academica of cicero. - 912 Freedom Library

The Project Gutenberg eBook of ...
for Democritus see my note on II. 73, for Empedocles on II. 74, for Anaxagoras on II. 72. Nihil
cognosci, nihil penipi, nihil sciri: the verbs are all equivalent; cf. D.F. III. 15 equidem soleo etiam
quod uno Graeci ... idem pluribus verbis exponere. Angustos sensus: Cic. is thinking of the
famous lines of Empedocles ste???p?? µe? ?a? pa?aµa? ?.t.?. R. and P. 107. Brevia curricula
vitae: cf. Empedocles' pa???? de ???? aß??? µe???. Is there an allusion in curricula to
Lucretius' lampada vitai tradunt, etc.? In profundo: Dem. e? ß???, cf. II. 32. The common trans.
"well" is weak, "abyss" would suit better. Institutis: ??µ? of Democritus, see R. and P. 50.
Goerenz's note here is an extraordinary display of ignorance. Deinceps omnia: pa?ta efe??? there
is no need to read denique for deinceps as Bentl., Halm. Circumfusa tenebris: an allusion to the
s??t?? ???s?? of Democr., see II. 73. Dixerunt: Halm brackets this because of dixerunt above,
parts of the verb dicere are however often thus repeated by Cic.
§45. Ne illud quidem: cf. 16. Latere censebat Goer. omitted censebat though in most MSS. Orelli
and Klotz followed as usual. For the sense II. 122. Cohibereque: Gk. epe?e??, which we shall
have to explain in the Lucullus. Temeritatem ... turpius: for these expressions, see II. 66, note.
Praecurrere: as was the case with the dogmatists. Paria momenta: this is undiluted scepticism,
and excludes even the possibility of the probabile which Carneades put forward. For the doctrine
cf. II. 124, for the expression Euseb. Praep. Evan. XIV. c. 4 (from Numenius) of Arcesilas, e??a?
?a? pa?ta a?ata??pta ?a? t??? e?? e?ate?a ?????? ?s???ate?? a???????, Sextus Adv. Math. IX.
207 ?s?s?e?e?? ?????; in the latter writer the word ?s?s?e?e?a very frequently occurs in the
same sense, e g Pyrrhon. Hyp. I. 8 (add N.D. I. 10, rationis momenta)
§46. Platonem: to his works both dogmatists and sceptics appealed, Sextus Pyrrhon. Hyp. I. 221
t?? ??at??a ??? ??? µe? d??µat???? efasa? e??a?, ??? de ap? ?t????, ??? de ?ata µe? t? ap??
?t????, ?ata de t? d??µat????. Stobaeus II. 6, 4 neatly slips out of the difficulty; ??at?? p???f??
?? ??, ??? ??? t??e? ????ta? p???d????. Exposuisti: Durand's necessary em., approved by
Krische, Halm, etc. for MSS. exposui. Zenone: see Introd. p. 5.
NOTES ON THE FRAGMENTS.
BOOK I.
1. Mnesarchus: see II. 69, De Or. I. 45, and Dict. Biogr. 'Antipater'; cf. II. 143, De Off. III. 50.
Evidently this fragment belongs to that historical justification of the New Academy with which I
suppose Cicero to have concluded the first book.
2. The word concinere occurs D.F. IV. 60, N.D. I. 16, in both which places it is used of the Stoics,
who are said re concinere, verbis discrepare with the other schools. This opinion of Antiochus
Cic. had already mentioned 43, and probably repeated in this fragment. Krische remarks that
Augustine, Cont. Acad. II. 14, 15, seems to have imitated that part of Cicero's exposition to which
this fragment belongs. If so Cic. must have condemned the unwarrantable verbal innovations of
Zeno in order to excuse the extreme scepticism of Arcesilas (Krische, p. 58).
BOOK II.
3. This fragm. clearly forms part of those anticipatory sceptical arguments which Cic. in the first
edition had included in his answer to Hortensius, see Introd. p. 55. The argument probably ran
thus: What seems so level as the sea? Yet it is easy to prove that it is really not level.
4. On this I have nothing to remark.
5. There is nothing distinctive about this which might enable us to determine its connection with
the dialogue. Probably Zeno is the person who serius adamavit honores.
6. The changing aspects of the same thing are pointed to here as invalidating the evidence of the
senses.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14970/14970-h/14970-h.htm[1/5/2010 10:31:57 AM]