Him the Aristotle Referred to As Alexander's Teacher in Several Texts and Renders the Emendation of This Name to Aristocles Un Necessary
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
I2 INTRODUCTION him the Aristotle referred to as Alexander's teacher in several texts and renders the emendation of this name to Aristocles un necessary. If this is correct his philosophical views are represented by a passage of the de intellectu dealing with the doctrine of "the external intellect" (voui; 6upa.6e:v).54 II. THE ALEXANDRIAN CORPUS 55 The purpose of this description of the Peripatetic school in the generation before Alexander has been to place his own contribution in perspective. It is clear now that a strong tradition of scholarly exegesis was established before him, and that he was linked to it through his teachers Herminus and Sosigines. There are also some indications of a less rigorous tradition represented by Alexan der of Damascus and Aristocles of Messenia in which philosophical eclecticism was combined with an affiliation to the culture of the Second Sophistic. Alexander's contribution was to be entirely the continuation of the former tradition 56 and its elevation to new heights, primarily through the composition of a series of com mentaries on Aristotelian works. The Commentaries The precise form of pre-Alexandrian philosophical commentaries is not known to us,57 the only extant example being the somewhat 54 Mant. no. 4-n2. 5 Bruns; cf. n. 44. 66 See Pt. II of the bibliography for additional literature on the works and subjects discussed in this section. 69 This is another reason, quite apart from those adduced by Moraux, why Alexander might not have been the pupil of Aristocles of Messenia. Nothing however is known of the contribution of Aristotle of Mitylene to the specifically scholarly tradition, and therefore his influence on Alexander as against that of the known scholars, Herminus and Sosigines, might have been slight. 67 Pre-Alexandrian commentators are quoted rather sparingly, both by Alexander and later commentators. For example, Andronicus is only mention ed in Alexander's extant works at Pr. An. I 160. 32, and Diiring (Biographical Tradition, p. 416) believes that he drew his knowledge about the arrangement of Aristotle's works from Adrastus, who wrote on this subject (Simplicius Cat. 16. 1-2). Boethus and Xenarchus are mentioned by name only at Mant. 151. 8 in a text of dubious authenticity. The very nature of textual commen tary makes reference to earlier authorities otiose unless an important point arises, such as a textual reading; cf. the references to Aspasius at de sensu 10. 2 and Met. 59. 6 and 379. 3. For these reasons it is difficult to measure the originality of a commentator, and thus while Alexander's achievement THE ALEXANDRIAN CORPUS IJ paraphrastic commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics by Aspasius.68 We know that something like this technique was practiced in both the Platonic and Aristotelian schools as early as the first generation after their foundation, 69 but it was not developed to any extent until the first and second centuries A.D. To this period belong several commentaries on the Timaeus by Platonists,60 as well as the works of Peripatetics mentioned above. We cannot be certain of their form. They might have been epitomes, or more elaborate paraphrases, or text by text commentaries like most of Alexander's works. We are rather better informed about the range of Peripatetic commentaries, and we find that an interest in the logical works predominated, epitomised by the celebrated description of Hermi nus in Lucian's Demonax. 61 There are references to commentaries on the Physics by Aspasius and Adrastus, and one on the de caelo by the former. 62 Both also wrote on the Nicomachean Ethics ;68 only Aspasius is known to have commented on the Metaphysics before Alexander. 64 Sosigines seems only to have written mono- was no doubt great we cannot afford to gauge his debt to his predecessors solely from the indices nominum. u CAG, XI-i. Only that on Books I-IV, part of that on Book VII, and that on Book VIII are extant. 69 Crantor was the first of many to write a commentary on the Timaeus (Von Arnim, RE XI, col. 1586), and Eudemus seems in effect to have written a commentary on some of the logical works and the Physics; note the texts at Wehrli, Schule des Aristoteles, VII, frs. 9-24 and 31-123. • 0 These were composed by the more orthodox Platonists Taurus, Atticus, and Severus, and there is also a record of one by the Peripatetic Adrastus. Alexander is known to have criticised Taurus' commentary-see Praechter, RE VI-i, col. 68. 81 Demonax 56, where he is said to deserve 3excx xcxTl)yoplcxL (ten categories = ten indictments). Simplicius' proem to his commentary on the Categories is a rich source of evidence on earlier studies of this work; cf. the index nominum. For our purposes we need note that there were commentaries by Aspasius, Adrastus, and Herminus. Alexander quotes from Herminus on some texts in the Topics (569. 3-5, 574. 26) and Prior Analytics I (72. 27, 89. 34ff., 91. 21ff.). Aspasius appears to have commented on the de inter pretatione. 82 Cf. Simplicius' commentaries to these works, index nominum. 83 For Aspasius cf. n. 58; for Adrastus, Athenaeus XV. 673. 84 He is quoted by Alexander in his commentary; cf. n. 57 above. This limited range of Aristotelian works on which commentaries were written illustrates Diiring's point that it was "ein sehr zusammengeschrumpter Aristoteles, fiir den man sich interessiert" (Antike und Abendland, 4 [1954] 124) in the period from Andronicus to late antiquity. The indices show that Alexander had a knowledge of the biological and zoological works, as well as the Ethics. It has also been shown that he had a direct acquaintance .