyv dacw eivar tov dvTwy: exeivor & / n éxovras péyeOos, Kadarep elpnra. mpdrepoy. doaxyas pev ovy évdexetar AEXOHvar wept adrdv, Kal br. mates elolv elpnpevot ot tpdmoL, pavepdoy ex TovTwy: éore d€ TdvTA pev ddvvara, waddov 8 tows Odrepa Tdv Etépwv. ; an ‘\ IIp@rov pev otv oxenréoy «i ovpBdrnral alt povddes 7) dovpBrAnro, kal ef dovpBAnror, Totépws domep S1eldomev. ore mey yap dmovavoty civar dmoiaoby povdds dovpBrnror, a be \ 2 SA a 5 dé \ \ 9) Ce a Mo) gore O& Tas éy adh rh dudd. mpos Tas ev adrh rh rpidd., \ LA x 2 Je aN os bi eee bes} , kal otrws 37 dovpBArnrovs elvar Tas ev ExdoTw TO TPOTH Gpiu@ mpds addjAas. el pev ody Tara. cvmBAnral kal adidopor ai provddes, 6 padnuwarixds ylyverar dpiOyos Kal a , x S PIN 4 > $) / a \ 2 ie eis movos, Kal Tas ideas ovK evdéxerar Elva Tovs ApLOwovs ~ = x b) Ni THEA BY ‘ ~ EN A (motos yap éorar adpiOuds atrd dvOpwmros 7) (Gov 7) GAdo orwdy T&v cidGv; idea pev yap pla Exdorov, olov adrod dv- Opdmov pla Kal adrod Cov GAdAy plas of 8 smoroe kal

big 5 Tov ex ray fecit A: an emitendiay (cf. 1083 23)? Kexo= piopévoy en) Al.:: KEX@pLo mevoY E'NA» 22 eva... vot] eva, €ivat Jaeger, secluso eiva 1, 23 23 tovroy] Tov Tovroy

b 33 ¢yovras E (s sup. lin.) Syre: : ¢xovra JAYr Syr.): €xov ut vid. Al. 108126 pabnrixds AP 7 Tovs omittendum ci. Bonitz 9 ortovy] Te ody KE} avroavOparov et 10 avrofatov E*

2573.2 K

1081?

TON META TA ®YSIKA M

vot] eva, €ivat Jaeger, secluso eiva 1, 23 23 tovroy] Tov Tovroy

b 33 ¢yovras E (s sup. lin.) Syre: : ¢xovra JAYr Syr.): €xov ut vid. Al. 108126 pabnrixds AP 7 Tovs omittendum ci. Bonitz 9 ortovy] Te ody KE} avroavOparov et 10 avrofatov E*

2573.2 K

1081?

TON META TA ®YSIKA M

o > / ddiuddopor dmeipor, ar ovey padrdov Hde 7) Tplas avroav- x a. / +9? Opwros 1 Srovaody), ef S& pr) eioly dptOuol ai idéaL, ovd = e m a € ddws oldy re adras etvar (ek rivwv yap evovrar apyav at a fal / a idéar; 6 yap dpiWyds éorw ex Tod Evds Kal ris dvados Tijs 15 dopiarov, Kal at dpxal Kal Tad oroLxela A€yovrat TOd apLOpuod elvat, Td€ar Te ore mporépas evdéyerar Tov apiOyev adras a ov0’ torépas) ef 8 dovpBrAnror ai povddes, kal otrws dovp- a an / BAyTor Gore Hricody irwwodv, ovre Tov waOnuariKdy evdexETaL elvar rodrovy tov dpiOpdr (6 pev yap pabnwariKds @& adia- 20 popwv, Kal Ta Sekvipeva kar’ adrod ws emt rovodrov ap- ie: LA \ rn Pawel > \ Da is \ , > porret) ore Tov TOv «lddv. od yap Eora 7) dvds Tpdry EK a lod lal lol / povades 7) of dpiOyol e& dv dAé€yovta, oloy ey i 4 \ 7 ‘ » \ a tpitn povas éorar mply ta tpla elva., Kal ev TH TpLdde Te- lf \fs / \ \ > \ / > \ SS a 35 TapTn Kal [7H] méwmTn mplv rods A4piOmovrs TovTovs. ovdEls Mev ODP \ a an Tov TpdToy Todroy elpnKey ad’Tov Tas povddas dovpPAnrovs, Gort 0& Kara pev Tas exelvwy dpxds ebdroyov kal obrws, TO81P Kara pevTor THY adjOevay advvarov. Tds Te yap povddas mporépas kal torépas elvat evdAoyov, elmep kal mpoTn Tis éort povds kal éy mpOrov, dpuoiws 8& Kal dvddas, elmep kal dvds mpdrn €orw: peta yap Td mp@roy etAoyor Kal 5 avaykatoy dSevrepdy ti etvat, Kal ef devrepov, Tplrov, Kab X an otrw Oo) Ta dAdAa eefs (dua 8 duddrepa A€yewv, po- vada Te pera TO ev mparny eivar Kal devtépav, kal duvdda

221 rovom.J 25 eel scripsi: émevra codd. T 29 ro om, J 30 re EJT All: om. AP 33 mréxovta J?AT Al. 34 tprade (Kai rerpdb:) Jaeger 35 7) secl. Jaeger >3 Kal dvddas

d€ dpolas A

7. 1081% 11 — 108285

lA 2 / i x. lal / ‘\ \ a mpdétnv, addvvarov). of 6€ Tovodor povdda pev Kal ev mpd- / ~ \\ 4 3 / \ / vA Tov, devTEpoy b€ Kat Tplrov ovKETL, Kal dvdda TPOTHY, Sev-

AP 33 mréxovta J?AT Al. 34 tprade (Kai rerpdb:) Jaeger 35 7) secl. Jaeger >3 Kal dvddas

d€ dpolas A

7. 1081% 11 — 108285

lA 2 / i x. lal / ‘\ \ a mpdétnv, addvvarov). of 6€ Tovodor povdda pev Kal ev mpd- / ~ \\ 4 3 / \ / vA Tov, devTEpoy b€ Kat Tplrov ovKETL, Kal dvdda TPOTHY, Sev-

J is \ 7 ae p \ x \ @ > 2 / tépay d€ Kal Tpirny odkéri. avepoy Se Kal ru ovdK evdéxe- sd > 4 ad € / / oD : oS Tat, ef dovpBAnTo. Tacar at povades, dvdda elvar avrny \ / oY cf A DA > 4 ot \ bo Kal Tpiada Kal oUrw Tovs GAXovs dpiOwovs. adv TE yap wow ddidgopor ai povddes av Te diapepovoar Exdorn €Exdorns, +) > lal A b) \ > rs ‘\ avaykn apiOpetcOa Tov apiOuov Kata tpdcbecw, oloy Thy dudda mpds Te Evt GAdov Evds TpoarebEvTos, Kal Thy Tpidda + RNY A tal au / \ \ A G\Aov Evds mpos Tots dvol mpoorebEevTos, Kal TiHV TeTpAda ocatrws: Tovrwy dé dvrwy dddvvarov Thy yéveow etvat TOV apiOpav os yevvdow ex THs dvddos Kal rod évds. pdpiov yap ylyverar 7 dvas ths tpiddos Kal atrn ths Terpddos, Tov avrov b& tpdmov ovuBatver kal ent Tov exouevwn. GAN ex tis Suddos ths mpérns kal tis doplorov bsvuddos 2. LP € J / if ’ TN iN / by eylyvero 4 TeTpds, Svo Svades map adriy tip dudda et d& py, pdpiov eorar avri) % Suds, érépa d& mpocéorat pla. duds. Kal 7 Suds éorar ex Tod Eévds avrod kal dAXAov évds i S a cd er 7 Nae lal / red el 0& TodTO, ody oidy 7 elvat TO ETEpoy oToLXElov dudda ddpt- A \ 14 a b) ’ > / e / aTov' povada yap play yevya add’ ov dvada wpioperny. ” > SIN nN ! \ BAN \ ! an ” érl Tap avriy THY Tpldda Kal avTiv THv dSvdda TOs Evov- if tat GAAat tpiddes kal dvddes; Kal tlva tpdmov ex Tpo- / a Tépwv povddav kal totépav ovyKewtTat; mavTa yap Tadr’ 4 > »\ /, ae 4 i ‘i fe (dromd) éort kal tAacpaTadn, Kal dddvarov civar TpdtHV dud- da, cir adriy rpidda. dvaykn 0, emelmep eorar Td ev Kal ? 3 4 ~ /. ) ddpiotos dvas oroixeta. ef 8 dddvvara Ta cvpPaivorra, \ S bE) Ss m , 2 7 9 XN io Kal Tas apxas elvat tavras advvarov.—e«i pev ody biddo- pot at povades dro.aoty drovacoty, tratra Kal road? érepa orpBalver @€ dvdyknss ei 8 ab pev ev GrdrAgw bid- gopor. at & & TO atta apoyo adiddopor dAAnAaIS 4 \ vA wa ps 2), J iy S 2 povat, Kat ovTws ovdey édaTTm ovpBalver Ta Svoxepn. olov yap év tH dexdd. adr evewr déKka povddes, ovyKel- ta. 5€ kal ex Tovrwy Kal ex dvo TevTddwv % dexds. érel 8 ox 6 Tvyav apiOucs adrn 7 Sexds ode otyKerTar ék TOY TLXOVTdY TEVTAdMY, HoTEp OSE povddarv, dvdyKn dia- pepe Tas povddas tas ev Th dexdd. ravrn. adv yap mi)

P14 mpddecw AP 15,16 mporeOévros A 21 é« codd. T Al.: e éx Jaeger 23 avry Ti Al. Syr.: atry EJ Ale: air AP 30 droma add. Jaeger: ddvvara fort. Al. Syr. eort] ctor AP

10821 ofov] of AP 3 atry JAP AL: attn E 5 ras alt. om, JA K2

=) on

T0828

TON META TA ®YSIKA M

ravrn. adv yap mi)

P14 mpddecw AP 15,16 mporeOévros A 21 é« codd. T Al.: e éx Jaeger 23 avry Ti Al. Syr.: atry EJ Ale: air AP 30 droma add. Jaeger: ddvvara fort. Al. Syr. eort] ctor AP

10821 ofov] of AP 3 atry JAP AL: attn E 5 ras alt. om, JA K2

=) on

T0828

TON META TA ®YSIKA M

dtapépwow, ovd al mevrddes dioicovew e€ Gv early 7H deKds: evel d& diaepovor, kal ai povddes diolcovow. et be diade- povol, morepoy ovK evécovtar mevTddes GAhat GAAA jdvoy a ¢ , Key. SNA y attra. at ovo, n eoovra; elre O& ji) everovTat, aToTov: 3 3 / / x ‘ 2 2 if ri > X ow ioelr évécovtal, mola ora dexds e& exelywy; od yap eoTw érépa dexas ev th Sexdd. map atrnv. adda pi kal érépa bexds ey TH Sdexdd. Tap adryy. & pay Kal us n lan ‘\ / avaykn ye pn ex tev TrvxovcGv dvddwv THY TeTpdda ovykeicOar ) yap adpicros dvds, &s act, aBodoa Tijv wpirpevny dudda dvo dvddas enoincer: Tod yap Anpevros 15 9v SvoTolds.—érL TO elvat Tapa Tas bo povddas Tiy dvdda giow twd, Kal thy Tpidda mapa Tas Tpets povddas, TOs ny evdéxerat; 1) yap peOéEer Oarépov Oarépov, domep devKds BA ~ A aed id > ra dvOpwnos Tapa AevKov Kal GvOpwmov (ueréxer yap Tovrwr), a) 4 > / / / e cy n Srav 4 Oarépov Odrepov diapopa Tis, woTEp 6 avOpwTos s O \ ot oy >s ‘\ 5s an >] >) & X de 20 Tapa Cwov kal Slmovv. ert Ta pev apf eoriv & Ta Oe a x BS / e INN > id ee nn piger Ta be O€oerr Gv ovdey evdéxerar bmdpxew Tais po- vaow e@& Ov Buds Kal H Tpids: GAN Gomep ob dvo dv- Opwmot ovx €v te map dporepovs, otrws dvdykn Kal Tas / \ b) 4 > / , x a \ foovadas. Kal ovx Ori adiatpeTot, diolcovot 51a TOTO? Kal bs c \ > - > > iA X ‘ - AX 25 yap at oriypat ad.atperot, GAN’ Guws Tapa Tas dvo ovdev érepov 7 Svas av’TGv.—adrd py odde Todro def AavOdveww, 4 vA / 2 € Uh > / ¢ £ drt ovpBalver mpotépas Kal tvorépas etvar duddas, dpolws d& Kal rods GAdovs aGpiOuods. at mey yap & Th rerpddu dvddes Eotwoay addjAats Guar GAN abrar tov ey TH 5) I , , > DN mae ov € X. , 30 6xTdb. mpdrepal elor, Kal eyevynoay, Somep 7H Svas Tav- Tas; ara, Tas Tetpddas Tas év TH Oxrdd. ait, woTe eb \ ¢ 7: XX PIN \ @ > / \ x c kal 4 mpétn dvas idéa, Kal atra idéar Twes eoovrar. 6 8 atros Adyos kal em rdv povddav: at yap ev TH dvaby t bad ap / ca xs t DS 2 a Th TpeTH povddes yevvOot iis Ae apes tas UEC TeTpaol, lad / 35 OOTE TacaL al povddes ld€ar ylyvovrar Kal ovyKeloerat idéa e€€ ideGv: Gore ShAov bri Kdxelva ov idéar abra Tuyxdvovew otoa ovyketweva eorat, oloy ei Ta Coa aly

26 mevrades AP Al.: mepmddes EJ 8, 9 (post p)), 10 évécovrat EJAY: écovrat recc. i Al.¢ et fort. Al. 8 mevrades Al. et fecit A>: mepmades J: meprades fecit E 9 aiom. EJ Syr) 4 ecovra) évécovrar E? de] 67 APT Syr.} 17 Oarépov alt. ci. Christ : 6arepov codd. T 25 ddcaiperoy AP 31 el () mpaorn Terpas)

Jaeger 32 7 E2J: om, E1AP = 28€a] ar EXJA'T Jaeger

7. 10822 6 — 1082» 33

Tis ovyKelobat ex C@wr, ef TovTwv idéat ciciv.—dAws 5% TO 1082 moeiy Tas povadas diapdpovs Srwcoty aromoy kal mAa- oparades (Ady S&> tAacpaTGdes TO mpos tmdbecw e- Buacpevov) ovre yap Kata TO Tocoy obre KaTa TO TOLOY

10822 6 — 1082» 33

fon , , t Deaf A A OpGpev diahepovoay provdda povddos, avaykn te 7 loov 7 5

BA a b) , / SS Ps Ss / K"

avicov td 7 Lae} ayo f x a \ dukdv, @or el pare mrElwy pat eAdtrev, toos: Ta be toa kal 6Aws ddiddopa radira wmorayBdvouev ev Tors apiOois. «i 5& pj, 008 ab ey adrH TH dexdds dvddes Gdidpopor eoovrar toar ovoa tiva yap airiav &€eu dEéyew to £ / > £ ‘“ yx PI] > %

0 packwv adiapdpovs civary ETL ef ATaca povas Kal po- vas GddAn bvo0, 7» éx Ths Suddos atris povds kal 7 ék THs Tpiddos adryis dvas éorar ex diadhepovedy Te, Kal = ey ms TOTEpov TMpoTepa THs Tpiddos 7) voTepa; paddAov yap eo.Ke Tpotepav dvaykatoy a a n ie ,.! € a Ss € 0 dpa rH dvdd. Tov povddav. Kal jyels pev troday

XN Bdvopev Giws ev kal ey, Kal ev 7 toa 7) dvica, dvo > \ J \ ‘ \ 4 SS oy a: 2 eivat, otov TO ayabov Kal TO Kakov, Kal avOpwmov Kat tr- Tov: ot 8 otrws éyovtes ode Tas povddas. eire bE pH uv Mf cy is a > x BLANEY 53. an Ie €oovTat at ideat apiOuoi. Tovro wey yap avTo dpOds A€Eyov- c v¢ \ / > fal LJ 4 IO /

sw ot diaddpors tas povddas a€vodvtes ctvat, elmep idea €rovTalt, womEep elpntar mpdrepov: ev yap TO e€ldos, at be

, > > / \ ¢ / \ c } ya Movades et Gdiadopor, Kal ai dvddes Kal at Tpiddes oov-

2 £ \ b. \ > tal iA A A ‘\ Tat adiadopor. 10 Kat TO aplOpetoOar otTws, Ev dvo, jun TpothapBavouevov mpos TS tadpxovt. avayKaiov avrois Aéyew (ove yap 7 yeveois ota ex THs doploTov dvddos, ovr’ 30 idé 2 dé i) . 2 / Se ead idé > Ceerd ideay evdexeras elvarr evuTdpger yap érépa idéa ev Erépa,

\ f x co / \ \ x XN € , kal mavra Ta €ldn Eévds pépn) 610 mpos pev Thy tnd0cow > n 4 oe ? > Bb) n x x b a dp0Ss A€yovow, Grws 8 od dpOGs* TOAAA yap avatpodow,

& on

DI ek (oar ei rovrav EAl.: «i rovrey ek (owov JT: ek Cowv ei rovrwy

ex (gov AP Syr.! ai id€ar fort. Al. 5 povada om. AP 7 tows tade J 8 ratra AP 9 airy ut vid. Al., Schwegler :’ ravry codd, I 12 7 pr. A’ et ut vid. Al.: 7 6’ EJ’ 21 mAcior

rece. T Al.: meio EJA?

1083*

TQN META TA ®&YSIKA M

S) \ ee 9 eS of \ VA 2 7 , emel TOUTS y avTo exe TWA PHoovow amoplayv, TOTEpOY, bray dpiOuauev Kal elmwpev ev b0o Tpla,. mpocAapBdvovres b) a BN ~ 7 ca) \ 5) , \ apiOuodmev 7) KaTd peptoas. Tooduev S€ adyuotepws: 610

a Ne 3 4 n roo b) id I yedotov ravrny eis TnALKavTHY THs ovolas. avayew Siapopav.— lf ‘ a = a 7 7 V4 a a mavtwy &€ mp@Tov Kadds exer Siopicacbar tis apiOuod

duadopd, Kal povddos, ef éorw. dvdyxn 8 7) Kata TO TO-

x cov 7) KaTa TO ToLdy diapepew: TovTwy 8 ovdéTepov patverar

avayew Siapopav.— lf ‘ a = a 7 7 V4 a a mavtwy &€ mp@Tov Kadds exer Siopicacbar tis apiOuod

duadopd, Kal povddos, ef éorw. dvdyxn 8 7) Kata TO TO-

x cov 7) KaTa TO ToLdy diapepew: TovTwy 8 ovdéTepov patverar

evdexerOar tmdpxew. add 7 GpiOuds, Kara TO Toodv. et \ XN \ € / n lal fe \ 9 X de dy Kal ai povddes TO TOTG Siehepov, Kav aptOyos an nn va an apiOpod diuepepev 6 ioos TO TAHOEL TOY povdday. €rL TO- n \ Tepov at mpOrar peicovs 7) eAdtTovs, Kal al Yorepov em- d no diddaow 7 Tolvavriov; TavTa yap tadra ddoya. adda / x py ovde Kata Td Toldv diadepew evdexerar. ovdev yap avrats otdy te wtmdapxew Taos: torepov yap Kat Tots S a \ i » apibyots dacly tmdpxew TO ToWy TOD TooOd. ETL ovT av and tod évos Tobr adrals yévoiro ovr dv amd Tis dvddos \ X xX > A c SN ld fal XxX XN TO mey yap ov rowv S€ TocomoLov? Tod yap ToAAG >> ya AN. ; ay vA c 7 » | > x oy Ta 6vta eivat aitia atrn » vous. ef 8 dpa exer Tws vA iy) Ss. >) n t n \ / \ dddws, Aexréov év Apyn pddvotra rotro Kat SiopioTéov Tept r A povados Siapopas, pdduora pev Kal dude avayKn drap- 5) N / r I, / N > + aes xew: ef 5€ yy, tiva A€yovow;—é6ri pev ody, elmep eioly Se Rye 35 / x X BS / € / apiOuot at idéar, ovre cupBAnTas Tas ovadas anacas evdexeTran civat, havepov, ovte dovpBAntovs aAAHAaLs ovdE- a , b SS XQ 39) c ed , / Tepov TOV TpdTwV' GAAG pay ovo os Erepol TwWeEs €yovaL mept Tov apiOuev A€yerat KadGs. elol 8 obrou boo. idéas pey ovk olovrar eivar ore ATAGS obTE ws ApLOpovs TiVas OVoAS, XX \ xX & \ \ 3 \ lA a wv Ta O& paOnuarika eivar Kal Tovs apiWyovs Tperovs TOV OV- Tov, kal apxijy avrév ecivar aito TO ey. dromov yap TO ev pev eival TL mpOtov TOV évdv, Gomep éxeivol pact, dvdda de TOv Svddav pr, pnde Tpidda Tov Tpiddwv: Tod yap avtod Adyou mavTa éoriv. ei pev ody ovTws exeL TA TEpl TOV X / ™ apiOpyov Kal Onoer Tis elvar TOY padnuariKoY fdvoV, OUK EoTL \ & 3 A e t DN / \ A 24 ~ mn TO ev dpxn (avaykn yap diadépew To ev TO TowtTo Tov b 36 plura in textu habuisse vid. Al. Syr. 108391 de EJ'T et ut vid. Al. : re J?AP 2 8’] 6% recc. 4 tmdpxew scripsi, fort. legit Al.: tmdpxov codd.P 76 AP Al. : om. EJ Syr. 7 ai alt, om. JI:Al. 12 Tov Tavrais J 13 mocorady E? Syr.: moody

mov E1JAY Al, 14 a’ryns EJT 20 Tov E 23 paby- tuka AP

7. 1082 34 — 8, 1083 28

Al. Syr. 108391 de EJ'T et ut vid. Al. : re J?AP 2 8’] 6% recc. 4 tmdpxew scripsi, fort. legit Al.: tmdpxov codd.P 76 AP Al. : om. EJ Syr. 7 ai alt, om. JI:Al. 12 Tov Tavrais J 13 mocorady E? Syr.: moody

mov E1JAY Al, 14 a’ryns EJT 20 Tov E 23 paby- tuka AP

7. 1082 34 — 8, 1083 28

dAkwv povddav: ef 5 Todro, Kal dvdda Tid mpdtnv Tov duddav, dpolws de Kal rods GAdovs dpiOuors Tods epekjs) Et d€ é€ort TO ev Gpxy, avaykn paddov domep TAdrwv ére- yey €xew Ta Tepl Tovs apiOuovs, Kal eivar dudda mparnv kal tpidda, Kal od ovpPAntods clvar Tods apiOuovs pds adAjdovs. dv 8 ad mddw tis tO Tadra, elpyrar re advvara ToAAG ovpBatver. GAG pay avayKkn ye 7 A te > if, wo. oe >? 2 / > oN 2 , ovrws 7) éxelvws exe, Bor ed pnderépws, odK Gy evdéxouro > \ 3 A , A > > U4 \ elvat Tov apiOuov xwpiotov.—davepov 6 €xk TovTwY Kal TL xelpusta A€yerat 6 Tpitos Tpdmos, TO eivar Tov adtov dpib- pov Tov Tév €ldGv Kal Tov pabynparikdy. dvdyKn yap eis 4 , tA / ie v2 BA x play do€av cvpBaive dvo0 dpaprias: otre yap padnua- \ > \ pI / fa) L. J ‘ , > ? ID 7 Tukoy GpiOyov evdexeTat TovToY eivat Tov TpdTOV, GAA’ dias tmodecers tmo0euevov avaykn pykbvew, Ooa TE Tols ws eldn Tov dpiOuov A€yovor cvpBaiver, Kal tatra dvaykatov A€yew.— Se rdv HvOayopetwv tpdmos TH pev eddrrovs éxet Svoyepelas Trav mpdrepov elpnuevav, TH Oe ldlas éré- x Xp porepov elpnpévor, Th A \ \ tal \ \ pas. TO Mev yap pa xXwpioToy Tovety TOV apLiOuov ada- petra, TOAAG TOY ddvvaTwv' TO S€ TA obpara e€ Adpib- pov civat ovykeiveva, kal Tov apiOyov Todroy «civar pabn- ‘ D7 / bp] EA Ss BA / 4 patikov, advvardy éotw. otre yap droua peyeOn éyew > / a / a oo \ , > 7 aAnbes, ef O bru pddtora Todroy €xer TOV TpdToY, ovx al ye / fy w” / XS >) p) / tal povades: péyeOos éxovow peyeOos Sé €€ adiaipéeTwv cvykei- lol / 5 s XN rd > ? \ 2 x cOar ms duvarov; adAG pV 6 y apiOunTtiKos apiOwos , 3 . 3 la x A 9. fe , > / S 7 > / A c cipnpevov TpdTav, ovdeva € TovTwY EvdExXETaAL, PavEpoY ws ovK éoTW apiOyod Tis ToLadTn tots olay KaTacKevacovow ot Xwpiorov Tmovodytes adtév.—eri Térepoy ExdoTyn povas &x Tod a oN a a peyddov Kal puukpod lcacbevtmy éoriv, 7 1) ev EK TOU puLKpod © a” 9) Fat i¢ 7 bs sy ey + pI lA ta) » © €k Tod jreyddov; ef pev 57 ovTws, ovTe ex TdvTwY TOV 4 cf + > / ¢ I, e) wn SS oToixeiwy Exacrov ovte ddidopor at povddes (ev TH Mev x ! bs 2 od S \ x € lA > 4 2 yap TO peya ey Th S& TO pLKpoy Umdpxel, évavtioy TH 4 yy yy c 2 mn / > Le! lal a 7 Ss ioe dv) er ot ev TH Tpidd. aiTH mOs; pla yap Te- 33 dudda AP Ale: twa dvada E: ry dudda J D2 xelpiora EJT Al): xeiporos fort. AP 15 é£ovowy Al.° et fort. Al. 25 TOY om. E

1083»

3°

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

lal a 7 Ss ioe dv) er ot ev TH Tpidd. aiTH mOs; pla yap Te- 33 dudda AP Ale: twa dvada E: ry dudda J D2 xelpiora EJT Al): xeiporos fort. AP 15 é£ovowy Al.° et fort. Al. 25 TOY om. E

1083»

3°

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

/ 2 Ss SS an ” rey \ & an rd nn pitty? GAG 81a TodTo lows aird TO & Towdow ey TO a U 5) Ait / n / b] > / TepitT® pecov. el d° exarepa Tov povddwv e& dpporépwv > \ > / c x a » rd > A > eotl icacbevtwr, 7 dvds TOs EoTaL pia Tis ovoa vats EK na na xX Sad lol Tod peydAov Kal puKpod; 7 Tl dvolcer~ths povddos; ri mpo- Tépa 1 povas rhs dvddos (dvaipovypervns yap dvapeirar 7 duds): idéay odv id€as dvayKatoy adriv eivar, mporépay ¥ ovoay ld€as, Kal yeyovévat mpotépav. ek Tivos ovv; H yap adpiotos dvas Svotowds tv—ere dvdyKn iro. ameipov Tov x a GpiO.ov civar 7) TeTEpacpEvov: xawpiotdvy yap ToLwodor TOV apioudv, Gare ovx ofdv re ju) Odxt To’TwY Odrepov bmdpxel. ir4 »% cA bs > 3 / a EA >S éru pev roivwy ameipov ovk évdéxerat, SHAov (ovre yap Te- \ Lae , > ¥y 2 9 € S , lan 2 n pirtos 6 Gmeipds eotw ovr aprios, » Se yeveris TOY GpLOyav aN rae oven eee. ‘ ee eh ‘ Poe Sah S > 2) TepitTod GpiOyod 7 apriov del eotw: dl yey Tod Evds eis x » ro / ei aN Led ‘ I > TOV aptiov minTovTos TEpiTTOS, WdL O& THS peVv Svados Ep- , £ > > € \ Pi c A » an mintovens 6 ad €vos ditrAacvaGéuevos, wd! b& TOV TeEpiT- TOV 6 dAXos Gptios: ett ef Taca idea Tivds of 5é aApiOpol PIN A cue ¥ x PIN , x at B) n x idéar, kal 6 Gmepos eora idea TwWds, 7 TGV aicOyTav 7 x” / / + BS \ / > t y XX GAAov Twds+ Kalrou ovTE KaTa THY O€ow evdexeTaL OUTE KaTa Adyov, tdtrovel y otrw tds idcas) ei d5& TeTmEpacpEevos, / , cal ay a / > , icf 3 x expt mocov; TovTo yap det AEyeoOar ov povoy Ort aAAG \ 4 7 \ NX ° Ne Lal / € 3 4, kal Overt. \GAAG pay et pexpt THS Sexados 6 apLOyes, ed / lal ‘ N\ 2 14 >s 4 Gonep Twes hacw, mpOrov pev Taxd emrehper ra €ldy —otov «i €oTw 4 Tpias avtoavOpwros, Tis Exrar apiOuds adro- immos; attd yap Exacros apiOuos expt dSexddos: avdyxKn 52) TOV ev TovTols apiOyav Twa elvar (ovolar yap Kal idea obrou) GAN Gpws emAciper (ra Tod Cov yap eldn trepeer)—: ef S fal 4 > € S > t x c Gua d€ djAov Ort ei otTwS 7H TpLas avTodvOpwros, Kal at » / 4 > € > “ > lad 2 tal ddAar Tpiddes (Guora yap at ev rots adrois dpiOpors), ad > bY x BA > S ANA eer lA wor amerpor eoovrar avOpwrot, «i pev ld€a Exdorn Tpias, bee eo cA >] s , >) 2 2 Ne \ auTO EkaoTos GvOpwros, «i O€ py, GAA’ avOpwrol ye. Kal > ze © ) / lal / 1.4 >] na an el pepos 6 eAdTTwy Tod pelCovos, 6 ex Tov ovpBANnTev povdday tov ev To aiT@ apiOue, ef di) H TeTpas adr? x a id€a Twvds éorwv, otov trou 7) AevKod, 6 GvOpwros Eorat pEpos b 35 rivos AP Al, Syr.: rwos EJT 108428 té€a EJT AL: ef may idéa AP 10 y’ Schwegler: 8’ codd.T 14 & EJP Al.: om. A» 16 év rovro.s] évrds TovTey yp. E tig Al. Bonitz: twas codd. T 21 avro €xaotos JiAl.: airoékacros EAT avOpeoros |

ay ayOpwros EJ 23 5) Bonitz: 8’ codd. I avty TiAl.: atry EJA‘Dr Syr}

8. 1083 29 — 1084) 20

A» 16 év rovro.s] évrds TovTey yp. E tig Al. Bonitz: twas codd. T 21 avro €xaotos JiAl.: airoékacros EAT avOpeoros |

ay ayOpwros EJ 23 5) Bonitz: 8’ codd. I avty TiAl.: atry EJA‘Dr Syr}

8. 1083 29 — 1084) 20

‘f fal immov, «i dvds 6 avOpwros. dromoy Sé Kal TO THs pev Se- 4 N a Kddos elvat id€ay évdexddos O& py, pyde Tov éxouevar > ) n x XS Nae f ~ - x \ we wy > apiyav. ert d€ Kal EoTL Kal ylyverat Evia Kal ov eld ovK éorw, Sore dia Th ov Kakelvwy edn Cot; odK dpa atria Ta ein éoriv. ere dromov ei 6 GpiOos 6 péxpe THs deKddos M@AACv tt dv Kal eldos adrns THs dexddos, Kaito. TOD jev > - fal > nan a OvK €oTL yeveois ws évds, THS OB oT. TeipGvTaL 8 ws Tod / fol na an lal Mexplt THs Sexddos Tedelov dvTos dpiOuod. yevvdou yoy Ta © + \ 4 a 7 \ , DS BA emopeva, olov TO Kevdv, dvadoylav, TO TepiTTév, Ta GAAG Ta Toladra, évrds Tis dexddos: Ta pey yap Tals apyxais b) , NA / =) A / \ ’ amodwWeacw, oloy Kivnow ordow, dyabdv Kakdv, Ta 4 y tal + a X \ a \ , 9 No 3 a dda Tois apiOuots: did TO ey TO Tepitrdv: ei yap ev TH f n Tpiddt, TOs 1 TevTas mepiTTdv; ert Ta peyéOn Kal boa Towabra pexpt toood, olov mpdrn ypaupr, () dropos, eira dvas, etra kal rabra pexpr dexddos—éri ef Eat. yopioros a nN 6 apiOpycs, amopnoeev av Tis ToTEpoy TpdTEepov TO ev 7) 7 oa \ ¢ / fe \ *s / ¢ > , \ e Tpias Kal 7 duds. 1 pev oy odvOeTros 6 apiOpos, TO ey, 7 6€ TO KaOddov mpdTepov Kal TO cidos, 6 apiOuds: Exdorn \ lo { / NS 5! rot 3 of ¢ iS s As yap TOV povadwy jLdpLov.Tod apLOuod ws tAn, 6 9 ws eldos. +a Ws / ~ bd i / ® Ady: ears as 7 o€eta, dre peépos kal els radvrnv duatpetrar. ws pev Oy DAn H d€ela Kal 7d ocrotxeioy Kal 2) povas mpdTepov, ws O€ KaTa TO eldos Kal THY ovolay Ti x \ , © > % \ \ ow aes: a or \ Kata Tov Adyov 7 opbi) Kat TO GAov TO ex THs VAns Kal Lol ¥' 3 / \ fal 4 \ oe £ , X, of Tod eldous: eyy’TEpoy yap Tod eldovs Kal ob 6 Adyos TO Gude, yeveres 0 Uorepov. TOs odv apyn TO Ev; Gru ov diauperdy, £: >! > bake | / \ A / \ \ Bix U4 ox SNe, bi DS SS c im AV pees apxnv. eat. d€ advvaTov: TO pev yap ws e€tdos Kal } ovoia TO 8 os pepos kal os DAN. ore ydp Tws ey Exdrepov—Tij Hep 1. yap pov—rij

425 d€] yap yp. E 28 otk... 29 eoriv in marg.J 29 6 alt. om. Al. Syr. ov pexpt tis évdexddos fort. Syr. 30 dy] dy 6 év ci. Bonitz kairo] Kat fort. Al. 37 peyeOn] pera madn AP: maOn Jt > ocod Al. Bonitz: mécov codd. 7 damnavit Schwegler 7 addidi 15 kal TO crowyeiov om. ut vid. Al.

16 ro pr.] an ta? 19 éru O€ rece. 20 Kut om. EJ Syr.l

7 mye

10852

4 or

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M

\ pev adndeia dvvaper (ef ye 6 apiOuds Ev Tr Kal pa ws awpos adr’ erepos @& érépwv povddwv, dotep, pacty), ev- tedexela 8 ov, EoTi povdas Exarépar alriov b€ Tis Tvp-

o —_-y l4 Bawotons Gpaprias ort dua éx TOy pabnudtav eOjpevov kal ek TOv ddyov Tov Kabddov, dot e& exelvav peV oS aS \ & \ ‘ > \ y € x \ ‘ oTlypayy TO ev Kal tiv apxiv eOnxay () yap povas oruypa aberds €orw: Kabatep ovv Kat erepol tives ex TOD éAaxloTov e \

Ta ovtTa ovveTibecay, Kal ovToL, Gore ylyverar 7 povas DAH n a lol / TOv apiudy, kat Gua mporepa tijs dvddos, madw 8 torépa ws ddov Tivds Kal évds Kal eldovs Tis dvddos ovens) bud be

lal r4 TO KaOdAov Cyrelv TO KaTnyopovpevov ev Kal ovTws ws pEpos €leyov. tadra 8 dua TO aitS advvatov tmdpyew. el a / d& TO &y adrd def Tudvoy Aberovt etvar (ovOevi yap dvadeper XN oF 2 / Nee S bs ‘ « as \ BA c n OTL apy), Kal pev Svas SiaipeTH 7) OE ovas ov, Of0L0- Tépa ay ety TO Evi aito 7H povds. el 8 7 povds, KaKeivo TH povdds 7 TH Svddu wor otépa ay ein €xarepa 7 Vee nN TH OV CTpeTep i pa 7 \ lal a a ‘\ A povas tis dvddos. ov act dé yevvdou yotv tiv dvdda om by I] y € ~ ed | \ c \ i / mp@tov. éru el €oTw Svas ev Tt adr Kal 7) TpLas avTn, BY > dupa duds. ex Tivos otv atrn 7 duds; ’Aropnoee & Gy tis Kal erel adr pev ovk eotw ev Tots apiOuots, TO 8 ees, Sowv pH €or peta&Y povddwy (otov a 5) a / x nn / , > a 7? Se ea TGV év TH Svddu 7) TH Tpidd.), ToTEpoy eheEHs TO Ev adTa xX By \ € SS J rc b] i BN n / 7 ov, Kal morepov 7 dvds TpoTépa Tov epeEHs 7) TOV pova- dwv dnoTepacty.—opoltws d5& Kal wept Tov totepov yevav Tob apiOpotd orpBaiver Ta dvoxepi, ypayphs te Kal émimédov kal odpatos. of pev yap éx Toy eldév Tod peydAov Kal Tov pikpod mrovodow, ofoy éx aKpod ev Kal Bpax€os Ta pHKN, mharéos O& Kal orevod Ta éemimeda, ek Babéos de Kal TaTeEL- vod Tovs dyKovs: Taira d€ éotww €ldn TOD peyddov Kal pLKpod. Ty b€ Kata TO ey dpxi GAAor GAAws TiWéac. TGV ToLod- \ > A XN lA / / 3 Va >. Tov. Kal éy rovrows b& pupia daiverar Ta Te advvata Kal \ lal lal Ta TAacpaTeéen kal Tra tuevavtia Tact Tols evAdyots. ’ anohehupeva Te yap GdAjAwy ocvpBaiver, et. pi) oVvvaKo-

> 23 ov scripsi: ovx codd. 33 povoy aberov] GOerov fort. Al. : pdvov acvvGerov ci. Bywater: an povadixov? 37 post povas add. 7 ev tH Svade J marg., T 1085*1 mporny E tt avtn JT 2 arn E 5 tovE TO évi] ro J atta... 6 epeEqs in marg. J 6 rev pr. codd. I: r@ Al.¢ Bonitz 7 Omotepaovy ia

8. 1084> 21 —g. 1085' 13

33 povoy aberov] GOerov fort. Al. : pdvov acvvGerov ci. Bywater: an povadixov? 37 post povas add. 7 ev tH Svade J marg., T 1085*1 mporny E tt avtn JT 2 arn E 5 tovE TO évi] ro J atta... 6 epeEqs in marg. J 6 rev pr. codd. I: r@ Al.¢ Bonitz 7 Omotepaovy ia

8. 1084> 21 —g. 1085' 13

Aovdovor Kai ai dpyal aor civar Td TAaTY Kal oTevoy Kal \ \ , E XN nan yx \ 3 4 X\ paxpov kat Bpaxd (ei S& Todro, éotar 7d énimedov ypaymr \ x kal TO otepedy emimedov: ert S& ywviat kal oynyara. kal Ta To.atra TGs dmodoOjceral;), TaTd Te cvpBaiver Tots \ ‘ > , an XX / , > 4 p > Tepl Tov apiOucv: Tatra yap maOn peyeOovs eotiv, addr > b] / \ / a SS > / \ oy, OvK €k TOUVTwY TO péyeOos, GoTep ovd e& edO€os Kal KapTv- ov TO phKos ovd ex Aelov Kal Tpaxéos Ta oTEped.—mdv- tov d€ Kowdr TovTwv bmep emi Tov ciddv TOV ws yévoUS 7 lal A lol ~~ , / \ oupBaiver diatopeiv, orav Tis Of Ta KabdAov, TOTEpoY TO Gov aitd év TO Cw 7) Erepov aditod (© 5 dp pr Oov aiTd ev TO (Hw 7 ETEpoy adrod wov. Totro yap ja} X@piorod pev dvTos ovdeuiay Tooe: Aropiav: ywpiorod bé, donmep of Tatra d€yovtés fact, Tod évds xal TSv dpiOuav od 4 a > XN La 4 tal / x LNA ig padtov doar, «i pay padwoy Set A€yew TO advvarov. a / \ aA \ > nan , yap vor Tis év TH dvade TO Ev Kal GAws ev ApiOug, TOTE- . x a a pov avro voel Tt 7) ETEpov;—ol pev ody TA peyeOn yevvGoy ex uA a ef XN >] fel lel AS X\ Sh ’ a totavTns Ans, Erepor S€ Ex THS oTLypHS (7) O€ oOTLypH adtots doxel evar ovy ev GAN oiov Td Ev) Kal GAAns Ans olas 76 TAHOos, GAN od TAnOovs: Tept Oy ovdey Hrrov cupBaiver TA 2 1% ., lal > XS \ f. € lA : XX \ avTa amopeiv. ef pey yap pia 7» UAn, Ta’Td ypayp? kal enimedov kal orepedv (ek yap Tov aitdy TO adtTd Kal ey ¥ > SN 4 uy Nees of S a (an? éorat) ef d€ mAclovs at trAau kal érepa pev ypaupis érépa d€ TOO émimedov Kal GAAN TOD aTEpEod, ToL akoAovOodcw aA- -, ON + ov > \ / \ vA xX ns > AnAats 7) OV, WOTE TATA TUB HOETAL Kal OVTWS* 7 yap ovX ef Se er J sy Ni oF , x a S &£e. TO eninedov ypappiyv 7) ora ypaypy.—éere TOs pev > / > 3 nn t Seat 4 \ / \ ’ \ AX evdexeTar eivat ex TO Evos Kal TAnOovs TOV apiOuov ovdeEv 3 ~ a > » / > \ a a emtxetpeirau' OTws O ody €yovot Ta’Ta cvpBaiver SvoxXEpPH dimep Kal Tots €k Tod Evds Kal éx THs duddos THs doplotov. 6 Mev yap ex Tod KaTnyopovpevov Kabddov yevva Tov apiOuov \ > x / © > . sy , a , , kat ov Twos TAnOMovs, 6 6 Ek TWOS TAOOUS, TOD TpeTOV dE \ \ / n , > an iA / AN (riv yap dvada mpGrév ti elvar TAOS), Gore Siapeper ovdev c ee fee) tal = > c > 4 c > \ 2 /, lal x os eimeiy, AAN al amopia at adral axodrovdjoovor, mikis 7) / » lal xX a Oars 1) Kpaois 7) yeveots Kal Goa GAda Toladra. padiora ? & adv tis emuCnrjcesev, ef pla éExdorn povas, ex Tivos éotiv:

425 exé7 Schwegler: 67 ywpiora Jaeger 26 ¢gov] (@ov Jaeger 31 Te omittendum ci. Bonitz b3 ravra ADSerit 9 68] od E 11 ai airai T Syr.! et ut vid, Al.: aira J, ai sup. lin. ante atra: scripto: atrat EA: atrat Christ 12 ovvOecis Bywater i) Kpaois in marg. J: om. I

13 ei] J

(ss) (eo)

1085)

1087?

Bonitz b3 ravra ADSerit 9 68] od E 11 ai airai T Syr.! et ut vid, Al.: aira J, ai sup. lin. ante atra: scripto: atrat EA: atrat Christ 12 ovvOecis Bywater i) Kpaois in marg. J: om. I

13 ei] J

(ss) (eo)

1085)

1087?

TQN META TA ®YSIKA M, N

3 + ENN 2S! lat y Dy \ \ a i , ov xwpioas. dSndo? € €k THY Epywy' dvev ev yap TOD Kabo- Aov ovdk éoTw emioTHynvy AaBely, TO OE XwplCew alitioy Tv

, n XS \ 3 / 3 - c ’ c b) ovpBawdvtwy SvoxepGv Tepl Tas ideas EoTiv. of 6 ws avay-

a = \ \ ce \ katov, elnep €oovral tives ovolar mapa Tas aicOnrds Kal € - \ > DA ‘\ > a - \ peovoas, YXwpiordas elvat, dAdAas pev ovK e€lxovy Tatras €

\ Tas Ka0ddov Aeyouevas e&€Oecav, Gate ocvpBaivew oyxeddv

\ eS / i \ / \ x 2 ee Tas avtas toes elvar Tas KaOddov Kal Tas Kal’ Exacrov.

oe ss a pes ’ CaaS wy x / n arn pev ody airy Kad’ abripy ein tis ay dvoyepera TOP

elpnpevov.

“O 8 Kal Tols d€yovor Tas ideas eye TWA Aaroplay

na lal , kal Tois py A€yovow, Kal Kar adpxas ev Tols dvaTophma- LY Ue , / a 9 x / X ya ow ed€xOn mpdtepov, A€ywpev vov. el pev yap Tis pa) On- get Tas ovotas elvyat KEexwpiopevas, Kal Tov TpdTOY ToOdTOV ws A€yerar TA KAP Exacta TGV dvTwv, dvaiphoe. THY ovctay © , / xX ie an \ > la / ws BovroumeOa Aeyew av d€ Tis Of Tas ovolas XwpLoTas, mOs Ojoe TA oToLXela Kal Tas dpxds airdv; «i pev yap > e \ Ne /, a Le MWg. 2 iva

ka@? €xacrov Kat pr) Ka0cdov, Tocadr eorar Ta dvTa doaTep TA oToLXela, Kal OK emoTHTA TA oToLyEla (CoTwoaY yap at pev év Th pwr ovddaBal ovolar ta d& croixeta addy oToLxela TOY ovoloy: dvayKn di) TO BA &éy elvar Kal Exdornv Tay ovddAaBev play, elmep py Kabddov Kal TO elder at

b i ’ \ Y « / a > an \ la \ ‘\ avral d\\a@ pia exaorn TO apiOug@ Kal Tdde TL Kal yur c y, » > ae OS. y ny ed / > ? c OM@vupoY: ett O avTO O €oTwW ev ExacTov TiWeacw: ef O ai ovddaBal, otra Kal e€ dv elo: odk orar dpa TArelw dra « /, ION a yo fs ea bs XN \ ’ \ 4 €vos, 0vde TOV GAAwY oTOLXElwY OVOeY KaTa TOV avTdy AdyoV dvmep ovde TOY GAAwY ovAdAaBSY %H adr GAn Kal GAAn: GAAG pay el TobTo, odK ~oTar Tapa TA oToLXela Erepa dvTa, =) \ , AN a y XX 9939 si x \ lal GANG povoy TA oTOLXElar ETL O& OVS EmLCTHTA TA cTOLXEla ov ydp Kadddov, » 8 emiotyun Tov KaOddrov: dShArov 8 éx tav amodelewv kal Tov dpiopdv, od yap ylyverat ovd- Aoytopos St. 7Téd€ TO Tplywvoy d¥o0 dpHats, ei pu Tay Tpl- ywvov do dpOal, odd bri 6di 6 dvOpwros Gov, «i pa) TaS A —~ - \ \ Xv avOpwTos Gov) adda pay elye Kabdrov ai dpyal, 7) Kal ab

ek TovTwv ovolar Kabdrov (7H) €orar yu) ovola mpdrepov odolas:

>16 Néyouey E? 19 07 APAl.: riOje EJ Syr.) 24 On EJfet ut vid. Al.: 6¢ AP = &v om. AP 27 60m.JT 33 ék] ék te E 35 tplywvoy alt. om. AP 36 dpbais J aie

7» 1087* I xa@ddov secl. Jaeger ai om. EJT Syr) 1087%1 kaOdd\ov 7) scripsi, leg. ut vid. Syr.: 7) kaOddov T: kadddov EJAY Al,

9: 1086 5 — 1. 10878 34

19 07 APAl.: riOje EJ Syr.) 24 On EJfet ut vid. Al.: 6¢ AP = &v om. AP 27 60m.JT 33 ék] ék te E 35 tplywvoy alt. om. AP 36 dpbais J aie

7» 1087* I xa@ddov secl. Jaeger ai om. EJT Syr) 1087%1 kaOdd\ov 7) scripsi, leg. ut vid. Syr.: 7) kaOddov T: kadddov EJAY Al,

9: 1086 5 — 1. 10878 34

‘ X \ 4 ’ > 4 X\ ie lal \ € > ‘\ TO Mev yap KaQodov ovK ovola, TO SE oTOLXEloy Kal 4 apy? , 4 XS \ a \ € > ‘ oe > oo kaOorov, mpdrepoy 5€ TO arTotxelov Kal 7 apxn av apy) kal oroixeldy eotw. Tadra re d) TavTa ovpBaiver edAdyus, érayv é€k oTowxeiwy Te Todor Tas ideas Kal mapa Tas TO cae Ly bl] v4 > 7, \ PINs et b cal >. avTo eidos eéxovoas ovolas Kal idéas Ev Ti d€iGow eivar Ke- ig a) \ XN 7 oe DEN: lat a fal Xwpiopevov' ef S& pnbev Kkwdver domep ent Tov Tis dwvijs oTotxetwy ToAAG elva Ta GAda kal Ta Bra Kal pnOev elvat Tapa Ta ToAAA adTd GAda Kal adrd Bira, covTa évexd ye Tovrov dmeipor at Gporat ovddaBal. To Se THY emoTHuny eivar Ka0ddov Tacav, Bote dvayKatov civar kal Tas Tév évTwy dpxas Kabddrov eivar Kal pa) odolas KEexo- A yo, S é cee 7 a Ji > \ piopevas, exer pev pddwor aropiay Tv hexOevTwy, od piv GAAA Erte ev as aAnOes Td Aeydpevov, oT. S ws odK dAy- Oés. i) yap emuothyn, Somep kal TO emiotacOa, Surrdv, Gv TO pev Suvduer TO de evepyeiqa. 7 pev ody dSvvayus os An fel / a sa ABY nn l4 + eae 2 7 > es [ro] KaOddov odca Kal ddpioros Tob KabdAov Kal dopiorov eotiv, 9 & evépyera wopiopern Kal wpiopevor, Tdd€ TLodaa TOODdE TLVOS, GAA Kata crpBeBynkds H dis TO KaOdAov yxpGpa dpa ig 4 A n A «wn n“ {ee | \ a ao £ ort TddE TO XpGua 0 bpa xXpGpd eorw, Kal 0 Oewpe? 6 ypap- patikds, Téde TO GApa adArda: eel ei dvdyxn Tas dpxas / AN b] sy NS 3 4 , Lye Kabddov elvat, dvdyxn kal ta ex TovTwy Kadddov, Somep SEA na 3 4 ) XX na > Da SN AX 99) ent Tov amodelEewy: ei dé TOOTO, odK Cora XwpioTor ovOey ovd ovata. GAAd dfAov Sri ote pev ws 7) EmLGTHUN KaOddoD, eoTL & as ov.

Ilept pev ody tis ovolas ravrns eipijcOw rocatra, mav- Tes d& trowodor Tas dpyds evavrias, domep ev Tols dvorkois, kal mept Tas dkwirovs ovolas duolws. el d& Tis TOV amdv- Twv apXHs pi evdexeTa mpdrepdv Ti Elva, dddvatov dy ely THY apxnyv Erepdv TL odoay civar apxny, oloy ek Tis €you TS

\ 2 \ be > Oe 2 2) , & rd Aevkov apxiy elvat ovx 7) ETEpovy GAA’ 7 AEvKdY, Elvar Eev-

26 avrocidos Al. kal id€as codd. I Al. : omittenda ci. Bonitz 12 pl) ovcas AP: otcas Al, 13 pev EJTAI.¢%: om. AP 14 0 ws KadnOes J 16 duvdper] divapis J Syr.} 17 rov secl. Bonitz . 18 évepyeig Al. 24 7 om. EJ 29 THs

aroptas ci. Bonitz 33 70 om, JAY

1087»

TON META TA ®YSIKA N

kal id€as codd. I Al. : omittenda ci. Bonitz 12 pl) ovcas AP: otcas Al, 13 pev EJTAI.¢%: om. AP 14 0 ws KadnOes J 16 duvdper] divapis J Syr.} 17 rov secl. Bonitz . 18 évepyeig Al. 24 7 om. EJ 29 THs

aroptas ci. Bonitz 33 70 om, JAY

1087»

TON META TA ®YSIKA N

7 e / ‘ ed 4 BY \ a pI) tal Tot Kad vroKeyevov Kat ETepovy TL OV AEvKOY Elval' EKElVO \ Q » cA EIN y } 2¢ 3 , yap mporepoy éorar, GAG pi ylyverar mavta e€ evavtiov @s tmoKeyyevov Twds' avaykn dpa padiota Tols evaytiors Ane a 2. y ! Ate, , 9. oe s TOU tmapxew. del dpa Tmavra Ta evavtia Ka wvroKeysevov kal ovdév xwpiordy, GAN domep kal atverar odOev odoia évavtiov, Kal 6 Adyos paptupet. ovdey dpa Tdv evavTiov / x \ b) ROE € XS A ef a 3 kuplws dpx} mavtwov add’ érépa.—ol bé TO Erepoy Tov evay- nN .3

tlov trAnv Trowsow, of pev TS éEvt [ro tow] 7d door, os

TodTo Tiv TOD TANOovs odoay diow, ot dé TO Evl TO TAHOOS Coaey.. -

(yevvGyrat yap ot dpiOyol Tots wey ex rhs Tod dvicov dvddos, Tod peyadov Kal utxpod, TO 0 ex Tod TANIovs, bd THs Tod évos d& odolas duoty) Kal ydp 6 76 dvicoy Kal ey A€ywv \ a N 50 oy > l \ es r Ta oTolxeia, TO 6 GAvicov Ex peyadov Kal pukpod dvada, « & wy \ ” % \ / \ \ M , os ey évta TO dyicoy Kal TO péya Kal TO puKpdoy déyel, \ > vi or 4 b) n ? + | MS SS S \ kal ov Suopi€er dre Adyw Gpibyd S ov. GAAA pay Kal Tas 5 \ ns a cal 3 an 3 / c = apxas as oroixela Kadodow ot KarGs arodiddacw, of pev TO peya Kal TO puKpdv A€yovTes peTa TOD Evds, Tpla Tadra a n S) nf \ \ /, e/ \ 9 | ‘\ oToixeia TOY apiOuev, TA pev Sdo PAnv TO 8 ev Ti» pop- Ud c cy \ \ \ yrs ig \ ‘4 \ A gynv, of b€ TO ToAY Kal dAlyor, Bre TO peya Kal TO pL- Kpov peyedous olkerdrepa thy vow, of d& Td Kabddov par- pee / iN e. / \ \ € , / Aov emt rovrwy, TO brepéxov Kal TO bmEpexduevov. diaper de TovTwy odOev as cimely Tpds Evia TOV cvUBawovTwr, dda mpos Tas AoyiKas pdovov dvoxepelas, as vAdrrovrar bia is \ ’ \ \ / \ > / XX fal TO Kab avdrol AoyiKds pew Tas dmodelers. Tj Tod avrod ye Adyov éorl rd drepéxov Kal trepexouevoy ecivar b) b \ \ \ / \ x , \ \ b) X Gpxas GAG pr TO péya Kat TO puKpdr, Kal Tov dprOpov mpdrepoy THs dvddos ek TOv oToLxelwy KadddAov yap dp- porepa addy éoriv. viv b€ Td wev €yovor Td 8 od A€yov- ow. ot 0& TO €repoy Kal TO GAAO Tpds TO ev avritiOdaow, ot 8 Anos kal 7d €v. ei 5€ eoTw, Somep Bovdovra, Ta a ‘\ dvta e@& evavtiwy, TH dé Evi 7 ode evavtiov 7) 14 an 9 oA ig / he TOAD TO GAlym dvtikertat.—rd 8 ev Sri pérpov onyatves, avepdv. Kal év mavti gore te €repov troKeiyevov, olov év

ot 0& TO €repoy Kal TO GAAO Tpds TO ev avritiOdaow, ot 8 Anos kal 7d €v. ei 5€ eoTw, Somep Bovdovra, Ta a ‘\ dvta e@& evavtiwy, TH dé Evi 7 ode evavtiov 7) 14 an 9 oA ig / he TOAD TO GAlym dvtikertat.—rd 8 ev Sri pérpov onyatves, avepdv. Kal év mavti gore te €repov troKeiyevov, olov év

\ a appovia dleais, ev Se pweyeOer SdxTvAos 7 Tovs 7 TL TOLOdTOY, 35 a Xx ev d€ pvOuots Baois 7) ocvdAdaB}: Spotws be Kal ev Bape arabs Tis Gpiopevos eoriy: Kal kata Tavtwy dé Tov adrov TpOmov, ev pev Tols mo.ols TowWv TL, ev S& Tots Tocots To- 1088 adv Tl, Kal ddiaiperov TO pérpov, TO pev KATA TO Eldos TO d€ mpos THY aicOnow, as ovK dvTOS TLVds TOD Evds Kad adTd ovalas. Kal todro Kard doyov: onpatver yap Td ev bru pé- / , ee ~ b) A 4 Lod / Tpov TAnOGovs Tivos, Kal 6 ApiOmos Ste TANHOOS pepeTpNEvoV § kal TAROos petpwv (S10 kal evAdyws ovK ore TO ev apropos: IOS \ BN , , rd ? > XN \ \ , \ ovde yap TO weéTpov petpa, GAN apyn Kal TO pérpoy Kal Neh ~ Cr sc N ‘ ae) € lat sy if ic) TO &v). def d€ del Td adtd TL dmdpyew TacL TO péTpoV, ofoy ) NY J ov \ > BA ei Urmo, TO pérpov tmmos, kal ef dvOpwror, dvOpwros. > ‘ a ei 8 GvOpwros Kat tmmos Kal Oeds, Gov tows, Kal 6 dpi- to Ouos adtGy éora (oa. ei 8 dvOpwmos Kal Aevkdv Kal Ba- digovy, Hxiora pev apiOucs rtovrwy bia TO Tare TdvTa ee \ ce, \ b} , 4 \ nm of € omapxew Kal évl kara dpiOudv, buws O& yevdv eora 46 > 7 £ 4 + te sf apropos 6 TovTwy, i TWos GANS TovatTns Tpoonyoplas.

Oi dé TO dyicov as & 71, Thy dvdda be Adpictoy ToLodyTeEs 15 MeydAov Kal puixpod, méppw Alay ty doKxotvTwy kal duvarev Aéyoutw: ma0n Te yap Tadra kal cvpBeBnKdra paddov x» a a a 7) broKeiweva Tots apiOots Kal Tots peyéOeciv eott, TO TOAD

\ ay Pd a \ / \ \ / iva kal dAtyov dpiOuod, kal peya Kal puKpov peyeOous, doTep dpriov Kat mepitrdv, Kal deloy Kal rpaxv, Kal «Ob Kal 20 kapmbdov: ere d& mpds tavtn TH dpapria Kal mpds te avaykn evar TO peya kal TO pukpdv Kal dca Tovatra: Td

ev \ la ka) d& mpds TL TavTMY TKiota pious Tis 7) ovola TOY KaTNyopLOV €oTl, Kal VoTEpa TOO TOLD Kal ToTod: Kal TdO0s TL TOD TOTOd TO mpds TL, BoTEp EAEXOn, GAN ody BAN, ef TL ErEpov Kal 25 T@ OAwS KOWG Tpds TL Kal Tois Peper adTod Kal elderw.

b 37 eoriy JAY Syr.!: om. E 108&*2 «ai om. JT 56 om. EJ 8 70 pérpoy secl. Bywater 9 imma... dvOpwros fort. Al., ci. Bonitz: tmmos 16 perpov, immovs, kal ef AvOparos, dvOpamovs ccodd. © 13 kara] kara roy recc. 15 tom. E 16 ek peyddou fort. Al, 21 avry JT et ut vid. E} 24 kal alt.] kal rod AP 25 et] 7 Al. Syr.l

2573-2 ily,

TQN META TA ®Y3ZIKA N

EJ 8 70 pérpoy secl. Bywater 9 imma... dvOpwros fort. Al., ci. Bonitz: tmmos 16 perpov, immovs, kal ef AvOparos, dvOpamovs ccodd. © 13 kara] kara roy recc. 15 tom. E 16 ek peyddou fort. Al, 21 avry JT et ut vid. E} 24 kal alt.] kal rod AP 25 et] 7 Al. Syr.l

2573-2 ily,

TQN META TA ®Y3ZIKA N

ovdev yap eori ovTE péya OUTE pLKpdY, OUTE TOAD oUTE dALyor, : x x» oite SAws Tpds TL, 0 ody Erepdy TL dv TOAD 7) OALyon 7) péya 2) puxpoy 7) mpds Theor. onpetov & bre Hxicta ovoia go Tis Kal dv TL TO mpds TL TO pOvOV pa Elvar yéveoww adTod pnd POopdy pyde know aomep xara 76 Tocdy avfgors kal Oiois, kara Td Tov GAdolwors, Kata Témov dopa, Kara Thy ovolay 1 amd yeveois Kal pOopa,—addr od Kara A , ¥ at nan Lal eX xX Las € zw X TO Tpds Tu dvev yap Tod KiwnOAvar Ore pev pelCoy dre de »” x ¥ va Me / \ ~ 4 33 €Aarrov 7) toov éorat Oarépov KwnOévTos Kata TO Toor. 1088> dvdyKn te Exdorov tAny eivar TO dSvvdper Tovdrov, Sore Kal ovolas: TO dS mpds Tt ovre Suvdper ovoia ovre evepyela. AToTOV S Cin) SS. 2 / A E: if a > 4 an a ovv, paddov 8€ advvaror, TO ovalas pr) ovoiay ToLely oTOLXEloV kal mporepov: torepoy yap macat ai Karnyopia, eri d& Ta 5 OTOLXEla Ov KaTynyopetra Kal’ Ov oToLxela, TO S€ TOAD Kal ddlyov Kal ywpls kal Ga Karnyopeirar dpibuod, Kal 7d paxpov Kal ro Bpaxd ypapuns, Kal enimeddy eote kal \ \ s > S X\ A Py lal a NS XS tAaTY Kal orevoy. ef O€ OF Kat €ote TL TAHOOS ov TO EV del, (rd) dAtyov, olov 7 duds (el yap odd, TO ev dv ddrlyor etn), 10 Kav TOAD atAGs ely, olov H dexds ToAV, [Kal] ef Tavrns Trae lal x \ 4 lol » ox of pl 3, 7 py €or TActov, 7) TA pUpta. TOs ody eora. obrws é€ dAlyou \ (Sata ta gh} , Xx \ + ot a Xx kal TodAod 6 apiOuds; 7) yap audw der KarnyopetcOar 7) pnd€érepov: vov b& TO erepov povov Karnyopeirat. ‘AmAGs 8& def oxomelvy, dpa dvvardv Ta didia ex 15 oTolxelwy ovyKeioOar; trnv yap eeu otvOerov yap may VS , > iA 3 / > o 2 b] \ PN TO x oToixeiwy. i Tolvuy dvdayKn, €€ ob éotw, ei Kal del éore Kav el éyevero, ex TovTov ylyverOat, ylyverar d€ Tay ‘ek TOO duvapyer dvtos Tobro 5 ylyverar (od yap adv eyévero 3 ree) / SINNED) \ ss \ 2 , aN 8. €x Tod ddvvdrov ovde Hv), Td de duvardy evdéxerar Kal evep- > \ / > \ 9” A ao N LES e 3 \ Ae ca 20 yely kal py, el kal Ott pddtora del €or 6 dpiOuds 7) driody uddo tAnv e€xov, évdexour dy ya) elvar, oTwep Kal rd play

429 i) alt.] aE 30 pdvov E Syr.): povoy J7A°l: pdvouy J? 35 €Aatroy recc.: €hacoov EJA? éorat AP Ale: éoriy EJT Syrt b2 duvdpuer om. J evépyeta J 6 dpt6yod EJT Syr.! et ut vid. Al. : dpiOpav AP 8 ob . . . 9 ddtyoy pr.] an d Aéyopen det OAtyov? ov| ov E?: op Syr.} g ro addidi, fort. legit Al. 10 kat secl. Bonitz II m\eiov, 7)] mAciov pyde ut vid. Al. ourws AP Al. : odros EJT Syrt 12 7) alt. om. AP 16 ef roiwuy E Al. : ert voy J: od roivvy AP 18 ek EJT Al: es A>’: 76 sup. lin. add, Ab? rovrov 6 ut vid. Al., fort. recte dy eyivero E 20 6riovy]

én JT 21 d\dov JAY

T. 1088827 — 2. 10898 16

nuepay exov Kal Td drocaody ern «i 8 obrw, Kal TO TocodToy

: odros EJT Syrt 12 7) alt. om. AP 16 ef roiwuy E Al. : ert voy J: od roivvy AP 18 ek EJT Al: es A>’: 76 sup. lin. add, Ab? rovrov 6 ut vid. Al., fort. recte dy eyivero E 20 6riovy]

én JT 21 d\dov JAY

T. 1088827 — 2. 10898 16

nuepay exov Kal Td drocaody ern «i 8 obrw, Kal TO TocodToy

, e@ Ne oy / > x ie oh ” ‘ Xpovoy ov pu) €oTe Tépas. ovk ay Tolvey etn aidia, elmep pH didioy Td evdexduevov ua) civat, Kabdmep ev AdAois Adyous ovveBn TpayparevOnvar. i d€ eat TO Aeyopevov vov adn- Ges xaOddov, Sri obdeuta eoriv aldios obola edv un 7 evépyea, Ta de atoxeia An THs ovolas, ovdemas dv ein aidiov odoias

a 3 rN 2 2 , 9_\ / A ie

aroixela e€ Gv éorw evuTapxdvtwmv. iol dé Ties ot dudda pev adpioroy Todor TO peTa TOD Evds oro.xeiov, Td 8 dvirov

dvoxepaivovow etrAdyws Sia Ta ovpBalvovra advvara: ois

a 4 > / a a 4 \ \ a Tocatra povov adnpynta. Tov dvoxepov doa bia TO ToLEiv TO dviwoy Kal TO mpds TL oTOLXEloy dvayKata ocvpBatver Tors héyovow boa 5 xwpls tatrns ths ddéns, Tabra Kdxelvous e b) ca) ed, Sf >) \ b) \ 2 SIN a tmdpxew avaykatoy, édy Te Tov eldnriKdy apiOyov e€ adrav To@cw edy Te TOY paOnwaTiKéy.—TOAAG pev ovv Ta atria ths em ravras tas airlas éxrpomfs, padwra S€ TO dmopi-

3 oes y \ Suey pe A Ny gat dpxaikds. edoke yap avrots mavr’ éoecOar ey Ta dvta, avrd 7d dv, ei py tis AoE Kal dudce Badvetrar TO Tlap-

4 f Cr Fe) MS / o. a Ly NAH, » pevidov éym “od yap pAmote Totro dayh, eivar pa) edvta, EPau A GAN’ dvaykn civat 7d py ov delat br. EoTw: otrw ydp, ek Tod é6vros Kal GAAov Tos, Ta bvTa ececOal, ef TOAAA eoTLV. n A na kalro. mpOrov pev, ei TO dv TodAdaXGs (TO pev yap [dru] 2: 27 12 \ , X 5) ef , \ \ ovoiay onpatvet, TO 6 Ort Tolov, Td 8 StL Tocdy, Kal Tas ‘ 4 ta a SS Y. A e > \ dAAas 6 Karnyopias), motoy oty Ta dvra mdvra ev, et pr} \ 2 ABS a} , € shea x N J \ Sane TO pn Ov EotaL; TéTEpov ai ovola, 7) Ta T40n Kal Ta GAda Se xX t A 5 19) A \ , \ \ , \ 57) Opwolws, ) mavtTa, Kal €oras ev 7d TddE Kal Td ToLdvde Kal TO Tocdvoe Kal TA GAAa Goa ev TL onpaiver; GAN Gromor, padAov be advvatov, TO play piow Tia yevouevny airiay > a a \ . , R \ Ny , XN gS elva, Tod Tov éGvTos TO pev TddE eElvat TO SE€ ToLVdSE TO dé Tooovde TO O€ TOV. EmetTa ex Tolov pH dvTOs Kal dvTOS TA r a \ \ N ee 3 N rN \ ¥ \ évTa; ToAAaX@s yap Kal TO pn OV, ETE) KaL TO OV Kal

b22 roalt. om. AP 24 Noyos om. E Al.¢ 26 éevepyera EJ AP AI. : évepyeia rece. T 32 7 alt. om. AP dvaykatov cup: Baivey ci. Bonitz 34 «idcxoy AY? 1089% 4 rovro dapn EJ Simpl. : rovr’ ovdayy APT Syr.! Plato: rodro pndanq Al.: rodro days recc. éavra Ab*® 6 éorw codd. I Al.: gora: ci. Bonitz 7 Ort ovaiav] dre secl. Maier: dru ovcia ci, Maier 9 motoy codd.T Al.: moia Bonitz II 7) wdavra JV: drayra EA: ravra Al. Syr) 12 év] dv Bonitz 14 rod row EJ? Al.: rod J'T: xat rovrov kat dvros eivat rod AP ~—_ rd. O€ rowdvde EJT Al. : om, AP

35 1089*

1089?

TON META TA ®YSIKA N

Maier: dru ovcia ci, Maier 9 motoy codd.T Al.: moia Bonitz II 7) wdavra JV: drayra EA: ravra Al. Syr) 12 év] dv Bonitz 14 rod row EJ? Al.: rod J'T: xat rovrov kat dvros eivat rod AP ~—_ rd. O€ rowdvde EJT Al. : om, AP

35 1089*

1089?

TON META TA ®YSIKA N

TO pep pay dvOpwrov (etvar) onualver 7d pH eivar Todl, TO be Ms 3A \ \ > ff sf XX ‘\ 4 A: X\ 9S pay €v00 TO pun elvat Tovovdi, TO S€ pH TpimnXU TO py Eval Tocovdt. e€k molov oby dvTos Kal 4H OvTos TOAAG Ta dvTA;

ay / BovrAerar pev On TO -Weddos-Kal ravrny tiv ptow eéyew TO ovk dv, €& ov Kal TOD dvTos TOAAG Ta OvTa, S10 Kal edE- yero bru det Webdds tr tm0OécOar, Gomep Kal of yewperpar TO Todwatay elvar THY pr Todiaiav: ddvvatov Se Tad6’ otras oo EY \ € / a »”AS € > \ éxew, ovTe yap of yewperpar Weddos odbev trorlOevTat (od yap > mu AY AG I x 3 cal A X\ ay \ ev TO ovAAOYLTMe 7 MpdTacis), ovre ek TOD otrw pul) OvTOS TA » \ \ évra yiyverat ovde POetperar. GAN’ eretd)) TO pev KaTa Tas mTegELs pr OV loaxds Tals Karnyoplats A€yeTaL, Tapa TodTO d€ TO ws Webdos A€yerar [TO] pH dv Kal TO Kara Stvamy, eK TovToU 7) yeverts €oTW, €k TOD pr) AVOpeTOV Suvdper Se AvOpedmrov ” \ 9 a N a ! N a , avOpwmos, Kal €K TOD pn AEvKod Suvayer SE AEvKOD AeEvKOY, duotws édy te Ev TL yiyvntar édy Te TohAd.—daiverar de n Gtnows TGs TOAAA TO Ov TO KaTa Tas ovolas AEydpevor apOjiol yap Kal paykn Kal odpata ra yevvdpevd eoTw. Dy \ \ iva \ \ \ \ \ ‘ee! ed dromov by TO Smws pev ToAAA TO Ov TO Th eoTL CYTHTAL, n Ss SEN J , > \ ~ € \ € SAF TOS O€ 7) TOLA 7) TOTd, py. ov yap yn 7 dvds 7 aopLoTosS a x airfa ovd@ 7d péya Kal TO puKpdov Tod dvo0 AevKA 7) TOAAG > , BN \ Xx , > \ \ x \ eivat xpouata 7 Xvuovs 7 oxnpara apiOyol yap av kal a > \ f a \ ‘ ” 9.) “Fie Tadra ijoav Kat povddes. ddd pi el ye Tadr empdOor, nN Q y \ Nee ah 2 \ BS J, AN ist x eldov dv rd airiov Kal ro év éxelvoiss TO yap adrd Kal rd

os I wy er \ LS / ‘sf \ a Q dvadoyov altiov. attn yap mapéxBaors airia kal rod TO 3. if a ” +. \ Led 4 ( ) e \ / avtixeluevov (yTrodvtas TO dvt. kal r@ évl, €€ ob Kal TodTwr Alga BS / wt Ny € tal a bo ipo’) fe Ta 6vtTa, TO Tpds TL Kal TO Gviocov Hrobetvat, 6 ovr evavriov pe 5. , b) / / / n wy. eo \ ovr andpacis exelvayv, pla re dios TGV dvToY domep Kal a a n n \ TO Tt kal TO moloy. Kal Cyrety ede. kal Tobdro, mOs moAAG Ta mpds TL Gd’ ody Ev: viv bE TGs pev TodAal povddes \ Q a d a na XN \ \ Tapa TO mpOtov ev Cyreirar, ms S€ TOAAA ayica Tapa \ lo TO Gyicov ovKeTt. Kaltor xpGvTar Kal A€yovor péya puKpor, SY ® moAv 6drlyor, e€& dv of apiOywol, paxpov Bpaxt, e€ av TO fol \ / > a A 2, 1% aS , pijkos, mAatd orevdv, e€ Gv TO eninedov, Babd ramewor,

217 avOperos Schwegler etvac add. Jaeger 20 déyewv codd.

Kaltor xpGvTar Kal A€yovor péya puKpor, SY ® moAv 6drlyor, e€& dv of apiOywol, paxpov Bpaxt, e€ av TO fol \ / > a A 2, 1% aS , pijkos, mAatd orevdv, e€ Gv TO eninedov, Babd ramewor,

217 avOperos Schwegler etvac add. Jaeger 20 déyewv codd.

IT: \éye Al. Bonitz 22 det om. E 28 7d om. T AL.e 35 7 alt. om. J b2 émpdOev E Al, 3 >) / * Ss iva TovTOLS O17 TL aiTLoy TOD TOAAG Elvyal;—dvayKy MeV OY, GoTEP r a re is A€yopev, HroGcivar 7d dvvdper dv ExdoTw (Todro S& mpocaTe- 4 / X\ gnvato 0 Tatta AEywv, TL TO SuVamEL TOdE Kal OVola, [AT By S > rg er \ 4 I BI) a \ , A ov b€ Kad avTo, OTL TO Tpds TL, BoTEP El ElmE TO TOLOV, 5 x / 3 \ Va x Xa yd, > , a CL ON OX ovtTe duvapet €oTl TO Ev 7 TO Ov OUTE ATOdacis TOD Evds OVdE Tov évtos GAN’ Ev TL TGV dvTwv), TOAD TE PAAAOV, GoTEP 20 Sie Sy: Se er lal SN \ ” \ Na ae} oe Sas eAexOn, ef eGijtres MGs TOAAA Ta OvTa, pr TA ev TH adTh a a Xx J \

Karnyopia Cyrev, TOs TodAa odolar 7) TOAAA Tod, GAA

a AN \ wy OS ~ SN eet \ BS 4 \ TOs TOAAG Ta OVTAa’ Ta peY yap ovoia, Ta b&€ TAaOn Ta

4 on

d& mpds TL. em pey ody TV GAAwY KaTnyopLdv exeEL TLVa

kal GAAny émioracw ms ToAAA (ia yap TO pa) YwpLoTa.45

elvat T® TO bmoKeElwevov ToAAA ylyverOar Kal elvar Told.

te T0AAG [elvar] Kal mood: xalro. det yé Twa etvar bAnv

Cone, / Ss \ 20/7 lal > lay b} B)

ExaoT@ yevel, TARY XwpioTiy ddvvarov TSY ovo.ay) GA

3 \ lal / A a , an \ \ ,

emt TOY TOdE TL EXEL TWA Adyov TGs TOAAA TO TédE TI,

Pi / x \ , \ , 4 o t

el py TL €otar Kal réd€ TL Kal dois Tis ToLadTn: atrn dE 30

> 3 ta} TDs ¢ > 7 lal aS Ps / > 4

€oTw exeiOey aAAov 1 amopia, TOs ToAAal evepyela odoiar

> > 3. a > SS \ \ , N\ a ) 3 a / \

GAX ov pia. GrAAA pry Kal el pay Ta’TOY EoTL TO TOOE Kal

TO Todv, ov heyeTat THs Kal did Ti TOAAA Ta dvTa, GAAA

TOS Toca TOAAG. 6 yap apiOuos Tas Toodv TL onpalvel, SS € fe ? X\ / \ \ \ SN \ 2 /

Kal 7 povas, «i pr) peTpoy Kal TO KaTa TO Tocdy ddial- 35

perov. ei mev ody repo TO Tocdy Kal TO Té eo, od A€yeTaL

TO Ti €oTi é€x Tivos ovde THs TOAAG: Ef Se TadTd, TOAAAS TOQO*

bmopevet O NEeywv evavTidcers.—éemioTHcELe 5 dv Tis THY / ‘ \ las 2 a , al lal \ 7 c

oKEW Kal TEpl TOV apLOuev Todev Set AaBEty THY TioTLW os

cloiv. TO pev yap ideas TiWeyevm mapéxovtat tw airiay ~ aN a eo a 2 a ID J € DNS

Tois ovow, elmep ExaoTos Tév apiOuav idéa Tis 7 SF id€éa

trois dAAos airia rod elvar dv 8 Tote Tpdmov (orm yap bmoKelyevov avtois Todro): To S& Totrov pev Tov Tpdmoy ovK Ly \ \ \ > / / Lae) \ \ PIN A

olouev@ bua TO Tas evotoas dvoyxepeias Spay Tepl Tas idéas a a AN ta > £ a \ 2 \ aote did ye Tabra jr) Tovey apiOuovs, TovodvT. O& dpiOuov Tov paOnpatikov, méev TE XpH TioTEDTaL ws EoTL TOLODTOS > 7 \ , fal BA / > \ \ »*

apiOj.os, Kat TL Trois GAAows xpHnowos; ovOevds yap ovTE y-

18 ef om. JT 19 ovde Bekker: ovre codd. 20 Kd)Atov fort. Al. 21 eCyre JAT Al. Syr.!: e(nreiro E Syr.!? 27 «vat inclusi: ein dv Apelt

31 ovca E 35 «kat alt. ex Al. Syr. scripsi: dre codd. I

TQN META TA ®YSIKA N

, by oly 6 Aéywv advrov civat, GAN ws adryy twa heyer Kad is avriy diow odoay, ovre datverar dy alts: Ta yap Oewpn- pata Tov apiOuntikev mdavtTa xKal_ Kata Tov aicOyTov 15 Umdpéel, KaOdmep ehExOn. bs Oi pev obv TiWéuevor Tas idéas Elva, kal apiOpods adras 3 > a \ \ \ bd elvat, (rd) Kata THY exOeow ExdoTov Tapa Ta TOAAA AapPa- a \ vew [ro] & tu €xaorov meipdvral ye Acyew Tos bia Th » a ok fo} €oTw, ov pay adda eel ovTE dvayKaia ovTe dvvaTa Tatra, 20 ovde Tov apiWuov bia ye Tatra elvar Aexréov: ot de IIvOa- ° lat na f yopevo. bia TO dpay TOAAG TOV apiOudv wdOn tmapxovTa a lal i A Tots aicOnrots cépacw, civar pev apiOuors emoinoay Ta yx > \ / b) eb) > > na Ke: 28 , 4 dvTa, ov xwpioTovs b€, GAN e€ apiOudy Ta dvTa dia Th dE; 4 \ / \ a > fal 2 £ ew | \ I bru Ta 7dOn TA TGV apiOyGv ev apyovla dmapxer Kal ev an > lal Y.3 a BA cal XX ay A 257@ ovpav@ Kal €v ToAAO’s GAols. Tols b€ TOV MaOnwariKOV , / oS > \ AX fa} b] / / povov d€éyovow elvat apiOwov ovOey Tovodroy evdéyeTar eyew \ \ € id 2 > > vi Ay ee 8 oe. kata Tas vmoboes, GAN Sti OK EgovTaL avTav ai émorTH- 3 1d € tal / > / wy aS Ul par eAcyero. nuels O€ ayev ecivar, KaOdmep elmopev Tpd- Tepov. kal dfdrov ote ov Kex@pioTat TA pabnuarikd: ov yap dv KeXwpiopevwy TA TAa0n OaApxe ev Tots Témacw. ob XN on rd \ XX \ fal > \ 97 f- > pev ovv TIvOaydpevor kata pev TO Towodrov odOevt évoyoé elow,

\ / \ lal 2 = fat \ \ ae: 3

kata pevto. TO Tovey e€ apiyav Ta void oopata, EK

N De LP: / x 4 yy , \

My €xovTov Bapos myndé Kovddrnta ExovTa KovpdrynTa Kal

if Py a A 3 lal / \ / > >

Bapos, €olkaot TEpl AAAOV ouUpavov AEyEelW Kal TwpaTwY GAA

35 ov TOY alcOnTOv: of 5€ xwpioToy TOLODdYTES, OTL emt TOV aicOn-

n 3) ot s 2 y. = a S \ , \

TOV ovK eoTaL Ta A€idpara, aAnOH Se Ta AEyoueva Kal

Ya \ / > € / ms \

cawer THY wWoxnv, elval te UvmrodauBavovot Kal XwploTa

1090? civau duolws 5& Kal Ta peyéOn Ta paOnuatikd. OSHdrov ody a \ c 2 te , 2 4 > “ >

dre Kal 6 évavtiovpevos Adyos TavavTia épet, Kal O aptt

> / / lal v4 / \ 7 > ” bl] ~

nmopnOn Avtéov Tots orw A€yovor, dia Th odvdapas EV Tots

aicOntots brapyovTay ta wd0n brdpyer adrav ev Tots al-

cOntois. lot d€ Twes ot ek Tod mépara eivar Kal éoxara

THY OTLYMY MeV ypaypns, Ta’Tny 8 emimédov, Todro S€ Tod

10907 12 avrdv (diriov) Jaeger ws om. E 17 76... 18 &] ro kata thy ekOeow ekaoroy mapa Ta TOANG AawBavery, ev Joachim T@ ex i addidi: ro add. Maier ri] 0 ci. Bonitz 17-18 apBadvorres év Bullinger 18 70 secl. Maier, om. fort. Al. mos Al. Bullinger : mas EJAY: ras kal recc, 24 ev dppovia E Al.: evappoma JAYT 33 ovde E Syrl Ta éxovra Bywater 37 xwpiocra codd. I Al, ; X@pioroy ci, Bonitz b3 Avera JAY Syr.2

Maier ri] 0 ci. Bonitz 17-18 apBadvorres év Bullinger 18 70 secl. Maier, om. fort. Al. mos Al. Bullinger : mas EJAY: ras kal recc, 24 ev dppovia E Al.: evappoma JAYT 33 ovde E Syrl Ta éxovra Bywater 37 xwpiocra codd. I Al, ; X@pioroy ci, Bonitz b3 Avera JAY Syr.2

Z2eoOgoVl2 —— 3, VOOL? 1

nn » Lo} ) 14 ; /, /, Hy lal \ OTEPEOD, OLOVTaL Elval avayKnY ToLav’Tas hvoets elvar, del 7) Kat todrovy dpay tov ddyov, py Alav 7 madaKkds. ovre yap of ra 4 \ Ba > \ ° / a / ovata. clot Ta €oxaTa GAAAd pahAov Tavta tadra Tépata 2 \ \ a y \ a f ox / (ere Kal tis Badicews Kal brAws KuWHoEWs oT. TL Tépas: Tobr ovv éorat Téde TL Kal ovola Tiss GAA’ droTov)—od pnv adda ef kal eioi, trévde Tov alcOnTdv Ecovtar mavTa (emt , \ c / y+ \ la s at ot 4 TovTwy yap 6 Adyos elpnKev): dia Ti odv.xwpicTa EoTar;—érL d& EmiGnticerey Gy Tis ma) Alay edxepis dv wept pev Tod dpu- Oy08 mavros Kal TOV padnuariKav TO pynOev ovpBddrdrAcoOaL Py , \ , tal a “ wy \ rae her) nn GAAHAOLs TA TpdTEpa Tots Yorepoy (un dvTOS yap Tod dpiOuod ovdey Hrrov Ta peyeOn EoTar Tots TA paOnuatiKa povoy eivat bapevois, Kal tTovray pi dvtTav 7 Wex7y Kal Ta odpara \ 3 id >’ a SAAe , 3 , KN 2 an Ta aicOnra: ovK Eoixe 0 1) vows ETrELTOdLadNS OdTAa ek TOY pawopevav, Somep poxOnpa tpaywdia) toils be Tas idéas TiWEuevois TODTO pey expevyet—mToLodor yap Ta peyeOn eK lol cA \ >) a 3 ™ nr / \ iP: 3 Ts Ans Kat apiOyot, ek pev THs dvados Ta paKn, ek J} > » Noe > S cal , \ \ Tpiados 6 tows Ta eémimeda, Ex O€ THs TeTpddos TA oTEpEd 7 Kal e€ Grov apiuav: diapeper yap ovdev—, ada radra BN an ye morepov idea ecovta, 7 Tis 6 TpdTos adtdv, Kal Ti cup- / ~ a bia bs / iva Od \ / BadAovra Tois ovow; ovOev yap, Gomep ovde TA pabnwariKd, ovde Tadta ocupBddrerar. GAAA pry ovd trdpxer ye Kar ere ba ps , 2\ / 4 tal \ avuTav ovdev Oedpynua, eav py Tis BovAntar Kiely Ta paby- \ \ tal IN7 x , a >’ > ae parka kal mroveiy ldias twas ddgas. or. 8 od xaderov dmotacoby trodeces apBavovtas pakpoTroreiy Kal cvvetpery. obToL Mey ovv TavTn TporyALxdpuevor Tals idéas TA padnpua- Tika Siapaptavovow: of 5& mpGror dvo Tovs apiOovs Tou)- cates, TOV Te TOV €lddv.-kal Tov pabnwaTiKdv, ovr’ ecipy- Kaow ovr exo ay elmeiy TOs Kal éx Tivos gota 6 pabnwatikds, toLotor yap avrov petagy Tod cldntiKod Kal Tod aicOnrod. «i pev yap ex Tov peyddov Kal puKpod, 6 avTos ekelvp éotar To TMV iWedy (€ drAov SE Tos puKpod \ I \ \ 7) a Did a Leia) Kal peyddov ta [yap] peyéOn more) «i 8 Erepdv tu epel, ’9 écyara (ovre xwpiora) Jaeger atta ravta AP Il é€orac AP Al. Syr.?: éori EJTSyr4 12 dN det EXY 13, €orae JAYT Syr.!: éorw E Al. 17 povov] Kal pdvov J 19 ra om. E 27-28 ye tovtav ovdey E Al. 30 pakpoy roe E 33 iWeav E padn- parexéy i Al. Syr.@: pa@npatcxov A> Syr.”: padnparixoy diddov EJT 34 ovr’] ovdapas ovr’ JT 35 «idnrixod EJ Al.: etdcxov fecit A>

37 an tivos, retento yap 10919 1? 1OgI® 1 peyddou ov ta yap ci. Cnrist yap om. iet fort. Al.: ye ci. Bonitz

3°

IogI@

sie)

TON META TA ®YXIKA.N

Syr.@: pa@npatcxov A> Syr.”: padnparixoy diddov EJT 34 ovr’] ovdapas ovr’ JT 35 «idnrixod EJ Al.: etdcxov fecit A>

37 an tivos, retento yap 10919 1? 1OgI® 1 peyddou ov ta yap ci. Cnrist yap om. iet fort. Al.: ye ci. Bonitz

3°

IogI@

sie)

TON META TA ®YXIKA.N

7 \ ‘al > tal \ > of c / € 3 it mAciw TA oToLxela epel? Kal ei. Ev TL Exarepov 7) apxXy, Kot vov Ti emt TovTwy ora. TO ev, CyTnTéov Te TOs Kal TadTa

a x TOAAG TO ev Kal Gua Tov apiWyov yevérOar GrAdos 7 e€ (REN \ / > 4 rd / > 3 lal / X évos kat dvados dopictov advvaroy Kat €xeivoy. TavtTa 7) tadra dAoya, Kal paxerat kal avrad €éavrois Kat rots > 4 \ Da > > fal 9S c si A evAdyous, Kal €ouxey ev avdtois etvar 6 Sipwvidov paxpos Adyos yiyverat yap 6 jaxpds Adyos woTep 6 Tév dotdAwv 4 XS € aS 14 / s ' LS \ oray pnOev vyles A€yoow. gaiverar S€ Kal avTa Ta OTOL- an x , \ BY \ a c c , bd / xela TO peya kal Td puxpdv Boav ws EAkduevas ov dvva- \ > fa fel \ > \ 2 > x \ 5g RUN Tal yap ovdau@s yevvyoar Tov apiOyuov aA’ 7 TOV ad Evos dutAacia¢éuevov.—arorov be Kal yéveow Torey didiwv dv- Twv, paddov & é&y tu TOv ddvvdtov. of pev ov TvOaye- a aN an lal pELoL TOTEPOV OV TroLOdTW 7) TOLOdaL yevEoW OvdEV Set SioTaCELY* pavep&s yap Né€yovow ws Tod évds ovaotabevtos, elt’ e€ em- t «aie Jeri | al Ear OS} / 23 +3 e > o médwv elt’ ex xpoas ‘elt’ ex onépparos cir é€ Gv amopodoww ’ ~ bape \ 7 lel bY , ig ov \ > eimetv, edO0s TO €yyiota Tod dmeipov bri etAKeTO Kal e7FE-

Ye € Dl lel / > a oS X\ lel &. PpaiveTo UTO TOU TEpaTos. AAA’ ETFELOT] KOTMOTIOLOVTL Kat dv- oiKds BovrovTar A€yewv, Sixaov avrovs eeracew TL Tepl

/ > X Let a > tal , \ \ 3 tal pioews, Ex O€ Tis viv adelvar peOddov: Tas yap ev Tots axwirow Cyroduev apyds, Gore kal TOv apiOudv Tdv ToLod- TOV ETLTKETTEOY THY yEeverw.

Tod pev oby mepittod yeveow ov dhaciv, as dydrovort Tod aptlov ovons yeverews: Tov 8 apriov mpdrov é€ dviowy Twes

/ n ny Katackevacgovot Tod peyddou Kal puKpod loacbevTwy. davayKn ovy Tporepoy bmdpxew Ti davicdryta avtois Tod loacbAvat el & det ijoav ioacpeva, ovk av joav dvica mporepov (rod

\ es AS > »” , > / iva S icf > an yap ael odk got. mpdrepov oder), Sote avepov Sti ov Tod Jewpnoa. Evexev Tovodor THY yeveow Tov apiOudv.—eyxer & amopiay kal evropjoavt. emuitiunow mds exer Tpds TO ayabov kat TO Kaddv Ta oTotxeia Kal ai dpyat: amopiay pev tav- Tv, TOTEpdy eoTi TL exelvwy olov Bovddyeba A€yew adTd TO ayabov Kal TO Gpiotov, 7) ov, GAN’ orepoyerf. Tapa per yap T&v Oeodroywv oixey Suodroyetabar TGv vobv Tioiv, ot ov pacw, GAG mpoeAOovons Tijs TSV dvTav d¥oews Kal TO

\ an ny ayabov kat 7d Kaddov epudaiverOar (rotro b& mowdow evAa-

44 7a év AP Syrl 7 éveivar J* 8 yap om, J? Ig tT] rovs Al. ; €v r7 Bywater 30 emornpnow E

ST. ALBERT’S COLLEGE LIBRARY 3. 10912 2 — 4, 10g” 34

Ig tT] rovs Al. ; €v r7 Bywater 30 emornpnow E

ST. ALBERT’S COLLEGE LIBRARY 3. 10912 2 — 4, 10g” 34

Bodpevor dAnOwnv svoxepevav 7) crpBaiver Tots d€yovow, og x \ By >) / * + T 3 AS 5 if a ov } ‘ X lal b @omep Eviol, TO Ev apxnv: EoTL O 7) dvTXEpEta Ov bia TO TH IOgI ) a \ ay 2 4 € c L by x x N \ a apxij TO €0 amodiovat ws Umapxov, GAA bia TO TO EV apxjy Kal apynv as orotxetov Kal Tov apiOmov ex Tod Evds),— ok de at ¢ Bb} to abt 6 7 S B Xr , x i 8€ mounrat ot apxator ravtn dOmotws, 1 Baotredew Kat A apxew acly od Tovs mpérovs, olov vita Kal ovpavov 7 5 t x > , 2 x N / > Ss b \ , xaos 7 @keavov, ahAad Tov Ata ov pyy adda TovTos SS \ \ 4 \ y a wy. ee pev bid TO peTaBddAew Tos apyovtas Tdv évTwy cvpBat- a. / Ps \ ¢ / oN \ an ver Toatra A€yew, ewel of ye pmewypevor adrdy [kal] rd X\ cal Mf / 3 4 \ ef , pan pvOikGs Tavta A€yew, olovy Depexvdns Kal Erepot tives,

\ a a td, \ (2 / \ fat TO yevvioay mpOtov dpiotov TiWéac1, Kal of Mdyou, Kal Tv 10 torépav b& copdv olov "EumedoxAjs te xal *Avagaydpas, £ > A f a een Xow ue > ‘SY DN a > (2 / \ & > a avTo TO ey TO dyabdy adro civau odolay pevToL Td ev adrod ” Co g € As cI > / 4 , lal @ovTo elvat padicta.— pev ody amopia abrn, morépws det Aeyew* Oavuaoroy 8 ei TS TpdTo Kal aidio Kal avrap-

_ ou

keoTaT@ TOOT av’TO mpOTov odvx ws ayabdyv tmdpxel, TO avrapkes Kal 7 cwTynpia. GAG pay ov dv dAdo TL dpOap- x , Lae. A Lae] BA c S XS / \ Tov 1 Sudte €d exet, avd avrapkes, Bote TO pev avat Tiy P} ‘\ / S x 3 \ sy \ / M4 apxiv Tovatrny eivat evrAoyov GdnOes eivat, TO pevToL Tav- 20 DN fet a a

TyV e€ivat TO ev, 7) €t iy TObTO, oToLXEldy ye Kal oToLXEtoV apiyav, advvarov. ocvpBaiver yap moAA} dvoxépeva—ijv évioe hevyovres GmeipjKacw, ol TO ev pev podroyodyTes dp- xi elvat mpernv Kal oro.xetov, Tod apiOyod dé Tod padnpa- TiKod—amacar yap ai povddes ylyvovrar bmep. dyabdy Tt, 25 kal moAAy tis edmopia ayafOv. er. ei ta cldn apiOpol, Ta eldn mavta Omep ayabdv Tu GAG pay Grov BovdreTat TiWeTH tis elvar iddas: ei pev yap Tdv dyabdy pdvov, ovK evovTat

a ES, Cy NA > \ \ a ’ a , \ ~ \ ovata. at idea, ef d& Kal rév odoldy, TavTa Ta (Ga Kal

\ \ ) \ x x tA rey, ‘ 12 Ta ura ayaa Kat Tad peTexovTa. Tatta te 87 ovpPBal- 30 vet Groma, kal TO évavtiov ato.yetov, elite TAHOOs dv etre TO dvicov Kal péeya Kal puxpdv, TO KaKov adTd (didmep 6 pen épevye TO ayabdv Tpocdmrew TO Evil ws dvaykaiov dv, émeL- on e& evavtiov 7 yéveois, TO KaKov Thy TOD TANOos piow b2 @ JATT AL: YE 4 Baorredov E 8 cai omittendum

ci. Bonitz . 9 dmavra recc. II vorepov E 21 ye J Syr.1: re EA» 26 ei EJT Al.: om, AP

TQN META TA OYTSIKA N

Pde ‘ e be AE i eee aN 2 Matt , : a 35 €Wal* Ol O€ eyovol TO avloov TV TOV KaAKOU guow TU

tog2*

bo on

Bonitz . 9 dmavra recc. II vorepov E 21 ye J Syr.1: re EA» 26 ei EJT Al.: om, AP

TQN META TA OYTSIKA N

Pde ‘ e be AE i eee aN 2 Matt , : a 35 €Wal* Ol O€ eyovol TO avloov TV TOV KaAKOU guow TU

tog2*

bo on

, X , \ ¥ , cal a ¥ e@_oN > lel Baiver 32) TavTa Ta OvTa peTexe TOD KaKod E€w Evos adTOU ere. \ c z , S , \ 2 a x BS Tod évds, kal madAov axpatov petéxew Tods apiOuods 7 TA a fod t peyeOn, Kal TO Kaxov tod ayafod yx@pay civat, Kal pere- xew Kal dpéyerOar tod POaprixod- Oaptixdy yap Tov 3 ‘4 X 3 e \ > 4 3 / 4 c ao évavtiov TO évavtiov. Kal « domep eA€youey Gre 7 DAN €otl TO dvvduer ExacTov, olov mupds Tod evepyeia TO bv- vapet Top, TO Kaxdv €oTat avTd TO dvvauer ayabdv. Tatra 3) mavta ovuuBaiver, TO ev STL apxiv Tacay oTotxetov ce) ES > 4 3 ‘4 > / \ 2 xX 3 , X mowdot, TO 8 ért Tavaytia apxds, TO 8 Sti TO ey apyyy, TO & dru Tovs apiWovs Tas TpeTas ovolas kal xwpioTa Kat €td7. 3 > \ \ X , X > X 3 tal bJ cad A ei ov kal TO pa) TiWevar TO ayabdv ev tais apxats Kai TO TiWWEevar otrws advvarov, dHAov Gr ai apyai ovK dpb@s > c> IDOr c nt > yt ¥. > n > ec anmodidovrat ovde ai TpOTat ovciat. ovK dpOGs 6 vm0Aap- r 32>? ¥ ra X 2X OF 3 x ol cod Baver odd et Tis wapernager Tas Tod dAov apxas TH TOP , rt n 4 3 3 4 3 n > ee.” \ 4 (gov kal purdv, bre e€ dopiotwy atedA@y TE dei TA TEAELO- \ iS 2 4 “~ , if y cA ov x Tepa, 610 kal emt TOY TpeTwY otTws Exew Hyoiv, ore pndE wv > \ > , eS X \ 3 ~ , e év Tu elvat TO ev attd. eiot yap Kal évradOa TeAevat ai > X > 2 nn »” A A za B dpxat é€ ov Tatra: avOpwros yap avOpwmov yevva, Kat ovK €oTL TO oTEepua TpOTov. atoTmov S€ kal TO TéToV Gua Tots oTepeots tots pabnwarixots moujoa (6 pev yap Td- na y my \ ~ , \ XX mos Tév Kal’ Exactoy tdtos, 510 XwpioTa TOTw, Ta 5€ pabn- \ 3 \ \ 3 cal ~ a X ” , | eae paTika ov Tov), Kal TO eimeivy pev StL Tov Eorat, Ti b€ eoTW i , , ” ay X , 3 ‘4 > Xx 6 Tomos pH—éeder S& Tos A€yovTas Ek oTotxelwy civat TA ovta Kal Tay dvTwY Ta TPGTa Tovs apiOpovs, Suedowevovs m@s GAAo e& GAdov Eotiv, otrw A€yew Tiva TpdTOV 6 apr Ouds €oTw ex TOV apxGv. aéTEpoy piger; GAN ovTE TaV MiKTov, TO TE ylyvdomevoy ETEpov, OVK EaTAaL TE XwpLOTOV TO év ovd érépa dvots: of 8€ BovAovTa. GdAa ovvbece, SoTEP avAdaBn; GrAAd Odow Te dvayKn trapxew, Kal Xwpls 6 = , A & ees = eK ee eo , voGy vonoet TO ev Kal TO TANOos. ToT ovv ora 6 apiOpos, x \ cod x xX Ae x Ly \ Re povas kal wAnOos, 7) TO ev Kal avicov. kal ewe TO Ek TL-

1092" 8 xopiora EJT Syri: yoporas AD Il aiom.E 12 7%

TE 13 te Ravaisson: 6¢ codd. © 17 70 alt. ACT ‘Alt tov EJ Al. 18 rots alt. JAPT Al. Syr.: cai ois E Al! 20 Tis Al, 25 yervopevoy E 26 ovd’] ovd’ 7 Robin 27 did

AaBn E Al.: cuddAaBnv JAE Syr.®¥ re om. E 28 €orat obv AP Syr

_ 4. 1ogt 35 —6. 1092 26

AaBn E Al.: cuddAaBnv JAE Syr.®¥ re om. E 28 €orat obv AP Syr

_ 4. 1ogt 35 —6. 1092 26

vov eivat ote pev ws evuTapxdvTwy ott b& as Ov, TOTEPHS 30 es 4 of x c 3 os > ¥ > 2 x 6 apiOuds; otrws yap os évuTapxdvTwy ovK éotw GAN 7) ov yéveois €oTw. GAN ws amd oTeppatos; GAN odx oidv Te TOO Gdiaiperov TL dmedOciv. GAN ws ex Tod évaytiov pi} bmopevovtos; GAN Oca ovrws ott, Kal e& GAAov Tivds éoTWW e t 2 x y Nk: € S n / 3 b , bmomevovTos. eet Tovey TO ey 6 pev TS TANOEL ws evavriov 35 ié c be lal Sy c ¥ nm ie A / c 3 é b TiOnow, 6 8€ TE Gviow, os iow TO Evi xXpepevos, os eF 1og2 b] c > , ¥ » cf ] - £ evavtiwy ein av 6 apiOyds: Eat apa Ti Erepov e€ ov tmo- x pevovtos Kal Oarepov éotiv 7) yéyovev. eri ti by ToTE Ta pev wv an er 3 > 7 BN ° oj 3 7 , bay 3 GAN boa e& evavtioy 7 ois eoTw evartia Pbeipera Kav ex mavros 7}, 6 5€ apiOyos ov; Epi TovTOV yap ovbev A€yeTaL. $7, & apiOos ov; mepl yap ovdev déyerat. 5

kalrou Kal évuTapxov Kal pn evuTdpyov POelper ro evavriov, otov TO veikos TO plypa (katrou ye ovK ede od yap éxelv@

3 4 AN Ss , IOXr c / a ‘ ye €vavriov).—ovbev 5& didpiotar ovde droTEpws of apLOpol aitio. TGV ovotdv Kal Tod cival, TéTEpoY ws Gpor (ofoy ai - oTtypal TOV peyeOGv, Kat ws Etpuros érarre ris apiOpyos rs = gh > 3 , er XX A c ‘ Tivos, ofov 60i pev avOpadrov di 5€ immov, SomeEp ot Tovs

fo)

apiOpovs ayovtes eis Ta oxHpata Tpiywvoy Kal Terpdywvor, a 3 cod ° , x Xx fol lol bl

otrws aouoiay tais Widois tas popdas tav uty), 7}

4 c , ec 4 s n £ , . A, ae

drt [6] Adyos 7 cvudhwvia apiOuadv, dpoiws de Kal GvOpwros \ fod LA ee \ }"* ‘ / cat > 7

kal TOY GAAwY ExacTov; Ta dé dy TaOn TGs apLOpoi, TO

Cl ur

Aevkoy kal yAukv Kal TO Oepydov; Ori Se ody of apiOpoi

> ? IO > led wv Vee! ec X\ , c > 4 ovoia ovdé THs popdys airiol, djAovy 6 yap Adyos 7 ovcia, c eee \ 4 > x x > a 3 a e Ee 6 8 apiOpos tAyn. otov capxds 7 doTod apiOuos 7 ovcta iA y \ cou XxX 4 A 2S _&. c 3 \ a » b 2 ovrw, tpla Tupos ys dSé€ dvor Kal det 6. apiOyos ds Gv 7

a 3 xX , x fae x , 2 > SF TWOY €OTW, 7 TUpLWos 7 yHivos 7) povadiKos, GAN’ 7 ovata 20 A , > oe A 4 X AQ tal cad > 3 J TO Tocdvd eivat mpds Toodvde Kata THY pléw: TodTO 8 ovKETL

al lal x

dpiOuos GrAAA Adyos pikews ApiOyGv copatiKGy 7 dToLwY- ody. ovTe ovy TH ToOLHoaL aitiws 6 apiOuds, ovTE GAws 6 apiOos ovTe 6 povadiKds, ovTe An ovTe Adyos Kal Eidos

n / 3 \ ‘ oS Aex 3 2" eo a TOV TpaypaTwr. GAAG pV ovVd @s TO OU EvEKA. 25

6 ‘Amopnoee 8 av tis kal ti TO & eotl TO amd Tov

b2é éora Schwegler 5 70m. JI: py 7 Robin 6 Kai py évurrdpxov om. EJ* 7 ye om. recc, éxetvo E 9 dpos E

ai om. JA> 10 peybav] ypappar fort. Al. Syr.: pyxav ci. Bonitz 13 tay duray] rovrwy Zeller, trav (oor kat uray ex Al. ci. Christ

14 6codd. Al.: secl. Bonitz 7 EAL: 7 JAeT Syr. 17 ovotut ovde recc. 5 18 vAns Schwegler njT: 7 er Syr}: 78E

JA> 10 peybav] ypappar fort. Al. Syr.: pyxav ci. Bonitz 13 tay duray] rovrwy Zeller, trav (oor kat uray ex Al. ci. Christ

14 6codd. Al.: secl. Bonitz 7 EAL: 7 JAeT Syr. 17 ovotut ovde recc. 5 18 vAns Schwegler njT: 7 er Syr}: 78E

21 ovKért] ovx eorey T Al! 23 6 alt. om. AP

TON META TA &Y3IKA N

a a na a x xv apOpav TO ev apiOud elvar tiv piéw, 7 &v eddoyloTo 7H ev TepitT@. vevl yap ovdev byvewdrepov tpls tpla av 7 TO peAlkparoy Kekpapévov, GAAA paddov e@pednoeey ay ev

‘ na

30 overt Adyw dv Hdapes de 7 ev apiOuG axparov dv. Ere ot Adyo. ev mpocbecer ApiOuav cio of Tov piLewv, odK ev dpiOyots, oloy tpia mpos b¥o dAd. od tpls dvo. TO yap avTo de? yévos etvar ev tats moAAaTAacldccow, Bote Set

a a e a a \ petpetoOat TS Te A TOv aTotxov ef ob ABI kal ro A Tov

35 AEZ: dote TO atro Tdvra. ovKovy eorar mupds BETZ

1093" kal tdaros apiOyos dls tpia—ei 8 dvdykn mavtTa apiOyod Kowavely, avdykn ToAAA ovpBalvew Ta adrd, Kal apiOpov

n a \

Tov avtoy T@de Kal GAA. Gp’ ody Todr airiov Kal dia

(en re) \ laa XN y e Va a a £ "¢ TOOTS €oTL TO Tpaypa, 7) GdnAov; olov €oTt Tis TAY Tod HALov

n n fod n /,

5 popdyv apiWuds, kal mddw Tov THs cEednvyns, Kal Tov Gav ye Exdorov Tod Biov kal HArkias: rl ody KwdAveL evlovs pev TOU- Tov TeTpaydvous elvat eviovs b& KvBovs, Kal toovs Tovs de dimAaclovs; odPey yap KwAver, GAN avdyKn ev Tovrots

/ pI] “) na / > Va 2 , , \ otpedperOat, «i apiOod Tavta Exowdvet. evEedexEeTO TE TA

u i wat \ LS 2 \ 4 24 Se c

10 dtaepovta vmod Tov adrov dpiOpov aTinrew: dor el TLow 6

, > a avTos apiOyos ouveBeByKer, Ta’Ta dv iv GAAHnAos exeiva TO adro e€idos apiOuod exovra, olov Atos Kal cednvn Ta aird. dda bia Th aitia Tatra; entra pev wvnevta, € aw BS \ € € 7 € \ S ¢ / 2 27 to ev dpOue om. JT 7@ Al.; rd EAP ethoytorar J § APT Al: 9 Es: om/ J 33 moANamdactdceow Al. Syr. 35 ovKovy ci. Bonitz: ovxovy codd.: ovxody ef T 10931 kai] 7 ci. Diels It radra AP 14 7) dppovia E Al.): i) dppoviat

JAY AL 15 8c] 88 freaw Roscher %ud yeom. E22 peddet E vo Al. Syr.} 23 8 alt.] 6) Diels

6. 1092 27 — 1093» 22

Id n n dvtwy Ténwv ev ep? Exdorov emipéperar TS olypa, dud TodTo tpla pdvov éotly GAN ody bri al cuvpdwviar tpels, ered mAelous ye ab ovpdwvia, evrad0a 8 odkér. Svvatat. oporot 57) Kat otro. Tols dpxatous “Opnpixots, ot puxpds dpoudry- Tas Op@ou peyddas b& mapopdow. dAé€yovor Sé Ties OTL TOAAG Toladra, olov al re péoa 7 pev evvéa 1 de dKTO, kal TO mos dexaettd, lodpiOuov rovrous, Baiverar O ev wey TO debi evvéa ovddaBais, ev b& TO ApioTEepO OxKTa: kal dru toov TO didornua ey Te Tots ypdypacw ard Tod A mpos TO Q, kal amd Tod BopBuKos em) thy d€vrdrny [ved- Tnv| ev addois, 7s 6 apiOuos toos Th ovAopedela TOD ovpavod 7 » hs 6 dp fj obdAopedelg pavod. econ Xx lal \ cal / opay d€ det pi) Tolatra ovbels dv Gmopnoeev ovTe A€yew ov@ etpioxew ev tots didlos, emel Kal ev Tots pOaprois. GAN’ ai ey rots dpiWpots dices ai enawotpevar kal Ta

econ Xx lal \ cal / opay d€ det pi) Tolatra ovbels dv Gmopnoeev ovTe A€yew ov@ etpioxew ev tots didlos, emel Kal ev Tots pOaprois. GAN’ ai ey rots dpiWpots dices ai enawotpevar kal Ta

/ 3 7 x ira = > cal / c xX rovtos évaytia Kat bdws Ta ev Tols pabjpacw, os pev Aéyovol tes kal atria Torodo. THs pioews, Couxey ovTwot ye oKoTOvpEevois diadetyew (kar ovdéva yap tpdTov Tov dimpirpevav mepl Tas dpxas ovdev adrGy airiov) éoTW ws Mévrou Movoto. avepdy Ste TO €d bmdpxer Kal THs cvoToL-

7 > \ loa na na \ f. \ 2 y oe / y xlas éorl THs Tod KadOd TO TeEpiTTdY, TO EvOU, TO iodkts toov, ai duvdpers evimy apiOuav: dua yap Spar kal dpiOuos Tovocdé:

\ \ AN 7 / - fal rn kal Ta GAAa by Goa ovvdyovow ex TOV pabnpariKOv Oew- pnyarav mavra ravryy exer thy Svvamiv. 610 Kal Eovke TUNTTOMaTW eoT. yap oupBeBynkdra ev, GAN oikela GAAjAos TdvTa, ev Se TH dvdAoyov: ey ExdoTH yap Tov yx 7 2 MY iN > / c As b 4, cf dvTos KaTnyopia éoTl Td dvddoyov, ws ebOd ev rjker otTws év mAdtet TO dpaddr, tows ev dpiOud TO Tepirtdv, ev dé Xpoud TO AevKdv.—€ri ody of ev Tots eldeow apiOyol airior TOV GppovikGy Kal TGv ToLovTwy (Siaéepovor yap ékeivor

224 eviDiels af’ E 10 ciypa Al, Diels: om.T 25 or ai]

60 ai AP: bray J 28 ér ci. Bonitz br ovdAdaBai ET Syr.t 2 mpdypaow E 3 vearny om. fort. Al., secl. Diels 4 fs] ois ci. Diels icos recc. 1: iodrys EJAY rod] re rod EJ 5 eu 67 E: &p det J 10 okoroupevous Diels II ovdev] ev A

airtoy .... 12 pavepov sic interpunxit Diels: airidy ear. os wevror ToLov= ot, pavepoy Al. as AP Al.: éxeivo JT Syr.: om. E 12 && codd. I Syr.: ev Al. kat et ovororxias om. E 13 lodkis too Al.¢ Syr.1 1 et fecit J : icdpiOpov E: toov AP 14 ai... dpiOpav secl. Diels - xat ai J’€ Syr.! pa J rowade J 18 rol

70 fecit AP 21 xpéa E 22 appovoy fort. Al.

TON META TA ®YSIKA N

dAAjAwY of toou cider Kal yap at povddes) adore bid ye tadra €ldn ov Tomréov. Ta ev ody ovpBalvoyta radra

xX bs , 4 ot — ON t a \ Te Kay ért mAEiw ouvaxdein: coke. d€ TeKunploy Elvat TO mTOAAA kakoTabety wept THY yeverww adréy Kal pndeva Tpd- mov dvvacbar ouvetpar Tod pr xXwpioTa elvar TA pabnwa- Tika TOV aicOnTGv, as evior A€yovor, pyde Tavras elvat Tas apxas.

b23 dia om. E 24 ravra eidn E 26 rémov J: AAourdy E : firmum TV 27 ovveipar] cudety E

BOOK Z

SupsTANcE (chs. 1, 2). What ‘7s’ in the primary sense ts substance (ch. 1).

1028* 10. While ‘is’ has the various senses distinguished in A. 7, what ‘is’ in the primary sense is substance (i.e. ‘what a thing is’— e.g. man, god, as opposed to ‘good’, ‘three cubits high ’—or a ‘ this’).

18. Other things are said to ‘be’ by virtue of being quantities, &c., of this.

20. Hence one might doubt whether ‘ walking’ and the like are existent; no such thing can exist apart from substance.

24. ‘That which walks’ more truly is, because it has an individual substance as substratum.

18. Other things are said to ‘be’ by virtue of being quantities, &c., of this.

20. Hence one might doubt whether ‘ walking’ and the like are existent; no such thing can exist apart from substance.

24. ‘That which walks’ more truly is, because it has an individual substance as substratum.

go. Substance is primary in definition, in knowledge, and in time; in time because it alone among the categories can exist apart; in definition because the definition of a substance is involved in the definition of anything else; in knowledge because we know a thing better when we know ‘what it is’ than when we know its quality, &c.; we know even a quantity or a quality only when we know what it is.

be. The eternal question ‘what is being’ really means ‘ what is substance’ (it is substance that was said by various thinkers to be one or many, and if many, finite or infinite in number), and so this is our chief and first and practically our only subject.

1028* 10. Kadarep Srethope0a, mpdtepov, A. 7.

II. ti éort kal ré8e tr, The two phrases indicate the two sides there are to Aristotle’s doctrine of substance. A ri éore is the ri éore of something, the answer to the question ‘ what is it?’; and whether this something be an individual or a universal, its essence can only be stated as a universal or a combination of universals. ré éore in fact points to the distinction between essential and accidental predication. A 708e 7. on the other hand is not the 7éde 7 of anything ; it is simply an individual; the term rode re points not to the distinction of essential from acccidental but to that of substance from attribute. The fact is that ovoia means initially for Aristotle nothing more definite than ‘ that which most truly or fully is’, He sometimes thinks of it as that

160 COMMENTARY

in things which most truly, is—ri éor. or essence; and sometimes as that which most truly is because it is not in anything but exists by itself—7d8e 7 or the individual. ‘The same ambiguity occurs in the Categories, where mpatyn ovcia answers to Tdde Tu and devrépa ovcta to ti €oTL.

16. Aristotle’s object being to distinguish quality from substance, not from the other categories, tpiyxv 7 is irrelevant, and was suspected by Bz. It was, however, read by Alexander, and apparently by Asclepius, and Aristotle is not incapable of such irrelevancies, especially in a clause which like the pév clause here is unemphasized. Cf. @. 1047710 n.

1g. I have restored from A? Al. the grammatically correct roodryres, wotoTnres, instead of the accusatives.

21, Ab’s reading onpatver seems to be required, instead of 7% py ov, to explain the grammar of éxacrov airév. ‘ Whether the words “to walk”, &c., imply that each of these things is existent’. Cf. L. and S. onpaive III. 1.

the grammatically correct roodryres, wotoTnres, instead of the accusatives.

24. Aristotle does not mean that 75 BadiGov unlike 7d BadiZew can exist apart from substance, but that 7d BadiZov, since it is a sub- stance (though referred to only as the possessor of an activity), can exist apart, while 75 BadéZew, since it is only an activity (though it implies a substance as the possessor of the activity), cannot exist apart.

26-27. Sid. . . . dpropevov. .e., when we say 7rd BadiZov, we think of some definite man or animal that is walking ; when we say 70 BadiZeww we imply that there is a subject but do not think of any definite one.

28. éugaiveror. . . tovadty, ‘is plainly implied in the use of such a designation ’.

30. Td mpdtws dv Kal od Tt dv GAN dv GAs, ‘that which is primarily, i.e. not in a qualified sense, but without qualification’.

32. Kal Adyw Kat yvdcer kat xpdvw. Alexander takes rév . . povyn ll. 33, 34 to be explanatory of ypdvw. Substance is prior to the attributes it successively possesses, as a jar is prior to the wines that successively fill it. What Aristotle says, however, is ‘for none of the other categories can exist apart; substance alone can’. Priority in this sense is elsewhere distinguished from priority in time (Caf. 14° 26-35, Phys. 260% 18) and is described in distinction from it as priority xara diow Kal oiciay (A. 1018? 14, 1o19* 2). The reading of the lemma in Asc. (kal dice Kail Adyw Kal xpdvw Kal yvwoe) and that of Bessarion and the Aldine edition (kai Adyw kat yrooe Kal xpove kal pvoer) are no doubt corrections designed to meet this difficulty, and do not mend matters, since they leave ypévw unexplained. Aristotle is by no means careful to preserve the same appellations for the various senses of ‘ prior’; thus ‘ prior in dvais’ in Cat. 145, Phys. 261° 14, 265° 22, P. A. 646% 26, A. 989° 16, ‘prior in otata’ in Phys. 260” 19, 261% 19, G. A. 742222, ©, 10508 4, M. 107719, Rhef. 1392% 20 are used in a different sense from that which they bear in the passages

Z, I. 1028216 — 1028) 5 161

already mentioned, It seems best to suppose with Alexander that the next words (Il. 33 f.) are meant to explain ypéve. That which can exist without other things while they cannot exist without it may naturally be said to exist before other things.

1028216 — 1028) 5 161

Priority Adyw and priority yvdoe are not elsewhere distinguished. In 1038 27 we have priority Ady, xpove, yevéeoer; in @. 1049) 11 hoyw, ovoia, xpovy ; in Phys. 265% 22 dice, Aoyw, xpovy. In A. 1018) 31 priority xara tov Adyov is one form of priority ry yvooe; in @. 1049>16f. the two are identified. But here they seem to be distinguished from each other; as xaé before ypovm means ‘and’, it is difficult to suppose that cai before yvwéoe means ‘i.e.’ Alexander is probably right in supposing that ll. 34-36 refer to Adyw and Il. 36-) 2 to yore.

34. Aristotle here says that substance is rpGrov Ady as compared with the other categories. In M. 1077" 6 he says 76 Aevxoy is prior in Adyos to 6 AevKds avOpwros (cf. A. 1018 34). The two statements are quite compatible. ‘White’ is prior to ‘ white man’ because you can define white without including the definition of white man, and cannot define white man without including the definition of white. But body is prior to white because you can define it without including the definition of white, and cannot define white without including the definition of surface nor surface without including the definition of body. All attributes involve in the end substances and cannot be defined without including their definition. The passages are to be reconciled, then, not as Bz. seems to hold by interpreting Adyos differently, but by observing that white man is posterior to white simply because man is not the substance to which white belongs Zer se,

36-2. Bz. points out that it is not substance as distinct from attributes, but the essence of a thing as distinct from its other attributes, that is here shown to be primary in yvéou.s, The fact is that in the notion of the first category these two notions are some- what unsatisfactorily blended. This has been already noticed in l. 11 n., and becomes increasingly apparent throughout the book. In b 1, 2 Aristotle points out that even things in categories other than substance have a ri éoru, a quasi-substance, which is to them as the substance of man is to man. ‘This notion is developed in 10308 17-27,

b4, ot pev év, the schools of Miletus and Elea.

5. ot pev memepacpéva, the Pythagoreans, and Empedocles and his followers; ot $€ dmevpa, Anaxagoras and the atomists.

Various opinions as to the denotation of substance (ch, 2).

1028» 8, (1) Substance is thought to belong most evidently to bodies—animals and plants and their parts, the elements and their 2578-2 ; M

162 COMMENTARY

parts and what is composed of them, e, g. the physical universe and the stars.

Various opinions as to the denotation of substance (ch, 2).

1028» 8, (1) Substance is thought to belong most evidently to bodies—animals and plants and their parts, the elements and their 2578-2 ; M

162 COMMENTARY

parts and what is composed of them, e, g. the physical universe and the stars.

16. (2) Some think the limits of body—surface, line, point, and unit—are more truly substances. - 1g. (3) Some think there are eternal things more numerous and more real than the sensibles, e.g. (a) Plato thinks Forms and mathematical objects are two other kinds of substance.

21. (4) Speusippus thinks there are many kinds of substance, each with its own first principles—numbers, spatial magnitudes, soul, &c.

24. (c) Some think that Forms and numbers are of the same kind, but that there are other kinds dependent on this—lines, planes, &c., ending with the class of sensibles.

27. These views we must examine, after first outlining the nature of substance.

1028) 11, Kal tay TovodTwv Exaotoy. For the probable meaning cf. H. 10428 n.

12-13. 7] poptwy...adrtod. The physical universe (for this sense of obpavés cf. Bz. Index 541” 56—5 42% 17) is composed of the totality of natural bodies or elements (De Cae/o 278" 21); its parts are composed of parts of this totality.

Bz. conjectures rwév or éviwv for poptwy. But this suggestion is not, as he supposes, supported by Alexander, who evidently read popiwy

462. 6). 14. I have inserted here, from T, % todrwv tes 7 kal aAdaw. EJ Asc. have 7 rovrwv tives 7) Kal GAdAwv, AP 7} rovTwv Twes Kal GAdwv, where dAAwv (sc. twés) would be difficult to defend. With % «at dAAau } TovTwv twes 7% Kat dou 7} TovTwv before them, it is natural that the writers of the inferior manuscripts should have passed from the first dAAa to the second, instead of the first, 7 rovrwv. The possibilities stated by Aristotle are that the complete list of substances should include— (1) only those already named, 2) those and others, 4 only some of those already named, (4) some of those already named and some others (7) kal dau), (5) only certain others.

16, tot, sc. Pythagoreans. The Platonic view is given as distinct from this in], 19. The Pythagorean belief that planes, lines, points, and units are substances contained in bodies is distinguished from the Platonic view that there are substances apart from bodies. For the former view cf, B. 1002 4.

18. ot pév, the pre-Socratics, cf. B. 100248.

Ig. of 8... dtSia. | aAefw may mean (1) more numerous than sensible substances (cf. A. ggo 4) or (2) of more than one kind. Again we may translate (1) ‘eternal entities more in number and more

$T. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRA

Z. 2. 1028” 11-31 163

real’, or (2), with a comma after uaAXoy, ‘ entities more in number and more truly substances, being eternal’. The first alternative in each case seems preferable. a@A\ov must not be taken with aida, for eternality is not a matter of degree. :

ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRA

Z. 2. 1028” 11-31 163

21. Speusippus’ doctrine is referred to in M. 1076% 21, 1080? 14, 1085? 31, N. 1091%34. It is this doctrine that makes the nature of things ‘episodic, like a bad tragedy’ (A. 10761, N, rogo? 19). The dpyai of numbers were unity and plurality (M. 1085> 5, 1087» 6, 8, 27, 30, N. tog» 31, 109235); the dpxad of magnitudes were the point and ‘a matter akin to plurality but distinct from it’ (M. 1085? 32). E. Frank, in Plato u.d. sogenannien Pythagoreer, 245-251, holds that Speusippus recognized ten stages in the structure of the universe, viz. (1) absolute unity, (2) absolute plurality, (3) number, (4) spatial mag- nitudes, (5) perceptible bodies, (6) the soul, (7) reason, (8) desire, (9) movement, (10) the good. This view is, however, largely con- jectural.

24. évor S€. This is the school of Xenocrates (so Asc.); for the evidence of this cf. M. 1076220 n. Other references to the view are found in A. 1069% 35, M. ro8o0? 22, 28, 108625, N. rogo> 28, 31; it is in M. 1083 2 called the worst of the Platonic views about numbers.

26-27. péxpt . . . aioOyrd. Theophr. fr. xii. 12 gives Xenocrates credit for carrying out his explanation of the universe more thoroughly than Plato and Speusippus ; otros yap dravta rws wepiriGnoe rept Tov Koopov, Spotws aicGyTa cal voyra Kal paGynmatixad Kat ere di) Ta Geta. According to Sextus Empiricus (Adv. A/azh. vii. 147) he distinguished mi aicOyriy otciar (riv évtos otpavot), tiv voyTiy (Tar éxrds otpavod), : zy atvGerov Kai dogacrijy (riv airod Tod ovpavod).

28-31. The question whether there are any substances rapa tas aio@yras is distinguished from the question whether there is a ywpior) oveia wapa Tas aicGyras. ‘The first is the question whether there are any substances besides sensible substances—e.g. forms of sensible substances ; the second is the question whether there is any substance capable of separate exisience besides the sensible substances, i.e. any pure substantial form.

SUBSTANCE AS SUBSTRATUM (ch. 3).

1028 33. At least four things are said to be substance : (A) essence, (B) the universal, (C) the genus, (D) the substratum. 36. (D) The substratum is that which is subject of everything else, never predicate; it is thought to be, most of all things, substance. M2

164 COMMENTARY

102922. In one sense matter, in another sense form, in another sense their compound, is said to be the substratum,

5. If form is prior to matter, it is prior to their compound,

7. Our account of substance as that which is always subject is inadequate ; for it would follow that matter is substance, since it is what persists when all attributes are taken away,

If form is prior to matter, it is prior to their compound,

7. Our account of substance as that which is always subject is inadequate ; for it would follow that matter is substance, since it is what persists when all attributes are taken away,

20. By matter I mean that which in itself is not any particular thing nor of any quantity nor otherwise determined. The other attributes are predicated of substance, and substance of matter,

27. But substance must be capable of separate existence and be a ‘this’, so that form, and the compound of form and matter, are more truly substance than matter is.

30. The compound we defer, as posterior in nature and familiar; we will study form, the most difficult of the three. We look for it first in certain generally recognized sensible substances.

bg. For the order of learning is from the less intelligible by nature and more intelligible to us to the more intelligible by nature.

1028» 34-36. 16 tI fv etvan is examined in chs. 4—6, 10-12; 76 Kabddou in chs. 13, 143 76 Groke(yevovy in ch. 3. 16 yévos is nowhere separately examined in Z. At the beginning of ch. 13 Aristotle says that, as he has examined the essence and the substratum, it remains to examine the claim of the universal to be substance. From this it appears that the genus has dropped out of view. But in fact chs. 13, 14 serve as an examination of genus as well as of the universal. Every genus is a universal (though the converse is not true, differentiae and properties being also included among universals), and if the universal cannot be substance, genus cannot be co.

1029* 1-28. The two characteristics of substance here signalized as primary—that of being ultimate subject of predication and that of having separate individual existence—are the same two that are mentioned in A. 1017) 23-26.

2. The treatment of 76 izroxe/uevoy as ambiguous, meaning (1) matter and (2) the concrete unity of matter and form, is natural, and common enough in Aristotle (matter underlies actuality or form, the concrete individual underlies its affections or accidents, |. 23, cf. 10385); but it is surprising to find (3) form put forward as one of its meanings. The same suggestion, however, occurs in H. 1042228. Aristotle’s meaning is that the form or essence, instead of the concrete individual, may be thought to be what underlies properties and accidents ; cf. the description of the soul as the toxeiuevoy of life, A. 1022832. The reference to form, then, is not as Bz. suggests a slip due to the constant association of matter, form, and the unity of the two, in Aristotle’s thought. Nor is the fact that form is discussed under the head of ri jv etva, not of troxeiyevov (Bz. 301) a real objection to its

Z. 3. 1028 34 — 1029% 29 163

suggests a slip due to the constant association of matter, form, and the unity of the two, in Aristotle’s thought. Nor is the fact that form is discussed under the head of ri jv etva, not of troxeiyevov (Bz. 301) a real objection to its

Z. 3. 1028 34 — 1029% 29 163

presence here. Substratum and essence present themselves with the universal and genus as rival candidates for the position of substance. If essence turns out to be a kind of substratum, the original division into four turns out to be a cross-division ; but we already know from the case of 76 xadAov and 76 yévos that that is so. The original four- fold division is merely a prima _facze one.

8: 1 popdy. popdy is often identified with «fos and ri Av clvas, but means primarily sensible shape; cf. ro cxjpua THs idéas |. 4, rHV ev TO aicOytd popdyv 1033" 6.

6. kai tod é& dudotv. The evidence is pretty equally divided between rod and ro, but the former gives a better sense, If Ais prior to B it is clear that it is prior to A+B, but it is not soclear that A+B is prior to B, which is what ro would imply. Further, while it is true that in 1. 29 Aristotle says the concrete unity is substance more truly than matter, he says nothing of its logical priority; but in |. 31 he says that form is prior to the concrete unity ; this again confirms od.

10. adTd... TodTo, i. e. the vague statement (riz elpyra) in |. 8 f.

12-16. Aristotle divides the process of ‘stripping off’ (epraipoupevwr) into two stages. 7a adAAa, the elements in the nature of a sensible thing other than length, breadth, and depth (i.e. the secondary qualities), are mere affections, actions, and powers of bodies. But secondly, length, breadth, and depth are themselves not substances but qualities and may be ‘ stripped away’ in thought.

22-23. @ 16 elvat. .. éxdoty. The being of matter is different from that of any of the categories, because, while matter is not pre- dicated of anything, substance is predicated of matter and the other categories are predicated of substance. It is noteworthy that even in working out the line of thought from which it might be inferred that matter is substance, Aristotle implies (in airy 8 rs tAns) that substance is something other than matter, something not entirely stripped of attributes but including certain attributes.

25. o0d€ 3% at dmoddoets, ‘ nor will the ultimate subject fer se be the negations of these’,i.e. ov ri, od rocoy, &c. This is difficult; one would suppose that it was just the essence of matter, as Aristotle conceives it, to be not ri, not zocov, &c. But he seems here to feel that to say even this of it is to assign it a character, while its character is to have no character.

ov ri, od rocoy, &c. This is difficult; one would suppose that it was just the essence of matter, as Aristotle conceives it, to be not ri, not zocov, &c. But he seems here to feel that to say even this of it is to assign it a character, while its character is to have no character.

27. Aristotle does not criticize the line of thought according to which matter is substance, precisely in the way which might seem most natural, by pointing out that the effort to find the truest reality in that of which attributes are predicated has left us with that of which nothing can be predicated. He puts the case differently. Matter lacks two of the characteristic marks of substance. It is not capable of separate existence, and it is not individual. It fails in both respects, we may say, because it is characterless.

29. In what sense are separate existence and individuality moré. characteristic of form than of matter (that they are more characteristic of the concrete individual than of matter is intelligible enough) ?

166 COMMENTARY

A similar remark about form occurs in A. 1017> 25, and the note on that passage may be referred to.

BI. borépa, cf. 1. 6 n,

32. SHAn, ‘obvious to sense’.

davepd S€ mws kal 4 Udy, ie. TH dvadoyia avepd, as Alexander says. Cf. Phys. 191% 4-11 9 0 troxepevyn pvows emiotnT) Kar’ dvadoytay. &s yap mpos avdpidvta xaAkds ... OUTWS atin mpos odeiav é Ele i 33-34. Bonitz translates ‘Es wird nun aber allgemein anerkannt, dass es gewisse Wesenheiten der sinnlichen Dinge giebt’. But it seems more likely that otcvéy should be understood with ray aicby- tov, to account for the feminine rwés, and that ova/a: is predicate,

» 3-12, Bz. has pointed out that (1) Il. 1, 2 do not naturally lead up to Il. 3-12, since the ri jv eivar is far from being yvpimov nptv, and (2) ll. 3-12 do not naturally lead up to ll. 13 ff., since then there is nothing in what immediately precedes xat rp@rov xrA, |. 13 for avrod to referto, It plainly refers to the ri jy etvar, which has not been mentioned since |]. 2. His suggestion that 3 zpd épyov.. . 12 atrév should be placed after ® 34 zpérov meets both these difficulties. This section is meant to justify the treatment of form as it exists in sensible things (# 34) before passing to pure self-existent form. Jaeger suggests with much probability (Ar7s4. 205 n.) that the whole section, with the preceding sentence, was a note added later by Aristotle; the first sentence of the note was written between the lines of Aristotle’s manu- script and therefore appears in its proper place, but the remainder of the note had to be written on a separate sheet and has therefore been misplaced. Jaeger holds that the section belongs to a later period, when Aristotle first began to view the discussion of sensible substance in Z as preliminary to the discussion of insensible substance in A. Cf. 1037% 10-20 n.

Jaeger holds that the section belongs to a later period, when Aristotle first began to view the discussion of sensible substance in Z as preliminary to the discussion of insensible substance in A. Cf. 1037% 10-20 n.

5. dowep év tats mpdgeor. The passage is to some extent explained by £. V. 1129) 5, where we learn that we should choose what is good for us (i.e. what aids ws towards the good life) and pray that what is good in itself (i.e. external goods) may be good for us. Here he simply says ‘make’ instead of ‘pray ’. Originally, owing to some defect in us, what is good in itself may not be good for us; but we must (starting by choosing the things that are good for us) transform ourselves till this is no longer so. So too what is intelligible in itself is originally not intelligible to us; but we must clarify our minds until it 7s intelligible to us, by starting with the apprehension of what is already intelligible to us.

SUBSTANCE AS ESSENCE (chs. 4-6). What things have essence P (ch. 4).

* 10291. (A) We proceed to study essence, 13. (1) in the abstract. The essence of a thing is what it is said to be per se (e.g. (a) your essence is not to-be-musical).

Z. 3. 10297 31 — 1029? 5 167

16. But not all of this ; e.g. (4) the essence of surface is not white- ness ; nor (¢) to be a white surface, for here ‘ surface’ itself is added improperly in the definition. The account of the essence of a thing is the account that states its nature but does not use its name.

22. (d) There are compounds of substance and another category ; is there an account of the essence of each such compound? Have they an essence?

27. E.g. has ‘white man’ an essence? It might be objected ‘that ‘essence of white man’ is not a thing that exists per se. But a proposed definition can be ‘not per se’ to its subject only (i) because of an improper addition (thus whiteness must not be defined by giving the account of ‘ white man’),

33. or (ii) because the subject has a qualification which is omitted in the definition (e. g. ‘white man’ must not be defined by giving the account of whiteness).

1030? 2. But is ‘being a white man’ an essence at all? No, for an essence is ‘just what something is’, but where one thing is asserted of another, as in ‘ white man’, this is not ‘just what something is ’, since it is not a substance. Only those things have an essence whose account is a definition.

7. It is not a definition if we merely have an account which means the same as a name (for then all accounts would be definitions, since any might have a name put to it), but only if it is the account of a primary real, i.e. of one which does not imply the assertion of something about something else.

It is not a definition if we merely have an account which means the same as a name (for then all accounts would be definitions, since any might have a name put to it), but only if it is the account of a primary real, i.e. of one which does not imply the assertion of something about something else.

11. Thus only a species has an essence or definition (for in a species, and only in a species, one element does not belong to the other by mere participation or by accident); but there can be an account of the meaning of azy name (saying that ‘this belongs to that’), or an accurate account can be given instead of a vague one.

17. Or perhaps definition has more than one sense, just as ‘what a thing is’ means now substance, now one of the other categories. ‘What a thing is’, like ‘is’ itself, belongs primarily to substance, secondarily to the others.

23. For we may ask even of a quality what it is; just as not-being is, in so far ag it is not-being, so quality is in a sense a ‘ what it is’.

27. (2) Since the proper way of using the term essence is now clear, we may say that in fact essence belongs (a) primarily to substance, (4) secondarily to the other categories, being in their case ‘the essence of a quality’, &c.

g2. The other categories are said to ‘be’ by an equivocation or with a qualification ; or rather, they ‘are’ neither in the same sense as

168 COMMENTARY

substance nor in a merely equivocal sense, but just as various things are ‘medical’ by virtue of relation to a single end.

b 4. Definition and essence, then, are primarily of substance, secondly of the other categories.

7. But there is definition only if there isaname meaning the same as an account which is one in one of the senses of ‘one’ answering to the senses of ‘being ’, viz. to the categories.

12. Hence (c) there is a definition of ‘ white man’, but in a different sense of definition from that in which there is one of ‘white’ or of a substance.

1O2gP1. év dpyy, 1028» 33.

13. Aoyukds suggests plausibility rather than truth (Zop. 162» 27), dialectic or sophistic as opposed to science (Az. Post. 93% 15, and cf. I, 1005 22, N. 1087) 20 with De Jnt. 17% 36), a reference to abstract considerations (Adyor) rather than to the precise nature of the facts in question [ )(dvotxds, dvadutixds, éx Td oikeiwy apxdv, Phys. 2044, 10, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 316*11, G.A. 747 28, 74828, and cf, A. 10692 28 with éy tots Adyous A. 987> 31, ©. 1050 35]. Usually its sense is depreciatory, but where abstract arguments are those that are required AoyiKds may = dxpiBys, M. 1o80%10, It probably always refers to linguistic inquiries or considerations, cf. AoyiKds here and in 1030 25 with 10308 27-28 n. It is in 1030% 28 that the real as opposed to the verbal inquiry begins.

1o80%10, It probably always refers to linguistic inquiries or considerations, cf. AoyiKds here and in 1030 25 with 10308 27-28 n. It is in 1030% 28 that the real as opposed to the verbal inquiry begins.

14. There is no other case in Aristotle of the accusative with ri jv eivar (in A. 1016* 34 ri Hv etvas is probably a gloss, cf. n. ad loc.), so that the manuscript reading éxacrov 0 Aeyerau will not stand (unless, which is unlikely, the meaning is ‘the ri jy evar is each thing, viz. what it is said per se to be’, or ‘the ri jv ecivac is what each thing is said per se to be’). éxaorov 6 A€yerau is palaeographically better than Bz.’s éxdoTw 0 déyerar. For the genitive cf. 10324 3, > 2.

16. o08¢€ 8% tTodto way. Aristotle rules out, as not the ri éorm of A, a term B which is xa atré to A in the second sense recognized in An. Post. (73 37), viz. that (1) it evyrdpye in A, is an attribute of A, and (2) A évumdpyxe in the definition of it. For this sense and the instance cf, A. 1022%30. He thus in effect implies that the r/ nv etvat Of A is that which is xa6’ adré to it in the firs? sense (73 34), viz. that it is present in the ri éove and definition of A.

Ig. St. mpdceoti adrd, i.e. such a statement of the essence of surface as ‘to be a white surface’ is wrong because it is tauto- logous.

21-22. dot ei... ev, ‘so that if to be a white surface is to be a smooth surface, then, though we are not told the essence of surface, it is implied that “to be white” and ‘to be smooth” are identical’. Aristotle is thinking of Democritus, who identified them (De Sensu 442? 11, Theophr. De Sensu 13, cf. De Gen. et Corr. 316* 1).

Z. 4. 1029 1— 1030 2 169

22-23. éwet 8 ott... ouvOera. There are oivGera or civoda, not only within the category of substance (@5, A. 102331) but also corresponding to the other categories, i.e. not only combinations of matter and form but also (more complicated) combinations of substance and accidental attribute. In fact every term in any category other than substance presupposes an underlying substance in which it inheres.

25. 1 kwyoe. The mention of this among the categories is unusual, but cf. “£. £. 1217629, where xuwetoOo, kwely occur as categories. xivyows is a synonym for zovety and racyew (cf. Top. 120 26); it occurs in less formal lists of categories in I. 1054%6, A. 10718 2. More strictly, xivnows is said to occur in the categories of substance, quality, quantity, place (PAys. 261% 27-36, De Gen. ef Corr. 315° 28 sqq.).

27. The omission of efyac with tt qv is unparalleled in Aristotle, and it is probable that the bracketed words are a gloss.

1054%6, A. 10718 2. More strictly, xivnows is said to occur in the categories of substance, quality, quantity, place (PAys. 261% 27-36, De Gen. ef Corr. 315° 28 sqq.).

27. The omission of efyac with tt qv is unparalleled in Aristotle, and it is probable that the bracketed words are a gloss.

28. For a similar use of tpdétoy cf. H. 1045% 26, De Jnt. 184 19. GANG phy ob8e Tov Kal’ aitd Neyoudvwy obS€ todro, Aristotle here anticipates an objection. Some one may say ‘it is no use asking what 70 ivariw etvaris. The thing denoted is not ka? atrd Xeydpevov—white is not xa aérd to. man—and therefore cannot be the essence of ‘white man’. The objection assumes, arbitrarily enough, that only what is internally xa@’ aird can be a xa aito predicate to something else. But Aristotle takes it seriously and shows that ‘white man’ may have something said of it which is not od xa atro in either of the senses in which a definition should not be od xa@ aire to its subject.

go. 7 8 ov. ‘ The other errs not by addition’, which is idiomati- cally equivalent to saying that it errs by omission; cf. Bz. /ndex 539% 14-47.

31-33. TO atts GANw TpocketcOat . . . TO GAO adt@, The anti- thesis is misleadingly stated. Really the error arises in one case because in the definition the definiendum is added to something else ; in the other because in the definiendum something else is conjoined with what is stated in the definition. apooxetofa: in 1], 31 refers, as mpoobécews does in |. 30, to the addition in ¢hought of a qualification ; the apooxetcOar which has to be understood in 1. 33 refers to the conjunction of a qualification in fact. Alexander’s understanding of detv mpookeicOa: in this line, which would remove the ambiguity, is indefensible.

34. Todefine is not dpiZew but dpiLerOar (Bz. Index 524? 8). JA?’s reading épiforto ipdriov must therefore be right. Alexander (470. 18) read either this or 6piZouro 76 iudrcov (so E?).

10302 1-2. It seems necessary to insert 76 before tt Hv etvar. ‘ But its essence is not to be white’. For the omission of 76 before Aevkd ewou cf. A, 101456 n., An. Pr. 67412, 13, Pl. Crat. 385 B2, 10, 408 A 5, Theaet. 176 B 3.

2. In pointing out the relevant senses of od xa airo Aristotle has

170 COMMENTARY

shown that the essence of ‘ white man’ is not ‘to be white’, But is being white man an essence at all, he now asks, and answers that it is not, though for a different reason from that suggested in 1029» 28 and subsequently set aside. An essence is dzep 71, ‘just what a particular thing is’, and a term like ‘white man’, in which an attribute is assigned to a subject distinct from itself (6rav dAdo kar’ dAAov déyytat), is not d7ep 10d¢ Tt (= dzep-tt), Since thisness belongs only to substance and ‘white man’ is not a substance but a substance + an accidental attribute.

The editions before Bz. place the full stop after the second instead of the first efvac in this line; the sense makes the change quite necessary.

3. Sep ydp ti, the reading of Ab yp. E, gives a good sense, and it is not necessary to read with Bz. drep yap (rdde) 7. For tu = 100e te cf. 10292 20, 24.

Otay 8 GAO kat GAou Adyntat. It might be said that a term like ‘man’, of which Aristotle thinks there is an essence, implies the predication of one term of another (‘rational’ of ‘animal’). Aristotle would reply that these are not dAda to one another since ‘rational’ exists only as-an attribute of ‘animal’ and has no separate existence. Cf. Z. 12, H. 6. On the other hand a man need not be white, nor a white thing a man.

6. dow 6 Aéeyos eottv dptopds. Any dvopa (like iparcov) can have a Néyos or combination of words, and any Adyos (like ‘white man’) can have a Adyos axpyBéorepos, which means the same as it; but that Adyos is not a definition, unless that which is thus explained is a mpOrov, a primary or simple real which is not the union of a subject with an irrelevant attribute.

g. A» and apparently Alexander (471. 28, 29) have Aéyo where our other authorities have A¢yw tai7év. The shorter reading is supported by An. Post. 92> 31 in yap dy dvopa O€cbar drowody Adyw.

date kat W IAuds dptopes eorat, i.e. the poem, being a combination of words, would be a definition of the word ‘Iliad’. The Iliad is a typical instance of the things that are only cwdécpue ev, Z. 1030? 9, H. 10452 13, An. Post. 93> 36, Poet. 14574 29.

11-14. Only yévous «dn have an essence, i.e. genuine species as opposed both to Platonic ei8y (cf. A. 9914 31 n.) and to collocations of substance + accident like ‘white man’. Platonic Forms xara petoynv Aéyerar—‘ participation ’” is one of Plato’s favourite ways of expressing the relation of particulars to the Form. Again, the Platonic Form need not express the innermost nature of its particulars, but is any universal under which they happen to fall, and may be a mere zaos or ovpBeBykds of them. In ‘white man’ the relation between the two elements is of the same external and accidental character. On the other hand, the genus which is implied in the name of a species does not ‘share’ in the differentia ; the differentia is not a mere ‘affection’ or ‘concomitant’ of it, but is its proper differentia. That xara peroyny is to be interpreted as above seems to be shown by 1037) 18, where

La he TO30™ 2=35 17t

also Aristotle is speaking of the unity of a species as opposed to a term like ‘ white man’, and says évradda 8’ (in the species) od peréxet Oarépov Odrepov' 7d yap yevos ob SoKet peréxew Tov Suahopdv. No im- portant distinction seems to be intended here between xara petoxyv, kara. rdos, and ds cvpB_eBnkds.

22. 7TH pév, to substance.

No im- portant distinction seems to be intended here between xara petoxyv, kara. rdos, and ds cvpB_eBnkds.

22. 7TH pév, to substance.

25. oytkds, i.e. that which is not cannot be said to ‘be’ in the plain sense of that word, but speaking Aoyixés, with reference to linguistic usage (oi Adyor—cf. ras de? A€yew, 1. 27), we may say that it is, since we can say it zs non-existent. Cf. A. 1069%21. For Aoyuds cf. 1029) 13.n. So too a qualitative term is never the answer to the question ré éory in its primary sense, i.e. what is such and such a thing, but is an answer to the question what is such and such a quality. ‘A colour’ is the answer to the question ‘ what is white?’. Cf. 1028b 1, B. 996% 18-22, Zop. 103” 27 ff.

26. tues is perhaps a reference to Plato ; cf. Soph. 237, 256 ff.

27-28, Sel pev.. . exer, ie. such linguistic inquiries as Aristotle has been conducting since 1029) 13 (Aoyixds) and has referred to in ], 25 are important enough, but it is still more important to study the facts themselves. The mode of using the term ri jv eva, being now plain, Aristotle proceeds to draw the conclusion about the facts with regard to the ri jv etvas, viz. that non-substances have in a qualified sense a ri Hv etvat, Not an essence simply, but ‘the essence of a quality ’, &c. (I. 31).

29. dpotws is explained by domep Kal ro ti €or, 1. 30. The distinction between 7é éor: and ri Hv etvau is that while the former may stand for either a partial or a complete answer to the question ‘ what isso and ¢o?’, i.e, either for the genus or for the genus + the differentia, the latter always means the complete answer. Thus, while every ti jv evar iS a ri éott, the converse is not true. 7é ésru is sometimes distinguished from ré jv eivas (An. Post. 82» 31, 92% 7, De An. 430° 28), sometimes used in the same sense (Aw. Post, g1* 1, 93%29, A. 987% 20, 988b 29). Cf. Bz. Lndex 763° 47—764* 16.

32-34. Set yap... émorntdv. We must say that substance and non-substance ‘are’ in different senses of that term, or we must add a qualification in the latter case, saying that non-substance ‘is’ in a qualified sense (as we say the unknowable can be known—to be un- knowable, cf. “het. 1402°6), and remove the qualification in the former, saying that substance ‘is’ simply. So Alexander. But it is equally likely that zpooriévras and ddaipotvras both refer to the things which are not dvra in the full sense. If we say that they are évra we add a qualification to, and deduct from the full meaning of, dv.

35. doattws = cvvwvipus, ‘in the same sense’.

mpos TO adTd .. . kat éy, i.e. to the surgical art (mpds tarpuxyy, T. 1003) 1),

Terms which are neither épevvpa nor cvvdvupa are, as here, said to be zpos & in T. 1003* 33, K. 10618 11. In £. NV. 1096 27 Aristotle

172 COMMENTARY

offers ad’ évds and xa7’ dévadoyiav as alternatives to mpds ev, and Seems to prefer, at least in the case of the various goods, kar dvadoyiav.

1003* 33, K. 10618 11. In £. NV. 1096 27 Aristotle

172 COMMENTARY

offers ad’ évds and xa7’ dévadoyiav as alternatives to mpds ev, and Seems to prefer, at least in the case of the various goods, kar dvadoyiav.

b 4. émorépws, i.e. whether we say that various categories ‘are’ in the same sense but with qualifications or deductions (@ 33) or that they ‘are ’,not in the same sense (xa év) but mpés & (*® 35-3). drrorépws can hardly refer to the alternatives stated in~* 32, 33, for Aristotle would not regard it as immaterial whether dv is a mere épdvupor, applied to the various ‘ beings’ by a mere play upon words.

8-10. toito 8. . . év, ‘i.e. with a Adyos which is the Adyos of some- thing that is one, not by continuity .. ., but in one of the senses of “one” which answer to the essential senses of “being” ’. écax@s héyerau 74 év is to be interpreted in the light of ll. ro-12. For the correspondence of the senses of ‘one’ to the categories cf. T. 1003 33, A. 1018 35, I. 1053 25, De An. 412» 8.

12. Since unity in some sense can be found in any of the categories, ‘white man’ (which is a union of terms from two categories) has a certain unity and can have a definition, though not in the same sense in which ‘white’ has one, while this again has a definition in a different sense from that in which a substance has one.

It is clear that the chapter does not do what it set out to do, viz. to discover whether essence is substance. It only tells us that it is substances alone that in the primary sense Aave essence, But this may be found to be a step towards the answering of the original question.

Flave coupled terms an essence or definition ? (ch. 5).

10g0> 14. With regard to (d) a coupled term like ‘ snubness ’, which per se belongs to the nose, not as ‘white’ belongs to Callias or to man but as ‘male’ belongs to animal, (i) how can such a term be defined, if definition must not involve an improper addition ?

23. Per se attributes are those in whose definition the account or the name of the subject must be present. If they have an essence, it must be in a sense different from the strict sense.

28. (ii) There is another difficulty about these. If snub nose = hollow nose, snub = hollow; but if this cannot be so because we cannot say ‘snub’ without implying the nose, ‘snub nose’ is tauto- logical, being = ‘hollow nose nose’. Thus, if such terms had an essence, an infinite regress would be involved.

10gI*z. Only substance, then, is definable, for definition of any- thing else would involve an improper addition; ‘odd’ cannot be defined apart from number.

5. Therefore (¢) if the terms are coupled, as in ‘odd number’,

Z. 4. 1030) 4-12 173

such combinations cannot be defined, any more than terms like ‘odd’, or can be defined only in another sense of ‘ definition ’, 11, Substance, then, is the only or the primary subject of definition,

5. Therefore (¢) if the terms are coupled, as in ‘odd number’,

Z. 4. 1030) 4-12 173

In this chapter Aristotle raises two problems about ra ody dr\G GAA ovvdedvacpéva, terms which stand for an attribute which is coupled with a subject (réde év rGde J. 18) not accidentally but in virtue of the very nature of the attribute; the attribute being xa6’ avro to the subject in the sense that it cannot be defined without either naming or defining the subject (I. 23), i.e. in the second of the senses recognized in the Postertor Analytics (73° 37-> 3). Ta cvvde- dvacpeva are in fact propria (e.g. snub) or unions of subject and proprium (e.g. snub nose), which are initially distinguished from (a) substances, (4) terms in other categories, and (c) combinations of substance and accident (e.g. white man), all of which have been shown in ch. 4 to be definable, though (a) are definable in a more proper sense than (4), and (6) than (c). But ultimately all terms in categories other than substance are shown to be in principle of the same type as ‘snub’, in that the ‘definition’ of them must be €x mpoobécews, must involve a reference to the substance to which they belong (10314 2-5). The question whether ‘ the snub’ has a definition is significant for Aristotle because mévra ra gvoixd duoiws TO oid déyovrar (E. 102534). But there is an important difference between 70 oipov and natural substances; cf.n.ad loc. The conclusion drawn from the first problem (1030 14-28) is that such terms cannot be defined, or can be defined only in a secondary sense, kadaep eipjxapev. The reference here is to # 17— 13, but Aristotle does not mean that he has already mentioned this particular sense (for the cvvdedvacpéva are a different class of terms—cf. > 20—from terms like ‘white man’, which he was there referring to), but that he has said there are secondary kinds of definition.

There cannot be a proper definition of 7a cvvdedvacpéva because the account of them must be é« mpoo@écews, and this prevents it from being a proper . definition (1029> 30). The ovrdcdvacpévov is a quality ; yet you cannot give an account of it without mentioning its subject as well as it. ‘The equal’ is ‘a quantity which is equal’; ‘the male’ is ‘an animal which is male’, Thus you define X as XY and break the rule against zpdceors.

The second problem of the chapter is stated in 1030> 28— TOSIA I:

If ‘snub nose’ = ‘hollow nose’, ‘snub’ = ‘ hollow’. But ‘snub’ is not = ‘hollow’, since ‘snub’ implies a reference to the nose while ‘ hollow’ does not. .*. ‘Snub nose’ is not = ‘hollow nose’, ,*. If we say ‘snub nose’ at all, we are saying what is = not to ‘hollow nose’ but rather to ‘ nose which is a nose-which-is-hollow’. Such terms cannot have an essence, since this would involve an in-

174 COMMENTARY

.*. ‘Snub nose’ is not = ‘hollow nose’, ,*. If we say ‘snub nose’ at all, we are saying what is = not to ‘hollow nose’ but rather to ‘ nose which is a nose-which-is-hollow’. Such terms cannot have an essence, since this would involve an in-

174 COMMENTARY

finite regress; ‘ nose which is a nose-which-is-snub ’ will involve ‘ nose’ once more.

By ‘such terms’ (1030) 34) Aristotle seems to mean such terms as “snub’, since this is the class of terms which he is throughout the earlier part of the chapter trying to prove_indefinable (he advances to ‘snub nose’ only in 10315), But he is evidently assuming that ‘snub’ is equivalent to ‘snub nose’ (which is what is implied in saying that the account of it must be ék zpocOécews) ; for it is only by applying this equation that he reaches the term ‘ snub nose nose’ in 1. 35. He had previously (I. 33) reduced ‘snub nose’ to ‘hollow nose nose’, which leads to no infinite regress, but now, substituting for ‘snub ’ its equivalent ‘snub nose’, he gets the form ‘ sud nose nose’, and has no difficulty in showing that if the same substitution be re- peated we are landed in an infinite regress.

I take ci 8@ py l. 35 as = ef d€ Tis Adyer Oru ora Kal ev TovTOLS TO TL hv evar kat opicpos (Al. 478.15). Alternatively, we might treat dud... eivat ll. 34, 35 as parenthetical, and interpret ‘ otherwise—i.e. if it be denied that the snub-nose is a hollow-nose-nose—we shall be com- mitted to a process ad ¢nfinitum. For (since the saud is the nose that zs snub,the snub nose will be the snub-nose nose: and) the snub-nose nose will contain yet another zose (and so on ad zfinitum)’. ‘This may well be right. In any case Bz. is wrong in supposing that the introduction of fils pis oxy in 1. 35 is a mere slip.

To this ‘infinite regress’ argument for the indefinability of ‘snub’ Aristotle himself in effect supplies the answer in Soph. 7. 182° 4. ‘The snub’ = ‘a snub nose’, but it does not follow that- in ‘snub nose’ we can substitute ‘snub nose’ for ‘snub’, and so ad infinitum. For in ‘snub nose’ ‘snub’ does not mean ‘the snub’, i.e. ‘that which is snub’, but a quality of the nose (puds rodi, otov wafos), so that ‘snub nose’ is analysed not into ‘snub nose nose’ but into ‘ nose having the kind of hollowness proper to a nose ’, in which no infinite regress is involved (jor otdev drorov, 29, Rhee. 1356% 10, 14059. Cf. also. B. 100081 n.

KaQdtep éXéx0n, 1030% 17—) 13,

Ts a thing the same as tts essence ? (ch. 6).

1031*15. Is a thing the same as its essence? This bears on the study of substance, for a thing seems to be = its substance, and its substance to be = its essence.

1g. (1) An accidental unity like ‘white man’ would seem not to be = its own essence. For else essence of man = essence of white man, since man = white man.

This bears on the study of substance, for a thing seems to be = its substance, and its substance to be = its essence.

1g. (1) An accidental unity like ‘white man’ would seem not to be = its own essence. For else essence of man = essence of white man, since man = white man.

24. But perhaps it does not follow from white man being = essence of white man that the essence of accidental unities is the same as that of the simple terms (essence of white man = essence of man); for the extreme terms of the syllogism are not identical in the same way with the middle term. _ It might, however, seem at least to follow that the accidental extremes (e.g. essence of white and essence of musical) are the same ; but they are not.

28. (2) Is a per se term necessarily the same as its essence? Take (a) primary terms like the Ideas? If the Good Itself is to be different from the essence of good, (i) there will be substances prior to the Ideas, if essence is substance.

bg, (ii) If the Ideas are separated from their essences, (a) they will not be known, and (@) the essences will not be existent. For (a) we know a thing only when we know its essence, and

7. (f) if the essence of good is not good, the essence of being will not be, arid since all essences are on the same footing, no essence will be.

176 COMMENTARY

11, (iii) That to which ‘being good’ will not attach (sc, the Good Itself) will not be good.

Therefore all terms (whether Ideas or not) which are self-subsistent must be the same as their essences,

(15. If the Ideas are such as the Platonists suppose, it will not be substratum that is substance, since they are substances which do not imply a substratum.)

18. (2) That a thing is the same as its essence is also clear from this, that to know a thing is to know its essence.

(22. If we consider an accidental term like ‘ the white’, the essence of white will not be the same as that which is white (the white man), but it will be the same as the quality white.)

28. (c) The absurdity of separating a thing and its essence is further seen if we put a name to each essence, for then it will have another essence of its own; it is better to recognize at once that some things = their essences.

32. The definition of a thing, also, = the definition of its essence ; for it is not per accidens that e.g. unity and its essence are one. To separate them would produce an infinite regress,

b 4. Each simple fer se term, then, is the same as its essence.

6. The sophistical objections are to be met in the same way as the question whether Socrates = being Socrates.

unity and its essence are one. To separate them would produce an infinite regress,

b 4. Each simple fer se term, then, is the same as its essence.

6. The sophistical objections are to be met in the same way as the question whether Socrates = being Socrates.

Aristotle’s doctrine in this chapter is that ra Aeydueva Kata ocvpPe- Byxés (i.e. terms denoting a union of a subject with an accident) are not, and ra xa attra Aeydueva (terms denoting a self-subsistent unity, i.e. either a summum genus or a species, either in the category of substance or in some other, 1031) 27, 28) are, identical with their essence. E,g. ‘to be a man’ sums up the whole substantial, per- manent nature of each individual man and is identical with each and every man; ‘to be a sitting man’ does not express the permanent nature of any man, and ‘ to be a white man’ expresses the permanent nature of some men but not of others.

Aristotle first discusses accidental terms (1031 19-28) and puts for- ward a proof of their non-identity with their essences, If

(x) a white man = the essence of white man, then, since (2) a man = a white man, .*. a man = the essence of white man. Now, if (1) is true, similarly (3) the essence of man = a man, .*. the essence of man = the essence of white man.

But this is evidently not true. Therefore a white man is not = the essence of white man.

This reductto ad absurdum, however, Aristotle points out in 1, 24, fails. It does not follow that the essence of accidental combinations.

Z. 6. 1031% 29 — 1031” 10 177

is identical, sc. with that of the corresponding simple terms. For the extremes are not identical in the same way, sc. with the middle term. In the first syllogism the major term is absolutely identified with the middle, while the minor is identical with the middle only per accidens ; in the second syllogism the converse is true.

Aristotle next puts forward (I. 25 éAX’ tcws xrd.) an alternative reductio ad absurdum. If the fallacy of the above reductio be detected, it might at any rate seem to follow from the identification of an acci- dental term with its essence that the accidental extremes, essence of white and essence of musical, are identical. But evidently they are not. Therefore accidental terms are not identical with their essences. The argument here implied is:

The musical man = the essence of musical man. The man = the musical man. ’ The white man = the man. The essence of white man = the white man. .*. The essence of white man = the essence of musical man. .*. The essence of white = the essence of musical.

This conclusion might seem to follow, because here musical man and white man are both identical with the middle term man in the same way, i.e. per accidens. The argument is, of course, unsound ; but Aristotle does not commit himself to its accuracy—he merely says ddéevev dv cvpBaivew.

I0gI* 29. It is not obvious why Aristotle should have chosen as his illustration of the identity of a xa airo term with its essence a class of ka’ otro terms which he does not believe in, the Ideas. The reason doubtless is that the argument in ® 29-> rr conveys a covert criticism of the ideal theory. Plato,*so Aristotle thinks, believes in a separate good which is neither a particular good thing nor ‘being good’ (or the essence of good). But the separation of the good itself from the essence of good leads to insuperable difficulties and is therefore con- demned. Instead of Ideas we should believe simply in essences or universals.

82. Laov, sc. aird 70 GGov. 716 Ov, sc. aitd 70 Ov.

bg-3r. These arguments only show that the Idea and the essence must not be thought of as existing independently of one another (dro\eupévan, 1. 3). But Aristotle uses them to show that Idea and essence are identical and cannot even be logically distinguished. One might hold that they are distinguishable but not independent, as is the case with any pair of correlatives. pév in ei pév (1. 3) looks as if Aristotle had noticed this point and meant to add another argument to show that if they are thus distinguished, but not treated as dzroXe- Avpévat, Other difficulties follow. But if this was his intention, he has not carried it out.

3. Tov pév, the Ideas. That they will not be knowable is proved in Nei6; "7.

4. es %, the essences. That they will not exist is proved in ll. 7-10.

10. Bz. objects that Aristotle has no right to say that if the essence

2678-2 N

178 COMMENTARY

of being is not, no other essence will be. The corresponding result for the other essences would be that the essence of good is not good, and soon. But the argument 'seems sound enough. ‘The reason for believing in essences holds of all terms alike. If the essence of being does not exist, there is no reason for supposing that any other essence exists.

But the argument 'seems sound enough. ‘The reason for believing in essences holds of all terms alike. If the essence of being does not exist, there is no reason for supposing that any other essence exists.

-11. To his two main arguments against the separation of the Ideas from their essences (ll. 1-10) Aristotle now adds a third, that if the essence does not belong to the Idea or thing-itself, the ‘ good-itself’ will not be good, which is absurd. Alexander takes this sentence as proving that the essence of good is not good. But this has already been stated in ll. 6, 8, so that érx would be unexplained. Besides, it would be tautologous to say ‘ that to which being good does not belong is not good’. There is more point in saying ‘that to which being-good (the essence of good) does not belong is not good’. Aristotle has already said (1. 5) that being-good will not belong to the Good-itself’ ; he now draws the inference that the Good-itself will not be good. dya66 14, 225226, 32, 4, 226% 24, 243% 6, 260% 26, De Caelo 310% 23, K. 1067» 31, 36, 1068% 9, b 16). All are included under peraPory (A. 1069” 9, H. 10424 32, De Gen. et Corr. 319 31); or else all except yéveows (Meteor. 465» 30).

16. at pev is resumed by ovrw pév ovy in |. 25, and the antithesis to it comes in ]. 26.

20. The éé ot of natural generation having been said in 1. 17 to be matter, Aristotle here breaks off to say that the éé ot of a// generation is matter. In ]. 22 he returns to his main point, andsums up what he has said in lJ. 17-19 by saying that in natural generation é€ ot, xa@’ 6, and i¢’ of are alike nature.

22. For the description of the é€ od or matter as duous cf. A. 1014 b 26-35, Bz. Index 839% 1-12.

kal ka’ 6 puois. xal’ 6 corresponds to ri in Il. 14, 18, i.e. that which a thing becomes is identified with the form which it acquires and im virtue of which it is what it is after the change. For this sense of ka’ 6 cf. A. 10227 14,

23. 7d y%... dvow, ‘for that which comes to be has a nature’, se. in virtue of which it is what it is.

24. The id’ ot of change is strictly not the parent considered as a unity of form and matter, but its nature in the sense of its form, which is the same in species with the form acquired by the offspring, for it is only a man that can beget a man. Aristotle holds that the form comes from the father, the matter from the mother, G. A. 730? 1, 10.

27-28. 4 amd téxvns . . . Siavotas, cf. E. 1025» 22 n.

Aristotle holds that the form comes from the father, the matter from the mother, G. A. 730? 1, 10.

27-28. 4 amd téxvns . . . Siavotas, cf. E. 1025» 22 n.

29. kal Go tadtopdrou Kat dd téxns. The first xa’ means ‘also’, so that the distinction between 76 atréuarov and trix is not stressed. The former includes the latter (Piys. 197% 36). Only those beings can act dro TOXINS which can act deliberately (i. e. adult human beings, 197> 7); tix is airia Kara ovpBeBnKos év Tos KaTd mpoutpeow Tov évexd. Tou (197% 5). I. e. chance is found when an action incidentally and exceptionally produces a result which might naturally have been the object of deliberate action. Since one such result may be produced incidentally by a variety of actions, chance is of the nature of the indefinite (197% 9), and since the result could not have been foreseen, chance is ‘a cause obscure to human thought’ (196> 6). 76 airdpa- rov, on the other hand, occurs ‘in events that normally happen for an end, whenever something whose cause is ex/ernal happens not for the sake of the result which actually follows’ (197 18), e. g. when a horse

Z. 7. 1032%12— 1032 15 183

(sc. being pursued by thieves) is saved by going to a certain place, but did not go in order to be saved (19715), or when a stone (sc, being pushed) falls and hits some one without having been meant to do so (197> 30). But besides the cases in which something moved by an external force achieves an unintended result, 76 airéuarov also occurs when an zfernal cause, i.e. nature, produces an exceptional result (197 33), e.g. when an illness cures itself (77. A. 604> 9). Aspecially important instance of the latter kind of spontaneity is ‘ spontaneous generation’ of plants or animals from rotting earth, dew, mud, excre- ments, wood, &c., for which cf. Bz. /ndex 124% 3-30. In general, then, chance simulates the action of art or, more generally, of thought, while in spontaneity (the more general term) (1) the action of thought is simulated, or (2) the normal action of nature is simulated by nature producing in an exceptional way (e.g. dvev orépparos, 1032 31) what it normally produces otherwise (e.g. ék owépyaros), Thus chance is more appropriate to rovrwy tues, ‘makings ’, and spontaneity to r& dad picews yuyvoueva.

30-81. evo yap... dveu omépparos, e. g. eels (7. A. 5.7047), fishes (569% 11), testaceans (547518, G. A. 761” 23), insects (5392 24, G. A. 732" 12). :

32. ToUTwy, i. e. TOY dd Tabroudrou Kal ard TUyNS.

dotepov émuoxentéoy, cf, b 23-30, 1034*% 9-21, » 4-7.

ba, rhv pdtv ovatay, i.e. the ovata avev vAns (I. 14), matter being only in a secondary way part of the substance of the concrete product.

A. 761” 23), insects (5392 24, G. A. 732" 12). :

32. ToUTwy, i. e. TOY dd Tabroudrou Kal ard TUyNS.

dotepov émuoxentéoy, cf, b 23-30, 1034*% 9-21, » 4-7.

ba, rhv pdtv ovatay, i.e. the ovata avev vAns (I. 14), matter being only in a secondary way part of the substance of the concrete product.

2-4. kal yap... vdoou. Aristotle has said that ‘by art are produced those things whose form is the soul’. But, he reflects, disease can be produced by medical art no less than health, yet the doctor has not in his soul the form of disease ; disease has no form but is merely a privation. To meet this objection he now adds that the form is in a sense the form of the privation (only ‘in a sense , because it is not by its presence but by its absence that it produces the privation). Thus if the doctor knows the form of health, he can pro- duce either health or disease.

4. For éketvys yap dmovola * vdcos, the reading of A>, cf. I. 10048 14.

6-10. This account of production may be compared with the account of moral deliberation and action, in which 76 €cyarov év rH dvadicer is said mparov etvar ev TH yeveoes (LZ. VV, 1112" 23). Still nearer is Z. Z, 1227) 28-33.’

7. otov S6uahdtnTa, ei Sé TodTo, Oepudryta. Heat produces réfus, by which different elements in the body (i.e. portions with unequal temperature or unequal humidity) are chemically changed into a homo- geneous whole (és éort reAciwots b7d Tod PvoiKod Kat oikelov Hepuod éx Tov dvrikeevov TaOntiKdv, Meteor. 379» 18, cf. 3814 20),

14. Méyw S€.. . evar, ‘when I speak of substance without matter (Il, 12) I mean the essence’,

15. There is much probability in Bywater’s conjecture of tv 8% for tov dé. 8 would naturally introduce the summing up of the account given in ll. 6-14.

184 COMMENTARY

17. Tov d\Nwv Tov petagd, i.e. the things that have to be done before the final object is achieved.

24. tod movetv is emphatic, being opposed to 76 voeiv; cf. 1.15. For dpxer cf, 10349 11,

26. The heat in the body is (1) an element in health, or (2) is followed (a) directly, or (4)-indirectly-(d.a wAedvwv) by an element in health, Thus, if once heat is present, health may be produced without the action of a doctor just as it is produced dy his action, The ‘ making’ is the same; only the thought is missing.

27. tT... Tovodtoy, something of the same kind, e.g. uniformity (ll. 7, 19).

oe? I follow here the reading of A>, which seems to have been that of Alexander, with the unimportant exception that Alexander may not have read the éore after évyarov. Alexander’s words are (492. 11) 70 6€ TobTo 8° €oxatov Td mrovody (add, Td pépos Tis byvetas LF) rovodrov ay éty, OTe 9 Tpifis 7 moodaa TO pépos THS Uytelas eoxaTy etl Kal THS Ocpporntos Kal THs 6uaddryTos Kat Tov Aowrav. Aristotle’s meaning is ‘and this, viz. that which produces the part of health, is the limiting point, or minimal necessary basis, and there is similarly a necessary basis for a house (se. the stones) and for every other product’, It would be also possible (1) to put a comma after yépos and make ris dyveias depend on érxarov; and(2 a)to read kat 76 ovrws jépos for 70 pépos (following EJ except that éori is omitted) and translate ‘that which produces health and is in that sense a part of it’; or (2 4) to read 7d Touty TO pépos Kal TO ovTws j.€pos, ‘that which produces the part of health and in that sense zs a part of it’.

Kal THS oikias (olov of AiGor) Kal rGv &Awv is tacked on very loosely, like cat ro wip in 10349 17.

It is difficult, however, to regard the relation of heat (or rubbing) to health as analogous to that of stones to the house that is made of them. In the generalization which follows, Aristotle regards himself as having shown that the matter of that which is produced must exist before the production takes place (1. 31); and stones evidently are the matter of a house. But the heat in the body is naturally conceived not as the material but as the efficient cause of health, and so it seems to be con- ceived in]. 21. Aristotle has got into difficulties through taking as parallel two things that are not parallel—health and a house (I, 11). That which is to the doctor as a house is to the builder is not health but a healthy body. Having stated the product abstractly Aristotle also states the cause abstractly, not as ‘a body having heat’ but as ‘heat in the body’; and thus he gets something not really parallel to the stones—which are the material cause of a house—and not really a material cause. There is, however, in his view a real difference between the two cases (103449). Stones are inert, at least so far as grouping themselves into a house is concerned, and are therefore simply vAy. But a body with heat in it has an innate power of transforming itself into a healthy state. It is thus both a material and an efficient cause ; it is 7 VAy » dpxovoa THs yeveoews (1034211). So, too, here it

Tee 7 NOR S17-— 1033" 1 185

(l es spoken of as an efficient (I, 21) and then as a material cause 132):

It is thus both a material and an efficient cause ; it is 7 VAy » dpxovoa THs yeveoews (1034211). So, too, here it

Tee 7 NOR S17-— 1033" 1 185

(l es spoken of as an efficient (I, 21) and then as a material cause 132):

Shute suggests that heat is the material cause of health as the genus is the material of its species (A. 1024» 8, Z. 10384 6), since heat has to be specifically qualified in order to become health. But even so its relation to health is not a very close analogue to the relation of the stones to the house,

30. KaSdmep Adyerat, ‘as we (in general) maintain’, not referring to any particular passage, Cf., however, A. 1069” 6, Phys. i. 6-10.

32. pavepdv’ 7 yap UAy pépos. It has been expressly remarked with regard to natural generation that it presupposes a pre-existing matter (#17), and the same has been implied in the account of artistic and fortuitous production.

103% I. yiyverax, not ‘comes into being’ but ‘comes to be something’,

1-5. It is most natural to take 4\N’ dpa «rh, as answering to or pev ovv ktA, The whole section will then mean ‘It is evident then that a part of the product must necessarily pre-exist; for the matter is a part, since it is already present in the thing and undergoes genesis. But does some element in the definition also pre-exist? Well, we state in two ways what bronze circles are, naming both their matter— bronze, and their form—such and such a shape; and shape is the proximate genus in which the circle is placed. The bronze circle therefore has its material (or generic) element in its definition (as well as matter in the more ordinary sense—viz. sensible matter, bronze—in its concrete wholeness. And this must pre-exist as well as the sensible matter; the bronze which is given a circular figure must already have figure of some kind)’,

The section, on this view, refers to the doctrine that genus is related to differentia as matter to form, and thus is in a sense matter (A. 1024? 8).

The objections to this interpretation are; (1) the ellipticalness of the expression, The section concludes not, as would be expected on this interpretation, by saying ‘thus part of the form must pre-exist, as well as of the matter’, but by saying ‘the bronze circle, then, has its matter in its definition’. (2) The question of the pre-existence of form is raised in the next chapter as a mew question, while the pre-existence of matter is assumed to have been proved in ch, 7. (3) In the discussion of the pre-existence of form, Aristotle expressly sets aside the notion that part of the form pre-exists while the rest supervenes (? 11-16).

(3) In the discussion of the pre-existence of form, Aristotle expressly sets aside the notion that part of the form pre-exists while the rest supervenes (? 11-16).

For these reasons I am inclined to think that Alexander and Bz. are ~ wrong in finding here a reference to the doctrine that genus is vAy. What answers to om pev ov, then, is not GAN dpa but e& ob d€ xrA. ]. 5. The words to be supplied with GAN’ dpa Kal rav ev TO dOyw ; are 7 VAn pépos (from 1032) 32), as is shown by the conclusion 6 37 xadKods KUKAos exer év TG Adyw THY VAnv. The passage simply points out that the bronze circle is a Adyos évvAos (De An. 403% 25), that bronze is present not only in its concrete wholeness but in its definition.

186 COMMENTARY

The main difficulty for this interpretation is kai totdro éoru 70 yevos «is 0 mpatov TiMerat, Which becomes pointless, ‘These words are perhaps a gloss due to some one who thought there was:a reference to the doctrine that genus is jAy. For glosses of similar form cf. TI. ro09® 26, A. 1073) 33, and possibly A. 984 1, Z. re41? 28, )8.

GAN’ dpa Kal tov év t@ N6yo; The form ddA dpa is a regular Aristotelian one, while dX’ dpa is not. I have therefore, with Asclepius and Bessarion, read dpa and treated the sentence as a question. Bz. recommends this.in Zzdex go? 28.

2. I have followed Bullinger’s suggestion and written 8 for ée. ‘Particula 67 inserta enunciationi, quae pro fundamento ponitur proximae argumentationis, eam vel ex communi omnium opinione vel ex argumentis alibi allatis firmam et evidentem esse significat.’ Bz. Jndex 172258. This seems better than Bessarion’s ye.

’ 5-23. Aristotle passes from the implication of the previous existence of something éé ob 76 yryvopevov yiyveras, to mention, rather irrelevantly, his favourite linguistic point about the use of such words as Ad@wos (cf. ©. 10492 18, Phys. 190% 25, 2459). The connexion is that this usage arises out of an ambiguity in the meaning of éé ot.

4. éxeivivov. - For this Aristotelian coinage cf. @. 1049% 19, 21.

8. éxetvo é& 06, i.e. Kd pvenV (cf. 1. 12), This, however, as Aristotle proceeds to point out, is not really analogous to ‘stone’, which the statue is ‘not said to be’. Stone is the maéler of the statue ; disease is the frzvation of health. Where the privation is clearly apprehended and has a name, we say the result comes from the priva- tion-rather than from the matter (since that from which a thing comes is properly something that changes, not something that persists, 1. 21); and what comes from X cannot be said tobe X. Where the privation is not clearly recognized and named, we say, less properly (ll. 19-22), that the thing comes from its matter, and, since here too we feel the difficulty of saying that a thing is what it comes from, we say not that the statue is wood but that it is ‘wooden’. This is the origin of such words (81a pev odv TOdTO oTwSs Aéyerau, has).

19-22), that the thing comes from its matter, and, since here too we feel the difficulty of saying that a thing is what it comes from, we say not that the statue is wood but that it is ‘wooden’. This is the origin of such words (81a pev odv TOdTO oTwSs Aéyerau, has).

8-11. ylyverat . . . Gyuns is concessive; paddov pévro. xTA. is in sense the principal clause.

15. tTovrwy, sc, bronze, bricks, timbers.

Soxet. Schwegler and Bz. are wrong in their suspicion that Alexander read, as Bessarion did, od doxet. Cf. Al. 493. 17.

Form does not come to be, any more than matter, bul only the combination of the two (ch. 8).

1033724. What comes to be comes to be by something and from something (let us take this to be the privation, not the matter) and comes to be something, e.g. a sphere. The sphere is not made, any

Z. 7. 163322 —8.. 40331 187

more than the bronze, which is the matter ; save per accidens, since the bronze sphere is a sphere and is made.

gi. For to make a ‘ this’ is to make it out of the substratum, im the full sense (i.e. out of a given form as well as a given matter). If the substratum were made, it would be made out of something else, and so ad infinitum.

b5. Evidently, then, the form is not made; the concrete thing is made by putting the form into the matter; if the form were made it would have to be divisible into matter and form.

1g. Is there a sphere apart from the particular spheres, a house apart from the bricks? Surely there would never have come into being a ‘ this ’ at all if that were so. The form isa ‘such’, not a ‘this’; in making, a ‘this such’ is made out of a ‘this’. The whole ‘this’, e.g. Callias, is analogous to ‘this bronze sphere’, man to ‘ bronze sphere’,

26. The Forms, if there are any Forms apart from particulars, do nothing to explain becomings or substances, and are not, on that account at least, to be viewed as self-subsistent substances.

29. In some cases it is obvious that the producer is something one in kind with the product, i. e. in natural generation, except in abnormal cases such as the production of a mule by a horse, and even there the class that comprises both parents presumably has the characteristics ot both, and is something like a mule.

1034*2. Thus we need not posit a Platonic Form as pattern, for living things are what are most truly substances, and there would be a Form here if anywhere. The begetter is adequate to the putting of the form into the matter. The individual is ‘such a form in this matter’, matter being what differentiates individuals identical in form.

10337 26. 78y yap Sidprotar, |. 8.

BI. é€k Tod Gdws drroKewpevou, ‘from the substratum in the full sense of the word’, including form as well as matter (1029%2). So Al. 495. 9

32. For the absence of the article before tév xadxdv otpoyyudov movety cf. A. 10146 n., Kuhner ii. 2. §472 a. A good example is found in Pl. Rep. 493.¢ 6 tiv Tov TOAAGY... dpynv Kal ydovas Kara- vevonkevat copiay iyovpevos.

So Al. 495. 9

34. It is doubtful whether we should not insert a comma after totro and translate ‘but is to make one of two different elements—e.¢. this form, viz. sphericity—in another’. This is attractive, but the com- bination érepov 7 év dAAw does not seem very likely ; we should expect TOde év THde OF Ti ev Twi.

b1, todto yap éméxetto, ‘for this was assumed’ (@ 25).

188 COMMENTARY

3. Touro seems to refer to Tod dAws trokepevov * 31, the intervening passage being parenthetical.

5-6. o08€ 76 cldos . » , yiyverat, Aristotle does not necessarily mean that form is eternal, Sometimes he says that it comes into being and passes out of being instantaneously, Cf. ro39> 26, H. 1044? 21. In one passage (H. 1043» 14) he gives both alternatives—j didiov eivar } POapriv avev Tod pOeiperOar Kai yeyovévar avev Tov yiyverOur. He apparently means these two alternatives to apply to different kinds of form. Pure forms which exist untrammelled by any conjunction with matter—God, the intelligences that move the spheres, the human reason—are eternal, Among the forms the acquisition of which by matter constitutes becoming or change, a distinction must be drawn. Where what is produced is a new substance, its form must have pre-existed in another individual; where what is produced is a substance with a new quality, quantity, &c., the quality, quantity, &c., need not have pre-existed actually; it may have existed only potentially (103418). dvOpwzos dvOpwrov yevva, but there is no corre- sponding principle Aevxdy Aevxdy yevvd. Le, in the former case the form is eternal; in the latter it comes into being instantaneously; it supervenes in a moment on a change which has taken time,

6. For the superfluous o@ cf. #16, 21.

7. o08€ 76 ti qv etvar. In these words Aristotle simply brings out another aspect of what has already been called 76 efdos and 7 ev 7o aic@nrS poppy, viz. that it is what is stated in a definition.

8. ious as opposed to réyvy and divas is dpyy év avg as against ev dddw (A. 10708 7, De Caelo 301 17). For the difference between téxvn and dvvayus cf. E. 1025» 22-n.

14-15. 16 pev, the genus, which is to the differentia as dy to eldos (cf. A. 1024> 3, 8). 16 8’, the differentia. 716 5é, the specific form.

16. otov here introduces not an example but a comparison. The specific form, as composed of genus and differentia, answers to the concrete thing, as composed of matter and form. For this use of otov cf, Bz. Index 501> 55-60.

A. 1024> 3, 8). 16 8’, the differentia. 716 5é, the specific form.

17. It is possible that the manuscript reading ocvvodos might mean ‘the coalescence of matter and form’. But such a meaning for the word would be without parallel in Aristotle or, as far as I know, elsewhere, and Jaeger is almost certainly right in reading cvvoAos. For 7 svvodos ( = 7 atvodos ovcia) cf. 1037% 26, 30. The same con: fusion has occurred in manuscripts in both those passages; A and A are easily interchanged,

19. yevvwpévy, the reading of EJ, is supported by yevva, |. 23 (cf. |. 30).

tOde.. . TOdE, Sc. VA... €ldos, Cf. 1. 13.

métepovy kth. Aristotle passes now to consider a doctrine which might seem to follow from his denial of the creation of form, viz. the Platonic doctrine that Forms exist eternally and independently. To this Aristotle answers that form is never a substance, always a characteristic ; never a rode, always a rowvde. Before it existed as the form of the offspring it existed as the form of the parent.

Z. 8. 1033 3 — 1034 3 189

21. 7) 08 Gy ...7t. Since one substance cannot contain another actually existing substance (1039 3), it follows that if the form were a substance there could never come into being an individual substance containing it as an element. So Al, Bz. But quite probably we should omit the comma after jv, and translate ‘ Perhaps the answer is that if the form were an individual subsistent in this manner, coming-to-be would never take place at all’.

24. Kahdias, cf. A. 98198 n.

26. 1 tdv eidav aitia, ‘the cause which consists of the Forms’.

28. mpds ye Tas yevéseis, the reading of A», is clearly an improve- ment on the vulgate apds re ras yeveres.

33. Aristotle’s account is that the form of the mule is not the same as that of its sire, the horse, since this has failed to master the opposition offered by the material element coming from the dam, the ass; but it is identical with the generic form of the sire, since this is also the generic form of the dam and thus has no opposition to conquer. Thus the mule is a sort of abstract universal, with the generic qualities common to horse and ass but without (or at least not having all) the specific qualities of either.

1034° I. odk @vdpacta. Aristotle himself uses the word Addovpor, ‘bushy-tailed creature’ (e.g. in H. A, 491% 1).

3. TovToLS, sc. TA Hvoixd (1033 32), living things.

The conditions of spontaneous production answering (a) to artistic (b) to natural production. The conditions of production in categories other than substance (ch. 9).

in H. A, 491% 1).

3. TovToLS, sc. TA Hvoixd (1033 32), living things.

The conditions of spontaneous production answering (a) to artistic (b) to natural production. The conditions of production in categories other than substance (ch. 9).

1034* 9. (1) (2) Why are some things (e.g. health) produced spontaneously as well as by art, and others not (e.g. a house)? The reason is that in some cases the matter which begins the production is such as to be moved by itself, in some not; sometimes again it can move itself in the particular way required, sometimes not.

18. Accordingly the product will or will not need the artist for its production; in the latter case it can be set in motion by what has not the art but can be moved either by something else that has not the art or by a movement starting from an already existing part of the product.

21. Thus all artefac/a are produced from something else with the same name as themselves, as living things are produced, or from a part which is of the same name (e.g. a house from a house, since the art of building is identical with the formal element in a house) or from what contains a part—unless the production be merely incidental.

25. For the cause of direct ger se production is a part of the

>... 7 those under which it mimics nature. In > 7-19 he discusses the genesis of qualities, quantities, &c., as distinct from that of substances.

1034* 11-13. Tay pev H OAyn... 7 ev ToradtTn. As Bz. observes, the insertion of the explanatory words 7 dpyovea, &c., has caused Aristotle to forget the original structure of the sentence. The anacolouthon is a natural one.

II. 1 Sdn 7 Gpxouca Tis yeveoews. The phrase might seem peculiar, in view of the passivity commonly ascribed to matter by Aristotle. The explanation is that it is only prime matter that is entirely passive ; other matter has some quality of its own and can thus inifiate move- ment: Cf. 1032> 28- —30 0.

12. TL pépos Tod mpdypatos. The notion that a part of the sesh must be pre-existent has been ae expounded in 1032 26— ROSS 7 i.

13-18. Aristotle divides matter thus:

(1) some matter can initiate motion, (2) some cannot.

Of (1), (2) some can initiate motion of the particular sort required to produce a-certain result; (4) some can initiate motion of some kind but not of the kind required; e.g. stones of themselves can fall but cannot arrange themselves into a house, fire.can rise but cannot move so as to heat bronze.

Two mistakes seem to be involved in this classification. (i) Aristotle assumes wrongly that the elements have a natural motion in certain

Leo LOSAM TIS! 1 Igl

directions, earth downwards, fire upwards. (ii) This once assumed, it is hard to see what is the matter he describes as having zo power of starting motion on its ownaccount. Apelt suggests that great masses of rock may be meant, and this is possible, though, as he says, zwkon- sequent genug.

17. For &8t pévtow vat cf. Zop. 171% 20 éore pev ds ov, dor 8 ds

Apelt suggests that great masses of rock may be meant, and this is possible, though, as he says, zwkon- sequent genug.

17. For &8t pévtow vat cf. Zop. 171% 20 éore pev ds ov, dor 8 ds

, * vat.

18-Ig. T4 pév, those products whose matter is of type (1 4) (e.g. a house), ta 8¢, those whose matter is of type (1 a) (e.g. health),

19. It seems clear that kwnOyoetar is used in a peculiar sense. The subject of the sentence is ‘the products which can come into existence without the agency of an artist’, and «.vyOyoerar must. mean ‘the motion which produces them will be started’, very much as if we had had yevyoerar (cf. dudw kwyoe, @. 1046" 21). The sentence then means ‘the motion leading to such products will be originated by these things (the things which have some power of originating the required motion, cf. 1. 14), which have not the art in question but can themselves be moved either by other things which have not the art, or with a motion that starts from a part of the product which already exists in the things themselves’, Thus Aristotle recognizes three modes of production of, e. g., health; it may be produced

1) purposely, by the physician,

U3 spontaneously, (a) by some action of a non-physician (or a materialeobject) on the sick body, (4) by a motion starting from some element of health (e.g. heat) present in the sick body.

20-21. kwetoOar ... téexvnv. There is no trace of these words in Alexander (498. 29), and they are decidedly suspicious ; the pév of EJ in 1. 20 looks like a piece of patchwork inserted in view of an intrusive $¢ clause following. Christ conjectured very reasonably (Studia, 45) that xivetoOar dvvapevwv airadv (loosely used for xweicOa duvdpeva ard) was a gloss on xwOyoera, and tx’ dddwv ovk éxovTwv Thy Texvnv a variant Of dd TovTwY TOV odK éxdvTWY THY TEXVNV.

21. ék pépous is difficult, but a comparison with 1032> 26—1033° 1, 1034*%12, 24-30 shows whatis meant. Asc. gives a good instance of Aristotle’s meaning, rod eudvrov Oeppod tAcovacavtos Kal KatacBécavros thy Woxpav dvoxpaciay (407. 6). Not improbably, however, 7) é« épovs has been wrongly inserted here, as in 1. 24, from the margin.

21-26. The section *® 9-32 is concerned with the conditions under which products’ normally produced by art are occasionally produced spontaneously. It is not till * 33 that Aristotle passes to consider natural products and the conditions under which spontaneity mimics the work of nature. dyra, then, means ‘all arzefacta’, i.e. things of the type of artefacta, whether actually produced by art or spontane- ously, The reference to natural products (éomep ra pvoer) is by way of comparison—just as ar/efacia are referred to by way of comparison in the account of natural products (*34, >4). ‘All aréefacta are produced from a thing having the same name as themselves, as are: natural products, or (more exactly) from an element in themselves

192 COMMENTARY

‘All aréefacta are produced from a thing having the same name as themselves, as are: natural products, or (more exactly) from an element in themselves

192 COMMENTARY

which has the same name as themselves (e. g. a house is produced from a house, inasmuch as it is produced by reason, for the art of building is identical with the formal element in a house), or from something involving an element in them (and having the same name as it)’.

One is tempted to punctuate so as to take é& oikias, éx pepovs

(sc. éuwvdpov) } exovrds Tu wépos as stating for the case of the house the alternatives stated generally as e€ duwvipou, ex pépovs duwvvpov. But a house cannot be produced ék ppovs in the sense in which éx pépovs is used in 1, 21 and presumably therefore in |. 24. For ek pépovs is used in |. 21 to indicate the way in which spontaneous: production takes place, and a house is never produced spontaneously l. 10). The sentence is evidently corrupt; the repetition 7 é« pépous Spovipov ...%) €k pépovs can hardly stand. Bonitz detected corrup- tion but offered no cure. Christ bracketed 7 ek pépovs dépwvipov int ], 23 and read % ék pepovs duwvdpov in |. 24, assuming that Alexander read 7 ék pepovs cvvwvipmov (Or duwvipov) there (Al. 499. 20). But Alexander seems to have had this phrase in |. 23 (499. 12), and per- haps only there; and the same is true of Asclepius (410. 3). It seems probable that 7 é« yépous, having at some early date been dis- placed from |. 23, was added in the margin and later inserted in |. 24. Cf. previous note.

22. é& épwvipou. ra doe are actually produced éxk suvwyvipov (A. 1070* 8), from that which shares their nature as well as their name, but Aristotle occasionally ignores the distinction between bpavupov and cuvavupov, which did not exist in ordinary Greek usage ; cf. A. 987> 9 n., De Gen. ef Corr. 328» 21.

24.) 6d vod. This emendation, which had occurred to me independently, has been proposed by L. Robin in Archiv f. Gesch. d. Phil. xxiii. 3. The manuscript reading 7 79 vod is not impossible, but a justification of é€ oixéas rather than an alternative to it seems to be required. 7 would easily be corrupted into 7 by the influence of the other 7 in the sentence.

# €xovrds tt pepos. For the absence of the article with ¢yorros cf. A. 10227 6,

25-26. édv... pépos. Aristotle notes here that what he has said in ll. 21-25 of the implications of production applies only to production which is not merely incidental. That by virtue of which A produces B directly per se isa part of B. rod zouety rpGrov kal avro, ‘of its producing the result directly per se’. Incidental production may be illustrated by the case of the builder’s producing not a house simply (which he produces directly) but a house which is agreeable or injurious to its inmates (E. 1026> 6-10).

28. 7 dkodouet. Jaeger supposes 7 to have been corrupted into 7 as in], 24. But Alexander read 7 (499. 27, 30, 35); cf. also 10326 27.

1026> 6-10).

28. 7 dkodouet. Jaeger supposes 7 to have been corrupted into 7 as in], 24. But Alexander read 7 (499. 27, 30, 35); cf. also 10326 27.

29-30. 8d... [Oepydrys]. The manuscript reading if kept would have to be translated ‘that is why the rubbing (cf. 1032» 26) is said to produce health, because that of which health is a consequence produces

§1. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY

Z. 9. 1034222 — 1034? 13 193

health, viz. heat’. Buta far better sense is got by treating (with Jaeger) THv byievav and Oepudorys as glosses on 86 Kat éyerar woveiv and dru exelvo trovet respectively. The sense then is ‘and this is why the heat in the rubbing is said to produce health, viz. because it produces that on which health follows’. Alexander understood the passage rightly (499. 36—500. 6), though Al.¢ has wove? riyv byieav.

30-32. In syllogism, i.e. in the scientific syllogism, a property is shown to belong to a subject in virtue of the subject’s essence or = definition (Az. Post. 9031). So too in generation the product springs from its ownessence. This applies to all three kinds of produc- tion described in ll. 21-30. (1) In natural production it is the specific essence of the father (which is identical with that of the offspring) that produces the offspring. (2) In artistic production the essence of the product, conceived by the artist, is the cause. (3) In spontaneous production heat, for example, which is the cause of the production of health, is the inner essence of which health is the manifestation.

33-34. TS prev yap oméppa . . . téxvns, ‘for the seed is productive in the same way as the things that work by art’.

b 3-4. édv... tpidvou. These clauses as traditionally arranged can be made intelligible only by reading: aX éav and punctuating as fol- lows : od yap mavra ovtw Set Cnreiv ws e€ dvOpdrou dvOpamos—xal yap yorn eg dvdpos* 810 Hiovos ovk e& jprdvov—adn’ éay pn THpwpa iE But this is excessively awkward. 810 . . . ypudvov does not follow naturally on the previous clause. Alexander (500. 13, 35) and Asclepius (411. 7) as well as AP read éay simply, and ddAd is pretty evidently a piece of later patchwork ; and not a successful one, since dA’ éay .. . 7 has to be taken rather unnaturally as = ‘ but only if it is not a rypwpya’. Alexander interprets éov... as coming Jefore did... Husdvov, and may have had the clauses before him in that order, The sense gained by the transposition is quite satisfactory ; o¥ yap ... dvépds is inter- posed parenthetically to explain the cautious zws in 1 I, and then the exception to éort TOS Spaivupov is stated i in dv wy mypwpa 7 (cf. the position of ea pn Karo. ovpBeBnxds yeyyras in #25), and illustrated. Cf. dy pa Tt Tapes poow yevnrat, otov tm7os jyplovov 1033 33.

4. @omep ékel, i.e. in the field of nature as in the already (2 9-32) discussed field of art. For ‘spontaneous generation’ cf. Bz. Zndex 124» 3-26.

the position of ea pn Karo. ovpBeBnxds yeyyras in #25), and illustrated. Cf. dy pa Tt Tapes poow yevnrat, otov tm7os jyplovov 1033 33.

4. @omep ékel, i.e. in the field of nature as in the already (2 9-32) discussed field of art. For ‘spontaneous generation’ cf. Bz. Zndex 124» 3-26.

7-19. Christ thinks this passage belongs properly to ch. 8. It is, more exactly, an appendix to the whole subject discussed in chs, 7-9.

7. & adtav, ‘from the parent animals themselves’. Cf. Schwegler, Lxcursus III, on the pregnant use of airés.

Q. Tav mpdtwy. For this as a name for the categories cf. ra Kowa apata An. Post. 96” 20, ra. rpdta tov yevov B. 998” 15.

II. kat émt xadkod, ei ylyvetar, ‘and as bronze, if it is generated, im- plies a form and a matter that are not generated at the same time as it’.

1g. The coming into being of a bronze sphere is the imposition of a new shape (which is a kind of guality, Cat. 10711) on an existing

2673-2 Oo

194 COMMENTARY

substance ; the coming into being of bronze is the generation of a new substance. Aristotle now generalizes and says ‘so is it, sc. generally, both in the case of substance and in that of quality’, &c.

16-19. Cf. 1033” 5-6 n.

EsSENCE AND DEFINITION (chs. 10-12).

(1) Should the account of a whole contain that of the parts? (2) What parts are prior to the whole ? (ch. 10).

1034 20. (1) Must the definition of a whole contain that of the parts? The definition of the circle does not contain that of the segments, but the definition of the syllable contains that of the letters ; why is this?

28. (2) If the parts are prior to the whole, the acute angle should be prior to the right angle, the finger to the man. Yet the wholes are prior both in definition and in power of independent existence.

32. (1) Really ‘part’ is equivocal. The parts of substance are matter and form, but in a sense only the elements of the form are parts of the thing.

1035°4. E.g. flesh is a part of snubness but not of hollowness ; bronze is a part of the whole statue but not of it as form (a name, like ‘statue’, may be applied to the form or to the thing as having form, but never to the bare matter).

g. This is why the case of the circle differs from that of the syllable (cf. 1034” 24). The letters are parts of the form of the syllable; the segments of the circle are matter on which form supervenes, though nearer the form than the bronze in a bronze circle is.

14. In a sense not all the letters are present in the definition of the syllable ; the letters in wax or in the air are only the sensible matter of the syllable. For the parts into which a whole is dissolved may be parts of the concrete whole but not of the form, and therefore not present in the definition.

25. Hence things which are composed of form and matter (e. g. the snub, the bronze circle) can be dissolved into their material parts ; immaterial things cannot be so dissolved.

gi. Thus the clay statue is dissolved into clay, and even the circle into its segments—i.e. the individual circle, not the circle in the abstract.

» 3. (2) To restate the matter, (2) parts which are parts of the definition and into which the definition is analysed are, at any rate some of them, prior to the whole definition ; but the definition of the

Z. 9. 1034 16-19 195

right angle is not analysed into that of the acute but we versa, for the acute angle is defined as ‘less than a right angle’.

9. So too with the circle and the semicircle, the man and his finger, The parts which are matter are posterior to the whole; the parts of the substance as defined are prior, at least some of them.

14. (a) Since the soul is the substance as defined (or form) of such and such a body (at least no part of the body can be properly defined apart from its function, which involves perception), so that (4) the parts of the soul are (all or some) prior to the concrete animal, while the body and its parts are posterior to the soul and are the constituents not of it but of the concrete whole,

22. therefore (c), while the bodily parts are prior in a sense to the concrete whole, in a sense they are not (for the finger in the proper sense cannot exist apart from the animal); while some bodily parts are neither prior nor posterior, viz. the supreme parts in which the essence immediately resides, e. g. the heart or the brain.

27. Things which are predicated universally of particulars (e.g. man) are not substance but a compound of this definition and this matter taken universally, while the individual comprises an ultimate individual portion of matter.

gi. (1) (Return to the first problem.) There are parts of the form, parts of the concrete thing, and parts of the matter; only the first are parts of the definition, which is of the universal.

10362 2. The concrete individual, whether sensible like a bronze circle or intelligible like a mathematical circle, is not definable but knowable by the aid of intuition or perception; when the circles have passed from actuality, it is not clear whether they exist or not, but they are described by the universal definition.

8. Their matter itself is unknowable. Matter is sensible and change- able, or else intelligible—viz. the matter which exists in sensibles not gua sensible, i. e. mathematical figures.

12. We have now treated of whole and part, priority and posteriority ; we must next answer question (2) (return to the second problem), whether the right angle, the circle, the animal, or their parts are prior. We answer by a distinction :

e. mathematical figures.

16. If ‘animal’ may mean the soul, ‘the circle’ circularity, ‘the right angle’ right-angleness, then while the whole in a sense is posterior to the parts in a sense, i.e. the bronze right angle or the right angle formed by particular lines is posterior to the parts in the definition and to the parts of the particular right angle, the immaterial right angle is posterior to the parts in the definition but prior to those of the particular ;

O02

196 COMMENTARY

24. but if the soul cannot be said to be the animal, even so some wholes are prior to their parts, others not, as has been said.

In this chapter Aristotle returns from the digression on generation which has occupied chs. 7-9, to continue, in-effect, the discussion of essence which occupied chs. 4-6. The chapter raises two main questions:

(1) Should the definition of a whole contain the definitions of the parts (1034? 20-28)?

(2) Are the parts prior to the whole (? 28-32) ?

The treatment of the two questions is interwoven: (1) is discussed in > 32—1035> 3, 1035 31—1036 12, (2) in 1035 3-31, 1036 413-25.

103420. was 8é Adyos pwépyn Exer. A Adyos must contain at least two words (De /n/, 16> 26); it must mention a genus and at least one differentia.

31. The subject of Néyovra: is ‘the parts’, though in the next clause ‘the wholes’ are again the subject. Schwegler’s proposal to read ob doxet in ]. 30 does not mend matters, since then there is a change of subject in kai r@ etvar de dvev GAAHAwY wpdrepa, and further éxeivwy will not refer to the same things as éxeiva. (Schwegler is wrong in thinking that Alexander read od doxe?. At 502. 16 Alexander is paraphrasing the sense.) For a similar construction cf. M. 1077? 3 n.

kat TG elvan Sé dvev GAAHAwY mpdtepa. What Aristotle says is true enouch of the finger; the body can exist without it, while it cannot exist without the body—it ceases to be a finger, except in name. But he is careless in assuming that the position of the acute angle is similar ; it is not true that the right angle can exist without the acute angle and not the acute angle without the right angle. Take a finger away from a living body and you leave it still a living body; take an acute angle away from a right angle and it ceases to be a right angle. Aristotle distinguishes the two cases clearly enough in A. 27. His other point, that the definition of the acute angle presupposes that of the right angle and not vice versa, is of course correct.

33. ets pev... moody. For this rpdmos cf. A. 1023) 15.

Aristotle distinguishes the two cases clearly enough in A. 27. His other point, that the definition of the acute angle presupposes that of the right angle and not vice versa, is of course correct.

33. ets pev... moody. For this rpdmos cf. A. 1023) 15.

10352 7. ‘ For the form or the thing as having form may be spoken of as the so-and-so (éxacrov), but the material element by itself should never be said to be the so-and-so,’ This is probably intended by Aristotle to justify him in speaking (in ll. 6, 7) of the form alone (as well as the concrete whole) as ‘the statue’, while he refuses to call the matter alone a ‘statue’.

11. Alexander is no doubt right in taking tod Aéyou as dependent on pépy, Not on oroixela (504. 5-8). For tot doyov rod eidovs cf. 1. 4.

12. éf js. With the manuscript reading ed’ ots, we have, very awkwardly, to suppose a comma after vAy. Jaeger is no doubt right in supposing ois to have come in by itacism (cf. apparatus crilicus to T. 1004% 20, A. 10249 23, Z, 1030>35). ed’ as is sufficiently con- firmed by 10357 5, 1036% 31, » 6.

13-14. éyyutépw... éyyévntat. In a bronze circle there are two

Z. 10. 1034 20 — 10358 20 197

grades of matter, one more essential than the other. Strip off the sensible matter (bronze) and you are still left with intelligible matter (the spatial parts of the circle). Aristotle’s remark here anticipates the doctrine stated in 1036* 9.

16. 1a év 76 dept, letters spoken and propagated through the air; cf. De Sensu 446” 6.

20. 70 cvvoXoyr is not to be identified either with the sensible or with the individual. It is applicable (1) to the intelligible individual ees 3), (2) to the universal answering to a set of sensible individuals

1035» 29), (3) to the sensible individual ; in fact to anything that con- tains matter either universal or particular, either intelligible or sensible. One would suppose that, as the universal of a set of sensible individuals contains the universal of their sensible matters (1035> 29), the universal of a set of intelligible individuals would contain the universal of their intelligible matters and would thus be a fourth kind of oivodov. But Aristotle does not draw this inference, and treats ‘the circle’ not as corresponding to ‘man’ and differing from it only by containing intelligible instead of sensible matter, but rather as corresponding to ‘soul’, which he identifies with ‘ being a soul’, i.e. with the pure form of vitality (103671). The main importance of the chapter lies in the recognition of (1) the intelligible individual, and (2) the materiate universal or \dyos evvAos (De An. 403? 25), as intermediates between the sensible individual and the pure form or, as we may call it, Adyos avAos.

A consideration of, say, the circle leads to the recognition of five entities :

(a) the relation stated in the equation to the circle,

(3 this relation spatialized (the circle in general),

¢) this relation exemplified in a particular space—(1) above,

A consideration of, say, the circle leads to the recognition of five entities :

(a) the relation stated in the equation to the circle,

(3 this relation spatialized (the circle in general),

¢) this relation exemplified in a particular space—(1) above,

(d) this relation embodied in a certain type of matter—(2) above,

(e) this relation embodied in a particular portion of matter — (3) above.

Aristotle in effect here ignores (4) or identifies it with (a). And in 1036 7-20 he rejects the Platonic conception that the form of line is something non-spatial—the number 2. This goes with his insistence (in the Posterior Analytics) on a complete separation between arith- metic and geometry.

It is evident that Aristotle’s intelligible individuals answer to ra petagd of the Platonists (for which cf. A. 987>14n.). He attacks these (A. 991 29, B. 997° 14, K. 1059) 6, M. 10771, N. 10go? 36) without hinting that he himself held a similar doctrine. There is, however, an essential difference, in his opinion, between the two doctrines. He thinks, rightly or wrongly, that the Platonists regarded the intermediates as separately existing entities, while he himself thinks of them as existing in sensible things and separable only by definition (1036 11, M. 2, 3); his objection to ra peragv is the same as his fundamental objection to the Ideas. But it is noteworthy that he also attacks a doctrine of intermediates which, like his own, conceived of them as existing zw sensible things (B. 9984 7). This doctrine too, he

198 COMMENTARY

would doubtless say, regards the intermediates as substances, while he regards them merely as characters of substances.

21-23. Neither the text of EJ nor that of AP in these lines can be accepted, and an early corruption is clearly indicated. The singular 7 in 1. 23 indicates that Adyos has been spokenof in the singular, and TO pey...7@ 0 was probably the original reading. This was corrupted into tov pev...7dv 8, and the reading of AP implies an attempt to amend the whole reading thus produced.

23. av ph 770d cuverAnppevou. Jaeger (anticipated by Christ) thinks this a gloss, (1) because in his view, whether we understand these words as meaning ‘ unless the parts are parts of the concrete thing’ or ‘unless the definition is the definition of the concrete thing’, they destroy the sense, and (2) because he thinks 7d cuverAnppevoy could not be thus used without any explanation, not having occurred before in Z The words occur, however, in all the manuscripts and in Alexander and are defensible, though not necessary. (1) They state the condition under which the parts should not be mentioned in the definition of the whole. ‘But in another kind of definition the definition of such parts should not be present, viz. if the definition is not the definition of the concrete whole.’ (2) cvveAnpperov peta THs tAys has occurred already in E. 1025) 32; further, ocvverAnpupévov is explained presently, in 1. 25. —

‘But in another kind of definition the definition of such parts should not be present, viz. if the definition is not the definition of the concrete whole.’ (2) cvveAnpperov peta THs tAys has occurred already in E. 1025) 32; further, ocvverAnpupévov is explained presently, in 1. 25. —

29. 7 ddws 7 ovToL oTw ye. Forms are not destroyed by dismember- ment but are eternal or else cease instantaneously to be (H. 1043” 14). For these two alternatives cf. 1033 5-6 n.

32. Bz.’s addition of yadxp between % and odaipa is not necessary. The bronze circle has been mentioned already (1033? 30 ff.), so that xaAxn can easily be supplied in thought.

33. 6 KadAtas, cf. A. 9812 8n.

ba. 6 Kad éxacta, cf. B. 999? 26n.

5. 7) wavta 7) eva. The last differentia of a species is logically neither prior nor posterior to it (1038% 19); all the other elements in the species are prior to it.

4. The insertion of 6 seems necessary.

14. 7} wdvta 4 eva, cf. 1. 5n.

14-27. This is to be treated as one sentence, the apodosis beginning not with éore (J. 18) but, as often in a long sentence, with pév ody (I. 22).

18. 5 odx Umdpger dveu aicPycews, sc. ‘and therefore involves soul ’.

IQ. 4 mdvyta 7 eva, cf. 1.5 n. The elements of the form other than the last differentia are prior to the materiate universal, as they are to the form ; the last differentia is ‘ simultaneous’ with both.

kal Ka0 éxactov 8) Spoiws. Al, 508. 8 interprets this as meaning ‘and as with animals, so with other concrete wholes’. Aristotle’s way of expressing this would probably be épuotws 8¢ kal éritav dAAwy. The meaning is ‘and as the parts of the soul are prior to the concrete animal as such, the parts of Socrates’ and Callias’ souls are prior to Socrates and Callias, the concrete individuals ’.

23. éotw ds, éott 8 ws ov. The parts of the body are prior to the

Z. 10. 1035% 21 — 1036% Io 199

concrete whole of form and matter as the element is prior to the com- pound, but not prior in the sense that they can exist apart from it. When they are separated from it they remain the same only in name.

25. eva S€ duo, These supreme parts are of course prior to the concrete whole in the sense in which a finger is so (cf. previous note), but in the sense in which the finger is posterior to the concrete whole these are neither prior nor posterior to it; they cannot exist without it nor it without them. Cf. A. 10249 23-28.

26. Kkapdia 7 éyképados, cf, A. 1013% 5n.

29. ovk éotw otcia. This may be compared with the view of the Categories that these things are devrepar odotar.

30. &s xaOddou goes, I think, with ripodt tis drys, ryodi THs VAs as kafoXov being opposed to ris éoxdrys VAns.

33. Bz.’s addition of a second kat ris bdns is required to account for air#s. But it is hard to see how Aristotle could distinguish parts of the matter from parts of the concrete thing; the third alternative is probably added simply for the sake of naming all the logical possibilities.

But it is hard to see how Aristotle could distinguish parts of the matter from parts of the concrete thing; the third alternative is probably added simply for the sake of naming all the logical possibilities.

10362 4. otov = ‘i.e.’ _

Tods padnpariKous, i. e. the plurality of circles which many geometrical propositions imply, different on the one hand from ‘the circle’ or circularity, on the other from material approximate circles.

5. peta vonoews 7 atoOycews, not exclusively by rational intuition or by perception, but by discursive thought with the aid of them. Cf. Plato’s description of sensibles as apprehended d0€ per’ aicOyoews (Zim. 52 A).

6. _é« Tis évrehexetas, the activity of intuition (vdyo.s) or of percep- tion, according as the individuals in question are intuitable or perceptible.

8-9. 4 8 thy... attHv. Aristotle has pointed out that pure form is definable and that the concrete individual is grasped (@) in its individuality, with the aid of yénows or aicPyows, and (4) so far as its universal nature goes, by definition. He now adds that substance in the third of the senses recognized in 1029 2, 3, 1035%2, viz. bare matter, is not knowable at all.

g-10. The phrase vA7 voyry occurs, in Aristotle’s works, only here and in 1037" 4, H. 1045 34, 36. Prima facie it has different meanings in the two books. In Z it is something which exists in individuals (103721, 2)—in non-sensible individuals (1036 35) or in sensible individuals not considered as sensible (1036 11), and the only instances given of these individuals are mathematical figures (103644, 12, 1037%2). It seems to be equivalent to 4 7dv pabnpatidy try of K. 105915. Alexander accordingly identifies it with extension (510. 3, 514. 27), and as far as Z goes this interpretation would be satisfactory. But in H it is the generic element in a definition, and therefore (1) is present in the nature of a species (there is no reference here to individuals), and (2) has no limitation to mathematical objects. It is not likely, however, that Aristotle would have used the phrase in two quite unconnected senses, and it is noteworthy that

200 COMMENTARY

the instance of it given in H is a mathematical one; ‘plane figure’ is the tA vont? of the circle. It would seem, then, that either the wider conception was already in his mind when he wrote Z, and extension is merely given as an instance of dAy vonry, or (which seems more probable) he generalized the notion when he came to write H. If we are right in connecting the two uses, Ay vonry in its widest conception is the thinkable generic element which is involved both in species and in individuals, and of which they are specifications and individualizations.

If we are right in connecting the two uses, Ay vonry in its widest conception is the thinkable generic element which is involved both in species and in individuals, and of which they are specifications and individualizations.

It is evident from ]. 11 that in Aristotle’s view everything that has sensible matter has intelligible matter, while the converse is not the case. Similarly everything that has tAn yervyti kat POapry has vA torucy and the matter involved in growth and in alteration (H. 1042» 3), whereas vAy tomky, at any rate, can exist without tAn yervyryn (1042) 4, 10444, ©. 1050” 17, A. 1069» 25). So also can the matter involved in alteration (®. 1050 17). It is further stated that vAy tomy implies none of the others (H. 1044» 7, @. 1050 21, Phys. 260% 28), Further, alteration presupposes local movement (260 4), and growth presupposes altera- tion (260% 29)—and therefore local movement (H. 1042) 4n.). Cat. 14, which asserts the independence of the different kinds of change, is probably not by Aristotle.

We thusget a.scaleof matters, each of which implies all that precede it:

(1) vAn vonry, (2) try aicOnrn, (a) kwyry (tomy), (4) dAAowT 7H, (c) adgyri cat bOiry, (2) yevvynth kal pOaprn, which is tAy pdduora Kal Kupiws (De Gen. et Corr. 320° 2).

II. } év Tots aicOntots bmdpxouca ph 7 aic@y7d. For Aristotle’s view of the mode of existence of ra palnuarixd cf. M. 2, 3:

16. dt. odx dds, ‘ that neither can be said without qualification to be prior’.

17. {Gov % Eppuxov should be read, with the best manuscripts. ‘If (not only the concrete whole, but) even the soul may be said to be the animal or (to put it more widely so as to include plants) the living thing.’

19-23. Aristotle’s answer to the question of priority is as follows:

(1) Some wholes are posterior to some parts ; viz., the particular or materiate right angle (whether its matter be sensible or intelligible) is posterior (@) to the elements in the definition, and (4) to the parts of a particular right angle (whether sensible or intelligible).

But (2) the immateriate right angle, while (a) posterior to the parts of the definition, is (4) prior to the parts of the particular right angle.

According to this interpretation trav év ro Adyw Kai Tivds dpOjs answers to twos in]. 19, and kal yap... tats Ka? éxaora answers to tt. I take xat twos dpO7s as = kal trav twos 6pOjs. But this is very doubtful Greek, and 7éy should perhaps be inserted.

ZO. 10569 1 1=2 3 201

pera THs Uys, 4} xadxq 6pOy isa perceptible right angle with per- ceptible matter (cf. ll. 4, 10) ; 4 év tats ypappats tals kal éxaora is an intelligible right angle with intelligible matter (cf. ll. 3, 11).

Which parts are parts of the form, which of the concrete whole ? (ch. 11).

10362 26. Which parts are parts of the form, which only of the concrete thing? Until we know this we cannot define anything, for definition is of the form.

ll. 3, 11).

Which parts are parts of the form, which of the concrete whole ? (ch. 11).

10362 26. Which parts are parts of the form, which only of the concrete thing? Until we know this we cannot define anything, for definition is of the form.

31. When the form supervenes on specifically different materials (e. g. the circle on bronze, stone, wood), the materials are evidently no part of the form; but when this is not so, it is hard to eliminate the matter in thought.

> 3. E. g. the form of man is always found in flesh, bone, &c.; are these, then, parts of the form, or parts of the matter but difficult to eliminate because the form never supervenes on other materials?

7. Some have suggested that lines are to the circle as flesh to man; they reduce all mathematical objects to numbers and say the definition of the line is the definition of ‘two’.

13. Some Platonists say two is the line itself; others say it is the Form of the line, holding that, while two is the same as its Form, the line is not the same as its Form.

17. It would follow that (1) there is one Form of many things which evidently have different forms; (2) at this rate there may be one supreme Form, the others not being Forms at all; but thus all things will be one.

21. We have stated the difficulty about definitions, and its reason. It follows that it is a mistake thus to eliminate matter; some things are essentially ‘this form in this matter’ or ‘ these things in this state’.

24. The comparison of ‘animal’ to ‘circle’ used by Socrates the younger is misleading; it implies that man can exist without his parts as the circle can without bronze; but the animal is a sensible object and cannot be defined apart from movement, i. e. apart from its parts, and these in a certain state; for it is only the hand which can do its work, i.e. which is alive, that is a part of a man.

32. Why is not the definition of the semicircles included in that of the circle? Not because they are sensible objects, for they are not. But in truth some non-sensible things have matter; every individual thing has matter, intelligible if not sensible. The semicircles are not parts of the universal circle, though they are of particular circles.

202 COMMENTARY

10372 5. Soul is the primary substance; the body is matter; man is the unity of the two taken universally. Socrates may perhaps be identified either with his soul or with the concrete unity; but if only with the latter, the particular (Socrates) answers to the universal (man).

10. Whether there is another matter apart from the matter of such substances, and another substance, must be considered later. It is with a view to this that we are examining sensible substances, which belong in a sense rather to physics, since physics must study the substance as defined, even more than it studies matter.

It is with a view to this that we are examining sensible substances, which belong in a sense rather to physics, since physics must study the substance as defined, even more than it studies matter.

17. How the elements in the definition are parts of it, and what constitutes the unity of definition, must be examined later. The thing evidently is one, but what makes it so?

21. We have stated generally (1) what essence is and in what sense it is self-subsistent, (2) why the definition of some things contains the parts of the things while that of others does not,

24. (3) that the material parts are not present in the definition (for they are not parts of the substance as defined but of the concrete substance, which in its union with matter cannot be defined but can only be defined according to its primary substance, the indwelling form, e. g. hollowness as opposed to snubness); but in the concrete substance (e.g. the snub nose) there is matter ;

33. (4) that primary substances (i.e. those which do not imply the presence of something in something else which is its substratum), e. g. crookedness, are the same_as their essence, while concrete things involving matter, and unities of substance with an accident, e. g. Socrates + musical, are not the same as their essences.

1036? g. adhedeiv todtoy, cf. ddaipety tiv BAny, |. 23.

8. dwopodct twes. Pythagoreans, says Alexander; and Aristotle’s expression dvdyova1 avra «is Tovs apibpovs (1. 12) (coupled with the distinction between these thinkers and the Platonists, ]. 13) shows that he is right. Cf. Scholia on Euclid, p. 78. 19 Heiberg, of d IIv@ayé- pelou TO mev oneiov avdXoyov éhapBavov povdd., dvad« de THY ypappav. The representation of the point by 1, of the line by 2, of the triangle by 3, and of the tetrahedron by 4, goes back to Philolaus ( Zheol. Ar. p. 62. 17-22). Alexander’s note (512. 20—513. 3) preserves some information about the Pythagorean theory which he probably derived from Aristotle’s lost work Ox the Pythagoreans. The number 2 was, according to them, 76 mp@rov duacrarov, the first product of the di- | remption of the unit, and, quantity being no part of the essence of the line but the matter in which it is embodied, the line should be defined not as roadv ed’ ev diacrardv, quantity dirempted in one dimension, but as 70 mpétov duacrartov.

Zeit. TOCOY 3532 203

13-17. It seems clear that 74 eiSos THs ypappyis is opposed not (as Alexander, Asclepius, and Bz. take it) to r#v dvdda but to abroypaypyy, and that éyva ev ydp, &c., explains the position of those who said that 2 is the form of the line but not the ‘line itself’, The distinction between avToypayyn and 76 2 f. ve in any case must be wrong. Christ is perhaps right in reading a comma after awA@s. womep..- éxaotov then means ‘ the individual corresponding to the universal ’.

ve in any case must be wrong. Christ is perhaps right in reading a comma after awA@s. womep..- éxaotov then means ‘ the individual corresponding to the universal ’.

10-20. Jaeger regards this (Avis/, 206 n.) as a section added later by Aristotle, when he began to view the discussion of sensible substance . in Bk. Z as preliminary to the discussion of insensible substance in A. Cf, 1029» 3-12 n.

II. tig GAN, i.e. a quasi-material principle (such as the great-and- small) present in incorporal things. It seems impossible to supply ovaia, as one is tempted to do, as the substantive understood with ts

aXAn- 12. okewréov Uotepov. ‘The reference is to Bks. MN. 13-14. TovTou yap... Svopife. For other indications that the

treatment of sensible substance is preliminary to the true business of metaphysics cf. 102.9% 33, » 3-12.

16. 08 ydp pdvov wept THs UAns KtA. Cf. De An. i. 1.

17. Tis Kata Tov Né6yor, Sc. ovaias.

émt may be defended by a comparison with the passages referred to in Bz. /ndex 268. 31-44, but Brandis’s conjecture éz is very likely right.

20. oxeTttéov Uortepoy, H. 6.

21-22. Ti... eipyrat answers to ch. 4, 22-33. 81 ti. . . UAy-to chs, 10, 11 (Il. 30-32 to ch. 5), 33. 61... 7 to ch. 6. This summary contains no reference to chs. 7-9, and confirms the view that these belong originally to a distinct treatise. Cf. 1032% 12 n.

Pee TO20" 354039) 6 205

27. peta pev yap THs UAns odk €or. Yet Aristotle has said (1036 » 29) that the definition of man must mention his material parts, Of course a definition must not mention prime matter, since that is aopirrov, i.e. nothing definite can be said about it; but in certain cases the proximate matter must be mentioned.

ZI. dis yap év TovTous Smdpfer H fits. These words appear quite irrelevant in this context, and seem to be due to a copyist who had 1030? 32 in his mind.

bs. The simplest emendation of ovdé is 068 et. ‘ Nor is a thing the same as its essence if the thing be a compound of a subject with an accidental attribute.’ Cf. 10318 19-28.

What constitutes the unity of a subject of definition P (ch. 12).

1037” 8. Let us discuss definition in so far as it has not been dis- cussed in the Analytics. The question there stated is of use to.our inquiries about substance, viz. the question why that, the account of which is a definition, is one.

1g. Why is ‘two-footed animal’ one and not two? ‘Man’ and ‘white’ are two when the one does not belong to the other, one when it does ;

18. but in ‘ two-footed animal’ one element does not share in the other ; the genus does not share in the differentiae, else it would share in contraries at the same time. Even if it does share in its differentiae, the same difficulty occurs, since the differentiae of man are more than one—possessed of feet, two-footed, wingless. Why are these one? Not because they are present in one genus, for then a// the differentiae that belong to a genus will form a unity.

Even if it does share in its differentiae, the same difficulty occurs, since the differentiae of man are more than one—possessed of feet, two-footed, wingless. Why are these one? Not because they are present in one genus, for then a// the differentiae that belong to a genus will form a unity.

24. But the elements in definition mus? be one, since substance, the subject of definition, is a unity, a ‘ this’.

27. Let us examine, first, definition reached by division. There is nothing in definition but the first genus (e.g. animal) and the differentiae; the lower genera are the first genus + the differentiae (e, g. two-footed animal).

33. The number of the elements of the definition makes no differ- ence; let us reduce them to the genus and one differentia.

10388 5. Now (1) the genus does not exist apart from the species, or, if it does, exists only as matter; therefore definition is the account consisting of the differentiae.

g. But (2) we must at each stage divide by the differentia of the previous differentia; we must divide ‘ possessed of feet’ into ‘ cloven- footed ’ and ‘ whole-footed’, not into ‘ winged’ and ‘ wingless’,

206 COMMENTARY

15. We must proceed so till we come to the indivisible species. There will then be as many kinds of foot, and of footed animals, as there are differentiae. The last differentia will be the substance and definition of the thing. ts

20. If we mention the earlier differentiae as well, we shall repeat ourselves. ;

25. If, then, we take a differentia of a differentia, one differentia— the last—will be the form; but if each differentia is accidental to the previous one, there will be as many differentiae as there are steps ‘in the division, Definition, then, properly consists of the last differentia.

go. If we change the order of the definition, putting ‘two-footed ’ before ‘ possessed of feet’, the latter is evidently superfluous; but there is no order in substance (therefore ‘ possessed of feet ’ must be superfluous even when it stands first). So much for definition by the method of division.

The unity of a definition, and of iis subject, according to Aristotle, lies in the fact that the genus and the differentiae have no existence apart from one another, nor have the successive differentiae. The genus is merely the ‘ matter’ of the definition, and each differentia the ‘matter’ of the next. He accordingly condemns definitions in which any of the differentiae are accidental to the genus or to one another.

The discussion is carried further in H. 6.

1037” 8. For the discussion of definition in the Analytics cf. An. Post. ii. 3-10, 18.

Q. év éxetvors, Av. Post. 92° 29. The dzopia is there raised but not answered.

II. 06 tov Aéyov Spiopdy elvat payev. The distinction between Adyos and épucpos has been drawn in 1030? r4.

1037” 8. For the discussion of definition in the Analytics cf. An. Post. ii. 3-10, 18.

Q. év éxetvors, Av. Post. 92° 29. The dzopia is there raised but not answered.

II. 06 tov Aéyov Spiopdy elvat payev. The distinction between Adyos and épucpos has been drawn in 1030? r4.

14-21. The obvious intention of this argument is (1) to show how man and white form a unity, when they do so (Il. 14-18) and (2) to point out that genus and differentia cannot form a unity in this way (il. 18-21). Bz. argues that the mode of unity referred to in the first section (kara mdéGos) is not the same as that referred to in the second (xara peOcéw). He thinks therefore that Aristotle is arguing that genus and differentia are not one ecther xara maOos or xara wéOcéw, and that it is merely by carelessness that he frames the sentence in a way which suggests that these modes are the same. But in 1030813 peroxy is used in this connexion as synonymous with rd@os. If weréxew be so used here, the argument can have its natural meaning. In 14-18 Aristotle describes a unity xara peroynv Kal rdOos, and in 18-21 he shows that the definition is not a unity of that sort. It is true that in the Zopzcs (1214 11 and elsewhere) 76 peréxew is defined differently, but that account of it does not seem to be in Aris‘otle’s mind here ; he is using perexyew in the Platonic sense alluded to in H. 1045° 14-20, by—9. The argument of !]. 14-21 may be put thus, A unity xara

Z. 12. 10378 — 1038? 35 207

pebeEw is one which may exist between A and B and between A and not B, but not between both at once ; but the relation of genus A to differentia B is one which A has at once to B and to not-B. Therefore genus and differentia do not form a unity xara péOeéw.

QI. et S€ Kat petexer. ‘Even if the genus could partake of the differentia, this would not explain how a genus + several differentiae form a unity.’

24. otTw pev yap ...év, ‘Forat that ratea genus and a// its differ- entiae would form a unity.’

27-29. Aristotle says the question must first be considered with re- gard to definitions by division (cf. 10384 34), but he never gets to any other kind. The other kind is that é« rév évurapxdvrwv (B. 998? 13, H. 1043? 20).

10384 5-9. Since the genus does not exist apart from the species or exists only as their matter, it offers no obstacle to the unity of the definition, and accordingly the definition may be considered as if it consisted only of differentiae. This is the first step in the explana- tion of the unity of the definition. The next step is to show that the differentiae in a definition may be reduced to one.

5. Ta ds yevous eidn, cf. A. got 31 n.

7. TA €idn Kal Ta oToLxeia, ‘the species, i.e. the letters’,

Q-10. TH... Svadopd, Prof. Joachim’s emendation of ry... da- opay, seems to be required by the sense.

The next step is to show that the differentiae in a definition may be reduced to one.

5. Ta ds yevous eidn, cf. A. got 31 n.

7. TA €idn Kal Ta oToLxeia, ‘the species, i.e. the letters’,

Q-10. TH... Svadopd, Prof. Joachim’s emendation of ry... da- opay, seems to be required by the sense.

14. GAN’ 7 KTH., ‘(and in general we can divide “animal with feet” into nothing) except ‘“ with divided feet ” and ‘‘with undivided feet” ’. ddN’ % in effect = ‘but only’. Cf. 1036> 31, I. roo5@12, A.A. 563» 22, 580% 20, Pol. 125721. The idiom is explained by Cook Wilson in Class. Quart. tii. 121-124.

17-18. tote & . . . Svadopats, i.e. there will be as many infimae species of foot or of animal with feet as there are ultimate differentiae.

19. 7 TeAcuTata Siapopa 7 otcia tod mpdypatos €oTat, since it will presuppose all the previous differentiae and finally the genus. From another point of view Aristotle can say (Zop. 139% 29, 142° 27, 143% 18) that the genus is the element in, the definition most expressive of the essence ; it is so because all the other elements presuppose it.

30. Kard ye Td dpOdv, i.e. according to the method in which each differentia is a differentia of the previous one.

33. Tdéis 8 obk eorw ev TH otcia, sc. and therefore what is seen by a perdraéis to be superfluous must have been superfluous before.

35. Thy mpérnv, ‘at the first attempt’, cf. 1037%27n. For the idiom (in which some such word as oddv was originally understood) cf, Ar. Zhesm. 662, Dem. O2. iii. 2, Hdt. iii. 134, i. 153 (the last passage has rv mpdrny eivor). Pol. 12865 is not a parallel, for adeiobw tyv mpornv seems to mean ddeicbw thy rpeTyv povapxtav €mLoKOTrELV.

208 COMMENTARY

No UNIVERSAL IS SUBSTANCE; NO SUBSTANCE CONSISTS OF SUBSTANCES (chs. 13-16).

The universal ts not substance (ch. 13).

1038” 1 (B) (cf. 1028>33). We have discussed two things that are held to be substance—the essence, and the substratum (which we showed to ‘underlie’ in two ways, as the ‘ this’ underlies the accidents, and as the matter underlies the actuality).

6. We now proceed to discuss the universal, which some think to be the truest cause. But it seems that no universal can be a substance, for :

g. (1) If it be suggested that the universal is the substance of a thing, we answer: (a) The substance of a thing is that which is peculiar to it, but the universal is common to many. It must be the substance of all or of none. But it cannot be the substance of all; and if it be the substance of one, this one will de the others, for things whose substance or essence is one are one.

15. (4) It is that which is not predicated of a subject that is substance, but the universal zs predicated of a subject.

16. (2) If it be suggested that the universal is not substance in the sense of essence, but is included in the essence, e. g. ‘animal’ in man, then (a) evidently it is definable (and so there will be an infinite regress).

19. But (4) even if not all elements in substance are definable, the universal will be the substance of something ; as ‘man’ is the sub- stance of the manin whom it is present, ‘ animal’ will be the substance of that in which it is present and to which it is confined. (Thus suggestion (2) turns into (1).)

23. Further, (c) a ‘this’ or substance, if it is composite, must con- sist not of qualities but of substances. Otherwise non-substance will be prior to substance ; but this is impossible; for affections are not prior to substance in definition, in time, or in generation, else they would be capable of existing apart.

2g. Further, (@) in Socrates a substance (animal) will be present as an element, and will therefore be the substance of two things (the class of animals and Socrates).

30. (e) In general, if infimae species are substances, none of the elements in their definition is the substance of anything or can exist apart from its particular instances or in anything else.

34. (3) No common predicate indicates a ‘this’, but only a ‘such’, Otherwise we get the ‘third man’ and other difficulties.

Zats. 1933 2~7 209

1039° 3. (4) A substance cannot consist of other substances existing actually ; for what is actually two is not actually one (e. g. a line which is double another consists only potentially of two halves, for their actualization separates them).

g. Democritus puts our point well when he says that one cannot be produced out of two nor vice versa; he refers to atoms, which he regards as the only substances. Similarly, if number is, as some say, a synthesis of units, the number two is not one, or else contains no units actually.

14. Our result involves a difficulty. If no substance can consist of universals (because-they indicate a ‘such’, not a ‘this’), nor of substances actually existing, all substance will be uncompounded and therefore indefinable. ‘

1g. But it is universally agreed that substance is the only or the chief object of definition. Either, then, all things are indefinable or they are definable in one sense though not in another. Our meaning will appear more clearly later.

‘

Chs. 13-16 form a separate section of the inquiry into substance, the main upshot of which is summed up in 10412 3-5: ‘no universal is substance, and no substance contains substances as its parts’. The section begins (ch. 13) by discussing and rejecting the claim of the third claimant to the title of substance—the universal, and implicitly also that of the fourth claimant—the genus. From this follows (ch. 14) the rejection of the claim of the Ideas to be substance. Further it is argued (ch. 15) that the individual is indefinable. This is argued partly on the ground that the individual is subject to destruction and change ; but the connecting link with ch. 13 lies in the other argument, that since the universal is never a substance, never a ‘this’, always a ‘such’ (13. 10392 15, 16), definition, which is an enumeration of universal marks, can never adequately express the nature of an individual. Next a corollary is inferred from the principle which was made the basis of one of the proofs in ch. 13 (1039 3, 16), viz. that sub- stance cannot be composed of actual substances; it is argued that the material parts of substances are not actually substances (16. 1040 5— 16). And finally a further attack is made on the Platonic tendency to identify substance with the universal (1040 16—1041° 5).

1038" 2, 3. This is a reminiscence of 1028) 34; genus, however, is now omitted (as coming under the universal), and 76 ék rovtwv, the concrete individual, is added.

4. mept rod ti Hv etvor, chs. 4-6, 10-12; Kal Tod droKerpevou, ch. 3.

5. ott SixGs bmdxertat, cf. 10297 2 n.

7. trow, the Platonists.

2678-2 P

210 COMMENTARY

10. I have adopted here the reading which sense and idiom seem to require ; it accounts well for the various readings found in the manu- scripts and the commentators.

13-15. The argument is not clear but may be interpreted as fol- lows : ‘ What will the universal be substance of? Either of all its particulars or of none (for there is no-reason why it should be sub- stance of one any more than of the others) ; but it cannot be substance of all (since, as we have just seen, 1. 10, the substance of a thing is something peculiar to it. It follows, then, that it is the substance of none of its particulars). Ifwe try to avoid this conclusion and treat it as the substance of one of them, then (since (the universal will be no less the substance of its other particulars, and) things that have the same substance are identical) this one will de the others; which is absurd,’ ;

Ifwe try to avoid this conclusion and treat it as the substance of one of them, then (since (the universal will be no less the substance of its other particulars, and) things that have the same substance are identical) this one will de the others; which is absurd,’ ;

18-23. In answer to the suggestion now put forward, that the universal is not the substance of things in the sense of essence, but is a substance because it is an element present in their essence, Aristotle replies that the universal can be defined, and seems to have meant to add that in that case it will itself contain a generic or universal element, and so substance will be contained in substance, ad zufinifum. But, he observes, we need not make this assumption, that everything that is part of the substance of something can be defined. Quite apart from this assumption, the universal will be the substance of something, as ‘man’ is of the man in whom it is present; so that the new view that the universal is a substance present 7m the essence of its particulars turns into the old one which has already (9-16) been refuted, that the universal zs essence. For the universal, e. g. animal, will be the sub- stance, not indeed of man but of that in which it is present as some- thing peculiar to it; i.e. of the class including all animals. This interpretation enables us to treat ll. 19-23, 23-29, 29-30 as giving three distinct arguments (as éru in ll. 23, 29 shows that they do), not (as Bz. does) as giving parts of one argument.

22, Bz.’s suspicions of otaia in this line are amply confirmed by its absence in A> and in Asc.c. The vulgate reading is due to the conflation of alternative readings, ovata éxe‘vov and éxeivov ovata.

23-29. The argument seems to be as follows: Universals having been -shown not to be substances (Il. gQ—16), they must not be regarded as constitutive elements of substance (as the view under consideration regards them, 16-18), since then non-substance would be prior to substance.

27-28. olte byw yap ore xpovw ore yevéoet .. . mpdtepa. Aristotle nowhere else distinguishes between xpdvw mpdrepov and yevéce mpo- tepov, nor is any possible distinction apparent. Prof. A. R. Lord has suggested yvwoe. for yevéoe, and this derives some support from 1028 32. But (1) the Greek commentaries as well as the manu- scripts read yevéoe, and (2) xpévm would not be likely to be put between Adyw and yvwoe, which are at least very near one another in sense (in @. 104917 they seem to be identified), It is better there-

Z. 13. 1038> 10 — 1039% 22 211

fore to keep yevéoe and to suppose that it is added as a synonym of xpove.

29. The variety of readings here seems to be due to Alexander’s 7 Ywxpdre odcia dvr evurrdpser ovoia, in which ovota dvr is no doubt added to bring out the point. ‘In Socrates, himself a substance, there will be present as an element a substance (sc. animal), which will therefore be the substance of two things (sc. of the class of animals and also of Socrates).’

‘In Socrates, himself a substance, there will be present as an element a substance (sc. animal), which will therefore be the substance of two things (sc. of the class of animals and also of Socrates).’

30. 6 dvOpwros, i.e. the individual man, Alexander thinks. But as Bz. observes, we should in that case expect something like 6 cis avOpwros ; and we should expect in 1. 33 twa dvOpwrov rapa Tovs Twas. It seems therefore that Aristotle means the infima species, which according to one of his lines of thought he regards as substance; cf. P. A. 644% 23. It is the substantiality not of man but of animal that he has been attacking in ll. 16-30; the infima species is at any rate more substantial than the genus.

32. év @AXw, not, as Alexander interprets it, ‘in the Idea’, The words are quite general.

33. Ta tTwd, ‘the particular species of animal’.

34. &k te... toUTwy is answered by xal dru (‘ and because’).

1039%2. 6 tpitos avOpwros, cf. A. g90? 17 n.

6. 4 Simdacta, sc. ypaypyy, says Asc., doubtless rightly. We may cf. 7 eveta, » qrodiaia, and A. rorg* 8 n., ©. 10488 33n.

8. The editions have a comma or colon after évuTapyougay, but Kai kara ToUTOV TOY Tpdrov appears to go closely with évurapyovady and to mean kal évreAexela evurapyovody. Possibly we should print a colon after tpdrov and read 6 with T.

1O-II. ta yap... movet, ‘for he identifies substances with the atoms’, from whose atomic nature it follows that one atom cannot con- tain two atoms. Cf. De Caelo 30326, De Gen. et Corr. 325% 35.

12, 6 dpiOpds odvOeors povddwy. This is practically the same as the earliest recorded Greek definition of number, povédwv-cvornua, which Thales is said to have borrowed from the Egyptians (lambl. 2% Necom. Ar. Introd. p. 10. 8). Cf. A. 10208 13 n.

15-16, pyre... onpatver, cf. 1038 23-29 ; 16-17. pyr é§ odcidv .. . otvGetoy, cf. 1039% 3-11.

1g. éhexOy mada, 10319 12.

22. tav totepov, Z. 15, H. 6. Aristotle is not very successful in solving the problem.

- The Ideas are not substance (ch. 14).

1039" 24. Observe the consequences for those who say the Ideas are separately existing substances, and at the same time resolve the species into genus and differentiae. ‘Animal’ will be either the same

202 COMMENTARY

or different in ‘man’ and in ‘ horse ’—i.e. numerically ; in definition it is clearly the same. If man is a separate ‘this’, animal must be so too.

33. (1) If ‘animal’ be supposed the same in horse and in man, (a) how can it be the same in things that exist.apart? Will it not be divided from itself?

ba. Further, (2) if it shares in ‘ two-footed’ and in ‘many-footed’, it, though one individual, will have contrary attributes; if it does not, in what sense can it de two-footed? It is absurd to say ‘ by com- position ’, i.e. by contact or by mixture.

Will it not be divided from itself?

7. (2) If ‘animal’ is different in each species, (a) there will be practically an infinity of things whose substance is ‘animal’. Further, (2) each of several things will be ‘animal itself’. For (i) the ‘ animal ’ in each species will be the swds/ance of that species, for it is that and not anything else that each species is called after ; otherwise that other would be the genus of man ; and (ii) all the elements in the essence of man will be /deas ; and therefore, since what is the substance of one thing cannot be the Idea of another, the ‘animal’ in each species of animal will be ‘animal itself’.

14. Further, (c) from what will the ‘animal’ in each species be derived? how can it be derived from ‘animal itself’? How can the ‘animal’, whose essence is just to be animal, exist apart from ‘animal itself’?

16. (3) These and even greater difficulties arise if we consider the relation of Ideas to senszble things. Evidently, then, there are not Forms of sensible things such as some suppose.

1039? 26- 19 is very similar to P]. Parm. 131 a—k, and in particular the language in 1 recalls that in 131 B ev dpa dv Kal tabrov év roAXors Kal xwpls ovow ddov dpa évérrat, Kat otTws aiTd adTrod ywpls av ely. Siebeck thinks this confirms his notion that the Parmenides is directed against the JZe/aphysics, but more probably Aristotle is pressing the difficulties raised by Parmenides in the dialogue,

33. dote kai td LGov might easily have been dispensed with, but is read by Asclepius as well as by the manuscripts, and need not be excised as Christ proposed.

ei péev obv 75 adtd. The other alternative comes in ? 7.

by-2. kal 8a ti ...todro; ‘If the Idea is present in separate things, does not this amount to separating it from itself?’

7-8. obxoiv ... &vOpwros. The argument, as ér in |. 9 indicates, is meant to be complete in itself. The conclusion dreipa as ézos eimely éorar dv 7 ovoia EGov is absurd, because things whose sub- stance is one are one (1038? 14).

Z. 14.°1039% 26 — 1039 17 213

Gmeipa Ws Eos eimety is an exaggeration, since for Aristotle the number of species in a genus is limited.

The conclusion dreipa as ézos eimely éorar dv 7 ovoia EGov is absurd, because things whose sub- stance is one are one (1038? 14).

Z. 14.°1039% 26 — 1039 17 213

Gmeipa Ws Eos eimety is an exaggeration, since for Aristotle the number of species in a genus is limited.

9-14. The argument is very obscure, but may perhaps be expanded as follows: ‘ Further, each of several things will be the Idea of animal. For (i) the “‘ animal” in each species of animal will be the substance of that species ; for it is after that and nothing else that the species is called (i.e. when we want to say what e.g. man essentially is, we say he is an animal, not an anything else); else that other would be the generic element in man. And (ii) each element in man, and therefore among others the element ‘‘ animal ”, is on the Platonic theory an Idea, We may infer that the “animal” in man is not the Zdea of one thing and the swdstance of another. Therefore the “ animal” in the various species of animal, which as we have seen is the suds/ance of each of these species, will be the dea of animal.’

For the force of kar’ dAAo déyerau 1. 10 cf. A. 987" 9.

14-16. ém. ... {dov; ‘Further, from what does this “‘ animal ” in each species spring? How is it derived from animal-itself? Or, if not derived from it, how can this ‘‘ animal”, whose very substance is animality, exist apart from animal-itself (the Idea of animal) ?’

15. Tas é§ adtod Laou; seems to be correctly explained by Alexander, TOS €k TOD TOLOVTOV adiToLwou oral TO év TG adToavOpaTw airoLdov ;

The reading and punctuation suggested by Bz. and given in the text is a great improvement on the traditional form ro fdov 6 ovicia, TovTo avTo wap avro, and derives some support from Al. 529. 17.

16, 17. The difficulties raised in *26->16 have referred to the relation of genus to species; Aristotle now says that even greater difficulties for the ideal theory attend the relation of species to sensible individuals.

Individuals, and therefore Ideas, are indefinable (ch. 15).

1039” 20. Concrete things are generable and therefore destructible ; forms are never in course of being destroyed any more than of being created; they are or are not, without generation or destruction.

27. This is why (1) particular sensible substances are not subjects of definition or of demonstration, viz. because they have matter capable of being and of not being. If knowledge can never become ignorance, there cannot be demonstration or definition of the contingent, but only opinion,

1040*2. For perishable things are no longer known when they have passed out of our perception, and, though the formula in the soul remains the same, there is then no longer definition or demonstration ; thus it is always possible to overthrow a definition of a particular, for it cannot really be defined.

214 COMMENTARY

8. (2) Therefore an Idea, also, cannot be defined, for (a) it is said to be a separate particular. Its definition would have to consist of words, but new-coined words would not be understood, while old ones are common to all things of a class,

14. If it be said that, while the marks used in the definition separately belong to many things, together they may belong only to one, we answer (i) that they will also belong to both elements in the definition, e. g. ‘two-footed animal’ to ‘ animal ’ and to ‘ the two-footed ’” (where the elements are eternal, this mws¢ be so, since they are prior to the compound and, further, separately existent, because, if ‘man’ is to exist apart from its particulars, so must ‘animal’, and if ‘animal’, then also ‘ the two-footed’) ; further, (ii) that the elements are prior to the whole, and therefore are not removed when the whole is removed.

22. (2) Again, if the elements of Ideas are Ideas (as they must be, elements being simpler than the compounds), the elements, e.g. ‘animal’ and ‘two-footed’, will be predicable of many subjects. Otherwise how could they be recognized? All Ideas are thought to be shared in by a plurality of subjects.

27. In the case of eternal things, especially if they are unique, like the sun, people do not realize the impossibility of definition. Definition may err not only by adding irrelevant attributes such as ‘ going round the earth’ (the sun would still be a sun if it did not do this, for ‘sun’ means a certain substance) ;

83. but also by naming attributes which can belong to another subject. Such a definition will be common, while the sun was supposed to be an individual—Why does not some Platonist produce the definition of an Idea? The truth of our remarks would become apparent.

Bz. thinks that as in chs. 13, 14 Aristotle has proved that universals are not substances, he now proves that individuals are not substances. But (1) that is not Aristotle’s view, and (2) Bz. can arrive at it only by piecing together the conclusion of this chapter, that individuals are in- definable, with the conclusion of ch. 4, that substances are the subject of definition. If Aristotle had meant his readers to draw Bz.’s con- clusion, he could hardly have failed to call attention to it.

The interest of the chapter is simply in the problem of definition. Aristotle has asked in ch. 13 (1039 14-22) whether anything can be defined, and begins his answer here by pointing out that at any rate individuals cannot.

While chs. ro-14 have continued the line of thought of chs. 1-6 and contained no reference to chs, 7-9, ch. 15 has such a reference (1039? 26). But it also continues the line of thought of chs, 1-6, 10-

Z. 15 1039 22 — 10407 15 215

14, and in particular the problem of the possibility of definition, which was raised in ch. 13.

1-6 and contained no reference to chs, 7-9, ch. 15 has such a reference (1039? 26). But it also continues the line of thought of chs, 1-6, 10-

Z. 15 1039 22 — 10407 15 215

14, and in particular the problem of the possibility of definition, which was raised in ch. 13.

1039> 22. 6 dyos ddus, ‘the definition in its full extent’, not bound up with any particular matter. Bz.’s suspicion of éAws seems unjusti- fied; in the /zdex he quotes a phrase which is a good parallel, TO 6& dd.aiperov drAws (De Gen. ef Corr. 326% 28). Cf. also 1029" 6, 1033) 26.

24. ottws date POeipecOar, ‘in the sense that it is ever in course of being destroyed’. Cf. 1033> 5-6n., E. 10278 29n,

26, SéSetxrat, in ch. 8.

28. tav Kal” éxaota, cf. B. 999% 26n.

oUTe Gmrdderéis oti, ‘nor can there be demonstration adoué such substances ’, i. e. demonstration of their attributes.

30-31. 815 P0apra ... atTav. Aristotle shows no knowledge here of the distinction drawn in A. 1069? 30 between two kinds of sensible substance, the eternal (the heavenly bodies) and the perishable.

7a Kal Exacta, cf. B. 999% 26 n.

ZI. Kal 6 dpiopds emrornporiKdy, sc. ‘and therefore tOv dvayxaiwy’.

1.040% 2-4. Gdnhd te yap... . dméAOn, cf. 1036 6.

6. Bz. interprets tav mpds Opoy as meaning guod ad definitionem atlinet. Parallels to such a use of ra pds dpov may be found in Top. 102» 27, 120? 13 (éo7 d€ Tatra oro.xela THY mpds Tovs dpovs), but the genitive is very difficult. It seems better to suppose with Alexander that the phrase means ray pds dpov twos tpaypatevonevwv. But corruption may be suspected.

8. tov... Kal exacroy 7 idda, ‘the Idea is an individual’.

II, maow, ‘to all the members of the class denoted by the name’.

14-15. ci 8€ Tis... Umdpxew. The definition of an Idea might be defended against the attack just made, on the ground that, though each of the marks separately belongs to more than one subject, taken together they belong only to the Idea in question. Aristotle proceeds in 1. 15 to object to this defence, but, as Bz. observes, he himself gives a similar account of definition in An. Post. 96°33 éxacrov pev ei mAciov brdpéer, Gravta S& pH ert wAdov. The objection, then, must derive its force, if it has any, from the gecu/zar nature of the Ideas—from the fact that they are individuals and exist separately (I. 9).

observes, he himself gives a similar account of definition in An. Post. 96°33 éxacrov pev ei mAciov brdpéer, Gravta S& pH ert wAdov. The objection, then, must derive its force, if it has any, from the gecu/zar nature of the Ideas—from the fact that they are individuals and exist separately (I. 9).

The first objection is stated in I]. 15-17. ‘ Two-footed animal’ will belong both to ‘animal’ and to ‘ the two-footed’. Bz. thinks that dzdp- xew is here used (by an illegitimate change of meaning) not in the sense of ‘ be predicable of’, which it has in ], 15, but in the sense of ‘ be con- tained in the extension of’; but for this sense he offers no parallel. imdpxew has, in fact, its ordinary sense. Aristotle means that ‘two- footed animal’ is predicable (1) of ‘animal’ (not universally, but in certain cases), and (2) of ‘ the two-footed’ (universally, since two- footedness belongs only to animals, as a differentia should belong only to its genus, Zop. 143% 30). This objection would not apply to an ordinary definition, since that does not imply the existence of genus and differentia apart from the species. But according to the Platonists

216 COMMENTARY

‘animal’, ‘the two-footed ’, and ‘man’ are separately existing Ideas ; and ‘two-footed animal’ is predicable of all three, and therefore not a proper definition of man.

The difference between the Idea and the ordinary subject of defini- tion is brought out in the next words (17-21). ‘ This applicability of the proposed definition to more subjects than “that for which it is pro- posed mus/ exist in the case of the eternal entities (the Ideas), since the genus and the differentia are prior to and parts of the compound, the species, and since further they exist separately. They must exist separately, if the species does; for the genus is described as existing apart from the species, and if the genus does so the differentia must do so too.’

18. mpdtepd y’ ova Kal pépy is a loose accusative absolute, for which cf. Kiihner ii. 2. § 487. 3».

21. Bz. objects to et’ (which purports to introduce a new argument) on the ground that the priority of genus and differentia to species has already been used in the previous argument (]. 18). But Alexander affords no support to Bz.’s suggestion dvadopa éorar, dru, except that he seems not to have read «79. Bz.’s objection is removed if we treat kat rovTo . .. diaopd (17-21) as parenthetical, and 27—

Z. 15. 10407 18 — 1040? 3 207

18). But Alexander affords no support to Bz.’s suggestion dvadopa éorar, dru, except that he seems not to have read «79. Bz.’s objection is removed if we treat kat rovTo . .. diaopd (17-21) as parenthetical, and 27—

Z. 15. 10407 18 — 1040? 3 207

1040 7) is not present in their case. Again, 74 povaxad, things which are the only instances of their kinds, are not specially impossible to define, but the impossibility is specially hard to detect. Definitions may be (1) unduly narrow (29~33) or (2) unduly wide (33-> 2). (1) In the definition of A as BC, B or C may be irrelevant. If there are several instances of A, probably there will be some in which B or C is absent and the badness of the definition will be noticed. But where there is one instance only, the badness may easily escape notice (cf. 1036” 6). (2) If you define an individual A as BC, then if there are like individuals the definition will apply to them also and will be seen to be a bad definition of A. But if, like the sun, A is unique, and there are no other things to which BC is applicable, you may easily not realize that there mzght de other such things, and that you have defined not ‘the sun’ but only ‘sun’.

Definition of the individual is inevitably liable to both the errors here described. (1) You may be sure that certain attributes are not essential, but since you do not know the whole history of the individual you cannot be sure whether certain others are essential or not, (2) No series of marks will exhaust the nature of the individual, since every series of marks marks off not an individual but a kind. Thus the individual is indefinable, and if Ideas are individuals, they are indefinable.

27. domep otv elpyrat. Aristotle has not made the remark in ques- tion before, but he has treated the impossibility of definition as less obvious in the case of eternal entities, since he has given several argu- ments to prove it (8-27) over and above the general arguments against the definition of individuals (1039 27104087). Cf. esp. 1040717,

ZI. vuxtixpudés, apparently a coinage of Aristotle’s on the analogy of Parmenides’ vuxripats pas for the moon (fr. 14).

32. 7% pavy. ded may very well be understood without being actually inserted. Asc. has it in his interpretation, but there is no reason to suppose that he read it.

by-2. @\N fv... Zwxpdtns. I.e. the sun though unique is as much an individual-member of a class of suns as Cleon is a member of the class of men.

2-3. émel 81d Ti. . . iS8€as; is tacked on loosely. ‘ If the definition of the individual (and therefore of the Idea) is not open to these objec- tions, why do the Platonists never produce a definition of an Idea?’

Two wrong views about substance (ch. 16).

1040” 5. (1) Most so-called substances are potentialities—the parts of animals (which do not exist separately, and even when separated

218 : COMMENTARY

are merely matter) and the elements; they are not unities but merely aggregates till they are fused into one.

16).

1040” 5. (1) Most so-called substances are potentialities—the parts of animals (which do not exist separately, and even when separated

218 : COMMENTARY

are merely matter) and the elements; they are not unities but merely aggregates till they are fused into one.

10. One might suppose that the parts of living things and the corresponding parts of the soul are both, existing both actually and potentially, because living things have sources of movement in their joints so that some animals live when divided. Yet they exist only potentially when they are united by nature—not by force or by adhesion, which is a malformation.

16. (2) Since the meaning of ‘one’ answers to that of ‘ being ’, and the substance of what is one is one, and things whose substance is one are one, unity or being cannot be the substance of things, any more than being an element or principle can be so; we have still to ask what the principle is.

21. ‘Being’ and ‘unity* are more substantial than ‘ principle’ or ‘element’ or ‘cause’, but are not substance, because (@) they are common, while substance belongs only to itself and to that which has it. Further (4), one thing cannot be in many places at once, while what is common can. No universal, then, exists separately from particulars.

27. The believers in Forms are right in saying the Forms exist apart if they are substances, but wrong in saying that the one in many isa Form. Because they cannot say what the eternal substances are that exist apart from sensible particulars, they make them the same in kind as the perishable things which we do know, merely adding ‘itself ’,—‘ the horse itself’, &c.

34. But, even if we had never seen the stars, they would have been eternal substances apart from the things we knew; and so, even if we do not Know what eternal substances there are, yet there must be some.

1041® 3. No universal, then, is a substance, and no substance is compounded out of substances.

In this chapter Aristotle abandons his own fourfold list of the things that might be considered to be substance (ch. 3 ad znit.), and returns to criticize the popular views about substance expressed in ch. 2 according to which the parts of living things, and the four elements, are among the things that have the most obvious claim to be substances.

1040” 6, Surdpers eiot, are not actual substances but components capable of contributing to the life of the whole body.

6-8. ‘For none of them is separately existent ; and when they are separated from the living body, then too they are existent, all of them, only as matter” The hand while it is in the body is not separately

Z. 16. 1040° 6-13 219

existent, and therefore not a substance but simply a material con- stituent, isolable in thought, of a substance. And when removed from the body, then too it is not a substance, with an activity of its own, but a mere collection of épovomepy, skin, bone, and flesh. Cf. 1035 17, G. A. 726 22. 3

And when removed from the body, then too it is not a substance, with an activity of its own, but a mere collection of épovomepy, skin, bone, and flesh. Cf. 1035 17, G. A. 726 22. 3

8. Kat yf Kal Tp kat dnp. Alexander and Bz. take these words closely with &s vAy, but a comparison with 1028 9, 10 shows that they are co-ordinate with rd te pdpia tov Cawv. Bz. has to suppose that re is answered by paAuora & (1. 10).

8-10. obey yap .. . €v, i.e. a part ofan animal body, e.g. a hand, is unified into a genuine whole only by the form of the living body to which it belongs—otherwise it is simply a collection of diverse materials, cf. De Gen. ef Corr. 321» 31 di Kal reOvedros paddov av ddgeev elvan ere cdpE Kal dorodv 7} xelp Kal Bpaxiwv.

Q. swpéds, which is much better attested than 6 dppos, is Aristotle’s regular example of that which has not organic unity (1o41? ra, H. 1044° 4, 104529, M. 1084) 22), while dppds does not seem to be used in this way. The latter reading is no doubt due to rep6¥, but both the plural airév and the usage of zpiv show that zpiv 7 Krd. goes with oidey yap airav ev éotw, Not with otov cwpds. mérrew, a regular Aristotelian term for maturing or working up (cf. Bz. Zndex 5902 61— 591% 1), is applicable both to the elements (cf. A. 989% 16) and to the parts of the body.

II. mdpeyyus dpow ylyveoOoa. Alexander's interpretation pddiora 8¢ trodd Bor dy Tis TA TOV ewdywv pdpia, ... dpolws 8& Kal THs Yoxns, mapeyyus Tod Kal évepyeia. peTa TOU OAOV ovTa ovoias aira A€yew Kal duvdpet (535. 27), interprets wdpeyyvs in an impossible way. So does Bz.’s ylyvecOan oxed0v dvta dudorépws Kat evredcxelg. kal duvaper (the comma being omitted). mdpeyyvs does not mean cyxeddv. Like ctveyyvs, it is used adjectivally rather than adverbially, and (where it does not mean ‘near’ in place or time) means ‘closely related’ (Top. 167° 5, G.A. 76927, Pol. 127120). Probably the best translation is ‘ above all one might suppose the parts of animate things and the parts of the soul nearly related to them to turn out to be both, i. e, existent both actually and potentially’. An alternative translation is: ‘One might be specially tempted to suppose that the parts of the animals come-to-be more or less on the same level of being (rdpeyyvs) as the parts of the soul, thus possessing, both taken together, a being which is actual as well as a being which is potential’.

12. dvra kal evrehexeta kal Suvdpet, i. e. existing actually, since they can initiate movement by themselves, and potentially, since they are absorbed in the life of the whole soul and the whole body.

12-13. T@ dpxas ... Kaprrats. For the ball and socket joint as the bodily instrument of motion cf. De An. 433” 19-27, M. A. 698? 16-? 7.

e. existing actually, since they can initiate movement by themselves, and potentially, since they are absorbed in the life of the whole soul and the whole body.

12-13. T@ dpxas ... Kaprrats. For the ball and socket joint as the bodily instrument of motion cf. De An. 433” 19-27, M. A. 698? 16-? 7.

1Z. 816 eva LGa Srarpovpeva Ch, i.e. some insects and many other animals doa pa Cwrixd diav 6ff. The suspicion is unnecessary. ‘The doctrine is that the cause of the inherence of a zé6os in a substratum (e.g. of noise in clouds) or of a quality in certain materials (e. g. of the shape characteristic of a house in bricks and timber) is always—to

state the matter abstractly (Aoyikés)—the ri jv etvax or definition of the union of substratum and dos, or of materials and anaety. But in some cases this definition expresses the final cause—e. g. a house is defined as a shelter for living things and goods (H. 10437 16, 33); other cases the definition expresses the efficient cause—e. g. thunder is a noise in clouds due to, i. e. produced by, the quenching of fire (Az. Post. 93 8, 94° 3). In other words the formal cause is not a distinct cause over and above the final or efficient, but is either of those when considered as forming the definition of the thing in question. Similarly in An. Post. ii. 11 the formal cause is identified with the efficient {94> 18-21) and even with the material (there treated as = the sum of the necessary conditions of a conclusion) (94* 34).

31-32. TO pev TorodTov aitvoy, the efficient cause ; Odtepoy 8¢, the final. It is when we are inquiring why has so-and-so come into being, or ceased to be, that we look for the apx7 xwyoews, the origin of the movement which brought the thing into being or destroyed it. On the other hand we may ask not only for what purpose has so-and-so come into being or ceased to be, but also for what purpose it exists.

It would be possible to take 76 pév rowtrov airy to refer to the final and efficient causes, @arepov 8€¢ to the formal, but the Greek does not so naturally suggest this.

83. The vulgate reading is wy KaraAAyAws. KaTdéAAnXos, karadAnAws are not found in the genuine works of Aristotle, and when they occur (in later Greek) they mean ‘ corresponding’, ‘ correspondingly’, which does not suit the sense here. ev rots pa) Kar’ dAAjAwY Aeyopévors gives the right sense, ‘where one term is not predicated of another’, For

224 COMMENTARY

kar é\AjAwv = ‘ one of another’, not ‘ of one another ’, cf. ia’ dAAnAa, Cat. 1” 16,

by, The general line of\ thought in the chapter is as follows: Substance is a cause (#9). Therefore, if we can find out what in general is the cause of things, the answer to the question ‘ Why?’, we shall have found what substance is. -Now 39—90%1, 90% 14-21. But in that workit is only the definition of attributes that is reduced to the question ‘ Why do they occur ?’, whereas here the definition of man seems to be similarly reduced.

-Now 39—90%1, 90% 14-21. But in that workit is only the definition of attributes that is reduced to the question ‘ Why do they occur ?’, whereas here the definition of man seems to be similarly reduced.

4. Set éxew, ‘one must know’. Cf. Bz. Zudex 305) 46.

5. Christ’s 81a ti 70 is a better emendation of dia ré than Bz.’s radi dua ti, and seems to answer better to Alexander’s interpretation (541. 31). Cf. @ ti éorw, |. 8.

Prof. Joachim thinks the manuscript reading may be retained and translated ‘why the matter is there—what it exists for’; and suggests alternatively 8:a 7¢ (rod¢).

5-7. ‘E.g. Why do these materials form a house? Because what it was to be a house (the essence of house) is present in them. Similarly this matter, or rather this matter having this form, is a man.’ It does not seem necessary to read di éxov with Bz. for todi éxov. The form of man is réde év 7@8e (1030 18), and the body can there- fore be said yew 7odé, to contain the form (cf. A. 1023* 11-13, 23-25).

7, 8. What Aristotle has been illustrating in lJ. 4-7 is not the cause of the matter but the reason why such and such matter constitutes such and such things. 70 airvov r#s VAns must therefore not be taken alone, but with 6 ri éorw, ‘the cause whereby the matter is some definite thing’. To get this result it is not necessary, with Christ, to regard TovTO. . . eloos aS Spurious; it is enough to treat it as parenthetical.

Se ES Te nse Te Seiy

44.1. Pe pe at SH L.1i > Z. 17. 1041 1-31 aL MARY

Q-10. pavepoy... torovTwy. Since ‘ Why?’ always means ‘ Why is B A?’, we cannot ask the question ‘ Why A is’ if A is a pure form, not a complex of form and matter ; such entities must be understood in some other way, sc. by that intuition which is ‘like touching’. For this cf. ®. 10512 17—10522 4 nn., De An. 430% 26, > 26-31.

10. €repos tpdmos tis Lythoews, ‘another method of inquiry than what is usually understood by the term’.

11-27. In this sentence not even the clause beginning with éze/ is ever completed; the parenthesis 7 d¢ cvAAaBy xrA. is so long that the original construction is quite forgotten.

17. For the description of the syllable as érepdv 1 apart from the etters cf. Pl. Zheac/. 203 E.

19-25. ei Tolvuy ...auddaPis. ‘ Let us suppose that this principle ofunion must be either an element or a complex of elements. If it is the first, this leads to an infinite regress (ll. 20-22), and so too if it is the second (Il. 22-25). Therefore it is neither.’

22. For ék orovxetou (singular) cf. H. 1043) 12.

"23. 4 exetvo atts eorar, ‘ or else (if it were composed of only one) that one would be the thing itself’. For 7 = ef d¢ un cf. Z. NV. 1170? 17, ®, 1050 14 (?).

20-22), and so too if it is the second (Il. 22-25). Therefore it is neither.’

22. For ék orovxetou (singular) cf. H. 1043) 12.

"23. 4 exetvo atts eorar, ‘ or else (if it were composed of only one) that one would be the thing itself’. For 7 = ef d¢ un cf. Z. NV. 1170? 17, ®, 1050 14 (?).

29. doar odcia (cici), kata diow Kat pice. cuveotjxacr, For Aristotle’s tendency to restrict sensible substance to natural as opposed to artificial things cf. H. 1043%4, >21. On the other side ch A. 1070%5, The reason for the restriction is that art does not make new substances but merely imposes new qualities, quantities, &c., on sub- stances. The statue retains the substantial or essential nature of wood,

“house, &c. And gwa wooden it is a atural substance ; it is only gua having such and such a shape that it is artificial, and in this respect it is not a substance.

30. [kat] atrn if pvos. AP reads dm, EJT rox, both of which are impossible. Probably 6m is an emblema due to Alexander’s para- phrase davepov dru, and tir and kai are attempts to emend oz.

30-381. atty 7 pats... i oti ob aTorxelov GAN apxi, i.e. the pvaus described not in A. 1014 27 but inib. 36, that which is not matter but form, For the difference between orovxetov and dpxy cf. A. T, 3.

2578-2 wrens iG )

226 COMMENTARY

BOOK H

Sensible substances ; matter (ch. 1).

1042° 3. We proceed to sum up what-has~been said and to bring our inquiry to its conclusion. We have said that (1) the causes of substances are the object of our search.

6. (2) Some substances are generally recognized, i. e. the physical, viz. the elements, plants and animals and their parts, the physical universe and its parts; while certain thinkers treat the Forms and the objects of mathematics as substances.

12. (3) Other substances are established by argument—the essence, the substratum, the genus, the universal; with the two latter are con- nected the Ideas.

17. (4) Since the essence is substance, we had to discuss definition and therefore also what parts are parts of the substance, and whether these are also parts of the definition.

21. (5) Neither the universal nor the genus is substance; the Ideas and the objects of mathematics must be considered later.

24. We must now discuss the acknowledged substances, viz. those that are sensible, all of which have matter. The substratum is substance, and this is (1) in one sense the matter (which is potentially a ‘ this’), (2) in another the definition or shape (which is a ‘this’ and is separ- able in definition), (3) in another the union of these, which alone is subject to generation and destruction and is separable in the full sense (while only some of the substances in the sense of definable essences are separable).

32. Of these three, even (1) master is substance, for in all change there is something that underlies the change, whether it be change of place, of size, of quality, or in respect of substance (generation and destruction).

» 3. The last kind of change involves all the others, but either one or two of the others do not involve it ; a thing need not have matter for generation and destruction if it has the matter or potentiality for local change.

The chapter opens with a summary of the contents of Book Z. 1042* 4-6 refers, roughly, to Z. 1,

” 6-12 ” ” ” 2,

4) LEHR Ok, ¥ » 3. 10282 33-36,

» 17; 18 ” ” ” 4-6, 12, 15,

” 18-21 » ”» ” Io, Il,

ee teeet pies i » 13, 16. 1040 16—1041° 5,

H. 1. 1042% 3 — 1042>7 224

It is noteworthy that the summary makes no reference to Z. 4-9, which we have already seen reason to regard as not belonging to the original plan of Z. The doctrine of those chapters is, however, referred to below in I. 30.

1042° 3. cuddoyicaca. seems to have its original meaning of ‘reckoning up’. ‘ We must reckon up the results of what has been said and compute the sum of them.’ Cf. £. V. 1101934 ovddoyt- OTéov Kal TAa’THY THY Siaopay.

8. téd\da ta GwAA odpata, cf. A. rorzPr1, Z. ro2z8P11. What simple bodies other than the four elements can Aristotle mean? The answer is given by De Caelo 268» 27 deyw 8 ardG . . . ofoy wip Kal yhv kal Ta TovTwy €ldn Kal TA ovyyevy TovTos. I.e. rédda is the various species of fire, air, water, and earth (ra ovyyevq rovros = air and water, cf. Meteor. 339% 28).

10. 6 odpavéds, ‘the physical universe’, as in Z. 1028) 12.

21. Christ is right in dispensing with the comma after ratra. ratra = Ta THs ovotas pépy.

Christ’s emendation of ét to éor is unnecessary. For ér rodvuy cf. A. 1071» 20,

23. Uotepov oxeTTéov, in MN.

28. dddws 8 6 Adyos Kal } popdy, cf. Z. 10297 2 n.

29. For the description of form as 1é8e tu cf. A. r017? 25 n.

BO. 06 yéveots pdvou kat plopd éott, cf. Z. 8,

Zl. at pev at 8 ot. The only form that is ywpiorov dAds is vods. Cf. A. 7, 9, De An. 413” 24, 4295, 430% 22. Reason exists in God, in the spirits of the spheres, and in man.

32-3. Aristotle’s classification of change into four kinds is partly anticipated in Zheae¢. 181 D, where Plato distinguishes aAAotwois and ops.

b 2-3. viv pev...otépnow. vov pev refers to the time when a sub- stance is being destroyed, raAw dé to the time when it is being pro- duced. What underlies or undergoes destruction is matter qualified by a positive form, i.e. a rode 713 what underlies generation is matter qualified by a privation.

4. 7 pra % Suoiv,- Aristotle leaves it open whether vAy adAXowry, as well as vAn romixy, does not imply tAn yervyry; in @, 1050) 17 he says definitely that it does not. His words here suggest that vAn avéynryn implies tAy yevvyry, and this is confirmed by De Gen. ef Corr. i. 5 (e.g. 32276, 7). On the relations between the various tla cf. Z. 1036* gn,

His words here suggest that vAn avéynryn implies tAy yevvyry, and this is confirmed by De Gen. ef Corr. i. 5 (e.g. 32276, 7). On the relations between the various tla cf. Z. 1036* gn,

5-6. ob yap ... éxew. The stars have vAn tomy but not try yevvnTy, 1044” 7, A. 1069? 26.

6. HAnv...tomuxyy. The phrase is a hapax legomenon in Aristotle, but cf, An xard rérov KwyTH, 10447, vAy wobev moi, A. 1069) 26,

HAnv ... yervytyy, not matter that can be generated (matter is eternal) but matter which can take on a new substantial form.

7. 76 pay drdGs yiyveoOa is applicable to the three kinds of change other than generation or destruction, viz. dopa, avénas, adAotwors,

228 COMMENTARY

in which a thing does not come to be, simply, but changes its place, size, or quality. The distinction in De Gen. ef Corr. i. 3 between émhh yéveors and yévecis 71s within the category of substance does not seem to be in Aristotle’s mind here.

8. é&v tois puatkois eipntar, Phys. 225%12-20, De Gen. ef Corr. 317217-31. For the citation of other works than the PAyszcs under the title 7a dvoid cf. Bz. Index 102° g.

Form or Actua.ity (chs. 2, 3).

The various types of differentia or constitutive form (ch. 2).

10429. Since substance as matter, i.e. the substance that is sub- stance potentially, is generally recognized, we next (2) discuss the substance, as acfuality, of sensible things. Democritus seems to think there are three differentiae—shape, position, order.

15. But there are many; things are characterized by composition (e.g. by being mixed), by being tied, glued, nailed; by position, time, place; by the sensible qualities such as hardness and softness, some by some, some by all of these, and in general by excess and defect.

25. ‘Is’ must therefore have just as many meanings; for a threshold ‘being’ means being so situated, for ice it means being so solidified ; the being of some things, e.g. a hand, will be defined by all these characteristics.

gi. We must grasp the kinds of differentia, for they will be prin- ciples of being; e.g. excess and defect, straightness and crookedness, mixture.

1043% 2. Since substance is the cause of a thing’s being, it will depend on these differentiae what kind of being the thing in question has. None of them is substance even when coupled with matter, yet they are analogous to substance; as in the definition of substances what is predicated of the matter is the actuality, in other definitions it is what most resembles actuality.

7. E.g. to define ‘threshold’ we say ‘wood or stone in such a position’ (adding sometimes the final cause).

12. To different matter there answers a different actuality or defini- tion—composition, mixture, &c. / Those who define a house as ‘ stones, bricks, and timbers’ are stating the potential house; those who say ‘a covering for animals and goods’ state the actuality; those who combine both statements give the concrete substance,

/ Those who define a house as ‘ stones, bricks, and timbers’ are stating the potential house; those who say ‘a covering for animals and goods’ state the actuality; those who combine both statements give the concrete substance,

H. 1. 10428 — 2. 1043814 229

21. Of the last kind were the definitions approved by Archytas, e “still weather is absence of motion in a large extent of air’.

26. Sensible substance, then, is (1) matter, (2) form and actuality, (3) the union of the two.

1042" 11-35, cf. A. 985° 13-19 nn.

16. It is curious to find xpaois treated as a Kind of cvvéecis. Elsewhere the two are opposed as one might oppose chemical com- bination to mechanical composition (De Gen. ef Corr. 328°8, N. rog2® 24, 26, and cf. 1042 29 n. with 1043213). But cf. De An. 407° 30 hv dpmoviar xpaow xal ovvOeow evartiov civa. ovvOecrs May in fact be used as the genus including xp@ovs, though usually it means & species opposed to it.

24. TA per eviots ToUTwr Ta SE wact ToUTos. A// physical bodies are characterized, according to Aristotle, by dryness or wetness (which form one of the xpérat évartiéryres), and presumably also by density or rarity. Every piomévoy copa, i.e. every aciwal sensible body as dis- tinguished from the pure elements, is characterized as well by hardness or softness (Meeor. 382° 8).

kat GAws TA wey drepoxA Ta SE eAAeiWer. This applies only to ra rois rar aicPyray wabeow (1. 21).

27. We should perhaps read xpvordAAw with one manuscript of Alexander, but xpderadXor is not impossible.

2Q. Ta per pepixOar, Ta Se Kexpdofar. xpaors is properly a kind of pigis, the wigis of liquids (Zap. 122% 26-31). gigs is probably here used in a narrower sense = the chemical mixture of solids.

33. Ta TO pGAdov, i.e. those that are characterized by degree, the aby ray aiePyray, cf 21-25.

1043* 2. # odoia airia tod etvar, cf Z. 17.

4-5. odcia pey ody... ékdete. IT.e. none of these differentiae is substance either (1) when taken by itself or (2) when coupled with matter; but it is what is analogous to substance in each case. The differentiae mentioned are in categories other than substances—in that of é exew (cvvdeces, Sexpds, KoAAy, aanrken)s of xetrGar, of xorg, of rov, or of rowy (ra ray aicfyray wefy). They indicate not the inmost nature of that to which they belong but a mode of arrangement or other characteristic which may be “only temporary. Therefore the things characterized by them—(r) artefacta, (2) states of a substance (xeveradAor, and perhaps rredna, cf. Meteor. ti. 4), (3) parts of living things—are not substances but only analogous to substances in that they contain elements answering to matter and form. For the exclusion of (x) from the dignity of substance cf Bar, Z. r04r 29, and for the exclusion of (3) cf. Z. 1og0°6. The reason for the exclusion of (3) is stated there.

7. paddwora, Loe. it is more truly évépyeca than anything else in such definitions is.

Ig-I4. Tov per ydp . .. cipnpéver. Cf. rog2? 16m, 29 ni.

r04r 29, and for the exclusion of (3) cf. Z. 1og0°6. The reason for the exclusion of (3) is stated there.

7. paddwora, Loe. it is more truly évépyeca than anything else in such definitions is.

Ig-I4. Tov per ydp . .. cipnpéver. Cf. rog2? 16m, 29 ni.

230 COMMENTARY

21. Archytas, one of the most famous members of the Pythagorean school, and a contemporary of Plato. We have no further light than that which this passage offers,on his doctrine of definition. The type of definition he approved is identical with Aristotle’s nominal definition of attributes per genus et subtectum, the dpirpos which is cvprépacpa. te drodetEews (An. Post. 75» 32, cf. 93% 22, 94° 7):

28. For the corruption of kat into 67 cf. N. 1089" 35 n.

Distinction between concrete substance and actuality or form. The Sormer is generated and destroyed, the latter not. Analogy between Sorm or definition and number (ch. 3).

1043 29. Sometimes it is not clear whether a word means the con- crete substance or the actuality, e. g. ‘house’, ‘line’, ‘animal’.

36. The two meanings have a common reference, if not a common definition. The question of the two meanings does not affect the in- vestigation of sensible substance; for the essence plainly attaches to the form. For ‘soul’ and ‘to be soul’ are the same, while ‘man’ and ‘to be man’ are different, unless the soul can be called man. Fs

b4. The syllable does not consist of the letters + composition ; for the composition is not derived from the things compounded. The position is not derived from the threshold, but w7ce versa.

10. Man is not animal + two-footed ; if these are the matter of man, there must be something apart from these—neither an element nor a compound but the substance. Those who describe man as animal +two-footed are omitting this, and stating the matter. If, then, this is the cause of man’s being, and that is the substance of man, they will not be stating man’s very substance.

(14. This is either eternal, or perishable and generable without ever being in process of perishing or becoming. It is not the form but the concrete thing that is generated. .Evidently the substances of some perishable things cannot exist separately, viz. those that cannot exist apart from the particular instances, e.g. house. Perhaps these, and

_jndeed all things that are not formed by nature, are not substances ; the nature in natural objects is the only substance in perishable things.)

23. Thus there is some point in Antisthenes’ problem; he said you cannot define what a thing is (definition being simply circumlocution), but can teach what sort of thing it is (e. g. that silver is Zeke tin),

28. so that composite substance, whether sensible or intelligible, can be defined, but its elements cannot, since definition predicates one thing (form) of another (matter).

H. 2. 10432 21 — 3. 1043? 11 231

g. that silver is Zeke tin),

28. so that composite substance, whether sensible or intelligible, can be defined, but its elements cannot, since definition predicates one thing (form) of another (matter).

H. 2. 10432 21 — 3. 1043? 11 231

32. If numbers are substances, it is in this way and not as assem- blages of units ; for (1) definition is a sort of number, being divisible, and divisible into indivisibles,

36. (2) Definition, like number, loses its identity if anything be subtracted from or added to it.

1044*2. (3) A number must be something by virtue of which it is one—else it is a mere aggregate ; a definition also is one; but the principle of unity in both is commonly missed. This is natural, for substance has the sort of unity that a number, not a unit, has; it is an actuality and a definite nature.

g. (4) Formal substance, like number, does not admit of degree ; if any substance does so, it is concrete substance.

We have shown, then, in what sense generation and destruction of so-called substances is possible, and have dealt with the reduction of substance to number.

This chapter is a collection of ill-connected remarks on various topics relating to essence and definition.

10437 29-4 is a note on the ambiguity of words like ‘house’, ‘line’, &c. At» 4 Aristotle returns to the main subject.

33. wétepov Suds év pyxer 7 [Str] Buds. Cf. Z. 1036 13-17 n.

34. ot, as Bywater pointed out, is doubtless an emblema from ll. 31, 33. For the intrusion of ori cf. Z. 1041» 30 (Ab), N, 1089? 7, Prodi. 962% 2 and possibly @. 10507 14, 1051 30.

37. @s mpds ev, cf. T. 10037 33 n.

be, uxt ev yap kat puxy etvat tadtdy. Aristotle has tried to prove this in Z. 6.

4. Twt péev twit 8 od. I.e. ‘being man’ will be the same as man in the sense of ‘the human soul’, but not as man in the sense of ‘the complex of soul and body’.

4-8. The reasoning is inconsecutive. ‘The syllable does not con- sist of the letters+their composition. This is natural because the composition doesnot consist of the letters.’ The second sentence contains a suggestion which is quite different from that contained in the first, and ydp is unjustifiable. Aristotle rejects both suggestions ; the form is oUre orovxetov ovr éx ororxeiov (1. 12). Bz. takes éx rovrwv (I. 7) to mean ‘one of the things’, but the use of é« in two quite different senses is most improbable.

Q. «i 6 00dds Oe, cf. 1042» 19.

Q-I0. otk ék Tod ob800. .. éxetyns. ‘The position is not made up out of the threshold’ (i.e. out of the material parts of the threshold, cf. 1. 7 ék tovrwv dy éori otvOecrs), ‘but rather the threshold is constituted by the position’.

11. Usually the genus is described as matter, the differentia as form, cf. A. 1024» 8, Z. 103876, 19. To treat genus and differentia

232 COMMENTARY

out of the material parts of the threshold, cf. 1. 7 ék tovrwv dy éori otvOecrs), ‘but rather the threshold is constituted by the position’.

11. Usually the genus is described as matter, the differentia as form, cf. A. 1024» 8, Z. 103876, 19. To treat genus and differentia

232 COMMENTARY

as if they existed side by side like material elements and required a third thing to unite them is un-Aristotelian. Cf. Z. 12, H. 6, where Aristotle makes the unity of essence depend on the fact that genus has no existence apart from differentia. Dittenberger therefore would omit ovde.. . . Séovy as an interpolation due to a misunderstanding of ch. 6, and treat éuows .. . éxetvys (8-10) as parenthetical. He has, however, misunderstood what Aristotle says.-‘Man is not €dov+dérovv but fGov dirow (Z. 1037 12-14). To describe him as Lov + Strovr i is to treat these as the materials of which he consists, and if these are mere materials, /hen there must be something else which is neither an element nor composed of elements but the substance; this they omit, and mention only the matter, if they describe man as {gov + déouv.’

12, éfa.podvtes, according to Al. 553. 7, governs ryv vAnv. Cf. Z. 1036” 23 ddawpety tiv tAnv. ‘Which people name when they eliminate the matter.’ What people? Alexander suggests the Platonists. But a reference to them is out of place. Aristotle is dealing in this chapter with the common tendency to describe a whole as a sum of parts or materials, omitting the principle of unity; cf. 104473, 6. Lines 10-14 form a much more consecutive piece of reasoning if e€apodytes be taken to govern 6. Cf. fin a similar context) De Gen. ef Corr. 335” 35 aaipodo. yep TO TL HV elvar Kal THY poppy.

13. Bz.’s kat otctas, todro adriv xrX., though it derives some support from Al. 553. 11, is not really needed. The reading of E*JIT gives a good argument :

The principle of union is the cause of being.

This (the cause of being) is substance (cf. 4 2).

.. In omitting the principle of union and naming only the matter they will not be naming the substance itself.

14. The omission of od in AP Al. is due to the misunderstanding of 0 é€arpodvres THY VAnv A€yovow (1, 12).

14-16. 7 didiov... yiyveoOar. Cf. E. 10242 29n., Z. 1033) 5-6 n.

16, év d&ddous, Z. 8.

I7. TWovetTar Tose, ylyvetar Sé TO ex ToUTwy is pleonastic, and there is a good deal to be said for Bz.’s woul eis rode. Cf. Z. 1033 10.

18. TovTwy, i.e. matter and form, cf. ll. 11, 12.

18-19. ci 8 eiot...890v. In the long run it appears that for Aristotle reason is the only ywpicroy «idos. Every other form is the form of a certain kind of matter and inseparable from it.

19-21. whi... oxedos. Cf. Z. 1033) 19-21.

21-22, ore TL... ouvéornkey. Cf. @ 4-5 n., Z. 1041? 29 n.

11, 12.

18-19. ci 8 eiot...890v. In the long run it appears that for Aristotle reason is the only ywpicroy «idos. Every other form is the form of a certain kind of matter and inseparable from it.

19-21. whi... oxedos. Cf. Z. 1033) 19-21.

21-22, ore TL... ouvéornkey. Cf. @ 4-5 n., Z. 1041? 29 n.

23-25. date 7 dtopia... exer Td Karpov. Aristotle has said (ll, 10-14) that if the genus and differentia are treated as the matter of the thing defined, the definition must miss the essence of the thing defined. ‘Thus’, he continues, ‘ there is a certain timeliness in the Antisthenean doctrine that definition is impossible, that any definition must miss the essence of its object.’ Lines 14-23 must be regarded as a digression.

24. ol “AvticPéverot Kal ot orws AmalSeuror, cf. A. r024? 32-34 Nn. The view of the Antistheneans seems to be that which is referred to

H. 3. 1043 12 — 10448 2 By

in Pl. Zheaet. 201 E-202 ¢, viz. that simple entities cannot be defined but only named, and that complex entities can only be defined to the extent of naming their simple elements, i. e. by a definition which con- tains indefinables. Definition is an dvoudrwv cvprAoKky. It explains its subject only by reference to elements themselves dAoya kai dyvwora, and is thus but a Adyos paxpés, a diffuse and evasive answer to a ques- tion. (For Adyos paxpds cf. N. 10917 n.) Hence simple entities (of which silver is taken as an example) cannot be defined at all, but only described as /zke certain other simple entities.

29. THs ouvOdrou, edv Te aicOnrh édv te vonth W. What is definable must in any case be a universal. The definable senszble composite will be a term like ‘man’, which is analysable into a certain form and a certain kind of sensible matter (Z. 103529). The definable z/elligzble composite will be a term like ‘line’, which is analysable into the form : bs and the intelligible matter ‘length’ (Z. 1036 13-17, cf. 1035 20N.),

The analysis of ‘man’ into ‘ two-footed’ and ‘ animal’, also, would be an analysis into form and ‘intelligible matter’, in another sense of that term (1045 34).

édv Te aloOnTh edv te vont 7. It is certain that Antisthenes, who was an out-and-out sensationalist, meant by a complex a thing which could be divided into senszdle parts or elements, Cf. Zheaef. 201 E ta TpOTa otovrepel oroixela, ef dv pels Te ovyKeieOa Kal TaAAG. Aristotle interprets him in the light of his own doctrine of tAy voyrn.

31-32. 75 pev, the genus; 716 8¢, the differentia, Cf. A. 10248, Z. 103876, 19.

32—1044714. This is a section, not closely connected with what precedes, in which Aristotle, while pointing out that substances are not numbers in the way in which he thinks the Platonists supposed them to be so, shows that there are certain analogies between substances and numbers. They are, he thinks, mere analogies, but they account for the attractiveness, to some minds, of the reduction of substance to number.

They are, he thinks, mere analogies, but they account for the attractiveness, to some minds, of the reduction of substance to number.

33. obrws eiot xth., i.e. they are not simply aggregates of units but have a principle of unity which keeps their parts together.

84. ds twes Aéyouor, sc. the Pythagoreans and Platonists. Cf. M. 6,7. Aristotle seems rather confused about the view he is attack- ing. He here describes it as the view that substance is like an aggre- gate of units ; in 1044? 8 he describes it as the view that substance is a sort of unit (unless indeed he is there referring to the view of some other thinkers, perhaps a different set of Platonists).

It is rather hard on the Platonists to attack them for treating the essential substance of things as an ageregate, if (as seems to be the case) the doctrine of inaddible numbers was meant just to avoid this implication. But Aristotle does not seem to understand the ‘ inaddible numbers’. Cf..M. 6, 7 nn.

1044-2. kal tov dpOpdv Sei eivai Tr @ ets. Bz. proposes 7G dpiO ue for rov apiOyov, but Aristotle means not that number must ave, but that it

$T. ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY

234 COMMENTARY

must de, a principle of unity, just as in general he identifies substance with the unifying principle.

8-9. Ad odx... éxdoty: | Cf. 104334 n. Aristotle here opposes his view of essence as an ‘actuality and nature’ which holds together material parts to the view that it is a mere indivisible unit.

Q-10. domep o8Sé 6 AptOuss ... Arrov. Ie. a number cannot be more or less a particular number ; it either definitely is it or definitely is not it.

11. AN’ elrep, } peTd THs Odys. In Cas 3>33—429 Aristotle implies that not even 4 peta rhs tAys, the concrete individual, can be more or less the substance it is.

II-13. epi pév ody yevéoews . . . Advvarov refers to 1043 14-23, Tept Tis eis Tov dpiOudy avaywyis to 1043>32—1044* 11. These, then, are for Aristotle the main sections of the chapter.

The various causes of generable natural substances, elernal natural substances, and natural events (ch. 4).

1044°15. Even if all things have the same ultimate matter, they have different proximate matter.

20. The same thing has more than one matter. Phlegm comes (1) (a) from what is fat, directly, (2) from the sweet, because the fat comes from the sweet, (2) from bile, by the resolution of bile into prime matter.

25. From the same matter different moving causes can sometimes produce different things ; in other cases different things involve different matter. If the same thing can come from different matters, the moving cause must be the same.

32. When we look for the cause of a thing, we must state all the causes we can—material, efficient, formal, final (the last two being ~ perhaps the same), taking care to get the proximate cause.

If the same thing can come from different matters, the moving cause must be the same.

32. When we look for the cause of a thing, we must state all the causes we can—material, efficient, formal, final (the last two being ~ perhaps the same), taking care to get the proximate cause.

bg. So much for generable natural substances. The case of eternal natural substances is different ; some things presumably have no matter, or only the matter which qualifies things for spatial movement.

8. In natural things that are not substances there is no matter; the substance is their substratum. There is no matter of eclipse; the moon is what suffers it; the efficient cause is the earth; there is presumably no final cause. The formal cause is the definition, but this is obscure unless it states the efficient cause, as does the definition ‘ deprivation of light by the interposition of the earth’.

15. The importance of getting the proxzmate cause may be illus- trated by the causes of sleep.

H. 3. 104428 —4. 104417 235

1044° 16. ék tod attod mdyta mpdrou, i.e. from prime matter; 4 Tav avTav &s mpdtwy, i.e. from the four elements.

22. et 76 Aimapdv ék tod yhuxeos, cf. De An. 42212, De Sensu 442° 17, 23.

33-34. mdcas .. . Tas évdexopnevas airias, i.e. all the causes we can state.

35. dpa ta katapynna; Cf. G. A. 727? 31, 729 30.

Gpa to oméppa; Cf. 7292 28.

DT, tows S€ Taira dpow 16 adtd, Cf. De Gen. e¢ Corr. 335» 6.

6. tay uoikay pev didlwy S€ odcrdy, i.e. the celestial spheres and the stars.

Q. oK €ott TovTous UAn kTA. What underlies an: accident, as matter underlies substance, is not matter but substance. Cf. Z. 1038) 5.

12. 70 8 of évexa iows od éotiwv. This is a serious admission, in view of Aristotle’s identification in ]. 1 of the formal with the final cause. His teleology is in fact not complete. There is not always a final cause. But where there is, it is the formal cause as well. In the absence of a final cause, the thing is defined by reference to its efficient cause, as in ll. 14,15. Eclipse is for Aristotle an example of tattopatov. ‘The sun’s motion is no doubt évexa tov and so is that of the moon, but the two acting together may produce a result which is not evexa Tov.

16. GAN Gre 7d Loov; vai, &AAd KTA. is very like ]. 19 ore dxuwyoia Toadt ; vat, dAN xrA. The first adda is natural enough in introducing a suggested answer. Cf. L. and S. s.v. 1. 1, Kiihner ii, 2. § 589. 9. The manuscript reading ddd’ 67 is therefore preferable to Bz.’s con- jecture aAAo zz (‘Is it anything other than the animal?’), a phrase which does not seem to occur in Aristotle.

The first adda is natural enough in introducing a suggested answer. Cf. L. and S. s.v. 1. 1, Kiihner ii, 2. § 589. 9. The manuscript reading ddd’ 67 is therefore preferable to Bz.’s con- jecture aAAo zz (‘Is it anything other than the animal?’), a phrase which does not seem to occur in Aristotle.

17. kapdta, Sleep is a wafos tov Kupiov TOv GAAwy Tavtwy aicOyTy- plov (De Somno 455 20-26, 33, »10, 458% 28), which is the heart (4568 4) or, in bloodless animals, what is analogous to it (456% 11). Elsewhere Aristotle connects sleep especially with the brain (P..A. 653% 10). A definition quoted thus by way of illustration is not necessarily his own; e.g. in similar contexts (dz. Post. 938, 944) he cites Anaxagoras’ definition of thunder, though his own was different (Meteor. 369% 10 —370* 33). Cf. ©. 1049820.

Only things subject to generation and change have matter. The relations between matter and its contrary states (ch. 5).

1044» 21. Since points, and in general forms, are and are not, without generation and destruction (for white does not come to be but wood comes to be white), not all contraries come to be out of one another (pale man from dark man but not pale from dark); nor have all things matter, but only the things liable to generation and reciprocal transformation.

236 COMMENTARY

29. How is matter related to its contrary states? Is a body potentially diseased as well as potentially healthy, water potentially vinegar as well as potentially wine? It is the matter of the one in virtue of a positive state or form, of the other in virtue of the privation of the form. + 1

34. Again, why is not wine ‘potentially vinegar’, the living man ‘potentially dead’? These corruptions are incidental; the matter of the living man is by force of corruption potentially a dead man, and water (the matter of wine) potentially vinegar. Where, as here, opposites change into one another, the negative (e.g. dead body, vinegar) must be resolved into its matter before it can change into its positive.

1044) 21. éva dvev yevésews Kat pOopas eorr Kal ov €or, cf. BH. 10274 29n., Z. 1033 5-6 n.

22. otov at ortypat, cf. B. 10028 32, . WV. 1174) 12.

eimep eiot, ‘if they may be said to exist’. The Pythagoreans and Platonists thought they existed as substances, but Aristotle insists that they are merely romai, diatpécers, répara of lines (K. 1060? 12 ff., N. 10go? 5 ff.).

1033 5-6 n.

22. otov at ortypat, cf. B. 10028 32, . WV. 1174) 12.

25. &\X’ érépws wth. A black thing (1) can become a white thing, and (2) does so bya process, by one part after another becoming white (Phys. vi. 4). But (1) black does not become white—all that we can say is that there was black and there zs white; and (2) white succeeds black instantaneously. When Aristotle says that contraries do not change into one another (A. 1069” 6), he is using évayriov in only one (the more fundamental!) of the two senses here referred to, i.e. of the contrary qualities, not of the things characterized by those qualities. In the work Iept évavriwy (fr. 119 Rose) he distinguished the two kinds of contraries as 7a Ka@ atrd evavria and 7a TO peréxew évavtiwv évavria. Cf. I. 1057 6.

34. dmopia 8€ ts €or. Aristotle’s answer to the question is that wine is not the matter of vinegar but the normal product of the same matter of which vinegar is the abnormal product. In sucha case there is no direct transition from the normal to the abnormal product nor vice versa; the given product must first be reduced to its constituent matter.

This is stated explicitly of the change from the abnormal to the normal product (1045* 4-6), and implied with regard to the converse change (1044> 34—104538 2).

36. card cupBeBnkds at POopat, i.e. the degeneration into vinegar does not attach to the wine directly, but to the water of which the wine is a particular form. Thus the chapter indicates three ways in which A may change into B:

(1) xa? e£w kal xara 76 e@Sos, as water into wine,

(2) kata orépnow Kal POopay tiv tapa pvow, as water into vinegar,

H, 5. 1044» 21 — 1045 3 237

(3) Kara cvpPB_eByxos, as wine into vinegar, or vinegar into wine. 1045* 3. ék tovtwy, sc. ex Lwov, é& olvov. As wine and vinegar have a common matter, water, so day and night have a common sub- stratum, air (A. 1070? 21).

The unity of definition (ch. 6).

104577. We return to the question (cf. 104423) what makes a definition or a number one. All wholes as opposed to mere aggre- gates must have a cause of unity, which in bodies is contact, viscidity, &e.

12. A definition is one not by external union but by being the definition of one object. What, then, makes man one, not animal + two-footed? In particular, if there are Ideas of animal and two- footed, why do not men exist by participation in these two rather than in one Idea? +

20. The usual modes of definition afford no answer to the question, but the distinction of form and matter does.

In particular, if there are Ideas of animal and two- footed, why do not men exist by participation in these two rather than in one Idea? +

20. The usual modes of definition afford no answer to the question, but the distinction of form and matter does.

25. The difficulty is the same as that of the unity of ‘round bronze’, if this be the definition of some term, It is one simply because bronze is matter and round is form. ‘There is no cause of the actual coming to be of what was potentially, save the efficient cause, in the case of things subject to becoming. It is the essence of the potential sphere to become actual, of the actual to have been potential.

33. Matter may be either sensible, or intelligible ; in a definition there is always an element of matter as well as one of actuality (e, g, ‘plane figure’ in the definition of circle).

36. Things that have not matter of either kind, i.e. the categories, are directly and essentially some kind of one as they are some kind of being ; hence their existence and their oneness are not stated in their definitions. ‘Their essence is directly a one as it is an existent ; hence there is no other cause of their unity or of their existence ; for each is directly an existent and a one, though being and unity are not their genera and do not exist apart from the particular kinds of being and unity.

b 4, Some solve the problem of unity by ‘ participation’, which they cannot explain or define; others by ‘intercourse’ (so Lycophron), ‘ composition ’, ‘ connexion ’—formulae that can be applied to anything whatever.

16. Their mistake is that they look for a difference between, and a unifying formula for, potentiality and actuality, while really the proxi-

238 COMMENTARY

mate matter and the form are one, the first being potentially what the second is actually, so that there is no reason of their unity except that which causes the movement from potentiality to actuality; while immaterial things are without qualification and essentially unities,

10452 7. THs elpnwevys, Z. 12, H. 10442 2-6.

8. kal mept tos dpiOuous. The chapter in fact discusses only the unity of definitions.

25. gott yap alt ¥ dwopta «tk. The problem is that of the unity of genus or vAy vont with differentia. Aristotle illustrates it by. the more familiar notion of the unity of form with vAy aicOyrn in e.g. a bronze ball, and then in |]. 33 returns to the case of genus and differentia, and points out that genus is to differentia as sensible matter to form and may therefore be called intelligible matter.

26. For iudérwv taken thus arbitrarily cf De Int, 18°19, Z. 1029? 28.

a bronze ball, and then in |]. 33 returns to the case of genus and differentia, and points out that genus is to differentia as sensible matter to form and may therefore be called intelligible matter.

26. For iudérwv taken thus arbitrarily cf De Int, 18°19, Z. 1029? 28.

33. éxarépw may mean (1) ‘for the potential ball and for the poten- tial man’ (I. 18) (this is Alexander's second interpretation, 562. 10); or (2) ‘it was the essence of the potential ball to become an actual ball, and of the actual ball to be produced from a potential ball’. This is the more probable interpretation ; the reference to the case of man occurs too far back to be referred to here as Alexander suggests.

34. tA vonry means here the generic element in a species. For this use of $An (without the adjective) cf. 23, A. 1024" 9, Z. 1038 6, I. 10584 23. tA vonry occurs in (apparently) a different sense in Z. 1036* g, where see note.

35. oXipa énimedov. The interest here being in matter, Aristotle states only the material or generic element in the definition of circle.

36—» 7. Aristotle has shown that a species is unified by the fact that its genus exists only as the matter of its differentia, and its differentia only as the form of its genus. This explanation does not apply to swmma genera (i.e. categories), which have no matter either intelligible or sensible. The unity of these, however, needs no explana- tion; they are by their own nature instances of unity (dep & 71), as they are instances of being. Because unity and being are inevitably predicable of them, unity and being are not mentioned in their definitions (really, of course, they have no definitions but can merely be described, Alexander 563. 17).

The section contains a certain amount of repetition, but this is for the sake of emphasis. The rearrangements of the text by Alexander and Schwegler are not necessary and do not help matters ; the justifica- tion of 86 in 2, which was the point that troubled them, lies in ei@us (* 36). Since any swmmum genus must from its very nature be a one and an existent, ‘one’ and ‘existent’ need not be inserted in the definition of any swmmum genus.

b 6-7. odx 4s... mapa ta KaO” Exacta is evidently directed against the Platonists,

H. 6, 1045 7 — 104519 239

6. otx ds... vi. Aristotle holds that being and unity are not genera, for reasons given in B. 998 22 ff. Each of them is one 7 ad’ évos OF T@ Tpos ey OF Kar’ avadoyiar.

7. 088 &s xwpiotay dvtwr, sc. rod dvros Kal Tod évds. TH Kal Exacta = the several categories.

8. ot pév, Plato and his followers, A. 987” 13.

10. Wux‘s is evidently an emblema from the next line.

Avuxédpov, an orator and sophist of the school of Gorgias, mentioned several times by Aristotle (Zop. 174” 32, Phys. 185 28, Pol. 1280? 10, Rhet. 1405» 35, 14067 7, 1410717). Cf. Zeller io 1323, n. 3.

987” 13.

10. Wux‘s is evidently an emblema from the next line.

12-16. Evidently Aristotle means to refute these explanations by a reductio ad absurdum. The absurdity lies in the application of terms like o¥vGects to things that never existed apart.

15. 76 Neukdv etvar. Bz.’s ro ryv émupdveravy Aevkov etvar would be easier, but the subject of Aevxdy efvar may as well be omitted as that of byaivew (1. 13). A surface is the only thing that can fer se be white.

18. domep eipytar. Aristotle has not actually said this; he is refer- ring loosely to 4 23-33.

1g. The ellipse of 6 pév, 7d pev before 6 dé, 7d d€ is not uncommon in Aristotle, Cf. A. 98159, A. 1024%33, I. 10575, 15, Bz. Index 166 55.

But the ellipse would be unusually harsh here, and Casaubon may be right in inserting 76 ev. In any case, it seems best to read €y with ACs

@ote Suovoy KT. ‘ So that it is like asking what in general is the cause of unity and of a thing’s being one’—which is an obviously absurd question.

BOOK ©

Potency (chs. 1-5).

Potency in the strict sense, t.e. power to produce motion (ch. 1).

1045 27. We have treated of primary being, to which all the other categories imply a reference, viz. substance; since being is divided according as it means potency or complete reality as well as according to the categories, we must discuss potency and complete reality.

35. First we will discuss potency in the strict sense, which, however, is not the most suitable to our present purpose. Later, in our dis- cussion of actuality, we will explain the other senses of potency.

240 COMMENTARY

104624. We may set aside the potencies that are so called by equivocation (i.e. potencies or powers in geometry).

g. Potencies in the proper sense are originative sources, and are called potencies by reference to a primary kind (a), that which is a source of change in another thing or“in the thing itself gwa other. The derivative kinds are (2) the potency of being acted on, of being changed by another or by the thing itself gva other, and (c) insuscepti- bility to change for the worse by the agency of another thing or of the thing itself gua other,

16. Again, these are potencies of acting or being acted on simply, or of acting or being acted on well; the definition of the former is implied in that of the latter.

1g. In a sense the potency of acting is one with that of being acted on; in a sense it is different. ‘The one is in the patient (it is because even the matter is a motive principle that things can be acted on, different things by different things); the other is in the agent. Thus so far as a thing is an organic unity it cannot be acted on by itself, for it contains no distinction of agent and patient.

Thus so far as a thing is an organic unity it cannot be acted on by itself, for it contains no distinction of agent and patient.

29. To every potency there answers a privation of potency, an incapacity to do that same thing in that same relation. We say a thing is ‘deprived’ of an attribute (1) when it has not it, (2) when it might naturally have it but has not it—has not it (a) at any time or (6) when it might have it, and again (a) has not it in a particular way (e. g. completely) or (8) has not it at all. Again, we sometimes mean that it is prevented by force from having what it would naturally have.

1045 28. eipytar. The reference is to ZH in general.

32. elmopev év Tots mpwTois Aéyots. The point has been made both in T. 1003 33 andin Z. x. As it is doubtful whether I was originally part of the same treatise as @, Z seems likely to be meant here.

32-34. émel 8¢...épyov. For the full list of meanings of év cf, E. 10264 33- 2,

85—1046? 4. The two senses of dvvayus which Aristotle wants to distinguish may be indicated by the words ‘ power’ and ‘ potentiality’ respectively. He proposes to treat first of power, and then, in discuss- ing actuality, to treat incidentally of potentiality (1046% 2-4). Power he explains as primarily a power in A to produce a change in B, or in A, considered in one respect, to produce change in itself in another respect (104611). Potentiality on the other hand is a potentiality in A of passing into some new state or engaging in some new activity (1048 32). This activity may be the production of a change in B, but the notion of a B to be acted on is not necessarily implied in the

©. 1. 1045 28 — 10464 31 24I

notion of potentiality, as it is in that of power. The notion of power is obscure enough, but it is certainly familiar and it is easily distin- guished from that of potentiality. But Aristotle proceeds to treat as subsidiary to the notion of power as distinct from potentiality, of h kata Kivnow divas (1046* 2), (2) the power in A of being changed by B and (4) the power in A of not being changed for the worse by B (t1-15). In these ‘powers’ part of the distinctive nature of power as against potentiality is still present—viz. the distinct implication of two things A and B; but the other part of its distinctive nature is gone—viz. the implication of positive force, for in (a) weakness rather than force, and in (6) inertial resistance rather than force is implied as being present in A. That Aristotle does not successfully preserve the distinction between power and potentiality is further indicated by the facts noticed by Bz., that in the discussion of power he introduces (1) a definition of dvvardv which clearly refers to potentiality rather than to power (1047 24), and (2) a lengthy section which also refers to potentiality rather than to power (1047 3-30).

10464 2, eimdvtes epi tavTys, in chs. 1-5.

3. ev Tois mepl Tis evepyelas Sioptopois, chs. 6-10. The precise reference is to 1048 27.

5. év GXous, A. 12.

10464 2, eimdvtes epi tavTys, in chs. 1-5.

3. ev Tois mepl Tis evepyelas Sioptopois, chs. 6-10. The precise reference is to 1048 27.

5. év GXous, A. 12.

7. xaddaep év yewpetpia. Cf. A. 1019) 33 n.

8. Schwegler puts a comma after yewmerpia and takes kal dvvard xr. as referring to the senses of dvvarov and advvaroy expounded in A. 1019 21-33, but the run of the sentence forbids this.

13. dmaletas Tis emt 16 xetpov is used elliptically for dmaeias pera- BodHs THs ext 76 xepov, and dOopas depends, like the ‘ understood’ peraBoArys, ON dmrabeias.

17. tod before zafety seems pretty certainly to have been inserted by a copyist who did not see the point.

19-20. éort pev... mdoyew. In saying that the power of acting and that of being acted on are in a sense one Aristotle does not, as Bz. supposes, make use of an ambiguity in the phrase apy) peraBodArs év dAXw (1.11), by which év d\Aw can be taken either with apy or with peraBoAjs. The whole context shows that év d\Aw goes only with peraBodys; it is in virtue of this that dpyy peraBodjs ev dAAw can be opposed to dpyy peraBodrns jm’ GAdrov (I. 12). Rather the unity, in some sense, of the active and the passive dvvayis is based on this, that the single fact that A can change B leads us to ascribe both an active power to A and a passive power to B. The active and the passive power are thus the complementary aspects of a single fact. Cf. De An. 425» 25—426* 30,

24. 76 AuTapdv pev yap Kkavotév. I.e. that which suffers burning must have a matter which lends itself to burning ; it must be fat.

28. cupmépuxer, cf. Z. 1040 15 n.

BI. 7 3é orépyors Aéyetar ToAAaxds, cf. A. 22.

2573-2 R

242 COMMENTARY

Rational and non-rational potencies (ch. 2).

1046? 36. Some potencies are irrational, others rational ; thus the arts are potencies. :

b 4. Rational potencies are of contraties, irrational of one result only; the hot can only heat, but the medical art can cause either disease or health, because knowledge is a rational account and the same account explains both a thing and its privation ;

g. but it explains the one essentially, the other incidentally by the absence of the first.

15. Thus the scientific man, starting from the single principle of movement which he has in his soul, can produce contrary results, linking both movements syllogistically with the same rational account.

24. The power of doing a thing well (or being acted on well) implies the power of doing it (or being acted on), but not vice versa.

1046) 3. at wowntiKal émorhpat = ai téxvau. xaé is explicative. Cf, A. 1075° 1.

24. The power of doing a thing well (or being acted on well) implies the power of doing it (or being acted on), but not vice versa.

1046) 3. at wowntiKal émorhpat = ai téxvau. xaé is explicative. Cf, A. 1075° 1.

4. at wey peta Adyou aca toy évavtiwv at adtat. Aristotle is not asserting contingency in the sphere of rational powers—asserting that precisely the same cause can produce opposite results. Opposite results may supervene on the presence of a single Adyos, but it has not been their sole cause; didvova, adr ober xwel (L. V. 1139 35); desire or choice turns the scale (1048*10). The Adyos has been accom- panied in the one case by the desire, say, to cure, in the other by the desire to kill, and this accounts for the difference in the result.

14. yap ortépnors | mpwTy 7d evavtiovy, eévaytiwors proper is erépyous teheia (I. 1055% 34); if a subject which might have a certain attri- bute completely fails to have it, this state is ‘contrary’ to the state of having the attribute completely.

15. éwet Sé ta evavtia ok éyylyverar év TG atte. This gives the reason for 76 pév byvewov. . . Wuxpdéryta, while 4 8 emurrnun . . . dpxnv gives the reason for 6 8 émorjpwov audw; and it is on 6 & émorjpov apdw and the reason for it that the stress falls. ‘ While the wholesome produces only health because its power gua wholesome, being an irrational power, is a power only to produce health and the law of con- tradiction forbids its having also the contrary power, on the other hand since knowledge . . ., the man who has knowledge can produce both,’

20. Adyos yép... pév. ‘For it (the Adyos mentioned in 1. 17) is a Adyos of both the contrary results.’

21. H xe. Jaeger prefers 7 éyer, but Alexander read # éyet (570. 6). The Adyos is not present in a Soul in virtue of the soul’s having an dpx7 of movement, but is present in a soul which in fact has such an apxy, and it is this coincidence that leads to action.

21-22, Alexander explains both tis atris apxis and taité as 76

©. 2. 10466 3-24 243

Aoyorixov. That ris abrys dpyjs means 6 Adyos is shown by |, 24, and tavré probably means this also, The soul will initiate either of two contrary movements as a result of the same originative source, the account it has framed for itself of the object, and it will have linked both movements with the same thing, i.e. deduced them from this account as the movements necessary to bring the object into existence or to prevent its coming into existence. For cvvdrrew used of syllogistic ‘linking up’ cf. Az. Pr. 4121, 12, 19, 65> 33, 692 18, 19.

22-24, A thing which has a rational power can produce the con- traries of the two results which two things having irrational powers respectively produce. Wholesome food produces only health, un- wholesome food only disease ; a doctor can produce both. ots dvev Adyov dvvarois is, however, rather pointless, and may be a mistaken gloss on ravavria.

Potency defended against attack (ch, 3).

Wholesome food produces only health, un- wholesome food only disease ; a doctor can produce both. ots dvev Adyov dvvarois is, however, rather pointless, and may be a mistaken gloss on ravavria.

Potency defended against attack (ch, 3).

1046» 29. There are some who say, as the Megaric school does, that there is potency only when there is actuality. This leads to manifest paradoxes :

33. (1) A man will not be a builder if he is not building, for to be a builder is to be able to build. Now if one cannot have an art with- out having learnt it, or, later, be without it without having lost it (i.e. by forgetfulness, disease, or lapse of time, for the odjecf of art cannot be destroyed), are we to suppose that the moment he stops building he has lost the art; if, then, he starts building again immediately, how will he have recovered the art?

1047* 4. Again, nothing will be cold or hot when it is not being perceived (so that they are really maintaining the theory of Protagoras), nor will anything have perception if it is not perceiving; people will be blind and deaf many times a day.

10. (2) That which is not happening will be incapable of happening, and then we must never say that it will be, so that change is done away with ; what stands will always stand, what sits will always sit.

17. To avoid these consequences we must distinguish potency and actuality.

24. A thing is ‘capable’ of something if there is nothing impossible in its having the actuality of that of which it is said to have the potency.

30. The word ‘actuality’, which we connect with ‘ complete reality ’, refers originally to movement; hence we do not ascribe movement to non-existent things, though we assign to them predicates like ‘ think- able’ because they will sometime actually exist.

244 COMMENTARY

Chapter 3 defends the notion of the possible in distinction from the actual ; chapter 4 defends the notion of the impossible.

1046 a9. ofov ot Meyapixot, Apart from this passage we have no information about Megaric views on possibility earlier than those of Diodorus Cronus (ob. 307 B. c.).

Diodorus in his famous xvptevor. Adyos used the principles that ‘everything that is past is necessarily true ‘(an Aristotelian dictum, E.N. 1139» 4-9, Rhet. 1418* 3-5) and that ‘on what is possible nothing impoattle follows’ (the criterion of the possible stated in this chapter, 10472 24-26) to disprove a third principle ‘ that may be pos- sible which neither is nor will be true’ and to prove instead that ‘nothing is possible which neither is nor will be true’. In this he gives up (presumably in view of Aristotle’s arguments in this chapter, the original Megarian position that ‘nothing is possible which zs not true’, Maier maintains (Archiv f. Gesch. d. Phil. xiii. 31) that Diodorus’ own position is directed against Aristotle’s statement (10478) otf Kove dvvardv tr dv elvan yevéoOar py etvar pyd éceoOar. Butthis cannot beso, These words are not Aristotle’s own statement but occur in his account of his adversary’s position. His own statement is the direct opposite and is identical with that of Diodorus—oix évdéxerar aAnbes eivar 76 elzreiy Ori Suvarov pev Todt, OdK éorat 5é (1047 4). Diodorus, with Aristotle, must have been attacking thinkers who interpreted the possible so widely that the impossible disappeared (1047) 5).

On Diodorus cf. also Ritter and Preller § 295, Zeller ii 1. 269.

The Megarian paradox was probably reached by a very simple piece of reasoning, natural for followers of Parmenides, ‘ A thing is what it is, and therefore cannot be-what-it-is-not’. The answer is equally simple. A thing cannot be what it is not, but it can become what it is not now. ‘Can’ refers always to the future, and it is no contradiction to say that what a thing is not now it can be in the future. ‘Can’ means that some of the conditions of the event are now present, and that if certain others are added the event will take piace

Aristotle’s answer, however, is more elaborate. His method is to point out the disastrous consequences of the Megarian doctrine.

34. For ot7’ answered by épotws 8€ cf. De An. 4rob £8, 2%.

1047* 2. 700 ... mpdyporos must be the form which is the object of the art in question, not as Alexander thinks the matter of the art; e.g. the form of house, not the stones of which it is made.

3-4. Stov... AaBdv; The question is contained in ras AaBav ; it is not necessary to supply was before érav as Bz. suggests.

6. tov Npwraydpou Aeyov, cf. T. 5, 6.

Q. kal ér dv, which has been suspected, is undoubtedly right. Cf, An. Post. 74? 32 eri el tis pH olde viv éxwv Tov Adyor Kat coldpevos, owlopevov TOU Tpdypyaros, pn ertdeAnopeévos, ovde mpoTEpoyv moet (a reminiscence of Pl. Theaet. 163 D).

10. kal kwot is, of course, an afterthought ; the words need not be

©. 3. 1046 29 — 10478 30 245,

suspected, as they are by Bz, For a similar afterthought cf Z. 1028 16 n.

Theaet. 163 D).

10. kal kwot is, of course, an afterthought ; the words need not be

©. 3. 1046 29 — 10478 30 245,

suspected, as they are by Bz, For a similar afterthought cf Z. 1028 16 n.

10-29. In this whole section Aristotle passes from the word dvva- cat to the more colourless word dwvardv. He is using the notion of potentiality, not that of power, and thus confusing the two senses of dvvayus which he proposed to keep distinct. Cf. 1045 35—10464 4n.

11. The reading of AP and Al., ytyvouevov, accords better than the vulgate yevdjevoy with the principle dray evepyy povoy dvvacbau

1g. todto, that which neither is nor will be,

23-24. kat pi... Badtlew, The manuscript reading must be wrong, since it says the same as has already been said in duvarov BadiZew ov pn Badiew. The reading adopted is that proposed by Prof. Joachim. The other emendations which involve less change are in themselves less natural. Once Badiew got corrupted into BadiZorv, the corruption of dv into efva: would naturally follow.

24-26. Considered as a definition of duvardv, this statement would evidently be circular and therefore worthless. But it does not claim to be a definition. It only amounts to saying that before you can pro- nounce anything to be possible, you should satisfy yourself that none of its consequences is impossible. It is a criterion for the determina- tion of possibility in doubtful cases.

26. Suvatoy Kabijcbat Kai evdéxetor KabjoOa, Maier rightly points out (Syl. d. Ar. i, 194) that Waitz’s distinction between dvvarev and evdexduevov as indicating respectively physical and logical possibility is inconsistent with the objectivity of Aristotle’s thought. Aristotle gives the same criterion of the évdeyduevoy in An. Pr. 32° 18, Phys. 2431, as he here gives for the duvardv, and in such passages as An. Pr. 19% 10, 13, 15, 21, An. Post. 74» 38 the two words are used as synonyms, The only difference is that duvardv brings out more clearly than évdeyxo- pevov that the possibility is rooted in a real dvvayis; the passages cited by Waitz as indicating a difference between the two notions (@. 10472 20, 1049 13, 105013, N. 108819, An. Pr. 3158, De Caelo 274» 13, G. A. 736» 7) imply no more difference than this.

30. 7 mpds Thy evtehexeray ouvTiBepévy. From 10504 22 rovvoja évep- yeva Aeyerat Kata 7O Epyov Kal-cuvTeiver mpos THY évTehéxevay, it Appears that strictly speaking évépyeva means activity or actualization while évre- A€xeva means the resulting actuality or perfection. Yet évépyea is not a movement towards something other than itself; this is the difference between it and xivyous. For the most part Aristotle uses the words as exact synonyms, Cf. Bz. dndex 253°46—254%12. Yet in A. 6, 7, where God is viewed as the prime mover of the universe, He is called évepyeta, activity, but in 8. 10747 36, where the immateriality and per- fection of His being is insisted on, He is described as évreA€xera,

Bz. dndex 253°46—254%12. Yet in A. 6, 7, where God is viewed as the prime mover of the universe, He is called évepyeta, activity, but in 8. 10747 36, where the immateriality and per- fection of His being is insisted on, He is described as évreA€xera,

One would expect évredéyea to be derived from an adjective évredexys, AS vovvéexea is from vovvexys. But the existence of the word évredexys in the time of Aristotle is doubtful. In Pl. Legg. 905 £3 the manuscripts read évreAeyds, but Stobaeus gives évdeArcxas, which suits the context much better. In De Gen, ef Corr. 336% 17,

246 COMMENTARY

b 32 évredexds, evredexn, though read by some manuscripts, give no suitable sense. In Theophr.,C. P. ii. 11. 10, Vv. I. 10 evredexes iS unsuitable and Wimmer reads evdedexés. evtehexys Seems to occur first in Philo 2. 587 Mangey. Hirzel, in Rhezn. Mus. 1884. 169- 208, put forward the view that Aristotle-in_one of his dialogues ascribed to the soul, as Plato had done, évdeAdyeva, continuous move- ment, and that he later invented the word évreAéyeca by a modification of évdedéxeua in order to express the change in his view about the soul. Diels, in Zestschr. fiir Vergl. Philol. x\vii. 200-3, success- fully controverts this view, and shows that évreAeyys is a correctly formed equivalent to 76 évreAés eXwv, ‘having perfection’. evredys, though not found at all in Plato, and only once in Aristotle, is not uncommon in Greek of the period. It is not necessary to suppose, as Diels seems to do, that the word évreAexys existed in Aristotle’s time ; he may have formed the abstract noun directly from ro évredés €xov or possibly from évreAGs éxov. The only other compound of évredys seems to be évreAdpuc bos, | Dem.] 1212. 12, ‘receiving pay in full’.

gl. ouvTiWenevn. Diels feels a difficulty about the word, and pro- poses ovvrewopevy, Citing 1050? 23 asa parallel. But it is only in the active voice that Aristotle uses ovrreivew in this sense. ovvrieuevn implies that Aristotle was in the habit of connecting the words évépyeva and évreAéxeva together in his lectures, and such phrases as «is ravrov Baoiréa Kat ripavvov ovveGewev (Pl. Polit. 2768, cf. 259d) form a close enough parallel.

kal émt 74 GAAa. The adda are not as Alexander says ra rexvyrd, for évépyeva has no original reference to natural as opposed to artistic activities. In fact Sivapus, with which it is correlative, is apy) pera- Bodns év dry } GAXo (1046%11), which means art rather than nature. émt ra dAAa refers to the non-kinetic meaning of evep- Eto, which is best expressed i in the sentence deyerau évepyeia . . . Ta pe ds Kivyous mpos Sivapw 74 8 ds odaia mpds twa Ernv 1048b 6-9 ; évépyea, in this sense is not movement as opposed to the power to pro- duce movement, but actuality as opposed to potentiality. Cf 2. V. II 54b 27 évépyeua akwyotas.

32. Soxel, ‘is commonly thought’. Aristotle’s own view is that the divine évépye.a dxurnoias is evepyeva. in the truest sense,

Cf 2. V. II 54b 27 évépyeua akwyotas.

32. Soxel, ‘is commonly thought’. Aristotle’s own view is that the divine évépye.a dxurnoias is evepyeva. in the truest sense,

34. KaTnyopias, ‘ predicates °, not ‘ categories’,

ToOTo dé... EvovTat évepyeiq, We refuse to say that they are

moved, because they do not exist actually; we say that they are

objects of thought or desire, because they zez// exist actually.

Possibility further considered (ch. 4).

10473. It cannot be true to say ‘this is capable of being but will not be’ (this would imply that nothing is incapable of being). .g. For it follows from our definition that if we suppose that to

©. 3. 10477 31 — 4. 104757 247

be which is not but is capable of being, nothing impossible is in- volved. On the view we are attacking something impossible zs involved. ‘The impossible is not the same as the false.

14. It is also clear that if, supposing A is, B must be, then if A is possible, B must be possible; for otherwise there is nothing to prevent its being impossible. Let A be possible. Then (we agreed) nothing impossible is involved in supposing A actually to be; but if so, B must be. But (cf. 1. 17) it was supposed impossible. Let it, then, be impossible. If, then, B is impossible, A is impossible. But B was supposed impossible, therefore A is so.

If A is possible, then, B must be possible, if they were so related that if A is, B must be.

26. And if, supposing A is possible, B must be possible, then if A is, B must be.

1047 3. The traditional text 29n.) dvvare advvatov py akodovbeiv. A comparison of 1047» 9. with the phrase in the Kupuevwv, duvarov “elvae 0 ovr eotw ddrnGes OUT éorou Suggests that Diodorus was borrow- ing Aristotle’s language.

There is, however, no absolute need to depart from the well- attested reading given in the~ text, which derives some support from An. Pr. 32% 24 yrow tava, éorw 7 dxoXovbel ddAHAats.

5. dote ... Siapedyew. ‘So that the things that are incapable of being would on this showing escape us.’ If we can truly say a thing is possible but will never be, anything may at this rate be possible and there will be nothing impossible.

7. & ph Noyrbspevos 7d d8uvartoy etvar may mean either ‘i.e. the sort of man who does not take account of that which is incapable of being’ (L. and S. s.v. AoyiZouar 1. 1), or ‘i.e. the sort of man who does not consider the impossible to exist’ (L. and S. mu. 2). In either case there is a reference to wore Ta ddivara clvar TaiTH Siapedyew. The Greek would be somewhat more natural without 6, but the word is well attested. In any case the clause is parenthetical, and or ov0ev «rX. gives the reason for duvarov .. . petpnOynoecOau.

248 COMMENTARY

10. Tov Keipevwv, What we have laid down in 4 24-26, » 3.

II. cupByoetar S€ ye, sc. ddvvardv TL.

14-26. The same point is proved in a not dissimilar way in Az. Pr, 34° 5-12,

248 COMMENTARY

10. Tov Keipevwv, What we have laid down in 4 24-26, » 3.

II. cupByoetar S€ ye, sc. ddvvardv TL.

14-26. The same point is proved in a not dissimilar way in Az. Pr, 34° 5-12,

15. The reading of EJA?, 8uvarod dvtos-etvoar tod A, clearly ought to be restored here. =

1g. 7d S€ ye B dvd-yxn etvar krd., ‘but ex hypothesi (cf. Il. 14, 15) if A is, B must be. But it was assumed, on the view we are attacking, that though A was possible B might be impossible’,

21. dvdyxy is an emblema from I, 20.

kal 75 A etvat, sc. advvaror.

24. obtws éxdvtwv tav AB, ‘A and B being so related (as they have been shown to be) that if the reality of A implies the reality of B, the possibility of A implies the possibility of B’,

25. otitws, sc. if A is possible.

26. as éré@y, i.e. so related that the reality of A does imply the reality of B,

How potency is acquired, and actualized (ch. 5).

1047 gi. The potencies that come by practice or learning are acquired by previous exercise ; those that are innate or are passive are net.

35. Irrational potencies must result in action and being acted on when the agent and the patient meet in the way appropriate to their potency.

104887. Rational potencies need not so result; since they are potencies for contrary results, if they were actualized necessarily they would produce contrary results at the same time, which is impossible. There must be something else that determines which result is to take place; this will be desire or will. Whichever action the agent decisively desires, that it will do, when it meets the patient in the appropriate way.

15. Its potency is conditional on the patient’s being present and in a certain state. (We need not add ‘and on the absence of external hindrance’; that is implied by the positive conditions of the potency.)

21. The possibility of doing contraries at the same time is excluded, even if one simultaneously wants to do them both.

1047 gr. Aristotle begins the chapter with a threefold classifica- tion of dvvdeis, into those that are inborn, those acquired by habit, and those acquired by learning, The latter two are then (1. 34) coupled together and opposed to the first, Aristotle then (1048 2)

©. 4. 10472 1o— 5. 10484 24 249

reverts to the distinction stated in ch, 2 (chs, 3 and 4 on the Megarian heresy have been something of a digression) between rational and irrational powers, It is clear that he means to identify the inborn powers with the irrational and to include éca: et as well as doa Adyw under the rational, This implies that éos includes a certain amount of Aoyos, or the possession of a plan of action, as indeed it does, whether it be a comparatively mechanical dexterity such as that of rd avdeiy (1. 32) or a moral character (Z. J, ii, 1) that is being acquired by habituation.

32) or a moral character (Z. J, ii, 1) that is being acquired by habituation.

33- Tas pev dvdykn mpoevepynoavtas exew. This apparent paradox is explained in £.V, 1105? 17-18. (1) To become ‘ypapparuxds you must have done ypapatixoy 7, but you need not have done it ypappartikds, i.e. with knowledge. (2) In the moral sphere there is a still greater difference between the activity that precedes the ééis and that which flows from it, In the laiter the agent must act (a) with know- ledge, (4) choosing the action, and. for its own sake, (c) being in a firm and unchangeable condition of mind. The activities which establish the eéis have not any of these characteristics. Aristotle does not, however, show how actions done in ignorance and not from the right motive can establish a ééis of acting with knowledge and from the right motive ; he simply takes it from common experience that they do, A more abstract explanation of the paradox is given in 1049>35—1050# 2. It is characteristic of all yéveous that of what is coming into being some part must have already come to be. Therefore he who is learning must already have some of the knowledge in question ; knowledge expands out of given knowledge.

34. Tas S€ py Toravtas kat tds él tod mdoxew, Alexander has tas 8 dvev oyou duvdpers eire Tod evepyeiv cite Kal Tod wacxeww, and Bz. conjectures that Alexander had a different reading from that in our text. . But his words seem to be a paraphrase. ras avev Adyov duva- pets Tod evepyety is a paraphrase of ras px rovavras and refers to inborn irrational active powers, like the senses, already referred to in ]. 32. ras avev Adyou dvvapes ToD macxew is a paraphrase of tas ext Tod macxewv and refers to inborn irrational passive powers like (to take Alexander’s exampie) the power of wood to be cut. «ai is not, as might be supposed, epexegetic, for the senses are not, in Aristotle’s view, purely passive.

35. Tas em rod mdcxew. Cf. A. rorg* 26n.

1048 g. dote Ga mouoe Ta evaytia, sc. if the power must neces- sarily act whenever agent and patient meet.

16. movety is clearly an emblema from 1. 15.

16-21. Td yop... eva is parenthetical; 910 ovd |. 21 connects with os exer |. 14.

20. It seems better to take taéra (with Alexander) as object rather than (with Bz.) as subject of dpa:petraz. With the latter interpretation daipotr’ av would be rather more natural than ddaipetrau.

24, oUTws, sc. ds eore SVvapus.

250 COMMENTARY

Acruatity (chs. 6-9).

Actuality distinguished from potency and from motion (ch. 6). 1048225. We now pass fromthe potency relative to movement, to actuality ; we shall at the same time discover another kind of potency, which has really been the object of our search.

go. Actuality means the presence of a thing not potentially like that of the Hermes in the block of wood, or of the half-line in the whole, or of knowledge in the man who is not contemplating truth.

35. Our meaning can be seen by induction and analogy; definition must not be always demanded. Actuality is to potency as the waking to the sleeping, &c.

»6. It is related either as movement to potency or as substance to matter.

g. Potency and actuality are different in the case of the infinite, the void, and similar entities from what they are in the case of the seeing, the walking, &c. The infinite does not exist potentially in the sense that it will ever actually have separate existence; it exists potentially only for knowledge. The fact that division does not cease implies that the activity of division exists potentially, but not that the infinite exists separately.

18. Since all actions which have a limit are means, not ends, they are not really actions, or not complete ones; that in which the end is present is an action.

2g. Thus at the same time one is seeing and has seen, is thinking and has thought, is knowing and has known, but it is not true that one at the same time is learning and has learnt, is being cured and has been cured.

28. The latter are movements, the former activities or actualities, Every movement is incomplete.

35. We have now explained the nature of actuality.

1048? 26, ecipytat, sc. in chs. 1-5.

26-27. ti té €or .. . kat moidy tt, cf. Z, 104126 n.

29. 7) GwAGs H TpdToy Tid, i.e. whether we admit all cases of move- - ment or restrict power to cases of movement towards the better (A. 1019* 22) or of good or successful movement (1019 23, 10467 17).

33- 7H 8An, Sc. ypappp, cf. A. rorg@8n, Alexander's 77 duapérpw is probably his interpretation of 77 oAy, not a variant reading.

35. To S€ evepyeia. This, the reading of most manuscripts, is a highly elliptical expression for ‘ the opposite implied in each of these

©. 6. 10488 26 — 10488 261

33- 7H 8An, Sc. ypappp, cf. A. rorg@8n, Alexander's 77 duapérpw is probably his interpretation of 77 oAy, not a variant reading.

35. To S€ evepyeia. This, the reading of most manuscripts, is a highly elliptical expression for ‘ the opposite implied in each of these

©. 6. 10488 26 — 10488 261

cases (sc. the Hermes when carved out of the wood, the half-line when the whole has been bisected, the man of science when actually thinking) exists, we say, actually’. Editors have been, not unnaturally, offended by the ellipse, and various conjectures have been made. (1) Schweg- ler proposes to treat d7Aov .. . cvvopay as parenthetical and omit or in 1. 37 with AP, so that the main clause runs 76 & évepyeiqa ws 70 oikodopodv kth. (2) Bullinger agrees, except that he reads 6 tu for dru. The parenthesis beginning with d7Aov, however, is awkward, and so is (as Cook Wilson points out) the separation of 76 dvddoyov from what is naturally the exegesis of it, viz. ds 7d oixodopodv KtA. (3) Bz. pro- poses to read ro 8’ évepyeia dfAov continuously, omitting dé after dpAov. (4) It has occurred to me that possibly we might read dewpjoar r0d¢ evepyetg, With APT Ald. Cf. 6 Gewped 6 ypapparikds, rode TO dAda adda M. 1084 20, 6d dn Gewpadv évtedrcxeia dv Kal KYpiws emioTdpevos tooe TO A De An, 417% 28.

Finding none of these suggestions thoroughly convincing, I have preferred to keep the vulgate reading 16 8 évepyeia, which by no means goes beyond the limits of Aristotle’s love of compression. Cf. for example De Gen. ef Corr. 319” 33 drav dé pydev bropevyn ov Oarepov mdos 7) cvpBeBnKds ddruws, yéeveois, TO Sé POopd.

36. ob Set mavtds Gpoy {ytetv. A science should at the outset define allits terms (Az. Post. 76" 32), but the same is not true of philosophy. For definition must be by genus and differentia, but philosophy deals with terms that are not included within any one genus but are common to all being as such. Potency or actuality, like being, unity, and good, is one only kar’ dvaAoyiav, and we must be content to grasp the analogy and see the nature of the universal term by studying the instances of it. It is beside the mark to criticize Aristotle for not succeeding in defining terms like potentiality and actuality, or for bringing out the nature of each by referring to the other.

b4. ds todro év TodTw answers tO as otcia mpds Twa vAnV |. 9; as ToUTo ... Tpds TodTO tO ws Kivnots Tpds dvvapw.

It is beside the mark to criticize Aristotle for not succeeding in defining terms like potentiality and actuality, or for bringing out the nature of each by referring to the other.

b4. ds todro év TodTw answers tO as otcia mpds Twa vAnV |. 9; as ToUTo ... Tpds TodTO tO ws Kivnots Tpds dvvapw.

8, Ta pev yap ds Kivnois mpds Sdvapiv. At one time Aristotle in- cludes évépyea in xivnows (het. 1412%9); at another he includes kivnois in évépyera (Phys. 201 31, De An. 4316, LE. NV. 1154? 27); at another he speaks of the two as mutually exclusive (1048? 28). xivyous is said to be an éevepyeia but dredjs (Phys. 201» 31), or to differ from evépyeia because it is dreAns (104829). The variations of language need not disturb us. «ivyows and évépyeia are species of something wider for which Aristotle has no name, and for which he uses now the name of one species, now that of the other. The difference is brought out as well in ll. 18-35 as anywhere in Aristotle. To the test of an évepyela, aS against a xivnows which he there offers, viz. that of an activity we may say that we are doing it and have done it at the same time, he adds in the £7Azcs another, that we cannot be said éevepyeiv quickly or slowly, though we may be quick or slow in passing into the state of évépye (11732). Cf. also K. 1065>14—1066%7, 10663 17-26 and notes.

252 COMMENTARY

g-17. On the infinite cf. PAys. iii, 4-8, esp. 6-8, on the void Phys. iv. 6-9.

Aristotle’s views about the infinite are briefly as follows: Exten- sion is not infinite except in the sense that it is inexhaustible, and it is not inexhaustible except in the sense that it is. inexhaustible by one particular method, that of division. If you take half of it, then a fourth,

: I : I ‘ : and so on, or in general —of it, then — of it, and so on, you will never 4 n

exhaust it. But the same can be said of any finite part of space. If

y wiigh on the other hand you take — of the whole of space, then ~ again; and a n

so on, you wz// exhaust it if you go on long enough. Space is thus dreipov Kata diaipecw but not xara mpdoobecw, infinitely divisible but not infinite (206 7-13). Number on the other hand is deipov xara apooGeow—not in the sense that an infinite number exists actually, but in the sense that a number larger than any hitherto thought of can be thought of; but it is not drepov xara Siaipeow, for in dividing it we come ultimately to the unit, which limits number in the downward direction. And its infinity does not persist but is always coming into being. Time is infinite both card diacpeow and card tpdcGecw, both infinitely divisible and infinite. But its infinity, like that of number, does not persist but is always coming to be.

And its infinity does not persist but is always coming into being. Time is infinite both card diacpeow and card tpdcGecw, both infinitely divisible and infinite. But its infinity, like that of number, does not persist but is always coming to be.

Aristotle does not in the PAysics explicitly make out any parallelism between the infinite and the void: But his doctrine about the void (Phys. 217% 21—» 28) is akin to his doctrine about the infinite ; it is that though we can suppose matter rarer than any assigned matter, there is no space in which there is no matter at all. Cf. his conception of the dense and rare as stated in De Gen. ef Corr. 326” 31—327°1 (taken with what precedes). There are no atoms and interspaces, no pores, only a stuff varying intensively. Aristotle’s view of matter in this re- spect has been compared by Prof. Joachim (ed. of De Gen. ef Corr. 124) to Kant’s view of ‘ das Reale’ in the ‘ Anticipations of Perception’.

Q-I2. GAdws . . . dpwnevw. The construction of the sentence is hardly possible as it stands in the manuscripts, and it may be that after duvdmer kal évepyeca Something like ) brdpyerrd Suvdper Kal evepyeta May have dropped out ; perhaps, however, it is sufficient to insert 7 and treat the following datives as ethical datives used loosely as in the instances quoted in Bz. Jndex 166 26-38, viz. An. Pr. 4329, An. Post, 82> 21, De Resp. 476° 18, G. A. 75512. For a somewhat similar change of construction cf. A. 10248, 9.

15-17. A comparison ofthis with the previous sentence would suggest that the subject is 76 elvar duvder tavryv rhv évépyeav. ‘The infinite does not exist potentially in the sense that it will actually exist as an independent (or objective) entity, but in the sense that it exists poten~ tially for knowledge. For the potential existence of this actuality ensures that the process of division never comes to an end, but not that the infinite exists independently.’ 7d pa) trodetrew Thy dialpeow

©, 6. 1048) 9-22 : 253

would then answer to yrvaoet, 76 etvar Suvdper tavrny Thy évépyeiay to 70 dmetpov Svvdper Eotw, Td xwpiLerOar to ds evepyeia eodpevov yuwpiorov. But a comparison with Phys. 203» 23-25 dia yap 7d év TH vonoer pi trodetrew Kai 6 apiOyos Soxel azreipos elvan Kal Ta pabnparika peyeOn kat 70 €& Tov ovpavod Shows that 7d yy trodetrew THY Siaiperw is viewed as the given fact which yields one conclusion (dodidwor) but not another. Alexander is therefore right in taking 76 wy drodetrew tiv diaipecw as the subject of both clauses; apart from the previous sentence this gives rather a more natural meaning. In any case it seems better to read ro Sd xwpigerfor with Alexander than r¢ dé xwpilec$a. with the manuscripts. The sentence may be rendered thus: ‘ For the fact that the process of dividing never comes to an end ensures that this activity (the activity of dividing without end) always exists potentially, but not that the infinite exists as a finished given fact’,

with the manuscripts. The sentence may be rendered thus: ‘ For the fact that the process of dividing never comes to an end ensures that this activity (the activity of dividing without end) always exists potentially, but not that the infinite exists as a finished given fact’,

18-35. This passage occurs in most of the manuscripts (including A>), and a paraphrase of it occurs in a good manuscript of Alexander (F). It is omitted by EJTT and Bessarion, and is very corrupt in the other manuscripts. But it contains sound Aristotelian doctrine and terminology, and is quite appropriate to the context, and there is no apparent motive for its introduction if it were spurious, so that on the whole it seems safe to treat it as genuine. The text has been vastly improved by Bz. On the distinction between kivyous and evepyeva proper cf. |. 8n., K. 1065» 14—10662 7 n.

18-21. éwet 8€ tOv mpdgewy . . . obx ott Tada mpaéis. mpaéis is first used in a general sense = xivnots, then in its stricter sense of xivnots tela.

18. dy Eat: mépas is best explained by eda dv ore raverOa, |. 26. Aristotle is speaking of actions Which have a limit set to them by the fact that they aim at an end other than themselves, with the attain- ment of which they come to a stop.

IQ. otov 16 icxvativey 4 icxvacia. The manuscript reading ofov rod isxvatvew 4 ioyvacia aito cannot stand. airé cannot be interpreted (as by Bz.) as réAos. Nor is it enough to excise atré (with Christ) as due to dittography ; for icyvacia is not the end of 76 icyvaivew but the same thing. It is named among the kwyoes drede’s in]. 29. The end of 10 icxvaivew is icyvorns or, more remotely, tyiea (A. 1013? 1, Phys.194” 36). I therefore follow Bywater’s suggestion and read ofov 70 ioxvaivew 7 icxvacia (sc. od TéAos eotly GAAG Tov TeEpl TO Tédos).

20. atta 8€ Otay ioxvaivy, ‘the parts of the body themselves, when one is reducing their bulk’. aird is curious, and some corruption may be suspected.

20-21. ottws...kivyots, ‘are in movement in this way, viz. not being already that for the sake of which the movement is’. The construc- tion of imdpyovra is very awkward, and perhaps we should with Fonseca read trapydvrwy. wv would drop out easily by homoioteleuton.

22, 23. Bz.’s emendation ékeivy 7, and his omission of 4, are neces- sary.

23. Bz. has emended this line successfully by the aid of De Sensu

254 COMMENTARY

4462 xal ei Grav Gua dxover kal axyKoe Kal 6Aws aicGavera Kal noOnrat, and Soph. El. 178° 9 dp’ evdéxerat 76 adtd dua rovety Te Kal rerounKevat ; ov. GAG pay dpav yé Te apa Kal éwpaxévar TO adtd Kat Kata TadTo evoexerat.

has emended this line successfully by the aid of De Sensu

254 COMMENTARY

The manuscripts give épa@ GANG Kal dpovel Kal vod Kal vevonxer. Bz, writes dpa dua xal édpaxe, Kal dpovel Kat redpdvyke, kal voet kal vevonker. Fonseca had already conjectured édpaxe for dpove?, but that is much less probable. Bywater, while accepting aya, thinks that the one per- fect tense vevonxey is enough and that the others are ‘understood’. But in the rest of the section Aristotle is careful to supply all the perfects ; and in so corrupt a passage we may allow a greater freedom of emendation than usual. I therefore follow Bz.

32, 33. It seems best to follow EJA? in reading kwetrat kal Kextvqtat

. . kwet Kal kekiynKey, and to put a comma after érepov. ‘It is not the case that a thing at the same time is being moved and has been moved; that which has been moved is different from that which is being moved, and that which has moved from that which is moving.’ érepov is easily understood as the subject of cue? kal Kexivnxev.

35. Tl té éote kat motor, cf. Z. ro4r®6n.

When ts one thing the potency of another ? (ch. 7).

1048 37. When does a thing exist potentially? Earth is not potentially a man till it has become seed, and perhaps not then, just as not everything is capable of being healed, but only the potentially healthy. .

1049? 5. (1) In artistic production one thing is said to be potentially another if (2) when the artist wishes, the actualization takes place if nothing external hinders, and if (4) nothing in the patient hinders ; that is potentially a house, in which there is nothing to prevent its becoming a house, and which needs no addition, subtraction, or change; and so in all cases where the source of the actualization is external.

13. (2) Where the source of the actualization is internal, one thing is potentially another if when nothing external hinders, the actualization takes place by the thing’s own nature. The seed is not yet potentially a man; for it must first fall into a certain material and be changed, as earth must become bronze in order to be potentially a statue.

18. When we say a thing is ‘of’ something else—as the casket is of wood or wooden, and the wood is earthen, and the earth is perhaps ‘of’ something else—that which it is ‘of’ is potentially (in the un- qualified sense) it; thus wood, not earth, is potentially a casket, is the matter of a casket.

©. 6. 1048 32 — 7, 10499 5 255

24. If there is something that is not ‘of’ anything else, it is prime matter, not being a ‘this’. Subjects or substrata differ by being or not being ‘ thises’ ;

29. (1) what underlies accidental attributes like ‘ musical’ is a sub- stance like ‘man’ (and he is called not music but musical, as the casket is called wooden) ;

Subjects or substrata differ by being or not being ‘ thises’ ;

29. (1) what underlies accidental attributes like ‘ musical’ is a sub- stance like ‘man’ (and he is called not music but musical, as the casket is called wooden) ;

34. but (2) where the predicate is a form or ‘this’, the ultimate substratum is matter.

36. Itis natural that the ‘ of’ or derivative form should be used with reference both to matter and to accidental attributes, for both are indefinite.

Bz. argues that the insistence in this chapter on the fact that that which is potentially X is the sum of the proximate, not of the remote conditions of X, marks a difference between dvvapyis and vAy. vAn is primarily applicable to zmpurn vAn, the remote and absolutely un- formed matter ; dvvajus to the proximate conditions. This distinction does not, however, seem to be intended by Aristotle, for in his dis- cussion of matter he has similarly insisted on the importance of finding the proximate matter of a thing (H. 10441). dAy and dvvayis are constantly used without any trace of such a distinction (e. g. 1049* 23, 1o50°15, 627, A. 10712 10, N. 1088 1, 10g2* 3).

1049*2, dtov Hdyn yevytar omeppa. Aristotle is using omépya in what is for him its proper sense, that of the spermatozoon or male ele- ment in question, as opposed to ra. karapnyia, the ova or female element; for |, 14 70 oréppa ovzrw (det yap ev ddAw Czreveiv) Kai peraBdArdev) must refer to the entrance of the male element into the womb. But he is not taking account of his own view that the oé¢pya forms no part of the matter of the offspring but is its formal and efficient cause ; he writes as if he accepted the popular view which treated the male and female elements as uniting to form the matter of the offspring. He is merely illustrating a general principle; and in such cases he often -writes from the point of view of a common theory not his own. Cf. H.

1044) 17 n. ob8€ téTe tows is explained in ll. 14, 15. 3-5. domep oby ... Suvduer. It would be possible to treat this as

the beginning of a long sentence, with the principal clause beginning (irregularly) with kal dowv $y in 1. 13. Aristotle would then be illus- trating natural production (II. 1-3, 13-17) by artificial (Il. 3-12). But awomrep ovv occurs several times elliptically without any principal verb, a principal clause like ovrws éye kai év rovrors being understood. Cf. B. r000%r n, It seems best to take it so here.

5-18. Aristotle first states the dpos in the case of artistic produc- tion, cf. 1. 12 dcwv ewbev 7% dpyn ths yevéeoews. Then in |. 13 he passes to natural products, kal dowy O17 év aitd tO exovTe (Sc. Ti yéveow), which are opposed to 76 dd diavoias. ‘The two types of pro-

256 COMMENTARY

duction, natural and artificial, have already been indicated in Il, 1-3, 3-5. Aristotle is evidently trying to determine the conditions under which A may be said to be potentially B. In ar#ste production A, the matter, has to be acted on by C, the artist, before it can become B, the product. Thus the dpos in this case“is as.follows: A is potenti- ally B when, if C wishes it and nothing external hinders, A becomes B, and when, further, nothing in A hinders (Il. 5-8). This he illustrates in detail in the case of the question ‘ What is potentially a house?’ (Il. 8-11), and finishes by saying that the same formulation applies to all cases of artistic production (ll rr, 12). In ma/ural production there is no artist involved; nature is an dpyi kwycews év aitd 7 ard. Thus here the dpos is simply that A is potentially B when, if nothing external hinders, A will of itself become B (ll. 13, 14). Thus the male seed is not potentially a human being, for it has first to enter the womb and be transformed; but the «ina thus produced is potentially a human being.

Q. TovTw kat ty UAy. xa is clearly explicative.

10. For ovd€ where pde would be expected cf, I. 1053 18 n.

13. kat dow 8} év aitG TO exovte (sc. radra Suvdper A€yerar etvar), Goa KTA.

14-15. Set yap... peraBddder, Alexander says de? yap év dhAw.. weve Kal petaBadAew. meoeiv may be simply Alexander’s interpreta- tion, but it is difficult to suppose that some such verb can be ‘ under- stood’ with év d\Aw, and accordingly wecety or some similar word should be inserted in the text. Cf. ris pjrpas mpds 0 rime TO o7réppa, HT, A. 583° 22.

Alexander takes 76 oréppa to be the seed of plants, but from I]. 1-3 it appears that Aristotle has in view the male element in animal genera- tion.

18-22. Aristotle now proceeds to give a linguistic test of the poten- tial matter of a thing. If we say_y is a-en, x is the proximate matter of y. The parenthetical example otov ... éxeivwov disturbs the con- struction of the sentence, so that we get as subject éxeivo, which does not refer to the same thing as 6, and we have éorw instead of etvat.

1g. éxetvivov, cf Z. 1033% 5-23.

20-21. wddw...ékeivivov. The construction is loose but intelligible. ‘ Again, earth will illustrate our point if it is similarly not something else but o/something else (not x but «-e7),’

24-27. This is the nearest approach in Aristotle to the use of rpary vAn in the sense of entirely formless matter. But even here it does not mean that, but matter with the minimum of form. If there is no material, x, out of which fire is made, so that it can be called x-en, then fire is first matter, but it will still have the definite character of fire. Cf. A. 101598 n.

But even here it does not mean that, but matter with the minimum of form. If there is no material, x, out of which fire is made, so that it can be called x-en, then fire is first matter, but it will still have the definite character of fire. Cf. A. 101598 n.

27. ot ré8e tt odca. The sentence must be interpreted in the light of what follows in ll. 27-36. Aristotle there distinguishes the case in which the substratum is a ‘this’ from that in which it is not. The substratum of a zdfos is a ‘this’ or substance; the substratum of

©. 7. 104979 — 1049? 1 254

a substance is matter. An opposition is therefore wanted between tAy and 76d tu Or ovata, and we should read od réd€ Tt odaoa OF od TddE TL kal ovata.

28. Apelt must be right in reading xa’ of. Alexander, who reads kaGoXov, has no reasonable explanation to give of it, and Bz, says ‘76 kafoXov cur h. 1. comparetur cum substrato, equidem non intelligo’, With a6’ ob we get a good sense—‘ the subject or substratum (kad ex- plicative) differs in different cases by being or not being a this’. For dvadéper in this sense with a singular subject cf. A. 1016424, Meteor. 34124. xaddov was probably introduced by a copyist who thought that ‘the subject and the substratum differ’ must mean that they differ from one another (which would be absurd). But Aristotle would almost certainly have expressed that by dvadéper rod troxeypevov. I have found only two instances in Aristotle of the things which are said to differ being coupled by kai (An. Pr. 57% 33, An. Post. 77% 14). The distinction which is drawn in ]]. 29-36 occurs also in Z. 1038? 5, H. 10449, and is there expressed as a difference not between the substratum and something else but between two kinds of substratum. What precedes xat 7d izoxeiyevov, then, must be a synonym of 70 broxeipevoy, and 7d Ka6’ od is exactly what we want. The same error has been made by the manuscripts in I. 1007* 34 and in Sext. Emp. 721, 2 (Bekker).

The difference which Aristotle here points out is that between two levels at which the cleavage between substratum and attributes may be made. You may distinguish accidental attributes from their subject, and in this case the subject is a substratum containing certain essential characteristics ; or again you may distinguish the essential charac- teristics from the substratum to which they belong, and in this case the substratum is bare unqualified matter.

35. For the description of the form as 168 tu cf. A. t017) 25 n.

36- 2. kat dp0Gs ...ddpiota. Aristotle is struck by the fact that we not only (1), if A is the matter of B, describe B by an adjective derived from the name of A, but also (2), if C is an accidental attri- bute of D, describe D by an adjective derived (as he suggests) from the name of C. This coincidence is, he thinks, natural, because A, dAn, and C, a6, are both indefinite.

This coincidence is, he thinks, natural, because A, dAn, and C, a6, are both indefinite.

Aristotle often, as here, says that we describe things rapwvvpws by words derived from the names of qualities. Cf. Ca¢. 1812, 613, 10% 28, Zop. 111° 33-4. He can hardly have thought that the word Aevxdv was derived from the word Aevkdrns. What he means rather is that when we say a man is white we are not saying that he is a certain entity, but that he is qualified by the possession of a certain entity, whiteness. ‘ White’, though linguistically simpler and earlier than ‘ whiteness ’, stands for a more complex meaning, viz. ‘ qualified by whiteness ’, just as ‘ wooden’ stands for a more complex meaning than ‘wood’.

by. What is the meaning of saying that both vAy and wd6y are in- definite? Matter is 76 ddpucrov piv dpicOjvar Kal peracyeiy 29-32, and even (2) does not exactly corre- spond to it. For (2) could only show that the potentiality needs, for its actuahzation, another actuality, whereas what Aristotle claims in ll. 29-32 is that it presupposes, as a condition of its exzstence, another actuality. At first sight it looks as if there were the same confusion as seems to exist at ]. 24. But Aristotle’s meaning is that though a bare dvvapus of building may exist in a man before he has done any building, such a man is not an oixodduos. Being an oikoddpos is not a bare dvvayus but a egis, and this presupposes evepyeto.. ;

35- Add introduces Aristotle’s answer to the sophistical objection, and should, as Bz. saw, have a full stop before it.

Being an oikoddpos is not a bare dvvayus but a egis, and this presupposes evepyeto.. ;

35- Add introduces Aristotle’s answer to the sophistical objection, and should, as Bz. saw, have a full stop before it.

36. ev tots wept Kwyoews. For this asa mode of reference to the last half of the Physzcs, cf. De Caelo 272° 30, 275 21, 299% 10, De Gen. et Corr. 318% 3, De Sensu 44519. The particular reference here is to vi. 6. The proof there is as follows: ‘That which moves must move in every part of the time which is the immediate or proper time of the movement. For if it moved only in some part of the time, that part would be the immediate or proper time of the move- ment. Now if a thing has moved a certain distance in a certain time, a thing which began to move at the same time and moved at the same speed must have moved half the distance in half the time. ‘Therefore the original thing must have moved half the distance in half the time. There- fore that which is moving must have moved. Further (an alternative proof, 237% 3-11) it must have moved in each part of the time during which it has been moving. Therefore, since time is infinitely divisible, everything that is changing must have undergone an infinite number of changes. Further (an alternative proof, 2374 11-17) that which changes continuously must either change or have changed év érwodv (237214: one must not say ‘in each part of the time’, for the moment, which Aristotle proceeds to speak about, is not a part but a section (roy) of the time). Now it cannot change ina moment. Therefore it must have changed at each moment, and must therefore have undergone an infinite number of changes, sincé there is an infinite number of moments in anytime’. So far Aristotle has said that the thing which is moving must have moved, not, what he says in the present passage, that a part of it must have moved. But he goes on to draw this distinction in the case of yéveois, though not of kivyows generally (237>11; the passage 2372 17— 9 may be omitted). ‘A house which is coming into being has not already come into being; but its foundations have.’ The distinction drawn in the Physics seems to be due to an am- biguity in the word yéyove. It would be absurd to say that what is coming into being must have come into being; and Aristotle there- fore contents himself with saying that a part of it must have come into being. But what really answers to the phrase ‘what is moving must have moved’ is ‘what is coming into being must have Jdcen coming into being’ (for ‘has come into being’ implies a completion

262 COMMENTARY

which ‘has moved’ does not), and here no distinction between part and whole need be introduced. Aristotle in the present passage unnecessarily introduces in the case of movement the distinction which in the Physics is drawn only in the case of becoming.

Aristotle in the present passage unnecessarily introduces in the case of movement the distinction which in the Physics is drawn only in the case of becoming.

Aristotle’s application here of the thesis established in the Physics is as follows: It will follow that if an émurrypn is coming into being, part of it must have already come into being. Thus the sophistical objection, that if the Suvames pera Adyou are acquired by évépyea a man who has not yet acquired an art must yet be supposed capable of acting artistically, is met by the answer that he has the art to some extent. In other words the faculty is not produced by actuality but transformed into actuality by it. This brings the fact in question under the general principle é« rod duvdme dvros ylyverae 76 evepyela. Ov bd évepyeia dvros (1. 24), but it really gives up what Aris- totle is trying to prove, that actuality precedes potentiality in time. There is the same confusion which we have observed in the note on Il. 24-25.

1050* 4-b 2. What Aristotle tries to prove in this section is that actuality is prior to potentiality in substance, i.e. is more real or more substantial. ‘The general principle on which he bases his proof is that what is posterior in generation is prior in form and reality. More definitely, actuality is prior in reality because the actually existent has reached its form while the potentially existent has not. The potentially existent or undeveloped has features unintelligible in themselves, which can be understood only as the prophecy of attri- butes which will be found in it when developed. It still lacks part of its nature; it is matter without form, and therefore not primary substance.

4. At first sight it seems inconsistent to maintain (1) that actuality is prior to potentiality in genesis (1. 3), (2) that it is prior in substance because it is posterior in genesis (1. 4). But with the qualifications with which Aristotle makes these statements (in the whole context) they are quite compatible.

7-10. The reasoning is somewhat complicated:

(1) The rédos of a yryvopevor is its dpxy, its origin (that this is the underlying meaning of ém dpynv Badier.. . kat TédAos, ‘moves to an &pxn Which is its 7éXos’, is shown by the fact that Aristotle subjoins a proof that the rédos is the dpyy, viz.:

The ob évexa is the apy7.

The réAos is the ob evexa).

(2) The évépyea is the réAos.

Therefore (3) the évépyea is the dpyy, and therefore prior to the dvvapus.

14. 7% dtu oddev Sdovrar Oewpety is excessively difficult, and one would be tempted to regard it as a gloss (so Diels, according to the editor of Bz.’s translation), if one saw what the gloss meant. Alexander's inter- pretation implies that he had these words, except 6rv, of which his in- terpretation (as distinct from the lemma) has no trace. This being so,

©. 8. 10507 4-19 263

Alexander's inter- pretation implies that he had these words, except 6rv, of which his in- terpretation (as distinct from the lemma) has no trace. This being so,

©. 8. 10507 4-19 263

it is possible (1) that we should omit dru as an intruder which has come in from the next line, and take 7 as equivalent to «i d¢ py (cf. Z. 1041 23, #. NW. 117017). For the intrusion of 6m cf. H. 1043° 34 n., Probl, 962°2. ‘They are not speculating, except in a qualified sense of that word’ (speculating in the proper sense means speculating for the sake of doing so, or of reaching the truth (cf. a. 993” 20, Pol. 1325 20)); ‘otherwise (if they are speculating in the proper sense) they have no eed to speculate’ (sc. for the sake of acquiring ewpyrixy, because in that case they must already have it). (2) Alternatively we might read with E ovx 7 (odxé has replaced ody 7 in good manuscriptsin Az, Post. 84> 8, #. VV. 1161* 1) and interpret ‘and these are said to speculate in order to get the speculative faculty, not in so far as they speculate but only in so far as they do so in a parti- cular way, or because they have no craving to speculate (for its own sake)’. Or (3) we might, besides reading ody 7, read 6 7 or dre for ort. ‘And these speculate in order to get the speculative faculty, not in so far as they speculate, but only in so far as they speculate in a parti- cular way, or about subjects about which’ (or ‘at a time at which’) ‘they have no craving to speculate,’

Apelt’s dA 7) dd¢, dre od dvvavrar Oewpety is not very probable.

16-17. dpotws Sé... Tédos. ‘And so too in all other cases, even those in which the end is a movement’. Aristotle has said that matter exists potentially just because in certain circumstances it will proceed into its formed state (efSos). But, he now says, the principle that potentiality exists only in relation to a possible realization is equally true when there is no matter to be impressed with a form, no material object to be produced, but the end is a movement. The dis- tinction between these two cases (zroéyovs and mpagis) runs through the whole passage 2 15-} 2,

18. évepyodvta, sc. tov pabyryv.

1g. kal % pvots dpotws. Aristotle is thinking of such things as sight (I. 24). Nature is content not when it has produced creatures capable of sight but when it has exhibited them in full exercise of the activity. ;

évepyodvta, sc. tov pabyryv.

6 Navowvos éorai “Eppyjs. Alexander tells us that Pauson made a Hermes about which it was hard to say whether it was carved in the ordinary way on the surface of a stone, or enclosed in a transparent substance. ‘How could it be “ without”, when the surface looked perfectly smooth like that of a mirror, or “ within”, when the surface showed no trace of joinings?’ This account is, however, certainly wrong. In the first place Pauson was not a sculptor but a painter, and in the second place the kind of sculpture Alexander mentions is not known and is most improbable. Pauson was apparently ad- dicted to trick pictures. Cf. the story told by Ps.-Luc. (Demosth. Encom. 24), Aelian (Var. Hist. xiv. 15), and Plutarch (de Pythiae Orac. 5. 3968) of his picture of a horse running, which by being turned upside down was made to represent a horse rolling on its back. Professor Percy Gardner suggests that the Hermes may have been

264 COMMENTARY

a tricky painting, which deceived the eye somewhat in the manner of those in the Wiertz Gallery at Brussels, which stand out, apparently, in high relief from the canvas.

20. ci gow 4 egw, i.e. whether the knowledge has been absorbed by the pupil or has remained ‘outside’ him. ~~~

22-23. 8d... evtedexerav. Because the épyov is the réAos (1. 21), the word évépyeia, which is derived from épyov, tends to mean the same as évreAdyeua. Cf. 1047% 30 n.

27. év0a pév refers to cases like seeing, ev0a 8€ to cases like building.

28-29. 7 yap oikoddpnats...oixia gives the justification for évOa de paAXov tédos THs Suvdpeds eorw. The actuality is more of an end than the potentiality, for it resides in the épyov, and comes into being, and exists, simultaneously with the épyov, which is the end in the strict sense; while the potentiality does not reside in the épyov, exists before the épyov, and can exist after the épyov has perished.

4 yap oixoddpnors év TO oikodopoupévw. The point of éy in this and the following lines is this: an activity like building, or like seeing, is evidently not a troxeipevor, but év troKepevy ; it requires a substratum. Now a zotyous like building is the actuality both of the builder and of the house (Phys. 2024 13-16), and resides, ina sense, in both. But that in which it most properly and directly resides is that which exactly answers to it, which comes into being with it and exists simultaneously with it. This is obviously the house rather than the builder. In the case of a mpaégis like seeing, on the other hand (1. 34), there is no ee épyov, and the actuality must be said to reside in the évepyody itself.

This is obviously the house rather than the builder. In the case of a mpaégis like seeing, on the other hand (1. 34), there is no ee épyov, and the actuality must be said to reside in the évepyody itself.

ba. The reference to eidapovia is a digression. Aristotle points out, as against a materialistic view, that happiness is in the soul, is an activity of it, and therefore does not depend primarily on the goods of the body, nor on external goods (cf. Z. JV. 1098» 12-22).

2-3. dote davepdv ... éotv. This follows not from what directly precedes but from the whole section # 4-2. For the language cf. os san 05

4. dotep eimopev, 1049>17-29. That passage, however, contained no explicit reference to the grzmum movens. For the doctrine cf. A. 6, 4.

6. adAd phy Kai Kupiwrépws, sc. mpdrepov TH ovoia evépyera Suvdpmews (I. 3). The new argument is:—

The eternal is prior in substance to the perishable (assumed here, but cf. B. 9995, Z. 1032 30, A. 6, 7).

Eternal things exist actually, perishable things potentially (proved in Jl. 8-18; 1, 18—10512 state corollaries of this, which form a digression).

Therefore the actual is prior to the potential.

Therefore (on the principle that what belongs to the better is better than what belongs to the worse, Zop. 116” 12) activity is prior to potentiality.

GT, ALBERT’S BOLL ECE | /22

©. 8. 1050? 20 — 1050? 30 dee

It is not obvious why this is priority 77 odcéa in a more proper sense (xvpiwrépws) than those already mentioned. But in A. ro1g? 11 Aristotle has said that all the senses of prior and posterior may be reduced to that which is stated in ro19*2; ‘those things are prior in nature and substance which can exist without others while the others cannot exist without them’. Now the eternal can exist without the perishable and the perishable cannot exist without the eternal, and though Aristotle does not explicitly put the matter in this way (ex- cept incidentally in 1. 19), it seems that this is the ‘stricter’ sense of ‘prior in substance’ which he has in mind.

7. €or 8 obey Suvduer atSiov. The most obvious rendering would be ‘nothing is potentially eternal’, but from |. 16 it appears that didov goes closely with ot6év, ‘nothing eternal exists potentially’. So Al. 591. 20.

8. maca Suvapis dpa tis dvtipdceds éotw. It is the peculiarity of rational faculties to be able to produce either of two confraries (10465); a knowledge of medicine enables a man either to cure or to kill. But all potentialities are potentialities for either of two contradictory results. ‘That which can under certain circumstances become or do something can also, if those circumstances be absent, not become or do it.

Q-II. Td pev... od0evi is merely preparatory; 16 Suvatdv .. . évep- yetv is the emphatic clause.

11. On the difference between 8uvardy and évdexduevov cf. 1047? 26 n.

Q-II. Td pev... od0evi is merely preparatory; 16 Suvatdv .. . évep- yetv is the emphatic clause.

11. On the difference between 8uvardy and évdexduevov cf. 1047? 26 n.

14. $9aptév, dwAds 7 TodTo adtd & AdyeTar evBéxeoOar ph eivar. ‘ Perishable either in the unqualified sense or in that precise respect in which it is said to be capable of not being.’ A thing is ‘ perishable’ if it can lose its essence ; ‘locally perishable’ if it can change its place; ‘quantitatively perishable’ if it can change its size; ‘ qualitatively perishable’ if it can change its quality.

IQ. Kaito tadta mpdta is the minor premise of the syllogism:

Things existing of necessity do not exist potentially.

The primary things are the things that exist of necessity.

(Therefore the primary things do not exist potentially.

Therefore actuality is prior to potentiality.)

21. obk €or. ... mot. Ie. it is necessarily moved, but while moving from A to B it may be capable of moving from B to C.

23. & hoBodvrar ot wept pucews. Alexander says the reference is to Empedocles, and this is confirmed by De Caelo 284% 24 otre di) Totrov Tov tTpdrov troAnrTéov, ote Sia Tiv Sivnow OdtToves TvyxavovTa (Tov ovpavov) hopas Tis oikeias poris ere cdlecbar tocodrov xpdvov, Kabdzrep *Byredoxdyjs pyoiv. Aristotle compares Empedocles’ view to the traditional belief in the necessity of an Atlas to hold up the heavens. There is nothing about this in the remaining fragments of Empe- docles.

30. KaQ aird...xivqow. It is doubtful whether this refers to the natural movement of fire upwards, and of earth downwards, or to the

ie ©

266 COMMENTARY

constant tendency of the elements to change into one another, by virtue of which Aristotle says (De Gen. et Corr. 337% 1-7) they imitate the circular movement of the heavenly bodies.

30-33. Aristotle repeats here the general statement (cf. 1. 8) that all potentialities are potentialities for either of two contradictories. He then subdivides. (1) Things which in virtue of a Aéyos can act in one way can also act in the contrary way (2 68/ = ‘to move not thus’, not ‘not to move thus’). (2) Irrational potentialities are potentiali- ties for either of two contradictories according as they are present or not.

Thus under (2) Aristotle is not referring to the sense explained above (ll. 8-12) in which potentialities are potentialities for either of two contradictories according as certain conditions are present or not (Alexander interprets it so, but the Greek will not bear this interpre- tation), but is saying that they are potentialities for either of two con- tradictory results according as they themselves are present or not. This at first sight seems pointless. But in PAys. 251231 Aristotle says that there is something in physical things akin to the con- trary actualizations of a ‘rational power’, 7d yap wWuxpdv Oeppatver otpapév mws kat dmeAOov. That which is cold is capable of be- coming hot, and shen of heating other things. This seems to be the meaning here.

251231 Aristotle says that there is something in physical things akin to the con- trary actualizations of a ‘rational power’, 7d yap wWuxpdv Oeppatver otpapév mws kat dmeAOov. That which is cold is capable of be- coming hot, and shen of heating other things. This seems to be the meaning here.

30. ai dé Gddar Suvdpers, because Aristotle has been speaking of things which are in some respect tainted with dvvapus, e. g.in respect of their position in space (cf. Il. 17, 18), though in other respects existing in actuality.

gl. é§ dv Sidpiotar. The statement is a general one about ai aAdau dvvdpes aca, so that the reference is probably not to the distinction of rational from irrational powers as being rév évavtiwy ai avrat (1046” 4, 104848), but to the discussion of potentialities in ro50? 8-12.

35. ot év Tots Adyots, ‘the people who occupy themselves with verbal discussions’. Cf. A, 987» 31 n.

36—1051° 2. atts émorypy is the faculty of knowledge itself, apart from particular manifestations, and as such inferior to the activity of knowledge.

I05I° 3. Kal Suvdpews Kal mdons dpxfs petaBAntiis, cf. 1049 6.

Miscellaneous remarks about potency and actuality (ch. 9).

105124. A good actuality is better than the good potency. For capacity for one thing is always capacity for the opposite, and is so at the same time (though the opposites cannot exist at the same time), and therefore is both good and bad, or neither.

@. 8. 1050 30— 9. 1051%15 264

15. Similarly a bad actuality is worse than the potency, and posterior to it, and therefore evil cannot be an actual substance existing apart from bad things. Therefore among eternal things there is nothing evil,

21, Geometrical relations are discovered by actualization, i.e. by dividing the given figures by lines that before existed potentially. Cf. the proof that the angles of a triangle = two right angles, or that the angle in a semicircle is a right angle. What exists potentially is dis- covered by being actualized. The reason is that the geometer’s thinking is an actuality. Thus potency comes from actuality (and therefore the knowledge comes by action), though the actuality is later in genesis than its own potency.

What exists potentially is dis- covered by being actualized. The reason is that the geometer’s thinking is an actuality. Thus potency comes from actuality (and therefore the knowledge comes by action), though the actuality is later in genesis than its own potency.

IO51° 5. doa yap Kata 7d Sdvac0ar Adyerar, TavTov éotr Suvardv Ta- vavtia, Aristotle’s strict doctrine seems to be that while rational duvders Can produce contrary results, irrational dvvayes are only duvdpets of contradictories, (1) in the sense that they may either be actualized or not (10508 n.), and (2) in the sense that their presence leads to one result and their absence to the contradictory result (1050? 33 and note on 1050? 30-33). He here says all duvdpers are duvdpeus Of contraries. ‘The apparent contradiction between the present passage and 10465, 10488 is due to the fact that in the former passages he was thinking of duvdmes Kara THY Kivnow, positive powers or forces, while here he is thinking of mere potentialities. For the difference cf. 1045” 35-1046% 4n. That which can produce health (e. g. wholesome food) cannot produce sickness, but that which can be healthy can also be sick.

7. Bz.’s conjecture in the Odservaizones, kat rs vooelv (sc. Sivacbax Aeyopevov), is obviously better than his actual reading, cat vooeiv.

II, 12. ‘But contraries cannot belong to a thing at the same time, and (therefore) the actualizations also cannot belong to it at the same time.’ | 13-15. dot dvdyxn ...Bedtiwy. The reasoning is not very clearly expressed but seems to be as follows: ‘To be capable of A is to be also capable of its contrary B. Therefore, while what is good (in the sphere of a particular dvvapus and the corresponding évépyevor) must be one of the contrary évépyeo, the dvvayis must be said either to be both good and bad or to be neither ; therefore the good actuality must be better than the dvvayis’. rtovtwv Odrepov 13-22) is quite different from Euclid’s. (2) Aristotle is not using technical language (cf. dvjjxro |. 25); dp67 is used in its ordinary sense of ‘upright’. The translation is ‘ the line set up- right on the base from the middle of the base’.

rtovtwv Odrepov 13-22) is quite different from Euclid’s. (2) Aristotle is not using technical language (cf. dvjjxro |. 25); dp67 is used in its ordinary sense of ‘upright’. The translation is ‘ the line set up- right on the base from the middle of the base’.

28. iSdvre Sidov' 7G éxetvo eidérr. - ‘ The proof is evident, when he sees the figure, to him who knows the former proposition.’ What is ‘the former proposition’? (a) Alexander says it is ‘ that if the three straight lines are equal, the angle in the semicircle will be proved to be right’. But this would amount to saying ‘if Z is JZ, then that JV is P is clear to him who knows that if Z is JZ, Vis P’, which is an im- probably clumsy way of stating a very simple thought. (0) ékeivo may be simply éru toa tpeis, 4 Te Baous S00 Kal 7 éx péecov érictabeioa 6p0y. But (c) éxeivo would naturally refer to something more remote. It refers in fact to the proposition stated in ll. 24-26, that the angles of a triangle = two right angles. Cf. An. Post. 71219 dru pev yap av tplywvov exer Svatv dpbais icas, mpoyder dry dé Téd€ 76 ev TO HyuKvKAlp tplywvov éorw, dpa. eraydpevos éyvaopurer.

29-33. The interpretation of this passage is complicated by two

242 COMMENTARY

questions of reading. (1) In ]. 30 EJ and apparently Alexander (dywv 597- 14, dyerat 597. 16) read dydmeva where the other manu- scripts have dvayoueva. Now a philosopher might be said ra duvdper évra eis évépyeav dvdyew (‘refer back’) when he shows as Aristotle does here that the actuality is the przzs of the potentiality. Cf. 2. lV. 1170* 16 7d Se Liv Spiovrar rots Cwors dvvaper aicOjnoews, avOpwrois & aicbjoews 7) vonoews’ 7 Se Svvayus cis THY évépyeav avdyetar, TO Be Kipuov év TH evepyeia’ Eouxe O1) TO Chv elvar Kupiws 76 aicOdverOar 7) voeiv. I113°5 waverau yap exaotos Lyrav wis mpage, Stay eis abrov dvaydyn Thy apxjv. 19 et de radra paiverar Kal px exomev cis GAAaS apxas dvayayeiv mapa Tas ev qpiv, Gv Kal ai dpxat ev Huiv, Kal avra. ed’ Hutv kat éxovova. But the operation here described is that of the mathema- tictan ; the sense required is ‘ the constructions which exist potentially are discovered by being actualized’ (perducta ad actum potentia, Bz.), and this sense demands dydmeva. Cf. Z. NM. 1153°12 rav els tHv Tedeiwow ayomevov THS PITEWS.

But the operation here described is that of the mathema- tictan ; the sense required is ‘ the constructions which exist potentially are discovered by being actualized’ (perducta ad actum potentia, Bz.), and this sense demands dydmeva. Cf. Z. NM. 1153°12 rav els tHv Tedeiwow ayomevov THS PITEWS.

(2) The manuscript reading airiov 8& ori vonow 4 évépyera is diffi- cult. ‘The potentially existing constructions are discovered by being brought into actuality; the reason is that the actuality is an act of thought.’ This identifies the actuality of the figure with the actuality of thought, while ll. 32, 33 seem to distinguish them. Aristotle has committed himself to the view that vdénous actualizes the figures, but it is doubtful whether he would identify the actuality of the figures with the vonots. True, ro voovpevov and 6 voids are identical in the case of dca ph tAnv exer (A. 107573, cf. De An. 43073). But mathematical objects do contain vA, even if it be vont vAyn (Z. 103611, » 35, K. 105915). They are not the pure forms which alone Aristotle identifies with the apprehension of them.

Nor does the manuscript reading seem to be that of Alexander, though it is impossible to say exactly what lies behind his words: gavepdv dpa ote Suvdper dvta Kal évepyyjoas rept ata 6 vods ebpicketar’ adtos yap eorw 6 aitis 6 dywv atta eis evepyeay. voyows 7 evepyera may have arisen from 7 voyous evéepyeia (cf. A. 10726 16), which goes well with what precedes and what follows: ‘the potentially existing constructions are discovered by being actualized; and the explanation is that the geometer’s thinking is an actuality, so that the potentiality pro- ceeds from an actuality, and therefore it is by doing that people come to know’ (or ‘by making constructions that people come to know them’).

Aristotle, then, brings the case under his general rule é« rod duvaet dvros yiyverar TO evepyeia dv bd evepyeia dvros (1049 24); the poten- tial constructions are actualized by the actuality of thought. And as, before, Aristotle drew from the necessity of an actuality for the actualization of a potentiality the inference that actuality is prior to potentiality (1049" 23), so he does here in the words dor’ é evepyeias » Svvapus (unless airiov... évépyea is parenthetical and ectpicxerat, not yiyvera, is to be understood with éé évepyeias 4 Svvayus). atriov dé éore vonows H évepye’a may also be suggested ; this comes nearer to

gT. ALBERT'S COLLEGE LIBRARY

@. 9. 10518 32-33 273

Alexander’s paraphrase. For confusion between éoré and dr due to tachygraphy cf. Bast 810.

atriov dé éore vonows H évepye’a may also be suggested ; this comes nearer to

gT. ALBERT'S COLLEGE LIBRARY

@. 9. 10518 32-33 273

Alexander’s paraphrase. For confusion between éoré and dr due to tachygraphy cf. Bast 810.

32-33. Aristotle has said that potentiality comes from actuality ; he now guards against misinterpretation. ‘But it is only in a sense that actuality is prior to potentiality, for the individual actuality is posterior in generation to the corresponding individual potentiality” Cf. 104919. In his view, the potentiality of the construction presupposes the activity of thought but precedes the actuality of the construction. For a similar elliptical use of ydp cf. Zop. 11927, 122> 39, De An, 407% 23, 409224. The emendation of]. 30 gives point to this clause, which Bz. found unintelligible.

We are now in a position to see the object of the whole passage ll. 21-33. Aristotle’s purpose is to enforce his doctrine of the priority of actuality by two considerations with regard to 7a wabnparicd. (1) It is only by being actualized that they are known. In their case therefore, as in all others (1049 17), actuality is prior to potentiality tH yvdoe. And (2), as in all other cases (1049> 17—1050® 3), though their potentiality precedes their actuality in time, it presupposes another actuality, that of apprehension.

The passage is of great importance because it emphasizes the significance of the intuition of the construction for the understanding of the proof (idovru d7Aor, ll. 26, 28). It thus corrects Aristotle’s ten- dency in the Organon to treat mathematical proof as if it were simply a process of deducing conclusions syllogistically from definitions and trobéces, and anticipates Kant’s doctrine of the synthetic nature of mathematical procedure. But it cannot be said that Aristotle works this out clearly.

The nature of truth (ch. 10). ”

1051* 34. ‘Being’ and ‘ not being’ are used with reference (1) to the categories, (2) to potency and actuality, (3) to truth and falsity. Truth means thinking that to be divided or united which is divided or united, respectively; error means being in a state contrary to the facts.

b5. When is truth present? You are not white because we truly think you are, but v7ce versa.

g. (1) Some things are always united, others always divided, others may be either. Being is being-united ; not being is not-being-united. About things which may be either united or divided the same opinion is at different times false and true; not so with regard to things that must be as they are.

17. (2) In the case of incomposites what is being and truth? For them, being is not being-united, and truth cannot be what it was in the case of composites.

2573.2 T

274 COMMENTARY

17. (2) In the case of incomposites what is being and truth? For them, being is not being-united, and truth cannot be what it was in the case of composites.

2573.2 T

274 COMMENTARY

22, (a) Truth in this case is contact and assertion (as distinct from affirmation). Ignorance can only mean in this case non-contact ; error is not possible (except per acczdens) regarding what a thing is or an incomposite substance. Such substances all exist actually, not potentially ; otherwise they would have come into being and perished, but there is nothing out of which being itself can have come to be.

30. About all things that are essences and actualities, then, we cannot err; either we know them or we do not. But we may inquire what they are, whether they are such-and-such.

33. (2) The Jeng which answers to truth does not in this case mean being united; if the thing exists at all it exists in a certain way, Truth means knowing such objects; no error about them is possible, but only ignorance—not, however, ignorance analogous to blindness, which would be a complete absence of the knowing faculty.

1052* 4, (Return to(r)). Regarding the unchangeable, if we believe it to be unchangeable, we cannot mistakenly suppose that it some- times has a certain attribute and sometimes not; but we may suppose one member of a class to have an attribute and another not. About a single member we cannot make even this mistake ; whether we are right or wrong, it is implied that the facts are eternal.

This chapter, dealing with truth and falsity, has little to do with the rest of book @, which treats of potency and actuality. _Schwegler and Christ therefore treat it as the work of an editor. Bz. and Bullinger point out that in view of the enumeration of the senses of ‘ being’ in A. 7 it is only natural that after discussing the chief category, sub- stance, and the distinction of potency and actuality, Aristotle should go on to discuss truth and falsity ; and that the chapter is specially in place here because ch. 8 has introduced us to the simple and eternal substances which are évépyevau avev Suvdjews, and are now described as the objects with which one kind of truth is concerned (1051 27), Jaeger thinks that the chapter is by Aristotle, but was inserted here simply because there was some room at the end of the roll on which Z-®. 9 was written. Between this view and that of Bz. it is difficult to decide ; that the chapter is the work of Aristotle there is no reason to doubt; E. 1027428 has prepared us to find such a discussion in the Metaphysics.

1051? 34-2. For the classification cf. A. 7, E. 10262 33-? 2.

85. To 8é KaTd Sdvayw 7 evépyerav toUTwy 7} Tdvavtia, i.e, being or not-being may be divided not only according as it is the being (or not- being) of (1) a substance, (2) a quality, (3) a quantity, &c., but also may be further subdivided according as it is the being (or not-being) (z) potentially or (2) actually of a substance, quality, &c.

br, rd Be [kupidrara 3] GdnPes 7} Weddos. Being as truth and not-

©. 10, 10518 34— 1051) 17 245

being as falsity are elsewhere treated as emphatically not the primary or strictest senses of being and not-being (76 & otrws dv érepov dv Trav kupiws, E. 1027) 31), but as being due merely to rs Siavoias ru 3d bos (ib. 34) and presupposing being in its primary sense, that in which it is subdivided into the categories (7 yap TO té eorw 7 dre rovov } dre Togov 7 TL GAAO ovvdrrer 7 Sraiped ) Sidvo.a, ib. 31). Jaeger suggests that Aristotle may mean merely that the copulative ‘is’ of the judge- ment is the commonest usage of the verb ‘to be’, but it is improbable that kupusrara dv should mean this. The words are probably a gloss, or should go after pevy in 2 34. It will be seen that there is a good deal of divergence among the manuscripts at this point.

If retained, xypustara dv must go with dAyGes 7 Weddos, ‘that which is true or false in the most proper sense of those terms’, in contrast to truth and falsity rept ra dovvOera, which Aristotle treats of later (l. 17—1052°4). But it is highly unnatural to sever xupuitata dv from 70 6éé.

2. todto 8 éml tOv Tpaypdtwy éoTl TA cuyKetoOat 7H SinpHoOat, ‘and this depends, in the things’ (i. e. so far as the objects are concerned), ‘on their being united or divided’. The implied opposition is between 7a. Tpdypara, and 7 dd€a (1. 14).

II-13. To pev...etvat. This passage makes no use of the distinc- tion drawn at the beginning of the sentence between things always united, things always divided, and things capable of being either united or divided. That distinction is first used in what follows, wept péev ody... wevdn (13-17). Bessarion and Christ therefore treat ro wey... elvas as parenthetical, while Bz. (following what may have been Alexander's reading) inserts xa/ before 7d pév. It seems probable, however, that grammatically 76 pev. . . etvar is the apodosis, though logically it only prepares the way for what follows.

elvas as parenthetical, while Bz. (following what may have been Alexander's reading) inserts xa/ before 7d pév. It seems probable, however, that grammatically 76 pev. . . etvar is the apodosis, though logically it only prepares the way for what follows.

17—1052° 4. There is much obscurity in Aristotle’s references to truth and falsity with regard to ra dotvOera, Ta drAG, 7d ddcaiperov. In BE. 4 and De Ax. iii. 6, as well as here, it is contrasted with truth and falsity with regard to composites, which is clearly truth and falsity of propositions. Aristotle seems to reason as follows. What is true in the ordinary sense is a judgement in which two things (a subject and an attribute) are thought to be united which are united in reality, or two things to be separated which are separated in reality. But if we think of two things as united, must we not first think of each thing by itself, and in this thinking is there not a possibility of truth and of error? Aristotle’s strict theory is that there is not (I. 2, E. 1027” 19, Cat, 2°8, De An. 430% 26); that the only alternatives are, to appre- hend them or not to apprehend them. He says in this chapter clearly enough that there can be no falsity with regard to them (I. 25), but he does not say as clearly as he might that there can be no truth either. That which could not possibly be false cannot without tauto- logy, and therefore absurdity, be said to be true, just as ‘true know- ledge’ is an absurd expression because there could not be false knowledge. But instead of saying this he says that truth 2 another

276 COMMENTARY

than the ordinary sense is possible with regard to incomposites (1. 24). The fault, however, is only in the expression; the distinction is probably clear enough in his ‘mind.

But what he means by dovvOera and the analogous expressions is not equally clear. In the De Anzma, instead of discussing terms in general as distinct from propositions, he discusses three kinds of object which are dévaipera in quite another sense. (1) 76 Kata 7d mocbv dd.aiperov evepyeia (430) 7-14), i.e. things like lines, which though quantitatively divisible are not quantitatively divided. (2) 70 TO elder advaiperov (ib. 14-20), the zufima species, (3) 7d Kara 7d rocov ddiaiperov Suvdper (430° 20-26), that which is quantitatively indivisible, like points (or, we might add, moments). Of these three only the second is relevant to the discussion of the present passage, and unfortunately the few lines devoted to it are so obscure and the text so doubtful that they need illumination rather than afford it.

Of these three only the second is relevant to the discussion of the present passage, and unfortunately the few lines devoted to it are so obscure and the text so doubtful that they need illumination rather than afford it.

In the present passage Aristotle seems for the most part to be reason- ing from the bare notion of an ‘incomposite’ as opposed to a ‘ com- posite’, without asking himself very definitely what he means by an ‘incomposite’. From the very fact that it is simple, it follows that there cannot be truth or falsity about it of the same kind as truth or falsity about composites. His primary meaning seems to be that if you say A is B you must attach a definite meaning to your terms ; you must know about A, and about B, ‘what it is’ (I. 25 f.). The alternative to knowing what it is is not having a false opinion about what it is, but simply not being ‘in touch’ with it at all. But from this general position about the terms of any judgement Aristotle passes to a point which he distinguishes from this (6uotws dé kal xrd., 1.26). The terms of a judgement are, so far as their function in the judgement goes, simple, but they may be in themselves complex terms, and again they need not be substances, and if substances, they need not be simple substances. ‘ White’, ‘incommensurate’, ‘ dia- gonal’ are not substances; ‘wood’ is a substance concrete of form and matter. What has been said of all terms with reference to their place in judgement may be said without qualification of ‘incom- posite substances’, the things which are free from any admixture of potentiality and therefore eternal, which are pure forms (‘just what it is to be something’) (Il. 26-31), i.e. God and the intelligences which move the spheres.

20. Bywater proposed 16 Neukév (76) EUXov , ‘ the proposition that the wood is white’, so as to get a phrase of the same form as 76 dovppetpov tiv dudperpov, and the addition seems to be necessary.

23. Td pev adybes 7H edSos is answered by 70 dé eivai in 1. 33. Truth and falsity as states of mind are discussed in Il. 23-33; ‘ being in the sense of being true’ and ‘ not-being in the sense of being false’, i.e. the objective counterparts of truth and falsity as states of mind, are discussed in 1. 33-1052%1. 7d dAnOes is explained in ll. 24, 25; instead of explaining what 7d weddos is in the case of incomposites,

@. 10. 1051) 20-25 277

Aristotle points out that there is no Weddos or dary with regard to them but only dyvowa (1. 25).

24. Qyetv. The metaphor of contact in the description of simple apprehension recurs in A. 107221. Its implications are (1) the absence of any possibility of error, which characterizes the apprehen- sion of the tdva aio Oyra. (cf. De An. 430” 29), (2) the apparent (though on Aristotle’s view only apparent, De An. i. 11) absence of a medium in the case of touch. 7d @yeiv means an apprehension which is infallible and direct.

(cf. De An. 430” 29), (2) the apparent (though on Aristotle’s view only apparent, De An. i. 11) absence of a medium in the case of touch. 7d @yeiv means an apprehension which is infallible and direct.

dvav does not seem to be used elsewhere by Aristotle as meaning anything other than xaraddvor, but dois in the sense of the term as opposed to the proposition occurs in De /né. 16? 27, 17% 17.

25. dmatnPivar yap mept 7d ti eotw odk eotw GAN’ 7 KaTa cupBEeBn- xés. Alexander and Bz. interpret this as meaning that one cannot be deceived about the ri éort unless by an abuse of the word dédry nescience be called dary. This does not seem a possible meaning for card. cup PBe- Byxos. The words must be interpreted in connexion with |. 32 dAAa 76 ri éote Cyretras rept adray, 38—12867 1 ev pe. ey O€.

35-86. ‘ The other, if it is existent, exists so;, if it does not exist so, it does not exist at all.’ I.e.as‘on the subjective side the only alterna- tives here are apprehension and non-apprehension, so on the objective side the only alternatives are being and not-being. We have not now to do with the question whether A is thus, i.e. conjoined with B, or otherwise, but simply with the question whether A is (in which case it can only be A) or is not.

This interpretation is much to be preferred to that of Bz., who deletes the comma after dv in 1. 35 and supposes the transition to incomposites not to occur till 10521 «i d¢ pi ovrws. Christ’s eirep dv ovTws, éorw gives no good sense.

Aristotle’s carelessness of language has made his meaning seem more obscure than it really is. In ll. 22, 23 he distinguishes the two modes of being (sc. of composites and of incomposites) from the corresponding two senses in which apprehension of them may be said to be true or false. He has treated the question of truth in ll. 23-33, and in 33—105 2° 4 he is treating the question of being. But instead of saying ‘the being of the object which answers to the truth of the apprehension’ he says (I. 33) ‘the being in the sense of truth’; and instead of saying that the composite is, if it is compounded, and is not, if it is not compounded, he says (Il. 34, 35) that it is true if it is compounded and false if it is not, and then complicates matters still

®. 10. 1051» 29 — 10524 10 279

further by recurring in 10524 1-4 to the question of the apprehension of incomposites, which has already been treated in 1051» 23-33. It would be easy to argue for a double recension, but Aristotle seems to be often so careless of form that that hypothesis is not necessary.

1052* 1-4. With regard to incomposites there is not error but only nescience, but Aristotle points out that it is not a nescience com- parable to blindness, which necessarily shuts off the blind man from knowledge of a whole set of facts. What would answer to this would be a complete absence of the power of apprehending essences, but what we have to do with here is simply failure to apprehend certain particular essences.

What would answer to this would be a complete absence of the power of apprehending essences, but what we have to do with here is simply failure to apprehend certain particular essences.

4-11. From the treatment of dovvGera Aristotle now recurs to certain ovv@era, viz. ra. dxivyta, the things which if they ever have an attribute have it always (i.e. those which det ovyxerras Kal ddvvara SiaipeOjvar, 10519). About 7a dovvOera there can be no arary; about those ovv@era which are dxivyra one form of azary is impossible, provided that we realize that they are dxivnta. If we realize that a triangle is axivyrov we cannot err by supposing that it sometimes has and sometimes has not its angles = two right angles. It may, however, be the case that some members of a class of dxivynta have a certain attribute and others have not, so that one might suppose either (wrongly) that no even number is prime, or (rightly) that one (the number two) is prime and the ethers are not. If we are thinking not of a class of dxivyra but of a single dxivyrov even this source of error is removed ; whether we be right or wrong, we shall make our judgement on the understanding that the facts are a/ways so.

Q. dprdua Sé epi va = epi 8 dpiuov eva dpibpd, ‘about a single number’. It is not impossible, however, that eva, twa, tTwd are neuter plural. For éva plural cf. I. 105621, M. 1083225, Phys. 207)»,

IO, o8 yap em tid pev twa 8 od oinoerar. I have restored the emphatic ov from ot of AP yp. E. Cf. L. and S. s. v. od, B.

BOOK | The meaning of unity (ch. 1).

105215. There are four main senses of unity—excluding acciden- tal unity. The ‘one’ is (1) the continuous, especially what is con- tinuous by nature, not by mere contact or colligation, and more especially that whose motion is indivisible and simple.

280 COMMENTARY

22. Unity belongs even more to (2) wholes which have a definite form, especially to natural wholes which have in themselves the cause of their continuity, i.e. which have a motion indivisible in place and time. Thus that which naturally moves with the primary kind of movement, i.e. circular locomotion, is a~single magnitude in the primary sense,

29. Further, those things are one the definition or thought of which is one, i.e. which are indivisible (3) in number (viz. individuals) or (4) in form (i.e. for knowledge)—that which gives substances unity. Thus ‘the one’ means ‘the naturally continuous’, ‘the whole’, ‘the individual’, or ‘the universal’. All of these are one either because their motion is one or because the thought or definition of them is one.

bx, The questions ‘ What sorts of things are said to be one?’ and ‘What is it to be one?’ ‘are different. Each of the things we have named is one, but to be one, while it sometimes means to be one of these things, sometimes means something else which is the more literal meaning, though these others express better the significance of the term.

Each of the things we have named is one, but to be one, while it sometimes means to be one of these things, sometimes means something else which is the more literal meaning, though these others express better the significance of the term.

7. Similarly we must distinguish the questions ‘ What is the ultimate physical element?’ and ‘ What is it to be an element?’

14. To be one is to be indivisible, being essentially a this and separate in place, in form, or in thought, or to be whole and indivisible, but above all to be the first measure of a class, and especially of quantity, from which it has been extended to the other cases.

2o. A measure is that by which quantity is known; this is eithera unit or a number, and a number is known by means of a unit, so that all quantity is known by means of a unit ; hence the unit is the starting- point of number as number.

24. Hence in other cases also that by which a thing is primarily known is a measure, and the measure of everything is a unit—in length, breadth, depth, weight, speed (the last two terms applying to what is light or slow as well as to what is heavy or fast).

gi. In all these cases there is a measure and starting-point which is something one and indivisible in quality or in quantity.

35. An accurate measure is one which cannot be taken from or added to ; hence the measure of number is most accurate, for the unit is in every way indivisible. In other cases, since a large quantity can be added to or taken from without detection, men choose as measure the first thing which cannot be added to or taken from without detection.

1053* 8. Motion is measured by the quickest simple motion (i. e., in

I. 1. 10527 15-27 281

astronomy, the motion of the heavens); similarly the quarter-tone is the measure in music, the letter in speech.

14. Sometimes there are more than one measure, e.g. in music, in speech, in incommensurate magnitudes.

18. The one is the measure in the sense that we learn what the essence of a thing consists of by dividing it either in quantity or in kind, The unit is indivisible either in all respects (like the numerical unit) or to sense (like the foot).

24. The measure is always akin to that which it measures ; e.g. the measure of units is a unit; we must not say that the measure of numbers is a number ; that would be like saying that the measure of units is units, for a number is a plurality of units.

gi. We call knowledge and sensation the measure of things because we become acquainted with things by them, but really they are measured rather than measure. It is as if we learned our height by some one else measuring us. Protagoras says man is measure of all things, meaning ‘the man who knows’ or ‘ the man who perceives’ ; there is nothing remarkable in what he says.

b4. Thus ‘one’, if we define it literally, means a measure, primarily of quantity, secondly of quality ; i.e. what is indivisible in quantity or in quality.

1052715. év tots wept Tod mooaxds, A.6. The classification of the senses of ‘one’ there given is as follows:

(1) 70 kard cvp,B_Byxds, e. g. the unity of ‘Coriscus and musical ’, &e.

(2) 16 Kal aro ev,

(a) 76 ovvexés civan (e. g. a bundle),

(4) 7@ 70 broxeipevov TO cider eivar ddidopov (e. g. all wine is one) or dv 70 yevos ev diadéepov Tals avrixepevars Siapopais (e.g. horse, man, dog are all one),

(c) dowy 6 ddyos 6 76 Ti_ Hv elvar éywv adiatperos mpos GAXov Tov Sndotvra [ri fv ctvar] ro mpayya (e.g. that which increases and diminishes is still one if its definition does not change).

(These three senses are summed up in 1016P9 pia i) ovvexeta } cider 7) AOyw, cf. 1017% 3-6),

(d) The essence of ‘one’ is dpyj tut dpibyod etvar.

17. téttapes. These are given in |. 34—r0 ovvexés, 76 dAov, 75 Kal? éxagrov, TO kabodov. The first answers to (2 @) above, the third to (2 c), the fourth to (2). The second appears as a species of (2 a), the con- tinuous which has a single form, e. g. a shoe as opposed to the same materials when not arranged to serve a purpose (1016 11-17). (1) is expressly excluded in this chapter (1052* 18); (2d) is introduced as the primary meaning in 1052) 18.

27. cit... mpdtqv. Grammar requires us to translate ‘if anything

282 COMMENTARY

by nature has a principle of movement which is the primary principle of the primary movement’. But it is hard to assign any definite mean- ing to ‘the primary principle’. It seems clear that rHs zpérys is explained by dopas and points to the fact that locomotion is the primary kind of movement, and that rjv_mpwryv is explained by KukAogopiav and points to the fact that circular‘motion is the primary kind of Zocomotion. I. e. tis tpaérns and rv mpwryy are used in the sense which they would properly have if xivyow, not Kwyoews apxny, had preceded. jl ;

tis mpéryns. Locomotion is prior to the other kinds of change— change of size, of quality, of substance (generation and destruction), since a subject can have it without having the others (PAys. 260% 20— 261%26). Cf. Z. 1036’ gn.

thy mpdéryv. Circular motion is prior to other kinds of motion because (on Aristotle’s view) it does not involve change of direction. This is equally true of motion in a straight line, but the latter is exposed to the objection that if it is to go on it ultimately requires infinite space (which Aristotle does not believe in); circular motion returns on itself and does not need infinite space (PAys. vili. 7).

28. toito mpAtov péyelos ey, i. e. a celestial sphere is the best instance of what is one by continuity.

vili. 7).

28. toito mpAtov péyelos ey, i. e. a celestial sphere is the best instance of what is one by continuity.

29. Just as the continuous and the whole are akin, so are the other two main kinds of unity, 76 xa6’ exacrov and 76 xafodov; they are introduced as subdivisions of ra dv av 6 Adyos cis 7. The first two are one because their movement is indivisible, the last two because the thought of them is indivisible (1. 36).

33. 16 Tals ovclais aitvoy Tod évds, i.e. the essence.

35. It is rather surprising to find the fourth kind of unity described as ro xaOdAov; what Aristotle has said about it (1. 31) suggests only the infima species, the least universal of universals. A genus is one object of thought in the sense that it has a single definite nature ; it is not one in the sense that it is logically indivisible, and Aristotle seems here rather to confuse the two things. But he is right in recognizing the unity of a universal, whether genus or species, as one kind of unity.

bz, Aristotle now introduces the distinction expressed in modern logic as that between extension and intension, or denotation and connotation. He has named four kinds of thing that are one; he now proposes to state the single connotation of the word ‘one’. This is ‘nearer to the word’, while the others are ‘nearer to its application’ (1. 6). |The connotation of ‘ one’ is ‘ indivisible’ (1. 16), or ‘ whole and indivisible’ (1. 17), or ‘first measure of a class, and primarily of quantity’ (1. 18).

7. TH Suvdpe 8 éxetva, Alexander takes this to mean ‘but the others are only potentially one’. It seems clear, however, that waAAov éyyvs is to be understood and that the meaning is ‘while they are nearer to the force (or application) of the word’. For this meaning of dvvapus cf. Lys. 10. 7, Pl. Crat, 394 B3.

Hy ty 1O5 2725. 10539 23 283

10. 76 daerpov, Anaximander’s ‘ indeterminate’.

27. Kowviy év tots évaytiors, i. e. each of the terms is common to each of two contraries.

1053° 12. BSieots, cf. A. 1016” 22n.

15. at dvécerg SU0o. There can be little doubt that this refers to the two distinguished by Aristotle’s pupil Aristoxenus (i. 21), the enhar- monic, which was a quarter-tone, and the chromatic, which was one- third ofa tone. Aristotle ignores the hemiolian déec1s, mentioned in Aristox. ii. 51, which was three-eighths of a tone.

Bz. thinks that the two diéces were the major semitone (éorop:)) and the minor semitone (Aciypa) recognized by Philolaus. But Philolaus seems to have used d/eous simply in the sense of ‘minor semitone ’ (Boethius, Inst. Mus. wi. 5, 8, pp. 277, 278 Friedl.).

17. at dwvat mrelous ats petpodpev, i.e. there is no one letter which is the measure of speech more than the others. A, @, 2, 0, w, and again J, c, d, &c., are equally units of speech and not necessarily of equal length.

Mus. wi. 5, 8, pp. 277, 278 Friedl.).

Kal 7 Sidperpos Suct petpetrar Kat 4 wAeupd. It is difficult in view of the order of the words to translate this ‘the diagonal and the side of the square are measured by two different measures’. It may be that the diagonal itself is said to be measured by two measures, i.e. that it is conceived as consisting of two parts, a part equal to the side, and a part which represents its excess over the side, and that these parts being incommensurate are said to be measured by different units. Cf. A. 10218 3 TO 0 dmepéxov Tpos TO dmepexopevov dAws adpurrov Kar’ apiOpov' 6 Yop, dpi pos ov ppeTpos, KaTo pn UPpeTpoV 8 api pos ov A€yerau, 70 oe & brrepexov Tpos 70 brrepexopevov Tog obrov Te €oTL Kab erL, rovto 6 dopuroy. If this interpretation be right, xat 7 mAevpa is the gloss of an over-zealous copyist.

18. kal 7a peyeOn mdvta. Bz, takes this to refer to quite a different point, that the areas of all plane figures are measured by multiplying together two numbers which express the Jength of the sides of a rectangle equal to the given figure. But (1) it is difficult to interpret Ta peyeOn rayra as referring only to plane figures. peyéOy covers all lines, surfaces, and solids. (2) The two factors of the area are not at all analogous to the two dieces, the various letters of the alphabet, the two different units required for the measurement of incommensurate lines, They are not two units used to measure different things ; both are used to measure any one plane figure.

No suitable meaning for ra. weye0n wavra presents itself, unless it be the rather vague one ‘and in all kinds of spatial magnitudes similar incommensurabilities can be found’. There is something to be said for Ab’s reading 7 dudpetpos . . . Kal 7 wevpa, peyeOn Twa Ovta. Ondov Oy, which seems to have been read by Alexander (610. 6, 7): In that case dru should be inserted after 67. But peyéOy twa ovra appears pointless. Goebel’s kal peyéOy twa ofov 76 AjAvoy. ovrw is more ingenious than convincing.

23. Geréov is Professor E. S. Forster’s conjecture. For ribévas eis

284 COMMENTARY

‘to class among’, cf. Phys. 201% 24, L. NV. 1156" 30, &c. Ar’s Gere represents the first stage in the corruption. This emendation gives a better sentence than Bz.’s eivar ddvatperov (for eis ddvaipera), in which the position of efvac is unnatural. -

Gotep eipytar 79n, |. 5. 4

30. 68 dprOpds TAHO0s povddur, cf. Z. 103912 n.

201% 24, L. NV. 1156" 30, &c. Ar’s Gere represents the first stage in the corruption. This emendation gives a better sentence than Bz.’s eivar ddvatperov (for eis ddvaipera), in which the position of efvac is unnatural. -

Gotep eipytar 79n, |. 5. 4

30. 68 dprOpds TAHO0s povddur, cf. Z. 103912 n.

32. érel petpodvtar paAXov 7 petpodow, ‘although really they are measured rather than measure’. The scope and variety of reality is not measured by knowledge and perception, since there are real things which we do not know or perceive ; but the scope of our knowledge and perception is measured by the things we know or perceive, as, when something of known length (e.g. a cubit-rule) is affixed to our body, our body is measured by the cubit-rule and not the cubit-rule by our body. On the priority of the object of knowledge (or perception) to knowledge (or perception) cf. 10572 7-12, I. roro 30—r1o114 2, A. 10218 29—-) 2, @, 1051” 6-9.

35. émi tooodrov, It seems difficult to take this as = rooavraxis as Alexander does, and probably the reading ézi tocotrov jv, ‘ over such and such a fraction of ourselves’, is preferable to AP Al.’s éxt TOTOVTOV Hiv.

Unity not a substance but a predicate coextensive with being (ch. 2).

1053" g. Is the one a substance, as the Pythagoreans and Plato say, or does some nature underlie it, e. g. (as the natural philosophers say) friendship, air, or the indefinite ?

16, (1) If, as we have said, no universal is a substance, and being is not an independent substance but a predicate merely, the same is true of the one; being and unity are the most universal of all predicated terms. Thus genera are not separately existing substances, and unity is not a genus, any more than being or substance is so,

24. (2) Since in qualities and in quantities ‘one’ is the attribute of something that underlies it, we must similarly in all the categories ask what the one is; it is never the whole nature of a thing to be or to be one. In colour the one is a colour (e. g. white), so that if the world consisted of colours, it would be a number, indeed, but a number of colours, and the one would be one something,

34. So too if the world consisted of tunes, articulate sounds, or rectilinear figures, it would be a number of quarter-tones, letters, or figures, and the one would be the quarter-tone, the vowel, or the triangle.

1054" 4. If this is true of the other categories, it must be true of substance ; the one itself must be one substance,

I. I. 1053%30— 2. 1053) 32 285

13. That unity in a sense means the same as being is clear (1) because it is found in all the categories ; (2) because it adds nothing to the meaning of a term, any more than ‘existing’ does; (3) because for a thing to be one is to be the particular thing it is,

1053? 10. év tots Stamophpacw, B. 10012 4-24.

10. év tots Stamophpacw, B. 10012 4-24.

14. Bz. sees that the question w&s Set yywptpwrtépws AexOfvar should not be answered at the same moment that it is asked, by the words xai padXov dorep ktX. In view of this, and of Alexander’s dpa do7ep oi rept pucews, he proposes 7 padAov (interrogative) for kai waAXov. But this does not remove all difficulties: as de? yrwpywrépws exOjvac remains a very curious phrase. The order is much against Schwegler’s aos for ras. The best solution is to excise 7@s as an emblema from kat was det, |, 11.

15-16. 6 pév tts, Empedocles; 6 8’, Anaximenes; 6 $é, Anaximander.

17. év tots wept ovcias, Z. 13.

18. The traditional reading makes o68 at7é todto kth. dependent on ei, and ovdé after ef is irregular. The irregularity may be removed by reading with Bywater 67. ovd, depending on elpyra:. For omissions of 6m in the manuscripts cf. ©. 10484 37, Zop. 122 10,156) 11, Soph. £7. 18233. Alternatively the irregularity might be removed by punctuating after instead of before dyAov ds in 1. 20; for dyAov as at the end of a clause cf. d7Aov 6m in De Caelo 282% 12, De Gen. et Corr. 316> 11, De An. 411% 22, Pol. 1333226. But ovdé is not surprising in view of the facts that ei here = éwe¢ and that a clause has inter- vened. Cf. @. 104929, 10, where there is not even an intervening clause, and Cope’s ed. of Rhe?. vol. i. 301-303.

avro Todo refers to ro ov (zepl Tov dvros, 1. 17). avrd Todro is sub- ject, ovciay predicate ; this is preferable to making airéd rotro, otciay, subject, as Bz. does.

23. For the reason why being and unity cannot be genera cf. B. 998» 23.

24-28. ‘The question whether unity is self-subsistent or requires a subject must be answered for all the categories alike. Now in the category of quality unity is the attribute of some subject or other (e.g. a colour); therefore it must be so in all the cate- gories.’

29. éort Td Ev xpOya. Alexander (613. 12) seems to have read éori ru 70 €v, and Bz. thinks the right reading is that of EJT, éoré 70 €v xpopa, ‘the one is some colour’, But the order is strange ; either te Or xp@pa is probably an excrescence, and it seems better to read xpaua with all the manuscripts and to omit 7 with A>. ru has come in by dittography or by the influence of |. 26.

29. The true reading seems to have been preserved by JT, who have eira. Al.’s commentary (613. 13) suggests efra rather than ¢i, which has no doubt been produced by haplography.

31-32. todtro...wrtds. Jaeger is probably right in treating this as

286 COMMENTARY

a gloss; for glosses somewhat of this form cf. A. 984> 11, T. roog* 26, A, 1073* 33.

10542 13-19. For the argument cf. I. 1003 22-34, Z. 1030” 10-12, K. 10612 18.

Unity and plurality ; identity ; likeness ; otherness ; difference ; contrariety (ch. 3).

A. 984> 11, T. roog* 26, A, 1073* 33.

10542 13-19. For the argument cf. I. 1003 22-34, Z. 1030” 10-12, K. 10612 18.

Unity and plurality ; identity ; likeness ; otherness ; difference ; contrariety (ch. 3).

1054220. The one and ¢he many are opposed in several senses—in one of them as the indivisible or undivided to the divisible or divided. The opposition is that of contrariety (involving as it does privation), not of contradiction nor of relation.

26. Unity is explained by reference to plurality, the indivisible by reference to the divisible, because the latter are more manifest to sense.

29. To the one belong the terms same, like, equal; to plurality the terms other, unlike, unequal. | Zhe same means (1) the same in number, (2) one both in definition and in number (in this sense you are the same with yourself), (3) one in definition (in this sense equal straight lines are the same—here equality is unity).

bg. Things are “ke, (1) if, not being absolutely the same (i.e. without difference in their composite substance), they are the same in form (e.g, the larger square is like the smaller), (2) if they have the same form and do not differ in degree, (3) if they have the same attribute in different degrees, (4) if they have more attributes, or more of the obvious attributes, the same than different.

13. Other and unizke have a similar variety of meaning. Other is (1) opposed to the same, so that everything is either the same as or other than everything else. It is used (2) if the matter and the defini- tion are not both one, and (3) as in mathematics.

18. Other is not the contradictory of the same ; things which are not are neither the same nor other, but simply ‘not the same’; things that ave are either the same or other.

23. Difference is different from otherness, The other need not be other in any particular respect, but the different must be different in some respect, so that there must be some identical thing in which the different things differ, i.e. either-genus or species. Things differ in genus if they have not a common matter and do not pass into each other (i.e. things that belong to different categories); in species, if they belong to the same genus.

31. Contraries are different, and contrariety is a kind of difference.

I, 2. 1054213 — 3. 1054? 13 287

All contraries differ; they are not only other but some are other in genus, while others are in the same category and therefore in the same genus. We have distinguished elsewhere which things are the same or other in genus.

10542 23. at dvtiOécers tetpaxds. The four kinds of opposite are dvripacts, Tavaytia, TA mpds TL, TTEpaIs Kal eéis (A, 10184 20, cf. Cat. 11> 17).

We have distinguished elsewhere which things are the same or other in genus.

10542 23. at dvtiOécers tetpaxds. The four kinds of opposite are dvripacts, Tavaytia, TA mpds TL, TTEpaIs Kal eéis (A, 10184 20, cf. Cat. 11> 17).

24. Mate adoption of odre (A>) for todtwy gives an impossible sense, unless his suggested rearrangement of |. 25, otre ds dvtidacis ovre ds Ta mpos TL Acyopeva, evavtia ay ein, be adopted also. Alexander says (615. 2) émet d¢ ai dvriOéoes terpaxds, 7d ev Kal Ta TOAAG Hs TA evavrio GVTiKELTOL, Kal ovre OS TO. Tpos TL OvUTE as Eis Kat OTEpHoLS ovTE os KaTd- gacis kat drddacis. It is impossible to say exactly what he read ; he may be merely interpreting freely.

It seems better to keep the reading tovrwy, which gives a fair sense. ‘Since one of the terms “ divisible” and “indivisible” is privative, they must be contraries and not contradictory or relative terms.’ Aristotle should have said, in accordance with his fourfold division of opposites, ‘ since they are not privative, nor contradictory, nor relative, they must be contrary’; but privation and contrariety are not mutually exclusive. Contrariety is the extreme form of privation, the form in which the attribute present in the one term is entirely absent in the other (1055) 14, 26, I. 1004» 27, torr» 18). As Bz. remarks, a clause indicating that the privation is of the extreme type has to be supplied in sense after Odrepov.

26. héyerat points to the fact that ddva/perov is derived from dauperov. -dyAodrat points to the fact that the meaning of ‘ one’ or ‘ indivisible’ is explained by reference to ‘many’ or ‘ divisible’.

30. ev TH Starpécer Tay evavtiwy, cf. TD. 1004? 2 n.

g2. Other passages on the various senses of ‘the same’ are A. 9, Top. i. 4, Vv. 4. 133" 15 sqaq.

33-34. éva pev...atrd. Since this is opposed to unity of both definition and number (absolute identity, ll. 34, 35) and to unity of definition (the unity of the members of a species, ll. 35-» 3), Alexander must be right in explaining this first kind of unity as accidental unity, which is expounded at length in A. 1015 17-34.

be, Bz. was right in omitting rd before isoydévua; the word is actually omitted by A> as well as by Alexander.

tetpdywva, This word in Aristotle usually means ‘ square’ but here ‘quadrilateral’ (cf. De An. 414 31(?), Pl. Zim. 558, Crit. 118 c). Euclid distinguishes the two as terpéywvoy and rerpdrAevpov respec- tively. .

3-13. On the meanings of ‘like’ cf. A. 10188 15-18,

1g. 7 Aeuxdy. There is no trace in Alexander of the manuscript reading 7 xpvo@, which is in itself highly improbable. The balance of the sentence would lead one to expect something like 7 Nevxov, and

288 COMMENTARY

Alexander probably read this ; his words are 6 dé xarrirepos TO dpy’pw Kata. TO mpoxetpor, olov TO Nevkdv. xpvod doubtless came in by ditto- graphy.

14-22. On the meanings of ‘other’ cf. A. 101849-1

The balance of the sentence would lead one to expect something like 7 Nevxov, and

288 COMMENTARY

Alexander probably read this ; his words are 6 dé xarrirepos TO dpy’pw Kata. TO mpoxetpor, olov TO Nevkdv. xpvod doubtless came in by ditto- graphy.

14-22. On the meanings of ‘other’ cf. A. 101849-1

14-18. Aristotle offers apparently three senses of ‘ ae *, but really the first clause gives a quite general statement of its meaning, and the other two give varieties. of this.

15. d&mav mpds Grav 7 tadTs } GAA. Aristotle’s remarks in ]]. 19-22 show that with this is to be understood the reservation doa Aéyerau €v kal év. ‘Other’ is the privative, not the contradictory, of ‘ the same’, and there are pairs of things (viz. ju évra) of which neither is predic- able.

17. ds Ta év Tors paPypatiKkois. This is to be understood as opposed to the sense of ‘ the same’ given in], 1.

18. 81a todro, i.e. because ‘other’ is the opposite of ‘the same’ (1. 15). Apelt (Betrdge, p. 220) thinks it refers forwards to 1. 19 od yap avripacis éort Tod radrod, but this is less probable, Christ’s view that dua rodro is spurious is quite unjustified.

22. Something like Apelt’s ré@uxe doa (cf. 1. 19) appears to be wanted instead of refuxds. I have printed the elided form, for which cf, Pl. Phil. 353 cvpBeBny jytv, Dem. 21. 120 oddé as ou’ Gduxo, &c.

23-31. On the meanings of ‘different’ cf. A. 10184 12-15.

26. dvdykn taitéd ti eivar @ Siapepouow. Aristotle means that if A and B are different, there must be a single statable respect in which they differ. If A differs from B in genus, B also differs from A in genus; if in species, then in species. He does not mean that they must have an attribute in common; this is not true in the extreme case, dawv ado oyna THS KaTnyopias.

28. The remark about yévos and yéveois is an interesting indication of the influence of biology on Aristotle’s logic. Cf. the account of yevos in A. 28.

29. olov dcwv ado oxfpa THs Katnyopias. In view of |. 35 (note) it seems that ofov = ‘i.e,’, not ‘e.g.’. Aristotle seems in this context to restrict the name ‘genus’ to the categories. Cf. A. 1016> 33 n.

31-32. 148° évaytia...t1s. Bz. points out that these words are out of place, since Aristotle is dealing in this chapter only with dvapopa and comes to évaytidrys Only in the next. The objection is sound, but with this sentence belongs the next. For rdvta yap diapépovra (or Suahépovra re) haiveras is meaningless if the subject be 7a duapéepovra, but significant if it be ra évavria. It seems better to treat 1054 31— 1055® 2 as a discussion of contraries which ought to have been super- seded by the fuller discussion in chapter 4 but was retained by the ex- cessive zeal of the original editor. For the meanings of ‘ contrary’ cf. A. 1018# 25-35.

34. If we read ra diahépovra for duadépovra with Alexander, or diahépovta Ti patverat, only the one sentence 7a 8’ évaytia xrA. need be regarded as out of place. But it seems better to retain the manuscript

For the meanings of ‘ contrary’ cf. A. 1018# 25-35.

I. 3. 1054> 14 — 10552 2 289

reading. Alexander’s reading rayra yap ra Siahépovra paiverat kai taird is excluded by the fact that some things which are ‘ different ’, viz. those that are different in category, are in no respect rairdé. The point which Aristotle makes above and in ]. 35 is not that things that differ must be the same in some respect, but that there must be some one thing in which they differ. adyta yap dSiadepovra ti daiverar kal od povov érepa. 6vra. would be a preferable departure from the manuscripts (though Aristotle would probably have said tw rather than ri, cf. 1. 26); but no departure seems necessary.

35. év TH abt cvotorxia THs KaTnyopias, cf. A. 9864 23n. Here ‘contraries (or differents) which are in the same ‘line of predication’ are said to be in the same genus. In 1058 13 (the only other pas- sage in which ovorouxia ris Karyyopias is found) contraries in the same genus are said to be in the same ‘line of predication’. Thus ‘genus’ and ‘line of predication’ are coextensive terms. Now it seems natural to identify the ‘line of predication’ here with the ‘figure of predication ’ six lines earlier. It is surprising to find genus identified with category, but the identification is vouched for by A. 1016) 33 (where see note), 102412. Aristotle doubtless calls many classes which are not categories genera, but in the strict sense the categories are the only genera, since they are the only classes that are not species.

Thus Bz.’s suggestion that cvotoryia THs Katyyopias means one of the main divisions of a category, within which the same sort of predi- cate is found (thus the various predicates of number might be thought of as forming a ‘ column’ under the main predicates odd and even) falls to the ground.

avoroxia is used (enter alia) of a series of terms of which each is wider than that which comes under it (Am. Post. 66% 27, 35, 79° 7, 8, 80> 27, 812 21, 87> 6, 14), and each category is one cvororxia ris katyyopias in the sense that it forms a ‘ Porphyry’s tree’ of which the apex is the name of the category.

1055*2. év adda, A. 1024 9-16.

Contrariety (ch. 4).

1055* 3. Contrariety is maximum difference. This is clear; for, while things that differ in genus cannot pass into each other at all, con- traries are the starting-points and extremes in the passage into each other of things differing in speczes, and have the greatest interval between them. Now what is greatest in each class is complete (since there is no going beyond it), so that contrariety is complete difference, the meaning of ‘ complete’ varying with the meaning of ‘ contrary’.

Now what is greatest in each class is complete (since there is no going beyond it), so that contrariety is complete difference, the meaning of ‘ complete’ varying with the meaning of ‘ contrary’.

1g. One thing cannot have more than one contrary, since (1) nothing can be more extreme than the extreme, nor can there be more than two extremes to the same interval, (2) contrariety is a difference, and difference is between two things.

2573.2 U

290 COMMENTARY

23. The truth of the other definitions of contrariety. follows: (1) the complete difference is the greatest difference, for () there is no difference between a thing and others ow/szde its genus, and (4) the complete difference is the greatest difference between a thing and others zmsede its genus. (2) The things that differ most in the same genus are contraries; so too are (3) the things that differ most in the same receptive material, and (4) the things falling under the same capacity that differ most,

83. Positive state and privation are the first contrariety—but only when the privation is complete. Other contraries are so called because they possess, produce, tend to produce, or are acquisitions or losses of these or of other contraries.

38. The kinds of opposition are contradiction, privation, con- trariety, relation. (1) Contradiction is not the same as contrariety since it does not admit of a mean while contrariety. does. (2) Priva- tion is a kind of contradiction, an incapacity which is determinate or involves the same subject which is capable of having the positive state. Hence, while contradiction has no mean, privation sometimes has ; everything is equal or of equal, but only that which could be equal must be either equal or wnegual.

bir. Since generation is from contrary to contrary, and is either from form or from privation, all contrariety is privation, though not all ptivation is contrariety since there are various forms of privation ; con- traries are the extremes from which change starts.

17. This can be proved by induction. Every contrariety has a privation as one of its terms, but there are various kinds of priva- tion; it sometimes means mere privation, sometimes privation at a particular time or in a particular part, or complete privation. Some of these kinds admit of a mean (a man need not be either good or bad), others do not (a number must be either odd or even), Again, some have a determinate subject, others have not.

26. Thus it is clear that one of two contraries is always privative. It is enough to show this of the summa genera of contraries, e. g. of one and many ; the rest are reducible to these.

1055" 17-19. moddax@s S€. .. attots is explained by ll. 24-33. Contraries may be defined as ra wAciorov diadépovra, as ra ev Taito yever TAcicrov Suadepovra, as Ta ev Tare dextcKG wAciorov Siadépovra, Or as Ta t7d THY airnv Svvapw rrclcTov diaepovra, and ‘ complete differ- ence’ will mean the maximum difference possible in each of these cases.

24-33. Contraries may be defined as ra wAciorov diadépovra, as ra ev Taito yever TAcicrov Suadepovra, as Ta ev Tare dextcKG wAciorov Siadépovra, Or as Ta t7d THY airnv Svvapw rrclcTov diaepovra, and ‘ complete differ- ence’ will mean the maximum difference possible in each of these cases.

23. Bz. takes this to be an instance of dare 7” apodos7; but that is

le 4emO55® 17 — 105553 291

rarely found unless the protasis has been so long that the structure of the sentence has been to some extent forgotten. It is better to take oAws Te ei ori KTA. as Subordinate to davepdv (éorw). ‘And, to put the matter generally, this (that one thing has not more than one con- trary) is evident if contrariety is difference, and difference—and there- fore complete difference—is between two things.’

23-33. The kinds of contrary mentioned in A. 10184 25-35 are:

(1) 7a py dwvard dua TO atTd rapeiven TOV SiadepdvTwv Kara. yéevos,

(2) ra wAciorov Siadépovta Tov év TO adTa yever (= 1055 27),

(3) Ta wrciorov Siahépovra Tov év TatTed SexTiKG ( = 10558 29),

(4) Ta mAciorov Siahepovra trav brd THY adryy Svvapw ( = 1055% 31).

I agrees with A in the last three kinds, but excludes the first (1055 26). In I the genus is conceived as a summum genus (105429). Nothing can pass from one genus to another (1054 29, 10579 26); naturally therefore there cannot be contrary genera or contraries in different genera. In A and elsewhere genus is treated more loosely, and virtue and vice can be treated as contrary genera ( Zop. 123» 14-16).

26-27. Serta yap... peytoty. ‘For it has been shown that in relation to things outside its genus a thing has no difference, while with regard to things within one genus the complete difference is the greatest.’ It is impossible to make consistent Aristotle’s various statements in these chapters about difference. In chapter 3 difference in genus was freely recognized, and in its extremest form, viz. differ- ence of category (105429, 35). So too in this chapter (1055 6). Yet here he says that there is no such thing as difference between a thing and something else outside its genus. Two explanations might be offered. (1) Aristotle may mean that if X and Y are in different genera they should not be said to have a difference, but the genera should. If this had been his meaning, however, he would probably have taken the trouble to state it clearly. (2) It may be that while he uses diapéeperv, Sudhopov in a sense almost (not quite, cf. 1054 25) as wide as their everyday sense, he uses duadopa in the technical sense which it bears in his logic, viz..= a differentiation of a genus. This seems more likely.

It is not clear where the proof referred to in d€8exra. has been given. Presumably in]. 6. Things in different genera may be called dvadépovra, but since there is no passage from one to the other there is no definite measurable interval, no dcapopa, between them.

This seems more likely.

bg. Privation, we are told by Aristotle, is a kind of contradiction, and contrariety is a kind of privation. Zeller objects that when the conception of privation is cleared up it is seen to fall either under con- tradiction or under contrariety. This objection I have dealt with in notes on A. 1022) 22-24, 24-31. An. Post. 73% 21, to which he refers, in no way proves his point; it rather suggests that contrariety reduces itself either to privation or to contradiction. The general position is this; Contradiction is the relation between two proposi-

' U2

292 COMMENTARY

tions of the type ‘Ais B’,‘Ais not B’. Privation is the condition of a subject capable of being B (let us call it A>) when it in any degree fails to be B. Contrariety is the relation between two condi- tions of A», that in which it is fully B and that in which it is not B at all. Thus contradiction includes privation as a particular case, and privation includes contrariety as a particular case.

4. % yap Td G8uvatovy bdws éxew. The application of a privative term to a subject which is quite incapable of having the positive pre- dicate is improper. In such a case it is only the contradictory term that should be applied. Strictly therefore Aristotle should not have included this as a case of privation (as he does both here and in A. 1022623), since privation is cuverAnppévg TO Sexrixd, i.e. implies that the subject could have the positive predicate, and is duopirbeioa, i.e. limited to such a subject. Aristotle is here taking account of the fact that terms like ‘blind’, though properly applicable only to animals, are in ordinary language sometimes applied to other things.

7. év Gddows, A. 22.

Q. otepnoews Sé tos Eotwv, i.e. in the case of all proper privations, as distinguished from the improper cases referred to in 1. 4 (note). For the possibility of an intermediate between ééis and orépyors cf. Cat. 13? 3 (seeing and blind), K. 10614 21 (just and unjust).

22. 7 7T@ kupiw, ‘or in the dominant part’. Alexander aptly illus- trates this by saying that a man might be called dyeup if he had no right hand.

4 (note). For the possibility of an intermediate between ééis and orépyors cf. Cat. 13? 3 (seeing and blind), K. 10614 21 (just and unjust).

22. 7 7T@ kupiw, ‘or in the dominant part’. Alexander aptly illus- trates this by saying that a man might be called dyeup if he had no right hand.

25. Bz. argues that the fact that some positive terms (like odd and even) have a determinate subject to which they are appropriate, while others (like good and bad) have none but may be applied in any category, is the reason why the former do not admit of a middle while the latter do. He therefore reads 67 for the manuscript év. Alexander gives the same general interpretation, and probably also read 6ru (624. 12). But it seems clear that this is not the reason why good and bad admit of a middle. Take Aristotle’s favourite instance of privation, ‘blind’, which has a determinate subject, viz. animals ; there are inter- mediates between ‘seeing’ in the full sense and ‘blind’ in the full sense. Distinctions such as are suggested by 7% wore 7 &v tut, olov av é€v 7Aukia Twi 7 TS Kupiw, 7 avTy are applicable to good and bad but not to odd and even, and this is the reason why the former admit of a middle and the latter donot. ér ra pv xrX. raises a fresh point, the point of the proper application of privative terms, already mentioned in 1. 4.

The opposition of ‘ equal’ to ‘ greater’ and ‘ less’ (ch. 5).

105530. If one thing has only one contrary, how is one opposed to many, or equal to greater and smaller? ‘ Whether’ always implies opposition ; we ask ‘ whether it is white or black’, ‘ whether it is white

I, 4. 105554 —5. 1055> -6 203

or not white’, but not ‘ whether it is a man or white’. When we state alternatives between which there is no apparent opposition, as in ‘whether Cleon came, or Socrates’, we imply that they are incom- patible ; if they are compatible the question would be absurd and another opposition would take its place, ‘whether both came, or only one of the two’.

10562 3. Now we ask ‘ whether it is greater, less, or equal’; what is the implied opposition of equal to the other terms? It is not con- trary either to one or to both, for (1) it is not contrary to one any more than to the other ; (2) it is contrary to unequal, so that it would have more than one contrary. If unequal is equivalent to greater and smaller together, equal would be opposed to both, but it would still have two contraries, which is impossible. (3) Equal is between great and small, but a contrariety cannot be intermediate, or it would not be complete.

15. The opposition must therefore be either contradiction or priva- tion. ‘ Equal’ is not the contradiction or privation of either extreme more than of the other ; therefore it is the privative contradiction of both. Hence it is never stated as alternative to one of them alone.

20. It is not a necessary privation, for not everything that is neither greater nor less is equal, but only that which could be greater or less. It is the privative contradiction of both, and therefore intermediate between them.

24. What is neither good nor bad is opposed to both but has no name, since the terms are ambiguous and have no one appropriate subject-matter. Even what is neither white nor black has no one name, though the colours of which ‘ neither white nor black ’ is pre- dicated are limited.

30. Therefore it is not fair to object that if what is neither good nor bad is between the two, there will always be an intermediate

etween two terms, e.g. what is neither a shoe nor a hand will be be- tween the two. The one is a joint contradiction of opposites between which there is an intermediate and an interval; between the other two terms there is no difference since they belong to different genera.

1055° 34. && imo8écews, i.e. on the assumption that the person who came must have been either Cleon or Socrates.

36.. GAN’ otk... . yévet ToOTo, i.e. this is not the necessary disjunction of any class.

GAA Kal TodTo éxeiPev EdpAuber, ‘but even the use of “ whether” in such a question as “ whether Cleon or Socrates came” is derived from its proper use in which the alternatives stated are opposite’.

204 COMMENTARY

1056" 1-2. «i 8¢... dvtiGeow, ‘but if they could be true together, even so the question falls none the less into an antithesis’.

8-11. ‘If “the unequal’: means the same as both (the greater and the less), then the equal would be opposed to both, but this means (in spite of the fact that we have now one word “unequal” to denote both) that one thing is contrary to two others; which is impossible.

10. tots doKxouct Td dyicoy Sudda eivor, the Platonists, cf. N.

1087) 4, - 15. Having shown that the opposition is not that of contrariety, Aristotle infers that it is ether contradiction or prtvation (the fourth kind of opposition, that of relation, it evidently cannot be, since the equal is in that sense opposed not to the unequal but tothe equal). It is disconcerting to find him, immediately after, saying that it is przvalzve contradiction, But in truth contradiction and privation are not mutually exclusive. Equal and greater-or-smaller are not strictly con- tradictory, for neither is true of non-quanta. But they are privatively contradictory, i.e. contradictory (so that both cannot be true and one must be true) when predicated of any subject in a certain genus, the genus of quanta. dddacis orepytixy amounts to the same thing as OTEpHOts. Cr 1055» 3n.

26. modax&s yap héyetat Exdtepov, the good and the bad are found in every category, Z. 1. 1096 19.

dddacis orepytixy amounts to the same thing as OTEpHOts. Cr 1055» 3n.

26. modax&s yap héyetat Exdtepov, the good and the bad are found in every category, Z. 1. 1096 19.

35. The best sense is got by translating ‘for the one is a joint negation of opposites’. guvamddacrs is predicate, and 7% is attracted to its gender.

DI. tav 8 otk gots Stapopd, according to the account of difference in 1054 23—1055% 2.

The opposition of ‘one’ to ‘many’ (ch. 6).

1056 3. A-similar question may be asked about one and many. If many is opposed to one absolutely, difficulties follow: (1) One will be few, because many is opposed to few; (2) two will be many and therefore one will be few, since it can only be in opposition to one that two is many; (3) woAv and éA‘yor are in plurality what long and. short are in length, and what is much is many and what is many is much (unless fluids are an exception), so that the few will be a plurality, and therefore one will be a plurality.

14. The truth is that the many are also called much, but the meaning of the two terms is different; water may be much but is not many. But many is applicable to all things that are discrete, and means (1) a plurality which is absolutely or relatively superior, as opposed to few, but also (2) number, as opposed to one. The opposi- tion of one to many is like that of one to ones or of white thing to.

I. 5. 105671—6, 1056) 12 205

white things; each number is many because it consists of ones and is measured by one, and as opposed to one, not to few.

25. In this sense two is many ; it is not many in the sense of being a plurality which is superior either relatively or absolutely. It is few absolutely, since it is the first inferior plurality (hence Anaxagoras was wrong in saying ‘all things were together, infinite in multitude and in smallness—by which he meant fewness—, for they were not infinite in fewness), since fewness is constituted not by one but by two.

32. One and many in numbers are opposed, then, as measure to the measurable, and these are opposed as things that are per accidens relative. A may be relative to B (1) as being its contrary, or (2) be- cause B is relative to A (in which indirect sense ‘knowledge’ is relative to ‘knowable ’).

10571. One may be fewer than some other things; it does not follow that it is few.

2. Plurality isthe genus of number; number is plurality measurable by one. One and number are opposed not as contraries but as some relative terms have been said to be opposed, viz. as measure to measurable; hence not everything that is one is a number.

7. Knowledge might be thought to be related to the knowable as measure to the measured, but in fact, while all knowledge is knowable, not everything knowable is knowledge; in a sense knowledge is measured by the knowable.

as measure to measurable; hence not everything that is one is a number.

12. Plurality is contrary neither to few (many being contrary to few as superior to inferior plurality), nor in every way to one. In one way it is contrary to one, because it is divisible while the one is indivisible ; in another it is merely relative to it, as knowledge is to the knowable, if many means number and one the measure of number.

10565. ddiyov 7% ddiyo. This does not mean ‘little or few’. édtyov means ‘few” as well as dAéya, and is used only because of the awkwardness of using the plural as a predicate of ro €v. On the other hand zod% and zoAAa are used with a distinction of meaning, ‘much’ and ‘many’, |. 12.

II. kal 6 dv 4 woAd Kal TohAd, Kat TO TWoAAG odd. This clause is introduced to confirm the premise just stated, that woAv and éAtyov are varieties of plurality; Aristotle confirms this by remarking that (apart from the case of fluids) what is zodv is woAAd, in which the plural case shows that a plurality is in question.

12. ci py TL... edopiotw, ‘unless indeed there is a difference in an easily moulded continuum’, viz. a fluid, to which ‘much’ but not ‘many’ is applicable. Alexander reads dopiorw, and takes this to refer to liquid; this is possible, since fluid is referred to in De Gen. et

296 COMMENTARY

Corr. 329 30 aS TO dopiorov oikeiw dpw, eddopiorov dv (what has no definite boundary of its own, and readily takes the shape of its re- ceptacle), but not probable, since fluid is often referred to as eddépurrov simpliciter (De Caelo 313° 8, De Gen. et Corr. 328° 14, Meteor. 3607 23, 381) 20),

14. ddN’ lows xtd. Aristotle begins” here.his discussion of the difficulties stated in ll. 5-14. The vital point in his solution of the difficulties is the distinction (Il. 16-20) between two senses of ‘many’ —the sense of ‘superior plurality’, in which it is opposed to ‘few’, and the sense of ‘number’, in which it is opposed to ‘one’, and opposed not as its contrary but as its correlative. Thus (1) the first difficulty (Il. 5, 6) disappears. Though many is opposed to one and to few, it does not follow that one is few, for it is many in different senses that is opposed to one and to few. (2) The second difficulty (Il. 6-10) disappears. We cannot say ‘two is many and therefore one is few’, for two is not many in the sense in which many is opposed to few (i. e. in the sense that there is a plurality which is smaller and which may be called few), but only in the sense in which many is opposed to one. (3) The third difficulty (ll. 10-14) disappears. For one of the premises of the argument, viz. that one is few, has now been shown to be untrue.

e. in the sense that there is a plurality which is smaller and which may be called few), but only in the sense in which many is opposed to one. (3) The third difficulty (ll. 10-14) disappears. For one of the premises of the argument, viz. that one is few, has now been shown to be untrue.

21, 22. Jaeger is no doubt right in treating kat 15 petpytév as a gloss on kal Ta prepeTpnweva, Suggested by jerpyrds in]. 23. Besides this he reads a colon after Aevkd, inserts dorep before ra peyerpypeva, and a comma after pérpov. This produces a neat sentence, but is (I think) an unnecessary departure from the evidence. It is just possible to retain xal 7d petpyntov if we abolish the full stop after it. “For we say one or many as though one said one and ones or white thing and white things; and things measured—in relation to their measure—and the measurable and multiples are spoken of in the same

? way. 25. TAHO0s Exov brepoxhy i meds TL 7 GwAQs, a plurality greater than some other, or than any other.

26. adda mpdrtov, sc. tAHO0s éorw.

28. dméotn, ‘left the subject’, cf. Zop. 1079, Phys. 191” 10, £. WV. 11659 35.

gO. eer... “kal ddtyétyt” makes specific the criticism stated generally in the previous clause. ‘Anaxagoras should not have been content to say ‘all things were together, infinite both in multitude and in smallness”; he ought to have said “and in fewness”.’ od yap dzreipa is then added somewhat elliptically. ‘And thus the error of his view becomes apparent ; for things cannot be infinite in fewness.’ Aristotle thinks that when Anaxagoras said xal 7AO0s Kal opixpdryra (fr. 1) he meant to be mentioning opposites; and the opposite of multitude is not smallness but fewness. Anaxagoras meant, as a matter of fact, what he said, that things were infinitely many and infinitely small, in the sense that everything however small included yet smaller parts. If he had meant that they were infinitely few, Aristotle’s objection

I. 6. 105614 — 105712 297

(od yap azeipa) that things cannot be infinitely few, since there is an absolute few, viz., two, would have been sound. After od« 6p0ds aaréory we might have expected ddd’ de, but for similar instances of d¢ cf. K. 10612 23, De An. 409» 28, Pol. 13267 12.

The meaning of the passage has been well brought out by Prof. A. A. Bowman in Class, Rev. xxx. 42-44.

31-32. émel 7d GAtyovy . . . SUo evidently refers back to |. 27 diya & amd@s ra dv0 xrX. Christ is right in treating the intervening words as parenthetical, but his excision of ov« in ]. 28 is indefensible.

A. A. Bowman in Class, Rev. xxx. 42-44.

35- év GAdows, A. 1021%26-b3, There, however, 7a mpds Ti, doa pn Kal atta trav mpds tL are Opposed not to ra mpds Tu ws evavria (for which cf. 10547? 37), but to the other kinds of pds 71, (a) 7a ds SurAd- cov Tpos npiov, (0) Ta ws TO Oeppavtikov mpos TO Oeppavtov. ‘These two kinds are here inaccurately summed up as 74 rpds 71 ws évaytia. The point of distinction is that while ‘double’, ‘half’, ‘heating’, ‘heated’ are all essentially relative terms, ‘the measured’, ‘the known’, ‘the object of thought’ are relative terms only because something else, ‘the measure ’, ‘knowledge’, ‘thought’, is relative to them. ‘The re- lativity is one-sided, not mutual as in the other two cases (10214 31).

There is a further difficulty in the present passage. Knowledge is said (1. 36) to be relative to the known in the sense that something else (the known) is relative to 27, But in A. 15 the known was said to be relative to knowledge in this sense; cf.1057% 7-12. There the known, here knowledge is made the term which is really absolute and only incidentally relative. The two statements are to be reconciled as follows: The term ‘knowledge’ is prior to the term ‘knowable’, since knowable = possible object of knowledge. But the thing which is knowable is prior to the knowledge of it, since there can be a know- able which is not known but there cannot be knowledge which is not ot something knowable. Cf. 1057 4-12.

1057* 3. Eott yap dprOuss wAHO0S Evi petpytoy, cf. A. 10207 13 n.

8. For drodidwow, ‘turns out’, cf. Ax. Post. 99°30, Meteor. 363° 11, A. A. 585> 32, 58622, G. A. 72278.

g-12. The sentence is difficult; the alleged fact (ovpBaive dé) is surprising in itself, and does not stand in a proper antithesis to what ‘one might suppose’ (d0€ere wey yap dv). The expression is loose, but the point (if the reading be right) seems to be this: Knowledge might be thought to be the measure of the knowable (a free render- ing of Protagoras’ maxim), but in point of fact, while all knowledge must be knowable, not all that is knowable is actually known or knowledge. The point is stated more accurately in Caf. 7» 22-35, where as here the relation of the knowable to knowledge is dis- tinguished from the relation of a genuine zpos ru term to its correlative. Cf. 1053 31-35. The doctrine of the identity of knowledge with its object (De An. 430% 4, &c.), to which Alexander and Bz. refer, does not seem to be relevant.

I suspect, however, that we should read émuornunv pev tacay émt- OTHTOU civan TO dé emvaTNTOV py TaV TPds emcaTHpyy, ‘that all knowledge is

298 COMMENTARY

430% 4, &c.), to which Alexander and Bz. refer, does not seem to be relevant.

I suspect, however, that we should read émuornunv pev tacay émt- OTHTOU civan TO dé emvaTNTOV py TaV TPds emcaTHpyy, ‘that all knowledge is

298 COMMENTARY

of a knowable, but not all the knowable is relative to actual knowledge’. This agrees better with Caz. 7 29 émuoryrod ev yap pm dvTos obk EoTW exioTHpn (ovdevds yap éorat ereornpn), emiornpns dé pr ovons ovdev KWATEL €TLOTHTOV €iVaL, OLOV Kal 6 TOD KUKAOV TETPAyOVLT [LOS elye éoTw emloTyrToV, ETLOTHN [LEV AVTOD OVK EoTW OvdETW, AvTOS BE emLOTNTOY EoT'.

14-17. From one point of view number is contrary to the one, because they have contrary attributes, being respectively divisible and indivisible; but from another point of view they are related not as contraries but with the sort of relation that knowledge has to the knowable, being respectively number (i.e. the measurable) and mea- sure. The distinction drawn in 105635 between évavria and the other kind of zpés 7: thus reappears in this sentence ; the meaning is brought out better by deleting the comma after 7. in 1. 16. It seems clear that the subject of 7 (1. 16) is not as Alexander and Bz, suppose » érotnun but 7d 7AROos, and that 76 & & pérpov, not ro 8 ev Kat /€rpov, is to be read.

The nature of intermediates (ch. 7).

105718. Intermediates must be compounded out of contraries ; for (1) they are always in the same genus as the extremes, since (a) they are that into which things must change before they reach the ex- tremes, and (4) it is not possible to change from one genus into another except per accidens, e. g. from a colour to a shape.

30. But (2) (a) all intermediates are between opposites (for it is only between these, fer se, that change can take place); and (4), of opposites, (i) contradictories admit of no mean (contradiction being between opposites one of which must be true of every subject) ; while (ii) relative terms that are not contrary have no mean because they are not in the same genus. Intermediates must therefore be between coniraries.

b2. (3) They must therefore be composed of these contraries. For the contraries must either fall within one genus or not. (a) If they do, so that there is something prior to the contraries, the differentiae that make the contrary species will be prior contraries ; for the species consist of the genus + the differentiae.

12, The intermediates will be composed of the genus + certain differentiae, which will not be the first contraries (otherwise every colour would be either white or black), but are intermediate between them.

19. Thus we have to consider first, of what are composed the inter- mediates between (4) contraries that are no/ in the same genus; for the things in the same genus must be composed of terms that do not

I], 6, 1057" 14—7. 10577 33 299

involve the genus as an element in them, or else be incomposite. Contraries are not compounded of one another, and are therefore starting-points ; of the intermediates ad/ or mone are compounded out of the contraries. Now from the contraries there arises somedhing such that change reaches it before it reaches the contraries (for there must be something that is less than the one and more than the other). Therefore all the o/her intermediates also are composite ; for that which has a quality in a higher degree than A and in a lower degree than B must be compounded of A and B.

29. But since there is nothing homogeneous with the contraries and prior to them, all intermediates must be compounded of the contraries, and therefore the lower terms, whether contraries or intermediates, will be compounded of the first contraries. Clearly, then, all intermediates are (1) in the same genus, (2) between contraries, and (3) compounded out of the contraries.

Chapters 7-10 are for some unknown reason not commented on by Alexander.

1057°18. kat éviwy €otw, i.e. in the great majority of cases; there are some contraries, however, like odd and even, straight and crooked, which admit of no mean (1055> 24).

19-' 34. That the intermediates are compounded out of contraries is proved (cf. > 2-4) by three premises, (1) that all intermediates are in the same genus as their extremes (I. 19) (which is itself proved-by two premises, (a) that intermediates lie on the path of change between ex- tremes (J. 21),(2) that change from one genus to another is impossible (1. 26)); (2) that all intermediates are between contraries (which is proved by two premises, (a) that intermediates are between opposites (1. 30), (6) that they cannot be between any kind of opposites except contraries (I. 33-1)). (3) Intermediates between contraries in the same genus, i.e. between contrary species, presuppose intermediates between contraries not in the same genus, i.e. between contrary differentiae (4-22); and since there is an intermediate differentia compounded out of the contrary differentiae, and if any of the intermediates is composite they all must be, all must be compounded out of the contraries (» 22-32).

27. Kad cupPeBykés, otov ék xpwparos cis oxqpo. A red thing may become round, but it does so not gua red but gua having some figure other than the round.

33-'1. Of the four kinds of opposites, viz. contradictories, relatives, privatives, contraries, Aristotle shows that the first two cannot have intermediates, and he infers that intermediates must be between con- traries. He says nothing of privatives, for contrariety is the extreme form of privation (1055? 35, @. 1046” 14), so that any privation short of complete privation falls between contraries.

He says nothing of privatives, for contrariety is the extreme form of privation (1055? 35, @. 1046” 14), so that any privation short of complete privation falls between contraries.

300 COMMENTARY

37. Tov S€ mpds TL doa ph evavtia, cf, 1056) 35.

b17. edn ds yévous, i.e. edy in the sense of species of a genus, not in the sense of Platonic Forms, cf. A. 991731 n.

8. 75 pév Siaxpitexdy xpdpua, Plato’s definition of white, Zim. 67 E 76 pv Suaxpitixov THs dwews AevKdv. Fine particles penetrate and dilate the visual stream, large particles compress it, and this produces white and black colour respectively (67 p).

II. GANG phy Td ye evavtiws Stapépovra paddov évavtia is very diffi- cult. Bz. takes it to mean ‘but the contrary differentiae must be more contrary than the contrary species’, since they are what make the latter contrary (cf. a. 993» 24). But (1) ra évavriws duadépovra is a strange way of expressing ‘the contrary differentiae’, and (2) this would be a mere repetition of the previous clause. 7a évaytiws diahépovra would more naturally mean the species that differ by having contrary differen- tiae, and Aristotle’s point may be that though the differentiae are in some sense prior contraries, the species are more properly called con- traries. Cf. Cat 6217 7a wActotov dAAjAwv Stet yKkoTa TOV ev TO AITO yéve. (we may illustrate this by white and black as opposed to dvaxpere- xév and ovyxpitixdv, Which are pi év yever, |. 20) évavria dpilovrar, and De Gen. et Corr. 324% 2. Even this interpretation, however, is not very satisfactory.

12. Td Aowwd Kal Ta petaéd, ‘the others, i.e. the intermediate species’.

20-22. ‘For the contraries which are in the same genus must be compounded out of (the genus and) the differentiae which are not themselves compounded with the genus (i.e. in which the genus is not an-element as it is in the species),—or else be uncompounded (which is incompatible with their nature as species).’

26. petags dpa éorat kal TodTo Tay évaytiwy, ‘ wherefore this differen- tia also comes between the contrary differentiae, as the intermediate species come between the contrary species’.

31-32. dote... €covtar. This seems to say that each extreme species as well as each intermediate species is compounded out of both the extreme differentiae. E.g. white would have to be to some extent ‘compressing’ as well as ‘dilating’, But this is not in itself a likely doctrine, and it can hardly be said to be proved in the present passage ; the meaning probably is that each extreme species contains one of the extreme differentiae as a logical element (the other element being the genus), while each intermediate species contains both the differentiae.

Otherness in species (ch. 8).

1057” 35. That which is other in species is different from something in something, and this must belong to both the terms that are other than

Otherness in species (ch. 8).

1057” 35. That which is other in species is different from something in something, and this must belong to both the terms that are other than

one another. They must therefore be in the same genus, for a genus is that which each of two things differing fer se is said to be.

igs 1057" 27-——8. 105898 301

105872. For not only must something common belong to both, but it must be different for each of them. The differentia must be an otherness of the genus; for a differentia of a genus is an otherness that makes the genus itself other.

8. This otherness must be contrariety. For all division is by opposites, and contraries are in the same genus, since contrariety is complete difference and difference in species is always difference from something in respect of something and this something is identical and is the genus that embraces both terms. Hence all contraries that differ in species and not in genus are in the same category, and have the utmost difference and are incompatible.

17. To be other in species, then, is to be in the same genus, con- trary, and indivisible (and to be the same in species is to be indivisible and have no contrariety)—for there are also contrarieties in the inter- mediate stages of division before we come to the indivisibles.

21. Therefore no species is either the same in species as or other in species than its genus (for matter is made known by negation, and the genus is matter of its species), nor with things not in the same genus; it differs in genus from them, in species from things in the same genus. For the difference must be a contrariety to that from which the given species differs in species, and contrariety exists only within a genus.

1057 35. From 1058412 it would seem that ri is ‘accusative of respect’; ‘other in some respect’. The same meaning is some- times conveyed by the dative, cf. 1054 25 1d dé dudhopov rivds Tut duaopov.

38. pi kata cupBeBnkds Exov Siapopdv. Cf, the rule that a genus must be divided according to its oixefa diaipeois (Z. 12, I. 10584 377).

105871. etre ds UAy oy, cf. A. 1024? 8.

4. €tepov &\Ajhwy, ‘different for one from what it is for the other’.

1054 25 1d dé dudhopov rivds Tut duaopov.

38. pi kata cupBeBnkds Exov Siapopdv. Cf, the rule that a genus must be divided according to its oixefa diaipeois (Z. 12, I. 10584 377).

105871. etre ds UAy oy, cf. A. 1024? 8.

4. €tepov &\Ajhwy, ‘different for one from what it is for the other’.

8. évavtiwots Toivuy gota atty. That the differentiation of a genus must be by contraries is by no means proved by what has gone before ; nor does what follows bear any resemblance to an éraywyy. It seems better therefore to take djAov Se Kat ex rHS éraywyhs as parenthetical (cf. Phys. 185? 13, 224% 30, De Caelo 276°14), and what follows as justifying evayriwots toivuy éorat atry. Even so the justification is far from complete. Aristotle merely points out that all division is by opposites, and that contraries are in the same genus. He does not show that they are the ov/y opposites which are in the same genus (which alone would prove that all differentiation is by contraries). Yet he could almost prove this. For contradictories are not in the same genus, since they together embrace the whole universe; nor are relative terms necessarily in the same genus (10572 38). Privatives and contraries alone remain, and these are very closely bound up together (10572 33” 1 n.).

302 COMMENTARY

Though Aristotle says that differentiation is by contraries, he does not in practice confine himself to division by dichotomy; e.g. in Café. 14> 347 he divides animals into wrryvov, reCov, evvdpor.

Il. déSerxrar, ch. 4.

Hv, 1055% 16,

4 8é Sradopa 7 eiSer maca tivds ti, ‘specific difference is always from something in something’.

13-14. TH adTH ouoToXia ... THs KaTnyopias, cf 1054°35 n., A, 1016 33 n.

17-19. Both indivisible species and individuals may be called aroya (Bz. Index 120° 58, 48). But the aroua which are said to be the same in species must be individuals, since two species are not the same in species. If, then, there is to be a proper opposition between the definitions of a TO dba and ravra 76 elder, aroua in], 18 as in l. 19 must refer to individuals. But since in ll. 21-26, it is species that are described as different in species from other species, aroma in }, 18 probably refers to indivisible species as well as individuals.

18-19. tadta , . . dvta is parenthetical. The next words justify the insertion of the previous éroua évra; in dividing a genus, we find contrarieties even in the previous stages (kal év rots peragv), 1. €. be- tween classes higher than the infimae species, but these constitute otherness in genus rather than in species; it is only between dtopa elon that there is otherness in speczes.

ai. 75 Kahovpevoy yévos, SEAN, to14b 9 7a Kadovpeva yery, The technical meaning of yévos and idos is not quite familiar, and xadov- pevoy introduces ‘it with some diffidence. In chapter ro we shall find yévos and etdos used quite untechnically. Bz.’s conjectural emenda- tions here are unnecessary.

22. ws yévous, cf. A. 991° 31 n.

In chapter ro we shall find yévos and etdos used quite untechnically. Bz.’s conjectural emenda- tions here are unnecessary.

22. ws yévous, cf. A. 991° 31 n.

Christ was right in reading mpooynkévtws. It is the reading of A as well as of E.

24. pi ds Td TOv “Hpaxderddy, cf, A. 10242 32,

ON’ ds 76 ev TH doer, ‘but in the sense of the genus which is an element in the nature of a thing’, Cf A. 10244 6 déyerar ev 7G TH > aA ve €OTL, TOUTO yevos.

27. 08 Siadeper = zpds Todro ob Siadéper Te

What contrarteties constitute otherness in species (ch. 9).

1058* 29. Why does not the female differ from the male in species, when female and male are contrary and the differentia is a differentia of animal as such?

34. This is much the same as the question why one contrariety (e.g possession of feet and of wings) makes things other in species, and another (e.g. whiteness and blackness) does not. The reason is that

I. 8. 1058811 —9. 1058 2 303

only the former are affections proper to the genus, Contrarieties in the definition make a difference in species, those in the concrete whole do not.

bg. Hence whiteness does not make a differentiation of man; for colour belongs to man on his material side, and matter does not make a differentia. Individual men are not species of man, though their flesh and bones are different ; the concrete whole is other, but not other in species because there is no contrariety in the definition. Man is the last, indivisible species; Callias is definition + matter, and so too is ‘the white man’, since ‘the man’ is only white per accidens because Callias is white.

12, Hence a bronze and a wooden circle are not other in species; and a bronze triangle and a wooden circle are other in species not because of their matter but because there is a contrariety in their definition.

15. But perhaps where the matter is other in a particular way it makes the things other in species in a sense, Why is this horse other in species than this man, though their definitions involve matter ? Because there is a contrariety in their definitions. A white man and a black horse are other in species not gua white and black, for they would have been so even if they had both been white.

21. Male and female are affections proper to animal, but not in virtue of its essence but in its matter (and hence the same seed can become male or female).

A white man and a black horse are other in species not gua white and black, for they would have been so even if they had both been white.

21. Male and female are affections proper to animal, but not in virtue of its essence but in its matter (and hence the same seed can become male or female).

This chapter implies a division into three kinds of the attri- butes which belong to some members of a genus and not to others. There are (1) oixeta 7déOy 70d yévous (* 37, » 22), which belong to the genus xa’ avré (4 32), i.e. are peculiar toit. These are subdivided into (a) those which are év 76 Adyw (P 1), which belong to the essential nature of the genus, i.e. dzfferentiae like ‘footed’ and ‘winged’ in the genus ‘animal’ (® 36), and (4) those which are & 76 cuverAnp- pévo TH BAy (P 2), which arise from the association of the essential nature with two or more kinds of matter. Thus a male animal is produced by the association of the owépya or male element, in which the form of the species is transmitted, with one female or material element, and a female animal is produced by its associa- tion with a different female element (» 23). The attributes under this head are properties of the genus; every animal must be male- or-female, and nothing but an animal can be either. There are (2) attributes which are not oikela wa6y rod yevous (* 37), like white and black, which belong to animals not gva@ animals but gua having surfaces. These attributes are accidents.

1058) 2. -1@ cuverAnppevy TH Oy, cf. E. 1025? 32.

304 COMMENTARY

5. s Ody yap 6 avOpwmos, ‘for when we distinguish the white man from the black man we are considering man on his material side’.

Q. todTo & éori 1d Ecxatov Gropov, ‘and this—that in whose defini- tion no contrarieties are included—is the ultimate indivisible species *. For aropoy cf. 2 17-19 n.

II-I2. xai 6 \eukds . .. GvOpwros...* The white man, then, is also definition + matter, for it is the individual Callias that is white; man, then, is white only incidentally {or per accrdens).’

1g. The substitution of a colon for a comma before ovdé does away with any need for Bz.’s emendation, HAwov tpiyevoy for EiAwos. ‘The bronze circle and the wooden circle, then, do not differ in kind; nor do the bronze triangle and the wooden circle differ in kind be- cause of their matter, but because of the contrariety in their defini- tions’, i.e. between triangle and circle.

17. tovdt dv6pa7ov would (I think) be unparalleled in Aristotle, and the addition of rod is necessary.

The perishable and the imperishable differ in kind (ch. 10).

between triangle and circle.

17. tovdt dv6pa7ov would (I think) be unparalleled in Aristotle, and the addition of rod is necessary.

The perishable and the imperishable differ in kind (ch. 10).

105826. Contraries are other in form, and the perishable and the imperishable are contraries. They must therefore be other in kind. But so far we have spoken only of the universal terms, so that it would not follow that every imperishable thing is different in kind from every perishable, any more than every white thing is from every black. The same thing may be both white and black, and, if it is a universal, may be both at the same time.

36. But while some contraries such as white and black belong to certain subjects per accidens, perishable and imperishable do not. Nothing is perishable per accidens; if it could be so, the same thing might be both perishable and imperishable. Perishableness is either the essence, or included in the essence, of all perishables. So too with imperishableness. Therefore the essential natures in virtue of which things are perishable and imperishable are opposed, and there- fore are other in kind.

1059? 10. Therefore there cannot be Forms such as some thinkers maintain, for if there were there would be a perishable and an im- perishable man. The Forms are said to be the seme in species as the particulars, but things other in genus are further apart even than things other in species.

105827. otépnois yap dduvapia Siwpicpévn. ‘Perishable’ and imperishable’ are contraries, not contradictories, for a privative term

$T. ALBERTS CSUTEGE LIBRARY

I. 9. 105885 —10. 1059%12 305

like ‘imperishable’ is not applicable to any and every thing that does not perish, but is limited to the class of things that might conceivably perish (cf. 1055) 8).

28. yéver. The premises only warrant the conclusion that the perishable and the imperishable are different in species, and there- fore Bz. reads eiSe. But this does not remove the difficulty, for in 10597 10 it is again stated, without any fresh grounds, that they differ yéve. It seems plain that cide and yéve are not here used in their technical sense. They may be translated ‘form’ and ‘kind’, In 1059214 on the other hand the technical distinction is found, and it seems probable that while the rest of the chapter was written before Aristotle had begun to use the words in their technical sense, ll. 10-14 were added later under the supposition that generic as opposed to specific difference between the perishable and the imperishable had been proved. These lines have the air of an afterthought; they use for the purpose of anti-Platonic polemic a result which in the rest of the chapter was established without any polemical motive.

For other instances of the non-technical use of the words cf. A. 10718 25 with 27, Caz. 8b 24 with 9214, An. Post. 97> 24 with 34, H. A. 490%16 with 17, 31 with 34, 55724 with 24, Pol. 1290 33 with 36. In Plato the words are often used indifferently.

1059*12. 6 pév, the sensible individual; 6 8, man-himself or the Idea of man.

BOOK kK

Book K consists of two very different parts, (1) 1059* 18—1065° 26, a shorter version of the contents of BIB, (2) 10654 26—1069° 4, a series of extracts from PAys, II, III, V. The two parts are in- geniously connected together by a transition from a discussion of the accidental to a discussion of chance. Jaeger has given (Arzsv. 216 ff.) strong reasons for holding that the first part is earlier than BIE, and was written when Aristotle was still much under the influence of Platonic presuppositions.

(1) While E has a section pointing forward to the discussion of substance and activity in ZH@ (1026 33-2), this is lacking in K (106415). I.e., while B has been worked up into a form which served to connect the original introduction ABIE. 1 with the later discussion of substance, ZH®, there is no trace of this in K,

(2) In K. 105939 Aristotle asks whether ‘the science we are looking for’ is concerned with sensible substances or with others, In the corresponding passage, B. 997° 34, he asks whether we must maintain the existence of sensible substances only or also of others.

2578-2 x

306 COMMENTARY

Jaeger argues (unsuccessfully, I think) that K here represents a more Platonic point of view.

(3) In K. 1060%7-13 the object of inquiry is said to be « tu xopiorov Kal! airs Kal pyderi rév aicOyrdv trdpxov. In B. 9997 24— 32 the language is much less strongly Platoni¢, K. 10604 21-27, » 1-3 reveal the same search for a transcendent object of knowledge.

(4) In K. 10638 10-17 Aristotle appeals from the changeableness of terrestrial things to the permanence of the celestial; in I’. roro® 15 ff., the appeal is to the permanent elements in the terrestrial world, and only incidentally (ib. 25-32) to the constancy of the heavens.

(5) The problem about the vAy tév pabyparixdy is peculiar to K. 1059 14-21. It is discussed in N. 1088? 14 ff., and N can on other grounds be shown to belong to the earliest draft of the Me/aphyszcs. The problem springs naturally out of Plato’s doctrine of the great-and-small.

(6) The one problem which is found in B (1002 32—1003* 5) and not in K is the question whether the elements exist potentially or actually—a question closely related to the contents of ZH®,

(7) K. 10593 presupposes the refutation of the ideal theory in A. 9; B. 99473 does not do this, and evidently belongs to the later period in which the attack on the ideal theory was removed from A and relegated to M. 4, 5.

Recapitulation of the problems stated in B. 2, 3 (ch. 1).

1059" 18. That wisdom is a science of first principles is clear from our examination of earlier thinkers, but the following questions arise :

4, 5.

Recapitulation of the problems stated in B. 2, 3 (ch. 1).

1059" 18. That wisdom is a science of first principles is clear from our examination of earlier thinkers, but the following questions arise :

20. (1) Is wisdom one science or more than one? If one, it should be of contraries, but the first principles are not contrary ; if more than one, which are these sciences ?

23. (2) Is it the business of one science to study the axioms? If of one, why of this more than of any other; if of more than one, which are these sciences ?

26. (3) Does it study all substances? If not all, then which; if all, how can one science study more than one subject ?

29. (4) Does it study attributes as well as substances? If it is a demonstration of attributes, it is not about substances; if a different science studies attributes, what is each and which is wisdom? Qua demonstrative, the science of attributes would be wisdom; gua about primaries, the science of substances.

34. The science we are looking for does not deal with the four causes ; it cannot deal with the final cause, i. e. the good, which is the first mover and is not presupposed by unmovable things.

Koer. TO5Q* 19-23 307

38. (5) Generally, is this science concerned with sensible substances or with others? If with others, then either with Forms or with mathe- matical objects. (a) The Forms do not exist; but, if we suppose them to exist, why is there not a third man, &c., just as mathematical objects are a ¢erfium quid between Forms and sensible things; on the other hand, if this er#um quid does not exist, what is mathematics about? Not about sensible things, which have not the required properties.

b 12. (4) Nor is the science we are looking for about mathematical objects, which have no separate existence, nor (c) about sensibles, which are perishable.

14. Which science should investigate the matter of mathematical objects? Not physics, which is occupied with things having a principle of motion and of rest in themselves ; nor logic, which is absorbed in the study of knowledge. This must therefore be a task for metaphysics.

» at. (6) Does metaphysics study the elements present in composite objects? It might seem to be rather concerned with universals (since all knowledge is of universals) and therefore with the summa genera, being and unity. These might seem most like first principles because if they are destroyed everything else perishes with them}; everything is existent and one.

gi. On the other hand, it would seem that these cannot be genera or first principles, because the differentiae must share in them, but no differentia shares in its genus, Further, what is simpler is more of a first principle than the less simple, and zmfimae species are simpler than their genera, being indivisible. But inasmuch as the destruction of the genus involves the destruction of its species, the genera are more like first principles.

But inasmuch as the destruction of the genus involves the destruction of its species, the genera are more like first principles.

K. 1, 2 covers the whole ground of B except the dopia stated in 996* 10, rr and discussed in 1002” 321003? s.

1059* 19-20. ék Tdv TpdTwY .. . TEpt TOY dpxay, i.e. A. 3-10.

20-23. This dzopia is that which is stated in B. 995» 5, 6 and dis- cussed in 996%18-5 26, The objection here urged against saying there is a single science of the dpyai is the objection stated jfirs¢ in B (996% 20, 21). The question here stated to arise if there be said to be more than one science of dpyai is different from that stated in B. 9961-24. The second objection stated in B (996% 21-» 1) against the first alternative is omitted here. The same point is made in 1059* 34-38, but in a different connexion.

22, at 8 dpxai odk évaytiat. By the dpyad are meant, as is evident from B. 996% 21-1, the four causes, which are evidently not contraries.

23. pia. We should perhaps follow I in reading péav, which gives the proper correspondence with «i pev yap play, |. 21.

308 COMMENTARY

trotas Set Oeivar tadtas; ‘ what sort of sciences is it that must be held to make up codia?’

23-26. This problem answers to the problem stated in B. 995» 6- to and discussed in 996 26—997%15, but is not identical with it. The question there was whether the science which studies the dpxai of substance should also study the dpyai of demonstration ; here it is whether it is one or more than one science that studies the dpyai of demonstration. The objection here stated to the first alternative answers, mutatis mutandis, to that in 996 339947" 2. That to the second alternative answers to that in 997%14, 15. The second argument against the first alternative (997° 2-11) and the first against the second alternative (9978 11-13) are here omitted.

25. Ti paddov tavrns 7) Srovacody; i.e. since the demonstrative dpxai are the dpyad of all the sciences, how can it be the business of one and only one science to study them? The argument is purely dialectical.

26-29 answers to the problem stated in B. 995” 10-13 and discussed in 997% 15-25.

26. ert métepoy Tacdv Tay ovoLay 7 003 sc. brodaPetv clvar Set THY codiav érurtpuny (|. 21).

29-34 answers to the problem stated in 995» 18-27 and discussed in 997% 25-34.

30. A comparison with the corresponding passage in B shows that a7ddeis €orw is an intrusion from the next line. The question is whether co¢éa is concerned with substances only or also with attributes ; the reference to demonstration comes in only by way of showing the difficulty of supposing that it is concerned with both.

The question is whether co¢éa is concerned with substances only or also with attributes ; the reference to demonstration comes in only by way of showing the difficulty of supposing that it is concerned with both.

32-38. Christ has rightly found 4 dwoderixy codia impossible, and therefore brackets copia, but Luthe’s } pév .. . 9 dé for H wey. . .# de is manifestly a better alteration of the text. Qwa demonstrative, the knowledge of properties might be thought to be codia (since knowledge is often identified with demonstration) ; but gua dealing with 7& mpara, the knowledge of substances might seem to be 80. ‘Luthe’s reading is established by the parallel i in 996> 9-14 rive xp? kadety TOY eruory- pov copiar € EXEL Aoyor € exdorny Tporayopeveu” rl Bev yap apxicwrary mais 7, TOD Téhous kat rayabot TOLAUTY «+ «, 7) OF TOV TPTOY aitiov ...H THS ovoias ay etn TOLAVT.

34-38. This passage differs from the rest of the chapter in not propounding a problem but simply stating a fact about codia. Ina sense the passage connects with the first problem stated above, in ll. 20-23, viz. whether one science can study all the dpyaé; and the corresponding passage in B (996% 21-" 1) occurs in the discussion of the first problem. On the other hand it seems impossible to remove the passage from its present position, for ovre yap |. 35 is taken up by dAws & 1, 38, and the passage thus connected with the following problem. We may suppose that the notes on which this passage is based were in some confusion and have not been properly sorted out.

K. 1. 1059% 23 — 1059) 35 309

34. Tas ev Tols puctKois eipnpevas aitias, the four causes, Phys. ii. 3.

85. otre. Bz. conjectures ode, but it seems more likely that ote is resumed irregularly (as often) by dAws 6’ in 1. 38.

g8. 7o Bé . . . dkiwnros, ‘but a something that moved them first does not exist in the case of unchangeable things’.

38—" 14 answers to the problem stated in 995» 13-18 and discussed in 997% 34—-998% 19. The question, however, is not the same. There it is whether there are substances other than the sensible ; here it is whether it is the business of copia to discuss the sensible substances or some others.

b 3. dHAov, sc. from A. g.

8. It isto be noted that ‘ third man’ has not here the technical sense in which it occurs in A. 990 17, Z. 1039% 2, M. 1079 13; the absence of the definite article in the present passage is significant. The phrase seems to have become a catchword which was used in various senses other than the originalone. Cf. A. 990? 17n.

990 17, Z. 1039% 2, M. 1079 13; the absence of the definite article in the present passage is significant. The phrase seems to have become a catchword which was used in various senses other than the originalone. Cf. A. 990? 17n.

14-21. This discussion of the question what science studies the matter of mathematical objects has no parallel in B. The question is not, what science studies mathematical objects (the answer to which is obviously ‘ mathematics’), but what science studies the tAy that under- lies mathematical objects. Thus the conclusion (l. 20) that meta- physics is the study in question does not contradict the statement in ]. 12 that metaphysics does not study mathematical objects.

15. THs Tov palnpatiKay Uns practically = space. It is the vAn vontyn Of which Aristotle has spoken in Z. 1036 9, where cf, n.

IQ. abtd tobTO Td yévos, i.e. dodeéis and émornpy.

2I—1060*1. Aristotle begins with the query raised in 995” 27-29

and discussed in 998* 20-14, whether the constituent elements or the universals are the dpxai studied by metaphysics, but he soon (Il. 27) passes to the query raised in 995 29-31 and discussed in 998” 14—999* 23, whether summa genera or infimae spectes are the dpxai. : 23. 74 Kadodpeva md tiwy ororxeta. Diels, Llementum, 17 fi., shows that the word is found (not before 370) in a tentatively meta- phorical sense in Isocrates, Xenophon, and Plato (Zheaet., Soph., Tim.).

Tait S€ TavTes evuTMdpXovTa Tois auVOdroLs TLHdaow, sc. while codia deals with immaterial entities (1. 14).

30, 38. For the notion of the cvvavaipotv cf. Top. iv. 2, vi. 4.

33. Stahopa 8 odSepia tod yévous petéxer. The genus is predicated not of the differentia but of the species, Zop. 144% 32.

tairy 8. Christ conjectures y’ for &, but 3° is sufficiently confirmed by the passages cited in Bz. /udex 167%7-12. Cf. B. 999% 27n.

35. 14 8 Eoyata tay ek Tob yevous, i.e. the zufimae species (as |. 38 shows), not the individuals, For droya used of cnfimae species cf. I. 10587 18.

310 COMMENTARY

Recapitulation of the problems stated in B. 4—6-(ch. 2).

1060*g. (7) Is there anything apart from individual things? These are infinite in number, but on the other-hand the knowledge we are looking for cannot be of genera or species, which are the things that might be supposed to exist apart from individuals. Yet we seem to be looking for something independent which is not an attribute of any sensible thing.

1g. If there is such a substance, which sensible substances does it exist alongside of? Why of some more than others? Yet it would be absurd to suppose eternal substances as numerous as the sensible and perishable.

19. But if the principle we are looking for is zo¢ apart from bodies, matter might seem to have a strong claim; yet it exists only poten- tially. Form has a stronger claim, but it is perishable, so that apparently there is ~o eternal independent substance. Yet the best minds have always sought such a principle; indeed, without it how could there be any order?

27. (8) If there is such a principle common to eternal and perish- able things, why are some eternal and others not? If the principles are different, then (a) if the principle of perishables is eternal, why are they not eternal? (0) if it is perishable, it presupposes another principle, and so ad infinitum.

36. (9) If we posit the principles that seem most unchangeable, being and unity, (a) if they are of individual substances, how can they exist apart, as first principles must ; if they are, all things will be sub- stances, since being is predicable of all; but plainly not all things are substances.

b6. (4) Those who make unity the first principle and a substance, and generate number from it and from matter and make number a substance, cannot be right; for how can you think of two or any number as one?

12. (c) Lines, planes, &c., cannot be first principles, since they are mere divisions and limits and therefore cannot exist apart.

17. (¢d) The unit or the point cannot be a substance, since there is no generation of it.

1g. (10) All knowledge is of universals, but substance is not universal but individual; if there is knowledge of the first principles, how can substance be the first principle ?

2g. (11) If there is nothing apart from the concrete whole, such wholes are all perishable ; if there is something, it must be form ; now

K. 2. 10607 3 — 1060? 13 311

in which cases will this exist apart? In some cases, e.g. that of a house, it evidently cannot.

28. (12) Are the first principles the same in form or in number? if in number, all things will be the same.

1060? 3-27 states the problem raised in B. 995> 31-36 and discussed in 999%24—- 24. There is first the question whether there is anything apart from individual things (3-13, 999% 24-32) ; then the question which sensible substances “have a corresponding separate substance (13-18, 999%32-55, » 17-20); the question whether, if the dpxy we are in search of is not separate, matter or form is more truly the adpx7 (19-24) is peculiar to K, and the arguments in 999 5— 16 are peculiar to B.

3. 74 Kad exaota, cf. B. 999% 26 n.

7. eipntor. The reference seems to be to 1059> 31-38.

15-16. The change of construction is awkward though natural. ‘Why should one suppose this other substance apfar/ from men or horses any more than another substance of the other animals’, &c.

3. 74 Kad exaota, cf. B. 999% 26 n.

7. eipntor. The reference seems to be to 1059> 31-38.

15-16. The change of construction is awkward though natural. ‘Why should one suppose this other substance apfar/ from men or horses any more than another substance of the other animals’, &c.

22, tolto S€ P0aprdév. Aristotle believes that an évvAov etdos (like the soul of an animal, or of a man in so far as he is irrational) is Oaprov, though indeed it is POaprov dvev rod POeiper Oar (H. 1043” 15n., _ cf. 1044P22, A, 107015). Cf. the distinction in De Caelo i. 9

between pure form and ei8os ody pepuypevov ; and Z. 1039) 20-2 23.

25. For ot xapueoraro. = ‘the most cultivated, refined people’, cf. A. 10759 26, De Resp. 480 29, &c.

27-36 states the problem raised in 996% 2-4 and discussed in 10008 5—1001% 3. K omits the historical discussion contained in 10008 g—b 20,

36-19 states the two problems raised in 9968 4-9, 12-15, and discussed in 1001® 4— 28, b 26—1002 11; thetwo problems are con- nected together by 1060 6-12.

b4. Bz.’s conjecture éora: is not necessary but is probable enough, and is confirmed by Al. 639. 37,640. 1.

5. kat evioy S¢ Kal To év, Really everything that is is one (1061 18); eviwv is used by way of caution. Alexander explains éviwy as meaning all things but numbers, but this is unlikely.

6-9. Tots... Pdokovow eivat, the Pythagoreans (A. 987% 18, B. 10014 10) and Plato (A. 987” 21, 9929, B. 1001@ 9):

8. tov dpiOpov yeryGou. mpdtoy, sc. and subsequently ra yewperpixa, Cf. 1. 12, B. ro01 17-25.

10. tav... dpiOpav Tay ouvOeTwy, not in the ordinary sense of com- posite as opposed to prime numbers. ‘The other numbers made out of the One and matter are meant.

13. émupavelas Tas mpdras, i.e. intelligible as opposed to sensible surfaces. For the sense of zparos cf. De An. 404 20.

taitd y. - J records the variant y’, which was conjectured indepen- dently by Bz. & and ydp seem to be both corruptions of this.

312 COMMENTARY

18, odolas pev yap méons yéveors eort, ottypfis 8 odK éotw, It cannot be meant that all substances are subject.to generation; for what then of God? The meaning is given better in B. 10028 28-? 11. If a substance at one time is not and later ‘is,it comes into being by a process of generation, while points, lines, and planes come into being instantaneously by the division of lines, planes, and solids.

19-23 states the problem raised in 9969, 10 and discussed in 1003* 5-17, especially in ll. 13-17.

23-28 recurs to the problem discussed in 4 3-27.

27-28. éw éviev yap... oixlas. The meaning is that there are evidently no separate universals of negations (A. 990? 13), of relations (990> 16), or of manufactured objects (991? 6, A. 10707 14).

28-go states the problem raised in 996% 1, 2 and discussed in 999 24—1000% 4.

The subject of philosophical study (ch. 3).

oixlas. The meaning is that there are evidently no separate universals of negations (A. 990? 13), of relations (990> 16), or of manufactured objects (991? 6, A. 10707 14).

28-go states the problem raised in 996% 1, 2 and discussed in 999 24—1000% 4.

The subject of philosophical study (ch. 3).

1060» 31. Philosophy is concerned with being as such universally, but being has more than one meaning. If it is merely ambiguous it cannot be dealt with by one science; if there is some common meaning, it can.

36. It is like the terms ‘medical’ and ‘healthy’, all of whose meanings have some reference to the medical art and to health respectively. So too everything that is is an affection, state, dis- position, motion, &c., of being as such.

1o61° 10. Since all that is is referable to some one thing, all con- trarieties are referable to the primary differences of being—plurality and unity, likeness and unlikeness, &c. It matters not whether the reduction be to being or to unity, for the two are at any rate con- vertible.

18. All contraries are objects of the same science, and each of them implies privation. (How can terms admitting of a mean, like just and unjust, involve privation? The privation must be said to be not of the whole definition but of the zwfima species. If the just man is ‘one who by virtue of a state of will is obedient to the laws’, the unjust man need not be the very reverse of this but may be ‘ one who is in some respect deficient in obedience to the laws’; in this respect he suffers from a privation of justice.)

28. The mathematician abstracts from all sensible qualities and studies simply what is quantitative and continuous in one, two, or three dimensions, and its essential attributes.

bg. Similarly the study of the properties and contrarieties of being

K. 2. 1060) 18 — 3. 106155 313

as such is the task of no science but philosophy; not of physics, which studies things not gua being but gua sharing in motion, nor of dialectic or sophistic, which study the attributes of things that are, but not gua being.

11. Since all that is is so called by virtue of some one common character, and things so related can fall under one science, we have solved our problem, how there can be one science of many things which differ in genus.

This chapter answers to T. 1, 2, the substance of which it states in a much briefer form. In the first part of the chapter, 1060 31—1061% 28, the question raised in 1059% 20-23 is incidentally answered, and in the second part, 10614 28—-» 11, that raised in 1059* 29-34, though at the end (1061 15) it is only claimed that the first of the two problems has been solved.

1061* 15. eotwcay yap avtat TeDewpynpévan, cf. DT. 100422 n. Alexander here again refers to the De Bono.

20-28. The question is how contraries that admit of a middle A€yerax kata orepyow. If contraries are related as égis and orépyors, it might seem that they are the only possible conditions of the dexrixév. The answer is that the intermediate in such a case lacks not every element in the definition of the positive term but only the final differentia. Besides just men, who conform to the whole definition of ‘just ’, and unjust men, of whom no part of it is true, there are men who in some respect fail to conform to it, e. g. who obey the laws but not from the right egis. Such men are said to exhibit the privation of the reAXevtatov eldos (1. 23); i. e. they do not belong to the zufima spectes ‘just man’ ; they are lacking in the final differentia, though they may belong to some wider class (e.g. that of men obedient to the laws) which includes also just men.

22, Td To.aiTa, i.e. TH ava pecoV.

23. To TeAeuTatou dé eidoug: Alexander explains this as ‘the extreme form’, but reAevraios is used regularly of the zmfima spectes or differentia (B. 99530, A. 10185, Z. 1038419, P.A. 643% 22, 35, 6443); and further rod dAov Aoyou suggests the splitting up of the definition into genus and differentiae.

24. et €otw 6 Bixaros Kal” ey Twd TwevPapxiKds Tots vopors, ‘This is the just man in the wider sense of justice, explained in LZ. VV. 1129> 1I—1130* 13.

25. 6 &Buxos is here used of the person who is in any degree unjust, i.e. of 6 dv& pécov, though in ]. 22 rod ddiékov meant the completely unjust man.

33. Tov pev ep’ ev, i.e. ray pev ro ed’ ev ouvexes.

b5. tas évavtidcets adtod, cf. B. 995) 20-27 n.

proaopias. dirocodia in the sense of rpwrn PiArocodia is rare, but giAdcodos occurs in the corresponding sense in 1003> 19, 1004" 34,

314 COMMENTARY

b16, 10054 21, > 6, 11, and the same narrowing down of the scope of pirocopia is implied in the distinction drawn between it and mathematics in A. 992733, A. 1073? 4.

Philosophy distinguished from mathematics and physics (ch. 4).

1061» 17. Since even the mathematician uses the axioms only in a special form, it is the task of first philosophy to study them. That if equals be taken from equals equals remain is common to all quanti- ties, but mathematics studies the several parts of its subject-matter (lines, angles, numbers, &c.), not gva being but gua continuous; while philosophy studies particular things only in so far as they have being.

27. Physics is like mathematics; it studies the properties and principles of things gua moving, not gua being, while the first science studies the attributes of being as being. Hence physics and mathe- matics are only parts of wisdom.

This chapter corresponds to IT. 1005*19-»2, and answers the question raised in 1059? 23-26.

1061” 18. tots Kowois, i.e. the aéimpara, cf. B. 997% 10.

TouTuy, i.e, Tov pabnpatiKOv.

Hence physics and mathe- matics are only parts of wisdom.

This chapter corresponds to IT. 1005*19-»2, and answers the question raised in 1059? 23-26.

1061” 18. tots Kowois, i.e. the aéimpara, cf. B. 997% 10.

TouTuy, i.e, Tov pabnpatiKOv.

20. kody pev éotiy éml mavtwy tav woody, i.e. this proposition is neither a common principle of all sciences nor peculiar to one; it is common to all the sciences of guantity. It thus belongs to a type not recognized in Aristotle’s classification of dpxai, An. Post. 76% 38. This axiom is similarly treated as a xowov, though really common only to the sciences of quantity, in Aw. Post. 774 30, 31.

21. drodkaBodoa, ‘cutting a part off for separate consideration’. Cf. Poet. 1459% 35 and the use of drorepvec$a, I. 1003% 24.

25. 4 3é prdogodia, cf. 1. 5 n.

26-27. mept To dy . . . Oewpet. The construction seems to be, ‘but speculates about that which is, in so far as each particular thing is’ (7 bv trav TowtTwy exactoy is opposed to 7 ovvexés airy ExacTov, 1, 24)—which is a brachylogy for ‘but speculates about that which is, and about particular things only in so far as each of them is’.

32. tavTny apparently refers to 7 vou; the clause answers to I, 1005) 1 éori d€ codia tis kal 7 pvoixy. THy démpaerny ... erepov 7. must therefore be treated as parenthetical. The point of connexion between 8.6, &c., and what precedes is not very clear. Alexander supplies a reason for the conclusion that physics and mathematics are branches of wisdom, viz. érevd) dodekvvovor Kal 6 pabnpatiKds Kal 6 pvorkos, kal ovdérote Wetdovrat, but this cannot properly be read into the text. It seems more likely that pépy is to be stressed. Because mathematics and physics do not study their objects gva being but gua continuous or gua moving, they are merely branches of wisdom; wisdom proper is

K. 4. 1ro61> 18—33 315

the more comprehensive science which studies being as such. This answers to the corresponding statement inT. 1005» 1 gor 5¢ copia Tis Kat 4 pvouxy, GAN od zpern.

33. For this wide sense of codéa in which it includes mathematics — and physics as well as philosophy cf. A. 981227, T. roo5b1, and EN. vi. 7, where it includes the study of é€ dy 6 xécpos ovvéornker, the constituents of the physical universe (11419 1),

Defence of the law of contradiction (ch. 5).

1061> 34. There is a principle about which it is impossible to be deceived—that the same thing cannot at the same time be and not be. Such truths cannot be proved absolutely because there is no more certain premise from which they can be inferred.

10628 5. But they can be proved to a particular person, viz. to any- one who makes contradictory assertions; the method is to assume something that is identical with the truth in question but does not seem so to our opponent.

11. People who are to discuss together must to some extent under-

stand each other; therefore each of their words must mean something, and ifit is ambiguous the intended meaning must be indicated. Now (1) he who says ‘A is and is not B’ is saying that the word B does not mean what it does mean, and since this is impossible the law of contradiction is proved. - 1g. (2) If the word means something and this meaning is truly asserted of a subject, the subject must necessarily have this character, and therefore can never not have it; so that the opposite statements cannot be true of the same subject.

23. (3) If the affirmation is no more true than the negation, ‘Ais a man’ is no truer than ‘A is ‘not a man’, and therefore a fortior? no truer than ‘A is not a horse’, and therefore (if contradictions are both true) no truer than ‘ A is a horse’; so that the same object is a man, a horse, &c.

gt. If one had argued thus with Heraclitus he might have abandoned his view ; he adopted it without realizing what he was saying. If his dictum were true, even it itself would not be true. For if‘ A is B ’ is no truer than“ A is not B’, ‘ A is both B and not B’ is no truer than ‘A is neither B nor not B’.

by, Further, if nothing can be truly affirmed it is false to say that no affirmation is true; while if something can be truly affirmed the dictum of these destroyers of all discussion is upset.

316 COMMENTARY

The chapter covers the ground of IT. 3. 1005» 8-end and of TI. 4, with the exception of

(1) the argument that if the law of contradiction be denied, substance is denied and everything reduced to accident (10078 20-» 18),

(2) the group of arguments in 10084 7-b 42,~

(3) the argument that the opponents of the law of contradiction themselves act upon it (1008 r2—1009%5). For this cf. K. 1063? 28-35.

1061» 341062? 2 answers to 1005” 8-34.

36—106222. Two kinds of contradictory proposition are here referred to, (1) ‘A is’ and ‘ A is not’, (2) ‘A is B’ and ‘A is not B’ (réAXa. Ta TOdTOV avToIs avTiKe(“eva TOV Tporov). Of these the second is the more general, since the first may be exhibited as a species of it, ‘ A is existent’ and ‘A is not existent’.

1062? 2-5 answers to 1006? 5-18.

5-I9 answers to 10064 18—1007? 20.

6. S167: Weddo0s. As Bz. points out, an argumentum ad hominem does not point out the reason of the opponent’s mistake but only its existence. Thus dud7, must be used in the sense of ‘that’. Cf. Jnudex 200? 39-45.

12, adtav = dhAnAwv. Cf. L. and S. s. v. m1.

5-I9 answers to 10064 18—1007? 20.

12, adtav = dhAnAwv. Cf. L. and S. s. v. m1.

16-19. In view of 1061> 36—10624 2 (where see n.) the meaning seems to be ‘ He, then, who says that A is B and that it is not B de- nies what he asserts, so that what the word B means he says it does not mean ; but this is impossible, so that if ‘‘being B” means something ’ (or ‘if any word means “ being something” ’), ‘the contradictory of it cannot be truly asserted of the same subject’.

17. ToUvopa, Sc. TO elvar, Says Bz., but the reference is to any predicate, cf. tév é6vopatwv exacrov, 1, 13. In 1006 30, to which Bz. refers, it is not clear whether 70 civai 7} a) etvar is as he supposes explicative of 76 dvopa, OF 70 €lvat 7 pa) eivar Todi is the object of oypaiver, so that 7o dvowa would be quite general.

18. elwep onpaiver tr 7d elvor Té8e. 7. may be either subject or object of onpatver.

Ig-23 answers to 1006) 28-34. The meaning is expressed more clearly in I. dvdyxn roivuv, «i te €otw GAnGes ciety O71 GvOpwros, Gov civar dirovy (rodro yap jv 6 éojpawe 70 dvOpwros) 12, Protagoras’ saying, ‘man is measure of all things’, is similar to the views we have been discussing. He means that what seems to each man is so; then since things seem different to different people, the same thing will be and not be.

20. The problem will be solved if we consider the origin of this belief. (1) With some, it arose from the doctrine of the physicists ; (2) with others, from observing that people have different impressions about the same thing.

24. (1) That nothing can come into being from not-being but everything from being is a view common to most of the physicists. Therefore, since a thing does not become white if it was perfectly white, the white must come from what is not white ; so that according to them it must come from not-being, unless the same thing was white and not white. The difficulty is easily removed; we have stated in the P&ysics in what sense things come to be from being and in what sense from not-being.

38. (2) (@) It is foolish to attend equally to opposite opinions. The same thing never seems sweet and sour to two people unless the sense-organ of the one has been injured; in that case only the other man is a measure. So too with good and bad, &c. We might just as well claim that the object which seems to be two when you press your eye must de two.

1063* 10. (4) We ought to judge of the nature of things not from the changes in the things around us but from the changelessness of the heavenly bodies.

17. (c) Again, if there is motion, there is a moving thing, which moves from something and into something ; and when it is in the one it is not in the other,

as. (¢) Even if things in this world were always changing in quantity—and the observation of such changes is one of the chief motives of the theory—they need not be always changing in quality, and essence depends on quality, which is determinate, not on quantity, which is indeterminate.

318 COMMENTARY

28. (e) Again, the fact that people act on the doctor’s orders shows that they think things have a determinate nature which is not always changing.

35. (/) If we are always changing, the changes in our perceptions do not show the objects to be changing ; if we-are mo¢ changing, then there is something that is at rest.

b7. It is not easy to meet those who feel these difficulties on dialectical grounds, for if they will not posit something and no longer demand a reason for it, they make discussion impossible; those, on the other hand, who are puzzled by the traditional difficulties may be answered as we have shown.

15. Contradictory statements, then, cannot both be true; nor can contraries, because contrariety involves privation, as may be seen by analysing the definitions of contraries.

1g. Nor can an intermediate be predicated of the same subject of which one of the extremes is asserted. If A is white we cannot truly say it is neither black nor white, for we shall be saying that it is both white and not white.

24. Therefore neither the view of Heraclitus is right, nor that of Anaxagoras that there is a portion of everything in everything; if everything is present acfually in everything, contraries are true of the same thing.

go. Similarly all'statements cannot be false, nor all true—for this reason in addition to others, that if all are false this statement itself is false, and if all are true it will be true that all are false.

This chapter covers almost the whole ground covered in T. 5-8, the main sections omitted being (1) the references to earlier views in 1009 38—1010% 22, (2) the arguments in 1010 26—1011% 2, 1orT® 17-12,

1062 12-24 answers to 10092 6-16, 22-30.

21-24. Of the two reasons for the Protagorean theory, the first is discussed in 24-33, the second in 33—1063? 7.

24-33 answers to 1009? 30-36, though not closely.

21-24. Of the two reasons for the Protagorean theory, the first is discussed in 24-33, the second in 33—1063? 7.

24-33 answers to 1009? 30-36, though not closely.

26-30. ‘Since, then, white does not come to be if the perfectly . white and in no wise not white existed before, that which becomes white must come from that which is not white; so that it will come from what is not, according to them, unless the same thing was white and not white.’ In the first clause the general sense shows that od goes with yiyverar, not with Aev«dy, and the use of ov, not 7, confirms this interpretation. viv dé yeyevypevov py Aev«dy is not only unmeaning in itself, but spoils the structure of the sentence, since the apodosis should begin with yéyvour’ dv. adore but rarely introduces an apodosis except after a parenthesis. Bz. is therefore right in suggesting that viv...

K. 6. 1062 12 — 1063721 319

Xevxov should be excised. These words look like a gloss by a copyist who took od Aevxdy together in 1]. 26. Baz. is also right in suggesting the excision of jy after yyvépevov. An alternative would be to insert pH before Xevxod, where it is read by E (in marg.) T'; but there seems to be no reason why the case of the not-white coming from the not- not-white should be substituted for the simpler case of the white coming from the not-white.

The argument then is:

Nothing can come to be from what is not. The white comes to be from the not-white. Therefore the not-white must also have been white.

ZI. év tois puoikots, Phys. i. 7-9, De Gen. et Corr. 314% 14—319? 5. Aristotle’s answer is that an A which is B comes out of an A which is but is not B, or which is B poientially but not actually.

338—1063* Io answers to 1010 1-26, 1o1I* 31—34.

1063? 6-10. The illusion referred to is produced by pressing the finger against the under part of the eyeball, when a single object is seen as two. The same illusion is referred to in De Somn. 461» 30, Probl. 958% 24. ‘Toexpect this is just like expecting the things which appear to people who put their finger under their eye and make the things appear two instead of one, to be both two because they appear to be two, and again one.’

9. The unintelligible vulgate reading dvo & eivarhas been produced by haplography from the correct vo deity civas preserved in JT. ra pawopeva ... dvo dety eivar is the object of aé:0dv understood.

10. kode. refers not to movement of the eye but to interference with it.

10-17 answers to 1010 25-32.

15. TO Kata Toy Kéopov, the heavenly bodies.

17-21 answers to 1o10® 35—) 1, though only in a very general way.

17-19. There seems to be no parallel in Aristotle for dpa 2 apodos? except after a long protasis (all the instances quoted by Bz., De Zvi. 19°18, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 333 29, 337224, De An. 42529, P. A. 642°13, H. NV. 11346 are of this kind); so that Christ is right in putting a comma after gor. ]. 18 and treating kal xwovpmevdy tu as apodosis.

except after a long protasis (all the instances quoted by Bz., De Zvi. 19°18, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 333 29, 337224, De An. 42529, P. A. 642°13, H. NV. 11346 are of this kind); so that Christ is right in putting a comma after gor. ]. 18 and treating kal xwovpmevdy tu as apodosis.

19, 20. Bz. thinks that Aristotle could not have said ‘the moving thing must be in that out of which it is to move, and not be in it’, without indicating that it is at different times that it will be in it and not in it. He therefore supposes airé to mean that 77/0 which the moving thing moves. It seems impossible, however, to suppose that aire refers to anything different from what éxefvm refers to ; and Bz.’s difficulty is an unreal one. The passage means, as a whole, that motion implies that contradictory predicates can be asserted of the changing thing at different times, but not at the same time. ovvady- OeverOar (1. 21), the reading of A? Al., brings out the point better than the common reading dAnbever Oar.

QI. Td... Kata Thy ayTibaow = Tas dvyTikepevas pacets.

320 COMMENTARY -

22-28 answers to 1010% 22-25,

23. katmep odx dAnOes dv. Aristotle tries to show in Phys. 253> 13- 23 that growth or diminution cannot go on continuously but proceeds by jumps.

27. 7) 8 oveia Kata 73 rowdy, in the sense of roy explained in A. 1020* 33. ‘

28. 16 8€ moody Tis dopictou, the size of things is not definite and unchangeable as some of their qualities are.

28-35 answers to 1008) 12-24,

32. Christ’s reading rod rpocaybévros, which in a note he describes as spurious, is a misprint.

35-> 7 answers to 1009? 38—? 33, but with the references to other philosophers omitted.

b7-16 answers to 10092 16-22, To11? 3-16.

8. ék Adyou, ‘on dialectical grounds’. Cf. 1009% 20 daar Adyou xapw Aéyovor, LOTI* 4 THY Tods Adyous TovToUs pdvov AcydvTwr, ib. 15 of év TO Aoyw tHv Biav povov Cytodvtes.

14. ék Tdv eipnpévar, sc. in 1062 20—1063? 7.

17-Ig answers to 1011) 17-22,

19-24 answers, though not closely, to I. 7. rorz1> 23—1012® 24, That chapter proves that there cannot be a middle between contra- dictories ; here the point is that a middle between contraries cannot be asserted of one and the same thing (1. 20), sc. of which one of the contraries is asserted. The proof is: If the same thing is white and neither white nor black, it is white and not white; which breaks the law of contradiction. This is a point not made in TI, though there is a general correspondence with I. 7.

24-35 answers to 10122 24-)18,

24-25. xa’ “Hpdxdertov . .. Méyovtas is to be understood by reference to 1062 31—) 2 (cf. to128 25, 35).

25. kar "Avagaydpav. The view referred to is indicated in ll. 26-30 (cf. 10124 27).

Distinction of theology from mathematics and physics (ch. 7).

24-35 answers to 10122 24-)18,

24-25. xa’ “Hpdxdertov . .. Méyovtas is to be understood by reference to 1062 31—) 2 (cf. to128 25, 35).

25. kar "Avagaydpav. The view referred to is indicated in ll. 26-30 (cf. 10124 27).

Distinction of theology from mathematics and physics (ch. 7).

1063 36. Every science marks out some genus for itself and studies this, but not gva being; they leave that for another science. These sciences get the essence of their subject by perception or by hypothesis, and try to prove the attributes; it is evident from a review of them that there is no proof of the essence.

1064210. The science of nature is not a productive science, for in such a science the principle of motion is in the producer and not in the product, being an art or other faculty ; nor a pracfical science, since here the motion is in the doer, not in what is done, while physics is

- aaah SS atta Ky 6: Fae 5a 22— 7. 1064? 13 321

concerned with things that have a principle of motion in themselves, It is ¢heoretical, therefore.

Ig. Since each science must know the essence of its subjects, we must note how the physicist should define. Should he define as one defines ‘snub’ or as one defines ‘hollow’, i, e. with or without refer- ence to matter? Flesh, eye, &c., must be defined with reference to their matter.

28. Is the science of being as being and as capable of separate existence the same as physics? Physics studies things having a principle of change in themselves; mathematics studies things unchanging but without separate existence. If, then, as we shall try to show, there is a separate unchanging substance, the science of it is different from physics and mathematics, If there is such a substance, here is the divine, and the first and most authoritative principle.

by. There are, then, three kinds of theoretical science, physics, mathematics, theology. Theoretical science is the best kind of science, and of its species the last-named is best, being about the best object.

6. Is the science of being as such universal? There is a universal mathematics as well as the various branches. If physical substances are the primary entities, physics is the first science ; but if there is a substance which is separate and unchangeable, the knowledge of it is prior to physics, and universal because prior.

This chapter answers to E. 1 much more closely than the preceding chapters answer to B and I. It answers the question raised in 1059 26-29.

10642 7. al pev Sv aicOnoews ai 8 broTdpevar, cf. H. rozs’ 11 n.

36. omep metpacdpeba Serxvdvar, cf. A. 6, 7. But see vol. I, xxvii. f.

bg. % Sé kaOddou Kowh wept mdvtwy, cf. B. 10262 25 n.

1g. ka0dhou to mpotépay, cf. E. 10267 23-32 n.

Accidental being and being as truth ; chance (ch. 8).

10642 7. al pev Sv aicOnoews ai 8 broTdpevar, cf. H. rozs’ 11 n.

36. omep metpacdpeba Serxvdvar, cf. A. 6, 7. But see vol. I, xxvii. f.

bg. % Sé kaOddou Kowh wept mdvtwy, cf. B. 10262 25 n.

1g. ka0dhou to mpotépay, cf. E. 10267 23-32 n.

Accidental being and being as truth ; chance (ch. 8).

1064) 15. (1) Let us first examine being in one of its senses—the accidental. The accidental is not studied by any of the traditional sciences; the builder does not ask what will happen to the people who use his house, but studies his own proper end.

23. Nor does any science reason that ‘the musical man who becomes grammatical will be both at the same time, not having been so before; but what is, without always having been, must have come to be ; so that he must have become at the same time musical and gram-

2073-2 Ni

322 COMMENTARY

matical’. It is only sophistic that studies this ; it is the only science of the accidental, and Plato was not far wrong in saying that the sophist spends his time on not-being.

30. That a science of the accidental is not even possible will be clear if we ask what the accidental is. Everything that is is either always and of necessity (logical necessity, not compulsion), or for the most part, or ‘as it happens’ (e.g. cold in the dog-days). The accidental is what happens, but not always nor for the most part, and for that reason there can be no knowledge of it.

1065° 6. There are no causes of the accidental such as there are of the essential ; for then everything would be of necessity. If A is when B is, and B is when C is, and C is of necessity, all the effects down to the last will be necessary, and contingency will have been abolished.

14. Similarly, if the cause be not a being but an event, all events will be necessary ; to-morrow’s eclipse will follow necessarily from something now existent,

21. (2) Being as truth depends on a combination in thought, and there- fore we pass it by and fix our attention on independently existing being ; being as accident is indeterminate and has indeterminate causes.

26. (3) Teleology is found in things happening by nature or as a result of thought. It is chance when some such event happens by accident; chance is an accidental cause of teleological events of the purposive kind. Hence chance and thought are concerned with the same objects; for purpose implies thought. The causes of chance events are indeterminate, and theréfore chance is obscure to human reasoning and is a cause only per accidens. It is good luck or bad luck when it turns out well or ill; prosperity and adversity are good and bad luck on a large scale. Since nothing accidental is prior to the essential, if chance is a cause of the universe reason and nature are prior causes.

1064) 15—1065* 26 answers roughly to EB. 2-4, omitting

(1) the account of the various senses of ‘ being’ in B. 1026 34—? 2,

(2) the statement that accidents are neither generated nor destroyed, 1026> 22-24,

1064) 15—1065* 26 answers roughly to EB. 2-4, omitting

(1) the account of the various senses of ‘ being’ in B. 1026 34—? 2,

(2) the statement that accidents are neither generated nor destroyed, 1026> 22-24,

(3) the examples given in 1026 35—10279 5, 10278 23-26,

(4) the reference of the cause of accidents to matter, 10279 13-15,

(5) the discussion of being as truth in E. 4 (just touched on in 10652 21-24).

K. 8. 1064 15 — 1065 28 323

23. It seems best to excise o48€ povotkdy Kal ypappatiKdy, which is omitted in Alexander and was probably inserted by a reader who wished to indicate briefly the sophistical question mentioned in the corresponding passage of E—zérepov érepov 7) TadTov povatKov Kal ypap- parixov (E. 1026>16, where see n.). od8& povorkdy Kai ypapparikdy will not stand by itself, and if these words be retained we must intro- duce after odé either ei with Bz., 76 with Christ, or (best) ei 76 with Bullinger.

23-26. o08€ tév dvTa... ypappatiKds. The sophistical argument here given is somewhat different from that in E. 1026 18-20. The argu- ment is:

A man who being musical becomes grammatical will be both at once, not having been so before.

But that which is, but bas not always been, must have come to be.

Therefore such a man at the same time came to be musical and grammatical,—which ex hypothes? he did not.

The fallacy evidently lies in the supposition that because he must have come to be simultaneously ‘ musical and grammatical’, he must have simultaneously come to be musical and come to be gram- matical; dua is ‘conjoined’ with a word to which it does not really belong. The compiler has thus replaced the fallacy in E. 1026> 18— 20 7 instance of the familiar fallacy of cvvOeors (Soph. El. 166% 23-32).

26. Bz. brackets 8é, and as an alternative suggests 67. But dé is justified by the passages quoted in Bz. /udex 167% 24-34.

29-30. fiddtwv .. . SiarpiPew, Soph. 237 A, 254A.

34. 4 xpapeOa ev tois Kata Tas dmodetgers, ie. Hy Acyomey TH py evdéxerOar ddAws, E. 1026> 29.

1065* 21. 16 8 ds dAnOes dv Kat Kata cupBeByKds. The insertion of py after kai in most of the manuscripts and Alexander is doubtless due to the previous corruption of dAnOés into dAyGas. uy Kata cupB_ByKds would be a proper synonym for the latter. Strict grammar would require 76 kata ovpP_Byxds, but for the omission of the article cf. Pol. 1280) 15, Poet. 1459 2, 37, &c. ‘There is no reason to suspect, with Bz., that the true reading is 76 8 ws dAnOes dv Kal pn, Kal TO Kare oupeBinxés.

24. é. Cf. BE. 10282 n. ;

26-> 4. The excerptor now supplements the account of the acci- dental in the preceding part of the chapter by an account of chance derived from PAys. ii. 5, 6.

24. é. Cf. BE. 10282 n. ;

26-> 4. The excerptor now supplements the account of the acci- dental in the preceding part of the chapter by an account of chance derived from PAys. ii. 5, 6.

28. toUtTwy, i.e. Tov Gvexd Tov. It is hard to see how something that is for a purpose can happen by accident or incidentally. The context in the Physics shows that Aristotle means by something évexa tov something that might naturally result from the unconsciously teleo- logical action of nature or from the consciously teleological action of man (Zor, 8 vexd tov dca te ard diavoias dv mpayGein Kal doa dd icews, 196» 21); i.e. something that fulfils an actual or possible pur- pose, whether it happens for a purpose or not. Cf. rod KxopicacOou

324 COMMENTARY

évexa in 196» 35, where actual purpose is expressly excluded, and the use of réAos in 197%1 of what would naturally be an end of action. Where a result is produced ‘accidentally that would normally be pro- duced by purposive action, it is said to be dao rvxns ; where a result is produced accidentally that would normally be produced by nature, it is said to be dé rabroudrov. To say that A produces B xara ovpBeBnxds means (1) that A has a concomitant C which produces B, or (2) that A produces C which has a concomitant B. But xara ovp,BeBnxds must be understood also in the light of the explanation of it given above in ]. 1; to say that A produces B accidentally is to imply that it produces it rarely.

Torstrik (Hermes ix. 425-470) has tried to show that Aristotle repre- sents chance results not as those which might naturally be produced by purposive action, but as those which are actually though incidentally so produced. But the evidence to the contrary in the Physzcs is too strong. Cf. 196 22 ay mpaxbetn (cf. 197% 35, 198%6), 196” 33— 197° 5, 197” 21 (where rv mpoaperav must mean ‘natural objects of choice’, not ‘things acquired as the result of choice’), » 30-32. Torstrik has to have recourse to emendation to prove his point; he has to read zpax67 in 196» 22 and to excise Tod KopioacOas evexa ib. 35.

31-32. 81d... Sidvorw, This serves to distinguish téyy from ratro- patov. tvxn is to purposive thought as ratrdéuaroy is to the uncon- scious purposiveness of nature.

bo-4. émel 8 ... pious. 70 Kata cupP_eByKds is always an indirect relation of A to B which implies direct relations of A to C and of Cto B. rvxy is just the production, by reason, of effects concomitant with its intended effects, and tairémarov is the production, by nature, of effects concomitant with those which it constantly tends to produce. Thus réyn presupposes reason, and ratrouarov presupposes nature. Aristotle’s attack here appears to be directed mainly against the Atomists. Cf. Phys. 196% 24, Simpl. 331. 16.

Torstrik has grammatical correctness on his side in inserting rév after od@év, But probably kara cupB_Byxds is used practically as an adjective.

Aristotle’s attack here appears to be directed mainly against the Atomists. Cf. Phys. 196% 24, Simpl. 331. 16.

Torstrik has grammatical correctness on his side in inserting rév after od@év, But probably kara cupB_Byxds is used practically as an adjective.

3. el dpa TUXN 7 TO adTéparTov altLov Tod odpavod, This is a clear in- dication that the latter part of K is an excerpt from the Physics, not notes preliminary to it. The excerptor is plainly referring to a previous passage of the PAyszcs which does not occur in K, viz. eiot dé twes of kal Tovpavod TovdE Kal THY KdcpwWY TavTWY aiTLOVTAaL TO avTOpaToV KTA. (196% 24-35). The reference is apparently to Democritus,

Potency, actualizgation, movement (ch. 9).

1065» 5. A thing may be, either actually or potentially or both actually and potentially, a substance, a quantity, or in one of the other categories.

K. 8. 1065% 31 — 1065» 2 328

7. There is no motion apart from things; for it is with respect to the categories that change occurs, and there is nothing common over these. In substance there are form and privation, in quality white and black, in quantity complete and incomplete, in place up and down, so that there are as many kinds of change as of being.

14. The distinction of potentiality and actualization exists in each class of things, and motion is the actualization of the potential as such ; e.g. when the buildable as such actually exists, it is being built, and this is the process of building. Motion takes place when the actualization itself exists, and neither before nor after.

21. Thus the actualization of that which is potentially, when it exists actually, not as itself but as movable, is motion. The bronze is poten- tially a statue, but the actualization of the bronze as dronze is not motion, for it is not. the same thing to be bronze and to be a certain potentiality.

28. This can be seen from the case of contraries ; to be capable of health and of disease is not the same thing (if it were, health and disease would be the same thing), but the substratum of health and of disease is the same.

32. Motion, then, is the actualization of the potential gua potential. That motion is what we have defined it as being, and exists only when the actualization itself exists, is clear. For the actualization of the buildable as such must be either the act of building or the house ; but when the Aouse exists it is no longer buildable; on the other hand it zs the buildable that is the object of the act of buclding. Therefore the actualization of the buildable is the act of building ; and this is

a movement. 106627. That we are right is shown by what others say about

motion, and by the difficulty of defining it otherwise. It cannot be placed in any other genus; others say it is otherness, inequality, or not-being, but none of these need be moved, nor are they the terminus or starting-point of motion any more than their opposites.

It cannot be placed in any other genus; others say it is otherness, inequality, or not-being, but none of these need be moved, nor are they the terminus or starting-point of motion any more than their opposites.

13. These thinkers define motion thus because it is thought to be indeterminate and the principles in one of the two columns are inde- terminate because they are privative; none of them is in any one of the categories.

17. Motion is thought to be indeterminate because it cannot be classed either with potentiality or with actualization, since neither that which can be, nor that which is, of a certain size need be moved. Motion is thought to be actualization, but incomplete, because that whose actualization it is is incomplete. It is difficult to grasp the nature of motion because it cannot be classed either as privation, as

326 COMMENTARY

potentiality, or as unqualified actualization. It must, then, be actualiza- tion, and the actualization we:have defined ; it is difficult to grasp but capable of existing.

26. Clearly motion is in the movable ; for it is the actualization of this: by that which has the capacity to set in motion.’ And the actualization of the latter is none other; it must be the complete reality of both. The mover is movent by virtue of its capacity, but moves by virtue of its activity, and it is on the movable that it has the power of acting, so that the actualization of both is one, as the interval from one to two and that from two to one, or the uphill and the downhill slope, are one, their being not being one.

The excerptor now passes to the discussion of movement, and gives extracts on it from PAys. iii. 1-3.

Aristotle begins his account of movement by referring (1065» 5-7) to the distinction of potentiality and actuality, which is implied in the definition of movement he is about to give. After pointing out (ll. 7-14) that movement is always in respect of one or other of four categories—substance, quality, quantity, or place—and is movement between the opposite poles, so to say, which exist in the several cate- gories, he formulates (1. 16) his definition—movement is the actuality or actualization of that which exists potentially, in so far as it exists potentially. I.e. movement is not the actualization of the whole character of that which is moved. Building is not the actualization of the buildable gua bricks and stones; the buildable is actually bricks and stones before the building process begins. Building is the actualization of the buildable gua buildable, and in general of the movable gua movable. I.e. part of the character of the bricks and stones is their capacity of being arranged into the form of a house, and the process or movement of building is the actualization of this capacity (Il. 23-33). That it is so is confirmed (ll. 20-21, 34— 1006* 7) by the fact that the building process exists just when the actualization exists. Prima facie either the building process or the house might be regarded as the actualization of the buildable. Lut when the house has come into being, the buildable has ceased to be; on the other hand the buildable exists throughout the building process, since this implies at each moment that there is still something buildable and not yet built, some material that has not yet received the last touch from the builder’s hand. The process, therefore, rather than the pro- duct, is the actualization of the buildable, and what is true in this case is true in all cases. Movement is always the actualization of a latent capacity (10663 2-7).

1065" 5. 76 pev évepyela pdvoy, i.e. pure intelligences; 1d Sé Suvdper, i.e, such things as the infinite and the void, cf. ©. 1048) 9 ; 7 Sé Suvdper kat évepyeta, i.e, physical objects comprising both matter and form ;

K. 9. 1065) 5—31 327

gua having form they are already actually something, gua having matter they are potentially something which they are not yet.

6. 75 pev dv. For dy in the sense of substance cf. Phys. 1917 12, De Gen. et Corr. 314 28,

7. petaBddder yap del kata Tas Tod dvtos KaTHYopias, i.e. change is kat ovotayv, the generation or destruction of a substance; kara, roar, growth or diminution; xara, roudv, alteration; or kata rézov, loco- motion.

14. tocar el8y doa Tod dvros. This is not strictly true, since there is (according to Aristotle) eraBoAy in respect of only four categories (substance, quality, quantity, place) and «vyots in respect of only three (quality, quantity, place); cf. 106849.

14—1066# 7. An aggregate of bricks, stones, &c., may be regarded (1) as so many bricks, stones, &c., (2) as potentially a house, (3) as potentially being in course of being fashioned into a house. The movement of building is the realization not (1) of the materials as those materials (they are, previously to the building, already actually these materials), nor yet (2) of their potentiality of being a house (the house is the realization of that), but (3) of their potentiality of being fashioned into a house (7 oixodojntdv). Similarly every movement is a realization-of-a-potentiality which implies a further potentiality and only exists while the further potentiality is not yet realized. Hence it is dreAys (10664 21) and, though in a sense an évépyeza, is distinct from an évepyeva in the narrower sense in which évépyea implies that no element of dvvapus is present at all.

16. 4 Tovodréy éorw, i.e. ‘in that respect in which it exists poten- tially’. Cf. 9 rod duvatod kat 7 duvaroy evredéxesa, |. 33.

1g. kai xvAuus (A>) is awkward, the other words in the list not being joined by xa. These two words, which are not foundin EJTT, seem to be a late importation from the Physics, where «ai occurs throughout the list.

22. It seems quite possible to understand évreAdyeva after dvros, and we therefore need not read it (with Bz.), against all the manuscripts both of the Physzcs and of the Metaphysics.

22. Of the variant readings, 7 air 7} dAdo introduces. an irrelevant distinction, that between self-moving things and things which move others. That the true reading is o8x 7 adtd ANN 7 KUvyTév is Shown by the explanation of 7 which follows in ll. 23-33.

28-32. The distinction between the substratum (e.g. house) and the capacity (e.g. the capacity for being shaped into a statue) is here brought out by pointing to the fact that a single substratum combines opposite capacities in itself. The capacity for health is obviously not the same as the capacity for disease, but one and the same substratum has both.

gl. ’s reading simply kat evepyevay THY €ipnpevny.

27. €v TO KWITA, SC. OdK ev TO KI TIKO.

28. 7% Tod KwytiKod évépyera odx Ady éotiy, i.e. the actual moving of the one thing and the actual being moved of the other are insepar- able aspects of the same event, as the same interval looked at in one way is the interval from 1 to 2 and looked at in another way the in- terval from 2 to 1.

29. det pev yap elvar evrehdxerav dpdotv, ‘for it must be the com- plete reality of both’. The xwyri«éy must have an actuality, viz. 7d xwveiv, and in this very act it actualizes the xwnrdv, so that one and the same event is on the one hand the actualization of the xuvyrixdv and on the other the actualization of the xuwyrév.

péev in de? pev ydp xrA. seems to point forward to éyeu 8 dzopiar, which follows in the Physzcs (202% 21) but not in the Aetaphysics— another indication that this part of K is not notes preparatory to the Physics but excerpts from it.

31-34. Spolws... domep ... Spotws is a good instance of Riddell’s ‘binary structure ’ (Apology of Plato, 198, § 209). Cf. A. 983>16n.

Non-existence of an actual infinite (ch. 10).

1066? 35. The infinite is either that which cannot be traversed be- cause it is not its nature to be traversed, or that which is traversed with difficulty, or that which cannot be traversed though it is its nature to be traversed; again, it is infinite by addition or by subtraction or in both ways. (A) A separate entity it cannot be; for (1) if it is neither a magnitude nor a multitude but infinity is its whole nature, it is indivisible, and if so it is not infinite except in the sense in which the voice is invisible, which is not the sense in question.

b7. (2) How can infinity exist per se if number and spatial magni- tude, whose attribute it is, do not so exist?

8. (3) If on the other hand it exists per acczdens, it is not gua in- finite an element in things, any more than the invisible is of speech, though the voice is invisible.

11. (4) That it cannot exist actually is clear. For any part of it must be infinite (since the infinite and infiniteness are the same thing, if the infinite is a substance), so that it must be either indivisible or divisible into infinites ; but the same thing cannot be many infinites, so that it must be indivisible. But that which is actually infinite cannot be indivisible, for it must have a certain quantity. The in- finite must therefore exist only per accidens, and therefore not it but that of which it is an attribute will be the first principle.

330 COMMENTARY

21. The above discussion is general; () that the infinite does not exist 7 sensible things follows from the facts (1) that if the definition of body is ‘that which is limited by planes’, there can be no infinite body whether sensible or intelligible, and (2) that since number is numerable, there can be no separately existinginfinite number.

26. The same fact is clear from the following physical considera- tions: (3) the infinite cannot (2) be composite, since the elements are limited in number; for ome of the elements cannot be infinite, the other finite, else the former would destroy the latter, and al/ cannot be infinite, since an infinite body must be infinite in all directions.

34. Nor (4) can the infinite be a simple body, either (i) as some- thing distinct from the elements from which the physicists generate the world (for there is no such body apart from the elements ; if there were such an element in things, they would be seen to be dissolved into it); or (ii) as one of the elements ; for apart from the difficulty of supposing one of them infinite, the universe, even if it is finite, cannot be or become any one of the elements, The same argument applies as in case (i); everything actually changes from contrary into con- trary.

1067* 7. (4) The sensible body is somewhere, and whole and part have the same proper place, so that if (a) the infinite body is homo- geneous, it will be unmoving or else always moving, but this is im- possible ; for why should it rest or move in one place rather than another? Where will any part of it move or rest? The place of the cognate body is infinite ; will it, then, occupy the whole place? How could it? It will either rest everywhere and nowhere be in motion, or move everywhere and nowhere be at rest.

15. If on the other hand (6) the all is not like throughout, the places will be unlike and (i) the body of the all will not be one save by con- tact ; (ii) the parts will be either finite or infinite in the number of their kinds.

18. (a) Finite they cannot be, for if the all is infinite, some parts will be infinite in size and will destroy the finite. parts; while (() if they are infinite and simple, the places will be infinite and there will be an infinite number of elements. If this is impossible and the places must be finite, the all also must be finite.

23. (5) In general, it is impossible that there should be an infinite body and at the same time a place for bodies; for if every sensible body is either heavy or light it will move either towards the centre or upwards, but neither the whole nor the half of an infinite body can behave thus; for how can you divide it?

K. 10. 10668 35 — 1066) 26 331

28. (6) Every sensible body is in a place, and there are six varieties of place; but these cannot exist in an infinite body. And generally, if there cannot be an infinite place there cannot be an infinite body; for what is in place is up or down, &c., and each of these is a boundary.

33. The infinite is not the same thing in magnitude, motion, and time; motion, if it is infinite, is infinite in virtue of the distance traversed, and time is infinite in virtue of the motion that occupies it.

This chapter consists of extracts from Phys. iii. 4, 5, 7 on the infinite.

1066* 35-)1. 16 8 dmeipov...mépas. On the various meanings of a privative cf. A. 1022) 32.

DT. ér mpoobécer 4 apaipécer 4 dppw. The infinite may be in- finite in the sense that it may be added to indefinitely (the sense in which number is infinite, according to Aristotle), or in the sense that it can be subtracted from (or divided—®dvaipeois is more usual than d@afpeors in this connexion, cf. Phys. 204% 7) indefinitely (the sense in which space is infinite, on Aristotle’s view), or in both senses (as time is, according to Aristotle).

Gude, i.e. xpoabere. TE diretpov Kal datpeoes dmerpov.

Xwpiorov pev 8 adto tu dv. Aristotle considers first the view of the infinite held by the Pythagoreans and Plato (cf. Phys. 2034). In the vulgate reading, xwpictov pev 81 adro te dv, aicOyrov & ovx otov 7 etvat, the words aicOyrov 8 are irrelevant to the argument, since the question whether the infinite can exist as an object of perception is not discussed until]. 22. Christ’s emendation aic@yrév 7 does not remove this difficulty, and it seems better to regard the words as an unintelligent gloss. The alternative is to read aic@yrov 3 ov, which would be a fair enough paraphrase of the reading of the Physzcs ywpu- orov Tov aicOnrav. ‘That the infinite should exist as a thing separate and existent by itself but not perceptible, is impossible.” The sort of infinite treated of in the argument in ll. 2-21, which is pyre peyeOos payre 7AO0s, is in fact an insensible infinite.

8. That number and extension do not exist apart from actual con- crete things has already been argued in A. ggt" 9 ff.

18. GAG advvatoy 7d évTedeXeEla Sv GaeLpoy, Sc. apepioToV Kal GdLaipe- TOV Elva.

20. cipy ran, Os

QI. Tov dépa. The allusion is to Anaximenes and to Diogenes of Apollonia, 716 dptvoy alludes to the Pythagoreans (cf. 203% Io).

25-26. dpiWyntov yap... dprOydv. ‘For number, or that which has number, is numerable and therefore not infinite.

26. duorkds, i.e. taking account of the physical nature of the infinite body, viz. the question whether it is simple or compound, as opposed to the purely abstract consideration in Il. 22-26.

337 COMMENTARY

28. ci memépaytar TH TWANPEL Ta oToLXeta. This has been proved in Phys. i. 6. :

33. mwdvTn €otat amerpoy, sc..and therefore there can be no second body alongside of it.

34. For od8€ év 8€ cf. De An. 427? 11, ZL. NV. 1120731.

35. Gs éyouct twes. The reference is to Anaximander.

37—1067°1. od dalverar .. . odpata, ‘we do not see things resolved into anything beyond, more ultimate than, the four ele- ments’.

34. For od8€ év 8€ cf. De An. 427? 11, ZL. NV. 1120731.

35. Gs éyouct twes. The reference is to Anaximander.

37—1067°1. od dalverar .. . odpata, ‘we do not see things resolved into anything beyond, more ultimate than, the four ele- ments’.

10677 2-4. dduvatov To Grav... 7 etvar H ylyverOar ev Tr adtav. The reason seems to be given in |. 6 way yap peraBddrdre ef évavriov. It is said to follow from this that there cannot be (1) an ultimate ele- ment other than the four, or (2) an ultimate element which is one of the four. Aristotle takes it as self-evident that (1) an element like that of Anaximander cannot be contrary to all the four d7Ad owpara, and (2) that none of these can be contrary to the other three. Further, any one who represents x as the element of all things, without drawing Aristotle’s distinction between matter and privation, thinks confusedly of « as something that persists in the compounds (which is implied in calling it their element) and yet as something that is left behind when they come into existence.

4. &mavta ylyveoOat mote mip. Cf. Heraclitus, frr. 30, 64, 66, go. Zeller i.° 867 translates this ‘all things will sometime become fire’, and uses it as indicating Heraclitus’ belief in a series of universal con- flagrations. Professor Burnet corrects the mistranslation (Z. G. P. § 78) and shows that Aristotle refers only to the Heraclitean doctrine of ‘the upward and downward path’. The evidence for a Heraclitean doctrine of a general conflagration is late and untrustworthy; cf. Burnet, §§ 77, 78. Aristotle does not say that there is a time at which all things together become fire, but that there is nothing which does not sometime become fire.

5-6. 68 adrds ... puorkot, ‘the same argument applies to this one of the four elements which is the element of all the others, as applied to the one apart from the four elements which the physicists (Anaxi- mander) posited’—for which cf. 1066 35—1067? I.

8. 6 adtds Toros Shou kal popiov. Aristotle does not mean that the place (i.e. 76 rod repiéxovros 7épas, the inner limit of that which contains the thing, Phys. 212% 20) of a whole is identically the same as that of any of its parts, but that the region of the universe proper to a whole is also the region proper to each of its parts. A clod of earth tends to fall towards the region proper to the earth, i.e. the part of the universe next the centre. ;

The argument against an infinite body based on difficulties about its place discusses it under two alternative hypotheses, (a) that it is homogeneous throughout (Il. 9-15), (4) that it contains parts of different nature (ll. 15-23).

otoy tis yfjs- Bz. would add kai Bodov past rom the Physics. But the PAysics has an altogether fuller text, for it reads not only these

Na) Sh kas Pee BOR SE SRR Os

K. 10. 1066 28 — 1067 10 333

words but further xat rupds kal orivOjpos. otov ris ys is intelligible enough by itself.

15-23).

otoy tis yfjs- Bz. would add kai Bodov past rom the Physics. But the PAysics has an altogether fuller text, for it reads not only these

Na) Sh kas Pee BOR SE SRR Os

K. 10. 1066 28 — 1067 10 333

words but further xat rupds kal orivOjpos. otov ris ys is intelligible enough by itself.

8-15. The argument to show that there cannot be a homogeneous infinite body is difficult. Aristotle first states the general position, and then (11-15) illustrates it by taking a particular case. The general argument is:

(A) If the infinite body is homogeneous, it will be immovable or else always in motion.

(2) This is impossible.

(Therefore (D) there cannot be a homogeneous infinite body.)

Here each of the first three propositions is difficult. (1) The justification for (A) seems to be as follows: Since the whole is homogeneous, there is no part of its place which is more appropriate to one part of the whole than to another. The natural conclusion then is that each part, and therefore the whole, should remain where it is. But if the whole should move, then since no part of its place is a more appropriate resting-place for any part of the whole than for any other, it will never cease moving.

(2) (B) and (C) (rotro 8% ddvvarov* ti yap paddXov KaTw 7) dvw 3) éovodr ;) look as if they referred only to the second alternative conse- quent (det oicfjoerar). But if that be so, the first alternative is never shown to be false, and the antecedent (ci éuoedés) is never refuted. rovro dé ddvvarov must be taken to set aside both alternatives. This it will do if ré yap paAAov Kdétw 7) avw 7) dzovoty be taken to mean ‘why should any part of the whole be resting unmoved, or be moving, in the downward or the upward or any particular region?’ The question is grounded on the fact that, the whole being homo- geneous, every part of its region is equally proper to every part of the whole. xdrw, avw, érovodv must refer to the place of rest, or motion, of the parts of the infinite whole; as applied to the whole itself they would be unmeaning. Accordingly Aristotle proceeds to illustrate his argument by the case of a clod of earth,

g. Simplicius points out that the opposition of dmuoedes to dvo- povoy is not identical with that of dzAoty to ovvOerov (1066 26). A oiv@erov is dmoedés if its elements so thoroughly coalesce as to lose their own nature, as happens in pigis as Aristotle conceives it.

Simplicius points out that the opposition of dmuoedes to dvo- povoy is not identical with that of dzAoty to ovvOerov (1066 26). A oiv@erov is dmoedés if its elements so thoroughly coalesce as to lose their own nature, as happens in pigis as Aristotle conceives it.

10-15. Aristotle now comes to the particular case, that of a clod of earth. He considers and rejects various alternatives that present themselves. (1) Will the single clod occupy the whole region of earth? Obviously not. (2) How else can it rest, or move? (@) Sup- pose it to rest somewhere, it will equally well rest everywhere (all parts of the region of earth being alike to it), and so will never move. (4) Sup- pose it to move in one place, it will equally move everywhere, and so will never rest. That it should never move, and that it should never rest, Aristotle treats as alike absurd, in view of his experience of the fact that earth sometimes moves, viz. when it is not as near the centre

334 COMMENTARY

of the universe as it can get, and sometimes rests, viz. when it is as near as it can get.

12. It is best to follow most manuscripts of the Physics in read- ing Tod cuyyevods airy odparos instead of airis Tod cvyyevods cwparos. The order in the latter reading is very improbable, and Aristotle seems always to use the dative with cvyyevjs except when it is used as-a noun,

17. taét, the parts of the infinite body.

18. temepacpeva prev obv obx oidy te. Light is thrown on the argu- ment by 1066 28-34. A finite number of kinds cannot make an in- finite whole, because some of them (i.e. at least one) would have to be infinite in quantity in order to make up an infinite whole, and these (or this one) would swamp and destroy the others, and prevent the whole from having the variety it is supposed to have. Aristotle tacitly assumes that a// the kinds could not be infinite in quantity ; they are limited by each other and thus cannot all be infinite.

20. xal dmha, ‘and if the parts which differ in species are themselves simple’. This is important with a view to both the conclusions that are drawn in |, 21.

21. ei 8€ toér aduvatov, sc. that there should be an infinite number of elements. ‘This has been proved impossible in P&ys. i. 6.

22. ot tTémot memepacpévor, i.e. there are only six regions, up and down, before and behind, right and left (Phys. 205» 31).

kal 75 wav dvdykn twetepdvOa, i.e. the universe must contain a finite number of kinds of part, and therefore (in view of the argument in Il. 18-20) be itself finite.

24. ei wav cdpa aicOntov 4 Bdpos exer } Koupdtyta. The heavenly spheres have neither ; but they are not aic6yrd.

29. témou Sé eld €€, cf. ]. 22 n.

35-37. otov Kivnots Kata Td péyeBos ... xpdvos Bé Bid Thy Kivnow, cf. A. 1020828. Time is dpibods kujoews, Phys. 219% 1.

Change and movement (ch. 11).

ei wav cdpa aicOntov 4 Bdpos exer } Koupdtyta. The heavenly spheres have neither ; but they are not aic6yrd.

29. témou Sé eld €€, cf. ]. 22 n.

35-37. otov Kivnots Kata Td péyeBos ... xpdvos Bé Bid Thy Kivnow, cf. A. 1020828. Time is dpibods kujoews, Phys. 219% 1.

Change and movement (ch. 11).

10671. That which changes may change (1) per acczdens ; or (2) because a part of it changes; or (3) directly fer se. That which moves another may be similarly divided. There is something that moves directly, something that is moved, a time in which it is moved, something from which and something into which it is moved.

9. The forms, affections, and places which are the termini of motion are themselves unmoved. Change er se does not take place between all things, but between contraries and their intermediates, and between contradictories.

K. 10, 1067412 — 11. 1067) 20 335

14. Change must be from A to B, from not-A to not-B, from A to not-A, or from not-A to A (A and B standing for the positive terms), so that there are three kinds of change, since the process from not-A to not-B is not change, these terms being neither contrary nor contradictory.

21. Change from not-A to A is generation, simple or qualified ; that from A to not-A is destruction, simple or qualified.

25. If neither that which is-not in the sense that it is a false proposition, nor that which is-not in the sense that it is only potentially, can be moved (that which is not white may be moved per accidens, since the not-white may be a man; but that which simply is not a particular thing cannot in any sense be moved), that which is not cannot be moved (and therefore generation is not motion, for that which is generated is not, and therefore that which is not is—ger acctdens—generated) ; nor can it be at rest. :

34. A further difficulty is that that which is moved is in a place but that which is not is not in a place.

36. Nor, again, is destruction motion ; for the contrary of motion is motion or rest, but the contrary of destruction is generation,

1068" 1. Of the three kinds of change, generation and destruction (the changes from not-A to A and from A to not-A) are not motion ; motion must be the change from A to B. The termini are either contrary or intermediate (privative terms may be treated as contrary), and are indicated by positive terms such as ‘naked’.

Chapters 11, 12 contain a series of extracts from Pfys. vy. 1-3 on the nature of change and on the definition of certain general physical relations.

1067" 6. Bz. is certainly right in omitting 1, with Bessarion and the Physics. is due to the influence of gor: 8€ 7, Il. 5, 8.

7. Bz. inserts with Bessarion and the Aldine 76 pe before xaré. ovpB_eBnxos ; but the ellipse Of 76 wév before 75 8€ is not uncommon in Aristotle ; cf. Bz. Zndex 166 55.

8. 16 kiwvodv mpStov, the proximate mover.

is due to the influence of gor: 8€ 7, Il. 5, 8.

7. Bz. inserts with Bessarion and the Aldine 76 pe before xaré. ovpB_eBnxos ; but the ellipse Of 76 wév before 75 8€ is not uncommon in Aristotle ; cf. Bz. Zndex 166 55.

8. 16 kiwvodv mpStov, the proximate mover.

15. €& SroKeypevouv. wtoxeipevov, aS Aristotle says in 1. 18, is here used not in the sense of substance but in the more general sense of anything denoted by a positive name, whether this be a substance or an attribute.

16. otk é§ Gmoxewpévou is idiomatically = e€ ovy tmoxepevov. CF. Bz. Index 5397 14.

19-20. 4 yap... petaBody. If there is a change from non-A to non-B we may be sure that the non-A-ness is merely a concomitant of B, which is the real starting-point of the change, or the non-B-ness a mere concomitant of A, the real terminus of the change.

336 COMMENTARY

21. Bz. would place ot odk dytiBeors before ore |. 20, and this would give a reading corresponding more closely to that of Pays. 225%10 7 yep ovK et DroKELpEvov ets ra) DmoKelpevov OvK OTL peraBohn dua TO py civar Kar dvTiOeow" ove yap évavtia ovre dvripacis é €oTW. That order is the preferable one, but the order given in the manu- scripts yields a fair sense. ‘There carinot be change from non-A to non-B because they are not related as the terms of a change must be, as contraries or contradictories; they cannot be either, since they are not opposed at all.’

22. kat dvtipaow. I.e., the relation of the zermznus a quo to the terminus ad quem is in this case (as opposed to that of change eé trokeymevov eis U7oxKeipevov) One of contradiction, not of contrariety.

kat dvtipaow. I.e., the relation of the zermznus a quo to the terminus ad quem is in this case (as opposed to that of change eé trokeymevov eis U7oxKeipevov) One of contradiction, not of contrariety.

23. 1 pev ATAS Gh, 7 S€ TUds Tis, E.g. when a man is produced from what was not a man but a seed, this is drAq yeveors; when a particular kind of man (a man with a particular quality, of a particular size, in a particular place) becomes a man with a different quality, size, or position, this is yéveots rus (Phys. 186214, 225214, 15). Any dAXoiwos, avenos OF POicis, OF hopa is yeveois Tis, and can equally well be called ¢Oopa tis (1. 24). Thus all the kinds of change recog- nized by Aristotle are included under the headings of change ovx é& trokeymevov eis troxelevov and e€ troxeysevov eis pr) UToKElpeEvov. Nothing is left for the third kind, change é€ ioxeipévov eis troxelpevov (Il. 15), and in fact Aristotle mentions it no more except very briefly in 106844. The fact is that change of quality, size, or place may be regarded under either of two aspects. Take for instance change of quality. Aristotle first intends to bring it under the head of change e& trroxeipévov eis Uroxeipevov. It is change from X which is A to X which is B, where A and B are positive and contrary qualities. He meant to treat only generation as change ovx e& troxeiévov eis brokeiwevov, but by an after-thought brings qualitative change also under this heading. It may be described not only as it has beenabove, but also as change from X which is not B to X which is B. Or again it may equally well be described as #@opa tis, the destruction of X which is A.

25. To kata otvOeow 7 Staipeow. This is what is in N. 1089%28 (cf. A. 10174 31, E, 1026735, @. 1051» 1) called 7d ws Weddos put Ov. 7O py ov TO Kata oivOeow is an untrue affirmative, ro px) dv TO KaTa dvaipeoiy an untrue negative proposition. Untrue propositions might be thought to change (Aristotle remarks) when they become true, but they do not really themselves change; they become true by a change in the facts (Ca. 4% 23 ff.).

26-27. pyre To kata Sivapiw ... dvtikeipevoy. 7d xara Svvapuy pH év, that which is not, in the sense that it is potentially but not actually so-and-so, is subdivided into (1) that which is opposed to 76 axAds ov, and which is dads pa 70d (I. 29), i.e. the a) dv of which ‘not-man ’ is an instance, and (2) that which is opposed to 76 71 éy, i.e. the pa dv of which ‘not-white’ is an instance (1. 27). These two, with the px dy as Weddos, are the three kinds of not-being here recognized.

K. 11. 10678 21 — 10682 7 337

29), i.e. the a) dv of which ‘not-man ’ is an instance, and (2) that which is opposed to 76 71 éy, i.e. the pa dv of which ‘not-white’ is an instance (1. 27). These two, with the px dy as Weddos, are the three kinds of not-being here recognized.

K. 11. 10678 21 — 10682 7 337

In N. 1089* 26 we get a different threefold division of not-being, into (1) 76 Kara Tas TrdCEIs, €.g. 7d wy dVOpwros, Td pA) €vOv, (2) 7d ds Weddos, (3) 7d Kara dtvapw, e.g. 7d pi) avOpwros Suvdper dé dvOpwros, TO pn AevKov Ovuvdper O€ Aevxov: and the last is said to be the starting- point of becoming. This division agrees with that in E. 1026? 34, @. 1051 34, if not-being in the sense of accidental not-being be left out ofaccount, In A. 1069? 24 Aristotle speaks of three senses of not- being, but without specifying them, except by saying that one of them core Ouvaprels

go. The common reading ddvvarov yap To pi) dv Kiveto bau leaves the sentence without a principal clause, and further does not agree with its general meaning. Aristotle has said that ro pi) ov has several senses, and that in two of its senses it cannot be moved while in the third it can be moved but only per accidens. That that which is not cannot be moved is evidently not the reason for any of the previous statements but is the summing up of what results from them. ydp should therefore be omitted, with JT and Christ. This is confirmed by Themistius’ words (in Phys. 169. 18) ddvvarov totvuy Ta ovTw pul) dvTa kweto bar.

32. ci yap kat ori pddiora, Kata cupPeByKds yiyverar, i.e. even if it is only in virtue of the matter that accompanies it that the privation can be said to be the /ermznus a quo of generation.

34. Spotws Sé kal 7d Hpepety, i.e. Spuolws ddvvarov Kal Npewely TO uA) Ov (cf. 1. 30), the words in ll. 30-34 being parenthetical. Rest, being the privation of movement, is equally inappropriate to that which is not.

34-35. Taird . . . Sucyep. M. 10856, De Caclo 304% 22 lend support to Jaeger’s emendation, but the sense is rather against it.

35-36. ei... o0x. i here practically = (duoxepées cvp,Baiver) dt, SO that ov« is not irregular. Cf. Kiihner ii. § 511. 4 by.

10682 2, ai eipnpevar, sc. in 1067) rg.

4. kivyows is sometimes used as synonymous with peraBoAn, includ- ing all four kinds of change (cf. 106514), more often as including the three kinds of change other than generation and destruction, as here.

Cf. Kiihner ii. § 511. 4 by.

10682 2, ai eipnpevar, sc. in 1067) rg.

5-7. The terms between which movement (as opposed to genera- tion and destruction) takes place are not contradictories but contraries or intermediates between contraries. Privative terms, though not strictly contraries (since only the extreme degree of privation is con- trariety, @, 1046 14, I. 1055 35), may be classed with contraries since they stand not for the mere absence of a quality but for its absence from a subject which is in some degree qualified to have it. The termini of movement are, unlike the “ermznus a quo of genera- tion and the ¢ermznus ad quem of destruction, expressed by a positive word (dydodrau karapdoer), such as ‘naked ’, ‘toothless’, ‘ black’.

‘Naked’ and ‘toothless’ are typical privative terms, but ‘black’ is for Aristotle a typical contrary. kat dyAoctrar katapdoret, otoy 75 yupvov kal vwdov Kat éAav therefore follows in sense not on kal yap 7 orépyors xetoOw éevayriov (which must be treated as parenthetical), but on ra & brokeipeva 7) évayTia i) meracv.

2578-2 Z

338 COMMENTARY

7. Bz. in Artst, Stud. i. 37 points out that Aristotle displays great constancy in his choice of examples, and that he nowhere else cites yupvdy as an instance of a privative term. He thinks either ruddAov (cf. Cat. 10 passim, A. 1022” 26) or Wuypov (cf. Cat. 12634, De Caelo 286226, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 318” 17) preferable. But yupvov is quite appropriate, and it would be a mistake to-emend it when the evidence of all the manuscripts both of PAyszes and of AZelaphysics, and of Simplicius and Themistius, is in its favour.

Denial of change of change (ch. 12).

106828. There are three kinds of movement—of quality, quantity, and place; not of substance, because substance has no contrary; nor of relation, for change of relation is accidental to the terms that undergo it; nor of agent and patient, since there is no movement of movement, nor generation of generation, nor, in general, change of change.

16. For (A) change of change would imply (1) that change is a subject of change, which it clearly is not; or (2) that some other subject changes from change into some other mode of existence.

22. But this could only be per accidens. For change is from oppo- site to opposite. Hence the subject would be changing at the same time from health to disease and from this change to another, i. e. into the opposite change, convalescence ; but this can only be per accidens, just as there is a change from recollecting to forgetting only because the subject changes into a state of knowledge and then into a state of ignorance.

e. into the opposite change, convalescence ; but this can only be per accidens, just as there is a change from recollecting to forgetting only because the subject changes into a state of knowledge and then into a state of ignorance.

33. (2) There will be an infinite regress if there is to be change of change. If coming to be was sometime coming to be, that which comes to be something was itself sometime coming to be, so that there was not yet that which simply comes to be something, but there was already something coming to be coming to be something. But this was sometime itself coming to be, so that it was not yet coming to be something else. Now in an infinite series there is no first and there- fore no subsequent term, so that there would be no change at all.

»6. (C) Generation and destruction belong to the same subject, so that that which comes to be is being destroyed when it has come to be coming to be; it must be then that it is being destroyed, for it cannot be before or after.

10. (D) What can be the nature of the underlying matter of change

K. 12. 10684 7-8 339

or becoming, and what can it be that they change into? The change must be change of something from something into something.

15. Since there is no change of substance, of relation, or of action and passivity, change must be in respect of quality, quantity, or place, each of which contains a contrariety ; quality meaning not that which is included in the essence but that which is a mere affection of its subject.

20. The unchangeable means (1) in general, that which cannot change; (2) that which changes with difficulty or slowly; (3) that which is capable of changing but does not change when, where, and as it might; this alone of unchanging things is said to be at rest, rest being the contrary of motion and therefore presupposing the same gubject.

Sundry definitions.

26. Those things are fogether in place which are in the same proxi- mate place; those things ouch whose extremities are together; those things are Jefween at which that which continuously changes arrives before it arrives at the extremes. Those things are contrary in place which are at the greatest distance in a straight line; that is successive to another which comes after the beginning and has nothing of the same kind between it and that which it succeeds. That is contiguous which is successive and touches.

1069* 2. Since all change is between opposites, i.e. between either contraries or contradictories, and the latter have no intermediates, what is between must be between contraries.

5. The continuous is a species of the contiguous ; it is found when the boundaries of the touching things are one.

1069* 2. Since all change is between opposites, i.e. between either contraries or contradictories, and the latter have no intermediates, what is between must be between contraries.

5. The continuous is a species of the contiguous ; it is found when the boundaries of the touching things are one.

8. ‘Successive’ is evidently the first of these terms; for what touches must be successive but not vce versa, and the continuous must touch but not wece versa. Therefore the point is not the same as the unit; for points have contact but units only successiveness, and points have intermediates but units have not.

1068°8. In this list of categories qoré, keto Oar, and éxew are omitted The omission of the latter two is regular; they occur only in Caz, 1b 27, 2%2 f., Top. 103 23. It seems probable that Aristotle had come to regard them not as categories but as sub-categories—perhaps (as Mr. Collingwood has suggested to me) merging them respectively in dudes and é£is, two of the sub-forms of zowy (Caz. 8 26—g* 13). moré occurs in the common text of the corresponding passage in

340 COMMENTARY

the Physics (225 6), but is omitted by EH and by Simplicius (and in the summary in 22623), and its absence is required by the logic of the sentence. Aristotle shows that there are four cate- gories in which there is no movement, and concludes that there are only three in which there is movement._ He must, then, have a list of only seven in his mind, Such a list occurs nowhere else in his writings. Simplicius quotes a discussion by Alexander of the question why there is no movement in the category of time, and discusses the subject himself (829. 29—832. 25). The reason for Aristotle’s omission of time here is probably that he saw that time, having the peculiar relation to a movement of being its number (Phys. 219>1), could not also be related to it as either subject or terminus.

10. kat’ ovaiavy 8 ov. There is change (ueraPody) in respect of substance, but it is not movement (xivyois) but generation and de- struction, being between contradictories, not between contraries. Cf. 1067» 21, 1068 25.

Sid 7d pybev etvar odcia evartiov, cf. Caz. 3% 24.

II. od8€ tod mpds 1. There is no movement of, i.e. in respect of, relation, because A may change in respect of its relation to B when A itself does not change at all but only B. Then the movement of A in respect of relation is only incidental to a change of B in some other respect—in size, quality, or place.

12. Schwegler’s emendation petaPBdddovtos py is required by the sense and is strongly confirmed by Alexander (as quoted by Simpl, 834. 27—835. 2) and by Them. 170. 21~24, as wellas by N. 10884 34.

IZ. o08€ movodvros Kai mdoxovtos. I.e. there is not, besides move- ment in size, quality, and place, another kind of movement in respect of action or passivity. Movement from one activity to another or from one passivity to another or from activity to passivity or vzce versa is, as Aristotle will try to show in ll. 22-33, merely incidental to alteration, increase or diminution, or locomotion.

It is true that acceleration or retardation, or change of direction of movement, is incidental to locomotion, but that is no reason why these should not be viewed as belonging to a distinct class of move- ments, i.e. movements from one movement to another.

14. ktvodvTos Kal Kivounevou, variant names for the categories of roeiy and wdoxew. Cf. Z. 1029) 25.

16. There might be supposed to be ‘change of change’, says Aristotle, in either of two senses. (1) Change might be thought of as a subject that changes from one state into another. But this is absurd.

(2) (1. 20ff.). Some other subject might be supposed to change from a state of change into another mode of being. Simpl. and Phil. interpret cis érepov efdos in Phys. 225 22 (answering to ets dAdo el8os, 10684 21) as ‘into another kind of change’, But that is not a natural interpretation of é« peraBodgzrs eis dAXo efdos. It is true that in ll. 26, 27 Aristotle says peraBddde... e& airas tavtns THs

E LIBRARY K. 12. 1069TrQLBBETS CO'LEG ie

petaBorns and Simplicius, wAnv ai pev cis dvtixeiueva odi, 7 8 adi, 7 Kivyots, ‘except that generation and destruction are changes into what are Opposites in one sense (sc, contradictories, e.g. from not-man to man or vice versa), while the other, movement, is change into what are opposites in another sense (sc. contraries, e.g. from up to down, from small to large, from white to black)’. For this distinction be- tween generation-and-destruction and the other kinds of change cf. 1067521 and note, Phys, 23513, 261%8. The readings of most of the manuscripts of the Physics—j 82 kivnows (H), 4 8 Kivy- ois ovx dp0iws (FI)—seem to be attempts to get an antithesis to ai pev eis avrixeipeva Odi after 7 3 dé had been lost by haplography. The reading of EJI', od xwyoes, seems to have been introduced from 1, 3.

26. Aristotle now proceeds to illustrate what he has referred to in ], 23—a change from one change to another, incidental to a change from one s/a/e to another. aya at first sight seems questionable ; it would seem that the change from change A to change B must succeed change A. But, as Simplicius points out, of that which is changing into something else some part must still have something of its former quality (T. 1010418). Change A must partly exist while it is changing into change B,

27. av voonon, ‘if it has fallen ill’.

But, as Simplicius points out, of that which is changing into something else some part must still have something of its former quality (T. 1010418). Change A must partly exist while it is changing into change B,

27. av voonon, ‘if it has fallen ill’.

28. eis dmovavoiy, sc. pera BoAnv, ‘into whatever may be the other change concerned’,

évdéxerar yap hpepety is difficult. It is, on the face of it, inconsistent

342 COMMENTARY

with the immediately preceding statement that the subject must have changed into some state of change. Phil. and Simpl. take Aristotle to be referring to the fact that after falling ill one may rest in the state of illness, and rejecting that fact as irrelevant to the case considered. ‘lz the case supposed, viz. that of change from one change to another, that which has changed from health to ‘disease has also changed from falling ill to recovering (though we must remember that 27 fac/ it may rest in the state of disease) ’.

One is tempted to read ovx évdéyerar, and to suppose ovx« to have fallen out by haplography after ézovavotv. ‘For it is not possible, in the case we are considering, that the subject should be at rest.’

29. kal ér.... dei, ‘and further the change from one change must not be, in any case, into any other change at random, but into the opposite change’.

go. The sense requires a comma after the second éorw. ‘So that it will be the opposite change, viz. recovery of health.’

32. dre pev eis Emorhnuny 6té Sé eis Gyvoray. ayvouay is Prof. J. A. Smith’s emendation of iyieay. One would expect this clause to refer solely to the case last mentioned, the change from remember- ing to forgetting, while tyieay introduces a reference to the remoter case of change from falling ill to recovering. Further, éré... 6ré refers naturally not to different cases but to successive stages in the same case. Again, tyiea in the one case does not answer to érucrjyy in the other. The corresponding pairs of terms are as follows: There is primarily a change from health to illness, or from ignor- ance to knowledge, and incidentally a change from falling ill to re- covering, from recollecting to forgetting. Thus the corresponding term to émorjun is vocos. Finally, the change from recollecting to forgetting is incidental not merely to the change from ignorance to knowledge but also to a subsequent change from knowledge to ignorance. On all these grounds, dyvovay seems to be a necessary emendation ; it is confirmed by the interpretations of Simplicius (842. 18, 24, 26—843. 1) and Philoponus (853. 32, 854. 3).

34. dvdykn Sh Kal thy mpotépay, sc. yeverw yiyverOu. Aristotle takes up the particular case of yevéoews yéeveous rather than the more general one of peraBodjs peraBody. If a generation is generated, its generation must have been generated, and so ad infinitum.

1) and Philoponus (853. 32, 854. 3).

35. ami yéveots has not here its technical meaning of generation as opposed to change in size, quality, or place (cf. 1067) 22 f.)—a meaning which would be pointless here. It means the original, simple coming to be as opposed to the ‘coming to be coming to be’ which has just been mentioned in #34 and will be mentioned again in b2.

by~g. In the extraordinary variety of readings recorded here by the manuscripts and the Greek commentators it is hard to choose that which Aristotle is most likely to have written. There would be little profit in discussing the readings in detail, but the following remarks may be made :

K. 12. 1068? 29 — 1068 10 343

(1) The balance of evidence is in favour of omitting da)és in |. 1, and the sense is not seriously affected by this.

(2) Bz.’s 7 Yeyvd pevov yeyvopevov in |, 2 is what the sense requires, and is confirmed by érav yevyra yeyvopevov, 1. 8.

(3) There is good evidence for the omission of 70 in 1. 2, but TO yuyvopevov seems to be needed rather than yuyvépevoy, as the anti- thesis to te yuyvdmevov yeyvopevov:

(4) The balance of evidence is strongly in favour of 75 as against ei dy in 1. 3. The sentence which Bz. gets by reading «i dy, viz. ei dy) Kal todr’ eyiyverd mote, bot ovK Hv Tw TOTE dy ey: is a more violent instance of dare 2 apodost than any in Aristotle, more violent even than Phys, 232® 12-14, with which he compares it (Avras/. Studien Il. III. 109).

I-2. kat Td yryvopevov... yryvduevoy | # | yeyvduevoy, ‘that which comes to be something (by the simple yéveous) was itself at one time coming to be, so that there was not yet that which simply comes to be something, but there was already something coming to be coming to be something’.

3. Kat Todt eylyvetd Tote, dot’ ok fy Tw tdTe yryvdpevov. There is the same ambiguity in ycyveoOou here as in 70 yryvopevov éylyvero in ], 1. ‘And this was at one time itself coming to be, so that it was not yet at that time coming to be something else’, i.e. coming to be coming to be something, which it was described in |. 2 as being. Cf. 1. 9, where yyvéuevov must from the context be interpreted as meaning yvyvopevov yyvdpevov.

‘And this was at one time itself coming to be, so that it was not yet at that time coming to be something else’, i.e. coming to be coming to be something, which it was described in |. 2 as being. Cf. 1. 9, where yyvéuevov must from the context be interpreted as meaning yvyvopevov yyvdpevov.

6-7. é...0opd. ‘Further, what is capable of one movement is capable of the contrary movement, and of resting, and what is capable of being generated is capable of being destroyed.’ Philoponus understands % évavria with jpeuyors as well as with «ivyous, and takes Aristotle to mean that what is capable of one sort of rest is capable also of the contrary rest, i.e. of rest in the opposite region of the uni- verse. More probably Simplicius is right in taking jpéuynous to mean the rest which is contrary to the original movement. According to this view Aristotle means that what can move from A to B can also move from B to A or rest at A. In any case kat jpéuyors is paren- thetical, since the possibility of the opposite movement is alone what concerns the argument.

8-10. dote ... POerpduevov. In accordance with the principle just laid down, that which comes to be must also cease to be; the question is, when? Not as soon as it is coming to be coming to be (we must interpret eds yvyvduevoy as opposed to dray yévnra:, so that another yeyvopevov is to be understood—or read—after it), nor after it has come to be (verepoy must apparently mean dray yévyras, as Opposed to drav yevyrat yryvopevov). For what is perishing must exist ; and the yvyvd- pevov does not exist at either of those times; at one of them there is only a yuyvopevoy yeyvdpevov, at the other only a YEVOVOS. It follows, then, that it perishes when it has become, and is, Yeyropevor 5 i.e. it ceases to be while it is coming to be, which i is absurd.

344 COMMENTARY

II, tis ovv éotat domep ... oUTw TU KTA. is an instance of Riddell’s ‘binary structure’ (Apology of Plato, 198, § 209).

14. The reading of the ‘manuscripts, 2 xivyow, is unsatisfactory. The words will hardly bear Bz.’s rendering ‘Denn Bewegung muss Bewegung sein aus diesem bestimmten Etwas in dies bestimmte Etwas, nicht blosse Bewegung’. To get this‘meaning, one would have with Lasson to insert dads after pu xivnow, and this might easily have dropped out before was. But it is better to adopt the reading which Alexander preferred (Simpl. 854. 21) and which is found in most manuscripts of the Physics, } yéveow. ‘For it must be the move- ment or becoming of something from something to something.’

18-19. Aéyw Be 7d movdy od 7d ev TH ovia .,. AAAG TO TaOnTLKOY, Cf.

854. 21) and which is found in most manuscripts of the Physics, } yéveow. ‘For it must be the move- ment or becoming of something from something to something.’

18-19. Aéyw Be 7d movdy od 7d ev TH ovia .,. AAAG TO TaOnTLKOY, Cf.

A. 10207 33, » 8, Change with respect to a zo.dv which is év 77 ovate would be not kivnows but yéveois or pOopd. _ 22. Bz, seems to be right in preferring the reading of the PAysics (confirmed by Simpl. and Them.) kat 8uvdpevov ph Kwvodpevoy 8€ to that of the manuscripts of the JZe/aphysics, pi Svvépevov dé. The essential, in the meaning of a privative word, is not that the sub- ject cannot, but that it does not, have the positive attribute when it might be expected to have it. Cf. Ca/. 12829, A. 1022) 27, ©. 10462 32.

25. The stress is on tod Sextikod. Rest is privation of movement in that which is capable of movement, and therefore not in things which are rather non-movable than immovable (76 dAws ddvvarov kweioOa.).

26—106914. The terms whose relations Aristotle is mainly in- terested in working out are darecOa, é&fjs, éxouevov, ovvexés. apa is introduced as implied in the definition of contact, peragv as implied in the definition of é&js, and évayriov xara Té7ov as connected with the definition of peraév.

The relations between the four main terms are not altogether clear. Aristotle begins by defining contact (éardmevov) and succession (és) quite independently of one another, and says that both attributes must be united to make an éyopuevoy (10691). Thus, to take Simplicius’ examples, two successive numbers are not éyoueva be- cause they are not in contact; and a coat in contact with the body is not éxdpevoy to it because it is not successive to it, not being of the same kind (cf. the definition of succession, 1068” 31); but two suc- cessive houses which touch are éydueva. Later, however, Aristotle implies (1069 g) that €éjs is a wider term including dropevov. 76 yap fs ovx amrerat (‘is not necessarily in contact’), rotro 8’ éfjs. If this be so, if the dréuevov be necessarily é&js, then éyouevov is a mere synonym of dmrémevov and ll. 1, 2 are misleading.

Finally, the continuous is described indifferently as a species of the éxdpevoy (1. 5), or of the daropevov (1. 10). It is the species in which the extremities are not merely together but are one.

K. 12. 1068 11 — 1069 5 345

Thus there is a confusion between two arrangements of the concep- tions, which may be represented thus:

ouveEXes pay ovvexes

(2) oe | |

drropevov = éxdoevov pn €xopevov

ovvexes pay ovvexes

The latter is the prevalent classification in Aristotle. In no pas- sage other than the present is there any attempt to distinguish exopevov from darropevov.

In no pas- sage other than the present is there any attempt to distinguish exopevov from darropevov.

26. doa év évi témm mpdtw. ‘You are ev 76 ovpavG because you are ev TO dept, ev TO aepr because you are ev TH yp, év TH yy because you are in this place which contains nothing but you’ (P&ys. 2098 33- bi). The last is your rézos iSios, ev & pore (ib. * 33), in which you are directly or proximately.

It is evident, then, that two things cannot be dua xara rémov, for the place which includes nothing but A cannot include nothing but B, Yet Aristotle evidently means that in some sense two things can be dpa Kata torov. ‘Two suggestions may be made as to his meaning. (1) He may mean that two things are dua if they are in one place which includes nothing but the two, i.e. where there is nothing be- tween them. Or (2) he might mean that one thing, occupying one place, may be two things in the sense that it discharges two functions. E. g. the ends of two lines which meet may be said to be dua, but this only means that one point serves as the end of both lines.

But, since dpa is used in the definition not of continuity but of the less close relation of contact (1. 27), and in the PAyszcs the unity of the d«pa is expressly distinguished from their being dya (2277 22), it is evident that the former is Aristotle’s meaning,

33. oloy ypappal ypappjjs, ‘e.g. lines between the given line and the first line of the series’,

106922-5. émei , . . petagd. This section seems to be out of place in the manuscripts both of the Aefaphysics and of the Physics.

346 COMMENTARY

The most appropriate place for it would be before évayriov in 1068? 30, where Prantl proposed to place it. In Themistius’ paraphrase it comes before peragév in 1068> 247 (Phys. 226.23), and 1068) 26— 27 dpa... dpa(Phys. 226? 21-23) are omitted, This position is, how- ever, less appropriate ; it is more likely thatthe sentence was originally a note appended to the mention of +6 jeraév, which has been inserted at the wrong point in the text.

II-12. év ois 8€... tovrors, This repeats in another form what has been already expressed by «i cuvexés, darera.

12. dot obk gor otryph povdd: tadtdév. Aristotle is probably attack- ing the view of Zeno, of whom we are told that ryv otypy os TO ev Aéyet (Simpl. 99. 10). Or it may be, as Philoponus says, the Pytha- goreans that Aristotle has in mind, cf. M. 1080 19, 1083? 14.

Tais pev yap (sc. orvypats) bmdpxet TO datecOar. This is inconsis- tent with the definition of contact in 106824, darecOau dv Tau aKpa. dpa, Sc. kata Torov (cf. 1. 26). Points have no d«kpa; and they have no térros, since they do not occupy space and therefore have no zrepiéxov.

14.

13. kal‘tay pev petatd tu Tay 8 ov. Phys, 227% 30 states this more fully: kai rov pev évdéxerau etval re peradd (race yop ypappa peragd otvypav), Tov & odk dvéyKn’ ovdey yap petagd dvddos Kat povados. Ii there is to be any proper opposition between évdéyerar and ovdK dvdykn, evdexeras must mean dvdyxy evdexecOar, ‘it is always possible’, and odk dvdéyxn Must mean odk dvdyKn evdexerOa. Now every line is between points, and therefore there is sometimes a peragv between points; but if points ever touched, as Aristotle has (1. 12) said they can, there would be no peragév between them. And on the other hand, though successive units have not a peragv, non-successive units have. Thus the opposition is ill thought-out.

BOOK a

Jaeger (Arts. 229 ff.) has various arguments in favour of an early date for A.

(1) Metaphysics is here restricted to the study of non-sensible sub- stance; the study of sensible substance in chs. 1-5 is merely pre- liminary (1069 36—» 2). But Z contains equally explicit statements of this view, and //zs argument appears to have no force.

(2) A. 1071» 6 expresses like K (1060% 22) the view that if there were nothing apart from sensible things there would be no per- manence in the world. Contrast this with the more guarded state- ments of Z. 10335, H. 104315. Like K (1060% 12), A (1071? 20, 1073 4) treats the object of metaphysics as being that which is present in no sensible thing.

(3) There is a very close connexion between A and the early book N. 1072» 30-107323 is based on 1092*g-17, 1075” 37-1076*4 on

Ke-t2 10609" 1T1—1 3 347

1090? 13-20, 10757 25-33 on 10872 29-) 6, 1075*% 34-36 on Iog1® 35-37, 30-32.

But the astronomical theory of Callippus mentioned in ch. 8 belongs to the period 330-325, quite near the end of Aristotle’s life (Jaeger, Arist. 365-367, Heath, Aristarchus of Samos, 197,198, 212). Jaeger points to the difference between the sketchy style of the other chapters, with its series of terse arguments introduced by such words or phrases aS pera Tadra Ort, eri, Kal, dua dé, dpolws Sé, 7) Kai (1069 35, 1070? 4, 1074” 21, 25, 36, 38, 1075* 5, 6, 34, © 14, 16, 28, 34), and the ample style of ch. 8. The astronomical detail of this chapter breaks harshly into the continuity of the speculative theology of chs. 7, 9.

4, 1074” 21, 25, 36, 38, 1075* 5, 6, 34, © 14, 16, 28, 34), and the ample style of ch. 8. The astronomical detail of this chapter breaks harshly into the continuity of the speculative theology of chs. 7, 9.

Aristotle seems originally, in the Iept ®urocodias, to have replaced Plato’s notion of a world-soul by that of a separate first mover, but to have retained the notion that each star or planet is moved by a single star-soul. The doctrine of ch. 8 is due to the influence exerted on this early mode of thought by Eudoxus’ analysis of each planetary orbit into several distinct rotatory movements. But the two lines of thought are not satisfactorily combined ; there remain inconsistencies which were already pointed out by Plotinus (Zu. v. 1. 9). In particular the section 1074 31-38 is a fragment (in the curt style characteristic of A apart from ch. 8) representing the older doctrine, and inconsistent with the later doctrine of the ‘intelligences’. There is in this section nothing to which otro in > 3 can refer, but with this section removed ofrox is seen to refer to Oetwy cwpdrwv in * 30,

Ch. 8 then seems to represent a late venture of Aristotle’s in a field in which he was not really at home. He deserts here the path of metaphysical speculation and enters on that of astronomical observation and mathematical reasoning ; and his prentice hand betrays itself in the arithmetical mistake of 1074% 13.

Freudenthal’s careful study of the quotations made by Averroes, in his commentary on this book, from the commentary of Alexander has established the fact that Averroes had before him the genuine com- mentary of Alexander (or rather an Arabic translation of a Syriac version of it), while the commentary which passes under the name of Alexander is not genuine. He argues with great probability that the latter work is to be dated somewhere between a. D. 450 and 600. The same judgement must probably be passed on the commentary on Books E-K, M, N, which have long been thought to stand on a differ- ent footing from the admittedly genuine commentary on A-A. The fact that Averroes was dealing with a translation of a translation greatly diminishes the value of his citations from Alexander, but some important

348 COMMENTARY

hints are to be got from him. Similarly the value of Themistius’ commentary is greatly diminished by the fact that we possess it only in a Hebrew translation of an Arabic translation ; but here again some- thing may be learnt of the text which Themistius had before him,

The three kinds of substance. Change implies matter as well as form and privaiion (chs, 1, 2).

Change implies matter as well as form and privaiion (chs, 1, 2).

106918. Our subject is substance. For (1) if the universe is a whole, substance is its first part, and (2) if it is only a series, sub- stance is prior to the other categories, Further, these others have not being in the unqualified sense, or we shall have to say that things like ‘the not-white’ have it also. Further, none of the other cate- gories can exist apart. It was of swdsfance, too, that the ancient thinkers investigated the causes. Modern thinkers owing to their abstract method make universals substances, but the ancients identi- fied substance with some particular body such as fire.

go. There are three kinds of substance :-—

(A) the sensible, including

(A 1) the eternal, and (A 2) the perishable (which is recognized by all)—e. g. plants and animals,

(&) the unchangeable, to which some thinkers assign separate exis-

» tence;

(a) distinguishing Forms and mathematical objects, (4) identifying them, or (c) recognizing mathematical objects alone.

(A) is discussed by physics, (2) by metaphysics.

» 3. Since change is from one contrary or the middle state to the other contrary, there must-be a substratum which changes (for the contraries do not change), and which remains when the contrary does not remain ; and this something is matter.

g. There are four kinds of change—

(1) in respect of the ‘ what ’—generation and destruction,

(2) in respect of quality—alteration,

(3) in respect of quantity—growth and diminution,

(4) in respect of place—locomotion.

14. The matter which changes must be capable of both states. All change is from the potential to the actual, from that which is not (actually), but also is (potentially).

20. Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Anaximander, and Democritus all pointed to matter in their view of the original state of the universe.

24. Different things have different kinds of matter; things that are

A. I. 1069% 19-23 349

not capable of being generated have matter for locomotion. We must not say with Anaxagoras ‘all things were together’, for if they had not differed in matter they would not have come to be different, the reason which was at work on them being admittedly uniform.

32. Thus there are three principles, form, privation, matter.

We must not say with Anaxagoras ‘all things were together’, for if they had not differed in matter they would not have come to be different, the reason which was at work on them being admittedly uniform.

32. Thus there are three principles, form, privation, matter.

1069* 19-21. Aristotle states here two alternative ways in which the universe may be regarded, (1) as ddov 11, (2) as 7d edeés, i. €. as being a universe by virtue merely of forming a series. Bz. explains the meaning of dAoy 7c in opposition to this by reference to I, 1052222 76 drov Kal exov Twa poppy Kai eidos, A. 1016) 12 dv pH 71 GAov 7, TOdTO - de dy py 7 €ldos exy ev (cf: H. 10457 10, M. 10772 28, 1084? 30). One may regard the universe as being a unity of form and matter, as every individual substance (except those which are pure forms) is, and in this case, Aristotle says, substance, i.e. substance as form, is evidently the primary element in it. Cf. Z. 10295 70 eidos THs VAns mpdTepov Kat paddov ov. If on the other hand we regard the universe as consisting merely of the categories arranged in a series, substance is evidently the first member of the series.

Bz.’s explanation is, however, not satisfactory. Substance is here contrasted not with matter but with the other categories. The sub- stance which is the subject of study in these chapters (1-5) is not specially substance as form but substance in all the senses enumerated in A. 8, Z. 2, including substance as matter (1069225, 1070%9), as form (10707 rr), and as individual thing (1070412). The contrast is simply that between the view of the universe as a genuine unity, in which substance is the primary element, and the view of it as forming a loosely connected series (the view, in fact, of Speusippus, which is referred to in this book, 1075» 37)—in which case substance is at any rate the first member.

22. It is doubtful whether we should read aAX¢ with the manuscripts or otov with Alexander and Bz. The latter is the easier reading ; the former compels us to take zovéryres in a wider sense than roy, and to suppose that all the categories other than substance are summed up under the two headings zowryres and xwyces. Evidently it would be impossible to bring the categories of relation, time, and place under either heading ; but at any rate quality and quantity might be grouped under wowdryres, and roety and rdoyewv under kivyoes, and Aristotle may have meant the mention of zoidryres and kwyjoes to be suggestive rather than exhaustive. It would be hard to explain the origin of the vulgate reading 7adAAa adda from an original radra otov, while ratra é\Aa& makes the corruption natural enough. Themistius seems (1. 21-23) to confirm édXd.

23. heyowev your etvar kal Tata, otoy oti 0b NeuKov. ov Xevkdv is evidently regarded here as the subject of éorw. Aristotle treats a not- white exists’ as necessarily implied in the fact that, e.g., a man who happens not to be white exists (cf. A. 10172 18).

350 COMMENTARY

26. ot ... viv, evidently the Platonists. Alexander unjustifiably considers the doctrine referred to non-Platonic, but cannot suggest any other definite school which could be meant.

28. 81a 7d AoyiKds Lyretv. For the use of Aoyixds cf. T. 1005) 22, Z. 1029» 13, and for similar expressions-_referring to Socrates, Plato, and the Platonists cf. A. 9873, @. 1050» 35,.\N. 1087) 21.

29. GAN of 7d Kowdy, cdpa, There is no xowdv cdpa (De Gen. ef Corr. 320» 23), i.e. no kind of body which is the basis of all the elements. It is better therefore to place a comma after xowev and in- terpret ‘but not that which is common to them, viz. body’.

30-32. There is considerable divergence here between the various readings. 7 pev didus 7 O€ POapty... 7 8 didios, the reading of all the manuscripts, cannot stand, and the best solution is to omit 7 8 didios with Themistius, and with Alexander as quoted by Averroes. Prob- ably 4 pev didios 7 5¢ POapry was first corrupted by haplography into » pev bOapry, and two attempts were made to correct this, one by mentioning the didvos ovata before the fOapr7, and the other by mention- ing it later, which attempts both found their way into the traditional text, The subdivision of perceptible substance into the eternal and the perish- able, 7js 4 ev... Ga, is doubtless parenthetical, and is dvaykn ra oroxeia AaBetv refers to aicOy7H ovcia in general. Aristotle proceeds to this general discussion of perceptible substance in 1069>3—1071? 2, Bz. thinks jv ravres 6poroyodow must refer to both kinds of perceptible substance, and proposes to read pia pev aicOynry, Hv ravres 6uodroyodow, js pev POaptyH... 40 dtdvos, following Alexander and in part Themi- stius. The eternal perceptible substance (that of the heavenly bodies) is included among the generally recognized (d0Aoyovpevac) substances in H. 1042 10, cf. Z. 1028> 12. But the eternity of the heavenly. bodies was not universally admitted, and jv mdvres dpodoyotow might well here be said only of terrestrial bodies; Bz.’s proposal is unnecessary.

34-36. twes, Plato and his school. ot pév, Plato, cf. Z. 1028? 19. ot 8é, Xenocrates, cf. Z. 102824 n. ot 8€, Speusippus, cf. M. 1076 20-21 n.

b 1. ary S€ étépas. Aristotle discusses unchangeable substance in chs. 6-10,

5. 00 Aeukdv yap % pwvy, i.e. voice is an opposite, in one sense, of ‘white’. Being not white it is contradictorily opposed to white, Yet there is no change from voice to white or vice versa. Hence change is not between contradictories but between contraries, which belong to the same genus as one another (I. 7).

6. ob yap Ta évaytia petaBddder, cf. H. 1044) 25 n.

Being not white it is contradictorily opposed to white, Yet there is no change from voice to white or vice versa. Hence change is not between contradictories but between contraries, which belong to the same genus as one another (I. 7).

6. ob yap Ta évaytia petaBddder, cf. H. 1044) 25 n.

18, katd cupPeBnkds évdéxetar ylyveoar éx ph dvros, i.e. a thing comes to be out ofwhat incidentally, or in virtue of a concomitant, is not. Y comes out of an X of which not-Y can incidentally be predicated,

20-23. The traditional punctuation is kal rotr’ éore 7d ’Avagaydpov ev (BéAtiov yap 7) 6uod mavra) Kat “Epmedoxdéovs 7o piypa kal ’Avagi- pdv8pov, Kal as Anpoxpirds dno, jv 60d ravra Suvaper, evepyeta 8 ov.

This reading, as Prof. Jackson has pointed out (/. of P. xxix. 139 f.),

A, 1. 10698 26 — 2. 1069? 23 351

presents the following difficulties. (a) Why does Aristotle, who in A. 989 17 identifies Anaxagoras’ vods with 76 & in the Platonic sense of that term, and his ravo7eppta with Oarepov, here assert that é is a better description of the zavo7epyia than 600 wdvra? (0) By what right does Aristotle use ptyya to describe the material principle of Anaxi- mander, who was a monist? (c) What does Aristotle mean by ascribing to Democritus the doctrine that jy duod mavra duvdmer, éevepyeta 8 ob ? (d) Is not the addition of duvdpet, evepyeia 8 ov just what ought to reconcile Aristotle to Anaxagoras’ theory of the material cause?

To find the material principle of Anaxagoras described as 76 & and that of Anaximander as 76 piyya is certainly somewhat surprising, and Liitze proposed accordingly to transpose ’Avagaydpov and ’Avagipav- dpov. He also renewed Karsten’s proposal to excise BéAriv yap 7) épod ravra. This, however, isan unnecessary tampering with the text. Jackson adopts the less violent remedy of reading ov for ev and alter- ing the - Punctuation so that the sentence reads kal rovr’ é core 70 “Avaga- yopov ov* BéArov yap }) 6pod mdvra (Kat Epredoxdéous, 70 pty, Kat “Avagydvdpov, Kat os Anpdxpitds pnow) jv dpod wavra Suvdper evepyeia 5 ov. On his interpretation (1) the subject of BeArvov yup 7 dod mévra. is “ Hv dod ravra Suvdper é evepyela. 8 od”, (2) EpredoxAcous and *Avaéuadvdpov depend on 76 dy, and 76 prypa is parenthetical and refers to Empedocles alone, (3) the words kai "EymedoxAéous . . . pyow in- dicate that the doctrines of Empedocles, Anaximander, and Democritus should, like that of Anaxagoras, be amended by the admission that the material principle in its elemental state is only potentially existent. For the phrase cai ds Anpoxpités pnow he compares A. 1071» 26, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 329213, %1, and for the order of the words BéArvov yap 7) 6u0d wavta.. . hv duod wavra Svvdper evepyeia 8 od he compares De An. 435° 5 810 kal rept dvax\dcews, BéATLov 7 tiv ow éfvotoay dvaxhao bau, TOV dépa TaTXEW UTd TOD aXHWaTOS Kal XpwpaTos pexpe tep ov dy eis 7.

1071» 26, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 329213, %1, and for the order of the words BéArvov yap 7) 6u0d wavta.. . hv duod wavra Svvdper evepyeia 8 od he compares De An. 435° 5 810 kal rept dvax\dcews, BéATLov 7 tiv ow éfvotoay dvaxhao bau, TOV dépa TaTXEW UTd TOD aXHWaTOS Kal XpwpaTos pexpe tep ov dy eis 7.

The first and the third point of Jackson’s interpretation seem to be right, but in two respects a view different from his seems preferable. (1) 10 "Avagayopov é& can be defended. It is true that 75 & does not seem to have been used by.'!Anaxagoras as a technical name for his material principle. But that principle is called a prypya (Phys. 187% 23, A. 1012 28), and 76 piypa ev Bovderau civar (De Sensu 447” 10), so that zo &v iS not an inappropriate name for it, and in PAys, 187% 21 it is actually called é&. It is true that in contrast with vots it may be opposed to ‘the one’; but in contrast with the various substances that come out of it it is properly called one.

(2) It is not necessary to take ’EyzedoxAéovs 76 prypa kal’ Avasiyavdpov in the awkward way in which Jackson takesit. It has commonly been thought necessary to apologize for, or explain away, the description of Anaximander’s dzeipoy as a piypa. Thus Zeller supposes that it is by an ‘easy zeugma’ that piyya, which is strictly applicable to Empe- docles, is applied to Anaximander (i? 279n. 1), and Prof. Burnet at one time (Z. G. P.? 59) regarded kat "Epzedoxhéous 70 piypa as an

352 COMMENTARY

afterthought and held that “Avagiudvdpov depended on 76 & (he now, ed. 3, p. 56, takes “Avagimavdpou to depend on 76 piypa).

Zeller has little difficulty in refuting (i.6 277-283) Ritter’s view that Anaximander’s dzreipoy was a mechanical compound in which the elements were actually present, and he-therefore thinks it can only loosely be called a ptyya. But the fact is that in Aristotle’s terminology

“the word piyya (a complete fusion) is more appropriate to Anaxi- mander’s dzepov in which the elements were only potentially present than to the original matter of Empedocles and Anaxagoras in which they were actually present. The latter isa mechanical ovvOerov rather than a genuine piyya. It is true that Aristotle nowhere else calls Anaximander’s deipov a piywa. But then he mentions Anaximander by name only five times; and further he may have avoided the ex- pression elsewhere because Anaximander himself had not used it, while he uses it of Empedocles probably because Empedocles used it himself, in a natural though non-Aristotelian sense.

25. Bz.’s conjectural insertion of érepa appears not to be necessary. Schwegler’s parallels for aAN’ érépay, A. gg1» 10, H. 1044230, I. 1058) 15, are not sound, but the use of &\Ao for dAXo a\Aov in 10718 28 seems to be a good parallel.

26. GAN ov yernthy GANG moOEv ol, i.e. not the matter presupposed by generation but that presupposed by spatial motion, the ‘local matter’ of H. 1042 6.

gg1» 10, H. 1044230, I. 1058) 15, are not sound, but the use of &\Ao for dAXo a\Aov in 10718 28 seems to be a good parallel.

26. GAN ov yernthy GANG moOEv ol, i.e. not the matter presupposed by generation but that presupposed by spatial motion, the ‘local matter’ of H. 1042 6.

26-28. dmopycee 8 Gv... ov refers to x pi) dvros |. 20, the historical discussion being parenthetical.

27. Tpix@s yap Td py dv. The three senses are given in N. 10898 26 (in a similar context): (1) 7d kata tas trades (the categories), i.e. that which is not a man, that which is not white, &c. (2) 76 ds Weddos, i.e. false propositions. (3) 7d xara dvvapuy, i.e. that which is not a man but is potentially aman, &c. The same list is found in ©. 1051%34. Aris- totle answers explicitly in N, as he does implicitly here («i 34 te éore dvvdper,]. 28), that it is from the third kind of not-being that generation proceeds. Alexander gives a similar account of the three senses, except that for the first he substitutes 76 pnday7 pndapds dv, that which in no sense is. He is here doubtless following the suggestion of K. 1067 25- 30, but inaccurately, for we have there (1) 76 xara ovvOecow 7) diaiperw (76 ds Weddos), (2) 7d Kata Sivapuy, (2) 76 TS Ards OvTL avTiKEtpevoY (rd dardGs pt) Tdde), (0) 7d ur) AcvKov 7) pH ayabdv. K, however, does not offer a list of three senses of not-being so definitely as does N, nor is the context so similar to the present passage, so that N is doubtless to be followed here.

28. ei 84 Ti gore Suvdper, GAN’ Spas of Tod TuXdvTOs, ‘if a thing exists by virtue of a potentiality, still it is not by virtue of a potentiality for anything and everything ’.

29. duod mavta and gr. 6... vods show that Aristotle is thinking primarily of Anaxagoras, but his remarks apply also to the other thinkers mentioned in Il. 21, 22.

32. eketvo, ie. éxelvo povor.

A, 2. 1069 25-34 353

ot is explicable in the same way as rod tvxévTos, |. 28, so that Schwegler’s conjecture 6 is unnecessary.

32-34. tpia 8)...dAn. For this list of the implications of change cf. Phys. i. 6, 7. In view of the stress laid on orépyous A stands closer to the PAysics than to Z, which works for the most part with the simple opposition of tA and ides.

Generation considered. If form ever exists apart from the concrete individual, tt ts in the case of naturag objects (ch. 3).

1069» 35. Neither proximate matter nor proximate form is gene- rated. For in all change something (matter) is changed by something (proximate mover) into something (form). If not only the bronze came to be round but also the round or the bronze came to be, this would involve an infinite regress.

1070? 4. Every substance comes from another of the same kind,

(A) by art (where the principle of becoming is in something else),

(B) by nature (where the principle of becoming is in the thing itself),

(D) by spontaneity (which means the absence of natural process).

g. There are three kinds of substance—

(A) matter, which is af¢arenily an individual something but coheres merely by contact, not organically,

(B) the individual nature and positive state of a thing,

13. In the case of the products of art, the individual form does not exist apart from the concrete result, except in so far.as the arf is the form; nor do the forms of such things come into being or pass out of being ; if the form ever exists apart, it is in the case of natural objects. Plato was not far wrong when he said that there are Forms of xafural objects, if there ave Forms distinct from sensible things. *Such as fire, flesh, head, which form a series of materials progressively approaching the complete substance * (these words should probably be transferred to 1. rr).

21. Motive causes precede, formal causes are simultaneous with, the thing they produce. It is a further question whether the form ever survives the thing. E.g. the reasonable part of the soul may survive the body.

26. So far, there is no need for Ideas. The individual produces the individual of the same class, and each specific art is the cause of its specific result.

2578-2 Aa

354 COMMENTARY

1069” 35. peta taita Sr, ‘next we must observe that’. This phrase (repeated 1070 4) is one of the clearest indications of the fact, apparent throughout chs. 1-5, that Aristotle is jotting down notes for a treatise (or lecture), not writing a treatise in its finished form; cf. 107122n. Alexander remarks on the ‘confused and disordered’ form of the book (673. 34).

36. Aéyw Sé 7a ecyata, Alexander takes Aristotle to mean the ulti- mate matter, that which is farthest from the individual yryvopevor, and the proximate form, that which is nearest to it (‘ Socrates’ as opposed to ‘flesh’). But it is impossible that éxxaros should have opposite meanings in the two cases. If the éoydry vAn is dveideos tAy the éoxa- tov eidos should be diAov efdos, and this is what ra éoyata means in Meteor. 390*5. The instances Aristotle gives, however, are roundness and bronze (1070 3), which are instances of the proximate matter and form, those immediately involved in the yéveous, and it is of these that in Z.-8 Aristotle has shown that they are not generated (1033 29), i.e. are not generated in the process of generating the bronze sphere. The bronze has been generated by previous processes, but that is beside the question. In saying A€yw de ra éoxara Aristotle does not mean that ultimate matter and form ave generated, but merely that he is not speaking of them. For éoxaros in the sense of ‘ proximate’ cf. Bz. Index 289” 85—290%2. Cf. also reXevraia tAy 1070* 20.

In saying A€yw de ra éoxara Aristotle does not mean that ultimate matter and form ave generated, but merely that he is not speaking of them. For éoxaros in the sense of ‘ proximate’ cf. Bz. Index 289” 85—290%2. Cf. also reXevraia tAy 1070* 20.

1070" I, mpdérou also must mean ‘immediate’ or ‘ proximate’. For this sense of rp&rov xwoiv cf. Phys. 243° 3, 14, 24528, 25, Pr. It is awkward that while éoyarov means ‘last, counting from the original state of things’, zpGrov means ‘first, counting from the yryvdpevor’, but Aristotle is indifferent to such inconsistencies.

4. peta taita dtu, cf. 1069) 35n.

Exdoty €k ouvwydpou ylyvetat ovcta. éx here refers not to origin but to agency. It is the agent of production, not the material, that is ovvevepov With the product.

5. Ta yap cet otciat kal Ta aAda, a note to show that substance is being taken to include not only natural substances such as the word primarily suggests (cf, A. 1017 10, Z. 10289, H. 10427 7 duoAoyov- pevar piv at pvorxai), but also products of art, chance, or spontaneity.

6-g. Aristotle holds that, in natural and artistic production alike, A produces an actual B out of a potential B by virtue of the fact that A has the form of B in it. The male parent produces the offspring out of the matter contributed by the female parent, by impressing on the matter the form which is the form alike of the male parent and of the offspring. The artist produces the work of art out of the raw material by impressing on the latter the form of the product, which he ‘has’ by virtue of knowing the art in question. The difference is that in the first case the producer ‘ has’ the form in the same sense in which the offspring will have it, and is therefore called by the same name, while in the second case the producer ‘ has’ the form only in the sense of knowing it, and is therefore not called by the same name. Thus a house is not produced by a house but by the ‘form of house’ in the

A. 3. 1069) 35 — 10702 9 355

builder’s mind, and is therefore not produced strictly éx cvvwvtmov (or e€ duwvdpov, used loosely in Z. 1034* 22 in the sense of éx cvvwvdpov) but é« pepovs duwvdpov, from a part of itself which shares its name (Z. 10347 23).

The difference stated in 1. 7 between art as an dpyi) Kwyoews ev @\Xw and nature as an dpyiy év aird is Aristotle’s usual distinction between them. It is appropriate to most natural processes, where a living being produces changes in itself, but is not appropriate to generation, where the change produced is év 4\Aw. The definition of nature really breaks down in the case of generation, but Aristotle would presumably seek to justify it by saying that in some sense the parent and the offspring, being members of the same species, are the same, or that in some sense the offspring is a part of the parent (cf. £. N. 1134" 11, 1161 18),

£. N. 1134" 11, 1161 18),

8. dvOpwmos yap dvOpwrov yevva. ‘This is, as we have seen, not a good illustration of nature as an dpyy év até, and Alexander sup- poses that these words go with éxdory ex cvvwvipou yiyverat ovoia (1. 5). But if placed after these words they would break very awkwardly the connexion between these words and ra. yap picet otoiat al ra GAAa. It seems better to suppose (r) that Aristotle wrote them carelessly as an illustration of the dpyy ev atré, or (2) that a copyist borrowed them from |. 27 below. The fact that the words already existed in their present place in the time of Alexander (cf. Alexander apud Averroem 82. 3) makes one hesitate to adopt this otherwise attractive supposi- tion.

ai 8é€ owmat airiar (sc. TUN Kal TavTdpaTov) aTepyoets ToUTwY. tovToparor is strictly the generic term, including all cases in which (1) something that is normally produced directly by the unconscious teleo- logy of nature is produced as a merely incidental result of a natural pro- cess, or (2) something that is normally produced directly by purposive human agency (here rather narrowly described as réyv7) is produced as a merely incidental result of a purposive act (PAys. 197) 18, ® 36); while rvx7 is confined to the second type of case (PAys. 1977 36, » 2, 20). Sometimes, however, riyn and rairdéuarov are used without dis- tinction in the general sense, and sometimes (as here) tattépuatov tends to be confined to the first type of case, t¥yn being the orépyors téxvys and rairdéuarov the orépyois picews.

Aristotle has said that all substances are produced ék cvvwvvpov, and that some are produced by rvyy or tavropatov. But he does not mean that these are produced éx ovvwvdmov; spontaneously produced animals are produced ov dm ovyyevav (H. A. 539% 22), and in chance events the art which is ‘synonymous’ with its product is lacking. He views chance and spontaneity, which are the negations of art and nature, as the exceptions that prove the rule. The words ‘chance’ and ‘spon- taneity ’, being meant merely to indicate the absence, in certain cases, of artistic or natural action, indicate that such action, with the ‘ synony- mity’ which it implies, is the normal thing.

Q. ovoiar Sé tpeis, cf. Z. 10299 2.

Aa2

356 COMMENTARY

The words ‘chance’ and ‘spon- taneity ’, being meant merely to indicate the absence, in certain cases, of artistic or natural action, indicate that such action, with the ‘ synony- mity’ which it implies, is the normal thing.

Q. ovoiar Sé tpeis, cf. Z. 10299 2.

Aa2

356 COMMENTARY

10. Td8e TL oda TH patvecOar. None of the attempts at emending this phrase seems at all successful. It is possible to make something of it as it stands. Ps,-Alexander interprets ro daiveoOor as kara pav- taciav, and Bz. follows him in supposing that the meaning is that matter is a ‘this’ to the eye of imagination, since it has the power of becoming a ‘this’.- This interpretation of +d gaivecOa1, however, seems impossible, and it is better to adopt the simpler interpretation which, with others, is given by Alexander as quoted by Averroes, viz. ‘which is a “this” in appearance’, I.e. to outward appearance the material parts of a whole as they lie side by side look like an indi- vidual thing, but if the organic unity is not there the appearance is deceptive (dca yap apy kal py cupdtoe, vAn Kal doKeipevov). Cf. Z. 1040 5 rav doxovady elvan obordv ai wAciorar Suvdpets iol, Ta TE popta Tov Cow... Kal yy Kal wdp Kal dnp.

It must be admitted, however, that this interpretation of otca To daiver Oar as = dhawvopeévn civat is not altogether satisfactory.

10. For cupopice cf. Z. 1040) 15, n.

11. The vulgate reading % d& pious Tdde Tu Eis HY Kat Eis Tus is intoler- ably harsh, and it seems best to read, as Alexander apparently did (676. 30), 4 d& vous 76de 71 (sc. ota from |. 10) Kal és Tus els HY (Sc. » yeveois éorw). For the description of the form as a ‘this’ cf, A. 1017) 25 n.

13. 76 708e tL, ‘the individual character’, i.e. the form, which has already been called réde ru in 1. 11.

14. et py H Téxvy, i.e. the form of the house has no existence separate from the house except as the art of house-building ; cf. Z. 1034? 24 7) yap Téxv7n TO «loos.

15. 008 éote yéveors kat pOopa tovTwy kth. Aristotle is not referring to the general fact that forms come into being not by a process but instantaneously (Z. 10335), but to some mode of ‘being and not being without generation and destruction’ which is peculiar to the forms of arfefacta. This can only be the artist’s instantaneously think- ing of them and ceasing to think of them. So Alexander interprets the words.

17. G\N’ elwep, emt tav ducer. This goes back in sense to éml pev ovy tTivav KTA. (I. 13), ll. 15-17 being parenthetical.

Aristotle does not think that the form of living things (ra @¥cet), i. €. their soul, is in general capable of separate existence. Cf. Phys. 193% 4, De An. 403°16, It is only reason that can exist apart (De An. 413) 26, 430917, G. A. 73799, £. WV.1178% 22). Herevhe simply says that at any rate the forms of lifeless things canmof exist apart.

€. their soul, is in general capable of separate existence. Cf. Phys. 193% 4, De An. 403°16, It is only reason that can exist apart (De An. 413) 26, 430917, G. A. 73799, £. WV.1178% 22). Herevhe simply says that at any rate the forms of lifeless things canmof exist apart.

18. For Plato’s limitation (though not in the dialogues) of the Ideas to natural objects cf. A. 991» 6n. It is noteworthy that the doctrine is ascribed to Plato himself and not merely to the ‘ believers in Ideas’, But Alexander as recorded by Averroes read ot ra cidy riBepevor épacav, and Themistius seems to have had the same reading (8. 13).

Ig. elwep Eotw eiSn GAAa ToUTwy gives a good sense, ‘if there are

A. 3. 1070% 10—21 35%

Forms distinct from the things here on earth’ (rév dedpo Kal aicOyrav Al.). tatra does not seem to be used in this sense elsewhere by Aristotle, but it is by Plato (Parm. 133 p 3, Phil. 5885, 62A9). If we adopt this reading we must suppose with Alexander that ofov . . teXevraia (Il. 19-20) is out of place, and is really a note to doa. . dzroKel- pevov (Il, 10-11). Bz.’s interpretation, ‘if there are Forms other than these things, i. e. than fire,’ &c. gives an unnatural sense.

If we read add’ od to’twv, we should have to interpret rovrwy as referring forward and as explained by oiov rip oapé kepady. But (1) Tovrwy otoy in this sense is very unnatural, and (2) the denial of Forms . of fire, flesh, or head does not agree with what we know of Plato’s theory. otov...teAevrata would come in much more naturally in ], 11, and it must be remembered that the first five chapters of A pre- sent, more perhaps than any other part of the AZetaphysics, the appearance of a rather hastily put together series of notes, in which mis- placements are likely to have occurred. Cf. note on 1069? 35,

19-20. Fire, being a drAotv cpa, is the sort of material out of which flesh, a djovopepés, is made. Flesh is the sort of material out of which the head, an dvopovopepés, is made. The head is the sort of material out of which a living body, which is a substance in the full sense, ismade. Cf. G. A. 715%9—-11, Z. 1040? 5-10,

Flesh is the sort of material out of which the head, an dvopovopepés, is made. The head is the sort of material out of which a living body, which is a substance in the full sense, ismade. Cf. G. A. 715%9—-11, Z. 1040? 5-10,

21-26. This passage has been used by Brentano as one of the main arguments for his view that the human reason, though imperishable, is not pre-existent from eternity, but is created by God at some point in the development of the embryo. This view is opposed not only to the explicit statement that reason is eternal (De An. 430% 23), but to the principle that what cannot perish cannot have been generated (De Caelo 282° 31, 283%29, » 19). Aristotle’s assertion that the formal cause is simultaneous with its effect (I. 22) implies, no doubt, that it not only is when its effect is, but comes into being when its effect comes into being (Az. Post. 95% 22). But that of which Aristotle says that it may persist after the effect (the living body) has perished (Il. 24—- 26) is not the same thing which is described as coming into being when the living body does. The soul as a whole comes into being with the body and (J. 26) perishes with it; but something (ru ]. 24), i.e. some element of the soul, may persist, viz. the reason, or more definitely the vots mountixos (De An. 430%17); and this Aristotle cer- tainly conceives as existing before birth no less than after death. ‘The soul is both generated and perishable, but there is 71 rs Wuxjs which is neither.

The reference to the eternity of reason is parenthetical ; the main point of the passage is to set aside the Platonic notion (cf. 1. 18) that Forms exist apart from and independently of the things whose Forms they are. Rather, they exist only when the concrete things do so, and only as elements in them. Further (Il. 26-30), separate Forms are not-necessary in order to explain generation; in natural production the cause is an individual parent, in artistic production it is the art, which must be present in the mind of an individual artist.

358 COMMENTARY

For the uselessness of the Forms in explaining generation cf. Z. 1033? 26. QI. T& pev ody KivodvTa aitia (sc. airid éotiv) OS Tpoyeyeyneva. OvTa,

In what sense all things have the same causes (chs. 4, 5)»

1070* 31. (A) The causes of different things are different, but (2) analogically all are the same.

35. (A) (1) What could be the common cause of relations and substances? There is nothing common to the several categories and prior to them; nor can substance be an element in relations, nor vice versa.

b4. (2) No element can be the same as the complex which includes it (nor, therefore, can any of the intelligibles such as being or unity be the common element, for these are predicable of concrete things). Therefore no element is either substance or relation; but there is nothing else it can be.

10. (B) But (1) all sensible bodies have a form (e.g. heat), a priva- tion (e.g. cold), and a matter. All things have by analogy the same elements, in that they all have form, privation, and matter; but these are different in detail for each different class of things.

22. Besides the internal causes or elements there is an external moving cause. There are three elements but four causes. The immediate moving cause, like the other immediate causes, is different for each different thing.

go. In nature the moving cause is a similar individual, and in art it is the form (or its contrary), so that as the efficient cause = the formal, we may say either that there are three or that there are four causes. Besides these there is the first mover, which is common to all things.

36. (2) Things which can exist apart are substances; the causes of all things are the same because affections and movements cannot exist without substances. These causes are, perhaps, soul and body (or reason, desire, and body).

1071* 3. (3) In another sense all things have the same principles analogically—viz. potentiality and actuality—though these are different in different cases, and apply in different ways.

6. They apply in different ways; for (a) in some cases the same thing is at one time actual, at another potential. This distinction can be brought into line with the previously named causes; the

A. 3+ 10707 21 — 4. 1070) 8 359

form (if it is separable), the concrete product, and the privation exist actually, the matter potentially.

11. (4) The distinction of potentiality and actuality takes a different shape where cause and effect have not the same matter (the form also in some cases being different). The causes of a man are not only (as in (a))

(i) his matter (fire and earth) and his peculiar form, but also

(ii) his peculiar external cause (his father), and

(iii) the sun and the ecliptic, which are neither the matter of the man nor his form nor the privation of his form nor identical in form with him, but the efficient causes,

17. Some causes can be stated universally, others cannot. The primary causes are the individual moving cause and the matter. The universals do not exzs¢. Man is the cause of man, but there is no uni- versal man, It is Achilles that exists, and his cause is Peleus.

24. If the causes of substances are causes of all things, yet things in different kinds have different causes, which are only analogically the same; and things in the same kind have causes the same in kind but numerically different.

29. The causes of things in different categories are the same or analogous (i.e. they are always matter, form, privation, mover), and the causes of substances are the causes of all things in the sense that with their destruction all things are destroyed. Further, the primum movens is the same for all things. But there are as many different causes as there are pairs of individual contraries, and the matters of different things are also different.

1070” 3. tdv mpds tt. The category of relation, which is that farthest removed from substance (N. 1088* 23), is here taken as typical of all the categories other than substance. Substance cannot be the elementary constituent of relations, since what consists of substances must itself be substance. Nor can a relation be the elementary con- stituent of a substance, since substance is prior to the other cate- gories and elements are prior to their compounds (I. 2); cf. Z. 1038? 23. er ovde ... cuvOeTwy is clearly parenthetical, for avrév |. 9 refers not to ray voytay nor to rév ovyOerwv but to ray croxeiwy, 1. 6. The meaning must be ‘nor is any of the intelligibles, therefore, e. g. unity or being, an element in things ; for these terms are predicable even of each of the composite things’ (and therefore cannot be their elements, on the principle stated in ll. 5, 6). The use of the partitive genitive as subject (tév voyrév = trav vonrav 71) is rare, but cf. ]. 22, A. 10214 21 n.

360 COMMENTARY.

For a similar argument, showing that unity and being cannot be the genera of things, cf. B. 998? 22.

Unity and being are called ‘intelligibles’ in distinction from ‘sen- sibles ’, because they are the most universal predicates, those farthest removed from sense- eee (cf. B. 998b-15-21).

10. dorrep héyoper, cf, @

12, 76 Suvdpet TadTa a Kad” “airé, ‘that which directly, in virtue of itself (and not of a concomitant), potentially has these attributes’. mpotov distinguishes the proximate matter from the remote, and xa@ aro distinguishes the matter, which as such becomes, for example, cold, from ‘the white’, which becomes cold in virtue of the matter whose concomitant it is.

13-15. Aristotle distinguishes here three kinds of substance :

1) radra, i.e. matter, form, privation.

2) Ta €k TovTwy, i.e. substances which include (a) prime matter, (6) a certain form, e. g. heat, and which presuppose, as that which they had before they had the form, (c) the privation of the form, e.g. cold. 7a, ék ToUrwy are in fact the four elements, two of which Aristotle sup- poses to be characterized by heat and two by cold.

g. heat, and which presuppose, as that which they had before they had the form, (c) the privation of the form, e.g. cold. 7a, ék ToUrwy are in fact the four elements, two of which Aristotle sup- poses to be characterized by heat and two by cold.

(3) ei te ek Oepyod Kal Woypod ylyverat ev, olov capE 7 dorody, i.e. compounds of two oppositely qualified substances of class (2); in other words, binary compounds of the elements, or dpovopepy.

Aristotle might have gone on to add the dvopovomepy and the living bodies which they make up (cf. # 19-20 n.). But since these are ultimately formed from the elements, they come under the general description et tu éx Peppod Kal yvxpod (Aristotle takes two of the rpérau evavtudoets as typical of all four) yiyverar ev.

Aristotle’s doctrine has been’ explained above as not implying that privation must be actually present as well as form in every concrete substance, that every body which is hot must be partially cold; I have supposed him to mean that the form of each thing presupposes a previous privation. It is in this sense that matter, form, and priva- tion are arrived at as the three dpyai in Phys. i. 6, 7, and it is this sense that is relevant in 1069> 32-34. But it is rather surprising to find privation which is merely presupposed as previously existing, described as évurdpxov (I. 22); it is rather zpotmapyov. It may be, therefore, that Aristotle has in mind his doctrine that no actual instance of any of the four elements is pure. Fire, though in the main characterized by the «idos heat, contains some of the orépyots cold, and so in other cases (De Gen. ef Corr. 330» 21, Meteor. 359» 32). Then et tu ek Oeppod kal yuxpod yiyvera év will refer to époupeph compounded out of a substance that is in the main hot (e.g. actual fire) and one that is in the main cold (e.g. actual water). But on the whole the former interpretation of the passage seems preferable.

15-16. érepov... yevduevov. Alexander thinks these words should be placed after zpos 71, 1.9. But they may stand in their present position. They are meant to justify the assumption just made (I. 13 ovotas de Tatra Te Kal Ta ek TovTwv), that compounds must be different from

ent oa

A. 4. 1070 10 — 5, 10718 1 361

their elements, or the assumption that a compound of hot and cold must be different from what is merely hot or merely cold.

They are meant to justify the assumption just made (I. 13 ovotas de Tatra Te Kal Ta ek TovTwv), that compounds must be different from

ent oa

A. 4. 1070 10 — 5, 10718 1 361

their elements, or the assumption that a compound of hot and cold must be different from what is merely hot or merely cold.

16-18. Bz. prefers the reading ratra in |. 16 on the ground that TovTwv toira, d\Awy GAAa, TavTwv TG dvddoyov Tavrd. gives the most symmetrical form to the statement. But where does he get the tavra which he supplies with 76 dvédoyov? It presupposes rabra in l. 16. The meaning is: ‘these things, then (sc. sensible substances), have the same elements and principles—sc. heat, cold, matter (though specifically different things have specifically different ele- ments); but we cannot say that all things (i.e. non-sensible substances and things in other categories, as well as sensible substances) have the same elements in this sense, but only by virtue of an analogy’; the elements of all are form, privation, matter, which are analogically the same wherever they occur.

22. For the construction of tay éxtds otov 76 Kuwvody cf. 1, 7, A. 1021 210.

23. €repov dpxt Kal ororxetov, cf, A. 101374, 7, 101 4% 26.

24. kal eis tadta Svarpetrar dpxy is in EJ repeated in |. 29, and Christ brackets it here. But it is better to follow the authority of A> Al. and omit it in 1. 29. Here it makes quite good sense— “principles are divided into two kinds, the évurdpyov and the éxrds’ ; ef. A, 10137 4, 7.

26. This list of four causes differs from Aristotle’s ordinary list by the subdivision of form into form and privation (cf. Z, 1032» 2, Phys. 193” 19), and by the omission of the final cause (due doubtless to its identity with the formal cause, H. 1044» 1). Aristotle here identifies the proximate efficient cause with the formal (Il. 30-32, cf. Phys. 198* 26), but distinguishes the w/¢maze efficient cause from it (I. 34).

27. 76 Tp@tov aitiov ws Kuvodv, the proximate moving cause. Bz. thinks this difficult in view of 1. 34, where 70 ws prov wavTwy Kwvody mavra. means the w#mate moving cause; he therefore here proposes rountikov for mpdrov. But Aristotle is careless in matters of this sort (cf. 4x n.), and further 76 s mpdrov mdvtwy Kwotv mdvta is different enough from 76 p@rov attiov ws Kwody to remove any misunder- standing. |

29-30. kai... apy, cf. 1. 24 n.

30. év ev Tots guciKois dvOpdmw dvOpwmos. In view of Aristotle’s frequent formula év@pwros dvOpwrov yevva, and of the awkwardness of pvorxois dvOpamos if the two words do not go together, I have adopted Zeller’s emendation. The corruption is evidently due to the influence of ucrxois.

32. tTpla aitia dy ely, i.e. matter, form, privation.

34. Bz.’s conjecture, 176 &s for as 7d, is required by the sense.

‘The first moving cause, to which Aristotle comes only now, is to be the subject of the second half of the book, to which chs. 1-5 are pre- liminary.

32. tTpla aitia dy ely, i.e. matter, form, privation.

34. Bz.’s conjecture, 176 &s for as 7d, is required by the sense.

‘The first moving cause, to which Aristotle comes only now, is to be the subject of the second half of the book, to which chs. 1-5 are pre- liminary.

1071*1. Christ’s taétdé is preferable to the traditional radra, since ratra in], 2, which refers back to this word, must mean not ‘sub-

362 ~ COMMENTARY

stances’ but ‘the causes of substances’. It is not substances but their causes that Aristotle views as the causes of all things; cf. |. 34. Because all other things are dependent on substance, the causes of all things are the same, viz. the causes of substance.

Tov odc.av dvev, This is apparently the only passage in Aristotle in which dyev comes after the word it governs, that word not being a relative. The order is characteristic of later writers, and would in itself suggest a late date for A.

2-3. Emeita ... dpegis Kal cHua. Aristotle concentrates his atten- tion on living things, which are in the strict sense the only substances (Z. 1040) 5-10, H. 1043? 21-23), and indicates their material and formal causes, (1) capa and (2) yxy (subdivided, in the special case of man, into vois xat dpeéis). Alexander seems to have read 7 Opesis kal cGpa (the elements of irrational animals) alter 7 vots Kal dpegis Kat copa, and it is not unlikely that these words have dropped out by haplography. But it may be that this is an addition of Alexander’s own.

2. €mevta comes in peculiarly here. Probably, like pera tatra (1069> 35 n., 10707 4) it meang ‘next we shall point out that’ &c., and indicates the hypomnematic character of the first half of A. Cf. 1. 24.

éotat. If it be accepted that the causes of substances are the causes of all things, we shall perhaps find these universal causes to be soul and body, &c. This seems to be the meaning of the future éora.

Cf. 1. 24.

3-17. Aristotle has in ch. 4 shown that matter, form, and privation are principles present in all things ; he now proceeds to show that potency and actuality are present in all things. Not only, however, are the potency and the actuality of one thing different from those of another (dAXa dAAous, |. 5), but potency and actuality belong to things in different ways (kal dddus, sc. trdpxe). Lines 6-17 explain what Aristotle means by d\dws. In some cases (év éviows ev, |. 6) the anti- thesis of potency and actuality means that the same thing exists first potentially and then actually. But the distinction of potentiality and actuality is present in another way (dddws dé, |. 11) where one thing acts on another. I take the two modes of presence of potency and actuality to answer to the two senses of potency distinguished in ©. The kind that is mentioned second here is dvvayis in the sense of ‘power’, that which is dpy peraBoAjs év dAAw 7) 7 GAAO (1046 11), 9 Kata Kivynow Aeyouevy (10484 25). Svvayus in this sense is the power in one thing to produce a change in another thing, and évépyeia is the change produced. The kind of dvvapis that is mentioned jirs¢ here is dvvapus in the sense of potentiality which is followed by the correspond- ing actuality in the same individual (16 abd été pev évepyeia eoruy bre Se duvdémer; contrast év dAAw, 1046 11). evepyeva and dvvapis in this sense are opposed ws otaia pds twa ‘Any; in the other sense they are opposed ds Kivnows mpos dvvapuv (1048? 8),

7. otov otvos, i.e. the same matter is at one time potentially wine and later actually wine.

minter $€ kal Tadta eis TA eipypeva aita, sc. form, privation, matter

Aes. 1O7T2 2-13 363

(1070 11). aire eis, ‘are divisible among’; for the phrase cf. I. 1005 2, A. 101317, Phys. 195715, 243° 16, P. A. 675% 25.

g. édv 4 xwptotdy. On the separate existence of the form in certain cases cf. 10707 13-19.

76 e& dudoiy, ‘that which contains both form and matter’. The mention of the concrete individual is not really relevant, since it was not one of the causes recognized in 1070? 11-13. The mention of it is due to Aristotle’s habitual distinction of three senses of ‘ sub- stance ’—matter, form, and the complex of the two.

The mention of the concrete individual is not really relevant, since it was not one of the causes recognized in 1070? 11-13. The mention of it is due to Aristotle’s habitual distinction of three senses of ‘ sub- stance ’—matter, form, and the complex of the two.

otepyals Te (vulg. 82) otoy oxdtos # Kdpvov. The traditional reading is open to three objections : (1 ye privation is being brought under the heading of actuality (as it must, since dvvdpe. comes only in the next clause), the clause should be introduced not by orépyats d€ but by Kai n orepnos. (2) The adducing of instances, darkness and disease, is peculiar, when form, concrete substance, and matter are left unillus- trated. (3) kdéyvov is an instance not of privation but of the union of ‘ts Ca with matter; the privation in question is véaos (cf. 1070? 28).

Themistius apparently did not read orépyous dé, and Christ condemns the whole clause. But the manuscripts and Alexander agree in having it, and some mention of privation is wanted in order to account for dudw in 1.11. I have endeavoured to remove the first objection by reading re for d¢. re in this usage is rare in Aristotle, but cf. T. 1004 14, Z. VV. 115810, 13. For confusion of re and é¢ in manuscripts cf. for instance &. ZV. 1153 7. The second objection is not very important, and as regards the third, the confusion is one which Aristotle makes elsewhere. The adjective or participle in the neuter with the definite article may always stand for an attribute as well as for a concrete thing. Cf, 76 pev Oeppov katyyopia Tis Kal etdos, 4 8é Wuxpdrys otépnows De Gen. e¢ Corr. 31816. Or, in the highly abbreviated mode of expression which is used in chs. 1-5, xat 7d 2& dudoty (tAns kal orepyoews), answering to 7d e€ dudoiv (vAns kal eidovs), may be meant to be supplied in thought. oxdéros is an instance of orépyois, kdpivov Of 7d e& auorv.

II, Go, ‘qualified by the form and by the privation’, cf. 1070» 12,13. It is implied that the privation no less than the form is a mode of realization of the matter, so that Alexander is wrong in supposing that Aristotle reckons privation to the side of potentiality (682. 34). Privation is in fact a kind of form (PAys. 193 19).

Bz. accepts Trendelenburg’s emendation adAus 8 (7) evepyeia Kal dvvaper Stabéper Gv. But this ignores the evident correspondence be- tween dAdws here and ddAws in |. 6, and the opposition between dAAws 8 here and é éviows pev in]. 6. Aristotle has said that the distinction of dvvayus and évépyea belongs to different things in different ways. He has stated one way in ll. 6-11; he now has to state the other. ‘The distinction in virtue of actuality and potency is present in another sense in things which’, &c.

12-13. Gv...Uhy, Gv... étepov. It is to be noted that the negative in

364 COMMENTARY

He has stated one way in ll. 6-11; he now has to state the other. ‘The distinction in virtue of actuality and potency is present in another sense in things which’, &c.

12-13. Gv...Uhy, Gv... étepov. It is to be noted that the negative in

364 COMMENTARY

the first clause is jn, in the second otc. The two clauses are there- fore not of the same nature, The first gives the essential nature of a certain class; the second states an additional fact about it; ovd« in fact shows that the second dy might be replaced by kat rovrwv. This pre- vents us from interpreting the two clausés-as meaning ‘things which have neither the same matter nor the same form’ (Alexander, Tren- -delenburg), or ‘things which have not the same form differ from things which have not the same matter’ (Bz.).

The meaning of these clauses may be ascertained by observing what Aristotle goes on to say. He proceeds to distinguish the following causes of a man:

(rt) the elements present in him, i.e. (a) fire and earth, the matter of which he is made, and (4) his peculiar form,

(2) an external (proximate efficient) cause, his father,

(3) an external (remote efficient) cause (the sun and the ecliptic) ‘which is neither (1 @) matter nor (14) form (nor privation, which is included in form above), nor (2) of the same species as the pro- duct’.

Aristotle has shown above (1. 6) that the existence évepyeia. of a thing may be contrasted with its own previous existence duvdpe. He seems to be now saying (though the expression is very obscure) that dvvayus and évépyeva may be applied to different individual things, in the sense that one has the power to produce the other, i.e. dvvayus may be ap- . plied to the father and to the sun, évépyeia to the child which together they produce. Now both the father and the sun have a different matter from the child, and the sun has also a different form (ovre dpoedés, 1. 16).

In view of the whole context, it seems that we must insert éviwy after the second dy, and translate as follows: ‘The distinction in respect of * potency and actuality is present in a different sense in the case of causes which have not the same matter as their effects, some of them indeed not having the same form either’.

If we emphasize i8tov efdos (1. 14) we may say that even the father has a different (individual) form from the child, and then éviwy will be unnecessary. But the distinction between the relation of the father, and that of the sun, to the child, is emphasized, and is expressed by saying that the latter, unlike the former, is not 6oevdés with the child, so that 70 aird 20 we learn that Eudoxus, whom Aristotle follows, believed the sun to move not in the direction of the zodiacal belt but at an angle to it (xara Tov NeAogwpévoy ev TG wAATEL TOV Cwdiwr), but the obliquity referred to in the phrase Aoges xvkdos is that of the sun’s supposed path not to the zodiacal belt but to the equator.

17. 17a pev KaOddou ot eimety, ‘some causes may be stated univer- sally (sc. the causes of certain types of product), while others cannot (sc. those of particular products)’. The cause of man is man, but the cause of Achilles is Peleus (1. 21).

18-20. Christ suggests with some probability that these two clauses should be transposed, and that dé should be read for 6y (so Alc), Then 8¢ would answer to pév odv, which otherwise must be taken as marking a transition to a new point, as in 4. A. 608» 19, Poet. 14608 11.

18. 7d évepyeta mp@rov Todi Kat aAXo 6 Suvdper, i.e. the individual actually existing efficient cause, and the potentially existing matter. Cf. det €x rod Suvdper dvros yiyveras TO evepyeia bv 76 evepyeia. OvTos, O. 1049? 24.

To évepyeta mp@tov Todi seems to mean ‘the “this” which is first in actuality ’, i.e. which is not only prior to the product but (in Aristotle’s view) prior also to the potentially existent matter. For this view cf. @. 1049” 24-25 n.

IQ. éxetva . . . TA KaOddou, the universal causes referred to in 1. 17. éxeiva may also suggest ‘the famous universals of the Platonists’ ; cf. Kiihner ii. 1. 650. 13. For the non-existence (more properly the lack of independent existence) of universals cf. Z. 13, 16.

24. The manuscript reading éreira eldn (or 75y) Ta THY ovordy does not give a satisfactory sense. If ein be kept, it is at least necessary to insert rd before it, with Christ. In that case we may (1) understand,

366 COMMENTARY

with Bz., opay de? from |. 17, so that the general sense would be ‘that we may judge rightly whether all things have the same causes (cf. 1. 29 70 dé Cyreiy kth.) we must attend to the different species of things as well as to the different individuals ’,—for which v. Il. 20-24. But the ellipse of épav det after such an interval is.difficult. Or (2) we may with Alexander understand airid éoru, taking €meita «rd. to be opposed to ravrwv On TpGta apyai,]. 18; but this also is not very satisfactory. The right solution seems to be provided by Rolfes’s reading «i 8y, though in other respects his interpretation is questionable. If ez 64 be read, a comma instead of a colon must be read after otaovdv. Then the sense is: ‘Further, if the causes of substances are (as Aristotle has shown in 1070? 36—1071 2) the causes of all things, yet differ- ent things have different causes and elements’. For dé adversative in the apodosis of a conditional sentence cf. Phys. 21515, Pol, 1287» 13, B. 999% 27 n.

25. domep édéxOy, 1070? 17.

Tv ph ev tadTo yéver is contrasted with ray ev raird elder |. 27, so that yévos and eidos do not mean genus and species but are used in- differently for ‘kind’. For the promiscuous use of the two words cf. Bz. Index 1814 57-56, and I. 1058” 28 n.

28, For édNo where dAAov dAAo might be expected cf. 1069) 25 érépay = Erepa Erépay.

27, so that yévos and eidos do not mean genus and species but are used in- differently for ‘kind’. For the promiscuous use of the two words cf. Bz. Index 1814 57-56, and I. 1058” 28 n.

28, For édNo where dAAov dAAo might be expected cf. 1069) 25 érépay = Erepa Erépay.

29. T6...{ntelv isa nominativus pendens ; the sentence does not end as it was meant to end. For a similar anacoluthon cf. Phys. 222> 11 70 6é"Ihuov paver On EarAwKéevar od €yopev.

ZI. Todhaxds ye heyowevor eotw éExdorou, i.e. roh\Naxds ye Aeyopevwv TOV OTOLXElwy TatTd éoTL TA OTOLXELa Exdorov. So long as the names of the elements are used ambiguously, i.e. so long as we say ‘matter, form, privation, mover’ without specifying the particular matter, &c., we may say everything has the same elements.

In view of the frequent confusion of ye and re in manuscripts (cf. E. N. 1099% 22, 11018, 1113917, 112429, 117818, Pol. 1291 17, 1339 29, and Bast 710)we need not hesitate to accept Christ’s ye for re.

33. #81, in the senses mentioned in ll. 33-36, i.e.

(1) the causes are the same or analogous because matter, form, privation, and mover are causes of all things,

(2) the causes of substances are causes of all things,

(3) the first mover is the cause of all things.

The sense requires traira 7) Td dvddoyov; cf. N. 10893 76 airo kal TO dvddoyov. 71 dvddoyov has come in from I. 26.

33. Ott Un, eidos, orépyors, 76 Kivodv, cf. 1070? 18, 22.

34. Kal G8t Td TOy odcvv aitia. Bz. thinks that we should perhaps read dru for &d/, as Them. (13. 5) may have done. But dd is quite right, being explained by 67 dvaupetrar dvatpovpevwv. Themistius paraphrases the passage very briefly, and it cannot be said with any certainty that he read 6ru.

70, Tay ovata aitia ds aitia mdévTwy, Cf. 1070? 36—10712 2.

35. &s aitia mévtwv. The superfluous ds is difficult. Perhaps dé-

A. §. 10718 25-37 * 367

yerax is to be understood, in which case the phrase would be parallel to 60a A€yerau ws Saxpva, Meteor. 388” 19, cf. Phys. 200° 31, Meteor. 379? 26.

St. dvatpetra. avatpoupevwy, ‘because when substances are removed all the other categories are removed’.

36-1. S31 8e... Gra. ‘But in the following respect there are different first causes, i.e. there are first causes as numerous as the contraries which are neither generic nor ambiguous terms ; and further the matters are different for different things.’

mp@ta here means ‘proximate’, while zpGrov earlier in the line meant ‘ultimate’. In using the word in the latter sense, Aristotle seems to have been reminded that it has also the former, and forth- with points this out. For the inconsistent use of zpéros in a single context cf. 1070? 27, 35, H. 10442 16, 18.

In using the word in the latter sense, Aristotle seems to have been reminded that it has also the former, and forth- with points this out. For the inconsistent use of zpéros in a single context cf. 1070? 27, 35, H. 10442 16, 18.

Aristotle has just said (I. 34) that matter, form, privation, and moving cause are causes common to all things. He presently points out (Pr) that nevertheless different things have different matters. Probably therefore in doa 74 évaytia ... toAAaxads déyerau he is saying as in 1070 rg that different things have different forms and different privations, the difference of the moving cause being omitted for the moment though it has been pointed out in 1070? 27, 10712 28.

37- & pie ds yévn Néyerau pyre wohhaxds A€yerar. Aristotle indi- cates that he does not mean (1) contraries stated generically, e. g. white and black, which are the contraries involved in the whole genus of colour (1070 20), nor (2) contraries stated still more widely, even am- biguously, i.e. form and privation, which are the contraries involved in all sensible things alike (107017, 10712 31-34), He must mean, then, the individual form and the individual privation which are differ- ent for each individual thing, cf ll. 24-29. xal ére ai tAa then will mean not that different kinds of thing have different kinds of matter but that different individual things have different individual matters (cf. 4 28).

There must be an eternal prime mover (ch. 6).

1071» 3. We must now speak of the unchangeable substance which is distinct from the two natural substances. ‘There must be an eternal substance, for if all substances are perishable, all things are perishable ; but motion or time cannot be generable or perishable. For there can- not be a before or after where there is not time, and time is either = motion or an attribute of it, so that motion must be continuous as time is, and if so it must be local motion, and in a circle.

12. That which is capable of moving things but does not actually do so will not account for motion. It is no use positing eternal sub- stances (e.g. Forms) if we do not give them a principle of change. Nor will it do if the principle is active but its essence is potentiality,

368 COMMENTARY

for then motion will not be eternal. Therefore there must be a prin- ciple whose being is actuality. And these substances must be without matter, for they must be eternal. Therefore they are actuality.

22. There is a difficulty. Everything actual has potentiality but not everything that is potential has actuality, so that potentiality seems prior. But if this were so, all that is might not be (i.e. not yet have been).

Therefore they are actuality.

26. The same difficulty is involved if the world be generated from night or from ‘all things together’. Matter cannot set itself in motion. Hence Leucippus and Plato say there is always motion—but do not specify it or its cause, or the cause of the motion’s being of the parti- cular kind it is. Nothing is moved at random; everything has its own proper motion, and its motion under compulsion, etc. Further, what kind of motion is first? Further, Plato could not tell what he means by describing the self-moving as a first principle, for the soul is later— coeval with the heavens. It is in a sense right to take potentiality as prior to actuality, but in another sense wrong. Anaxagoras testifies that actuality is first; so do Empedocles and Leucippus.

1072" 7. Therefore chaos or night did not last an indefinite time. The same things existed always either in a cycle or in some other way, for actuality is prior to potentiality. If there is cyc#c change, something must remain always active in the same way. If there is to be change at all, there must be something else whose activity varies. This must act in one way fer se, in another way by virtue of something else, and this something else must be that which acts always in the same way. This is the cause of uniformity, the other the cause of variety, both together the cause of uniform variety. Accordingly these are the movements that actually exist. What need, then, to seek other principles?

1071 3. Haar, cf. 1069% 30.

5. ai Te yap odciat mpdtat ty dvtwy. Aristotle has tried to prove this in 1069* 19-26.

6-10. GAN’ a8dvarov . . . mdfos. The argument is: If all sub- stances are perishable, everything else is perishable (since everything else is posterior to and depends on substance). But movement and time are not perishable. Therefore not all substances are perishable.

For the eternity of movement cf. Phys. viii. 1-3.

8. od yap... xpdvov. The argument is: If you say time comes into being, you imply that before that there was no time; but the very word ‘before’ implies time. But does not Aristotle’s view that space is finite contain the same difficulty ?

A. 6. 1071) 2~26 369

9. Having used the eternity of movement to prove that there must be an eternal substance, Aristotle now draws from it a further y inference, that movement must be continuous, and from this he

develops his whole astronomical theory.

10. 7 Kwyoeds Tt mdOos, cf. Phys. 251% 28. In Phys. 219 1 time is defined more precisely as dpiO ds Kivypoews Kata TO mpdrepov Kal Vorrepov. It is further said to be dpiOpos ody & apiOpodpev GAN 6 apiOpovpevos (220 8), i.e. not abstract number, but the aspect in respect of which movement is numerable.

7 Kwyoeds Tt mdOos, cf. Phys. 251% 28. In Phys. 219 1 time is defined more precisely as dpiO ds Kivypoews Kata TO mpdrepov Kal Vorrepov. It is further said to be dpiOpos ody & apiOpodpev GAN 6 apiOpovpevos (220 8), i.e. not abstract number, but the aspect in respect of which movement is numerable.

IO-II. kivnows 8... kUkAw. Aristotle’s proof that local movement is the only change that can be continuous is given in Phys. 261% 31— 26, and his proof that circular. movement is the only one that can be con- tinuous in 261» 247—26323, 26427—265212. The reason for the first dictum is that all other changes are between opposites, and that, since a thing cannot have opposite movements at the same time, it must rest at the opposites which form the limits of its move- ment. The reason for the second dictum is that all other changes of place are from opposite to opposite, and therefore (like non-local changes) cannot be continuous.

- 13. obK €otau Kivyars, ‘there need not be (always) movement’, For this use of the future cf. Bz. Zndex 754” 5-12.

15. ei py tis Suvapévy evéotar dpxy peraBdddew. Aristotle has argued in A. 988? 2 that there is no such dpyy in the Ideas.

16. 008 GAA ovata mapa Ta eidy, e.g. the mathematical objects which Plato supposes to be independent substances, Z. 102820. Robin suggests that the reference is to the Platonic world-soul (cf. 1072 r). But, since this is thought of as essentially active, the objection « ji evepyynoel, ovk eorar kivnois would not be appropriate to it.

19-20. Rolfes remarks that the description of God as pure actuality is inconsistent with any form of pantheism, which at once involves God in development. Aristotle’s remarks on Speusippus and the Pythagoreans (1072) 31) show how clearly he saw the irreconcilability of pure actuality with development.

21. tavtas . .. Tas ovcias., So far Aristotle has spoken of the necessity of one unmoved mover of the universe. He now refers by anticipation to the unmoved movers of the several celestial spheres, for which cf. 10742 15.

22. From Alexander 689. 19 it seems clear that he read, with Ab, évepyeta, which is the preferable reading.

24. ote Tpdtepoy etvar thy Suvapi, on the principle stated in A. 1019*2 7d 8 Kara piow Kal odciav (porepa), doa evdexerar elvar avev dAdo, exelva & dvev éxeivwv pun.

25. o00év eora tv dvrwy, ‘nothing that is need be’, cf. ovk éorau kivnots, 1. 13. That there never was a time when there was nothing, is proved in De Caelo i. 12.

26. «i ds Aéyouow = ci ovrws exes Ws Aéyovow. For this use of ds cf. De Gen. et Corr. 329% 35 Tatra pev yap petaBdAde eis dAXyAG, Kal ovx os *Eprredox) fs Kal €repou Aéyovow.

2678-2 B

370 COMMENTARY

27. ot Oeoddyor, cf, A. 983) 29 n.

ot ék vuktos yevvavtes, cf..N. togi5, and Orpheus fr. 12 Diels, Musaeus fr. 14, Epimenides fr. 5, Acusilaus fr. 1, 3, Hesiod, Op. e¢ D. nF Theog. 116 ff., Aristoph. Av. 693.

2678-2 B

370 COMMENTARY

27. ot Oeoddyor, cf, A. 983) 29 n.

ot ék vuktos yevvavtes, cf..N. togi5, and Orpheus fr. 12 Diels, Musaeus fr. 14, Epimenides fr. 5, Acusilaus fr. 1, 3, Hesiod, Op. e¢ D. nF Theog. 116 ff., Aristoph. Av. 693.

ol duotkot, i.e. in particular Anaxagoras, fr, 1, but his view is in this respect like those of Anaximander, Empedocles, Democritus, and others ; cf. 1069? 20-23.

30. o88€ TA Eripyvia 068’ 7 yh, GAAG TA orréppata Kal H yovy, i.e. yovn is needed to transform the émiyvia, which are potentially the young animal, into the actual offspring, while oépyara are needed to transform the earth, which is potentially the young plant, into the actual plant. -yovy is properly used only of the male element in the sexual generation of animals (G. A. 724? 12), while owépyara may be used with reference to plants as well, which have not the distinction of male and female (715” 19, 731” 10), but have something akin to it (715” 20, 732° 12), though the two elements are united in the same plant (731° 1, 200 28, 741" 3, TBO? 30, 763” 24).

ZI. 81d eviot movotow det evépyerav, otoy AevKurmos. Cf. De Caelo 300? 8,

32. Kal MAdtwy, cf. 77m. 304.

33. GANA Bid TL Kal tiva od héyouow. Cf. A. 985” 19, De Caelo 300? ro, 16, and (on Democritus) 313% 21. The objection is not fair, as regards Plato; he makes the world-soul the cause of the movement, cf, 107271.

34. Diels’s reading, o08, ei Ot 7 G8, is much the best emendation of the unmeaning ovdé ddt odd¢ Of the manuscripts, and derives sup- port from Alexander 690. 35. Schwegler’s ovdé rod &d/ and Zeller’s ovd «i woi are less probable.

35. Prof. Jackson thinks that the readings of A (de? aied 7) and of E (de? 7 dei) point to an original de? 7 dia ri. But the two readings are merely an instance of the constant tendency of the two manuscript groups to vary the order of words, and the required sense ‘there must be a cause’ may be got out of the traditional reading. ‘There must in every case be something present’, sc. to account for the particular movement. The simplest emendation would be de? rw’ (sc. airiav) del id pew.

36. 4 . 7 Alexander takes to mean ‘either... or’, Themistius (probably rightly) to mean ‘or... or’

&AXou, e.g. THS pavracias (Alexander).

1072°1. dpxny, Sc. Kujoews.

2. Uotepov, sc. THs KWHoEws, NOt Tod otpavod as Bz. supposes. Aristotle seems to be reasoning from the late point at which the formation of the soul appears in the Zimaeus (348). He argues that Plato makes soul coeval with the heavens, which are later than the original disordered movement of Z?m. 30, and that soul therefore cannot be the cause of this movement. Plato no doubt describes the soul as the principle of all movement and as eternal (Phaedr. 245 c—246 A, cf. Laws 894 c—896r). Further, he describes

A. 6. 1071 27 — 1072% 10 341

30, and that soul therefore cannot be the cause of this movement. Plato no doubt describes the soul as the principle of all movement and as eternal (Phaedr. 245 c—246 A, cf. Laws 894 c—896r). Further, he describes

A. 6. 1071 27 — 1072% 10 341

it aS Kal yevéres kal dperh mporépay Kal mpeoBurépay Toparos (Zim. 34C), and explains that it is only in the order of his exposition that it is later (348). But he at any rate describes it as made by God (34 c), while movement is found by God as something pre-existing (30 a). Some- thing must be allowed for the mythical and conjectural character of the Timaeus, but it does not seem that, as Zeller maintains in Pla/onische Studien, Plato had a perfectly consistent theory.

4. elpntar 8é ms. It is not very clear whether this refers to 1071» 22-26 or to @. 8. Bz. contends that when Aristotle refers in one book of the AZefaphysics to another, the reference is always fuller in form than this. H. 104243 and N, 1090%15 hardly form exceptions to this rule, since ZH and MN so clearly belong together respectively. The only genuine exception is K. 1064236, which seems to refer to A. 6, 7. In the other works the only instances I have noted of very vague references in one work to another are De Gen. ef Corr. 33615, De Caelo 271% 21, De Resp. 47712, De Sensu 436% 1, G. A. 715%1. On the whole Bz. seems justified in inferring that the refer- ence here is to 1071 22-26. That passage does not definitely say in what sense potency and in what sense actuality is prior, but indicates obscurely that though each individual potency is prior to the corresponding actuality, there must be some actuality prior to all potency.

5. Alexander seems to have read évépyeva (691. 33), and so do TT Ald. This reading is preferable to that of EJA?.

6. “Epmedoxdijs pudiav kal 1d veikos, sc. A¢ywv from Adyovres. For the arbitrary insertion of 7d cf. the passages referred to by Vahlen on Poet. 1449%1—®. 1049? 11, M. 10819 34, Soph. LV. 173° 9, De Resp. 478) 28, Rhet. 1361% 24, 1363” 3, 13695, 1390716, 14047) 31, 1414° ER.

ot del Aéyovres kivnow evar, cf. 1071) 32,

8. TadTd del 7 Tepiddw 7 Ans: tepid refers to Empedocles’ doc- trine of cycles (De Caelo 279” 14, Phys. 250 26). dAdws refers to any view which, without committing itself to cycles, holds that the main characteristics of the universe remain the same. In the next sentence Aristotle concentrates on the belief in cycles, though what he says of ils implications would apply also to the alternative view referred to in dAAws. It is not necessary with Schwegler to treat repiddw in 1. 10 as a gloss.

In the next sentence Aristotle concentrates on the belief in cycles, though what he says of ils implications would apply also to the alternative view referred to in dAAws. It is not necessary with Schwegler to treat repiddw in 1. 10 as a gloss.

9-17. The general upshot of this passage is that the motion of the sphere of the fixed stars, which is parallel to the equator and therefore unchanging relatively to the earth, is the cause of the permanence in the history of the world, while the ecliptic motion of the sun, which brings it now nearer to and now farther from us, causes the alternation of birth and death. Cf. 1071%15, De Gen. ef Corr. 336” 15.

IO. Set te det pever doadtws evepyody, From De Gen. et Corr. 336 23 ff. it is clear that the reference is to the sphere of the fixed stars, while the évepyodv GAAws Kat adAws is the sun, which moves in one way (éd¢)—i.e. has its yearly motion along the ecliptic— xa aird, and

Bb2

372 COMMENTARY

moves in another way—i.e. has its daily motion parallel to the equator —kxatr dAdo. The question then arises whether this dAdo is 76 rpGror, i.e. the sphere of the fixed stars, or something else’ (e. g. the sphere of - Saturn, says Alexander). But if we suppose something else to be the cause, then in turn the sphere of the~fixéd. stars causes both the sun’s motion and that of the supposed other.

15. atte. The editors since Brandis read atré and take the clause to mean that the sphere of the fixed stars will cause both its own motion and that of the supposed other. But in Aristotle’s view the motion of the sphere of the fixed stars is not self-caused ; it is caused by God. It is therefore better to read atv with Alexander and take it to refer to the sun. Since we cannot suppose the motions, parallel to the equator, (a) of the fixed stars and (4) of Saturn and the sun, to be unconnected, we should have to suppose the motion of the fixed stars to be the cause of the motion of Saturn and therefore, in- directly, of the motion of the sun.

15-16. otxodv BéAtioy 75 mp@tov .. . doattws. The principle is: If B causes C, but A causes B, A is more truly than B the cause of C. Cf. a.994*11. There is a further advantage in regarding the sphere of the fixed stars as the cause of the sun’s daily motion; it has already been shown to be the cause of the uniformity in the uni- verse (kai yap airiov hv xrA.), so that if we assign to it also the causation of the sun’s daily motion we shall be practising se in explanation.

17. ovKody otTws Kat €xoucwv at KU ELS. Theory requires the ac- count given in ll. g—17, and accordingly the actual motions are found to be such as have been described.

18. d&ddas.. . dpxds, sc. like the Platonic Ideas, cf. 1071» 14.

Nature and mode of operation of the first mover (ch. 1).

17. ovKody otTws Kat €xoucwv at KU ELS. Theory requires the ac- count given in ll. g—17, and accordingly the actual motions are found to be such as have been described.

18. d&ddas.. . dpxds, sc. like the Platonic Ideas, cf. 1071» 14.

Nature and mode of operation of the first mover (ch. 1).

1072°19. There must, then, be something that is in incessant, and therefore in circular, motion, and this is actually observed to be the case. The first heaven, then, must be eternal. Therefore there must also be something that moves it. Since that which is moved and moves is a middle term, there must be an extreme which moves without being moved, being eternal, substance, and actuality.

26. The object of desire and that of thought move thus. And in their primary forms they are identical. ‘The object of desire is the good or the apparent good. Now desire depends on thought rather than thought on desire. And thought is moved by its object, and the terms in the column of positives are fer se objects of thought, and

A, 6. 1072%15-18 373

in this column substance, and among substance that which is simple and actual, comes first. But the good and desirable belongs . to the same column, and the first term in this column must be most good.

by, A final cause in the sense of that whose good is aimed at cannot be found among unchangeable things, but a final cause in the sense of the good aimed at can; it moves by being loved, while all other things that move do so by being moved.

4. That which is moved is capable of being otherwise than as it is, so that if its activity is the primary (i.e. circular) motion, it has con- tingency in this sense—liability to spatial motion, though not to change of substance. The unmoved mover, on the other hand, has no con- tingency ; it is not subject even to the minimal change (motion in a circle), since this is what it originates. It exists therefore of neces- sity ; its being is therefore good, and it is in this way that it is a prin- ciple of motion. (The necessary in the sense of the non-contingent must be distinguished from the necessary in the sense of what is con- trary to natural impulse, and from the necessary in the sense of the sine qua non).

1g. On such a principle, then, the physical universe depends. It is a life which is always such as ours is at its best. Its very activity is pleasure—just as waking, perceiving, thinking are most pleasant because they are activities.

18, Thought which is independent of lower faculties must be thought of the best object. Now thought does think itself, because it shares in the intelligibility of its object. It becomes intelligible by contact with the intelligible, so that thought and object of thought are one,

22. Activity rather than potentiality is the divine thing in thought— actual contemplation the pleasantest and best of all things. If God is always in that good state which we sometimes reach, this must move our wonder ; and if his state is even better, this must move our wonder yet more.

26. God must also have life, for the actuality of thought is life and God is that actuality. God therefore has, or rather is, life continuous and eternal.

30. Those who, like the Pythagoreans and Speusippus, think the good is not a first principle because the developed living thing is better than the germ from which it comes, are wrong, for the germ comes from prior developed beings.

10732 3. It is clear, then, that there is a substance eternal, im- movable, separate from sensible things: We have shown that it

374 _ COMMENTARY

must be without magnitude; it cannot have finite magnitude, for then it could not have the infinite power which it displays by causing motion eternally, and it cannot have infinite magnitude be- cause there is no such thing. It must-also be free from change of quality, for the other-sorts of change presuppose locomotion.

1072° 19. ék vuktds éotat, cf. 1071) 27,

20. Kal ék py Ovtos, cf. 1069) 19.

21. aity 8 4 Kukda, cf. 1071» 10-11 n.

23. 6 mp@tos otpavds, the sphere of the fixed stars, cf. De Caelo 288*15, 292b22. This is ‘first’, counting from the outer edge of the universe.

éott Tolvuy Te kat 6 Kuvet. From the existence of a xwovpevoy there cannot be inferred the existence of something which it moves, but only the existence of something that moves it. 6 therefore is sub- ject of xweé as in |. 25.

24. The traditional reading evel d€ ro Kwovpevoy Kal Kwodv, Kat pécov tow éori 7m gives an unsatisfactory sense; the unmoved mover is not a pecov. Nor does it mend matters if we punctuate after pecov instead of after xwodv. ore d€ Kal TO KivoUpevov povus cannot as Alexander. suggests be understood, and roi cannot begin a clause, nor is kat pécov intelligible. «ac must in any case be excised ; we may then read for rowvvv éori either €or toivuy oF Kwodv éort or simply éor. The argument then is as follows: Aristotle has just remarked that there must be something that moves the det xwovpevoy Of |, 21. This xuvoby may be (a) kwovpmevov or (d) od Ki- vovpevov. Buta _ Kuvoupevov kal kwvobdv is something intermediate, which presupposes te 6 od Kwovpevov xwet, For the description of the x:- vousLevov kal kwovv as a pecov cf. MZ. A. 70325, and for the argument cf. Phys. 256» 20 ff.

This xuvoby may be (a) kwovpmevov or (d) od Ki- vovpevov. Buta _ Kuvoupevov kal kwvobdv is something intermediate, which presupposes te 6 od Kwovpevov xwet, For the description of the x:- vousLevov kal kwovv as a pecov cf. MZ. A. 70325, and for the argument cf. Phys. 256» 20 ff.

Professor Jackson proposes ézel 8€ 7d Kwovpevoy Kal KivodV Kal [7s dv Towvv éori TL KTA., ‘since there are two sorts of kivovpevoy, a Kwov- pevov Which is xevodv and a Kvovpevoy which is ju) KLvOvV, there is also, to complete the series, something existent which is xwodv and pa xwovpevov’. But (1 us Aristotle has not established the existence of a Kwovpevov kat kiwodvy and that of a kwovpevoy kat pa Kwodv, but only that of a xwovpevor (1. 21) and that of a xvodv (I. 23). (2) dv row é€oti 7 is not a very natural mode of expression. Professor Jackson quotes De An, 43313 in support of his view, but there we have not what his view implies, a division of 7d Kivovjevov into two kinds, but what our interpretation above implies, a division of 76 kwvoov into two kinds.

26. wet Sé GSe 7d dpextov Kal TS vontdv’ Kiel od Kivodpeva. In general, according to Aristotle, there is no xwely without dvrixvel- aba (G. A. 76818); the action of an object of desire is the only exception to this rule. On the dpexrov or dyafdv as the motive power in the world of nature cf. PAys, 192°16, De Gen. et Corr. 336% 27,

ef FO72™ 19—27 375

De Vila 469° 28, P. A. 687215, /,.A.704¥ 15. The doctrine becomes very prominent in Theophrastus; cf. his fragment on Metaphysics, SOOO RS tOnIOAT Ineo, 312. 4,315. 05, 327.20, ne doctrine that the motions of the stars were due to the desire to imitate the perfection of the divine nature lasted long. There was much dis- cussion among theologians of the question whether the stars are conscious. St. Thomas ’(.S. 7. 1% qu. 70) sums up by saying that Origen and Jerome held them to be conscious, Basil and John of Damascus denied them consciousness, and Augustine was neutral. He himself concludes that corpora coelesha non sunt animalia eo modo quo plantae et animalia, sed aeqguivoce, i.e. the consciousness to which the motion of a star is due is not its own form but the in- telligence to which it is subject. Cf. Webb, Studies in the Hist. of Vat. Theol. 243 f. Kepler argued against the Ptolemaic theory on the ground, among others, that it implied that the planets know mathematics; but he himself thought that the sun apprehends the harmonies of number which regulate the planetary orbits.

The colon after vonrov gives a better sense than Bekker’s full stop after de or Bz.’s comma after dpexrov (with xwovpevov for kwovpeva). For ode referring backwards cf. > 26, Kiihner i, p. 646.

Aristotle is not here expressing the view that dpegis and voids are independent sources of acton or local movement, the view stated provisionally in De An. 433413 and set aside in 433%21 in favour of the view that dpegis is the only direct principle of action. Line 30 here indicates that his meaning with regard to 76 voyroy is that it stimulates ¢hought without being itself stimulated.

27-1. The argument for the identity of the zpa@rov dpexrov and the mpatov vontov is as follows: The actual object of desire is either the apparent or the real xaddv, so that the primary object of desire is evidently the kaAov. (Aristotle next observes that the desire of it presupposes the recognition of it as xadov. This remark makes the transition from desire to thought but is not meant to prove the identity of their primary objects; the proof of that comes in what follows.) Now the proper object of vots is the assemblage of positive enti- ties () érépa cvororxia), negatives being known only as the opposites of positive entities (cf. ®. 104611). Substances are the first members of this assemblage, prior to positive gualztes, and simple immaterial substance is prior to substance which includes matter as well as form. Hence immaterial substance is the zparov vonrov. But 76 xadov, which was shown to be the zpérov épexrov, is something positive and therefore also belongs to the positive assemblage. This Aris- totle takes to imply that the positive assemblage is the assemblage of xaAa. And if so, immaterial substance, which is the first member of the assemblage, and therefore contains in the highest degree the character of all members of the assemblage (a. 99324), must be the dpucrov Or mp@rov dpexrov, while it has already been shown to be the zpérov vonrov.

27, toUTwy Ta mp@ta 7a adté. Alexander points out that some

376 COMMENTARY

6pexta are NOl voyta, e.g. a loaf, and some vonra are not dpexrd, e.g. evil things.

27-28. émOupntov...dvKaddoy. Aristotle establishes that the rpdrov dpextov is the kaddv by considering the species of dpegis. There are in all three species—érufupiia, Ovpds, Bovdnois(De An, 414>2, M.A. 700b 22); but Aristotle has also a tendency to divide dpegs simply into that which is rational (GovAyo.s) and that which is against reason (ériOupia) (De An. 433% 22—26), and these two he is satisfied to mention here.

There are in all three species—érufupiia, Ovpds, Bovdnois(De An, 414>2, M.A. 700b 22); but Aristotle has also a tendency to divide dpegs simply into that which is rational (GovAyo.s) and that which is against reason (ériOupia) (De An. 433% 22—26), and these two he is satisfied to mention here.

ZI. 4 érépa cuoroyia, ch A. 986423n., K. 1066815, Phys. 2o1b25. Not only is cvorouxia used of the Pythagorean list of opposites, but Aristotle himself recognizes a positive ovorouxia or column including such terms as being, unity, substance, and a nega- tive cvorouxéa including not-being, plurality, not-substance (I. 1004? 27, De Gen. e¢ Corr. 319215, De Sensu 447° 30, 448°16, P. A. 670» 21). In each case the negative is known not fer se but as the negation of the positive term.

32-34. Alexander thinks this note on the difference between ‘ one’ and ‘simple’ is meant to meet the objection that if the primary un- moveable substance is simple it must be one, whereas Aristotle be- lieves in a plurality of such substances (the beings that move the spheres, 1074°15). Rather, Aristotle seems to be intent on explaining what he means by ‘simple’, without any further motive.

33. Td pev yap ev pérpov onpaiver, cf. A. 1016) 18,

16 8€ dmAodv THs Zxov adté, ‘One’ denotes that a thing is the measure of something, the unit used in counting an assemblage; ‘simple’ denotes that a thing is zse/f in a certain condition, i.e. unmixed.

385-P 1. kal €ottv...mp&tov. The first term in a series is the best term, if this description of it is appropriate (as it is in this case, since TO kaAédv is in the series); or if it is not, then the first term may be said to be ‘analogous to the best’. Thus circular movement may by analogy be called the best movement, to take Alexander’s example.

bi-g. 81. 8 gor... . odk 2omr, It might be thought (cf. B. 996% 22, K. 1059735) that the teleological view implied in calling immaterial substance (God) the zp&rov épexrév is incompatible with the unchang- ing, eternal nature of immaterial substance (#25). Aristotle therefore proceeds to point out that 7d ob évexa, the object of purposive action, may in one sense of these words be found in the realm of eternal, unchangeable entities. J.e., when we speak of the ov évexa of a thing we may mean (r) that the thing is good rw, for some conscious being, or (2) that it is good twds (évexa), for the sake of some end. The latter exists in the sphere of unchangeables (éor1, 1. 3 = éorw €v rots axwytows), While the former does not, since the attainment of good involves change in that which attains it.

Christ’s addition of kai twos (rwds AP) after évexa (I. 2) is amply justified by De An. 4152 76 8 of vera dirrdv, 7d pev ob 70 8 @ (cf. ib. 20, Phys. 194235). G. A. 742% 22, which Christ quotes, is not

A. 7. 1072% 27— 1072h 5 377

a parallel, for the true reading there is not 7d ob évexa but 76 rovrouv eveka,

2) is amply justified by De An. 4152 76 8 of vera dirrdv, 7d pev ob 70 8 @ (cf. ib. 20, Phys. 194235). G. A. 742% 22, which Christ quotes, is not

A. 7. 1072% 27— 1072h 5 377

a parallel, for the true reading there is not 7d ob évexa but 76 rovrouv eveka,

2. 7 Siaipecis Syrot. Cf. ey TH diapered Trav évavtiov I. 1054 30, év TH éxAoyH TOV evavtiwy T. 100482. Phys. 194* 36 says the distinc- tion eipyrai év trois repli pirocodias, i.e. in Aristotle’s early work of that name. Alexander thinks the reference is to the dialogue De Bono, but elsewhere he refers to a separate "ExAoyy t&v évavriwv (cf. 250. 19, 262. 18, 23, 615. 14, 643. 2, 695. 26). The distinction here, however, is not a distinction of contraries, and it seems improbable that here 7 dvatpeois refers to a book at all. It probably means simply ‘the well-known distinction’.

g. The subject of xuvet is the ob évexa in the sense of ris, the ob- jective end.

4. Kivodpeva dé radda Kuvet. The manuscript reading xvoupeve, ‘and by something moved it moves all other things’, is hardly possible Greek, and xwovpevov, ‘while the other (the apres ovpavds) being moved moves all other things’, is little better. x:voveva gives the right sense, ‘it moves as being loved (sc. without itself being moved), while all other things move by being moved’, i.e. simply transmit the motion impressed on them. a and w are often confused in manuscripts (Bast 183, &c.).

5. Alexander’s commentary here says éév eorw % évéepyeia Tod ovpaved 7 mpatn dopa, which leaves it doubtful what he read, except that there is no trace of the xaé which the manuscripts have be- fore evépyew. I have adopted a reading which may have been that of Alexander, and which gives better sense than those of the manuscripts and, I think, than those of previous editors (ei pope 7 mparn evepyetd. eat, 7 KuvelTat Bz., ei 7) Popa 7 mpdry evepyea eorw 0 Kwvetrau Christ). Taking 7 «we?ra: with what follows, and reading tavTn ye, Which the sense requires, we get the following meaning for the sentence. Aristotle has said, with the heavenly spheres in mind, ‘the other things move only by being moved. Now if a thing is moved, it is capable of being otherwise than as it is’, He now continues ‘so that if its actual mode of existence is the primary kind of local movement (sc. circular movement), then in so far as it is subject to change, in this respect it is capable of being otherwise, i.e. in respect of place even if not in respect of substance’, i.e. even if it is not subject to generation or destruction. The words ite

circular movement), then in so far as it is subject to change, in this respect it is capable of being otherwise, i.e. in respect of place even if not in respect of substance’, i.e. even if it is not subject to generation or destruction. The words ite

14-24. Having shown (® 25) that there is a prime mover which is substance and is pure activity or actuality, Aristotle assumes that it must be such as the highest actuality or activity that we know, viz. vonots, immediate or intuitive knowledge. Further (1. 18) this vénous, being xa atryv, i.e. unconnected with any lower function such as sense or imagination, must be vonors of what is in itself the best, and that which is in the fullest sense voyois must be vonors of that which is in the fullest sense best, i.e. of the rp&rov dpexrdv (#27), the prime — mover itself. Now yvots does know itself by sharing in the know- ability of its object ; for when it touches and knows it becomes know- able, so that it and its object are one. It is when it actually ‘ touches’ its object that this happens, for, while vods is that which is capable of receiving the knowable, i.e. essence, it is actual only when it actually possesses the object, so that actuality rather than potentiality is the divine thing in vods—actual contemplation is the pleasantest and best of all things.

14-15. Siayuy) & .. . Hptv, ‘it is a life such as the best that we live, and live for but a short time’. Or duaywyy may be used in the more pregnant sense in which it implies both noble activity and pleasure

A. 7. 1072 8-20 379

(Pol. 133917). The primum movens is described not as having but as being a life, because it is pure évepyeua.

15. ola 4 dpiory pixpdv xpdvoy Hiv, i.e. when we are engaged in philosophic thought, cf. A. 982> 19—9837 10, L. V. 1177526. We can do this only for a short time because we are not all évépye and our dvvapus being finite is bound to tire (cf. ®. 1050» 24, £. NV. 1175? 3, De Somno 454? 8).

16. émei kat qdovt h evépyera tovtov. ydovn 7 evéepyeia is clearly preferable to the vulgate 4 dov7 évepyea. Aristotle uses here the language of L. JV. vii. 1153214, which identifies pleasure and activity. In the exacter language of Z. WV. x (1175?15), pleasure inevitably accompanies and completes activity.

17. 81d todto, because they are activities.

18. S14 tadta, because they are hopes and memories of these activities.

JV. vii. 1153214, which identifies pleasure and activity. In the exacter language of Z. WV. x (1175?15), pleasure inevitably accompanies and completes activity.

17. 81d todto, because they are activities.

18. S14 tadta, because they are hopes and memories of these activities.

18-21. In order to find the connexion between these two sentences, it seems necessary to suppose that when Aristotle says that the divine vonors ) Ka? avrnv is of 70 Kal? attd dpucrov he means the conclusion to be drawn ‘and therefore of the divine vois itself’, which has been exhibited as the zprov dpexréy (* 27), in other words as the dpiorov (#35). He then goes on to show ow vods knows itself; he shows that it is only in the activity of véyots that vods becomes its object and so becomes knowable, and the distinction thus drawn between activity and potentiality leads him to the statement that the activity is better than the potentiality, that the actual exercise of Gewpia is the pleasantest and best thing in the world.

18. 4... vdnots 7 kad adtyy, thinking in itself as distinguished from the human thinking which depends on sense and imagination. Alexander interprets these words as meaning 6 kar’ évépyeay vods in distinction from 6 xa@ eéw and 6 duvdper, but it is difficult to get this out of xaf aurny.

19. aitdv S€ voet. Bz. is not justified in inferring from 1074) 33 that 67 should be read; the argument there is obviously different. 64 gives a good sense here, but so does de.

20. KaTa peTakay tod vontod. Cf. De An. 430°8 exeivw (vd) 7d vonrov brdp&e. vovs, as Alexander says (698. 7), knows primarily the intelligible form, and incidentally itself, through the fact that when it knows it becomes what it knows. Ch De An. 43072 Kal avros (6 vois) « ae voyros coTw domep TH vonta. emt pev yep TOV dvev vAys TO aire fore 70 voobv kal 70 voovievov" a] yap eTLOTH LN n GewpytiKkn Kal TO ovTWS emliaTyTOV TO aito éeorw. ‘The identity of actualized vods (voids actually engaged in voyors) with the actualized voyrov (which has been changed from a dvvdpe vonTov to an évepyeia voynrov by the action of vods in véyois on it) is parallel to the identity of actualized sensation with the actualized sensible object (De Ax. 424% 25, 425 » 2

The doctrine that the actual aic@avopevor is identical with the actual aicOyrov seems to be based on two grounds :—

380 COMMENTARY

(1) The metaphorical description of the apprehension of the sen- sible form as 8éye6a, and the comparison of it with the reception of the shape of a seal by wax (424° 18), lead Aristotle to think of the percipient as becoming actually qualified by the form of the object.

(2) He interprets the inseparability of actual hearing from actual sound, of actual seeing from actual colour (425> 30), as implying that these are but two names for the same thing viewed from different standpoints.

The first of these grounds, at any rate, is also implied in his identification of vots and vontov (vots is Sextixdv Tod eldous Kal du- vape. Towodvtov GAAG pi TodTO 429%15). vods must have no character of its own, that it may be able to take the character of whatever it knows (429221). And doubtless the second ground is also implied in this case, though there is no passage so explicitly implying it as that referred to above with regard to sensation (425 30).

21. Qyydvey. For the metaphor cf. @, rog1> 24,

22. kal Tis odcias, i.e. ‘of substance’ in the sense of essence, cf. De An. 4292 15 dexrixov Tod etdous.

22-24. évepyet 8€... dpiotov. ‘ But vods is actual when it has its objects (instead of being merely capable of receiving them), so that (since actuality is better than potentiality, cf. ©. 8) having them rather than being capable of having them is the most divine thing in voids, and actual contemplation is the pleasantest and best thing.’ I follow Alexander (698. 29) in the interpretation of évepye? d€ éxwv; for the use of éywv cf. Bz. /ndex 305» 46. Bz.’s interpretation of éywv, guoniam ipse in se continet aiqgue tpse est 7d vonrov, is hard to get out of the Greek and seems less probable, the point being the contrast of actual with potential knowledge, without special reference at this stage of the argument to the identity of knowledge and its object.

Krische’s interpretation of éywv as = ‘having the potentiality of thought’ is rightly rejected by Bz.; the supposed parallels in Phys. 255*34, De An. 412% 26, 417 5, are not convincing. Dr. Jackson (Proc. Camb. Phil, Soc. cix-cxiv. 11 f.) translates évepye? 8& exwv ‘and it energizes continually’, comparing such phrases as ri xumrdGes éxwv; and éywv pdAvapeis. This idiom seems, however, to be some- what contemptuous and therefore out of place here ; cf. the instances quoted in L. and S.

Mr, A. J. Rahilly has an ingenious conjecture (Vew Jreland Review, October, 1909), évepyet dé éywv éxeivo waddov, dre TovTOV 6 KTX., ‘ but it is rather by possessing the former (the intelligible) that it (the intellect) _ becomes actualized. And so the contemplation of that which the intellect seems to have divine in it (i.e. self-consciousness) is its greatest enjoyment and good’. The transposition gives an excellent sense, but does not seem to be necessary.

23. dot ékeivou paddov todto is the reading implied by Alexander (698. 35). He interprets the clause as meaning ‘so that the divine thing in vois (i.e. its self-knowledge) belongs rather to the rpéros vois’ (than to the actual vods of mankind). 7 Qewpia will then mean not

A. 7. 1072> 21-32 381

‘contemplation in general but ‘God’s contemplation’. But it is difficult to supply 76 éavrév voety as the meaning of 6 doxel 6 vods Oetov éyew. We must, it seems, choose one of two interpretations :

(xt) ‘so that what reason is thought to have of the divine belongs to the prime mover (éxetvov, cf. éxelvos |. 27) rather than to the human mind’, s¢. since it always éyeu 76 vontov while we only sometimes do so. Then 7 Oewpia = ‘ God’s contemplation’.

(2) ‘so that this (actuality) rather than that (potentiality) is what reason is thought to have of the divine’. This derives some support from 1074? 21 étu 8€ etre vods 4 odota avTod cite voynois éort. Then 4 Gewpia will mean ‘actual contemplation’ in general. So Bz. takes the passage.

If éxetvo paAdov rovrov be read the meaning must be ‘so that that which reason is thought to have of the divine belongs to the prime mover (rovrov) rather than to the human mind’, This is slightly less natural than the two interpretations above.

24. For 4 Sewpia as the actuality, opposed to émornun, the poten- tiality of knowledge, cf. @. 10488 34, 1050%12-14, Phys. 255% 34,

De An. 412% 11, 23, 417% 29, G. A. 735211, L. WV. 1146 31-35. lob oUTws eb éxel, ds Hpets ToTd, 6 Beds del resumes what was said in Il. 14, 15.

25. ci S¢ paddov. That God’s voyors is always better than ours ever is has not been proved, but has been suggested in the words 7 dé vonows 4 Ka abryy (1. 18), where the self-dependent voyois of God is contrasted with the human ydyo1s dependent on sense and imagination.

26. For #e retrospective cf. ® 26,

That God’s voyors is always better than ours ever is has not been proved, but has been suggested in the words 7 dé vonows 4 Ka abryy (1. 18), where the self-dependent voyois of God is contrasted with the human ydyo1s dependent on sense and imagination.

26. For #e retrospective cf. ® 26,

30-34. Soot Se... toUTwy. For this view cf. 1075 36, N. 1og1® 33, tog2%11, As regards the Pythagoreans, Ritter’s notion that they believed in a development of the divine nature from imperfection to perfection is generally rejected by scholars. ‘The late position of the good in the Pythagorean list of opposites perhaps fits in with the doctrine here ascribed to them. The production of the ‘perfect ’ number ten from less perfect numbers is significant of the same ten- dency ; and, consistently with this, the Pythagoreans assigned the higher entities and qualities to the higher numbers. Cf. Zheolog. Arithm. p. 55 Ast Bur0Aaos 8é pera 70 pabyparixoy péyeOos Tpiyh dua: atav (ev) rerpdd., moutnta Kal xpoow eridergapevys THs pioews ev mevTdoL, Wixwow be év E€ddi, vodv O€ Kal tyelay Kal TO tr adrod Acydope- vov pas ev eBdopudd:, pera TatTa pyow épwra Kal pidiay Kal wyTi Kal erivoiay ér oydodd. cvpByvat Tots ovow. This point, which was noted by Gruppe, affords a connexion between the Pythagoreans and Speu- sippus, who wrote a book on the Pythagoreans and was specially in- terested in the perfection of the highest number, ten (Diels i.’ 303. 20). He no doubt considered the good to be manifested first in one of the later of the grades of substance which he recognized (Z. 1028» 21).

28. Bz.’s conjecture 84 for d¢ greatly improves the sense, and is supported by Them. 24. 19.

32. Sia 7d kal Tov putay KTh., cf. N. 1092 12.

382 COMMENTARY

35—1073" 3. Cf. @. 1049) 17-27.

1073? 3-» 17. Blass has pointed out that in this whole passage there are only two hiatuses (# 26,,34), that > 17-38 is almost free from hiatus, and 1074* 38-? 14 contains only one (> 7), while 1073? Ahora 1074® 38 is full of hiatuses. He points out further that otro in 1074» 3 does not refer naturally to anything that immediately precedes. He infers that Aristotle has here incorporated, with additions, extracts from an earlier and less scientific work of his own, in which much more attention was paid to style. This view can, however, hardly be right. At least the reference to Callippus’ theory (1073 32-38), and probably the whole discussion of the concentric spheres and their movers (1073 14—1074? 14), belongs to the latest period of Aristotle’s life. Cf. n. at beginning of ch. 8.

This view can, however, hardly be right. At least the reference to Callippus’ theory (1073 32-38), and probably the whole discussion of the concentric spheres and their movers (1073 14—1074? 14), belongs to the latest period of Aristotle’s life. Cf. n. at beginning of ch. 8.

5, déSektar, Bz. thinks the reference is to Phys. 26717, but Aristotle’s mode of reference to a separate book is almost invariably fuller than this (cf. 10724 n.), and, since the first 67. clause (3-5) and the third (11, 12) clearly refer to the results of the immediately pre- ceding argument, it is pretty certain that this one does so too, Aris- totle has not, strictly speaking, shown that the przmum movens is without extension, but he has proved something from which it readily follows (cf. Il. 7-11), and dédexrar expresses this fact, though rather loosely.

7. obdev 8 exet Svvapu & diretpov metepacpevoy, Cf, Phys. 2662 24 6,

10. dAws ovK EoTiv Obder daretpoy peyeDos, cf. Phys. iii. 5, De Caeloi. 5.

12, waco. yap at d\dar Kuvyjoers FoTepar THs KATA TéToy, Cf. 1072) 8, 9.

The number of the eternal moving principles (ch. 8).

1073714. Our predecessors have not been precise about this. The ideal theory does not discuss it. It identifies Ideas with numbers, but sometimes treats them as unlimited, sometimes (but without sufficient proof) as limited by the number ro.

22. We can use previous premises and distinctions. The first principle is an unmoved mover which causes one primary eternal motion. Since every eternal motion requires an eternal cause, and there are other eternal motions (viz. those of the planets) besides that of the first heaven, each of these requires an eternal substance as mover. It must be substance since the moved is a substance, mover is prior to moved, and only substance can be prior to substance. There must be as many such substances as there are motions.

bg. Their number must be determined by astronomy—the most akin to philosophy of the mathematical sciences—since it alone of these sciences deals with concrete substance. It is obvious that the

A. 7. 1072” 35~-10737 12 383

motions are more numerous than the moved bodies. We proceed to give a sketch of the accounts of various mathematicians.

17. Eudoxus assigned three spheres to the sun and three to the moon,

(1) a sphere having the daily rotation of the fixed stars,

(2) a sphere having a yearly motion along the zodiac,

(3) a sphere having a motion across the zodiac (stretching across a greater breadth of it in the case of the moon).

He assigned to the planets (1) and (2) and

(3’) a sphere whose poles are in the ecliptic (the poles being the same for Venus and Mercury),

(4’) a sphere moved obliquely to (3’). Total 26.

32. Callippus kept the same order, and the same number of spheres for Jupiter and Saturn, but added two each for the sun and moon, and one for each of the other planets. Total 33.

Total 26.

32. Callippus kept the same order, and the same number of spheres for Jupiter and Saturn, but added two each for the sun and moon, and one for each of the other planets. Total 33.

38. We must suppose, for each of these bodies except the moon, counteracting spheres, one less in number than the positive spheres, to neutralize their action on the outer sphere of the next system (counting

inwards). Total 55. Or if we do not add the said motions to sun and moon, we get Total 47.

107414. This is also the number of the unmoved movers (prob- ably—we do not claim certainty). If there can be no motion which does not contribute to the motion of a star, and every substance which is impassive and in itself has attained the best is an end, this must be the total number of the unmoved substances. For if there are others, they must cause motion as ends of motion. But there cannot be other motions than those named. This is made probable by study of the moved bodies. For no motion is for its own sake or for the sake of another motion, but for the sake ofthe stars (otherwise there would be an infinite regress).

(31. The physical universe is one. For if there were many, each would have a different individual cause, and therefore the causes would have to have matter; for, as far as form goes, it is common to many individuals. But the prime essence has not matter; for it is actuality. Therefore the prime mover, and therefore also the universe which it moyes, is one in number as well as in definition.)

38. There is an old tradition that the stars are gods. The rest of the tradition has been added to lend sanction to the laws and on utilitarian grounds—i.e. the anthropomorphic or zoomorphic parts of the mytho-

384 COMMENTARY

logy. But the original part, that the prime substances are gods, is in- spired, It is a relic of that completest possible development of the arts and sciences, which must have been often achieved and often lost.

Jaeger has argued forcibly (Aris¢, 366-392) that while most of Bk. A is early, this chapter must have been written quite late in Aristotle’s life. The theory of Callippus referred to in 1073 32-38 as a thing of the past (ériOero, 1. 33) can hardly be earlier than 330-325. The chapter interrupts the discussion of the first mover in chs. 7, 9. It is written in a full and careful manner, very different from the jottings which form the rest of the book. The doctrine of the ‘intelligences’ which move the spheres is hardly consistent with the doctrine of the single first mover in ch. 7 (cf. 1072» 13 f.), and is late—still absent in the De Motu Animahum and only tentative in Physics viii (258 10-12, 259° 3-15). 1074 31-38 seems to be a fragment belonging to the earlier and more monistic period of Aristotle’s thought.

1073* 16. For émopdcers = arodpavoes, cf. Rhet. 1365) 24.

7 (cf. 1072» 13 f.), and is late—still absent in the De Motu Animahum and only tentative in Physics viii (258 10-12, 259° 3-15). 1074 31-38 seems to be a fragment belonging to the earlier and more monistic period of Aristotle’s thought.

1073* 16. For émopdcers = arodpavoes, cf. Rhet. 1365) 24.

20. dté 8 ds pexpt Tis Sexddosapropevwv. Thisviewis ascribed to some of the believers in ideal numbers in M. 1084° 12, to Platonists gener- ally in 1084 31, and to Plato himself in PAys. 206 32. The doctrine was derived from the Pythagoreans, for whom cf. A. 98628; Philolaus fr. 11.5; Theo Smyrn. pp. 93. 19, 25, 99. 8, 106. 7 Hiller; Zheologum. Artthm. pp. 60, 61 Ast; Photius, 4747. p. 439%5 Bekker; Zeller io 504-505; Burnet, Z. G. P.§ 48. Speusippus connected one with the point, two with the line, three with the plane surface (the triangle), four with the solid (the tetrahedron) ; and 1+2+3+4 = 10 ( Theo- logum. Arithm. p. 63 f.). Cf Z. 1028» a1 n.

24. dxlyntov kat Ka8 abTd Kal KaTa cupPeRnKds = ore Ka’ adTd ovTE Kata ovpBeBnkds KwyTor.

29. Thy Tod Tavtés Thy GmAHv popdy, the diurnal apparent motion of the whole heavens.

32. ev Tots puoikois, Phys. viii. 8, 9, De Caclo i. 2, ii. 3-8. ;

33. bw dxwhtou te KiveioOar Kab aitiv Kal didiou odctas. These moving causes of the several planetary motions are, says Alexander (706. 32), not identical with the souls of the planets which Aristotle’s language in De Caelo 292% 20 ff. implies. It is in virtue of their souls that the planets are able to move at all, but it is in virtue of the desire of their moving causes for God that they move eternally and uniformly. The souls of the planets, we may add, are immanent in them, but the moving causes transcend them as God transcends the arAavijs odaipa. But it must be remembered that Aristotle nowhere speaks explicitly of souls of the planets, though he ascribes to the planets action and life (De Caelo 292% 20).

DY. 81d Thy eipnuevny aitiay mpdtepov seems to refer to ® 5-11.

6. ai 8 Gar wept odSepras odctas, cf. M. 2, 3.

17—1074* 14. The views of Eudoxus, Callippus, and Aristotle about the planetary system are discussed more fully by Simplicius (Comm,

A. 8. 1073216 — 107317 385

DY. 81d Thy eipnuevny aitiay mpdtepov seems to refer to ® 5-11.

6. ai 8 Gar wept odSepras odctas, cf. M. 2, 3.

17—1074* 14. The views of Eudoxus, Callippus, and Aristotle about the planetary system are discussed more fully by Simplicius (Comm,

A. 8. 1073216 — 107317 385

in De Caelo 488. 18-24, 493. 4—506. 18), Eudoxus’ theory was first satisfactorily interpreted by Schiaparelli in Puddlicaziont del R. Osservatorio di Brera in Milano, 1875). Excellent accounts of the theory are given in Dreyer, Plane/ary Systems, 84-114, and in Heath, Arzstarchus of Samos, 190-224. The importance of the theory in the history of astronomy is well indicated in the following remarks by Dreyer(p. 107). ‘Scientific astronomy may really be said to date from Eudoxus and Kalippus, as we here for the first time meet that mutual influence of theory and observation on each other which characterizes the development of astronomy from century to century. Eudoxus is the first to go beyond mere philosophical reasoning about the construction of the universe ; he is the first to attempt systemati- cally to account for the planetary motions. When he has done this the next questionis how far this theory satisfies the observed phenomena, and Kalippus at once supplies the observational facts required to test the theory and modifies the latter until the theoretical and observed motions agree within the limit of accuracy attainable at the time. Philosophical speculation unsupported by steadily pursued observations is from henceforth abandoned ; the science of astronomy has started on its career.’

Simplicius derives his account largely from Sosigenes the Peripa- tetic (second century a.p., the teacher of Alexander Aphrodisiensis), who in turn borrowed from Eudemus’ treatment of the subject in his History of Astronomy. Simplicius quotes from Sosigenes the state- ment that Aristotle discussed in his Physzcal Problems objections to the hypotheses of astronomers (sc, Eudoxus and Callippus) arising from the fact that even the sizes of the planets do not appear always the same. Simplicius further refers to 1073 10-13 and 1074 14-17 as indicating dissatisfaction with the theory of concentric spheres, But Aristotle’s doubts are clearly only on points of detail.

Simplicius further refers to 1073 10-13 and 1074 14-17 as indicating dissatisfaction with the theory of concentric spheres, But Aristotle’s doubts are clearly only on points of detail.

‘The theory of concentric spheres was pursued for some time after Aristotle. Schiaparelli conjectures that even Archimedes still held to it. Autolycus, the author of the treatises Ox the moving sphere and On risings and settings, who lived till the end of the fourth or the begin- ning of the third century B.c., is said to have been the first to try, presumably by some modification of the theory, to meet the difficulties which had been seen from the first and were doubtless pointed out with greater insistence as time went on. What was ultimately fatal to it was of course the impossibility of reconciling the assumption of the invariability of the distance of each planet with the observed differences in the brightness, especially of Mars and Venus, at different times, and the apparent difference in the relative sizes of the sun and moon’ (Heath, 221).

17-32. On the general nature of Eudoxus’ theory I cannot do better than quote Heath (p. 195). ‘Eudoxus adopted the view which prevailed from the earliest times to the time of Kepler, that circular motion was sufficient to account for the movements of all the heavenly bodies. With Eudoxus this circular motion took the form of the

2573-2 ; Cc

386 COMMENTARY

195). ‘Eudoxus adopted the view which prevailed from the earliest times to the time of Kepler, that circular motion was sufficient to account for the movements of all the heavenly bodies. With Eudoxus this circular motion took the form of the

2573-2 ; Cc

386 COMMENTARY

revolution of different spheres, each of which moves about a diameter as axis. All the spheres were concentric, the common centre being the centre of the earth; hence the name of ‘“ homocentric spheres” used in later times to describe the system. The spheres were of different sizes, one inside the other. Each planet was fixed at.a point in the equator of the sphere which carried it, the sphere _revolving at uniform speed about the diameter joining the correspond- ing poles; that is, the planet revolved uniformly in a great circle of the sphere perpendicular to the axis of rotation. But one such circular motion was not enough ; in order to explain the changes in the speed of the planets’ motion, their stations and retrogradations, as well as their deviations in latitude, Eudoxus had to assume a number of such circular motions working on each planet, and producing by their com- bination that single apparently irregular motion which can be deduced from mere observation. He accordingly held that the poles of the sphere which carries the planet are not fixed, but themselves move on a greater sphere concentric with the carrying sphere and moving about two different poles with a speed of its own. As even this was not sufficient to explain the phenomena, Eudoxus placed the poles of the second sphere on a third, which again was concentric with and larger than the first and moved about separate poles of its own, and with a speed peculiar to itself. For the planets yet a fourth sphere was required similarly related to the three others; for the sun and moon he found that, by a suitable choice of the positions of the poles and of speeds of rotation, he could make three spheres suffice. In the accounts of Aristotle the spheres are described in the reverse order, the sphere carrying the planet being the last. The spheres which move each planet Eudoxus made quite separate from those which move the others. One sphere sufficed of course to produce the daily rotation of the heavens. ‘Thus, with three spheres for the sun, three for the moon, four for each of the planets and one for the daily rotation, there were twenty-seven spheres in all. It does not appear that Eudoxus specu- lated upon the causes of these rotational motions or the way in which they were transmitted from one sphere to another; nor did he inquire about the material of which they were made, their sizes and mutual distances. In the matter of distances the only indication of his views is contained in Archimedes’ remark that he supposed the diameter of the sun to be nine times that of the moon, from which we may no doubt infer that he made their distances from the earth to be in the same ratio g: 1. It would appear that he did not give his spheres any sub- stance or mechanical connexion; the whole system was a purely geometrical hypothesis, or a set of theoretical constructions calculated to represent the apparent paths of the planets and enable them to be computed.’

It would appear that he did not give his spheres any sub- stance or mechanical connexion; the whole system was a purely geometrical hypothesis, or a set of theoretical constructions calculated to represent the apparent paths of the planets and enable them to be computed.’

Eudoxus of (Cnidus ¢. 408-355 B.c.), one of the greatest mathe- maticians of antiquity, was the discoverer of the theory of proportion expounded in the fifth book of Euclid’s Hvements and of ‘the mensura- tion of areas and volumes by the method of exhaustion, and the first

A. 8. 1073" 18-19 387

proposer of the Julian cycle. He was a pupil of Archytas and of Plato, who is said to have suggested to him for solution the problem of planetary motion (Simpl. 488. 21). He explained his system in a book On Velocities, which like all his other works is lost. Aristotle had his knowledge of the system from Polemarchus, an acquaintance of Eudoxus.

18. thy pev mpdtyy Thy Tv dmdavdv dotpwv eivar, i.e. the first (outermost) sphere of the sun (and similarly the first sphere of the moon) was meant to explain its diurnal motion from east (through south) to west. Aristotle means not that the first sphere of the sun or of the moon was the sphere of the fixed stars, but that it had the same motion.

19. Thy Sé Seutépay Kata Tov 81d péowy Tav Lwdiwv (KvKAor), i.e. the second sphere moved in the circle which bisects the signs of the zodiac longitudinally, in other words the ecliptic, the Aogds kVKos Of 107.1% 16 (which is different from the AeAofwpévos of 107320). Simplicius supposes that this second sphere produced, in the case of the moon, the revolution from west to east in a lunar month, while the third sphere produced the retrograde movement of the nodes (or points of highest latitude) in about eighteen years. But it has been pointed out that if these were the relative speeds of the two spheres ‘the moon ‘would have been found for nine years north, and then for nine years south, of the ecliptic .. . We must assume that the third sphere pro- duces the monthly revolution of the moon from west to east... round a circle inclined to the ecliptic at an angle equal to the greatest latitude of the moon, and then that this oblique circle is carried round by the second sphere in a retrograde sense along the ecliptic in a period of 223 lunations’ (Heath, 197). Simplicius’ mistake goes back to Aristotle, since ‘ Aristotle clearly implies that the second sphere cor- responds to the movement in longitude for all the seven bodies including the sun and moon, whereas in fact it only does so in the case of the five planets’ (ib.).

Simplicius’ mistake goes back to Aristotle, since ‘ Aristotle clearly implies that the second sphere cor- responds to the movement in longitude for all the seven bodies including the sun and moon, whereas in fact it only does so in the case of the five planets’ (ib.).

With regard to the sw, Simplicius says that, as in the case of the moon, the third or innermost sphere moves much more slowly than the second, but (unlike the third sphere of the moon) in the direct order of the signs (493. 15-17, 494. 6, 7, 9-11). ‘Simplicius makes the same mistake as regards the speeds of the second and third spheres as he made in the case of the moon. If it were the third sphere which moved very slowly, the sun would for ages remain in a north or a south latitude and in the course of a year would describe, not a great circle, but (almost) a small circle parallel to the ecliptic. The slow motion must therefore belong to the second sphere, the equator of which revolves in the ecliptic, while the revolution of the third sphere must take place in about a year..., the plane of its equator being inclined, at the small angle mentioned, to the plane of the ecliptic . . . The slightly inclined great circle of the third sphere which the sun appears to describe is thus carried round bodily in the

. Cic?

op an COMMENTARY

revolution of the second sphere about the axis of the ecliptic, the nodes on the ecliptic thus moving slowly forward, in the direct order of the signs; and lastly both the second and third spheres are carried round by the revolution of the first sphere following the daily rota- tion’ (Heath, 198).

The sun’s apparent motion is, asa matter of fact, along the ecliptic, so that two circles would have been enough to explain its motion. How did Eudoxus come to suppose that it moved at a small angle to the ecliptic? Simplicius says this was inferred from the sup- posed observation that the sun, at the winter and summer solstices, does not always rise at the same point of the horizon (493. 11-17, cf. Al. 703. 27). Schiaparelli thinks that the early astronomers inferred a movement of the sun in latitude from the observed motion of the moon and the planets in latitude. This belief was opposed by Hipparchus, but lasted long; Pliny puts the inclination at one degree, Theon at half a degree. Schiaparelli (p. 17) shows that the theory was not started to explain the precession of the equinoxes, ‘ which was discovered by Hipparchus, but was unknown to Eudoxus, Pliny, and Theon’ (Heath, 200).

‘ Eudoxus supposed the annual motion of the sun to be perfectly uniform; “he must therefore have deliberately ignored the discovery, made by Meton and Euctemon sixty or seventy years before, that the sun does not take the same time to describe the four quadrants of its orbit between the equinoctial and solstitial points ’ (ib.).

23. kal tovTwy Sé Thy péev mpetyv Kal Seutépav Thy atThy etvar éxelvats, i.e. the planets shared not only the diurnal motion of the sun and the moon, but also their motion along the ecliptic. ‘The periods of this motion, ‘in the case of the superior planets, are respectively equal to the sidereal periods of revolution, and in the case of Mercury and Venus (on a geocentric system) one year. As the revolution of the second sphere was taken to be uniform, we see that Eudoxus had no idea of the zodiacal anomaly of the planets, namely that which depends on the eccentricity of their paths, and which later astronomers sought to account for by the hypothesis of eccentric circles; for Eudoxus the points on the ecliptic where successive oppositions or conjunctions took place were always at the same distances, and the arcs of retro- gradation were constant for each planet and equal at all parts of the ecliptic. Nor with him were the orbits of the planets inclined at all to the ecliptic; their motion in latitude was believed by Eudoxus to depend exclusively on their elongation from the sun and not on their longitude’ (Heath, 200-201).

26. éwd tatty, nearer than this to the centre of the universe, the earth.

27. adwacdy, sc. Tov ohaipdv Or trav dopdv. ‘Of all the planets’ would have been more accurate.

28. ris S€ tpityns dmdvtwy tods modous év TH Bid pécwy Tov Lodiov eivat, i.e. ‘the third sphere had its poles at two opposite points on the

A. 8. 1073 23-29 389

zodiac circle, the poles being carried round in the motion of the second sphere ; the revolution of the third sphere about the poles was again uniform and took place in a period equal to the synodic period of the planet or the time which elapsed between two successive oppositions or conjunctions with the sun’ (Heath, 2or). It is not clear in which of the two possible directions this sphere rotated, but Schiaparelli shows that this does not matter for the theory.

29. THs dé TeTdpTyS Thy hopdv Kata Tov (KUKAoV Tov) Neho§wpevov mpds Tov pecov TavTyS (K’KAov). The fourth sphere moved in a circle inclined to the equator of the third. The inclination ‘was constant for each planet but different for the different planets. And the rota- tion of the fourth sphere about its axis took place in the same time as the rotation of the third about its axis but in the opposite sense. On the equator of the fourth sphere the planet was fixed, the planet thus having four motions, the daily rotation, the circuit in the zodiac, and two other rotations taking place in the synodic period’ (Heath, 201).

On the equator of the fourth sphere the planet was fixed, the planet thus having four motions, the daily rotation, the circuit in the zodiac, and two other rotations taking place in the synodic period’ (Heath, 201).

The combined effect of the rotation of the third and fourth spheres is thus described by Simplicius (496. 23—497. 6): ‘ The third sphere, which has its poles on the great circle of the second sphere passing through the middle of the signs of the zodiac, and which turns from south to north and from north to south, will carry round with it the fourth sphere which also has the planet attached to it, and will more- over be the cause of the planet’s movement in latitude. But not the third sphere only ; for, so far as it was on the third sphere (by itself), the planet would actually have arrived at the poles of the zodiac circle and would have come near to the poles of the universe ; but, as things are, the fourth sphere, which turns about the poles of the inclined circle carrying the planet and rotates in the opposite sense to the third, i.e. from east to west, but in the same period, will prevent any considerable divergence (on the part of the planet) from the zodiac circle, and will cause the planet to describe about this same zodiac circle the curve called by Eudoxus the Azppopede, so that the breadth of this curve will be the (maximum) amount of the apparent deviation of the planet in latitude, a view for which Eudoxus has been attacked’ (Heath, 201-202). Schiaparelli has shown how it was possible for Eudoxus, with the geometrical knowledge at his command, to arrive at the Azppopede (horse-fetter) or spherical lemniscate (a sort of figure of eight) as the path of a planet so far as it is determined by the third and the fourth of its spheres. But in virtue of the second gopd the lemniscate itself moves along the ecliptic. The actual motion of the planet among the fixed stars is due to the combination of these two motions. For half the synodic period the motion of the planet along the lemniscate accelerates its motion along the ecliptic, and for half of the period it retards it. When the backward motion along the lemniscate is greater than the forward motion of the lemniscate the planet retrogrades, and when the two motions are equal it is stationary. The theory is evidently meant to explain the retro-

390 COMMENTARY

When the backward motion along the lemniscate is greater than the forward motion of the lemniscate the planet retrogrades, and when the two motions are equal it is stationary. The theory is evidently meant to explain the retro-

390 COMMENTARY

gradations and the stations of the planets; while the breadth of the lemniscate defines their motions in latitude. Except in the case of Mars, Eudoxus (according to the figures given by Simplicius 495. 26-29, 496. 6-9) assigned fairly accurately both the synodic and the zodiacal or sidereal periods, which implies the use of careful observa- tions whether Egyptian or Babylonian. -We~do not know the angles of inclination of the axis ef the fourth to that of the third sphere which he assigned for the several planets, but taking the most probable angles Schiaparelli has shown that ‘for Jupiter and Saturn, and to some extent for Mercury also, the system was capable of giving on the whole a satisfactory explanation of their motion in longitude, their stationary points, and their retrograde motions; for Venus it was unsatisfactory, and it failed altogether in the case of Mars. The limits of motion in latitude represented by the various /zppopedes were in tolerable agreement with observed facts, although the periods of the deviations and their places in the cycle were quite wrong’ (Heath, 211).

30. elvar Sé THs TpiTHs ohalpas Tos médous TOV pev GANwv idious, tos S€é THs “Appoditys kal Tod ‘Eppod Tods adtovs. ‘As regards Mercury and Venus, inasmuch as their mean positions coincide with the mean position of the sun, Eudoxus must have assumed that the centre of the hippopede always coincides with the sun. ‘This centre being on the ecliptic and at a distance of go° from each of the poles of rotation of the third sphere, the poles of the third sphere of Mercury and the poles of the third sphere of Venus coincide’ (Heath, 210).

31-35. These names for the planets are apparently late. They occur first in Pl]. Epznoms 9878 f., where they are mentioned as compara- tively new (the name Hermes occurs in Z?m.'38D). Plato ascribes the names to a Syrian origin, and they were in fact derived from Babylonia. In earlier Greek literature only “Eozepos and “Ewodopos are mentioned by name, though the names ®aivwy (Saturn), @acOwv (Jupiter), TIvpdes (Mars), ®woddpos (Venus), Sr/ABwv are probably old (Burnet, £. G. P.2 23, n. 1).

32. Callippus of Cyzicus (fl. 330 B.c.) studied with Polemarchus, a friend of Eudoxus, and is said to have stayed at Athens with Aristotle, ‘correcting and completing, with Aristotle’s help, the discoveries of Eudoxus’ (Simpl. 493. 5-8).

33-34. tod . . . ta, which is omitted by E, is doubtless a gloss like those (also beginning with rodr’ éo7v) which A has in A. 984? 11, T. r009% 26. Cf. I. 1053» 31,

493. 5-8).

33-34. tod . . . ta, which is omitted by E, is doubtless a gloss like those (also beginning with rodr’ éo7v) which A has in A. 984? 11, T. r009% 26. Cf. I. 1053» 31,

34. TO peév Tod Ards kal TO TOO Kpdvou Td adtd exeivw drediSov. As a matter of fact, Eudoxus’ theory, as we have seen, works best for these planets. Callippus had evidently ‘not perceived the elliptic inequality in the motion of either planet, though it can reach the value of five or six degrees ’ (Dreyer, 104). Norcan he have perceived their deviations in latitude.

35- TOS FrLw kal TH ceAyvy S00 Weto Ett mpocOereas civar ohaipas,

A. 8. 1073 30-38 301

TG Horvdpeva, ei pedder Tus dmoddcew. Simplicius tells us that ‘accord- ing to Eudemus, Callippus asserted that, assuming the periods between the solstices and equinoxes to differ to the extent that Euctemon and Meton held that they did, the three spheres in each case (i.e. for the sun and moon) are not sufficient to save the phenomena, in view of the irregularity which is observed in their motions’ (Heath, 218). With regard to the sun, Euctemon, about 430 B.c., ‘had made the length of the seasons (beginning with the vernal equinox) 93, 90, 90, and g2 days respectively . . . Callippus, about 330 B.c., made the correspond- ing lengths 94, 92, 89, 90 days respectively’ (ib. 215)—a much more accurate estimate. Callippus accounted for the inequality by supposing, besides the three spheres attributed by Eudoxus to the sun, a fourth with its poles on the third, and a fifth with the sun on its equator, its poles on the fourth sphere, and its axis slightly inclined to the axis of the fourth; the fifth sphere rotating at the same speed as the fourth and in the opposite direction. Thus Callippus explains the sun’s unequal motion in longitude as Eudoxus explained the synodic inequalities of the planets, by a Azppopede; and ‘this representation of the motion of the sun is almost as accurate as that obtained later by means of the eccentric circle and the epicycle’ (id. 216). Sim- plicius implies that Callippus assigned two new spheres to the moon for the same reason; i.e. he ‘was aware of the inequality in the motion of the moon in longitude’ (ib.)—a discovery which would naturally have resulted from comparing the times of lunar eclipses with the corresponding longitudes of the moon. Here again a Azppopede would explain all the facts except evection.

he ‘was aware of the inequality in the motion of the moon in longitude’ (ib.)—a discovery which would naturally have resulted from comparing the times of lunar eclipses with the corresponding longitudes of the moon. Here again a Azppopede would explain all the facts except evection.

37- Tots S€ Norrois TOv ThayyTwv ExdoTw piav. Simplicius tells us that ‘the reason why Callippus added the one sphere which he added in the case of each of the three planets Ares, Aphrodite,and Hermes was shortly and clearly stated by Eudemus’ (497. 17-24); but he does not tell us what it was. We have already seen that Eudoxus’ system fails signally with Mars. ‘The fifth sphere was probably meant to account for the retrogradations of Mars, without assuming as Eudoxus did a synodic period other than the true one (260 instead of 780 days). Schiaparelli has been able to show how three concentric spheres instead of Eudoxus’ latter two will give the planet at certain points ‘a much greater direct and retrograde velocity with the same motion in latitude’ (Heath, 215) and thus ‘preserve the appearances’ much better.

In‘ the case of Venus and Mercury also, Callippus’ fifth sphere enabled him to approach nearer to the facts than Eudoxus had done.

38. Eudoxus and Callippus had offered a purely geometrical account of the planetary system; Aristotle aimsat a mechanical account, and can- not isolate the system of one planet from that of the next. He therefore supposes for each ‘ planet’ except the moon certain spheres which ‘ roll back’ the outer sphere of the planet just nearer to the earth than the given planet, i.e. which prevent the influence of the forward-moving or

392 COMMENTARY

He therefore supposes for each ‘ planet’ except the moon certain spheres which ‘ roll back’ the outer sphere of the planet just nearer to the earth than the given planet, i.e. which prevent the influence of the forward-moving or

392 COMMENTARY

deferent spheres of one planet from affecting the next. The mode of operation of the ‘ backward-rolling ’ spheres is explained clearly by Heath. ‘Suppose A, B, C, D to be the four spheres postulated for Saturn, A being the outermost and D the innermost on which the planet is fixed. If inside the sphere D we place a first reacting sphere D’ which turns about the poles of D with~equal speed, but in the opposite sense, to D, the rotations-of D and D’ will mutually cancel each other and any point of D’ will move as though it was rigidly con- nected with the sphere C. Again, if we place inside the sphere D’ a second reagent sphere C’ rotating about the same poles with C and with equal speed, but in the opposite sense, the rotations of C and C’ cancel each other, and any point of C’ will move as if it were rigidly connected with the sphere B, Lastly, if inside C’ a third reagent sphere B’ is introduced which rotates about the same poles with B and at the same speed but in the opposite sense, the rotations of B and B’ will cancel each other and any point of B’ will move as if it were rigidly con- nected with the sphere A. But, as A is the outermost sphere for Saturn, A is the motion of the sphere of the fixed stars; hence B’ will move in the same way as the sphere of the fixed stars; and consequently Jupiter's spheres can move inside B’ as if the spheres of Saturn did not exist and as if B’ itself were the sphere of the fixed stars’ (p. 218). In this system, however, both the innermost reacting sphere of a planet and the next sphere to it, the outermost deferent sphere of the next planet, are moving with the same motion, viz. that of the fixed stars, so that the second of these two spheres is superfluous. Aristotle might thus have reduced the total number of spheres by six.

107425. The subject of movetoOar is daravra, which = ovyrebetoar maga. (at opaipa) 1073" 38. tiv dopdv answers to Ta hawopeva 1074°T,

6. at pev dxrd, i. e. four each for Saturn and Jupiter (1073 23, 34).

7. at dé mévTe Kat elkoow, i.e. five for each of the other five bodies (107317 and 35, 23 and 37).

The subject of movetoOar is daravra, which = ovyrebetoar maga. (at opaipa) 1073" 38. tiv dopdv answers to Ta hawopeva 1074°T,

6. at pev dxrd, i. e. four each for Saturn and Jupiter (1073 23, 34).

7. at dé mévTe Kat elkoow, i.e. five for each of the other five bodies (107317 and 35, 23 and 37).

7-8. tovtwv dé wdvas 06 Set... Pepetar. ‘Aristotle should have realized that, strictly speaking, the account which he gives in the Me/eorologica of shooting stars, comets, and the Milky Way necessitates the introduction of four reacting spheres below the moon. For, according to Aristotle, these phenomena are the effects of exhalations rising to the top of the sublunary sphere and there coming into contact with another warm and dry substance which, being the last layer of the sublunary sphere and in contact with the revolution of the outer heavenly sphere, is carried round with it; the rising exhalations are kindled by meeting and being caught in the other substance and are carried round with it. Hence there must be a sphere below the moon which has the same revolu- tion as that of the sphere of the fixed stars, in order that comets, &c., may be produced and move as they are said to do. The four inner spheres producing the moon’s own motion should therefore be neutra- lized as usual by the same number of reacting spheres’ (Heath, 219).

0 ee ee ee Ns ee Cee eit nee ees eae

A. 8. 1074 5-14 393 10-12, 6 8}... wévte. The number of the spheres in the several theories is as follows : Eudoxus Callippus Aristotle

Saturn 4 4 7 Jupiter 4 4 7 Mars 4 5 9 Venus 4 5 9 Mercury 4 5 9 Sun 3 5 9 Moon 3 5 5 26 33 55

12-14. ei 8€...tTecoapdkoyta. It isnot evident how Aristotle reduces the number from 55 to 47. If Callippus’ extra spheres for the sun and the moon, and the corresponding reagent spheres ofthe sun, be deducted, the total is reduced only by six. Alexander makes three suggestions (706. 8-15): (1) that Aristotle subtracts the two Callippean spheres of the sun, and the two reagent spheres to correspond, and similarly subtracts four spheres from the moon, forgetting that there are here no reagent spheres to be subtracted. (2) that he subtracts all the extra spheres assigned to the sun and the moon by Callippus and himself, forgetting that two of the extra sun-spheres are needed to counteract two of the Eudoxean sun-spheres. (3) that, as Sosigenes had suggested, we should read évvéa for érrd.

(2) that he subtracts all the extra spheres assigned to the sun and the moon by Callippus and himself, forgetting that two of the extra sun-spheres are needed to counteract two of the Eudoxean sun-spheres. (3) that, as Sosigenes had suggested, we should read évvéa for érrd.

Another suggestion has been made by Krische, who (followed by Schwegler and Bz.) holds that the motions to be subtracted are the four reagent motions of Mercury which prevent its forward motions from affecting the sun, and the four reagent motions of the sun which prevent its forward motions from affecting the moon. These, he thinks, may be omitied because, the sun and the moon being far from one another and from the planets, there is no danger of their being affected by the forward movements of Mercury and the sun respectively. To this view there are three objections. (a) Aristotle says nothing of a greater isolation of the sun and the moon, and it is clear that he believed all the spheres to be in contact (De Caelo 287% 5-11)— presumably assigning various thicknesses to the shells of the spheres. (4) The reagent spheres are spoken of as belonging to the system of the outer, not the inner, of the two planets concerned (I. 1), so that the meaning required by Krische’s view would have been expressed by saying ‘if one were not to assign fo Mercury and to the sun the motions we spoke of’. (c) Krische ignores De Caelo 29135 éAdrrovs yap Avs Kal oedyvn KWotvTa KWyoes HY TOV TAGVW_EVWOV aoTpwV eva. This of course refers to the forward motions only. Now the greatest number of forward motions assigned to any of the planets is five, so that Aristotle must have assigned less than five forward motions to the sun and the moon; i.e. the reduction of the total number of spheres

394 COMMENTARY

to 47 is not got by subtracting reagent spheres only, as Krische supposes.

Dreyer (p. 114) suggests, after Martin, that Aristotle might have meant to dispense not only with the extra Callippean spheres of the sun and the moon but also with one of the Eudoxean spheres of the sun, that which was devised to explain the-supposed motion of the sua in latitude, and accordingly to reduce the reagent spheres of the sun to one. This would give the number 47, but as Dreyer observes Aristotle is unlikely to have thought of this reduction. There is at any rate nothing in this passage to suggest it.

This would give the number 47, but as Dreyer observes Aristotle is unlikely to have thought of this reduction. There is at any rate nothing in this passage to suggest it.

The most probable explanation of Aristotle’s meaning is the second given by Alexander, viz. that as regards the sun and the moon Aristotle proposes to return to Eudoxus’ theory. But if this be so, he holds that the sun and the moon have fewer motions than any of the planets; why then does he say in the De Caelo (loc. cit.) that they have fewer motions than some of the planets? ‘The answer is that the paradox he is examining there is that the number of motions of the heavenly bodies does not increase steadily as we proceed inward from the sphere of the fixed stars, which has one only, but first increases and then decreases. It is enough for the statement of the paradox to say that the sun and the moon have fewer motions than some of the planets, and Aristotle does not say more than the statement of the paradox requires.

14. The manuscripts and Alexander have opa:pav, while Them.¢ and Simpl.¢ have opdv, and read xai ras aicOyras |. 16, which is omitted by Alexander. If these last words are kept, they must refer to the spheres, and since the number of the spheres cannot be inferred from itself, odaipdv in 1. 14 cannot stand. qopdy is probably an early emendation which has come in for this reason. But it does not suit the context. It is not the case that Aristotle has so far enumerated motions and only now proceeds to infer corresponding spheres. Spheres have been mentioned throughout the passage 1073) 17— 1074%14, and the enumeration in 1074 6-14 has been expressly stated as an enumeration of spheres. oda:pdv therefore is right. But if so, xat ras aicOnras, as we have seen, cannot also be right. In any case the word dpxat is not appropriate to the sensible things in question, the spheres, but to their movers, and it is to these that the word ovtcia also is in the context applied (1. 22), The argument in ll. 17-24 is purely an argument from the number of the spheres (or movements) to the number of the moving causes. Goebel is therefore right in omitting kal ras aicOyras.

17-24. The argument is: (1) There is no motion in the heavens which does not contribute to the motion of a star. (2) Every substance which is free from outside influence (draOys |. 19 = axivyros |. 15) and is enjoying the sammum donum must be an end, and must produce a motion by final causality (1. 22). In other words,

All motions in the heavens are motions required to explain the behaviour of the heavenly bodies.

Every perfect substance produces a motion in the heavens.

A. 8. 10742 14 — 1074> 3 395

Therefore the number of perfect substances is the number of the motions required to explain the motion of the heavenly bodies.

20. Bz. is clearly right in proposing to read téAogs (which is read by two manuscripts of Alexander); this is shown by as téAos odaar popas bea.

10742 14 — 1074> 3 395

Therefore the number of perfect substances is the number of the motions required to explain the motion of the heavenly bodies.

20. Bz. is clearly right in proposing to read téAogs (which is read by two manuscripts of Alexander); this is shown by as téAos odaar popas bea.

21. tavtas, the 55 (or 47) unmoved movers answering to the 55 (or 47) spheres.

22-23. The movers of the planetary spheres are here said to act as final causes on the planetary spheres, as God does on the sphere of the fixed stars; i.e. a sort of desire is ascribed to the planetary spheres ; cf. De Caelo 292% 20-25. The relation of their movers to God is nowhere stated, but is presumably also one of desire.

Though the mover is the téAos opas here, the moved body is the tédos hopas in 1. 30; i.e. the mover is the of évexa in the sense of the rwvds, and the moved is the o@ évexa in the sense of the rwi, to use the language of 1072? 2.

31-38. The unity of the universe is proved on physical grounds in De Caelo i. 8, 9; Aristotle here offers the metaphysical proof which he there merely refers to, 2779. Schwegler points out a difficulty into which Aristotle falls. If the immateriality of the first mover proves its uniqueness, how can there be 55 immaterial movers, as Aristotle’s theory implies? The objection goes back to Plotinus, Lym, v. 1.9 mas 6& Kat TOAAG ovTws dowpara dvra VAys"od xwpilovons; and is difficult to answer. Cf. Introduction, cxxxix f.

On this’section cf. note at beginning of ch.

33- S00 dpiOug awoddd, UAnv exe. Ch Z. 1044% 7, De Caelo 278° 18,

34. els yap Adyos kal 6 adTds ToOAGy, otov avOpdmou, ZwKpdtys Se ets. Aristotle expresses himself rather obscurely, but the point seems to be this: One and the same definition, e. g. that of man, applies to. many individuals, but Socrates is only one, and therefore must have in him something over and above the definition of man, something to dis- tinguish him from other men, i.e. must have An.

35-36. 76 Se ti fy etvar. .. 7d mp@Tor, i.e. the prime mover, which has been described in 1072? 25 as pure actuality or essence.

38-14. For Aristotle’s views on the element of truth in popular religion see De Caelo 270) 5-9, 2848 2-13, » 3, Meteor. 339” 19-30, and cf, Pl. Crat. 397 c, Phil. 16 c. Towards the defazls of popular belief Aristotle adopts a somewhat contemptuous attitude; cf B. 10007 9, De Caelo 2847 18.

3. obro. The reference is rather vague—either to the beings that move the stars (® 22) or more probably to the stars themselves (4 30). Cf. 1073* 3-» 17 n. and n. at beginning of ch.

3-8. ta 8€ ora... cipypevors. Aristotle speaks as if Cronos, Zeus, Ares, Aphrodite, and Hermes were primarily star-gods and only later had human characteristics assigned to them. This is not historically true; the application of these names to the planets is late (cf: 1073 31-35 n.). His meaning is probably more general—that

396 COMMENTARY

This is not historically true; the application of these names to the planets is late (cf: 1073 31-35 n.). His meaning is probably more general—that

396 COMMENTARY

the gods of mythology have their origin in the prime forces that lie behind nature, and that early religion is right in recognizing the divine behind nature (Il. 8-10).

4. For the utilitarian value of myth cf. a. 995 4.

5-7. The anthropomorphism of the early beliefs is referred to simi- larly in B. 997" 10, Pol. 1252» 26. In Aristotle’s own view the stars are really much more divine than men (Z. WV. 1141 34).

6. kai tv dddwv Lowy dpotous trot, Alexander refers to the Egyptian mythology, and Aristotle may have had this in mind, since he refers to barbarians, and indeed to the Egyptians, in a similar connexion (De Caelo 240 5, Pol. 1329”25-33).

The traces of zoolatry in Greek religion are very slight and their meaning notclear. Cf. Farnell, Cud/s of the Greek States, iii, 58-62 on the horse-headed Demeter, iv. 115-116 on Apollo Avxevos.

10. For the belief in cycles of artistic and scientific discovery cf. De Caelo 240 19, Meteor. 339” 27, Pol. 1329 25. Plato already has the notion; he speaks more than once of past destructions of mankind by fire or water (Zim. 22.c, 23 a B, Crd. 109 pv, Laws 788 B).

The mode of existence of the supreme reason (ch. 9).

1074515. What must be the mode of existence of reason, if it is the most divine thing in the world? (1) If it thinks nothing, it is no better than a man asleep. (2) If it thinks, but its thinking depends on something else, it being itself only potency, not it but its thinking will be the best thing. (3) What does it think? Itself or something else? If the latter, either the same object always or different things at different times. Does it make a difference whether its object is noble or trivial? Evidently it must contemplate what is most divine, and without changing; any change would be for the worse and would infect with movement what is unmovable.

28. (Return to question (2).) If it is only a potency, (a) the continuity of its thought will be laborious; (4) its object will be nobler than it. The potency may be realized in the thinking of the worst possible object, so that the mere thinking is not what is best.

33. (Return to question (3).) Therefore, since reason is the best thing in the universe, it must think itself; its thinking is a thinking of thinking.

35. (4) But how can this be? All apprehension seems to be of another, and of itself only by the way, And (5) is it thinking or being thought that gives reason its goodness ?

38. (Answer to question (4).) Where the object is immaterial it is

A. 8. 10744 —9. 1074» 16 307

identical with the subject, and this is the case with the object of reason,

38. (Answer to question (4).) Where the object is immaterial it is

A. 8. 10744 —9. 1074» 16 307

identical with the subject, and this is the case with the object of reason,

1075* 5. (6) Is the object composite? If so, the thought of it involves transition. No; everything immaterial is indivisible, As the human reason (or rather that of composite beings) is in a certain period of time (for it possesses its good not in this or in that but in a whole, since its good is different from itself), so is the divine self-thought throughout eternity.

Aristotle now turns to the consideration of 6 vots, i.e. of the supreme intellect which has in ch. 7 been shown to be implied as the cause of the movement of the heavens,

107416. The description of the supreme reason as the most divine Tov Patvonever is strange, since ra pavdueva Means properly things apprehended by sense. But ¢atveoOar can also be used of what is discovered by reason (Bz. /udex 809* 8), and seems to be used here of all the things discovered whether by sense or by reason,

16-35. There are certain difficulties, which must be met if we are to succeed in describing the supreme reason in such a way as to make it the most divine of all the things we know. (1) LI. 17, 18. We must not describe it as knowing nothing, This is to make it an unrealized potentiality, which is no fit object of worship. (2) LI. 18-21. We must not say that it knows but something else determines it to know. This is to make it essentially a dvvayis, which must be inferior to its actuality and therefore not the best thing in the world. (3) Li. 21-27. It must know (a) itself or (6) something else, and if something else, then either (i) always the same object or (ii) different objects at different times. Now the object of knowledge makes a difference to the value of the knowledge; the object of the supreme reason must therefore be what is most divine, and therefore not different things at different times. Any change must be a change for the worse, and, apart from this, no change should be ascribed to that which has been shown in ch, 7 to be unchangeable. (ii) is thus set aside.

Aristotle now (I. 28) recurs to the second difficulty, though this has already been dealt with in ll. 18-21. He has in ll. 21, 22, implied that that question is not quite settled, and he returns to it because it has a bearing on the third. If the supreme reason is a mere faculty of knowing, then (a) it will find continuous knowledge toil- some (cf. @. ro50%24, De Somno 454° 26), which is absurd, and (4) the object of its knowledge, which as we have seen (Il. 25, 26) must be the most divine thing in the world, will be more precious than the reason or its knowing, since, if reason is a mere faculty, it is a Svapus rdv évavtiwy and is capable of being actualized as the knowledge of the worst thing in the world, so that its mere actualization cannot be the best thing in the world.

398 COMMENTARY

This enables Aristotle (I. 33) to set aside not only the suggestion that the supreme reason is a mere faculty, but also the suggestion (3 (2) above) that it knows anything other than itself. Since it is the most divine thing in the world (I. 16), and its object is the most divine thing in the world (ll. 25, 26), it must be its own object. Its knowing is a knowing of knowing. —_

The argument is somewhat confused by the failure to keep the

—second and the third question distinct.

For the doctrine of vonaews vonats cf. 1072) 20.

18-21. Alexander supposes Aristotle to be here setting aside the suggestion that not reason as a whole but some part of it is what strictly speaking knows (xvpiov). But this interpretation is ruled out by Gd\Aa ddvapyis 1. 20 and by ere vods ere vénows |. 21, where vots answers to dvvamuis |. 20. ddAo Kvproy is ‘some external condition determining reason to activity’.

35-38. Of the two difficulties raised here, Aristotle answers the first in 38—1075%5; he points out that the divine véyois knows itself not év wapepyw but as its only object. The second question is left unanswered. The answer Aristotle probably has in mind is something like this: If A knows B and is known by C the question may fairly be asked ‘is it in virtue of its knowing or of its being known that A is good?’ But when A knows itself, the question becomes ‘is it because A knows A or because A is known by A that A is good?’ and this is an unmeaning question.

36. atts 8 év mapépyw, e.g. the medical man knows primarily about health, and secondly that his knowledge is knowledge about health.

10757 1-3. émt pev . . . vonors, ‘in the arts the knowledge is the substance and essence of its object, and in it only the matter of the object is omitted, while in the sciences the definition and knowing is the very object’ (since the object in this case, being universal, contains no matter), Cf. Z. 10324 32-6 14, De An. 430% 2, 19.

3-5. ox érépou... pia. ‘The object of thought and the thought not being different in the case of immaterial things, the supreme thought and its object will be the same, and the thinking will be one with its object.’ Aristotle uses a certain amount of tautology here for the sake of emphasis.

6. petaBdddor yap . . . Sdov, ‘for if so, reason would change in passing from part to part of the whole’, whereas reason has been shown in ch. 7 to be unchangeable.

7. dowep, Bz. reads aorep ydp, but in the style of Bk. A the asyndeton seems possible. 7 dd.aiperov... 10. aidva; is an example of ‘binary structure’ with domep. Cf. A. 983) 16 n.

8. 46 ye tav cuvOéTwy. Bz. (after Ravaisson) brackets 7 and trans- lates ‘although its objects are composite things’. But (1) ye cannot mean ‘although’. (2) vods with an objective genitive is difficult (cf., however, De An. 430» 28 6 rod ti eat, sc. vots). (3) It is doubtful if vods would be described as apprehending ra ovvGera, which are pro-

A. 9g. 1074) 18 — 10757 10 399

But (1) ye cannot mean ‘although’. (2) vods with an objective genitive is difficult (cf., however, De An. 430» 28 6 rod ti eat, sc. vots). (3) It is doubtful if vods would be described as apprehending ra ovvGera, which are pro-

A. 9g. 1074) 18 — 10757 10 399

perly the objects of émuoryuy (didvoiw). It is therefore better to follow Alexander’s interpretation: ‘As the human reason, or rather the reason of beings compounded out of matter and form’; the last words extend the remark so as to make it refer to any beings other than man who have reason and also have matter. It is awkward that ovvGerov should refer in |. 5 to the object and in 1. 8 to the subject of knowledge, but this is not unlike Aristotle’s manner; he is care- less in such matters.

For the opposition of 76 cvv@erov, that which is half-divine, half- animal, to God, cf. £. V. 1177 28, 1178%20.

&y tu xpévw. Bz. compares 1072» 15 puxpov xpovov Huty, 25 ws Hyets more, but the comparison is misleading. éy tue xpdvw Means not ‘for a certain time’ nor ‘at certain times’ but ‘in a certain time’. The meaning of évy when used of time is seen from such passages as £. NV. rior 11 ék re Tov Towvrwr (sc. druxnudtwv) odk ay yévorTo madw evdaipwv ev ddAlyo xpdvm, 1174%27 odk eorw ev dtwodv xpdvw aBety kivnow Tedciav TO cider, GAA’ eirep, ev 7G away, Meteor. 355% 28 & ye tw Tetaypévors xpdvois arodidwor Trav 7d Andbev. The reference is therefore not to the enjoyment of the swmmum bonum in moments of illumination but to its progressive attainment év Biw teheiw (£. WV. 109818). Cf. MW. M. 1185? 4 ovd? (sc. éorar 1) eddau- povia) ev xpovw ye aredel, GAN’ ev TeAclw.

It is doubtful whether ypovm is to be understood with rod. . Twdt... dw Twi in |. g. If it is, the meaning will be ‘for it does not possess the good in this particular time or in that, but it possesses the swmmum bonum in a certain whole period’. If ypdvw is not to be supplied, the meaning is ‘for it does not possess the good in this par- ticular activity or in that, but it possesses the summum bonum in an organized life of activity’.

9. dv adXo tt is Opposed to air) atts. It is because man’s summum bonum is different from himself, because he is a ovv6eror, including in him unrealized potentialities, that time is needed for their realization. God, being pure activity, pure self-thought, enjoys com- pletely in each moment and throughout eternity the bliss which man can be said to enjoy only in a complete life.

10. Bz.’s ovrws 841s not improbably right. But for 8 after a com- parative clause cf. T. 1003>5n. There is a certain degree of opposi- tion between the principal and the subordinate clause which makes dé not unnatural; cf. B. 999% 27 n.

How the good exists in the world (ch. 10),

1075*11. Is the good a separate element in the universe, or the per- vading order? It is both, as in an army—though the general is the good in a higher sense than the order, since it depends on him and

400 COMMENTARY

B. 999% 27 n.

How the good exists in the world (ch. 10),

400 COMMENTARY

not vice versa. All things are ordered together for the common weal though as in a household the higher members are less free than the lower. All must, at least in their dissolution, contribute to the whole.

Difficulties in other views.

25. (1) All other thinkers make all things out of contraries. But neither ‘all things’ nor ‘out of contraries’ is right. Further, con- traries cannot act on one another. Our solution is that there is a tertium quid, the substratum. But other thinkers make one of the contraries matter (e.g. the unequal, the many). We refute this by saying that the matter which is one for all things is contrary to nothing. Further, on this view all things except the One will share in evil, since evil is one of the two elements.

36. Others do not even make the good and the bad first principles. Yet in all things the good is a principle. The former view rightly makes it a principle, but does not say whether it is final, efficient, or formal cause.

br. Empedocles has a strange view. He makes love the good, but makes it both an efficient and a material cause. Even if the same thing is both, their essence is not the same. In which capa- city, then, is love a principle? It is strange also that he makes strife (which = evil) imperishable.

8. Anaxagoras makes the good the efficient cause, for reason is the source of movement ; but this implies an end other than reason (unless the efficient and final cause are identified, as by us), Further, why does he not assume a contrary to the good?

11. None of those who speak of contraries use them—unless we recast their views. And no one tells us how, if all things have the same causes, some things are perishable, some not. Further, some make the things-that-are out of not-being ; others to avoid this make all things one.

16. (2) No one states a proper efficient cause of generation. Those who posit two principles need a third, supreme one; and those who posit Ideas need a supreme principle. Why do particulars share in Ideas?

20. Other thinkers are bound to assume a contrary to first philo- sophy ; we need not, since we assume no contrary to its object, for all contraries have matter and potentiality.

24. If there is xothzng but sensibles, there is no governing principle, no order, no generation, no celestial movements, but, as in mytho-

Mer tO, 10759 LI—22 401

logy and in physics, we are referred from one principle always to another.

24. If there is xothzng but sensibles, there is no governing principle, no order, no generation, no celestial movements, but, as in mytho-

Mer tO, 10759 LI—22 401

logy and in physics, we are referred from one principle always to another.

27. If on the other hand there are Ideas or numbers, (a) they cause nothing or at least no motion. Further, (4) how can things that are unextended produce what is extended? Number cannot be either efficient or formal cause of a continuum. Further, (c) no contrary can be the efficient cause, since all contraries are capable of not being, and their activity is at least posterior to their potentiality, so that things could not be eternal if contraries were their cause. But there are eternal things. Therefore the premises must be revised in the way we have stated.

(d) No one tells us what unifies a number, or soul and body, or form and thing. The only true answer is, ‘the efficient cause’.

37. (¢) Those who put mathematical number first and make a series of kinds of substance, each kind with distinct principles, make the universe disjointed, with many governing principles. But such it must not have.

1075* 11-15. The doctrine here stated is that goodness exists not only immanently in the world but transcendently in God, and even more fundamentally in Him, since He is the source of the good in the world, which is produced by the desire for Him as the order in an army is produced by its striving to do the will of its leader.

15. Sia thy tog... Sid tobTov. dua seems to mean not ‘for the sake of’ but ‘by reason of’.

16-23. Bz. thinks that aAX’ domep (I. 19) answers to ddd’ oix dpotws, and that cal odx otrws... cvvréraxtot is parenthetical, ex- plaining mdvra ovvréraxrat mws. This leaves pev in 1. 18 without anything answering to it, and in general seems highly unnatural. It is more natural to make two sentences as Bekker does—(1) ravra 8€ owvréraxtar ... €or tT, (2) mpds pev yap ev... Pvors eoriv, |. 23. The second sentence then Tepeats the first in greater detail; instead of saying merely ddd’ odx Suotus Aristotle describes the difference by using the instance of the household, dN’ (otrw ovvréraxrat) domep év oikia KX,

19-22. The freemen in the house answer to the heavenly bodies, which are bound by necessity, the slaves and animals to mankind and indeed all sublunary creatures, which are much less divine (Z. JV. 1141%34) and whose actions are largely contingent. Aristotle, as Grant observes (£7hzcs* i. 286), assumes freedom for man, ‘not so much from a sense of the deep importance of morality, but rather from an idea of the slightness of man and of his actions in com- parison with nature, and with what he would call the “ diviner parts” of the re :

‘ For the nature of each of them is such a principle’, i.e. it pro-

2578-2 Dd

402 : COMMENTARY

duces obedience to duty in the higher creatures, caprice in the lower.

it pro-

2578-2 Dd

402 : COMMENTARY

duces obedience to duty in the higher creatures, caprice in the lower.

23. déyw 8 ofoy els yer td Sraxprbjvor dvdykn Gmracw ede, ‘all things, even if they make no other contribution ‘to the whole, must at least come to be dissolved’, sc. so that better things may be made out of their elements. Sap

25. Aristotle now begins a very brief discussion of some of the main metaphysical doctrines opposed to his own.

26. xapteotépus, cf. K. 10607 25 n.

28. ote S€ 16 Tdvta ovTe Td ef evaytiwy dp0ds. (1) It is wrong to say that all things come from contraries. There is an eternal sub- stance which does not come from contraries nor from anything else (10692 30, 1071» 4), (2) Even things that are generated are not generated simply from contraries; there must be a substratum as well (1069? 6).

30. dali yap Ta evoytia bw G&AAHAwv. Black cannot be affected by white, but only that which zs black.

32. of 1d dyicov 7 iow refers to Platonists, cf. N. 10875, 1088 32, 10896, 1091 32. Aristotle’s point is that matter, the substratum of contraries, should not be made one of the contraries.

33. 4 70 évi ta odd probably refers to Speusippus, cf. M. 1085 gn. bs n.

34. 4 yap Hy H pla, ‘the one matter which underlies any pair of contraries ’,

35. To yap Kakdy atts Odtepovy Tay ororxeiwy, i.e. the unequal is identified with the bad; cf. A. 988° 14.

37. Robin points out that in the other passages referring to this doctrine of the Pythagoreans and of Speusippus (viz. 107232, 34, N. 1091* 31, 36) 76 Kaddv is mentioned several times, 76 Kkaxov never; and he would read xaAdv. But 76 xaxoy is in place here in view of the context (cf. 1. 35).

bg. kal ds Gn’ pdprov yap tod plypatos. That Empedocles thought of strife and love as material no less than the other elements is clear from such passages as fr. 17. 18-20, especially kat purdorys ev rotow, ion pinkos Te TAdTos Te. In Empedocles’ time the notion of incorporeal forces did not yet exist.

5. Ty etvar od tadrd, cf. Z. 1029% 22-23 n.

_ 6-7. For strife as the origin of evil for Empedocles cf. A. 985% 6. Why does Aristotle regard the indestructibility of strife as a paradox? Alexander thinks it is because in the odatpos all strife must have disappeared. ‘This interpretation takes no account of rotro 8 éorly avTd 4 Tov Kakod dios. It must be because of its badness that Aris- totle thinks strife must be perishable. He is in fact using his principle that év rots didiow obey éoti Kaxdv (. 10519 19, where see the proof).

Q-I0. ddd seems to introduce an objection—Aristotle’s first objec- tion to Anaxagoras (cf. drowov dé kai], 10), Anaxagoras exemplifies the vagueness of early thinkers on the question whether the good is

A. 10, 1078% 23. 1075 19 403

10519 19, where see the proof).

A. 10, 1078% 23. 1075 19 403

a final, an efficient, or a formal cause (* 38). He introduces it as an efficient cause, in the shape of reason. But since it must be for some purpose that reason produces motion, there must be another good which is a final cause. The objection is the same which is expressed in A. 988? 6-16. The argument is made clearér by placing a full stop after xvet in], 8. Aristotle thinks that he can himself dispense with two distinct causes, an efficient and a final. The form of health, as existing in the doctor’s mind, is the efficient cause of his action; and as something to be realized in the body of another, it is the final cause. Cf. Z. 1034224, A. 10707 14.

10-11. Aristotle complains that Anaxagoras, having recognized reason, or good, as one principle, ought to have recognized evil as another. Elsewhere Aristotle treats him as recognizing opposite prin- ciples of good and evil (A. 988717, cf. 98930, ' 16). His point must be that Anaxagoras does not explicitly describe the chaos as the opposite of reason or of the good, though implicitly treating it as such (989 19). But in reality, according to Aristotle, evil cannot be a first principle (év rots é€ dpyqs ovOev éoru kaxdv, ®. 1051* 19).

12. 08 xp@ytav tots evavtiows. The same objection is made in A. 985° 17-23 with special reference to Anaxagoras and Empedocles.

édv pi pulpton tis, cf. what Aristotle says of Empedocles in A. 985% 4 and of Anaxagoras in 989? 30.

13-14. Cf. the discussion in B. 1oo0*%s5- 21, Aristotle himself escapes the difficulty by making the things which are eternal (1) con- tain no matter at all, or (2) contain a matter different from that of the four elements, viz. the réurrov cpa, which makes them capable of moving in space but not of being destroyed.

14. ot pev, Hesiod and the other cosmologists, cf. 1072%19. Aris- totle regards the generation of what is from what is not as obviously wrong, and needing no argument to show that it is so.

15. ot 8, the Eleatics, cf. A. 98610. Their view also is self-con- demned, in that it abolishes difference and change.

16—10762 4. The general trend of these remarks is, as Bz. points out, to show that Aristotle’s predecessors give no satisfactory account of the cause of generation and motion. Cf. ll. 16, 28, 30, 37. But parts of the passage have no bearing on this question, but form a general attack on Aristotle’s predecessors and especially the Platonists —l]. 20-24, 28-30, 37—1076? 4.

16-17. For Aristotle’s own explanation of the eternity of becoming ef. 10724 10-18, De Gen. ef Corr. ii. 10.

But parts of the passage have no bearing on this question, but form a general attack on Aristotle’s predecessors and especially the Platonists —l]. 20-24, 28-30, 37—1076? 4.

16-17. For Aristotle’s own explanation of the eternity of becoming ef. 10724 10-18, De Gen. ef Corr. ii. 10.

17. Tots 800 dpxas morodow refers to all Aristotle’s predecessors (@ 28, N. 1087 29) or to nearly all (1. 100430). The contrary principles are, in general, form and matter, and an efficient cause is needed to unite them (1070) 22), i.e. a first mover.

19. Bz.’s ér for éru derives some confirmation from Them. 38. 12, and is fairly certainly right. Christ’s suggestion, however, that dru... Kuptwrépa is a gloss on du. ri yap pereoxev 7) pmeréxer; has something to be said for it.

Dd2

404 COMMENTARY

Sud Ti yap peréoxev petéxer; sc. 7a Kal? exaora Tov ciddv.

20-24. This curious and difficult passage seems to be an allusion to Plato’s recognition (Rep. 477-478) of ignorance as a state of mind op- posed to knowledge and related to not-being as knowledge is to being. ‘Other thinkers, since they recognize only two, and these contrary, principles, must recognize an ignorance related to one of them (non- being or matter) as knowledge is to the other (being or form). But we need not. For we make the highest knowledge refer to a first principle which stands above the contraries and itself has*no con- trary ; for contraries contain matter, and things containing matter exist only potentially. The ignorance which is opposed to any knowledge leads to an object opposed to the object of the knowledge; but our first principle has no opposite, and therefore for us the highest know- ledge has no opposite ignorance.’ 7

22. 7a évavtia here means ‘things possessing contrary attributes’, while in ® 30 it means the contrary attributes themselves.

23. kal Suvdue: Taira €or. Tadra seems better than raird. Con- traries are not potentially the same (though the same thing is potentially possessed of contrary qualities); nor, if they were, would it be in point to say sohere. radra is probably subject and = ra vAyv éyovra. Bz, (reading ratra éorw and treating ratdra as predicate) takes the words to mean that each contrary is potentially its contrary; guod album esi actu, idem nigrum est potentia et vice versa. It is difficult to see how this can be got out of the Greek.

eis 73 evavtiov. One might conjecture éoziv (or éorar) evaytiov (or Tov évavriov). But the text is confirmed by /. /. 1224% 33 ézel kal 7 drdrn ovk cis TA TUXOVTA yiverat, GAN cis TA evavTia dools eotiv évayTia, though that is made easier by yiverau. is means not ‘is relative to’, which would be zpds, but something like ‘leads the mind to’, The passage does not seem to have any connexion with the distinction between dmdry and édyvoiw in @. 1051” 25, to which Baz. refers.

is means not ‘is relative to’, which would be zpds, but something like ‘leads the mind to’, The passage does not seem to have any connexion with the distinction between dmdry and édyvoiw in @. 1051” 25, to which Baz. refers.

24. €l Te wh Eotor Tapa Ta aicOyTd GAAa, obK EoTar Gpxy Kal TALS kat yeveots Kal Ta oUpdvia. If there is nothing besides sensible things, then (1) there is no first principle ; for sensible things exist potentially (i.e. include an element of contingency), and if we admit nothing which exists actually we are driven back from one potentiality to another ad znfinitum. (2) There will be no order; for this involves something eternal and separate from matter (K. 1060 26). (3) There will be no generation; for this has been shown to depend on the motion of the heavenly bodies, and ultimately on the prime mover (10728 ro-18). (4) There will be no celestial movements ; for they depend on a prime mover.

For the consequences of denying the existence of non-sensible, eternal substance cf. B. 999 5, K. 10607 26.

26. 14 otpdvia means the celestial movements, not the celestial bodies, for it is the former that involve a prime mover. For this use of ra otpavia cf, Xen, Mem. i. 1. 11, Pl. Crz#. 107d.

tots Beodsyors, the cosmologists, cf. B. 10008 9.

A, 10. 1075 20 — 10768 4 405

28. oUt is sufficiently confirmed by Cas. 6%2, Phys. 25822, De Caelo 241%18, De Sensu 439732, Pol. 1282%11. In Z. 10357 30, Phys. 254% 26 (cf. Pol. 1308 15, 13204 16) the manuscripts are divided between ours and ovrou.

é§ dpeyeQ@v. e& does not refer, as might be supposed, to material causation; Aristotle’s point is that numbers cannot be either the efficient or the formal cause of extended magnitudes (1. 30).

30-34. ‘ But none of the contraries is essentially also a principle of production and of motion; for a contrary is capable of not being, and at any rate its period of action must come after a period of merely potential action. Hence it cannot have been making things from all eternity. Hence ra dvra are not eternal.

But there ave eternal dvra.

Hence we must give up one of our assumptions,’ viz. the assumption that contraries and nothing else are the principles of things. There must be a first principle which is substance, actual, and eternal.

33. GAN Ect must apparently mean not ‘the things that are are eternal’, which Aristotle is not likely to have said, but ‘there are things that are eternal’, e.g. the prime mover and the heavenly bodies whose eternity has been proved in ch. 7.

34. Todto & elpytat mas, sc. in 1071? 19, 20.

34-37. On this question cf. H. 6, especially 1045230. Form and matter, as Aristotle there points out, belong together and require only an efficient cause to unite them.

37. ot Se Aeyovtes kTA. The reference is to Speusippus, who is men- tioned by name in Z. 102821. For the doctrine cf. N. 1090? 13.

On this question cf. H. 6, especially 1045230. Form and matter, as Aristotle there points out, belong together and require only an efficient cause to unite them.

37. ot Se Aeyovtes kTA. The reference is to Speusippus, who is men- tioned by name in Z. 102821. For the doctrine cf. N. 1090? 13.

10761. émevoodisdy. Cf, the definition in Poet, 145134 Aeyw & ererooiwon podov ev wT ereicddia pet GAANAG OUT’ cikds OUT avayKN ewat. ‘The word is used again of Speusippus’ theory in N. 1ogo? 19.

g. The word modtteveoQar and the quotation from Homer show that dapyy is used with reference to its meaning of ‘rule’ as well as to its ordinary Aristotelian sense of ‘ originative source’. For a similar play on the meaning of dpyy cf. An. Pos/. 1007 13.

4. odx dyaOdv kth. Hom. //. ii. 204. Susemihl would omit éc7o, which is lacking in most of the manuscripts. But it is required by the rhythm of the sentence, and it would be particularly easy for the last word of a book to drop out in the archetype.

Aristotle is not a thoroughgoing monist. He is a monist in the sense that he believes in one supreme ruling principle, God or the primum movens. But God is not for him all-inclusive. (1) The sensible world is thought of as having a matter not made by God, though the whole history of the sensible world is caused by the desire to approximate to the divine life. (2) There are subordinate spiritual beings (1073% 37, 1074215) which move the heavenly spheres without being moved (i.e. move them ds dpexra), and whose relation to God is never indicated by Aristotle. Cf. Introduction, pp. cxxxvi-cxli.

406 COMMENTARY

BOOK M

Much light has been thrown on the date of Bks. M and N relatively to one another and to the rest. of the MJefaphysics, by Jaeger’s researches in his Arzsto/eles, pp. 181-199, 212-215. BookM, with its clear distinction between the doctrines of Plato, Speusippus, and Xenocrates, belongs to a later period than the criticism of the ideal theory in Book A. The original ideal theory is now for Aristotle somewhat out of date, and he is content to reproduce in chs. 4, 5 what he has said about it in A. 9; his efforts are now turned towards the discussion of mathematical and ideal numbers and magnitudes. The discussion is completed by 10862 15, and he ends, as he does occa- sionally elsewhere (Jaeger refers to the end of A and of £. J. ix), with a literary quotation (1086417). The final sentence (ib. 18-21) is difficult to construe, and perhaps its last words are missing, as might easily happen at the end of a book. Syrianus tells us that some manuscripts made M end at this point.

J. ix), with a literary quotation (1086417). The final sentence (ib. 18-21) is difficult to construe, and perhaps its last words are missing, as might easily happen at the end of a book. Syrianus tells us that some manuscripts made M end at this point.

In M. 1086 21-32 we have a preface which Jaeger (187-189) has shown to be a doublet of that at the beginning of M (1076* 8-32). The latter is much the more elaborate. It mentions, besides Ideas and numbers, the spatial magnitudes (I. 18); it distinguishes the views of Plato, Speusippus, and Xenocrates (ll. 19-22). It treats the dis- cussion of the original ideal theory as a minor matter, sufficiently discussed in the ééwrepuxot Adyou (Il. 26-29).

In trying to find a date for the section M. 10864 21-end, Jaeger concentrates on 1086? 16-19. It is not clear that he is right in supposing that when Aristotle says BovAdwefa he must mean, as in A. 990” 9, 11, 16, 18, 23, 991» 7, B. 997? 3, 1002» 14, ‘we Platonists ’. But it is at any rate possible to interpret the passage as an argumenium ad hominem directed against Platonists from a Platonic standpoint.

What is more convincing is that, while in 1086% 21-24 Aristotle says of the views of the materialists merely that they have been discussed in the P&ysics, and are inappropriate to the present dis- cussion, in 1076 8-10 he says that the matter of sensible things has been discussed in the Physics, and their actuality (or form) has been discussed Jater. I.e., M. zuz/—1086* 18 presupposes, while M. 1086* 21—/in. does not, the discussions of ZH®. The one version presupposes only AB; the other belongs to the time when Aristotle had worked the greater part of the JJefaphysics more or less into a single whole. (Jaeger, 212-215.)

RST 1076" 9 407

Jaeger concludes that M. 1086* 21—end belongs to the same early period as AB, i.e. to Aristotle’s stay at Assos in 348-345 B.c. It is only natural, then, that this brief section contains more references to AB than the whole of Z—A (1086 34, » 2, 15).

(Jaeger, 212-215.)

RST 1076" 9 407

But in N. 1091*32, otov BovddcucOa A€yew abtd Td dyabdv Kal 7d apiorov, Aristotle certainly treats himself as a Platonist. N, then, also belongs to the Assos period; and, since Xenocrates was Aristotle’s companion at Assos, it is only natural that, while M criticizes him frequently and sharply (e.g. 1083) 2 xe(purra A€yerau 5 tplros tpdros), N criticizes him only in passing (1088> 28-35, r1ogo? 20-32), Further, the preface in M. 9 undertakes to examine the views of those who hold that the elements (1) of Ideas or (2) of mathematical numbers are the elements of all things. The theory of Ideas is treated of in M. 1086 32—end. N begins with a reference to the wide-spread doctrine that the elements of all things are contraries, but soon (1087> 4) settles down to discuss the view that unity and plurality or the equal and the unequal are the elements at once of mathematical number and of all things; and to this theory (that of Speusippus, already mentioned in the preface, M. 1086 29) and the kindred theory of the Pythagoreans, the rest of N is for the most part devoted. M. 1068# 21—N. end thus forms a whole, and a whole earlier than M beginning—1086? 18.

Two supposed kinds of immaterial substance to be discussed— mathematical objects and Ideas (ch, 1. 1076% 8-32).

107628. We have discussed elsewhere the substance of sensible things; we have now to consider whether there is apart from these an unchangeable eternal substance. First we must sift the opinions of others on the question.

16, Some hold that mathematical objects are substances; others hold that the Ideas are. Some believe in both, some identify them, some believe only in the mathematical objects.

22. We will discuss (I) mathematical objects, asking no further questions about them but simply whether they exist, and if so, how; (II) the Ideas (briefly); (III) and chiefly, whether the substances and principles of things are numbers and Ideas.

107629. év pev TH pebd8m... Ans no doubt refers to Phys. i. dotepoy is referred by Alexander to PAys. ii, and by Bz. to the latter part of the PAysics. But neither of these can be described strictly as discussing ‘substance according to actuality’, i.e. form. The posi- tion of pev.and d¢ shows that vorepov dé does not refer to the Physics,

408 COMMENTARY

and the part of Aristotle’s works which best answers to the description is Me. ZH®. Bz.’s interpretation is partly actuated by the wish to show that MN do not presuppose the central part of the Mef/aphyszcs.

Cf. Introduction, pp. xviii f.

ZH®. Bz.’s interpretation is partly actuated by the wish to show that MN do not presuppose the central part of the Mef/aphyszcs.

Cf. Introduction, pp. xviii f.

12, mp@tov, Alexander’s notion that zparov means ‘with special care’ cannot be accepted. ap@rov must-refer to time. A positive statement of Aristotle’s-doctrine of ‘unchangeable and eternal sub- stance’ was meant to follow. But this cannot be identified with A, which seems to be an earlier and separate work.

15. tot... Sucxepaivwpev. The order of the words is curious, the object being to throw into prominence the opposition between kowov and idia. ‘And that if some doctrine is common to us and them, we may not on that account be privately dissatisfied with our- selves’ For the expression cf. A. 984% 29.

1g. ot pév, sc. Plato and his most orthodox followers, cf. A. 987? 14- 18.

20-21. ot S€... €repor S€ tives. Alexander ascribes to Xenocrates (745. 32) and also to Speusippus (782. 32) the belief in mathematical number only ; in 766.8 he ascribes to both Speusippus and Xenocrates the identification of ideal and mathematical number, and to some of the Pythagoreans the belief in mathematical number only. We may safely infer that he knew little or nothing about the matter. A com- parison of Z. 1028 21-24, where Speusippus is mentioned by name, with A. 1075” 37—1076%3 and N. rogo» 13-20 makes it evident that it was Speusippus who rejected the Ideas and believed in mathematical number only. Asc. (379. 17) thinks it was Xenocrates who identified ideal number with mathematical, and this is strongly confirmed by the reference in 1080) 29 (where see note) to the well-known Xenocratean doctrine of indivisible lines. oi 8€, then, means Xenocrates, érepou dé twes the Pythagoreans and Speusippus, Cf. Introduction, pp. Ixxi- Ixxvi. Aristotle omits the fourth possible view, ascribed to dAXos tis in ro8oP 21, the view that ideal number exists but not mathematical.

22. ™p@Tov pév, chs. 2, 3.

26. émeita, chs. 4, 5.

27. amdds, ‘simply, without elaboration’. Cf. Pol. 1341> 38 i 8 Aéeyopev THv Kéilapow, viv pev ards, tadkw F ev Tois rept zownTiKAs €podpev capecrepov.

écov vopwou xdpiv, ‘as far as the accepted manner of treatment re- quires ’"—and it requires some discussion of all views held by thinkers of repute. Cf. betas evexa, dicts causa, Diphilus Zuypago. fr. 2. 13 ovdev 7p0€ws Trovel yap otros GAN’ dcov vopou (Xépiy, and Pol. 1341» 31 vov d€ vopukds SueAwpev, TOYS TUTrOUS LOVOY EiTOVTES TEPL AUTOV.

28, tv é&wtepikay Adyov. The meaning of this phrase has been repeatedly discussed; the following discussions in particular may be mentioned: Bernays, Dialoge des Aristoteles, 29-93; Zeller, Phil. der Griechen, Il. 2. (ed. 4) 112-126; Grant, Lthics of Arist. i, App. B; Grote, Aris/olle; ed. 3, 44-53 ; Diels in Sttzungsb. der Berl, Akad. 1883. 477-494; Susemihl in Meue Jahrb. fiir Philol. 1884. 265-277;

M. I. 10767 12-28 409

der Griechen, Il. 2. (ed. 4) 112-126; Grant, Lthics of Arist. i, App. B; Grote, Aris/olle; ed. 3, 44-53 ; Diels in Sttzungsb. der Berl, Akad. 1883. 477-494; Susemihl in Meue Jahrb. fiir Philol. 1884. 265-277;

M. I. 10767 12-28 409

Susemihl and Hicks, Politics of Arist. 561-565. The other references to the éfwrepuxol Aoyou in the Aristotelian Corpus are as follows : LYS: 2x7? 3° mpOtov O& KadGs exer Suarophoat wept avrod (i.e. xpovov) Kal dua Tay eEwrepiKOv Aoyov.

E. NV. 1102 26 Aéyerou de wep aris (i, @ yoxiis) kal ev TOUS egurept- Kos Adyous d dpxovvTws evi, Kat xXpynoreov avrots’ otoy TO pev aoyov avTHS elvat, TO O€ Adyov exov.

EN. 11.40% 2 €repov 0 eat Toinos Kal Tpagis (miaTEvomev O€ mepl avrOv Kal. Tots elurepixois Aédyots).

L, £1217» 20 76 eivan ideay pu povov dyaGod GdXA. Kal dddov 6 drovodv Aeyerau AoyiKds Kal KevOs' emréoxerrar O€ TOAAOIS Tept adrod TpdTats Kal ev Tois e€wrepikors Adyous Kal ev Tols Kata pirocodiay.

LY. E. 1218 32 rdvra dh téayaGa 7 exrds } ev Woyy, Kal TovTwv atpe- TWTEPA TA ev TH Woy, Kabdrrep SiarpovpeOa Kal ev ToIs eEwrepiKots Ad-yots.

Pol. 1278» 30 adda. py Kal THs dpyis ye TOs Aeyouevous Tpdrous padiov dieAciv’ Kal yap ev Tois eEwrepixois Adyous OvopiLouca epi adtOv ToAAGKIS.

Pol, 1323? 21 vouicavras odv ikavOs roAAd A€yeoOar Kal TOV ev TOIS eEwrepixois Adyous wept THs dpiorys Cwfjs, kal viv xpyoréov avrois.

With these references may be compared the following, in which similar phrases are used: De Caelo 249% 30 év rots éyxu«Alos pidoco- gypact, L. NV. 1096* 3 ey rots éyxucAlous, De An. 407” 29 rots ev Kowo yvomevors Novos.

Bernays tries to show that in all these passages except the first the reference is to Aristotle’s dialogues, which were ‘ exoteric’, i.e. were published in a fuller sense than the works in which the references occur. In other words Bernays accepts the distinction, which had certainly become current by the time of Cicero, between the exoteric and the acroamatic works of Aristotle. It may be admitted that all the subjects in question were probably treated of in Aristotle’s dialogues, or in other lost works of his which were published in the full sense. Thus (to take the present passage and the first passage from the Hudemian Ethics) it is certain that Aristotle criticized the Ideas in the dialogue De Philo- sophia and in the works De Jdets and De Bono; he may also have dealt with them, as Bernays suggests, in the dialogues De Justitia, Sophistes, and Politicus, But the meaning of Aéyou in the Physics passage, as the preposition S:¢ shows, is not ‘books’ but ‘arguments’, and w7o in the present passage suggests the same, in view of the frequent tendency in Greek to treat ‘the argument’ as if it were a person, as in Aikowos Adyos and "Adiucos Adyos, 6 Adyos aipée, and many other examples quoted by Diels. By a comparison of Pol. 1323% 21-35 with Z. VV. 1098» 9-18 (dealing with the same subject) Diels shows beyond a doubt that by ra ey rots eCwrepiKois doyors IN 13234 22 Aristotle means the same as he does by ra Aeydpeva in 1098? 10, i.e. that in that passage at least é€. A\dyo. means ‘ discussions not pecu- liar to the Peripatetic school’. This is probably its meaning in the other passages also. ‘The precise shade of meaning may differ in the different passages ; in some the reference is to Academic doctrines, in others to discussions or distinctions which were familiar to cultivated

410 COMMENTARY

Athenians of no particular philosophical school. In the present pas- sage the reference probably is to attacks on the Ideas by Antisthenes and by sophists like Polyxenus, the inventor of the ‘third man’ argu- ment against the Ideas (cf. A. 990 17n.). Diels’s conclusions do not seem to have been refuted by Jaeger’s argument in Ar/stofeles, 254- 270. Jaeger thinks the present reference isto the De Philosophia. 29-32. €r B€ .. . oxéfis. A further reason for brevity in the second part of the treatise, the discussion of the Ideas simplictter. The third and main part of the treatise (rév wAefw Adyov) must finish by throwing light on the second problem (xpos éxe(vny Set riv oKépuy amavtav), So that the second discussion need not itself be elaborate. 30. dray émickoT@pev, chs. 6-9.

I. Maruematicat Opjects (ch. 1. 10762 32—3. 1078) 6).

The third and main part of the treatise (rév wAefw Adyov) must finish by throwing light on the second problem (xpos éxe(vny Set riv oKépuy amavtav), So that the second discussion need not itself be elaborate. 30. dray émickoT@pev, chs. 6-9.

I. Maruematicat Opjects (ch. 1. 10762 32—3. 1078) 6).

1076? 32. If they exist, they must exist either (A) in sensible things, in the way maintained by certain thinkers, or (B) separate from sensible things, or (C) in some other way.

Mathematical objects cannot exist as distinct substances (ch. 2).

10762 38. (A) We have shown (cf. B. 998% 7-19) that mathematical objects cannot be 2% sensible things; (1) because two solids cannot be in the same place, (2) because it would follow that the other powers and characteristics of things must also be immanent.

b4. We now add (3) that on this theory no body can be divided. For it would have to be divided at a plane, the plane at a line, the line at a point, so that since the point is on this view in- divisible, the body is so too; and if mathematical body, then also the sensible body in which it is.

11. (B) Nor can mathematical objects exist apart from sensible things. For (1) if there are separate mathematical solids, there will be (@) separate planes, lines, and points,

16. and therefore also besides (4) the planes, lines, and points of the mathematical solid there must be (c) planes, lines, and points prior to (while the former are simultaneous with) the mathematical solid.

24. Again there will be (d) lines and points prior to the lines in these planes, and (¢) points prior to those in these prior lines,

28. The accumulation is ridiculous; there is one set of solids apart from the sensibles, three sets of planes, four of lines, five of points. Which will be the objects of the mathematical sciences ?

36. (2) The same argument can be applied to numbers. There

Meera O70r20 —. 1076" 33 41

wil be units apart from the points, units apart from the objects of sense, units apart from the objects of knowledge.

39. (3) The objects of astronomy will exist apart from sensible things, as much as geometrical objects; but how can there be moving objects such as the heavens apart from sensible things?

1077* 4. There will be objects of optics and of harmonics—voice, senses, sensibles, animals, all separate from the ordinary objects of sense. ;

g. (4) There will be separate objects, which are neither numbers, points, spaces, nor times, for the universal mathematics which is true of all of these alike.

14. (5) The belief violates common sense. It makes mathematical objects prior to sensible things, but really they are posterior in sub- stance, being incomplete.

20. (6) What gives them unity? Things in ¢4zs world are made one by soul, by a portion of soul, or the like, but what gives unity to these divisible quanta?

It makes mathematical objects prior to sensible things, but really they are posterior in sub- stance, being incomplete.

20. (6) What gives them unity? Things in ¢4zs world are made one by soul, by a portion of soul, or the like, but what gives unity to these divisible quanta?

24. (7) Length is generated first, then breadth, then depth, so that if that which is posterior in becoming is prior in substance, body is prior to the plane or line; and it is more complete because it is what becomes the vehicle of soul.

gi. (8) Body is a substance, but lines cannot be substances, either as form, or as matter (how could a thing be composed of lines ?). :

g6. They may be prior in definition to body, but they are not therefore prior in substance. That is prior in substance which excels in power of separate existence ; that is prior in definition whose defini- tion is implied in the definition of something else.

b4. If attributes cannot exist apart from substances, they are prior in definition to the complex of substance + attribute, but not in sub- stance ; thus the product of abstraction is not prior nor that of addition posterior.

12. Mathematical objects, then, are not more substantial than bodies, nor prior to them in being (but only in definition), nor separately existent; and since they could not be zz sensible objects either (1076 38-» 11), they exist either not at all or in some qualified sense.

1076? 33. # év Tots aioOntois etvar adtdé. This doctrine is said (1. 39) to have been discussed év rots dvaropyuacw, i.e. in Bk. B, and the reference is clearly to 998%7-19. The view in question is there described in a way which marks it off clearly from the ordinary

412 COMMENTARY

Pythagorean view (for which see A. 987 27-29), and is attacked both there (998# 11-13) and here (» 1-3) by arguments which have force only against believers in separate Ideas of some kind. Further, in 10802 37—» 3 the regular Pythagorean view is. distinguished from another form of belief in numbers immanent in things (sc. the view referred to here), We may infer that Aristotle is speaking here either of Platonizing Pythagoreans (as Robin infers) or of Pythagoreanizing Platonists. For evidence of a Platonizing school of Pythagoreans cf. Robin, 649-651. Syrianus (84. 21) says that no Pythagoreans or Platonists held this view; but this is part of his general policy of defence of Platonism against Aristotle.

39. elpynror pev, B. 998% 11-15, 997% 12-34.

by, It is rather surprising that these thinkers recognized mathema- tical solids as distinct from sensible solids. Planes, lines, and points might naturally be distinguished from sensible things, since all sensible things have three dimensions; but what difference could there be be- tween mathematical and sensible sods? The answer no doubt is that by mathematical solids were meant the regular solids to which sensible objects never do more than approximate.

The answer no doubt is that by mathematical solids were meant the regular solids to which sensible objects never do more than approximate.

2. Tas dAas Suvdpers Kal pdcers, Alexander (725. 21) thinks the limits of sensible bodies, i. e. planes and lines, or else the characteristics studied by applied sciences like optics and harmonics, are meant. The meaning is fixed, however, by the corresponding passage in B. 998% 11-13. The dvvapes and dices are, quite generally, the characteristics of things, which these thinkers treated as separate Forms when consistency required that they, like ra poa@npuarixa, should be viewed as immanent in things.

4-11. Aristotle argues as follows: ‘If these mathematical solids are divisible, they are divisible along or at (karé) planes, and similarly the planes are divisible along lines, and the lines at points. But points are indivisible; so therefore are the lines, planes, and solids. But if the mathematical solids are indivisible, so must the sensible solids be.: Which is absurd.’ He treats the divisibility of the line at a point as implying the division of the point, and one might be disposed to question this. But the one does imply the other, according to the principles of the view he is criticizing, for (1) these thinkers cannot say, aS he would, that the point is brought into actual existence by the act of division; it is a substance, always existing actually ; and (2) they cannot say that the division comes de/ween two consecutive points, since (so Alexander says, and we may suppose that he is right) they, like Aristotle, held the line to be continuous and so to have no consecutive points.

1I—1077? 14. Aristotle now proceeds to the second alternative, stated in ® 34, that mathematical objects exist apart from sensibles (the view of Plato and of Speusippus). If there are mathematical solids apart from and logically prior to the sensible solids, there will be

(1) (Il. 14-16) planes, lines, and points apart from sensible planes, lines, and points.

M. 2. 10768 39 — 10778 20 413

(2) (Il. 16-24) planes, lines, and points in the mathematical solids.

(3) 4s planes, lines, and points apart from those numbered 2). (4) (il. 24-27) lines and points prior to the lines in the planes numbered (3).

(5) (ll. 27, 28) points prior to those in the lines numbered (4).

The lines in the planes numbered (3), though introduced by raw (1. 24) are not meant to be a new class not mentioned before ; else we should get five classes of lines instead of (as Aristotle says, 1. 32) four. They are identified with the lines numbered (3), and are mentioned anew in ]. 25 only as leading up to the further class of lines and points numbered (4).

24) are not meant to be a new class not mentioned before ; else we should get five classes of lines instead of (as Aristotle says, 1. 32) four. They are identified with the lines numbered (3), and are mentioned anew in ]. 25 only as leading up to the further class of lines and points numbered (4).

The enumeration is careless and by no means complete. Aristotle might have argued that if there are two sets of solids (sensible and mathematical), there will be two sets of planes in these solids and two sets abstracted from them; four sets of lines in these planes and four sets abstracted from them ; eight sets of points in these lines and eight abstracted from them.

The enumeration betrays its incompleteness by lack of symmetry. If we take the sets of mathematical objects which he mentions we get the series:—one set of solids, three of planes, four of lines, five of points; and if we add in the sensibles we get the series 2, 4, 5, 6. Neither series is symmetrical. The fact is that Aristotle begins cor- rectly the geometrical series 2, 4, 8, 16, but tires of the capevors and turnstheseries intoan arithmetical one. The capevors is éroros enough, even as stated by him. The error which lies at its base is the ywp- opos Of, or assigning of separate existence to, what is only distinguish- able by thought.

QI. akwhytos = pabyparcKors.

38. For ra dvra aicOnra of the manuscripts it seems necessary to read Ta Ova, Ta aicOynTd.

39. ev Tots dwophpacw, B. 997) 12-34.

1077 2. Bz.’s éorat is confirmed by |. 5 and B. 997? 16.

3. otpavey, sc. rapa Tov aicOyrov ovpavor, cf. B. 997° 16.

6. 7a kal €xaota, cf. B. 999% 26n,

Q. ypdperar, Alexander explains, means detkvutar. Cf. Top. 158” 30 od padiws ypadeo Oar and the use of didéypaypa = proposition in Cas. 14° 39, B. 998% 25, A. ro14236. In all these cases it would seem that a proof aided by a figure is meant. The general mathematics here referred to, which proves attributes that are not peculiar to numbers or to spatial magnitudes or to times, is also mentioned in 1077) 14, E. 1026827, An. Post, 74223. Eudoxus’ doctrine of proportion, which is preserved in Euclid’s Lvemen/s, Bk. V, is the best instance of this ‘ general mathematics’ (cf. 74 23).

20-24. et... . cuppever is a digression from the main point. The question what causes the unity of mathematical magnitudes is inserted between two arguments from genesis, (1) the argument that sensible magnitudes must be prior in essence to mathematical because they

414 COMMENTARY

are later in generation (Il. 18-20), and (2) the argument that solids must be prior in essence to planes and lines because they are later in generation (Il. 24-28).

20. Bz.’s ri Kat mor’, ‘by virtue of what in the world’ is attractive, but though ris wore is common ris cai wore does not seem to be recorded | as occurring in this sense, and itis better to keep Bekker’s reading tive KOL ToT, -

24-28).

22, wépet uxis, e.2., Says aden? in the case of animals which have only the sense of touch and therefore only a part of the soul.

eUNoyov (sc. éorw ev etva) is Jaeger’s probable. emendation of cidoyo.

We should perhaps read ddAw tii, edAdyws. For etddyws added thus at the end of a sentence cf. Bz. Index 297% 22-27, Alexander illustrates dAAw tit edAdyw by the case of things glued or tied to- gether.

24-30. Bz. points out that there is a serious ambiguity in Aristotle’s use of yéveous in this argument. yéveous in the sense in which 76 yevéret vorepor is oaia mpdrepor is natural genesis, e.g. the growth of the boy into the man. But yéveous in the sense in which it can be applied to mathematical objects refers to the quite different process by which the line is generated by a moving point, the plane by a moving line, the solid by a moving plane. The ambiguity deprives the argument of whatever value it might otherwise have possessed.

24-26. mpdtov ... éoxev evidently refers to Speusippus fr. 4. 44-47 (Lang).

27. An ambiguity is to be noticed in the meaning of ri odcta mpétepov in this chapter. In this line it is used of that which is Jater in generation, and means in effect what is réAcov (I. 28), and in |. 19 TH ovoia v Dorrepov has the corresponding meaning. So too in Phys. 260» 18, 19 ee Kat ovoiav; in @. 1050°5 7O elda Kal ™m otota. mpotepa; in G. A. 742422, Rhed. gaa 21 TpoTepov TH ovoia; in Cat. 1425, Phys. 26114, 2652 22, A. 989% 16 rn pioer mporepov. But in 1077” 2 7a 7H ovoia mpdrepa are defined as dca ywpilopeva TO elvat trepBadde; 1. e. Of two things that is prior which can exist with- out the other while the other cannot exist without z/ Cf. A. ror9* 2, where 7a Kata iow Kal ovolay (zpdrepa Kal vorepa) are similarly defined. This is said to be the primary sense of zporepov kal vorepov (1019? 11), and so too in @. 1050? 6, actuality having already (# 4-? 6) been shown to be prior ovcia to potentiality in the first sense described above, Aristotle proceeds to say that it is kal xvpuwrépws (mpdrepov ovcia), and explains this in the secondsense. This is again one of the senses assigned to mpdrepov in Caz. 12, where it is described as 76 pip dvtiatpépov Kata THY TOD ctvar GkoAovOnow (14% 30). Once more it is referred to in Phys. 260418, where it is distinguished from 76 Kar’ ovoiav mporepov.

The two senses of kar’ otciay (or pvcer) tpdtepov answer to two of the meanings of otaéa which are so often distinguished by Aristotle. The first sense answers to that sense of ota/a in which it means form,

M. 2, 10772 20— 107715 415

or to the rdde zu considered as a fully formed or developed thing ; the second to that in which it means 70 troxeiwevoy or the rdde te Con- sidered as something capable of separate existence.

BI. 78 yap exer mws Td Tedevoy, cf. De Caclo 2682 7-24. ws, says Alexander, because gwa mere mathematical solid it lacks the qualities by which 7a duoixa eidororetrar (732. 5):

b 3. Sowy ot Adyor ek TOv Adyov is difficult. The natural translation would be ‘those things are prior in definition whose definitions are com- pounded out of the definitions of the other things ’, but this is the exact opposite of Aristotle’s doctrine (cf. A. 1018? 34, Z. 1035» 4). We might interpret dcwy as depending on Adywy, not on Adyou, and translate ‘of whose definitions the definitions of the other things are com- pounded’, but it seems more likely that the transition from doa to dour leads Aristotle to substitute in thought an antecedent rovrwy for the antecedent raira. ‘Those things are prior in substance which when separated from other things surpass them in power of indepen- dent existence, and things are prior in definition to the things whose definitions are compounded out of their definitions.’ | Schwegler’s proposal to excise é« does not, therefore, seem necessary. For a similar confusion cf. Z. 1034? 31.

4. 00x dpa Smdépxer does not mean that these characteristics are never found together, but that they are not always found together. It is not necessary to read tdpyxer (de/) as has been suggested.

For a similar confusion cf. Z. 1034? 31.

4. 00x dpa Smdépxer does not mean that these characteristics are never found together, but that they are not always found together. It is not necessary to read tdpyxer (de/) as has been suggested.

10. €k mpoo0dcews yap TO evKs 6 evKds AvOpwmros A€yeru. Bz. proposes 70d AevKod, which he takes to be Alexander’s reading. He argues that ‘ man’ cannot be considered as added to ‘ white ’, but rather ‘ white’ as added to ‘man’, On this interpretation the clause would mean something like this: ‘ We have spoken of ‘‘ white man”’ as if it were ex mpoobecews compared with “ white”. But really it is é« mpoofécews only as compared with ‘‘man”.’ Alexander’s general interpretation agrees with this, but it seems clear that he read ro Aeve@ with the manuscripts, and interpreted this as ‘by virtue of white’ (rpooécer tov NevKod); V. 733. 34. This is surely an impossible interpretation. It seems better to translate ‘ by addition to the white’. It is true as Bz. says that we cannot suppose a ‘ white’ to exist first and then to become a man. But we can think first of ‘white’ and then add the thought of ‘man’, and this is the Aristotelian use of rpdcfecrs. Cf. Z. 1029 33, where we have 7G dAXo (sc. dvOpwrov) aitG (sc. AcvKG) mpookeioGar, and Z. 5, where the definition of 76 ouov as fils oyun or of 76 dppev as dppev Goov is described as being éx rpooOécews. On this view the clause in question does not correct what has gone before but justifies the previous description of Aevxds dvOpwios as being é« mpoo- @goews in comparison with Aev«dv.

15. évedexeto, as was shown in 1076 38-} rr.

416 COMMENTARY

Mathematics considers as tf they existed separately objects that do not exist separately (ch. 3).

107717. (C) As the universal propositions in mathematics are about spatial magnitudes and numbers but not about them as such, so there may be proofs about sensible magnitudes “but not about them gwa sensible. As there are reasonings about things merely gwa movable without there being an entity ‘the movable’ either apart from or in sensible things, so there can be reasonings about movable things gua bodies, gua planes, &c.

gi. Thus we can say without qualification that mathematical objects exist, and are such as mathematicians suppose. Each science deals with objects in respect of some particular attribute and not of those incidental to it. Similarly mathematics deals neither with sensible things as such nor with separate non-sensible things, but with the attributes that belong to sensible things gwa involving lines and planes.

1078*9. The simpler the object, the more exact the knowledge ; arithmetic is more accurate than geometry, geometry than kinetics, the kinetics of simple movement than the kinetics of complex movement.

14. Harmonics and optics, again, study their objects not gua voice or sight but gva numbers and lines; so too mechanics. There is no mistake involved in supposing the objects separated from their con- comitants, any more than in the geometer’s supposition that a line is a foot long when it is not.

21. The best procedure is that of arithmetic and geometry --to suppose separate what is not really so. Their objects exist potentially though not actually.

gi. Since the beautiful may be found in unchangeable things though the good is confined to action, they err who hold that mathematics says nothing of the beautiful or the good. Even if it does not mention the beautiful it proves attributes that are the chief forms of beauty— order, symmetry, definiteness.

be, Since these are the causes of many results, mathematics in a sense treats the beautiful as a cause.

107720. % evar Svaiperd. One might have thought that divisi- bility was an essential characteristic of all the objects of mathematics. But it must be remembered that points (# 12) and units (1078 24) are among these objects.

_ 33. Aristotle said in 1, 16 of mathematical objects that otx dds

M. 3. 1077 20 — 10788 28 417

éorw. Now he Says ott éotw atA@s GAybes cimety. They donot exist in the unqualified or strict sense, but we can say in an unqualified or general way that they exist (that daA@s goes with ciety is indicated by |. 31). daAds, ‘ without qualification’, can mean ‘strictly’ or ‘ vaguely ’ according to the context.

36. The reading of EA ci iyrewov 1d Aevkdv, 4} 8 orw tyrevov, add’ éxeivov 7 éoriv Exdorov, byrewov tyvewod is unintelligible. Alex- ander read ei 76 tyvevov Aevkdv, 4 8 eorw tyrewod, add’ exeivov ob eorlv éxdory, «i tyvewov vyewod, which with Bz.’s emendations, the © reading of # for 7 and the addition of 7 after the second 9). Very likely it is meant to point to both distinctions. Then, just as d&vev peyeGovs rd. places arithmetic above geometry, and pddwora dvev kwycews places geometry above all sciences of motion, cay 0€ Kivyow, padioTa THY mparnv places astronomy above sublunary kinetics, which studies non-circular q@opaé, and still more above, say, biology, which studies avdénows kat pOiors.

15. ypoppat refers to optics, which is subordinate to geometry, GpiOyot to harmonics, which is subordinate to arithmetic (An. Post. 75” x5).

16. The oixeta ...mdé0 here mentioned are to be distinguished from the ida 2dOy of 1.7. The ida wa0y were the derivative attributes which belonged to, e. g., animals gua male or gua female—the major terms of demonstration; the oixeta wa6y are the attributes linearity and numberedness which belong directly to the objects of optics and harmonics and from which other attributes can be derived—the middle terms of demonstration.

g., animals gua male or gua female—the major terms of demonstration; the oixeta wa6y are the attributes linearity and numberedness which belong directly to the objects of optics and harmonics and from which other attributes can be derived—the middle terms of demonstration.

20. Alexander’s reading is sufficiently confirmed by N. 108% 22,

28. todrwy, humanity and indivisibility (cf. 1. 26), Alexander may have read rovrov, indivisibility (739. 14).

16 Suvarév. Alexander takes this as subject of érdpyew and supposes that it is a geometrical attribute which Aristotle states to be capable of belonging to man even if he were not indivisible. Alexander is no doubt thinking of the sense of dvvac6a. which has led to the use of the

2673-2 Ee

418 COMMENTARY

word ‘power’ in its arithmetical meaning. But (1) what is said dvvacGa in this sense is the line on which a square or a cube is erected, so that 8vvardy in this sense is not asuitable epithet for a man, and (2) the subject of ddpxew is undoubtedly &... aird. Bz. takes 7d dwvardy to mean ‘so far as possibility is concerned’, but this with évdéyerau is otiose, and the usage is apparently not found elsewhere. 0 dvvaroy is probably a gloss on iAuas (1, 31), perhaps introduced here by a copyist who took rovrwy to be the antecedent of g@ and thought that trdpyew needed a subject. The words are omitted by I.

30-31. Sitrdv yap... dAukas. Aristotle means that mathematical objects exist éAucds, and this, since it is opposed to évredexela, we may interpret as = duvdue. The meaning must be that mathematical objects exist neither (1) as actually and substantially present all along in sensible things (refuted 10768 38-11), nor (z) as substances actually existing apart from sensible things (refuted 1076 11 —1078%21), but (3) as potentially present in sensible things and receiving actual existence by the geometer’s act of ywpucpds. Cf. Il. 21 ff. and @, 10514 21-33. The mathematical parts into which a body can be divided are its tdy vonry, as its material elements are its vAn aicOyryn (Z. 1035% 12, 10364 9-12, > 32—1037*5).

Cf. Il. 21 ff. and @, 10514 21-33. The mathematical parts into which a body can be divided are its tdy vonry, as its material elements are its vAn aicOyryn (Z. 1035% 12, 10364 9-12, > 32—1037*5).

g1— 6. The thinkers here criticized are those referred to in B. 996% 32 as tév copioctav twes olov ’Apiotimros. In B nothing is said of 7d xaddv ; these thinkers are represented simply as attacking mathematics because it never uses dya6dv as a middle term. Here they are represented as saying that mathematics never uses either dya@dév or xadov, and Aristotle replies that it uses the latter though not the former. This: distinction of the two terms (xaAdv being the wider of the two, ll. 31, 32) isnot found elsewhere in Aristotle, though we may perhaps find a trace of it in IZ, A. 700? 25 76 rovwirdv eo TOV d-yabdv 70 Kwodv, aX’ od ray 76 kaAov. It is somewhat surprising to find Aristotle saying that 76 dyaOor is det ev pdfe, considering that it is found in every cate- gory and can be applied to God and to reason (LZ. JV. 10964 23). But, though xaAdv and dyaféy are often used synonymously, xaAdv is applic- able primarily to the physically beautiful and dya@dv to the morally good ; or at any rate for the sake of argument Aristotle is willing to admit this restriction of the meaning of dyafdv.

35. The épya of beauty are the facts in the nature of the universe due to rats and 76 dpurpevoy ( 2-4), i.e. to the striving of nature to attain to order and determinateness. By the Adyo of beauty Aristotle means rats, cupperpia, TO dpirpevov.

The next sentence presents them in another light, as main species (eidn) of beauty. His stricter view is that they are elements in the definition of beauty (cf. Poet, 1450 36 70 Kadov ev peyeOa kai rage éori, ‘involves size and order’), The péyefos which is mentioned in the Poetics and in Pol. 1326* 33 as an element in beauty answers to 16 dpurpévov here; the third element cupperpia is mentioned in Top. 116% 21 as being thought to constitute the beauty of musical tunes,

M. 3. 10788 30 — 1078) 5 419

bi, rdgts, the spatial arrangement of the parts; oupperpta, the proportional size of the parts; 13 dpiopévoy, the limitation in size of the whole. Mathematics does not speak of beauty but it proves that certain objects have these attributes, which are the very soul of beauty.

5. év dAdo, Neither A. 7 (1072* 34), 8, ro, nor N. 4, nor the De Caelo really fulfils the promise here made, and it seems best to treat it as one of Aristotle’s unfulfilled promises.

I]. ‘Tur Forms (chs. 4, 5). Flistory and criticism of the theory of Forms (ch. 4).

1078" 7. We must first examine the doctrine, in its original orm, apart from any theory of numbers.

12, The founders of the doctrine were convinced by Heraclitus arguments that sensible things are always in flux, and inferred that there must be other things to serve as objects of knowledge.

4).

1078" 7. We must first examine the doctrine, in its original orm, apart from any theory of numbers.

12, The founders of the doctrine were convinced by Heraclitus arguments that sensible things are always in flux, and inferred that there must be other things to serve as objects of knowledge.

17. Socrates was the first to seek general definitions—viz. of the virtues. Democritus had defined, in a way, heat and cold; the Pythagoreans had reduced the definitions of a few things to numbers.

2g. It was natural that Socrates should seek definitions ; for he was trying to reason, and the ‘what’ is the starting-point of reason- ing; there was at that time no dialectical power such as enables people to study contraries without knowing the ‘what’. Two things we may ascribe to Socrates are inductive arguments and general definition, both concerned with the starting-point of knowledge.

30. Socrates did not treat the universals as existing separately ; his successors did, and called them Ideas; by the same argument they involved themselves in Ideas of all universals.

34. Objections: (i) The theory merely doubles the number of things to be explained; for there is an Idea answering to every set of things with a common name; there is a ‘one over many’ both for substances and for non-substances, both for temporal and for eternal entities.

1079" 4. (ii) Of the proofs of the theory, some prove nothing, others would prove the existence of Ideas of things of which the Platonists think there are none, (a) The arguments from the existence of the sciences would prove that there are Forms of all things of which there

Re 2

420 COMMENTARY

are sciences. (8) The argument of ‘one over many’ would prove that there are Forms of negations. (y) The argument from the possibility of thinking when the object has perished would prove that there are forms of perishable objects. —

11. (5) Of the most accurate arguments some lead to Ideas of relative terms, others posit the ‘third man’.

14. (iii) In general the arguments about the Forms destroy what the supporters of Forms think more important than the Forms; number becomes prior to the dyad, the relative prior to number and thus to the absolute. In various ways the opinions about the Forms conflict with the first principles of the theory.

1g. (iv) According to the view on which the theory is based there will be Forms of many things besides substances (for there can be a single conception, or a science, of other things); but according to the logical requirements of the theory and their actual opinions, if the Forms are shared in there are Forms only of substances.

26. For (a) each is shared in not as an accident of something else but as something not predicated of a subject (i.e. not as anything that shares in doubleness shares in eternality because doubleness is eternal), so that the Forms must be substance. But (8) the same names must indicate substance in the sensible world as in the ideal (else what is meant by calling the Idea ‘one over many’? Ifthe Ideas and the things that share in them ave che same form, there is something com- mon, for instance, to the Idea of two and the particular two, as there is to the perishable twos and to the particular mathematical twos; if they have not the same form, they have only their name in common, as Callias and a statue may both be called ‘a man’.)

b 3. If it be suggested that the common definition applies to a Form, and only the name of that which it is the Form of has to be added, the suggestion is unmeaning. (a) To what element in the definition is this tobe added? Every element in it isan Idea, genus and differentia alike. (8) ‘Formness’ will itself be a Form present in all Forms, as ‘plane’ is present in all its species. Thus there is an infinite regress.)

1078” 7-8, St. Te dvta éoti Kal THs dvtTa (7a pabyuarixd) has been the general subject of chs. 2, 3; m@s mpdtepa kai ms of mpdtepa the subject in particular of 1077 17-20, 24—-) 11.

11. Who were ot mp@to tas iS€as pyoavtes etvar? A comparison of ll. 12-32 with A. 987%29-58 shows clearly that Aristotle means Plato. The evidence of Aristotle is against the ascription of the ideal theory to Socrates or to the Pythagoreans. It may, of course, be contended that Aristotle had no knowledge of Socrates’ views except what he got from the Platonic dialogues, and that he com-

§T. ALBERTS COLLEGE Lip M. 4. 10786 7-12 421

pletely misunderstood the dialogues in supposing that the doctrines ascribed to Socrates in them are ascribed to him for dramatic pur- poses. But that the ‘mind of the school’ misunderstood the dialogues so completely is unlikely and demands more proof than has yet been offered.

4. 10786 7-12 421

The ‘first people who said there are Ideas’ are stated here, , exactly as Plato was stated in Bk. A, to have been influenced by the Heraclitean doctrines (1078 13, 9872 32), to have followed the lead of Socrates in his search for ethical definitions or universals, and to have given the name of Ideas to these universals (cf. 1078 17-19, 30-32, with 9871-8). Prof. Taylor’s view (Varza Socratica, 81-89) that of & éxépucar (I. 31) refers to the Megarian School, the eidév iAor of the Sopfzszes, ignores the correspondence of the passage with that in Aristotle. The main difference between A and M here is that M, in using the phrase of rpGrou tas ideas Pyoavres eivat, and in referring only to the influence of Heracliteanism in general and not of Cratylus in parti- cular, perhaps suggests that Plato was one of a band of thinkers who by their united efforts arrived at the ideal theory. Socrates, however, was not one of this band, though he prepared the way for it; the dis- tinction between his view and the doctrine of Ideas is stated emphati- cally in ll, 30-32. The vague reference of mparou tas ideas Pjoavtes is thoroughly characteristic of M, which is concerned with doctrines, not with people (cf. 1076 ® 16-22, 1080» 11-30).

There is, of course, a distinction drawn here between the theory of Idea- numbers (which we know Plato to have held) and the first form of the ideal theory (ll. 9-12). But this does not amount to a distinction, as Prof. Burnet maintains (G. P. 157) between Plato and ‘the first persons who said that the Forms existed’. The distinction is between the theory of Idea-numbers (a theory held in different forms by Plato and by Xenocrates) and the ideal theory as it was originally (€ dpyjs) held by its first supporters (Plato and the rest of the band referred to above). Prof. Burnet tries to discount the value of Aristotle’s state- ‘ments about Socrates (in particular his refusal to treat Socrates as a, or the, founder of the ideal theory) by pointing out that Socrates ‘had been dead for thirty years when Aristotle first came to Athens at the age of eighteen’. He smaintains that all that Aristotle knew about Socrates was derived from the Platonic dialogues, and especially from the Phaedo. But it is as near certainty as we need wish that he must have learnt much from Plato about Socrates by word of mouth. Surely the very fact that he does not take the dialogues at their face - value and ascribe to Socrates everything that is ascribed to him in the dialogues shows that he had independent information in the light of which he interpreted them. Cf. Introduction, pp. xxxiii-xlv.

Surely the very fact that he does not take the dialogues at their face - value and ascribe to Socrates everything that is ascribed to him in the dialogues shows that he had independent information in the light of which he interpreted them. Cf. Introduction, pp. xxxiii-xlv.

13. TWept Tis dAnPelas, ‘on the question about the truth (or real nature) of things’. Cf. A. 983° 2 n.

tots “Hpakertetois Adyous, cf. A. 987232n.. Cratylus is there mentioned as the Heraclitean who was Plato’s first master in philo- sophy.

422 COMMENTARY

15. povyois is used here in the Platonic sense in which it is not distinguished from éruorjn and restricted to moral questions.

17. The sentence beginning here is never properly completed ; the long parenthesis, ll. 19-30, causes Aristotle to forget the construction cf. K. 1067” 25-34.

19-20. The opposition Tév peév ...puockdr.... ot Sé NuPaydperor sug- gests that rév dvouxGv means ‘of the physicists’, and that the object of nwaro is ‘the problem of definition’; Alexander’s interpretation, that Democritus ‘touched on natural objects’ gives a good enough sense, but the other interpretation is made certain by a comparison with P. A. 6422 24-31. povov goes with él puxpoy Haro and emphasizes the slightness of Democritus’ effort. Cf Phys. 194% 20.

21. On the Pythagorean attempts at definition cf. A. 985? 29, 9874 20.

22. avomrew is not used elsewhere by Aristotle in this sense, and one is tempted to read dvjyov, which Alexander uses in his interpretation and E gives as an alternative reading. But dvamrew is used thus by other authors.

katpds was identified with the number 7 (Al. 38. 16, 75. 23).

23. 75 Sikatov was identified, Alexander tells us (741. 5), with ‘the number that divides ro in half’, i.e. 5 (cf. 721. 13). But elsewhere he says it was the first square, either 4 or 9 (38. 12), and the other evidence (Z. WV. 1132%22, MM. M. 1182%14) tends more in this direction. ydéos was identified with 5, the sum of the. first even and the first odd number (39. 8).

25. oUmw tor ‘jv. Aristotle is quoted as having called Zeno the Eleatic the inventor of dialectic (frr. 1484» 29), and Zeno was doubt- less considerably senior to Socrates (Pl. Parm. 127 Bc), so that ovzw tor Hv is meant only in a very limited sense. Aristotle means that the procedure of which we have an instance in the Parmenzdes (cf. Meno 86 ff. and Sophistes), where the consequences of contrary hypo- theses, ‘if one is’, ‘if many are’, are studied without any definition of one or of many having been agreed upon, was not yet a well-recognized’ mode of discussion in Socrates’ time as it afterwards became.

26. tay évavtioy ei 4 adTy emorypy is again in Zop. 105 23 mentioned as a dialectical inquiry (zpdéracis Aoyixy). It is rather sur- prising to find this particular inquiry about contraries co-ordinated by kai with the general phrase rdavayria, but it is not necessary with Maier (Syll. des Arist. ii. 2. 168) to regard kal... émuornn as a gloss.

105 23 mentioned as a dialectical inquiry (zpdéracis Aoyixy). It is rather sur- prising to find this particular inquiry about contraries co-ordinated by kai with the general phrase rdavayria, but it is not necessary with Maier (Syll. des Arist. ii. 2. 168) to regard kal... émuornn as a gloss.

28. Aristotle cannot mean that Socrates was the first person who used inductive arguments or gave general definitions, but that he was the first who recognized the importance of them and systematically used the former in order to get the latter. The inductive arguments referred to are not scientific inductions but arguments from analogy such as we often find Socrates using in the AZemoradilia and in Plato’s ‘Socratic’ dialogues. For an instance cf. A. 10252 6-13.

84—108028 agrees almost verbally with A. ggo? 2-991? 9, with the exception of the section 1079” 3-11, which has nothing

M. 4. 1078%15 — 1079? 11 423

answering to it in Book A. The main points of divergence are noted below ; for what is common to both passages cf. the notes on Book A. Alexander had the passage in his text of M but does not comment on it. Occasionally A is fuller than M (cf. 990% 26, 991725, 55 with 1079? 23, > 28, 10804), but for the most part M is fuller (cf. go? 20, 9917 4, 17, °3, 7, 9 with 1079 17, 35, > 21, 108042, 6,8). Cf A.g note ad zniz. 8

36—1079*1. For mheiw... ein A has oxeddv yap ica—i) odk eAdrrw —ra eidn éeori Trovrors, a milder statement.

1079? 5. Setkvutar, 990) g deikvupev. Cf. 7 oiovrat, 990” 11 oidpeba 12, 20, 1080%6 gacw, 990 16, 23, 99127 dapev; 14 BovdAovrar, 990” 18 BovAovrar APAI., BovAdueba E Asc.

20. The M version as compared with the A version affects the use of a plural verb with a neuter plural subject ; cf. 1. 20 with ggo? 24, 28 with 990» 31,» 12 with 99179.

> 3-11 is peculiar to M. It suggests an alternative course between the supposition that the Idea is cvvdévvpoy with its particulars (# 33) and the view that it is éuévvpov (@ 36, » 1)—a course, however, which does not free the Platonists from difficulties. The suggestion is that the definition of an Idea is the same as that of its particulars, except that in the former we must add ‘that of which it is’ the Idea or pattern, EE. g. the Idea of circle would be defined as ‘a plane figure such that every point on the circumference is equidistant from the centre, such figure being the Idea of sensible circles’. Aristotle makes two objections. (1) To what element in the definition must the ov éori, the statement of what the Idea is an Idea of, be added? To the word ‘centre ’, the word ‘ plane’, or to every word? Every element in the Idea must be ideal. (2) ‘Being an Idea of something’ will itself be a common nature present in all Ideas, i.e. itself an Idea:

To the word ‘centre ’, the word ‘ plane’, or to every word? Every element in the Idea must be ideal. (2) ‘Being an Idea of something’ will itself be a common nature present in all Ideas, i.e. itself an Idea:

I10-II. pvow ... yévos is predicate of etvyar, and there should be a comma after érimedov. It is not necessary to omit ts as Christ suggests. ‘“ So-and-so itself” (aiz¢ 71) will be a nature present in all the Forms as their genus, as ‘‘ plane” is present in all the species of plane figure.’ aio 7 is a generalization of Platonic phrases like airs ayaGov, and the meaning is that Formness will itself be a Form; and this can be attacked by a rpiros dv@pwiros argument.

The Forms do not explain the changes in the sensible world (ch. 5).

1079 12. (v) The main question is, what do the Forms contribute either to eternal or to transient sensibles? (a) They cause no change in them, (8) they contribute nothing to the knowledge of them (for, not being in them, they are not their substance),

424 COMMENTARY

17. nor (y) to their being (if they were in them they might perhaps be their causes as white is of the whiteness of that in which it is mixed ; but this view of Anaxagoras and Eudoxus is easily refuted).

23. (vi) Other things are not composed of Forms in any ordinary sense, and to call the Forms patterns and say that other things share ia them is empty metaphor. For (a) what-is it that works with its eye on the Ideas? (@) It is possible to be or become anything without being copied from an original.

gi. (y) There will be many patterns, and therefore Forms, of the same thing; to a man there will answer the Forms of animal, biped, and man. (8) The genus will be the Form of its species, so that the same thing will be pattern and copy.

35- (vii) How can the Ideas, being the substances of things, exist apart from the things? In the Phaedo they are said to be causes both of being and of becoming.

1080* 3. Yet (a) even if the Forms exist, the things that share in them do not come into being unless there is a moving cause, and (8) many things, e.g. houses, come into existence though the Platonists say there are no Forms of them, and therefore those also of which they say there are Forms may be or come into being owing to similar causes, and not to the Forms.

g. These and other more abstract and accurate arguments may be brought against the Ideas.

1079» 28. It is not, I think, necessary to insert éuovov from Book A with Bonitz. ‘It is possible to be or become anything without being copied from an original.’

34. Tav ds yévous cidav, cf. A. 991® 31 n.

g. These and other more abstract and accurate arguments may be brought against the Ideas.

1079» 28. It is not, I think, necessary to insert éuovov from Book A with Bonitz. ‘It is possible to be or become anything without being copied from an original.’

34. Tav ds yévous cidav, cf. A. 991® 31 n.

10807 10. AoyiKds, AoyiKHs generally in Aristotle denote a discus- sion which does not start from the oixetau dpyad of the subject but from verbal considerations, and is a term of reproach rather than otherwise, so that it is somewhat strange to find Aoyexwrépwy coupled with axpi- Beorépwv. If we remember, however, that the Platonic doctrines are themselves said by Aristotle to have been of this nature (1084) 25, A. 987° 31, ©. 1050” 35, A. 1069228, N, 108721), we may infer that he means that he could produce arguments which would meet the Platonists more on their own ground and would have the precision that comes from abstraction (cf. 10784 9, 10).

M. 5. 1079» 28 — 1080? 10 425

III]. Numpers as Separate SuBsTANCES AND First CAusES (chs. 6-9. 1086* 18).

Various ways in which numbers may be concetved as the substance of things (ch. 6).

10802 12. If number is an entity whose essence is just to be number, then (1) there is an order of priority and a specific difference between the numbers, and between the units, which therefore are incomparable.

20. or (2) all units are comparable, as in mathematical number ;

23. or (3) the units of a single number are comparable, but those of different numbers are not comparable zzéer se ;

30. so that while in mathematical number 1 is added to 1 to make 2, in this kind of number 2 is two ones distinct from the number 1 ;

35- or (4) there are all three kinds of number, those described in (1), (2), and (3).

37. Further these numbers must be either separate from things or in things, i.e. composing sensible things; the latter alternative may be true of some or of all numbers.

> 4. All those who treat the One as a first principle and a substance have adopted one or other of the above views, which are the only possible views ; all the views but (1) have found support.

1. (A) Some (Plato) believe in both kinds of number—that which has priority and posteriority (the Ideas) and mathematical number ; they believe both to exist apart from sensibles.

14. (2) (a) Some (Speusippus) believe in mathematical number only; (4) the Pythagoreans too believe in mathematical number only, but in the sense that sensible substances are actually composed of extended units—though they cannot tell us how the first extended unit came into being.

21. (C) (a) Another thinker says only ideal number exists, and (6) some (Xenocrates) identify this with mathematical number.

23. There is a similar variety of opinion about lines, planes, and solids. (A) Some distinguish the mathematical lines, &c., and those which come after the Ideas; (#) some say that the mathematical objects exist, and speak mathematically about them (viz. the non- believers in Ideas); (C) others say that the mathematical objects exist, but do not speak mathematically, for they say that not every magnitude is divisible into magnitudes, and not every two units make a two,

go. All who treat the One as a first principle suppose numbers to

426 COMMENTARY

be composed of abstract units, except the Pythagoreans, who conceive of numbers as extended.

33. These are the possible views; all untenable, but perhaps some more so than others,

1080 15-4. The sentence is_irrégular ‘in structure. Aristotle begins (1. 17) by stating what looks as if it were to be the first of a series of alternative hypotheses about the nature of zzmders, but he proceeds to state three possible forms of this one hypothesis, differing in the view they take of the nature of wnz/s (Il. 18, 20, 23), and recurs to numbers only in 1]. 35, where he states as a fresh alternative that there may be three kinds of number having the three kinds of unit respectively ; finally in 1. 37 he classifies the possible views according to a different principle of division. It is noteworthy that he brings forward his classification as one arrived at a priorz, not by enumeration of existing views. This awakens a certain suspicion that he may in his account of the actual views do them some injustice in order to fit them into his ready-made scheme. He says «definitely, however, that each of the views he mentions had supporters, except the view that all units are incomparable (1080) 8, cf. 1081°35). # tas pev KrAr. (I. 23), though grammatically, co-ordinate with rou etvar xrX. (J. 17), is in sense co-ordinate with # él rév povddwy KrX. (1. 18) and with 7 ets epeens xd. (1. 20). The views Aristotle mentions are

(1) the belief in incomparable numbers (1. 17), (2) with units all incomparable (I. 18),

or (4) with units all comparable (1. 20), or (c) with the units of each number comparable with each other, but incomparable with those of other numbers (1. 23),

(2) the belief in all three kinds of number, i.e. the kind (1 a), the kind (1 4), and the kind (1 c) (1. 35).

He omits (3) the belief in two kinds of number, (1 a) and (1 4),

’ (1 a) and (1 ¢), or (1 6) and (1¢).

In ll. 21, 36 he confuses (1 4), the belief in incomparable numbers whose units are all comparable, with (4), the belief in comparable numbers (whose units must necessarily be all comparable), for clearly this is what he conceives 6 wabyparixds dpiO.ds to be.

It must not be thought that this passage offers a classification of hypotheses about ideal number in particular, for the classification includes the Pythagoreans (16), who drew no distinction between mathematical and ideal number, and Speusippus ( 14), who believed only in the former. What we have is a classification of all the views which treated numbers as ‘separate substances and first causes of existing things’ (#14). Alexander, failing to notice that the Pytha- goreans enter into the classification, takes it to be a classification of theories of ideal number (e.g. 743. 13), and this leads him to give an absurd interpretation of * 35-37. He takes it to mean that e.g. 3, 4,

M. 6. 10802 15 — 1080) 4 427

5 might be composed of units all of which are incomparable, 7, 8, 9 of units all of which are comparable, 20, 30 of units such that those in 20 are comparable with each other and those in 30 with each other but those in 20 are not comparable with those in 30. It seems clear that the view referred to in # 35-37 is one which believes in the existence of three complete number series of different kinds.

So far as ideal numbers are concerned, the doctrine that they are ‘incomparable’, i.e. incapable of being added or subtracted, multi- plied or divided, is a perfectly sound one which is misunderstood by Aristotle. The ideal numbers are simply the natural numbers, 1, 2, 3, &c., or in other words oneness, twoness, threeness, &c., and these of course cannot be added. You cannot add oneness to one- ness because there is only one oneness; and it is equally certain that you cannot add oneness to twoness. And, further, Aristotle’s notion of numbers as containing units, and the resulting question whether these are comparable or incomparable, is equally mistaken. The number 2 does not contain two numbers 1, for there is only one number 1.

As against the mathematical or ‘intermediate ’ numbers believed in by the Platonists, Aristotle’s objection would have more force. There are no ‘mathematical numbers’ distinct on the one hand from the natural number, and on the other from the particular one-member groups, two-meimber groups, &c., which are the instances of the natural numbers. ‘The weakness of Aristotle’s position is that he believes in mathematical numbers, which do not exist, and does not believe in ideal or universal numbers, which do.

On the conception of dovpBAynto. apiOyot cf. Cook Wilson in Classical Review, xviii. 247-260, especially §§ 2, 3, 5.

‘The weakness of Aristotle’s position is that he believes in mathematical numbers, which do not exist, and does not believe in ideal or universal numbers, which do.

On the conception of dovpBAynto. apiOyot cf. Cook Wilson in Classical Review, xviii. 247-260, especially §§ 2, 3, 5.

1g. doupBAntos. The usage of cvpBardAcv, cvpBAnrtds, dovpBAnros in Aristotle shows that the word must mean ‘incomparable’ ; and things are comparable if and only if they belong to the same kind (Phys. 2488, 24993, Top. 107147, I. 1055%6). Thus dovuBdrnros is practically equivalent to érepov dv ra cide (1. 17), and cupBAyrds can be coupled with adiddopos (108145). Strictly, to say that two things are ovpBAyra is to say that one can be expressed as a fraction of the other, or at least as greater or less than or equal to the other. But in this context cuuBdAyrat seems to mean ‘capable of entering into arithmetical relations with one another—of being added and sub- tracted, multiplied and divided’.

35-37. otos 6 mp@ros ehexOn, cf. ll. 15-203; otoy ot polnpatiKkol héyouat, cf. 20-23 ; tov pnOévta TedeuTatoy, cf. 23-35.

bg, 16 mp@tovy, 10769 38-6 11. Aristotle is now omilting the com- promise of Pythagorean and Platonic views referred to there, and taking account only of the genuine Pythagorean view.

4. Bz. argues that the view that all the numbers are immanent in sensibles has been already mentioned in ], 1, so that 7 wavras eivau is unmeaning. But Alexander evidently had these words (perhaps }) Tavras py etvar as well), though his interpretation of them cannot be

428 COMMENTARY

right; and so have all the good manuscripts. The solution of the difficulty is to treat ot otrws . . . aiofyra as parenthetical. ‘* The numbers must be either transcendent, or immanent .. . either some immanent and not others, or all immanent.’

6. cxeddv is explained by zAqw ra. 1. 8.

4. Gddou twés, ie. the dzeipov in the case of the Pythagoreans, the _‘ great and small’ er indefinite dyad in the case of the Platonists.

IO-Il. o0 yap... cipnpérvous. We shall see how Aristotle can say this if we remember that (a) he confuses (4) above with (1 4), and (8), since the view (1 @) is not held by any one (Il. 8, 9). (3.2) and (34) disappear with it and (3¢) takes the place of (2). There thus remain (A) the belief in (x 4) (Il. 14-21), (2) the belief in (12) (I. 21, 22), (C) the belief in both (Il. 11-14), and (JD) the confusion of the two (ll. 22, 23).

II, ot pév, who believed in both, means Plato and his orthodox followers ; cf. A.g87®14-18. Aristotle thinks of the Platonic 7a peraév as of the type (1 4), though they were more probably of the type (4).

14. ot S€ means Speusippus; cf. 10767 20-21 n.

15. Tov (not 75) mpatoy Tey Svrwv is somewhat strange ; in the light of 1083? 23 (also on Speusippus) 7a 8¢ pabqparixa eivar Kai Tous apil- pods =pérous Tay Gvrev One May conjecture that réy should be omitted.

14. ot S€ means Speusippus; cf. 10767 20-21 n.

16. The Pythagoreans, like Speusippus, believed in mathematical number only; but they differed from him, as from all ra in holding numbers to be actually present in ‘things (cf. 237-" 4). Mr. Cornford holds, with much probability, that the Pythagorean doctrine here referred to is not the mystical system of Pythagoras but a scientific system of number-atomism which was developed in the fifth century and was the forerunner of Atomism proper.- He summarizes the main features of this system as follows: ‘(1) there is only one kind of number—namely, mathematical number. (2) This number does not exist separately, but sensible substances are composed of it . . (3) These numbers do not consist of abstract units, but the units are conceived as having spatial magnitude. (4) They are described as “indivisible magnitudes” (1083"13). (5) Things or bodies are identified with numbers composed of the indivisible magnitudes or monads (1083 12 sqq.). (6) The Pythagoreans regarded numbers as generated—the process of generation being, of course, identical with the physical generation of the sensible world (1091* 17 sqq-)’ (CZ. Quart. xvii. 8). Cf. N. 1092» 8-15 n.

19. Atv of povadixéy. The Platonists, like Aristotle, thought of numbers as composed of unextended units; the Pythagoreans thought of them as extended and having extended units. In other words they had not reached the notion of arithmetic as distinguished from geometry. Aristotle uses dpifpos dpiOuqrixos in the same sense as dppos povadixes (108316). Zeller thinks (i.° 483-488) that in stating the Pythagorean units to be extended Aristotle is drawing a mistaken inference from the Pythagorean view that bodies are com- posed of numbers; he admits, however, that the Pythagorean

M. 6. 1080) 6-25 429

cosmology implies the treatment of numbers as spatial. But -at the time of the Pythagoreans the notion of non-corporeal reality did not exist, so that they necessarily thought of the units as extended. There is some ground for holding that they called them éyxo: (Burnet, E.G. P.§ 146).

But -at the time of the Pythagoreans the notion of non-corporeal reality did not exist, so that they necessarily thought of the units as extended. There is some ground for holding that they called them éyxo: (Burnet, E.G. P.§ 146).

20-21. Stas 5é. . . oixacw. Cf. N. 10912 15, where we learn that the Pythagoreans ‘say that when the One had been put together whether out of planes or out of surface or out of seed or out of they know not what, immediately the nearest part of the infinite began to be drawn and limited by the limit’. The general sense of the present passage is: ‘ The Pythagoreans construct the universe out of numbers having spatial units; but how the first unit was constructed as an extended thing they cannot tell’. ‘ They had not’, as Mr. Cornford observes (CZ. Quart. xvii. 9), ‘reached the position of fully developed atomism, which postulates an indefinite plurality of atoms or monads as an ultimate and eternal fact.’

ai. It is not easy to identify dAdos . . . 71s, who believed in ideal number only. Alexander’s suggestion that it was a Pythagorean can hardly be right, since Aristotle never ascribes the belief in Ideas to Pytha- goreans. It must be a Platonist, but further than this we cannot go. Elsewhere in enumerating the views held Aristotle omits this one (1076? 19-22, 10864 2-13, cf. 1080» 24-30).

Jaeger would remove the difficulty by treating Go: as a variant for eivax and removing eivaz in |. 23 as a later-addition due to the intrusion of €or. But Alexander and Syrianus had our text; and it is not particularly surprising that Aristotle should mention here a view he does not mention elsewhere—a view which is almost certain to have been held by some Platonist.

22. By the vo. who identified ideal and mathematical number Aristotle probably means Xenocrates. Cf. 10762 20-21 n.; Z, 1028> 24 Nn.

24. ot pev answers to of wer in |. 11 and refers to Plato.

25. Ta peta Tas ideas. Cf. A. 992° 13 ovGeva F exer Adyow ovde Ta peta. Tovs apiOpors pjKn Kal éxireda Kal oTEped ... TatTa yap ovTe «dy otov Te evar (ov yap ciow apiOpot) otre Ta petadd (uabnwatixa yap éxetva) ovre 7a POaprd, aAAG waAw Téraptov GAO gaiverar TotTd 7 yevos. Just as Plato distinguished the Idea of ‘two’ from the many 2’s of which arithmetic speaks, he distinguished ‘the straight line itself’, ‘the triangle itself’, ‘the cube itself’, from the many straight lines, triangles, and cubes of which geometry speaks. In the earlier form of his theory he spoke of these as Ideas, but when he came to call the Ideas numbers he no longer called these Ideas, since they were not numbers. Accordingly he called them (or Aristotle calls them for him) 7a pera Tas ideas OF Ta peta Tots GpiHuovs. Just as mathematical number is prior to mathematical lines, planes, and solids, being é€ éX\arréver, the Ideas of numbers were prior to these quasi-Ideas of lines, planes, and solids. ra pera ras idas (rods dpibuovs) : dae (eidnrixot dpOn0r) 2: pabypatixd pyxy KTA. : waGyuatixoi dpiOoi.

Just as mathematical number is prior to mathematical lines, planes, and solids, being é€ éX\arréver, the Ideas of numbers were prior to these quasi-Ideas of lines, planes, and solids. ra pera ras idas (rods dpibuovs) : dae (eidnrixot dpOn0r) 2: pabypatixd pyxy KTA. : waGyuatixoi dpiOoi.

430 COMMENTARY

26. of pév answers to ot dé in ]. 14 and means Speusippus and the Pythagoreans.

28. ot 8¢ answers to évoi' dé in 1, 22 and means Xenocrates. (No one is mentioned answering to dAAds ts in 1. 21, and this view is difficult to distinguish from that of Xenocrates.) od réuverOar peyeOos may eis peyeOy (1. 29) is a clear allusion to the doctrine of indivisible lines, of which the main supporter was Xenocrates, though it is also ascribed by Aristotle to Plato (A. 992 20).

29. 000 Strovacody povddas Sudda etvar is not strictly relevant here, where spatial magnitudes are being spoken of, but is rather illustrative. Xenocrates speaks of mathematical magnitudes in a non-mathematical way, supposing that the units in one mathematical number (as Plato had supposed that the units in one zdea/ number) are specifically different from those in another, so that a unit of 2 + a unit of 3 would not make 2.

30-33. Aristotle here recurs from 7a pera Tas ideas to numbers, and repeats what he has said in Il. 17—20.

36. paddov 8 tows Odrepa tav érépwy. Aristotle means the view ot Xenocrates, which xe/purra déyerar (1083> 2), combining as it does 800 dpaprias, misdescribing mathematical number and also being open to all the objections against ideal number (1083) 3).

Examination of Plato's view (ch. 7-8. 1083* 20).

1080) 37. (A) We must first examine whether the units are com- parable, and if not, in which of the two senses they are not.

1081* 5. (1) If all are comparable and not different in kind, we get only mathematical number, and the Ideas cannot be the numbers thus produced (for there is but one Idea. of each thing, e.g. of man, while there is an indefinite number of similar numbers, e.g. threes ;

12. but if the Ideas are not numbers, they cannot exist (for the first principles are said to be first principles of number, and the Ideas cannot be classed as either prior or posterior to numbers).

17. (2) If all units are incomparable, (a) the number so produced is not mathematical number (which is composed of undifferentiated units).

21. Nor is it ideal number, for 2 will not be the first product of 1 and the indefinite dyad, and be followed by 3, 4, &c. (the units in 2 not being prior or posterior to one another), since if one unit is to be prior to the other, it will be prior to the 2 which they compose.

29. (4) The units will be prior to the numbers after which they are named, e. g. the third unit (the second in the number 2) will be prior to the number 3.

M. 6. 1080 26-36 431

29. (4) The units will be prior to the numbers after which they are named, e. g. the third unit (the second in the number 2) will be prior to the number 3.

M. 6. 1080 26-36 431

35. Though no one has supposed the units incomparable in this way, the view agrees sufficiently with the principles of these thinkers, If there is a first unit, there will be priority and posteriority among the units, and similarly among the twos; but though they recognize a first unit and a first two, they do not recognize a second or a third.

bro. (c) If all the units are thus incomparable, there cannot be a ‘two itself’, a ‘three itself’, &c. For whether the units are different or not, the numbers must be generated by successive additions of 1; but if so, they are not generated as these thinkers say they are, from the One and the indefinite dyad.

18. For the number two is a part of the number three, and this of the number four, whereas they generate four from the number two and the indefinite dyad and make it consist of two twos other than the number two;

22. otherwise 4 will consist of the number 2 and another 2, and the number 2 will consist of the One itself and another 1, and if so, the element in 2 other than the One itself cannot be the indefinite dyad, since it produces one unit, not a definite 2.

27. (d) How can there be other twos besides the number 2? How can they be composed of prior and posterior units? These sup- positions are quite fictitious. But if the conclusions are absurd, the first principles must be wrong.

35. (3) If the units in different numbers are different but those in the same number not different, equal difficulties follow.

10821. (a) Since the ideal ten is no ordinary number and the fives in it no ordinary fives, the units in the one five must be different from those in the other; i.e. the theory inconsistently with itself implies that five of the units in ro are different from the other five.

7. If the units in ro differ, there must be other fives in 10 than those we have named, but if so, what sort of tens do they make? These thinkers recognize no other 10 in the number 1o.

11. They must, as we have assumed (I. 3) that they do, suppose the number 4 to be composed of no chance twos, for they say the indefinite dyad received the definite dyad and made two dyads.

15. (2) How can the number 2 be something apart from the two units? Either by participation of one in the other, as ‘white man’, which shares in ‘ white’ and in ‘man’, is apart from them, or by one part being a differentia of the other, as ‘man’ is apart from ‘animal’ and * two-footed ’.

20. (c) The units in 2 or in 3 cannot be one by contact, mixture, or position; there is nothing apart from the units any more than a pair of men is anything apart from the two men. The indivisibility

432 COMMENTARY

of the units makes no difference; points are indivisible, but a pair of points is nothing apart from the single points.

The indivisibility

432 COMMENTARY

of the units makes no difference; points are indivisible, but a pair of points is nothing apart from the single points.

26. (d) The theory implies that there will be prior and posterior twos, threes, &c. The twos in 4 are prior to those in 8, and generated the fours in 8 as 2 generated ¢hem, so that,since the 2 is an Idea, they also are Ideas. :

32. So too the units in 2 generate the units in 4, so that all the units are Ideas and an Idea is composed of Ideas, and therefore that of which the Idea is an Idea is similarly composite, e.g. animals are composed of animals.

br, (ec) To make the units different in any way is absurd and artificial ; unit differs from unit neither in quantity nor in quality, and a number which is neither greater nor less than another must be equal to it and identical with it; if it is not, neither will the twos in 10 be without difference, as the theory supposes them to be.

11. (f) If one unit and another unit always make two, a unit in 2 and a unit in 3 will make a 2. Now (a) this will consist of units differing in kind; () will it be prior or posterior to the number 3? Presumably prior, since one of the units is simultaneous with 3 and the other with 2.

16. We say that one and one (e.g. good and evil) always make two; but ¢hey say that not even one unit and another unit always make a two.

19. (g) The number 3 must surely be greater than the number 2, but if so, it will contain a number equal to and without difference from the number 2; which it cannot, if there is priority and posteriority between any two numbers.

23. (#) On this view the Ideas cannot be numbers. ‘Those who say all units are different are right in supposing this to be implied in there being Ideas; for the Form is unique, but if units are without difference, the twos and the threes will be without difference too.

28. These thinkers are bound to say that in’counting ‘ one, two’ we do not add one to the original one; for then (a) generation would not be from the indefinite dyad, and (8) an Idea would not be pro- duced, since if it were it would contain another Idea, and all the Ideas would ultimately be parts of one Idea.

32. Thus what they say agrees with their hypothesis ; but it destroys many of the truths of mathematics. They will say that there is a difficulty in the question whether we count by successive additions of x or by constructing each number separately. But we do both; it is absurd to suppose a separate kind of number to which the latter process applies.

ST. ALBERT’S COLLEGE LIBRAR

M. 7. 10828— 8. 1083» 433

1083*1. (7) What is the differentia of a number, and of a unit, if a unit has any? Units must differ in respect either of quantity or of quality, but neither is possible. (a) If units differed in quantity, num- bers equal in number of units would differ from each other. Are the first units greater or less than the later? All this is absurd.

Units must differ in respect either of quantity or of quality, but neither is possible. (a) If units differed in quantity, num- bers equal in number of units would differ from each other. Are the first units greater or less than the later? All this is absurd.

8. (8) They cannot differ in quality. They have no qualities, for in numbers quality depends on quantity. They cannot get quality either from the One, which has none, or from the indefinite dyad, which gives quantity.

14. If units differ in some other way, these thinkers ought to have said why this difference must exist, or at least what difference they mean. Thus if the Ideas are numbers, the units cannot be all com- parable, nor incomparable in either of the two ways.

Examination of the views of other Platonists and of the Pythagoreans (ch. 8. 10832 20-» 23),

1083* 20. (Ba) The views of other thinkers are no better, viz. of those (Speusippus) who do not believe in Ideas but in mathematical objects, and make numbers the primary realities, and the One their first principle.

24. For it is paradoxical that there should be a first 1, but not a first 2, 3, &c. If only mathematical number exists, the One is not a first principle (for if it were, it would be different from other ones, and there must then be a two different from other twos); if the One is a first principle, the numbers must be such as Plato supposed them, i.e, incomparable.

35. If both Plato’s doctrine and that of Speusippus lead to impossible results, number cannot exist apart.

by, (Cd) The worst view is that ideal number and mathematical are the same (Xenocrates). This view falsifies the nature of mathe- matical number, and involves further the difficulties incidental to the belief in ideal number.

8. (Bd) The Pythagorean view escapes some difficulties by not making number exist apart, but has peculiar difficulties arising from the supposition that bodies are composed of mathematical numbers.

13. For there are no indivisible magnitudes, or at any rate units have no magnitude, and therefore bodies cannot be composed of them, as the Pythagorean view implies.

19. Thus none of the ways of treating number as self-subsistent is satisfactory; therefore it is not self-subsistent.

2573-2 Ff

434 COMMENTARY

Aristotle first (1080 37) discusses the theory of incomparable num- bers (which, we are told in 1083% 32, was the view of Plato). Then (10832 20) he proceeds to the theory of Speusippus, then (1083 1) to that of Xenocrates, and last (1083 8-19) to that.of the Pythagoreans.

IO81* i. domep Sve(Aopev, 10808 18-20, 23-35.

4. TpOTe = cidyrixG Al. 748. 1. Cf. -1080b22, and aparn dvds 1080* 26 and MN assim, mp@rov phKos, tAaTos, Babos De An. 404» 20, eripdverar tpatar K. 1060) 13.

7. Bz.’s proposal to omit tovs is supported by |. 12, but is not absolutely necessary. As he himself says, we may render the manu- script reading ‘and the Ideas cannot be the numbers thus produced’.

404» 20, eripdverar tpatar K. 1060) 13.

11-12. dot’ oW0ev ... dmovaody, E.g. any of the threes in nine will be the Idea of man as much as any other, and the uniqueness of the Idea will be destroyed.

14. This isthe first use in the AZe/aphysics of the phrase adpucros dvas. Doubt has been felt as to whether the phrase refers to the doctrine of Plato, or to that of his followers. The description of the material prin- ciple as the ‘great and small’ is certainly ascribed to Plato (cf. A. 987» 20, 26, 988813, 26). In N. 1088b 28 Aristotle says eiot d€ tes ot dvdda pv dopictov rrovodat TO pera TOD Evds oTOLXElov, TO 8 dvicov SvoXepaivou- ow eddAdyws 8a TA orp Baivovra ddvvata. I.e., the adoption of the indefinite dyad as material principle seems to be described as an amendment of the description, which we can safely ascribe to Plato, of the material principle as the unequal. On the other hand the un- equal and the indefinite dyad are coupled as belonging to the same theory in N. 1088215. So, too, in 10836 23-32, N. rogob 32— 1091%5 the great and small and the indefinite dyad seem to be both referred to Plato. Cf. Theophr. AZe/. 33, Hermodorus ap. Simpl. Phys. 244..30—248. 18, and Al., Simpl., Syr., Asc. passim. The reference of the indefinite dyad to Plato was doubted or denied by ‘Susemihl (Genet, Entwickl. ii. 532 ff.), Zeller in Plat. Stud. (222), Trendelenburg (De Jd. et Num. 48-51), Heinze (Xenocr. 16-15). ‘On the strength of two passages (which are inadequate for the purpose) Heinze maintains that the phrase originated with Xenocrates (Theophr. Met. 11, Plut. De An. Procr. ii. 1, 2, 1012 DE). Zeller later gave up his doubts, and there is no reason to distrust the evidence of Hermo- dorus, Alexander, &c. In N. 1089®% 35, though the expressions ‘ great and small’ and ‘indefinite dyad’ are distinguished, there is nothing to show that they were not used by the same thinkers to designate the same thing. And 1088» 28 does not tell us that ‘the indefinite dyad’ was a later phrase than ‘the unequal’, but merely that some thinkers (Xenocrates is probably included) retained the former, while discarding the latter because it made one of the first principles something merely relative.

Zeller thinks that Plato described only the material principle of zdeal and mathematical numbers as the indefinite dyad. But the silence of MN{as§to the derivation of sensible things from it proves nothing, since these books are not concerned with the derivation of sensible

M. 7. 10819 1-24 435

things. The PArlebus certainly describes the dzeipia as the material cause in all oteéa, without special reference to numbers (ravta ra viv évta év TH wavti 23.C 4). On the whole subject of the indefinite dyad cf. Robin 641-654.

7. 10819 1-24 435

15. at dpxat kat ta otorxeta = 7d ey Kal Svas 7% ddpiotos. The argument seems to be: ‘the only principles put forward by these thinkers are put forward as principles of number. If, then, they are also the principles of the Ideas, which they are clearly meant to be, the Ideas must be (1) identical with numbers, which we have shown they are not, or (2) prior or posterior to, causes or effects of, numbers, which they evidently cannot be, since they are composed of a different kind of units. Therefore the Ideas are left without any dpyai at all’. The order of the words is against Apelt’s proposal to interpret 1. 15 ‘and the principles (sc. of the Ideas) are said to be also the elements of number’,

17. Aristotle passes now to the view according to which even the units in one number are incomparable with one another. Considering that this view had found no supporter (1080 8, 1081 35), the space Aristotle devotes to it (10814 17— 33) is disproportionate.

Aristotle passes now to the view according to which even the units in one number are incomparable with one another. Considering that this view had found no supporter (1080 8, 1081 35), the space Aristotle devotes to it (10814 17— 33) is disproportionate.

21-29 is a difficult piece of argument. Alexander supposes I]. 21-23 to mean that if the units are incomparable each with each, the numerical series will be destroyed because the numbers will be all formed simultaneously (749. 19), and this view is adopted by Robin (note 285, iii). But this is contrary to Aristotle’s usage, according to which ‘incomparability’ implies the very opposite of simultaneity ; TO pev TpOTdv TL avrod Td 0 exouevov 1080®17 is synonymous with dovpBAnros ib. 19. Alexander, continuing to misunderstand the passage, thinks that Aristotle should have said (1. 23) 7 yap dua ai... povddes yevvvrat 7) ody dua. This means that Alexander is quite at sea. Bz, perceives the general nature of the argument as it stands in the received text, viz. that Aristotle offers two proofs to show that the supposition of units incomparable each with each is contrary to the Platonic view of ideal number as forming the series 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. (ll. 21-23), one proof being given in Il. 23-25, another in Il. 25-29 ; and that really what Aristotle professes to show (that ovx éorai 7 dvas tpatn) is proved only by the second proof. The argument can be made right by the alteration of one word—by reading ézeé for éreira in |. 25 (éxevra has probably come in through the influence of érera in |, 22). Then the argument runs thus: ‘For the two will on this hypothesis not proceed first from the one and the indefinite dyad, and then the other numbers, as the Platonists say “2, 3, 4””—for they generate the units in the first (i.e. the ideal) two simultaneously—since if the one unit in the two were prior to the other (as it must be, on the hypothesis of incomparability, cf. ro80 17, 19), it would be prior also to the two which is composed of them. Thus the order would be not, as they say, I, 2, 3, 4, but 1, first unit in 2, 2, second unit in 2, first unit in 3, &c. For the combination éret ei cf. 10874 21.

24. 6 mptos eimdy, sc. roy TOV ciddv dpiOuor etvai (cf. 1.21), A com-

Ef 2

436 COMMENTARY

parison with 1086411, N. rogo>32, where Aristotle is referring to a doctrine which marks Plato off from Speusippus and Xenocrates (cf. 1076% 19-21 nn.), shows that here also Plato is meant.

10874 21.

24. 6 mptos eimdy, sc. roy TOV ciddv dpiOuor etvai (cf. 1.21), A com-

Ef 2

436 COMMENTARY

parison with 1086411, N. rogo>32, where Aristotle is referring to a doctrine which marks Plato off from Speusippus and Xenocrates (cf. 1076% 19-21 nn.), shows that here also Plato is meant.

ef dviowy (icac0évrwy yap éyévovto). The unequals are the great and the small (1083 23, N. rog1%24). Plato, according to Aristotle, represented the One as producing the units in 2 by equalizing the great and the small. But Aristotle speaks with some hesitation as to how this was done (1083 23-25). It is noteworthy that the material principle is never spoken of as ra dvuca but always as 76 avicov, and it seems probable that Plato did not think of two things, the great and the small, but of one thing, the great-and-small, i.e. indeterminate quantity, and that he represented this as simply being determined into the successive numbers by the operation of the One or formal principle. Cf. Introduction, Ixi f.

30-31. Tv dAd\wv . . . éxeivo, sc. the first unit in 2.

31-32. tpitov ... ev, sc. the second unit in 2.

32. The principal clause begins irregularly with dore, as often in Aristotle. Cf. 2nd, Ar. 873° 31-44.

33. The reading of AP Al., zAéxovrar, would require a strange per- version of order, the antecedent of dy being then ai povades. The reading of EJ}, Néyovrat, gives an excellent sense and must be adopted. ‘The units will be prior to the numbers after which they are called ; the third unit (i.e. the second unit in 2) will be prior to the number 3, and so on.’

byi-g. tds te yap... mpatov. ‘It is natural that there should be prior and posterior units, if there is also a first unit or first one ’—sc. the ideal one.

6-8 is a parenthetical recurrence to the point made in ® 21-29,

8-10. It is doubtful whether Aristotle’s attack is quite fair. The Platonists spoke of the Ideal One as the first One not in the sense that it was the first member of a series of units, but in the sense that it was the principle of the whole class of units. The word ‘first’ is ill- chosen, since it seems to make the universal a member of the class which it constitutes; but there is not necessarily any serious confusion in the thought.

12-14. ‘Whether the units are without specific difference or not, number must be counted by addition’, i.e. each number must be arrived at by adding 1 to the previous number. This is a successful enough appeal to common sense, but is something of a petrtzo principir. The Platonists simply denied the premise that the numbers were reached by addition, and gave quite a different account of their generation.

17-19. ‘The numbers cannot be generated as they try to generate them, out of the indefinite dyad and the One; for three is generated not from the indefinite dyad and the One but from the number two and a unit.’

21. aX’ does not, as Al. 753. 9 and Bz. suppose, introduce a possible objection to the previous argument. It points out the con- tradiction between the actual facts (Il. 18-20) and the Platonic account

M. 7. 1081430 — 10827 II 437

(ll. 21, 22). Jaeger’s addition of «i is ingenious, but not strictly necessary.

22-26. ‘If the two 2’s in 4 are not distinct from the 2 itself, 4 will be composed of the 2 itself and another 2, and similarly 2 of the One itself and another one; so that the element other than the One itself will not be (as they said) the indefinite dyad, since the second element generates one unit (the second unit in the 2), not (as the indefinite dyad does) a definite dyad.’

According to the Platonic account (as represented by Aristotle) the indefinite dyad ‘received the definite dyad and made two — (1082* 13).

27-33. Aristotle passes here from particular arguments to a general protest against the absurdity of the position created by supposing all units, even those in the same number, to be incomparable.

30. dromd. Alexander (754. 12) and Syrianus (131. 1) may have read advvata, or this may be their interpretation of déroma. For drora kat tAacparwdn and for the meaning of wAacparwdy cf. 1082) 2—4.

BI. dvdyxn 8 wth. I.e., if each number is derived not (as common sense says) from the previous number by the addition of 1, but (as the Platonists say) from the One and the indefinite dyad, each number is as it were a special creation, differing in kind from all others, and thus we get an ideal two, an ideal three, &c.

1082? 1. otov ydp, ‘for, for example’.

2-4. What does Aristotle mean by saying that the ‘ 10 itself’ is not any chance number nor composed of any chance 5’s or units? The meaning Seems to be that, the ro itself being an ideal number, the numbers contained in it must be numbers of a special kind, viz. ideal numbers, just as the units in it are supposed by these thinkers to be of the special type described in 1081 35-37. Now two Ideas cannot be specifically the same; therefore the two 5’s in 10 differ specifically ; and therefore the units in them differ specifically; thus five of the units in 10 differ specifically from the other five, which is contrary to the hypothesis we are examining. ‘There seems to be no allusion to the presence of numbers other than 5 in ro (Al. 755. 12), nor to the specific difference between ro and the 5’s in it (Bz.).

‘There seems to be no allusion to the presence of numbers other than 5 in ro (Al. 755. 12), nor to the specific difference between ro and the 5’s in it (Bz.).

7-11. In Il. 8, 9 (after ay), ro it is not clear (as Bz. thinks) that Alexander read écovrar; it seems better to keep the reading of all the good manuscripts, évécovrar, which Alexander may be merely misinter- preting. év 7 dexdév in |. 11 rather confirms évécovra, and quite a good interpretation may be given to the word. If the units in the 10 differ specifically, will there be no other 5’s in the ro than the two already mentioned? (1) We can hardly suppose that there are not. Aristotle does not say why, but the reason obviously is that if you take, say, three units from the first 5 and two units from the second, you will get a new 5 different from the original two. (2) If there are. these other 5’s in the 10, what sort of 10 will they constitute? Apparently another ro in the 1o itself, but the Platonists do not suppose that there is any such thing.

438 COMMENTARY

11-15. Aristotle now proceeds to confirm what he has already used as a premise (I. 3), viz. that the 10 itself is not composed of any chance 5’s, He infers the.mode of composition of the ro from the mode of composition of the 4. This, according to the Platonists, is not produced by successive additions of specifically like units, but by the action of the indefinite dyad, which received the definite dyad or

‘2 itself’ and made two dyads.

For a similar use of d\Aa pay... ye confirming a view of the opponent’s position which has already been stated ( they not only say So but they must say so’) cf. T. 1007» 20-29 éorat yap 76 aiTo fal Tpunpyns kal Totxos Kal dvOpwros, ei Kara mayTos TH Katapio ou 7 dropinr at évoexerar . . » GXAD py AexTéeov Y adrois Kata mavTds (ravTos) THY Katapacw % THv arodacw.

13. AaBotoa, ‘having received’, not ‘having taken’. The material principle receives the formative principle as the female receives the seed, which is the formal principle of generation. For the analogy cf. A. 987> 339882 ¥, and for the literal sense of AapPavew cf. H. A. 559° 8, 577° 31, 32, 578% 14, 6329 28.

17-20, The union might be of the nature (a) of the accidental union of a subject with an attribute, or (0) of the intimate and essential union of genus with differentia, For the difference cf. Z. 1030% 11-14, 1037 13-21.

17. The manuscript reading pebééer Oarépov Garepov (‘ one will partici- pate in the other’) does not offer a grammatical parallel to the other alternative 7 dray 7 xrA. Christ is therefore right in proposing peOeger Barépou Sarépou (‘ by participation of one in the other’).

18. petéxer yap todtwy. We should expect peréxer yap 6 avOpwros Tod AevKod, answering to pebeée Garépov Oarépov. But Aristotle is not careful about consistency of expression where his general meaning is clear.

20-21. As instances of things which are ev addy, pige, Pere. Alexan- der mentions a bundle of sticks, mead, and the stones in a house. igus means complete fusion ; the distinction between ady and Ogois is not so clear, but probably ag@y means mere contact which may be accidental, while @éo1s does not necessarily imply contact but does imply intentional arrangement. Cf. H. 1042> 15-20.

30-31. ‘As the definite or ideal 2 produced (by co-operation with the indefinite dyad) the 2’s in 4, so these 2’s (again by co-operation with the indefinite dyad) produced the two 4’s (more strictly, the four 2's) in 8.

gi—>1. The argument in ll. 26-31 was directed to showing that some 2’s are prior to others. But in the course of the argument Aristotle showed that the 2’s in 4 discharge a function analogous to that of the ideal 2. He now draws another inference from this, viz. that there- fore they also must be Ideas. And so, too, will be the units in the ideal 2 which similarly (by co- operation with the indefinite dyad) pro- duce the units in 4. Thus the units in any number are Ideas.. Ideas will be composed of Ideas. The Idea of one animal will contain the

M. 7. 10828 11 —1082 37 439

Ideas of other animals, and therefore one animal itself will contain other animals.

Jaeger points out that E1JA» read idea: after duds in 1. 32 (he infers from Al, 758. 21 that Alexander also read id€a; but 758. 25 has idéa). He concludes that 4 zpury terpas has dropped out before kai 7 mporn duds. But the argument in Il. 28-32 is that the dyads in 4, since they generate the tetrads in 8 as the first dyad generates them, must be Ideas as much as the first dyad; a reference to the first tetrad would be out of place. id¢a: has come in because the eye of the writer of the archetype travelled on to idéa: later in the line. For the idiomatic xaé before 7 mparn duds cf. N. 1089® 16.

bi, et toUtwy iSéa. eiciv. Christ’s suspicion of these words seems quite unfounded, and it seems clear that Alexander read them (759. 4). They may be taken in either of two ways. -(1) We may render ‘if there are Ideas of animals’, or (2) we may take ofov . . . Ggwy as parenthetical and render ‘if the Ideas are Ideas of the sensible things’.

6. povadixor, cf. ro80b1gn, Aristotle means that while as regards two concrete groups we might find some difficulty in admitting the disjunction ‘they are either equal or unequal’, we can find no difficulty about two abstract numbers.

11-16, From the premise that if we add one unit to another we always get a 2, two objections to the view here attacked follow : (1) the 2 thus formed will be composed of units specifically different, which contradicts the view in question; and (2) it will be hard for the thinkers in question to say whether it is prior or posterior to the 3. * It would seem more likely to be prior, since one of its elements is prior to and the other simultaneous with the 3. Why then should the Platonists not say that it is prior? Aristotle does not say why, but no doubt he means that it will be awkward for them thus to put a number. between 2 and 3.

21-22. Sijdov.. . eveore TH Sudds. ‘Clearly there is in 3 a number equal to 2.’

22-23. ‘But the 2 in 3 cannot be equal to the 2 itself, if there is a first and a second number ’, i.e. if 2 and 3 are numbers qualitatively different from one another. Cf. 1080417, 19, where 70 ev mparov te abrod (i. €. rod dpiOuod) 7d & exdpevov is synonymous with dovpBAyros.

23-24. ‘Nor will the Ideas be numbers,’ sc. as common sense understands numbers.

26. mpdtepov, 10813 5-17.

28-30. ‘ For which reason they must say that when we count thus, “1, 2”, we do not do this by adding 1 to the previous 1.’

32. mdvra Ta eldy Evds pepy, i.e. all the Forms would be parts of the Form which is the largest number.

34-37. Alexander’s commentary (762. 17—763. 3) may be sum- marized thus: ‘ The Platonists raise this difficulty, whether when we count “1, 2”’ we count by addition or by successive divisions of ro. They say we cannot do so in either way; not in the former because

440 COMMENTARY

then we should be treating the units as comparable, and not in the latter because then we should make the Idea of 10 contain the Ideas of the smaller numbers. We must confine both addition and division to mathematical number, and recognize ideal. number as otherwise produced. But we actually count, says Aristotle, in both ways. If the number is definite, like 8, we divide it into its proper parts; if it is indefinite we add unit to unit till we reach the number we wish to determine. But what does he mean by indefinite number? Perhaps he’means that the numbers included in 20 are indefinite and of the nature-of matter relatively to 20. And so, he says, it is absurd on the strength of this superficial dzopia to say that each of the numbers is a separate Idea and substance’. Bz. seems right in supposing that Alexander -had before him words which do not exist in our text (cf. especially 762. 32 d\AG w&s aopicrov etre Tov dpiOuov;); and there are traces of something similar in Syr.

Bz. seems right in supposing that Alexander -had before him words which do not exist in our text (cf. especially 762. 32 d\AG w&s aopicrov etre Tov dpiOuov;); and there are traces of something similar in Syr.

As regards xara pepidas Alexander’s interpretation is probably guesswork. A better interpretation has been suggested by Apelt. He quotes, for the meaning of pepis, Plut. Quaest. Conv, il. 2.644 C Ta Sdypooa detrva pos pepida yiyverGa, which means ‘to be served separately by portions, so that each guest has his separate dish’. Aristotle’s point seems to be this: The Platonists deny many of the accepted truths of mathematics (for roAAa dvaipotow cf. 1086% 9). E.g. they think they will put us in a difficulty by asking us whether we count by addition or by separate portions, i.e. constructing each number independently. If we say ‘by addition’, they will answer ‘then you are not grasping the nature of abstract number’; if we say ‘by separate portions’, they will answer ‘then you are already admitting a number other than mathematical number’. But in fact we can regard the process in either way; it is absurd to rest the doctrine of two entirely different kinds of number on so superficial an dzropia.

10837 1-2. Aristotle’s own view is that numbers have a differentia, but units have not.

4. The grammar requires émdpxew (which Alexander seems to have probably read, 763. 9) instead of the manuscript reading brapxov.

GAN’ 7 dpiOuds, KaT& td woody, ‘but number gua number differs in respect of guantily’.

Q-I0. o00ev yap... mdBos. Cf. De Caelo 299% 17, where Aristotle remarks that indivisibles cannot have zd@y because all za6y are divisible.

11. By the quality of number Aristotle means such attributes as compositeness ()( primeness) and being ‘plane’ or ‘solid’ (having two or three factors); cf. A. 10203. These attributes, according to Aristotle, attach to a number in virtue of its quantity.

12. THs Suddos, the indefinite dyad.

13. Bz.’s reading wogorovdy is evidently right, though it is read only by Syr. and the second hand of E. The word seems to be a hapax

M. 8. 10832 1 — 1083 20 44h

legomenon, but dvorrows ( 36, 1082%15) supplies an analogy, and the play on words supplies a motive, for the coinage.

17-19. 61 ... pavepdv summarizes 1081 5-17; IQ-20. oUTe.. tTpomwy Summarizes 10819 17—» 35, » 35108317.

20-1, Aristotle here passes from Plato’s views (cf. ].-32) to discuss those of Speusippus. Cf. 10764 20-21 n.

24-27. Aristotle shows that Speusippus was inconsistent in that while retaining as the formal cause of number the One, conceived as a. separate substance and distinguished from mathematical units (cf. Z. 1028» 21 n.), he did not similarly believe in a Two or Three dis- tinguished from the many twos and threes of arithmetic.

separate substance and distinguished from mathematical units (cf. Z. 1028» 21 n.), he did not similarly believe in a Two or Three dis- tinguished from the many twos and threes of arithmetic.

32. domep MAdrwv eXeyev is important as showing that the whole discussion in 1080 3y—1083* 17 was a discussion of Plato’s views rather than of those of his followers. _Speusippus is discussed much more briefly in 1083% 20—» 1, and Xenocrates in » 1-8. The imperfect tense indicates that Aristotle is thinking of Plato’s lectures rather than of published works. ‘This is the only reference to Plato by name in MN.

35: cipy tat, 1080P 341083" 17.

2. 6 tptros tpémos, that of Xenocrates, 1080) 22, 23. Aristotle omits here the view of aAAos tis (1080? 21) that ideal number is the only number that exists.

6. pnkivew, cf. N. Togo? 29 core & od xaXerov brovacoty imobécets AapBavovras prakporovety Kal ouvelpeuy. As Robin remarks, Xenocrates’ prolixity on mathematical matters is indicated by the list of his works in Diog. Laert. iv, 2. 13.

8. Aristotle now recurs to the Pythagorean view (1080? 16-21), which agrees with that of Speusippus in believing only in mathematical number, and differs from all the Platonic views in regarding numbers as the stuff out of which things are made.

8-9. Ti pev... cipnpévav. The Pythagorean view avoids the mis- takes implied in separating the substance of a thing from the thing itself (Z. 6).

13-19. The argument is as follows:

There are no indivisible magnitudes (proved in De Gen. et Corr. 315” 24—3177 17).

Or at least units (numerical indivisibles) have not magnitude.

And a magnitude cannot consist of indivisibles.

But arithmetical number consists of units, which are indivisibles.

Therefore real things, which are magnitudes, cannot consist of numbers. ,

But these thinkers apply arithmetical theorems directly to real things, and imply that real things consist of numbers.

Alexander illustrates this by saying that they thought body: in general was composed of ae number 210, fire of the number 11, air of 13, water of 9

20. tav cipypévay tpdmwv, sc. those enumerated in 10804 15—) 36 and refuted in 1080 371083? 19.

442 COMMENTARY

ARGUMENTS AGAINST ALL THEORIES OF SELF-SUBSISTENT NUMBER (ch. 8. 1083 23—9. 1085? 34).

(1) How are the numbers produced from-the matertal principle ?

1083 23. Is (a) each unit derived from the great and the small, equalized, or (4) one from the small, another from the great? If (6), then (a) the elements are not all present in everything ; (8) the units are not without difference in nature; (y) what of the odd unit in 3? Perhaps this is why they make the One itself occupy the middle place in odd numbers.

30. If (2), then (2) How will 2 be a single entity? How will it differ from a unit? (8) The unit is prior to the two and therefore must be an Idea of an Idea. And it must have been generated before the two. From what, then? Not from the indefinite dyad, for this makes not units but twos.

(2) How many tdeal numbers are there P

36. Number must be either infinite or finite, if it is self-subsistent. But (a) it cannot be infinite. For (a) infinite number is neither odd nor even, but the generation of numbers whether by addition or by multiplication is always either of odd or of even numbers.

1084* 7. (8) If every Idea is an Idea of something, and the numbers are Ideas, infinite number will be an Idea of something, which is neither possible on their theory nor reasonable in itself.‘

ro. (4) If number is finite, how far does the series go? They should tell us both how far it goes, and why it goes just so far. If it stops at 10, then (a) the Forms will soon run short. E.g. the kinds of animal will exceed the numbers up to ro.

18. (8) If the number 3 is the Idea of man, then all the other threes will be Ideas of man, or at any rate men ; thus there will be an infinite number of men.

21. (y) If the smaller number is a part of the greater when composed of the addible units contained in a single number, then if the. horse is 4 and man is 2, man will be a part of the horse.

25. (6) It is absurd that there should be an Idea of ro and not of rr.

27. (e) There are, and come to be, things of which there are not Forms. The Forms, then, are not the causal agencies.

2g. (¢) It is absurd if the number-series up to ro is more of an entity than 10, though never generated asa unity. Yet they treat the series up to ro as a complete number. At least they generate the

M. 8. 1083>— 9. 1085? 443

succeeding entities, the void, proportion, the odd, &c., within the series up to 10, assigning some to the first principles, others to the numbers. Further, they identify spatial magnitudes (lines, &c.) with numbers short of ro.

(3) What ts the nature of the One?

» 2g. If number is self-subsistent, is 1, or 2, 3, &c., prior? Inasmuch as the number is composite, the one is prior ; inasmuch as the universal or form is prior, the number is prior, being to the units as form to matter.

47. The right angle is in a sense prior to the acute, viz. in definition and because it is determinate ; the acute angle is in a sense prior, because it is a part of the right angle. The acute angle is prior as matter; the right angle which is the union of form and matter is prior because nearer to the form.

13. How, then, is the One a first principle? ‘ Because it is indivi- sible.’ But both the universal and the particular or element are indivisible. ‘They are first principles in different senses, however; the former is first in definition, the latter in time. :

18. They make the One a first principle in both ways. But this is impossible; it cannot have the primariness both of form and of ‘matter. Both the number and the unit are in a sense one, but if the number is actually one (not a mere aggregate), the units exist only potentially. .

23. The cause of the mistake is that they were inquiring from two points of view, that of mathematics and that of general definitions ; from the former they treated the One (i.e. the first principle) as a point, merely divested of position, a minimal material part analogous to the atoms, while from the latter they treated the unity which is predicated of each number as a formal element in the number. These characters, however, cannot belong to the same thing.

32. But if the One must only be without position, differing from the unit merely by being a first principle, and the number 2 is divisible while the unit is not, the unit is liker the One than the number 2 is, and therefore each unit in 2 is prior to 2. But they generate the number 2 first.

1085* 1. Further, if the number 2 is one thing and the number 3 is one thing, they make, together, a 2. What, then, is the origin of this 2?

3. Does the number 2, or one of the units in it, come next after 1?

444 COMMENTARY

(4) Défficulties about the first principles of geometrical objects.

7. Similar difficulties arise about the genera posterior to number— the line, the plane, the solid. (a) Some derive them from the kinds of great and small, lines from the long and short;splanes from the broad and narrow, solids from the deep and shallow. There is a difference of opinion about the formal principle answering to the One.

‘14. These views involve many impossible results. (i) Lines, planes, and solids are cut off from one another, unless their first principles go together so that the broad and narrow is also long and short (in which case the plane would be a line and the solid a plane).

20. (ii) The same difficulty arises as with regard to number ; long, short, &c., are atirzbudes of spatial magnitude, not the ma/ter of it, any more than straight and curved are.

(23. We may put the same difficulty that arises with regard to species when we posit the existence of universals, viz. whether it is ‘animal’ itself or some other ‘animal’ that is present in a particular kind of animal. Similarly if the One and the numbers are self- subsistent, is the unit which we recognize in a number the One itself ?)

gi. (4) Others derive magnitudes from the point (which is akin to the One) and an element akin to plurality. The same difficulties follow.

Similarly if the One and the numbers are self- subsistent, is the unit which we recognize in a number the One itself ?)

gi. (4) Others derive magnitudes from the point (which is akin to the One) and an element akin to plurality. The same difficulties follow.

35. For (i) if the matter is-one, line, plane, and solid will be the same ; (ii) if it is different, the matters either go together or not, so that the plane either will not contain a line or will be a line.

(5) Lhe difficulty of generating numbers and spatial magnitudes ~ as the Platonists generate them.

b4. The difficulties which attend the great and small as material principles of number, attend plurality also if this be taken as the. material principle (Speusippus). One thinker generates number from the plurality which is universally predicated, the other generates it from a particular plurality, viz. the first (the dyad). (@) In both cases we may ask whether the elements are united by mixture, position, fusion, generation, &c.

12. (4) Each unit must be composed of the One and either plurality or a part of plurality. Now the unit, being indivisible, cannot be a plurality, while if its material element be a part of plurality, (a) each of the parts must be indivisible, and it is not, as they say, plurality, but

M. 8. 1083) 23 445

a part of it, that is the material principle ; (8) number is being derived from a plurality of indivisibles, i.e. from another number.

23. (c) We may inquire with regard to these thinkers too, whether that number is infinite or finite. There was a finite plurality from which the finite units were derived, and there is another ‘ plurality itself’ which is infinite plurality. Which kind. of plurality is the first principle?

27. (d) Similarly (cf. * 32-34) a point cannot be derived from the ‘point itself’ and an interval, nor from the ‘ point itself’ and an indi- visible part of an interval ; for spatial magnitudes are not, like number, composed of indivisibles.

SUMMING UP OF CRITICISM OF IDEAL NUMBERS ° (ch. 9. 1085 3410868 18).

1085” 34. These objections show that number and spatial magni- tudes are not self-subsistent, as is shown also by the diversity of views about numbers, (1) Those who believed only in the objects of mathe- matics (Speusippus) did so because they saw the difficulties about the Ideas.

1086? 5. (2) Those who thought of the Ideas as numbers, and did not see how, if the first principles are what they suppose them to be, mathematical number could exist apart from ideal number (Xeno- crates), made them the same in name, but really did away with mathematical number.

11. (3) The first thinker who held that Forms existed and were numbers, and that mathematical objects existed (Plato), naturally separated them.

13. All are partly right and (as their mutual contradictions show) partly wrong. Their error springs from the wrongness of their assumptions.

11. (3) The first thinker who held that Forms existed and were numbers, and that mathematical objects existed (Plato), naturally separated them.

13. All are partly right and (as their mutual contradictions show) partly wrong. Their error springs from the wrongness of their assumptions.

1083” 23—1085? 34. So far Aristotle has distinguished the various modes of conceiving numbers as substantial entities, and has criticized them separately. Now he attacks the general view which was common to the Pythagoreans and the Platonists, no longer drawing the distinc- tions drawn in 1080 15—1083? 19. His criticisms from now onwards may best be classified not according to the thinkers attacked but according to the subjects on which he attacks the whole of the two schools. These fall, as Bz. has pointed out, into five groups.

(1) 1083>23-36. How are the numbers produced from the material principle ?

(2) 1083” 36—1084" 2. How many ideal numbers are there ?

446 COMMENTARY

(3) 1084 2—-10852 7. What is the nature of the One?

(4) 1085° 7—- 4. On the principles of geometrical objects.

(5) 1085» 4-34. On the difficulty of generating numbers from unity and multitude, and spatial magnitudes from similar principles.

23. Aristotle begins with a difficulty arising out of Plato’s (cf. 1081 24) description of the units in the ideal two as produced through the equalization of the great and small by the One. Aristotle appears, as Bz. points out, to have misconceived the nature of the Platonic material principle. It was no doubt conceived as a principle which was both great and small; i.e., it was indeterminate quantity. But Aristotle habitually speaks of the great and /he small as if they were two distinct principles, and his argument here turns entirely on this point. We may note a significant looseness in Aristotle’s way of referring to the principle. Sometimes (and, we must suppose, more correctly) it is 7d peya Kal puxpor, e.g. B. 998 10, M. 1083> 32, 10852 12, N. 1087» 8. At other times it is 76 peya Kal 76 palkpor, @.g. A. 987» 20, 988 26, M. 1083? 27, 10852 9, N. 1087 11, 14, 16, and this is what the argument here requires.

28-30. ‘ Further, what account can the Platonists give of the units in the ideal Three? One of them is an odd unit and cannot be assigned to the great or to the small (since these produce only one unit each); which is perhaps why they make the ideal One the middle unit in odd numbers.’ For the fact that they did so cf. Diels, Vorsokr.’ 270. 18. And why should they not? we might ask. Aristotle’s answer would doubtless be that if they make the One a purely formative principle in the case of even numbers, they have no right to make it one of the material elements of odd numbers. We can hardly suppose, however, that they did this ; it is more likely that they represented the One as a sort of arbiter (cf. Al. 767. 17 tv THs povddos peciteiav) between the tendencies to excess and to defect.

We can hardly suppose, however, that they did this ; it is more likely that they represented the One as a sort of arbiter (cf. Al. 767. 17 tv THs povddos peciteiav) between the tendencies to excess and to defect.

30-32. ‘If each of the units in the ideal Two comes from both the great and the small, these being equalized, how will the ideal Two be a single entity composed of the great and the small? Or how will it differ from one of its units?’, sc. if each of the units turns out to be what they describe the ideal Two as being, viz. what is produced by the co-operation of the One and _ the-great-and-the-small (which dvorows jv |. 36).

36. ddpiotos Suds. Robin quotes this as one of the few passages definitely relating to Plato in which this term is used. The other passages he cites are N. 1088815, 10915, besides various places in later writers (Robin, 643-5).

37. xwptotov yap morodor. Aristotle holds that if you regard number as a separately existing substance, you have to say that it actually is finite or that it actually is infinite, and both alternatives are impossible ; he believes himself to escape the difficulty by holding that number does not exist as something given for all time, but only in the process of counting, and that it is potentially infinite in the sense that, however high a number has been counted, a higher can be counted. Acdrerau

M. 8. 10835 23 — 1084? Io 447

Suvdper eivar TO dreipov Phys, 206% 18,133 ovrws orl 7d dzreipov, TO det GAXOo Kat GAA AapBaverGar 206% 27: it is not a rode Tu like a man or a house but like a day or a contest, whose being is not that of a substance but is always in course of destruction or generation.

10842 4-7. The peculiar words wimrew, éumirrew (not elsewhere found in Aristotle, nor, perhaps, in other authors, in this connexion) are probably Academic terms to express the mode of generation of numbers. ‘There are three cases:

(1) By addition (dt pev) of 1 to an even number an odd number is produced.

(2) By multiplication (dt dé) (z) of 1 by 2 a power of 2 is pro- duced,

(4) of an even number by an odd number, an even number not a power of 2 is produced.

eis TO ev is apparently to be supplied with éuaurrovays, being under- stood from 6 ad’ évos durdAacalopevos, while with di 8& rév wepurrav we must supply in thought the eis tov dptiov of ll. 4,5. The main opposition is that between generation of numbers by addition and by multiplication, the latter being subdivided. Accordingly Aristotle says Gd d€ THS ev Svados, Meaning to continue with ray dé repirtav. But by an oversight he continues with wot d¢ tév qwepittav.

Alexander offers a more elaborate classification, which doubtless preserves some real information about the Pythagorean and Platonic arithmetic (cf. Heath, Gk. Math. i. 71-74). According to him every genesis of number is

(1) dpridkis dpa (powers of 2, = (2 a) above), or

(2) dpriomépiacos (products of an odd number and 2), or

Heath, Gk. Math. i. 71-74). According to him every genesis of number is

(1) dpridkis dpa (powers of 2, = (2 a) above), or

(2) dpriomépiacos (products of an odd number and 2), or

(3) mepuroaprios (products of an odd number and 4 or a higher power of 2), or

(4) apy kal dovvberos (prime numbers), or

(5) Sevrépa kat avvOeros (composite odd numbers), or

(6) kal?’ éavrnv pev devrépa Kat ovvOeros mpos adAov 8é ‘pity Ka dovvOeros (pairs of composite numbers which are prime to one another). ;

Alexander supposes that (1), (2 2), and (2 2) of Aristotle’s classifica- tion are identical with (4), (1), and (2) of his own, and that Aristotle omits the rest dia Bpaxvdoyiay (769. 21). But it is evident that a com- plete classification is necessary to Aristotle’s purpose. Aristotle’s (1) includes Alexander’s (4) and (5); his (2 4) includes Alexander’s (2) and (3); and Alexander’s (6) has no proper place in the classification, since it depends on a relation between two numbers, not on a quality of one. -

Q. ote Kata tiv Odow évBdxeTat, i.e. it is incompatible with the notion of the Idea as a principle of limit; ote kata Aédyoy, i. e. it is unreasonable in itself, since it implies the existence of an actual infinite.

10, tdtrovci y oltw tds iS€as. The manuscript reading (rérrovor 5 otrw ras ideas) can hardly mean, as Alexander supposes, ‘ but they

448 COMMENTARY

limit the series of ideal numbers to 10’. Since this is not mentioned till 1. 12, it cannot be what otrw means here. The word would have to refer to 1, 7, and mean ‘but they conceive of the Ideas as Ideas of something, and of the numbers as being Ideas’. Schwegler’s emenda- tion is undoubtedly right ; raérrovoi y' crv. = ‘i.e. for those who arrange the Ideas as they do’, i.e. identifying each Idea with a finite number.

-12, ei péxpe tis Sexddos 6 dpiOuds. Cf. ll. 25-34, N. 1088) 10, A. 1073219 ot A€yovtes ideas wept... THY GpiOpGv dre pev Os Tept dmeipwy A€yovow Ste dé ds pexpr THS dexddos dpirpevwv. In Phys. -206> 32 the doctrine is ascribed to Plato by name: péxpu yap dexados move’ Tov dpiOudy. Speusippus is probably also referred to (ch Z. 1028> 21 n.). The origin of the view is of course to be found in the fact that the Greeks used a decimal system and in the reverence paid by the Pythagoreans to the number 10; cf. A. 986*8 and Philolaus fr. rr Diels. to was the sum of the first four numbers, the terpaxtvs, Which had a special significance because they were the principles of the point, the straight line, the triangle, and the tetra- hedron respectively.

15. Bz. (dnd. Ar. 12575) takes aité as predicate ; ‘each number up to 10 is a thing-itself (an Idea)’; cf. Zop. 162° 28. It seems better to take aird Exaoros dpiOds together = 6 cidytixds apiOuds, as Alexander does (770. 23), and péxps dexddos as predicate. atrd éxacros apiOpds = ‘the series of numbers which are the several things-themselves (the Ideas of the several things)’. For atré exaoros cf. Top. 162° 24, £. NV. 1096? 35.

23), and péxps dexddos as predicate. atrd éxacros apiOpds = ‘the series of numbers which are the several things-themselves (the Ideas of the several things)’. For atré exaoros cf. Top. 162° 24, £. NV. 1096? 35.

16. tav év tovTois dpOuav is usually interpreted as ‘the numbers within ‘these limits’, i.e. between 1 and ro. But on this view what is the point of dAX’ pus (1. 17)? That suggests that in spite of there being a /arge variety of numbers to choose the Ideas of different kinds of animals from, there would not be enough. Now the notion of numbers contained in other numbers is clearly in Aristotle’s mind (cf. Il. 18, 19 and notes) and is expressed similarly by év. May it not be that Aristotle uses év rovrous in a double sense? ‘The Idea of horse © must be one of the numbers contained in these, i.e. either one of the numbers between 1 and ro, or one of the numbers contained in those between 1 and 10,’

18-21. There is little to be said for Christ’s transposition of this section to]. 25. ovrws refers quite as naturally to |. 14 as it would to 1. 22 (6 ek rév ovpBAyrov povddurv).

18. at adda tpiddes. Alexander explains this (770. 30) as ai tpuades THs avtoeEddos Kal trav NowrHv, and similarly Bz. thinks the 3’s included in the other ideal numbers (cf. 10824 2, 28, » 13) are meant. Against this Robin argues (p. 351, n. 7) that on the view here criticized the ideal numbers are limited to ten, and the ‘ other 3’s’ in these will be only 14 in number (1 in 4, 1 in 5, 2 in 6, 2 in 7, 2 in 8, 3 ing, 3 in 10), so that the conclusion depo. éoovrar avOpwrot (1. 20) will not follow. He therefore supposes Aristotle to be now taking account of mathematical numbers, which are not limited to 10, and saying that

M. 8. 10842 12-30 449

each 3 contained in them, since it is like the ideal 3, will be some sort -of a man, even if not an ideal man. We may either suppose this, or suppose Aristotle to be taking account of a further complication within the series of the ideal numbers. Besides the 14 3’s of which Robin takes account, there will be the 3 which is in the 4 which is in the 5, the 3 in the 4 which is in the 6, the 3 in the 5 which is in the 6, the 3 in the 4 in the 5 in the 6, &c. A list which may fairly be called dreipov is thus produced.

Besides the 14 3’s of which Robin takes account, there will be the 3 which is in the 4 which is in the 5, the 3 in the 4 which is in the 6, the 3 in the 5 which is in the 6, the 3 in the 4 in the 5 in the 6, &c. A list which may fairly be called dreipov is thus produced.

IQ. oporar yap at év toils adtois dpiOpots. Bz. supposes idéar to be the noun implied by ai, and takes the phrase to mean ‘the Ideas con- sisting in identical numbers’. But zpuddes is the only word that can be supplied ; and further Bz.’s interpretation assumes that the dAdo tpuddes are Ideas, which Aristotle expressly leaves uncertain (Il. 20, 21). It seems better to suppose, with Robin (p. 352), that Aristotle means that the 3 which is in the 4 itself is like the 3 which is in the 4 which is in the 6, and the 3 which is in the 6 itself is like the 3 which is in the 6 which is in the 7 itself, and so on. Yet even this interpreta- tion is not quite satisfactory, since to justify ai dAAa (ad/ the other) tpiddes Aristotle ought also to mean that the 3 in the 4 itself is like the 3 in the 6 itself. But probably Aristotle overlooked this point.

20-21. ‘Ifeach 3 is an Idea, each of the numbers will be Man Him- self.’

25. The assignment of numbers to the different Ideas by Aristotle is arbitrary ; itis quite unnecessary to read tpids for duds with Christ to bring the sentence into conformity with Jl. 14, 18.

27-29. Bz. thinks this is an interpolation, belonging to the criticism not of ideal numbers but of Ideas in general (cf. 1080%2-8). The passage is, however, interpreted by Alexander and Syrianus without any suspicion of its spuriousness, and it seems quite possible to connect it with what precedes, if we interpret «id as meaning ideal numbers, which in view of the repeated identification of Ideas with numbers we are entitled to do. Aristotle has just referred (il. 25-27) to the arbitrary assertion of the existence of Ideas of numbers up to ro, and the arbitrary denial of their existence beyond that point. Here he points to a similarly arbitrary distinction. ‘Forms are introduced to explain being and becoming.” Yet some things (negations 10794 9, relations 1079° 12, manufactured objects 1080 5) are and become with- out being supposed to have Forms answering tothem. Why have they not Forms? ‘The fact that the Platonists can dispense with Forms in these cases shows that Forms are not the causes of being and becoming.’

30. padddv tr ov. It seems pretty clear that Alexander and Syrianus had the same reading as our manuscripts. Alexander interprets it as meaning kal radra 70 ev Kar’ avrovs paAdév Tu ov KTA.; SO also Syrianus (Alexander may have read in the next clause xa/ for kairo). Bz.’s proposal to read «i 6 dpuOpos prexpr THs Sexddos, parAdv Te dv Td Ev Kal eldos xtA. has not the authority of the Greek commentators; and the accusative absolute is not probable. The interpretations of Alexa: and Syrianus do not commend themselves. According to Alexande

2573-2 Gre:

Bz.’s proposal to read «i 6 dpuOpos prexpr THs Sexddos, parAdv Te dv Td Ev Kal eldos xtA. has not the authority of the Greek commentators; and the accusative absolute is not probable. The interpretations of Alexa: and Syrianus do not commend themselves. According to Alexande

2573-2 Gre:

450 COMMENTARY

argument is: ‘If the One is both the Form of the ro and ungenerated, while the ro has come into being, there will be an 11 whose Form is the One and whose matter'is the decad’, According to Syrianus the One in question is the One which is the formal principle of number, and what it is in relation to all the numbers, the ideal ro is in relation to the other tens, the hundreds, and the thousands, for which reason it was called Sevrepwdovpéva povas. The meaning seems to be: ‘Further, it is paradoxical if the number series up to ro is more of an entity and a Form than the ro itself; to this we may object that there is no generation of the series as a unity, while there is of the 10. Yet they try to speak as if the number series up to 10 were complete’, Certain Platonists may have said something (we do not know what) to justify Aristotle in describing them as holding the series up to ro to be more of an entity than the 10 itself; once grant this and Aristotle’s objection becomes plain. He objects that, as the Platonic theory only describes the origin of the numbers severally and not of the series ws évds, the series cannot form a true entity or Form.

32. Ta émdpeva, ‘the derivative entities’.

He objects that, as the Platonic theory only describes the origin of the numbers severally and not of the series ws évds, the series cannot form a true entity or Form.

32. Ta émdpeva, ‘the derivative entities’.

33. To kevov kT. Alexander explains that the space between the even numbers 2, 4, 6, 8, or again between the odd numbers 3, 5, 7, 9 was the Idea or pattern of the void (this may be an inference from Phys. 213° 24 70 yap kevov duopilew thy piow airar, sc. Tov apiOpar, but it is of the Pythagoreans that Aristotle says this); that ‘2, 4, (6), 8’ was the pattern of arithmetical and ‘2, 3, 6, 9’ the pattern of geometrical proportion; that the number 1 was the Idea of oddness ; while movement and good were derived from the One, rest and evil from the indefinite dyad. Thus he takes ra dAAa (1. 35) to refer to ro Kevov, THY dvaoylav, TO mepitTov, TA GAAa Ta ToLadTa. On the other hand Theophrastus (JZef, 312. 18—313. 3 Br. = fr. xii. 11 fin., 12 Wimm.) says that the Platonists derived place, she vord, the infinite from the indefinite dyad, and certain other things, e.g. soul, from the numbers and the One. Robin accordingly (p. 317) takes 70 Kevov, dvadoyia, To mepitrév, as well as xivyows, ordows, dyabdv, Kakov to have been derived from the dpyai (the One and the indefinite dyad), and thinks that 7a dAAa (1. 35) is left here without illustration but means what Theophrastus describes as yy) kal GAN drra. With Theophrastus’ statement that the void was derived from the indefinite dyad cf. Phys. 209> 11 IAdrov tiv vAnv kal thy xdpav taiTd dyow etva. Zhe odd is actually described in 1. 36 as identified by the Platonists with one of the dpyai, the One, In this the Platonists followed the Pythagoreans, who described the formal principle indifferently as the limit and the odd. The best explanation of the reference to proportion is furnished by Syrianus, who points out that instances of all the three fundamental évaAoyia. ean be found without going beyond the number ro: arithmetical dvaAoyia, e.g. 1, 2, 33 geometrical, e.g. 1, 2,4; harmonic, e.g. 2, 3, 6. For the derivation of movement from the indefinite dyad cf. K. 1066 11, where we are told that some thinkers describe movement as érepéryra Kal dvicdryta Kal Td

M. 8. 10842 32 — 1084> 7 451

pa ov (which = 70. péya Kal 7d puxpov Phys. 1927), and A. 992? 7. Eudemus also says that Plato identified movement with the great and small (ap. Simpl. PAys. 431. 6, 13, p. 41. 18, 42. 8 Spengel). For the reference of good and evel to the One and the indefinite dyad respectively cf. A. 9884 14.

36-37. ‘ And so they identify the odd with the One (a principle, not a number); for if oddness had depended on the first odd numéer, how would 5 (which according to the theory has not the ideal 3 in it) be odd?’ To say that the number 3 is the principle of oddness would imply deriving 5 from the union of 2 and 3, whereas according to the Platonic view itis otherwise derived.

The force of 80 seems to be this: The Platonists derived all derivative entities either from the first principles or from the numbers up to 10. Now oddness could not be derived from a number such as 3, because this would not explain the oddness of any other number (the numbers being supposed independent of each other) ; sherefore it had to be derived from one of the principles, and of the two the One rather than the indefinite dyad was indicated for the purpose.

For the force of év rq rpiads cf. Eucken, Sprachgebrauch d. Ar. pie2as

37-b 2. éru... SexdSos, ‘ Further, magnitudes and the like extend, they say, only up to a certain point, e.g. there is the first or indivi- sible line, then the two, &c.; these entities also extend only up to ro.’ Aristotle is giving a further ground for his statement that the Pla- tonists treat 10 as the perfect or complete number (I. 31). They recognize first the primary or indivisible line (their substitute for the ‘point’ of geometrical theory, A. 992% 22). mpdérn ypappi) dropos is difficult, and it seems best to read 4} rpérn ypayyn, 4 dropos. (Alterna- tively we might omit % after otov as Schwegler proposes, and translate ‘first comes the indivisible line’; but 7 is more likely to have been omitted after zpary than to have been inserted after ofov.) I know of no exact parallel to zpwry ypaypy in this sense, but in A. 9924 21 the indivisible line is called dpy% ypappys, and 4 te dpxi mpGrov Kal 70 mpa@tov dpyyn, Top, 121? 9.

Certain Platonists (A. 992°21, De An. 404» 16-24 suggest that Plato himself was among them, while a comparison with N. 1090 20- 32 suggests that Xenocrates also is referred to) connected the point or indivisible line with the number 1, the line with 2, the plane with 3, the solid with 4 (N. rogob22, Z. 1036514, H. 1043%33); and I+24+3+4= Io.

b 4-13. The discussion whether the One or number is prior may be compared with the discussion in Z. 10, 11, where the same illustration (the right and acute angles) is used (1034> 28, 10356, 1036% 14). The present passage seems to be written without any reference to the previous one.

7. 6. dprotar Kat TO Adyw. Two reasons for the priority of the right angle are given, (1) that it is definite, while the acute angle may be of any size between 0° and 90°, and (2) that it is involved in the

Gea

452 COMMENTARY

definition of the acute angle while the acute angle is not involved in zs definition.

12, 76 dpe, i.e. what is elsewhere called 76 é& doty (A. 1071" 9), or 76 ovvdpdw (H. 1043%22). 6 dpiOuds, which is here treated as a compound of form and matter, was in 1. 6 described as form.

14-15. The list of three things that are indivisible—the universal, the particular (for the meaning of 76 ért pépous cf. Meteor. 359” 30, lV. E. 11074 30), and the element—is somewhat embarrassing, since in the passage as a whole only two things are opposed to each other (e. g. 7d pev 15, 76 5€ 16, worépws 16). Alexander seems not to have read kat 7d oroxetov, but it is 7d emt pépovs that could be best dis- pensed with, since it is the opposition of universal or form to element, not to particular, that is insisted on through the greater part of the passage (cf. ll. 4, 5; 19, 20). At one point, indeed (Il. 9-12), the opposition of number to one is seen to be more truly that of whole to element ; and the whole (76 ddov To ek THs TAns Kal Tod eidovs) = the particular (76 éwt pépovs) ; but for the most part number is treated as a universal. In fact the relations of whole and part, and of universal and particular, are not kept sufficiently distinct.

The difficulty may be escaped in various ways. (1) We might read 7a dé in 1. 16 and take it to refer to both the particular and the element, 7d pev referring to the universal. (2) We might suppose ro émt yr€povs to be added for the sake of completeness though it does not enter into the argument and is forthwith ignored. (3) We might suppose that kat 7d wrorxetov is explicative of 7d ét pepovs. The mention of 70 KaOdAov, we may suppose, led Aristotle to its natural opposite 7d él yépovs, which elsewhere means the particular, but, the relations of whole and part and of universal and particular being here confused, Aristotle uses 76 éi pepovs in the sense of ‘part’ and explains his usage by adding kai 76 orouyetov. This use of ért pépovs would be to some extent in line with the uses of xara pépos, ava pépos, Tapa pepos, év pépe quoted in Znd. Ar. 455” 3~23.—Of these possibilities the last is, in view of the dichotomy which pervades the passage, the most probable.

This use of ért pépovs would be to some extent in line with the uses of xara pépos, ava pépos, Tapa pepos, év pépe quoted in Znd. Ar. 455” 3~23.—Of these possibilities the last is, in view of the dichotomy which pervades the passage, the most probable.

15-16. ddXG tpdtrov Gov kth, An opposition of ‘indivisible in Aéyos’ and ‘indivisible in time’ would be quite unparalleled in Aristotle, and no reasonable meaning can be attached to it. Alexander explains that the universal is indivisible in Adyos because ‘ footed two-footed animal’ is not divisible into other Adyou and eidy as ‘animal’ is into ‘man’ and ‘horse ’—which is evidently nonsense ; and that the particular is indivisible in time because my form is not prior in time to me— which, besides interpreting 76 émi pépovs in a sense which we have seen reason to doubt, is a very unnatural interpretation of ‘indivisible in time’. Nor does any better interpretation of this last phrase seem possible. We are driven, then, to suppose that rpomov dAXov KTAi does not qualify ‘indivisible’. Ifwith Bekker we read a full stop before dAAd, we may take tpdrov addAov as qualifying dpyy. ‘The One is

M. 8. 1084» 12-32 "453

said to be dpxy because it is indivisible. But the universal as well as the element is indivisible. Yes, but their consequent primariness is of different kinds.’ We thus get the ordinary opposition of zpdérepov Aoyw and xpovw, for which cf. ll. 12, 13, Z. 1028%32, 1038 27, @. 1049 11, Phys. 265% 22. Accordingly in]. 16 Aristotle asks not ‘in which sense is the One indivisible?’ but ‘in which sense is the One apxn Le

18. Kat ckatépa, pia may mean (1), as Alexander says, ‘ and each of these is one and the same with itself’. I.e. these words may simply emphasize the fact that one single thing may be in one sense prior, in another posterior, to another single thing. But it seems more likely (2) that these words fit into the argument as follows: In which sense is the One dpxyn? The right angle is prior to the acute angle, and in another sense the acute angle is prior to the right angle, and each of these is one (s¢.the acute angle is one as an element is one, and the right angle is one as a whole—here confused with a universal—is one). |The Platonists accordingly (84) make the One primary in both senses, in time and in Aéyos. But this is impossible ; for ‘One’ is here used ambiguously— it is what is one, as a form or essence (= universal) is one, that is primary xara Adyov, but it is what is one as a part, or as matter, that is primary kata xpovov.

But this is impossible ; for ‘One’ is here used ambiguously— it is what is one, as a form or essence (= universal) is one, that is primary xara Adyov, but it is what is one as a part, or as matter, that is primary kata xpovov.

20-24. éott ydp mws ktd. ‘For each of the two (the unit and the number) is one in a certain sense—in /rwth, if the number is not a mere aggregate but a unity consisting of units qualitatively distinct from those of any other number’ (cf. 10808 15-35), ‘each of its two units exists’ (and is one) ‘only potentially, not actually’ (while the number exists, and is one, actually). ‘This isthe truth, and the cause of the error into which the Platonists fell is that’ &c.

22. For owpds in this sense cf. Z. 1040? 9, 1041 12, H. 1044% 4, 1045° 9.

25. €k Tov Adywy Tov Ka8ddov. The Platonic method of inquiry is described similarly in A. 98731, ©. 105035, A. 10697 28, N. 1087) ar,

26. 16 év kal thy dpxyv, ‘the One, that is, the first principle’. The Platonists, Aristotle means, treated the One which was the formal principle of number as being at the same time to number what the point is to the line, viz. a material principle.

4 yap povas ottypy AWetds eotw. Cf. the definition of the point as povas Gow éxovoa De An. 40926, A. 1016” 25 n.

27. €tepot ties, the Atomists.

2g. It is evidently not the unit’s turning out to be matter and its turning out to be prior to the two that are meant to be described as dma, but its turning cut to be prior and its turning out to be posterior to the two, so thata commais wanted after dpu0yav. Cf. Robin, p. 396, who, however, puts a full stop after dpub.av.

30-32. 51d SE... ENeyov. ‘ But owing to the universal nature of their inquiries they treated the unity which can be predicated of every number as being in this way too a part’, sc. as a formal part

454 COMMENTARY

or element in the definition predicable of each number, as well as a material part of it. For this line of thought about 76 év, which led the Platonists to treat it as the very essence of real things, cf. B. 996 4, 998 17, 10017 4, 20, I. 10539, 20, K. 1059 27, 1060? 3.

32. Taira 8°... bmdpyewv, ‘but one thing cannot be at the same time a material and a formal element in one other thing’. Cf. 1. 19.

B. 996 4, 998 17, 10017 4, 20, I. 10539, 20, K. 1059 27, 1060? 3.

32. Taira 8°... bmdpyewv, ‘but one thing cannot be at the same time a material and a formal element in one other thing’. Cf. 1. 19.

32-34. ei S¢... apy. ‘ But if the One itself must only be without position (for it differs in no respect except in that it is a first principle),’ What the One differs from only by being a first principle is the wef; but its being without position distinguishes it from the pozn (I. 26). Thus the two clauses have not any such connexion as ydp indicates, and can hardly be right as they stand. Alexander feels no difficulty, but gives an impossible interpretation; and Bz’.s interpretation, which takes aerov as if it could mean dpyixdy, does nothing to meet the difficulty. The proposed emendations of dOerov (ddvaiperov Schwegler, dovvOerov Bywater) would give a satisfactory sense if it were not for pdvov, but in the presence of povov are unsatisfactory. Two suggestions may be made. (tr) It is just possible that a@eroy may be used in a new sense. Each unit has, on the Platonic view, a setting or Oéc1s in some parti- cular number ; all that distinguishes the One which is the formal prin- ciple of number is that it has no such particular setting, that it is aerov. It would not be unlike Aristotle to use dOeros thus in a different sense from that which it bore in l. 27, but the suggested use of d@eros is apparently without parallel. (2) We might suppose povaducoy to have been corrupted into pdvoy ddiov, and this to have been altered through a reminiscence of ]. 27 into povoy aberov.

33-34. The use of od0evi.. . 4 for otfevi dAdw... 7 OF OVMeL... aXX’ 7 is irregular, but cf. Kihner, ii. 2. §540, Anm. 4.

1085* 1-2. The argument is not, as Bz. says, the same as that in 1081 25-35. It is simply this: If one thing added to another always makes a two, the two itself and the three itself make a two, and a two of whose generation the Platonists can give no account. They cannot derive it from the One and the indefinite dyad, since what these originate is the two itself, the three itself, and so on.

3. ab pev odk oti, cf. 10822 20, Phys. 227220. Only those things touch one another ay ra dxpa dua 226 23, so that things which have not extent, such as units or numbers, cannot touch, though they can be successive. év rots dpufmots is ambiguous ; Aristotle means that there is not contact but only succession, both as between units in a number (1. 4) and as between numbers (I. 6).

év rots dpufmots is ambiguous ; Aristotle means that there is not contact but only succession, both as between units in a number (1. 4) and as between numbers (I. 6).

4-5. oowy .. . tpidd. might be taken either with what precedes or with what follows. ‘The meaning may be (1) 1o 8 éeéqs éorw ev Tals povacw dowv pH eore petagd, Or (2) worepov at povddes, dowv py ore petagv, epeéjs. In either case 7 7H Tpiad. is embarrassing, since it is only the units in 2 that Aristotle goes on to speak of; but it is specially embarrassing if dowy «rd. be taken as in (2). Therefore (1) seems preferable. Then ai év 77 dudé. is to be understood as the subject of epeéqs (ior) in |. 5.

M. 8. 1084> 32 —g. 1085414 455

6. Bz. reads r@ ebe&fs and claims the authority of Alexander. But it is not clear what Alexander read, so that it seems better to retain the manuscript reading trav édeéjs, which gives a good sense. Aristotle does not here state the objections which follow if (1) the units, or one of the units, in two, or (2) two itself, are to succeed the number one directly. The objection to (1) is that then there is a two (composed of the number one + one of the units in two) before there is the number two itself (cf. 10818 32). The objection to (2) is that the first unit in two, being prior to the second unit, should be prior to the two composed of them (10818 25~27),

7. tav botepov yevav Tod dpOyod, ‘the kinds posterior to number’. These are also called ra wera tods dpiOuovs A. 99213, ra pera Tas ideas M. 1080» 25, For the priority of numbers to geometrical objects cf, A. 982226, Z. 1028" 21 n.

Q. ot pev ydp. érepor d¢ does not come till 1. 32. The Platonic opinions mentioned regarding the material principle of spatial magni- tudes are

(1) That it is the various kinds of the great and the small (108529, A. 992%11, N. 1090537). Some, if we may believe Aristotle, did not distinguish the great and the small which is the material principle of number from that which is the material principle of spatial magnitudes (B. roo1» 19). Al. 228. 10, Asc. 207. 37, Syr. 48. 20 think Plato himself is here referred to, and this may well be so. Others divided the great and small into the many and few, which is the épy7 of number, and the long and short, the broad and narrow, the deep and shallow, which are the dpxaé of spatial magnitudes (N. 1089? 11).

(2) That it is something analogous to 7A7Gos, i.e. something which is to spatial magnitudes what multitude is to numbers (10854 33). wAnGos is mentioned in various places as the material principle of number according to some Platonists ( 5, N. 10876, 27, 1091 31, 10928 28, 35). A comparison of 1091) 30-35 with 10914 29-» 3, and with A. 1072 30 (where he is mentioned by name), makes it pretty certain that Speusippus is the thinker referred to. Cf. Al. 823. 12. Plut. De An. Procr.ii, 1, 2. 1012 DE, ascribes the view to Xenocrates, but his testimony is of less worth.

A comparison of 1091) 30-35 with 10914 29-» 3, and with A. 1072 30 (where he is mentioned by name), makes it pretty certain that Speusippus is the thinker referred to. Cf. Al. 823. 12. Plut. De An. Procr.ii, 1, 2. 1012 DE, ascribes the view to Xenocrates, but his testimony is of less worth.

13-14. ‘As regards the principle in such objects which answers to the One (i.e. which is for geometrical objects what the One is for numbers), different thinkers hold different views.’ Al. 777. 17 distinguishes two views. (1) Some thought that the ideal numbers were the forms of geometrical objects—two the form of the line, three of the plane, four of the solid. (2) Others thought that the One was their form. Both views are suggested in B. roo1? 24.

(1) This view is mentioned in N. 1ogo} 22, Z. 103613. It may be that the holder of this view was Xenocrates, for in Z. 1028» 24, after saying that Speusippus severed the various classes of being from each other, Aristotle continues with the words évou dé ra pev td Kat rovs dpOpors Tiv aitny exew dact pic (this shows that Xenocrates is

456 COMMENTARY

in question, cf. M. 1076? 20 n.), 7a. dé dAAa exomeva, ypappas Kat eizeda., péxpt pos THY TOD otpavod ovciay Kat Ta aicOyrd. I.e. these thinkers linked up the various classes of entity, and made ypappas kal érireda dependent on the numbers. Cf. Theophr. Jef. 313. 4 Br. = fr. xil. 12 Wimm. The view of Zeller (ii. 1.4 949, n. 2) that Plato was the holder of this view seems less probable. “Al. 777. 16, Syr. 154.9 refer the view to Plato, but we have seen reason to believe that they knew little about early Platonism. Cf, Robin, pp. 295-298.

We have no further information about view (2), but (3) a third view is expressed in |. 32, the view that the formal principle was the point, considered as analogous to the One. Cf. 27. The persons who held this view are identified by Aristotle with those who took the material principle to be otoy wAOos, and we saw (l. 9 n.) that Speusippus is meant. It could not be either Plato or Xenocrates that is referred to, for they did not believe in points (for Plato cf A. 992 20).

16. dmohedupéva te is caught up by rairé re |. 20. The argument in ll, 16-20 may be put thus: If long and short, broad and narrow, deep and shallow are the characteristics of the lines, the planes, the solids respectively, either (1) what is broad or narrow is not long or short, so that lines and planes are quite cut off from each other, or (2) it is, in which case the plane is a line.

19-20. The point of ém 8é. .. dmod00jcetar; seems to be: ‘ How will they describe the principles of excess and defect which are to angles and figures what the long and short is to the line, the broad and narrow to the plane, &c. ?’

20. tadtd te cupPaiver tots mept Tov dpiOudy, sc. cvuPaivovow, Long and short, &c., are, as much as straight and curved, attributes (to be exact, they are properties, which are xa atrd in the latter of the senses stated in Am. Post. i. 4. 73° 34-» 3) of the line, not its matter, just as great and small are attributes, not matter, of number, A. 992» 2, N. 10884 17.

23-31. Aristotle now introduces, in the middle of his discussion of the principles from which the Platonists derived geometrical objects, an argument against the general theory of ideal numbers existing apart from sensible things. The section breaks the continuity of the thought, and is evidently out of place.

23. wdvtwv ... ToUTwy appears to be neuter—‘all these cases’.

24. Tdv elddv Tdv ws yévous, cf. A. 991°31 Nn.

25. 97. Alexander and Bonitz take this in the sense of ‘ ascribes separate existence to’, but it seems doubtful if the word can mean this; nor is either of the suggested emendations very plausible. I believe that 07 has its ordinary meaning and that the argument runs thus : ‘A question which can be applied to all these Platonic beliefs is that which must be faced in the case of species of a genus, when one posits the existence of universals, viz. whether it is ‘animal’ itself that is present in the particular species of animal, or an ‘ animal’ distinct from ‘animal’ itself. If we do not assign separate existence to the

M. 9. 10852 16 — 1085) 22 457

universal there is no difficulty; if we do assign separate existence to the One and the numbers, the question is difficult, not to say impossible.’

26. % Erepov atrod tuou. Jaeger reads Ceov for Gwov and renders ‘or an animal distinct from the sensible animal’. But this would be a mere synonym for rd €Gov avré, whereas mérepov ... 7 suggests alternatives. The meaning is made clear by Il. 29-31.

27-28. xwprotod 8¢... tod évds Kal Tav dprOuay, ‘the One and the numbers being separate from sensible things’.

gi. It seems quite possible, pace Bz., to retain atrd voet tT, in the sense of ‘is one thinking a thing-itself (or Idea)?” Cf. 1079” 9.

32. Tovadtys UAys, the various forms of great and small, 1. 9.

érepou S€, apparently Speusippus, cf. 1. 13 n.

33- KatadAys Uys, cf. 1. gn. For the construction ddAys vAns otas 70 wAnGos cf. De An. 424” 2, G. A. 766” 13,

35-4. Aristotle here reduces those who made the material principle of peyéy ‘something analogous to rAjOos’ (I. 33) to the same dilemma to which he reduced those who made the principle ’ “the kinds of great and small’ (# 9-20).

b5. ék Tod évos kat mdyQous, the view of Speusippus, cf. #9 n., Z. 1028 21 n.

6. Gmws 8° ody Aéyouct, ‘ but however they speak’. A€yovar is par- ticiple, cf. Zop. 128 33, De Sensu 444% 18, Pol. 1319» 37.

b5. ék Tod évos kat mdyQous, the view of Speusippus, cf. #9 n., Z. 1028 21 n.

6. Gmws 8° ody Aéyouct, ‘ but however they speak’. A€yovar is par- ticiple, cf. Zop. 128 33, De Sensu 444% 18, Pol. 1319» 37.

J. Tos €k Tod évds...dopicorov. Plato is probably referred to, as well as Xenocrates. For the evidence cf. Robin, pp. 641-654.

Q. 6 8 =oi ek Tod Evds Krd., |. 7.

II. at adtat, which is read by the vefus versio and apparently by Alexander, gives a better sense than the manuscript reading atra. Christ’s conjecture airaé is nearer to the manuscripts, but the crasis does not appear to be used by Aristotle. The passage suggests 10822 20, but the point is not the same. There the question was, How are the units combined into numbers? here it is, How are the formal and the material principle combined?

On pigs and Oécis cf. 1082420. «pao is a kind of pigis (Zop. 122>26)—the kind that belongs to fluids; though sometimes the words are used interchangeably (Po/. 126218). Cf. Al. De Mist. xili. 228. 7, 25 Br.

18-22, From the supposition that each unit is derived from the One and a part of plurality, three difficulties might seem to be deduced : (1) each of the parts of plurality must be indivisible, so that a divisible is composed of indivisibles (which is absurd),—unless we are to make the part of plurality itself a plurality and the unit divisible (which is equally absurd); (2) the elements will be not the One and plurality but the One and a part of plurality; (3) this plurality of indivisible parts which is supposed to be an element of number will be itselfa number. But there is a difficulty in this interpretation. In 1. 33 number is said to be composed of indivisible parts. That each of the parts of plurality should be indivisible (1. 18) is, then, in itself no difficulty. d8vatperov (1. 18) . . . dvarperqv (I. 19) is not a complete

458 COMMENTARY

objection ; the following words cai. . . évés must go withit. The first objection then is that each of the parts of plurality will be indivisible, and thus the material principle will not be +AOos at all; and there are only two objections, not three. re, then, in 1 18 is caught up not by xaé in |. 19 but by éru in |. 21. :

In all this, Bz. remarks, Aristotle ignores the facts (1) that Plato probably did not think of number as containing units at all, (2) that he meant by the material principle of number something which was a mere potentiality and could not be charged with being an actual number. But as regards the first point, we must remember that Aristotle is here attacking not Plato but Speusippus (cf. 1. 5 n.), who did not believe in ideal but only in ordinary mathematical number (cf. 1076® 20-21 n.), and is therefore more open to Aristotle’s attack.

22. TS yap TAGs ddvaiperwv éotiv dprbuds, cf. Z. 1039 12 N.

1. 5 n.), who did not believe in ideal but only in ordinary mathematical number (cf. 1076® 20-21 n.), and is therefore more open to Aristotle’s attack.

22. TS yap TAGs ddvaiperwv éotiv dprbuds, cf. Z. 1039 12 N.

23. Kat mepl Tods ofrw A€yovtas kTA. A similar question has already (1083> 36) been asked regarding the theory which derived number from the One and the indefinite dyad; Aristotle is now considering the theory which derives number from the One and rA7j@o0s. But it is not quite the same question that is asked. In 1083 36 the question was, Is number finite or infinite? Here the question is, Is the number which we have shown the original rA7#60s to be (1. 22) finite or infinite? That this is what Aristotle is asking is shown by |. 26 zotov ovv tAROos oTorxeiov.

tept tods otw Néyovtas. The manuscripts read apa xrA., and Bz, Ind. Ar. 562% 7 interprets wapa as ‘according to’, but this use seems unparalleled in Aristotle. Alexander seems not to have had the pre- position, and to have taken rots ovrw A€yovras as object of Cyryréov ; but this is not an Aristotelian construction.

24. xa, at first sight difficult, may be explained by the following para- phrase: ‘Since the units produced from the 7AjOos and the One were finite, the ThIGos also must have been finite ’.

26. €or. te . . . daeipov. Alexander explains ‘and plurality is different from infinite plurality’. (Though he does not use the word air, it would not be safe to infer with Christ that he did not read it.) So too Bz. The only objection to this interpretation is that if we adopt it, Il. 24-26 give no reason at all why the original plurality should not have been finite. But Aristotle evidently thinks that he is putting Speusippus into a difficulty. Perhaps, then, we should in- terpret the whole passage thus: ‘ There was, according to Speusippus, a finite plurality from which and the One the units were derived. And there is another plurality which is “ plurality itself’ and infinite plurality. Which sort of plurality, then, is the material principle in number ?’

27-34. Aristotle now passes from the views of Speusippus about the derivation of numbers to his views about the derivation of spatial magnitudes (stated in 432-34). The objections stated here to the

M. 9. 1085 22 — 10868 12 459

derivation of points are clearly akin to those raised against the deriva- tion of units in Il. 12-21. Line 29 answers to 14; 30, 31 to 15-173 31-34 (less closely) to 17-21.

29. ob yap... atry, ‘for this is not the one point which alone exists’,

9. 1085 22 — 10868 12 459

derivation of points are clearly akin to those raised against the deriva- tion of units in Il. 12-21. Line 29 answers to 14; 30, 31 to 15-173 31-34 (less closely) to 17-21.

29. ob yap... atry, ‘for this is not the one point which alone exists’,

36. tpdmous. Alexander knew both this reading and zpdrovs, and preferred the latter, interpreting it as rods évdoforépous (782. 25). But this is awkward, considering that Aristotle uses 6 rpéros immediately after (1086 11) in the chronological sense. It is equally awkward to suppose that Plato, Speusippus, and Xenocrates could be grouped - as oi mp@ro in the chronological sense, since in 1086411 Plato is distinguished from the other two as 6 zpéros. It seems better, then, to read with EJ zpdzovs, which is used quite similarly in 1080) 4, 10, 35, 1083 2, 1086231. There is perhaps, as Goebel remarks, a special appropriateness in the use of the musical term zpdzos with Siadwveiv.

1086? 2. oi pév, sc. Speusippus. Cf. 10762 20-21 n., 1080) 14,

4. Tod eiSytiKod dpiOu0d. This phrase, which occurs again in N. 1088) 34, 1090) 38, seems to stand for the ideal, i. e. universal or natural, numbers, as opposed to the so-called mathematical numbers. It has no necessary connexion with the presumably later theory which said that a// Ideas were numbers. Nor has it any connexion with the ‘ figurate numbers’, i.e. the numbers which can be represented by a regular geometrical pattern, such as .*. or :: . This way of thinking of numbers was an early Pythagorean device, and is referred to in N. 10g212, but the expression ecidyriKds dpifds Comes not from the old Pythagorean usage of clos = cyjpa but from the developed Platonic sense of ¢f8os. It is a synonym for 6 dpuByds 6 Tov «idav (1081 21, N. rogo? 33) or of év Trois cideor dpufpot (N. 1093 21).

5. ot 8¢, sc. Xenocrates. Cf. 1076% 20-21 n., 1080 22, 1083? 2.

5-6. 1a eidy .. . wovetv, ‘ wishing to make the Ideas at the same time also numbers ’.

7. Alexander (783. 3) seems to have omitted tds, and Jaeger follows him, taking ravtas as = 7a «ldy. But there would be no special point here in the description of the eidy as dpyad. A comparison with 10814 12-17, N. 1090” 36 shows the point to be that if the One and the great-and-small are taken as the first principles, it is hard to deduce do/h the Ideas and mathematical numbers from them. If tavtas be kept, the reference is to the discussion of the One and the great-and-small in 1083 23—1085 34. But ras airds would be rather more pointed, and may be the true reading.

II-I2. 6 8€ mpatos ... etvar, sc. Plato (Al. 783. 22). For the phrase cf. 1078” 11, for the doctrine 10764 19 n., 1080? r1.

According to the manuscript reading Plato is described as laying it down (1) that the Ideas existed, (2) that they were numbers, (3) that mathematical objects existed ; éydépucev is left rather awkwardly

460 COMMENTARY

22). For the phrase cf. 1078” 11, for the doctrine 10764 19 n., 1080? r1.

460 COMMENTARY

without an object. There is therefore something to be said for Christ’s proposal to omit the second eva. This gives the sense ‘ He who first posited that the Ideas were also numbers naturally separated the Ideas and the mathematical objects’. Cook Wilson’s proposal to put elvan after aprOuovs gives a still better sentence.

17. kat ’Emixappov. Diels, Vors. fr. 14. Ahrens (De Dral. Dor. 457) writes the verse of Epicharmus thus: dptiws te yap AcAexrar KedOds od kadds éxov | haiverat.

Criticism OF THE Doctrine or IpzEas (M. 9. 10862 18—N. 2. 10g0® 2),

(A) Lf assigns separate existence to universals (M. 9. 10864 18—ro. 1087 25).

18. So much for the numbers; with regard to the first principles, what those say who are speaking of sensible substance only is a question for physics; we must discuss the statements of those who believe. in non-sensible substances, Ideas and numbers, whose principles are the principles of all things.

29. Those who believe in mathematical numbers only may be deferred ; we must discuss the believers in Ideas. They treat the Ideas as universals and at the same time as existing apart and as being particulars.

34. The reason of this impossible combination is that they thought that since sensible particulars were in constant flux, universals must be something apart from these.

be. Socrates by reason of his definitions gave the impulse to this view, but did not separate the universals from the particulars. He was right, for knowledge implies a universal; it is the separation that causes the objections to the Ideas.

7. His successors, seeing that if there are substances apart from sensibles they must exist separately, could find no others than these universals to assign separate existence to, and therefore assigned it to them. The result is that their universals and their particulars are practically the same kind of thing.

14. We may state a difficulty already discussed which affects non-believers as well as believers in Ideas: if we do not suppose substances to exist apart, we annihilate substance; if we do suppose them to do so, what are we to say of their elements ?

20. (1) If we make these particulars, then (a) things will be no

M. 9. 1086% 17-21 461

more in number than their elements, and (4) the elements will be un- knowable. For suppose syllables to be substances, and their elements (the letters) the elements of substances.

24. Then (a) each syllable will be a unique individual, and there- fore also each letter; and therefore there will be nothing but the letters.

32. (4) The elements will be unknowable. For knowledge is of the universal, as is clear from the nature of demonstration and definition.

24. Then (a) each syllable will be a unique individual, and there- fore also each letter; and therefore there will be nothing but the letters.

32. (4) The elements will be unknowable. For knowledge is of the universal, as is clear from the nature of demonstration and definition.

37. (2) If the first principles are universal, either the substances com- posed of them wil] be universal, or what is not substance will be prior to substance. For the universal is not-substance, the first principle is universal, and the first principle is prior to what is composed of it.

10872 4. These difficulties arise when people derive the Ideas from elements, and at the same time treat the Ideas as existing apart from the substances that have the same form. But (a) if there are many a’s and b’s and no ‘ aitself’ or ‘b itself’ apart from the many, there can be an infinite number of similar syllables ; and so with substances and their elements.

10. (4) The view that knowledge is universal, so that the first principles of things must be universal and not separate substances, is true only in a sense.

15. The potentiality of knowledge, being universal and indefinite, is of the universal and indefinite, but the actuality is definite and of the definite, individual and of the individual; what the grammarian studies is ‘ this a’, and ‘a’ only indirectly because this a is an a.

21, If the principles had to be universal, their compounds would have to be universal, and then there would be no self-subsistent sub- stance. But it is only in one sense that knowledge is universal.

1086? 20. Bz.’s proposal to read wereopevoy or rererpévovs for the second memetopévos does nothing to remove the difficulty. The manuscript reading is as old as Alexander. The sentence though careless is not unnatura]. Aristotle writes ot@év paAXov as if some- thing like ay éxidoéq could be supplied from the previous clause; but he happens to have written in the previous clause dy zeioGein, which with zpos 76 reve Oqvar would make nonsense.—Cf. note at beginning of Book M.

21. Syrianus tells us (160. 6) that some manuscripts made Book N begin at this point. Certainly there seems to be a greater change of subject than at 108729. So far, Aristotle has been discussing the question whether Ideas and numbers exist independently of particular

462 COMMENTARY

things; now he proposes to discuss ‘the first principles and the first causes and elements’. In essence 1086* 21—108¥%4 25 is a preface to N, and with N forms a parallel and probably earlier treatment of the subject dealt with in M. init.—10862 18. Cf. note at beginning of Book M.

In the discussion now entered upon two~distinct questions arise: (1) whether Ideas and numbers could serve as the elementary principles of things; (2) whether the account given by the Platonists of the principles of Ideas and numbers is satisfactory. ‘The two questions are, as Bz. observes, not kept very clearly apart by Aristotle.

‘The two questions are, as Bz. observes, not kept very clearly apart by Aristotle.

23. év Tols wept pucews. Alexander refers to Phys. ii. 3, where the doctrine of the four causes is stated, and De Gen. ef Corr. ii. 5, where the four elements are deduced. But the reference is more probably to Phys. i. 4-6, De Caelo iii. 3, 4, De Gen. et Corr. i. 1, where the views of the materialists are discussed.

2g. ot pév, the Pythagoreans and Speusippus, cf. 1076 20-21 n., 1080} 14.

30. dotepov, N. 10908 7-15, 20-) 20, 10g1® 13-22.

32. KaOddou Te [ds odcias] movodcr Tas is€as. ‘They make the Ideas universal as substances’ does not give the right sense; the sub- stantiality of the Ideas should not be emphasized in this half of the sentence, but only their universality. Jaeger is probably right in treating as oveias as a variant of ws ywpioras which has found its way from the margin into the wrong part of the text.

33. Kat tdv Kab” exactov, ‘and belonging to the class of particulars’. kai is unmeaning if we take rév kal’ éxaorov as depending on Xwpiotds.

34. Sinmdpyntar suggests a reference to Book B (cf. similar references in T. 100432, I. 1053>10, A. 1076239, > 39, M. 108615); and B. 1003®7 is quite relevant. The same point has been discussed in Z. 13. There is nothing in M. 4, 5 (which Bz. suggests) that quite suits the reference.

35-37. aitiov...émolouv. The traditional text would mean: ‘ The reason why these characteristics (universality and separate existence) were combined together by those who described the Ideas as universal was that they did not regard the Ideas as substances identical with sensible things’, This is evidently in more than one respect a weak sentence. It is completely cured by Jaeger’s conjecture that idéas is a gloss which supplanted ovovas, and that ovovas later found its way from the margin into its traditional position. His reading gives the excellent sense: ‘the reason why these characteristics were combined by those who described their substances as universal was that they did not identify substances (as common sense does) with sensible things’.

ba. év rots éumpooder, A. 6 (= M. 4).

3. éxivyge, ‘stirred up’, perhaps (as Mr. W. J. Goodrich has sug- gested) with a suggestion of the impropriety of the action, as in kwely Ta aKivyta,

M. 9. 1086223 — 10, 1086 22 463

8:4 Tods dpiopods, ‘by reason of his definitions’. A less direct con- nexion is implied than would have been conveyed by the genitive.

5. Sydot. For dyAot impersonal and intransitive cf. /ud. Ar. 174° 15-17.

10. e&Becay, cf. A. 992? 10 n.

15. Tots pi) Aéyouow refers both to Speusippus, who did not accept the doctrine of Ideas (# 29 n.), and to non-Platonists.

év Tots Sianopypaciw, B. 999” 24 —1000% 4, 1003” 5-17.

5. Sydot. For dyAot impersonal and intransitive cf. /ud. Ar. 174° 15-17.

10. e&Becay, cf. A. 992? 10 n.

15. Tots pi) Aéyouow refers both to Speusippus, who did not accept the doctrine of Ideas (# 29 n.), and to non-Platonists.

év Tots Sianopypaciw, B. 999” 24 —1000% 4, 1003” 5-17.

18-19. dvaipyjoer... déyewv. ‘One will be destroying substance in that sense in which we understand “substance”.’ For this use of BovtrcoOau Néyew cf. N. 1089 20, 1091 32, Pl. Laws 892 c 2, When ws Bovdducba déyew is interpreted thus, Alexander’s dep 0d Bovrducba (787. 25) is seen to be not a variant reading but a paraphrase. Bz. supposes Aristotle to be admitting that the refusal to posit substances separate from sensibles leads to the negation of substance, and accord- ingly takes ds BovddpeBa A€yew to mean ‘as we are willing to admit for the sake of argument’. But this is not (I think) idiomatic Greek, and no reason can be suggested why for the sake of argument Aristotle should admit something so entirely contrary to his own view, He is in fact saying something quite different: ‘If one does not suppose substances to exist separately, and in the way in which individual things are said to exist, one will destroy the kind of substance that we wish to maintain’. The question of the chapter is a general one, involving those who do not believe in Ideas as well as those who do (Il. 15). Aristotle agreed with the Platonists in supposing substances to exist separately (the substances ‘hey meant being Ideas, i.e. entities which were supposed to combine universality with independent existence, while the substances 4e means are individuals). He there- fore dismisses at once the supposition that substances do not exist separately, and passes (1. 19) to the supposition that they do, which occupies the rest of the chapter. Are their elements unique individuals or universals? (1) If individuals (Aristotle is no doubt thinking here of expressions like ‘ ‘ze One’, ‘ the indefinite dyad’), then (a) the sub- stances will be unique individuals also, and (6) the elements will be unknowable. (2) If universal, the substances will be universal and no true substances. --Aristotle’s-own view is that the elements, and the substances, are neither unique individuals nor universals. All that is substantial is individual, but individuals are not necessarily unique ; there may be many ofa kind. And what is true of substances is true also of their elements(1087* 7-10). So Aristotle meets objection (1 a) ; (1 5) he meets by the assertion that in a sense knowledge is of individuals (10878 10-25); (2) he leaves alone, since his view is that the elements are individuals, though not unique individuals,

Cf. note at beginning of Book M.

22-32. totwoav... pdvoy Ta atorxeta. ‘The main point of these lines may be put thus: If each letter of the alphabet were a unique individual, then you could never by any process of composition get any more at one time than just A, B, C, &c., each occurring once.

note at beginning of Book M.

464 COMMENTARY

You could not have, for instance, a syllable BA and a syllable BC. Similarly, if the elements of substances were unique individuals, sub- stances would be miserably Jimited in their number.

Aristotle professes to be assuming that the elements are unique individuals (ll. 20, 21). But he complicates the argument by deducing this (Il. 27, 28) from the unique individuality of the composite sub- stances, which he first states as following from their being separate substances (Il. 22-27), and then establishes by reference to what the Platonists actually say (én... r.0éacw 1. 27).

27. dpdvupov is used here in the sense more properly expressed by ovvevepov (cf. Ind. Ar. 514% 25-31, ' 13-18), as often when there is no point in emphasizing the difference between the two words.

é1. 8... tu0€aowv, a parenthetical remark to the effect that the nume- rical singleness of the Idea is not a mere supposition of Aristotle’s, but is actually believed in by the Platonists. ‘They posit that “the just what a thing is” is in each case one.’ For atro 6 éore cf. Crat. 389 D6 abrd éxeivo 6 éorw bvopa, Phaedo 78 D3 aird Exacrov 6 €or, Symp. 211 Cc 8 yG aird reAcvTGv 8 gor Kadov, Parm. 133 D8 ovk adrod deardrov Syrov, 0 €or SearoTns, éxelvov Soddds EoTW. 6 €or. Appears as a more or less technical name for an Idea in Phaedo 75 B1,D2, Rep.507B7,597C9, &c. Cf. similar phrases in Zheaet. 4689, Phil. 6242.

29-30. Kata Tov adtovy Aéyov ... kal aAAy, ‘according to the same argument by which in the case of the other syllables there will not be more than one instance of the same syllable’. For ovrep = xa? dvrep cf, A. 991° 8n.

35. Prof. Shorey in Class. Phil. vii. go—g2 holds that et py here and in], 36 means not ‘unless’ but ‘ but only that’. He argues that in 1. 33 knowledge is said to be ‘of’ universals, i.e. to have universal con- clusions as well as universal premises (cf. Phys. 1892 5-7, Z. 1039” 27), and that singular propositions never occur as conclusions in Aristotle’s logical writings. This use of ei py is found, e.g., in Ar, Zy. 186, Av. 1681, Lys. 943, Thesm. 898, and Alexander so interprets the words here (790. 1)—There are, however, occasional references in Aristotle to the occurrence of singular propositions as the minor premise or conclusion of syllogisms (e.g. Az. Pr. 43° 37-40), and in the absence of any evidence of this idiomatic use of ei jm in Aristotle, it seems preferable to suppose that Aristotle has in mind a syllogism of the form :

All triangles have their angles = two right angles,

This figure is a triangle.

. This figure has its angles = two right angles.

Cf. An. Post. 71* 19-29 (where the same example occurs).

. This figure has its angles = two right angles.

Cf. An. Post. 71* 19-29 (where the same example occurs).

36. 6p0ai is as much in accordance with Aristotelian usage as dp6ais, and it is better to keep the better attested reading.

37—1087* 4. GANG piv... éotw. According to the manuscript reading the argument is: ‘But if the principles are universal, or for that matter if the substances composed of them are universal, non- substance will be prior to substance; for the universal is not sub-

Mate btdbes td se welt we ful

M. 10. 1086) 27 — 10877 465

stance, and the element or principle is universal, and an element or principle is prior to the things of which it is principle and element’. There is manifestly no argument here; the second clause makes nonsense of the passage. All that is needed is to insert 4 before gorau in 1087%1. ‘But if the principles are universal, either the substances composed of them are also universal or non-substance will be prior to substance.’ Cf. 10879 21 ézel ei dvdyKy Tas dpxas KabdAov Elva, ava-yKn kal ta éx TovTwv KaGodov. When the first 7 once came to be mis- understood as ‘or’, the second was bound to drop out. Syrianus (164. 36) treats the clause beginning 7% xai as apodosis, and therefore probably read the second 7.

Aristotle has already (ll. 20-37) shown the difficulties that arise if the elements of substances be taken to be numerically single. He has now (1086 37—1087* 4) shown that if the elements are universal, either non-substance will be prior to substance (which is absurd) or the substances will be universals ; but this contradicts the very notion of substances, which is that they are xeywpiopevat, Kal Tov TpdTov TovTOV ds A€yerau 7a Kal?’ Exacta TOV dvtwv (1086) £7).

Jaeger treats 37 7)... 10872 1 xaOddov as a gloss intended origin- ally to have come after ovoias in 108741. But the clause goes back to Alexander (790. 9), and the insertion of 4 cures the passage more simply.

108724-10, in spite of wdvra, refer especially to the difficulty expressed in rtocatr’ éora Ta dvta doamep TA oToLyeia (1086? 21, cf. 108729, 10); ll. ro—25 deal with the other difficulty, od« émurryra 7a. ororxeia (1086? 22).

9), and the insertion of 4 cures the passage more simply.

5-6. kal .. . kexwptopevov has given much trouble. Alexander has two interpretations. (1) ‘And when they claim that there is a single separate avroeidos distinct from the substances which are sensible and have in them the Ideas’ (791. 2). The Greek evidently will not bear this meaning. (2) ‘And when they claim that there is a single abroeioos separate from the substances, i. e. from the Ideas, which have in them the dpyixov & or avrocidos’ (791. 5). Besides misreading 76 ard eldos aS TO avToEtoos, this introduces a notion which the context does not warrant, the notion of a hierarchy among the Ideas. The passage is concerned solely- with the relation between separately existing substances and their elements. In view of the failure of Alexander’s interpretations Bz. proposed to omit xa} i8éas, but there is another interpretation which removes the difficulty. ‘When they claim that apart from the substances which have the same form there are Ideas, which are each of them a single separate entity.’ So interpreted, the two clauses dependent on dray answer exactly to the original statement of the question, ay dé tis 09 Tas otoias (here = the Ideas) ywpurrds, rs Onoe Ta. crorxELa Kal Tas dpyas adrdyv ; (1086 19).

4-10. Aristotle here states his own mode of escape from the difficulty raised in 1086 22-32, just as in ll. 13-25 he states his mode of escape from the difficulty raised in 1086) 3 2-37.

y. Aristotle says domwep as if he were afterwards going on to state

2573 2 Hh

bili ded

466 COMMENTARY

the true view about the elements of substances, of which the true view about the elements of syllables is an illustration ; but the dozep clause gives his meaning sufficiently and the principal clause never appears. Cf. B. 1000 r n.

Cf. B. 1000 r n.

1g. exeu pev paduor dmoplay tOv AexPévrwy, Aristotle means that this presents the greatest difficulty not to the, Platonists but to every one, whatever his views about Ideas may be (1086 15), and therefore proceeds to modify what he has said (7d Aeydpevov) in 1086 33, that knowledge is of universals. The modification is contrary to his usual view, which is that actual knowledge is of universals. The doctrine of the Posterior Analytics cannot be understood in any other sense, and other works as well occasionally state the doctrine quite explicitly. De An, 417% 22 has tév xo exactov Kar’ evépyeav alcOyows, ) O ériaTypyn tov Kabddov, where the érurjun meant must be 7 Kar évépyevay as the alcOnois is. Cf. Z. 1039) 27 ray otcrdy TOV aicOytov tov Kal? éxacta ovre Spirpos ovr damddeEs eéorw. Yet the doctrine of the present passage is implied in De Ax. 417228 6 8 78n Oewpar, evtedcxeia dv Kal Kupiws érurtdmevos T68€ 7 A, and, according to one reading, in ©. 10487 34 (Aéyoper) eriotnpova Kal Tov pt) Oewpodvra, av Suvards 7 Gewpjoa Té8¢ évepyeia. In neither of these passages is the doctrine introduced to escape from difficulties such as that put forward here ; it is a genuine part of Aristotle’s theory, though perhaps incon- sistent with another part. Usually knowledge is opposed to sensation as being of the universal while sensation is of the particular, but occasionally Aristotle admits that knowledge is of the universal in the particular, as he admits (An. Post. 87 28, De An. 424% 21-24) that sensation is of that in the particular which is wmzversal. Cf. pp. Cviii—cx.

17. Bz.’s excision of tod is, in spite of Alexander’s attempt at an interpretation, absolutely necessary.

22. domep emt Tov dmodetEewv, because dzddevéis must be in the first figure (Az. Post. i. 14), and in that figure universal premises always give a universal conclusion.

BOOK N

(B) The tdeal theory treats contrartes as first principles (ch, 1. 1087 29-33).

1087? 29. All philosophers make the first principles contraries, the first principles of unchangeable substances as well as those of the objects of physics. Now, since there cannot be anything prior to the first principle of all things, the first principle cannot be an attribute of something else, for then that other would be prior to it. But

M, Yo! 1087" 13-22 467

all generation from contraries implies a substratum, so that all con- traries are attributes of a subject and none is self-subsistent ; therefore no contrary is strictly a first principle. .

b4. Now the Platonists make one of the contraries—viz. the unequal (the dyad of the great and small) or plurality—the material principle, and its contrary, ‘the One’, the formal principle.

12. Further, they state the first principles badly, whether they describe the material principle (a) as the great and small, or (6) as the many and few, or (c) as the exceeding and the exceeded. These diversities make no difference to any but the verbal objections.

21. If you treat the exceeding and the exceeded in general as the principle rather than the great and small, you should say that number in general is derived from the elements previously to the number two ; but they do not say this.

26. Others oppose (¢) ‘the other’, or (e) plurality, to the One. If the One has any contrary, it is plurality; but even this antithesis is wrong, because it would follow that the One is few.

Objections (ch. 1. 1087> 33-2. 1088 35). (1) Objection relative /o the formal principle.

33. ‘The one’ evidently means a measure. It always has a sub- stratum, in harmony the semitone, in length the finger, &c., and generally in qualities a quality indivisible in kind, in quantities a quantity indivisible to the senses; there is no substantial ‘One itself’.

1088%4. This is natural, for ‘one’ means a measure of some plurality, and number a measured plurality or a plurality of measures (so that one is not a number).

8. A measure must be something common to the things measured ; ‘horse’ is the measure of horses, ‘living being’ is the measure of a man, a horse, and a god, ‘class’ is perhaps the measure of ‘man’, ‘white’, and ‘ walking’.

(2) Objections relative to the material principle.

15. Those who make the dyad an indefinite something composed of great and small say what is neither plausible nor possible. For (a) these are, like odd and even, &c., attributes rather than the sub- stratum of numbers and magnitudes.

21. (4) Great and small are relative terms, and therefore belong to the least substantial of all the categories. Relation is an accident of quantity, and always implies a substratum.

Hh 2

468 COMMENTARY

2g. Its unsubstantiality is shown by this, that of it alone there is no generation, destruction, nor change, as there is increase and diminution in respect of quantity, alteration in respect of quality, motion in respect of place, generation and destruction in respect of substance; a thing becomes greater or smaller without itself changing, if its correlative becomes-smaller or greater.

by. (c) The matter of a thing is what is potentially that thing; but relation is neither potentially nor actually substance. Non-substance cannot be an element in substance.

4. (d) Elements are not predicated of their compounds, but many and few are predicable of number, long and short of line, &c.

8. If there is a plurality (e.g. two) which is simply ‘few’, there must be one which is simply ‘many’ (e.g. 10 or 10,000), But if the many and few are elements in number, either both or neither should be predicable of it.

(3) Odjection to regarding eternal entities as composed of elements.

14. Can eternal things be composed of elements? If they were, they would have matter. That which is composite is generated from its elements, but that from which a thing is generated is that which is potentially it. Now that which is potential need not become actual. Therefore that which has matter, however long it lasts, is capable of not being and is therefore not eternal.

28. Those who make an indefinite dyad the material principle, but avoid calling it the unequal, avoid only the objections incidental to making the unequal (a relative term) an element.

The mistake on which the theory rests (ch. 2. 1088> 35-10908 2).

35. The chief reason why the Platonists turned to such causes was their archaic statement of the problem. They thought all things would be one, viz. ‘being itself’, if they did not oppose Parmenides’ dogma and prove that not-being is; they thought that if things are many, they: must be composed of being and something else.

1089* 7. But (r) if ‘ being ’ has many senses (substance, quality, &c.), what sort of unity will all things be if not-being does not exist? Will all substances be one, all qualities, &c., or all things in whatever category they are? It is impossible that one thing (not-being) should cause the diversity between the different categories.

15. (2) What sort of not-being combines with being to make things ? Not-being has different senses answering to the categories.

20. Plato means by ‘not-being’ the false; whence it was said that

N. 1. 10884— 2. 1089) 469

we must presuppose something false, as geometers assume the line which is not a foot long to be a foot long; but in fact geometers assume nothing false, and this sort of not-being will not account for the generation or destruction of anything.

26. It is from not-being in another sense, viz. the potential, that generation takes place.

gi. The inquiry seems to be how being in the sense of substance is many; for what these thinkers generate is numbers, lines, and bodies. But it is absurd to ask how there are many substances and not how there are many qualities or quantities. The indefinite dyad cannot be the cause of there being many colours, for instance; for then colours would have been numbers and units.

bg. If they had considered this, they would have seen the cause of the plurality of substances also; for it must be at least analogous. This error is also the cause of their treating as the material principle a relative term (viz. the unequal) which is not really opposed to being or to the One but is one kind of being.

This error is also the cause of their treating as the material principle a relative term (viz. the unequal) which is not really opposed to being or to the One but is one kind of being.

8. They ought to have asked how relations are many; but while they ask how there are many units besides the One, they do not ask how there are many unequals besides the Unequal. Yet they use many unequals—great and small, many and few, long and short, &c.

15. It is necessary to presuppose for each thing that which was potentially it; the author of this theory indicated what in his view is potentially substance, viz. the relative—he might as well have said quality—which is neither potentially the One or being nor the con- tradiction of them, but a kind of being.

20. Much more, if he was asking how things are many, was it necessary not to confine himself to substances or to qualities.

24. In the categories other than substance there is another problem as to how things are many ; no doubt, since they do not exist apart, they are many through the substratum taking on many qualities, &c.; but there must be a matter for each category, only it cannot be one existing apart from substances.

28. But in the case of substance we can see how the individual is many things, if we avoid the mistake of treating the same thing both as an individual and as a nature; the real difficulty here is how there are many actually existing substances.

gz. A ‘this’ and a quantity are not the same, but the Platonists do not tell us how existing things in general are many, but how there are many quantities; for every number indicates a quantity and so does the unit. On the other hand, if a ‘this’ and a quantity are treated as the same, many contradictions follow.

470 COMMENTARY

On the other hand, if a ‘this’ and a quantity are treated as the same, many contradictions follow.

470 COMMENTARY

1087? 29. Tis odctas TaUTys, i.e. the dxivytos otcia which has been the subject of Book M (cf. 1076211), Aristotle has already at 1086 21 passed from the discussion of the Idea-numbers, which were the axivyntos ovata that the Platonists believed in, to the discussion of the first principles of the Idea-numbers, so that the transition now made is really not from the dxivyros otcia to its ‘principles but from one question about the principles to another. ‘This difficulty is correctly stated by Bz., but his proposal for its solution, the reading of dzopias for obaias, does not commend itself; Alexander read otcéas and inter- preted it as we have done. We have already seen (10868 21 n.) that there was an early divergence in the manuscripts as to where N should begin. It might be suggested that the original beginning was at 1086 21 (or 18), and that the present clause or the whole sentence was added by an early copyist who divided the books at this point and felt the lack of a formal introduction. But it seems more probable that 1086418 and 1087229 were two alternative transitions, both written by Aristotle, to the question of the principles of Idea-numbers, or in other words that 1086? 18—1087 25 is a fragment which does not really belong to the main structure of MN but was introduced by an early editor as dealing with the same subject.

In any case the distinction between M and N as dealing, the one with dxivnros ovata, the other with its first principles, is not well maintained ; we hear a good deal in M of the One and the indefinite dyad.

br. 1000’, i. €. dzroKeipevov TL

3. For the Méyos cf. Cas, 3> 24-27.

4. GN Erépa, i.e. GAN’ 4 apyn érépa.

ol 8€ krA. Aristotle proceeds to show (ll. 4-12) that the Platonists fall into the error (exposed in ® 36-» 4) of making contraries the first principles.

5. ot pév = (1, 9) 6 70 dvicoy Kai €v A€ywv. Plato is no doubt meant, since in M. 1081824 we have «lite domep 6 mpOrtos cimov e€ dviowr. Cf. Al. 796. 23.

7G tow, which is read by all the manuscripts and by Alexander (796. 26), is difficult, since és rodro tiv tod zANOovs otcay diow explains why these thinkers opposed 76 dvicov instead of 7AOos to 7d ev, and this clause would be unnecessary if 76 é& had already been identified with 76 icov. Jaeger is probably right in treating 7@ tow as a gloss.

6. ot 8€= (1. 8) 7G 8. The expression 7A9O0s seems to belong to Speusippus, cf. Z. 1028 21 n., M. 10859 n. In the light of the evi- dence there cited, we may ignore Alexander’s statement that it is the Pythagoreans (796. 32) or Pythagoras himself (ib. 34) that Aristotle is referring to. Xenocrates may possibly also have used the expression in this context (Plut. De An. Procr. ii. 1,2, 1012 Dk, cf, Aet. i. 3. 23).

32) or Pythagoras himself (ib. 34) that Aristotle is referring to. Xenocrates may possibly also have used the expression in this context (Plut. De An. Procr. ii. 1,2, 1012 Dk, cf, Aet. i. 3. 23).

12. Alexander reads dpv6ud Adyw & ov, and apparently takes the words to mean that the unequal, though in point of fact the same thing as the great and the small, has a different definition. But it seems more probable that the manuscript reading is right, and that

N. 1. 10872 29— 1087? 27 471

the meaning is: Plato treats the unequal (or the great and the small) as one and does not draw the distinction that though definable by a single definition it contains within itself a plurality, sc. the great and the small. This has more point in the context. Obviously contraries go in pairs, and Aristotle is confirming his statement that the Platonists make their first principles contraries by showing that for Plato the One and the-great-and-the-small are but /wo things. Aristotle himself in accordance with his usual misinterpretation of the great and small (cf. M. 108323 n.) insists on treating them as ¢hree (I. 14). This interpretation is rendered certain by comparison with 1088? r5.

12-13. GANG pv... daodiddacw: i. e., apart from the general error of making contraries the first principles, the Platonists describe the first principles or elements badly.

16, ot S€ 73 woAd Kai éXiyov. These thinkers are distinguished from those who posited the great and small, and, Plato being the chief of the latter thinkers (the doctrine is ascribed to him by name in A. 987» 20, 26, 988413, 26, Phys. 187217, 203215, 209? 35), the former must be disciples who modified the expression for the reason here assigned, viz. that the great and small was more fitted to serve as the principle of spatial magnitudes than of numbers. The other passages where the ‘many and few’ are referred to are 1088° 18, 1089? 12, A. 992° 16.

17-18. ot S¢. . . Td brepexov kai Td Gepexduevoy. Sext. Emp. p. 531 Bekker treats these as essential terms of the Pythagorean division of concepts, and Robin (p. 659) suggests that it may be ‘acousmatic’ Pythagoreans of the school of Hippasus that Aristotle has in mind; but the evidence is too vague to warrant any certain conclusion,

20, 21. Noyids appears to take two somewhat different shades of meaning according as it is used with dvoxepeias or with dzodeiéets. In the former case it means, as in I, 1005? 22 Aoyixads duoyepetas, LL. 1221>% tas cuxopartias Tas AoyiKds, very much what we mean by ‘quibbling’ (almost = coduotixal evoyAjoes De Int. 17*36). We may connect this with the definition of a NoyiKds Adyos as ek Wevdar, evddgwv d¢ (Top. 162 27). With dzodeiées the meaning seems rather to be ‘abstract’, cf. G. A. 747° 28 A€yw Aoyixiy (drdderEw) 81a TotTO, dre dow Kaborov paAAov, Toppwrépw TY oikeiwy éoTiv apxav.

17*36). We may connect this with the definition of a NoyiKds Adyos as ek Wevdar, evddgwv d¢ (Top. 162 27). With dzodeiées the meaning seems rather to be ‘abstract’, cf. G. A. 747° 28 A€yw Aoyixiy (drdderEw) 81a TotTO, dre dow Kaborov paAAov, Toppwrépw TY oikeiwy éoTiv apxav.

24. Apelt’s proposal of xad for éx rests on the supposition that r7s dvados means the indefinite dyad, not, as it evidently does (cf. Al. 798. 14), the ideal Two. Cf. A. ggo? 20.

26. of 8... dvtiTOdacw. Alexander (798. 23) refers this view to ‘ other Pythagoreans ’(cf. 1. 6 n.),and with this we may compare Damasc. De Princ. c. 306 = Arist. fr. 15144 24 “ApiotoréAys O€ év Tots Apxutelois iotopel kat UvOaryopav “ dAdo” rv VAnv Kadciv. The latter statement is most improbable, since Aristotle in his preserved works never refers to the views of Pythagoras. But he may well have ascribed the view to certain Pythagoreans, and there may easily have been late Pytha- goreans, influenced by Platonism, who adopted such a view. Cf. Robin, pp. 650, 660.

27. ot dé wAAQos, cf. 1. 6 n.

472 COMMENTARY

30. atr@. Alexander read avT@ (798. 34), and evidently takes erepov to be opposed td Tabr6, ‘the same’, and aro to aro, ‘the thing itself’, But in I. 105415 76 dAdo is opposed to ro Tair, and there is no trace in Aristotle of such a distinction between érepoy and dAdo; the two words are synonymous. Presumably one of the thinkers he is criticizing used the words 76 erepov and 70-rairo, another the words 70 aAXo and tavro.

BI. 8d€ns, i. e. riPavorntos, says Alexander. twos doéys is ‘something that can really be called an opinion’. Cf. the use of &dogos.

33. To 8 ev dtu pérpov onpatver. This is the strictest sense of ‘one’, I. 1052) 18, 1053 4

34. Tt €repov droxeiwevoy, something, different in each genus, which is the subject to which ‘one’ belongs as an attribute.

35. Sieots. Cf A. 1016” 22 n.

36. Bdows means the dipody—cf. schol. in Heph. p. 124 ed. West- phal Baous 8€ ear 70 éx S00 TodGV GrVETTHKOS, TOD ev Apoer TOD Oe Herer mrapadapBavopevov ; ib. p. 151 dexerae de (the iambic metre) év pev tH mpaitn Bdaoe tapBov kal o7rovociov.

35. Sieots. Cf A. 1016” 22 n.

1088?.2-3. 1d pev...ate®jow. Alexander explains (799. 21) that the finger is indivisible in efSos because it is not divided into fingers but into half-fingers, which are different in eidos from the finger; while the dieous is indivisible xara rHv alcOynow because it is the smallest sound— he means of course the smallest interval. This account of ‘indivisible in efSos’ is not a natural one, and does not agree with Aristotelian usage. In Aristotle the phrase seems to apply (1) to infimae species (B. 999? 3)3 (2) both to genera and to species, in virtue of the core of identity in each (A. 1016419; Aristotle says there dv advalperov 76 eloos Kata THY alobyow, So that Kad. TO eidos and Kara THY atoOnow is a distinction not always maintained); this seems to be the meaning also in I. 10522313 (3) to that which cannot be divided into parts different in kind from the whole (A. 1014# 27—this contrasts strongly with the meaning Alexander assigns)—i.e. to elements. In I. 1 the indivisible in quantity is opposed first to the indivisible in quality (1052” 35) and then to the indivisible in eidos (1053% 20, cf. De An. 430» 14), and the indivisible in «idos is evidently meant to be the same as the indivisible in quality. Further, xara ryv aicOyow, mpos THY ata O@yow is used in describing the indivisible in quantity (1053" 5, 23)- Evidently, then, 76 pev kata 76 €idos refers to év pev Tois qoLots TOLOY TL, and 76 dé mpos tiv aicOyow to ev dé Tots Toots tocov 7 (1. 1). The latter refers to quantitative units such as have been mentioned in 1087 34-37; the former to species and genera, which have con- ceptual unity (dv 4 vonows pia I, 1052430); of these, instances are given in ll, 9-14.

5. kat 6 dpwOyds ote mAHRGos pepetpnpevoy Kat APs pétpwr, cf. A.'1020*'13'n., Z. 10397 12 0.

6-8. 86...é. Sir T. Heath thinks (@%. Aath. i. 69) that this doctrine may be of Pythagorean origin. It appears in Nicom. J/nérod. Arithm, ii. 6. 3, 7. 3, and is implied by Euclid (£7. vii, Defs. 1, 2).

N. 1. 1087 30 — 1088 8 473

Some of the Pythagoreans called the unit dpiO0d Kat popiwv jrcOopiov (Iambl. zx Micom. Ar. Inirod., p. 11.10). Perhaps the first to treat I as a number were the followers of Chrysippus, who called it rA7j0o0s ev, magnitude one (ib. r1. 8).

Q. ei immo. . . . dvOpwwos. Lines ro, 11 indicate that the ei clause should relate not to the measure but to the things measured, so that Bz.’s conjecture (which is confirmed to some extent by Alexander) seems necessary. Bywater’s proposal to excise 76 jérpov in |. 8 (J. of #. Xxxii, 111) does not meet the whole difficulty.

Lines ro, 11 indicate that the ei clause should relate not to the measure but to the things measured, so that Bz.’s conjecture (which is confirmed to some extent by Alexander) seems necessary. Bywater’s proposal to excise 76 jérpov in |. 8 (J. of #. Xxxii, 111) does not meet the whole difficulty.

15-16, oi S€... prxpod, This is one of the passages which indicate that Plato used the phrase ‘indefinite dyad’, for 76 dviwov and 76 péeya kal puxpov are phrases characteristic of his doctrine. For similar passages cf. rogo> 32—109145, M. 1083” 23-36, and see Robin, Pp. 643-653.

15. Thy Sudda de. dé has its usual adversative force. The first clause states the unity of the dvicov, the second its twofold nature (cf. 1087” 9- 12), Thus Trendelenburg’s proposal to omit d¢ is unnecessary.

23. tav katnyopioy is loosely epexegetic of révtwv. The descrip- tion of relation as the least substantial of the categories is unique in Aristotle, but cf. 2. 1V. 1096? 21.

25. With et 7 €repoy there is no difficulty in supplying vAy éoriv.

29-35. There is no distinct kind of change which can be called change in respect of relation, as there is change in respect of substance, quality, quantity, and place. Change in respect of a relation is always due to change, in one of these other respects, of one of the relata. A thing may change in respect of a relation when z¢ does not change at all, but its correlative changes. This indicates, Aristotle observes, that relation is a superficial category. The statement that relation is the only category which has not a specific kind of change answering to it implies a list of categories including only substance, quality, quantity, place, relation. This precise list is not found else- where. But Aristotle probably has in mind a list of eight categories without kxetoOa. and éyew (which occur only in Cat, 1527, Top. 103 23), and omits wovy and wacyew as being practically equivalent to xivnors itself (cf. Phys, 22513 = K. 10684 14), and zoré because, while time is involved in-change, there is obviously no change which is merely in respect of time.

There is an excellent conspectus of the forms in which the list of categories appears in Aristotle, in Apelt, Beir. 2. Gesch. d. Gr. Phil. pp. 140, 141.

The subsidiary character of relation is nowhere stated in the Categories; this distinction between it and the other categories belongs more properly to metaphysics than to logic.

b6. kat Xwpls kal Gua, e.g. two is merely few, the largest number is merely many, but three is many relatively to two, few relatively to the other numbers.

8-11, «i S¢ 8)... pupa. The sentence is very difficult. Various solutions of the difficulty may be proposed: (1) The manuscript read-

474 COMMENTARY

two is merely few, the largest number is merely many, but three is many relatively to two, few relatively to the other numbers.

8-11, «i S¢ 8)... pupa. The sentence is very difficult. Various solutions of the difficulty may be proposed: (1) The manuscript read-

474 COMMENTARY

ing may be translated ‘if plurality is a class of which one member is always few’. This, however, is very unnatural. (2) Alexander 802. 37 says Néyer ei 8€ 8} Kal ori TL TAHOOS, Aeywr Tr TAHOOS THv dvada, Kal’ 5 TO Erepov popiov THS evavTboews KaTYyopElTal, Coy TO GALyov. This suggests the reading of 76 pév det, 7d édiyov ; we may understand KaTyyoperat from 1. 6 (cf, 1. 12). (3) All the difficulties would be removed by a change of two letters if we read wAjOos 0 Acyopev det “éd‘yov. But it is hard to see how this could have been corrupted into the manuscript reading.

10. Bz.’s omission of kat is necessary.

14-28, The argument is:

Things that have elements are complexes.

Complexes have matter.

What has matter is capable of ceasing to be.

What is capable of ceasing to be is not eternal.

Therefore things that have elements are not eternal.

The argument is put forward in opposition to the Platonic doctrine that the numbers have elements and are eternal.

16. ei kal del éort. Alexander understands as the subject of this 7o €€ ov, But a remark of this sort about the elements would be irrelevant to the argument. Bz. is therefore right in taking the subject to be 70 é& abrod dv (cf. 1. 20), There is, of course, a contradiction in saying ‘it is necessary that whether a thing exists for ever or comes into being’ (ei cat... Kav ei seems to be = ceive. . . Eire, Al. 804, 5, though the usage is curious), ‘it comes into being from that of which it consists’. But the meaning is explained by 1. 20, ‘ however true it be that number or anything else that contains matter exists for ever, it must be capadle of not being’, So here dvayky ylyvecOa. must mean something like ‘must be capable of having come into being’.

18. We must either take toGro 8 ytyveras as predicate of ycyverat or read TOUTOU 6 ylyverau.

24. év Gddows Adyors. The reference may be either, as Alexander says, to the De Caelo (I. 12, not I. 7 as Bz. says) or to @. 1050) 7 ff, It is not safe to assume with Bz. that MN never refer to TEZHO.

28-35. Christ thinks that this section belongs to the latter part of ch. 1. But it is quite appropriate that after mentioning the general difficulties (cf. dwAds 1. 14) that attend the derivation of number from elements (Il. 14-28), Aristotle should now point out that by giving up the term évoov certain particular difficulties, though not the general difficulties, are escaped.

dwAds 1. 14) that attend the derivation of number from elements (Il. 14-28), Aristotle should now point out that by giving up the term évoov certain particular difficulties, though not the general difficulties, are escaped.

28-30. The passage suggests at first sight that the description of the material principle as ‘the indefinite dyad’ was a modification of an earlier description of it as ‘the unequal’. Yet Aristotle couples the two phrases as occurring in the same theory (1088415), and implies that the phrase ‘indefinite dyad’ goes back to Plato (1090) 32 —1091*5, M. 1083 23-32). His meaning here is that owing to certain difficulties some thinkers abandoned the phrase ‘the unequal’

N. 1. 1088> 10 —2. 1089? 20 415

but retained ‘the indefinite dyad’. Cf. Robin, pp. 643-653. | Xeno-

crates is probably meant, as there is evidence connecting the ee ‘indefinite dyad’ particularly with him (M. ro814 14 n.).

10892 2-6. Aristotle plainly has the Sophzstes in mind ; cf. ‘such passages aS 237 A, 2505.

4. ob yap... ébvra = fr. 7 in Diels, Vors. In Pl. Soph. 237 a the best manuscripis are divided between rodr’ otdauq (BT) and roir’ od dayn (W); here EJ have rodro dayy, APT rotr’ ovdaun, Alexander has rodro pydapy, and only inferior manuscripts have rotro days. Simpl. Phys. 135. 21, 143. 31, 244. 1 has rotro dayq (best manu- scripts), which is clearly the right reading.

5. dvdyxy is the right case after édoge 1. 2; Bz.’s proposal of dvay«nv is a mistake. Aristotle is thinking of such passages as Soph. 241 D. ek Tov dvTos Kal dAXov Tivos iS explanatory of otrw, and should therefore be preceded and followed by commas.

47. 67 seems to be an emblema from |. 8. Cf. H. 1043 34 n.

Q-10. Totoy ody... éotar; ‘What sort of unity will all things that are constitute, if that which is not be not admitted to be?’ Aristotle means that Plato hastened to maintain the existence of 70 pm ov without considering what sort of unity of all things Parmenides’ denial of 76 pi) év implied—whether a unity of substance, or of substance with all the other categories.

Aristotle asks ‘ what sort of unity do all things make?’, and interprets this (]. 10) as meaning ‘ what things make the unity?’. The question he addresses to the Platonists really is ‘do you mean that all substances make a one of substance, or that all the categories make a one which embraces them all?’ Cf. Phys, 185% 20-30.

Bz.’s rota is impossible, and the text needs no emendation.

IL. # wdvta, Kal éorar... onpaiver is evidently meant to convey the same meaning as the last of the possibilities stated before it. Now the meaning of kai éorau «rd. is ‘and will substance, quality, &c., form all together a single unity’. This seems to justify Bz. in reading n before zdvra. (It is read by JI’, and omitted by EA? Al.) Thus there are three alternatives. The unity may be (1) a unity of sub- stance, (2) a unity of quality, &c., separately from substance, (3) a unity of all the categories. together. -

This seems to justify Bz. in reading n before zdvra. (It is read by JI’, and omitted by EA? Al.) Thus there are three alternatives. The unity may be (1) a unity of sub- stance, (2) a unity of quality, &c., separately from substance, (3) a unity of all the categories. together. -

12. Bz.’s ov does not seem necessary. é tu = one genus or category.

12-15. GAN Gromoy... mov, Aristotle now points out that 76 pi dv will not save Plato from a unity of the third kind, if that was what he feared. It might divide the world into two parts, but it could not divide it into ten. ptay dvow twd = 7d py dv. yevouernv, ‘having been called into play by the doctrine ’,

17. Jaeger is probably right in supposing ¢ivar to have dropped out by haplography ; this is more likely than that dvOpwmros should have been corrupted into dvOpwrrov. Alexander’ S 6 pa dvOpwros (806. 16) is probably only his interpretation of 6 7) dvOpwrrov.

20. Either the manuscript Aéyew or Alexander’s déyer gives a

476 COMMENTARY

possible sense. (1) ‘He means by “not-being ” the false and every- thing of that sort’. (2) ‘He means the false and calls that kind of entity not-being’. The manuscript reading is the more idiomatic (cf. M. 1086> r8-r19n.), and the other has probably arisen from a failure to understand it.

The reference is to Plato (Soph. 237 4,240), but Plato only says that there cannot be Weidos unless there is not-being; he does not identify the two.

21-23. 816... ph} wodvatay, Apparently some Platonist (not, as far as we know, Plato) argued that, just as geometry has to assume what is false in order to prove what is true, so philosophy must assume the false or non-existent in order to explain the true or existent. The charge against geometry that it makes false assumptions goes back to Protagoras (B. 99843). Cf. An. Pr. 4935, An. Post. 76” 41.

24. ov yep év TO oudhoyrop@ Fi 4) mpotacis. Alexander: explains (806. 34) ov yap 7 TpoTewopevn Kal ypapopery YPappay év TO ovAoyio pg kat TH amrodeiée mapohapBdverat, aXN 7 i) voouper. This, however, is an unexampled sense of mpdracis. Proclus 7m Luci. (p. 203." 6) uses the term zpéracus for the enunciation of a preposition, tivos dedouevov Ti 70 Cytovpevov éorw; e.g. in Eucl. i. 1 d€dorau eiOeta rerepacpevn (ib. 208. 4). So too in the case mentioned here the geometer says dédorax ypappa odvaia and seeks to prove something about it or to construct some figure onit. But supposing the given line is not a foot long, what then? It does not matter, says Aristotle; the zpdracis is not part of the proof. Strictly the weddos occurs not in the zpdracis or general enunciation but in what Proclus calls the éeous or setting out of the particular data. But in Aristotle’s time wporacis may have been used to cover both.

In M. 10788 20 rats rpordcecr is used (in a similar context) in its more ordinary sense of ‘ premises’.

But in Aristotle’s time wporacis may have been used to cover both.

In M. 10788 20 rats rpordcecr is used (in a similar context) in its more ordinary sense of ‘ premises’.

26. To... Kata tds mrdcets pi) Ov, ‘the ju dv taken according to its different cases’, such as those named in ll. 16-19. ardors is as general in its meaning as ‘case’ (cf. its use in geometry). The only exact parallel to the present use in the Aristotelian corpus is £. Z. 121729 70 ayabov ev exdotn TOY TrdcEdY (= Tov KaTnyopLOv) éotL TOUTWV.

34. 76 Tl éom is in apposition to ro dv, ‘being, in the sense of substance ’.

35. TOs S€ H ord H Trood, Sc. toAAG oT.

b 3. 76 yap atrd Kat 7d dvddoyoy aitov, ‘it is the same thing or something analogous that is the cause’. Aristotle means Ay, which is the same in all the categories, or analogically the same; i.e. in all things matter and form are in the same relation to one another, cf,.Z, r029» 23, A. rozo> ry, 26.

12. For wod0 éAtyov cf. 1087 16, 1088» 5-13, A. 992% 16.

16-20 is a digression. Plato defined that which is potentially sub- stance as 7d dviov, which is a zpdés 7. This is as bad as if he had said that what is potentially being is quality—which, so far from

N. 2. 10892 21 — 1089) 35 477

being the potentiality or negation of being, is merely one kind of being.

20. domep éhéxOn, ® 34.

25. émiotaow. Bz. prefers the interpretation of this as = dmdxpiow, which occurs once in one manuscript of Alexander (811. 27). But Alexander’s commentary there shows that this is a mere copyist’s error. Alexander really interpreted the word as meaning dzopiav (816. 8, 12, 21, 811. 27), and this meaning alone agrees with the Aristotelian usage of émicracis (cf. Phys. 1967 36, £. £. 1236” 33) and of épiordvar (cf. 1090" 2 and Jnd, Ar. 305% 2-17). émicracis is an arresting of the attention, and this is caused by a problem or dzropia.

Bz.’s preference for the meaning ‘answer’ is no doubt due to the fact that the words immediately following, dia yap ... rood, answer a question instead of propounding one. But these words are concessive and preparatory to the problem, which is stated in xafrov... tav ovovdy. The special difficulty attaching to the minor categories is that of assigning to each a matter which shall render plurality possible without being separable from substance.—Alexander is quite at sea about Il. 25-28.

27. It seems impossible to interpret the etva: after zoAAd. We should either read «fy dv with Apelt (or éo7. or éorav) or treat eiyar as an emblema and understand éo7u.

25-28.

27. It seems impossible to interpret the etva: after zoAAd. We should either read «fy dv with Apelt (or éo7. or éorav) or treat eiyar as an emblema and understand éo7u.

29. éxeu twa Adyov. Alexander explains as ‘contains a difficulty’, but the only meaning the phrase seems to have in Aristotle is ‘is intelligible’ (dnd. Ar. 436% 48-54), and this suits the context perfectly. Aristotle has assumed in ]. 26 that a tzoxe/uevov becomes and is many, i.e. comes to have and has many attributes. Now he continues ‘it is intelligible how the individual thing can be many, if we do not confusedly suppose that a thing can be both an individual and a certain characteristic ’,—the confusion with which Aristotle habitually charges the Platonists. If an individual were a characteristic, it could not be many in the sense of being many characteristics, but there is no reason why a genuine individual should not be many in the sense of having several characteristics—Alexander’s interpretation of ll. 29, 30, adopted with reserve by Bz., seems impossible.

30-31. airy dé... odctar.- ‘ The problem that really arises out of the facts about substance is this, how there can be many actually existing substances ’,—not how one thing can be many in the sense of having many attributes.

82. GAG pry kat ei, ‘but also if’, not ‘ but even if’.

35. ei py... Gdcaiperov. The manuscript reading seems to mean that if the unit is not some finite measure it is the limiting case of quantity—infinitesimal quantity ; it is always quantity of some kind. But dr: is superfluous, and the opposition of pérpov to 76 Kara Td TooOv dS.atperov is not Aristotelian. Alexander (812. 23) says éfuordve. Kadds déywr, et pH) dpa H povas od roady, didtt pérpov apiOwod Kai didre kara toaov ddiaiperos. Cf. Syr. 176. 6. This suggests the reading «i py pérpov Kal to Katrdé xth, ‘The unit indicates a quantity unless it

478 COMMENTARY

means a measure or what is indivisible in quantity.” ‘Measure’ and ‘indivisible in quantity ’ are not, indeed, absolute synonyms, for the measure may be an ‘indivisible in quality’ (I. 1053” 4-7), but 7d & is a measure of quantity primarily (1052) 20, 1053? 5).

For a similar confusion between dru and xaé in the manuscripts, where Alexander preserves xai, cf. H. 1043828. The error probably arose from the misreading of a contraction.

Even if ‘unit’ means not a quantity but what is indivisible in quantity, it refers to quantity and thus confirms Aristotle’s point.

10QO* 1-2. woddds . .. evavtudcers. Alexander (812. 19) mentions two. (1) If substance is quantity, then since quantity is an accident, substance will be an accident. (2) Substance as substance will be a substratum ; as quantity it will be zz a substratum.

CRITICISM OF THE THEORY OF NUMBERS (ch. 2. 10908 2—6. 1093? 29).

(A) Zhe theory that mathematical numbers exist separately (ch. 2. 1090 2—3. 10gI® 12),

(2) Substance as substance will be a substratum ; as quantity it will be zz a substratum.

CRITICISM OF THE THEORY OF NUMBERS (ch. 2. 10908 2—6. 1093? 29).

(A) Zhe theory that mathematical numbers exist separately (ch. 2. 1090 2—3. 10gI® 12),

1090* 2, (1) How are we to be convinced that the numbers exist? For the believers in Zdeas they act as causes of existing things, since each number is an Idea.

7. But why should we believe one who sees the difficulties about the Ideas but posits mathematical number; what causal value has this? It is not asserted to be the cause of anything, but a self-subsistent entity, nor does it turn out to be the cause of anything ; the theorems of arithmetic are true of sensible things, and do not imply self- subsistent mathematical number.

16. (z) Those who hold that there are Ideas and that these are numbers (Plato) fail to show why there must be Ideas, and therefore why self-subsistent number must exist.

20. (6) The Pythagoreans, because they saw many attributes of numbers belonging to sensible bodies, thought things must be numbers —not separately existing numbers but numbers of which things were made.

25. (c) Those who believe in mathematical number only (Speusip- pus) cannot say this; they only said that the objects of the sciences could not be sensible things. We maintain that they are. If mathe- matical objects existed apart, their attributes would not be found in bodies.

30. The Pythagoreans are free from objection on this score, but in constructing bodies out of numbers seem to be speaking of other bodies than those we perceive

Nea2 1OOOt 1-4 479

35. while those who treat number as self-subsistent are open to the objection made above (1. 29).

b5. (d) Some treat the limits, point, line, and plane, as separate entities. But (i) at this rate the limit of a walk should be a substance, and (ii) at all events the limits do not exist apart from the things of which they are limits.

1g. (2) One might point out that the prior genera contribute nothing to the later; (a) if number did not exist, spatial magnitudes could still exist for those who believe in mathematical objects only (Speusippus) ; and if these did not exist, the soul and sensible things could still exist. But nature is not episodic like a bad tragedy.

20. (4) The believers in. Ideas (Xenocrates) escape this objection, for they construct magnitudes out of matter and number, lines out of the number two, planes out of three, solids out of four, But (i) are these magnitudes Ideas, or what are they? They contribute nothing to sensible things, any more than the mathematical objects referred to above (I. 15).

27. (ii) No mathematical proposition is true of them, unless one starts a new set of assumptions.

They contribute nothing to sensible things, any more than the mathematical objects referred to above (I. 15).

27. (ii) No mathematical proposition is true of them, unless one starts a new set of assumptions.

32. (c) The first thinkers who believed in both ideal and mathe- matical number (Plato) cannot tell us how the latter exists. They make it intermediate between ideal and sensible number. If it is derived from the great and small, it is the same as ideal number; if not, the elements are getting rather numerous. If the formal principle in both kinds of number is a One, how does the One take these two forms, if at the same time number cannot on Platonic principles be derived from anything but the One and the indefinite dyad?

091° 5. The theory is evidently like Simonides’ ‘long story’, which slaves. spin when they have nothing sound to say. The great and small seem to complain of their ill-treatment; for they cannot generate any number but two and its powers.

1090* 2—109QI® 12 is a discussion of the doctrine of separately exist- ing numbers, covering much the same ground as that covered in M. 2, 3, and it seems impossible to detect the distinction Bz. draws between the two passages: ‘lIllic ipsa rei natura disputandi legem et ordinem praescribit, hic vero eorum philosophorum, qui res mathematicas per se esse statuerunt, sententias singulas respicit et refutat.’ M and N cannot have been meant to form parts of a single treatise; they are independent essays.

4. etotv. Alexander 812. 30 interprets this as eiot xwpiorod, and this is confirmed by Il. 1-13.

480 COMMENTARY

TH pev yap iBdas riepdvy. This applies to Plato (cf. M. 1076" 19n.). 16 € «7h. (1. 7) applies to Speusippus (cf, M. 10764 20-21 n.), Aristotle returns to these two views respectively in ll. 16-20 and in ll. 25-30, and to both alike in 35-» 5, Thirdly, he discusses the views of the Pythagoreans in ll, 20-25, 30-35,

11. o60evdg depends on atriov, which can be supplied from atris |. 13.

15. ka0darep ééxOn, M. 3, especially 1077? 17-22.

16-20 refer to Plato, 20-25 to the Pythagoreans, 25-g0 to Speusippus, 30-35 to the Pythagoreans, 35- § to Plato and Speusip- pus alike, The views of Plato, who believed in both mathematical and ideal number, apart from sensible things, of Speusippus, who believed in mathematical number apart from sensible things, and of the Pythagoreans, who believed in mathematical number existing in sensible things, are to some extent played off against one another. E.g. in» 2 in attacking the view of Plato and Speusippus Aristotle says the Pythagoreans (6 évayriovjevos Adyos) can make out as good a case for the opposite view.

E.g. in» 2 in attacking the view of Plato and Speusippus Aristotle says the Pythagoreans (6 évayriovjevos Adyos) can make out as good a case for the opposite view.

16-19. The best interpretation of this very difficult sentence seems to be got by reading, as Bessarion perhaps did, 74 before xard in|, 17, omitting rd in 1, 18, and reading ¢éorw inl. 19. ‘As for those who assert that the Ideas exist, and that they are numbers, by their assumption —in virtue of the method of setting out each term apart from its in- stances—of the unity of each general term they try at least to give some account of why they believe number to exist.’ I take the subject of Zarw to be number, which is the subject of the whole discussion (cf. ll. gf, 10, 13, 20). It is impossible to say what Alexander read, except that he does not seem to have had 76, Other attempts to deal with the sentence are (1) that of Winckelmann, who keeps the manuscript reading and translates ‘those who posit the Ideas ... try at least to say how and why it is possible, according to the doctrine which separates each kind of thing from its many particulars, to assume each to be a unity’. ‘The objections to this are that (a) 76 is unexplained, and (4) the order in which the words are taken is intolerably unnatural, (2) Bz. suggests card 10 exOcow. » « Aap Bdvew. This leaves the difficult rd, and it neglects a passage which in some respects illustrates the present passage, Z 1031” 21 Kora, THY Exdeow avayKn év tu elvan dppo. (3) Maier proposes TO Kare, tiv exGeow . .. KapBdvew & 1 exaorov. But if, as he says, the subject of éorw (sic) is & 1 exaorov, then ro... AapBdvew is left without a construction, while ifr)... AapBdvew & 1 Exacrov is the subject, the order is highly unnatural. (4) Bullinger proposes AapPdvovres & for AapPdvew 7d év, which gives much the same sense as the reading we have adopted but is somewhat less probable as an emendation, (5) Prof. Joachim proposes 7 xara. rhv éxOeow exaorov mapa ro. TOG AapBdvew, &v te Exacrov weipOvrat KTA.

The reading adopted in |. 18 as being the better attested, mws for mas kai, does not affect the main difficulties of the passage.

17. For the meaning of é«Oeows cf. A. 992100, Z. 1031” 24,

N, 2, 1090% rt — 3, Togo? a1 48r

M. 1086" 10, Ps.-Alexander here describes the process very much as Alexander describes it in A. 992” 10. The procedure according to him is as follows: You adduce particular ale@yrd, e.g. Plato, Socrates, Alcibiades, Dion. You then argue ‘ Man is either the same as Socrates or different. If it were the same, it would not be also present in Plato, Therefore it is different from Socrates, and similarly from Plato and from all the other individuals. There is, therefore, one thing apart from the many men, and this is man himself. Similarly with horses, oxen, &c.’

This account of the Platonic éx@ecrs is probably correct.

There is, therefore, one thing apart from the many men, and this is man himself. Similarly with horses, oxen, &c.’

This account of the Platonic éx@ecrs is probably correct.

25-26, rots Se... dprOudv, i.e. Speusippus, cl. M. r076® 20-21 n, These thinkers cannot justify their belief in the substantial existence of numbers by saying that sensible things are composed of them; their own language precludes this (cf. 1. rr), They therefore only said that the objects of the sciences could not be sensible things (adray |. 27 refers to rd aloOyrd ocadara |. 22, dppovia, obpavds, and woAAd dda Il. 24, 25), and must therefore be immaterial but substantial numbers,

28, etiropev, M, 3.

85-37. Ste... Wuxyy must be taken to give the reason for drodap- Bavover, not for yopirrdv rowwdvres ; otherwise elvar . .. yeopirrd elvac is otiose,

37. catver thy woxyy, ‘fawn on, flatter, the soul’, Cf, dadpa yodv dm dpparov | cave we Soph. O. C. 310.

xwptord, The subject of efvar should be rdv dpBudy (ch lL 35 of 8 xopiordy wowdvres). But Aristotle has, not unnaturally, passed in thought to a vague subject such as radra; it is not necessary to adopt Bz.'s conjecture ywopirrdy.

be rot... eat ‘both ...and’, 6 evavriovuevos Adyos Means the Pythagorean argument (*® 20-25).

&pre HropyOy, ® 29.

5. eiot S¢ twes. The persons meant are probably Pythagoreans. They seem to be distinguished from Plato (Z 1o28" rp, 19), and from the Platonists (B. 1002* 8, rr).

Ir, od phy AdAAd answers irregularly to odre 1, 8,

12, lot, se. rd Eoyara ovoriat.

15-16. rd pydev .. . Uerepov. Speusippus’ doctrine is similarly characterized in Z, 1028 ar (where he is mentioned by name) and in A. 1075" 37. rots Td padyparixd pdvov evar daudvors (1. 7) also shows that Speusippus is meant; cf, M. t076% a0-ar n,

1g. eweiodiidys, used in the same connexion in A, 1076" rt.

20-32. A comparison with De An, 404» 16-24 has led some interpreters to suppose that Plato is referred to, but the phrase xuwety rd pabyparixiKat roredy Sias reds SdEas (1, 28) at once suggests Xenocrates (cf. M. 1080» 28, 1086" ro), and this is confirmed by Alexander's inter- pretation of mpooyAtydpevoe fl gt). From the thinkers here referred to Aristotle distinguishes in 1, 32 of mpdros, i.e, Plato (of mporot is replaced by éxeivov in rogt® §).

QI, Todro pev expedyet, ‘this objection escapes’, i. e, fails to hit them,

2673-2 Tt

482 COMMENTARY

There seems to be no quite similar use of éxpevyew in Aristotle, but cf. €ouxey ovtwot ¥s TKOTOU[LEVOLS diahevyety 1093 9.

26-27. od0ev ydp ...cupBdddeTar, 1. e. Recnocaiee assumption of paOnparixa which were Ideas does as little to. explain the sensible world as Speusippus’ assumption of pabywarixa which were not Ideas.

It appears from this passage that as Xenocrates identified ideal with mathematical numbers, he identified ideal with mathematical figures. By idcat d0€au is meant the belief in indivisible magnitudes.

30. paxpotrovety, cf. pyxivey M. 10836 and paxpds dAdyos IOgI® 7.

cuveipew, cf. 1093” 27, De Div. 464” 4, G. A. 71644. It is short for rovs Adyous ovveipew, for which cf. #. NV. 11.47% 21.

BI. TpocyAixspevor Tats Sears TA pOlnpatiKd. mpooyALyouar OCCUTS with a different construction in A. 98626 «i ti mov diéAeure, mpooeyAi- Xovro Tod ovveipomevnv Tacay advrois civar THY Tparyparelav. Alexander interprets (816. 37) ctv ydov7n mpooriOeacr Ta palnpariKd Tals ideas Kal ideas aita mowtov. yAcxouat occurs with the accusative (Pl. Aipparch. 226 ©, and in some manuscripts of Hipp. Z/. ix. 364 Littré), and it seems quite possible for the two elements in zpoo-yAiyoua to govern tais ideas and ra paPnpwatixa respectively, Cf. Hdt. iii, 21 yy addqnv mpookTacGar TH EwuTOv.

37. The manuscript reading, é& &Aou 8€ twos puKpod Kal peyddou: Td yap jeyéOn movet, may be dealt with in various ways. (1) We may omit the colon and the ydép (the reading implied in Bessarion, and possibly in Al. 817. 7 ; but cf. 814. 14). (2) We may read rivos for twos, and translate ‘from what other small and great can he construct mathematical numbers? He already constructs spatial magnitudes out of one other’. But the supplying of ‘out of one other’ is difficult. (3) Christ’s weydAov ov is open to the same objection.

IOQI* 2-3. kal ci... ev. Aristotle here passes to the formal cause and says ‘if some One is the formal principle of each of the two kinds of number, unity will be something common to these two Ones’.

8-5. The point here is: how can there be this plurality of Ones, if at the same time, as Plato says, number or plurality is generated only by the union of One with an indefinite dyad? Plurality, which is said to involve a material principle, breaks out even in the formal principle.

3. Taira modkdd, For the absence of the article cf. Xen. Az. iv. 7. 5 dAlyous TovTous avOpwrovs, Lys. 7. 10 téOvnKe Tada tpia érn, and Kihner, Grech. Gramm. § 465 Anm. 6a.

5. Trendelenburg remarks that here it is only ‘One and az indefi- nite dyad’, not ¢he indefinite dyad, that is ascribed to Plato. But this is probably unimportant. Cf, M. 1081% 14 n.

éxeivov. Aristotle has previously said of zpadro: (10g90” 32), but clearly has had Plato in his mind.

7. & Xiwvidou paxpds AMdyos. The scholiast on Eur. Phoen. 215 quotes a verse from Simonides of Amorgos :

ri radra bud paxpOv Adywy avedpap.ov ;

N, 3. 1cgo> 26 — 10918 15 483

Cf, M. 1081% 14 n.

éxeivov. Aristotle has previously said of zpadro: (10g90” 32), but clearly has had Plato in his mind.

7. & Xiwvidou paxpds AMdyos. The scholiast on Eur. Phoen. 215 quotes a verse from Simonides of Amorgos :

ri radra bud paxpOv Adywy avedpap.ov ;

N, 3. 1cgo> 26 — 10918 15 483

But Aristotle seems to point to some more striking phrase or passage than this; further, he never refers by name to Simonides of Amorgos, and often to Simonides of Ceos, so that we need not doubt that the latter is meant. Alexander says that in the "Araxro. Simonides represented the sort of story that a slave will tell to cover his failure in some duty (fr, 189 Bergk.). Cf het, 141523. Perhaps the reference is to a mime like those of Sophron and Epicharmus; cf. Schneidewin in RA. Mus. vii. 460-463. We may compare Eur. /pA. in Aul. 313 paxpors de doddos dy déyers Adyovs. Antisthenes con- temptuously called definition a paxpos Aoyos (H. 1043? 25). ‘

10. The great and the small cannot (Aristotle maintains) produce any number save 2 and its powers, since it is dvoroids (M. 1082 14, 1083» 35). In order to derive other numbers the Platonists had to use (contrary to their own principles) addition as well as multiplication (M. 1084* 4).

(B) Adsurdity of ascribing generation to the numbers tf these are thought of as eternal (ch. 3. 10918 12—4. 10g1* 29).

12. It is absurd to ascribe generation to eternal things, as the Pythagoreans certainly do. They say that when the One had been put together the nearest part of the unlimited began to be drawn and limited by the limit.

18, But the discussion of these thinkers is more appropriate to physics ; we are seeking the principles of wnmovadle things.

1091° 23. They say the odd is not generated, implying that the even is, viz. from the equalization of the great and the small. These, then, must previously have been unequal, so that the account is meant to be historical, and not merely logical.

1091* 12-29. Bz. points out the connexion between this passage and 1088 14-35. — Aristotle there showed that eternal things cannot be constructed out of elements. Here he shows that the Pythagoreans and Platonists actually proposed to explain the generation of eternal things.

15-18. This is one of the comparatively few passages which throw light on the general Pythagorean cosmology. Aristotle’s suggestions as to the mode of composition of 76 & (i.e. the spatially extended first unit, M. 1080 20-21 n,) are not necessarily based on any- thing the Pythagoreans had said; they might be merely derisive con- jectures of his own, like his suggestions about the constitution of the Platonic numbers in 10g2* 21 ff. (where owépya occurs again, ib, 32). But in one respect he uses the Pythagorean terminology, for xpo.ds is doubtless used in the Pythagorean sense of ‘surface’ (De Sensu

Tia

484 COMMENTARY

(where owépya occurs again, ib, 32). But in one respect he uses the Pythagorean terminology, for xpo.ds is doubtless used in the Pythagorean sense of ‘surface’ (De Sensu

Tia

484 COMMENTARY

439" 30). Aristotle is here referring to the Pythagorean generation of solids by fluxion from planes, of planes from lines, and of lines from points. Again, his reference to seed probably implies that some Pythagoreans thought of the generation of numbers as akin to that of living things. For the conception of the ‘ nearest parts of the infinite ’ being ‘ drawn and limited by the limit’ (here apparently = the One) cf. Anatol. p. 30 Heib. (Diels, Vors. 112. 1) rv povaduuny diow “Eorias tporov ev péow idptoba, Philol. fr. 7 Diels 75 aparov dppoobev, 7d ev, év TO. peow. Tas opaipas éotia Kadcira, fr. 17 6 KOopos eis eoTiv, jptato Sé yiyvecOar ard Tod pécov. The ‘infinite’ is the air (Phys. 2048 31), mvedpa (213” 23), or mvon (Stob. Lvl. i, 18. 1 b = Diels 276. 43),—things not distinguished in the early period of Pythagorean- ism (cf. Anaximenes). The One is thought of as being in the centre of a shapeless mass of air or vapour and gradually introducing shape and limit into it, working from within outwards. The ‘drawing in’ is further described as ‘ breathing’, and the wind or void drawn in is said to keep the units apart (Phys. 213° 24). ‘This is’,as Prof. Burnet remarks (Z. G. P. §53), ‘a very primitive way of describing the nature of discrete quantity’. It will be observed that the Pythagoreans are trying to describe at one moment the formation of the number system and that of the physical universe, which is just what on their principles they were bound to do. The number One is identified with the central fire, as two was with the earth and seven with the sun,

15-17. &s... O07. For similar tautology cf. Znd. Ar. 538” 33-39.

19. éferdfew tu wept picews. There is much to be said for Bywater’s proposal e&erdlew év rn rept picews.

Aristotle discusses the Pythagorean cosmology in such passages as Phys. iii. 4, De Caelo ii. 2, 9, 13.

&s... O07. For similar tautology cf. Znd. Ar. 538” 33-39.

19. éferdfew tu wept picews. There is much to be said for Bywater’s proposal e&erdlew év rn rept picews.

Aristotle discusses the Pythagorean cosmology in such passages as Phys. iii. 4, De Caelo ii. 2, 9, 13.

23-29. Though so far Aristotle has mentioned only the Pytha- goreans (I. 13), he now proceeds to argue that the Platonic account of the origination of things from the principles is chronological, not merely logical. For their failure to give any account of the production of odd number cf. A. 98734n. It is hard to believe that they seriously denied the derivativeness of odd numbers. Zeller supposes that it was only the first odd number (3) that they treated as ungenerated, as it is their original (zpérov) generation of even number that is referred to in 1. 243 if they assumed the number 3 without generating it, they might be said to deny the derivativeness of odd number, though they gave a derivation for odd numbers other than 3. Syrianus’ explana- tion is probably the correct one—viz. that the Platonists were speaking ‘symbolically’; ‘likening odd number to the gods, they naturally say it is ungenerated, while, taking even number as analogous to things that have matter in them, they call it generated and liken it to a dyad ; but none the less they derive the series of even and odd numbers from the same principles’; i.e. they described the odd numbers as un- generated because they likened them to the One, the principle of pure form, and the even numbers as generated because they likened them to the indefinite dyad, the principle of matter and change.

N. 3. 1091715—4. 10917 28 485

28. o6 tod Oewpioa evexev. Alexander tells us (819. 37) that Aristotle is here attacking Xenocrates’ interpretation of Plato; for this cf. De Caelo 279 32 280% 2, which the Greek commentators interpret as referring to Xenocrates. A similar interpretation of the Platonic Yoxoyovia as logical, not temporal, was offered by Xenocrates and Crantor (Plut. Az. Procr. 3. 1013).

From Procl. 7 Lucid. ed. Friedlein, p. 77. 15—78. 8, we may infer that Speusippus is also referred to.

2g. It is a difficult question whether the good and the beautiful are among the first principles or are later.

33. The cosmologists seem to agree with some moderns who treat them as later owing to the objection which confronts those who make the One a first principle; but the objection is not to the ascribing of goodness as an attribute to the principle, but to making the One actually the constituent element in things.

b4. Similarly the cosmologists say that not the first beings—Night, Ouranos, Chaos, Ocean—but Zeus rules the world ;

8. but those whose treatment is not purely mythical, such as Pherecydes and the Magi, identify the first generator and the best, as do Empedocles and Anaxagoras. Of the believers in unchangeable substances some identify the One with the good, but make oneness its essence.

16. It is strange if itis not as being good that self-sufficiency and eternality belong to the primary being; but truly they belong to it just because it is good. The first principle, then, is good.

20. But that this good principle should be the One, or an element of numbers, is impossible. Difficulties arise (to avoid which some make the One the principle of mathematical number only) :

25. (1) Each unit becomes essentially a good, and we get too many goods.

26. (2) Every Form becomes essentially a good. But if there are Forms only of goods, the Forms are not substances ; while if there are Forms also of substances, all animals, plants, &c., will be goods.

gt. (3) The contrary element will be the bad itself. One thinker avoided describing the One as good, just because it would follow that plurality was bad. Others accept the identification of the unequal with the bad.

486 COMMENTARY

35. It follows that (a) all things partake of the bad except the One ; (8) the numbers share it in a purer form than the spatial magnitudes ; (y) the bad is the place of the good and shares and desires in that which destroys it; (8) the bad is the potentially good.

1092? 5. These conclusions follow from treating (1) every prin- ciple as an element, (2) the contraries~as principles, (3) the One as first principle, (4) the numbers as the primary substances, self-sub- sistent, and Forms.

g. If, as we have seen, it is impossible either to put or not to put the good among the first principles, evidently the account of the first principles must be wrong. It is wrong, too, to argue that because living things come from something indefinite and undeveloped, the first principles of all things must be undeveloped; the undeveloped seed comes from a fully developed parent.

17. Again, it is absurd to make place simultaneous in origin with the mathematical solids (for they are not anywhere), and to say that they must be somewhere without saying what their place is.

IOQI* 29—1092° 17. The relation of the good to the dpxai, and the views of Speusippus and the Pythagoreans about it, have already been briefly discussed in A. 1072 30 ff.

30. ebmopyjoaytt émtipnow, ‘a reproach to any one who makes light of it’.

ZI. dmopiav pév. The d¢ clause does not come till » 16.

32. otov Bouddpeba Adyew adits TS dyabdy. Cf. note at beginning of Book M.

33. mapa pev yép. The d¢ clause does not come till » 13.

1072 30 ff.

30. ebmopyjoaytt émtipnow, ‘a reproach to any one who makes light of it’.

ZI. dmopiav pév. The d¢ clause does not come till » 16.

32. otov Bouddpeba Adyew adits TS dyabdy. Cf. note at beginning of Book M.

33. mapa pev yép. The d¢ clause does not come till » 13.

34. Tdv Oeoddywv. Though Aristotle uses Geodoyixy as a Synonym for first philosophy, GeoAdyo. never means, in his works, anything but the cosmologists, such as Homer and Hesiod, as opposed to the ducukot ; cf. B. 10004 9, A. 1071» 27, 1075 26. So Geodroyia Meleor. 353% 35, Geodoyeiy A. 983” 29.

tov viv tioiv refers, as A. 1072» 31 shows, to the Pythagoreans and Speusippus.

37. Aristotle does not specify what the dvoyépeua was which Spet- sippus tried to avoid. He must mean that Speusippus, observing that Plato (who is meant by évou in 1), through treating the One as first principle and regarding it as good (cf. A. 988% 14), fell into diffi- culties (such as those which Aristotle points out passzm), tries to avoid them, not, as he should have done, by ceasing to regard the abstract One as first principle, but by ceasing to regard the first principle as good.

be, Two mistakes are here ascribed to Plato: (1) he regarded the One as a first principle, (2) he regarded it as that sort of principle which is an actual constituent element in ils product, viz.in number. A fuller

N. 4. 1091% 29— 1091” 10 487

list of the mistakes involved is given in 1092°6: (1) he makes every first principle an element, (2) he treats contraries as first principles, (3) he makes the One a first principle, (4) he treats the numbers as the first substances, separately existent, and Forms. For the differ- ence between element and first principle cf. A. 1, 3, Z. 1041 31, A. 1070> 25.

4. of... womnTat of dpxator = of Geodoyor * 34.

For the differ- ence between element and first principle cf. A. 1, 3, Z. 1041 31, A. 1070> 25.

4. of... womnTat of dpxator = of Geodoyor * 34.

5. vixra xai odpavdy. Zeller (i.6 122 ff.) enumerates four Orphic cosmogonies, of which the first is referred to by Plato (Craé. 402 8, Zim. 40 D—4I a) and Aristotle (cf. A. ro71® 26) and described by Eudemus (ap. Damase. c. 124). Aristotle supposed it to have been put into writing by Onomacritus (fr. 1475* 44). According to this system, Night came first and gave birth to Earthand Heaven. The children of Earth and Heaven were Ocean and Tethys (Orpheus, fr. 12 Diels). Musaeus is said to have derived all things from Night and Tartarus (fr. 14); Epimenides, from Air and Night (ff. 5) ; Acusilaus, from Chaos, Night, and Erebus (fr. 1). Aristophanes (Av. 694) makes the birds sing of Erebus and Night as the first parents. The chief other Orphic system is the ‘rhapsodic’ cosmogony dating from the third century B.c. and described by Damascius (¢. 123), which places Chronos in the first place, followed by Aether and Chaos, &c. Zeller argues convincingly for the priority of the first-named system, but Lobeck and others took the opposite view. Tannery shows in A. G. P. xi, 13-17 that the rhap- sodic cosmogony differed from the original Orphic cosmogony not by transforming it so much as by adding to it. For the place of Night in the cosmogonies cf. A, 1071 27, 1072° 8, 19.

6. xaos. Aristotle is here referring to the Hesiodic system ; he else- where quotes Hesiod’s ( Zheeg. 116)

> warroy Rey Tpdricta Xaos yévet’, abrap Erara yat’ etpvorepves

(A. 984°.27,5P&vs. 208% 30). Acusilaus is said also to have made Chaos the first parent (frr. 1, 2).

@xeavéy. The reference is presumably to Homer (cf. A. 983° 30 and /7. xiv. 201). The same view is ascribed to Orpheus by Plato (Cra#. 402 8) and by Eudemus (Diels, Vors. 476. 16).

tourors prev is answered irregularly by éreé xrA. 1. 8.

Q. epexddns. Pherecydes of Syros (a younger contemporary of Anaximander, ¢. 600-525), placed Zeus (Heaven), Chronos (Time), and Chthonia (Earth) at the beginning of things (Diels, Vors.* 201. 18, 23, 202. 4),—or Zeus, Chthonia, and Eros (201. 32). It is his placing of Zeus at the beginning that warrants Aristotle’s statement about him here. In other respects too his system marks an advance on earlier cosmogonies (Zeller, i.6 117).

TO. ot Mayor, i. e. the hereditary caste of priests who took the place of the ‘ fire-kindlers’ of the Zoroastrian religion. They are one of the six Median tribes mentioned by Herodotus (i. ror).

Diog- Laert. (Prooem. 8) tells us that in the dialogue on Philosophy

438 . COMMENTARY

Aristotle identified their two principles, Ormuzd and Ahriman, with Zeus and Hades. Eudoxus is said to have visited the East with a view to acquiring its: astronomical knowledge, and seems to have aroused in the Academy a deep interest in Zoroastrianism (cf. Jaeger, Arest. 133-138).

COMMENTARY

12. tovxetov: Love was for Empedocles one of six material elements. é&pxnv: Reason was for Anaxagoras a motivésprinciple set over against everything else—not a crovxeiov.

13. Tav 8é Tas dxivyToUs ovclas etvat Aeydvtwy, the Pythagoreans and Platonists. ‘

oi pév. There is no dé clause, but one can be easily understood, and Bz. successfully meets Zeller’s suggestion that words to the effect of ‘others held the good not for the One itself’ have dropped out before oiciav. ot ev means primarily Plato (A. 988%14); Alexander and Syrianus cite also Brotinus the Pythagorean, but on this we have no further information. ot d¢ would be the Pythagoreans in general and Speusippus (A. 1072» 31), whose view has been stated in 8 34-8,

16-19. ‘It would be strange if to that which is first and eternal and self-sufficient this very attribute, self-sufficiency and self-maintenance (= eternality), does not belong in the first place as a good. But truly it is imperishable (= eternal) and self-sufficient for no other reason than because its condition or nature is good.’ Aristotle establishes the goodness of the first principle in two ways: (1) the self-sufficiency and eternality which it is assumed to possess are good qualities. (2) It could not have these if it were not in itself good. One is tempted to read os dya66 in |. 17, but then ll. 18, 19 would merely repeat what is said in ll. 16-18.

20, tovadtyy = dyabyv, TatThy = Tiv dapxnv tHv ayabyv. It is impossible, says Aristotle, to suppose that this good first principle is the One; or even, without saying this («i 7 todro), to describe it (more indefinitely) as an element, and an element of numbers. (Plato says that the good is the dpy7 of things; he also says the ororxeta of num- bers are the dpyai of things. It follows, then, that the good is a oto.xetov of number, even if it be not expressly identified with the One.) The reasons for describing this as impossible come in Il. 25-32 ; Aristotle mentions parenthetically in ll. 22-25 the attempt made by some thinkers (evidently Speusippus is meant; cf. M. 1076* 20-21 n.) to escape the difficulties.

22-25. Speusippus attempted to escape the difficulty by doing away with the ideal numbers and treating the One as the starting-point of mathematical numbers only, so that no goodness need be assigned to it and no superabundance of goods be produced from it (I. 26 woAAy Tis evrropia éyabav).

25. Sep dyaQdy tT, species of the genus good, cf. T. 1003) 33 n.

26 woAAy Tis evrropia éyabav).

25. Sep dyaQdy tT, species of the genus good, cf. T. 1003) 33 n.

28. ‘If there are Ideas only of the qualities which are the species of the quality good, the Ideas (will not be Ideas of substances and therefore) will not be substances.’ For the missing step of the argument cf. A. 990 29—g91 2 1.

N. 4. 1091212 —5. 1092421 489

32. 6 wév = Speusippus; cf. M. 108529 n., 25 n. His theory differs in two ways from that of Plato: (1) (1. 23) he treats the One as principle only of mathematical number (the only kind of number he believed in); (2) (I. 33) he did not connect the One and the good, but described the good as coming in only at a later stage of the evolution of the world (#35). But*how is this to be reconciled with the statement (/. WV. 1096? 6) that he placed the One ey rp rv dyabdv ovoroxia? Aristotle must mean that Speusippus put the One in the series to which all good things belonged, though he did not think of it as itself a good.

- 35. ot 8€ = Plato and Xenocrates.

37—10927 I. paddov axpdtou. . . peyéOn, sc. because the numbers are more directly derived than the spatial magnitudes from the original material principle. Spatial magnitudes are ‘the genera posterior to number’ (M. 1085? 7),

1092 I. xépav etvar, a reminiscence of Zim. 52 a B. Cf. Phys. 209? 11.

2. dpéyecQar tod POaptikod, cf. Phys. 1924 18-25.

3. For parallels to the superfluous om cf. Jud. Ar. 872" 39-48.

12. tus, 1.e. Speusippus; cf. A, 1072? 30-34 n.

13-15. Speusippus’ argument is represented as follows:

(1) The One is the beginning of all things.

(2) All beginnings are imperfect.

Therefore the One is imperfect.

From this Aristotle draws a consequence of his own probably not drawn by Speusippus :

(3) What is imperfect cannot be said really to be.

The One is imperfect.

Therefore the One is not.

Aristotle denies the premise numbered (2) above.

17-21. The charge of ‘producing place simultaneously with the mathematical solids’ and of ‘assigning place to them without saying what their place is’ has little connexion either with what precedes or with what follows. Alexander takes it to refer to Plato; but Plato’s xépa (which Aristotle often refers to as rézros, e.g. Phys. 208” 7, 209% 8, b 15, De Caelo 309 24-26) was eternal. It seems more probable that (as Ravaisson, Brandis, and Zeller suppose) Speusippus is referred to. In that case the section continues the attack on him made in I]. rr-17.

Syrianus throws some light on the later Platonic theory of place or space by saying that four kinds were recognized—the place of physical bodies, that of @vvAa «iS (viz. matter), that of mathematical bodies (viz. davracia), that of dvdor Adyou (4) dvw OF SiavontiKi Yux7).

_ 21, 6 témos, ‘dherr place’, which is evidently not the same kind of place that sensible solids have.

490 COMMENTARY

matter), that of mathematical bodies (viz. davracia), that of dvdor Adyou (4) dvw OF SiavontiKi Yux7).

_ 21, 6 témos, ‘dherr place’, which is evidently not the same kind of place that sensible solids have.

490 COMMENTARY

(D) Relation between number and tts first principles (ch. 5.1092" 21 8),

21. These thinkers ought to have distinguished the meanings of ‘from’ and then told us in which, sense number is derived ‘from’ its principles. Not by mixture, for (1) not-everything can be mixed;

_(2) what is produced by mixture is different from its elements, so that the One would then not exist apart, as they want it to do.

26. Not by composition, for (1) that implies position ; (2) number would then be two distinct things, the unit+ plurality. Number cannot be derived from elements which inhere in it (for this applies only to things that are generated), nor as from seed (for nothing analogous to seed can come off from the indivisible One).

33. Is it derived from its contrary? This implies a substratum which persists. These thinkers seem to derive number from con- traries; a substratum therefore is implied.

bg. Again, why are all other things that are derived from contraries or have contraries perishable, while number is not? The contrary of a thing a/ways tends to destroy it.

1092 21-» 8. This section seems to refer primarily to Speusippus. Cf. Introduction, p. Ixxii.

22-23. Svehopevous ... eotiv. Aristotle's suggestions here as to the sense of éx have little connexion with his classification in A. 24,

24. piger, cf. A. 9891 n. Two reasons are given why the One cannot be supposed to be ‘mixed’ with the great and small. (1) Not any and every sort of thing can be mixed. This follows from the definition of the puxrdv as 6 dv edépirtov bv rabytiKov 7 Kal rounTiKoy (De Gen. e¢ Corr. 328 20); again piyvuta dv Ta eoxara ev (De Sensu 447* 30). Further, irdpxeuv def ywpiorov éxdrepov Tov pryOevTwv TOV de rabdv ovfev xwpiotrév (De Gen. ef Corr. 324> 21), and great and small are dy (1088417). pigs is an affair of material things, and to speak of it as existing between the One and the indefinite dyad is a mere metaphor. (2) The product of mixture is something different from its elements, so that after the mixture had been achieved the One would no longer exist as a separate and distinct entity; cf. De Gen. et Corr. 327% 22-26 for the doctrine that the constituents exist only potentially when once the mixture has been made.

The second te in |. 25 serves to introduce not, as Bz. supposes, a third argument, but (as Alexander takes it to do) the second part of the same argument.

26. 4ddd ouvOécer. oivOeors differs from piéis as mechanical from chemical combination (De Gen. ef Corr. 3284 3-17).

30. €oT. pev . . . od. Alexander says Aristotle is here subdividing ctvOeots. It seems more likely that pigis and ovvOeors are treated as

ST. ALBERT’* ~~" °°" LIBRARY IN LOO2? 293 4 491

oivOeors differs from piéis as mechanical from chemical combination (De Gen. ef Corr. 3284 3-17).

30. €oT. pev . . . od. Alexander says Aristotle is here subdividing ctvOeots. It seems more likely that pigis and ovvOeors are treated as

ST. ALBERT’* ~~" °°" LIBRARY IN LOO2? 293 4 491

subdivisions of generation é& évyrapxovrwv, from material constituents present potentially (in the case of pigs) or actually (in the case of avvOecrs) in the resultant. From this is to be distinguished the generation of a thing from an efficient cause which is zo/ present in the thing (A. 10238 26, 29; cf. 1013 4, 7, A. 1070? 22 for the meaning of évurdpyeuv).

32. GAN’ es dard oméppatos ; Cf. 1091716. Alexander (825. 30) takes this as an instance of ds é« px evutapxovrwv, as adda. suggests, and takes yéveors to refer to artistic production. Bz. supposes that édAd indicates not as in Il. 26, 33 the transition to a fresh alternative, but as in Il. 24, 27, 32 (GAN ody oiov krA.) an objection to the alternative under discussion. ‘Only those things which yiyvera: can be said to be é éevyrapydvtuv. But can we suppose that number yiyvera: ds dd orépparos?’ Bz. is evidently right as against Alexander in saying that yéveous cannot = artistic production as against natural generation. It either means natural generation as opposed to artistic production or includes both (Z. 1032% 26). On the other hand, Bz. seems not to be right in taking . ws ard oméppatos to be a case of ws é& evuTapydvrwv. o7méppa, NO doubt, means sometimes the seed of plants, in which the male and female elements are united, and which may be said to be ‘ present in’ the plant that grows from it; but it seems more likely to mean, as it constantly does, the male element in animal reproduction, which is no part of the offspring but only its efficient and formal cause (G. A. 729” 1-21, 35, 730” 10-19, 716% 4-7, 765” 11).

The supposition that number comes from its principles ds e& evv- mapxovrwy is sufficiently refuted by the answer that it is only things that are generated (whether naturally or artificially) that are é€ évu- mapxovrwv—while the numbers are eternal (cf. 1088 14-28). as did o7repparos is one form of as éx py evuTrapyYovTwy. ;

GAN obx ofdy Te Tod Adiatpérou Ti dmeAOetv. Bz. interprets thus: “To explain growth from seed, something must be supposed to come off from the seed; but nothing can come off from the indivisible One’. But it is no part of Aristotle’s theory to suppose that in generation something comes off from the seed; rather the seed comes off from the male parent (for this use of dwedOeciv cf. Meteor. 4669, P. A. 641° 34, G.A. 721 12 ef passim).

But it is no part of Aristotle’s theory to suppose that in generation something comes off from the seed; rather the seed comes off from the male parent (for this use of dwedOeciv cf. Meteor. 4669, P. A. 641° 34, G.A. 721 12 ef passim).

33. GAN ds ek Tod évaytiou py Gmopevovtos; Aristotle now passes to another case of production é« pi) évurdpxovros. Production from a contrary which does not persist (cf. a. 994% 24, 30) is dAAoiwors, not yeveots amdh ; for yéveois arAF is yeveots Kara. THY ovciay, and an ovcia has no contrary (1087 3 n.); yéveows dAf is peraBodr Kat’ dvribacw, from the absence of a substance to its presence, not from one contrary to another (PAys. 2252 12-17), and it involves no persisting sensible substratum (De Gen. e¢ Corr. 319» 14, 33), while the kind of production here in question does involve such a substratum (109 2° 34).

34-3. The argument against the suggestion that number comes from a contrary which does not persist runs thus: ‘What comes from its contrary presupposes also something that persists. Now number

492 COMMENTARY

is represented as coming from contraries. Therefore there must be something else, from which, as well as from one contrary, number is produced’. The reasoning is evidently fallacious. The major premise states that when A is produced from zs contrary B, a substratum C is presupposed. The minor states that number is according to the Platonists produced from /wo contraries. Production of a thing from its contrary, and production of a thing from.two contraries, are quite different, and there is a fallacy of four terms. Aristotle perhaps means to say that instead of deriving number from the One and plurality the Platonists should have derived it (since it is itself plurality) from the contrary of plurality, viz. the One, and from something which can be the substratum at one time of oneness, at another of plurality, as the change from white to black implies a substratum which can be either ; but if this be his meaning, he does not express it clearly.

35- 6 pév. In the light of 1091 32 and A. 1072? 31 it is clear that this means Speusippus; cf. M, 10859 n.,5n, Plutarch (De An. Procr. ii. 1. 2, 1012 D £) tells us that Xenocraées spoke of the material principle as plurality, but of this we cannot be so sure. 6 8€(?1) means Plato,

b4. dca e€ évaytiwy contains the ambiguity commented on in the note on *® 343; it might mean things of which each is produced from its contrary, or things each of which is produced from two con- traries. Kav ék wavrds 9, ‘even if all the contrary is used up’ (which refers to this case alone, not to ois éorw évayria) shows that the former is meant. The contrary which has been used up in making a thing is conceived of as still potentially present in it (évurdpxov |. 6) and capable of destroying it, no less than a contrary which is outside the thing (1) évurdpxov).

7. otov 7 veikos 76 piypa, in Empedocles’ system.

(E) Mumbers as causes of other things (ch. 5. 1092” 8—6, 1093 29).

6) and capable of destroying it, no less than a contrary which is outside the thing (1) évurdpxov).

7. otov 7 veikos 76 piypa, in Empedocles’ system.

(E) Mumbers as causes of other things (ch. 5. 1092” 8—6, 1093 29).

8. We are not told how numbers are the causes of substances, whether (1) as boundaries (as points are of spatial magnitudes, or as Eurytus determined the number of each thing by counting the pebbles he used in tracing its outline), or (2) because harmony, man, and every- thing else is a ratio of numbers. ,

15. But (1) how can attributes, like white, be numbers? (2) The ratio is the substance of a thing ; the number is merely matter. ‘The number is always a number of something, of portions of fire or earth or of units; the substance is ‘so much to so much ’, i. e.a ratio of mixture of numbers.

23. Thus number is neither efficient, material, formal, nor final cause of things.

N. 5. 1092% 35 — 10928 493

26. What is the good that comes from the fact that a mixture is expressible in numbers? (1) It is more important that honey-water should not be too strong than that its elements be in any particular ratio,

30. (2) The ratios of mixture involve not numbers merely but the addition of numbers, not ‘thrice two’ but ‘three of one to two of another’, while in multiplication the genus must be the same.

1093°1I. (3) Ifallthings share in number, (a) it does not follow that a thing’s number is its cause, (4) many things have the same number and will therefore, on the theory in question, be the same.

1g. There are seven Pleiads and there were seven against Thebes, but the nature of the number seven is not the cause of their being seven,

20. They say there are only the three double letters, BWZ, because there are just three concords ; but the number is in either case arbitrary. We are reminded of the methods of the old Homeric scholars. Other numerical comparisons which the Platonists make are equally frivolous,

b, The lauded characteristics of numbers are not causes in any of the senses of ‘ cause’ ; but these thinkers do show in a sense that good- ness belongs tothe odd, the straight, &c. There is a sort of correspon- dence between the straight in length, the even in breadth, the odd in

number, the white in colour. at, (4) It is not the ideal numbers that are the causes of harmonic relations and so forth (for equal ideal numbers are different in kind), so that this affords no reason for believing in Ideas.

24. These difficulties show that mathematical objects are not separate from sensible objects, and that the first principles are not those which these thinkers put forward.

1092» 8—109329. Aristotle now passes from the alleged genesis of numbers to the alleged genesis of things out of numbers. The following considerations show that he has in mind the Pythagoreans and perhaps also the Platonists who most resembled them :

(1) The mention of Eurytus.

(2) The reference to the connexions established between numbers and movements of sun and moon, and the periods of animal life (1093* 4-6, cf. A. 986% 3-8).

(3) The reference to the significance of the number 7 (1093* 13).

(4) The reference to the two cvororxias (1093° T1-14).

It is only at 1093 21 that Aristotle turns to the Platonic theory of

Idea-numbers. 8-15. Mr. Cornford suggests with much probability (Class. Quart.

494 COMMENTARY

xvii. ro f.) that the second of the alternatives here mentioned, the view that ‘things embody or represent numbers, not are numbers ’, is the origi- nal Pythagorean doctrine; and that the first alternative, ‘the crude materialistic view... that things ave numbers, and numbers consist of monads, which are the terms or boundary-stones (6po.) marking out the void “ field” (yépa) in the geometrical patterns of numbers “figured” by pebbles’, is-a later, fifth-century doctrine. Aristotle’s doubt as to the meaning of the Pythagoreans may well be due to his not having distinguished successive phases of their doctrine. Cf. M. 1080? 16 n.

10. We may infer from Theophr. Ae/, 11 Wimm, = 312. 15 Br. that the source of Aristotle’s information about Eurytus was Archytas. Eurytus belongs to the beginning of the fourth century; he was a disciple of Philolaus. Alexander tells us that his method was to sketch the outline of, e.g., a man with coloured pebbles, and then to say that the number of pebbles he had used, say 250, was the number ofman. ‘This is a travesty of the method of limits according to which the early Pythagoreans represented the line by the number 2 (the number of points required to determine it), the surface by 3, the solid by 4 (cf. Z. 10368 n.).. The same process was as it were worked backwards when the numbers were ‘reduced to the forms of triangle ane square’ (l. 12). 3 (.*.), 6 (.:) and all numbers of the form “** were triangular (cf. Plut. Plaz. Quaest, 2.1003 F). Nicomachus of Gerasa (Introd. Arithm. ii. 8-11) and Theo of Smyrna (pp. 31-33 Hiller) represent numbers by a’s arranged in various geometrical patterns:

I 2 3 4 5 6 9 a aa a aa a (9 ee Aas 3 aaa aad aa aa a aa a ae

ag aad

Plut. Plaz. Quaest, 2.1003 F). Nicomachus of Gerasa (Introd. Arithm. ii. 8-11) and Theo of Smyrna (pp. 31-33 Hiller) represent numbers by a’s arranged in various geometrical patterns:

I 2 3 4 5 6 9 a aa a aa a (9 ee Aas 3 aaa aad aa aa a aa a ae

ag aad

‘Square’ and ‘cube’ survive as names for kinds of numbers; ‘linear’, ‘plane’, ‘solid’, ‘ triangular’, ‘ oblong’, ‘ pentagonal ’, and other names which belong to the same geometrizing order of thought have passed out of current use, but, as Prof. Burnet observes, we still represent numbers in this Pythagorean way on dice and dominoes, and we still call numbers figures. On ‘figured numbers’ cf. Heath, Hucld, vol. ii. 288 f., Gk. Math. i. 76-84, Burnet, L. G. P.§ 47, G.P. 53, Iamblichus, Zxfrod. p. 56. 26 ff. Pistelli. According to Lucian (Biwy mpacis 4) the ‘triangular numbers’ were recognized by Pythagoras himself,

13. utd is surprising when the instances given have been man and horse. Christ conjectures Cgwv xal durdv from Alexander (827. 26), but it is by no means clear that Alexander read this (cf. 826, 35), and it seems more likely that Aristotle uses durdv in its older and wider sense of ‘living being’, which is found in Plato (Soph. 233 8 8, Rep.

N. 5. 1092510 —6. 1092 29 495

401 44, Zim.goAa6). Aristotle may be quoting from Archytas’ account of Eurytus,

15-16. 7a 5é 8h wdOn. . . Oepudy. This is an objection to the first suggested mode of treating numbers as causes of things (Il. 9-13); you can make an outline of a man, but how are you to sketch the outline of a aOos?

16-17. om 8€... SHAov is an objection to the second suggested mode (Jl. 13-15); if harmony is a Adyos dpufyav, the numbers are merely the matter, the ratio is the essence.

18. 68 dp.Opds dAy is in verbal contradiction with ovre vAy |. 24, and Schwegler would read tags (cf. Al. 827. 40 6 d& dpibuds... 7d moaov éort THS ExdaTou VAys). Aristotle’s view, however, is that ap. .0s cwparixds (1. 22) (i.e. amounts of certain simpler forms of matter, numerically determined) is the vAy of a compound, though dpibpuds povaducos (1. 20) is not the vAy of any material thing but only the measure of its constituents; so that both statements are true, though of number in different senses.

19. Tpia mupds ys S€ SUo. This suggestion is clearly framed on the analogy of Empedocles’ analysis of bone—

tas S00 Tav éxrd pepewy Ade Nyoridos aiyAys, téccapa 8 “Hdaicrowo: ra 8 doréa AevKa yévovto (De An. 4107 5).

GpiOpos ... mupivos 4 ynivos. Cf. the dpiOuot pydtra, piadtras, numbers of apples (or of sheep), of bowls, &c,, which Geminus (cf. Procl. 7 Eucl. i, p. 40. 2-5) and the scholiast on the Charmides (165 £) describe as studied by Aoyrrixy in distinction from dpibpntixy (Heath, Atst. of Gk. Math. i. 14, ii. 442).

mupivos 4 ynivos. Cf. the dpiOuot pydtra, piadtras, numbers of apples (or of sheep), of bowls, &c,, which Geminus (cf. Procl. 7 Eucl. i, p. 40. 2-5) and the scholiast on the Charmides (165 £) describe as studied by Aoyrrixy in distinction from dpibpntixy (Heath, Atst. of Gk. Math. i. 14, ii. 442).

25. If number is in no sense the cause of things, how is it related to them? Aristotle nowhere gives a positive theory of number (the nearest approach is in M. 3), but his answer might be that number is an oixetov 7aOos of their matter.

27. év edhoyiot» means not, as Alexander says, éy dpriy, i.e. in a ratio like 1:2 or 1: 4, but ‘in an easily reckoned ratio’ (illustrated in De Sensu 439° 25—4402 6 by 3:2 and3:4). It excludes (r) ratios of which either term is an irrational, and perhaps also (2) ratios which cannot be expressed in terms of numbers within the series 1-10,

28. év mepitta, in a ratio like that of 1:3 (Alexander) or possibly like that of 2:3 (~:2+41). For the virtues of the odd number according to the Pythagoreans cf. A. 9864 18 n.

tpis tpta. The meaning of this difficult phrase is clear from 1. 32. Aristotle supposes the Pythagoreans, when they say tpis dvo, to mean ‘three to two’. When they gave zpis zpéa, then, as the recipe for peAtkpatov, they meant that if you take three parts of honey you must take three parts of the other ingredient (milk in Homeric times, later water). Alexander’s mention of a third ingredient, saffron, seems due to a misinterpretation of zpis tpia; it is contrary to his statements about pAikparov elsewhere and to those of other writers. Cf, Columella xii. 12.

29. év ob8é Adyw. Aristotle does not mean that the constituents

496 COMMENTARY

could be in no ratio; he means that the particular ratio does not matter provided there is enough water.

30. axparoy, not of course absolutely dxparov (for then there would be no ratio), but axparéorepor.

30—109371. Aristotle’s statement that ‘3 to 2’, not ‘3 times 2’, is the right way of stating the formula ofa mixture is evidently right. A mixture is got not by taking the same thing over and over again but by taking two or more things in a given ratio. Multiplication means the addition of things of the same kind (1d aird det yévos ctvat év tats rokAarAacuiceow |. 32).

A mixture is got not by taking the same thing over and over again but by taking two or more things in a given ratio. Multiplication means the addition of things of the same kind (1d aird det yévos ctvat év tats rokAarAacuiceow |. 32).

If a given kind of body could be properly represented as ABT, i.e. as IX2X 3, it must be ‘measured by A’, i.e. it must consist of a unitary amount of some substance, taken six times. If another kind of body could be properly represented as ABZ, i.e.as 4X5 X17, it must similarly consist of four portions of some substance, taken 35 times. dore rd aird ravra (sc. det perpeio Bar) (1. 35) Seems to mean ‘so that all the things i in whose formula a certain number occurs must consist of a larger or smaller number of portions of a single elemen- tary substance’. It follows that the number of fire cannot be BETZ (2x5xX3%X7) and at the same time the number of water 2x3. 2X5X3X7=6X35, and a unitary amount of fire would simply consist of 35 unitary amounts of water (which Aristotle treats as absurd).

1093*1-1g. There seem to be two arguments used here, (1) ll. 3-9. If all things share in number (this is not a mere concession to the adversary, but is Aristotle’s own view), there is nothing surprising in the fact that some things (e.g. the periods of movement of sun and moon, the periods of the life of animals) should be designated by square and cube numbers, or by numbers related as equal or as double and half to one another. This is no warrant for treating the numbers as the cause of the phenomena. (2) Il. 9-13. It was assumed that different things could fall under the same number. Then, onthe view which is being considered, they will be the same thing, which is absurd.

This interpretation involves treating sober te l. 9 asnot depending on «i (Bekker, Bz.) but starting a fresh sentence. re often introduces a new objection (e. g. A. 991 27).

4. For the number of the motions required to account for the motions of the sun and the moon cf. A. 1073? 17, 35.

8. dvdykn év TouTois otpépeo Par, ‘all things must move within these limits’ (i.e. be designable by square or cube, equal or double, numbers); ch, KikXw otpédecOau.

12, The sun and the moon on Aristotle’s view have, each of them, five proper motions (A. 107317, 35), and this makes them a good enough illustration of his meaning. The Pythagoreans themselves assigned dzfferen/ numbers to them (2, 7).

13-» 4. Syrianus says that no important Pythagorean quoted triviali- ties such as those which Aristotle here ridicules, as instances of the power of numbers. He refers to the Pythagorean Prorus as having written about the number 7 (the treatise really belonged in all proba-

N. 6. 1092 30 — 10939 24 497

Syrianus says that no important Pythagorean quoted triviali- ties such as those which Aristotle here ridicules, as instances of the power of numbers. He refers to the Pythagorean Prorus as having written about the number 7 (the treatise really belonged in all proba-

N. 6. 1092 30 — 10939 24 497

bility to Alexandrian times, Diels, Vors, 267. 22), but says he confined himself to showing how many things ‘nature does in seven years, months, or days’; while others wrote about the number 10. He retorts on Aristotle by pointing out that Aristotle himself does rever- ence to the number 3 in the De Caelo (2684 13), and forcibly reduces the flavours and the colours to seven each (De Sensu 442219). On the number 7 in Greek cultus, mythology, philosophy, and medicine cf. Roscher in Adbh. der phil.-hist. Kl. der K. Sachs. Gesellschaft d. Wissenschaften, vols. xxi, xxiv, esp. xxiv. 24-43 on the Pythagoreans. The numerical fact about 7 which interested the Pythagoreans was that within the decade it alone has neither product nor factor (Philol. fr. 20 Diels).

14. xopdat 7 dppovios (JA*T Al.) is not very natural, since seven chords are very different from seven modes or harmonies. E’s reading xopdal 4 dppovia is strongly confirmed by Prod. 9184 13 (= 922 3) Awa zi of dpxaio. éxtaxdpdovs mowidvres dppovias kth. Cf. g1g) 21 (= 922% 22). Alexander finds a difficulty in reckoning seven harmonies (832. 20).

év émra Sé d8dvtas Badder, cf. Solon fr. 27. 1 Bergk.

15. evi ye, eva 8 ov. The horse, e.g., does not, H. A. 5764 6.

1g. thy S€ dpxtov ye Sd8exa. Galen (ix. 935 K.), who evidently has this passage in view, says that seven stars were reckoned in each of the two Bears, and the same account is given in Philo de Mundi Opif. 39. 114, Anatol. p. 36. 4 Heiberg, Hermipp. Beryt. ap. Clem. S¢rom. vi. 16. 143. 1. Ptolemy, however, assigned 27 stars to the Great Bear, and Hevelius, much later, assigned 12.

oi 8€ (XaAdator Al.) mhetous. We know that the Chaldeans had a name for the Bear, viz. Narkabti, but we do not know how many stars they reckoned in it. Cf. Ginkel in Kiz0, vol. i. 5.

20-21. om... tpia. Alexander says that £ was connected with the fourth, € with the fifth, y with the octave.

21. Sri Sé pupia &v ein toaita. Tannery has published (Bull. de Corr. Hell. xx. 422) a table of the fourth century B.c. found at Delphi giving simple symbols for various groups of consonants.

22. ei 8 ot, ‘if they say that’; cf. pacity |. 20. ‘If they meet our objection (that there are many combinations of letters for each of which a single sign might be devised) by saying that € y ¢ are the only combinations each of which takes twice as long to pronounce as a single consonant, and if the cause of this is’, etc.

pacity |. 20. ‘If they meet our objection (that there are many combinations of letters for each of which a single sign might be devised) by saying that € y ¢ are the only combinations each of which takes twice as long to pronounce as a single consonant, and if the cause of this is’, etc.

23. Tpidy dvtwy téTrwy, the palate, the lips, the teeth, against which the tongue is placed when é, w, ¢ respectively are formed. Syrianus says that Archinus (the introducer of the Ionian orthography in the second half of the fifth century) gave this explanation of the fact that there were in Greek only these three double letters.

24. tv éh Exdotou émpéepetar TH olypa, ‘ a single letter (guttural, labial, or dental) is applied to the sigma in each region’. Alexander seems to have read 76 ofypa, assuming the sigma to be sounded after the other element in the double sound. But ev ... 76 o¢ypa would

2578-2 ; Kk

“52 &

498 COMMENTARY

be an unnatural combination, and further £ = a8, not dao (A. 993° 5). émupeperar must be taken as implying nothing with regard to the order of the two sounds combined.

26. mdelous ye al cupdwviar, i.e. new combinations (such as the eleventh) can be made out of the primary concords. But you cannot combine two double consonants to produce a new consonant.

27-28. Tots dpxalois ... mapopdow. The reference is probably to allegorizing interpreters of Homer such as Pherecydes of Syros (c. 600-525), Theagenes of Rhegium (fl. 525), Metrodorus of Lampsa- cus (d. 464), Anaxagoras (c. 500-427), and Democritus (fl. 420). Cf. Diels, Vors? i. 376. 15-17, 414. 9-24, ii. 67. 21, 22, 203. 27—204. 7, 205. 26—206. 10, Sandys, rst. of Classical Scholarship, i. 29, 30.

29. at te péoar h pev evvean Se dxTS. The peoae are the fourth and the fifth, the chief notes intermediate between the keynote and the octave. The fourth and the fifth answer to the ratios 8: 6, 9: 6.

67. 21, 22, 203. 27—204. 7, 205. 26—206. 10, Sandys, rst. of Classical Scholarship, i. 29, 30.

30. 75 €mos Sexaemré. The epic verse has seventeen syllables, if we assume a spondee only in the last place. Alexander takes év pév 76 ded to mean ‘in the first half of the verse’, and this is confirmed by the fact that ‘ right’ and ‘left’ were technical terms for the first and second parts of a lyric system. The alternative is to suppose that ‘right’ is the part after the caesura xara tpitov tpoxatov, the common- est caesura in Homer; this too has nine syllables. Wilamowitz in Berl. Classthertexte,v. 2. 141, and S. E. Bassett in Class. Phil. xi. 458- 460 defend Alexander’s interpretation of 76 defidv. For the identi- fication of the right with the dépyy of movement cf. H. A. 498° 6, I, A. 70518, De Caelo 285” 16 (cf. 284» 6, where the Pythagoreans are referred to). Bassett quotes many instances to show that 70 defov was used by the metricists of the section of the verse which came first, e.g. Mar. Vict. 108. 16 Keil ‘arma virumque cano... Huius incisioni quae syllaba clauditur, si alteras duas adicias, ut tertium pedem trisyllabon compleas, erit hoc trimetrum defidv’, i.e. the three dactyls at the beginning of the line form the colon dexitrum or dpxrixdv (cf. Mar. Vict. 74. 8 K., Plotius 514. 28 K.). Further, Aristotle would naturally mention the first half of the line first. And, finally, BatveoOar refers not to caesura but to scansion in feet. The earliest Greek definition of caesura is in Aristides Quintilianus (p. 52 Meibom), in the second or third century a. p.

b 2-4. The meaning is that there are 24 notes on the flute, from the BouBvé (an onomatopoeic word for the deepest note) to the highest. guwvny is to be supplied with 6gvrarnv.

4. js. 24 is reckoned as the number of the highest note, so that Diels’s ois is unnecessary.

ioos TH odAopeneta, Alexander suggests that the number of the uni- verse is 24 because there are 12 signs of the zodiac, 8 spheres (i. e. the sphere of the fixed stars and those of Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, Mercury, Sun, Moon) and 4 elements. ovAouéAea is an Ionic word meaning the whole nature of a thing (uéAos = limb) ;_ cf. Hipp. De Artic. iv. 108 L., De Anatom. viii. 540, De Gland. viii. 556,

N. 6. 10932 26 — 1093 14 499

De Nutr. ix. 106. Here, however, there is probably a reference to the music of the spheres, cf. A. 9864 2 f. (uéAos = tune), Nicom. ap. Phot. Bzd/. 14425 says it was used as a name for the number -7, and in Theol. Arithm. p. 36 Ast we are told that the Pythagoreans, following Orpheus, applied it to the number 6 ; but the present passage shows that it was with the number 24 that it was identified.

(uéAos = tune), Nicom. ap. Phot. Bzd/. 14425 says it was used as a name for the number -7, and in Theol. Arithm. p. 36 Ast we are told that the Pythagoreans, following Orpheus, applied it to the number 6 ; but the present passage shows that it was with the number 24 that it was identified.

Q. otTwot ye oKkorroupévois, ‘if we look at them in the critical way in which we have been looking at them, they seem to vanish away ’. For the dative cf. 1090? 20 ois dé ras id€as TiHeuévois TodTO péev expevyer.

10. T&v Siwpiopevav Tept Tas dpxds, Asets.2:

11. Bekker and Bonitz read airwyv éeorw. exelvo pevtTor mo odor gavepov rv. Christ reads airidy éoriv. ws pévTou rovodor, pavepov KTA. as is better attested than éxeivo, but Christ’s punctuation gives a false antithesis between as pev Aéyovod ties Kal aitia rovodet THs Pioews and @s pevto. odor. Diels’s punctuation removes this difficulty. Aris- totle makes a concession to the Pythagoreans. Their view that numbers are the causes of good and evil evaporates on examination ; but they make it clear that in some sense the good ‘ belongs’ to certain numbers. The seasons of the year and of life go ‘together’ with certain numbers. There is an analogical relation between things in different ‘categories’ (loosely used here for genera), whereby oddness

_in number may correspond to straightness in a line, evenness in a surface, and perhaps even to good in things which can® be either good or evil. But all this is mere correspondence and not causation

12. ovototxias, cf. A. 986% 23 n.

13. 15 tepitroy, cf. A. 986° 18 n., 23.

76 e000, cf. A. 9864 25 n.

TO iodks toov is probably the right reading, since it preserves a rare but genuine Pythagorean phrase (cf. JZ. M. 1182°14 od ydp éorw 7 dixarordvyn apiOpos ioaKis toos, sc. ‘as Pythagoras said it was’, and Pl. Theaet, 148 a1), and accounts best for the variants icov A>, iodp.6- pov B. iodxis icov = retpaywvov, which occurs inthe overorxia of the good, A. 9862 26.

14. at Suvdpers éviwv dpOpav. It is doubtful whether this means the ‘ powers’, in the mathematical sense (cf. A, 1019” 34, @. 104628, De Lin. Insec. 970% 2), of certain numbers (terpdywvov occurs in the overor- x‘a of the good in A. 9864 26, and cf. rerparywvous, ciBovs 1093* 7), Or whether itmeans the powers of certainnumbers, inthe non-technical sense of ‘power’. éviwy is in favour of the latter view; according to A. 986% 26 one would suppose the sgware of any number to be in the ovoroixia of goods. Alexander gives the second interpretation, and illustrates éviéwy by TEeTpPAyOVUY, TpLrywovev (numbers like 1, 3 (Ee 1+2), 6 (= I+et+ 3)), eayovov (numbers like 1, 6 (= 1+5), 15 (=1+5+9)).

dua yap Opar Kal dpi6pds tovogdi, ‘for the seasons and a certain kind of number (the square number 4) go together’, There may also be a reference to the comparison, ascribed by Aristides Quintilianus (Musica, iii, p. 145 Meib.) to Pythagoras, of the seasons to the con-

Kka

500 COMMENTARY

Kka

500 COMMENTARY

cords; spring is to autumn the fourth, spring to winter the fifth, spring to summer the octave, so that the four seasons are to one another as 6, 8, 9, 12. Plut. Ox the Birth of the Soul in the Timaeus 1028 f. ascribes the same view to the Chaldaeans,

17. cuptrepacw, ‘chance coincidences ’,

oixeta ddAnAots mavra, i.e, the normalineach class corresponds to the normal in every other class.

20. tows, i.e. for the sake of argument Aristotle is willing to allow the superiority of the odd number, on which the Pythagoreans laid such stress.

21. It is not Idea-numbers but ordinary mathematicalnumbers that are at the base of musical harmony and the like, for equal Idea-numbers, like Idea-units, differ in kind (M. 6-8), whereas the theory of harmony implies that equal numbers are identical.

22-23. Siapépovor yap... kal yap at povddes. From the fact that Plato treated the different numbers as different in kind Aristotle infers that the units were also different in kind, and from this that equal numbers composed of different units were different in kind.

27. For ouveipa: used absolutely cf. rogo? 30 n.

$7, ALBERTS COLLEGE LIBRARY

INDEX VERBORVM

0293" = 1000%—1093"

a privativum 22°32

aBapés 4°1

ayabdy = ov een 98210, 983%32, 996724, 12, 13°25, 59 #36 syn. wardy 13°22, 91*30 dist. warty 78*31 dist. pauvépevov dn 13? 94 onpaive 70 toby 20°23, cf. ib. 13 mais épxn 75°38, cf. ib. 12, 8.11 mas éxovct apes 70 d, 74 aToxX¢ia g1*30, cf. 92*9 ovOev Aéyew Tas pabn- pariuas eémotnpas mepl a. 78°31 khenriy a. Kal ovKopayrny 4. (2119 70 dpewvov 827 eis 70 Gpewvov dmotehevT hoot 983718 Pyth. 986% 26 Plat. 31*31-"12, 84735

ayanaabat 980% 23

dydanats 980% 22

d-yannrov pers 5

d-yevnrov 999” uf

dyvou. opp. 76 eidévar 982" 20, cf. 75° 23 dist. Yed5os, dndrn 52%2

dyvwaoros 995%2, ,30°9

d-yporedrepo 986° 27

d-yopyvacro 985%14

dyaviov 20*35

ddvatperos I. T, 84 14, 85° 16-22 Kara, 76 moody (Kara THY aicnow), Kara, TO elB0s 999*2, 16*19, aXe » 23, 89> 35) cf, 88%2 To eld 14% 27 eis elon 999° 4, Kara. Xpovov 16° 6 a, avTé 76 & z 7 a, oriyph 2° 4 syn. dmdods 14°5 a. mpos. 16°33

dbiapopos 16*18, 35*16, 54° 4 4, povades 81” 13, 30, 82227

ébizta Pyth. 990% 24

Gdinos 61722, 25

ddropior ers 986" 34

Gpés 17°8

GB puv ors 65°20

ddvvapia mocaxa@s 1920 def. 46°29 a. opiabeica us ouveiAnppevn TO beKTUKD 55,8, 58> 27

dbvvarety 36°7, 38" 13

abvvarov ouppaives 2°32, a7?11, 19 a, smoraxes 19? 21 dist. Wevddos 47°14 4 eva ib, 5 dévva- Oe ie i998 *19

21 dist. Wevddos 47°14 4 eva ib, 5 dévva- Oe ie i998 *19

dépwos 49*26

aap | ( (Anaximenes) 66°21

aderov 7 povds 16°25, 30, 84°27, 33

db pey 998” I

Aiywa 15% ae

Alyuntos 981" 23

aténdos Emp. 0° 8

alb.os. Siapevewy dba 984* 16 dkwnra 987” 16, 15°14 Ta alia ee cf. gg1*10 obey Buvdper

a. 50°7 ev Tots Gd. ovbey kakov 51%

20 ovata. aiainrh a. 69 31, Bae dydryen civat G, ovotay A. 6 dpa 7d. Gd, && oroixelo 88> af Gromov yeve- aw Tovey didioy gi*12

aiperov bv aid 72° 35

atoOnpa 10°32, 63°4

aisOnots 980* a2, 27, 29 >25, 981" 10, 986" 32, 999° 3) 10>2, 3,3 36*6, 8873 ai Kowal laos 98114 fp al. ddAoiwas 9” 13

aisOnrnpiov 63% 2

aicOnrés 987°8, 14, 997°12, 10°32, 78°16 = rary ai. det peovree 987° 33, cf. 999” 4, 103, 36°28, 69” 3. émt- oTnpns mept TaY ai. ovK ovans 987° 34) 2 15 Opp. padnpartinds 989? 31, 9g0*15 coni. lyqovs 989» aT 36” ap opp. as gd 990* 31; 999°2, 25°34, 30°32 9 43°29, 45° 34 Opp. elonrixos 9° Pag m6 Epov Tas ai, odoias pévas cya paréov 997% 34,

a. Kat

riee 59° 39 ai. ovclat vAnv zxovet 42°25 ai, évaytiwoes 61% 32 ovata ai, 69% 30

airetaOat TO ev 8exh S817; cf, 20

airia syn. 2px 982°9, 983°4, 986° 335 989° 23, 13°17, _mpern ale 983°25, cf. 3731 —airiay éxer 984° 19 TOU ware ovpBeBnxes al. 65°7 al. réocapes 7° >26 1OTE pov pas q TwoAA@V EmoTnpav Beaphjoas tas al. 995°6

airraobas 985 * Bis E313

aimiarév 65% 11

airiov, copiay mept Ta hha ai, tmo- AapBavovat mayTes 981? 28, cf. 982° 13 70, apxis at, 983° 24 eyn, dp ib. 29, 990%2, 3°24, 13°16, 69°33 syn. oroxeiov 25°5, 42%5,

502

69*%26, 71%25, 86%22 A€yera rerpaxas 983%26, 9965, 44°33, A. 4 otk dnepa Ta ai, a, 2 métepoy puds % mAcbvay emarnpav Gewphou nivra Ta ~yévn Tov al. 996* 20 nogaxa@s 13%16, A, 2 mavra 7a, al, dthia 26%147 al. yevnTa, Kal pOapra dvev rod ylyvecOa Kal pbeipe- ga EB, 3 at. ward oupBeBnkds 27%8, cf. 65%6 7a éyyirara al. 44”1 70 KivoOUVTa. al., Ta ws 6 Ad-yos 70% 21

aldy 72” a9, 75%10

dnvyata 988" 3, 44°19

dkwnros. 76 vd, 984*31 éorw d. tis pbows 10°34, cf. 69733, A. 6, 73% 24, 33 mocax as 68” 20

dxorovbeiv 981*27, 989%32, 3°23, 18% 36, 42°3, 47°3

dnoveyv 980" 23

duparos Aoyos 9* 4

dn pBns 982*13, 995° 10, 73°16, 78%10 dupiBéorepor Adyor 99015, 79%11 airion dxpiBécrepa 257 a, 70 peérpoy 52"36 éxpiBéorepos opp. paranwrepos 64% 7 coni. AoyKw- Tepos 80* 10 dnp Bas 31%7

dnp. Boroyia 995 915

dxpoages 994” 32

dxpos. al dxpbrara airia 2,*26 7a apa 30*25

AKpwrnpiov 24% 25

ddrndea 983” 3, 988420, 993%30, 17, 20, 53, 91, 78°13

ares cimetv 9897, 6” 29, 7°32, 12% 28,17°34, 21°1, 25°14, 77°31, 33 mt dG, OD eyytrepoy TO paddAov 4 9*1 ToUTw d. 113 y ib, 25, 12%9, ®. 10 E, 4, 17*31, @. 10,65 *%21

10 E, 4, 17*31, @. 10,65 *%21

drnbeve mepi 7t 10%9, wept Tivos » 24 adnbevecOu Kara Tivos 10%8, 11°16, 62%34

ddndwurepov 9*3,

*Adrnpalov 986% 27

dAAG in apodosi 103

dddo mocax@s 54°15 Gddo 71 44°16 v. 1.

dAdoios Emp. 9” 20

ddrdolwats 989%27, 42%36, 6912, 88% 32

Acad. 87°26

a dddoppoveiv Hom. 9” 30 ddoryos 99923, 2%29, 8348 pets 462, 48% 4, 5033 Gros 65°20 dpa 68” 26 dpa voeiv 27°23, 24 dpdprnpa 51*20 dpapria 834, 8424 apBpoata o* 12, 17 dueveOns 75°29

a, duva-

Tay Kore cupBEBnkos TA —

INDEX VERBORVM

dpephs 73°6

dperaBarnros 14°28, 19%27

dperdmearos 15%32

dpeyhs 98915, 17

Gpuxros 9891

dyo.Baios Emp. o? 15

dpmexopevor 23 *11

dpvbpas 985%13, 988°23, 993°13

dpproBnrnotpos 996"27, 10717

dppw, 70 e dppoiv 29*6,71%9 70 appa 84%12

Gpas yé mas 22%2

dvayew eis Tov Adyov, THY apxHV, Tovs dpiOpovs, evépyeav, etc. 983%28, 4°T, 36°12, 51°30, 994>17, 4>28, 34,

55°29, 61212, 82°37 eis yvapt- purepov 40” 20 ypappny 51*25

dvaykatov 10" 28 mocax@s A. 5, Vor LT

h dmddegis Tov a, 39°31

dmodeucviovow dvaykadrepoy 25°13

dvayin def. 6°32 nocaxas 26°28, 64°33 —é d. 62%21, 7210 opp. ws émt 7d odd, cupBeBnios 25% 15, 18, 20, 2628, 278, 64°33— 65°3

dvaryoryh 5*1, 27°14, 61°11, 16

dvaipeiv 990° 18, 1215, 6211, 79°14, 82533 70 émtaracba 99420 ov ciay 7*20, 86°18 del dvauipeiv €or 40% pass. 9929, 0” 29, 68, 65%14 dva.poupeve dvatpel- rar 17"18, 71435

dvaxaprreyv 9943

dvardoiwros 73," 11

dvahoyia. Kar’ d, €v, etc. 16°32, 34, 17 "2,18" 13, 70%32,!) 26, Same

dyddoyov 43%5, 487, 93°19 0 d, auvopay 48%37 7@ &, TavTa 7OP ty 714s 26, 93°18 7d avrd Kal 70 a. 89”

dvahvew Tovs Adyous 63°18

dvadurind 5° 4

"Avagtarydpas 984*11-16, °18, 985% 18- 21, 988%17, 28, 989%30-"21, 991 . 16, 9*27, 12°26, 6325-30, 69%21—- 32, 72°5, 75°8, 7920, gr?44 citatur 7 25, 9>25-28, 5628

*Avagipavbpos 69” 22

*Avagipévns 984% 5

dvamre eis Tovs dpiOpovs 78” 22

dvatponh 13°14

dvapépeaOat mpos 7. 4*25, 26, 45°28

dvbpamnoba 75% 21

dvipravronontinn 13°6

dvdpravrorotds 13°36—14*15

dvbpeds 13° 35—14*11

dveredbepos 995% 12

dveXitrovoa opaipar 74% 2, 9, 11

dvépyacros 48” 4

dvev, tov oboiay a. 71*1

INDEX VERBORVM

dvOpwroeidets Beot 997” 10, 74°5

Seoparnos, TO dv Opa elvan 6° 33— vce Seman 8 pevdns eae &, av- Operon dee g2025, a s2,070"8, 27,°34, 92°16

duixia Pyth. 990% 24 v- 1.

dvicoy 2233 7o &. Acad. 75%33, 8705, 9 88*15, >29, 32, 8976-15, 9135, cf. 81225

dyrucelpevas paces 11 14, 62" 6,.10,.22, 33, 17 peraBons) els ra dvruceipeva 11°34, 69% 4, cf. 57°31 dvtixeipevar Siapopai 16% 25 Aglade mooax@s A. 10, Etsaetory sy fe 33 dist. évayrioy 69"5

dy Tide yew 24? 34

*AyriaGéveror 43” 24

*Avriabevns 24°32

dvriotpepew 16° 28, 61717

avripacts T. 3-6, 12P2, K. 5, 6, 67°14, 21, 22 perago ayTipacews ovbév T. 7, 55°1, 63°19, 69%3 maa dvvapus da THis | d. 509, 31 dist. orepnots, évavTidTns, TA mpds TL 55% 38 70 Kara THY a. 63%21, 24

dvtixOov 986%12

dvumderos 5°14

dvw 992° 17 7g, 16% 29 jdvarré pos 990°6, 5°34, 16°30 dywrdrw 998? 18

dvdvupos 33°14, 56225

afiopa = dmodeKrinh apxn 997"7, 11, 5*20, 533, 90°36 =sententia 1>7, 77°30

do.bot 983%4

déparov 22°34

dépiatos 98918, 10%3, 63%28, 92%13 a. 70 Suvdpe ov, 7 VAN, TO ovpBEBn- kos 729, 34%24, 65%25 cf. duds

dnayopevew gt 23

anddea 46*13

dnaOns 99126, 19731 syn. dpera- Banros, dvaddoiwros 19*27, 73711

dmadevaia 53, 6°6

dmatdevrot 4324

dnayrav tea 145,63? 13

dndy rots 9% 20

Gnaft 20>%7

dmaray a Bay ts

dnarn dist. dyvoi 52%2

5°3

Gnavatos kivnots 72% 21

drecpia opp. éumetpia 981*5 opp. mépas 988 * 28

dmepov, To a. 2, K. 10 dmetpoe ai dpxat Anaxag. 984°13 d. 70 & Mel. 986°21 To &, ovalay eva Pyth: 987° 16, 990%9, cf. 986% 23, 4p 33 & peydou kal puxpod Plat. 987° 26 rd, Anaximandri 52°10 obs d, Td atria a. 2, 74% 29 70 a. TOs evdéxerat voelv 994” 22, 28, 999° 27 76 a. ward THY mpbadeaw 994° 30 ad. emt 7d dvw dAdas TO d. A€yerar Suvdper kab évepyelg 48? 9-17 70 drei py elvat wat a. 70 avrd 66°13 diareipov ti ib. 32 ovK éorw a. HEyeB0s 73%10 ijrot dmeipos 6 apiO pos 7 TeTrEpagHLEVOs 83> 36 —eis dmetpov iéva, Badicer, mpoévat 994° 3, 8, 20, ° » 4, 0° 28, 6% 9, 10% 22, 1 p2 12; ba, 229, 30° 35, 32% 3» Baw ED 4132, 70*2 elvan

994°3, 10*22 v, aE dmepavrws 66> 33

dmepyaecdar 48° 4

dnépxeoBau éx Ths evTehexelas 36°6 = ek Ths aio Oqo Eas 4073

andav dor pa PB PTO

dndods. d. cHpara 9846, 988° 30, ag

KOs 42° 9; are I peyes ameyns, ddvatperos 989” 17; 14°5 70 mpa- TOV dvarykatoy TO a. F 5 “b 12 olriat

dmdovorepau Opp: dueptBéorepat 25 Bey Ta a. a. ovota 24> 27) at LXoy 72° 32 a. Kivnots, popd 53%8,73%29 padAov apx? 76 admAovarepoy 5935 ‘yéveois an 07) 23, 245 68°35, 6910, 88*33 dist. é 2" 32 amas 987*21, 15°8, 20°33, 26°33, 42°7, 49*23, 52°19

dnoBdéTey 986 24

dmoBodat 18°34) 55°37

dmoryiyveqbar 49° II

amodekvivar éeyeTucas 6°11 15>8

dmodektixal dpxai 996>26 dmodek- Tuk 997 *5-30 onovdn a. 73°22

andbeugis 992” 31, 14°36, 77? a2, B78 2 Tept mavtav dddvarov a, eivat 997°8, 6*8, cf. 11% 33 ovK EoTW dmddergts ¢ ovolas 2514, 64" 9 TOV ovaiay Tay aianray Tov Kad’ Exaora oud’ dpa pos obr’ a, gov 39°28 = ad. TaY Guaryreaiay ibs 31 pepe Tas a. 526, 87> ar d. amA@s, mpos rovde 62% 3) Aoyixal a. 87 at

amA@s, mpos rovde 62% 3) Aoyixal a. 87 at

amodéxecOan 987” ANOOR G0; 13,5503

darodudovau 40°30, 45°16, 57°8, 59°27 70 aitiov, TOY ae etc. igh 35, 64% 2850452 2200 87a ne O24 DE Ta,

amA@s

504 pavdpeva, 73°37, 74%1 Te Tals apxais 84°35.

admokabioravar 74%3

dmoxpive 989°6, 14, 48°3, 63°30

dmodAapBavew 61 a1

dmodoylay éxew 1° 15

dmodveuv. dmodeAupévos 31°3, 85°16

dardpy ya 4 Bek ae ah ft (ie

drropta 1995" 30, 87°13 988> 21 diadvey 6115, 6231

anoppinray adiopiatws 986%34

dmopwrarn ovaia 29733

dmoredeutay eis TowvavTiov 983°18

dmorépvedOa 3%24

amorpwyev 1*2

sore xdvee? 9931

dmovy 22 *35

dmovata 4°14

dmopaivesdar 984%3, 99317 idta

42°7

dmopdvat Ti mpds Te 12°13 amoré- pnke ib. 16

sey » eters:

amdpaats. 14

drop pierdat 10831

dmrecOar 998%2, 2°34, 14%21, 25, 68> 27, 09%13 metaphoric 984%28, 985° 24, 538790; 09" 24

arvpnvov 23°1

dpe? TeAciwats Tis 2120

apiOpnrinds 5°31, 9o*14 &. &p.O nds

8316 apiOunrinn axpiBeorépa yewperpias 982° 28 h apOunrin 99128

apiOunrds 66 25

apiOucs, % Sexds Soxet macay reprecdn-

peva THY TaY &. pvaw 986%9, 73%20, 84°12, 32 Tov ad. voulCovTes api elvat 986*16,76%31 apiOpod ora- xela, yéveois, ma0n 986%17, 8415, 84°3, 91°29, 990°19, 4P10, go*21, cf. 986%20, 84°28, 8912 TOV Gd. THY ovalay andvrwy 987%19, 1°26, VO" 31, S0*13, 83 429) sO24 TOs Nch. 98726, 1°25, 90%23 mparoa a. 98734, 52°8, 81%5 a. vonrot, aigOnroi 990*30, 90°36 _—coni. «tn 9919, 8022, 8676, 91°26 coni. idéar 76%20, 8012, 81°7, 90°37 Aspe apiopey, etc. 99113, 17, 19, 92> 14, 31; cf. 985” 33 bia rh ev GG, 992°4, 4453) .45°8 | vepelne, Kar’ p10 pov év 9905), 33, 2224, 16°31, 18913, 33°31, 39°28, 54°34,

d, SvepxecOar-

INDEX VERBORVM

60> 29, 87> 12 70 évl elvar apxn Twi zor apiOpod eivar 16°18, 21 *13, 52°24, cf. 88°6 def. 20°13, 39” ae 5a> 39; 57° 3), 85°22, 88*5 of a. Trowot tives 203 avayew es Tous a, 36°12 coni. Spo pds re 34a, 4508 évépyea % Kar’ apd- pov 51* 33 a. padnarsicol 76*20, 8021, 30, *135 81°6, 8353, 8645, 9033; 35, 1°24 ot a. Acad. M. 6-9, N 64. 6€ xov 70 mporEpoy kal vorepov 8012 a. parabocal 8019, 30, 82°6, 83° 1% 92°20 a. mp@ros 80°22, 81%4 6 Tay eidaiv a. 81°21, 33" 3) 90°33 tis d pub pod Srapopa Ser ov aupBAnrods €ivat Tovs a. Plat. ib, 34 a. dpi unruxcds

83°16 drretpos, memepacpevos ib. 36 6 dp’ évos SemracvaCspevos 84%

6 apn ob« €or ev Tots d., TO F epetiis 85% 4 a. 34 go? 35 Opp: Abyos 87°12 a. TUpwos, ynivos g2°20 & apn elvat ib. 27 a. Terpayowor, KUvBot 93° 7 Ta peta Tovs &. 99213, cf. 85°7

dpiorepov 986% 24

Ap erimns: 996 *32

apiorov 42? 21

dpros 93° 19

93°14

dpyoviich 997>21, 78%14 dppovKa 77% 5) 93°22 :

Gpyotrev Tit 22%2 20

dppev 988%5, I. 9

dppuomoros 14°27

dpats 19 "16 Valls

dprao bat By hikyy

dpriov Pyth. 986%18, 24, 990%9, 66°21 Plat. eae 3-7, 91°24

dpriérns 4°11

dip xaiKas 89*2

dp xatos 989° II, 69% 25

dpxn syn. aitia, atrioy 982? 9 983° 29, 4, 98633, 989 23, 990° 2, 3° 24, 13° Hy Beat 5, 69°26, 33, 86% 21 7a é€ da. atria 983° 24 6 Oeds a. Ts ib. g syn. oTotxetov 983711, 989°30, 995 °37s OGR as 255, 42%5, 69°20, 80? 32, 86%an dist. orouxetov 41°31, 7023, grag, 10 d. & Bays elder, TO e€ ov, ws VAN, Twparecn 983" 7, 24, 986°17, 987° 4, 46%23, cf. 984%6 Ths KW Tews, HeraBAnriKh, KWYTLKN 7) OraTeet as Kwoov 7) tardy 984%27, 46°14, ? 4, 49°6- -9, 70” 25, cf. *7 év dAAw év aiT@ 70°7 d. 70 ob Evexa 50%8

énTa

émi tivos 81%

Pyth. 986724

INDEX VERBORVM

dmetpo. ad. Anaxag, 984°13 Tas Gd. déxa Tas Kara, ovarorxiay Aeyouévas Pyth. eee TavavTia apxai ps6" ans 31, 87° 30 ddqPéorarss 993°23 éorw d. Tis go4*I & Tos Adyois, ev TO bmoKepevy 996% drodektinal da 99626, cf. 99328 BeBadrara 59, 11, 18, 22, 6%5 Wwopipwrary 5°13 dvumd0eros ib.

14 _mororépa 623 mOTEpoy TA yer dpxat aon? cide, aprou@ €&y 999°25, 2°31, 6oP29, A. 4, 5

TOV poapray wat Tay apOdprav 076 monepow Kadddov 7 Ka’? Exacta 3°74, ramon iM. 10, cf. 6022, 69° 28 a. moocax@sA,I aid, rav ovrow a évra, BE. 1, cf. T. 1 coni. ovgia mph $y 60? 23) 6928, 70°25, 76°24, TA. ee d. Kat TA eine 51%20 poe d, 70 atdovaTepoy 59°35 an 73 avvavaipody 60*r ad, mas ai avral, mas erepat A. 2-5 m@s TO ees ee 75°38, cf. 12 mas TO ev d. 84° 19 mas Exel mpos TO ayaddy gi*31, 92°12 —aireioOa 70 év a6, cf. 20, 8>2 apis 983” 20 apxikwrépa, apxikwrarn emorhyn 82% 14 96 dpxiTenTovinal TExvat 13714 apxiréxtav 981% 30 dpxoeidés 999% 2 ’Apxvras 43%21 dorarov ope. 7 3° 31 dorpa A. 8 a Tov d. pots 73°34 darporoyia 989°33, 997°16, 35, 998° 5, 53°10, 73°5s77°2 dovpBAntos 55%7 d. povddes M. 6, 83°19 dovpperpia Tis, Sanerpov 983716 dovpperpos a geo 120 down bea 995° 2 dotvOera 51°17 a. TH yever 57°21 davvOeTwTEpos 40% 23 doxioros 38°14 dowparos 988*25, Bae arakra Kat drepa 65%26 dragia 985°1 opp. «fdos 70 28 arehés 77°19, 92°13 drehedryTos 66°37 “Arthas 23%20 dirunros BaPa aropot pap mat 992% 22, ef. 84° I a. peyebn 83°13 — Tad, = maxime universalia 994221 =TAa Kad’ exagrov 995°29, 998°16, 29 (?), 999° 12, 15,

58°18-20 = 4, ld 998" 29 (2), 18> 6, 34°8; 58°18, P10, 59°36 To yevee 18

dronwrepa ovpBaive 39°17

595

ba i 42"35 opp. picts 6911, 88% 31

abrapices 91°16, 18, 19

abr é pare syn. TUN, Opp. Poats, réxvn

984° Be eos tar 4g: 23, 34°10,

Ay 65°3, 70°7 — Tay PavpaTtwr Tab. 983 "14 avtés. mpooriBevres Tois aisOnrois 70

picts 6911, 88% 31

abrapices 91°16, 18, 19

abr é pare syn. TUN, Opp. Poats, réxvn

984° Be eos tar 4g: 23, 34°10,

Ay 65°3, 70°7 — Tay PavpaTtwr Tab. 983 "14 avtés. mpooriBevres Tois aisOnrois 70

phua To av7é Plat. 40°34, cf. 991%5 avTodimAdctov 99032 abrody6 poy- mos 991%29, 19, 997°8, 40°33, 79” 33, 81°8, 11, 84*14, 18, BI avto- ayadoy 996828 abrd ev, ov 1*22, 27, 30 abro-ypapp} 36°14 avo 70 (wov 39 P 9-16 avrolnmos 40” 33; (84% 14. avTo émornun 5° 536 avrdé Te 79° 9 85°31 abd Exaoros 84°15 auto 6 éorw 86” 27 airs aya, Bara 87*9 + —rTavrd 995” ar, 21°11 mooaxas A. 9, 54° 13 T. T@ cide, TH apiOud 18”7, 49) Pag; 42% 58°18 T. KATO oupBeBnicds ay? 7

dpaupety opp. mpoariWévae 1°8, 30°33 TH diavola 36°3, cf. 23, 27” 33 vy. 1.

datpeots 661 — é€ da, 61%29, 77 10

apy 14°22, 70° 10, 82°20, 85°3

dpOaprou ovctiae 40° 31 éTepoy TH yéver 70 pbaprov kal TO d. 1. 10

depeevan g81? 24 év wowed 98714 ét THs pe0650u gi*20

aduoTavat. dnéary 56>28

dpoporody 92°13 Lod 985° 33

anand 4819, 60 kar €ldos

981*10 a Aids 485. 77°26 opp. duvdpe 2°23 "Agpodirn 73” 31 dx pov 989° 9

dxupoy 989” to axaproros ga? 17 dyuxos 981" 4, 46°36, 47°4

Badicey eis Gireipor o> 28, 6*9, 12°12, paamwazeow3s? 4 41? 22 = expe mwas B. dpxjs 27°12 én apxiv Kat tédos 50°17 Badi(ey eoriy = Radice 17%29 7 Badifew, To Badicov a8 20) 24

Badiors p04" 9

Babos 20°12, 14

Badd nat ranevdy 992*13, 15, 20°21, 85° II, 89° 13

Balyeacba: evvéa ovdAdAaBals 93°30

Bdvavaot réxvat 996% 34.

Bapv 20% 22

Bapirns 20 10

Baows geom. 51%28 metr. 87°36

BéBatos a yupipos, etc, 8*16, 17, gma, 10

Bia opp.

mute OSSie PEMEE TO

——

506

Bimov kai % B., coni. dvayxaioy 15% 26, 30

Bidkeobar mpos imdbeow 82>3

Biatoy 15*26, 28, 36 syn. mapa piow

Bréray paddov 986? 28

Boay ws éAkdpeva gi* 10

BéOpos 25%16

BopBvé 933 :

BovrAccOa opp: A€yev capes, SiapOpovy 89P19, 2°28 BovAccbar Aéyew 86° 19, 89% 20, 91232

Bovdntés 72% 28

Bpovray 41% 25

B@dAos 67* 11

yadnvn 43°24

yapos Pyth. 78> 23

yeveots. ai y. mepi 7d Kad’ ExacToy 981" 17, .Cfe 42 %30, 7O= Ts yevéoe Uorepov, pice mpbTepoy 989*15, 50% 4, 77220 peragd Tod efvar Kal pur) elvat 994727, cf. 55°11, 91°34 = pvouwal opp. momoes 32°16, 26 Tov y. % pev vdnots % 5& moinos 15 yéveots €x Twos Ti €ora 33°11 ema dvev y. €or kal ove éotw 44? 21 def. 67°22, 6910, 88°33 = -y. amA7j 67°23, 24, 68°35, 69°10, 88°33

dist. xivnows 67°31, 68%2 ovK €or yeveoews yévecis 68°15 yerntds 27°29, 44°3, 69°25, 26 yevvay tov ovpaydy 989°34 Tov

dpiOydv 608

99824, 30%12, 3845, 85224 dist. xa8ddov 99212, 15°28, 28535 +. TeAevraia, mpara, éoxata, dvwrdtw, éyyvTata 995°29, 998°15, 18, 999°1, 23°27, 34°1, 37” 30, 59°27 TOTEPOV TA Y. TTOLX ELA 998*21, 14°11, cf. 42°14, 59? 21-27,

69*27 dpxal Ta y. TeV dépiopav 998°5 ody ofdv Te ovTE Td ev OVTE TO

év elvat y. ib, 22, 45°56 y. Coni. épispds, eldos 998°13—999%23, 16° 32, 23°18, 24, 25, Z. 12, 39°26, 57°7, 59°36—60%5 ~—coni. d:aopd g98” 31, 14°11, 16924, 37°19, 21, 39% 20, 42422, 59°33 tmocaxas A. 28 y. ws bAn 24°8, 38%5, 58223 a) ¥. ob# ovoia 42% 21, 53°21, cf. Z. 13 76 Siapepoy diapéper 7 yéver 7) elder 54°28; cla 24° 0, 58870 amdekinaP 30, 57°38 peraBadrdew eis dAdo yévos ove Cot 57*27 = eldos 58> 28, 59*10, 71% 25, cf. 58°26, 31, 71% 27 7a mpara y. 5927 yépas Simon. 98231

INDEX VERBORVM

yewdacia 997°26, 32

yewmerpns 998*I, 4, 5711, 31, 78°25, 89%22

yewperpia 99634, 997°27, 19°33, 46*8

“yewperpixds 983%20, 992%21, 61°3

‘vi 989%9

ynivos 49%20, 22

ynpavais 65°20

yiyver@a. dixGs yiryverar Tdd€ Ex TODSE 994% 22 TO yeyvopevov peragd Tod évtos Kal py bovTos ib. 28 Ta Y- éxer UAnv 32720 yiyvera x THs aTepnoews Kal Tod Umoxepevov 33%8, cf. 55°12, 6226, 69°18, 20, 88°17 y. Ti, « Tivos, bd Tivos 9996, 10* 20, 32°13, 31, 33°24, >12, 44°24, 49°28 =». puoet, TexvD, Amd TadTO- parov Z.7,9 advvaroy +. ei pndiv mpovndpxot 32°31, cf. 3312, 49°35 y.70 abvordov Z. 8, 42%30, cf. 34°8, 43°18, 44°23, 69°35 —-y. & Spar vipov, avvevipov 34°22, 49°28, 4ots ye atd@s, pt) GmA@s 42°47 dud 70 TOD yeyvopévov yeyevqadal te 49°35

yeyveonev 994%22, 28437, 2, 31>7 mept Tivos 997*2

“yvwpifev = sensu percipere 980% 26, 36% 6 syn. émigracba, etc. 981°6, 983% 26, 994°30, 99616, 997°1, 4, 9985, 4°20, 23, >7, 5*28, 36°8 mept Tt 5%28 mept Tivos 37*16

yrmptpbos 62*14 y. pice, adT@ 29° 3-12 yopipwrépas 53°14

yopiotinds 4°26

wots 981" 11, 1830, 28423, 3828/2), 48° 15, 49°17 = ToD potov 7h dpolw 0°6

ywords 29°10

youpos 42°18

youn dist. oméppara 71°31

ypappata o%3

ypappartucds 6424, 26 ypapyparucn B20 exemplum 70d ovpBeBn- Kéros 26° 17-19, 64% 23-26

yeanpn 2°5, 766-35, 78°15 — dropor ys 00292 4uch 1SAen aigOnrat 998" — ode Ex oriyp@v 1°18 def. 16° 26 ypappns 6 dNOyos 36°13, 43°33

ypaperba 779

yupvov 68%7 @

yr 34°3, 58°29

apx? Tod y. 1620

darpdvia 1712

daetvAoy exivee pdvoy Crat. 10*13 troBadAovar 63*8 éndddAagis TOV ONLI *33

day Parm. 89*4

INDEX VERBORVM

deinvov 42” 20

béna tds dpxds d€yovow eivar Pyth. 986° 22

bexaenTa 93*30

bends. Tédevov 4 6. Pyth. 9868 Plat, 73% 20, 82%1-11, 84%12, 29-2

dexrimov 18% 23, 29, 32, 68> 25

Sefidv 986%24, 9371

deopds 42°17

Beipo, 7 g91%30, 2%15, 598, 11, 60%9, 63%11, 22

Ore 98112, 41%10 = Bd ti mpwrov 983% 29

did-ypappa 998%25, 14%36, 51°22

Siarypapew 54% 30

Biaryoryy 981" 18, 98223, 7214

bidbeos 195,22? 10 mooaxds A. 19

b.a0vyn Democr. 98515, 42°14

diarpetv §=— 2733, 513, = 6934 mathem, 23 log.8%19,21,27,62°3 diarpetoba 4% 28, 28%10, 29° 1

diaipeors 164, 5 mathem. 994” 23, 2*19, P10, 48°16, 60%14,19 log. 27°19, 3728, 67°26, 722 Taw évay Tio 54%30

diatperéy 20% 7, 7720

biancioban 830, 2211, 631

braxdopnass 986*6

Braxpivew 984% 11, 985°24, 28, 75%23

Pipl be 15, 98833

Biaxpiritov XpHpa 57°8, 10, 19

BraréyerOa 98933, 420, 7%20, 78% 29 mpos airov 6°8 ef dpicpod 12

bad ciney 986% 7

Siadexrirot 995° 23,417 diadexrinn 987° 32, 4°25 6. ioxis ote hy 78° 25

SidAAagis 15%2 :

jiadtou dmopiav 63°8, 13

drapayecOar 992% 20

biaperpou acovperpia 983% 16, cf, 20, 12% 33, 17°35, 19°24, 24°19, 47°6,

» 51D 21, 53°17

SrapproBynretv 62° 34

Biavociaba 74°25

Siavonrinds 25°6

Sravonrév 21%30, 31 dist. vonrdv 12%2

bidvow 12%2, 13%20, 21°31, 32, 25°6, Ty, 272 2 28, 32%28 = bdbfa 984%5,986" 10, 9*16 — opp. Aéyeiv 985%4 édroravar tiv 8. 987°4 7h 5. dpioa, dpereiv, timodaBeiv 9* 4,

. 36°3, 73512 ovvdmrer Hh duaipel 7 5.

507

arr ag supmroKh HS 6. 65%22 dnd 6, yiyvecOa 49%5, cf. 32%28, yoP a1

Sramopeiv 991%9, 995%28, 35, 95, 996" 17, 999%31, 9°22, 59%19, P15, 79° 12, 21, 85%25, 86%19, 34

diandpnyua 53°10, 761, 8615

5iapOpodv 9866, 989%32, 227, 412

biacapnvicey 986" 22

iidornya log. 55%9 mathem, 85°30

Braspépew 1.4 Kara yévos 187 26, cf. 54°28 bua sri yun) Gvbpds obK elder Biapéper I. 9

biapepdyrws BY 11

Brapedyew 2°27, 93” 10

BiapOopa 51% 2

Siapopd 988" 23, 99825, 30, 4%14, 20% 33-2, >15, 42°15, 57°4-19, 58° 30, 59°33 ‘moAdds dnAoi 6, 980% 27

tpeis Democr. 985%13, 4212

dist. evayridrys, érepdtns 4%21, 54” 23—55 "33, 58°11 dy titel evan 5. 16%25, cf. 484, 57°5 yen tov 8, 42%32 6 60 Tdv 8. dOyos 43%19 opp. Adyos évorroids 45°17 def. 58°7 yevous 5, ib. 8 ov rrovel 6. 7) HAn 6 mporo 5, 61 14 tis dpOpod Siapopd, nai povdbos, «i éorw 83%

Budipopos mogaxas 18%12 81°33, 35

Srapavely 85°36

BiaxwpliCecbar 23% 23

frapevbecOu 512, 9%11, 14,61" 34

Bi6agis 4110

bibacKarinds 982%28 TEpos Ta aitlow ib. 13

Kbdonew 9817

bibdvar = avyxwpelv 6% 24

drepxeoOai 71 98821 epi Twos 48%30

diepwrav 0% 20

povdbes 5,

biBacKaAKw-

Siecis 16°21, 53812, 87%35 al 8, 600 53715

Brexey 63% 31

ixavéis, diopioreov, etc. 27°18, 29*1, 48°37, 996°8, 14

diopiopds 5°23, 48*2, 20

Bide 981% 29 = bri 62*6

Sirdacialdpevos ap’ Evds 84*6

bimAdorov 20” 34

Binovy 38% 23

508

Sirrov 76 dy 6915

ddypa 62525, 76*14 992" 21

doxovvra coni. parvdpeva, Suvata 9°8, 88°16

Sodrxaiwves Einp. 0*32

ddfa 984*2, 99I*19, 993°T2, 18, 996” 28,.9°3 36, Io*I, as 14 “Hpaiehei- Teor 5. 987* Pyth. 990° 23 ai wept TaY bea ddgar, etc. ggo° 22, 28, 78>10, 13, 79°18, 25 —coni. SmdAqyus 5° 29-31, 9* 23 (cf. 30), 10® 10 coni. Savoia 9*6 (ct, 16) coni, payragia 62>33 dist. Emt- oTHuN 39°33, 34 warpros 8, 74°13

yewperpicor 6.

éxovtat on ddéns 87°31 (Seat ddgar go 29

BogaCew 9°11, 13 opp. émicracdat 828, 30

dovdy 982529

duds dist. S:aAdovov 987° 26 coni,

péya Kat puxpdv Plat. 98726 (cf. 33)3 g88*13, noes Io, 88915 p@aprat Evades gol * 4 Tpwrn TOY apiO way 999*8, cf. 85” 10, 889 = auTo- ypaupn Plat. 36°14, cf. 43°34 8. adptoTos Plat. SI*14, $255 Be. yan.

8213, 30, 83°36, 85°7, 88°15, 528, 89%35, ot 5 5. mpatn 8r* Bok a1), » 4—83*33 avr? 5,

815327, 82>12, 20, a, cf. gg1?3r dvorro:ds 82°13, 83536 «TOU dvioov 5. 87>7

_ Bee TA oTotxeia 2°33 dv dépictov 7%28 dist. évépyea 7°28, © 3, 48°32, 69°15, 71°7 5 év Th yeaper pig 19>34, 46°6 dist. vods, TéxVN, puats 2523, 27°6, 32° 28, 3328, 64°13, 49°9 coni. tan 42°28, 10 49° 23; 50* 15, >27, 60% 20, 69> 145 70 12, 71*10, 75°22, 88®1, 92*3 7) Svvdpe kat 7d evepyela é&y mus éotw 45°21 5 ddoyor, peta Adyou ©. 2, 50°33, cf.

, , moTepov Suva- TO Suvapet

évépyea Suvdpews ©. 8 over Sura- pe atdiov 5058 Gua ths dvTipa- vews ib. 31, cf athe ao mporepov 6. evepyeias 71°24, cf. 341 —plasép-

metpias i ad dmoreActy Q81°I Tpd= ros THs 5. 4° 24 dvvapls = émornun 18*30, 55°31, cf. BT 5 See signifi-

catio 52>7

93°14 SvvacGa 70 adré 11*7 Suvarov tocax@s 19*33,

48*27 coni,

ai 5. eviny apiOpov

bo8) @nc4; éviéxerar 47°26,

INDEX VERBORVM

50 11 8, elva 478 TpwTas 8. 49° 13 tavrov 5, ravavtia 51°6 eis 76 5, 74> TI 7O 5, adv. 78* 28 y. is

dvo0 Ta TOMAR TOY dO parnivaay 986% 31

dvoTords 82% 15, 83? 36

duckoNa = drropia 997°5, 74°17

dvoKodovI? T

dvaTuxets 983%1

duoxepalvew Te EavTois 984%29 twos 76°15 = Tt 88° 30

Svoxépeta 995°33, 85°17, 864, P12, go*8, OL 37.5 Ura Aoyteai 5 aa, 87020

duaxeph 81> 32, 85>6, 8657, 8831 auvayew 5, 63°32

Kara

ey yerepoy attiov 148 5

eyeépaos 13°6, 35°26

eypnyopés 48> R

eyprryopats 7217

€Ovos g81? 25

00s, & opp. Vee 981° 5, cf. 47°32 KaTa Ta €. 9943

eldévar g8o* ae gure 24, 28, 983%25, 993°23, 994°21, 29, 996° 15, 19, 28% 36 syn. émistacbar 982*30, bat, 994 4° 20

cloqrurds 865, 8834, 9035

eldos OPP: vAn 988°3, forts. 69°34, 70*2, Dine 84° 10, cf. 35%8 THs vans paddoy oy, atrioy 29%6, 1>8 yévos «lda@y ggI* an ein ds yevous 57°79 58°22, 79°34; 85°24, cf. 998° 24, 30°12 coni. yévos S998 45 23°18, 24, 25, 38°7, 57° 7» 59 «i39 = yes 58°26, 31, 71°27, ch. 5 28, 59* 10, 7itas ely ray eddy a 23 Tov bvtav AaBely émornunv 7 ray ei. AaBely 998°7 ddiaiperov Kata 70 €. 999° 3, cf, 2°24, T6Bgay 18°13, Bey 49 18, 29; 58°18 = syn. Hoppn 999°16, 15°5, 17226, 33° 5 44°22, 52°26, O8 22, >26, cf. 22%6 coni. rk iv clvau, ovola 13% 26, 30°12, 3201, 33°52 35°16, 32, 4198, 44°36,

els ddialpera €.

502, 84>10 coni. agi dpiopds 13° 226, 35°21, 36% 28, 43°20, 44°12, 69°34, 8410 pla

ouvexeiq a eidec a Adyw 169, cf.

ib. 23 érepa T@ cide 18%38, I. 8,

9, cf. 54°28 coni, 7éd€ Te I 26, . 49° 35. TeAevraioy el, 185, 61°24 def. 32>r dopo 34°8 coni.

Thon ib. 24, 70°14 70 MIs cba TO el. 34°8, cf. 43 17; 44° 22, 69°35, 70%15 7a TOU el, pépy

INDEX VERBORVM 509

Zs 10, It TO €d0s ex Tod yévous kai Tov Sapopay 39°26, 57>7 syn. fis 44°33 =~ opp. or épnats, ib., 70> 11 — & BAns eiber 983°, 984°17 — «idn Plat. A. 6, 9, 999°33, B. 6, 4820, 31°14, 15, 36%15=20, Z. 14, 5o* IT, 13, M. 4, 5, 84°13-29 ot 7a el. TWevTEs, A€yorTes 988" 1, QQ? 197 90702; YOUTK, ch 42°11, 7519 Ta THY Ei, OTOLXEIA Q87>IQ et, THY dnopacewy gg0°13, 79%9 €i6n éorw énéca pice 7018, cf. 14, 9917 ei penta TA el. Qg0>28 coni, dprOpoi 9919, 8022, 81%21, 833, 86%4, 90°33, 91526 ra el. aicOnra diiia 997%12 4 rar el. airia 3326 mpos Tas yevéoces Kal Tas ovoias ov Xphotwa ib. 28

eixaCecdar 7928

eixov got” 1, 79°35

elvat, @ 70 el. erepoy Kab Toy KaTn- yopiay Exdotn 29722, cf. 52°15, 75°5 70 dy coni. 7d & 986I5, 99822, 1*5-?1, 3°23, 4°5, 5%9, E35 )40°416, 456, IF. 12, 5948, sr, Go's, 704 ovx elvan yévos, ovK elvat ojaiay Tay dyTwv 998>22, 1%5, 5*9, 40°18, 45°6, 59°31, 70°7 TO dv mohAAX@s 992°10, 3°33, A. 7, 19°4, 26°33, 27°31, 28%5, 10, 30° 21, 4225, 51%34, 60°32, 64? 15, 89°7 7 ov 7 Ov, Syn. oy amas, KaQdXov, opp. ov TL, kara péposT. 1, 2, 25°3, 9, 2631, 32, 60°32, 64°15 76 Op 70 Kata oupBeBnkds 17%47, E. 2, a 70 ws GAnbés 17°31, E. 4, ©. 10, 65%21 70 dv Suvdper, bruL- K@s, Opp. éevTedAexela 17°35, 78°30 kupiws dv 2731, cf. 511 m™pwTov év 76 th ear 28°14, cf. 30 TO Ov 76 Kata tds ovotas 8932, cf. 34 — ph ov 6919, 72°20 = 70 ph Ov elvat pn) dv 3°10 TO pr dv ws Td Yeddos 26°35, E. 4, ©. 10, 89°28 70 ph dv dEyerar TAEOVAXas 67” 25, cf, 51°34, 6927, 89°26 advvaror TO ph dv KiwvetcOa 67°30 TO pn) ov Plat. 26°14, 8925-28

eimeiv, @s 980%25, 98531, 99832, 1030, 26°9, 28>, 85°11, 8719

eis 6 7O%2

clcaywy? Tov cidGv 98731

x Tivos 991*19, 994%22, A. 24, 44%24, g2*23

26°14, 8925-28

eimeiv, @s 980%25, 98531, 99832, 1030, 26°9, 28>, 85°11, 8719

eis 6 7O%2

clcaywy? Tov cidGv 98731

x Tivos 991*19, 994%22, A. 24, 44%24, g2*23

éxelvivos 33°7, 49°19, 21

éxeivas 1%9

€xOeors 992" 10, 3121, g0*17

éxrenis 44° 10

exon Tov evayTioy 4°2

éxparyetov.988 * 1

mpds TL QQI*24

éxrievat 86" 10

éxtonwTepos 98930

éxtpomn 89°

expéepery Bpov 40” 2

expevyew Twi go> 21

éxav 25%9, 12

eheyeTin@s amodeitar 6212, 15

ékeyxos opp. dmddefis 6°18, g*21 copuotinds 32°7, 49°33

€AcdOepos 982" 26, 75% 19

€duKes TOU oVpavod 998"5

€AkeOat QI * 10

éAAeupis opp. Drepoxy 992°7, 42°25, 35

éuBpva 14°22

"Epredoxdys 984%8, 985%2-10, 21-4, 988°16, 27, 989%20-30, 993717, 996°8, 998%30, 0%25-P20, 1%12, O9%2mn 7226, 752, OPE ~ cita- tur o®29->16, 9°18, 15°1

éumerpia 980? 26—981"9

éuminrew ets Tt 986°15, 56%2, 8475

éumoveiv pavTactay 24” 24, 25°5

épmroinTids 25% 4

éupatvecbar 28% 28, 91% 36

Eupuxos 46°37, 48°4

& TW, ToGAaX@s 23°24

év, 76 I, 1-3 Kata Tov OYoY, TI vrAnv, Thy atcOnow 9869, 10, 32 dpiOu@, Kar’ eidos, kata “yévos, Kat’ dvadoyiay 99925, 33, 2°24, 16°31, 33°31, 39°28, 54°34, 60°29 = kara. 70 auvexés, moady, Toby 1425 auy-

exridecOa 3°10 v.

exeia, elder, Ady 16°9 apn, piger, Oéce 82%20 Adyy, apOpue 87? 12 éy 76 nav 98822 ev

ént moAA@Y g90”7, 13, 991%2, 40° 29 ovn eart yévos, ovaia 99822, 1%5— BZ Re OrChaAO TOW AR Oya?) RO” Bu yoy kal 7d dv 99822, 1% 5—

As 323,45, 5°9, 12, 40°16, 456, I. 2, 59°28, 31,605, 7o?7 ev 70 ddialperov 999%2, 4T*19 mpos &, Kad’ &y, xa’ Evds, &v 3°33, 15, 5*I0, go's, 43°37, 6r?12, 615 dmavta tora 6°17, 36°20 mocaxas A. 6, 52°15 dpxh dpiOpod Kat pérpoy 16°18, 21°12, 52°18, 23, 8478, ‘cf.0' 87233 TO evi elvat 16°78, 41°19, 52" 35 16 dpb pos, Spiopos eis 443, 6, H. 6, cf. Z.12 év nal ToAAG I. 3, 6, 75%33, cf. 4*10,

87> 28 éva 5623, 83%25 dist. Gmdodvy 72°32 ove eoTw apiOpos 886 —Pyth. 986%19, 21, 24,

987%18, 27,111, 80°20, 31 leat. 98615, 19, 24,1°33 Plat.987°21, 9882, 992°8, 1%11, 25%33, 80°6 Anaxag. 989°17, 60921 Emp. 0% 28

510

évaytioy 13°12, 18%25-38, 54% 25, P 3? f I, 41,5) 1 58° 26,75 21-24, 31, 92°3, 33-8 Tavavtia apxal Tay dvTwv 9863, 4 30, 75° 28-32, Pia), 87°30 ee Tay. cis THY px ‘TadTqy AAC) Pam éxdoyy THY ev. 4°2,

cf. 54°30 Ti €oTl, TOGAX@s A€yE- Tai 4? 3s 18925 ey évi évayriov 4? 35 cf. bbe 20 = «Tay é, 4 eT Epa quaroixia :

f I, 41,5) 1 58° 26,75 21-24, 31, 92°3, 33-8 Tavavtia apxal Tay dvTwv 9863, 4 30, 75° 28-32, Pia), 87°30 ee Tay. cis THY px ‘TadTqy AAC) Pam éxdoyy THY ev. 4°2,

cf. 54°30 Ti €oTl, TOGAX@s A€yE- Tai 4? 3s 18925 ey évi évayriov 4? 35 cf. bbe 20 = «Tay é, 4 eT Epa quaroixia :

orépyots 4° Wisma hited 55> 14,) 275 61*19, 63” 17 éy. eimety I1*1 Tay. ovX Ga vrdpyey evdexeTa TO aire °T%, cf. 63” 26 coni. aro- aos Te 9 TOV (a TO avTo eldos OF) oo neara ravayria yiyvecbat é¢ dAdnAay 44? 25, .ch, OOo dovy- Gera éf GAAHAwY 57°22 anaen on adAapany 75°30 coni. mpds Tu 56” 36, 57°37. éx Tov é& Ta peragy 7 Ta é. THs avTHs emorhuns 6119, cf. 996%20, 78°26 pndev ovaiag é, 68911 é. kata Témov » 30 dist. dvrice(peva 695 ov aS ev. HeraBadrer ib. 6 DAnv exer 75? 22, 87> 7a evavrios Seospoyae 57 Dir ivavatoras 99522, 55%16-» 15, 58° 11, 63°14 dist. Suapopa, eregeras, avrigaats, orepnots, mpos Tt 4°20, 55° I bia Ti 7 wey TOLEL TO eiBet érEpa evavTiwats 7 e ov I. 9 evayT.ovabal tive ggo> a3, 79%18 évaytiws diapépovta 57> II évayTiwaes 9861, 63°28, 69°6, 13

2 lod See ee 4 py

év 77) ovaia é, Exe 18°3 = évav- tidtns I. 3, 4, 5898 mpaTar €. TO évros 61%12, P13, cf. P5 —aiaOn-

Tar €. * 32 ToAAGs Umopevew €. go*2

evap pos ggi>22

evavgerat Emp. 9°19

evdexds 84% 26

evdexetOat. ws ep’ daov évdexeTar 982 9, 26°25 Tas évdexopevas daopias 988° 21 TO evdexdpevov = eq’

doov évdexerat g? 34 coni. duvarév 47°26, 5OP IL

evdtar piBey mepi tos 98927

évexa. ov evexa 44°36 = 70 dyabdv 982 Io, 983 32, 996% 24, Dra, 138 20, 25,442 12, 59° Mowe coni. Tédos, dpxf 9949, 13°33, 226, *21, 50%8 Twi kat tivds 722 TO everd Tov 65% 26

evepyeia ©. 6-9, K. 9. coni. ovgia, eldos, Near etc. 42° Io, 43° 23, 35s 5OPa, 43% 205,32, 008, 50 “16,70 PSs 43°12, 25, 28, 32 51> 31 OPPs HAn 43°6, 12, 45°35, 71°22, 76% 10 opp. Guvapis 43 * 18) 65°16, 69° 16, PH*® 6. iNT? 20,122 ag dist: eredexera

INDEX VERBORVM

47°30, 50%22 — dist. xivgois 48> 28 mporepoy duvapews O. 8, 9 dist. épyov 50% 22 adn adds dAns 43°12 70 Suvdper kat TO evepyeia év mws 45°21 éevepyela, opp. eee, xwpiorov 48°15 700v7) i] é 72> 16 évepyelv 72°11, 13 Ta évepyouvra

Kat TA-Kae’ enaator 14%21 évia puxn 26%5

évvolas xdpuy 73? 12

évomrotds Adyos 45°17

évorns 18", 33 ope le}

évoxds Tit OP 17, 70°14; Gof 31 evravoa, Ta &. 990° 34, 99° E302 ey evredexeia opp. dévapis 7” 28, 15*19,

17) admedOdvta ex Tis é. 36°7 opp. vAn 38°6, 78°30 He. xerplger 39” sy) syn. ovgia, dats 44° 9

coni. évépyea 47%30, 50°22, 65°22

evrevgis * 17

evTpaphvat 985°25

Spumancet 986° 7, 13% 4, 7) 24, 14°26,

OTe ues 7Ou22, noo 30 6 &e Tay

évuTapXovT@y Adyos 43*20

efaupely 994°12, 43°12, 47°14

éfavOciy 10% 10

etfs 68° 31—69° 2

us opp, bronelpevoy 983°15 coni. 7a0o0s 986°17, 15°34 = owparos duddeois 9° 18 opp. orépnats 18°34, ToP7, 85 55°33, 13 mogaxdis A. 20 coni. eldos, ios 44? 32, Yoo Te

7a0o0s 986°17, 15°34 = owparos duddeois 9° 18 opp. orépnats 18°34, ToP7, 85 55°33, 13 mogaxdis A. 20 coni. eldos, ios 44? 32, Yoo Te

4 70d eldous €. 55°12 €, dmadelas 46°13

efioracba 9°29

éfw AaBeiv mr 21°13, 55412 é, ov

wal xwpiordy 65%24, cf. 28%2 éfa- Tépe 55°25

efwodels 2 25°27

efwrepurcol Adyou 76% 28

endryew 989° +33

énayoyy 25>% 5 64%9 — dist. dmédergis, Spigpos 992" 33, 48°36 AapBavey did THs, SnAov ex THs €. 25°10, 5433, 55°6, P17, 58%9

enatay, 981 *24 4°10

éraxrucot Ad-you 78> 28

émdAdagis Tay SaxrvAwy 11* 33

éravaBhva 990°%6

éravadimdodaat 3° 28

éravadaPoytes eimpev 35° 4

mepi Tivos 99634,

| énavépxeoat 381

ererodudbns 76°1, I 90” 19 émexteivery 14° 17, 28°24 énépxecbar 986%13, 995%24

mrept Tivos 388, 42%25 tt 8g>2

INDEX VERBORVM

émeOa, Ta Emdpeva 84°33 vos 23%24, 30°22

eméxewy Jae

én Twos 993” 17, 99621, 999° raat 2ar ev ét pOAA@Y Qg0” 7, 13, 991% 2,40°29 ent Trav Kad’ éxaora O* I, 35>28 én rod macxev 19% 26,

émt wuvi 26533 em mAéov,

ToOAv, ef €y y. Todd,

émrope-

ovvexes

émBadrAew Tivi 993° Tt 53°35

émBrEmev apddpa 33°21 7793

emylyvecbat 987% 29, 35°12, 30°31, °6

em(nreiy 988*16

émBupety 48°21

émdelmey 84% 13

émpedctoda 8» 28

émpedes 264

émpnvea. 71” 30

em po prov 21%

émimedov 16°27, 28, 76>5- 35) 7910 oxipa é. 241, 45°35, 79°5

émpohaies 98722 émuoAaudTEpov 993” 13

émimovos 50> 26

emoanéepacbat 4 P60, 527;

énignepis 983°2, 989” 27

EmioKoTrely Kaoron, KaTa pépos 3°23, 5%29 = mepi Twos 37°28

émiarasdat syn. €ldévar 982%30, Yat, 994° 20, 8°27, 30

émigracis Bo? 25

émaornpy g81* D826 dipxuearrépa, innperovaa, etc. 982% 14- 17; ™ 4, 27) 31, 983° 5, 996” 10 Tay e apxis cidv emornun 983°25, cf. 25°6 ar emaorhpns 985°16 émornpyns mept TOV aiaOnrav ovk ovons 987% 34 oi Adyou of dnd TOV emornpav 990” 12 omep ras émornpas aitiov 992% 29 Tay OvTov AaBeiy emtoTHuNnv TO TOY ciddv AaBetv 9987, cf. 31°6 opp: aladnoes 999° 3 Kabddov 3°15, 59°26, cf. 60°20, 86°37, 87*11-25 Beavorrrun 2 5°6 TpakTiKen, jwoun- TURN, Beepeyraies 25 pie 26, 64* 16- 19, cf. 982°9 mounrucal emorh pat 46>3, 73" I ov Tod oupBeBykéros 264, 27°20, 64°31, 65*4, 77°34 — Opp. ace, 39? 32 coni. Adyos 46° yA BO? 205 77°28 HET poy 9 TOV mparypar ev 53°31, 57*9 me, mept by yevos pla 55°32, of, 3°13 coni, émoryrdy 56” 30, 57% 8-12 Tavaytia Tis arts é. 61719, 78> 26, cf. 996%20, 4%9 opp. von’ 75° a1—24 é. ditrév 87915

émornpovixds 39°32

émoTHyov 43° 34

émarnrov 982” 2, 99613, 3°14, 21%29, 56” 36, 57*8-12

85°6

émos hexam. 93°30

énra@ Pyth. 93%13

épav. epwpevov 723

épyov opp. opyavoy 13°3 dist. évép- yea 50% 23 mpd épyou 31°16

épratixol Aéyou 12°19

‘Epps 73°32 éy TO AiOm 2%22, 177, 48733, cf. 50%20

‘Epportpos 98419

Epos Hes. 984° 29

épws Parm. 98424, 27, 988*34

eoxdrn Béga 5°33 é Dmoneipevoy, UA, €ldos 10°23; 1724, 35” 30, 69? 36), cf 514229; 33 syn. dropov 59 P26) (2k éoxaTwTEepos 55%20 eoxarov adv. 983% 28

Eraipos 985>4

Ere pounices Pyth. G86%26

éTEpov MAO BES 54°14-23 Te eter 18%38-7, T, 8, 9 TO yEvel 24 > 9-16

érepotns 18°15, 54°23, 58°7 dist. Siapopd, 4° 21

érepdpOadrpos 23%5

Ere pars 48*30

ed, 76 988°14, coe 526, 9312

Se ile 482

Evdogos a 17, 73° 17, For 2t

evndes 62 evndws 24°32

Evnvos 15% a

e009 986% 25, 93°13, 19

evOdypappos 54° 3

ev0ds 4°5, 31°31, 45°36

eddverpia 994%2

eviaros 9719

evxiyntos cs 991 *16, 79°20

evAdbyoros Bpilies 92” 2”

evAoyos 991’ 26, 99913, 0% 23, 60°18, 74°28, 77°22, 85°15, 91" 7; 20 ‘obK ed. 996° 33, 997°18, P19, A II dist. dvaykxatoy ney 16, 81 Cholem 74824, 81°37, cine. es 989°26, 7823, 86212, 886,

P20 ev. eupiatarr ed, Aderar, Ovp-

BeBnte 26513, 75%31, 80°10

euperanivizros 19*28

ebvodxos 1929

eddproTos 56°13

ebrropely 995*27, 91°30

ebropia 995*29

copeaT ERY OS. Hes. 984° 28

Evpuros 92°10

Tvs 996* 16

B12

evTeAca Ai duavotas 984°4

edopvés 3° 3. pogmes 987 34

ebxepns 252, 90°14

Roaporre 9866

epetns 4°90, 8? 3369" 14, 69%20 dist. mpos &, €v 5°11, 27524 arithm. 80*%20, 85%4

apeordvan Thy Sidvoiay, oxepw 987>3, go*2 émotabeioa bpOn-51*28

e€xew tocayas A. 23 éxwy 72°23 éxdpevos 4%4, 28526, 37°32, 60°12, 69*1, 5

£903"5 cumpariaig3 *a0

Zeds 73° 34, 91°6 Cav rats pavracias opp. TexXvY 980 26

TO Adc TO byp® 983° 24 def. 45°

Znvev : hig

(aTnos 983° 22

(@di0v 73° 20, 2

(a) TOU Ocod 72” 26-30

(@ov Z. 14, 74°6 (Ga ena Siarpov- peva (7 40°13

i ~obicientis 29°29, 70" To, 7p°6 ny Be 3073, 31°24, Sonaa, 58°36, 74°38 corrigentis 43%9

05°23

tyyevorieardrg émorhun 99610

Hon 22° 19

78ovr} % évepyea 72°16

7)0e1ed 981? 25, 987°1 4. dperai 78°18

HAtkia Opp. epya 984%12

Hos 71°15, 73°17, 22, 35, 74°12

pede LOY 35°9, 10 €v H. 51927

Typedduov oe 12, 21*1

iyplovos 33°33, 3482, °3

983% TEpteXEL 70 0. Thy bAnv piaw 74°3 70, Oeia

26°18 Tov pavopnevwy Oeiws elpijodas 7429 Oepérros 13% 5, Deororyety 983° 29 Oeodoyiky 20°10; 04° 3 Bcoddyor 0% 9, ec Bar Taras gr" 34 eds 983°6, 72? 25, 29, 30 apxn Ts

Oeotarn emortnun 983°5 Oedratoy 7416

983°8 To ev 6 0. Xen. 98624 6 6. Emp. 0%*29 Oe0t 997? 10, 42-9

Pee: 67° 12

Oeppavtinds 20°29

Deppavrds 20? 29

Geppos. TO 6. Parm. 9871 700. yo? 12

Oepporns 328, 34* 20, 27

Géots math. 985° Tie 16°26, 22% 93) Ploy 42°19, ae 30, 82°21, 85> 12 log. 32°7, 63°32, 84%9

one 16? 30

Oewpeiv mepl Tivos 983° 335 ET ie etc. reOewpnrar ixavas, rebeaphaba) 983°33, AMT 6. Tas duoxepelas, Tov Adyor, etc. 995*33, 64% 26, 997" 15, 998°10, 999° 25, 4°I, 10, 76°13, 78°21, 86%26 7a Kab’ aba oup- BeBnudra 997% 20-33, 3°25, cf. 80%

ws €idos

ae} nares pea syn. émoKo- meiv 3° ar, chi23 TO Ov H Ov 3°21, Bae chs ham mept Tt 27°28 éK

TIVOS 38°34 opp. emiaTh Hav 48734, cf, 50°12, 14 tds dpxds 61" 19,

cf. 99625, 59%24 Tod 0. &vexa g1*28 Oewpnpa 83° 18, 90° 13, 228, 93°15 Dao 1575 2 TWos

Gewpnt inh ee 982° 29, 25° 216 epi Tt Oewpn- Tinds 5° 25, 25 bio6; Ox 2a

Bewpia 989° 25, 993" 30, 5°29, 61°29 70 HRdvoTov al dpotov 72°24

O7Av 988%5, 24°35, 1.9 Pyth. 986* 25 Onpevety Tadnbés 63°14 é Tivos 84° 24 beryety Ths picews 986? 23, cf. 988% 23, »18, o* 16 coni. ava, voeiv

BT? 24, yaar Od\acrov 46*25 Opvdety Ta? 14, 76% 28

O¥pa 993” 5 tacts 9* 21

larpevdpevos 19°18

darputés 3>1-4, 60°33—61%5, 70*%30,

33 idéa Plat. 9878, A. 9, 31%31-16,

INDEX VERBORVM

39?12, 70°28, M. 2 4, 5, 83°34— 84°26, 86% 26-7, grP 28,29 oftds i. airias T1Wépevor, AEyorTes, etc. 990% 34, 90°16, ? 20, 36°14, 39°25, 73°19 86°31, >14, 78°12 i. Tov mpds TH 990” 16, 79% 12 ovdeptay Eau dpi- gacba 40%8 cope ib. 9, 86°33 maa pebekth 40°27 Kaddrov 42* 15, 86°33 {cont dpt0 wot 76*20, 80° 12, 81°47, go? 37 TO. pera Tas idéas 80> 25 carly oxXnpa ons i, 29%4

iS0s 990" DSenTOr-3 16, 64° 22 1. 7a0n Pio beer 16 ds t. brapxev 38°23 trobéces, ddgau 86%10, go? 29 ~—s ida 4277 idles 61” fe

‘Thids TO oe év 30°9, cf. "9, 45°13

Epdriov 29°27—30%2, 45°26

“Inmagos 984°7

“Intov 984% 3

isd(eoOat pass. 81°25

ides toov 93°13

iodpi0 nos 93% 30

icax@s 13°16, 54°14

isoymvios 54° 2

ioémdevpoy 16°31

toos def. 21°12, 56°22, 82» 7: TS avrixera. TO paren: Kal TO puKp@ rs 70 t. Plat. 75°33, 875 v, Je iows caute asseverantis 987% 26, 995* 17, 5°6, 10, 1533, 26°15

igoawenes 16°31

iadrns 4> It, 54>

iordy 70°25

704

toxvatvew 48? 10; 27

ioxvagia Te! Tr, 48°10, 29

ioxds Biadenrsich 7825

Kara méyran’, Kouwdy, bdrws 990" 20, 38 23°29 opp. Kae exaorov, €axarov, KaTa épos, ént Hépous, atoxeloy O81, 18°33, 71°28, 59! b26, 60°32, 84>14 176- TEpov ai dpxat xaBdrov 3°7, 60° 19- 23, 69% 27, M. Io, Ch; pie Ta. x. ov ovota 3%8, Z. 13, 53°16, 60 21, 87%2, cf. 69% 26, 27, 718 20

nal? aira t bmdpxet ry 35 def. 23° 29, 38°11 T® x. ai idéar ovvar- Tovow eo" iy wm oee we) emorquy

Tav Kt. 5926, 60°20, 87°17, cf. 999% 28, 3613, 3628, 86> a nat explicative 3" Pa 2On 3098 ° 7, 40” 9, 72°22, 89° 3, etc. kaivoTpeTesTtépws 989>6

2573-2

513

warpds Pyth, saat 30, 990%23, 78>22 éxet Tv reaupby 43°25

kaxoTrabeiv 93,” 26

Kakds. TOK, onpalver 70 mowy 20°23, cf. ib. 13 Ta Kaka, 7d weandy 51% T5r21,. 75> TAclw Ta kK. Trav ayabiov 985 %2 Pyth. 986*26 76 kK. Odtepov Tay in, Acad. 75% 35, cf. ib. 37, 84°35, 91°34

KadAlas 981 > etc.

KdAdurrmos 73°32

KaOv syn. eyeter 19322, 9% 30 dist. dyaboy 78° 31- 5 PUVEREVOY Key ov kK. 72728 Pyth. 93” on TO Begs ph ev apy elvar 72°32

kaumn 40°13

dure, Kexappevn ypaypyn 16°12

ea pmbdov 95725

KapmvrCTys aye 2

wd pis 16710

Kava Lae ©

keapDia nae . 35°26, 44° 17

Kard TL AéyecOau 987° 9; 9988, 4°19, 18%36, 19712 — Kad? éxaoTov. ai yeveoets wept 76 Kad’ €, ciow 981% 17 eiTe py éort Te Tapa Ta kK. &, 999°26, cf. 60%3 Ti 999° 33 sence” ai dpxal ds Td Kad? Exaora eye ie F230; 86°21 syn. évepyoovra 14? 2; ef. 1336 kara THY al- o6nawr mporepa 18> 33 HGAAoy Claes ues 29 — ad? erepov, dddo 13%, 39°10, 49725 — Kal? airé 990° 21, 20°14-26, 22%24~-36, 29° 14, 16, 29, 30°22, 31°28 4, av. nal Bers 31513 = —«xae’ & A. 18, 32%22 TO Kad’ ob 7°34, 49%28

KaTadederppeva 74? 2

KaTadAnrws 41%33 v.11.

KaTapeTpety 23°15

Katrapnvia 44°35

HET ADONIS KEL, Tu els TL Q90%3

KaTavoEly 52 I

Karackevd ew yéveow, ovsias, etc. 984 25, 60°18, 991 »28, 80>18.

karapdvar yar, 1120

kaTapacts dist. pdots 51°24

Katnyopeiv émt Tivos 99816, 24, 999% 15 xatd Tivos 999*20, 23°31, 60°5 rd Katnyopovpeva 7O"1, cf. 28°13

Pare paRe 28° 22, 53°19

Karn‘yopia 4% “295 18° 38, ZO Roe S 32°15, 34°10, ae 34, 65°8 6888,

88%23, 89°27, D2 oxXIpa, oxi para THis 1“. 16 34 Tye aaa 13, 26° 36, 51° 35, 54°29 ovoToxia

THs Ke 54" 35 58°14 ed eh 43°28, 54” 12

KaTw 992°18, 994* 19

iy]

514

Kavoos 981°12

keipeva dvépara 40°11 péevav 4710

Kevodoyely ggl*21, 79°26

kevdv, 76 48°10 Dem. 985°5, 9728 Acad. 84%33 bid evs A€yetv 992%28

kepavvva0at 43% 29

Kepadaiov 42° 4

Keparaody 13°30

Kepadrawdes 988*18

KEepary 7O*19

kenpwos 35°15

KOapiCey 49°31

70%21 7d mp@rov mvody axivntov av7é 12°31, A. 7 70 Kwvody mpwrov 678i ch yo8r coni. mparreyv 23°18 5: 70 TOD Kivovpevou Kert- vng0ai Te 49° 36 70 Kwodv A. 3, 4

2 a €k TW KEl-

kwvovpevov Pyth, 986%25 70 avTo éavrd kvodv Plat. 72°1 kwnos K. 9, 68%8-25 bbe 7

dpxi) THs «. 983°30, 984%27, 985° 19, cf. 988° 27, 9966, 13g opp. o7a- ats 4°29, 25°20 coni. evépyea, mpafgis 20°20, 48°28, 22%7, 5, 48> 20 coni. vats 25°20 coni. bAn 26*3, cf. 989>32, 36°29, 69>1 coni, mody, moady, etc.29>25 — dist. évépyeia 48°28 amhh, taxlorn, ovvexns, anavoTos, mpwTn, 6padrn 53% 03.70.95 72 721, FO NES dist. ~yéve-

ats, pOopa 67°31—68*5 avaykn Tpeis elvar knoets 68%9 advvarov K. yeveodar 714, cf. 33 kK. Kara. Tomov 73°12 Acad. 84°35

kwnytinds 9846, 49°47, 66%28

Kuta pop 69” 26

Koa 19% 28

whénrns 21°18

Koidos 25°31, Z. 5

kowddrns 25°33, Z. 5, 35°4

kowdv 43°31, 69%30 ai k, aic@noes 98114 k. Sofa, TA k. 996” 28, 997%21,61°18 Kowh 3*10, 39°1

Kowvovabat 99312

kolpavos Hom. 76%4

KkodoBov A. 27

KoddBupa 24*13

Kopionos 1015%17-32, 2618, 37%7

Kopupatos 18°29

Kooporotety O1*18

kooporaia 985% 19

Kéapos 984” 16, 990% 22, 63°15,

Kovpov 20°22

kovpérns 20° 10

INDEX VERBORVM

“pacts 42°16, 85°12

Kparvdos 987*32, 10412

kptots Pyth. 990% 24

KpiTypiov 63% 3

Kpitys. Kkpitny AapBavew 989°*7

Kpédvos 73°35 :

KpvaTadXos 4379

KbBot apOpot 93°47

KUKhos 16516, 3671-18 4 KUKAD pope 72°9, cf. 7111, 72%22

Kukdopopia 52% 28

kbruts 65°19 v. 1.

kbptos 981 10, 10°13, 20%4, P14, 48 10, 55222, y4PI9 7a Kk. Tis ovoias 24%24, cf. 35°25 Kupiws 3°16, 15%12, 45°36, 48°12 Kupio- Tépws 506

Kwdvev TwWds 49*9

Parm. 9°22

AapBavev 127, 52>2, 53%27 bd Ths enaywyns 25%10 mept Tivos sepa 7a, oTotxeia 69°33

AclWava 7412

Aegis 328

Aentéraroy 989*1

Aevxummos 985° 4, 71°32, 72°97

Aeuvedy gg1*15, 6226-30 exemplum Tod oupBeBnxdros 17*15, 18, °28, ea Z. 6, 37°15; 77°5-1 I,

Aqpers 18°34, 55°37

AlOtvos 33°17

Aurapdév 44% 22, 46%24

AoyilerOa 47°7

Aoyixds 5% 22, 80710, 87°20, 21 Aoyt- KOs 2913, 30°25, 41°28, 69% 28

Aoytapds Q80> 28

Adyos Opp. Sidvorag*20,11%4 Adyov xdp 9*21, 112, cf, 12°6 6 Th povy Adyos g*22 —A. Exew 981°15, 996°9, 6°13, 10°17 = ev Tos A. keys 98731 of &y Tots Adyos 50°35, cf. 8425 opp. paivecda 988%3, 87>2 Katddrdyor - 989%31, 8894 é Adyou63"8 6 abzds A., Tov abTod A. 989? 10, 2°25, DIO 7a 998°13, etc. GAdos A, 27%23, 44°6 A. bmopeve, bméexetr, etc. 6926, 11°22, 24, 25, 6%14, 11% Q, 12, 18, 2%, 12°18, 19, 2%, 63% A. éprarinol, Aoyinwrepor, axpiBéorEpor 12*19, 80°10 ~— A. evdns 24>26— 25*1 A. paxpds 43°26, 91°47 eEwrepicol A. 76%28 — duvapes pera r., dvev d, @. 2, cf. 47°34, 50° 33. Ths wuxijs 7d A. exov 461 — syn. défa 9*3, 12°14, 47%6, 51° 14, 78°14, go®2 = definitio 626, 14°10, 16°35, 28°34, 315 yu amos Di Agbo8 opp. ¥An, atvoador,

2, cf. 47°34, 50° 33. Ths wuxijs 7d A. exov 461 — syn. défa 9*3, 12°14, 47%6, 51° 14, 78°14, go®2 = definitio 626, 14°10, 16°35, 28°34, 315 yu amos Di Agbo8 opp. ¥An, atvoador,

INDEX VERBORVM

aicbnots 98619, 32, 39"20, 58°10, |

coni, «los,

18, 64°23, 74°34 5, 43%20, 42% 28,

poppy 996°8, 36 69°34, 8411 opp. dvopa 61, 30°7 A. Tod ri qv cya, THs ovatas 13,*27, 16*33, 24%29, 29” 20, 31*12, 18%10, 28%35 i) ard TOV A. oboia 25°28, 35°13, 15, 37°17 dist. dpopds 30*%14, 37°11 al ev Tos A. dpyal g96*2 70, ws byos airta 70*22 6 A. THs obcias es 998" 12, 24% 29 pia i ovvexeia cider 4 AbyY 16%9 Th vy THR, 23°23, 33°1, ch 15°25 pepy Adyou Z. 10, 11, cf. 16%35 dvadvew rors a, 63°18 TO. xupiotov 42%2 coni. émorhyn 46°7, 59" 26 np6- Tepa Myy, opp. oiaig 49”11, 77°14, cf, 18°32, 23%32, 38527, 54%28, 78*10 84°15 arithm. 985"32, 991" 13, 17, 19, 993°17, 1°30, 53°16, 61"1, 9214, 31 ward Tov a, 18%27 Cf. dvdroryov

AoBopia 13*10, 23*30

Aotds nbwhos 71*16

AofodaGa 73” 20, 29

Avkbppov 45°10

Avots 995% 29

Awpacba 63%2

Admov = iphriov 6” 26

Méyot 91” 10 pabhpara 985°24, 992°32, 996%29, 4*9, 77°18 h &Y Tos p, Gppovurn 997” 21 ea. p,. 26%9 pobnparixis 997°2, 61%28, 77%9, 80% 36 thy pobnyariuwrépa yg2”2 dpiopos p. M. 6, 86%5, cf. 76%20 hp. 26%7-26, 61%32, 64%32, cf. 981" 23, 78°33, p 22 TOWMTtHOL t. pp. EmaoTHpa oy ee 78*33 TO p, peratt t. 987" 15, 992° 16, 99517, 2°14, 2820, 59°6, 69235 opp. 7a alabyra 989°32, 990°15, 36%4 74 p. TORN arta bponby 2°14 coni. clin, tbéac Acad. 2"14, 23, 28°20,

76*20, 83%23, 90°26 nbTE pov ovola 42°12, 69%35,M. 1-3 xw- proroy aitan ot0éy 59"13 hy Tay p» An ib. 16 polnparinas heyew 5*6, 8026, 28

lie nas yiryveras 992" 30, 294

pabnrixés 980° 21

panporo.ey go” 30

panpés. paxpoy nal Bpaxt 992* 11, 85* 10 Abyos paxpés 43°26, 91*7 y

parands débyos go”8 padakdstepoy dnobenviva 25°13, 64*6

Ty ps Exel pep |

| pavoy 985

| pebetis Plat. 987” byy, dpiOp@ ev 87" 12, cf. |

péooy Ti 9947 11-19

515

pavOdvew 980923, 24 11, 9925 paprupa end-yecba g95*8 yg 69% 25 5 dbyos paprupet 7°3

paxn &¢ rAovboptas 13%9, 23%30

péya ral puxpiy 20°23 ~—-~Plat. 987”20, 988% 26, 998¥10, 83%24, 32, 87>8- 16, 88%16, 90°37, g1*!o TO dreapov &t p. wal. 987°26 —puxpov Kal peya gg2*12 clin ToD yp. Kal ToD p, 85*9, 12, cf. g92%12 — ms dyrixerra 76 toov TO p. Kal TO p. I. 5

peysropépea 989*6

Meyapitot 46" 29

peyebos 990*26, 20%9, I1, 53*18, 25, 83°13

pebentbs 99028, 40%27, 79%25

14, 21, 45°8, 824 17 = ely kara p. 31°18, 45*18

pébob0s 983%23, 4, 984%28, 76%9, 86%*24, 91%20

peravia, 20" 10

pereray 50*1

perAlnparoy 42°17, 9229

Méducaos 98619

| pédAurra 980" 23

KaTd peplbas 82°36

pepio pos eueliies 29°20; 32

pepiorov 24712

pépos mooaxas A, 25, 34°32 opp. bdrov 9936 70 alrioy Tod Toelv mpa@rov p. 34%26 p. TOD Adyou, Tov mpayparos Z, 10, 11 év pepe 98912, 3%12 KaTd pépos 5%29 76 éml pépous 84°14

dvd, pécov 61%

21, 63°19 ~—_ peor etipeots gg6” 21

ai péoa 93,729

pera Taira 671 69°35, 70%4 peroparrey ois whbec 983,” 10

KOTO, 70 moaby, mov 10%23 peragy tavra eis boa p. dvdryen mpbrepov TO petaBadrov 57%21 ef dyties- pevew ib. 26-31 ov Ta évayTia p. 69°7 coni. tAn, Stvayus ib. 14, 24, 15, cf. 10%15-22 th, bad Twos, els 71 69°36, cf. 984%22

peraprAnrixoy 13,*32 apxi) p. 20%5, 49°6, 51*3

peraBanrés. ovota p, 69"3

peraBorkn K, 11, 12 eis TO dyTicel- peva Kal peragt 11°34 ée Tay dyrikeapevew h Trav petats 69"3-14, cf. 57%33 coni. tmoxeipevoy 42% 33 p. Twabnrinn 46%12 yp, Téo- aapes 69"9, cf. 42*33, 72°9

Llg2

516

peTabects 24%4

peradnyis 7220

peragd Plat. 98716, 99129, 99216, 997°2, 13, 998"7, 2°13, 21, 59°6, hin es — def. 68°27, cf. 56°32, Bye 2m, OOM ee hd HB. avTipacews ovdev T. 7, 552 coni. dv7ikeipeva TLP35 OoM4 el. 2347 ee TOV évaytiay 7a pw. I. 7 +5

petampere Hes. 98429

perapéepery 14°3, 20°25, 21°17, 26

petapopal omtinat g91*22, 79°26 perapopG 15711, 24°8 Kara pera- popdy 19°33, 21°29

perapiva Emp. 9°20

peréxety 990” 30—991*3, 37°18, 75> 19, 20, 82°18 7a peréxovTa ggI*® 14) "5, 79°18

perievan évredOev 41*10 ~— rept Tt 444

PETOXN. Kara peToXHY 30°13

perpely 983°17, 53°33

petpntés 983%20, 21°29, 56°22 v. 1.

petpiwtepov 987*TI0 v.1.

pétpov 7d €v 5218, 72°33, 87>33 dxpiBés 52°36 ovyyevés 53%25 dbdiaiperov 88% 2 émoTnpyn p. TOV mpayyuaToy 53°31, 57%9 Trav TOY py. dvOpwmros Prot. 53°36, 6244, cf. 19, 63°4

HExpt mpds 28° 26

pijkos 20°12

pnkdvey 83°6

pytiCecda Parm. 984° 27

pijris Emp. 9° 19

pNxavy xphoGat 985°18

pnxavinn 78°16

piypa Anax. 12°28 75°4, 92°7

piyvvcba 9892, 42°29 pévot 918

puxpodoyia 995%10

pk popepeatatoy 989* I

puKpov, V. peya

purpdrns Anax. 56°30

pipnpa 988*7

pipnots Pyth. 987° 11, 13

Emp. 69°22,

of pepy-

wigs 989°4, 43°13, 82°21, 85°11, g2%24 }

pynpn 980%29, P25, 26, 28, 29

pynuovedew 980? 22

povadicol adpiOpot 8019, 30, 826,

83°17, 92°20

povas def. 16°25, 30, 84°26, 8935 oriyph aeros 84°26, cf. 69%12 pw. dpode’s got’24 p. Biapopor, dovpBanro. 992°3, M. 6-8 tis povddos Siapopa 83% 2

Hovaxdés 40°29, 7629 povaxy 16 26 = povax@s 99515, 997°35, 12%29

~ povatkds,

HDO0s 98219, 74?

pududns 995° 4

popia 88°11

pupiakis 7°16

vat 34°17, 44°16, 19

vavTar 23° 1

vedtn 93°3 v. 1.

veixos Emp. 994°7, 0°27, 72°6, 75°7

véxrap O* 12, 17

Népea 18°18

véos 987%32

ynvepla 43°22

yntn 18°28, 57%23

vapor 984°17

voeiv 99014, 994°23, 24, 26, 610, 326, 8

vonpa 99025, 79%21 Parm. 9°25

vonows 16> opp. molnos 32°15 dist. aicOnows 36°6 coni. Adyos 52% 30, Pr, 7593) cf. OOn am dist. vods A. 7, 9, cf. 51%30 vonoews vinows 74°34

vonTiKey 52°3

vontoés opp. aigOn7és 990°31, 999°2, 36°3, 10, 43°30, 45°34, 707 vontov dist. Siavonréy 12%2 dist. dpextov 72°26 = Td mp@rov v. ib. 27 pears Tod v. 20

vépwot 995°4, 74°5 vopou xapwv 76% 2

fae 27°10, 68%22, 26

voupnvia 27%25

vods 70226, A. 7, 9 v., Kal pugs 992*30 Ths huetépas Wux7s 6 v.993°11 dvOpmmwosy.75*%7 vv, Exe 994°15, 95 vy TEXYN, dvvayus 25,22 TavTov v. kat vontéy 72°21 — Anax. 984?15, 98521, 98915, 69°31, 758, II Pyth. 98530 Parm. 9°23

vurrepliov dupara 993°9

VUKTIKpUpHs 40% 31

viv. 7d vov 2°6 pexpt TOD viv 994*18 _— of. viv 992°33, 69% 26

vig 71°27, 72°8, 19, 9t?5

vadov 68%7

INDEX VERBORVM

&, gTuppovia 93% 20

favOds 54°13

fevik@Tepa coni. dyvwordtepa 995%3 Eevopavns 986>21, 1076

¢uveévat Te To OvT@Y 5°15

dynos 85712, 8914

b5e 9908, 997°30, 14222 T5€ syn. ovala 3824, 6911, 89*11, 32 rode Te 1°32, 17225, 28%3, 29%28, 30°4, 39°30, 32, °4, 42°27, 29 AQa 35,07 OIclO,| 13, etc. Tobe ev TebE 30°18, 36523 68 9818, ggoPr

ddoroe? 76 mpAypya 984*18

680s cis ovoiay 3°7 eis GAANAG 55°47 Tpo 6800 44°24

oinetos Ad-yos 24°33 yévous 58°37, P22 14°7

oixia 2656, 70*14, 75*19 Hh dvev vAns 70716

oixoddpnots 50%27—32, 65°19, 663, 6

oixodopunn 26°10, 50°26, 7029, 33 oixodopunov 49>14

oioddpos 14°23, 25, 26237

otoy explicative 1815, 17, 33734, 55° 28, 70°23, 71°4, 783

éxnTds 82*30

dAtyov I. 6

ddvyoTns 984710, 56°30

oikeia 7a0n TOU oikelws eyerOau

bAov 9936, 13°22, 24°12, 52%22, 69719 moaaxas A. 26 dist. Tav 2473 = koopmos 75°11 syn.

avvodov 84°11 dAws ggo? 17, 13% ZOpsi tA, 11, 12, (8°11 syn. Kabdrov 9826, 23°29, 29°6, 33° 26, 71*23

dddtys 23°36

dpadds 78°13, 93°20

Spaddrns 32°7, 43226

dpadwveay 32°19

‘Opnpixot 93°27

“Ounpos 9°28

Gppa 980% 24

dpoyerns 98126, 57°29

dpoedns 99124, 2°16, 22, 13531, 14% 30, 248, 32% 24,679, 71°17

dporopepns 984*14

Adyos 62, 30%y mpaypa 6°22

dvopacerOat ént rv Emp. 1572

dgurarn 933

dmep 126, 3°33, 21%28, 3073, g1 25, etc.

énioow Emp. 0*30

émogocouy 5229

émoTeovy 4971

Omérepov éruxey 21°7, cf. 27*17, 13, 65%12

ém7iKn 99720, 78914

dpayv 980%25

dpacis 50% 24

épatixds 49°15

dpyavoy opp. epyov 13°3

bpeyecOa 980%21, 72229

opextov 72°26

Gpegis 48711, 71°3

6p6n (ywvia) 36% 18-21

épife 2°6 apiOud wpicpevos 2°18, 65 On vi TO wpiopevov 781 dpifec@a coni. Ti éotiv, ovaia, Kadd- dou 987%21, 2674, 64%21, 78°18, 28 idéay oddeulav eotwy épicacOa

Opp.

7a 6. 77°5 énwna Emp. 07

40°8 = =§ — @piopéevws 20°33 éptopds 30°7, 31%1, Z. 10-12 ef 6. diadexréoy 127, cf, *3, 11, 22 syn.

TO 7h fv elvae 30%7, 31%12, 44°1 dist. Adyos 30716, 37°12 ov Tay Kad’ Exacta, THY aicdOyTav 36%5, 39° 28 Tov KabdAov 36%28, cf. 9873 dua Ti eis Z. 12, H. 6 6 nara Tas Siotpéces 37°28 6, émuoTnpovtkos 39°32 6 6. dpiOpos Tis 43°34, ch 45°7 Soc. 863

épiatiKds Adyos 43°31

dpiotés 9986

dpkos 98331 Emp. 0°16

6ppn 23°18, 23 6. kal mpoaipeots DSP 7giGten 2 coni. pais 23*9

bpos 929 syn. dpicpds 30°8, 38% 21, 39°20, 43°22, >26, 29; 40°15, 4975, 529, 55 %23 Kowos 0. 987°6 Tay Tpos Opoy 40%6 opp. énaywyn, TO avadoyov auvopay 48* 36

doaxa@s 17°23

daax@orep 18%5

dcrovv Emp. 993°17

bre opp. Side g81%29, 13 kat 70 elvot 41°15

ovdds 42°19

ovdAopedera 93° 4

ovv in apodosi 983733, 2? 25, 27528

ovpavia, Ta 75%2

_ 70 6T1

518

ovpards 986%3, »24, 990%5, 20, 997°, 10*28, 2812, 42*10, 91°5 mpatos

ov. 72%23 drt eis ob. 74°31 ovata mocaxas A, 8, 28°33, A. IE, opp. 7400s, aupBeBnkds, etc. 98310,

25, 27528

ovpavia, Ta 75%2

_ 70 6T1

518

ovpards 986%3, »24, 990%5, 20, 997°, 10*28, 2812, 42*10, 91°5 mpatos

ov. 72%23 drt eis ob. 74°31 ovata mocaxas A, 8, 28°33, A. IE, opp. 7400s, aupBeBnkds, etc. 98310,

98510, 989°3, 2%2, 38°28, 71°11, 7*31, gg2>22 troxeipevov, ov Kad’ Urorepévov 19*6, 42°26, 17°12, a5°8, 38°15, ch. 985>10 apx7, airia 13°21, 41%9, °30, 43%2 mp@rov ov 28°15, 32, 45°29, cf. 38528, 69%19-26, 715, 8853 xoporov 28°14 ov. 7 Te VAN Kal 76 €ldos Kal 70 éx TOUTwWY 35%2, 7oP13 ds An, bAuwh 9922, Z. 3, 42°27, 9, 44°15, 49°36, 77°35 syn. €ldos O87 Paic hls imaooe Site sas Pa aianh 15, 37°29, 41°9, 502, cf. 99614, To38ar syn. Ti Av elvar 983%27, 988° 35, 993°18, 7°21, 22°8, 31°18, 322, 14, 35°15, 3814, 75%2 syn. Tt €ott 98828, 25>14, 64%22 CT kata Tov déyov 25527, 35°13, 15, B72 Ly syn. évépyea, évTedAexera 42°11, 43°24, 35, 50?2, 72°25, 44% 7 dist. 70 odvodov 35°22, 37%29 syn. 7é5€ T: 30219 = advoAos 33°17, Siete lor, Vy: avvOeros 43°30 H1) ovvOeTai 5127 © auyKepern 544 ov. aigOnTat 997734, 42°25, 59%30, 69°30; 23 dporoyovpevaa 42°6, cf. 288, 69°31 guotkal 42°8, cf. 70%5 apiOuov Thy ov. anavTwy Ryth.. 987419, cir th a7 76%30 ovoia Ta padnparind Acad. 42°11, cf. 69°35, M. 1-3 mOTEpoy TAS aioOnrds ov. povas elvar paréoyv go7* 34, ch. 59739 7A, KaOAov OvdK Ov. B78, Zonta) Bah TG, OOMan 8 F2nichs 692247, 71%20 ovTE TO év ovTE TO dv évbéxerar ov. evar 4oP18, I. 2 TO Yévos ov« Ov. 42°21, 5322 vdaota mpwtn 322, 3810 pndev ovoia évavtiov 68°11 ovata Tpeis 70%9 avayen civat Twa aidioy ovciay axivn- tov A. 6 m@s modal évepyeia ovata A, 6 mporepoy TH ovaia 49° 11, §0°4, 77°27, D214 oUTe... 5€ 46°34 dxela 988°6 dis 21%33->3 28, 63%7, 10 dporomnrinyn 27 %4 dporrotds 2473

= dpOadrpcs 11% dist. 6pacis 50% 24

rraryios 8°15, 6215, 63°33

TAYXGAETIOS 9O7* 33

mdOnyua opp. ovata 98512 8216

madnrinn weTaBorn 40°12

oeAnvns

ey? 7) Ov.

INDEX VERBORVM

mabos mooaya@s A. 21 opp. ovcia 983°10, 98511, 989°3, 2%2, 38? oxo mpy fit?) apOpav m. 985" 29, cf. 990727 ma0n Kat ees 986*17, 1534, 20%r9 coni. cupBeBnios, Kivnots 989°3, 30°14, 71%2 nad? aia 7d6n 4°6, 191, 3019, 31, cf 997°7,4>11, 9030 ‘oikela, (Sia 58°37, 22, 78%7, 16 opp. bmoxel- pevoy 49*29 peTaBorn Kkard 76 7. 69? 12

mardapiwdns 995% 5

mada, of 69%29

mapmadaror 98328, 74?1

mav dist. oAov, mayTa 24*I-10 mav 69°19, 73°29, 76°1

mavTn TaVTWS 10%9

mévTws 10%9, 35°24, 36°30, 48°18

mapa Tatra AEeyecOar 987>8 mapa. THY wAEevpav 51%26

mrapaBorn 36°24

mapayecbat 33°17

mapaderypa 13%247 Plat. 27, 29, 31, 7925, 31, 33, 35

Trapadery pats OO5*7

mrapadogos 1218

mapaxoAovdety 54% 14

Tapakpoverdar 25%6

mapadcinev O* 5

mapadoytGecOar 22% 21

Tapadoyiopos 22°22

mapavyTn 18” 28

0°16 v. 1.

mapédKev 985%20

mapepyov 7436

mrapéxeoOa 9885, go*4

napioraro Emp. g?ai Parm. ib. 23

Tlappevidns 9843, 986>18—987%2, ne 22 citatur 98425, 9>21, 89%3

Trapotpia 983%3, 18

mrapoupacecbar 993°4

mapopay 95°27, 93°28

nacxew 989%29, 18°16, 37°16, 68%9, 14, >16 70 mpHTov maaxov 44°16

marépes, Oxeavos Kat TyOUs 983” 31

marpos ddga 74°13

Tlavowy 50*20

mreOapxucds 61°25

mein, memeopevos 11°3, 86%20

med 9°17, 7424

mretpabels 64” 31

| mecpaorinds 4°25

\ TO

ggr*21

mapa-

naplorarat

INDEX VERBORVM

mevratds 7633

Temepacpevoy 994716 Pyth. 986%

18, 987°35 Parm. 986°20 TE pas RONaNG A. 17 Pyth. Be 23 990%8, 4°32 emt 7. HKEW 994”

14 coni. Téhos, apxn ib. 16, 22712 math. 2°10, 60°16 mpageav Tr. 48°18

mepiaupety 29°11, 61%29

meEpt ypapecbar 2 58, 642

Treplepyos 36923, 38%21, 32

mreprexery 13°34, 46> 24

meptAapBavey 986%9, 990°4

mrepiodos 72°8, 10

mepice@aban 74°13

mepitTos 983%2, §3°3 opp. aprcos Pyth. 986%18, 23, 990%9, 91°23, g2>a8, 93°13 Plat. 84°33-37, gi*23

mepirrorns 4°11

TrepipépetOat 985 * 14

meropeva Sidney 9°38

meTTEW 989716, ae

TALvos press 35732

mhpopa 34? hs

mhpwots 40” 16

mBavov 0% Io

ninrev émi tr 9828 13°17, 71°7, 84°5

morevey 99718

niorw AaBety 903

moTorépa dpxn 624

mAdvnTEs 73” 37, 748 5

mrdots 86% 4

mracpatias 6439

mag parwdns 81> Fs, 8253, 85715

TAATOS Syn, emipdvera 20°12, 14

mharTew. TeTAdGGbar 9868

mAaTy Kal orevdy eat 992*12, mAatvs Opkos Emp. 0° 15

TlAdroy A. 6, 988% 26, 990* 30, A. 9,

996*6, 179, 10°12, 19° Zi, ASD 14,

2819, 53°13, 64? 29, 71°32—72"3, 83°32 Phaedo 9913, 80%2 Hippias Minor 25,*6 Z

mreiddes 93°14

mreovace TO NE 99418

mAcovaxas 15°13, 14

TAnyas kadas TUTTE 985°15

TAGs Tt 20°8, 10, 54%22, 573 opp. OAvyétns, Ev 984*10, 986%24, 4*10, 17, 85°33, "5-32, 876, 8, 27-32,

91°31, 34,92%28, 35 7. mpwrov 859

ry GX’ 7H 981*18 v. 1.

mdfjpes Dem. 985 °5, 9 228

minpovoba: 3 bd ee 7 988°6

mAngiov 1016

TrAvOivn oixia 33°19

mviyos 26°34

nodiaia 52°33, 78%20, 89%23

eis Tt 5*2,

888

519

moddTns 38715

Tobey Trot 69” 26

nrocety dist. mparrev 25°22 yeveow Troveto Bau = yiyvecOcu 98831 momad- pevoy pass. 21%23 Troveiy 7) ma- oxev 68%9, cf. 14, >16

TOD NOX® 992? Legos, 25°'5,) 10,

60°32, 61> 12, ise 31, 37, 89°7

mohAogTN HO ploy 2028

moor 73°28, 31

mod VKapnTos Parm. 9°23

TloAvwAertos 13°35—34°15

moAveotpavin Hom. 76%4

modUs. moAAd TO ev ee 987%27 7a 7 Plat. ro moAv Kal dAtyov Acad. 992716, 87°16, 88°18, 89°12 moAAd opp. 76 ev I. 3, 6, 75733 dist. Todd 50°15 ds ént TO Todd 25% 15, 18, 20, 26530, 27%21-25, 64> 35 mréov Parm., 9?25 én mAéov elvan 46*1

Toppwrepov 14%4

TooaKs tocol 205

ToGaX@s, TA TEpl TOD 28°11, 52716

Tooov pReeen es Ae aka opp. «ldos 999° 3, 10°24, 1623 év Kara 70 moody 1425 man TOU T, 20% s19 yeywonerat a évl 7} api p@ RaP oy 70 7. THS doptorov Piaews 63°28 petaBod? kata 70 7. 69" Io, cf. 10% 23 borepoy 70 mordv Tod Tm. 83°11 moadkis mocol 205

mogomotdy geas 13

more 993” 29, 52°5

mérepoy, éy dyTiWéoa 55°32, cf. 56°18 MOTE pas 75°11

Tov, peraBodr Kata 76 6910

Tpay Ha. peddos 24?17- Be

mparypareia 987° 30>, 59°18

mpaypateverda 9872, 98933, 99532, 25°17, 64%3

520

mparcruicés, 981>5 m. émornyn 993”

21, 25” OmaRs 200 ir, mpawrév 25°23, 24, 59°36

T pats mepl TO #aQ’ exacroy g81°17 dist. wphruais 48? at

mparrev 23°18 dist. movety 25°22

mpecBvtatov 983° 33

mpodyery 985° 24

mpoalpects 4525, 15%27, 20225 4 Tr. apxn, Kbpiov 13%21, 1825, 48°11 dist. dpegis 48% 11

MpoalpeTikos 25 %3

mpoapeTov 25°24

mpoatopely 99522

mpoackety 993°14

mpoyeyevnd0at 70% 21

Tpoyryvwakev 99231

mpodogacew 116

mpoedévat 99224

mpoevepyety 47°33

mpoemiaracba 55

mpoepxerbat 9906, 95°33, 91°35

mpotevar eis dmetpov 60°36

mpokeipevos 98928

mpodauBdave 50” 5

Tpommaanicev 996% 33

mpds Tt A. 15, 50°34, 35, 575, 16, 08% TI, 703, 88%21-2, 8956, 14 Tay mpos Tt dear 99016, 79*12 opp, 76 Ka8’ attéd 99020 TO mpods TL heuora pots Tis 88%23, 30, cf. go> 20 mpos & 3733, 303 pos GAANAG IL 71

mpooayev pvOuds 74° 4

mpocayopevery 99610

mpooamorpivecOat 7°10

mpocatopaiverdar 89» 16

mpoodnreay rt tive 83°18, 9133

mpooyiyvecbat 49*10

mpooyAtxecba 986 a7 OO-3r

mpoadetobat 55 *1 5

mpoodiopiCerOat B20 27 yrAo Tk

Tpooetvar 29? 19

mpooemiTibevan 987 *15

mpoonkdvTws 58% 22

mposkarn-yopetaOas 54716

mpoorelabar 29” 31

mpoorapBdvew 82°35

mpooTiOévae 18, 12, 16, 30°33

mpoorpéped bar 63% 29

355 — ovoig 77® 27 Ady, ovoig 77>r ev ois TO 7. Kal U. 999°6 dpi pov & EXOVTOL 7o 7. kal J. 8012 _Mpore pals, de-

yeoOar13 31 — mparov wt 3°16, 30°10, 373 7. airia 983%25, cf. 9822, 3 >16 ef 0d yiyverau mips

Tov 983°9, 989°, 998% 23, 35,45. 4p 7, 14°26, 52°14 ot. BAN 15°77; 44°18, 49°25, cf. 16220 syn. Kuptas 15°13, © ET; Noo %rseporApmnele 46°16 ot. moddaxas 28°32 syn. Kal? abré 31°14, 32°5 = ovala 32°25 28 LOn ser Queary ar O.mck 99815 nm. macxov 44°16 T. orépnats 46°15 = eldnriKds Go 13, 80°26, bo2, 81%4, cf. 24-230 T. KVOUY 70*I, of. 67>8 évavTiov TO Tt. ovdev 75» 22), wae of mp@rot pirooodjaayres 982” 11, 9836 TT. apiO pot 987 345 52°8 mpwrws 16 8, 184, 2293, 175 28°30, 30823, 29,5, 31°13, 49°13

TpouTapxev O* 26

mpodpyou 983 4

mpdxetpos 98213, 54? 12

[pwrayopas 998*3, 722, I. 5, 47°6, 53°35, K

mpwriaros Parm. 984" 26

mra@ows 89% 27

Tlvdaryépas 986% 30 walk

Tlvdaydpecor 985 2398608, 987913 27, 21s 23, 31; 989" 29—990" 3a, 9966, 1*10, 36518, 53°12, 7 Dia GaP at, 80516, 31, 838-19, go*20- 35; 91“13

mukvoy Kab pavdy 985° 11

muKvodacba 42°28

mop 984°7, 989%2, 1°15, 67°5, 70°19

mupivos 6 dnp 49°26

muppos 54°13

Tl@Aos 981% 4

padvpws cera 985>20

paoravn 982523

pety Heracl. 987%33, 63°22, 35, 86°37

biiHa 40> 34

pyrov 17°

poma 52229

pubpicay 75 12

pud yds 87>36

puopds Atom. 985>15, 16, 42°14

pyres 17%3 v.1.

caivew Thy puxnv 9o*37 aap~ 93°19, 20, 70°19 vehnvn 73°17, 22, 36, 74°12 cepvés 74°18

INDEX VERBORVM

onpaivey Kad’ évds, &v 614

onueiov 980*21, 981" 7, 998%6

oi-yHa 93°24

o.pov dist. KoiAoy 25° 31—26°1,Z. 5, 10

a.porns dist. kowddrys Z. 5, 3731

Sipwvidns 98230, 91*7

oKédos 16°11, 12

oKeTAT HA 43°32

oKerraoTikds 43°16

onenrecOar 28°15, 29°25, 76%22

oKevacTa 13°18

oKelus twos 98613, 98929 Twos 9929, 5*22, Pr, etc. 76*10 idia 73°18 Aéyots a. 98732

okiaypapia 2423

oKonely wept Tivos 0*19, 5*33, 59°18 Tt 10%2, 64°19, 22 Tl €& Twos 7a Ris oxoneiaOa syn. Oewpely 29% I

oxdT0s 986% 26, 53°31

okuTiKn 996*34

ope 9935 v.1.

gopia A. 1, 2, 9969, 5°1, 59%18-34, 60*10, 61°33, 75520 copia 995” 12

copiCecOar pvOiKn@s 0718

copraTns 996732, 4°17, 26°15

copiorinn 4°18, 23, 26 Plat. mepi 7 pn ov 26°14 a. edeyxos 32°6, 49°33

SopokrAjs 15%30

aopds 9815, 982%6-21

OmepHa 44°35, 49°2, QI*16, 92%32 dist. youn 71°31

Srevourmos 28°21, 7231

orovdaios 2124 o. Sivapus 51% 4

amovdy amodeKnTinh 73%22

ddndos 33%13 opp. ééts, 26, cf. 4%12

orepyTinn damdpacis 56°17, 24 oTepn- Tunas ib. 29

oTLyu 992%19, 2°32, P4, 16226, 44% 8, 60°18, 69%12, 766-35, 8426, 27, 85°32, P27—31

oroxelov = littera 993710, 23%36, 34° 26, 27, 35°11, 14, 41°13, 86%23-

mept TOT Epov q &y Tots

32, 87°8 = elementum 985%25, 986°7, 9, 98974, 6, 31, 992°18, 9939, 1°18, 59°23, 8415, 86° 20— 875, 883, 15-32 coni. dpx7, aittoy 983” 10, 98930, 99528, 998* 22,255, 42°5, 59°23, 69°26, 70% 34-516, 71925, 86222, 87%2, g1*31 dist.dpx7 41” 31,70 22-26,87>13-15, 903,10 = Tav daypapparwy 998* 26 motepoy Svvawe eoTt Ta OC. PAI mocax@s A.3 o.TéTTApa Emp. 985%*32, cf. 998°31 TOV id@v arotxeta Plat. 98719 aToxemdéaratov 98835 orotxos 9234 oroxaecbar 273 OTpaTevpa 75°13 oTparnyos 75°14 aTpéperOar rept Te 422 aTpoyyvaAov, TO '70*3 OTpoyyvaAdTns 35714 =rvé 98332 ovyyerqs 99512, 47°31, 53°24, 76°18 ouyKeioba opp. Sinppaba 22, 2721, 5122-19, 34,35 —_ && Tivos 5733, 70°6 ovyKepevn odoia 545 ovykeipeva opp. davrGera, 7618 ovyKkepadaovy 52°17 : avykpivew 984%10, 985%24, 20, 989%16 avyxprors 984%15, 988°32, 35 avykpiriKov xpapa 579, IO, 19 avikopavTns 21°18, 20 ovAAaBn 23°36, 34°26, 27, 35%10, 15, 16, 4112, 8623-30, 87*10 avAAapBavey 99828, 35°28, 34, 37” oy 7 guverAnpupévoy 25°32, 35%

év TWt 9379

23, 25, 30°27, 37°5, 5872 — ouver- AnepeD TO SexTiUKd 55°8

avddoyicecda med. 42°3 pass. 22° 21

avdAoyicpds Q90P 10, 79°6 =o. Mpa 142 ék TOU Ti EoTwW Oi oO. 34°32, 78°24

oupBaivew = convenire 8394 = eve-

nire 982°22, 988*r = concludi posse 987%27, 989%22, »1, 16, 990” 19, 99124, 998%9, 17, 0°3, 231, 42°12, 565 —oupBeBnkds Tooaxas A. 30 o. (Ka@’ abré) = proprium 9893, 995°20, 997%20, 29, 33, 3° 25, 47, 25°30, 59°30, 33, 61%4, 88°17, cf. 981%20, 995526, 78*5 o.=accidens 7°15, 21-16, 13°34— 14%20, 18*1, >34, 25%14, 25, 26° 13, 21, 32, 27°14, 20, 33, 30°14, 59°2, 61'S) 6418, 31; 65%, cf. rage % vAn airia Tov o. 27%14 kara o. 98815, 7931, 14°8, 15°16, 17°7, 19-22, E. 2,3, 3119-27, 52% 19, 59*2, K. 8 70 Kata a. ditTdv

522

Rivas obdeuia éorl mepl aro Oewpia 263, cf. 64°31, 65%4 ravTa Kara o. 377 otbev bd Kata o. 59%2

oupBadreo8al tux 991%9, 76%2, 7913

oupBaAntat Hovades M.

ovpBdrma 995711

ouppévery 77% 24

ovpperpia 4°11, 7e0t

o¥MpeET pos 12°3 33, 1924, 24°20

oupmepacpa 13°20

oupmimrer evAdyws 26>13

oupmdcxecOar 72, 14°13, 19, 62>5, 63°23

oupmAoKn azn 29, 65%22

oUpmrapa 03°17

ouppava 993% 23, 12*19

cupgvew. oupmepurévar 14” 21-25, 46% 28

ovppvars 14°22, 40°15, 69°12, 7O*IT

odpouros 993°1

ouppavia def. 43” 10, ga? 14, cf. ggt? 14 eg gees 93720

ovvayew 9g1* 18, ne ii, 42° 3, 70022

Stee cea 9932°3

guvatrioy 15221, >3

ouvadnbeverbar 63% 21

ovvappotepoy 62? 4

>16

avveyyus 2 >32

ouvedpedey TO Adyw 987 %2

ouvelpew 995710, 90? 30, g3>27 €tpomevn mpaypateia 986%7

ovvexera 169, 15, 50°26 ouvexet aoe

owvexés TA 025, ee TO Wen.) OO Me 1 | pica, Bia, and@s, etc. ie 23 B32, | 40°15, 52°19 ep &, emi duo | 20°IT, 61°33; Dog TO oO. Ths VonTEws 74” 29

ovvnbes 995°3

ovyOects formae et maleniae: 1522; 45? LI elementorum 14°37, 42° 16, 43°13, 92°26 subiecti et pre- dicati 2719, 67 26

cbvOerov ex THs UAns Kal THs poppys FPA es Sto bp te: o. ovaia 43°30, Ch S727 €ort Kat Kata Tas dA- das Katnyopias ctvOeTa 2923 opp.

\ | | |

Twi 42°16 mpds eis TAVTO 86°35

eis ouvdégpw *13

ovvdesvac-

ovy-

INDEX VERBORVM

oroxetov 70°8, 88°15, ovvbeTn bd b 232, 57°47 ouvievat EavTou 62° 3 5s : ovvicracba, ouvearnKevat. ai i palgee

kal Téxvat ovveoTaCUr 981? 24 & TiVOS . 990% 22, 80°18 ouviora- Heva. neyé6n 990% 26, cf. 80b21 = Tov évos avorabév Tos Pyth. opr" 15 gu-

GeO. 34°33, 41°30, 43 ovvodos 33°17 v.1. atvoros 35%6, 19, 29 17, 37°26, 30, 32 999"32, 29%5, 35°21, 39°20, 6024, 778 auvopay 984"2 70 avadoyov 48°37 avvovola 459, 13 owTarrev 75°16, 19 ovvreivay mpds Tt 50%23, 74°18 avvTibévar 12%4, 2419, 5110 ovvTopos 41%20 curiae 988*18 ouvdovupos 987? 10, 99325, 6°18 ovvevdpou Meiget =: ovota 7 5

ovororxia 986% 23, 4 °273 54°35, 58°13

o. ovata 33° 7) 5.995) 35; Daas

€k

vont? v7] (Erépa o. 72°31, 35 Hu Tov Kadod 93°12 opaipa 33°30, P14, 34°11, 35°32

opatpa Tov dor pay A.8

oxfpa = puopds Atom. 985 "14, 42 14, 19 math. 999%9, 2%21, 70%23 émimedov, Oe Tp aR EO, Tpiyavoy abe by evap av awy: TavToV Ge T@ pidro- abpy Anis o. Katnyopias 10" 34, 17°23, 24°13, 26°36, 51°35, 54°29 a. THs ideas 29%4 évy pvOov oxN~ part 74? 2

oxConodia 38°15

oxiCorrouy hae

TXOAACEY 981? 23

TXOAT 999*I0, 1°23

Swxpatns 9871, 2, 78°17, 28, 863 6 =. 7830 3.6 vecorepos 3625 =. ut exemplam 981" 19; 98313, 18*2-4, 32 he eViaiicnyh 35) etc.

cGpa 992%6, 1 doy, 1628, 71°3 ama 0. 984°6, 42°8 pound 28°10

gapariny & apxn 987"4 puots 98823

aropevars 7629

ge 409, 41°12, 44°4, 45%9, 84°

ee gt 18

fe eae 17; 985 P14, 22°, agree

Dir ovn oT ev TH viola 38°33 ee mundi 751 3-15,” 25

Tapaxn 86°2

tavTérns 18°7

Taxos bir Tév 52 boy

TE... 5€ 994 »18

reXeropévo.0 xpeHoNo Emp. ors

rédevov def. 23°34, 55°11 TOTaXaS

INDEX VERBORVM

A. 16 tT. % Sexds Pyth. 986°8 Plat. 84°32 Ypa pep) Tae LO 1 TO T. &Y Tos &k FOV apxay Pyth. Speus. va ia4, ch. 9°13 TEAElwS aE 27 TEAEwS 62°27

Tedelwois 21” 20

Tedevtatoy. eis & pOeiperm T. 9830, ch. 7o"21 dmoKelwevov T. Tpos TO eldos 16%20 Te eos 185, 61924

TéAOs 21°28

TéAos 21° 23— 29: coni. ov eta 994” 9» 13°33) 59°38, cf 994°16, 74°30 coni. poppy 23°34 coni. évépyeva 51°16 sr, émiBeivaur 424

TeTparyoviCeny 996 21

TET payovov 54” 2 Pyth. dpOpol r. 93°7, cf. 9212

Terpagés 7632

UE. 63%21

Terps go 23

Texyn 980? 28—981» 27 bud, Ths éprerpias 981 *3 meipia, ib, 25, 8 dist. émorqun 981>26, cf. 46°3 = emorTnyn 997"5 dist. vods, Sivamis, didvowa 25° 2240152228, 33°8 ryiryvec bau pice, "rey, dio ravtoparov Z. 7-9, cf. 25522 dist. pois 33°8, yo", 17 q 7. TO eldos, 34°24, 70°15 yeyerau adn oer 47” 23, Ch 462347 Ta ward id 70°17 7. GPXITEK- Tovical ried)

rexvirgs dist. épmetpos 981 bay

THKTOS I #10; 50" 22, 23°28

ridevar 2°14, 63% 23, P11, 85%25 pera Twos 984% a eis piav pvow 69°35

Tepat Emp. o

Tipwov 983" 33, “640 4, 74°21, 26, 30 Tim@rarn emoThHn, TipuwTaToY yEvos 983%5, 7520, 26%21

Tipddeos 993° 15, 1 16

tis. 76 Th 26°36, 45° 33, 699, 89> 8 70 Tl éo7t 25°31, 27° 32, 28°11, 17, 30°17, etc. TO Tt ear 27°28 Ti éore 54°15 ev TO tt eae imdpxeww ia a7 Ch 20°18, 245 70 Th gor mheovaxas 30" £7, “cf. 25» 31 ét TOD Th eon of avAAoyiopol 34°31, 7824 70 Th Hy elvar 28> 34, 2. 4-6, 8, 453, 74° 35 coni. ovata 983%27, 988° 34, 993718, 7*21, 22%9, ar° 18, 32>2, 14, 35 > 16, EA aaa Sigs m7 2 coni. épicpés, pier 994° 27, 16°33, 17°21, 30°6, 45°3, ao, b28 coni, eos 13% 27, 30% 1a, Zap a 35°16, 44°36 70 Tl hv 29” 27v. Ta Ti Hv elvae 31” 9, 29

Tphpara KKrov 34°25, 35°34

TynTUKds 20" 29

986% 26

amoBaive. i opp. ép-

523

TpnTEs 20°30

To.ovTos ad ea quae sequuntur pertinens 987°” 4, 998*10, 26? 2a

roun math, 994>25, 6014 log. 38°28

tomum, tAn 42°6

tomos 67%8-31, 68526, g2%17-21 peraBoA? Kata Tomov 42°34, 69°13

TooavTax@s 134, 17%24

TpameCa 988%4

Tpepecdar Emp. o° 14

Tpl-yavov gar ia T. 70 Oddo dpOds EXov ANE Us cf. 51°24, 86°35

TpiTnUOprov 20°27

Tpiros dvOpwmos ggot7, 39%2, 59°8,

ee 1828

tpiTTés 76" 30

Tpixh Siaperov 16" 27

Tpomn Democr. 985°16, 17, Atou Tpomal 983 °15

Tpoms 13°5

Tporo. aitiwy 996”5, 13°07) 29 avy- repadaodpevor 7. 52® 17

TUYXGVELW, 7 dedi ETUXE CY ak by sige cf. aT, 64°36, 65%9, 12

Tiny chen Tae 29°7

Tuprds 23%4, 47°8

Tvxn 981%5, 65* 27-3 — coni. rabré- parov 984°14, 32°29 dist. radrd- parov 70°6 yhyveobau TEXYN, poe, TUXT, TH adTopaty 7076, cf. 32%29, 49°4

42°14

ipedcew 981°18, 26°37

dypatvery ae aes 32°18

dylea 340 10, 28, 29, 68%22, 26, 70"17, 2 ?

falcon ge *35; 60937, 77 »36

bdaToOpeppov Emp. 0*31

dap 983°21, 31

falcon ge *35; 60937, 77 »36

bdaToOpeppov Emp. 0*31

dap 983°21, 31

Brn 983°7—984°18, H. 3, 4 syn.

dowel pevoy 983% 29, 22°18, 24°09, 42°32; G1” ee 70° D0) ch, 985° 10, 988*11, 992” 2, 42° 9 dist. imo-

welpevov 29%2, 42°27, 44°9 = se ob yiyverau gary, cf, 42°32, 699 év bAns elder 9837, 984° iF apx7) as v, 986°17, cf. 983” 7 46*23 opp. Adyos, 7} ovota 7% Kata TOY O10" tyre exeia, évépryeia 986” 20, 74°34, 849, 38°6, 43°6, 45°35, 71°21, 72-9 ope lbes, Hopon 988%3, 29%4, 6, 41°8, 50% 15, 70%2 coni. GRAV 988% 2- “l 24°35, Cf. 44°35 eyryte 999? 12 igh 15°77, 17°5) 44°18, 49°25, cf. 23°27 Tov eldovs , 232 revos as U 248, 38°6, 58% 23, cf. 232 ai- o@nrn, vonty 25°34, 30°9, 37°34,

S83.

L24

45°34, cf. 36°35 b. T&v pabn- parinav 59°16, cf. gg2%2 coni. kino 20%3 Gravta Ta ~yyvo- peva €xe Any 32°20, 42°26, 44”

24 aitia Tod cupBeBnkdtos 27%13 méTepov ovoia Z. 3, 42°27 def. 29% 20 dyvwotos Kad’ attny 36°8

doprarov 37%27, 491 coni. dv- vous 42°27, °O, 49°23,50°15, 227 60*20, 69"14, 7012, 71*10, 75°22, 88255" 192%) Jol soP 29 TOMLKN, yevvnth 42°6, 69°26, cf. 42%32-"1, ZW Pn Cos6-) h évépyea dAdn GdAns U. kat 6 Adyos 43712, cf. 69? 24 H €oxaTn VU. Kal 4 pwoppy TavTd 45° 18 ov more’ diapopdy 586, 14

9 0. Th TL TO palvecbar 7o"9 a) evaytia , éxer 75°22 bAucés. 7d bAucdv 35%8 b. ovoia

44°15, 49°30, 77°36 — bArw@s 78% I

pelagha 181

bmapxewv 37°16, 40°15 imapxew KOO avr. 2% 22,625" 3 1 Paietso las 7a bnapxovra opp. Ti éoTt 26°32

imatrn 57% 22

dreivar 09°6

brevayTiov 85°15

bmempopiov 21%2

bmép Huds O° 15, cf. 77730

bmepBodn 21°15

brepéxe 84°17 imepéexov, bmepexd- pevov 2028, 21%4, 6, 57%13, 87°18

imépOupoy 4219

bmepoxn coni. €dAAeuis 9926, 4°12, 42°25, 35, 52°30

bmeprnday els Tr 276

banpeTodoa éemotHyn 982° 17

bird. tp ob} = mp@rov mvovy 701, cf. 33°24 tnd THY avTnY Gratin, pice émotnyny, etc. 18% 29, bbe 31, 61” 15, 63°37,93°10 TaUT0 THY apxny 60* 30

broBddAay Tov SaxtvdAov ind THY oY 6378

bmodveabat TavTov oxHpA TO pirocdpw 4°18

brddeos, e@f b. 5°13, 55°34 iv dvaykatov éxew tov oT.ody 20 mpos Thy & 8232 rar kat ov pa@nyuarical b. 86710, cf, 83°6 coni. dpxai 86°15 KaTa Tas wv, go*27

bmonatw 74%4

imoxetoOar = sumptum esse tamquam fundamentum 98316, 331, 990%9, 67°15-24, 68"4, 5, 73°23 — bmo- kelpevoy = UAn, poppy, TO Ek TOUTMV 28>36—29%3, cl. 385, 42%26, 49°

INDEX VERBORVM

28) = ony 983 * 30, 984%22, 22°19, ZERO, Aas 7°" 11, 88°18, cf. 985” 10, 992°, 42°9 slapd makes Tailor, toxaroy 16°19, 22719, 24°10, 16423, 1724 —-yevos 8. 99776, 16% 26, cf.997%20, 243 =70 ee rodTwY (res_concreta) 996%2, 19%5, 31°16, 449, cf. 198 opp. 7400s, ouvpBe- Byxds 1°31, 10°34, 7°35, cf. 37°16 Kad’ SToxepevov 9go3r, 1 °31, 7°35) 17°13, 16, 29°8, 66°14, 79% 28, 87*

=e id 70 “yevos ovra neanaa 4,533, 03P am

imodapBavew 998" 22, 5°26

trodeinew 48? 16

bmdAnyus g81°7, 982°6, var 17 be dpxaia Kat Bnpoticn g89*12

bmopévey intrans. 2°3, 698, 7o%25 Aéyor, évaytiwaes 6°26, go*2

tnémovy 38% 10-33

bromrevew 98423,

imorOévar 988%25 med. 98614,

47°10, 89%22 Kadr@s 54°33 AapBavovor 70 Ti eat UmoTWEmevat 6478

bmorumovaba 28” 31 € ae avs vote

boreporyevy 91°33 Vorepov, Vv. mpoTepoy bpnurdrAcov 21°1

paivesbar 11%17-33 opp. Adyos 988*3, 872 q UAn 7éd5€ Te TO pabicoeat Wes Io pavdpevov opp. ov 4 19,1327, gare syn, Go- Kooy 9*8, cf. 98920 70 gp. Twi éome fp. 11%18 Ta >. 98631, OPN, 74256 7a p. dmodovva 73” 36, 74°1

paoy 11°30

paicedos 10° 1%, 42207

paranpos 24% 28

pavat, dnopdvat 8%4-?1 Ovyciv kat

p. 51 24

pavepés. Ta pavepagg2*25 Ta pavepda Tov Ociwy 26°18

gavragia 98026, 10°3 éproveiy gavraciay 24°24, 25°6 H and

Twos p. 24°26 = béfa 62°34

pavracpa ggo14, 79°11

papayé 8>16

pacts syn. Karapacts 8*9, 62% 24 dist. Maree 51> 25 dvr ucelpevat . 11°14, 62°6-34, 17, 63°16

pathos yvwora 29” 10

pépew Tas dnodeiEas 5° 26 . dvopa émi te 62°16 7a pepdpeva Kara Tov ovpaydv ggo*II

Sepexvins gig

POaptixn apxn 19°11

pOaprés. . ovoia 69*31 ovgia

INDEX VERBORVM

gp. dvev 70d POeipecOa 43°15, cf. 27% 29 7O p. Kat 70 &pOaprov I, 10 7A, POapra 99217, 0°6

pbeyyerba 88

POcipecbar 0722, 27°30, 43°15 Grayra >. eis ratr’ é¢ wy eoTw 0 25 poicrs 69” 11

pbovety 982" 32

poopa 9946, 0°27, 67°24, 69°11 Tov éx ToUTaY pdvouv Pp, EaTL 4230, ch 7O= 15 “ata oTépnow Kat pOopdy 44°33, ch 45°1

pirciv duporépous 73°16

giria Emp. 985%3, 24, 988° 33, 996°8, 4°33, 726, 75°2, 6

pirdpuv0o0s 98218

prrocopeiy 98213, 9832, 49, 9°37 of TpaTa pirocopjcayvTes 98211, 983°6

pirogogia 983921, 987%29, 31, 992° 32, 99320, 4°3, 74°11 dist.

copiorinn, Siarexriny 4° 21-26 pets gp. Oewpnrixat 26°18 TmpwoTn >. ib, 24, 30, 61°19 = Oeodoyien

Gres

prdscopos 982°18, 3°19, 4°6, 34, PI, 16, 18, 5°21, °6, 11, 60°31 = Oeo- Adyos 61° 10

pidérns Emp. oP 11

prcypatwiys 981° 11

powrkody 57% 25

popa 69°12, 725 Kuta pop 69” 26 mpotn THY peTaBody 72°8 opal Tay mAavnTwy A. 8 amhH op. 73°29

popriK@s Oewpeiv 1° 14

ppéap 8? 15

pporpudtecbat 995” 5

ppovnats 98224, 9” 13, 32, 78°15

ppdvipos g80P ar, 22

Spvvis'993°16

pvecba 14°20

uoinds Tpétos 995*16 . = puowo- Adyos 5°31, 34, 26°5, 37°16, 67°6, 7127, 75°27, 819g —-yeveoes gp. 32°16 =. ovciar 42°8, 446 H prow 995°18, 5°1, 25°19, 26, 207 0,012,037 °14, 59°10, 616, 28,

mpayyarela

993°11, 42°8, 59°34, 62°31, 73°32, 76*9 gpuoik@s Aeyerv gi*18, cf. 66” 26

puororoyety mrepl mavrwv 988" 27

gpuarordyor 98614, 98930, 990%3, 992°4, 23°21, 6221

pos mocax@s A. 4, 3222-24 = ev % Kivnows 1 mpwrn ev avtT@ % avo

bmdpxe: 14°18, 15°14, 49°8, 70°7

525

h p. apxy 13°20 gvoe opp. ov 00s, Téxvn, TO adTouaTr@, amd d.a- votas 981° 4, 32%12, 65%27, 70%6, 17 gvats dist. dvvapus 338, 49°8 dist. Téxvn 33°8, 70%7 opp. Bia 52% 23, 71°35, cf. 15°15, 33°33 7a pvoe dvra 14°19, 27, 32, cf. 34%23, 70"5, 17 = HAn 14°33, cf. 983° 13, 24°%4 = dos, évTehéxera, éfis 1575, 32°24, 44%9, 7O* LT TO Kata tiv ptow 98612 TO TH yeveoes Uorepoy TH p. mpdorepoy 989% 15 gic opp. mpos Huds 291 gpuow exe 15%5, 32%23 = ovola 993°2, 997°6, 1°11, 3°27, 14°36, 15°12, 19°2, 31°30, 5379, 21, 64” II, 88°23 h pvows povn ray ev Tots pOaprois ovata 43°23 op. vypa 983? 26 p. nunrinn 984°7 4 Tov ayabovd, TOU aopiarov, Tov KaKov $. 994713, 996°23, 104, 757 TO ToLdv THS wpiopervns . 63°28 XpHTa ws mwa p., etc. 985"1, 98822, 9986, 3°23, 69°35, 89°7 brn, TG0a, } TOV OvTwY, TOD Grou P. 987” 2, 5°32, 10°7, 9849, 75°11, cf. 993°2 Ta mept p. 983°33, 985% 12, 988%22, 989%24, 86%24 oi mept dp. AGYOL g90%7 oi mept op. = of puaoddyor 1°12, 6%3, 5024,

62 26 HP. & Te yevos TOV byToW 5°34 Emp. 15°1

gurév 72°33, 92°13 ~uT® Spotos 6°15

pas 986%25, 53°31

xarnés 14712, 34? 17

XaAkovs. XaAKy opaipa 33°30, 3411

xdos 72°8, 916 Hes, 984°28

xepeomaren 60% 25 Xapieorépws 75% 2

xetporéexyns 981*31, P4

xorAwsns 981*12

xopsal errd 93°14

xpela 980% 22

xphow opp. «idévac 98221 épyov 50°24

Xpod g1*16, 93” a1

xpévos Kara, oupBeBnkds moody 20°29 addvaroy xpévor 7 yevécOar 7) pOaphvar Wey coni. Kivnots ib. 9 T™pa- Tov, mpétepov xpbvw 28%32, 38227, 4911

XpOpa Siaxpericdy, ovyxpitindy 57° Q

xupot 16%22

xwraivew 25°11

xwpa Plat. 92°%1

xewpifev 9893, 162, 406, 28, 78> 31,

4 xwpis 998%18, 68" 26

Opp.

= 1000%—1093?

Anaxagoras 984°15, 28°5 Anaximander 988% 30 Anaximenes 988 * 30,996 * 8-9, 53? 15-16 Antisthenes 5° 2-5 Aristippus 78% 31-°6 Aristotle : metaphysical doctrine ]xxvi—cxxx method of metaphysics Ixxvi f., 3% 21, 254-18 subject of metaphysics Ixxvii-lxxix further determination of subject Ixxix—Ixxxii the categories lxxxii-xc substance the main subject of meta- physics xci—xciii substratum xciii f. essence xciv—cvii the universal cvii-cxi essence is substance cxi-cxiv principle of individuation cxv—cxix analysis of becoming cxix—cxxiv natural generation cxx artistic production cxx f. spontaneous production cxxi potentiality and actuality cxxiv—cxxx rational and irrational powers cxxv vindication of the conception of capacity exxvi f. actuality and movement cxxvii f. priority of actuality cxxviii-cxxx Aristotle’s theology cxxx—cliv the ‘active reason’ cxliii—cxlix Aristotle, references to other works : Posterior Analytics 25°34, 37°8 Physics 98333, 985°12, 98630, 988%21, 993%11, 42°8, 49°36, 59°34, 62°31, 73°32; 76%9, 86°

actuality and movement cxxvii f. priority of actuality cxxviii-cxxx Aristotle’s theology cxxx—cliv the ‘active reason’ cxliii—cxlix Aristotle, references to other works : Posterior Analytics 25°34, 37°8 Physics 98333, 985°12, 98630, 988%21, 993%11, 42°8, 49°36, 59°34, 62°31, 73°32; 76%9, 86°

De Caelo 986*12 (2), 989*24, 73% 32, 86°23, 88” 24 (?)

De Gen. et Corr. 42°8, 6231, 86%

Nicomachean Ethics 98125

De Bono 4*2 (2), ®34 (?), 54% 30 (#)

De Contrarits 4*2(%), °34(%), 54% 30(?

De Pythagoreis 986* 12 (2)

1 This index is simply supplementary to the Zudex Verborum.

Asyndeton 75°7 Atomists 285, 84°27

Binary structure 98316, 214-26, 3° 33—?5, 17° 10-13, 2478-9, 66%31- 34, 08" 11, 75°7

Democritus 29” 21-22 Diogenes 996*8-9

Eleatics 98612, 284, 75>15

Emblemata in text 981° 12, 983%14,°32, 985° 10, 986% 23-26, 29 f., 987716,

10, 22, 99019, 993°16, 995°19,

1? 35, 4°55 16, 32, 5°8, 6728, BGs 331 9*34,°7, 16934, 17°3, 19°26, 32, 2081275, Pa, 2a e4.ao3y, 320%3, 31°30, 34°24, 30, 37°10, 31, 41°30, 43°17, 34, 44°18, 451, 10, 46°17, 47°21, 48° 20, 23, 498, 51° 1, 53°14, 31,56°15, 22, 57°24, 59%30,62°6, 27, 28, 64223, 66°25, 67°6, 682, 69% 32, 72°24, P5, 73°33, 74°16, 78% 28, 79°14, 81°35, 85°32, 86°33, 37, 87°17, Ly 88? Io, 89°7, 28, Dae, 90°18, 91°12, °8, 9214, 93°3

Empedocles 9845» 4°32, 2S URN ROP. 23, 53° 15-16, 927

Fitzgerald’s canon xxxix-xli

Heraclitus 996% 8-9, 1°15 Hesiod 983°27

Hiatus 7373—?17 Hippasus 996* 8-9, 1°15

Infinitive, with 76 irregularly omitted 146, 30°1-2, 3111, 33°32 Itacism 35%12

Mathematics, origin of 98123

Megaric school 5°35

Metaphysics, structure of xiii—xxxiii the connected treatises xv—xxiv the outlying books xxiv—xxix inserted fragments xxx—xxxi earliest editions of AZet. xxxi-xxxiii text of cly—clxvi

E. g. under

* Plato’ will be found only references to passages in which Aristotle does not ex-

plicitly mention him.

528

Orpheus 98327, 91°5

Parmenides 4°31

Partitive genitive, subject implied in 21%21, 707-8, 22

Plato 995°16, 9989, 1223, 2°11, °13, T7>19, 28°16, 30°26, 31°29, 33°

19, 39726—?I9, 51717-21, 58°28,

59°3, 60°6-9, 69° 34-36, 70% 21-26, 71°16, 73% 20,75"20-24,M, N passim Plato’s views, origin of xlv—xlviii

‘earlier and later theory of Ideas’ xlviii-li

ideal numbers and ideal spatial mag- nitudes li f.

Ta pera€y liii—lvii

derivation of ideal numbers from their first principles lvii—lxiv

derivation of ideal spatial magnitudes and their place in the theory lxiv— Ixvii

GAAA phy 9961 GAN’ 7 5°13, 38°14 dé t apodost 999% 27, 5, 59°33, 71°24,

5°10 : 5é and ve confused in MSS. 320-22 eiSos 987°8 évdexdpevoy )( Svvardy 19°32 evTed€xela 47°30 érei and ért confused in MSS, 16? 112 idea 0878

112 idea 0878

xaanep at beginning of elliptical sen- tence 318-9

Adyos 24°26

8ST, ALBERT’S COLLEGE LIBRARY

INDEX TO INTRODUCTION AND COMMENTARY

identification of Ideas with numbers Ixvii-lxxi

Platonists 9909, 997"3, 998 etc apy 3613-17, 402-3, 43°34, 50°35, 56*10, 69°26, 7532, M, N passim

Plural verb with neuter plural subject 985*27, 79°20

Protagoras 999"3

Proverbs 9833, 18, 9935, 9°38

Pythagoreans 2"11, 4531-32, 17°19, 285, 16, 368, 75°37, 76°20-21, 91°34

Sight 980% 23

Socrates xxxiii-xlv

Speusippus Ixxi-lxxiy, 69°34-36, 75% 33, 37, °37, 8014, 83%20-"1, gi® 34, 92°12

Thales 996%8-9

Xenocrates lxxiv-Ixxvi, 28°24, 69%34— 36, 80°22, 91°35

vn setting aside irrelevant suggestion 994° 22

ofoy introducing a comparison 33°16 6rt superfluous 91° 15-17, 92°3 ovdé after «i 49°10, 53°18

orotxetoy 985% 25 Swxparns, form of cases 981°19

Te, use Of 991"23 Te and 6€ confused in MSS. 3°22

70 Ti Hy elvat 983% 27

76de TL 1°32

bAn 983°7 wonep at beginning of elliptical sen- tence 0° 1, 49°3-5, 87°7

Printed in England at the Oxford University Press

Jf % v a

5645 185.1 Ross, Bw. D. A63

AUTHOR

Aristotle's Metaphysics