08.04.2019 Views

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

MACEDONIA is GREECE and will always be GREECE- (if they are desperate to steal a name, Monkeydonkeys suits them just fine) ΚΑΤΩ ΤΟ ΠΡΟΔΟΤΙΚΟ "ΣΥΝΤΑΓΜΑΤΙΚΟ ΤΟΞΟ"!!! Strabo – “Geography” “There remain of Europe, first, Macedonia and the parts of Thrace that are contiguous to it and extend as far as Byzantium; secondly, Greece; and thirdly, the islands that are close by. Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece, yet now, since I am following the nature and shape of the places geographically, I have decided to classify it apart from the rest of Greece and to join it with that part of Thrace which borders on it and extends as far as the mouth of the Euxine and the Propontis. Then, a little further on, Strabo mentions Cypsela and the Hebrus River, and also describes a sort of parallelogram in which the whole of Macedonia lies.” (Strab. 7.fragments.9) ΚΚΕ, ΚΝΕ, ΟΝΝΕΔ, ΑΓΟΡΑ,ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ,ΝΕΑ,ΦΩΝΗ,ΦΕΚ,ΝΟΜΟΣ,LIFO,MACEDONIA, ALEXANDER, GREECE,IKEA

MACEDONIA is GREECE and will always be GREECE- (if they are desperate to steal a name, Monkeydonkeys suits them just fine)

ΚΑΤΩ ΤΟ ΠΡΟΔΟΤΙΚΟ "ΣΥΝΤΑΓΜΑΤΙΚΟ ΤΟΞΟ"!!!

Strabo – “Geography”
“There remain of Europe, first, Macedonia and the parts of Thrace that are contiguous to it and extend as far as Byzantium; secondly, Greece; and thirdly, the islands that are close by. Macedonia, of course, is a part of Greece, yet now, since I am following the nature and shape of the places geographically, I have decided to classify it apart from the rest of Greece and to join it with that part of Thrace which borders on it and extends as far as the mouth of the Euxine and the Propontis. Then, a little further on, Strabo mentions Cypsela and the Hebrus River, and also describes a sort of parallelogram in which the whole of Macedonia lies.”
(Strab. 7.fragments.9)

ΚΚΕ, ΚΝΕ, ΟΝΝΕΔ, ΑΓΟΡΑ,ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑ,ΝΕΑ,ΦΩΝΗ,ΦΕΚ,ΝΟΜΟΣ,LIFO,MACEDONIA, ALEXANDER, GREECE,IKEA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

;:<br />

';<br />

:'<br />

;<br />

<strong>ARISTOTLE</strong>'S WHITINGS 117<br />

both <strong>by</strong> the express distinction<br />

O-urepiKol \6yoL have mentioned<br />

the Mhics, which in the Politics<br />

he repeatedly quotes as r)6iKa, and<br />

puts in the closest connection<br />

with them (vid. p. 127, n. 2, of<br />

<strong>Zeller</strong>'s 2nd ed.). Bernays' theory<br />

(73 sqq.), that the first chapter<br />

of the seventh book of the Politic!<br />

strikingly diverges from the usual<br />

style of his scientific works, and<br />

bears distinct traces of having<br />

been extracted from a dialogue<br />

can scarcely be supposed after<br />

Vahlen's forcible objections<br />

( Arist. Aufs. ii.) to be established<br />

<strong>Zeller</strong>, however, feels bound to<br />

agree with Bernays that <strong>by</strong> the<br />

' exoteric discourses ' in this passage<br />

is meant a written work of<br />

the philosopher's which is lost to<br />

us, and which Aristotle here seems<br />

to follow pretty closely, for which<br />

very reason he refers to it, and<br />

not to the Mhics, though the<br />

parallel passages in the latter<br />

were closely connected with it<br />

in meaning. — Less convincing<br />

with regard to this, in spite of<br />

what Bernays says to the contrary<br />

(ibid. 38, 51 sqq.), appears<br />

to be Polit. iii. 6, 1278, b, 30<br />

aAAa fityv Kal rrjs apxys T0 ^s<br />

\eyoftevovs rpSvovs [the Setrirorela,<br />

the oUovofitKi), and the toAitikj)<br />

apxh] f)4^ l0v SteAeTi/ • Kal yap 4v rots<br />

S^ayrepiKois \6yois $topt£6fie6a irepl<br />

airiiv woWdicis. These words,<br />

looked at in themselves, might<br />

refer not only (as Onckbn, ibid.,<br />

suggests) to oral disquisitions,<br />

but also (<strong>by</strong> taking the Siopifif/tefla<br />

as the collective we ' ') to conversations<br />

not connected with the<br />

School or even with scjentific<br />

philosophy. That Aristotle here<br />

refers to the i^ar. Xiyoi, not for<br />

'<br />

the existence' (more correctly<br />

that is drawn between<br />

' distinction<br />

' ') of different kinds<br />

of dominion, but for the exact<br />

limitation of their difference<br />

(as Bernays, p. 38 asserts), cannot<br />

be inferred from the $iopt(6-<br />

lieBa, since this expression designates<br />

not only the exact distinction,<br />

the ' carefully-weighed logical<br />

antithesis,' but any kind of<br />

distinction whatever. If we<br />

compare with it the perfectly<br />

analogous use of \4yo/i.ev, Siopif-<br />

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!