ARISTOTLE AND THE EARLIER PERIPATETICS vol.I by Eduard Zeller, B.F.C.Costelloe 1897

In
ARISTOTLE'S WRITINGS 77
portions were brought into this connection immediately
The main body of the work,
begun but not finished by Aristotle,
is made up of books i., iii.
(B), iv., vi.-ix. In these, after
the critical and historical introduction
in book i., one and the
same inquiry, that as to Being as
such, is methodically carried on,
although it is neither brought to
a conclusion, nor in parts submitted
to final revision. Book x.
seems to have been intended for
a somewhat further advanced
section of the same inquiry (cf.
passages of the Metaph. (e.g. x. 4,
1056, a, 23, with which cf. v. 10,
1018, a, 25, and x. 6, 1054, b. 34,
cf. v. 15, 1021, a. 25) ; and a discussion
reserved in v. 7 ad fin.
for another place is to be found
in ix. c. 7. The tract n. tov
noaaxm, however, cannot have
originally formed part of the
work On ' the First Philosophy.'
It must have been written much
earlier— as is shown by the citations
in the Phys. and in tbe
Gen. et Corr.—and as an aid to
the exact use and understanding
of philosophic terms ; and as
such it appears in D. 36, and in
An. 37 with the special addition
n. t. ttoct. Key. ^ rav Kark irp6a-
Seo-iv. Nevertheless, Ar. Met.
vi. 2 init., alludes unmistakably
x. 2 init. with iii. 4, 1001, a,
4 sq., and x. 2, 1053, b, 16 with
vii. 13), but as it is not brought
by Aristotle into any express
connection with book ix., it has
almost the appearance of a
separate treatise. Between these
connected books there is inserted,
tov. 7, 1017, a, 7, 22 sq., 31, in the
in book v., an inquiry words : a\\' 4vel tS ov cmKas
into the different meanings of \sy6fievov \eyerat TroWax&s, wv
thirty philosophical conceptions %v /ih fy to Kmh. (Tu^jSe/STj/cis, etc.,
and terms, which stands in no in a way which indicates, by the
connection with either the preceding
word fy, that the discussion had
or the following book. already come under the reader's
The Aristotelian authorship of this notice. It appears, therefore,
section is beyond doubt. Aristotle
that Aristotle actually intended
himself quotes it (in to incorporate our book v. or the
Metaph. vii. 1 init., x. 1 ; cf. contents of it in this part of his
Gev. et Corr. ii. 10, 336, b, 29, work, but never was able to finish
Phys. i. 8, 191, b 29), with the the literary connection. As to
words iv rois irepl rod irotrax&s or book xi., the second half (c. 8,
ir. tov iroff. AeyeTcu eKatrrov. The 1065, a, 26 sq.), is a compilation
view of Susemihl (Genet. Entw. from the Physies, obviously not
d. Plat. Phil. ii. 536) that these genuine. The first half exactly
citations are not satisfied by our corresponds in content with
book v., and that it is an un- books iii., iv., and vi. ; and is
Aristotelian tract which has taken
the place of a genuine book with
therefore either an early sketch
of the argument afterwards expanded
similar contents, is as decisively
in them, or else, as Rose
disproved as that of Rose (Ar. (Ar. Lib?: Ord. 156) supposes, a
Litr. Ord. 154) that the book is later abstract of them. A point
entirely unworthy of Aristotle. in favour of the latter view is
The book is alluded to in other the objectionable recurrence,
78 ARISTOTLE
seven times, of the particle ye
/iVi which is otherwise unknown
in Aristotle's writing (Eucken,
Be Ar. Bin. Rat. i. 10; Ind.
Ar. 147, a, 44 sq.) In view,
however, of the arguments from
the contents of the book themselves
adduced in support of the
other view by Bonitz (Ar. Met.
ii. 15, 451), this peculiarity is* not
decisive, especially as the general
style of the book has Aristotle's
characteristics, and as similar
phenomena as to particles are
found elsewhere. [Thus re . . re
occurs in Aristotle almost exclusively
in the Ethics and Politics
(Eucken, 16) Be 7e almost exclusively
in the Physics (ibid. 33),
;
in which also fievroi, KaWoi, and
rolvw are much commoner than
in the other works (ibid. 35, 51) :
&pa recurs oftener in the later
books of the Metaph. than in the
earlier (ibid. 50) : and among
the ten books of the Ethics,
there are many variants as between
the three last and the sections
i.-iv. or v.-vii., which again
vary from one another in diction
(ibid. 75 sq.). this first half
,
of book xi. five of the seven cases
of ye fiifv occur in c. 2. Besides,
7e is so often inserted by the
copyists that it is always possible
some early scribe is partly responsible.-]
Book xii. appears as
an independent treatise, which
refers to none of the preceding
books, but seems to allude to the
Phys. viii. 10 (esp. 267, b, 17 sq.)
in c. 7, 1073, a, 5, and in c. 8,
1073, a, 32, to Phys. viii. 8 sq.,
and also to the Be Ccelo ii. 3 sq.
It is remarkable that while c.
6-10 develop in some detail the
views of Aristotle as to the Godhead
and other eternal Essences,
c. 1-5 on the contrary give us
the doctrine of changeable substances
and their causes only in
narrow compass, and in a style
condensed often to the point of
obscurity. This, with the fact
that in these chapters the formula
pera. Tama. \sc. \eKreov~\ Sti
occurs twice (i.e. 3 init., and 1070,
a. 4) indicates that it was not a
book published by Aristotle, but
a set of notes intended as a basis
for lectures, in which many
points were only hinted at in the
the briefest way, with the knowledge
that they would be made
plain by oral development. The
main theme of the lectures consisted
of the points which in the
second half of book xi. are
treated with special care ; while
the more general metaphysical
inquiries which were to serve as
an introduction or basis for them
were only lightly sketched. The
matter the lectures dealt with
was no doubt intended to be
included in the work on the
First Philosophy; and c. 6-10
are, as far as matter is concerned,
exactly fitted to be the
conclusion of it. C. 1-5, on the
other hand, include nothing
which is not contained in the
earlier books. The polemic of
Kose (Ar. Libr. Ord. 160) against
this book—which, as will be seen
in the next note, is specially well
fortified with external evidence
—has no value as against its
Aristotelian authorship, but only
as to its connection with our
Metaph. The relation of the
remaining two books to the rest
is not clear; but there is no
reason to hold with Rose (p. 157)
that only xiv. is genuine. Aristotle
must have originally meant
to include them in the same
book, for xiii. 2, 1076, a, 39, refers