FOOTNOTES
Project Gutenberg EPUB3 edition
Arnold, Edward Vernon
Source notes
[1] See below, § 95.
[2] μάλιστα μὲν οὖν τῶν μαθητῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ Ζήνωνος ἠγαπᾶτο ὁ Περσαῖος Ind. Sto. Herc. col. xii 3 (Arnim i 437).
[3] ‘Zenonis Stoici servus, qui Persaeus vocatus est’ A. Gellius N. A. ii 18, 8. ἦν γὰρ ὄντως οἰκέτης γεγονὼς τοῦ Ζήνωνος, ὡς Νικίας ὁ Νικαεὺς ἱστορεῖ ἐν τῇ περὶ τῶν φιλοσόφων ἱστορίᾳ καὶ Σωτίων ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεὺς ἐν ταῖς Διαδοχαῖς Athen. iv 54 (Arnim i 452). On the other hand ‘nullum [servum fuisse] Zenoni ... satis constat’ Sen. Dial. xii 12, 4.
[4] Arnim i 439, 440.
[5]ib. 449.
[6] Athen. iv 54 (Arnim i 452).
[7] Diog. L. vii 162.
[8] Athen. as above.
[9] Paus. ii 8, 4; vii 8, 3 (Arnim i 442).
[10] Plut. Arat. 23, 3. According to Plutarch he afterwards admitted that he had been wrongly taught as to the ‘good general.’
[11] ‘Persaeus eos dicit esse habitos deos, a quibus magna utilitas ad vitae cultum esset inventa, ipsasque res utiles et salutares deorum esse vocabulis nuncupatas’ Cic. N. D. i 15, 38. Persaeus derived the theory from Prodicus; Philod. de piet. 9 (Arnim i 448), and above, § 42.
[12] Diog. L. vii 9.
[13] ἐκ Διὸς ἀρχώμεσθα, τὸν οὐδέποτ’ ἄνδρες ἐῶμεν | ἄῤῥητον· μεσταὶ δὲ Διὸς πᾶσαι μὲν ἀγυιαί, | πᾶσαι δ’ ἀνθρώπων ἀγοραί, μεστὴ δὲ θάλασσα | καὶ λιμένες· πάντῃ δὲ Διὸς κεχρήμεθα πάντες. | τοῦ γὰρ καὶ γένος ἐσμέν· ὁ δ’ ἤπιος ἀνθρώποισιν | δεξιὰ σημαίνει, λαοὺς δ’ ἐπὶ ἔργον ἐγείρει | μιμνῄσκων βιότοιο: Aratus, Phaen. Pref.
[14] Plut. Cleo. 11, 2.
[15] Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 222.
[16]ib. p. 245.
[17] Zeller, Stoics etc., p. 44.
[18] ‘Sphaeri, hominis in primis bene definientis, ut putant Stoici’ Cic. Tusc. disp. iv 24, 53.
[19] See below, § 332.
[20] ‘fortitudo est ... conservatio stabilis iudici in iis rebus, quae formidolosae videntur ... [haec definitio erat] Sphaeri’ Cic. as above. The principle was accepted by all Stoics, see below, § 323.
[21] ‘omitto ... Erillum, qui in cognitione et scientia summum bonum ponit; qui cum Zenonis auditor esset, vides quantum ab eo dissenserit, et quam non multum a Platone’ Cic. Ac. ii 42, 129. See also Fin. iv 14, 36.
[22] ‘sin ea [quae virtus leget quaeque reiciet] non neglegemus neque tamen ad finem summi boni referemus, non multum ab Erilli levitate aberrabimus; facit enim ille duo seiuncta ultima bonorum’ Fin. iv 15, 40.
[23] ζῆν ἀεὶ πάντα ἀναφέροντα πρὸς τὸ μετ’ ἐπιστήμης ζῆν Diog. L. vii 165.
[24] ὑποτελὶς δ’ ἐστὶ τὸ πρῶτον οἰκεῖον τοῦ ζῴου πάθος, ἀφ’ οὗ κατήρξατο συναισθάνεσθαι τὸ ζῷον τῆς συστασέως αὑτοῦ, οὔπω λογικὸν [ὂν] ἀλλ’ ἄλογον Stob. ii 7, 3 c.
[25] διαφέρειν δὲ τέλος καὶ ὑποτελίδα· τῆς μὲν γὰρ καὶ τοὺς μὴ σοφοὺς στοχάζεσθαι, τοῦ δὲ μόνον τὸν σοφόν Diog. L. vii 165.
[26] The best discussion is by Hirzel, Untersuchungen, ii 46 sqq. He considers the teaching of Herillus to have inclined to Cynism rather than to Platonism, and to have been substantially identical with that of Aristo.
[27] λάλον ἐπέκαλει Diog. L. vii 18.
[28] Athen. vi 58 (Arnim i 342).
[29]ib. vii 14 (Arnim i 341).
[30] See above, § 89.
[31] Diog. L. vii 163.
[32]ib. vii 161.
[33] ‘nihil istorum [physicorum] sciri putat posse’ Cic. Ac. ii 39, 123.
[34] ‘qui neque formam dei intellegi posse censeat, neque in dis sensum esse dicat; dubitetque omnino deus animans necne sit’ Cic. N. D. i 14, 37.
[35] ‘Aristo moralem quoque ... quam solam reliquerat, circumcidit’ Sen. Ep. 89, 13. ‘hanc partem [quae dat propria cuique personae praecepta] levem existimat, et quae non descendat in pectus usque’ ib. 94, 2: in this letter the whole subject is very fully discussed.
[36] ἴσον γάρ ἐστι τὸ προηγμένον αὐτὴν λέγειν ἀδιάφορον τῷ ἀγαθὸν ἀξιοῦν, καὶ σχεδὸν ὀνόματι μόνον διαφέρον Sext. math. xi 64 (Arnim i 361).
[37] ‘Aristonis ... sententia, non esse res ullas praeter virtutes et vitia, inter quas quicquam omnino interesset’ Cic. Fin. iv 17, 47.
[38] ‘huic [sc. Aristoni] summum bonum est, in his rebus neutram in partem moveri, quae ἀδιαφορία ab ipso dicitur’ Cic. Ac. ii 42, 130.
[39] Galen, Hipp. et Plat. vii 2 (Arnim i 374). Chrysippus is said to have complained that he made the various virtues σχέσεις or variations of a single virtue (Plut. Sto. rep. vii 3); nevertheless the same doctrine frequently reappears in Stoic writers.
[40] ‘vives, inquit Aristo, magnifice atque praeclare, quod erit cunque visum, ages: nunquam angere, nunquam cupies, nunquam timebis’ Cic. Fin. iv 25, 69.