product; the heat in the rubbing produces heat in the body, which is or is followed by health or.a part of health; whence it is said to produce health, since it produces that on which health follows.
30. Thus production, like syllogism, starts from the substance or essence.
33. (2) Natural production is fle artificial; (i) the seed operates like the things which work by art; the source of the seed is something which has the same name, in a sense, as the offspring (only in a sense, for woman is produced from man\—unless the offspring is an abnor- mality (which is why the parent of a mule is not a mule).
bq. (ii) Spontaneous production, as before, occurs when the matter can give itself the movement which normally the seed gives to it; when it cannot, generation by parents is necessary.
7. (2) As the form of a substance is not produced, so too with other categories.
14. It is not the quality or quantity but the wood of that quality or quantity that is produced; but another individual of the same kind need not pre-exist actually as in the case of substance ; it is enough if the quality, &c., pre-exist potentially.
In 2 9-32 Aristotle discusses the conditions under which spontaneity mimics art, in ® 33—> 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
, * 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
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.
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
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.
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).