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

ARISTOTLE'S WRITINGS 155
which even the earliest of them contain to Athens and
to the place itself where Aristotle taught. 1
If, then, the
view already indicated a as to the destination of these
texts for his scholars, their connection with his teaching,
and the character of their cross references be right, it
1397, b, 31, 1399, b, 12, refers son of the indefiniteness of that
without doubt to past events particle. Just as little does
of the years B.C. 338-336 ; in iii. it follow from Anal. Pri. ii.
17, 1418, b, 27 it mentions Iso- 24, that Thebes was not yet
crates' Philippus (B.C. 345); of destroyed at that time ; we might
the Rhetoric also Brandis shows rather gather the contrary, with
(PMUlogui, iv. 10 sqq.) that the regard to this work, from Polit.
many Attic orators quoted in it iii. 5, 1278, a, 25.
and in the Poetics who were ' Cf. Bbandis, 6fr.-rom. Phil.
younger than Demosthenes, could ii. b, 116. We may give here a
by no means belong to a time few further instances, besides
prior to Aristotle's first departure those already noted. Categ. 4, 2,
from Athens, and the same is a, 1, c, 9 fin.
: iroD, oTov iv Avueitp.
true of the numerous works of Anal. PH. ii. 24 : Athens and
Theodectes which are used both Thebes, as examples of neighhere
and in the Poetics. In bours. Likewise in Phys. iii. 3,
Metaph. i. 9, 991, a, 1, xii. 8, 202, b, 13; ibid. iv. 11, 219, b, 20:
1073, b, 17, 32, Eudoxus and the rb iv Avxeliji elvai. Metaph. v. 5,
still younger Callippus, and in 30, 1015, a, 25, 1025, a, 25 : rb
Mh. N. vii. 14, 1153, b, 5, x. 2, TtXtvaai sis Atytvav, as an example
init., Speusippus and Eudoxus of a commercial journey. Ibid.
are spoken of as if they were no v. 24, fin.
: the Athenian festivals
longer living. Bose (Arist. IAbr. Dionysia and Thargelia (Ari-
Ord. 212 sqq.) has shown with stotle also uses the Attic months
regard to the History of Animals, e.g. Hist. An. v. 11, &c. ; but it
from viii. 9, ii. 5. init., and other is not fair to attach any importpassages,
that it was only written ance to this). Rivet, ii. 7, 1385,
(or at least completed), some a, 28 : S iv AvKeltp rbv op/ibv Sois.
time after the battle of Arbela, Ibid. iii. 2, 1404, b, 22, PoUt. vii.
in which the Macedonians saw 17, 1336, b, 27 : the actor Theoelephants
for the first time, and dorus. Very frequent mention
probably not before the Indian is also made of Athens and the
expedition. The fact that even Athenians (Ind. Ar. 12, b, 34
much earlier events are intro- sqq.). Again the observation on
duced with a vvv—as inMeteor. iii. the corona borealis (Meteor, ii, 5.
1,371, a, 30, the burning of the 362, b, 9) suits the latitude of
temple of Ephesus (01. 106, 1, Athens, as Ideler (i. 567), on this
B.C. 356), and in Polit. v. 10, 1312, passage, shows,
b, 19, Dion's expedition (01. 105,
2 P. 108 sqq. : especially p.
4 sq.) — proves nothing, by rea- 123 sq. and p. 138 sq.
156 ARISTOTLE
follows that all of them must have been composed during
his final sojourn in Athens. Equally decisive, on this
head, is the observation that throughout the whole of so
comprehensive a collection, there is
hardly to be found
a single notable alteration of teaching or terminology.
All is ripe and ready. All is in exact correspondence. All
the important writings
are woven closely together, not
only by express cross reference, but also by their whole
character. There are no scattered products of the
different periods of a life. We can only look upon them
as the ordered execution of a work planned when the
author, having come to a full understanding with himself,
had gathered together the philosophic fruit of a lifetime.
Even the earlier works which he proposed to connect
with his later writing, he revised on a comprehensive
plan. Therefore, for our use of these texts, it is no
great matter whether a particular book was written
sooner or later than any other. The problem, however,
must be dealt with nevertheless.
A certain difficulty is caused by the use of cross references
already noticed. 1 As such cases are, after all, only
exceptions in the general run of the citations, the value
of these as an indication of sequence is
not so slight as
has been supposed. There are, in fact, but few instances
in which our judgment as to the order of the writings is
placed in doubt by the occurrence of references both ways.
Of the extant books, so far as they are open to this
classification, 2 the logical treatises, excepting the tract on
1
Cf. p. 124 sqq. opposed on other grounds. Not
2 This, however, is always only are none of these quoted
the case except with writings in the genuine works, and only
the genuineness of which can be a single one in a spurious compo-