


Sabet les ici Special wacet tan 





rs 
ie ey 


rasiny. 


if 
i BE EEE if ag fi 
y oe re fay, a ys Cie _ a 1 i 
pliner aie 
ae ee Le fs ie 
ie 





{ mee: oyise 
7m 
Y ee tee 


2 < = eet 
orton > weemuaes nates meee 
ee Se 
Seen eer TON AS 
= >; ee es SSO ~ 


rm 


us A fa Seas 

rt My) 

PUR a 4 
t? 
ae (i 
A im oe 


See 
SSS 


Se 
: re Se 


exe 


ne Ssoee 
at name 


eee 
Z ra 
SI me ind, A Oy 

NS owe 
CR A a 


pleat 


ye Hey 
: WH Bis 


ae 
ee 


EGE 
ti eae e 
pear a nae 


= 
pei 


PESOS SILT eats 
Pegler ens 


== 
pee 





ee 
Pate 


iN co v 
AiR ue 
JERE 


. 
7 . 


RS A a 
; co 


\ 
He wey iy 























ARISTOTLE’S 


_ VOL. I. 


ETHICS. 


PRINTED BY SPOTTISWOODE AND CO. 
NEW-STREET SQUARE 


e. 

: . 
a 

¥ 
; _ 
& 

; ess ‘ 

-* 4 = 





THE 


ETHICS OF ARISTOTLE 


ILLUSTRATED WITH 


ESSAYS AND NOTSS. 


BY 


SIR ALEXANDER GRANT, BART., M.A., LL.D. 


DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION IN THE BOMBAY PRESIDENCY 
AND FORMERLY FELLOW OF ORIEL COLLEGE, OXFORD. 


SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND COMPLETED. 


IN TWO VOLUMES. 


VOLUME THE SECOND. 


LONDON : 
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CoO. 
1866. 











E 







THE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS. | 
BOOKS IL—x. 
ae " Ae 
« piles et 





A : . J 
%. 
<2 AA 





Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2007 with funding from 
Microsoft Corporation 


https://archive.org/details/ethicsofaristotlO2arisiala 


PLAN OF BOOK III. 


T has been already assumed without proof, that virtue implies 
purpose (Zth. II. iv. 3, I. v. 4, I. vi. 15), and therefore of course 
will and freedom. Before proceeding to the analysis of particular 
virtues, Aristotle begins by examining the generic conception of the 
Voluntary, with a view chiefly to the comprehension of its species, 
Purpose. 
‘The first five Chapters of Book III. are accordingly devoted to 
this subject, and stand so much apart from what goes before and 
after, that some have been led to the conclusion that they were 
written as a separate treatise (see Essay I. p.10). That several 
parts of these chapters are unnecessarily repeated in Book V. c. xiii., 
and that certain points in them do not agree with the psychology of 
Books VI. and VII, is no argument against the present chapters 
having formed part of Aristotle’s original draft and conception of his 
Ethics, but only tends to show that Books V. VI. VII. were written 
later. It is more to the purpose to notice that in Chapter V. § 10, 
there is an apparent ignoring of the whole discussion upon the for- 
mation of moral states which occupies the commencement of Book II., 
and that no allusion occurs to ‘the mean’ or to ‘happiness.’ On the 
other hand, while we must attribute a sort of completeness in itself 
and a sort of isolation to the account of the Voluntary, we must also 
acknowledge that there is at all events great skill shown in the way 
in which it is worked into the general ethical treatise by §§ 21, 22 
of the fifth chapter. And on the whole these chapters bear out the 
theory which seems most natural with regard to the composition of 
the Ethics (see Essay I. pp. 42, 43), as they both exhibit to some 
degree the characteristics of a separate treatise, and also appear to 
have been written in reference to the preconceived plan of the 
entire work, ‘The contents of these chapters are as follows : — 
B2 


1V PLAN OF BOOK III. 


(1.) The general definition of the Voluntary. Ch. I. 

(2.) The special account of Purpose, that it is distinct from desire, 
wish, opinion; its relation to the process of deliberation. Ch.IJ.—III. 

(3.) Some consideration of the question whether Wish is for the 
absolute or the apparent good. Ch. IV. 

(4.) An attack upon the position that while virtue is free, vice is 
involuntary. Ch. V. 

The remainder of the book is occupied with a discussion of the 
two first virtues upon Aristotle’s list—courage and temperance. 
With regard to courage the following heads are treated of: — 
(1.) Its proper objects; Ch. VI. (2.) That it is a mean; Ch. VII. 
(3.) That true courage is to be distinguished from five spurious 
kinds of courage; Ch. VIII. (4.) That it is particularly related to 
pain, and implies making great sacrifices for the sake of what is 
noble; Ch. IX. The objects and the nature of temperance are 
treated of in Chapters X. and XI. And the book ends with two 
remarks on intemperance: (1.) that it is more voluntary than 
cowardice; and, (2.) that its character is shown in its etymology; 
Ch. XI. i 





HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON III. 


——1e—— 


~ wo 
H® cperijs 0% weph waby re xal mpakes obong, xal én} 
~ , 
pay Tog Exovciors eraivay xal Veywv yivopévey, én} 
X ~ > ‘4 7 sv x » ee , \- ¢ , 
82 Toig dxoucias cuyyvmpmys, eviore 08 xal 2Azou, TO Exov- 
coy xal axotoroy dvayxaioy lowe Oioploas Toig meph dperiig 
> yar, , \ A ~ ~ / 
emioxoroucs, ypyoynov O& xal roig vouoberotos mpeg Ter 





I. 1—2 Tis dperijs 5)—Koddcers] 
‘Virtue then being concerned with 
feelings and actions; and praise and 
blame being bestowed on those which 
are yoluntary, while pardon and 
sometimes even pity are conceded to 
the involuntary, it is surely necessary 
for those who treat of virtue to define 
the voluntary and involuntary; and 
moreover this will be useful for legis- 
lators with a view to their rewards 
and punishments.’ In the Eudemian 
Ethics, which contain generally speak- 
ing a reproduction of these Ethics, for 
the most part compressed, but also 
occasionally expanded and supple- 
mented, we find (Zth. Eud., u. vi.) 
a more definite and reasoned state- 
ment of the voluntariness of virtue 
and vice, which is by far the best and 
most ingenious part of the books that 
certainly belong to Eudemus. His 
reasoning is briefly as follows :—All 
ovoia are apxal, and tend to reproduce 
themselves ; and only those épyaif are 
properly so called («épiu) which are 
primary causes of motion, as is espe- 
cially the case with regard to immu- 
table motions, whose cause is doubtless 
God. Mathematical dpyai are called 





so only by analogy, not being causes 
of motion. We have hitherto only 
mentioned necessary consequences : 
but there are many things which may 
happen or may not, and whose causes 
therefore must be, like themselves, 
contingent. All human actions being 
contingent, it is obvious that man is 
a contingent cause, and that the reason 
of the contingency in his actions is 
his ability to will one way or the other, 
as is farther manifest from our praise ~ 


_or blame of actions. A deeper ground 


than that which Aristotle has taken 
might surely have been found for the 
position that morality implies freedom. 
But though philosophy even before 
Aristotle had dealt to some extent 
with the ideas of necessity and free- 
dom, it remained for the Stoics to 
open the question more decisively; 
and (for reasons elsewhere given) this 
is one main point in which modern 
systems may claim an advantage over 
the ancient ones (see Essay VII.). It is 
plain that the discussion of free-will 
in this place is never metaphysical, 
and rarely even psychological. An 
appeal to language and common 
opinions sums up nearly the whole. 

. 


6 HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQN IIf. 


\ ‘\ 5 ‘\ , 
3 TAS TILAS KAI TAS XOAaT ELC. 


, ANd WM / 
Pic 7 OF ayvolay yivopeva. 


[Cuap. 


doxes 02 Axovoia elvar TH 


Blaroy 03 0b 7 apy 2Gobe, 


TOVMUTY ovo ey 4 pndey oupParreran 6 mparTwy 4 6 
TAT XeOY, oloy ei mveimna xouloas mor 7 dvipwro_x dptot 


4 OVTEC. 


doa 0 Oa pofov peesSoveoy xax@y mparreros } oa 


XAACY Tl, Oloy Eb TUPAYYS MpoTTATTOL aloypov TE mpacas 
xuplog wy yovewy xa) Téxvey, xal mpakavros piv owFowro, 
pa, mpakavrog 0 amobvicxoey, dpdiohyryow eyes worepoy 





The scope of the argument is limited 
to a political, as distinguished from a 
theological point of view (dvayxatoy 
Tots wepl dpeTis emioKoToveL, Xphoiwov 
Se kal trois vowoberovcr). _ 

3 done? 5t—yivdueva] ‘ Now those 
acts seem to be involuntary which are 
done under compulsion or through 
ignorance.’ In asking what is the 
Voluntary, Aristotle does not pursue 
a speculative method of inquiry. Such 
a method might have commenced with 
the deep-lying ideas of personality 
and consciousness, of the individuality 
of the subject, &c. But he is content 
with defining the voluntary by a con- 
trast to the common notions (doxe?) of 
what constitutes an involuntary act. 
It might be said that this is giving a 


merely negative conception of freedom. , 


But in fact the conception given is 
positive, only the analysis of it is not 
pushed very far. The voluntariness 
of an act Aristotle represents to be 
constituted in this—that the actor is 
in every case the apx%, or cause of his 
actions, except in cases of compulsion, 
where there really is a superior épxh 
(Kant’s ‘heteronomy’), or of ignor- 
ance, where he does not know what 
his action is, and can only be held to 
be the cause of what he meant to do. 
In what sense and how the individual 
is an dpxf, is the point where Ari- 
stotle stops short in the inquiry. 
Biaov 5¢—dvyres] ‘That is com- 
pulsory, whose cause is external to 





the agent, and is of such a nature 
that the agent (or patient) contributes 
nothing towards it; as, for instance, 
if a wind were to carry you to any 
place, or men in whose power you are,’ 
‘Apxf seems here equivalent to épxy 
kwhoews, the efficient cause, Ari- 
stotle attributes spontaneity so de- 
cisively to the individual act, that he 
confines the term compulsion as only 
applicable to cases of absolute physical 
force, where a man’s limbs are moved 
or his body transported, as if he 
were inanimate, by some external 
power. The compulsion of threats, 
fear, and such like, he will not call 
compulsion without qualification, be- 
cause still the individual acts under 
it. He has already spoken of the life 
of money-making as being Blaids tis, 
‘in a sort compulsory’ (Z7h. 1. v. 8). 
With 6 mpdrrev 7} 6 rdoxwy cf. v. viii. 
3: TOAAG yap Trav dice drapxdvTev 
eiddres nad mpdrrouey Kal mdoxomev— 
olov 1d ynpay 7h} amobvhoKew. 

4—9 The cause of the act must be 
entirely from without, for in some 
cases men are forced, not to an act, 
but to an alternative. They may do 
what is grievous for the fear of what 
is worse. Such acts, then, are of a 
mixed character, partaking of the 
‘nature both of voluntariness and 
involuntariness. Relatively to the 
moment, they come from the choice 
and will of the individual. Ab- 
stractedly and in themselves they 


1] H@IKOQN NIKOMAXEION III. 7 


a , 
AxOUTIA eOTW 7 EXOUTIA. 


wn 7 , \ 
TooUToy Of Th TuUPalver xal 5 


~ ~ > , s ~ 
mech ras ey Toig yepdow exPorag: arrde pty yap ovdelc 
A ~ aa < 
amopanrnrsras Exwy, er) cwrnpia 8 abtod xal ray Aomay 


~ wv 
GmayvrTes of voy EyovTss. 


\ . a \ 6 
pbuTak ev ovv eloly ai rormdT ou 6 


\ ~, c , 
mpaszets, doluacs OF paAAoy Exoucioig: aizeral yap ciot 
\ A / ~ 7, 
TOTE OTE TOATTOVTHL, TO dz Tédog Tig mpaSews xata Toy 





are contrary to the will. But as 
every act aims at something in refer- 
ence to the particular moment, and 
is thus entirely dependent on it, so 
these must be judged as acts done and 
chosen voluntarily, and according to 
circumstances must obtain blame or 
praise. There seems to be four cases 
which Aristotle conceives as possible: 
(1) Praise is deserved where pain or 
degradation is endured for the sake of 
some great and noble end; (2) but 
blame, where what is degrading is 
endured without a sufficiently great 
and noble end. (3) Pardon is con- 
eeded where human nature succumbs, 
under great extremities, to do what is 
not right; (4) except the action be 
such as no extremities ought to bring 
a man to consent to, in which case 
pardon is withheld. In these dis- 
tinctions we may recognise a practical 
and political wisdom such as might 
be found in the speeches of Thucy- 
dides, but the discussion does not rise 
to the level of philosophy. 

6 puxral—ovde] ‘Now it may be 
said that such actions are of a mixed 
character, but they are more like 
voluntary actions, for they are chosen 
at the particular moment when they 
are done, and the moral character of 
an action depends on the circum- 
stance of the moment; hence also the 
terms ‘voluntary’ and ‘involuntary’ 
must be predicated in reference to 
the moment when a person is acting. 


Now, in the supposed case (év rorabras | 


mpdtect), the individual acts volun- 





tarily; for the efficient cause of the 
mevement of the accessory limbs is 
in himself, and where the cause is ina 
person, it rests with him to act or not. 
Therefore such things are voluntary, 
though abstractedly perhaps, involun- 
tary, for in.themselvyes no one would 
choose any of such things as these.’ 
7d 5 réAos ris mpdtews] The phrase 
is general, not referring only to the 
eases under dispute, but to action 
universally. In this sense we may 
translate tijs mpdtews ‘of an action.’ 
TéAos is used here in a peculiar sense 
to denote the ‘moral character of an 
action.” This sense arises out of a 
combination of associations, ‘final 
cause,’ and ‘ motive,’ being combined 
with ‘ end-in-itself” ‘ perfection,’ 
‘completeness.’ A precisely similar 
use of the word occurs, Eth. m1. vii. 
6: Té&Aos 58 mdons évepyeias—épilera 
yap Exastov 7G TéAet- (on which see 
note). The Paraphrast treats the 
present passage as if the réAos of an 
action were different from the volun- 
tariness of an action; and as if the 
argument were, ‘because the character 
of an action as good or bad is judged 
in reference to the mind of the actor 
at the moment of action, so also must 
the voluntariness of an action be 
judged.’ *Eme) nal rd éxdorns rpdicws 
Tédos Kata Toy Kaipdy abrijs éori, Kad 
&xd Tod Kaipov  ayabby 4 movnpdy 
ylverar’ Sore Kal rd Exotcwov, HR Td 
dxototov, kara Toy Kapoy bre mpdtrerat, 
(nrnréov. Of course the interpreta- 
tion of Muretus is wrong which ate 


8 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III, [ Cuap. 


\ \ c ‘ ‘\ \ \ > / a 
xal TO exougsoy Oy xal TO axodoiov, OTe 
, \ ~ 
MpATTEL, AEKXTEOY, MpaTTEL Oe Exwv* xal yap 7 apyy TOD 
~ 4 ~ / 
xively TA opyavixh mépyn ev Taig ToadTaIg moakeow ey 
mS > ~ , ~ / 
muta éoriv? wvd ey AUTO 7 apy, ew avTw xal TO wpAT- 
é 
/ \ ~ ~ 
Tew xal uy. exodoia On Ta ToAtTA, amaAds D lows axov- 
2N A \ wn oA > e”-4 ~ , 2>y/ 
Tia OvdElG Yap AY EAOITO xa aito riy To1oUTwY ovdEr, 
me ~ ’ / \ ~ 
er) tals mpageos 02 Tals TormuTass eviore xal ErasvotvTas, 
/ , \ 
ray aloypov Thy AvmnpoY UToMEvwol ayTl peyarwyv xall 
~ 2 / \ b) > 
xardy' av 0 avawany, Wéyovra Ta yap aloyio§ 
jmowsives er) wxydevl xaAw y peTplw davaov. em’ évios 
Uropeivas el paydevl xan ¥ petpln Pawrov. fosg 
Yi Dr 
0 graivos pev ov yivetas, ovyyv@py Oo, OTav Oia TommuTa 
, aA \ ~ A \ > / / c \ 
™ pasy TIg & [a7 Ok, & ray dvipeomivyy doow omeprelves xal 
N ~ 
pendels av brroneivasr. Evia 0 lows obx eoriv avaynacbyvas, 
~ / i f 
AAAK paarrov amohavaréoy mabovts Ta deworara’ xal 
~ \ 
yap tov Evpimldov Arxpatlwva yeroia daiveros TH avay- 
~ + , S ~ 
HAT UYTA LNT POXTOVAT OL, EOTLOE YarEmoy eviore Oiaxpivers 
~ A / ld 
moiov avtl molov aiperéov xat Th avTi tivog bmomeveréov, 
~ ~ € A 4 
Zr1 08 yaremm@repov eupeivou Tog yywobsiow* wo yap ext 
r , a , 
TO TOA EOTL TH eV MpOTOOXMMEva AvTILA, & O avoyRe- 


xOL100v cory. 


“N 


oo 


ie) 





stotle’s principle, that the body is the 
means to the life, mind, or soul, 
which is the end, Cf. De An. u. i, 6: 
Wuxh cori evredéxeia | TPOTN Thparos 
puoixod Suvduer (why Exovros, Towdro 
5é, d bv 7H dpyavndy. De Part. An. 


butes a merely popular and un-Aris- 
totelian sense to téAos ‘ actio—termi- 
natur eo ipso tempore quo agimus,’ 
8re mpdrre:] .The omission of tis, 
especially after. conjunctions like éi, 
8re, &c., is common in Aristotle, 


though not peculiar to him, Cf. Eth. 
Im. ix. 5: wAhy ep b8c00v Tod TéXoUS 
epamrerat. Pol. vu. xiii. 8: &omep 
ei rou KidaplCey Aaumpy Kal KaA@s 
aitlpro Thy Avpay wcidAov THs TEXTS. 

7a opyavixd wépn| The ‘subservient,’ 
or ‘instrumental’ limbs, The modern 
word ‘organised,’-which has grown out 
of the Aristotelian conception of ép- 
yavikoy gGua, does not exactly repre- 
sent it. ‘ Organisation’ implies mul- 
teity in unity, the co-existence and 
interjunction of physical parts under 
a law of life. But in dépyavucds 
originally nothing more was implied 
than ‘that which is, fitly framed as 
an instrument,’—according to Ari- 





I. i. 41: 08rws Kal érel 7d cOua bpyavoy 
(€vend tiwos yap Exactov ray poplwr, 
duolws 5& nal 7rd BArov), avdynn tipo 
tovovel elvor Kat ex’ rowwvd) «i exeive 
fora, : 

8 Kal yap tov EvpimlSov—pnrpo- 
krovijgat] ‘For the things which com- 
pelled the Alemzon of Euripides to 
kill his mother appear absurd, 7. ¢, 
the curses threatened by Amphiaraus, 
who, when departing for Thebes, 
enjoined his son to put Eriphyle 
to death. Aspasius preserves the 
lines :— , 


MdAuora pev wo eniip’ emianhiyas marhp, 
87 Gpuar’ cicéBauvev eis OfBas idy, 


1] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 


9 


> + gh 4 \ 4 4 x st 
Sovran aloypa, bev Erasvor xat Woyor yivovros meph rovg 
> x , x oy ~ / , Ne ~ 
avayxacbévras 7) ey. THO Ton daréov Pian; 7 amAGS 10 
aX / ’ ~ \ s \ 

peey, Omer av 7 aitia ev Tolg ExTOG yj xal 6 mpaTTwY pxdeY 

, A DX > Coes: » > a | to ~ X \ 
cuppanrranras; & 02 xal abrad piv axovord 2071, viv OF xal 
’ \ ~ € , » aa oak: ~ / > (pao. 
vt rév0e aivera, xal7 apyy ev TO mpaTrovTi, xal abTa 


‘\ > 7 | ae ~ Sv \ 27 \ fod c ; 
PeEV AxOvuTla EO TI, YUY de HOE AVTE THVvOE EXOvVC IA. 


parroy 


a € / € \ / > ~ a) ev. 
Y Zoimev éxoveloig’ ai yop mpa&ers ev roig nal’ zxacra, 


ne eo < Y 
Tatra Oo éxovclm. 


~ ae \ / € , s e.I% 
TOla 0 QYTtL Tomy QIDETEOY, ou pooboyv 


~ 4 ~ 
amodotivas’ worral yap diadopal siow ev Toig xa gxacra. 
el 02 Tig TH Tosa Kal TH HAAR aly Bice civos (AvayxaFery 11 
2 a A / ED oe la fe a 
yap ew tvra), mavta av ely ovtw loin: rourwy yap 


s , y 
Yap Wavres WavTA MpaTTovoly. 


\ 
xab of piv Bia xat 


v ~ \ © nw 
GxovTes AuTpws, of OF Did Td OD xal xardy fel” FOovijs. 
~ oA > ~ eed ‘4 > \ \ ae 3A 7 
yEnotov O7, To airiaobas: Te EXTOS, AAG [LY] KHUTOY evdyparov 

Rd A ~ \ ~~ ~ / ~~ 
OyTa Ord Thy ToLOUTWY, xal THY ply xAAG@Y ExuTOY, T@Y O 


> ~ \ ey 
abo XY pw Ta 7040. 


Zoixe On TO Plasov civou ov 2Ewbev 7 12 


Ay, pndivy cupParropévov To PiacGévroc. 





10 mota & dyt) rolwv aiperéoy, ov 
fd¢d.ov darodo0tver| There is something 
careless about the composition here, 
as these words repeat what has been 
already said in the preceding section. 
“Eott 5& xademby évlore Siaxpivos moiov 
aytt rolov aiperéor. 

11—12 In these sections Aristotle 
guards his definition against a possible 
misconception. Having defined the 
compulsory to be that whose cause is 
external, he disallows the supposition 
that the two great inducements to all 
action, the pleasant and the noble, 
because external to us; make the 
actions they induce compulsory. His 
arguments aguinst this supposition are: 
(1) It would make all action com- 
pulsory, and thus imply more than 
any one would wish to support. (2) 
Compulsory actions are painful; those 
done for the pleasant or the noble are 
pleasurable. (3) It leaves out of ac- 
count the internal susceptibility of the 
agent (abroy eb@hparoy byta), 

VOL, II. 


His 





Cc 


own definition, then, is sufficiently 
qualified by the addition of the words, 
‘the person under compulsion in no- 
wise consenting’ (undév cvpBarrouévou 
Tov Biacbevros). 

7a Hdéa Kal ra Kardd] Aspasius 
reads ra 7déa nal Ta Avanpd. The 
commentators Victorius, Muretus, 
Giphanius, and Zell, get over the 
difficulty by taking r& xaAd to mean 
‘non honesta, sed formosa, pulchra, 
It is plain, however, that the same 


. classification of inducements is here 


referred to as that given Eth, 1. iii. 
7, the cuupépoy being a means either 
to the 730 or the KaAdy, The xaddvis 
in short ‘the noble,’ or ‘the good, 
viewed as morally beautiful.’ A con- 
cise definition of itis given in Rhet. 
I. ix, 3: KaAby pev ody éotiv, d by BP 
aitd alperdy dv emawerdy 7, H 8 bv 
&yabby dv 750 7, Bri &yabdv. It is 
used in the present passage not at all 
emphatically, but simply to denote 
that form of inducement which con- 


a5 


10 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON III. 


[ Cap. 


Td 8: Or ayvoiay ody Exotoroy piv amray iorly, axov- 
coy OF To ewiAumoy xak ey peerayssncio. 6 yap or dyvouoy 
mpagas é OTlotv, andev O8 Suc xepalveny em) rH mpage, Exe 
pay ov Em paLxey; 0 ye pr Fst, oud av axwy, ya Aumoupevog 
ye. Tod Oy OF ayvoimy 6 pdy ev pmeTaperncin axwy Ooxsl, 6 


Sv \ , > \ oo 4 > 53 Bn 

Ob pay pasTapendinevog, eel Erepog, EoTmM oUY exw 
\ / 

14-Yap dvadéper, Bearioy ovopee exe YO10v. y 

xal To OV ayvolay mparTey Tod ayvootvTa moleiv’ 


> \ 
ere 
ao “ ” 

eTEDOY 0 eons 


6 yop 


~ ‘ 
psdiwy  opysSonevog ob Soxei Ov dyvoiay mparre, AAAG 





sists in our wishing to do a thing 
because it isright. A little examina- 
tion shows that the writing here is 
vague, for presently it is said to be 
absurd to assign the cause of the good 
things to oneself, and of the bad 
things to pleasure (airsaéo@a:—réay 
bev Kad@v éautév, trav 8 aicxpay Ta 
75éa) ; whereas consistently the ‘good 
things’ would have been assigned to 
‘the good’ as an external cause by 
those who maintained the position, « 
6é tis TX HSéa x.7.A. Also would 
Aristotle say that what is done 5:4 7d 
kaddy, is always done pel 7doris? 
This goes strangely against Eth, m1. 
ix. 4—5, where the higher satisfaction 


of the caddy is represented as pur- — 


chased by great pain. There is a 
vagueness also in the use of Bla, 
which first stands for that which 
compels, and secondly for that which 
is compelled. The principle, how- 
ever, is well brought out, that the 
objective inducement to an action 
cannot be separated from the sub- 
jective apprehension of this in the 
will. 

13 70 88 BY &yvorav—Fxew Wror] 
‘Now that which is done through 
ignorance is always non-voluntary, 
but it is involuntary only when 
followed by pain, and when it is a 
matter of regret. For he who has 
done something through ignorance, 





but without feeling any dislike at the 
action, has not, it is true, acted 
voluntarily, inasmuch as he did not 
know he was doing it, but, on the 
other hand, not involuntarily, since 
he is not sorry. With regard, there- 
fore, to actions done through ignor- 
ance we may say that he who repents 
has been an involuntary agent, while 
him who does not repent we may 
distinguish as having been a non- 
voluntary one; for where there is a 
real difference, it is proper to have a 
distinctive name.’ Aristotle begins 
the discussion of ignorance as modify- 
ing volition by this refined distinction, 
that an action may be done through 
ignorance, and yet not against the will. 
It may in short be neither with the 
will nor against it. He then goes on 
to consider the precise meaning of 3? 
&yvouy. 

14—16 €repoyv 8 oixe—dxovolws 
mpdrre:} ‘There seems to be a farther 
difference between acting through 
ignorance and doing a thing in ignor- 
ance. Common opinion pronounces 
that the drunken or the angry man 
acts not through ignorance, but in 
consequence of drunkenness or anger, 
and yet that he does not act wittingly, 
but in ignorance. Without doubt 
every depraved man is-in ignorance of 
what he ought to do, and of that from 
which he ought to refrain, and it is 


, 
: 
‘ 





I.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 11 


~~ xa A ~ 
Oia Th Tey ipnpévwy, ox eld@s 02 AN ayvowdy. 


ayvort pty 


s ~ \ A dO _~ , \ ca 
aby was 6 pmoxbnypis & bei mpartely xal wy adexréov, xal 





in consequence of this error that men 
become unjust, or bad generally. 
But the term involuntary is not meant 
to cover ignorance of man’s true in- 
terest. Ignorance which affects moral 
choice, and ignorance of the universal, 
are the causes, not of involuntary 
action, but of wickedness, and it is 
precisely for this ignorance that wicked 
men are blamed. The ignorance 
which causes involuntary action is 
ignorance of particulars, which are 
the circumstances and the objects of 
actions. With regard to these parti- 
culars, pity and pardon may be proper, 
for the man who acts in ignorance of 
some particular is an involuntary 
agent.’ The connexion of this some- 
what compressed passage is as follows. 


An act is involuntary when caused- 


by ignorance. But ignorance cannot 
be said to be the cause of an act if 
the individual be himself the cause of 
the ignorance. In that case ignorance 
rather accompanies the act (ayvodv 
mpdrre:) than causes it (8° &yvoiy 
mpdtre:). Wesee this (1)in instances 
of temporary oblivion, as from anger, 
or wine; (2) in those of a standing 
moral ignorance or oblivion («ef tis 
dyvoet Td cuupepov—} ev TH mpoaupécer 
&yvoia—7 Kabdrov &yvo). The only 
ignorance, then, which is purely ex- 
ternal to the agent, so as to take 
away from him the responsibility of 
the act, is some chance mistake with 
regard tothe particular facts of the 
ease. A great deal of trouble has 
been expended upon the endeavour to 
distinguish and explain the various 
terms, dyvootyra mpdtreiw— ayvoeiy 7d 
cunpepov—n ev TH Mpompécer &yvora— 
h Ka0drov tyvow. But a closer 


examination shows that these different _ 


terms are not opposed to each other, 





but rather are all different ways for 
expressing the same thing, being op- 
posed to the 7 Ka@ Exacta, é ois 7 
mpatis. This is the way in which the 
Paraphrast understands the passage, 
for he renders it: Ai 8) Toatra 
mpates ovk cioly axotvoor yap ev TH 
mpoapere &yvoiw, ris éotly aitia Tay 
KaKi@y, ovk tot aitia tod dxouclov, 
GAAG Tis woxOnpias. Od yap Td KaBdAov 


*mepl THs méOns a&yvoeiv bre mrovnpoy, 


atriov yivetat Tod a&Kovelov, GAAG Td 
&yvojom pepikas thyde thy pebodor" 
oiov, pépe eimety, ove eiddra wéxpt wécou 
mdévras vt webvery. Aristotle strictly 
confines ignorance, as a cause of in- 
voluntary action, to mistakes about 
particulars. Before proceeding to this 
particular ignorance, he separates from 
it that kind of ignorance which is 
faulty, because caused by the agent 
himself. Of this there are two kinds, 
the temporary, as for instance that 
caused by intoxication, and the per- 
manent, such as that caused by any 
vicious habit. ‘Ignorance of the uni- 
versal’ is not different from ‘ignorance 
of our real interest,’ but serves to 
point the antithesis of ‘ignorance of 
the particular’: nor is it opposed to 
ignorance as shown in wrong moral 
choice, but to ignorance of external 
facts. It goes to constitute ignorance 
in the purpose, for in every moral act 
there is a universal conception, as well 
as a particular application of this. 
But Aristotle does not here enter upon 
the psychology of the subject, as is 
afterwards done, Eth. vu. iii. The word 
oupdépoy is used, Politics, 1. ii. 11, to 
include and denote all kinds of good, 6 
5& Adyos él Tq Sndrodv €or) rd cvudéepov 
kat To BAaBepdv, Sore kal 7d Sikacoy 
kal 7d &tKov. 

- 14 did tt Trav eipnuévwy] Some refer 


c2 


12 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IIL. [ CuaP. 


Nek Ss A e , AN Va \ , 
Ola THy TOAUT THY OpapTiay adixol xal GAws xaxOl yivoYTas, 
~ \ 

1570 0 axovrloy BoursTas Adyer4as ovx el TIS Hyvosl TO TUL 

~ : ~ / 
dépov’ ob yao 7 ev TH mponipéoes Ayvoim aitia Tod AxovTioV 
~ S / \ , 
AAAA Tig poy4yplas, 040 7% xaborov (éyovras yap dia 
LA > 8 97 > \ \ Ae ~ . 
Ye TAHUTHY) AAD 7 xa? Exaora, ev olg xab weph & rj mpaEIS 
\ ” ‘ / 
162y TovToIG yap xal EAeog xal cuyyv@pn* 6 yap TOUTWY 
Ti ayvow@y axoutlwg mpatter. tows ody ob xeipov dioploas 
ul / ‘ , A ‘Rd 
auTa, Tiva xal roca earl, Tig Te On xal Tl xal weph Th 7 ev 
, sf 
Tivi moarres, eviote OF xal thy, olov dpyavw, xal Evexa 
/ 4 if \ ~ s ¥ a 
Tivos, olov owrTypiag, xal mag, olov ypiua 4 odddpa. 
inf ~ > * 7 \ , 

17 dravTa pey oby TAUTA oUdEls AY AyvonTELs Ay) PabvomEvos, 
Aw > e xAK 1 , ~ ‘A « / a 
O%Aov 0 wy oud? Tov mpaTTovTA’ mao yap EauTOY Ye; 0 
08 WLaTTEl, AyvojTEetev XY TIC, oloy AEyovTés Dac exmecely 

> v4 a > »>/ a > / sz 4 . 4 
QUTOUS, 7 oux Eldévar ST1 amoppyTa jv, Womep AioxurA0g 
\ , oo oe , > ~ SE Fae 
TH puTTixh, 7) OeiEas Bovrdmevog adeivas, Ws 6 Toy xaTa- 
BA 
méatyy. olnbelnd dy tig xal Tov vidy morgusov elvos Mowep 
~ / / * A 
7) Meporn, xal eo daupido bo TO Asroy HwW.Evoy dopu, q Tov 
/ 
AYov xioonpiy civ xal eri owrypin malcag amoxtelvas 
v \ ~ , a € > , 
av’ xal dziGar Bovrcuevos, Worep of axpoyeipsSomevor, 





this to § 11, Ta 75éa Kad Ta Kadd, but 
it appears simply to mean ‘not from 
ignorance, but from one of the things 
now specified,’ (¢ e. drunkenness or 
anger). Cf 1. iii, 11, Tov eipnuévoy 
tpérov, which refers to the passage 
immediately preceding, 

16—17 The particulars connected 
with an action are as follows. (1) 
The person doing it, about which 
ignorance is impossible to the doer. 
(2) The thing done, which may not 
be known, eg., Aischylus did not 
know he was revealing the mysteries. 
(3) The thing or person made the 
object of the action (wept rl # & 
tiv), e.g., Merope did not know it was 
her son. (4) The instrument, e¢.g., 
one might fancy one’s spear had a 
button on it. (§) The purpose, or 

. tendency of the act (&vexa rivos), ¢.9., 
one wishing to preserve might kill. 





(6) The manner (7s), ¢.g. one might 
strike harder than one wished. 

domep AicxtAos Ta pvotud| Re- 
ferring to the well-known story that 
ZEschylus was summoned before the 
Areopagus on the charge of having 
revealed the mysteries, against which 
charge he pleaded that he had never 
himself been initiated. 

aéomep 7) Mepdrn| This same incident 
is alluded to by Aristotle in the Poetics, 
¢. xiv. 19: Kpdrioroy 5¢ 7d TeAevraiov, 
(é.e. Tov uéAAOVTA Toreiy Te TaY dynKe- 
orev 8° ayvowy, dvaryveploa mpl 
moijoa), Aéyw bt oioy év TE Kpeohdvrn 
h Mepérn péddce tov viby dmonrelvev, 
dmonrelver 58 ob, GAN aveyvapicer. 

kal Seita: BovAduevos, domep of &xpo- 
xeipiCouevor, mardtaev &] ‘And 
wishing to show the way, as those do 
who box with the open hand, a man 
might give another a blow.’ Aspasius 


A HOIKQN NIKOMAXEITON IIt. 13 


, Rd \ , \ a= ~ > if ” ’ 
maraceey av. weol mavTa by Tatra Tig ayvolag ovaNs ev 18 
~ ra 7 My” ~ 
ols 7 mpaGiG, 6 TOUTwWY Ti ayvojTAs Axwy Doxel TempAayYevaL, 
~ / , 
xal paricra ey Toig xupwTarois’ xupiwrara 8 sivas 


~ . X c ~ ie a a 
doxel ey ob 7, pasts xHOF OU EVEXR. 


~ \ \ 
Tod Oy xaTa 19 


\ ¢ a > / / n~ >, 
Thy ToaUTYY ayvolay axovtlov Asyousvou Ett Osb THY 


mpakiv Avurnpayv elven 


A ; , 
xOb EV feETOpLersia, 


oyTOS 9 20 


> / ~ rd \ > wv \ c s N27 
Gxovgiov Tod Bia xal Oo” dyvoiav, To Exovoroy doFetev 


E) ca ¢ > \ 5] 
cv elvas 08 1 apyn ev 
vig 74 mais. 


To Ore Bupdy 7 OF ersbuplay. 
Thy dArAwy Cwy Exovolwg weaker, od of waides: 


5 ~ IN 7 A >, a . 
aUT@ eidoTs TH xa Exaocra év 
if \ > ri né > , s 

TwWS Yap ov HAAS AgyeTa AxovTIE civas 21 


~~ .¥ 4 Ox b 4 
Tpwrov bev yee QUOEY ETL 22 
Eira 23 


, IDV c 4 / ~ Mek) / \ 
morepoy avdty éxoutlwg mpatromev thy OF emiduptay xa 
U x \ \ X c / \ > \ 3 / x 
upoy, 7 TH xara pty ExovTing TAO altxpAa axouTins ; 7 
~ , wv y \ \ 7 
yerolov Evdg ye aitiov Ovrog; aTomoey 02 Iows TO axovTla 24 


/ se ma S- £ 
ddvas dy bet opeyerGas. 


\ >? ~ ~ = c / \ 7 
xal eribupciv tivioy, oioy bytelag xal palyocews. 


Oct 62 xal dpyiSeoboas emi tics 


doxei Os 25 


\ ‘ > , A A DA t he , ns 
TH piv axovTIa AuTYLA elvat, TH OF KOT eriBupiay dea. 
+ Xv 7 , ~ > v5 se \ A \ x 
ers 02 Ti Diadéver THO axovoin eivar TA xaTA AoyiopOY 7 26 





explains dxpoxe:piCecOc thus: gore rd 
muKTevey 7) TayKkparidCew mpds Erepor. 
avev cupmdrokis Hf bAws Axpas Tats 
XEpal per GAATAwY yuurdlecOau, Ze, it 
is what we call ‘ sparring.’ This same 
phrase deita: BovAduevos was applied 
before to ‘the man who was showing 
the catapult, and was given as an 
instance of one being ignorant of the 
nature of his act. Here it is an 
instance of ignorance of the tendency 
of an act. The different kinds of 
ignorance are not very distinct from 
one another. 

18 wept mdyra 54—€vexa] ‘Igno- 
rance then being concerned with all 
these circumstances of the action, he 
that was ignorant of some one of these 
is held (Sone?) to have acted inyo- 
luntarily, and especially (if ignorant) 
with regard to the most important; 
and the most important seem to be 
the objects of the action and the 


tendency of it.’ The words éy ofs are 





used at the beginning of the section in 
a general sense, as before(§ 15); after- 
wards they correspond with mepi ri nat 
év tiv. (§ 16). There is an awkward- 
ness about of €vexa. A person knows 
with what end or view he is acting 
(and this is what 06 €vexa legitimately 
expresses). But he is mistaken about 
the means which he uses. Hence 
wishing to produce one result he pro- 
duces another. But what he mistakes, 
is not the end (of €vexa) but the means 
(7& mpds 7d TéAXos). The phrase here 
would imply that an action had an end, 
oraim of its own (ot €vexa) independent 
of the doer,—in other words a ten- 
dency, of which therefore the doer 
might be ignorant. 

20-27 Having separated off the 
involuntary in its two forms of com- 
pulsion and mistake, there remains to 
us the conception of the voluntary, as 
that whose cause is in an agent know- 
ing the circumstances of the action. 


14 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 


[ Cap. 


27 Susy auaotyfévra; devxra piv yap aud, doxet O2 ody 
Ta , Q x ” "4 enw / ~ 
qTTov aviowmixd elves Ta aroya waIy. ai Ot mpaSerg Tod 


~ ‘ 
aviowmoy ard Junot xah exibupiag. 


AXOUTIA TAUTA. 


»” \ A , 
aromoy On To TiHOevaL 


~ , ~ 
2 Awpicpévey 3: roi Te Exovotov xal Tod axouciov, reph 





This definition requires justification, 
owing to a false notion (od Kadd@s 
Aéyerat) that acts done from anger 
or desire (which are‘ in the agent’) are 
involuntary. This notion is refuted 
by the following arguments: (1) It 
would prove too much, and would 
make all the actions of brutes and of 
children involuntary. (2) Some acts 
prompted by desire or anger are right 
and good. We must either call these 
involuntary, or say that, while these are 
voluntary, bad acts similarly prompted 
areinvoluntary. Either supposition is 
absurd. (3) There is a feeling of 
obligation (57), attaching sometimes to 
these emotions; we ought to desire 
some things and be angry at some, 
This feeling of ‘ought’ implies free- 
dom. (4) Acts prompted by desire 
are pleasant ; involuntary acts, pain- 
ful. (5) We have as strong a feeling 
about errors of passion, as about errors 
of reason, that they are to be eschewed 
(pevxtd). The passions are as much 
part of the man as the reason, there- 
fore acts prompted by them are acts of 
the man. 

The polemic in these arguments does 
not seem to be directed against any 
philosophical school, but rather against 
a popular error. Aristotle does not 
deal with the maintainers of the 
doctrine of necessity as a whole, but 
only with those who, allowing that 
half our actions are free, would argue 
that the other half are not free. Such 
reasoners are comparatively easy to 
answer. The most important argu- 
ment adduced by Aristotle is the third, 
where he implies that the idea of 


‘ 





freedom is contained in that of duty. 
He does not draw out this principle, 
nor could he have done so without 
anticipating the philosophy. of later 
times. The last argument seems to 
come to this, that you cannot separate 
a man from his passions, or say the 
reason is the man’s self and the 
passions not. Elsewhere Aristotle 
says 6 vots avrds Exaoros. And in 
truth the relation of a man’s de- 
sires to his individuality might be 
more deeply investigated than is here 
done. 

geveTa pry yap tudw] This seems 
a counterpart to the former argu- 
ment, &romoy tows Td axovow pdvar 
dv Sei dpéyecda. The passions are 
proved to be voluntary on account of 
the feeling of reprehension we have 
for errors of passion. On the em- 
phatie opposition between everdv 
and aiperdy, cf. Eth, x. ii. 5. 


II. Having given a_ generic 
account of the voluntary, Aristotle 
proceeds to examine the special 
form of it which he calls mpoatpeois, 
This does not mean the will as a 
whole (for which indeed, Aristotle 
has no one name), but a par- 
ticular exhibition of it, namely, a 
conscious, determinate act of the 
will. ‘Purpose’ or ‘determination’ 
is perhaps the nearest word in our 
language, but in fact no word exactly 
corresponds. The contrasts and dis- 
tinctions made in this chapter might 
at first seem unnecessary, until we. 
observe that Aristotle is himself 
founding a new psychology. The 


1e-IT.] 


HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION III. 15 


> ~ > / \ ~ 
T poaiper ews Zeros Oierbely’ olxesoTaroy yap elvas Ooxei 
~ ~ ~ \ 4 , ~ 
TH cperh wal parroy ta yO xpivery tay mpakewv. 72 
4 , > ¢ s iS , > 3,24 dé ’ Wes fee 
T PoKipEer ss OY EXOUTIOY [LEY daiverat, ou TauTov 0&, AAA ext 
~ \ / ~ 
mrgoy TO ExovTIoy' TOU Bev yap exouciov xal waideg xal 
ct rps re f a ” \ ae / 
TAAAK CWA KOIVWYEL, TPOAIPET EWS O OU, XA TH eEaldyns 


sxovoin piv Agyouev, xaTa mpoalperww 0 ov. 


of 0 Aéyor- 3 


> AY > id a > * 7 yy / > 
reg auTyy emibuniay 7 Junov 7 Bovryriw 7 Tiva doSayv ovx 


. > ~ / 
gorxaoiv opfis Agyely. 


ov yap xolvoy 7 mpoulperig xah 
~ > , ° / d: \ § ie 
Téy aroywy, eriupia 08 xal Juno. 


xal 6 axpaTig4 





word mpoalpecis only once occurs in 
Plato, and then not in its present 
psychological sense, but merely de- 
noting ‘selection’ or ‘choice.’ Par- 
menides, p. 143 B: Th obv ; édy mpoedw- 
peda abray etre BovrAer Thy ovoiay Kar 
7d €repov etre Thy ovclay Kal Td Ev ere 
7d év Kal Td érepor, dp’ obn evéxdoty TH 
mpoaipéoer mpocpovucdd tive & opbas 
Zxer KaAretcOat auporépw; It is true 
that the verb mpoatpeto@u is of fre- 
quent occurrence in Plato, but gene- 
rally in the sense of ‘selecting’ or 
‘preferring, and not ‘ purposing’ or 
‘determining.’ As in other cases, 
then, Aristotle takes up a floating 
term from common language, and 
gives it scientific definiteness, so that 
it becomes henceforth a psychological 
formula. His account of mpoatpeois 
in the present chapter is, that it is 
a species of the voluntary (éxodc.oy 
bev galvera, ov Tavtov 5é, GAN em 
mAéov Tb Exodc.oyv), and that it differs 
from anger, desire, wish, and any 
form of opinion. (1) It differs from 
desire or anger as not being shared 
by irrational creatures, as being often 
opposed to desire, &e. (2) It is still 
less like anger than like desire, anger 
excluding the notion of purpose or 
deliberate choice (fjKioTa yap Ta Bid 
Ouudy Kara mpoalpecw civat Sore). 
(3) It is not wish, because we often 
wish for what is impossible, or beyond 
our control, and because, speaking gene- 





rally, wish is of the end, whereas pur- 
pose is of the means, and restricts itself 
to what is in our power. (4) Nor is it 
opinion, which may be about anything, 
the eternal or the impossible, and 
which is characterised as true or false, 
not, like purpose, as good or bad. 
Nor is it opinion on matters of action. 
For opinion on good and evil does not 
constitute the moral character in the 
way that purpose does; again, the 
use of these terms in common lan- 
guage points out a difference between 
purpose and opinion. 

Purpose then, being a species of the 
voluntary, implies also intellect (uer& 
Adyou Kat Siavolas) and deliberation. 
It is a deliberate desire of what is 
within our own power (BovAevtixy- 
dpetis tov ep? juiv, Eth. mn. iii. 19). 

I oixeidratoy yap—mpdtewy] ‘For 
it seems most closely bound up with 
virtue, and to be a better criterion of 
moral character than even actions.’ 
Cf. Hth. x. viii. 5: dudioBnretra: 5& 
méTEpOy KUpLmTEpoy THs apeTis 7 mpoat- 
peas } ai mpdters, ds ev audoiv otons. 
The importance of this position as a 
ground-work for the whole doctrine 
of morality must be estimated by the 
advance which is made in it beyond 
what Plato had arrived at. 

3 of 8& Aéyorres] There is a ten- 
dency in Plato to merge the distine- 
tions of will and reason: whether 
some of his school are here alluded 


16 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. [Cuap. 


5) ~ \ / 7 bd ae! ‘ 
iribund@y ply mparre, mpouipovpevog O oUt O eyxparns 
~ cA 
50 avaTanw mpoaspoupevog psy, emifuntov 0 ov. 
~ 4 
moouperss pay exibuulae evavriotires, emibuple 0 emidupto 
” AD X > , ens > 7 4 / 
ov. xal 7 ety emibupla 7ddog xal emsrAvmron, 7 mpoaiperig 
60 ours Aurnpod obf 7ddog. Oupdg O ers Frrovs yxora 
7 yup TH did Gupdy xaTce mpouipeow elvas Ooxel. GAA AAY 
is / 
00d? Povrncis ye, xalmep coveyyug Daivopevov’ mpouipeois 
piv yap ou tor Tey dduvarewy, xa) el Tig aly mpoopsioban, 
doxoln dv VAsiog elvars Povanoig 0 éorl ray aduvaray, 
x > , coy , firs \ BY 
Solov abavariag. xal 7 piv Bovancig éors xal weph TH 
pendapdos Ov abrod mpaybévra ay, olov bmroxpitiy Tia wxcay 
Ase , ~ \ A ~ 2D 7 > > @ 
7 abaranriy* 7% POIDEIT OL dt Tad Toadra Ovudsig, GAA GOH 
wv , x >> € ~ 4 c + f, ~ 
gvlzras yevéo$a: av OF abrod. Ets 8 7 piv Bovanosg Tob 
, ’ \ ~ c .Y , ~ A A la 
TEAOUG ETTL LLAAAOY, 7 d: Tpoaiperig TWY MPG TO TEAOS, 
i Q / , , \ 9) ae ~ 
olov bysaiver Povrdueba, mpocupodpeba 08 OF wy dyiavotmey, 
\ > ~ / X ‘ / , 
xa) eddaspovely Rourcusba pty xal dapév, mpooipovpeba 02 
Adyely ody apudter Orws yap Zomev 7 mpoalperig weph 
10 TH eh’ Hulv elves, nds On O0&a av ely 7 pay yap d0Fa 
> ~ x , i \ vos Ga \ \ nid } 
Ooxet weol mavTa elvas, nad ovdty Arrov mepl Ta aidia xab 
Ta aduvata 2 Ta eh apive xad rd Pevdet nal arndet 
Olaipeiras, ob TH xaxwd xal ayabe, 7 mpoatpeoig OF TovTOIG 
~ a XA 3 / » , a“ , > , 
II LaAAOY. GaAwSs wey uy d0Ey TavToy lows DOE Adyes OUdEIG. 


\ 
xab 





to, or whether it is a merely popular 
confusion of terms that Aristotle 
attacks, is not clear. 

5 Kal mpoapéce py emOuula 
évaytiodra, emibuule 8 eribuula od] 
It might be said that desires are 
really contrary to each other, and 
contradict each other as much as 


ofoy &@avaclas] ‘But wish is for im- 
possibilities, as, for instance, immor- 
tality.’ This is not a passage that 
ean be cited as an indication of 
Aristotle’s opinion with regard to a 
future life. *Aé@avacia here means 
‘exemption from death,’ and does not 
touch the question as to the imperish- 


purpose contradicts any desire, ¢g., 
the desire for money is thwarted by 
that for pleasure. But the psychology 
is not very explicit here, and Ari- 
stotle seems to imply, without de- 
finitely expressing it, that in the 
moral will there is an element con- 
tradicting the desires in a manner 
different from that in which one 
desire interferes with another. 

7 BovAnos 8 éort tay advvdrwr, 





ability of the soul. It seems to haye 
been a stock instance of an impos- 
sible wish. Dr. Cardwell quotes 
Xenophon’s Symposium (1. § 15): obre 
yap eywye orovddom by Buvaluny 
baAAor, Hrep &bdvaros -yevérOat, ‘ 
11-13 dA@s uty oby—toper] ‘ Now 
that purpose is identical with opinion 
as a whole, perhaps no one muintains 
at all. But neither is it identical 
with any special kind of opinion. 


me 


If.—III. | HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION Ill. 17 


> > SN7 RB ~ \ " b » A A 
AAW ovde TIVE? TO yap mpooipsiobas Tayaha 7 Ta xaxd 
@® 02 
‘ 


, / > iN / wv A , 
mowol Tivég 2opsv, TH 02 OoFale ov. xal mpocupovpchar2 
pav AaBeiv y duyeiv 4 TH Thy ToodTwy, D0ExZouey OF re 
> a , , aX aa ~ s <A ~ > , 
gor 7) Tivs TuLdeper 7) THS* AaPeiv 0 x duyely od wavy 
do€alouev. xal ry piv mpoalpeoig emouveiras Tw elvan ov 13 
Osi parrov 7 TH opbids, 7 02 Boa TH ws aAyfws. xal 
/ X a / Sf > \ / 
mpoorpoupsla wey & panera lopsy ayaba ovra, doEaCousy 
0 & od wavy Iopev. doxodol re oby of abrol mpomspeio Boel 14 
Te GpioTH nah doEaCey, ann Zvios OoEaSew pty aeivoy, 
, ~ 5 Nn ~ , 

dia xaxlayv Oo aipeio bas ovy a Ost. eb OF mpoyiveros O0Ea15 
Tig Mpoaiperews 7 Tapaxorovsel, avdty diadsper* od Toro 

A ~ > > , > / > a7 , "2 x 
yap oxoroimev, AAR ei TaUTOV Eats O0Ey Tvl. Ti ody 716 
moloy 7 cory, emeidy riby eipnptveny ovbéy 5 Exovotoy jeey 

x ¢ ~ > 

On daiverat, TOO ExovTioy ov may mpouipeTov. AAA’ Apa 17 
ye To mpoPePourcupévey; 7 yap mpoaipeoig weTa Adyou 
xal diavolac. tmrocnpaivery 0 Zoe xal Tovvoua we dy 
mpo eTEpwy aiperov. 

Bovasdovras 83 worepa wepl wavtwy, xal wav PovrcuTov 3 





For in purposing what is good or bad | again be reacted on by it;’ but the 
our moral character consists,—not in | question is, are they identical? 
opining it. And we purpose to take 12—13 The arguments in these 
or ayoid, or something of the kind, | sections consist in an appeal to lan- 
but we opine what a thing is, or for | guage—we cannot speak of ‘opining 
whom it is good, or how; but we do | to take,’ &c. 
not exactly opine to take or avoid. HGdAov 7 TG bp0Gs] *H is of course 4 
And while purpose is praised rather | not connected with wa@AdAov. It simply | 
by the epithets, “ of the right object,” | means ‘or.’ *Opéés, which should 
or “rightly,” opinion is praised by the properly go with a verb, seems used 
epithet “truly.” And we purpose on | because the verb mpompeio@a: was 
the one hand things that we know for | much commoner before Aristotle than 
certain to be good, but we opine what | the abstract form mpoalpeois. "Opey 
we do not exactly know for certain.’ is applied to dpetis (the element of 
obdé T1v1] i.e. purpose is not identical | desire in mpoalpeois), Eth. vi. ii. 2. 
with an opinion as to moral matters. 
The first argument to prove this is cha- III. Since Purpose implies delibe- 
racteristie of Aristotle as opposed to | ration, this latter is now analysed, and 
Plato. He says, ‘our moral character | an account is given, first of its object, 
does not consist in ouropinionson good | secondly of its mode of operation. 
and evil, but in the deliberate acts of | The object of deliberation is -deter- 
our will.’ This is guarded afterwards | mined by an exhaustive process. All 
by the limitation (§ 15) that ‘opinion | things are either eternal, or mutable ; 
may go to form purpose, and may | we do not deliberate about things 
vol. Il. D 





HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. [Cuap. 


18 


oT, 7) wepl eviwy obx Eos Bovay; arexréov 0 lows Bov- 
AeuToy ovy tmtp ov BouvreioasT’ ay Tig YAIDsOg 7 LOLvOMEVOE, 
aAN Ortop wy 6 vollvy Eywy, mwepl 08 trav aidlay ovdels 
Rovrgderau, olov weph Tod xdopov 7 Tig Oiapérpou xal Tig 
TALUpaS, OTL aoUpMET OL, GAA ovd? wepl Téy év xiv7jos, 
asl 0 xara TAUTA yiwopevey, lr’ EE avayxngs elre xal dios 
7) 01a Tiva aitiay aAAYY, lov TpoTay xal avaToA@y. 0008 


v 


> 


wn 


an 


weph Thy GAAOTE GAAWS, choy adypdov xal buBpwr. 
mepl Toy ard TONG, olov Byoaupod ebpérews. 


ovo 
AAR ovde 





eternal. Of things mutable, we do 
not deliberate about those things 
which are regulated by necessity, by 
nature, or by chance. Hence it 
remains that we deliberate about 
mutable things within the power of 
man, and not about all such, but 
about those within our own power, 
and not about ends, but about means, 
and where there is room for question. 
The mode of operation in deliberating 
is a kind of analysis. Assuming as 
desirable some end, we first ask what 
means will immediately produce this 
end, what again will produce that 
means, and so on till we have brought 
the last link of ‘the chain of causation 
to ourselves, when we commence 
acting at once, ‘the last step in the 
analysis being the first in the pro- 
ductive process. If any step occurs 
which is on the one hand necessary 
for the given end, and on the other 
hand unattainable by us, the chain 
cannot be completed ; the deliberation 
is relinquished. But if all the steps 
are feasible, ‘that which was indefinite 
before at once becomes definite, and 
purpose succeeds deliberation. A dis- 
cussion of the nature of edBovAla as 
related to ppéynots occurs Eth, vi. ix., 
but is evidently written quite inde- 
pendently of the present chapter, on 
which it improves by employing the 
formula of the moral syllogism, and 
by inquiring after the faculty which 





perceives ends. We might have ex- 
pected Aristotle to say that in the 
deliberation which precedes an action 
some account should always be taken 
of the right or wrong of the action. 
But here the only question is repre- 
sented to be, how a given end is to be 
obtained ? What action will serve as a 
means to it? Hence while the present 
discussion must be considered a subtle 
piece of elementary psychology, and of 
great merit in the infancy of thescience, 
on the other hand it seems incomplete 
as regards the theory of morals. 

3—5 wepl 5 ray didlwv—eipécews] 
‘No man deliberates about eternal 
things, such as the universe, or the 
incommensurability of the diagonal 
and the side in a square; nor indeed 
about things in motion, if the motion 
takes place invariably in thé same 
way, whether of necessity, or by 
nature, or from any other cause, as in 
the ‘instance of the solstices and the 
risings ‘of the sun: nor about things 
entirely variable, like droughts and 
rains: nor about matter of chance, 
like the finding of a treasure.’ The 
opposition to 7a &idia is 7a ev ewrhoes, 
The more exhaustive division of 
objects would have been that which is 
given Eth. vt. i. 6, into ra évBdexdueva 
GAdws txew and Ta ph erdexdueva. 
But there is an absence of logical 
formulz in the present book which is 
observable, The instances here given 


II.] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQN III, 19 


reph ry avIpwmindy mavtwy, oloy mig dv Txibar apiora 


> A , , 
monitevoiwTe ovdelc Aaxedasmoviwy Povrcieras. 
, 2: a , Oy BY ¢. «= 
yivoir ay ToUTwy ov%iy Oy yudy. 
<i 939 €¢ ine ~ Dr \ oo” , 
tay 2D" apiv mpaxtaéy' Taira 02 xal lors Aomra. 


oo yap 
Bovrsususba 62 mepl7 
alria 


~ , A , ‘ U wv ~ 
yap Goxotcr sivas duos xal avayny xal TYYyn, Ets OF voids 


zal wav ro OF avIpwrou. 


/ A ~ ~ ~ 
Bovrcvovras wepk Toy OF abtay meaxTay, 


~ > So. fh / ad 

téy 8 aviowreoy xacto 
\ \ \ 

xal meph piv 8 


Xo AxoIPeic xal adTaDKsIG THY EtIgTHUM@Y OOx EoTs BOVAT 
Tas axpiPeic xai auTapxelg Thy Erie TyL@y oo Eos Bovrr, 


\ , > ere ty A , 
oloy wepl ypaumatwy (ov yao diotatousy ris ypamrréov)* 
HAR OG fi df c ~ \ € , a Bak 4 , 

GAR Goa yiveTas OF yutoy, wn WoauTwsO asi, Tell ToUTwY 
~ \ 
Bovrcuiusia, olov reph ray xara iarpinyy xal yoqweti- 





of the eternal are (1) the universe, 
(z) a particular mathematical trath— 
that the diagonal of a square is in- 
commensurate with its side. That the 
universe is eternal, being uncreated, 
indestructible, and, as a whole, immu- 
table, was part of Aristotle's physical 
philosophy. Cf. de Celo 1. x. Io: 
“Nor € 7d BAov cGua cuvexés dv dre 
pey obtws bre F exelyws Siariberar Kat 
didkexdopnrat, 5 Tod SAov ciaracts 
éott kécpos Kal ovpavds, ove by 5 Kécpos 
ykyvorro Kat pbelporro, AAW’ ai Siaderes 
abtov. The above mathematical truth 
is called ‘eternal’, De Gen. An. u. 
yi. 15: éwel xal rd tplywvor Exew Svoly 
ép0ats Yoas del wal Td Thy diduerpov 
Govppetpov elvar mpos Thy mAcupay 
Gidiov. It is mentioned as one of 
those things which philosophy begins 
by wondering at, and ends by feeling 
their universal necessity. Metaphys. 
I. ii, 15: xabdwep Tay Bavpdtwy Tavrd- 
para Tois whrw Teewpnkdor Thy aitlay, 
H wept ras ToD HAlov Tpords 7 Thy Tis 
diapérpov aoupuetpiav’ Cavuacrdy yap 
elvat Boxe? waow, ef Tt TG CAaxloTe wh 
perpetrat, de7 5 cis todvavtloyv—ano- 
TedeEvT joo’ —ovdev yap by obrw bavud- 
ceey avhp yewperpixds as el yévorro 7) 
diduerpos petpnth. Two kinds of 
eternity seem here placed in juxta- 


position—one physical, the other ma- 





thematical. But eternity or necessity 
can only exist in relation to the laws 
of the mind that perceives it. There- 
fore we might say that these two 
kinds of eternity find their meeting- 
point in a metaphysiec above the 
division of the sciences. Aristotle 
however is writing od kat’ axpiBecay. 

7 atria yap—arOpérov] ‘For the 
causes of things seem to be as follows, 
nature, and necessity, and chance, and 
again reason and all that depends on 
man.’ A similar classification of 
causes is implied Eth. 1. ix. 5, vi. iv. 4. 
The relation of necessity and chance, 
as causes, to nature, forms the subject. 
of Aristotle’s Physics, Book ur. Chapters 
iv.—ix. See Essay V. pp. 221—s. 

8 «al wep_—yparréovy] ‘And on 
the one hand there is no deliberation 
about sciences that are fixed and 
complete in themselves, as for instance 
about writing—for we do not doubt — 
how we ought to write.’ The a«piBeis 
émotijpoat here meant are not the 
‘exact sciences, as we may judge 
from the instance given. *AxpiBfs 
seems equivalent to ‘fixed’ (cf. the 
note on Eth, 1. vii. 18), and émorfun 
is used in a wavering sense, almost 
equivalent to téxvn, though the words 
are immediately afterwards distin- 
guished, 


D2 


20 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON III. 


[CHap. 


, 4 4 . ~ BY , so 
OTIRYY, Xb eps xuPepyytingy [AAAAOY 7) YUMLYAOTTINGY, OT W 
97T Tov Oinxpibwras, xl ers weph Toy Aoimey buolws, LaAAOY 
0: xal wep) rag Téyvag W Tas erioTHMAg’ PaArAOY yap 


1o men) auTac dloracomsy 
mel auTas [ney 


To Povrsverbas O& év Tole Wo emt 


¢ ~ \ 
TO TOAU, AOYAoKS OF WHS amoPyceTaI, xal ev oig AdidpLo TOY. 
/ \ / > \ / > 
oup.PovrAous Os TOparapavosy ebG THA PEYAAR, ATI- 


II oTOUYTES Yuly avTOIG Ws oY ixavoig dioyvevas. 


Povrsu- 


~ ~ \ nw \ 
ouch 3 ov meph rey TeEAMY GAARA wepl TY wpog TH TED. 
v \ > \ 4 Dg € rs yw «7 > 
ours yap larpig Povasveras ei Syidoel, ovTs pytwo «Ek 
4 ~ ~ 

WElTel, OUTE TOAITIXDG Ei EUVOLIaY MoIjgel, Ode THY AoIMeY 
ovdels meph Tod Térougs AAAA Oémevor Térog TH, mig ual 
1a Tivwy Zora TxoTovcs, xal Oi mrciovey nv Dasvomevov 
if ‘ / cn / 2 ~ N > 
yivecbou die Tivos pdora xal xarAALTTA Exioxorodas, Ob 
<- > / ~ \ / ” > ~ bY \ 
évig 0 émirerounévou ws bia TouTov EoTas xaxeivo die 

4 a * Ww > A \ nw aA 3 ~ ec , 
Tivos, Ewg av 2Abwow eal rd rprov alriov, 0 ev TH ebpeoes 

/ ~ 
toyaroy gor’ 6 yap Boureuopevos Zoixe CSyreiv xa 
, 
12 avanruely TOY eipyévoy Tpomoey WamEp Olaypapyp.c. Doiverou 
c ~ 4 

Oy piv Surnois 08 maou elvas PovArAcvors, olov ai probno- 
if. earn 4 ~ 7 A Y wt > ~ 
Tixal, 7 08 PodAcuots Maca SyTHTIG, xal TO ETYATOY EY TH 


~ ~ / 
13QvAAUTEL MpMTov Elva ev TH yeverss. 


x \ > / 
nay wey aduvarew 





11 ore yap—didypaupa] ‘The 
physician does not deliberate whether 
he is to cure, nor the orator whether 
he is to persuade, nor the statesman 
whether he is to ‘produce a good con- 
stitution. The end is not the subject 
of deliberation in any science. An 
end being assumed, we consider how 
and by what means it can be brought 
about; if it appear that there are 
more ways than one, we inquire which 
is the easiest and best; if it can be 
accomplished by one means alone, we 
inquire how this produces the end, 
and by what it is itself produced, 
until we come to that which as a 
cause is first, but is the last thing to 
be discovered; for such deliberation 
as we describe is like seeking the 
solution of a geometrical problem by 
analysis of the diagram.’ The process 
of deliberation is analytical, proceeding 





backwards ém rhy apxhv. It ends 
with the mp@roy atfrioy, i.e. the indi- 
vidual will. ‘Will,’ says Kant, ‘is 
that kind of causality attributed to 
living agents, in so far as they are 
possessed of reason, and freedom is 
such a property of that causality as 
enables them to originate events 
independently of foreign determining 
causes.’ That each man is, as regards 
his own acts, an originating cause not 
determined by other causes, is Ari- 


stotle’s view throughout. Kant’s de- — 


finition throws light upon this. 
Kaxeivo] Refers to évés and dia 
Tovrou, 
@omep Sidypauyal] Aristotle com- 
pares deliberation with the analysis 
of mathematical problems. Given a 
problem in geometry, ¢.g., to find the 
method of constructing some figure. 
Assume it as constructed, and draw it 


III. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 21 


evrdxooty, abloravras, olov ek yonparey dei, ratira OF p22) 
olov Te opie Gijyeus gay 02 duvaroy palvyrau, éyXstpoics 
mparrew, Ouvard 08 & OF Hdoy vévorr’ ave TH vp Orc 
raov dirwy or jpdy reg eoriv" 7 yap apy?) ey apely. 
Sareiras 0 ore ey TO épyave, ort 0 7 xsi aUTaOY, 14 
bpolws OF xal ev Tog Aolroig Te dy OF OU, dre OF HG 7 
dice Tivos. Zoine On, xaddmep elpyrat, avOowmos civor apy 15 
Tiby Tpasewy* 7 62 Bovay wep rv abtrwo mpaxtéy, ai dz 
m pagers Anrrwy Evexar. 
AAKa TH mpdg Ta TEA. 0008 OH TA xal ExaorTa, olov Ei 
Aprog ToUTo 7 mementos we det alcbyoews yap Taira. 
ei 02 asl Poursdoeras, cig admeipov Ser. PovrcuToy Ot xabr7 
MpouipsToy TO HUTS, TARY Adwpiopévoy 7dy TO mpooupeToy 


> EN > yf \ / 
oux av ouv ely Pourcuroy TO TZA0G 16 


\ \ > ~ ~ \ f > / 
7 yap ex Tig Povrts mpoxpibev mponiperay ear. maveTas 
yap Exacros Snrby mig mpage, Grav cig abrov avayayy 


\ > , \ Giicw: 29 eer ’ 
THY apex, xt uTov eg TO HY OupEvov* 


TOUTO yap TO 





accordingly. See what condition is 
immediately necessary, and what again 
will produce this, &e. 

14 Qnreira 8—dia Tivos] ‘The 
question is sometimes what instru- 
ments are necessary, sometimes how 
they are to be used; and, speaking 
generally, we have to find sometimes 
the means by which, sometimes the 
manner or the person by whom.’ 
Michelet makes a difficulty about év 
Tois Aomots, explaining it ‘in reliquis 
eategoriis;’ but the Paraphrast ren- 
ders it simply Kal amAds. 

15 fouwe 5)—Evexa] ‘It seems, 
therefore, that man is, as we have 
said, the cause of his actions: that 
deliberation is about the things to be 
done by ourselves, and that actions 
are means to something else.’ In one 
sense, and so far as deliberation is 
concerned, action must be regarded 
as a means. Cf. Rhetoric, 1. vi. 1: 
mpoxerra: TG TuuBovdevoyTs ckowds Td 
avupépov, Bovdevovrar 5& ob wep) Tov 
rérous UAAX wept Tay mpds Td TéAOS, 





tavra © éorl rd cuupépovta Kara Tas 
mpdtes. But in another sense, and 
from a moral point of view, each action 
is an end-in-itself. Cf. Eth. v1. ii. 5: 
"AAAG 
70 mpanrdév> 7 yap evmpatia réros, 4 & 


Ov TéA0s &rAGs—Td ronTdv. 


dpetis Tovrov, 

16 eis &respov hger| 
to infinity ’—impersonal. 
i vit. 7. 

17 Tmaverar yap—mpoatpodpuevor] 
‘For every one stops inquiring how 
he shall act, when he has brought 
home the first link in the chain to 
himself and to the guiding principle in 
himself; that is to say, to that which 
purposes.’ Throughout these discus- 
sions we find a striking clearness of 
expression for some of the ordinary 
phenomena of consciousness; on the 
other hand, evident tokens that the 
psychology is new and tentative; and 
again, a want of deeper inquiry into 
the nature of personality and of the 
will. 


‘It will go on 
Cf, 1, ii. 1, 


22 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQN III. 


18 T pOoLLpoULEvay. 


[ Cap. 


OyjAoy OF ToUTo xal éx Tidy ep yolary 


TOALT ELOY, aS "Opnpos epipsiro® ol yap Bac tris a mye 


19 €A01vTO euiyyennrov TO oho. 


ovTOS dé TOU m pacipares 


PoureuTod opextod Téby ep’ mply, xa) 7 mpoalpertc ay ely 
Rovrsuriny ope&ss thy ed’ mie ex TOU Povrevoaa bas yap 


20 xplvayres bpeyopheda HATH THY Bovacuory, 


7 pey ouy 


mpoaipss 1g Turw eipiobw, xa) meph mold gor1, xal ore Toy 


™ pos TH TEAR. 


‘H 83 Podanoig Ort pev tod TeAoug éotly, elpyras, 





18 djAo0v St—dhu~] ‘Now this 
is exemplified from the old polities 
which Homer depicted ; for the kings 
used to announce to the people the 
course they had selected.’ Cf. the 
conduct of Agamemnon, Jliad wm. 53, 
sqq. A modern illustration is furnished 
by the French Parliaments, which 
used to register the edicts presented 
to them by the king as a matter of 
course. The Paraphrast explains the 
comparison by making the people re- 
present the mpoalpeois.—Eiodye ‘yap 
tous Bagirels pera Thy BovdAhy Td mpo- 
KpiWev amayyéAdovtas TH Shup Sowep 
Th mpoupéce, Sore mpaxOjvar, The 
people were required to acquiesce in 
and carry out the decisions of the 
kings, which else would have remained 
unratified. So the reason announces 
its decisions to the will or purpose, 
z.e. the active powers in the mind. 
Metaphors of this sort never accu- 
rately represent mental distinctions. 
The present comparison has many 
flaws. For the zpoatpeois is here 
called 7d 7yobmevoy, which does not 
answer to the people, distinguished 
from the king. Again, it is the indi- 
vidual (€xacros), not the reason, that 
announces his deliberations to the 
leading part in himself. What consti- 
tutes the individual as separate from 
the will or purpose? And, is not 
reason part of purpose, how then can 
it be distinguished from it ? 





19 dvros 5&—BolAevow] ‘If the 
object of purpose is that, which, being 
in our power, we desire after delibera- 
tion, purpose will be a deliberate 
desire of things in our power. After 
deliberating we decide, and form a 
desire in accordance with our delibera- 
tion” The Paraphrast here reads 
kata thy BobtAnow at the end of 
this passage. There might seem to 
be something plausible in the change, 
because BovAevsis is represented as 
confining itself to means; hence how 
can we be said to desire xara thy 
BotaAevow? Consistently, our desires 
must depend on something else, 
namely, BovAnots—deliberation is the 
faculty for attaining them. On the 
other hand, the phrases fovAevrod — 
épexrov, and BovAevtikh dpegis, run 
the consideration of means and ends 
together. 


IV. Hitherto every act has been 
regarded as a means, and has been 
accounted voluntary because origi- 
nating in the individual. Delibera- 
tion and purpose have been restricted 
in their function to the mere choice 
and taking of means. A great question 
therefore remains to be mooted, 
whence do we get our conception of 
ends? What is the nature of the 
faculty called BotvaAnots, which has 
been assumed to be the faculty of 
ends? Are we as free in the choice 


IIL.—1V.] 


HOIKON NIKOMAXEION III. 23 


~ ~ ~ is ~ \ ~ 
doxet 08 roig pay ayabod elvas, Toig 08 Tod dasvo- 


pévov ayabod. 


~ A 
cupPaiver 8 Toig ev TO BovrAnTroy Taya-2 





of these, as we are in that of the 
means? Aristotle contents himself 
with mentioning in the present chapter 
that there are two extreme opinions, 
the one (that of Plato) that wish is 
always for the good; the other (that 
of the sophists) that it is for the 
apparent good. He rejects both of 
these, the first as contradicting facts, 
the second as ignoring any true object 
of wish. He takes a position between 
them, that, abstractedly and ideally, 
as appealing to the universal reason 
(@mA@s piv kal ar’ &dAf8eav) the good 
is the object of wish, while to the 
individual mind only what appears 
good can seem desirable ; hence, al- 
though the wise man, who is in accor- 
dance with the universal reason, and 
is its exponent in particular cases 
(raAnbes ev exdoros Spe, dorep kaywv 
kal pérpov abtray Sv), wishes for the 
good alone, others are deceived by 
false appearances and by pleasure, 
and choose what is not truly good. 
Aristotle for the present passes over 
the important question, which is dis- 
cussed in the next chapter, Does our 
knowledge of what is good depend 
upon our natural character? And if 
so, how can vice and virtue be called 
free? The statement in § 4, éxdorp 
3t 7d pawdpevoy (BovAnrév) is incon- 
sistent with his usage of the word 
BotAnots elsewhere; see the pas- 
sages quoted in next note. 

I Boxe? Se tots wey Gyabod elva} 
This doctrine is found stated at length 
in the Gorgias of Plato, p. 466, sqq. 
Polus having argued that the position 
of a tyrant or orator is enviable, 
because ‘he can do what he wishes,’ 


Socrates answers that ‘the tyrant or, 


orator does nothing that he wishes:’ 
onut yap, & Tare, eye nal ods 





bhropas Kal rods tupdyvous divacba 
hey éy Tats wéAeot cuixpdtatov'—ovdey 
yap moty ay BovAoyra, as enxos 
elwely * moety pévtor 6 tt by abtois 
ddim BéAtictov eivasz. Then follows an 
account of BovAnots, that it is of ends 
not means. [érepoy ofy cor Soxodow 
of &vOpwrot tovtTo BolAccOa, & dy 
mpatTwow ExdoTote, 7} éxeivo ov Evexa 
mpatrover Tove % mpadrrovew; By 
which it can be demonstrated that 
BovaAnots is of the absolute good. 
The difference between Plato’s account 
and the one above is, that Plato dis- 
tinguishes fovAnors from émuula, 
while Aristotle does not. The BovaAn- 
ots of Plato is the higher will or 
desire of the Universal. In this 
higher sense of the word wish, no 
one wishes except for what is good, 
that is, in his best moments, in the 
deepest recesses of his nature, if the 
true bearings of his wish be pointed 
out to him. In this sense the wish 
of the individual is in accordance with 
universal reason, and is an expres- 
sion of it, In a lower sense, we wish 
with different parts of our nature, and 
thus wish for all sorts of things, bad 
as well as good. But to this latter 
kind of wish the name ‘ desire’ is ap- 
propriate. The tenet Sr: dyafot Bod- 
Anots éorw is of great importance 
for morals. -It implies much that 
modern systems would convey in other 
terms, such as the ‘ supremacy of con- 
science,’ the ‘autonomy of the will,’ 
&e. Elsewhere Aristotle distinctly 
maintains it. Cf. Metaphys. xt. vii. 
2: 7d dpexroy Kal Td vonrdy Kive? od 
xwobpeva, TotTey Ta mpata Ta abTd 
(transcendentally the objects of reason 
and of longing are identical). "Emév- 
pntov pev yap 7d pawdpevoy Kaddy, 


BovAnrdy 5¢ mpatov 7d bv Ka?.dy, in 





O4 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IIL. [Cnar. 


Gov rAégyouor py elvar Bournroy 6 Povreras 6 py dpbig 
c , > A # , \ > , <a 3 > 
QI GOvILEVOS (<i yap ora Bovrayroy, xel ayabovs avo, ef 
oa wv ‘ ~ > ¥ 4 , > \ A 
3 OUTWS ETUYE, xaxov), Toig O av TO Dasvowevoy ayahoy rb 
XN / ‘\ 4 / > os 2 , 
Bovrnroy Aeyours a) elvas duces Bovanrov, arr XAT TW 
BA wow 4 ‘ ? a a4 
AAAO O AAAwW haiveTas, xas Eb OUTWE ETUYE, 
’ 4 > \ \ ~ i et a z , c ~ 
4TavavtTia, ei 02 On TadTA p27] aperxel, apa Darecoy arrwe 


SNS ~ 
TO OOx0UY" 


f / 
pay xal xar’ arnberav Bournroy sivas reyaboy, Exaotw de 
\ / ~ \ z / \ > > ‘4 
TO Pauvopevoy ; TH dy aby orovdake To xar ann fevay 
elvas, TW OF dairy TO TUXoy, Borep et), dar) réby TwLarwy 
Toig peey ev diaxerpdvors byieiva éors Ta xar arrnbeay 
Tora ovra, Toig 3 emivoroig Erepa.  spolws 08 xal 
~ ” 
mixpa xh yruxéa xab Gepud xab Bapéa xab roy aArAwy 
~* a , ~ A 
Exacta’ 6 omovdalos yap Exacta xplver opb@c, xal ev 
Ce > X > ~ 4 > € / A a 
Exaoros TAAUIES adTw daiverasr. xall? Exdoryy yap Ew 
iia gos HAAR xa adda, xab diadéper wAsioroy lows 6 
orovdaios TH TAANOES ev ExaOTOIG Ody, Women xavay xa} 
/ > ea tA ~ ~ , a feet , X ‘ PY ¢ 
[ET poy HuTWY WY. TOG TOAAOIS Oe Y aTAaTY Oia THY HOovyy 
. U ~ 
Zoixe yiverbos* ov yap oboa ayaboy daiveros* aipotivras 
ovy TO OU Ws ayaboy, Tyy Ot Avayy Wo xaxdy devyouTW. 


an 





De Animé, mm. x. 4, he makes the 
wish (or will) side with reason, in 
opposition to desire. ‘H yap BovAnats 
dpetis * Bray Bt Kara Toy Aopomdy KWh- 
rat, Kal Kara BovAnow nweira. 7 8 
Bpetis nivel mapa roy Aoyioudy * | yap 
émibuula dpetls ths ear. In other 
parts of the Ethics also (which may 
hence be concluded to have been com- 
posed at a different period from this 
chapter) this distinction between Bod- 
Anots, the general wish, and any par- 
ticular desire or determination, is ob- 
served. Cf. Eth. v. ix. 6: ob0els yap 
BodrAetat, od8 56 axparhs, GAA mapa 
thy BovAnow mparret. obre yap BovAe- 
tat ovbels 8 uh oferat elvat omovdaior. 
VII. xiii. 8: TovdTo 5& cvpBatver 31a 7d 
BotaAcoOa piv wdyras } rods wAelorous 
Ta Kadd, mpocupetoba Bt Ta wpEeAIUAL, 
tois 5¢ Tov pavouevov &yabod) This 
is a corollary of the doctrine of Prota- 
goras. If the individual could only 





know what ‘seemed’ to him, he 
could only wish for what seemed 
good. Thus the objective distinction 
between good and evil is done away 
with (ocvpBalver uh elvor does Bovdn- 
tév), Cf. Metaphys. x. vi. 1: "Exeivos 
(6 Tpwrayépas) &pn ndvrwv xpnudreov 
elyvas pérpoy &vOpwrov, odftv Erepov 
Aéywv 7 7d SoKxody Exdorw TodTo Kal 
elva maylws. rovrov d5& yryvoméevov 
Td abrd cuuBatver nal elvar Kab py 
elvat, kal kandy Kal dyabby elya, Cf. 
Essay II. pp. 91-3. 

4 6 omovdaios yap Exacta xplve 
6p0s| The good man is made here 
again, as above (1. vi. 15), that 
standard of right and wrong, that 
exponent of the universal reason, by 
which Aristotle escapes being forced 
into an utterly relative system of 
morals. 

5 ob yap otca a&yabw palvera] 
The ‘pleasant’ is often characterised 


— se 


i tai 


z 
< 
-. 
= 
Fe. 





IV.—V.] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON III. 25 


"Ovrog 64 Bovayrot piv rod rérouc, Bovrcurdy 05 xal 5 
mpooipeT@y Thy pos TO TEA0G, al weol Tatra mpakers xara 
7 pOakpeo ty ay lev xa Exovoios. ai O83 ra&y apetiby evépyeion 


meph TAUTA. 


eb’ piv 02 xal yj apery, spolws 08 xal 72 





in Aristotle as ‘the seeming good.’ 
Cf. De Motu Animal. vi. 5: det 5 
Tiévae kal Td gaivduevov ayabdy 
&yabod xdpay exew, Kal rd 7dU° 
dawdpuevoy yap eorw ayabdy. 


VY. Aristotle winds up his ac- 
count of the voluntary, by arguing 
that virtue and vice are free (é¢’ qui 
bt wal 7 dperh, Suolws 5 Kal 
7 waxta). As before remarked, this 
must not be taken as a metaphysical 
discussion of the question of free-will. 
Partly, the question had never yet 
been fully started; partly, Aristotle 
would have thought it foreign to 
an ethical treatise ; partly, we find in 
the present chapter that same ele- 
mentary and tentative character 
which marks the previous discussions 
in this book. In dealing with one of 
the real difficulties of the question at 
the end of the chapter, Aristotle 
contents himself with a very qualified 
and moderate assertion of freedom, 
which contrasts with the dogmatic 
statements on the same subject in 
the Ethics of Eudemus. The discus- 
sion here is evidently suggested by, 
and directed against, the doctrine 
of the Platonists, that ‘vice is in- 
voluntary,’ since it consists in ignor- 
ance. The arguments are as follows: 
(1) All action implies the possibility 
of its contrary, hence if to act rightly 
be in our power, to act wrongly must 
be in our power also. (2) That an 
individual is the originating cause of 
his actions, is a conception which it is 
difficult to get rid of. This implies 


freedom. (3) We all act as if vice — 


were free as well as virtue. It is 
VOL. II. 





punished by the state. Even for 
ignorance and carelessness producing 
vice, men are held to be respon- 
sible. (4) Men must not charge 
their acts upon their natural character 
—rather their character is produced 
by their acts. (5) The analogy of 
bodily infirmities shows us that if 
some vices are congenital, some, at all 
events, are self-produced. (6) The 
great difficulty of the question is as 
follows: if, as was said above (Chap- 
ter IV.), we each of us desire what 
seems good; if our conception of the 
end, that is, our idea of good, depends 
not on our own will, but on nature, 
or our character and tendency from 
birth; and if all our acts are deter- 
mined by this conception of the end, 
how can they be called free? Ari- 
stotle answers by putting various 
alternatives: (a) you may either 
accept this position in its full extent. 
It will then apply to virtue as well as 
vice. Both will be equally under a- 
law of nature. Neither will be 
voluntary. But this the mind seems 
to revolt against. (8) Or, you may 
say that while the end is absolutely 
determined, the means to it are all 
free as springing from the will of the 
individual. Thus, virtue and vice 
are free, because all their parts are 
free. (vy) Or, you may modify the 
doctrine by admitting that there is 
something self-produced and self- 
determined in the character as a 
whole, and therefore in the idea of 
good, which is to determine our 
actions. 

1-2 Ovyros Sh—%H Kania] ‘The 
end then being the object of wish, 


26 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. 


[Cuap. 


/ > Og \ Seo! 6 ws \ ei \ \ \ , 

nari, ev olg yap ep yiv To mparrey, xal TO Ly mpar- 
. , \ a / 

Te, xab ev lg TO py, xal TO val' WoT El TO mpaTTEY 
A a ° > cw ) / \ \ A ’ >) 9 V6 A wv 

xanroy ov ed july corti, xal To ey mparresy ed yuly cores 

> ” / \ a CL ee \ 

alo x poy ov, xab EL TO Ly MpaTTEW xarov Ov Ed yUly, xOLk 


\ - , A a ° , cm 
370 WOAaTTEY Aa1a YX poyv ov ed qlAby. 


ei 0 ep yuiv Ta 


\ / \ A . f 2 , \ \ A \ /, 
HANK TOATTEY HAL TH ALT YOO, OLL0bwWS 02 xal TO py TAT 
~ Qs ¥ A > ~ 2 ~ ~ > > ecw wv 
TEL, TOUTO O YY TO ayabois Hob KAKOIS Elva, ED YUby ApH 
Ac e9 , \ / > . Oe , e 
470 emisixsot xab Davros elvas.- TO OF AEyely WS 


ovdele Exy mevnpoc OVO akwY paxap, 


Eomme TO psy evdel TOO aryGel* maxdpiog pev yap ovdelg 





while the means are the objects of 
deliberation and purpose, the actions 
that are concerned with the means 
must depend on purpose and must be 
voluntary. But every calling out of 
the virtues into play is concerned with 
the means ; virtue accordingly is in our 
power, and in like manner so is vice.’ 

ai wep) taira mpdies| The words 
wept raira are ambiguous. The 
Paraphrast confines them to ‘the 
means,’ which rendering is supported 
by xara mpoalpeow by elev. Actions 
were above said to be means (11. ili.15). 

ai 5& ray dperav évépyern| This is 
an unusual expression. We find it 
again, Hth, x. iii. 1: ov8& yap al rhs 
adpetiis evépyesa modtnrés eiow. Ari- 
stotle’s usual formula is évépyeia kar’ 
aperhv, i.e. the evocation of the in- 
ternal nature into consciousness or 
action, under the regulation of the 
moral law. He seems :averse to con- 
sidering &perh as a ddvayus, or latent 
quality that might be soevoked. The 
psychology of this passage is different 
from that of Eth, vi. xii. 8-10, 
Here it is said that BobAnots gives us 
the idea of the end, and that virtue 
consists in mpoalpeois and BovAevors 
taking the means; there that virtue 
gives the end, and an intellectual 
faculty (¢pévnois) the means. 





2 év olsydp ep’ quiv 7d mpdrrew 
kal 7d uh mpdtrey] Elsewhere (Meta- 
phys. vu. ii, 2) Aristotle states in more 
philosophical form this first step in the 
doctrine of free-will, namely, that 
every psychical duvayuis is a capacity of 
contraries, see Essay IV. p. 187. 

3 Todt 8 iv rd ayabois Kat Kaxots 
elva:] ‘And this is, according to our 
hypothesis,—being good and bad.’ 
jv =‘is as we have said,’ referring to 
the preceding section. Trendelenburg 
in his paper on 7d rf Fy elvou (Rhein- 
isches Museum, 1828) tells us that 
&ya#ots in the present passage is by 
attraction to jyiv. It is therefore to 
be distinguished from the logical ex- 
pression 7d d&ya0¢ eivai, ‘the essen- 
tial idea of goodness.’ 

Td 5 Adyew &s—éAnOe7] ‘But to 
say that ‘‘ No man prefers a crime or 
spurns a bliss” seems half false and 
half true.’ The line here quoted, 
on which the discussion in this chapter 
turns, is of uncertain authorship. It 
is quoted in the dialogue which bears 
Plato’s name, ep) Arafov, This 
fragmentary dialogue is, in all proba- 
bility, not Plato’s, but of the Platonic 
school (though Victorius ascribes it 
to Plutarch). It stands pretty much 
on a level with the ninth book of the 
Laws (see Essay III. p. 166), and one 





V.] 


> e Sv , € , 
AXWY, 7 0g povdnpia EXOUG LOY, 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQON III. 


27 


7) Tog ye viv cipypévorg 5 


>’ , \ K a 2 / > xX s 
apdisPyryréoy, xab Toy avlpwrov ou darcoy apyry elyas 
O00 yevynT ay Toy TeAEewy WoTED Hal Téexvev. £108 TATE 6 
U ~ 
haiveros xal py Eyouev cig AAAUG Apyas dvayayEly Tapa 
x S29 € v4 \ er 43 Nav cow \ aia Nee OS ee 
Tas éb ypiv, wv xal ai apyal ev ymiv, xal auTa ed ypiy 


as r 
HOLE EXOUGIA, 


/ ~ 
TouToIg O zone paptupelobar nal iin bd’7 


c is x ec > > ~ ~~ ~ 14 ~ 

éxacroy xal bm avtr&y t&y vouoberdyv’ xorcSovos yap 
\ ~ \ ~ Ly er \ / N 3 

seoul THuempotivran Tous dead Pox dnpa Or or (27 Big 7 Os 

Ga 5) 

ayvolay Ho pon avrol alriot, ToUg OF Ta KAA mpaTTOVTAS 
nn . \ 

Tio, Wo TOG ev, poTpelorTEs, Tavs OF xwAUGOYTES. 
r o fics} Sngist vig > \ spr , Nn 

xaitor boa pyr ed rplv éorh pal exovora, ovdelg wpo- 





ean hardly doubt that it is referred to 
here. Cf. p. 374 A: Idrepoy 5€ éxdv- 
Tas ote. &xew TovTo Td &biKkov Tovs 
avOpamovs 7) &Kovras; w@de 5& A€yu, 
éxdvTas ote: Gdikety Kal adlkous «iva 7 
&xovras; ‘Exdvras @ywye, & SHxpares * 
movnpol ydp «iow, ‘“Exdvtas tpa ov 
ote. movnpovs elvar kod adlkous davOpa- 
mous ; *Eywye + ot & of ; Od, ef yé Th 
def TH woinTh weiber Oa, 
“Oorts elrev 


Tloiw woinrh ; 


ovdels Exc movnpds OVT Ukwv pdrap. 


a 


*AAAG Tol, @ 
Awa mapomta exe, Sts woAAG wWed- 
Sovra: do150t. The answer to this is, 
an argument to show that injustice is 
3? duadtay, and therefore involun- 
tary. Od &pa epetoaro rovrd ye 
ao0.8ds. The original saying was pro- 
bably a mere truism, rovnpés meaning 
not ‘wicked, but ‘wretched.’ This 
play on the word rendered the line 
peculiarly suitable for the Platorfic 
argument. 

5 ‘yerunthy tav mpdiewy woTep 
kal réxvwy| The analogy here given, 
when looked at closely, does not imply 
any very strong assertion of free-will 
(though Aristotle meant it to be so). 
For the father inherits, or receives by 
nature, qualities that he transmits to 
his children. Analogously the will 


Zdéupares, «bd 7 Ta- 





EB 2 


might be regarded as an effect, as well 
as a cause, of circumstances. 

7 tobrots & €o.xe—vouober ey] ‘This 
seems to be supported by the testimony 
both of individuals and of legislators 
themselves. The argument drawn 
from the constitution of society, from 
the fact of rewards and punishments, 
goes so far as this. It proves thatthe 
mind is of a nature to be acted on by 
inducements. It, of course, does not 
touch the metaphysical difficulty as to 
the whole world being bound by a law 
of necessity. But it proves an in- 
stinctive belief existing in society, 
exactly coincident with the position. 
of Aristotle, that the individual is the 


cause of particular acts. There is no 


natural tendency in criminals to dis- 


claim responsibility for their crimes. 
If they do so, it is not from an in- 
stinctive feeling, but rather from a 
sophisticated mind. As before said, 
this fact is not sufficient to disprove a 
metaphysical system which would 
represent legislature, judge, criminal, 
and the whole world, as forced to do 
what they do by an irresistible suc- 
cession of cause and effect. But 
ethically and politically it is sufficient 
to justify a practical assumption of 
freedom. And in any system it must 
at all events be taken account of. 


28 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. [ Car. 


, / e PENS \  § * A ~ A 
TpimeTOs MATTE, WS OvdEY THD Epyou ov To meio Ohya a 
Geouatverbasr 7 aryeiv 7 weivijy 7 AA oTiody Toy ToIOUTwY" 

dd imate Hs 4 a a a baa 4 A . > > 
‘ tod ~ 
Soukty yao nTTov meoousia auTa, xal yap Ex auTm TH 
~ ~ ad / 
ayvosiy xoraZovarw, tay alriog elvos Doxy Tig ayvolas, oloy 
~ ~ nt \ > > ~ 
Tolg peGvoucr OimAG TH eriTibiA’ 7% yap apyy EV QUT" 
~ ~ ~ 4 nw 
xuplos yap To ry peduobyvas, toiTo 0 altiov Tig ayvolas. 
~ ~ ~ , a fe DISS 
xal TOUS HyvoodYTaS TI THY ey TOI voMoIG, & Ost erioTa- 
/ \ 
9760: xal py yarera bors, xorAaZovow. suolwg 08 xal 
: ~ ~ ~ . , La 
ey TOlg AAAS, OTH OV aUsAciay Hyvosiv DoxotCLY, wg ex av- 

~ HN \ \ > Oo ~ A 5) 47, , > , 

1OTOIG OY TO [LT] HYVOELY’ TOU YAD ETILEANIT VAL XuPIOl, AAA 
~ a \ ” ~ \ ~ 
lows TowdTog ert WoT py empsryoyvar GAG TOD 
~ , ~ 
Towvurovg yeverbo avrol altios Swovteg aveévng, xal TOD 
x ~ aR 
adlxoug 7) axoraoroug elves, of piv xaxoupyodyTes, of OF Ev 
~ a 
TOTO xab Toig ToLoUTOIG OiayovTes’ ai yap weph ExacTa 
a ~ ~ ~ > ~ 
IT EvEpyElas ToLoUTOUS Tosovorv.  ToUTo Ot OyAov ex TaY 
PEAET@YTWY TpoS AvTively aywvlay 7} mpaEw* diaTerAodos 
~ z ~ a ~ ~ 
12Yap EvepyouvTes. To wey oUY ayvosiv OTE ex TOU evepyelY 
ao ~ 4 4 
1370) Exacta ai eEeg yivovras, xousdy avaidyrou, eTs 
~w wv ~ wv x \ 
0 adoyoy Toy adixotvTa py PodAsobas Adixov elves 7 Tov 
F ~ / 

AXOAMTTAIVOYTA AxOAATTOY. Eb OF [Ly Ayvowy Tig MPaATTE 





8 Samra ra emirlmal Cf. Poli- 
| dics, m, xii, 13: "Eyévero 8 Kad 
Tltraxds vduwv Syusoupyds GAA’ ov 
| woAurelas’ véuos 8 Yd10s abrov 7d Tobs 
| weOvovtas, by tumThowo, TAclw Cyuiay 
‘amorivery trav vnpdvrwv’ Bia yap 7d 
|arelous bBplCew peOvovras 2) vipovras 
lov mpds Thy ovyyvduny &wéBrcyer, bri 
\Set weOvovow Exe M&AAOV, AAG Tpds TO 
cundépor. Drunkenness is self-caused 
ignorance of right and wrong. (Cf. 
Eth. 1. i. 14). The law of Pittacus 
is given in the Rhetoric to illustrate an 
évoracis depending on an appeal to 
authority. (a. xxv. 7) Ef tis év@dunua 
eimev Sri Tots peOvovot Se? cvyyveunv 
éxew, ayvoodyTes yap auaptdvovow,, 
évoracis bri obxovy 6 Murrakos aiverds, 
ov ydp by pelCovs Cnulas evopobérnoev 
dy Tis peOUwy Guaprayn. 


Io—12 af yap wept exaora— 





avac@frov| ‘For the particular de- 
velopments of the mind in each case 
give people their character. This may 
be illustrated by the case of those who 
are practising for some contest or 
action,—for they keep on exercising 
their powers. Now not to know that 
the several states of mind arise from 
particular developments of the powers 
is absolute idiocy.’ This passage con- 
tains exactly the same theory of the 
formation of moral states as that given 
at the beginning of Book II. But it 
is written independently of the former 
passage—in that separate way, which 
must be called a marked peculiarity of 
Aristotle’s writings. ove 
13 @ 8 &droyov—anddracroy] 
‘Again it is absurd to say that he 
who acts unjustly does not wish to be 
unjust, or he who acts intemperately 


v.] 


HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION III. 29 


> e ” xO c \ x0 nv y > \ Ws 

e& wy tortor adinoc, Ex@v KOixog av ely, ov pany gay yer4 
£ ANY a 4 \ oer 4 4 Dr \ 

Povanros, adinos wy TavoETOL xal EoTOL Oixasog’ 00d? yap 


~ re 
6 vormy OyI7S. 


\ ~ ~ ~ 
Biorevwy xalb amreibiy roig iarpoic. 


\ a ov XN ~ 3 ~ 
xab El OUTWS ETUYVEY, EXWY YOO Es, AX PATS 


, s x 2 fon 
Tore pay ouv e&ty 


IT@ py voosiv, Toosuevw O ouxEeTL, WomED 000 ade 
avr@ ph voociv, mpocevg odxert, domep ob évTt 

/ vy % > > ~ > > be > > Nn 
Albov Er avroy duvarov avarafeiv? AAA Buwsg ex auto 


To Barsiy xal silas’ 4 yap apy ew avtTH 
0 Pars p 7 Yap apyn ex avTO. 


ouTw os 


\ PANE \ ~ 9 ree 25 os ~ N 26% , 
HOLL Tw ool w x1 Tw AxO0 a0TW & apxXNS ev Souv TOlOUTOIC 


X , Ness a7 SAY, t 9-5 Sof ” 
-4 yeveobus, O10 EXOYTES ELT LV’ yevowevass 0 OUXETI 2Eeor1 


\ cz 
pen Ebvo. 


> , > c la ~ , € 7 7, 
)7) [ovoyv ny at TH¢ Wuxis HAKIAE EXOVGLOL IS 


> > ha A 1 ted ~ , ~ cs w 
elo, AA évioig xal ai TOU TMpATOS, OIG nal emiTIL@peEY* 

~ \ \ 5 A 7 > ~ 2 ‘ > ~ ~ de Yi 
TOIG psy yap ice hoo aloypolg ovderg EmiTind, ToIg dé Os 

, , 
ayupvaclay xal auérziav. bpmolwg 08 xal rept aobéveray xeck 
mipwoiw* ovbelo yap av overdlosie TUPAM Hvoes 7) ex voorov 
ile § ve P > ae , ess 4 / 
~ > ~~ ~ 

7} 2x TANYIS, AAAK parr eAsHoTos* TH O 2E oivodauvyiag 


} AAANS axornolag Tas ay erITILHT OL. 


~ NA \ \ 
THY On Tepl TO16 


~ ~ ee 2s ee TA > ~ «3\ a, att Ue OR Ra ” 

THpa xaxidy ai eb july emitipovral, aide wy ed yuly ov. 
a \ \ ~ BA e fe ~ ~ 

el 0 otTw, xal ext Thy AAAwY ai emiTILa@evO THY xaxIoY 


~ a 
2h’ auiv ay elev. 


° / / a / > / ~ 
el 02 TIG A€yor OTL MavTES EhlevTas TOU 17 





to be intemperate.’ Aristotle would 
not say himself that any one ‘ wished 
to be intemperate,’ that is, wished it 
in the general, in the abstract, for its 
own sake. But here he points out 
that those who do not wish to be in- 
temperate yet take the steps that 
lead inevitably to this. He argues 
that the means make the end free; the 
outset, the conclusion ; the parts, the 
whole. Afterwards (§ 22) he allows 
that the general state is not so entirely 
in our power as the particular act. 
With regard to the former it is rather 
true to say that we are responsible for 
it, than that we choose it. A para- 
dox then still remains, that men pro- 
duce by voluntary acts that which 
they do not wish. The resolution of 
this is to be found in £th, vu. iii, 
where it is shown that right moral 
_ acting consists in allowing the act 
of the moment to be sufficiently in- 





fluenced by universal considera- 
tions. Error and vice, on the con- 
trary, consist in suffering the univer- 
sal idea, the general conception of 
what is good and desirable, to stand 
in abeyance. 

14 Tpoeuévp 8 obxér:] * But after 
he has thrown his health away, he 
has no longer a choice.’ To ‘give 
away’ is the only sense in which 
mpotec@a is used in the Ethics. Cf. 
Iv. i. 9, 1x. i. 7, &e, 

17—20 This complex argument 
will be perhaps made most clear, if 
divided into the following separate 
members, (1) Ei 5é tis Aéyoi—airg 
is the general protasis. Suppose it 
to be said that all aim at what appears 
to them good, but that their ideas and 
impressions are beyond their control, 
being dependent in each case on the 
character of the individual, (2) On 
this an alternative follows: either (é 


30 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON III. 


[Cuap. 


/ > ~ ~ 9s / > , > s « ~s 
daivonévoy ayuhot, rig Oe havtaciag ov xUpI0l, AAA’ Gmolog 
ao ~ \ > ~ 
mol Exacteg éori, TowvTo xal To TéA0G dalveras aUTw® 





bev obv—atrios) the individual is the 
cause of his own character, and so 
accordingly of his ideas, 07 (3) let us 
see what the consequences will be if 
we allow that the individual is not 
the cause of his own character («i 5€ 
uh—evpvia). In this case no one 
will be responsible for doing wrong: 
wrong will reduce itself to mere 
ignorance, the knowledge of the good 
to a happy gift of nature. (4) But 
these extreme deductions are over- 
thrown (¢i 8¢ rair’ éorly—émwodhmote) 
by its being shown that they will 
equally disprove the voluntariness of 
virtue, as well as that of vice. (5) 
The argument is concluded by 
summing up the results of the pre- 
vious discussions (ere 84—édpolws 
yép). In whatever sense virtue is 
said to be free, whether as implying 
that the idea of the end is in our 
power, or only that there is something 
free and individual in the taking of 
means,—in exactly the same sense 
will vice be free, for these two 
opposite terms stand on exactly the 
same footing. 

17. THs 5é gavtacias od Kupiot] 
‘But are not masters of their impres- 
sion.’ avraclais a special word, de- 
noting something between sense and in- 
tellect (pavracla yap €repov kad aicbh- 
cews Kal diavoias* abrh Te ob ylyverat 
dvev ainOqoews, Kal tvev tavrns ovK 
torw brérnfis. De An. m1. iii. 5). 
It denotes, in short, the sensuous im- 
pression of an object. Aristotle says 
that we may have a false payracia 
even where we have true opinions, 
as, for instance, our gayracla of the 
sun makes it a foot in diameter, 
while our belief is that the sun sur- 
passes in magnitude the habitable 
world (gaivera: 8 Kal wWevd7, sep? 





dv Gua imdambw GdAndj Exe, otov 
galvera: piv 5 HAs modiaios, mwenl- 
orevta 8 elva pel(wv Tis oixoupévns, 
De An, wm. iii. 15). avracla is 
closely allied with prjun, it belongs 
to the same part of the mind (De 
Memor. i. 9). Memory and ¢av- 
tasia are something short of in- 
tellect—Aristotle attributed them to 
the lower animals. Cf. Metaphys. 1. 
i. 3:7 wey ody HAAG rails payraclaus 
Gi xa rats prhuus, eumeplas 5e 
peeréxe: puxpdy. Cf. also Eth, vu. 
iii. u. Brutes and the incontinent 
are said to follow their pavracta, De 
An, 1, iii. 21: Kal Bid 7d eupéverw Kar 
dpolws elva tats aic@hoeot, moAAG 
kar’ abtas mpdrre: Ta (Ga, Ta pev Bid 
7d wh txew vodv, cov T& Onpla, ra BE 
51a 7d emikadrdtrresOa Toy vody évlore 


-mdber }} vécos }} brv~, oiov of &vOpwmrot. 


Cf. Eth. vu. vii. 8. We find the 
word gavracia not as yet settled into 
a psychological formula in Plato’s 
Theetetus, p. 152 B, where the doc- 
trine of Protagoras is shown to imply 
that everything is as it appears, and 
that this appearing is identical with 
sensation. %. 7d dé ye palvera aicOd- 
verbal éorw; ©. “Eott ‘yap. &. 
bavracta &pa Kai atoOnots tabrdoy ev 
Te Oeppois kal mac. Tots Towobrois, ola 
yap aicOdvera €xagros, Tora 
éxdor kai Kwovvete: ely. Aristotle, 
giving a scientific account of it in the 
De Anima, separates it, as we have 
seen, from sensation on the one hand, 
and reason on the other. The term 
does not correspond with any of our 
regular psychological terms. In rela- 
tion to the fancy and the imagination, 
it represents the material for these, 
the brain-images out of which the 
creations of fancy (as well as the 
phantasmagoria of dreams) are con- 


V.] 


HOEIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 31 


> \ oa e ~ ~. a , > , ¥ Q 
Eb peev OUY EXOHOTOIS EAUTW TNS Zeus EOTL TW AITIOS, XAE 
~ / 4 £ ete. yf st , > \ > n~ 
TIS PAVTATIAS ET TAL TWS AUTOS AITIOG* Eb OF LT, ovdels AUTO 


ov ~ \ ~ > ‘\ > ~ / ~ 
QITLOS TOU HAXH TOLELY, HAAG On AYVOIaY TOU TEAOUG THUTH 


a mh L er ¢e ~ \ ” ” 
TpATTel, Ol TOUTwWY olomsvog aiTm TO ploToy Eoeo Dau. 
\ ~ / 4 3 ow: Ve Y n~ ~ a 
7 08 TOU Térous Edecig ovx aUIalpeToc, AAA Hives det womep 


v 


+ ey4 ~ ~ \ \ > ES ld > \ 
ows EXOTA, +4) x pbVEs XHAAWS xHAL TO XAT arnseroyv ayaboy 


, 
mionT eT Os. 
‘ 


Av > " ? ~ ae) , x 
xab eat evduys W TOUTO XAAWS meduxev’ To 


X , thr er Sh e7 Nee 
YAP PEYITTOY HAL XLAAIO TOY, XXL O TAG ETEDOU [Ly OloY TE 
~ \ ~ fi} i ~ a \ \ Ss 
AaPeiv unde pabeiv, AAW oloy Ebv, TorwvToy 2Ee1, xal Td ev 
\ \ ~ ~ , € , A ee Va B) 
xal TO KAAS TOUTS medhuxevas 7 TeAsin nal AAnSivy av ely 


evdvia. 


ei On Tar’ 2orly arnfy, Ti LaAAOY 7 apery 7s 


xaxlag 2oTAL ExouTIov; audoly yap omolws, TO Kya4e 18 
S 5 Oe yap opoiws, TH ayaa : 
\ ~ ~ \ / , N ¢ 7 , \ 
xal TH Haw, TO TEAOG HucEs 7 bmwodnmoTe halveras xa} 
~ \ %. ne nw , ié 
xeitol, Ta OF AoITa mpog ToT avadEpovres mpatTovor 


ec ’ 
omrwoonrore. 


bY \ < / \ 7 c A s 
elre 07) TO TEAOG py OvoE ExaTTHW dal- 19 


c 7 > / ‘ > > / > y \ 

veTat olovOymoTe, AAG TH xa map auTov Eotiy, elre Td 
\ / 4 ~ \ \ | Ey: € lf X 

peev TEA0G Ducsxoy, Tw Of TH AolTA WPAaTTELY EXOUTIS TOY 


~ ae WV, '€ 4 i Poe SAS... Re / 
OTovoaloy q APETY) EXOUO LOY EO TILY, oubsy TT OV HAL 7) HOKIA 


 éxodotov av elyn* buolwo yap xal TO xaxw braoyes TO OV 
é 7° Opolwg yap ; r PX 


aitoy ey tais mpok&eos xal el py ey two Tere 
Ss mp pa ey rd : 


> 
gb OvY, 20 


a , € / out) ae / \ ni ~ v4 

WoTréep AEYETOAS, EXOUO 10k ELT LY AL ApET at (xa YP TwyY ZEewy 
/ > it \ ~ ~ , 

Cuvaitiol rws aUTOL EO LLEV, HL TW TOLOk THVES Lvs To TEA0S 





structed. Aristotle, not entering at 
all into the philosophy of the imagi- 
native faculties, merely speaks of 
gavrasia, as furnishing a necessary 
element to thought (vociy od éorw 
tivev payvrdoparos, De Mem. i. 5). 
From what has been said it is easy 
to see the special appropriateness of 
the word in the above passage to 
denote an impression or idea of the 
good received passively, and in itself 
erroneous. . 

19 etre Sy—réAa]  ‘ Whether, 
then, the conception of the end, of 
whatever kind, comes not to each 
individual by nature, but something 
also is contributed by himself (7: kal 
map avtéy éortv), or whether the end 
indeed is fixed by nature, but it is 





through the good man’s voluntarily 
taking the means that virtue is yolun- 
tary ; in either case, I say, vice will 
be not a whit less voluntary (than 
virtue), for the bad man, exactly as 
the good, has individuality (7d 8? 
adrov)in the particular actions, if not 
in the conception of the end.’ 

20 Kal yap Téy etewv ouvalriol Tws 
abvrol éowev] ‘For we are ourselves 
joint causes, in a way, of our own 
states of mind.’ The word cvvatrios, 
meaning not the primary, but a con- 
comitant cause, is of not unfrequent 
oceurrence in Plato. Cf. Timeus, p. 
46 p, where it is said of fire, &c., 
dokdera: 5 ind Tay wAclotwv ov 
Euvalria, GAN oltia elvan Tey mdvToV. 


On the general bearing of Aristotle’s 


32 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 


[Cuap. 


, Ey) ’ 
roves THEuea), xd ak xaxias Exovorn ay elev* Suolws 


21 yap. 


~ 7 ~ ~ ~ / 
xoiwy ev ouv mepl Tay apeTady elontar apiv TO TE 


’ sd , a 4 td 3. 2a 
yévog TUTW, OT pecoryTés ciow, xal OTL BGeic, OD wy Te 

, ae, = 4 / \ / \o Le 
yivovTas, xal Ors ToUT@Y mpaxTinal xal abTag, xak OTE ED 
cow Qe Ui Led 4 « oes ee 46 / / * 
july xak Exovrios, xa odTwWs ws av 6 dphog Adyog mporTAsy, 


> € s » c / « / / I] ‘ ed a 
22 oe eters Eas mpabers EXOUC LOL ELT XA AL é Sets 


Toy 


pey yap mpaGecy an apy BEXp Tov TéA0uG rev ptok 20 ey, 
elddres TH xal Exacta, Thy EEewy O2 Tis axing, xaf 
Exacta 08 7 mpocbeoss ov yywpi.os, Womep exh Thy appw- 
~ > 24 ee eee er ee oe a ae | , 
OTIMOY* AAA OTL ED Yuly yy oUvTWS 7% [LY OUTH Xie ae Gas, 
23 01d TotiTo Exovotol. cevaraPdyTes Ox mepl ExaorTns, elrwpey 
A , ~ ~ ~ 
Tiveg clot xah meph moia xal rao" dpa 0 eorou OFAov xa 


, , 
Torus cioly. 


\ ~ A > / 
xal moro weph ovdpelag. 





treatment of the question of free will, 
see Essay VII, pp. 316-18. 

21—22 These sections form the 
junction between the somewhat 
isolated treatise on the Voluntary 
and Aristotle’s discussion of the 
separate virtues. They bear marks 
of having been added for the express 
purpose of forming a junction. For 
after a general statement of the theory 
of virtue in section 21 there is a 
resumé of some points with regard to 
the voluntariness of actions and habits, 
which is just what a man might have 
been likeby to add after reading over 
his own treatise, and thinking that it 
required a word or two of elucidation. 

22 obx dpyolws 8) — appworidy] 

But actions and habits are not equal- 

ly voluntary, for we are masters of 
our actions from the beginning to the 
end because we know all the parti- 
culars, but we can only control the 
beginning of our habits, while the 
gradual addition made by each parti- 
cular step is unperceived, as is the 
case also with illnesses.’ 

23 dvadraBdvres 8h mwepl éxdorns 
—eiciy] ‘Let us therefore resume 
our discussion of the separate virtues, 





stating what they are, with what 
actions they are concerned, and in 
what manner. It will at the same 
time appear how many there are.’ 
On the assumed completeness of Ari- 
stotle’s list of the virtues, see note on 
Eth. u. vii. 1, and the plan of Book 
IV. ; cf. also Eth. m1. x. 1, note. 

kal mp&rov wep) dvBpelas] Aristotle’s 
admirable account of courage is to 
some extent indebted to the observa- 
tions of Plato, while in some points 
again it is a protest against the Platonic 
theory. In the Protagoras (pp. 349— 
351, 359—361) courage is identified 
with the science of the truly safe and the 
truly dangerous. In the Laches (pp. 
198—201) a refinement is made upon 
this, and it is argued that, if danger 
be ‘future evil,’ courage cannot be 
the science of this, for a science 
excludes all consideration of time, so, 
if courage be a science at all, it must 
be the science of good and evil 
universally. Thus Plato merges 
courage in that universal wise con- 
sciousness, which he considered the 
true ground of morality. In the 
Republic (p. 430 8B), courage is 
said to be the maintenance of 


V.—VL.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. 33 


"Orr piv oby pecdrys goth wep doBoug xal Iapon, 794 6 
xal mpdrepoy elpyras, doodeda 02 d%Aov ors TA GoBepd, 2 

~ > 2 \ c c ~ ? ~ / \ \ % / 
Tadra 0 éoTly Wo aTAMS eimeiy xaxa* O10 xal Tov doBov 


opiovras mpocdoxiay xaxod. doPovusia piv oy mavra3 


/ ? la / / / / 
TH xaxe, olov adoElay meviay vooov adiriav Oavarov, AAD 


> \ tA ~ € > ~ s rs ww A A ~ 
od mepl mavra Ooxet & avdpeiog sivas’ Evia yap nai del 
’ ~ \ / \ \ MS > / % > / c 
PoBsiobas xal xarov, rd OF py aboypov, olov adoSiav’ 6 





right principles in spite of the dis- 
tractions of danger. By Aristotle, 
courage is more definitely fixed as a 
condition of the moral side of man’s 
nature, and as implying not only a 
consciousness, but a conscious choice 
of the highest moral good. Its sphere 
is limited to war, and thus a rather 
special and restricted character is 
given to the virtue. At the same 
time a reverence is shown for the 
nobleness of courage beyond what we 
find in Plato. And deep human 
observations are made which are in 
the best style of Aristotle’s moral 
writing. 


VI. 1-2 wept pdBovs Kad Odppn— 
taita 8 éotiv ws amdGs ciety xaxd,* 
5d Kad tov pdBov dpiCovra: mpocdoxiav 
xakov | These points are accepted from 
Plato, ef. Protag. p. 358 D: mpocdo- 
klay Twa A€yw Kakod TOTO, elre HdéBov 
elre 5eos Kadeire. Laches, p. 198 B: 
Tyobucba & jets Sewd pty eivor & Kad 
déos mapéxet, Oapparda St & wh Séos 
mapéxer * Sos Bt mapéxer od Ta yeyovdra 
ovdé Ta wapdyta Tav KaKx@y, akAX TH 
mpocdokaépeva’ Séos yap elvat mpocdo- 
klay péAdovTos kaxod. . . . ToUTMY SE ye 
Thy emothunv avipelay mpocaryopeders ; 
kousdq ye, The subject of the present 
chapter is the proper sphere of courage. 
- H8n Kod mpérepov, Eth. w. vii. 2. 

3-8 oBotpucda pev odv—nivdive] 
These sections contain a protest 
against the doctrine represented in 
the Laches, p. 191 D, 8, where 

VOL. II. 





courage is extended to all those 
objects which are here expressly ex- 
cluded from it—dangers by sea, ill- 
ness, political conflicts, even the 
encountering of temptation. Bovad- 
Hevos ydp cou mudécbar ph pdvov rods 
évy t@ dmditix@ avdpelous, GAAG Kal 
Tous éy T@ immug kal ev tdumavt: TE 
ToAEUKG €lde1, Kal wh pdvoy Tovs ev TS 
ToAeu, AAG kal Tos éy ToIs mpds Thy 
OdrAatray Kiwdbvors dvdpelous dvTas, Kab 
boot ye mpos vécous Kal Boor mpds 
mevias i Kal mpds ra 
&ySpetot eit, kal ert ad ph pdvov bro 
mpos AvUTas avdpetol eiow 7 pdBous, 
GAAG Kal mpds emiBuulas 7 nSovas Se.vol 


MOAITLiKG 


pdxer0a, Kal wévovres 7 Gvactpepovres 

. iat ydp mob tives, & Adxns, kal ev 
Tots ToovTas &ySpetor. Aristotle treats 
all such applications of the word 
as merely metaphorical 
(Aéyera & iwdé tivwv Gvdpeios Kard 
petapopdv), to these he opposes the 
proper use of the word (kuplws 3) 
Adyar’ by, § 10) as belonging peculiarly 
to war. 

tia yap Set poBetcOar wal Kadrdy] 
Cf. Eth. m1. i. 24: de? 5€ kad dpylCerOar 
éxt ict Kat émiOupeiy tiwadv, oiov 
byeias Kal pabhjoews. It admits of 
discussion how much, independently 
of a merely permissive attitude in 
the will and reason, the instincts of 
fear, anger, and desire, may be 
positively called out and even created 
by considerations and suggestions of 
the reason, or how far their place 
may be supplied by the reason itself. 


avdpeios 


ot HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IIL. [ Cuar. 


\ 
pav yao DoPovmevog emisinyg xal aidjpwy, 6 08 pay do- 
~ _ 
Povpevos advair yuvtos, AgyeTasO umd TivwY AvOpsiog HATH 
, »” , ivf ~ > lf ® »” 
pstadopav’ Eye yap Tt Suomyv Tw avdpelw' adofos 
4yap TIG xal 6 avdpelog. meviay 0 tows ob det doPsiobas 
IDA U 2No oF a a ee Pee, , Dy ye € “ 
oud voooY, O00 GAWS Ora py are xaxlag pyd? OV adbrov. 
AAN 000 6 weph Tatra adoBog avdpeiog. Adyouev OF xal 
~ v ~ 
tolroy xa Gmomoryra’ Evior yap ev Toig moAsusxoic 
, \ > , Pra \ \ , 
xivduvorg Oerrol ovT|eg eAsvbeps0i ios xal mpdo yoymarwy 
~ \ 
samopoany evbapow@s Eyousiw. 000? by ef Tig bBow mepl 
~ ~ ~ x ~ , 
Taidas xal yuvatxa doPeiras 7 dbcvoy 7 ti Tay ToovTwY, 
Bziaog gotiv: oud i Oapped merArwy parr ivyoie bau, a.v0pEiog. 
~ > ~ ~ ~ \ 
6mEpt mola ovv thy oPecy 6 avdseiog; 7% mweph Ta 
7 ~ ~ 
peyiota; ovbelg yap tmromeverixwtepog Thy Dewey. do- 
 é > c , ; , , xO ” nw 
Pec@rarov 0 6 Bavarog mépag yao, xal ovdiy Err TH 
~ S ~ V9. 19 Ay x \ ri 56 »» 
7 TeOvewrs Ooxet our ayaboy ours xaxoy sivas, d0Gsi¢ 
a LANDS \ 9 \ > Ae, 9 ~ i a > 
ay ovds meph Oavaroy tov ev mavtl 6 avdpetog elvan, oloy eb 
> if , a BI] / > U A a > ~ 
gev Oararry 7 ev voooig. ev ticw ov; 4 ev Toig 
AAL > ToIOUTOL Of of ev woAcuw* ev EyioTwW ya 
KAAMOTOS 5 T 2 ob ev morguw peyloro yap 
\ / Q/ « /, de ‘ ees } c 
g Xb XAAMTTW XivOvyW. OLLOAOYO! VE TOUTOIG ELT HOLE OL 
\ oeae , ~ /, A A ~ , 
Tinal ab ev Taig woAcor xal mapa Tolg povapyors. 
/ by / > x > 5 ~ c \ A A “be 
ro xuplg On AsyoiT av avdpsiog 6 mwepl Tov xarov Oavaroy 
ads7c, xal boa Gavarov emidépa tmoyuia ova’ Tomtira 
Ne! / \ \ / > \ > A } ? 
110 PAAITTA TH XATR WOAEMOY. OU MIY RAAK HAL EV 
, ne , ’ ‘\ ¢ “S ~ > a \ c c 
Jararry xab ev voroig adeng 6 avdpelog, ov odTw OF we of 
Jararrio of piv yap amsyvoxacs THy cwrnpiay xal Toy 
/ A ~ if e QL 2 N7/ > 
Javatoy tov TordTov ducyepaivovary, of O& evéAmidés ciot 
a \ \ 39 , > ’ 
Gia 08 xal avdpiSovras ev ols erry 
> NC sn \ \ > mo ° ~ , \ ~ 
AAR 1 XAAOY TO amobavely’ ey THAIS TOMUTAIC Oe Dbopaig 


12 Tapa THY Emerplay. 


> , ec A 
ov§erepoy bmapyel. 





It is a similar question which is dis- 
cussed by Kant, How far is it possible 
to obey in a positive sense the injunc- 
tion, ‘love your enemies’ ? 

6 poBepdératov 8 6 Odvatos* répas 
yap] See Essay V. p. 242. 

10-12 kuplws—tbrdpxe:] ‘He then 
can be properly called brave who 
is fearless about the noble kind of 
death, and about things which sud- 





denly (iréyuia bvra) bring on death, 
—and such are especially the affairs 
of war. No doubt the brave man, 
when he is upon the sea, or upon a 
sickbed, will be brave : but his bravery 
will not be that of a sailor. Lands- 
men in danger of drowning give up 
all hope of safety, and feel repugnance 
at the thought of such a death; 
while sailors are made confident by 


VI—VII.] HOIKON NIKOMAXEION III, 35 


To 02 doBepdy ob maior piv Tb adre, Adyomev 02 Th xal7 
imtp avOpwmrov. Toliro wiv atv mavTl doPesey Th ye voy 
yy \ SS > , , \ ~ ed 
EXOvTI, THOR xaT AvIpwroy diadépes peyéber nal TO parArov 

1s ¢ , x \ \ sf Oi. 3 ~ 
xab qrTov" ouolwg 6 xal Ta Gapourza, 6 08 avdpstos2 
8 c BA 7 . mf \ A 
avexTArAnxtos wo aviswros. doyceTas piv ov xal TH 

~ € ~ NA \ ec c / ¢ ~ ~ ~ 
TOLAUTA, WS Oi 62 xal weg 6 Aoyos umomevel, TOU xXAAOU 
o ~ ‘\ / ~ > ~ yy XN ne 
EVEXH* TOUTO YAP TEAS TIS ApPETIS. ECT oe [aADoy 3 

, ee ~ ~ A ow \ \ . e 
xab yTTOv Tata doPeiobas, xab Ets TA py Doeca we 
Toiatira dofeicbas. yiveras 02 THY apapTioy 7 pev4 
o > ~ € NA o& 9 ON eA > 4 by ~ 
OT8 ov Osi, 7] OF Ors od We det, 7 OE OTE ODY OTe, % TH THY 

Yd ra Lh > \ \ X / cs \ s 
ToouTwWY* bpolws Oe xal mepl Ta Dapparza. 6 pev ody s 
a P) ae \ * ad c / \ 4 bo P) ba \ 
& Ost xk Ob Evexe bropevoy xal DoPovpzvoc, xak ws Ozt xak 
a c ra > \ ~ > ~ > > feos / \ 
OTs, Gpoiwg 02 xal bappiy, dvdpelog: xar akiay yap, xab 
TEAS 6 


c * c / / \ / € 5 SN ~ 
@o ay o AOYyos, TATHEL XAL WHATTEL v avopetos. 





their experience. Besides, men put 
forth their courage on occasions where 
to die is helpful or glorious; but in 
death at sea or from sickness neither 
of these qualities is to be found.’ 
This passage is a curious exemplifica- 
tion of Athenian feeling. In spite of 
the glorious traditions of Salamis, 
the Athenians had never attained 
those instincts which are inherited by 
the descendants of the Norsemen-— 
the feeling that ‘the deck’ is their 
proper ‘field of fame.’ 


VII. Thischapter discusses courage 
as being a mean state with regard to 
daring and fearing. Setting aside 
terrors which are too great for human 
nature to bear, the brave man is calm 
(avéxmAnxros), and endures or fears 
all things in their due measure ac- 
cording to the true standard, his aim 
being to attain the noble. 
distinguished from the extremes by 
whom these proportions are violated. 
The extremes, by a refinement which 
Aristotle does not extend to the other 
virtues (cf. note on Eth. u. vii. 2), 
are fourfold. (1) Deficiency of fear, 


F2 


Thus he is" 





producing a character which has no 
name. (2) Excess of fear=cowardice. 
(3) Deficiency of daring =cowardice. 
(4) Excessof daring=rashness. Two 
of these terms are identical, and one 
is nameless, so that the extremes 
really reduce themselves to cowardice 
and rashness ($12). Some excellent 
remarks are introduced on the cha- 
racters of the boastful man and the 
rash man. 

1 Td 5& poBepdy—Oappadréa] Having 
said where fear and courage are to be 
looked for, we next observe that fear 
admits of degrees, so that courage 
is proportionate. ‘ Now the Fearful is 
different to different persons, indepen- 
dent of our calling some things fearful 
beyond human endurance. These 
latter are fearful to every man in his 
senses, but dangers that are not 
beyond human endurance differ both 
in magnitude and in degree, a differ- 
ence found also in the things that give 
courage.’ 

6 teAos 5t—Aydpelay] This diffi- 
eult section must be taken in con- 
nexion with what has gone before. 
Aristotle is determining the charac- 


36 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 


€ bea NS / oe 
7) avOpEla xaAOY. 


[Cuap. 


SN / ° / > \ A \ ‘\ isd ‘ ~ > Py lA 

df maoys evepysiag totl To xaTa TH EE. Hal TH avdpeio 
~ / / 

2 TowiToy Oy xal To TeAog* Opiteras 


~ ~ \oa ~ / 
yap txacroy TH TEAEL. xKAACD On Evexa 6 avOpElog bropever 


/ \ \ ‘ SR s 
7 xa} WOATTEs TA HATA Ty avopelay. 


thy 0 SmrepPar- 


AovTwy 6 ev TH AhoPia avwvusog (elpntras O ruby ev Toig 
TpOTEpov OTL TOAAG EoTIV Avwvupa), ely O ay Tig polvd- 
psvog 7) avaryytos, ei unlev hoBoiro, wxre ceiopoy pyre 


Ta xipara, xabamrep back rods Kearrode. 
simepparnrwy meph ta oPepa Gpacug. 
anratwy eivasrs boards xal rpoomromrinds avdpelac, 


6 08 rw Gappelv 
Boxer OF xed 
ws ouv 


exelvog meph Ta Qofdepa Eyes, olTws obTog PovrAsTas Paive- 


Gast ey olg obv Ouvaral, pimesirou 
9 7Gas* ey ols ouy Ouvaras, piecirou. 


010 mal eloly of 


TonAcl atv Gearvderror* ev TovTog yap bpacuvdnevor 


10TH ospa ovy tropévouciy, 


c X nw ~ 
6 08 rd doPsiobas 


imepBanrrwy dregs: xal yap & py Oet xal we od del, xal 





teristics of a brave act. He here says 
that ‘the End-in-itself, or perfection, 
of a particular moral act will be 
identical with that which belongs to 
the formed moral character. The 
End-in-itself for courage, as a whole, 
is the idea of the noble. The idea of 
the noble, therefore, must be that 
End-in-itself which a man proposes to 
himself in each separate act of 
bravery in order to constitute it 
brave.’ In short, the meaning comes 
to this, ‘what makes an act truly 
brave, is that, like the perfect state of 
bravery, it aims at the noble.’ The 
term réAos is used in a sense between 
that of ‘perfection’ and ‘motive,’ or 
rather as implying both (see Essay 
IV. p. 176, and cf. Eth, m1. i. 6, note). 
’Evépyeia, in mdons évepyelas, is op- 
posed to és as ‘act’ to ‘state.’ 
The phrase 7d xara thy €{w tédos 
occurs again III. ix. 3: od phy GAA 
ddkerev by elvar Td Kata Thy ayvdpeiay 
The whole notion that a 
moral act can only be considered good 
when it exhibits the qualities of the 


TéAOS HOV, 





formed moral character has been 
already brought forward, 1. iv. 3. 

kal T@ dvdpelp 5¢—dvbpelay] ‘Now 
to the brave man courage is some- 
thing ideally noble (xaAdv), Of this 
nature, then, must be the end of 
courage, for it is the end of a thing 
which in each case determines its 
character. Therefore the noble is the 
end for the sake of which the brave 
man endures and does whateyer is 
brave.’ The argument is as follows: 
Nobleness is what characterizes 
bravery, therefore it is the end of 
bravery (because final and formal 
causes coincide), therefore it should 
be the end of each brave act. The 
above explanation agrees with that 
given by the Paraphrast, except that 
he does not appear to supply réAos 
with 7d Kard thy iv. His words are, 
TovTo ‘yap Tédos gor) mdons evepyelas 
Ths Kar’ Gperhy, To Kata Tov Adyor 
Tis Ekews yiverOat’ ofov ai Kata d- 
kasoobyny mpdtes TéAos Exover Td Kara 
toy Adyov ris ekews THs Siucsocdyns 
mpartecOa* Kalai xara thy dvdplay 


VIL—VIII.] 


| A ~ > ~ > ~~ 
TAVTA TA TOWAUTA axorou4el auto. 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 37 


7 . ~ 
EAAElwres OF xal TO 


Gappeiv? AAW ev Tals Avmaug trepParrwy paAroy xaTa- 


davyg éoriy. 
Betras. 


dvoermig Oy Tig 6 detAdg* mavTa yap do- 
60 avdpetog evavTing’ To yap Gappely eudamidoc. 


\ Leek \ as \ g 5 \ ‘ 56 A \ 
wept TAUTA [Lev OUY EOTLY Té& EbAOC xb O paous xaos 


c > ~ dX» , > of \ > / € XN \ 
6 avdpetoc, diadcpws 0 Eyovor moog avTa* of Bev yap 
bmrepParrouos xal eArsirovol, 6 OF péows Eye xal wes 
Oei* xal of pév Gpaceig mpomereic, xai Povrduevos wpe Tay 

4 , > ~ > > y c ] > ~ > ~ 
xivdvvwy ev autoig 8 adioravras, of 0 avdpetor ev roig 


” > ~ / € 27 
Epyots o&eis, WpoTepoyv Oy youXIo. 


xabamep ody elonrou, 


7) avdpela pecoryg éotl weph Bapparta xal doBerd, ev olg 


-f \o re c ~ Nae , NW > \ 
& PUTAS, HAE OTL KAAGY AIDELT Ab Hab UTPO[LEVEL, y OT! aba XY pov 


TO [Ly 


\ ee 7 7 / \ 0 wy 
700 anobyjoxey devyovTa meviay 7 Epwra 7 Ts 


Aumypoy ovx avOpsiov, GAAG BAAAOY DeLA0d* Baraxia yap 


\ / ee Die: \ > a a e , > \ 
TO Devysiy TAH EMITOvA, KAI OVY OTL RHAGY UTOMEVEL, AAAM 


devywy xaxoyv. 


Te hl X on rs , ee , \ A 
Eors bev ouyY 7, avdpelo TOlLOUTOY Th, AEyovTas Og HOS 


a \ , ~ 7 
ETEpal HATA WEvTE TpoTous, mpwHTov wey y% WOAITIX 





kara Tov Adyov Ths Ekews Tis avdplas, 
K.T.A, 

13 Aristotle denounces suicide 
committed on account of poverty, or 
love, or anything grievous, as the act 
rather of a coward than of a brave 
man, Taking a broad human view of 
life, he does not sympathise with or 
discuss the sentimental deaths of the 
Cynic philosophers (see Essay II. p. 
130). Suicide was afterwards digni- 
fied by the Stoics with the name 
of eaywyh, ‘ushering oneself out of 
the world,’ 


VIII. This chapter discusses the 
spurious kinds of courage, classified 
under fiye heads. Of this classifiea- 
tion we find the germ in Plato’s Pro- 
tagoras, p. 351 A: Odpoos pty yap Kad 
and réxvns ylyverat avOpdros Kab 
Grd Ouyyod re kal aad pavlas, Sowep 7 
Bivayus, dvdpela 5& amd gicews kal 
edtpopias ray uxay yhyvera, The 





five shades (tpéror) mentioned by 
Aristotle are (1) apparent courage 
produced from a regard to the opinions 
of society, (2) from experience of the 
particular danger, (3) from anger, (4) 
from a sanguine mind, (5) from ignor- 
ance. 

I mp@rov piv 4% moditiKh| This 
phrase is to be found in Plato’s 
Republic, p. 430 ¢, where it probably 
originates, but it is there used in a 
different sense from the present. 
Plato meant by the term ‘civil 
courage’ to distinguish the true 
courage of a civilized man from all 
merely brutal instincts. Aoxe?s ydp 
pot Thy dpdhv Sdtav wep) Tav adtay 
Tovtwy &yveu maidelas yeryovulav, Thy TE 
Onpidin Kad avdpar0ddédn, ore mavu 
voutpmov nyeicbat, &AAo TE TL 7} Gvdpelav 


Kade. "AAnbéotata, iv 8 eye, 
Aéyers. "Amodéxouae Tolyuy Tovro 
dySpelav eivar, Kal yap amodéxou, jv 


S eyd, moditixhy ye, Kal spas 


38 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 


[ Crap. 


~ \ , \ , 
PAnMoTa yap oinev* doxodor yap womevery Tovg xivd0voUS 
~ n~ / / A oe ANS 
of woAiras Oi TH 2x THY yOMwWY eriTinia xal TH oveldy xal 


Oia TAS TILES. 


\ \ ~ > / ~ 
xXaS Oia TOUTO vO peor aT os doxovoly elvan 
Toe, gf « > \ wv \ c > 5 ~ + 
77 Op Of¢ Ob OElAob QATILOb xb O AY pesos EVTSLOL. 


s 
Tolou- 


roug 58 xal"Opnzsog mosei, olov tov Asopydyy xal rov 


"Exropa. 


TlovAvddpag poe mparoc éheyxeinv avabjce 


xal Arou7yangs, 


"Exrwp yap wore orice évi Tpweco’ ayopevwr, 


‘Tudeldnc tx’ épeio.’ 


3wpolwTas 0 alry parioTa TH mpoTEpov eipymévy, OTs OF 
apetay ylveros’ OF ald® yap xal dit xarod opeEw (Tipiig 





amodetex, Aristotle meant by ‘civil 
courage’ that daring which is 
prompted, not by an independent 
desire for the noble, but by a regard 
to reputation, and to the fame or dis- 
grace, and even punishment, awarded 
by society to brave or cowardly 
actions respectively, 

did Ta ee véuwv emtiual The laws 
relating to cowardice are alluded to, 
Eth. v. i. 14. 

kal && rodro—éytimor] ‘And for 
this cause men appear to be more 
brave in communities where cowards 
are held in dishonour, and the brave 
in honour.’ Aristotle does not actually 
assert that real courage is capable of 
cultivation by the influence of society. 
But if we do not put too fine a mean- 
ing on the word courage, there is no 
doubt that it flourishes most in 
warlike ages and communities. And, 
in short, with all but the very few, 
individual virtue generally springs 
out of the feelings of society ; what is 
first outward, afterwards takes root in 
the mind. 

2 Towvrovs S&t—eueio] ‘Now just 
such men does Homer depict, as, for 
instance, Diomed and Hector, (when 
he says,) ‘‘ Polydamas will be the first 





to cast a reproach at me,” and so 
Diomed, “Hector will some day, 
haranguing among the Trojans, de- 
clare, Tydides, by me terrified, fled to 
the ships.”’ Cf. Jliad xx. 100, vot. 
148, sq., where the line ends poBeb- 
pevos Ixero vijas. 

3. a@polwra: 3 —#vyros] ‘But this 
courage is most like the kind which 
we have described, for it originates 
in virtue, namely, in a sense of 
honour (aidé), in a desire for the 
noble (since it aims at reputation), 
and in a fear of dishonour as of some- 
thing base.’ On the nature of aildds, 
see Eth, rv. ix. and the note on m1. 
vii. 14. Most admirably does Ari- 
stotle touch off here in a few words 
the spirit of honour which is the 
nearest approach to, and, at all 
events in many of the relations of 
life, the best substitute for, a genuine 
morality. In reading his words, we 
can hardly fail to be reminded of 
Burke's magnificent lament over the 
loss of the age of chivalry. ‘The 
unbought grace of life, the cheap 
defence of nations, the nurse of manly 
sentiment and heroic enterprise, is 
gone! It is gone, that sensibility of 
principle, that chastity of honour, 


VIL] 


yap) xa duyyy dveidoug, aio ypod ovtos. 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 39 


Taka 0 av Tig 4 


« ~ / 
xal Tog ord THY apyovTwy avayxatouévoug elg TAUTG" 
~ \ \ ~ 
xslpoug 0, Gow 08 OF add arra dia PoBoy auro Somer, xa) 


7 > \ > \ > \ A / F > hod 
devyovTes ou TO AIT YPOv AAA TO AUTYpov* avayxacgovTl 


yap oi xipio, women 6 Extwp 


“ 4 8.5 > Ff , , ’ 
bv 06 K éywy aravevfe payne TrasoovTa vonsw, 
- , 

ov of GpKioy écoeirac guyéety KUVaC. 


7 x ~ / A * & 
xal of T POT TATTOYTES, HAY AVAYWLOT TUMTOYTES TO AUTOS 


OpHo1, xalb ol mpd Tey Tadpwy xal Thy TowdTwY Tapa- 


/ ~ / 
TAUTTOVTES’ TAYTES Yap avayxacoucty. 
> / > ~ > eu , 
Avaynyy avopetoy elyat, AAA’ OTE xaAOY. 


dei 0 ou OF 


~ DS A 
doxet 02 xal 7/6 





which felt a stain like a wound, which 
inspired courage whilst it mitigated 
ferocity, which ennobled whatever it 
touched, and under which vice itself 
lost half its evil, by losing all its 
grossness’ (Reflections on the Revolu- 
tion in France, p. 149). Just as 
Plato placed the philosopher above 
the man of honour (@vypoedjs, cf. 
Repub. p. 547-9), 80 Aristotle con- 
ceives of a courage higher and purer 
than that which emanates from the 
spirit of honour. 

4 ‘Civil courage’ is of two kinds 
(1) that which depends on honour, 
(z) that which depends on fear. The 
latter may remind us of the descrip- 
tion given by Plato (Phedo, p. 68 D), 
where he speaks of most men being 
courageous from a sort of cowardice. 
There is a vast falling off between the 
first class and the second. To the 
second belongs the spirit of Asiatic 


slavery, which Burke contrasted with’ 


the spirit of chivalry (¢.c.). The 
instances here given are the compul- 
sory measures used by the princes in 
the Trojan war to make the people 
fight, and similar devices used by the 
Persians, &c. 

6 “Extwp] This is a misquotation, 
the words are those of Agamemnon 





(dliad, 11. 391), and stand thus in the 
original: “Ov 5€ x éydv amdvevde 
baxns €Bédovta vojcw Miuvd tev tape 
vnvot Kopwrlaw, of of 2rerra “ApKioy 
eooeira puyéetv Kbvas 73° oiwvods. 

tbmtovtes] As done by the Persians 
at Thermopyle, Herod. vit. 223. 

6 doxet 5t—éorw] ‘Experience of 
particular dangers is also accounted 
a kind of courage; which gave 
Socrates occasion to think that courage 
was a science. Different men have 
experience in different dangers, and 
regular soldiers in the dangers of 
war. Now there are many unreal 
shows of danger in warfare, and 
professional soldiers, being perfectly 
accustomed to these, appear brave, 
because other men are deceived by 
appearances.’ The second cause (after 
that of a regard for opinions) which 
gives rise to a semblance of courage, 
is experience, the quality of the prac- 
tised veteran. The effects of this 
may be analysed and subdivided into 
(t) a familiarity with, and contempt 
for, much that is seemingly, but not 
really, terrible ; (2) a skill of weapons, 
&e., giving both an offensive and a 
defensive superiority (rojo «al uh 
mabeiy uddicra SivavTa ex THs éume- 
plas). 


40 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IIf. 


[ Cap. 


> , € \ ae > 5 , i 3 a4 Nec 
EUTEIDIN 1 WEpl EXAOTH AVOpELA Tig Elvat* GYev Hak O 
— , 27 > 7 is * . / ~ \ 
OK IATNS o77 ETIOTUANY EVAL THY AVODELAY. TOLOUTOE Oe 
> ” ~ ~ a 

AAAoL pty ev AAAS, ev TOIG WoAEMIxoIG O of OTPAT MOTO” 
A ~ \ s \ \ ~ / aA / / 
OOKELYAD EVAL TOAAK KEVA TOU MOALLOV, & MANO TA TUYEWLO- 


xacy outs dalvovras dy avdpsios, OTs ovx lracw of AAAOE 
7olatotiv. eita rojoo xal py radeiv parmsora duvavTou ex 
Tig tumreiplac, Suvdpevos Ypyjobas Toig brAoG xab ToLAdTO 
zyovres omoia ay ely xal mpog To moljoo xal mpbg To ey 





80ev kal 6 Swxpdrns| Cf. Memorad. 
it. ix, 2, and Plato, Protag. p. 350°, 
where it is agreed that those who 
dive most boldly are the professional 
divers, those who fight most boldly 
the professional soldiers, &c. This 
empirical view of courage forms one 
side, it is true, of the Socratic 
doctrine, but by no means the whole 
(see Essay II. p. 123), and the state- 
ment about Socrates in the text is 
accordingly unfair. The statement is 
corrected by Eudemus in his Ethics 
(1. i. 13), where he well sums up 
the present part of the subject : “Eort 
8 cldn avdpeias mwévre Acydueva Ka? 
duodTnTa’ Ta abTa yap bdropévovotr, 
GAN od Sia Ta ard, Mila wey modrtiKh* 
alirn 8 éorly 7 50 aid@ oboa, Aevrépa 
3 h otparwrixh abrn 5t 80 eureiplay 
kal 7d eidévar, odx Bomrep Swkparns 
Zon, Te dewd, GAN Bre (Toaor) rads 
Bondelas trav Sewer, 

ToAAG Keva TO moAcuov] This is 
the reading of Bekker, supported by 
a majority of the MSS., the Scholiast, 
the Paraphrast, Casaubon, &e. It is 
illustrated by Cicero, Epist. ad Att. 
vy. 20: ‘*Scis enim dici quedam 
mavikd, dici item Ta Keva TOD moA€uov,’ 
where the editio princeps (Romana) 
has kowd, another instance of similar 
confusion. Another reading, supported 
by six MSS., is ra Kawa rod mor€uou, 
which would mean ‘the surprises of 
war.’ The phrase occurs in Diodorus 
Siculus, xx. 30: &AnOes elvat, 871 moAAG 





Td Kavd rod modcuov, Cf. Thucyd. 
Il. 30: kal wh aroxvhowpey roy Kiv- 
Suvov, vouiouytes ovk %AAO ti elvan Td 
kaivoy Tod moA€uou 7) Td ToLvovToOv, ef 
Tis otparnyds & Te abt@ pvddecorto 
kal Trois moAeulos évopdv érixepoln, 
mAcior’ ty bp00ciro: where also the 
MSS. vary between xavdv and Kevédy. 
It would seem, then, that 7r& Keva 
Tod ToAguov, and Td Kava TOU TOAEMOU, 
were both received formule, only 
with different senses. In the text 
above, either phrase might have been 
substituted for the other, according 
as it was more familiar to the tran- 
seriber. But 7a «eva alone makes 
good sense, for while the soldiers 
would get accustomed to the empty 
show, the noise and pageantry of 
war, it is not true to say that they 
would get accustomed to the surprises 
of war, these being exactly what not 
even the experienced could calculate 
upon. Perhaps there is no better 
setting forth of the Kevd rod woAguov 
than in the speech of Brasidas, Thu- 
cyd. rv. 126, 4: obror 58 thy méAAnOW 
pey exovor tots dmelpors poBepdv* Ka 
yop mrHOe wyews Sewol nal Bojs 
peyé0e = apdpntor, h Te did Kevijs 
éravdceisis tay SrAwy exe Twa 
BhaAwow arearjs: mpocuita de rots 
bropévovow abta odx Sporto. 

cvvewpdxaov| The ovv here seems to 
mean not ‘together,’ or ‘at a glance,’ 
but as in ovyywéckw, civoida, &e., 
‘ intimately,’ ‘ privily,’ ‘ familiarly.’ 


VIII. | HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. 41 


Ac” / iA > a. ff c / 
malely xparigta. Womep ov avorroig wmrricpévass 
peaxovros xa abanral idimraisge xal yap ev Toig ToLodTOLS 
ayeow ody of avdpsioraros payipwrarol eciow, AAA ol 
pamora icxvovres xal TH TwpaTA ApioTA ZyovTEG. 019 
orparidtas 02 deiAol yivovros, Otay bmreprelyy 6 xivduyog 
XOl AcimwyTas Tolg TAYIeo4 xal Tals Tapacxevaic* mpwTos 

\ , \ \ \ / > 7 ao 
yap devyoucs, TH OF worITIna pévovTa amobvycxel, bmrep 
ee" ~ (ED / / ~ XN \ > \ x , 
xami TO “Eppaio cuveby. Toig pev yap aioypoy ro Gev- 
~ / € 
ye nal o Gavarog tig Tomadrng cwryplag aipetwrepos’ 
ob O& xal 2& apyiig exivddvevoy we xpeitroug ovrEes, yvovTes 
02 devyoucs, tov Pavaroy parroyv Tod aloypod doPovme- 
Y ’ [se 
~ > ~ 
vos’ 6 8 civdpeiog ov TowdTogc. xal Tov Bupoy O éml Tijy10 
> > , > / > ~ \ ~ \ € 
advdpsiay exidépovory* aivdpeios yap elvas doxotios xal oi 
Oia upiy Women ra Gypia exh rods tpwcavtas hepdpevor, 
OTs xa) of civdpeios Guposideig: ityTinw@Taroy yap 6 bupos 

\ A O06 i<4 a ‘ / + 
mpog Tovg xivdvvousg, ddev xal “Opnnpog ‘ obévog EpBars 
6 ~) N¢ , \ ) \ W at \ 6} \ _ SN 
upw@’ xab * pévog xak Jumov eyeipe’ xal ‘doit 0 ava 

~ , yw ~ 
pivas pévos’ xal ‘elerev aipa’’ mavTa yap Ta TomiTa 
Zoime onpaivery THv Tod Jupod eyepow xal opuyy. obi: 





9 of orpari@ra 5¢—ouvveBn| ‘But | war, they are opposed to the indepen- 
regular troops lose heart when the | dent heroism of the brave man; sce 
danger is overpowering, and when they | below, mi. ix. 6. The present passage 
are inferior in numbers and equipment. | contrasts the courage of the man of 
In such cases they are the first to run | honour with the hardiness of the vete- 
away, while citizen troops remain and | ran, which under any extraordinary 
die, as actually happened at the Her- | pressuregivesway. ‘Citizen courage’ 
mzeum.’ in the instance mentioned cannot ex- 

émt 7G ‘Epuaie| Of this affair the | ternally be distinguished from the 
Scholiast gives the following account. | very highest kind of courage. 

Coronea had been betrayed to one ro «(Kal thy = Oupby 8 —édpyivr| 
Onomarchus of Phocis; an engage- | ‘The spirit of anger, too, men 
ment took place in an open spot | reckon as courage, and they who act 
ealled the Hermzeum ; the Coronean | through anger (like brutes turning on 
citizens were killed to a man, while | those who have wounded them), get 
their Beotian auxiliaries fled in a | the character of being brave, because 
panic, Td modrtiuKd, by a common |: the eonverse is true, and brave men 
usage, is nearly equiyalent to of | are spirited. The spirit of anger is 
mohira, Cf. Asch. Perse, 1. tdéSe | most keen for the encountering dan- 
mév §Tlepo@v—mora xadrciru, &c, | gers, and hence Homer wrote: 
Srpari@rau, or mercenaries, in the time ; \ 
of Aristotle had not a high name. As “(Apo lo) # put strength into his 
common fighting men, the machines of =. 

VOL. II. G 





42 IIOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON III, [ Cuap, 


~ \ 
[sy ody avdocios ik To xarby mpaTrouTiv, 6 08 Bupig 
~ > ~ \ 6 H o3 Dy \ / . 3 \ ‘ \ 
Cuvepye autois' Ta Oypia OF dik Avmyy’ Oia yap TO 
~ a ~ > \ eA > a x 2? sf ¥ > 
manyivas 7% poPziobas, érel eav ye ev UAH 7] Ev EAsE YH, OD 
, ak eee yd ~ 3 \ Oe d6 
TPoTepyovTas, ov 07 eoTIy Avdpsia Oia Td Om aAyydovos 
~ ~ \ ~ 
xah Gupod éSerauvdneva mpog tov xivduvov boc, ovbey tiv 
dsivioy mpoopiyTa, ere) odTw ye xav of Gyor civdpsios elev 
meiviovTeg' TumToevol yap ovx adloravras Tig vomys’ 
xa) of poryoh 08 die Thy emibuplay ToAU Da TOAAA Opor. 
~ ~ / 
1200 07 éoriy dvdpein TH OF AAyydovos 7 Gupot EFerauvoneva 
\ 
mpro Tov xivduvey, ucixwrary Oo Zormev 7 Od Tov Oupov 
~ vr 
civas, xa wooo AaPotoa mpoulpeciy xal TO Ov Evexa aty- 


Opela elvan. 


xal of dvIpwros Oy opysSomevor piv aryotct, 





“We roused up his strength and 
spirit.” 

“Fierce strength in his nostrils,” 

“ His blood boiled.” 


For all such things appear to signify 
the awakening and outbreak of anger.’ 
These quotations are obviously made 
from memory, and none of them are 
quite accurate. The first seems to be 
compounded of J7. xtv. 151, pméya 
obévos EuGar’ Exdorw Kapdin, and xvi. 
529, méevos 5€ of EuSare Ouug. The 
second appears to be meant for Ji. v. 
470, &Tpuve pévos kad Oupdy éxdorov. 
The third is Od. xxtv. 318, ava pivas 
d€ of H5n Apimd pévos rpobrupe. The 
last is not in Homer at all. This 
passage illustrates the progress of 
psychology towards distinctness, for it 
is impossible to translate it simply into 
English; @vzés means more than 
anger, or than any one modern word, 
for even with Aristotle it includes what 
we should call ‘spirit. But with 
Homer it meant (1) life, (2) spirit, (3) 
wrath, (4) heart, (5) mind. Aristotle 
in quoting Homer fails to remember 
this great indefiniteness, though there 
is no doubt that in Homer a simple 
and physical account is given of the 
manifestations of courage. 





12 voiwrdtn 8 oumev—eivas] 
‘Yet the sort that springs from anger 
appears most natural, and with pur- 
pose and motive added, it becomes 
genuine courage,’ ‘Taking this sen- 
tence in its context, it must be an 
apology for the drdpela Sia Oupdy. 
Aristotle had said that anger makes a 
man brave only in the sense that a 
hungry ass is brave, obeying the goads 
of a blind instinct. He adds that the 
instinct of anger is part of our nature 
(cf. Eth. 1. iii. 10, note, and vu. vi. 
2), and that, rightly directed and 
brought under the control of the will 
and reason, it can be elevated into a 
moral state. It is remarkable on what 
a high level Aristotle places courage. 
It must be entirely, he says, prompted 
by a desire for what is morally beau- 
tiful (of pév ody dvdpetor 5a 7d Kadrdv 
mpdrrovow); mere physical courage 
is only an assistance in realising this 


(6 3& Oupds ouvepye? abrois), and the — 


prompting of anger, &c., will make 
men pugnacious, but not brave (of 3& 
ba Tatra paxduevor pdximor wey, odK 
dvdpeior 8é). Perhaps Aristotle makes 
almost too great a separation between 
true courage and this ‘spirited ele- 
ment,’ which must be its physical 
basis. This is to be attributed (1) to 


VIL] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IIL 43 


jsyos 0 yoovrar* of 02 Oia TadTa pmayousvo 
Tip. pouy.evos 7 [LAY O[LEVOL 
Lay rLo4 ev, 00x Avdpsio1 02° ov yap Did TO xAADY OUD We 6 


7 ~ 
Adyos, AAAR Oia TO wabog* mapamAyotov 0 Eyoucl Th. 
” ~ \ 
ovds Oy of evzAtideg dvTeg aivdpetor Oia yap TO woA-13 


, \ \ , ~ > ~ ’ 
AAKIS XAb TOAAOUS VEVINXEVOLE bappodoty- €v Tols x1vOUYOLC. 


mapoporor 32, OTs audw Oappartoss GAN ob piv avdpeios 


dia Ta mposipyusva Oapoarzos, of O2 Sick Td olzobas xpelr- 


3 \ \ > ~ 
Tous civar: xal prydev avrimadety. 
xal of psbuoxdmevor® eveamides yap yivoyrau. 


oTay Oa 


> ~ \ ~ ~ , > , w Fs \ 

AUTOS [27 cup ToauTa, devyovoly* divdpetou 0 qv TA 
ASS , x A / e , a A 

doepa aviporw OYTa xak daivoneva UMOLEVELY, OTL RAAOY 


\ > \ X 7 
xaE be YX pov TO -%. 


9 A \ > , ~ 3 m, | 
010 xal cdvdperotépou Sox eivar To15 


dy rois aidyidlois DoPoss adoBoy xab arapayoy sivas 7 ey 
~ 7, 2% a v ~ x 1 & Ge 
Tole m podyAors* a6 2Ecwe YAP PAAAOY, % XAb OTL ITTOY 
ex Tapacxevig’ TA mpohavy pty yap xav ex Aoyio pov xa 
, / X\ , 2g , \ \ a 
Adyou Tig Mposroiro, Ta eEaidyyng xara tay FE. 
> ~ XN 4 \ € > ~ \ as 3 
civdpsios 02 daivoyra: xal of ayvoodvres, xal eloly ov 16 


, ~ > aN / > a dott PEAS a” 
Toppw Twyv EUEAT LOWY, XPS oow AStwua OudEV EX ou- 


> ~ NZ 
OW, Exeivol O€. 


00 xal pévoucl tive xX povov" of O 





his high moral tone, (2) to his analy- 
tical mode of treatment. In Shake- 
speare, as in Homer, courage is attri- 
buted to physieal causes. It is made 
sometimes to depend on the action of 
the spleen, or it is connected with 
the gall. Cf King John, Act nu. 
Se. 1: 
‘Rash, inconsiderate, fiery volun- 
taries, : 
With ladies’ faces and fierce dragons’ 
spleens.’ 


And Hamlet, Act mu. Se. 2, quoted 
below on Eth. tv. y. 6. 


13—15 The fourth kind of spurious © 


courage is that which arises from a 
sanguine mind. This may be due to 
previous success, and gives a con- 
fidence like courage, but also like 
intoxication. Such confidence is 
liable to a collapse. 





15 8 xal—étv] ‘For this reason 
it seems braver to be fearless and un- 
troubled in sudden perils than in such 
as may be anticipated. In the former 
case a man is brave more by habit, or 
in other words less by premeditation ; 
for in foreseen dangers a man may 
calculate and reason out the course to 
be chosen, in sudden ones he must 
depend upon his habitual character.’ 
This acute observation puts real cour- 
age in opposition to the case of a man 
puffed out with a sort of extraneous 
confidence. Take a man on a sudden, 
and you will find how brave he is. 
While Aristotle makes courage a 
quality of the moral will, he requires 
that it should be a settled habit, and 
a second nature of the mind, not pre- 
pared consciously to meet a particular 
emergency. 

16 dvdpeio: 8 —Sixcverlois] ‘In the 


G 2 


~ \ ~ 
TorwouToy OF woLlodaor 14 


Ad 


> / 2N ~ a 4 a 

YTATHBEVOL, sav yu@ow OTL ETEpOY 7 
, oa e. 9 ~ v7 

devyouoiv* omep of “Apystor Erad$oy 


17 Aaxwow wo DSixveviose. 
S 


MOIKQN NIKOMAXEITQN III, 


[ Cuar. 


bromrresewot, 
: ' 
TEepim@ecovTes Toig 


of re OH cvdpeion elpnyros 


Se \ \ ~ ~ 
motok Tiveg, xak of OoxodyTEg avdpetos. 


9 


Ilep) b&ppy 3 xad poBoug 7 dvdpela toa ody spolwg 


meph dudw eoriv, AA paAroy wepl Ta hoBepa 6 yap 
ey TouTog aTapayos xal wep radh’ wo dei Eywy avdpetog 


2panrnrnoy 4 6 mepl ta Oapparda. 


TH On TH AvMNpA 


Omopévev, Wy elpytos, avdpeios ACyovTas. O10 xal eriarvmroy 
~ \ 
7 avdpsia, xal dixaiwg emasveiras? Yarerw@TEpoy yap TH 


Me / x ~ eN7/ > / 
LAvInpa bromevey Y Thy HOswv améyerbou, 


ov payy aAAG 


‘\ \ / , Ul ‘ ~ 

doSerev av elvar To xaTa Thy avopslay Térog 7OU, bwo T&y 

xuxrAw 0 abaviSecbas, olov xav Toi yuuvixols aywor yivs- 

ee \ a ° \ X 4 ej 7 7 € 

To’ Tog yap wuxTais TO pev TéAog OV, OU EvExa, O 
, \ c / \ 5: 7 § > , L- 

orébavos xal al timal, ro 0 TomTerbas aAryesvor, elrep 

~ \ \ \ \ 

cupxivor, xab AvP, xal was 6 wovog’ dia = TO MOAAA 

tr’ eit pov OY TO OU & nosy 7OU Daliveras Zyenv 

TACT Elvan, Lixpoy dv TO ov Evexa oUdEY 700 Das yew. 





last place, men appear brave from not 
knowing their danger. Such persons 
are not far removed from the sanguine, 
but are inferior to them, because they 
have no self-confidence, as the san- 
guine have, This confidence makes 
the sanguine to stand their ground 
for a time; while those who have 
blundered into bravery, as soon as it 
appears that the danger is other than 
they suppose, take to their heels, as 
was the case with the Argives, when 
they fell in with some Lacedemo- 
nians whom they took for men of 
Sicyon.’ The last and pcorest sem- 
blance of courage is when something 
daring is done unknowingly, and from 
a mistake. The instance given is 
mentioned by Xenophon (Heéllenics, 
1v. 10), Some Spartans assumed the 
shields of some vanquished Sicy- 
onians, and were at first contemp- 
tuously encountered by the Argives, 
who, when they discovered their for- 
midable enemies, took to flight. 





IX. This interesting chapter is on 
the connection of courage with pain 
and loss. The nobleness of courage 
chiefly depends on the sacrifice which it 
implies (érlAvmov 7 av5pela nod Sixalws 
éwaveirat), The brave man by en- 
countering death consciously makes a 
sacrifice of the greatest magnitude, 
since he runs the risk of relinquishing 
a life which is eminently valuable, 
and, by reason of his virtue, full of 
happiness. Courage, then, is not to 
be called pleasurable, except as attain- 
ing to a satisfaction above all plea- 
sure, attaining, in short, to the end of 
one’s being (ob 8) év &mdoms ais 
Giperais Td 7déws evepyeiv imdpye, 
mrhy eq? Brov rod Tédous épdwrerat). 
The conscious heroism of the brave 
man distinguishes him from the reck- 
lessness of the mercenary; it dis- 
qualifies him, indeed, from becoming 
mere rank and file, a mere machine of 
discipline. 

3 0d phy GAAd—€xew] ‘ Without 


Viit.—Ix.} 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION ITi. 45 


> \ ~ Ss 2 \ \ \ \ > / € X 
ei On rowtroy éors xal TO mepl THY avdpeiav, 6 pev4 
2 \ , \ ~ ae 
Bavarog xal Ta TpavpaTA AuINPaA TH avOpsiw xal KxovTI 
‘ 4 


BA e , \ > , a \ No > A \ , 
EOTAI, UT OULEVEL og AUT, OTb xADOY Y OT! aba YX pov TO P%. 


wal bow av LaAAOY THY apeTay 2 TATAY Hah E00 Z 
boca [e qy aperny Exy al eidotpove- 


> COON RN at , r» 4 , : Pos , 
OTEDOS %, UAAAOY Exh TH DavaTo AvTAInTETAL* TH TOLOUTO 
‘ / ne BUA \ a ee ~ 
yap pamora Civ &Esov, xat ovtos peylotwy ayabiy amro- 


~ xs) 7 
OTEpEITOL Eb0WS* 


Avrnpoyv O& TOTO. 


IN 4 
AAN oudey ATTov 


~ A ~ v4 ~ 
GvOpeiog, lrwg 03 xal parAAoy, OTE TO ev TH TOAE UD KAAOY 





doubt the end that belongs to courage 
is pleasant in itself, but this pleasant- 
ness is neutralised by the attendant 
circumstances, as happens likewise in 
the contests of the arena. The end at 
which the boxers aim, the garland and 
the honours, is pleasant; but the 
blows, and indeed the whole exertion, 
are painful and grievous to flesh and 
blood; so that by the multitude of 
intervening pains the incentive, which 
is small in itself, loses all appearance 
of being pleasant.’ 
4 Kat boq~—aipeitra:] ‘And in pro- 
portion as a man possesses all excel- 
lence, and the happier he is, so much 
the more will he be pained at 
death, for to such a one life is espe- 
cially valuable, and he will con- 
sciously be deprived of the greatest 
blessings. And this is painful. But 
he is not the less brave, nay, perhaps 
even more, because he chooses the 
noble in war in preference to those 
other goods” These last words may 
remind us of the characteristic attri- 
buted by Wordsworth to his Happy 
Warrior, who is ‘more brave for this, 
that he hath much to love.” The 
whole of Wordsworth’s description 
may well be compared with that of 
Aristotle: 
‘Who, if he be called upon to 
face 

Some awful moment to which Heaven 
has joined 





Great issues, good or bad for human 
kind, 

Is happy as a lover, and attired 

With sudden brightness, like a man 
inspired ; 

And, through the heat of conflict, 
keeps the law 

In calmness made, and sees what he 
foresaw ; 

Or if an unexpected call succeed, 

Come when it will, is equal to the 
need: 

He who, though thus endued as with 
a sense : 

And faculty for storm and turbulence 

Is yet a soul whose master-bias leans 

To homefelt pleasures and to gentle 
scenes ; 

Sweet images! which wheresoe’er he 
be ats 

Are at his heart, and such fidelity 

It is his darling passion to approve ; 

More brave for this, that he hath 
much to love.’ 


The consciousness of the sacrifice to 
be made appears rather more promi- 
nent in Aristotle’s brave man than in 
Wordsworth’s. In saying this we 
must not forget that the word ‘ sacri- 
fice,’ in the moral sense of the term, 
expresses an idea that has grown 
up in the human mind subsequently 
to Aristotle. How nearly Aristotle, 
by the force of his penetration, 
realised it, the present chapter shows 
most remarkably. 


46 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION III. 


’ 5 beg / € ~ 
5 ayvT ExXSivmMyY AIpslT ah, 


[Cuar. 


’ \ ° ce , ~ > ~~ A 
oy On Vv araoas TAG apETAIS TO 


ens . ~ € , \ > bs A ~ , > , 
yOews evepysiv trapysi, TAnY eb droyv Tod Téroug eba- 
SMe / 
6rTEeTA, TTLAaTIMOTAG O ovdEY lrws xwWAUEL [L2) TOUS ToLOUTOUES 
/ > \ \ Ce XX > SX a + > 
ALATIT TOUS Elval, hAAG TOUS WTTOY [LEV AVODEIOUS, HAA 8 
” a - A 
ayaboy pity Eyovrag’ Erotmos yap obTo: mpdg Todg xIv- 
N7 \ \ / A \ , 7 
Quvous, xa Tov Ploy mpog puinpa xéodn KATAAAATTOVTAL. 
\ X ne > / ek, | ~ , CNY , > 9 4 
7meph pty obv avdpslag ext rorotrov eipyodw: ti Oo ory, 
~ ~ , 
od XaAETov TOW ye Teplrafsiy ex Thy elonmévey. 
rd ~ 
10 Mera 08 radryy weph cwdhpoodyng rAéywusy' doxotos 





5 ob 5h—epdwrerai] ‘Therefore 
it is not the case that in all the virtues 
virtuous action is accompanied by 
pleasure, except in so far as one 
attains to the End-in-itself.’ On the 
import of this passage, see Essay IV. 
p. 176. With épdrrera, tis is to be 
understood ; see above, m. i. 6, note. 

6 otparimras §—KaraddAdrrovrat| 
‘ After all, perhaps it is true that it is 
not brave men such as I have de- 
scribed who will make the best mer- 
cenaries, but fellows who, while they 
are less brave, have nothing to 
lose ; for these are ready for dangers, 
and will sell their life for a trifling 
sum.’ See above, ch. viii. 9, note. 
On the readiness of miserable wretches 
for danger and death, cf. Shakespeare, 
Macbeth, Act ut. Se. 1: 


Sccond Murderer.—I am one, my 
liege, 
Whom the vile blows and buffets of 
the world © 
Have so incens’d, that I am reckless 
what 
I do, to spite the world. 
First Murderer.—And I another, 
So weary with disasters, tugg’d with 
fortune, 
That I would set my life on any 
chance, 
To mend it, or be rid on’t. 


X. Mera 5& tabrny—apetal] ‘Next 





let us speak of temperance, for .these 
(namely, courage and temperance) seem 
to be the excellencies of the irrational 
parts of our nature.’ This is almost 
the only indication which Aristotle 
gives of the system upon which he 
has arranged the several virtues in 
order; he places together, and first 
treats of, the development of the 
lower and more instinctive qualities, 
On the arrangement of the remaining 
virtues see the plan of Book IV, 
With regard to the first two, there is 
a want of any distinct principle in 
their arrangement. If it be said 
that they are based on @upés and 
éri$uuia, and that Aristotle begins at 
the bottom of the scale, why does he 
not begin with cwdpootvn, since Ou- 
ués is higher than émOuula (2th. vu. 
vi. 1)? Again, as we have seen (ch. 
viii. § 12) Ovpds is here considered 
rather as having an occasional con- 
nection with courage than as being 
the basis of it. But in fact Aristotle’s 
Ethics are very little psychological in 
their character. In them psychology 
and morals are both in process of for- 
mation; we cannot therefore expect 
in so tentative and unfinished a work 
to find systematic arrangement. Ari- 
stotle probably began his list of the 
virtues with courage and temperance 
because they were two of the Greek 
cardinal virtues, and when he came 
to temperance, he said ‘this comes 


1x x] 


A ~ ~ a bf 
yap Thy aroywy pepidy abTas sivas ai aperad, 


HOIKQON NIKOMAXEION III. 


47 


od \ 3 
oTt ev ouy 


, > ‘ ee do | e d 7 if Ge = 
peanorye eOTh Weph 7 vas 7 ‘dos porwr); 2h ae Tpby 
\ \ > € ? > ~ 

YTTov yap xak ovY omolws ETT TELL TAG AUTAg* Ev Tols 


~ \ / / 
auToig 02 xal 7 axoracia daiveras. 


\ 4 ca ~ 
wep TOlkS GUY Twy 


jdovdy, viv adopicwper. Inypycbwoay 03 ai Wyixal xal 
€ / = / , 3 U \ 
Ab TWUATIXAL, Oloy DiroTipin Diropabera EXATEDOS YAO 





next, since it also belongs to the irra- 
tional part of our nature.’ 

Tov adéywv pepov] The instincts, 
such as those of self-preservation, fear, 
desire, &c., can only be capable of 
excellence by being brought under a 
law (ueodrns, Adyos) of the intellect, 
haying no law in themselves. This 
law of the intellect becomes the most 
important part of the conception of 
virtues, as form is more striking than 
matter. In Plato the law is put for 
virtue altogether, and thus,.as we 
saw, he calls courage a_ science. 
Similarly in the Charmides, where 
temperance is discussed, the nearest 
definition that is given is ‘self-know- 
ledge,’ though it is shown that mere 
‘ self-knowledge’ has no content, and 
would be a useless blank ; therefore it 
is implied that knowledge of the good 
must be added to make the conception 
complete. 

It is the extreme opposite of Plato’s 
view to speak of temperance as ‘a 
virtue of the instincts’ (tay aAdyev 
pep@v); the word weodtns however in 
the next line implies what was omitted, 
namely, ‘ under a law of the intellect.’ 
The formula of Aristotle attributes a 
worth to the bodily instincts which 
would be opposed to asceticism. 

pesdrns eat wept Hdovds | Swppocivn, 
which, in spite of the false etymology 
given in Plato’s Cratylus, 411 §, and 
Eth. vt. v. §, meant originally ‘ sound- 
mindedness’ (in German Besonnen- 
heit), soon came to mean temperance 
with regard ‘to pleasures. In this 
sense it is often popularly defined by 





Plato, cf. Repub. p. 430 B: Kéopos rod 
Tis—i Twppootyy éott Kai HdovGy twav 
kal émOuuidy éynpdrea, Sympos. p. 196 
c: elvar yap duodoyeirat cwppooivn Td 
Kpatety jdovay Kal embuuar, &e. Ari- 
stotle’s procedure in discussing it is 
first to ascertain definitely its object. 
Pleasures are either bodily or mental. 
With mental pleasures temperance and 
intemperance are not concerned. Nor 
again with all bodily pleasures—not 
those of hearing, nor of smell; but 
only the merely animal pleasures (av 
kal 7&2 Awa (Ga Kowwve?) of touch 
and taste. Even taste, as an object 
of intemperance, reduces itself to 
touch; and with regard to touch we 
must exclude the manly and human 
satisfaction felt in exercise, &c. (chap- 
ter xi.) Desires of the kind in 
question are either common, or special 
and acquired (%5:0: xa) éwfl@ero); in 
the former, excess is the only kind of 
error possible; in the latter all kinds 
of errors are committed. The only 
pains with which temperance and in- 
temperance can be concerned are 
pains arising from the want of certain 
pleasures ; these pains the intemperate 
man feels to excess. While intempe- 
rance thus consists in excess, there is 
no such thing as deficiency in the 
sense for the above-named pleasures ; 
thus there is no name for the opposite 
extreme to intemperance. In respect 
of propriety, health, and fortune, and 
with a regard to what is noble, the 
temperate man preserves a balance. 

2 dinphie@woav—Siavolas| * We must 
take a distinction between the bodily 


n 


48 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. 


[ Cuap. 


¢ / om , ’ x/AN / ~ 
TouTwMY YaloEl, ov DIAYTINOS ETTIY, oubey TAT HYOvTOS TOU 
, Din \ ~ ~ / é € \ \ \ 
TWUATOS, AAAR PAAAOY TIS Oiavolag* of 08 wepk Tag 
, c A x 7 ” > f 'g 
TOIAUTAS WOOVaS OUTE TwPpoves OUTS AXOAMTTOL AEYOYTGI. 
c / ae tS Tae \ \ + o \ / 39s 
O.O1WS d oud of TEDL TAS AAAAS OTA [47 TWLATIXAL EOL 
Tous yap diropsboug xab dinyytinods xal weph rv TuyxovTwy 
\ c / > 7, cd / > 
xatatplbovtas Tag ypépag adorecyac, axoracroug O ob 
Agyomev, ove TOUS Avmoupévous em) yp7 n Pia 
EYOUsv, OUOE TOUS AUTOUMEVOUg ETL Yoyacw 7 diross. 
3 reoh 0 TAS TWMATInAs Ely av 7% TwdpOTd » 1O 08 
ph 0€ TAG pe g ein ay 71 TwHpoTuVy, ov TAaTAG OE 
NV / / ~ ~ v 
ouds TaUTAg' of yap yalpoyTeg Toig Oia Tig oWews, olov 
~ » 
HPOpacs xa TYULAT xal pad, ouTE owdpoves ouTe 
2: 1, , * / N {= aA t \ ec 3 ~ 
AXOAMTTOL AEYOVTAL® XAITOL OOSsievy Ay Siva XAL WE Eb 
yaipey xab routers, “xal xab’ drepPoryy xal Errenluv. 
45uolwg O08 xak ev Tolg meph THy axoyy’ Tovg yap bmrep- 
, , i me / > \ > U 
<RaAnweveg HabpovTas EAETIY 7) UMOXPIO EL ov9elo axora- 


sotoug Ayer, ovde Tog ws Jet cwdpovas. 


EaNS A 
ovds TOUS 


wep Thy dopiy, TAY xaTa TupPEPyxdg* Tods yap yal- 
povTag pyarAwy 7 podwy 7 Jupsaparwy dopaig ob Adyomev 
’ / > & , \ i \nr / - 
AKONAT TOUS, AAAK MLAAAOY TOUS LUpwWY XOb oey* Xabpoues 
yap rovTog of axcracrol, Ott Oia ToUTMY avamynoIS 


6yiveTor autos Thy emibupntay. 


Yoo 8 av rig xal rove 


AADROUG, OTAY TeGot, yalpovTas TAs TOY Ppw~RaTwy opal, 


4 dt £ a > r~ / $ ’ A °. i) A 
TO OF TOLOUTOIC Keipely AXOAACTOU TOUTHM Y%p ET MIUILY TOA 


7 TaUTAM. 


+ ~ ’ 7 
oux Eats 08 0Ude ToIg AAAS Swag xaTa TAUTAS 





pleasures and such as are mental, like 
ambition and the desire of knowledge. 
The man who has either of these feel- 
ings takes pleasure in the object of 
his desire without the body being at 
all affected, but only the mind.’ The 
writing is loose here, constituting a 
Transi- 
tions as from @iAoriula to piAdtios 
Cf. below, ch. xi. § 3: 
51d A€yovra obra yaorpluapyor, where 
there is nothing preceding which an- 
swers to yaotpiuapya, only a general 
description of a course of action. 

4—5 While Aristotle justly says 
that the words temperance and intem- 
perance do not apply to the pleasure 


oXiMa mpos Td onwawdpuevoy. 


are common, 





felt in colours, forms, painting, 
music, and acting, it is strange that 
he should have spoken of these at all 
as bodily pleasures. Such a way of 
speaking shows an early and immature 
psychology. 

6 Pleasures of smell are not the 
objects of intemperance, except acci- 
dentally, as by association, reminding 
people of eating, &c. Eudemus 
quotes a witty remark on the subject. 
Eth. Eud. wt. ii. 10: eupedds en 
Srpardvikos Tas wey Kaddy bev, ras Be 
750. 

7 Brutes, says Aristotle, have no 
pleasures of hearing, or smell, or 
sight, except accidental ones, namely 


X.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN II. 49 


nr . 


\ > , ey ‘ \ \ , on 
ras aloes ydovn TARY xaTa TUUzPyxdG. 00d yap Tals 
bc pais Tey Anyway al xbveg yaloovow, AAAR TY Bowes 

X 2 ” ee: \ ? / SQN Cc , iat ~ 
thy 0 abodyow 7 Gop7n eroinrev. 009 6 Agwy Tr Dwvy 

~ / \ ~ BENT ~ a ~ 
Tod Bods, AAAR TH dwdy* OTe D eyyvg eoTs, Oia Tis 

~~ A 4 \ / - or / "ft c , PN 
devs yo5ero, xal yalpew On TavTy dalveras. Spmoiws 

> \ x a, nef 
090 ia@y 4 ebpady Zradoy 7 aypiov alya, aA brs Bopay 
4 \ \ 4 N% LN \ 4 / \ e 
eget. meph Tag ToavTag Oy ydovas 7% Twdsocvvy xal 78 
> , A - A A A ~ ~ a 
AHOALTIA EOTIY WY Xai THA AdITA Cia xoiwwyel, Oey 

S 7™ \ 
avpamod@ders xal Gypswderg dalvovrasr attas 0 sioly 
c \ \ ~ f \ \ ~ tA ay 2 * 
ady xai yetoss. daivovras On xal TH yedoes Exh puxpoy 7) 9 

IAN ~ ~ \ 7 7, 7 ~ ~ 
ovbey xpjobas Tig yap yeioews Zor 7 xploig THY YuLwy, 
tad ~ \ 4 
Orem mowwdow of rods olvoug Boxinalovres xal ra oa 
> , > A SN 7, 

Gpriovres. ov mavu OF yalsoucs Totros, 7 ody oF ys 
> /, BJ \ ~ 3 , ~ ~~ 
AXOAATTOL, AAA TH AMOAAVTE!, 7 ylusTar waoTa OF adic 

\ ‘4 \ ~ ~ 
xah 2v oirioig xal ev motels xal Toig Adpodiolosg Asyopevols. 

X A bs , > , a \ , € ~ 

10 

0 xal noSaro tig Ghoddyog wy roy dapuyya airaé 





when sounds or scents indicate to 
them their prey or their food. It 
may be questioned whether this is 
absolutely true, whether, for instance, 
brutes are not capable of some plea- 
sure from musical sounds. This 
appears to be the case with lizards 
and snakes; and horses are fond of 
bells. It is said that the cat likes the 
smell of mint, Dogs like the smell 
of carrion, apparently for its own 
sake, this being their taste. With 
brutes the senses are the intellect, and 
thus by the well-known law that as 
an organ increases in fineness of per- 
ception, it decreases in sensitiveness to 
pleasure and pain,—we may conceive 
how it is that the fine perceptive 
organs of brutes are to them in a less 
degree the instruments of pleasure. 


See Sir W. Hamilton, Reid’s Works,’ 


pp. 880 and 836. 
eipov ZAapoy| This alludes to Homer, 
dl, 1m. 23: 
Sore Adwy exdpn meyda@ éml capatt 
Kdpoas, 
eipdv 7} rao Kepadv h wypiov aiya. 
VOL. II. 





10 8d Kat nitard tis dpopdyos| 
The name of this glutton is recorded 
by Eudemus (m1. ii. 10), who para- 
phrases the present passage as fol- 
lows: 51d of dWopdryor ode efxXovTa Thy 
yAGtray Exew paxpay GAG TY od- 
puyya yepdvov, Samep SiAdzevos 5 "Ept- 
édos. Athenzeus mentions the same 
story (vm. 26), quoting the verses— 


Sirdtevos 108’, as A€youo’, 6 KuOhpios 
eviaro Tpidy Exew Adpvyya THXEwr. 


Aristotle uses the word ¢dpvyya here 
in its loose sense for the ‘throat,’ as 
Adpvyé (which properly meant the top 
of the windpipe) was also loosely em- 
ployed by the ancients to mean the 
whole throat. Speaking scientifically 
Aristotle confined the term ¢dpuyé to 
mean the trachea or windpipe, dis- 
tinguishing it from the esophagus or 
gullet, cf. De Part. An. mi. iii. 1: 
6 ey ody ddpvyt Tov mvedpuatos Eve- 
Key wépuxev'—6 & oisopdyes eat) or 
ob % Tpoph mwopedera eis Thy KoAlar. 
The latter was the term properly 
required above. Aristotle seems to 


30 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQON - III. 


[ Cuap. 


/ ~ ~ 
paxporepov yepavov yeverbas, we WOowevos TH ADH. x0I- 
~ , / 

vorarn 01 Thy alobyjoewy xal Hv 7 axoracia® xal doFeev 
Ly Oixalwe éroveldioros elvas, OTs OvY ¥ AvIowrol eopmev 
dy bixaing emoveldiorog elves, Ot1 avy y avipwmok Eom 
c la > > ~ 

IL UTADYEL, AAA % Cia. +o 01 ToLovToIS HENPEY HO UAMIT TA 


ayaray Onpi@des. 


nah yap ab ercvbepimraras: Tay ice Tig 


€ ~ ec ~ ~ / \ 
Adis jdovdv adrenvras, olov ai ev roig yupvacioig Oi 
~ , 4 ~ 
tpibews xa Thy Jeppraclag yivomevar* oF yap mepl may 
\ ~ € ~ 3 / € , > ‘ / / 
TO TOMA Y TO axorAaTTOV APY, AAA Wek Tiva [LEDy. 


II 


Téiv 8 émibupudy af piv xoiwal doxotow elvou, af 8 Wro 


xal ériberos. olov 7 py Tig Tpodys duoixys mag yap 
eribupet 6 evens Enpds yf bypag tpodijg, ort 0 audoiv, xab 
civic, dyoly "Opnpos, 6 véos xal dxpatwy: ro 08 rodode 


>) ~ > / ~ IDA ~ > ~~ 
27) Toidods, ouxéTs Mas, ovde THY aUTdyY. 
\ 4 
oo pay GAN Eye yé Tr nak Quoixdy, 


« , 
7jPETEpOY elvan. 


01) dalverau 


or \ ets > ‘ xf ed ~ “ni ~ 
ETEDH yap ETEDOLS EOTIVY OER, XL EVIA TACIY THOIW TwyY 


3 TUX OT WY. 


\ oa \ \ ~ 
apoapravours xal ed’ ev, ext To wAsiov. 


~ ~ , , 
gy piv ody Taig duoimaig emibuplas GAtyo 


\ \ > AH A 
TO yap eoUiery TH 


TuyovTa 7 wivey Fws ay bweprancdy, bmepPannrew éor) Td 
xata duow TO TAUIE* avawArpwolg yap THg Eevdelag 7 


duoixy émibupla. 


\ \ , ~ > Ld 
mapa +o dgov wApoUYTEG B77). 
meph 08 Tag idlag Tey 7dovdy roAAGl 


4 Alay avOparodwoets. 


Oso Agyovras ovTa yaortpluapyol, we 


~ \ « 
TosouTos 08 ylvovras of 





have considered that the pleasure of 
gluttony was not in ¢aste, of which the 
tongue was the organ, but in the con- 
tact of food with the passage of the 
wsophagus. 


XI. 1 Kal ebvijs, pnolv “Ounpos) 
Iliad, xxtv. 129: peuynuévos obre TL 
alrov, Ob’ edbyijs, the remonstrance of 
Thetis to Achilles. It is plain what 
evv7js means, 

2 d—rvxévtwy] ‘Hence (this 
choice of particular foods, &c.) appears 
merely factitious. In reality, How- 
ever, it has something natural in it, 
for different things are pleasant to 
different people, and all men have 
their preferences,’ Aristotle attributes 





the very diversity of tastes to a law of 
nature, which no doubt exists,—and 
to a wise purpose, else what a fearful 
rivalry there would be in the world. 
Some MSS, for waow read ti. It 
seems common for transcribers, when 
they do not understand a sentence, to 
play fast and loose with was and vis: 
see below, Eth. v. vii. 4. 

3 ‘yarrpluapyo.| - * Greedy-bellies’ 
from pdpyos, cf. Homer, Od. xvut. 
2, meTa © expeme yaordps udpyy—and 
Euripides, Cyclops 310, mdpes 7d 
pdpyov ons yvdSou. 

wAnpovvtes aithy] sc. Thy yaorépa, 
which is to be supplied from yaorpi- 
Hapyo, according to the Aristotelian 
mode of writing. 


X.—XI.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IIt. 51 


», nw c f ~ 4 iA 
xal ToAAayads apapTavovtiv* Tov yap DiAoToOUTwY 
, a ~ SOS - i Nw A ~ re * e rs 
ASYOMEVWY 7 TW YAGSY O'S [LT OFb, 7 TW KLAADAOY, 7 tos Os 
te ‘ c ~ \ , ~ eu42 f ¢ 
WOAAOL, % [Ay WS Ost, HATH WAVTA O Ob AXOARTTOL UTED- 
\ \ ’ , a > VY” X 
Barrouoiv* xo yap HXalpovor evioig olg ov Ost (wionra 
7, \ y >) ~ , ~ , ~ AQ ~ 
yap), HAL Eb TIOk Of YalpElLy THY ToOLloOUTWY, ULAAAOY 7 Oh, 
S \ \ cay A 
7 pay obv wreck Tag yovac 5 
\ X \ 
weph 0: Tas 


\ 
xak ag oi moAAol yaisouow. 
ao ~ 
tmepory 6T1 axoracia xal Wexrov, WHAov" 
Av > a ey | ~ > ,) Pyf ~ ec , re 2T OL 
Uras OVX WOTED ETI Tig avIpsing TH Hromevely AZyeT 
cwdpwyv axor~uctos 02 TO BH, AAR 6 pty axOAaTTOS TH 
mre + OF 3 Fp: Ok 2 pee : og 
= ~ ~, * ~ od ~ e>7 > / \ 
Avumsio Gas parAAoy 7, bei OTs Thy HOswy oD Tuy Xaver (xat 
THy AUTHY OF Toei AITw 7 Fov7), 6 OF THpwY THO pI 
4 4 > ‘ , c ae 4 ii z a iy ‘ c 
~ ~ ~ ~ c 
Aumeiobas TY ATOUTIA HAL TH améyer bau TOU YOE0S. 0 Lev 6 
> > /. > ~ ~ . eps , Aw 7 
oby axoAacTOS Exifuncd THY Yoéwy TaYTwY 7, THY LAALTTA, 
\ 4 a ~ > , a > \ ~ ” ~f? 
HAL AYETAL UTO THS erbupiag OOTe avTl Tey arAAwY TADE 
~ \ ~ \ , ~ 
aipsiobos 015 xalru@eiraxal amotuyyavey xal éribupdy. 
\ 7 \ om Mates 4 ed VV QS epRF \ 
pera AuTYG yap 7 emifupiay arorw O Zoixe TO OV ydovay 
~ > 4 x 4 A > \ ae a 
AumsioGat, eArsimovreg 08 wepl tag rdovag xal FrTov 7 7 
~ ‘4 / ‘ , 
Ost Yalpovres ov avy yivovTas ob yap avopwmixy eoti 
id 7 > , \ 4 \ \ ~ > 7 \ 
4 ToauTy avaicdyoia xal yap TA Aoima Cia diaxpiver To 
Bpw xal Toig piv yaiper toig B od* ek dE be 
pwpara, xal Toig piv yaiper Tog O ov ei 02 Tw perder. 
> gor ‘ / a ie / * W ~ 
EOT OU 402 Diadhéepes Erepov exrépov, wappw av ely Tobi 
4 ~ ae 
avipwmrog sivas’ ov tétevye 8 6 ToLUTOg dvomaTos Oia Td 





4 2} TE padrdrov, 4} Tés of woddAoi]} 
It seems almost certain that és here 
is an interpolation. It could not have 
been said that ‘with regard to the 
special pleasures men are called 
“lovers of particular things” because 
they like them as people in general do,’ 
What Aristotle wrote was, no doubt, 
9} TE pardoyv 7 of woddAol, ‘ or because 
they like them more than people in 
general ;’ cf. Eth. rv. iv. 4, éwatvotyres 
pev em) 7d padrov Fh oi 
Wéyovres © ext rd paaroy 7 de7. The 
copyist must have taken # of woAAol 
for a separate sentence, and so have 
thought it necessary to insert és. 

5 Kal thy Avanv BE moet ciTG 7 
ndovh| ‘ And thus it is pleasure that 


H 2 


ToAAdl, | 





produces him his pain.’ This is stated 
as if it were a sort of disgraceful pa- 
radox, which takes place in intem- 
perance. 

7 ob mdvy yivovra)] Aristotle, 
from his experience as a Greek, 
might have been justified in asserting 
that a deficiency in the sense for plea- 
sures ‘could hardly be said to exist.’ 
It is not so certain that the same 
would be true in all periods of the 
world. It is not so certain that the 
monkish turn of mind does not oc- 
easionally diminish to an unhappy 
extent the natural and human feel- 
ings, so as to impair the kindliness, 
the geniality, and the good sense of 
mankind. 


52 HOIKON NIKOMAXEIQN III. 


\ , , 
8 un mavu ylvecbas. 


[ Car. 


3 \ E: / \ ~ > 
608 cw@dpwy pécws wept Tatr Eyer: 


wv \ n 
OUTE Yap TOETOL Og PAALITTAS AxdrAaTTOS, AAAG paADY 
\ / vf? a ‘ NA ~ BA , 7 
duoyepatver, 008 CAwgs olg py Ost ovTe ohadpa TomovTH 

BENS - wis > s ~ s>>2 9 ~ a / 
oudevi, our amovrwy Avmeitas 00d emibupel, 7 perpiws, 

~ E) ~ tof \ ~ > is4 n~ 
oUdE aA 7 Oi, 000 OTE py Dei, 00d CAwWS THY ToLOUTwY 

>pAr a \ \ Cy pay > a \ > 4 ens 4 

ovbév’ boa 08 mods byledy eori 7 mpdg eveSiay ydéa ovr, 
Vg > Le , \ € der. \ ~ ” dé 
TouTwy opeseTar metplog xal we dsl, xal Thy AAAwY YOE@Y 

a 3 DY , ” x \ \ rAd N ¢ : ‘ 

pn eerodiwy TooTols byT@Y mapa To xardY 7 Oweo THY 


ew 4 
Oud IayY, 


€ \ od 4 ~ > ~ \ 7 
0 Yap OUTWS EXYWY LAAAOY AYATA TAS TOLAUTAS 


~ / ~ 
yjoovag Tig aFiags 6 0&8 cwMdpwy ov TolodTOS, AAN we 6 


aphog Aoyos. 
12 


‘Exoucin 03 paxarrnov zone 7 axoracia Tig OeiAlag. 7 wey 


yap OF AOoviy, 7 OE dick Abayy, dy Td pdv aiperov, Td OF Hev- 


, 
2xTOY. 


c ~ ¥. 
xal 7 ey Avy eEloryos xal Hbelpe THY Tou EyxovToS 





8 We see how indefinite after all 
Aristotle has left the standard of tem- 
perance, he refers it merely to the 
blank formula of és Se? and 7d Kaady. 
In so leaving it, however, he appeals 
to a sense in each man’s own mind. 
There is a relative element to be con- 
sidered, the health or fortune of the 
individual (apbs syleay, wh brép Thy 
ovatay), and there is also something 
that appears absolute amidst all that 
is relative (7d Kaddv), 

5 yap ottws %xyav] This is an 
awkward piece of writing. Oras 
refers to those phrases which have 
been negatived—mapa 7b Kaddy 7} brép 
Thy ovotay. 


XII. Which is most voluntary, 
cowardice or intemperance? a suitable 
question to conclude a Book which 
opened with a theory of the voluntary 
and proceeded to diseuss courage and 
temperance. Thus far there is method. 
Courage and temperance are con- 
sidered very much throughout in re- 
lation to each other, and here they are 
considered in relation tothe voluntary. 
On the other hand the subjeet of this 





chapter is closely connected with the 
theory of the formation of habits (Zth. 
u. ii—ii.), and also with the questions 
mooted above (£th, m1. y.) as to the 
voluntariness of yicious habits. Stand- 
ing then as it does isolated, it forms an 
instance of the immaturity of Ari- 
stotle’s moral investigations. 

Intemperance is more voluntary 
than cowardice, inasmuch as it con- 
sists in choosing pleasure, while 
cowardice is under a sort of compul- 
sion, flying from pain. (2) Again it 
is easier by practice to learn to resist 
temptation, than it is to learn to with- 
stand danger, for the opportunities are 
frequent and free from risk. Hence 
intemperance is the more disgraceful 
of the two. (3) These vices are in a 
peculiar way different from each 
other, for cowardice as a whole is 
more voluntary than its parts. In- 
temperance as a whole is less volun- 
tary than its parts, 

The chapter ends with some re- 
marks on the nature of éxoAacla as 
connected with its etymology. 

2 Kal h pey Abwn—woe?] ‘And 
while pain distracts and overturns the 


XI.—XII.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IIl. 53 


diciv, 7 38 ydovy ody rosctroy moist, waAAOY D Exovoioy* 
O16 xal eroverdiororepov. xal yap ehiobivas baov mobo ata’ 
TOrAa yap ev TH iw Ta Tomita, xa} of 2biopol axlvduvor. 
ewl 08 réy doPspey avararyv. d0fe2 0 ay ody ipoiwe , 
« 7 +4 / ~ 79° > ‘\ ~ A 
Exovotoy 7 Osirla elvas toig xab’ Exacrov’ adry py yap 
wy aa \ \ , Me yy, oe ee, Ok 
Grumos, TAUTA OF Oia AUTyy eEioryoTW, WoTe xal TH OTAA 
cr \ s > ~ ) \ ‘ ~ , 
pintew xal TaAAa aoynpovely® O10 xal Ooxet Biase elvan. 
~ D> > / a; 2 \ \ a a3 , 
TWO AXOAATTO AVATAALY TH [LEY xah’ Exacre EXOUT IA, 4 
emibumotyTs yao xah dceyone 0 8 Gacy 7 * ove} 
Gupotyrs yap peyouevw, TO O Grov Frrov* adfels 
\ > 4 ~ > /, + X > 4 ~ > , 
yap exibupsi axcracros elvas. TO 0 Gvome Tig axorAaciac 5 
xol ext Tag maidinas apaptiag désomev’ Zyoucs yap Tive 
opooryta. mworepoy dO ams morépov xarziras, ovbty mpdc 
A ~ 5 / oF De ao \ a > A ~ 
Ta viv Oiadhépes, OFAov 0 Ort To Sorepov axd Tod mpo- 
Tépov. ov xaxio 0 Zoe petevyvéybar’ xexoracbas yap 6 
Nw A ~ > ~ > , A ‘ wv 4 
Ost TO TWY AIT YPWY OpsyoLLEvOY XAb TOAATY abvenow exoy, 
Towdroy 08 pariora y% emibupia xal 6 mais xar’” ém- 
Guplay yap CHoi xal Te mwaidia, xal pariocra ev Tours 





mental balance of him who expe- 
riences it, pleasure does nothing of 
the kind.’ dc1s here denotes the 
perfect or normal state: see above, 
Eth. a. i. 3, note. : 

3 ddtee F ty—etlornow] ‘But 
cowardice is not equally voluntary 
with (¢. ¢. is more voluntary than) its 
particular acts, for in itself it is pain- 
less, while its particulars distract the 
mind with pain.’ It seems curious to 
speak of cowardice in this abstract 
way as distinct from all particular 
acts of cowardice. It is, however, 
true that cowardice is not, like in- 
temperance, a growing chain upon 
the mind. Each cowardly act, while 
it leaves the mind irresolute and so 
prone to fresh cowardice, on the other 
‘hand brings experience and renders 
the mind more familiar with danger. 
Thus cowardice, which at first was 
involuntary, tends to become more 
and more voluntary and deliberate, 
the more it is continued in; but in- 





temperance, which at first was volun- 
tary, becomes the longer it lasts more 
and more involuntary and a mere 
bondage. 

5—6 7rd ® tvopa—ipetis] ‘Now 
the name intemperance (or unre- 
strainedness) we apply also to the 
faults of children, for these have 
some resemblance to it. Which is 
ealled from which, matters not for our 
present purpose ; obviously that which 
is later in conception is called from 
that which is earlier. And it seems 
no bad metaphor, for that which han- 
kers after what is base, and which has 
a mighty capacity for development, re- 
quires to be chastened, and this is 
just the character of desire and of the 
child. Children live entirely by desire, 
and have the longing for what is 
pleasant most strongly.’ Eudemus 
(Eth. Eud. wt. ii. 1) commences his 
account of intemperance with this 
etymology. He points out that ax«d- 
Aactos is capable of two meanings, 


54 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN III. [Cuar. XII. 


¢ ~ ene ” Tn Ne > 6} % (6.48 \ 
7] Tod 7Oz0g opeSig* eb ody wy Eorar evmeibig xal bro rd 
BA ar ek \ a ” \ c ~ ens wv 
ApXOv, ETk TOAV Hesu aATARTTOS yap 1 TOU 7yOE0G opeSis 
\ , ~ 9 , en ae > , ae 
nal mavTayddev TH avoyTw, xal 7 Tig emidupiag evepyetae 
, a U \ 
avGer To cuyyevic, nav peyaras xab ohodpal wot, xa roy 
S] ~ / > \ 
Aoyiopoy exxpovouor. O40 det petplag elvar adtag xal 
CECH S \ ~ if \ > ~ i) \ Q2 ~ 
oAlyas, xab To Aoyw pylev evavTiovcdas, +o 62 Tosotiroy 
¢ \ \ ~ 
cumreibeg Adyomuey nab xeXOAMT EVO" WOTED Yap Toy Tako 
~ ~ S ~ a \ ‘ 
del xara To rpooTAype TOU mauywyod Civ, oltw xal To 
bd », \ \ , \ Py ~ ~ / X 
imibupytixoy xara Tov Aoyov. 410 det Tod cwdppoveg To 
5) \ ~ ~ / . XN \ > ~ 
imifuuytixoy cupdwvely TO Acyw" oxorIg yap apdoiy 
\ , 1 6 ~e ’ 2 ? Nw A c 3 ~ } a - 
Th xarov, xal exibumst 6 c@dewy wv Ost xal we det xal OTe 
a ~ r Ve , ~ 9 > ec ~ oa 2 § } 
10 UTw 68 TATTEL Kalo AOyYOG. TaAUT’ ody Hiv sipyobw wep 


N 


oo 


No) 


cwhpoovvys. 





‘he that has not been chastened’ 
and ‘he that cannot be chastened.’ 
Tlis account of the metaphor implied 
in the word appears to be lost. He 
says ($3) dveypdaper mpdtepoy mas 
Thy &xodaclav dvoudCovTes perapepouer, 
but in £th., Hud. 1. iii., to which he 
alludes, there is apparently a lacuna. 
Aristotle declines to decide which is 
the primary and which the metapho- 
rical use of the word; but there can 
be no doubt that the punishment and 
unrestrainedness of children is the 
more concrete and the primary idea. 
7 ei otv—evayrioicOa] ‘If then 
this thing be not obedient and sub- 
jected to the governing element, it 
will develop vastly ; for the longing 
for what is pleasant is insatiable in 
him that is foolish, and it seeks 
satisfaction from all quarters; and the 





exercise of desire increases its native 
powers, and if the desires grow great 
and vehement, they expel all reasoning 
in the end. Wherefore the desires 
should be moderate and few, and no- 
wise opposed to the law of reason.’ 
Evreidés is indefinite; it might refer 
either to 4 émi@uula or 6 wats, Ari- 
stotle speaking indistinetly had the 
idea of ém6vpla most present to his 
mind. Out of this etymology of 
‘intemperance’ he develops anew 
the relationship which ought to exist 
between the passions and the reason. 
The passions should be to the reason 
as a child to his tutor. This analogy 
was already suggested in Eth. 1. xiii. 
19: derrdv ora Kal 7d Adyor Exov, 7d 
bey kuplws Kal év aitd, 7 8 Bomrep 
TOU maTpds GkovoTiKdy Tt. 


PLAN -OF BOOK FY. 





ITH only two exceptions, this Book follows faithfully the 

programme drawn out in the seventh chapter of Book II. 

These exceptions are, that it inverts the order of the social virtues 

—Truth, Wit, and Friendship; and that, being at its close frag- 

mentary or mutilated, it omits to discuss Indignation, and breaks 
off in the middle of a discussion upon Modesty. 

The only question, then, that arises, is—can we find any logical 
sequence in Aristotle’s list of the virtues as given in Book II. and 
followed out here? There are various principles on which a classi- 
fication of the virtues might have been made; as, for instance, on 
a principle of psychological division, it might have been shown how 
the virtues are the proper development of man’s nature in its 
various parts. Or, again, with a view to education, the virtues 
might have been arranged according to the most natural order of 
inculcation. Or, again, in point of excellence, the greater virtues 
might have taken precedence of the lesser ones. But no one broad 
principle of this kind is to be found in the arrangement made by 
Aristotle. It must always be remembered that his Ethics, while 
tending to advance psychology very greatly, are not composed upon 
a psychological system. Hence, though he said (Hth. m1. x. 1) that 
Temperance must succeed Courage, because these both consisted 
in the regulation of the brute instincts, we do not find elsewhere 
any reference to a classification of the parts of man’s nature. 
Aristotle, having clearly divided moral from intellectual excellence, 
does not carry out the same sort of division in discussing moral 
excellence. He seems to have taken up first the most prominent 
and striking qualities, according to the common notions in Greece 
—Courage, Temperance, and Liberality. Liberality suggested to 


56 PLAN OF BOOK IV. 







him Magnificence—Magnificence, High-mindedness; and from 
he proceeded to distinguish the more ordinary quality of Ambition. 

He then added, what had hitherto been omitted, the virtue « 
regulation of the temper; and pointed out that in social inter- — 
course three excellent qualities are produced by bringing the 
demeanour under the control of the law of balance. Lastly. even : 
in the instinctive and untrained feelings of Modesty and Indig- 
nation, this same law exhibits itself. ; 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON 


LV. 


—_°059{00——— 


ETQMEN @& é&%o wepi ercvGepsoryros, Ooxet 0 elvos 


i wep ypjpara pecorys’ emasvelras yap 6 erev- 


, > > ~ ~ 399 . a c ' fe 

Gépog aux ev Tolg morsusxoic, avd’ ev olg 6 cwdpuy, 

209 ys > eg / > \ \ / UA \ 

Oud QU EY TAIG XPITETIY, AAAK TEP! doo HON-AT MY Kab 

Aji, parrov 0 ev TH OooE. Yyorpatra OF Aéyomevz 
rovTa bow 7 aEla vouioware peTpeitar. torts OF xal 73 
, ia xak 7 avercubecta meph AULATH UTEpPonal xal 

AG WT bO. % aversubes ph x pny pPorat xal 

> / \ ‘\ © > / / : JO, 

erreibers. xab THy pev avercubepiay TPOTATTOLEY Eh 

lal ~ x QV &~ \ 7 Dy ty \ 

TOG parnrov q Ost wepl yorypatTa omovdagouoel, THy O 

acwrtiay emihéoopey eviore cupmaAsnovTes’ TOUS yap axpae - 
Teig xal eig axoraciay damravnpots ATWTOVG xaroTEEY. 

Om xal davadraro: doxodow elvas. 


TOAAAS yap Ope 4 
xaxlos Eyouoly. 


> \ > / 7 , 
ov 07 olxeiws por ayopevoyTas Moure- 5 
\ wv eg \ 4 A 7 \ 
Tah ¥%P ACOWTO0S Elva. O EV TheHOAXOYV EXWY, TO dbeipew Thy 


> , 
ougiay’ 


\ vA ~ 
aTwros yap 6 OF abrov amorArdpevoc, Doxei 0 





I. 1. Aristotle’s excellent account 
of liberality represents it as the 
balance between illiberality and pro- 
digality. On the characters pro- 
duced by these different qualities the 
most discriminating and happy re- 
marks are made in the present chap- 
ter. 

1 008 av év rats xploecw] ‘Nor 
again in decisions.’ The Paraphrast 
adds &omep 5 dixasos. Kptois here is 
used in a general sense; it may or 
may not be a legal decision. Cf. Eth. 
V. Vi. 4: 7 yap Sikn Kpiows TOD Sixatov 
kal Tod Gdliov. 

VOL. II. 





2 xphwara S&—petpeira] ‘Now 
we call “property” all things whose 
value is measured by- money.’ In 
other words ‘all things with an ex- 
changeable value.’ 

3 Thy 8 aowrlayv—xadroduer] ‘ But 
the term “ prodigality” we sometimes 
apply in a complicated sense, for we 


-eall those who are incontinent and 


who lavish money on intemperance— 
prodigals.’ Exactly the same usage 
has been confirmed in modern lan- 
guage by the associations of the 
parable of ‘the Prodigal Son.’ 

5 ov 8h  oixelws—exdexducda] 


58 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION 


IV. [ Cuap. 


ww \ ¢ ~ $48 , c ~ 
ATWAEA TIC RITOD Elva xal 7 THg oVTIAS fond, Ws TOU 


lad AN WA v 
Civ 01a TouTwY OYTO. 


a \ \ . , > / 
odTw On THy acwriay exdeyousta. 


6m 0 earth ypela, Bors TovTOIS ypyoba xal e0 xal KaXM@S" 
6 madres 0 éotl r&y ypyoibwy Exactw 0 apore 
xpiro 6 Eywy tiv wepl TodTo apeTiv' xal wAciTw dy 
UNTsT aL aprora 6 Eywy Tyy wepl TA Ypypara aperyy. 


ouToc 0 éoriv 6 ércubeptoc. 
7, S 


xpos 8 elvos Soxet yonua- 


tTwyv damavyn xal dooig? 7 08 AFdic xal 7 OurAaxy uTIiors 


PAO. 


Oro paarrov gots Tod ercubepiou To Biddvas ig 


~ ~ isd ~ 

Oct i AapPavew O9ev dei xal py AnpPaverw Obey ov Ost. 

~ \ > ~ ts. 5 ~ Ae NX F , ce) 
Tis yap apeTig parrov TO ed wolsiv 7 TO eb TaTYELY, x 

~ x , 

TH XAAK TPATTEW PAaAAOY 7 TA aloxpPa pH mpaTTEl 

> DAN we ~ x do a \ x ~ } \ 

g oux Adnroy O OT1 TH ey Gores EweTos TO EU Tosely nal TO 

~ , “4 * ‘ 

HOAa mparrew, TH OF Aryrber TO EU mooyEY H py. 


aio ypompayety. 


/ ~ 
g PavovTt, xab 6 Zrasvog OF parroy. 


xal 7 yapig TH OievTs, ob TH pH Aap- 


xal pov 38 To pH 





‘This application of the name is im- 
proper; for “prodigal” ought to 
denote a man who has one fault, the 
habit of wasting his substance. The 
word literally means “he who destroys 
himself,’ and the wasting of one’s 
substance may well be thought a kind 
of self-destruction, for life depends 
upon substance. This accordingly is 
the sense in which we take the word 
“ prodigality.”’ Aristotle attributes 
some weight here to the etymology of 
éowros, arguing that the man who 
destroys his property, destroys him- 
self, and he who destroys himself is 
beyond salvation (&owros). BovAerat 
elya: is exactly analogous to the En- 
glish word ‘means,’ Cf. Eth. m1. i. 15, 
Td 8 dkovowy BobrAeTa Aéyer Oa K.7.A, 
In Eth. v. v. 14, BotAerou is used in 
a slightly different sense to denote 
not the ‘meaning’ of a word, but a 
‘tendency’ in things, Suws 5 BobAeras 
pévety padAov, 

7 Liberality or ‘the virtue con- 
nected with property’ consists more 
in right giving and spending than in 





right receiving. The former is the 
positive and active side, the latter is 
the negative and passive side. 
Giving is the ‘use’ of money, receiving 
and keeping is mere ‘possession.’ 
And ‘use’, as Aristotle tells us in the 
Rhetoric (1. v. 7), constitutes wealth 
proper, as being a sort of life and 
reality (évépyea), which mere posses- 
sion is not. “Odws 5€ Td wAouTew 
éotly ev TH xpioba parrov h ev TE 
KekT7obat * Kal-ydp n evépryerd ear TOY 
roovrev Kal 4 Xpiigis TAoDTOs. / 

8 obk &ndrov 8 —aicxpompayeiv] 
‘It is not hard to see that giving is 
an avenue to the doing of good and to 
noble action, while in taking we only 
receive a benefit or at most avoid a 
base position.? Aloxpompayeiy here 
seems to be on the analogy of edmpa- 
yetv, and hence to have partly a pas- 
sive, and at all events an indefinite 
sense: see above, th. 1. iv. 2, note. 
A:xaonpayla is used similarly Eth, v. 
v. 17. > 

9 Kal pgov 5¢—GAAdrpioy] ‘And 
it is easier too to abstain from taking 





I.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 59 


Aabsiv rov douveu. 


/ 
Agyovras of Odors" 


\ \ ~ Ga 
TO yap olxeioy Yrrov mpolevrou 
~n x‘ ra U 
panrroy 7 ov AapPavovcs TO KART PLOY. 


xal ercubépios Og 10 


\ > 
of 08 hy AapPavovres ovx Eig 2Aeu- 


, . ~ > 3 > oe ] re 
Gensoryra EWAIVOUYTAL, AAA ouY YTTOYV ELC Oncor ova" 


of 0 AnpPavorvres 00d erawotvTar Trav. 
\ , e? , ne FS oS no 
oxedov pariora of ercvbepior Thy am aperig. 


/ ~ a 32 oN SL 
YP, TOUTO d ey Th 000 &t, 


\ \ ~ ~ oo 
HOAQL HOLE TOV XAAOUD EVExa. 


Dirodvras OF11 
WdEALLO8 


c \ > > \ te 
ai Ob xar aperny mpaSers 12 


xab 6 ersubépiog ov dwoes 
\ 


~ ~ bee hz 2 ® Sar \ oo \ oo 
TOU HAAGU EVEXAR XAb OFIMS* OIG yap OE Xa OTA xXak OTE, 


¥ or y ms 7s , 
HOl TAAAG OOH EWETAL TH 6p97 bore. 


\ ~ ens 
xHAL TAVUTA 704wW¢ 13 


No, 7 eoN Lr N 2-9 \ +S vo» of \ 
q adrdrws’ TO yap HAT apeTyy YOU 7 AAvuToV, HxITTH OF 


Avanpoy. 


6 02 did0dg og pwr Dei, Y py TOR xaAod Evexa 14 


AAAR Dia TW HAAUY aitlay, ox erevbépiog HAN AAAOS TIC 


pypyoeras. 


>\ ~ is &) 
00d 6 AumNswS* ParroY yap EAuIT av Ta 


Xpripara rig xarjg wpaFews, totiro @ ovx ersubepiov. 
oud? AjWeTou OF bev pry Dei* 00d? yap 2ors TOD py Timor. 15 
Tog THR Ypypatra y% ToavrTyn Aydic. ox dv ely OF 000’ 16 


/ 
AiTHTI0G. 


ov yup EoTk TOU ED mosodvTOS EvYEDiG evEpye- 





than it is to give; for men are less 
willing to give away (frTov mpotevrat 
HaAAov) what is their own, than they 
are to abstain from taking what 
belongs to others.’ M@Adoy is redun- 
dant, it goes to strengthen the com- 
parative force of frrov.—Od AauBd- 
vovet corresponds to mh AaBeiy just 
before, and makes up a positive notion 
to ‘abstain from_taking.’ Aristotle 
attributes to men in general a cha- 
racter the reverse of that attributed by 
Sallust to Catiline, ‘alieni appetens, 
sui profusus.’ 

II of S€ AauBdvoytes odd era- 
vowvta mdévu| ‘But they who receive 


are not praised at all.’ Mdvv means | 


‘quite’: ob mdvv in the sense of 
‘hardly’ is frequent in Aristotle; ef. 
Eth, 11. ii. 12-13: AaBety } pvyeiv ob 
mdvy dokdCouev—doidQouey & ob mavu 
tovey: and ovdé rdvu appears,to mean 
‘not at all,’ the ovd¢ being joined with 
the yerb. 





16 ov« by elin—evdepyereioba| ‘Nor 
would he be ready to ask favours, for 
it does not belong to the benefactor 
to be easily a receiver of benefits.’ 
This is a manifestation of the spirit 
which runs through the virtuous cha- 
racters of Aristotle—the spirit of man- 
liness and nobility (dvdpéins Kat 
pirdnadros, cf. Hth. tv. iv. 3). It 
appears most strongly in the cha- 
racter of the high-minded man; see 
below, ch. iii, § 24. The principle of 
individuality, a sense of life and free 
action (évépyeia), are with Aristotle the 
basis of morality, and the first requisite 
to nobleness seems to be self-respect. 
Now, a slight difference in the way in 
which this truth is stated will make 
it appear a pure or a selfish principle. 
Christianity says, ‘It is more blessed 
to give than to receive,’ implying 
that to gratify a feeling of love and 
kindness is better than any pleasure 
that the sense of gain could afford, 


.12 


60 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IV. [ Cap. 


17 Teta 4a. 
> e \ > > c > ~ ad 4 , 
TWY, OVX WS HAAOY LAA Wo AYAYXAIOY, OTWS Exy O1dovat. 
IWS 3 7 ~ x7 / sf NY A if 4 
OU0 AUEAYUTEL THY bOiwy, Povrcmevog ye oie TouTwY TIClY 
> ~ INA ~ ~ YN 7 o 4 N/ ? ~ 
ETApPHEY. OUOE TOG TUYOUT! OWTEL, Iya EYY Oidavas og Ost 
‘ A 
ércubeplov 0 zorl ohodpa xal rd 
e Y 2 ~ os cr ’ « ita or . 
OmepPanrciy ev TH O00 el, WOTE HATAASIITEy EAUTW EARTTW 
NX; A x > / ’ > «< \ >. / . ‘ A X 
19TO YAR [7 emiParégmey ed seauroyv ercubepiou. HATA THY 
ovolay O 7% ersubepiorng AgyeTas’ ov yao ey Two wAVIe 
A me P Kg a > 9 Ls 3 pri ae 
Tiby Oidopévoy Td Ersvbepiov, AAA’ ev TH Tod OiDovTog EFx, 
/ / 
auTy O8 xaTa THY ovTiay Oidwoiw. ovbty Oy xwAver Erevbe- 
(f rf \ 1 ae / Py BYA aw > oS / 
PhWTEDOY Elyal TOY TH EAATTW OOYTA, Fay am EAATTOVWY 
ercubepi@repos OF elves doxotow of wy xTyTOpLEVvOL 
> \ , \ oy oo , ‘ nw 
AANA maparapovres Tiy ouTlav® ameipol TE YAR TH 


~ i ~ 
Obey 02 det, AnWerTau, oloy ard Tay Wiwy xTyBE- 


ares \ ee St 
18 Hak OTE xAL OV XAAOY. 


20 0100, 





But at the same time, if we analyse 
the Christian sentiment of love and 
charity, we cannot by any means 
separate it from the development of 
the personality of him that feels it. 
For as all knowledge implies a sub- 
ject as well as an object, so does 
every moral act or feeling imply the 
will and individuality of the actor. In 
the Christian sentiment there is so 
great a harmony between the object 
and subject, that the subjective side 
appears to be lost ; but in reality it is 
only lost to be found again, it is di- 
minished to beenhanced. Aristotle’s 
statement would be ‘It is better to 
give than to receive, because it is 
more noble.’ This has a slight ten- 
dency to give too much weight to the 
subjective side. In Aristotle’s whole 
account we do not find a word about 
benevolence or love to others as 
prompting acts of liberality. We find 
no other motive but the ‘ splendour’ 
(xaddyv) of the acts themselves. What 
is said in the present section verges 
towards the selfish theory, which 
would ascribe such acts to the love of 
power inherent in man. In Hobbes 
(Leviathan, Book 1. Chap. xi.) we find 





a bitter statement of the feelings with 
which benefits may be received. ‘To 
have received from one, to whom we 
think ourselves equal, greater benefits 
than there is hope to requite, disposeth 
to counterfeit love; but really secret 
hatred; and puts a man into the 
estate of a desperate debtor, that in ~ 
declining the sight of his creditor, 
tacitly wishes him there, where he 
might never see him more. For 
benefits oblige, and obligation is 
thraldom ; and unrequitable obligation, 
perpetual thraldom, which is to one’s 
equal, hateful.’ Cf. Hth. rx. vii. 

17-19 Points in the character of 
the liberal man: he will take care of 
his own property in order that he 
may have means for his liberality. 
Hence, too, he will be discriminating 
in the objects of his favours; yet his 
tendency is to forget himself, to give 
largely, to leave hardly anything for 
himself; yet again, liberality does 
not depend on the largeness of the 
gift, it is in proportion to the means 
of the giver, a less gift may be more 
liberal than a large one. 

20 édevbep@repor 88 —moinral] ‘We 
see that those are the most liberal who 


Z| HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 61 


> a, RP A , > ~ ~ 4 ec nw + a 
EVOEIAG, HOE TAVTES AYATWOL LAAAOY TH KUTWY EDYA, WOTED 


~ \ bd 
of yovsig xab of moinral, 


~ , 
WAOUTELY O OD oq01ov Toy eAsu- 


, 7 \ yx 7 , x. 
Géps0y, Pate AnwTixoy ovTa pyTe Quraxtixoy, mposTixay 
\ \ \ « > e 4 \ , > > oa 
02 xal pn TipdovTa OF abTa TH HENAATA AAA EvExe 


rio dorews. 


513 Noa vcr ae Ga ¢ aN 
$0 HAL EYHAAEITAL TY TUXY OTL Ob LAMIOTH ar 


vw BA is4 ~ id > > 2 4 
ASL OvTeg HxioTH wAovTOUTIY. TupPaiver 0 oUx AAdyws 
ToUTO" ob yap olov Te ypymar Eyew wy erserovdpevoy 


ae A a ANS Jae om nw ay 
OTWS EXY, WOTED oud em) T&y AAAWY. 


ov pny dwoes ye 22 


a 3 ~ 3 a A ~ > og 4 ~ 

oig 00 det oud OTE [7] Osi, 000 Boa KAAA ToIATA’ ob yap 
a yf / \ ? , \ ~ 
dy 2k mparTo xaTa Tiy eArsvbepioryTa, xal cig Tatire 


> ij > aA ov > aA ~ 3s ig 
AVAAWT AS OUxX AY Xo Elg a det OVAAITHELY. 


Women yop 23 


. , / > < \ \ > If ~ \ 
elonrous, ercubépieg EOTLY O XATA THY ovd lay damavay xO 


cig & Oci* 6 8 brepParrwy dowros. 


O10 TOUS Tupay yous 


> , > i \ A ~ ~ 7 > ~ 
OU AEYoeYy ATwWTOUS' TO yap TAHI0¢ Tig XTHTEWS ov doxEt 
¢ /5 z ~ / \ Ao. SN / ¢€ / 
pooroy clvar Taig doreos nal Tals Oamavais bmepPanreiy. 

~ / 
Tig erevbepiorytog On pecdryTog ovaons mepl yonaTwy 24 

/ \ ~ Ct / \ fh V9 7, > 
doo xal rR, 0 erevdep10g xal Owoes xal Oamavynoes ig 
a Ost xal Gon Ost, Gnolws ev paxpoig xal weyeross, xal Taira 


\ 7 vA ~ vA ~ 
Hozws’ xal aj berasr 0 Obey Oct xal oon Dei. 


rig dperhig 


yap wepl dudw odors pecoryTos, monoe anhorepa we dei 
emeTar yap TH emieinel Oooes 7 TorndTy ARNIS, 7 OF py 


£ ° / 3 Vs 
TOIAUTY EVAVTIA EOTIY, 


id , 
ai pey oly emouevar ylyvovTas 


fod , ~ > ~ c a / n e wv ar \ \ 

Opn ev TH AUTH, ALO evavTios OHA Ws ov. Edy OF ToLpor 25 

\ , Ath PY ” , Cee , 

To Ogoy xal Th xaAw@S EyoV cupBalyyn aUTwm avarioxely, 
7 , A \ c ae ~ > ~~ \ \ 

AumyTETaL, weTplwg OF xal wo del Tig apeTIg yap xal 





have not themselves acquired their 
property, but have inherited it; for 
they have never known what want is, 
nor are they restrained by that love 
of what we have ourselves produced, 
which belongs to all men, and is well 
exemplified in parents and poets.’ 
On the philosophy of this remark, cf. 
Eth, 1x. vii: 2-7. The remark itself 
comes almost verbatim from Plato’s 
Republic, p. 330 B-c. Socrates asks 
Cephalus whether he made his money 
or inherited it, and gives as a reason 
for the question, 06 To: évexa hpdunr, 
hv & eyd, bri por otas ob sHddpa 





ayanay T& xphuara, Tovro d& roodaw 
&s To TOAD of by wh adrod KThcwvTa: 
of 8 Krnodwevor SiwA 1) of %AAot 
domdCovra ard’ Somep yap of moinrar 
7% avTaY Tonwata Kal of marépes Tovs 
maidas ayan@ot, TaiTn Te Bh Kab 
Xpnuaticdmevor wep. TX Xphuata omov- 
daCovow, ws Epyov éavTGy, kab Kara Thy 
xpclay, Hep of &AAoL. 

21 With perfect good sense Ari- 
stotle says that a very natural expla- 
nation may be given of the common 
railings you hear against fortune for 
not making ‘the right people’ (ze. 
the liberal) rich. People can’t expect 


62 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. [ Cuar. 


26 7osrbas xt Avmeiobas eh’ oig dei xat we Det. nal evxoive- 
My > \ ce 8 fae 5] 7 a 00 \ 10 
27unTOS O eoTly 6 ersubépiog ig yoymaTa* dWvaToL yap AOI 
xeiobou, py Tidy ye TA yonuaTa, xal parrov aybomevog 
” as Nek ey, By , > \ os SON 
Sh TLOEOY [LY] AYAAWO EY 7) AUTOUPLEVOS Eb [Ly] OfOY TL AVAAWOE, 
~ / 
xa) Two Zipwvidy ovx aperxduevog. 60 dowrTos xal ev 
, , of Vk 242 9% Ae 19 NA coe 
TOUTOIS OlapapTaver, OUTE yap HosTas ed’ vig det ovde We 
29 dei oUTs AuTsiTas* EoTas OF wpoiotios havepwrepov. sloyro 
0 ypiv ors OrepPoral xak errsiberg sioly 7 aowria xal 7 
dveneviepic, xal zy Ouoiv, ev Oooes xa} apes * nal Thy Oamedyyy 
vp cig Tiy doow Tisnev. 7 pdy ovv dowria TH Oiovers 
Had en AopPovery brepRannsi, TO 08 roy Seivery innebness 
7 0 avercuberian TH Oiddvoer py eArsire, TO AnwPaverv 
2» ¢ , ‘ + % ~ \ \ om < ~ > 
300 bmrepParres, WAYY STk [AbN POG, TA KEY OLY THE acwrlas 
> t / a > \ enw re , 
ov mavu TuvduaceTas’ ov yap padiov pydapdlev AawBavovTa 
Tao! Sievers Taxéwg yap ewiAglre 7 odoin Tods idiwTaAg 
DidvTas, olen xab Ooxodorw aowros elves, ere) 6 ye ToLOUTOg 
x ~ ~ 
doGeev av ov pixpo Perrioy eivas rot avercubépou, eblarog 


- 


3 





to be rich who have hardly any care | to the solid advantage of riches. Of, 
for money, and this is the characte- | Ar. Rhetoric, u. xvi. 2: 8@ev Kad rd 


ristic of the liberal. Siuwvidov elpnra wep) rev copay Kad 

26-27 Kal edxoiwdyntros—dpeoKds- | mAovoiwy mpds Thy yuvaixa Thy ‘lépwvos 
wevos| ‘Further, the liberal man is | é¢pouévny nérepoy yevécOa xpeirtoy 
easy to deal with in business transac- | mAotoiv 7 copdy * mAotowy eimeiy: 


tions; for there is no difficulty in | tods copods yap pn dpav em) rats ray 
cheating him, owing to his disregard | mAovolwy Odpus SiarpiBovras. Again, 
of money, and he is more annoyed at | there is quoted from Plutarch a 
having omitted any proper expense | saying that‘ the money-chest is always 
than vexed at spending what is | full, and the chest of the graces always 
needless, nor does he approve the pre- | empty ;’ and another, that ‘ avarice ig 
cepts of Simonides.’ These remarks | the proper pleasure of old age,’ On 
show a penetrating knowledge of | the philosophy of Simonides, see 
mankind, but they do not exhibit | Essay II. pp. 62-4. 

liberality in the highest light. The 29 TO AauSdvew—prxpois | ‘ Tllibe- 
gratification of a personal feeling is | rality exceeds in taking, only it must 
made rather too prominent, hence we | be in petty matters.’ Grasping on a 
miss the beauty of ‘charity seeketh | large scale gets another name than 

not her own.’ With the present | illiberality ; cf. §§ 41-42, 

passage we may compare the deserip- 30 Td wey otv—dverev0épou] ‘The 
tion of equity in the Rhetoric (1. xiii. | two sides of prodigality can hardly 
15-19), part of which is 7d avéxeo@u | exist together; for it is not easy to 
a5ikoiuevoy, Various sentiments are | give to everybody and receive from 
attributed to Simonides, all testifying | nobody; private persons, whom alone 





IJ HOIKQN NIKOMAXETON IV. 63 


, > {  .e&-_& ~ e 4 {  e.54 6 > , \ 
TE YAO EOTL HAL UTO TIS YAIMIAg XA UTO TIS ATopIaC, al 
TON N , , 2 ~ 4 \ \ ~ 3 , 
ETFs TO [LET ov Odvarar erdeiv. EXEL YaD TA TOU ersvdepiou 
zal yap dwar xak ov AapRaver, odderepov 0 we Dei 00d’ ed. 
> \ ~ > 4 x + / Vv xX 
ei 07 ToUTO bic bein % Twsg aAAwWS peeTaParos, aby ay 
erev9epiog" 
016 xal doxet odx elvas daiirog rd 740g" 0b yao poxdnpod 


da@oes yap olg dei, xal ob AjWerat EOev ob det. 


~ \ , / \ 
oud ayevvoig TO dresPanrray OidovTa xal uy AawRavoyra, 
> 4 >/ e 53 ~ \ / + A ~ 
jarbiou 0€. 6 58 toTov Tov Teorey aowTos TOAD DoxEl 32 
/ ~ 3 / y / \ > , G @&. 

Bearioy roti avercubépou civar dia Te TR eionuéva, xal OTE 

~ 7 sft 
6 pay wherei morrovc, 6 02 ovbéva, HAN 00d. abrov. 

\ ~ / yy \ 
GAN of ToAAG Thy acwTwr, xalarep elpyTas, xal Aap-33 

, a \ ~ \ > \ \ ~ > Yi 

Pavovow Soev pa dei, nal cio xara roto dvercdbepos. 

7 7 
Anmrixol O2 ylvovrat Oia Td Bovrccbor pey avarloxesy, 34 





we reckon prodigals, soon find their 
substance failing them. Therefore the 
" prodigal man may well be thought in no 
small degree superior to the illiberal.’ 
The commentators, from not seeing 
the train of thought in this passage, 
have made a difficulty about érel, 
which refers to the beginning of the 
sentence, the intermediate clauses od 
yap padior—eiva being parenthetical. 
With ofep at Soxodorw, cf. § 23. 
31-32 Reasons are given why 
the prodigal is better than the illiberal 
man, namely, he may be cured by 
time, or by the failure of his means. 
His tendency to give is a principle 
which requires only to be harmonised 
to become a virtue. Lastly, he does 
more good than the illiberal man. 
Aristotle here is speaking of a better 
sort of prodigality (todroy roy tpdmov 
&owros) which is only a slight over- 
stepping of the bounds of liberality ; 
but even with this restriction, it is’ 
much to be doubted whether prodi- 
gality does more good than illiberality. 
From wise acts of liberality much 
good may arise, but the common sort 
of prodigality, as Aristotle himself 
says, § 35, being prompted by folly 





and vanity, almost invariably goes to 
enrich the wrong people. If the case 
be even not so bad as this, the solid 
benefit which accrues from any ten- 
dency to capitalize money may surely 
be set against the chance good done 
by money given away indiscriminately 
or spent unproductively. 

33 GAA’ of modAADi—dveAeVOepor] 
‘But most prodigals, as we have 
implied already, take whence they 
ought not, and in this way are illibe- 
ral.’ This is an instance of a pheno- 
menon often to be observed in Ari- 
stotle’s virtues and vices, that the 
‘extremes meet’ (cf. rv. vii. 15, I. 
vii. 15). The rationale of this phe- 
nomenon appears to be that the 
extremes are both the result of the 
same principle, they are both different 
forms of selfishness, Selfishness can 
equally produce prodigal giving and 
meanness in receiving. Hence, if a 
man be selfish, though his tendency 
is to be prodigal, yet on occasion 
selfishness, which is his governing 
principle, will lead him to become 
illiberal. The fact is noticed by Eude- 
mus, Eth. Hud. wi. vii. 12: "Eons & 
évayTi@tepoy tots Kxpois Td péoov 


64 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. [ Cap. 


> ne OA ~ ~ \ , \ \ > / 
evyepiog 92 TotiTo molly py Ouvacbar Tayd yap erirslmre 
y 7 
aUTOUS THOTapyovTA. ayvayxalovTas ovv ETéowiev mopitey. 
~ ~ tf 
Gn OF xal did To pyfey Tod xarod hoovrifew crAryopws 
\ U4 , . / \ > ~ A 
xal mavrodev AapPavovoiw’ didovas yap emupotios, To 
XN ~ x / sAN > ~ / / 3» 
3508 mio 4 mobev odhtv atroig diadéper. diorep oud 
By ip € , ’ ~ by / 3 \ / JOA 
ércubépion ai dooeig autéy siolys ov yap xarai, ovde 
, s ~ of IDV c ~ > 9 ih a ~ 
TouTou auToU Evexa, ovdt wo del. GAA éeviore oc dzi 
~ ~ / 
wévecbos, TovToug mAoucioug molode1, xal ToIg pay eT ploIg 
\ ~ ~ \ / of a 
Ta 75n ovdty av doiev, Toig O08 xorakiw y% Ti” aAAnY 
eN XN iy f O10 \ > f 3 ~ . } 
YOovnY Topkgougl MOAAG, 10 XHAL CHOAATOTOL AUTWY EIOLY 
€ / > n~ \ ? la \ > \ > 
Ob TOAAOL* EUYEDWS YAP AvAaAlTxXOYTES NAb EIG TAS AxO- 
ve / » ol > l x \ ») \ , ‘\ \ \ rAd 
aclas Oamavnpol cick, xal did TO py mpdg TO KaADY 
36 C7 0g TAS FOOvASG ATOXAL 5 pay cov & 

Civ mpeg tag yOovag AmoxAlvovolv. 6 Bev oUY aOwTOS 
/ , ~ , 
rawaAywyyTog ‘yevonevosg ig Tatra peTaPalver, Tuya 
iN ee / > \ / \ \ / 4 a > ae c > 
370 émipernciag cig TO mewoy xal TO Odov adinxaiT av. yf O 

7 ~ nw 4 ~ 
civensubspla aviatog eotiv’ Ooxel yap To yijpag xal maoa 
ahuvapia aversvbepoug molly. xal cupduéorepoy Tog 
5: / ~ 3 / c \ \ 7 
dv§owmros TiS aowTiag® ob yao Torro Diroypyuaros 

we \ , 
38 uaAAroy 7) OoTixol, xal Oiereives F ex} woau, xal moruesdes 
CY \ A f ~ ~ > , 
EgTIV* TOAAOL Yap TpOTros doxode8 THS avensubepiag elycts, 
> in \ \ oe ~ Ss ‘6 nw , A ~ ¢ 
év duol yap oboa, TH T eAASKYe Tg BooewS al TF UmEp- 





exeiva GAAHAots, SidtTt Td wey pet’ ovde- | perhaps too favourable a view of the 
vice of prodigality. Its connexion 
with vanity, selfishness, and often 
utter heartlessness, he does not suffi- 
ciently notice, nor does he observe 
that lavish giving often proceeds from 
the want of a faculty—from an ineca- 
pacity for estimating the worth of 
objects. Thus if illiberality be in- 
compatible with a magnanimousspirit, 
prodigality is incompatible with abso- 
lute truth and justice. 


révov ylverar aibtay, Ta Bt wodAduus 
per’ GAAHAwY Kad eioly éviore of abrol 
OpaciSerro, Kal TA wey Bowroa Ta Se 
avedevGepor Kad BAws avduarot KaKds, 
37 kal cundvéctepov—Borikol] ‘This 
vice runs more in our blood than 
prodigality : the mass of men love to 
keep money, rather than to give it.’ 
It may be doubted whether this as- 
sertion is universally true. Would 
it, for instance, be true of the Irish ? 


Again, Aristotle hardly acknowledges 
enough the kindness that exists among 
men, and which made Kant wonder 
that there was ‘so much kindness 
and so little justice’ in the world, 
Aristotle, from his dislike to all that 
is sordid, and his admiration for the 
brilliant and noble qualities, takes 





38 Illiberality is- widely spread, 
and has many forms; it contains two 
elements—excess of taking and defect 
of giving; but it does not always 
manifest itself in its entirety (od 
macw dAdKAnpos maparylyvera), some- 
times one element exists separately 
from the other. 


oa ik HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 65 


~ ~~ ia > nw , , 
Bory tig Anbews, od mao GAoKAYpOS TapayiveTa, BAR’ 
Le _ iy \ c xX ~ 7 c / 4 
eviors ywpizeras, xa of py TY anwer brepParrouoy, oi 
X ~ Qs > c XA A > ~ , 
6: TY GooEt EAASIT@OUTIY, Ob LEY Ya EY TALS TOIMUTHIC 39 
ng > \ / , ~ 
mpornyoplasc oioy Desowrol Yrlo xpos xi 1xEC, TAYTES TH 
/ ~ / 
dere eAAsi@oucl, Tv OB AAAoTLiwy ovx edizvTas ode 
’ f c S / > , 4 > / 
Bovrovras AapwPavery, Ob ev Oia Tivae emielxeiay xa evAa- 
~ ~ ~ \ y a / 
Bziav tev aicypmy. doxotics yap Evo 4 dao ye dia 
nr , Yo 7 ~ / 
rovro duaarrey, iva py wor avayxacbwow aioypoy Tt 
-~ , x \ A ~ ~ 
mpasar. TovTwy O2 xal 6 xvuivorplorys xal was 6 ToLOt- 
'' ~ ~ ~ x 
Tos wvopactra 0 ard Tig breBoarts Tod prfevt ay 
~ € a oF DY ‘4 , > , ~ > / e 
Ootvas. of O ad did hoBoy améyovTas THY AAACTPIwWY We 40 
> en \ ee \ hed eZ / \ > € ~ 
od padtoy TO aUTOY ey Ta ETEDWY AapPavely, TAO AITOU 
7 7 wy, > ~ 4 , 7 
ETépous pny apsoxer ody auUTOIg TO pyTE AaPPaverY LITE 
 >7 i 4A \ ~ ~ 
Osdovas, of 0 ad xara Tay AR OrEesParrouels TH TavTO- 
bev AapPave | way, olov of Tag avenev4é Zoveriag & 
ev AapPavery xak way, olov of TAG averevFEpous Esyaring ép- 
/ *% \ / ~ A 
yalopcvor, wopvoocxol xal raves of Toto, xal Toxo TAL 
HATH plepoy ET] FOAAW. WavTeg yap ovrot obey ov Jet Aap- 
/ og P \ ‘4 iy s : Lhe > > if as 
c ~ ~ ec 
Bavoucs, xab brocoy ov Ost. xolvoy 0 ex’ auTois 7 aloypo- 41 
, > lf 7 \ a | \ 7 
xepdsia Daiverar’ mavTeg yap Evexa xepdouc, xal TovTov 
~ > ‘> , \ ra 
paxpod, 6veldn Swomtvouciww. Tods yap Ta meyarna py GeV 42 
3: Py ~ > B / SL A Ow > , > é 
2 OS AMULPAVOYTAS, 70 A Ol, OU AEyousy aversuTepouc, 
= ‘ / / ~ \ ~ 
oloy Tous Tupavvous TOAZIG mopFoivTAg xa icpa TUA@YTAS, 





39-40 of pév yap—obv Sez] ‘Men | not easy to tuke what belongs to 
of one class, those who go by such | others, and not have others take what 
names as “stingy,” “ closefisted,” | belongs to oneself—they are content, 
*‘curmudgeons,” all fall short in what | therefore, neither to take nor give. 
they give away, but they neither | A second class are excessive in taking 
covet their neighbours’ goods, nor | everything and from all quarters, as 
wish to take them. With some of | for instance, those who ply illiberal 
them this arises from a certain sense | trades, brothel-keepers, and all such 
of equity and shrinking from what is | like, and lenders of small sums at 
base : for their motive, either supposed | high interest. For all these take 
or professed, in being careful of their | whence they ought not, and more than 
means, is to prevent the possibility | they ought.’ This passage falls into 
of their being compelled by want to | two parts, of & ad Kxard thy Ajyw 
do base actions. To this set belong | corresponding to of pév yap év tais 
the “‘skinflint,” and all his like, a | sodtrais. There are two subordinate 
name derived from superlative un- | divisions of the first part, namely, 
willingness to give to anybody. But | of piv did twa émelxeay, and of 3 ad 
others again abstain from their neigh- | 3a @éfor. 
bours’ goods through fear, since it is 

VOL. II. Kk 





66 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQN IV. [Cuar. 


43 ZAK Tovypous parry xal aoePeig xal adixous. 6 wévTos 
\ ie 7 ate \ ~ > , 
xuBsuT7nS xal 6 COE CUES xb O ANTTYS Twy avensubeomy 
/ 
cloiv, aio xpoxepoeig yap. xépdoug yap evexsy audorepor 
mpoypwaTebove ott xah oveion bropévouewy, xa of ey xivduvous 
Tovs psylotous Evexa TOU AjupaTos, of O ars THY dirAwy 
ery: a ~ , > , ,o > ~ 
xepdaivoucsy, ofg deb Osddvas. apdarepos Oy O4ev ov Osi xEp- 
~ ~ \ ~ 
dalvery Bovrcuevor aloypoxepdsic, xai maoas On ai Torairos 
~ / 

44 arwerg averevdepor, scuba’ 0b TH eAsudepioryts avereu- 
Gzpia evavtiov AgyeTau* psigey TE yap 207! “andy Tis 
acwrias, xal wanrroy exh TavTyY auapTavourly y Kara THY 

~ \ bx , ~ 
45Asybeioay aowriav. meph mev ouv ércudeporynrog xal Tay 
~ ~ a] 4 
QvTixeinevoy xaxi@y ToradT sipyjodw. 


2 Aog&eie 8 av axcrovboy sivas xal mepl peyarompereiag 





44 pet(dy te ydp eort Kady Tijs 
Gowrlas] Before (§ 32) Aristotle 
made the doubtful statement that 
prodigality does more good than 
illiberality. He now makes the 
positively untrue statement that illi- 
berality does more harm than prodi- 
gality. His view is fallacious from 
an ignorance of the principles of 
political economy, and from not 
looking at the question with sufficient 
breadth. He regards prodigality as a 
short-lived evil which will be cured 
by time, and illiberality as inveterate. 
But in their consequences it is rather 
prodigality that is incurable, and 
illiberality transitory. liberality 
can always be remedied, and indeed 
it brings its own remedy, for saving 
produces wealth and capital, and 
these lift a man naturally,and neces- 
sarily into a more expensive style of 
living, however much he may haggle 
over details. But prodigality causes 
personally, to the family, and to the 
nation, a loss of resources which is 
absolutely incurable, 


II. Magnificence, the virtue next 
discussed, is a higher kind of libe- 





rality. It consists in spending money 
on a great scale with propriety (év 
meyé0es mpémovca Samrdvn éoriv). Thus 
there are two elements, greatness and 
propriety. The greatness is relative, 
being limited by the propriety, and 
the propriety is relative to the per- 
son, the circumstances, and the ob- 
ject. Magnificence will of course 
be prompted by a desire for what is 
noble. There will be something 
imaginative and striking about the 
effect it produces (7d 3¢ weyadomperts 
Oavuasrév), Great and solemn ocea- 
sions will be its proper sphere, the 
services of religion, the entertaining 
of foreigners, public works, gifts, and 
return-gifts, The well-born and 
illustrious will be the proper persons 
to exercise it. The house of the 
magnificent man will be of suitable 
splendour, everything he does will 
show taste and propriety: even in a 
gift to a child he will exhibit the idea 
of magnificence. The vulgar man, 
missing this happy nicety, will jar on 
our taste with his excessive splendour 
(Aaumptvera: mapa pédos), his object 
being evidently mere ostentation. 
The petty man, on the other hand, 


¥—11.} 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. 67 


Oienbciv' Soxet yap xal aUTH wepl YpypaTa Tig apeTr 


a 
ELVAE. 


3 a ING?* e-- 9 , » / A / 
OvXY WOTED O Fh erevdeporys OlaTelves Tepk Tacas 


Tas fy ypypaci moa&srs, AAAA weph Tag damavypas povoy" 


zy rouToig 0 bmepéyer Tig EAsubepioryTog meyedes. 


xaba- 


\ ” ey eae , 2 t , 
3EO yae TOUVOUL.A AUTO UTOOUUAWEL, EV peyébes TPE Ove 


, . , 
baravn eoTiy. 


Boum cy jsct TpInpapye xaos apxdempe. 
60 ev pixpoig 7 ev perpioig 3 


air ey, xh ey @ xal mph a. 


4 OM , , > \ \ 328 
TO GF peyebos ™wpos Tk° ov YP TO AuUTO2 


\ , IN! \ 
TO sd sain 07 al gd 


“ar ab lay Samavioy ov Aéyerou et echoed ac 77S, oloy Td 


‘mornraxt dooxoy AATTY* 


AAnN 6 ev psy anrois ouTws. 


& piv yap peyaromperng eArsubepioc, 6 0 ercubeps0g ovbev 


pearroyv pesyarom per, S$. 


Tig Tomotys 0 Eews 7 evs 


ZrAsiiC px pom pemerae xarsirat, 7 0 drepPorn Bavavola 
xah mespoxanta xal boos Toadras, ovxy tresBarrovoo Td 
peyedes wel & del, AAD Ev ig ov det xal we od det Aap- 





from timidity and constant fear of 
expense, will be always below the 
mark, and even after considerable 
expense will mar the whole effect 
by meanness in some point of de- 
tail. 

2 7d 5e péyebos—apxibewpg | ‘Now 
the greatness is relative, for there is 
not the same expense for a trierarch 
as for the head of a sacred legation.’ 
This latter office would of course 
demand peculiar splendour. The 
Aerroupyla at Athens were exactly 
fitted to exercise the magnificence of 
the citizens. 

7d mpéxov 3) apds airdv, Kal ev G 
xa) mepl &] ‘ The propriety accordingly 
must be relative to the person, the 
circumstances, and the object.’ We 
have here nearly the same categories 
as were given, Eth. 11. i. 16, where 
the points connected with an action 
are enumerated, tis te 5) Kal rt ral 
wept th ev zim xpdtre, On the 
suitableness of the person see below 
§§ 12-14. The circumstances are 
touched upon §§ 13,15. The object 


K2 





(which cannot be definitely sepa- 
rated from the circumstances) $§$ 
16-18, 

morAdnt SécKoy aAirp] 
Odyss. XVII. 420. 

4 7 5& tmrepBorah Bavavoia kai 
Gmeipoxarla Kal Sou toatra| ‘The 
corresponding excess is called “ vul- 
garity,” and “ bad taste,” and the like.’ 
Bdvavoos is said to be derived from 
Baivos ‘a forge’ and atw. Thus it 
means a metal-worker, or artisan. 
From the contempt felt by the Athe- 
nians for this kind of craft, Bdvavoos 
came to imply ‘mean, ‘vulgar,’ 
analogously to goprixés. In Aristotle’s 
Politics there is a definition of what 
kind of work is strictly to be con- 
sidered Bdvavoos (vu. ii. 4). Bdvavoor 
® epyov elvar det tovto vowiew Kal 
Téxvyy Tabtny Kol pdOnow, Soa mpds 
Tas xphoes Kal tas mpdtes tas Tis 
apetis &xpnotoy amepyd Covra 7d cGua 
Tov édevOepwr f thy Wxhv h the 
didvoray. The word Bavavela is ex~ 
cellently applied here to denote vul< 


garity in expenditure, 


Homer 


68 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. [Cuar. 


5 Tpuvowzvar’ Uorepoy OF meph auTi@y epodmev. 608 wsyae 
Aomperyg erioTyuovs oimev* TO wpemov yap duvaras Jew- 
6 pijras xal damavijcos peyara eupsrde. wWomrep yap ev 
apyy) elroy, 7 241g Taig évepyeloug bpiterou, xal wy eoriv. 
ai dn Tot peynronperotig Oamavas peyanror xal mpérouras. 
Toda by xal TA Epya’ oltw yap Foros peyo damdvye xa 
mpérov TH Epyw. WaoTe TO pev Epyoy Tig Samavyg aEiov 
dei civat, THY 08 damdvyy Tod Eoyou, } xal bmepParrey. 
7 damavyires 08 TH ToLMtiTA 6 meyaromperng TOU xaAOD Evexr” 
8 xolvoy yap TOUT Tails apsTaic. xal Ets ydéwo xab mposTi- 
9 xs" 7 yap axpiBoroyin pixpomperéc, xal rg xaAALO TOV 
xal mperwotoratoy, oxeVaiT av ULaAROY  worov xah wos 
102AayioTov. avayxaiov Oy xab érevdépov Toy peyarompery 
civar* xab yap 6 2rzubépiog Oamavioe a& det xab wg dei. 
év TouToig O08 Td péya Tod meyaromperotc, oloy péyeboc, 
mipl rasta Tig eAsvdepsoryros odons, xal ard Tig Tons 
damavng To Epyov Toijoe peyaronperéortepoy. O08 Yap 7 
AUTH apeTH XTTLATOS xa) Epyou’ xTipa wey yap TO WAI 
oTov KEiov TimsmTaroy, olov ypuoos, Epyav OF TO peya 





5 5 8& peyaronperhs—euperds] | generally tothe beginning of Book IL.; 
‘The magnificent man is a kind of | perhaps Erh. u. ii. 8 is the nearest 
artist, because he has an eye for the | reference that can be given. But in 
becoming, and can spend great sums | the present place Aristotle is not 
tastefully.” The word émorhyor here | speaking of the formation of habits 
conveys the association of those quali- | out of acts, but rather of moral habits 
ties which were said to belong to a | or states having a definite existence 
perfect work of art, Zth, u. vi.g: Ei | and reality only in acts and in the 
3) masa emorthun obtw 7d epyov <b | objective circumstances (Gy éoriy) to 
emtedel, mpds Td pécov BAémovea, | which they (the moral states) refer. 
K.T.A, _ This view regards a moral state as a 

6 g&aonep yap—tgG %pyy] ‘For as | mere potentiality, which only attains 
we said at the outset, a moral state is | definite and conscious reality by 
determined by its acts and its objects. | emerging into an act. The remark 
Therefore the outlays of the magnifi- | is apparently made to account for a 
cent man will be great and suitable. | concrete treatment of the virtue of 
And the works on which he employs | magnificence. We have above 
them will be of the same character, | noticed (Eth. mt. xii, 3 note) a sepa- 
for only thus it will be possible to | ration made between the habit and 
have a great outlay suitable to the | the act, which looks much less philo- 
work.’ sophical., 

ev 4px] The allusion seems to be | 10 évayxaioy 5h—év meyéOer] ‘It 








II. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IV. 69 


\ , ~ \ Pe c , 7, A X 
xal xarov. To yap ToodTov 7% Oewpia Savpacry, Td dt 
psyaromperts Javparrey. 


/ > / 
AO pETEla EV psyeber. 


\ 4 + ‘ 
xab EOTIV EpyoU apEeTH PEya- 
” N i ™ , z 
coTs Of Thy daTavyLaTwy oie 
, \ , bi ‘ \ \ > 7 \ 
Agyousy TH Tipia, olov Ta mech Oeots avabyuare xa} 
\ \ re / 4, a ~ 
xaracxeval xai Guolas, buolwg 08 xal boa meph may Td 
3 / ow. \ \ \ > , (Lek e 
GiLOVLOY, XA GOR moog TO xowvov EUdIACTILYATA ZoTIY, Oloy 
vw ~ yy ~ ~ x ~ 
el mou Yooyysiy olovTas Osiy Aaumpiog 7 Tpinpupysiv 7H xa 
c ~ ‘ , a a 
eoTiay THY TOA. ev amao1 O women elontos, xal pos 
\ , > / \ a / 
TOY WLATTOYTA avadézceTas TO Tig WY Xai TiVwY SrapydvTwY* 





follows therefore that the magnificent 
man must also be liberal, for the 
liberal man spends what he ought 
and in the way he ought. But it is 
in these same particulars, which are 
common to magnificence and liberality, 
that the element of greatness which 
there is in the magnificent man ap- 
pears, as for example in vastness of 
proportions, and with the same expense 
he will make the result more splendid. 
For a work is not to be esteemed for 
the same qualities as a possession. 
That possession is most prized which 
is worth most, as for instance gold, 
but that work which is great and 
noble. When we contemplate such a 
work, we admire; but the magnificent 
is always admirable ; and the highest 
excellence of a work, as far as scale is 
concerned, is magnificence.’ The words 
ofoy wéyebos have vexed the commen- 
tators. One device that has been 
adopted is to omit the stop after ué- 
yeOos and to translate the passage, 
‘Sed in his magnum est magnifici, 
veluti magnitudo liberalitatis circa 
hee (reading ratra) versantis’ (Mi- 
chelet). 
punctuation, we might construe, taking 
oioy péyeOos as epexegetic of 7d uéya, 
‘But the greatness of the magnificent 
man, as it were a certain grandeur of 
scale, appears in these same particulars, 
which are common to magnificence 


Or, without altering the 





and liberality.” But the point Ari- 
stotle insists on is that magnificence 
differs from liberality not in degree, 
but in kind, being a display of more 
genius and imagination on the same 
objects, and thus with the same ex- 
pense producing a more striking result. 
He gives as an instance of the means 
employed, ‘vastness of size.’ Td 
wéya is the moral greatness of the 
magnificent man, this takes as its ex- 
ponent péye#os or physical bulk. 
The Paraphrast carries out the com- 
parison in the text rather neatly. 
Olov, pépe eimetv, Oepametoa Td Oeiov 
defjicav, 6 pty eAevddpios xpucody tt 
oKevos mohoet, Kal AlOovs Timlous 
eyKoAAtoe: TG oKever* 6 BE peryado- 
Tperhs vady péyay Kal Kaddy oixodo- 
uhoe } aviplavras avacrhoe: 7h yeptpas 
cikodouhoe: 7 &AAO TL peya Kad Bav- 
paotoy Sid Tis tons Samdvns epydoerat, 
kal 7d wey TOD peyaduTpeos epyov 
kuplws epyov éara, Td St Tov eAevOeptou 
KT7jua padAov 7} Epyov. 

Il ebpiAoriynra] ‘favourite ob- 
jects of rivalry.’ Dr. Cardwell (upon 
§ 2 above) quotes Lycurgus Orat. 
contra Leocr. p. 167: Ov yap ef tis 
immoretpépnrev 7} keXoptyynke Aaumpas 
—itids dori nap juay To.abrns xdpiros 
—éAnr’ ef Tis TeTpinpdpxnKe Aaumpas 7} 
telxn TH Tarplds mepiebarev, 7} mpds Thy 
kowhy owrnplay éx taév idlwy ovvevTd- 
pnee, 


70 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. [ Cuap, 


aE yap Oe TOUT elvos, xal py pdvoy TH Eoyw AAG xal 
137 ToMUyTs ™ PET ELV. 01d mévng pay oux ay ely peyero- 
TpeMIg* 0 yap Eat ad’ wy TOAAG bamavicss TpEToYTWS* 
60 emsyerpey 7albsog’ mapa tiv a&lav yap xal rd déov, 
14xaT apeTyy 08 Tb Ops. mpérer OF xal cig TA ToLadra 
mooimapye OF avtr&y 7 bid Ty mpoyovwy 7 wy abroig 
pérectiv, xal Tog evyevéos xal Toig evdeZog xal boo 
ToMiTa’ TovTa yap Tavra péyeboc Eye xal aFlwpa. 
ISLAMOTR py oY TOLOUTOG 6 meyaromperyc, xual Ev ToIS 
TOLOUTOIS OATAVILATY 7 BEyaroTperEaA, WaorED slonTas" 
peyloTa yap xah evtiporata> Thy 8 idiwy boa sicamak 
yiveras, oloy yapog xal el rs ToLUTOV, xal ei Tepl TI TATE y 
Tons orovoates y of ev AEsmpari, xal wept Edvewy 02 bro- 
doyas xal amooToAds, xal Owpeas xal avTIOwesag* ov yap 
cig EauTov damavnpos 6 mEeyaromperng AAA sig Ta xoIwa, TH 
16 82 O@pa Tos avabyjpaciw Eyer TI Suomov, pmeyaromperatg 08 
xal oixoy xaTacxsvacacbas mperovTMg TH TALUTW* xOT- 
p0g yap Tig xah obTog. xal wept Tatra waaArov damavay 
Oo TOAVY povie Tay epywy" HAAMO TA yap Tatra. xal éy 
17 ExaoToIg TO Mpemov’ ov yap TauTa apuoler Becig xab av- 
Gpwroig, 000 ev iene xal radw* xal exi roy daravyparey 
ZxaorTov peya ev TH yével, xal peyaromperécTaroy pty TO 
182y peyarw péya, evTatda 0& To ey TovTOIG péya. xal 
Oiadéper TO ev TH Epyw péya Tod ey TO Jamavipate 
cdaica pty yap y Ajxubog 7 xaAAloTy Eyes peyarompemeray 
moasdixo Swpov, 7 8 ToUTOV TIy pixpoy xal aversdbepov. 
19 01d TOTO eats Tol peyaromperods, ev av mory Yevel, 





14 mpéerer 6¢—AGtlapa] ‘The under- ; events which in a play are supposed 
taking of such expenses is proper for | to have been done before the com- 
persons already distinguished by mag- | mencement of the action. 
nificence, either in themselves, or their 18—19 kal diapéper—damravhyaros | 
ancestors, or their connections, and | ‘And the “greatness,” which is ex- 
for the noble, the illustrious, and such | hibited in the work, differs from the 
like persons: for in all those cases “greatness” of the expense; for the 
greatness and dignity are present.’ | most beautiful of balls or of bottles is 
The use of mpoirdpxew here to denote | magnificent as a present to a child, 
that which exists already as an achieve- | though its price be small and paltry, 
ment in one’s family is not unlike its | Hence the magnificent man, whatever 
use, Eth. 1. xi. 4, to denote those | kind of thing he be producing, will 











TY, ) HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IV. 71 


~~ ~ ‘\ A ~ 3 > , 
Psyaromsem@s Tossiv’ TO YAS TOLOUTOY oUx evumepPanroy, 
Soy’ aS Sek ~ Dd , ~ X > ee 
xOb EYOY KAT ablay TOU OATAVYLATOS. TOLOUTOS LEY OUY O20 
7 c o. 2 , \ , ~ \ \ 
psyanromperrs, 60 trepparrwy xal Pavauoos To Tapa To 
isd y \ ~ 
dgoy avarloxey brepPanrrsi, Women elpnTar. ev yap ToIs 
~ ~ f §. 2 2 / \ Ld 
[bx polg TwWY OUT AVY EXT WY TOAAL AVANO KE HAL ALT OUVE- 
\ / = \ ~ ~ \ 
TOb TALK [LEAOC, ObGY epauicTas YAUARWS Eg TIOY, HO HW ULW- 
~ ~ > ~ 7 > 7 > , a e 
dois Hopnyay ev TH Tapoow Topdupay elo Depwy, WOTED Of 
ne \ if \ ~ 7 > ~ ~ 
Meyapsic. xal TavTa TH ToIMUTA Tooe: ov TOU xaADD 
a > A 7 ~ > Py Va 4 | y A ~ 
EVEXH, AAA TOY TAOUTOY ETIOSIXVYUMLEVOS, XL OIA THUTH 
ey 7 A og ~ \ ~ 
O1dLEv0S Gavpateobas, xOL OU peey dst TOAAAK avaAw@oas, 
> 7 Nn ~ rr ND > , , c ~ 4A 
OAlLYa OaTaYWY, OU O GAlYa, MOAAG. 4G 02 [lx pom psm7g 21 
% / zAAsiVe \ \ & > > , > ~ 
TEOb WAVTA EAASHYEI, HOLL TH MEYITTA AYRAWT AS EV LLixow 
. A > ~ i ut x ~ (4 \ nw 
TO HAAOY ATOAEL, HAE O TL AY TOY EADY, XA TXOTWY 
~ a / / *) ~ iN} A 4A 
Tis dy EAAYITTOV -AvarAwWoal, xal TAIT ddupomevos, xcLk 





produce it magnificently ; for the cha- 
racter of such work is that it cannot 
be easily outdone, its magnificence 
being always in proportion to the 
outlay. The first part of this passage 
is almost a repetition of what was 
said § 10, on the difference between 
‘greatness’ and ‘costliness’ in a work 
of art. The ‘ball’ and the ‘bottle’ 
seem to have been common toys. Dr. 
Fitzgerald compares the description 
of Cupid’s toy in Apollonius Rhodius, 
Arg. 1. 135, and Plato, Phedo, p. 
110 B, woTep ai SwiexdoxvTa opaipat, 
moitan, xpeuacr SierAnuuévn. Also 
Theophrastus’ Characters, Mlept ape- 
oxelas, where the &peokos is said to 
purchase @upiakas tav orpoyyiAwy 
Ankb@ovs—Kal opaiporhpior. 

20 Tolovros—moAAG| ‘Such now is 
the magnificent man, but he who ex- 
ceeds and is vulgar exceeds because, 


as was said before, he spends more © 


than is necessary. He spends much 
upon trifies, and preserves no harmony 
in his splendour; he entertains his 
club-fellows with a wedding-feast, and 
when he has charge of a comic chorus, 
he makes them appear in purple, as 





the Megarians do. In all this extra- 
vagance he never aims at a noble end, 
but only seeks to parade his riches, in 
the hope of being stared at; where 
he should spend much, he draws his 
purse-strings, where he should spend 
little, he squanders.’ The last sentence 
shows that in vulgarity extremes meet, 
selfishness prompting both too much 
expense and too little, see above, 
chap. i. § 33 note. With mapa péros 
we may compare Shakspeare, Merry 
Wives, Act i. se. 3. ‘ His filching was 
like an unskilful singer: he kept not 
time.’ 

oiov épavioras| Epavos being a club 
where each member entertained in 
turn, or an entertainment where each 
guest contributed, it was of course 
bad taste to eclipse the rest in splen- 
dour. 

év tH wapddy| The parode was the 
first song of the chorus sung at its entry. 
Naturally the comic chorus would not 
require rich purple dresses. The ex- 
pense of a comic chorus at Athens 
appears to have been sixteen mine 
(48/.), that of a tragic chorus thirty 
minz (9o/.); see Bentley on Phalaris, 


72 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 


/ > pe La ~ a 5 ~ 
227 OVT OLOLLEVOS [-FbS@ TOLElY % OFS, 


[Cuar. 


oe X x cg 
ciol ev ovv ai Bec 


td , ] \ > Lang > > Ul ‘ \ = 
airasr xaxiat, ov pay dveldn y emidépoves die To pyre 
PraPepal rw rérag elvor prjre Alay aoyrmoves. 

€ X < s \ , \ \> Pe ee 

H 3: peyaroWuyla meph peyara piv xal éx rob dvoparog 





p. 360. The Megarians were noted 
among the Greeks for stupidity. 

22 €lol uty obyv—aoxhpoves| * Now 
these (#.e. vulgarity and pettiness) 
are vices, but they do not entail dis- 
grace, because they are neither hurtful 
to one’s neighbour, nor are they very 
unseemly.’ 


III. Aristotle’s famous description 
of the virtue of high-mindedness 
(which he places as a mean between 
vanity and want of spirit) throws 
great light upon the whole bearing of 
his moral system. 

We must notice in it rather an 
admiring picture of what 7s than an 
investigation into what ought to be. 
High-mindedness is nothing else than 
a certain loftiness of spirit possessed 
by great men. It can only (in its 
fullest sense) belong to great men, for 
unless accompanied by qualities su- 
perior to those of the rest of the 
world, it would be simply ridiculous, 

Aristotle takes this loftiness of 
spirit, and, considering it fine and 
admirable, points out the various 
traits in which it exhibits itself. And 
nothing can be more subtle or felici- 
tous than many of his observations on 
this head. But it is plain that high- 
mindedness, as here represented, is 
not something which is prompted by 
duty, rather it stands quite beside 
the idea of duty. Greatness and the 
sense of moral obligation are essen- 
tially distinct, however much they 
may accidentally coincide. 

The high-minded man has all 
virtues, says Aristotle ($$ 14—15). 





But we find on nearer inspection that 
this means that the high-minded man 
is above all those minor interests 
which might induce to vice; he does 
not care about money, so he will 
never cheat, he does not value even 
life very high, so he will not be a 
coward. Here then there is no self- 
subjection toalaw. The high-minded 
man does not avoid vice because it is 
‘wrong* (in the modern sense), but 
simply because it is unworthy of him. 
Thus he is most essentially a law to 
himself and above all other law. Ari-. 
stotle spoke of high-mindedness as 
being a sort of culmination of the 
virtues (§ 16), and justly so, for it is 
the culmination of his moral system. 
As we before remarked (ch. i. § 16, 
note), his system is based on the idea 
of self-respect. Loftiness of spirit is 
the highest form of self-respect (me- 
yarov éavrdy atwi, &kos Sy). This 
principle goes a long way in elevating 
the character and purifying the con- 
duct, but its natural development is 
also a dislike (§§ 24-26) of all limi- 
tations of the individuality ; in short, 
its natural development is a sort of 
noble pride. 

High-mindedness, however fine may 
be the qualities that go to make it up, 
is essentially not a human attitude. 
As we have observed already, it is 
something exceptional, and in Ari- 
stotle’s account of it we have a psycho- 
logical portrait of a great man. Yet 
still this account shows Aristotle not 
to have been familiar with that con- 
ception of ‘ moral goodness’ which has 
arisen out of later associations. 


II.—TIII.] HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIOQON IV. 73 


Zoixev elvan, wepl mola O éori mpwrovy AaPewpev, diacéper2 
~ 54: \ ie a \ \ \ od ~ » ws ot 
O ovbty ray 2S qf roy xara THy eS oxoreiv. doxel 033 
, > ec / [ peek > ~ + BA ec 
peyarobuyos elvar 6 peyarwy abroy a&iov aFiog wy. 6 
\ A ee > 4 > 4 ~ > (9 ~ » > 23. ‘\ 
yop py nar a&iav avrs moby 7atdioc, Téy 68 xaT’ aperay 
ID _\ > aN) } eet d | \ z e 
ovdelg yAlsog oud avonTog,  peyaroWuyog piv ovy oO 
cipypévos. oyap pixpioy &&10g xal Todrwy a&iov ExuTov4 
, / > yt 2 / A € 
cwdpwy, peyaroyuyxos O ov° ey peeyebes yap | psyano- 5 
a 
Wuxia, dorep xal To xdrAog év pEyarAw T@paTI, of psxpol 
0 doreio xal ov Aol 0 ov. 6 OF peyadrAwy 6 
peT por, xaAOl U. 6 08 peyaroy 
€ \ > ~ Sf x ~ CNN , KS 
sautov a&idy avaEos wy yadvog: 6 08 peSévav 4 aSs0g 
> ~ ne ra 3) 23 / xX A / 2.7 
od as yatvos. 60 eratrovwy 7 aEt0g puxpobuyos, eav7 
~ af \ 
TE peyarwy éay Te weTplwy, gov Te xal puxpiy AEsog wy ert 
> ra ek > ~ \ , BD) / € iz 
2harrévwy adroy a&iol, xal wariora ay ooSesey 6 meyaruy 
»” 7 \ x‘ ? / > \ / 3 v BA 
AEs: th yap ay eros, ek pr ToooUTwWY yy AEs; eoTL8 
or c / ~ \ £4 a ~ de 4 DY ~ 
6 peyanrnobuyos TO piv peyeder dxpoc, TW 08 we Vel 
/ ~ % > > , e.& ? ~ #23" -¢@ , 
péoog’ Toi yap xar agiav abriy a&iwi. of 0 repPar- 
~ wo 
Aouot xa} 2AAEimrovclv. ei OF Oy peyarwy éavTov aEs01 F106 9 
~ x 
ay, xal parniota Tad peyiorwy, weph Ev polrcTa ay ely. 
€ 3 / , \ eee At > / / INS ~ % 
70 a&ia Agyerou 3 pog TH EXTOS ayaida. peEYtOTOY OE TOUT IO 
Ey , a ~ pa CF , ee, / a2 , F 
av Geinwev 6 Toi Bevis arovémoucy, xal ov paArIoT edievTas 
4 > > iA A A te A ~ / s 
oF ey AE WOLaTh, xb TO EL TOG XAAAITTOIS abanrov. 





2 diapéper F ov0tv—cxoneiv] ‘Now | picture of a highminded man here 
it does not make the least difference | given to us must have been taken 
whether we consider the state of | from life. Probably Aristotle traced 
mind, or the character that is pro- | different manifestations of the high- 
duced by the state of mind.’ The | minded element in different people, 
procedure adopted by Aristotle | and has here combined them. 
throughout is that of describing 5 ev peyé0er yap—ot] ‘For high- 
virtues in the concrete, though inno | mindedness implies greatness, just as 
other case does he give so complete a | beauty implies a large body; little 
personality as in describing the high- | people may be pretty and elegant, but 
minded man, This procedure, while | not beautiful.’ This was the Greek 
it gives graphic liveliness to his dis- | idea, ef. Politics, vu. iv. 8: 76 ye kaAdby 
cussions, tends to make us forget that | ev wafOe: Kal peyéOe clw0e yiverba. 
these virtues are not so much different | Poetics, vii. 8: 7d yap Kadrdv év peyébe 
kinds of character as different elements | kal rater ori, Cf. also the story of 
in the same character. A later de- | Phye in Herodotus, 1.¢. 60. Against 
velopment of Aristotle’s ethical system | such critics of beauty as the Greeks, 
calls attention to this point (cf. Eth. | nothing is to be said. 

vi. xiii. 6). It has been said that the 
VOL. Il. L 





74 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 


~ > c , 
TOlOUT OY 0 4 id sel 


[Cuap. 


~ ~ > \ 
peyioroy yep 07) ToUTO Téy euros 


ayabiov. sph Tips 07) xa} aripiag 6 peyancyuzas eoTHw 


II ws Ogi, 


xal avev 08 royou palvoyras ok peyancrpuxos 


mph Tapy elyar® THLAS yap panied oi peyotror aEoior 


12 cauTous, xaT aélay 0g. 


6 82 puxpdbuyos zarcimes al 


13 ™ pos sauTov xal pos | To TOU peyaroyoxouv a Eien. 6 Oe 
Havvos 7 pos EauToy peey bmepParres, ov pay Tov ye posyanro- 


14 Vuyov. 
dpiortos ay ely" 
psylote@y 6 d&ploros. 


é 08 psyancpuxos, elrep ThY peyloTwy aGH06, 
pelSovog yap asl 6 Peatiny a&iog, xal 
Tov wo daybms dpa peyarobuyoy 


bet ayabey civar. xal doEee 0 dv civar peyaroWuyou To ev 


« / ~ , 
15 SXAOTY, ALpSTY| [LEY OL. 


oudap.is T oy dipp.oGor peyaropax 


devyey mapaccio aves, 000 adixeiv® Tivos yap Zvexa TPO 
Ea aloypa, @ obey péya; xa Exacta 0 emioxomodyts 
Tapmay yeroiog dalvar dv 6 peyaropuyos py) ayabes 
@y, oux ely 0 ay ovds Tins AEs Patrcg wy Tig 
apeTig yap abrov 7 Tiny, xal amovéneras Toig ayabois. 
16 20IME LEV OUY 7 peyaroWuyla olov xoTpos TIC Elvas THY 


ApeT oY ° 
2 ve 
exelywy. 


/ \ Dita ~ ‘ > 4 ” 
psiSoug yap avTag molsi, xak ov yiveras avev 
: \ ~ \ ~ > 7 4 
Oia Toro yareroy TH aAnfein peyardbuyoy 





1O—II TowdtTov 8—xar’ dtiav €] 
‘Such a prize is honour, which is the 
greatest of alloutward goods. There- 
fore the highminded man bears him- 
self as he ought with regard to honour 
and dishonour, But why should we 
prove what is obvious, that the study 
of magnanimous minds is honour? 
And great men lay especial claim to 
honour, yet according to their desert.’ 
Aristotle here fixes external honour 
us the object with which _high- 
mindedness deals. Afterwards he 
sets it above all external honour 
($17), Gperijis yap mayreAots ok dy 
yévoiro Gila tiwh. Honour is not 
good enough, but the world has 
nothing better to give. 

15 ovdauas—mapaceloayr:] ‘It 
would never suit the highminded man 
to fly in ung:aceful haste.” Tapa- 





oclew (i.e, Tas xetpas) meant ‘to 
work the hands in running.’ Cf. De 
Incess, Animal, iii. 4, where the 
principle of the lever is shown to be 
involved in this motion. Avd Kat of 
méyrafao. G&Adovrat wAcioy xovres 
Tovs GArTipas 7) wh exovres, Kal of 
Ogovres Oartoy Oéover mapacecioyres Tas 
xeipas’ ylvera yap Tis dmépesots ev TH 
diardce: mpds Tas xeEipas Kal rods 
Kapmovs. 

16 foe pty oby—Kadoniryablas] 
‘Now highmindedness appears to be, 
as it were, a sort of crown of 
the virtues ; it enhances them, and it 
cannot come into existence without 
them. Hence it is hard to be high- 
minded in the true sense of the 
term, for this is impossible without 
accomplished excellence.’ The word 
‘magnanimity’ is the conventional 


—————— 


LJ 


s > 4 FF wv > / 
ELVAi* Ov valid O10Y TE AYEV xanroxayablas. 


HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 75 


PArMeTa psy 17 


y = A QA A > / ec = row az. s \ > \ 

ovy mepl Times nal aTilag 6 peyarobuyosg Eats, xal ex} 
~ ~ ~ / 

piv Taig peyaros xal bro TOyvoToudalwy peTping 7067- 


c ~ > , / a \ 3 , > ~ 
TETAl, WS TWY O1XEIWY TUYHAYWY 7 XA EARTTOYWY* ALETIS 


\ ~ > * / > , A > \ > ; Ge 7 
YAP TAYTEAOUS OUX AY YEvOITO aE la TIAN’ OU NY AAD aTro- 


2&2 / — ~ . + > \ elf > ~ > , ~ 
ESETOAL YE TO By EXE QuToug [4s @ AUTH QATFOVEILELY. THs 


02 mapa Téy TuysvTwy xal Exh pixpoig MapmAY GALYWpTCEL* 


> \ 4 ¥ 
ou yee TOUTWY a&10¢. 


« I SA 4 > , 
OMOlWS OF XA ATILIAS. 


ov yap 


” 4 Nines See , SN ?. 3 , or 
EOTAL Oixaiws wept QUTOYV, POMTTA [AEY OUY EOTIY, WOTED 18 


y ¢ / \ a > \ > \ \ \ 

ELOY T OL, 0 peeyanobuyos TEDL TILAS, OU [AY AAA XOb Teps 
~ ~ fA 

Trotiroy xal duvacreiay xal mdoay euTuylay xal atuylay 


, o oe x , ee ook pe ~ \ 
ET pos 2&e, OT WS AV YlVYTAL, HAL OUT eUTUY wy WEDLY ADS 


wv 19,9 ~ f IOV \ \ \ is 
EOTAL OUT aTUYm@Y TEepiAumTOS. ONde Yao Tepl TiLAY OUTWS 


” € r ” 
EXE wo PEyYIOTOYV OY. 


€ \ “ > eee ~ 
as Yep duvacreiou xHaL O TWROUTOS 


\ 7 / ~ + ~ 
Oe Thy Tipny eo aipera* of yodv Eyovres auTa Tipa- 


~ 7 
cba Ov avtTamy Bovrovras. 
s \ x 
TOUTW HAL TAAAG. 


= \ s Re \ , 5 
© 07 xal 7 Tie7 pxpov gor, 
O10 OmrepomTou doxouTIY FivoL. 


N ~ 
OOXEb 19 


02 xal ra evTvyypaTa TupParrcobos mpdg peyaroWuyiay. 
of yap evyevelg aEsobvTas TIpig xal of duvarrevovTes 7 oi 


~ > c ~ / X\. No 3 ~ € , aa> 3 
Trovtovvtes* ev Imepoyy yap, TOO ayalw srepeyov wav 
eyriorepov. 10 xal Ta ToLAdTA meyaroWuyorépoug Tose. 


~ ‘ - % ~ + 3 4 S. -e> 3 \ i 
TIPOYTOL YAP UTO TIYMY, KAT arnnberayv 0 6 ayabis [ovo0g 20 
, - 2 wv c / ~ > ~ 6 
THANTEOS * WwW p) apdw UMADYEL, LAAAOY AE wUT OL TILNS. 
~ ~ A 
of 3 dvev apeTig TA ToLatira ayaba Eyovres oUTE Oixaiws 





- representative of weyadowuxla, but it 
does not really answer toit. ‘Mag- 
nanimity ’ often implies rather gene- 
rosity, and what Aristotle calls émef- 
xeia, than that loftiness of spirit which 
he attributes to the peyaddpuxos. 
The difficulty of finding English 
words to answer to the terms of 
Aristotle has given rise to a practice, 
not to be commended, of constant- 
ly using Greek terms while speaking 
of the system of Aristotle. It is 
better to paraphrase if we cannot 
translate. 

Kadonayabias| This abstract noun 
does not occur in Plato, who fre- 





quently uses the words kadds te 
xaya0ds (written separately) in the 
common Athenian sense, denoting 
very much what we mean by ‘a 
gentleman.’ By Aristotle the word 
is used with no peculiar moral import ; 
Tav ev Big Karey KayalGy occurs 
Eth, 1. viii. 9, to denote generally 
‘what is noble and excellent in life.’ 
Eudemus appears to have developed 
the idea of kaAok&yabta, and to have 
understood by it the perfection of 
moral virtue combined with the ser- 
vice and contemplation of God. Cf. 
Eth, Eud. vit. ili, 15, and see Essay 
EPisge.7- 


L2 


76 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. [Cuar 


EauTovs meyarwy aksotiow ore 6pbHo peyaroWuyor Asyor- 
21 TOs, avED yap ApeTng MavTErovs ovx ZoT) TaUTA. b7mrEp- 
~ ® 
Omran dt xal poral xab of ra Toaiira Eyovres ayada 
~ ~ \ 
yiyvovrat. cavev yap apeTijg ov padsiov épewv Eupsrwds Ta 
eiTuyyUaTa’ ob Suvdpevor 08 Hépeiy xal olomevos THY 
” € / ° f xX ~ > \ o 
aArhwy Umepeyely exeivwy ev xaTappovolioiw, AUTOL 0678 
ay TOYWT! TEATTOVEW, pLiotivTas yap Toy weyarobuyoy 
ovY du.0101 OvTEG, TOUTO Ot Opwaww ev olg OivavTas® TH Bev 
ou xar’ apeTyy ob mparTovol, xatadpovotios 62 Téy 
22anrwy. 6 08 peyardtuyos Oixalwg xatradpovel (d05aes 
23yap aayfis), of O& morrol ruxsvTws. obx Eats OF 
prxpoxivouveg avd? diroxlvduvos did To OArya TILaY, Ey 
Aoxivo 0g, xal OT duvedy, adeidng Tod Riou we ovx 
vouvog 02, xal dray xivduvedy, adeidyg To v ws 
bd ~ ~ > A 
24aE1oy ov mavtws Civ. xal olog ev moseiv, evepyeToumevog 
0 alcyiveras* To phy yap bwepéyovTos, To 0 bmepeyo- 
/ x \ > Bs ag PK ve / 
pevov. xal ayrevepyeTixdg masiovwy' oITwW yap mpoo- 
asodayoe 6 brapSag xal Zoro ev mwemovbws. Ooxotas dt 
xal pyymovever ols ay Tajowow ev, oy 0 av rabwow 
* 2, fF \ € \ x ~ 7 s 
ov" erarrwy yap 6 mabwy eb Tod moijoavros, PovrAerou 
O tmepéyew. xal Td pdtv ydswo axover, TAO aydiog* O10 
\ x , > / \ > / ~ / 74 « 
xal tTHy Oéti ov rAéyew Tas evepyeriag TH Ass’ ond of 
Adxwveg mpos todo “Abyvatous, aAN a memovbeoay ev. 





one; he will serve “any readily; he 
will be proud to the great, and easy 
with the lowly, &e. On the principle 


22 & 5 peyardpuxos—tuxdvTws | 
‘But the highminded man despises 
justly (for his estimate is true), but 


most people do so at haphazard.’ 
Throughout, the great man is justified 
in the high position he assumes by 
reason of the correctness of his 
estimate. Modern ideas of delicacy, to 
say the least, would proseribe this 
accuracy of self-appreciation, and the 
claims founded upon it. 

24—26 He is glad to do a benefit 
and ashamed to receive one; he will 
wipe out a favour by doing a greater 
one in return; he will remember 
those whom he has benefited, but 
not those by ‘whom he has been 
benefited ; he will be in want of no 





of independence, which appears here 
in an extreme form, see above, note 
on ch, i. § 16. 

5d wal rhv @érw] Homer, iad 1. 
503—4. She only says— 

elmore 54 ce per dldvaracw bynoca 
Hj tre H epye. 2 

ov8 of Adxwves] This is said to 
have been on the occasion of a The- 
ban invasion into Laconia. Aspasius 
quotes from Callisthenes a mention of 
the circumstance. Xenophonis thought 
to allude to the same event (Hell. v1. 
Vv. 33), where, however, he makes the 
Spartans enumerate their services. 


Iil.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 77 


peyanoviyou 02 xab rb pnfevig deioFas 7 poyic, dayperely 26 
0: wpobipws, xal mpdg piv rods evatimpars xal ebruxiosg 
peyay elvos, mpog 08 Todg péooug pétpiov’ THY wiv yap 
imepeyew Yareroy xal cepvov, Thy OF poldioy, xal ev Exeivors 
pay cepviverbas ovx ayevvec, ev 02 Tolg Tameivoig doptixoy, 
@arep cig Tous aobeveig ioyupilecbas. xak cig TH EvTipn 27 

\ oF A 2 y 7 Vet re hog \ 
fH beval, 7 OU WHwWTEvOUTlY HAAGL* xa Apyoy sivas xak 

\ > sh. \ / NW Le 
PEAAYTHY AAA 7 OTOU TILLY PEYAAN 7 EDYOV, xAb OALYwY 
pay moaxrixoy, usyarwy 6% xaldvonactay. avayxatoy 03 28 
nab davepopsooy civar xal davepodirov? ro yap rAavOdvery 
~ ~ x ~ 
doPoupévov. xal uérziw tio aAyfeiag paArOY 7 Tis BENS, 
~ ‘\ 

xal Atyew xal mparrey davep@o* mappyoiacring yap dia 

\ me \ \ > 4 ‘ a \ 
To xatadpovelv. 010 xal aarfevTixos, TARY boa py 
Of cipwyeiav elpwva 02 mpbg Tog moArovs. xal mpdg29 
Grroy uy Odvacbos Siv arr’ qmpdg dirov™ Bourixdy yap, 
yA8 \ ¥. € f ‘ \ c \ I. 

615 nal mavTeg of xorAaxes Gytixol xal of Tameivol xoAaxEC. 
SNK , IAN \ / > nace £ IDV 
oud Gavpartixes: ovbiv yap méya auTw@ egoTiv. 000230 
puycixaxos* ob yap psyaroWoyou To amrouynovevely, 
GAnrws Te xal xaxd, AAA pAAAoY mapopdy. 00 avOow- 31 
moroyog’ ure yap wep) abroad eet odre mepl érépov- 

a \ oe ° ~ , > ~ af? o& e bd 

ours yap iva emawijras perce utd 089 Grwg of AAA 
Wiywrrat, ov) ad emaivetixeg eotiv’ Siorep oud? xaxo- 
AG Oe ~ > 4 ~ > \ or Ho \ \ 
ayes, ovde t&y eybpmy, ei py OF Op. xal wepl32 
avayxaiwy 7 pinpdy qxsora drohuprinds xal deyrixos- 





27—34 A list of characteristics 
follows, completing the picture of the 
lofty-minded man. He will not com- 
pete for the common objects of 
ambition (7a @riua); he will only 
attempt great and important matters, 
he will seem otherwise inactive; he 
will be open in friendship and hatred ; 
really straightforward and deeply 
truthful, but reserved and ironical in 
manner tocommon people, Will live 
for his friend alone, will wonder at 
nothing, will bear no malice, will be 
no gossip (ov« av@pwroddyos), will not 
be anxious about trifles, and will care 





more to possess that which is fine, 
than that which is productive. His 
movements are slow, his yoice is 
deep, and his diction stately. 

28 elpwva 5& mpds Tods moAdoUs] 
Bekker has introduced this reading 
on the authority of one MS. alone; 
all the rest read cipwyela, Etpwva is 
not strictly grammatical, but it is in 
accordance with the Aristotelian mode 
of writing; it comes in despite the 
nominative &AnGevtixds, as a carrying 
on of the accusatives before used, 
Kad apydy eivai—xal drAlywv xpaxrixdy, 
&e. 


78 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. 


\ oe v \ ~ 
330TouNKLoYTOG yap oUTWS EYXEIY Tepl TAUTM. 


[ Cuarp. 


xa) olog 


xexTyobas panroy TH HAAG XO ExoipT a. tiv xaprinwy xal 
34 WHEAl WY * AUTaDKOUS yap parDov. xal xlynog OF Ppobetae 
Tov msyanoyexou doxel elvas, xo Peovy Bapeia, xah AZEig 
oTATILOS* ob yap omevoTIxeS 6 Eph GAlya orovdatoy, 
oud: cuvroves 6 paybdy cya oidpevog’ 40 o&vdwvia xal 
357 TayuTIg Ore ToUTwWY. ToLodTOG wey ObY 6 meyarouyos, 6 
0 éArgirwy psxpobuyos, 60 drepParrwy yativoc. ob xaxol 


\ nj IN) ~ io ae z 
p-Ev ouy d0xOU0 LY Elva ovo OUTOL 


Tysorpr nyse vor Og. 


, 
ov yap xaxorotol elo * 


O peey yap puixeperpuxos 5005 wy ceyaubioy 


EauT Oy arog repel wy AEG oT, xal Come KAXdY ee Tex 
Tov py akvoov sauTov tay ayabey, xal ayvociv OE EauToy * 


pet! \ a z ” M3 > ~ a4 
WLEYETO Yap Avy wy aE10¢ HY; ayaday YE OvTwy, 


ov pay 


7aAiGiol ye of Tootiror doxotiow elvasr, AAAR ULAAROY oxvnpol. 





35 ov Kakol—ijpaprnpévor dé] 
‘Now it is true that these again are 
not bad, for they do no harm, but are 
only in error.’ Ovédé refers to ch. ii. § 
22. Vanity and want of spirit are, 
like pettiness and vulgarity, not very 
serious vices. Of the latter pair, 
speaking of the qualities and not the 
persons possessing them, he said they 
are kaki, but not disgraceful. 

‘For the 
mean-spirited man, though worthy of 
good things, deprives himself of his 
deserts, and seems to be harmed by 
not appreciating his claims, and by 
ignorance of himself; else he would 
have aimed at the good things he 
hadaclaimto. Such characters, how- 
ever, are not to be called foolish, but 
it is rather their energy that is de- 
ficient. Still this way of thinking 
seems to have a bad effect upon the 
character: for men’s aims are regu- 
lated by their opinions of their 
merits, but these men draw back from 
noble actions and pursuits, thinking 
themselves unworthy; and in the 
same way they cut themselves off 
from external advantages.’ From 


6 pev yap—ayabar] 





these considerations, and from the 
whole tendency of his system, Ari- 
stotle decides that want of spirit is 
worse than vanity (§ 37), and he also 
asserts that it is more common. 
Want of elevated aims, want of effort, 
of will, of individuality, these are 
indeed fatal deficiencies as regards 
the attainment of what is fine and 
noble in character. The conception 
of ‘* humility’ is of course quite 
beside the system of Aristotle, but 
we may observe that it does not come 
into necessary collision with a con- 
demnation of pixpopvxla. For this 
latter implies a want of moral aspira- 
tion. Now it is desirable to combine 
with humility the greatest amount of 
moral aspiration. 

GAAG pardAov éxvnpot] Another 
reading, supported by several MSS., 
is voepot, which the Scholiast explains 
by Spmmets cad ervonrixol. The Para- 
phrast, however, gives vw6pol, which 
supports the present reading. Noepot 
makes good sense, since it is true that 
want of spirit often accompanies an 
intellectual turn of mind, men’s 
‘native hue of resolution’ being 


II.—IV.] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQON IV. 79 


ec 7 X\ 7 N ~ A , a a Q 
7 ToauTy 02 d0Fa doxet xual yelpoug woisiv? Exaoror yap 
rey x 3°93: Sar a x Ware. r 
edlevras Tay xar aSiav, apioravras 08 xal rdy mpakewy 
~ ~ \ ~ / ” e / 
Thy xar@y xal Toy emitydevpatwy wo avaEso1 ovTEs, opoiws 
\ \ one. , A ’ nw c yy ~ > La » Wats 4 
02 xal ray exrog ayabdy. of 08 yatvor 7As4i01 nal EavTods 36 
~ \ ~ ~ A a 
ayvoodvTes, xal Tatir emibayiis' wo yap a&tor ovtes 


~ >. , ’ ~ s > , 5 eee ~~ 
TOC EVTbU0LG EMILY ELDOUT IY, EITA eSertyyovras* xO eobare 


~ \ rg ~ \ z 
HOT LOUYTAL XO OY AAT xal TOIg ToLoUTOICG, xa! BovrAoYTaL 


\ > y 2 \ ig ecw \ , \ 
TH EUTUYNMATA Pavepa elyat avTwy, xab AEyouTs Wepl 


cow ¢ > A 7 / 
QUTOY WE 01a ToUTwWY TiLAIyTOMEvOL. 


> if X\ ~ 
avTitiberou oe TY 37 


psyaroluyia 7% puxpoluyla parroy Tig yauvoryros* xa} 


yap yiyveras panrrov xal yelpov eoriv. 


¢€ \ on 
7) poev OUY Leyva 38 


/ A 7 > Ul is . yy 
roy ia WEL TIAYY ETL LEYAAYY, WOTED ELOYTOL. 
"Eoixe 02 xal reph radryy civos apery Tis, xabamep ev Tois 4 
, > a , Dy , A X x 
mpwrors ertyby, 7 OoFeev dv mapamanoiwg Eyew moog THY 
psyaroluylay daomep xal 7 ercufepiorng mpog TH peya- 
Romperciav. audw yap avtas Tod uly peyarov adecraos, 
mepk OF TH peTpIA xal Ta puxpa Osaribdacw nds we det. 


a >> 7 \ , / ’ > \ \ 
Women 0 ev Anber xal dooes yYonpatwy psocoTyg eo} xal 2 
c Us a! a YS ~ ewe \ 
umepoan re xalb ErArenbic, ooTw xal ey TLLIS épeSet TO 


~ EN ~ a Vege \ SA ~ \ afd 
PaArroy 7, Sei xal Arrov, xal To Obey ei xal we Dai. 


TOV TEs 


yap diroripov Weyouey wig xal paarroy 7 Osi xa Bbev ob det 
w~ ~ I] ys Ul > / c a a ee, 8 ~ 
Tig Tig ediduevov, Tov Te AdsrAcTimoy ws odd emt ToiG 
~ “A ~ x” so \ 4 
xarOIG mpocpounevoy Tinaobas. Zot O OTE TOV DiAoTiOY 4 





‘sicklied o’er with the pale cast of 
thought.’ ‘Yet, on the other hand, it 
is possible that voepol has come to sup- 
plant éxvnpot from a mistake arising 
from a fancied antithesis to 7Al@.01. 


IV. Descending now from what 
is extraordinary to the common level, 
Aristotle discusses another virtue 
which bears the same relation to high- 


mindedness as liberality does to mag- 


nificence, namely, the virtue of a 
laudable ambition. Thisis concerned 
with the desire for honour as it exists 
in ordinary men. There is no name 
for this virtue, but language testifies 
to the existence of extremes, hence 





we may infera mean. There aretwo 
words, ambitious and unambitious; 
both these are made terms of reproach, 
thus implying that there must be a 
middle quality, in relation to which 
they are each extremes. Again, both 
are used as terms of praise, which 
shows that each in turn lays claim to 
the mean place, as setting itself off 
against its opposite. 

1 KaOdmrep ey rois mpéros| Cf. 
Eth, u. vii. 8. This expression might 
seem to suggest that the present 
passage was written after an interval ; 
it is repeated in § 4. 

4 tort 8 bre—pésor] ‘ But some- 
times we praise the ambitious man as 


wn 


loa) 


80 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 


[Cuar. 


~ lf e 
ETaivoduey We avdpwmon xal dircxanroy, Tov OF ad:AOTHLOY WS 
~ , 
pirpiov xal cwdpova, Women xal ev Toig mpwWTOIS eiwopey. 
~ ~ ~ / > 
OjArov O° OT1 WAcovAYwS TOU HirAoToodToU Asyouevov oUx 
exh To auto det épomevy Toy Diroripov, AAA’ EeraivoyTEs 
5) ~ , a 25 \ Cad 
pty er) rb array 7 of woarrol, Weyoures O emt To UaAAOY 


aA YQ ~ 
| O&t. 


aywvipov 0 ovr7s Tig LETdTHTOS, Ws epyEng Eolxey 


apdiocbyreiv ta axpar ev olg 8 early dmepBory xab 


yr 
EAAEKIC, nal TO péroy. 


dpéyovras O& Tips xob paArOY 


7, Ost xal Arrov, ZoTs D OTe xad we dei? ewaiweiTras yoo 
€ ‘\ 7, rs 
7, 2E1g adry, pecorng ovoa mepl Timyy avwvunog. Paiverou 


& 
(7 


mpog piv tiv diroriplay adirorinia, mpog O8 THY 


adiroriplay Dirotinia, mds apdorepa OF auddrepa Tws. 


> ~ s \ \ »” > / 
Eosme 08 TOUT elvas xah mepl Tag aAAAG apeTas. 


OYTIHET- 


obo 0 evradl of dxpos daivovras did Td py WvomacGas 


\ t 
TOY [LEO OY, 


IIpacrys 8 gor) piv pecéryg mepl opydg, avwvopov 0 
GyTog TOU péoov, oyeddy 08 xal Twy axpwy, ex) Toy Bécoy 





manly and noble-spirited, and some- 
times we praise the unambitious man 
as moderate and soberminded, as 
mentioned in our first remarks. Now 
it is plain that as the term “lover of 
anything ” is used in more senses than 
one, we do not always apply the term 
“lover of honour” to express the same 
thing, but when we praise, we praise 
that ambition which is more than 
most men’s, and when we blame, we 
blame that which is greater than it 
should be. The mean state having 
no name, the extremes contend, as it 
were, for this unoccupied ground; 
but still it exists: for where there is 
excess and defect there must also be 
a mean.’ 

6 foe St TovT elvan Ka wep) rads 
&\Aas dperds] Cf. Eth, 1, viii. 1-2. 


V. The regulation of the temper 
(uerdtns mepl dpyds) is the next 
subject for discussion. Aristotle con- 





fesses that there is no name for this, 
but he provisionally calls it mildness, 
though this term is also used to ex- 
press a deficiency in the feeling of 
anger. Excess in this feeling has 
various forms, and accordingly various 
names; the passionate (épylaoz), the 
hasty (&«xpéxodor), thesulky (mxpol), the 
morose (xaAemof), all come under the 
same category as showing excessive 
or ill-directed anger. Aristotle does 
not here enter upon the philosophy of 
anger, inquire its final cause, and in 
accordance with this determine its 
right manifestation. He says it is 
human to avenge oneself (§ 12), and 
not to resent certain things is slavish 
(§ 6) and a moral defect, hence 
we must have a certuin amount of 
anger. This amount must be duly 
regulated, but where the true mean is 
cannot be laid down in the abstract 
(ob pE5iov tre Adyp Gwodoiva); it 
depends on the particular circum- 


IV.—V. | HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQON IV. 81 


\ / ‘\ y. 

Thy moaoTyTa hépomnev, mpdg THY EAA amoxAivoucay, 

> , z ew ie i, ae 2 / if >» 

avovupoy ouray. 7 0 UmEel0Ar opylAoTys TIS AgyoIT ay. 2 
\ X \ Mt) > \ > 7 \ > > ~ \ \ 

Td piv yap wabog cotly opy7y, TAO EuromiyTa TOAAR xa 

ow ~ ~ 

Oiahgpovra. 6 pty ouy ed’ olg det xal cig det dpyiSopuevos, 3 

ert 08 xal we Osi xal dre xal Goov ypdvoy, éraivelras mpdiog 
\ cs ~ 

07 otTog av ely, elrep 4 mpaoTys eraiveirar. PovAsTas 

yap 6 mptiog atd&payosg sivas xal py ayecbou vrd Tot 
4 > > e a‘ € W / a 1 ee Y 4 

TAIOUG, AAA Wo ay Oo ADYyoS THEN, OUTW Xk ETS TOUTOIS 

xab ert TorodToy ypovoy yareraiver. apaotavery O8 Ooxel4 
~, \ ~ 

parnroy érl ray zrrenbiv. od yap TimmpyTixds 6 mpéios, 

GAAL parrov cvyyvwpovixes. 70 EAAEHLIG, elt dopyyola s 
/ > 7 A on { , € \ ips , 

tig eorw e106 re On wore, Weyer. of yap wn dpyito- 

pesvos eh vic Set YAiGs01 Doxodoiv elvas, xal of py wo det 

ao ~ ~ 
pend ore pend olg det: Ooxed yap ovx aicbaverbas avd? 6 


~ Nu 7d , la > > , 
aAvumeto bos, PY opy1Sopevog TE OU elvan ALUYTLXOG. 


To O8 


, Te F A \ > 4 ~ 
T POTNAAXISOULEvoY avever bau xab TOUS obxEloug meplopay 





stances, and must be left to the in- 
tuitive judgment of the mind (év rf 
aicOjoe: 4 Kpiots). 

3-6 BoldrActa yap—édvdparodades | 
‘For the term “mild man” means 
one that should be dispassionate and 
not carried away by his feeling, but 
should be angry in the way, at the 
things, and for so long a time, as the 
mental standard may have appointed. 
Yet this character seems rather to 
incline to error on the side of de-— 
ficiency, for the mild man is more apt 
to pardon than to resent. But the 
deficiency is a moral fault (Yéyerar), | 
whether it be called perhaps (ris) 
want of anger, or whatever else. 
For men seem fools who do not feel 
anger at things at which they ought — 
to feel it, or inthe manner they ought, 
or at the time they ought, or with the 
persons they ought. Such a man 
seems to be devoid of feeling and of 
the sense of pain, and since nothing 
provokes him, he seems not to know 
how to defend himself: but to suffer 


VOL. II. - M 





insult or to stand by and see one’s 
friends insulted is servile.’ 

BotaAerat yap 5 mpaos] BolAera ap-= 
pears to be used here in a doubtful 
sense, something between ‘the word 
mild means,’ &c, and ‘the mild 
man has a tendency to,’ &c.; cf. ch. 
1. § 5, note. 

7d 8& mpomnraxi(duevov] Had the 
Ethics been composed on a psycho- 
logical plan, what is said here might 
have been arranged under the head of 
@uuds, and would have been connected 
with the relation of @uyds to courage, 
which is discussed above, Eth. m1. 
viii. 10-12. The present passage is 
admirably illustrated by Shakespeare’s 
Hamlet, Act II. Scene 2: 


‘Am I a coward? 
Who calls me villain? breaks my 
pate across ? 
Plucks off my beard and blows it in 
my face? 
Tweaks me by the nose ? gives me the 
lie i’the throat 


82 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 


[Cuap. 


, x / * 

7 avoparrodm@des. 7 0 tmepfooryn xara mayvTa [ev yiveTou 
~ > ~ \ ~ a ~ 

xal yap olg ov Osi, xat ed’ olg ov det, xal paarroy H det, 


~ / & > ‘\ of , ~ 
xal Qdrrov, xal marsiw ypovov* ov pny amavTa ye TH 


~ a > * \ \ S 
auTa® tmapye. ov yap ay duvaiT’ civar* TO yop xaxOv 
4 
a / yf > s 4 
xal EauTo AMOAAVTL, KAY GACKANLOY yj, AadopyToy yiveTau. 


A > ~ 

sol piv oov dpylnor taxéws wey dpyifovras xal olg ov dst 
> ~ ~ a ~ s > / 

xat 2h’ olg ov Oct xa parrov q Gel, wavovTas 62 TaYEwWS* 


a4 
0 xal PéATIoTov Zyouory. 


/ > > ~ ~ og 
cupPaiver 8 avroig rotTo, ort 


> = , 
od KATEYOUTL THY Opyyy AAA avTarodiboaoly 7H peuvEpot 


> 
Qelor Ore THy oEvTYTa, eit amomavoyTat. 


imepBory Oo 


~ ~ A ° 
cioly of axpdyoro d&sig xal mpg mav opylao xab emt 
romavti* they xa rovvoun. of O& mixpol duodiaruTos, xa 





As deep as to the lungs? Who does 


me this ? 

Ha! why I should take it: for it 
cannot be 

But I am pigeon-liver’d, and lack 
gall 


To make oppression bitter.’ 


7 1 & tbrepBorajh—ylvera] ‘ Now 
the excess is possible under all heads, 
the wrong people, the wrong things, 
more, quicker, longer, than is right. 
However, these excesses cannot all 
coexist inthe same man. This would 
be impossible. For evil destroys even 
itself, and if it exist in its entirety, 
it becomes unbearable.’ Psychologi- 
cal reasons might be assigned why 
the same person cannot be passionate, 
peevish, and sulky. But Aristotle 
here gives an abstract generalization 
—that the different forms of evil are 
mutually destructive, and that it is 
only by tempering evil with a certain 
admixture of good that its existence 
can be borne, 

8 oupBalver 8—émronatovra] ‘ This 
happens because they do not keep in 
their anger, but make immediate 
reprisals, so that their anger is be- 
trayed by their hastiness, and then 
they are done.’ The words } avepol 





eiot can have nothing to do with the 
principle given in the Rhetoric, un. ii. 
1, that anger desires to make itself 
manifestly felt, else we must have 
had 7 pavepol by einoay, The Para- 
phrast simply renders od xaréxovot 
Thy dpyhy, ovdt Kkpiwrovaw, GAAG éEd- 
yovra: Kal ddvoyrar evbus. 

9 of &xpdxora] ‘The hasty” The 
older form of this word is &«pdxoAo:, 
The etymology appears to be &«pos 
and xoA%, as if ‘on the point’ or 
‘extreme verge of anger.’ On the 
same analogy we’ find the word 
&xporpadrns, ‘on the verge of being 
overturned, ‘ricketty,’ cf. Plato, 
Repub. p. 404 B. Plato speaks of 
passionate and peevish people as 
having become so through the ener- 
vating of an originally noble and 
spirited temperament. Cf. Repub, 


“Pp. 411 B—413: edy 38 Oupoedq (e€ 


dpxiis AdBn), &00evi movhoas Tov Ouudy 
Ctbpporov amepydoaro, &xd opiKpav 
Taxd épebiCsuevdy re xal xatacBevyb- 
Mevov, axpdxordo ody Kad dpylAo ayrh 
Ovpoeidods yeyévnvrat, SvoxoAlas %u- 
WAEOL. K.T.A, 

10 of 5 mxpol—gidois] ‘But the © 
sulky are hard to bring round, and 
are angry a long time, for they keep 
in their wrath. Now there is a 


V.] HOIKON NIKOMAXEION IV. 83 


8 , > , / \ \ , 
moruy ypovav opyiovrar xaréyouor yap Tov Gupay. 
TAUAG OF Yi 0 x O10@* 7 yap TI f 

ina B yiverau, Bray dvromodidp: 7 yap Tirwpla 
~ ~ ec ~ ° ~ 
TaUEL TiS “Opyis, YOovyy avTi TIS AvumYS epoca: 
Tourov Of py yivouévou Td Papog eyouTw' die 
\ \ 5 ee N 5 ey , Aen ~~ 
yap To py emidavicg eivas odd? cupmreifer avrovdg ovdzis, 
ev aurwm Oo: wet ny Opyyy ) dei. iol 3 
TH 08 mebar THy opyyy Ypovov dei. iol 
‘4 ~ ~ ~ , 
oi TolwtiTos EauToig GyAypoTaTo xal Tolg parloTH 
/, 
diroiw.  yarerods 58 Adyomev Tog ed oig Te pHrIt 
») ie M4 = \ = ED DY ~ \ , 73 
Eb YAAETALVOYTAS XAb PAAAOY 7 OFb HAL TAEIW YpOVOY, 
\ .) ~ 
xal 7 OiarAraTTouévous aver Timwplag 7 xOAdTEWS. TH 12 

, \ ~ \ ¢€ SS > , \ 
mpaornts 08 panrrov Thy OmrepPoryy avTiTidenev* xal 
yop panrrov yiverar avoowmixworepoy yap To Tiyzwpsiobal, 

\ \ \ ~ x \ iA A NY A 0: 
xal moos TO oupfoiody of yarerol yetpoug. 0 OF xb ev1; 
Toig mwpoTepov elpytos, xal Ex Thy Aeyouevwy OHAov* ov 

f ~~ 
yap podioy dsopicas To wg xal tio xal emt woloig xa 
Torov ypovoyv opyioréov, xab TO peyps Tivog ops woset 
a le 
Tig ) Gpoprave. 6 piv yap pixpoy mapexPaivey ov 

/ hte eek a | \ ~ F293 iN ND Sie cpl A 
Wéyerou, OUT ETL TO LAAAOY OUT ETL TO WTTOV. EVLOTE 
yap Tovs eAAEiwovTag emouvodpev xal mpcoug dapev, xal 

\ , Nett & e , JA 2 NN 
TOS YarEeTaivovTas avipwoels ws Ouvaprevoug apyelv. 6 O7 

, \ ~ Ai , Ve > e IN ~ , 
mocov xal ris maexalvwy WexToc, ov padiov TH Adyw 

p)n~ \ ~ : ~ 
amodotvas’ ev yap Toig xal? exactTa xal TH aiobyoe 7 

’ > A i ~ ~ ad e XX la 
xplolG. AAR TO YE TOTOUTOY OnAoY, OTs 7 EY EOF 14 
Z£1¢ émaivery, xa yy ois Set opysGoued 1 ed lg Oct 
Sig emouvern, xa.’ ay oig det opyiSopsla xal ed’ olg det 

> Eek re \ , \ ~ CAND Ke \ Vics 
xalws det xalravra TH TomtTa, ai 0 bmrepPoral xal er- 
rei wv ta VFX s x 4 = : a. § 
eieig Wextal, xal el pixpoy pev yivoprevas ypena, emt 
~ / ~ og 
mrgoy 0 paarrov, eal word OF ohddpa. diAov ovy Ort 





natural termination, when one has | account of sulkiness, on which 
wreaked one’s resentment, since | nothing more need be said. 

revenge stops anger by substituting 13 6 5€ Ka) ev Tots mpdrepoy elpnra] 
a feeling of pleasure for that of pain. | This refers to Eth. m. ix. 7-9, which 
But if this does not take place, these | passage is with some amplification 
people continue to feel their burden. ‘| almost exactly repeated here. This 
Their feeling is not manifest, and so | part of the Ethics is written with a 
no one reasons them out of it, while | constant reference to Book IL, and 
to digest it internally requires time. | yet as if the subject had been taken 
Therefore such personsare exceedingly | up again to be worked out after an 
vexatious both to themselves and to | interval. 

their best friends.” An admirable 





M 2 


84 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. [ Cuap 


~ a \ a > ‘\ 
IsTig pions 2Eews avbexréov. ai piv ody mepl THY OpyHY 
21g sipyjcbwoay. 
= ~ “~ ne A / 
6 "Ev 68 rails opialoug xal TO cuSiy xal Adywy xal mpay- 
~ ~ ef , 
parwy xowwvely of piv apecxos Ooxotiow eivas, ob mavTe 
~ , bd > 
mpeg yYOovny eraswodvtes xal avbivy avtiteivovTes, HAA 
~ ~ , 
2olduevor Osiv aAumOL Toig evTuyyavoucw elvas’ of O EG 
evavTiag ToUTOIG mpbs TavTa avTiTElvovTes xal TOU AumelY 
oud ériotiv dpovtifevres dvoxora xal ducépideg xaAroiiv- 
a XX z « > , a / > > 
3701, OT pey ov ab cionuévar 2Geig Wexrat eiow, ovx 
DAN We 4 ¢ Li 7 > 7 f A > ys 
AOnrov, xah Ort 7} eon TouTwy emaiveTy, xaT Hv amodeceros 
A ~ A c NA es , x \ ~ yw ™ > 
4a zt xal we dei, duolwg 02 xal ducyepavel. Ovonm O oux 
° C ~ , ~ 
amrodeooTas AUTH Th, Foe OF parioTa Hiri? TorotiTog 
, > c \ \ , 4 vf , 4 / 4 
yup got b xara Tay peony BEtv olov Bovrcucha Agyery Tov 
~ / 
Sémiiny, idov, To orépye mpoocrafovra. diacéper 08 
~ Ud a 4 Ad) > 4 } ~ , i 
Tis Dirias, OTs avev mafoug éorl xal rod orépyery og 
ec ~ > \ ~ ~ xs / > Ns a 
Opsrsi* ov yap TH Direiv 7 Eybaipew amodeyeras Exaore 
~ ~ ~ / A ~ 
Ws Osi, AAAG TW ToLoiiTOG eivas. solws yap mpos ayvorag 
, ; s \ , 
xal yywpip.oug xal cuvideg xal aouvyders autos mores, 
\ 7 
TAY xah ev ExaoToIg Ws apuoter. ov yap bmolws mpoo7jxEs 





VI. The next subject is the regu- 
lation of one’s deportment in society, 
with regard especially to complacency 
or the reverse. This also is a balance 
between extremes, avoiding on the 


one side surliness (td 8écKoAov), and | 


on the other side the conduct both of 
the weak assentor (&peoxos), and of 
the interested flatterer (xéAat). The 
balance has no name, it is most like 
friendship, but differs from it in being 
devoid of affection, and being ex- 
tended to all in proper degrees. 
There is a slight departure here from 
Book II. vii. 11-13, and it may be 
said that the present treatment is an 
improvement. Before (/.c.) it was 
said, there are three virtues connected 
with speech and action in society : the 
first is about what is true, the others 
about what is pleasant. But here the 
quality which concerns the deport- 





ment and whole spirit of a man in 
society is rightly treated as most 
generic, and placed first. In Book II. 
the name @iAla is unreservedly given 
to the quality in question, but here no 
name is assigned, and only a resem- 
blance to friendship is pointed out. 

5 ob yap duolws—Avureiy] ‘For it is 
not fitting that we should pay the 
same regard to familiars and to 
strangers, nor again have we an 
equal title to put them to pain,’ 
This latter clause is explained in 
§§ 7-9, where it is laid down that 
though the general object will be to 
give pleasure, yet that a man must 
bring himself to give pain on occa- 
sion, with a view to important moral 
consequences in the future. He. 
would, of course, feel himself more 
bound to exercise this duty with 
regard to friends. povrifew is a 


V.—VI.] HOIKON NIKOMAXEION IV. 85 


cuvniwy xah ofvelwv dpovrifey, vd at rAureiv. xaborou 6 
pay ouv elpyras OTs we det Gusrrjoes, avadépwv OF mpg TO 
xaAoY xab TO oup.déepov OTOYATET AL TOU ey) Aumeby 7 
cuvyduvev. Zone piv yap mepl rydovag xab Avmag eivos7 
TAG ev THIS OuLAlalG yivOKevas, TOUTwWY O boas Ley HUT 
Y S» $ tt 
xX , ~ 
goT! uy xaAoY AaBeoov cuvyduverv, duoyepavel, nol 
P , panes 
MpooionreTas: Aumeiv, xav TH ToodyTs O aTYHLordvyY 
dion, xal raurny py pixpav, 7 Parada, 4 0 evavTiwors 
pixpay AUMYY, obx amodeGeTas AAA BuTHEpavel. diade- 
7 ~ ~ ~ 
povrws 0 busanoes Tog ev aFiwpacs nak Tolg TUYOtoL, xal 


oo 


~ \ , € , a2 X \ \ v 
P-AAAOY 1 YTTOY YYWPLILOIC, OL0IWS OF KAI KATA TAS MAAAS 
Oracdbopac, exaorog amrovéenwy To mperoy, xal xaF aire wiv 

c 4 XV N77 ~ > > A ~ > 
aipovmevog TO Tuvyduvelv, Au@Eiv O° eVAABodmEvOG, ToIg 3 
amoPaivouciy, ery 7 uciSw, ovverromevoc, Agyw 02 TW KAA 

; 9 BAY 7) [LELGW, TUVETOMEVOC, AEYW OF TW XAAW 

~ , 
nab TH TudéepoyTs. 
/ \ ¥ 
PEYAANS Plxpa AUTYTEL. 

> > ae / ~ \ 7 c » ~ ~eNN\ s 

ux wvonnoros 02, TOD DE cuvynidvovTos 6 ev TOU 7dUC sivas 


\ rans ~ s - n~ > ~ 
xa yoovijg O vexa Tig clondhic 
be / ~ / 
6 ev OUY LETOG TOLOUTOS eoTIY, 9 


oroxacousvog py OF GARO TI aperxos, 6 O rug WHALE 
Tig abtd ylyvyras cig yojpara xal oon din yonpatewy, 

/ c \ ~ > / a 4 \ 
x0rnaE* 6 08 maar duexepalvwy elonras rs ddoxorcg xa 





general expression, implying as much 
eare to please, as care for the welfare 
of the persons in question. 

6-7 Kabddrov — dvcxepaveT] ‘We 
have said generally that (the good man) 
will associate with people as he ought, 
but we may add (8é) that, with a con- 


nance.’ (1) It may be derogatory to 
oneself to show complacency. (2) It 
may be hurtful to some member of the 
company. These cautions show the 
moral and thoughtful spirit by which 
Aristotle would have conduct in 
society regulated. The following 


stant reference to what is noble and 
good, he will aim at not giving pain, 
or at contributing pleasure. The 
province of his virtue lies among the 
pleasures and pains that arise out of 
social intercourse, and wherever in 
giving pleasure he would dishonour 
or injure himself, he will make a 


difficulty, and rather choose to give 


pain than such gratification. And if 
there be something which will bring, 
to any considerable degree, disgrace or 
harm on the doer, while opposition 
will give him slight pain, he will not 
approve it, but will show his repug- 





section prescribes the bearing of a 
finished gentleman, giving to all their 
due. It must not be forgotten that 
Aristotle himself had played the 
part, not only of a philosopher, but 
also of a courtier. 

9 dvcxodos}| Eudemus uses the 
word avéddns to denote this character 
(Eth. Eud. ut. vii. 4), in which he is 
followed by Theophrastus ( Characters, 
e. 15) and the author of the Magna 
Moralia (1. xxix.). Eudemus makes 
the mean state ceuvdérns, which is a 
departure from the present treat- 
ment. 


86 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 


V7 

OUT EDI. 
> , > \ / 
AVWYULLOY ELVA TO oes 


[Cuar. 


avrinsio§as 68 dalveras TH Axpa EavToig Oe TO 


Ilepi TH HUTA 08 o xe00v gots xal 4 TIS ana Fovelag 


peoorns® AYMYUILOS de xah AUTH. 


ou xeipov dt nal Tag 


Towadr ag emenbeiv® paarrov TE yap ay eidelysev Ta meph 
Td 70s, xad Exaorov dierbovres, xal peroryTas elvas TAS 


’ ov , 

caper og TioTEvG cLIpLEY ay, em) mavrwy orang Eyov cuvidovTes. 
ey 07 TO oust ol peey 7 pos yOovny xal romay opsrotvTes 
elpyvrat, weph 0: Tay ann fevévrery te xal pevdonéveny 


el wey bpoieas ey Aoyors xat m paseo xal- To porary 


2 Lath. 


doxel 07) 6 py drAalwv mpoomomrinods Thy evooewy 


\ \ € , \ 4 EA Ud «< Dy 
3 iver xab oy SmapyovTwy xal perGoveny a brapyel, 6 é 
elowy OVATOAALY apveto bos TO bmrapyovra %) ZEAATTO moti 


46 03 péoog avbéxacros TIG Wy aAyfeuTixds xal TH Blo nal 





VII. There follows another name- 
less excellence closely connected with 
the former, having still to do with 
demeanour in society; this, by a 
curious formula, is termed the regu- 
lation of boastfulness (7 Tis GAaQo- 
velas zeodtns). The boastful man lays 
claim to honourable qualities which 
he does not possess, or to a greater 


degree than he possesses them (done? 


mpoomontixds Tay evidtwy eivat K.T.A.), 
while the ironical man denies or 
understates his own merits. The 
balance between these two is found 
in the straightforward character 
(av0exacrdés tis), who in word and 
deed neither diminishes nor exagge- 
rates his own good qualities, In 
Eth. 1. vii. 12, the provisional name 
éAGea was given to this virtue, but 
here Aristotle points out that it is to 
be distinguished from ‘truth,’ in the 
more serious sense of the word, that 
‘truth’ which makes the difference 
between justice and injustice. What 
he is at present concerned with is 
merely a truthfulness of manner, 
though he confesses (§ 8) that this 
has a moral worth (éreufs), and 





that the man who is truthful in little 
things will also be truthful in more 
important affairs. 

3 «lpwy] This is an excessively 
difficult word to express in English. 
‘Tronical’ has acquired an association 
of bitterness and taunting, —‘ Dissem- 
bler’ of craft. If we render it by 
‘over-modest’ we trench upon the 
qualities of the uucpéyvxos, and imply 
too much that is connected with the 
whole character. Eipwyela as here 
spoken of is simply an affair of the 
manner; there appear to be two 
forms of it, one that refined species 
exhibited by Socrates, the other an 
affectation of humility which is really 
contemptible. There is perhaps no 
one English word to express these 
two forms, the only resource appears 
to be to use the word ‘ Ironical’ in a 
restricted sense. Elpwy in Theo- 
phrastus (Char, I.) is already used in 
a worse sense than in Aristotle, to 
denote one who dissembles for selfish 
motives, and whose whole life is artifi- 
cial and deceitful. 

av0éxacros| probably from aitd 
€xaoroy ‘everything exactly as it is,’ 


VI.—VII. j HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 87 


D AG x Ome Ta buoroya@y siva: meoh atrav, xa} 
TO AOYW, TH STApYovTA SLoroy Ep ; 
wv ly wv ; , »” ney 7 a \o ? 
ovTE pelSw UTE EAATTW. EOTIO TOUTWY ExaoTA xal Zvexa 5 
n~ , a er ° ~ 
Tivos moiiv xak pxyfevoc. Exaoros B olog éoti, ToadTa 
/ \ / \ ef ~ 7 a , 
Aeyer eal mpaTTEL nal OOTW Cy, Edy [Ax TivOSg Evexa TOATTY, 
~> ~ \ / \ > 
xa abro 68 ro pev Weddog dadaoy xl Wexrov, rd O'6 
> \ oN eee , of i \ AZ \ > 
arnits xarov xal érawerov. otw OF xal 6 wey arndev- 
A , x > / e X oid > 4 \ 
ThxOg [200g Wy erasveTos, of OF Wevdomevos audorepos prty 
~ if \ , 
extol, parrov 0 6 aratwv. mepl éxaréoov 0 elrwpey, 
, ~ ~ \ ~ 
mpotepoy b2 mepl Tod aryfeuTixod. ob yap meph Tod év7 
~ c ’ > / / 399 > >N / 
TAS OOAOYIAICS arn§evovTos AEYOMEV, OUD OOH ELC AIIxlaY 
a r¢ / ” \ x y fe. 3:9 ~ 
7 Oincoc Ovyy OuvTEbyes (arrngs yap ay en TAUT aperis ), 
e > , \ / 
GAN ev olg pxfevdg TosovTov diadéepovTog xal év Aoyw xal 
> , > , a x oS & ~ 5 Nw > 
ev Pi aAnfever TH THY ZEw Towwittog civasr. doFee O'8 
x es ~ 5] \ bg e \ ang as 
ay 6 ToLotiTos emisinyg sivar. 6 yap diraandys, xal ev 
14 ‘\ / , , oa 
oig py Oraheper aaAnFedwy, dAyBevoes xal ev ois Osachéves 
a4 ~ € \ > \ \ ~ > vg 
ETL PARC. ws yap aloxpov To Weide evrAaByoeran, 
a \ > Bs 2% > ~ e \ ~ > / 
oye xal xa? airo yoAaPeiro’ 6 02 To1odrog éemaivetoc. 
A A + \ ~ ~ ~ 
emi TO EAATTOY OF PaAAOY TOU aArfotig admroxAlve'9 





and hence a ‘matter-of-fact’ or 


‘ straightforward’ man. 

5—6 gor: 5t—daalev] ‘Now it is 
possible to practise both irony and 
boastfulness either with or without 
a particular motive. But in general a 
man speaks, acts, and lives, in accord- 
ance with his character, unless he 
have a particular motive. Falsehood 
is in itself base and reprehensible, and 
truth is noble and praiseworthy, And 
thus the truthful man, who occupies 
the mean, is praiseworthy, while those 
who strive to give a false impression 
of themselves are both reprehensible, 
and especially the boaster.’ Aristotle 
first appears to assert that both irony 
and boastfulness are prompted gene- 
rally by a particular motive, for, if it 
were not so, men would be simple and 
natural, Afterwards we are told that 
boastfulness is a condition of the will 
(év 7H mpompécer), that it aims at either 
gain or reputation,—that irony may 





spring from a motive of refinement, 
or again from vanity itself. These 
things however may aim at reputation 
and yet be instinctive, the desire for 
reputation forming part of men’s na- ~ 
tural impulses. 

8 Sdétee F By—ewaiverds] ‘But 
this character appears to possess a 
moral excellence. For the lover of 
truth, who adheres to what is true 
even in things where it does not 
matter, will be still more truthful in 
affairs of importance, for he will 
surely ayoid a lie when it appears as 
something base, when he avoided it 
before merely for its own sake.’ The 
writing here is a little careless, since 
above, all lies were declared to be 
essentially base, but here a contrast 
seems to be drawn between the 
‘white lie’ in society, and the base lie 
in affairs of importance. It throws 
great light upon the nature of Ari- 
stotle’s table of the so-called ‘virtues’ 


88 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. 


[ Cuar. 


E[LpLeneore poy yap daiveras Oia TO erax seis TAS ‘omrep 


10 Borag elvas. 


6 0: sic = imap yovreny 7 oom o1oupLevog 


pyfevog Evexa hatrAw péyv Eormev (08 yap ay eX%pe TO 
rr Yevde), parang de aiverces peaininoy % xaxog. 1 O Evexa 


Tiv0S, 6 pev dodns 4 7) THis ov Alay extras, fais 0 dratey, 


120 08 apyvplon, 7 6oe els pie bee AT YHpover repos. 


’ 
OUx 


> 3 > ~ / ms 
ey aH Ouvepet 0 eotly 6 drat@yv, GAA ev TY, Wponipec et 
HATO vy ZEw yap xal rd rowed eivos anatary cry, 
wWomep xa pevorns 6 piv TO Pevdes atte yaipwy, 6 08 


13 O0ENS Opey operas 7, xépbous. 


of piv ovv d0fyg yapww 


anaove SUOMEVOL TH TOMUTO mpoomovoiivras ep’ olg é 2raivog 
7} evdaipovic pos, of 08 xépdoug, wv xal ardrauots Eork FOIE 

~ a 
mérag xal & diaradely Zors py ovTa, olov pavTiv codoy % 


> , 
baT D0Y. 


~ ~ ~ \ ~ 
Ose TOUTO Ob WAElOTOL 7 P00 HW OLOUYT at TA TOAvTA 


Le) / 4 + 5] > Nn A > / 
14xal KAaCovevovTOsL* ETTL Yap EV QUTOIG TH elpymeva. of 
Ne. oy ee. \ wv , / , 
QO ElpwvEs ETL TO EAATTOV AEYOYTES YADIET TEDOL perv TH 74 


/ > ‘ / 
dalvovras* ov yap xépdous 


Zvexa, Ooxovos Adyesv, HAAG 





to observe that he excludes from 
them truth proper, and admits truth- 
fulness of manner. 

1o—12 6 5 pel(w—xépdovs| ‘ But 
the man who pretends to better qual- 
“ities than he really possesses, if he 
has no motive, shows like a mean 
man, for else he would not have de- 
lighted in the falsehood, though he 
seems foolish rather than bad. Sup- 
posing there is a motive, if it be re- 
putation or honour, the boaster is not 
to be severely blamed, but if it be 
money, directly or indirectly, his con- 
duct is more discreditable. The boaster 
is not constituted by a given faculty, 
but by a particular condition of the 
will; for it is in accordance with his 
moral state, and by reason of his 
character, that he is a boaster, just as 
a man is a liar,—-though the latter 
takes pleasure in falsehood itself, 
while the former aims at either repu- 
tation or gain.’ 

tas 6 ¢Aa¢dév| This makes no sense. 


The Paraphrast omits és altogether, 
rendering the passage, ef 8€ twos 
evexa mpoomoeirat, ei wey ddEns 2) Tits 
od Alay Wexrds 6 &daldv. To follow 
his example seems the simplest 
remedy. One of the MSS. omits 6, 
which would give the sense ‘he is not 
very blameable considering that he is 
a boaster.’ 

12 ove év TH Buvduer—arr’ ev - 
mpoapéoer| Of. the well-known pas- 
sage [?het.1. i. 14, where the Sophist 
is said to be distinguished from the 
Dialectician not intellectually but 
morally, 6 yap copiorixds obk ev tH 
duvdper GAN ev TH mpoaipécer, 

13 This is a very happy observation, 
that desire for reputation makes men 
pretend to virtue, power and the like; 
but desire for gain makes them pretend 
to useful arts the possession of which 
cannot be tested; thus a man will 
give himself out to be a clever sooth- 
sayer or doctor. 





14—15 of 8 elpwves—draLorindy] 


ie - 


VIL-VIIL] 


devyovres To ayxnpov. 


> ~ Kt 4 b / 3 ld 
ATAEVOUVT OL, OlOy HOE Dwxparys ETT OSE. 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IV. 


89 


pariora Of xal obTo: Ta EvdoEa 
e \ \ \ 
of O& xal Ta 15 


pupa nal To davepa 7 poo o1ouprevos Bauxoravojpyor 


/ \ > / leer) 
AsyovTas Hab euxaTadpovyTos eioty, 


ia ae o 
xal evlore araCovera 


dalveras, olov 4 tov Aaxcvey 2o475° xal yao 7 brepory 


xa 7 Alav ZAAErVIG aAaCovsxoy. 


€ ‘ 4 , 
04 08 [LET OWS XKPOREVOL 


ee i \ \ \ \ ?, 5] \ \ AN 2 
TY ELOWYEIN HAL MEGL TA 7) Alay ELT OOWY nab Davepa sipw- 


YEUO[EVOL Haplevres daivovras. 


avtixciobas 0 6 arnava@y 


4 ee ~ Sf , 
Paiverar Tw arnnisvTixo Xelpwv yap. 
Ov Oe \ > Ld ,. nw la A 3 re 
UONS OF XO AvATAVTEwWS EY TH Piw, HL EV TAUTY, 





‘Ironical persons, in depreciating 
themselves, exhibit it is true a certain 
refinement of character, for they do 
not appear to speak in that way for 
the sake of gain, but to avoid pom- 
posity. These persons are especially 
given to disclaiming the possession of 
honourable qualities, just as Socrates 
used to do. But they who make a 
pretence about things petty and obvious 
are called “affected fops,” and are de- 
spised by every one. Sometimes this 
kind of conduct appears to be really 
pretension, as in the case of the Laco- 
nian dress; for both the excess and 
the extreme of deficiency are of the 


- nature of boasting.’ 


“petyovtes Td dyxnpdy] Cf. above 
§ 9: eupedrcorepoy yap palvera: did 7d 
eraxbets Tas bmepBords civat. 

7a %ySota| Such as wisdom and 
the like, cf. § 2, where ra ota is 
used in the same sense, an unusual 
one in Aristotle. Cf. Hth. vu. i. 5, 
and note. 

otov Kat Swxpdrys| On the Irony 


of Socrates, see Vol. I., Essay IL, p. . 


114. 

1§ mpooroovpevot] It is impos- 
sible to understand this in the sense 
of ‘disclaiming’ which the context 
requires. The Paraphrast supplies ay 
divac0a, and explains it very clearly, 
as follows, ds 5¢ od pdvoy Ta peydrAa 

VOL. II. 





kad Evdota GAAG kal Td miKpa Gmrapverrat, 
kal & OS7Ads ears Suvduevos Tatra 
mpotmorettar ph Svvacba, But mpoc- 
Totovpevos can never have been con- 
sciously meant to stand for this. 
There must have been some slip 
about the writing. Two of the MSS. 
read wh tpoomroovpevor. This sort of 
variation in MSS. does not show what 
was the original reading, but only that 
the transcribers felt a difficulty. 


VIII. 1 Ovens 5&—rowotrev a&koverv] 
‘Rest also being a part of human life, 
and an element of this being playful 
diversion, we find here likewise the 
sphere for a certain harmonious man- 
ner of intercourse, and the possibility 
of both speaking and hearing the right 
sort of things in the right way ; though 
there will be a difference as to whether 
one is the speaker in such matters or 
listens to what is said.’ 

Aristotle considers the virtue of wit 
or tact (ef émidegios cfr’ ebtpdmedos 
Aéyerar) to be concerned with the 
amusing and sportive element in 
society, and to be a balance between 
buffoonishness that sacrifices all pro- 
priety to the ludicrous, and dulness 
that is incapable of either making or 
appreciating a joke. Aristotle does 
not here enter into the philosophy of 
the ludicrous, or inquire what is a 


90 HOIKON NIKOMAXEIQON IV. [ Cuap. 


\W ~ \ 5 ~ S ~ et 04 rf c / 
Oraywyig sta Tasdids, Ooxel xa evTatda elvas ousAta Tig 
> , \ e Lele ee 4 », Waneiad c / Sv \ a 4 
EULILEAIS, MAb O1K OE DEVEIY HAL WC, OLOIWS OF HAL AxOuUEIY, 
/ a s 
Oioloes OF xal TO Ev ToloUTOIG AsyElY 7 TOLOUTWY axOvELY. 
~ € | ~ 4 \ »~ 
2O7Arov 0 we xab weph Tals’ gotly dwepPory Te xal ZrArsMbG 
~ s ~ , / 
3700 pero. of wiv oy TH yeroiw bmepParrovtes Pwpo- 
~ , ~ 
ACyos Ooxotios elvas xal Poprixol, yAryousvos MavTMs TOD 
~ / ~ ~ a 
yeroiov, xal wrarAAov TTOYACouEval TOU yéAwTA ToIHTas 7 
~ / \ ‘\ ~ \ / 
Tou Adye evT YY pmova xai Ly AuTEly TOY TOxWTTOMEVOY" Ob 
NY s \ x , ~ ~ / 
Ot xr avrol av eimovteg puliv yerolov tolg Te Agyoucs 
pen 
ob 0 


> eine iy > , "4 v a 
EU[LEAWS TACOVTES EUTPAMEAOL MHOTHyopevOYTal, ObOY EU 


S / ” \ \ ~ 
Oud YELAlYOYTES AY prot xab TxXANOOL doxoveLy elvan. 


~ JA ~ ~ a gy 
Touro. TOU yap qoous al Tomiras doxotor xivyoersg sive, 
‘\ nw rs aA 
Wore OF TA TWLATA Ex Thy xIviTEwY xplveTou, OUTW xOl 
Nr > Y ae ~ / \ ~ / 
47a 74. emimoratovtos 02 Tov Yehoiov, Xb THY TAETTwWY 
~ Nn ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ A 
YOMLOVTWY TH THK aL TH TXMTTELY PAAAoY 7 Ost, xa) OF 
Ud sd 
Pwporcyor euTpamenor mporayopevovTas wo yaplevTes. “OTs 
ine) / < > / . w~ / ~ ~ 
503 diabépours, xal ov pixpoy, Ex Tay eipnucvwy OHAov. TH) 
/ ~ a , ~ \ ens , > d ~ J 
péon O ees olxsiov xal 7 exideSsorng eoriv> rod 0 emt- 





joke and why it pleases. Nor does | creatures who lay in wait at the 


he lay down any canons for the regu- 
lation of wit, except such general ones 
as that ‘nothing should be said which 
is unworthy of a gentleman’ (mérepuv 
otv toy ed oKdémrovta sdpicréov TE 
Acyew & mpérer Aevoepiy;), that the 
hearer must not be shocked, &c. On 
the whole he leaves it indefinite, say- 
ing that tastes differ, and the educated 
man will be a law to himself. His 
account of wit then is negative and 
abstract, though perfectly just as far 
as it goes. 

Siaywyis peta madias] divywyh 
is the passing of time, hence ‘diver- 
sion.’ Cf. Metaphys.1.i. 15 : tAedévev 
& edpioKopévwy texvav, kal Tay pey 
mpos Tavaykaia Tov 5& mpds diaywyhv 
ovoav. Eth. x. vi. 3: Katapetyouo: & 
ém tas Toabtas Biaywyas tay ebdat- 
poviComevwy of modAol, 

Bwuodrdxo:] This name seems origi- 
nally to have belonged to the vile 





altars to purloin the offerings, and 
hence to have been applied to those 
who thought nothing too low for them, 
buffoons who would descend to any- 
thing. 

3 0f D euued@s—ra HOn] ‘ But they 
whose jocularity is in good taste are 
called men of elegant wit, as if it were 
nimble, by aname that signifies nimble- 
witted ; for such motions of wit seem 
to belong to the moral character, and 
characters, like bodies, are judged by 
their movements.’ Aristotle here calls 
attention to the etymology of ebtpd- 
meAos, as he did before to that of 
fowros. Ch. i. § 5. 

4. emimodd(ovros—xaplevres] ‘ But 
as the ludicrous meets us at every 
turn (éiwoAd(ovras, cf. Eth, 1. iv. 4), 
and most people take pleasure in sport 
and jesting more than they ought, 
even buffoons get the name of witty 
just as though they were fine wits.’ 


VIII. ] HOIKON NIKOMAXEION IV. 91 


’ > \ a , % ta , ? ~ 9 ~ \ 
OsElov tort roaira Agysty xal axovesy ole TH emrerxel xed 
. , / yf , ~~ 
EAcUbEllO ApmOTTEL* ETTL Yao TIVH WoerovTA TH TOLOUTW 

‘ ' 4 ‘ 
, ,. ~ / 1 a - \ € ~ 9? / 
Acyelv ev TOMAS [AEpsl HOLL AxOUEIY, HOLY TOU eéAevdepiov 
\ , Po Pier eS aN ee PR 
Tosi Ovadeper THs TOU avdparodwious, xal ad Tob memau- 
/ \ > est yD > ” \ > ~ 
Oeumevon xat amanevrov. Toor 3 av Tig xal ex Thy 6 
~ ~ ~ \ ~ nw ~ \ 
xopwdioy Toy Tarcidy xal ry xawiy* Tog wey yao Hy 

“ e - / ~ N ~ el / 
Ysroroy yy aoyvorroyia, ToIg dg PeaAAOY % UTrovola® O1a- 

/ > > \ ~ , 
deper 0 ov pixpov tratra mpdg evoxnuocvvyy. morepov7 
> s y , ~ aA 
ouy Toy ED TXWATOYTA boloOTeoY TH Adyely & WoeMEL eAEv- 

, a‘ ~ \ ~ \ > rs a \ / * \ 

Gepiw, 1 TH py Avrely Toy axovovTa, i xal Tépmeiv; 7 xl 

‘ ~ ak Ly \ ” / \ 
TO YE TOLOYTOY HODIDTOY; HAAG Yap AAAW [LLONTOY TE XOL 
en? n \ \ , A \ - 
700. Tomita de xal axovoeTas’ & yap dmroudver axovwy, 8 
~ . ~ ~ ’ NA ~ re A 
TaUTH xa mossiy doxet. ob 09 wav Toijoe’ To yao9 
oxOupn Aowddonua Th errtsv, of 8 eros Evie Aosdopel: 
pepe pypa Th eoriv, of 02 vooteras Evie AosopEly 
/ - IN > % A , e NN / AY 
xwrvouoiv* e021 0 lows xal oxwmrev, 6 On yaplerg xa 10 
> , [cA Cl fe = £ Ny c ~ ~ \ 
ercubepiog ots BFet, olov vopog wy ExuTm. TorotTos prev 
bs aa / > / wy > > N27 v3 ’ UY , 
OUY O [LETOS EOTIV, EIT 2m 102&10¢ ekT euTpamEenrog AsyseTal* 
c de B AG 4 2 \ ~ cr , \ wv = € ~ 
6 de Pwuorsyosg ATTwY eoTi TOD yerolou, xal oUTE EauUTOD 





6 tor 8 &v—evoxnpootvyny| ‘ This 6 8) xaplers—éavrg] ‘This then 
we may see from a comparison of the | will be the attitude of the refined and 
old and the new comedy. In the | liberal man, he being as it were a law 
former it is coarse language that pro- | to himself.’ Aristotle usually escapes 
vokes laughter, in the latter it is | from pure indefiniteness and relativity 
rather inuendo ; which makes no small | by asserting that the standard in each 
difference with respect to decorum.’ | case is to be found in the good, the 
This interesting remark is in accor- | wise, the refined man. This standard 
dance with what we know from other | is evidently the expression of the 
sources, of the comparative tameness | universal reason of man. It is not 
of the new comedy in relation to the | to be supposed that wit, beauty, or 
license of the old. Cf. Horace, 4.P. | goodness are mere matters of taste, 
281 sqq. as Aristotle would seem for a moment 

9 ob 8) nav—ondrrew] ‘There- | to imply (7) xalré ye rotodTov adpiorov; 
fore he will not give utterance to | &AAo yap %AAw miontéy TE Kal 750). 
every jest, for the jest is a sort of | When he adds afterwards that the 
reviling, and the lawgivers forbid.| educated man must be the standard 
certain kinds of reviling—they ought | of appeal, he means that the laws of 
doubtless to have forbidden (certain) | reason must decide. And _ these 
jests.’ “Evia must be understood as | might, had Aristotle thought it worth 
carried on from Aodopety to oxdarew. | his while, have been more drawn out 
Aristotle could never have wished | in reference to the question under dis- 
that jesting altogether should be for- | cussion. 
bidden by the law. to—12 These sections are an 

N 2 





92 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IV. 


[Cuapr. 


ours THY KAAwY deme Xousvos, el yerwro. Tones, xa) TOMOTE 
AEyeov wy oubiy ay elirot 6 yale zig, 2via 0 ov ay axovoas. 
60 aypt0s elg Tag TomuTas opiates ay psios* ov§ey yap 


~ / 
11 TUUPAAAGLEVOS FAT OUT YEpaivEs. 
12 x01 7 Tose ev TO Pin elvou ceycnyy2ecsloy. 


O0xe) OF 


7 avamauolg 
~ 3 
Tpalg OUY ab 


eipmnevas ev TO Bieo peroryres, elo} 0& maoas meph Aoyeoy 


Tivioy xal moakewy xoiwewviay. 
a ~ 
mepl arjdeay éorw, ab 08 wepl To yOu. 


diapépoves 0 ors y pay 


tiy 08 weph Tay 


c , ~ ~ e ° ~ \ A LA 
joovay 7 wiv ev Taig maidialg, 7 0 ev Taig xaTa TOY AAAOY 


Ploy opsrtoss. 
Ilegi 68 


IN w 


aidots ws TOG 


> ~ > VJ / 
ApETIS Ov Mpooryxer AEyery* 





almost verbal repetition of what was 
said, Eth wu. vii. 11—13. They 
appear like an afterthought as com- 
pared with Eth, rv. vi. 1. 

We perhaps ought hardly to quit 
the present subject without alluding 
to the remarks which Aristotle has 
elsewhere thrown out on the nature 
of wit and of the ludicrous. The most 
striking are Ihet, 1. xii. 16, where 
he defines wit as ‘chastened inso- 
lence, 7 yap ebtpameAla memaidevpervn 
bBpis éotiv, and his account of the 
ludicrous, that it consists in a thing 
being out of place, anomalous, ugly 
and faulty, though not in such a way 
as to cause any sense of apprehension 
Poet. v. 2: Td yap yedotdy 
eat auapTnud Te Kal aloxos avdduvov 


or pain. 


kal ov POaptixdy, ofoy evOds Td yeAotov 
mpbcwruv aicxpdy Tt kal Sieorpaypevov 
This definition, which is 
to the highest degree penetrating, has 
been made by Coleridge the text for 
his admirable dissertations on wit and 
humour. See Jkterary Remains, 
Vole: 


&vev oduvns. 


IX. 1—2 Mepl 88 aidods—elva:] 
‘Modesty we can scarcely with pro- 
priety describe as a virtue; for it has 
more of the feeling than of the state. 
It may, however, be defined as a kind 





of fear of evil report; and in its effects 
it greatly resembles the fear of danger, 
for persons who are ashamed blush, 
and those who are in terror of death 
grow pale. Both therefore appear to 
be in a manner corporeal, which again 
approximates them to feelings rather 
than states.’ Aristotle, following out 
the programme given, Eth. u. vii. 
14—15, arrives now at the place for 
discussing two instances of the law 
of the balance existing in the instinc- 
tive feelings of the mind (éy ois 
mwd0eot weodérnres), namely modesty 
and indignation. But from some 
eause his work is interrupted here ; 
indignation (Néyeots) is not treated of 
at all, and the discussion on modesty 
is left unfinished. There is no men- 
tion of the extremes, shamelessness 
and shamefacedness 
(xardrAntis), which are specified in 
Book II. (/. ¢.) and in Eth. Bud. m1. 
vil. 2, After stating that only to 
certain ages is ‘modesty’ suitable, 
and that only in a certain provisional 
sense (€ dro@écews) can it be called a 
virtue, the chapter abruptly ends, a 
sentence having been added by some 
later hand which gives an appear- 
ance of finish to the book and 
awkwardly connects it with the open- 


(avarcxurria) 


|! ing of Book V. 


VII.—IX.] 


HOIKON NIKOMAXEION IV. 93 


moder yop panna Zoey 4 EEGs. apieras yoy déog tis 
>>) / > ~ SA ~ A A +7 , 
adoiag, amorencivar 02 TO wept Ta dea OoBwW wapa-2 


, 5] / \ < > / € X\ \ 
TAT Oy * epudpatvovTas Yap Ob Abo YUYOLEYOL, O85 02 Toy 


/ 7 > ~ A \ , , 
Gavarov doPovpevo: Wypimiow, cwpartixa On dalveTal 
> / a ~ U ~ x of 
$ws sivas apdorepa, ome doxet maboug parroyv 4 2Eews 
> > if > An , \ 24 c ones XAG ~ Z - 
Elval, Ov TAC) 7 SHI TO TAINO ADILOSEh, a a TY VER 5 


37 X\ ~ ‘ iA SAL. a \ 
oloucla yap dely Tog THAIMOUTOUS aidjmovasg elvas Oi Td 
/ ~ \ c / c \ 6 2) w~ \ 7 
mae Covtag ToAAa apaptavelv, O70 THG aidoig 02 xwAd- 


eobas. 


_ ~ ~ \ , A D7 
xa ET ALVOUILEY Tw [ev YEwWY TOUS ALON Lovac, 


A > > \ a bd / a > , 
mpecRurepoy & ovdelo dv ewasvéoesey OT1 aloxuvTHAdS* 
JAN 7 bd NAN ~ > A / ’ > ts , 4 
oubiy yap olomeda deliv auroy mpatrey ed olg early 
aicyovyn. od? yap emseixods eotly 7 aicyury, elrep ylyve-4 


> \ ~ OG > A , QA ~ 
TaL Ewk Tolg DavaAoige ov yao mpaxtTeoy TH TOIMUTE. 


eb 5 


0 éotl ra piv nar arrdeay aloypda ra OF xara doFay, 


IAN / LANDA \ , ad > > > 
ovbsy Oradhéver - ovder ena yap WPARTEH, WOT OUX aba Yuy- 


, 
Tov. 
Tey airy poy. 


s X \ \ ~ e , 
davaou 0 xal To elvas ToLotroy olov TpaTTEy Th6 
\ > icf yw a7 > > / z ~ 
TO 0 ovTWS EXEly WOT &b ™ pagseré TL Tiwy 


/ > / \ \ ~ > > ~ 
TowuTey aicyuverOas, xak Ose TOUT olecbas erserxy elvors, 


wv en ~ c 7 \ e 9N 7 c \ a > 
QTomOv" Erk TOG EXOVTIOIG Yap 7% AlOwWS, ExwY df 6 eT bes- 


xg ovdemoTe TpaSe TA data. 


¢ , > , 
brobérews ETLELHEC * 


> \ er > 7 > A 
el yap moaSas, aicxyuvorr ay. 
+ ~ \ 

Zors O& Tolro meph Tag apeTas. 


yw > x e 29 N > Se 
ein 0 av y aldas 227 
oux 
bY >) € > y 

ei Oy avaoryurtia 


~ \ \ ‘ >>) ~ \ > \ / IAN 
daiiroy xai ro py aideicba: ra alcypa mparresv, ovbey 

~ ~ 7 / 
PaAROY TO ToLaiiTa mpaTToVTA aicyuver bos eTIEHES. Ux 8 





-3—5 aiddés is the apprehension of 
shame, joined of course with a capa- 
city for strongly feeling it; neither 
modesty nor any other English word 
seems adequately to convey the force 
of aids, Aristotle speaks of it as a 
desirable quality in tender age, before 
the character is formed. But in 
maturer life the necessity for it, and 
therefore its merit, ceases to exist. 
It might be said that sensibility to 
shame ought to be preserved with 
regard to acts that are conventionally 
(kara Sdfav) and not really (kar’ 
éAndeay) disgraceful; but Aristotle 
says that any possibility of feeling 





shame must be avoided altogether, so 
that the former acts must not be done. 

7—8 ‘Modesty can only be good 
hypothetically: if a person were to do 
so and so, he would be ashamed. But 
this is not the way with the virtues. 
Though shamelessness and the having 
no sensibility about base acts is bad, 
it does not follow that to do such 
things and feel shame is good. Just 
so continence is not a virtue, but a 
sort of mixed quality.’ Et iwo@écews 
‘conditionally’ is opposed to awAd@s 
‘absolutely.’ While the virtues are 
absolutely good, modesty is only con- 
ditionally so, 


o4 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IV. 


[Cuap. IX. 


Zor! 0 v0 y eyxparera apETT,, AAAG TIS pixty* $O1x5%- 


ms INS \ x ww > ~ ad 
OfTAt OF wep QAuTyoG Ev Tob UTTEDOY. 


Cinco Uyyg elrwmsy. 


~ \ \ 
yov o8 weph 





odk ort 3& TodTO wep Tas apeTds] 
The same formula occurs before, Eth. 
I, vil. 20: ixavdy &y riot 7d St SerxO7vae 
KaA@s, olov kal wep) Tas apxds. 

t SerxOqoetar 5& wep) adrijs év tots 
torepov. Nov 8 mept Stxaooivns 
e{rwuev] Aristotle's MS. of the 





fourth book having ended abruptly at 
the word sixth, Nicomachus or the 
editor, whoever he was, in all proba- 
bility added these clauses in order to 
give the book a seeming union with 
the three Eudemian books which were 
now to be grafted on. 


PLAN OF BOOK V. 


ITHERTO all has been perfectly coherent and regular in the 
Ethics of Aristotle. Down to the ninth Chapter of Book IV., 
though all the parts may not have been composed at the same 
time, yet all belong to the same plan, and bear every mark of 
being the work of the same author. But the MS. of Book IV. 
seems suddenly to have broken off in the middle of a subject. 
Whether this was owing to mutilation, or to original incom- 
pleteness, there is now no means of saying. What is clear to us 
from internal evidence is, that the editor has at this point com- 
menced supplying a lacuna ; and accordingly three whole books are 
now introduced, which, though bearing a close resemblance to the 
style of Aristotle, and probably conveying, with only slight modifi- 
cations, his actual system, yet belong to the Ethics of Eudemus, 
Aristotle’s disciple, and thus have only an imperfect coherence with 
the present work. The chief arguments by which it is demonstrated 
that Books V., VI., VII., are only ‘copies’ from Aristotle by one 
of his school have been given, Essay I., pp. 33-43. These argu- 
ments may be briefly recapitulated as follows. 

(1.) It is established both by probability and by internal 
evidence, that the Hudemian Ethics, and the Magna Moralia, are 
not works of Aristotle, but expositions of his system by his disciple 
Eudemus and by some later Peripatetic. 

(2.) The three books in question form part of the Eudemian, as 
well as of the Nicomachean Ethics. 

(3.) They belong naturally to the Hudemian Ethics and fit into 
them without causing the slightest irregularity. 

(4.) In the Nicomachean Ethics they are the cause of extreme 
irregularity, and of collisions and discrepancies which would be a 
disgrace to Aristotle as an author, if it could be supposed that he 


96 PLAN OF BOOK V. 


had allowed them to remain in a work written by himself as a 
whole. 

(5.) In style they possess all the peculiarities of Eudemus as far 
as his writing can be distinguished from that of Aristotle. These 
peculiarities are a sort of confusion of expression, as if philosophical 
thoughts were slurred in the repeating—a want of method and a 
frequent tautology—a fondness for logical formule—and an 
abundance of quotations from different kinds of literature. 

(6.) In various philosophical questions, especially in psychology, 
these books contain an advance beyond the point arrived at in 
other parts of Aristotle’s works, the Politics, the Nicomachean Ethics, 
&c., but they are consistent with the views in the Eudemian Ethics. 
This last argument is the most important, but also the most subtle, 
and it can only be followed up in detail by a careful examination 
of different passages as they occur. 

(7.) Lastly, it may be said that there is no really strong argument 
in favour of attributing these books to the direct authorship of 
Aristotle, beyond a habit of belief which has depended on the 
question never being mooted. All arguments drawn from apparent 
quotations in the Politics, &c., on examination come to nothing. 

The present Eudemian book on Justice bears probably the same 
relation to Aristotle’s theory of Justice now lost, as the Eudemian 
theory of Pleasure in Book VII. bears to Aristotle’s theory of 
Pleasure given in Book X. The Eudemian books have all a 
peculiar indistinctness which taxes the reader’s thought to divine 
their exact bearing. But on consideration, the outlines of a method 
appear to show themselves through the mist. And accordingly, 
the following parts may perhaps be discerned in Book V. 

(1.) Justice having been defined to be ‘a state of mind that wills 
to do what is just,’ the first part of the book is concerned with 
determining, what is the just? (76 décacoy as distinguished from ducat- 
oovvn)» The abstract principle of ‘the just’ may either be iden- 
tified with all law and therefore with all morality ; or it may be 
restricted to its proper sense, fair dealing with regard to posses- 
sions, &c. (7d toov). In this restricted sense ‘ the just’ finds its 
sphere either in distributions of the state, or in correcting the wrongs 
done in dealings between man and man. ‘Though justice is not 
retaliation, yet in all commerce, &c., there is a sort of retaliation. 
Ch. L—V. § 16. 


eS a 
eS 


7 


balpetd le ee ai ellis 


PLAN OF BOOK V. 97 


(2.) Having settled the nature of ‘ the just,’ it follows to discuss 

‘justice,’ or this same principle manifested in the mind of the 
individual. This part of the subject is very imperfectly carried 
out. We miss the graphic impersonations of the virtues with 
which the fourth book of Aristotle’s Ethics is filled. We find 
nothing but a few barren remarks on voluntariness as necessary to 
make an act unjust, and deliberate purpose to constitute an unjust 
character. There isa large digression here on the proper sense of the 
word ‘justice.’ Justice, it is said, can only properly exist between 
citizens; it is a mere metaphor to talk of justice in families, &c. 
Ch. V. § 17.—Ch. VIII. 
(3.) Avset of questions are added, the answers to which go to 
supply deficiencies in the definition hitherto given of justice. The 
leading question is, Can one be injured voluntarily ? and the answer 
to this shows that justice implies a relation between two distinct 
wills and interests. It is again repeated that justice must be a 
settled state of the character; thus the just man could not at will 
be unjust. The subject is concluded by an assertion that justice is 
essentially a human quality. Ch. IX. 

(4.) An appendix follows on the nature of Equity, which is a 
higher and finer justice, dealing with exceptional cases and acting 
in the spirit not in the letter of the law. Ch. X. 

(5.) Ch. XI. is evidently superfluous and out of place. It touches 
on the already settled question, Can a man injure himself? The 
Eudemian Ethics were probably never finished, and this is the only 
account that can be given of the irregularity. 

This book, imperfect as it is if we look at it as a whole, is yet full 
of interesting suggestions, especially those in the fifth chapter on 
subjects which belong to political economy. It disappoints the 
reader, however, by seeming to approach questions, without abso- 
lutely dealing with them. Thus in Ch. III., there is very nearly 
a theory of the division of property ; in Ch. IV., there is nearly a 
theory of punishment ; and in Ch. V. nearly a aie of value and 
price. No one can say, however, that these questions are really 
met. There is considerable confusion in the treatment of cases of 
‘voluntary contracts,’ and it is left entirely uncertain to what head 
of justice these belong. But even were the political questions more 
satisfactorily treated in this book, it must be said that the moral 
view of justice as an individual virtue is left strangely deficient, 

VOL. II. Oo 


HOIKON [ETAHMIQN] V. 


~ 7 \ s 
EPI 62 dixcsordvng xa) adixlag oxemréov, wept oles 
Ys \ 7 / 
Te Tuyxavougw ovo meaEerg, xal mole pscoTys 


> \ em / ‘ A , y / 
22oTly 7 Ginaioouvyn, xak TO Oixasoy Tivwy pécoy. 


4 8 


~ \ ~ / 
oxalic yuiv EoTw xara Tiy aUTiHy pebedoy Tolsg mpostpypLs- 


3 voss. 


op@mev Oy wavTas THy ToadTyy 2&1 Povrouévous 





I. This chapter proposes and opens 
the discussion upon the nature of 
justice and injustice. The chief 
points it contains are as follows. (1) 
Justice and injustice must stand 
opposed to each other, as being two 
contrary states of mind. From the 
nature of one, we may infer its 
contrary the nature of the other, and 
if the one term be used in a variety 
of senses, the other term will be used 
in a corresponding variety of senses. 
(2) The term ‘unjust man’ is used in 
two senses, to denote one who is 
lawless, and one who is unfair. 
Therefore the term ‘just’ must 
denote both lawful and fair. (3) The 
lawful (7d véuipov) is simply all that 
the state has enacted for the welfare of 
its citizens. Therefore, in one sense, 
‘justice’ means fulfilling all the re- 
quirements of law. Thus it is no- 
thing else than perfect and consum- 
mate virtue. In this general sense 
justice is different from virtue only 
in the point of view which one would 
take in defining it. 

1 mola weodrns| Aristotle proposed 
the question about the two kinds of 





justice, ‘in what sense are they mean 
states?’ w@s weodryrés eiow (Eth. 1. 
vii. 16), which is slightly different 
from the above. Cf. ch. vy. § 17 of 
this book. 

2 88  oxélis—rpocipnpévors | 
‘And let our inquiry be according to 
the same method as what has preceded.’ 
This probably refers to the way in 
which the moral virtues have been 
treated in the preceding Book of the 
Eudemian Ethics. There is nothing 
distinctive about this method, or diffe- 
rent from the procedure of Aristotle. 
What is most specially alluded to at 
present must be the fixing of the 
meaning of terms, which is now 
resorted to with regard to justice, 
and which was more or less employed 
before. Cf. £th. Hud. um. v. 1—3, 
where the general method and the 
style of the writing has great affinity 
to the present opening. Tepl 8 
Meyahopuxlas ek tay Trois peyado- 
Yixos arodiSoudvwv Set Biopica 7d 
Brov (e conj. Bonitz. Ceteri atriov). 
“Qowep yap nal ta BAAa Kara Thy 
yertviacw Kal dpodrnra péxpr Tod 
AavOdvew mébppw mpiidvra, Kai rep) 





Cuap. I.] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 99 


, ’ > 9 \ ~ £ yee A 
Agyew Orxosocuryny, ad’ 7g mpaxtixol Thy dixaiwy cio xob 
> p ape Fa ~ \ , \ ig 2 \ Ae 
ad Ho Oixosompayotor xat Podarovrar ra Olxata’ Toy auToy 
63 / A A 10 , > aS x0 ~ A B on 
2 Tporoyv Hab wept Adixlac, Ad 7G adinovor xal PourovTcu 

AQ ‘ ake ~ e > / Ve 
TH Adina, O10 xak Yuly mp@rov ws ev TUTW droxcicbw 

NX \ \ Lees 4 , > as ~ J 
aude yap TOY AUTOY EYE TLOTOY Em Te THY ETI-4 
N7/ XN 
OUYALIG [LEV 

> a > 
auT7 Elva, 


TAUTA, 
~ \ ») / . Create as ~~ 2¢ 
OTYUMY XOL OUVaLEWY XA ETL Ty Esso, 

\ \ / » ~ ~ / 
yap ual emiotyun doxet Thy evavtioy 7 
a y e133 7 ~ ? / a i. > \ ~ ¢ / > 
2&i¢ 0 7 évavrTia riby evavtioy ov, oloy ard THg uUylebag ov 
, SoS / > \ \ Oe \ sf ‘ , 
WPATTETAL TH EVAVTIAN, AAA TH VYLELYH [Lovoy’ AEsyorey 
\ e ~ ial a df e 3\ © ie 
yap vysewis Badia, Grav Padlfy wo av 6 syaivoy. 
/ \ * / eu 9 / 4 t aes, Y ~ > 
TOMAAKIC [LEV OY yrwpilera Y EvavTla 2&6 ATO TIS Evay-5 
4 / \ co ‘oe ' ~ G , Se Sb 
Tlac, morrnazxic 02 al 2Ee1g awd Thy broxeipévwy" Eav TE 
ap i evsEla % tL, xal yi xayveela d X yiverot, xal 
yap y evssin 4 davepa, xaly xayesin haven yiveras, 
> ~ pe , \ , N > , > 
éx Thy evexTindwy y evsela xal ex THUTYS TH EevEXTIXa. Eb 
, € 3 , , / f \ \ 
yap cori 7 eusSian muxvorys THxpxXOS, avayey xal THY xaye- 
7 \ \ * > \ \ \ 
Elay sivas pavoryta capxos xal To evexTixoy TO TWomnTixoy 
/ > , > ~ > ¢ b ae, A , 3 
BWURVOTYTOS EY TUDXI. axorovber 0 wo érl rod ToAv, cay 6 
J we , A , ~ , 
barspo TACOVAYWS AsyYYTAs, XOb Odirepa TrEovayws AsyE- 





Tay évavtiwy 4% avth, and then, to 
a c 
efis 7 


Thy peyarowuxlay ravTds cupBEBnrev.— 


Aéyopuev 5& ry meyadAdpuxov Kata Thy | answer to it, évavtia TeV 


Tod dvouaros mpoonyopiay, Sowep ev 


peyeOer tw Wuxis Kal duvduews. 
K.T.A. 
4 ovd8t yip thy abrdv—pdvor] 


‘(And I have specified them thus) 
for it is not the same with developed 
states as it is with sciences and 
faculties. A faculty or a science 
appears to be the same of contraries, 
but a contrary state does not include 
its contraries, as, for instance, from 
health only healthful things and not 
the contraries of health are produced,’ 
Tap refers to the mention of both 


justice and injustice separately, and 


as opposed to each other. The writer 
accounts for this by saying that a 
Ovvayis admits of contraries, but a 
€fis not (see Vol. I. Essay IV. p. 
187, 190). The style above is some- 
what careless, for we first have émiarhun 





évaytiwy ov. 

5—6 Though a state does not in- 
clude its contrary, yet its contrary 
may be inferred from it; and the 
state itself may be known by its par- 
ticular manifestations (ard tay bmo- 
kemévev), just as a bodily condition is 
known from the symptoms. If the 
name of a state be used in more 
senses than one (mAeovaxas), it follows 
usually that the name of its contrary 
will be used in more senses than one. 

ard tov broKepévoy| As we might 
say, ‘from its facts,’ the donelueva 
being the singular instances in which 
a general notion is manifested. The 
meaning is, that 7a dixam are to 
dixaocdyn as good symptoms are to 
good health. Téy droxemévwy is an 
instance of the logical formule with 
which the writing of Eudemus abounds. 


o 2 


7 


foe] 


100 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] V. [Cuar. 


: wv wv XA 
oat, clov ci To Olxciov, xal TO ddixov. Zoime 08 WAsOVA- 
=; ’ \ , > 4 ‘ \ 
xs rAgyer9ar 7 Oimasocuyvy xal 7 adinia, AAAR dia TO 
, ~ Ul A 5 a 
Tuveyyus Elva THY Ouwyuplay auTdy ravbaver xal wwY Wo- 
. ~ 7 ~ A 4 ‘ 
ep em rey 7 Oppw onary PeaADOV" 7j yap diadopa TOAAY 
\ a ~ A / a 
i “ata Tiy iéav, olov Ort xareiTas xAEIG GLwvUEwWS 7 
c ~ , », Wierd A , / 

TE UO Tov any evar Toy Swwy xaly Tas Gupas xAElOUT IY. 
, 7 ~ , ~ \ a 
sla7ndIw Oy 6 adixog mooayms AéyeTou. doxes Of 0 TE 
, DANY ‘ c / ) X BA 
TAGAVOILOS LObOG civat “al 6 maAsovéxTys xal 6 avioos, 
a Nod a 5 es OL: a4 ov , } c 
WOTE OHAoY OTL xal 6 Olxasog EcTat O TE vOUIMOG Kal 6 


yv 
toc. 


To sy Oixatoy apa To vopsov xal Td Ioov, TO eo 





Cf. Ar. Met. 1. ii. 4 (6 Exwv thy 
Kabdrou emiothuny) o1dé mws wdvta Te 
imrokerméeva, 
‘Now the 
term “justice” appears to be used in 
more senses than one, and so does the 
term injustice, but, because there is 
a close resemblance between the 
ambiguous senses, the ambiguity 
escapes notice, and the case is not the 
same as with things widely differing, 
where the ambiguity is comparatively 
plain (34An paaddrov). <A physical 
difference appealing to the eye (kara 
Thy id€ay) is widest, as for instance 
the word ‘key’ is used ambiguously 
to denote the clavicular bone of 
animals, and that with which men 
lock doors. While the general 
upshot of this passage is clear enough, 
the writing is in itself very indistinct. 
Hence in translation it has been 
necessary to use expansion. To say 
that ‘ their equivocation escapes notice 
because it is close’ goes beyond the 
legitimate bounds of compression. 
Cf. the obscure and probably corrupt 
passage above cited from Eth. Hud. 
ut. v. 1: dowep yap kal ra HAAG Kara 
Thy yertviacw Kal duodrnta pexp) Tod 
AavOdve.y wéppw mpoidyra, 

kata Thy idéav] This seems to mean 
‘in external form.’ Cf. Eth. 1. viii. 
16: 6 Thy idéay mavaloxns. 


7 Gouxe 5¢—kdActovow] 





kAeis|] There is a pun attributed to 
Philip of Macedon—ef. Plutarch, Reg. 
et Imp. Apophth., Philippi rx.—which 
it has been thought that Aristotle here 
alludes to: tis KAeidds abTg@ kate- 
ayelons év wokéum Kad Tod Oepameboyros 
iatpod mdvrws Tt Kal? juépay aitodytos, 
AduBave, Epn, Boa BovdAci, Thy yap 
kAciv éxeis. 

8—11 The word ‘unjust’ is used 
in three different senses to denote the 
lawless man, the greedy man, and the 
unfair man. The word ‘just’ may 
mean either the lawful man or the 
fair man. In this statement there is 
something illogical, for we notice at 
once that there are only two senses of 
the word ‘just’ to match the three 
senses of ‘unjust.’ We find in § ro, 
that unfairness (7rd aor) is a generic 
term, including both greediness (aAeo- 
vetia) and also the collateral notion of 
selfishly avoiding evil. In short, to 
divide ‘unjust’ into lawless, greedy, 
and unfair, is a cross division. 
Evidently there are on each side 
two terms: (1) justice is divided 
into lawfulness or universal justice, 
and (2) fairness about property, or 
particular justice. Injustice is divided 
into (1) lawlessness or universal in- 
justice, and (2) unfairness about 
property, or particular injustice. 


Se ii a ll 


Vy ee el 


1] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 101 


EUAN \ U \ ES 2 \ da ‘ , 
Adixoy To Tapavomoy xal To avicoy. mel 02 xa WAzovE-9 

© WD \ > bo ” > ’ 9 Q \ 

nrg 6 ddimog, meph Tayaba EoTO, ov TaYTA, HAAG Tepl 

A ‘é A. 5 x x ~ \ ie 

boa eotuxia xal atuyla, & eoTl pmev amAwS asl ayaba, 

~ »” \ , 

of 8 avOpwros Tatira evyovra: xal diw- 

~ y Yj \ \ ~ \ \ 

xouoiy? O21 0 00, HAN edyeobas pay TA ATAMS ayada xal 

¢ ~ > 4a H €.. 0 ) ds \ € ~ > ba c y 
aitoig ayaa iva, aipetobar be TH aToig ayaa. 6 0 10 


\ > , 
Tivt 0 oux asi. 


” ~ b] \ \ \ ov 
Adinos ox Kel TO WAZoY aipsiras, AAAA xal TO EAaTToy ext 
~ e ~ ~ > 2 ~ \ \ ~ ,. 
TOY ATAWS XAXWY’ AAA OTh doxet xal TO peEboy HOxXOY 
> , 5 a ee Aiea kent hie , yA 
ayaboy mwsg sivas, To) 8 ayabot eorly 7 wasoveSia, dia 
~ ~ Ss li > ~ 
TovTo Ooxel mAcovexTys iva. Eat: O dvicog* Toto yap 11 
, \ / > \we / DANY ~ c \ 
mepréyer xal xowov. eel 0 6 mapevopnog adixog Hy 6 Oe12 
4 7 ~ a , \ lf , , , 
you.sog Olxasoc, OHAov OTL TWavTA TA voRILA eoT TwWS 
/ / \ \ ~ ad , 
Olnaia’ Ta Te yap wWoiopéva brd TH vopodeTIxyG vowsmo 
A a , oe / 
gor, xal exaoroy TovTwy Oixaioy evar dapev. of 0213 
, , \ / , an n~ 
youo ayopsiovor mepl amavTwy, croyatouevor 7 Tot 
~ / ~ Ey ~ 3. a ~ / 
xowy TupdépavTog maow | Toig aploTos y Toig xupiols, 





g émel 5&—éyabd| ‘Now, since 
the unjust man is greedy, he will be 
concerned with things good, not all, 
but the “goods of fortune,” which 
abstractedly are always goods, but 
which are not so always to the in- 
dividual. (Men pray for these and 
follow after them, but they ought not 
to do so; they ought to pray that 
what are abstractedly goods may be 
so to them, and they ought to choose 
the things which are good for them.)’ 
The goods of fortune are those which 
all men desire, though it is not certain 
that they will prove goods to them. 
The phrase ra &mAGs Gyabd. becomes a 
set formula in this book, cf. ch. vi. § 4; 
ch. ix. § 17. The difficulties con- 
nected with prayer, arising out of 
human ignorance, form the subject of 
Plato’s Second Alcibiades. They are 
also alluded to, Laws, m1. p. 687. At 
the end of the Phedrus is given the 
prayer of Socrates (279 B): 70 pire 
Tay re xal %AAn Boo THSE Oeoi, Solnré 
Mor Kar@ yeverOau tuvdober" Ziwbey F 





boa exw, Tots évrds elvat po lr. 
mAovctoy St voulCouu toy copdy* Td be 
Xpvood TAGs €%n wor Soov phre pépew 
phre &yew Sbvar’ &drdos }} 6 cdhppor. 

12—15 In one sense all that is 
lawful is just ; the law aiming at the 
good of all, or of a part, of the citizens, 
speaks on all subjects, and more or 
less rightly enjoins the practice of all 
the virtues. Justice, then, in this 
sense, may be said to be the practice 
of entire virtue towards one’s neigh- 
pour. 

13 oToxaduevor 7) TOD Kows ovppé- 
povros «.7.A.| Cf. Ar. Pol. mt. vii. 5: 
heey yap tupavuls éort povapxia mpds 
Td cuudépov Td Tod povapxoivTos, % F 
davyapxta mpds Td T&v cdmdpwr, f SE 
Snuokpatia mpds Td auudepoy 7d Tay 
amdpwv. The term vopuoberich (§ 12) 
oceurs again in the Eudemian book, 
Eth. vi. viii. 2. The view given here 
of law, which is expressed still more 
strongly below, ch. xi. § 1, is quite 
different from modern views. Law is 
here represented as a positive system 


102 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. [ Car. 


5 oe ‘ a Lee, é \ ij ~ ad od 
KAT ApETYY 7] KAT AAAOY TIVa TLOMOY TOLOUTOY* WoTE Eve 
X , dL / \ \ \ \ ~ 
[LEV TLOTOY OLHOIA ASYOMEY TH TOLYTINA XAk DUAAKTIXA TIS 
~ ~ ~ ~ / 
evooipovias xal Tay Lopiwy auTag TH WoAITIxy xosvevic, 
14mporTaTTEs 0 6 voKog xal Ta Tot avdpsiou Eoya sorely, 
, ‘ ‘ ’ / ‘\ 
oloy py Agimen THy TAG pyde Hevyew yds firrey TH 
~ 7 
Orra, xal Ta Tod TwMdpovos, olov wy porysvery yd UPoi- 
Sev, xal ra Tod mpchou, oloy py TUmTEy pnd? xaxyyopsiv, 
c / Py: \ \ \ wv > A } 4 / \ \ 
O{LOLWES OF KAL KATA TAS HAAAS ALETAS HAL LOYUNDING TH LEV 
xsrcvwy THO amayopevmy, opbis piv 6 xelnevog apb@c, 
y , 
15 yelpov 0 6 amecxediagpévoc. adTH MEY ovY 7) OimcsoruYy 
> \ / > / > ’ > c ~ > \ » ee 

ADETH [LEV ETTL TEAEIA, AAA OUY ATAWS AAAK TpOS ETEPOY. 
nal Oia TOUTS TOAAAKIG xpaTioTy THY apeTdy Elves OoxEd 7 





(though the instances quoted of its 
formule are all negative, wh Aelrew 
Thy rdw, &e.), aiming at the regu- 
lation of the whole of life, sometimes, 
however, with a bias of class-interests, 
and sometimes only roughly executed 
(amecxediacuévos). This educational 
and dogmatic character of the law 
was really exemplified to the greatest 
extent in the Spartan institutions. 
Athens rather prided herself (accord- 
ing to the wise remarks which Thucy- 
dides puts into the mouth of Pericles) 
on leaving greater liberty to the in- 
dividual. But Plato and Aristotle 
both made the mistake of wishing for 
an entire state-control over individual 
life. 

1472 Tov dvdpelov] Cf. Eth. m1. 
viii. Enactments of the kind 
here mentioned form part of the 
system given in Plato’s Laws, pp. 
943—4. Modern statutes of military 
discipline against desertion, &c., fur- 
nish an exact parallel to these ancient 
laws, if we only consider that in the 
Greek cities the whole state was 
more or less regarded as an army. 

15 aiirn mtv obty—é€repov] ‘Now 
this justice is complete virtue, not 


LZ, 





absolutely, however, but in relation 
to one’s neighbour.’ There is a 
careless transition here from Ta 
vopiwa and 7% Sikaa to  Sixcsocdyn. 
Correct writing would have required 
H xara tTabra Siccsocbvyn or a similar 
phrase, Generally speaking, this first 
part of the Book is about 7a dixaa as 
distinguished from 7 Sixaootvn (see 
Plan of Book V.). TedAela is here 
used apparently with no trace of the 
Aristotelian or philosophic sense, but 
simply as denoting ‘complete.’ 

15—20 Hence justice is often 
thought the best of the virtues, 
brighter than the evening or the 
morning star, the sum of all other 
excellence. It is the wse of virtue, 
and not in relation to oneself alone, 
but also towards others. Hence it 
has been defined ‘others’ profit.’ As 
he is the worst man who is bad both 
to himself and others, so he is the 
best who is good to himself and to 
others. This kind of justice is nota 
part of virtue, but the whole; it can 
only be distinguished from virtue 
when you come to define it, and dis- 
cover that you must take a different 
point of view for each. 


Re lll 


ry] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 103 


S , \ wp> oa afr> cw oe e.. 
Oieasoruvy, xal of Eorepog 006 Ewog oITw Favpacros 
\ , 
Hal Toporsaconevos daprev 
év O& ducavocvry suvddAH/Ony Tao’ Gperi Eve. 

A / Sr > ae ~ f bg ~ ~ / 
HAE TEASA PANT TA AETY, OTL TIS TEAEIAG ApETYS YOITIS 
+ 3 \ 
got. ters 0 eoriv, Ort 6 Eywy auTay xal mpeg Erepov 
ou z ~ > hoe ~ 4 ws > , 5 ig Pee 

arate TH apeTyn xpjoFu!, a OU [Lovo ad abroy 
2 \ ~ . ~ > ~ ~~ 
TOAAOL Yo ey MEY TOG OIXELOIg TY ApETY OuvavTas Xea- 
> ~ \ sd >\ ~ \ eas | ~ 
whos, ev 08 Toig mpbg Erepov dduvarodow, xal dik TotTo 16 
oe Dy ~ wv \ ~ / vA > \ yv ie 
a0 Ooxel Exeiv tro Tod Biavrog, ors apyn avdpa deter: 

\ 5 sd \ \ 3 / “oy « A ) \ ds X 
Mpeg ETEpov yop xa Ev XoLvwWVIa On 0 ApywY. dia OF TO17 
aUTO ToUTO xal aArCTpLOy Kyabdy doxEl civas 7 Oixcsoobyy 

/ ~ > ~ a \ a , ° a yy \ \ 
[07 THY ALETWY, OTL THOS ETEDOY EOTIV’ HAAW Yap TH 
\ »+ a ~ 
Tup.depovTa MATTEL, 7) APYovTs F XowwMvo. xaxITTOS pev 18 
y c \ \ C7 W \ \ \ /, , ne 
ouUY 0 xa Tpbg MUTOY xa MpOG Tous HiAouS Ypwevog TH 
/ yy 5] > € x | ea | ~ ¥ ~ > \ 
poxdnpia, apiotog 0 ovy & mpdg avroy TH apEeTH AAAA 
of . re Ree o 
[pos eTEpov® ToUTo yap Epyov yarsrov. adTy pey ovy19 
ANS 7 > / , ~~ > 7 > A sN>2 ¢ 
Y) ObXAbOTUVY), OU [LED0S APETIS AAA GAY ADETY EOTIY, oud x 
; 
evavTia adixla Lépog xaxlag aAN OAy xaxia, TOE diadé- 20 
ea \ Ae aN / oe ~ i ~ > 4 
psh % ApsTy xak 7 OixauoTvy AUTH, OjAov ex T&Y elpnueveny. 





ov@ Exmepos «.7.A.] This may have 
allusion to something in literature, 


h wdoas advaykaiov &kodovdeiy tas 
dAAas. 


now lost. At all events it is a fine 16 dpxh &vdpa] The same senti- 
saying. ment is expressed by Sophocles, 


év dt Siucaoodvn| Given among the 
verses of Theognis (147 sq.) in the 
following couplet : 


ev 5& Bucasootyyn cvAAHBSny was” aperh 
-oTW, 

mwas dé 7° avhp ayabds, Kipve, dlkaos 
éav, 


mpos €repoy| Fritzsche quotes Eurip. 
Heracl. 2: 


65 wiv dtxaos Tots wéAas wépur’ ayhp. 

6 8 eis 7d Képdos Aju Exwv avemévor, 

moder 7 &xpnoTos Kal ouvadAAdooeEy 
Bapis, 

aitg & upioros. 


And Ar. Pol. mt. xiii. 3: 
yap aperhy cival paper Thy Sixaoodyny, 


KOLWa@viKhy 





Antig. 175 sq. 

17 GAAétpiov &yabdv] Repeated 
below, ch. vi. § 6. Cf. Plato’s 
Repub. 1. p. 343 0: &yvocis ri H pev 
dicasocdvn Kal Td dSikatov &AAOTPpLov 
ayabdoy TG bvt1, TOD Kpelrtovds Te Kah 
&pxovtros acuppépov, 
meBouévov Te Kat Swnperovvtos BAdBy 
(see Vol. I. Essay II. p. 109). The 
sophistical and sneering definition of 
justice is here repeated without com- 
ment, being accepted as a testimony 
to the unselfish character of justice. 

20 Th 8& Siapéper—aperh| ‘ But 
what the difference is between virtue 
and this kind of justice is clear from 
what we have said already. They 


oikela 8€ ToD 


are the same, only conceived diffe- 


104 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[ Cuap. 


ZoTk pay yep 7 arr, ToD elvar ov TO aT, AA F py 
mpeg ErEepoy, Ouxouardvy, h 0: Toads FEig aTAwS, caper. 
Ziyroiipev O¢ ye THY ey pepst aperiis Oixasoobyay’ gors 


yap TiS, WS panty. 
2 [= p05. 


ipolang de xah mel adixclas Tis XOTOHR 
o7Hpsbov S ori Zorw: xara pay yap TAS AAALAC 





rently ; viewed as a relation to others 
the state is justice, viewed as a state 
of the mind simply, it is virtue.’ 

708 elvat ov rb abrd] This logical 
formula occurs again th, vt. viii. 1, 
where it is said that wisdom and 
polities are the same state of mind, 
only their essence is differently con- 
ceived (7d pévro elya ob tabrby 
abrais). On the force of elvat, see 
Eth. mu. vi. 17, note. In both of 
these Eudemian passages, where it is 
said of two things that ‘they are 
the same, only their ¢elvym is diffe- 
rent,’ we must understand that the 
results are the same, but the essential 
nature, the causes, and what the 
Germans would call the Grund-begriff, 


or fundamental conception, are diffe-. 


rent. Thus the first idea about 
justice (in the widest sense) is, that 
it is a relation to others. The first 
idea about virtue is, that it is a 
regulation of the mind. There is a 
slightly different application of the 
formula, Arist. De Animé, m1. ii. 4: 
H d5& Tod aicOnrod evépyea Kal Tijs 
aic@hoews ) abt?) pév éott kad pla, Td 
3& elva: ov Tavrdy abrats. ‘Now the 
consciousness of an object is identical 
with and inseparable from the con- 
sciousness of the sensation of it, but 
yet in conception these differ from 
each other fundamentally.’ Here we 
have two distinct sides or ‘moments’ 
represented as, though logically dis- 
tinct, yet inseparable. 

Plato in discussing justice had first 
to clear the subject of sophistical 
notions, and to prove that justice did 
not depend alone upon human insti- 





tutions, but far more on the nature of 
the human soul. Thus he concluded 
by defining it to be a just balance in 
the mind itself. The Aristotelian 


starting-point is different. It is as- — 


sumed that justice proceeds from the 
development of man’s nature as a 
‘political creature.’ Also itis assumed 
that in political institutions there is 
something which is absolute and not 
merely conventional (Eth. y. vii. 
1—5). Then the only question is, 
what are the exact limits of justice 
itself? To which the answer is, that 
we may either regard it in the 
broadest sense as including the whole 
of right dealing with others, or, more 


restrictedly, as right dealing in respect — 
of property and advantages of all 


kinds. 


II. This chapter consists of three 
parts. (1) It brings arguments to 
prove the existence of a particular 


kind of injustice, relating chiefly tongs 


property, from which the existence of 
a particular kind of justice might also 
be inferred, §§ 1—6. (2) It sets aside 


universal justice as not being the 


object. of discussion to the present 
book, §§ 7—11. (3) It divides par- 
ticular justice into two kinds, distri- 
butive and corrective, §§ 12—13. 

1—6 The arguments brought to 
prove the existence of a particular 
kind of injustice reduce themselves’ 
apparently to an appeal to language. 

(1) We speak of the coward as 
‘doing wrongly’ (&3icciv); also we 
speak of the man who takes more 
than his share, as ‘doing wrongly ;’ 


7 

r 

b> 

a 
<a 
pe 





I—IL.] 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. 


108 


f¢ C ek ~ xD ~ , ~ x SDs ML € 

pox Syplas O EVEDYWY HOME (LEY, TASOVERTEL O OUDEY, OLOY O 
e/ \ > ‘> a5 5 / x ~ > \ Py A , 
pias THY ATWIOK Oh OFLAIAY 7% XAXWS EITWY 01K YAaAETO- 
Ey > B 4 7 7 » > > Ae Ge , ‘ o ds 

THTA % ov Ponlynoas YpyUaot OF avErsuTepiav’ oTaY Os 
~ / ] > , ~~ s > Q 
THEOVERXTY, MOAAAKIG KAT OUOSUIAY THY TOLOUTMY, HAAG 

‘ PANS \ / \ , , / , 

pay 0v0 HATA TATAS, KATH Tovynpiay dg ye Tiva (Weyomev 


/ \ 2 / 
Af) HAL XAT AOLKICY, 
v herd 


COTY Hpa Ye AAAN Tig abixIa 3 


c , ~ oa \Y aS , > / ~ of INS 
WS LEp0S THES GAYS, KA AOIKOY TH EV [LLEpEl TOU OAOV AIIxOU 


Tou Tapa Toy voLLoY. 


x a9 1e XN ~ , sd 
ETE €4 0 ev Tou xepoaivery EVEXA 4 


poryeves xal roocrapPavey, 6 02 mpoortibelo xal Cyusovpe- 


> > / a X\ > /, 
yoo Ov émibuplav, ovTog piv axorAacTos 
~ a ~ ” 
parroy 7 wacovéntys, exeivog 3 adixos, 
Bd sf SX \ PN aee J 
OnAoy ok OT 01k TO xEpOCIVvELY, 
, >> 4 , € > \ 
TOVTA QOMUUUATA yiveTaAL 1 eravahora 


doksiev av civ 
> / ’ BA 
Ax6AaTTOS O ov" 
mepl py TAAAG S 
imk tive poy4y- 


oy 
ETs 


, ee x 4 ae , a a , * 9 , 
play Geb, OloY Eb ELLOLYEUTEY, ET AxXOAUTIAY, Eb EYHATEAITE 

\ / - ay, 4 Mey J / i ee te 7 2 99 
TOY TAPATTATHY, ETE OSIAIAY, ELETATAZEY, ET ODyYY" Eb 4 





the latter use of the terms is evidently 
different from the former. 

(2) A crime committed for the sake 
of gain is called a ‘wrong’ distinc- 
tively, rather than by the name it 
would have had, were this motive of 
gain not present. 

(3) While all other wrongs (a5:«q- 
para) are referred each to some evil 
principle, such as cowardice, intem- 
perance, and the like; acts of unjust 
gain are referred to no other principle 
except ‘injustice,’ which accordingly 
must be used in a special sense and 
denote a special vice in the mind. 

The statement of the first of these 
arguments in the text is extremely 
confused. It is put in such a way 
that it would as well prove any other 


vice as mAcovetia to be particular. 


injustice. Suppose we substituted 
‘idleness’ in the text for ‘grasping’ ; 
it would then be true to say, ‘When a 
man is idle, he often errs in none of 
the other vices, certainly not in all, 
but yet he acts with a certain faulti- 
ness (for we blame him) and wrongly 
VOL. Il. 





(kar’ abixfav). Hence there is a kind 
of wrong separate from universal 
injustice,’ &c. However this is only 
a matter of statement; there is no 
doubt that adi with regard to pro- 
perty means something special, and 
different from &3iula in the sense of 
wrong-doing in general. In English 
‘injustice’ is not used to mean vice 
generally ; though its opposite ‘just’ 
is occasionally used in the transla- 
tion of the Bible as equivalent to 
‘righteous,’ and in a sense answer- 
ing pretty nearly to that of vdumos. 

4 rv ei 6 pev—xepdaivew] ‘Again 
if one man commits an adultery for 
the sake of gain, making a profit by 
it, and another man does the same for 
lust, lavishing money (mpoor:els) and 
incurring loss; the latter would 
rather be deemed intemperate than 
covetous, the former would be called 
unjust, but not intemperate; evi- 
dently because of his gaining by it.’ 
Fritzsche (upon i. 14) quotes Aeschines 
Socraticus, mu. 14: done? & Sy oo 
&vOpwros ei porxeder Tas TaY méAaS 


106 


—- 


HOIKQN [EYAUMIQN] V. 


[ Cuap, 


xEpouviv, em oudsniay pox dypiay LAN a ex ahintay. 


6 WOT pavepiy 6 OTl EOTL TIG KOixia mous Tuy baqy AAAY 2y 


— 


wEpst, TuvovUROS, OTs 0 opto yads éy TO aUTD vives’ 


auheo 


yap + ey TO dae Erepoy axoves Ti Divers AAD 7 pay 


\ 
3eok Tiny 7 UPN PATO 7 cwrnplay, 7 yh el ris Ey orev ev} 
~ ~ / + Ne can \ \ > 
OYOLATE menraPely TAUTH WAVYTH, XA OL YOovany THY ane 


« 


N ~ 
Tou x82 ows, a: oe weph Oravta wep boa 6 sTrovdaios. 
XY Te ” 
7 “Ort pdy ody lol Orxasordvon mAzioug, xual Ors Eos TIC 
eet Se \ Vince > , he , \ \c , 
xal ETépa Wap Tiy OAyy apeTyy, OHAov* Tig OF xab orola 


, 
8 Tic, ANWTEOY. 


nN 7 \ EAN , UG 
OLW AIO THs a7 TO QOlxOY TO TE TWACKVOUOY 


\ \ BA XV 3A , , \ \ ‘ 
xal To AaviToY, TO OF Aixasoy TO TE vousmoy xab To Tooy, 
xaToH psy ody TO Tapavomoy 7% mpaTepov eipyuévyn adixlas 


9 iorly. 


M2’ mes 


Eel aag 


A yw \ A 
dmsl Of TO QviOoy xAal TO WAZOY OU TAUTOY AAD 
€ , \ ad \ X\ A , icf 
Ws pepog mpeg GAov (To piv yap wAdoy amay 


4, 4 2 ~ la \ A BAN ¢ 
avicov, TO 0 avicov ov may TAO), xal TO Adinoy xal 7 


> 


c 


> , > ee Ve 70 > / ‘ \ c / \ > 
AOLHIA OU TAUTA HAA ETELH EXEIYMY, TH [LEY WS [LEDy TH d 
o , \ a e 9S ’ ~ oO >> ie « / 
WS OAA* [LEL0S YAH AUTY 1 HOLKIN TIS CANS AOImMIAS, OMOlWE 
Ob xal 7% Oimasoruvy Tig OixasocUrys. 


cA \ ~ > 
Wore xal weph Tig ev 





yuvaikas em apyuply, &diucciv dy H od, 
kal Tatra mévtor Kal THs méAEws Kal 
TeV véuwy KwAUvdYTOD ; 

6 dore—orovdaios] ‘So that it 
is plain that there is a particular kind 
of injustice distinct from the uni- 
versal kind, having the same name by 
reason of a kindred nature (cwvdyv- 
os), because its definition falls under 
the same genus. For both have 
their whole force consisting in a rela- 
tion to others, but the one is con- 
cerned with honour, property, or 
safety (or by whatever one name one 
might sum up all such things), and is 
prompted by the pleasure of gain, 
but the other has to do with the 
whole sphere of virtue.’ 

cvvevupos| What logic calls ‘ ana- 
logous. We before had the word 
duwvuuta to denote ‘equivocation’ 
(c.i. § 7), see Eth. 1. vi. 12, and note; 
and ef. Ar. Categor. i. 3: Zvvévupa dé 





Aéyera Gv 76 Te bvoua Kowdy Kal 6 
kara Tovvoua Adyos tis ovctas b abrds. - 

g éwel 5&—Bixaroodyys|] ‘But as 
(éet) ‘unequal’ and ‘ more’ are not 
the same, but stand related to each 
other as part to whole (for ‘more’ is 


a species of ‘ unequal’), so («al) the 


unjust principle and habit belonging 
respectively to the two kinds we have 
mentioned are not the same but dif- 
ferent, this from that, the one being as 
part, the other as whole. For this injus- 
tice (about property) is a part of uni- 
versal injustice, and the correspondent 
justice is a part of universal justice.’ 
The only way to give any meaning to 
this indistinct passage is to consider 
what is said about ‘more’ and 
‘unequal’ to have nothing to do with 
mAeovetia, but simply to be an illustra- 
tion of a part included by a whole, 
Particular justice includes all the 
generic qualities of universal justice, 





II.) 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. 


107 


, , \ \ ~ > , ’ , , 
[Eps OLMOLOTUYAS HOLL wept TH Ev [-Epss AOLHIAC AEXTEOY, 


\ ~ > / \ ~ D7 € 7 
HAL TOU OLXQLOD XA TOU KHOLXOV WOKUTwWS. 


c \ z \ 
7% pov ouv xAaTHI0 


Noel > \ fe I~ , eae ere ¢ \ 
Thy OAyy apeTyy TeTAypévy Oixasorivy xal adixla, 7 Bey 
Tig CANS apETIs OVTA YpHoIg mHog AAAdY, 7 OF THg xaxins, 


adsicbw. 


\ \ dL. DX Ay, oN \ \ / 
xaL TO ObxasOY OF XAL TO AOIMOY TO HATA TAU- 


Tag davepoy we diopiotéov’ oysdov yap TH TOARR ThY 
youinwy Ta aro Tig GANS aperig mpaTTomeva eoTiy * 
nah’ éxnoryy yap dperyy mpoorarres Civ xal xa éxa- 
oTHY poy lyplay xwAVEL GO vOMOS. TH OF oyTIXa THg OAS 11 
cipevig gor) Thy voinwy Coa vevopobérntas mesh masdeiay 


\ \ \ , 
Tuy wpog TO xoOlvoy, 


\ \ ~ 7 / 
meph 08 THg xa ExacToy masdelas, 


xa’ hy amAw@es ovip ayahos éors, mOTEcoy Tio. WoAITInIS 


i 33 \ N ¢ ff [cA Py / < > \ yf S85 
eOThY q ETEOAC, UOTEDOV bOpkG TSOv ou YP sOwo TAUTOV 





no less than as a particular virtue it 
ineludes all the generic qualities of 
universal virtue. Some MSS. read 
érel 5& 7d &vicov Kal To Tapdvomor, 
from not understanding the force of 
the illustration applied in ére/. It is 
no wonder that confusion should have 
been caused when the writer was at 
so little pains to avoid it. 

1o—11 We may set aside justice 
in the wider sense as being identical 
with the exercise of virtue, amd also 
the principle on which it depends 
(kal 7d Slxaoy 8), this being simply 
the inculcation of virtue by the state. 
(The question as to whether private 
education is the same as public, 
whether the good man is the same as 
the good citizen, may be discussed 
hereafter).—This seems to be the 
train of thought, the whole of § 11. 


being parenthetical. cxeddv yap ra 


ToAAG K.T.A. is a mere repetition of . 


ch. i. § 14. 
7a d& momntini—maytl] ‘Now the 
enactments productive of entire virtue 


are those which have been made with 


regard to education for public life. 


With regard to individual education, 
according to which one is not a good 





P2 


citizen, but simply a good man, we 
must afterwards determine whether it 
belongs to politics or some other pro- 
vince. For perhaps the idea of the 
good man is not the same as that of 
the citizen in every case.’ 

borepoy S.iopioréov] This is an un- 
fulfilled promise in the Hudemian 
Ethics as they stand. Nor can this 
exact question be said to be touched 
upon in the Mcom. Eth. In the 
Politics Aristotle very decisively pro- 
nounces that education should be all 
public, ze, under. the control of 
government and reduced to one 
standard, cf. Pol. vai. i. 3: *Erel & 
év Td TéAos TH wéAEL MdoH, Havepdy Sre 
kal thy watdselay play Kal thy abdrhy 
avaryKaioy elva: wdytTwy Kal radTys Thy 
émiédeiay elvat Kowhvy Kol wh Kar 
iStav, dy Tpdmov viv Exagros emiweAcirat 
Tay abtov téxvey idig Te Kal udOnow 
idiav, hy av Sdn, SidacKnwv. He also 
after a discussion pronounces that on 
the whole the virtue of the man and 
of the citizen is the same, ef. Pol. m1. 
iv. and m. xviii. Eudemus then in 
the present place appears to depart to 
some extent from the views of Ari- 
stotle. 


I 


13 2y Tolg ouvanrnadypact diophwrixor. 


& 


> enh. Weald > 
2av0pl T 


[ Cuap- 


108 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


> hed \ 4 / ~ a: \ 
ciyah@ elves xal mority mavtl, rig 68 xara 
~ ‘\ "4 A / 
sos Oixasorvvys xal TOD xaT aUTyY Oixaiov Ev mev EoTIW 
~ ~ ~ a / a ~ wv 
0g TO ey Taig Olavomaic TITS % YpnuaTwy 7 THY ahrAwy 
~ ~ ~ ¢ 
GTR MEoTa Toig xolwwvotor THg worITelag (év ToUTOIG 
v a a ‘ \ 
yap tari xal dvicov Exew xab Troy Erepoy érégouv), Ev 02 TO 
\ 3 , 
TouTou 0: pgpy duo" 
~ \ / A A e , | te a 
TOY YAP TVVAAARYLATWY TH [LEY EXOUTIA ETT TH O AKOU- 
A / ~ A 
win, ExovTIa pev TH TOLADE oloy MpaoIg wy OaveropoS 
~ 4 / Ul \ 
2yyvn XpITIs Mapaxaradyxy plo bwoig* exovore Os ASyeTat, 
~ / ‘ ~ 
OTL % apy Thy TuvArArAAypaTwWY ToUTwWY ExoUTIOg. TaY 
LN ee / \ \ 4 ~ a \ d 
6 axovTlWwY TH [LEY AATLAIA, Oloy xAOTI Molyela tappa- 
, / nN , , 
xela mooaywysia dovrararia dorodovia Wevdonaprupia, 
x \ , is > 7 ~“ A /, c A 7 
Ta 02 Biase, oiov aixia deopog Javaros aprayy mypwors 


xaxnnyople TPOTNARKIT LOC. 


” ¥ BA 
Ere) 0 6 41 cdixog avicog xal To adixoy avicoy, 





avdpt 7 eyab@ elvas] ‘The essen- 
tial idea of a good man.’ On this 
formula, see Eth. 11. vi. 17, note. 

12—13 Particular justice is now 
divided into distributive and correc- 
tive justice. For all details connected 
with these two forms, see the follow- 
ing chapters. It must be observed 
at present that there is some confusion 
in the account at its outset, for ‘vo- 
luntary transactions’ (74 éxobo1a cuvad- 
Adypara) ‘such as buying, selling, 
lending, pledging, using, depositing, 
and hiring,’ are said to come under the 
head of corrective justice, as well as 
‘involuntary transactions.’ But this 
is not entirely the case; we find that 
in all bargains the principle of 
geometrical proportion comes in 
(which does not belong to corrective 
justice), and we find in fact that volun- 
tary transactions are not touched upon 
in the chapter which treats of cor- 
rective justice. They are discussed 
to some extent in chapter v., but 
not assigned to any particular head, 


III. This chapter, without for- 





mally announcing its subject, treats 
of distributive justice. The main 
points with regard to it are as 
follows. Justice implies equality, and 
not only that two things are equal, but 
also two persons between whom there 
may be justice. Thus itis a geometrical 
proportion in four terms; if A and B 
be persons, C and D lots to be 
divided, then as A is to B, so must 
C be to D. Anda just distribution 
will produce the result that A + C will 
be to B+D in the same ratio as 
A was to B originally. In other 
words, distributive justice consists in 
the distribution of property, honours, 
&e., in the state, according to the 
merits of each citizen. 

With regard to this principle, 
though the text is not explicit, yet 
it appears to be (1) really applicable 
in all cases of awards made by the 
state, (2) ideally to be capable of a 
wider application as a regulative. 
principle for the distribution of pro- 
perty and all the distinctions of 
society. As to the history of the 
doctrine, we find it shadowed out by 


IL—III.] 


~~ 7 ~ ae 
OFAoy OTs xal peoov Th EoTL TOD aviooy, 


HOEIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


109 


~~ ~ 
TOUTO O 2o0T} TO2 


yf ,’ c / 7 / : \ \ , A bee 4 
boov"’ EY OTOla yap ™ pages EOTL TO TWAECOY XA TO EAATTOY, 


2o71 xal To loov. 


. sf \ wd A \ 7 
él OUY TO AOIXOY AvIoOY, TO OlxaLoYv3 





Plato in the great idea of a harmony 
and proportion ruling in the world, cf. 
Gorgias, p. 507 &: gaol ® of coool, 
@ KadAikAeis, xal oipayvdy Kal yiv Kal 
@eods Kal avOpdrovs thy Kowwviay 
ouvexew Kat pirtay Kal xoopdryta Kat 
cwppootvny Kal Sixadryta, Kal 7d 
SArov Todt Sia TadTa Kéopoy Kadovowy, 
& éraipe, ovk akooplay, ob8t axodractay. 
av 3€ pot Soxets ob mpocéxev Toy voiy 
Tovros, Kal tradra gopds dv, &AAG 
AéAnvE oe Bre FH icdtys H yewmerpiKy 
Kal év Oeots kal ey avOpdmas péya 
‘Bivara ob 8 mAcovetiay ote Seiv 
\aokeiv’ yewuerplas yap Gmedcis. There 
is a still nearer approach to the pre- 
sent doctrine in the Laws, p. 757 B, 
where it is said that there are two 
kinds of equality; one is a mere 
equality of number and measure, the 
_ other is the ‘award of Zeus,’ the 
“equality of proportion. Thy 5¢ ddne- 
ordrny «al dplorny iodtryra obxér: fd- 
diov mayti ideiv. As yap 5h xpiots 
éort Kat tots avOpdros Gel ouixpa 
pv émapnel’ way 5¢ Scov by exapKéon 
mércow 7} Kar idiitous, mdvr? dryabd 
Grepyd{era. TG pev yap pelfon 
Trciw, TE BE CAdtTom cpyKpdrepa 
veer, méetpia Sid00ca mpbs THY abray 
gicw éxarépe* xal 5) Kal Timas 
pelQoor piv mpds dperhy del pelCous: 
tots 3& roivaytiov Exovow aperis te 
kal moidelas tb mpéwov éxarépas 
Grovéuer kata Adyov. 

It is remarkable that the terms 
‘distributive and corrective justice’ 
are not found in the Politics of Ari- 
stotle, though this distinction and the 
various points connected with it in 
reality belong much more to political 
than to ethical science. However, 
though the zame of distributive 
justice does not occur, yet. the idea of 





it is fully developed in Politics, m. 
¢. ix.—a passage from which it is not 
improbable that the present chapter 
may be partly taken, though an inter- 
polated reference (xaOdmep etpnra: mpé- 
TEpov év Tois HOiKois) gives the passage 
in the Politics a fallacious appearance 
of having been written later, and of 
having accepted conclusions from the 
present book. Far rather it is likely 
that the conception of ‘distributive 
justice,’ having been received as a con- 
ception from Plato, and farther worked 
out by Aristotle in his Politics, only 
became stereotyped into a phrase in 
the after-growth of his system, at the 
end of his own life, or in the exposi- 
tion of his views made by Eudemus. 
It is in speaking of the ‘oligarchical 
and democratical principles of justice’ 
that Aristotle says: (§ 1) mdyres yap 
Grrovra: Sixalov tivds, GAG péxpe 
Tivos mpoépxovta, Kal A€yovow ov way 
7d kuplws Sikaov. Oiov done? troy +d 
Sixaoy elvat, nal oti, GAN ov wacw 
GAAG Tois trots. 
Slxasoy elves. 


kal to &yuoov Sone? 
kal ydp éorw, GX od 
waow, GAAG Tois advisors. of 5& Toor’ 
apatpodat, Td ois, kal Kplvover Kaxds. 
7) 8 atriv ort wepl abray 7 Kplois* 
oxeddy & of rAcisto: Patra: Kprtal reph 
tav oixeiwy. “Dor érel rd Sixcsoy 
ticiv, Kat Sinpytar tov abtrév tpdmov 
éxl te Tav Tpayydrwrv Kad ois, + Kabd- 
mep elpntor mpdrepov ev tois 7O:Kois, 
Thy pey Tov mpdyparos icéryta 
duoroyote, Thy 5& ofs audioByroda. 
The conclusion is*(Poi. ur. ix. 15) 
that they who contribute most to the 
joint-stock of virtue and good deeds 
in the state are entitled to a larger 
share in the control of affairs than 
those who base their claims upon any 
other kind of superiority. 


110 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. [Cuap. 


‘4}orov' omep xal avev Aoyou Ooxel mao. eel 08 Td Troy 
poov, To Oixasoy péoov TE av ely. Zots OF To tooy ev 
craylorois duclys avayxy Tolvuy Td Oixasov péoov Te xab 
loov sivas [xal mpeg t1] xab riolv, xal 7 wey wéoov, Tivdy 
(ratra o earl wasiov xal Zrarrov), 49 Yoov eori, duvoly, 

57 8 Oixatoy, TIT. avayxn dpa Td Olxasoy ev ZAnyIoroIS 
sivas Tértapolw’ ols Te yap Oixasoy Tuyyaver dv, Ovo éoTi, 

6xak ev olg Ta Moaypata, du0. xaly avTy ~oras ioorygs, 
vig xal ev olg* Wo yap éxeiva Eyer TH ev vlc, oOTW xa- 
xelva Byer’ el yao py loot, oun toa 2Eouoi, arn’ evredbev 
ai payor xal Ta eyxajpata, bray 7 loo py loa 4 py 

aloo loa eywor xa vénwvras. ets éx To xat a&lay 
ToUTO OnAoY’ To yap Oixasoy ev Taig dravomnig bors. 
yoo mares xar agiay tive deiv iva, THY pévros aSiay 
ou THY auTHy Atyougs mavTEg bmapyey, BAA of py 


Onpoxparixol ersufepiav, of O érryapyixol 


oo 


N/ > / A 
GIXaloy AvarOyOY Th. 


> / c > > \ J / 
suyéveiay, of 0 aploToxpartixol apeTyy. 
To yap avaroyoy 


TravTOY, of O 
4 a \ 
eoT I apa Td 
ov provoey eat) 





1—4 These sections are full of 
confused writing. It is said ‘since 
the unjust is unequal, there must be 
a mean, which is equal; justice must 
be equal; the equal is a mean, there- 
fore justice must be a mean. As 
being equal justice implies two terms, 
as being a mean two extremes, as 
being just two persons, therefore it 
must be in four terms, &e.’ The 
general meaning is clear, but the 
statement, especially in § 4, is very 
faulty. A confusion is made by the 
introduction of the idea of pécov with 
regard to justice, which at the present 
part of the argument was not required. 

6 «f yap ur) Yoo, «.7.A.] Cf. Ar. 
Pol. m1. ix. 1 8q. d. ¢. 

7 &rt ex rov—dperhy] ‘Again this 
is clear from the principle of equality 
according to standard; for all agree 
that justice in distributions must be 
according to standard, but men are 
not unanimous in declaring the same 





standard. While the democrats 
declare liberty, those who are for an 
oligarchy declare wealth or birth, and 
those who are for an aristocracy (in 
the highest sense) declare virtue.’ 
This is apparently taken from the 
saying in Aristotle’s Pol. 11. ix. 4: 
Of wey yap by Kard v1 hvicon Zow, ofoy 
xphuacww, brws olovra buco elvat, of 
& by xard 1 Yoo, oloy érevbepla, Srws 
too. Cf. Jb. un. ix. 15. It is 
observable that Aristotle (7. cc.) twice 
speaks of men being equal in point of 
liberty, unequal in point of wealth or 
virtue ; but the above writer confuses 
this, and speaks of liberty being made 
the standard for distinctions, 

8—14 oTw &pa—éyabod] ‘The just 
then is something proportionate, The 
proportionate is not restricted to pure 
number alone, but appliestoeverything 
that admits the ideaof number. Pro- 
portion is an equality of ratios, and 
implies four terms at the least. Now 


ID] 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. 


111 


povadixod apsOnod ISiov, GAN GAws apibu0d* 4 yap ava- 


, , , 2 \ / \ 3 f 
Aoyla ioorns goth Acywy, xal ev TEeTTApoLW 
7} pay oby Ompywevy OTs ev TéTTApTT, OFAov. 
S ya evi we duol yoyo xal Olg Agyes, lo: 
TO Yap Evi ws buol YpiTOL xa Olg Agyst, olay 


ouveyys’ 
ws 7 TOU 
TOU Y. 


7 / SA \ > UG 
dls, TETT AOL EOTAL THA AavanOya. 


> , 

EAKYIT TOC. 
\ 

AAAG xal 7g 


A \ ~ A AP Se ~ \ \ 
a moog THY TOD B, OUTWS xal y TO B modg THY 
\ % € Pe y od 3. 5:8 ec ine xe, 
dig ody 4 Tod B slenras wor cay x To B reby 


’ , 22 / AP 4e 0" € > L Seem d , 
ey TETTALOLY € AXITTO!NC, HOLL O oyos 0 AUTOS bY PYVT As 


\ c / i a \ oa ” em € c A ; on \ 
Yee OU.0IWS, 9 G$ TE HALA. EOTHA! Asa woo a Opos Wpos TOV IL 


8 od « Q \ PY \ 2 ArAaE i ei. ¢ \ A 
» OUTWC O oy: mWpos TOY 0, XQL Eva AS Ap, WOU a 7 POs Tov 


7,6 mods roy 4. 


ad , \ & \ bE a 
WOTE Xb TO OAOY 7 90S TO OAoy" omsp 


q voy cuvdvate' xadv obTwo cuvt24y, Oixaiog cuvduadet. 

4 * 

% dpa Tov a Opou TH y xal y% TOP THO ovZEvEIg TO ev 12 
~ ‘ / 5) s \ , \ INT A nae 5) % 

Oravoyy Oixasdy sort, xal éooy To dixasov TodT goth Tod 


\ 5 apt 
TAPh TO AVArOYOY. 
> / 
avanoyoy* 


\ \ ’ / , XN A. 
TO Yap avarOYOY [LETOY, TO OF Olxouoy 
~ \ 7 F 
HAKOUTE OF THY TOIMUTYY AvaArAoyIaY yews. 13 





it is plain that ‘discrete proportion” 
is in four terms; but so also is ‘“‘con- 
tinuous proportion,” for it uses the 
one of its terms as two, and names it 
twice over, thus,—as A is to B, so is 
Bto C. Bthen is twice named, and 
if it be set down twice over, the pro- 
portionate terms will be four. But 
justice also implies four terms at 
least, and an equality of ratios: for 
the two persons and the two things 
are divided in similar proportion. 
(The formula) then will be, “as the 
term A is to B, so is Cto D;” and 
alternando, “as A is to C, so is B to 
D,”’ and so too the whole to the whole, 
which the distribution couples, and if 
the terms be thus united, it couples 
them justly. The joining therefore 


of A to C and of Bto D in distribution . 


is just, and this justice is a mean 
between violations of proportion. For 
proportion is a mean, and the just is 
proportionate. Mathematicians call 
this kind of proportion geometrical, 
for in geometrical proportion the whole 
is to the whole as each separate term 





is to each. This proportion is not 
“continuous,” for it has no one term 
standing in a double relationship, 
Now this justice is the proportionate, 
and injustice is a violation of propor- 
tion, which takes place either on the 
side of more or less. And this is 
actually the case, for he that does an 
injury has more than his share, while 
he that is injured has less than his 
share of what is good.’ This passage 
gives a formula for distributive justice 
in mathematical language, which 
comes in short to this, that in all 
awards of the state the result should 
be proportionate to the separate worth 
of the citizens. 

8 povadicod apiOuod} ‘number ex- 
pressed in ciphers, ‘ abstract’ number,’ 
in German, wabenannte Zahl. Fritzsche 
refers to Euclid Z/, vir. def. 1. 

g edy ) Tod B| 7 is indefinite and 
probably meant to be so. It may 
stand for orryph, ypapwh, or the like. 

13 yewueTpichy] Cf. Plato, Gorgias, 
p. 508, quoted above, p. 109, 


v \ 3 Vw 
ZOTS O& HAL TO Olxatlov 10 


112 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. [Cuar. 


Tpieny of pracdrprcer iaeok* ey yep wh ye@psr pley, ou Boiver 
xal To Bray mpg 7b Orov Omep éxe0.T Epov mpog é exdrepoy. 
142071 0 ov Guvexng aT % dvaroyla’ ov yap yiveras cig 
> ~ of a ¢ \ nN x / ay JA els 
cipiGud boos, @ xab 6. TH Bey oby Oixasoy TobTO To ava 
‘ ‘ 
A > WSS \ ‘ \ DEAR ot / wv 
Aoyov, TOO Adixoy TO Tapa TO AvaAoyOY. ‘YyiveTa apo 
\ \ / \ x: 6 a } > } ~ v 
TO LEY TAEOY TO Ot EAaTTOY. Omsp HAL ETL TWY EDYWY 
€ \ \ >> n~ ‘ 4 ¢ + ee BN f 
6 piv yap adinddy margov Eyes, 6 0 adixovmevog 
emt 03 Tod xaxod avamanw' ev 


oupatyes: 
1s zAaTToyv To ayadod. 
cdyabod yap Adyw ylveras Tb BAaT Tov xaxdy mpog TO psisoy 
16 xaxoy' EoTh yap TO EAaTTOY xaxdy PaAAOY alperoy Tod 
17 wsiSovoc, TOD alperdy ckyabov, xal To UdAroY peloy. TO 
tv ovv ey eldog Tob Oimalov TodT eoriy, 
4 To dt aosmoy ev 70 dtopbwrixov, 0 yiverou ev ToIg TUVAA- 





15—16 A repetition of ch. i. § 10. 


IV. This chapter is on corrective 
justice, which is said to apply to the 
transactions between men whether 
voluntary or involuntary. Corrective 
justice goes on a principle, not of geo- 
metrical, but of arithmetical propor- 
tion; in other words it takes no ac- 
count of persons, but treats the cases 
with which it is concerned as cases of 
unjust loss and gain, which have to be 
reduced to the middle point of equality 
between the parties. Justice is a 
mean, and the judge a sort of imper- 
sonation of justice, a mediator, or 
equal divider. The operation of jus- 
tice, bringing plaintiff and defendant 
to an equality, may be illustrated 
by the equalizing of two unequal lines, 
The names, ‘ loss,’ and ‘ gain,’ are how- 
ever often a mere metaphor borrowed 
from commerce. 

The term ‘corrective justice’ (7d 
BiopOwrikdy or, as it is afterwards 
called, § 6, 7d emravopOwrixdy dixasor) 
is itself an unfortunate name, because 
it appears only to lay down principles 
for restitution, and therefore implies 
wrong. Thus it has a tendency to 
confine the view to ‘involuntary trans- 





actions,’ instead of stating what must 
be the principle of the just in all the 
dealings between man and man. In 
the present chapter, it is remarkable 
that although we are told at first that 
‘voluntary transactions’ belong to 
corrective justice, yet all that is said 
applies only to the ‘ involuntary trans- 
actions ;’ and at last we are told that 
the terms used are ‘a metaphor from 
voluntary transactions ’—as if these 
were something quite distinct. It 
may be said indeed that bargains, and 
voluntary. dealings in general, have 
no respect of persons (kata thy 
dpiOunt. avad.), and thus have some- 
thing in common with civil and 
criminal law, Also that the next 
chapter supplies some of the principles 


' for the regulation of commerce. In 


short we might deduce some sort of 
a theory from various suggestions in 
the text. But the statement in the 
text itself is undeniably confused. 

1 7d 5¢ Aormdy @v] This excludes all 
possibility of the writer having con- 
ceived another kind of justice, to be 
called ‘ catallactic’ or some such name, 
as it has been sometimes fancied. Td 
diwpOwrindy dix. implies not merely 
‘regulative,’ .but strictly ‘remedial’ 


113 


HE IV] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


~ / \ ne ~ 
Aayyaos xal Tolg ExovTloig xal Tolg axouTlois. Toliro O82 
BA s> D4 ~ / 
Tb Oixasov AAO eidog Eyer TOU mpoTepov. TO py yap 
4 ~ ~ A 
Oiaveuntixoy Oixasoy Thy xolwdy ast KATA THY aVAAoyiaY 
, A \ \ / ~ 
ZoT) Ty sipnusyyy’ xal yap aro yonuaTwy xowdy zay 
4 U x \ / x 
ylyynras 7% Oravony, FoTHL KATA TOY Oyo TOY aUTOY Bymrep 
\ Bd , \ ‘ 
Zyougt pbs AAAYAG TA eloeveySevta® xal To Adixoy Td 
, ~ / fe \ 
GyTixeinevoy TO DUixalw ToUTW Fase TO avaroyov ZoTIy. 
YO > ~ ie NWA 5] \ XN y \ 
TO O EY TOG TUYRAALYUAT ObXAIOY ETTE LEV TOY Th, HAE 3 
A BAN wv > > > \ ‘ > / > , 
TO AOIXOY AVITOY, AAA OU XATA THY AvarAnylayv exeivny 
> X \ x > , ’ \ , 
GAAR xaTa THy apiduynrinyy. ovdtvy yao Diadépe, ei 
. A ~ > , x ~ - ~ oS J > 
emieinng datiroy ameorepyoev y datirog emieixh, 00d ei 
7 \ -)) ~ > AS \ ~ / 
guolyeuoey emicixgg 4 daiarog’ aAAA moog Tod PrAadBous 
\ \ , , € , \ ~ ¢ v 
Tyy diahopay povoy Prewes 6 vouos, xal ypyras wo ioosc, 
~ ~ % ” s 
ci 6 ply adinei 6 0 adixeiTou, xal eb EBAabev 6 OF Be 
a > ee ~ v x ~ 
Pramrrat, Gore TO Adixoy TotiTo avicoy Ov ioale MeIpATOL 4 
e 3 aoa 2} \ a € X oe ~ » 2 aX 
6 dixactyg* xal yap bray 6 piv mAnyy 6 08 maTa&y, 7 
A 7 c D > 96 5 4 \ 24 A e LE 
xal xTeivy 69 amodavy, Oiypytas To wabog xal 7 mpaEc 
ig & * AAA weiparar TH Gyula ioaleayv, adaipa 
cig avica’ a p 4 Snple toads, adapeyv 





justice ; S:4p@wua is used to signify a 
remedy in Arist. Pol. mi. xiil. 23, 
where it is said of ostracism, BéAriov 
Bey oby toy vomodérny e apxiis cttw 
overioa Thy woritetay Sore wh deicOa 
Toairns iarpelas * Sedrepos 5t wAOds, dy 
oupBh, wetpacba to.otr@ Twi Si0psd- 
part SiopSobr. 

2 7d piv yap—eicevexbévra] ‘For 
distributive justice deals always with 
the goods of the state according to the 
proportion we have described ; for if 
the distribution be of comnion goods, 
it will be according to the proportion 
which the different contributions bear 
to one another.’ Ta cicevex@évra is 
thus explained by the Paraphrast, 
avadrdyws Exdore dldwor ard thy dtlavy 
‘ndorov Kal tiv eiopopav, hy cis Td 
kowdv auveréAccev* éwel ov mayTes 
Buorot, ovde TdvTes Suolws cicpépovaww. 
Probably the remark in the text was 
taken from Aristotle, Pol. mr. ix. 15: 
didrep Brot cuuBdrddAovTat TAEioTOV eis 


VOL. Il. 





Thy Towalrny Kowwviay, Tobtous TIS 
moAEwS METETTL TAEiOV, 

3 Kara THy GpOuntihy] This term 
occurs Eth. m1. vi. 7. ‘ Arithmetical 
proportion’ denotes a middle term, 
or point of equality, equidistant from 
two extreme terms, thus, 6 is the 
mean, according to arithmetical pro- 
portion, between 4 and 8 In Eth. 
u. (Zc¢.) it is called wécov rod mpdy- 
paros, which implies that it has no 
respect of persons. So corrective 
justice is here said to regard each 
case impersonally as an affair of loss 
and gain, and between these it strikes 
the middle point. It is the moral 
worth of persons that is ignored (ei 
emieikys paddov x.7.d.), for we find 
afterwards, ch. v. §§ 3—4, that a 
consideration of the position and cir- 
cumstances of persons does come in 
to modify the estimate of the loss 
sustained from an indignity, &e. 


114 


nw haa 
5 Tov HEBOOUS. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[ Cuap. 


AgyeTas yap Wo amAwG eixeiv exh Toig 


DD , ~ y” wv \ , 
ToLwuTOIG, xaY sh LY TIOW Olxsiov bvoue ely, TO xEpd0G, 
v ~ Afe; € ’ ws / - > sf 
6uloy Tm watagavri, xal 4 Snpia ro wafovts’ aA Oray 
. ~ \ 24 ~ \ *« , 1 4 / Py 
ye pet pndy To wahos, xarsiras TO ky Syusa To 02 xepdoc. 
~ / \ tes \ / \ \ 
Wore TOU wiv TAsiovog xal ZAaTToveg TO loov wérov, TO OB 


ns \ 4 , 
xépdog xal 1 Syuian ro wiv wAgov +O 0 EAaTTov EvavTis, 


“ ~ “~ ~ ~ / ‘ 
Td pev TO ayabod mazoy Tod xaxot O Zrxarrov xEpdog, TO 
p> 9 r (ere. , + 7, Aa 7, 
0 évavriov Cyuia’ wy yy péerov TO Trov, 0 Adyousy elvas 


\ / a Vv ‘ , 
Oinasov' worTe TO eravopIwrixoy Oixasoy av sin TO prov 


4 , \ / 
7Gnplas xal xéodoug. 


010 xal Grav audioPyreow, ent 


\ S \ , AOE Le \ ‘ 7 
Tov OixnacTyy xaTadbevyouriy® TOD em) roy Oimaoryy seve 
? \ \ , 
igvas eorly él ro Olxasiov® 6 yao Oimacrys Bovrsras elvocs 

<A ol ” 4 A ~ d \ / } 
olov Oixasoy Euabuyov' xal Cnrotios dixacray péoov, xo 

ve Ww ~ 7 ~ 
xaAoUTIW Eviot perilous, Wo éav TOD wsooU TOYwWO!, TOD 


8 dixcaiou TevEousvor. 
OlINATTIS. 


, A A : c 
péoov dpa Tt TO Oixasoy, elrep xak 6 
6 08 Oixacrys eravicot, xal domrep ypappas 


> ~ ~ ~ , 
els Avo TsTANLEVNG, TO Eiooy TUALA THs Husoelag 
¢ ~ ~ ~ 9 7, 
imepéyes, Tor adetas xal Tw eAATTOVE TUNUATE mpoTE- 


Anxev. 


Orav OF Olya Srospeby To GAov, Tore Hacly eyes 
\ C10 ad , \ 
9TH aNTHY, OTaY AaBwWo TO Tooy, 


to 8 loov wéoov éorh 


~ Pita \ tnd A A 3 A) s > 
THS PEllovog xab EAATTOVOS KATA THY apUuUNTIxnY ava- 


Aoylay. 


Nh ~ \ 2 / NT o yA > / 
Oia ToiTo xal Gvonateras Oixauoy, OTs Diva early, 


ad a y Ns \ec ‘ ? 
WoT ay Eb TIC elrrot Obyatoy, Xak O OIKATTIS dryaoris. 





7 (nrotor Bxacriy pésorv| Cf. 
Thucyd. rv. 83: ’AppiBatos émennpu- 
Kevero, érotuos @y Bpaciia meow 
Ar. Pol. rv. xii. 
5: tavtaxod mordéraros 6 Siairnrhs, 
diarrntys F 6 wécos. 

Heatdious] Used in rather a diffe- 
rent sense, Pol. v. vi. 13: év 8 1H 
eiphyp 8a thy amorlay riv pds 
GAhAous eyxeiplCovor thy pudakiy 
oTpari@ras Kal %oxovtt peoid'y. 

9 5.4 rovro—8.xas7Ths| ‘Hence, too, 
justice gets its name, because it is a 
dividing in twain (3lya), as though it 
were written not Sixasov, but dfxaop, 
and the judge is one who divides in 
twain.’ This etymology, though in- 


Sicarrh emerpérey, 





genious, is false. The earlier notion 
connected with dfn seems not to have 
been one of decision, arbitration, or 
justice, but rather of ‘showing,’ ‘in- 
struction,’ ‘rule,’ ‘manner.’ The word 
is derived from a root 8:x-, which 
appears in defxvum:, and the Latin 
indico, index, judex (the law-shower), 
&e. Plato, in the Cratylus, p. 412 D, 
gives a sportive etymology of df«aor, 
in accordance with the spirit of 
the work. Justice is there said to 
be the ‘permeating,’ 7d 3:& idy, with a 
« added for euphony. *Emel émrrpo- 
mever Ta AAG TavTa Biaidy, TodTO Td 
bvoya exAHOn dpbGs Slav, edoroulas 
évexa Thy Tod K Sivapyiy mpoodhaPdr, 


1V.] 


. HOIKQN [EYAHMION] V. 115 


> \ \ vs yf > ~ 3 % / \ , 

emay yop due low abaipely dao Garépou, m Pog Garepoy d: 10 
~ ref c 

mpooredy, dual rovrois tmepeyer Garepov el yap adypedy 


/ \ / Qf e€ YQ a / ¢ ~ 
BEY, By mporeréby O€, vl AY Lovoy UmEpEel yey. 
»” £6 A A / > > CA > Yé c / 
apa evi, xal TO MeTov, ad ov adrpeedn, evs. 


~ / 
TOD pLerou 

re la 
TOUTW D0. II 


~ ’ ~ ~ ~ wv 
yrwpioipey rire adersiy det dws roi madov Eyovtoc, xal 


Ti moocbsiva: Tw FAaTTOV EyovTi’ w LE LO TO Me 

poo bs XovTs’ WO pev yap To péoov 
e / ~ ~ ~ ~ + »” vr NS 
Owepéyver, ToUTO m poo Gsivas det TO EAaTTOY ByovTI, OO 


c / > ~ . Q ~ / 
UmEpEeyeTal, aAdsAciy ao TOU Meylorou. 


yf DS EO I x 
boas ated wyryi2 


AA BBIT aaajarags: ard rig AA adypychw 73 AE, 
xab moorxelobw ry TT rd ef’ dy TA, wore 6ay 74 AIT 


tig EA brepéyes rO TA xal ro TZ. 


Tig apa BB ro 


TA. feos 0: nab er) Tey aAAwY Teyveoy TOTO" OVY/- 


~ >, ” > \ ’ f= > ~ } a \ cf 
pouvTo Yap AY, EL RY ET OLEL TO TOLOUY HAL OTOY XA OLoyv, 


2 / of ~ \ ~ \ ~ 
xal TO TAG YOv ETAG YE TOUTO Xb TOOOUTOY Xi TOLOUTOY, 
° 7 Xv \ - ae ~ a Ig \ \ / 

- I 
eryrude 08 TA dvopara raiita, 7 te Cypla xal Td xépdo, 33 


> ~ c / > ~ XK XN \ PA yw aX \ 
EX TIS EXOUTIOU AAAaYS* TO Ev Yap WAEoY EYE Y TH 





10o—12 énray yap—TA] ‘For, of 
two equal lines, if a part be taken 
from the one and added to the other, 
that other will exceed the first by 
twice this part; for if it had been 
subtracted only from the one and not 
added to the other, that other would 
have exceeded the first by only once 
this part. Therefore the line which 
is added to exceeds the mean by once 
the part added, and the mean exceeds 
the line subtracted from by once the 
part added. By this we learn what 
we must take from the term which 
has more, and what we must add to 
that which has less) We must add 
to that which has Jess the amount by 
which the mean exceeds it, and we 


must take from the largest term the - 


amount by which the mean is ex- 

ceeded. Let AA, BB, and CC be equal 
to one another; from AA take AE, and 
/add CD to CC; then the whole DCC 
| exceeds EA by CD and OZ; and 
| therefore it exceeds BB by CD.’ The 
| figure required is as follows : 








E 
Ao cenewes A 
B B 
z 7 
C Coeeeesee fh 





féort 5¢—rowirov] This clause 
exists in all the MSS. The Para- 
phrast explains it here to signify that 
the same principles of corrective 
justice are applicable to the arts and 
commerce, &c. But when the clause 
is repeated with a different context in 
the next chapter, the Paraphrast, no 
doubt feeling a difficulty about the 
repetition, does not again touch it, 
In its present position the clause bas 
no meaning, in the next chapter it is 
an important remark, All we can 
say about its appearance here is that 
it is an evidence of the same want of 
completeness about the book which 
shows itself in chapter xi., and also 
in sundry other parts of the Eudemian 
Ethics. 

13—14 eAfAvde 5t—orepor] ‘ Now 
these names, “loss and gain,” have 


Q 2 


116 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[ Cap. 


€ ~ 4 , 4 9 <a, ~ s > ~ 

EnuTod xepdaiver Aéyeras, TOO Zrarroy tiv && apying 
~ ws ~ ~ A ad 

Crpsotiobas, olov ev TO wveiobas xal mwrsiv xak ev boosg 


a wn , 
14AAROIG AdElay FOweEv 6 vOMOC. 


Oray O& uyTe wAgoy AT’ 


~ ~ \ 

ZAaTTOY AAA auTa OF abtra@y yévyras, Ta abtay dacly 
” \ W n~ v d , a A / 

Zyciv xal olre Cyusotcdar ovre xepdaiverv’ Warts xépdoug 

tives xal Syplag péoov ro Vinay eots Thy Tapa To ExOU- 

oiov, To looy Eye xal mporepov xal Dorepoy. 

~ , x. 3 \ c ~ / 

Aoxel 62 trios xal To avTimemovbes civar amA@S Oixosoy, 

a € ‘b a €..¥ \ « ~ \ 

wanes of Ilubayopsio Ebacav: wollovto yap amrawg Tb 


NWA \ > ‘ + 
2ObxXQIOY TO avtimemovios AAAW. 


To 0 avrimemovbog obx 





come from voluntary exchange. For 
having more than one’s own is called 
‘‘oaining,” and having less than at 
the commencement is called ‘ losing,” 
as, for instance, in buying and selling, 
and all the other things in which the 
law gives one immunity. But when 
the things are neither more nor less, 
but on a level (abd 5? abrav), then 
men say they have their own, and 
neither lose nor gain. Thus justice 
is a mean between a sort of gain and 
loss in involuntary things, it is the hav- 
ing the same afterwards as before.’ 

év Scots &Serav] In commerce of all 
kinds, the law allows one to gain as 
much as one can. In involuntary 
transactions, the law allows no gain 
to be made, but brings things always 
back to their level. This non-in- 
terference of the law with bargains 
becomes, if carried out, the principle 
of free-trade. 

GAN’ abta BL abrav yévnta] This 
has puzzled the commentators. Fe- 
licianus interprets it ‘sed sua cui- 
que per se ipsa evaserint;’ Argy- 
ropulus, ‘sed sua per se ipsa sunt 
facta ;’ Lambinus, ‘sed paria paribus 
respondent.’ What the phrase must 
mean is plain, whether grammatically 
it can mean this is another question. 
It must mean ‘ neither more, nor less, 
but equal to itself.’ Perhaps it may 





be construed ‘but remain themselves 
by means of reciprocity,’ @¢. by mu- 
tual giving and taking, €avréy being 
equivalent to GAAfAwr. 


Vv. This chapter, commencing 
with a critical notice of the Pytha- 
gorean definition of justice, that 
‘justice is retaliation,’ shows it to be 
inadequate, and then goes off into an 
interesting discussion upon the law 
of retaliation as it exists in the state. 
Proportionate retaliation, or an inter- 
change of services, is said to be the 
bond of society. The law of propor- 
tion regulates exchange, and settles 
the value of the most diverse produets, 
Money measures and expresses value, 
and turns mere barter into commerce, 
The chapter concludes with some 
general remarks on the relation of 
justice as a quality to the just as a 
principle. 

1 Soxet 5t—kAA~] ‘Now some 
think that retaliation without further 
qualifying (amAg@s) is justice, as the 
Pythagoreans said, for they defined 
justice simply as retaliation on one’s 
neighbour.’ On the rude and in- 
adequate attempts at definition made 
by the Pythagoreans, cf. Ar. Metaph, 
I. v. 16: d&plgovrd re yap emimoda'ws, 
Kal @ mpdre dmrdptecer 5 AexOels Spos, 
Tor elva thy obclay rod mpdyuaros 


1V.—V.] HOIKQN [EYAHMION] V. 117 


5 / wv 2 ’ A A A a7 Mies ° \ QA 

ehapuorres ovr ext To diavenytixoy dixasov ot exh Td 
/ / , ~ ' 

Orophwtixnev’ xaitos Bovroyvral ye ToliTo Aye xal 703 

c , / 

Padapavdves dtxasoyv- 


” , ~ 
et ke TaD Tak’ Epete, Cikn « iOeia yévouro. 


~ \ ~ ov , 
Torrayod yap diadwvet* lov ei apyyy Eywy ewaragev, 4 
> m > ~ \ Bd 
ob Ost avTimaAnyyvas, xal eb ApyovTa emara&ev, ob TAy- 
~ , ~ > \ \ ~ 
vijvar povoy O2t aAAR xal xorachyvas. 
\ OP £ > / ra > 22 X pnd / 
XL TO AXOvT lov Oradepes WOAU, AAD EV LEY TAIS KOLVWVICLIS 6 
~ ~ / ~ 
Taig AAAAKTINAIG TUVEYEL TH ToOLOUTOY Oixaloy TO AYTITE- 
, , ‘ ~ 
moviec, xar avanroylay xal wy xar’ iodtyTa* TO avTI- 
~ a\ ~ 
Toiely yap avanroyoy Tumpméevel 7 WOAIS. yap TO xaxids 
~ > X , I > (neh 3 > eae) , 
Syroticw ej OF ex, Soursian Ooxet elvan, el py avTimoijoss 
* \ wt > \ , / > 4 ~ , \ 
4 TO c0° ef O8 py, peTadooig ov yiveTou, TH meTadooe OF 


” Ane , 
ETL TO EXOVG LOY § 





evéusCov, Somep ef ts oforro tTavrdy eivas 
SimAdovov Kal thy dSvdda, did71 mpHrov 
brdpxet tots vol 7d SimAdowov. Their 
inadequate account of justice was 
doubtless owing not only to an im- 
perfect logical method, but also to the 
immature political and social ideas of 
the day. Demosthenes mentions a 
law of retaliation given by Zaleucus 
to the Locrians (Timocr. p. 744): 
dvtos yap avTd@ vouou, edy Tis OPOad- 
pov exxddn, aytrexndya tapacxeiv Tov 
éavrov. In the Mosaic code the same 
rude principle appears, Exod. xxi. 24, 
Levit. xxiv. 20, Deuteron, xix. 21. 

2 It is obvious that simple re- 
taliation cannot be the principle of 
distributive justice; the state does 
not win battles for its generals, &c. 
Nor is it that of corrective justice ; (1) 
because the same treatment is diffe- 
rent to different individuals; (2) 
because an involuntary harm must 
not be requited like a voluntary one. 

3. 7d ‘PadaudvOvos| Necessarily a 
primitive idea of justice. 

ef xe md8x] Of uncertain author- 
ship, attributed to Hesiod. 

4 oioy et apxiv wr] Cf. ch. iv. § 3, 





note. Rank is here looked at as a 
kind of property. It is not a ques- 
tion of individual goodness or bad- 
ness, but an officer being struck 
loses more than a common soldier 
being struck in return, so that re- . 
taliation is in that case not justice. 

6 Gar’ &y pey—ouppévovow] ‘But 
in commercial intercourse, at all 
events, this kind of justice, namely, 
retaliation, is the bond of union—on 
principles, not of equality, but pro- 
portion, for by proportionate requital 
the state is held together. Men seek 
to requite either evil or good ; to omit 
the one were slavery, to omit the 
second were to fail in that mutual 
interchange by which men are held 
together.” On mutual need as the 
basis for civil society, cf. Plato, 
Repub. p. 369 B: ylyvera toivuy 
modus, émed2) Tuyxdver Nudy ExacTos 
ovK avtapKns, GAAX TOAAGY evoers. 
A recognition of this principle might 
be called the first dawning of political 
economy ; from it several deductions 
are made in the text above as to the 
nature of value, price, and money. 
These, though rudimentary, are able 


118 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[Cuap. 


, ») \ \ / € \ 5] » \ ~ “7 > 
7ouppevougly. O16 xab Napirwy iepoy gumodwyv rosodvras, Wy 
avtamodorig y* Tore yap Wiwv yapitos* avbumnperi- 
, A XN ~ ~ / 4 / > \ wv 
cal te yap Osi TH Yapioapevn, xal mar aUToY apeou 


8 yapilousvoy, 


~ \ ‘ > ’~ \ $< 4 
Tosh OF THY AavTIbooW THY KAT avaroyiay 


ne 
7 xaTa O1ameTpoy TuSevEig, olov oixoddnoc eh’ & A, oxuTo- 
ra CAS ee 2 oe ] > a= c , Sah Nw 
Tonos ed w B, oixia ed oT, brcdyna edo A, de ooy 
/ A > Wd A 7 ~ > 
AapBavery Tov oixodonoy rapa Tod TxUTOTOLOV TOD exelvou 


” \ 24 es 336 \ cm 
Epyou, xAb AuTov EXELYD Eta 100vat TO AUTOU, 


zayv ou 


~ (, ae \ \ ? , z + \ > 
TPpwroyv +4] TO XATA THY avanroylay COV, ELTA TO AVTITMETOV- 


x / ” \ / 
Gog yévnTal, EoTaL TO AEYOMEVOY. 


ci 02 xr, ovx Troy, ovde 


/ AN \ , ~ \ 4 
cuppever’ ovdey yap xwaver xpeirrov elvos To barépou 





and interesting, but the relation of 
the law of value (7d Slxaoy éy tats 
ko.v. Tats GAA.) to the other kinds of 
justice is not stated. 

7 8i—xapi(suevoy] ‘Hence, too, 
it is that men build a temple of the 
Graces in their streets, that there 
may be reciprocity. For this is the 
property of grace, one must serve in 
return one who has done a favour, 
and again be in turn the first to 
confer favours.’ Pausanias (ix. 35) 
says that the Athenians originally 
worshipped two Graces, Auxo and 
Hegemone; afterwards, from Eteocles 
the Beeotian, they learned to worship 
three, and called them Euphrosyne, 
Aglaia, and Thalia. There was a 
statue of the three Graces (clothed), 
the work of Socrates, which stood 
before the entrance of the Acropolis, 
Seneca (Benef. 1. 3) mentions with 
some disdain the various symbolical 
meanings which were supposed to be 
expressed by the figures of the Graces, 
and on which Chrysippus appears to 
have written an elaborate treatise. 
Of course no English word will 
exactly answer to xdpis. 

8 moet 5¢—cbeviis] ‘Now the 
joining of the diagonal of a square 
gives us proportionate return.’ The 





diagram supposed to be drawn is as 














follows: 
Architect. Shoemaker. 
House. Shoes, — 


The joining of the diagonal gives each 
producer some of the other’s work, 
and thus an exchange is made, but 
the respective value of the com- 
modities must be first adjusted, else 
there can be no fair exchange. What, 
then, is the law of value? It is 
enunciated a little later ($ 10). de? 
tolyvw—tpephy, ‘As an _ architect 
(or a farmer it may be) is to a 
shoemaker, so many shoes must there 
be to a house or to corn.’ That is, 
the value of the product is determined 
by the quality of the labour spent 
upon it, The sort of comparison here 
made between the quality of farmer 
and shoemaker seems connected with 
a Greek notion of personal dignity 
and a dislike of Bavavola. Such 
feelings are opposed to the impartial 
views of political economy, and are 


V.J HOIKON [EYAIHMIOQN] V. ‘119 


4 ’ 
ZOTs O29 
~ +, oe ~ wv ~ > ~ \ wy” > 
TOUTO HAi ETk TWY HAAWY TEYYMY’ AYYGOUYTO YA AY, Eb 
‘ 


y x \ ; ~ = ~ 3 ~ 
Epyov 7 To Garépov, Ost ovy ratira ioacbijvou. 


\ , ~ , @ \ \ 
py emwoiss TO wowtv xak Goov xal olov, xal To maTyov 
~ ~ \ ~ 
tmarye Tore xal Tocoiirey xal TolwTov. ov yap ex duo 
~ 4 £. 3 ~ 4 ~ “4 
iarp@y yiveros xowwvia, AAN 2 iarpod xai yewpyod xal 
a cP ‘ > Ww > \ s Ni ~ 9 ~ 
Grws étéowy xal obx lrwy' aAAA TouToug Osi icacFvas. 

\ , \ ~ Ay e Ss] \ > 7a 
01) mavTa oupBaAyTa Osi mws elval, wy eoTlv aAAAYY.10 
. >a ‘ , sD 4 Az \ ré a 4 / = / 
ed 0 TO voUIoMm eANAVTS, xa yiveTAL TwWS ETO’ TavTH 

A ~ a \ \ c A A ‘ v , 
Yap LET pel, WoT xal THY OwEpoyny xal THY EAAEILY, TOTH 
ww 5 ar & » \ as S: -<6ff . / a ~ ery VA ov a 
arra $9 brodyuar’ Ioov oixig i Tp0ds. det roivuy Grep 

> f . 

oixodoL0G Tpog TXUTOTOMOY, TOTAI UrobjBRATA mpOs oixlay 
>) a > A \ ~ > vw > \ PANS 
qtpodyy. si yap py TOTO, ox EoTa! AAAMYH Od? xOI- 

4 ~ 4‘ wv - 3 y” ~ Ww 
yvovia, rodro o, ei wy loo ely wus, ovx Eorat. det doar 
TOUTO 
0 éotk tH piv aanfela 7 ypsla, 1 mavTa cuveyer® eb ya 

ne Pree XPS, A FANE Pb vp 
\ / x Ne , A 33 ” ’ a aa Gee ¢ 
pufev déowro 7 py buoiws, 7) ovx Boras AAARYH 7 OVX 7 


eo. F , ~ oe . V4 oF 
evi Tivi WovTA peTpsITbas, wWomED EAEYIN MpoTepoy. 


> 7 
QuTy. 


oloy 0 brarAAayua THs Ypslag TO voUITMA yeyovE 





quite superseded by the law of supply 
and demand. If it be asked what is 
to determine the quality of labour, it 
will soon be seen that quality resolves 
itself into quantity, that the excellence 
of labour must be measured also by 
supply and demand. We cannot be 
sure that we have above the full 
statement of Aristotle’s ideas upon 
‘value,’ but if we have, they are 
imperfect. 

g tort 8& todto—isacbjva] Cf. 
ch. iv. § 12, note. ‘Now this is the 
ease with the other arts also (Z.¢. 
beside those of the architect and shoe- 
maker), for they would have been 
destroyed if there had not been the 
producer producing so much, and of a 
certain kind, and the consumer (7d 
mwdoxov) consuming just the same 
quantity and quality. Forout of two 
physicians no commerce arises, but 
out of a physician and a farmer it 
does, and, in short, out of persons 
who are different from one another, 





and not equal; these, then, require 
to be brought to an equality.’ The 
division of labour, the mutual depen- 
dence of the arts, and the correspon- 
dence of supply and demand, are here 
well stated. It is a pity that these 
principles were not further carried 
out. The terms rowdy and mdcxov 
may probably have some reference to 
the dvrimerov6és, which is the subject 
of the chapter. 

II ov 8 drddrdAaypa THs xpelas 
7) vomopa yéyove Kate ouvOhKny] 
‘Now money is a sort of represen- 
tative of demand conventionally esta- 
blished.’ This excellent definition 
was not altogether new; Plato had 
already said (Repub. p. 371 B): 
&yopa 5h juiv Kal vduiopa tduBodrov 
THs GhAayns Eveka yevnsera ex TovTov, 
The present chapter is disfigured by 
repetitions. Thus cf. § 15: tovro 8’ 
€& trobécews: 51d voutoua Kadciras. 
The saying (§ 10) 7d vduiow? EAHAVOE 
kal ylveral mws pécov, is repeated 


120 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[CuaP. 


~ wv wo , 
xatra cuvinxyy' xal Oi TolTo ToUvoUA Eye youre, 
a > , > \ , ° / > ? ew ~ 
6Tt oD DUT AAAR vow earth, xal ed’ yuiv weraParsiv 


~ / 
12 x0) TOIATAL AYPHTTOY. 


” A > / ° > 
Zoro 07 avTimerovaoc, bray ioa- 


obi, Wore Omep yewpyog WLdg TxUTOTOLOY, TO Epyov Td TOU 


\ \ ~ ~ 
TXUTOTOLOU WHOS TO TOU yewpyou. 


cig oy Hpa 0 avaroylag 


od Ost aye, Grav arArAaSwvtTas ei OF wy, audorépag 


ee \ e \ A 4 BLA 
ESsh TAG UMEDOYAS TO ETEDOV Axo. 


a 
GAN oTav Eywor TH 


Chee or \ soo o ae ene 6 YA 
QAUTWY, OUTWS toos HAL KXOlVWYVOlL, OTh AUTY 7 17 0THS Obvaras 


Mend x ww / f 
eT huTMy ylvEeo Jas. - 


yewpyos A, toby T, cxuroropos 





§ 14: 7d 8h vduoua Sowep pérpov 
ctupetpa mojoay iader, The law of 
value is given twice, § 10 and § 12, 
&e. 

12 état 3) dvrimenov0ds—yiver0a| 
‘Retaliation, then, will take place 
when the terms have been equalized, 
and the production of the shoemaker 
has been made to bear the same 
relation to that of the farmer, as a 
farmer himself does to a shoemaker. 
We must not, however, bring the 
parties to a diagram of proportion 
after the exchange has taken place, 
else one of the terms will have both 
superiorities assigned to it. When 
the parties have got their fair share 
(8rav éxwor Ta abrev), then are they 
on an equal and mutual footing, it 
having been possible to establish this 
kind of equality between them.’ 
This vexed passage appears to de- 
scribe the steps in a commercial 
transaction, There being a mutual 
need between producers of a different 
kind, their products require to be 
equalized. This is done by reducing 
the goods to a standard of inverse 
proportion, Asa farmer to a shoe- 
maker, so shoes to corn; thus, if a 
farmer's Jabour be § times better 
than a shoemaker’s, then 5 pair of 
shoes =a quarter of corn; or if a pair 
of shoes =1o shillings, then a quarter 
of corn=50 shillings. When this 





process of equalization has been 
effected (8ravy icacéf), then simple 
retaliation, or ‘tit for tat,’ begins, 
After an exchange has been made, or, 
in short, after the price of an article 
has once been expressed in money, it 
is no longer the time to talk of ‘ the 
quality of labour,’ or for either side to 
claim an advantage on this account. 
If he did he would have ‘ both supe- 
riorities, or his superiority reckoned 
twice over. Having enjoyed the 
superiority of price already, in which 
the quality of labour was an element, 
he would now proceed to claim the 
superiority of labour by itself, which 
would thus be reckoned to him twice 
over. “Oray GAAdfwvrat can mean 
nothing else than ‘when they have 
exchanged,’ 8ray with the aorist im- 
plying a completed act. It seems un- 
necessary to say that the value of a 
thing is not to be settled after it is 
sold. Rather it is after the goods 
have come to market, and had a 
market price put upon "them, that 
considerations of their production 
must cease. The expression, there- 
fore, is not clear, but the above inter- 
pretation seems the most natural that 
can be given of the passage. The 
commentators, driven to extremity, 
have resorted to violent measures, (1) 
omitting od with no authority of 
MSS.; (2) interpreting duorépas ras 


v.] 


B \ ov > n~ & 6 Z A 

» 70 epyov AUTOU TO IO AO [LEVOY e 
/ ’ Oy Lé 

avTimemovbevas, OUxX AY YY xKXOlVMVIA, 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. 


121 


> > ad \ z 

ei 0 oUTw en ay 
oe > ¢€ / V4 
OTL 0 7 XPEba Ouve-13 


oe a v7 ~ oo a \ > / y 
xXEt Women Ev Th by, OnAol Ori Grav py ev Ypsin wor 
/ \ of i a 
AAATAwY, 7 Aphorepos 7 ATepos, ux AAAATTOYTAI, WOTEp 
a + es > \ N/ / 2 by A / / 
Gray ov Eye: auTog dental Tis, oloy olvov, OWovteg iTV 


eEaywyiis. 


~ of ~ ~ 
dei asa ToUTO ioacbyvos. 


bmto 02 Tig mEA- 14 


/ >’ ~ > nx xX ~~ ed BA oN to 

seers NETS Ek viv paydty OsiTal, OTL EO TOL EQLY beni 
7, ’ 3 > c ~ ~ x ~ 

TO VOUT LO Oboy EYYUYTYS 206 a paby® det yap TOUTO depots 


elvas rAaPsiv. 


/ Ss z \ ~ \ Sees > 
WAG YE [EV OUY XQAL TOUTO TO MUTO’ OU 


NZ a A ~ 
yop ast toov duvarasre Guwg 08 Povrcrar pevery parAoY. 
SA Dow / 6 4 \ a Ny > rf 
O10 Ost wavra TerTintodasr obTwW yap aEl EoTAL AAAAYT, 


> \ ~ / 
el O& ToUTO, xolvmyic, 


XOX / a , / 
TO 07 YOULG [LO WOTED [4ET POV O Up.- 


~ Ps Ae bu \ * \ BUA > ~ 
PETAR TOINTAy boaosb* OUTE YAP AY fy OUTNS AAAAYIS 

/ s mn ase Ss) / \ v Laat Seed , 
HOWWVIA YY, OUT AAAAYY IOOTYTOS [LY OUTS, OUT 1FOTYS 


PH ENS TUMmET PIAS. 


~ kd N7 AY 
Ty peav ovy aAndeloe AOvvaTOY THIS 


~ , A / AN XN ‘ 
torodroy diadépovra otpmstpn yeviobas, moog 08 Ty 
/ > , « ~ a , N~ ~ 35,9 
ypelav evdeveras ixavds* ev Oy rs deb elves, rotiro 0 e& 


G / \ , ~ 
tmrofécews* O10 vousopa xarsiros. 


~ / 
TOTO yap TayTa 





brepoxas, ‘both extremes,’ z.e. excess 
and deficiency ; (3) asserting that the 
principle enunciated is one not of 
commerce, but of friendship, &c. 
Fritzsche understands it as if aAN’ 
bray Exwor were in opposition to 8ray 
GAAdEwvrat,—but we learn from ch. 
iv. § 8 what the former phrase must 
mean, TéTe paoly exe Ta adTay, Stay 
AdBwor td toov. Cf. also ch. iv. § 14. 

13 871 8 7 xpela—icacOjva| ‘And 
that mutual want like a principle of 
unity binds men together, this fact 
demonstrates, namely, that when men 
are not in want of each other, whether 
both parties or one be thus indepen- 
dent, they do not exchange; whereas, 
when some one else wants the com- 
modity that a man has (they effect an 
exchange), one party wanting, for in- 
stance, wine, and the other being will- 
ing to give it for an export of corn: 
and then an equality has to be brought 
about. Some MSS., and the Para- 

VOL. II. 





R 


phrast, read étaywyhy, which would 
invert the relation of the parties. 
Aiddvoar ekaywyhv, ‘to grant an ex- 
portation,’ occurs in Theophrast. Char. 
xx.: Sibopévyns Eavt@ ekaywyiis kiAwv 
areneous. 

14. brép 5&—paddoy] ‘But with a 
view to future exchange, supposing 
one does not want an article at present, 
money is a security that one will be 
able to get the article when one wants 
it, for with money in’ his hand a man 
must be entitled to take whatever he 
wishes. It is true that money is 
under the same law as other com- 
modities; for its value fluctuates, but 
still its tendency is to remain more 
fixed than other things.’ On these 
excellent remarks nothing farther need 
be said. The term éyyunras is quoted 
from the sophist Lycophron by Ari- 
stotle, Pol. ur. ix. 8, in application to 
the law. 

15 TovTo 8 ef brobcews| ‘ Conyven- 


16 


122 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. [Cuap. 


~ ~ A , Id . 
TOT TULPETLA* [LETDEITAL YARD TAYTA YOLIT LAT. vixla 
~ / \ \ ~ ied > 
A, pyat déxa B, xaivy VT. 76 On A tod B qysov, et 
, Pas 2fe/ « y bee! \ wv e X , Nr / 
mévTe pyioy ASia 7) olxla, % boov’ 7 02 xAivy OéxaTov Epos 
~ ~ / ~ , a 
76 I rod Bo Oyaov rolvuv mocou xArivas Yoov olxig, Ort 
ld a > a e ,’ ‘.. = 4 A , 
wévTe, Tb 0 oUTWS 7 AAAAYH Fy Whi TO voRIT BLA elva, 
Qn , nN PENS x ~ , > ee a 
Onjarov’ Oradéoer yap ovdey y xAival wevTeE avtl oixiag, 7 
Goou ab wevre XAlval. 
a A x , , . 
Ti pv oby 70 adixoy xal tl ro dixaioy eotiv, elonras. 
~ a , 
Osco pig pevewy 0& TouTwy OyAoy OTs 7 dixcuoTpaylia peoov 
3 \ ~ > ~ \ cn ~ \ \ A , ” 
£OT! TOU AOinely xl Adixeiobas* TO p-Ev yap WAEOV EXE 
x 2° 0 lA ° c \ , , > } > 
760 EAaTrToy eotiv. 7 OF Oixaloouvy pecoTyg EGTIY ov 
~ ~ a , 
Toy QUTOY 7 pom ov Tals 7 POT Epov apeTais, AA OT ETO 





} 


tionally’ opposed to amas, cf. Eth. | society, the writer proceeds to consider 
Iv. ix. 7. The merely conventional | justice subjectively, that is, as mani- 
character of money is strongly stated | fested in the character of individuals. 
by Aristotle, Pol. 1 ix. 11: “Ore 8& h Siuxaomparyia—adinctoOa| ‘Just 
mddw A7jpos eivas Soxel Td vduioua kal | treatment is plainly a mean between 
rduos maytdmact, pice & ovbév, Sr: | injuring and being injured.’ Asao- 
perabeuévwv Te Tay xpwpévwy oddevds | ampayla is formed on the analogy of 
&ttov ob5€ xphomov, x. 7. A, edmparyla (cf. also aicxpompayeiy Eth. 
16 81 & oftws 7 &AAwyh] The | tv. i. 8), and as ed wpdrrew is used 
origin of commerce seems taken from | ambiguously to denote both ‘ doing’ 
this place by Paulus, cf. Digest.1. De | and ‘faring well’ (ef. Eth. 1. iv. 2), so 
Contr. Empt.: ‘Origo emendi venden- | dS:xaorparyia includes both the doing 
dique a permutationibus ccepit; olim | and the receiving justice. 
enim non ita erat nummus, neque h 3& SiKxaocivn peodtyns K.7.r.] 
aliud merx aliud pretium vocabatur, | Justice is a mean state or balance in 
sed unusquisque secundum necessita- | a different sense from the other 
tem rerum ac temporum utilibus inu- | virtues. It is not a balance in the 
tilia permutabat, quando plerumque | mind, but rather the will to comply 
evenit ut quod alteri superest alteri | with what society and circumstances 
desit ; sed quia non semper nec facile | pronounce to be fair (Tod pésov éoriy), 
concurrebat ut, quum tu haberes que | Justice, according to this view, is com- 
ego desiderarem, invicem egohaberem | pliance with an external standard. 
quod tu accipere velles, electa materia | While in courage, temperance, and 
est tujus publica ac perpetua esti- | the like, there is a blooming of the 
matio difficultatibus permutationum | individual character, each man being 
vequalitate quantitatis subveniret.’ a law to himself, in justice there is 
17 Tl wey obv—elpnra] ‘We have | an abnegation of individuality, in 
now stated what is the nature of the | obedience to a standard which is one 
unjust and the just abstractedly.. A | and the same for all. It must be 
fresh division of the book commences | remembered that the account of 
here; after discussing the various | émefxera in this book supplements 
kinds of justice objectively, that is,as | that of justice and takes off from its 
principles which manifestthemselvesin | otherwise over-legal character. 








V.—VIL.] 


;. \ e 
egTiv" 7 
c 


xa Fv 6 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


> aN , ~ w 
0 adinin THY Axowy. 


123 


NU, .€ ‘ ia > \ 
xb TY [LEV Olxaloc vy, ECT 


\ 4 , ~ 
dixasos AgysTaus TPARKTIXOS xXATA TW POasea ky Tov 


Oreenk ) diavennrixds nal AUTH woos AAAoy nal Ereow 
ixalou, xal OravennTixos D mp0S eu 


A a > a ov ~ \ e ~ 7, c ~ 
% POs ETEp0¥, aed? & OUTWS WATE TOU [LEY ALgeT Ou 1 AEOY auTw 


~ ~~ ~ / \ 
EAatroy 08 TM TAYTIOY, TOD PrAaso00 O avaTarv, AAAA 


~ ~ > > / € , OV Vee \ 
TOU I70U TOU XAT AYAADYiAY, OMOlwWS OF XAab AAAW THOS 


aAnroy. 


€ 22) 30 / > 4 ~ 97 ~w& iNS a J A 
7,0 QO1xXIa ToUYaYTIOY Tov AOIxOU. TOUTOO EOTiy 18 


brepory xal Zrrziwlic Tou whsrinou 7 PraBepod mapa 


\ ° , 
TO avanroyoy. 
imepBortig xat errsivews 


> > 
cOTIY, & 


Oso SmwepBory xal Zrrenlug 7 adixia, Or 


> € ~ X\ ce ~ 
abTou wey SmepPorns 


~ ~ > ‘f ~ ~ t ee 

pay Tod amAws WHeAinov, EArEHbews 02 To LAaL=sp0d° ext 
~ a / yy. Q \ % / 

08 TY KAAwY TO Ley GAoY GuolwWS, TO OF Mapa TO AYAAO- 


/ a 
ov, OWOTEDWWS ETUYEY. 


pe , in \ i Pe 
To adixciobat gor, To OF siSov To Adixely. 


~ Qr 3D s \ \ Sd 
TOU OF HOIKHUATOS TO Liv EAATTOV 


meph py ovyrg 


, \ >> , , c , > A € , 
Oixasoruvys xal adinias, Tis exaTepag soTiv % Duois, 


y ~F ~ X , € 7 S \ \ ~ SS 4 
elpyobw Toitov Tov TpoToy, Guolws OF xal mek TOD dixatou 


\ nes f, 
xal adixov xaborov. 


4 ~ Ve AN ~ 
"Exel 0 lori adinodyTa pymrw adixoy eivat, 6 mola 6 


> 5 7 > » ~ vw N ANY , > € / > p , Ke 

AOIWNUATA KAOLKWY YON HOlMOG ETTIY EXATTHY KOLXIAY, OloY 
4 a x bal 16 * ff \ 2 / \ 

HASHTNG 7 [91S 7H ANTTIS 5 7 OUTW LEY OUdEY O1oloes 5 xos 





18 8:d brepBvrAy—drorépws Ervxer] 
‘ Hence too, injustice is an excess and 
a defect, because it is a principle that 
aims at excess and defect, in one’s 
own case the excess of what is benefi- 
cial absolutely, and the defect of what 
is hurtful; but in the case of others, 
while the general result will be simi- 
lar, it will not matter in which of 
these two ways proportion is violated.’ 
That is, an unjust award may be 
made by giving a person too much 
good as well as too little, and too 


little evil as well as too much. In-. 


justice is here said to be an extreme 
bt bmepBodrjs éortiv, just in the same 
way as justice was before said to be a 
mean state 871 pécou éeoriy, 


VI. This chapter, which is writ- 





ten confusedly after the manner of | 


Eudemus, apparently has for its object 
to restrict the term justice yet more 
definitely than has hitherto been 
done. We are now entering on the 
second division of the book, and the 
question is, what will constitute an 
individual unjust? This question 
tends to elucidate the nature of 
justice and injustice as individual 
qualities. But before answering it, 
there is a digression. It must be 
remembered, says the writer, that we 
are treating of justice in the- plain 
sense of the word, that is, civil justice, 
not that metaphorical justice which 
might be spoken of as existing in 
families. On the nature of this justice, 
proper or civil justice, and on the 
metaphorical kinds, some remarks 
are given. 


R2 


124 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[ Cuapr. 


Sys a , A 1d XN eee LAD? ’ d \ 
Yap AY OVYYVEVOITO YUVAIXs ELOWS TO Ny a ou 01a 7 poak~ 


2 PET ECs apyay ArArAK Oia Wabos. 


~ 4 DAN > 
abimel pty ovv, adixog O 


> y ra , ” , DV r 
ux oT, oboy aude xAdwTys, ExareWe 02, oud? prosryog, 
> / t ¢ , OA eT. ha »” ~ \ 4 
3 euolyevore O° Guolws 02 xal erlra@y arrwy. mio wey ovy 
ww \ Dl a 4 

EXEl TO avTimemovbog moog TO Olxosov, elontas mporepoy* 
N ~ 4 7 N ~ 
40st 08 px AavOdver Ott TO Cyrovmevoy éors xal TO aTAwS 


Nw \ ce \ ~/ : 
OLXQIOY HAL TO TOAITIXOV OlxaloY. 


~ f-% ef 
TOUTO d¢ EQTLY EL HOI- 


~ / \ x > / > i) / } if a 
yovioy Biov mpog TO elvas auTa&pxsiav, érsvbeowy xal lowy 7 
. a 7 9 ~ 

xar avanroylay 4 xar apibpov’ Wore booig 7 BOT TOU- 


, \ / 
TO, OUX ETT TOUTOIG LOG GAAYAUS TO MoAITIxOY OlxouoY, 


’ tf A / 
arArna Ts Olxcsoyv xal xaG’ opororynTa. 


7 \ , 
EOT yap Oixcsoy, 


a \ , \ ’ , / ~~ (8 >> / c 4 
OlG HOLb yoLOg TMpog MuTOUS* YvOmoS O, ev olg AObxla* y yap 





3 mas wev ofy—mpdrepor| The allu- 
sion is to ch. v. § 4—6, and the mean- 
ing appears to be simply, in the variety 
of cases that may occur, punishment 
by simple retaliation will not do. The 
sentence however appears irrelevant. 

4 Sef 5& ph—Kar’ dpiOudy] ‘Now 
we must not forget that the object of 
our inquiry is at once justice in the 
plain sense of the word (amA@s) and 
justice as existing in the state. But 
this exists amongst those who live in 
common, with a view to the supply of 
their mutual wants, free and equal, 
either proportionately or literally.’ 
Td amas Sikaov is opposed to Kal? 
It is not meant here to 
separate 7d Gm, dle. from 7d woA. dix., 
rather it is implied that they are both 
the same. The only justice that can 
be called so without a figure of 
speech is that between fellow-citizens, 
who have mutual rights and some 
sort of equality. Proportionate equal- 
ity belongs to aristocracies and con- 
stitutional governments, numerical or 
exact equality to democracies. Cf. 
Ar. Pol. vi. ii. 2: Kad yap 7d Slav 7d 
Snuotinby 7d Yoov exew orl kar’ 
apiOudy GrAdAa ph Kar’ atlav, robrov & 
ovros ToD Sixalov To wAROS avaryKaioy 


duodrnra, 


elvat KUptoy, 





4—5 for: yap Sixasov—rtparvos] 
‘For what is just exists among those 
who live under a common law, and 
law is where there is injustice, (for 
legal judgment is a decision between 
the just and the unjust). Now 
wherever there is injustice there is 
wrong dealing, but it does not follow 
that where there is wrong dealing 
there is injustice. Wrong dealing 
consists in allotting oneself too much 
absolute good and too little absolute 
evil; and hence it is that we do not 
suffer a man to rule, but the imper- 
sonal reason, for a man does this for 
himself (i.e. rules, ef. érépp mou? 
below), and becomes a tyrant.’ This 
passage does not give the origin of 
justice, but the signs by which you 
may know it. Justice could not be 
said to depend on law (especially as 
law is said to depend on injustice, for 
we should thus argue in a circle), but 
where law exists you may know that 
justice exists. The argument then is 
that justice exists between citizens 
who have a law with each other, 
and not between father and children 
between whom there is no law. Law 
implies justice because it springs out 


of cases where a sense of wrong has 


been felt, 


rs 


VL] HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. 125 


, , re , \ 6.5 
dixy xploig TOD Oixatou xab Tov adixov. ev vig O adixla, 


\ \ sd ~ > 7 ) LZ \ A 3 ~ > ~ 
xal TO adixeiv ey TOUTOIG, “ev oig D8 TO KOixElv, ov Tao 
> lf ~~ eo 5 A + , € ~ , ~ ec ~~ 
adixia*’ Touro 0 éoTl To WAEoY QUITO vewsiy TOY aTAMS 
> wn A X ~~ id ~~ ~~ A \ 3 In 
ayabay, Zraatrov O& Thy arAw@s xaxy* O10 ovx e@mev 5 
+ BA ’ A \ , a c n~ ~ ~ 
apyery av)pwroy, AAA TOY Aoyoy, OT EXUTW TOUTO 7OIEt 

\ / / BA t a eee 7 ~ / 
xal yiveTaL Tupavves. ETTEO 6 apywy DvaAake rod dixaiou, 
°. db: ~ N , A ~~ rf ’ 7 > we 5 ~~ ‘é 
eb 08 TOU Oixalov, xal TOU Ioou, eres O oudey aUTW TALOY 6 

~ yf , , ~ ~ 
civos doxet, elmep Sixciog* ob yap vémer TAY TOD aTAwS 
ayabod airw, el uy modo avUTOY avaroyoy é > O10 Ere 
y D, El Ly WeOS avTOY AvaAoYoY EOTIV’ O10 ETEDW 
ge \ ”) \ 6 > If y r ¢ > bt \ 
worek* xob Ola ToUTO KAAOTpIOY sivai dao ayaboy THy 
7 / f \ , ms la 
Oixarocbvny, xadamep eréxby xa mPOTEDOY. pucdos Opa 7 
Tic OoTé0G, TOUTO O& Tim) nal yéouc: STw OF MH ixava 
4 ” v i Y iad vo oe \ 
~~ rs 
TH TOAVTA, OUTOL YivovTa: TUpaYYoL. TO 0: deamorinxoy 8 
bi } \ Q >’ ei 7 > > Oo ‘ 
ixcoy xal TO TATPIxOY OV TAUTOY TOUTOIG AAA’ ofLoOL0y 
> / >. > y \ \ c ~ € ~ ‘\ \ ~ 
ov yap eotiy adinlan mpbg TH abTOU amAw@s, TO OF xThLa 

\ \ / a an y FA \ A ~ fod 
Hal TO TExvoy, EWS ay x THAIxoY xa 7 yupio hy, WOTED 
HN 
010 9 


/ > ~ Cea | ” > \ ~ - . 
Pépos autod, adrov 0 ovbelo mpoaipsira: Pramrey 
> ld NY \ 
oux oT Adixla mpog AUTOY. 


ovo apa. GOolxoy OvdE OIxaLbov 





ev ois ® adixla K.7.A.] This seems to 
mean that law has not arisen merely 
from the fact of unequal dealings (46:- 
ety), but from a sense of the violation 
of a principle (48ula), Thus the prin- 
ciple of justice is prior to all law and 
not created out of it. Totro 8, ze. rd 
adixetv. Following up this concep- 
tion of the a priori character of justice, 
the writer says we must be governed 
not by a man, who may act selfishly, 
but by an impersonal standard of the 
right. That selfish rule is tyranny, 
Aristotle asserts in Pol. m1. vii. 5: 7 
bey yap tupayyls ear. povapyla mpds 
Td cuupepov Td Tod povapxodvros. Cf. 
also Pol. 1. xvi. 3: TOv &pa vduor 
tipxew aiperdrepov madrAov  Tav 
woAitav eva Tid.—b piv obv Tov 
vooy Kedevov tpxew Sone? Kedevery 
&pxew tov bedy Kal Tovs vouous, 6 & 
avOpwrov = KeAevwy 
Onploy, 


mpoort@nor Kal 
H Te yop eribvula ro.odror, 
kal 6 @Oupds &pxovtas diacrpeper Kar 





Tovs apicrovs tvdpas, Sidrep tvev 
bpétews vots 6 vouos early. 

6 ere) & od0&v—yépas] The apo- 
dosis to éwel is uioOds pa. From ov 
yap to mpérepov is parenthetical. ‘ But 
since he does not seem to gain at all, 
if he is a just man (for he does not 
allot to himself more of the absolutely 
good than to others, unless it be pro- 
portional to his own merits, and hence 
he acts for others, and justice thus is 
said to be the good of others), we 
must give him some reward, and this 
comes in the shape of honour and 
reverence.’ 

Kabdwep €rA€xOn 7d mpdrepov| The 
reference is to ch. i. § 17. 

8 7d 5&—Spo.v. ' ‘ Now the justice 
of masters and parents is not identical 
with what we have gone through 
(rovTos i.e. am. Kal morur, Six,), but is 
only analogous to it.’ 

9 5—&pxecbu] ‘Hence a man 
cannot have a spirit of wrong towards 


126 HOIKQN [EYAHMIOQN] V. [Cuar. 


\ if \ 4 \ : a Lf ° / 
TO TOAITIXGY’ KATH vouoy yap Hv, xal ev olg exschuxer 
z 7 / ~ 
clvat vowog* autos O oa olg Srapyes loots TOU apyew 
\ ” NS ~ \ i 8 ] / a 
xOb doyerbas. O10 aAAOY Thos Yuvarma eoTh Olxasoyv 7 
7, ~ A 
Tpog Téxva xab RTHBLATA’ TOUTO Yap ETTs TO vixovopIxoY 
4 \ ~ ~ ~ 
Oixasov’ Erecov OF xa ToUTO TOU moAITIXOD. 
~ ~ / XN ij V Of 
7 Tod 08 roasrixod Osxaiou TO wiv uoixoy eorts TO 08 
\ \ ~ ‘\ ‘ ” 4 
vousxov, Quoixoy piv TO mavTAYyoD THY MUTHY Exoy OuvapLy, 


xal ov Tm doxsiv 7 py, vousxov 086 2& dpyng pty ovbdev 
Oiadépsr odrwg 7 dAAwS, Orav OF Gdvras, Siadhépes, oloy ro 





himself; nor civil justice or injustice ; 
for this is, as we have said (#v), ac- 
cording to law and among those 
who can naturally have law; namely, 
those, as we said (#oav), who have an 
equality of ruling and being ruled.’ 


VII. Continues the discussion as to 
the nature of civil justice, in which 
there are two elements, the natural 
(pvoixdy) and the conventional (vopi- 
xév). They are distinguished, and 
arguments are brought against the 
sophistical position that all justice is 
merely conventional. The chapter 
as above is not conveniently divided. 
We need not have had a fresh com- 
mencement with § 1, Tod 5€ woArrixod, 
which is a carrying on of the same 
digression before made; and we might 
well have had the end of a chapter at 
§ 5, xara piow 7 dplorn, after which 
there is a return to the main question 
as to justice and injustice in the acts 
and the characters of individuals. In 
his later edition Bekker makes one 
undivided chapter including Chaps. 
VI., VII., VIIL., of the present edition. 

1 Tov 5 moditiKod—diapéper] ‘ Now 
in civil justice there is a natural 
element and a conventional element; 
that is natural which has the same 
force everywhere, and does not depend 
on being adopted or not adopted (r@ 
doxety } wh) ; while that is conventional 
which at the outset does not matter 





whether it be so or differently, but 
when men have instituted it, then 
matters.’ The distinction here drawn 
is like that between Y.os and kowds 
véuos in Aristotle’s Rhetoric 1. xiii., 
and also that between moral and 
positive laws in modern treatises. 
Natural justice is law because it is 
right, conventional justice is right 
because it is law. Td vouixdy is not 
to be confused with 7d vdumov (cf. 
ch. i. § 8), which is justice expressed 
in the law, and which is nearly equi- 
valent to woAutixby dixaoy, containing 
therefore both the natural and con- 
ventional elements. In the early 
stages of society all law is regarded 
with equal reverence. Afterwards, in 
the sceptical period, the merely con- 
ventional character of many institu- 
tions is felt, and doubt is thrown on 
the validity of the whole fabric. 
Afterwards the proper distinction is 
made, ahd the existence of something 
above all mere convention is: recog- 
nised. The idea of ‘ nature’ as form- 
ing the basis of law, which was started 
in the school of Aristotle, was after- 
wards developed by the Stoies, and 
still further drawn out by Cicero and 
the Roman jurists. It became a 
leading formula in the Roman law, 
and hence has influenced the modern 
school of continental jurists, until a 
reaction was made against it by 
Bentham. 


VI.—VIL] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


127 


~ ~ ‘ 
pvas rutpodcbos, j To alya Guew aAAX py O00 reoBara, 
rt boa ext tiv xal Exacta vomoberovory, oloy TO Gus 


Bpacida, xal ra Wydicparady. 


~ > > £ > 
doxel 0 evioig eivett 2 


~ a % 7 > ve A ~ 

TOVTO TOUAVTA, OTL TO peev duces AHIVYTOV XAL TAYTA YOU 
X Ea’ wv >7 a ne ~ » eee | , Cae 
THY HUTHY EVEL OUYALIY, WOTED TO TUD xak evbads xal ev 


[lépoaig xatsr, ra OF Oixaie xivodpeva poor 


TOUTO 0 3 





7d pvas AvTpovabc1| Herod. (vr. 79) 
speaks of two mine as the ransom, 
&rowd éort TeAotwovyncioww: S00 pyéa 
retaypevar Kat &vdpa aixuddwroy 
exrivery, 

7d aiya Qvew] Cf. Herod. 1m. 42: 
boo piv 5) Aids OnBatéos tdpuvrau 
ipdy 2) vouod OnBatov cist, obra pév 
vuy mdvres diwy amexduevor alyas 
Ovove. 

76 Ove Bpactdg| ¢.e. in Amphipolis, 
ef. Thucyd. v. xi.: nal 7d Aoumdy of 
’"AugdumoAira mepiéptayres abTod Td 
pynuciov, as fpwl re évréuvovar Kai 
Tyas deddnacw dy@vas Kal érnolovs 
Ovotas voutoavres Tov Bpasibav cwrijpa 
opav yeyevijc ba. 

2 Bdoxet 5&—édpHowv] ‘Now some 
think that all institutions are of this 
character, because, while the natural 
is fixed and has everywhere the same 
force (as fire burns equally here and 
in Persia), they see the rules of jus- 
tice altered.’ Kal év@dde xa) év rots 
Iigpcats. This appears to have been 
a common formula, cf. Plato, Minos, p. 
315 EB: éym wey (voul(w) rd Te Sixasa 
Sika Kat Te Bde Bira, 
rapa macw obTws ws évOdde voulCeras ;— 
vat.—ovxovvy Kal év Tepoas;—tad ev 
In the same dialogue, p. 


ovKody Kar 


Tlépoais. 


315, are given specimens of the diffe-. 


rent laws and customs in different 
times and places (p): Mupia 8 &y rs 
zxo rowira eiweiv., moAA} yap edpu- 
xwpla tis awodeltews, Gs ore Hues 
jmiv avrots del Kata trabTda voulZouer 
ore GAAHAos of &vOpwrot, The variety 
of customs and ideas is brought for- 





ward by Locke and Paley to disprove 
the existence of an innate ‘moral 
sense.’ This variety is generally over- 
stated, and the list of aberrations is 
mainly obtained from the usages of 
barbarous tribes. On the origin of 
the opposition between ‘nature’ and 
‘convention,’ and on the use made of 
this by the Sophists, see Vol. I. 
Essay II., p. 107-8. 

3 TovTo 8—ov pice] ‘But this 
is not the case (¢¢. that justice is 
mutable), though it is so to a certain 
extent. May be among the gods 
justice is immutable; but with us, 
although there is somewhat that exists 
by nature, yetallis mutable. Though 
this does not do away with the dis- 
tinction between what is by nature 
and what is not by nature.’ The 
writing here is very compressed, 4AA’ 
got &s, 7.€. Tu Slkaia KivodyTat, to 
which also ovdaués afterwards must 
be referred. The answer given to the 
sophistical argument against justice 
consists in denying the premiss that 
‘what is by nature is immutable.’ 
This might be the case, it is answered, 
in an ideal world (wapd ye rots Gets), 
but in our world laws are interrupted, 
and the manifestation of them is less 
perfect (kiwnrdy pévto wav), Again 
‘nature’ must be taken to mean not 
only a law but a tendency (see note 
on Eth. 1. i. 3), as, for instance, the 
right hand is ‘naturally,’ but not 
always, stronger than the left, while 
merely conventional institutions exhi- 
bit no natural law (0d doer GAAd 


128 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQON] V. 


> wv ed wv we J > »” a 

OUxX EGTIVY OUTWS EYOV, AANA EOTIY WE. 
3 ~ ‘ 

map apiv 0 gotl psy The xO 

4 
AAN Guws goth TO ev duces 
~ \ / ~ aN / 
moiov O& duce Thy evdeyoudvwy xab 


~ ~ ” >d ~ 

toig G20ig Iows ovdapyws 

, \ / ~ 

Duces, xivyTov pevTos Way, 
7 

470 0 ov duoe. 


[Cuap. 


7 
HOITOL Tope y= 


~ x \ \ 4 
aAKwS Eye, xal Woiov ob AAA vousnoy xa cuvdyxy, 


elrep audw xivyTa spolws, dyrov. 


\ \ ~ A 
xal eri THy aAAwy 6 


autos apuooe Olopiopog* Oboes yap 2 SeEia xpeirrwy, 


sxalror evoeyeral tTivag apdsdeEloug yeverdau. 


Ta Os 


Sy , \ \ f ~ / a , 3 
xata covdyxyy xal Td cupdépoy Tay Oixateoy omoia ears 
~ ~ \ ‘ 
Tolg péTpoIg’ 08 yap mavTayod loa TH olyyDa xal OITYPA 

/ > > a ‘\ > ~ / x NA ~ 
PETIA, ANA OU MEY WYOUYTO!, plow, ov 0 TWAGUTIY, 


> , 
EAQATTO. 


: , 
onoiws OF xal Ta ey Huoixde AXA’ avIpwmriva 


\ ~ \ LN ~ \ 
Oixoim ob TAUTA TavTayod, erel ovd ai ToAITEIAL, AAA 


, tf ~ \ bo Sk Dele ~ ot Oixak 
6 nia povoy ravraxol xara duo 7 aplory. Téy OF dixakoy 
€ \ U \ \ id 
xal voninwy ExarToy Ws Te xaboro moog Ta xa’ ExacTe 
” ao 
Evel’ TR pev yap THATTOMEVA TOAAG, Exelvwy O ExaoTOY 


gy* xaforou yap. 


vN 
Oradéper 08 ro adixywa xal To adixoy 





cuvéhkn), and are like weights and 
measures, which entirely depend on 
the convenience of men. 

mapa ye Tots Geois| Of course there 
is nothing theological in this allusion. 
In Eth. x. viii. 7, the notion of attri- 
buting justice to the gods is ridiculed. 
The present mention of the gods is 
not meant to convey anything about 
their nature, it merely contrasts a 
divine or ideal state with the human 
and actual. An exactly similar men- 
tion of the gods is made below, ch. ix. 
§ 17. 

4 evdéxeral tivas| Bekker reads 
vias, Zell and Cardwell mdyrtas, all 
without mentioning any variation in 
their MSS. The latter of the two read- 
ings is supported by the Paraphrast 
and also by the author of the Magna 
Moralia (1. xxxiv. 21): A€yw & ofov i 
7h GpiorepG meAcT@uev mdytes Gel 
BddAew, yivoime? by dugidetio. In 
either case, the sense is nearly the 
same, mdvras implying ‘any one 





out of all,’ as above, kindy. péevror 
way, 

5 Suoa rots wérpas| The meaning 
appears to be, that measures differ in 
size in the producing (05 piv avodvra) 
and the consuming (of 5 mwAodoww) 
countries. 

dpoiws bt—dplotn] ‘So, too, 
those institutions which are not based 
on nature, but on human will, are not 
the same in all places, for not even 
are forms of government the same, 
though there is one alone which for 
all places is naturally the best.’ From 
the primary difference in goyernments 
will follow manifold other differences 
in conventional usages. For the 
Aristotelian idea of the one best 
government, see Politics m1. Vii., It. 
xv., &e. 

6 trav 8 dixalwy—Kabdaov dp] 
‘Now every just and lawful rule stands, 
like the universal in relation to the 
particulars, for while actions are mani- 
fold, the rule is one, being universal.’ 


a 


VII.—VIIL. j 


. aN , 4 4 / , 
xal To Oixalwpa xal To Olxasov. 
T) auro 08 ToUTO, Grav mpaydy, adixnnd 


Quo 4 ra&e. 


eorl, mply 08 meaybivat, odmw, AAA’ adsxoy. 
~ X\ ~. “dl \ 
xarciros 9% parArAov ixasompayyua TO 


dixaiwnn, 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


129 
AN wa , 5) ~ 
COlLxoyv ev yop EOTI TY 


épolwg 02 


, , N “os , ~ 9 , > 
xoiwvoy, Oixaiwpa 08 Td emavopbwuc To adinyjpatos. xa 
oa INS > ~ ~T aN \ \ \ ~ 
exaoToy Of auTm@y, mola Te eldy xal moon xal wept mola 


Tuyyaver bvTa, DorEepov emirxerréoy. 
"0 cd Riel , \ 997 Po > , > ~ 
yrwy 92 Thy Oixaiwy xal adixwy Toy cioyévoy, adixet 8 


X \ ~ oo , : 
pay xab Oimcompayel, Bray Exwy Tig HUTA TpAaTTY * 


or 
OTay 


BA ld ~ ~ A 
0 auwy, our adixel ote OixauoTpaysi GAN 7) xaTa coL- 


BeBnxog: 
T PAT TOUTIY. 


c / \- 
ExXOvTIw xa axour le * 


i \ , , N 3297 
oig yap ous BEeBars Oixalors eivou (1 abluoss, 
ahem. 08 xal Oizeousom povynpse cpiorau TO 2 
OTay yap Exovoloy %, iverau, 


iz4 
apc 08 xal adlunna Tor totiv: Wor ZoTaL Th ADixoy [LEY, 


>n7 ING] A 
AObxynpn 0 ouTM, 


AN \ Aton “A ~ 
EY 4 TO EXOU0 lOV poo). 


adyo 03 


« , , o \ a oo “ 
EXOUTIOY Lev, WomEp xal mpoTEpoy elpyTaL, 0 av Tig TdY 





We have a transition of subject now, 
a return from the digression on civil 
justice, to inquire into individual 
responsibility, &e. The transition is 
made by saying that the principles of 
justice and injustice (7b dicoy and 7d 
&iixov) are universals and differ from 
just and unjustacts. At first the writer 
makes d:kaiwpa stand to dixaoy, as ddl- 
nua to &ixoy, Afterwards he substi- 
tutes Sicaompdynua as a more correct 
word, inasmuch as dixafwua had another 
special meaning to denote the setting 
right of injustice—legal satisfaction. 
It is not improbable that Eudemus 
here is correcting the phraseology of 
Aristotle, who at all events in his 
Rhetoric, 1. xiii. 1, uses Sikaiwya as the 


opposite of adixnua, merely to denote | 


a just action, Ta? adichyara mdéyra 
kal Td Sixaduata diéAwmer, Kk. T. A. 


VIII. The general principles of 
justice having now been defined, the 
question is what constitutes justice 
and injustice in the individual? In 

vor. I. 





one word the will. This chapter 
adds some needless remarks on the 
nature of the voluntary, and distin- 
guishes between the different stages 
of a wrong done, according to the 
amount of purpose which accompanied 
it. The same act externally might 
be a misfortune, if happening beyond 
calculation; a mistake, if through 
carelessness; a wrong, if through 
temptation ; the act of an unjust man, 
if through deliberate villany (§§ 6—8). 
This distinction is illustrated by the 
legal view with regard to acts done in 
anger (§§ 9—r10). All voluntaryjust | 
acts are just. Some involuntary acts 
are still unpardonable. 

3 Aéyw F Exovoov pév, dowep Kar 
mpérepov etpnra| The reference is to 
the Hudemian Ethics u. ix. 1, where 
voluntariness is defined to depend on 
knowledge. ’Emel 5€ rot7” Ze rédos, 
kal obre Ti dpéker ore TH mpoay ever Td 
éxotoioy dpiota, Aowdy 3h dpicacbcu 
Ta Kata Sidvoiay. SoKet Sh evayriov 
elua Td éxovowy TE axovoly, Kal rd 


nn 


nN 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. [Cnar. 


2” asta byrwy sidwog xal pi cyvoy marry pare oy 
pits @ pYTE ov Bvexa, oloy Tiva TUrTE xal Tim xa Thvog 
fyexa, xaxsivwy exarToy wy xaTa cupfe—yxds yd: Bia, 
Women el tig AaPw@y THY yEipa avTO TUmTOL ETEpov, ODY 
éxwv' ov yap ex aurd. evdeyeras 02 Toy TuMTOMevov 
marépa civas, Tov 0 Ori wey avopwros 7 Thy TapovTwY TIE 
yiwmoxely, OTt O& TaThp ayvosiv. buolws 02 Td ToLodroy 
diwpicbw xak ext rot ob Evexa, xab meph ray mpaEw oary. 
To Oy cyvootmevov, 7 py Ayvoodmevoy pev py em” adrad O 
ov, 7) Pla, axovoiov’ ToAAA yap xal ry duce brapyov- 
Twy eidores xal mparromey xal maocyousy, wy ovbev abt 
sxovoloy oT axouriey Eat, oloy TO yypay 7 amobvnoxely. 
42oTt 0 Golws exh T&y adixwy xal Téy Oixnaiwy xal To 
xaTe ocup.syxog* xal yap av Thy mapaxarabyxyy amro- 
doin Tig axwy xal dic hoo, ov odre Oixcue moarrew oUTE 
Oinasompayey daréov AAR 7 xaTa cupPePyxdc. buolws 
08 xal Tov avayxatouevoy xal axovTa THy Tapaxarabyxyy 
pn amodidovtTa xaTa cupPeRyxds daréov adineiv xal Ta 
abixa mparrey, Thy OF Exoveloy Ta ply mpoeromevor 
TPATTOMEY TH O OU MPOEAGLEVOL, TpoEAduevar pty bow TpO- 
Bovrsurapevol, ampoalzera 08 boa ampoBodrAcuTa. Tpid@y 
07 ovchy Pray r&y ey raig xowwviats, Ta py per 





cidora ) tv 1) G 08 EeKa—7TG F 
ayvoodvrt kal dv Kad G Kal 8, 30 &yvoy, 


are not within this sphere. It would 
have been more accurate to say that 


bh Kata cupBeBnkéds. 

womep ef Tis AaBdv Thy xEipa K.T.A.] 
The same illustration is given in the 
Eudemian Ethics wm. viii. 10, where 
the discussion has a great affinity to 
the present chapter. 

emt rod ob €vexa] See the note on 
Eth, un. i. 18. 

TOAAG "yap—amrobvnoKey| ‘Since we 
knowingly both do and suffer many 
of those things that happen to us by 
nature, none of which are either volun- 
tary or involuntary, as for instance 
growing old or dying.’ To constitute 
voluntariness we must do knowingly 
things that are within the sphere of 
the will (ép’ quiv). Physical things 





we do not do them. It is characte- 
ristic of Eudemus to turn to the 
consideration of physiological facts ; 
see the notes below, on Eth. yu. 
ch. xiv. 

6 tpia@v 5) ovcav BAaBav ray ev 
tais Kowwvias| ‘Therefore there 
being three kinds of harm that may 
be done in the intercourse of men,’ 
&e. Really four kinds are specified, 
but the last (8:4 poxOnpiav) seems to 
be an addition to the old list, con- 
sisting of the misfortune, the error, 
and the wrong, which division is to 
be found in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, 1. 
ch. xiii. The present discussion is 
promised in Eth. Hud. 1. x. 19: dua 


VIII.] HOIKOQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 131 


> , c la OP a 7 a ay 4 A 7 x2 
AYVOAG ALOLTHLATA EOTIV, OTAY LATE OY PATE O ATs w 
Pi ec / , = a \ > ~ x ‘5 
Pars ob Evexa trérake wonky’ 7 yap ob Parciv qf oo 
, * 2 ~ x > 4 a 37 > A ICC 
TOUTW 7% OY TOUTOY 7% Ov ToUTOU Evexa WII, AAA TuvEby 
> Ss o > ‘6 oo > o , yAR’ o , 
OUXY ob Evexa W75n, olov ovy iva TpwWoY AAA iva xevTHon, 
ax > od ax > a oa X ¥ Ly ec , 
7 Ovyx ov, 7 wvXY WS. OTAY pey oUY Taparcyws 7 PAaby7 
\ 
yevaTa, aTIyyLA, bray Ot py Taparcyws, avev Bt xaxlac, 
apapTna* apaptaves piv yap Grav 7% apyy ev autem 7 
~ a > ~w 7 4 a x >> N Xx 5 ‘ 
Tig aitias, aTuysl O bray EEwiev. Stay 03 cidws piv 78 
, ae 
mpoPovrsdoas 02, adixnua, olov boa te die Bundy xab 
” / a 3 ~ x Ul 4 ~ > 
AAA ran, Oona avayxaia 1 ducixa, cupPasver Tog ay- 
A re 
Gpwrog tatire yap Prartovrses xal apapravovTes as- 
~ wv 
note! nev, xal ddixyuata eortiv, ov pévTos ww Adios dice 
~ aD’ s 5 A ® A sf ec / a 
TAUTA ode movypol* ov yap did poySypiay 7 Prdby* Gravy 
O° 2x mpouipéoews, Kdixog xak poybynpss. 10 xaA@so Ta 
P Ss $ OXI POS $ 
. ~ »” ~ 
ex Guat ox 2x mpovolag xplveras’ ov yap apyer 6 bupa@ 
~ LAR a , ” 5 es \ ~ 3 , 4 x 
Body, AAR 6 opyioas. ers O2 ond? weph rod yevérbas 7 10 
» ~ ~ \ 
pH apdichareizas, AAAA weph Tot dixaiov’ ext dawopevy 
X ~ 
yap abixin a opyy eotw. 08 yap Wome ey Tog cUVAA- 
7 ~ ~ - 
Aaypact wept rob yevicbar audiohyrotcw, wy avayxy 
» alice. 3 , > Vi -NS , PES, ~ 
Tov eTepoy sivas poySypov, av wx die AnOyy auto domo" 
> ae ~ \ ~ , NY ~ , 
AAR oporoyolyTes mepl To mpaypLaTtos, TEP TOU ToTEpWS 
/ > ~ \ >; 7 > > ~ 
Oixasoy audicPytotow. 6 8 ewiBourAsdoag ovx aKyvosi, 
a c \ >> ~ e Qo ¥ a > 4 
WOT 6 pezy olevas adinciobas, 6 0 ot. avd ex 7 poaiper ews 
Ba xn D) ~ A 7 ~ > “ay \ >> i< c 
ay, abixel xal xaTa TAadT yon Ta adinyjwaTa O11 





® &« robrwy davepdby cal Bri Karas 
Biopi{ovrat of trav mabnudrey Ta piv 
éxotow Ta F axotow Ta F ex rpovolas 
vouoberotow «i yap Kal wh diaxpr- 
Botow, GAN Grrovrai yé my Tis 
GAnbelas~ GAAG mwepl pey Tobray 
épodpev ey TH TEpl Tay BiKxatwy éem- 
oneve, 

g—io 8b Kadraés—éduce7] ‘Hence 
too acts done from anger are well 
judged not to proceed from purpose, for 
not he who acts in anger, but he who 
provoked the anger is the beginner. 
Again, the question is not about the 
act having taken place or not, but 
about the justice of it; for anger 





arises on the appearance of injustice. 
It is not as in contracts, where men 
dispute about the thing having been 
done, and where (if the thing has 
been done) one of the parties must be 
a villain, unless they have done it in 
forgetfulness. But (in the present 
case) agreeing about the fact, they 
dispute on which side justice is. 
Now he that has attacked another 
eannot plead ignorance, so that (the 
issue lies on this) one party thinks he 
has been injured, the other denies it. 
But if a man has harmed another on 
purpose, he is guilty of injustice.’ 
Owing to the obscurity of expression, 


s2 


132 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[Cuar. 


~ \ / ee X \ 
Dixy KOIx0g, BTAY Tapa To avAroyo 7 7) mapa TO Iooy. 
€ isd / ~ 
buolwg 08 xal Olxasog, OTaY mpoeAduevog Oimasompayy. 


N ~ rs a / ¢ c ‘ 4 
12 OLHQLOT PAYES 0&, Gy (Lovey EXxX@V TPAaTTY. 


~ > > rf 
Toy 0 axouTiwy 


\ / ao 
TH pév gor! Cuyyvmpouna TH 0 ob CvyyvwpoUIKa’ 60H 


piv yop py Povey cyvootvTes CAAA xab OF ayvorcy cpap . 





this passage has given great trouble 
to the commentators. The context 
is a carrying on of the distinction 
between Gudptnua, 4&dlenua, and 
&ucov. What distinguishes these is 
the amount of purpose they contain. 
This, says the writer, is illustrated by 
the way in which acts of anger are 
treated legally. Such acts are not 
denied, but the plea is that they were 
caused by an injustice, that they did 
not proceed from purpose, but were 
caused by an injury which gave rise 
to them. Thus the question is 
moved off from the acts themselves, 
and is entirely concerned with their 
antecedents. Was it a real injustice 
that gave rise to them? Whereas 
with regard to harmful acts done on 
purpose (avy ® é« mpoap, BAddm) 
there is no doubt that in themselves 
they constitute a wrong. The chief 
difficulty is about the words 6 ® 
émiBovaevoas obk ayvuet, Sore 6 pey 
Who is 
6 émBovAetcas ? and who are 6 péy, 6 
8 of? Apparently ode Gyro is 
merely in reference to 8a Anny. 
Cases of anger differ from other civil 
cases (€v Tots cuvadAdypact), (1) be- 
cause the acts of anger are not 
denied ; (2) because ignorance is not 
pleaded to justify them. ‘O émBov- 
Aevoas, accordingly, must mean ‘he 
that made the attack,’ though the 
word is not very appropriate to 
denote an attack made in anger. ‘O 
ev refers to the same person, namely, 
to him who, having done a violent act 
in anger, now pleads that he was 
injured before, which plea the one 


oterar GdixetcOa, 6 8 ov, 





who has suffered from his violence 
denies. The sentence &y & é« mpoap. 
is in contrast to the whole of the 
preceding passage—to all that is said 
about deeds of anger. If it appears 
to any impossible that 6 ém:BovA, can 
refer to the angry man, there are 
several other meanings that can be 
assigned to it. (1) It may mean the 
person who by an injury provoked 
the attack, and then the second clause 
would mean, ‘so that the angry man 
thinks he has suffered.a wrong, the 
unjust man does not.’ (2) The first 
clause may be parenthetical, the 
‘plotter’ being contrasted with the 
angry man, and the second clause may 
be taken to mean ‘so that the sufferer 
thinks he is wronged, and the angry 
man thinks he is not.’ 
clause would then have been inserted 
to show that where, in cases of this 
kind, intentional provocation has been 
given, the parties are in the same 
relation as in cases évy Tots cvvadAdy- 
kaw, te. one of them knows upon 
which side justice is, because he is 
conscious of his own wrong. 

12 tév 8 &kovciwv| The word is 
used less sternly here than it is by 
Aristotle in Eth, mm. i. 21; &e., where 


acts of passion are excluded from the 
class of the involuntary. On the © 


difference between Gyvoovvtes yee 
30 &yvoay, see Eth. m1. i. 14, and note. 
The view here given of chenlene 
temptation as constituting an ex- 
euse for wrong acts is similar to 
that in the later Eudemian Book, vu. 
xiy. 6. 


The first . 


* 





VIIL—IX.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


135 


, , oa de - A 3 . ” > > 
TAVOUTL, Tuyyvwpmovixd, Boa OF py OF ayvoIay, AAA 
> ~ ‘ A , \ a A ) ge , 
ayvootvres ev Oi mabos 02 pyre duoixey wyT avOowrivoy, 


/ 
oy TUYyYwmoVIXE. 


by uA »” wis ~ rs \ ~ 
Aropyoes 0 ay Tis, eb ixavios dropio ras wpb TOU 


ah ~ 4 \ > ae ~ X 2° a Es Ms 
$HUOUAL HAL AOLKELY, PWT ov [ev Eb COTY WOTREp upt 


mlong elonxe, Adywv atorws 


, x 
pnrépa Kkaréxra Tiv éuhy, Bpaxue Oyoe, 
£ ~ s 
éxwy éxovoay, 7] OéXoveay ovy Exwyv. 





IX. This chapter, by means of 
mooting and answering certain diffi- 
culties and objections with regard to 
the nature of justice and injustice, 
completes and deepens the conception 
of them that has hitherto been given. 
These questions are as follows: (1) 
Can one be injured voluntarily? 
§§ 1—2. (z) Is the recipient of an 
injury always injured? §§$3—8. The 
latter question is first generally 
answered, and then, §§ 9—13, it is 
re-stated in the form of two other 
questions, namely, Is the distributor 
of an unjust distribution, or he that 
gains by it, unjust? and, Can a man 
injure himself? By mooting these 
points it is at once shown that justice 
implies a relationship of two wills, 
and that an act of injustice implies a 
collision of two wills: a loss on one 
side and a gain on the other. The 
chapter ends with some remarks cor- 
recting popular errors, and deepening 
the conception of justice. (1) Justice 
is no easy thing consisting in an 
external act. It consists in an in- 
ternal spirit, § 14. (2) To know it is 
not like knowing a set of facts. It 
implies a knowledge of principles,- 
§ 15. (3) The just man could not at 
will act unjustly. The character of 
the act depends on the state of mind, 
$ 16. (4) Justice is limited to a 
human sphere, § 17. 

I Gmopnoce F &v—éxdvtes| ‘Now 
one might doubt whether we have 





adequately defined being injured and 
injuring; in the first place, whether 
it be as Euripides says, in his strange 
language, A. “I killed my mother, 
and there’s an end of it.” B. “ Was 
it with the will of both, or was she 
willing while you were unwilling?” 
In short, is it as a matter of fact 
possible that one should be volun- 
tarily injured, or, on the contrary, is 
that always involuntary, just as all 
injuring is voluntary? And is all in- 
justice, like all injuring, to be summed 
up under the one category or the 
other, or is it sometimes voluntary 
andsometimes involuntary? The same 
may be said about being justly 
treated, for all just doing is volun- 
tary, so that it might be supposed 
that being injured and being justly 
treated would be opposed to each 
other as to being voluntary or in- 
voluntary correspondingly to the two 
active terms (dytix. dyuolws Kal? 
éxdrepov). But it would be absurd to 
say of being justly treated that it is 
always voluntary, for some are treated 
justly against their will.’ 

ei ixay@s Siépiora:] This shows the 
purpose of the chapter, to complete 
the definition of justice and injustice 
by looking at them on the passive 
side. 

@onep Evprriéns| Wagner (Eur. 
Fragm. p. 4°) says the lines come 
from the <Alemeon of Enuripides. 
The Scholiast refers them to the 


134 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[Cuapr. 


~ 0 ~ + OK 
morepoy yap Wo adarAndis Bory ExovTa adincio bau, 7) OU GAN 


> 7 o \ A BANS ~ ~ € , } 
AXOv0 boy ATAY, WOTEp HOL TO QOLXELY TOY ExoUTLOY. xO 


ay - a eS , ad A + oN ~ o£ , 
Apr TAY OUTWS 7 EXELVMS, WOTED HOLL TO QOLKEIY WAY ExXOvu- 


Ase Sole , \ ME OS 3 
2O040¥, 7) TO KEY EXOUTLOY TO AaxovudC lov, 


€ / \ eer 
OL01MS d& xab én} 


~ ~ 4 > ~ ~ ¢€ s 4 > 

Tod Oimasodobas* TO yap Oimasompaysly may ExovTLOY, WOT 
~ / , / NY ~ 

evAoyoy avTineiobas suolws xab’ Exarepoy TO T adinciobas 


\ \ 9 ~ Nv ¢ LA r ES: 0 / + 
xal TO Oimasovcbas 7 EXOVTLOY 7) AxXOUTIOY Elvou. 


aroroy & 


AY , , ie ee | ~ ~ > ~ ¢ , yv \ 
ay do€ee xal exh rod Oixoucdo bas, eb may Exovotoy* Evior yap 


IN ~ > Me? ? \ \ LN , Ds 
3 OLXaLOUYTOLL OUY EXOYTES. EEL KOS TO0E Ovo opyoesev AY TIC, 


, c \ WS \ >> ~ ~ \ of \ 
TOTEpoyv O TO QOLKOY memovds QOMKEITAL TAC 7) WOTED xOk 


tml ro mparrey, xal em) rod macyel eotiv: xara cup 
A A > , 2.9 > , / ~ 
BeByxds yap évdiverar em cipdotépwy psraray.Pavery Toy 


Oimaloy. 


c , \ Qa a K. 19.5 ~ a7 > A 
opolws 02 SHAov Ort xal éxl Tay adixwy* ov yap 


> \ \ yvyN , ~ 3 ~ LANDY A wv / 
TAUTOY TO THOMA TPATTELY TH Adixsiy ovds TO AOIKa Ta- 
~~ ~ , ~ ~ 

oye TH adineiobou. spolwg 8 xal ex) Tod Oixcsompaysiv 
\ ~ Ny ‘ >> ~ \ >> ~ a 
xa Oinasodobasr? addvaroy yap axsiobas uy KOsmodvrog 7 


S ~ ‘\ ~ 
4dimasovoos ) Osxauom payouyros. 


ei 0 éoTly amAw@s TO 





Bellerophon. Wagner writes them as 
a dialogue, supposing the persons to 
be Alemzeon and Phegeus. He con- 
jectures xatéxray, which appears 
more probable than the usual reading 
katréxra, and which accordingly has 
been adopted in the above transla- 
tion. 

2 The passive terms are not 
opposed to each other in respect of 
voluntariness in the way that might 
be expected from the opposition be- 
tween the active terms under which 
they stand. 


&dinetv—Bixaromparyetv 
&5:K€to ar—Bikaodo bat, 


For ad:ceio@a is always involuntary, 
but dicaotc@u is not always volun- 
tary. A man may be ‘treated justly’ 
by being hanged. 

3 Not every one who suffers what 
is unjust is injured, for injury implies 
intention on the part of the injurer. 
Cf. Aristotle, het. L xiii. 5: tore 5H 





Td Gdixciobas Td bd Exdyros Ta dia 
mdoXEL. 

4—6 «i 8 eorly—mpdrret] ‘ Now if 
to injure is simply defined “to hurtany 
one willingly,” and “ willingly” means 
‘* knowing the person, and the instru- 
ment, and the manner,” and the in- 
continent man hurts himself willingly, 
then it follows that one can be 
willingly injured, and it will be pos- 
sible to injure oneself. But this 
was one of the points in question, 
whether it is possible to injure oneself. 
Again, one might from incontinence 
be hurt willingly by another who was 
acting willingly, so that in that way 
it would be possible to be injured 
willingly. But shall we not rather 
say that the definition is not correct, 
but that we must add to the formula 
“hurt any one willingly, knowing 
person, instrument, and manner,” 
the terms “ against that person’s 
wish?” It is true one is hurt and 
one suffers injustice willingly, but no 


oo, ae oe a 


ee ee ee a oe 


IX.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


135 


a r , 4 9 , , \ 

aoinely To PrAamwresy ExovTa TiVa, TOD ExdvTa sldorTa xal 

a . eee. te € a > A c \ / ae Y € , 

ov xalW xal We, 60 axpaTng Exwy PrAdTTE AUTOS adTOY, 

c 7 > na iD) ~ \ > dé ey. a. iD ~ 

EXWY T GY AOIM0ITO xal evdeyoITO aUTOY MUTOY cdixe;Y. 
~ a ~~ , / 

Zari O& al TOUTO Ev TL TY Amropoupevoy, gi evdeyverau 
92% e QA 2) ~ + c \ x ») . > / c > 
auToy abTOY adimely. ETL exw ay Tig OF axpaclay bm’ s 
»” , c , a >. 7% x € Ud bey gt ~ a‘ 
arrAov PrAaMToITO ExovToG, WOT Ely av ExovT adixciobar. 7 

\ / \ / ~ 
obx ape 6 Oropio pds, AAAR m poo Jer éov TO Prawrely 
INF Va A \ a \ 4. \ > / 7 
EMOTO HOE OV HOLL W HOE WS TO TAPA THY Exsivor Bovanosy ; 
om \ \ / ~ 
hamreTou wey ouv Tig Exav xalTadIxa TATE, KOIMEITAL 6 
’ 
PNG 04 \ € E> ft) \ \ / Ty Core. , > \ 
oudelg exwy* oulelg yap Bovrcreu, 0U9 0 AXPATIS, HAAG 
\ \ “3 / ” \ 7 > \ aA 
Tapa THy Bovanowy WPATTEL* oUTE yap Bovreras ovfels o 
oe. a \ aA ~ 
y oleTOL elvar orovdaiov, 6 Te K&xDUTHC OvY & oleTas deiv 
7] ’ 
/ / c 83 \ y ~ 518 / a "Q s 
Tearre TaTTE, 40 Ta wbToU didovG, Women "Opnpos - 
~ A ~ n 7X 
dyos dotvas tov Taraiixoy rod Asourdes 


xXpucea xadkeiwy, Exardufsor évveaBolwr, 





one is injured willingly. For no one 
wishes (harm), nor does the incon- 
tinent man, but he acts against his 
wish. For no one wishes for what he 
does not think to be good, and the 
incontinent man does not what he 
thinks to be good.’ 

4 adds is opposed to Kata mpdc- 
Geo as implied in mpooOeréov. Cf. 
vu. iv. 2—3. 

7 BAdrrew] Harm does not con- 
stitute injustice without a violation 
of the will. Cf. Ar. Rhet. 1. xiii. 6: 
avdrykn Tov Gdicovmevoy BrAawrecOat, 
Kat &xovtiws BAdrrec Oa, 

6 & axparh}s| The incontinent man 
may harm himself, or be led into 
ruin by others. The phenomena of 
incontinence appear to have constantly 
occupied the attention of Eudemus. 
They not only form the main subject 
of Eth, Book vn. (Eth. Eud. v1.), 
but they are also mixed up with the 
discussion on the voluntary, Ezh. 
Bud. 1. viii. 

6 ovre yap BotrAcra x.7.A.] In 
his inmost self every one wishes for 
what he thinks good. Thus the 





incontinent man, following his desire, 
acts against his own real wish. This 
is the same point of view as is taken 
in the Gorgias of Plato (p. 466 sqq.).- 
It is rather different from that in 
Eth. mm. ch. iv. (on which see notes), 
though the word overa: prevents an 
absolute collision. The terms apa 
thy BovAnow are rather awkwardly 
introduced in the text, for it is said 
they are necessary to turn mere harm 
into injustice, but with regard to the 
incontinent man, while acting volun- 
tarily he receives ‘ harm—against his 
wish.’ Yet he is not injured volun- 
tarily, because the terms ‘against: his 
wish’ constitute him an jnvoluntary 
agent. In short, in this case mapa 
thy BodAnow is made to qualify, not 
the harm, but the voluntariness of 
the recipient. There is a slight con- 
fusion in the expression, but on the 
whole the tendency here is to at- 
tribute a less degree of voluntari- 
ness to weak and foolish acts than 
was done by Aristotle in his discus- 
sions on the voluntary; Hth. m1. i. 
14, &e. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. [ Cap. 


> aN ~ - tah > ~ t > A Py YA \ ye 40 
OUx GdinsiTas E© AUTO yap sot! TO Oidoval, TOO AOI- 
~ > 3.9 > ~ > \ \ > ~ ~ © , 
xeio bas oux er MUTM, HAAG Tov adixotyra dei UMTALYELY. 
g mepl pty oby TOU ddincstoban é OTh 00x x00 10%, Oirov. 
“Ext 0 ay mpostronedar ov earl ebrely, wore pay wor 
adinel 6 veluag mapa THv dElay Td waciov 7) 6 Zywy, xal ek 
A ~ , 
9foTiv auUTOY aUTOY adinEly’ eb yap evdeyeTo TO MpOTEDOV 
~ \ / ” 
Asybev xal 6 diavenwy adixet AAA’ oY 6 EYwWY TO TAEOY, Eh 
4 Cor a‘ € ~ sf >> N Be r e J 
Tig TAgoy ETepw 7] AUTH veer eidwe xal ExwY, OUTOG AUTOS 
~ ad ~ ~ \ 
airoy adimel, rep Ooxotiow of pérpion moreiv' 6 yop 
5) \ > , > a INL ~ 3 ~ Hm! 
ETIElnIg EARTTWTIKOG EOTIV. 7 OVO? TOUTO AmAOUY; ETEPOU 
\ > ~ + SP > / U4 NS EY ~ € ~ 
yap dyabod, i Eruyev, errcovéxres, olov d0Eyg 7 TOU amAws 
~ \ ~ ~ 
nano. ert AveTaL xal xaTa Toy Diopiopoy Tod adixeiv® 
ovbiy yap mapa THy abrou mao yes Bovanow, Wore ovx 
Adimeiras Ore be TOUTO, GAN elrep, Pardmreras pdvoy. 
10 Pavepov 02 xal OTF 6 drovémeny adsxeel, AAN obY 6 Td maeov 
EXwy ael* ov yap « @ TO GOsxoy orapyel adinei, GAN o TO 
ixdvta ToUTo molly’ ToUTO O Obey 7 7 apa Tis mpaéews, % 7 
” 
rr eoTly By TO Oiowepovr AAW ovx ev TO Aap Bavovrt. ETL 
ere} ronnayios TO Toisiy never ou, xal Bot wo TH aduya 
% Xelp xah 6 olxerngs emit Govr os, ox KOImed 
12 Kev, Toles OF TH Adina. ert ek pdv clyvoiby Expivev, oux 
> ~ \ | \ a7 3 of c 4 > / 
diel xaTa TO vomixov Oixasov od adinog 7 xploIg EOTIY, 
” ? € ” a a.’ \ \ yy \ \ 
ZoTs 0 wo abixog* ETEpoy yap TO vomInoy Oixasoy xal TO 


xTELVEL xal 7) 


~ ee iN , ” PENwa ~ \ 
TpWTov* Eb OF YivwouwY ExpiVEY adlxws, mAsovexTel xal 





8—13 ert © Gv mpoeirAdueba bv 
Zorw eimeiy| ‘ But of the questions 
which we determined on there remain 


tice may have been violated by his 
decision. 
11—12 @r éwel—mp@roy] ‘ Again, 


two to discuss,’ namely, (1) whether 
the distributor of an unjust distribu- 
tion does the wrong, or he who gains 
by it? (2) Can a man injure himself, 
as for instance by taking less than his 
share? These questions are as good 
as answered already; it is already 
clear that no one can injure himself, 
Again the act belongs to the distri- 
butor and not to the receiver, If the 
distributor acts from corrupt motives 
he is unjust, if unconsciously and by 
accident he is not unjust, though jus- 





as the word doing is used_in more 
senses than one, and there is a sense 
in which inanimate things kill—or 
one’s hand—or the slave who does his 
master’s bidding—so the distributor 
may be the instrument of doing injus- 
tice, without himself injuring. Again, 
if he decided in ignorance, in the eye 
of the law he is not guilty of injuring, 
nor is his decision unjust, though 
from another point of view it is un- 
just, for justice according to law is 
distinct from abstract justice.’ The 


x.) HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. 137 


A ED ey / 
AUTOS 7 YapiTOS q Tinwplas. 
~ \ ~ ~ 7 / 
THiTo TO adinyLaTos, xal 6 dia Tadra xplvag adixws 
/ 4 \ \ + ee / ¢ \ ’ \ , > 
magov eyer* xal yap ex exelvwy 6 Tov aypoy xpivag oux 
> \ > > ? / 4 
aypoy GAN dipyipioy EraPev. 
BA A > ~ \ \ \ / = e J 
olovras elvas TO adixeiv, O10 xal TO dixcsoy elvas Sodiov. 
ya / \ ‘ ~ ~ / 

700 ovx cot: cuyyeveras ev yao TH TOU yelTovog xal 
U \ tg \ Now ~ ‘ \ > I 
maraczar: tov mayoloy xal dotvar TH yeEIpl TO aipyvpsov 
[ ANY \ tae > ~ > ‘\ \ eW\V ~~ ~ 
podiy xa ex avrois, aAAA TO WO ZyovTAs TadTH Toseiy 
” e /N Vi > 13 '3 > ~ c , \ \ \ ~ \ 
OUTE EadLov OUT ex’ avTolg. dpolwg b8 xal TO yvivos TO 
/ . 5 or LANDS \ a re 
Olxora nob TH ddim ondey olovTas codey elvas, OTs wepl wv 
c f , > \ / > > > ~ > 
Ob YOMOL AsyouTly OU HAAETOY Tuvieval, AAA Ov TOUT 

\ / ‘\ ~ 
COT TH OlHOUA LAN 7 xaTa TupPeyxdG, AAR THS TUAT- 
, A ~ / ~ 4 ED 
Tomueve nal WHS venousva Olan’ Toro O& mAgov Epyoy 7 
Os » ys > \ > ~ , N.S. V2 / 

TH UYLELYO ELOEVOLL, EEL HAXEL LEAL XO OlvOY xa EAA EPopoy 
\ ~ \ PaNwA €f > 4 ~ ~ ~ 
xal xadow xed Tomryy eidévar padiov, AAAG Whe Set velo 

\ , \ ~ 4 
wpos byisiay xal thu xal wore, ToooUToy Epyov ooov iarpoy 
> re X\ ~ \ ~ 4 x F SAN 

elvasr. Of auto Ot TOTO xal Tod dixaiov olovras civou ovdey 
< \ ~ sf e , \ \ ~ 
WTTOY TO adixsty, OTs OUdeY ATTOY 6 Oixalog AAA xa) ULOAAOY 
7 Ey og ~ tA ‘ 

duvet’ ay éxacroy mpaSas rovrwy xal yap ouyyevérbou 





first case supposes the distributor to 
act as the instrument of others, the 
second that he makes a mistake 
through ignorance. In the latter case 
abstract justice (rd mp@roy Sixamov) is 
violated, and yet legally: (kara 1d 
vouwdy) no injustice can be com- 
plained of. mp@rov here appears used 
analogously to mpérn pirocopla, mparn 
fAn, &e., to denote that which is most 
real and necessary, and also most ab- 
stract as being most removed from 
individual modifications. The Para- 
phrast and many of the commentators 
understand § 11 to refer tothe receiver, 
not to the distributor. It might also 
be taken in a quite general sense, as 
applying to all such subservient acts. 
But it seems simplest to refer it to 
the distributor. 

14—17 These sections contain 
remarks concluding the subject of jus- 

VOL. IT. 








tice. As they correct popular errors 
regarding its nature, they may be con- 
sidered a continuation of the daopia:, 
with which the chapter commenced. 
The views which are here combated 
are (1) a shallow and external notion 
about justice and injustice as if they 
merely consisted in outward acts ; (2) 
a sophistical opinion that to know jus- 
tice merely consists in knowing the 
details of the laws, ef. Eth. x. ix. 20; 
(3) an opinion that justice implies its 
contrary, as if it were an art (ddvauis) ; 
see above ch. i. § 4. This opinion 
would be a consequence of the Socratic 
doctrine that justice is knowledge. 
Plato saw what this doctrine led to 
and drew out the paradoxical conclu- 
sion, Repub. p. 334 4, Hipp. Min. pp. 
375-6. The Aristotelian theory that 
justice is a moral state (€€s) set the 
difficulty at rest. 


4 x DY ” , 
WOTED OUY HAY Eb TIC (EPb-13 


of 0 avOpmmra ed’ gauroig 14 


158 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


[ CHar. 


~ \ >» ~ 
yuvaix) xal rarakos, xa 6 avdpsiog Tiy aomioa adeivas 


xal orpadels ep’ sorepaoty Tpeyesy. 


AAA TO OebrAaivery 


xa) TO adinely ov TO TATA Tolely eoT!, mraqy HOT OL rupee 
Bz Puxsc, AAA TO wt exovran Taira morely, domep xa vo 
iarpsusiy xal ro byiebew ov TO Tepvely 7, ya Tépvery 7 
Re dappwaxevery 7 ft) dappaxevery 2oTiv, AAAG TO WO. ZoOTI 
0: TH Olxaia ev TovToIG olg péTerT THY aTAwS ayabay, 
Zyoves 0 brepBorny ev Touro xal ZArenbi* ToIg wey yap 
oux Eotiv brepPorn adray, olov lows toig Geoig, Toig O 
odhiy popioy wWbérArov, Tog aviaTwWS xAxXOIC, GAR TavTA 
Bramrer, Toig Ot péyps TOU’ Od Toit’ avOpwmivey eoriy. 

10 [leg} 08 éaiesxelag xal rod erserxots, mg exer 7 pev 
emielasia mpdg Oixcuocdvyy TOO eisintg mpdg TO Olxasoy, 





17 tor 5t—eorw] ‘ Now the rela- 
tions of justice exist between those 
who share in what are commonly 
called goods, but with regard to them 
can have both too much and too little. 
For some cannot have too much, as 
perhaps the gods; and to others again 
no portion is advantageous, but all 
is hurtful—I mean the utterly bad ; 
while there is a class who can receive 
goods up to a certain point. Hence 
justice is human.’ Two ideal states, 
one of the absolutely good, the other 
of the absolutely bad, are here 
depicted in contrast to the condition 
of human society. The idea of pro- 
perty cannot of course be connected 
with God (ef. Eth. x. viii. 7), who has 
and is all good (cf. Eth. 1. vi. 3, 1x. 
iv. 4); nor again with those who are 
so degraded that they could not receive 
any benefit at all from what are called 
goods (cf. ch. i. $9). The passage is 
« curious one, and may remind us of 
the position assigned by Aristotle (ef. 
Pol. 1. ii. 14) to man in his social con- 
dition, as something between the 
beast and the god. 

X. Some 


account of equity 





(émelxera) forms a suitable comple- 
ment to the theory of justice, and we 
find the subject so treated in Ari- 
stotle’s Rhetoric, 1. xiii., from which 
it is not improbable that the present 
chapter may be partly borrowed. 
Professor Spengel is mistaken in say- 
ing that this chapter is out of place, 
being introduced into the midst of the 
&moplat on justice. Evidently it is 
chapter xi, and not chapter x., 
that is out of place. Spengel thinks 
that the words wep) 5 émesxeias would 
come in well after the words m@s péy 
oby Exer Td dvtimerrovOds mpds Td dixatov, 
elpnrat mpérepoy (which occur ch. vi. 
§ 3), as if first retaliation and then 
equity should be discussed in relation 
to justice. But it is evident that they 
stand on a different footing, as treated 
in this book. Retaliation is a principle 
existing im justice and with certain 
modifications constituting it; equity 
is something outside justice and cor- 
recting it. 

*Emetxeva has a close connexion with 
what is called -yyépun (consideration), 
Eth. vi. xi. 1, ef. Rhet.t. xiii. And 
thus it is treated of by the author of 
the Magna Moralia amongst the intel- 


xx.) 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


139 


> 4 f 5) a ~ »” 4 c wre 3 ~ ws> e 
EXOLEVOY EOTIY ELEY" OUTE YAN WS THUTOY ATAWS oF we 
isd ~ / 4 / Sa Fest. x \ 
= 
erspen: di yever paneerek nua gas it, res OTE a 46: 
EWIELKEG EMOAIVOUILEY KO “VOOM TOY TOLOUTOY, WOTE HAL ETI 
A »~ > ~ , > A ~ ~ \ 
Th AAAK EMAIYOUYTES peeTadepopey QyTi Tou ayaso, TO 
> / a / ~ e- > ‘\ ~ if 
EMIELHETTEDOY OTE Béariov Oyrotivrec: Gre Oe TO ROYO 
~ / ” ‘ \ 
axonrovioda: daiveras aromov ei To ewieixeg Tapa TO 


bi: , a > , 5] oe \ \ PY , 
bHOLOY Th GY EmaiVETOY EOTIV’ 7 Yap TO OlxaloY OD T7TOU- 
bai aA XV > , a & a > yy 

lov, 7) TO emteixtc ov Oixasov, ci AAAO'Y El aLdw orou- 

~ . s ys 4 tA 
dain, TaUTOv éoTiv. 7 peey avy aTopho. oxe00v cup.Pasves 

‘ ~ ” a , ‘ 
Oia radra mwepl To émicindc, Eyes 8 dmavTa TpOmoy TIVE 
> ~ A sAX , re , 7 °° X 
6pha@s xak ov§ev Swevaytiov Eautoig’ To Te yap emieixes 





lectual qualities, and is coupled with 
what he calls edyvwpootvn, Magna 
Moralia, n. i. 1, sqq. 

To us the contents of this chapter 
appear natural and easy to appre- 
hend. The idea of equity as the com- 
plement of law and justice is to us 
perfectly familiar, but the writer saw 
a difficulty in saying how logically 
(7@ Adye GkoAovbo0tc1) equity could be 
praised if it contradicted justice. The 
answer is well given above, that equity 
is a higher and finer kind of justice 
coming in where the law was too 
coarse and general, The best illus- 
tration of this conception is to be 
found in the beautiful description 
given in Rhet.1. xiii. ‘It is equity to 
pardon human failings, and to look to 
the lawgiver and not to the law; to 
the spirit and not to the letter; to the 
intention and not to the action; to 
the whole and not to the part; to the 
character of, the actor in the long 
run and not in the present moment; 
to remember good rather than evil, 
and good that one has received, rather 
than good that one has done ; to bear 
being injured (rd dvéyec@a GSuxod- 
pevov); to wish to settle a matter 
by words rather than by deeds ; 
lastly, to prefer arbitration to judge- 
ment, for the arbitrator sees what is 





T2 


- Stxatov. 


equitable, but the judge only the law, 
and for this an arbitrator was first 
appointed, in order that equity might 
flourish.’ 

1 drt pev—é&yalod] ‘Sometimes we 
praise what is equitable and the 
equitable character in such a way, 
that we transfer the term and use it 
instead of the term good in praising 
people for all other qualities besides.’ 
The word éme:«hs is constantly used 
merely in the sense of ‘ good,’ cf. Eth. 
Iv. ix. 7, € twolécews emenmés, and 
above, ch. iv. § 3, &c., but it is a mis- 
take to consider this the ater sense of 
the word, as if ‘equitable’ were the 
primary sense. "Emeucis (from eixés) 
first means ‘customary,’ as in Homer; 
then ‘seemly,’ then ‘good’ in general ; 
afterwards it is probable than an asso- 
ciation of efxw, ‘to yield,’ became con- 
nected with the word, and hence the 
notion of moderation and of waiving 
one’s rights arose, and 7d émemés 
was constantly contrasted with 7d 
Thus in Herod. ur. 53: 
mokAol tay diKxalwy Ta émieKéoTepa 
apotiBéact. Cf. Plato, Laws, p. 757 D: 
7 yap ements Kal tvyyvapov Tov 
Tehéov Kal axpiBods mapa dSikny thy 
épOhy éo7t mapatebpavopévoy, &e. Out 
of this contrast the idea of equity was 


developed. 


» 


140 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. [ Cuap. 


/ A > c yy 
Oixaiou Tivdg Ov Béariov eats Oixasov, xal OVX WS GARO TE 
/ * , ‘ 5) ~ > / > & wv di A 
vyévog by PEATIOv EOTL TOU Olxalou. TAaUTOY Hapa OlxcIOY xaS 
3 = ” ~ \2 , 
erieines, xal ap.coiv omovdatoi dyTow xpelT Toy TO Emterxes. 
pe , es > 
3 Tosi Of THY Kmoplay OTE TO emserxts Olxasoy ev EOTIY, OD 
\ A , dé > . b] / 4 , ) , 
Th xaTa vonov 04, AAA’ eravopbwun vouluouv dimatou. 
v > a « x / 46 ~ 6 -t7 , > 
galriov 0 Ott 6 pay vonog xabcrov mac, meph eviwy 0 ody 
by tg > ~ ? A 46 ? i s Sift Xx 
olov re opbdg eimsiv xabdrov. ev olg atv avayxn piv 
> ~ / ‘ io: a: > ba \ c > } b / 
cimely xaboarov, jy olov te 62 opbmc, To wo exh +O wAgov 
~ QA / 
AapPaver 6 vowos, oOx ayvowy TO amapTavonevoy’ xual 


” ID - > be f \ \ G UG > > a 
ZoTiv oudey yTTOv ophies* TO yap apapTnua oux ey TO 


von oud ev TH vopobery GAN ev TH Duce Tob paywareg 
5 cory" cd0dg yep TOLMOT 7 Thy mpaxT@y day early, OTay 
ouy Agyy pay & vomnog xaborou, oop Ra O ext rovrov Tape 
TO xalerou, TOTE opbids = yet, 7 mapocnstmres 6 vopoberng 
xal Tpaprey ATAMS ei wy, exavopboty TO erreidbey, 0 0 xay 
6 vouobérng avrog odtwg dv elo éxet mapwyv, xal eb 7084, 
6 evopobergoey ay. O60 Olxasoyv wey gers, xal BeArtiov Tivos 
duxatou, ov Too aa niog 03 AAG TO Bud TO amnds apap 
THparos. xal Zor adTy 7 duos 4 TOU émieinotc, éra- 
vopbwp.c YOLLOU, 7 2rrcina Oia TO xaborov. rodro yap 
altiov xal Tod pa mavTa xaTa vouoy civou, Ors wep) eviwy 
7 aduverroy béobas vopoy, OoTE Vadloporos di. rod yap 
GdoplaTov aopiorog xah C xavey cory, Bomep xal Tig 
AcoPlag oixodopiig 6 poridiwog xave@y* moog yap TO THI po 
Tod AlGov peTaxivelTas xal od péver o xavev, xal To Wi- 
Signa moog Ta TpaypaTa. TI pev ov got) TO emisixéc, 





4 mept éviev 8 odx oldy re K.7.A.] 
That law is necessarily imperfect and 
unable to cope with details, Aristotle 
constantly admits, ef. Polit, m1. xi. 19: 
wep dowy etaduvatoda of vduot A€yew 
axpiBas bia 7d ph padioy elvar abddrov 


to legislate, you require a special 
decree to meet them.’ The WAgiopa, 
like the exercise of equity, was a 
remedy to make up the insufficiency 
of laws. On its special character, 
ef. ch. vii. § 1, and Eth, vt. viii. 2, see 


nepindytwv, Pol, 11. viii. 23: earéov ertas 
Guaptias Kal rév vowober@y. Pol. m1. 
XV. 9: undey mapa Toy vduor mpdrrortes, 
GAN 7) wep Gv exAclrew dvaryKaiov 
autov. 

6 dore Ynploparos Set] ‘ There are 
some cases for which it is impossible 





also Arnold on Thucyd. ut, 36. 

7 Tod yap—mpdypata] ‘ For the 
rule for what is indefinite must be 
itself indefinite, like the leaden rule 
in the Lesbian architecture—the rule 
is not fixed, but shifts itself according 
to the shape of the stone, and so does 





SX] 


‘ La / ‘4 ~ 
xal OTs Olxasov, xa Tivos BéATiov Oixaiov, d%Aov. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] V. 


141 


avery 


\ \ f > ‘ ~ 
0 éx rovTou xal 6 emisinyg Tig eoTIv* 6 yap Ty ToLOUTwWY 
\ \ 4 > eg \ 7 
TpoaipeTsxog HAL TMPARTIXOS, HALO ny AxpiPodixarog ex} To 
~ > ia , s 4 \ , , 
HEMP GAA EAATTWTIXOG, KHAITED EXYWY TOY YoLLOY Bonfey, 
\ A a , 
emseixyg Gots, xab 7 Eis adry emicixera, Oixcsocbvy Tis 


> ee eay of 
Ovuga XI ouxX ETEDR Tic ZE16. 


, ee Ye c ‘ >> ~ x A \ 5] 
[lorepov & evdeyerou sauroy adineiv 7 08, Davepov éx11 
nS if rn / 
Thy sipnévwv' Ta wiv yap tot Thy Oimalwy TA xaTa 
~ \ ‘ ~ s 4 z 
TACAY ApETHY UFO TOU voRoU TeTAYLEVaA, Oley ov xEAEUEE 
7 A / a \ 

GMOXTIVYOVEL ELUTOY 6 vOmLOG, & OF MH KEAEEL, AMoyopeEL” 

»~ a ‘ 4A / \ > , © tA 
eTh OTay mapa Tov vonov Pramry py avTibrawrTwy, Exwy 2 

> ~ ¢ X Se. ae Nh Va 4 Mie c \ > > x c ‘ 

abixel, ex@y OF 6 cidwg xal Oy xal @. 6 08 OF ooyiy EauTov 
lf c ‘ ~ ~ A A > \ / a > 9m ¢€ 
odatTwy Exwy TOTO Ope mapa Tov aphoy Adyov, O ovx 2a 6 

, ge en, a > ‘ 7 ax x a ee. ~ v 
- YOULOS adinet Ah. ANAK TiVa; 7% THY TOALY, MUTOY O 033 


c s ‘ , LNs ~ > > A € / 
EXWY YAO TATHE, AOiKETAL 0 ovbelg Exey. 


‘ \ c 
010 xal 7 


Ld ~ / > s / ~ \ / 
Tong Cyusol, xat Tig aTiia mpoTeoTs THO EauTov d1addei- 


U ~ 
pavTs wo THy Tor adixotvTs. 


4 > a + c 
ets xa 6 dIKOS, 6 [Lovoy 4 





the decree according to the nature of 
the case.” ‘Lesbian architecture’ 
appears to have been a kind of Cyclo- 
pian masonry, which may have 
remained in Lesbos from the early 
Pelasgian occupiers of the island. 
Polygon stones were used in it, which 
could not be measured by a straight 
rule, cf. Asch. Fragm. 70, 


GAN’ 6 wév Tis AéoBiov 
Koy év tpryovors éxmepavérw puOuois, 


where «ua means a waved moulding. 


XL. This chapter, which is evidently 
superfluous (ef. Vol. L., Essay L., page 
41), discusses an already settled 
question, Can a man injure himself? 
“There is no merit in the present dis- 
cussion. Amidst the feeble reason- 
ings and the repetitions which it pre- 
sents, the only points the least inte- 
resting are the view that is taken of 
suicide, §§ 2, 3, and the saying that it 
is a mere metaphor to spéak of justice 





between the higher and lower parts of 
a man. 

I ex tGv cipnuévay] i.e. ch. i. §§ 12 
—zo. The question is complicated 
by introducing a mention of universal 
justice (7a xara wacay dperhy), and 
the extraordinary assertion is made 
that ‘ whatever the law does not com- 
mand it forbids.’ We might well ask, 
Did the Athenian law command its 
citizens to breathe, toeat, to sleep, &c.? 

2—3 The suicide sins against the 
state, not against himself. This is 
proved by the fact that the state 
affixes infamy to the deed. In 
ZEschines, Ctesiph. p. 636, § 64, it is 
mentioned that the hand of a suicide 
was buried apart from himself. And 
in Plato’s Laws, rx. p. 873 c, sqq., 
regulations are laid down for the burial 
of suicides. In the words ddie? dpa. 
GAAa tiva; there is a change of 
meaning from the intransitive ad:xeiv, 
to ‘do wrong,’ to the transitive verb 
to ‘injure.’ 


142 HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] V. [Cuar. 


PNY w~ \ \ a ~ 5 »” oN ~ c r 
adix@y xab pn CAws datiros, ovx EcTiv adinjoas eauTcy. 
~ \ »” > , ov Ul ra xO iA 
TOUTO yap HAA exeivou. EOT! yap TwS 6 abixog oUTH 

‘ a € / 5 ec a »” A , 
Tovynpos WomEp Oo dEtAos, ouX WE OAnY EXwWY THY TOYYpIaY, 
a > IDA \ 7 > ci icf A a ~ > ~ 
WOT O00t KATA THUTYY Adinel? Ao yap av 7d auT@ ely 
> ~ | ~ A > , ~ \ sN7 
adrypijrbas xa m poor xeto Goes TO GUTO* TOUTO OF aoUYATOY, 
, / \ / 4 xyN 
GAN adel ev wAsionw dvayxn civas TO Oixasoy xal To adsxov, 

, A , \ “ \ 

5 ETL O& ExoUTIOY TE HAL Ex Tpoaperews xal mpoTEpoy. 6 yap 
\ A ~ > ~ 3 ~ Wee. 

O1oTs errade, XA TO AUTO GyTITOLY Ov OoxEl HOIXEIY" AUTOS 

A> ¢ / A > A a \ , A ~ + na. 

60 EMUTOY, TH HUTA Apa xal macHer xO woisi. ETE ein av 

~ \ , 4 ~ \ / 

ExovTa Gdixelobas. mpog 08 ToUTOIS, aveu THY xATa MEpOS 

bins , > , > ~ "4 > \ ‘\ 7 ~ jo 
adinnwatwy ovhelo axdrxsi, pooryeves 0 ovdele THy EauTod ov 
~ \ « ~ ~ ANS , \ c ~ 

Torywpuxel Tov EauToD Tobyoy ovds xAEWTEL TA EQUTOU. 
\ ~ 7 \ \ ‘ 

OrAws OF AVETAL TO EKUTOY GOIMElY HATA Tov Oropio pov Tov 

\ Ae A » ~ \ \ 1 ee, + 

7 mpl To Exovtiwg adixciobasr. davepoy 02 xal ors audw 
X ~ . \ o] ~ A \ Dy eee XN X A 

piv daira, xal ro ddixciobar xal To adineiv’ TO ev yap 

wy \ AN , wv > A ~ , 4 ao 

EAATTOY TO OF MWAEOY EXE ETTE TOU PETOU XA WOTED 

c \ \ , 7] ~ > 4 » > ~ > > 

UYsEbVOY [LEY EV IAT PINY, EVEXTIXOY OF EY YULYATTINY* AAA 
~ \ ~ \ ,” % ~ \ / 

Guws Ysipov TO Adimely’ TO Ev yap doixely PETA xaxlag 





4 Gua yap—&dixov] ‘For it would 
be thus possible for the same thing to 
be gained and lost by the same person; 
but this is not possible, justice and 
injustice must always take place be- 
tween more persons than one,’ cf. 
ch. iii. § 4. 

6 Baws 5& Aderare.7.A.] A verbal 
repetition of what was said above, 
ch. ix. § 9. 

7—9 The chapter ends by touch- 
ing upon two points which have an 
apparent reference to Plato, (1) the 
assertion that to injure is worse than 
to be injured, which the writer here 
qualifies with a consideration ; (2) the 
conception of justice existing between 
the different parts in the mind of an 
individual, which is here pronounced 
to be a metaphor. 

kal donep—yuuvaoriu| This sen- 
tence is parenthetical and elliptic. 
The train of thought appears to be: 
‘Injuring and being injured are both 





bad, they are both departures from 
the mean, and it is (with justice) as 
with health in medicine and good con- 
dition in training, namely, it is a 
state of balance between excess and 
defect, cf. Eth, 1. ii. 6. 

GAN’ Suws xetpoy Td aducciv] This is 
exactly the point which is urged by 
Socrates in the Gorgias of Plato (p. 
473 A, 509 Cc), and seems to his 
hearers a paradox. It is qualified 
above by the admission that being 
injured might be in its consequences 
(xara ovuBeBnxds) a worse evil than 
injuring; just as a stumble might 
cause a man’s death, and so be acci- 
dentally worse than a pleurisy. Is it 
then worse to be ruined by the cheat- 
ing of others, or to cheat some one 
of a sixpence? The writer above 
acknowledges that moral science will 
maintain the severity of its verdict, 
and say cheating is the worse (&AX’ 
oddity peace TH Téxvp K.T.A.). Of 


XT] 


HOIKQN [EYANMIQN] V. 


143 


A , A 7 ax ~ , Ve ~ Ew fe 
xal Yexrev, xal xaxlag 7 THG TeAsing xal a@ADS 7 eyyvs¢ 
> A a 3 c 4 \ > , A 2 3N ~ 
(0d yap away To ExouTloy meTa BOixlac), TOO addixeiobon 
Bd 4 A >> / > ie XN oe \ BANS ~ 
avev kaxlag xak adiniag. xal atto ey ody To ddixcio§ous 
Ga ~ \ A > lA n~ 
qtroy davaroy, xara cupPePyxds 0 ovbty xwaver prcifov 


La / 
elyak xaxOV. 


GAN’ oUdEY LEASE TH TEYVY, AAA wAsupiTiv 


/ / / / / , Sh eg 
AEyes peelS@ yvoooyv TpooTTAbe LATOC* xXQITOL YEvaiT av 


/ \ / > A \ \ 
more Garepoy xara cupPeByx0c, i mpormraloavra oie TO 


~ / ~ ~ ~ 
mecely cup.ain tro Thy ToAcuioy Ajndojvar xal awobavelv. 


xaTa petadosayv 68 xal buosrynta eoriv ovx aUTw TLOS9 
a 4 OtOT AT Dm RUS 


A , 4 ~ ~ 7 \ 
auToyv Oixasoy HAAR Tv adTod Ticiv, od may 52 dixcuoy 


ANAK TO Geomorixoy 7 TO olxovomsxay’ éy ToUTOIG yap ToS 
, SP \ f v / 6 ~ \ ‘ 
Aoyors OieoTyXE TO Aoyov Eyov Epos Tig WUY RS mpog TO 


anoyov. 


ig & 07 Bréwovuer xal doxel elvasr adinia ™p0s 


a , 4 7 \ ‘ ~ 
GNTOY, OTL ey TOUTOIG ZOTL MAT YELY TE TAPa TAS EaUTmY 
OpeGeig* Women ovy apyo 1] &pyonevw elvar moog aA- 
peSsig’ Womep oy ApyovTs xal apyousvw og & 
a7 , \ / \ X < 7 \ 
AYAK OlXOLOY Th HAL TOUTOIC, Wepk [LEY OUY Oixcocvyyg xaLh 10 


~ + ~ > n~ > ~ N ‘ \ / 
Thy aAAwY Toy WOixdy apeT oy diwcio bu Toy TpoToy 


TOUTOY, 





course being depraved in mind is 
the worst of all evils. It is not 
this (ios eiva:), but a single act 
of wrong (7d ddixeiv), that will bear 
comparison with the evil of being 
injured. 

9 Kar& perapopay 5—rovrois] 
‘Now metaphorically and by analogy 
one is capable of justice, not towards 
one’s own self, but towards certain 
parts of oneself, not every kind of 
justice, but despotic or household jus- 
tice. For in the theories alluded to 
there is a separation made between 
the reasonable and unreasonable part 
of man’s nature. Regarding this, 


people consider that one can have- 


injustice towards oneself, because these 
separate parts may be made to suffer 
something contrary to one’s proper 





tendencies; so then, like ruler and 
ruled, they have a sort of justice with 
each other.’ 

éy tovros yap tots Adéyos] It can 
hardly be doubted that there is a re- 
ference here to Plato, Repub. p. 441 
A, 443 D, 432 4, &c. However, the 
reference may be second hand, having 
been first made by Aristotle. To deny 
the appropriateness of the term ‘jus- 
tice’ to express a harmony between 
the different parts of man’s nature 
is unlike the point of view taken Eth. 
Ix. ¢. iv., where the friendship which 
the good man has with himself is 
described at length. Eudemus, how- 
ever, was much busied with problems 
as to the unity of the will, and pro- 
bably advanced to some extent the 
Peripatetic psychology. 


PLAN OF BOOK VL. 


\URNING to the contents of this Sixth Book, we see at once that 
it includes two subjects, and that the intermixture of these 
two has given rise to some little confusion. The questions are 
(1) What is the moral standard? (2) What are the intellectual 
aperal ? 

Commencing with the former question, the writer goes off into 
the latter. And thus Wisdom (gpdvnac) is treated of at some 
length as a perfection of the moral intellect, but is hardly touched 
upon with regard to its operation as the moral standard. 

After the two above-mentioned questions have been proposed, 
without any statement of their connexion, the discussion of the 
intellectual &perai commences by a division of the reason into 
scientific and calculative. Ch. I. 

Truth ‘is the object of both, but truth is divided into practical 
and speculative. The former enters into and becomes an element 
in the decisions of the will. Ch. I. 

Truth of whatever kind is attained by only five organs of the 
mind—Science, Art, Wisdom, Reason, and Philosophy, These 
then are severally discussed; and Philosophy, after being treated 
independently, has Wisdom brought in again in contrast to 
itself. Ch. IIL—VIL. | 

The relation of Wisdom to Economy and Politics is then — 
discussed. Ch. VIII. 

Prudence (eBovAéa), Apprehension (cvveore), and Considerateness 
(yv@pn), as being component elements of Wisdom, are severally 
treated of, and some remarks are added on the natural and 
intuitive character of these practical qualities. Ch. IX.—XI. 

The book ends by the statement and solution of difficulties with 


eT 


PLAN OF BOOK VI. 145 


regard to Wisdom and Philosophy, their respective use, and their 
relation to each other in point of superiority. 

With regard to the use of Wisdom some important though 
not very clear remarks are made on its inseparable connexion 
with Virtue. Though inseparable, it is not, however, identical 
with Virtue, as Socrates wrongly asserted. In relation to 
Philosophy, Wisdom is the means, while Philosophy is the 
end. Ch. XIJ.—XIII. 

The upshot of the book, then, is, that it treats of the intellectual 
aperai. These are two—not five, as some would say, reckoning as 
such the five organs of truth, nor again an indefinite number, as 
Aristotle would seem to say, admitting ‘ Apprehension,’ &c. (Zth. I. 
xiii. 20); but two essentially, Philosophy and Wisdom. These are 
contrasted with each other, but in such a way that Wisdom, 
though the least excellent, is brought into prominence, and is the 
real theme of the book. With all the discrepancies of statement 
which we have already alluded to (Vol. I. Essay I. p. 40), 
Wisdom comes out in its general outlines as the perfection of the 
practical reason combined with the will; as inseparable, if dis- 
tinguishable, from Virtue itself. The picture of this quality and 
of its growth in the mind is made the occasion of many interesting 
remarks; but the question how the mind acts in determining the 
mean, and what is the nature of the moral standard, is left still 
unanswered. 


VOL, Il. U 


HOIKQOQN [EYTAHMIQN] VI. 


*TLMIIEI 3 
peooy 
ZAAcwv, TO 
~ / 
TOUTO O1eAwLEY. 


TUYXAVoLEy MpoTEpov eipyxores OTs Osi To 
aipeiobas xak pm THy tmrepRorny pyre Thy 
0: péoov eorly ws 6 Adyog 6 dpbag AéEyel, 
ty maoais yap Taig eipnpévarg 2Feo4, 


r > ho ® ~ ” 4 \ A a 
xabamep xal ext thy aAAwY, EoTI Tig OxOmOS Mpos OV 
> , c X ij ” > , € “exe 
aToPAEerwy 6 TOY AoYoy Eywy EmiTeiver xO avInoY, xo TIS 





I. This chapter states, though some- 
what indefinitely, the question which 
is to be answered in the ensuing book. 
Referring back to a previous mention 
of ‘the mean,’ it proposes now to 
discuss ‘ the right law’ by which the 
mean is determined. For only to 
know that action must be ‘in the 
mean, and according to the right 
law,’ is a mere blank formula which 
requires filling up (4An@is wév, od8ey St 
capes). What then is the right 
law, and what is the standard of it 
(tls 7° early 6 dp0ds Adyos Kal TovTov 
tls bpos)? In answering this question, 
the procedure must be to discuss the 
most perfect developments of the 
intellectual faculties, for by so doing 
we shall learn the proper function of 
each (Anmwréoy tp’ Exatépov rodtwy tls 7 
Bearlorn eis: abrn yap aperh Exarépou, 
h 8 aperr mpds 7d &pyov 7d oixeiov), As 
the inner nature of man was before 
divided into two parts, the rational 
and irrational, so we may now sub- 
divide the rational part into two 
elements, the scientific and the cal- 





culative, in accordance with the two 
classes of objects which are presented 
to the mind, and which we may con- 
clude are dealt with by separate 
faculties, namely, the permanent, 
which is dealt with by the scientific 
element in us, and the contingent, 
which is the object of calculation or 
deliberation. 

1 éwel Be tuyxdvouey mpdrepov 
eipnxdéres|] The reference is to Eth. 
Eud. u.v. 1: éra 8 dwrdnevras dperh 
elvar ] ToLvTH Elis ap” Hs mpaxricol 
Tay Bedrticrwy Ka Kal ty upiora 
didkewras wept 7d BéATiCToy, BéATLOTOY 
dt Kat Upirrov 7d Kara Tov dpbdy Adyor, 
tovTo © €or) 7d péoov dmepBodts Kad 
CrAclpews Tis mpds uas K.T.A. 

év rdous yap—Adyov] ‘ For in all 
the states of mind which we have 
described, as also in all others, there 
is a certain mark to which he who is 
in possession of ‘the law’ (6 rédv 


‘Adyov &xwv) looks, and tightens or 


relaxes (the strings) accordingly, and 
there is a certain standard of those 
mean states which we say are between 


. 
| 
. 
) 





Cuap. I.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 147 


éotly bp0g Thy pecoTiTwy, ag peTaEd dapev eivar rig 
c ~ \ ~ > ¢ wv A \ > \ 
imepRoarrcs xal rig EArAsibews, otcag xara Tov opboy 


Agyoy. 


gore 02 TO wey eireiv oUTWS aAnfts pév, ovdey OF 


~ v / Qr@ 
cubic’ xal yap ev Taig aAAaIG Eriersiotc, Tepl ooas 
> \ > 7, ~ > > X \ > ~ a »” / 
EOTIY ETIOTHLY, TOUT aarnbes [eev El@ely, OTL OUTE TWAEIO 
~ ~ ~ , \ 
ours cAaT TM det woveiy avd? Zabumeiv, AAAA TH peta xa 
e c > A , ~ Xv , » 4 a AN a 
we 6 opbag Adyog* Toro OF povev Eywy ay tig ovbiy ay 
> 7 , ~ Nn ~ / A A ~ 
eldein wAgov, oloy woia dei mpordépeobas mpig TO cHpa, 





excess and deficiency, being in accor- 
dance with the right law.’ *Emrrelver 
kal dyinow is a metaphor from tuning 
the strings of a lyre. Cf. Plato, 
ysis, p. 209 B: kal éreiddy, ds 
eyguat, thy Adpay AdBys, od diakw- 
Avovet ce otf 6 rarhp of 7H whTnp 
emreivat te Kal aveiver hy By BovAn 
tay xopiav. Phedo, p. 98 c: nal ra 
Bev do7a orl oreped, Kal Siapuas zx 
xwpls am GAAHAwy, Ta Bt vetpa ofa 
emreiverOou Kat avier@u, This meta- 
phor is not quite in aecordance with 
that other metaphor of ‘looking to 
the mark,’ but in fact the term 
cxoréds seems to have become so 


regular a formula with Eudemus as 


to have lost its metaphorical asso- 
ciation. By Aristotle cxorés was 
used as a pure metaphor, the appli- 
cation of which was borrowed from 
Plato (cf. Eth. 1. ii. 2, note). But in 
the writing of Eudemus it seems used 
as ascientific term equivalent to 
téros; ef. Eth. Eud. 1. x. 20: ene 
St Bovrcdera Get 6 Bovrcudpevos Evence 
twos, Kat éotl cxomds tis del TE 
BovAcvopéve mpds dy okore Td cum- 
pépov, wept mev tov TéAous ovdels 
Bovaederar, Jb. ut. xi. 2: Aéyouev Se 
mpoamophoavres, “Eats yap tov piv 
okondy dpOby eivat, év St Trois pds toy 
cromdy Siapaptdvey’ tore St Tov pev 
oKomdy juapticOa, Ta dt mpds exeivoy 
mepalvovra, opbas Exe, Kal pndérepov. 
In like manner the use of dpos by 
Eudemus is quite different from 





anything that we find in Aristotle, 
and is no doubt an innovation. Cf. 
Eth. Eud. w. v. 8 (which is especially 
referred to in the present passage), 
tls © & dp0ds Adyos kal mpds riva Set 
Spov a&moBAewovtas A€yew 7d pécor, 
Sorepov émoxenréoy. Ib. vit. iii. 12: 
de? twa elvar Bpov Kal ris Etews Kal 
tis aipécews kad rept puyns xpnudrov 
TAnGous Kal GArydtnros Kal Tov 
ebruxnudtoy, Ib, vit. iii. 15 (quoted 
Vol. I. p. 23). 

2 tor: dt—cagés] ‘Now to say 
this is to say what is true enough,” 
but not explicit This same expres- 
sion, with the same illustration of the 
medical art, is repeated Eth. Eud. 
Vil. iii; 13: & pty trois mpérepoy 
eréxOn Td ws 6 Adyos* TodTO F eorly 
aonep by ef tis ev Tois wept Thy Tpopiy 
elreey &s 7 iarpixh Kad 6 Adyos rabrns. 
tTooTo & GAnbés per, od cadés 5€. 
Cf. Ib. 1. vi. 2: €« yap Tey GAnOads pev 
Aeyouévwv od} capas St xpoiodow zora 
kai rd capGs. Throughout the Hude- 
mian Ethics one can trace an inclina- 
tion to make small corrections and 
improvements upon Aristotle. Cf. 
the notes on Z£th. m. viii. 6 and 


_ V. vil. 7. In the present place there 


is an apparent protest against the 
indefiniteness and relativity of Ari- 
stotle’s moral theory of ‘the mean’ 
and ‘the law.? Eudemus does not 
seem (according to the statement here) 
content to give greater explicitness to 
the idea of the ‘law’ by the develop- 


u 2 


v 


148 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Car. 


‘ , A ae , 
el rig elreisy OTL OOM 7 laTpiny xerevEer xal Wo 6 TAUTHY 


3 EY wy. 


Oi Set xal meph rag Tig Wuyxiis EGeg py povov 


arnbts eivasr Totr’ elpnuévov, AAAA xal dsopiopévoy Tig T 
Zotly 6 opbds Adyog xal rovrou Tig dpos. 
4 Tao 04 rig Wuyig aperag diercuevor Tag piv civas TOD 


nooug Zbapev tag BF Tig dravolas. 


reph py ouy Tay 


HOindy duernrvdapev, meph 08 THv Aoumdv, wepl Wuyiis 


~ a 
5 FpwToy eimovTec, Afywpey oUTWS. 


m™porepov ped ouv ersyOy 


~ ~ / »” \ ef > 

Ov elves wéon THg Wuxis, TO Te Adyov Exov xal Td AAoyoy 
~ ~ ‘4 / 

viv O& mepl ro Adyow Eyovrog Tov aUTOY Tpdmroy O1aip|TEoY. 
Ave , , \ 4 7 a X a ~ 

xal oroxeicbw dbo To Aoyoy eXovraL, Ev pty @ bewpotasy 

~ ~ ¢ c 
TH TOKITA Thy OyTwWY bowy ai apyal Ly EvdeyorTa AARWS 





ment of the idea of the wise man 
who is its impersonation. But he asks 
(separating oxorés and 8pos from 
the Adyos) ‘What is the mark to 
which one possessing the law must 
look?” What is the standard of the 
law? In reality these questions get no 
answer. They only cloud the subject 
by introducing a confusion of formule. 

4 Tas pey elvar Tod HOovs Epaper] 
Cf. Eth. Eud. mu. i. 18: Gperfjs 8 
en Svo0, H wey HOH SF Bravonrich * 
eraivovpev yap ob pdvoy Tovs Sixaious, 
GAAG Kal ods kal obs 
copods. 

5 mpdrepov pev ody eréxOn 50’ 
eivat] Cf. Eth. Eud. 0.1.15: érel ® 
avOpwrlyny apethy Cnroduer, broKxelaOw 
500 mépn Wuxijs Ta Adyou meTéxovTa, 
ov Toy adtov BE tpdrov peréxey Adyou 
Gupw, GAAG Td pev TE emirdrrew 7d 
de 7G welOerOa Kal axovew mepuKévat* 
ei 5€ Tt early érépws tdoyor, apela bw 
tTovTo To wdpiov, It will be seen that 
in the passage quoted Eudemus did 
not exactly divide man’s nature into 
two parts, ‘rational and irrational,’ 
but said that these are ‘two parts par- 
taking of reason’ in different ways. 
Thus he gave a compressed summary of 
the results of Aristotle’s discussion in 


ouverovs 





Eth.t. ch. xiii. But here he speaks as 
if he had repeated verbatim the popular 
division into rational and irrational 
which was provisionally aecepted by 
Aristotle. Thus, by a slip of the 
memory, he confuses his own state- 
ment with Aristotle’s. 

kal droxelc@w—abrois] ‘And let 
us suppose that the parts possessing 
reason are two, one by which we 
apprehend such existences as depend 
on necessary principles, and one by 
which we apprehend contingent 
matter, for to objects differing in 
genus there must be different mem- 
bers of the mind severally adapted, 
if it be true that these members 
obtain their knowledge by reason of a 
certain resemblance to and affinity 
with the object of knowledge.’ We 
have.here a division of the mind in 
accordance with a division of the ob- 
jects of which the mind is cognizant. 
And as a justification of this we have 
the assumption that knowledge implies 
a resemblance and affinity between 
object and subject. With regard to 
this, Aristotle (De Animé, 1. ii. 10) 
says that ‘those philosophers who 
wished to account for knowledge and 
perception identified the yy with 


1] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


A> NN OS 
EXety, &y O€ wo 


149 


A > 5 , . \ ». \ ~ , 
TH EVOEYOMEYA Toog YAR TH TW EVEL 


is \ ~ ~ ~ , 4 ~ , ‘ ‘ 
cay te xab TWY Tas Woxiis id saat . shih ic TWH fort TO mw pos 
c 

sxatepoy meduxos, elrep xal omooryra tive xal oixess- 


~ > ~ 
TyTa y yy@org brapyer avroic. 


/ 
Acyécbw 3: rourwy 756 


pav émiorypovixnoy To 0 AoyioTixoy’ To yap Bovrsver Sas 
xak royiSeobas radrov, ovbelg 02 Povrcvera mepk Ty [Ly 





the principles of things, because like 
is known by like. “Ooo & ém) 7d 
ywooxew Kal 7d aicOdver Oa TGV byTwY 
(GaroGAgrovow), obra: BE A€youot Thy 
Wuxhy Tas apxds, of uev wAclous Towitv- 
tes, of 5& play rabrny, Sowep “Eure- 
donAjs mev ex Tay oroxelwy mdvTwr, 
eivas 5 Kal Exacroy Wuxhy Tobrwy, 
Aéyor oiirw 
yaln wey yap yalav émérapev, Bats F 
FBep, 
aidépt & aidépa Stay, arap mupt wip 
aidnror, 
oropyh 5& oropyhy, veixos 5é re velxei 
Avyp@. 
tov abroy 5& tpdmrov Kad TlAdtwyv ev TG 
Tale thy Wxhy ek Tay cro xelov 
Tot ywooKecOa yap TE Spolp Td 
Buoy, Ta St mpdypata ex Tay apxay 
elva, Sir W. Hamilton says (Dis- 
cussions on Philosophy, p. 60): ‘Some 
philosophers (as Anaxagoras, Hera- 
clitus, Alemzon) maintained that 
knowledge implied even a contrariety 
of subject and object. But since the 
time of Empedocles, no opinion has 
been more universally admitted than 
that the relation of knowledge inferred 
the analogy of existence. This analogy 
may be supposed in two potences. 
What knows and what is known are 
either, first, similar, or second, the 
same; and if the general principle 
be true, the latter is the more philo- 
sophical.’ The fact is, that every act 
of knowledge is a unity of contra- 
dictions. It would be absurd to deny 
that the subject is contrary to the 
object, and it would be equally 





absurd to deny that the subject is the 
same as the object. As Empedocles 
says, the mind only knows fire by 
being fire, but, on the other hand, if, 
in knowing fire, the mind only were 
fire, and were not contrary to fire, 
then to know fire would only be to 
add fire to fire. But it is gua ‘know- 
ing’ that the mind is contrary to its 
object, not gua knowing any par- 
ticular object. Thus from the diver- 
sity of objects we are justified in con- 
cluding a diversity in the mind. But 
we must be sure that objects are 
really different from one another in 
genus (TG yéver Erepa), before we con- 
clude the existence of different parts, 
faculties, or elements corresponding to 
them, else we may attribute to diffe- 
rent principles in the mind phenomena 
that were only modifications of each 
other, and not by any means implying 
a diversity of principle. 

6 AeyérOw 5 — Exovros] ‘ Of these 
let one be called the ‘ scientific,’ the 
other the ‘ calculative’ part, for deli- 
berating and calculating are the same, 
and no one deliberates about neces- 
sary matter. The calculative part, 
then, is one division of the rational.’ 
The psychology here is an advance in 
dogmatic clearness of statement be- 
yond what we find in the writings of 
Aristotle. The terms 7d émornpovi- 
xév and 7d Aoyiorixdy are not opposed 
to each other in the De Animd. Aoy- 
ortxéy has not there taken the definite 
meaning which it wears in the present 
book. Rather it is used in a general 


150 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Cuap. 


o \ we or 
WOTE TO AoyloTlxoy EOTIY EV TL 


> + 

eEvde youevny LAAWS eye. 
7 

Anmwréov ap Exarépov ToUTwY 


7 [Epos TOU Agyov exovTos. 


tig y Bsatiorn eS1g° 


airy yap apery éxarépov, 7 


dpeth, mpog Td Epyov TO oixeiov. 
/ > ° \ > ~ ~ 4 , , en 
2 pla 0 éorly ev ri Wye Ta xdpia meafews x 





sense to denote ‘rational.’ Thus in 
asking how the Wux7 is to be divided, 
Aristotle says (De An. mm. ix. 2): Exe 
5° aroplay ebOds mas Te de? pdpia Aéyew 
Ths Wxis Ka wéoa, Tpdmov ydp tia 
umepa dalvera, nal ob udvov & Twes 
Aéyoust Sioplfovres, Aoyirikdy Kal 
OuuiKdy Kad émOuunridy (i.e. Plato, Re- 
pub. pp. 436—441), of 5& 7d Ad-yor Exov 
Kal 7d BAaoyov. Cf. Ib, ut ix. 5: & 
TG Aoyioring@ yap } BobAnors *yiveras. 
Ib, um. x. 10: gavracia Bt aca 7 
Aoyiorixyn 7H aicOnrich. Cf. Topics, 
v. v. 4, where in stating the various 
ways in which the logical property 
may be predicated of a substance, it is 
suid, } GmAG@s Kabdrep (gov Td Civ, I 
Kat’ &AXAo, Kabdmep Wuxis TO ppdvipor, 
} &s 7d mp@rov, Kabdmep AoyorTUKOD Td 
ppdvipov (ppdvimov and Acyiorrixdy 
being here both used most probably 
in a general sense for ‘wisdom’ and 
‘reason’). Again, 7d émornuovxdy is 
used, not as here opposed to 72 Aoyior., 
but generally. De Anim, U1. xi. 3: 
7d & emornuovikdy ob KivetTat GAAG 
péver, However, the distinction here 
given is already prepared in the De 
Anima, and is even stated (though 
less dogmatically) in a place which 
was probably borrowed by the present 
writer. Jb. 11. x. 2: vods 8 6 vend 
tov AoyiCouevos Kal & mpaxrinds: dia- 
péper St Tod Oewpyricod Te TEAL. 
ovbels 5& Bovrcdera, x. T. A.| Cf. 
Eth, Eud, 1. x. 9: mept dv oddels 
iv odd eyxeiphoee BovdreberOar pur) 
ayvody, Tleptay & évdéxera: wn pdvov 
To elvar kal uh, GAAA Kal rd Bovdrcd- 
cac0a tots avOpamos. We before 





observed (cf. Eth. 11. iii. 3, note) 
that Aristotle, in the parallel passage, 
did not use the terms 7a évBexdueva 
and rd pr) evdexdueva. To combine 
logical with psychological formule is 
the characteristic of Eudemus, 


II. The last chapter having 
divided the reason into scientific and 
calculative, the present chapter pro- 
ceeds to bridge over the interval 
between the intellect and moral 
action. This is done by assuming — 
three principles in man—sensation, 
reason, and desire. Sensation merges 
into the other two, and then it is 
shown that in purpose, the cause of 
action, there is the meeting point of 
desire and reason, not of the pure or 
speculative reason (answering to the 
‘scientific part’ of the last chapter), 
but the practical reason aiming at an 
end (which answers to the ‘caleu- 
lative part’ in the former division). 
Thus there are two kinds of truth, 
one pure, the other having a relation 
to the will, and ‘agreeing with right 
desire.’ This distinction is a great 
step towards answering the question 
with which the present book is con- 


cerned, Truth having been divided —— 


into pure and practical, it only re- 
mains to see the forms under which 
the mind deals with these two kinds, 
and the highest developments of the 
mind will be disclosed, arranged 
under a twofold head. 

1 tpla & éorrty] Cf. Ar. De Anima, 
ul. X. 1: palvera 5€ ye Sto Taira 
kwoovta, 7 bpekis h vots, ef ris Thy 


LIL] 


aarnfelac, alcbyors vod opeSic. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


151 


rf , € 
TouTwy 8 xy alobyoic2 


oudepicis apy moakzews’ OnAov 02 Tw Ta Oypia aloOyow pty 


” ‘ , DS \ ~ 
EXE, Tpaeews = fy xXObymMvEty, 


oo > 9 5) y 
EoTi O Om@Eep EY dravola. 


xatadacic xal arodacig, Totir’ ev oper Oiwkig xal duy7: 
a 73 ne, ‘ > % & rf epr i. 

Bor emesdy 7 Woiny apern 261g mpoouperiny, 7 O8 mpoaipeois 
opeEts PovAcutixy, det did Tatra Tov Te Adyov aayoy clvou 
nak Thy opeEww apbriy, elrep 7 mpoaiperic omovdaia, xal Ta 


> ‘\ A X\ , \ d2 5 , 
auTa Tov piv davas tyy OF drwxesy. 
Oidvoin xal 4 aavfea mpoaxtixy. 


adTy pay ou 7% 
Tig 08 Bewpyrtixiigs 3 


A \ ~ \ ~ > ~ 
Siavolas xal py mpaxTintg pends wontinijs To ed xal xaxide 
TaArnses cor xal Yetidog* TotiTe yap ears mayTos diavoyri- 
~ ow ~ ~ ~ 
xod Epyov, Tod OF mpaxTixod xal diavontixod 7 anjdere 


sporsyens eXoura. TH epee TH phi. 


mpabecs pv otv4 


ap v4) Tpoaipzects, 4, 7 xlynois AAW oux ov 2yexat, 7 poo 





pavractay riWeln Gs vénolyTwa’.... 
tiupw apa tadra KwytiKd Kata Térov, 
voos kal dpetis. Nods 5 6 Evexd Tov 
Aoy(Suevos Kal 6 mpaxtiucds: Siapépe 
dt Tod Oewpntixod TE TEAC... . . Kal 
h daytacia dt Gray «wh ob Kwet Hvev 
épétews. It is highly probable that 
Eudemus had this passage before his 
eyes. The only alteration he has 
made is to substitute aic@nois for 
pavracia, and to speak of the deter- 
minators of truth and action as three, 
with one merged in the other two, in- 
stead of calling them two with a third 
implied. Tovtwy ® 7 alcOnots k.7.A. 
answers to xa) 4) paytacla K.T.A. 

2 SHAdov 5t TG ra Onpta — mpdtews 
ph Kowwveiy| The definite meaning of 
mpdrtew and mpagis to denote ‘ moral 
action’ appears perhaps rather more 
strongly in Eudemus than in Aristotle. 


Cf. Eth. Eud. w. vi. 2: mpds 88 robras © 


3 yf &vOpwros Kal mpdtewy twdy eorw 
apxh pdvoy trav (gwv’ Tay yap tAAwy 
ovbey etroimey by mparrew. Ib. 1. viii. 
6: ov yap papevy 7d madlov mpdrreiy, 
ovde 7d Anptov, aArN’ Bray Hin Gia Ao- 
yirpov mpdrrovra. 





brep év diavolg «.7.A.] All this is a 
compressed result of Aristotle’s dis- 
cussions, De Animd, ut. x.—xi. 

éredh 7 HIKH aperh] Cf. Eth. Bud. 
Il. X. 28: avdynn tolvuv—riy aperhy 
civar thy 7Ouwhy Ekiv mpoaperuchy 
peodrntos Tis mpos quas ev Hdéor nad 
Aumnpots. 

h 8& mpoalpeois] Cf. Eth. Eud. u. 
X. 14: dijAov St1 | mpoalpecis wey dot 
dpetis Tay ep aitg@ BovAcurich. 

tév TE Adyov GAnOR elvar Kad ee 
dpetw dpiv] ‘The decision of the 
reason must be true, and the desire 
must be right.’ The terminology 
here used is rather more accurate 
than that of Aristotle, De An. m1. x. 
4: vous mév oby Tas dpOds Upetis BE Kal 
gpayracta Kad dp0h Kad odk dp0h. CF. 
Eth, m. ii. 13, where it is said that 
6p0ds is the proper epithet for purpose 
(¢.¢. as a function of the will), aanéfs 
for the functions of the intellect. 

4—5 mpdtews uty oby—kvOpwros| 
‘Now of moral action purpose is the 
cause (I mean the efficient cause, not 
the final), and the efficient cause of 
purpose is desire, and that reason 


152 HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VI. [Cuar. 


r ee 4 / 


f bY 4 g x / < Out 5, pa ed 
oioews 08 OpsEig xal AOyog 6 Evexa Tivog’ O10 OUT aveD 
~ V9 / wy sw > “ > \ A c / 
vou xal diavolag odT avev ibixig early ESews 7 mpoalperig* 
> \ \ wv d , \ 
eumpagia yup xak To evavrloy ev mpaSer avev dravolag xal 
y > + , Pee AN ~ > > «eg / 
siboug ox ZoTiv. Oravoia O adry ovbey xivel, AAA 2 Evexa 
7 icf \ \ ~ nw ” 
Tov xal mpaxTixy’ adTy yap xal Tig womTinng apyer* 
s4 A "~ ~ c ~ \ > U =: ~ > h 4 
EVEXA YAO TOU TOLL TAS O TWOMOY, XAL OU TEADS ATAWS AAAK 
\ \ , ‘\ \ / 
mpos Th xal TIVOS TO TOINTOY. GAAAR TO mpaxTdv* 7 yap 
> / , c : eee 7 \ a > A ~ 
cumpakia Térog, 7 0 dpe&ig Toro’ O10 7 GpexTixdg vous 
xx 4 7 \ , A 
7 mpoalperig 7% OpeSig dtavoynriny, xal y% TomuTy apyy 


6 aviowmros. 


> wv \ \ AN ‘ 
oux tors O& mpoasperov ovbey yeyoves, olov 





which takes cognisance of an end. 
Hence purpose can neither be sepa- 
rated from intellect and thought, nor 
from a particular state of the moral 
nature. Well-doing and its contrary 
imply thought and moral character. 
Now thought by itself moves nothing, 
only thought aiming at an end, that 
is, practical thought. This controls 
the productive thought as well, since 
he that produces, produces for the sake 
of some end, and the thing produced is 
not an end in and for itself, but is only 
an end relatively and belongs to some- 
thing. But the thing done is an End- 
in-itself, since well-doing is an. end, 
and this is what we desire. Hence 
purpose may be defined as desiring 
reason, or as rational desire, and such 
a principle as this is man.’ We have 
here a resumé of Aristotle’s views in 
De Animé, l.c. Another division of 
the intellect, however, is introduced, 
that into practical, productive, and 
speculative, which is to be found im- 
plied in £th. 1. i. 1, and is stated Me- 
taphys. V.i. §: bore ei waco Sidvown } 
TPAKTLK7 2) ToNTLK?) 7) OewpynTiKy K.T.A, 
It is here shown that the productive 
faculties of man are subordinate to 
the practical thought, since no artist 
produces anything purely and solely 
for its own sake; however much he 
may seem to do so, still his art as a 





part of his life falls under the control 
of his will and reason. 

Sidvora & abt) obey Kiet, GAN F 
€vexd tov] There is a slight confusion 
here. Aristotle had said (De An. m1. 
ix. Io, 1. x. 2, m1. x, 4), that the 
reason dealing with ends differed from 
the speculative reason, that reason 
neither speculative nor practical was 
the moving cause of action (m1. ix. 10: 
GAAG why ovdeE Td AopoTiKdy Kad 6 Ka- 
Aatyevos vos éotly 6 kway 6 wey yap 
Oewpyntixds ovOtv voet mpaxrdv—ovd 
Srav Oewph +t Towdrov K. 7. A.), and 
that intellect could not moye any- 
thing without desire conjoined (m1. x. 
4: viv 5&6 pev voids ob palvera Kwav 
dvev dpétews), but Eudemus mixes up 
these points. He said that ‘ thought 
by itself moves nothing, and then as 
if in opposition to thought by itself 
he puts ‘but practical thought does.’ 
He should have said ‘ practical thought 
plus desire.’ Tal 

xal mpaxtikh| Kal is used here 
denoting identity. Cf. Eth, v. vi. 4: 
7) GmaGs Sixaov Kal 7rd wodwrimdy 
dixuov, Ar. De An. ut. x. 2: vods 886 
€verd tov Aoy:Cduevus kal 6 mpaxtinds, 

edmpatia] On the ambiguity of this 
term, cf. Eth. 1. iv. 2, note. 

6 obk tort Be mpomperdy ovbev 
yeyovés| ‘Now nothing that is past is 
ever the object of purpose.’ This 


re ee ee 


I.—II1.] HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VI. 153 


ovbeig mpocspeiras “LAsov merropinxévas* oud? yap Pov- 
AgveTas mepl rod yeyovorog AAR wepl TOU Ecopévov xal 
° , 4 \ 4 > > , ‘ / ‘ 
2vdeyoutvou, To 08 yeyovlg obx evdéyeras wy yeverdas~ did 
6pbas "Ayabay 

povov yap abrov «cat Bede orepicoxerat, 

ayévnra Touiv doo’ ay  Texpaypéva. 

3 , , X ~ | ap 4 Ree % 
apdorépwy O7 ray vontixiy popiwy aryfea rd Epyoy. 
f a > LA 2& XD; 4e ? c , oe 
xa’ dg otv pariota BSeig aAnfevoes ExaTepov, avras 

apeTat audoiy. 

"ApEdpevor ody avwlev weph avt@y marw rAEywper. 3 
Zora Oy vig aAyGeder i Wuxy TH xaTadavas 7 arodavas, 
mivre Toy apibuove tatira 8 tosh riyvy emioryey 


—--  ——_—* 





assertion, with the quotation from 
Agathon to illustrate it, appears cer- 
tainly to be a digression. The nature 
of purpose had been quite sufficiently 
explained already, especially in refe- 
rence to the present context. How- 
ever, to exclude the past, and circum- 
stances which though contingent 
have become historical, from the 
sphere of deliberation, is an addition 
to Aristotle’s list of exclusions (Eth. 
It. iii. I—10), and on this account 
probably Eudemus was glad to intro- 
duce the above remarks. 


III. This chapter proposes to con- 
sider the two parts of the reason 
(scientific and caleulative) from a 
fresh point of view (&ptduevor—ardrw). 
It accordingly gives a list of five 
modes under which the mind attains 
truth; namely, art, science, wisdom, 
philosophy, and reason. It then pro- 
ceeds to give some account of science. 
This account will be found to be a 
mere cento of remarks from the logical 
writings of Aristotle. The chief 
points specified are as follows. 
Seience deals only with necessary 
matter. It is demonstrative, starting 
from truths already known, and pro- 

VOL. Il. 





ceeding by means of induction or 
syllogism. Its premises are obtained 
by induction, but they must be more 
certain than the conclusion, else the 
knowledge of the conclusion will be 
not scientific, but merely accidental. 

I wévyre toy GpiOudv] It seems in 
the highest degree probable that this” 
list was suggested by a passage in Ari- 
stotle’s Post. Analytics (1. xxxiii. 8), 
where, after a discussion on the diffe- 
rence between science and opinion, it 
is said: 7a 5¢ Aorma ws Set Siavetuce 
éxt re diavolas kal vod Kal emorhuns 
na réxvns kal ppovncews Kal codias, 
7a wey pvots Ta 5e HAOrxijs Cewplas 
uaGAAov early. It will be observed 
that Aristotle in this passage does not 
propose six terms to be distinguished 
from each other, but three pairs of 
terms which are to be separately dis- 
cussed, part of them (ze. probably 
the two first pairs) by psychology 


. (Pvouns Sewpias), and part of them 


(i.e. codia and ¢péynots) by ethics. 
Eudemus, taking up the whole list, 
has omitted d:dyvo, which he does 
not distinguish from voids, and has 
given the rest as an exhaustive © 
division of the modes by which the 
mind apprehends trath. By so doing 


w 


154 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. [ Cuap, 


dpovyoig cobia votlgs troaybe: yao nal dofy evdeyera 
diavevderbar. ersotipyn pev ovv tl eortiv, evreibev 
f, > wa). SS ~ \ ‘\ > ~ n~ 
davepov, eb Set axpiPoroysiobas xal py axorov¥eiv Taig 
opouryow. mavTes yap tmonapPavouev, 6 émiorapeda,, 
\ > , v, »” ™ \ y zy) , ”, 
a) evdeyver Gan ahAWS EYE’ TH EVOEYOMEVA AAAWS, 


a »” ~ ~ U4 , 77 x» 7 
Tay Ew Tov Gewpely yévyras, Aavoaver ei 2oTW 7 [2% 
avayung apa eotl To ExsoTyroy. 


& 


Aidiov dpa Ta yap e& 


> / ” c nw , > A. A > SAD > / 
avayung OvTa aTAw@s TavTa aldia, THD aidie, AyevyTA 


xal adbapra. 
xal To emioryntoy payor. 


»” \ ~ > 4 ~ = 
ers Oibaxty TaTa exioTipy Ooxel elves, 
ex Tpoyivwoxopevwy OF TATE 





he has made a cross division, for 
copia does not stand apart from voids 
and émorhun, but includes them, and 
surely so complex an idea as ‘philo- 
sophy’ ought not to be placed on the 
same leyel with the intuitions of the 
reason, the simplest and deepest 
forms of the mind. In ch. vi. § 2, 
however, the logical exhaustiveness of 


the division is made the only ground - 


for proving that the principles of 
science are apprehended by reason. 

broahye yap—diapevderOu] ‘For 
conception and opinion may be false.’ 
This is suggested probably by Ar. 
Post. Anal. u. xix. 7: "Emel 5 trav 
rept thy didvoiay Ekewy, ais GAndevouer, 
ai piv del dAndeis ciciv, af dé emidéxov- 
Tat Td Wevdos, oloy ddta Kal Aoyiopds, 
dA7nOn F del emaorhun Kad vovs, K.T.A. 
In Ar, De. An. m1. iii. 7, bwdAnis 
is used in so general a sense for the 
apprehensions of the mind as to in- 
clude émorhun, Séga, and pévnas. 
If opposed (as here) to scientific cer- 
tainty, it comes to very much the 
same as dda, 

2 émorhun pev—emorntdéy] ‘Now 
what science is, will be clear from the 
following considerations, if we wish 
to speak exactly and not be misled by 
resemblances. We all conceive that 
what we know is necessarily what it 
is—if it be so only contingently, as 





soon as it is out of our ken, we can- 
not tell whether it be so or not. 
Therefore the object of science is 
necessary matter.’ 

tais dpodrnow)] i.e. the yarious 
analogical and inaccurate uses of the 
word ‘knowledge. *Emorfuy is to 
be defined amA@s and not Ka? 
duodrnta, cf. Eth, v. vi. 4. The 
present passage is taken from Post. 
And. 1 ii. 1: ’Exloracbat 5 oiduee? 
exaorov amvA@s—8ray thy 7 airiav 
oidpeba yiwéonew BC hy Td mparypd 
éotw, Sri éxelvov aitta éorl, Kab pa) 
evdéxerOa toi’ GAdws Exew.—doTe 
0b amd@s eotly émaorhun, ToiT adbva- 
tov &AAws Exe, ; 

téw Tod Oewpeiv] ‘ Out of the reach 
of our observation.’ @ewp. here re- 
tains more of its original sense of 
‘seeing’ than generally ; ef. e.g. ch. i. 
§ 5: & pey @ Cewpotper Ta ToLadTa 
«.7.A. Eth. 1. vii. 21. In the follow- 
ing chapter, § 4, Gewpety is used for 
to ‘consider,’ or ‘speculate,’ though 
not in the special sense of philoso- 


phical speculation. 


7a 8 didia «.7.A.] For a specimen 


of ‘things eternal’ ef. Eth. ut. iii. 3, 


and see note. 

3 &rt 5iSuxr}—ovaroyiope] ‘Again 
all science appears capable of being 
imparted by demonstration, and the 
matter of science appears capable of 


-— 9 


ii a 


Til.] 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VI. 155 


Oidarxaria, wo 1 éy Tolg AVAAUTIXOIS ASyomev’ H Le 
Warxanria, women xak ev TOIG UTIXOIS ASyomey* y psy 


yap OV éraywyiis, 7 OF TUAACYITBO. 


i pev On eraywyy 


> Le: 9 \ ~ / € XN \ > ~ 
ADYY OTL HAL TOV xaborov, 6 08 GUAALYIOMeS ex TaY 


xaborou. 


4 , > \ + 
OTL TUVAADYIO MOG” exaywyy Apa, 


ee. ay > b, 5 € / 7 > 
ELOY ADK AOVas 2& WY 0 TVAAOYIT L0G, WY OUx 


7 pay Opa emiotyey 4 


gory 261g amodeixtiny, xal Goa GAAK mpoodsopiSoneba ev 
Tig cyaduTixoig’ OTav yap wg miorTely xal yyw@psros 





being so apprehended. But all de- 
monstration depends on pre-existent 
knowledge (as we say in analytics 
also), for it proceeds either by induc- 
tion or syllogism.’ 

@omwep A€youey] This is a general 
mode of expression, not a particular 
reference; some MSS. however read 
éAéyouev. Eudemus, as we know, 
wrote a book on analytics (cf. Vol. L., 
Essay I. p. 21). In his Ethics, m, vi. 
5, he speaks, as here, generally of 
analytics, SjAov & 3 emtxepodper Bre 
dvarykaiov, ék Téy avaduTiKev. In the 
present passage he is borrowing, not 
quoting, from the opening of Ari- 
stotle’s Post. Anal. Waoa d:dackaAla 
kal maca pddnois Siavontikh ex mpod- 
mapxovons ‘yiveror yvaoews. It is the 
first proof of knowing a thing, to be 
able to impart it, ef. Metaphys. t. i. 
12: bAws te onuctov Tov cidéros Td 
divarda Siddonew éorly, Hence, by 
association with the idea of science, 
diiackadia comes to be almost iden- 
tical with demonstration, cf. Sophist. 
Elench. ii. 1: “Eort 5h tav & TE 
diaréyeoOu Adywy Térrapa yévn, 5ida- 
GkaAducol kad SiaAeKTiKol Kat meipacriKol 
Kal épiotinol, SidacKadikol pev of éx 
Tov oikelwy dpxay éExdstov pabhuaros 
Kal ovk éx Tay TOD GroKpivomevon Botev 
ovrdoyCouevol, Set yap mortevew roy 
pavOdvorra, Cf. 7b. X. 11. 

h pev yap 50 emaywyis k.7.A.] This 
is taken from Post. Anal. % i. 2: 
where Aristotle, having said that all 
demonstration depends on previous 


x2 





knowledge, adds that this is true with 
regard to the mathematics, and also 
in dialectical arguments, duolws 5€ 
Kal mept robs Adyous of re Bid TvAXO- 
yiouav Kol ot o° éraywyis' aupdrepar 
yop 81a mpoyryvwoKopévay moodyTan 
thy Bdi8acKaArlay, of wey AapBdvovtes 
@s mapa tvvievtwy, of bt Seuxvivres Td 
KabdrAov 51% Tov SHAov eivac Td Kad? 
éxagrov. What Aristotle had said 
of dialectical arguments, Eudemus 
applies to science, which he accord- 
ingly asserts to be sometimes induc- 


-tive. His further assertion that the 


principles of deductive science are 
obtained by induction is inconsistent 
with the conclusion of ch. vi., though 
it agrees with Ar. Post. Anal. 1. xix, 
6. In fact éraywyh seems to be used 
by Aristotle in the Post. Anal, as 
equivalent to that amount of expe- 
rience which is the condition, not the 


cause, of necessary truths. Cf. 72. 1 
i. 4. 
4 % pev—avadurinots}] ‘Science, 


then, is a demonstrative state of mind, 
with all the other qualifications which 
we add in analytics. Cf. Ar. Post. 
Anal, \. ti. 2: ?Avdynn nor rhy amrode- 
Krikhy emorhuny €& GAndav v civa 
Kal mpdtov Kal duécwv Kal yvwpi- 
Horépwv Kat mpotépwy nad aitlwy tod 
oupmepdouaros. Aristotle, in his 
account of science, represents it from 
its objective side as a deduction of 
ideas rather than as a state of mind, 
bray yap—emorhunv] ‘For a man 
knows when he is convinced, and is 


156 


HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VI. 


[ CHap 


> ~ 7,3. td Neen > \ ‘ TAA . ~ 

air® wow al apyat, emloraros, eb yap ph parrov rob 

TupmEepaT pares, xaTa oupPEPyxds Efe TIy emioriny. 
meph pedv ovv emiot7ung Oimpicdw Tov Tporoy ToUTOY, 

~ YW? / BA ” 7 \ A } 

4 Toto evdey oLévov AAAWS EYEW EOTE TLKAL TOLNTOV XA 

2mpaxtoy, Erepov 0 earth molyoig xal mpaEig* miotevomey OF 

mech autéy xal Toig EEwrepinoig Adyors. Wore xal7 mera 

Acyou Eig mpaxtiny Erepav tors THg peTa Adyou Tol7y- 


Tixig eEews. 


37] TpaeIS moingls odTe y wolnoig wpaeig eoriv. 


O13 0008 wepiéyouTas bmw AAAVAwY* ovTE Yap 


ind P4) 


? \ / > \ 1 @¢ a ? \ / 
olxodominy Teyvy Tig EoT) xal Omrep EEig Tig meTa Adyou 
” \ 4 > \ / 
Tointixy, xal ovdenla ore Teyvy eoTly ATs ov PETA Adyou 
Nee 3 > , ” , aA 9 , > x 
Toinrixy Sig éotiv, odtTe ToadrTy 4 ov Téxvy, TaUTOY aY 





sure of the premises; since if he is 
not more sure of them than of the 
conclusion, the knowledge which he 
has will be only accidental.’ Taken 
from Post. Anal. 1. ii. 1 :’Emloracécu 
5é oiduel Exacroy amAGS, GAAG mh TY 
copiotikoy tpdrov Kata oupBeBnkds, 
k.7.A. To know results without the 
proofs Aristotle called ‘accidental’ 
knowledge, and this mode of know- 
ledge he attributed to the Sophists; 
ef. Metaphys. v. ii., &e. 

moretn| Cf. Sophist. Elench, ii. 1 
(L.c.): de? yap moretew Tov pavOdvoyra. 
Infra, ch. viii. § 6: 7& wey ob moredtov- 
ow of véot, AAG A€youvaw. 


IV. Eudemus altered the list of 
mental operations given by Aristotle 
(Post. Anal. l.c.) only by the position 
of votds, which in first stating his list 
Eudemus places at the end, probably 
because, having separated it from 
didvoia, he was uncertain about its 
admission ; afterwards he discusses it 
before gvopia, as being prior to it in 
order of time. The list then appears 
in Aristotle, didvo vods, emuothun 
Téxvn, ppdvncis copla; in Eudemus, 
émothun, téxvn, ppdynots, cola, 
voids (afterwards voids, copia). This 





chapter, in treating of art, gives but 
a scanty account, apparently bor- 
rowed from different passages in the 
Metaphysics of Aristotle. Art, like 
action, belongs to the sphere of the 
contingent, but its difference from 
action is universally recognised 
(moretouey wal rois é. Ady.). As 
shown by an instance, it consists in ‘a 
productive state of mind in harmony 
with a true law.’ It has todo with 
producing and contriving the produc- 
tion of things that fall neither under the 
law of nature nor necessity. Rather 
art deals with the same objects as 
chance, by which it is often assisted. 

1—2 Tod 8 éviexouévov—Adyois] 
‘Now contingent matter includes the 
objects both of production and action, 
but production and action are diffe- 
rent. On this point even popular 
notions sufficiently bear us out.’ 
With regard to éfwrepixol Adyo, ef. 
Eth. 1. xiii. 9, and see Vol, I. Essays, 
Appendix B, pp. 328-332. 

3 érel F—rointich| ‘But since 
architecture is an art, and may be 
defined as (8rep) a certain state of 
mind rationally (wera Adéyov) pro- 
ductive, and there is no art which is 
not a rationally productive state of 


Hl.—1v.] 


HOIKOQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


157 


yy , \o x , 3 4 ~ A x 
ely téyvy nab 281g pera Aoyou aAyJodg momrixy. Eors 924 
~s / \ \ ~ 
Téyvn Tho Teph yeveowv, xa TO Texvatew, xal Hewpely 
, 4 ~ ] , \ 
omws ay yevyrak Ts Tay evdeyouevwy nal elvas xal 27 Elva, 
\ v3 3 > ~ ~ > 7 \ b) ~ , 
xb WY Y ADHD EV Tp monmay es ares: [ey EY TW Torovpevw 
A \ ~ 3 > / e , > i 
obte yap Thy cE avayurs ovTwy 7) yivopevwy 7 TéExvy eoriy, 
~ \ / ~ of ~ 
ore THy xaTa duo’ ev abTOIg yap EyouTL TATA THY 


apy ny. 


> 7" SA , \ ~~ isd > / ‘\ 
é@el OF TolyoTlg xaos ™paSi¢ ETEDOV, AYAYXy THY 
7 ua > > > / sz 

TEXVHY TWOINTEWS AAA ov ™ pasews EVO. 


\ £ \ 
HAL TROTOY TiYe 5 





mind, nor again any such state which 
is not an art: art must be the same 
as “productive state of mind rightly 
directed.”’ The procedure here is to 
take a species of art, and, abstracting 
what is peculiar, to leave the generic 
conception remaining, which thus is 
taken as the definition of the genus. 

émep| A logical formula implying 
identity, convertibility of terms, cf. 
Eth, vu. xiii. 1: 0d yap dy galn Sep 
Kady TL iva Thy Ndovhv. 

otre rotatrn } ov Téxvn] This isa 
slight discrepancy from Aristotle, 
who speaks of three modes of produc- 
tion, art, faculty, and thought, with- 
out, however, specifying the difference 
between them, Metaphys. v1. vii. 3. 
macau 8 cioly af morhoes 7} awd Téxvns 
4 amd Buvduews 7 amd diavotas. Ib. 
XK. vil. 3: momtixjs piv yap & TE 
TowvvtTt Kal ov TH TWolovperm TIS Kwh- 
cews 1 apxh, Kal todr’ éorly etre 
téxvn tis el” BAAN Tis Bbvauis. 

4 ort 5&t—owovpéve| ‘Now all 
art is about creation, and the con- 
triving and considering how some- 
thing may be created of those things 
whose existence is contingent, and 
whose efficient cause exists in the 
producer and not in the thing pro- 
duced.’ There is not any distinction 
intended between rexvd¢ew and 
Gewpetv. The absence of the article 
before @ewpetvy shows that these 
belong to the same idea; they are 





both only an expansion of the term 
yéveov, and are not to be separated 
from it, as if the writer was describing 
different stages in the process of 
art. We find rexvdfew used by Ari- 
stotle simply in the sense of ‘con- 
triving,’ Pol. 1. xi. 12: dupdrepor yap 
éavtois eréxvacay yevér Oat povonwAlay 
Ib. vi. Vv. 8: Texvacréov oby brws dv 
evropla yévorto xpdvios. \ 

Gy 7 &pxh «.7.A.] Taken from Ari- 
stotle, Metaphys. x. vii. 3 (U.c.). Cf. 
v. i. 5: TOv ply montiKey & Te 
TOLoovTt | apXY 7 vows } Téxvn 7 Sbvapls 
Tis, Tay BE TpaxTiKay ey TE TpdtTovTt 
h mpoaipecis, There is the same 
classification of causes here as in Eth, 
m,. ii, 7, into nature, necessity, 
chance, and the human intellect. On 
Aristotle’s conception of nature, see 
Vol. I. Essay V. pp. 221-6. 

5 wal tpéroy tivda—réxyn] ‘And 
in a way chance and art are concerned 
with the same objects.’ Eudemus, 
taking this observation from Aristotle, 
illustrates it, after his own fashion, 
with a quotation from Agathon. Cf. 
Metaphys. vi. vii. 4: Tobrwv (morh- 
cewv) dé tTwes ylyvovrat Kat ard rabTo- 
parov Kal dd rixns mapamdnolws 
Gorep év trois amd picews yryvouevas, 
Cf. Jb. vi. ix. 1, where the following 
question is started: amophoee 8 ty tis 
bia th Th pey ylyverat Kal réxvn Kal amd 
TavToudrov, oioy wyica, Ta F ov, olor, 
oixia, The answer is, that there is a 


158 HOIKOQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Cuap. 


\ x 3 £3 € , % / 4 / } "A 
TEDk TH HUTA ETTIY 7 TUYY HAL y TEXYYY, xAUAMED KH * 


ya5ov dyol 


réxyn TUXHY Eorepke Kal TUXn TExYNY. 


67 piv ouv Téyvn, Women elonros, Eig Tig peta Adyou 

aArnfods momriny got, 4 0 aTexvin TobvavTioy peta 
, ~ \o@¢ A A >> , ” 

Adyou Weudctg womrixy EE1g, wept TO Evdeyousvov AAAWS 


” 
EXE. 


5 


[lech 02 dpovjcewg obtwg dv AdBowsv, Oewpyoavres 





principle of self-moyement in the 
matter to be operated on in the one 
case, but not in the other. That the 
devices of art are often suggested, 
and its results assisted, by chance, 
need not be confirmed by examples ; 
but while art is thus assisted by 
chance, on the other hand, it is the 
main object of art to eliminate chance. 
Cf. Metaphys. % i. 5:  pev “yap 
éumepia téxvnv emolnoev, as yor 
TldAos, Op0ds Acywv, % F trepla 
toxnv, The theory of art is but 
meagre in the writings of Aristotle. 
His great defect with regard to the 
subject is, his not having entered 
into the philosophy of the imagination. 
Yet still he gives us remarks of far 
greater interest than what is contained 
in the brief reswmé of Eudemus, ef. 
especially the saying, Metaphys. vt. vii. 
4, that ‘all things are done by art, 
of which the idea exists in the mind,’ 
amd réxvns 5é yiyverat bow 7d eldos ev 
Th wux7, and.add Post. Anal. m1, xix. 
4: é« & éumeplas i} ee mavros hpeuh- 
cavtos Tov KadAou ev TH Wuxi, TOU 
évds mapa Ta TOAAG, © by ev Gmacw ty 
evi exelvors 7d abtd, Téexvns apxh Kad 
emoThuns, ev wry wep yéveow, réxvns, 
edy 5¢ wep) 7d by, emiothuns. 


V. Wisdom (@pévnais) is next dis- 
cussed. Its nature we learn from the 
use of the word ‘wise’ (¢pévimor) to 
denote those who take good counsel 





with regard to the general ordering of 


life. This subject admits of no ~ 
scientific demonstration ; again, it is — 


different from art. We see the quality 
of ‘wisdom’ exemplified in such men 
as Pericles, who know what is good 
for themselves and others. This. 
knowledge and insight is preserved 
by temperance, which hence gets its 
name (cwppociyn). Art admits of 
degrees of excellence, but ‘wisdom’ 
does not. Voluntary error in art is 
better than non-voluntary, but the 
reverse in ‘wisdom,’ which thus is 
shown to be more than a mere quality 
of the intellect,—it becomes part of 
ourselves (dpovhoews odK Fort AHOn). 

1 mept Bt ppovhaews| From Socrates 
to Eudemus we may trace a distinct 
progress with regard to the doctrine 
of ¢péynois. Socrates said ‘virtue is 
knowledge’ (émorhun). Plato first 
‘virtue és,’ afterwards ‘ virtue ¢mplies 
wisdom’ (ppéynois). Cf. Meno, p. 
98 pv: bidanrdy otey elvat, ei ppd- 
ynois  dpeth. Theetet. p. 176 B: 
duolwois 5& (Tg Oe@) Slxaov Kal Soroy 
meta povhoews yevérOu. Phedo, p. 
69 A: éxeivo udvov Td vomiocua dpOdy, 
av ob Set Gxayta tadra KaraddAdr- 
Tecba, ppdynois, Kal TovTov pey wavTa 
kal werd Tobrov wvobpevd Te Kal miempa- 
oxdueva TG byte j, Kal avdpela Kal 
cwppootyn Kal Siucaoctvn, Kad ~EvA- 
AHBSgy GAnOhs dperh F mera ppovhoews, 
Kal mpooyryvonevey Kal aroyryvonévwr 


yer Vee 


IV.—V.] 


Tivas Aéyomev Tovs povijmous. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQON] VI. 


159 


doxet Ox Dpoviov elves 


To duvacbasr xarws Bovrsicacbas meph TH AUTO ayaha xat 
CupdepoyTa, ov HATA pépoc, olov mola mpdc Sylaav 7 


~ \ oe ~ 
ioyxvv, AAG mola moog To ed Cy. 


~ a \ 
o7jpcov 0 OT xal 


\ / / , a XV Z 
Toug Eps Th Ppovipous ASYOMEV, OTAY MOOG TEAOS TL O7FOU- 


Oaioy eb AoylowyTas, Oy wx eats Téyv4. 
EY 4 € , 
dy ely dpdvipog 6 Boureutixes. 


a La 4 

WOTE XA OAWS 
F: 

Bovrcveras 0 ovSels weph 





kal 7dovav Kal ddBwv Kal Trav BAdrwv 
TdvtTwy TeV TowtTwy* xwpiCdueva dé 
ppovhoews kat GAAaTTémeva avT) GAAA- 
Awv, uh oKiaypapla tis 7 7 ToLatTy 
Gpeth Kal TE byt GvSparodéins. This 
‘wisdom,’ however, he defined as the 
contemplation of the absolute (Phedo, 
p- 79 D), and thus identified the 
moral consciousness with philosophy 
(see Vol. I. Essay III. p. 144—5). 
Aristotle, as we have already seen 
(Post. Anal. 1. xxxiii. 8, quoted on ch. 
lii. 1), proposed as a subject for dis- 
cussion the distinction between ¢pdvn- 
oisand copia, With him ¢pdvnats was 
gradually coming to assume its dis- 
tinctive meaning as practical wisdom ; 
but this was not always clearly 
marked. Cf. Topics, v. vi. 10, where 
it is said to be the essential property 
of @pévnots (wisdom) to be the highest 
condition of the reasoning faculty (7d 
Aoyiorixdy), just as it is of temperance 
to be the highest condition of the 
appetitive part. In another place of 
the Topics (rv. ii. 2) it is incidentally 
mentioned that some think pédvnats 
to be both a virtue and also a science, 
but that it is not universally conceded 
to be a science. Aoxe? yap evios 7 


ppdvnois apeth Te Kal emiorhun elvat, 


kal obdérepoy Tay yevay im’ odderépov 
mepiéxerOat’ ob phy bird mdvtwy ye 
ovyxepeirar thy ppdvnow emorhunv 
elvat, In the Politics, ut. iv. 17, it 
is said to be the only virtue properly 
belonging to a ruler. ‘H 8¢ ppdvqats 
toxovros ios aperh pdvn+ Tas ‘yap 





&AAas oixev dvaryeatoy elvo xowds Kad 
Tay apxoudvey Kal tay apxdvrav. 
*"Apxouévou B€ ye ode @orw dperh 
ppdyncis, GAAG Sdéta GAnOhs. Thus it 
is used for practical wisdom, but in a 
broad general sense, with reference to 
state affairs rather than to individual 
life, implying, however, an absolute 
consciousness as opposed to GAnOhs 
déta. Frequently Aristotle uses ppd- 
vnots simply to denote ‘thought’ or 
‘wisdom,’ without reference to its 
sphere. Cf. Eth. 1. vi. 11, 1. viii. 6, 
&e. Finally, it appears in its dis- 
tinctive sense, De An. 1.ii.9. ‘Anaxa- 
goras says that all animals possess 
vos, they certainly do not all possess 
equally the reason that gives “ wis- 
dom.”’ od galvera F 6 ye Kata opd- 
vnow Aeydmevos vods macw dpolws 
imdpxew. Fhet. 1. ix. 13: pdynots 
& éorly aperh Siavolas, na? hy eb 
BovreverOar Sivavra wep) &yabay Kai 
kak@v Tav cipnuévwy eis evdapmoviay. 
Eth, x. viii. 3, where there is a con- 
trast between the life of contempla- 
tion and of practical virtue, ppévnois 
is spoken of as inseparably connected 
with the latter, while the happiness 
of contemplation by the pure reason 
is something apart. In. the present 
book we have the Eudemian expo- 
sition and development of Aristotle’s 
theory, which entirely contrasts pé- 
vnois with gopfa, and limits the 
former to the regulation of individual 
life. 

3 Bovdcteta 8 odfeis] A verbal 


n 


w 


160 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VI. [ Cuap.. 


by ADUVATMY AAAWS ZyElv, ODE THY Ly evdEyoue ITO 
Thy AduvaTW g eyes, Tay wn evdeyousveoy avTa 
~ ad 2 25 > 7 \ 2 3 / “4 
mpi bas WoT elrep emioryyy piv wet amodeiSews, wv 0 
ai apyal evdeyovras aArrAws Eye, ToUTwWY Ly got aT- 
\ f \ > dé a, ” \ > »” 
deiEic (mavTa yap evdeyerou nal AAAWwS Eyelv, xa) ovx ZoTE 
Povrsioacbas mepl riby e& avayxng ovrwy), obx av ely 7 
A > I >. 4 ‘ 
pornos emia Tne ouds TEXMY, EmoThwn prey OTs evdexeraut 
TO T paxTov adres eyely, rexyy 0 OTs hAAO TO yévog 
ampasews xah moioews. Asiwerou dpa auriny ecivas Ze 
annoy [esT Ot Aoyou T PORT INDY meph TO aviporw ayaha xol 
Tig piv yap woincews Erepov Td Téros, THG OF 
id > Ey v ” \ 9. A 8: gt 1D / / \ 
smpakews oux av ely* EoTi yap auTy 7 eumpaSia Teroc. Oia 
~ r \ cy , s 27 6 * 
rotiro Tlepixaéa xal rodg rorovrovg dpovifroug voiced 
elvas, OTL TH AUTOIS ayaa xal Ta ToIS avi pam o1g OUvavT aE 
Gewpsly elyas 58 roiourous iyoopale TOUS olxovopsrods xal 
rove wonTixovs. Evbev xal ray codpor byny TOUTW por a- 
6 yopevomey TH OvOUATI, Wo TMboUTAY THY bpdvyow. owes 


/ 
HAXA’ 


Of THy Toauryy omroanliy. 


ov yap amacav tmroanly 





repetition of ch. i. § 6. Cf. Eth. Hud. 
I Ka19:(.0;). 

4 THs wey yap] A repetition of ch. 
ii. § 5. 

5 && todro—moditiKovs| * Hence 
we consider such men as Pericles 
“ wise,” because they have a faculty of 
perceiving what is good for themselves 
and good for men in general. And 
we attribute the same character to 
those who have a turn for the manage- 
ment of households and of state af- 
fairs. On pévnots as a quality for 
the ruler of a state, cf. Ar. Pol. 11. iv. 
17 (l.c.), and on the connexion estab- 
lished by Eudemus between wisdom for 
the individual, for the family, and for 
the state, see below, ch. viii, § 1, note. 

évOev—imdanyw] ‘ Hence it is that 
we call temperance by its present 
name (swppoctyn) as preserving wis- 
dom (cé(ovcav thy opdynow), and 
this is the kind of conception which it 
preserves,’ 7.e., a moral conception 
(wep 7d mpaxrév) about the right and 





wrong, or, as it is here put, about 
‘the end’ (7d of €vexa) of actions. 
The false etymology here given comes 
from Plato’s Cratylus, p. 411 D, 
where, after a sportive derivation of 
opéynors, that of cwppoctrn is added: 
‘H gpdvnois* opis ydp ear: kal pod 
vohots. Etn 8 bv xa tvnow sbroda- 
Betv pops GAN ody wept ye Td Peper bat 
éoriv, ei 5& BovdAct, } yvdun wayvrdract 
Snr? yous oxdby nal vdunow* 7d 
yap vepay Kal Td oKxoreiv tabrdy. ei 
dé BovaAct, ard H vdnois Tov véou éorly 
€ois* 7d 5€ véa elva Ta ByTa onualve 
yiyvepeva Gel elvas* rodbrov ob éplerbat 
Thy Wuxhv pnvie 7d bvoua 6 O€wevos 
Thy vederwv, ov yap vénots Td &pxaiov 
€xadetro, GAN’ dvtl rod 7H Et Wer Agyew 
dio vedeowv. cwppoctyn 5¢ cwrnpia ob 
viv 8h eoxéuucba, ppovhoews. OF 
course owhpocivn merely means 
‘sound-mindedness.’ On the apxat 
Tav mpaxTay see below, ch. xii. § 10, 
note, and Vol. I, Essay IV. p. 217— 
218, 


V.] HOIKOQN [EYAHMIQON] VL 161 


Siapbeipes ovdt Osaorpseder To HOV xal ro Avanpoy, oioy 
ov A f A > ~ Sf v x ’ 54 > \ 
OTL To Tplywvoy duchy opbanis lous Eyer 7 oux EYXEI, AAA 
\ \ \ / € \ \ > MS ~ ~ \ 
Tag wep To mpaxTov. ai piv yap apyai Thy mpaxTady To 
aed 4 , ~ Or , oe 8 a ‘a 
ov fvexa TH MpaxTa’ TH OF Oiedbappév OF yOovny 7 AUTHY 
2 AN > , © > , AN ~ oe o AN ‘ 
cubog ob dalverou 7 apyy, oud? delv rovTou evexev ond? dice 
ToUs aipsiobar: mavta xal mparrew Bors yap 7 xaxlo 
\ > ~ a ae ee \ , og 
baprinn apyiig: aor avayxn thy dpovynow FEw elvas 
4A / > ~ \ \ > , > iY 7 
PET Adyou aAnTH, wept Ta avipwmiwva ayaba mpaxTinyy. 
> \ ‘ / \ > \ > 7 7 S73 ” 
ANA [ANY TEY VIS EV ETTIY ADETY, dpovnrews 6 OuUx EOTIV"7 
xo ev peyv Téyvy 6 Exwv apaptavwy aiserwrepos, wepl OF 
oovycw yrrov, Womwep nab wept Tag apeTas. OHAov ovy 
OTs Oper? Tig EoTL nal ov Téyvy. Suolv O ovToW mepoivs 





7 GAAX phyv—réxvn] ‘It must be | a small antagonism against Platonic 
added that while in art there are | doctrines; whether in detail this was 
degrees of excellence, there are none | original, or borrowed from oral re- 
in wisdom ; and while in art he that | marks or lost writings of Aristotle, 
errs voluntarily is the better, he that | we cannot tell. Cf. Eth. v. ix. 16, 
does so in wisdom is the worse, asis | v. xi. 9, vi. xiii. 3, &c. Here there 
the case with the virtues also. There- | seems to be an allusion to the So- 
fore it is plain that wisdom is a sort | cratico-Platonic paradox which forms 
of virtue, and not an art.’ “Hrrov, | the subject of the Hippias Minor, 
as contrasted with aiperérepos, stands | that to do injustice voluntarily was 
for jTTov aiperés. The phrase aperh | better than doing it involuntarily (see 
téxyns occurs again ch, vii. § 1. | Vol. I. Essay II. p. 125). Here the 
The present passage probably has | contrary is assumed with regard to 
reference to Topics, 1v. ii. 2 (i¢.), | ‘wisdom,’ and the conclusion drawn 
doxe? yap eviois 7 ppdvnois Gperh te | is, that wisdom is not an art, in other 
Kal émorhun elva, where émorhun | words (as is said more distinctly 
answers to téxvn in the place before | afterwards), not merely intellectual. 
us. To say that there are no degrees | If wisdom were merely intellectual, 
of excellence in ‘ wisdom’ gives it an | then voluntary error in action would 
absolute character, justas it issaidthat | not be error at all, because knowledge 
there are degrees in the understand- | would remain behind unimpaired ; 
ing, but not in the reason. Common | but if wisdom is a state of the will as 
language would admit of degrees in | well as of the intellect, then voluntary 
wisdom. Cf. Ar. Metaphys. 1. i. 2: | error, as implying a defect of the will, 
dia Todo Taira ppoviumrepa xa) wafy-| is the worst kind of error. The worst 
Tinhrepa Tay ph Svvapévov uynuovebe | kind of error, morally, is thought to 
éorly, De An.t.ii. 9, 1.c. But here | be sinning against knowledge, know- 
‘wisdom’ is considered as something | ing the right and doing the wrong, 
ideal, just as afterwards, ch. xiii. | which some philosophers deny to be 
§ 6, it is said to imply all the virtues, | possible. See below, Book yu. ch. 

6 éxov Gpaprdvey| Eudemus seems | iii. 
often inclined to betake himself to 8 dvoty F—orw] ‘And as there 

VOL. II. ¥ 





162 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ CHa. 


rig Wuyiis Thy Adyov eydvTwy, Garépov av ely apeTy, Tov 
doEacrixod’ Te yap Oo&u wep) ro evdeyduevoy AAAwWS 


yy A € é 
eye xa 4 DpovyTss. 


AAAG pay ovo EEIG pera Adyou 


povov' onpsioy 0 ors Abn THg wey ToAUTYS EFewg eoT!, 


li 
ovnceMc ® oux ETI. 
povy $ 


"Evel 0 yj émiotipn weph rev xaborov éorly vroaylig 





are two parts of man’s nature which 
possess reason, wisdom will be the 
highest state of one of these, namely, 
the opiniative part, for opinion and 
wisdom both deal with the contin- 
gent. We must add that it is not 
merely an intellectual state (€s werd 
Adyov), the proof of which is that 
while such states admit forgetfulness, 
wisdom does not.’ Td Sofaarixdv 
answers to 7d Aoyiorikdy, ch. i. § 6. 
That opinion deals with contingent 
matter, we are told, Ar. Post. Anal. 
I. XXXili. 2: Aelwerat Sdgav elvan wept 
7d GAndes wey H aeddos, evdexduevoy be 
kal 4Adrgws exew. After associating 
opinion with wisdom, the writer 
separates them just as Aristotle sepa- 
rates mpoalpeois from 8é6fa, Eth, m1. 
ii. 11. In the present passage there 
is a great want of clearness. We are 
told that wisdom is an excellence, or 
highest state, of a part of the intel- 
lect. Hence we should naturally 
conclude that it was Adyos ts (ef. ch, 
xiii. § 5), but the formula throughout 
used is, that wisdom is €&s pera 
Adyov. This formula is itself an in- 
accuracy, since it implies not a state 
of intellect, but a state of the will 
under the law of the intellect (see 
Vol. I. Essay I. p. 39). But on the 
top of this another inaccuracy is laid, 
for we are now told that wisdom is 
not simply a €ts wera Adyou, by which 
the writer evidently means to say, 
that wisdom is not a mere state of 
the intellect. It may be indeed true 
that the moral intellect cannot be 





separated from the will and personality 
(cf. ch. xii. § 10), but what is to be 
complained of is, that the formule 
used for expressing all the truths con- 
nected with this subject are so very 
imperfect. Mera Adyou is used in 
the present place probably to mean 
nothing more than ‘rational’ Cf. 
Eth, Eud. vin. ii. 3: 0b yap BAoyos 7 
ppsvnots, GAN Exer Adyov bia th obrw 
mpdtrer, It is used differently ch. 
iv. § 3, and again ch, vi. § 1. 

onuciov & Sri AHO] Cf. Eth. 1. x. 
10: where it is said that ‘the moments 
of virtuous consciousness in the mind 
are more abiding than the sciences,’ 
and see note. To opévncis in the 
Platonic and general sense, of course 
forgetfulness might attach. Cf. Laws, 
Pp. 732 B: dvdurnots & early emippoh 
ppovhoews &toAccTovens. 


VI. This chapter treats of reason, 
but goes no further into the subject 
than as follows,—science implies prin- 
ciples, and we cannot apprehend these 
principles by science itself nor by three 
out of the other four modes of mind 
which give us truth. It therefore 
remains, on the grounds of exhaustive 
division, that reason must be the 
organ by which we apprehend first 
principles, 

On examination it will be found that 
the contents of the chapter are bor- 
rowed almost verbatim from Aristotle’s 
Post. Analyt, 1. xix. 7: ’Emei 8& ray 
mepi thy didvoay eewr, als dAndetouer, 
of pty del GAnbets eioly, ai St éemidé- 


ae. aT ee 


V.—VII.] HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VI. 163 


nal riby 2& avayuyg vtwy, cial 0 doyal rey amodexray 
nal maong emioTHys (KeTa Adyou yap 7 emioTipy), THs 
ApXis ToD emioTyTOD odT’ ay Emit Ely OdTE TeyVT OUTE 
dpovnoig* To wav yap emiorytiy amodexror, al 88 ruyya- 
your LY OUT aL mee) TH evde x ofneve adres Exe. oud: a 
codia TouTwy zoriv’ Tov yap copot wepl evicoy even Or o- 
daly gor. él oH ois arndedopey xal pndérore dtanpeu- + 
Oopebon wel TH p22) evdexopeve i xal eve xojeve dnrwg 
Xe, emiorny xal dpovyoig tots xal codia xab vois, 
TouTwy 0: réy Tpriby pnbey evOEX era sivas (Aéyw 08 tein 
porary emioryyy codiav), AsiweTar vody elvas tidy 


apyiy. 


\ ~ ~ 
Tay 38 codlay 2y re taig téyvary Trois axpiberraross 7 





Xovra 7d eddos, ofov SdfanalrAoyiouds, | eumoe?. Also he is at variance with 
GAnb7 F del emorhun Kat voids, nad | his own statement above, ch. iii. § 3. 
ovdty emorhuns axpiBéorepoy %AAo peta Adyou yap H émothun| ‘For 
yévos 7} vois, ai 8 apxal ray awobdelfewv | science implies inference.’ This is 
yvopymdrepa, emoriun 8 daca were | evidently the meaning of the present 
Adyou earl, tév dpxav emorhun wey | sentence, taken as it is from Post. 
ovn bv etn, erel & oddtv aAndéorepov | Anal. l.c. Adyos is frequently used 
evdéxerar elvar emiothuns 7} votv, vods | to denote ‘inference.’ Cf. ch. viii. 


by etn tav apxav, & te TolTwy oKo- | § 9: 5 Mey yap voids Tay Spwr, dv odk 
modot Kal Sri dmodeléews apxh ove amd- | Eart Adyos: Xi. 4, TOV erxdTwY vods 
deitis, Wor’ 08 emorhuys emorthun. | éo7 Kat od Adyos, &e. 

Ei oty pndty &Adro nap émorhunv ovde 8y—eorw] ‘Nor of course 


yéevos %xouev dAndés, vods dv etn ém- | does philosophy apprehend these prin- 
orhuns &pxh. Aristotle argues that | ciples, for it is the part of the philo- 
principles must be apprehended either | sopher to possess demonstration about 
by science or reason’; they cannot be | some things.’ It need hardly be said 
apprehended by science, therefore they | that this is a very poor ground for 
must be by reason. Eudemus, it will establishing the point in question. 

be observed, follows this mode of 
arguing, only he applies it to all the VII. What ‘philosophy’ is may 
five organs of truth, which he had be learnt from the use of the word 
before arbitrarily laid down as an ex- | s0fds, as applied to the arts, It 
haustive list. In following implicitly | denotes ‘nicety,’ ‘subtlety,’ ‘ exact- 
the passage above cited, he hasignored | ness.’ Philosophy, then, is the most 
for the time the earlier part ofthe same | subtle of the sciences, It embraces 
chapter, in which Aristotle attributes | not only deductions, but also prin- 
the origin of universals rather to indue- | ciples. It is ‘a science of the highest 
tion; ib, § 6: AfjAov 5h Sri juiy ra | objects with the head on.’ It is 
mpara enaywyh yvwpl(ew avaykatov, | above all practical wisdom and science. 
kal yap Kad alcOnois obtw Td KaOddov | It is one and permanent, while they 

¥2 





164 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[Cuap. 


\ 
Tas Téyvas amrodidonev, olov Deidiav AiGoupyov codiy xal 
/ 3 , 5) ~ \ x IAN Bd 
TlovvxAeiroyv G.y0 play T OTF OLOY, evTaba [Lev ouy oubiy KARO 
, \ / vA 7 > \ / > Fr. 7: Ds 
2onasvoyTes THY Godlay y OT! ApETH TEYYNS ETTIV® elo OE 
\ 27 og > ‘ , 2 ow 
Tivag codous olopnsban OAWS OU HATA [E005 oud aADO Th 
7 a a , > ~ / 
copous, wamep “Opnpog dyow ev ro Mapyiry 


Tov © ovr ap oxamnrinpa Deol Décay ovr’ aporijpa 


ovr’ &ddwe Te cody. 


Wore OFAoy Ors yj axpiPsorary avy Thy emiorypdy ely 7 


3 codla. 


~ \ \ ‘ ‘4 \ > ~ > ~ 
Ost apa Tov copoy py pmovoy TH Ex THY apydy 


> \ ’ s Yo > x 
eidévar, AAA xa wepl Tag apyacgarnfeve. Wor ely av 
~ 4 ‘\ ov > 
% codla vots xal emiotyin, Womep xedarny EyouTa emI- 
~ ‘ A 
TTHLY THY TiLIWTATWY. ATOTOY yap El TIC THY TOASTING 





are manifold, relative, and change- 
able. It is higher, as the cosmos is 
higher than man. Philosophy and 
not wisdom was the reputed property 
of men like Thales and Anaxagoras, 
who were thought to know strange 
and out-of-the-way, but useless things. 
On the other hand, wisdom (@pévnots) 
is good counsel about human things. 
It implies knowledge of particulars as 
well as of universals, Indeed, the 
knowledge of the particular gained 
by experience is its most important 
element, though it includes the 
universal also, and in its own sphere, 
namely, that of action, it is supreme 
and paramount (apxirexrovirh). 

I—2 tiv 5& copiav—copia] ‘ The 
term copia we apply in the arts to 
those who are the most finished 
artists, as, for instance, we eall 
Phidias a consummate (co¢és) seulp- 
tor, and Polyeletus a consummate 
statuary, and in this application we 
mean nothing else by copia than the 
highest excellence in art. But we 
conceive that some men possess the 
quality in a general and not a 
particular way—‘nor in aught else 
accomplished, as Homer says in 
the Margites-— 





‘ Not skilled to dig or plough the gods 
have made him, : 
Nor in aught else accomplished,’ 


We may argue, then, that copia, in 
the sense of philosophy, is the most 
consummate of the sciences.’ On the 
meaning of &«p{Be as applied to the 
arts, and on the transition of meaning 
when it is applied to philosophy, see 
Eth, 1. vii. 18, note, and m vi. 9, 
note. 

3 dor’ ein—tiyuwtdtwy] ‘So that 
philosophy must be the union of 
reason and science, as it were a 
science of the highest objects with its 
head on.’ This excellent definition 
does not-appear to have anything in 


Aristotle exactly answering to it. 


There are two chief places where 
Aristotle treats of copia, namely, 
Metaphysics, Book 1. i—ii., and i, 
Book x. ch. i—vii. Metaphys. 
Book 1. opens by showing an ascend- 
ing scale in knowledge,—perception, — 
experience, art, and the theoretic 
sciences, or philosophy. Of philo- 
sophy we are told that it is the 
science of first causes, it is most 
universal, most exact, and most en- 
tirely sought for its own sake, &c, 





VIL. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


165 


Ey) ‘ , Dy / ye rf ? A A 
% Tiy Dpovynow omovdnoraTyy ob:TaAs Elyat, EL BH TO 


vw ~ . ~ f ” v / > 
ALG TOY THY EV Tw HOC [LW av§owr os EOTLY. 


SUN: \ 
eb Ov Uylelyvoy4 


, yd 
pay xal ayaboy erepov avipwros xai iybdo1, To Ot Acuxdy 
\ AN + 2% ce eA \ A A ay * f a 
wal evbd ravrov asi, xal To codsy Travroy mavreg ay 
i: f 0& Erepov’ TO yap mweol abTo ExacTa ev 
elmosev, Dpoviproy 02 ETEp yap wep 





(Met. 1. ii. 2—6). Philosophy begins 
in wonder, wonder at first about 
things near at hand, afterwards about 
the sun, moon, and stars, and the 
creation of the universe (Jd. § 9). It 
ends in certainty and a sense of the 
necessity of certain truths (Jd. § 16). 
We may see that this account is per- 
fectly general—it does not distinguish 
in philosophy between mathematics, 
physics, and metaphysics. It even 
attributes a practical scope to philo- 
sophy, saying that philosophy, by 
taking cognisance of the good, deter- 
mines the object of the other sciences 
(1b. § 7), apxixwrdrn 8¢ tay émorn- 
BwGy, Kol pGdAdrAov apxikh Tis swnpe- 
Tovons, ) yvwplCovea tivos Evexéy éott 
mpaxtéov exacrov* Todt 8 éor! Taya- 
Ody ev Exdorois, Aws 5é Td Upioroy ev 
Th pice adon. From a_ certain 
immaturity thus shown, it would be 
difficult to believe that the account in 
Metaphys. Book 1. was written after 
that in the present chapter of the Ethics. 
In Méetaphys. Book x. the subject is 
taken up anew, and treated much more 
fully. Physics, practical science, 
and mathematics, are now separated 
from philosophy proper. Jb. i. 4: 
ovdé wept tds ev Tots puaikois cipnucvas 
aitias =rhv = CGyroupévny $= émothuny 
Oeréov. 
Towdroy yap Ta&yabdy, TodTO & év Tots 


mpaxtois tmdpxe: Kat ois obow év - 


kvjoe. Id, i. 7: 0b88 phy wep 7a 
pabnuarixd — xwpioroy yap abrav 
ovdév. These, however, are branches 
of philosophy, Jd. iv. 3:3: ka rabryy 
(thy gvauhy) Kal Thy pabnparinhy 
emorhuny wépn Tis coplas eiva: Oeréor, 


Otre yap wept 7d 0b vere” 





Cf. Met. mt. iii. 4: ore 88 copla tis 
kal 7 puch, GAN od mpétn. Hence 
we get the famous division of specu- 
lative sciences, Met. x. vii. 9: SjAov 
tolvuy Br. tpla yévn Tay OewpntiKay 
emotnpav eori, pvoiuh, pwabnuatixh, 
Oeoroyikh. BéAtioroy pev ody 1d THEY 
OewpntiKx@y emaornuay yévos, TobTwy 5’ 
aitav 9 Tedevtala AExXOcioa wep) rd 
TyuadTATOY yap éoTt TaY byTwy, BEd- 
thov 5 Kal xelpwy Exdorn A€yera 
kata 7d oixetov émarytdéy. Philosophy, 
then, in the highest sense, may be 
called theology, or the science of the 
divine, that is, of pure, transcen- 
dental (xwpiorh), immutable being. 
It is the science of being gua being 
(10d dvros f by émorhun). Eudemus, 
following in the wake of this discus- 
sion, has adopted as much of its 
results as suited his purpose, He 
speaks of philosophy as having the 
highest objects (rav tiyuwrdrwr, cf. 
Met. x. vii. 9, /.c.), but he does not 
distinguish its different branches. 
He includes in it both physical and 
mathematical ideas ($ 4, 7d 5é Acukdy 
kal ebOd Tabrdy ael: ib. GE Gv 6 KdcMos 
cuvéornkev), though he uses codds 
once in its special sense to denote a 
metaphysical, as opposed to mathe- 
matical or physical, philosopher. Ch, 
Vill. § 6: paOnuarinds wey mats yévorr’ 
ty, copds & 4 voids of, In short, 
his object is rather to contrast philo- 
sophy with practical thought than 
exactly to define it. His attribut- 
ing to it a union of intuition with 
reasoning seems however a happy 
result of his present method of dis- 


cussion, 


wn 


166 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. - [Cnap. 


Gewpoiv daisy av elvas dpovimov, xal rovrw émirperperav 
~~. £4 \ ~ / wv / / > iA 
O10 Hab THY Oypiwy evia Doovipa Paci sivas, oom 
weph Tov auta@y Ploy Exovra aiverou divapsy mpovonTixyy. 
\ \ \o > Ey i: € / \ e ‘ c 
davepoy OF xal ors oux ay ely y codla xal 7 moriting 7% 
> s > 4 \ X\ > / . c ~ > ~ 
airy’ eb yap Thy meph Ta WhEAILA Ta abrois epodor 
, eae. 2 a > \ , \ QR ft / 
copiay, ToAAal ETovTas Topias* ouyap pia wepl TO amay- 
ryaboy roy Cwowy, aAN ere le i py xak 
Twy ayaboy Tov Sowy, éTépa Teph Exaoroy, ek nn xal 
> x , \ / ~ + > a / 
lar piny pia mech mavrwy Tey oyrwy. 10 bre BéATioroy 
avpwros Tiny KAAwWY Fwwy, ovdey diadhéper* xal yap avOow- 
” ‘ / \ 7 , / 
Tov AAAG TOAD Jesorepa Tay Diol, oloy davepwrara ye 
26 wy 6 xdopog cuvérryxev. ex On Thy cipnucvwy OHAov 
6ri  codia éorl xal emioripy xal vols Tr&y Timiwrarwy 
~ A sag , \ ~ \ , 
77 duce. O10 AvaSayopav xal Oarjy xal rods rorovrous 
i \ XN / . bd av 
coders piv dpovinoug 0 ob dacw elvas, bray wow 
ayvootvTas TH cupdéepovs éaurois, xal TepitTa pay xl 


> / 
QAuTa. 





4 «i 3 Sr BeATicToyv—ouvécrykev | 
‘And if it be said that man is the 
best of the animals, this will make 
no difference, for there are besides 
other things far diviner in their 
nature than man, such as, to quote 
the most obvious instance, the parts 
out of which the symmetry of the 
heavens is composed.’ On the Aristo- 
telian view of man’s position in the 
scale of dignity in the universe, see 
Vol. I. Essay V. p. 226-9. On Ari- 
stotle’s doctrine of the divine nature 
of the stars, &c., cf. De Calo, 1. ii. 9: 
“Ex te 5) TovTwy pavepdy Bri mwépuKé 
ris otaia copuatos YAAn mapa Tas ev- 
ravda avotdaces, Oerorépa Kal mpoTrépa 
tTottwy andyrwy (this has given rise to 
the notion of the ‘quintessence’), Jd. 1. 
ii. 11, which repeats the same. Jd. 1. 
ili. 2: “Exaorév éoriv, adv early Epyov, 
évexa TOU épyov. @eod 8 evépyea 
abavacla: tovro 8 eat) (wh atdios, 
“OQor dvdynn TG Oclp Kivnow Gildiov 
imdpxew. "Emel 8 & odpavds totodros 
(cpa ydp tt Oetov) 5a Tobro exer 7d 
caua, 8 doe 


eyKvKALOV Kiveirat 





KbKaw ael. Cf. Metaphys. xt. viii. §: 
“H te yiip trav torpwy pbors dldios obata 
wis, Ib. x. vi. 8: “Odkws 8 &romov 
éx Tod palvecOa Ta Sedpo wetaBdAdAovTa 
kat undémrore Siaévovta ey Tots avrois, 
éx Trobrwy wepl Tis GAnbelas Thy Kplow 
moeioOa, Act yap ex tay del Kara 
TavTd Exovtwy Kal undeulay weraBorAhy 
Trooupevay TaANGES Onpeder. 
& éor) 7a kard tov Kéopor. 

5 8d "Avatarydpay nal Oadjy] Cf. 
Eth. x. viii. 11; Plato, Theetetus, p. 
174 A: “Qowep wal @adijv dorpovo- 
Hobyra, @ Ocddwpe, kal tyw BAérovra, 
mwecdvrTa. eis ppéap, OpGrrd Tis Eupearrs 
ka xaplecoa Oeparawis arocKayat 
Aéyera, @s Ta pty ev odpavge mpobv- 
Motto eidévar, Ta 8 %umpooOev adbrov 
kal mapa mddas AavOdvo: abrdv. 
Tairoy dt dpke? cr@upa er mdvras 
bro ev pirocopia didyouor.. On the 
other hand, Aristotle (Politics, 1. xi. 
g) tells a story of Thales turning his 
philosophy to practical aecount, fore- 
seeing by astronomical observations 
that there would be a good crop of 
olives, buying up the crop in Miletus 


TOLADTA 


VIII. ] HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VL. 167 


Saunan rc xaeh xanen de xa Oaimovia eidévanr adrove dari, 
AX pyore 0, or ou TH avipomiva ayo Sur otosy. 7 O26 
dpovnsis wep TH avipam ive xal meph wy Zo71 Bovrsioa- 
ohas* rod yap dpovinov marsora Tor’ epyov elval dapey, 
To 20 Povrsveobas, Boureveras 0 obbelo mech rey aduva- 
y 7 wo Od \ Nd | Soa A ~ 
TWY AAAWS EYVElY, oud Gowy [4 TEAOS Th ETTI, XAL TOUTO 
\ 3 , ec > e nw » c ~ > / 
T PaxT ov ayaloy. 6 9 amrrw@s evfouvr0c o Tov aploTov 
7 ~ ~ 
aviparw Toy TPAXRTOY OTOYATTINGS KATH Toy AoyIoMI. 
> > \ e , ~ U ~ 
oud eotly y dpovycig Thy xaborov ) psv0Y, anna Ost xal TXT 
nal Exacta yywpitey’ PONT yep, 7 yO: mpabis mph 
O10 ab 2vios ox eidores ETEpwy EidoTwY 
. e : ~ c. # > \ 
Hb EY TOG HAAOIS OF EMTEIDOL* Eb Yao 
> f av \ ~ Ww / ‘ c Zz ~ \ 
eldein OTs Ta xotdba eUmerra xpea ual vyieiva, Tolan OF 


\ 2 7 
Ta xab EXACTA. 
TPAXTINWTEDOL, 


~ > ~ > Ys e , > 3 “2 st A a A 
xOUDa Ayvool, ov Tonos: vyisiav, AAA O EldwWS OT! TA 


> , ~ 7 ~ 
bpvibeia xotda xal tyseiva vdoigeagiss ENR: 


se T POLIT 627. 


4 88 dpavy- 


wots Osi aude é i ide q TAUTHY parroy, 


ely 0 ay Tig xal evTadha o OpKiTentovixy. 


"Eorts 02 xab % mworitiny; 


xab 4 dpovncig y airy pay 





beforehand, and having sold at his 
own price, ToAAa xphuara avAdrékayTa 
emideitar bre pddidy eott wAouTEIY Tots 
piroodpos, By BolAwvta, GAN ov 
Toor’ éotl rept 6 orovdda(oucr. 

6 Bovdrctera F ovGeis] A repe- 
tition for the third time of the same 
remark, cf. ch. i. § 6, ch. v. § 3. 

7 Owing to its practical character, 
wisdom (@pévnots) necessarily implies 
a knowledge of particulars. The par- 
ticular, indeed, would seém for action 
the more important element, as appears 
also in other things, if we compare 
science with empirical knowledge. 

5d Kal Enor ove ciddtes] Cf. Ar. 
Met. 1. i. 7—8 (whence this passage 


may probably be borrowed), mpds mév 


obv To mpdrrew eumeipla téxvns oddév 
Boxe? Siapépery, GAAG Kal maAAov ém- 
tTvyxdvortas dp&uer Tovs éumelpous TGV 
tyev ths eurepias Adyov exdvtwr. 
Atriov & bri 7h piv eureipia Tay Ka? 
Exacrtéy eat yvaois, % 5 TéEXYN TOY 





Kabdaov, ai 5 mpdtes wal af yevéres 
mwaca wept TO Ka Exacrdy eioww. 


VIII. This chapter fulfils a promise 
made before in the Eudemian Ethics 
(1. viii. 18), by distinguishing wisdom 
from other modifications of the same 
practical thought, namely, economy 
and the various forms of politics, 
This distinction would at first sight 
tend to reduce wisdom to mere 
egotism (§ 3, Soxet pddrior’ elvar 7 
wept avtoy Kal Eva. § 4: 7d abtgG 
eidévat), and thus to isolate the in- 
dividual within himself. In order to 
obviate this, the writer brings forward 
arguments to show that the welfare 
of the individual is bound up with 
that of the family and the state (§ 4). 
He urges the difficulty of knowing 
one’s own interest, hence concluding 
that wisdom is no mere instinct of 
selfishness. Wisdom implies a wide 
experience, on which account boys 


168 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


ate \ , 7 > 2 \ 2 6 
ESIC, TO LEVTOL EVAL OU TAUTOY auTaic. 


[ Cap. 


Tijg 08 meph won 


7} piv wo apyitextoviny dpovyoig vomoberiny, 7 OF Wg Ta 

xal Exaora Td xolvoy Byer ovoma, ToAITINY * aOTY OF mpax- 

\ \ , % A \ / \ € > 

tint, xal PovrcuTixy® To yao Wydiopa mpaxtoyv we T 
, 

Zoyarov. O10 woAiTeverGou TovTOUS Ldvoug AgyouTiV* [LOvOL 





cannot attain to it, no more than they 
can to philosophy, though they are 
often clever in mathematics (§§ 5—-6). 
Wisdom is a sort of deduction with a 
universal and a particular element 
($ 7), and yet we must distinguish it 
from science on this very account, 
that it deals with particulars (§ 8). 
It is the opposite to reason, which is 
of first principles, while wisdom is 
rather an intuition of particular facts 
(analogous to apprehending a mathe- 
matical figure). At all events, one 
form of wisdom is of this character. 
1—3 fort 5t—Bixacrimh} ‘Now 
polities and wisdom are really the 
same faculty of mind, though they 
form quite distinct conceptions. Wis- 
dom dealing with the state is divided 
into—first, legislation, which is the 
master-spirit asit were; and secondly, 
politics in detail, which is practical as 
being deliberative (for a ‘ measure’ is 
like the practical application of a 
general principle) and which usurps 
the common name of politics; hence 
too they who are concerned with par- 
ticular measures alone get the name of 
politicians, for these alone act, like 
workmen under a master. Just so 
that appears to be especially wisdom 
which is concerned with the indivi- 
dual self. And this kind usurps the 
common name of wisdom, while the 
other kinds I have alluded to may be 
specified as—first, economy ; second, 
legislation ; and third, politics (in the 
restricted sense), which may be sub- 
divided into the deliberative and the 
judicial.’ This distinction was pro- 





mised before, Hth. Hud. 1 viii. 8: 
“Qore toir’ by em abrd rd aryabdby 7d 
Tédos tay avOpary mpaKTay. TodTo 
® eo) 7d bmd Thy Kuplay racav. Airy 
® éor) moditixh nad oixovouixh Kab 
ppdévnois. Atapépovor yap avra ai 
eis mpds Tas UAAas THE Toadrat elva* 
mpos ® Gddhaas ef tt diapépovor, 
borepoyv Aextéov. It would appear 
that Eudemus by a sort of afterthought 
united the conception of péynats, 
which was developed later, to that of 
moAitixkh to which Aristotle had as- 
signed the apprehension of the chief 
good for man (cf. Zth. 1. ii. 5). But 
in so doing he had to bring together 
two different things; for ppéynois was 
a psychological term expressing a 


faculty of the mind, but woAcrimh was — 


merely one of the divisions of the 
sciences. In order to make them com- 
mensurate, Eudemus alters the signi- 
fication of roArrixh. He treats it asa 
state of mind (&s), as a mode of 
gpéynois, dealing with the state either 
universally or in details. From the 
same later point of view he adds also 
oixovouikh ; cf, Ar. Pol. 1. iii. 1: ’Emwed 
dé pavepdy e dy poplwy h wérus ovve- 
ornKey, avarykaioy wept oixovoulas eimeiv 
mpdorepov, &e. 

2 as Td %rxarov] The vagina or 
particular measure is here compared 
to the minor term in a syllogism, #. @ 
it constitutes the application of a 
general principle. Cf. Eth. vy. x. 6. 
On the use of &rxarey in this 
purely technical and logical sense, cf. 
§§ 8—g: Ar. Met. x. i. g: was yap 
Adyos kal nioa emorhun ray Kabddrov 


Cg ee ee 


VIII.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


169 


yap mparroverw obTo Women ob yerpoTreyvas’ Soxei OF xa 3 


if , > > ¢ \ at N b, Wat - & 
dpovynois Parner Elvas 7 TWepl KuTOY xak Eva, 


xah Ever 


Ld \ Ay Ok f ae V bY Ce > i 
AUTH TO xowwoy von, dpovyrig’ exelywy OF 7 pty olxovopla 
e \ 4 < \ 7 A , € \ s 
71 02 vopobeoia 7 08 moriTixny, xal TaUTYS 7 wey PovrAcuTixy 
c A 7 me \ oe N By , QA c ~~ 
7 Oe Oimaorixy. eidog mev obv Th av ely yowoews TO nITM4 

f ~ \ \ 
eidévas’ AAA’ Exe diadopav mworayy’ xal doxel 6 TX mwepl 





Post. Anal, 1. i. 
4: ob bid 7d péooy Td toxarov yrwpi- 
Sera. 

3 The classification here intended is 
as follows,—péynois or wisdom being 


Kal ob Ta éoxdTwr. 


first a general term and including 
politics with the other faculties men- 
tioned, and seeond a special kind 
contrasted with the other faculties— 











Wisdom 
| 
| ioe A 
About oneself About the family About the State 
| 
‘Wisdom’ Economy Pollties 
Ls 
Universal In detail 
apXiTeKTOviKh XELpoTEXVIKH 
Legislation ‘ Politics’ 
| : | 
Deliberative Judicial 


4 eldos pev ody—rodirelas] *‘ Now 
it must be considered a species of 
knowledge to know one’s own interest, 
but this is widely different (from true 
wisdom).- A man who knows his 
own concerns and occupies himself 
with these is commonly thought wise, 
while politicians are thought med- 
dlesome fellows, and hence Euripides 
wrote :— 


Small wisdom was it in me to 
aspire, 


When well I might, mixed with the © 


common herd, 
Enjoy a lot full equal with the best. 
But ah ! how full of vanity is man! 
The restless meddling spirits in the 
state 
VOL. II. 





Z 


Are gaped at still and made the 
country’s gods. 


Men with these selfish principles seek 
their own advantage, and this, they 
consider, is what they have to do. 
From this notion the idea has grown 
that they are the wise. And yet, 
perhaps, the welfare of the individual 
is inseparable from the regulation of 
the household and from the existence 
of a state.’ 

To airg eidéva:] Fritzsche reads 7d 
7a aitg with the authority of two 
MSS., adding ‘ Ceterum in hae quoque 
prefracta orationis brevitate qui mul- 
tum Eudemi Moralia diurnd noctur- 
naque manu volutavit Eudemi stilum 
agnoscat necesse est,’ 


170 


HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VL 


[ Cuap. 


aiToy eidws xal diaTplBoyv dpoviproc elvat, of 08 moAiTixol 


morumpaypoves’ O10 Evpiridng 


rac © av gpovolny, @ Tapiiy axpaypdvwc 
éyv rolot ToAAOIc nprOpnpevy orparou 


lov PETATYXELY 5 


Tove yap wEeptocovs Kai Tt TPagoorrac TéEOY. . « 


~ \ \ ~ > , \ ¥ ~ ~ 
Cryrovel yap To auTois ayabov, xal olovras Totro deiy 


, 
WPATTELY, 


¥ ~ , re , 
ex TauTnS avy THS OoEns eAyAvbe TO ToUTOUS 


, 5 / > * ,' e ~ oP; sae 

dpovirous ELVAL*? HQITOL lows OUxX EOTk TO AUTOU EV AYEU 
> / a ” { ae a: ) e ~ ~ 3 ~ 
OLXOVOLIAS OUO AYEV TOAITEING* ETS OF TH AUTOU mwE Eb 


~ wn \ , 
5 Osoixely, KONAOY xal OxETTEOY. 


~ - 4 ~ > 
onpsioy 0 zotl Tod eizy- 


pévou xal Osors yewpmerpixol piv véor xal pabywarixol 
yivovrar xal copol Ta Tomita, dpovisog O ov doxed yive- 


o Sau. 


alriov 0 Ort rey xal Exacta tot 7 dpovysis, & 


, , . > , , a A > »” = 

YrveTas YYWPlLLa 2& EUTEIDIA’, YEO 3 ELTELOS OUxX ECTIY 
~ \ , ~ ‘ 5] / ge “en \ \ ~ > 

6 TAHIOS Yao Ypovov wolsh THY EmEelpiav” emsh HAL TOUT AY 
, Leen J2NN ‘ \ ~ ‘ > »# 

Tic oxelairo, 01a Th OH pabnparixas [ev WAG YEVOIT ay, 


codss 8 4 ducixds ov. 


A OTs Ta wey OF adaipeoeo 
7 & 





moAunpaypoves | This is often opposed 
Cf. Plato, 
Gorgias p. 526 c: pirogdpov ra abrod 
apataytos Kal ov moAumpayuovhoaytos 
év 7G Big. Repub. p. 433 A: 7d Ta 
aitod mpattew Kal uh woAumparypoveiy, 
Evipintdns| In the Philoctetes; the 
later lines are thus filled up by 
Wagner, Fragm. Eur. p. 401 :— 


to 7a abrov mparrew. 


Yoov peracxely THE TOPwTaTY TUXNS ; 

ovdev yap ot w yatpoy ws avhp epu. 

Tovs pev meptocovs Kal Tt mpdoooytas 
™A€ov 

Tiapev Bydpas 7” ev wre voul Comer. 


The Scholiast and Paraphrast both 
conjecture icet to govern 
mepiscovs. This would give no metre, 
and only a very inferior sense. 

4—5 &i—*ylveaOa] ‘ Moreover the 
directing one’s own affairs is by no 
means simple, it is a subject for much 
consideration. In proof whereof we 
may allege that while boys learn 


Zevs 





geometry and mathematics, and be- 
come clever in such things, no boy 
seems to attain to “wisdom.”’ The 
writer is arguing against the identi- 
fication of ‘ wisdom’ with an instinct 
of selfishness. If it were so simple, 
why should not boys possess it? d:d7z 
is for 871, as in Eth. Bud. yu. x. 20: 
Afriov 3t rod pdxecOa, didTt KardAlov 
wey 4 Auch quria, avaykaorépa Bt 4 
xenotun. Cf. Ar. Meteor. mi. iii. §: 
Snuciov dé rovrov Bid71 evredOev yiyve- 
Ta 6 &veuos Sbev by 7 Kupia yiywnrat 
bidonacis. Ib. 1. xiii. 23: Té re iro 
tois bpecw exew Tas mryas paprupe: 
ddr: TE cuppeiy ex” SAlyov Kal Kara 
puxpoy ex moAA@y voTibwy Siadliwow 6 
témos Kal ylyvovta obtws af xryal Tay 
WOTauay. 

6 copds 8 4 puornds of] ‘But not a 
metaphysician or physical philoso- 
pher.’ odds is here used in a dis- 
tinctive sense, ‘ philosopher,’ par 
excellence, with a science above physics 


VIII] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VI. 


wes 


2 ~ ™“ € > ae > 4 / \ ‘ XN 3 
EOTIV, TWY O Ab ADYal 2g EULTELDIAG* Hab TH BEY ov 
ae « / > A / : ~ X . Kas > 
TITTEVOUTLY Ob Ye0k HAAR AgyouTiy, THY O2 TO Ti EoTIY Ovx 
Aonrov: ers auaprin % weol To xa4crov ev Tw Bouvrcu- 
‘ 4 : x me Zz P > - “ an \ o 5 , \ 
cachas 7% wepk TO xa? Exacroy’ 4% Yap OT TWavTH TA7 


Papiotaipa dara daviaa, 7 ors Tod! Papuorabnov. 


or 
OTL 


0 74 dpovyoig ovx emioryuy, davepov' rod yap erxarov8 


ecotly, Womep sloytasr’ To yap mpaxToy To1odTov. 


> / 
AYTI- 


X\ \ ~ ~ € \ A ~ ~ a cs > ” 
HET QS bev On, To yo. 0 prey YP youg Twy Opwy, WY oUx EoTL9 





and mathematics, cf. ch. vii. § 3, 
note. 

% 8r1—&5ndov] ‘The reason surely 
is that the former matters (7. e. mathe- 
matics) are abstract, while the prin- 
ciples of the latter (physics and philo- 
sophy) are got by experience; thus 
boys repeat truths of the latter kind, 
without being really convinced of 
them; while the nature of the other 
subjects is easy to comprehend,’ 

50 apatpécews | The form in Aristotle 
is either év apaipéoe: or e apatpéecews. 
He constantly applies these terms to 
denote the mathematics. The locus 
classicus on this subject is Metaphys. 
X. lil. 7: KaOdrep 8 6 pabnuatixds 
mepl Ta e& apaipécews Thy Oewpiay 
Toeirat, mepiekwy yap maytTa Ta 
aic@nr& Oewpe?, oiov Bdpos Kad Koupd- 
TyTa Kal oxAnpdtynTa Kal rovvayrloy, ert 
dt Kal Oepudrynra Kal puxpdéryta Kat Tas 
&AAas Tas aicOnras évaytidoets, udvov 
8 Katadclre: To moody Kal cuvexés, 
«.7.A. Cf. De Celo, mt. i. 11: 81a 7d 
7a pey e& aapécews AéyecOu TH 
pabnuarikd, Ta 5& HyoiwKd ex mpoade- 
cews. De Anima, m1. vii. 10: oftw ra 
HaOnpatina ob Kexwpiouéva ws Kexwpt- 
opéva, voet, Stav von éxeiva. 

marevovot| Cf. ch. iii. § 4, note, 
and Eth, vi. iii. 8: of mp@rov paldytes 
Guvelpovat pev Tos Adyous, toact 
® ovrw. 

7 Another argument to prove the 
complex and difficult character of 





‘wisdom’ is that it implies a kind of 
syllogism, wherein both the major 
premiss and the minor equally admit 
of error. 

7a Baptorabua Sara pavaa| This 
was probably a medical notion of the 
day. Cf. Problems, 1. xiii. where a 
similar superstition is maintained: 
Awa th 7d 7a Bdara wetaBadAew vor @dés 
garw elvat, To BE Thy Gépa ob ;— 
BSaros wey TOAAG et5y €or) Kal Sidpopa 
Ka? attd, &Zpos 5€ ob, dor kat TodTo 
alr.ov. 

8 8r. 8 —rowirov] ‘But (though 
implying a syllogism) it is plain that 
wisdom is not science, for it deals 
with the particular, as we have said, 
the action being of this kind.’ 

9 dyvtixerrat—elios| ‘To reason, 
indeed, it forms the opposite pole; 
for while reason deals with those 
terms which are above all infe- 
rence, wisdom on the other hand 
deals with the particular, which is 
below demonstration, and is appre- 
hended by perception ; not the per- 
ception of the separate senses, but 
analogous to that faculty by which 
we perceive that the immediate object 


. presented to us in mathematics is a 


triangle. For on this side also de- 
monstration must cease. However 
it is rather this particular mode of 
wisdom which is a perception, the 
other presents a different form.’ 
Gvrixerra pev 5) TH vp] Having 


z2 


172 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Cuap. 


~ ce wv ° ¢ > > 

Adyos, 7 08 TOU ETYaTOU, OU OUx ZoTIV EIOTILY arm 
y > € ~ 27 > ? o > / 4 . 

alrbnois, avy 7 os bObwy, o> ole air bayonet ont i 5 
Tol pabynarreors EO YNATOY THlywyoy" TTYTETAL YA XAXEL, 





alluded to the syllogistie nature of 
wisdom, the writer seems to have 
been reminded to distinguish it from 
science; and thus, haying before 
(ch. v. § 8: ch. vii. § 6) con- 
trasted it with art and philosophy, he 
is led on to finish the round by 
placing it in contrast with reason. 

obx 7 Tov idiwy, GAN ofa aicbavd- 
veGa] This is the same as Aristotle’s 
famous distinction between the ‘ sepa- 
rate senses’ and the ‘common sense.’ 
His own words are clear on the 
point, cf. De Animé, u. vi. 2: Aéyw 
& Yiov pév (aicOnrdv) 8 wh evdéxerau 
érépa aicOhoe aicOdverda, Kai mepl 
b ph evdéxerar ararnOivat, ofov ds 
Xpaémaros Kal axoh Wéopov Kal yevors 
Xvyuov.—Ta& pev ody TowdrTa AéyeTat 
Wia Exdorov, Kowd St Klynois, HApeula, 
apiuds, oxijua, pméyeOos* Ta yap 
TowavTa ovdemas eorly Tia, GAAG Koide 
mdcas* Kal yap apy Klynols ris eorw 
aic@nth wal dpe. It will be seen 
that figure (oxjua) is one of the 
objects of the ‘common sense;’ the 
text gives as an instance of this the 
perception of a triangle. In De An. 
11. i. 6, Aristotle adds ‘unity’ to the 
list of ‘common sensibles,’ but he 
reduces them all to modifications 
of the perception of motion: Taira 
yop mayvra Kivhoe aicbavdueba, ofoy 
MéyeOos Kuvhoe, “Qote nal oxiua’ 
péyeOos yap tt 7d oxjma. TO 8 
hpenotv TH ph nweicOa: 6 F apiOuds 
TH anopdce: TOU cuvexovs, K.T.A. He 
admits (De An. w. vi. 4) that ‘com- 
mon sensibles’ can scarcely be said to 
be apprehended by sense at all, ray 5¢ 
Ka? atta aic@ntay rd Bia Kuplws 
éotly aicénrd, cf. Jb. um. i. 6, where 
it is said these are apprehended ac- 





cidentally or concomitantly by the 
senses. This is surely the true view; 
we see in the apprehension of number, 
figure, and the like, not an operation 
of sense, but the mind putting its own 
forms and categories, 7. ¢. itself, on 
the external object. It would follow 
then that the senses cannot really be 
separated from the mind; the senses 
and the mind each contribute an 
element to every knowledge. Ari- 
stotle’s doctrine of row ate Onois would 
go far, if carried out, to modify his 
doctrine of the simple and innate cha- 
racter of the senses, eg. sight (cf. 
Eth, 1. i. 4), and would prevent its 
absolute collision with Berkeley’s 
Theory of Vision. On the general 
subject of xow. aiod. see Sir W. 
Hamilton, Reid's Works, pp. 828— 
830. 

br 7d ev Tots uabnuariKots %oxaror 
tplywvov| This has been frequently 
understood to mean that ‘the ulti- 
mate or simplest possible figure is a 
triangle.’ But the Paraphrast does 
not so explain it; his words are rodroy 
3t tov tpdwov Kal of wabnuatixol rd 
aig@ntdy yiwéoxovet Tpiywvov, K.T.A, 
And referring to Ar. Post. Analyt. 1. 
i. 4, we find exactly this instance 
given of a particular knowledge, the 
result of observation, 87: wév yap way 
éxet Suolv dpbais toas, 
mpoyder* Sri bt rdéde rd ev TH Tuscv- 
KAlp tplywvdy err, &ua erayduevos 
eéyvépicey, The term écxaroy is used 
in the very next line: éviwy -yap 
Todroy Toy tpédxov 7 pdbnols éort, Kar 
ob 51a Tod wéoou Td Er xarov yywplCerat. 
It is true that in different places Ari- 
stotle uses rxaroy in different senses, 
as denoting with various applications - 


Tplywvov 


Vit — 1,1 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


173 


AAN adry paaroy alodyois fy dpovycis, éxelyng F aADrO 


eid0c. 


To Gnreiv 08 xal rd Bovreverbou diadéoer* Td yap Bov- 9 


Asveobou Syreiv Ts eoriv. O08 AaBely xal mepl evPovrAlag 


| haps: 3 , > ta a d0f EY > id \ +e > 
Th EOTh, WOTEPOY EMIOTYLY Tig y 0OSA 7 EVTTOYIA 7 AAXO 


Th yévos. 


> 7 X N a a” Ld \ ~ 
emioTH Uy piv Oy ox Eoriv’ oD yap Cnrotcs2 


meph dy lraci, 7 0 evBovrla Bovray Tis, 6 08 BovrAcuopevog 


Snret xal Aoyiferau. 


AAG pany 00d evoroyla. 


bd 
OVEU TE 





the end of a series, thus cf. De. An. 
mI. x. 2, where it means ‘final 
cause,’ th, m1. ii. 11, ‘the last step 
in analysis;’ Metaph. vi. iii. 6, 
‘matter, &c. But in the place 
before us 7d xxaTov has been already 
appropriated to the logical meaning 
of ‘particular,’ ‘minor term,’ ‘ imme- 
diate truth,’ cf. § 2 and § 8. 

oThoerat yap Kare] ‘For on that 
side too (7. ¢ in dealing with an 
object of the sense as well as an in- 
tuition of reason) demonstration must 
stop.’ “Iorac@a is a common logical 
form, it is opposed to mpotévm eis 
&meipov, and is frequently impersonal, 
ef. Post. Anal. i. iii. 1: adbvaroy yap 
Th tmeipa SveAOety, Et te lorara ral 
cioly dpxal,n.7.A. Met. u. iv. 22, &e. 

GAN arn pardov alobnois th 
gpévnois| Three of Bekker’s MSS. 
read 7 ppévnois, and this seems most 
natural, and to give the best sense 
(though 4 is supported by the Para- 
phrast). What the writer means is 
apparently to add that only one kind 
of wisdom can be called analogous to 
the apprehension of a triangle; atrn 
refers to ) kal’ Exaora ppdvnots, men- 
tioned above, ch. vii. § 7: de? audw 
exev 4} tabrnvy paddrov, There is 


another kind (ékefvns), namely, the 


possession of universal ideas (7év 
Kadaou) (/.c.), which is of a different 
nature. 


IX. This chapter commences the 





examination of a set of faculties 
cognate to wisdom, or forming part 
of it. The first of these is good 
counsel (evBovAla). This, says the 
writer, is to be distinguished from 
science, which does not deliberate ; 
from guessing (evoroxfa), which is too 
quick; from sagacity (a@yxlvoiw), which 
is a kind of guessing; and from 
opinion, which is too definite. It is, 
then, a certain rightness of thought, 
it chooses the right means to a good 
end. The conception of this end 
wisdom itself must supply. There is 
a great assumption here of the manner 
of Aristotle. The chapter seems 
formed after Eth, ut. ii. ; § 6 reminds 
us of many similar passages in Book 
IV., and § 7 is after the manner of 
Eth. 1. iii, 5. There is an advance 
upon Aristotle’s account of delibera- 
tion (Eth, m1. ili.) in two points, (1) 
the process is illustrated here by the 
logical formula of the syllogism, -(2) 
there is a mention here of the faculty 
whereby ends are apprehended, which 
Aristotle had left unnoticed. See 
Eth, ui. iii. 1, note. 

1 It is an abrupt, awkward com- 
mencement of the chapter to say, 
‘enquiring and deliberating are diffe- 
rent, for deliberating is a species of 
enquiring. But what is meant appa- 
rently is, to bring ‘good counsel’ 
under the head of enquiring, which 
separates it at once from both science 
and opinion, 


174 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VL. [Cuar. 


\ , \ Cf € ’ / / \ \ 
yap royou xal TAYY TY sUoTOYIA, PoursvoyTas OE moruY 
, \ \ / \ NN ~ A A / 
xpovov, xal dal mearrey psy dely Taxd Ta Pourcubevra, 

, AA Ne ” © , o € 
3 Bovrsusrdas 68 Ppadiws. Ere 7 ayyilvoim erepoy xal 7 
> / ” Nd > ye cy , ADV QA QO/ 
eufovAla’ £571 O ELOTOYIA TIG i ayyIvoIH. oUdE 7 d0ba 
« 1:2 , PINS / > r ees} bt \ ~ / 
7) euUouAIa oUdEUIn. GAA Emel O [LEY XAXOS Povacuvopevog 
apaptaver, 60 20 dpSig Povrsveras, O%Aov Gre opbdrng Tig 
e > / 5 yA feet Sake , \ ” > > 7 
7, edBovrta eoTly, OUT emiarans 08 ate O6EnS* EmioTHENS 
piv yxp obx zotw dpborns (ood yap cynoptice), dobus Oy 
épbarns arrdera’ peat 03 xal Bproras jon may ov d0&a 
éotiy. diavolag 
v , a 2, 7 , \ A eas ? 
ipa AsimeTas* adTy yap ourw dacig’ xal yap 7 ofa ob 
Sirnoig AAR Pacis Tig 7dy, 6 OF PovrAcudmevoc, eay Ts EU 


AAAa pay oud ayeu Aoyou 7 euPouria. 





2 gaol mpdtrrev pev Bely raxd 
k.T.A.] Fritzsche quotes Isocr. Demon. 
p- 9, ¢. § 35: Bovdetou piv Bpadéws 
emitéAer 5€ Taxews Ta Sdtavra. Herod. 
VI. 49: avhp 5) ofrw by ely &pioros, 
ei Bovdevduevos wey appwdéo1, may ém- 
Aeydsuevus welcerOar xphua, ev bt TE 
Epyy Opacis etn. 

3 fort 8 evotoxla Tis H &yxlvora| 
This is announced by Aristotle, Post. 
Anal. 1. xxxiy. 1, in the very next 
line to that passage on the distinction 
of the organs of truth, which appa- 
rently suggested so much of the sub- 
jects of the present book, 7 8 ayxlvod 
est evoroxla tis ev doxémT@ xpdvy 
In more general terms 
ayxlvoiais defined by Plato, Charmides, 
p. 160 A, as dfvrTns Tis THs Wuxjs. 

emothuns pev—aAoylifera] ‘ Now 
in science there is no such thing as 
‘‘rightness,” for there is no such 
thing as wrongness. In opinion, on 
the other hand, rightness is truth. 
And besides, whatever we have an 
opinion about is already decided. 
But good counsel is not by any means 
beyond questioning (&vev Adyov), 
Therefore it remains that good coun- 
sel is a rightness of the operation of 
thought (d:avolas), for this does not 


TOD pérou. 





amount to decision. Opinion is not 
an inquiry, but is already a kind of 
decision. On the other hand, he that 
deliberates, whether well or ill, is 
inquiring after something and caleu- 
lating.’ 

émorhuns| This is said here just 
as it was before said, ch. v. § 7, that 
there were no degrees of excellence in 
wisdom. 

doims 8] Cf. Eth. m1. ii. 13, and 
above, ch, ii. § 2, note. 

Siavolas upa}] Plato, Repub. p. 511 
D, proposed to confine the term d:dvoia 
to the discursive understanding as 
opposed to vovs, the intuitive and 
speculative reason, Sidvoiay 5& Kadreiv 
pot Soxets Thy Tav yewueTpiKa@y TE Kal 
Thy TaY ToLOUTWY Et GAN’ Ov VodY, ws 
petaty tt d0fns Te Kal vod Thy didvoray 
otoay, Aristotle probably had the same 
distinction in view, Post. Anal. 1. xxxiii. 
9 (l.c.), TOs Set Savetuar emi re Siavolas 
cal vod. But he did not maintain the 
distinction in his works, and certainly 
it is not observed by Eudemus in the 
present book, where both vots mpax- 
Tixos and didvoia Oewpntixh are spoken 
of. In the place before us didvom 
apparently means the exercise of 
reason, a process of thought, . 


IX.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


175 


zav Te xaxWe Povrcunras, Cyrei ti xal AoyiSerar. An 4 
opbéryg Tis ear 7 euovAIa PovAts* O10 4 Bourn Syryréa 


~ \ \ / 
7 pwroy af xb WES Th. 


eel 0 2 dpboryg mazcovayts, 


~ o > ~ c \ > \ We ~ aA , 
OWAoy Gri od TaoH" 6 yap axparng xal 6 daviarog 6 rpori- 
Berar iely ex Tod Aoyiopod TevEera, Wore ophe> zoras 


PsBovrcupévoc, xaxdy 0& péya elAandas. 


doxet 0 eyaboy 


Tt elvar Td ev BsPovrstiobou’ 7 yap ToradTy opborng Bovars 


> , ec > ~ F 
euPovaia, % ayadod reuxtixy. 


> lf \ i A 
QAAN eat xal Tovrous 


CN ~ oo) ~ Va ~ nw ~ 
Wevdel ovrroyiopd ruyelv, xal 6 wey bel moijoou Tuyelv, 
SSNS OS > \ De \ , a oe > 299 
Or 00 0 ob, aAAA Weudy Toy pérov poy elvar’ Wor’ oud 
a > / + eae A ~ \ 2 > z 
adTy mw evPouria, xa qv ov Ost pwev Tuyyavel, oD pévToL 





4 érel &—BeBovacidcbaj] ‘ But 
since the term “ rightness” is used in 
more senses than one, it is plain that 
** good counsel” does not answer to all 
the senses. For the incontinent or 
bad man will obtain, by his calcula- 
tion, what he proposes to himself, 
so that he will have deliberated 
rightly, yet secured a great evil. 
Whereas, to have deliberated well is 
generally thought (doxe?) to be a good.’ 

mAcovaxa@s| i.e. Rightness of means, 
either respective, or irrespective, of 
rightness in the end; or, again, 
rightness of end (§ 5), whatever may 
have been the means. 

6 yap &xparhs| It would seem rather 
the abandoned man (a&kéAaoros) who 
by calculation attains bad ends. The 
incontinent man would not generally 
haye deliberation attributed to him, 
ef, Eth. vu. ii. 2. But the characters 
cannot be kept very distinct. 

idety] Perhaps iSety may be taken 
here as equivalent to something like 

_oxondy. The Scholiast offers the fol- 


lowing loose explanation: 8 yap 6. 


axparhs Kal amA@s 6 gavdos mpor{de- 
Tat, as TéAos ideiv, Hrot ocKxebacdat 
Srws avTod émiredterat K.7.A. 

done? 8 ayabdy] Fritzsche quotes 
Herod. vir. 10: 7d yap eb Bovaeder Oar 
Képdos wéyioror ecipicxw ébvy. Sopho- 





cles, Antig. 1050: Kpdtioroyv KTnudTwY 
evBovdia. Isocr. Demon. p.9. c. § 35: 
Hyod Kpatiotov elvar mapa wey Taev Peay 
evTuxlay, Tapa 5¢ judy abTa&v eiBovatay. 

5 GAN &or1i—eiva] ‘ But, further, 
it is possible to obtain what is good 
by a false syllogism ;—to obtain what 
one ought to do, not however by the 
right means, but with a false middle 
term.’ Great indefiniteness is intro- 
duced here by the word moijou. We 
could not surely be said ‘to obtain 
what we ought to do’ by the wrong 
means. Doing a thing is means not 
end (cf. Eth. m1. iii. 15), or if looked 
at as end, it is end inseparable from 
the means. Again, it is an inaccu- 
racy to speak of a ‘ false middle term.’ 
Falsehood or truth is the attribute of 
a proposition not a term, cf. De Inter- 
pret. i. 3: wep yap obvOerw Kad dial- 
peoly éort Td Wevdos Kat Td dAnbés. 
If the conception of the end be right 
and yet the syllogism wrong, it follows 
that the minor premiss must be false, 
thus: 


Preservation of health is good : 
Abstinence from intellectual labour is 
preservation of health : 


the result of which syllogism will be 
the preservation of health, but by the 
sacrifice of mental culture. 


176 


668 op 2OEb. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Cuap- 


Ets Gort TOAdY ypovoy PovrAsuomevoy TUYElY, 


~ ° / / 
Toy Os TAYY. ovxody 0d’ exeivy rw edBourla, aAA’ dpborys 


Ye ~ 4 
77 xaTa To WheAoy, xal ob Det xal Wo xal ore. 


ae. 
ETL EGOTE 


c 


xal awards ed BePourctiobas xal mpog ri TéA0c. 7 prev OF 
ams 7 pds TO TEAOS Th arAwS xaTophoioa, 7 OE TIS 7 


mpg Th TEAS. 


ei On Tay dpovinwy Td ed PePovrciobas, 


7 eUPovrla ely av dpbaryg 7 xara ro cupdéepoy mpog TH 
/ en 3 la . A ec / , , 
TéAog, 08 y Ppovyoig aAIHS broranbls eoriv. 
+ X 9 eS 2 4 ee / > A A 
10 "Eort 03 xal 4 ctveosg xal 7 aouveria, xa? ag Adyomev 
\ \ 3 wn a \ EE A , a ‘ 
cuveTous xal aovverous, oUF GAws To adTO emioTin 7 O0Ey 





6—7 The writer first raises good 
counsel to the rank of one of the vir- 
tues, by the mention of all the quali- 
fications necessary; afterwards he 
seems to modify this by saying that, 
besides the absolute good counsel 
which aims at the absolute end, there 
is also such a thing as relative good 
counsel aiming at relative ends. 

One might have thought that it was 
unnecessary to give so separate a 
psychological existence to excellence 
in deliberation. However, the quality 
here described answers more nearly 
than gpévnois to what we call ‘ pru- 
dence.’ &pévnois, we are here told, 
is the conception of ends, and after- 
wards (ch. xii. § 9) it is shown to be 
the faculty of means. In truth, it is 
both, according to the Aristotelian 
views (as far as we can discern them) ; 
it implies both prudence (€bBovAla), 
and also a certain moral condition 
(apern), and it is implied by both of 
them. As compared with the one it 
is of ends, and as compared with the 
other it is of means. 


X. This chapter treats of another 
faculty which forms an element in 
wisdom, and yet may be distinguished 
from it, namely, apprehension (otve- 
ois). Apprehension is not mere 
opinion (else all would possess it), 





nor is it a science, for it deals with no 
separate class of objects whether 
necessary or contingent (otre yap mept 
Tov del byTwy Kal dxwhtowy 4% obvecis 
eat, otre wep) Trav yryvouévey Srov- ~ 
oov). It deals with all that can be 
matter of human deliberation, in 
short, with the same objects as wis- 
dom. But wisdom commands, it is 
concerned with right action, in short, 
it belongs to the will as well as 
to reason. But apprehension only 
judges, it is merely intellectual. It 
is neither the having nor the getting 
wisdom, but rather it is the applica- 
tion of one’s knowledge to give a 
meaning to the dicta of wisdom. It 
is ‘understanding,’ as its name im- 
plies, or ‘taking in’ (ovméva:), when 
another speaks. The word appears 
to mean ‘combination,’ ‘joining one 
thing to another.’ 

Aristotle had spoken of ctveois as 
one of the intellectual excellencies, 
Eth. 1. xiii. 20: coplay yey kad obverw 
kal ppdéyvnow diavontixds. Eudemus 
does not apply the term dperf to this, 
or to any of the other intellectual 
qualities which he treats of, except 
wisdom and philosophy. He gives 
here a psychological aceount of odve- 
ots, the operation of which he con- 
fines to intellectual insight with regard 
to moral subjects, apprehension of 


{eX H@OIKQN [EYAHMION] VI. 177 
, \ As , of 7 ~ \ , 
(wavres yap ay joav cuveTol) oUTE Tig pia Tiy xaTa p.Ep0s 

~ \ \ ~ x 4 \ 
emIoTH@yY, oloy iarpiny wepl Uyisiv@y 7 yewmsTpla wept 
~ ld \ Ve 
psyéboug* obte yap meph Ty asl byTwy xal axiwyTwy 7 
~ / ~ \ 
cuvecig gor ovTE meph TdY yryvouevwy OTovOtY, aAAA 
nh > 7 ov \ , O40 \ \ 
wep wy amopycersy ay Tig xak Povrsvoaito, O10 mepl Te 
~ , x \ / 
aura piv TH dpovyice: eoriv, ovx zor 03 TavTOY TUvECIS 
, oe | 4 
xal dpovyois* 7 pev yap dpovycig emitaxtiny cot’ The 
bead » lad i 
yap det mparre 7) wy, To TEAOG aUTHS erly’ 7 08 TOVETIG 
, + 
ApITiny povov’ TAUTOY yap TUVETIG xa) eUTUVETIA xal oUvE- 
\ \ > 7 Bf > wv 4 \ 7 
Tol xa evovveToI. eoTs 0 oUTE TO Eye THY Hpovyciy3 
v QA / ce 7 > > a + 4 
OUTE TO AapPavery 7] TUVETIS* AAA WOTED TO povOavery 
tA a ~~ ~ r. re ao - 4 ~~ 
AeyeT Os Tuvseves, OTAY YoHTAL TH EMioTyUN, oUTwWS ev TH 
~ ~ , % =% / / Pes < 
po oo TH O0Sy el +o xpiverw wepl rovTwy wepl wy 7 


, 7 > A / % id n~ % 
Ppovycic EOTIV, AAAOUV ASYOVTOS, XA xpivEely xAAWS* TO 





the meaning of moral dicta and 
critical judgment thereon. That 
there is such a faculty of apprehen- 
sion, and of sympathetic or critical 
understanding, quite distinct from 
moral goodness in people, the expe- 
rience of life seems to show. 

The author of the Magna Moralia 
gives a much inferior account of 
ovveots (I. Xxxv. 17), making its cha- 
racteristic to be that it deals with 
small matters, wep) pixpOv te Kad év 
puxpots 4 xplors, 

1 8d meph 7a abra wey TH ppovhoer| 
It is used nearly equivalently to 
gpdvnots by Thucyd. 1. 140: Auae Trois 
kowh Sdtacw, hy pa te nal opadrrAd- 
pe0a, Bondeiv, 4 unde xatopbodvras THs 
tuvécews petamoreto bat. 

2 pey yap ppdyvnois emraxtinh 


éorw—f St cbveots kpitixh udvov| The 
opposition of these terms is taken - 


from Plato, Politicus, p. 259 E— 

260 c, where it is argued that the 

arithmetician (Aoyiorhs) is content 

with a knowledge and judgment about 

numbers, whereas the architect (apx:- 

TéxTwv) must go on to apply his know- 
VOL, Il. 





ledge by directing the workmen—thus 
that all science may be divided under 
the two heads of critical and manda- 
tory. (260 A) OdKody ywwortkal pév at 
Te Todrar tbumaca Ka dméoa Evve- 
TwovTa. TH AoyioriKh, Kploer SE Kat emt- 
Taker Siapéperov aAAHAoW TovlTw Tw 
yévee;—oalvecbov. *Ap’ ody cupumrdons 
Tis yrworinns ef Td pey emiraKtiKdy 
pépos, Td 8 
mpooelmoier, 


KpitiKdy B1aupodmevor 
eumer@s dy caiuer 
SinpjicOc ;—Kard ye thy éuhv ddftav. 

3 GAN’ Gowep Td pavOdvew A€yerat 
cuvidvar Bray xpitu TH emorhun| 
The word pav@dvew was ambiguous in 
Greek, it meant either to ‘learn’ or 
to ‘understand.’ The Sophists used 
to play on this ambiguity, arguing 
that one could ‘learn what one knew 
already.’ Cf. Ar. Soph. Elench. iv. 1, 
2, which illustrates the present pas- 
sage: Eiol 8¢ mapa wey rhy duwvuplay 
of rowlde Tov Ndbywr, ofoy Bri pavOd- 
vovow of émiorduevors TH yap amo- 
orouariCoueva, wavOdvovaw of ypaypa- 
Tikol. Td yap pavOdvew dudvupor, Td 
re tuviévat xpépevoy Th émorhun Kar 
Td AapBdvew emorhuny. 


AA 


178 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. [ Cuap, 


4yap su TH KAAMS TaUTOY. xal evredDev 2ryAube ToUvonn 7) 
coveric, xa Hv evobverol, ex Tig ev TH pavOaverv* Agyomey 
yap To pavdavery Tuvievas TOAAGHIS. 

11 ‘H 83 xadroupévyn yropuy, xad jv ebyvwpovac xab eye 
dapsy yywoury, 7 Tod Emieixods earl xpiorg of67. oHmetov 
02° Tov yap émisixy parnora dapev sivas cuyyvwpovixoy, 
xal erieints To eye wel Evia cvyyvMpyy. 7 08 cuyyvmpey 
yvopn aor) xpitiny Tod emresxodg 66%. 6f64 0% Tod 
aarniovs. 

Eloi 8: wé&oa: ai 2&9 ebrcyws cig TavTd Telvouras® 
Agyomey yap yuwuny xal covery xal dpovyow xal yoiy 
exh rods adrovs émidépovTes yuwpny Eye xal vodv 4Oy xal 
dpovinoug xal cuverodg* maou yap ai duvdpess adros Tey 
Zo yatwy eich xal roy xal Exaoroy, xai ev piv TH xpiTixog 


v 





XI. This chapter (which is not 
conveniently divided as it stands) 
opens with a mention of the quality 
of considerateness (yvéun), and pro- 
ceeds to point out how various quali- 
ties unite in wisdom, and what are 
the natural and intuitive elements 
which it contains. 

1 7 38 Kadounévn yroun| By the 
progress of psychology, this term came 
to bear the special meaning of ‘ consi- 
derateness.’ At first it meant know- 
ledge in general, cf, Theognis, vv. 
295 sq. 

Tvduns 8 obdév &uewor avnp Exe abrds 
ev avT@, 
OF ayvwpootyns, Kipy’, 68uvnpdrepor. 


In Thucydides it bore a variety of 
significations, especially when used in 
the plural, standing for almost any- 
thing mental, ‘ minds’ as opposed to 
bodies, ‘thoughts’ as opposed to 
deeds ; ‘feelings,’ ‘ principles,’ ‘ max- 
ims, &c. In Aristotle’s Rhetoric, m. 
xxi. 2—15, yrwun is used for a moral 
maxim (such as those of the so-called 
Gnomie Poets); so also, for all 
popular sayings, Soph, El. xvii. 17. 





It was probably from the association 
of ovyyvéun that yréun came to haye 
its distinctive meaning. The author 
of the Magna Moralia calls it ebyrw- 
poovvn, and makes it a sort of passive 
form of émefeim (1. ii. 1): fore mey 
ody ovk kvev emetkelas 7) evyyvwpootyn* 
7d wey yap Kpivat Tod edyyvdpmovos, Td BF 
dn mpdrrew Kara thy Kplow Too 
émetkous, 

In the text above, it is said that 
‘considerateness is a right judgment 
of the equitable man.’ ‘Pardon is a 
right critical considerateness of the 
equitable man.’ : 

6p9} 8 7 Tod GAnOots] ‘Now bya 
right judgment is meant a true one.’ 
This must be the import of the sen- 
tence, but the writer says not &AnOhs, 
but rod &An900s—probably ‘ by attrae- 
tion’ to Tod émexods. But it is an 
inaccuracy of language to speak of ‘a 
true man’ in the sense of ‘a man 
whose judgment is true.’ Eudemus, 
as we have seen (ch. ii. § 2, note), 
is inclined to confine the application 
of ép8és to acts of the desire and will. 

2 elot 58—%Adrov] ‘Now all the 
(above-mentioned) conditions of mind 


x XE] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VL. 


179 


“J \ , A \ > , a 

clvas mepl wy 6 dpovipos, ouveTos xal evyywpwy 7 TvyyVw- 
~~ \ ~ ~ . 

poo? Te yep emisinh xowd Tov ayabdy amdvtwy éortly ev 


~ \ ” By \ ~ > of \ ~ > , 
TO Mpog aAAoY. ETT OF THY xaP Exacta xal Thy eoya- 3 


UY \ Y Cea" \ , ~ , 
TWY TAVTATA TPAXKTE* xt Yop Tov Dpoviproy Ogi YivWoxEly 


> / \ c 7 he 7 \ / ~ 
AUTA, HAL Y TDVVETIS XA 7, YVOULY) wept TO WPAXT hy TAUTA 


~ 


ey 
0 ET HATH. 


* ~ ~ > , reel Poms ae 4 \ 
xOL O YOUC TWY ET XAT WY eT aprDPoTepar * HAL 4 


\ ~ / ae \ ~ ee ~ x 
yap THY THwWTwWY bpwY xal THY eoYaTwWY vovG éoT! xal ov 


AO 6 \ \ x > DY ig ~ > iz ed 
oyos, xaAI O [ev xATA TAG A770 elEetc TOV AXLVYYTwY opwy 





naturally tend to the same point ; we 
apply (émiépoyres) the terms consi- 
derateness, apprehension, wisdom, and 
reason to the same persons, and say 
(Aéyouev) that they have considerate- 
ness, that they have attained to (#57) 
reason—that they are wise—that they 
are apprehensive. For all these 
faculties deal with immediate truths 
(ra@v €rxarwv) and particulars; and 
it is by being able to judge of those 
matters with which the wise man is 
concerned, that a man is apprehen- 
sive, considerate, or forgiving. Equity 
extends itself over all the forms of 
good which consist in a relation to 
one’s neighbour.’ 

vooy %8n| What this means is not 
quite clear. It may refer to what is 
said in § 6, Hde 4 HAmia voiv exe, 
Thus it might be nearly equivalent to 
our saying of a person that he had 
‘attained to years of discretion.’ Or 
again, it may refer to the moment of 
action, and #5 would be thus equiva- 
lent to the French voila. ‘There is 
reason exhibited.’ *H5dy is used 
similarly to denote the present 
moment, Eth. Eud. um. viii. 11: Kat 
yap 5 éyxparevduevos AvTetra: mapa 


Thy emOuuiay «pdtrayv Hin, Kal xalpe - 


thy am édrnldos Hdovhv, btt torepov 
apednOnoera, } Kal Hin awperctra 
byiatvwr, 

7a yap émeix7j| This is said because 
youn and ovyyvoun are acts of 
equity. Cf. Eth. v. x. 1, note. 





4—5 Kal 6 vods tay érxdtwy— 
vods| ‘ And reason is of the ultimates 
at both ends of the series. Both the 
first and the last terms are appre- 
hended, not by inference, but by 
reason. On the one hand, the scien- 
tific and demonstrative reason (6 pév 
kare ras dmodelteis) apprehends those 
terms which are immutable and 
primary. And on the other hand, 
the practical reason (6 év tats mpak- 
tikais) apprehends the particular 
(écxdrov) and contingent truth, and 
the minor premiss. For these con- 
stitute the sources of our idea of the 
end, the universal being developed 
out of the particulars. Of these par- 
ticulars, then, one must have percep- 
tion, and this perception is reason.’ 
The writer having before (in § 3) con- 
nected the faculties of ‘apprehension,’ 
&c., with wisdom, on the ground of 
their all being concerned with par- 
ticulars (rxara), proceeds to include 
reason (vovs) under the same category, 
and says that this apprehends éoxara 
at both ends of the series. But now 
comes in a piece of confusion which 
is thoroughly Eudemian, for he goes 
on to say that the scientific reason 
apprehends first truths or principles 
(ef. ch. vi.), while the practical 
reason apprehends /as¢ terms or par- 
ticulars. To mix up considerations 
of the scientific reason with the 
present discussion is to introduce 
what is entirely irrelevant. We see 


AA2 


180 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Car. 


n~ ~ ~ /, 
xal mowTwr, 6 0 ev Taig moaxTixaig Tod eoyarou xal 
. ~ ra \ \ ~ FF 
evdeyousvou xal Tig ETEpaG MpoTaTEWS’ Aapyal yap TOU OD 
Ke ~ is 4 / ¢ 
5S évexa autos’ ex Thy xal Exacta yap To xaJorov. ToUTwY 


oby Eye dei alodyow, ary 0 gor) voids. 


O10 xab Duoina 


doxei clyas Tatra, xal dooce codpds pey ovdelc, yuwuyy d 


/ 7 4 ~ 
6 Eye Xl CUVETIY HAL VYOUY. 


~ Mw 4 ~ € 
OnElOY O OTL Hal TAG HAI- 


/ CWA > ~ \ € € / ~ ” \ 
xiasg cloned axorovdsiv, xal 70s 7 yAsncie voy Eyer nok 
yywopuyy, ws Tig dUcews aitiag odoys. O10 xed ayy xah 





here a bringing together of two things 
which were before placed in contrast 
with each other (ch. viii. § 9), namely, 
the reason which apprehends first 
principles, and wisdom apprehending 
particular facts (é€oxdrwv). In the 
present passage, what was before 
called wisdom (pévnots) is called 
reason (vows), and it is said that 
reason is the faculty which perceives 
or apprehends the particular in moral 
subjects (€v rats mpaxtixais), This, 
then, is the main purport of the 
present remarks. Setting aside as 
irrelevant what is said of the scien- 
tific reason, we learn that the moral 
judgment is intuitive, that moral in- 
tuitions are to be attributed to the 
reason, and that out of these par- 
ticular intuitions the moral universal 
grows up. When stripped of its 
ambiguities of statement, the sense of 
the passage becomes unexceptionable. 
We may compare it with the in- 
cidental observations of Aristotle, 
Eth. 1. iv. 7: "Apxh yap 7d brt* Kad ei 
TobTo palvovro dpxotytws, ovdiy mpor- 
dehoe Tod Sidrt. 5 Be rowdros 7 exer 
7} AdBo by apxas padlws. Id. vii. 20: 
ixavoy &v riot Td Sri FerxOjvoar Karas, 
oiov Kal mepl ras apxds: Td 8 bri 
mpa@tov kal apxh. The expression of 
Eudemus is not so strong as that of 
Aristotle. Eudemus says é« trav ka? 
éxatta 1 Kabddov, while Aristotle 
said apxh 7d brs, The latter must be 
true if reason be the organ by which 





the fact is apprehended, for reason is 
in itself universal, and whatever it 
apprehends must be of the nature of 
the universal. 

dpxal yap Tod ob Evexa avra)] This 
is similar in form of expression to ch, 


iii, § 3: 4 mdv Bh emaywryh dpxh gore 


Kal rod Kabddov, On ob Evexa see 
below, ch. xii. § 10, note. 

airn 8 éo7t vods] To say that 
‘reason isa perception of particulars’ 
is only the counterpart of Aristotle’s 
saying that we can have ‘a perception 
of universals.’ th. 1. vil. 20: TaV 
dpxav ai piv alcdhoe: Oewpotyrm, Ari- 
stotle expresses the intuitive character 
of reason by saying that it ‘ touches’ 
its object. Cf. Metaphys. vm. x. 5: 
7d wey Ovyciv Kal pdvar GAnfés... . 
7) 8 dyvoeiv wh Oryydverv. Ib. xt. vii. 
8: adrdy 5t voe? & vots kara werddnlb 
vontos yap yiyverat 
Ovyydvev Kal vodv, ote raitoy voids 
nal vontév, That reason, while it is 
on the one hand intuitive, is on the 
other hand developed by experience, 
we learn from the discussions in Post. 
Anal, 1. ch. xix. The same is ex- 
pressed above in the saying that 
‘reason is the beginning and the end.’ 

s—6 =a «= vo tKa—6p0Gs] 


Tov vonrod: 


‘Hence it is that these faculties are 


thought to come naturally, and that 
although no one without conscious 
effort (pice) gets to be a philosopher, 
men do get naturally to have con- 
siderateness, and apprehension, and 


ee as es 


Pee 1 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


181 


Tédos volig* ex ToUTwy yap ai amodelEeig xak wep ToUTwy. 
Wore dei Toocéye Thy Eureipwy xal pec Butépwy 7) dp0- 
vinwy Taig avarodelxtosg dacers nal O6Eass ody HrTov Téy 
amodeiGswy* Oia yap To Bye ex THg Eumeiplag Opa opw- 


ow ophes. 


/ X s > \ c / A. AS 
Th wey ovy eotlv y dpavyoig xa 7 codla, xat7 


\ 7 ¢ , / x Veer ” ~ 
meph Tiva ExaTépn TuyxavEr OTA, xa STE AAAOU TIS 
Wuxiis poplov apery éxatépa, elpyras. 

Asamopiyoes 0 av Tig wep adray th yojowol eloww.12 
c A A / aN ~ > - eA NN / BA 
% pay yap copia ovdév Jewpel 2F wy Foros evdainwy avopw- 





reason. A proof of this is, that we 
think they ought successively to appear 
as age advances, and (we say that) 
such and such an age possesses reason 
and considerateness, as if these things 
came from nature. Hence reason is 
the beginning and the end, the matter 
of premises and conclusions is the 
same, Thus we must pay regard to 
the unproved assertions and opinions 
of the elderly and experienced, or of 
the wise, no less than to demonstra- 
tions. For, from having obtained 
the eye of ‘old experience,’ they see 
aright.’ In these excellent remarks 
the subject is brought round again 
to the contrast between philosophy 
and wisdom. The former never 
comes naturally, but the latter does. 
The nature of reason, and its growth 
in the mind, is illustrated by the 
common fact of the respect paid to 
age. 
éx Tovrwv—kal mepi TobTwy] Cf. Eth. 
1. iii, 4: mep) rowtTwy Kal é« TorodTwy 
Aéyovras, The ‘subject’ of the 
demonstration is the conclusion, cf. 
Eth. t. viii. 1: Seewréov . . . od pdvov 


ex Tod ovupmrepdouaros Kal ef dv 6 Adyos. 


- dupa] Cf. Eth. 1. vi, 12: os yap év 
cépatt dys, ev Yuxi vods. Plato, 
Repub. p. 533 Dd: &v BopBépy Bap- 
Bape tut 7d Tis Wuxis Supa 
Karopwpyyuévoy jpéua EAker Kad avd-yer 
avw. 





XII. In this and the following 
chapter, by mooting the question, of 
what use are wisdom and philosophy ? 
the writer shows the. relation of the 
two qualities to each other, and the 
inseparable connexion existing be- 
tween wisdom and virtue. The fol- 
lowing difficulties are first stated. 
(1) Philosophy is not practical, it does 
not consider at all the means to 
happiness, how then can it be useful ? 
(2) Wisdom, on the other hand, 
though it treats of happiness, might 
be said to be mere knowledge. It 
might be said that a man no more acts 
well from having this knowledge of 
the good, than he zs well from having 
a knowledge of medicine. (3) Or 
again, if wisdom be useful for telling 
us how to be good, why not get this 
advice from others? Why should it 
be necessary to have wisdom, any 
more than it is to learn medicine, 
when one can go toa doctor? (4) If 
philosophy be better than wisdom, 
how is it that the latter controls the 
former? The answer to question (1) 
is, that both philosophy and wisdom 
are good in themselves, and desirable 
as being perfections of our nature, 
even though they were not useful as 
means to anything beyond. But they 
are not without results. Philosophy, 
if it does not serve as an instrument 
to happiness, is identical with happi- 


182 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. [Cuar. 
~ f ~ 
mog (ovdepices yap tore yeversws), 7] OF Dpovyrig TotiTo wey 
»” > A / ad ~ Diane wv c A , , 
EYE, HAAR TIVOS EVEXA Ost AUTHS, EiTED Hy [LEY Ppovyois 
7 
éotiy y mepl Ta Olxoue xal xard xal ayaba avipore, 
~ ~ ~ / 
Taira 0 eotly a Tot ayabod eorly avdpig mparresy, ovdey 
02 mpaxtinwrepor TH sidevar auTa eopev, elwep EEeig ab 
petal ciow, Womep onde Ta tyseivad Ud? TH evExTIXG, bom 
\ ~ —~ > \ 4, 23 \ ~ a i / ~ yO 
[7] TW TOY AAAG TW ATO TIS 2Eews Elva AEyeTas” OuUsy 
YAP TPUXTIRWTEPO TH EEL THy laTpixnY xab yupyaoTixiyY 
2iopev. el OF py TOUTWY YapIY Ppovipoy FeTéoy HAAG TO 
, ~ a 7 ” 
yiverbas, Toig over orovdalosg ovbey av ely ypnomog, ETE 
> ~ \ * 
0 096 roig py Eyouor’ ovbty yao Orolres auToug Exew 7 
~ 4 ~ a 
arAos yovor welbecbou, inavig 7 Eyos av yulv Worep xa 





ness itself. Questions (2) and (3) are 
answered by showing the relation of 
wisdom to virtue. Virtue gives the 
right aim, and wisdom the right 
means. They are inseparable from 
one another. Wisdom without virtue 
would be mere cleverness apt to 
degenerate into cunning, and virtue 
without wisdom would be a mere gift 
of nature, a generous instinct capable 
of perversion. Whilethusinseparable 
from virtue, wisdom is not to be 
identified with it. In this respect 
an advance has been made beyond the 
crude formula of Socrates. Wisdom 
accompanies the virtues, and is a sort 
of centre-point to them all (éua 77 
gpovnoe. iG oton wacu imdptovow, 
xiii. 6). Question (4) is easily an- 
swered, since wisdom rather ministers 
to philosophy than thinks of controll- 
ing it. 

1 ovSeuias ydp eort ‘yevécews] 
Suggested perhaps by Eth. x. vii. 5, 
where it is said of the Oewpnruch évép- 
yerca—ovdty yap am abtis ylveru 
mapa Td Oewpjoa, Ib. § 7: Sone? . 
map aithy ovdévos épierOar Tédous. 

elrep 7 wev ppdvnols éorw 7H mepl rd. 
Sika Kal Kara Kal ayaba avOpory] 
‘If wisdom be that which is concerned 





with things just and noble and good 
for man.’ ‘H is indefinite, being 
probably feminine on account of the 
preceding ppévnois. This passage is 
the first that asserts strongly the 
moral nature of wisdom. We are 
told here that wisdom takes cognizance 
of the just and the noble; before it 
was only said to be concerned with 
what was good (mepl 7a dvOpémwa 
Gryaéd, ch. v. § 6). These conelud- 
ing discussions about ppévnois show 
the inadequacy of the term ‘prudence,’ 
by which it has been so often trans- 
lated, really to represent it. 

ovdtv St mpantindtepo TE cidévac 
ard] The answer to this objection 
has virtually been already given, ch. 
v. § 8: where opévnois was said not 
to be a merely intellectual quality. 

2 ef 5& wh—eldecOu] ‘But sup- 
pose we assume that a man is wise 
not for this object (¢.e. mere know- 
ledge of virtue), but with a view to 
becoming (virtuous), we must then 
concede that to those who are virtuous 
wisdom will be of no use; but neither 
will it be so to those who have not 
got (virtue), for there will be no 
difference whether they have (wisdom) 
themselves, or follow the advice of 


XII] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


183 


mepk Thy byleav: Bovrdnevas yap byraivery buws ob pavda- 


vomney larpixyy. 


\ X\ / + Dy / 
mpog G8 ToUTOIg aromoy ay eivas doFesey, 3 


eh yelpwy rijg codiag oboe xupiwtépa avrig Zora 7 yap 


~ 7 % 23 Y ‘  ¢ 
TOlOuTa appx HAL EMITATTES wept EXAOTOY, 


wept dy 


/ ~ \ / ~ 
ToUTWY AExTEov" Viv ev yao ymopyTa meol aUTdy pLovov. 
~~ sy / is ~ 
mpw@Tov ev ovy Agyouey OTL xa atTaAg avaynatoy aipeTac 4 
> \ > 4, > ” / ~ / 
auras elvas,apeTag y oboas ExaTépay Exatépov TOU jropiov, 


\ > ‘\ ~ X\ / x, Aw 
wal eb ey molotor pydev pyderépx auTddy. 


” \ 
ETEITA HOES 


~ / > et io \ SC e Fe > a. Ca ea 
TOMOUTL LEV, OUY WS LAT PIXy 08 bylelayv, GAN We 7 uylela, 
a e 4 > , / \ s ~ a 
olTws % Tobia evdamoviny* fEp0g yap ovgn THS CANS 

~ ~ oS ~ ~ ~ / 4 
apeting TH Eyeobas worst nal TH evepyeiv evdalwova. Ers6 





others possessing it. The compres- 
sion used here is quite in the style of 
Eudemus, and so is the confusion 
caused by the careless writing in Tots 
wh exovow' ov0ev yap diotce: avtods 
éxew, where €xovow and éxew appear 
to refer to two different things. 

3 i xelpwy rijs coplas otoaKupiwrépa 
abtis ora] This difficulty may have 
been partly suggested by the promi- 
nent position assigned to wisdom in 
the present book (cf. ch. vii. § 7: ¢€f% 
& ty tis kal evraida apxitexroviKn), 
partly by the authoritative character 
attributed to politics by Aristotle, 
Eth, 1. ii. 4—6: Sdfere F By Tijs 
kupiwrdtns kal udAioTa apxiTeKToviKijs * 
toattTn © 7H woduTiKh palvera K. 7. A. 
Cf. Plato on the Baotrskh réxyvn, 
Euthydem. p. 291 B, quoted Vol. I. 
Essay III. p. 140. 

4 Wisdom and philosophy cannot 
be otherwise than desirable, as they 
are the best state of the human mind. 
And the mind must necessarily 
(&varykaiov) desire its own best state. 

5 trera—- eddaipova] 
more they do produce happiness— 
philosophy produces it, not in the 
way that medicine produces health, 
but rather it operates like health 
itself. Being a part of the entire 
well-being (tis 5Ans aperijs) of man, 


*Further- . 





it makes one happy by the con- 
sciousness of possessing it.’ 

Tijs bAns &per7s| This phrase, which 
hever occurs in the writings of Ari- 
stotle, is frequent in those of Eude- 
mus. Cf. Eth. Eud. ui. 9: nat gore 
(wh Kal rerda Kal ateAts, kal aperh 
aoavrws (Hy mev yap bAn, 7 5F wdpiov). 
Ib. § 14: 5d wad Ado ef Te wdpidv ears 
Wxijs, ofov Td Opertixdy, % Tobrov 
dperh ovr Zor: udpiov ris BAns aperijs. 
Eth. Eud. rv. (Nic. v.) iis 7: bre wey 
oby iat Sikacocdvar mActous, Kar Bre 
gore Tis Kal Erépa mapa Thy BAnv dperhy, 
djaov. Ib. § 10: 7H mey ody Kara Thy 
BAnv Gperhy Terayuévn Sieasoodyn. 
This conception Eudemus came to 
identify with kadokdyabia, Eth. Eud. 
vil. iii, 1: KaTd& pépos pey ody eph 
éxdorns aperijs elpnta: mpdrepoy: eel 
dt xwpls deiAouev Thy Sivamw aitay, 
Kal wep) ris aperiis SiapOpwréov THs éx 
Tovtwy, hv exadovuey Hn KadoKeya- 
Olay. 

™@ txecOu Kal evepyeiv] “Evepyeiv 
added on to @xeo@a: expresses the 
fruition, as well as the possession, of 
philosophy. It implies that philo- 
sophy exists not only zz, but for, the 
mind. See Vol. I. Essay IV. pp. 
193-196. 

6 &t—rodroy] ‘ Again, man’s 


proper function is discharged by an 


NQ 


co 


184 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. [ Cuap. 


~ A 
To Epyov amoreAcirar xara THy dpdvyow xal ray ySinqy 
apeTiy' y% pay yap apern Tov oxomby moist opbdv, 7 Oe 
rod 0 TeTapTov popiov THg 
Wuyxiis obx Zoriv apery TormvTy, To Operrixod* odbev yap 
S19 - ~ U x \ , A \ ~ \ 
ex’ abr mparrety a” i) MparteW: “wep! 02 rot pybev 
civar mpaxtixwrépoug Oe tiv dpdvyow Ty xard@y xal 
. \ 
dixalwy, pixpoy avwbev apxrttov, AaBdvTag apyay TAaITHY. 
Worep yap xal Td dixase Atyouey mpaTTOYTaS TiVAS OUTw 
Oixatoug elvat, olov Tovg TA Ord THY voRwWY TEeTAYLEVE 
~ \ © E>) DY ; a Ne / } A 
TowdyTas 7 axovTacg 7) OF ayvorayv 7 OF ETepoy Ts xal pa 
A ~ 
Ov abira (xairos mparrouol ye & det xal doa ypH Tov 


dpovyois TH mpeg Tovroy. 


~ wv ~ »” 
orovdatoy), orws, ws Eoimev, EOTL TO WHS EYoVTA MPATTELY 
a 4 > > / / \ 7, 
exacTa wor elvar ayabov, Aéyw 8 olov did mponipeosy 
~ ~ \ / 
xa) abray Evexa THY pATToUsvwWY. THY eV OUY MpoaipEerIY 
> \ fe eS 7 A a. > / 4 / ’ 
opoyy mort 7 apeTy, TOO Oa Exelvng Evexa meduxe WpAT- 





accordance with wisdom and moral 
virtue. For virtue makes the aim 


u. i. 14 (2.¢.). There is apparently 
an attempt here to bring under one 


right, and wisdom the means to the 
attainment of this.’ The conception 
of 7d %pyov is taken from Ar. Eth. 
I. vii. 10, The rest of the psychology 
here is different from that of Aristotle 
(see Eth. ut. v. 1, note), but is 
identical with that adopted by Eude- 
mus in his earlier books. Cf. Eth, 
Hud. 1. xi. 1: 
A€ywuev wéTEpov H apeTh avaudprnrov 
Trove Thy Tpoalpeow Kat Td TEAOS pdr, 
ottws dere ob evexa Set mpoaipetoOau, 
2 &owep Sone? ticl, Tov Adyov. “Eort 
5 rovro eyxpdteia: airy yap ov 
Siapbeiper tov Adyov. “Eat: F dpeth 
kal éyxpdreia Erepov. Aexréov & 
botepov wept abr@y (this refers to 
ch. v. § 6, where, however, cwppo* 
aivn is substituted for éyxpdéreia). 
Ib. § 3: wétepov ® 7 dperh more? roy 
oKxomby 7) T& mpds toy oKxomdy; Tibé- 
peda 5) Sti Toy cKomdy, didTt TobTOV ovK 
gott gvAAoyiopds obdt Adyos. Ib. § 6, 
quoted below. 

tou 5& tetdprov k.7.A.| Of. Eth. Hud. 


Tovtwy bt Siwpitpévev 





view the functions of the different 
parts of human nature, in relation to 
morality—On mpdérre, see ch. ii, 
§ 2, note. 

7 The first step to prove the use 
and practical necessity of wisdom, is 
to show that moral action implies con- 
sciousness and a conscious purpose. 

8 Thy pev—bduvduews]| ‘ Now virtue 
makes the purpose right, but the 
means to this (ca éxelyns Evexa wé- 
uke mpatreca) do not belong to 
virtue, but to another faculty.’ There 
is some confusion here in speaking of 
the means to a purpose, mpoaipeots 
itself being in the Aristotelian psycho- 
logy a faculty of means ; but ef. Eth, 
Eud, 1. xi. 5—6, where 7, is is 
said to imply both end and means, 
and whence the present passage is 
repeated almost verbatim. “Eors yap 
mwaca mpoalpects twos Kal Evexd Twos, 
O6 pev obv Evexa 7d pécov eoriv, ob 
aitla 7 a&peth 7rd (7g, Fritzsche, e 


conj.) mpompeioOu ob Evexa. ~Eors 


XIL] 


HOIKON [ EYAHMIQN] VI. 


185 


> wv n~ > ~ > 2¢ / SN / , 
reo bat oux EOT! TUG APETHS AAA ETELAS OUVAaLEWS. AEXTEOY 


a "4 / \ > w~ 
0 EMIOTYTAGL CADETTELOY TEP KUTY. 


Zo7T1 On Tig Ouva-9 


aA ~ PY , 4 a > > A € of a 

Aig Hv xarotios OesoTynTa* adTy O eoTl ToMvTH WoTe TA 
J, A , “4 ~ 

moog Toy bmorebevTa oxordy cuvtTsivovTa divacbos Taira 


A / ~ 
TPATTEW Kab TUYYavELY aUTdY. 


x Xx zy € \ ics 
ay bev GUY 0 OxO7F0S rf 


/ > Ff > x ~ 
HAaACS, EMaIvEeTY EoTIV, AY OF Hatiros, mavoupyia’ did xal 


\ s 5 \ \ , \ 5 
_ Foug Dpovisnous Oeivoug xa mavoupyoug daj.ev elves. 


” 
EOTLIO 


ec / > e / > > > A ~ , 
0 7 dpovnoig ody 7 Oeworys, AAD odx avev Tig Ouvapews 
7 e 2 o ~ / / fod ~ 
THVT IS. 7 n) e6ts Te Opens: roures yiverees Tis Wuxiis 
OUX AVEV ALETYS, WC SioyTAl TE XUL EOTI OFAoyv* oF yap TvA- 
\ ~ ~ > A ° 
Aoyiopol Ty mpaxTwy apyny Eyovrég eiowy, emeidy To1ovde 





Béevrot 7% mpoalpecis ov TovTov, GAAG 
Tay TovTou vera, Td pev ov Tvyxd- 
vew tottwv GAAns duvduews, boa Evexa 
Tov TéAouvs Set mpdtrew: tov 5& Td 
TéAoS OpOdy civar THs Mpoapérews, oF 7 
dpeth aitia, 

8—10 Aekréoy F—dyabdy] ‘ But 
we must speak on the point with a 
more exact attention. There is a cer- 
tain faculty which is called “ clever- 
ness,” this is of a nature to perform 
and to hit upon the means that con- 
duce to any given aim. Now if the 
aim be good, this faculty is praise- 
worthy, but if bad, it turns to cun- 
ning. Hence both wise men and cun- 
ning men get the name of “ clever.” 
Now wisdom is not cleverness, but it 
is not without a faculty of the kind. 
But this eye of the mind attains its full 
condition not without virtue, as we 
have already stated, and as is clear, 
for the syllogisms of action have as 
their major premiss—* Since such and 
such is the end and the best ”—(being 


whatever it is,—something for the | 


sake of argument, if matters not 

what). But this (major premiss) can- 

not be apprehended except by the 

good man; for vice distorts (the mind), 

and makes it false with regard to the 

principles. of action. Hence it is 
VOL. Il. 





evident that one cannot possess wis- 
dom: unless he be good.’ 


kal tovs dpoviwous Sewovs kal may- 


" obpyous papty elva:] We should have 


expected rods avotpyous. That want 
of clearness of mind which is charac- 
teristic of Eudemus shows itself in his 
use of the article, cf. ch. xi. § 6: ray 
éumelpwy Kai rpecButépwy 7 ppoviper, 
where one would have expected ray 
ppovipwr. 

Fritzsche quotes Plato, Theetet. p. 
177 A: by ph amaddAayaor Tis Se.vd- 
TnTos—TavTa 3) Kal wavtdracw os 
devol «al mavoipyo: avohtey twav 
&xotcovra. Demosth. Ol. 1. p. 9: 
mavoipyos dy Kal dewds tvOpwmos 
mpdypact xphracba. 

10 as elpntal re] Ch. ii. § 4: dd 
ovr” &vev vod Kai Siavolas, ot’ tvev 
Hous atl Etews | mpoalpecis. Eth. 
Eud, 11. xi. 5: 51d thy aperhy by dpddv 
ely 7d TéAOS K.T. A. 

of yap audAoyicpol Tay mpaxtay] 
The form of the practical syllogism is 
similarly given, Eth. Hud. 1. xi. 4: 
Gorep yap tais Cewpnrixais ai saobé- 
ces dpxal, otw Kal Tals momticais 7d 
TéAos apxnh Kal brddeois* ‘émeidh Set 
765 tyialvew, avdynn Tod) iwdpta, «i 
tata exeivo,’ dawep exei, ‘ei Zot Td 
tplywvoy dbo dp0at, avdyKn rod) «iva, 


BB- 


186 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. (Cua. 


To TEAOS Kal TO AplOTOY, OTIONTOTE Gy. 
xapw To TuxOy. 
diacrpéber yap 4 poxOnypia xob Siabeddeobas moret meph 
TAG TpaxTinas apyas. wate davepdy Ors addvaToy dpovi- 


” A , 

eoTW YAR Aoyou 

ToUTO O ei uy TH ayadw, ov dalveras’ 
fA TO AYaIO, 


peov elvou pn ovTa ayaboy. 

13 Lxerréov Oy waAW xal mei aperig? xal yap 7 apeTy 
raparrAnolog 2yer Ws 7% dpovyrig mpos THy deworyTa* ob 
THUTOY UAsy, BOLO O€* odTW xal 7 DuTiny apEeTH MpdG THY 


xuplay, 


~~ .¥ ~ ad ~~ 3\n~ ec / , 
mao yap doxet Exacta Thy iidy brapyew duces 





On the doctrine of the practical syllo- 
gism, see Vol. I. Essay IV. pp. 212— 
219. It was there doubted whether 
Aristotle was himself the author of 
this formula which appears in the 
Eudemian Ethics, and in the probably 
spurious treatise De Motu Animalium. 
But, in fact, one passage, at all events, 
in the De Animé, proves that Ari- 
stotle had himself applied the syllo- 
gistic form to the process which the 
mind goes through in forming a prac- 
tical resolution, though Eudemus 
undoubtedly carried out the application 
farther and used it more constantly ; 
ef. De An. mW. xi. 4: "Ere P 7 pe 
xabdrov brédnpis Ka Adyos, 7 St Tod 
Ka? Exacta (7H pev yap Aéyet Bri Set roy 
ToovTov Th Todvde mpdrrew, 7 St Sti 
7é5e 7d viv rodvbe, Kay Bt Todc5e) 
Hon abrn Kwet n dda, odx 7] KabdAov. 
“H tuw, GAN 7 bev NpEe“otoa maddror, 
n® ov. 


XIII. xewrrdov 3)—xuplay] ‘ We 
must consider then, over again, the 
nature of virtue. For there is a rela- 
tion in virtue analogous to that borne 
by wisdom to cleverness. Clever- 
ness, though not the same as wisdom, 
is similar to it, and this is the way 
in which natural virtue stands related 
to virtue proper.’ The doctrine of 
the natural element in virtue was 
clearly given by Aristotle, cf. Eth. x. 





ix. 6—8: Tiver@ar & &yabobs otovrat, 
of wey pice, ci F et, of 5& ddax7. 
Td pev ody Tis pboews SiAov ws odK 
ey’ jhuiv brdpxei, GAAG did Twas Olas 
aitlas trois &s &AnO@s ebruxéow imdp- 
xer—Aei 3) 7d HOos mpodmdpxew mws 
oixeiov Tis aperiis, orépyov Td Kaddy 
Kal dvocxepaivoy 7d aicxpdy. In the 
present passage, the analogy between 
the development of the reason and of 
the moral will is well drawn out. At 
first, there is the intellectual faculty, 
cleverness, undetermined as yet for 
good or bad, but requiring a right 
direction to be given to its aims, 
This the moral feelings ean alone 
supply. On the other side, there is 
the generous instinct, the impulse to 
bravery, justice, and the like, but this 
is deficient in consciousness and in 
the idea of a law, which reason can 
alone supply. The joint development 
of these two sides gives, on the one 
hand, wisdom, on the other hand, 
virtue, in its complete and proper 
form. What there is difficult or 
strange in the doctrine, is, that virtue 
has apparently assigned to it the in- 
tellectual function of apprehending 
the end of action. This appears an 
inversion. ’Aperf seems now to haye 
changed places with Adyus. But, at 
all events, the point is clearly esta- 
blished that an intellectual side and a 
moral side are entirely inseparable, 


187 


XIL—XII.] HOeIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VL. 


mws' xal yap Oixasor xat cwdpovinol xal avdpeios xal 
3 ” 2AN > ~ > > re 
TAAAGL EVOMEY evhdg a yeveTng’ AAA opws OnTotjev 
Erepov Th To xuplwg ayaboy xal Ta Toaira AAAoY TpOmoy 
imapyew xal yap mach xai Snplug ai duomal drapyouriy 
> ~ 
ZEeic, GAN’ avev vod BraaBepal dalvovras odoas, mary 
Torodroy Zorxev bpcobal, OTh Worep THLATI isxupwo dvev 
oWews xivoupevw cupPaiver cbarAAETOaL ioyupws did TO 
\ ” wv is4 ee ~ | X\ if ~ > 
py Eyew oli, olrw xal evratda’ eav 08 AB voy, ev2 
~ , PY be € Sg Zé c / zy £29) <a 
TO mparrew diadeper. 7 O EFig opoia ovoa ToT EoToL 
/ > 7 a £. > ~ ~ 
xuplwg apeTy. Wore xabamwep emt Tod doFacrixod duo 
> \ > rd \ , a Cus 8 ~ ~ 
zotly eldy, Seworys xal dpdvycis, odTw xal emi rod 7Osxot 
80 5) ‘ \ \ > <. \ \ Oy € / \ 4 
vo earl, TO py apeTyn Huoixy TOO 7 xupla, xal ToUTwWY 
7 xupia ov yiveros avev dpovycews. diomep tives dacr3 





kal yap maiol—daperh| ‘For the 
natural dispositions belong both to 
children and beasts, but without reason 
they appear harmful. At least this 
seems evident, that as a strong 
body, if moved without sight, comes 
into violent collisions because it has not 
sight to guide it, so is it in mental 
things (évravéa). If the natural 
qualifications have reason added to 
them, they then excel in action, and the 
state, which (before) was asemblance of 
virtue, now becomes virtue in the true 
sense of the term.’ Svoimal €feis is 
used inaccurately for puvoinal diabe- 
ces, cf. Eth. u. vii. 6, note. On the 
moral qualities of brutes Aristotle 
often speaks; cf. Hist. An. 1. i.; Ix. 
i. &c, The ‘courage’ of brutes, being 
undirected, is no doubt harmful, so 
the generosity, &c., of boys. That 
fine natures are capable of the worst 
perversion, is an opinion to be found 
stated in Plato’s Republic, p. 491 E: 
Odxotv, jv F eyd, & Adetuayre, rai 
Tas puxas ofrw pauev Tas ebpverTd- 
Tas Kaxjs madaywylas tuxotcas dia- 
pepdvrws Kaas ylyverOu; 2 ote ra 
MeydAa Gdikhuara Kal thy &Kparov 


. with wisdom is virtue. 





movnplay éx pavaAns, GAN odk ek veart- 
Kis pioews Tpoph Siodropévns ylyve- 
cba, aobery 5¢ plow peydawy obre 
&yabav otte Kakav aitlay mote ece- 
oOGu ; 

3—5 didwep—pera Adyou] ‘Hence 
it is that some say that all the virtues 
are wisdoms ; and thus Socrates was 
partly right and partly wrong in his 
investigations. He was wrong in 
thinking the virtues wisdoms, but 
perfectly right in thinking that they 
were inseparable from wisdom. The 
same point is testified to by the fact 
that, at present, persons, when they 
wish to define virtue, add the terms 
“ state (specifying the particular ob- 
ject), according to the right law.” 
And that law is right which is in 
accordance with wisdom. All men 
therefore seem to havea presentiment 
that a particular state in accordance 
But a little 
alteration is necessary. Not merely 
the state according to the right law, 
but that which is conscious of (merd) 
the right law constitutes virtue. Now 
in such matters wisdom is right law. 
Socrates then considered that the 


BB 2- 


188 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


[ Cuar. 


, x > A 4 \ / ~ 4 
Taras Tas apeTac dpovyncess elvas, xal Dwuparygs TH pev 
opbds eSyre TH 8 ypaptavev’ ori piv yap Ppovyress 
WeTo Elva TaTAS TAS apETAS, apTavev, OTs} oUx avEU 


4dpovntews, xarws zAsyev. 


onusioy 02° xal yap viv 


/ ad rae \ > 7 , ‘ a 
mayTEc, OTAY bplowvTas THy apeTiy, MpooTiOcacs THY BELY, 

, \ \ ad \ 4 . 
clmovrTeg xal mpog a eer, THy xara Toy apfov Adyoy 


épbos 3 6 xara Thy dpavycw. 


2 iv. x 4 / 
Zolxacs Oy pavTever Oa 


ud ov € / a > aa) « a ‘ 
TWO ATAYTES OTL 1 TOLAUTY Z£1¢ APETY ETTIY 1 HATA THY 


5 dpovyo ty. 


dei 62 puxpov peraPyvar: ov yap povoy 7 


xara Tov ophov Adyov, AAA’ 7 wsTa Tov dpbot Adyou Big 
apeTy eotiv. opb0g d& Acdyos wept Thy TuodTwY 7 dpovyncig 


eoTy. 


Swxoa ty oby AG XG ODETAC WETO Elva 
oaTng piv ody Adyous Tag apEeTaAG We 


6(émioripas yap elvar raoas), Husic 38 pete Adyou. OHAov 
ody Ex Tidy elonudvwy OTL ody olov Te ayaddv elvou xuplog 
divev dpovyrews, ov? Hpovipov avev Tig AOimyo aperhg. 
AKAK xal 6 Aoyos TaITH AvoIT’ av, w Orareybely Tig ay 





virtues were laws (for he defined 
them all as sciences), but we consider 
that they are conscious of a law.’ 

kal Swxpdrns| On the doctrine of 
Socrates that ‘virtue is science,’ see 
Vol. I. Essay II. pp. 122—124. In 
Eth, uw. viii. 6, the phrase is 8@ev xat 
6 Zwxpdrns, on which Bishop Fitz- 
gerald remarks that by prefixing the 
article Aristotle appears to have in- 
dicated the Socrates of Plato’s dia- 
logues, the dramatic, and not the 
historical, philosopher. Thus speak- 
ing similarly of characters in books, 
Aristotle says, Eth. m1. viii. 2, Tov 
Avophiny Kal tov “Exropa, Ib. 1. ix. 3, 
7H Kadvpo, u. ix. 6, mpds thy “EAévny. 
And contrariwise of real persons he 
speaks without the article. Hth, 1. iv. 5, 
Ed yap nal TWAdtrov hrdpe. Id. 1. v. 3, 
duoorabeiy SapdavamddAw. 1. vi. 8, 
ois 5h Kal Swevowrmos. I. X. 1, Kara 
dédAwva. All through the first book 
of the Metaphysics, when writing the 
history of philosophy, Aristotle speaks 
of the different philosophers without 





the article, and so too elsewhere in 
contrasting Socrates with Plato, &e. 
The only exceptions to this rule are 
the cases of renewed mention. Cf. 
Met. xu. iv. 5: Avo ydp éorw & Ts 
dv arodoln Swxpdre: Sinalws—AAr 6 
bev Swxpdrns K.7.A. But in discuss- 
ing Plato’s Republic and Laws (Pol. 
11. i—vi.), Aristotle invariably speaks 
of 6 Swxpdrns, of Tod SwKpdrous Adyot, 
&c., as referring not to a real but to 
a represented personage. Assuming 
that Eudemus has followed the same 
rule, we may conclude that here and 
in Eth. vu. ii, 1, Swxpdrns piv yap 
bAws eudxero, Ib. vu. iii. 14,8 eChre 
Swxpdrns,—the actual and historical 
Socrates is designated. 


Koad yap viv mdvres| i.e. since the 


establishment of the Peripatetic doc- 
trine. Eudemus refines upon the 
usual Peripatetic formula, substituting 
mera Adyou for Kara Adyov. On the 
meaning of this alteration see Eth. 1. 
vii. 14, note, 

6 GAAa Kal 5 Adyos—imdptover] 


a, te n,n 


XII] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VI. 


189 


Ort yuwpiSovTos AAAVAwY al apeTal* od yap 6 aUTog eddué- 
\ 
crates mos amacas, WoTe THY fey 7Oy THy OD olrw 
sae Xe ~ x \ X ‘ \ > \ 
elandwds Zoras* TOTO yap xaTa wiv TAS huoinas apeTas 
Efe of >A \ € ~ , > 6 > > , 
evdéverou, xa ag OF awAds AZyeras ayabds, Ux Evdéyerau” 
Cpa yap TH dpovycer pik odor waoos bmapEovow. dyrov 7 
Bf BE) ~ ~ 
08, xav el py mpaxriny yy, OTs Eder av adrng did Td Tot 
pooplov aperay elas, xal Sts oux Zoras rj mpoaiperic opby 
BA , PIN ed > ~ ¢ \ \ \ / ey 
dvev Dpovijrews odd avev aperig? 7 pty yap To TéA0g 7 OF 


\ | \ , ~ UY 
TH WMpog TO TEAOG Tosh WHATTELY, 


AAAG pny odd? xupia s 


, | \ « , SDA ~ / Vs a bie 
Y eorl rig codiag odd? rod PeAriovog popiov, Wamep ode 
~ f ~ ~ ~ 
Tig Oylelag 7 iaTpiny* ov yap YpyTaAL avTI, AAA’ ba 
nae. f 
Orws yévynTas® exeivng ody Evexa EwITATTEL, AAA ovx exeivy, 
y+ ov EN X \ / cA ~ ~ 
Th Gporoy xav ef Tig THY MorITixyy daly apyew Thv Oedy, 
og \ ~ 
OTs EmiTaTTE wepl MavTa TH Ev TH WOASH. 





‘Thus the opinion is refuted of him 
who would argue that the virtues are 
separated from one another, that the 
same man is not equally gifted by 
nature for all the virtues, so that he 
will acquire one now and another 
later. This is possible with regard to 
natural good qualities, but not so with 
regard to those which constitute a 
good man absolutely; for together 
with wisdom, which is one, all the 
virtues will be in his possession.’ The 
same perfect character is attributed 
to wisdom below, Zth. vu. ii. 5: 
mpaxrinds ye 6 pdvimos’ tay yap 
écxdtay tis Kal tas BAdras exwv 
Gperds. The theory is, that he who 
has wisdom can do no wrong. It 
will be seen how nearly this ap- 





proaches to the Stoical idea of the 
‘wise man.’ 

7 This section is a mere repetition, 
in Eudemian fashion, of what has 
gone before, ch. xii. §§ 4, 10; Eth. 
Eud, 1. xi. 6 (i.¢.). Cf. also ch. ii. 
§ 4: 3: ot7 tvev vod Kad diavolas 
ott = dvev 70iKqs eorly 
Tpoalpects. 

8 The relation of wisdom to philo- 
sophy is clearly stated by the author 
of the Magna Moralia, who para- 
phrases the present passage (M. MM. 
LXXXV. 32), 7 ppdvnots womep eritpords 
tls éort Tis copias, Ka moparkevd er 
catty oXOAnv Kal 7d moeiy Td adrijs 
tpyov, Karéxovoa Ta mwd0n Kal Taira 
swhpoviCovca, 


eews Fj 


PLAN OF BOOK VII. 


HIS last of the Nicomacho-Eudemian Books consists of two parts, 

of which the one is a necessary complement to Aristotle’s ethical 

system; the other superfluous, being little more than a modi- 
fication of Aristotle’s (far superior) treatise on Pleasure. 

Part I. having enumerated the moral states which are above, 
below, and between virtue and vice, mentions six ordinary opinions 
on these states (Ch. I.), points out the difficult questions to which 
these opinions give rise (Ch. II.), and proceeds to elucidate them. 

In Ch. III. the question is discussed, How is incontinence com- 
patible with a knowledge of the right? 

In Ch. IV. the question, Whether incontinence is confined to 
any definite object-maitter ? 

Chs. V. and VI., pursuing the same inquiry, treat of certain 
morbid and unnatural kinds of incontinence, and of incontinence 
(analogously so called) in the matter of anger. 

Ch. VII. compares generally incontinence with intemperance, treats 
of the subordinate forms of the intermediate moral states (endurance, 
softness, &c.), and traces incontinence to two separate sources in the 
character. 

Ch. VIII. continues the comparison between intemperance and 
incontinence, reverts to two questions before mooted, namely :— 
(1) Is intemperance more curable than incontinence? (2) Is in- 
continence to be regarded as absolutely bad? and gives a negative 
answer to both. 

Ch. IX. §§ 1-4 discusses the question mooted in Ch. II., Does 
continence consist in sticking to an opinion or purpose, right or 
wrong? In answering this question, a good distinction is drawn 
between obstinacy and continence. 

Ch. IX. § 5—Ch. X. winds up the previous discussions and 


PLAN OF BOOK VII. 191 


formally settles the remaining questions of Ch. II. Is intemperance 
the same as incontinence? Can the wise man be incontinent? 

These chapters form, as we have said, a necessary complement 
to the Aristotelian ethical system, taking a more practical point of 
view (aAAny apxfv) than that which would divide mankind simply 
into the virtuous and the vicious. Moral systems in general have 
perhaps too much neglected this field of the intermediate states ; 
and general language has not definitely adopted the. distinction 
between the ‘intemperate’ and the ‘incontinent,’ as the use of 
these English words at once testifies, for we are evidently obliged to 
give a certain special and technical meaning to the word ‘ intempe- 
rate’ in order to make it stand as the representative of axoAaaroc. 
A subtle, but not always clear, psychology is employed to explain 
the phenomena of moral weakness, and it is observable that 
physical and medical considerations are prominently appealed to 
throughout this book. The remarks on bestiality, cretinism, or 
morbid depravity (@npeérn¢) here made have attracted the notice of 
modern writers on the psychology of insanity (as for instance Dr. 
Thomas Mayo).* And the interesting allusions here made to the 
melancholic, or bilious, temperament might be illustrated, not only 
from Aristotle’s Problems, but also from Burton’s Anatomy of 
Melancholy. The chief thing that we have to complain of in this 
book is the too vague way in which incontinence is treated. For 
the sake of forming a more definite notion of the standard of Greek 
morality, we could have wished a graphic portrait of the continent 
man, in the style of Aristotle’s fourth Book. As it is, we must be 
content to know that the continent man yields to temptation less, 
and the incontinent man more, than people in general. 


* ‘Now according to this view of the subject, we have a class of persons, 
differing from the majority of mankind in their incapacity for moral 
distinction, differing from the insane, in not labouring under any suspension 
of the power of will. On the first of these grounds, they have a right to a 
place in our system of mental pathology. On the last, they must constitute a 
distinct head from insanity. I am. not at present considering this class 
generally ; I exclude indeed that section of persons, in whom the absence of 
principle is obviated by the harmlessness of their tendencies. I am speaking 
of persons destitute of the moral faculty, and a/so vicious in their propensities. 
For these I have borrowed the designation given to them by Aristotle: and I 
eall them brutal.,—Mayo, Elements of the Pathology of the Human Mind, 
p. 127. 


192 PLAN OF BOOK VII. 


Part II. consists of that superfluous treatise on Pleasure, the 
authorship of which has been so much disputed. While professing 
to treat of pleasure as falling under the philosophy of human life, 
the writer seems to confine himself almost entirely to a refutation of 
three positions maintained by the Platonic school: Ist. That 
pleasure is in no sense a good. 2nd. That most pleasures (i.e. 
physical pleasures) are bad. 8rd. That no pleasure can be the 
chief good. 

The first and third of these positions are refuted in Chs. XII. and 
XIII., and the second in Ch. XIV. The subject is treated in this 
book under a more physiological and practical aspect than in the 
tenth book of the Nicomachean work, 


oe 


HOIKQON [ETAHMIQON] VII. 


——c0ttioo—_—. 


ETA 0 Tatra next eoy, ArAHY ToInTapévous apyyy, 
~ \ ~~ 7 
ors Tay wreck Ta HOn deuxTdy tTpla ory eldy, xaxle 


axpacia Onpsorns. 


f ~ @ ~ 
Ta 0 evavtia Toig piv dul OyAa* Td 


pay yop aperiy TOO eyxpareiay xarotmev’ mpdg 08 THY 

, / > EN e “4 4 \ (a. Lee ed 
Onpioragroe aged ay Gaius payee ids UmEeO NEES 
ApETHY, Yowixyy TivE xal Geiay, @omep “Opnpog mept 
g 7 / \ ¥ a / > 
Exropog memoinne AgyovTa Tov IIgiapoy ors ohddpa ay 


ayases, 





I. This chapter proposes a new 
field of inquiry (@AAnv dpxfv) in 
Ethics, namely to consider those 
intermediate states, continence and 
incontinence, together with their sub- 
ordinate forms (softness, luxury, and 
endurance), which are ‘neither identi- 
eal with virtue and vice, nor yet 
wholly distinct from them.’ After 
an enumeration of the moral states 
above, below, and between, virtue and 
vice, the writer announces that his 
method of inquiry will be, as else- 
where, to collect current opinions on 
the subject, to raise doubts and ob- 
jections to them, and by a process of 
sifting to reject such existing opinions 
as are untenable, and to leave a residue 


of ‘sufficiently demonstrated’ theory. | 


He accordingly mentions six com- 
mon notions about the states in ques- 
tion. 

1 7a 8 evayria x.7.A.] A scale of 
the moral states is here drawn out, 
which stands as follows: 1. Divine 

VOL. II. 





virtue, or pure reason. 2. Virtue 
(afterwards called temperance, cw- 
gpoctyvn), or the perfect harmony of 
passion subjugated to reason. 3. 
Continence, or the mastery of reason 
over passion after a struggle. 4. In- 
continence, or the mastery of passion 
over reason, after a struggle. 5. Vice 
(afterwards called dkoAacia, intem- 
perance), or the perfect harmony of 
reason subjugated to passion. 6. 
Bestiality, or pure passion. It is 
remarkable that the terms cw¢poctvn 
and 4&«oAacia, which in this book 
certainly supply the place of dper# 
and «axle, are actually introduced 
extremely late. Cf. ch. v. § 9. 

hpwikhy twa] Cf. Arist. Pol. vu. 
xiy. 2, where the gods and heroes are 
mentioned as excelling men, Dr. 
Hampden, in his Bampton Lectures, 
mentions that, in the canonisation of 
a Roman Catholic Saint, it was cus- 
tomary to declare that he had gradu- 
ated ‘in heroico gradu virtutis.’ 


CC é‘ 


194 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. [Cuap. 


ovde EpKet 

avopog ye Ovnrov mdic Eupevar &dXAa Oeoio. 
2bor si, xabdwen daciv, 2& avdpwrwy yivovras Geol OF 
aperig OmepPornyy, ToravTy Tis ay ely OyjArov OTs y% TH Oy- 
puoder dvritibenévy Eig * xal yap Bomep 0008 Oyplou east 
xaxia 000) dpeTy, odTwg 00d: Geo, AAA’ 7 wey Tips@Tepor 
3 xpeTijg, 7 0 Erepoy Ts yévog xaxlac. mel 08 omayviov xal 
To Oziov dvdpa elvan, xabamep oi Adxwves ci@iacs rpornyo- 
pevew, Orav ayacbmar chddpa tov (celog avip daciv), 
odtw xal 6 Anpimdyg ev Toig avOpwmross OTAVIOG. pLaAAoTo 
® ey roig PapRapors éoriv, yiveror 0 Zyia xab Oe vooous 
xal mypwoes* xal rods did xaxlay 0: rév avipwrwy 
40mecParrovtas alTws smibuodypovmey. AAG Teph pv 
ris Toot ys diabécews Borepov mormréov TiVe pvelay, mepl 
0: xaxlas elpynros meorepov* mel 08 axpariag xal moranlas 
xa tTpudig Acxtéov, xal wep) eyxparelas xal xapTeplas” 
outs yap we weph THY aUTibY EEewy TH ApETy) xal TH 0x 97- 
spin éxarépay avrdy troayrréoy, ov we Erepov yévos. Oct 





ove exer] I]. xxiv. 258. 

3 of Ad«wves| Apparently taken 
from the Meno of Plato, p. 99 D. 

4 borepoy] z.e. in chapter v. 

mpérepov elpnta| Cf. Eth, Hud. 1. 
x. 28, &e. 

5 det 8 borep em trav UAAov—ika- 
vas | ‘Our course must be, as elsewhere, 
to state existing ideas (Ta paiwdueva), 
and, having gone through the doubts 
(which these ideas suggest), to esta- 
blish thus if possible all, but if not 
all, anyhow the greater number and 
the most important of the ideas which 
are generally admitted (Sofa) about 
these conditions of mind. For if the 
difficulties be resolved and at the 
same time the generally admitted ideas 
be suffered to stand, the thing will be 
established sufficiently.’ This passage 
is obscure, chiefly on account of the 
ambiguity in the words éay yap Adnral 
Te Ta Svoxeph Kal Katadrelrnra 7d 
évdota, Two meanings might be 





attributed to Adnra r& Svexeph, which 
might either refer (1) to the rejection 
of ideas that involved a difficulty ; or 
(2) to the clearing up of difficulties 
attaching to any of the popular ideas. 
The former interpretation would seem 
best to suit the context, and to be 
justified by the actual procedure of 
subsequent chapters, and accordingly 
the following is the way in which the 
passage is rendered by the Paraphrast. 
Aéywuev 5h rep) abrdv xara tov Tpérov 
ka’ dy Kal wept TOv %AAwy elmopev 
exOnodueba yap rods Soxovvras meph 
abra@v Adyous, Gv Tos wh cvuBalvoytas 
Th aArndele edrcytavres, Tods wader 

évddtous naradrelpavres BeBaidoomer* 
kal ottws ora: pavepds 5 rept abtav 
Aéyos. But on looking below we find 
a sentence answering to, and in fact 
repeating, the present one in such a 
way that we cannot help taking it as 
a decisive guide as to what is here 
meant. After a statement of the 


tc HOILKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL 195 


~ oo 3. Po wv , ‘ , \ ~ 
0, WOTED Tk TWY AAAWY, ribevrac TH Pasvonevee XO TF OWTOY 
~n 4 ao 4 / 
dlamopncavTag ovTw Osinvuvar PAanioTa ply wayTa TH 
2yd \ ~ \ Ad) > 3S / \ ~ \ 
ey ofa Wepk TAUTA TH WAI, Eb OF AY, TA TWAETTA xa 
, oA A / / AN S ~ \ 
HUPIWTATH” EAY YAP AvyTas TE TH Qua HEH Kat xAaTA- 
A + - 2X ~N , a wv c ~ 
AElTYTAL TH Fv00Ea, Oedery revoy AY £bn Ixaywcs. 
~ A a ; / \ ’ ~ 
Aoxsi On Y TE SYXPATEA Hal XAPTEDIA THY orovoalwy 6 
\ ~ 5 ~ Ss / \ 
xOb TWY ETAIVETOY civat, 7) > axpac la TE xb paranio 
~ t \ ~ . 
Thy Oavawy Te xak Wextov, xal 6 auros eyApaTyS xah 
>; A ~~ nw A 3 XN ~ 
EU[AEVETIHOS TW AOYIe LW XOb AXOATIS xah EXOTATIXOG TOU 
~ ao Q > ‘ sp N a ~ s 
AoyiTp.0U. xXAb Oo Mev axpaTng Elowe oT datiAa mparres 
5 A Al c ig > ‘\ DD) A a ~ oi> 4 V4 > 
1h WAIOG, 00 EyxXpATIS EhOwWS CTI Dative gi ems ULbas OUX 
> ~ A 4A 7 \ A 4 X\ 3 ~ 
axonrovdss Oia Tov Aoyov. Hxab Toy cwdpova [eev eyxparty 
A A ~ 
xah HOpTEpixoy, Tov O& ToLoUToy of wiv TayTa cwdpova of 





various ideas, and of the difficulties 
- which they suggest, the writer adds af 
bev oby Gropla Toadrai Twes cvpBal- 
vouvow, Tobrwy d€ Ta pey dvedeiv Sel, Ta 
de Karadimeiv: 7 yap Adots Tis amoptas 
eSpects éorw (ii. 12). The words 
before us, Avnra: Ta SvoxXeEp7, corre- 
spond with r& yey avedcty (T&y axopimv) 
and with 7 Avows ris Gropias. Itis to 
be observed, however, that kataArrety 
is used in the one place to refer to the 
popular ideas, and in the other to the 
objections (@ropla) urged against those 
ideas. 1a pavdueva, as shown by what 
follows, is here equivalent to ra 
Aeyéueva in § 7, the common sayings 
and ideas of men. It is used in the 
same sense, Eth. Bud. i. vi. 1: wetparéov 
dé wept trobTwy mdvrwv Cnreiy Thy riot 
dia Tay Adywr, papruplos Kal wapa- 
delypact xpdépevov Tois davopevais. 
6—7 The common ideas are now 
enumerated. They are six in number: 
(1) ‘ That continence and endur- 
ance are morally good, while inconti- 
nence and softness are morally bad.’ 
(2) ‘ That the continent man is he 
who sticks to his opinion, while the 
incontinent man is he who departs 
from his opinion.’ 
(3) ‘ That the incontinent man errs 





through his peculiar state, knowing 
all the while that he is doing wrong ; 
while owing to this knowledge the 
continent man abstains.’ 

(4) ‘ That temperance is the same as 
continence, and in like manner incon- 
tinence is sometimes confused with 
intemperance.’ . : 

(5) ‘It is occasionally maintained 
that wise and clever men may be 
incontinent.’ 

(6) ‘That there is such a thing as 
incontinence of other things beside 
pleasure, ¢.g. of anger, of honour, and 
of gain.’ 

6 Sone? 5) x.7.A.] Cf. Xenophon, 
Memorab. 1. v. 4-5, where it is said 
that Socrates considered éyxparea the 
foundation of the virtues. (Cf. Zé. rv. 
V. I; IV. V. 9-7, 1%.) » 

kal toy céppova pey eyKxpari Kal 
xaprepixév| The distinction between 
cwppoctvn, eyxpdrea, and xaprepla, 
was not accurately maintained either 


- by Xenophon or Plato; cf. Memorab. 


Iv. v. 7,1 i. 1, &e. Plato, Gorgias, 
Pp. 491 D: Gs éavrod &pxovra Ayes ; 
obdty moixlAov, GAN’ Somwep of woddol, 
céppova dyvraKal éyxparh abtoy éavrov, 
Tay jdovay Kal émbuuay Epxovta Tav 
év avrg. Rep. p. 430 B: Kécpos mov 


co2~- 


196 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VII. 


[ Car. 


~ \ \ > ~ 3 / 
0 0d, xal Tov axcAaoTOY axpary xal Toy axpAaTH axXorAa- 


, € es > 4 
7oTov cuyxexupevnc, of O Erépoug eival daciv. 


Tov 08 


dpovipoy ort pry od dacw evdévyerbar sivas axpari, ore 
0 eviousg dpovipous ovTag xab desvoug axnpareis eivas. ett 
axparcis AgyovTas xak Junot xal Timing xal xépdoug. Ta 


\ yy tZ a 2 
[-EY OUY AEyomeva TAUT eorly. 
~ ~ , 
"Amopycesed ay Tig ms bmonapPavwy opSig axparede-_ 


2 


/ 
Tal Tig. emioTapsvoy ety ovy ov acl Tiveg olov Te sivas" 





Tis... . 1 owhpoctyn ear) Kal jdovay 
Two Kal émOuuiay eykparea, 

Tov a&KdAacrov axpary] Fritzsche 
refers to Xen. Mem. rv. v. 6 sqq., and 
for the opposite comparison to Xen. 
Mem. . i. 1: @3dKer mporpérew rods 
cuvovtas aoKetv eykpdteray Bpwrod Kal 
morod Kat Aaxvelas kal Srvov Kat plyous 
kal @dAmous Kal mévov. ‘yvous ydp Tia 
Tav ouvdvTwavy a&Kodkacrorépws ExovTa 
mpos T& TOLAUTA, K.T.A, 

7 Gkpareis A€yovta: Kad Oupod Kal 
Tis Kal Képdous| Cf. Plato, Legg. ix. 
p. 869 a. Isoer. Demon. p. 6: i? dy 
Kpareiobar thy Wuxhy aicxpdy, ToUTwy 
eykpareay kone mdvtTwv, Képdous, 
opyis, ndevis, Avans. 


II. This chapter contains a state- 
ment of the objections and difficulties 
which may be raised against the above- 
mentioned ideas. 

1—4 state the difficulties which 
attach to the third-mentioned idea— 
that the incontinent man sins against 
knowledge. How is this possible ? 
how can one know the best and not 
doit? Socrates denied the possibility 
of incontinence altogether, making it 
convertible with ignorance ; but with 
what kind of ignorance remains to be 
asked. Others confess that it is not 
knowledge which is perverted in the 
mind of the incontinent, but only 
opinion, 7.e. a vague and weak con- 
viction. 

5 Continuing the same subject, 





introduces also an objection to idea (5) 
—that the wise man may be incon- 
tinent. Some fancy that wisdom 
(though not knowledge in the scientific 
sense) may coexist with incontinence. 
But this shows a misconception of the 
nature of wisdom. The wise man can 
do no wrong. 

6 Contains an objection to idea (4). 
How can continence be the same as 
temperance, since the former implies 
evil desires to be controlled, but the 
latter is a harmonious state of the 
moral nature ? 

7—10 Show the difficulties and 
absurdities which attach to idea (2), 
that continence consists in sticking to 
your opinion. If so it must be bad 
sometimes ; Neoptolemus was incon- 
tinent; folly and incontinence com- 
bined will produce right actions; the 


abandoned man will be a more hopeful ~ 


character than the incontinent, &c. 

t1 Urges against the sixth of the 
ideas, that the term ‘ incontinence’ 
cannot be indiscriminately relative to 
wealth, honour, &e. There must be 
some absolute conception of incon- 
tinence, independent of these qualifi- 
cations. 

1 “Amophrae 8 —tyvowy] ‘Now 
one might raise the question, how it 
is that a person with right conceptions 
comes to act incontinently. That a 
man who had absolute knowledge 
should do so, some say would be 
impossible, for it would be a strange 


ray ee ee ee 


a 4 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 197 


Oewdy yap emioryns evovors, Wo Beto Dwxparys, kAro TE 
xpareiv nol mepieAxely avToY WomEp avdpamodoy. Dwxpa- 
Tyg piv yap CAws Euayero mpog Tov Adyov Ws oux ovo7¢ 
axpariag* ovbeva yap bmrorapPavovTa mpArTely mapa TO 
Béarioroy, AAAA OF ayvorav. Odrog pey oty 6 Adyog au- 2 
dicRyret roig dawopévorg evapyds, xa déov Synrelv wepl 
To mabos, ei OF ayvoray, Tig 6 TpUMOG yiveTas THG ayvolas, 
Ort yap ovx oleral ye Gaxparevdmevog mply ev TO wade ye- 


, , +18 , S28 \ ~ \ 
veo bo, davepoy. ELOb dg TIVES Ob TH [LEV Tuy Xwpoudt TH 3 





thing, as Socrates thought, if know- 
ledge were there, that anything else 
should master him and twist him about 
like a slave. Socrates in short was 
totally opposed to the idea, (arguing) 
as if incontinence did not exist at all, 
for he said no one with a conception 
of what was best could act differently 
from that best, but he could only so 
act through ignorance.’ On _ this 
doctrine of Socrates, and on its con- 
nection with the rest of his ethical 
views, see Vol. I. Essay II. p. 125. 
The omission of the article before 
Swepdrys seems to show that the real 
man, and not the personage of Plato’s 
dialogues, is referred to, (see above, 
note on Eth, vt. xiii. 3), but yet the 
words of the passage before us have 
obvious reference to Plato’s Protagoras, 
P- 352 B: Sone? 5& tots moAAois mepl 
emorhuns Towodrdy Tt, obK ioxupdy ob 
Hyewovinoy ovd apxikdy elvyar* ovde ws 
mep) rowottov abvrov byTos SiavoodyTa, 
GAN evobons TorAdKis avOpdmrm ém- 
oThuns, ov thy emiorhunv abrod &pxeu, 
GAN BAAO TL, TOTE pev Ouudy, ToTe SE 
jdovhy, Tote 5& Avany, eviore 5t Epwra, 
modaduus 5& PdBov, &texvGs Siavoobmevor 


mepl Tis emorthuns, domwep wep avdpa- 


wédov, mepieAKkouevns bmd TeV BAAwY 
andyTwr. 

Saws éudxero| This is repeated in 
strong terms by the author of the 
Magna Moralia, u. vi. 2: Zoxpdrns 
wey ody 6 mpecBirns dvyper BAws Kal 





ovn &pn axpaciay eivar, A€éywv S71 odOels 
elias TH KaKd bm KaKd elow EAorT’ dy. 
Cf. Plato Protag. p. 357 EB: 7 5€ ea- 
paptavouéevn mpakis avev emorthuns tote 
mou Kal ato) 871 duabla mpdrrerat, &e. 

2 ovrTos piv odv—avepdy| ‘Now 
this reasoning is manifestly at variance 
with experience, and we require to 
ask with regard to the state, supposing 
it to arise from ignorance, what man- 
ner of ignorance it is that takes place, 
for itis plain that the person who acts 
incontinently does not at all events 
think (that he must so act) before 
he gets into the particular state.’ 
Dawvouévois here refers no doubt to 
the actual facts of life, and accordingly 
the rendering of the Paraphrast is, 
ovros 5¢ 6 Adyos éevaytios eat rots 
gavepots. And yet there is probably 
some allusion also to the gavdpueva 
mentioned above (i. 5); we may re- 
present the double allusion of the 
word by translating it ‘ experience,’ 
comparing with it also the use of 7a 
brdpxovra, Hth, 1. viii. 1. 

ovk oteral ye] There seems to be 
an ellipsis of Sety mpdrrew & mpdrret. 
Cf. below, iii. 2: 6 & obk oferta pév, 
didxer 5€. The writer argues that if 
incontinence be ignorance, it is a pe- 
culiar kind of ignorance, an ignorance 
that comes on (yiverar), nota consistent 
ignorance ; for the incontinent person 
does not think ignorantly, ¢. c. wrongly, 
before the time of temptation. 


198 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VIL. [Cuar, 


>> ” \ N \ 3 , N ~ e 
0 ov To ply yap Eemioriung pndiv elvar xpsitrov b0r0- 
voto, To OF pybiva mparrev mapa Td IoSav Perriov ovy 
~ ~ . ~ / 
Emoroyourl, xal Oia ToUTe Tov axpary dacly ovx emioryyy 
4tyovra xpareiobor bro Thy ydoviy aArAa dofav. aArAA 
A i: d0 \ sete 7, y > » Paes / c 
peyy lye O0fa xol py emsioryyn, wyd ioyupa broanlis 7 
ayritelvoura aA rpspola, xabdmep ev Toig Oioratoucl, 
TVYYVOLY THO py every ev avTaig mpdg eribuplag ioyupac” 
~ de 4 ‘ Me > , iy. ~ LAA 2D \ ~ 
7H 88 poxdypig. ob cuyyvapn, ovde riby drwy ovder) réby 
~ , > >. 
SWexra&y. dpovicews apa avTitevovens’ abry yap irxu- 
poTaToy. AAA aTorov* Zora yap 6 avTig ana dpdviprog 
teat) , , my ny Ey) on ‘4 fi \ , 
xal axparys, dye 0 00d’ av sig dpovinou elvas TO mpar- 
€ \ 7 
Tew éExovTa Ta DavaAdTaTAa, mMpog Oe ToUToIg OédeixTOL mpO- 
TEpov OTL MpaxTinds ye 6 Dpovipog’ Thy yap EryaTwY TiC 
6xal TAS AAAaG Eywy apeTas. Ett Ei mev ey TH emibuplag 
” ? \ \ if e? 7 > 54 € , 
EXElY IOYUpAS xa DavAaS O EyYxpATIS, OUx ETTALO TMDpwWY 
” 
eyxparig ovd’ 6 eyxparys Twhpwy* ole yap To Kya ow- 
dpovog ovre TH Pavrag Eyew. BAAR ‘ayy Ost ye* eb prey 
yap xpyotal ai emibupetos, Pavan 7 xwavoura Eig oy axo~ 
Aovdeiv, Wol 7 eyxparea ov aca orovdaia’ ei 0 aobe- 
veig xal wy Gavras, ovfev cepvov, ovd ei hatras xal aobe- 


7 veic, ovdey meya. 


BA > 4 / ° A ~ c 
ert et waon O0y epeveTixoy moses 7 


eyxparera, DAVAY, oloy ci xal TH Wevdet* xal ei maongs d0ENS 





3 emorhuns undev elva xpetrroy | Cf. 
Eth, Eud. yur. i. 10: ka 6p0ads 7d 
Swxpatixdy, Sr: ovdtv ioxupdrepoy 
ppovhrews, GAN Brit emiorhunv epn, 
oix dp0dv, Plato, Protag. p. 352 D: 
aisxpdv éori—oopiay kal emorhuny wy 
odxl mavreyv Kpdtictoyv pdvat elva TOY 
avOpwrelwv mparyudrov, 

5 mpos 5& robrois—aperds] ‘And 
besides, it has been previously de- 
monstrated that the wise man is 
emphatically (ye) one who acts, for 
his province is to deal with particulars, 
and he possesses also all the virtues,’ 
apérepoy, cf. Eth, vi. vii. 7, VI. vill. 8 ; 
tav écoxatwy is here the genitive of 
the object, as, in the place last quoted, 
Tou yap éaxdrou early (H ppdvnais.) 





kat tas GAAas Exwv dperas| Cf. Eth. 
VI. xiii. 6; «al rds %AAas is equivalent 
to kat ai mdoas. See the note on Lh. 
1L i. 4. 

7 The rough and hasty conception 
of continence which would confound 
it with obstinacy is here refuted by 
showing that absurdities would follow 
from it. Continence would be some- 
times an evil, and incontinence some- 
times a good. From this point of view 
the conduct of Neoptolemus, (who first 
promised to deceive Philoctetes, and 
afterwards abandoned the design as 
unworthy), must be called incontinent 
and at the same time right. The full 
reference here given to the Philoctetes 
of Sophocles is more in the style of 


I1.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. 


199 


£9 | Soke , w Wo fF > “4 Ki € 

7 Axpacia 2xoTATINOY, ETTAL TIS TTOUdAIA axpacia, lov 6 

, J > oes , 3 Q \ 

Dodoxarzoug Neo rorspog ey TW Piroxryry ETAIVETOS YAP 

, ec Xx ~ A ~ 

vx sumévewy oig ereioby Ord Tod "Oduocéwe did Td AuTEi- 

+ X\ , 

oar Wevdomevog. ers 6 copsorindg Adyoo Wevdopnevog amo-8 
7 

pias did yap To mapadoSa Poursobau eardyyeiv, iva desvol 
/ 

wow bray exiTiywol, 6 yevomevog TuAAYITL0G Gmopla 





Eudemus than of Aristotle. The al- 
lusion is repeated below, c. ix. § 4. 
For the sake of observing more accu- 
rately the ‘noble incontinence’ of 
Neoptolemus, it is worth while to 
quote at length the ‘passage referred 
to (Soph. Phil. 895—916). 


N. wanat rl d77 bv pg eyw Tovv- 
Oévbe ye ; 
&, ti 8 éorw, & wai; wot wor ekéBns 
Abye ; 
N. od off Sow xph T&mopoy Tpéwew 
ros. 
, amopeis 5¢ Tod ob; ph Ady, @ 
Téxvoy, TAdE, 
N. GAN eved® Hin Tovde tud wdGovs 
Kup®@. 
&. ov 54 ce Svoxépera Tov voonuatos 
éreivev BoTE wh we wyew vabrny ETL; 
N. Gmayra ducxépeia, Thy abrod piow 
bray Auwév Tis BpG TA wh Tpoce- 
Kora, 
&. GAN oddev tw rod ¢ uvredoayTos ob ye 
Spgs ovdt gwvreis, ecOddv wip’ 


erapeaA@y, 
N. aioxpds\ pavodpa* todr andya 
| mddan, 


otkovy év ois ye Spas* &y ois & 
abdgs dxva, 
N. & Zed, th dpdaw; Sedrepov AnPea 
Kaxés, : 
kptrrav & & wh Sef Kal rAéyor 
aloxior’ enay ; 
&. avhp8o, ciph ya Kaxds yvounv Eur, 
mpodovs mw Eorke KaKAIT OY TOY TAODY 


% 


oTeXelv. : 
N. Aurov wev odk Eywrye* AumnpGs 5E wh 
méumw o€ paAAoY, TOOT av@uat 
_ WaraE. 





&, ti mote A€yeis, @ TéKvov, as od 
pavOdve, 
N. oddév ce Kptyw. det yap és Tpolay 
oe hei 
mpos tovs "Ayaovs kal tov *ATpet- 
dav ordAov. 


8—g &r1 6 cogpuorixds—kand mpd- 
tex] ‘Again (if we accept the above- 
mentioned definition of continence) 
the sophistical argument [though 
lying] will cause us perplexity. For 
from the sophists wishing to confute, 
and at the same time astonish (zapd- 
dofa édéyxev), in order that on suc- 
ceeding they may establish areputation 
for power,—they construct a piece of 
reasoning which perplexes, since the 
intellect is fettered, on the one hand 
not wishing to abide by a conclusion 
which does not please, and, on the 
other hand, being unable to get loose, 
from having no means of breaking 
the chain of argument. Now from 
one of their reasonings it ensues that 
folly together with incontinence will 
make up virtue ; for (he who possesses 
these qualities) does the reverse of 
what he conceives (he ought) by 
reason of his incontinence, but he 
conceives good to be bad and that he 
ought not to do it, and thus he will 
do what is good and not what is bad.’ 
In the Oxford edition of Bekker 
(1837) there is a misprint of pévew 
bev 84. The Berlin edition of Bekker, 
like all other editions, reads pévew pev 
uh. The MSS. appear to vary with 
regard to wey (which by some of them 
is omitted), but not with regard to uh. 


Weg 


hataa 


9 Ouvyrau Oia TO Atoas wy F exew roy Aayov. 


i“ lot « yorss | 


200 


s 
yiveTas * 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


[Cuar. 


520 \ ¢ ps oo / \ \ 4 
Of0ETAL te q OLavole, OoTay p-Evely ree ea) Bow- 


Ayrou Oia TO LY apeoxsly TO cyperepasie, m poigvas 08 a 


ous Bokver 0 ex 


Tivos Adyov 7 Adpor ivy pweTa axpaciag apeTy TavavTia yap 

£ i A ¢ / \ ‘\ > / c / A 
mparres cov SrorapPaver Oi THY axpaciay, brorapyPaver Oe 
rayoba xaxd elvos xal ob dziv woarrew, dors Tayada xal 





The great difficulty in the passage 
before us is caused by the word evdd- 
nuevos, This is explained either to be 
(1) an additional adjective to 6 cogi- 
atixds Adyos, in which position it has 
an awkward appearance, or (2) to refer 
to the well-known puzzle of Eubulides 
the Megarian, which was called 6 
evdduevos, and in logic books ‘Men- 
tiens’ or ‘the liar.’ The puzzle was 
as follows: ‘If a man says that he 
lies, does he lie or speak the truth ?’ 
to which of course no simple answer 
can be given. He may lie, and yet 
speak the truth in saying that he lies; 
for if he lies in saying that he lies, then 
he speaks the truth. This was a speci- 
men of the ‘eristic’ of the Megarians, 
which consisted to a great extent in 
drawing out the difficulties that beset 


the common forms of language. Chry-. 


sippus wrote six books on the puzzle 
of ‘the Liar;’ and Philetas of Cos 
is said to have died of vexation from 
failing to solve it. Hegel ( Geschichte 
der Philos. 11. 117) compares it to the 
squaring of the circle. But clearly 
this puzzle has nothing to do with the 
subject under discussion in the text. 
Indeed one might almost fancy that 
the word wevdduevos was an inter- 
polation which had crept in owing to 
the occurrence of the words 8a 7rd 
Aureio@at Pevdduevos in the line before. 
The acquaintance of the copyist with 
the fallacy ‘Mentiens’ might have 
tended to shroud the mistake. Evi- 
dently the words cvpBatve 8 & twos 
Aéyou are an explanation of 6 cogi- 
otikos Adyos, and the Paraphrast, 





seeing this, ignores the word Wevdd- 
Hevos altogether. Supposing, how- 
ever, that it be allowed to stand, 
we must interpret it in a logical sense, 
not as if it had anything to do with 
the fallacy of Eubulides. The ex- 
planation of it is to be found in the 
Sophist. Elench. of Aristotle, iii. 1-2, 
where it is said that the aims of the 
Sophists and Eristies are five in 
number, éAeyxos kal Weddos Kal wapd- 
dotov Kal codronicuds (making one talk 
bad grammar) kal réurrov Td roijou 
adorecxijoa (making one repeat the 
same thing over and over)... wdAiora — 
bev yap mpoapotyta palvecOa eréy- - 
xovres, Sevrepoy 5 Wevdduevdy te Set- 
kvivat, tpitoy eis mapddotoy tyew, k.7.A. 
In the above passage we see that the 
writer has brought together two of 
these separate terms, speaking of 
mwapddota éAéyxew. It is possible that 
he may also have qualified the ‘so- 
phistical reasoning’ with another of 
these logical formule, though, as 
before said, its addition presents an 
awkward appearance. On the eristic 
of the Sophists, see Vol. I. Essay II. 
sl it 

dédera 7 didvora] Cf. Ar. Metaph. 
I, i. 2: Avew & obd« Zorw Gyvootyras 
tov Beoudy> GAN 7H TIS Siavolas dropla 
Bndoi todTo wep) rod mparyyaros~ F yap 
Gmropet tabry maparAhoiov mémovOe Tots 
dedeuévois’ Gddvarov yap auorépws 
mpoedbety eis rd mpdaber. If we grant 
the premiss that continence is sticking 
to an opinion of whatever kind, we 
cannot ‘ get loose’ from the conclusion 
forced upon us by the Sophists. 


'F—II0-} 


> \ \ , 
OU TH Hand Weasel. 


-HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


201 


x ec ~ ~ T 4 4 a , 
ETL GOTO mwemrsic$os mpatTwy xak d1w- 10 


ey ~ 
HWY TH HOH Hal Mpoatpovjrevos Berarioy av doetev Tod wy 
\ \ > \ +19 / Dee , \ Vee! \ 
Dia Aoyiopoy AAAR OF axpaciayvs eviaToTepos yap Oia TO 


nw wv 
petamerrbivas av. 


20 2 Nee 2 ~ ae eee 
0 m) AHPATHS EvoYos TY WAGOLLE ey ae 


\ ic? \ 30. , TINGS S 4 2? > \ 

dapev “brav ro ddwp mviyn, Th Ost Ewimiverv;” ch ev 
\ sf a , \ an» > 7 

yap wn eméreioro & mparTe, petameobeic dy emavoaro 


~ sv / IDV ice ” , 
vv O€ WEMEIOpEvog oUdEY YTTOY MAAK TWAaTTE!. 


” Sy 
STi ei it 


\ , > / > \ \ > / / c 3 ~ 
weph wavTa axpacia eoTl xal eyxparein, Tig 6 aTrAw@S 
, f + \ ‘f XN 
axpatys ; ovGelo yap amacag eye TAG axpaciacg, dapev 


® elvat trivag amrrws. 


A 4 / ~ , 
ak peey Guy OTF Oo phos TOIAUTAL TIVES 


cupPalvovow, Tovrwy O08 TH pay averciv Ost Ta OF12 
xaranimeiy' 7 yap AvoIg Tg amoplag sUpecic eoriv. 

[Iparov piv ov oxertéov worepoy eldoTes ov, xab THE 3 
eidorec, elra mepl mola Tov axpaty xal Tov eyxpary, 





10 @r 6 rG—UAAa mparrea| ‘Again 
he who on conviction and with full 
purpose acts and pursues pleasure 
would seem to be in a better state 
than he who does so not from reason- 
ing, but from incontinence; for (the 
former) is more curable, since there is 
a possibility of changing his con- 
victions, whereas the incontinent man 
is open to the saying ‘“ When water 
chokes, what must one take to wash it 
down?” Had henot been convinced 
before with regard to his actions, 
there might have been a hope of his 
mind being enlightened and his 
ceasing so to act; but as it is, with 
all the conviction in the world, he 
still acts contrary to it.’ This is a 
reductio ad absurdum of the saying 
that incontinence means never acting 
on your conviction, and that continence 
means sticking to your conviction. If 


it were so, intemperance (d«oAacia) - 


would seem to be a sort of continence, 
and, on the ather hand, incontinence 
would seem incurable, The reverse, 
however, of all this istrue. See below 
ch. viii. 

ei piv yap uh eréreroto| Some MSS, 
VOL. II. 





omit «, which is not to be wondered 
at, as there is a transition of meaning 
in the use of éwémeioto: (1) the in- 
temperate man is said to act T@ 
mere Oat, 7.€, with a wrong conviction, 
thinking bad to be good ; (2) the in- 
continent man acts od T@ memeicOa, 
not by reason of a conviction that he 
ought to do as he does; (3) the 
incontinent man wéreora & mpdtTeL, 
has a full conviction with regard to 
what he does (z.¢. that it is wrong), 
but does not abide by that conviction. 

12 af wey oby—éorw] ‘This then 
is the kind of difficulties which arise ; 
part of them we must explain away 
(avedciv), while we leave part un- 
answered, for resolving a difficulty is 
finding something out.’ Cf. Ar. Meta- 
phys. U. 1.2: ore BE rots edropijca 
BovaAopévois mpotpyou rd B.aTopjoau 
KadGs* 7 yap Borepov ebropia Atvois 
tov mpdtepoy amopovnévwy earl, Adew 
8 obk Eotw ayvootytas tov decudy, 
See above, ch. i. 5, note. 


III. This chapter discusses that 
which is really the most important 
and interesting question with regard 


DD 


202 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. [ Cuap. 
~ ‘ ‘ \ 
Geréov, Agyw 38 mworepov weph waoay yoovyy xal AumyY 
/ \ \ ~ 

7 Tepl Twas abwpiopevas, xal Toy eyxpary xal Tov xap- 
a .< / ig \ 

TEpixdy, ToTEpov 6 MUTOS 7 ETEpoG EoTiV’ buolws be xal 
~ a ~ nw / \ tA 

mepl Thy dAAwy boa ouyyevi, Tig Jewpiag eat! TauTYS. 

~ , / 
Zots 8 apyy THg oxEews, MoTEpoy & eyxpaTng xal 6 
~ \ A xX ~ ~ 4 4 

AXDATIS EiTk TO TEDl ay TH THs EXovTES THy diadopay, 
/ Sv / ~ \ 4 > ‘ ae 

neyo oe worepov TH meph Tank elvau Havoy axparag > axpa- 
, > ~ Fy ~ > 

TIS, 7 OD AAA TH WG, 7 oF AAA’ EE apdoiv* Exes’ ei weph 

, \ A Sy A DA 4 

TOUT éoTly 7 axpacia xal 7 eyxpareia 7 Oe oUTE yap 

\ , T3: ‘ « ¢ ~ > 7 > A \ a «3 ‘= 

WEOL TWAYT ETTIV O ATAWS AXLATIS, AANA TEL ATED O AXO- 

a ~ A ~ c ~ yy - hs, * \ x 

AKTTOS, OUTE TW THOS THUTA AMAWS EYElY (ravroy yap ay 
> ~ > , > \ ~ ey oF € ‘ \ 4 

nY TY AHOAAT IO), AAAA TW wot EXE. 0 [LEY Yao ayEeTat 

/ / Nf ~ \ » €n\ , c > 

Tpoospovj.evoc, voulowy asl Osiv To mapoy 730 di@xew* 6 O 





to incontinence and the whole nature 
of the moral will, namely, how is it 
possible to know the right and yet do 
the wrong? It treats of the third of 
the popular opinions mentioned above 
(ch. i. § 6), and the difficulties arising 
out of the same(ch. ii. §§ 1-4). The 
commencement of the chapter is rather 
confused, as it touches on, without 
discussing, the nature of the object- 
matter of continence and incontinence, 
&e. With § 3 the main question is 
opened, namely the relation of know- 
ledge to incontinence, and a. pre- 
liminary step is taken by the assertion 
that it makes no difference whether it 
be right opinion or knowledge which 
the incontinent man possesses, since 
opinion may be held quite as strongly 
as knowledge. 

In §§ 5—8 it is shown that the real 
point to be ascertained is, what is 
meant by knowing or having know- 
ledge. A man may have knowledge 
which is in abeyance, either because 
he does not apply a minor premiss to 
his general principle, or because he is 
under the influence of sleep, wine, 
madness, or the like, 





9—14 A more intimate examination 
tells us that there may be two syllo- 
gisms in the mind, the one leading to 
continence and the other to inecon- 
tinence. The former is not drawn 
out, but remains in want of a minor 
premiss ; the latter through the in- 
stincts of sense and desire becomes 
realised and is acted on. However, 
the former knowledge cannot be said 
to have been present in a complete 
form to the mind, and therefore 
Socrates was not wrong in denying 
that knowledge of the right could 
exist, and yet be overborne. 

1—2 There is something awkward 
in the way in which the questions to 
be discussed in succeeding chapters 
are here propounded. The writer 
might have made it his d&pxh ris 
oxépews to consider what is the exact 
point of difference between continence 
and incontinence, but as a matter of 
fact he has not done so. There is a 
want of art in the sudden announce- 
ment (6 wey yap &yera x.7.A.) of the 
distinction between intemperance and 
incontinence. The same want of art, 
proceeding from whatever cause, marks 





III.] 


> yf / N 7 , 
OUX ObETHs LEY, O1mxeh 04. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. 


203 


mepk pev oby To O1Eav ar7yd7 3 


HAAR pH emiothpyy elvar map qv axparetovTas, odbty dia- 
/ XN A / 4 \ ~ , > / 
éper mpdg Tov Adyov’ Evior yap Ty doFalevrwy od diora- 


~ NS 
Sours, AAA’ olovrar cixpiadg eidevan. 


> -. A A b eas 
Eb OUY Oc TO NPEYe4 


LA c 5 / ~ ~ bd , \ A’ 
miorevely ob OoEafovTEs PAAAOY THY EMIT TALEVYOY TAL THY 
c iZ / IAN (eee > , , ” 
broanlay mpasoucry, ovhey droioes emiotyn Oo&ng* Zvios 

a ’ 2 Oe 4 re d Sy Ao LY ey MOREY 2 
yap TioTEvouTl ovdey ATTOY OIC o€aSoucr 7 ETELOL O1G ET I~ 


oravras* dnrot O “HpaxArsiros. 


GAN Emel Oryiog AZyouney 5 


To éwicracbos (xal yap 6 Eywy piv ob ypwmevos 0 TH 
EMIoT HY xal G6 yowEsvog AZyeTas ExloTac4as), Stole : 
To Eyovra pev py Gewpoiivra 02 a pn Set mparrey Tod 
+ \ ~ ~ ‘ > ~ / > > > ? 
ZyovTa xal Oewpotvra* Toito yap doxst desvov, GAA’ ovx El 





the whole of these two sections, and 
the main business of the chapter only 
commences with section 3. 

3—4 Tepl wey ody tod Sdtav Grn 
k.T.A.] Cf. above ch. ii. $$ 3—4. We 
must dismiss any idea that the pheno- 
mena of incontinence can be explained 
by saying that the incontinent man 
has only moral opinions, and that 
opinions are weak. ‘ Heraclitus shows’ 
that opinions may be as strongly held 
as scientific certainties. Of course 
neither Aristotle nor his school would 
wish to do away with the distinction 
which Plato had established between 
déta and émorhun. It is only as 
connected with the will, and as form- 
ing a ground for action, that opinion 
can be considered as strong as science. 

dndot F ‘HpdxAccros| Heraclitus had 
a reputation with the ancients for 
pride and dogmatism ; ef. Diog. Laert. 
IX. i. 5: HKoucé Te ovdevds GAN abrdy 
Zon diChoacbu Kal pobeiv mdyra map” 
Ib. rx. i, 1: peyardppwv be 
yéyove wap Sytivaovy Kat drepérrns, ds 
kal éx Tov ovyypdupatos abtod SiAov 
ev & gnot* woAvpabin véov ob dddoKer- 
‘Holodov yap ty ebldake Kat Mubaydpny, 
abbls te Zevopdved te Kal ‘Exaraioy. 
civas yap ev 7d copdy exloracba yvd- 


éavrov, 





unv Hre of eyxuBepyica mdvta die 
wdyTov, 

5 GAN érel Six Gs—Oewpav] ‘ But 
since we use the term ‘knowing’ in 
two senses, both to denote the man 
who possesses without applying, and 
the man who applies knowledge, there 
will be a difference between doing 
what is wrong, when you have the 
knowledge but do not attend to it, 
and doing the same when you have 
the knowledge and pay attention to it. 
The latter case seems strange, but 
not so if you act without attending’ 
This distinction between the posses- 
sion and the application of knowledge, 
which is of the utmost importance 
for explaining moral weakness, was 
perhaps first started by Plato in the 
Theetetus, pp. 197-198, where he 
introduces his famous image of the 
pigeon-house. Every knowledge once 
acquired by the mind is like a bird 
caught and placed in a pigeon-house ; 
it is possessed, but not available, till 
it be chased within the enclosure and 
captured anew. 

Kh Gewpodvra] Gewpeiy is used to 
express ‘direct observation,’ just as 
in Eth, vi. iii. 2: Stay Zw Tod Oewpetv 


_ yevyra, 
vb 2 


204 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VIL [Cuap. 


7 > \ & Fr ~ f 7 
6 pa Jewpiy. Er emel duo Toro réby mpoTaoewy, <& ovTa 
pav dpdorépag ovbiv xwAver mpartery moapo. ray er iota: 
a Ps hod rad pevro TH xaforov narra pen TH KOTO 
p-Zpos* m para yep ra xa Exacta. diachéepes 0 xal ro 
xa5orov’ To wey yap ed éautod To 0 em} Tod m pay parog 
oriv, oloy ts mavTl avicwmw cupdéper Ta Enod, nab ore 
e ” No \ 4 / > TE an , 
obras avipwr os qr Supiy TO TOMOvOE’ KAA eb TOdE ToOLOy- 
Os, 7 ove exe 7 our evepyeh. xaTa Te Oy TobTOVG dioloes 
TOUS TLOTOUS apyyavoy brov, Wars doxelv odTw psy eidevan 
x ” / NA - a \. ae ‘ 

7pnbev a&romov, arArAws 02 Gavparroyv. ert TO Eye THY 
EMIOTHLNY LADROY Tpamroy Thy viv pudéevrery imrapyer Tog 
avi paras * ay TO yap eye peey ad xpiebes 02 diuspé- 
povoay opdopey riy 2Ew, wore xal Eyev wg xab py 
EXE, oloy tov xabevdovTa xal [ouvopevoy xa oivenpivoy. 
anne pay ouTw diarifevros of ev ois malerty ovTes* 
Gupol yap xad emibupios adpodiciwy xal Evia tay Tol 
olrwy emidyiAws xal To chpa peblioraow, éeviorg OF 





6 ér érei—@avuacréy] ‘ Again 
since the premisses (in a syllogism) 
are of two modes, nothing hinders a 
man acting against knowledge, al- 
though he possesses both these, if he 
apply only the universal premiss, but 
not the particular, for it is particulars 
which are the objects of action. More- 
over there is a distinction which may 
be made in the universal itself; part 
of it applies to the subject (ép’ éavrod), 
and part to the object (ém) rod mpdy- 
patos), for instance (you may have 
the universal) “dry things are good 
for all men,” and (the minor premiss) 
“this is a man,” or “such and such 
is dry;” but (the farther knowledge) 
that “this object is such and such,” 
the person either has not or it is not 
realised. According then to these 
different mode of the premisses there 
will be an immense difference (in the 
way one knows), so that there is 
nothing paradoxical in (the incontinent 
man) “ knowing”’ in the way I have 





specified, but that he should know 
otherwise would be marvellous.’ This 
section well points out the number of 
particular applications which have to 
be made before a general moral prin- 
ciple can be realised and acted on. 
Else it remains in abeyance, and the 
man who possesses it may yet act 
against it. 

7 ev TG yap Exew—olvopévor] ‘For 
in the case of having and not using we 
see that the having (rh €v) becomes 


quite a different thing, so that in such - 


cases a man has (knowledge) after a 
manner, and has it not, as for instance 
in sleep, in madness, and in drunken- 
ness.’ €s is used here simply as the 
verbal noun of éxw, as it is in a 
passage of Plato, already alluded to, 
which the writer possibly had before 
his mind, Theetetus, p. 197 A: du«h- 
koas oby } viv Aéyover 7d ertararbas ;— 
“Iows* ob pévra ev ye TE wapdyre 
pynpovebo,—Emorhuns mov ev paoly 
abd elvas, 


aN ee) 


II.] 


\ , ~ 

xal paving TooUciy. 
a ~ 

TOUS axpaTEig TOUTOLS. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQON] VIL 


208 


~ 5 a 
OWjAov ody OT1 Emolws Zyew AexTZov 
\ 8: fs ‘ lé \ > \ 
TO OF AEYELY TOUG ADyoUS TOUS aos 


~ 7 ~ \ ~ 
Tig emiotiys ovdty onsiov’ xal yap ob év Toig maderr 
7 wv yi F 5 Wate , > (a 
TOUTOIG OYTES drodsiEe¢ xab ern Acyouri Euredoxrzoug, 
xal of rp@rov paloyreg cuveipouos piv Tos Adyous, loact 
> wv ra ~ aS ~ / \ , ~. a 
0 ovrm? det yap cupdivar, rovTw 8 ypodvou det* Wore 


4 / \ € , 4 G Vd / \ 
HATA ED TOUS UTOXPIVOLEYOUS, OUTMS UTOAYTTEOY ASYELy HOLL 


‘ , 
TOUS AxpAaTevopevous. 


” \ 7) ~ oy 5) 
ETL Xb WOE DuTixHso av Tig Eemi-9 





8 Td BE Adyew—daxparevouevous | 
‘Now repeating the words which 
belong to knowledge is no sign, for 
those also who are in the states I have 
mentioned repeat demonstrations and 
verses of Empedocles, and those who 
are beginning tolearn string the words 
together without yet understanding 
them; for (to be understood) a thing 
must grow up in the mind, and for 
this time is required. So in short we 
must suppose that men in a state of 
incontinence speak just like actors.’ 
This is an extremely subtle observa- 
tion. The writer having said that 
passion is like sleep or madness, 
which make one know and yet not 
know at the same time, proceeds to 
remark that men acting incontinently 
will often speak as if they were fully 
aware of the nature of their acts. 
They will say at the very moment of 
yielding to temptation, ‘I know I 
ought not to do this.’ Butsuch words 
are no sign that the knowledge is 
really felt and realised; they are 
only like the verses of Empedocles 
which a man might mutter in his 
sleep ; they are like the repetition of 


a schoolboy’s task; they are hollow. 


like the ranting of an actor. 

ard Tis emiorhuns| ‘That arecaused 
by, are the results of, science.’ Cf. 
Met. 1. iv. 4: GAN obre exeivor ard 
émothuns, ‘they do it not because of 
science,’ and see below, Ix. ix. 6. 





of mp@tov pabdvtes] Cf. Eth. v1 
viii. 6. x 

g—11 ét kal Gde—prhuny] ‘Again 
in the following manner one might 
psychologically consider the cause. 
There is first a general belief, and 
secondly a particular belief, which is 
no longer under the domain of reason, 
but under that of sense. Now when 
out of these two a third is created. it 
is a necessity that the mind should on 
the one hand assert the conclusion, 
and in the sphere of practice should 
straightway carry it out. As for 
instance, if (there be the general pro- 
position) ‘one ought to taste all that 
is sweet,” and the particular one ‘‘ this 
thing is sweet,” it is a necessity that 
he who is able, and is not hindered, 
should at once proceed to act upon 
the knowledge. When therefore there 
is in the mind one universal which 
forbids tasting, but another which 
says, “all that is sweet is pleasant,” 
(having a minor) “this thing is sweet,” 
and thus the second universal is 
realised,—and_ supposing that desire 
happen to be there; (in this case) the 
first universal says, “avoid this,” but 
desire leads us on (to take it), from 
the power which it has of setting in 
motion every one of our organs. Thus 
the result is that one is incontinent 
under the sanction as it were of reason 
and belief, and a belief too which is 
opposed not directly but only acciden- 


206 HOIKON [EYAHMION] VII. [Cuar. 


A / \ 

Pages tyy airiav, 7 piv yap xaforov d0fa, 7 0 erépa 
\ ~ Fat = 4 | Seen. ud 4 / oa 
mepl thy xal’ Exacta eoriv, wy alobyors Oy xupia* bray 
dt fd / ee 32 we eee \ A: tv6 
E pla yevyTor eF aut@y, avayxyn To cupmepaviev evde 

, A 7 . ~ ~ / >f,7 
viv davas ray Wuyryy, ev 08 Taig mointixaic mparres evduc, 
v > A , 7 ~ ‘ A 4 e iA 
olov, eb mavTog yAuxeog yeverbas Sei, TouTi OF yAuxd we ev 
~ 4 / 
Ti Thy Kal ExacTov, avayxy Toy Ouvapevoy xal Ly xwWAUO- 
od ~ \ a 
10 [LEvOY Ana TOUTO xal mpaTTEY. STav ovv 7% psy xaborou 
7. ~ V4 7 € , oa ~ ‘ \ tyn7 
Evy, XWAVOUT ao yever bas, v7) og, OTL way Ta yaAuxu 700, 
TouTl O& yauxd (abry 08 evepyel), TON O eribupla evod 
y Tn 08 Evepyel), THX O eribupla évotoa, 
e \ / ~ e So 9 i »o ~ \ 
H pay Adyer Devyew TodTo, 7 0 ewibupla ayer? xiely yap 
, ~ / ov \ 
Exarroyv duvaTas Thy popiwy’ worte cupPalver 5rd Adyou 





tally (to the true knowledge). For 
it is desire, and not the intellectual 
belief, which is opposed to the right 
law. And this consideration leads us 
to see why it is that brutes are not 
incontinent, namely, because they have 
no conception of universals, but only 
an image and a memory of parti- 
culars.’ 

This passage gives an admirable 
explanation of the way in which a 
man under temptation may ignore his 
moral principles. Action (as the 
writer implies) always depends on a 
syllogism in the mind, and, if a minor 
premiss were applied to the right 
moral principle, wrong action could 
never take place. But it is equally 
true that the man who acts wrongly 
does so under some sort of shadow of 
reason. The story of the temptation 
of Eve is typical of all similar cases 
of yielding. There are always ar- 
guments and considerations on which 
the mind, self-deceived and blinded by 
desire, may form a syllogism. And, 
as the writer observes, the misleading 
principle thus applied is not directly 
false or contrary to what is right. The 
saying ‘sweet things are pleasant’ is 
not in itself contrary to the principle 
‘intemperance is to be avoided.’ Ac- 
cidentally and in their effects the two 





propositions are brought into collision, 
though not originally opposed. 

gvoixGs| Perhaps ‘psychologically’ 
is the most representative translation 
which we can give of this word in the 
present passage. Psychology was, as 
we know, considered as a branch of 
physics by Aristotle, see Vol. I. Essay 
V. p. 237, and cf. Eth, rx, ix. 7. 

#5n] A circumlocution is necessary 
to express what was probably here 
meant by thisword. Cf. Eth. y1. xi. 2, 

0a pty] ¢.e,in the sphere of the 
reason, to which éy dé tats woinrixais 
is opposed. For the latter phrase we 
should have expected to find rais 
mpaxtixais, a formula which occurs 
Eth. v1. xi. 4. But in the Eudemian 
Ethics, u. xi. 4, exactly the same 
usage is found: domep yap rats Oewpn- 
tikats af brobeces apxal, obrw Kal rats 
mointixais Td TéAos apxh Kal iwdbecis. 
It is not easy to say what substantive 
is understood. Perhaps af mpaxriucal 
(or woinrixal) émorriuoe was the origi- 
nal phrase. 

dvayen—mpdrrew edts}] On the 
doctrine of the practical syllogism, see 
Vol. I, Essay IV. pp. 212-219. 

tay poplwv] i.e. ‘the parts of the 
body,’ This is mixing up a physical 
explanation with the account of mental 
phenomena, The same thing is done 


II.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. 


207 


\ BAe 4 s 6 > ’ , 3} [eae 
TWO xb Oss AKOATEVET Ob, OUX EVAVTIAS OF XA AUTYY, 


AAAK xaTa cuuPeRyxOs. 


ody 7 6Fa, TH op8G AOyw* Wore xal Did ToiTo TH Oypia 


> ~ oo > 4 ~ y \ ~ 
OUx AXPATH, OTs ox Eyer Ty xaBdAOU UMOAHYIY, AAAG THY 


i s \ , 
nal’ gxactra davraciay xal puneny. 


wt A , , 2 7 e > ig ce x 4 
AYVIn Kab TAAL ‘yiveTOL ErIoTY WY 6 axpUTIS, 6 AUTOS 
ai x‘ | b) / \ / \ LS > 
Adyos xal meph olvwpuevou xal xabevdovrog xal ovx Yds0g 


"sh ~ Uf A ~ BY) ~ A > cA 
TovTou Tov Tafouc, ov det Tape Tay puTwrAcywy axovery. 


/ 
i yap emibupia evavria, &AN 11 


~ \ s e 
mas O€ AvETOU 7 12 


> \ > € y / / ~ A 

exci 0 7 TeAcuTain mpoTacig OoEa te aicbyTod xal13 
, ~ / 7, ) > ay 2.3. ~ , y 

xupla Thy mpakewy, TauTHY 7) obx Eyer 6 ev TH wader dy, 


> 





in the Peripatetic treatise De Motu 
Animalium; cf. especially with the 
present passage Jd. vill. 5: 
& Gua ws elety voet 8t1 wopevtéoy Kat 


51a TodTO 


mopeveTa, dy un Te eumodi(n erepov, 
7a wey yap dpyavikd méepn mapacKevd cer 
emitndelws Ta 17aOn, 78 Bpetis TA WAON, 
tiv 8 dpetiy h pavracta’ arn 5 
yiveras 7) 51a vohoews 7) 5P aicOhoews. 
11 The mere intellectual knowledge 
that a thing is pleasant is not opposed 
to the moral law. It is only when 
this knowledge has become desire, 
z.e. part of the will, which implies 
acting, that an opposition is felt. 
Brutes act on desire, but their in- 
tellectual apprehension being entirely 
of particulars, there is a harmony 
between desire and the data of per- 
ception which prevents our attributing 
incontinence to brutes.—It might be 


said that there are dawnings of the - 


moral faculty, traces of a sense of 
right and wrong, in some animals, 
for instance, dogs; but the writer 
here does not enter upon the subject. 
On the meaning given by Aristotle to 
gaytasta, see note on Hth, m1. v. 17. 
12 ‘Now to explain how the ob- 
livion (&yvoua) of the incontinent man 
is stopped, and how he comes again to 
the use of his knowledge, requires no 
special account peculiar to this con- 
dition, but the same account as is to 





be given about (the recovery of) the 
intoxicated man or the sleeper, for 
which we must inquire of the physio- 
logists.’ The most interesting relic 
of the speculations of the old physio- 
logists upon the above question which 
has come down to us, is the account 
given by Sextus Empiricus (Adv. Maths 
vu. 129) of the opinion of Heraclitus, 
who thought that our rationality de- 
pended upon our communion through 
the senses with the universal reason 
that surrounds us ; in sleep we become 
foolish because cut off from all com- 
munication with this, except through 
the act of breathing alone, but on 
awaking we are again replenished. 
Totroy 5) Toy Oeiov Adyov Kal’ ‘Hpa- ; 
KAetov 8° avanvois omacavres voepol 
yiwdpeba, Kat ev trvois AnOato, Kard Se | 

eyepow mddAw euppoves. ev yap rots | 
brvas pyodvtev Tay aidOnriKay mépay, | | 
xwpiCera: ris mpds 7d meptéxov cunpvtas | 
6 év jpiv vots, udvns Tis Kare dvamvohy 





x. 


mporpbaews acwlouérns, ofovel tivos| a, ¢ 


pl€ns* xwpioGels re d&moBdrre hy mpéd-| 
repoy elxe wynuovichy Siva, ev Be 
eypnyopdot maéAw 8a Tov aicOntiKay. 
mépwv, &omep did tier Oupldwv mpo- 
kipas Kal TQ meptéxovrs ouBdrdrwy 
Aoyichy evdverar Sbvamiy, 

13—14 éwe) 8—aicOnrinjs| ‘But 
the minor premiss being a belief with 
regard to perception of the senses 


208 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


[ Cuap. 


* a U e > se A 
7] oUTWS Eyes WE oUx Hy TO EEL Exloracba HAAR ASE 


Waren 6 olvwyévog TH Kpuarsdoxrgoug, xal did To pn xabo~ 


2 \ ~ ~ 
Aov pyd emsiorypovixoy buolwg elvor Soxsiv ro xabdrov 


\ yo or 
TOV EO YATOV apoyv. 


\ 
xal Fomev 0 eyres Dwxparnys ou 


14Paivew* ov yap THg xupiwg emiotiung sivas Doxovons 
mapovons yiveTas TO wabog, od atrn mepiérxerou Did TO 


mwasocs, AAAa Tig aicbyrixio. 


wep) pv ovv Tob elooTa 


, ~ N/ ~ 
xa) px, xal mg eldora evdeyeros axpareterboar, Toratra 





eio7o bu. 


and being what determines action,— 
this is either not possessed by a man 
in the condition we have been describ- 
ing, or he possesses it in a way in which, 
as we said (as od« jv), possession 
is not knowledge, but is only a form 
of words, like the drunken man spout- 
ing Empedocles. Andsince the minor 
term is not universal and has not the 
‘same scientific character as the uni- 
versal, the question raised by Socrates 
seems really (xal) to be substantiated. 
For it is not knowledge properly so 
called that is present when the con- 
dition arises, nor is it this which is 
twisted about by the condition of 
mind that comes on,—but only per- 
ceptional knowledge.’ This section 
winds up the discussion of the com- 
patibility of knowledge with incon- 
tinence. The first sentence is clear 
enough, but there is some little ob- 
scurity in the saying that perceptional 
knowledge is present in incontinence, 
and is overborne by passion. What 
is meant apparently is, that passion 
prevents that perception which would 
cause the moral principle existent in 
the mind to be realised. Hence, in 
short, there is a moral oblivion, and it 
is quite true that Socrates was justified 
in saying that incontinence could not 


take place if knowledge of the right 


were really present to the conscious- 
ness of the actor, 
kat 3a 7d wh KabddAov] Lambinus, 





followed by Fritzsche, places a full 
stop before these words, and connects 
them with «ai Zoiuxev 5 Swxpdrns. This 
punctuation has been adopted in the 
above translation as making far better 
sense. It must be confessed, however, 
that the Paraphrast favours the pune- 
tuation of Bekker. The occurrence 
of kal before Zoicey would naturally 
lead to a full stop being placed after 
pov, but it might still be justified, as 
merely giving emphasis to gome ovp- 
Batvew, cf. ch. x. 2: 81d nad Soxotow 
évlore x, 7.A. Eth. ut. viii. 6: 50ev nab 
5 Swxpdrns. Ib, § 10, 8ev wat” Opunpos. 

h TeAevraia mpdtacis| This phrase 
is equivalent to % érépa mpéraots, Eth, 
vi. xi. 4. The minor premiss is so 
called as containing the %rxaros Spos, 
or minor term, which is mentioned 
shortly after. 

ws ob iv] With this use of the past 
tense cf. Eth. v. vi. 9: Kara véuov yap 
hv, ‘for this is, as we have said, 
according to law.’ 

® é¢hre:] This is sometimes trans- 
lated ‘what Socrates meant,’ for which 
the Greek would have been 8 #@eA€ or 
eBotvrAero A€yew. d eChre: must mean 
‘the questionings’ or ‘doubts’ of 
Socrates, é.¢, as to the possibility of 
acting against knowledge. Cf. Hth. 1. 
iv. 5: Ed yapnal TAdrwy jmdpe todo 
kal éChrer, 

Tis aicOnrixhs| The phrase alo@nrixh 
émorhun would to some philosophers 


WI.—IV.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


209 


~ ) \ ED 
Ilérepov 0 gorl rig amAGS axparng 7) TAYTES KATH ps- 4 


\ 9 9 \ ~s 9 rE ré 2 Ej og . > 
PSs HOE EL EOTH, Tepe TOMA EOTI, AEXTEOY ede WO. OTL [KEV OUY 


oR \ \ ra ee," ne ee ~ \ \ 
eps YOovas xak AvTas Eloly OF T BYXPATELS KOL KRAPTEDIXOS 


\ ss ~ \ / , 
xOL OL AXPATELG XAL PAAKKOL, Pavepoy. 


> \ 2 3 \ nt 
ere} 0 2oT) TH2 


gt Ros ~ ~ 4 > , \ _ « Wrens ’ 
[-Ev AVAYHALK TWY MOLOVIVTMY YAOvIyv, TH IDET A [ev xa 


€ ee > e fe > ~ X\ \ Ez 
AUTH EXOVTA f) bmreporry, AVAYHKOUA LEV TH TWUATIXA, 


4 82 \ ~ / \ \ XN A \ ~ 
Acyw 0 TA TOIMUTA, TA TE Wepl THY TpodyY xal THY THY 


adpodiciny ypsiav, xal Ta ToatTa Tiby TwLaTixwy Tepl 


a \ > / + \ ‘\ / X > 
a THY AxoAATIaAY eOepev xOL THY Twdpocuvyy. Ta O avay- 


~ X A c \ Ss ? c , 
xan piv od, aivera 08 xal’ abra. 


Aéyw O olov vixyy Ti- 


\ ~ \ \ ~ ~ > SLs ON Fe A 
Y WAGUTOY xal TAH TOLAUTA TY Kyabdy xal yOswv. TOU 
i ] 
X zy A ~ \ XN > \ , ¢€ , 
psy OUY TpOg THUTA TMAaDK TOV opbov Aoyoy OmepParrovras 





be a contradiction in terms, as they 
would hold that sensible things cannot 
be known. A doctrine was attributed 
to Speusippus, of which we may be 
here reminded, viz. that besides science 
‘there is ‘scientific perception.’ Cf. 
Sextus Empiricus adv. Math. vm. 145: 
Srevoirmos 5é, ered ray mparyudtov Te 
pev aicOnta Ta Oe vontda, TaY Mev vonTaY 
Kpirhpioy édetev elvar tov emotnuort- 
«doy Adyov, Tav BE aicOnrav Thy ém- 
ornpovixhy atcOnow, emornuovinhy dé 
alcOnow brelrAnpe kabeotdvar THY mera- 
AapBdvovcay THs KaT& Thy Adyov &AnN- 
elas. 


-IV. This chapter discusses the 
question mooted above (ch. i. § 7, ch. 
ii. § 11), as to whether incontinence 
is an absolute term, having a definite 
object-matter, or is merely relative. 
The answer is very simple. Pleasure 
is divided into necessary and desirable 
(§ 2), or into good, bad, and indifferent 
(§ 5). Incontinence, in an absolute 
sense, applies only to the necessary or 
bodily pleasures. It has then the 
same range of objects as were before 
assigned to Temperance and Intem- 
perance, and differs from Intemper- 
ance chiefly in that it goes against the 

VOL. II. 





reason and the will, instead of carry- 
ing them on its side. Having thus 
laid down a definite notion of Incon- 
tinence as something absolute and 
positive, it is easy to see that the idea 
and the term may be applied in a sort 
of analogous sense to mean an ill- 
control of the desires for other kinds of 
pleasures also, beside the bodily plea- 
sures, ¢.g. wealth or honour. In such 
applications we must recollect that the 
use of the word Incontinence is meta- 
phorical. 

2 wept & Thy akordactay beuev Kad 
Thy cwppostyny| Cf. Eth. Lud. ut. ii. 
5: "Emel 8 6 oddpwy éorh wept jdovds, 
dvdynn Kat mept emiOuulas trivds avtov 
elvat, Met 5) AaBetv wep) tlvas. Od yap 
mepl mdoas ovdt wept dmavra Ta Hdéa 6 
céppwv eariv, GAAG TH mev bey Tepl 
d0o Tay aicOnray, wept Te Td yevordv 
kal 7d amrdv, TH 8 GAnOela wep) 7d 
anrrév, k.T.A. This is of course taken 


from Eth. Nie. ut. x..3-8. 


tous uév obv| Here commences the 
apodosis to: éwel.6 éo7l, which is a 
complicated sentence with two paren- 
theses (Aéyw 5& td to1aira—owppo- 
avvny) and (Aéyo 8 ofov—ndéwv), 

Tovs pev—E€repos jv] ‘Those then 
who with regard to these latter objects 


EE 


210 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VIL. [Cuar. 


Tov gy auTols mAs pey Ov ALyouey Axparels, moooribevTEes 
02 To ypypatwy axpareig xal xépdoug xal Timiig xal Ouprod, 
amnras 0 od wy érépoug xab xal? buournra Asyouévoug, 
a ” « \ >? , ES. , \ c 
worep avIowmros 6 Ta Orupmria vevinnxews* excivo yap 6 
\ ip ~ 297 ~ / > 2 o a 
xaiveg Aoyos ToD idiov pixpw@ diehepev GAD’ Guwe Erepog Fy. 
~ / € \ \ > 4 / > € c / 
onusioy 02° 7 piv yap axpuoia Weyeras oy wo apapTia 
G > iy \ ¢ / Ae ~ a a\ U 
[-OVOY LAAK XA WG XAXIA TIC 7 ATAWS oVTH Y KATH Th 
3 .époc, TouTwy 0 ovbelg, Tay 02 mepl Tas TwpaTIxas amo- 
7 A 4, 
Aavoess, mesh ag Asyomey Toy TwMdpova xal axdAaoToY, 6 
x ~ ~ ~ Lane 7 
py TO wpoespsiobar Thy Te WOéwv diwxwy Tag brepords 
\ é nw ~ ?, \ / > ld 
xal Thy AuEypa@Y devywy, melvyng xal dhbyg xal ardag 
\ , \ / ~ A uf \ \ ~ > S 
xal Yoyoug xal mavrwy thy repli Adyy xal yetow, AAAA 





(z.e. good pleasures) transgress that 
right law which they have within 
themselves, we do not call simply 
incontinent,” but we add a qualify- 
ing term (mpoori@évres) and speak of 
them as incontinent of wealth, gain, 
honour, rage,—not as absolutely in- 
continent, because they are different 
from this and are only called incon- 
tinent by analogy, as in the phrase 
‘“Man that has been victor at Olym- 
pia;” there the general conception (of 
man) differed but little from the 
special conception of the individual in 
question, and yet still it was different.’ 
The meaning of this passage is clear, 
not so however that of the illustration 
which closes it. It is plain that the 
word akparis when spoken of in rela- 
tion to anger, money, &c., has a some- 
what different sense from the unquali- 
fied term dxparhs, which implies a 
certain moral weakness with regard to 
bodily indulgence. But what is meant 
by saying that &v@pwmos 6 re’ OAdumia 
veviknkes is different from the general 
conception Man? There appear to be 
only two explanations possible: (1) 
that supported by the Scholiast on this 
place and also the Scholiast on Zth, 
v. i,—by Alexander Aphrod. ad 





Topica 1. xvi., by Suidas, and by Eus- 
tathius on Iliad, A. p. 847; namely, 
that there was a certain Olympionices 
whose name was”Av@pwros. It might 
be said that this name “AvOpwios was 
not more distinct from the general 
term ‘Man,’ than the term a«parfs 
in the phrase a&«par7}s Ouyod is from 
the general conception of incontinence, 
The historical tenses S:épepey and 
€repos jv are in fayour of this inter- 
pretation. (2) It might be argued 
that these very tenses had given rise 
to a conjectural fiction about a person 
called ~Avépwros, The Paraphrast 
takes no notice of the tradition, and 
treats the illustration as a logical one, 


‘which would come merely to this, ‘the 


conception of an individual implies 
a certain diversity from the conception 
of the genus.’ If this be accepted, the 
past tenses of the verbs must be un- 
derstood to mean a reference to some 
previous logical discourse with which 
the school was familiar. In short the 


passage must be considered to bear. 


traces of being a scrap from some 
oral lecture—a hypothesis not to be 
entirely set aside with regard to parts 
of the Ethics of Aristotle. 


‘ . ™ 
— es Ye 


IV.] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 211 


A \ / > , 
Tapa tiv mpoalzerw xal THY Oiavolay, axparng AtyeTaU, 
> 7 s be A ‘ She 4eé 2 4 ~ rr? 
ov xaTa mpoobeciv, OTL wept Tabs, xabamep opyiic, & 
ae a , \ \ \ , \ 
ATAMS pLdvov. onpsioy 02° xal yap paraxol Adyouras wel + 
, > >N / », Gk da. nw ‘ 
TAHNTAS, Weph éxsiveoy O ovdsulav. xal Oia TOUT sig TaUTOY 
“ss , / \ ~ 
Toy Gxpaty xal Tov axdraoroy Tieunsv nab Eyxparh xat 
7 3 , > > , LENY A ea . \ A > f 
cwdpova, AAA OUX EXEIVWY OUOEYA, OI TO Tesh TAG HUTAaS 
<> \ \ “ ~ J . e $9 vo x \ > ‘ 
ws yOovag xal Avwag elvos* of O siok piv wep TATA, 
> 3 > ec 7 > / > > c X\ ~ ew > 
AAA OY WOKUTWS EITIY, AAA Ob LEY MOOMIDOUYTaL O10 ov 
~ A ~ . f a 
TF POAsoouvT as, b40 PaAAGY AXOAaTTOY ay elroy, OOTIS 
Pe nw ee A , \ € \ \ c 
pen emibupdy 7 ypipa diwxer tag brepRorasg xal devyz 
A / * ns a SX A », a ~ /» , 
petplag AUTas, 7 TOUTOY GoTIG Oia TO ExMupsiy ohodpa" Ti 
x ~ s , s 
yap ay Exelvog Woiyoeiey, ei Mpooyevoiro emifupla veavixy 
\ \ A ~ > , >a 7 , > , > PWNS 
xal weph Tag Thy dvayxaiwy evdsing AUTY loyupa; erel OF 5 
~ ~ \ ~ ey ne / ~ , wn 
Thy eribupsd@y xal t&v 7 dovey ai ev dior TH yéver xarc@y 
4 / ~ X ens ” / c / \ 99 
xak omovialwy’ Thy yap yewy Evia Duoes aigera, TH O 
. 7 7 » 5: Ed he 3 Ty = ao _ 
evavTia TouTwY, Ta Ot peTaku, xabamep dieirowev mpoTepoy, 
z , q 28'S Micke \ , Lo 
oloy Ypymara xal xépdog xal viny xal TiLy* mos amavTo. 
\ \ ~ \ \ A ~ LA 
0 xal ra Toatra xal Ta peTasd ov TO Tacyev xal 
> ~ \ we , = 
eribupeiy xal dirsiv Wéyovral, arArnd TO Tos brepParrsiv. 





3 kata mpdcGeow] See note on Eth. | be called by the name of incontinence, 


Il, iii. 5. 

xabdrep dpyiis| Fritzsche quotes 
Thucyd. mt. 84: 7 GvO@pwreia piois— 
&xparhs pev apyis ovoa Kpeicowy Se 
tov dixaiov. : 

4 GAN ode exelywy ovdéva] 7. e. not 
one of those mentioned in § 2, who 
are immoderate in giving way to a 
fondness for riches, honour, &c. 

31d waddov axdracrov K.T.A.] It is 
more intemperate to pursue luxury, 
&c., in cold blood, than to do so under 
the influence of passion. It shows 
that luxury has become more a part 
of the mind itself. 

5—6 The remainder of this chapter 
is little more than a repetition of what 
has gone before. Indulgence in the 
good pleasures is no harm, except it 
be to excess; even excess in them is 
rather folly than vice, and is not to 





except as a sort of metaphor. 

érel 5¢—irepBdAdrcv] ‘Now since 
some desires and pleasures are in 
their kind noble and good—according 
to our former division of pleasures 
into the naturally desirable, the 
naturally detestable, and the inter- 
mediate—as for instance, wealth, gain, 
victory, and honour (are noble and 
good); with regard then to all such, 
and the intermediate pleasures, men 
are not blamed for feeling, desiring, 
and loving them, but for some sort of 
excess in them.’ The present division 
of pleasures can hardly be said to have 
been made ‘before,’ though it can be 
harmonized with that given above in 
§ 2. The gptoa aiperd (of which 
wealth and honour are specimens) 
answer to the aipera pty xaé’ aitd 
éxovta & ixepBoarty ; while 7a petotd 


EF 2 


212 HOIKQN [EYAHMION]| VIL. [ Cuap- 


WN XV \ \ , x ~ a , ~ 
O40 OOOL Pev Tapa Tov AOyoy 7H xpaToUYTaL 7% OiwxoucL TwY 
, ~ . Wee ~ a c \ \ ~ oN 
doce: Th xardy xal ayabdy, oiov of WEDb THLYY [LAADOY 7 
~ aA \ ~ ~ 
dei omovdabovres 7) wep Téexva xah yoveig* xal yao Tatra 
~ ~ \ ~ ~ 
Thy ayabiy, xb eraivodyTas of reph Taira cmovdatovres* 
> es ” G ‘ a Ae / 4 iA 
AAA OWS ETT TIC rep ony 4b EY TOUTOIC, Ek TIC WOTED 
e TT. , \ ‘ A 4 vs a / « 
7, Nicby payorro xal pag Tovg Feovc, 7 Waomep Darupos 6 
7 ‘ AX / 
diroratwp eminarovpevog meph Tov marépa* Alav yap 
, 28 / ~ 
edoxer prwpaivery. proxOnpia piv ov ovdenla meh raiir’ 
> ld a / ~ ~~ a 
eT! Oi TO Elpyevoy, OTs duce: Thy aiper@y Exaoroy eors 
~ \ ~ 
OF aira* datinas 08 xal devxtal aubrey sicly ai drepPorct. 
e , IN IOV 9 , c \ ° , > , ‘ 
6 bpolwg 08 Oude axpagin’ 7% yap axpacia ov povoy deuxroy 
~ ~ / , ~ 
anna xal Tov Yext@y eoriv, 43° duodrnra 33 Tod maboug 
/ \ 
mpooemiTilévTes THY axpaclay mepl Eexaotou Agyoucly, oloy 
> 7 A nw a» 
xaxoy latpoy xab xaxdy UroxsITHy, Ov ATAMS oUx Ay Elrorey 
/ ad Lf > 5 ~ LY \ ‘ f , 
xaxov' worep ody 00d evTadda, Oia TO py xaxlav elves 
€ , > ~ > \ ~ > ‘ c s 4 
EXAOTYY AUTWY, AAAK TW AYVAAODYOY OLolay, OUTwW O7Aov 
cl ~ / / 
OT xaxel OmoAnTTéoY Lovny axpaclay xal eyupareray elven 
A 5) \ \ est ~ 7 \ ~ > Pa 
jing éorh mepl rabra tH Tadpoo ivy al rH axonal, 
2 ¢ 
ep} 02 Oupov xad” 6moornra Agyomev* O10 xa mpooribevres 
> ~ ~ ~ / 
axpary bupod Worep TILAG xal xépdoug dapev. 


=, | wv i A 4 A \ 
5 “Enel @ eorly tua piv yin duos, xal rourwy Ta wey 





here correspond with the ‘necessary 
or bodily pleasures’ of the former 
passage. The writer has here intro- 
duced a mention of pleasures ‘naturally 
detestable,’ by which must be meant 
the bestial pleasures which are dis- 
cussed in the following chapter. The 
formula 7a 8 évayria, ra St perakd, is 
used by Eudemus in Eth. Eud. u. x. 
24: GAAd py Exdorov ye pOopa Kab 
diasrpopr ok eis TO TUXdy, GAN’ eis TA 
évayvtia xa) ra peratd. Later in the 
present book (ch. xiv. § 2) there is 
a mention made of pleasures which are 
not only good in themselves, but do 
not admit of excess. 

Sdrupos 5 piromdrwp] Of this per- 
sonage nothing is known. The story 
given by the Scholiast is, as Fritzsche 
observes, not worth repeating. 





HoxOnpla wév ody] This is an ana- 
coluthon. The sentence ought to 
form an apodosis and supply a verb to 
5d Boo. wey x.7.A. We therefore 
require “ox@npul uev od« eial, &e. 

6 5? duoidrnra 5¢] The writer seems 
here to make a mistake about the 
history of the word a«parhs, just as 
before (Zth. v. x. 1) about the history 
of the word émienmfs. *Akparhs in a 
limited and special sense, to denote 
want of control over a particular set 
of desires, is certainly later than the 
general use of the word, as in the 
phrase d«parjs épyis, &c. Hencethe 
latter is not to be regarded (histori- 
cally) as a metaphorical extension of 
the former. 


V. This chapter discusses those 





Iv.—V.] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIOQN | VIL 


2138 


€ ~ XA A , \ , . Bere 7 a ™% > 

amTAws TH OF xaTa yévy nal Swwy xal avipwrwv, Tad odx 

” > x 4 DATES © , \ 5 52 24 , ‘ 

ZoTIv GANG TH ey Oia Wypwoess TH OF OF Fy yiveras, ra 
, wv \ \ 

0 die poybypas duces, Zor: xal weph rovTwy Exacta 


maparnycias ideiv eGerc. 


Aéyw 02 Tag Gypiwdets, ciov2 


\ ” a , \ / > , ‘ 
riy avipwroy qv AEyouTg! TAG xUOUTAS avaryilouTay TH 
4 / * if rf \ SET. ~ > 
maiwia xarecGiew, 7 ols Xaiper daciv evioug Tay amry- 
/ A \ rs . > ~ A ins 
ypropsvoy wept tov Ilovrov, toug piv wycig Tove 02 ay- 
7 , \ x ‘ / / > / > 
Gpm@rwy xpéaci, ToUg OF TH Madina davelSev AAATAOIS cig 


> id * XN \ Ud / 
euwylav, 7 To wept Darapiy Acyouevoy. 


- X 
avras pay by-3 


, c \ , 4 , A 7 ae 
prmders, ai 08 Oia Te voroug yivoyTas xal poviay evioss, 





kinds of incontinence which are some- 
thing more than incontinence, being 
morbid or bestial. Certain pleasures 
are specified which imply a depravity 
either of nature or habits. A sort of 
classification of these is suggested, but 
the whole style of the chapter is care- 
less and inaccurate. 

1 éxel ¥—€tas] ‘Now while some 
things are natural pleasures, either 
absolutely so, or relatively to the 
different races of animals and men, 
other pleasures are not natural, but 


depend on physical defects or habits. 


or depravity of the nature; and we 
may see moral conditions correspond- 
ing to each of these latter kinds.’ 
The apodosis to érel is Eo: wal repi 
rotrwv. The things which are ‘plea- 
sures absolutely’ are for instance life 
and consciousness; while it depends 
on the constitution of the race whether 
it be pleasant to live on land or water, 
&e. In this passage pers is used in 
two senses, (1) péoe:=in accordance 
with the entire constitution of things, 
not only what is, but what ought to 


be. (This corresponds with head V. - 


in the note on Eth. m. i. 3.) (2) 
ices means individual natures, not 
as they ought to be, but as they are. 
(See the same note, head IV.) 

2 Tas Onpimders| i.e. Efets. 

tiv &yvOpwrov| ‘The female.’ The 





word &y@pwros (in the feminine) was 
applied contemptuously, as for in- 
stance to female slaves. Here it de- 
notes the monstrous nature of the 
person in question, who was not to be 
called ‘a woman.’ Perhaps for the 
same reason it was applied by Hero- 
dotus to the gigantic Phye. Book 1. 
ch. 60: kal év TE hore? reiOduevor TH 
yuvaixa, eivas abtiy-thy Gedy mpoced- 
xovTd te THY &vOpwrov Kai édéxovto Toy 
Teclorparov. Who was the monster 
alluded to in the text is not known. 
It appears a mere fiction of the Scho- 
liast to connect her with the Lamia 
mentioned by Horace, A. P. 340. © 

tous 5€ Ta maidia SavelCew &AAHAS 
eis ebwxlay] ‘And others (they say) 
lend their children to each other (in 
turn) to be served up as a banquet.’ 
Cf. 2 Kings vi. 26-29, where the 
same horrible arrangement is said to 
have been made under the compulsion 
of famine. The shores of the Black 
Sea seem to have had a character for 
cannibalism. Cf. Ar. Pol. vu. iv. 3: 
mora & éotl trav ebvav & mpds 7d 
krelvewy kal mpos thy GyOpwrodayiay 
ebxepGs exe1, Kabanep tay nepl Tov 
Tidvrov *Axaot re nad ‘Hvioxor. 

7) wept Sddapw dAcyduevov] Some 
story now lost, which is apparently 
referred to again in § 7. 

3 ai 6 Bid te vécovs—ai 5 voon- 


214 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. [Cuar. 


a € \ , 4 3 A \ ’ \e ~ 
women 6 THY pyTepa xablepevcag xal daywv, xa} 6 To 
NF, ee 4 c \ , a > wv * 
cuvdavrov To yrap. ak de vornnarwdes 7 2& EOouc, olov 
~~ / A tae , + >’ 3 / A 
Tpiydy TiATEG xl GvOxwY TpwMFeIG, Ets 0 avopdxwy xal 
Vis, mpeg 58 TovTas 7 Twy Adpodiciwy Toig Appeoiv" Tog 
\ Q , ~ y , 24 , 4 ~ c 
pav yap duces toig F 2& Boug cupPaivovery, olov roig bPpr- 
4Copévoig éx maidwy. Boog pay ody duoig aitia, TouToUs 
pev ovdelg av elreiev Axpareic, Women odds TAS yuvaixac, 
a > > / > > > fa c V4 “AN A ~ 
OTL oux OmulouTIY AAA GrulovTast WoavTws OF xal ToiIG 
4 
TO psy ovv Eyew Exacta 
7, wv ~ a ° ~ ~ / / \ c 
ToUTwy EEw Toy opwy earl Tig xaxiac, xabamep xal 7 Oy- 
ploryg’ Too Eyovra xpareiv 4 xparciobas oy 7 arry 
> , > : ae: 2 , 2 \ \ \ A 
axpacia aA 7 xal’ imouryTa, xabamep xal Tov weph Tovs 
Gupods Zyovra ToUTov Tov Teomov Tod mabouc, axpary O ob 
AexTéov. TaTH yap brepParrovoa xal adpoodvy xal dei- 
/ A > / \ / c \ , c 
Ala xal axornacia xal yarerorygs ai piv Oypmdec ai 02 
6 voonpatwoes ciciv' 6 piv yap dvoes Towwtirog olog be- 
a ~ 7 
Oiévas mavra, xav Yodyor pic, Oypimdy derrlay deirec, 6 


svoonuatwods Exouor Or e4oc. 





parédes| These clauses are a repe- 
tition of each other, the style is un- 
finished. 

7 TaV appodiclwy Tots &ppeow] It is 
important to observe here the strong 
terms in which the unnatural character 
of these practices is denounced. An 
equally strong and more explicit 
passage occurs in the Laws of Plato, 
p- 636 8B, where the advantages and 
disadvantages of the gymnasia and 
syssitia are discussed: Kal 87) ka) 
madaoy vdusov Soxet TovTO Td émiTh- 
devna Kata plow Tas wepl Ta appodlora 
jdovas ov pdvov avOpamrwv GAAA Kal 
Onpiwy divepOapkévar, Kal rovrwy tas 
duerépas méAes (Sparta and Crete) 
mpotas ty tis aiti@to Kal boa Tay 
dAAwy pddota Errovrat tay yupvaclov- 
xa etre walZovra elre omovddCovra 
évvoeiy Sei ra Toadra, évvonréor Bri TH 
Onrcig Kal TH TeV appévwv pice els 
kowwvlay lobon THs yevvioews 7 ep) 
ravta Hdovn Kata iow amodedéc0cu 
Boxe?, appévwy 5 xpds Uppevas 7) Onreav 





mpds Onrelas rapa pbow kal ray motor 
7d TéAunua elvan bv’ axpdreiay Hdorjs. 
4—5 boos | wey oby—aAexréoy] 
‘Where nature is the cause, one cannot 
call people incontinent, just as no one 
would find fault with women for being 
not male but female; and it is the 
same with those who by habit have 
superinduced a morbid condition. To 
possess, indeed, any of these tendencies 
is beyond the pale of vice, just as bes- 
tiality is; and if a person possesses 
them, his subduing them or being sub- 
dued by them is a matter not of simple 
incontinence (or continence), but is the 
analogous kind, exactly as a man who 
is in this condition with regard to his 
angry passions may be called (incon- 
tinent of anger), but not simply in- 
continent.’ What the writer here 
implies is quite true, that morality 
requires for its sphere certain natural 
conditions of body and mind. In 
states that are entirely morbid, 
whether originally so or from the 





V.—VL] 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


215 


0: THy yank 2dedier Od vooov* xal ry adpovey of piv 2x 
ducews aroyioros xal povoy TH aicdryoes Sovreg Inpiwdesc, 
omen Ena yévyn tiv moppw BapPapwy, oi 02 did vooous, 
oloy Tag emiAnmTixas, | paving vorymaTwoeIG. ToUTwWYT 
7 \ or = ee ms! ~ Wd ’ 

0 ors piv Eye Tivd eviots pLovoy, ny xparteiobas O24, AZyw 
02 olov ei Parapig xaretyev ewibupd@dy wasdlou dayeiv 7 

\ > N / v ban) earime. 4 X \ ~ 
mpos adpodiciwy aroroy yoviyy* Eort OF xal xpareio Gas, 


\ / yA 
Pe povoy eye, 


a s \ / € \ > 
WOTED OUY xOb poybnpla 1) pev xat 8 


avipwroy amrds Agyeras poxOypla, 7 08 xara rpdobeowy, 
Ors Oypiwdys 7 vornwaradys, amaAd@s B od, Tov adroy 
Tporoy OyAov Ort xal axpacia sory 7% prev Oypiwdyg 7% 08 
YOTNLATWONS, ATAS O32 7 xaTa THY avVOoWRriVyY axoraclay 


pon. 


/ \ , 
OT peyv ObY axpacin xal eyxpareia eoTL pLovoy 


‘ 4 > , % / \ oo \ % 
TEph ATED Ax0AATIA xal Gwdporvvy, xal OTL Tepl TAD 
+ > A + o> > , , \ 

AAAK ETTIV AAA EldOg UxXDATIAS, AEyYOMEVOY KATA METOL- 


hopayv xal ody amarws, O7Aov" 


if \ ee . ‘ > / ¢ ~ ~ RX e 
Or: 08 xal arrov aicypa axpacia 7% Tod bumod 7 7 

~ ~ 7 + 
Tov emibups@v, Oewpyowpevr. Forme yap 6 bunds axovery 
~ , , 7 Lf ~ ~ 
pev TL TOO Aodyou, Tapaxouery 62, xabamep of Taysis Tav 
Oiaxovwy, of ply axodoa: mav TO Aeyomevoy exbeouciy, 
cite Gpapravovor Tig mpoota&ews, xal of xdvec, amply 

x 7 ~ 

oxivacios ci dirog, av povov Wodyoy, sraxtodow: 
ovTws 6 Gunog Oia bepudryTa xal TayuTaATa Tis dUoews 
> / , > = pray So; 9 / e ~ \ ‘ 
axovcas pév, oux ewiTaypa 0 axovoas, bona modo THy 





effects of an ill-regulated life, the 
distinctions of right and wrong are no 
longer applicable. Cf. ch. vii. 7. 

7 «i bddapis Katetxev| ‘Had Pha- 
laris refrained.’ With this use of 
karéxw, cf. <Aristoph. Peace, 944, 
where it is applied to a wind lulling: 

émelyere viv ev bom 
coBapa bedbev xaréxer 
Tod€uov merarporos aiipa, 


And Soph. Ed, Rex, 782: 
Kary BapuvGels Thy wey odoay juépay 


pdAts KaTéoxov. 


VI. It having been repeatedly laid 
down that there are some kinds of 





incontinence not simply to be called 
so without a qualification, there now 
follows a comparison of some of these 
kinds, from a moral point of view, with 
incontinence proper. Incontinence of 
anger is not so bad as incontinence of 
lust, (1) because there is more sem- 
blance of reason in anger; (2) because 
anger is more a matter of constitu- 
tion ; (3) it admits of less deliberate 
purpose ; (4) because anger is exercised 
under a sort of pain, and not in 
wantonness. As to the rest, inconti- 
nence which exceeds the pale of 
human weakness is more horrible, but 


_ at the same time is rarer, and less 


mischievous, than vice. 


216 


TILwWhay. 


HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VII. 


[Cuap. 


6 pay yap Aoyog 7 7% davracia ori bBpig 7 


° / 9N 7 c > a / icf ~ ~ 

dArywpia 2ojrwoev, 6 0 Womep TUAADYITU[LEVOS OTE dei To 

TOLOUTW ToAsMEly yarsmaiver 07) edbdc* 7 O° emibuula, éav 
! [LEY YaAE 7, s° 7 pla, 

dvoy clay ors YOU 6 AGyoo H % alobnoic, b0ua mode THY 

a y or 6 Adyos 7H 7 alobyors, iond meds Ty 


>’ /, 
ATOAQUTIY. 


woF 6 piv Gupog adxoroubel TH ACyw THs, 7 


0 éribupla of. aicxlwy ctv 6 pev yap To bupod axparig 
TOU Acyou mws 7rTaTaI, 6 08 Tig emibupiang xal od TOD 


2 AOyou. 


271 Taig duoixaig parroy cvyyvapy axorovieiy 





1 6 pev yap Adyos—ob’] ‘ For first 
(wev) reason or fancy tells that there 
is insult or slight, and then (anger) 
drawing a sort of conclusion, ‘‘ I must 
fight with such and such,” forthwith 
rages accordingly. But desire, if 
reason or sense merely assert that a 
thing is pleasant, rushes to the enjoy- 
ment of it; so that anger in a way 
follows reason, but desire. does not.’ 
éaytacia here seems nearly to cor- 
respond to our word ‘ fancy,’ which 
has of course grown out of the Greek 
term, though it has come to imply 
widely different associations. We are 
told in Ar. De An. m1. iii. 15 that 
gavrasia may be mistaken, See the 
note on Eth, m1. v. 17. 

The present passage might seem 
discrepant from ch. iii. § 10, dare ovp- 
Balver imd Adyou mws Kal Sdkns axpa- 
revecOa, where incontinence is said to 
have some sort of reasoning in what 
it does. And if the comparison were 
exactly carried out, it would probably 
appear that incontinent anger had no 
more reason in it than incontinent 
desire. But it is true that anger is 
fundamentally based on an idea of 
justice, however wild that idea may 
be. Hence there is a peculiar force 
in cvAAoyicdmevos Sr Sez, And hence 
too anger is a less immediately selfish 
passion than desire. .It is less de- 
basing in the long run to the character. 
On anger, cf. Eth. v. viii, 10: ob88 
meph Tod yeveoOar H wh GupicByretra, 





GAAG ep) Tov Sinalov: em) pawouéevn 
yap aula h dpyh éorw: and Ar, Rhet. 
I. ii. 1: “Eorw 5h dpyh Spetis pera 
Adrns Tiwwplas pavouevns 31a patvo= 
pevnv ddrywplay. The illustrations in 
the text comparing anger to an oyer- 
hasty servant who runs off before he 
has heard half the message, or to a 
dog who barks without waiting to see 
who it is, are most admirable. 

2 The next plea urged in favour of 
anger is that it is more natural (or, we 
might say, constitutional) than desire: 
in support of which two humorous 
stories are told in the text (see Vol. I. 
Essay III. p. 165). The argument 
appears somewhat contradictory to 
Eth, u. iii. 10: @r 8& yadremdrepov 
Hdova wdxerOa 7 Ovug, Kabdrep pnolv 
‘HpdkAerros, However, when we look 
closely at the text, we find that it is 
‘excessive and unnecessary desire’ 
with which anger is here compared 
(rav émibupmiay Tev THs bwepBorTs Kal 
tay ph dvaryxatwv). This no doubt 
makes the above assertion true, but it 
gives a new conception of incontinence, 
as compared with the mention of 
dvarynaia nd€éa, c.iv.§2. Itsetsincon- 
tinence too much in the light of 
Onpiétns. But indeed the vagueness 
of the term &«pacia, and the uncer- 
tainty as to what it exactly implies, 
must be felt throughout the present 
discussions. 

With regard to anger, it is true 
that hot temper is frequently consti- 





VI HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL 217 
BF > \ q,.. 2 ‘4 ~ / ~, a 
opsGeowy, rel xual ewifupiaic Taig roavTalg paAROY boas 
\ ~ ek AG TRE ft \ , 
xowal maot, xah ed Goov xowals 6 6? Gupos ducixwrepoy 
xal 7 yaremoryg Thy Exifupidy tay Tig brepRorts xal 
~ / a / 
TOY pH dvayxalwy, OTE 6 amoAoyoULLEVaG OTL TOY TATEpA 
A \ sg y \ € ~ ~ 
TumTo. ‘xal yao ovTog’ Edy ‘Tov EauTo xaxelvog Tov 
wv , \ ‘ aL 3 , ‘ AS ese Wee Pam 
avwihev,’ xal To masdloy belEag ‘xal outs éuz’ Edy, ‘Tay 
/ XN \ € te e 
civnp yevytas* cuyyeves yap Fply.’ xak 6 EAxomevog O70 
~ ~ , \ ~ \ 
Tod viod mavecbas exércue mpg Tals bUpaig* xal yap autos 
, \ / I a ~ 
EAxUoOL Toy TaTépa méxpig evTadba. 
/, 
emsPounrarepot. 


v > , é 
ETI AOIKWTEDOS O83 
6 psy ov Obupmdyg ovx éerifourog, 00d 6 

‘ , , 
Gupdc, aAAa davepog* 7 9 émibupla, xabamrep tHy “Adpo- 
ditny daci* 

SodowAdKou yap Kumpoyevovs* 
\ \ A c , o e 
xak Tov xeoTov imavra Opnpos 
mappacic, iT exdele voov TuKa TEP GpovéorToc. 

gq > ¥ > f \ > , © > , a ~ 
Wor elrep adinwtepa xal aloyiwy 7 axpacia atty Tis 

/ ~ 
meph Tov Gupoy éoti, xal amrrAds caixpacia xal xaxia ws. 
+ 7> A « 7 , € > ~ ~ ~ ~ 
ets ovdelg dPpiSes Aurovpsvoc, 6 O apyy moby wag Toit 





tutional. It appears more difficult to 
tame down and eradicate, even with 
the help of time, than other passions. 
The Stoics gave peculiar attention to 
its control. ¥ 

3 ert Gdindrepor—xaxla wws] ‘Again 
there is more wrong where there is 
more craft. The angry man and 
anger are not crafty, but open; while 
lust is crafty, as they say Aphrodite 
is, ee 
“The wily Cyprian goddess.” 
And Homer sings of her embroidered 
girdle (that on it is wrought) 
*‘ Allurement which can steal the wise 

man’s sense.’’ 
So that if this kind of incontinence is 
more wrongful than incontinence of 
anger, it is also worse, and thus 
deserves to be called by the simple 
name “incontinence,” and amountstoa 
sort of vice.’ 
VOL. Il. 





doAotAdKov] From some lyric poet. 
Muretus compares the fragment of 
Sappho: 
TloxtAd@por &bavar’ ’Appodira, 
Tlat Ards S0AdmAoke, Alooouat ce, 


tov Keotov iudyra “Ounpos| Iliad, 

xiv. 214-217 :-— 

7H, Kal awd othGerdiy éAtoaro KeoTov 
iudyta, 

TloixiAov> Oa 5€ of GeAKThpia wdvTa 
TéTUKTO* 

“Ev? & pev piddrns, ev 8 ipepos, ev & 
dapiotbs 

Iidppacis, i 7 exAehe vdov wixa mep 
ppovedytwr, 


4 Incontinence of desire is full 
of wantonness and exultation, while 
anger implies pain and suffering. 
This argument is similar to that used, 
Eth. m. xii. 2, to prove that in- 
temperance is more yoluntary than 
cowardice. 


FF 


218 HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VIL. [ Cua. 


Aumoupesvoc, 6 8 PoiSwy web’ ydoviig. ek ody olg dpylSerbau 
PAricTa Oixatov, Taira adinwTepa, xal 7 axpacian 7 
a) / > , . > ~ of - \ , 
500 érifuplay: ov yap ear ev Gund dRpic. we may Tolvuy 
aicyioy % ep) émifuplag dxpacia tig wep Tov Gumoy, xeel 
Ort Zor i eyxpareia xal 7 axpacia meph eribupiag xa 
en \ , dF > ~ 3: / \ 3 \ 

6 Novas TWLATIXAS, OAV, auTw@Y O€ ToUTWY Tag O1adopag 
Aywtéov. Women yap slonrar xat dpyac, ai pev avOow- 

Tes: \ 4 \ ~ / ~ , « D8 

mincak sios xo duormat, ol rep vyéves ath To peyeder, ai 02 
NY 

Gyprbdzic, ai OF Sia wypwoeis xal vooypara, TodTwy OE 

, \ / 

Tépl Tas mpwTas Twdpooury xal axoracia povoy Eoriv* O10 

nai ta Oypla odre cwdpova ovr axorAaoTa Adyousy AAD 

} xara pstadopav xal ef Tis GAwS GARG pag AAA O1a- 

/ ~ / oe \ / ~ 

deve yévog tay Sowy bBo xal owapwpig xal rd wap- 

, sy 3 \ wv / Or , > > 

dayov elvas* ov yap EXE! MPOaiperiy OVOE AoYIO LOY, AAA 

~ , ~ 
eEdoryxe Tig ducews, Waorep oi povomevor TOY avoowrwy. 


7AaTTov OF Onporns HAXIAG, 


dohepwrepoy O€* ob yap O1é- 





56 8 bBpiCwv pe? Hdovqs] ‘While he 
who wantons acts with pleasure.’ 
There seems to be a double meaning 
in this passage to the word #fpi¢e, 
exactly as there might be to our word 
‘wantonness.’ It first means ‘to act 
insolently’ or ‘ wantonly’ in a general 
sense, and second, it means to ‘act 
wantonly’ in a particular sense, 7@.e. 
lasciviously. 

6 aitay 8 robrwy tas Siapopas 
Anntéoy} i.e. the difference between 
continence and incontinence, which 
with other things is treated of in the 
next chapter. There is a want of 
method about the sequence of different 
parts in this book. The reference 
which follows, é0mep elpnra: kat” dpxds 
only goes back to ch. v. 1, and gives 
colour to a suspicion that the book may 
have been put together out of separate 
pieces, and perhaps lectures, one of 
which may have commenced with the 
fifth chapter. 

51d xal 7a Onpla—dvOpdrwv] ‘Hence 
we do nct call brutes either temperate 





or intemperate, except by a metaphor, 
and where it happens that one whole 
race of animals in comparison with 
another is remarkable for wantonness 
it may be (rw), or lechery, or voracity ; 
for (animals) have no purpose or rea- 
soning, but are beside themselves like 
madmen.’ Different races of animals 
have good or bad moral characteristics 
ascribed to them. The goat, the ass, 
and the monkey have a bad reputation 
for wantonness, and the shark, &c., for 
voracity. It is not quite clear what 
is meant by ééornxe tis ptoews. 
Perhaps it may best be taken to imply 
not that animals transgress their own 


nature, but simply that they get into 
a state of ecstasy, like madmen, and 


have no senses nor any principle 
which would justify their being called 
either temperate or intemperate. 

7 Aartov b&—Onpiov] ‘Now bes- 
tiality is less evil than vice, but it is 
more fearful, for in it the good principle 
is not corrupted, as in a man, but does 
not exist. Therefore (comparing bes- 


Y nies Ay on 


-VIL—VIL.} HOIKQN [EYAHMIOQN] VII. 219 


djapra: ro Béarioroy, waomep ev TH avoWTW, AAR odx 
a4 a eo a + / 5 ” ! 
SHE. OMOloY OUY WOTED abuyoy TuLPAAAEY pos eryuyoy, 
, \ / ~ 
TOTEpoy KaKIOV? AoWETTEDA yao y% davrAcTyS del 7 Tod 
y Sv ~ > 7 ra 
fey Eyovros apy7y, 6 08 vols apy7. mapawAryotoy ovy TO 
, BINS , \ ww yn mM” \ c 

cupPanrrsiy ddixiay mpog avocwroyv adixov* Zot yap we 
EXATEPOY XAXIOY" PUploTAATIA yao AY xaxd Toinoeiey 
avOpwmros xaxog bypiou. 

Ilepi 02 rag O0 adiig xal yetoews yovac xal AUrag xal 
> rf 4 / \a is . / 5 Cs. 
em Gupias xaos puyas, a Ag % TE AXOAATIA XA 7 pombe 
ouvy, Seenpio by mporepor, gos pay adres eye Wore aT 
tacba: xa wy of worrol xpeirrous, gore O& xparsiy xal 
@y ob ToAAG 7% HTTOUS* TouTwy 0 6 pay weph ydovas cinpatns 
c x > 7 c De A , XN e DA , 
69 eyxpariys, 6 OF meek AUTag paraxds 6 08 xapTepixos. 

\ 2 c ~ s iA x 9. e2 x 

pstaso 0 7 Thy wAciotwy ZEic, xdv ei Peroves wAAALY 





tiality with vice) is like comparing 
what is inanimate with a living thing, 
and asking which is worse. Evil is 
always less harmful when it has no 
guiding principle, and reason is the 
guiding principle. So it is just like 
comparing injustice with an unjust 
man; each is in a different sense 
worse. A bad man will do ten thou- 
sandfold more evil than a beast.’ 
éxet] sc. 7d Onplov. The whole 
passage is briefly expressed, but 
perhaps requires no further comment. 


VII. This chapter, after a general 
comparison between intemperance and 
incontinence (§ 1-3), makes some 
remarks on endurance, softness, and 
childishness (§ 4-7); and ends by 
distinguishing two kinds of inconti- 
nence, of which the one proceeds from 
impetuosity, the other from weakness 
of character. 

"x mpérepov] Eth. Hud. mt.ii. 6. Cf. 
above ch. iv. § 2. 

tort pev—xelpous] ‘It is possible to 
be in such a state as to yield to things 
that most men are superior to, and 
again it is possible to overcome things 





that most men yield to. Of those 
who possess these opposite dispositions, 
with regard to pleasures, the first is 
an incontinent man, and the second a 
continent man; with regard to pains, 
the first is soft and the second en- 
during. But the state of the majority 
of mankind lies between these op- 
posites, albeit men verge rather to the 
side of the worse.’ Moral designations 
may be fixed either in relation to the 
standard of what is, or of what ought 
to be. Cf. Eth. mi. xi. 4: Tay yap 
giAdotootrev Aeyouévav 4 TE xalpew 
ois wh det, 7} TE MGAAOv 7 of woAAdL, 
Jb. 1v. iv. 4: ewatwodvtes pev én 7d 
pGAAov 7 of wodAol, Weyovtes F ext rd 
p@AAov *® Sei, The above passage 
fixes the terms ‘continent’ and ‘in- 
continent’ relatively to what is, as 
implying more or less continence than 
people in general have. And yet 
there is evidently some reference 
beside to the standard of what ought 
to be, else it could not be said that 
people in general verge rather to the 
worse side. Torepresent the majority 
of mankind as possessing 4 mediocre 
moral character, neither eminently 


FF 2 


7 


220 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


[ Cap. 


\ \ , > A oo 9” ~ cp ~ > ~ / 9 
2mobG TAS HEipous. EwEl O Evie THY yOovdby avayxaiat cioww 
»” 
ai 0 od xal péyps Tivos, ai 0 bwreporal ov, oud ab er- 
vt 4 - ec / d A 5 .3 4 / wv \ Av « 
ehbeic, opolws 08 xal mwepl emibuutag Eyer xak AuTAG, 6 
n Ea » 
piv Tas repPords dimxwy Tay yoewr 7) xal brepPorasy 7 
4 ad ~ 
Oia mooalperiv, OF abtrag xal wxdty Or Erspov amoPaivoy, 
AXOAAT TOG’ avaynn yap ToTov wy elvas peTaApeAyTIXoY, 
a La , « A > / a: -F c . , 
WOT AVIATOS’ OYAD ALETAMEATTOS AvIATOG. O Oo éaAsimwy 


€ > / SAS la / 
0 AYTIxeiMEvoS, O OF LETOS TwWDpwY. 


opolwe 2 xal 6 ded- 


yor Tas TwpaATIXas AUTOS py OF ATTA AAA Oia Mpoal- 


3 peoty. 


~ 5: ‘ , c \ ” 3 A ‘ 
TWY OF -4 7 POA pOulLevay i) bev AYETAS 1a THY 


‘yoovyy, 608 Bid TO devyew Thy AUTHY THY amd Tig emibu- 





good nor bad, but inclining to weak- 
ness, was in accordance with the 
Greek point of view. Widely dif- 
ferent from this was what may be 
called the Semitic point of view, 
which, regarding man with greater 
religious earnestness, attributed to 
him ‘desperate wickedness.” The 
latter feeling was not confined to the 
Jews and to the pages of the Bible, 
but in some degree made itself known 
to the world in the Stoical philosophy. 
See Essay VI. p. 261 &e. 

2 émel 8 %ai—évtaros| ‘Now as 
some pleasures are necessary, but 
others are not to be called so, as 
being (kat) only necessary in cer- 
tain degrees, while their excesses or 
deficiencies are not necessary, (and 
the same division holds with regard to 
desires and pains), he who pursues 
excessive pleasures, or who pursues 
pleasures not in themselves excessive 
in an excessive way, and does so from 
deliberate purpose, with no ulterior 
aim beyond the pleasures themselves, 
is abandoned (&«éAacros), (and he 
may well be called so), for it stands 
to reason (ava‘y«n) that he is not likely 
to repent, and so he is incurable; for 
without repentance there is no cure.’ 

ovd af €ddclpers] This might seem 
superfluous. But what is meant is, 





oA 
that in some pleasures the péoor is 
good and necessary. Cf. below, 6 ® 
éAAclroy 6 ayticelwevos. — 

} Kal? iwepBorads # Bid capil 
The Paraphrast well expresses the 
meaning of this passage as follows: 
6 pev tas brepBoras diéKnwy Tov Hdovar, 
kal } ras dice: peydAas del Cytav 
jdovds, 7 Tas pice: perplas dwepBar- 
Advrws (ntav, ovx EAKduevos Pialws 
aes im’ abtGv, GANG wera mpoaipérews ex” 
abras tpéxwv, ov 5° BAAO Ti, Sédzav, 
pepe ciweiv, } népdos, GAAA abras BY 
éavrds, &xéAaoros. It is plain that 
h before 5:4 mpoaipeow in the text 
must be a mistake. One of Bekker’s 
MSS. reads xal—which would be very 
easily changed into 4, especially with 
the clause # Kaé’ twepBodds preced- 


ing. It would answer also to the 


expansion of the Pe odx arxd- 
MEVOS K.T.A. 

avdryen yap] Ifa man with dalibersta 
purpose pursues pleasure for its own 
sake, he is not likely to repent of his 


course, therefore he is a&«éAaoros. 


This is the first intimation we have 
had that an unrepénting character 
belongs to ‘intemperance’; it is an 
irregular argument, unless we regard 
it as laying some stress on the ety- 
mology of the word a«éAacros. Cf. 
Eth, wt. xii. §-7, IV. i. §. 


VII. ] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 221 


£, 
plas, Wore Oradépovow arAATAwWY. maT! O ay boEes yei- 
poy elvat, ef Tig en emibupey 7 rpiua moarros Th alo xpov, 
x > , > ~ \ > a , , a 
Hci ohodpa emibuptv, xal ei py doyiSopevog turrTo 7 
7-9 , A , \ Xx > / > s 4 §. ec) 9 ft 
ei opysGomevos’ Th yap ay emoler ev mabe: wy ; O10 6 axo- 
Aactos yelpwy TOU axparotg. Tov Oy AsybévTwy Td wey 
7 s> ~ c > f ? a \ n~ 
paraxing eidog paArov, 60 axorAurtoc. avTixeiTas Oe TH 4 
XN > ”, Ue Bee 2 ig ~ \ ~e ear A 
pay axpares oeyxparns, To 68 parand 6 xaprepindg* 70 
~ ~ c 
pay yap xaprepeiv cotly ey TH avtéyely, 7) 0 eyxparea ev 
wn ~ a y\ , ~ 
TO xpareiv, Zrepoy Oe TO avTEX sty xh xparely, aomep xah 
TO py jrrdo ton Tou vindiv' O10 xal aiperabrspov eyxpa- 
TELA xapTeplas éotiv. 69 éAAcirwy 700g & of TOAAO xal 5 
, 
avTiTelvougs xak OuvavTaAl, oUTOG MaraxdS xal ToUd@y* xal 
‘\ c \ “4 , > , a 4 ‘re U A 
yap 4 Toudy paraxia tig eotivs Og Axe TO imariov, iva 
‘ 7 A a: ~ wv , A , 4 
fy TovATy Thy aro Tod alps Avrny, xal pspodmevos TOY 
, > SA A > 7 a 4 c / 
xap.vovTa oux olsTo AIAL0G elvas, AOAIw Bo10g Wy. Soles 6 





3 Sore diapépovow GdrAdAhAwr] ‘So 
that they are distinct from one 
another,’ ze. on the one hand the 
reprobate (axéAacros), in his two forms 
of systematically seeking pleasure, and 
of systematically avoiding pain; and 
on. the other hand the morally weak, 
whether in the form of yielding to the 
allurements of pleasure (&«parjs), or 
flying from the pressure of pain 
(uadraxds). The comparison is not 
between the two forms of the py 
Tpoaipovuevor, but these are together 
contrasted with axoAacta, 

_ maytl 3 By ddtee] A repetition of 
ch. iv. § 4, on which see note. 

tev Bh rexOevtwv 7d wey padraxlas 
clos waAdov, 6 & axdrAastos] The 
temptation is great to refer trav 57 
Aex0évtay to Tay ph} mpoatpoupévwy, 
and to read a«parhs for axdédacTos, 
taking the sentence in connection with 
what follows. Wilkinson does so 
without any variation of the MSS. to 
justify him, although the Paraphrast 
has axpatjs. But when we consider 
(1) the unanimity of MSS.; (2) that 
padaxta has been already distinguished 





from a&«pacia, in § 1; (3) the import 
of waAAov, we shall be led to see that 
the sentence comes in, though rather 
in a disjointed way, to wind up the 
comparison here made generally be- 
tween incontinence and intemperance, 
(ef. ch. vi. § 5, and above, § 1). In- 
continence may be said to be more 
like a kind of softness, while deter- 
minate vice is something different. 
MadAaxla, according to this interpre- — 
tation, is used here in a general sense, 
in the next section with a special and 
limited import. 2 

4 Continence, it is argued, is finer _ 
than endurance, just as victory is finer 
than holding out. This argument is 
not sound, since continence is in 
reality nothing more than holding out 
against temptation. To noble natures 
continence would doubtless cause a 
greater struggle than mere endurance 
of pains, and in this sense it might be 
called finer. 

5 6 & eAdcixav—iuows Sv] ‘Now 
he who faints before things against 
which most men hold out and are 


strong,—he is soft and luxurious, (for 


222 HO1KON [EYAHMIQON] VIL. [Cuap. 


/ > A 4 
O eye: xal wep) eyxparsiay xab axtpariay® ov yap eb Tig 
* nw 
io yupa@y xah brepBarnove cop dovéoy arrar on 7 alge 
Gavpacroy, arArAM Tuy yveopovixdy, el yTiTElveoy, domep 6 
Ozodéxrov Diroxriryg bd tod Zyews wemanyp.évos 76 
re , > ~? / , \@ c 1 ed 
Kapxivov ev ri Anory Kepxvwy, xat worep oi nares 
/ ° , 
meipwpevor Tov yéawra abpoov exxayyatour, olov cuve- 
,a7 
Eevodavtrw, aan’ el tig mpdg ag of woArol Ouvavras 
~ / \ 
cytéyesy, ToUTwy 7TTaTAL xad py OdvaTOL avTITElvE, [La 
~ ‘ x ~ oF ~ 
diam duo Tod yevoug 7 Sie voroy, olov év Toig Lxvb@y Pa- 
~ € Vg \ \ / A c \ 47, ‘ ‘ 
TlAEUTIWY 1 LAAaKIA dia TO Yevos, xal Wo TO DHAV WpOg TO 
~ UJ 
7 dopey Oieoryxev. Ooxel dt xal 6 rasdiwdys axoraorog elvan, 
»” ds / < ee \ »y \ +f ---/. > L > , 
GOT OF UAAAKOS’ Y YAP WAI AvEeTig EOTIY, EITED AYA- 
~ 7 , 
ravers Thy 08 mpdo TadTyy bmepParrdvrwy 6 maidi@dns 
> / > , \ \ \ U \» > / irate a8 
zotiv. axpaciag 08 70 ev mpomeTeia TOO cobevera’ of ev 
Ld 5 / \ \ 
yap Bovrsvodpevos obx eupevouow ols BovrcvoayTo Oia TO 


WECE 


oo 





luxury, it may be added, is a kind of 
softness), he for instance who trails 
his cloak, rather than have the trouble 
of lifting it, and who imitates the 
languor of an invalid, without seeing 
that it is miserable to be like one who 
is miserable.’ This passage is some- 
what in the style of the Characters of 
Theophrastus. To illustrate the affee- 
tation of weakness described aboye, 
Coray quotes from Athenzeus a story 
of the Sybarites, one of whom said 
that he had been in the fields, and 
that ‘to see the men digging had given 
him a rupture.’ To which his friend 
replied, that ‘the very mention of it 
gave him a pain in his side.’ 

6 6 Gcodéerov SirontHrns}] A play 
by Theodectes the rhetorician, a friend 
of Aristotle’s. Fritzsche quotes Cicero 
Tuse. u.vii. 19: Adspice Philoctetam, 


cui concedendum est gementi: ipsum | is said that traces of the disease. are - : 

enim Herculem viderat in Eta magni- | still found among the inhabitants of 

tudine dolorum ejulantem, &c, Southern Russia.’—Mr. Rawlinson’s . 
Kapxivov] Of this tragic poet no- | Herodotus, Vol. I. p- 248. . 

thing appears to be known, kal &s Td OFA] Cf. c. v. § 4. “a 


Eevopdyt»] Giphanius finds in 
Seneca, De Jra, i. 2, a mention of 





Xenophantus as a musician of Alex- 
ander the Great. 

ofov év rots Sxv0av Baciretow 7H 
madanla 8: 7d yévos] Aspasius for 
XKv0dv reads Tepoa@v. But the com- 
mentators refer us to Herodotus 1. 
105: Toto. B¢ tay Sv0dwy ovdhcact 
tToipdy 7d ev’ Agkadwn Kaltoiot TolTeY 
del exydvoior evéoknve 7 Oeds OhAeay 
vodooyv* dove &ua A€youct re of SKvOar 
3a rovTd oheas vocéew. Hippocrates 
gives a description of this malady, 
which appears to have been a kind of 
impotence (De Aer. Ag. et Loc. V1. 
108): 
epydCovra: kal ds aiyuvaixes Suardeyorral 
te dpolws, Kadetyral te of roiodro 


évavdpiets. ‘This impotency Hippo- 
crates ascribes to venesection, but he 


mentions that the natives believed ee Ge 


to be a judgment from the gods. t 


8 dxpaclas 8&t—gavracig] ‘Now 


. 


~ 


edvouxla ylvovra: kal -yuvauketa 


fae 


incontinence is sometimes impetuosity 2 


VIL] HOIKQN [FYAHMIOQN] VIL. 223 


, v ~ 
waSos, of O02 did To ey Povrsicac4as ayovras bd Tod wa- 
uv ao / > / 
Goug* Zur yap, Womep mpoyapyanrioayres ov yapyanilor- 
« , 
Tob, oOTw xal mpoatcbousvor xal mpoldovTEg xa mpoeyei- 
A ~ ~ 
pavtes EnuTOVg xal Toy Aoyiopmoy ovY ATTw@YTAL Ord Tod 
, vosNKN ‘Ou y Ws x / / a ec LY os ~ 
mahouc, oT av 700 7% otT av AurnpOv. pariora O ob d&<ig 
~ , ~ 
Kab PEnayYorinol THY mpoTETH axpaciay eioly axpareic’ 
ee \ \ \ ~ € \ \ \ , 
of pev yap dia THY TaxuTHTA, of O2 Osa THY ThodpoTyTA 
> > , \ / \ \ ? Y 7 ~ 
oux avanévouos Tov Adyov, dia TO AxoAdUVanTIXO) civas TY 


davracia. 





and sometimes weakness. Some men, 
when they have deliberated, do not 
abide by their deliberations, owing to 
the state into which they are thrown, 
(and this is weakness): while others, 
from never having deliberated, are 
carried away by their feelings. Some 
on the contrary, like the beginners in 
a tickling match, who cannot be 
tickled,— having prescience, and fore- 
sight, and having roused up them- 
selyes and their reason beforehand, 
are not overcome by their feelings, 
whether pleasant or painful. It is 
especially persons of a quick or bilious 
temperament who are subject to the 
impetuous kind of incontinence, for 
the one through the rapidity, and the 
other through the intensity, of their 
nature, do not wait to see what is the 
law of right, because they are apt to 
follow impressions.’ 

bamrep of xpoyapyadlcaytes] The 
Paraphrast understands éavrods, ren- 
dering the passage Sorep ra mporpi- 
Bévra kal mpoyapyad:c0évTa wéAn ov 
yapyaAigovra:, And two of Bekker’s 
MSS. read of rpoyapyadic0evtes. It 
might be possible by previous tickling 
to exhaust the irritability of the 
cuticle, but this would not be a usual 
process, and in one of the Problems 
attributed to Aristotle (xxxv. vi.) it 
is discussed, ‘Why cannot a man 
tickle himself?’ To which the answer 
18, 





‘For the same reason. that he | 


ean hardly be tickled by anybody else 
if he knows that itis going to happen. 
For laughter implies a sudden revul- 
sion and a surprise.’ Surely this is 
exactly what is meant in the text. 

of éfets Kat wedAayxoAikol] An ac- 
count which seems at first sight the 
opposite of this is given by the author 
of the Magna Moralia (u. vi. 43): 
*Exeivn wey ody (the impetuous kind of 
incontinence) ov® &y Alay ddterey elvan 
Wexth* Kal yap ev tots orovdalois 7 
Toubrn eyyivera, ev Tots Oepuots Kad 
edpvécw: 7 St (the weak kind) éy rots 


Wuxpots kat wedayxoruKors, of SETowdTo - 


If however we consult the 
curious disquisition on pedayxoAsKot 
and the wédawva xoah in Ar. Problems, 
XXX. i, we shall see that both pas- 
sionate impetuosity and cold sluggish- 
ness were considered by the ancient 
physiologist to be different manifesta- 
tions of the same strange temperament, 
Ib. xxx. i. 18: “Ocos 3& & TH dion 
auvécrn Kpaots Toa, evOYs ObTOL TA 
HOn ylvovra mayrodamol, %AAos Kart’ 
BAAnv Kpaow* oiov Scots pev TOAAYH Kad 
Wuxpa evumdpyxei, vwOpo) Kat uwpol, dros 
de Alav wodAh kal Oepuh, mavixod Kat 
evoueis kad épwrikol Kad edxtvntor pds 
Tovs 9upovs Kal Tas emiOuplas, Evior 5é 
kal AdAot waAAov. With the moderns 
the term ‘ melancholy ’ is restricted to 
the cold and dejected mood ; while the 
ancients much more commonly ap- 
plied the term pedayxoAucds to denote 


exrol, 


* 


e 


224 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. [ Cuar. 


8 “Eon 8 6 pay dxahaoros, damp enex on, ou perayssny- 
Tinog? eumever yap Th m pocupécres” 60 departing psroys- 
AYTIMOS més. O10 ox domep aroha apsy, odrw xah Eyer, 
GAN 6 pay avlaros, 6 0 iardg’ Zoe yap 7 pay poxby- 
pla réy voonparey oloy ddépm xal dbice, 4 o axpacia 
Toig emiAnrTinolg’ 7) bev yap cuveyys, yj 0 ob TuvexIS To- 
yypia, xal dawg O Erepov To yévog axpaciag xab xa- 
xlas' jurv yap xaxla AavIdver, 7) 0 axparia ob AavOaver. 

2autTé@y O& ToUTwy BeArioug of éxorarixol 7 of Tov Adyov 
Eyovrsg dv, oy eupevovTes 08° bm EAaTTovog yap maboug 





3 
warmth, passion, and eccentricity of | after yielding, these are all repentant 
genius, Cf. Plato, Repub. 573 ©: | (metaueAntinds mas), while the in- 
Tupayvikds dé, Fv & eyd, & Samdne, | temperate man forms a contrast to 
avhp axpiBas ylyvera, Stay } pice 7 | them, and is unrepentant. 
emirndevpac 7} auporépas pedvorinds 5d odx Gorep hropheauer] Cf. ch. ii. 

Te Kal épwrikds Kal pedayxoduKds yévn- | § 10. Intemperance, which is a cor- 
rau. Of. also Ar, Probl. x1.xxxviii: 7 | ruption of the will, is like a chronic 
Th pavtacig axodovbeiy taxéws 7d | disorder, while incontinence, which is 
meAayxorikdy elva: éoriv, Inthe lan- | a temporary derangement of the will, 
guage of our own day, ‘The passionate | is like an epileptic seizure. 
heart of the poet is whirl’d into folly h yap xaxla AavOdver] As being a 
and vice. For more remarks on | false sort of harmony in the mind, in 
LéAawa xoAh, see below. which no struggle is felt. 
2 abtav 5&—éupévoyres 5¢] ‘ Now, 
VIII. This chapter is not separated | looking at incontinence itself and the 
by any marked logical boundary from | two kinds of it which I have men- 
the preceding one. Rather it is a | tioned, those people who are carried 
continuation of the same subject, as it | away are better than the sort who are 
goes on comparing incontinence with | in possession of “the law” but do not 
intemperance. Two previously mooted | abide by it.’ As said before, the _ 
questions are now discussed, namely, | thread of reasoning goes on com= 
is intemperance more curable than | tinuously from the end of: the he 
incontinence? (which is answered in | ceding chapter (according to Bekker’ 
the negative), and, is incontinence to | division), and so,there is no’ od 
be regarded as absolutely bad? (See | markable in the writer’s now ee 
above ch. i. § 6). This is also an- | to the two kinds of incontinence, as Deel 
swered in the negative. if he had never digressed from dis- 
1”Eott 8 6 pev &xddagros, Sewer cussing them. Of éxoraricol here 
er€xon, ob peraueAnrixds] Cf.c. vii. § | answers to the dfe7s Kal merayxoruc 
2. The continuity of the subject is | (ot) thy mpower# axpactay eiolv ZZ 
preserved, if we consider that the | refs. The words %oracis, exorivat, 
writer, having mentioned the various | and exorarixés, are frequently used in aS 
ways in which incontinent people sub- | the Problems, (J.c.) in connection with ag 
mit to temptation, next reflects that, | the werayxodmmol, Cf. Ib, xxx. i. 3: 





a» 


VIII. j HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL 225 


e ~ \ > > - ao ao a 
YTTMvTAL, xab aux ampoPovAcuTol WomEp ATEpOL* OLL010¢ 
XA > 7 ~ \ 7 . °°. /, 

yap 6axparig tort Tog TAYD weducxopevorg xa OT GALyoU 
y \ >? f oe € , 
OlYVOU XA EAATTOVOS 7 WC Ob TOAAOI. 
> 6 > ” , 
axpacia oux eat, Davepoy. 


a X > / ¢ 
OTL pdy oUv HAXIA 7 3 
> a5 lA Ba . \ Ly a 

\ la \ ‘ A ig geeks oe as p ’ v o 
Tap wooaiperiy To OF xaTa Tpoulperlv eoTIy. OF [LIY 
> of , \ > 
GAN ouoroy ye xaTa Tas MpasEG women TO Anpodoxon cig 

, , , ~ » CTI 

Mianctovg § Miajoras aguveros tv ovx eloiv, Ip@ord oia- 
‘ , 
wep of a&vveror.’ 
> ~ / 
adinotos 2. 


\ c. 5 ~ aN \ 2 NY 
xab of axpareig KOixos ev aux eloly, 
ae: c x a > \ \ A “ 
érel 0 6 pty ToLoTog log pry Oi TO Ws-4 

~ ae 
metobos Oswxey rag xal trepBoryy xal mapa Tov dpbov 

, A € U ¢ \ , > \ X ~ 
Aoyoy TwWMATINAS YOovas, Oo OF wémetrTas Oia TO TOLOUTOS 
ey , ~ 
elvas ol0g Oimxsw adtag, exsivos piv ody eumEeTamEoTOS, 
60° SA \ > A 4.8 g / A > A c ‘ hel. 
00 ov yap apeTy xal 7 poydnpla rHy apyny 7 pev DUst- 





where it is said of Ajax, éxoratixds 
eyévero mayredG@s (t.¢. mad). Cf. above 
ch. vi. §6. "Exorarixés is used presently 
(§ 5) im a different sense to express 
‘departing from’ a purpose, as also 
before, ch. i. § 6, and ii. § 7. 

oi Tov Adyov Exovres}] On this phrase 
see Eth. v1. i. 1, and note. 

_ Spowos yap—oi moddAot] ‘For the man 
who is weakly incontinent is like those 
who are soon intoxicated, and by a 

small quantity of wine, less than in- 
toxicates people in general.’ ‘O dxpa- 
Ths seems used in this sentence as if 
specially applicable to the weak kind 
of incontinence. It is in contrast to 


 €xoratixés. Weakness is worse than 


being carried away by passion, for it 
is acting against warning, and with 
less temptation. 

3 Incontinence is not vice, though 
it resembles vice in what it does (kara 
Tas mpdtes), but it goes against the 
will, while vice goes with the will. 
-It is like the saying of Demodocus 
against the Milesians. ‘The Milesians 
are not fools, but they act just as if 
they were fools.” The incontinent are 
not bad, but they do wrong. 

Anyuodéxov] This was an epigram- 

VOL. II. 





matist of the island of Leros, not far 
from Miletus. Some of his epigrams 
against different cities are preserved 
in the Anthology. 

&3ixode1] In the general sense ‘ do 
wrong.’ Cf. Eth. v. ii. 2. 

4.7 yap aperh—evarrios | ‘ For virtue 
on the one hand preserves, while 
vice destroys, the major premiss. Now 
the end is in action just what the 
hypotheses arein mathematics, namely, 
a major premiss on which everything 


depends; hence, neither in the one 


case nor in the other is it the chain of 
inference (6 Adyos) that demonstrates 
the major premiss, but in the case 
of action (évrad@a) it is virtue either 
natural or acquired to which a right 
opinion with regard to the major 
premiss is due. He who possesses 
this is temperate, while the contrary 
person is intemperate.’ This passage 
comes in as a final argument against 
the notion that incontinence is more 
curable than intemperance. In the 
latter the fountain-head.of action (the 
épxnh) is destroyed. While the tem- 
perate man has in himself the source 
of all good action, the intemperate 
man is the direct opposite, and the 


GG 


226 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL ~ 


[Cuap. 


pet 7 08 owe, ey 08 Taig mpaeot TO ov Evexae apyxh, OorEp 
zy roig pabyparinois ai tmobéceig* oltre Oy exel 6 Adyos 
Sdacxarinss ray dpydy obre syratba, arn dpery 7 u- 
oxy 7, biorn Tod épbodoGelv meph rHy apyyv. Yodpwy pey 


z c ~ > I DN o. / 
50UY 6 TOLOUTOS, AXOAKTTOS O EYaYTIO“. 


Zot OF THG O1K 


mabos éxorarixds mapa Tov opbev Adyoy, ov wore piv [By 
mpaTTey xara Tov opboy Aoyoy xparei To waSoc, WoTe O 
sivas TolouToy olov memeiobas Simms cavedny Osiv TAS TOLMU- 
TAS Woovas od xpaTel* odTOS EoTIv 6 axparis, PeATiny TOU 





incontinent man is something inter- 
mediate. 

h 8t oda] cf. Eth. vi. y. 6, where 
almost all the ideas which occur above 
are given, even the reference to mathe- 
matical axioms. Jb. ch. xii. § 10: 
where a still more explicit statement 


is made of the relation of virtue to- 


the practical syllogism. 
ai tro0écas| This term is used 
precisely in the same way in the 
Eudemian Ethics, 1. x. 20: tepl pev 
tov TéAous ovMels Bovdeverat, AAAG TODT” 
éotly apxh Kat bwd0cots, domwep ev Tats 
Ocwpntikais emiorhucus trobéces* elpn- 
tat 5 wept aitav év pey tots ev apxij 
Bpaxéws, ev 8 tots dyadutixots oP 
&xpiBelas (i.e. the Analytics of Eude- 
mus). Cf. Jb. ch. xi. § 4: Somep yap 
Tais Oewpntixais al imwudéoes apxatl, 
ora Kal rats mointiKats Td TéAOS GPX} 
kal inddeois, In Eth. Eud. vu. ii. 4, 
indbecis is used as equivalent to 
apxh.—(§ 3) wept rotrwy .. 
téov d:oplea, AaBotow apxhy rhvde 
. TovTov bt Siwpitméevou Anwréov 
inddcow éErépay, Plato, Repub. p. 510 
—511, reproaches mathematics with 
always resting on hypotheses of which 
they can give no account. P, 510 c: 
olua ydp oe eidévar Ste of weph ras 
yewmetplas te Kal Aoyiopovs Kal 7d 
To.avTa mMparyparevdpevot, brobeuevor Th 
Te wepit Toy Kal Td Uptiov kal Ta oXHpaTE, 
Kal ywriey TpitTe fbn Kal BAAGa TobTwY 
aerpa cal éxdorny uOodor, TadTa wey 


. Teipa- 





ws €iddres, moinoduevar brobéces a’rd, 
oddéva Adyov obre abrois ore HAAS 
ért Gkodo1 wep) abtav d:8dver as wayth 
pavepav, éx rovrwv & apxduevor Te 
Aowra Hn Sietidvres TEeAcEvT@ow Suodro- 
younévws éxt rodro, ob by em oxdluv 
dpphowoww. 

Aristotle, Post. Analyt. 1 ii. 7, 
defines thesis or assumption as an 
immediate syllogistie principle, in- 
demonstrable, but not (as the axioms 
are) a necessary antecedent to all 
reasoning. He divides theses into 
hypotheses and definitions, which 
differ in that the former assert exist- 
ence or non-existence, while the latter 
do not. The hypothesis then is a 
peculiar principle (oixefa &pxn), and 
differs from an axiom, (1) in that it 
varies in the different sciences; (2) 
in that it is wanting in recognisable 
necessity. (Cf. Post. Anal. 1. x. 6: 
otk tots & Swdbeois. ..d dvdeynn 
elvat 52 abrd Kal Soxeiv avdyKn). The 


Aristotelian hypothesis is however 
widely different from the hypothesis — 
of the moderns, which means in short 

little more than a conjecture. For — 
more particulars on this subject see 


Mr. Poste’s Logie of Science (Oxford, 
1850), p. 139—1438. : 

Tod dp0odoteiy] By what the gram-~ 
marians call zeugma, this genitive 
goes with ray apxay, as governed by 


SidarKaduds, One would have ex- — 


pected airia. 


VIII.—IX.] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 227 


, ~ ~ 7 A A “ 
axordeTov, ose Davaos amaAws* cwletar yap To fer- 
, ae! / v ee / or 3 \ N.S 
TITTOY,  APYY. AAAS ® evavrios, 6 EULLEVETIHOS HAL OVX 
> \ Ces: # \ s \ NAN 9 7 o € 
éxorarinas did ye TO wados. davepov Oy ex TouTwY OTE 7 
a / - . 
piv omovdain 2Eic, 7 02 Davay. 

, ee > 7 > gi .¢€ ~ / Xe 
Tlorepov ody éyxparng cori 6 érommody rye seouh bot 
~ hd "4 b> c ~ > ~ > \ 

Qnty mponipeoe: Eupevwy 7 6 Ty O09y, nal axparng a8 
~ \ > / / \ wn / 7 
Groimoly py eEupevwv mpoasperes xal orosmody Acyw 7 
~ ~ , ~ ~ \ > ~ a 
TO Wevdel Acyw xal TY mpoaspéoes TH wy OPI, womep 
> 7 aX ~ 
ymopniy mporepov; 7 xaTa piv cupPsPyxdg oroimoty, 


cr of 





5 &Ados & évayrilos x.7.A.| Incon- 
tinence haying been shown to be an 
intermediate state not so bad as in- 
temperance, it is here added, that 
the true opposite to the incontinent 
man is he 


‘Who, through the heat of conflict, 
keeps the law 

In calmness made, and sees what he 
foresaw ;’ 


z.e. not the temperate but the conti- 
nent. And though incontinence is 
not absolutely bad, yet relatively, if 
you compare it with its opposite, you 
must call one bad and the other good. 


IX. The first part of this chapter 
(§$§ 1—4) takes up again the question 
before started (ch. i. § 6, ch. ii. § 7—10), 
Does continence consist in sticking to 
any opinion and purpose, whether 
wrong or right? After some refine- 
ments, which are perhaps unnecessary, 
as to the continent man ‘accidentally’ 
or “non-essentially’ maintaining a 
wrong opinion, a good distinction is 
given between obstinacy and conti- 
nence. Obstinate people (ic xupoyvd- 

" poves), if not mere dullards (of duade?s 
kal of &yporkor), are self-opinionated, 
which state of mind is rather inconti- 
nence than continence, for it is a 
yielding to the desire for victory and 
self-assertion. The continent man on 





? 


the other hand is not at all deaf to 
the voice of persuasion, it is only the 
voice of passion when opposed to 
reason which he resists. Nor is a 
man to be called incontinent if he 
deserts a resolution, even for the sake 
of pleasure, Since Neoptolemus de- 
serted his resolution to deceive, in 
order to obtain the noble pleasure of 
preserving his honour. 

1. 1 6 TH Wevdet Ady@ Kal rH mpoar- 
pécet TH wy 6p07| Various solutions 
have been proposed for the difficulty in- 
volved in this sentence. (1) Aspasius, 
followed by Argyropulus, Fritzsche, 
&e., think that éunévav is to be 
understood as carried on from u% 
éupévwy in the line before. But this 
will not do. The a&«parhs cannot be 
said to ‘abide by a false opinion.’ 
(z) Some understand the clause as 
applying to cases like those of Neo- 
ptolemus. ‘Isa man incontinent who 
does not stick to a false opinion?’ 
But all this is implied in 6 dro:qoty 
«.7.A, And moreover this interpre- 
tation would give a new sense to #, 
making it a particle of opposition 
instead of a particle of contrast, which 
is required for the sake of correspon- 
dence with the opening sentence. (3) 
One of Bekker’s MSS. reads t¢ wh 
Wevde2 Adyp Kal tH mpoupécan TH 
6p07. This is a very natural correc- 
tion to'make, and it seems followed by 


ca2 


9 


228 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. [Cuar. 


> e258 \ ~ > ~ , A n~ , ~ / 
xaf airs O& TO aANDeE Adyw xal TH 699% mpooupeoes 
€ \ > / € > > 5b] / > / d} 5 \ 3} 
6 pay eupever 6 0 ou eupevers eb yap Tig TOOL Ore TOO 
€ ~ ) ~ / \ me 
aipeiras 7 Oroxet, xaP abro wey TodTo Oimxer xal aipsiras, 
~ f ‘ 
xaTa cupe>yxdg 8 +o mpdrepov. amAdg OF Agyomey TO 
f aire, wore & ty we 6 ty O0&y 6 wiv eumeves 
xaf atro, woTE ExT pv Wg broimoty OoEy 6 pay Erp 
’ ~ ~ ~ / 
6.0 e&loratat, amaws Ot 6 7TH aAnfet. eiol 02 Tiveg xal 
~ n~ , 
eupevetinol TY O0En, obs xarotor ioxupoyym@povac, olov 
, a / 4 
dvomeoros xa) Ux eULETaMELT TOS O1 Ofoloy prev TL EXOUTE 
~ ~ ~ / \ A 
TO éyxparel, OorEp 6 AowTos TH EArcvIeplw xal 6 Gpacds 
is yA > > o ‘ f ¢ \ s' 5 a 
TH Japparen, sia} ETEPOL KATA TOAAA, 0 [LEY Yap Ob 
/ > 7 > 
mabos xal emibuplav ob peraParrs, 6 éyxparis, émel 
, \ > \ 
cUreloTos, OTay THY, Zora! 6 eyxparys* 6 OF ovy brs 
Ua 
Adyou, érel éribunlas ye AapPavoucl, xal ayovTas OAD} 
~ e ~ , , 
307d Téby ydoverv, iol 08 irxupoyvmMpores of idsoyvw@poves 
~ y , D318 
xah of amadeic xal of diy porxos, of peey idtoyye>poves oy 70o- 
viv xas uray : Xaipours yop VICIT ES, Zay py perourel- 
Gwvras, xa Aumotvrau, aay dxupa Ta auTéy 7 donep 
UiGlopata’ Wore parry TM axparel eolxacw 4 TO 
° ~ ~ , / > 
4eyxpares. elol O€ tives of Tolg doSacw ovx euméevouory ov 
q ~ ond / 
Ov axpaciav, olov gv rd Piroxryry tw ZodoxAéoug 6 





the Paraphrast, who has 6 wh éuuévav { xaxdv, which is a weak qualification 


7H op07j. But since the correction is 
so natural, why should such a pre- 
ponderance of MSS. have failed to 
adopt it? Though the sense ab- 
solutely requires some such reading, 
it seems better to conclude that there 
is some original confusion in the 
text. The author may have carelessly 
written as above, from a mistaken 
antithesis to } 6 7H 6p07 in the former 
sentence, 

Kata oupBeBnkds 5& 7d wpdrepor] 
One chooses the means ‘ accidentally,’ 
This is a mere illustration of the 
import of xa® airé and cupBeBykds. 
The whole paragraph seems perfectly 
irrelevant. It may be compared with 
Eth. v. xi. 8: KaP? aibrd yey ody rd 
GdixetoOat ATTOv paddAov, Kata oupBe- 
Bynkds 8 odfiv Kwddver peiCov eivat 





of the moral principle, that to injure 
is worse than to be injured. 

2 &omep 5 towros «.7.A.] The 
same illustrations are coupled together 
in the Eudemian Ethics mt. vii. 14: 
7d duodrepoy hrrov éevaytiov alveras, 
olov rérovOe Td Opdaos mpds 7d Odpoos 
Kal dowrla mpds érevdepidrnra. 

6 5& obx —ijSovay] ‘ But the obsti- 


nate man (is immovable) not from the - 


influence of reason, for such men 
assuredly admit desires, and many of 
them are carried away by the allure- 
ment of pleasures. The curious 
phrase émiOuulas AawBdvover occurs 
in the Hudemian: Ethics, m. ii. 13% 
mdyres yap rovros pice re xalpovor, 
Ka éribuulas AauBdvover, 

4 oloy év rG Pidonrhry] See above 
ch. ii. § 7, note, 


IX.] 


Neorroazpos. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


229 


xairos OF yoovay ob evemewev, AAA 


y , > ~ \ s / 
xHAaAHY* TO yap aryfevew UTM xaroy 7y, éreloby O brd 


rod “Oduecéws Wevdecbas. 


Ob yap mas 6 BF yovyy v1 


/ A et ee A v7 ~ fae HE D re > > 
TPATTWY OUT AXOAKTTOS ouTE davrog ovr AXDATYS, AAA 


c > > A 
6 OL alo x pay. 


? \ oo] , A ~ ig A a ~ ~ 
Evel n) EOTL TIC HOLE TOLOUTOS O10$ YTTOY 7 det Tolg Ow-5 
~ , \ > > la ~ A ~ ~ 
PATIHOIS YAIDwWY, KA OUX EUmEYWY TW AOYUr y ToLOUTOS, 


7 \ ~ ~ / 
TOUTOU XQL TOU Ax LAT OUS peoog 6 eyxparys* 


6 pev yap 


cixparng oux éupéver TO Adyw Oia TO WAAAGY TI, OUTOS OF 
\ & 3% e sy 2 \ > , \ ENS bs 

Oia To yTTOy TE 60) Eyuparig Eupéver xml 0008 OF Erepov 

petaParnrs, Act d¢, elrep xj éyxpareia orovdaioy, apdo- 
, \ > ’ v4 Ud > a \ 4 

Tépas Tas evavTiag EFeig davaag elvos, Worep xal dai- 


YVOVTOL* 


% \ \ X \ (4 4 
AAAK Oia TO THY ETEpay ev GALyoIg al oruyaseig 


elvou davepay, domep a Tanhpoo wry TH Axoraa ie doxet 
évavtioy elvou peovoy, ouTwW xal 7 syxparetoe A ax par ia 
eet 3 xal? OmoroTynT a ToAAa ALYET OL, xa 7 EYHDATELO 76 





5—ch. x. § 5. In his later edition 
Bekker makes this portion of the text 
into a separate chapter, which seems 
a better arrangement. We have now 
a winding up of the previous dis- 
cussions. Continence is not only the 
contrary of incontinence, but is also 
a sort of mean. It bears an analogy 
to temperance, but must not be iden- 
tified with it. Neither must incon- 
tinence and intemperance be con- 
founded (see above ch. i. § 6). Nor 
must it be thought possible that the 
wise man can be incontinent, though 
the clever man may (see ch. i. § 7). 
Incontinence is like sleep or drunken- 
ness, not a state of wakeful knowledge 
(see ch. iii, §§ 6-8). Its acts are 
voluntary, but yet it is not absolutely 
wicked, since it implies no deliberate 
purpose. The incontinent man is 
like a state which has good laws, but 
does not act upon them. The bad 
man like a state with a bad code, 
which she carries out. Both the 
terms incontinence and continence are 
used comparatively, as implying more 





firmnessthanis common, or less. Of the 
two kinds of incontinence, that which 
is caused by passion is more curable 
than that caused by weakness, that 
which proceeds from habit is more 
curable than that which is natural. 

5 Kal ovdé dV? Erepoy peraBddrre] 
This is an Atticism for kal 5? oddére- 
pov. The attempt to make continence 
into ‘a mean’ can hardly be called 
successful. It can only be done by 
assuming the same @AAenis for this 
quality as for temperance. You will 
have one set of terms, dkodacta, 
cwppoctyvn, avatcOnota, and another 
set axpacla, eyxpdreia, dvacOncta. It 
is plain that éyxpdérea is not a mean, 
in the sense of being a balance, or 
harmony of the mind. It is only 
imperfect temperance, it is temperance 
in the act of forming. 

6 7 eyKpdrea 7 TOU Géppovos Kul? 
duordrnta jKodovencey] ‘The “con- 
tinence” of the temperate man has 
come to be called so derivatively 
(AxoAovOnkev) and by analogy.’ 


230 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. [Cuap. 


~ , See , > , o \ 
To) cwdseveg xal’ cpowryra yxorovdynxev’ 6 Te yap 
éyupatig olog pydiv mapa Tov Adyoy bid TAG TMMATIXAS 
e> \ ~ » 3 , > >» © \ w <g> 9 4 
YOovag Torey xal o TwWHpwWY, AAA O LEV EXwYO 0 oux Exwy 

/ ° 4 / \ ec A ~ Lg \ “) 4 
davrag emibuplac, xal 6 pey rosotiros vlog pn 7OeoOon 
mapa Tov Aoyov, 6 0 olog *derbas AAAR poy ayers. 


a ‘\ \ c > ‘ ec > if a ‘ 
7 Goss 08 xab 6 AXPAaTHS xal 0 axdrAaTTOS, ETEDOY [LEY 


” i. > id 3 ‘ \ Dé Dy / P LAA ¢ 

ovTec, apdhorepor OF TA TWMRATIXA OER O1WXOUTIY, AAA O 
a7 ~ > 

sv xach olomevoc Oeiv, 6 O° ovx oldmevoc. 


1O Ov dpa dpovipov xal axparh evdeyeras elvos Tov 


2 OZOSINTOL WY. 


w 


5] , a \ / A Nw A "4 
auto? apa yap dpovipos xal omovdaiog to og 
2Ts ov TH eldévar povoy Hpovimog aAAA 

wire B Povs[eog 


\ ~ U e > > A > A 
xb TW WOAKTIXOS* O n) AxXPATHS ov T pat ixdc. TOV 


0: Beswoyv ovdey xwaAver cixpary elvas* 010 xal doxodoww 
eviore dpovipor prev elval tiveg axparsig 02, dia To Tay 


IN) , , ~ , \ > , , 
Oewornta diahépew THg povycews Toy cipnuévoy Tpomrov 
> ~ 7 / \ \ \ 
gv Tolg MpwTOIG Avyols, xal xaTa ev Tov Adyov eyyUS 
a N , 5.4 \ ‘ / OY: Ov e 
elvat, Oiadépeiv 08 xara THy mpoalperiv. aude Oy we 
CG sy N \ 4 ~ > > c c § 50 a > 
0 el0wg xa Uewpwy, AAA wo o xatsvowy 7 olyw- 
‘ \ a ~ 
peeves. xal exwy wey (Tpdmov yap Tiva eldwg xal 0 motel 
a , 7 
zak ob Evexa), movnpdg 0 od" 7 yap mpoaipeoig emseixyg* 


woh jpsmovnpos. 


/ 
xal obx adixog* 0b yap ExiBovrog* Oo 





X. 1 dua yap ppdvios Kal orov- 
datos Td HOos Sé5euxta wv] Cf. ch. ii. 
§ 5. Eth. v1. xiii. 6. 

2 Tov cipnuévoy tTpdmov ev Tots mpa- 
tos Adyos | Cf. Eth. vi. xii. 8—g. The 
phrase év trois mpéros is used by 
Aristotle, Hth. rv. iv. 1, 4, in refer- 
ence to the Second Book of Ethics. 
It must mean something more than 
mpérepoy, one would think. It seems 
to point to a sort of interval between 
the later passage and that referred 
to. Cf. ch, i. § 1: &AAnY rorncauévous 
apxhv. 

3 kal éxow pey] Cf. Eth. v. ix. 4-6, 
where the question is discussed, Does 
the incontinent man voluntarily do 
wrong and injury to himself as well 
as harm ? 

h yap mpoalpeots emienkhs | Mpoalpecis 





here must mean the general state of 
the will. It is only one form of 
incontinence, which errs against a 
definitely formed purpose. Inconti- 
nence is always rapa thy BotAnow (cf, 
Eth. v. ix. 6); in passionate natures 
it is &vev mpoapécews, The Aristo- 
telian psychology seems however to 
have admitted the formation of mpoa:- 
péoets which are not carried out into 
action, and the question thus arose, 
Are purposes or actions most decisive 
as constituting virtue? See Eth, m. 
ii. 1, note, and Eth, x. viii. 5. 

dof jpyumdynpos| ‘So that he is only 
half depraved.’ This epithet occurs 
in Ar. Pol. v. xi. 34: @t & abrdv 
(the monarch) d:akeioOar (avaryKaiov) 
Kara Td HOos Hrot KaA@s mpds aperhy 7 
nulxpnoroy byra, Kal ph movnpoy GAN’ 


1X.—X.] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 231 


\ \ beet > bl % x , € > 
pay yap avT@y obx eupevetixos olg av Poursvonras, 6 0 
perayyorixes 000s PovrsuTixdg Baws. xal Zoe d7 
> \ a / \ a \ , 
axparng moras 4 Wydifera: piv dravta Ta déovTa xa} 
yomous eyes orovdasoug, ypyras 08 ovdév, Womep AvaSay- 
dpidng Exxwev 


2 On m2 


i) TOdLC EBovAEO’, 7) vopwy ovdev pédec* 

6 08 movnpos Xpmpery pay Toig YOUOIS, Ferapois 02 yowpévy. 4 
tots 0 axpacia xal cyxparera meph TO bmepBanrroy Tis 
Thy ToAA@Y EFews* 6 pay yap eupéver warrov 60 Frrov 
Tig THY TAcioTMY Ouyapews. 

~ a e » 3 , ~ , 
TOY, HY Ob [LEARY YOAIXOL AXPATEVOYTEI, TwWY Bovrsvopevwy 
pay pay eupevovtwy 02, xal of OF ehiopod axpareig tay 
duoixdy sdov yap tog peraxivioar dvoews* did yap 

— ee, Ris oe < , ” or \ 
ToUTo xual Td Ebog yareray, Ott TH DvTEs Zoinev, WoTED xa) 
Edyvog Aéyes 


Dee , X\ ~ > 
EVIATOTEDE 0: Tay Ox p0.- 


ont Tmohvxporiov pedérny Epeva, pire, Kat o7 
ravrny avOpwro.ce TeXevT@oav gvow eivat. 


, 4 ¢ / 
rh wey aby 2otly eyxpareia xal Th axpacia xal th xaprepia s 
, ~ ww a 4 
xal th paraxia, xal rg eyouTww ai BEeig adras mpog 


GAAIAUS, ElpyTo. 





jyumdvnpov. In Plato, Repub. p. 352 
c, the term juimdxOnpo is used, in 
proving that there must be honour 
even among thieves. 

ov yap ériBovdos] Though lust as 
compared with anger is called éwiBov- 
Aos (cf. ch. vi. § 3), yet it is true on the 
other hand that the incontinent man 
is not a designing character. 

6 5& pedayxorrKds] Cf. above ch. vii. 
§ 8, ch, viii. § 2. 

Gomep “Avataydpléns] A Rhodian 
comic poet, who issaid to have satirized 
theAthenians. Aristotlementions one 
of his plays, the Tepovropavla (Rhet. m. 
xii. 3). Also a famous saying of his (Jd. 
1m. xi, 8), AvatavSpldov +d éemasvodpe- 
vov— 

Kaddy y arobaveiy mply Cavdrou Spay 

&fuov, 





And another witticism (J. m1. x. 7). 
Cf. Athenzeus, Deipnos., x. 16: 

4 Tis tav mrcloTwy Suvduews| Cf. 
ch. vii. 1, note. 

orep al Envos] An elegiac and 
gnomic poet of Paros, who appears to 
have been a contemporary and friend 
of Socrates. 

pnp worAvxpdnoy K.7.A.] 

‘ Habit sticketh long and fast, 
Second nature ’tis at last.’ 

peA€rny | ‘ That which is acquired by 
culture and habit.’ That habit is 
‘second nature,’ we are told by 
Aristotle, De Mem. ii. 16: &omep yap 
tots Hin Td os, 5d & wodrAAdKS 
évvootpev Tax avauimynoxducda’ do- 
mep yap pice téde pera téd€ early, 
obtw Kal évepyeig* Td 5 TOAAdKIS Hiow 
Towee, 


232 


II 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL 


[ Car. 


Ilegi 02 7dovijg xal Avang Bewpijoos Tod ray OMIT IXY 


~ ; e \ ~ , > , A 
dirorodutivrog* otrog yap Tov TéAous apyiTéxTwWY, TPOS 
6 BaAgmoyTes ExaoToy TO wey xaxoy TO 0 ayaloy arrAws 


2 Acyouey. 


tr: 08 xal rév dvayxaiwy emioxebacbas mepl 





XI. We now come to a treatise 


upon the nature of Pleasure. With 
regard to the authorship and character 
of this treatise see the remarks in 
Vol. I. Essay-I. pp. 34 and 38, and 
Essay III. p. 145. A notable scholium, 
discovered by Professor Brandis in 
the Vatican, and quoted by Spengel 
and Fritzsche, attributes it to Eude- 
mus, though in a merely conjectural 
way; see below ch, xiii. § 2, note. 
In the outset of the Eudemian Ethics, 
a discussion on Pleasure is promised 
in terms which correspond both to 
the contents and the position of the 
present chapters. (Eth, Eud. 1. v. 11.) 
rovray 8 (é.e. with regard to the 
three kinds of life) ) wey mept 7a 
odpara Kal Tas drodatoes Hdovh, Kal 
tls kad mola tis ylveru Kal did tTlhyov, 
ovk &Sndrov, hor’ ov tlyes eiol Set 
(nreiv abtds, GAN el ouvtelvovol Tt 
mpos evdaipoviay } wh, kal rds ouvrel- 
vouot, kal wérepov ei Set mpoodrrey TE 
Civ Karas 7dovds twas, rabras Set 
mpoodmrew, } TovTwy pey BAAoy TWd 
Tpdmov avarykn KoLvwveiy, erepa 8 elolv 
jdoval BV &s ebAdyws olovras Tov eddal- 
pova Civ 7déws kal wh pdvov GAdmws. 
GAAG Tept piv ToUTwY Borepoy émirKe- 
aréov, wept 3 aperns Kal ppovhoews 
It is quite in 
agreement with the terms of this pro- 
gramme that the present treatise is 
prominently concerned with the dis- 
cussion of bodily pleasure (# wept 7a 
céuara kal Tas dnodavaes 5ovh), At 
the close of the Eudemian Ethics there 
is also a reference backward to these 
chapters (Eth. Eud. vit, iii. 11): kat 
epi Hovis 8 elpnra moiby Tt Kal mos 
ayabsy, kal 81 Th TE GMAGS HSEq Kar 


mparov Sewphowpuer. 





Kadrd, kal 7h (ye) awrGs dryada 7déa. od 
ylverat 5& Hdovh wh ev mpdter* 5a TovTo 
6 GAnOGs eddaluwyv Kal Hd.ora Choe, ear 
TovTo ov pdrny of &vOpwror Gtovoww. 
(Cf. this Book, ch. xii. § 3, and § 7; 
ch. xiii. § 2.) 

1—2 mepl 8¢ 7dovns — xalpew] 
‘Pleasure and pain are subjects which 
come within the scope of him who 
makes polities a philosophy, for he 
has to frame the idea of that supreme 
end, in reference to which we call 
things absolutely good and bad. Also 
these are quite necessary for us to 
consider, since we have laid down the 
principle that moral virtue and vice 
are concerned with painsand pleasures, 
and since people in general hold that 
pleasure is involved in happiness, 
whence they have given the happy 
man his name (#axdpios from xalpewv).’ 

There are three reasons given here 
for discussing pleasure; (1) Because 
it has claims to be ‘ the end.’ (Cf. Eth. 
Eud. u. i. 1, where as a reason for 
discussing psychology it is said, ppé- 
yyors yap kad &perh Kar HBovh ev uxt, 
dv tna h wdvra rédos elvat Sone? rao). 
(2) From the connection before shown 
to exist between pleasure and mo- 
rality, cf. Eth, Eud. . iv. 2-4. 
(3) Because the idea of pleasure is 
involved in the common idea of 
happiness, as shown by the etymology 
(a false one) of waxdpios. i 

épxiréxtwv Tod TéAovs| %.€. to con- 
ceive in a grand and liberal way, 
independently of details, that supreme 
human good at which a state should 
aim, Cf. Eth. 1. xiii. 1-3, and 1 i. 4, 
note. 

amA@s A€éyouer] There is some con+ 


XL] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQON] VII. 


233 


L eee 7 \ > ‘\ A ‘\ \ 
auTiby' Thy Te yap aperny xal THy xaxlav THY AOinyy Tepl 
7 A S A 4 \ \ ~ 
Avumas xa ydovag Bemev, xal ryy eddasmoviay of TAzioTo: 
> €Q ww > , \ \ \ / > , 
pl yDovigg elvat daciw, 010 xal Toy paxdpiov Wronaxacty 


aT TOU yas ply. 


~ \ eo N ~ > s cans \ 
Tals [ey OUY OOXES ovdepnse 700v7 eivens 3 


> “2 y+ > ig », | wv A , > », 

ayalav, obts xa ato ors xaTa cupBsByxsg* ov yap 
> 2 4% > 4 \ ex 7 ~ > x € 
elvas TavToy ayadoy xal ydovyy' Toig O Zvi ev elvas al 


df rorral davrau. 


” DS! , Yj > \ ~ 
ETL OF TouTwyY TplToy, Eb Xb TACHA! 


> , ad \ Nw A XV Vv cv 7 

ayahov, sums pn evdeyer$as elvar TO ApioTov 7joovny. 

a A > > ld 4 ~ en XN / F > . 

OAws psy oux ayaboy, ors maca ydovn yévecig zortiv cis 4 
, , >> , \ \ ~ 

dicw aicdyry, ovdenla 62 yéveoig Tuyyevig Tols TéAEoIY, 


= 2X , > , Tea) 
Oloy OUdELba oixodouLyTis Obxie. 
eA c f \ bod ee! > \ e)7 
eTh O Ppovinos TO AAuToy OlwxEl, OV TO TOV. 


A en , 
TAC yoovac. 


evs 6 cwdhpwy devyes 


ww > ™~ ~ ran) a ec ex 7 ,o ~ f 

ets Eumodioy TH Opovely ak ylovat, xa Gow PaAAOY Yaipss, 
is z \ ~ > oF Nw x x , 

parroy, olov ray THY adpodiciwy’ ovdiva yap av duvacbar 


~ : > ~ 
yonoal Th ev QUTY). 
> X , ” 
ayatoy TEXVYS Epyov. 
Lan} / 
youvac. 


+ , xx , on ~~ t A ~ 
ETL TEY YY OUdEULIA YOovAS* xaiTOL Tay 
” , \ , , \ 
ETI TOOla xaL Opie diwxes TAC 
= SS N , 5 ’ o > NO \ 
Tou OF py Wacag ocmovdaing, OT! Elol nals 





fusion in this expression, for though 
things are called good in reference to 
the supreme end, yet they are not 
called so absolutely. All such goods 
are merely means, and therefore goods 
relatively. What is here meant is 
more definitely expressed in Eth. Hud. 
I. Vill. 18, 71 8 atriov 7d TEAOS TaY 
ig’ airdé, Sndot h didacKadrla. dpicd- 
pevol yap Td TéAos TGAAG Seuxvdovcry, 
Sri Exacrov abtav ayabdy* airioy yap 
7d ob Evena. 

ue® 7H5ovqs) The first sentence of 
the Eudemian Ethics asserts that 
happiness is not only most good and 
_beautiful, but also most pleasurable ; 


this is taken, of course, from Eth. Nic. 


I. Vill. 4. 

3—5 The writer now mentions 
three existing opinions with regard to 
pleasure, and the arguments by which 
they are supported. 


1 That pleasure is in no sense a 
good. 
VOL. II. 





(a) because it is a state of be- 
coming (yéveats) : 

(8B) because the temperate man 
avoids pleasures ; 

(y) because the wise man aims 
not at pleasure, but at a 
painless condition ; 


(3) because pleasure hinders 
thought ; 

(€) because there is no art of 
pleasure ; 


(¢) because children and brutes 
follow pleasure. 


2 That some pleasures may be 
good but that most are bad; sup- 
ported by instances of morbid and 
hurtful pleasures. 

3 That pleasure is at all events not 
the chief good; because it is not an 
end-in-itself, but a state of becoming. 

Tois wey ody Soxet] The opinions 
stated here are negative. The writer 
in all probability had before him 


Aristotle’s treatise on Pleasure (Eth. 
HH 


15) 


234 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


[Cuap. 


aio pa xal averdiGopevant, za. eTh PacPepat: voowey yep 


Evia THY 702 Zwy, 
AADAK yiver ie. 


Tb apoTov, x Thvde d7Aov. 


OT O oux apioroy i WDovy, OTs ov Tédog 
TH psy ov Asyoueva Oyedoy TAUT early. 
~ \ 

"Ort 8 od cupPaiver Oia Tatra wy elvar dyobov pyte 


~ ‘ > \ . oes Ay 
TpwTov [4E¥, ETEL TO aya ov 





x. i.-v.). He deviates from it slightly, 
and exhibits that kind of differences 
which might be expected under the 
circumstances. He does not, like 
Aristotle, state the positive view 
(held by Eudoxus) that pleasure is 
the chief good, but commences witli 
the opinions of the objectors to this 
view (i.e. Speusippus and the Plato- 
nists of his school). The principal 
argument which he attributes to them 
(that pleasure is a ‘yéveots) is given, 
though not in such a definite form, 
Eth. x. iii. 4. Argument (¢) appears 
to be implied in the objection against 
Eudoxus which is mentioned Eth. x. 
ii. 4. Argument (e) may be the same 
perhaps as that given Eth, x. iii. 2 
(that pleasure is aépiorov). The 
other arguments are not taken from 
Aristotle; they may perhaps have 
been derived from the books of Speu- 
sippus on this subject (wept doris a’, 
’Aplatimmos a. See Vol. I. Essay IIL. 
p. 168). 

The second view belongs probably 
to a more moderate section of the 
Older Academy. It still however 
requires qualification, and to this ef- 
fect the writer argues below, in ch. 
xil. 

The third view,— that pleasure, 
however good, cannot be the chief 
good,—was held by both Plato and 
Aristotle (though the argument by 
which it is supported, 87: ob réAos 
G@AAa yéveots, was Plato’s alone, ef. 
Philebus p. 53 Cc, 54 A, &e. Eth. x. ii. 
3, x. iii. 8-13). Eudemus, identifying 
pleasure with happiness, denies this, 
ch. xii. § 1, ch. xiii. § 2. 





XII. The arguments used in this 
chapter are as follows: (1) Before 
deciding on the goodness or badness of 
pleasure, a distinction has to be made 
between absolute and relative good- 
ness or badness, and then various 
degrees have to be admitted among the 
relative kinds of goodness, § 1. (2) We 
must allow that real pleasure consists 
in life itself (évépyera), not what merely 
produces life (yévecis). Hence all the 
arguments founded on defining plea- 
sure to be a yévects fall to the ground. 
Those processes which restore nature 
are only pleasures jn a subsidiary and 
accidental way. And even in them 
what is pleasant is the life (évépyesa) 
which accompanies them, §§ 2=3. (4) 
Some pleasures may be morbid or 
they may hinder thought; but this 
only proves that from one point of 
view they are not good: but again the 
pleasures of thought are an assistance 
to thought, § 4-5. (4) There is no 
art of pleasure, because art is of 
conditions, not of functions, not of 
life itself, § 6. (5) The arguments 
about the wise man, the temperate 
man, and the child (ch. xi. § 4), all 
apply merely to the inferior and sub- 
sidiary, that is the bodily, pleasures, 
§ 7. 

The course of procedure here is like 
that in Eth. x. 
objections of the schoal of Speusippus 
are answered before Aristotle gives 
his own theory of the nature of plea- 
sure, The arguments above are rather 
confused in statement. Those in § 1 
are apparently meant to answer the 
assertion that no pleasure is good, 


se wee 





Ki.— Xi] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. 


235 


IN ~ \ N \ € wn b XN 4 \ € 7 \ 
o1yws (76 fev yao amTrAws TO Oe Thvt), xab ab Duets xal 


¢ The > On hy ; ‘ a A \ € Le §. c 
at ESsls AxHOAOV YTOUCbY, WOT HAL AL KIVITEG KALE AS 


4 \ € ~ ~ > € \ ¢ ~ 
yevereic, xat ab Davras doxotoas sivat al psy amaAds 
n \ nN > > \ ~>d 4 ENS ~ 
dating: til O ob AAV aizeral Twde, Evie 0 00d? Twd: 

\ \ > J. 6 \ Y ~ 
GAA wore xal GAlyov ypovoy, aizeral 0 ov" ai 0 ond 
ex > \ ie a \ 7 i-4)3 f 
7iove, anrAa DabvovTas, oat psTa AvTIS xal IAT PEAS 


tc4 e ~ , 
EVEXEY, OLOY AL THY XALLVOYTEY. 


+ > \ nw > ~ A 
evs éwel To ayadod Td 





ote Kal adtd ote KaT& cuuBeBnkds, 
The writer wishes first to urge that 
pleasure may be relatively good, if not 
absolutely so; he afterwards goes on 
to maintain that it is absolutely good. 

Other passages of Eudemus bear a 
similarity to this, ef. Eth. Eud. ut. i. 
7: GAN tows Td poBepdy A€yeTa, dowep 
kal To 75d Kal raryaddv, Six@s. Ta wey 
yap amras, 7a 5 Th pev Kal Hdéa Kad 
ayaba éoriv, ards & ob, GAAG Tovvay- 
thoy patrdAa nal ovx nda, boa Tots 
Tovnpots wpédiua, nal Boa Hiéa rots 
moudiors 7 waudia, vit. ii. 4-7, &e. 

1 Bre 8 od cupBalver — xauvdvrwr] 
‘But that it does not follow from 
these arguments that (pleasure) is 
not a good, nor even that it is not the 
chief good, will be seen from the 
following considerations. First, the 
term ‘good’ has a double import, it 
means either the absolute or the 
relative good; in aceordance with this 
distinction, different constitutions and 
states will be either absolutely or 
relatively good, and so too the pro- 
cesses of charge and transition (which 
produce them). Thus some of these 
processes which appear bad may be 
so in the abstract (aA@s), while they 
are not so relatively (7wi), but are 
desirable for the particular indivi- 
dual. Others again cannot be called 
desirable even for the particular 
individual, except on occasion and for 
a short time; others are not pleasures 
at all, but only seem so, being accom- 
panied by pain and being (merely) for 





the suke of relief, as for instance the 
pleasures of the sick.’ 

2 2% émel—amd Trovtwr] ‘Secondly, 
“good” may be either a state or the 
operation of a state, and so the pro- 
cesses which restore any one to his 
normal state (pvounyy Efw) are plea- 
surable (not in themselves, but) acci- 
dentally (and by association). In 
fact there is an operation or vital 
action in desire, namely that of the 
powers in us which remain unimpaired 
(ris brodotrov eEkews Kal picews), 
(And it may be proved that pleasure 
depends not on want and desire, but 
on vital action), because there are 
pleasures which do not imply want and 
desire, as for instance the pleasures 
of thought, which take place when the 
nature is in no respect deficient. A 
proof (that the processes before-men- 
tioned are only accidentally pleasur- 
able) is to be found in the fact that 
men do not find delight in the same 
pleasure while their nature is being 
recruited (dvamAnpouwévns) and when - 
it is in a settled condition, but when 
it is settled they delight in things 
which are absolutely pleasant, and 
during the other process in things 
that are even quite the reverse ; as in 
sharp and bitter things, which are not 
naturally nor abstractedly pleasant. 
Nor is the enjoyment of them natural, 
for as pleasant things, regarded ob- 
jectively (7a 75éa), are to one another, 
so are the subjective feelings which 


_these excite (jdeval).’ 


HH 2 


n 


w 


236 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL [Cuar, 


piv evéoyeia To 8 2Eic, xara cupPeyxds ai xabioraoas 
> \ \. &g e(VN~ 7 9 ” NS Ce Se8 > 
elg THy Quoinyy BEuy yieial ciow. Eors O 7 Evepyeia ev 
Be > , ~ c , cl fe A id + > \ 
tals eribupiaig Tig broroirov EEews xal Duoews, ewes 
Ni or , Vs 4 , > \ ey l xf € oe 
xal avev AvIng xal emibuplacg sicly yoval, olov ab Tob 
2 ~ Sees A ~ 7 > > ~ ” a 
ewpeiy evepyeras, Tig dicews ux evdectg odons. oystov 
NS of > ~ > ~ tN ~ > / wn 
OTL ov TH AUTH Yaipouow Fst avararAnpouuevys Te THS 
/ / > A / x ~ 
dicews xal xabeoryxviacs, AAAA xabeoryxviag piv ToS 
~ , / ~ sf ‘ 
ards (ber, avarrAnpouevng OF xal Toig evavTioig’ xal 
\ bd / \ ~ , - Dr ” f yy 
yap o§2or nal minpoig yalpouotv, wy ovdev olTe Odes 700 
wsrie ~~ ens a > tS ee 2 ) © 4 ‘ cy/ 4 
oF arrws 7Ov. WoT 00d ydoval- wo yap TH AdEa mpg 
” U (4 \ ee, qe ie , 
ARAAYAKL TUVETTYREY, OUTW HAL A 7Ooval ab ATO ToUTMY. 
wv > ieee 4 a / ‘7 / ~ ‘D6 ~ a 
ETs OUx avayxy ETEpov Th Elvar PEATIov THS 7OoviG, WomED 





This passage is expressed so ellip- | p. 199), but it is borne out by e. xiv- 
tically as to require several links of | § 7: Aéyw 5 xara cupBeBnwds Hdéa 
thought to be supplied. Inthe above | 1& iarpedovra- ri -yap cupBalver iarped- 
translation this has been attempted. | eo@a: rod dropévovtos Hyiovs xpartovTés 
A bare rendering of the sentences into | ti, &:& rodro 730 Sone? ely. Cf. Eth. 
English would leave them utterly un- | x. iii. 6. 
intelligible. éféo1 xal mixpots] Mentioned as an 

ai katicraou]) i.e, af euhoes Kalai | instance of things only pleasant during 
yevéoets, carried on from the previous | a morbid condition of the body. Cf. 
section. The argument is that it is | Eth. x. iii. 8. 
only life and the vital action (@vouh 3 ert ob« avdynn—tort & Erepor] 
fis kal Tavtys évépyea) whichis good | * Moreover it does not follow that 
and pleasant; the restorative processes | these must be something better than 
are only secondarily, non-essentially, | pleasure, as some argue, in the same 
and by a sort of inference, pleasant. | way that the end is better than the 
The words xafioraoa and kabeornxvias | process which leads to it. For all 
correspond with the term xardoraots, | pleasures are not transition-states 
which is used of pleasure in Ar. | nor the accompaniments of such, but 
Rhetoric, 1. xi. 1: kardstacis &Opda | they are rather life itself and the end 
Kal aigOnth eis Thy bwdpxovcay pvaww. itself. They do not result from our 

Tis bwodoimov Efews] The argument | coming to our powers (ywopéver), but 
goes on to add that even in these re- | from our using those powers (xpe- 
storative processes there is vital action | pévwr); and it is not true that all 
(évépyea), namely of those organs that | pleasures have an end separate from 
remain unimpaired. The Paraphrast | them; this is only true of such as are - 
and others understand boAoixrov to | felt by persons in the process of being 
mean ‘deficient, and as being equi- | restored to their normal condition. 
valent to évdeovs in the next line, | Hence it is not right to define plea- 
But the above translation is not only | sure as a “sensible transition,” but 
more suitable to the doctrine of the | rather we should call it “a vital 
Peripatetics, (see Vol. I. Essay IV. | action of one’s natural state,” and 








XII. ] HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VIL. 237 


~ £ > \ , ea, 
Tivig Daok To TéA0G THES yEveTEwWS* Ov Yao yevETEIG Eioly 
PENS 3 , ~ > ee eee \ f « 
Ou0E [LETH YEVETEWS TATHL, AAA Eveoysias HAL TEAOG 
AN , rf > > / A re 
OUOE YivomLevwy cupPaivoucty, AAAL YOWLEYWY* Xb TEAOG 
~ BS ~ \ , > , 
o) macdy erepov Th, AAA THY Eig THY TEAEWOIY KYOLEVODY 
~ , XN \ > ~ ” x > 4 \ , 
THS Ducews. 010 xal ov xaA@S EXEL TO HIOUNTYY yeveoty 
nN A ’ \ ~ / Be 
davas civar THy yOovyy, AAG PAaAAGY AsxTEOY evepysiay 
6 \ / tea > \ db: ~ > § \ pee aN 
Tig xatTa duow eFews, avTl OF TOU aloUynTHY avzumodIC- 


TOY. 


~ DW , >; od , , , \ 
doxst 0: yiveols Tic chy, oTt HUZLWS ayaday: Ty 





3 66 


instead of “sensible,” “unimpeded.” 
Now pleasure appears to people to be 
a transition-process from its being 
good in the full sense of the term, for 
people confound the ideas of process 
and action, whereas they are distinct.’ 

@onep twés pact] In all probability 

the school, and perhaps the actual 
writings, of Speusippus, are here al- 
luded to. Nowhere in Plato do the 
exact words of this definition of plea- 
sure occur (yéveots eis pio aicOnth), 
but they represent his views, though 
perhaps carried rather farther. The 
present section places in opposition to 
each other the theories of the Platonic 
and the Aristotelian school, of whom 
the one considered pleasure to be a 
relief from pain, a return from depres- 
sion, an addition to the vital powers ; 
~ the other considered it to be the play of 
life itself, the flow of life outward 
rather than anything received. On 
these two divergent theories see Vol. 
I. Essay IV. pp. 197-201. Thesame 
subject may be found worked out at 
greater length, and with interesting 
notices of the opinions held by later 
philosophers, in Sir W. Hamilton’s 
Lectures on Metaphysics, vol. u. lect. 
~xiiil. pp. 444-475. 

GAAG maAdov Aekréov evépyeay] Ari- 
stotle when writing accurately dis- 
tinguishes pleasure from the moments 
of life and consciousness (évépyecat), 


from which it isinseparable. Cf. Eth. - 





X. Vv. 6: af 5&y(7doval) cbveyyus tats 
évepyetaus, Kal abdidpicTot ofTrws ware 
éxew audicBarnow ef tabtéy est 7 
évépyeta TH Hdovy. od why Found ye 7 
HSov} Sidvora clvar ovF atobnors* &romov 
yap’ GAG Sie 7d wh xwplCeoOat haiveral 
He however does not 
more specifically define it than as 
ervyryvomevdv Te TéAOS (TH evepyeig), 
Eth. x. iv. 8, &e. Eudemus does not 
preserve the distinction, but simply 
says that pleasure should be defined 
as ‘the unimpeded play of life.’ Ari- 
stotle himself occasionally writes in 
this way; cf. Metaphys. x1. vii. 7: éred 
The term 
évépryeta, besides other associations, im- 
plies consciousness, as has been shown 
in Vol. I. Essay III. pp. 193-196. 
Sone? 5& yéveolts tis elvat, Sti Kuplws 
&yabdy| At first sight there appears 
to be a contradiction in saying that 
pleasure is thought not to be a good, 
becauseit is a-yéveots (ch. xi. § 4); and 
that it is thought to be a yéveois 
because itisagood. The explanation 
is that the latter clause refers not to 
the Platonists, but to the Cyrenaics. 
The Cyrenaics, who considered plea- 
sure the chief good, defined it as an 
equable process in the soul.’ Plato 
accepted this definition, and turned it 
against them, arguing that by the very 
terms used the Cyrenaics had proved 
pleasure not to be the chief good. 
The Platonists then were originally 


TIL TAUTOY. 


kal 7 Hdovh evépyecu TovTov, 


238 


\ Led , Mv a 4 
4yap evéoysiay yéveoty olovras elvas, EoTs O Brepoy. 


HOIKOQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


[ Cuap. 


To Oo 


> t co , ” eps \ en \ o¢ 
ELV davaas oT vor won, EVIA VOEKA, TO AUTO RXAb OTE 


€ \ ~ \ , 
uylsiva Evia Cane 7% 20S APR SOP 


¢ s ~ 
spi ouy Davara 


ap.dw, GAN ov Paine HATA Y= TOUTO, ere) xal TO Sewpsiv 
SmoTt PaAanwres mas bylsiay, eparodiGes 02 oUTe dpovnoss 


oF Ee ovdeusae 7 ad’ éxaorys voov7, 


AAD ai AAAGT piel, 


Cota gh ee ote ~ ~ \ , edi , 
erel ai amo Tov Oswosiv xab pavdave parnroyv womoroues 


6 Jewpety xab pavlavery. 


c~ ~ i 
7 ¥O0vNS ebvas, 


A Na! , ‘A ” 
To 08 Téeyvng py Elvas Epyov 
nN Ss S_ / >’ , / 
7Oovny pydztay evrcyws cupPePyxev 
. ~ / 
evepyslag oudsusag Téyvy eoriy, 
/ \ , \ 
xOITOL xa y% puserlingn Teyvyn xal 


oud? yap arAAYS 
AAA THS Suvapmews* 
oWoronrixy Ooxet 


TO 02 Tov cMdpova Hevyey xal roy Ppov- 


nN la \ RA , ‘ A \ ‘ db } ‘\ 
pov O1wxeiy TOY AAuToy Ploy, xal TO TH Tasbin xal Ta 





indebted for their definition of pleasure 
(aic8nth yéveots) to the Cyrenaies. 
See Vol. I. Essay II. pp. 132-133. 
4—5 708 elvar patras—pavbdvery] 
‘To say that pleasures are bad because 
some pleasant things are unhealthy is 
like saying (health is bad) because 
some healthy things are bad for 
money making. From that point of 
view it is true they are both bad, but 
they are not on account of this in- 
cidental badness bad simpliciter ; simce 
even thought is sometimes injurious 
to health, and neither wisdom nor 
any other state of mind is impeded 
by its own pleasure, but only by 
foreign pleasures; for the pleasures 
of learning and thought will make 
one learn and think more. The ar- 
gument here is that a thing good in 
itself may be relatively bad, e.g. 
health, and thought itself. One good 
may clash with another, and be from 
that point of view (tatrn) bad. The 
writing is elliptical; we might have 
expected &rA@s to be added to paidaa. 
The last clause in section 5, which 
asserts that a mental function is rather 
assisted than impaired by its own 
proper pleasure, is taken from Ar. 





Eth. x.v.2-3. Nooédn seems to mean 
‘producing disease,’ cf. ch. xi. § 5: 
as voonuarddns before (ch. v. § 3, &e.) 
means ‘ produced by disease.’ Sporharet 
is evidently used above as the verbal 
noun of ¢poveiy, in the general sense 
of ‘thought,’ and not in the restricted 
sense which is given to it in Book yr. 
Cf. Eth. 1. vi. 11: Eth. Eud. uw. i. 1 
(quoted above). 

6 7d be réxvys «.7.A.] Cf. ch. xi. § 
4. An answer is now given to an 
argument probably occurring in the 
works of Speusippus. This argument, 
if fairly represented here, must have 
had a false major premiss, namely, 
‘ All that is good is the subject of art.’ 
The answer consists of two diff-rent 
pleas; (1) pleasure, like life, is above 
art, which can only deal with the 
conditions tending to these things. 
(2) In another sense there are arts of 
pleasure, e.g. the cook’s or the per- 
fumer's art. 

7 Most of the arguments against 
pleasure ignore the distinction between 
different kinds of pleasures, the one 
kind being of the nature of life, and 
the end, and therefore good in them- 
selves (§ 3); the other kind being 


XIL—XiIL.] 


/ / ~ > ~ Ve: , 
Onpica OLwxElY, TO AUTO AUETAL TAYTH. 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. 


239 


22) yao slovros 
ame yap 2ho7 


~ > 4 c ~ A ~~ > > 4 ~ ec en , 
FwWS ayuha ATAWS HAL TWS GUX ayahas TATA Ab YOOVES, 
\ \ ined 7 \ ‘ 
Tas ToauTas TH Gysin xal TH masdin Oimxer, xal THY 
, > , « , A P >> 4 , \ AUTH 
TouTwMY AruTiay Oo Dpavimoc, Tag weT EmMIuulag xas u nS 
, ~ A 12 \ \ 
xab TOS TWUATIXAS (roratiros yap auras) xab TAS TOUTWY - 


imeporac, xal? ag 6 axorAacTos axoAuTTOS. 


a0 6 


, , \ \ ; \ \ Ae 
cwdpwy devyes ravtas, Exel cioly ydoval xal cwdpovos. 
A ~ >| 
"ADAG pay OTs xal H AUTH xaxdy ouoroysiTal, xai] 3 


, c X ‘ € ~ 
deuxtov’ 7 wiv yao aTAw@s 


\ ~ 


xAKOV, 7 OF TH WH eu7r0di- 
ya OE a a 





connected with inferior conditions of 
our nature, with pain, want, &c., and 
being therefore only secondarily and 
accidentally good (§ 2). This latter 
kind, and excess in them, are made 
the ground of reproaches against 
pleasure in general: 


XIII. In this chapter, after refut- 
ing (§ 1) the objection of Speusippus 
(that pleasure may be the opposite of 
pain without being a good), Eudemus 
urges the claims of pleasure, of the 
highest kind, to be considered the 
chief good, because from the terms of 
its definition it is inseparable from 
and indeed identical with happiness 
(§ 2). It is a mere paradox to talk 
of a man being happy in torture, &c. 
Happiness requires prosperity, that an 
‘unimpeded function’ may be obtained, 
i.e. pleasure, though there must not 
be too much prosperity, else happiness 
is ‘impeded’ in another way (§§ 3-4). 
The instinct of all creatures testifies 
to pleasure being the chief good (§ 5); 
and it is a mistake to think that 
bodily pleasure is the only kind that 
exists (§ 6). In short that pleasure 
is necessary for happiness proves that 
it is a good (§ 7). 


I GAAa phy—7dovhy} ‘But we may 


go further—it is universally agreed 


that pain is an evil, and detestable— 
for it is either absolutely an evil, or 





is so relatively as impeding the in- 
dividual in some way or other.—But 
that which is contrary to the detest- 
able in that very point which makes 
it detestable and evil, is good. There- 
fore it follows that pleasure must be 
agood. For the answer of Speusippus 
to this argument does not hold, that 
“(pleasure is contrary to pain and to 
the absence of pain) in the same way 
that the greater is contrary to the less, 
and also to the equal.” Forno one 
could ever say that pleasure is iden- 
tical with any form of evil.’ That 
pleasure is a good because it is the 
contrary of pain, is an argument. at- 
tributed to Endoxus, Eth. x. ii. 2. 
Aristotle there (Jb. § 5) mentions the 
answer to it, and refutes that answer 
as above. Eudemus, in accordance 
with his usual style, adds the name of 
Speusippus. Aulus Gellius, rx. 5, 
mentions this doctrine: ‘ Speusippus 
vetusque omnis Academia voluptatem 
et dolorem duo mala esse dicunt op- 
posita inter sese: bonum autem esse 
quod utriusque medium foret.” Ac- 
cordingly, the neutral state between 
pain and pleasure would have to be 
regarded as good. Aristotle and 
Eudemus reply that the point of con- 
trariety between pain and pleasure is 
that the one is gevxrdy, and the other 
aiperéy, therefore the one must be 


| considered an evil, the other a good. 


240 HOIKON [EYAHMION] VIL [Cuap. 


~ ~ XN 4 / a Ud \ 
OTIXH. THO 02 DevxT@ TO evavtloy 4 devxrov Te xal xaxdy, 
ey , os , > A ‘D " ‘ > 4 7 7 ta 
ayahov. avayxn ov Tiy ovny ayaiov Th eivat. we 
\ , ” > , ¢ , o 4 
yap Dwrevoimmos eAvev, ov cupPasves 1) AvoIs, WOTED TO 
a ws \ ~ , > ‘ x , 
psifoy To EraTrTou xal Tw low evavTiov’ ov yap av dain 
ed : , Ls ‘ ee ia é »” , > LENS 4 
20mED KAXOY Th Elvas THY YOOVyY. ApioToy T oUdEy xwAUEL 
€ , > 4 ~ c 4 4 
yoovyy tive sivas, ef Evins Dabaras yoval, wanes xal 
>, , a (Se , Koda ee 
emioTyny Tive evioy dadaAwy odody. Tous 03 xal avay- 
~ , Ste - > 7 > , 
xalov, emrep éxaorTng EZewo elo evéoyeiar avenmodioros, 
5) ~ . > wv \ > wa 
el? 1 macwy evépysia eoriv evdaimovia site 7 Tivdg auUTayY, 





brep kandy T1| Cf. Kih, vi. iv. 3, note. 
We are probably to understand tis, 
with the Paraphrast and Scholiast. 
Speusippus would have said that plea- 
sure is an evil. Cf. Eth. x. ii. 5. 

2 &pioroy 7 ovdey Knwdrter}: This 
admission is directly contrary to the 
conclusions of Aristotle (ef. Eth. x. 
iii. 13). It is to be explained as an 
after development of the system of 
Aristotle, and an attempt to bring 
different parts of that system into 
harmony with each other. Aristotle 
having used the same formula (évép- 
yerz) to express both pleasure and 
happiness, Eudemus from the force of 
the terms identifies them. In this he 
is quite justified, for it is impossible 
to distinguish the highest kind of plea- 
sure or joy from happiness, especially 
if we consider peace (évépyem rijs 
axwwnaias) to be a mode of joy. It is 
in accordance with the rest of the 
Eudemian Ethics to speak in this way 
of pleasure as being an essential ele- 
ment in, and as inseparable from, 
happiness. Cf. Eth. Eud. 1. i. 6-7, 1. 
v. 11-12 (quoted above), vmt. iii. 11, 
&e. See Vol. I. Essay IV. 200. 

The Vatican scholium on this pas- 
sage speaks of it as being merely 
dialectical (but this is from an un- 
willingness to recognise the discre- 
pancy between Books vi. and x). It 
proceeds to attribute the present trea- 





tise conjecturally to Eudemus. Ard& 
Bev otv rotrwy Boxe? radrdy dropat- 
veoOat Tayabdy Kal Thy Hdovhy* ob phy 
otrws exer, GAAX mpds Tos A€yorras 
yéveow elvar}) pavaas twas Tov idovar, 
&s cal BC abrd 7d wh elvan abthy 7d aya- 
Ody émvylyvera Kad emixeipet evddtws as 
évdy athy 1 &picrov Aéyev, ered & ye 
Tuis Nikouaxetors vey SrelrAexrar kab 
rep) ndovijs AptotoTéAns capes eipnrey 
airivy wh Tadroy ely rH eddatuovia, 
GAAG TapaKxorovbeiy Somep Tois axpators 
Thy dpay. onucioy 5€ Tod ph elvan Tovr’ 
*ApiotoréAous GAN’ Evdfuov 7d ev TE 
« (Book X.) Aéyew meph Hdorqs ads 
ovdérw mph airis SietAcymévov. mAHy 
elre Evdjuou tadra dori et7’ "Apiororé- 
Aous, evddtws elpnrat. dia TovTO Aéyerat 
Td &piotoy Hdovy br civ TE aplorw Kar 
axdpiotoy abtod. rovTw 5° duodoye? kal 
7a étjs. This, which is a remarkably 
favourable specimen of the Scholia, 
may serve to show the wavering and 
unprofitable character of these com- 
mentaries. 

@onep kal emorhuny| This must not 
be taken very strictly, since pleasure 
and knowledge cannot both be the 
chief good. Both however may be 
considered as forms of the absolute 
good. Cf. Eth. 1. vii. 5. The article is 
omitted at first with &piwrov, but is 
added below. Knowledge is good, 
though some things it is better not to 
know. 


co a 
i * 


XII.) HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] ‘VIL 241 
By wy , ‘ ae - eae \ 
av 7 AVELTOOITTOS, IDET WTATHY chivas’ ToUTO EOTIy 


ANY 7 a BA eA > an! \ a ~ ~ 
N00]. WOTe Eby AY TIS YOOVy TO ApIoOTOY, TwY TOAAWwY 
CN ow , She "a ¥ € ~ ‘ 3 \ ~ 
joovoy Havawy ovedy, eb Eruyev, ATA. xal dia ToUTO 
/ A 7) , ‘Ot Vv / 7 rae / 
TOAYTES TOY eVOAiova YoU oloyTas Bloy sivas, xal ELmAE- 
\ € \ > \ EN) / > / ‘ WOE , 
xougt Tiy yOovny elg THyv evdamoviny, evAdywo* oudeLIa 
\ mie / 2 / e >) 4 ~ 
yap evépyeia Téreiog sumodiSouevy, 7 0 eudaimovia THY 
h \ ~ ~ 5) UE ~ 
Tersioy* O10 mpocdeiTas 6 evdalwwy Thy ev oMpars Hayat 
\ ~ Q n~ f 6 \ / 
zat Thy extig xal THG TOYS, Grog py EUModISyTaL 
~ 7 
raira. of O& Tov tpoyxiSousvoy xal Tov duoTuxiaig [éE-3 
/ 28 s 
yanraig mepiminrovra evdainova darxovres elvas, cay ¥ 
> 4o Hn ¢ / are 4 IDV , O1e ds \ 
ayabos, 7 ExovTes 4 GaxovTec oudivy Agyouolv. Ole OF TO4 
~ ~ ~ s > , 
mpordsiobos Tag TOYNG OoxEl TIok TaUTOY ElvaL 7 eUTUYICA 
n~ CaN / > sz “) \ \ > \ ce , 
TY EUOKILOVIR, OUX OUT, EMEL RAL AUTY bmepParrovoa 
> : U 5] - \ : > / 2 , ~ / 
Eumddsog eoriv, xal lowe obxéTs evTuylav xarsiv Olxatoy* 





kal eumréxovor Thy Hdovhy eis thy | cruciatus, patrie eversiones, exsilia, 
eddaipoviay, evAdyws| Cf. Eth. Eud.1. | orbitates, magnam vim habere ad 
vy. 11 (which passage is here referred | male misereque vivendum, non est 
to): €repar & ciolv Hdova 5° &s ebAdyws | ausus elate et ample loqui, quum 
olovra Tov eddaiuova Civ Hdéws kal wh | humiliter demisseque sentiret.—Vex- 
udvoy GAvras. atur autem ab omnibus primum in ‘eo 
Tov ev Cépart wyabav Kal Tav éxtds | libro quem scripsit de vita beata, in 
kal ris tUxns] This is the principle | quo multa disputat, quamobrem is, 
with regard to happiness whichis laid | qui torqueatur, qui crucietur, beatus 
down in Eth, Nic. 1. viii. 15-17. It | esse non possit: in eo etiam putatur 
was afterwards considered character- | dicere in rotam beatam vitam non 
istic of the Peripatetic School. Cf. | escendere’ (quoted by Fritzsche). Cf. 
Cicero, De Fin. 1. vi. 19: ‘Aristoteles | also Cicero, Paradoxa, ii. 
virtutis usum cum vite perfectee pros- 4 Tabrov elvar 4 edtuxla] Cf. Eth. 
peritate conjunxit.’ Eud.%. i. 4: 4 8& réxnv* woddod yap 
3 of 8t—A€yovew] ‘But they who | rairdévy pacw civa thy ebdaipovlay nad 
allege that he who is being racked on | tiv ebruxlav. This, together with the 
the wheel, or he that is plunged in | present passage, is taken from Eth, 
great calamities, is happy, provided he | Nic. 1 viii. 17. 
be virtuous, talk nonsense, whether aith tmepBddAdovoa eumddids eorww] 
intentionally or not.’ Cf. Eth. Nic. | A more forcible expression of whut is 
1 v. 6, The words éxdvres ovdty | said Eth. x. viii. 9: ob yap ev Ti drep- 
A€youow answer to ef ph Oéow d:0- Bodgj Td abrapKes K.7.A. 
gvAdrrxv in that place. The paradox kal Yeows—odris| ‘And perhaps 
alluded to was maintained by the | (when it is overweening), we should 
Cynics, and afterwards by the Stoics | no longer call it prosperity; for the 
(who denied that pain was an evil). Cf. | standard of prosperity consists in its 
Cicero, Tusc. v. ix. 24: Theophrastus |. being conducive to happiness.’ The 
quum statuisset verbera, tormenta, | -use of the term épos here is by itself 
VOL. II. BE 





242 HOIKQN [EYAHMION] VIL 


\ ‘ ‘ > / ed > w 
5 Rees yap oy ee ena 6 0p0¢ eke 


[Cuar. 


\ A , 
xal To OlwMxely 


0 amavta xal Onpia xa avipwrong Thy Hooviy onpsiy Th 
Tou cival rws TO aporoy QUT. 


Oipn & ov ri ye Tapmay ardddvrat, iy Twa daol 


TOAAOL .  « 


\ ” - - i v a ” 
6AAN ered ody 7 adry ore dvaig ob9 EEig x aplory ovr 
” ” N ~ 0. Py ‘ ) , ‘ > ‘ / 
coriy obrs doxsi, 00 adovijy Oidxouer ryy adryy mdvrec, 


cd \ , / 
Bory pevror Wayres. 


t Osiov. 


byA 
dures eyes T 


lows 02 xal Buoxour sy ouy iy 
olovTas oud yy av daiev, AAA TH auriy* 
AAN Elayjdact THy To dvoparog 


TOVTR yop 


/ c \ tS \ PY A \ / 
HNUOOVOUAY AL TOUATIXAL HOoval O1 TO WASOTAXIG TE 





almost a conclusive sign that this is 
the writing of Eudemus. Cf. Eth, v1. 
i. 1, note; and Vol. I. Essay I. p. 22. 

5 Kal rd didxerv 8 —Oetov] ‘In short 
that all things pursue pleasure, both 
beasts and men, is a proof that it is 
in some sort the chief good,— 


“ For mankind’s universal voice can 
not 
Be wholly vain and false.” 


Since however there is no one nature 
or state which is, or is thought to be, 
the best for all, so neither do they all 
pursue the same pleasure, but still 
they all pursue pleasure. Nay, per- 
haps unconsciously they are pursuing, 
not what they think, or would declare, 
but (in reality) the same; for all things 
have within them by nature a divine 
instinct.’ This is said, Zth. x. ii. 1, to 
have been the argument of Eudoxus: 
Evdotos wey obv thy jdovhy Ttayabdy 
Beto elvar bia To dv dpav edieueva. 
airs kat EAdoya wal taoya, Ib. § 4, 
Aristotle justifies the argument-against 
objectors in much the same terms as 
those adopted in the text. 

fv Twa Aaol wodrdrol] se. Puttovor. 
Hesiod, Works and Days, v. 761. Cf. 
Eth. x. ii. 4: 8 yap waot Soxe?, todr’ 
elval mayer. 

tows 5¢ xal] Perhaps by a mys- 





terious instinct all creatures, in seek- 
ing life and joy, seek under different 
manifestations one and the same prin- 
ciple of good. Cf. the dream-images 
in Goethe’s Faust : 
‘ Einige glimmen 

Ueber die Héhen, 

Andere schwimmen 

Ueber die Seen, © 

Andere schweben 

Alle zum Leben; 

Alle zur Ferne 

Liebender Sterne, 

Seliger Huld.’ 


Aristotle, Eth. x. ii. 4 (which is the 
source of the above passage), does not 
go so far as to make all creatures aim 
at the same good, tows 5& Kal év Tois 
gavrAos earl tt puody dryaddy Kpeir- 
tov } Ka? abrd, 8 eplerat Tod oirelou 
ayabod. 


GAN eiAhpaci—otovra elvat] ‘But — 


bodily pleasures have usurped the 
possession of the name of pleasure, 
from men’s most often resorting to 
them, and from all men partaking of 
them; hence because these are the 
only dinkeenes they know of, they 
think they are the only ones which 
exist.’ mapaBdAAew appears to mean 
‘lay themselyes alongside,’ ‘apply 
themselves to.’ 


7 ee ae ee 


R= xv] 


HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 


243 


f ’ > \ \ / Zz > ~ . Dy A 
Tapapanrrsy slg adTaS xal mavTas peTeyEly aUT@Y* die 
. 7 Ss 
Th povas oby yywplwoug Elvas TavTAg povag olovTaL elvan. 
\ X\ \oa > \ eS \ > A \ ese 
davepoy 08 xal ori, ef wx yovy ayaboy xal 7 evepyeia, 7 
> + ~ ens \ > / / \ a N7 
oux gorau Civ ydéws Tov evdalova’ Tivog yap Evexa Oz0r 
* > ~~ \ > , > 4 A ~ » ee 4 
ay aris, elrep py ayaldv, AAR xal Avmnpws EvdeyeTHE 
~~ »” x a. ww? X c 4 - yv 3 
Say 3 ote xaxov yap ovr ayaboy 4 Avan, elwep pnd 
e 4 o \ 7 nN , IDA \ eyn7s c , ta ~ 
qdovy* wore Oia Ti ay Hevyor; ovde Oy Folwy 6 Plog 6 Tov 


aa A > \ A (aoe Saeed > ~ 
omoudaiou, El -4 HAL OS EVEOYELAL QUTOvU. 


X ~ ~ ~ / ~ 
[lest 03 07 t&y cwpatindy jdoveyv emioxenteoy Toigl4 
, oe ” / e> \ € \ / <4 € 
AEyouTsy OTs EvIAk YE YOOval AbosTas & dadpa, oboy ah 





7 pavepdy 58—abrod] ‘ Finally it is 
plain that unless pleasure and the 
action of life are a good, the happy 
man cannot live pleasurably. For 
why should he need pleasure, if it be 
not a good, and if it be possible for 
him to live painfully ? (and it will be 
possible), for pain will be neither evil 
nor good, unless pleasure is; so why 
should he avoid it? and hence it will 
follow that the life of the good man 
will not- be more pleasurable than 
that of the bad man, if his moments 
of action are not more pleasurable.’ 
This is a reductio ad absurdum of the 
position that pleasure is not a good. 
We shall be reduced to think (1) that 
the happy man may live devoid of 
pleasure ; for nothing that is not good 
can form part of happiness—or even 
he may live a life of pain, which is 
the contrary of pleasure; (2) that the 
good man will have no more pleasure 
than the bad man, unless pleasure 
attaches to good acts, in which case 
it will be part of the good. 


XIV. Hitherto Eudemus has fol- 


lowed the lead of Aristotle, only in 
one respect making a slight develop- 
ment of his conclusions. He now 
discusses a subject untouched by Ari- 
stotle, but which he had proposed to 
himself in his first book; cf. Eth. Bud. 





I. Vv. 11: wérepoy, ei Set mpocdrrey TE 
Civ Kadas idords twas, Tavras (7.e. Tas 
cwparixas) Set mpocdrrey, I TovTwy 
Bey &Adov Tid Tpdwoy avayKn KowWwyety 
—G\AG Tept wey toitwy totepoy ém- 
oxertéoy, Assuming that there are 
higher pleasures, and that pleasure 
in the highest form is identical with 
happiness and the chief good, what is 
to be said of bodily pleasure ? is it an 
evil or a good? and why is it that 
men indulge in it somuch? ‘To this 
twofold problem the answers are, 
Bodily pleasure is in itself a good, as 
being the contrary of pain; but it is 
only good under certain limits, as it 
admits of excess, and the excess is 
bad ($2). There are various reasons 
why bodily pleasure recommends itself 
to human nature. (1) It expels the 
sense of pain, and hence as an ano- 
dyne is universally desired from a 
physical law, for life is full of labour, 
and the ordinary functions of the 
senses are laborious acts, only miti- 
gated by custom, §§ 4, 5. (2) The 
period of youth especially craves after 
physical pleasure. (3) There are 
special cases where it is in a way 
necessary, namely, where peculiarities 
of temperament render men constitu- 
tionally depressed and in want of a 
sort of relief, §§$ 4, 6. (4) From 
the mixture of the material with the 


112 


244 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. [ Cuap. 


\ \ \ A ee pe A 
HANA, AAR’ ovy ai TwmaTixal xal wepl AS O AxoAMOTOS. 


~ , ~ 4 > \ 
2O1a Th avy ab evavrias Atron poydypal, xaxd yap oyaboy 
~ fed A \ » 
} otras cyabal ai avayxaias, OTs xak TO By 
x . / ~ x \ 
xaxoy ayabey éorivs 7 péxor Tov ayabal; Toy pey yap 
i od \ , ed 4 3 ~ , c a 
ESIWY HAL KIVYTEWY GOWY [LLY ETT TOV Peariovog imepPony, 
IOV ~ ey n a > , \ 6 > ~ > , 
00d: Tig Ydovag? Cowy 0 eori, xal TH yOovijg eoTiv. 
~ ~ ~ \ ¢ \ ~ 
Toy 62 cwparindy adyaldy eerily brepBory, xal o daiirog 
~ d Je \ c , > > > > X > / i 
TW OLMXELY THY bmepPoryy EOTIV, HAA OV TAS Avayxaiac 
, i 4 > 
mavtes yap xalpoucl mwg xal dWorg xal olvorg xal adpo- 
~ \ x a > 
Oioboig, AN ody wg Osi. evavting O eal rig AU@yg* OD 
\ d > ia > ~ 
yop tiv imepBorry hevyet, AAA Grws* ov yap or! TH 
G3 ~ td > > > A ~ , \ Gg 
imephong auwy evavtTla GAN 7 TH BiwxovrTs tiv bweEp- 
Boavyy. 
a ~ 4 \ 
3 Eel 0 od provoy del ratandes cimeiy AAAA xa TO alrioy 
os , eos \ , \ ‘ r ; 
TOU Wevdoug TOUTO yap TULPAAAET OL mpog THY WioTy 
~ > x 
Tay yap evroyoy havi To did Th daiveras arydeg ovx ov 


, 
EVAYTIOV. 





spiritual in us, we are unable to con- { the excess of pleasure.’ This argu- 


tinue perpetually delighting in one 
pure pleasure, that is, the pleasure of 
thought. God alone is capable of 
this; to us, through a fault in our 
nature (ob yap amAj ov8 emenchs), 
change appears sweet, because lower 
and contradictory elements in us re« 
quire to be allowed their due action, § 8. 

1 Tots Aéyouotv] 7.é. that section of 
the Platonists referred to above, ch. 
xi. § 3: rots au pev elvar, af dt 
moAAal pavAat. 

2 Tay bE cwpaTinGy—brepBorjy] 
‘But right bodily pleasures admit of ex- 
cess, and the bad man (is bad) in that 
he seeks that excess, instead of seeking 
such pleasures as are necessary.” All 
men find delight in meat, and wine, 
and love, though not all according to 
the proper law. And reversely all 
men avoid pain (évavrlws 8 én) rijs 
Avrns). A man does not avoid the 
excess of pain, but pain in general. 
Pain is not contrary to the excess of 
pleasure, except to him who pursues 





ment goes to prove that bodily pleasure 
is in itself good ; only when in excess 
is it evil. On the other hand all pain 
is evil. Pleasure and pain then are 
opposite terms, the one being good 
and the other evil. To make the 
doctrine of Speusippus (ch. xiii. 1) 
hold good, it would be necessary to 
make pain and the excess of pleasure 
opposite terms. But they are not so, 
except perhaps in the mind of the in- 
temperate man, who thinks that the 
only alternative is between excessive 
pleasure and a painful sensation. 

3 This section is not logically con- 
tinuous with what immediately pre- 
cedes. It no longer deals with the 
opinion of the Platonists that bodily 
pleasure is an evil, but takes up 
another question already partly anti- 
cipated, ch. xiii. § 6: namely, How is 
the vulgar error to be accounted for, 
which gives so much prominence to 
physical pleasure in the scale of plea- 
sures ? 


XIV.] HOIKON [EYAHMIQN] VIL. 245 


, ~ ~~ ~ ~~ a 
aarnges, miorevel Woes TO AANIEE PWAAAOV’ WoT AExTZov 
ee / / c ‘ eS \ c z. 
die Th dabvovrat ab cwuatixat ydoval aiperwrepas. 


~ QA sz \ ad ° o pa fh \ OY A 
TpWOToy [Ley ouy O07 OTb Exxpover THY AUmYY* xal O1e TAC 4 


c A w~ te € wv > i“ A e N 
bmrepPoras TS AumyS, wo ovae7ns laTpeiacg, THY YOovay 
> £ a c 7 A sf ~ s 
OLwxOUTL THY bmepParrouc ay HAL OAWS THY TWMLATIXYY, 
\ \ / ae ~ XA \ ? \ \ 
ohodpal b& yivovras ai iarpetou, 010 xal dsmxovTas, O1a& Td 
xal ob omovdaioy O17) doxet 
eee Sie ® 7 ~ a SYA a ec X\ , 
% 700v7, 01a dv0 Tata, Womep elontos, Ott ai piv davays 
x nt E) 
ducews ciot mpagerc, 7 ex yeverng, Waomep Aypiov, 7 Ov 
ay e € ~ , > / c > > ~ oa 
z00¢, olov ai Ty davawy avipwmav. gi 0 iarpeios, ors 
ee Ge \wv Ls E / e X 4 
evdeots, xal Eyew ertiov 7 yivecbou. ai 08 cupPaivoucs 
/ \ x s ~ y+ / 
TeAcoumevwy® KATA TuUePyxdG ov OmoVdaIaAL. ETE O1W- 
\ \ \ s CoN ~ BA x , 
xovTas die TO Thodpal sivas bro Thy aAACIG Py duvape 


‘\ \ 2 , / 
Tapa To Evavtioy daiver Ga, 





4 mparov—gaiverdar] ‘The first 
reason is that it drives out pain. 
When overwhelmed with pain, as a 
remedy men seek excessive pleasure, 
and in short bodily pleasure. Now 
remedies are naturally violent, and 
they are adopted because they seem 
to match (mapa) their opposites.” On 
the opinion that remedies are the 
opposites of the diseases to be cured, 
ef. Eth, 1. iii. 4. 

xal 08 omovdatoy 8)—omovdaic| ‘ It 
is on account of these two causes, then, 
that pleasure is thought not to be a 
good; first, that some pleasures, as we 
have said before (ch. v. 1.), are the ac- 
tions of adepraved nature,whether con- 
genital, like that of a beast, or acquired, 
like that of depraved men ; secondly, 
that other pleasures are remedies, im- 
plying imperfection, since a normal 
condition. (€xev) is better than the 
process of arriving at that condition, 
and some pleasures take place while 
we are arriving at a complete state of 
being, hence they are only inferentially 
and not directly (kara ovpBeBnxds) 
good,’ This paragraph reverts paren- 
thetically to the opinion of the Pla- 
tonists. 





5—6 ert Sidkovrai—yivovra] The 
argument is now resumed from the 
sentence ending galvec@a. ‘Another 
reason why physical pleasure is sought, 
is its comparatively coarse and violent 
character, which suits those who require 
strong excitement. And indeed such 
men even create in themselves certain 
artificial thirsts for pleasure. If this 
does not hurt their health, it is no 
harm. Such men are incapable of en- 
joying the purer and simpler pleasures, 
and a neutral state of the sensations 
is to many painful by a law of nature. 
For the living creature ever travails, 
as the physiological books testify, 
telling us that the acts of seeing and 
hearing are laborious, only that we 
are accustomed to them (so they say). 
So also the young, in the first place, 
owing to the principle of growth in 
them, are like those who are intoxi- 
cated, and youth is pleasant in itself. 
And again those of bilious nature are 
ever in need of an anodyne. Their 
body is continually fretted by reason 
of their temperament, and they are 
ever in vehement desire. Nowpleasure, 
be it the opposite of a given pain, or 
be it what it may, provided it be strong 


wn 


246 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. [ Cap. 


~ ~ / 4 tA 
yoy yaipe* auto yoo abtoig Ohbag Tivas maparxeua- 
~ a 
Covow. OTav piv ory aParaPetc, averitinynrov, orav OF 
~ \ a i 
brabepac, datirnov' ovre yap zyouc ly eTepa ed 
, / dé ~ \ ~ \ 7: 
HXEpouTlv, TO TE MNOETEPOY MWoAACIG AvTypoy O1M THY 
duow' ash yap moved rd Saov, domep xal of duoixol 
Aoyo4 papropoics, TO Opdiv xak TO axovey dao xovres 
elyas rumnpoy AAW a) cuviiders eop.ey, as. daciv. 
6ipolwg 0 ey phy TH vedrynts OA Tiy alEnow worep ob 
) / Niue. A err ¢ / 
OLYMILEVOL OlaxElvTOs, Hal OV % veoTyE. 02 psray- 
\ \ , Tes, , > / \ \ \ ~ 
Yorixol THy Huow ast Geovrau iarpelag’ xal yap Td oHya 
¢ ~ \ ~ 
daxvousvoy diarersi Cid tHv xpaow, xal ded dv dpeGer 


No Naw b) Ue 
oPoope esos, 


4 ’ / 
eSerauver 08 yOov7, AUmyy 7 T evayTia xal 


€ ~ oS ys If, 41, A. % ~ > / } 
% TUHOVTA, EaY  ITYUPA* Kal OIA TATA axoAMOTOL XO 


~ / 
7 davros yivovrar ai O 


¥ ‘i n~ 4 
avev AvT@y ovx Exoucw vmep- 





enough, drives out that pain. And 
hence persons of the bilious tempera- 
ment become intemperate and vicious.’ 
This passage gives two reasons to 
explain why a neutral state of the 
sensations is distasteful, first a general 
reason: that the laborious action of 
the human faculties calls for allevia- 
tion ; second, a special reason: that 
certain periods of life and certain tem- 
peraments produce a craving after 
physical indulgence. 

didas tivds] Fritzsche, after the 
Scholiast, understands this literally, 
that men make themselves 
thirsty to 
drinking. But the use of the plural 
seems to indicate that we should 
rather follow the Paraphrast, and the 
majority of the commentators, in 
understanding it generally of artificial 
desires for pleasure, émoxevagcral 
as the Paraphrast calls 


some 


emOuutan, 
them. 
dpoiws 8 ev péev x.7.A.] The best 
commentary on this passage will be 
found in Aristotle’s Problems, bk. xxx. 
ch. i., where a frequent comparison is 
made between the effects of wine, 





enjoy the pleasure of | 





youth, and the melancholy (or bilious) 
temperament, in producing desire. Cf, 
§ 5: 6 yap oivos 6 woAds pdrduora oal- 
veTat TapacKkevdfev Toiovrous olovs 
A€éyouev Tods medaryxoAtKods elvat, § 10: 
kat 6 olvos 5& rvevpaTadns Thy divamuy. 
5d 54 cori Thy piow Syow b TE olvos 
kal 7) Kpaous, «7.2. Cf. Prob, rv. xxx.: 
51d rh appodiciaerixol of wedroryxoduKol ; 
}} Sri wvermardiers, «.7.A. The Scho- 
liast gives a vapid explanation of the 
words &omep of civwuévo: in the passage 
before us. Evidently, all that is 
meant is to compare the desires of 
youth with those of drunkenness, and 
of the melancholy temperament. We 
may compare the lines of Goethe: 


‘ Trunken miissen wir alle sein ; 
Jugend ist Trunkenheit ohne Wein.’ 


The principle of a&fjas in youth is 
represented as producing the same 
results as the humours (xupds 6 weaay- 
XoAuds—H Tis wehalyns XoATs Kpacis) 
in the bilious temperament. 

7—8 of © dvev Avray—emiuchs| 
‘The pleasures unpreceded by pain do 
not admit of excess, they are essen- 
tially and not accidentally pleasures. 


= a 


XIV.] HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. 247 


, ry ~ 7 , \ 

Boarjy. abras: 02 ai rév dice ydéwy xal py xaTa cup- 
, , aA A ‘ ens ae , 
PsPnxcg. Agyw 02 xaTa cuplsPyxdg yO2a Ta laTpedovTE 
o , > / ~ / ~ 
OTs yap cupPaive iarpevecbas Tol Smwopévovtos tyros 

f / SW A ~ enn a J ‘ / ens “A 
TPATTOVTOS Th, Oi TOUTO 70 Ooxel elyas* Duce Oo dea, a 
~ ~ ~ ~ / e 
Tost mpasiv tig Todods duoews. vx asl O ovddy 7dv8 
\ > \ \ \ ~ ne \ / 
TO QUTO OI TO py aMAKY yudy sivas THY OvTW, AAV 
7. ~™ 7 ben: 4 \ / v4 wv , 
evelval Tt xak Erepov, xahs basta, wore ay Tt Aaxrepov 
, ~ ~ ¢ / , AQ f oa a ; , 
patty, Toro TH ETEpy uces mapa Huai, cray 0 icaty, 
BA . > ~ wf? eNr \ / > amet ¢ 
ouTe Aum@ypoy doxel UG 7O0 Tb mparronevov’ eel ef Tov 7 
r c ~ +f + ae, tees, a5 % ~ ens ” Ay Se 
ducig arny ein, ash y aury wpaSig WOlory Fora. O10 6 
\ 4 \ ~ , , s 
Gz0g asl pilav xal awarijy yoipe: wlovyyv' ov yap povoy 
7 , > ba > \ Le , \ CoN A 
HLYNTEWS ETTIY EVEDYEIL AAA xAk AxivyTlag, nal YOOvy 
nw ) > / . A xX > 7 \ A 
ParArov Ey YorUle eoTiy 1 EY xIVYTEI. peTaorn 02 
/ \ \ 7 \ 
TOYTOY YAUXUTATOY, KATA Toy TOIATTY, Oi Tovnplay Tive" 
a \ wv § ow > 19 re + / Ae bs 
Wore yap avipmmrog edpeTaPoros 6 movnpas, xal 7 ducts 
¢ , ~ > A e ~ x >> 9 la 
v7 Osonevy pstaforrs* Ov YAP ATA OVO Emterxys. 
\ x f \ , \ ~*~ ~ 
Ilepi piv ody eyxparsing xal axpaciag xak wept rdovijg 9 





By the accidental pleasures, I mean | pleasure consists rather in tranquillity 
such as are of the nature of a remedy. | than in motion. “ Change,” as the 
Because, when it happens that we are | poet says, “is the sweetest of all 
relieved, owing to some operation of | things,” on account of a certain fault 
that part in us which continues sound, | in our nature. The bad man is fond 
the result is a sensation of pleasure. | of change, and of the same cha- 
By the natural pleasures, I mean | racter is the nature which requires 
those which produce the action of any | change; it is not simple or good.’ 
given nature. The same thing is | In the above passage we see a re- 
never continuously pleasant to us, be- | production, and to some extent a 
cause our nature is not simple, but | carrying out, of Aristotle’s doctrines 
there is in us a second element, by | in the tenth Book of the Ethics, ef. 
reason of which we are destructible. | especially ch. iv. 9: Mas ody obdels 
Thus, when the one element is in | cuvexas HSerar; # nduver; wdvta yap 
action, it thwarts the tendencies of | 74 dv@péreia dduvare? cuvexas evepyciv. 
the second element. And when the | On the comparison between the com- 
two elements are balanced, the result | pound nature of man and the purely 
appears neither painful, nor pleasant. | divine nature of God, ef. ch. vii. 8: 6 
If there ig any being whose nature is | 68¢ rowdros ty efn Blos xpelrtwy # Kar’ 
simple, the same mode of action will | &@pwrov- ob yap 5 tvOpwnds eorw 
be continuously and in the highest | oftw Bidcera, &AX’ 7H Ocidy tT ev abT@ 
degree pleasurable to him. Hence | badpyer- Bom 3 diapépe toiro Tod 
God enjoys everlastingly one pure | cuvr@érov, tovovT@ kal 7 évépyeia Tis 
pleasure. For there is a function not | xara thy &AAnv aperhy. 

only of motion, but of rest; and 





248 HOIKQN [EYAHMIQN] VII. — [Cuar. XIV. 

\ Lé ‘ l Me 4 \ ~ ‘ \ > \ 
xal AU@S ElpyTal, xal Th exacTov xal ws Ta pry ayada 
auTéy got) Ta O& xaxa’ faomoy 02 xal meph Oirlag 
EDOUILEY. 





It is to be remarked that the | which is the consciousness of the 
present Book, which commences with | same. 
a mention of Oefa dperh, or the opera- tAoumdy—époduev] See Vol. I. Essay 
tion of reason unalloyed by passion, | I. p. 32. 
ends with a mention of @ela 78ovrh, 


PLAN OF BOOKS VUI.—IX. 


RISTOTLE’S treatise on Friendship, here contained, is quite 
continuous. The division of it into two books is merely arti- 
ficial. There is really no break between the end of Book VIII. 
and the beginning of Book IX. The words wrpi pév ody rovrwy éml 
tosvvrov eiphadw (VIII. xiv. 4), introduced to create a division, are 
evidently from an Editor’s and not from the Author’s hand. 

The use of the phrase éy apyy (VIII. ix. 1, VIII. xiii. 1, IX. iii. 
1), in reference to the earlier chapters of Book VIII., has led some 
persons to suppose that this was originally an independent treatise. 
But nothing is more clear than that it was written to form a part of 
Aristotle’s work. on ethics. Besides general expressions of the 
author’s purpose to confine himself to an ethical point of view 
(see VIII. i. 7, LX. ii. 2), we find direct quotations of, or references 
to, the first books of the Nicomachean Ethics. (Compare IX. ix. 5 
with Eth. Nic. I. vii. 14; and I. viii. 13, and IX. iv. 2, with Eth. 
Nice. Ill. iv. 5.) 

The present treatise has a close connection with the first three 
books of the Nicomachean Ethics. But it is remarkable that it has 
no connection with Books V., VI., VII. Friendship is here treated 
in relation to Happiness and in relation to Justice. What is said of 
Happiness forms the complement to Eth. Nic. Book I., but what is 
said of Justice has no reference to Eth. Nic. Book V.; rather it 
appears written tentatively, perhaps before the Politics of Aristotle, 
from which the theories of Eth. Nic. Book V. seem to have been 
derived. (See VIII. vi. 6, VIII. vii. 2-3, VIIE. ix., x., EX. i. 1-2.) 

Again, it is equally striking that there is no reference to Book 
VH. in the parts of this treatise where the phenomena of viee are 
discussed (see IX. iv. 8-9, IX. viii. 6). Indeed the views taken 

VOL, II. KK 


250 PLAN OF BOOKS VIII—IX. 


here are inconsistent with those of Book VII., which contain a 
more rigid analysis. (Compare IX. iv. 8 with VII. viii. 1.) 

The style of these two Books is certainly unlike that of Books V., 
VI., VII., while it bears a close similarity with that of Hth. Nie. I. 
and X. Not one of the ‘Eudemian’ forms of expression is to be 
found here. . 
The treatise on Friendship may be roughly divided into three 
parts :— ‘ 

I. On the different kinds of Friendship, and on the nature of the 
highest and truest type, VIII. i—viii. 

II. On the connection of Friendship with Justice, (1) as arising 
(with certain exceptions, see ¢. xii.) out of political relationships, or 
coinciding with them; (2) as implying obligations to be repaid, 
VIII. ix.—IX. iii. " 

III. On other questions connected with the nature of Friend- 
ship, and especially on its relation to Happiness, IX. iv.—xii. 

Though the treatise is continuous, yet it is easy to see that the 
writer’s views became deeper and more definite as he advanced. 
(Thus compare IX. vi. with VIII. i.4; IX. x. with VIII. i. 5; 
and VIII. vi. 2-3, VIII. viii. 7 with VIII. i. 6.) 

At the same time we see what a powerful instrument was the 
Aristotelian analysis for producing. clearness of view. By an 
analysis of the objects of liking (rd gAnrév, VIII. ii. 1), Aristotle 
clears away all the vagueness which the Lysis of Plato had left 
around the nature of Friendship. By an application of his own 
philosophical form évépyeca (IX. vii. 4-6, IX. ix. 5-6, IX. xii. 1), 
he obtains a profound theory of the operation of the highest kind 
of Friendship in relation to human happiness. 


HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQON VIII. 


—_059400——— 


ETA 8 ratra wep) dirlag ero’ dy dserbeiv’ Bors 
‘ , x ~ ? 
Yop apeTy TIG | pst ApeTyG, Et: 0 avayxasoraroy 
> \ Bk se \ f de) aN er Mahe SF N 
cig Tov Ploy" aveu yap dinwy ovdelg Edur, av Cay, exw TH 
Aoma ayaba mavra’ xal yao maouTotos xal apyas xal 
/ / ~ 7. / > * , 
duvarteiag xexTyLivolg Ooxel DiAwy paroT sivat YpEla* 
, my” w~ , > / / > 
Th yap heros THgG TomUTYS eveTyplag adaipebelong evEp- 
a 
yecing, 4 ylyveTas parsota xab exasverwraty mpds 
~ Dy , 
dirous; 4 mH av rypyfely xal cw@lor’ kvev dirwy; 


a \ , 4 2 re Ze 
0TwW yap TAciwy, TOTOUTH emia >anrcoTEpa, 


> , 
Ev WEVi TE 


\ ~ ~ 7 / BA ‘ 
xah Taig Aoimaig dvoTUyiotg povyy olovras xaTaduyyy 


elyas Toug dirous. 


\ , ‘ \ Q > / s, 
xXOLb VEDIC ne pos TO AVAMLAST YT OV xa 


mpsoPuréporg mpeg Gepameiay xal ro Errsimov Tig mpaSews 
NN > > , ~ ~ > > , ~ A A % 
O° acbéverav Pondel, roig + ev Axx mpog Tag xarag 


m pagers ‘ 


' 19 9 , 
Ouvv TE ov EpXOMEVW* 





I, The discussion of Friendship is 
justified here (analogously to the way 
in which the discussion of the volun- 
tary is justified, Hth. m1. i. 1-2) first, 
on the ground of its connection with 
virtue, secondly, on the ground that it 
is a means to happiness (évayxaidta- 
tov) in all conditions of life. As a 
commencement of the discussion, Ari- 
stotle mentions the difficulties raised 
on the subject in the Lysis of Plato: 
Does friendship depend on similarity 
or on contrast? Can bad men be 
fiiends to each other? and he adds 
another: Is there only one species of 
friendship, or are there more? Ari- 
stotle by his own analysis of the like- 
able (7d giAntév) immediately cuts 
straight through these difficulties. 





1 dperh tis 7} per aperis| We have 
of course nothing here to do with that 
nameless excellence, mentioned Eth. 
Iv. vi. 4, which is said to resemble 
giAla, and which in the Ludemian 
Ethics, and the Magna Moralia, is 
brought into the list of virtues, under 
the name of ¢:Ala, as a mean between 


.@xOpa and KoAaxela. 


tt yap dpedos—larovs] ‘For what 
is the use of that sort of abundance, 
if one is deprived of the power of 
doing good, which is exercised most 
especially, and in its most praise- 
worthy form, towards friends ?’ 

2 abv te BY épxouévw| The saying 
of Diomede when about to penetrate 
the Trojan camp, Z/. x. 224: 


Kk 2 


w 


4 dirov. 


252 


xal yap vious xal meazas OuvaTwTEpOL, 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 


[Cnap. 


, > > 
duce T evu- 


/ BA \ \ ~ 4 \ 
TAGYELY EObXE pas TO VEY EVYT LEvOV Tw YEvVVyTAVTs Hab 


\ \ n ~ / > , bd > 7 
moog To yevvicay Two yevvybEevTi, ov provoy ev avbowross 
> \ \ > v \ ~ / ~ 
ANNA HAL EY ODVIOL HAL TOIG MAEIOTOIC TwY Siov, xa) 
~ ¢ , A ” ’ \ , ~ 8 4 
Toig bmosbvior wodg AAAYAG, xal warmICTA Tol avOpwmrolc, 


obey Tovg diravoswmroug eraivotmev. 


Ydos 0 ay Tig xal ev 


~ / € > ~ ov ” > , \ 
Taig mAavaIg WE oixstoy amas avIowrog aviswmrm xal 


wv \ \ \ fi / c / \ € 
Zoe OF xb TAG TOAELS ouveyey 7 Pirin, xob ol 


; Gé RAD \ au& d A a ‘\ 3 / ‘a 
YOUOIETAL MA av wep KUTYYV CTOVIAGEsSY 7 THY bHALOOVUVYY 


e \ c , (4 A ~ { a i / oe 
4 YE Opovole owotoy Ts Ty DiAlmw eoixev sivas, TavTYG OF 


, > ‘ s 
parmor edlevras xal ray ordow Eyfoay oboay pariore 


. lf ’ wv ~ i 
eEcrauvouow. xa dirawy pty ovrwy ody bet Oixcsocuvys, 


N77 N fe / ~ / 
Olxaios 0 ovTeg mpocdéovTat dirlac, xal rav Oixatwy Td 


A sy ~ ~er ‘J 
SparsoTra dirsxov elven Ooxel, ov wovoy 0 avayxalov erty 
> \ \ s \ ~ isd 
AAA xal xarov* Todg yap dirobiaoug eraivotmey, 7 TE 

/ ~ “~ ~ ad > \ A 
morudsalin Ooxet ray xarmy ev Ti elvas, nal Eviot Tous 


6 


aUTOUG olovTos avopag ayabods civas xal diroug. 
Aiap.dicbyreiras 08 meph 


> 9 x. | c \ 
QUTIG OUx OAIYa, Ob MEV 





aby te BY epxoudve, kal te wpd 6 Tod 


événoer, 

bnmws Képdos &n* potvos 8 elwrep Te 
vonon, 

GAAd Te of Bodorwy Te vdos, AerTh SE 
TE LITIS. 


The words here quoted had become 
proverbial. Cf. Plato Alcib. 1. 140 A; 
Protag. 348 c. 

3 Tots duocOréot| This word is ap- 
plied here to brutes as well as men. 
In the same sense duoyevéow is used, 
Eth, Eud. vu. v. 3, and ovyyery, Ar. 
Tthetd, X25. 

Y5o. 8 &y tis—ptaov] ‘And in tra- 
velling too one may see how near and 
dear every man is to man,’ ie. one 
may see this both as a matter of gene- 
ral observation, and as oneself meet- 
ing with kindness and hospitality. 

4 kal of vouodéra:] Cf. the speech 
of Lysias in Plato's Phedrus, 

kal trav Fixaiwy—Soxet] ‘And the 





height of justice appears to be of the 
nature of friendship.’ Under the 
words tév Sdixatwy 7d pddcora equity 
(7d émeteés) appears to be meant. Cf. 
Eth, v. x. 6-8. 

5 GAA kal kaddy] This is repeating 
in other words that friendship is éper4 
ats. The distinction between dvayKxatoy 
and kaAdv is common in Aristotle, and 
the one term suggests the other. Cf. 
Eth, 1x, xi. 1. 

f) Te modvpirla doxet] «To have 
many friends is commonly thought to 
be something noble.’ This popular 
opinion is considerably qualified on 
further examination, cf. Eth. rx. x. 6. 

nad &o1—idrovs] ‘ And some think 
that the term “ good friend” is con- 
vertible with that of “good man.”’ 
Cf. a similar form of expression, Eth. 
v. ii. 11: ob yap tows rabrdy avdpi 7” 
&yad@ elva wad woAlrn wave. 

6 SiaupicBnte?ru| The questions 
mentioned here are raised in the Lysis 


L] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN VIII. 253 


\ , A a 3 ‘ 
yap omooryra tia Tihéaci avTiy xal Tous s6poloug 
/ a \ a / € x av \ \ 
Dirouc, obey Tov Guorov daciw wo Tov oMoLoOv, xab xOAOLOY 
\ / \o ~ AN ie > , ~ 
mot) xorooy, xal doa Toatra* of 0 2& évavriag xepaucic 
/ ‘ va 7 A cn 
TAYTAS Tovg TolovTOUS AAATAGIS daciv etvas. xal Treph 
> ~ 4 > , ~ 
autéy TolTwy avwtepov emiSytotos xal duoinwrepoy, 
Es ‘> X , . nw X + ~ 
upimiong piv dacxwy epdy piv ouPsov yaiav Exgav- 
~ > ~~ \ A > \ v4 wv ~ 
Gsioay, eocy 08 cEuviv oupavoy TAypoULEVaY OuSp0u mecelY 
. ~ v te YU \ , \ 
eg yaiav, xal “Hpaxreirog ro avtigouy cupdéepov xa ex 
~ 7 Ig 7 
thy diadepovTwy xarriotyy aopoviay xal wavTa xaT 
y ae § es , av C ” Yar 
Eply YiveTUAs* E& EvaYTINg OF TOUTOIS MAO TE XA Epsre- 
NS ~o. \ \ od ~ , = \ s 
OoxATg* TO yao oporov Tod omolov Edizofar TA Bev ovY7 
\ ~ > 7 ~ wo 
duoixda thy aropypatwy adzicbw (ov yap oixsia Tig 
7 4 a Oa \ > \ \ A 
mapouars oxtlews)* boa 9 eotly avIowmixa nab avyxe 
> A 49 \ AY , ~ 3 5) , a 
cig TR 49y xal ta maby, Tate emioxebousda, oiov 
, : ~ , 7, aX , er \ 
Worepov ev Taos yiveTar Didia 7H ovy olov Te poySygovg 





of Plato, pp. 214-215. (214 4) Aéyouct 
d& (of rontal) mws tadra, as ey@ua, 
Qdi- 
aiel rot Tov Suotoy Hyet Oeds ds Tov Sustov 
Kal moet yvdépipoy . . . odxody Kat 
Tos TOY ocOopwrdtey ovyypdupacw 
évretoxnkas TadT’ aita A€yovow, Sri 
7d Buoy TS buolw avdyen ded plrov 
elvat; cic) 5€ mov ovTor of wept picews 
Te Kal tov BAov Siadreyduevor Ka) ypd- 
ovres. GANO}, Zpn, A€yers . . . (2150) 
“Hin moté tov Hxovga A€yovTos, Kal 
dipr: dvauipvhoxoua, Sri Td wey buooy 
7G dpolw Ka of &yabol Tois ayaGois 
moAeueraror elev’ Ka 5} kal tov “Holodov 
emiyyeto d.ptupa, ACywv as &pa 
Kal Kepaueds Kepauet koréer Kad Gordds 
a01d0 
Kal wroxds Trwxg. 
Kal TGAAa 5} wdvTa odtws py avary- 
Kaiov eva pddiora Te Suoidrara mpds 
HAAnAa POdvov te Kat pidroverctas Kat 


ExOpas eurlrracOa, Ta F avopodrara 


girlas . . . TO yap evayTi@taroy Te 
evayTiwtdare elvat uddrrota plrov. émibu- 
peiy yap Tov TorotTov ExaoTov, GAN ob 


Tov duolov' Td wey yap Enpdy bypod, 7d 





dé Wuxpdy Oepuod, 7b SE mixpdy yAvKéos, 
Td 5& Ob GuBArcos, Td SE Kevdy TAH- 
péoews, kal Td wATpes SF Kevdcews. 
Which of the two views is true, is not 
decided in the Lysis, where however 
it is laid down that friendship cannot 
consist in pure contrariety. 

kal wep) abt&v—pvoinetepoy] ‘And 
about these very questions some in- 
quire in a more deep and philoso- 
phical way,’ ¢.¢. not limiting their view 
to the phenomena of friendship itself, 
but bringing in the analogies of the 
physieal world. Aristotle sets aside 
such speculations as not belonging to 
ethics; he remarks parenthetically 
below (Eth. vin. viii. 7), that the con- 
trary in nature does not desire its 
extreme contrary, but the mean. 

Evpirldns| The verses occur in a 
fragment of an uncertain play, which 
is preserved by Athenzeus, X11. p. 599. 

7d dvtitouy cuupépoy] ‘The opposing 
eonduees,’ a play on words character- 
istic of the oracular style of Hera- 
clitus. 

7 4 obx ofdy Te poxOypods bvras] 


_This question is started in the Lysts, 


254 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VILLI. 


[Cuar. 


ovtas diroug sivas, xal worepov Ev eidog rhg didAlag early 


a / 
YT WAsIO, 


€ X \ a 7 oa 5) ye A 
Ob [AV Yor ev O1OULEVOL, oTt ET IOEYETAL TO 


Led \ » ed > ra ~ 7, , < 
[P-aAAov xat TO TTY, ouXx sxHAYM eisai Nani, THEID 
7 ~ \ \ ? ~ 
OsYET OL yap TO parrov xal TO 7TTOY xal TH ETSOR TW 


Ww 
eboel. 
2 


y D> ¢€ X\ > ~ ” 
felonros 0 trip autay tumporder. 
Taya 0 dv yévorro weph adra&y davepby yywpiobévrog 


TOU Dianrod* doxet yao ov wav Osrciobas AAA TO irq 


~ > hf , \ x Dy a 7 
Tov, TOUTS O sivas ayatov 4 Adv y YpHo Lov. 


doGes 0 ay 


, > a) / * oD 46 a ) 7 ag 
XEN bfov elvas ny ou YiveTas aya Ov Th Y YOOVN, WOTE 


x A c / 
2Diayra av ein Tayadoy Te xal TO YOU WE TEAH. 


TOT spov 


aT ~ \ n~ , ny ~ XA 
ouy rayadoy dirotow 7 7b adroig ayadov; diadwyst yap 


ey 4 ~ 
EVIOTE TAUTA,. 


€ / \ \ \ \ er7 
OfL0bMS 0s xas Teo TO 7Ov. 


dox2 O28 TO 


~ ~ \ ~ X\ 
ato ayadoy diasiv éxactos, xal elvar amaAws wey Taya- 


\ / € / X\ +. / 
Gov dianrov, exact 8 To exaoTo. 

VK € ~ > \ ze \ \ , 
TO Ov ATW ayaboyv AAAA TO hosvoevor. 

yY \ \ \ ‘4 
32oTH yao To DiAntroy Daiwvonevoy. 


bined oO Exacrog ov 
dioioes 0 ovdey" 

~ ww OW a A 
Tpiiy O ovTwy Os a 





Pp. 214 D: TovTo Tolyuv aivitrovra, ds 
€uol doxoto.y, @ Eratpe, of Td Buorov TE 
duoly plrov A€yovtes, as 6 &yabbs TH 
&ya0G udvos udvw plros, 6 5é kaxds ob’ 
ayabG ore Kang ovdémrore eis GANOH 
pirtay epxerat 

oi wey yap ty oiduevor K.7.A.] ‘For 
they who think that there is only one 
species of friendship, because it admits 
of degrees, trust to an insufficient 
proof. Tor things also that differ in 
species admit of degrees. But we 
have spoken about them before.’ Ari- 
stotle immediately proceeds to show 
that there are three distinct species of 
friendship, in accordance with the 
three objects of liking. He also says 
that the friendships for pleasure or 
profit are less friendships than that 
for the good (firréy eiow, vit. vi. 7). 
All three kinds admit of the idea 
(Adyos) of friendship, thus they are 
comparable in point of degree. Cf. 
Ar. Categ. viii. 36: GAs dé, dav uh 
emidéxnta dupdtepa Toy Tod mpoKemévou 





Adyor, ob fnOhrerat Td erepoy Tod Er€épov 
m@Adov. As there is no place in the 
Ethics where Aristotle has discussed 
this logical question before, a Scholiast 
says with regard to the last words of 
the paragraph; ome 88 cipfoda ev 
Tos exmentwxdo. tav Nixouaxelwy. 
But most probably the words e%pnra 
3 éwép abra&y are the interpolation of 
a copyist, who was perhaps thinking 
vaguely of Eth. 1. viii. 5, to which the 
commentators generally refer. These 
words spoil the grammar of the sen- 
tence, as wep) aitéy is used in the 
next line with a different reference. 


Il. 2 mérepoy .obv—abrois a a0dv] 
Aristotle here guards himself against 
the appearance of having admitted the 
Platonic theory, that the absolute good 
is always the object of human desire. 
Cf. Eth. m1. iv. 1, and note. 

Zora yap—pavdpuevoy] ‘For in that 
ease the object of liking will be an 
apparent and not an,absolute object.’ 


- 
F 


IT.—III. } HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQON VIII. 255 


n~ , QA QA ~ nw ’ 7 7 > , 
Pirotow, ext wey TH THY anova Diayjoes ov AeyeTau 
> / 3 / ° 4 
dirla’ ob yap eoriv avTidianoic, oud? Bovrnoig éxeivwy 
* ~ ~ \ 4 ~ 4 7 > / 
ayalot* yeroloy yap lows rd olyw BovrAcc§a: tayaba: 
> > A 7 ; , 3 , fof ee | ” 
arr’ elrep, owSsoba: Povreror aurdv, va atros tyr, 
~~ A WN ~ s 
TH OF Hirw hac dely Povrscbar rayaha exelvou Evexa. 
me X / a4 > \ wv , sy \ 
Tovg 68 PovAopévous oUTW TayAIA edvous A¢yourIY, Edy LI 
\ s / f 
THUTO xal wap exeivov yiyyyTas’ edvolay yap ev ayTi- 
, r > a , \ , 
merovidot Diriav eivar. 1 mpocberéoy py AavIavoucay' 4 
\ , > gs 59 > € if ¢ / 
TOAAO YAP ELObY EUVOL OG OUY EWLAXAOIY, bronapPavoucs 
~ sy x 7 ~ \ . 
02 emsetxeic civas 7 yonolwoug’ Todt O2 Tawrov xay exelvwy 
\ x cael 
Tig ma$or mpog ToUTov. etvor wiv ody ovTo dalvovras 
7 \ ~ lj yf € 
aAAnAoIG* diroug 0& mo av Tis elror AavoavovTas we 
+ c ~ ~ > ~ > 7 A 7 
EYoucly EauToig; deb apa evvosiy HAAN AOIC xal Bours 4Iar 
> A \ / 7 7 ~ > / 
Tayada py rAavIavovrag dv ev Tt Téy eipnudvoy. 
~ , ‘ 7, / 
Aradépe: 02 Tatra aAAVAOY eld? xalal OIATTES dpa 3 
\ / / \ \ ~~ , > , ~ 
wal ab Dirtas, rplay dy TH FIG dirtag edn, ivapiOua Tois 
~ a / , 3 /, 3 , 
biaynrois: xal? Exacroy yap sorw avtidianois ov Aavba- 
* N ~ 7 Ls 
youon. of O& DirotyTes AAANAUS HovarAovras Tayaba AAAT- 
Ao TAaUTY 7 Dirodow. of wy obv Die TO oiov d 
g THUTY : pe ih To XpHoipoy di- 
~ > > > c n~ > > 4 
AOUYTES HAATAOUS OU xal? aitovs Dirovow, LAA N ybyveTos 
> ~ Ce) 7 > , € i, X ‘ €£$ >. eS 
Th QuUTOlS TAD AAANAWY ayaboy. Of-0bWS Of xa of O: 7/00- 
~ 7 > ~ \ 
viv" 00 Yap TM Tots Tivag Elva ayamot TOVS eUTLAME- 
> > of CN 6 c ~ 7 Xa SN \ ; 
Aous, AAA OTL YOEIG AUTOIGC. Ob TE on Ola TO XPUThLoyv 2 
~ HEA A c ~ > \ / \ 2+ fF. CH \ 
dirotvres Oia 7b abroig ayabey orépyoucs, xal of OF ydovay 





3 TH Tav aybxwr] Suggested by the | kal mporéxer, xanelvov ye xdpw Tadra 
Lysis of Plato, p. 212 p, where olvos 
is mentioned as an object of liking: 


ovd’ &pa plarmnol eiotv, ods dy of tnmo 


Sécet. 


III. 1 tadrtn % pidodeir] ‘ Accord- 


Mh adyTipidGow, ovde giddprvyes, ove 
ad pirdxuvés ye ad plrowo: K.7.A. 

4 )—rodroy] ‘Or must we add the 
proviso that it be not unknown? For 
many are kindly disposed to men- 
whom they have never seen, but whom 
they suppose to be good or useful, and 
one of these latter might reciprocate 
the same feeling.’ toirov, being sub- 
stituted for the plural moAdol, gives 
definiteness. Cf. 1x. i. 4: Todros 


ing to the particular mode of their 
friendship.’ The differences of mode 
are specified afterwards. 

ob Kal’ abrobs pidodow] ‘Do not 
love each other for their very selves.’ 
This phrase xa@ airods is rather a 
logical formula than an ordinary 
grammatical combination. It seems 
to have arisen from xaé’ airé, ‘the 





absolute.’ Cf. vi. iii. 7, and the use 
| Of 8¢ adrods, vim. iv. 6, rx. i. 7. 


256 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIIL * [Cuap, 


~ € / , , 5 > 
Oia TO MUTOIG HOV, xab OVX y & Pidovpevag EoTIV, AAA 
SA / A / 
XPUT 0g 7 ydvs. xara cupPsPyxog Ts Oy ab Didricu auras 
> tA / 
clow* ov yap 7 éotly Gomep eotiv 6 dirovmsvos, TaUTY 
db ~ > tM 3 c X > AYA c > ‘3 , 
DiAEkTOs, AAA Y TopiGouery Ob EY AyAVoy Th OL O YOovHy, 
IN IN) c ~ / > \ S , > ~ c 
3 SUOIAAUTOS OF) CLE TOLMUTES EIT, [A7) OLALEVOYTWY HUTMY O- 
5) ~ : s , 
poly sav yap wyxeTs OEig H YpyTLo1 Wor, MavovTas Ou- 
~ v yw 
Aotvres. To O& Yproipov ov diapéver, AAA AADROTE GAAO 
/ 
amonubévrog ouv Or 0 dino yoauv, diarveros 
~ / ~ 
4xal 7 OiAla, wo avons THg PiAlag mods Exelva. parucTa 
O éy Toig moco Putas 7 ToaUTy Donel Giria yiverbos (ov yo 
ev Taig mpeo Burous 7% TorauTy Soxel Grrio. Y yap 
x en ~ ‘é > > ~ 
TO YOU Ol THALLOUTOL OLEXOUTIY HAAG TO wpéripoy), xal réoy 


Y 
YIyveTat. 


5) > ~ A / SA \ / ’ > / 
ey axy, xal véewy boot TO TuUdzpoyv Oim@xovolw. ov TAY 
> c ~ IN ~ >: at 7 of \ >>> 
0” ob ToLotros onde cuSmor JET AAANAWY’ EvloTS YAP oUd 
ak ‘nN ~ Ir \ , ~ 7 c / oA 
eloly 70sig* avde On mpordéovTou Tig ToLMUT YS GuIAlag, coy 
\ Sy , a we ~ , > cn ~ 929 7 
p71 WDEAILOL Woy’ eETh TOTOUTOY yap ciolv Ydeig Eb Ooo 
PI ~ a \ Xs \ 
eamloag Zyoucw ayabod. sig tadtag 08 xab ray Eevingy 
~ / \ ~ \ 
steno. x 08 Tey vewy Dirla OF VOovny elves Ooxet* xara 
bog yap outa 6@ b Lar duce dydu aUToK 
malos yop obror Gear, xod parsoree duenxoues 7O.OU 4 broig 
/ ~ c / 
xal To Tapov’ THg YAIxiag OF PeTAmIMTOUTS nal Ta OE 
, qd DNA , / I \ ‘A ° 
yiveras ETEpa. 01d TAYEWS ylyvovTas Piro xb MavovTas 
Ci wn c ~ 7 ~ \ 4 
Gna yap TH Het y Oiria peraninres, Tig 02 ToUTYS 
~ ~ la s A 
yOovijg Taxsla y weTaPoAy. xal EpwTixol O of ver” xaTA 
‘6 \ \ a ep ON Ny \ re > woe 3 r 
Tasos yao xab OF YOovnY TO TOAU TIS EpwTIXyg* OboTED 
~ / ~ ~ c 4 
Dirotos xal Taxews MavovTas, TOAAAKIC THE AUTIS TLEpAS 
i A / 
pstanintovtes. cuvnmecever 08 xal culay ovtos Povroy- 
\ ~ / a 
TOL ylveTas yap auToIg TO xaTa iriay odTwS. 
~ ~ 7 \ 
6 Tersin 0 éotly y thy ayabdy diria xal xar aperay 
€ , . ° \ > he © ; p A LAD: a, 
buolwy* oUToL yap Tayada spoiwmg Povrovra: aAAHAOIS, 
v t , 
7, ayabol: ayabol 0 eici xa abtodc. of 88 Povromevos 
~ /. A rf / 
tayaha roig diroig éxelvwy Fvexn parmora pir or 
G \ \ oe ” \ x 4 
asTous yap odTwS Eyouc!, xal ov xara cupPsPyxog* 





2 Kal odx 7 6 pirdodmerds eoriv, GAN’ 
h xphotmos 4 H5vs] The reading surely 
should be @o7ty, ‘ not by reason of the 
existence of the person who is loved, 
but by reason of his being useful or 
pleasant.’ The personal existence of 
the friend is, according to Aristotle, 





the chief blessing of friendship. Cf. 
Ix. ix. 10: ef 5) T@ panaplm rd elvar 
alperov éort Ka abr, &yabby TH pice 


bv Kal 75d, wapamrAjoov 5é Kal 7d ToD 


pirov éoriv, nal d plros tay aiperay by 
ein. : 


IIl.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIIL 257 


> , Bi ae x ~ 
Oiapéver ovv 7 TovTwy Didia ews av ayahol wow, 7 2 
eg , : ~ 
ApeTy povimov, xal Zot ExaTEpog arAM@S ayabos xal 
~ f. e A . 3s od > \ \ > , 
TO Olraw* of yap ayabol xal arAds ayadol xal arAAHAdIS 
> , € / Dr \ ey ~ \ ‘ 3 ~ 4 
wMderimol. omolwg Of xab YOEIg* xal yap amAwS ob 
nyabol 7deig wal AAAYAOIS* ExacTwHW yap xa ydoviy Ei 
ayabol 7oeig xal AAATAGIS* ExaoTH yap xal’ ydoviy cioww 
~ / \ ~ ~ ~ S 
ai oixeias mpaSeag xal ai roatrar, rv ayabdy 0 ai 
> A a oo c 7 X / , > / 
QUTAL 7 OOINl. % TOLKUTH 0: dala f-ovipeog evrAoyws 7 
° , » , = A > av ~ - , f a ~ DIA PY ~ 
eotiv' cuvamte yap ey autTy wavs Goa tois didroig dei 
e / ~ A , > > , 3 Aa dr e-> 4 a 
tmapyey. mica yap diala Or ayaboy cori 7 OF adovyy, 7 
LTAG@S 4 TH Dircdyts, xal xal onooryra * TauTy OF 
amAws 7 TH DirodyTs, CLOT HTa,TIVA® TAHUTY OF 
7 > e / 4A > / , e £ > 7 ‘ a 
wave irapye Ta sipnptva xad abrovgs tatty yap buom 
4 \ , , € ~ > \ A Len: ¢ ~ > 4 
wal TH AOITA, TO TE ATAWS aya5oy xa} 700 ATAWS ETTIY. 
s ~ , \ ~ \ 
parora 6: raita diaynra, xal To Oidciv 02 xal y Dirla 
\ / , 
éy ToUTOS parioTa xal aploTy. omraviag OD eixds TAGs 
, \ ~ ow ~ 
ToauTas elvas* GAlyor yap ol ToodTor. rs Ot mpocdeiran 
, / \ / ” 
xpivov xah cuvyfeiag* xara THy Tapolay yap ox eos 





6. éxdorw yap—Suow:] ‘For to | Kal xuplws thy trav dyabav F ayabol, 


every man his own actions and those 
similar to them are pleasurable, and 
the actions of the good are (to the 
good) identical (with their own actions) 
or similar.’ The friend being alter 
ego, the delight of friendship is that 
it gives an increased sense of ex- 
istence. 

7 cwdxre| Neuter, asin vill. iv. 5: 
ov mdyu 8 abrat cuvartovow. 

aoa yap—rtiva] ‘ For every friend- 
ship is for good or for pleasure; either 
absolute, or else relative to him who 
feels the friendship, and only bearing 
a certain resemblance to the absolutely 
good or pleasurable.’ The comma 
should surely be omitted after 7g 
gidoovts. Aristotle is not here saying 


(as the commentators fancy) that every’ 


friendship implies similarity. But 

that every friendship, whether the 

genuine type or one of the secondary 

and reflected species, aims at either 

good or pleasure. This is made clear 

by the next chapter, § 4: mpaérws wey 
VOL. II. 





Tas 5é Aowmas nal? dpodryra. 

Tautn yap Suoa kal ra Aourd, 7d TE 
arras w&yabby nal 75d arrads éoTiv] 
‘For the other kinds of friendship 
moreover are resemblances of this 
(the perfect kind), and the absolutely 
good is also absolutely pleasurable.’ 
This passage has vexed the commen- 
tators. Zell thinks that 3uou may be 
referred to caf duoidrntd twa in the 
previous sentence (which he mistakes), 
and explains, ‘In this kind of friend- 
ship there is similarity and all the 
other requisite qualities.’ But we 
surely then should have expected 7a 
duo. Cardwell, following Giphanius, 
Zwinger, and the Scholiast, reads 
tabtn yap Suowt Kal Ta Awd, ‘In 
this kind of friendship, men are simi- 
lar, e¢ cetera.’ The common reading, 
as above explained, seems borne out 
by the opening of the next chapter, 
H SF Sid 7d 73d duolwua radrys Exe. 
Cf. vim. vi. 7. “Owom here is in op- 
position to tatty—«xal abrous, 


LL 


258 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIIL [ CHap. 


~ A isd ~ 
ElO7T Ob AAAYAOUG Moly TOUS Asyouevous AAAS TUVAYAAw@O AL" 
¢ ‘ 
oud amodegacbas 04 mporepoy oud’ elvas lacus, moly av 
ExaTepog exatépm davy dianros xal miorevhy. of 88 
9&XATEDOG EXATEDE vv) mrs i. Ok 
\ \ ’ ~ ¢ 
Tayeg TH DIAM WHOG aAAYAOUS TorodyTes PovrovTas 
\ / > > + een. \ d¢ ) ‘ \ / ~ ? 
pty Diros elvat, ovx clot dg, eb fey xal Dirynrol, xal rotir 
\ ~ 
loaciwv' Povanoig pev yoo Taysin dirlag yiverou, dirt 
x A 
0 od. airy may oby xl xara Toy ypovoy xal xaTa TH 
/ 
Aoima TeAcia eoTl, xal xaTa mavTa TAT yivero xal 
o € , bees a / o del ~ in, ¢ s 
OU0lk EXATEpHW Tap EXATEpOV, OmEp det ToIg hiro brap- 


Eby? 


\ s 
4 ‘“H d2die 76 700 tpolwpa radryg yes" xal yap of eyabol 
Cited > , ¢ Ie de 4 ¢ 5 \ \ , a } 
YOEIG LAANAOS. OolwS OF xXAk y 01H TO HUT ov? xe 
\ - > , e. 4 / , AN ) , 
YAP TOMOUTOL AAAYAOIG OF MYAVOl. PAAITTA OE xal év Tov- 
a 
Tog ab Dirt Oiapévouci, bray To adTd ylyvyras mag’ 
oe 4 % + , \ \ a > \ ye d 
AAAYVAWY, O1OY 1O0VY, XAL [LY POvVOY OUTMS HAAR XAb aT 
~ ~ ~ / ~ 
To avrod, oloy Toig euTpaméArnic, xal wy ws EpuoTy nab 
ZowLeyw* Ov yap ewl Tolg aUTOIG HOOVTaL OU LAD O [Le 
EDWILEYD* OD aide b TOkS side $7 ga OUTO,: CAN eee 
opty exeivoy, 6 08 Gepameuducvos bxd Tot epaorod* Ay- 
7 \ ~ a SE: bee , la é ~ . QA 
yours OF THg Wpag EvioTe xa 7 DiAIa Arjyer* TH wry Yap 
’ wv ¢ ~ Cat d ~ > > 4 e / 
oun ECT Osa yj OWS, TH O Ov yiveTout 7 Oepameia, mor- 
\ >» a8 , 2 > ~ 4 / ; ‘ n6 , 
Aol O aU OlapevouTiy, EY Ex THG TuVyTelag Ta HON OTED- 
£ € “4 or e ec Oy \ \ yy > Ar 
2Swowv, oponerg ovres. of O& xy TO YOU avTiIMaTAAAaT- 
NiO 4 > ‘1 3 ~ 1 
TOPEVOL AAAG TO YOYT Loy Ev Toig EpwTinolg xal eioly ATTOY 
/, \ PY 4 e nye > x \ 7 x ig 
Dinos Has OlaprevouTlv, Ob OF O1H TO YOTOIMOoY OvTESG DiroE 
ana TO cuphepovtTs OiarvovTar* ov yao aAATAwWY Foray 


\ ~ ~ 
DiAoL AAAG TOU AUTITEAOUS. 


Ov vdovay pby ov xal dict 


x 7 € /, s / 
TO Ypjormoy xal davaoug evdeyeras Hiroug elvou aAAUAoLS, 
~ , A / ~ 
xal emseixets Davros xal pydérecov sroiwoiv, OF abrovs 





8 rovs Aeyouevous &das] ‘The salt 
of the proverb,’ cf. Eth. Hud. vu. ii. 
35: 51d eis mapomlay érhavber & wedip- 
vos Trav Gk@y. Cicero, Lelius, ch. xix.: 
Verumque illud est quod dicitur, multos 
modios salis simul edendos esse, ut 
amicitize munus expletum sit. 

oS &xodétar@ar 8)—dladous] ‘ Nor 
indeed can they be satisfied that they 
are friends at all.’ Cf. vim. v. 3: of 
8 dwodexomevor GAAHAOus. IX, iii. 3: 





eav 8 amodéxnta ws ayabdy, Xen. 
Mem. tv. i. 1: arodéxecOar Swxpdrnr. 

9 ef uh—Ioaow] ‘Unless they are 
likeable (by one another), and are 
assured of this,’ 


IV. 2 nal eioly Frrrov—diapévovew] 
‘Are both friends in a less degree 
and are (less) abiding’ 

Kat undérepov dxoiwovy] ‘And he who 
is neither good nor bad may be a friend 


III.—IV. ] HOIKQON NIKOMAXEION VUL 259 


Os oF a , \ > 4 ape e i’ \ J af 
€ O7AoY OT LovoUS TOUS MYATOUS* of Yap XaxO1 OU YaIoOUELY 
éaurois, eb uy Tig GHércia yiyvoito, xal povy 03 7 THY3 
> ~ 7 > / / - ° < > \ Cae! BANS 4 
ayabiy viii Ad1aBART OG EOTIY ou thal d pedtoy eee 
~ ~ ] ~~ € ~ 8 
ThoTEvoads Weps Tov EV TOAAW XPOVo Uh QUTWY O200KI- 
pacpévov. xal To miorevey ev ToUTOIG, xal TO MyeMOT AY 
ADixjooL, xal boa aArKO ev TH Ws AAYIwS HiIAla AEsodTas. 
gy 08 Talg éTépaig oddity xwaver Ta ToIatra yiverbas. 
° A \ e Rd , if \ \ \ A , 
eTEb Yap ob avipwror Agyours Diroug xal Tovs dia rd XPU- 4+ 
a € ~ e stad 
Tioy, Women ai woAeIG (Goxotior yap al cuppaylos Taig 
, é 4 ~ , \ \ SE EN \ 
ToAEos yiver Jos Evexa Tod Tuudéepovroc), xBl Tods OF yOoviy 
> 7 , ao ra ~~ Vv ’ \ 
AAANAOUS OTEDYovTAS, WOTED Ob TWaldes, bows Asyeby [EY 
N ~ \ ~ , n 
det nal ayuds diroug Tovg TosodTous, eldy OF Tig OiAlas 
/ ~ > ~ 
Trin, xal mpwTas pev xal xuplws Tiy Thy ayaboy 7 
a 4 7 \ db: ’ f « / ; cs \ > 4¢ 
YAIOl, TAC OE AOLTAC xa Of.0L0TYTA $7] yap Ayasov Tk 
et f /, P \ \ \ CNN 55 4 ~ 
XOb Omolov, TaUTYH Piro xal yap TO yOu ayatoy Tols 
PY / > / > ~ / ION / 
Diryndeow. ov wavy O avtTar cuvarroucly, ovds yivoyTau 5 
€ > \ a \ \ 7 VN \ en7 > \ 
oi avTol diros dia Tod XPUTi ov HAL OI TO HOV" ov yap 
, SE \ \ f 5) ~ NSS 
wavy cuvduaceTar TH xaTa oupPeByxos. sig Tatra 98 
\ 1d n~ , , e \ ~ By ? 
Ta Eb0n THS PiAlag vevepymsvyg of ev Patino: EvovTas6 
either to the good or to the bad, or | ph didBarrAe Cut Kal Opacduaxoy kpre 
to him who is neither one nor the | ldous yeyovdras. 
other. For the word pndérepos to 4 yap ayabdy rt Kad Buoior, TadTy 
express a neutral or intermediate | faa] ‘For so far as (these kinds of 
state, cf. Eth. vir. xiv. 5: Td undérepov, | friendship exhibit) something good and 
‘that which is neither pleasure, nor | resembling the good, so far (those who 
pain.’ exercise them) are friends.’ The com- - 
3 Kar pdvn St—ylvecOu| ‘And in | mentators are again deceived by the 
short the friendship of the good is | word Suoov, taking it to mean ‘simi- 
alone incapable of being disturbed by | larity of character.’ See above ch. iii. 
accusations, For it is not easy (for | § 7, note. 
the good) to believe any person about 5 ov mdévu—oupBeBnyxds] * But the 
a man whom they haye long proved. | above-mentioned kinds of friendship 
And the sayings about “having faith,’ | do not always coincide. Nor do the 
and that (the friend) ‘‘never could | same men become friends for the sake 
wrong one,” and all the other points -} of the useful, as for the sake of the 
which are demanded in ideal friend- | pleasant. For things only accidentally 
ship, are realised in the friendship of | connected are not always found to- 
the good, But in the other kinds | gether.’ On cupBeBnxds, cf. Ar. Met, 
nothing prevents disturbances from | Iv. xxx. 1: oupBeBnkds A€yera 3 
accusations (T& rowadra) arising.’ Aia- | dmdpxe udv rin Kal aAnbés eimeiv, ob 
BddAew is ‘to set two people by the | pévro: ob ° e& dvdynns obr’ em Td odd, 
ears.’ Cf, Plato, Repub. p. 498 c: | See also L°low, § 6. 
LL 2 








260 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII [Cuap. 


1 N39 Cen CN BY ‘ , , o ” « 
diros Ov vdovny 7 To ypTomLov, TaUTH Spolor GyTEg, ob 
9), 9 A > € \ U4 K a \ > / A \ 
O ceyabot b0 abrots diAa’ H yap ayabol. ovror wey ov 
amrAws Piro, éxeivos OF xaTa cupPeSyxdg xal TH wWyol- 

o$as tovrosc. 

5 “Qorep © em rev aperay of piv xa? eEiv of 08 xa’ 
5 dee > \ / a 5 a | ~ Ud c X 
EVEDYELAY ayabol Agyovrat, odTw xal éexl Tig Diriac of pey 

AQ ~ , > 7 > , 
yap cuvl@yreg yalpovow aAryAog xal mopllove1 Tayaba, 
of 02 xabevdovres 7 xeywplopévor Toig TOmOIG oUx evepyotos 

, eo ” a4 9 2 ~ ~ c ‘ , 
pev, ctw O Eyour wort evepyeiv dirindg* of yap Tomo 
od OiaAvours THY DiAlay aTA@S, AAA Tay evéoysrav. eay 

nm ~ ia 
88 ypovios 7 amourian yivyTal, xal TIg Diriag Soxet AYAyy 
mossiv’ bev elpyras 
Toddag On giriag axpoonyopia duéhvaer. 
200 dalvovras 0 oth of rpecBiras otf of arpudvol dirsxol 
\ ~ > > ~ \ ~ Lan) ~ >> _\ \ ‘ 
elvos’ Bouyd yap ev abroig Td Tig Adovijg, ovdeig 02 Ouvaros 
, n~ ~ axaK ~~ --% ed ~~. , ‘ c 
TUVYILEDEVELY TW AUTI DW ovde TH [27 104 pepe: 7 y 

, / 4 > ~ 

ducis daiveros To pv Avwnpdy devyziv, edisoGou 62 rod 
~ / 
371020¢. of 0 amodeyomevor AAAYAOUS, Ly TUC@YTEG 02, evYOIS 
eolxaot LaAAOY 7) Dido. ovdty yap odrws éotl dlrawy 
Ws To ousiy’ whering pty yap of evdecis opeyovTal, cuvnue- 
pevely 08 xal of maxcpior* povwrais piv yap elves TouTOIS 
a 7 , X ed , > v 
FxIoTa Toooyxe, cTovvdiayev OF eT AAAVAwWY oUX EOTE 

‘ € ~ OS ~ ~ 
pen 7deig Ovrag pydt yaipovTag Toig avTOIS, Gmrep 7 ETOUpINT 
Ooxet Every, 

’ ~ ~ 
4 Marora piv oy tori diria 7 téy ayabdy, xabarep 
4 Vv ~ \ \ XN \ c XN \ 
TOAAAKIG ELONTOAL doxel yap Dianroy pev xak aipeTov TO 
€ ~ > \ a EN? '€ , \ \ ¢ ~ ~ « 
amnris ayaboy 7 700, éxaoTw 38 To aitwd Towdrov’ 60 





6 rabrn 8uo.r dvres| ‘In this re- 
spect (¢.e. as affording and seeking 
pleasure or utility) being like (the 
good)’ 


V. 1 of 88 Kabeddovres—evépyerar] 
‘But those who are asleep, or who are 
separated by the intervals of space, do 
not exercise friendship, though they 
have all the disposition to exercise it. 


For the intervals of space do not de- | 


stroy friendship, but only its exercise.’ 
This is of course a most inadequate 





translation of évepyeiy and txovew. 
These words must be understood by a 
study of Aristotle’s forms of thought. 
See Vol. L. Essay IV. On the évépyesa 
of friendship, cf. Eth. rx. ix. 

3, of drodexduevor GAAHAOus] ‘They 
who are satisfied with one another.’ 
Cf. above, vill. lii. 3. 

brep 4 Eratpuch Sone? Exew] ‘And 
this (é.e. pleasure and sympathy) 
seems the propertytof companionship.” 

4.6 8 adyabds TE GyabG 8? Gudw 


| ratra] ‘Now the good man (is a 


IV.—VL] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIIL 261 


~ ~ v ~ 
avalos rd ayabd OF audw taiira. tome F 7 pty di-s 
ad 
Anois maber, 7 OF Hira BFea° yi yao diajoig ovy Hrrov 

\ , «2 > ~ ds \ , 
mpos Ta aYuxa eoTiv, aYTIP>IAoUOL Of eTa mpoKsperews, 
c \  £ > og. s, > \ 7 ~ 
7 08 mpouiperig ah Eews. xal rayaba Potrovrou roig 

, > / A > \ , ? \ > of 
Diroupevorg exeivwy evexa, ov XaTH mobos arra xab 2E1y. 
xal dirodyres Tov piroy ro abroig ayabey dirctiow* 6 yap 
> A 4, / > \ , i /, € 4 
ayabos diros YIVOLEVOS ayaboy yiveros w iarog. exate- 

x ~ \ c ~ > 4 eS. WV. > , 
pag oy DiAsi re TO adTwO ayabov, xal Td loov avTarodlows: 
TH Povrnoes xal Tw ydst* Adyeras yap dire | loo 
¥ Bovay D Ost? Aey yap TUS 7 igorygs. 
\ ~ ~ ~ ~f? 

Marra on TH tTéy ayabiv Tradl trapye. ev 026 
Toig orpudvoig xal mpsaPurixoig Arrov yiveros yj diria, 
Gow OuTxXoAMTEDOL clos NAL AT TOY THig busrlasg Yalpoury. 
TANTO yap Ooxel MAaMioT evar Oirixa xa mointina dirlac. 

\ , . / /, 7 ~ > ” > A 
O16 véor pedy yivovras diac Tayd, mpeoPUros B ot ob yap 

, y er | \ , c , oe, SANE 
Yhyvovras diros vig dv pn yalswow' opoiws O 000" of oTpu- 





friend) to the good man for the sake 
of both these things,’ (é.¢. the 
absolutely good and the absolutely 
pleasant). 

5 fone S—€tews] ‘Loving is like 
an emotion, but friendship like a 
settled disposition of the mind. For 
loving exists just as well towards 
inanimate objects; but when men 
reciprocate friendship it implies pur- 
pose, and purpose proceeds from a 
settled disposition of the mind.’ In 
Eth. 1. vi. 5 (cf. u. v. 2), Aristotle 
makes friendship to be an emotion, or 
characterized by emotion. The present 
passage does not in the least contradict 
this, as fs, or a settled disposition of 
mind, is merely the result of regulated 
emotions, and the tendency to repro- 
duce them. 

h 5& mpoaipeois, K.7.A.] In Eth, m1. 
ii. 1, Aristotle speaks of ‘ purpose’ as 
the test of character; ib. § 11, as 
constituting character ; 2b, § 2, as not 
acting suddenly ; 2d. § 17, as implying 
reason and forethought. 

éxdrepos—7dei] ‘Each of the two 
then loves that which is a personal 





good to himself, and he makes an 
equal return both in wishing good 
and in (actual) pleasure.’ Zell, fol- 
lowing two MSS., reads «fe. But 
Bekker’s reading (73?) appears pre- 
ferable: (1) because Yoor efSe would 
not be a natural expression; it con- 
founds degree with kind; we should 
expect tairdy efSer: (2) because 757 
gives very good sense, since it is 
one thing to reciprocate the motives 
or feelings of friendship, and another 
to give your friend the same amount of 
pleasure as he gives you. 

Aéyerar—iodrns] “For equality is 
said to constitute friendship. <A 
Pythagorean saying, connecting moral 
ideas with the ideas of number. Cf. 
Diog. Laert. vu. i. 8: ei te mp&tos 
(ds pnot Tiwasos) kowd Ta plrawy elvas: 
kal pidlay iodrnra., 


VI. 1 This section is an awkward 
repetition of what has been said 
before, ch. v. § 2. This, however, 
merely shows that we have probably 
the uncorrected draft of Aristotle’s 
treatise on Friendship. 


262 


~ oe 
vol. AAA of To1odTor edvor ev eiowy KAAAOIG* PovAoy- 
\ > \ b Vane ~~ - A / a /, > 
ToL yap TAyAIa xal amavTmow sig tag ypsiag* diro Oo ov 
, Sl NTS LY \ 7 x / > / aA 
TAVU EITL OL TO [Ay TUVYLEpEvEsy pends Haley AAAS, & 
~ 4 ~ 
207 warior civas Ooxel Dirixa. WoAAIG O elyas Hirov xaTa 
/ cad ~ rw 
Tiy Tersiay Dirlav oux evdeyxeTas, Wows 00d Eodv ToAAwY 
iad ” \ © ~ X ~ x \ cA / 
da? eons yap wmepPory, To ToL0tiro GF mpbg Eva méhuxe 
/ A Ds icf ~ > ~ > , >» > 
ylverbas, rorAAous 0 aua TH aUTo apecxew ohadpa ov 
roa fi v »w > 4 \ rf 
3 padiov, lows 0 oud ayatoug sivas. 


HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. [ Cuar. 


) ~ SA > ’ 
zi 62 xab gumeipiav 
Pe > , / a 
AaPely xal ev ouvybein yevécbo, 6 mayyarsrov, Odie Td 
, X \ \ ayy ~ fad > ye A 
H PNT pov Of al TO YOU MOAAOIG apETxery SYOEVETAL® TOAAGL 
\ c ~ hie 2. / / r- / s 
4 yap Ob SNOUT ONS Hab EV year Xpovw oe Ena TOuTM@Y 
N ~ \ ¢ > A > 
Of paarroy Zorxe Dirla 7 did Td 700, Grav TavTa bm’ op 
~ 0, , , xa ~ ~ 
Dosy ylyynras xb YaIDWoLY AAAYACIS 4 TOIS aurois, ola 
~ U 2. c e ~ \ > 4 A 3 
Toy vewy sioly ai Dirias MAAAOY yap ey TaUTaIG TO EAEU- 
Gépsov, 7 OF Oi TO Ypryoov ayopaiwy. xal of paxc~ 
NN J \ Ox dé ens , ve . 
plok OF YoyThAwWY [LEY OUdEY OsOvTOL, YOEWY 02° cudiy peev 
Q Bm / SNS, \ re \ / / 
yap Bovarovrai Tios, TO 08 Aumypoy orAlyoy ev ypovoy dé- 
~~ INS > \ * e / 2» a 2% \ < 
pourly, TUVEYWS O ovbels ay UTOMEIVOL, OU0 AUTO TO aya- 





‘ 


2 moAdois—elva] ‘It is not possible 
to be a friend to many men on the 
footing of the perfect kind of friend- 
ship, just as one cannot be in love 
with many at the same time. For 
(the perfect friendship) is a sort of 
excess of feeling, which naturally 
arises towards one person alone; 
again, it is not easy for many persons 
to be intensely pleasing to the same 
individual, and perhaps not easy that 
many should be good.’ brepBoah here 
would be nearly represented by the 
French word abandon; it implies 
the throwing away of limits and 
restraints, a giving up of one’s whole 
self. Cf. rx. iv. 6: 7 dwepBorh rijs 
gidlas TH mpos abtoy duowtra, Of 
course there is an association of 
Aristotelian ideas (uecérns, @AAenis, 
&c.) in the term. It is repeated Eth. 
Ix. x. 5, where the question of the 
plurality of friendships is carefully 
gone into. , 





3 woddAois apéoxew evdéxerau] We 
should have expected woAAobs jyiv 
épéoxew, on the analogy of the last 
sentence, moAAo’s TE aiTG apéokery, 
but the writing seems careless and 
the expression is inverted. 

of rod] ¢.e. the useful and the 
pleasant. Cf. § 6, where rovodro: again 
takes its sense from the context. 

4 &yopatwy] ‘Of mercenary persons.” 
Cf. Ar. Pol. rv. iv. 10: Aéyw 8 &yopaioy 
(wAH00s) +d wep Tas mpdoes Kal Tas 
avis Kal tas utopias Kal Kamndclas 
diarpiBov, Ib. vi. iv. 12: 6 yap Blos 
padros, kad odfev Epyov wer’ dperis Gv 
peraxepl(era: 7d wAROos 76 TE TaY 
Bavatowv kal td Tdv &yopalwy dvOporey 
kal 7d Onrixdv. 

xpnoluwy piv oddtv dSéovra] i.e. 
Happiness by its definition implies a 
sufficiency of external means, Eéh. 1. 
Vili. 15. : 

ovd abtd 7d ayabdy, ei Avmnpdy] 
This sentence is wap’ drdvoiay, in other 


VI.J 


HOIKON NIKOMAXETQON VIII. 


263 


\ ~ \ \ / ~ ~ 
Qov, ei Aumypdy avTa@ ely’ O10 Todg diroug yeig Syrotory. 
n~ \ ” ~ 
dei O lows xal ayabods TolovTovg oyTas, xal Eri abToIS’ 


olrw yap tmapSer avroig toa det roig dirs. 


of O évs 


Tals eGove tas dinpapevors paivovrans xPiedau Tos won? 
AAO vap auroig cio} XPHe peo xoh Erepos 7Wdets, dude o 
of aurol ob wavy’ oUTE yap WlEig per ApeTijg SyTovow odTe 
, a A / > A A \ > , ~ 
HENTwous bg TH XAAK, AAA TOUg MEY eUTpameroug TOV 
ens. > / \ NSS »y \ ~ A 3 / . ~ 
020g Edseevor, Tovs O2 Osivodg moaSou To emitaydev’ Tatra 
0 ov ma lyeror év TO QUTd Hdd dt xal 7] 6 
od Tmavu yiv D auTm 700g 0 xal yprjonos 
ic wv iA e ») ~ . > 24€ , 3 Pn € 
Cyne elpytoas oT 6 omoudaiog’ AAD brepéyovTs ov yiveTou 6 


~ / x \ \ ~~ 63 ~ ¢ / 
Todos dirog, dv py nal TH apery Owepeyyras’ 
ovx ical: avaroyov bmrepsyomnsevoc. 


~ f 
TOLOUTOL Yb yeo bas. 


el OF 27, 


> / > 3 7 
ov wavy d siwbacs 


eX 2 s c ° / a > > , A A > A 
Eiot 0 ody ai eipyusvar Dirios ev iooryTi® TH yap MUTAT 
, p >. 2 > ~ \ £f . 7 a a 
yiyverar am apchoty xal Povrovras aAAUAGIS, 7 ETECOY 





words, a joke. It is a contradiction in 
terms to speak of the Absolute Good 
as painful. Cf. Ar. Rhet. 1. vi. 2: 
“Eorw 5) ayabby 6 dy abrd Eavrod evena 
i alperdy, kal ob Evexa %AXo aipotueba, 
kat ob eplerar mdvta 7} mdvra Td alo- 
Onow xovra i) vody, 7) ei AdBot voby -— 
kal ov wapdytos €b Sidnerta Kal abtdp- 
Kos @xel, K.T.A, 

def © tows—asrois] ‘And perhaps 
(in seeking friends) one ought (to 
require) that even good men should 
have this qualification (¢.e. pleasant- 
ness), and moreover not in a merely 
universal way, but relatively to one- 
self.’ 

5 of 8 éy tais—idos| ‘ Great 
potentates’ (cf. Eth, 1. v. 3) ‘however 
seem to make use of their friends 
separately ;’ ¢.e. they keep two sets of 


friends, one for profit or business, and 


another for pleasure. 

6 dvs 5t—ylvecdu] ‘Now we 
have already said that the good man 
is both pleasant and useful at once. 
But such a man does not become a 
friend to his superior (in rank), unless 
he be surpassed (by that superior) in 





virtue also. Else, he does not find 
himself in that position of equality 
which is produced by superiority in 
proportion to merit. Such persons, 
however (as potentates who surpass 
the good in virtue), are not produced 
every day.’ The commentators have 
strangely interpreted this passage, 
making brepéxnra take for its nomi- 
native 6 trepéxwy, as though Aristotle 
had said that a good man would not 
be a friend to a potentate, if that 
potentate had superior moral qualities; 
and as though ‘equality’ were 
produced by one man _ haying 
all the merit and another all the 
power. On the contrary, Aristotle 
would have said that ‘ proportionate 
equality’ is produced, according to 
the principles of distributive justice, by 
each man having in proportion to his 
merits, ef. Eth. v. iii. 6, Pol. mt. ix. 15. 
There is no sense of inequality pro- 
duced by the position of a man socially 
exalted in intellect and character ; 
inequality is felt when a fool ora villain 
occupies a high social position. "Iod¢er 
is doubtless intransitive, and dvdAoyov 


264 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. [ Cuap. 


ave erépou avTiIKATAAAATTOVTAL, Olov yoovay avT wWhersiag. 
oe w 2 + Spee «4 ra , . / y 
OTh O ATroy cioly abrasr ai Dirtas xal pévovow, elpnras. 
doxotor Ot xal BV duowrnra xal avonouTyTa TaUTOD elval 
\ > > 7 > c / \ ~ > 
Te xal ovx elvar dirlass xal? bpowrTyta yap Tig xaT 
> \ / / e \ ~ eNr\ Vv € DA \ 
apetay dalvovras irias (7 pev yap To yOu eyes 7 OF TO 
Heo pov, tatira O trdpyer xanelvy), rw 08 THy piv adia- 
Panrov xal povipoy elvos, Tadras 38 Tayxéws petamirrely 
Grnroig Te Oiadbéoey ToArAIG, od halvoyvras hiriou OF dvo- 
poornra exeivys. 

7 “Erepov 0 earl diaiag eidog +d xal? trepoyyy, oiov 
matpl mpeg viov xab Gaws mpesButéowm mpdg vewrepoy, 
avdeh mpog yuvaixa xal mavtTl apyovts mpog apyonevov. 
Oradbépoucs 0 abras xal AAA AwY* ob Yap yj AUTH yovstor 

\ , \ Ed \ > / > > 1D 
Tpog TEXVH XAb ApyouTk Mpog apyowsvousc, AAA ou é 
matph moog viby xal vid mpog marépa, ovd avdpl mpdg 
yuvatxa xal yuvouxl modo avdpa, sErépn yap Exaorw 

/ > \ \ ad a \ \ 7 on ~ ; 
ToUTwY apEeTH Kal TO Epyov, Erepa OF xal OF & dirodow" 

2Erepas ctv xah al. diarjoess xal ab dirlar rTaurd wey 
On odte ylyverau éxariow mapa barépov ore dei Syreiv: 
— \ Y Y - i > . , si ~ ~ x 
Tay O08 yovsios piv Téxva Amoven & OE TOIg yevvioact, 
yoveis O02 vidow & Ost Toig TéxvoIg, LoviLOG 7 THY ToOUTwWY 

Se \ W , | we / ~ 
xb emserxns EoTaL DAI. avanroyoy 0 éy mara TAI 

a ~ 
xal trepoyny ovoaic dirlais xal ryv dlanow dei yiver ar, 
oloy Tov apelvw PaAAoY Dirciobas 7H Direiv, xal Tov wWde- 
Aipwrepov, xal Thy aArAwY Exaorov bpolws* bray yap xar” 
> fs e /, / é 4 , ee aA \ 
agiav 4 dlanois yiyyyras, tore ylyvetal wws iooryg 6 Oy 
Tig Dirlag elvas Ooxet. 

Od € , ds \ 7, »” ~ Py , Se ~ 

3 UX Oporws 08 TO looy Ey Te Toig dialog xal ev TH 
biria dalveror Eye: Fors yap ev pty roig dixatac th 

, x yap &v pry roig Bixatag Yoow 

, \ > > fer VY 3 \ \ / > x 
mewTws TO xaT aflav, To 08 xaTa moody devTépwe, ev OF 

~ t: \ \ 
TH DIMA TO Bey KATA ToTdy Mpwrws, Todt xaT aEiay dev- 





adverbial. For this intransitive use , tained above in § 6 of the last chapter, 

of iod¢w, cf. xiii. 1: iodovres rats | is again appealed to. Where friends 

wperciass Kal Biabéporres. are not equal, their friendship must be 
7 elonra| Cf. vit. iii. 2-3. regulated by proportion. 

3 ox dpolws—tdevrépws] * But 
VII. 2 Gvdaoyov &] The same | equality seems to stand differently in 

principle of distributive justice, main- | justice and in friendship. In justice, 





VIl.j HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 265 


, ~ > 2A % YD 2 , > ~ a 
Tipws. OyAov 0, tay WoAY diaoTypLA ylyyyras apeTig 7) 
4 a , , ¥ Moo = > A ” /. Red 
xaxkag 7% eumoplag 4 Tiveg HAAGV* ov yao ETL Diros cioiy, 
~ > /, > ~ ‘4 ~ ~ 
AAD 0b0 a&wtow. eudavécraroy Oe ToT ert Tay bemy * 
ns 4A a ~ ~ > ~ c , 
Taioroy yao oT Taos Tog ayaboig tmrepeyouoiw. OHAov 
X a% ~~ e A >t 4A Va 4A ~ 7 
3: xal exh ry Pacirswy’ odd2 yap TovTOIg aFiovoww sivas 
c 4 Le AN ~ > / a 
Dido of woAv xaTadeeoresol, ovde Tolg asicrtoIg 7 Toda- 
Ul c > X YW fe > x X = : ~ 7 
TATOOS of pydevog ASio1. axp1iyg Ev ody Ev ToIg ToLOUTOIC 5 
> ” c , a / ¢ f. ~ \ > 
GU% EOTIY ODT LOC, EWS Tivos ob Didol* ToAAwY yap adai- 
wv / \ \ / i ~ ~ 
poupevwy ETL pever, TOAD 68 yuwpicbévros, ciov Tod God, 
> / a \ > ~ a > > / c f. 
odxéTi. OFev xal amopsiras, xy oT od BobAovras of Dina 6 
~ / X / ~ Fis ~ = A <P >> 
T0ig Diroig TA peyiota Thy ayabay, olov Geog civas- odd: 
. » s » at 56 IAL OA s A 7 
yao eth Dirotr ecovTas avToic, ovde a7 ayaha * of yap Diros 
> , > dA on y a « f. ~ , , 
ayaha. sida xarwe elena O78 6 Divos THO OiAw Povrstas 
> <1 S if C4 s a / er > 2 bee ~ Pe 
rayada 2xcivov Evexa, révery ay 220k ol0g WoT zoTly Zxzivos 


avicwra 5: tyts BovAyoeTas Ta meyiota ayaa 
pore o3 ioe pay yadd. 

c ~ \ / > of id bd , 
auTe yap parc Exacros Povreras Taya. 


ees 
a ou TAaYTA* 


4 
iows 





proportionate equality is primary, and 
quantitative equality secondary; in 


friendship, quantitative equality is the: 


first, and proportionate equality the 
second consideration.’ Distributive 
justice begins by presupposing in- 
equalities between man and man, and 
by proportionate assignments it equal- 
izes these. Justice, however, cares 
little about bringing men to quantita- 
tive or exact equality. The latter 
kind of equality at all events is aimed 
at only in democracies, while the pro- 
portionate equality belongs to aristo- 
eraciesand constitutional governments, 
cf. Ar. Pol. vi. ii. 2. Friendship on 
the other hand begins by presupposing 
equality between the parties, and 


though a certain amount of inequality | 


may be made up by proportionate 
assignment of affection, &c., yet a 
wide interval of inequality will render 
friendship altogether impossible, 

4 Trciotoy yap obra] The reading 
mwAciorwy in the Oxford reprint of 
Bekker's edition (1837) is a misprint. 

VOL, Il. 





The original Berlin edition has 
TAEeioTov. 

5 axpiBys—odxér:] ‘In such cases 
there is no exact definition up to what 
point friendship is possible; for though 
many (advantages) be taken away 
(from the one side), friendship still 
abides ; but when (the one friend) is 
far removed from the other, as, for 
instance, God is from man, there is 
no friendship any longer.’ 

6 Sev xal—riyafd] ‘From this 
the question hasarisen whether friends 
wish for their friends the greatest of 
all goods, as for instance to be gods. 
For having attained this, they would 
no longer at all be friends to those 
who formed the wish, and therefore 
no advantage to them, for friends 
are an advantage. If then it has 
been rightly stated that the friend 
wishes all that is good to his friend 
for that friend’s sake, it will be 
necessary for that friend to remain as 
he is, and then he will wish for him, 
being a map, the greatest goods. 


MM 


8 


N 


w 


266 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. [ Cuap. 


X 


Oi worrol 02 doxotor did Dirotipiay Povrcobas dirciobas 
pcirroy y dirsiv, O40 Diroxcraxes of worrol * twepeyone- 
ro DiAog 6 xOAaE, 7H 7 Urog sivas xab 
vos yap didog 6 xoAaE, 7 mpoomosciras To1TOg 
~ ~ ~ >s ~ > 4 
panrrov dirsiv 7H dirciobgou. 1d de dirciobces EvYUS elyces 
> ~ ~ ~ § = dy € » ee ae > or ¢.& 
doxel TOU TiLaoUaL, OU On Of WOAAGL EdievTat., ou Os AUTO 
NFS c ”~ ‘ 4 > ‘\ \ , 
0 golxaciw aipetobar THY TiLyY, AAAA xaTa cupMe—>yxOE * 
yaipovor yap of piv moarol brs trav ev raig eEouriass 
7 = 5 \ \ yt id e vf QA 0& 4 > 
Tipdpevos Oi Thy Edwida.: oloyrou yap revgerdas wap 
> ~~ * e ~ 
avriy, av Tov déwyTas* we dy onmElw Tig eUmabelag yal- 
~ ~ > \ ~ > ~ 2907 > 
pouor TH Tiny. of O two Twy emterx@y xal eidorwy ops- 
yomsvor Tintg PePasoasr THy oixsiay doFav edievras weph 
autéy* yatpoues On OTs cloly ayatol, miatevovTes TH TY 
, , ~ ~ INS > ia / 
AsyovTwy xpicet. TO dirsiobas OF xa’ abto yaipovow* 
a ~ ~ ~ , 
O10 Oo€eev av xpeirrov elvos Tod Tindobos, xal % dsria 
9 € aN c \ ~ >. ~~ ~ ~ a 
xal aoriy aipers elvan. doxet o ey To pinsiy pParnroyv 7 
° ~ ~ ~ c ~~ ~ 
gv td Dirsiobas elves. opeloy 8 ad parépes Th punsiy 
yainovoas* Evias yap didoaor Ta Eaute@y tpEhecGou, xa 
dirotios pbyv eidvias, avTidsrciogas 0 ov Cyrotiow, éav 
> , A > / > > «4 A > ~ ww re 
apDdorepa py evdeynrat, AAA bHAVOY KUTOIC EOlxEY EbVOLL, — 
~ ~ vn 
éxv Epo ed mparrovtag, xal auTal dirodow abrovs, xav 





After all, perhaps he will not wish 
him to have everything. For every one 
especially wishes for himself what is 
good.’ Under the words dmope?ra: uh 
mor ov is included a question both as 
to fact and cause. Ovdt yap denies 
the fact and states the cause, which is 
that if we wished our friend to become 
a god, we should wish him to be in a 
position where he can no longer be 
our friend. The last sentence (%ows 
8 of wdvra) qualifies the previous 
statement, and guards against the 
notion that any human friendship can 
be utterly disinterested and selfless. 
The same topic is fully discussed~in 
the eighth chapter of Book LX. 


VIII. 1—2 Though the essence of 
friendship consists rather in loving 
than in being loved, the mass of men 





prefer the latter, as ministering to 
their vanity. Being loved is akin to 
being honoured. Parenthetically it 
may be observed, that honour is sought 
not for itself but on account of things 
variously associated with it (Kara& oup- 
BeBnxés). (1) To be honoured by 
the great affords a hope of promotion. 
(2) To be honoured by the wise and _ 
good is an evidence to men of their 
own merits. Thus honour is desired 
as a means to the consciousness of 
virtue. Cf. Eth. 1. v. 5: eolxact thy 
tiny didxew a motebwow éavTovs 
GyaBods elvos+ (yrodo yoiy ixd Trav 
povinwy tiyacOa, Kal wap’ ols yyvd- 
oxovTat, Kat én’ dperi. 

3 The active spirit of love, as 
opposed to the passive gratification of 
being loved, is exemplified by the 


| ease of mothers, who give their children 





VIll.] HOEIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON VIII. 267 


> 


ex eh Atv w Tol WOOT MEL eTPOveLTs Old THY Kyvol- 4 
Exeivor padev cov grph mpooyxes 21.0 head 
ay. petro 6: pila Dirias evens sy TW pexary, xa THY Dir- 
opiney Em auvoureeveny, Gineoy aperyi TO dinsiv = EOIXEY, oor 
ey ols TOUTO yiveras xaT aGiay, oUToL provirros Diror xual 7 
rovrwy diria. oTw oO ay xaloiavoo parmior chev Oiao*5 
ee \ EL eon > 7 N.. / , \ 
ioalowrTo yao av. 70 iooTyg xual OmoloTys DiaAcTys, xab 
~ / wv 
PAMOTA Ley 7 THY HAT ApeTHYOLOLOT NS" PoviLLoL yapovTEs 
> e \ \ \ > y , \ ” a7 
zal aitovs xal TPOS AAAYACUS [LEvOUTI, Xk GUTE OEOvTaL 
, were ~ wn ; > © ; ~ A B 
davrawy ov§ UMYPETOUTL TOLAUTA, AAA WES ElTely XA Ola- 
~ ~ \ 7 > \ Pad 
xwrvoves* Tay ayabdy ep PANT auTovs Guapr avery pare 
~ / s 
Toig Dirois cavrpereiy. of 02 pox Sapok TO ey Bs Basov oux 
oud yap AUTOS Srorsévour ty moos OvTEg* er 
> tA xX 
oAbyoy ae xX povov yhyvovran dinar, Xaipovres TH anrG ROY 
c ~ ~ 
poxOypia. of ypjoipor OF nak 7dsig ext marsiov diapevov- 6 
\ / 3 \ * 4 
ow Ews yap dv ropitwow roovag 7 wWdzAclag AAAHAIC. 
She 3 , X / X Ce See + 7 7 
2& évavTioy O62 pariota piv doxel 7 dia TO yojowmoy yiy- 
/ Ka / 4 > ‘ Pine, a + \ 
verfas dria, oloy mevyng TArovTio, auatyg EidoTs* ob yap 
, 3 \ yw 7 ° , > > ~ Ww 
TuyzZaver Tig Evdeng wy, ToUTOV Ehigevog avTOUpsiTAL AAD. 
> ~ D4 ow (4 A b) A a! ’ , 4 
éyraida O av Tig EAxot nak EpaoTay xai Epwmevov, xal 
\ , 
KAAOY HOLL ObT YOY. 


v 
EXoucly - 


\ , \ ee ae \ ~ 
Os Datvovras xab of epacral yeroins 
a ~ ~ ~ 
eviote, a&iwuvtes Dirciobas we dirodoi * opolws Oy Didry- 
” Ww / ~ + 
Tous ovTas tows aSswréiov, pydiv 62 Towdrov Eyovras 
~ yy \ 39.9 , Tae / ne UE > 
yeroiov. tows 02 000 edieras Td evavriov Tod evavTion xa 7 
c / LARC \ B26 é e s vy 2& ~ / > , é 
AITO, AAAL HATA TvUPzPyxIG, 7 0 bpeEsg Tod péoou eoTly 





to be brought up by other persons, 
and go on loving them, though not 
eyen recognised by them. 

4—5 It is this active spirit of love 
which constitutes the virtue of friend- 
ship, and which causes us to praise 
those who are of a friendly disposition. 
This then explains what was above 
stated merely as a fact, Eth. vim i. 5. 
The same spirit serves as the equal- 
ising principle in unequal friendships, 
greater merit being met by greater love. 

5—7 Friendship is based on equality 
and similarity, especially the friend- 
ship of the good. Friendships for the 
sake of pleasure or profit seem rather 





based on contrariety, as for instance 
on the contrariety of riches and 
poverty. But, after all, one would 
say not that the contrary seeks its 
contrary, but that the contrary seeks 
the mean. 

5 paducTa piv TOV Kat’ apeThy 
duodtns| Cf. the Lysis of Plato, -p. 
214, quoted above upon ch. i. 6. 

tev &yabGv—emirpérew] ‘For the 
good will neither do wrong them- 
selves, nor permit their friends to do 
it. 

7 Opetis rod wécov] This phrase is 
in accordance with the pantheistic 
side of Aristotle’s philosophy, attri- 


M M2 


268 HGIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. | Cap. 


oT yao ayatoy, of dD Enow ony typw yeviobas arn 
TOUTO yap ayatoy, oloy TH Enpw ovy vypw yever 
sh A f 224 ei; \ ~ he n \ ~ HAD c / 
emi TO BeTov sAUzIY, xal TH UepUw Hal TOG HAAG Golwe. 
~ > , \ , . , , 
Taira piv ov adsiobw’ xal yap ect aAroTpIM@TEpaL, 
aki *) pone be - ° > <7 rT \ > yh } ev 
9 Lolne Of, xaUaTED Ev apy slonTOI, Wepl TaVTa Ob 
re > ro) > ov , eae , ) c , \ 
Tulg QuTOIG civas 4 Te DiAla xal To Olxatov’ ev aTATy yap 
/ Ny ~ rd . 2 \ / Nv 
xolvwvie Ooxel Th Oixasov eivasr, xab Oirla Oé- TT poo ay O- 
, ~ / \ 4 A 
psuougk youy ws direug Tous TULTAOUS nol Tous TvoTLA- 
/ A A > ~ Pld / 
TITAS, bolws OF nal Tog ev TAIS aAAGIG xoiwwyvious 
f° o INN ~ 2, 8 ~ fs : , 
xual ocov O% xowwvodoiw, ext Torotroy ears Diriar xal 
\ bd / ‘ \ ‘\ f 9 
xab 1 Tapoinia Sxowa ta dirwy, 
3a fr ae 3 , \ e / ” > > ~ x 
2ophig* ev xowmvin yap % diria. Fors 0 aderdoig pey 
\ "le is iA , ~ > of > , \ 
HAL ETALDOIS TAYTA KOWA, TOS 0 aAAOIC adwricpeva, xO 
~ \ , ~ s 3 / \ A ~ ~ © 
TOMS [LEY TAS TOS 0 éAaTTw* xal yap Twy Diri@y at 
, \ \ \ / > 
Oracépes 8 xal Ta Olxoua’ ob 
\ > ‘ ~ \ / 4 3 ~ A > 7 
YAP TAUTA YovEuTk WHOS TEXVA XO adeAdoig pos AAAHAOUS, 
399 € 4 \ fF. c / \ {275 ~ ” 
OUD ETALDOIG XO TOAITAIC, OLolws 0: mal éerl rey dAAwY 
~ tA NA A A yd ‘\ c / 4 
3 DIADY. ETEPR ON HAL TA ANIXA MpOS ExATTOUS TOUTwWY, 
\ + , ~ ~ A /. 
xal avgyow rAapPaver TH parArov wpdg iroug elvat, 
e , > ~ c ~ / a / 
Oloy YpyuaTa amTooTEpyTas eTaspov dewore pov 7% TOAITHY, 
1 py PonSjoa: adernade 7 dbveiw, xai matakou warépa 
mee ea wh + f : . o a P 
ne « ~ ~ 
 bvrwvoiiy annoy. adgeobar 0: meduxey ape Th >in 
xal TO Oixasov, WS ev Toig avToig bvTa xal-éx Toov 
, / ~ 4 4 od 
40ijxovTa, ai OF xolvwvies maoos poploig eolnaos THE 
w~ \ / \ 
TOMITIXTS* CupmopevovTas yao eri Tivt cupdécovTi, xab 
~ yl 2 AG ~ > 7. fer *. } c r~ ‘\ 3: 
Mopiconevol Th TwY Eig TOY Ploy’ xab y% WoriTIxy Ge 


yap To Obxasov. 


pay panroy ab & arrov. 





buting to nature a desire for the good. 
Cf. De Anima, u. iv. 3: wdvta yap 
€xelvov (Tod Gelov) dpéyerat, Kanelvov 
évexa mpatre: boa mparTe: Kata pio. 
Eth. x. ii. 4: Yows 88 nal ev rots 
gpatrAos dork tt puoikdy dyabby Kpetrroy 
4} na? aitd, & eptera Tod oixelov 
ayabov. 


IX. 1 ev apxp] Eth. vam. i. 4. 

mept TavTa Kat év Tots abtots] ‘ About 
the same things, and in the same 
Cf. Eth, v. iii. 5: ofs re 
yap Sixaov tuyxdve bv, 300 éorl, Kad 


persons.’ 





ev ois Ta mpdypnara, dbo. Pol. m1. ix. 3: 
Thy wey Tov mpdyuaros icérnTa duodo- 
yotot, Thy 5€ ois audio Bntovos. 

3 Avfec0 58&—S:hnovra] ‘ Justice 
of necessity becomes more binding as 
friendship becomes closer, for they 
exist in the same subjects, and are 
coextensive in their application.’ 

4 af 5 xowwvla:—Blov] ‘ All com- 
munities are like parts of the political 
community; for (the members of 
them) unite with a view to some ad- 
vantage, and to providing some of the 
conveniences of life.’ 


Vill.—X. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 269 


/ ~ , 7 » ~ "3s by 6 
xowvwvia To cupdécovrog yap Ooxet xal e& apyiig cuver- 
Gciv xa Oiapévery’ TovTov yap xal of vouobéras oToyalov- 
xal Olxasoy dacw elvar TO xow7y cupdécov. ai pt 
’ d vy p i . 5 [ev 5 
Ov arcs xowwvint xaTHX Léon TOD TuLdeoovTOS edie 
oby GAAaL x pep TO cupdéeoovtos edievrai, 


Tal 


- ~ . ~ \ A ~ A > 7, 
Oioy TAWTHZES [LEY TOV KATH Tov 7 Aouv mpog epyaciay 
, + ne ~ ~ 
HOMATwWY 7 Th ToLotiTov, cvoTTpATI@TON OF ToD xaTa Toy 
f, yw Ww / a /, > / 
WOASLOY, ITE YONUATWY ELITE VINIS 7 MOAEWS ODEyoLEVOL, 
62 Tay 
~ N> er 4 > ~ , ~ A 
xowwvieny Os YOovnY Goxouc yiyvec Gas, Giacwrey xal 


/ \ / 
opoiws OF xal duarérar xual dOyporas. Fvion 
> Ns ¥ x , Pa \ , w 
Epavicta@y* abtas yap Guoiag Evexa xal cuvouciacs. ruoe 
> - A ‘\ ‘ nee ~ 
O atta: ib ri moritixgy eolxacw elvar* ov yao Tod 
/ , e y.. 3 / > > > a , 
TapovTos TupdéepovTog 7 WoAITIny EdisTal, AAA sig AmavTA 
\ / / ~ / 
tov Piov, Gucias te mostvteg xal wepl TavTag cuvddouG, 
\ / ~ ~ \ ~ 
Tipag amovenovres Toig Gzols, xal abtoig avamavoess 
ly > can ~ 
 WOopegovTeg ped doris. 
s > / \ \ ~ ~ 
cuvotos Daivovras yiver Gar meTa TAG THY xapray ouyxo- 
>A i > fis y 4 > 7 ,. /, ¥ 
[OAS OlOY ATAPYAL’ PANITTA Yap Ey TOUTOIG EO YOAMCOY 
~ ~ ~ \ / ~ 
Tolg xaspoig. maces Oy DalvovTas ai xowwvios popia Ti¢ 6 


ca \ > ~ / \ 
ai yap dpyatas Guotar xal 


~ , ~ / 
WorrTings sivas’ axonrnovdycouos 02 ab Toradrar Dirions 
~ s , 
TAG TOAUTALS xOIVwVice. 
, , ‘ / 
Tlorsreiag 8 early eldy tpia, loos 0% xai mapexPaceic, 10 


i e ~ 
olov dbopah rorwy. cio) F ai pv morsrsins Paosrcin 





5 Sacwrav Kal épaucréy] Cardwell 
refers for illustration of these terms 
to Demosthenes, pp. 313, 23; 403,19; 
1355.33 1217, 14. 

By omitting, with Fritzsche, Bek- 
ker’s full stop after svvouctas, and by 
placing the words od yap—rdy Bior in 
a parenthesis, we see that the parti- 
ciples mowdvres, Gmrovépovtes, mopt- 
(ovres are to be referred to Kowwyvol, 
as implied in xowwyav above. The 
passage which speaks of men ‘ award- 

ing honour to the gods, while providing 
recreation and pleasure for themselves,’ 
is highly characteristic of the Greek 
religion. This sort of thing can 
perhaps be best understood in the 


present day by those who have seen 





the religious festivals of the Hindoos. 
Cf. Plato’s Republic, p. 364 B: @votas 
Te Kal émwdais—pc0” 7dovay te Kal 
éopTav. 


X. This chapter, containing a classi- 
fication of forms of government and of 
the perversions to which they are 
exposed, can hardly have been written 
after the Politics of Aristotle. It has 
rather the appearance of a first essay, 
the conclusions of which were after- 
wards worked out into detail, and 
partly modified. Thus Aristotle in 
the Politics by no means concedes the 
position that monarchy is the best 
form of government. He argues, Pol. 
I. xv. 4-16, that it is better for a 


v 


270 HOIKON NIKOMAXEION VIII. [ Cua. 
Te xal apiotoxpatia, Tpity 0 7% aro TienaToy, Hy TI- 
poxpatinny Asyew olxsiov dalverot, worirelav 0 avriy 
slwfaciv of wasioro: xarciv. Tourwy O: Bertioryn pay 
7 Pacsasia, xetpiory 0 7 Tipoxpor ie. mapex Boots de 
Bacircing pey Tupawyis® ade yap poverpyicu, depépouers 
Of mAsiotov’ 6 pay yep TUpavves To EauTo oupdépov 
cxomre, 608 Paciredg Td THY apyoudvwy. ob yap eer! 
Bacrsds 6 py avrapeng xal maos Toig ayabois brepeywv" 
6 38 Tootrog ovdevdg mpocdsiTo* TA WHEAILA ody abTad 
pav obx av oxoroly, Toig 0 dpyousvoig* 6 yap py ToLodTog 





state to be governed by good laws 
than by the best individual will; 
further on, Pol. m1. xvii., he qualifies 
this by admitting that for some peoples 
monarchy is better suited. 

1 mapexBdoes| ‘ Perversions’ or 
‘abnormal growths’; ef. Pol. ut. vi. 
‘1, where a form of government is 
pronounced to be normal as long as it 
aims at the public good, abnormal 
when its end is private interest: 
gavepdy Tolyuy ws boat wey mode Td 
Kowh ouupépoy akorovow, avra pey 
bp0al Tvyxdvovew otcat Kara Td aMAGS 
Sixaov, Boa 5 7d cHérepov pdvoy TaV 
apxdvTwv, huaptnuévat Tacat Kal mapeK- 
Bdacets tev bp0Gy moAtTEL@v* SeowotiKal 
yap, ) dé wéAts Kowwvla Tey eAcvdepwr 
early, 

trodwrelay 8 abrhy eidbact of rAcitrot 
kadeiv|] ‘ But most people are accus- 
tomed to term it “a constitution.’ 
The word wod:rela was used by the 
Greeks in a restricted sense, just as 
the word ‘constitution’ is in English, 
to denote a balanced form of govern- 
ment. Cf. Ar. Pol. mt. vii. 3: ray 5é 
To TAOS mpds Td Kody ToALTEdNTAL 
oun €pov, Kadeira 7d Kowdv dvoua 
macév TOv modtTe@y, woduTrela. Ari- 
stotle does not use the word in the 
Politics to denote a timocracy. In 
the ninth chapter of Book IV. he uses 
it to denote a mixed form between 





oligarchy and democracy. He also 
uses it to express his own ideal of a 
state, which was far from being a 
timocracy. 

2 5 yap wh ToLovTos KAnpwrds Gy TIS 
efn Baoideds| ‘For he who had not 
these qualifications would be a sort of 
ballot-box king.’ It is difficult to ex- 
press the word «Anpwrés, which as 
coupled with Bacweds is certai 
meant to be contemptuous, Aristo 
does not appear to mean any definite 
form of monarchy, so we learn nothing 
from Pol, 11. xiy., to which the com- 
mentators refer us. Aristotle here 
says that the genuine king must be 
independent in property and position, 
and above all his subjects in this re- 
spect. Externally wanting nothing 
for himself, he will administer the 
state for the good of his subjects. If 
this is not the case, he will be no 
genuine king, but a parvenu, kAnpwrds 
1s, like a person who had been raised 
to the throne by the contingency of 
lot, and therefore insecure in his posi- 
tion, with perhaps only a temporary 
tenure of office. The word éuticdovs 
is coupled with wh KAnpwrds, (as an 
epithet of mevrapxias), Pol. 1. xi. 7. 
It is possible that in the present pas- 
sage a notion of ‘ paid services’ may 
be implied. If so, ‘hireling monarch’ 
would express the terms under notice, 


X.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 271 


A ¥ , \ 
xAnpwros av Tig Ely Bagiredg. 7 02 Tupawls 2E tvavrTiag 
, ‘ ‘ \ « ~ 3 A Ker \ , 
Tavry To yap saute cyaiov dimes. xa Pavepwrepov 
> > ~ 
em) rauryg Ort yepiory® xaxiotoy OF To évavTioy Td 3 
/ . 
Bsariorm. petaPaiver 0 &x Paorrslag cig Tupavvida: 
, , > , c fg NS \ 
davrcrng yap eoTs povapyias a Tupavviss 6 by poxSupdc 
, \ , , 
Bacsrsdg tupavvog yiverat, 8&5 dpiotoxpatiag 32 ig 
, , ~ , aA \ ~ 
dAtyapylay xaxig thy apyovTwy, of vénouTr TA Tig 
s, 4 \ > ’ a ~ ~ 
ToAews Tapa THy aSiav, xal wavTa 7 Ta TAcioTa Thy 
~ ~ 4 ~ ~ 
ayaiiy saurois, xal tag adpyag dsl Toig adroic, wepl 
, , \ ~ tf dA BA \ 
AscloTov Toovsvos TO WAouTEiv* GAtyor Qy Apyoucs xal 
poxdypot civtl riby erisinxectarwv. ex 08 On Tioxpariag 
, ? 
zig Oypoxpariay’ cuvopor yap siow avtas* waroug yap 
Bovrsras xal 7 Timoxparia eivat, xak loos wavreg of év TH 
Tipypati, xara 8 poydnpoy éotiv 7 dypoxpatias él 
/ ~ 
paxpoy yap wapexPaiver ro Tig woAsTeiag eidog. peta 
/ XN s / > icf ec ~ > / 
Barnroucs fev ouy parse OUTWS Ab TOAITEAL* EAAYIOTOY 
nw / 9 nw 
yap oiTw xa paora peTaPalvovorw. snowpara 0 abrir 4 
5 f / a ~ 
xab olov mapadelypara AaB Tig av xal ev Taig oixious. 
‘ ~ 
Wo piv yap marpog mpeg vicig xowwvie Bactrziag Eyes 
Tyna Thy TexvOv yap TO Tarp pines. evTetider OF 
xah"Opnzos tov Ala warépa mpooayopsve* marpinyn yap 
¢ / > 5 ~ 
apy Povrsras y Pacireia sivas. ev [lépooug 0 7 rod 
7 ~ ~ 
Rat pog Tupavvixy* yotwvTa: yap we dovAag Toig viéow,. 
4 Or \ 4 , A S&S. £F \ A ~~ 
TUPAYVIHH OF XAL 7 decmorov wpog OovAoug*’ To yap Tov 
~~ a 
deomorov cup.dépoy ev auTy mpaTreTas. alTy pby aby ooby 
daiveras, 7 Ilepoixy 08 ypaptypévy: rey diadspovtwy 
\ er °F A 3 , FOR Sv \ \ > 
yap ai apyal diadopor. avopig G2 xal yuvartog apioro- 5 
wv 
xpariny dalverosr* nar’ aFiayv yap 6 avap apyet, xal meph 
~ a det A A >) Paget dt \ t: Ge ) ots 
Tatra & det Tov avdpae doa 62 yuvainl apudta, exeivy 
> A/> c / X\ 7 eng Utes > > 4 
amodibwaow. amavtwy OF xupievMY 6 avnp Eig oALyapylay 
pebiotyow mapa tTyv a&liav yap avTd wall, xal aby 7 
Gpcivwy. eviore 08 apyourl ai yuvaixes Exixrngos odoas 





4 tav Siuapepdvtrwv—didpopo:| ‘For | Greek feeling about ‘heiresses’ is 
those who differ should be governed | strongly expressed in a fragment of 
differently.’ And thereforethe Persian | Menander (xv.). 
system is wrong, which governs child- | Sorts yuvatk’ éxlxAnpoy émiBupet AaBeiv 
ren as if they were the same asslaves, | mAovrovcay, fro: pivw extive dear, 

5 ‘yuvaixes éxlxAnpor obca] The | % BotAer aruxeiv, uaxdpios kadovuevos, 





272 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 


[ CHap. 


, J \ A ~ 
od Oy yivovTos xa’ aperav al apyal, aAAa dik wrovTOV 


6 xal Odvaps, xabamep ev Taig dAryapyioss. 
O Zoimey 7 Thy dderah@y* loos yap, rany 
HArxioss Biarnrdrrovow* Oiorep av Tord 


TILOXDAT IXY) 
> Via - 3 a 
eb oTov Taig 
~ € / 
TAG NAMIC 


diabépwary, obxérs dderdiny yiverar 7 diria, Onpoxparia 
O& panioTa ply ev Taig deomoros Thy oixyjTewy (evTatha 

\ / 5) ” , “2 1 > \ cv \ 
yap movteg 2& Yoov), xal ev aig adobevang 6 apywy xat 


«c , cd y 
EXATTO eSouola. 
II 


[of 


~ ~~ / , ’ 

Koaf éxacryy 6: téy moriTei@yv Oiria daiveras, ed 
xal To OF Bactasi we bg ToUG BaclAcvousvo 

Ocoyv xal To Oixasov, arrrsh piv moog Tovg evopeevous 


~ / s \ ~ \ , 
ev tmrepoyy) evepysolag’ 60 yap mosst Tog PaorAsuopevouc, 
a ~ ~ of oe / 
clrep ayabos wy Eximersizos aurdy, iv ed mparTwow, 


Wome vonets mpoParwy' bev xa “Opnpzog tov “Aya- 


2 LéYOVO TrOILEVOL AoeeDy elev. 


, Ww Ae 7 
TOLAUTY OF XO 7 TAT PIxY, 


Oracdépes OF TH psyeber Tay evepyeTypatrwy: alriog ya 
foes Dh vei ueyiOl? vei7 sir 
Tov elvas, OoxotvTog peylorou, xual Tpodig xal maidstag* 


\ ae , \ ww ’ , , > \ 
xi TOIS Tm poyovors ns TOAUTA QT OVEILET OS % dures Té apyrxoy 


\ tn A i > / \ A 
TATHD vidy KXal TMpoyovor Exyovwy xal Bacircug Paci- 


, 
3 AsuopLevwy, 
TILCOVTOs Ob YovEls. 


/ ad \ \ , 
4QAAG To xar aFiav> oirw yap xal 7 diria. 


~ / om \ 
év trepoy7 82 ai dirlor avros, O10 xab 
\ \ 4 cus s > 9.7% 
xa TO Olxasov O7 ey ToUTOIG Ov TAUTO 


a A 
xo avopag 


bt \ ~ La > \ AL } > > / * > 

2 mpog yuvaixa y aut diria xal ev apioroxpatig® xar 
\ / ~ / / > / ‘ , 

apeTiy yap, xal TS apeivovs wrgov ayadov, xal To apocoy 


€ 7 a \ x X V7 
5EXATTO* OUTH 0& xal Td Oixatoy. 


4 0 T&y aderAdGY TH 


€ ~ % A © ~ € ~ > 
ETALOLRY, EOlKEy® Toros Yop xt GALKIOT AL, 64 TOLOUTOL 6 


Suomascic nal buorSeic we éx) rd morv. Foie dy TAUTY 
éuorabeis xet bnonfers we i TaOTy 


i. e ‘\ \ 4 ~~ t 4 c ~ 
HOE NY HATA Tay ThAOXDATIXYY O08 Yap OF WOAITAL 


/ ‘ > ~ > , \ A v 
PovaAoyTas HOE EMIELKELC elyvas* ey [-Epet 37 TO ape, xah 


62E irov* obTw On xal y diAla. 


> \ ~ , 
ev 08 ralg mapexPareowy, 


a . QS 5 ih , e] a b Geek: la 
WwoTrEep xab To Olxasov emt pixpoy EOTiv, oUTwM xal y DIAIA 





XI. 3 & trepoxf—vyoreis] ‘ All 
these friendships imply superiority on 
the one side, and hence it is that 
parents are honoured,’ ¢.e. because 
superiority demands honour, as well 
as love. 

5 too yap—elvar] ‘For it is the 
part of the citizens (in a timocracy) to 





live equally and equitably with one 
another.” To understand the full 
meaning of émvescets, see the fine pas- 
sage from Fhet. 1. xiii., translated in 
the note on Eth. v. x. i., and ef. rx. x. 
6. BovAovra: expresses a natural tend- 
ency, cf. vil. x. 3: ®AhGous yap Bod- 
Aerat kad H TimoKparia elvat. 


X.—XII.] HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQON VIII. 273 


5) , Vo > ~ , ae 1> \ IOV. ON 
orl, xal yuioTa ey TH yemplory’ ev Tupavvids yop oudey % 
XN / 
Hit Peet REG «<a alge eaneae? wag le 
xab Td apyopévw, oud? Oirin* oud? yap Oixasove a 


ey olg yap pydev xowwev eoTs TH ApyovTs 


cs ft \ ” \ ~ \ ~ \ 
oloy texviry mpdg opyavov xai Wuxy mpog THe xal 
~ ~ a / ~ 
deomary mpoc dotiaov’ whercira: wiv yap TavTa Tare 
rae ' ~ / f Ne > 7 \ \ Bl 
irs ty ypwpéveor, Dirla 0 ovx zoTs moog Ta arbuxe 
INL , > > INL AY oe EN ~ INV \ 
oud? Oixasov. AA’ oud woOg immov 7% Poiiv, obde mpag 
8 n~ Ge ~ DOV \ , . é c \ ~ 
auAoy 7, OodA0S,  ovdzy yap xolvoy soTiv’ o yap dodAesS 
Bi ” \ ee. av ns Ko x 
Eubuyoy apyavov, To 0 bpyavoy abuyog Soiivog. 4 pev7 
5 Sonn. ee d ri, \ 3.18 <a 4 3 
ouy OotAos, oux Bots Dirla mpog autov, y 0 avIpwmrog 
~ > 7 
Ooxet yap sival Ts Oixasov mavtl avoowmmrw mpog mavTa Toy 
~ , , , 
duvapevoy xoivmv7icas yonou xal cuvdyxys: xal diriag 07, 
\ ~ , 
xa? boov avoowros. emt pixpov Oy xal ev Talg Tupavvioly 8 
e 4 \ \ / > \ ~ > , 54 
ai Dirios xak To dixasov, ev 0& Taig dypwoxpariaig ext 
~ \ \ X \ s 
TATTOV’ TOAAA YAR TH KOH 17 01g OUOIY, 
mm , \ > ~~ / °’ / iA A 
Ev xowevig piv obv waoa dirla eoriv, xabamepelpyros 12 
f 7 , 
adboploee 0 av TIS Thy TE TUYYEVixTY Kal THY ETOIDIXTY. 
«e > A ‘A \ % oo he \a 
ab OF TOAITI“AL XA DUASTIXAL Hal TUMMAIXAL, XAI OTHS 
TOAUTAL, xoWWMUIKAIG EolxaoTs PaAAOY* oloy yap xa’ buo- 
Aoylay Tiva daivovras sivas. 
Tig xa THY Esvinyy. 
e1d7g elvan, ypTyobas 8 maou Ex Tig marpinyg* of yovsis 


2, 4 X\ 7 We 
cig TavTag D8 Tagerv ay 

A c 3, PY / 
Hah 4 cuyyevixy OF dalveras woru- 2 


\ \ Le \ , e c ~ + \ Oe 
bev Yap oTEpyouds TA TEXVA WG EXUTWY Tl OYVTA, TH OE 
parroy Oo 

c x. 0o ee €- ine x \ / 4 . s 
louow of yoveig TH EE abray i Ta yevyyfevta ors Ex Tov- 


~ / 4 
TExXVae TOUS YyovEls wo am EeExelvwy Th OYTA, 





6 &percirai—dixaov] ‘For though | its functions. The slave, who is 


all these things receive benefit from 
those who make use of them, yet 
neither friendship nor justice is pos- 
sible toward inanimate objects.’ The 
corresponding passage in the Hudemian 
Ethies serves as a commentary on this: 


Eth, Eud. vit. x. 4: copBalver d& «ad 


aid Td [e conj. Bonitz] dpyavoy émrme- 
Actas tuyxdvew, hs Bixaoy mpds 7d 
Zpyov, éxelvov yap Evexev éott. The 
instrument receives just so much care 
from its master, as will keep it in 
proper condition for the exercise of 

VOL. II. 





treated not as a person but asa thing, 
receives the same kind of attention. 
Friendship and justice imply the re- 
cognition of personality, they imply 
treating men not as instruments, but 
asendsinthemselves. On the slavery 
of the body to the soul, ef. Ar. Pol. 1. 
y. 6-8. 


XII. 1 dgepioese 8 &y ris] In say- 
ing that all friendships imply com- 
munity of interests, an exception is to 
be made of the friendships of relations 


NN 


274 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. [ Cuap. 


\ ~ / \ > > i ~ hé x 
TWY, HO UAAAOY TUYWXEWTAL TO ad ov TD YEVVATEVTE 4 
~ 4 A 4 > > ~ > ~ ~ 
TO YEvouevay TH ToryjgavTs* TO yap e& avTov oixsiov TH 
> \ 5) a ~ ~ oe > AN 
ad’ ob, oiov ddod¢ 7 4018 7 Sriotiv TO EyovTs* exelyw 9 ovbev 
0 ad ov, 47 1 rd wander 3% Tov ypovou® of 
TO aD ov, % YTTOV. xXul TH WAHYEr OF TOU Ypoy 
x \ AN , / \ Sy bo: 
pv yap evhos yevoneva orépyouow, Ta 08 mposrbovTa 
~ , ~ 7 \ ld ° 
ToS ypovolg TOvG yovels, cUveT 7 alobyow AaovTa, Ex 
~ \ A ~ ~ , 
rouTwy O& OyAov xal OF a& Didrotios paarrov ai wyrEepes. 
~ ‘ s / ~ c c 4 4 .¥ > > 
3yovelg tv ovy Téexva Dirodow we éauTovs (Ta yap EE av- 
~ a \ ~ / XN ~ ¢ 
Téby olov Erepor auTol TH xeywpicbou), Téxva OF yovElg WE 
\ ~ ~ 
am exelvwy meduxora, aderdol 0 aAATAoUG Tw Ex THY 
~ ~ > J a 
auTiy mehuxévar* 7 yap mpog eExeiva TaUTOTYS AAATAOS 
3 ~ a A ree, \ e/ \ \ 
Tautou bev hac ravTov aina xal Zitav xal ra ToI- 
~ tee, § \ > , {. 2 / / \ A 
taira. sick 01) TAUTO Tus xal ev Oinpymévoss. peya O3 mpg 
/ , 4 ye , 
Dirtav xal rd cuvtpodoy xal ro nal yaiiav? HAE yap 
sf \ e 4 e ~ \ $. 43 X ~ 
Haima, xab ob cuvybers eraipor* O10 xak 7 AdeADiny TH ETOI- 
~ ~ iN \ ~ > 
pixy, oporovras, aveliol O& xal of Aoirol cuyyevelg Ex 
~ \ \ ~ > ww re 
TOUTWY TUYOxElWYTaL TH yap aro Thy avTéy Elvat.  Yi- 
> ‘ \ > 4 ¢ 2. 3 , fad , 
yvovras 0 ob wey oixesorepos of O AAAOTPIMTEPOL TH TUVEY- 
\ \ \ ” ~ 
5S yus 7 moppw Tov apynyoy eivar, errs 0 7 pay mpd yovels 
/ A , A 7, \ A 
Diria réxvoic, xal avGowmross moog Geovs, wo moog ayaboy 
’ \ ait / < z \ ‘A A / ~ 
Hal bmrepeyov' 80 yap Mewoijxaor Ta peyioTa* TOU yap 
vay ad By , ~ n 
elvar xal Tpadyvas airiot, xal yevopévorg Tod maevdivas. 
+ INS ‘ Wee XN | A , ra s , ~ 
6 EEL OF HAL TO HOD xal TO Yoromoy 7 ToLMdTY dirAla Mar- 
~ / oa A / / ~ , 
Aov Thy dOveiwy, bow xal xowdrepog 6 Plog avToig éoriv. 
ZOTs OF xa) ey TH AdEADINY Ameo nal ev TH Erapiny, xa 
; vo nN ‘i 7 Pen, 
nr >. ~ . / a Lee ] ~ c a 
P-AAAOY EV TOIG ETIELHET!, XL OAWS EV TOlS épolois, 0ow 
U , ~ / 
OlNELOTEDOL Hal Ex YyevETIG Umapyoucs OTEDyOvTEG AAAT= 
WG 4 ~ ~ \ / 
Aous, xal Gow buondéorepos of Ex Thy abTay xa) cuvrpodor 





and companions, which depend on 
feeling rather than on any sort of 
compact. 

3 1 yap mpos exeiva Tabtérns &AAH- 
Aois tabtowoet] ‘For their identity 
with the parents identifies them with 
one another.’ éxeiva is in the neuter 
gender on account of the words é 
Tév avtev to which it immediately 
refers. 





4 Gvefiol 5t—elva:] ‘But cousins 
and all other relations get their bond 
of unity from these (¢. ¢. the brothers); 
for (it depends) on their coming from 
the same stock. Relations are more 
or less closely united to one another, 
in proportion as their common an- 
cestor is more or less near, 

5 mpos Ocods as mpds ayabdy Kal 
bmepéxov] Cf. Eth. vit. vii. 4, 1X. i. 7, 


XII.—XIII.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 275 


\ N , € U » ee \ \ / “ / 

xab masdeyIevreg opolwg* xal yi xaTde Toy yodvoy doxipaola 
ad / / ~ 

TAsoTy xal PsPaswTaryn. avaroyov OF xal év Toig Aol-7 

n~ 7 ~ \ lg 
moig Tey ouyysvOy TA Dirind. avdpl OF xal yuvauxt irate 
doxel xaTa dvuow braoyey: avowmros yap TH dices ocuv 

A ~ a Px iP ag P : 2 i 0 £43 : 

OuaoTixoy WAAAY 7 WoAITIXOY, Bow MpdTEpov xa) dvayxo- 
, > la lZ \ iA ~ , 
OTEpoy oixin mMoAews, xal TEexvomolia xoIvOTEpoY ToIS Swols. 

~ \ yy » cea ~ c , > , e 2 
TOig pev OUY AAAOIG Ext TooOUTOY 7 xolvwvian ZorTiv, of O 
BA > ft 6 , ~ \ 
dvipeomos ov movoy THs Texvowasioig yapw cuvorodory, AA 
xal THY cic Tov Bioy eudde yep Oinpntas Te ithe xo EOTIY 
erspa aw pig xo} ylovaunog* eTrapxovol ou AAAI, el¢ 
To xoivoy Tibévreg TH Tia. did Tatra 03 xal Td YpyoIpoy 
> ~ \ ¥ XS , ~ BY \ 
elvou Ooxel xa) Td yOu ev TaUTY TH Diria. ely O av xa OF 
‘ y é ra é 
pst iy, 

/ * ~ 7 
Xalporev av TH ToL10vTH. 
o 
eivas* 


el émisixeig elev’ Eats yap éxarépou apeTy, xol 
ig XX % , > ~ 
Tuvosopmos OF TH Téxva doxel 
Os Garrov of arexvor OiarAvovTas’ TA yap Téxva 
% > \ > ~ , X \ r ns \ ~ 
xowvoy ayabov audhoiv, cuveyer 08 TO xolvev. Td OF THES 
cupPiwréoy avdpt mpdg yuvaixa xal draws diAw mpds Hiroy, 
5d ’ ~ m & ies 2 \ 
oudey etepoy daivera Syrelo bees } ribs Oixcuoy* ov yap 
TOHUTOY dalvercu TO Ginep moog tov direv xal roy abvetoy 
nal Tov eTaipoy xak Tov suudoiTryTyy. 
] > lod b) 
Tpirraéy 3 ovcdy dirsdv, xabamep ev apyy elpyrat,y3 
\ x € , ~ \ 5) - , /, ” ~ NA 
xab xa exaoryny Toy wey ev iooryti diawy ovrwy Tay dt 
FN 3 2." \ € A > \ /. ig \ 
xa’ trepoyyy (xual yap buolws ayabol dire: yivovras xal 





&e. Aristotle throughout these books 
speaks of ‘‘the gods” from the point 


supposes that of the state, which will 
accordingly be prior. In the same 


of view of the popular religion. 

7 mpdrepoy «al dvaryxadrepoy vikia 
mwédkews| In point of time the family 
is prior to the state, but in point of 
idea (Adyw) and essentially (ver) 
the state is prior: Cf Ar. Pol. t. ii. 
12: Kal mpdrepov 5h TH pioer mdALs 7) 
oikla kad Exasros Huey éotly, Td yap 


baov mpdrepov avaryKatoy clyat Tod 


mépous* &ratpoupévov yap Tod bAou od 
Zrrat movs ovdé xelp, ef wh duwvdpws. 
Aristotle argues that, without the 
idea of the ‘state,’ the terms ‘man’ 


-and ‘family’ would lose their mean- 


ing. Thus the idea of family pre- 





way, the family is more necessary as 
a means, the state as an end. 

érapkodaw ovv—idia| ‘They help 
one another therefore, bringing what 
they each have separately into the 
common stock.’ Fritzsche quotes 
the saying of Ischomachus to his 
wife in the Geonomics of Xenophon 
(vii. 13.) viv 3) -otkos juty b5¢ xowds 
éorw. *Eyé te dp, boa pol ecru, 
a&ravra «is Td Kowdy aropatyw, od TE 
boa avéeyno, mdyra cis Td kowdy Kareé- 
Onkas. 


XII. 1 ev apy] Hth, vunr iii . 1: 


NN 2 


27 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 


oO 


[Cuap. 


, / 


U € / X A en “« \ 5 \ \ , 
apshywy yelpovs, Golweg 08 xal 7deig, xal did TO Ypyoipoy 
~ \ * 
icatovres Tals Whersioug xal diahécovrec), Todg looug wey 
~ o ~ ~ ~ ‘ \ 
nar icoryta bei Tw DiAsiv xal roig Aommoig ioageyv, Tos 
> ~ ~ ~ / / 
29 avicoug TM davanroyoy Taig brepoyals amodiovas. ‘yiyve- 
A A > / € , > ~ \ s 
Tar 08 TH éyxajpara uab al péurbers ev Ty xara TO 
s 7 a / ED / > , c \ a 
NenT ov OsAla H povyn 7 parirra evrdcyws. ob wiv yap 
9 > » Kd ~ ~ 
Ov cperyy diror ovreg 20 dpdv arAATAoug moobupoivras” 
~ la 
wpog TOUTS O amiAAwULE- 
3 ” > 7 LENS) / _ \ \ ~ 
YY OUX ETTIV EYHANLATH OVE Layo? Tov yao didodyTa 
\ s ~ > \ / > a oe s / 
xab 20 molotvyTa ovdslg duoyepalver, AAN Edy 7 Yopletc, 
> / FS Nin € De / / vw > / 
AruvEeTat EU OGY. O n) omepParrwy, TUYHXAvwWY ov edleTaut, 


ToUTO yap apertjg xal Didriag. 


1x av eyxaroln TO diAw* éxatesog yap Tod ayabod 
oux ay eyxaroly TH DiAw* ExaTepog yap 7 
> / > / w EES] ° ~ > Lang 7 * ied ‘ 
3édierat. ov wavy 0 oud ev roig Or ydovyy' ama yap 
~ ° ~ / f 
aucduiy yiverar ob opeyovTas, el TH Tuvdieyery Yaipouoiy. 
~ a ~ ~ \ / 
ysrotog 0 av alvorro xai 6 eyxarmy THO ey TEpmovTi, 
> foN \ , ear hy em , > ae 
4250 un Tuvdinrspeverv, 7) 08 01d TO Yojonoy EyxANMATING, 
aT 25 > iA \ 4 > ta a ~ , Ns 
ex whenrsion YER HPWLAEVOL HAAYAOIG Heh TOU aie O€0v- 
4 yf ~ ¢ f 
Tou, xol CAAT Tov Eyes olovTas TOU TpoonxovTas, xoLk prEedoy- 
er / wv wv 
TOL OTL ODY Bowy OdovTal ToTOUTwWY TuyyavouTIY AELOE GY- 
€ ~ / ~ ~ a 
T2¢* ob 0 ev mosotvTEs ov OUvavTaL erapxely TOOAUTA GowY bi 


smarxovtes bgovTas. Zone 08, xabamep Td Oixasoy Eors OiT- 


, \ ‘ ” \ 53 \ / \ ~ \ \ 
Toy, TO bev aypadoy TO OF XATA YOY, HAL TYS HATA TO 





2 ovdels Svcxepalver, GAN? dy Fj 
xaplers auiverat eb Spav] ‘No one 
takes it ill, but (every one), if he be of 
gentle mind, pays him back in good 
deeds.’ The subject to dudvera is 
implied in ovdels. Fritzsche quotes 
Horace Sat, 11. 1. 

Nemo quam sibi sortem 
Seu ratio dederit, seu fors objecerit, illa 
Contentus vivat, daudet diversa se- 

quentes. 

xaples has nothing to do with ‘ grati- 
tude.’ It means much the same as is 
conveyed in the word ‘ gentleman,’ Cf. 
Eth. 1. v. 4: of 88 xapievres Kad mpax- 
ticol. IV. vill. 9: xaplets kal €AedOepos, 

5 ouxe—diarvwvrar] ‘Now as jus- 
tice is twofold, the one unwritten, the 





other according to law, so also of 
utilitarian friendship there appear to 
be two branches, the one moral, and 
the other legal. The complaints then 
(which arise) chiefly take place when 
men do not conclude their connection 
in the same branch in which they 
commenced it.’ guvadAAdrrew is to 
make a contract, diaAvecOar to wind 
up a contract by the mutual perform- 
ance of theterms. Men who consider 
that they have entered upon a so- 
called friendship with a fixed stipula- 
tion (vouixh) of certain advantages to 
be received, will complain if the fixed 
stipulation is denied, and only a gene- 
ral moral obligation (7@1«) to render 
services is admitted, 


XITT. } HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIII. 277 
7 ld ec X > be X \ / 
Ypyerwoy Oirlag 7 pe 4ix7y 7 02 vousxy elvar. ylyveras 
ouy TH eyxAvpata paniod bray wy xaTa THy adTyy 
cuvarrazocs xal diarvwvtas, Forts Oy vouixy pty 7] eri 6 
yrois, i piv mapmav ayopain ex yeipds sig yzipa, 4 02 
érzubsprwrépa sig ypovov, x05 buoroyiay 08 Ti avr} Tivog. 
OyAov O éy TauTY TO odsiAnua xodx audinroyov, dirixdy 
02 ray avaorny Zyer O10 map’ eviosg odx cick TouTwy 
Olina, AA oloyTas deiv orépyei Tog xaTa wiotiy cuV- 
annagzavras. 7% 0 rhixy ove emi pytoic, AAW we diraw7 
Owpeitas 7 OTMymoTe HAAG, xopilecbas OF aEs0i Td loov 
q TaAédov, Ws ov dedwxws AAAR yYpIoas. ody suolmg O28 
ToUTO OF TUL- 
Baiver die ro Bovrccbat piv mavrag 7 TOUS MAsioToug TA 
’ ~ \ X\ > / X XN \ = ~ 
xara, mponipeiobas 08 TA WHEAILA. xaAbY OF TO Ed mosEly 
aK: > / bd , \ \ > ~ / 
pen va avrimadn, whérimoy 08 Tb evepyereio5as. duvapévwg 


Tuvarrnakacs xal diarAuowevog éyxarso et. 





6 o7t—ovvaddrdtavras | ‘That which 
is on stated conditions then is legal 
(utilitarian friendship). One sort of 
it is wholly commercial, implying 
payment on the spot (é« xetpds eis 
xeipa); another is more liberal, allow- 
ing time (eis xpévov), but still on the 
understanding of a specified return. 
In this then the debt is plain and un- 
doubted, but the delay which it admits 
of is friendly. Hence in some states 
no suits are allowed in cases of this 
kind, but men think that those who 
have contracted on faith should abide 
(by the issue).’ dvaBoAf in commerce 
answers to ‘credit,’ cf. Plato’s Laws, 
XL p. 915 D: und em avaBorAy mpacw 
pndt avhy movida, Or it may an- 
swer to buying or selling for future 
delivery. tducdy (‘of the nature of 
friendship’) stands here as a pre- 
dicate. Cf. Eth. vm. i. 4: Tév dixaiwy 
7d pdriora pidrucdy elva Soret. 

7—8 49 HOucn—edepyereioat| ‘On 
the other hand the moral (branch of 
utilitarian friendship) is noton stated 
conditions, but the gift, or whatever 
else it be, is made as if to a friend, 





Yet (the giver) claims to get as much, 
or more, as though he had not given 
but lent. And if he does not come 
off in the connection as well as he 
commenced, he will complain. Now 
this (sort of disappointment) takes 
place because all or most men wish 
that which is noble, but practically 
choose that which is expedient. It is 
noble to do good not with a view 
to receive it back, but it is expedient 
to be benefited.’ This passage dis- 
criminately exposes a sort of vacilla- 
tion between disinterestedness and 
self-interest, which occurs in utili- 
tarian friendships. A man at one 
moment thinks vaguely (SotAera) of 
aiming at the noble, and makes a gift 
as if he expected no return. But 
presently the more definite bent of his 
mind (poatpeots) reverts to the profit- 
able, and he claims to get back as good 
as he gave. On the distinction be- 
tween BovdrecOar and mpoaipetoba cf. 
Eth, 1. iv. 1, v. ix. 6, and the notes. 

9 Suvaueve 8h—F wh] ‘If one is 
able then one ought to pay back the 
full value of what one has received ; 


2 =\ if a 2 NX , € / a a 
10 &7b Tht, OT WS ET TOUTAIC UT OLLEV) y --%. 


I 


-_ 


278 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION VIL [ CHap. 


NS. 3 SN , \ > fol od Wee eng io Le 
Oy avTamooTéoy THy a&iay wy Emabey, xual ExovTs’ xovTH 
/ € INS / ’ nw ~ 
yap dirov ov moimnréov. wy 07 OiapaprovTa ev TH ApYT 
. > \ \ I IQV\ WS 
xal eu maovTa Ob" ob oux Eder * ov yap dro didrov, ovde Os 
~ ~ / Nb \ ~ > , 
auto Toit OpvTog* xabamep ody Erk Pyros evepyeTnbevTa 
N , A « 7 > oN / > d / - 
Olarutéov. xal omoroyyoas 0 ay duvajevog amodwosiy 
2N ~ 9 INS '€ \ feos vw a > id , 
abuvatoivTa 0 vd 6 dodg FEiwosy av’ WoT zi duvaTos, 
> N / > > ~ >»? 9 / a el Cee ~ } 
Gmoboréov. ev apyy O emirxerréoy UD’ ov evepyereirou xo 
7 
adic Pyryow 
O Eyes mores Ot TH TOU mabovtog Whersin meTpely xal 
xs i r ; u \ i ED) ; es p / 
\ ~ > ~ ~ 
mpos TaUTHY Toliobo THY avTAMGdooLY, 7 TH TOU Opacay- 
if ~ ~ 
Tog evepysoin. ob wey yap mabovres Toaira dact AaPeiv 
~ ~ a A ne ‘4 \ few , 
Tapa Tiby ebepyeT@y & pixpa viv exelvoig xal eSijy map 
Lie fd ~ / 2. Se, <2 -~2 \ 4 
eTépmy AaPelv, xaTaopixpiSovTes* ol O avaTanW TH [Le 
ts ~ A wv > os ee 
yiota tiv wap abtols, xal a map’ aArAwY oux Fy, xab Ev 
* » \ \ \ 4 
ap obv Oe pev TO Ypy- 
6 , ” € ~ 4 ar A f z 
TiLoy THS PiAstag ovens y Tov mabovrog whérsia [eet pov 
~ > ~ 7 
eotiv; ovTog yao 6 deousvoc, xal emapxel aUTM WE xofLLOU- 


xX la Af 
xivOvvolg 7 ToLmuTaIS YpElosg. 


A) Lod f / a 
pevos THy lonys TorauTy ob yeyevynTan 7 Exixoupia boov 
0 Der ) dmodoréov 07 ANTM boov ernvparo 
ouTos WdEAYTOL, xal AmodoTeoy Oy AUTH Oo Uparo, 


Ey \ / , f > \ ~ > > \ 
7 xb WAEOY" KAAALOY Yap. EY de Taig xar apeT yy 





for one must not make a man a friend 
against his will (z.e. treat him as if he 


kal éxdytt are omitted in the above 
translation. They are left out by two 


were disinterested, when he did not 
really mean to be so). (One must 
act) as if one had made a mistake at 
the outset, and had received a benefit 
from one whom one ought not to have 
received it from, that is to say not 
from a friend, or from some one doing 
a friendly action; one must conelude 
the business therefore as if one had 
been benefited on stated conditions. 
And (in this case) one would stipulate 
to repay to the best of one’s ability ;— 
if one were unable, not even the giver 
could demand it; so in short, if one is 
able, one should repay. But one 
ought to consider at the outset by 
whom one is benefited, and on what 
terms, so that one may agree to ac- 
cept those terms, or not.’ The words 





of the MSS., and while they merely 
interrupt the sense of the passage, 
they may easily be conceived to have 
arisen out of the following words 
&xovra yap. The passage prescribes 
the mode of dealing with a person who 
having conferred a benefit (as described 
in the last section) expects a return 
for it. The accusative case diapap- 
tévta is governed by the verbal ad- 
jective d:aAuréorv which follows, ef. Eth. 
VIL. i. 1: Aexréov &AANY Tornoapmévous 
apxhv. Some editions read duoroy#rat 
® av, which the commentators explain 
to be governed by de?7, as implied in 
the verbal adjectives dvramodoréor, 
diadutésw. 

11 Gp’ odv—mdéov] ‘Surely, as the 
friendship is for the sake of utility, 


<i —x1v,} 


HOIKQON NIKOMAXEION VIII. 


279 


Dis x , x Ta, , 5 ” nie 3 , he 
yx YfAATA fey OUX EGTIY, [ETP GO EGlKEY 7% TOU PAGAYs 6¢ 


mpoaiperig’ THs apeTig yap xal Tod fous év TH mpoapeoes 


\ / 
TO xugioy, 


Asadépovrasd? xai ev raig xal’ trepoyay diriasss Esl 4 
\ c UY s 5 ao , re , 
Yap EXATEDOS TAZOY EYElY, OTAY OF TOUTO ylyyyTas, d1AAvE- 


ToL 7 DiAla. 


oY \ a 
OLETO Yor on TE 


/ a c ~ 
Bearioy mpooyjxsy ato 


f ~ ~ 
Wargoy Exe’ TH yap aya5e vénerbas TAZoY* Spolws OF xab 


c , , > ~ A BA wt a W 
0 wheAiuwrepog’ ayosioy yap ovTa ov dacs dsiv too 


yy , A / \ ’ / > ‘ 

EXslv* AsiToupylayv Te yap yiver $a xat ov DiAtayv, el py 
/ ~ ~ 

nat a&lay thy Eoywy tora Ta ex Tig Diriag: oloyran 


7 , 2 , / ~ / 
yap, xalamrep ev yoypatwy xowwvia rasiov AnpBavovotu 


s ~ a ~ ~ / 
of TupPanrronevos TAEIoV, OUTW Oely xual ev TH DIAla. 40 


? 3 \ ‘. -e ’ ee A ; /. \ > ~ F x 
EvOENS XAL 6 Yelpwy avaranw’ dirov yap ayabod elvos ro 
emapusiv Toig evdseowv’ Th yao, daciv, ober voaiw 7} 

6 ¢ évdseon b yap, dactv, oderog orovdain 7 


/ /. > / / wv 
Ouvacry Pirov elvas, uniev ye wearovra amoravesy 3 Gore 2 


x .¢ / ’ ~ > ~ \ DR ~ c / ’ 4 
02 exarepog aphtio azZtoiiv, xal div Exatéow TALoY vier 
éx Tio OiAlac, od TOU avToU O¢, AAAR TH uly omeod yori 
qs ‘Ss : ? ee ad PEX 
wn ~ ~ m nw X > ~ ~ 
THRs, TH 0 evdeei xéptous* Tig piv yap apeTig xal Tig 
> ¢ \ / ~ cds Dares Batt J / A | ek 
sbepyeoiag % Tih Yepas, Ths 0 evdsing emixoupia. TO xépdos. 
oUTw O Eyew TOTO xal ev Talo moAITElaig GalveTas’ ov 3 


A ~ c Xv > \ ~ ~ , jz \ \ 
YAD THLATOL O pendivy oyadoy TH KOO moplGwy TO xOlvOY 


\ >/> ~ \ \ > ve 4 % \ / - 
yee OL00T aL Tw TO X0ivov EVEBYETOUYT Ih, q Thy 0g xOlvay, au 


\ x iA rhs ae > XN ~ ~ \ ~~ 
Y%eP EOTIY AU xpnpariterbou ATO TWY XOlYWY XI TIL 


> ~ \ Vo SN 56 L 
obas’ &v TAC! Yer TO EAATTOY oudsis UT O[LEVES. 


TO 07 





the benefit accruing to the recipient 
is the gauge (of what is to be repaid). 
For he (the recipient) is the asking 
party, and (the other) assists him on 
the understanding that he will receive 
the same value. The assistance ren- 
dered then is exactly so much as the 
recipient hus been benefited ; and he 


ought therefore to repay as much as 


he has reaped, or more.’ 


XIV. 1 d:apépovra| ‘Men have 
differences’ in those-friendships which 
are contracted between a superior and 
an inferior. Aristotle says that these 
differences ought to be settled by both 





parties respectively getting more than 
each other; the one receiving more 
money or good, the other receiving 
more honour. 

3 ov yap Ecriv—imropéver| ‘For it 
is not allowable that a man should at 
once gain money, and honour out of 
the public, for no one endures to have 
the inferior position in all points.’ 
This notion, that the state-officers 
should have ezther pay or honour, but 
not both,—is expressed before, Eth. 
v. vi. 6-7. It is drawn from the 
Athenian ideas of liberty and equality, 
but is hardly in accordance with the 
practice of the modern world. 


280 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON VIII. [ Cnar. XIV. 
\ , > , \ > f \ ~ DY 
Teph YOUPATA EAUTTOU[LEYH TILLAY KTOvELOUTE XA TH Dw- 

. ~ , 
poboxw ypypata’ To xaT aklav yap exaviool xal owes 
\ : / , a \ ~ 4 
tiv dirlav, xabamwep elpyras. odTw Oy xal Toig avirors 
€ ~ Ud \ ~ 9 iz J PN , A ® > ny 
omirgréoy, xal Td ig Yeyparae wdsroupevn % Eig pera 
> > Q . ‘é 
4TILIY AYTAMOOOTEOY, AYTAMOOMOOYTA TO EvdsYouEVOY. TO OU- 
A \ c / > ~ > A > 2 fo NV A 
YaTOV Yap 7 Pirsa emsonret, ov TO XAT asiav’ aude Yap 
tori ev mao, xabamep ev Taig mpbg TOUS Bends TiLaig xo 
Tovsg yovelg* ovdelg yap av more Tiy a&iav amodoly, Eig 
NZ AA c rd > \ ~ A aX f 
duvapuy 68 6 Jepamevwy emteinng sivas Ooxel. O10 xav Oo- 
Serev ovx eSeivor vio marion amrsiracbas, matpl 3 viov 
: , \ > 5 , 63 > , » fo a 
ébelrAovTa yao amodoreov, ovbey 02 moijoag a&sov Tay 
imnpypéevwy dédpaxev, dor cel obeiret. oig 0 oPelrerau, 
cd ~ ’ 4 
aa 0 lrg otdete 
2 oN > ~ ~ Ring € Y / 
TOT AY ATOOTHVAL doxet pH imepParnrovrog pox bnpia’ Xw- 


° / > ~ 7 7 ~~ \ Ig 
eSovoia adeivar’ xal two warp) 7. 


\ \ ~~ ~~ , \ . , > 4A \ 
pis yap THg Duoixng Diriag THy exsxoupiny avipwmixoy a) 
n ~ Or a \ 
Oiwhcicbas To de deuxtov 7 od crovdacrov TO erap- 
~ ~ Ww > td \ € \ he 
Eby, pox Snow OvTL" EU TATHELY Ya OL TOAAOL Bovaovras, 
ENN n~ ’ c cy / \ \ F 7, 
TO O€ Tolely Devyouoly we aAvoITEAES. trepl [4Ev OUY ToU- 
Twy ext TorovToy elpyobw. 





4 Gmrelrac0a] ‘To disown.’ Card- | his son).’ Siwetcba: is used in the 


well quotes Herodotus i. 59: e¢ tls of 
Tuyxdver eay mais, rovTov amwelmacba. 
Demosthenes 1006.21: (6 vduos) robs 
yovéas moret kuplovs ob pdvoy baba 
Totvoua e& apxis, GAAd Kal mdérAw 
efareiipa eav BotAwvTat, kad daroxnpdtat. 

xwpls yap—diwbeic@a] ‘ For inde- 
pendently of natural affection, itis a 
human instinct not to reject the assist- 
ance (which he might derive from 





same sense, Hth, rx. xi. 6. 

mep) pty ody rottay emt rocovToy 
eipo@w| This has every appearance 
of being the interpolation of an editor. 
There is no real division between 
Books VIII. and IX. They follow 
each other continuously without any, 
break in the subject. The editor who 
divided one treatise into two books 
has added the above artificial division. 


HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION 


IX. 


—oFQ{oo— — 


\ ~ y 
N TIAZAT® 02 raig dvoposoesd2o1 Dirioug ro dvaroyov 
> , x ‘ , * \ > / Ae a ? 
ioates xat owda tH dirlav, xabamep elpynras, oiov 
X' 5 ~ ~ ~ / > \ wn ¢ > 2 
xa ey TH TOMTINY TO oxurorope avth réy brodnwarwy 
> . oi + -S , A ~ ~ 
aoiBy yiverans not abiay, sol rep bdavry real robs Aomois. 
~ A 
yravia ev oly WeTOpLo TAs Xolvoy LET POY TO YOUIT LE, Hcl 
~ \ , ~ 
mpeg TodTo Oy MavTa avadépeTas, xal ToUTW PET pElTaL” ey 
AN ~ > oe RE XN 23 \ > ner e c ~ 
Of TH Epwrixy eviore pev 6 epaotag eyxaasi ors bmephirwy 
> > ) Aer Oe + Xr / b] a A 
oux avTidircizas, ovbev Eymy Diayroy, el odrwg Eruyey, 
ld > c > 7 a , > / 
moaraxig 3 6 EPWILEVOG OTL MPOTEDOY ETAYYEAAOMEVOS 
/ ~ 2/7 > ~ 4 \ \ ~ ° % 
mwavra. viv obey emitenci. cup Paliver de Ta Taare, éreay 
« \ Md € A A > lA ~ c . A \ , 
6 pev OF rdovay Tov epmpevoy Diary, 6 Oe did TO YoyoIov 


A > 7 ~ \ \ > ~ € / 
Tov Epactyy, TaUTA de ey apdoly UTapYy). 


Ola TADTA 


\ ~ + / Tes > \ \ / 
yap THs dirlag oblong diaAvolg yiveTat, emEebay wy yivyTos 
Te 22. F, > \ € \ > \ a eat ¢ A 
wy Evexa EDiAouy* ov Yap aUTOUS ZOTEDYOY HAAG TH UTaL- 


> f ” p \ ~ \ 9 / 
KITA, ov ovina OvVTAa 010 TOLAUTAL XA AL Dirsas. 


7 08 


~ hn~ > 2% Mf , , A > , 
tay Hoey xal? aitay oboe peeves, xabamrep eloyjTar. O1acde-4 





I. In heterogeneous friendships, 
equality is to be obtained by the rule 
of proportion. The same rule holds 
good in political economy, where the 
most heterogeneous products are 
equalized against one another. In 
political economy there is the conve- 
nience of a common standard, money, 


by which products may be measured. | 


In friendship there is, unfortunately, 
no such standard. 

1 Gvouowedéor] This is not quite the 
same as Tals kal dwepoxny pirtas. It 
implies relationships in which the two 
parties have respectively different 
objects in view, as for instance, in the 

VOL. II. 





case of the employer and the employed, 
the épéuevos and the épaorhs, &e. 
Kabdmep etpnra| Cf. Eth, vin. xiii. 1. 
éy Th modttixj| By the modern 
division of sciences, Political Economy 
has been raised into separate existence, 
so as in its method to be entirely 
independent of, and in its results 
subordinate to, Politics. On the Ari- 
stotelian theory of the law of value in 
exchange, see Eth. v. vy. 8, and note. 
3 7 8 rev H0Gr] ‘Moral friendship’ 
or ‘friendship based on character,’ 
the same as 7 kar’ dperny piria. Cf. 
Eth. vou. xiii. 11: 
dpethyv—rijs aperis yap Kal Tod Hous, 


év d€ Talis Kar’ 


00 


iS) 


ve 


282 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN 


IX. [Cuar. 


NSN Qe? a , > ~ \ A me. > Z 
povrau 08 xal Gray Erepa yiyyyrou auroig xb pm cov Ops- 
7 Sy Gee wanes 

yours Guorov yao TO pxiiv ylyveoGas, Grav ov edieras 

XN / LY \ ~ Ww 2) 3 es , \ 

[An TUYHaYY, oloy xab TH x19apwdo O ETAYYFAANLEVOS, HAb 
a > ~ 

Gow Kusivoy aoreisy, ToToUTW TAEiw’ sig Ew O AmarTouyTE 

nee € / > , eN ~ : en a. \ > \ Dy va ” > 

TUS UTOTHETELS av UOvaAg yovany amodcdwxevas Edy. eb 

X y € , ~ 3 B 7 nw a 7 < > es c 

pty avy Exarepog Toro eBoursto, ixavidg av elyev* eb 0 6 

\ , € dt ae a eer: . ” c Dy 7 > a 1. 

pay Tepriv 6 OF xepdog, xal O ev Ever O OF LT, oux ay Ely 
4 ~ : A , lA 

TO KATA THY xoWWWViaY KAAwS* WY yap deduEvog TUYYaVEl, 
t r , a ’ 

TouToig xal mpootyer, xaxelvou ye yap tatira dwoet. 

/ ~ - / a ~ 

STyY agiav O& mworégou Ta&at eortk, Tov mpoisévou 7 TO 
«/ ” ‘ > ’ 

mporaovtos 3 6 yap Mpolemevog Eoin’ emitpemey exeivw. 

6 ixal I ) iv 6 Lp ide 2%, 

rep dact xal Lpwrayopay moisiv’ bre yap didaFsrev ady,- 

~ a ~ wo > , 

wore, Tintioas Tov pabivra exéAzcusy Ooov Ooxeh ASia Emi- 





Of course the above terms 
have nothing to do with the ‘ moral’ 
branch of utilitarian friendship, men- 
tioned Hth. vim. xiii. 5. 7. 

4 ofov—én] ‘ Asin the case of him 
who promises (a reward) to the harper, 
and “the better he sang, the more he 
should have,” but when the man next 
morning demands the fulfilment of 
his promises, said that “he had paid 
pleasure for pleasure,” ’ (7.e. the plea- 
sure of hope, for the pleasure of 
hearing music). The present tenses 
emaryyeAAduevos, a&marrovytT:, seem to 
imply an oft-repeated and current 
story. The story itself is repeated by 
Plutarch (De Alexandri Fortund, 11. 1) 
where the trick is attributed to Diony- 
Avovictos yotv 6 ripavvos, &s 


Ke TNs 


sius, 
act, KiBapwdod tivos eddoKipmovyTos 
akovwv érnyyeldaro Swpedy aitg Ta- 
Aavtov: TH SF borepala tov avOpdmov 
xs, 
elev, edppaivduevos bd cod map’ ty 
noes xpdvov, eSppava Kayd oe Tals 
éAtlow: Sore tov picbdy ay Zrepres 


thy tmécxerw dmarrodvros* 


ameAduBaves edvOvs, avrirepwéuevos. 

av yap Sedue: 0s—déce:] ‘Fora man 
sets his mind on the things he happens 
to want, and for the sake of that he 
will give what he himself possesses.’ 





The beginning of the sentence (ay yap 
deduevos) is a general statement, the 
words ké&«elyou ye contain an applica- 
tion of the general statement to a 
particular case. 

5 Thy dtlay 8&—rocodroy] ‘ But 
whose part is it to settle the value (of 
a benefit),—is it the part of the giver 
in the first instance, or of the reci- 
pient? (One would say it was the part 
of him who was the recipient in the first 
instance) for the giver seems to leave it 
to the other. Which they mention 
Protagoras as doing, for whenever he 
taught anything he used to bid the 
learner estimate “ how much worth he 
thinks he has learnt,” and he used to 
take exactly so much.’ . 6 rpotéuevos is 
used in a peculiar sense here to denote 
‘qui prior donum dedit,’ in opposition 
to 6 mpodaBdy (or 6 mpoéxwy, § 8), ‘qui 
prior ab altero accepit.’ Protagoras 
was said to be the first philosopher 
who taught for money. He probably 
found it not disadvantageous to assume 
a high and liberal attitude towards 
his pupils. On the wealth which he 
amassed by teaching, see Plato’s Meno, 
p. 91 D, and above, Vol. I, Essay II. 
p. 80. 


a4 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 283 


\ > / ~ > ~ s > 
otaciasr, xal eAauPave ToootlTov. ev Tolg TormwouTtog 46 


, / \ » NF \ 

évioig aptoxer To ‘ pioog 8 avdpl.’ of 08 mooraBavres 

\ > / +2 43 ~ - »” \ \ 

T) apyopioy, cira pndev momdytes wv Ehacav, da Tas 

€ . oe 2 ro SCs > ~'3 , , 

bmepBorag Thy emayyeniy, cixdTws ev EyxATBack yivov- 

4 > ~ Ae ne , ~ 

ToL’ ov yap emiTEADUTIY & Wuorcyycav. Toto 0 lows7 
~ € \ > Ad 5 \ XN he * 5 ~ 

woisiy of codiotal avayxaSovras Oia To nféva ay dotivan 

oa \ s ‘4 ” \ 

OUTOL BEY ody coy EAaPoY Tov 
\ \ ~ te > > 7 4 ? > 

pucbav ry wowdvres, eixotws ev eyxanwacly cio’ ev ol¢ 

\ ‘\ / / ~ ‘ 

08 pn yhyveras dioporoyia rig roupylas, of wey OF 
\ of f cod , 

aUTOUS mpoiguevor eloyras OTL AaveyxAYTOL’ -ToIAUTY yap 7 

\ f 
xaT apeTyy Dirla. 


> / - re 
apyuploy WY ETILOTAYTAL. 


‘ > 7 , \ A 
Thy AuoPyy TE Tointéoy xaTa THY 

/ a \ ~ /, \ ~ ’ n a > 
mpoalperiv' adty yap Tod dinrov xal rig aperyc. oTw O 
” a ~ , , \ , 
one xal ToIg Dirowodhiag xavwvyTaciv’ ov Yap 70g Yp7,- 

~ / xs 

pal 14 abla perpsiras, tiny T iocppomog ox ay yévolTo, 





6—7 év trois To.0bTo1s—eniorayTas| 
‘In such matters some like the prin- 
ciple of “a stated wage.” Those, 
however, who take the money before- 
hand, and then do nothing of what 
they promised, are naturally blamed 
in consequence of their excessive pro- 
mises, for they do not fulfil what they 
agreed. But this course the Sophists 
are perhaps obliged to adopt, because 
no one would be likely to give money 
for the things which they know,’ 
Protagoras had no fixed price for his 
teaching, he left it to the pupil. 
But some people prefer having terms 
settled beforehand, pic@ds eipnuévos, 
as it is called in the line of Hesiod 
(Works and Days, v. 368): Miodds 8 
Gvdpi ptr eipnuévos Epxios toTtw. It 
is the perversion of this when men 
take the money beforehand, and then 
fail in performing that which was paid 
for. The Sophists (says Aristotle 
with severe irony) are perhaps obliged 
to insist on payment beforehand, on 
account of the utter worthlessness of 
their teaching. Aristotle contrasts 
the conduct of Protagoras (of whom 
he speaks honourably) with that of 





‘the Sophists’ after the profession 
had become regularly settled. 

7 év ois 5e—quAla] ‘ But supposing 
there is no agreement with regard to 
the service rendered—then, in the 
first place (of mév), with regard to” 
those who give purely for personal 
reasons, we have said that they are 
free from all chance of complaint; for 
this is the mode of virtuous friendship,’ 
5? abrovs is more of a logical than a 
grammatical formula, and would be 
represented by per sein Latin. This 
phrase and ka atrods are frequently 
used by Aristotle to characterise the 
highest kind of friendship, which is 
an ‘absolute’ feeling. Eth. vim. iii. 1: 
of pey ody bid Td xphomoy pidodytes 
GAAHAoUS ob Kal abrods pirodaw. In 
the following section, énf rim, ‘ for 
some external object,’ is contrasted 
with 8¢ adrods, ‘that which looks to 
the personal character alone.’ Cf, rx. 
x. 6: 8° dperhv Be nal 5 abdrods 
(ptAla) obk ort mpds moAdAods. 

oitw 8 Loixe—évdexduevoy| ‘And 
thus it seems that they ought to act, 
who are made partakers in philosophy 
(7.e. they should measure the benefit 


oe 2 


284 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. [ Cuap. 


yee e , , \ ve Beet \ \ ~ 

ann lows ixavov, xalamep xat mpog Jeoug xak mpog yoveic, 
\ , > ” ~ , > 

pen ToauTys 8 avons THs dorEewS HAA 

> I / XN y ~ \ > ee A / 

eri Tivl, PAMITTA psy lows et THY avTAmOdooW ylyver Ook 


eas , 
8 TO EYOEYOLEVOY, 


N ni ’ = eet y Ng ~ > ON ms \ 
doxoticayv audoly xar a&lav elvas, ef 08 ToUTO wy TupPas- 
, > ~ Ql & a \ / /, 
Vol, OU MLOVOY Civayxatoy OoSeley AY Tov MLOEyovTA TATTELY, 
> \ 5 ie rm ‘ ° > 49 * > f or 
AAAK KOE Olxasoy’ oTov yap ouTos wheryIy 7% avd Goou 
\ CaN \ oO, > ” ~ > \ oa \ A 
Ty Toovyy elAsT ay, ToooUToy avTiAaPwy eGe1 Tyy mapa 
/ A ~ / lad , 
TouTov aSiav* xal yap év Toig wviosg obTw haiveras yivome- 
’ n~ ia ~ / , / 

9 vov, EviayoU T Elol vouor Thy ExouTiwy TuUPorAaioy Oixag 
\ 9% ¢ “? ae ea 5 5 Ay; \ a hé 
pen sivas Wg Of0v, @ erioreuce, diaruT iva mpeg TobTOv xa9a~ 

2 , ~ Vv 
TEp Exowwmovygev. Ww yap exetpaddy, ToUrov oleras Oixoud- 
: af I fo meas Ly \ r~ArC \ > 
Tepoy elvar TAS To emitpelavtos. Ta TOAAA yap ob 
~ ~ ew 1 of B 6 ms ~. Beiv: A. 
700 Ioov Tindow ob EyovTEeg xal of Povrcusvor Aaeiv’ TH 
x nie NAT Ne ey 2 , aa a 
YAP ObHEIa HALO dion Exaoros halveTat TOAACD Hla, 
> sd e19 ‘ “4 \ ~ cd x ay 
AAA OMS v opro127 YiveTal MPoG ToToUTOY OTOY AY TAT- 
€ id ~y 9» > / oe 
Twoly 01 Aaovres. 02869 Tows ov rorovTov Timmy boou 
” 7 Vv ’ a » \ yy Dio, 
Exovts daiverar aEsov, AAA’ Goo mply Eye erie. 
> 7 INS ed \ \ 7>$ is , ne / 
2 “Amoslay 0 eye: xal Ta Todds, oloy morepa Osi mavTa 
~ A 6 a / ~ 
TO TAT pL amovensiv xal welJeoOal, 7 xapvovTa piv iarpd 
, 
TEOTEOV, OTpATH yoy OF YElpoTovnTeoy Tov ToAEmEXOY" 
bois O& O/AwW BAAAOY 7 TroUdAiw brnpeTnTZoV, xa) evED- 
poles 88 diaw pe. i p onnpernréoy, xa edep 
, > / / ~ xv c 7 / oN 
yitTy avTamodoTéoy Yay UAAROY 4 ETalow Doréov, env 
> ~ \ , y se / \ ~ 
2audoly py evdeyntar ap ov mayvTa TA Toadra axpi- 
~~ / > ‘'~ \ \ ‘ 
Ribs pev Oropioas od fadiov; moAAAG yap xal mavToIAg 
by N A . , \ / A ~ ~ 
Exst Olahopas xa psyéer xal puxporyts xal TO xarwd 





received by the intention of their 
teacher), for the worth of philosophy 
is not measured against money, and 
no amount of honour can balance it. 
But, perhaps, as also towards the gods 
and one’s parents, it is enough if one 
gives what one can, Aristotle, per- 
haps mindful of the twenty years which 
he passed in the school of Plato, placés 
very highly the spiritual dignity of 
teaching in philosophy. After oie, 
deity movety is to be understood. 

8 ph To.abtns & obeys] ‘In the 
second place, when the gift is not of 
this kind,’ z.e. not 8? abrods. 





tov po€xovta] ‘ The first recipient,’ 
see above § 5. 

8—g Kal yap év— éxowdyycer] ‘ For 
this is what is done in the market 
(z.e. the buyer, who is the recipient, 
settles the price); and in some places 
it is the law that there must be no 
actions on yoluntary contracts, it being 
right that one should conclude with a 
person whom one has trusted on the 
same terms as those on which one 
entered on the contract with him.’ 
Cf. Eth, vit. xiii, 6: xotwwveiv here is 
used in the same sense as ovvadAdrremy 
there, 





I.—II.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 285 


Ar 3 , of ae, , Ce ee ne: ae 2 > 
xeL AVAYHAWW. oTt d OU TAVYTA TW AUTW aT O00TEOY, OUX 3 


wv \ \ XN > > / € Lae pa \ 
aonrAoy. xal TAG pey evepyerlac avTAmTodoTéov Wo ex} TO 
A ~ EY , € / \ o Vs oy 
TOAV PAAAOY 7 YAapLoT EO ETALO0IG, HAL WOTED Oaveloy, W 
~. aN / y 9 C 
odelrcs Amodoréov paAroy 4 ETaAIow doréov. ows 0 00d? + 
~ Ye a ~ / nA ~ / 
TOUT Gel, oloy TM Aut pwhevrs Tok AryoTwy morepov Toy 
7, > , 3 c n sy Ey \ x 
AUT ALEvOY AYT LAUT PWT EOY, HOY OTTIOOUY Yj, ] XA fA7 
© , > ~ int > , a 4, / 
EAAWHOTL ATaITOUYTL 62 amodoTéoy, 7 TOY TaTeca AvuT- 
, N/ \ EY a: ae ~ ~ \ , 
Pwreoy ; doGst2 yap av xal sauTod parAoy Tov waren, 
4 3 5) / \ ba / > iY , 74 
cmp oy eloyrat, xahorov piv TO odelAnuc. arodoréoy, eau 5 
nN ¢ / e f. ~ ~ XN ~ > / \ ~ ? 
0 dmepretyy 7 O0o1g TO HAAG 7 TO avayxalo, Tog TAUT 
> , 7 \ x>™ 9 \ y \ \ os \ 
amoxniTéoy" eviore yao ovd sori looy TO THY mooUmapy AY 
apelbacbas, gredayv 6 piv crovdaioy eidws 20 rojo D 
iad ) Be S$ OV, TO 
o: ¢. 9 [ANY , a oy i) A 7 PEASY 
37 avTamddoats ylyvnTas, ov olsTas poydnpoov sivas, ovds 
~~ ee > VA 
yap TH OaveloavTs evioTe avTiOavecTénv' 6 piv yao 
+7 - ~ . f 3 ~ WwW c > > oS) r § : 
oiopevos xoprciobas edcveroev Emseinel OvTs, 6 0 obx eAmigzs 
~ \ ~ / ~ 
xopssioboar rape movypod. elte Tolvuy TH aAyOela odTwWS 
i ‘ ‘ 
a > BA A > / yo X % a of 
eyEt, aux loov To aslwpa* elt eye piv pny ovtws olovrau 
wa > x n/ + ~ a s , 
02, ox ay do€asey AToma Toseiv. OTED OUY TOAAAKIC 6 
Vv c \ 7 \ A rf iA c / 
elpntas, ob meph TH wahn xal Tac 7 pagers Aoyot ouolws 
U . , ~ \ a ] oC Z 
EXouT! TO W plo psvoy Tolg Wept & Eloi. OT pay ody ov 
\ ~ , 2d ~ \ , 
THUTAR TaTW amodoreoy, oud? TH Tarp mavTa, xabamep 





5 Sep oby etpnrat—morety] ‘As I 
have said then, as a general rule the 
debt should be repaid, but if the 
giving (to some one else) prepon- 
derates in moral glory, or in the 
urgency of the case (over repaying), 
one must incline to this; for some- 
times it is not even an equal thing to 
requite the former fayour, (namely) 
when the one man knowing the other 
to be good has benefited him, but on 
the other hand, the repayment has to 
be made to one whom one thinks to 
be a scoundrel. For sometimes a 
man ought not even to lend money in 
return to one who has lent money to 
him. For he lent it to one who is 
good, thinking to get it back again, 
but the other does not hope to get it 
back again from a villain. If this be 





the real state of the case, the claim is 
of course not equal: and even if it be 
not, but the parties only think so, such 
conduct does not seem unreasonable.’ 
This and the other casuistical questions 
here discussed have very little interest. 

eipntat| vide § 3. 

mpovrapxnv| ‘that which was pre- 
existing,’ here ‘ primary obligation,’ 
Cf. Eth, vin. xiv. 4: ov6ey movhoas 
&kiov Tey trnpywévev, Eth, wv. ii. 14: 
ois T& TOLAdTA mpoUmdpxel. 

6 pév—7@ 5&] These words, by 
carelessness of writing, refer to the 
same subject. 

elre tTolvuv—elr’ Exe: wiv wh] This 
double protasis, instead of having as 
usual only one, has a double apodosis. 

6 dep ody wodAdKis elpntau] Cf. 
Eth. 1. iii. 1; . ii. 3, and above § 2. 


286 


\ 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IX, 


[Cuap. 


x>N ~ \ f >’ y™~ ] \ ao ~ 
70002 TH Aut Gusrat, ovx ainrovs ems) 0 Brepa yovstor xal 


DENY ~ Xe / > z. c , ‘ > ~ 
AdeADoG xOl ETAIG06G xa EUSDYETAIG, EXATTOIG TH O1XSbK 


\ \ i , 
xab TH ApLOTTOYTA AT OVELNTEOY. 


a \ 4 wn 
oUT@ OF xa Toei 


dalvovras’ eig yapoug piv yap xadroton Tovs cuyyeveic* 
TOUTOIG yap xolvoy TO yévog xal ai mepl Toro Oy mpakerg* 
xal cig TH x7On OF parrot olovTas Oeiv Tos Cuyyeveis 


’ ~~ ‘ > , 
8 aravTay Ola THUTO. 


doSe1e 0 dv rpodijg pty yovetos deiv 


panmer exapxelv, wo odsirovracs, xal toig aitlog rob 


> , * w~ ~ > oe = 3 ~ 
ELVOLE KAAAIOY OV 7 EKUTOKC IG TAHUT EMAUDXELY, 


xal Tiny 


G2 yovetor xalamep Geolc, ob meray €* o0d8 yap riy 


TAN \ \ Vie 29 z \ ~ ~ A ~ 
GAUTYY TATLh Xb YT HL oud au THY TOU coded 7 TOU 


~ > \ \ 7 € U A \ \ 
TTLATHYO, AAAA THY TMATPIXYY, OMOlWS OF XAL THY [LYT- 


7 
9 Dixy. 


al wavtt 0& ta mpecBure ny THy xa? 
x avTh D mpecPuTépw Tiny THY xo 


€ / A ~ 7 
VAixlay, iravacTaces nal xaTaxAloes xal TOlg ToLOUTOLG. 


\ c , S s \ YOEA A he A. / 
7 pos ETAICOUS AU Xb KOE doug TAEEYT Av XAl ATAVTwWY 


, 
XOLWOTYTE. 


\ / 
xal ovyyevios On xal durgrass xa) mworirous 


€ ~ ~ ao tek, | , A > ~ > / 
HOE TOC AOsTrols ATA Ab WELOXTEQV TO OlXEbov ATV OVEILELY, 


/ \ / rs / 
xal TUYxXplvElLY TH EXATTOG UTApyovTA KAT oixsLoTyTA 


10 xal apeTay Y ypHouv. 


/ ~ \ / > , 
xploig, Thy 08 OradspovTwy epywoeo rep, 


~ ~ 
Thy piv obv buoyevoy sawy 7 


oo pny Oia ye 


~ > / > =) ec EN ° , a / 
TOUTO ATOOTATEOY, AAA WS ay Evdey nT as, ouTw drops roy, 


3 


"Eye 0 amoplay xal meph rot diarterbar Tag irlag 7 
pen mpeg ToUs py diapévovTac. 


a \ A ‘ A ‘\ 
mpeg pev Tovg Oia TO 





ovdt TG Ad Overa] ‘Not even to 
Zeus are all things indiscriminately 
sacrificed.’ It is given as an illustration 
of conventional right, Eth. v. vii. 1, 
that goats and not sheep are sacrificed 
to Zeus. 

7 al eis Ta KHdn—Oia tabrd] ‘And 
for the same reason men think that 
relations ought especially to meet at 
funeral ceremonies.’ 

8 tpopijs érapxetvy] ‘To furnish sub- 
sistence,’ Fritzsche quotes Xenophon, 
Memor. UW. Vi. 23: Stvavta 5 Kad 
xpnudtav ov pdvov—Kowwveiv, GAG 
Kal émapkety GAANAOLS. 

9 travactdoe: Kal Kataxrloe| ‘Ris- 
iug up to greet them, and conducting 





them to the seat of honour.’ Cf. 
Plato Repub. p. 425 a: ovyds Te Tay 
vewrépwy mapa mpeaBurépas, &s mpémet, 
kal karakAloes Kal dravacrdces. 

10 tay piv ody dyoyevav paw 7 
kptois] te. It is easy to compare a 
relation with a relation, a tribesman 
with a tribesman, &c., but to compare 
a tribesman with a relation would be 
more troublesome, 


III. 1 mpds rods ph diapévovras] 
‘Who do not continue the same.’ Cf 
Eth. x. tii. 3: GAN Gnenévyn Stapever 
Ews rivds. 

eykadécere 8 —700s] ‘But one might 
complain, if a man who liked one for 


If.—I1I. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX. 287 


7 E>) \ err f, ” a , ~ 9 
Upyowov 7 TO AOU Hiroug ovrac, orav poyxérs Tatir 
” QV ow > / 2 , \ “a I. = 
EXWOlY, OUOEY ATOM OY drarverIasrs exelveov Ya yoay Diros 
y A \ ~ . , / 
Wy AToAmTOvTwWY EvUAOyOY TO py DIAC. eyxanrgres O a 

>) \ SA > nw ~ 
Tig, ek Oia TH Ypyoimov 7 TO 700 ayarwy mpocerossiTo bic 
tO 79og* Omep yap ev apyy slmousy, mAsioras diadosal 
/ 4 . P y P “Px AY ‘ete ; E \ P 
~ € x x, 
ylyvovras Toig Dirac, Grav py tpmoing olwyvrar xal wor 
/ oe \ zy ~ \ ¢ , 
diAor, bray peev avy diavevo by Tis ath bronaBy di- 
~ ‘ ~ > 
Asiobas die To Foc, prbiv rosotiroy éxelvou mparrovroc, 
c %. ~ v a ~ > , 7, 
EaUTOY aiTMOT av’ Oray O orb Tig Exelvou TporToINTEw; 
> ~ ws > ~ ~ 3 7 \ ~ a 
aratry iy, OLHOOY EYKAASIY TW ATATYTAVTL, XI LKAAOY 7 
~ \ , > f a \ ig e 
Tol, TE -wopsopic iBdyrsvouciy, bow meph Tysmrepov 
°’ > > € ’ ‘ 
xaxoupyia. sav 0 amodiyyrar ws ayabov, yévyTar 0: 
\ 4 ~ Fs , A 3S ’ ” 
poxOypis xai boxy, ap’ Err hiraynreov; 7 ov duvaroy, elrep 
~ ’ \ , / iN / 
pen wav Dianroy arnra Tayasay; ovre 68 Hiayréov movyoiy 
»” N ~ , \ > Vo SS NS} € ~ 
oUTEe dei’ Didowovynpoy yap ov yon elves, ov) dporotaGos 

7 > rs A x, a tod € 7 / K ae 
davaw* elonras 0 OTs TO OMoloy TW v[LOlwW dirov. ap 

s s7N , x >’ ~ ’ \ ~ ’ Us 4 
oby evbug OimaAuTéoy; 7] OV TAT, AAAA TOIG AVIATOIG KATH 
\ 4 Loe m 2 6 4 i Q wv oc LAD B 4 / 
Tiy pox Iynolay 5 emavopIwow 0 Eyoucs warrov PoyInréov 
> \ Fs ie wy, o SW < aus ’ 
gig TO VOog 4H THy ovolav, bom BéATioy xal Tig dirAlas 
° ‘ QN7 > * cry : / INA bd ~ - 
oixerorepov. dose D cy 6 diaduvonevog ovdey aToroy Tosi 
> + we s / > > , s 2N ~ 
ou yap TW TOLOUTW Dirog yy  arroswwIevta ody aduvaray 
J ~ > ie, 2 N38 Se \ / N98 v4 
avacwoa abiorarar 0 6 wey diapevor 6 0 emteixéc- 
- , \ > ‘ 7 r~r , ee ant , 
TEPOG YEVOLTO XAL TOAUV OLAAAATTOL TH ApETY, UDA YOHTT Ev 

diaw, 7 ovx evdéyerars ev weyarn 0: diacTas LA 

w, 7) x 5 Ev MEyary OF TATEL LAM TA 





profit, or pleasure, pretended to like 
one for his character,’ 

dmep yap ev apxn| This observation, 
that ‘differences arise, when men 
are not really friends to each other 
in the way they think,’ has never 
been exactly made before. The com- 
mentators variously refer us to Eth. 


vil. iii, 3, vil. iv. 1,-and Ix. i. 4, 


none of which passages corre- 
spond. 

2 bray wey ody diapevo Oj tis | ‘When- 
ever one is mistaken,’ 7. ¢. by his own 
misconception. Cf. Ar. Metaph. in. 
iii. 7: BeBaordrn @ apxh wacav wet 


hy SiapevoOjra advvarov. The word 





diapevoO7 answers to Siapaprévta in 
Eth. vu. xiii. 9. 

KiBdnAevovaty] To counterfeit friend- 
ship, says Aristotle, is worse than 
counterfeiting the coinage. The com- 
mentators quote Theognis, vy. 119 
sqq., where the same maxim occurs. 

3 obre Bt pidnréov wovnpdy obre det] 
The MSS. vary extremely about the 
reading of this passage, in which there 
is evidently something wrong. 
Se? is at all events an interpolation. 
Fritzsche thinks that the whole is a 
double gloss upon g:Aomdvnpor, 

éravdp0wow 8 exovor] ‘To those 
who are capable of restoration.’ 


ore 


nv 


w 


288 


iN , Cd , ~ 
OnAOY YivETal, OlOY EY TAICG 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 


[ Cmap. 


Tasoinais dirias? ei yap 6 


XN / \ Need ~ © eS 35 eS yw ~4 / 

[ay Olapevos THY Olavoray mais 6b AVP Eby 010g XPATIOTOS, 
~ a 7 ~ > ~ , 
mos av elev Divo pyr apecxcusvor Tolg avToIg pyTE 

4 \ / ny \ , a) ‘ of 
HAboOvTES HAL AvTOoursvol; Ove YAO TWEPk AAANAOVS TAU 
G , > ~ ” Dv 4 > x t. i . 
tmapges QuUTOIS, avev Of TouTwY oux ay dirAoug elvas 


5 cup Piotv yap ovy obey Te. 


elonras 08 meph rovTwy. 


ap 


ouy oudiy aAAoTEpoy Tpog aUToY ExTZov y El pny Eyeyoves 
dinog pndémore; 7 Ot pvelav Eyew Tig yevonevng cuvy- 
Gelac, xal xabamep dirus parrov 7 dSveloig oidpeba Deiv 
yapilecbos, odtw xal Toig yevouévorg amrovenntéoy Th Oi 


Tiv wooyeyevnpevyny dirlay, 
Oypiag 7 O1aAvoIg yevynTou. 


Grav pn Os twrepPorny pox- 


4 Tad dirinad 08 re mpdg tous diroug, xal ois ai dsrian 


€ i wv . ~ +1 « \ . , 
OpICOvTGh, Olney EX TWY THOS EKUTOY ennrubevas. 


ribdacs 


. A A 

yap dirnov toy Povrdcusvoy xal mparrovra rayasa 7 Te 
, : If is -) \ Ud ° } ~ 
dasivonsva exelyou Evexa, 7) Tov Bovrcnevov eivas nod Civ 
~ ad A / 
Tov diroy aurod yap orep al pyrépeg mpog Ta Texva 
~ / , \ \ 
mwemovdact, xal Tey dirwy of TporxnEexpouxoTes, ob de Tov 
cuvdinyovTa xal TAUTA uipovpevoy, y Tov cuvaryouvTa xa 
é ~ /, ¥. >s \ ~ \ \ 

CvyxaicovTa TW Dirw* parioTa O€ xal ToUTO TEpl TAS 


pyrépag ocupPaives, 
c so c x « ». | De 
2opiSovTas. mpog eautoy oe 


\ \ / 
rouTwy O24 tims xal ray iriav 


TouTwy exacroyv TW Emsernet 





4 tvev 5& Tobtwr od« Fv plrous elvar] 
‘But without these things it is not 
possible, as we said, that they should 
be friends.’ On this use of the past 
tense jv in reference to what has 
been previously said by the writer, 
ef. Metaph. x1. vi. 1: éwel 8 Hoay tpeis 
ovcia, Eth, mt. v. 3: Totro 8 hy 7d 
Gyabots Kal Kakots €ivat, V. i. 12: émel 
& 6 wapdvopuos &dixos Hv, &e. Aristotle 
is here referring to Eth. vin. iii. 9; 
VIII. V. 3. 


IV. 1 Srep ai unrépes—mpooxexpov- 
xéres| ‘Which mothers feel towards 
their children, and which friends who 
have had a rupture (feel towards each 
other),’ z.e. they quite disinterestedly, 
since in the latter case intercourse is 


precluded, wish each other tolive. On 
the disinterested feeling of mothers, 
ef. Eth, vu. viii. 3. On the use of 
mpooxpove, cf. Politics, 11. v. 4.: of mA€t- 
oro. diapepduevor ek tay ev mooi Kal 
€x mixp@v mpooxpovoyres GAAHAOS, ert 
dt tay Ocpamrdyrwy robros pdAwora 
mpookpovouer, ols wAciora mporxpoueda 
mpos Tas Siaxovias Tas eyKuKAtous, 

2 mpos éavrdv—elva] ‘The good 
man has every one of these feelings 
towards himself, and other men have 
them in so far as they set up to be. 
good;’ (z.e. wherever they fall. short 
in these feelings, they fall short also 
in their attempt to be good). ‘For, 
as we have said, virtue and the good 
man are the standard for everything.’ 





Cf. Eth, m1. iv. §; X. ¥. 10. 


Til.—IV. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 289 


€ if wn \ ~ ‘7, ~ c / > 
UTAOYEL, TOS 02 Aoimois, 1 TOLoUTOL brorapPavoursy Ebvas, 
4 / A / / \ 
zone yap, xabamep elpyTal, LETpPOY EXATTH 7) ApETH XAL 6 
~ > \ c Of ~ A ~~ 
Trovdniog civas. OUTOG Yap ouoyywWLover EnUTM@, xaL Tédy 3 
> ~~ 2 2 \ ~ ‘ 7 A / XA 
AUTOY ODEYETHL HATA TATAY THY Wyx7y, nak Poureras 07 
€ ~ > \ \ A 4 \ / Nn \ 
eaure réryad. xa TH Pasvijeever nol xparres (rot veg 
ayabos rayaliv diamoveiv) xal EauTod evexa* Tod yap 
. Y %e DA 
xa Cry dz 
7 c \ A s ¥. \ / ~ Kz 
Povrstas sauTov xal owlerbas, XOb PAAITTAH TOUTO W 


SiavonTinod yap, Orep Exaoros sivas doxel. 


eG > ‘ \ ~ NS , \ Ly 
dpovet* ayaliy yap To crovdaiw To elves. 
c ~ , > / , BA \ ne 
EauT@ Povrcras Tayada, yevousvoc 0 KAAOG, ovdElg aipeiras 
/ 7 > ~ yw ~ 
TavT Eye excivo To yevdusvov, (Eyer yap xal viv 6 beds 
> , > a tS | / f 2 KX ‘ ~ 
Tayatev), AAN wy 6 Timor egoriv. doFere O ay To voiiv 
aq a LA , ~ ~ 
ZHATTOS Elva, | PAAITTA. TuvdIayEly TE 6 TOLOUTOG EAUTM 5 
4 ~ ~ 
Bovrcras yews yap avTd mot’ Thy Te yap Tempay- 
pévwy emiteoreig ai pvijos, xal Tay meArovT@y éAmibes 
, ~ ~ ~ 
ayabats ai romitiras 0 ydcias. xal Gewpnnarwy 0 eumopel 
~ , ~ \ 7 ~ 
TH Oiavola, cuvaryes Te xal cuvideras parish sauTa- 
, / > A - ek , \ eN7 \ ; 
TAYTOTE Yp ETTL TO AUTO AUTNpOY Te xa 7IV, xAL Ux 
GAOT AAA AmeTAMErn Lp wo eiwel: d On wot 
AAor! GA? psTapényros yap aig eimeiv. To Oy mds 
€ ~ ~ - 
auToy ev ExacTa ToUTwY brapye TH emieixel, pos OF TOY 
/, 4 a \ c / - Ae : \ « id 4 
Piroy eyxsiv women Tpog eauToy (Eor1 yap o dirog AAAOS 
, \ / ~ e 
abres), xal 7 diria rourwy elval rs doxei, xal diror ois 





A w 
EXAOTOS O 4+ 


4 €kacros & éavtg BobrAcTar—pa- 
Aura] ‘But every man wishes what 
is good for himself. No one, on con- 
dition of becoming another man, chooses 
that that new thing, which he should 
become, should possess everything, 
(for God has now all good); but 
(every man desires to possess what is 
good) remaining his present self. And 
the thinking faculty would appear to 
be each man’s proper self, or more so 
than anything else.’ 
tuation of this passage has been altered 
. to obtain the above translation, which 
has been suggested to the annotator, 
and which seems to give a more natural 
explanation of the text than has been 
arrived at by the commentators, who 
universally explain 4X’ dv 6 tt mor” 


The usual punc-— 





éariy to refer to the unchangeableness 
or to the personality of God. If the 
passage be read as above, it will be 
seen that the words av 8 7 mor’ éorly 
are in opposition to yevduevos 3 &AXos. 
Aristotle says that to every man his 
personality is what is dear to him, he 
would not relinquish this to gain all 
the world, for by relinquishing it he 
would not gain anything. With a 
changed personality, he would no more 
possess any good thing, than he now 
possesses it because God possesses all 
good. All his wishes are made on the 
basis of being still what he is. The 
good man, who fosters his thinking 
faculty, most of all takes care of his 
proper self. 


VOL, Il. : Ee 


‘ 


290 


6 rand omapyet. 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 


[ Cuar. 


\ CN ONS , ee ne ees: 
pos QuTov dE WoTepoyv EOTIY % OUX EQTE 


~ a ¢ 

dinia, adsicbw él rod mapovrog: OoFee F av ravTy 
, ~ lA a 

civas DiAia, 4 207} B00 7 waciw éx Tay cipyuévwy, xal OTE 

ere \ ~ 7 ~ ‘ ee c ~ 7 

7H bmepoary TIS DiAias TY) TP0S HUTOY OLOLOUT AL. daivera 
~ ~ 4 <s 

de TH eipnuéva xal roig moAroig trapyelv, xalmep ous 


davroic, 


~ iA 
ip’ ody 7 apéoxouciy EauToig xal SrorauPa- 


vouoww erieineig elvar, TaITH meréyouriy avTdy; eel THy 
~ ~ ~ , 
ye xousdy Patrwy xal avorsoupymy odfevd raid darapyer, 


SAAN ovuds Haiveras. 


oyedov 58 ovd2 Toig Datircig? dia- 


t A « ~ » Gee Pees 2 A > ~ wv 
dipovra: yap eauToig, xal eTepwy pmev emibupovory AADAC 
NN Va ~ ~ ~ 
03 PBovrovras, oloy of axpateis* aipoiyTa: yap avtl Tay 





6 xpos abroy 5&—éyowdra] ‘But 
whether friendship towards oneself is, 
or is not, possible, we may leave un- 
decided for the present. It would 
seem to Je possible in so far as two or 
more of the above mentioned conditions 
exist, and because the extreme of 
friendship resembles one’s feelings 
towards oneself.’ Several commen- 
tators explain 9 éorl dt0 } mAciw to 
mean ‘in so far as man consists of 
two or more parts,’ and é« téy eipy- 
Héevav they would translate ‘in ac- 
cordance with what we have before 
said, referring to Eth, 1. xiii. 9. In 
this sense the passage would be a 
parallel one to Eth, v. xi. 9. But it 
is clear from the next section that é« 
Tay cipnuéver refers to the definitions 
of friendship, given in § 1 of this 
chapter. @eic@w is used as in Eth. 
VI. i. 7, VII. viii. 7. We are not 
here referred to the subsequent dis- 
cussion in Eth, 1x. viii., where by no 
means the same subject is renewed. 

8 Sxeddy G& odde Tors PatAos— 
éavrovs] ‘But one might almost say 
that these things do not appertain to 
the bad at all. For theyare at variance 
with themselves, and desire one set 
of things while they wish another, 
just like the incontinent; instead of 
what seems to them to be good they 





choose the pleasant though it is hurt- 
ful; and others through cowardice 
and want of spirit abstain from doing 
what they think to be best for them- 
selves ; and they who through wicked- 
ness have committed many crimes hate 
their life, and fly from it, and put an 
end to themselves.’ The ‘desire’ of 
the wicked, as being of the partieular 
and subject to the domination of 
the senses (Eth. vu. iii. g), is at 
variance with their ‘wish,’ which is of 
the universal and implies a conception 
of the good. Cf. Eth, v. ix. 6, vm 
xiii. 8. The description of bad men 
given here ignores and is at variance 
with the conclusions of Book vm. In 
that book the strength, and here the 
weakness, of vice is represented, Thus 
in Eth. vu. yiii. the bad man is de- 
scribed as unrepentant, abiding by his 
purpose (§ 1), having the major pre- 
miss of his mind corrupted (§ 4), and 
therefore having no wish for the good, 
even in the universal. The account 
in Book vu., which makes &xoAacla 
or abandoned viee free from all weak- 
ness, is more theoretical and less drawn 
from nature than the above deserip- 
tion. All that is said here has aclose 
relation to, and was probably suggested 
by, the words in the Lysis of Plato, p. 
214.C: Tobds bt xaxovs, Srep xal Ad-yeras 


IV.—V.] 


HOIKON NIKOMAXEION IX. 


291 


doxovvTwy EauToig ayab@y sive: Ta dea PraPepa ovTa* 
c 7 N88 , es 4 Sa 7 ~ , 
of 0 at Oia Oelrlav xal apylay adlotavras to mpar- 


a ~ , iy 
Tel & olovTas EauToIg PeATIoOTA civos’ 


ve or \ \ 
OlG¢ OF TOAAM xOl 


\ , 4 \ , oS et \ 
Osa mérpaxtos bia Tyy poydnpiav, piootcl Te xal 


, \ A > ~ e # 
devyoucs To oi Hab AvaIpOUT hy caUTONG, 


~ f/f c 
Cnrovot Te 0b9 


pox dapol ped wv cuvdimpspedo ove, EauToug de devyoveiy 
Cevcnpayasrye aeovT on yap moAr@y xal dua xepioy, xab Toad 
Erspa ermifouct, xaf éautatg bytes, mel” Eréowy 0 byres 


yd 
erinavocvoyrat. 


/ 
TAT YOUTL pg eaUTOUS. 


ovbéy re Dsrayroy Eyovres aviv irsxoy 
PANS \ / LANDS 
oud Oy cuyyalpoucw oud: 


cuvaryotory of Tooiiros cauTeigs oraciale: yao auTamy 7% 

Woyy, xal rd piv die poybupiay aryei amreyouevoy Tividy, 
\ 4 \ \ X ~ \ 2 9 ~ 4 iA 

TO 0 Yoerar, xal To tv detipo To O excios Erne: Womep 


dlacraeyTa. 


ei 02 wy oloy Te Gua Avmciobas xal Yerba, 10 


> ‘\ \ 4 ~ o 4 \ > a 

AAAL [LETH [ebxpOv YE AvTEITAL OTS 74o4y, nab oox ay 

éBobrero yosa Tatra yevécbar avuT@m* petaperncing yap ol 
y i sented (Ai 


~ / 
daviaa yépovory. 


od 3% daiveras & dares ovd? mpd¢ 


c % ~ 
cauTov dining Osaxciobas did Td pydey Eye Diryrov. 
ei Oy To odTwS Zyew Alay éorly AbAwv, heuvxréov Try 
a 7 3 x , > 5 4 i 
pox Oypiay diarerapévng xal reiparéoy emseixh elas’ ovTw@ 
\ A \ c »! ~ Es x ges Pe lZ 
yap ual mpog eauToy PirixwWo av eyo: xal etepw idrog 


yévoiro. 
wv 


A 
‘H® eivoim dirin pdv eoixev, ob pryy eorl ye 


dirla> 5 


7 wv \ \ ~ \ : 
yiverar yap sdvoia xal modo ayv@rag xal ravdavouca, 





wepl avray, undérore Suolous und abrovs 
elvat, GAN éumannrous te Kal doTaOh- 
Tous, 

g—I10 oracdfea—-yéuovow] ‘For 
their soul is in tumult, the one part of 
it, through viciousness, grieves at ab- 
staining from certain things, but the 
other part is pleased (at this abstin- 
ence), and the one pulls this way, the 
other that way, as though tearing (the 
man) in pieces. If it is not possible 
to feel pain and pleasure at the same 
moment, at all events after a little 
while (the bad man) is pained that he 
* felt pleasure, and he “could have 
wished that those pleasures had not 





happened to him ;” for the wicked are 
full of repentance.’ This picture of 
the mental struggles of the bad does 
not recal either the phraseology or 
the doctrines of Book vn., where 
pox@npla is contrasted with, and op- 
posed to, axpacta (cf. vm. viii. 1). The 
metaphor otacidfer occurs repeatedly 
in Plato’s Republic, ef. 1. p. 352 A: 
(7) G5inla) év ért—evotca—mparov piv 
&bitvaroy abtdy mpdrrew Toho oracid- 
(ovra Kat ovx Spovootyta abtdy EavTe, 
&reira exOpby Kat EavTg@ Kad Trois Sixatois. 
Cf, Eth. 1. xiii. 15. 


V. ‘H & edyora—dxodrovdel] ‘Now 


PP2 


292 


{4 w 
diria O° ov, 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX. 


\ r \ ~ > oO 
xs 7 poTepoy 0g TOUT ELOY TOs. 


[Cuar. 


AAA ovde 


4 / 5) “2 > \ » SV. 2»> W ~ 
diancis gorw* ov yap eyer diataow ovd oosSw, TH 


adiajoes O08 Tatir? axoroubel. 


xal 4 pey dlanoig pera 


\ 
cuvnjelac, 7 8 edvoie xal éx mpormalov, olov xal meph rods 
aywuotas cupPalverr ebyor yap avroig yivovras xab cuv- 

x ns if \ 

§zrouciy, Topmpagassy 0 ay ouley omep yap clropay, 
mpormalwsg edvor yivovTa: xal eximoraiwg oTépyoucty. 
yy AN > \ , as a ~ > 6 c Py A ~ 
320ie On apyn DiAlag sivas, Womep Tod Epav ¥ did THs 
oWews ydovy* wy yap mponobels rH idee ovbelg epg, 6 OF 
xaipwy Tad elder obbiy paeArOY og, AAV bray xal amovTe 





good-will is like friendship, but yet it 
is not friendship, for goodwill is exer- 
cised both towards unknown persons, 
and when its own existence is unknown 
(to the object), which is not the case 
with friendship. But all this has been 
said already. It is not even the same 
as loving; for it exhibits neither viol- 
ence nor longing, which are the ac- 
companiments of loving.’ The Saxon 
word ‘ Good-will,’ and not the Latin 
‘Benevolence,’ which is too abstract 
and general, is the representative ,of 
Goodwill, says Aristotle, is 
engendered by the appearance of noble 
qualities, it is rapidly conceived, but 
is passive in its character, and is only 
the prelude of friendship. Therebeing 
no correspondent adjective to the sub- 
stantive ‘Good-will,’ we must express 
eivot by ‘ Well-disposed.’ Just as in 
Eth, 1. the cognate faculties to Pur- 
pose, and in Eth. v1. the cognate 
qualities to Wisdom are discussed, so 
Aristotle here introduces a discussion 
of the feelings which are cognate to 
Friendship. 

kal mpdrepoy St] vit. ii. 3-4. 

didragw] ‘Intensity,’ ‘ straining,’ 
‘violence.’ In the previous section 
diarerauévws means ‘strenuously.’ Cf. 
Ar. Polit. vu. xvii. 6: tas diatdoes 
tay maliwy Kal KAavOpuous, ‘the violent 
passions and cryings of children,’ 


edvoia. 





2 4 & etvoia—oupBalvye] While 
loving implies acquaintance and fami- 
liarity, good-will is conceived instan- 
taneously ; thus men conceive good- 
will towards particular competitors in 
the games from their appearance, and 
are inclined to wish them success. 

3 Good-will, says Aristotle, is the 
prelude of Friendship, just as the 
pleasure of the eye is the prelude of 
love. This however does not consti- 
tute love. The test of love is longing 
for a person inabsence. Cf. Ar. Rhet. 
I, xi, 11: where the same test is given. 
In accordance with the unhappy no- 
tions of the Greeks, aévrais here put 
in the masculine gender. ' 

51d THs Spews | In Plato’s Cratylus, 
p- 420 A, it is suggested that “Epws is 
derived from eiopeiv.—Epws 811 elope? 
ewlev kad ob« oixela early H poh airy 
7™@ FxovtTt, GAN eneloaxtos Bia Tay 
bupdrov, 5d raira amd rod eiopeiv Eopos 
76 ye madaidy éxadetro. Cf. Shakspeare 
Merchant of Venice, Act ut. Se. ii. 


‘It is engendered in the eyes, 
By gazing fed.’ 


And Romeo and Juliet, Act I. Se. iii. 
‘T'll look to like, if looking liking move.” 

ob thy di 7d xpho mor] ‘Goodwill’ 
is essentially disinterested in its cha- 
racter, 


ee re 


V.—VI.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 293 


~ \ ~ £ 2 ~ 4 \ ‘ UG 
moby xal Tig mapovolag eridupy. otrw Oy xal dirous 
ovx oloy T° Elvos py evvoug yevoevoug, of O etvor od42y 
parrov dirotow* Bovarovras yap povov rayada oig eioly 
3 , 2 ox ALY 29 9 ~ erat Fes 
ebvol, cupmpagasey 0 ay ondév, oud oyarndeiev trip auray. 
NX A / fs ED > \ > \ Ss , 
O10 pstadepwy dain Tig av auTny apyyy Elva iriay, 
/ Nv s > , > VA / 
xpoutopevyny Oz xal cig cuvyferayv adixvoupevyny yiverbo 
4 / 3 \ ») \ % ee joe », ») \ \ ‘OU * IDrN 
diriav, od THy die TO Ypjosoy ovde THY Oia To 7d" onde 
/ & 
yap sbvoim eal rovrosg yiverot. Opiv yap evepyerybels 
, > ? / > l4 \ y+ A 4 ~ c 
avf wy mémovbev amovéne THy evvolay, TH Olxoua Opw@y* 6 
ey ré / > > ~ > , A 3 i > 
08 Povrcnevas tiv’ eumpaysiv, ermida Eywy sumopiag 1 
> / > a4 ? wv > / > x ~ c ~ 
EXELYGU, OUX EOIX EUYOUS ExElYwW eivotl, AAAKL LAAKAOY EXUTW, 
/ aN / ° 7 ree / ~ : 
xabamep ovd8 diros, ei Oepameder avrov die tive ypHow: 
Baws 0 7 ebvore OF apeTray xal emisixeray Tiva yiveTou, 4 
6 bavi xaro i) avOpElog 7 TL ToLoUTOY, xabe 
prencedory xargs tig 7) dvpsiog 4 74 + , xadamep 
’ ~ , ~ x 
nal éxl ray dywyvictay elromeyv. 
Pirixdv OF xal 7 opdvore dalveras’ dsoren ox Zor 6 
€ 4 ~ X \ p ee ~ > 7 ¢ , 
6moo0gla* Touro [ev Yap Xab AYYoOUTIY HAANAOUS UTAD- 
Gesrev ay. 0008 Todo mepl brouoiiv buoyvwpovotivTag buovosty 
\ \ Pe > , > Q \ ‘ 
Gacly, oloy rovg mweph T&y odpaviwy (ov yao dirixov TO 
\ 7 e ~ > ‘\ \ / c ~ 4 
wepk TouTwMY éu.ovosty ), AAAK TAS MWOAEG OLLOVOELY daciy, 
7 \ ~ ij € ~ \ > ‘ 
6Tay mel Téy cupbepovray bpoyvnpovines rot roared. 
mpoosplovTas xal mpaTrTwor Ta xowy OoFavtTa, wept TA2 
mpaxTa On bpovootiow, xal TovTwy wepl Ta ev peyeder xa) 
~ EY ~ 
Ta eydeyouevan aphoiv bmapyew 7 maw, olov ak worse, 
o ~ ~ \ ae NS € \ x ~~ 
oTay maot doxy TAG apyas aipeTag sivas, 7) TULpayelY 
A Dy / x I , 4 x \ > b 19 rE 
axedasmovios, ¥ apyew Llitraxoy, dre xal avrog Wdercv. 





VI. 1 piAindy Bt—édyodotla] ‘Un- 
animity also appears to be of the 
nature of friendship; therefore it is 
not the same as agreement of opinion.’ 
On giArindy, cf. Eth. vat. i. 43 Vu 
xiii. 6. 

otoy Tovs wep) TGV ovpavlwy] Cf. Eth. 
Ti. ili, 3: ep) 5& ray Gidlwy oddels 
Bovaeverat, oioy wep) Tod Kdcpov. Ari- 
stotle arrives at his definition of dudvoiw 
inductively, saying that we do not find 
the name applied to agreement of 
opinion in general, nor again to agree- 





ment of opinion about every particular 
subject, but we do find it used of states 
whose citizens are unanimous on the 
measures to be adopted for the common 
weal. Hence we get the idea that 
unanimity is ‘political friendship.’ Cf. 
Eth. vu. i. 4, where éudvoi is used 
as the opposite of ordots, 

2 } &pxew Mirrady, Gre Kad adrds 
HOercv] ‘ Or (if all agree) that Pittacus 
shallrule, (supposing this to be) during 
the period when he himself was willing 
to rule” Pittacus, haying held his 


294 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION 


IX. [Cuar. 


Gray 0 Exatepos ExuTov PovAnras, Womep ol ev Taig Poww- 
lous, oraciazouciw ov yap eof bmovosiv To avTd éxa- 
Eepoy evvoely ibimors, AAAG TO ey TO auTe, olov Gray xak 
6b OFpos xal of emreineig TOUS apiorrous apysw. olTw yap 


TAT) ylyveras 08 edievrau, 


OMT IXY 08 Oiria dalveraes 


7 opovore, xabdaep xa néyeros* weph Tae oupdepovras yep 


w 


ioT! xb TA eis Tov Bilov avixovr a, 


Zo71 0 7} Tomury 


jpovola ey Toig emieixéoiv' OTOL yap xal ExuToIg dnovootos 
xal GANG AOE, enh téy auTdy ovres as elreiv* Tay Tol- 
oUTw@Y yap [ever TH Povajpara xal ov perauppel donep 
eUpimrog, Bosrovral Te TH Olxaia xal Te ouppepovren, 


4 rouTwy OF xa) nowy edievras. 


Tovg 08 dadacug ody obey 


C3 ~ \ > % , / ‘A /, 
Te bpovosiv wAyy exh pixpov, xalamep xal diroug elves, 
mrsoveSiag ehieuévoug év roig wWherluois, ev O8 Toig movorg 


~ / 4 
xat Taig Aeitoupyiaig eAAelrovTas* 


€ ~ is4 
caut® 0 Exaorrog 


~ / e 
Povrcnevog taiira tov méaag eGerates xalb xwrver* my 


/ 
yap TypodvTwY TO xoWoy aMOAAUTOL. 


cupPaiver ody ad. 


~ / > 7 \ > / > \ 
Tog oTaciabewv, AAAACUS pty eravayxalovtas, avTovs 
S tA ~ 
03 pn Bovropévoug Ta Olxase moieiv. 


7 


Oi 0 evepyéras rods edepyernbéevtag Doxodor pmarrov 


dirsiv 7 of ed mabdyreg roo dpacavras, xal we Tope 





elective monarchy for ten years, re- 
signed. Had the citizens after this 
period wished him to reign, his own 
will would have been wanting to make 
unanimity in the state. 

of év tais bowlocas] Eteocles and 
Polynices. Cf. Eurip. Phenisse, vv. 
588, sqq. 

7) aitd Exdrepoy évvociv SdhTore] 
The commentators illustrate this by 
the joke of the man who said ‘that he 
and his wife had always perfectly 
agreed —in wishing to govern the 
house.’ 

3 ém ray abtay bytes, ws cimeiy] 
‘Being on the same moorings, as it 
were, as opposed to the ebbings and 
flowings of a Euripus. Cf. Demos- 
thenes, De Corona, p. 319, § 281, od« 





em rijs abrijs dpuet tuts mwodAois, sc. 
Gvykbpas, 

4 This is a picture of the discord 
produced by evil passions, where every 
one grasping at the larger share in 
good things, and shirking his part in 
labours and services, watches (éerd(et) 
his neighbour to prevent him encroach- 
ing. Thus men force each other to 
do what is right, while unwilling to 
do it themselves, 


VII. Aristotle says, it is noticed 
as something extraordinary (és mapa 
Adyov émi(nreira) that benefactors 
seem to love those, to whom they 
have done a kindness, more than the 
benefited persons love them, The 
common explanation of the paradox 


VI.—VIL. | HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 


295 


Toig piv ouy mAsiorots 
Tog OF ObeiAsTas’ xaba- 
dheirovres Povrovrou py 
elves olg ddeirovow, of 0% daveiravres xal erimérovtas 


Ud » nN 
Adyov yivousvoy emigyreiros. 
4 > /. 
daiveras, OTs of pty obetroues 
on 3s & ~ i e \ 
mep ouv em) tiv davelwy of pty 


~~ ~~ > / / cd \ \ > , 
Tig Thy GdelAcvTMY TwTHpiAs, oUTW xal Todg evepyeT7- 
5 A 
caytag Povacrbar civar Tov mabovras ws xopsoupévous 
7 ~ i ~ 
TAS YapiTas, Tig O ovx Elvas Emimentg TO avTamodoivas. 
BE £ \ x Tee OK i ~ , > \ 5) 
mivapwog ev oby Tay’ av hain Tatra rAgyew avTovs éx 
~ £ wv o > ~, > a A c 
movnpois Gewpevous, gore 3 dvllpevm ied aurnroves ycp oi 
~ ~ £ 
TOAAol, xal UAAAOY ED TATE 7) Tossiv edievras, OoEEre 2 
J a ~ 
0 dv duoinwrepov civas To altiov, xat ody Spoloy TH mepl 
\ Ng ys > / > / \ 9 li y > A 
TOUS OvElOAYTAS’ OU Yap EoTI DiaAyois TEDL EXELVOUG, HAA 
~ 7 lA ~ nw a > 
to} owlzcba: Bovraynois ris xopsdyg Evexan* of O ed 
~ ~ A 9 
memoinxores Didotos xal ayammo: Tovg memovboras, xav 
> , o , y ’ 
penbev wor yonowor pnd sig Vorepov yevoiwT av. o7Ep3 
\ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
xal exh trav Teyvit&y cupfébyxev’ rag yap TO olxetoy 
x ~ ~ EI / Ey ~ 
Epyov ayama parrov 4 ayamrryfeln av brd To Epyou 
> 4 / \ \ 
euaboyou yevoévou. wept Tovs 
7 ~ MA ~ 
montas cupPaiver trepayara@or yao oto Ta oixeta 


parmora 0 lows Toro 





is, that benefactors look forward to 
obtaining a return for their kindness, 
they thus cherish the persons of those 
who are indebted to them. This sel- 
fish theory views mankind on the dark 
side (€« rovnpod Gewpévous), but is not 
altogether devoid of truth. A deeper 
(puoixdrepov) reason however may be 
assigned for the phenomenon in ques- 
tion, namely, that as we can only be 
said to exist when we are conscious of 
our vital powers (ésmeév évepyelg),- so 
anything which gives or increases the 
sense of those powers is dear to us. 
The benefited person stands to the 


benefactor in the relation of a work 


to the artist, he is an exponent of the 
benefactor’s self, and is thus regarded 
with feelings of affection, as being 
associated by the benefactor with the 
sense of his own existence (orépyet 5h 
Td épyov, 5id7t Kal rd clva). These 





feelings of course cannot be recipro- 
cated by the benefited person. Again, 
the benefactor associates an idea of 
the noble (7d xaddv) with the recipient 
of his good deeds; the other associates 
with him only an idea of the profit- 
able, and this is a less loveable idea, 
especially when viewed in the past, 
and become a matter of memory. 
Again, the active part taken by the 
benefactor has more affinity to the 
active principle of loving. 

tots mwev ovv mAcioras| This ex- 
planation is put by Thneydides (11. 40) 
into the mouth of Pericles: BeBaid- 
tepos b&¢ 6 Spdoas thy xdpw adore 
dpetAouerny BV edvulas G FébwKe cw ety - 
6 & dvropelAwy duBAadtepos, cidds ovK 
és xdpw, GAN eis dpelAnua Thy dperhv 
amodéowr. 

*Entxapuos| The words é« movnpov 
Gewuévovs seem to have been taken 


296 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX. 


[ Cuap. 


/ r Cd , s ae 
3 a s 
4+ TOW ULATA, TTESYOVTES WOTED TEXVA. TOlOuUTwM bn E0lxE 


\ \ ns > ~ \ \ x \ ” > \ 
HAL TO TWY EUEOYETWY* TO Yop EV mwemov4os epyoyv EOTIY 


> wn ~ \ > ~ ~ x L © A ¢ 
auT@y* ToUTO 07 AYATWT! PAAAOY % TO EDYOY TOY TOby- 


OAVTA. 


, > ¥ o \ 7 ~ € \ } 
TOuTOU QITIOY OTL TO ELYVAL TAOLY AipsTov xa 


, > \ is / ~ ne \ \ / 
dianrayv, expev 0 EvEepysia*’ TH Civ yap xal WPAT TEL. 
. \ 
Evepyere 07 6 moincag To zpyov ZoT! Tus: orécyel on TO 


a4 / \ 4, 
Epyov, O1oTe xal TO elven. 


mn 


~ DV / aA / > 
ToUTO Of ducinoyv: 0 yap OT! 
d , ~ 5) Z 44 ok. / / 4 dt ‘ ne 
UVOLEL, TOUTO EVEDYEIR TO EDYOY MYVUEI. Aa Of xab TH 


: > f re \ ‘ \ ~ cA #. > 

pay eveoyeTy xaroY TO xaTa THY TPasW, Worse yaipew ev 
2, ~ ~ \ , xAN 4 ° ~ / > > 
© ToUTO, TH OF wabovTs ovGty xaroy ev TO OpaoayTI, AAA 


nN 


eiep, cundécov- rotro 8 yrrov ov xal psanrov. 


njOzian 


NG > \ wy / (tal OER ~ a3 / © 
EOTL TOU [LEY WOPOYTOS 7 EVEDYELM, TOU OF [LEAAOYTOS 7% 
? / ~ \ , c 7 GAN X \ \ 
éAmic, To OF YEYVEVY[LEVOU % LYNN. -NOLOTOY d& To xara 





out of some iambic or trochaic verse 
of the Sicilian poet, but the verse 
itself has not been preserved. 

4 ToovtT@ 5)—unvde| ‘The case of 
benefactors seems then something of 
the same kind. For the object bene- 
fited is their “ work ;” they love this 
therefore more than the work loves 
him who made it. The cause of this 
is that existence is desired and loved 
by all, but we exist by consciousness, 
that is to say by living and acting. 
Thus he whe has made the work in 
question exists consciously, and there- 
fore he loves the work, because he 
loves his existence. And this is a 
principle of nature; for that which 
exists potentially, the work proves 
to exist actually.’ On this mode 
of paraphrasing évépyei, see Vol. 
I. Essay IV. ° Any work of art, 
or creation of the mind, or moral 
achievement, is here said to shew us 
externally to ourselves. It causes us 
to exist évepyelg, that is, not only in 
ourselves, but for ourselves. It thus 
becomes a union of the objective and 
And the philosophical 
principle explains a whole class of ho- 
mogeneous facts, not only the feelings 


the subjective. 





of benefactors towards the benefited, 
but of poets towards their poems, of 
parents, and especially mothers, to- 
wards their children; and of those 
who have made fortunes towards their 
property. These facts were brought 
together, without being analysed, by 
Plato, ef. Republic, p. 330 B-c, and 
Eth, rv. i. 20. ; 

évepyelg 3j—mws| Many commen- 
tators understand these words to 
mean, ‘Therefore by means of con- 
scious activity the maker is in a sense 
his work,’ in which they are supported 
by Eustratius and the Paraphrast. 
This would not materially alter the 
general drift of the passage. 

6 deta 8 esri—prijpn] ‘Now of 
the present the living reality is sweet, 
of the future the hope, of the past the 
memory.’ In two clauses of this 
sentence subjective words are used 
(éAmts and prhun), but évépyea in the 
remaining clause hovers between the 
objective and the subjective. Cf. Ar. 
De Memoria, i. 4, where atc@nots is 
used in an analogous sentence :* Tov 
piv mapdvtos (€orlv) alaOnois, Tov be 
BéAAovtos é€Amls, Tod Se yevomevor 
pvhun. 


Vil.—VIII.} HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX. 297 


\ peat \ 2! € I ~ \ me 

Thy evepysiay, real Diayroy prolong. rh piv ouv Tewory- 
xOTS peeves TO epyv (To xarov yao monuypovioy), TO 03 
mwabovTs TO xPaT pov wapoixer ds. i TE pov Tay pay 
xanr@y yosia, Thy 03 ypyolwy ob Tay 7 ATTov* 7 7poC- 

7 > / yy x \ € \ / 
doxia 0 avamarw eyew eoimev. xal x ev OiaAjots 

2 ” \ ~ INS! ~ , ~ c 
momo Goixev, TO Dirciobas 08 TW Tacyev. ToIg brEp- 
/ or \ ‘ cog es a \ ~ \ \ 
éyoucs On mepl tay wmeaSiw Eweras To Dirciy xal TH 

, y+ Dv \ > , , , ~ 
Dirima. ets OF TH EMITovWS yEvoUsYa TayTEG PAAAOY7T 
orépyouolv, oloy xal Ta yYpjpara of xTHoapeEvoL 
~ A ‘ 
mapanraovtwy’ doxet On TO pev 0 TaoYEIy Amovoy eivat, 
\ sy 4 ~ > ~ \ ~ NSS \ c / 
To 0 eb moisiy epywdec. Oia Tatra df xal ai pytEepes 
Dirorexvarepacs” em imovwtipan yap 7 yévynois, xal parrov 
~ x ~ ~ 

joao OTs abta@y. d0Fe% 0 av Toto xal Toig evepyéTous 


TOY 


olxetoy elycu. 

"Amopeiros 08 xal mérepov Ost direiv cavTov pariora 8 
7H GAAoY TVA" EITi@o! Yap Tog EMUTOUG BarMITTA aya- 
Tol, xal Ws ev aicyp@ diravrovg amoxarotios, oxet 
Te 6 pev Dadrog sauTod yapw wavta mpatrey, xal dow 
ay poxbnporepos 4, ToToUTH Marry’ eyxarodor Oy AUTO 
Ort ovbevy ad’ EauTod mparrer’ 60 emieinyg die TO xardY, 
xah dow ay Pertinv %, pardAov did TO xaAdY, xal dirou 


a ‘ a € ~ ’ ~ ‘ , A 
Evexa’ TOO aUTOD Taping. ToIg Adyors 0 TOUTOIG TH2 





VIII. In this interesting chapter, 
Aristotle discusses the difficulty as to 


self promotes at the same time the good 
of others, and is worthy of all praise. 


‘whether one ought to love oneself es- 
pecially, or some one else.’ On the one 
hand, ‘ self-loving ’ is used as a term of 
reproach; on the other hand, one’s 
feelings towards oneself are made the 
standard for one’s feelings towards 
friends. These two points of view re- 
quire reconciliation, which may be ef- 
fected by a distinction of terms. For 
the word ‘self’ has two senses—the 
lower and the higher self, the one con- 
sisting in appetites and passions, the 
other in the intellect and the higher 
moral faculties. He that gratifies his 
lower self at the expense of others is 
‘ self-loving’ in the bad sense of the 
term. He that ministers to his higher 

VOL. II. 





Such self-love as this may lead a man | 
even to die for his friends or for his 
country. A man, grasping at the 
noble, may give up honour, power, 
life itself; and thus the greatest self- 
sacrifice will be identical with the 
greatest self-love. These considera- 
tions show in what sense one ought, 
and in what sense one ought not, to 
‘love oneself.’ 

1 as é& aicxpg] ‘As a term of 
reproach,’ 

ob0ty ad’ Eavrod mpdtre:] ‘He does 
nothing apart from himself.’ ‘ Nihil 
@ suis rationibus alienum.’ 

2 Tois Adyous 5t¢—ovK GAdyws | ‘With 
these theories men’s actions, not un- 


QQ 


298 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN IX. [Cuap. 


” re A . ~ wn 
Epya diadwyel, ovx ardyws. acl yap deliv dsrciy 
, 
arora Toy pariora diroy, dlaog 62 pariora 6 Povrc- 
Me - , > \ > / a * > § } 
f2v0g w Povarasras Taya exelvou Evexa, xal eb pondelg 
y ~ ~ \ U 
cloeras, Tatra 0 tmapye parisr avTd moog abroy, 
\ 
xal ra Aoima dy wal’ vig 6 Dirog apiSeras* elpnros yap 
a >’ ? > ~ , + A \ XN A oA 
OT! OT auTOD mavTa TA DIAIKA xal MHOG TOUS AAAoUE 
/ \ ~ oo 
xal ab mapornlas 08 maéoas bpoyvwpovodory, 
= \ z /, U 
olov To ‘pia Wuxy’ xal Sxowda ra dirAwy’ xal ‘ioorygs 
+ 7 ~ 
inorys’ xal Syovu xvyng eyylov. wmavTa yap TadTo 
\ Eas , > ¢ , P / \ / G ~ 
7pog auToyv pared UTOAPYEL* MAMTA yao dirog QUTW, 
\ / NA / es £ / > ~ w > 
xab Diryreoy oy parr EAUTOY, ATOpEITAs O EbxOT WS © 
/ \ a > ~ > , \ , 
woréoog ypswv Erecbas, audholv eydvtov TO mioroy, 
» bg \ / ~ ~ , ~ 
3lowg ovy Tods TolwovToug det TY Adywy DBiospeiv xa 
\ I oe ah c / 7s \ ~ ar 4 / > On 
OsopiSev ed Goov Exarepor xal wi arndevouow. ei OF 
rap \ in ~ €.  £ ré ,. Ae 
afomev To dirauroyv mg exarepor Ayourlv, TAX ay 
« | 1 > ” ” > \ 
of psy oby Eig Oveidog KyovTEes avTO D1A- 
, ~ \ ~ ~ 
AUTOVS xAADIoL ToUg EnUTOIG amovémovTag TO MAEiov Ev 


NZ, 
ONE. 


4ysvoiTo OHAoy. 


xprjpacr nal tipaig xal ylovais raig cwparixaig* 
TouTwY yap ob WoAAo) opéyovTas, xal Eomovdaxacs weph 
wv / , A 
QUT Wo apoTa byTa, O10 xal mepimayyTa éoriv. of OH 
~ ~ , o 
woh Tatra macovextos yapicovras Taig eribupioug xa orAws 
~ , ~ > / ~ ~ ~ PSR c 
tolg wabeot xal TO AACywW Tig Wux%}s. To1odToLd Eloiy of 
/ x , c / / > A ~ ~ 
Torro’ O10 xab 7 Tpoonyopla yEeyevyTas amo TOU MOAAOV 
UL + IN s s ~ a 7 > D7 
davaov oyvTog. dOlmaiws on Tolg ouTw DirAauToig overdi- 
a 4 INS \ MM og c ~ 3 / > of 
5 Sera. Ort OF TOUS TA ToIAdT abrois amovémovTas ciwhacs 
5 v7 
Agyew of moArol Pianvrous, ovx adnrov’ ei yap Tig cael 
orovsalor TH Olxaia WLATTELY KUTOS PAMITTA TavT@Y 7 
\ ’ nN Cc ~ yy ~ \ A > / \ 
Ta TMdpOVA 7 GroMoly aAAa THY xaTa Tag apeTas, xa 
nw ~ \ ~ ~ 
oAws asl TO xaAdY EMUTM WepIToLoiTo, ovOElg EpEei ToUTOY 
/ * ~ ~ 
6 diaavurov 0808 WeFer, d0Fere OF av 6 TomdTog paAroy eivou 
/ es , oer: ok , \ s > 
PiAKUTOS’ AMOVELEL YOUY EXUTW TA XAAAITTA KA MANITT 
> / ~~ n 
ayaha, xal yapiSeror Eautod To xupiwrarw, xal ravTE 





reasonably, are at variance.’ To the 
list of the meanings of the word épyov 
given in the note on Eth. 1. vii. 11, 
we must add the above use of 7 épya 
to mean ‘actions’ as opposed to theory. 
Cf. Eth. x. i, 3: of yap wept ray év 
Tots Tabet Kal Tats mpakeot Adyo: Hrrdy 





eiot moro Tay Epywy. xX. Vill. 12: TO 
& GAnbes ev rots mpaxtots éx Tay Epywv 
«al rod Blov kplyera:. Aristotle says 
that men do not ‘act’ as if they con- 
sidered self-love to be wholly bad, and 
he proves this by quoting popular pro- 


verbs, which support the contrary view. 


VIII. | HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 299 


‘A 4 a \ \ / \ , 
TouTw meieras* womrep 08 xal morig To xUgMOTUTOY 
, i > > ~ \ ~ of 7 4 \ 
panier elvas doxet xal mav arro TVOTYULA, GUTW xa 
aviowmrosg’ xal dirautog On pariota 6 TOTO ayamrdéy xa! 
a $ / \ K 2 X \ \ > Y X 
vA MA 
TOUT Kapiopevos. xa eyxparng be xa axparag AEye- 
TOL TO xpaTEly TOY VOdY | Py, WS ToUTOV ExaoTOU bYTOC" 
wal mempayivas Soxotiow avtol xal éxovolwg Ta pera 
, ‘ a X - ~f> oo , 2 3\ , 
AGyou parIoTa. OT pev ov TOU ExacTEG éoTIV 7) ME- 
> a A a c > x / ~ > 
AioTa, ovx Adyrov, xal Ors 6 emieixys parAIoTA TodT 
~~ a . 
ayamrd, 616 dirautog pant av ely, xal’ Erepov eidog 
nw > /, \ ~ oe \ \ 
Tod GvediSouzvov, xal diadéowy TocodTov Moov To xaTE 
4 ne ~ A , % S28 ~ ~ KR ~~ 
Aoyoy Say Tod xara maboc, xal opeyerbau Tod xarod 7) Tod 
~ A se \ 
Ooxotivrog cupdépey. Todo piv ov mepl Tag xarag7 
/ , o , > Dd 
mages diadepovtrws crovdalovtag mavres amodeyovTas 
~ \ 
xal exawotow mavtwy OF ausrArAwpévoy modo TO xardY 
/ ~ 
OlaTewopévwy TH KAAATTA WoaTTEW xo T ay 
, > ‘ / 4 3y7 c / x ij ~ 
TavT ely TH OfovTa xal ign ExacTw Ta peyiore Téby 
ayabiy, elrep % apeTy TooTEv zor. Wote Toy pay 
ayaboy de dinauray civas* xal yap avrdg ovo er cu TH 
XAAK mparreoy xah TOUS &XAous aipernoes’ Toy oO: Pox”. 
Gnpov ov det Bader yap xal éaurdv xal rote wérac, 
« / ~ ~ > s ~ 
davroc rabeowy ETOMEYOS. TWH pox Sneed peev ov Oiadwyei 8 
~ tA A , > > i aA ~ “é 
a Osi mparrey wah & mparres 66 emieinis, & O¢i, TAUTA 
xal mparres® mwas yap vous alps siTau TO Bi reese's éaure, 
6 8 emery meibapysi TH vb. aarniig O8 zepl Tob 9 
oTovdaisv xal To Téy blrcoy € EVEXA TOAAG WpaTrEy xah 
x x : s , 
Tig marpidoc, xay déy imepamobvyjcxey* mpojoeras yap 
\ , 
xal ypjpata xal Tid xal Grws Ta Tepipaynta ayaba, 





6 &omrep 5 Kal wédA1s— tvOpwros] 
‘But as the predominant part (in a 
state) seems before all things to be 
the state, and as the predominant 
part in every other system seems to 
be that system, so (the predominant 
part in man seems, above all things, 
to be) man.’ Cf. Eth. x. vii. 9: ddgee 
8 by cal civat Exacros rovro, etxep rd 
KUpiov Kal Guevoy. On the uses of the 
word xépios cf. note on Eth. 1. ii. 4. 
in the above passage 7d Kupwtatoy 





means the ‘most absolute,’ the ‘ruling’ 
part. Cf. Ar. Politics, mi. vii. 2: 
ToAirevupa & éot) 7d Kipioy Ta TéAEwY, 
avdryun 8 elvar xbprov } Eva 4 dAbyous } 


Tovs moAAOVs. 


7 «trep 7% Gperh towdtdy ect) 
‘If virtue is one of the greatest of 
goods.” 

8-10 The sentiments expressed in 
these sections may be compared with 
the elevated description of the self- 
sacrifice of the brave man, in Eth. nt. 


@Q@2 


/ 
10 OT OVELEb. 


300 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX, [ Cuap. 


7 c ~ + x6 ‘ BAL A A or 
Tepimoioupervos sauTdd +d waLAdy’ CALYov yep XpOvOw aes 
nw ~ > 
GFvar ohodpa parrov earor av 7 monuy pec, rear 
~ n~ > a / > > 
Liioas xards evavrov 4 moan Eryn TuyovT@s, xal play 
re \ , ~ 
Teas xaryy xal peyaany 7) woArag xal pixpas. Toig 
5 ~ ~ \ 
0 trepamobyycxover tor lows cupBaivers aipodyros Oy 
~ ~ a > vr 
péya xarov éautoig. xal yxpyjpara mpooiwr av ed w 
iY ¢ c /, 2 , \ ~ X /, 
masiova An bovras of iro yiyveros yap TO ev DIAM 
, > ~ Dye \ , Q VN OA ~ > 46 c nw 
Xerjpara, avTwd o& To xarov' +o Oy pesiSov ayaboy eauTa 
‘ , 
xal meph rinag 08 xal apyag 6 avTog TpOTog" 
if x wn f. ~ 7 o A A > ~ 
TOYTA Yap TH DiAwW TAdTA mpoyoeTOL* KAAOY yap aUTw@ 


~ Wi) , 
TOUTO XQL EMALVETOY. 


. v ~ ~ 

eixoTw@s 0% Ooxsl o7moudaiog elvan, 
> , 
avril mavtTwy aipovevog TO xaAcy. 


evdeyeTas 08 xal 


mpases TO DiAw mpoleobas, xad elvar xarAAsov Tod aoTov 


~ \ » ~ /. / 
m paso TO aiTIoy TO DIAw vyevéc bas, 


° ~ \ ~ 
éy macs OH Toig 


? ~ c ~ , « ~ ~ ~ lA 
eTasveTolg 6 omoudatog daiveTou ELUTW TOU XaAOU AEOY 


yew, 


odrw piv ovy diaavrov elvas det, xabamep 


eloytos* wg 0 of worAol, ob Xp7. 
"Au.dicByreiras 08 xal meph roy eddaipova, ei denoreras 
dirwy 7 py. ovbev yap dacs deliv dirwy roig paxaplorg 





ix. 4-5. But we may particularly 
note here the delicacy of thought 
which suggests that the good man 
may on occasion give up to his friend 
the doing of noble acts, and thus 
acquire to himself a still greater 
nobility, A comparison is sometimes 
instituted between the g:Aauria of Ari- 
stotle and the ‘self-love’ of Bishop 
Butler. But the ‘self-love’ described 
by Butler is a creeping quality, it 
deals with means rather than with 
ends, and considers the ‘interest’ of 
man in this world or the next. Ari- 
stotle’s g:Aavria is simply a devotion 
to what is great and noble. 


IX. Does the happy man, who is 
all-sufficient in himself, need friends, 
or not? To prove the affirmative of 
this question, Aristotle uses the fol- 
lowing arguments, 





1 A priori, we might assume that, 
as happiness is the sum of all human 
goods, the possession of friends, one 
of the greatest of external goods, 
would necessarily be included (§ 2). 

2 Friends will be required by the 
happy man, not so much as the givers, 
but rather as the recipients, of kind- 
ness (§ 2). 

3 We might assume also that the 
happy man should neither be con- 
demned to be a solitary, nor to live 
with strangers and chance people (§ 3). 

4 Those who take the negative side 
in the question have an unworthy 
conception of friends, as persons af- 
fording profit or pleasure, The happy 
man is almost independent of such 
(§ 4), but yet he may want friends in 
a higher sense. Happiness consists 
in the play of life (évépyem), and he 
that sees before his eyes the virtuous 


VIII.—IX.] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX. 


301 


xal adrapxsow’ Umapyey yap avtois Tayaba* avTapxes 


ody bvTag ovdevdg mpocdeiobos, Toy DE diroy, Erepoy adrov 
+ 7 a > ¢ ~ > we \ 
Gvta, mopitew & Ov avrol aduvarel* Obey 76 


ray 6 daipwr ev Cid9, ri dei pidwr ; 


4 by > tf \ 4 > > / > A ~ baNY Td 
Zoixe O aTorw To TaYT amovenovTag Tayaba TO evdai- 

y <a s , a ~ a > Nes ee 
pov diroug py amodidovas, & Ooxei TY exTIg ayabdy 


peyloroy elvets. 


is ~, / \ x ad 
ef re Dirov paarray gots TO ev Toisiv 7 


7 \ \ ~ > ~ \ ~ ~ 
TaoxEW, xak ect TOU ayabod xal rig aperng TO evep- 
~ ce ~ J. , ~ z 
yetelv, xaAAsoy O ed woseiy Diroug dbveiwy, THy ed meioo- 
, ~ \ <5 7 ~ 
pévoy defjoetas 6 omovdaiog. 010 xak emiSyreitas worepoy 
> > / ~ ~ / x 2? > i e \ ~ 
EY EUTUYIAIS PAAOY det Dirwy 7H év ATUX AIG, WS Kab TOV 
~ / ~ > ie ‘ ~~ 
atuyoivtog Osouevou Thy euepyeTncovTwY xal THY sUTU- 


7 a a va 
KovvT wy 0UC EU TOC OU0 LY. 


El > y \ \ , 
ATOTOY sOwog xt TO [ova- 3 


~ A s e > A \ a > a > es. 

TYY Wolely Tov [-axapLOoYv ovbelc yap EAOIT ay xa QuTov 
A , td > / XN \ c A \ 

TA TAaAVT EXEL ayaba * WOAITXOY Y%eP 0 avipwros HAL 


oulxy meduxoc. 


A ~ > Ld \ ~f> ¢ / \ 
xal TH evdaimovs On TOUT bmapyer’ TH 

\ ~ 7 > \ x 
yap TH pioes ayaba eye. 


OyAoy 8 wo psTa dirwy 


\ ~ ~ a > > , \ ~ , 
xs em sesma@oy x pElT TOY q PET O9veiwy xat TwWY TUX OVT@y 





acts of a friend has a delightful sense 
of the play of life, seeing harmonious 
action and identifying it with himself 
(emtecnets kad oixelas, § 5). 

5 Again, the sympathy and excite- 
ment of friends enables a man to 
prolong that vivid action and glow of 
the mind which is the essence of 
happiness (§§ 5-6). 

6 It also confirms him in the prac- 
tice of virtue (§§ 6-7). 

7 Finally, a deeper reason may be 
assigned for the necessity of friends 
to the happy man; it depends on our 
love of life. That sympathetic con- 


sciousness (cvvac@dveoGa) which we 


have of a friend’s existence, by means 
of intercourse with him, is, only, in a 
secondary degree (mapamAjowv), the 
same as the sense of our own existence. 

1 avtdpKeow] The quality adrdpkera 
is claimed for happiness, Eth. 1. vii. 6, 





where Aristotle guards himself against 
the supposition that it implies a lonely 
life. 7d yap TéAciov a&yabdv avrapkes 
eivat Soxet. To ® aitapkes A€youev 
ovk aitge pdve TG CGvrt Blov povarny, 
GAAG Kal yovetor Kal réxvots Kad yuvatr? 
kal SAws tots gplros Kad wodlras, 
ered) pice: wodiriKds tyvOpwros. 

brav 5 datuwy| from the Orestes of 
Euripides, 665, sqq. : 

Tous ldous 

év Tots KaKots Xph Tots piAoiow wperetv’ 
bray & 6 datuwr ed 515g, ri de? Hlrawv; 
dpkel yap adrds 6 beds wperciv Oérwv. 

2 &movéuovtas| ‘Us who allot,’ ef. 
Eth, 1. vii. 8, where happiness is said 
to be réAcidv tt kal abrapxes. The 
form of expression here used is similar 
to thatin Eth. 1.x. 2:*H rotrd ye wayte- 
A@s &rorov, %AAws TE Kal Tors Aéyovcw 
hiv evépyecdy Twa Thy evdaipovlay ; 


302 HWOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. [ Cuar. 


Cuvypepsvery* Ost apa TO evdaipovs Oiawy. Ti ody Agyou- 
« ~ \ my 29 / vA 7 € \ sae 

ud OL TWEWTOl, KA TY, arnbevouri ; 7) OTs of WoAAG) Hiroug 
> \ / iy ~ 7 

OlovTas TOUS yEyoIpoUS Elva; THY ToLoUTwY Ley oY oUbey 

INS VL ~ 

Os TeTOL 6 paxapiog, emeidyn TayAba tmapye ANTM. ode 
\ ~ 

Oy Thy dich Td 700, 7] ex) pixpdv dds yap 6 Blog wy ovbey 

Ociras ereoaxrov yOovijc. ob Osdmevog 02 Tey ToloUTwY 
ie ~ ~ 

dirnwy ov doxet dsiobar birawy. 1d 0 odx Zor lows dAy- 
/ ~ ao 

bég* ev apy yap elpyros Ors 7 eddaimovia evépyeid tis 

> c ee 2 ~ ce / 

cOTIY, 7) O Eevepyeia OHAov GTI yiveTas xal ovy tmapye 

Worep xTHpa Th eb OF TH evdasmovely eotly ev Two Cay 
Xe ~ ~ w 9 we ie, 2D if / A Ci ee 

nal evepyely, Tov 0 dyabod 7 evépysia omovdaia nal dei 

’ C7 , > > ~ ” \ \ \ 

xal’ airiy, xabamep ev apy elpntos, tors OF wal Td 
> ~ ~ ens ~ \ ~. \ /, N / 

oixstov Thy 7déwv, Gewpely OF pAAAOY Tods TeAAS Ouvaedce 

7) EavTovs xal Tag éxelvwv mpakers 7 Tag oixeiag, al rév 

Ny / A A J, »” « ~ ~ > ~ 
omrovdaiwy On mpakers Dirwy dvrwy wydeias Toig ayaboic* 


audw yap Eyoucr Ta TH dboes Aden. 


6 paxcpiog oy 





4 ereodurov n5orvqs| ‘ Adventitious 
pleasure,’ ‘pleasure introduced from 
without,’ cf. Eth. 1. viii. 12: ovdév 5) 
mposdeirar ths hdovns 6 Bios abtaey 
domep mwepidmtov twds, GAN Exer Thy 
joovhy év éautg. Cf. Eth. x. vii. 3. 
The word érefcaxtos occurs in Plato’s 
Cratylus, p. 420 B, quoted above in 
the note on rx. v. 3. 

5 év &pxi—paov] ‘For we said at 
the outset (Zth, 1. vii. 14) that happi- 
ness is a certain function of the con- 
sciousness, and it is plain that this 
arises in us, and does not exist in us 
like a possession. But if being happy 
consists in the play of life, and the 
actions of the good man are good and 
essentially pleasurable, as we said 
before (Eth, 1. viii. 13), and also the 
sense of a thing being identified with 
oneself is one of the sources of plea- 
sure, but we are able to contemplate 
our neighbours better than ourselves, 
and their actions better than our own, 
then the actions of good men being 
their friends are pleasurable to the 
good ; for (such actions) contain both 





the two elements that are essentially 
pleasurable. The supremely happy 
man then will require friends of this 
character, if he wishes to contemplate 
actions which are good and also identi- 
fied with himself: and such are the 
actions of the good man being his friend. 
Again, men think that the happy man 
ought to live pleasurably, whereas 
life is painful to the solitary man, for 
by oneself it is difficult to maintain 
long a vivid state of the mind, but 
with others and in relation to others 
this is easier.’ 

The first part of this sentence con- 
tains a complex protasis, to which 
the apodosis is af ray orovdalwy 5, 
K.T.A, 

Tod 8 ayabod 7% evépyea] In the 
passage referred to (2th. 1. viii. 13) 
the words are af kar’ dperhy mpdtes, 
which may justify the above trans- 
lation. 

&udw yap Exover] Some of the com- 
mentators take &udw as though it 
were the nominative case to €xovct, 
and meant ‘both the good man and 


——— -— ” 


IX.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 303 


dinwy rowovrwy dejoeras, elrep Gewpely wpoaipetron mpa- 
Eeig émisineig xal olxciags tomtra: 0 ai rod ayabod 
/, ” v , NY ~ en7/ lad A >N s, 
iro bvrog. olovratl te deliv ydews Civ tov eddatpova’ 
4 X z \ c / - > \ e &y > Cpe 
poverty piv oly yaremos 6 Ping’ ov yap padiov xa abToy 
> ~ ~ / NY \ \ yy ~ 
evepyelv cuvex@s, psd Erépwy 02 xual mpog AAAouS paov. 
a J , e ~ s 
Joras ouy % everysia Tuveyeotéepa, rosin orca xal airyy, 
~ \ \ / A ~ a 
6 Och meph Tov paxdpioy elvas’ 6 yap Troudalos, y TToOU- 
~ ~ \ / , ~ / 
Ouiog, Taig xar aperny mpakeot Yalps, Tals 0 amo xaxiags 
> / / € \ ~ ~ , GaN 
Oug Hepatvel, xadamsp OG ouTbxOS TOG XAAOIG WEASoLY YOS- 
, X ~ 7 n~ 
Tab, éml O& Toig Davros AumreiTos. 
BA ~ ~ ~ me ~ ~ / 
aoxnols Tig THs apeTig ex Tod cub; Toig ayaSois, xaba- 
mep xab Oloyvig dyow. uorarepoy 0 emioxomoiiow 
” c ~ , ~ 7 ~ 7 c \ 
Zoimev 6 Gmovdalog Didog TH Trousdale TH Duces aipeTos 
civas* TO yao TH duces ayaboy ef 0 D das 
yap TH duos ayaboy eipyras OTs TH Trovdaiw 
> \ A eQ”az 2 > c / \ \ ~ eee ~ 
ayahoy xab dv gots xa? adro’ ro OF Civ opiSovras rots 
/ / / 3 x 
Cabos Duvaner aicdjcews, avIpwros O aichjcews 7 vorjrews* 


— ee ee ee 





his friend.’ Butit would be irrelevant 
to speak of the feelings of the friend. 
The question is, what advantage does 
the happy man get out of having 
friends? &uw here evidently applies 
to Ta TH pice 7H5éa, as is further 
proved by the words émeieis kal 
oixelas in the next sentence; it refers 
to what has gone before, tod 8 ayabot 
—oikeiov tay ndéwy, 

6—7 6 yap croviaios—onow] The 
good man, feeling the same sort of 
pleasure in the moral acts reciprocated 
between himself and his friend which 
the musical man feels in good music, 
will prolong and enjoy that recipro- 
eation, and as Theognis says ‘ will 
learn what is good by associating with 
the good’ The advantage here attri- 
buted to friendship is that, by adding 
the element of pleasure to the best 
functions of our nature, it assists and 
developes them. Cf. Eth, x. v. 2: 
cuvavte. yap thy evépyeav 7% oinela 
jdovh—dpolws Se Kat of pirduovoea Kad 
prroucoddéuo. Kat Tov BAdrAwy Exacro 





emididdacw eis Td oixetov Epyov xalpoytes 
alte. 

Kabdmep 6 povoixds] On the ‘ moral 
sense’ in its analogy to the ‘ musical 
ear,’ cf. Eth. x. iii. 10. 

7 7d 3 Giv—voeiv] ‘ People define 
“living” in the ease of animals by the 
power of sensation, in the case of men 
by the power of sensation or thought. 
But the word ‘‘ power” has its whole 
meaning in reference to the exercise 
of that power, and the distinctive part 
of the conception liesin the ‘‘ exercise.” 
Thus the act of living appears distine- 
tively to be an act of perceiving or 
thinking” The train of reasoning in 
this latter part of the chapter is, that 
life consists in consciousness ; life is 
good and sweet; consciousness is 
intensified, and life therefore is made 
better and sweeter, by intercourse with 
friends. 

tots (gors| On the ascending scale 
of life from the plant to the man, ef. De 
Anima, U. iii. 1-9, Eth. 1. vii. 12, and 
Vol. I. Essay V. 


nN 


, Ne \ 
yivoiTo 0 AY X17 


304 


aioe 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX, 


NIL 5] \ » Net! 4 > A 
tan Rie ELS nae ae basins piper Sete 


[ Cuap. 


\ AA td . 
TO O€ xUpLOY EY 


TH evepysig: Lone 07 TO Syjy civas xupiwg ro aicbaver bas % 
vosiv, TO 68 omy ray xaf aire dyaboy xal véwy" ai 


pevov yap, TOO wipig psvoy Tis teyabot pucews. 


0 be TY 


duces dyaboy xal Tw emieined’ O1owep Zone TaoW iad 


civas. 
pesvyy, oud ev Avmous* 
TH UTAPYOVTA QUT). 
erro ‘Davepwrepoy. 


ov det Os Aap Bdvery pox Onpav Cwry xat drebbap- 

Qiproros yap 7 ToavTy, xabamep 
ey Toig Eyousvarg O8 wepl Tg AUS 
ei 0 aura ro Say ayaboy xa 700 


(Zoixe 02 xal 2x Tod mavrag dpeyso bas avrod, xal parmora 
Tovg emieixeig xal paxaploug: TovTag yap 6 Blog aiperw- 
TATOS, xal y ToUTwY Ponpior dry gan), & 8 bp@y or 
ich aicbaveras xal 6 dxovwy Ors axover xab 6 Radice 6 oT 
BadiSer, xal exh tay arrAwY ool Zot Tt TO aiobavo- 





h dt Sbvams eis Thy evepyeay dvd- 
yeru] Cf. Metaphysics, vir. ix. 5: 
davepov bt1 7% Suvdue bvTa eis evépryeiay 
avaydueva etploKeTat 

d.dmrep Zorke Macw HSV Elva] ‘Where- 
fore it appears to be sweet to all,’ ¢.¢. 
of course ordinary individuals love life, 
in which there is a certain physical 
sweetness, ef. Ar..Politics, M1. vi. 5: 
Ajjdov 8 &s Kaptepovar roAAnY KaKowd- 
Gerav of moAAO Tay GvOpemwy yArxbpevot 
tov Civ, &s evobons tiwds eimueplas ev 
This 
Greek view of the sweetness of life 
contrasts with the philosophy of the 
Hindoos, which represents life as a 
burden, and individuality as a curse. 

8 Ov di 5¢—qavepérepoy] ‘ But one 
must not take (as an instance)a vicious 
and corrupt life, nor one in pain; for 
such a life is unharmonised, like its 
characteristics. In the following dis- 
course the nature of pain will be made 
more clear.’ 

adpiaros | 


avT@ Kal yAvKUTNTOS pucuchs. 


‘Unlimited ;’ ‘without 
law, balance, order, harmony.’ On 
the use made by Aristotle of this 
Pythagorean formula, see Eth. m1. vi. 
14, and Vol. I. Essay IV. p. 202-3. 





’Ey tois éxouévors] We have here an 
unfulfilled promise, like that in Eth. 
I. vii. 7: for in ‘the following book” 
there is nothing on the ‘ unlimited’ or 
‘unharmonised’ nature of pain. The 
sentence may possibly be an interpo- 
lation. 

9 Ei ® abrd 7d Civ a&yabdv] This is 
the beginning of a complex protasis, 
which goes on prolonging itself, 6 3° 
bpav—rd B Bri aisOavdueda, &e., till 
at last it finds its apodosis in § 10: 
kabdrep oby Td abtoy Elva: aiperdy corw 
éxdor, ofrw kal Td Toy plaoy, 2 mapa- 
rAnolws. 

kal ér) ray 4AAwy—voeiv] ‘And with 
respect to all the other functions, in 
like manner there is something which 
perceives that we are exercising them, 
so then we can perceive that we per- 
ceive, and think that we think. But 
this (perceiving) that we perceive or 
think, is perceiving that we exist; 
for existing, as we said (§ 7), consists 
in perceiving or thinking.’ évepyotmer 
is here used in a purely objective 
sense; the évépyea is here distin- 
guished from the consciousness which 
necessarily accompanies it, and with 


TX.—X.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 305 


a , ~ a “ > , > Di Pf > 7 
psvoy Ort evepyodmerv, Wore aicbavoinel av ors aicbavoneba 
xal vooimey Ort vootuev, 7O0 Ort aicbavoneha 7 vootjuev, 
a > 7 . * z > , a ~ A > 
Ort iopev. TO yap shvos yy aicbaverbasr 7 vociv. Td d 

> / ud ~ ~ cys =A ec , 7 \ 
aisbaverOas Sti Sy, tev ydéwv xal airs dice yap 
> \ 7, \ _ Wee \ e Uf . € ~ : , 
ayaboy Sw, ro 0 ayaboy brapyoy ev EauTwm aicbaver dau 
nov c \ 82 \ A , ~ 3 4 ~ a ‘ 
400. aiperov 62 ro Cay xal pariota ToIg ayoabois, OTs Td 
elvan ayaboy zor adtoig xal 700° cuvacbavonevor yap 
Tod xaF airs ayabot yoovras. wy 38 mpbg eauroy Zyet 610 
orovdaios, xal mpdg toy drove Zrepog yap adrog 6 diroc 
torly. xabcamep ody Td adrov civas aipeTow tori ExaoTo, 
o Me eae oN r 5 r 1 » & 
OUTM xak TO TOV DiroY, 7 TAUPATANTIWS. TO Belvo ny 
c A A X -2 / c ~ 3 ~ 0 c x 
aiperov die 7o aicbaverbar abtod ayabod ovros. 7 38 
, e ~ c , 4 wy 
raairn alobyois dein xaP eautyy. cuvarcbaverdar apa 
~ ~ 4, a 4 ~ x‘ ‘4 > x . n~ 
dei xab Tod didov oti EoTiv, ToUTO OF yivoiT av ev TH 
ouliy xal xowwvelv Adywy xal diavolags odrw yap ay 
d0Eee To culiy exh rév avipwrwy rAzgyerbou, xal ody 
a , | ~ , a ~ > ns , > 
@aomrep exh tev Porxyparoy To evTo avTw vénecbas. ek 
on TO paxaplo To sivas aiperdv tori xal aire, ayaboy ry 
4 x eyV7 4 \ .7 \ ~ J, > a 
dios Oy xal 700, TApPAT ATT oy 0: xal TO TOU idrov éoriy, 
a f, ~ c ~ x + An 3 ‘ > ~ e f- 
xi O dirog TWY AipeTwWY ay Ely. 0 0 EOTlY QUTW AIDETOY, 
~ ~ ee , > ~ xX rf Te ” 7 
Toilro Osi Omapyery aur, 7 TAOTy evdens Zora. denoes 
Apa TO evdaspovyrovTs DiAwy orovdaiwy. 
"Ap ovv ws mAsiorous irous roinréov, 7 xabamep exl 10 
Tig Saving supertdg cipjobas doxet 


pare wodvéecvoc par’ agecvoc, 





which it is frequently identified. See 
Vol. I. Essay IV. The absolute unity 
of existence with thought here laid 
down anticipates the ‘ cogito ergo sum’ 
of Descartes. 

10 SuvascbdverGai—véuecGar] ‘ There- 


fore we ought to have a sympathetic 


consciousness of the existence of our 
friend, and this can arise by means 
of living together with him, and shar- 
ing words and thought with him, which 
is the true meaning of “living to- 
gether” in the case of men; it does 

VOL. I. 





not mean, as with cattle, simply herd- 
ing in the same spot.’ This view of 
the importance of ‘intercourse,’ and 
of the advantages to be derived from 
it, is repeated and summarized in ch. 
xii., and forms the conclusion of the 
treatise. 


X. The question of the plurality of 
friends is brought under analysis in 
this chapter. The number of one’s 
friends for use or for pleasure is shown 
to be limited by convenience. The 


RR 


306 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. | Cuap. 


Cad i 9 : 
xa axl rig diAlag apporer pyr’ adiroy elvar pyr? ab 
7 ae , ~ \ or \ ~ \ 
2ronvdinoy xa tarepPorry; Tolg pev On mpog ypjow xat 
mavu Oo&eiev av apuobe TO Aeybev? TOAAOIC yap avbury- 
~ / ~ ~ / 
peTely emimovoy, xal ovx ixavos 6 Blog autoig Toro mpar- 
Tel. of mAcloug 0% Tay mpos Tov oixeiov Ploy ixavidg 
ya ee ‘\ A \ ~ in > Oe v 5 ~ 
meplepyos xal gumadsos moog TO xarws Civ’ ovdev ody det 
auréy, xalol mpog ydovay 08 d&pxotiow GAlyor, xabdamep ev 
377 Toby TO HOuTma. Tog O8 cmovdaioug mérepov mAsio~ 
TH Tpody TO TluTpa. US S p 
t ve / vA oo , \ ~ 44 
TOUS XAT apiO ay, 4 EOTL TL LET POY xab DirAixoU MAYIouS, 
Wares moAswg; olTe yap ex déxa avbpwrwyv yéevorT 
x I, ee N7 40) ” / > 4 \ 3: 
av TonG, OUT ex Oéxa pupiddwy ETI TOAIG eoTiv. TO 
\ > x a > \ ~ \ A ~ 
mocoyv oux got lows fy TI, AAAA wav Td peTAED Tidy 
« , \ r , 9 A c , } 
wpiopévov, xal dirwy oy ears ®AHIOG WPT [LEVOY, HO 
” c ~ eee 4 a ¢ ‘ “ ~ 
lows of wasiorol, wel wy av dvvoiTS TIG TUSHY’ ToUTO 


4 yap eddxer Diriewraroy elvas, OTs 0 ovy olov Te TOA- 


~ ~ / > DAN 
roig ouSyy xal diavimew abrov, ovx adyrov. 


ers O8 





number of one’s friends, properly so 
called, is shown to be limited by one’s 
incapacity to feel the highest kind of 
affection (depBoaAh Tis piAias) formany 
individuals, and by the practical diffi- 
culties which would attend a close 
intercourse (cv¢jv) with many persons 
at once, who would also have to asso- 
ciate harmoniously with each other. 
On the whole the question is answered 
in the negative. 

I éuperas eipjoOau] ‘Neatly ex- 
pressed,’ 

unre wodvtewos| From Hesiod, 
Works and Days, 713. 
bende woAdiewoy pnd &éewov naréerOau. 

The line is untranslateable into 
English, as we have no word (like the 
German Gastfreund) to express both 
‘host,’ and ‘guest,’ as Eévos does. 

2 This section may be said to re- 
tract, upon further consideration, what 
was admitted, Hth. vim. vi. 3: Auk 7d 
xphomor 5& Kal rd Hdd wordrois apéokew 
evdéxeTar* modAol yap of rowdrot, Ka 
ev oAly@ xpdovyp af Srnpeciau, 





ixavds] This reading, adopted by 
Bekker from a majority of MSS., is 
surprising ; fxav@s weplepyo: would not 
be a natural phrase, whereas the con- 
text really requires of wAclous 3) rav 
mpos Tov oixetoy Biov ixavar. 

3 obre yap—mérs éorly] ‘For a 
state could not consist of ten men, 
nor again if consisting of a hundred 
thousand does it still continue to be 
a state.’ This extremely limited idea 
of the size of a state is based on the 
Greek notion that each citizen must 
personally take part in the adminis- 
tration of affairs. On this hypothesis, 
a state consisting of a hundred thou- 
sand citizens might easily appear un- 
wieldy. Aristotle in the Politics, vm. 
iv. 9, represents the state as an organ- 
ism of limited size, %ort rt nal méreot 
meyé0ous wérpoy, domep Kal Trav tAAov 
tdvrwv, Sdwv, putav, dpydvwy" Kad yap 
TovTwy €xacroy obre Alay pixpdy obre 
kara péyebos drepBddAov eke Thy abrov 
Sbvapuy, K.7.A, ‘ 


X.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 307 


xaxelvoug Ost aAAHAGIG Diroug elvou, ei pérarouos TOYTES 
dee. 7 / 

Pst AAANAwY curiae” ToUTo O epyddes ¢ ey wonaoig 
Umapyery. xanemoy 02 yiverar xal 7d cuyzaipey xa} 5 
\ 
TO cuvanrysiv oixciwg WoAACIC* Elxds yap cupmiaresy [0 
TO pey cov7decbar TH 32 rybec49 if Oy eu & 

P pev cuvydertas TH 02 ouvayGeotus, lows ody ev Exe 

~ e > b. / 
pen Surely wo moaudinwraroy elyat, AAAK ToroUTOUS boo: 
? \ ¢ / IDV \ > Ne , EN 
sig TO ouSiy ixavols 00d! yap evdéyerbou dofeev av 
Tornroig sivas dirov ododpa. dsomep 00d" epay TAsiovey * 
bmrepBony yap Tig elvas Povaeras dirlias, rovro O2 mpos 
Zva* xal ro ohidpa on mpeg oalyous. Zyeu 6 
ome xal exh Tay mpayparwy* od yiyvovTas yap diror 
\ \ ‘ € ‘ / e st) 56 £ > 

TOAAOL HATA THy ETaIpixyy Diriay, ai f) UPLVOUILEVAE EY 
duct Agyovras. of 0 morvdsros TAC oixeiog 
evtuyyxavovtes ovdevt doxotow eivas diva, many moru- 


ouTM ny 


\ 
xt 


~ A \ ~ / 
Tints, oUg xal xarovow apecxous. 


~ X sz 
TOAITIHWS [LEY OUY 





didmep oS epay wAciédvwy] This is 
almost a verbatim repetition of Eth. 
Vil. vi. 2, which passage contains the 
germ of the present chapter. 

6 oftw &—rowbrovs| ‘And this 
seems to be practically the case ; for 
we do not find that people have many 
friends (together) on the footing of 
companionship. And the classical 
friendships of story are recorded to 
have been between pairs. But they 
who have many friends, and who asso- 
ciate familiarly with all, seem to be 
friends to none, except in a civil way, 
and men call them “over-complaisant.” 
In a civil way indeed it is possible to 
be a friend to many without being 
over-complaisant, but being really 
kind ; but on a moral and personal 
footing this is not possible in relation 


to many; one must be content to find 


even a few worthy of this.’ 


én r&v mparyydrov| Opposed to 
tois Adyos implied in 1d A€exOév 


above. Cf. the use of Ta &pya, Eth. 
IX. Vili. 2. 
éraipixhy| Cf. Eth. vir. xii. 1-6, 


and vor, v. 3. ‘Companionship,’ 





which Aristotle compares to the feel- 
ing between brothers, is much more 
akin to the perfect and ideal friend- 
ship than it is to either of the lower 
forms of friendship (for gain or for 
pleasure). It is essentially based on 
personal considerations (5? avrovs), 
though not necessarily on moral con- 
siderations (5:’ dperjrv). 

ai & duvotvpeva:] Fritzsche quotes 
Plutarch De Am. Mult. 2: tov pwaxpdv 
Kal madady aid@va pdptupa dua Tod 
Adyou Kal odpBovaov AdBopev, ev o@ 
Kata Cevyos pidlas A€yovta: Onceds Kab 
"AxtAAeds Kal Tidrpoxaos, 
*Opeorns Kal TlvAddns, Siwrias Kat 
Aduov, "Exauivdévdas kot Meadoridas. 

of 5& mwoAvpiAo1—ovdert doKxodow 
elvat pido] Cf. Eudemian Ethics, vu. 
xii. 17: 7d Cyreiv july Kat ebxecOu 
moddovs pidous, Gua 5¢ Agyew as obels 
gtros @ Torro) giro, tudw A€yera 
6p8@s, which sentence reconciles the 
above passage with Eth. vit.i.5. In 
an external way (woArTiK@és) a man 
should have many friends, personally 
(8¢ abrovs) a few. 

&péoxous | Cf. Eth, i. vii. 13, IV. vi. 9. 


Tleipi8ous, 


RR2 


308 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX, 


[ Cuap. 


~ \ »” ” 
ZoTs WoAAoig sivar Dirov xal py apsrxov ovTaA, AAA’ we 


arnits emieixy OF aperny 68 xal OF abrods obx ears 


\ wis > \ 0: \ Jank e ~ 4 
% POS TWOAAOUS, AYAMYTOY OF KAI oAlyous supely TolouTOUS. 


el 


IIcrepov 0 év edruyiaig parrov dirwy ei i ev durru- 


/ > > ~ * ° ~ & is A > 
yiais; ev apdoiv yap emiGyrotvras of te yap aru- 
yoivreg Oéovran emixouplas, of 7 euTuyotvrTes cupPiwy xa} 


a / 4 Ld wn 
os «0 Toincouciv' PovrAcvra: yap 20 dpdy. 


avay- 


xouorepoy pev On ev Taig atuylais, Ob TaY yYponTinwy 
> ~ ~ , > ~ > / A \ 
évratda dei, xarArAsoy O ev Taig euTvyiass, O10 xal rods 
emicineig Cytotow' Toureug yap aiperwrepoy evepyereiv 


\ \ id , 
2X4 ETQA TOUTMY Oiayely. 


4 \ 4 
EoT! yap xal y mapouria 


nw ~ ~ / 
aut thy diawy ydsia xal ev raig duoruyiaig’ xovdi- 
\ ec Lf 7 ~ / \ 
Covrar yap ok AuTovpevos cuvaryouvTwy Ty dirwy. O16 
a > / , , is 4 7 / 
nav amopyreiéy Tig moTEpoy Waomrep Papoug peTarapPa- 
~ w ~ oe 

yougl, 7) ToUTe ply ov, 7 mapovTla 0 adréy ydeia oboe 
\ ev ~ ~ > / \ / ~ > 
Xb 7% EVVOIR TOU DUYAAYElY EARTTW THY AUTHY TOE. Eb 

~ / 7 
pty ody Oia Tadra 7 OP aAAO TH xovdilovrai, adsicbw- 
4 / 
3 ovpPaivery 0 ody daiveros To Asybev. Zoixe 0 7j wapouTia 

~ ~ 4 4. 

plerTy Tis aUT@y elvasr, avTd piv yap To dpay Tods Hiroug 
~ , / 
700, aAAwWS Te xal aTuyodyTi, xal yiveral Tig emixoupia 
\ XN \ ~ = 4 \ A c 7, } 
™pog TO [La Avumeio bas TAPALUIYTIXOY YAS O dirog xa 

~ of \ ~ , 2X >? , * \ \ 
Ty Ober xal TH Ady, édv 7 ewidéFtog* olde yap rd Abog 


4xal éd oig yoerar xal Avumeiras. 


To 82 Avum@odmevoy 


> , Pe, ~ o ~ > 7 ori ~ A 
aicbavec bau ETL TAG AuTov ATU AICS Avmnpov Tac YP 


devyes Avmng alriog elvas roig irois. 


Osomrep ob pey 





d¢ abrovs] Cf. Eth. rx. i, 7, and 
note. 

towvdrous| %.€. capable of being 
made personal friends. 


XI. The question whether friends 
are most needed in adversity or pros- 
perity is here answered by saying, 
that in adversity friendship is more 
necessary, and in prosperity more 
glorious. Some remarks are added 
on the exact operation of friendship 
in alleviating sorrow, and some practi- 


cal rules are deduced. 





2 towep Bdpovs pweradkauBdvovew] 
‘Whether they take part of the burden, 
as it were. This is the ordinary me- 
taphor. Cf. Xenophon, Memor. uw. 
Vii. 1. (Swxpdrns) ’Aplorapxéy wore 
épav cxvOpwras Exovra* Zoixas, pn, 
*Apiorapxe, Bapéws pépew ti- xph 5 
Tov Bapovs peradiddvar trois pldos. 
tows yap ty tl oe Kad jets Kovploamer. 
Aristotle hints at, without fully giving, 
a more psychological account of the 
operation of friendship in adversity. 

3 punt tis] Cf, Eth, m1. i, 6, tv. ix, 8. 


X—XI.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIOQN IX. 309 


avdpwderg THY OUT evAaPotvTA: TUAAUTElY roug didrouc 
avroic, xav pan Omeptelyyn TH adrumia, Ty exeivoig yivo- 
rd > 
pevny Avmyy ody tmwopéver, GAWS Te cuvopyyoug ov 
mpookeras Sik To pyd avTdg civar Opyyytixoss yovorn 
~ ” ~ 
0: xal of rosodros avdpeg Toig cueTévovTs Yaipovol, xal 
~ € / \ ~ ~ w > 
Dirovow ws diroug xal cuvaryouyrac. poset Bors O ey 
C4 ~ De a \ c ; ~ > lA 
amacs Oct OyAov ott Tov Bertin. 7 0 ev Taig eUTUYialss 
tiv dirwy rapoutla Tiy Te Oiaywyhy yosiay Eyer xal THY 
wv icf isd 9 A ~ < ~ > ~ + f a 
Evvoray OTs YoovTas er} Toig abo ayaboic. 410 doGetey av 
~ > 4 A > , ~ A 7, v4 
div cig piv Tas edTUylag xareiv Tod diroug mpoddpws" 
evepyeTyTinoy yop sivas xarove sig 08 Tag aruxias 
~ a ~ ~ ~ 
éxvotyTa* peTadidcva: yap ws quota Osi THY xaxdy, 
a 
Ofev To 
adic éyw Svervyoy. 
7 ‘ , a / > ’ > 
panieTa de TWOAPLKRAYTEOY, OTAY PLEAAWOY OALYa OYAT- 
, 7.9 > 4 > ’ of our y 
Géyreg peyan avroy wdeayjoev. iva: 0 avamrarw lows 6 
ppoter mds pey Tovg atuyoiytag axAyTrov xal mpo- 
7 /, 4 s ~ 4 , A > / 
Gupws (dirov yap 20 wolslv, xal pariota TOUS ev Ypsian 
\ A \ > , > ~ A A \ tr 
xal To py aFimoavtasg’ apdolv yao xarrtoy xa 70107), 
/ 6 2 
elg 02 Tag ebTuxlag cuvepyodvTa piv mpobipws (xal yap 
; ~ ; , /, A > , AY 7 2 
ElG TAUTA YEA diray), ™ pos eumaberav 02 THOAAIWS * ou 





4 Key ph sbweprelyy tH GAvTig— 
Opnvnrixds| ‘ And (such a one), unless 
he be excessively impassive, cannot 
endure the pain which is brought 
upon them; and altogether he does 
not like sympathetic wailers, not being 
given to wailing himself.’ The words 
«ay wh «x.7.A. have troubled the com- 
mentators. The Paraphrast explains 
them as if meaning:—‘And unless 
(the sympathetic presence of friends) 
be exceedingly painless to them.’ But 
evidently the clause is brought in 
in reference to of avdpédes. ‘Manly 
natures’ are not at all unlikely to be 
somewhat blunt and callous, and de- 
ficient in sensibility for the feelings of 
others. One might almost fancy that 





Aristotle was thinking of the Ajax of 
Sophocles, vv. 319, 320: 


mpos yap Kakod Te kal Bapudixou ydous 
towtsd adel mor avdpds eknyeir Exe. 


5 Gus eye dvervxay] These words 
are not to be found in any extant play 
or fragment. The nearest approach 
to them is in Sophocles, Ed. Tyr. 
1061: GAts vogots’ eye. 

6 plrov yap—foiov] ‘For it behoves 
a friend to benefit (his friends), and 
especially those who are in need, and 
to (benefit) them when they have not 
asked. For this is nobler and sweeter 
for both parties.” With «al 7d, «3 
matety is to be repeated. Some editions, 
against the MSS., read xat rods, 


310 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON IX. [Cuap. 


yap xanrdcy To mpobupeioba: whercioba.  dofav Oo 
> Ow ’ ~ ~ > , Pee \ 
andiag ¢v TO Orwbeiobas tows evraPyréov eviore yap 

pee oe / ‘ ~ /, > 4 € \ 
cupfaiver, % mapovola Oy ray dirwy ev amacw aipery 
daiverau. 


~ ~ ~ / 
12 "Ag ov, wWomrep Toig epwor TO bpav ayarnrorardy 


N 


w 


. A ~ c ~ 7 \ a» A 
éort xal paarrov aipodyras tavryy tay alobyow 7 Tag 
~ ‘ 
Aoimas, WS KATA TAUTHY parAITTA TOU Epwrog byTOG xal 
yivonévov, odtw xal roig lacs aiperwraroy ears Td 
ve / \ c / } € \ c 4 ” 
ouliv; xowwvia yap 7 diria. xal wo mpog eauroy Eye, 
a | A \ / } e:% > c Z A 
oUTwW xal mpog Tov Dirov. wepl abrov 0 7 alobyorg or1 
»” c 4 \ \ A i 7 ec oS aoe cA 
cori aipety* xal meph tov dirov Oy. 7 0 evépyerm yive- 
Tat auToig ev TH ouoyy, War eixotTws TovTou edievra. 
a ~ 
xab O Th oT éortly Exaorog TO elvos 7 oF yapiy aipodyras 
~ /, 
To Cav, ev rovTw peta Thy dirAwy Povaovras diceyesv’ 
NINA c X\ / € \ iA wy, 
Osomrep of pev oupmivouciy, of 08 cuyxuPedouol, aAAOL OF 
\ ~ a ~ 
cvyyupvacovTas xal cvyxuyynyovow 7 cundsrocodpotony, 
a ° t , oa / > 
exagros ev TobTen cuvynepevovres 8 ri ™Ep paAsorroe ceyyce- 
moos Tov ev TH Piw- cupiy yap Povrcnevos pera Tey 
dirwy, tatita motos xal TouTwy xoiwwvotoiw cig olovTou 
~ sy ~ 
culty. yhveror ov y pay Thy dadawy diria poyxbypa 
n~ \ ‘ -) t's wv \ ‘ 
xovwvoicr yap davarAwy aPePasor oytec, xal poybypor OF 





ddtav 8 —ovpBalver] ‘Butone should 
beware perhaps of getting the reputa- 
tion of churlishness in rejecting (bene- 
fits); for this sometimes happens.’ 
andia answers to the ‘ insuavis, acer- 
bus’ of Horace, Sat. i iii. 85. 


XII. In conclusion, the best thing 
in friendship is—intereourse. This 
gives vividness to the pursuits of 
life; and when good men have inter- 
course with each other, they mutually 
strengthen and increase the good that 
is in them. 

178 evépyea ylverat abrois ev TG 
ovGiv] ‘But it is by living together 
that they attain the fulness of life.’ 
The word évépyem here has evident 
reference to 9 aloOnois bt €orw in 
the preceding sentence. Zell and 





Cardwell follow some of the MSS in 
reading airijs, i.e. ris alcbqoews, 
But 7 évépyem stands naturally alone 
(cf. Eth. rx. ix. 6), meaning ‘ the vivid 
sense of life.’ And a similar collo- 
cation oceurs Eth, vu. iii. 5: yiveras 
yap abrots 7d kara pirlay obrws. 

3 Kowvwvotor yap—arafaros| *‘ For, 
being of an unstable nature, they 
have fellowship in evil, and become 
bad by assimilation to each other.’ 


Cf. Eth. 1x. i, 7: Tots idocoptas 
kowwrvjoasw. The word &BéBao 


here is not connected with the use of 
BéBuoy in Eth, vu. viii. 5: Of BF 
HoxOnpol 7d wey BéBaoy ovK exovow, 
Aristotle is not talking here of the in- 
stability of the friendship between bad 
men, but of its evil results mutually. 
Throughout the treatise on Friendship 


XT] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION IX. 


dll 


“4 e , > 7 e€ Dr ~ > x 5] vd 
YiVOVTOLL OLLOLOUILEVOL HAATAOIS* 7 08 Tey emseincy Erieix7}C, 
, ~ c , ~ N \ , 
cuvavgavonevyn Tals dusrtas? Doxotor 0 xak PeAtious 
F > ~n A ~ > 7, = > / 
yiverbas evepyotvres xak dsopboivres AAAYAOUG’ amronar- 
Q > 3 4 > a a 
TOYTA Yap TaD AAA AWY oig ApETXOYTAL, fev 


écO\G@y pév yap dn’ éoOdd. 


frepl pdv ovv diriag ex] trocotrov cipyobw* ércuevoy 0 av4 


ely dserbeiv mesh ydovijc. 





he speaks of the weakness of vice (cf. 
note on Ix. iy. 9), and here he says 
that bad men, from the weakness and 
instability of their natures, imbibe 
evil example. 

GroudrrovTa: — apécxovra| * For 
they take the stamp of one another in 
those things which they like.’ Cf. 
Aristophanes, Rane, v. 1040. 


d0ev Hh “uh dphy amropatauévn moAAds 
dperas éxolnoer. 


écAGv ev yap] On this passage of 





Theognis, which is referred to above, 
Eth. 1x. ix. 7, see Vol. I. Essay II. 
p. 61. It is after Aristotle’s manner 
to end a treatise with a line of poetry ; 
ef. Metaphysics, x1. x. 14, where the 
book ends with the verse 


OvK a&yabby woAuKoipavin: eis Kolpavos 
erro, 


Accordingly the unnecessary para- 
graph ep) ev obv giAlas K.7.A. is pro- 
bably the interpolation of an editor. 


PLAN OF BOOK X. 


ee ee el 


HIS Book, beginning with a treatise on Pleasure, (which subject is 

introduced (1) because ofits connection with Morals; (2) because 
of the controversies about it), and rising from the critical examination 
of extreme views to Aristotle’s own theory of Pleasure, namely, that 
it is the sense of the Vital Functions, or in other words, of the 
harmonious action of some one faculty ; proceeds, almost without 
transition, to declare that Happiness in the truest sense of the term 
must consist in the action of the highest faculty, and that, this 
highest faculty being Intellect, Philosophy must, beyond all com- 
parison with anything else, whether idle amusement or even the 
exercise of the moral virtues, constitute Happiness, or that practical 
Chief Good which is the end of Man, and the province of the 
ethical branch of Politics. 

Thus far this branch of Science, having obtained a definite con- 
ception, might be thought to be complete. But it still remains to 
ask whether something cannot be added towards its practical realiza- 
tion, and, as habits of life are clearly necessary for the attainment of 
human excellence, on which the Chief Good depends, it follows that 
we shall require such domestic institutions as may be favourable to 
the cultivation of human excellence. These institutions, whether of 
public or private ordinance, can only be rightly conceived after a 
scientific study of the principles.of Legislation, ¢.e. of Politics in 
its highest form. To this then Aristotle proposes to address himself, 
considering it to be a branch of science which has hitherto been 
neglected. He roughly sketches out the plan of his work on 
Politics, with a transition to which the ethical treatise concludes. 

This tenth book then shows us the Ethics as a rounded whole. 
It is written in close connection with Book I. (cf. X. vi. 1.), and it 
sums up referentially the contents of Books I., IL, IIL, IV., VIIL., 
IX. But while the Zthies are thus rounded off in their beginning 


nrerextee 


a rr 


PLAN OF BOOK X, 313 


and end, and as to part of their contents, it is clear on the other 
hand that they contain a lacuna which has been artificially filled up. 
Book IV., as we have already seen, ends in an abrupt and almost 
fragmentary manner. And then follow three Books which, we may 
say decisively, have no literary connection with the other parts of 
the Nicomachean Ethics, while they stand in close relation to the 
whole of the Eudemian Ethics, of which in almost all MSS. they 
form a part. Those persons who believe the whole of the Hude- 
mian Ethics to be as entirely the writing of Aristotle as Book X. of 
the Nicomachean Ethics, as the Politics, or as Book I. of the Meta- 
physics, must at all events admit that there is some reason to say 
that the Nicomacho-Eudemian Books (£th. V. VI. VII.) were 
written separately from, and in all probability later than, the rest of 
the Nicomachean Ethics. 'Those who consider that the Eudemian 
treatise, as a whole, gives us the thoughts of Aristotle conveyed in 
the words of Eudemus, will probably conclude that the same 
account is to be given of the disputed books. 


VOL. II. 88 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


—.059400-——- 


ETA 8 ratra meh 7dovijig lew treros Orerdeiv? pa 
X ~ ~ ~ / ec ~ & A 
Mota yap Ooxel cuvwxedabas TO yéver jpdov’ O40 


Taswevoues Tovg véoug olaxiZovres ydovy xal AV 
H2U0U S c $ 4o0vR 7h. 


doxet 


Ot xal mpdg THY Tod Fboug aperny méyioroy elvan To Yaipely 
olg det xual pioeiv a ei Oiarelver yap Taira dik mavrog 
700 Piov, poryy Zyovta xa ddvapy mpdg aperyy Te xal 
\ IN) Ae / ‘. \ x \ fang ~ \ 5: 
Tov evdaipova lov’ Ta piv yap noEa mMponipotvTal, TA 


vn 


Aurnpa pedyoucsy. 


€ \ \ ~ , ind , wa 
Um Ep oe TWY TOLOUTWY RIOT OV 


A / 
dokere macetéov selva, aAAwWS Te xal woAAY EXOYTMY 


adic Brito 1. 


« \ ‘\ > A e \ , c 
oi piv yap Tayaboy ydovny Agyoucsy, ob 


0 2& évavtiag xousdy datinoy, of piv lows mwemsiopéevos 
é 5 eOpeiey) OY, pe $ sd 
a \v c Des 27 ~ Ben i ‘ \ eye 
OuTwM xak EXELY, OL OF Olomevos EATIOV Elvas Mpeg TOY Ploy 
€ ~ > , \ CaN} 4 ~ ‘ \ > \ > / 
Vp@y amrodaivey Tyy yOovny Toy PavaAwy, xal El Ly ETTIY" 
ev \ \ as A > ‘\ , id 
psmely yap Tous MoAAouS Tpeog auTHY xal Oouredz Taig 
CIN ~ \ Dp ~ > > / ” > ~ \ x cr 
joovais, Ovo detv sig TodvavTiov aysiv* eAsiv yap av ovTwEs 





I. The treatise on Pleasure opens 
analogously to that on the Voluntary 
(Eth, ut, i. 1), and that on Friendship 
(vii. i. 1, 6), justifying the introduction 
of the subject, (1) as connected with 
Ethics, (2) as having been made matter 
of controversy. 

I pddora yap—ijuay] ‘For it seems 
to be most intimately connected with 
the human race. Omni sed non soli, 
see below v. 8. 

5d madevovor «.7.A.] This is all 
taken from Plato’s Laws, u. p. 653. 
See noteon Eth. m1. iii. 2, where the 
passage is quoted. : 

mpos Thy Tov HOovs aperhy] Some 
MSS, read épxiv, which it is strange 





that the commentators should have 
thought a natural reading, supported 
by af pév tis pperhoews &pxai (below, 
viii. 3). Because ppévnois is regarded 
by Aristotle as a syllogism, or set of 
syllogisms, having dpxaf or major 
premisses,—it does not follow that 
the phrase 7 Tod H0ovs &pxh is ad- 
missible. 

2 of pev yap—pécoy] ‘For some 
call pleasure the chief good, others on 
the contrary call it exceedingly evil, 
(of these latter) some perhaps believing 
it to be so, but others thinking it for 
the interests of morality to declare 
pleasure to be an evil, even if it be 
not so, because most men incline to- 


Cuap. I.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 815 


ee, A , 7 o: > ~ ~ , 

mb TO [LETOY. [4 MOTE OF OV XAAWS TOUTO AEYeTaL. 
~ ~ \ ~ 

yap meph ray év roig mabeo xal Taig mpaEsor Aoyos TTTOv 

~ ov og x > ~ ~ 
clot wictol Thy Epywy* oTav ody Oiadwrdo1 Tog xaTE 
‘ , \ > X ~ 
Try alobnow, xatadoovodmevar xa TANTS mporavaipod- 
c A , ‘\ en ig > td 5-9. , >’ 

ow 6 yap Vey THY HOovyy, Od92ic mor edieusvos, azro- 
~ \ > \ / 

xAivery Ooxel mpog aUTHY WG ToInUTYY odTAY amTacAY* TO 


/ A > v ~ ~ 16 
dropilery yap oux Eats Thy TOAA@Y. eolxao ody of KAY-4 


~ ~ / > XN \ 
Oeig Tay Adywy ov pbvoy mpog TO Eldévar yYonTiILwTaToL 
5 > \ \ \ \ gee \ A Gar ~ 
elvat, AAG xal mpog Tov Ploy’ cuvwdel yap ovTEeg ToS 


” , \ , \ , ~ 
Epyots ThOTEVOYTAl, 010 WpOT pemovT as Toug Evuviévras Say 


oi 3 


XAT aUTOUS. 
A ~ € ~ . 4 
meph Tig yoovys erérAOwp.ev. 


~ X » 4 , isd < we > , 
TOY [LEV OUY TOLOUTWY HAIG, THO ElpyevE 





wards it, and are enslaved to plea- 
sures, and so one ought to lead men 
in the opposite direction, for thus 
they will arrive at the mean.’ 

In all probability Aristotle here 
alludes immediately to two sections of 
the Platonists, (1) the party repre- 
sented by Eudoxus, whose arguments 
are quoted ; (2) that headed by Speu- 
sippus, whose anti-hedonistic argu- 
ments were contained in two books 
mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, under 
the titles Mepi 780v7qs a’* "Aplorimmos 
@’.,and which are now passed under 
review. Under the class of those 
who ‘call pleasure the chief good,’ 
Aristotle less directly refers to Ari- 
stippus, who, though he belonged to 
a bygone era, still lived in the pages 
of Plato’s Philebus, and in the book 
of Speusippus bearing his name. 

erciv yap—péooy| Cf. Eth. 1. ix. 
5, where it is said that by going 


counter to one’s natural bias one may. 


attain the mean. Aristotle does not 
approve of this being done by means 
of a sacrifice of truth. 

3 ph more—Aéyerat| ‘ But perhaps 
this is not rightly said.’ Cf. Plato, 
Meno, p. 89 c: GAAa ph TovTO ob 
KAA@s apodroyjoauev. This. use of 





Hhwote became very common in the 
later Greek. . 

6 yap Yé-ywv—modrddr] ‘ For he who 
blames pleasure (unreservedly), and 
yet is seen occasionally desiring it, is 
thought to incline towards it as being 
altogether good ; for ordinary persons 
cannot discriminate.’ ro:atrny here, 
as To.vtos does frequently in Ari- 
stotle, takes its sense from the con- 
text. Cf. Eth. vu. vi. 6, x. ii. 4, &e. 
From what is above stated we learn 
that, the decline of philosophy having 
commenced, some of the Platonists 
enunciated theories which were meant 
to be practically useful, rather than 
true. Thus they overstated what they 
believed to be the truth about plea- 
sure, in order to counteract men’s 
universal tendency towards it. Ari- 
stotle ‘doubts whether this is good 
policy.” Their whole theory is likely 
to be upset by their occasionally 
indulging in the higher kinds of 
pleasure. 

tovs ~umévtas] ‘Those who com- 
prehend them,’ 7.¢. appreciating the 
truth of the theories, as shown by 
their agreement with men’s actions. 
Cf. Eth. v1. x. 1, note, On rots &pyors 
ef. IX. viii. 2. 


ss 2 


316 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X, f 


[ Cuar. 


EvdoEog piv ody riy yOovny Teyabov wer eivas did TO 


/ ~ ey , > ~ - ef \ » ° 
nave opay Esemeva AuTIyc, Xa EAAOYA nal arAoya* EV 
~ NS] ~ c ‘\ ° la A ‘ / , 
waar O elvat TO aipeToy emseixec, Hal TO PAALTTA xpAaTI- 

4 \ , > > > A 4 td : fod 
orev’ TO On mavT eml TanTd dépecbar pave wo maior 
~ > a \ ~ A / 
TOUTO AploTov’ ExaoToy yap TO avTwm ayatoy sipioxely, 


@ \ a ‘ ‘\ dy ~ > $6 \ ? /, > 
wonrep xak Tpodyy’ To On Tao ayatov, xal ov mavT 


edleras, Tayaboy elvan. 


, r \ 
emiotevoyTo O of Adyor Sie THY 


Tod Hous apsray parrov 7 OF abrodgs iadhepivTws yap 





II. This chapter contains the grounds 
on which Eudoxus ‘ used to think that 
pleasure is the chief good’; and an 
examination of three objections, which 
had been started to those reasonings. 
The arguments of Eudoxus are, (1) 
that all things seek pleasure, (2) that 
pain is essentially (xaé’ airé) an object 
of aversion, and therefore pleasure, its 
contrary, must be essentially an object 
of desire, (3) that pleasure is always 
desired as an end-in-itself, and not as 
a means to anything, (4) that pleasure, 
when added to any other good, makes 
it more desirable. The objections to 
these arguments are, (1) the opinion 
of Plato (which serves as an objection 
to argument 4th), that the chief good 
must be incapable of being added to 
any other good, and so made better. 
This objection Aristotle allows as 
valid. (2) An objection to the rst 
argument, probably suggested by 
Plato’s Philebus, p. 67, and repeated 
by Speusippus,—that the testimony 
of irrational creatures is of no value. 
This objection is disallowed. (3) The 
counter-argument of Speusippus to the 
znd argument of Eudoxus,—that not 
pleasure, but the neutral state, is the 
true contrary topain. This is refuted. 

1 7d aiperdy éme:xés] We have here 
a quotation of the very words of Eu- 
doxus. In § 4, Aristotle generally 
approves of the present argument. 
His whole conclusion is to be found 
Eth. x. iii. 13:—that Eudoxus was 





more right than his opponents, but 
wrong in not discriminating between 
the different kinds of pleasure, and in 
going so far as to say that pleasure is 
the chief good. The term td aiperdy, 
in opposition to 7d meverdy, seems to 
have played a great part in the rea-" 
sonings of Eudoxus. It is admitted 
by Plato, Philebus, p. 20, as a neces- 
sary attribute of the chief good, and 
so also by Aristotle, Hth. 1. vii. 8; x. 
ii. 4. Here it is implied in the word 
éplera. It appears simply to mean 
‘that which is a reasonable object of 
desire, ef. Eth. vur. viii. 2: 4 idle 
Kal aitrhy aiperh, and x. iii. 13, Ader} 
ob waoa aiperh. As implying will 
and choice, it is applicable in a rela- 
tive, as well as an absolute sense, to 
means as well as to ends. Book m. 
of the Topics contains hints on the 
method of dealing with this term, and 
throws light on its use, which flue- 
tuates between a reference to the good, 
the useful, and the pleasant (cf. Top. 
I. iii. 7). 

émorevovto & of Ady] This is a 
pleasing allusion to the personal 
character of Eudoxus of Cnidus, who 
lived about 366 B.c., and who enjoyed 
great fame as an astronomer. He 
appears to have introduced the sphere 
from Egypt into Greece. The poem 
of Aratus is a versification of his 
éaivépueva. Certain stories in Diogenes 
would leave the impression that, being 
Plato’s pupil, he quarreled with his 





II. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 317 


, , > > NN ', ~ e ~ 
edoxer Tmdpowy elvas* ov On we didog rig ylov9gg edoxe 
~ , > > a ” Sis eh > ak 
TAUTA AEYEY, AAA GUTWS EYEIY HAT annferay. OUY ATTOv2 
> »” > Ss QA > ~ 8 , a X A v2 > 
0 wer’ elvan davepov ex Tou evavtiov’ THy yap AUmHY xa 
ae ~ \ 7 e , NN > , c , 
airs mass Devatov elvas, buoiwg O74 TovvavTioy aiperoy. 
, ee c \ a NO Nc Be ee Do ¢ / f 
panrara o civar aipetov 6 wy OF ETeCov yd ETépou yapty 
c ¢ ~ N , \ 
aipovsha* Toutitoy 6 Guoroyourevwg elvar THY dovyy" 
/ A ° ~ , ov aN 
oudeva yap EmepwTay Tivos Evexa Foetal, Wo xal adryy 
v N \ > 7 "4 ~ ~ 
ovoay aiseray THY Oovyy. mpooTiMenévyy Te bTwoly Tey 
> ~ c , ~ a 4 ~ > ~ \ 
ayaliy aissrwrepoy Toislv, olov Tw Osxasompayely xal 
cwdpovely* 
” \ a 2 e , os > a ee. > , 
Zoime 0% oUTOS ye 6 Acyos THY ayal@y adTyy arodaivery, 3 


\ 7 \ \ > \ a, | e oe 
zal ab§scGor by 7o ayabev aito abTe. 


\ Irv TAD eee . ~ X “ff ae > 4 ~ 
Hal ovdiy paAroy ETépou" wav yao ws Erépou ayasod 
ipeTWTEDOy 7 ovoUMEvOY. TolouUTwW 07 Acyw xal [lAarwy 
" ? =i a ” : ss ‘ > : $4 is . z A 
~ et € 
Gvoigel OTs oux EoTIv Yovy Tayabov’ aizerwrepoy yap 
\ es 4 \ , x 4 > \ AY 
elvas Tov 700v lov peta Dpovycews % ywpis, ci 02 7d 
\ ~ \ \ , ; 
paxtoy xpeitTov, ox elvar THy yovyy Taya5ov oddev'g 
/ > ‘\ rf / 
yap mpootshivrog auto tayalov aiperwrepov yiverOaus. 
~ ” x ¥ a / 
d7Aov O Wo 00d AAAO oudty Tayatoyv ay ely, 0 META TiVo 
7) ly $ 





master. Aristotle (or, as Diogenes 
says, ‘Nicomachus’) is the only 
authority for his ethical opinions. 

2 6 wh bP Erepoy] The end is better 
than the means, but this does not 
prove anything as to the comparative 
superiority of pleasure to the rest of 
the whole class of ends. Thus the 
argument of Eudoxus overshot the 
mark. A similar argument of his is 
mentioned with careless approbation, 
Eth. 1. xii. §: Aowe? nak@s ovvnyopiicat, 
says Aristotle, ‘Eudoxus is thought 
to have pleaded well’ in favour of 
pleasure being the chief good, because 
it is never praised. This argument 

_would only prove that it belongs to 
the class of T& tiua. 

mpootGeuerny| It is suggested as a 
commonplace of reasoning, Topics, 
wi. ii, 2, that you may say ‘Justice 
and courage are better with pleasure 
than without.’ 





3 wav yap—xwpls] ‘For that “every 
good is better in combination with 
another good than alone.” This is 
indeed the very argument by which 
Plato proves pleasure not to be the 
highest good. For the pleasant life 
is more desirable with wisdom than 
without.’ Cf. Philebus, pp. 21-22: 
where however the proposition ovdévos 
mpootebévtos—rylvecba: is not to be 
found. Plato only argued that, as the 
highest conception of human good im- 
plied a combination of both pleasure 
and knowledge, pleasure separately 
could not be the chief good. It is 
a deduction of Aristotle’s from the 
terms ixavoy Kal réAcoy, used by Plato, 
that the chief good is incapable of 
addition or improvement. Cf. Topics, 
ll. ii. 2: where it is said that the 
end plus the means cannot be called 
more desirable than the end by itself, 
ef. Eth. 1. vii. 8, where the same 


318 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. [ Cuap. 


| ees > 
ti ouv éo7} 
~ it ~ ~ ~ ~ 
TOWUTOV, OU HAL YLEIG XOLVMYODILEY ; TOLOUTOY yap emicnrel- 


~ , eb eS ~ € , - 
4riy xa’ airs ayabey aiperwrepoy yiverau, 
€ 5) U ¢ > > ~ * , | , 
Tat. of O évioTapmsvar ws ovx ayaboy ov mavr edierau, 
\ IAN , 4 aA \ ~ 3 ~ ~ % 7 , 
pen ov8iy Agywou 0 yap mao doxel, TotT elval dopey. 
~ \ / / / ~ 
60 avaipiy TauTyy THY mioTIY Ov TaVU TIO TOTEDM EpEt* 
4 / > ~ z » 
el piv yap Ta avonTa wWpreyeTo aUTMY, Fy av TE TO AsyO~ 
> XX \ \ , ~ / LA D4 \ 
[nsvov, eb O08 xal Ta Dpovipa, wis Agyorev av TE; Tows de 
A ° ~~ 7 . 4 x > \ ~ a 
nal ev Toig havaog eori ts huoixdy ayaboy xpeirrov 7 
> € , > , ~ b | ‘4 > ~ 
sxal ard, “ edleras Tov oixelov ayabod. 
IQR \ ~ 4. ~ ld 
oud mepl Tov evavTion xnrwg AéyerIas. 


3 wv \ 
oux Forme OF 
> ra , 
ov yap daciy, eb 
c 7, , ° \ € ‘\ > \ 3 ~ 
q AUTY xaxdy eos, THY yovny wyaboy civar’ avTinciobas 
yap xal xaxdv xaxwd xal audw TH pydETEpw, AyovTEs 
~ ~ \ ~ 7 
TaiTA ov xaxids, ob why Exi ye Thy sipnuevoy AANDedovTES. 
= ~ xX ‘ ” ~~ \ , MN ” 
cov piv yap ovtwy xaxdy xal heuxTa Eder audw elvos, 
~ 5 i Dy dé nN ¢ , A ~ dt / ‘ 
Tiby pyeTepwy OF nderepoy 7] dmolwg* viv 02 datvoyros THY 
/ 
pay devyovtes wo xaxdv, Thy 0 aipovmevor wo ayabaye 
odTw On xual avTixeital. 
O32 \ ie > \ ~ , > ‘ € _. , 5 4 
b pay oud ei pn Thy Towryrwy eortiv 7 7jdovy, Oia 
~ > ~ > ~ PENS x ~ ~ 
ToT oud? Thy ayabdv' 00d? yap ai Tig dperng evépyeras 





opinion seems to be conveyed, though 
that interpretation of the passage has 
been disputed. 

4 tl odv—émnre?ra] ‘What is 
there then which has these character- 
istics (7.é€. supreme goodness without 
the capability of addition) which we 
men can partake of? For such isthe 
very object of our enquiries.’ That 
is, not a transcendental good, but 
something to be practically realised. 
(03 a 7 aes 0s a oe 

% yap mac Sone? | This acceptance 
of the testimony of instinct occurs 
also in the Eudemian book, Zth. vn. 
XI hs 

6 8 dvatpav] Probably Speusippus, 
taking up a suggestion from Plato, 
Philebus, p. 67. 

tuts pavdos] In the neuter gender, 
‘the lower creatures ;’—alluding to 





the @npla mentioned by Plato, Phile- 
bus, 1. c. 

5 0b ydp gacw] As we learn from 
the Eudemian book, Eth. vii. xiii. 1, 
Speusippus was the author of this 
objection. 


III. Aristotle investigates remain- 
ing arguments used by the Platonists 
to prove that pleasure is not a good ; 
(1) that it is ‘not a quality.’ This 
argument would prove too much, as it 
would be equally decisive against 
happiness, or the actions of virtue; 
(2) that it is ‘unlimited.’ But (a) 
in one sense this will apply to virtue 
also, (6) in another sense it is only 
applicable to the ‘mixed pleasures, 
which are analogous to health, ¢.e. a 
proportion variable according to cir- 
cumstances ; (3) that it is ‘not final’ 


II. —II.] 


, , > +>“ e ’ lA 
TowrntTés cio, ovd 7% evdaspovia. 


HOIKQON NIKOMAXEION X, 


319 


Agyoucs OF TO ply 


’ \ er \ a \ 27 > or , 
ayaloy wpicbas, tHy 0 yOovny aopioroy elvan, Ors Oéyerou 


X ~ \ \ - 
TO PAaAAOY XA TO YTTOV. 


> X = 5] ~ Ay 
eh peev ouv éx Tod Fdeobou 


~ / \ \ \ 5 7 \ \ of 
TovTo xpivouct, xal mepl THY OixaLoTbvyy xal Tag AAAS 
> 7 f a ogee ~ \ ~ ios \ 
ApEeTac, xaU ag syvapyws back parrov xakb yTTov Tous 
A ie \ \ 4 ov 
mows Omapye xaTa Tag apEeTas, EOTaL TO AUTO" 
/ / > ~ \ > ~ + x ‘ 
Oixaior yap siot paarrov xal avdpeiot, Zor: OF xal 


Oixasompaysiv xat cwdpovsiy parrov xal 7rTTOov. 


] Ne eS ~ 7 > > 
Ey THAIS YOOVAIC, KK WOT ov 


~ 
eb 0 

id A x x 
Agyours TO alriov, av wow 





or perfect, but in some sort ‘a transi- 
tion.’ Against which Aristotle argues, 
(a) that it cannot be a motion because 
not admitting the idea of speed, (d) 
that it cannot be a creation, because 
not capable of being resolved into its 
component parts, (¢) that it cannot be 
a filling wp, for this is merely cor- 
poreal, and even in the case of bodily 
pleasure it is not the body that feels ; 
(4) that there are many disgraceful 
pleasures. To which it may be an- 
swered, that pleasures differ in kind, 
and even if some be bad, others may 
be absolutely good. 

1 i wh tTév TowThTwy| This seems 
to be the only record of an argument, 
probably occurring in the works of 
Speusippus, that ‘pleasure is not a 
good, because it is not a quality.’ It 
points to the moralising tendency, 
above noticed, of this school of Pla- 
tonists, as if they said that no- 
thing could be called ‘good’ which 
did not form part of man’s moral cha- 
racter. 

2 ei pey odv éx Tod HdecOu]| Plea- 
sure may be said to admit of degrees ; 
first, in reference to men’s different 
eapacities of feeling it, but in this 
respect it will stand on the same 
footing as courage and justice. 

ei & ev rais jdovais—pmral] ‘In 
the second place, if (they predicate 
this attribute of “unlimited” as 
existing, not in the recipients of 





pleasure, but) in the pleasures them- 
selves, perhaps they omit to state the 
reason of the fact, namely, that while 
some pleasures are unmixed, others 
are mixed.’ Plato in the Philebus 
divides pleasures into mixed and un- 
mixed. Of each he makes three 
classes. Mixed pleasures are (1) 
bodily pleasures, the restoration of 
harmony in the animal frame, where 
the bodily pain of want or desire is 
mixed up with the bodily pleasure of 
gratification ; (2) the pleasure of ex- 
pecting this restoration, where the 
bodily pain of want is mixed up with 
the mental pleasure of the idea of 
relief; (3) the pleasure which we feel 
in the Iudicrous, where the mental 
pain of seeing the un-beautiful is 
mixed with the mental pleasure of 
laughing at git. The unmixed plea- 
sures, 7.¢.in which no pain is implied, 
are (1) those of smell; (2) those of 
sight and hearing; (3) those that be- 
long to the intellect. Of these two 
classes Plato confines the attribute of 
éuerpla, ‘want of measure,’ to the 
first class. The unmixed or pure 
pleasures necessarily possess éuperpia, 
ef. Phileb. p. 52 c. The same doc- 
trine is given Eth. vu. xiv. 6: ai ® 
tivev AvTav (jdoval) obk Exovow brep- 
Boahv. Speusippus, forgetful of this 
distinction, appears to have made 
dmerpia (&dpicrov elva:) a universal 
predicate of pleasure, 


520 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


€ \ > ~ er NN i 
3b LEY ALIYElG Ob OF LIKTAS. 


[ Cua. 


/ \ 7 7 
Th yap xwrvet, xabamep 
A n~ 


Ca if e / + , \ ee 

tyleiae wpiopévy odTa OfyEeTal TO UAAAOY xal TO ATTOY, 
ad € 7 \ > \ 4 ° 

oUTw xal Tiy jdovyy; ov yap 7 auTy CUMMETpIA ev 

riley ¢ > OSS ~ ’ ~ , | pe 7 > Pe , 

TAC EOTIY, UO EV TW AVTW LIA TIG Hl, AAA Avigmevy 

Py / is4 / 4 5 , i ~ LAA 4 ca 
lapeéver Ews Thvog, xal diaheper TH PAArOY xa ATTOY. 

~ ‘ \ \ a Lan) ‘\ ° / 

Toodrov Oy xal To meph Tay ydovny evdéyeros elvers. 
/ , > \ / \ ‘ a ‘ \ 
aréasioy Te Tayaboy ribévres, Tag OF xIWioESG xAl TAS 

~ \ / \ la 
yevewets ATEAEIG, THY YOovny xilvyTiy xal yéverwy Arodaivery 


TElLp@vTas, 


~ / 
oo xarw@s O eolnacs Agyssv 00d elvos xivy- 


/ \ > ~ ~ / , 
OW" TAaTN Ya olxebov elvas doxet TAYOS xa Peadurys, 
a > \ > c 7, ~ ~ , \ »” 
HOt EL fry xa QUTHY, oloy TY, TOU xooKLOU, Wpog AAAO* 





3 Tl yap KwAver x.7.A.] Even the 
mixed pleasures, says Aristotle, admit 
the idea of proportion (cupperpia), 
just as health is a proportion, though 
a relative and variable one, of the 
elements in the human body. In the 
Topics, vt. ii. 1, the words 4 bylea 
ouyperpla Oepuav Kal Wuxpayv are 
given as an instance of an ambiguous 
definition, ovpmerpla being used in 
more senses than one. 

ov yap—frrov] ‘ Health is not the 
same proportion of elements in all 
men, nor evenin the same man always, 
but with a certain laxity of variation 
it still remains health, though admit- 
ting of difference in the degrees (ac- 
cording to which the elements are 
compounded),’ 

4 TéAEtdy Te Tayabby TWéyTES K.T.A.] 
Plato, in the Philehus, p. 53 ©, ac- 
cepted the doctrine of the Cyrenaics, 
&s del yeveots éorw (nH Hdovh), and 
then, by the contrast of means and 
end, yéveots and ovata, he proved that 
pleasure could not be the chief good. 
As said above, Vol. I. Essay IV. p. 
198, Plato seems to have recognised 
a class of pleasures above those which 
were mere states of transition, but to 
have had no formula to express them. 
Speusippus probably applied the ar- 
gument drawn from the Cyrenaic 





definition not merely ad homines, as 
Plato had done, but as if absolutely 
valid. 

olov TH Tod Kécpov] 7.¢. obK Zore 
taxos Kal Bpaduths xa? abrhy. ‘All 
motion has speed and slowness pro- 
perly belonging to it, if not relatively 
to itself, as for instance the motion 
of the universe has no speed or 
slowness in itself (because it moves 
equably),—at all events in relation to 
other things.’ Aristotle argues that 
though it is possible ‘to be pleased’ 
(hoOjva—petaBddrdrA{cUxv eis Bovhv) 
more or less quickly, it is not possible 
to ‘feel pleasure’ (Seca) either 
quickly or slowly. This argument 
seems a verbal one, like some of those 
in Eth. 1. vi. against Plato’s doctrine 
of ideas. If pleasure be identified 
with «lyyois, the argument holds good. 
But if it only be held to have the 
same relation to xivynois as Aristotle 
himself makes it have to évépyesa, Eth. 
X. viii. 4,.the argument falls to the 
ground. This argument and the one 
in § 6 really only apply to the 
want of a sufficiently subjective for- 
mula to express pleasure. If pleasure 
were defined as ‘the consciousness of 
a transition,’ there might then be 
degrees of speed in the transition, 
though not in the consciousness of it. 


Eee a 


III. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X., 321 


TY 0 yOovy TovTwWY OddETEp0v Erapya: yobF ty yo 
¥ 0 yOovy TovTwy odderspov brapys' yobjvar piv yap 
4 ‘ is4 > 47 aN 4 > ” SIN& \ 
EOTL TAYEWS WorEp opyicOivas, WIecbas DO ov, ovdE modg 
oe M Py ‘ BA \ VA \ re 
erepov, PadiSey d& xa avSerbors xal mavra Ta Tomira. 
/ z 
psTaPanrrciv piv ovy cig THY ydovay Tayéws xal Ppadéws 
+ ~ 
EOTIY, Evepysiv 22 xaT auTHY oux ExTL Taxéws, Acyw 0 
is4 / rf ~ ‘ ~ ~ 
nozoGas. yéverig te mivg av ely; doxel yap ox ex Tos 
, \ \ / > 
TuyOvTog TO TuxOY yiyvecbal, AA EE ov ylyverau, Eig 
i N fexh Ne ere ene CuLeNnry , Sn eaY 4 
TOUTO OlAAVETUAL. xXAb OU YEYETIC 7 YOOVN, ToUTOU 7% AUTY 
§ / \ , INS AN \ , oN ~ : ‘\ 
dbopa. xal Agyouos OF THY wiv AvTyy Evdciav Tol xATAaS 
7 \ > e ‘\ , ~ 
vor eivor, ray 0 ydovyy avaraypwow. Tatra 08 cw- 
/ > \ / ~ 
parixa eors ta waby. «i On eors TOD xara dvow 
VATA), 5 y yoovy, 2y & avaraAy OT a i 
Ypwors 7% rovn, ev W avarArypwols, TOUT dy xal 
CAN . \ ~ oy 2° iN ~ / >> v » > 
HOOTO” TO TWUK Ala" OU OoxEs 02° oud zat Ape Avo 
V4 e € £ »: Q\ / 4 
TANPWO IS 7 WOOv”n, HAAR Yivomevys pev AVATANPWT EWS 


10 > wv } , » nr ~ 
HOOT Av TiS, XA TE[LVOMEVOS U7 O1TO, 


4 doa 8 avry 





Aristotle’s real objection to the term 
xiynois lies deeper than these mere 
dialectical skirmishings, and has been 
explained, Vol. I. Essay IV., p. 197-9. 

5 yéveots te—pbopd| ‘And how 
ean it be a creation? For it does 
not seem to be the case that anything 
ean be created out of anything; a 
thing is resolved into that out of 
which it is created. And (as the 
Platonists say) pain is the destruction 
of that of which pleasure is the crea- 
tion” This elliptical argument seems 
to require for its conclusion, ‘ Where 
then are the elements out of which 
our perfect nature (ovcla) is created 
by the process called pleasure, and 
into which it is resolved by the de- 
structive process called pain?’ We 
find pain called a destruction in the 
Philebus, p. 31 BH: Shpos F ab pbopa 
Kal Adwn Kat Adois, H SE Tod sypod 
add 7d EnpavOey wAnpodoa dSivams 
Hdovh. Aristotle, arguing polemically, 
says, ‘Where then are the elements 
with which the creative and the de- 
structive process must begin and end?’ 

VOL. II. 





He afterwards reasonably substitutes 
évépyeia for yéveors as a better formula, 
but the above polemic seems not to 
have much value. : 
6 ob8 éarw %pa—aAvmotro| ‘Neither 
is pleasure therefore a replenishment, 
though one may feel pleasure while 
replenishment is taking place, just as 
one may feel pain while one is being 
cut.’ Pleasure, says Aristotle, may 
be synchronous with replenishment, 
but cannot be identical with it, for 
pleasure is a state of the mind, and 
not of the body, ef. Eth. 1. viii. 10: 7d 
piv yap HSec0u Tey puxinGy., All that 
is proved here is that a more sub- 
jective formula than dvarAfpwors is 
required to express the nature of 
pleasure. Plato had used the formula 
mAnpwors, Philebus, p. 31 EB, and Speu- 


| sippus probably repeated it. 


teuvduevos| The words toual kal 
kavoes were commonly used by Plato, 
as instances of bodily pain. Cf. 
Timeus, p. 65 B: Tatra 8 ad mepl tas 
Kavoes Kat ToMas TOD Cdmaros yryvd- 
pevd. €ort KaTddnra, 


de 


322 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X, [ Cuap 


~w ~ n~ ’ ~ \ 4 ‘ nw } 
doxet yeysvicbo: ex Tay meol tiv Tpodyy AvToy xa 
eS ss ~ 4 
joovioy’ evdeeig yap Yivopevous xah mporumnderrans HBeoGau 
7TH devour Anpwaes, Toro 0 ov wept Taras oupPaives TAS 
‘doves aAvTo yap diow al re podlnuarixal xal ray 
xata Tag aicbyoes al did Tho dodpyoews, xal axpod- 
\ ee / \ \ ~ \ > id 
ara 0: xal OPALATA TFOAAK HAL PVA Hab SAMIOSS. 
/  E ? , ” sD A ‘A ys 
Tivog ov aUTaL yeverelg EDovTaL; oUdevdg yap Evdela 
7 
gyeyevynTal, ov yévoir’ av avamraAypwois. mprg O8 rods 
~~ ~~ a 
m pode povTag Tag emoveidioroug Ty YOov@y Aéyor Tig ay 
OT: oux Zot: TAD yoda od yap ei Toig xax@g dioexes- 
/ ey > / > , > + ‘\ ADE. it A 
pévaig ose eaotiv, ointéov auTae xal den elvar many 
~ , A a 
Touro, xabamrep ovdt THR Tog xapvoUTIY Uylea 7 
- , Xx / »d9> > \ \ s ~ 
yaunéa 7 mixpd, 000 ad Asuxd Ta awoneva Tois 
~ »” 7 
96dbarpimow. yf orw Aégyorr’ av, Ori ak wey ydoved 
aiperal siow, ob pay amo ye ToUTMY, Women xal Td 
= ~ D6: Mg 4 \ A ¢ ‘f ely > ‘ 6T ~ 
TAouTElv, mpodovTs O ov, xal TO Hyialvery, ov pay OTIOdY 
, a ~ oy , c cg ‘, 
10 Paryovrt. 4 TH elder dioxpépourty ak Woovas Erepos yap 
> ~ ~ ~~ ~ ne 
ai ano Théy xar@y Thy and Thy aicypw@y, xal oux EoTiV 
€ ~ \ ~ 3 A »” / SAK A ~ 
jofivar tTHy Tod Orxaiov py OvTa Oixcsov 00d? THY Tod 
~ etd , € he 33 oe } ~ ” : 
POUT IXOU [LT] OVTHA [LOUTIXOY, OLOlWS OF XAb ETL THY AAAWY. 
~ x wn 
rr eu.dhaviterw 08 doxet xal 6 irog, Erepos wy Tot xdraxog, 
> s > \ \ c \ a , ~ ry c .¥ a 
obx odoay ayaboy THy ydovny 7) Siaddpoug elder’ 6 wiv yap 
mpog Tayaboy ousrsiv doxel, 6 08 mpbg rdovyv, xal ra wey 





7 trun yap eiow al Te waOnuarica 
«.7.A.] This is all admitted in so 
many words by Plato, Phileb. p. 52 
A: rt 8h tolvuy tobros (i.e, to the 
pleasures of smell, sight and hearing) 
mpoc0@ueyv Tas ep) Ta Mabhuara ndovds, 
el &pa Soxovow juiv abrar melvas piv 
By exew Tod pavOdvew pndt did wabn- 
pdrov nelyny Grynddvas e€ apxijs yevo- 
bévas, 

8 mpds 88 robs mpopépovras K.T.A.] 
This argument of the Platonists is 
quoted Hth. vit. xi. 5. 

10 THv TOU povoikod| Cf. Eth, rx, 
ix. 6; x. iv. 10, The arguments here 
given to prove that pleasures differ in 
kind are (a) that some men are in- 





capable of feeling certain pleasures ; 
(4) that the flatterer is different from 
the friend; (¢) that the pleasures of 
childhood differ from those of maturity. 
The whole reasoning is repeated in 
better form in chap. V. 

11 éupavifew Bt Sone? wad 5 plros] 
The term ‘friend’ is used here in a 
distinctive sense to denote ‘the true 
friend,’ just as it is in Eth, vim. xiii. 
9: &xovta yap plaov ob momréopy, 
Common language, which contrasts 
the flatterer, who ministers pleasure, 
from the friend, who ministers good, 
testifies to the non-identity of pleasure 
(in all forms) with good, 


I1.—IVvV.] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


328 


> / A Se ~ e % a c ~ 

oveiiSerat, Tov O eravodol Wo mpog ETEpH bpmirovyTa. 
‘ wv 

ovdeig TF ay Eroito Civ mwasdiov Osavoiav Eywv dice iov, 12 

€ Va Ns 3 Ld if IAN 

WOonevog eb olg TH maidin we olov Te parioTa, ovdE 


yalpey mody th thy aloyicrwv, pxdérors pEArAwy 


Avanbivas. mwepl moArg TE 


5} , & x x 
oTov0nY ToinoTnipes av xo 


> lA 5) , e , e cow / 297 
ei pandeplay eridépos yOovyy, lov ipa, pynwovevesy, sidevan, 


\ > \ BA 
TAS MapETasg EYEIY. 


> : ae 2 o 7 
ei 0 e& avayxng erovTas TovTols 


HOoval, oddity Siadéper Erolneda yap av Tatra xal ei wy 


£ > > ? > ~ ‘OD , 
ylvoiT aT auTwWY yOovy. 


oa \ x A > XN c 
OTs pedy ouy otTe Tayatoy 7 


id \ vv ~ c a ~~ SA Se - 2 ) ’ 

HOovy ovte maoa aipery, OnArov Zoixev elvat, xal OT cial 
~ x Ka 

Teg aipetal xa abrag diadépovoas rH elder 7 ad’ wv. 
\ ~ ~ ~ 

TH piv ody Asyoueva mepl TH Ydoving xal AUG ixavas 


elpyjobw. 


rN 9 4 ax ~s , , a A ee} 
Tid éoriv 4 woioy th, HATADAVETTEDOY YEVOIT OY aT 


apyig avaraPotow. | doxet 


yop y piv opacig xa ovri- 





12 mep) woAAd re] If pleasure, ac- 
cording to Eudoxus, were the chief 
good, all pursuits would be prized in 
proportion to their affording pleasure, 
but this Aristotle shows not to be the 
case. 


IV. Having finished his critical 
remarks on existing theories (Ta 
Aeydueva) about pleasure, Aristotle 
proceeds synthetically to state his own 
views, as follows: (1) Pleasure is, like 
sight, something whole and entire, not 
gradually arrived at, but a moment 
of consciousness, at once perfect, in- 
dependent of the conditions of time, 
§§1-4. (2) It arises from any faculty 
obtaining its proper object, but is 
better in proportion to the excellence 
of the faculty exercised, §§ 5-7. (3) 
It is thus the perfection of our func- 
tions, but is distinct from the functions. 
themselves, § 8. (4) It cannot be 
continuously maintained, owing to the 
weakness of our powers, our func- 
tions being soon blunted by fatigue, 
§ 9. (5) Pleasure, in short, results 
from the sense of life, and is insepa- 


rably connected with the idea of life, 
§§ 10-11. 

1 th ® éorty } woidv 1] Cf. Eth. u. 
v. 1: pera 8& radra ri éorw 7 aperh 
oxerréov. Ib. vi. 1: Set 5& wh pdvor 
otrws eimety, Sri eis, GAAA Kad Tota TIS. 
The genus (ri éort) of pleasure here 
given is that it is 6Acv 7, one of those 
moments of consciousness which are 
complete in themselves ; the differentia 
(motéy re) is that it results from the 
exercise of any faculty upon its proper 
object. It may be said that this defi- 
nition would leave pleasure undefined ; 
but in fact it is a simple sensation, 
not admitting of entire explication. 

h ev bpacis| Modern researches in 
optics would tend to modify this view 
of the entirely stmple nature of an act 
of sight. But it may be conceded 
that any ‘process’ which takes place 
in sight is too swift to be noticed by 
the mind. Cf. Locke, Essay on the 
Human Understanding, book II. e. 
xiv. $10. ‘Such a part of duration 
as this, wherein we perceive no suc- 
cession, is that which we may call an 





instant, and is that which takes up 


TT 2 


- 


324 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


[ Car. 


~ , ‘4 7 > > / bd bd d ‘\ 1D , A 
vouv ypovoy TEAsinN Elval* OV Yap EOTIVY EVOENCG oUdEvOC, O 


, > ~ A 
ats Oorepov yevomevoy TEAEIMWOEL QUTYS TO Eldoc. 


TOl- 


/ / \ > 

ourw 0 Zoime xal 7 yOovn* GAov yap Th gor, xal xar 
; ey qs eat onan Yost | , ’ 

oudéva ypovey AaPor Tig av YOovny YS Ext wAsiw YpovOY 


2-yivomevng Terciwdyoetas TO Eidos. 


diorep ovde xlvnoic 
Pp v7, 


~ ld \ / , 
Zot’ éy ypovw yap maca xlvyoig xal Téroug Tivds, lov 


\ , ao , ia > 
7 olxodopiny TeAcia, OTav moon ov edlerou. 


iad \ ~ / x 
amravts 84 TO xpoM FF 


x 63 
i ev 


Tw 2y OF Tolc méneos 
ToUTw. ev O& Toig pép 


To Ypovou maou aTErels, xal Erepor Two elder Tig GANS 
xa arAAjAwY’ 7 yap Thy Aidwy civberig Erépa Tig Tot 


\ xf ~ ~ ~ 7 
xlovog papdwoews, xal AUTAL TIg TOD YAO moinTews, 


xah 


~ ~ , 
7 piv Tot vaod TeAsin® ovdevdg yap evdenc mpig Td mpoxel- 


pesvov? 7 88 Tig xpymidos 
ptpoug yap Exaréeca, 


xal tol tTpryrvudou arerrg* 


Tw elder ody diadhepover, xal ovx 
‘ 


w~ ~ ‘4 ~ > 
Zot év oTwotv ypovw AaPEly xivyow TeAciav THO Ede, 


> ~ ao 
3QAN elrep, Ev TO ATraveTi. 


opolws 5 xal él Padioews 


~ ~ \ / / ~ 

xal Thy Aomey* el yap oT 7 dood xivnoig Tobey mol, 
nw a 

zal rautyg diadopai xar’ eldyn, rrijoig Padioig dAoig xal 





the time of only one idea in our minds 
without the succession of another, 
wherein therefore we perceive no suc- 
cession at all.’ 

2 d6rep—G&rayti] ‘ Therefore it is 
not a process; for every process is 
under conditions of time and aims at 
some end, as for instance, the (process 
of) architecture is perfect, when it has 
effected what it aims at. May we not 
say (4) then that it is perfect in the 
particular (rovrw) time viewed as a 
whole? But in the separate parts of 
the time occupied all processes are im- 
perfect, and are different in species, 
both from the whole process, and from 
each other. For the collection of the 
stones is different from the fluting of 
the pillars, and both from the making 
of the temple. And the making the 
temple is a perfect process, for it wants 
nothing towards its proposed object ; 
but that of the basement and the 
triglyph are imperfect, for they are 


each the making of apart. Therefore 


they differ in species, and it is not 


possible to find a process perfect in 
species in any time whatsoever, unless 
it be in the time occupied viewed as a 
whole.’ With Michelet, who follows 
two MSS., # has been omitted above 
before tovrw. The reading } totr@ 
makes no sense, unless one which 
would be opposed to what is said 
afterwards (od« éorw év dr@odvK.7.A.). 
The form 4 with a question, used for 
conveying Aristotle’s opinion on any 
subject, occurs again in § 9 of this 
chapter, 7) xéuve:; In the illustration 
given, two of the processes mentioned 
are merely preparatory, the collection 
of the stones for building, and the 
fluting of the pillars before they are 
set up; two others are substantive 
parts of the building, the laying of 
the foundation (the first act), and the 
adding the triglyph, which was a 





fluted tablet added as an ornament to 


Pye OS aS Se 


IV. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 325 


\ ~ ’ , » or 3 A ee > 6 ~ 
TA TOIAUTA. OU MOVOY O OUTWS, HAAR KML EV HUTY TY; 
/ ~ ~~ 
Badioes* TO yap mobev mot ov TavTOv gy TH oTAdiw xal 
ey Tw Hepet, xa ev erépe poet xOs ETEpO, vot TO Beeb udveu 
, 
THY ypoepeny TH v0E mcacelyyy ou feovev yep poppy O1a- 
mopeveTaus, AAAaG xal ev TOTw oboay, ey eTEpD 0 adry 
éxelvys. oe dx piPelag py ouy mph xiviio cans ey AAAS 
elonras, Zoixe O oux ev amavTs Xpovw TEASIA elvan, AAN ai 
~ \ , ~ ww yy 
Torral areasig xab diadépovoas TH etdet, elrep TO Tobey 
~ U ~ ~ > ~ ‘ 
moi eidoroiy. THg Ydovijg O ev brwotiv ypovw TEAsioy TO4 
~ s ee / a , \ ~ 
eldog, O%jAov ody wo ETepal F ay elev AAATAWY, xal THY 
a \ lA € ey 7 dof ww A ~ qs 
OAWY Th XA TEAELWY Y 700V%. Ossie O AY TOUTO XML Ex 
ve \ 2 dé § ‘x1 an, i) \ > , Ae § dé- \ 
TOU ey EvOEYeCUMI xiveloUML Py EY YOOYM, 7920 IAL OE* TO 


7 > ne ~ a. 
yap ev Tw yuY OAOY Th. 


7 ~ 
éx TouTwy O& OyAov xak OTE ov 
~ , U ey / x 3 7 
HAAS Asyours xivynow 7 yéverwv Elva Tiy jOovyy, 


> 
ov 


\ , ~ , > \ ~ ~ \ \ 
YAR TWAYTWY TAUTA AEYETAL, AANA THY [LLEDITTWY KOE [A7 





the frieze (perhaps the last act in the 
creation of the temple). The creation 
of the temple as a whole, regarded in 
the whole time which it occupies, is 
alone to be regarded as a_ perfect 
process. 

3—4 dpolws B&t—elS0s] ‘So too in 
the case of walking, and all other 
processes. For if passage be a pro- 
cess from place to place, even of this 
there are different species, fiying, 
walking, jumping, and the like. And 
not only this, but even in walking 
itself (there are different species), for 
the whence and the whither are not 
the same in the whole course and in 
the part of the course, and in one part 
and the other part; nor is it the same 
thing to cross this line andthat. For 
a person not only passes a line, but a 
line in space, and this line is in dif- 
~ ferent space from that line. We have 
treated exactly of process elsewhere, 
but it seems not to be perfect in every 
time, but the majority of processes 
seem imperfect and differing in species, 
if the whence and the whither con- 





stitute a differentia. But pleasure 
seems perfect in kind in any time 
(of its existence) whatsoever.’ Every 
process, says Aristotle, is under con- 
ditions of time, and its parts being 
under a law of succession are essen- 
tially different from each other; the 
borepov is different from the mpérepor, 
the beginning, middle, and end, differ 
essentially from one another. In 
pleasure nothing of the kind is to be 
found. One moment of pleasure does 
not lead up, as a preparative, to an- 
other more advanced moment. Plea- 
sure, when felt, is, ipso facto, complete. 

ev &dots elpyra] This refers gene- 
rally to the Physics of Aristotle. See 
especially Books IV. and V. 

oik év G&ravtt] ‘Non in quolibet 
tempore,’ this is of course different 
from éy Gmavytt 7G xpdvy toire, and 
év 7@ &xayri, in the preceding section. 

év étgoiv] ‘ In quolibet,’ but above, 
ovk @otw éy Stwoty means ‘in nullo 
potest.’ 

4 dirov oby—7dovh] ‘It is clear 
then that (process and pleasure) must 


526 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


[ Cuap. 


lad ; WY: \ c , A > / IANA ~ > 
OAwy" Ode Yap opaTEWS eoTL YévEeTIG OvdE OTIYLAS oDdE 
AS. INV , AN , IDOL IOV \ 
povasos, oud? TouTwy ovbey xlvyoig ond? yéveoig: ond? Oy 
en loath a ad o . 7 NS , ‘\ A > 
5 nbov7ig* OAoy yap TI. aicbjoews 03 raoxg mods Td aioby- 
\ / / ~ z A 
Tov evepyouTys, TEAEing 02 TIg eb diaxeiévng mpds TO HAA- 
~ \ \ ~ 
Moroy Thy bro THY alcbyowws TolodTOY yap pBarioT 
> \ ~ e / * 2 * > \ \ / > ~ wn 
clvos Ooxel yj TeAcin evepyera* curry OF Ayes evepyeiv, 7 
> bt ee / \ / @ > of \ / 
ev @ cori, peaiey dradsperen xa Exacroyv O: Psariory 
> fie ~ / \ 
cotly 7 evepysia To apioTa Oiaxeinévon moog TO xpa- 
~ € > € \ a > * ¢ 
Tiotoy Thy OD abtiyv, adry 0 av Tercioraty ely xal 
env 5 5 ~ A wv / 5 ec 7 c / \ 
HOloTH* xaTa maoayv yap alobyoiv éoriv ydov7y, bpoiws dz 
i d if \ 4 4 Di ™w € d 
xal Oravoray xa Jewpiay, yiicryn 0 y TeActoTAaTH, TeActO- 
~ Sh \ \ ~ 
TaTH 9 7 TOU Ee EyovTog mpog TO omovdaTATOY TéY 
PES ¢ A ~ db: \ r Saar 2 c e / > \ 
6a abryy. Tearsiol d8 THy evépyerav y% dovy. ov Toy 
> os ds Ul A iD A ~ \ ‘ > , 
auToy O& Tpomoy 7% Te yYOov7, TeAciol xal TO aliobyrov Te 
\ ¢e ~ § 5 ~ + oa 20 ¢, e158 . 
xak 7 alcdyois, orovdain bvtTa, Womep 000 7 byicia xal 
xal sxaorny 
a re 7 ~, 4 
0 alobnow ore yiveros ydovy, OjAov' dapev yap opa- 
\ > / = ‘Dé on de } a 
para xal axovopaTra etyas ydéa. O7jAov 92 xab Ore 
, > >A a 1, 6 x ; 4 } \ 
parmora, emeday 7 te alobyois 7 xparioryn xal mpoc 
~ ~ nn »” nw ~ 
TolouToy evepyy* TolouTwy 0 dyvTwy ToD Te aicbyroD xab 
7 
~ + > A / / ~ 
To aicbavopévov, ask Zoras ydov7 tmapyovres ye Too 
~ ~ \ 
8moinsovtog xal Tod metoomevov,  TeArsiol OF Tay evép- 
c eN ‘ > e eve ? 7 > , c > 
yelav 7 yoovn ovx wo 4 Eig evurapyouca, AAA we éemi- 
U id ~ / a o a 
yiyvouevoy Th TEAOG, olov Tolg axpalorg 7 Wea’ Ews ay 
/ x \ Fy ~ 4 ~ 
ody To Te vonroy 7 aicbyrov 7% olov det xal +d xpivoy 


e \ / ” > ~ , 
70 latpog bpoiwmg altia eots TOU byiaivesy. 





be different from one another, and 
that pleasure belongs to the class of 
things whole and perfect.’ 

6 redciot 5t—iyialvew] ‘Pleasure 
renders the exercise of a faculty per- 
fect, but not in the same way in which 
the goodness of the faculty itself and 
of its object does so, just as health 
and the physician are in different ways 
the cause of one’s being well;’ Ze. 
pleasure is the formal, and not the 
efficient, cause of a perfect function. 
‘Cause’ in this Aristotelian usage 
becomes equivalent to ‘ result.’ 





The - 


illustration used here is given also, 
with a slight confusion of terms, in 
the Eudemian book, Eth. v1. xii. 5. 
“Ereta Kal mowior pév, odx as iarpixh 
5t byleiav, GAN ds h byte, 

7 toobrwv 8 tyray—meicopévov] 
‘But if the object and the percipient 
be in this (highest) condition, there 
always will be pleasure as long as 
subject and object remain.’ The re- 
lative terms 7d moby and 7d mdoxov 
take their meaning from the way in 
which they are applied. Thus, Eth. v. 
v. 9, they are used for ‘ producer and 


Iv.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 327 
o\ ~ yw > ~ 3 / e Lan ee e , \ 
7 Gewpodyv, Boras ev TH evepysin 7% Yovy’ suolwy yap 
” \ ‘ BA \ + ea. | ‘ . , ~ 
OVTWY KA TPOG AAAYUAK Toy HuTOY THOTOY EYOYTWY TOU TE 
~ ~ ~ / 

mabnrixod xal Tod mointinod TavTa wéduxe yiverdas. 
~ ~ a / 
mig ody ovdelg cuveyidg Hostal; 7 xapvers WavTa yao9 
Ta avipwmrea aduvarel cuveys éevepyeiv. 
oo O ‘D0 A. 14 AQ ~ > = { of db: , 

iv. aud doy’ Ereros yap TH évepyela. sua Oe repre 

‘ € 

wave OvTa, VoTEpoy 08 ovY Smolwg die TAUTO’ TO pEY 

\ ~ / / 
yap mpbroy TapaxexrAyros 7% Oiavoim xal draTeTaEvWG 

\ 2. Ax 9 a 4 \ \ v e 3 B , 

Tepl MuT& evepysi, WomEp xaTa THY Ov oF EuPAemroyTEs, 

, ’ ’ / ey ee > \ / 
PETE ELTA 0 ov TOLAUTY 7) EVEDYELA HAAK TASYLEAYLEVY * 
O40 \ e e> \ > ~ Die F \ ~~ eS ~ 
tb xal 7 Yovn apauvpotiros. apeyerGas 02 Tig rlovijg 10 

4 a isd a ~ ~ a 
oindein Tig dv Amavrac, OTe xal ToD Civ amavTes ebievrau' 

e x \ / , / 4 \ “ 

% OF Swi evépyera tis éori, xal Exacros mepl radTa xal 
, ~ A A / ~ e 

TOUTOIS Evepyel & KOI PAALTT AyuTE, oloy 6 Uev LoUTIxOG 
~ > ~ A p / «e 3S \ ~ SX , \ 

TH dxof weph ra pean, 6 08 dirouabdags Th Oravole mepl 

a A ~ ~ c > 

Ta Bewpyjpara, orw 08 xal Tv Aormiby Exacrog. 7 4 

Lan ‘ ~ \ > , \ \ ~ , \ 4a BONE 2 

Hoovn TeAsiot Tag evepyeiag, xal To Cyy OE, ov opeyovTas. 

eVACymwS oby xal THS yoovns edi * TEeAsiol yap EXaoT 

yos THS Wovyg edievras* TeAsiot yap & w 
ro oH c \ v , dt BY \ \ ‘ x \ oF 

0 Civ, aiperov ov, médrepov la THY ydovny TO Cyyit 
c / x \ \ ~ ‘ ed , > / ° ~ 
aipounsda 7 die rd Civ ryv ydovyv, adsiodw ev To 


> 4 
OU YhVETOL 





consumer.’ Here 7d mowdy is used 
for the percipient, 7d mdéoxov for the 
object perceived. 

8 dpolwv yap bvrwy—ylvecdas| ‘For 
from similar pairs of relatives, bear- 
ing the same relation to one another, 
z. €. the active and passive, the same 
result is naturally produced.’ This 
appears to be an abstract and d priori 
way of stating the universality of 
pleasure attendant on the harmony 
between a faculty and its proper 
object. 

9 TGs obv—épavpodra] ‘How is it 
then that no one is continuously in a 
state of pleasure? The reason must be 
that one grows weary. For all human 
things are incapable of continuous 
activity. Pleasure therefore ceases to be 
produced, for it depends on the activity 
of the faculties. It is on this same 





account that some things please us 
while they are new, but afterwards 
not in the same way. For at first 
the intellect is excited and: acts strenu- 
ously on the objects in question (as 
in the case of sight, when one first 
fixes one’s glance) but afterwards 
the, action is not equally vivid, but 
relaxed, and so one’s pleasure also 
fades.’ On this doctrine, ef. Vol. I. 
Essay IV. and Ar. Metaph. vut. viii. 
18, there quoted, p. 201. 

10 It is natural to say that all 
desire pleasure, from its inseparable 
connection with the sense of life, and 
with each of the vital functions. 
Thus far Eudoxus was right, but he 
was wrong in not recognizing a differ- 
ence in kind between different plea- 
sures, and this point is demonstrated 
in the ensuing chapter. 


5 


N 


328 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON X. [Cuap. 


/ ~ \ \ ~ , A 
mapovTr, auveledydar piv yap tatra daiveros nab 
yopcpov ov déysobos* dvev Te yap evepyelag ov yiveras 
jOovy, waaay Te evépyerav TEAELOS 7) 7}00V7). 

~ ~ a ~ 
"Obev doxotos xal rw elder Osadépev* TH yap Erepa TH 
~ ec + 4 Z 27 ‘ ~ a + ‘ / , 
elder 6’ Erépwy olousda rersiotcbas. olTw yap daiveras 
,' \ ».' \ \. \ / i ~ \ dé nN 
xal ra dvoid xal Ta bd Teyvyg, olov Soda xal dévdpoa 
xal yoady xal ayarpatra xal oixia xab oxetog. bmolws 
INS \ x > A 7 a Ye 
0& xal tag évepyslag tag diahepotoag tH elder bd 
diadepovtwy elder rersiodcbas. diadzpovor 0 ai rijg 
/ ~ \ \ ? ? \ > y eee 7 
Olavolag Thy xaTa TAS aicdyioes XL HUTAL AAAHAWY 
~ \ E ~ 
xat edocs’ xal al TeAciodoas O7 yOoval. davein O av ToUTO 
Ves Po ~ ~ € ~ ey 2 ~ 9 , 
xal éx Tol cuvwxeroobas Thy Yovioy Exaoryy TH Evepyela 


OI ~ 
Nv TEAELOL. 


4 \ ‘ 2: °F, e > / en 4 
cuvauEe: yap THy evepysiay 7 oixsia 7Oov7" 





V. Pleasures may be thought to 
differ in kind, (1) Because our 
several functions (mental and others) 
differ from each other in kind, and 
things different in kind are perfected 
by things different in kind, §§ 1-2. 
(2) Because while its own pleasure 
promotes any particular exercise 
of the faculties, an alien pleasure 
impedes it, §§ 2-5. (3) Because the 
human functions differ from each 
other in a moral point of view, and 
the pleasures therefore which are so 
closely connected with them as almost 
to be identical must differ in the same 
way from each other, §§ 6-7. (4) 
Creatures different in kind must have, 
and by common consent do have, 
different pleasures, § 8. (5) The 
pleasures of man when in a morbid 
state must differ from the pleasures 
of man when in a healthy state. As 
a corollary to the last argument it 
may be added, that reasonings against 
pleasure from a reference to the mor- 
bid pleasures have no weight. The 
answer to them would be, that such are 
not pleasures at all. 

1 Kalra void xal rd bed réxvns] 
The évépyeso here mentioned appear to 





be taken as equivalent to 7a mpaxrd. 
Thus we have the classification of 
things capable of being made perfect, 
into nature, art, and morality. Cf. 
Eth, wi. iii. .7: atria yap BSoKxotow 
elvar ios Kal dvdynn Kal rdxn, ere BE 
voos Kat way 7d 5 avOpdmov. 

2 gaveln &—redcwoi] ‘This would 
also seem to be shown by the intimate 
connection existing between each 
pleasure and the function which it 
perfects.’ Cf. Eth. x. i. 1: pdAuora yap 
done? ouvpKeadoOa Te yever Thuar. 
Pleasure, generally speaking, is proper 
to the human race ; from another point 
of view, each function has its own 
proper pleasure, and the pleasure 
‘proper’ to one function is ‘alien’ 
to other functions. This distinction 
of oixela and &AAorpla 750vh was per- 
haps suggested by a passage in the 
Republic of Plato, rx. 587 a, where 
these terms are used, though not with 
quite the same application. It is 
there said that in the philosopher 
each part of his soul does its proper 
work and attains its proper pleasure ; 
but when some lower passion has the 
predominance, that passion, causing 
disturbance, does not itself attain its 


IV.—V. ] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 329 


~ \ ad / \ nw 
parroy yap sxacta xplvovor xal eFaxpiPotow of pel 
Ne ee os 2 \ , 
WOovig evepyotvTes, olov yewpeTpixol ylvovras oi Habpovres 
~~ ~ A ~ rh ~ / 
TW YEWULETPSIV, HAL HATAVOOUTIY EXAOTA PAADOY, OLolWS 
DQv \ / “, iz ~ li 
02 xalb ol Dironove a xOL Diroixodonos xal TMV AAAwY 
vA > , \ ~ (2 ~ 
ZXOCTOL ETLOINOATIY EG TO OlxElOY zpyov Habpovres QUTO. 
7 de ec on , \ AA A . ~ y 
cuvavEovet 02 ai yOovai, Ta 02 cuvavEovra oixcia, 
c / X\ n~ w~ Q AY n~ ‘A ~~ 
ET EpOLG Og TH elder xal TH olnela ETEDOL TO etOEt. 
~ ~ > HK / ~ 
PaArov Totir av davely ex Tod Tas ad’ Eréowy 
> di ~ > , > 2 c 4 /. > 
Eumodioug Tals evepystoug sivas of yap diaavarc aduya- 
~ ~ , / , v7 >’ ~ 
TOUGL TOG Avyolg mpooeyey, EY XATAXOVTWOW AUAODY- 


TIC 
f 
ETL O83 
eN 2! 
yoovas 


~ / ~~ ~~ , 
TOS, PAAAOY YalpoYTES KUANTING TIS Mapovang evepyelag* 
¢€ \ \ > S 3 GN. NX \ \ \ 4 
YW xaTA THY avANTIxyY ov FOovn THY Mepl Tov Aoyoy 
~ Oe ) / ~ n~ vo 
Evépysiav Obeiper. suolws 08 Totiro xal él ry arAAwY4 
/ ad ad x , > ee QA fing, x 
CupPaiver, Gray duo mepl Ovo evepyy* 7% yap yolwov THY 
c / ’ a ’ a A »y , \ \ ex ve 
ETEpaY ExxpovEL, xaY TOAD diahéoy xaTa THY ~YOovryy, 
~ a ~ 
PaAAov, WoTe py evepyely 
/ ~ 
Haipovres itwmotv ohddpa ov 
f ~ / / 
AAAL Tovey AAAS DE WoL 
/ c y eA n~ € S , 
Gsarporg of rpaynuarivovtes, orav data of aywuto- 
, tf > 3 XN ~ > A Qs c X\ > lA 
[AEVOb WO, TOTE PAALTT HUT Opw@ow. eel O 7 Lev olxeia s 
\ ~ \ 
jdovn eSaxpiBot tag éevepyeiag xal ypoviwrépag xal 
/ ~ i ~ 
Pearioug roisi, ai 0 AAAdTOIAL AUPalvovTal, OHAoY WES 
\ ~ 4 A € >’ tf ed ms ~ 
TOAD Oleo TAO" THEdeY yap ab AAAGTPLAL Ydoval moLotioLy 


X a € , \ 
HATH THY eTEpay, O10 
, N «~~ ad \ 
Tavu Opwey eTEpov, xk 
/ \ ~ 
ApEerxowevol, xa’ ev TOIS 


Omep ab olxcias AUmou* DbeipouTs yap. Tag evepysiang ai 
vinta Atmos, olov ef Tw TO yoadew andes xal exiarvmoy 7 
Th royiserdasr’ 6 piv yap ob ypadss, 60 ob Aoyiteral, 
Aurnpas obong Tig evepyciac, cupPaiver On mepl Tag 





own pleasure, and compels the other 
faculties to pursue a pleasure which is 


‘give the last finish to.’ It is used 
intransitively Hth. 1. vi. 13: eaxpiBotv 


alien to them: 8ray 5 upa Tay érépwv 
Tt Kparhon, brdpxe aitg phre thy 
éavrod jdovhy ekeuploxey Ta TE HAAG 


avarynacey dAAotplay Kal wh GAnOR - 


Hoovyy SidKew. 
étaxpiBovow] ‘ They work out.’ Cf. 
note on Eth. 1. vii. 18, The word 
étaxpiBovy is used transitively Eth. 1. 
xii. 7, and below, x. v. 5, where from 
the analogy of the arts it means to 
VOL. II. 





brép rovTay, ‘ to refine.’ 

4 kat & ois Oedrpors—dpaoww]| 
‘And those who munch sweetmeats 
in the theatres do so especially when 
the actors are bad.’ This is one of 
those illustrations from common life, 
which are richly strewed about the 
writings of Aristotle; the art of 
making which he perhaps learnt first 
from Plato. 


UU 


330 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. [ Car. 


> / > / ’ n | ~ > / cn ns A 
Evepyelag Touvavtioy ard Tay oixeiwy yOovmy Te xa 
~ , ~ > > \ e \ en / > c \ ’ 
Aume@y* olxeios O cioly ai em) TH évepyela xal’ abray yivo- 
c 3 > e A a 4 , 
pevar, ab O ANAT PLO ydoval elpnros OTh TAPATANT OY 
~~ ~ , / \ > , 
TL TY AUTH Torodaw* Pbeipovor yap, TARY oY opolwe. 
S ~ \ ae Pe 4 \ / ‘ 
6 diadepovew@y 03 Tey evepyer@y Emterxele xal DavarAcTyTs, xk 
n~ ~ 3 ~ ~ N nw ~~ ~w > / 
TwY wey aipeTo@Y ouTwy THY 62 deuxtawyv tay 0 ovdeTEpwy, 
/ , 
buolws Eyouct xal ai ydovals xal’ Exaoryy yao evepysiay 
olxeia %Oov7 eor i wey ob TH orovdala oinela emterxye 
incl yOovy 2oTiv. 7 Be TH orovdalg oixela erieix7e, 
c \ ~ / / \ \ o> / ~ 
7 02 TH davran poxbypad: xal yap ai emibupias Tay wey 
~ / ~ ~ , / x 
xanrcdy exosveTal, Thy 0 aicypm@y bexTat, oixesoTepon OF 
~ , ~ ~ / 
Taig eveoysious al ev adTaig ydoval ray dpéFewvs ai wey 
U \ ~ r ~ , 
yap Owpropevos cick xal Toig ypsvorg xah TH Duce, ab 02 
, ~ a a yy 
cuveyyus Tals evepyslouc, xal adiopioros OUTwHS WoT EXELY 
> 4 >; 5 , ’ c rd / ~ e ~ 5 
7TapdicPytysw ck TavTov eoTiv 7 evépyela Ty WOovy. ov 
‘ a / e e¢>) XR LF = >» + 
[ANY EOLKE YE 7 NVOVY OlvOIM Elva OUD alrfnots* ATOTOy 
: , 4 , Pa 
yap? arrw did To py ywoiterbor haiveral rior THUTOY. 
a y Cs. ce isd \ « ¢) / 5 / 33 
Womep ovv ak eveoyeras Erepor, xal ai doves.  dsacdeper O2 
co c ~ / Xi \ \wv U4 * 
7 OWig Ad%G xabapsorynTi, xal axon xal Codsnors yeuTews 
auolws On diadé } ab yoval, xal Tov i wepl 
auolws b% diadépovor xab ab yoval, xai rourwy ai wep 
\ , 7 ~ 
STi Olavolay, xalb ExaTepar aAATAwWY.  doxet O elves 
c , b , \ sD \ > af a \ oo» = ¢ \ 
exacren Cie xek 700%: Smehs, domep” nak: Spy yep 
‘\ > J c ~ ~ 
xaTa Thy svépysrav. xal eh’ exaorw 08 Gewpoivrs ToiT 
dy davely: éré: no jDov7 xab xuve ) avbou- 
y* éTépa yap ixmov ydovy xal xvvog xal avopm 
/ c 7 / ” 4 we c / 
wou, xabamep “Hoaxrsitos Dyoww ovoy cuppar av ereobat 
~ a (RP: O \ ~ \ ow c X\ 
parrov 7 ypuTdy* Tsov yao ypuood tpody ovoig. ab prev 





—— 


6—7 Kal a8idpioroi—raitrdy] ‘And 
they are so indivisible as to raise a 
doubt whether the function is not 
identical with the pleasure attached 
to it. And yet pleasure can hardly 
be thought or perception, this would 
be absurd; but through their not 
being separated, some persons fancy 
them to be identical’ To ‘divide’ 
and to ‘ distinguish’ are, as Coleridge 
tells us, two different things. Plea- 
sure, though not divided, should be 
distinguished, from the vital functions. 
The author of the Eudemian books, 





however, Eth. vn. xii. 3, identified 
them, and we might well ask Ari- 
stotle why happiness, any more than 
pleasure, should be identified with 
evépyeta. 

7 kaSapidrnt:] On the superior 
purity of sight, hearing, and smell 
over taste, cf. Plato, Philebus, p. §1, 
and Eth, m1. x. 3-11. 

8 &owep nat epyov] Cf. Plato, 
Republic, p. 352 #: "Apa ody rovTo by 
Geins kal txmov Kal %AXov Srovody Epyov, 
d dv Ff pdvy exeive mop tis } Epiora ; 

Kaddrep “HpdxAe:tos—xpvody| ‘As 


¥%] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 331 


x ~ e , ~ ¥N > , wv» ‘ Or ~ 
Guy Twy ETEQWY TW Eb0Eb G1adzpouory eb0e4, TAS OF Twy 
2 ~ > + 
aitay adiadopoug etaroyov elvat. diarratroucs 0 ov9 
. . / ~ f \ 4 A 
puxpoy emi ye Tov avipwmwy' Ta yap auTa TOUS jeY 
, ~ \ ~ | Lf 
Tépmes Toug 62 Aumsi, xal Trois piv AuTySa xal pioyTa 
° ~ aAA ens A , b ae) \ / SA ~ 
EGTI TOIG OF OEK xa DIAYTA. xal erik YAvxEwWY OF TOUTE 
, A ‘ 3 a! ~ ~ A ~ 
cupPatver* ov yap TH AUT Ooxsh TW MuleTTOYTI xa TO 
, DA A by moe? ~ ~ ~ 
byiaivoyts, ovd? Gepuov sivas rw aobevel xal TO evexTixw. 
ec / Dr ~ \ ; > c , y , : a ~ » “é 
opolws 03 Toro xal ed erépwy cupPatver. doxeh 0 eyt0 
at ~ A Ly A ~ Ys 
Gract Tog ToovrTos sivas TO Daiwouevoy TH Trovdaiw. 
> | ~ ~ , , ~ Bs 4 ww > 
ei 02 toro xar@g aAzyetat, xabareo Ooxei, xal Eorw 
« , / \ A 3 F ~ \ 
EXAOTOU [LETPOY 7) ALETH xa 6 ayaboc, y ToLoUTOS, xa 
<> A 7 x c 4 , A exes Z. = 
Yooval sizy av ai rourw Daiwopsvar xak Fea olg ovTos 
/ X% AA / Ss ~ v / eyn7 IQ 
yaiper. Ta OF ToUTH buTHEp7, el Tw daiverau 10éa, ovdey 
, = \ \ \ : \ ~ > i 
Gaupacray TOAAaL y%p D4opat Hb DULL aviowmwy 
, ex? > > »” > \ ’ A a 
ylvovras* 70éa 8 odx EaTIVv, AAAA ToOUTOIG xal oUTWw d1axEI- 
, A bf / A ~ > 
peeves, TAS pv obY GuoroyouLsvWs ait ypas OHAoY Wg ov It 
, Loans X | ~ Dd ye ~ 3 
dariov wdovac civar, many toig OsedSappyévoig? TaHy 6 
> ne > ~ ’ Roy ee r 
emieix@y sivas doxove@y molay 7 Tiva darioy Tod avbpwmrou 
.- 2 ~ > 6 re A (4 
elvas; 7% ex Thy evepyesoy OFAov; TavTaIg yap ExovTos 
c ex / > ¥ / : \ Wf . , c ~ ’ 
ai yhovai, ir ody pia eotiv elre wasioug ai Tou TeAsIoU 
\ , Se ee, ’ ~ / 
xOb poxapiov avopoc, al TauTag TeAciovoo Hoval xupiwgs 





Heraclitus says that ‘tan ass would | xara rhy alocdnow- obdémote yap 7d 
prefer hay to gold,”’"—the reason | adtd galverai trois wey yAuKd, Tots BE 
being that he is an ass. This saying | rovvaytiov, uh dieplappévew Kal AerAw- 
of Heraclitus, which reminds us of the | Bynuévev tay érépwv 1rd aicOnrhpioy 
ZEsopic fable of the Cock and the | kal xpirfpiov trav AcxXPevTwy Xuma. 
Jewel, was probably meant to satirize | robrov & byros roovTov rods érépous 
the low desires of the human race. | piv SwoAnwréoy pérpov civat, tos & 
It forms the pendant to that other | érépous obx Swodnwréov. dpyolws 5& 
saying, ‘Zeus looks on the wisest man | roiro Adyw kal én) dyabod Kal Kaxod, 
as we look on an ape.’ kal KaAod Kat aicxpov, kal Tay ZAAwy 
10 @atw éxdotov pérpov 7 apeth kal | sey to1obTwy. Those who are vicious 
6 &ya0és] That there is a definite | and corrupt are to be pronounced not 
standard of pleasure and of taste, as. | to be right judges of what is good or 
of other apparently variable things, is | pleasant. Their pleasures are to be 
most clearly laid down in Aristotle’s pronounced not pleasures at all. Cf. 
discussion upon the saying of Prot- | Plato, Philebus, p. 40 c: pevdéow tpa 
agoras, that ‘manis the measure of all | 43oyais 7&4 woAAa of wovnpol xalpovow, 
things.” Cf Metaphysics, x. vi. 6: | of 8 &yadol rév dvOpdmwy &drndéow. 
gavépby Bt Toor ex Tay yryvonevey 
; uv 2 





HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X, 


[Cuar. 


, >» £ en \ S \ ~ , 
AgyowT av avIowmrov ydovas civat, ai 08 Aowral deuTéowe 


\ a a rd + 7 
Hab TOARLT TOS, WITTE ab EvEpyslas. 


6 


NX? Ul \ ~ ‘ ‘ > , \ / \ 
Kignuevwy Of Tay WEepl TAG ApseTAS TE xAk diving xok 


bf / \ 3 ’ , ny ~ . \ 
Ydovas, Aosmoyv Eph evdalovias TUTW Orendely, ere10n 


/ > \ / ~ > / 
Tinos auTyy Tienev Thy avOowriver. 

/ , a € , 
mporipnuéva cuvTonwTspog av ely 6 Adyos. 


ie) 


dvarapotcs Oy Ta 
elroy 


0 Ors ovx got 28g" xal yap td xabeddovts Oi Piov 
irapyo av, dur@y Covrs Piov, xal rH duoruxodyrs 


TH psyloTa. 


ei Oy Tatire pn apéoxer, AAA paarrov 


> 3) oF / / , > ~ / i. 
EIC SVEDYEIAY Tha Gerzoy, xadamep EY ToS WpoTresoyv Eba7y~ 


~ > 9 ~ € \ > \ > ~ \ 70 
TAL, Twy d EVEDYElOV at bev ELOY AYAVHAAL xt ou ETEDA 


€ / € \ > ¢ / Died a \ >> ~ 
ainsrat, at 08 xal abrac, OjAov OTs THY evdaspovlay Twy 


\ ~ \ / \ > n~ v > \ 
xad aitas aiperwy tivd Gerdov xal ov Tay OF GAD ovdevaG 


w 


\ 22 NN mA 3 >> f J > > f. 
YAP EvOEHS H EVOALMOVIA AAA auTAapxXyS. 


xaG airag Oo 


2 c aes > XN > ~ A \ » SP, 
sholy aipeTas, aD wy penoey emiSnretT os Tapa THY EvEerysloy, 


~ > ~ c a.” ‘ yA a \ 
TOLAvUTAL 8 elvan doxovely Al XAT ApETHY ™ pagers TA 


\ 4 \  ~ , ~ 5 > c A c ~ 
Yao HAAR XAL OTOvOAaIA WPAaTTEy TWY OL AUTA AlpeTwy, 


\ ~ ~ A c tx. ~ ; > A PL: > 4 
xal Thy Twodimy O62 ab ydeias’ ov yap OF Erepa avTag 


€ ~ ‘ / \ > > > ~ ~, EN > ~ 
AbQOUYTOL Bramrovras Yap AT AUTMY LAAAOY 7 wdenrovv- 


~ ~ \ ~ 4 
TH, ALEAOUYTES TOY THOMUATWY XAl TIS xTATEWS. 


xaTA- 


‘Gi NS] ° 4, \ / » \ ~ > 
devyouor 0 eal rag ToimTag Oiaywyas Thy eddalpovi- 





VI. Aristotle having concluded his 
treatise upon the nature of pleasure 
reverts now to the general question of 
the nature of happiness, or the chief 
good for man. He takes up from the 
first book the following fundamental 
propositions : (1) that happiness must 
be a development (€vépyera) and not 
a state (€f&s) of the faculties ; (2) that 
it must be final and satisfying; (3) 
that it must consist in some develop- 
ment of the faculties sought for its 
The remainder of the 
chapter is occupied with excluding 
games and amusements from the 
above definition. Though exercises 
of the faculties sought for their own 
sake, these are (a) patronised by un- 
worthy judges,—tyrants, children, 
and the like; (4) after all, they are 


own sake. 





rather the means to working, than 
ends in themselves; (c) they do not 
represent the higher faculties in man. 

1 eipnuévwy Bt tay wep) Tas dperds 
re kal girlas «al Hdovds| Cf. Eth. 1. 
xiii. 1, where the analysis of aper%, or 
human excellence (the most important 
part of the conception of happiness, 
Eth, 1. x. 9) is introduced ; Eth. vit. 


i. 1, where the discussion of friendship, - 


partly as connected with virtue and 
partly as an external blessing, is 
justified ; Hth. x. i. 1, where a treatise 
on pleasure is added on account of 
the human interest of the topic, and 
the controversies which haye been 
raised about it. a 

2 elmopev 8 bri x«.7.A.] Cf. Eth. 1. 


eVib. (13-5 5 V:8; 


* 


3 Tay ebdaporCouevoy] * OF those ha. 


Ce 


VE] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 399 


/ c £ s& & \ ~ / >> ~ « 
Sonevey of TOAD, O10 Tapa Tolg TUpavYoIS EvdOxILODTLY Ob 
> ~ , ~ > , a 2 ‘ rel. 
ey Taig TolauTals Oraywyaig euTpATEAOL* WY yao EdicvTaAL, 
> / ~ > 7 rn ~ N27 wA , 
éy ToUTOIG MapeyouTs THAS aUTOUS 7Osig* OeovTas OF ToLOU- 

~ x z >> \ ~ \ \ \ 
Twv. Ooxel piv ody evdaimouxe TatTa elyas dia TO TOUS 
>. , . 4 > Ae ct INA Sr y 
éy Ouvacreiaig ev TouToIg amooyoratey, ovdiv 62 tows 4 
~ ~ / > > \ ey ~ 4 
onpciov of TodTol cio’ ov yap ev TH duvacrevEly 7 
> \ syn? € ~ > > e. c \Q w~ is / »>> > 
ApeT7 000 6 voig, ad’ wy ai cmovdaias evepyesos* 00d &i 
” cod ”  #n > ~ vos , oN 
AYEVTTOL OUTOL GYTES YOoviIg ElAIxpIVOUG xal EAsUIepIoU emt 
4 \ 7 A ~ 7 /, 
TAS TWLATINAS xATADEVyOUTIY, OI TOUTS TAUTAS OinTéOY 
/ \ 4 ~- A ~~ 
aipeTwTepas clvar* xah yap of maides TH map. avrois 

, , ¥ eS a” 4 a 

TiIL@Evae xPATITTA olovTas elvat. evrAoyov 47, WomreED 
\ a ek ee oe , , + N 
TOaIGk xab avOpaciv eTepa DalveTas Tiuia, ovTW xa; 
s \ > ' YU 4 , 
Davao xa erieixeoiy, xabamep GUY TOAAAKIC elonras, 5 
/ \ 4 \ \ ~ ee ~ 4 
xal Tivia xal yea éotl Ta TO orovdaiw Toaira ovTa* 
Marek sixard thyclxelas ten alperarréry ivioys 
EXATTH OF 7 7 : Ew aiperwrary evepysia, 
\ ~ “4 ~~. £ \ \ > / > : ~ 
xal TH orovdaiw OF y xaTa THY ApETHY. Ux Ev Wasa 6 
‘ s 4 
” e 2% / \ \ 4 \ , LF 4 
Apa 7 eudaimovin® xab yap aTomOY TH TEAog Elvas Toudiay, 
\ / A ~ \ / a ~ 
xal moaypareverbar xak xaxorabeiy Tov Biov dmavTa Tod 
/ s a X ec > ~ €-=2f a 
male xapry. AT AYTA yap ws simeiy erepou evexa 
© , ~ > /. ‘\ a 3 
aizotcha FAHY TIS eVdaImoVIAg’ TEADS yap AUTH. o7ov- 
> Ae 8: \ ~ >) ~ / > / / \ 
OaSew Of xal movely maidias yapsy HASIov dalveTas xal 
P , Ub 4 ~ a sg \ Bp oe t Mas , 
Alay wosdiney* mailey 0 orwg orovdatyn, xar Avayap- 
bd ~~ a4 N ~ ’ Pf A bf Ni 2 
ai, opis Eye Ooxet avamavoes yap “oimev 7 Toudic, 
~ ~~ \ ~ ~ > IND 4 > 
ahuvatotyTes 68 Tuvey@> Tovely avamadcews déovTAL, 00 





who are called happy,’ cf. Eth. 1. ix. 4 &yevoro] This reminds one of 
I1: TeAevtycavta GOAiws ovdels ebda:- | the saying about greedy and corrupt 
porter. kings, in Hesiod, Works and Days, 


3—4 Sone? pty odv—évépyeiat}] | vv. 40, sq.: 
‘These things are fancied to be 
constitutives of happiness because 
monarchs spend their leisure in them. 
But perhaps after all monarchs are Ries: 
no evidence, for neither virtue nor Sil abet 

_ reason, on which the higher functions 
of man depend, are involved in kingly 
power. Cf. Eth. 1. v. 3, where it is 
said that brutish pleasures ‘ obtain 
consideration ’ owing to potentates, 
who have everything at their command, 
devoting themselves to such. 


vitor ovdé tcacw bom wrEov Fyicv 
Twayrdés, 
ovd Saov ev paddxn Te Kal aopodéeAy 


6 obm ey madd Epa 7 eddaiporia} 
With the whole of the present chapter 
we may compare the interesting dis- 
cussion in Ar. Politics, vm. vy. 12-14. 
On the relation of amusements to 
happiness, see Vol. I. Essay IV. 





334 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON X. [ Crap. 


/ \ a ~ 5] , 
Oy TéA0g 7 avaTauoIg* ylveToL yap Evexa THG Evepysiag. 
> ~ > ¢ Nee , ie as) \ ‘ ? \ \ 
Noxsi 8 6 evdainwy Blog xat apeTay elvou* oUTOG OF pera 
/ 
Beariw re Agyouey Ta 


~ ~ \ ~ ‘ 
tay yerolwy xal Tmy [sta Taos, xal Too 


~ i] > , ~ 
7TOMOvOyS, aAN oux ev massa. 
oTouNata 
is z ca, \ / ‘ > , / A 
BzAriovos asl xal poplou xab avOpwrov omovdaorépay THY 


evéoyerav’ 7] 08 To BeAriovog xpeittwy xal evdasmouxw- 


oo 


, DAN > / f > a ~~ ~ ¢ ~ 

Tépa 7Oy. Gmrornvoee T ay THY TwpaTixw@y xdovey 

c bd nw 

6 tTuywy xal avdparodoy ovy ArTov Tol aplorov. evdal- 
/ , LN | > ‘» did > A / 

poviag 6 avdsig avdpamodw psTadidwol, ci 7 xab Biov" 

’ ~ i ~ / 

od yap &y Taig ToaUTOIG diaywyals 7 Evdasmovia, AAA 

> ~ / / 

ey Taig xaT apeTyy evepyelois, xabamep xal mporspov 

elont os. 


a | 


. \ , \ la »” 

Ki & eotly 7% evdatpovin xar’ aperiy evepyera, euroyoy 
elre 
~ ~ a ‘ lA ~ oS 
07 vods ToUTo elre AAO TG Oy xaTa vow doxEl apyesy 


\ \ Id uA > x ie See 9 
xaTa THY xpatloryyv® avTy 0 av ely TOU aploToD. 


La ~ \wv ” \ ns } 6 / 
xak rysiobas xal Evvoray Eye meph xardy xal Oeiwy, elre 
~ * ~ ~ , 7 
Getoy Ov xal aurd elre tay év yuiv To Georaroy, %. ToUTOY 
Saye A \ > / > *) a ec / >~ 
evépyiia xaTa Thy olxelay apeTyy ely av 7% TEAsia evdos- 


, 
[ovia, 


v 


ort 8 ear) Gewpyriny, elpynras. 


Oporoyoupsvoy 8 





8 ebSauovias 8 ovdels—Blov] ‘Forno 
one allows a slave to share in happi- 
ness, any more than in the social life 
of a citizen.’ In Politics, 1. xiii. 13, it 
is said that the slave, as distinguished 
from the artisan, is Kowwvds Cwijs, 7.e. 
he ‘lives with the family,’ but he is 
not Ko.tvwvds Blov, he does not share in 
the career of his master. 


VII. Aristotle’s argument now cul- 
minates in the declaration that happi- 
ness, in the highest sense, consists in 
philosophy ; (1) because this is the 
function of the most excellent part of 
our nature; (2) because it most admits 
of continuance ; (3) because it affords 
most pure and solid pleasure; (4) be- 
cause it has pre-eminently the charac- 
ter of being self-sufficient ; (5) because 
it is above all things an end-in-itself, 
and not a means to ulterior results; 
(6) because it is a sort of repose, and 





as it were the fruit of our exertions. 
It is indeed something higher, than 
man regarded as a composite being, 
and is only attainable by him through 
virtue of a divine element which is in 
him. But we must not listen to those 
who would preach down our divine as- 
pirations. On the contrary we should 
encourage them, and endeavour to live 
in harmony with our noblest part, 
which is in fact our proper self. 

1 etre Octov—Oedtarov| ‘Whether 
it be absolutely divine, or relatively 
speaking the divinest thing in our na- 
ture.’ Philosophy is said in the Me- 
taphysics, 1. ii, 14, to be most divine 
in two ways, first, as being kindred to 
the thought of God; second, as being 
knowledge of things divine. ‘Tomdérn 
5 dixas By ein pdvov: hy re yap pdAuor’ 
dy 6 Geds exou, cla ray emiornuay earl, 
kay ef Tis T&v Oclwy etn. Cf, the note on 
Eth. 1. ii. 8, , 


Ou 


VI.—VII.] HOIKON NIKOMAXEION X. 33 


~~ * , ~ ~~ 
Tour ay Oofsev sivas xal toig mporepov xal tw daniel. 
/ ad \ ~ 
xpatiory Te yap alty eoTly 7 evépyeia’ xal yap 6 vols 
~ ~ \ ~ ~ aA ~ 
Thy ev jiv, xal Tay yywotdy, weol & 6 vodg. ETE OF 
/ é < ~ \ / ~ ~ 
cuveysoraty* Jewpelv te yap duvapsia cuvexs parroy 
* / ~ , / ~ ~ 
 wparrew oriotv, olomeba Te Oeiv YOovny mapapenty Gos 3 
~ >> , NWA ~ ~ 
TH evdaipovin, yiorn OF Thy xar apeTHy evepysioY 7 
A ‘ / ~ ~ 
xaTA THY Todluv tmoroyoupevwsg eotiv: Boxxet yoy 7% 
et yw ~~ 
dirorodia Gaupacracg yovas Eye xabaporyts xal TO 
BsBaim, etroyov 0% Toic eldo oy SnTov iw Tx 
sPaiw, y 2 toig eldoos Thy CyrobyTwy yim THY 
Ny ‘ Ly a \ 
Olaywyny sivas. TE Asyouevy auTapxeia wept TH Gew- +4 
i 
\ / > x f ~ ns 
YTIKYY UAALTT av ein’ THY ty yao mpog To Chy avay- 
i 7 rs 7 7 
/ \ A \ 4 , ~ 
xaiwy xal codes xal Oixaiog xal of Aoirol déovTas, Tois 
\ A ~ / ~ 
02 roovrog ixaviog xexopnyynpévwv™ 6s pry Oixasog detras 





2 Bri 8 or Oewpnrinh, elpnra] It 
is difficult to point out a precise pas- 
sage corresponding to this reference 
(cf. Eth. IX. iii. 1, where a similar 
vague reference occurs). But perhaps 
it partly is meant to recal Eth. 1. xiii. 
20: Siwpl€era 5€ Kal n dpeth Kara thy 
diapopay Tabrny’ Aéyomev yap abTav Tas 
Bey Siavonrixas Tas 5¢ 7OiKds, partly 
Eth. 1. ¥. 7: tptros & éatly 6 Oewpn- 
Tubs, wept 08 Thy énloxefuy ev Tois 
érropévois morntdueba, There is nothing 
in Book VI. which corresponds. 

3 eVAovyov 5t—eiva] ‘ And it is rea- 
sonable to suppose that those who know 
pass their time more pleasantly than 
those who are enquiring.’ This is op- 
posed to the often repeated saying 
that ‘the search for truth is more pre- 
cious than truth itself.’ Thus Bishop 
Butler says, ‘Knowledge is not our 
proper happiness. Whoever will in 
the least attend to the thing will see, 
that it is the gaining, not the having 
of it, which is the entertainment of 
the mind. Indeed, if the proper hap- 
piness of man consisted in knowledge 
considered as a possession or treasure, 
_ men who are possessed of the largest 
share would have a very ill time of it; 





as they would be infinitely more sen- 
sible than others of their poverty in 
this respect. Thus he who increases 
knowledge would eminently increase 
sorrow.’ (Sermon XV.) In onerespect 
these two views are reconcileable; 
for Aristotle never meant to say that 
the €&s or xrfjois THs coplas consti- 
tutes happiness, but the évépyeim kara 
Thy copiay, ‘the play of the mind un- 
der the guidance of philosophy.’ He 
contrasts the peace and repose of con- 
viction with the restlessness of doubt. 
Inthesame spirit Bacon said (Zssayt.), 
‘ Certainly, it is heaven upon earth to 
have a man’s mind move in charity, 
rest in providence, and turn upon the 
poles of truth.’ But in another re- 
spectthe views of Aristotle areirrecon- 
cileable with those above quoted from 
Butler. The one over-states, nearly 
as much as the other under:states, the 
blessings of knowledge. And Ari- 
stotle strangely leaves out of account 
that sense of ignorance which the 
wisest man will always retain. His 
statement is chargeable with philo- 
sophie pride, which, as we have said 
(Vol. I. Essay III. p. 165), Socrates 
and Plato were free from. 


wn 


nN 


N 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. [ Cuar. 


\ XN re \ > Ke c , NY \ < 
hog ous OmaLoTpAyHTEL XAk eh wv, ouoiws 08 xal 6 

, \ c 3 oN ~ \ ~ ¥ a ts € ‘ 
cwdpwyv xal oO avOpslog KxAaL THY AAAWY EXAOTOS, 0 de 
codos xal 

id 

Todwrepos 
> a . 
AAD Opecog 


’ <8 a re ~ 1. a 
xaf abtroy wy duvaras bewpeiv, xab OTW AY 
x ~ . / > \ ” 

Yo Parroyv Béatiov 0 tows Tuvepyous sywy, 
> / U > a 3 \ , »> 
auTapeecTatos. Ooo T av airy povyn Ob 
¢ ‘ > ~ Ps baNS a > > > w / 4A A 
QUTHY ayar ac bos ouvey YaD am MUTYS YlveTAL MASA TO 
~ ‘ ~ ~ a ~ Aw 
fewpijcat, aro 02 Taéy TpaxTamy G wAciov 7 EAaTToy mwepi- 
4 \ \ ~ ~ c > ’ > ~ 
Tolousda mapa Thy mpaSiv. Ooxsh Te 7 evOnsmovin ev Ty 
~ s A > , \ a ° UJ \ 
TYoAN shyaut ao yoroupeba yap va oT yoratwpey, xOb 
~ o "7 v < ne yx re 
Tonsnouey iv’ eleyyyy aywiev. Thy piv ouv mpaxTixdy 
~ ~ ~ av ~ ~ 
apsT@y ev TOG TOAITIXOIG % EY TOG WOAEUIxOIS 7 eveoyera” 
e SA \ ~ / ~ o ¢€ X 
Ab Of TEepl THUTA m™ pagers doxodaoty AT YOAOb elvas, ol peev 
\ \ ~ > \ \ ~ “~ 
TOAEULKAL KOAL WAVTEAWS * ovdsls yap aipetrou TO TOAEMELY 
~ ~ a DOs cy u 4 
TOU TOAcUElY EVEXA, OVOE TMApATXEVAaSEL TWOAELOy" doa 
\ SD) ~ , rf > \ /. 
yap ay TAaYTEAWS petasdovog Tic elvas, es Toug Didoug 7ro- 
> 
Zort 02 
Nile i€ ~ ~ ow \ > tee \ 4 
HAL 7 TOU TOAITIXOU ATYOADS, Xa TAG AUTO TO TOAITEU- 


~ fod / \ / 7 
Azuloug TorwlTo, iva payar xal Dover yiyvowro, 


4 \ , 
cobas mepimoiouperyn Ouvactelag xal Tinas 7 THY ye evda- 
~ A ~ 4 / y “~ 
poviany abTw xXab Tog WoAlTaIg, ETEpay ovTaY TIS MoAs- 
~ a \ ~ N~ e Cx et sz > \ 
Tints, qv nal Cyroduev Oijrov we Erépay odoay. sh Oy 
Tibv ply xata Tas apeTag moaSewy ai worutixal xal 
\ , \ / Ld -e > 
TOASAIHAL XAAASL KOE pesyébes WposYouclv, GauToL p) 
” A / A > , + > > c A 
ATyoror xak Téroug Tivds edlevtTas xal ov OF abrag 
c © ‘ ~ ~ / ~ 4 
aiperal slow, 7 OF TOD vo evépyeia omoudy Te Osadéoerv 
doxet he ie A re \ > ec \ Vos \ > la § 
inch Gewpytinyn otca, xal mac’ abray ovdevdg edierbas 
, ov Nn oN > 3 4 \ ¢ \ 
Ténous, yew Te yovyy oixeiav, adty 0& cuvavFer riy 
’ at \ 
evépysiay, xal To avTapxes Oy xak TYOAaCTIxEy xal 
” e > / .- 9 ” ~ / > ‘ 
ATPUTOY WS avIowre, Xb OTH AAAR TW UAXAPIwD AToOVve- 
4 ‘ ‘ 


- \ , \ Pe 2 / ” c 
[AETQS, HATA TAUTTY TH EVEDYELAY daiveras OvVTa. q 


/ XN 2S / a 
Terclia Oy evdalmovin avTy 


x A , ~ 
av ely avismrov, AaPotoa 





6 gore 5€ Kal H TOU moALTLKOD— 
vioay| ‘But moreover the 


(function) of the politician also is 


c / 
eT Epay 


restless, and beyond mere administra- 
tion it aims at power and distinctions, 
or, if happiness for the man himself 
and his citizens, at all events a happi- 
ness which is something distinct from 





the exercise of the political art; nay 
we are in search of this happiness— 
plainly as something distinct.’ codia, 
while producing happiness, is identical 
with it; but woA:ti is to happiness 
as means to end. Cf. Eth. VI. xii. 5: 
ovx ws larpich Sylear, add’ ds 7 bylea, 
obtws 7 copla (moet) ebdamoriay, The 


¥ 


VIl.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 337 


lot , , D2 ‘ > / s ~ ~ EAN 
pixog Piov rérstov* ovdiy yap atereg ears THY Tg ed)au- 
, ~ a BY 7 
paviac. 6 08 Tomdrog av ely Biog xpeittmy 7 xar 
wv ae , a , 
aviowroy* ob yap 7 avIpwreg oti oUTwW BimgeTas, AAD 
- ~ ~ / a , ~ ~ 
7) Gziov Te 2v auTm brapyer* Gow OF diadhéves Toto Tov 
. , £ : ay. 2e 4 / ~ \ \ wv > 
cuv§erav, ToToUTH xal 7 EvEpysia TIS HATA THY AAAYY apE- 
4 DA ~ ~ A wv 
Tiy. eb On Geiov & vollg moog Tov avIzwrov, xal 6 xaTE 
~ / ~ A ns 7, 7, 
Toitov Plog Osiog mpog Tov avIowmivoy Biov. 08 xen OF 
\ A ~ , ~ 
HATA TOUS TapaivodyTas avIpwrive dpovely dvIowmrov ovTa 
Ss \ / , a / 
00d? Oyyta tov Gvyrov, arr’ ed’ doov evddyerar abavarifey 
\ 7 ~ \ \ ~ ‘ A , ~ 
xal WavTa Tosiy mpog To Civ xara To xpatioToy Témy ey 
wn A ~ mW ¥ Ny , \ 
AITO" Eh yap xa TH Oyxw pinpoY EO TI, OuvapsE Xa ThLLO~ 
‘ ~ , / Ul ~ A Bae 3 
THTL TOAU LAAAOY TavTwy UTELEYEL. do&es O av xak civas9 
~ \ of A v A 
ExaTTOG TOUTO, EimED TO xUPLOY xa AueIVOY’ ATOTOY ovY 
s > > ‘ \ e ~ / | etd > U ” 
YivoiT Ay, Eb [Ly TOY AUTOU Biov ASCOlTO AAAA TivOg HADAOV. 





words fv xal Cyrotuey may be referred 
to Eth. . ii. 9: 7 pev otv péBodos 
TovtTwy épierat, TOALTIK] TIS OvCA, 

8 Kar& Tovs tapavobvtas| The mo- 
ralists, says Aristotle, take a shallow 
view in bidding us tame down our as- 
pirations to our mortal condition. Cf, 
Rhet. ut. xxi. 6, where the gnome, 
Ovara xph Toy bvardy dpoveiy, is quoted 
from Epicharmus. Isocrates (Ad Dem. 
p-9 b) gives asort of reconciliation of the 
views: d@dvata pty ppdvet TG meyadd- 
Wuxos elvat’ Ovnra dt TE cuppetpws tay 
bwapxévtwy &rodavew, which reminds 
one of George Herbert's quaint lines: — 


‘Pitch thy behaviour low, thy projects 

high: 

So shalt thou humble and magnani- 
mous be: 

Sink not in spirit: who aimeth at 
the sky 

Shoots higher much than he that. 
means a tree. 

A grain of glorie mixt with humble- 


nesse : 
Cures both a fever and lethargick- | 
nesse.’ = 


si yap Kal TE dynp—orepexer] ‘ For 
VOL. II. 





though (this noblest part) be small in 
proportionate bulk, yet in power and 
dignity it far surpasses all the other 
parts of our nature.’ Aristotle here 
signifies that the divine particle (voids) 
bears a small proportion to the whole 
of our composite nature. And in ac- 
cordance with this he elsewhere in- 
timates that only at short and rare 
intervals can man enjoy the fruition 


of his diviner nature. Cf. Metaph. 
XI. vii. g: ef ody obtws eb Zxe1, dS Hpuets 


Pol, vi. 
v.12: & wey TS TAL ouuBalver Tots 
avOpéros odvydKis yiyvecOu. With 
which we may compare the saying of 
Spinoza (De Intellectus Emendatione, 
Il.), that at first he found himself 
only able to rest in the idea of ‘the 
truly good’ for short intervals, yet 
that these intervals became longer 
and more frequent as he went on. ‘ Et 
quamyis in initio hee intervalla essent 
rara et per admodum exiguum tem- 
poris durarent, postquam tamen Verum 
Bonum magis ac magis mihi innotuit, 
intervalla ista frequentiora et longiora 
fuerunt.’ Aristotle idealises these 
moments of the philosopher, suppos- 


mote, 6 Geds del, Oavuacrdv. 


xX xX 


vn 


Ww 


398 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X, [ Cap. 
si LZ , « , } ons A 4 > ~ 
TO Asyléy Te mpoTepov appooes xal viv’ TO yap oixetoy 

c ~ U / 
ExaoTw TH Dios xpariotoy xal Foiorov eorw ExaoTo. 
~ ’ ~ s ~ 
xal Td aviomrw On 6 xaTa Tov voy Plog, elmep ToUTO 
: BA \ > / 
panera dvOsowmros. adTog apa xak evdaimoverraros. 
, « A ‘ ” > 4 e ‘ > 
Asurepug 0 6 xaTa THY KAAYY ApeTyYy" Ab YAO KAT 
Si% Ly > /. / \ \ > } 
auTiy evépysion avipwrinal* Oixaie yap xal avdpela xe 
wv \ \ \ > ‘ \ > 7 / > 
AAA TH HATA TAS ALETAS TPOS AAANACUS TWoATTOMEY EV 
/ I. / 
cuvanrraypacsr xal ypelais xal mpakeos wmavrolaig év re 
Toig waders OvatypodyTes TO woEmOv ExdoTw. TatTa O 
> 4 , > 4 , ” 5: } / 
elvar daiverar wavta av§owmina. eva 02 xa cup Pai- 
n~ ~ Y ~ 
vey ard TOO cwpatog doxel, xal MOAAR Tuvmxsi@obar 
~ i € ~ > 7 / 53 se 
toils wadeow 7 TOO Hloug apsty. cuveleuxTas OF xeLk 7 
, ~ ~ vv ~ A ao hid Fi 
dpovycis TH Tod ASoug apery, xal ary tH dpovynces, 
v € ‘ ~ 7 > \ Md \ > , > 
elrep ai piv Tig dpovicews apyat xara Tag Aimag slow 


N ~ ~ \ ‘ , 
apeTas, TO O bphov Tay Windy xaTa Tay dpovyciy. 


Gu- 





ing them to extend throughout life, 
n teArela 8n evSapovia atrn by etn 
avOpdémov, AaBodca pjkos Blov réAciov. 


VIII. Aristotle, pursuing his theme, 
declares further the paramount excel- 
lence of the philosophic life, by show- 
ing that the life of practical morality 
holds a merely secondary place, (1) 
because it is bound up with man’s 
composite nature, that is, with the 
passions ; (2) because it is more de- 
pendent on external circumstances ; 
(3) because such a life cannot possibly 
be attributed to the gods. He adds 
that though the philosopher will cer- 
tainly require a degree of external 
prosperity, this will only be a very 
moderate degree, as the sayings of 
ancient sages testify. And if there 
be any providence of the gods watch- 
ing over men, it may be presumed 
that this will especially watch over the 
philosopher, who loves and honors 
that which is divine. 

3 gvveCevarat 5¢—AdvOpwmixal] ‘Wis- 


dom moreover seems inseparably con-* 


nected with excellence of the moral 


_ syllogism. 





nature, and this with wisdom, since 
the major premisses of wisdom are in 
accordance with the moral virtues, 
and ‘the right’ in morals is that 
which is in accordance with wisdom. 
But as wisdom and moral virtue are 


bound up with the passions, they % 


must be concerned with our composite 
nature; and the virtues of the com- 
posite nature must be purely human.’ 
And therefore secondary to philosophy, 
which is more than human. This 
passage appears to contain the germ 
of much that is expanded in the 
Eudemian books, cf. Eth. yi. xii. 
§-16; xii. 4. But we may observe, 
1st, that wisdom (ppévyots) is here as 
if for the first time coming forward 
in opposition to philosophy (cogia), 
and not in that recognised opposition 
which would have been the case, had 
Book VI. been previously written ; 
2nd, that there is no reference to any 
previous discussions on the as 


_ ovve{evxra:] Wisdom and moral 
virtue are here said to be reciprocally 
connected, just as it is said of pleasure 


* 


» 


VII.—VUI.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 339 


r PN Kb 4 ~ A ‘ , Byy 
yypTypcvar 0 auTar xal Toig ma4eos weph To ouvderoy av 
> 
elev> Qt Os 


QA 


ec > > x A e PBN , 
01 O XAT MUTAS KAI Y EVdKIMLOVIC, 


~ , > \ > / XN. 4c / 
To} ouv§erou apstal avOowmixal, xal 6 Bios 
7, 08 Tod vot xeywpic- 
~ \ \ [ee a ee ~ 
pevys TocotToy yap meph anTIg cipjodw: diaxpiP@ocas yao 
~ te / , 7 iN) a‘ \ ~ 
pesiSov To mpoxsinevov eoriv. d0See 0 av xal rig éxtog 4 
7 a. 4 \ a peat / ~ nr ~ 
Hopnyiag emi pixpov 7 em Erarroyv Oziobar THs VAix%o° 
~ X\ \ > £ > ~ 5 , 
TOY piv yap avayxaiwy audoly yosla xal &§ loov zoTw, 
> \ ~ > ne \ \ ~ c , % 
fh HAL PAADAOY Olamovst wept TO TWUL O TOAITIXOS, xXAb 
or ~ : \ Yo ~N , é \ NN \ 
(TH TOAUTA’ pinpov yao av TE Osadeonr’ mpeg GE Tas 
5) = oil Ae 3 fs ~ . \ a he A den 
evepysiag moAv dioiost. TO piv yap ersvieriw dejoe 
, \ \ / 4) "> / ~ s / 
Henp-atwv woos To wWearre TH eAsviepia, xal TH dixaiw 
~ 4 \ , / 

Oy sig TAG avTamoddosts (ai yap BourAnoeig AdNAGL, TpOT- 
~ \ \ e Ng NE 7 ~ 
mootvra: OF xal of ux Obxasos Povrcobas dixcuompayéty), 

~ X ’ / yf ~ ~ 
TH avozeiw OF Ouvapews, simep ewiTeAsh Tt TOY xaTa THY 
4 ‘ ? 
> z A ~ £5 26 / é ~ \ Ona 4 
ApEeTyY, xa TH THdpoU eSouciags’ THs yap GHAos EoTaL 


a ~ ~ 
q avrog 4 Tay aAAwY Tig; apdiofyTsitar 02 worepoy 5 


xupLMTEepoy Tig 
apdoiv otons. 


w / \ / ’ 
ApEeTIG % wpoaloerig 7 ai moa&erc, wo ev 
NX DN , ew € 3 > ~ x y 
TO On TEAStOY OFAOY WE ev aUdoly ay Eb7. 


\ ‘A ~ yy _~ », a / 
mpeg 08 Tag mpaSsg TOAA@Y Osital, xal Gow ay elZoug 


> \ , , 
WoL HAL XAAALOUG, TAsovwy, 


TO 


s 


02 Gewpotvrs ovdevos 6 





and life, chap. iv. 11: cuve(etx@as 
ev yap raira dalveta Kal xwpiopdy 
ob BéxeoOat. 

7d cbvOerov| Cf. chap. vii. 8. The 
term occurs repeatedly in the Phedo 
of Plato, ef. p. 86.4: airy F 7 Adpa 
kai ai xopdal cdpara Te Kal coparoe.d7 
Kal tbvOera Kal yeddn earl nal Tov 
Ovnrod Evyyern. Cf. Hth. vu. xiv. 8. 

4 Tav pey yop avayKalwv—duolcer| 
‘For though on the one hand both 
(the philosopher and the practical 
man) will have an equal need of the 
ordinary means of life, even if the 
practical man takes more trouble about 
the concerns of the body and such 
like—for there will be but little 
difference in this respect—on the other 
hand there will be a wide difference 
with regard to the discharge of their 
respective functions. The term 6 





wodttixés here appears to be used in 
opposition to 6 copds (§ 13), not as 
distinctively indicating ‘the politician,’ 
but as representing the whole class of 
the active virtues, which are subse- 
quently analysed. Thus, Eth. 1.-v. 4, 
we find of xaplevres kal xpaxtixol 
given as equivalents for of woActixol. 

TG avdpely 5& Suvduews] Sdvapus here 
seems used in a sense exactly cor- 
responding to ‘physical power. In 
modern warfare, a weak body may 
often be accompanied by the highest 
personal courage, but in the ancient 
mode of fighting this would haye been 
impossible or useless. 

7G capport eovaias| ‘The temperate 
man will require full liberty of grati- 
fication.’ Cf. Eth. 1. v. 3: 51a 7d woAAvdS 
wav évy Tats etovclais duownafeiy Zap- 
SavardrA@. VL vi. 5: of 8 ev rais 


xx2 


N 


340 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. [ Cuarp. 


TwY ToLoUTMY m pas ¥vé ray avepy stay xX pela, AAW ws elmely 

xal b ewarddsa éoTk 7 p6g vé Ti Beerpiny* 7 y dvipwmog 

eoTs xal wasioos oush, aipelTras Th HOT pet ay ™ POT TEL” 

#4 33 
/ >> , a 7 "A , 9. ff 

TEAEIA EVOKKLOVIA OTS Gewonrixy TIS EOTIY EvEeoyela, xal 


dD > Pe , \ <5 , 
deyoeTas ovv Thy ToLoUTwY mpg TO avOpwreverGaL. 
~ A 
evrevbev av davely. Todg Georg yap pariora tretry- 
/ *. 7 

dapev paxaploug xal evdaipovag elvar meaerg 08 roiag 
~ ~ aA ~ 
rovers ypewy avToIs; morepa TAG Oimalag ; 7) yEAoioE 
Pe , : 
davotvra: cuvarnrnarroyres xal mapaxatadiyxas amods- 

Nv v 9 ~ > ‘ \ > / e la 
OOVTEG HAL OTH TOIAUTAS AAAM TAS avdpslous, UT OLLEVOY= 
\ \ \ yA a / a 4 
Tag Ta doepr xal xsvduvevovTas, OTs xarov; q TAS 

> / , \ , Ey 2 > 4. ot 
ercu§epioug; tive 08 Owoougiw; aToroy 0 ei xal ora 

€ \ 7 aw 

ai d8 cwdpoves ti ay elev; 

\ eof a > ” / > , 
oprixog 6 Zrasvos, bts ob Zyovor Davaag emibupiag ; 
N ~ SA 7 7 a ‘ ‘ A 7 4 
OseEsotos 08 mavTa daivorr av Ta wepl Tag mpakerg pipe 
xah avagin Geiv. GAAK pay Cy Te wavTes brarAjdacw 
> \ qs ~ BA > \ \ Lan a \ 
auTovs xal évepyciv apa od yap Oy xabsudsy Womep Tov 
’Evoupiove. 


~ / ~ 
AUTOS VouIoa 7 Th TOMOUTOY. 


TO On Cévtt To moarTey adatpoupévon 
‘ 7 P P as id 
” QV +, re *~ , , \ , o 
ETL OF LAAAOY TOU TOIsIY, TL ASiTETAL TAHY ewple ; WOTE 
7 ToD Geod evéryera, paxaporyts diadspouca, Oewoynriny 
av ely, xal rdv avOpwrivwy Oy 4 TaITYH TUyyeverTaTy 
eVOaimovinwTaTy. orypeiov be xal To py peréye TH 
\ ~ > 7 w~ , ] / 3 >. / 
Aoima Coa evdaspoviac, Tig ToMUTYS Evepyelug EOTEpNLEVA 
’ ~ \ ~ a , , ~ 
TEAgWg. Toig wiv yap Oeoig amag 6 Plog paxapiog, Toig 
> ~ / 
0 aviowross, eb’ brov spolwpd Ti THg ToMUTHS evepysiag 





éfovalais. The use of the article, and 


defined the thought of God as ‘the 


of the plural number, makes a slight 
difference in signification. 

7 Siekiotor 5t—Ocdv] ‘And if we 
went through all the virtues, we should 
see that whatever relates to moral 
action is petty and unworthy of the 
gods.’ Aristotle argues here that we 
cannot attribute morality to the Deity 
without falling into mere anthropo- 
morphism ; but it might be replied 
that there is the same difficulty in 
conceiving of God as engaged in 
philosophic thought. Aristotle him- 
self felt this difficulty, and elsewhere 





thinking upon thought’ (Metaph. x1. 
ix. 4), which would not only deprive 
the Deity of all those fatherly and 
tender functions, which the human 
race is prone to attribute to Him; 
but would also remove Him from the 
conditions of all human thinking. If 
it be conceded that the life of God is 
only analogous to that of the philoso- 
pher; we might then ask, why not also 
analogous to the life of the good man ? 
Plato, by placing the ‘idea of justice’ 
in the supra-sensible world, allowed a 
more than mortal interest to morality. 


VIII.] HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. B41 


£ ~ 4 , xNN sN ~ 
Umrapye* téy 0 aAAwWY Gwowy ovdiy eudasovel, ered7 
S 


> ~~ ~ , > 2 of Ax / c 7 
ovdany xowwvel Gewplag. ed’ Goov Oy Oreretves 7 Gempic, 
\ c / \ e ~ , ~ 
wal 7 eddaspovia, xab olg paArOY Urapyer TO Dewpelv, xal 
> ~ > \ \ > \ \ \ , 
Eudamovely, ov xaTa TUUPsPyxdG AAAA xaTa THY Dewplay* 
i \ \ a c \ Us v4 > yy a‘ ¢ 1) , 
uTy yap xa abriy tipia, wor ely av 7 evdorpovia 
/ ANY a \ \ n > A > 7 > , 
swpia Tig. Osyoes O2 xal Tig exTog sUNLEDIng avIowrw 
v > \ > , tf ie \ \ ~ > \ ~ 
OvTs* ov ‘yap auTapeng 7 DvoIg mpog TO Dewpelv, AAAG OEt 
\ \ ~ , x \ \ 
zal To cpa byiaivery xal tToodyy xal THy Aommyy Jepa- 
/ c / > \ >? / ~ \ , 
WELAY UMAOYELY, OU [AY OLNTEOY YE TOAAWY XO BEYaAwWY 
7 LN , \ / f 
Osnrerbar Tov evdaimovyrovTa, ck poy evdeyeTas aveu 
~ > A ~ / oe > \ ~ 
Thy éxTog ayabiy paxdploy sivas? ov yap ev TY U7rec- 
~ A BA > n> c Lol a= » x OA \ \ 
Bory ro adrapxes 00d 7 mpaSig, duvarov 0% xal py 
” ~ \ / / 

AbYOVTA yg xat ararrns TPaTTELY TH XAAK* xa; yap 
\ / 7 V4 ’ 
ams pmetploy duvaiT ay TIG mpaTTEY xaTa THY ape 
ff 
THY. 

~ > vs 
duvacriy ovy ATTov 

\ ~ 
xOb LOADOY. 

/ > 7 ~ % \ > \ > ~ 
Blog evdainayv Tol xaTa THY ApeTyy evepyotvTos. 


~ 2-8. > ~ > ~ ce A IN aw ~ 
Toure 0 got Welv evapyms' of yap WidTor Tév 
~ \ ~~ 
Ooxotios TH erleiny TOATTELY, AADAC 
c \ \ af? «¢ , ” \ € 
ixavoy 02 rooavl trapyew? EoTar yap 6 
\ / 
xal Yo- 
ye A 2QN. 7 ” > s ~ > \ 
Awy O& TOUS EUDKIMovagG IowWS amePhaiveTo XaAMS, elroy 
, ~ 4 , 
peTplog Toig exTOG xEYoDHYHLEVOUG, mempayoTtag OF Ta 


xarALTH, WS Beto, xal PzBiwxdras Twdpovws* evdeyerau 


yap PET p10 HEXTYMEVOUS Tparresy a Ozh. 


” \ \ 
EQIKE Oe Has 





And he speaks of the just man, by the 
practice of virtue, being ‘ made like to 
God. Rep. 613 a, quoted below. 

10 Aristotle seems to lose no op- 
portunity of expressing his contempt 
for great potentates. ‘Reason is not 
implied in kingly power,’ th. x. vi. 
4. ‘One may do noble deeds without 
ruling over land and sea,’ &c. We 
may again refer to George Herbert, 
who in his verses on Church Musick 
says, i 
‘ Now I in you without a bodie move, 

Rising and falling with your wings ; 


We both together sweetly live and | 


love, 
Yet say sometimes, God help poore 
kings.’ 





ixavov 5& tocad@’ brdpxew] i.e. Ta 
Mérpia, referring to amd ray petpiov 
above. 

kar& Thy aperhy] ¢.e. whether philo- 
sophie or moral excellence. 

11 Kal Sddwv 5¢] Referring to the 
well-known story in Herodotus, 1. ¢. 
30,8q., where Solon pronounces Tellus, 
the Athenian citizen, to have been the 
happiest man he had ever known. 

éuce 5 Kal *Avatarydpas—pdvor] 
‘ Anaxagoras moreover seems not to 
have conceived of “the happy man” 
as a rich man or a potentate, when he 
said that he should not be surprised 
if (his “happy man”) appeared a 
strange person to the crowd, for they 
judge by externals, having no sense 


9 


It 


342 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


[ Ciar. 


, pe , > , ID \ ~ \ 
"AvaSayopas ob maovosoy 00d? duvactiy troraPeiv Tov 


SN 7 > \ ov > a , y BA 
SUDAILOVa, ELTWY OTL OUX GY Gaupacessy eb TiC ATOTOS 


, ~ ~ a 4 ~ / 7 
davely Toig TOAADICG’ oUToL yap xplvougs TOLS exTOS, TOUTWY 


12 alo bavouevor jrovoy. 
ai th&y codmy boFas. 


~ \ ~ , LF 
Tupdwyiv On Tolg Adyorg solxactw 
lA s \ \ ~ 
mioTW pry auv xal Ta Tomaire 


” Y S92 9 Nat's ~ ~ > ~ of 
EXEL TVA, TO 0 annses Ev TOC TPAXT OS EX TWy Epy@y xal 


Tou Plov xplveras* ev ToUTOIG yap To xdpIOVy. 


~ \ 
oxoreiv On 


\ / 4. 35 \w 4 A 4 ° / 
TH Mposienreva Yon ewl TH Epya xak Tov Ploy emsPepovTag, 
xal cuvahoyvrey fedy Tolg Epyoig amodextéov, diadwvodyTwy 


Ww 


\ ug / 
0 Aoyoug Hrornmréoy. 


53 \ ‘ ~ > ~ 
6 G5 xara volv evepy@y xal 


~ a , ” A / 
ToUToy Gepumevwy xal Oiaxeinsvog apiota xah Geodirneo- 
a s ~ ft 
TATOOS Eoixey sivas’ el yap Tig EmipsAsia TOY avOowrivey 
e Bea Pi or i B ssage <2 hak yo me 
Uno Jey ylveras, Wome Ooxsl, xal ely ay evAryov Yalossy 





of aught beside.’ Anaxagoras, being 
asked to define “the happy man,” 
said that his opinion, if he declared it, 
would be thought paradoxical. 

12 ovppwreiy 5) —broAnrréoy] ‘The 
opinions of the philosophers appear 
then to coincide with our arguments, 
Authority of this kind affords a certain 
ground of belief. But truth in prac- 
tical matters is settled by an appeal 
to facts and human life, for in them 
rests the decision. We ought then to 
consider previous sayings with a re- 
ference to facts and life: if those 
sayings agree with facts, we should 
accept them, if they differ, we must 
undertake a discussion of the subject.’ 
Cf. th. 1. viii. 5. 

13 Oceopidéotatos Zounev elvor| The 
term GeopiAjs occurs repeatedly in 
Plato; cf. especially the interesting 
passage in Republic, p. 613 a: where it 
is said that “all things work together” 
for the good of those whom the gods 
love. 
dixalov avipds, édy 7° év wevia yiyvnrat 


obtws &pa broAnwréov Teph Tod 


edy 7 év vécots H Tit &AAW TOY SoKaby— } 
® 


Tw KaKa@V, as TOUT@ TadTa eis ayabdy 
Tt TeAeuThoe: CayTt H Kal aroCavdyti* 
od yap 5) bad ye Oedy wore ducrdetru 





bs dy mpodupetcOan €0<An Sixatos yiver Oat 
kal émirndevwy dperhy eis Bcov duvatdyv 
avoporp duorotcba Beg. 
ei ydp tis—omep Soxet] ‘For if 
there be any care of human affairs by 
the gods, as men think there is.’ We 
may compare Shakspeare’s 
‘If powers divine 
Behold our human ‘actions, as they 
do.’ 


Aristotle expresses here no opinion, 
one way or the other, as to the reality 
of a Divine Providence. Soxe? merely 
indicates that an opinion is held; the 
word is frequently used to indicate a 
false opinion or faney. Cf. Eth. vu. 
xii. 3: doxe? d& yéveots tis elvar, Ort 
kuplws &yaAdvaX. vi. 3: Sone? pty obv 
edaovind Tatra elvar, Bre K.7.A, 
Plato had said that moral virtue (see 
the last note) placed men peculiarly 
under the care of thegods. Aristotle, 
differing from Plato in his conception 
of the Deity, says, if there be any care 
of men by the gods, it must surely be 
extended in an especial degree not 
to the just man, but to the philosopher, 
since philosophy is most akin to the 
life of the Deity Himself, 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X, 


VII.—IX.] 343 


> A ~ > 7 \ ~ , ~ 
Te abroug TH aplotw, xal TO cuyyevsectatw (Toto 0 
a if ~ \ 4 > ~ n~ 
av ely 6 vols) zak Tos ayamm@yTas PAMLTTA TOUTS xal 
nw ~ n~ , ~ 
Ti@yTas avreuToLeiy wo Ty dirwy adroig eriperoupevous 
ATS ~ \ ~ / “f r ~ 
xah ophids TE xAaL KAAS TpaTTovTAS, OTLbe TayvTA TAUTA 
TO Godo parich brapyel, ovx adnr 
‘ Dp pHEl, OUX AONAoY. 
Ope. 


Geodirgoraros 
\ 8% > ee | \ >> / a nn 
Tov auTov O eixds xal evdamovectatoy’ Wate xay 
a wv « \ U > IN -F 
ouTws ely 0 TodoS PAAIGT EUOOIILMY. 
vA > Ss >. \ 7 \ ~ > n 4 Ine A 
Ap ody et mweph rovrmy xal ribv aperiy, 274 3 xa 
, \ € ~ ~ ~ 
Dirtag xak rdovijg ixaviog elpyras roig tTUmog, TeA0G 
yy > / \ / x ld / > 
EXel otytéoy tay mpoalperiy, 7 xabamrep AdyeTas, ovx 
~ ~ \ “« + 
eoTW éy Tig mpaxToIg TEA0g Td Jewpnoa: ExacTA xal 
n > \ ~ \ , / \ 
YVOVAL, AAA PAAAOY TO WoaTTe avTA; 0908 On Tepl 





Kay oftws| ‘Even on this supposi- 
tion.’ It seems probable that Ari- 


teaching is merely empirical. So far 


stotle had in his mind the very words 
of Plato, above quoted. 


IX. The theory of human life now 
being complete, Aristotle asks if any- 
thing more is wanting? The answer 
is Yes, since theory is not by itself 
enoughto make men good. For virtue 
three things are required, nature, 
teaching, and custom. The first is 
beyond man’s control ; the second may 
be identified with theory, which we 
have now supplied ; the third requires 
institutions for the regulation of life, 
which may either be (1) of public, or 
(2) of private ordinance. As a fact, 
the state too much neglects (§ 14) the 
arrangement of daily life, and there- 
fore private individuals must address 
themselves to the task, in a scientific 
spirit, and must first learn the princi- 
ples of legislation. Whence are these 
principles to be learnt? On the one 
hand we find that practical politicians 
neither write nor speak on the prin- 
ciples of their art. On the other 
hand the Sophists, who profess to teach 
politics, are far from understanding 
eyen what it is, and their mode of 





from imparting principles, they go to 
work in an eclectic way, collecting 
laws, which are mere results, lying, 
as it were, on the surface. Legis- 
lation, as a science, has in short been 
neglected hitherto, and must now be 
essayed. We must enter at once upon 
the whole theory of the state, examin- 
ing former speculations, and existing 
constitutions, and developing a con- 
ception of the best form of government. 

According to the sequence of ideas 
in this chapter, it would appear that 
the connecting link between ethics 
and politics is to be found in the 
word @0s, custom, or mode of life. 
As custom has great influence upon 
men’s power of attaining virtue and 
the chief good, and on the other hand 
as the institutions of individual life 
have a close connection with those of 
the state, it follows that politics are 
the complement of ethics, 

1 GAAG paGAAov 7d mpdrrew adtd] 
Under the head of ‘doing’ are of 
course included the functions of 
thought, which, as we have just been 
told, are the highest forms of action 
inman. Cf. Pol. vu. iii. 8: aGAAad rdv 
mpaxrixoy ovK dyvayKaiov eivos mpds 


Nv 


Ww 


nN 


d14 IIOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. [ Cuar. 


Obs ~ € ‘ \ oe ak v a \ ~ rf) 
petng ixavoy Td eideval, a exsty nal ypyobar wes- 
, a 4 + > 4 \ , i) > \ x 
pareov, 1 el mwg aArhws ayatol yiwousia. ei pby ov 
Lg / > 7 ~ . ~ 
7TaY of AGYOI aUTaDXEIG TLbG TL Tolyoas Erierxcic, TOA- 
~ \ Ey) \ \ £ N , a A ‘ 
nods ay piobods xal peyarous dixaiwg Edepov xaTa Tov 
vr ) & ~ 
Oloyviy, xal des av TovTovg mopicardar. viv b dalvoy- 
/ \ \ ~ ~ 
Tar mpotpebacia: piv xal mapoppijcas Thy véewy Tods 
, SAT a 
erevdepious io xvety, Jog + euyeves xal we arndads Psro- 
xaAOv move ou ay earroxeay spo ex Tig apeTys, Tovg 02 
4 oAAovs aduvarely 7 pos xaroxayabiay m por peyatau* ov 
yap meduxaciy aidot meibapy ety AADAC doBew, oud améeyer- 
~ U Lea | \ > 4 > A \ H A pm 
far Toy Savrwy 01a TO aioypov GAARA Oia TAG TIwpIas* 
, Q ~ . > / ¢> A &: of \ Ds ae 
mass: yap Ca@vres Tag oixslag ylovag dsmxovcs xal OF wy 
. if is ‘A \ > / ~ 
auTar 2rovTas, Devyoums OF Tag avTineLZVAS AUTAS, TOU 
NA ~ A e > ~ exes »~> © ” x 
0: xarod xal wo arybe@s 750g 040 Evvoray Exyourw, Hyzv- 
\ > , ‘A x 
5aTO byTEc, ToUg Oy ToloUTOUS Tig ay Adyos peTappu- 
ED) > tJ n~ 
ploar; ob yap oly Te 7 od folhiov Ta ex waroudd 
~ / / ~ 
Toig Oso1 naTEATUPpSvA AdywW LETACTITA, ayarHToY 
> y / ~. 
0 lows éotly eh mavtwy trapyovtwy, OF wy éemseinsig 
7, 
ylvecbour o 
\ / ~ 
ayasovs olovras of ev duces, of O° E4e1, of 62 Oidayy. 7d 
\ y ~ / OF € s > , cn ere 
psy ouy Tig duTews OHAov wo oux eh Yuly UTapyel, 
> A Wire / ° / ~ e ° ~ > , 
AAna Oia Tivag Oeiag airing ToIg wo aAnf&s euTYYEoEY 


doxovuey yiverbal, wEeTAAaPOLUEY THC ADETH 
oxodmuey yiverbal, We jesy Tig apETiIG. 





érépous, kadwep otovral tives, ovde Tas 
diavoias elvar pdvas TavTas mpaxTiKas 
Tas Tv GroBawdyTwY Xap yryvouEevas 
ex Tud mpaTTev, GAAG TOAD UaAAOY TAS 
avToreAets kal Tas abTay Evexev Oewpias 
kal Siavohces. So too under dperh, 
codia is included as its highest form. 

3 ToAAobs dy pucbods| The saying 
of Theognis (v. 432) was that the 
Asclepiadee would have deserved great 
reward had they known how to heal 
the minds of men. 


Ei & ’AckAnmiddas TodT0 Swe eds, 


"lacbar KkakdtTnTa Kal arnpas pévas 
avdpav, 

TloAAovs by pucbobs Kal peydaAous 
&pepor. 


The last line is quoted in the Meno 





of Plato, p. 95 8, to indicate that 
Theognis held teaching inefficacious 
to produce virtue. Aristotle borrows 
the application. On Theognis see Vol. 
I. Essay IT. 

KaToK@xinov ee Tis dperis| * Under 
the influence of virtue.’ This word, 
which is also written xatax® x.moyr, 
seems derived from xaréxew, with 
a reduplication. In Ar. Pol. 1. ix. 8, 
we find xataxéximuot mpds, and ib, via. 
Vii. 4, Katakdxtnor bd, 

5 Te ee maraod Tots Heat KareiAnp- 
uéva] ‘ What has long been fastened 
in the character.’ 

6 tots &s GAnOas ebtuxéow] ‘To 
those who are in the most ideal sense 
of the term to be called fortunate.’ 
Cf. Eth. mt. v. 17: wal 7d €6 Kal 7d 


X.] HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEION X. 345 


€ , e 4 £ \ € 4 , , > ’ (od 
tmapyer* 6 33 Adyos nal 7 Oidayy pa wor ode ev kracww 
> F > x f / ~ yo XN ~ 
ioyuy, arrn Oey mpodserpycobas Toig eos Tiyyv Tod 
axpoatot Yuyiy mpos To XAAMS Yaipew xal pioElv, WOTED 
yay tay Ooebouray To orepun. 08 yap av axovoels AdyoU7 
> , 2» > re € BY a ~ \ 
amorpéemovTos 080 ad cuvely 6 xaTa mabog Cav" Tov 0 
odTws ZyovTa mis olov Te peTaTEioal; GAwS T ov doxet 
Acyw tmweixewv TO wabos arrAa Pla. Set Oy Td Hbog wpod- 8 
, ~ 6 ~ 
Taye Twsg oixeiov Tio apeTns, oTEvyov TO xaAoY xal 
~~ ~ ~ nw ~ 
dua xepaivoy To ainypov. éx véoud aywyiig opbig Tuxely 
mpos apeTyy Yaremoy uy Ord To1ovToG TpahévTa vomorg* 
To yap cwhpovws xal xaprepintds Civ ody 700 Toig woA- 
~ ” CCgdlee’ \ , ~ r ‘ 
Aoig, aAAwWS Te xab.vdoig. O14 voporg det TeTayGas THY 
Tpodyy xal ra emitydeipara*’ ovx EoTaL yap AvToa 
cuvyiy yiwiueva. ov ixavoy 0 lows véoug ovTag Tpodis 9 
, eae , ~ > ~~ > > \ eae. / 
wok emimersing tuxeiv opbio, AAA’ emeidy) xal avdpmdévrag 
Nm~ 9 s 2 -& sae \ \ ~ 4 > 
Ost emitypedery avTa nal 20iSzobou, xal mepl raitirae deoiued 
sy a \ HON De ee & Bi ‘, ry \ "0 
av youmy, xa Crwg 37 mech mavTH Tov Ploy’ of yap mToA- 
Aol OVE xv, TAA a rAG 4 ~ \ G / I a 
AH Parr 4] Ady wedapyotor xal Cymbals 7 
~ ~ / ~ #e 
TO xHAAD. Giowep olovtal tives Todg vouolerodvrag deiv10 
Pav mapaxarsiv exh tiv apetiy xal woorpémeobor Toi: 
HAAG yap, Wo STaxovTouevwy THY emieixids Toig eect 
Tponypevwy, amebodor 02 xal aduerrépoig odor xorAaoErs 





KaA@s TovTO wepuKévar  TeAcla Kad 
GAnOwh dy etn cipvia, 

9 ovx ixavby &—rby Blor] ‘It is 
not enough perhaps that, while young, 
people should meet with right nurture 
and superintendence, but, as when 
grown up they must practise the things 
in question, and accustom themselves 
to them, so we shall need laws about 
these things, and in general about the 
whole of life.’ In a spirit the very 
opposite of this remark, Pericles is 
* reported (Thucyd. mu. 37) to have 
boasted of the freedom enjoyed by 
the Athenians from all vexatious in- 
terference with the daily conduct of 
individuals: €AcvOépws 5& td TE mpds 
7d Kowdy TmodiTrevouey Kal es Thy mpds 

VOL. II. 





GAATAoUS Tay Kal? jucpay emiTndev- 
udrwv broplay, ob 3¢ dpyis Tov méAas, 
ei kal? jdovhy te Spa, Exovtes, ovde 
&Cnulous wey Auvmnpas 5& TH Sper axXOn- 
ddvas mporriOeuevor. On the one hand 
Thucydides praised the free system of 
Athens; on the other hand Aristotle 
praised the organised and educational 
system of Sparta; see below § 13, 
and cf. Eth. 1. xiii. 3, and note. He 
was probably led into this political 


- mistake, partly by the state of society 


in Athens itself, partly by the influence 
of Plato, from whom he imbibed the 
essential idea of communism,—which 
is, that the state should arrange as 
much as possible, instead of as little 
as possible, 


Dae & 


346 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQON X. [ Cua. 


\ , > hé AOR Sk oe a > r 
re xal Tipwpiag emitifévas, ToS 9 aviaroug GAws eopi- 
~ \ ~ ~ 
Ce Tov piv yap emseixy xal mpog TO xarov Covra TO 
, ua : \ ine ~ ‘> ~ > / 
Aoyw mebapyyoesy, Tov 0& Davaov ydovng opeyowLevov 
é , \ / ~ 
Aumy xoralscobar Womwep troluyov. d10 xal dacs delv 
‘ 
romautas ylvecba: Tag AU@ag at parior evavTiodyTas 
~ ~ 4 / 

11 Taig ayarwpévats dovaig, ef O ody, xabamep elpnrou, 
\ > / > oP ~ ~ det \ 24 47 
Tov eoousvoy ayaboyv tTpadivar xarw> det xalb ehio Sivan, 

> ao . . 4 > / 2. S550 
if ovTws ey emitydevpacw emiesxeos Cyy xal pyr axovTa 
PhS” @ , / \ ~ ~ db: , ’ * 
pif exovra mpatreyv Ta hataa, Tatra O& ylyvoir’ av 
~ 7 »” 7 
Piovpévorg xara Tiva voov xal raEsy opbryy, Eyouray io yov. 
€ \ y \ / > ” 4.3 ‘ IDV ‘ 

127] piv oby TaTpIxy mpooTAsig oux Eyer TO iayupov Oude TO 
> ~ INL \ oo e,e.% > U ‘ / ” 
avayxatoy, vd? 07 bAws 7 Eveg avdz05, ey RPaciréwg ovTOS 

‘ w 7 
7 Tivog ToovUTOU' 6 OF vomog avayxacTiniy Eyer SivaptyY, 
\ ~ ~ 
Adyogs wy amd Tivos Hpovycews xal vod. xal T&y py 
A , / ~ ~ 
avipwmuv éybaizover Todg evavTiovpévoug Taig oppats, 
a > ~ 2 IN IN ee 5 se Dy: / ’ a > 67 
xav ophis avTd dpow' 6 68 vonog oux tori exaybryg 
4 ee / > , \ ~ ’ / 
I3TATTWY TO ements. ev povy Dt TH Aaxedaspoviwy mors 
, / > / ~ ~ 
pet OAlywv 6 vomobérng emipcrciov Ooxei memorjobon 
tpodis Te xal emitydevparwv: ev 08 Taig wAsioTaig Tay 
nm , \ ~ 
morswv enusanras weph ty roodrwy, xab Sy exaorros 
e , ~ , ‘> SDP 29a e 
ws BovAsTas, xuxAwrin@s bepsoredoy TaLowy 1O aAoyou, 
F \ 

14 xpAaTIOTOV pev ov TO ylyverbos xoIwyy emipérgiay xal 
’ \ \ P) fod a-% ou § ; ~ > b] / 
opbny xab dpav avro ddvacbasr xowy 0 eFaperoupevwy 

/ a ~ / / 
exaoTw OoFesev av mpoorxey Toig ohetéporg Téxvorg xal 
/ ‘ > > ‘ A Dy ~ 4 
dirog sig aperny cupParrcoc§ar, 7 mpoaspsiobal ve. 
, ~ a ~ au 4 5 so > ~ > / 
parista 0 ay rotro divardas Od5eiy ex Thy cipnucvwv 
/ 7 / 
vouoleTixos ‘yevauevoge ai piv yap xowal emrindrcson 





13 kukAwmixas | Referring to Homer, 
Odyss. 1X. 114: 


opinion,’ which in so many respects, 
and more naturally, supplies the place 
of legislation. 

14 Kal Bpiv abrd divacba] ‘ And 
that it should have power to effect the 
object in question.’ This apparently 
Aristotle considers that any people | refers to § 12: 9 piv obv mwarpiKh 
among whom the state does not settle | mpdéoratis obi Exe Td lo xupdy K.7. A. 
by law the customs of daily life is udricra 8 —vyevduevos] ‘But from 
unworthy to be called a society at all. | what we have said it would appear 
He ignores that element called ‘ publie | that a person would best be able to 


Oeworever 5& Exacros 
raidwy 4S aadywv, obd GAAhAwy 
dA €youatv. 


IX.] HIOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 347 


on a CY ‘ , > ~ ™ c A ~ 
Wrov ott Oa vouwy yiyvovTas, exizixzig O al Oia toy 
a 7 - Z > vv > , LSS Do ONY fo 

Troudaiwy. yeypapmevoy 0 7% aypadwy, ovdev av O¢Ez2 
~ , sy ee es 5 ae \ > £ a 
dradéepesy, Oude OL WY Eig 7% TOAD Tassubycovra, Wore 
>w ~ \ ~ \ ~ f 

oud Ex) mouoiKyg nal yupvactixys xal Toy AAR éemt- 

/ ic4 A , ~ , 

TYOUEaTwWY. WoT yap vy Taig mWorsow euioyvar TH 
/ \ \ wy a \ 

Youle xab TH 207, oUTW xal ev oixlaig of martpsxol 
AG \ \ 24 aed ~ d \ \ 4 \ 
Oyor Hak TH EOy, KAI ETL WAAAY Oia THY CUyyiVvslaY x41 
\ ie , : oo =F \ , A Netse a 
TAS euspyeting’ mpoUTasyouT! yap OTEpyoUTES xa euTrsI- 

§z7. 7 A 4 >\ \ Dy , « Mg ov 
zig TH Duos. Ets OF xal Oradspovow ai xad Exacroyts 
~ ~ ~ ad \ ~ / 
mordeias thy xowdy, wWorep ext larpints’ xx40rov pey 
\ ~ / / c / \ 
yap TH wupettovTs oupdéoss Yrvyia xal aoitia, Tih 
Ww >» ed \ oy > ~ \ | es | td 
0 lows ov, 6 Te MuXTIx0g lows ov Tao THY HITHY BayrY 
/ > ~ bs / fe » ~ \ 
mepitlinow., eSaxpiBovobas Oy doZesv ay parr ro xaP 
a 27 ~ ? P< * , * ~ A ~ 
EXAGTOY Ibias THg EMIBsAsing yivoLevyg’ PAAAD Yao TOD 
’ , eo > > ° "A X\ 
™ p00 dopou TUYHXaVEL EXXOTOS. AAA em nsAayozby perv 
” pra \ \ \ \ \ ~ 
apioTa xad Evy xak iaTpOg xal yuRvaoTINS xa WAG AAAIS 
\ 4 * | a ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ 
6 To xaborov eldws OTL Tao 7 Tolg ToMicds* TOU xolvoD 
X ¢. -3 2 ~ , / \ beer ’ \ > % 6 
Yap ab ETioTY par AgyovTal TE nak Eloy. 69 LAY AAG? 
se eg IDV »” (aa ~ bs ~ \ 
HL EYOG TivOg OVOSY ITWS KWAVEL KAAWS em inzan divas xO 
3 7 7 / > ~ x lf 
averioTHuova ovTa, Teeanevoy 0 axpiPHo Ta cupPal 
By > € , Ww.9 > 7 , hay ae A 
youTa ed exanotw Ov eumeipiav, xalanep xal largo Evios 
~ ~ v be / NY * X / 
Ooxotiosy EauTw@y apiortos elvas, Etépw ovdiv ay duvamevor 
3 , xNN oS 7 a - , 
emapneoas. ovdev 0 yTTOv lows TH ye Povrouevw Tey- 
~ / ‘ ~ ° x x U im / 
uxod yevéo$as xat Gewpytinw® ert To xaSoroy Padiaréoy 
so NV x > ~ : / c ’ A wv 
Elvat OISshev Av, XAxeivO yuwpLoTéoy WS EvOEYeTAL* elpyTau 
\ a - ~ / \ ~ 
yap ors meph Tod ai emsoriat Taya 62 xab 7H17 





do this (z.e. to help his children and | for. That the family is a deduction 
friends towards virtue) after learning | from the state, which is prior in point 
the principles of legislation.” As we | of idea, we know to hare been Ari- 
find from Eth. vi. viii. 2, legislation | stotle’s opinion, Pol. 1. il. 12. 

was considered by Aristotle to be the 16 ov piv GAAd—éureiplav] ‘And 
superior (¢pxitextrovxh) form of poli- | yet perhaps nothing hinders a man 
tical thought. A person possessing. | even without scientific knowledge 
the general principles of scientific | treating well some particular case, 
legislation (see below, § 16) would | from an accurate observation, empiri- 
be best able to deduce rules for the | cally, of what results on each thing 
guidance of his family, and at the | being tried’ Cf. Metaph. 1. i. 7: 
same time to allow of such exceptions | mpds wey ody 1d mpdrrewv eumeipla 
as individual peculiarities might call | réxvns ob3év Boxe? diapeperv, GAAG Ka) 

Yy2 





348 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEIQN X. 


[CHap. 


Povropeven Ov emipersiag Bearioug wotely, elre moharoug eir’ 
oAtyous, vopober ind Tepour Eoy yeveo Bas, ci Oia vomey 


ayabol yevolued OY. 


OvT iva yap ou xah Toy T poTée~ 


> ” ~ U > > wv 
béevra diabeivasr xarw@o oux Bots Tod TULOVTOS, AAA ebm@ED 


/ n~ Nes ed os et ~ \ w~ ~ r A 
TIVOS, TOU E100TOS, WOMED ET IAT PIXYS Hal THY AoITo@Y WY 


iiotly emiméercian Tig xal Dpovynoig. 


sy 3 A \ ~ 
ap ouyv ETA TOUTO 


> V4 , a ~ ‘ , > ” ny 

emionemtTéoy mwobey 7 mo vouoletixos yévoit av Tic, 7 
\ ~ 4 x nw ~ ’ 

xalanrep eri THY AAAwY, Tapa THY TOAITIXY; pLOpLOY 


yap edxer TIS moriTIxTS elvas. 


x > ad s 
q ovy opoov Daiveros 


~ ~ n nn ~ / 

el Tig ToAITINIAS Kal TOY AcITaY EmioTHwY Te ab Ouva- 
> a \ ~ »” c > A 7 7 

pEwMv;, EY BEY Yao Tog AAAOIG Of aUTOL daivovrar Tag 


ts ‘3 \ 
TE OUVa[LELS TapadiwovTes 0th 


? > \ | ee ~ 
Olovy iar por xal ypadeic: 


Ta Os 


~ > ~ 
evepyovvTes amr auTiy, 
\ > ee 
WOAITINOA ETMAYYEAAOVTAS 


pay Oiarxey ob corer au, m pares 0 auTrdy oudels, AAW 
ol Tans Tevopeevol, of doGouey a ay duvayses tTivl ToOTO mparrely 


xah ep.mreboho p-arADov 7 Orervolee 


ouTe yap vpdhorres ouTE 


AgyovTes Teph Tey Towovurwy dalvovTas (xairos HAAALOY 
is ef x U N , \ 3 / 2° oe 
vv lows 7) Aodyoug Olmavixoug Te xa Onunyopixovg), Od av 
~ wv 
TOAITIXOUG MWemolnxoTes TOUS TheTEpoug visig 4 TivES 


19 AAAOUG THY dirwy, 


7 > 7 ” 
etaoyov 0 vy, elmep eduvavTo* oUTE 


n~ ” 

yop Tals morcow Apevoyv ovdty xarérArmoy dv, o0F 
« ~ c / , ae ~ n 7 / 
QuTOIS bmapsa TPOEAOWT AVY LAAAOY TIS TOImUTYCS duva- 


pezws, ovdt On Toig Oiararois. 


od pany paxpov ye Eormey 


1 eumeipia cupBarrsrbar? obs? yap eylyvovr av die 
Tio mworitixiig cuvnfelag moritixol* O10 Toig edieeévorg 


\ ~~ DIN VN ~ ° , 
20 TED MOAITINYS EL0Eva MpoTOEly Eolxey EUTEIDIAS. 


Tay Os 





HGAAov émitiyxdvovtas dp@uev Tovs 
éurelpous Tay tvev Tijs éumeiplas Adyorv 
exdvTwy. 

17 Syria yap obv Kal roy mporebévra| 
‘Any one you like to propose.’ Cf. 
Eth.t. iii. 8: +b mporWéueba, ‘what we 
propose to ourselves.’ 

18 pdpioy yap éddner THs wodrTiKhs 
elva] ‘For, as we said, legislation is 
generally considered to be a branch 
of politics.” This probably refers to 
Eth. i. ii. 7: xpwmévns 5 rabrns tats 
Avmals mpartikais Tay emoTnnav, ert 





5 vouoberovons ti det mpdrrew kar 
thyov &réxer bat. 

erayyésAovTar mev SiSdoKew of co- 
giaral] Cf. Plato, Meno, p. 95 B: of 
copiotal cor ovror, otwep pdvor eraryyéer- 
Aovrat, doxovar BddoKador elvan dperhs 5 
The whole of the present discussion’ 
on the teaching of political science is 
evidently suggested by that on the 
teaching of virtue in the Meno, where 
it was shown that the great statesmen 
do not attempt to teach their sons 
virtue, and that the Sophists, who 


—» i) 


~ useless. 


IX.] 


HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. 


349 


~ , / , 
codiorioy of emayyerromevos Alay Daivovras mopew eivas 
~ VPSDP/Z a \ IO ~s Ae a \ ~ 
To Makar GAws yap ode woloy Ti eotv 7 wepl Toi 

y : > A x \ > \ ~ c ~ 2D. ’ 
loacw' 08 yap av THY aUTAY TH PYTopIxy Odd? yzipw 
rer: > a oO” e/> ma 
eriberay, od av WovTo Sadioy ives Td vomobeTiTA cuva- 
A > ~ ~ , , 
yayovrs Tods evdagximotvTag THY vouwys ExrtEacbas yap 
4 , or 2 \ > \ > 
elvas Tovg aplotous, Waomep OUdE THY ExAoyAY odTAaY 
\ ~ ow , o AM 
cuvicsws xal To xpivasr op4@o péyiotov, WomED ev ToIS 
\ / \ \ dq 
HATA pougixyy’ of yap Zumeipor wepl Exacta xpivouciy 
~ \ # Ya ? x ~ ~ ~ 
ophio TH Epya, xal OF wy % mHS ewiTersiTaL cuiaow, 
~ / / ~ > , 
xal woin molotg cuvader* tolg O ameipoig ayamyToy Td 
‘ - a ~ / 4 
ph Siaravdaver ei ev 4 xaxHg merolnta: To Epyoy, 


id tao ~ 
womrep ext ypadixigs. 


e AN ’ w~ ~ wv 
Ob OF YOO TYG ToAITInAS Epyors 


: et ~ sz > , : \ , =. 
EQLXaC IY" Wwo GUY EX TOuTMY yooberix0g YEVaiT ay Tic, 
x ‘ aA - 6 / > ‘ Ui SNS 9 \ 
 Tovg aploTous xplval, ov yao daivovTas ous baT pbxO4 21 


~ , 
ex TY cuyypappatwy yiverGal. 


, ~ , 
xXQAiTOL WELDWYT Ob 


, > 4 \ 4 > \ \ c > ~ 
Ye Aeyely OV Lovey TA Geparevpare, AAA xal Wes iadeizy 
a \ ec ~ , 3 / / ‘ a 
ay xal we bz fzpamevery EXAOTOUS, OeAGUsvOL TAS EEzIC. 





profess to teach it, are doubtful in- 
structors. 

20 of 5 véu01—éolkaciv] ‘ But laws 
are as it were the results of political 
science.’ Aristotle’s account of the 
Sophists’ method of teaching politics 


is precisely analogous to his account | 
of the way in which they taught | 


dialectic. He here speaks of their 
taking a shallow view of politics, and 
making it an inferior branch of rhe- 
toric; and he adds that they adopted 
a superficial eclecticism, making col- 
lections of laws without touching upon 
the principles from which legislation 
must depend. They thus imparted 
mere results, which to those who are 
uninstructed in principles are wholly 
In the same way (Soph. 
Elench. xxxiii. 16) he says they gave 
various specimens of argument to be 
learnt by heart, and that this was no 
more use than if a person who under- 
took to teach shoemaking were to 
provide his pupils with an assortment 





of shoes. Adyous yap of uév bnropixods 
of 5 épwrntixods edidocay exuavOdaveww, 
eis obs TAcioTaKs Cunimrey ghOnoay 
éxdrepo: Tovs GAATAwY Adyous. Ardwep 
Taxeia wev &rexvos F hv 7 didacKkadrla 
Tois pavOavover map aiT@v- ov yap 
TEXYNY GAG TA awd THs TéExYNS BiddyTEs 
madevew tireAduBavoy, domwep by ef zs 
emothunvy odokwy mwapaddcew emi rd 
pndtv moveiy rovs wédas, eira ocKuTo- 
Touhy pevy ph didacKxo, pnd dbev 
duvhoerar wopl(ecOar Ta TowiTa, doin 
Se TOAAG evn TavToOdaxGy brodynudtwv. - 

21 ob yap gpalvovrai—éias] ‘For 
men do not appear to learn the 
physician’s art from treatises, though 
(they who write such treatises) aim at 
stating not only.modes of treatment, 
but how people-can be cured and how 
each person is to be treated, according 
to a classification of habits (of body).’ 
ovyypoppdrwv here is frequently trans- 
lated ‘ prescriptions,’ but, from what 
Aristotle says about them,clearly some- 
thing more is meant. In the Minos 


300 HOIKQN NIKOMAXEION X. [ Cuap. 
~ ~ t / ~ ~ 
TaUTA OF Tolg tv eumeipoig WHEALA sivas Ooxel, ToIg O 

rf ~ - ~ / ~ 
avemioTynoow aypeia, lows ody xal rey vonwy xal ray 
~ ~ \ ~ 
TomTsiov al cuvaywyat Tog ev duvausvoig Gewpnoou xal 
~ / ~ / ~ / , 
xpivas Th KAAMG 7 ToUvaYTIoy xal rola Tololg apmOTTEL, 
yo 2A Pa ~ y ” Le \ “~ S i 
evypnoT ay ely’ Tots 0 avev ESews TA Tointra disGsotior 
\ \ / ~ a \ ” 
TO Ev xplvely xAA@S ox ay brapyoL, EL Ly Ape MUTO- 
, ~ / 
parov, edouverwrepo 0 sig Tadta Tay’ av yévolvTo. 
~ ~ / / ~ 
22 TADAAITOVTWY OUY THY MpoTEpWY avEpeivyTay To Eph THs 
\ / ~ 
vouolzolac, auTovs emioxébasba: waarrov Psariov tows, 
Nerers! Sa \ / ov > / e A 4 
xal CAMS O71 Wepk MoriTElas, OrwS cig duvapy 7 Wepl TA 
, , ~ ~ ~ 
23 avGpwmiva dirocohia terciwhy, mpwrov pev ovv eb TE 
x / ~ \ ~ 
HATH pepos eloyTos xarts brs Thy mpoyevertepwyv Weipa 
~ 3 ~ Lg ~ / ~ 
Geprev ewenbsiy, elra éx Tay TUVYY{LEVOY TOAITELMY bew- 





which bears Plato’s name we find 
ovyypéuuara used as a generic word, 
of which several species, iarpixd, yewp- 
yiucd, poryerpixd, &e., are mentioned, 
and are compared (as here) with 
Cf. Minos, p. 316 ¢ sqq.: H5n 
mote évéruxes tvyypduparte mep) byelas 
Tay Kanvévtwy ; “Eyoye.—larpind tipa 
kal iarpikol vouot Tad ra Te ovyypdumara 
€or 14 Taéy iatpev ; “larpine pevTor.— 
“Ap oov Kal Td yewpyiKd ovyypdupara 
yewpyixol vou eiciv; x7 A. The 
cvyyptuuata here mentioned were 
perhaps ‘reports of cases,’ or mono- 
graphs on particular diseases, 

cots 8 &vev—yévowto] ‘ But those 
who without proper training study 
such things would not be able 
to judge of them correctly (except 
indeed by natural ability), though | 
they might gain an appreciative 
faculty with regard to the subject.’ 
égis here denotes the state of mind | 
formed by scientific training. Such a 
training especially produces ‘ judg- 
Cf. Pol. x11. 
xi, 14: fora yap Exacros pty xelpwv 
Kpiths Tay elddtwy. Eth. 1. iii. 5, and 
note. This kind of judgment, as | 
being deep and original, is distin- | 


‘laws.’ 





ment’ (7d xplvew Kad@s), 


guished above from cuveots, the power 
of appreciation, but in Eth, vr. x. 2 
atveots is called kpiruch, in a lower 
sense, and as contrasted with wisdom, 
which is mpaxtinh. 

22 Tapadiméytrwy ody] One must be 
struck with the disdainful way in 
which Aristotle here quite sets aside 
the Republic and Laws of Plato, by 
which he had been himself so much 
influenced, as if they were not to be 
reckoned as even attempts at founding 
the science of politics. Below, he 
alludes to them as ‘perhaps on some 
particular points having made good 
remarks.’ 

mp@rov wey obv] A rough outline of 
the Politics is here given, as Aristotle 
conceived it before writing it. The 
sketch is so very general that it omits 
the subject of Book I., and yet critics 
have thought that this passage may 
be taken as evidence of what the order 
of books in Aristotle's Politics should 
be. 

éx Tay curnypevwv rokiTE@y] ‘From 
my collection of constitutions.’ Cf. 
Cicero, De Finibus, v. iv: ‘ Omnium 
fere civitatum, non Grecie solum, sed 
etiam barbarie, ab Aristotele mores, 


IX.] HOIKOQN NIKOMAXEIQON X. 351 


~ \ ~ r + Abelodi we , ae Nomen 
pica: Ta rola cwher xal dosiper Tag moAsig xal Te mola 
e we ~ \ tee / / 
ExaoTtag Thy ToriTe@v, xab O1a Tivag aitiag ai pay 
~ / / , 
xanris ai 02 Todvavtiov moritevovtas* GewpySévtwy yap 
, Ba? dh ss > ‘ , , 
TOUTM@Y TAY AY PAAAGY TuVIOOILEY HAL Tolan WoAITEIA 
~ ~ \ , ae 
dpioty, xal mg Exaoty TAYGsloa, xal Tick vowoig xal 
4 / ? sd > / 
cor yowpivy. aAgywpev ody apFapevor 





instituta, disciplinas; a Theophrasto | xal, dpicroxparixal, kal rupayvixal, The 
leges etiam cognovimus.’ Diogenes | fragments of this work have been 
Laertius, in his list of the works of | collected by C. F. Neumann, and may 
Aristotle, mentions (v.i. 12): woArreiae | be found in the Oxford reprint of 
mérAewy Svotv Beovcav éffjkovta Kal | Bekker’s edition of Aristotle. 

éxardy, Kat i5iq Snuoxpatinal, dAvyapxi- | 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


ABEBAIOL IX. xii. 3. x. A. xi..2. TL ib. VILL 15. ‘iv. 2. 

a&BAaBeis VII. xiv. 5. vis 2,4. Gyaots I. x. 15. III. v. 3. 

Gyadds I. iii. 5. vii. 17. viii. 12. x. 11. EY. iii: 15, VILL .vit:.4; °x: 02; JEX-ix: 
xis 12,11. iii..7, 10. iv. 5. vi. 3. IV. Na oe cess 


iii. 15, 20. V. ii. 11. VI. xiii. 6. VII. *Ayddwv VI. ii. 6. iv. 5. 

ad. Sui,:3.. VEIL, iti..6,. v. 4, 5. xi. 1. &yadrpa X. v. 1. 

K.v.10. Gyan Il. i. 5. dyabdy I. | ayaduarorod I. vii. 10. 

ii. 1, 7. iv. 1. v. 1,8. vi. 2,5, 6,11, | *"Ayauéuvova VIII. xi. 1. 

13:°vil. 1, 6, 15, 17. viii. 9. x.3, 13. | &yar VIL ii..6. 

xi. 5. xii. 2. xiii. 5. II. vi. 2, 14. IIL é&yang IIL xi. 8. 1X. vii. 3. viii. 6. X. 


ay. 2,°3,.5; 6. v. 175 vi G5 ix. 6. IV, iv. 10. @yam@or I. v. 2. IV. i. 20. 
iii, 14. V.i..10, 17. iii. 17. vi. 6. VI. VER aise vitae: Vitis. EX xi 2: 
vii. 4, 6. viii. 4. ix. 4. xii. 7,10. xiii. Gyorgy III. x. 11. ayawey IX. iii. 1. 
456. VIL xi, 1,,3,4, xi -1,:3. xiii, viii. 6. G@yan@vras X. viii. 13. aya- 
Le7Aec2y VAL 2.1, 2. iii; IF, 2).7. andein IX. vii. 3. Gyawara I. v. 8. 
iv. 4. v. 4, 5. vi. 4. viii. 7. x. 2. xi. 4. dyanaobu X. vii. 5. Gyardpeva I, 
xii. 5,7. xiv. 3. IX. iii. 3. iv. 3. viii. vi. 8. Gyamwpévais X. ix. 10. 

2S: ix. 7,859; 10, X. ii. 1,2, 4,5. | eyaryrdy 1 iii. 4 IK. x. 6. X. ix. 5, 
iii, 2,11. ix. 11. Gyabod Li. 1. iv. 20. 


1. vi. 8,15. xi.5. I[Liv. 1. v.17. | @yawnréraroy IX. xii. 2. 

V. i. 10. iii. 14, 15. iv. 6. vi. 6. ix.9. | &yao@dor VIL i. 3. 

x. 1. VI. ix. 4. xii. 1. VIL xii. 2. | @y&nra VI. ii. 6. ayévynra VI. iii. 2. 
VIIL iii. 4. xiii. 2. xiv. 1. IX. iv. 3. | G@yevvotsIV.i.31. dyevves IV. iii. 26. 
ix. 1,5, 7,9,10. X. ii. 3,4. dyad@ | &yevoro X. vi. 4. ix. 4. 

Ill. ii. 10. v. 18. IV. iii 19. Vii 11. | a@yvoe? IIL i. 14,15. V. viii. 10. ay- 


VI. xii. 10. VIIL v. 4. xiv.1. dyaGo) voovot IX. vi. 1. Gyvoot VI. vii. 7. 
I. viii. 16. II. i. 6, 7. ii, 1. v. 5. vi. 9. eyvohoee III.i.17. ayvoety I, vi. 15. 
VIII. iii. 6. iv. 1, 4,5. v. 1. viii. 2. IIL. v, 8,9. IV. ii. 85.. V. viii. 3. 
xiii. 1. 1X. ix. 9. X& ix.1,17. dyabat a&yvoay IIT.i. 14,16. v.12, V. viii. 3. 
1. viii. 13. VII. xii.°7. xiv. 2. IX, iv. ix. 12. x. 3. &yvoodvres III. viii. 16. 
5. Gyada I. iv. 4. vi. 11, 14. viii. 2. IV. iii. 86. V. viii. 12. &yvootvtas 
TL. ii. 13. IV. iii. 10, 20, 21. V.i. 9, IIL. i. 14. v. 8. VI. iii. 5. a&yvonoas 
VI. v. 1, 4, 5, 6. vii. 5. xii. 1. xiv. 9. Ill. i. 18. &yvoodpevor V. viii. 3. 
VUIL. i. 1. v. 5. vii. 7. IX. viii. 6,9. | &yvow Ii. 15. VIL iii, 12. a&yvotas 
ix. 3. dyadav I. vi. 4, 7, 10,14. vii. Hii 18, v: 8. . V. viii. 6. VIL ii. 2. 
8. viii. 2,3, 15. ix. 7. xii. 4,5. IV. &yvouy I. iv. 3. III. i. 3, 13, 14, 19, 
ae. 10;-35. (Vi. vis. 4... ixs1 7. xis 2. 20. v. 7,17. V. viii. 12. xii. 7, VII. 
VIL iv. 2; 65. xiii. 2. xiv. 2. VILE “iii, ii. 1, 2. VIIL viii. 3. 


6. iv. 3, 4. v. 4,5. vii. 6. vili.5. x.2. | dyveras IV. vi. 5. IX. v. 1. 
1X. iv. 8. viii. 7. ix. 1,7. X. ii. 2,3. | @yopata VIII. xiii. 6. &yopaiwy VIIL 
iii. 1. viii. 9. Gyaods I. v. 5. ix. §. vi. 4. 


VOL. II. a 





il INDEX VERBORUM. 


dyopevwy III. viii. 2. dyopedovar V.i. 13. 

&ypapoy VILL. xiii. 5. aypdpwv X. ix. 
14. 

iypios IV. viii. 10. &ypiov II. x. 7. 
&ypto. LV. viii. 3. 

ayporta IIL. vii. 13. 

&ypoiwos IL. vii. 18. &yporor II. ii. 7. 
Mil ix: 3: 

aypov V. ix. 3. 

ayvuvaciay III. v. 15. a&yxivoa VI. 
ix. 3. 

wyet VIL. iii.10. &yew V.v. 12. X. i. 2. 
tywuev X. vii. 6. ayovres IX. viii. 4. 
&yovoa Il. vi. 9. &yerat III. xi. 6. 
VIL iii. 2. vii. 3. &yovrat VIL. vii 8. 


ix. 2. d@youdvwy VII. xii. 3. HxOa 
Iiv. 6. IL iii, 8. &yeo@ae ILI. xi. 3. 
Mil. ix 6. 


aywyjs X.ix. 8. aywyhy X. vii. 3. 

aye@or III, viii. 8. 

ayoviav IIL. v. 11. 

ayouCduevot I, viii. 9. Xv. 4. 

aywvioras IX. v. 2. aywonorav IX. v. 
4, 

adeys III. vi. 10. 

&deav V. iv. 13. 

adé€xaoror II. ix. 6. 

adcAdih VIL x. 6. xii. 4, adeApiKf 
ViIPT-x11./6: 

adeAp@ VILL. ix. 8. &deApod VIII. xii. 
3. adeApav VIII. x. 6. xi. 5. a&beA- 
gots VIII. ix. 2. IX. ii. 7. &deAgods 
IX. ii. 9. 

adecmrdtas VIII. x. 6. 

&naov LV. i. 8. vi. 3. VIL viii. 4. 6. 
PRS 153) 6:.-viil.55 6. %. 4s. VS 
13. &dnAo X. vill. 4. &dHAos III. 
iii. 10. 


&ddBAntos VILL iv. 3. &did8Anrov VIL. 


Wises 

&diapdpous X. v. 8. 

edicewy IL. vi. 19. IV. iii. 15. Viv. 17, 
18. vi. 4. viii. 4. ix. 1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 14, 
16. xi. 1, 5, 6, 7. Gducet V. ii. 2. iv. 3. 
vi. 2. viii. 1, 1L. ix. 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. 
xi. 2, 4,6. Gdiucjou V.xi. 4. VILL 


iv. 3. &Sixovot V.i. 3. viii. 8. VIL 
vill. 3. G@due@v V. iii, 14, vi. 1. viii, 
ll. xi. 4. Gdicodvros V. ix. 3. Gdi- 


Kkouvtt V. xi. 3. &dixodvra III. v. 13. 
V. vi. 1. ix. 7. &Siee?rae V. v. 3. ix. 
3, 6, 7, 9. xi. 3. adtkotro V. ix. 4. 
adiuceca Oa IV. 1.26. V.v. 17,18. viii. 
10. ix. 1,3, 5, 7, 8 xi. 5, 6, 7, 8 
adiucovmevos V. v. 14. 





&dixnua V. vii. 7. viii. 2,8. GdiKnharos 
V. v. 18. vii, 7. ix. 13. &deehmare 
V. ii. 5. viel. viii, 8, 11. dduenudrov 
Vixis'6; 

G5ucia V. i. 7, 19. ii. 8, 6,8, 9, 10. v. 
17, 18. vi. 4, 8,9. xi. 9. GBsclas V. 
i. 1, 3. ii. 1,9. v. 19. xi. 7. dduclow 
LV. vil. 7. V. ii..2. 5. vi de aR 
vii. 7. dducla V. viii. 10. 

& wos III. v. 18,14. V. i. 8, 9, 10, 12. 
ii, 4. iii, 1. vi 1,2, viii. 8, 11. ix. 12, 
xi. 4. VII. x. 8. &duov III. v. 13. 
V.i. 7,8. ii. 8,8, 9, 10. iii, 1,3, 14 
iv. 2, 3, 4. v. 17. vi. 1,9. Vil. 7. ‘Vili. 
2. ix. 3,10. xi. 4. VM. vi. 7. ddlxov 
V. ii. 3, 9. v.18, 19. vi. 4. &dle@ IIT. 
v. 14. &ueot II. 1,7. Illi. 14, V. 
viii. 8. WIL. viii. 3. ddtewv V. viii. 
1, 4. ix. 3. d@dfcors V. viii, 1. WOixa 
V. 1, 3. viii. 4. ix. 3, 6,11, 15. VIII. 
ix. 3. ddixous IIL. v.10. IV. i. 42. 
ddicwrépa VIL. vi. 8,4. addixws V. ix. 
12, 13. 

adidpozov IIL. iii. 10. X. v. 6. 

adovéoxas ILI. x. 2. 

ddogias LV. ix. 1. adokiay III. vi. 3. 

ddvvaula IV. i, 37. 

aduvare? IX. ix. 1. X.iv. 9. ddvvaroior 
V.i.15. Xv. 3. dduvarety X. x. 3. 
aduvarotvra VILL xiii. 9. a&dvvarovr- 
Tes X. vi. 6. 

adivaroy I. viii, 15. V. v.15. ix. 3. x. 6. 
xi. 4. VI. xii. 10. dduvdre IIL iii. 13. 
advvara IIL. ii, 10. advvdroy III. ii. 
7. VIL v. 3! Vii. 6; 

Get I. vii, 8,11. IL. ii, 23. vi. 18. IIL 
iii, 4, 8, 16. IV. iii 14. iv. 4. Vii. 10, 
ii. 5. iv. 2. v. 14. iz. 10. sie 
vii. 4. x. 1. VII. iii, 2. ‘vi. Tor Saws 
5,6. VIII. x. 3. xiii. 4. xiv. 4. IX. 
ii. 4, 9. viii 5. X. iii. 8. iv. 7. vi. 7. 

Goeve IX. i. 4. 

émdhs IL. vii. 13. andes X. v. 5. andlas 
IX. xi. 6 dnSas IV. iii, 25. 

a0avactas III, ii. 7. 

abavariCew X. vii. 8. 

*A@nvatous LY. iii, 25. 

&OAnTyy IIL. ii. 8. &OAnrad III. viii. 8. 

&OAuws 1. x. 4,13, 14. VIL. vii. 5. &0Alp 
VII. vii. 5. &OAcov I. x. 8. LX. iv. 10. 
OAtwy I. xiii. 12. d&OAtws I. ix. 14. 

&0A00era@y I. iv. 5. 

G@rov I. ix. 3. IV. iii. 10, 15. 

&Opdov VIL. vii. 6. 

alya Ill. x. 7. V. vii. 1. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


aidetoOat IV. ix. 7. aidovuevos II. vii. | 


14. 


aidhuoy II. vii, 14. IL. vi. 3. aidquovas | 


IV. ix. 3. 


&fSiov I. vi. 6. VIeiii, 2.. afS:a IH. ii. 10. | 


VI. iii. 2. GéSiwy III. iii. 3. 

aides II. vii. 14. IV. ix. 6, 7. aldods 
IV. ix. 1, 3. aido? X. ix. 4. aida III. 
viii. 3, 4. 

ainia V. ii. 13. 

aiva III. viii. 10, VIII. xii. 3. 

aipeow II. iii. 7. aipéoers II. iii. 7. 

aiperds IX. ix. 7. aipery VIII. viii. 2. 
IX. xi. 6. xii. 1. X. iii. 13. alperdy 
L. vii. 4,8. IIL. ii, 17. xii]. V. ili. 
16. VILL. v. 4. IX. vii. 4. ix. 9, 10. 
X. ii. 1,2. iv. 10. aiperot V. v. 17. 
aiperty X.ii. 2. aiperat IIL. i.6. VIL. 
ai. 1. xiv. 1. X. iii. 9, 13. vi. 2, 3. 
vii. 7. aiperd& IIL. i. 10. IV. iii. 18. 
VII. iv. 2,5. aiperay I. vii. 4. VIL. 
ive be EX. ix: 10; X..v..6.,, vi.-2,'S. 
aiperas VI. xii. 4. IX. vi. 2. aipera- 
repos III. viii. 9. VI.v.7. aiperw- 
tepov I. vii. 8. VII. vii. 4. IX. xi. 1. 
X. ii. 2,3. aiperwrépay I. vii. 8. aipe- 
Tétepa VII. xiv. 3. aiperwrépa I. 
i. 4. aiperwrépas X. vi. 4. aipeto- 
ratos IX. ix. 9. aipetwrdry X. vi. 5. 
aiperératov IX. xii. 1. aipetwrdrny 
I. vii. 8. VII. xiii. 2. 

aipetra: I. vii. 5. IIL. vi. 8. IIL. vii. 13. 
jx940' Vi. 10. VIL ix. 1. TX iv. 4. 
viii. 8. X. vii. 6. aipovyrat III. iv. 6. 
3Xsivs8,.-viii. 9.. xii. 1,2. X. vi. 3. 
aipotro X. vii. 9. aipodpeda I. ii. 1. 
vii. 8, 5. X. ii. 2. iv. 11. vi. 6. €Aoi- 
peOa I. vii. 5. X. iii, 12. €Aorro IIL. 
i. 6. IV. i. 14. VIILi. 1. TX. viii. 9. 
ix. 3. X. iii. 12. €AéoOa X. v. 8. 
aipeto Oa II. vii. 16. ILL. ii. 13. xi. 6. 
V.i. 9: VL i. 1. v. 6. VILL. viii. 2. 
aipovmevos III. iv. 2. IV. vi. 8. IX 
viii, 10. afpovpevoy IX. iv. 1. aipovdue- 
vo X. ii. 5. alpjoerat UL. v. 17. 
aiperéoy III. i. 9, 10. 

afpew VII. vii. 5. 

aic@dveru IX. ix. 9. aicbavdueda VI. 
viii. 9. IX. ix. 9. aic@dvecOa IV. v. 
6. IX. ix. 7,9, 10. xi. 4. ala@avo- 
wév@ I. x. 3. aicdavduevor IX. ix. 9. 
aicOavduevor X, viii, 11. Ho8ero IIL. 
» Sf 

alcO@nows VI. ii. 1,2. viii. 9. VIL iii. 9. 
Win ts TX ix 10. Xaiv. 6, 7% viet 





ll 


aic@joews IIT, iii. 16. IX. ix. 7. X. 
iv. 5. aic@foe IV. v.13. VII. v. 6. 
atoOnow Ill. x. 4. VI. ii. 2. xi. 4. 
VILE. xii2) 1X, xt 1 XSL 3) iv.5: 
7. aic@joes X. iii. 7. v. 2. aicOyj- 
oewv II. i. 4, III. x. 10. 

aicOnrixy I. vii. 12. aic@ntixijs VII. 
iii, 13. 

aic@nty VIL xi. 4. aiocOnrdv X. iv. 5, 
6,8. aic@nrod VII. iii. 18. X. iv. 7. 
aic@nrhv VIL. xii. 3. 

aicxporepdera IV. i. 41. 

airxperepdets LV. i. 43, 

aicxporoyla IV. viii. 5. 

aicxpompuyeiv IV. i. 8. 

aicxpoy IIL. i.4, 7. v. 2. vi 3. vii. 13. 
Wills 45/9. 14. ix. 4.6 TV. 3539. vit. 7a 
Vile vii3: VIL vie (6. 2X. ix. 408. 
aiocxpe IIL. i. 9, 23. v. 3. IV. i. 7. iii. 
15. ix. 5, 7. VIL vi. 1. aioxpat VII. 
xi. 5. aioxpod IL. iii. 7. ILL. viii. 3, 9. 
aioxp@ IX. viii. 1. aicxpay VIL. ix. 4. 
aisxpas X.v. 11. aicxiwyv VIL. vi. 1, 
3,5. atsxiota IL. i. 7. aicxlorwr 
X. iii. 12. aioxpev Il. i. 11. xii. 6. 
IV. i. 39. ix. 5. X. iii. 10. v. 6. aic- 
xpots III. v. 15. 

Aioxdaros IIL. i. 17. 

aioxivn IV. ix. 4. : 

aisxvverat IV. iii, 24. aicxtvorro IV. 


, ix. 7. aicxdvecdu IV. ix. 6,7. aic- 
xvvduevar LV. ix. 2. aicxuvréov IV. 
ix. 5. 


aisxuvrnards IV. ix. 3. 

airnticds LV. i. 16. 

aitia IL. viii. 8. IIL. i. 10, 15, VIl.v. 4. 
X. iv. 6... airfas IL, viii. 7. V. viii. 7. 
VI. xi. 6. X. ix..6, 23. airfay I. vii. 
20. ix. 6, 10. IL. vii. 9. IIL iii. 4. IV. 
i. 14. VIL iii. 9. airtae IIL. iii. 7. 

atrios III. v. 8,17. VII. xi. 2. IX. xi. 
4, aittov III. i. 23. airiy I. x. 10. 
-atriov I. iv. 4. xii. 8. xiii, 11. ITIL. 
ii 11. ve8. V. x. 4, 6.. VL viii..5. 
VII. xiv. 3. UX. vii. 2, 4. viii. 10. X. 
iii, 2. aitiows IX. ii. 8. ation IIL. v. 
7520: VIIL'xii..5. 

airiaoOat WII. i. 11. aitigro IX. iii. 2. 

aipyidiors IIL. viii. 15. 

&xapra LY. iii, 33. 

axtvduvo III. xii. 2. 

aicuvnolas VIL. xiv. 8. 

akiyntov V. vii. 2. Giwvhtwy VI. x. 1,4. 

&eAnroy IX. xi. 6. 

aucun VILL. i. 2, iii. 4. 


a2 


lV INDEX VERBORUM. 


akpaios X. iv. 8. 

dxudCwy IIT. xi. 1. 

ako) X. v. 7. axon X. iv. 10. dxohv 
ATs. 4: 

éxodacla II. vii. 3. viii. 6,8. II. x. 1, 
SLO xi sy Xs, VEL v.-G, 9. vi.6: 


vii. 1. &kodactas IIL. v. 15. xii. 5. 
IV. i. 85. Gxodacle VIL. iii. 2. iv. 6. 
ix. 5. dakodactay II, viii. 8. IV. i. 3. 


Vii 5: VL 1v.:2.;'¥..8; 

akodacratvew IL. vi. 19. axoAacralvoryra 
ITI. v. 13. 

axdédAaortos II. ii. 7. iii. 1. viii. 2, IID. xi. 
5,6. xii, 4. Vii 4, VIL ii. 2. vil 
PS Tees UN bet >. tak Sey Aiea. ot ye’ Pree <h Oatl Fe 
axoAdorou III. x. 6. VIL viii. 5. a&xo- 
Adore Ill. v. 14. xii 4. axddAaoTov 
Dyin 2. EHS vo Ss. VEE 6: ly: :8: 
4. akxédaoro IL. i. 7. TIL. x. 2, 3, 5, 
9. xi. 4. IV.i.35. VII. xiv. 6. dedAa- 
ora VIL. vi. 6. a&koAdorous III. v. 10. 
X25 4, ide 

axoAovde? III. vii. 10. V. i. 6. VII. i. 6. 
vi. 1. IX. v. 1. d&koAovOodar IL. i. 8. 
V. x. 1. jKoAodOnke VII. ix. 6. a&xo- 
AovOjoover VIL. xii. 1. VIII. ix. 6. 
a&koAovbety VI. iii. 2. xi. 6. VII. ii. 6. 
Vi. 2: 

GkoAovOntinds I. iii. 6. 
VII. vii. 8. 

axddovOov IV. ii. 1. 

&kovovoy IIL. i. 1, 6, 13,15. V.v.5. viii. 
3. ix. 1,2. d«ovotov IIL. i. 15, 19, 20. 
ii, 1. dkovoty V. viii. 2. akodorw III. 
i. 3,6, 10, 21, 24, 25, 26,27. V.ii. 
13. dxovoiwy V. ii. 13. viii. 12. 
axouvcios IIL. i. 1. V. iv. 1. dxovolws 
TU. 16, 23: 

a&kovopata X. iv. 7. 

arover LV. iii. 25. IX. ix. 9. akotovor 
II. iv. 6. dkovwrv I. iv. 7. IV. viii. 8. 
IX. ix. 9. daotvovra IV. viii. 7. axovew 
IV. viii. 1,°5.. VIL it,.12. wW. l.-‘miv. 
5. adkovodtw I. iv. 7. dkovoa II. 
1.4. IV. viii. 10. VIL vi. 1. dxotoas 
VII. vi. 1. Gxodoee X. ix. 7. axod- 
cera I. iii. 6. IV. viii. 8. akovad- 
hevov I. iv. 6. dkovoridy I. xiii. 9. 

axpacia VII.i. 1,6. ii. 7,11. iii. 2. iv. 
BG. v5, 8,9. viel 9, 4.5. wii. 
1,3. x. 4,5. akpactas VII. i. 4. ii. 
1,9, 11, v. 9. vii. 8. viii 1. xiv. 9. 
axpacia VII. ix.5. d&«pactay V. ix. 5. 
VIL i. 9; 10. 1v../6.. vi..6, 8. 1x, 4. 
axpaci@v VII. x. 4, 


&roAovOntikol 





axparevera: VIL. ii, 1.  dkparedovras 
VIL iii. 3. x. 4. dxpareveoOou VII. 
iii. 10,14. dkparevduevos VIL, ii. 2. 
axparevouevous VIL. iii. 8. 

dxparys IIL. ii. 4. V. ix. 4,6. VL ix. 4. 
VIL i. 6. ii. 5,10, 11. iii, 1, 2, 12. 
iv. 1,3. vi. 1. vii. 1,8. viii. 1,2, 5 
ix. 1, 4, 5,7. x. 2, 3. IX viii. 6. dx 
parovs J. xiii. 15. VIL. vii. 3. ix. 5. 
dxpare? VIL. vii. 4. ix.3. depary VIL. 
i. 6. ii. 3. iii, 11. iv. 4,6. v. 5. x 1,2. 
dxparets IV. i. 8. VIL i. 7. iii. 7. iv. 
2. v. 4. viii. 3.x. 2; 4 Eaves 
dxparev I. xiii. 15. d«paréot I. iii. 7. 

axpates III. v. 14. 

axpiBhs VILLI. vii. 5. adxpsBes I. iii. 1, 4. 
IL. ii. 4. dxpiBets ILL iii. 8. depsBe- 
orepov II. vii. 5. axpiBeorépa IL. vi. 9. 
dxpiBeordrn VI. vii. 2. axpiBeordros 
VI. vii. 1. 

axptBeay I. vii. 18. 

dxpiBodixatos V. x. 8. 

dxptBoroyta IV. ii. 8. 
VL. iii. 2. 

d«piBos II. ii. 38. VIL iii. 3. IX. ii, 2. 
X. ix. 16. 

axpoduara X. iii. 7. 

d«poatns I, iii. 5. dxpoarod I. iii. 8. X. 
ix. 6. 

&cpos IV. iii. 8. &xpor II. vi. 20. viii. 7. 
V. v.12. &«por II. vii. 8. viii. 3. IV. 


dxp{Beas X. iv. 3. 


axptBoroyeiabat 


iv. 6. &«par II. viii. 1. &«pov LL. vi. 
5. vii. 10. ix. 3. IV. v. 1. Vive47. 


&«pa IL. vii. 11. IV. iv. 4. vi. 9. 
&pors IL. viii. 4,5. &«epous IL. viii. 1. 
axpéraroy I. iv. 1. 

dxpotns II. vi. 17. 

&rpws II. ix. 4. 

dxpoxeipiCouevor III, i. 17. 

axpéxodo IV. v. 9. 

&upa VIL. ix. 3. 

dAafovela II. vii. 12. IV. vii. 15, dAao- 
vetas LY. vii. 1. 

dAaCovevduevor LV. vii. 13. dAaCovedovrat 
IV. vii. 13. 

dAagoundy LV, vii. 15. 

dvaev II. vii. 12. III. vii. 8. IV. vii. 
2, 6, 11, 12, 17. 

daas VIII. iii. 8 

aayev II y. 7. Gaye IX. iv. 9. @A- 
yodor IIL. viii. 12. 

éAyewdy II. ix. 3. 

aadyniddvos III. niga 11, 12. 

éAéas VIL. iv. 

GAelrrns IL. Ky 2. 


INDEX VERBORUM. Vv 


&aAfGea LU, vii. 12. VI. ii. 2, 3, 6. ix. 3. 
GAnOelas I. vi. 1. IV. iii. 28. VI. ii. 1. 
aAnGeia IV. iii. 16. V.v. 11, 15. IX. 
ii. 5. GAnOey I. vi. 1. xiii. 2. IIT. 
iv. 4. v. 17. IV. iii. 20. viii. 12. ix. 5. 
Os | Fas 

GAndeder IV. vii. 7. VIL iii. 1. GAnOedouev 
VI. vi. 2. GAn@edovor IX. viii. 3. ix. 
4. GAnOedew VI. vii. 3. VII. ix. 4. 
GAnbedwy IV. vii. 8. GAnNOevovros IV. 


vii. 7. GAnSedorvtes X. ii. 5. GAn- | 


Oevovrwv IV. vii. 1. GAndevoe LV. 
vii. 8. VL. ii. 6. 

GAnGevtixds IV. vii. 1. GAnGevtieg IV. 
vii. 17. GAn@evtixov LV. vii. 6. 

aAnOhs II. vii. 13. ix. 7. GAnOes IL. vii. 
Ata. TV. vii. 6G: Vii. 2. Vil. xiv. 
3. IX. viii. 9. ix. 5. X. viii. 12. aAn- 
Ocis X. 1.2. GAnOods IV. vii. 9. VI. 
iv. 3,6. xi. 1. GAnOe? VIL ix. 1. xiv. 
2. X. vii. 2. &AnOR IIL. v.17. VI. 
ii. 2. v. 6. VIL. iii. 3. 

GAnOwh UI. vy. 17. GAn@weérepa IL. 
vii. 1. 

aAneas IV. iii. 14, 22. V. ix. L. VI. i. 3. 
VIIL iv. 3.. TX. x. 6. X ix. 3, 4, 6. 

éAqtn IV. iii. 3. 

Gus I. v. 6. xiii. 14. IX. xi. 5. X. i. 4. 

aAlonw. éadwndri IX. ii, 4. 

GAxy LIL. vi. 12. 

*AAkuatwva, III. i. 8. 

GAAG kal I. vii. 6. viii. 8. xiii. 6. IL. ii. 
8. iv. 3, 4 vi. 1. vii. 1. III. vi. 11. 
Misee.G: VILiv.2. x. 2. xii 7. 
pawe op Ss, VAIL i.3, 5. iv... xi. 7. 
IX i..8. Xi. 4. iv. 3. viii. 8. ix. 21. 

GAAG pev VI. xiii. 3. 

GAAG why I. vi. 6. viii. 13. IIL. ii. 7. V. 
ii. 2. VI. v. 7, 8. ix. 2,3. VIL ii. 4,6. 
iii, 7. xiii. 1. X. viii. 7. 

Gada ph IIL i. 11. 


GAN’ Hp IV. iii. 27, 29. V. ii. 5. viii. 1, 4. 


ix. 15. VII. vi. 6. 

adAAayh V.v. 10, 11,14, 15,16. adAdayijs 
V. iv. 13. v. 14, 15. 

GAAaktikats V. v. 6. 


&AAdrrovra V. v.13. GAAdtwvra V. v. 


13. 

G\AfAwv II. vii. 11. viii. 4, 5. V. v.11. 
VI. iv. 2. xiii. 6. VII. vii. 3. VIII. 
i... 4. iv. 1, 2: v.-3. vii. 1: -viii: 5. 
x4. IX. xi 3. XX. iv2, d:cv2 2 7; 
GAAHAos IL, viii. 4. VII. v. 2. VIII. 
inG. i. 4. iii. 1,6: iv. 1, 4. veoKk? vi 
1, 4, 7. viii. 6. ix. 2. xii.3, 7. xiii. 4. 





IX. vi. 3. x. 4. xii. 3. GAAHAs II. 
viii. 1. Viv. 12. GAAnAous V. vi. 4. 
VIIL. iii. 1, 9. iv. 2, 3. viii. 5. xii 3, 
G.xib. 22° TX. an. 4-- vied; 4. ‘xii./3. 
X. viii. 1. G@AAHAas IL. vii. 11. VII. 
x. 5. &AAnAa II. viii. 4. V. iv. 2. 
xi; 9) VEE si?) VIER i 3) oe 
iv. 8. 


BAdos I. vi.8. IV. i. 14. VII. viii. 5. 


IX. iv. 4,5. X.ix.15. &AA7 I. xiii. 
15.) Vi. ci.3; 6.) -GAAe bi. 5: aves; 
vi..10, 12. vii. 2,4, 5. i. 2; 9.. xi.'6. 
KHL 15; 2112.1. 8: .ILEav.'S; -v: 
7.21%. '6. (TV. vi.9:- vin. 7... “Viiv. 2- 
x. 1,2. xi.4. VL v.3. vii. 1,2, 9. 
Hols VEE i 2. ve 9) vi GeV 
iii. 3. viii. 6. xiii. 7. IX. iv. 5. viii. 
G.. x1. 2) Son: Si. 4: “vi. 2: vin 3. 
&Adou Liv. 7. v. 8. IL. iv. 2. V. ix. 
Bat Wee eas fo VER WIL 4s 
vii. 9. &AAns I. vi. 13. ix. 3. III. v. 
15. IV. vii. 7. VIL xii. 6. &AAw 
Livi: 125 vss? Ti av,.52 hve vik 
te Vit V7. We 118 GANG. vil. 2: 
&AdAov I. vi. 8. x. 1. IV. iii. 29. viii. 
$2.9 Veo 1S. ne IO Vo 7; 182. ie 
2. Vi. xi 1. VEL in. 7. VIL. ix. 3. 
IX. viii. 1. &AAnv I. xiii. 11. ILI. iii. 
A. VV.i18;,35.> Vil. a5 35. vine 
8. viii. 1. &AAo: Liv. 8. II. ix. 4. 
III. viii. 6. IV. iii. 28, 31. VIII. i. 6. 
vi. 5. IX. xii. 2. &AdAa I. i. 4. vii. 
21. IL ie vii-6,01. Villoix5: 
HAAG Ei. 1. xii. 5. IL. iii. 5. iv. 3. 
Wi 03. ins 4e i 2. xn Se TV 
92. Vivi. 8: x: 1. Vin: ‘4. vir 
4. VII. ii. 10. VIII. iv. 3. IX. iv. 8. 
X. v. 4. vii. 7. viii. 1. &AA@v L ii. 7. 
viii. 12. xii. 2. TLi. 4. ii, 7, 8. vii. 
ll. viii. 3. IIL iii. 15. iv. 4. v. 16. 
xi. 6, 8. IV. i. 21. iii. 21. viii.10. V. 
ii. 12. iv. 12. v. 9,18. vi. 2. vii. 4. 
VLi.l. vi. 4. VIE i. 5. 0. 4. 11. 1. 
VIII. vii. 2. ix. 2. xiii. 10. IX.9. X. 
iii. 10. v.2, 4. vii. 4. viii. 4,8. ix. 18. 
&AAas I. vii. 19. viii. 6. IIL. v. 9. viii. 


<6h 859. Vave 18: Vie-vi:7. x1. 2; 


WEE: Vis. 7s. Vili, 7, 01%5/2.° X31. 75. ik AVe 
3. v.4. &AdAas VIIL ix.1. X.ix. 18. 
&AAous I. x. 18. Til. x. 6. IX. viii. 
75ixa5. X35, 18;, GaAdas Won. 2: 
wide SiL-v. 6; x52: 2Vi1v76. V: 
1E45-.1.- VEL 2: VER. 2: 5-21, 
5. X. in-2. 


Baws L. vii. 21. viit. 9. ix. 1. IL i. 2. 


vl INDEX 


UO Vets vole. WWaVike lod. Wierd: 
D516; cll. 2 Vee geG.) Vet) Or Vis Agnes 
Vilos Gs Viele XG xaos 

&AAws Te Kal I. vi. 1. x. 2. IV. iii, 30. 
PX XI 3e eX 2s EK: Be 

BAAOM IL. vii, 16. 

&AAote III. iii. 5. VILL iii. 3. TX. iv. 
5. 

adrAAowwOevra IX. iii. 3. 

GAAodTepov IX. iii. 5. 

@AAdtprat VIL. xii. 5, X.v. 5. dGAAd- 
gpiov I. xiii. 14. IV. 1.9, 17. V. vi. 6. 
dddotpiov IV. i. 39. dAAoTpidTEpa 
VIIL. viii. 7. dAAoTpibrepor VILL. xii. 
4, 

dAdyorot VIL. v. 6. 

&aoyov I. xiii. 9,18. IIL v.13. V. xi. 
9, VI.i.5. dAdyou I. xiii. 11. dAdy@ 
IX. viii. 4. &Aoya IIL. i. 27. X. ii. 1. 
GAdyev IIT. ii. 3. x. 1. GAdyws LV. i. 
2). TX. ‘vii. 2. 

*AAdrn VII. vii. 6. 

éAdxou X. ix. 13. 

GaAcis X. iv. 8. 

ddumig IX. xi. 4. dAvmlay VIL. xii. 7. 

&Avumos IL xii. 8. &Avmwoy IV. i. 13. 
VII. xii. 4, 7. &Auwo: IV. vi. 1. X. 
Hil. Ts 

advros LV. i. 18. 

dAvorreaés VIII. xiv. 4. 

Gua IIL. v.23. vi. 12. IV. i. 8, 24, 34. 
V. viii, 2. xi. 4,5. Viiixs 3: :xili: 6. 
VIL ni. 9. x. 1. VER. mipdy aey2: 
vi. 2, 6. ix. 3. xii. 8. xiv3i 4.0 1X. 
av. LO. viu.-5. :x.'5:. Ss wid. 

duadhs VILL. viii. 6. duade?s VIL ix. 3. 

auaprdavovot II. i. 5. Ill. xi. 3, 4. IV. 
i144. V. viii, 12. VIL vi.1. duap- 
tavovtes V. viii. 8. duaptdywy VI. v. 
7. tdpravey VI. xiii. 3. fuaprev 
V.x. 5. Guaprdvew II, vi. 14, 18. ix. 
Be Ve ve 4. ix. 3.0 VILE. vila 5: 
Gpaprdavetat II. vi. 12,20. auaprdvo- 
pbevoyv V.x 4. Guaptnoducba II. ix. 
6. duaprndévra III. 1.26. amaprdver 
IV. v.13. V. viii.7. VI. ix. 3. tap- 
Thmévot LV. iii. 35. Tuaprnuévn VIII. 
x. 4. 

audptnua V. viii. 7. x.4. Guaprhuaros 
V. x. 6. Guaprhuara V. viii. 6. 

auaptnzicos II. iii, 7. 

Gmaptia VI. viii 7. ix. 8. VIL. iv. 2. 
auaptias III. xii. 5. Guapriay IIL. i. 
14. duapriy III. vii. 4. 

duaupovta X. iv. 9. 





VERBORUM. 


dmetWao@ar IX. ii. 5. 

duelvwy II. vi. 9. VIII. x. 5. xiii. 1. 
&uewwoy Ill. ii. 14. IX.x.4. X, vii. 
9. ix.19. duelvorr VILL. xi. 4. duelvw 
VIII. vii. 2. 

duéAeay III. v. 15. 

dueAhoer IV. i. 17. dueAdodvrres X. vi. 3. 

duetaxivhtws I. iv. 3. 

duetameAnros VIL vii.2. IX. iv. 5. 

duhxavov VIL. iii. 7. 

duryets X. iii. 2. 

GuiAAwpévwy VIII. xiii. 2. IX. viii. 7. 

duyhuoves IX, vii. 1. 

dpoiBh IX. i. 1, 9. duorBhy IX. i. 7. 

dudverou VILL xiii, 2. 

duvytixds LV. v. 6. 

duidetious V. vii. 4. 

duptaroyov VILL. xiii. 6. 

dupicByret VIL. ii. 2. dupicBnrovow I. 
iv.2. dupicBnte@ow V.iv.7. dudio- 
Bnreiv IV. iv. 4. dudioBnreira V. 
viii. 9. [Xl ix. 1. X. viii. 5. duqio- 
Byrnréov III. v. 5. 

dupicBarnos L. vi. 8. dudioBarnow I. 
x. 38. DL i. 4.:°Ve wink eee 
xili; 10: 2\X2i5 2: 9a: 

dupérepo IV. i. 43. vii. 6. V. v. 18. 
VIL. ix. 7. dupdrepa IL. vi. 10. IV. 
i, 24. iv. 5. ix. 2.) VE xi See 
vill. 8. duporépas V.v. 12. VIL. iii. 
6. ix. 5. dupotépwy V. ix. 8. VI. 
ii. 6. 

&popw IL. vi. 13. viii. 4. TDL. i. 26. viii. 
18, ix. 2. IV.i. 24. “ai aomae 1. 
V. ii. 6. vii. 4. x. 1. xi, 7. VIL. vii. 7. 
VIL. xii. 4. VIII. v.4, vi. 5. x. 2. 
IX. ii, 1. ix. 5. XX. ii. 5. upow Ts 
viol. V.x.2. VIL di..6. 2VERp meee 
VUL vi. 4,7. xii. 7. IX. i. 38, 8. vi. 
2. vill, 2. xi. 1) 6. -- KG Bee 
4, 5. 

ay cum infin. IIL. ii. 8. 
i As 

&y pro éay IIL. viii. 11. V. viii. 2, 10, 
11. VI. xii. 9. VIL vi. 1. © VELL ai. 
8: viii. 2. 

ave III. viii. 10. 

avaBoAny VIII. xiii. 6. 

dvorynd¢ew WL.i. 11. dvoryedCover IIL 
viii. 4.  dvarynaCduevoy V. viii, 4. 
dvarykaCouevous III. viii. 4. avary- 
kagovrot LL.i. 9. IV. i. 84. TX i. 
7. dvarykdoavra IIL. i. 8. dvayKac- 
Gor 1V. i. 39. dvaryKnacOjva IILK. i. 
8. dvaryxacdévras III. i. 9. 


cum indie. Y. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


dvarynactixny X. ix. 12. 

dvayxatov I. ix. 7. I. ii. 1. iii. 9. IIL 
i1. IV.i 17. i110. iii. 28. xii. 4. 
VIL vi.:2.. xi. 2: xii 2. - VIE © 5. 
1X. i. 8. X.ix.12. Gvoryrai¢ IX. ii. 
2, 5. dvayxaia VII. vii. 2. xiv. 2. 
X. vi. 2. Gvaryxatas VII. xiv. 2. 
avarynaia LV. viii. 1. V. viii. 8. VII. 
iv. 2. dvaykaier IV. iii. 32. VIL. 
iv. 4. X. vii. 4. viii. 4. dvayxadrepov 
VILE. xii. 7. IX. xi. 1. avayxa:dtatov 
WEL i. 1. 

avarynny II. iii. 7. Vii. 5. iii. 4. viii. 10. 
x. 3. xi.4. VI. iv. 6. v.6. VIL ii. 
9. vii. 2. xii. 3. xiii. 1. dvaynns I. 
viii. 9. Ill iii. 4. VI. iii. 2. iv. 4. 
v. 3. vi. 1. X. iii. 12. dvaynn V. iii. 
5. X.ix. 6. dvdyxny III. viii. 5. 

Gvaryparyat I. vii, 17. 

Gvdryera: IX. ix. 7. dvarydyy IIL iii. 17. 
évaryaryetv III. v. 6. 

avaGijpara LV. ii. 11. 
15. 

avaipew I. vi. 1. dGvaipet X. ii. 3. ava- 
povot IX. iv. 8. dvaipav X. ii. 4. 
avercv VIL. ii. 12. avnpoivro V. iv. 
3.28... 9; 

avaic@nota II. viii. 6. III. xi. 8. 

Gvaic@nros II. ii. 7. vii. 3. viii. 2. dvao- 
@qrov lil. v, 12. avaic@nroyr IL. viii. 
2. 

évaroxuvtia II. vi. 18. 

avaloxuvros II. vii. 14. 

avaxuxdrciobat I. x. 7. 

avodaBévres I. iv.1. IIL. v.23. 
Bovor X. iv. 1. vi. 1. 
v. 14. 

avadynotay I. x. 12. 

avdadynros III. vii. 7. 

Gvarione: IV. ii. 20. Gvadrioxey IV. i. 
22, 25, 34. ii. 20. GvadfoKkovres IV. 
1.35. dvddwoe IV.i.27. dvardoa 
IV. ii.21. dvadr@oa IV. ii. 20. dva- 
Adoas IV. i, 22. ii. 21. 

avodoyla V. iii. 8,14. dvadroylas V. v. 
12, dyvadoylay I. vi. 12. V. iii. 13. 
iv. 2, 3, 9. v. 6, 8, 18. vi. 4. 

dvadoyov II. i, 6. viii. 3. V. iii. 8, 12, 
14. iv. 2. v.6, 18. vi 6 viii. 11.— 
VIL iv. 6. VIIL. vi. 6. vii. 2. xii. 7. 
IX.i. 1. dvdaoya V. iii. 9. 

evadvew III. iii. 11. 

dvadvoe LIT. iii. 12. 

dvadutikots VI. iii. 3, 4. 

dvaudprnrov VIII. i. 2. 


évabjuact IV. ii. 


EV: 1x27: 
III. vi. 3. 


avada- 


avaraBeiv III. 





Vil 


dvapévovert VIL vii. 8. 

dvapipvhoKkovra IX. iv. 9. 

dvduynots III. x. 5. ; 

*Avataydpas X. viii. 11. *Avataydpay 
VI. vii. 5. 

*Avatavipiins VII. x. 3. 

avagios IV. iii. 6. dvdgior IV. iii. 35. 
avagia X. viii. 7. 

dvagkiws II. vii. 15. 

avaradw Liv. 5. WII. i. 7. IV. vii. 3. 
Vii 15.29; 073- VER xn. 10. xiv. 
Ve, EX vil).6; xi.:6; 


avamavots IV. viii. 11. VII. vii. 7. X. 
vil. 6. dvanmatcews IV. viii. 1. X. 
vil. 6. dvamatoce: X. vi. 6. avarat- 


oes VIII. ix. 5. 

dvamAnpwots III. xi. 3. X. iii. 6, 7. 
dvardnpécews X. iii. 6. advawAnpaécer 
X. iii. 6. dvarAtpwow X. iii. 6. 

avamAnpovpévns VII. xii. 2. 

avamodelxtas VI. xi. 6. 

dvacrpéper@ar II. i. 7. 

dvarxiCovoay VII. v. 2. 

avacaoa IX. iii. 3. 

avabqjoer III. viii. 2. 

avatod@y III, iii. 4. 

avapépwy 1V. vi. 6. dvapéportes III. v. 
18. dvapépecOa I. xii. 5. dvage- 
pera IV.ii. 12. IX i. 2. dvagepd- 
pevot I. xii. 3. 

avapopas I. xii. 3. 

"Avdxapow X. vi. 6. 

avaxwpect X. viii. 5. 

avipdmodov VIL. ii. 1. X vi. 8. 
wédy X. vi. 8. 

dvipawoiades 1V. v. 6. dvbpamodadous 
IV. viii. 5. dvipawodddas I. v. 3. 
HE s58.-21.3. 

evBpela I. ii. 7. vii. 2. IIT. vii. 6, 13. 
viii. 6, 11, 12. ix. 1, 2. dvdpetas II. 
ii. 7, 9. vi. 20. IIL. v. 23. vii. 8. ix. 
7. xi. 5. dvdpeig IL. viii. 6, 7. av- 
Speiay I. iii. 3. IL. viii. 5. IIL. vii. 6. 
viii. 6, 10. ix. 3, 4. 

avdpetos II. iii. 1. viii. 2. ILI. vi. vii. 
Wis.9; ix-1;.4... V.x: 16: 1X; ¥. 4. 
X. vii. 4. avdpetou J. xiii. 17. IIL vii. 
13. viii, 14. V. i. 14. dvdpei IIT. 
vi. 3. vii. 6. ix. 4. X. viii. 4. adv- 
dpetov I. xii. 2. IL. viii. 3. ILL. viii. 
5. avdpeto II. i. 4,7. ii. 9. III. vii. 
12. viii. 1, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17. 
ix. 2. VL xiii. 1. X. iii. 2. dvdpeta 
IL i.. 4, HE viii. 12.. X. viii: 1. 
dvSpetovs III. ix. 6. X. viii. 7. dv- 


dvipa- 


vil 


dpecorépov III. viii. 15. advdpecdrara 
III. viii. 1, 8. 

dvSpiavromowy VI. vii. 1. 

dvSpi(ovrar IIL. vi. 12. 

dvdpopovia II. vi. 18. 

avdpa5n IV. iv. 4. avdpwdes II, ix. 7. 
IV.v.13. 1X. xi. 4 

avipwhéevras X. ix. 9. 

dvéyxaAntoat IX. i. 7. 

dvé5nv VII. viii. 5. 

avéxmAnkros III. vii. 2. 

aveAevdepta II. vii. 4. IV. i. 3, 29, 37, 
44, dyvedevdeplas IV. i. 38. dvedev- 
Geptay IV. i. 8. V. ii. 2. 

dveAevOepos II. vii. 4. viii. 2. dvedcv- 
Oépov IV. i. 31,32. dvededOepov IV. 


ii, 18. dvededOepor IV. i. 33, 43. 
dvedev0épwy IV. i. 43. dvedevbepous 
IV. i. 37, 40, 42. 

dveumddioros VII. xiii. 2. dveumddiorov 
VII; xit.S: xnt.\2: 

dvemurthuova X, ix. 16. dvemorhmoct 
D.Gb 20 UE 

avemittunrov VII. xiv. 5. 

dvepevyntov X. ix. 22. 

&vev I. vii. 14. viii. 6. x. 11, Il v. 4. 


IV. iii. 11, 16, 20. v.11 vi. 5. V. iii. 
3. vii 7. xi. 6;.7, VI. il,.4.. ville 4. 
ix. 2,3. xii.10. xiii. 1,2, 3,6, 7. VII. 
xii. 2. xiv. 7. VIIL i}... EX. iii. 4. 
X. iv. 1. viii. 9. ix. 21, 

avéxeoOar IV. v. 6. 

dveyiot VIII. xii. 4. 

dviyyyeaaAor III. iii. 18. 

avice VII. i. 7. dvnkovra IX. vi. 2. 

évhp Liv. 7. Voi 11. VOL 1 8..Me2; 
VIII. x. 5. IX. iii, 4. dvdpds I. vii. 
14y Wie xii Ue VIE de. Vile x, 
HeeXis Aye Nese Mil, 1K. 12s,  GuOph Ve 
Helle. VIL. vil. Ls: xii: 75/85 LX 16. 
&vdpa V. x. I. VII.i. 3. VILL. vii. 1. 
x. 5. &vdpes I. viii. 7. UX. xi. 4. 
avipov I. xii. 4. dvipdor X. vi. 4. 
&vSpas I.vi. 1. VIII. i. 5. 

avbextéov IV. v. 14. 

avOpdxwv VII. v. 3. 

avOpmmem X. iv. 9. ix, 22, 

avOpwreverOat X. viii. 6. 

avOpwmrkdy V. viii, 12. VIII. xiv. 4. 
avOpwrikh Il. xi. 7. GvOpwrig IX. 
Vii. 1. dvOpwrikis I. xiii. 14. &vOpw- 
mal X. viii. 1,3. GvOpwrind III. i, 
27. X. villi. 1. GvOpwmindy III. iii. 
6. dvOpwmrixerepov IV. v. 12. 

avOpwmvos I. ix. 9, GvOpamwwor I, ii. 7. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


vil. 15.. xiii. 5. Vi itt 1722 ails 
dvOpwrivns I. xiii. 5. GvOpwmlvy I. 
xiii. 12. dvOpwriynv I. xiii. 5,6. IIL. 
i. 7. VIL v. 8. dv@pwrivoey I. ix. 2. 
x. 10. X. vic 1. viii, 7. GvOpemwa 
V. vii. 5. VIv: 6. ¥ii. 6,6... Sei 
8. avOpémwa VIL. vi. 6. 

avOpwrordyos IV. iii. 30. 

tivOpwmros I. vi. 5. vii. 6. II. vi. 8. IIL. 
iii. 15. vii. 2. xi. 7. V. viii. 3. VIL 
ii. 5. vii. 8, 4. xii. 1. VII. iii. 6. iv. 
2. vii. 7. xiv. 8. VIIL i. 3. xi. 7. xii. 
7. IX. viii. 6. ix.3. X. vii. 8,9. viii. 
6. dvOpémov I. vi. 5, 16. vii. 10, 11, 
14. IL, vi,.8, 101.27. ak VE 
vii. 4. Row Sp 1B Vib. Tetweds 
évOpémw I. vi. 5,13. vii. 10. IIL. viii. 
14. VI. v. 4. vii. 6, xii. 1. VIL iii. 
6. vii. 7. VITL 1. '8:) sikSetaeteie 
1X. ix. 7. X. vii. 7,9. viii. 8. &v6pw- 
mov I, x. 8. III. v. 5. vii. 1. V.vi. 5. 
VIL. v. 2, 8. vii. 7, X. vii. 8. Go 
Opwrot III. i. 8. viii. 12. x. 10. Ve i. 
9. ix. 14. VIIL. iv. 4. xii.7. GvOpd- 
mov I. x. 1. III. iii. 7. VIL. i. 2, 3. 
v. 1,.2.. vi. 6., xiv..40° [SSaeeaex. 
3. X.v.9, 10. viii. 18. ix. 12. év- 
Opémras I. ix. 2. IV. 1.37. ii, 16. V. 
viii. 8. VI. vii. 4. VIE i. 3. iii, 7. 
VILL. i. 3. xii. 5. X. viii. 8. GvOpa- 
mot VII. x. 4. avOpémous I. x. 16. 
It.i.,7... VI, xii 6; 

dvOumnperety IX. x. 2. avOumnperijioa 

ONG te Fe 

dviaros IV. i. 87. VII. vii. 2. viii. 1. 
dvuidros IX, iii. 3. dvidrouvs X. ix. 
10. 

avdatws V. ix. 17. 

dvinot VI. i. 1. dvemévn X. iii, 3. 
dvemmévos II. v. 2. : 

&vnoos V.4.11. iii. 1. dvicov V. iii. 1, 
3. &vuoov V.i.8. ii. 8,9, 12. iii. 1. 

- iv. 1,3, 4. Soo VILL. viii. 5. troa 
V. iv. 4, 8. dvicos VIII, xiv. 3. 
dvisovs VIIIv xiii. 1. 

dvénros IV. iii. 8. dvonr@ IIL. xii. 7. 
dvénra X, ii. 4, 

dvouowoedéor IX. i. 1. 

dvonodrepov II. viii. 7. 

dvouodrys II. viii. 5. dvowodrnta VII. 
vi. 7. } 

dvdynros I. iii. 7. 

dvémdors III. viii. 8. 

dvopynata II. vii. 10. 

dvdpytoros IIL. vii. 10. 


= 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


évoo.oupyay IX. iv. 7. 

dvramodiig IV. v. 10. dvramodidwor 
VIUl. v. 5. dvramrodotva 1X. vii. 1. 
avtamodoréov VIII. xiii. 9. xiv. 3. 
IX. ii. 1, 3, 5. 

dvtamddoois V. v.7. IX.ii. 5. dvtamd- 
doow VIII. xiii. 10. IX. i. 8. dvr- 
amoddceis X. viii. 4. 

dyrevepyetixds LV. iii. 24. 

avrevroeiv X, viii. 13. 

avréxew VII. vii. 4, 6. 

avri ILL. i. 7, 9, 10. ix. 4. xi. 6. IV. v. 
10. V.v. 16. x. i. dv@ oy IX. v. 
3. 

dytiBaivor I. xiii. 16. 

avTiBAdmrrwy V. xi. 2. 

ovribaveioréov IX, ii. 5. 

avtidoow V. v. 8. 

dvtidwpetra VIII. viii. 6. 

avtiatadAdrrovra: VIII. vi. 7. 
karadAatréuevor VIII. iv. 2. 

avrixerrat II. viii. 6. VI. viii. 9. VIL. vii. 


> 
QvTi- 


4. X.ii. 5. Gytixewro I. viii. 1. _ 


éyrixeioOae LV. iv. 6. vi. 9. vii. 17. ix. 
2. X. ii. 5. avticemévos VIL. vii. 2. 
avtiuemevas X. ix. 5. dy ticepevev 
IV. i. 45. V. iv. 3. 

ayTiAaBwr IX. i. 8. 

ayritovy VIIL. i. 6. 

évrindOy VIII. xiii. 8. avrererovdds V. 
v. 1, 2, 6, 8,12. vi. 3. Gyvriwemor- 
Oevac V. v. 12. aGvtimerovOdcr VIII. 
ii. 3. 

aytimAnyivat V. iv. 4. 

aytimoeiv V.v. 6. dvtimolnoe V. v. 6. 

arimoay V. xi. 5. 

gytiteive I. xiii, 15. avtereivovoa VII. 
ii. 4. dyterewotons VIL. ii. 5. avti- 
telvovor VIL. vii. 5. dytireivwy VIL. 
vii. 6. Qvriteivew VIL. vii.6.  a&vturel- 
vovtes IV. vi. 1, 2. 

aytitibewer II. viii. 7. IV.v.12. dyri- 
riderat, IV. iii. 37. avtiriOeuevn VII. 
ee 

avripidodot VIII. v. 5.  Gyripiretra 
IX. i. 2. dvtipirciobat VIIL. viii. 3. 

ayripiAnots VIII. ii. 3. iii. 1. 


fyw IL. i. 2. avdrepoy VIIL i. 6. kvw- 


ev VI. iii. 1. xii. 7. VII. vi. 2. 
avévupos II. vii. 2, 8. Ill. vii. 7. IV. 

iv. 5. vil. 1. Gvwvupa Il. vii. 2, 11. 

Ill. vii. 7. dvwvipouv LY. iv. 4. v.1. 

avevupov IV. v. 1. vi. 9. Gvdvupor II, 

vii. 8. dvwviper II. vii. 10. 
aveperds I. iii. 6. 

VOL. II. 





b 


ix 


&fewos IX. x. 1. 

dtia IV. i. 2. ii. 12. iii. 10,17. V. v. 
15. 1X. 1..5, 7; 9. elas, UT. xi. 8: 
étiav I. x. 4. IV. ii. 3, 13, 19. iii. 3, 
8,11 855 Veni 7. ie 8) Vit vit: 
2, 3. viii. 4. x. 3, 5. xi. 3. xiii. 9. 
X1V.73; 4. 0X52. 15558: 

&kwos IV. iii. 3, 4, 6, 7,9, 14, 15, 17, 35. 
&&iov Ill. ix. 4. IV. ii. 6, 10, 23. 
VIIL. xiv. 4. IX. i. 9. &fsoe IV. i. 
21. iii. 36. VIII. vii. 4. xiii. 4. 

agio? IV. iii. 7,8, 9. VILL. xiii. 7. xiv. 
1. a£iodvres VIII. viii. 6. akcodr II. 
WIS. TVS ii 35... “VIELE -xiv., 2: 
hélwoe VILL. xiii. 9. akidoavras 1X. 
xi. 6. G£todor LV. iii. 11. VIII. vii. 4. 
diiobvra IV. iii, 20. VILL. iv. 3. 
akotvra IV. iii, 19. ako 1V. iii. 
3,4, 6. dfmwréor VIII. viii. 6. 

Gétwua III, viii, 16. IV. ii, 14. iii. 12. 
IX. ii. 5. Gktopata LV. ii. 15. akid- 
part LV. iii. 10, 26. vi. 8. 

agbverot VII. viii. 3. 

dopynota IV. v. 5. 

adpiotos V. x. 7. IX. ix. 8. doplorov 
V. x. 7. adpioroy IV. viii. 7. X. iii. 2. 

&maryopever V. xi. 1. amaryopedwr V. i. 14. 

araypidw. arnypwpevev VIL. v. 2. 

amayovres II, ix. 5. 

amabetas II. iii. 5. 

dmadayaynros LV. i. 36. 

amatdebrou IV. viii. 5. 

amairobyT: IX. i. 4. ii. 4. dmorrntéoy I. 
vil. 20. dmornréor II. ii. 3. 

andveve III. viii. 4. 

amavr@ot VIII. vi. 1. d&mayrgy IX. ii. 7. 

arapvodvra IV. vii. 14. 

Gmapxat VIII. ix. 5. 

amarjoavtt IX. iii. 2. daratrnOy7 IX. iii. 
2. trarnuévor III. viii. 16. 

andrn LI. iv. 5. 

anebav III. v.14. dareBodar X. ix. 10. 

amelracdat VIII. xiv. 4. 

&metpoxaAla IT. vi. 6. LV. ii. 4. 

depos I. iii. 5. &meipoy I. ii. 1. vii. 7. 
IIL, iii. 16. Gwetpou Il. vi. 14. darel- 
po LV. i. 20. 

&répavtov I. xi. 2. 

dméxov IL. vi. 5. améyovra II. viii. 5, 7. 
amexdvra IV.i. 39. dmexéoGat I. ii. 
7. ILL. ix. 4. a&wexdueda II. iii. 1. 
dmexduevos IL. ii. 7. iii. 1. IV. viii. 
10. dmrexduevor IX, iy. 9. 

amotoortes III. iii. 10. 

&mAnotos III. xii. 7. 


Xx 

amdy VIL v. 5. xiv. 8. amdodv V. ix. 
9. adn VIL. xiv. 8. 

amwa@s I, iii, 5. iv. 5. vii. 4,14, xi. 5. 
Il. iii, 5. v. 8, 5. vi. 14, 18. vil. 16. 
IIL. i. 5, 6, 10. vi. 2. V. i. 9, 10, 15, 
205 Al, -Lisaiv..O:. Vs 15.08; vied: 6, 8. 
ix. 4, 9, 17. x. 1, 5, 6. xi. 4,7. VI. 
li. 5. lil, 2. ‘vil 6.:X. 7, XUL:G. WIL. 
Tee WNT Ses as oe an Oe 


ViswOe Ville Di. 1®e hs: Ss toe Ket kg ls 
xin. U,'2; VIL it. 2. ili... 6; 2. ave 5: 
Veg lca, 


amd. ap’ abrov IX. viii. 1. 

amoBaivovar LY. vi. 8. 
vil. 2. dmroBatvovtos L. vii. 5. 
Bhoerou III. iii. 10. 

&moBaAAerau III. i. 5. 

aroBAérwy VI. i. 1. 

amoPoAyy III. vi. 4. 

anoywookw. gmeyvexact IIT. vi. 11. 

amoydvous I. vii. 7. amoydverv I. x. 8. 
xi.. 7. 

amodextixy VI. iii. 4. 

amodektov VI. vi. 1. 
Vi, 1: 

amddeéts VI. v. 8. Gmodeitews VI, v. 38. 
amodettw VI. vi. 1. Garodelfers I. iii. 
4. VI. xi. 4, 6. VIL iii, 8. daro- 
deitewv VI. xi. 6. 

amodéxerOat I. iii, 4. dmrodéxerat LV. vi. 
5. amodexduevoe VIII. v. 3. aaro- 
déxovrat IX. viii. 7. amodéxnrat IX. 
iii. 3. amodetera LV. iii. 17. vi. 8, 7. 
anodetacOuu VILL. iii. 8. &modexréoy I. 
iii. 8. iv. 8. X. viti. 12. 

érodtSouev IL. i. 4. VIL vii. 1. daro- 
didwor ll. vi, 2. VIII. x. 5. amrodiidacr 
Liv. 2. IV. v. 8. dmod:ddvra V. viii. 
4, VIII. xiv. 3. dmodiddvras X, viii. 
7. awod:ddéva II. i. 8, IX. ix. 1. arro- 
dwoet Il. vi. 8. dmrodécev VIII. xiii. 
9. drodoln V. viii. 4. VIII. xiv. 4. 
dmodouva III. i. 10. IV. v.18. dao- 
Sedwxévar 1X. i. 4. amodoréov VIII. 
xiii, 9,11. xiv. 4. IX. ii. 3, 4,5, 6 
amodéborat LY. vi. 4. 

amobavaréoy III. i. 8. 

drobynoktev III. i. 4. drobdvy I. x. 2. 
V. iv. 4. dmodaveiy III. vi. 2. -V. xi. 
8. admoOvhonev IIIT. vii. 13. Vz viii. 
2. amoOvjcke: IIL. viii. 9. 


amoBaivov VII. 
airo- 


amrodextav VI. 


aroxadovot IX. viii. 1. cdmoxadotvtTes 
Me axe 7s 
amoxAlvet IV. vii. 19. dmrorAlvover IV. 


i. 35. dmoxAlivovcay IV. v. 1. dmo- 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


kAlvew IL, ix. 9. X. i. 8. dmoxArréov 
EX. 11,/8, 
amwoxtelvae IIL, i, 17. 
54 at I 
dnédavois IV. vii. 13. _ dwédavoer IIL. 
ix. 9. amédavow VII. vi. 1. daro- 
Aatoes VII. iv. 3. 
dmodavoTikoy I. vy. 2. 
amodavew VIII. xiv. 1. éd&modatwr II. 
ii. 7. amoraboee X. vi. 8. 
awodundvrwy IX. iii. 1. 
andddvot IV. v. 7. amore IV. ii. 21. 
anédovro I, iii, 8. dardéddvrat VIL. 
xiii. 5. dmroAAvmevos IV. i. 5. 
arodoydupnevos VII. vi. 2. 
awodvdéyros VILL. iii. 3. 
dmopdtrovrat IX. xii. 3. 
amouvnuovevew LY, iii. 30. 
urovéue: IX. v. 3. viii. 6,9. dmovéuouer 
IV. iii. 10. dmovéuovor VIII. xiv. 3. 
drovéuy VILL. vii. 2. dmovéuwor VILL. 
viii. 3. dmwovéuew IV. iii, 17. IX. ii. 
1, 9. dmrovéuwy IY. vi. 8. dmove- 
povres VIIL ix. 5. dmovéuovras IX. 
vii. 5. ix. 2. dmovetwor X. viii. 7. 
dmoveuerat LY, iii. 15. VILL xi. 2. 
X. vii. 7. d&mroveunréov IX. ii. 7. iii. 5. 
&movov IX. vii. 7. 
dwévralX.v. 3. admévrwy IIL. xi. 8. 
&romavovrat LV. v. 8. 
aromeumduevor II, ix. 6. 
émopetra: I. ix. 1. VILL vii. 6. IX. viii. 
1,2. daropovmévwy V. ix. 4. aHmdper 
Liv. 5. dmophoee I. vi. 5. IL iv. 1. 
V. ix.1. VIL ii. 1.. LX. xi. 2. -dre- 
pndev I. x. 6. hmropndy VII. ix. 1. 
Arépynrat VI. xii.3. Arophoapey VIL. 
viii. 2. 
d&ropnudreyv VILL. i. 7. 
axopta V. x. 2. VIL. ii. 8. 
aj. 81.° WEL. it. 12: 
VW. z.<8,AR. ii: K 
VU. ii. 12. 
&opor I, vi. 16. 
amdppnra III. i. 17. 
amooraréov IX. ii. 10. 
&mosrepetrat III. ix. 4. 


dmwoxtwviva V. 


aropias IV. 
Gmoptay I, x. 4. 
iii, 1. Gmoplas 


“ 
amoorepira 


VIM. ix. 3. dmeorépnoey V. iv. 3. 
VI. x. 1. Gmroorepe? IV. iii. 35. 


amoothpact I. x. 4. 

a&rootoAds LY, ii. 15. 

dmecxediacuévos V.i 14. 

amoaxord ew X. vi. 38. 

a&moreAe II. vi. 2. dawroreAc I. viii. 9. 
dmoreAsctrat LV. ix. 2. VI. xii. 6. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


GmotpemovtTos X. ix. 7. 

anotpipyacOa LI. iii, 8, 

amotuyxdvey III, xi. 6. 
vi. 14, 

amovota III, xi 5. VIII. v. 1. 

dmopatvey X,i. 2. ii. 8. iii, 4. dropai- 
vovres 1. x. 8. admepaiveto X. viii. 11. 
amepyvavto I. i. 1. 

amégacts VI. ii. 2. 

dmopavat VI. iii. 1. 

dmoxwpetv IT. ix. 3. 

ampayyoves VI. viii. 4. 

ampaxretv I. v. 6. 

dmpen? LV. viii. 7. 

dmpoatpera V. viii. 5. 
v. 4. 

dmpoBovtaAcura V. viii. 5. ampoBovdAcvta 
VIL. viii. 2. 

dmpoonyopla VIII. v. 1. 

drw0ovvra II. viii. 3. 

&p VI. vii. 2. 

po I. iii, 5. vi. 11, 12. vii, 12. viii. 14. 
1.7. 8. iii. 6. vi. 18, 15. ix. 10. IV. 
Hy l4.. Wei. 8. a8. 3). 4,- tit, 5,-8 17, 
12, 14. iv. 7, 10,11, 12. v. 11, 13. 
Wie Gy 9s ies Be Qe ai 2. VE: 7. 
iii. 9) 3,4. v. 4. vii 3. ix. 3. VIL. ii. 
5. VIIL ii. 4. iii, 1. IX. ix. 3, 10. 
X. iii. 6. vi. 6. vii. 9. viii. 7, 13. ix. 23. 

dpa Il. iv. 4. IX. iii. 3, 4. 

apa ye I. x. 2. III. ii. 17. 

Gp obv I. ii, 2, VIII. xiii. 11. IX. ii. 2. 
hi Sav. Yicx. 1 xii. 1. X. ix. 1, 18. 

’Apyetot IIL. viii. 16. 

épyia I. xiii. 13. apylav IX, iv. 8. 

apyov I. vii. 11. IV. iii, 27. apyhv IX. 
v. 3. 

épyvptov Il. ix. 9. IV. vii. 11. V. ix. 
13, 14. IX. i. 6, 7. dpyuplor IV. vii. 
af 

tpeoxos II, vii. 13. IV. vii. 9. &peokor 
IX. x. 6. &pecxo IV. vi.1. apéoxous 
IX. x. 6. 

Gpéonxe: Ill. iv. 4. IV. i. 39. IX. i. 6. 
X. vi. 2. dpéoxovor IX. iv. 7. apé- 
oxovrat IX. xii. 8. dpeokduevos LV. 
1.27. Gpeoxducvor IX. iii. 4. Xv. 4. 
épeoner VIL. ii. 8. VIII. vi. 2, 3. 

dperh) Lv. 5. viii. 6, xiii. 12, 20. TL. i. 
SG. H. 1. iii, 1,3, 6,10, 132 ws 1, 6. 
vit. 145 ix: L. TEE v. 3; 17,193: IV. 
ii, 1, 10. iv. 1. ix. 8. V. i. 15,18, 20. 
Wii. 7. ii. 2. vi 7, 6s WLils SL 7, 
xii. 6, 8. xiii. 1, 2, 4, 5. VIL i. 2. 
viii, 4. VIIL. i. 1. iii. 6. vii. 1. viii. 4. 


drotuxeiy II. 


ampoaperws II. 





52 


Xl 


Kil 7. UX. dvs 2:- Vili 7. Xv.10;. vi: 
4. viii. 2. dperfs I. ix. 8,10. xii. 6. 
xiii. 1, 5,14. Ii. 1. vi. 11, 12, 14. 
Vitis Das Ie Vases cody ceils 
15, 17, 21. vii. 7. ix. 1. V- ic 15, 19. 
Teds LO; eh.) VAG xi: 55, 85. 10c-xill, 1, 
Gove Ville 25 VEU its sv 5s vite 
4, Rill, 2,01. xiv. 25> EX d. 7, 1X.02. 
Tee Meds Wills Or Xs Los, OSs 
éperp I. v. 5. IL. iii, 10. IV. iii, 14. 
V. 1. 15; 18.) Vil. 4.. VIL vii. 
IX. iii. 4. X. viii. 3. dperhy I. v. 6. 
vii. 5, 14,15. viii, 8, 10, 11, 13, 17. 
1x0, Serge. x. 9, VO; TI Ts Zid 
xis 1, .6..-Hovie.l6.) Hiswnio3. ix, 4: 
1V. i. 6, 12, 13. ii 13. iii, 3,21. V. 
175 LOs Ne We -Xie de xUls 62 Vit. xin. 
4.20) VEL ei 2h “VIE, 6: 
VINO” Ki 5 X1hon KUL Fe RMle See Le 
xiv. 3. IX.i. 7,9. v. 4. ix.6. x. 6 
MXil. i. 1,3 915,28. vil. 1, 8, 8: 
viii. 1, 4, 6,10. ix. 8,14. dperal I. 
vi. 3. vii. 15. IL i. 8. iii. 3. v.-8, 4, 
6 TI v.20) x. Viki, 6; 2xiis41. 
xiii. 6. X. viii. 3. dpera@y II. i. 2, 7. 
ii. 7, 9.-iv. 3. vii. 16; TIL v. 1, 21. 
IV. iii. 16. Vii 15,.17.xi 105° VELL. 
v. 1. X. vii. 6. ix. 1. dperats IIL. ix. 
5. IV. ii. 7. Vi v.17. dperas I. xiii. 
20. IL. i. 4. ii. 2. iii, 5. iv. 3. v. 3, 4, 
IV 2Ve(6.-Vilo ks 1X7. Vell L4. VIS 
i. 4. v. 7. xii. 4. xiii. 3, 5,6. VII. ii. 
5, eae VI (6. as 22, Vie: 
vii. 7. viii. 1. 

apOuew, npOunwévov VI. viii. 4. 

apiunticyy II. vi. 7. V. iv. 3, 9. 

GpiOuod V. iii, 8. G&piOu@ V. iii. 14. 
apidudy V. vi. 4. VIL iii, 1. IX. ix. 3. 
épiOuar I, vi. 2. 

apiorelwv I. xii. 5. 

apiorepe I, xiii. 15. 

&poros lV. iii. 14. V. i. 18. aplorn 
V. viii 6. VIL. xiii. 6. VIII. ili. 7. 
&piorrov I. ii. 1. vii. 3,9 vill. 9, 14. 
IXO OMe lin Vin LL Vic, Alle Velias 
VI. vii. 8. xii. 10. VII. xi. 3, 5. xii. 
1. xiii. 2, 5. Xi 1. Gplerov VI. 
vii. 6. X. vi. 8. vii. 1. plore X. 
viii. 18. dptorny I vii. 15. viii. 14. 
ix.6. &pioror X.ix. 16. dploroy I. 
xii. 4. dptoros V.i. 13. VIII. vii. 4. 
aptoras J. viii, 14. dpiorovs IX. 
vi. 2, X. ix. 20. &piora IIL. ii. 14. 
iii, 6. viii, 8. IV. i.6, IX. viii. 4. X. 
iv, 5. viii. 18. ix. 15. 


Xl INDEX VERBORUM. 


apiotoxpatia VIII. x. 1. épioroxpartas 
VILL. x. 3. dpioroxparia VIII. xi. 4. 

épiotoKpatinh VIII. x. 4. dpicroxpa- 
tucol V. iii. 7. 

apret II. iv. 8. d&pkodor IX. x.2. dpxov- 
pevot II. vii. 5. 

apkouvtws I. iv. 7. xiii. 9. 

&priov III, viii. 4. 

Gpud Cer III. ii. 9. IV. ii. 16. vi. 5. ix. 3. 
VIII. x. 5. IX. xi. 6. a&pud or LV. iii. 
15. Gpudgoy VIII. xi. 4. apudcew 
1X. x.2. apudoe V. vii. 4. IX. x. 1. 
X. vii. 9. 

apuoviay VIII. i. 6. 

apudrre: LV. viii. 5 X.ix. 21. apudr- 
rot VII. i. 1. apudrrovra IX. ii. 7. 

apvetoOa LV. vii. 3. 

Gporipa VI. vii. 2. 

aprayn V. ii. 13. 

éppev VII. vii. 6. &pbeor VII. v. 3. 

eppworiay IIL. v. 22. 

aprdopat. ApTjcOa VIII. xii. 2. 

pros IIL. iii. 16. 

aptvovres III. x. 9. 

apxata VIII. ix. 5. apxatwy III. iii. 18. 

dpxy I. iv. 7. vii. 20, 23. IIL. i. 3, 6, 
10, 12, 20. iii. 13,15. v. 8,14. V. 
ie l6oal. Us evil sees Os VL, 
4.0.3 ive 4. -v..6. x1./6. “VIL iti, 2, 
vii. 7. viii. 4, 5. VIII x4. IX. v. 3, 
apxis I. xiii. 4. IIL. v. 14, 22. viii. 9. 
Viva 18. vil. 1s y¥.16: yi, ie Vs, 
4. X.iv. 1. Gpxfi I. ix. 8. IV. ii. 6. 
VIII. ix. 1.-xili. 1,9. IxX.i 15 35.5. 
apxiv I. xii. 8. III. iii, 17. v. 5. Vi 
Vi. 4. vi... VIniy. 4;-x0i. 7,10; VIL 
i. 1. vi. 7. viii. 4. Ki i 1. dpyxat 
DTS v6, Visi: 6s ti 82.4.-veG;, ‘vi. 
Me vii, 6; xt. 45 VEE ea BS Xe 
vill. 3. &px@v I. iv. 5. vii. 21. VIL 
vi. 2. vii. 3. viii, 4. dpxas I, iv. 5, 
6. vii. 20. I. ii.'3. IHS v. 6.-Vi, 
vii. 8. xi. 6. xii. 10. VIL. vi.6. VIII. 
ie Deeks 8.) UX. vis 2.-yuig 10: 

apxnyov VIII. xii. 4. 

apxWedpp IV. ii. 2. 

apxicov VIII. xi. 2. 

apxirextovixh, VI. vii. 7, viii, 2. dpxt- 
textovikys I. ii, 4. apxirexrovinav 
Li. 4. 

épxtrextwyv VII. xi. 1. 

épxovort VIII. vii. 1. x. 8, 5. Spt V. 
v.7. &pxe V. viii. 9. VI. ii. 5. xii. 
3, VIIL x. 5. &pxewr IV. v.18. V. 
Vir Ore Vile Kile GS. VIII. Sh, -, ane 





vi. 2. X. vii. 1. &pxerOu V. vi. 9. 
&pxov V. i. 16. vi. 5. VIIL x. 6. 
&pxovTt V.i. 17, xi. 9. VILL. vii. 1. 
xi. 6. &pxovra V.v. 4. &pxov III. 
xii. 7. apxévrwy III. viii. 4. VIII. 
x. 3. &pxovras X. viii. 10. &peréov 
Liv. 5. VI. xii. 7. ap&dwevor VI. iii. 
1. X. ix. 23. dpxduevoy VIII. vii. 1. 
apxouevy II. vi. 7. V. xi. 9. VILL 
xi. 5. apxouévov VIII. x. 2. apxome- 
vas VIII. x.2. &pxouévous VIIL vii. 1. 

aoeBets IV. i. 42. 

ao0éver VIL. vii. 8. d&oOéveray III. v. 
15. VILE 4. :2: 

&cOevyns VIII. x. 6. dobeve? X. y. 9. 
aaGevets LY. iii. 26. VIL ii. 6. 

doweorépa VII. vi. 7. 

aowria X. ix. 15. 

&oxnors IX. ix. 7. 

aoxnroy I, ix. 1. 

aomiba V. ii. 2. ix. 16. 

aoa VI. ii. 6. 

aareiot LY, iii. 5. 

aovumerpor ILI. iii. 3. 

acuveota VI. x. 1. 

aovvérous VI. x. 1. 

aovvnbes IV. vi. 5. 

aoparas I. x. 3. 

aoxnuovety III. xii. 3. 

aoxnuootyny IV. vi. 7. 

acxhwoves IV, ii, 22. 
IV. vii. 11. 

&oxordos X. vii. 6. &orxoAo X. vii. 6, 7. 

aoxorovucba X. vii. 6. 

aowrta II. vii. 4. IV. i. 8,29. dowrlas 
IV. i. 80, 37, 44. dowria LL. viii. 5, 
dowtlay IV. i. 35, 44. 

&owros II. vii. 4. viii. 2, IV. i. 5, 23, 28, 
32, 36. VIL. ix.2. &owroyr II. viii. 2. 
&owro IV. i. 30. aodrwy LY. i. 33. 
aodérous IY. i. 13, 23. 

&rdpaxos III. ix. 1. IV. v.38. a&rdpaxor 
IIL. viii. 15. 

&rexvos I, viii. 16. &rexvor VIII. xii. 7. 

GreA}js X. iv. 2. aredAés X.vii.7. are- 


toxnow I. ix. 3. 


aoxXnmover repos 


Acis X. iii. 4. iv. 2,3. Gredcorépa I. 
v. 6. 
Grepos V. v.13. G&repor VII. viii. 2. 


arexvia VI. iv. 6. 

arexv@s I, xiii, 15. 

ériula V. xi. 8.  Gryatas IV. iii. 10, 17 
arimion I. x. 3. 

&ror IIL. viii. 1. 

&tomos X. viii. 11. &romov I. x. 2, 5, 7. 
Til, i. 24527 s-1V.ta2 6e Vix..2.«x.1. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


VI. vii. 3. xii. 3. VIL.ii. 5, iii. 6. v. 7. 
IX. iii. 1, 3. ix.3. X.v.7. vi. 6. vii. 9. 
viii. 7. &rdmm IX. ix. 2.. &roma IX. 
ii. 5. 

arémws V. ix. 1. 

arputov X. vii. 7. 

érra V. v. 10. 

aruxe? V. viii. 7. G&ruxay IV. iii. 18. 
Gruxovvtos IX. ix. 2. aruvxovvrs 1X. 
xi. 3. &rvxvdvres IX. xi. 1. atuxodv- 
Tas IX. xi. 6. 

arbxnpua V. viii. 7. aruxnudrov I. x. 14, 

aruxig V. i, 9. aruxtay IV. iii, 18. 
@ruxtas I. x.12. IX. xi. 5. Gruxilaus 
IX, ix. 2. xi. 1, 4. 

aé I. iv. 7. Il. i. 13. iv. 3. IV.i. 1,39, 
40. iii. 31. vi. 5. IX. ii. 8, 9. iv. 8. 

abvOatperos III. v. 17. 

avdéxacros IV. vii. 4. 

avAovvtos X. v. 3. 

abanra I. vii. 10. 

avAnriKh X. v. 3. 

abdods I, vii. 3. 

avter Il. ii. 6. avterOu I. xiii. 11. 
VUL ix. 3. X.ii. 2. iii, 4. adgera 
II. iii, 11. 

abémow II. i. 1. VII. xiv. 6. VIII. ix. 3. 

avéjoes II. ii. 8. 

avénrichy I. vii. 12. 

abrdprea X. vii 4. adrapkeias I, vii. 6. 
abtdpreay V. vi. 4. 

abtdépens VIII. x. 2. X. vi. 2. viii. 9, 
abrapnes I. vii. 6, 7, 8. X. vii. 7. viii. 
9. abrdpkovs IV. iii. 33. adrdpreis 
III. iii. 8. IX. ix. 1. adrdpreor 1X. 
ix. 1. abrapkéoraros X. vii. 4. 

abre I. iv. 7. 

abtoavOpémy I. vi. 5. 

avroéxactoyv I, vi. 5. 

avtéuaroyv X, ix. 21. 

abxéva V. i. 7. 

avxma@v III. iii. 5. 

a&paipéoews VI. viii. 6. 

apaipav V, iv. 4. apeire V. iv. 8. doe- 
Aey Il. vi. 9. Ve iv. 11. datpoupevwr 
VIII. vii. 5. doipePeions VIII. i. 1. 
apatpebp V.iv.10. dpnpeén V. iv. 10. 
adgipnta V. iv. 12. apypioba V. xi. 
4. donpnuery X. viii. 7. dpaipetobou 
I. xi. 5. Gepypnvra III. x. 11. 

apaves I. x. 15. aavey IL. ii. 6. 
apavicer Oat III. ix. 3. 

aperdys IV. iii. 23. 

a&pexréov III. i. 14. 

apeAnerv II. ix. 5. 


avaAntixhyy X. v. 3. 





xl 


aph Il. x. 8. apis II. x. 9,11. VIL. 
vii. l. X.v. 7. apf Ul. x. 18. aphy 
VIL. iv. 3. 

&pOapra VI. iii. 2. 

apiévat VIII. xiv. 4. dpetvoe IIT. i. 17. 
V. ix. 16. dpévri IIl.v.14. dpeicOw 
Teve8.- Wei lO: VES. 7s vith 7. 
IX. iv. 6. xi. 2. X.iv. ll. dgperéov 
I. vi. 13. 

adpixvoupevny IX. v. 3. 
36. apitkrat I. vii. 2. 

apiriay III. vi. 3. 

&pirov I. xi. 1. IX. x. 1. 

dpirotiula LV. iv. 5. dirotimtay LV. 
iv. 5. 

agpiAdtipos II. vii. 8. 
3,4. 

dplorarat IX. iii. 3. 
iii. 18. vii. 12. viii. 11. IV. iii. 35. 
IX. iv. 8. dpeoraot IV. iv. 1. azo- 
orjva VIII. xiv. 4. dpéornne II. 
viii. 5. 

dpoBla II. vii. 2. 

&poPos III. vi. 3,4. &poBor III. viii. 15. 

apépntov LV. v. 7. 

apoptoa I. ix. 8. apwpiomévor ILI. iii. 
17. dopiowuer III. x. 1. dpwpic- 
péva. VIII. ix. 2. dgoporréor I. vii. 12. 
dpopicee VIII. xii. 1. dpwpiouevas 
Vis itt, 1. 

dppodiotos II. x. 9. VII. xiv. 2. dppo- 
diotwy VII. iii. 7. iv. 2. v. 3,7. xii. 4. 

’Agpoditny VIL. vi. 3. 

appoctvn VII. ii. 2. v. 5. 

appdvev VII. v. 6. 

apveotépas X. ix. 10. 

ax Oduevos II. iii. 1. IV. i. 27. 

axopnynrov I. viii. 15. 

a&xpetos IV. viii. 10. axpetov VIII. xiv. 
1. ayxpeta X. ix. 21. 

axpnios I. iv. 7. 

dxdéptora I. xiii. 10. 

&uxos VIII. xi. 6. &bvxor VII. vii. 7. 
&buxa V. ix. 11. VIII. v. 5. xi. 6. 
édxwv VIII. ii. 3. 


dplicoiro IV. i. 


apiAdrimoy IV. iv. 


dploravrat III. 


B. 


Badifer 1X. ix. 9. Badicwr II. ii. 8. IX. 
ix. 9.. Badifew V. i. 4. X. iii. 4. 
Badi¢n V.i. 4. Badioréov X. ix. 16. 

Badiors X. iv. 8. Badioews X. iv. 3. 
Badioe: X. iv. 3. 

BoadAAnrat I. iv. 7. 
V. viii. 6. 


Badew IIL. v. 14. 


X1V 


Bavavaos IV. ii. 20. Bavavata II. vii. 6. 
IV. ii. 4. 

BapBdapwy VII. v.6. BapBdpors VIL. i. 3. 

Bdpos IV. v.10. Bdpous IX. xi. 2. 

Bapeta LV. iii. 34. Bapéa III. iv. 4. 

Baptorabuov VI. viii. 7. Bapioradua 
VA. viii. 7. 

Baot\eia, VIIL. x. 1, 2, 4. 
VIET -x, (2°84. 

Baoidrebs VILL. x. 2,3. xi.2, Baoiréws 
X. ix. 12. Baotre? VIII. xi. 1. Ba- 
otAets IIL. iii. 18. Baotdéwy VIII. vii. 
4. Baotretor VII. vii. 6. 

BactAevouévev VIII. xi. 2. BactdAcvo- 
pevous VIII. xi. 1. 

Bavxoravotpyot LV. vii. 15. 

BéBaoy VIII. viii. 5. BeBalp X. vii. 3. 
BeBaotary VIII. xii. 6. 

BceBadtys I. x. 10. 

BeBoaudoa VIII. viii. 2. 

BeBatws II. iv. 3. 

BeaAtiwy I. xiii. 7. TL. iii, 5. IV. i. 81, 
82.. iii. 14. VIL. ii. 00. - Fitts 5. ERS 
viii. 1. BeArtovos VI. xiii. 8. X. vi. 7. 
Beatie J. i. 2. xiii. 8. IX. xi. 4. X. vi. 
7. BéArioy I. vi. 1, 14. ix. 5. xii. 4. 
xiii, 1, IT ni.10. I-88: ° Vex: 1, 
2,6,8. VII ii. 3. xii. 8. xiv.4. VIIL 
xiv. 1. IX. iii. 8.° X. ‘im 15°22;\Bea- 
tous VII. viii. 2, IX. xii. 8. Xv. 5. 
1x 175 

BéAttotov I, ix. 2. IV. v.10. VI. vii. 
4. VIL. ii, 1. vii’ 5. UR? yi 78, 
Bedttorn VI.i.7. VIII. 10.2. X. 
iv. 5. BeAtiorm VIII. x. 2. Béa- 
tTiota, J, xiii. 15. IX. iv. 8. Bedario- 
rov II, iii. 6. 

AG& Il. i. 8,11, 20. v. 7. V. viii. 3. 
Xe, 1x28 

Biac@évtos III. i. 12. 

Biawos I. v.6. Bia II..1.10, 122° ¥% 
ii. 13. Blatov III. i. 8, 12, 

Bios I. viii. 10, 12. x. 9. VII. xiii. 7. 
VIL sit36. IXoie. 406,9, sk. 
vi. 6. vii. 8, 9. viii. 8,8, 10. Bitov I. 
¥,/4,/6..x:.102) 204,12 ead 2s TV; 
Nis 23: Vii vie, OTR Te Ot 2s Vi 
2, 8. vii. 7. viii. 12. Alp I. vii, 16. 
vill. 9. IL. iii. 8. vii. 18. IIT. xii. 2. 
LVs vil. 4,47. Viil.1, 11,19: EXsxi: 
2. Biov I. ii. 2. iii. 5. v. 2, 8. vii. 6, 
To olXel lek V2 15. Riese Te eae 
TWilesixe 62 oVI.-vils 4; VIER eis 7: 
baht ewes 1G (ims Pes Set tae es Poa Spey 0 
TN sevies 2 gi Xt ew he ly 2 ACs Oe Vip 


BaoiAclas 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


2,6. vii. 8,9. viii. 12. ix. 9. Blow 
I. vs 1: 

Biorevwy TIT. vy. 14, 

BeBiwkdrt I, x. 4. BeBioxdras X. viii. 
ll. Bidoot IX. viii. 9. Brovmévors 
X. ix. 11. Bidcera X. vii, 8. Biw- 
oduevov I, x. 15. 

BaaBepdy IV. vi.7. BAaScpod V. v. 18. 
BaAoBepal IV. ii.22. VI. xiii. 1. VIL. 
xi. 5. BAaBepa IX. v. 8. BAaBepas 
VIL. xiv. 5. 

BaaBy V. viii. 7,8. BdrAaBhy IV. vi. 7. 
BAaBav V. viii. 6. BaAaBas I. iii. 3. 

BAdBous V. iv. 3. 

Badmre: V. ix. 4, 17. VIL xii. 4. 
Badwrrew VY. vi. 8. ix. 4,5. €BAobe 
V. iv. 3. BAddy V. viii. 11. BAdm- 
tovres V. viii. 8. Bader IX. viii. 7. 
BaAdrrn V. xi.2. BaAdarerat V. ix. 6, 
9. BAdmwrovra X. vi.3. BAdmrotro 
V. ix. 5. BéBAamwrat V. iv. 3. 

Brére V. iv. 8. BAérovor V. xi. 9. 
BaAérew LV.i.18. BAérovee II. vi. 9. 
BAémovres II. vi. 9, VII. xi. 1. 

BonGetas VILL. i. 2. 

Bonéety II. ii. 5. BonOhjoas V. ii. 2. 
Bon@joa VIII. ix.3. Bon@nréov 1X. 
lii. 3. 

BonOnua, I. vi. 15. 

Bonddy V. x. 8. 

Bopay III. x. 7. 

Bocknudrey I. v. 3. IX. ix. 10. 

BovaAedoyrat Ill. iii, 3, 7. VIL ix. 2. 
BovaAetoaro III. iii, 2. VIL ii. 1. 
Bovacverau III. iii. 8, 6,11. VLi 6. 
ii, 6. v. 3. vii. 6. ix. 3.  BovAevoueba 
III. iii. 7,8, 11. BovAever@au IIT. iii. 
10. VI. i. 6. v. ‘Ts ‘Vil. 6. RiE Freee 
1,2,4,7. Bovaedoerat III. iii. 16. 
BovaAevdpevos III. iii, 11. VI. ix. 2, 3. 
BovaAcdoacOa III. iii. 19. VI. v. 3. 
vii. 6. VII. vii. 8. BovAevOevra VI. 
ix. 2. Bovdednra VI. ix. 3. BeBov- 
Aetmevos VI. ix. 4. BovAevduevov VI. 
ix. 6. BeBovAedioOa VI. ix. 7. Bov- 
Aevoduevar VII. vii. 8. eBovdrctoavro 
VIL. vii. 8. Bovdaedonra VII. x. 3. 
Bovaevoapéevwy VII. x. 4. 

BovaAevors ILI. iii, 12. Bovrdevow Tl. 
iii, 19. on ecru a 

BovaAeutinds VI. v. 2. VII. x. 8. Bov- 
Aevtinh) IIL. iii, 19. VI. ii. 2. viii. 
2, 3. 

Govaevtdy III. iii. 1, 2, 16, 17. Bov- 
Aevrod III. iii. 19. BovAevrey III. v. 1. 


INDEX VERBORUM. xv 


Bovay Ill. iii. 1,8,15. VI. ix. 2, 4. 
BovaAjjs IIL. iti. 17. VI. ix. 4. 

BovAnua IL i. 5. BovdAhuata IX. vi. 3. 

BovaAnots III. ii. 7, 8. iv. 1. VIIL ii. 3. 
ii. 9. IX. vii.2. BovAnow IIL. ii. 3. 
V. ix. 5, 6,9. Bovanoe VIL. v. 5. 
BovaAnoes X. viii. 4. 

Bovanroy III. iv. 2, 3,4. Bovdnrod III. 
west. 

BovAerau I. x. 3. xiii. 2. TIL. i. 15. iv. 
2. vii. 8. IV.i. 5. iii. 25. v.3. V. iv. 
7. v. 14. ix. 6. VIII. ii. 3. vii. 6. x. 
3,4. IX. iv. 3,4,5. vill. 2. x5. X. 
ix.13. BovdAducda Lii.1. III. iii. 9. 
IV. vi. 4. BovAovrac I. vi. 5. IV. iii. 
18; 36.. Voi. 3.2v.82 VILL.-ii. 1,'5, 
6, 9.° vi Ss: vi. 1,594, 7. vil. 6 xi. 5. 
xiv. 4. IX. iv. 8. v. 3. vi. 3. vii. 1. 
xi. 1, xii. 2. BovAeoOa I. x. 7. III. 
wi i3: / IV. i..34. “VEL i. 8 VII. 
ii. 3, 4. viii. 1. xiii. 8. IX vil. X. 
viii. 4. BovAduevos III. i. 17. IV.i. 
17. IX. v. 3. vi. 4. viii. 2. BovdAd- 
pevor II. vii. 12. IV.i. 43. VI. xii. 
2. VIII. iii.6. IX. i.9. xii.2. Bovd- 
Anrot Il. vy. 14. VIL. ii. 8. IX. vi. 
2. Bovdrouévous V.i. 3. VIII. ii, 3. 
IX. vi. 4. éBovAero VII. x. 3. IX. 
i. 4. iv. 10. BovAhoera VILL. vii. 6. 
BovAduevoy IX. iv. 1. BovAopéve X. 
ix. 16, 17. 

Bods Ill. x. 7. Bot I. vii. 12. Bor I. 
1x;:95 VILL. xi. 6. 

Bpadéws VI. ix. 2. X. iii. 4. 

Bpadeia TV. iii. 34. 

Bpaburhs X. iii. 4. 

Bpactda V. vii. 1. 

Boaxis V. ix. 1. Bpaxd VILL. v. 2. 

Bpi8os I. xi. 3. 

Bpépara IIL. xi. 7. Bpwpdrwy III. x. 6. 

Boéoe Il. x. 7. 

Bwporoxta Il. vii. 13. 

Boporoxds Il. vii. 13. 
Bwpodroxoi LY. viii. 8, 4. 


TV. wit. 40. 


Fr 


yatoy VIII. i. 6. 

yadjy VIL. v. 6. 

yauras IV. ii. 20. 

yauos IV. ii. 15. yduous IX. ij. 7. 
yapyarivovra VIL. vii. 8. 
yaotpivapyo: IIT. xi. 3. 

yelrovos V. ix. 14. 





yeadowos IV. iii. 15. VIII xiii. 3. 
‘yeAotov IIT. i. 11, 24. IV. viii. 3, 6. 
VILL. ii. 3. viii. 6. yedAofou IV. viii. 
3,4,10. ‘yedoig IV. viii. 3. yeAotor 
I. xii. 3. VIII. viii. 6. X. viii. 7. 
yeAoiwy X. viii. 7. yeAota III. i. 8. 

yéAwra IV. viii. 3,10. VII. vii. 6. 


| yéuouor IX. iv. 10. 
| yeveots VII. xi. 4, 5. xii. 3. X. iii. 5. iv. 


4. yevéoews VI. xii. 1. VII. xii. 3. 
yeréce III. iii. 12. yéveow IL. i. 1. 
VL. iv.4. VIL xii..3. _X. iif. 4.- iv. 4. 
yeveous IL. ii.8. VII. xii. 1,3. X. 
iii. 4, 7. 

yeverys VI. xiii. 1. VII. 14.4. VIII. 
xii. 6. 

yevvdbas I. x. 12. 

yervhoavt: VIII. i. 3. yeyevynuévov 
VIL. i. 3. yevyqoact VIII. vii. 2. 
yevvnévra VILL. xii. 2. yerynOevre 
VILL. xii. 2. yevvduevoy VIIL. xii. 2. 

yevynors 1X. vii. 7. 

yervnrhy IL v. 5. 

yevos Liii. 4. TW v.21. V.x.2. VI 
W330 Ika 4S | NUL S5 he, Vin7.- vik. 6. 
viii. 1. IX. ii. 7. ‘yévous VII. vii. 6. 
vyéve L vii. 14. IL vii. 6. IV. ii. 17, 
19.0 NG it. [Os xh, IVE IS Ree 
iv. 5. Xi. 1. 967 VIL vy. .1, 6. 
vi. 5. 

yevavov III. x. 10. 

yépas.V. vi. 7. VIIL xiv. 2. 

yevois IIL. x. 8. vyetoews IIL. x. 9. 
VII. vil..J. X. vy. 7. yeédoe IIL x. 
9. yevow VIL. iv. 3. 

yever Oa VIL. iii. 9, 10. 

yewpetpe X. v. 2. 

yewpeérpns I. vii. 19. 

yeoperpta VI. x. 1. 

yewpetpuchy VY. iii. 13. -yewuerpixod VI. 
viii. 5. X.v.2. ‘yewmerpucy V. iii. 13. 

yewpyos V. 12. yewpyod V. v. 9. 12. 


| yys VIL. v. 3. yijv X. ix. 6. 
| ynpas IV.i. 37. 


yhpws L. ix. 11. 

ynpay V. viii. 3. 

yiveracl. i. 3. iii. 7. vii. 8, 15. viii. 3. 
x.12. xiii. 13. ILi 6. ii, 7, 8 iii. 
10, 11. iv. 5. vi. 3. viii. 8. IIL. i. 7. 
HL, S.yil 4, vii. 3. ix. 3. x. 5. IV. 
ii, 15. iii. 16, 37. v. 7, 10. ix. 4. V. 
i. 5. ii. 5. iii. 14,15. iv. 1. v. 6,9, 
10. vi. 5. viii. 5. VIL xii. 10. xiii. 2. 
VIL i..3. ii. 2,8, iii, 12, 18. v..1. 
WEES We 7. ik. HL 5, 9. ive 1. 
vy. 5. Vi. 1, 5,6, 7. vii. 2.. viii. 4. x. 3. 


Xvl 


BST iio ics ats ea) 0. Sy Pan Weak: Tony od Paes + ge” 
v. 1,,3,-4. ‘vi. 2. “vit; 10)... ix. 5. .x..5. 
pies tyme OF is hee Cap TAN; Eee Th Rag se | cay 
9,11. vi. 6. vii. 6. viii. 13. yiwo- 
mwevyns I. vi. 1. IL ix. 4. X. iii. 6. iv. 
1. ix. 15. yévorro. I. vii. 10. x. 18, 
14; xii, 4. IL i.:7. . TE wi. 6; 18; 
IV. iii. 17. Viv. 8 IX. iii. 4. viii. 8. 
X. iii. 7, 12. iv. 1. ix. 18,20. yeyd- 
vaot I, vii. 17. ylynroe I. vii. 19. 
LV. Ui 18.-sie 9. Ve ivi-d, - VER. 
SoulWadks Wi ke Vie As, Vik 24. xiv V, 
1X.i.8,4. ii. 5. ylveoO@al, vii. 23. 
x4. Xi 8. iia Goole ls, a 
NLGLE SV: 0s 9.S0e-de, Wile Wills Oe. XU, 
2. VIL xiv. 4. VIII. i. 6. iii. 4. iv. 
35,45, Vis 25D. NI 2a Ville. G6; 1570. 
KiVe ds, Lol, 4) '85- Vee Rin Oke 
ji. 3. iii. 5. iv. 8. x. 5, 6, 14, 21. 
ywopévov IV. v.10. IX. xii 1. yl- 
vovrat I. viii. 9. ix. 11. IL i. 4, 6, 7. 
ii. 8. iii. 5. vii. 3. IIL i.9, 14. v.12, 


21. viii. 9,14. zi.3,7. TV. i24. 
Hi 2). Vevin-7.. VEL vili.:6.- Vile 


2..Ve. 8s. X1V..9,/6... VELL ii,B. “av. 6. 
Vi, 1... vili..5. X: 5. xu. 4° xitt.. 1s. DX 
ta Gre Vain Xe On Rie he, yas: Ve esi LO: 
ix. 14. ylvorol. x 4. VIII. iv. 2. 
TX.:ix.7, 10. X. vii..9. ix. 1... 7é 
yynta V. iv. 14. v. 8. viii. 7. VI. iii 
2. iv. 4. xi. 8. FKL 3. i3; 5 
yeyéevnvrat I. xiii, 38. X.iii. 7. yé- 
yove V. v. 11. yeyovds VI. ii. 6. 
vyevouevos I, x. 14. IV. i. 36. VII. 
ii. 8. IX. iv. 4. Mi ix. 14. ywdueda 
DD As Ts oils 9. We Bs. ake 1X6 S57 <= 
vouevoy IT,i.5. IX.i 8 vii.l. X. 
iv. 1. éylvovro Il. i. 7. X. ix. 19. 
vyeviueda II. ii. 1. yevéo@ar II. ii. 1. 
AV, (Osta ELL. (1 Ss, Vek O; bbe. 7Xs 8 Oc 
V. v.12, 15. vii. 4. viii..10.. VL 6. 
VIE. fi.2.. -VIUL-vi.3:. -vili.. 7s OES 
iv. 10. viii. 10. X.ix. 16,17. yiwd- 
peal. x.49. Ab. 6." vad. vs. 4. 
IIL. i. 8. yevouevor II. ii. 9. yuvd- 
pevor II. ii. 9. yevduevae II. iii. 4. 
III. x. 11. IV..v. 14.. Kiv..5. yoo- 
ever Eixat2. LT ii. 1 ANE 34.05 
Mee 4ee WiloiVer 4. 'X:, Bo Vile Sie; 
ywopevous X. iii. 6. eyévero II. iii. 
11. ywopevas II. vii. 15. IV. vi. 7. 
yevouevors III. v. 14. VIII. xii. 5. 
IX. iii. 5. yevdueva VIII. xii. 2. 
IX. vii. 7. X. ix. 8. ywopevnv IX. 
xi. 4. yévowro IX. vii. 2. X. ix. 21. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


yeyovédros VI. ii. 6. yivdevos VIII. 
v. 5. yevouevns IX. iii. 5. -yerdpevov 
IX. iv. 4. -yevouévov IX. vii. 3. yi- 
vowto X. vii. 6. ‘yevoiueba X. ix. 17. 
yeyeriicOa X. iii. 6. yeyernuévov 
IX. vii. 6. yeyénrat VIII. xiii. 11. 
IX. viii. 4. éyeydve: IX. iii. 5. yeve- 
pévous IX. v. 3. 

ywoorew V. viii. 3. VI. xi. 3. yevdoner 
L iii. 5. yuwodonovral. vy. 5. ywo- 
oxwy VY. ix. 12. -yvdvres III. viii. 9. 
yava. V. ix. 15. X. ix. 1. yrwoOeior 
Ill. i. 9. 

TAatxov V. ix. 12. 

yAurxpol IV. i. 39. 

yAixdpuevot IV. viii. 3. 

yAukd VII. iii. 9, 10. -yAueéos VIL. iii. 
9. ‘yAuveéo III. iv. 4. X. iii. 8. yAv- 
Kkéwy X. v. 9. yAukbraror VIL. xiv. 8. 

youn VI. xi. 1,3. yvdunv VI. xi. 1, 
2, 6. 

yropl(ew I. vi. 4. VIL vii. 7. yowpige- 
Ta V. i, 5. ‘yywpioduey V. iv. 11. 
yvwpiobevros VIIL ii. 1. yrwpirréov 
X. ix. 16. 

yvepimos IIT. v. 22. -yvdpyuov IIL. ix. 5. 
yvwpinwy I. iv. 5. yvwpiyous IV. vi. 
5. VIL. xiii. 6. yvo@pyor VI. iii. 4. 
ywopipa VI. viii. 5. yrwpiwos IV 
vi. 8. 

yroots I. ii. 2. iii. 6, 7. iv. 1. VIL i. 5. 
yoow I, vi. 15. xiii. 7. III. vii. 16. 
yveoews VI. viii. 4. 

yrworav X, vii. 2. 

yoveis I. vii. 7. x. 4. IV.i.20. VII. 
iv. 5. VIII. vii. 2. xi. 3. (iS 
xiv. 4. IX. i. 7. ‘yovetdor I. vii. 6. 
x. 5. VIIL. vii. 1,2. ix. 2. Sizahegs 
8. yovéwy III. i. 4. 

yévu IX. viii. 2. 

yoov I. v. 5. xiii. 17. IV. iii. 18. iv. 5. 
VII. xiv. 5. VIIL ix. 1. IX. viii. 6. 
X. vii. 3. 

ypapudrwv III. iii. 8. 

ypauparuchy IL. iv. 2. 

Ypauparinds II. iv. 2. ypaymarindy ibid. 
ypapyparicol, ypapmariucd II. iv. 1. 

ypauparies IT. iv. 2. 

ypappis V. iv. 8. ypauphy X. iv. 3. 

ypapeis X. ix. 18. 

ypaph X.v. 1. ypapy IIL. x. 3. 

ypapucys X. ix. 20. 

ypdpe X. v. 5. ypdew ibid. ypdpovres 
X. ix. 18. yeyaupuevow X. ix. 14. 
ypanréov X. iii. 8. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


yupvaoww IL. ii. 16. yuuvarviwy II. vi. 7. 
yuuvactors IIL. x. 11. 

yunvacrtis X. ix. 15. 

yupvactixy I. vi. 4. yuuvaotirjs X. ix. 
14. yuuractiuy V. xi. 7. yuuvacti- 
«hy IIL. iii. 8. VI. xii. 1. 

yupevixots IIT. ix. 9. 

yovaia IX. xi. 4. 

yuvainds VIII. x. 5. xii. 7. yuvourd I. 
ore Vs Wek: cs 16. VILE. vii. 1. 
x. 5. xii.7. ‘yuvaina III. vi. 5. V. 
vi.9. VIII. vii. 1. xi. 4. xii. 8. yu- 
voixes VIII. x. 5. ‘yuvatxas VII. v. 4. 


A. 


Sadvia VI. vii. 5. 
il. 

Saiuwv IX. ix. 1. 

Saxvduevoy VII. xiv. 6. 

davetCew VIL. v. 2. Saveloayr: IX. ii. 5. 
eddveie IX. ii. 5. Saveloavtes IX. 
vii. 1. Saveicavras IX. vii. 2. 

ddverov IX. ii. 3. Savetwy IX. vii. I. 

daveruds V. ii. 18. 

Samavav IV. ii. 16. Samavey LY. i. 23. 
ii. 8,20. Samavfjoa Il. ix.2. IV. ii. 
5. damravhjoe LV. i. 24. ii. 7, 10, 18. 

Samdyn IV. i. 7. ii. 1. Samdyns IV. ii. 
6, 10. Samdyny IV. i. 29. ii. 6 
Sdmravat IV. ii. 6. Samdvaus LV. i. 23. 

Samdynua IV. ii. 6. Samavhuaros IV. 
ii, 19. Samavqpatt: IV.ii. 18. dama- 
yvnuadrov IV. ii. 11,16, 20. Samavh- 
pact LY. ii. 15. 

Samavnpds IV. ii, 15. Samavnpol IV. i. 
835. Samavnpods IV. i. 3. Samavnpas 
IV. ii, 1. 

ee Ns iec¢a ive O° Vile 17. ix. 10. x. 7% 
xiii. 7.- I. i. 4, 8. ii.,4,,6. iii. 1, 2, 5. 
iv. 1. vi 1,11, 18. vii. J, 8, 13. ix. 
3, 4,5, 6,9. Ill. i. 7, 14, 19, 24. ii. 
13, 14. iii, 18, 16. v. 8,17. vi. 3, 4. 
vii. 2,4, 5,10, 12. viii. 5. ix. 1. x. 
3, 4. x154, 5,7, 8. xii.6, 7,.8,.9.. IV. 


Saimdviov IV, ii. 


i. 3, 7, 12, 18, 15, 17, 22, 23, 24, 25, _ 


-28, 31, 33, 35, 40, 42, 43. ii. 4, 6, 10. 
12, 20, 21. iii. 8, 10, 14. iv. 1, 2, 3, 
4, 5. v. 8,5, 7,8, 10, 14. vi. 3, 5, 6. 
vill, 4. V. i. 9.i8. 11. v. 4, 7, 8, 9, 
10, 11, 12, 18, 14,15. vi. 4. ix. 7 
Th. x..6:. Vivi 1,25 Se. Ue D9 1 Dy 
Wiis 3,7. ix. 1, 5, Gx. Bu xb 8, 4) 6: 
xii, 1,7. xiii. 5. VIL i. 5. ii. 6, 10, 


VOL. II. 


~ 


| 


| 





XVI 


12. ni..5,.9,.12.. iv. 5. vi. Fe “vii. 3. 
ix. 5. xiv. 2,8. VIIL iii. 4, 7, 9. iv. 
4. vi: 3,4. vil. 2. x. 5. xtii. 110: 
IX. i. 8, 9. ii. 1. iii. 5. viii. 1, 2, 3, 7, 
6,11: 4s 28 6. SO 2 
xi 1, 4,5.- X.il. iv. 7 viii. 9, 11. 
15,8595 V1 2)ee dew Evie We TVe ti 
US avis lx Odeo SV eliiage 1k Gs 
VI. vs.6.,-viil..45. 1x52). VIN ii. 9. tii: 
2, Vill delXs: Zee» VALI 1s Soexiie 6: 
xiv. 1,2. IX. ii. 7,8. viii. 2. ix. 1, 
5. x1. 5. X. 1.2. vii. 3. ix. 10. Sefoes 
I. vi. 11. IX. ix. 10. X. viii. 4, 9. 
ée Il. i. 7. IV. viii. 9. VIL. ix. 5. 
Zui, 7.95. Ke. 1,5. 1.08,  Séor- Vl, 
xiii, 7, VIIL. vii. 6. 3éy IX. viii. 9. 
X. ix. 6. dehoeras 1X. ix. 1, 2, 4, 5. 
X. viii. 6. Sénrar V. v. 13. denO7 
V.v. 14. Setrae ID. i. 1. V. v. 14. 
IX. ix. 4. X. vii. 4. viii. 5. Seto Oar 
IV. iii. 26. IX. ix.4. X.viii.4. Séor- 
vat VII. xiv. 6. VIII. vi. 4. viii. 5. 
xili,4, IX ix. 1. X. vi. 3, 6. vii. 4. 
déowro V. v. 11. Séwvrow VIII. viii. 
2. defjoecOat X. viii. 9. Seolueda X. 
ix.9. Seduevos VIII. xiii. 11. IX. i. 
4. ix. 4. deouévyn VIL. xiv. 8. Seoue- 
vou IX. ix, 2. 

denrinds IV. iii. 32. 

Sedidva VII. v. 6. 

dexevivar VII. i. 5. 
detia: X. i, 17. 
dedevypévov VIL. i. 5. 
ii. 5. x. 1. SecxOAvae I. vii. 20. 
XOhoer an LV. ix. 8. 

decAatvew II. vi. 19. V. ix. 16. 

decAfa II. viii. 6. 7. ILL. xii. 3. VII. v. 
5. SeAias Il. xii. 1. SetAlay V. ii. 
2,5. VILv.6. IX iv. 8 

derdds II. ii. 7. iii, 1. vii. 2. viii. 2, 3. 
Tov, 5a: vik 10, 115; 32.5 Vi-xik 4. 
VIL. v. 6. Seadoo IIL. vii. 13. Ser- 
Adv IL. viii. 2,3, SeAol II. i. 7. II. 
vi. 4. viii. 1, 9. 

devvoy VIL. ii. 1. iii, 5. x. 2. 
ii. 8. Sed I. xi. 4. T. iii, 1. IV. 
ix. 2, IX. iv, 8. Seway III. vi. 6. 
viii, 11. Segvots Il. i. 7. devods VI. 
xih- 9... VII.3. 7; VILE vi. 5. 

devdrepov VIII. ix. 8. Sewdrara III. 
i, 8, 

Sewdrns VI. xiii. 2. Sevdrnra VI. xii. 
Osexite le VLE x2. 

Séxa. IL. vi. 6,7. V.v. 15. IX. x. 3; 

déxarov V. y. 15. 


eSedlec VII. v. 6. 
Belfer V. i. 16. 
dettas VIL. vi. 2. 
bé5eueTa VII. 
be1- 


Sevot VIL, 


XV 


Gevipa X. v. 1. 

deta I. xiii. 15. V. vii. 4. 

Geoy Lis vile Le) AU XLs Os DVL 20; 205 
B6n1 el. 20s) Ville io, 2 19. 
iii. 5. Séovros I. ii. 2. II. vii. 16. 
déovra VII. x. 2. IX. viii. 4. 

deopds V. ii. 13. 

deonétyn VIII. xi. 6. 
x. 4. 

decmotixdy.V. vi. 8. xi. 9. 

devpo IX. iv. 9. 

dedrepoy II. ix. 4. V. iii. 9. Sevz€epov 
V. iii, 9. Sevrépws VIIL vii. 3. X. v. 
DLS yiiis ¥. 

déxera: VIII. i. 7. 
o@a X. iv. 11. 

dé5era VIL. ii. 8. 

53 I. ii. 1. vi. 7, 12. vii. 2, 5, 8, 10, 12, 
14, 19. viii. 1, 2, 12. x. 2,4, 7,11, 
24: “xi: 355. xil.'2- xi. 8,/95,,18;. 2. 
i. 7, 8 vi. 3,4, 8,9. IIL. i. 1, 6, 10, 
11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 27. ii. 2, 10, 
16. iii, 15, 16. iv. 4. v. 1, 16, 17, 19, 
23, vi.5, 10. vii. 6, 11. viii. 6, 11, 12, 
13, 17. ix. 2,4, 5. x. 7,8, 9, 10, 11. 
IV. i. 4, 5, 6,19, 31, 43. ii. 2, 6, 7, 
10: “i1.°8,'9; 10,18. iv.'5.-¥. 138.. ‘vit- 
AO Ville, Ak. 2s) Velso, 6. We 
10, 12, 14, 15, 16. viii. 3. xi. 9. VIL 
fe Soe sy Grylls ed. Ve hy Wis Aste AW 
4, 5. ix. 3,7. xii.-3,.9. xiii. 1,4. VII. 
ii..6; iv. 5. Viil.4.. 3x. ¥. x7, Syexaitt 7. 
xiv. 1,3. VIIL iii. 1,2,3, 4,8 v. 1. 

l. vii. 2, 6. viii. 1, 2,6. ix. 3, 6. 

Siri; .0, 6,7, Ss: kU. oO “XMis 1, 

V1.) xiv: 334. DX. 3.7. a1. 3..3y, 


Seonmérov VIII. 


X. iii. 2,3. 5€xe- 
Sé€ac Oa II. i. 3. 


9,10. v. 3. vi. 2. vii. 4, 7. viii. 
, 2, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11. ix. 3, 4, 5,10. 
9-3; 5. 2x0 1,6. Ko 1:9; 3,5 

ly./2;,4,.9. V¥.2; 5, 7s. Vi, 1; 
a Wis, 1), 7). -85~9.. vei. -85.°5, 
ix. 2, 5, 8, 9, 12,°16; 19 


? 


djAos X. viii. 4. SnAH V. i. 7. SHAov I. 
ii. 1. v. 5,8. vi. 3, 9, 13. vii. 3, 8. x. 
4) Siyl2.exils 1,10, 8: fe Kit, 45 7.40 
i. 2,4. IIL. i. 17, iii, 18. v.11, 23. xi. 
5. xii. 5. IV. 1,24. iv. 4. v.13, 14 
viii. 1, 4. V. i. 8,12, 20. ii. 2, 7. iif. 
195, OioV~ 15, L617. Vil 4.. 3x5 8-8; 
RO. Vin. 2. yes. Vit. 26; tke SB, 
Araxi LOs XU O,0 6 AVAL. Ste gs WE 
5 exe Lo) VILL. ive 2s vii. 2 x. 9. 
Xi, Ge EX 42-yilh. S$. ix, 35. Xe. 








INDEX VERBORUM. 


ii. 3. iii. 13. iv. 4, 7. v. 5, 11. vie 2 
vii. 6. viii. 5. ix. 6. Oda VIL. i. 1. 
SyAdvore I. xiii. 5. TIL. vi. 2. VIL i. 2. 
iv.6. v. 8,9. IX. xi 4, Kiimed& 
SndAot I. ix. 9. V. v. 18. VIL iii. 4. 

Sndotvres V.x.1. edHAwoe VIL Vi. 1. 

Snunyopixovs X. ix. 18. 

Snusoupyoupue vars I. iii. 1. 

Snuoryépovres II. ix. 6. 

Anpodéxov VIL. viii. 3. 

Snuoxpatia VIII. x. 3. Symoxpariav 
VIII. x. 1. Snuexparia VIII. x. 6. 
Snuoxpatlas VIII. xi. 8. 

Snuoxparixol V. iii. 7. 

éjmos IX. vi. 2. Shy IIL. iii. 18. 

Snudra VILL. ix. 5. 

Sfmwore VI. xii. 10. VII. xiii. 7. TX. 
45°55 Vu: 

diaryvevas III. iii. 10. 

did-ypappe IIT. iij. 11. 

diarypag7s II. vii. 1. 

didtyeww IX. xi. 1. xii. 2. Sedryorres TI. 
v. 10. 

Siaywyis IV. viii. 1. Staywyhy IX. 
xi. 5. Siaywyas X. vi. 3. Siarywyais 
X. vi. 3, 8. 

didSyaor I. xiii. 12. 

diddects II. vii. 18. Sabéoews VIL. i. 4. 
diabéoes II. vii. 6, 8. Siabécewy IT. 
viii. 1. 

Sioupety I. xi. 2. IX. viii. 3. Scoupetrar 
II. ii. 10. dreAduevor II. vii. 6. VI. 
i.4. X. ix. 21. drefAoper VIL. iv. 5. 
diéAwpey VI. i. 1. Sejpnvras V. iii. 
10. Sijpnra V. iv. 4. VIII. xii. 7. 
Sinpnuern V. iii. 9. Smpnuévors VIII. 
vi. 5. xii. 3. SaspeOf V.iv.8. dmph- 
oOwoay IIT. x. 2. diuperéov VI. i. 5. 

Siatper@ II. vi. 4. 

Stata I. vi. 3. 

SianetoOa I.v. 4. [X.iv.10. dideewros 
VII. xiv. 6. diaxeiwevos X. viii. 13. 
diaxemévov X. iv. 5. Sraxemeévns X. 
iv. 5. Siaxemévors III. iv. 4. X. iii. 
8. vie 11. 

Siaxdvev VII. vi. 1. 

SinxpiBwrat III. iii. 8. SiaxpiBooo X. 
viii. 3. 

Sianptver IIT. xi. 7. 

dtaxwAvover VIII. Vili. §. 

diardurer I. x. 12. 

diaravOdvery X. ix. 20. Siadrabeiv IV. 
vii. 13. 

diarex Gein VI. xiii. 6. 

SiadAdtrovor VILL. x.6. X.v. 9. diad- 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


Adrro: IX. iii. 4. diadAdAarrouévous 
IVoveily 

SéAvce VILL. v. 1. Ssadvovrar VIII. iv. 
2. xii. 7. Siaddevra VIII. xiii. 5. 
diadvduevos VIII. xiii. 8. IX. iii. 3. 
drarverOa IX. iii. 1. X. iii. 5. deadv- 
Oven IX. i. 8. Siardveror VIIL. iii. 3. 
xiv. 1. SaAuréoy VIII. xiii. 9. 
iii. 3. 

didAvors IX. i. 3. iii. 5. 

diapaprdver IV. i. 28. 
viii. 7. Siaunaprovra VILL. xiii. 9. 

Siqpéever VIII. iii. 3, 6. ix. 4. X. ili. 3. 
Siapévoe IX, iii. 4. Stauévovor VIII. 
iv. 1, 2. viii. 5,6. Stawevdvrwy VII. 
iii. 3. Sdeauévoyras IX. ii. 1. 

Siauérpov IIL. iii. 3. Siduerpoy V. v. 8. 

dioppicBnretrat VIII. i. 6. 

Eiraveuntixds V.v. 17. Sdiaveunrixdy V. 
Iv. 2. v.:2. 

diavéueww IX. x. 4. Siavéuwy V. ix. 9, 
10. Siavéuovts V. ix. 10. 

dtavoovpuevoy I. vii. 13. 

Stavontixh Il. i. 1. VI. ii. 5. Stavon- 
Tings IL.i.1. S:avonrixod VI. ii. 3. 
VII. iv. 3. Stavontixds I. xiii 20. 

didvora VI. ii. 2,5. VII. ii. 8. X. iv. 9. 
v. 7. Stavotas III. ii.17. x. 2. VI. i. 
4D i, 3,4. ix. 3. TXix, 3. Xv. 2. 
diavolg VI. ii.2 IX. iv. 5. X. iv. 10. 
ix. 18. ddvoy VII. iv. 38. IX. iii. 4. 
Modes We 5. Vids 

diavouh V. iv. 2. Stavouy V. iii. 12. 
Siavopats V.ii. 12. iii. 7. 

dtarrovet X. viii. 4. diamoveiy IX. iv. 3. 

diamopjoa I. vil. d:amophoese V. ix. 3. 
VI. xii. 1. S:amophoavtas VII.i. 5. 
diamopnbev I. x 10. diamropetoOau I. 

- at 5s 

diamopeverat X. iv. 3. 

diapOpaoa I. vii. 17. 

Siacapjom I. vii. 2. 
iii. 1. 

Siacra@yra IX. iv. 9. 

Siacrdoe IX. iii. 4. 

Sidornua VILLI. vii. 4. 

diactpépe VI. v. 6. xii. 10. dteorpap- 
peva IL. “x. 5. 

didraotw IX. v. 1. 

diardooet I ii. 6. 

diaretver IV. i. 38. ii. 1. 
viii. 8. Starewouevewv IX. viii. 7. 

dtaretauevws IX. iv. 10. X. iv. 9. 

SiareAct? VII. xiv. 6. 
¥y-11. 


diauaptave I. 


diacapnbetn I. 


IX. 


1 Ws es ee. 


SiareAovor III. 








xix 


dtarnpovyres X. viii. 1. 

diariBéaot IV. iv. 1. Staribevra VIL. 
iii. 7. Scaetvar X. ix. 18. 

diatpiBwy VI. viii. 4. 

diapéper Li. 5. iii. 7. viii. 9. xi. 4. xiii. 
TO;L6:, Ai, 5.82, vis Gio UPL oS, 
26.15! Ve Daevits La Xia Ki oe 
IV S45, 11,18; 11.12. vie 5. Vit. .8: 
Wills2086s.51X.75:. Viele cO.clVeo- aves 
LG:ovate 1507.7 Vile Vite Ae ixesls cent. ol 
VIL. iii. 3,6; vi.6. VU ini. 1. ix... 
xi. 2. X. iii, 3,12. v. 7. vii. 8. dra- 
pépover I. iv. 5. II. vii. 6,11. IV. 
Vill, 4,122) Visit 72 vil.-3.. VII. 
vii. 1 x.2. X. iii. 10. iv. 2. v. 2,7, 
8. ix. 15. Siapépy X.v. 4. diapepor 
X. viii. 4. diapépev I. xiii. 12. VII. 
Xo. 25-8 WEG vies Zen Reed's Willer IX 
14. Srepepe VII. iv. 2. diapepérw 
X. iv. 5. Swotce IV. viii. 1. V. vi. 1. 
Vi. xii. 2. VIL iii..4, 5, 6. VILL it. 
2. X. viii. 4. diapépwor VIII. x. 6. 
diapépovra VIIL. xiv. 1. IX.i. 4. iv. 
8. Siolcover I. vi. 5. Siapépw IX. 
Viil.6. d:apépovoa X. viii. 7. Siape- 
povros IV. vii. 7. S:apéepovoay II. vii. 
8. Siapépovra IV. v. 2. V. v. 15. 
diapépovres I. vi. 11. VIII. xiii. 1. 
diapépovoa X. iii. 13. diapepdvrwy I. c 
x12) Viibie306. 1xs4- De n.. 10; 
X.v.1. d:apepovody X. v. 6. diape- 
povous X. v. 1. 

diapepdvtws I. vii 19. IV. vi. 7. IX. 
Ville), Morils de 

SiapOetpe: VI. v. 6. SiapOefpayts V. xi. 
3. S:épOapra VII. vi. 7. diepOap- 
pévy Vi. v 6. S:epOapyevny IX. ix. 
8. SiepOapuéevors X. vy. 11. 

Siapopa 1.1.2. Siapopay I. iii. 2. xi. 5. 
xiii, 20. V. iv. 3. VL viii. 4. VIL. iii. 
2. diapopas I. xi.2. IL. i. 8. IV. vi. 
8. VII. vi. 6. IX. ii. 2. d:apopot IIT. 
1 1O., Xe tis 1.) Ke ive 3: 

Sidgopo VIII. x. 4. Siapdpous X. iii. 10. 

diapdpws III. vii. 12. IV. vi. 8. 

SiabvaAdrrwyv I, v. 6. 


- Siapovel L viii. 1. V.v. 4. VIL. ii. 2. 


IX. viii. 2, 8. Stapwvety I. vi. 15. 
Siapwvotcr X. i. 3. Siapwvoivrwy X. 
viii. 12. 

SrapevdecOa: VI. iii. 1. xii. 10.  d:aev- 
Bdueba VI. vi. 2, Srepevo 7 IX. iii. 3. 

didackadrla VI. iii. 3. Si5acxaAtas IL. 
ik 

SiSackaArxds VIL. viii. 4. 


C2 


p>, a INDEX VERBORUM. 


diddonew X, ix. 18. didatere IX. i. 5. 
diddakat X. ix.20. ddatovros IL. i. 7. 
didanty VI. iii. 3. 

5:5ax} X. ix. 6. Sidaxy X. ix 6. 

dddvae IV. i. 7,17, 29, 80, 34, 39, 43. 


Vieixee..  Ooupal Als 18, 2.0 1 Vicks Os 
39. V. ix. 7,14. IX. i. 7. 8f5ora 
VIIL. xiv. 3. <ddécovor X. viii. 7. 
Sdvres V. v.13. d5dacr VIIL. viii. 3. 
IX. i. 9. ' Sedwxcs VIII. xiii. 7. Sods 
VIII. xiii. 9. Sf5ovres IV. i. 10. 
Séoe IV. i. 12,17, 22, 24,31. IX. 
1.4. Oidobs IV.i.14. V.ix. 7. d- 
douévwy IV. i. 19. Si8dvros ibid. 
didwor IV. 1.19, 31. SsddvrTa IV. i. 
19; “Si... -0@- TV. i. 19. EX. ix. 1. 
d:ddvras IV. i. 30. Sotev IV. i. 35. 
ddckov IV. ii. 3.” Sédwxev V. iv. 13. 
So0évtwy I. x. 138. 

Sietrevar X. iv. 3. Srekcovor X. viii. 7. 
1X. 21. 


OteAGeiy IN. ii, 1. IV.ii. 1. WII. 1. 


IX. xii. 4. Xo i. 1. vic 1. SeeAOdvres 


IV. vii. 1. SeeANAVOapev VIL. i. 4. 

Oinyntixovs III. x. 2. 

inner TX. viii. 2. Sihxovra VIII. ix. 3. 

duixvetrat I. xi. 5. Suixvodyvra I. xiii. 13. 

diéornee V. xi. 9. VIL. vii. 7. Steoraor 
Movird. 

dicatompaye? V. viii. 1, 11. Sieasomparyn 
V. viii. 11. Sieawmpaynoe X. vii. 4. 
dixasompayety X. ii. 2. iii, 2. viii. 4. L. 
viii. 12. V. viii. 4. ix. 2,3.  SiKato- 
mpayouvtos V. ix. 3, dixatomparyovor 
Vel.3: 

dicaompaeynua V. vii. 7. viii. 2. 

diucatompayla V. v. 17. 

dixatos IL.iv. 4,5. TI.v. 15. V.i. 8, 
U5 v.07. vil. 62 vil. DY. 1x; 16s x 
vii. 4. Slequov I. viii..12. xii. 2, 4. 
V.i. 1, 8, 12. ii. 8, 10. iii, 8, 7, 8, 10, 
11, 12, 14. iv. 2,3, 6, 7,14. v. 1,2, 
3, 6,17. vi. 3, 4, 8,9. viii. 10. ix. 
12, 14. x. 1,2, 3, 6, 8 xi 4,9. VIL. 
vi. 4. xiii, 4. VII ix.1,3,4. xi. 1, 
3) 456):7,.8. Xi Sy in. 6. TX" iF 8. 
iii, 2. X. iii, 10. Sixalov V. ii. 9. 
7. Ive 717, 19... vi. 4,550 Vi. 
Te wil, 10,0 ax. 165) x; 2,19,/6,.02- as 
iii, 10. Sicalw V. iv. 2. X. viii. 4. 
Sica IL. i. 4,7. iv. 4. VIL xiii. 1. 
VIM i 4s XS. “Sten: Li. 2. 
viii. 10. Ii 4. iv.1,3,4,5. Vii. 
3,12. vii. 2,5. viii. 4. ix. 15, 17. 
Visas eo7, oo VALSix.:2;- EXows3; 





vi. 3, 4. viii. 5. XX. viii. 1, Sieatow 
Liv. 6. V.i, 3. vii. 596.) vith 1y4, 
ix. 3. xin l. VIL xii..7. “Vine 
Sicatous II. iv. 1. VI. xii. 7. Sieators 
V. viii. 1. VIL. vii. 3. Sueatas X, 
viii. 7. Staudtepov IX. 1.9, Sircaud- 
tarov I. viii. 14. 

Sucasoobvyn V. i. 1, 15, 17, 19, 20. ii. 9, 
10. v.17. x. 8. &xaoodvns II, vii. 
16, IVs ix. 8 V.i..1. i. pte ee: 
xi. 10, VIII. i. 4. Sseasoodvy V. i. 
15. Sikaoovvny IV. i, 10. vii. 7. 
V. i. 2. ii.1.- vis Gy aes 
X. iii, 2. Sieasoobvas V. ii. 7. 

dicasovoda V. ix. 2, 8. Sieasodvra V. 
1X.) 2. 

Siralwua V. vii. 7. 

dicavixods X, ix. 18, 

diucaorhs V. iv. 4,7, 8. Sikacrhy V. iy. 7. 

Sixaorixh VI. viii. 3. 

din V. iv. 8. vi. 4. Sloe VIII xiii, 6. 
dteas IX, i. 9. 

dd Ti, 1. iii. 5. iv. 6 v. 2,8. IL i. 8 
iii. 2, 5, 8. vi. 14.17. viii. 3, 8 ix. 
2,3. TI. v.14. vi. 2. vii. 9. viii. 
15, 16. ix. 2. x. 10. xi. 2,3, 6:79 
2,3, 7,9. IV. i. 4,7, 21, 23, 31, 35. 
ii, 13. iii, 18, 19, 25,29. V.i. 8. iv. 
7. v. 7, 10, 14, 15, 18. vie 5, 6, 9. 
viii. 9. ix. 14, x. 6.: xi. 2y Mie 
ii. 5, 6. vii. 4, 5, 7. viii. 2,4. ix. 4. 
xi, 5,6. xii. 9. VIL. iv. 4, 5,6. vi. 
6. vii. 3,4. viii. 3. x. 2. xi. 3. xii. 
3. xiii. 2. xiv. 4,8. VIII. iii. 5. vi. 
1. viii. 1, 2, 6. xi. 3. xii. 4, 7. xiii. 6. 
xiv. 4. IX. v. 3. viii. 4, 6. ix.2. xi. 
1,5. X.i. 1, 2,4. v.4. vi. 3, i=8, 
10, 19. 


Sioixety VI. viii. 4. 


Avouhdns III. viii. 2. Awphder V. ix. 7. 
Atophinv II. viii. 2. 

dtomoaoyta IX. i. 7. 

dédwep I. vi. 2. IL1. 1. ix. 9. ooee 
834. iii, 81. VIL xiii. 3.  VIIL iii, 5. 
x.6. IX. vi. 1. ix. 7° 237 Snes 
xii. 2. X. iv. 2. ix: 40; 


d:opSovvres IX, xii. 3. 


diopOwrixdy V. ii. 12. iv. 1. v. 2. 


diopiCew IX. viii. 3. X. i. 3. Suoplobe 


Ix. 16. V. viii. 3. xi. 10. VIL. ii. 4 
dtoplCerat I. xiii. 20. IL. iii. 5.  Scopi- 
objoerat II. vii. 5. Stopioas IL. ix. 7. 
Til. i. 1, 16. IV.. veehdigetae cit 2. 
diwopiorat I. viii. 14. V. ii. 8. ix. 1. 
SiwploOy VIL. vii. 1. StopioOaor I. vii. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


23. Swpicpévac X.v.6. Siwpicuévoy | 


VI. i. 3. S:wpiopever I. xii. 1. DIL 
ii. 1, Viv. 17. d:optoréov V. ii. 10, 
1%, TX. i: 10. 

Stoptopds V. vii. 4. ix. 5. 
$5595 X15) 6: 

diére Liv..7- Ve xis 5. VL viii. 5. IX. 
vii. 4. 

dirAG@ IIL. v. 8. 

dls V. iii. 9. 

dioraQomev III. iii. 8, 9. SiardCovor VIL. 
ii. 4. iii. 3. 

d&irrbv I. xiii. 18, 19. 
Sirr7js II. i. 1. 

dirt@s I. iv. 5. vi. 9. vii. 13. 

dixa V. iv. 8, 9. 

dixatov V. iv. 9. 

dixaorThs ibid. 

dix@s VIL. iii. 3. xii. 1. 

dims VIL. iv. 3. Shpas VIL. xiv. 5. 

SiwOeioPa: VIII. xiv. 4. IX. xi. 6. 

Sidcew 1. iii. 7. v.14. ILiii 5. VI 
Bose VL a 2. vid. 4, 5s) oxi. 7. 
xiii, 5. xiv. 2. didkovorV.i. 9. VII. 
iv. 5. ix. 7. xiii. 6. xiv. 4. VIIL 
iii. 4,5. X.ix. 4. dionouer I. vi. 10. 
didneet VIL iii. 2. iv. 4. ix. 1. xi. 4, 
xii, 7. VILL x. 3. didnerar I. i. 4. 
vi. 10. didxwv VIL. ii. 10. iv. 3. vii. 
2. Sweovtt VIL. xiv. 2. SidKovta 
VII. xiv. 4, 5. Siwxdueva I. vi. 8. 
Stwnroy I. vii. 4. 

Stwkts VI. ii. 2. 

donei I. i. 1. v. 4, 6. vi. 7. vii. 5, 6, 10, 
$3623. Wilks 6.. XS: -XiL) 5, “xi:; 2: 
a2: Ewin. 7. Li 3, 13.14 18; 
25, 27. ii. 1,6,10. iv. 1. vi. 3, 6. 
vii. 8. viii. 6,15. xii. 3. IV. i. 1, 5, 
7, 23, 31,32, 37. ii. 1. iii. 3,19, 34, 
36.29, 4.2 882) vil. 1, 8511.. ix. 2. 
V. i. 4, 8, 10, 15, 16,17. iii. 3. v. 1, 
Gs. vi. 6. Vil. 2: xi. 5,9. VI. iii. 3. 


diopiopov V. 


VIII. xiii. 5. 


Ye 42 Vi S, Se 1x; 4s (xi. 5. xu. 1: 
Viss..6. (01,5, G2. vil. 7: six: 5. xi. 


S53. 8) Gs Se 46s, Riv. 3,8: 
WiGE tl, 452i, 2.0 m4. ve 1, 
3:4; “vi, 3. vii. 2. viii. 1, &, 6. ix. 1, 
te a BH Ga Mave di. TX.EB, 
Hid. iv. 3, 5. vii. 7. viii. 1, 6, 10. 
1x, /2, 4.20%, Ki. 1, Sin: 4, iil. 4, 
5, 6, 12. iv. 5. 
vii. 1,3, 6,7. viii. 2,13. ix. 7,13, 21. 
ddfete Li. 4. vi. 1, 14. vii. 10, 17. 
MIS 15-20. vis 72. 3%5.0. Xs 3, 105. Xi. 
Ms. SNe Ol. aul. “a, 7, 14 iv, 


v. 8,9, 10. vi. 3, 6. 








XXi 


Vile Ge) 1X2 2s Vilsis. Vil 0: 
vis 3, VILL. 1. vir. 2. xiv.i4. UX. 
1°85, Us 4. i. S. iv. 4, /6:. svi. 2,77. 
Will. G21Xs UO) EL ONS. xis 5p. Nc. 
iv. 4. vii. 2,5,9. viii. 4. ix. 14, 15, 


16. ore VILiv. 5. IX.x. 3. X. 
ii, 1, ix. 18. Sone I. iii, 2. V. vi. 


i Vil. cin. 13., --doxouce 1.x.) 10; 
TUE 3.2145. iis 7s. “Ve De, vill. 2; 10. 
x. 1. xi 1. IV. i. 4, 20, 30, 38, 39. 
iii. 18, 25, 35. v. 5. vie 1, 7. vii. 14. 
Vilici35ixs:9. Vie vitiz4.- Vil x2. 
VILE ivs4. vin 1s ix. 5... Dice yi. 2: 
Vii (650x652 xi. (35) KV. 1: vind. 
vii. 6. viii. 10. ix. 16. Soxotn IIL. 
ii. 7. Soxovy III. iv. 3. Soxq III. v. 
8. IX. vi. 2. Oddf Veil. 4. Sdtqcev 
IX, i. 5. Xvix. 18, Sd€aor VII. ix. 
4. 6Soxotcas I. iv. 4. Soxowres III. 
viii. 17. Soxovons VII. iii. 18. 6o- 
wxovvtos VIII. xi. 2. IX. viii. 6. do- 
kovo@v X. v. 11. doKxovoa VII. xii. 
1. Soxovcay IX. i. 8. Soxovvtwy IX. 
iv. 8. ddé€avra IX. vi. 1. 

doxcud(ovres IIL. x. 9. Sedoximacuévov 
VIII. iv. 3. 

Soximacta VIII. xii. 6. 

. SoAomAdKou VIL. vi. 3. 

dorvgovia V. ii, 13. E 

Sétas I. iv. 4. Sdtay I. vii. 2. viii, 2, 
TEE 3s LV ts 5. VES i. 3. Se 
IX. xi. 6. Sdfars I. xi 1. VIL xi. 6. 
ddéa III. ii. 10,13, 15. IV. iii. 35. 
Vie-vii8.\ ix. 36 32 VIL 24: ii 9, PIs 
13... Xs-iv...65- .O0by TUS ti. i 15. 
Vie nicl). x. 15-3) Vib ae 73 i 152. 
ddéar X. vii. 6. viii. 12, Sdéqs IV. iii. 
28, vii. 12,13. V.ix.9. VIL viii. 4. 
ix. 3. VIL. ii. 7.. ii.:4,-10. 

dotdCew IIL. ii, 11, 14. d0fdCoucr VII. 
iii. 4, SofdCouer III. ii. 12,13. So- 
Ed¢er IV. iii, 22. SoEdCovres VIL. iii. 
4. do0faévtwy VII. iii. 3. 

Sofacrixov VI. v. 8. xiii. 2. 

ddpu III. i. 17. 

déo1s IV. i. 7. IX. ii. 5. Sdoews IV. i. 
20, 38. IX.i. 8. Séoe IV.i. 1, 8, 11, 
12, 18, 24, 29, 38, 39. iv.2. Sdow II. 
vii. 4. IV.i. 1, 24,29. Séo0es IV. i. 
35. Sdéceor IV. i. 23. 

Soréos V. vi. 7. Soréov IX, ii. 1, 3. 

Sotixol IV. i. 37. 

SovAanatia V. ii. 13. 

SovAcia V. v. 6. 

SovAcvew X. i. 2. 


XXI11 


SovAudy TV, iii, 29, 
dovAos VIIL. xi. 6, 7. 
4. 8SovadAors ibid. 
Opav VIML. xii, 2: LX; xi, Wy he 1m. 145 
dpav VIII. xiii, 2. IX. v. 3. dSpauev 
X. v. 4. Spovras III. v. 7. VIII. 
xili. 9. Spdoavros VIII. xiii. 10, 11. 
dpdoavT: IX. vii. 5, Spdoavras IX. 
vi. 1. 8p@ V. xi. 2. Sp@or IIL. viii. 
4,5,11. IV. iii. 21. V. viii. 10. VII. 
vii. 4. X.v. 4. ix.12, S€dparey VIII. 
xiv. 4, 

Spomnoy I, xii. 2. 

dpdpov II. vi. 7. 

Spd ILI. viii. 10. 

duvdueba II. ii. 9. IX. ix. 5. X. vii. 2. 
divarae II. ii. 8. iv. 4, III. vii. 8. 
IV. i. 26,31. ii, 5. V.i 15. v. 12, 
14 VEL iOS cyt, 6.” Villey.. 2; 
X. vii. 4. Survnodmeda II. ii. 9. ix. 7. 
Svvavrat III. viii. 7, IV. iii. 21. V. i. 
U5. cVi,-v. 5s VL. vii./5,-6.. VILL 
xiii. 4. SdvacOa I.v. 5. IV. iii. 29. 
Vikvil. xun9. Vil. xi4, -X. 1x, 14, 


SovAous VIII. x. 


duvduevor III. viii. 7, 21. X. ix. 16.° 


edUvayto X. ix. 19. Suvduevos VIII. 
xiii. 9. Suvayév@ ibid. Suvayevwy 
VAT, exive. ds 
VIL. xi. 7. Sdynra VII. ii. 8. dv- 
yairo. LV ¥e7. Ve ix. 16. IX. x. 8: 
X. viii. 10. Svvauévous IV. v. 18. 
duvapevots X. ix, 21. 

Sivas I, xiii, 12, V. i. 4. ii 6. VIL 
xii. 9,10. IX. 9, 7. Suvdmews I. viii. 
Mose Wile xny B51 O02 VLA ee 45 xii, 6; 
X. vill. 4. ix. 19. Suvduer IV. vii. 12. 
IX. vii. 4. ix. 7, X. ix. 18. ddvapuw 
Texel Vics vile) 32. Vows 4: 
WATE Sx Ch De RIVes den ah ls Neredke Los 
22. Suvaues II. i. 4. v. 1, 2, 5, 6. 
VI. xi. 2. X. ix. 18. Suvduewy I. ii. 
Oe One dle Veke 4e.- Ike Le 

duvacrelay LY, iii. 18. Svvacrefas VIII. 
i 1. X. vil. 6. Suvacretau LV. iii, 18. 
Suvacteias X. vi. 3. 

Suvacreve X. vi. 4. 
THO: 

duvdorn VIII. xiv. 1. Suvdorgy X. viii. 8. 
duvaorwv X. viii. 10. 

OuvaTOv Nt wi<s. 45, IL i, 1S. vs 14. 
VIII. xiii. 9. xiv. 8. IX. iii. 3. X, viii. 
10. dvvaroi Il. v.2,5. duvarérepor 
VILL. i. 2. Suvard III. iii, 13. 

bvo lexis. 10: TH. vis 6; 7, 15: vill. is 7. 
IX Vetleoouite, IV, cl 0s. Ve De 


duvacrevovres IV. 


Suvduevoy VII, iii. 9. . 


. eyylvorvrat I, i. 3. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


vil. 1. ix. 8. VL iS. , xiii, 2. ER 
iii, 6. xiv..3. VIIL i..2.. 1X, ive 
X. v. 4. dvow V. iii, 5 VI 28s 
duct IV. i. 29, 38. V. iii. 4,9. iv. 10. 
ViI.v..6. VEL 3. DX x. & 

ducapalperov I. v. 4. 

Svoyevis I. viii. 16. 

dvod:dAvrot IV. v. 10. 

SvceAms III. vii. 11. 

ddcepis II, vii. 13. IV. vi. 9. Suoépibes 
lV. vi. 2. 

dboKodos IIL. vii. 13. IV. vi. 9.  Sto- 
coda IV, 6, 2. Svoxordrepa VILL. 
vi. 1. 

dvomeorot VIL. ix. 2. ° 

dvompattat I. xi. 6. 

dvotuxav IX. xi. 5. 
Vie 2: 

Svoruxnudtoy I. x. 3. 

dvoTvxtat Ix. 3. Svorvxtas VIL. xiii. 3. 
VIII, i. 2. IX. xi. 1, 2. 

dvorxepaive IIL. xi. 8, IV. viii. 10. VIL. 
xiii, 2. IX. ix. 6. dvexepalvovor II. 
vi. 11. Svoxepaivey IIL. i, 18. IV. 
vi.9. Svoxepatvoyres IV. viii. 3. dv- 
oxepaivoy X. ix. 10. Svexepavet IV. 
vi. 3;-7. 

dvoxeph VIL i. 5. X.v. 10. dvoxepav 
IX, iv. 9. 

Swpeas IV, ii. 15. 

Swpetrat VIII. xiii. 7. 

dépnua I. ix. 2. 

dwpoddcm VIII. xiv. 4. 

Sépou IV. ii. 18. Sapa IV. ii. 15. 


dvotuxovvT: X. 


E. 


éay IT. v. 2,3. vi. 4. IID. iii, 185 wir8s 
viii, 16. IV.4. 19, 25. iii. 7.2 Wis 
vil. 5. V.i. 5,6. fil 9. iv. 2,:7, ees 
viii, 1]. ix. VIL i. 5.. vi. 1. ieee 
xiii. 38, xiv. 6. VIIL iii. 3, 4. iv. 1. 
v. 1. vi. 6. vii. 4. viii. 3. xiii. 2. IX. 
ii. 1,5. iii. 3. viii, 9.. xi 3... X.dids 
v. 3, 4. 

édy ye III, v. 14. 

éap I. vii. 16. 

éaréoy I, xiii. 14. 

€@ V. xi. 2. é@per V. vi. 5. 

eyyliverau II. i. 2. 

eyytn V. ii. 3. 

eyyunths V.v. 14. 

éyyts IIL. x..7. V. xi. 7., Vilawiteg. 
VIII. viii. 1. &yytov IX. viii. 2. ey- 
ybrepov IL. viii. 7. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


&yeipe III. viii. 10. 

éyepow III. viii. 10. 

eynaret IX. 1.2. éyradotor IX. viii. 1. 
éynadéoe: VIII. xiii. 8. eyxadréoere IX. 
iii. 1. éykadoln VIII. xiii. 2. ey- 
kadew IX. iii. 2. e@yead@y VIII. xiii. 
3. eykadetrat LV. i. 21. 

eyAnuata V. iii. 6. VILL. xiii. 2, 5,11. 
éeyxAtpact IX. i. 6, 7. 

eyrAnuatixny VIII. xiii. 4. 

éeykaréAure V. ii. 5. 

éyxpdre, IV. ix 8. VII. i. 6. ii. 6, 7, 
Ts iii; 2. 'v..9. ‘vi. 5. vii. 4.- ix. 5, 6. 
x. 3,5. éyxparelas VII. i. 4. xiv. 9. 
eyepdrevay VIL. i. 1. iv. 6. vii. 6. 

eyxparhns IIL. ii. 4. VIL i. 6. ii. 6. iii. 
Fe Vile Ba Xe Lyne 30,00. LAS VINO: 
eyxparovs I. xiii. 15, 17. eyxpare? 
Vix. 1,2, 3. eyxpary VIL. 1.6. 
jii, 1. iv. 4. é@yxparets VII. iv. 1. 
vii. 1. . 

eyxurAtots I. vy. 6. 

eyxdmea I. xii. 6, 7. 

éyxetpovor IIL. iii. 13. 

eyrexpwopmévor LI, iii. 8. 

&yw IX. xi. 5. 

€dwd7 IIL. x. 7. 

HOcAev IX. vi. 2. 

eGicera: IL. i. 2. eOiobefn IL.i.2. IV. 
i831. €6l@ IL i. 2. e@i(ovres II. i. 
5. €OCdwevor 1.1.7. ii.9. e0iCer Pan 


Il. i. 8. X. ix. 9. CO: O7Rvar III. 
xii, 2, X. ix. 11. @:Couevors VII. 
vy. 3. 


eOicwod VII. x. 4. 
e@.opol III. xii. 2. 

Z6ver I. ii. 8. 

€00s VII. v. 4. xiv. 4. @@ovus IT. i. 1, 3. 
VII. v. 3. x.4. €0e. X.ix.6. 7 VII. 
ve 1. @€eorl. iv. 6 X. x. 6, 10, 23. 

eiwOact II. vi. 9. VII. i. 8. VIII. vi. 6. 
xed. DX, vili.-5. 

eVs-v.-6s ix. 2; Vi. wih 2. Vili.-2; 
yi. 1. 

ei 5¢ why VIL. i. 5. 

ef wh VI. vii. 4. xiii. 7. VII. xiii. 7. 
WELT: 31. 95-iv. 2). xiv. 1. 
vi. 8. viii. 9. 

efye VII. ii. 4. 

eldomoiwy X. iv. 3. 

el5os I. vi. 8,10. V. ii. 12. iii, 17. iv. 
2. VI. vill, 4, 9. VIL v. 9. vil. 3. 
WADE etd GV ails: Xe Gen EVs: 05 
Movivey 2, dovs2s efoet VII. as 
ifs. 1.:y. 5. IX. vy. 8. -X.-iii..10;-14, 


Cong I. vii. 21. 


X. iii. 4, 12.: 


| 
| 





XX 


ef5n I. vi. 1. 


USSaIVes Garton 15 2.6 
de eV netbeanys 


Vix Vila: 
A. G.ke Ie kaise o- 

cld@uev Levi. 4. IT. ii.1.  eiSds I. vi. 16. 
saivirG ols. oA at xec4on WVelevic. ls 
Vile fe Ville 3}18.01%-.95-x1052;. Vi. vis 
dee Nille ae Ville a6. Oe HX i 5: 
X. ix, 15. efrerar IX. viii. 2. idety 
TWris4. Vie ix: 40 “Vilsev als, exe 
vill. 10.. Hoe: TU: 3. 138) Vi x: 5: 
eldein VI. i. 2. vii. 7. Z8wor VI. vii. 
5. ei6drosIL.ix.2. X.ix.17. dds 
III. i. 20. VIII. viii. 6. eiddéra V. 
ix. 4,6. VII. iii. 14.  efSdéor X. vii. 3. 


eidéTwy VI. vii. 7. VIII. viii. 2. ofde 
TX. xi.3.  efSjoa VIII. iii. 8. 25 uzan 


VIII. viii. 3. eldSeinuey IV. vii. 1. 
eidévan I. iii. 7, xiii. 7. I. iv. 3. TI, 
B75, Ve ixe 15s. Vibvil. 3/5. vill. 4; 
Kos) VALS ils Rae. ON a de iis 
12, ix. 1,19. eiSéres III. v. 22. V. 
Witiwee Vis Vilecde Waite. 4808 
Tleexts Gs Ve evil 6: Villy Sie 
iddv III. x. 7. eiodueda I. vi. 14, 

ele V. v. 8. 

elxa(ov II. vi. 14. 

eixds VIII. iii. 8. IX, x. 4. X. viii. 
13. 

eixéros I. ix.9. xiii. 13. IV.i.44. IX, 
1s 6)-7e-,Vills 25 LO, xan, 1 

éouwe I. vii. 2,12, 15. viii. 17. x. 10. xi. 
S75. xe8; wit 5s Ili. 10) 12% 
145197. ie LL PS ivbejys, 47 
Vis 1 LO 2. 2G. xu) 6.85 bc 
ii, 5. iii. 1, 16, 35. iv. 1, 4, 6. vi. 4, 
Woovits TOS im Ts WE xiss7-- xiii: 1% 
VII. iii. 18. vi. 1. x. 3,4. VII. i. 3, 
De Wade Vie Ze 4, Vile, 85:4. 18228, 6: 
Xi 0s,7 X10 OeML sX1v eos, nets ae 
HYs Ugh 2es Wad Ge sVile bool VG, oEx,t2557- 
OF EXAGi eX O-1 Mallne, Otaliba LO; Viele 
Se eNe (attVie se LVAlis al byt Gs Jee Oe 
éolkact I.v.1,5. vi. 7. UL i.6. VI. 
xiii. 4. VII. ix. 8. VIII. v. 3. viii. 2. 
1X64) Oe Ri AC Ae aavc ltd oe 
ix. 20. égxe: VII. i. 1. 

eiAucpivods X. vi. 4. 

elvat VI. viii. 1. IX. xii. 2. 
vii. 4. ix. 9. dvTwy VILi. 5. eoope- 
vov VI. ii. 6. €orw VI. iii. 1. aor. 
tat VI. vii. 4. ¢oduevoy X. ix. 11. 
éueva: VIL. x. 4, 

etrep I. vi. 5, 6. vii. 10. viii. 13. ix. 5. 
xv 8; 14; Ik ix. 3:- IV. iit 14. ix. 
4 V. iv. 7. -vi.. 6. vii.-4. 1x: 9. VI. 


éopev IX. 


XX1V INDEX VERBORUM. 
i. 5. 1. 2. v.38. x1 1. VIL vi3. vii | ITD. iii. 7. IV.ii. 85. DX. xi. See 
@eulXs One Xie ee Vil lew lieve Xie oy v.2. éxdotm I. viii. 10. II. ix. 2, 
TX. vill. 7oixed. Sov. Se vil.9:. vii. III. iv. 3,4. v.19. IV. i. 6. VILL. ii. 
3, 4.1%. 17,19. 2. iii. 6. v. 4. vii. 1. x. 6. xt, 4 ER, 
elphynv X, vii. 6. ix. 10. X. iv. 10, v. 8. vi. 5. vii. 9. 
elpwv II. vii. 12. IV. vii. 38.  eYpwves viii. 1. ix, 14,16. €xaora I. iii. 4, 7. 
IV. vii. 14. I. ii. 4. vii. 1. rx. 8& Ted IOS; 
eipwvela Il. vii. 12. IV. ili. 28. eipw- 20. iii. 16. iv. 4. v. 10, 12, 22. viii. 
veia IV. vii. 16. eipwvelay IV, iii. 6. xii.4. IV. iii. 15. v.13, vi. 5. vii. 
28. 5. V. vii. 1, 6. VI. vii. 4, 7. viii. 2, 5. 
elpwvevduevor IV. vii. 16. xi. 8,4. xii. 7. xiii. 1. VIL. iii. 6, 9, 
eis Levi. So “Vile 14. VEL iw, 5:-v. 4, 1]. v1. vi. 5. DX. iv.ib, SBe ve 2: 
UX iS. viis'o) ke k4.. ep. 1. Va, ix. 1,20. éxdorov IIL. v. 7. IX. iv. 


Sy75.85 L2, 1obvile os vill-a7., U1 Vie. d: 2. éxdoros I. vii. 18. III. iv. 4, 5. 
TU xis 3.0 DV 7ia.5y iu: Doe Va, 330, 12 IV. ii. 16. vi. 5,8. TX. 4. Siri, 9: 
Wiss T¥eu)s Vs 1S,, ES. vi. 6. dx14. xii. 2. éxdorovs I. ii.6. VILL. ix. 3. 


Vii 5, (6; VEL-ni 9. VILL i.5, 7. 
iv.4.. TX xe 3, Xsix I$: pla devi. 
4.yi. VOs Ui 25 -wui..8:.. V; “wie: 
Wile vite 40 VER is 9S, SX ne Sev: tepov II. viii. 3. V. iii. 13. viii. 3. 
1]. és I. vi. 12, X ix. 12, 16. ix. 2. VT.i. 5,6. VIL vi. 7.. DX yi. 
puds I, viii, 1. ig I. vi. 3. VIL xiii. 2. éxarépas II. vii. 16. V. v. 19. 
6. évt I; li. 8. gE i. 7 oh V. ii. 6. iii. éxatépou ye vi. 5. IV. Vii. 6. VIL is 
OF val: Vv. Lie (era DVelooos. Vols 6. xii. 4. VIIL iii. 9. xii. 7. éxa- 
13s Vis:vil. 32° Vilblvis 2: - xsd. Tépat D6, By & éxarepa VI xi 2s 
pioy Ti, 4. vi. 4,9, 11. viii, 14, IL iv. 2. éxarépav VIL i 4. éxarépp 
viii, 7. VII. xiv. 8, IX. viii. 9. VIII. iii. 8, 9. vii. 2. xiv. 2. éxdr- 
ciadmag IV. ii. 15. epor IX, viii. 3, 
eicavits I. vii. 7. IV. vi. 8. | éxardpBo V. ix. 7. 
clapépwv IV. ii. 20.  eicevexbévta V. | exBoras IIL. i. 5. 
iv. 2. éxydvev I. x. 5. VIII. xi. 2. exydvous 
elra I.vii. 17, TH. i: 23...vi 7. IV. L xa 
iii. 36. v.8. V.v.8 VIL iil. vil. | exdexduea IV. i. 5. 
Rill Ae le Os Meds. ke ike eae éxet V. x. 5. VII. viii. 4. xetoe IX. 
etre IIL. iii. 4. v.19. IV. viii. 10. VIII. iv. 9. 
1X1, Oc- Moe tll evils 1s xs LL 17: éxeivos I. iv. 7. III. vii. 8. V. ii. 4. 
elris VII. iv. 5. fre X. ix. 23. frp VII. iv. 4. viii. 4. VIIL vii. 6. éx- 
Kev 55105 etvo II. ii. 8. III. iii, 11. TX iv. 4. 
éxaoros I. iii. 5. TI. iii. 17. v. 17. vii. éxeivov I. x. 6. V.v. 8. ix. 6. xi. 4. 
5a VAM es Vil Os. Kills 2o0 A IV. VIII. ii. 3. vii. 6. UX iii, 2. iv. 1. v. 
3,4. -vi. 4. vill.-6.. X. iv. 10. ‘vii, 9. 3. viii. 2. éxelyns VI. viii. 9. ix. 6. 
ix. 18,15, éxdorn X. ix. 23. &a- xii, 8. xiii. 8. VILL vi. 7. X. ives: 


éxdoras I. vii, 22. X. ix. 23. 
éxarepos II. viii. 3. III. x. 2, VIIL. iii. 
6, 8. v. 5. xiv. 1,2. [X.vi2. €xa- 


orov I. iii. 4,5. vi. 16. vii. 5,15. viii. 
WSeo wa deoxls 2. As Xie 2.) UE ix 7. 
TLDS VitecGs XUcoe, LV ee, Oy der Vile). 
Vers 12s ai. V1 vii, Gi: 76 1x. 16s. VE 
Wilds Vis Veo Khe ees Mike. Os. WEL iil, 
QUNOF IVs 10,105 Xin ikon KIVGOs WILDE. 
Hisvlenvils Qe OX, Wwe02s a. 1. ix: 
15. €kdorov I. vii. 11. IX. viii. 6. 
X. v.10. ix. 21. éxdorns I. vii. 1. 
NMey23h. Ville xiAb. exi:2: - vexed: 
otn IV. iii. 14. é«dorny IIT. iv. 5. 
VewlOstvin.ls VEL vive 6; Vill. xi: 
1. xiii, 1. X. iv. 7. v. 2,6. Exaoror 





exelvp V. vy. 8. ix. 13. VIL. iy. 2, 
VIL. xii. 2. IX. 5. v. 3. exetvn 
VI. xiii. 8. VIII. x. 5. éxetvoy VIII, 
iv. 1. éxetvor IID. viii. 16. VIIL iv. 
6. viii. 3. @xefvwy IIL. ix. 6. IV. iii. 
16, 21. V. ii. 9. vii. 6. VIL. viii. 3. 
VII. iv. 4. VIII, ii. 3, 4, 6. v. 5. xii. 
2,3. IX. iii. 1. ix. 5. éxelvos I. xi. 
5. IV. iii. 26. VIII. xiii. 10. IX. xi. 
4. éxelvovs IX. vii. 2. éxeiva I. v. 
8. V. iii. 6. VIII. iii. 3. xii. 3. exefynv 
V. iv. 3. Kdnetva V. iii. 6. 


éxOéovar VII. yi. 1. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


exxayxa cover VII. vii. 6. 
éxxpovovor III. xii. 7. 
xiv. 4. X.v. 4. 
exAciacOat X. ix. 20. 
exaroyhv X. ix. 20. 
éxovctos V. ii. 13. €xodcrov III. i.6, 13, 
20. ii. 2,16. v. 4.17, 19. xii. 2, 3. 
V. iv. 14. v. 5. viii. 2,3. ix. 1, 2, 8. 
xi. 5,7. é€xovolov III. ii. 1,2. V.iv. 
13. éxovotw III. xii. 1. 


éxxpover VII. 


V. viii. 2. | 


éxoveta IIL. i. 4, 6, 10. ii. 2. v. 6,7. | 


xii. 4. V.ii.13. éxovorn III. v. 1, 
15, 20, 21,22. éxovolwy V. viii. 5. TX. 
i. 9. €xovotos III. i. 1, 6,10. IV. 
ix. 6. V. iv. 1. éovolws III. i. 22, 
23. v.19. V. xi. 6. LX. viii. 6. 

éxmecety III. i. 17. 

exotatixds VII. i. 6. viii. 5. 
mux VIL. ii. 7. 
viii. 2. 

éxrds I. viii. 2, 3, 6,15. x. 3, 15. II. 
ix. 3. III. i. 10, 11. IV. iii. 10, 35. 
VII. xiii. 2. X. viii. 4, 11. 

“Extwp III. viii. 2,4. “Exropos VII. i. 
1. “Extopa III, viii. 2. 

€xov TIL i. 5, 6,13. v. 4, 138,14. IV, 
ix. 6. V. viii. 1,3, 11. ix. 1,4, 5, 6, 
Os 32.3; 35. VI. v. 7... VII. x.:3. . éx- 
évres II. v.14. V.ix. 2. VIL. xiii. 
3. éxdyrt VIII. xiii. 9. éxovoav V. 
ix. 2. éxévtos V.ix. 5. éxdvta V. 

xt.d, 4,5; 10. xis 8. VIL i. 5. X. 
ix. 11. 

aédrrav IV. iii. 25. €Aarrov II. vi. 4. 
vii. 12. viii. 2. IV. vii. 9,14. V.i. 
10. iii. 1, 4, 14, 15, 16. iv. 6,11, 13, 
14, v. 17, 18. vi. 4. xi. 7. VILL xiii. 
4. xiv. 3. X. vii. 5. viii. 4. éAdrro- 
vos V. iv. 6,9. VII. viii. 2. éAdrro- 
vu V.iv. 8. VII. xiii. 1. é€Adrrw IL. 
ii. 6. IV. i. 18, 19. vii. 3,4. V. vii. 
RN is3. VILL ts. BS: DS hi 2. 
érarroverv IV. i. 19. iii. 7, 17. 

éAarroupevy VIII. xiv. 3. 

éAartwtixds V. ix. 9. x. 8. 

éAagoy III. x. 7. 

éAadporépors I. xi. 3. 

eAdxiotov IV. ii. 21. VIII. x. 3. 
axiorou I. vii. 8. IV. ii. 9. &Adxuora 
Il. ix. 4. éAaxloros V. iii. 4,5, 
8, 10. 

éreyxeinv IIL. viii. 2. 

éréyxew VII. ii. 8. 

"Edevny IL. ix. 6. 

éAejou II. v. 2. vi. 10. III. v. 15. 


VOL. II. 


éxora- 
éxoratixol VII. 


rr 


eA- ' 








d 


XXV 


eos III. i. 16. 
eov II. v. 2. 
€Aec III. viii. 11. 
éAcubepia X. viii. 4. @Aev@eplay V. iii. 7. 
éAevdépios II, viii. 2. IV. i. 1, 6, 12, 14, 
23, 24, 26,31. ii. 3,10. éAevOepfov 
H, vii..6. 1Vi2.'75°04, 18. “vite 5. XK. 
vi. 4. éAev@epip IV. viii. 5, 7. VIL. 
ix. 2. X. viii. 4. éAev@époy I. viii. 
12. TV .3. 19,20; ii. 102 Vevie4. 
VIIL vi. 4. éAev@épio: IIT. vi. 4. IV. 
i. 10, 11, 35. €AevOépiorts I. viii. 12. 
éAevGepious X. viii. 7. ix. 3. éAev- 
Oepiwrépa VIII. xiii. 6. €AevOepi@tepov 
IV. i. 19. €AevOepidrepo IV. i. 20. 
eAevOepiérarat III. x. 11. 

eAevOepiérys II. vii. 4. IV.i. 18. ii. 1. 
iv. 1. éAevOepidrgros IV. i. 1, 24, 25. 
ii, 1, 10. éAevOepidrnt: IV. i. 44. 
éAevOepiérnta I. xiii. 20. Il. vii. 8. 
Wills 52: TV. i 10;:22; 

éAcet VIL. vii. 5. IX. iv. 9. €Axot VIII. 
vill. 6. é€Axduevos VIL. vi. 2. 

éAxtoa VIL. vi. 2. 

€AA€Bopoy V. ix. 15. 

éAAciwew ID. vi. 16. eAAelwer II. vi. 5. 
vii. 4,15. IIL. vii. 10. IV. i. 29. iii. 
12. V.x.6. éAdAelroy II. vii. 2, 8, 
10, 13, 14. IV. iii. 35. VII. vii. 2, 
5. @AdAcelwortes II. vii. 3. III. xi. 7. 
éAAcimov I. vii. 17. VIIL.i. 2. ea- 
Aetrovta II. ii. 6. ¢AAelrovar II. 
vii. 4. viii. 2. III. vii. 12. IV. i. 38, 
39. iii. 8. éAAelwortas II. ix. 7. IV. 
v.13. IX. vi. 4. éAdAepéev V. x. 5. 

Zarenus I. iii. 7. IL. vi. 10, 12, 14, 20. 
vii. 4, 6, 7,10. viii. 6. IV. ii. 4. iv. 
2,4. v. 5. vii. 15. viii. 2, V.v. 18. 
éaAehpews IL. ii. 7. vi. 4, 9, 19, 20. 
V.v. 18. VIL i. 1. eAdetbe: IV. i. 
88. ii. 21. EAAenwy IT. vi. 8, 15, 19. 
viii. 1. ix. 1,9. I. x.3. IV. v. 3, 4. 
V. v.10. ix. 17. VILi. 1. eAdetpes 
IL vi. 18. vii. 2. IV.i 3, 29. v. 14. 
VIL. vii. 2. 

éAAoya X. ii. 1. 

mle: IX. ii. 5. éAmlCover IX. iv. 9. 

éAmida I. ix. 10. VIII. viii. 2. IX. v. 3. 
éamtSes IX. iv. 5. X. iii. 7. éAmldas 
VIII. iii. 4. 

éuBare IIT. viii. x. 

éuBdAémortes X. iv. 9. 

éuBpvors I. xiii. 11. 

euuedns IV. viii. 1. 
vii. 9. 


éAcov III. i. 1. EA- 


éupedcotepov IV. 


XXV1 


eupea@s I. x. 11. IV. iii. 21. viii. 3. 
1D. 0) 

€umevetinds VII. i. 6. viii. 5. x. 8. eu 
peverixoy VIL. ii. 7. €uueverixol VIL. 
ix. 2. 

é€uuever VIL. viii. 1. ix. 1,5. x. 4. Qu 
pévoy VIL. ii. 7. ix. 1, 5. eupévover 
XII. vii. 8. ix. 4. éumetvar IIL. i. 10. 
évéwewey VIL. ix. 4. éuperdvrwy VIL, 
x. 4. 

’Euredonanjs VILL. i. 6. 
VIL. iii. 8, 138. 

éumepia IID. viii. 6. X. ix. 19. @ume- 
plas II. i. 1. IIL. viii. 7. VL viii. 5, 
6. xi. 6. X. ix. 19. €umerplay IIL. vi. 
Ll. VI, vili.. 6s. VER. vis. .25:ix. 
16. éumecpia X. ix. 18. 

gureipos VI, viii. 5. Eumerpor VI. vii, 7. 
X. ix. 20. €umelpwy VI. xi. 6. eumel- 
pos X. ix. 21. 

éumodiCe: I. x. 12, VIL. xi. 5. eumodiCnrat 
VII. xiii. 2. €urod:Couevn VIL. xiii. 2. 

eumodiotixy VII. xiii. 2. 

éumddios VII. xiii. 4. €umddsov VII. xi. 
4. éumddioc IX. x. 2. umodious X. 
v. 3. eumddia X, viii, 5. eurodiay 
DU x1 82 

éurodwy IV. vii. 16. V. v. 7. 

éumowtoa IV. vy. 10. éeumowvvTa IV. 
v. 2. 

éumpootev VIII. i. 7. 

eupaiverOar I. vi. 11. 

eupavérraroy VIIL. vii. 4 

éupavicew X. iii, 11. 

Eugpova I, x. 13. 

éuvixou IX. vii. 3. Euuxov V, iv. 7. 
Vise? VELL. 2h. Ox 

evaradde V. iii. 11. 

évavtios III. vii. 11. VII. viii. 4, 5. 
évaytia I. xiii. 15. IL, viii. 5, 8. III. 
iv.8. IV. 1.24: V, 14,6, 19:- Vil. 
i. 1. iii, 10. iv. 5. xiv. 2,6. évavriov 
I..x. 9. Dl. ix. 8.” VIO vith. 2. ak 
2,5. evayrias I. x. 4. IV. vi. 2, V. 
i. 5. VII. iii. 10. ix. .6.. ; VOHS,.6; 
x.2. X.i.2. évavriow I. xi. 5. xiii. 
15. IL. iii. 6. viii. 7. ix. 5. IV. i, 44. 
V. iv. 6. VI. ii. 4, VII. ix. 5. xiii, 1. 
xiv. 2,4, VIIL. viii. 7. x. 2. X. ii, 2. 
évaytiat I. x. 9. IL. viii, 1. IV. i, 24, 
VIL. xiv. 2. évavrtwy I, vi. 8. IL. iii. 
7. Vil. iti, 4. V. i, 4. Vid sae. 6 
évayri@tepa II. viii. 7, 8. évavriots 
VII. xii. 2. 

évayt.éTns II. viii. 4. 


’EuredoxAéous 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


évayriovrat IIT. ii. 5. evavrideba III. 
xii. 7. @vavtiovyra: X. ix. 10. évay- 
Tioumévous X. ix. 12. évayriotmevov 
i xin. 16. 

évaytiws Il. vii. 
xiv..2: 

évavtiwois IV. vi. 7. 

évapyav I. iv. 8. évapyéorepor I. vii. 9. 

évapyas VII. ii. 2. X, iii. 2. viii. 10. 

évSehs IIL. xi. 1. VIII. viii. 6. xiv. 1. 
IX. ix. 10. X. iv, 1,2. vi. 2. évdeés 


4, V. iv, 6. VIL. 


I. vi. 15. évdeods VII. xiv, 4. dea 
I. vii. 7. evdee?s VIII. v. 38. X. iii. 6. 


évdeéot VIII. xiv. 1. évdeet VIII. 
xiv. 2. 

évdea IL. viii. 6. evdelas II. ii. 6. III. 
xi, 3. IV. i. 20. VIL iv. 4. VIII. xiv. 
2. dem X. iii. 7. Evdercay X, iii. 6. 

évBelxvvc at I. iii, 4 

évdéxerau I. viii. 9. ix. 11. x. 4, IL. iv, 
2. V.v. 15. vii. 4. viii. 3. ix. 8,4,9. 
xiv 1. VIL ii 6: iil. v.08) yi Sie 
6. VIL. iii. 14. x. 1. xiii. 7. VIII. iv. 
2. vi, 2,3. IX. iii. 4. viii, 10. X iii. 
4. vii. 8. viii. 9, 11. ix. 6. évdexorro 
V. ix. 4. évdéxovra VI. i. 5. vy. 8. 
evdéxecOu I. v. 6. VI. iii. 2. VIL i. 
7. xi.3. IX x. 5. XK ivi 4, Oe 
xnro. VIII. viii, 3. IX. ii, 1, 10. 
évdexduevov IX.i. 7. evdexdueva VI. 
i. 5. iii. 1. vil, 2. VIEL xiv See 
vi. 2. evdexouevov VIL. ii. 6. iv. 1, 
6. v. 8. xi. 4. rbex oneness vii. 4. 
VI.i. 6. iv. 4. v. 3. 

évdeovons VII, xii. 2. 

dot I. viii. 7. evddtors IV. ii. 14. 
évddtwy IV, vii. 2. evdota LV. vii. 14. 
VII. i. 5. 

éveivas VII. xiv. 18. 
évovoa VII. iii. 10. 
ii, 1. 

*Evduptwva X. viii. 7. 

évexa I. vii. 1, IL. ii. 2. vi. 1. vii. 18. 
ix. 2. III. i. 16,18. iii. 15. vii. 2, 5, 
6. viii. 12. ix. 3. IV. i. 12, 14,20, 35, 
40, 43. ii. 6, 20. iii, 15. vi 8. vii. 5, 
10,11, 14. V. ii. 4. viii, 3, 6. VIL iit. 
4,5. v. 6. xi, 4. xii, 1, 7, 8 xiii. 8. 
VIL. viii, 4. x. 3, xiii, 7, VILL ii. 3, 
6. iv. 4. v. 5. vii. 6. ix. 5, UXaes 
iv. 1,3. vii. 2. viii. 1, 2,9. Diao 
vi. 6. vii. 6. 

éverey VIL. xii. 1. 

évépyeis I. vii. 14, 15. viii. 8. ix. 7. 
xiii, 1. IIL. xii. 7. VIL. xii. 2, 3. 


evy VII. iii, 10. 
évovons VII. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


xiii, 2, 7. X. xiv. 8. IX. vii. 6. ix. 5, 
6. xil. 1. Xi jiv. 5,9. v.6. vi. 5. vu. 
1, 2,7,8. viii. 7. ev pyelas I. i. 5. 
viii. 2. ix. 9. x. 10. Ii. 4, 8. UL. 
vii. 6. VII. xii. 6. X.iv. 10, 11. v. 1, 
3, 5. vi. 6. viii. 4,5, 8. evepyela I. 
wiiio.1 IX Wi. 43x07. K iv. 8, 9. 
y. 2,5. évépyeiay I. vii. 13, 14. viii. 
9.ix 9. xiii '6, VIL. xii. 3. VIIL. v. 
Ti. PX: vite 6, ik. 7. X.-iv. 6, 8; 11. 
v. 2,3, 6, 8. vi 2,8, 7. vii 7. éy- 
épyeim I. i. 2. viii. 3. x. 9,13. IL. ii, 
a UE. v. 7, 10.) Vil. xii 2: -xiii.2; 
Po EEE a Te V7; 11. Vie, WAG; 
viii. 1. évepye@v Ii. 2. I. i.7. X. 
v. 6,11. vi. 2. vii. 3. évepyetats I. viii. 
14, x. 12. IV. ii. 6. X. v. 3, 6. vi. 8. 

*vepyet LL. iii. 3. VII. iii. 6,10. X iv. 
9,10. évepyf X.iv. 7. v.4. ep- 
yetv I. xiii, 12. IIL. v. 12. ix. 5. VI. 
xii. 5. VIII. v. 1. IX. ix. 5. X. iii. 4. 
iv. 5,9. v. 4. viii. 7. evepyotvra I. 
x. 15. évepyav V.ii. 2. X. viii. 13. 
évepyoovres III. v. 11. IX. xii. 3. X. 
vy. 2. viii. 10. ix. 18. évepyovper IX. 
ix. 9. évepyovons X.iv. 5. évepyh- 
caves LI. i. 4. 

év6a VIL. iii. 9. 

evOdde V. vii. 2. 

evdey VI. vy. 5. 

eviavtov IX. viii. 9. 

emaxo IX. i. 8. 

mo I. iv. 8. viii. 17. TID. ii. 14. vi. 4. 
TV.i.S9.. IL iv. 7. ix. 2. VI. vii..7. 
VIL. iii. 3,4. vii. 8. VII. i. 5. X. 
ix. 16. Gu VII. vii. 2. xi. 3. xii. 1. 
xiii. 2. VIII. viii. 3. ix. 5. éviwy I. 
Pie 16ee TEL iii. 1. V3 x04... Vivi 
1. VII. xiii. 2. eévtors I. viii. 5. II. 
i. 7. vs 15. xi. 4. V. vii. 2. VII. iii. 
7. v. 3. VILL xiii. 6. IX.i.6. %a 
Bx 9: I... vi..18. IIL 1, 8. vi. &. 
xj. 2. IV. viii. 9,10. VI. vii. 4. xi. 
Be Viled 8.1.7. 1v,15.. ve 1, 6-4 x10 
5. xii..4. X. iv. 9. viii. 2. 

éviore III. i. 1,7, 9, 16. IV. i. 3, 35, 
Seva tS. tn. 16. VIL. Ve75 xv. 
VIII. ii, 2. 4. iv. 1. viii. 6. x. 5. IX. 
i 2, 5. xi. 6. 

éeviorduevot X. ii. 4, 

éevioxver X. ix. 14. 

évveaBolwy V. ix. 7. 

évvoeiv IX. vi. 2. 

évvoie, IX, xi. 2. 
View. 1x. 4. 


évvoww IX. xi. 5. X. 





d 2 


XXVli 


€voxos VIL. ii. 10. 
évravéa IV. ii. 17. iv. 6. villi. 1. VI. 
Wiki, de 44. oxi. Ay. VELsiv.-6." vi... 2: 
viii. 4. VIII. viii. 6. x. 6. TX i. 2. xi. 1. 
évredOey V. iii. 6. VI. iii. 2. x. 4. VII. 
Xo As As Vill. .7s 
€vriwot III. viii. 1. 
évrivos IV, iii. 36. 


évtima IV. iii. 27. 
évtiudtepov IV. 


iii, 19. évrmotdras I. ii. 6. évTiud- 
tata IV. ii. 15. 
évtuyxavover: IV. vi. 1. évtuyxdvovtes 


IX. x. 6. évtvxwor IIT. iii. 13. 
évurapxev VIII. i. 8. évumdpxovoa X. 
iv. 8. 


ef II. vi. 6, 7. 

elaywyis V. v. 13. 

étalpyns IIL. ii. 2. viii. 15. 

étaxpiBot X. v. 5. é€axpiBovr I. vi. 13. 
xii. 7. xiii. 8.  @£axpiBovor X. v. 2. 
etaxpiBotobar X. ix. 15. 

éfaueAoupéevwy X. ix. 14. 
DSi as GE 

etnpynkéte I. viii. 9. 

egetvor VILL. xiv. 4. 
VIII. xiii. 10. 

étedatve: VIL. xiv. 6. éfeAadvove: VII. 
i 4. ekeAavydueva III. viii. 12. 

efeAdyxovrat LV. iii. 36. 

eferd(er IX. vi. 4. téardCew I. iv. 4. 

éfjs IL. vii. 9. IV.i. 1. 

eis I. iii. 5. vi. 1,8, 15. vii. 13. ix. 9. 
1Ve is/6. ive.b. V2 15.45) vite N2s- Var. 
4, 5,20. x.8. VILi.6. ii. 2,6. iii. 
4. iv.2,3,6. y.8. viii. 1. xii. 10. 
xiil. 2,4, 5. VIL. 2. ik 6... vill. 5. 
xii. 2. xiii. 6. X.iv. 8. vi. 2. Efews 
TIL vy; 173. -vitt. 19: TV. di..4..5 y..14. 
ix. 2. VLiis4. iv..2.° ¥,:8.- xii. 
VIEL x. 42 xii, 2; 3. xi. 2. VOL v. 
Sa Xin. «dhe -vin::9, TV. 16 
19. viii. 5. ix. 1. VIII v.5. ew I. 
viii. 9. xiii, 20. III. iv. 4. vii. 6. 
viii, 15. IV. iii. 2. vi. 4. vii. 7. V. 
Goon Wile 45 Gi Sn gi, VEL die ee 
xii. 2. VII v. 1, 5. vi. 5.  egeis II. 
1.0184. Soe we l OOG. “Wille 2. LE 
y. 12, 21, 22, IV. ii, 22. v. 15. vi. 3. 
Vitus VG So xte2) xis le xu, 1. 
Vito: vie t.- as.S5 x. 5. xt 1: 
X. ix. 21. Efewy I. xiii. 20. IL. iii. 
EEE, 426, 22.; Voi.4. VIL.b 4, 
xiv. 2. 

eilornon III. xii. 2,3. é&loraroa VII, 
ix. 1. étéornxe VII. vi. 6. 

étdy VIII. xiii. 3. 


etnuéAntat 


éjev TIL v. 14. 


XXvill 


efoptCew X. ix. 18. 

étovola VIII. x. 6. xiv. 4. étovolass I. 
v. 3. VIII. vi. 5. viii. 2. efovolas 
X. viii. 4. 

tw WL i 1. VIL iii. 2. v. 5. 

tEwOev III. i. 3, 12. V. viii. 7. 

éEwrepixots I. xiii. 9. VI. iv. 2. 

emayyeAtov IX. i. 6. 

émaryyeAAo X. ix. 20. émayyéAAovTat 
X. ix. 18. émaryyeAAduevos IX. i. 2, 4. 

émaywyh VI. iii. 3. eéraywyis VL. iii. 3. 
éraywy7 I. vii. 21. 

émawverinds LV. iii. 81. 

émaiverds LV. vii. 6, 8. VII. ii. 7. éma- 
very II. ix. 9. IV. v. 14. vi. 8. VI. 
xii. 9. émowerdy I. xii. 2. IL. vii. 
Dax. 2. IV. vi. 6. V) x2) 1s kX, 
vill. 10. émwaweral X. v. 6. ézrauve- 
tots IX. viii. 11. émaver@y I. xii. 1, 
5. VIL. i. 6. e@waweras L. xiii, 20 
émavera Il. vii. 11. e@rawerwrdrn 
Villa. 

émave: I. xii. 4. €mauvovor IX. viii. 7. 
X. iii, 11. émanwotpev I. xii. 2. xiii. 
15, 20. IY. vii. 8. ix. 7.. TWsiw ds ve 
18. ix,,.2..  V.-x...1.°-VIR a-ak: 
éravoovtes IV. iv. 4. vi. 1. V. x. 1. 
VII. iv.5. émawhra IV. iii. 31. emai 
veioOar I. xii. 2,5. émavovueba II. 
v. 3, 5. émawetrat Il. v. 8. vi. 12. 
vii. 14, TID. ti. 182 ix. 2. DVGS 
iv. 5. v. 3. émawodvra Ill. i. 7. IV. 
i. 10. émawovpévwy VIII. viii. 4. 
érawéoee IV, ix. 3. 

éxawos I, xii. 4, 6. IV. i. 8. vii. 13. 
X. viii. 7. ,@rawoz, IIL. i. 9. ératver 
I. xii. 8. IIL. i. 1. émawwods I. xii. 3. 

émakoAovbeiv I. x. 9. émakodovOjoa I. 
vi. 7. 

érakovcomevwy X. ix. 10. 

éxay V. iv. 10. 

éravayKacovras IX, vi. 4. 

éravapopa V. ii. v. 

émaréACwuer I. vii. 1. 

éravioo V. iv. 8. VIII. xiv. 3. 

éravitéov I. x. 6. 

éravdép0wna V. vii. 7. x. 3, 6. 

éravdpOworv IX. iii. 3. 

éravopOwrixdy V. iv, 6. 

éravopbovv V. x. 5. 

émapket VIIL. xiii. 11. erapxodor VIII. 
xii. 7. é@mapkéoa X. ix. 16, émap- 
ke IV. i. 17. VIII. xiii. 4. xiv. 1, 4. 
IX. ii. 8. 

éraxOys X. ix. 12. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


émel I. vi. 3,4. vii. 8. xiii. 1. TL. ii. 1. 
v. 1. vii. 16. ix. 4. TLL i: 183¢0raR 
11. IV. i. 81.) V. 4.9, 192 ai2 Ghee 
1, 3. vi. 1, 6. vii 6. 4x3 ae 
VL i. 1. iv. 3,5. vi Livi eae 
4, VILi. 3. iii, 5, 6,13. iv. 2, 5. v. 
l. vi. 2. vii. 2. viii. 4. ix. 2, 5, 6. 
xii, 1, 2,4, 5,7. xiii. 3,6. xiv. 3,8. 
VIII. iv. 4. IX. ii. 7. iv. 7. Xv. 5. 

émedday I, x. 2, 12. IX. i. 3,5 X. iv. 7. 

éretdy I. iii. 6. iv. 1. vii. 6. x. 15. xiii. 
14, IL. ii.16. VL ii. 2. xii, 10, IX. 
ix.4. X.vi. 1. ix. 9. 

émevodxrov IX, ix. 5. 

érevra I. iv. 3. VI. xii. 5. VIL iii. 2. 

émextetvoyras I. vii. 7. 

émedOciv IV. vii. 1. 
Owuev X, i. 4. 

emepwrdv X. ii. 2. 

émnBodos I. x. 14. éemhBodor I. viii. 9. 

éexnvparo VIII. xii. 11. 

ep’ av V. iv. 12. eg 6 V. v. 8. IX. 
viii. 9. 

émBarny II. vi. 2. 

emBardpee VIL. iii. 9. 

émtBovAcuoas V. viii. 10. 

é{Bovros VIL. vi.3. x. 3. emiBovddrepor 
VIL. vi. 3. 

émvywduevov X. iv. 8. éemvywouevny II. 
iii. 1. 

érlypauma I. viii. 14, 

emdeixyduevos IV. ii, 20. 

émidetios TV. viii. 10. IX. xi. 3. ém- 
detfou IV. viii. 5. 

emidekidrns IV. viii. 5. 

émdéxerar I. iii. 4. VIIL. i. 7. 

éemdharws VIL. iii. 7. 

émididdact X. v. 2. 

émidixdCovrat II. vii. 8. 

éml5oots II. viii. 8. émiddcers I. vii. 17. 

emidvcpnpodmev VIL. i. 3. 

émeikeia V. x. 1,8. ememelas V. x. 1. 
émemela X. v. 6. emeleeiay IV. i. 39. 
TX. v. 4. 


X. ix. 28. ér&A- 


’ émemhs II. vi. 8. vii. 8. IV. ix. 6. V. 


iv. 3. ix. 9. x. 8. VIL %. 8 xiv. 8: 
VIIL. vii. 2. xiv. 4. IX. viii. 1, 6, 8 
xii. 8. X.v. 6.  émteseods IV. ix. 4. 
V.x.1,6. VI. xi.l. emenmés IV. ix. 
7 V. x. 1, 2,'3, 8, “3i°4.? Se 
ix. 12. émeme? IV. i, 24. viii. 5. 
IX. ii. 5. iv. 2,5. ix. 7. emserey LV. 
vi. 4. ix. 6. V. iv. 3.~ Vierd a. 
IX. iv. 10. x. 6. X. viii, 10. ix. 11. 
émenets VIII, ii. 4. iv. 2. xi, 5. xii. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


Wan UNIVE dar Nis Bo AK en Siete es 
ix. 8, 5, 14. émemoy I. xiii. 13. 
VIG wii: 22 EXix’3. oxi Sco ox: 
ll. ix. 10. émenéor II. vy. 3. VIII. 
iis 6.0 ERS vn Se vi — xs. 11; 
emenkéorepos IX. iii. 4. mrtetéotepov 
V.x. 1. émemeordérwy VIII. x. 3. 
em(nret VIII. xiv. 4. émi(ynreiv L iii. 4, 
vi. 15. vii. 18. émt(ntovoa I. vi. 15. 
ém(ntodor I. vii. 19. VIIL.i.6. ém- 
(nretrat IX, vii. 1. ix. 2. Xi. 4. vi. 3. 
émiCnrovmevoy I. x. 6. eminrodvra 
IX. xi. 1. émi(nrnréor I. iii. 1. 
érlOerou IIL. xi. 1. 


éemOuue? III. xi. 1. xii. 9.  emiOupeiv 
Til. i. 24. VIL. iv. 4,5. émiOunjoo 


Il. vi. 10. émOupG IX. v. 3. emibv- 
povor IV. i. 84. IX. iv. 8. éembupav 
TIL. ii. 4. xi. 6. VIL. iv.4. v.7. vii. 3. 
émOujodvre III. xii. 4. 

émiPuunjpara III, x. 6. 
TH. x. 5. 

émOuuntinoy I, xiii. 8. ILI. xii. 8, 9. 

érOupia IT. ii. 3, 5. xi. 3,6. xii. 6. 
VIL. iii. 10, 11. iv. 4. vi 1,3. em- 
Oupias Il. i. 7. VII. ii. 4, 6. vi. 1, 5. 
Mie hy Oe 3X.(2, Gs xi 2, 7. X. viii. 7. 
émiOuuiay Il. v. 2. III. i. 21, 23, 25. 
Hs SE vii LIS xi..6.- V. ii 4: VII. 
vi. 4. vii.2. ix.2. émOvula IIL. ii. 3. 
emOuulat VIL. i. 6. ii. 6. iii. 7. X. v. 6. 
émOuutas III. xi. 3. VIL. vi. 2. xii. 2. 
IX. viii. 4. 

émixadovmevos VII. iv. 5. 

émtxAnpot VIII. x. 5. 

émoupla VIII, xiii. 11. xiv. 2,4. IX. 
xi. 8. émucoupias IX. xi. 1. 

émaAavOdvovra IX, iv. 9. 

émAeyew II. vi. 9. 

émActre: LV. i. 30, 34. 

émiAnmricots, VII. viii. 1. 
VII. v. 6. 

éxfaumoy II]. i. 13. ix. 2. X. v. 5, 
-émiAbmov III. ii. 5. 

emmeéAcia, X. viii. 13, ix.17. émmedeias 
Pex 4. Wat) S6.. X. ix. 9, 15;'17, 
émpéAciav I, ix. 8. X. ix. 13, 14. 
émiméderat X. ix. 14. emtmedctas VIE 
is 2. 

emmeAeirat VIII. xi. 1. emipeAounévous 
X. viii, 13.  emipeAnOeln X. ix. 16. 
émmeAnOjva III. v. 9. X. ix. 16. 
émueAovmevov LV.i.21. emmedodvTat 
IX. vii. 1. 

émimedés IX. vii. 1, 


ériOuunudtwv 


éemAnntikas 





XX1x 


émimedds II, iv. 6. 

émvéoos III. iv. 4. 

émimebes I. vii. 13. 

émmivew VIL. ii. 10. 

émmodd(ovtos IV. viii. 4. émimoAaCotoas 
I. iv. 4. 

émimoAatdtepoy I, v. 4. 

émimoAaiws IX. vy. 2. 

émmoAdv IIT. iii. 10. IV. i. 37. 

émimovoy IX. x. 2. énimova III. vi. 13. 
émtmov@Ttepa IX, vii. 7. 

émimdvws IX. vii. 7. 

émioxemtéov I, vii. 7, xiii. 1,5. V. vii. 7. 
VII. xiv. 1. VIII. xiii. 9. X. ix. 18. 

émokePoucba I. xii. 1. VII i. 7. ém- 
oxévacda I. vi. 1. VIL. xi. 2. X. ix. 
22; 

érloxeuy I. v. 7. 

émoxomeiv I. vi. 16. é@micxoroovt: IV. 
iii. 15. émioxomotvor III. i. 1. iii. 11. 
Exo ix: 7; 

émordueba VI. iii. 2. 


émiotdoOau III. 


v. 8. VIL iii. 5,13. IX. i. 5. éxt- 
oravra VII. iii, 4. IX. i. 7. ém- 
otduevoy VIL. ii. 1. iii. 4. emiorhoace 


VI. xii. 8. eéwiorarat VI. iii. 4. 

ematnun I. vi. 4. IL. vi. 9. V.i. 4. VIL 
1,2). ine 1:2, 3, 4.> vi Sov gS Vi 
3,9. ix.1,2. VID. ii. 4. iii, 4. em 
otnuns VI. iii. 4. vii. 1. ix. 8. VII. 
ii. 1,3. iii. 8,14. émiorhun VI. x. 1, 
3. VIL. iii. 5. emorhuny III. viii. 6. 
VI. iii. 4. vi. 2. VII. ii. 3. iii. 3, 6, 
7. xiii, 2. @morhuer X. ix. 15, 16. 
emornuav I. i, 3, 5. ii. 3, 6,7. x. 9. 
Te ni. 8s. Vi 4.) Wie vii 2.-* x1. 
X. ix. 18. émorhuas I. vi. 15. em-. 
orhpas I. iii. 9. VI. xiii. 5. 

émotnuovikoy VI. i. 6. VII. iii. 13. 

émorthuwy Il. vi. 8. VII. iii. 12. 
othwovr IV. ii. 5. 

émoryrov VI. iii. 2,3. vi. 1. émiornTod 
Vivvi I; 

emaparéorepa VIII. i. 1. 

érlrayua VII. vi. 1. 

émtaxtixy VI. x. 2. 

émrdrret VI. xii. 3. xiii. 8. emirdtavros 
V. ix. 11. émirax@ev VIII. vi. 5. 

émreive: VI. i. 1. 

émireAe? Il. vi. 9. IX. i.2. X. viii. 4. 
émitredovor IX. i. 6. emiteAcitar X. 
ix. 20. émireAovpévov III. iii. 11. 

émirepmeis IX, iv. 5. 

émitnoevew X. ix. 9. 

émirndevuatra X, ix, 8 


ém- 


émirndevudtwv 


XXX INDEX VERBORUM. 


IV. iii. 85. X. ix. 18,14. émirnded- 
fact X. ix. 11. 

émitbevar X. ix. 10. 

emt U1.v. 15. éemiryshoa III. v. 15. 
emitim@otlX. viii. 1. émitiy@vrat ILI. 
v.16. émiriudmevat ibid. emirim@uev 
Theva L5. 

emtiunots I. xiii. 18. 

emitiuia IIT, v. 8. viii. 1. 

émitomoAd V.i.6. VIIL. xi. 5. IX. ii. 3. 
émitoTA€ov V. x. 4. 

émrpéemew VIII. viii. 5. IX.i. 5.  ém- 
tpéevat Tix. 6. émirpépeay VI. vii. 4. 
emtpéepavtos IX.i.9. emetpapn IX. 
129: 


ém.tuxev IL, vi, 14. emitdxwow VII. 


ii. 8. émirevtdueda I. vi. 4. 

émipaveés IV. v. 1. 

emipavas IV. iii. 36. 

émipéeper I. x. 12. IIL. vi. 10. emipépor 
X. iii, 2. emipépovor IV. ii. 22. em- 
pepouey IV. 1.3. emipéepovres VI. xi. 2. 

emevarov VIII. xiv. 4. 

em xaipexanta II. vi. 18. émtxaupexantas 
II. vii. 15. 

émixaupexaxos II, vii. 15. 

*Emtxappos IX, vii. 1. 

emixepav IV. ii. 18. emtxerpodor IV. 
lii. 36. 

émercu Il. iii. 8. v. 2. Tk it,.1.. TV, i 
8,12, 24. LX. ils. 7, Xe teks as 
12. iv. 9. €morro VIII. i, 1. €Emov- 
Tat X. v. 11. €mecOar IX. viii. 2. 
éxduevos IX. viii. 7. €mduevov IX. 
xii. 4. éméuevar IV. i. 24, Emopévors 
Ly. 7. éwopévy I. vii. 12. émdueva 

_ I. vii. 23. 

émoveldioros III. x. 10. émoveldiorov 
III. xii. 2. ewovesdiorovs X. iii. 8. 

éxn VIL. iii. 8. 

ele VIII. xi. 1. ery VII. vi. 1. efrrot- 
pev VII. iv. 4. frou I. viii. 12. IV. 
Vills1O., Vocivs 9. x. Ge. Vas dee 
VIL. v. 4. VIM. ii, 4. efrouey I. 
viii. 13, 15,17. ix.9. 2.9,13. xii. 
3. xii. 17) IL ik, 8: oaths, Nee 
IV. ii. 6. iv.4. IX iii 1. v. 2, 4. 
Kivi Ds lelwew NV iVeO.. 421 aeKecds 
4, Voi: 2: Vit. xiv. 3:. VIDE ‘viii 
5. IX. iv. 5. vii 3. X. vi. 6. viii. 5. 
elmwyuev IIL. vy. 23. IV. vii. 1, 6. ix. 
8. elxoev VI. vii. 4. VII. iv. 6. 
elxwy V. ii. 2. x. & X. vi. TL. 
elrovttl. iv. 7. elrovres IV. viii. 3. 
Vii 4. xii; 3. 





épaviot@v VIII. ix. 6. epavoras LY. ii. 
20. 

épacris IX.i.2. epacrod VIII. iv. 1. 
epacra ibid. eparrhy VILL. viii. 6. IX. 
i. 3. é@paorai VIII. viii. 6. 

ep I. viii. 14. IX. v. 3. épaw VILL 
i. 6. vi.2. IX. v. 3. x. 5. pa@mevos 
IX. i, 2. épwuévm VIIL iv. 1. epw- 
mevoy VIII. viii. 6. IX. i, 3. €p@or 
IX. xii. 1. 

épydfovra: II, vi. 10. epyatsuevos IV. 
i. 40. 

épyactay VIII. ix. 5. épyacias IV. i. 
40. 

%pyor I. vii. 10, 11, 14,19. IL. vi. 2, 3, 
9, ix. 2. IV. ii. 6, 10; His Sieve 
i. 18. v. 8,12. ix. 15. VLi6. ii. 
3, 6. vii. 6. xii. 6. VII. xi. 4, xii. 
6. VIII. vii.l. IX. vii. 8,4,6. X. 
v. 2, 8. ix. 20. you IIL. v. 17. 
IV. ii. 6,10. IX. vii. 8. Epy@ I. vii. 
10. IV. ii. 6, 12, 18. %yaLi 2. 
vii, 11. xii..2. IL.-vi, 9. (AWG cnoeee 
i. 6. Vi. 14. . v.80 Was 
IX. viii. 2 X viii. 12. ix. 20. &pyov 
I, vii, 19, xii. 6... TV..ai,- 36. vee 
14. VIID. xiv. 1. X. i. 3. viii. 12. 
€pyois II. iii, 1. vi. 9. TLL. vii. 12. 
X. i. 4. viii. 12. ix. 20. 

épya@des IX. vii. 7. x. 4. €pywdéorepov 
I. xiii. 8.  epywdéorepa IX ii. 10. 

épet IV. iii. 81. IX. viii. 6. X. ii. 4. 
épovort VI. vii. 4. époduer I. x. 8,16. 
Il. vii. 16. IV. ii. 4.: VIL: xiv. 9. 
elpnrat I. v. 6. viii. 4. ix. 7. IL. vy. 
6. ix... TIL ii. 16. ceils vas 
vii. 7, 13. ix. 2. IV. i. 28, 29, 33. 
ii, 12, 15, 20. iii. 18, 37. v.13. vis 
6,9. V.iii.9. v. 7. Vie®. wines 
VI. iv. 6. viii. 8. xi. 7. xii. 10. VII. 
i,.4. Vis Geox. 5. Xtis 7. o%1¥. eee 
VOI. i 7. “wei. 4. vi, 6.72. ‘Vileaie 
ix. 1.- xii..1.. xiii, 1... xly.3... Ea 
1, 3,7. ii. 5,6. iii, 3,4, iv. 2 vil. 
viii. 2, 11. -ix.. 5,7. XK iv; 8. ¥e8s 
vi. 2,5, 8. vii. 1. ix. 1, 11, 16,23. 
eipjoOa IX. x. 1. eiphodw I. vi. 6. 
Il, iii. Jl. TO. itt, 20. FV. ress 
V. v.19. VIL iii, 14. VIIL xiv. 4. 
IX. xii. 4. X. iii. 13. viii. 3. eipq- 
cOwoov IV. v.15. etpnvrar ILL. viii. 
17. IV. vii. 1. .elpnee. V.. ikemee 
eipheauey Il. ii, 1. vi. 8. eipn- 
kétes VI. i. 1.  eipnuévos I. v. 2. 
IV. iii. 3. eipnuévor VI. i. 3. VIL. 


INDEX VERBORUM. XXXi 


iv. 5. x. 2. elpnuweévy III. viii. 8. V. 
ii. 8. eipnuévov VI. viii. 5. eipnuéva. 
IV. i. 32. vii. 18. VIII. iii. 7. TX. 
iv. 7. X. i. 4. elpnuévov I, xii. 7. 
TIL i, 14, ii. 16. ix. 7. IV. viii. 4. 
Vié20.. vill, Is. xb. WL vii. 5. 
xiii. 6. VII. ii. 4. IX. iv. 6. X. iii. 
1. vi. 1. ix. 14. eipnuévars VI. i. 1. 
eipnuévots I. viii. 12. ILI. v. 5. «ipn- 
pévat IV. vi. 8. viii. 12, VIII. vi. 7. 
cipnuéevny V. v. 2. 

éphuns IV. iv. 4. 

épw VIIL. i. 6. 

“Epuaiy ILL. viii. 9. 

épudpalvovrat IV, ix. 2. 

*Epvéios III. x. 10. 

éAdev IV. i. 31. VIII. viii. 7. A@wor 
III, iii. 11. eAhAvGe V. iv. 18. v. 10. 
VI. vill, 4. x. 4. éAnav@éva IX. 
iv. 1. 

écOs IV. vii. 15. eo Ort IV. iii. 36. 

éoOlev III. xi. 3. 

écOAds I. iv. 7. ecOAd IX. xii. 3. eo 0- 
A@y ibid. éc@Aol II. vi. 14. 

“Eomepos V.i. 15. 

éoriav IV. ii. 11. éori@y IV. ii 20. 

érxaroy III. iii, 11,12. VI. viii. 2 9. 
VII. iii. 18. éoxdrov VI. viii. 8, 9. 
xi. 4. @oxara VI. xi. 38. eoxdTov 
VI. xi. 2, 3,4. VIL ii. 5. 

éraipixh VIII. vy. 3. éraipix VIL. xi. 
5. xii. 4, 6. éraipieyy VILL. xii. 1. 
IX. x. 6. 

éraipoy VIII. ix. 3. xii. 8. éralp@ IX. 
ii, 1, 3. €ratpor VIII. xii. 4. éral- 
pos VIII. xii. 2. IX. ii. 3,7. éral- 
pous IX. ii. 9. 

€repos III. i.13. VII. iii. 1. iv. 2, IX. 
ix. 10. X. iii. 11. €répov IIL. v. 17. 
Rie7s LV, ii. 81. Voit. 12.. ix. 9. 
VII. vi. 7. X.ii. 2,8, vi. 6. @repa 
I. vi. 3. vii. 8. Ill. iv. 4. xi. 2. V. 
fis 9. VI. i..5.° VII. xiv. 5.. ‘WIIL. 
i7o HDs Via. 1. imeS.xik 7. EK 
i. 4. ii, 7. iv. 9. X. iii, 11, iv. 4. 
v.1,2. vi2,8,4. &repoy I. ii, 1. 
iv. 3. vii 4. xiii, 16. Il. viii. 7. U1. 


Hid) vin 12. viii. 1G. <xi..7. Vii. - 


90. ii. 9,12. v. 12,17. vi. 9, viii. 3, 
10) we 22x. F. VIS 45... iv, 1,.2, 
5. v. 4. vii. 4. ix. 3. xii. 7. xiii. 1. 
VII. i. 2, 4, -vii. 2,4. viii. 1. ix. 5. 
xii. 3. xiv. 8. VIII. vi. 7. vii. 1. xii. 
8. EX. viii. 6. ix, ly, Koi. 2... 4. 
érépas I. i, 4. Vii 11. VIL xi. 4. 





xii. 8. érépa II. viii. 8. V.ii 7. x. 
8. Vi vil, 4s 4e VAT, ait. 9. 
VII. vii. 1. Xviv. 2. v. 8 érépw 
Mee Lie Visi Os siXs0 Oi: NV Og Ik: 
15, 16. érépq VII. xiv. 8. érépay 
VIL. ix. 5. X.v. 4. vii. 6. repo: I. 
DL SseVL Vs. vil. 6s, xitho. Vil. 
a, Aes xD, Je, WIDL Vis Be, alos 
€repat IIL. viii. 1. VIII. vii. 1. X. 
iii, 10. iv. 2. v. 7. érépwy IIL. ii. 7. 
IVsts: 8930 Vie ¥590.° VIEL xiii, 10: 
IX. iv. 8, 9,10. ix. 5. X v.1,3,8, 
9. érépos III. xi. 2. X.v. 2. éré- 
pas VIII. iv. 8. érépovs IV. i. 39. 
VEN.E6., ive 2; 


érépwOev IV. i. 34, 
ért Liii. 7. iif. 6. ¥. 5. vi. 8,4, vii. 2, 8, 


9,16. viii. 16. xiii. 17. ID. i. 4,6. ii. 
4. iii. 3, 5, 7, 8, 10. iv. 3. v. 4, 5. vi. 
4, 14, 16..<viil. 5. ix. 2. TIE i 9, 19, 
26. FEV. i. 22.41, 8. iii..7. iv. 4. vii. 
8 V. ii. 4; 5. ii 7. v. 5. vie L.. -vili. 
10. ix. 5,8,9, 11,12. xi. 2,4,5. VI. 
iii.3.. viii. 4,7. ix. 8, 7. xii. 6. \xiil. 
8. VE. 1.9. 33.6; 78510, LY. .6, 
7,9. ¥e.8e Vi. 2,38, 4 2s xB, 8, 4. 
xii, 3. xii. 4, xiv. 5. VIO. i.1, 5. 
iii. 8. vi. 4. vii. 4,5, 6. IX. iii. 3. 
Nil 70 Si8.. OX Ve Sh vals 2 vill. 7s. 
ix. 14, 15. 


érn IX. viii. 9. 
€romot III. ix. 6. 
ed I, iv. 2, 5, 7. vii. 10, 14, 15. viii. 4, 


Dx G i302 TE i5/5,. Os. 18 Os LO: 
iv. 3, 5, 6. v. 2, 3. vi. 2,9,10,17,18. 
vii. 15. ix. 2, 8,9... TD viv.-4iayv. 17. 
IV. i. 6, 7. 8, 16, 31. iii, 24, 25. viii. 
Get N eas BGM Co VL Ss. “Vii, 2. 
vii. 4,6. viii.4. ix.3,4,7. x.3. VIII. 
viii. 3, 4. xi. 1. xii. 5. xiii. 2, 4, 8, 9. 
miys (4, Ks WHS 25 7. ig. 2. 
x. 5. xi 1,6. X. iv. 5. ix. 20. 


evBovala VI. ix. 2, 3,4, 5, 6,7. ebBou- 


Atas VI. ix. 1. 


e¥Bovdos VI. vii. 6. 
evyevelas I. viii. 16. edyéveray V. iii. 7. 
evyevés X. ix. 3. edyeveis IV. iii. 19. 


evyevéat IV. ii. 14. 


evyvdépwv VI. xi. 2. edyvdpovas VI. 


zits 


evdamover I. iv. 2. ix. 5. III. ii. 9. 


IX. ix. 5. X. viii. 8. ebdamovjoeyr 
I. vii. 5. ed8auove? X. viii. 8. evdau- 
povhoovta X. viii. 9. eddatmovqcorts 
IX, ix. 10. 


XXXI11 


eddamovia I. vii. 5,8. viii. 14. xii. 7. 
Xis J. Vill; xii25) EX. fix. 5, 
iii. 1. vi. 2, 6,8. vii. 1, 6, 7. viii. 3, 
7,8. evdamovias I. iv. 2. vii. 5. x. 
Ql ae Kile bck ies bee Wiis hes Raker Via 
1, 6, 8. vii. 7. viii. 8. edSdauorlg I. 
viii. 17. VII. xiii. 3. X. vii. 3. €d- 
Samoviay I. iv. 2. v. 1. vii. 5, 7, 9. 
viii. 5, 14. ix. 2. x. 2,7, 15..R8, 4. 
xiii. 5,6. VI. xii. 5. VIL xi. 2. xiii. 
2,4. X. vi. 2. vii. 6. 

eddamoviCev I. x. 7. evdamovioee I. 
v. 6. evdamovife: I. ix. 11. evda- 
poviCouey I. xii. 4, evdamoriCduevov 
X. vi. 8. evdamonoréoy I. x. 1. 

evdatmovixds I. viii. 16. eddamovind X. 
vi. 3. evdauoviewrépa X. vi. 7. ev- 
Gaimovikwrary X. viii. 7. 

evdamovionos LV. vii. 13. 

evdaiuwy I, ix. 19. x. 2, 4,14. VI. xii. 
1. VII. xiii. 2. X. vi. 6. viii. 10, 13. 
e¥daiov I, ix. 9. evdafuovr I. x. 11. 
IX. ix. 2,3. evdafuova I. vii. 16. viii. 
4, x 8,8, 15. VIL. xii. 5: Vil.cxiii. 
2°97. ERs ix, LO: ke ae de PVs 
evdaiuovas I. xi. 5,6. xiii. 12. X. viii. 
7, 11. eddamovéoraros X. vii. 9. 
evdamoveoraroy X. viii. 13. evda- 
povéorepos III. ix. 4. 

edd:advtol VILL. iii. 3. 

evdokimover X. vi. 3. 
ix. 20. 

Evdotos I xii. 5. X. ii. 1. 

eventing X.v. 9. edextixdy V. i. 5. xi. 
7. evextuxa V.i. 5. VI. xii. 1. ev- 
extixav V.i. 5. 

evéAmidos III. vii. 11. 
11. viii. 13, 14. 
16. 

evetia V.i. 5. evetiay IIT. xi. 8. 

evepyeotas IV. iii. 25. VIII. i. 1. xi. 1. 


evdoxmuovvtas X. 


eveAmodes ITI. vi. 
eveAridwy ITI. viii. 


xiv. 2. IX. ii. 3. X. ix. 14. evep- 
yeoia VIII. xiii. 10. 
ev pyerew IX.ix.2. xi.l. evepyerovytt 


VIII. xiv. 3. evepyereto@ax IV. i. 16. 
VIII. xiii. 8. evepyere?rat VIII. xiii. 
9. evepyerhoavtas IX. vii. 1. ev- 
epyetnodvrwy IX. ix. 2. evepyerov- 
bevos IV. iii. 24. evepyernOels IX. v. 
3. evepyernOévra VIII. xiii. 9. ed- 
epyeTndevras IX. vii. 1. 

evepyeTnudroy VIII. xi. 2. 

evépyerat IX. vii. 1. evepyera@v VIII. 
xiii, 10. IX. vii. 4. evdepyérn IX. ii. 
1. vii. 5. evepyéras IX, ii. 7. vii. 7. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


evepyerntixoy IX. xi. 5. 

evernplas VIII.i.1. evernpiar I. viii. 6. 

ed(wla I. viii. 4. 

e’nrodtepoy I. xiii. 17. 

ednueplas I. viii. 17. 

Einvos VII. x. 4. 

evOapoas III. vi. 4. 

evOnparov IIT. i. 11. 

eb6vs II. i. 8. iii. 2. vi. 18. V.x.4. VIL 
v. 6. xiii. 1. VIL iii. 9. vi. 1. VIII. 
xii. 2,7. IX. iii. 3. 

ev6d VI. vii. 4. 

eviaros 1V. i. 81. ediardrepos VIL. ii. 
10. etiarorépa VIL. x. 4. 

edxatapopat II. viii. 8. 

edxatadpovntoi IV. vii. 15. 

evkowaynros IV. i. 26. 

edxddws I. x. 12. 

evAdBeray IV. i. 39. 

evAaBeira LV. vii. 8. evdAaBotmevos IV. 
vi. 8. evAaBodyrm IX. xi. 4. evAa- 
Bncera IV. vii. 8. evAaBnréov IX. 
xi. 6. . 

ebAoyor I. vi. 15. viii, 7. ix. 2,5. V. ix. 
2. VIL xiv. 3. IX. ik 27) eeaee. 
vi. 4. vii. 1, 3. viii. 18. ix. 19. ev- 
Aoyérepor I. xiii. 11. 

evAdyws VI. xi. 2. VII. xii. 6. VIIL 
iii. 7. xiii. 2. X. iv. 10. 

evuerdBodos I. x. 14, VII. xiv. 8 ev- 
petdBoror I. x. 7. 

evuerdmeorot VILix.2. eduerdmesoros 
VIL. viii. 4. 

evv7s III. xi. 1. 

edvoeiv VIII: ii. 4. 


. Vili. 9. 


e¥voia IX. v. 1, 2, 3,4. e®voy VIII. 
ii, 8. IX. v. 3. 

edvoutay ILI, iii, 11. 

eovo: VIII. ii. 4. vi. 1. IX. v. 2,8. e@- 
vos VIII. v.38. edvous VIILii3. IX. 
v. 3. 

evdmaGelas VIII. viii. 1. edmabelay IX. 
xi. 6. 


edrapaxoAovéjrov II, vii. 11. 

evre:dés Ill. xii. 7,8. evdmerBets X. ix. 
14, - 

e¥re:oros VII. ix. 2. 

eUrenta VI. vii. 7. 

evmope? IX. iv. 5. 

evroptas VIII. vii. 4, IX. v. 3. 

edmpatia I. viii. 4. VI. ii. 4, 5. v. 4. 
edrpatia: I. x, 3. xi. 6. 

eSpeois VII. ii. 12. edpéoews LIL. iii. 5. 
edpéoe: IIL. iii. 11. 

ebdperhs I, vii. 17. 


INDEX VERBORUM., 


Edpinidns V. ix. 1. VI. viii. 4. VII. i. 
6. Evpinldov III. i. 8 

Evpiros IX. vi. 3. 

etpioxew II. vi.16. X. ii. 1. 
x.7. ebdpey IX, x. 6. 

evo Oevoivra I, ix. 11. 

evoroxia VI. ix. 1, 2. 

evouvecia VI. x. 2. 

evovverot VI. x, 2, 4. 
ix. 21. 

evoxnudves I, x. 13. 

eboxnuootyny IV, viii. 6. 

evoxhuova IV. viii. 3. 

ebrexvias I. viii. 16. 

ebtpameAla II, vii. 13. 

edtpdmedos II. vii. 13. IV. viii. 10. €d- 


eBpwv III, 


evouveTmrepor X. 


tpdmehoe IV. viii. 3, 4. X. vi. 8 
edtpaméAos VIII. iv. 1. edrpamédous 


VIII. iii, 1. vi. 5. 

ebrpora 1V. viii. 3. 

ebtuxav IV. iii. 18. edruxodvres IX. 
xi. l. edtuxotvtwry 1X, ix. 2. 


evtuxhpata IV. iii, 19, 21,36, ebrv- 
Xnudrov I. x. 12. 

evtuxéow X, ix. 6 

edtuxla V.i.9. VII. xiii, 8. edtuxlas 


IX. xi. 5, 6. edruxiav I. viii. 17. IV. 
iii, 18. VIL. xiii. 4. edruxtas IV. iii. 
26. UX. ix. 2) xi.1,2, 5. 

evuT@épBAnror IV. ii. 19. 

edpiarortivnta IV. ii 11. 

evpuys III. v. 17. edpuéoraros VI, 
xili. 6. 

evpu'a IIL. v. 17. 

edxepas 1V. i. 16, 34, 35. 

ebxecOar V. i. 9. ebxovTa V. i. 9. 
nvéaro III. x. 10. 

e¥xpnora X. ix. 21. 

edwxlay VII. v. 2. 

épdmrerat IIL. ix. 5. 

épapudtre V.iv.2. épapydrresv II. vii. 1. 

épeéyjs VIL. iv. 1. 

&peors III. v. 17. 

epnuepou I. vi. 6. 

éplera: VIII. viii. 7. ix. 5. xiii. 2. IX. 
i 4. X. ii 1,4. iv. 2. eplevras IIL. 
v.17. 1V.i. 89. iii, 10,35. VIL i. 


4) Vili. 1,2. ix. 5. FX. vi.2,.3. vii. 1, 


xii. 1. X. iv. 10. vi. 3. vii. 7. éol- 
eoOa: I, i. 1. iv. 1. VII. 6. v. 2. 
X. vii. 7. épi€uevos VIII, viii. 6. X. 
1.3. épieuevoy IV. iv. 8. eprepevor 
VILL. vi. 5. epiguevon Iv. 15. €p.€- 
peva X. ii. 1. ehtemévous IX. vi. 4. 
coremévais X. ix. 19, 


VOL. Es 





XXXIll 


éxOaipev 1V. vi. 5. 
12. 

€xOpay VIII. i, 4. 

éxews VII. vii. 6. 

éxouev I. xiii. 3. IL vy. 2. Ill. v. 6. VI. 
Riliv dr vee 111,95 32 Sen vs ze 
vi. 15. viii. 12. x. 8. xi. 3. xiii. 7, 8. 
De A 7. 2) -35°4,:75 Si ilk 5; lv: 
934i. S-vil.. 8. Te via: vii; 
8) 125 1V. 151s Ae lor LSet oe 
V.i. 4. iii. 6,14. v. 11,12. vi 3. vii. 
2). Gs 1Xs POvcKek se) Oso Vil we, Ga wvile 
2, 3,4. xi. 6. xii. 1s xii 1. VIE. ii: 
11. iii. 6, 11, 18. vi. 6. vii. 2, 6. viii. 
1. x33. xiL;S; VILL iv. Uy vis-zs x24 
xii. 6. xiii.6, IX.i.4¢ ii. 1,2, 5. iii. 1. 
iv, 4. 1x, 3,10. x. 5. x1. 5, xu, 1. X- 
viii. 12. ix. 12. €xwor V. iii. 6. v. 12. 
TX. iit Ws. eber TIE ve 17, -xe70 VG 
Hi. 182. Vii 10.” Vicys 125° Veal 4 
VIL xii. 5. IX.i. 8. xovras III. ix. 
6. V. ix. 14. VIII. viii. 6. yovtes 
Lit. 2. vi. 14, 0D 1.4. IN i5s viii: 
7, 8 IV. ii. 18, 20,21. VE. xii: 10. 
VIL. itis. 2.. -vill. 25 ISS £92 -iv, 9. 
éxew I. iv, 4. ix. 5. x. 4. xii. 2, 8. 
xiii. 18,19. IL. iv.3. vii. 8. IIL i. 
13. ix. 3. IV. i. 21. iii. 17, 32, 35. 
iv. I. ix. 6. Vii. 16. iL 12riv..8, 13, 
14. vii. 4. xi. 7. VI. i. 5, 6. ii. 2. iii. 
Qi nv2th;G:.¥./3; Ss, vis 1, 2.) vik.-G; 7, 
x.(3. xi.d, 2,5, 6s XiL 1. -xilipd.- VIL 
He Gy Be Mb Dy eed oe We Beds Wis Le 
vii. 1, xiv. 4. VIII. v. 3. vii. 3. xiii. 
4, 10. :xiv.id 8. EX..3.9; 30:..5. dv..4 
OPO Vil. G ctx: 8. G5. 8505 
I, iii, 12;'v.:6. yi, Go viik 1, 8, 75 
1,2. €xovta I. v. 6. vii. 17. Thi iv. 
$, IH.-¥. 17. Yi. ix. 16., ML i; 55: vii. 
4, St ZH. MEL. te Bis Ue 5, G.a ys 2. 
v. 5. X. il. ix. 7. €xovros L, vii. 
13.- TH... xii. 2.. Veiv: 11.. ViE-£ 5, 6. 
VIL vi. 7. X. iv. 5. ow I. vii. 13. 
xiii. 9, 10,19. TV...i.25. ii. 19. vii. 
1. V. vii. 1,2. xi,9. VILi 5. Zxovce 
I. vit, 23. TI. vi. 9. II. vi:.4. vii, 12. 
viii. 12. xii. 5, IV.i. 4. v. 8,10. V. 
liz 6: -iv..2.:ix, 17.. VL.iv.4. Viloix. 
2.75.8. xy. 5; 7.. VILE. 4,6. v. 1: 
viii. 5. IX. ii. 6, iii. 3. ix. 5. X.v. 6, 
viii. 7. ix. 4. éxdvrwv I. xi. 2. VIL 
vi 8: X.-b.2. ivi8. . tyor Ixi.2, IV. 
i, 22. IX. iv. 10. é€oxnee IL i 1. 
éoxouey Ii. 4. elxev Il. i. 7. IX 
i. 4. &xp I. iv. 8. III. ix, 4. IV. i, 


éxOatpovor X. ix. 


€xOpav IV. iii, 31. 


XXX1V 


17, 21. VUI. i. 3. exer IL iv. 3. 
Mie 12 FO De tiie de, ik, te 15.8 
IV.i. 5,6. V.i. 15. iv. 5. ix. 9, 10. 
5/8: Xie 45 LIL sn 8s, Vii 2) Vi 
LO Me Oa AKs 16a. XeiGe, Mallat ds 
IX.i. 2. v.3. X. iii. 12. vii. 4. €£ovor 
Il, iv. 6. V. iii, 6 VIL v. 4. €xovca 
Il. vii. 11. @xovre II. vii. 1. V. iv. 
11. VIII. xii. 2. IX. i. 9. Exomer 
V. ii. 6. éxduevoy V. x. 1. Exovoa 
VI. ii. 3. vii. 8. ExeoOar VI. xii. 5. 
éxtéov IX. iii. 5. éxdvrow IX. viii. 2. 
éxouevois IX. ix. 8, Exovoay X. 
ix. 11. 

"Ew IX. i. 4. 

‘Egos V. i. 15. 

ews I. x. 1. Ti. fi 21. xt. 3... Vo, 8. 
VIL. iii. 6. vii. 5. viii, 6. X. iii. 3. 
iv. 8. 


Z. 


Zevs VI. viii. 4. Ad IV. iii. 25. IX. ii. 
6. Ala VIIL. x. 4. 

€¢Ceoev III. viii. 10. 

(naor II. v. 2. 

Cnuta V. iv. 5,6. Cyulas V. iv. 6, 14. 
(nula V. iv. 4,13. Cnplos X. ix. 9. 
Cnutot V. xi. 3. Cnusotpevos V. ii, 4. 

(nutodo ba V. iv. 13, 14. 

Civ I. iii. 7. iv. 2. vii. 12. viii. 4. IIL 
ix. 4, xii. 8. IV. i. 5, 35. iii. 23, 39. 
V. ii. 10. VIv..1. . VIL xiii. 7. VIEL 
i.1, IX. iv. 1,3, 8. vii. 4. viii, 6. 
ix. 5, 7,9. x. 2 xiL 2. Ragen. 
12. iv. 10, 11. vii. 4, 8. viii. 7. ix. 8, 
ll. (@vraly. 6. X.ix. 10. (@vre 
1. Vite 6:°X..3.. Be Vi. 2s Will 7. yA. 
x, i. TV. vii. 5. DXiss9., Aj ix 18, 
(dévtwy I, x. 13. (a@vres III. v. 10. 
VII. v. 6. X.ix. 4. (@oe III. xii. 7. 
VIL. iii. 5. (Gv X. ix. 7, Q@yras I. 
Rede Riva, LV ik es 

(nret IL. vi. 8. VI. ix. 2, 3. (yrety IIT. 
iii, 11. VL ix. 1: Vil a2) VER. 
vii. 2, IX. x. 5. yreév IIL. iii. 17. 
(nrovperv V. iis 1, VI. xiii. 1. X. vii. 
6. (ntobyvtw X. vii. 8. Cnreioba 
VIII. xii. 7. (nrotorl.v. 5. V.iv. 7. 
vy. 6.. VL vil. 5.. vill. 4. - ix..3. Vif. 
vi. 4, 5. vil. -3. IX, iv. S. sai 4, 
e(are: I. iv. 5. VI. xiii. 3. VII iii. 
13. (nrovpévov I. v. 4. Cyrotuevov 
Inv. 8. vii..1; 3.3m. 7.) dds. VeVi. 
4. Cnretrat I. vi. 13. vii. 12. IIL. iii, 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


14. (nrovpéver I. vii. 23. éCnrod- 
pev I. xiii. 5. Cnrotueva I. xiii. 8. 
CAryots I. xiii. 4, ILL iii. 12. VL ix. 3. 
Cnrjoews I. vi. 1. 

(ntnréa VI. ix. 4. 

(wh IX. ix. 9. X. iv. 10. (was L x. 
12,13. (why L vii. 12, 14. TX ix. 8. 

(@ov VIL. xiv. 5. (é I vii. 12. X. v. 8. 
(@a VIL. ii. 2. x. 8, 10. xi. 7. Mv. 1. 
viii. 8. (éwv I. ix. 9. TIL i. 22. 
VI. vii. 4. VIL v.1. vi. 6. VIII. i. 3. 
X. viii. 8. Qéous I. iii. 7. VIIL. xii. 
7. (Xin. % 


H. 


# V. i. 20. x. 5,6. VWIIL iii. 1, 6. iv. 6. 
Xs Gr ie TO 

trystoOcu X. vii. 1. 7ryovmevov IIL. iii. 17. 
jyovueba VI. v. 5. 

457 I. iii.3. x8. IL iv. 1s wi ae. 
iii. 17. vi. 1. V.i. 16. vi. 1. viii. 11° 
ix. 3. xi. 2, xiii. 6. VIL iii. 9, xiv. 4. 
X. vi. 7. 

Hdera IIL. xi. 8. IV. i. 28. IX iv. 9. 
ix. 6. xi. 3, X ii. 2. iv. 9. HbeOae 
I. viii. 10. IV. i. 25. VIL ix. 6. 1X. 
iv. 10. X. iii. 2,4, 6. iv. 4. joOjvae 
II. vi.10, IX. viii. 9. X. iii, 4, 10. 
Hdovra IIL. viii. 12. VIL. iv. 1, IX 
ix. 9. xi. 5. Hon IX. iv. 10. qo67- 
cera IV. iii. 17, 73duevos ITE. x. 10. 
X. iii. 12. 

noovy IT. iii. 2. v. 2. TLL. x. 7. xi. 5. 
xii.2. VIL xi. 3, 4, 5. xii. 5. xiii, 2, 
7. xiv. 4, 6,8. VIL. i. Lived. EX. 
v.3. X. ii. 3. iii, 1, 5, 6, 12, 13. iv. 
1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8,9, 10, 11. v.2, 3, 5, 
7, 8. dorms I. vi. 11. viii. 6, 12. 
IL ii 7. ix. 4. TEL. 21. i¥iewee: 
VII. vi. 4. xi. 1, 2,4. xii, 8,6. xiv. 
2,9. VIEL iii. 5. v2. ize 6) 4a 
4. ix. 4, xii. 4, XX. i 4. did, aie 
iv. 4, 10. v.2. vi 4, ix. 1, 10. #B0n7 
I. xii. 5. IL. iii. 8,10. X.i. 1. iii, 4. 
v. 6. mdovhv I. iv. 3. v. 2. vii, 5. 
viii. 12. IL. iii, 1, 7. vii. 15. ix. 6. 
Ill. v. 5. xi.'6. xii... cI Vi aeSGnree 
10. vi. 1. vii. 1. viii. 12. V. ii. 6. 
VL.-v. 6. Vil. iti, 1. v.72) igs 
xi. 3. xii. 3, 6. xiii, 1, 2, 5, 6. xiv. 8. 
VIIL. iii. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7. iv. 2, 4, 6. vi. 
7. ix. 5. xiii. 3. IX. i. 3,4,8. x. 2. 
X. i. 2, 3. ii. 1, 2, 3, 5. iii. 2, 3, 4, 6, 
11, 12. iv. 1, 4, 1. v. 4. vii. 3, 8. 


INDEX VERBORUM. XXXV 


ndoval I. vi. 10. VII. xi. 4. xii. 1, 2, 
7. xiii. 2,6. xiv.1,3. X. iii.9, 10, 
12. v.2,5,6,7,10, 11. #Sovav IL. 
ii. 9. iii, 1. IIL x. 1, 11. xi. 4. VIL 
ii. 3, iv. 2,5. vii. 2, 3,6. ix. 2. xiii. 
2. xiv, 3X: ins 6.8: wi Se. vis 8. 
noovats IX. viii. 4. X. i. 2. iii. 2. ix. 
10. #Sovds II. iii. 1, 3, 5,6, 10, 11. 
vii. 3. viii. 8. III. x. 1, 2, 8. xi. 5,7, 
8 IV.i. 35. vi. 7. VIL iv. 1, 4. vi. 
5. vii. 1. viii. 4, 5. ix. 6. xi. 2, 4. 
Wall Vi 6. X. iii. 7. v.38, 11. vil. 
vii. 3. ix. 4. 

Hdéws IIL. ix. 5. IV. i. 13, 24. ii. 8. iii. 
25. xii. 7. IX. iv. 5. ix. 5. 

ndvs I, viii. 9. II. vii. 13. IV. vi. 9. 
VIII. iii. 2. vi. 6. I[X.ix. 4. deta 
VIIL iv. 1. IX. vii. 6. ix. 5, 6, 10. 
xi. 2. 760 I. viii. 10. II. iii. 7. vii. 11, 
BSe°ix. G2 HI. it 11. iv. 6. ix. 3. xi. 
7. IV. i. 18. viii. 7,12. VLv.6. VIL. 
iii. 2, 10. vi. 1. vii. 8. xi. 4. xii. 2. 
xiv. 6, 7,8. VIIL ii. 1, 2. iii. 2, 4, 5, 
7. iv. 1,2, 4,5. v.2,4. vi3,4, 7. 
xii. 6,7. IX. iii. 1. iv. 5. v. 3. vii. 5. 
ix. 4, 7,9, 10. xi. 3. X.ix.8. 7déos 
BY ii:7:. TH. it. 5.. xi. 5. xii. 6, 7. 
VIII. v. 2. vi. 5. Mix. 4. def VII. 
xii. 1. VII iii. 5. v. 2. 7ddy VIL 
xiii. 2. X ii. 3. Hdeiay IX. xi. 5. 
neeis VIII. iii. 1, 3, 4,6. iv. 1. v. 3. 
vi. 4, 5. vii. 6. xiii. 1. X. vi. 3. 7déa 
I. viii. 11. IIL i. 11,25. iv. 4. xi. 2, 
S WIL 8210: wil. ix. 7... xii. 2; 4. 
xive7. VIIL it. 5..iv. 8,10. IX. ix 
5. Xi. iii. 8. iv. 7. v. 9,10. vi. 
5. deta I. viii. 2,13. VIL xii. 2. 
IX. iv. 5. ix. 5. X.vi. 3. deer IIL 
ix. 2. xi.5, 6,8. VII. iv. 2, 3, 5. vii. 
2. xi. 5. xiv. 7.. VIUIL vi. 4. IX. ix. 
5, 7,9. 75€or VIL xii. 2. Hdiwv VIL. 
xiii. 7. X.v.4. dv IX. xi. 6, X. 
y. 8. 7dtorn VII. xiv. 8. X. iv. 5. 
vii. 3. H8:0Tov I. viii. 14. IX. vii.6. 
X. vii. 9. dle IIL. xi. 2. X. vii. 3. 

Hivopa 1X. x. 2. 

Houmas I. xiii. 20. X. viii. 3. HOce7s IT. 
i 1. VI. ii. 4. xiii. 6. X. viii. 4. 
Ouch IL i. 1. iii. 1. ix. 1. VI. ii. 2. 
VIL. viii. 4. VIL xiii. 5,7. 7Ocnav 
TIERS Ves 10:) Viei4. X. viii, 
8. Ouchy IL. vi. 2. VI. xii. 6. VII. 
xi. 2. 70x00 VI. xiii. 2. 

HOos I. iii. 7. IV.i. 31. vii. 1. VII. x. 
1. 1X. iii, 1, 2,3. xi.3. X. ix. 1,8. 


e2 





HOous I. xiii. 20. IV. viii. 3. VIL. i. 4. 
ii. 4, VIII. xiii. 11. X.i. 1. ii. 1. viii. 
2,3. 6m IIL. ii. 1. IV.i.35. vii. 14. 
Wilisigs. VIE 1S “Valie a. 7 39: oe 
X. ix. 14. #0éy VI. xiii. 1. IX.i. 3. 
HOeor X. ix. 5. 

fora I. xiii. 12. IIL. ii. 6. IV. i. 13, 
21-325 WALL vos x Os- X16: 
1D. eRe. Ghee 

héec IIL. iii. 16. xii, 17. fSouer IL. 
bate 

HAlos IIT. ii. 7. iii. 2. IV. ii. 18. iii. 
3. 7Al@wv IV.i. 81. 7AMoy X. vi. 
6. Alor IV. iii. 35, 36. v. 5. 

fMuciay I. iii. 7. VIII. xii. 4. TX. ii. 9. 
nautas IV. i. 31. VII iii. 5. FAucla 
VI. xi. 6. Auta IV. ix. 3. Aulus 
Wil xis. G.. VALE -x::6. 

NAui@roas VIII. xi. 5. 

HA, HAua VIL. xii. 4. 

juépa I. vii. 16. muépas IIL. x. 2. VIII. 
iii. 5 

juérepov IIT. xi. 2. 

Tymévnpos VII. x. 3. 

huoelas V. iv. 8. 

juuov I. vii. 23. xiii. 12. V. v. 15. 

“HpaxAectos II. iii. 10. VIL. iii. 4. VIII. 
i. 6. Koy. 8. 

jpéva III. i. 16. IV. v.14. VIL iii. 4: 
vii. 3. IX. viii. 9. X. v. 4. 

hpepata VIL. ii. 4. 

hpeutas II. iii. 5. penta VIL. xiv. 8. 

npwuny VIL. i. 1. 

“Howddou I. iv. 7. 

novxta X. ix. 15. 

nov xeor IIL vii. 12. 

Array VIL. vii. 2. 

qzracOu VII. vii. 1,4. qrra@vra VIL, 
vii. 8. viii. 2. 

Arroyv I. viii. 16. xi. 2. xiii. 16. IU. iii. 
8. vi. 10. vii. 3, 8. ix. 3,6,8. TIL i. 
27. ii. 6, 10. iii. 8. v. 7,19. vii.1, 3. 
Vu US, 3X; 4,16. -%5 3.) x16 7. xu 4. 
TV: 9,102 iv.'25 5. v.13. vic:8.- V: 
ix. 1G; x..4.- x1..8.- Viiv: 7 “xi.6: 
VIL LOS in 42° vis Ns ie 5s x2 4 
VILE 8: Jovi 26 v5 Seva {7 ies: 
LS viis 5,6. 213. ii. 2. i. 2,3. 
vi. 8. viii, 10. ix. 16. 

Arzwv LY. viii. 10. Hrrovs VII. vii. 1. 


e. 


Oaddrrn III. vi. 8, 11. Oadrdrrns X, 
viii. 10. 


XXXVI 


Oardrriot III. vi. 11. 

Oadjy VI. vii. 5. 

Odvaros III. vi.6. viii. 9. ix.4. V.ii. 18. 
Odvaroy III. vi. 8, 7,10, 11. viii. 9. 
IV. ix. 2. @avdr@ III. ix. 4. 

Gappadréa III. vii. 1, 4, 13. ix. 1. 

Oapparéor III. viii. 13. Oapparé VIL. 
1X;23 

Oappet III. vi. 5. 
Oappev III. vii. 5. 
vii. 2. III. vii. 7, 10,11. 
vi. 10. 

Odppn II. vi, 2. TIL vi. 1. ix. 1, 

Odpaos II. v. 2. 

Odrepov V. iv. 10. xi, 8. VII. xiv. 8. 
Oarépov V. iv. 10. v. 8 VI. v. 8. 
VIII. vii. 2. @drepa V. i. 6. 

Oarrov IV. v. 7. VILL. xii. 7. 

Oavudover I. iv. 3. Oavudoeev X, viii. 
11. @avpdcerOa IV. ii. 20. 

Oavpaorixds LV, iii. 30. 

Oavpaords V.i.15. Oavpaorh IV. ii. 10. 
Oavpaoroy IV. ii. 10. VII. iii. 6. vii. 
6. X.v 1l. Oavparras X. vii. 3. 
Oavpacra VI. vii. 5. 

Oéaua I. viii, 10. 

Ocarhs I. vii. 19. 

Oedrpots X. v. 4. 

Ocwpuevous IX. vii. 1. TeOeduevos I. vi. 16. 

Ocios X. vii. 8. Oeudrepa VI. vii. 4. Oelay 


Oappodor IIT. viii. 13. 


bappjoa II. 


I. ix. 1. VIL i. 1. Oerdrepoy I. ii. 8. 
xii. 4. Oefas X. ix. 6. Oesdrarov X, 
vii. 1. Oelwy X. vii. 1. Oerordrwy I. 


ix. 3. Oefov I. ix. 8. xii. 8. VII.i.3. 
xiii. 6. X. vii. 1, 8. Oetordrous I. 
xii. 4. 

@éAovoay V. ix 1. 

Oeuiorevwy X. ix. 13. 

O¢oyuis IX. ix. 7. O€oyv X. ix. 3. 

@codéxrov VII. vii. 6. 

Oedmeuntos I. ix. 3. 

Geds I. vi. 3. VI. ii. 6. VII. xiv. 8. IX. 
iv. 4. Oeoo VII. i.2. VIIL. vii. 5. X. 
viii. 7. Oeoto VIL.i. 1. @edy I. xii. 5. 
Geol VI. vii. 2. VIL.i.2. Oe@y I. ix. 2. 
VI. xiii. 8. X. viii. 7,18. @eods I. 
xii. 3, 4. IV. ii. 11. VIL iv. 5. VIII. 
vii. 6. xii. 5. xiv.4. [X.i.7. X. viii. 
7. Oeots IV. ii. 16. iii. 10. V. vii. 3. 
ix.17. VILL ix. 5. IX ii.8. X. viii. 8. 

GedoSorov I. ix. 2. 

Ocobiréotatos, OcopiAéoraroy X. viii. 
13. 

Gepameta VIII. iv. 1. 
2. X. viii. 9. 


Oepametay VILL. i. 


dappew IL. i. 8. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


Oepareduara X. ix. 21. 

Oepareve: IX. v.3. Oepamevew X. ix. 21. 
Oeparedwy VIII. xiv. 4. X. viii. 13. 
Gepamevovra I. xiii. 7. IIL. iv. 6. 
Oepamevduevos VIII. iv. 1. 

Oepuatver Oa IIL. v. 7. 

Ocpyacias III. x. 1}. 

Ocppdv X. v. 9. Oepug VIII. viii. 7. 
Geppa III. iv. 4. 

Oepudrnra VIL. vi. 1. 

béow I. v. 6. 

Geréov I. vii. 18. x. 2. X. vi. 2. 

@ériy IV. iii. 25. 

Oewpet VI. xi. 1. Oewpodvrat I. vii. 21. 
Bewpnbein I. x. 6. Oewphoer I. x. 11. 
Gewphoamev I. xiii. 1. Oewpnréor I. 
xiii. 8. IL. ii. 6. Ocwphowmer III. vi. 
4. VII. vi. 1. @ewpotyr: X. v. 8. viii. 
6. Ocewpoty X. iv. 8. Oewphom IV. 

‘1.3. VIL xi. 1.) XX. vil) Sih iay p20, 
23. Ocwpodmey VI. i. 5. Oewpeiv VI. 
iii, 2. iv. 4. v. 5. vii. 4. VIL xii. 2, 
5. TX ix. 5. X. vii. 2, 4. viii. 8, 9. 
Oewpay VIL. iii. 5. x.3. Oewpnbévrww 
X. ix. 23. Oewphoavtes VI. vy. 1. 
Oewpoivra VII. iii. 5. 

Oewphuara X. iv, 10, Bewpyudroy IX. 
iv. 5. 

Oewpnrixh X. vii.1,7. viii.7. Oewpnriucs 
VI. ii. 3. Oewpnrixg X. ix. 16. Oew- 
pntixhy X. vii. 4.  Oewpyntinds I. v. 
2,7. 

Oewpta IV. ii. 10, X. viii. 7, 8. Oewplav 
X. iv. 5. viii. 8. Oewpias IL. ii, 1. VII. 
iii. 1. X. viii. 8. 

O7Av VIL. vii. 6. 

Onptov VII. i. 2. vi. 7. xiv. 4. Onplors 
VI. xiii. 1. Onplov VI. vii. 4. Onpla 
Ill. viii. 10,11. VI. ii. 2. VIL. iii. 11. 
vi. 6. xi. 4. xii. 7. xiii. 5. 

Onpidrns VII. i. 1. v. 5. vi. 7. Onpidrnra 
VIS. Zit. 

Onpwdns VII.i.38. v. 8. Oepi@des II. 
x. Ll. OnpiwSers Ill. x. 8. VIL. vy. 2, 
8, 5, 6. vi. 6. Onpidde VIL. i. 2. 
Onpiddn VII. v. 6. 

O@noavpod III, iii. 5. 

Onrikot IV. iii. 29. 

OQacwrey VIII. ix. 5. 

oaAipe I. x. 12. 

Oviokw. TeOvacr I. viii. 16. TeOvews I. 
x. 6. TeOve@ri I. x. 3. III vi. 6. 
TeOveata I, x, 3. 

Ovnrov X. vii. 8. Ovnrod VII.i.1, Ovnra 
X. vii. 8. - 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


OpacvdeAor III. vii. 9. 

Opacurduevor III. vii. 9. 

Opaods II. ii. 8. vii. 2. viii. 2,3. III. 
vii. 7, 8,12. VII. ix. 2. Opacty II. 
viii. 2, 3. @pacets III. vii. 12. 

Opacirns IL. viii. 6, 7. Opacdryte II. 
viii. 5. 

Operrichy I. vii. 12. Operricod VI. xii. 6. 
Opemtixdy I. xiii. 14. 

Opnyntinds IX. xi. 4. 

Opit VIII. xii. 2. rpix@v VIL v. 3. 

Ovmiapdtoyv III. x. 5. 

Oupoedets IIL viii. 10. 

Ovpds IIL. ii. 8, 6. viii. 10,11. VII. vi. 
2,3. @vpod III. viii. 10, 11,12. V. 
wo... VIL i 7.5 ivi 2,& Nea 
Oup@ I. iv. 7. IL. iii, 10. III. viii. 10. 
V. viii.9. VIL. vi. 4. @updy IIT. i. 21, 
23,26. ii. 3,6. viii. 10,12. IV. v.10. 
V. viii. 8. VII. vi. 3,5. @vpol VII. 
iii. 7. @vpods VIL. v. 5. 

Oupddns VII. vi. 3. 

Ovpas V.i. 7. @vdpas VII. vi. 2. 

@vota IV. ii, 11. VIII. ix. 5. 
VIIL. ix. 5. 

Ovew VY, vii. 1. 


6uvotas 


Overou IX. ii. 6. 


I. 


iards VII. viii. 1. tarot X. ix. 21. 

iarpelas VII. xii. 1. xiv 4,6. iarpetat 
If. iii. 4. VIL. xiv. 4. 

iarpever I. vi. 16. iarpevovra VII. xiv. 7. 
iarpevew V.ix. 16. iarpeverOu VII. 
xiv. 7. 

iatpuxy, J. vi. 4. Vi 1, vii 4. x. 1. 
xii. 5. xiii, 8. iarpiucjs Ii. 8. xiii 7. 
Il. ii. 4. X. ix. 15, 17. iarpeng 1. 
vii. 1. V. xi. 7. tarpixhy III. iii. 8. 
VI. xii. 1, 2. 

iarpix@repos I. vi. 16. 

iarpods I. vi. 16. IIL. iii. 11. X. iv. 6. 
ix. 15. iatpod V.v.9. iatp@ IX, ii. 
1. iarpy IV. vii. 18. V. ix. 15. 
VIl.iv.6. iarpovI.xiii.17. II.iv.6. 

’ V. v. 9. iarpots III. vy. 14. iarpol 
X. ix. 16,18. - 

idéa I. vi. 3. iSéas I. vi. 2, 10, 18. 
idé¢ IX y. 3. idéav I, vi. 2, 4,9, 11, 
16.) viii. 12. V.i. 7. 

idtoyvemoves VII. ix. 3, 

YSios VIL. iii. 12. tStwy IV. 1.17. ii. 15. 
VI. viii. 9. iSé¢ IDL. iv, 5. VIII. xii. 
7. i8i¢ WL v. 7. Ydoy I. vii, 12. 
IIL. i,13. V. iii. 8. v. 7. %6.a¢ JIE, 





XXXVI 


Ki -1.. Stas TIL, sha. — Ke ‘ix:. 15. 
idtov VII. iv. 2. 
iSi@ra X. viii. 10. 

idiéras IV. i. 30. 
idpipevoy I. x. 8. 
iévat IV. iii, 27. Viiv. 7. IX. xi. 6. 
fepov V.v.7. iep@ IV. i117. Zepa lV. 

i. 42. 
ideta V. v. 3. 
ixavos IX. x 2. 

VITE.. 257% 

VIII. viii. 3. 


i:éraus III. viii. 8. 


ixavol IX.x.5. txavg 
ikavov I iv. 4. vii. 20. 
IX. i. 7. X. viii. 10. 


ix. 2,9. ixavots III. iii. 10. ikava 
V. vi. 7. ikxavoy IX. x. 2. 


ixav@s I. iii. 1. iv. 6. v. 6. x. 15. xi. 2. 
xii: 8 Th ixtli> Vaud. i. NI. 
Ku: 2; VAL %.5.- DER: KH, 
vii. 4. ix. 1. 

"TAvov VI. ii. 6. 

quavra VIL. vi. 3. 

iudriov VIL. vii. 5. : 

Wa-Livsd..+ vist. IWeaiis Se 7V. 
¥..%6 Vilie.6,. VELL. & VAL ii: $25xi. 
Ly xiii S:/ Xi 6: 

immuchy Ii. 4. frmnédy I. i. 4. 

inmmds I. viii. 10. You I. vi. 2 X. v. 
8. imme I. vii. 138. trmov I. ix. 9. 
"HK. vi. 25. VILE xi. 6; 

iodfee V. v.14. VIII. vi. 6. 
iod(ew V. iv. 4. VIL xiii. 1. iod¢y 
VII. xiv. 8. icac@jva V. v. 8,9, 13. 
icac@f V. v.12. icacuévor V, v. 12. 
iodGowro VILL. viii. 5. ioa¢ovres VIII. 
Siliz 1. 

iodp:Oua VILL. iii. 1. 

icax@s I. vi. 3. 

Yoaor VI. ix. 2. 

io dpporos IX. i. 7. 

Yoos V.i. 8. toov II. vii. 4. V.v. 18. 
wield.» VIER. x6.ixi, 6.' TX. 4.9. oX. 
viii. 4. Yons 1V.ii.10. tow VII. xiii. 
1. . Yoor' II. vi. 4, 5. viii, 2... Vi i..-8, 
ii. 8, 12. iii. 2, 3. iv. 3,6, 8,9, 14. v. 
8,10, 14, 15. viii, 11. VIL viii. 4. 
VIIL v. 5. vii. 3. ix. 3. xiii.7. xiv. 1. 
TX: 1.5. Yor V. i1i..6. v.12. VII. 
x, 8,6, xi. 5. oat V.iv..12.. VIL 
x. 1. Yoa V. iii. 6. v. 10 vii. 5. 
towv V. iv. 10. v. 9. vi. 4. Yoous V. 
iv.3. Yoas VI.v.6. Yoovs VIII. xiii. 
1. Yonv VIII. xiii. 11. 

iodrns V.iii.6,8. v. 12,14. vi.9. VIII. 
v. 5. vii. 2. viii. 5. IX. viii. 2. iod- 
antos V. v.14. iodrnre VILL. xiii, 1. 
ioérnta V. v. 6. VIII. vi. 7 xiii. 1. 


TX...i: 1. 


XXXV111 

torn. éornnds, IL. ii. 3. orhoero VI. 
viii. 9. 

ioxupl(ecOa IV. iii. 27. 

isxupoyvapoves VII. ix. 8. 
povas VII. ix. 2. 

ioxupds IL. ii. 8. ioxupg VIL. xiii. 1. 
ioxupdy I. xii, 2. X. ix. 12. ioxupa 
VIL. ii. 4. iv. 4. xiv.6. ioxupas VIL. 
ii. 4,6. loxupay VIL. vii. 6. ioxu- 
potato I. viii. 9. ioxupdrarov VII. 
it.,5: 

ioxup@s VI. xiii. 1. 

ioxdy II. ii. 6. VIL v. 1. 
toxvos II. ii. 6, 8. 

ioxve: IL.iv.4. ioxdn X.ix.6. itoxdew 
X. ix. 8. ioxdovres III. viii. 8. 

tows I. iv. 4, 5. vi. 1,18, 16.' vii. 9, 17. 
Ville. 9;. 16.0 ix. 8, x1. 5, Ki 7. KU 8, 
1651750 De vie7.5 ie. 7. GE a6, 
8, 16, 21, 24. ii. 11. iii. 1. iv. 5. v. 
10; ix: 5, 6:. IV.. viii. 9. WV. SDL 
vii. 4. ix. 17. VIL viii. 4. VII. viii. 
3. xiii. 2, 4,6. VIIL ii. 3. iv. 4. vi. 
2,4. vii. 6. viii. 6,7. xiv. 4. IX.i. 
7,8. ii. 4. vii. 3. viii. 3, 9. ix. 3,5. 
x, 8,5. xi. 6. Xi. 1,2. 91:4. vit. 
vii. 4. viii 11. ix. 5, 9, 15, 16, 18,21, 
22. 

irntiketartov III. viii. 10. 

ixOvor VI. vii. 4. 


ioxupoyve- 


Xx ix. 31. 


K. 


KoOamep I. i. 4,5 ii. 2. iii, 7. vi. 11. 
vii, D1. viii. 15, 17: ix. Ds 9548, 
Xi,-3s Kit, xi. LO 16S 90, ta Tank, 
10. x3. Wii 1S; vil. 7, 18. V2 
1,33 iil. iv... V.. vis 6. Via. 
iVsDs. X1ls2e Vil 258.00, 40,41 By 
IWsH ODS Vos Whe byore VAR is Weeks 
Meexsbe oxi: 1. xiii 1,5), 9) XW se, 
4° 1X64. .1,'3,.75 9. 1.6, 8.3 Se Av, 
2. v. 8.4. Vi, 2,4. vii. Lo vitis 11. jEx. 
5,6,7,8,10. x. 1. X. iii. 3, 8 v.10. 
vi. 2, 5, 8. ix. 1, 11; 16,18. 

Kabapiérntt X. v. 7. vii. 3. 

kabevdew I. v.6. X. vill. 7. Kadeddwv 
VII. x. 8. «adedSovros VII. iii. 12. 
Kadevdovra VII. iii. 7. Kabevdorr: I. 
viii. 9. X. vi. 2. xaOedSovres VIII. 
Vans 

kabepevoas VIL. v. 3. 

kabiotaca VII, xii 2. 
VIL xi2: 

xa0od VII. xiv. 8. 


abearnkvias, 





“INDEX VERBORUM. 


xaddrov I. vi. 1, 3, xi. 2. 
1. IIL i. 15. -IV. vi. 6° 949 
vii. 6. x. 4,5,6. VI. iii. 3. vi. 1. vii. 
7. viii. 7. xi. 4. VIL iii. 6, 9, 10, 11, 
13. IX. ii. 5. X. ix. 15, 16. 

kal yap VII. vi. 2. VIII ix. 1. 

kal 64 VIL. x. 4. 

rawa X.iv.9. Kawa IV. viii. 6. 

katrep I. vi. 1. IL ii. 5. UL ii 7. V. 
Oe aed BO CA 

karo: I. vi. 15. Ill. v. 7. x. 3. V.v- 
8. vil. 1, 4. X. ix. 18. 

kapds I. vi. 3. IIL. vii 16. Katpod I. 
vi. 4. Kapdy Il, ii, 4. TIL i. 6. 
kaipots VIII. ix. 5. 

katee V. vii. 2. 

xanet V. ix. 15. VI. viii. 9. VIL. iv. 6. 

kaxeivos VII. vi. 2. xaneivo X. ix. 16. 
Kaxeiyn VILL. vi. 7. «dselvov IX. i. 
A. Kaxelvny X. iv. 8. «anelvous IX, 
x. 4. 

kaxnyopeiv V. i. 14, 

kaxnyopla V. ii. 18. 

kaxta II. iii. 6. vii. 10. III. v. 2, 19. 
V.i.19. Viv. 6.. VIL ica Soave 
vy. 5. vi. 4. viii. 1,3. saulas ID. v. 3, 
4. vi. 14. IIL v.17. vi. 4. IV.i 3. 
V. i. 19. ii. 10. viii. 7. xi. 7. VIL i. 
2,4. v. 5. vi. 7. Vili, 1. VEEL Wits 
IX. ix. 6. «axlq VIII. x. 3. kaxlay 
TIL. «ii. 14.> VIL i. 3.civ.-6.tgrie 
kant II. vy. 3. IIL. v. 15, 20. IV. ii. 
22. xaxi@y II. vi. 15. viii. 1. ix. 1. 

. TIL v. 16. IV. i. 45. 

kaxoAdyos IV, iii. 31. 

kaxorradety I. v. 6. X. vi. 6. 

kakotrorety IIT. v. 17. 

kaxorrotol LV. iii. 35. 

wands I. xiii, 12. IL. iii. 7,10. IV. vii. 
10. VII. vi. 7. xakov III. vi. 2. V. 
iii. 15. iv. 6. xax@ IIL. ii. 10. v. 18, 
19. VIL. xiv. 2. X. ii. 5. Kandy I. 
x. 8. II. vi. 14. IIL iv. 2, 6. vi. 6. 
vii. 18. IV. i. 5, 44, iii, 35. v. 7 Ve 
i. 10. iii. 15. xi. 8. VIL. ix. 4. VIL. 
iv. 6. xi. 1. xiii, 1,7. xiv. 2. X. ii 
5. «axol Il. i. 6, 7. v. 5. vi. 14. TIL 
i. 14. 1V. iii. 35. VIII. iv. 2. kaxov 
I. ix. 8. I: iz. 4, TIL i..4. Weee: 
vi.4. IX. xi. 5. X. ii. 5.  xaxots II. 
v. 3. V.ix.17. xaxd IIL ii. 11. vi. 
2, 3. IV. iii. 30. VI. v. 4. VIL. ii. 9. 
vi. 7. xiv. 9. «dxiov VIL. vi. 7. Kd- 
kiotos V.i. 18. Kdxioroy VIII. x. 2. 

kakoupyoortes III, y. 10. 


II. ii, 4. vii. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


Kakoupyia IX. iii. 2. 

kacos I. x.9. If.i.6. iii. 9,10. v. 2. 
qi. xit; 6. -IV. i. 6. V. ii. 2. vy. 6. 
Vind, 8:1xs3. (Xe 5. a8. ix. 20. 

nade VII. xiii. 4. VIII. x. 2. IX. xi. 
5. kKadoduey IV. i. 8. VIL. i. 1. 
kadéowuev II. vii. 10. Kadovor II. 
vis Si Vi 18. 18. 1v.07.> VI xn 9. 
VAR ix 2.) UXS i 7ie viliea4. x. 6s 
kadetrat IIL. xii. 5. IV. ii. 4. Vii. 7. 
iv. 6. v. 15. vii. 7. kadovvTa IV. vi. 
1. Kadoupévy VI. xi. 1. 

dAdos IV. iii. 5. KaAAous I. viii. 16. 
KaAAe X. vii. 7. 

Kadokayadias LV. iii. 16. 
xix. 6. 

adds VI. xii. 9. IX. v. 4. Kady Ix. 
19. Koddv I. x. 32. IL. iii. 7. ix. 2. 
IIL i. 4. v.2. vi. 3, 10, 12. vii. 6, 13. 
Wo 5; 11, 12; 145 ix, 4. xi. 8, xii. 9. 
EVO -172 352 11; 21. vi. 6, 7. vii. 6. 
ixc4) VIN i. 5. viiie 6. xiii. 8. IX. 
vii. 5, 6. viii. 1, 5, 7,9, 10. xi. 5, 6. 
X. viii. 9. ix. 8,10. «adod IL. iii. 7. 
III, vii. 2, 6. viii. 3. IV.i. 12, 14, 34. 
ie7, 20. V. ix. 9.- 1X. viii..6,11; X. 
ix. 4,10. «xad@ III. i. 7. IV. vi. 8. 
TXeab 5. X. ix. 9. Kaas IV. i. 14, 
nado LV. iii. 5. Kadat I. viii. 13. 
IV. i. 12, 385. VII. xiv. 1. Kxadrdy I. 
ivi 6. viii. 9. ix. 8. x. 14. xii. 6. IT. 
iis tae DEE 7,11. (TV l..85; “Vi. 
au 7 VIE iv:.5, VIE i..5. 1X.. vit 
6. X. iii. 10. v. 6. vii. 1. Hadots IV. 
iv. 3. VI. xiii. 3. IX. ix. 6. Karty 
VII. ix. 4. IX. viii. 9. Kxadats I. viii. 
12. Kaaa I. iii. 4. viii. 15. III. i. 11, 
2S.0i¥, 4; V3) To EVeis 7,8. iis 33. 
Vis StipTeo VILE. vil. Tor xii. 8... IX. 
viii. 7. X. vi. 8. viii. 10. xadAds VIII. 
i, 2. IX. viii. 7. «ddAdsov I. ii. 8. 
VIII. xiii. 1. IX. ii. 8. viii. 10. ix. 2. 
xi. 1, 6. X. ix. 18. Kaddious X. vii. 
7. «ddAdAoTo I. viii, 9. KadAlorn 
IV. ii. 18. KadAlorny VIII. i. 6. 
KdAAworov I. yiii. 14. ix. 6 x. 13. 
Rili-vs 172 IV. ii. 9. X. iv. 5. nda 
Acre 1, ix. 5. x: 11,13. Id. iii. 11. 
IV. ii. 16. IX. viii. 6, 7. X. viii. 11. 
kadAlorors III, vi. 8. IV. iii. 10.* 

KaAuyo IL. ix. 3. 

KoAGS. Ii. 1. iii, 5.. iv. 6. vii. 14, 17, 
20, 22. vit. 2) 186 xii/S... II.. i: 21. 
Vel’. IV. 2: 262 Vivi. 9. VI.-yv. 1. 
ee Ss, Kil, 3. VIER 6. IX. 4. 


KaAokaryablay 





XXX1X 


Vill Oro xe 2a Needs Gerdes laden: 
4. v.10. viii. 11,18. ix. 6, 11, 17, 
21, 23. 

kdpvee X. iv. 9, xduvovra VIL. vii. 5. 
IX. ii. 1. kapvdvrav VIL. xii. 1. 
kduvovot II. iv. 6. X. iii. 8. xexun- 
kéotl. xi. 5. kekunndras I. xi. 5. 

KOW UV Verte Views Volks 4a cabs Vile 
Rls WiguiGe Rs Kho es ks ovine as 
ix. 12. 

kavoviCouer II. iii. 8. 

kdvov III. iv. 5. V. x. 7. 

kamvou II, ix. 3. 

Kapxivou VIL. vii. 6. 

kapriuwr IV, iii, 33. 

kapro@v VIII. ix. 5. 

kaptepetv VII. v. 5. vii. 4. : 

kaptepta VII. i. 6. x.5. Kaptepias VII. 
i. 4. vii. 4. 

kaptepixos VII. vii. 1, 4. 
VIE Gs dite ol. 
TVs. 

KapTepiK@s X. ix. 8. 

kataBéBAnvrat I. v. 8. 

katadeéorepot VIII. vii. 4. 

kata Civ I. x. 10. 

katarAioer IX. ii. 9. 

Kkatakovowor X. v. 3. 

katéxta V, ix. 1, 

katakwxtuov X. ix. 8. 

KkateiAnuméeva X. ix. 5. 

kataAelrew 1V.i 18. KaréAmoy X. ix. 
19. karadurety VII. ii. 12. kata- 
Aclanrat VII. i. 5. 

kaTradAdrrovrat III. ix. 6. 

katavoovot X. v. 1. 

karamwéArny III. i. 17. 

katamané IL, vii. 14. 

Kkatreokevacor I, vi. 2. 
IV. ii. 16. 

katacKevat TV. ii. 11. 

katacpixplCovres VIII. xiii. 10. 

katatpiBovras III, x. 2. 

karapaviys III. vii. 10. Katapavéorepov 
Xe iv. ds 

katdpaots VI. ii. 2. 


KapTepiKoy 
Kaptepixol VIL, 


karacKkevacas bat 


Karapevyovtes II. iv. 6. Katapedyovos 
V.iv. 7. X. vi. 3, 4. 

katapavat VI. iii. 1. 

katappovet LV. iii, 22. Karappovoicr 


IV. iii, 21. Karappovery II. ii. 9. 
Karappovotmevot X, i, 3. 
Katappovntines LY. iii. 28, 
katapuy)y VIII. i. 2. 
carldwpev II, vii. 11. 


xl INDEX VERBORUM. 


kateo@lev VIL. v. 2. 

karéxovot LV. v. 8,10. xaretxe VIL. v. 
7. Karéxew VIL, vii. 6. 

Katnyopovpevoy I. vi. 13. 

katnyoptay I. vi. 4. Karnyoptaus I. 
vi. 3. 

xatnkoov I, xiii. 18, 

katopOowyv I, viii. 7. II. vi. 14,18. Kar- 
opovca VI. ix. 6. Katop0ovra II. 
Vier 12s 

karopOwrikds II. iii. 7, 

kato II. i. 2. 

kavow V. ix. 15. 

kaxetla V. i. 5. 

keitat IIT. v. 18. 


kaxetlay V. i. 5. 

keiuevos V,i. 14. 

keAever V. xi. 1. VIL i. 2. Kededov V. 
i. 14. é«éAeve VII. vi, 2. IX. i. 5. 

KeAtods ILL. vii. 7. 

kevyy I. ii. 1, 

kepamets VIII. i. 6. 

kepdatvey 1V, i. 48, V. ii, 4. iv. 18,14. 
kepdaivovar IV. i. 43. exépSavey V. 
ii. 5. 

képdos V. iv. 5, 6,13. VII. iv. 5. VIII. 
xiv. 2. IX. i. 4. xépdous IV. i. 41, 
43. vii. 12, 18, 14. V.ii. 6. iv. 4, 6, 
14. VII. i. 7. iv. 2, 6. «xépdy III. 
ix. 6. 

Kepxvwy VIL. vii. 6. 

keotoy VIL. vi. 3. 

kepadatou IL. vii. 5. 

kepaddy VI. vii. 3. 

«ndn IX. ii. 7. . 

KiBdnAevovar IX, iii, 2. 

KOapiCew I. vii, 14, IL i, 6. 
piCovres IIL. i. 4. 
KBaptotod I. vii. 14. 

4, 6. 
KOapwd@ IX. i. 4. 
kiuBires LV. i. 39. 
kiwduvetn IV. iii. 23. KxwSuvetboytas X. 
viii. 7, éxivdvvevor III. viii. 9. 
klyduvos ILI. viii. 9. xevddvm IIL. vi. 8. 
«ivduvoy ILI. viii. 11, 12. wddver 
IIL. vii. 12. «wSdvois ILL. viii. 13. 
VIL xiii. 10. ssvddvous III. viii. 1, 
10. ix. 6. 
Kxwvet VI, ii, 5. 


Kepadaip IL. ix. 7. 


Ki0a- 


Kiaprorad IIL. i. 


awe III. i, 6. VII. 
iii. 10. nevjoal, xiii. 15. xwnO7- 
cetal. x. 14. weicOau IL v. 4. X. 
i, 4. KkwovduevaV. vii. 1. Kivoupérw 
ViE-xiisl. 

kivynows IV. iii. 34. VI. ii. 4. X. iv. 
23. Kwhoews VII. xiv. 8 X. iv. 3. 
cujoee LL, iii, 4. VIL. xiv. 8 Kivn- 





ow X. iii. 4. iv, 2, 4. Kxwhoes IV. 
viii. 3. VIL xii, 1. X. iii, 4. xeevq- 
cewy I. xiii, 13. IV. viii. 3. . VIL 
xiv. 2, 

kwnrov Y. vii. 4. 

klovos X. iv. 2. 

«loonpw IIL. i. 17, 

KAels V. i. 7, 

kAclovat V. i, 7. 

KAérrns V. vi. 1, 2. 

KAénre V. xi. 6. exAehe V. vi. 2. VIL 
vi. 3. 

KAnpovoulay VIL. xiii. 6. 

KAnpwrds VILL, x. 2. 

«Aivn V. v.15. KAtvas V. v. 15, 16. 

KAoty II. vi. 18. V. ii. 13. 

«vjuns LX, viii. 2. 

xotAoy I. xiii, 10. 

kowds VIL iv. 2. own I. vi. 2. vii. 
12. ‘xiii, 12. > LL:iii. “% “TR viiee?. 
kowdy I, vi. 3,11. vii. 12. IL. ii. 7. 
IIL it. 3. AVS. 415 SS Eee 
ll. ii, 11. vii. 7. VI. viii. 2, 3. 
VIII. xi 6. xii. 7, xiv. 3. IX. i. 2. 
ii. 9. iii. 4. xowod X. ix. 15. Kkow@ 
I. xiii, 11. xiv. 3. xow@ I. vi. 13. 
TIL. y. 21. V.lisiss ~ WE aes 
IX. vi. 1,3. X ix. 14. «owhv X. 
ix. 14. xowal III. xi. 1. VIL. vi. 2. 
X. ix. 14, cowd 1V.ii. 15. VI xi. 
2. VIII. ix. 1,2. xi, 8. IX. viii. 2. 
kow@y VY. iv.2. VIII xiv. 3. X. ix. 
15. Kowdrepos VIII. xii. 6. Kowd- 
tepov VIII. xii. 7. xowordry III. x. 
10. 

kowdrnta IX. ii. 9. 

kowovel I. xiii. 8. III. ii. 2. x. 8. X. 
viii. 8. Kowwvety IV. vi. 1. VI. ii. 
2. IX.ix. 10. kowwvovor I. si. 5. 
V. ii, 12. VIL ix, 1. TX. 2ie2ye; 
kowwvjoa I. ix. 9. VILL. xi. 7. 
exowdvnge 1X. 1.9. Kowdvnoacr IX. 
i. 7. Kowwvovpuev X. ii. 4. 

kowovia V. v. 9, 10, 12, 14. VIIL ix. 4. 
x. 4, xii. 7. IX. xii. 1. xowwvig V. 

. i. 18,16. VILL ix. 1. xii. 1. xiv. 2. 

kowwvias VIL. ix. 4, 5,6. Kowwvlaes 
V. v. 6. viii. 6. VIIL ix. 1,6, kor- 
veviey II. vii. 11. IV. viii. 12, IX. 
#4. Kxowwrdy VIII. ix. 5. 

xowwvikats VILL. xii. 1. 

kowwvol V. v. 12. Kowwrg V. i. 17. 
Kowwvav V. vi. 4. : 

xodd(over ILI. v. 7, 8. mexoAdoOae III. 
xii. 6. «oAd(eoOa: X. ix.10, Koda- 


Kuta V. vii. 4 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


obhva V. v. 4. 
xii. 8. 

kodad IL. vii. 13. IV. vi. 9. VIII. viii. 
1. «éAaxos X, iii. 11. 
iii, 29. xodagkw IV. i. 35, 

koAdoes Il. iii, 4. DIL i. 2. 
10. 

KoAodyv VIII. i. 6. 

wowdy IIT. v. 12. IX. iv. 7. X.i. 2. 
Koutd7js TX. vii. 2. 

koutCoueba II. i, 4. 


KekoAacuevoy III. 


koutoo Ill, i. 3. 
koploavres I. vi. 2. scoue(éoOar VIII. 
xiii. 7. Koutovpévous 1X. vii. 1. Ko- 
puotpevos VIII. xiii. 11. KopuctoOae 
IX. ii. 5. 

Kkoopovrra IV. iii. 36. 

Kkoopuidtnta II. viii. 8. 

xéopos IV. ii. 16. iii, 16. VI. vii. 4. 
xécpov III. iii. 3. X. iii. 4. xdopp 
VL vii. 3. 

KougiCovrat IX. xi. 2. 

kovpa VI. vii. 7. 

xpaow VII. xiv. 6. 

kparet VIL. viii. 5. «pareiv VII. ii. 1. 
vii. 1, 4. IX. viii. 6. xparetrOat 
VIL. ii. 3. v. 5, 7. xparovyta VII. 
iv. 5. 

«pariotos IX. iii. 5. 
X. iv. 7. vii. 2. xpaériorov X. ii. 1. 
iv. 5. vii. 8. ix. 14. xpartorny X. 
vii. 1. xpdériorot IIL. viii. 13. xpa- 
torovs II]. ix. 6. xpdriora IIL. viii. 
7a Se Wis 4. 

xpéa VI. vii. 7. xpéace VII. v. 2. 

kpeitrwv Iv. 5. V.vii. 4. X. vi. 7. vii. 


kpatiorn V.i. 15. 


8. xpetrrov I. xii. 5. V.v. 8. x. 2. 
VIL. ii. 3. VII. viii. 3. IX. ix. 3. 


X. ii. 3,4. xpeirrovs IIL. viii. 9. VII. 
vii. 1. 

Kpnmidos X. iv. 2. 

Kpnrtay I. xiii. 3. 

xpivopev II. ix. 6. Expwev V. ix. 12. 
Kptverat V. viii. 9. X. viii. 12. xpi- 
ver I. ii. 1. Vi.x. 3. X. ix. 21. 
xplvayres IL. iii. 19. xpiver L. iii. 5. 
viii. 13. IL iv. 4. «pfya X. ix. 20. 


kpwet III. y. 17. xpivat X. ix. 20, 21.. 


xplvas V.ix. 13. xplvovor X. iii. 2. 

y. 2. viii. 11. ix. 20. xptvoy X. iv. 8. 
xpiots Il. ix.8. II. x. 9. IV. v. 13. 

V. vi. 4. ix. 12. VL xi. 1. xpioe 

VIL. viii. 2. «pices IV. i. 1. 
kpiths I, iii. 5. 
kpitixds VI. xi. 2. 

xi. 1. 

VOL, II. 


xpitucn VI. x. 2. 


| 


kéAakes IV. | 


Kix, || 


xli 


Kext7 00a IV. iii. 33. 
i. 20. IX. vii. 7. Kkexrnuévous X. 
viii, 11. xextnuévors VIII. i. 1. 

kretver V. ix. 11. xreivy V. iv. 4. 

atjpa IV. ii. 10. V.vi. 8. EX. ix. 5. 
KThuata V. vi. 9. Krqpdrov IV. i. 
17. «tharos IV. ii. 10. 


aTagépeva TV. 


| Ktjow IV.i. 7. xrqoews IV. i. 23. X. 





f 


vi. 38. aethoee I. viii. 9. 

etnrov I. vi. 13. «rnra I. vi. 14. 

kuBepynricis I. ii. 4. xvBepyntiucyy IL. 
iii. 8. 

kuBeuths IV. i. 43. 

scbkdov IL. ix. 2. xtedq IIL. ix. 3. 

KuxaA@mnes X. ix. 138. 

kbpara II. vii. 7. «dparos IL. ix. 4. 

Kuu.vorpiorns IV. i. 39. 

Kuzpoyevous VIL. vi. 3. 

kuptevoy VIII. x. 5. 

kvpos III. i. 4. v. 8. «dpia VI. ii. 1. 
xiii, 2, 8. VII. iii. 9, 13. «uplav 
VL. xiii. 1. redpeo: TIL. i. 3. v. 9, 17, 
22. viii. 4. xvpuul.ix. 13. IL ii 
1. xvpios V. i. 13. kxupiwrépa VL 
xii. 8. -xupwrdrns I. ii. 4. Kupid~ 
tepov I, vii. 13. X. viii. 5. Kupide 
tata l. viii. 2. IILi.18. VIL i. 5. 
kupwotaros III. i. 18. xupiditarov 
IX. viii 6. xupwordrp IX. viii. 6. 
«vpoov VIL. xiii. 11. TX.ix. 7. X. 
vii. 9. viii. 12. 

Kvpios I. xiii, 19. VI. xiii. 1, 2, 6. VII. 
iii. 13. xii. 3. VILL. iv. 4. TX. ix. 
(te ES Pye WE 

xuprov I. xiii. 10. IIL. vi. 10. 

xvotvoas VII. v. 2. 


kbves II. x. 7. VIL vi. 1. «xdvas II. 
viii. 4. 

kwdvtixe I. vi. 8. 

ewaver Ix. 15. IIL ix. 6. IV. i. 19. 


Va 10.2 y. 8. xi Be. VELL. Gy x. 
2: xiii. 2. VII. iv. 3. TX. vir4. 
X. iii. 3. ix. 16. KxwdAdtoovres IIL. v. 
7. Kwadvovor lV. viii. 9. KwddvecOat 
IV. ix. 3. «wAvovoa VII. ii. 6. iii. 
10. KwAvduevoy VII. iii. 9. 

kwpwdiav LV. viii. 6. 

K@pedots LV. ii. 20: 


A. 


Aaywoyv III. x. 7. 

Aadpaia V. ii. 13. 

Aaxedaimovioyv I, xiii. 3. Ill. iii. 6. X 
ix, 13. Aaxedatpovtos LX. vi. 2. 


xhi INDEX VERBORUM. 


Ad«wves LV. iii. 25. VIL.i. 3. Aakdver 
IV. vii. 15. Adewor IIT. viii. 16. 

AauBavew II. ii. 8. IV. i. 7, 9, 29, 39, 
40. V.v.8 VI. x. 38. AapBdavouer 
Il. i. 4. AauBdvovor II. vi. 6. IV. i. 
9, 83, 84, 40.' VII. ix. 2. VIII. xiv. 
l. AauBdvovras IV. i. 42. eAdp- 
Bave IX. i. 5. AdBwouey LV. iii. 1. 
AaBew I. ii. 8. IL. vi. 4. ix. 2. III. 
2) ve 275. Vive BAL VA as 
VILL vi. 8: xiii.-10,. TEX. £96. «Rive 
2. AdBol.iv. 7. VIN. x. 4. X. iv. 
1. édAdBouey I1.i. 4. AaBwor V. iv. 
8. AaBoy V. viii. 3. AaBev V. ix. 
13. AdBomey VI. vy. 1. IX. viii. 3. 
AaBdvras VI. xii.7. AdBy VI. xiii. 2. 
AaBdvra VIII. xii. 2. €AaBov IX. i. 7. 
AaBovca X. vii. 7. Anhouévy II. vi. 
7. Anetra IV. i. 15, 17, 24, 31. 
ciAnpow V. i. 8. AnpOjva V. xi. 8. 
ciAngas VI. ix. 4. xiii. 6. €iAHpace 
VII. xiii. 6. AauBdvoyvTr: IV.i.8. V. 
ix. 10. AauBdvorvtes IV. i. 10. IX. 
1.9. AauBavoyra lV. i. 80, 31. Aau- 
Béve 1V.i. 31. V.x. 4. VIIL ix.3. 
Anwovra IX. viii. 9. AnpOety I. vii. 10. 

Annréos I. vii. 7. Anwréov II. vi. 7. vii. 
1, ix. 4. Vu ih. 7. VIL i 7s Vike vie 6. 

Aaumptvera LV. ii. 20. Aaumpurduevar 
IV. ii. 4. 

Aaumpos LV. ii. 11. 

AavOdve: II. ix. 8. V. i. 7. VIL iii. 2. 
VIL. viii. 1. AavOavérw I. iv. 5. AavOd- 
vovogy VIII. ii. 4. AavOdvew IV. iii. 
28. vi. 4. AavOaydyras VIII. ii. 4. 
AavOdvovea VIII. ii. 4. IX. v. 1. 

Aaoy VIII. vii. 1. 

Aéyw I. xiii. 11. IL. v. 2. vi.5,10. IV. 
vi. 8. V.. vill. 8. VEL. vi. 25 xis. 
VIL. iii. 1, 2. iv. 2: ws 2, 9.5 xvi Fi 
X. iii, 4. Aéyee HI. ii, 11. x. 4. IV. 
vii. 5. V. iii. 9. xi. 9. VEG VIL 
iii, 10. x. 4, Aéyouen I. iv. 1. vii. 4, 
6. viii. 2. ix. 9. x. 3. xiii. 6, 20. IL 
iv. 1. VI. 9. vii. 5. viii. 8. HII. ii. 2. 


vi. 4. x. 2,5. xii. 8. IV. i. 2, 23, 42. 


ii. 2. v.11. vii. 7. Vi. 8, 18. iv. 6. 
VEL ait: Bs vi; 2: 4x, 1, 4. ai Os eee 


7. VIL. iii, 5. iv. 2, 8, 6. vi. 6. ix. 1. 


xi. 1. X. vi. 7. A€yovor I. iv. 2. 
vill. 7: IL,.2i.. 5. TV. iii. 36.) Vea 
7. ix. 15. VI. viii. 2, 6... Vilaics; 
iv. 6. v. 2. xiii. 38. VIL i So tvs: 
IX. viii. 3. ix. 4. Kii®. iti. 9 6, 
iv. 4. €Aéyouey I. vi, 2. IL, vii. 8. 





ix.4. éaeye VI. xiii. 3. Aéyor III. 
v. 7. X. ili, 8. Aéyorey X, ii. 4. 
Aeyn V. x. 5. Aéywuer I. iv. 1. v. 1. 
IL. vii. 9. WL x1. -IVsGee Yee 
4. iii, 1. xii, 4. A€ywor X. ii, 4. 
Aéyew I. vi. 5, 7. vii. 9. x. 15. IIL 
ii. 3,9. v. 4. IV. iii, 25,28, vi 4 
vii. 14. viii. 1,3, 5,6. ix. 1. Vi. 3. 
v.3. VIIL.i.1. iii. 8,13. VIEL iv. 
4, x1. IX. vii, 1.. vii. 35a; 
iii. 4. iv. 5. ix. 21. Aéyow IV. viii. 
10. V. ix. 1. Aéyovra Il. vi. 7. VII. 
i. 1. Aéyovros VI. i. 3. A€yovres I. 
xiii. 20. IL. vii. 10. IL. i. 17. ii. 3. 
IV. vii. 14. X. ii. 5. ix. 18. Aéyouor 
I. viii. 8. x. 2. ILL. iv. 230 DVawnt 
3. VII. xiv. I. Aéyovras I. iii, 4, 
iv. 3. Aéyerat I. vi. 1, 2, 3, 9, 12. 
viii. 10. xiii. 9,18. IL iv. 4, 5. vi. 
18. vii. 8, 14,16. IDL i. 21. v. 20. 
vi. 3. xi. 5. IV.i. 19, 44. ii, 3) ai 
10. viii. 10. V.i. 8. ii. 13. iv. 5, 18% 
v.17. ix, 11. x. 8. °xiil Sd? egy 
VIL. iii. 5. iv. 8. v. 8. ix. 6. VILL. ii. 
3. v. 5. IX. viii, 6. X. i. 3. iv. 4 y. 
10. ix. 1, Aeyduea II. v. 2, 8, 4, 5. 
Adyovrat I. viii. 8. ILL. viii. 1. ix. 2. 
x. 2, 3. xi. 3. IV.i. 10. iii. 20. vii. 14. 
VIL. 7. iv.3. VID. 17 Eee 
X. ix. 15. Aéyorro I. iii, 1. vi. 9. 
viii. 2. TIL. vi. 10. IV. v. 2. XX. aii, 
9. AeyéoOw II. vii. 12. VI. i. 6. 
Aéynta V. i. 6. Acydyrwv VIII. 
viii. 2. é@Aéyero I. vi. 3. — A€yowro 
Xv. 11. Aeyouévww I. iii, 4. viii. 
1, 2. Ill. xi. 4. IV. v. 18. Aeyo- 
pevns I. vii. 18, ° Aeyduevor I. ix. 
10. Aeyouévn II. vii. 7. X. vii. 4. 
Aeyouévov III. i. 19. IV. iv. ,4, 
Acyouévors III. x. 9. Aeyduevov V. y. 
8. VII. v. 2,9. vi.1. X. ii. 4. Ae 
youeva VIL i. 7. xi. 5. X. iii, 18, 
Aeyouévous VII. iv. 2. VILL. iii. 8. 
AexOeioav I. i. 5. AexOévrwv VII. 
vii. 8. Aex@évra I. v. 8. x. 16. A€x- 
Oetow I. vi. 8. A€yerOat I. vi. 8. vii. 
18. IL ii. 3. vile 1.0 TIE £15 VOR 
6. IX.ix. 10. X. ii. 5. AexOjvac 
I. vii. 9. AexOévri I. viii. 5. Ae Oev 
I. xi. 2. V. ix. 9. IX. x. 23 xi; Soe 
vii. 9. AexOcioav IV. i. 44. eAdyOn 
IV. iv. 1. °V.v. 11s vil’ 6.) “Vas 
VIL. viii. 1. Aexréoy III. i. 6. iii. 2. 
Viii9. Vib xii. '8) 8S VEioasd, 4, 
iii. 7. iv. 1. v. 5. xii. 3. xiv. 3. 


INDEX VERBORUM. = xhii 


Aefwew V.i. 14. Aelwera I. vii. 13. IL. 
¥.:0- VE yi-4, Vi. 2. x... ° X, viii. 
7. Aetmwyrat III. viii. 9. 

Ae:toupylay VIII. xiv. 1. 
IX. vi. 4. 

AcoBias V. x. 7. 

Aeundy VI. vii. 4. Aeved X. iii. 8. Aev- 
xérepov I. vi. 6. 

Aeukdrntos I. vi. 11. 

Aéwy III. x. 7. 

Afye: VILL iv. 1. Anyovons ibid. 

.AOn VI. v. 8. AhOnv I. x. 10. V. viii. 
40. VIEL. v: 3. 

AnkuOos LV. ii. 18. 

Anrrixdy IV. i. 20. Anmrixod IV. i. 34. 

Afus IV. i. 7,15, 24. Aner II. vii. 4. 
IV. i. 8, 29, 38. iv. 2. AjWw IT. vii. 
4, IV. i. 24, 40. 

Anorhs IV. i. 43. V. vi. 1. 
IX, ii; 4. 

Mow Toix.:6). il. TIL xi. 3. IV. ii. 
22. vii. 11,15,16. VILiv. 5. IX. 
iv. 10. X. vi. 6. ix. 20. 

Al@os II. i. 2. AlOov V. x. 7. 
ait. 5. 17:, v.14, 
Aoupydv VI. vii. 1. 
Acyicerat VI. ix. 2,3. X.v. 5.  Aoyl- 
cwvTat Vi. v. 2. Aoyi€er@au VI. i. 6. 

XW Bs 

Aoyix@y II. vii. 16. 

Aoy:oue VIL. i. 6. Aoyioudy IIT. i. 26. 
xii. 7. VI. vii. 6. VII. ii. 10. vi. 6. 
vii. 8. Aoyouod III, viii. 15. VI. ix. 
4, VII. i. 6. 

Aoyiorixdy VI. i. 6. 

-Adyos I, vi. 5, 8, 16. vii. 2. viii. 1, 8. 
Il if. 2, 3,4. IL. v. 21. vii. 2, 5. 
viii, 12. xi. 8. xii. 9. IV.v.3. V. 
Heder ix. ch VER 1,2) Be. 4. 
viii, 9. xi. 4. xii. 5, 6. VII. ii. 2, 8, 
12. iv. 2. vie 1. viiied. X. ii 5. vi. 1. 
ix. 5, 6,12. Adyou I. v. 3. vii. 14. 
ix. 7. xiii, 15, 17, 18. Il. ii. 4, 5. iii. 
5, TUL. He 27. viii, 153 TV. ii... V-. 
iii, 3,8. VI. iv. 2, 3, 6. v. 4, 6,8 vi. 
12 te525-3;. xii. 10. xiii. 5. VIL. ii. 
9. iii. 10. viel. ix. 2. IX. viii.6. X. 
ix 7. Adyw I. vii. 13. viii. 4 x. 10. 
xiii, 10, 15,17. IL i. 7. vi. 15. ix. 
8. Ill. xii. 7,9. IV. v. 13. vii. 4, 7. 
Vetivdb..x.45 VIL iii. 11. ix.-1, 5. 
TPS Oe > 155..5;, 75:9, 10. 
Adyov I. iii. 7. iv. 4. vi. 11. vii. 13, 
14. x. 4,15. xiii, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19. 
TE if, 2 ive6. viee17.. TIL... xii. 8. 


Aecroupylas 


AnoT@v 


Aidov 
Alt@wy X. iv. 2. 


f2 





V. iy. 2..ViyS: xi..2, 9. “VIL 1. 1,5; 6. 
Mig Oe. WV. BS xi; 45: Vile. Ge it. 2: 
ili. 3. iv. 2, 5. vii. 8. viii. 2, 4, 5. ix. 
6,°xe 2. IX. vis le viii. 6; XL v.38. 
Adyor I. iii. 6. iv. 5. v. 8. vi. 1). IE. 
1 3 Vil. Xiv...5;. ER. iG: ok. 1. oe 
ii, 1. ix. 3,14. Adyow II. vii. 11. 
DV 6 vie Va vills. L2: TX. viii, Six. 10. 
oi 45. “Adyos-Eihie dT. xiie.92. 0. 
Vitek -DVcviels Vix 9.. Viiv: 
2: Wiles 2: TR vii 2! WK yis8: 
vill, 12. Adyous I. vi. 8. VI. xiii. 5. 
VIL. iii. 8. X. viii. 12. ix. 18. 

Acdoyxwmeévoy IIL. i. 17. 

Aotdopety LV. viii. 9. 

Aaddpnua. LV. viii. 9. 

rondy II. vii. 13. V.iv. 1. VII. xiv. 9. 
X. vil. Aomral Xv. 11. Aowrhy X. 
viii. 9. Aowmwats I. vii. 1. VIII. i. 2. 
Aoweé I. vii. 1. xii. 8. ID. iii. 7. v. 
18,19. xi 7. VEER ic Bai F59: 
IX. viii. 2. X. viii. 8. Aouréy I, ix. 7. 
Tov. 9. TOG 4.5: a. 99s Ve, 
X, iv. 3,10. ix. 17,18. Aozot IT. i. 
6. VIII. xii. 4. X. vii. 4. Aourorts 
TIE ‘ii. 46 VERL xi 7s xiii.) TX, 
i. 1. ii. 9. iv. 2. Aowds VIII. iv. 1. 
IX. xii. I. 

Avuaiveratl. x. 12. Avuatvoyrat X. v. 5. 

Avual X. v. 10. 

Auvmew IV. vi. 2, 5,6, 7,8. viii. 3, 7. 
Aurnoet IV. vi. 8. Avrodmuevos II. iii. 
1. T3418: FV. £ 27;.. VIR vi 4. 
Avreic Oat II. iii. 2,9. vii. 15. xi. 5, 6. 
TV. 4.25... v. 5.. VIL ik, 7. “DXiv, 10, 
xi. 3. AuwnOjva Il. v. 2. vi. 10. X. 
jii. 12. Avme?rat IT. vi. 15. IIL. xi. 6, 
8.. IV. i. 28. IX. iv. 10. ix. 7. xi. 3. 
Aurhoera IIT. ix. 4. IV.i. 25. Av- 
moupevous III. x. 2. Avmrovvrat VIT. 
ix. 3. Avmovmevor IX. iii. 4. xi. 2. 
Avrotuevoy IX. xi, 4. Avumotro X, iii, 
6. Aue? X. v. 9. 

Av’ry II. iii. 8. v. 2. TI. xii. 2. VIM. 
ive4. xii; 1,72, Kiv. 2. Kok Sy 5. 
Aumys II. ix. 4. III. xi. 6. IV. v. 10. 
WE ie aii A oreo KIVe ay) 4 De 
IX. ix. 8 xi. 4. X. iii, 13. Ady IT. 
ii, 8. Xi 1. v. 5. ix. 10. Adwyv 
Il. iit: T., vii. 154 TH. iv. 6: “viii. 11. 
xi; 5. SE, SY IV vi 7. vio ee VS 
v. 6. VII. iii. 1. vii. 3, 5. ix. 3. xiv. 
4, 6. IX. xi. 2, 4. X. ii, 2. iii. 6. 
Aurav VIL vii. 6. xiv. 7. X. iti. 6. 
v. 5. Advmats IID. vii. 10. IX. ix. 8. 


xliv INDEX VERBORUM. 


Abwas T..x. 12), Ti. 7,.5,.6, 10, 11, 
Vile Bs LANs, Kyle Khe Os el Ves Wie, 1c 
WD ivek Rov bi 2o- xi 2s Cae 
4,10. Atma VII. xiv. 2. X. v. 5. 
Aurnpod II. iii. 7, IIL. ii. 5. Avmnpas 
X.v.5. Avmnpg@ VIL. v. 2. Avmnpdy 


Ill, i. 7. vii. 18. viii. 454 ins 8,24. 


1V.i.13. VI. v. 6. vii. 8. VIL. xiv. 
5, 8. VIIL v. 2. vi. 4. EXSives. 
xi. 4. Aumnpay III. i. 19. Avmnpa 
III. i. 9,25. ix.2,4. X12 v9 
ix. 8. Avumnpar VIL. iv. 3. 

Avous VIL. ii. 12. xiii. 1. 

AvorreAods VIII. iv. 2. 

Avtpotoba V. vii, 1. AvrpwOévrs IX. 
ii. 4, 

Autpwréov 1X, ii. 4. 

Avera V.ix.9. xi.6. VII. iii. 12. xii. 7. 
Ava:rro VI. xiii. 6. Adnrae VIL i. 5. 
Avoa VIL. ii. 8. Avodmevoy IX. ii. 4. 
&ve VII. xiii. 1, 

Awmodurns IV. i. 43. 

Agoroyr I. viii. 14. 


M. 


pabquarinds VI. viii. 6. pabnuarucol V. 
iil, 13. VI. viii. 5. aOnuarucots VI. 
viii. 9. VII. viii 4. padnpuaricod I. 
iil. 4, pa@nuatiuad IIL. iii, 12. X. 
ii. 7. paOnguaricoy I. xiii, 18. 

paenow I. ix. 3. 

padhrov I, ix. 1, VIL iii 3. 

powduevos III. 1.17. iii. 2. vii. 7. pou 
vouevoy VII. iii. 7. pouvduevar VII. 
vi. 6. 

paxap IID, v. 4, 

porapiCovra I. ix. 10. paraptoeey 1. 
x.3. parapi(ew I.x.7. paraplCouer 
I. xii. 4. parapicer I. xii. 4, 

Maxdpioy I. vii. 16. viii. 16. ix.8. x. 7, 
12, xi. 5. Vil. xip2s+Bk,aed8. 
X. viii. 9.  praxaptovs I. x. 10, 16. 
IX. ix. 9. X. viii. 7. paxapidrepor 
Ix. 12. paxaploy I. x. 13. pard- 
pos I. x. 14, Wlv.4. IX ix. 5. X. 
viii. 8. poaxdpios VIII. v. 3. vi. 4. 
poxaplos 1X. ix.1. parapwrdrn IX. 
ix. 9. moaxaply IX. ix. 10. X. vii. 7. 
paxaplov X. vy. 11. 

pakapidrnte X. viii. 7. 

paxapiws I. x 4, 

paxpoy I. xi. 2. paxpdrepor III. x. 10. 

podaxla IT. vii. 13. VII. i. 6. vii. 5, 6, 
x. 5. padaktlas VII. i. 4. vii. 3, 


padands VIL. vii. 1, 5,7. paraxg VIL 


vii. 4. padaxot VII. iv. 2, 3. 


pddrwora I. ii, 4.° iv. 4. v. 2. vii. 5. 


viii. 2, 18. . ix.:2; 6; 11. o2290P aR 
xiii. 2,12. IL ii. 8,9... i872 
6,7. IIL i.18. ii. 13. vi. 10. viii. 
1, 3,6,7,8. ix. 4. x Nee 
xii. 6. IV. i. 11,21. ii, 15. iii. 7,9, 
10, 11,17, 18. v.10. vi.4,14. V. 
i. 15. VI.ii..6.. vii. 6. vii Ses, 
VIL. i. 1,3, 5. vi. 4. vii. 8. VIIL i, 
1, 3,4. iii. 4, 5,6, 7. iv. 1. v. 2, 4. 
vi. 1. vii. 6.. vilic 5)/Gs) Skee, ee 
xij. 2,5. IX. i. 8. ii. 7,8. iii. 4. iv. 
1, 3, 4,5. vii. 3. viii. 1, 2, 5, 6. ix. 
9, xi. 5, 6, xii. 1, 2. Dearie 
2,12. iv. 4,7,10. v. 4. vii. 4,9. 
viii. 7, 13. ix. 10. 


paddor I. ii. 2. v. 4, 6, 8. vi. 6, 12, 14. 


16. vii.2. xi.2,4,5. xii 1. xiii, 7, 
II. i. 8. ii. 4. iii. 8. vi. 10. vii. 8, 11. 
viii. 5, 6,7, 8. ix. 8,8. IIL i. 7, 8, 
10. ii. 1, 9, 10,13. iii. 8,9. vy. 15, 
17. vii. 1, 3, 10, 13. viii. 9, 15. ix. 
1.4. x. 2,5. x14, By Se 
1V. i. 1, 3, 7, 8, 9, 14, 20, 27, 37, 42, 
44, ii, 8, 9,16. iii. 20, 28, 30, 33, 
35, 37. iv. 2, 3,4, 5. v. 4, 7, 8, 10, 
12, 13, 14. vi. 8. vii. 1, 6, 8, 9, 10. 
viii. 3,4,6. ix.1,2,7. V.i.7. ii. 4. 
iii. 16. v.14. vi. 9.- vii. 7. ix. 16. 
XL. iii. 4. vii. 7. viii. 9. VIL. iii. 4. 
iv.3. vi. 2. vii. 1,3. ix. 3,5. x. 4, 
xi. 4. xii. 3,5. xiv. 3. VIIL.i. 4, 7. 
v. 3. vi. 4. vii. 2. viii. 1,8,4, ix. 3. 
xii. 1, 2,6, 7. IX. ii. 1,3. iii, 2, 3. 
v. 3. vii. 1,3 7. viii. i. 6,9. ix. 2, 
6.2 xt. Tl xi. J) 36 die Ee 
v. 2,3, 4, 8. vi. 2,3. vii. 3, 4, 8. 
viii. 4, 7, 8, 10. ix. 1, 9, 14, 15, 18, 
19, 22, 28, 


pavOdver I. ii. 6. VI. x. 3,4. VII. xii. 


5. mabdvras II. i. 4. pavOdvouev II. 
i. 4. VI. xii. 2. padeivy III. v. 7. 
paddyres VIL. iii. 8. 





Havias VIL. iii, 7. pavlay VII. v. 3, 6. 

pavérnra V. i. 5. . 

pavrevéucda X. v. 4, 

peavrw LY, vii. 13. 

Mapyetrn VI. vii. 2. 

Maptupe: I. x. 10. IL. i. 5. paprupodas 
VIL. xiv. 5. japrupetoou ILI. y. 7. 

papruptois II. ii. 6, 

pactryote Ga: III. vi. 5. 

pdraos IV. vii. 10. paraor I. vy’. 10, 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


paralay I. ii, 1. “paradérepoy I. 
iv. 4. 

paraiws I. iii. 6. 

paxns III. viii. 4. pdxnv X. ix. 15. 
paxo V. iii. 6. VIL xiii. 2. X. 
vii. 6. 

paxot IL, viii. 12. paxiu@raro: III. 
viii. 8. 

paxera I. viii. 11. xiii. 15. paxorro 
VIL. iv. 5. pdxovra: III. viii. 8. 
éuaxero VIL. ii. 1. pdxeo@au II. iii. 
10. 

péya I. iv. 3. II. viii. 4. IV. ii. 6, 10, 
17, 18. iii. 14, 15, 30, 34. VIL ix. 4. 
VIL. ii. 6. VIL. xii..4.. TX viii. 9. 
peydAny I. ii. 2. vii. 23. IL. vii. 8. 
IV. iii. 37. IX. viii. 9. peydaus I. 
ix. 11. IV. iii. 17. VIL xiii. 3. peé- 
yoda I. x. 12, II. vii. 6. ILL. iii. 10. 
BY: AW TE Ss. i) 2. DOK. :xi: 5. 
peydAas I. x. 12. peyddwr I. x. 14. 
Ill. i. 7. IV. iii. 3, 6, 7,9, 20, 27. 
X. viii. 9. peydadou II. viii. 4, IV. 
iv. 1. eydAa IIL. xii. 7. IV. ii. 6. 
peydros IV. i. 24. ii. 3. peyddn 
IX. iii. 4. weydAous X.ix. 3. peydaw 
IV. ii. 17. iii. 5. preyaaor IV. iii. 11. 
peydan IV. iii. 27. peydans IV. vi. 
18. péyora Ly. 6. IIL vi. 6. IV. 
ii, 15, 21. VILL vii. 6. xii. 5. xiii. 
10. IX viii, 7. X. vi. 2. peyirov 
I. ix. 6. Il. v.17. IV. iii. 10, 18. 
TX. ix. 2. Li. 1. ix. 20. peyior@ 
IIL. vi. 8. peyiorwy III. ix. 4. IV. 
iii.9, 14. peylorov V. iv. 11. VIII. 
xi. 2. peylarouvs IV. i. 43. péyar 
IV. iii. 26. 

peyadokivouvos LV. iii. 23. 

peyadonperea II. vii. 6. IV. ii. 10, 15. 
peyadompercias IV. ii. 1. peyado- 
mpéreiay II. vii. 8. IV. ii. 13. iv. 1. 

peyadonpenys IL. vii. 6. IV. ii. 3, 5, 7, 
13, 15,20. peyadumperois IV. ii. 6, 
10, 16, 19.’ peyadomper# IV. ii. 10. 
peyzAomperés IV. ii. 10. peyadro- 
mpexéotepov IV. ii. 10. peyadompené- 
otartov LY. ii..17. 

peyadonperas IV. ii. 19. 

peyaroduxia II. vii. 7. IV. iii. 1,5, 16, 
37. peyadodvxtay II. vii. 8. IV. iii. 
19. iv. 1. peyadopuxig IV. iii. 37. 

peyaddyuxos I. x. 12. IV.iii, peyadd- 
Wor IV. iii, 11, 20. peyadrodixe 
IV. iii. 15. peyadoyixou IV. iii. 12, 
14, 30,34. meyaardvuxoyr IV. iii. 13, 


| 





xlv 


14, 16, 21. 
iii. 19. 

Meyapeis IV. ii. 20. 

méyeOos IV. ii. 1, 10,14. peyéOer I. x. 
12. EL vis 1. TV 2i..1, 45.10. iii. 5. 
VIL. vi..6, VIL xi..2.. IX. i, 2 vi. 
2. X. vii. 7. peyéOn VI. x. 1. 

BeOlorno: VIII. x. 5. peOioraor VII. 
iii, 7, peractioa X. ix. 5. 

pébodos I. i. 1. ii, 9. péOodov V. i. 2. 
pebddq I. vii. 18. 

peOvonduevor III. viii. 14. 
vos VII. viii. 2. 

weOvovor III. v. 8. peOdoy TIM. i. 14, 
pebve Ova IIT. v. 8, ; 

pet(or I. ii. 8. vii. 8. xii. 4. IL. vii. 12. 
viii, 2. IV.i. 44. V. iii. 15, 16. iv. 
8. v.18. xi. 8. xiii. 1. IX viii. 9. 
X. viii. 3. peiCovos IV. iii, 14. V. 
iii. 16. iv. 9. pel(w IV. ii. 21. iii. 17. 
Vii 8. vii: :4,.10.. Vi-witsi xi. 8. 
melCous IV. iii. 16. X. viii. 5. per(d- 
veov III. i. 4. IV. iii, 6. vii. 1. 

petov V. i. 10. 

peAayxoAucol VII. vii. 8. x. 4. xiv. 6. 
perayxodinds VIL. x, 3. 

pedernv VIL. x. 4. 

peAetovrey IIT. v. 11. 

peadAnrhy IV. iii. 27. ° 

méAAovat IX. x. 4. péAAwor IX. xi. 5. 
peaAAfoee IL. iv. 5. médAdwy IIL. vi. 
5. IV. ii. 21. X. iii. 12. péardrow I. 
x. 15. méAdovta VIII. xiv. 2. péa- 
Aovtos IX. vii. 6. jeAAdvrwy IX, iv. 
5. peAdotons V. v. 14. 

peéAos IV, ii. 21. peAeot IIL. x. 4. IX. 
ix. 7. péAn X. iv. 10. 

peace IV. iii. 31. V. xi. 8. VIL. x. 3. 
VIIL x. 4. péAew IV, iii. 28, 

peuvjcba I. vii. 18. 

phéugorrat VILL. xiii. 4. 

péewpers VILL, xiii. 2. 

peévos IIL. viii. 10. 

pévee Vox. 7. VIIL vii. 5. TX. i. 3. vi. 
3,6. meiva IL vi. 2. peévovor III. 
viii. 16. VIII. iv. 1. vi. 7. viii. 5. 
pévovra III. viii. 9. pévew Viv. 14. 
VII. ii. 4, 8. VIII. vii. 6. 

pévro: I, xiii. 15. V. iii. 7. vii. 4, 8. 
VI. viiis 1. VIL. iii. 6. 

peptoarto V, ix. 13. 

pepotoy I. xii. 10. pepiore V. ii. 12. 
pepiotav X, iv. 4. 

Mepérn III. i. 17. 

pépos V.i. 19. ii. 1, 3, 9, 12. v. 15. vi. 


BMeyadoWwxortepous IV. 


pebvoKope- 


xlvi 


So xteGs 9) Viet Gove ie Witsoe ae he 
Kil: By. WAL. as.6s. 1s 15-25 kX. 23. 
mépous II. vii. 1. X. iv. 2. pepe IV. 
viii. 5. Vii. 1,3, 6,9. VIIL xi. 5. 
Kuiv. S. pépy TL 1.6. x11. Vs ii. 


9,13. VI.5. 5. VIII. ix. 5. pepav 
Ill. x. 1. pépeot X. iv. 2. pepo 
VI. v..8. 


peotdlous V. iv. 7. 

béoos II, vii. 8, 12, 13,14. IV. iii. 8 
vi. 9. vii. 4, 6. viii. JO. VIL. vii. 2 
ix. 5. péon Il. vii. 1. ix. 9. IV. v. 
14. vi. 3. uécov II. vi. 4. vii. 10. 
viii, 3, 4, 5, 6 ix. 2,5. IV. i. 31, 36. 
iv. 4,6. v. 1. vi9. Voi 1. iii, 1, 3, 
4 12. iv. 6, 7,9, 10, 11, 14. v. 10, 
17. Vitel. iz.3. VEEL wits: XX. 
ji. 2. péoov Il. vi. 9, 13. viii. 4, 7. 
ix. 1, 3,4, 7,9 IV.v. 1. viii. 2. V. 
iv. 7,10. we 17. oxi. Ze MEM? wih;7. 
méow II. viii. 7, 8. jéons IL. vii. & 
IV. v.14. péon II. viii. 1. IV. viii. 
5. wéonv IV. vi. 4. péoar IL. viii. 2. 
péoous IV. iii. 26. peéoa II. vi. 6. 
Vio 2 2. 

peodrns II. vii. 18, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20. 
vil, ix. 1. IED. vii 1. vile 1raem. 
IV. 4.1. iv. 1,5. % Ts Vie oViSal, 
v.17. peodrntos II. ii. 7. vi. 9, 20. 
viii, 1. IV. i. 24. iv. 4. peodrnte IL. 
vi. 15. peodtyta II. vi. 18, 19. vii. 
10. peodrnres II. vii. 11, 14, 16. 
Ill. v. 21. IV. viii, 12. peoorhrwy 
VILi. 1. peodrnras IV. vii. 1. 

péows II. v. 2. ITIL. vii. 12. xi. 8. 

peraBalver IV.i. 36. VIII. x. 3. pmera- 
Batvey I. vit. 2. petaBatvovor VIII. 
x. 3. weraBhva VI. xiii. 5. 

perapddAe VII. ix. 2,5. petaBddrrot 
IV.i.31.  peraBddAdrovar VIII. x. 3. 
petaBddAvAew V.v. 11. X. iii. 4. 

petaBodAy VII. xiv. 8 VIII. iii. 5. 
meraBodal I. ix. 11. jmetaBodds I. x, 
4, 15. 

petadldwor X. vi. 8. 
8. IX. xi..5. 

petddoots V.v. 6. peraddoe: V. v. 6. 

peraxivjoa VIL x. 4. jeraxuetra V. 
SH 

petadauBevew V. ix. 3. petarauB4- 
vovot 1X. xi. 2. perardBomer X. ix. 5. 


petadiddvar V. v. 


peraueAcia III. i. 13,19, perapedrclas 
TXSiv. 10. 
petapeAntixds VII. viii, 1. getapeAnti- 


nov VII. vii. 2. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


perameAduevos ITI. i. 13. 
peratd VILi. 1. VII. iv. 5. vii. I. 
merametoat X.ix.7. petameiOwvra VII. 


ix. 3. petameiodels VIL. ii. 10. pera- 
meio Ojvat ibid. 
metamirre: VIII. iii, 5. peramtrrew 


VILL. vi. 7. pweramtrrovres VILL. iii. 
5. meramrrovons VILLI. iii. 5. 

perappet LX, vi. 3. 

petappu0uloa X. ix. 5. 

petapép mev Vix. 1. pmerapépwy IX. v. 
3. merevnvéx Oat ILI. xii. 6. 

Hetapopay III. vi. 3. V. xi. 9. VIL. v. 
9. vi. 6. 

péreott LV. ii. 14. V. ix. 17. 

petleva I. vii. 22. 

merémerra X. iv. 9. 

peréxer I. xiii. 18. peréxew I, xiii. 17. 
VIL. xiii. 6. X. viii. 8. weréxovea I. 
mii.15. metracxetv VI. viiil.4. jeré- 
xovar IX. iv. 7. 

Merpet V. v. 10. petpnéj V. iv. 6. 
petpetru IV. i. 2. Viv. 15. IX i. 
2,7. perpetcoOar V.v. 11. perpeiv 
VIII. xiii. 10. 

werplas IIL. xii. 8. VII. iv. 3. peérpioy 
I. vi. 3. IV. iii, 26. iv. 4. perpie 
Ill. i. 7. perplov I. vi. 4. jerplois 
IV, i. 35. ii. 3. petplov IV. iii. 7. 
X. viii. 10. wérpia IV. iv. 1. X. viii. 
11. pérpror V. ix. 9. 

perplws III. xi. 8. IV. i. 25. iii. 17,18. 
vii. 17. X. viii. 11. 

pérpoy IIL. iv. 4. V.v. 14. VIII. xiii. 
10, 11. IX. in2s4we. IBF eve 
10. pérpa V. vii. 5. peérpars V. vii. 
5. mérpy VIII. xiii. 11. 

méxpe I. ii. 6. IV. v. 18. 
VII. vi. 2. vii. 2. xiv. 2. 

pnaudber 1V. i. 30. 

pnoaua@s LV. x. 7. 

wnde VIL. xiii. 7. VIII. v. 3. 

pendels IIL. i. 7. v. 17. IX. viii. 2. py- 
Semis ID. ii. 7. pwndeulav VIL. xii. 6. 

~X. iii, 12. wndevds I. vii. 5, 7. IV. 
iii. 25. vii. 5, 7, 10., VILL vii. 4 
pwndevi TIL. 1.7. pndev I. xiii. 9. x. A. 
xi. 6. IL ii 7, IDL. i. 3, 10, 12, 13. 
viii. 13. ix. 6. xi. 7. xii. 7. IV. i. 84, 
39. iii. 34. V. v. 11,14. VIL vi. 2. 
VII. ii. 3. iii. 6. vii. 2. ix. 6. VIIL 
viii. 3, 6. xi. 6, 8 xiv. 1, 3. IX 
i. 4, 6. iii, 2. iv. 10. vii 2 X. 
iv. 5. vi. 3. undéva VIL ii. 3. IX. 
1% 


Vi imsrhZ. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


pandemore I. vii 4. VI. vi. 2. VIII. iv. 
Sie ER. 3155.5. XS, iii. 12. 

pnderépa VIL xii. 4. pnderépw X. ii. 5. 
pnderepoy I.iv.7. VII. xiv.5. VIII. 
iv. 2. X. ii. 5. pnderépwr X, ii. 5. 

pndotiodr I. xi. 1. 

penreére VILL. iii. 3. IX. iii. 1, 

ejwos X. vii. 7. 

phawy III. x. 5. 

wav I. vi. 6. viii, 18. x. 14. 
Votes Vis Ll. ix. 3. xi 2. 


III. ii. 7. 
IV. i. 22. 


mols, 17; 18, 85. v. 7. VI. v. 7. 
VIIL. viii. 3. 
pnvier I. xiii. 18. IX. vii. 4. unvdew 


| Diag) fg Page. Coa | a 
iii. 4, 

bhmore VIII. vii. 6. X. i. 3. iii, 2. 

penme V. vi. 1. 

eentpuchy IX. ii. 8. 

eatpt VILL. viii. 3. IX. ii. 8. pnrépa 
V. ix. 1. VIL v. 3. aunrépes VIII. 
vili, 3. xii, 1. IX. iv. 1. viii, 7. n- 
tTépas IX, iv. 1. 

Mnzpoxrovijca IIT. i. 8, 

Miapdvos X, vii. 6. 

Muxpoxtybuvos LV. iii. 23. 

Mikpompérera If. vii. 6. IV. ii. 4. 

puxpomperhs IV. ii.21. puxpomperés IV. 


ii. 8. 
Maxpol IV. iii. 5. pupdy I. viii. 9. xi. 5. 
xiii. 13, l,i. 1. iii. 9. iv. 3. viii. 4. 


ix. 8: WE ix. 3.¢x..9: IV. ii. 18. iii. 
18. v. 13, 14. viii. 4,6. VI. xii. 7. 
xii. 5. VIII. x. 3. xi. 6. IX. iv. 10. 
vi, 4. ix. 4. X v. 9. vii. 8. viii. 
4. ix. 19. pupa I. x. 12. II. vii. 
6, 8. III. ix. 6. iv. le vi. 8. vii. 
15. VIII. xiii. 10. X. viii. 7. pinpdv 
IV.vi.7.  jupod II. viii. 4. 1V.i. 41. 
purports LY. i. 24, 29. ii. 3, 20. iii. 17. 
pucp@ IV. i. 31. ii. 21. VII. iv. 2. 
punpas IX. viii. 9. puxpay IV. iii. 4, 
*, 32. 

puxpérytt I. x. 12, IX. ii. 2, 

puxpoWvxia II, vii. 7. IV. iii. 37. 

puxpdpuxos IV. iii. 7, 12, 35. 

purrh IV. ix. 8. IX. xi. 3. 
ii. 8. puxral TD. i. 6. X. iii, 2. 

MiAjoios VIL. viii. 3. =MiAnotous ibid. 

MidAwv: II. vi. 7. 

piwetrat IT. vii. 8. euimetro ILL. iii. 18. 
piwodmevos VII. vii. 5. pruetoOa: LX. 
xi. 4. ptmovyrat LV. iii, 21. 

puoety Xi. 1. ix. 6. roe? VI. viii. 4. 
pucobvrat IX, iv. 8. 


unviover II. 


pucrov X. 





xlvii 

kuonrov IV. viii. 72 pronrd I. x. 13. 
TH. 'xi, 4; 

pioObds V. vi. 7, IX. i. 6. 
7. pucOovs X. ix. 3. 

bioOwors V. ii, 13. 

meat Il. vi. 7. Viv. 15. pvav V.v.15. 
pras If. vi. 7. Vi vii. 1. 

mvetay VII. i. 4. IX. iii. 5. 
iv. 5. 

bvjun IX. vii. 6. 
pevijwo X, iii. 7. 

bynwovevew IY, iii, 25. X. iii, 12. 

bynocikatos LY, iii. 30. 

Boipay I. ix. 1. 

borxela II. vi. 18. V. i. 14. 

Moixever V. ii. 4. xi. 6. uolyeuse V. 
li, 5. iv. 3. vi, 2. potxedew IL. vi. 
A VR IE 25. 

Hotxos V. vi. 1,2. jorxol III. viii. 11. 

pmoAtBadivos V. x. 7. 

bors LV, iii. 25. 

povadirov V. iii. 8. 

povapxtot VIIL. x. 2. povapxias VIII. x. 3. 

povdpxois IIT. vi. 8, 

povddos X. iv. 4, 

fovaxas II. vi. 14. 

peévamos VIIL. iii. 7. vii. 2. pdviwov I, 
x. 7. VIII. iii, 6. vi. 7. povipor 
VIII. viii. 4, 5. pévywa IX. i. 3. 
povip@repat I x. 10. povuiwrarar 
ibid. 

pévos IV. ili. 20. porn V.i. 17. VII. 
v. 8. VIII. iv. 3. X. vii. 5. pdvov 
Teait25s¢vins 3. Vitis Me | aE S37 vi 
Ly. vite ly Sie Cvs 16s Veal, 
12. V. i, 8, 15. iii 8 iv. 3, 9 
Wi 4s vit. 6. vii. 11, I2.-ix.29peai. 
45 VE.02,: 3. -v.- 8.0. vik Ose Vim 
XeDs RSs. xiii S.. - VI, 1.9854: 
2,3, 6: ve. 6, 7, 9 vi. Dy Cini 
x. 2. xiv. 3 8:- VEE 3) 6x Iv 
xi. 7. IX. i. 8.) vi8.) X40 4e ive 
viii. J1. ix. 21. mdvovs VIII. v. 
pévas, VIL. xiii. 6. udvny VII. iv. 6. 
VII. i. 2. pdvor VI. viii. 2. drm I. 
ii. 8. vii. 6. mdévy I. vi. 8. VIIL 
xiii, 2. X. ix. 18. mdvov VI. ii. 6. 

povovpevoy I. vii. 7. X. ii, 3. povovd= 
peva. I. vi. 10. 

poverny I. vii. 6. 
VIII. v. 3.- 

pépiov I. xiii. 12, V. ix. 17. X. ix. 
18. optov VI. xi. 7. xii. 4, 5. xiii. 
7,8. X.vi. 7. pdpea I. xiii. 10, 15. 
VIL. ix. 6. popiwy I. vii. 11. V~. i. 


perOdv IX, i, 


peveca IX, 


penny VII. iii. 11. 


ie ee 


IX. ix. 3. poverats 


xlviii 


13.5 Vi. i. 8. is (6. VEL, 
woptos VIII. ix. 4. 

povoikds LX. ix. 6. X. iv 10. povotod 
X. iii. 10. povowdy X. iii. 10. pov- 
ons X. ix. 14. povoiuhy X,. ix. 20. 
povotxol II. iv. 1. povowre II. iv. 1. 

poxOnpia II. v. 4. VI. xii. 10. VII. 
iv. 5. v.8. viii. 1,4. mox@nptas III. 
14..16. Vii 14. ai. 2. EXSraiib. 
poxOnpla V. i, 18. VIE i. 4. ti. 4. 
VIII. viii. 5. xiv. 4. pox@nplay V. 
ii. 5, 10. viii 8. IX. iii. 2. iv. 8, 9, 
10. 

moxOnpds III. i. 14. V. viii. 9. VITIL 
x. 8. IX. iii. 3. sox@npd III. v. 7. 
IX. xii. 8. X.v. 6. pox Onpdr V. viii. 
10.. VIUL =. 3... 85, 8s ai 7 
ix. 7. mox@npod IV.i. 31. poxOnpe 
VIII. xiv. 4. IX. viii. 8. pox@hpas 
VIL v. 1. jox@npat VIL. xiv. 2. jo- 
xOnpods VIII. i. 7. poxOnpot VIII. 
viii. 5. x. 3. IX. iv. 9. xii. 8. po- 
xOnpdrepos IX. viii. 1. 

uvdeverau I. ix. 11. 

pupedixh VII. xii. 6. 

peupiaees IT, i, 2. 

pupiddwy IX. x. 3. 

HuptowrAdoww VIL. vi. 7. 

pupwr IIT. x. 5. : 

pos VIL. v. 6. 

puotika IIT. i. 17. 

pwpalvew VIL. iv. 5. 


N. 
vat III. v. 2. 


vaov X, iv. 2. 

vavrnyiKys I. i. 8. 

via II. ix. 3. 

veavik?) VII. iv. 4. 

veapos I. iii. 7. 

veneontinds II. vii. 15. 

veweots II. vii. 15. 

véuet V. vi. 6. ix. 9. véuover VIII. x. 
3. véuew V. vi. 4. VIIL. xiv. 2. 
IX. viii. 11. veiwas V. ix. 8. vetua 
V. ix. 15. véweo@ar VIIL. xiv. 1. 
IX. ix. 10. véuwvrat V. iii. 6. veud- 
peva V.ix 15. veveunuévns VILL. iy. 
6. veveunuévwr I. viii. 2. 

NeomréAeuos VII. ii. 7. ix. 4. 

veos I. iii. 5, 7. III. xi. 1. 
véewy II. i. 8. iii, 2. IV. ix. 3. VII. 
iii, 4, 5. vi. 4. Xi ize 3. wloeVE 
viii. 5,6. VIII. iii. 5. vi. 1. véou X. 


VI. viii. 5, 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


ix. 8. véos VIII. i. 2. X. ix. 8, 
véous X. i. 1. ix. 9. vég IV. ix. 3. 
vedreporv VIII. vii. 1. 

vedrns VIL. xiv. 6. vedrnrt ibid. 

vatiov II. iii, 8. 

ving III. ii. 8. VIL. vii. 4, veviennévar 
IIL. viii. 13. vuedor I. viii. 9. vivdy- 
ves VII. ix. 3. vewnnds VII. iv. 2. 

vixen loi 3. VII. iv. 5. vies VILL ix. 
5. vlenv VIL. iv. 2. 

NidBn VIL. iv. 5. 

voen lL. iv. 7. vohow III. viii. 4. vonhot 
I. iv. 7. vojom VIL. xi. 4. VIII. i. 
2. voeiv IX. ix.7, 9. voodv IX. iv. 
4. voovmerv IX, ix. 9. 

vohoews IX. ix. 7. 

vontixeyv VI. ii. 6. 

vontov X. iv. 8. 

vouh V. iii. 11. vopijs TI. viii. 11. 

voulCwy VII. iii, 2. 

vourh VILL. xiii. 5, 6. voyuxdy V. ix. 
12. 

voumos V. i, 8,12. vdumov V.i. 8. ii. 
8. vii. 1,4. vouinov V. x. 3. vopl- 
pov V. ii. 10, 11. vii. 6. vdpyua V. 
113. Rie Ae, 

véutoua V. v.10, 11, 14, 15, 16. IX 
i. 2. iti, 2. X. viii. 7. 

vomuoréoy I. xiii. 16. 

vouobeota VI. viii. 3. 
22. 

vomoberovar III. i. 2. V. vii. 1. vopo- 
Oerotvons I. ii. 7. evopobérnae V. x. 
5. vouoberovvtas X. ix. 10. vopo- 
Oerijoa X. ix. 20. vevowobérnrat V. 
ii. 11. 

vouobérns V. x. 5. X. ix. 5. vomobern 
V. x. 4. vowobéras I. xiii. 3. vomo- 
Oérar II. i. 5. IV. viii. 9. VIIL i. 4. 
ix 4. vouvbérov IL. i. 5. vopoberav 
III. v. 7. 

vouobetixds X. ix. 14, 18, 21. vomobe- 
Tikh VI. viii. 2. vowobetucjs V. i, 12. 
vomobstix@ X. ix. 17. 

véuos IV. viii. 10. V.i. 14. ii. 10. iv, 
8, 18. vi. 4,°9. x4, Si oxi 
ix. 12. vduov V. x. 6. xi. 1. VIL 
xi. 7. vou {. iii, 2. Viv. 11, x. 4. 
vowov V.ii. 3. vi. 9. x. 3,8. xi. 2. 
VI. xii. 7. VIIL xiii. 5. vdmor V. i. 
18; ix. 15. IX. i. 8; i ae 
vépov I. xiii. 2. II. viii. 1. VIL x. 
3. X. ix. 9, 14,17, 20, 21. véduous 
ik, v. 8 VII. x. 4. X.ix, 8; 23, 
vdpous VIL x. 3. | 


vowubeclas X. ix. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


vpooe: III. v. 14. voceiv ibid. vocar 
ibid. voojaas I. iv. 3. 

voohuata VII. vi. 6. voonudrev VII. 
viii. 1. 

voonuatédns VII. v. 8. 
Vil. v./3,:5; 6. 

vooquatwiws VII. v. 4. 

vécov Ill. vi. 8,4. V.xi.8. VII. v. 6. 
vil. 6. vdcou If. v.15. vdo@ I. vi. 
4, vécous VII. i. 3. v.38, 6. véoors 
If. vi. 8, 11. 

voowdn VII. xi. 5. xii. 4. 

vovdernais I. xiii. 18. 

Pous- 1; vi 3, 12. TYE in. 7... VE 1. 
He i. WS vi. 2: vii. 3, 4. viii... 9. 
meas 5G: VIE vi’ 7. IX. viii: 8. 
X. vi. 4. vii. 1,2. viii. 18. voo X. 
vii. 7. viii. 3. ix. 12. vo VI. viii. 9. 
IX. viii. 8. vooy I. vii. 5. IL. i. 5. 
fee-ae yin ES. (VE. vis.2. ‘xi. 2, 5; 6. 
xiii, 2. IX. viii. 6. X. vii. 9. viii. 13. 
ix. 11. vdov VII vi. 3. 

voy I.v. 2. vi. 4,13. x. 6,10. II. vii. 
9: Ti. 20. -v. 5.x. 1. xii 55: V. 
wet VIL 1-5. xii, 4. VIL. iii. 7. 
eanee. EX. iv. & XL 1-5. iv. 4. 
vii. 9. ix. 3. 


voonuaTwdoes 


MW 


éevias IX. x. 1. 

Eevixhy VIII. iii. 4. xiiv Le 

Eévwr IV, ii. 15. 

Zevoparty VII. vii. 6. 

Enpavecioay VIII. i. 6. 

Enpov VIL. iii. 6. Enpg VIII. viii. 7. 
Enpas LI. xi. 1. Enpd VIL. ini. 6. 

tvA@y II. ix. 5. 


Euvévos V. ix. 15. fumeévras X. i. 4. 


oO. 


Syn X. vii. 8. 

bd. Hde VI. xi. 8. Todt VI. viii. 7. 
1. radi VII. iii. 2. 

680s I. iv. 5. 

6d0vs VIII. xii. 2. 

Odupéuevos 1V. ii. 21. 

60ev I. vy. 1. vii. 17. viii. 17. ix. 1. xiii. 
ie 4 ile vis 9. ‘vii. 8. TIT. i. 9. 
viii. 6,10. x. 8. IV.i. 7, 15, 17, 24, 
31, 33, 40, 42, 43. iv. 2,3. v.9. V. 
ix. 10. Vi-sio4t Vii. 3, 6. v. 1. 
Wii 6. xi, 1. oxite GTX. ix 1. xi. 5. 
xii 3. X. ve 1. 


VOL. Il. 


ix. 





g 


xlix 


odvetov VIII. xii. 8. 
xii. 6. 0velwy IV. vi. 5. 
8. d0vetos IX. iii. 5. 

oiaxiCovres X. i. 2. 

oixetos I. iii. 5. oireia X. v 2, 6, 8. 
otxetov I. v. 4. vii. 18. IV. i. 9. viii, 5. 
Vawe5s Visi MIDE S: Sxosle 
Ries2 GLAS I 9) ini, As Avie Oya teudXs we 
XD Rad Vee 5s Vile Ooi e8e 
oixetov X. ii. 4. oixelay I. vii. 15. 


66veim VIIT. ix. 3. 
TX xis 


VIII. viii. 2. X. vi. 5. vii. 7. oixetar 
VIIL. iii. 6. X. v. 5. oixeiwy IV. iii. 
We Xe Ver5s- loiteia Vs) vi. 12 VILE: 


7. [X.i. 9. ii. 7. vii.3.  oltefous LV. 
v. 6. oixeiows V. i. 15. olxeias IX. 
ix. 5. X.ix. 4. olxeidrepoy I. vi. 13. 
ix. 3. xii. 7. olxesdrepor VILL. xii. 4, 
6. oinedtepar X. v. 6. oixesérarov 
IIL. ii. 1. 

oixedtntra VI. i. 5. IX. ii. 9 

oixelws IV. i. 4. IX. x. 5, 6. 

oixérns V. ix. 11. 

oixhoewy VIII. x. 6. 

oixta I. vii. 1. V.v. 8,15. VIII xii. 7. 
X.v. 1. oixias Viv. 16. oikia V. v. 
10,15. VII. xi. 4. oirfay V. v. 10. 
oixiaus VIII. x. 4. X. ix. 14. 

vixodouciv II. i, 6. olkodeuodvres IL. 
i. 4 : 

oixoddépna.s VIL. xi. 4. 

oixodoulas V. x. 7. 

oixodouixy VI. iv. 8. X. iv. 2. 
pry I. vii. 1. 5 

oikoddéucs V.v. 8,10. oixodduov V. v. 
8. oixodduor IT. i. 4, 6. 

oixovoula VI. viii. 3. oikovoutas VI. 
viii. 4. 

oixovomixdy V. vi. 9. xi. 9. oikovomihy 
T. ii. 6. oixovomnns I. i. 3. eikovo- 
perods VIL v. 5. 

oivnp V. vii. 5. 

otvov V. v. 3. VII. viii. 2. olvoy V. ix. 
15. otvm VII. ii. 3. ofvois VII. xiv. 
2. oivous III. x. 9. 

oivopAvylas IIL v. 15. 

oivémevos VIL. iii. 18. x. 3. olvwuévou 
VII. iii. 12. otvdémuevoy VII. iii. 7. 
oivéuevor VII, xiv. 6. 

otec Ou III. viii. 13. IV. ix. 6. ofera 
TL, ik: 8. Vi vili. 10. ix. 6: Vileviis 
2. VIL ii. 2. iii, 2. vii. 5. VIIL. xiv. 
1 ES iw 8! a5. \oindety, TEE a. 17. 
X. iv. 10. @Hén III. viii. 6. V. viii. 
6. oidueOa I. vii. 7. x.13. IV. ix. 3, 
i> Viw Ss. vit. 2. xi. Ss TX, iii: 5. 


oikodo- 


] INDEX VERBORUM. 


X. v. 1. vii. 3. Pero I. xii. 5. VI. 
Miers Ose Wb its Vs. aX it 2, Wil 
Lis ‘otovrat TE iv.-6.. JV: ins-tl.. “V: 
1x14 5 6 Vivid Vile ile ds 
Ried.) si. 1/G.. VELL 1 26. wii. 2. 
Nit. 3;165 xiv; 1: TX. i. 5, 4.038. 8. 
1X.) 4. 65 xii. 2. wi. 4, x6. 20- 
oiduevos III. v.17. IV. ii. 20, 21. iii. 
34. VII. ix. 7. IX. ii. 5. @ovro I. 
iv. 3. X.ix. 20. ofwvrat IX. iii. 1. 
oiduevor IV. iii. 21. vi. 1. VIII. i. 7. 
X.i.2. oinréoy X. iii. 8. vi. 4. viii. 
tS Pam ea 

oios IV. iii. 24, 33. vii. 5. VII. viii. 4. 
ix. 5,6. VIII. vii. 6. IX. iii. 4 ofov 
I. iv. 3. vi. 3, 4, 10,14. vii. 8, 20. 
vaiis/9 10, 16.2x:*8s xt 9: P12 8: 
ii, 8. v.2. vi. 2, 6, 10, 18. viii. 6, 7, 
8. TE 1:3; /4;.16,.17;, 24; Gis 78h. 
iii. 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 13, 16. v.8,17. vi. 3, 
SeaVilly 2.0 Xs Oat Ke 2, Spo be eRe 
IV. i. 17, 40, 42. ii 3, 10, 11, 15, 20. 
iii, 16. vi. 4. vii. 13, 14, 15. viii, 3. 
V. i. 4, 6, 7, 14. ii. 5. iii. 9. iv. 5,12. 
V4.9; D1) 18s viol, 2: vie 1s wii. 3; 
Gy 8s 1X9) Dec xb 1 VERS. 16; 
Wad Gr vik ly 4s de Stic Ws 18, 
7. iii. 7, 9. iv. 2, 5. v. 2, 8, 7. vii. 6 
Vili Os. IX 2 Ane Khe Aue RIV DG A 
VIIL i. 7. iv. 1. vi. 7. vii. 1, 2, 5, 6. 
Viil.(6. ix. 55 x. 1, 4 2106. xk 829: 
IX.i1,4. ii 1,4. iv. & v.2 vied, 
2. vii. 7.. Vili. 1,2. X, ilke4}- 38; av. 
2, 8,10. v. 1, 2,5. in Is. Amie 
iv. 4. III viii, 6. IV. ii. 11. viii. 1, 
5. ow II. iii, 5. of% VI. viii. 9. 
ofa VIII. vi. 4. 

olovdjmore IIL. v. 19. 

oia wep VIL. viii. 3. 

oidy re I. viii. 9. ix. 5, 9. IIL. iii. 18. v. 
V7. AV 20. ai 16. Views VG 
X= G.- VAL 22: VERE 7. Xan. 
4. iv..10. v. 3: vi. 4, x4. X. iti, 12, 
be 

éxvnpol IV. iii. 35. 

éxvoovrTa IX. xi. 5. 

oAryaxis VII. ix. 5. 

oAryapxiav VIII. x 3, 5. 
VIIsx.5: 

oAvyapxiKot V. iii. 7. 

odiyos I. vii. 6. 6Abyor IL. vi. 7. VII. 
xii. 1. VIII. vi. 4. viii. 5. IX. viii. 9. 
oAtyas III. xii. 7. déAtya IL vi. 6. 
IV. ii. 20. iii. 23, 34. VIIL i. 6. IX. 
xi. 5. odAfyo: I. viii. 7. TI. xi. 3. 


dAryapxtats 





VIIL iii. 8. x. 3. IX. x. 3. date L 
x. 14. VIII. vi. 8. dAtyou VIL viii. 
2. dAlyos VII. ix. 5 dAtyous IX. 
x. 5, 6. X. ix. 17. éAtyow IV. iii. 
27. 
édrAvywpla VIT. vi. 1. 
dAvywpjoet IV. iii. 17. 
Orrywpws IV. i. 34. 
bAd«Anpos IV. i. 38. 
Weoit. 
8dov III. xii. 4. V. ii. 9. iii, 11, 12. iv. 
&. v. 18. X. iv. 1,4. SAors L. viii. 7. 
bAov V. ii. 3. SAn V. i. 9. iv. 12. 
bAwy X. iv. 4. SAns V. ii. 3, 9, 10, 
11. VI. xii. 5. XMiiv. 2. 6anv V. ii. 
6, 7, 10. viii 3. xi. 4. SAa V. ii. 9. 
ddogpuptixds IV. iii. 32. 
-OrAtuma VII. iv. 2. 
viii. 9. 
daws I. iv. 6. 


baAduAnpov IV. 


’OdAvuriacw I. 


vii. 3, 5, 6, 10, 11. viii. 
10. x. 3. xii. 2: xi asses 
v.2. vi. 10,20. vii 14. TILi 14 
ii. 9,11. vi. 4. xi. 8 V. iii. 8. v. 9 
xi. 6. VI. v. 2. viiv® xls) Vie. 
1. vi. 6. viii. 1. xii, 4. xiv. 2, 4, 
VIII. vii. 1. xii. 6,8. IX. v. 4, viii. 
4, 5,9. xi4. X. ix. 7, 9,10, 12, 20, 
22. 

buBpov VIIL. i. 6. SuBpov LIL. iii. 5. 

“Ounpos III. iii. 18. viii, 2,10. xi. 4. 
V. ix. 7. VIL vii. 2. Vila eee 
Villx.'4. sii 

dwar IV. vi. 5. Susaqoe IV. vi. 6, 8. 
duireiv X. iii. 11. dtAodvra X. iii. 11. 
bu:Aouvres IV. vii. 1. dusAnréov VIIL. 
xiv. 3. , 

duaAla IV. viii. 1. dusAtas TV. viii. 10. 
VII. iii. 4. dusrtars LY. vi. 1, 7. 
VIIL. vi. 1. IX. xii. 8. 

dupa VI. xi. 6. Sumate VIL. xii. 10. 

dpoyevav IX, ii. 10. 

dpoyvwpove: IX. iv. 3. duoyvwnovotor 
IX. viii. 2. duoyvwpovdar IX. vi. 1. 
duoyvwmovotyras IX. vi. 1. 

buodotla IX. vi. 1. 

dmoeOvéor VIII. i. 3. 

duon0es VILL. iv. 1. 
xii. 6. 

dmotoradeiy I. v. 3. 

bua s VIL. vii. 5. viii, 2. duolov VILL 
i. 6. duota VI. xiii, 2. VIII. iii, 9. 
Suo.oy II. iv. 3, 6, 19. vi. 19. ILL vi. 
3. IV. ii..15. V. vi. 8. > VES. 
VII. vi. 7. viii. 3. ix, 2. VIII. i. 4, 
6. iv. 4. IX.i. 4. vi. 3. vii. 2. X. 


duonbéorepa: VIII, 


INDEX VERBORUM. li 


ix. 18. duotw IX. iii. 3. 
iv. 6. Spoor IV. iii. 21. 
VII. iii. 7. iv. 6. viii, 5. Spore 
VIL. iii. 6. duolwy IL. i. 7. VIL. 
iii. 3,6. X. iv. 8. duolors VIII. xii. 
6. duotous VIII. i. 6. Sora V. vii. 5. 
duotorepov IL. viii. 7. 

dpordrns II. viii. 5. VIII. viii. 5.. duor- 
érnra ML. vii. 11. III. vi. 4. xii. 5. 


buoiay VII, 
Vit 1x: 6: 


VW. G..4- xt.9. VIL i. 5. VEL. 25, | 


Gi.vi5. ix. 6. VIL. 1. 6: 
4. dyodrnor VI. iii. 2. 
duoodra VIII. xii. 4. IX. iv. 6. duor- 

ovaOan IX. iii. 3. Suorodpevor IX. xii. 


iy ae 1 


3. @po@cba VILL. iv. 6. apolwra 
II. viii. 3. 
duoiwua VIII. iv. 1. X. viii. 8. dpoww- 


para VIII. x. 4. 
épotws Li. 1. iii. 1. 
1, 18, 20. viii. 12. 
* G x..4;6. IL 1 6, 7. i..6,-7, 9- 
vy. 2. vi. 2,7,12. vii. 16. viii. 2. 
IL iii. 9,14. iv. 4. v.2,3,9,15, 
ES; 19, 20, 22. vii. 1,.4,.5. ix. 1. 1x. 
£25407... x3: TV. 24. tis 2-1. 
17, 35. vi. 3, 5,8. vii. 1. viii, 1. V. 
414, iii. 10. v. 2,18, 19. vi. 2 vii. 
4, 5,7. viii. 3, 4, 11. ix. 2,3, 15. 
VEE. ii. 1,.8, 13. iv. 6. vii. 2, 6. 


iv. 3. wi 13. vii. 
1x: 6.) (x..12;. 1 


=1926,; VEL i. 2. ii. 1,6. iv. 1. 
Wied. ove. 2,3. viii. G7. ix..1,5. 


xii. 6. xiii. 1, 8. xiv. 1. 
8. iii. 1. vii. 6. 
iii. 10. iv. 3, 6, 9. 
9. vii. 4. 

épodoryetra: T.iv.2. VII. xiii. 1. duodo- 
yotor VIL. ii. 3. dporoyer IV. vii. 4. 
duoroyoortes V. vill. 10. apoddynoe 
VIII. xiii. 9. aGpuordynoay IX. i. 6. 
duoroyotpevov I. vii. 9. X. vii. 2 
duoroyouperny I. vii. 3. dporoyoumeva 
I. ix. 8. 

bpodroyoupuevws X. ii. 2. 

Gporoyias IV. vii. 7. 
xii. 1. xiii. 6. 

6udAroyo: III. vi. 9 

dporcyws VI. ii. 3 

éuovoew IX. vi. 1, 2, 4. 
vi. 2, 3. 

épdvoiw VIL. i. 4. IX vi. 1, 2, 3. 

éponabets VIII. xi. 5. 

bpogwvet I. xiii, 17. 

duwvuptay V. i. 7. 

bpovipors I, vi. 12, 

duwripws V. i. 7. 


IX. ii. 1, 6, 
ix. 9. X. ii. 2, 5. 
v. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 


v. 2. vii. 3. 
duoroyiay VIII. 


duovoota. IX. 





Suws I. vi. 10. viii. 15. x. 12. III. v. 
Lar. OV sy 143, Wis ox Te VA xi 
2. Ried, Vill av. 2, 5. <xi..3.. UX. 
rt Po: Gh gla © 

overdiCerar IX. viii. 4. Xiii, 11. dvecde- 
cee III v.15. dvecdiCouevar VII. xi, 
5.  dvetdtCouévov IX. viii. 6. 

bveiSos IX. viii. 4. dvetiSous IIT. viii. 3. 
éveidy III. viii. 1. IV. i, 41, 43. ii. 22. 

évnoetat LX. viii. 7. 

évouea Ii. 1. TIL i. 13. ii. 7. xii. 5. 
IV. vi. 4. V.iv. 5. VIL viii. 3. dvd- 
Haros II. vii. 3. TI. xi. 7. IV. iii. 1. 
VIL xiii. 6. dvduars L.iv.2. V. ii. 6. 
VI. v. 5. dévduara V. iv. 13. 

ovondtera: V. iv. 9. wvoudxacw VII. 
xi. 2. dvduaora II vi. 8. IV. i. 39. 
vi. 9. g@voudcba LV. v. 6. 

évopacraey IV. iii. 27. 

évouaroroteiy II, vii. 11. 

évot IIT. viii. 11. dvors X.v. 8. dvous 
ibid. 

évixev VII. v. 3. 

gets ILI. vii, 12. IV. v. 9. VII. vii. 8. 
ogéor VII. xii. 2. 

éturnta I. v. 8 

dtuperia IV. iii, 34. 

brAiCw. @rAcuevor IIT. viii. 8. 


6mAq III. xii. 3. Vi. 14. 8#Aos III. 
Vili. 7. 

6motos Ill. v. 7. dota III. viii. 7. V. 
vi. 1. dzoig V. iii. 2. 


Gro.aovy IX. viii. 5. dmorpodv VII. ix. 1. 
VIII. iv. 2. dxogotv VII. ix 1. 

brocov VII. i. 40. 

Sore III. i. 10. 

émrotepavovr V. ix. 16. 

érotépws V. v. 18. 

Srov IV.i. 17. iii. 27. 

érviovow. érviovra: VII. v. 4. 

Saws I. vii. 19,22. IV.i.17, 21. iii. 18, 
81. vi. 9. VI.iv.4. xiii 8. VIL. xiii. 
2) Vill. xii. 9: X.:vi..6.. ix. 22. 

éxwoShmorte III. v. 18. 

dpauara X. iii. 7. iv. 7. 

Spacts X. iv. 1. dpdoews X. iv. 4. 

6p& VI. xiii. 8. VIIL ix. 9. dpé@y I. vi. 
AOS ed 2s. A laiv: oe. Vile xtveco. 
IX, xii So xii. 1. X. ii. 1. iii. 12. 
dp@uev I. ii. 6. xiii. 16. IL. ii. 6. vi. 
2. V.i. 3. VIL iii. 7. dp@or V. vii. 


2. VI. xi 6. dpao@u VI. xiii. 1 
éwpdxact VILL ii. 4. dpav VAIL. iv. 1. 
IX. ix. 9. 


épyavine IIT. i, 6. 


g2 


hh INDEX VERBORUM. 


épyavixes I. ix. 7. 


| 


épyavoy VIII. xi. 6. épydve III. i. 16. | 


dpyava I. vii. 3. ILL iii14. dpydver 
Tis 4. vine. 

épy) IV. v. 2. V. viii. 10. dpyis IV. 
v. 10. VII. iv. 3. dpyhv II v. 2. 
vii, 10. IV. v. 8, 10, 15. V. ii, 5. 
xi. 2. épyf VIL. vi. 4. épyas IL i. 7. 
IV. v.10: 

épyicas V. viii. 9. dpytoO7jvou IL. v. 2. 
vi. 10. ix. 2. X. iii. 4.  dpytCouevos 
Iey. 3) Wiis14:. TV.-y:.8° 6) VIL 
vii. 38. dpyCoueba II. v.4. IV. v. 14. 
opyi¢ec@a Til. i. 24. VII. vi. 4. 
opy:Couevor IIT. viii, 12. IV. v. 5. 
épyigevrat IV. vy. 8, 10. dpyiorréor 
Wsaxcee Veer eS: 

épytaos II. vii. 10. dpyfAo Il. i. 7. IV. 
Varouo: 

épy:Adrns IT. vii. 10. IV. v. 2. 

opéyerat I. iv. 1. VIII. xiii. 2. IX. iv. 
3. X. ii. 4. épéyovra: IV. iv. 5. 
VIII. v. 3. °xiii.3.. IX. i. 4. viii. 4. 
X.iv. 10 épéyeo@ar II. vii. 8. III. 
24.2 Xvi: GS “ax 9: Ik. .i¥,-'9, 
GpeyoucOa lll. iii, 19. dpeyduerem LIT. 
xii. 4. dpeyéuscvoy III. xii. 6. X. ix. 
10. dpeyduevoe VIII. viii. 2. ix. 5. 
dpeerar III. xi. 8. mpéyero IV. iii. 
35. dpeyduevos IV. vii. 12. 

évextixdy IL. xiii, 18. opentixds VI. ii. 6. 

cpextov III. iii. 19. 

Spekis IIL iii. 19. xii. 6,7. VIL ii, 2, 
4,5, 6. VILL. viii. 7. dpeg L. ii, 1. 
IT vite 3.. Visi 2: TX. a. Ts 6d: 
te VI. ii. 2,3. pees Lili. 8. V. 
xi. 9. dpétewy X. v. 6. dpéteor Il. 
MinGu fv Lewis 2) 

épfodokety VII. viii. 4. 

opeos Mauna. Tv 2), xic8. Voix 
5. VLi.1, 2,3. xiii. 4,5. ép0h IL 
i122. Wi xi. Sin 7. VIL ats, 
cpdov I. x.9. IL ii. 2. V. xi..2. VI. 


dob. xii./6. xii). 4,-5:. VIL ave 2. with 


4,5. X. viii. 8. édp@od VI. xiii. 5. 


ép0G VIL iii, 10  ép0fs X. ix. 8, 9. 


6p67 1V.i. 13. VI. ii. 8. VIL. ix. 1, 
6pOhv I. vii. 19. VIL ii. 2. xii. 8. X. 
ix. 11, 14. 6p6a II. vii. 11.  dpOais 
WiAvaG: 

ép0drns VI. ix. 8, 4, 6, 7. 

opOotvres II. ix. 5, 

épéas I. vii. 9. xiii 15. TIL ii. 8, 13. 
Hee 2y4s: Vee 12. a3. 120; “vy, 
Mia Vonliy daa x02 A 5 VC a, 





ix. 3,4. xiii. 3. VITvii. 3. Vikas 
1. xiv. 2. X. vi. 6. viii..18. eae, 
20. 


bpiCovrot II. iii. 5. viii. 5. IIL. vi. 2. IX. 


iv. 1. ix. 7. dploeve II. vi. 15. — dpi- 
(erat IID. vii. 6. 1V. ii. 6. ix. 1. TX, 
viii. 2 épiCwyrat VII. xiii. 4. &pio@ae 
X. iii, 1. Spiora V. viii. 2. VIL ix. 
3. dpiopévoy IX. ii. 6. ix. 7. x. 3. 
apiouéva V.i, 12.  api€ovro V. v. 1. 
apipévey IX. x. 8. wpiopévy IL. vi. 
15. apicnévn X. iii. 3. dpioreov IV. 
vill 7. 


Sptopds V. ii. 6. VIII. vii. 5. 
dpu@ VIL. vi. 1. dpuay UI. viii. 11. 
dpuhy IIL. viii, 10. dpuat I, xiii, 15. 


bpuats X. ix. 12. 


épvéos VIIL. i. 3. 
épviderx VI. vii. 7. 
Spos I. vii. 7. V. iii, 11, 18/2 tae 


3. VIL. xiii. 4. Spou V. iii. 12. Spor 
VI. ix. 5. VIL iii. 13. 8Spev VI. viii. 
9. xi. 4. VIL y.5. 


Souor I. vi. 1. 
écax@s II. iii. 5. 
éouy IIL. x. 7. dophy II. x. 5. dopais 


III. x. 5. 6, 7. 


Soor I. iii. 4. vii. 18 19. xiii. 8. Tix. 2. 


IIL ix. 5. IV. v. 3. V. iv. 12. v. 9. ix. 
15. VIL. iii. 6. vi. 2. VIII. ix. 1. 3.6. 
xi. 1, 7. xiii, 11. IX. i. 8,9. viii 3, 
6. X. vii. 8. viii. 8. 80a L yi. 10. 
Il. i. 4. iii. 5. TIL i 4. 2B P ane: 
v.7,9. vi 4,10. IV. i. 12, 22; 24. 
ii, 11, 14, 15, 16. iii. 28. vi. 9. vii. 
11. V.i. 9. ii. 6, 11, 12s Ty vik 
5,8, 12. VI. iii. 4. vii. 4. xii. 1, 8. 
VIIL. i. 6. 7. iii. 7. iv. 4. vi. 4. x. 5. 
IX.i. 5. X. vii. 7. viii. 4,7. Soa 
I. i. 4.. ITT. x, 2.. lV. i407 
2. xii. 1. VIIL. xii. 1. So@ I. ix. 2. 
xiii, 7. ILL. iii. 8. viii. 4, 16. ix. 4. 
VIL. xi. 4. VIII i. 1. vi. 1. xii. 6, 7. 
IX. i. 4. ii.2 3. viii 1. X vii 4, 8 
viii. 5. 600: ID. i. 5. IIL v. 7. VIL 
iv. 5. VIII iii. 4. IX. x. 5. dev 
IV.i.2. VI. i. 5.- vii..6.. Wiese 
2. VIII. xiii. 4. Scov V. v. 16. IX. 
i. 8,9. doors V. iv. 13. vi. 4. VIL 
v.4. 8cas IV. vi. 7. VIL i. 2. 


Swep Il. ix. 5. IIL. viii. 9,16. x. 9 


IV. ix.2. V. iii. 3,11, 1290 
10, 12. ix. 9. VI. di. aes: 
VIL. xiii. 1. VIII. iii. 9. v. 8. IX. i. 
5. ii. 5, 6. iii. 1. iv. 1.3. v. 2. vii. 3. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


X. v. 5. tymep Viiv. 2. Gmep VIL. 
iii. 2. VIII. xii. 6. 

Goris VII. iv. 4. Hrs VI. iv. 8. VII. 
iv 6. 8tw V. vi. 7. 

éoTiwouv IX. ii. 4. dvtwaody VIIL. ix. 
S$: Xz ives ix. 17. - drwor T. xi. 5. 
BS wi. 88:0 TE 18)-v. 75 TV. vi. 2. 
VIL. xii. 2. X. iii. 9, vii. 2. érq@ovv 
X.1i. 2. iv. 2,4. v. 4. drovowy VI. 
xd, | EX. vi}. 

éogppnois X.v. 7. dodphoews X. iii. 7. 

6rav Il. iv. 4. Ill.i. 7. iii. 17. viii. 9, 
RA x. 6. xi. 1. IV. iii. 23.. v.. 10. 
V. iv. 4, 6, 7. 8, 14. v.12, 13. viii. 1, 
2767, 8,9, 11. = § x2. VI ii. 
Sav: S vi 5. x, 3. xii. 4. VIL 
i, 3. ii. 8,10. iii. 9,10. vi. 2. ix. 2. 
xiv; 3, 5,8. VIII. iv. 1. vi. 4. vii. 2. 
xiii. 5; xiv. 1. IX.i. 4. iii. 1, 5. v 
eae Wie 19: e500. xh 8. RS: 
iv. 2. v. 6. 

re I. x. 4,7. Il. iii. 5. vi 11, 18. vii. 
Sciix..2,'7. TW: i. 6. iii. 14. vii. 4, 5. 
xi. 1,8. xii 9. IV.i. 12, 22. v. 5. 
Weexe-):) VE. ix.6. VELL. 7. DS i 
5. vi. 2 

ov IV. iii. 27. V. vii. 5. 

ovdau7n X. viii. 8. 

ovdaues 1.x. 9. IV. iii, 15. V. vii. 3. 

obdé IV. i. 11, 15, 16,21. v. 10. viii. 10. 
x. 8. Vii. 4.11. 2: vit. 5, ix. 3, 6, 
9. xi. 4. VI. ii. 6. iv. 2. ix. 3. xiii. 
oo VE. 2 2. ii. 5. iv. 6. xii 6: xiii. 
iG xiv:'2.. VILE. iti. 4. xi: 6. IX. i. 
G.I 4. iv. 7, 8,10. x. 5. X. iii. 1. 
iv. 5, 6. 

ovdels I. v. 6. vii. 5. viii. 12. ix. 11. x. 
13. xii. 4. TL iv. 5. III. i 5, 6, 17. 

Gi. 8, 11. iii. 3, 6, 11. v. 4,7, 15. vi. 
6)°x. 4" xi. 4. IV. iii. 3: v. 10. vi. 
So Veils: 6. x1. 8,6. VILi. 6. v. 3. 
vii. 6. xi. 5.- VII. ii. 11. iv. 2. vi. 4. 
WALE i1. v. 3. xiti<2.. TX.v.3. X. 
iii. 12. iv. 9. ix.18. ovddeuia VI. 
ae ix. S.- -VIL. iv. 5. xi. 3, 4. 
xi. 2. obdey I. i. 5. iii. 7. vi. 5. 


vii. 11. viii. 12. ix. 9. x. 10. xiii. 10,- 


Pret bh, 3. 2,°%. ti. 1,8 iv. 8, 6. 
ix. 8. IIL i. 6,22, 23 ii. 10, 15,16. 
iii. 6. v. 7,19. vi. 6. viii. 11, 16. ix. 
3, 4,6. x.2,9. xii 2,5. IV.iT9, 
34, 35. ii. 3. iii. 2, 15, 30. viii 10. 
te 5. V. i. Siive&: -¥.-16. vi 1, 6: 
vii. 1. viii. 3. ix. 9, 15,17. x. 2. VI. 
i. 2. ii. 5,6. vii 1. VII. ii. 6, 10. iii. 


| 





hii 


8..x<2, xii: 3. VEL. v.'S. x1.-6..xit 
8. “ERs 1.33. Sei 3, i. 12 v: 
10. vi.4. vii. 5,7. viii. 8. ix. 14, 16. 
ovdéva, I. x. 1. VII. ii. 1. iv. 4. X. ii. 
2. iv. 1. odSeulay IL. ii, 4. V. ii. 2, 
5. VII. iv. 4. obdevds II. vii. 13. 
VDDD 2. ORG ge Veg epi Wis ee. 
vii. 7. viii. 6. odSevt IIT. xi. 8. VII. 
ii. 4. x.3. [Xv iv. 7. x. 6. ob8eusas 
VI. ii. 2. xii. 1. VII. xii. 6. obdepnig 
VII. xii. 5. 

ovSév uaAAov IX. iy. 3. X. ii. 3. 

ovéémore |. vii. 5. x. 13, 14. II. vi. 18. 
EV 3x.'6. 

ovdérepov IV.i.31. X. iii. 4. oddérepa 
IV.ix.5. ovdderépous I. viii.7. odde- 
Tépwy X. v. 6 

od évexa V. viii. 6. VI. ii. 4. v. 6. xi. 4, 
VII. viii. 4. x. 3. 

oveére IIT. v. 14. 

otkouv VI ix. 6. 

oJ why IX. i. 10. v. 1. X. ii, 5. iii. 1, 
93 ve 7s, vill. 95.3. 16,-19, 

o¥mw L ix. 10. V. vii. 7. viii. 3,8. VI. 
1X2, 3.021 7s. 2-6. VIL in: 8: 

ovpaviwy IX. vi. 1. 

ovpavoy VILL. i. 6. 

ovcta I. vi. 2. IV.i. 30. ovdotas IV. i. 
5. ovoley II. vi. 17. III x'.8. IV. 
i. 5, 19, 20, 23. IX. iii. 3. 

obre V. ix. 6. 

ofrw I. vii. 11, 15, 16. viii. 3, 9, 13. 
7 Sts Paap ¢ Pat: Hoomeal © Pomp Pie iy fet Pees (for Oa 
Nie 75 Oc .xG;,,.9: Liles yi3 4, 
Xi. 95. TVis So ik. 6., 401, 24. iy. | 2. 
vii. 5, 6.; V. iti. 6.) v.12, 14), vis 1. 
45 Vi exits ls VIR. 125. 7, 
8: iv.'6.. viii. 1. “xii, 35. VIII. iii: 3; 
vi. & = 8. xt. R xiv. 1,3. TLE 8: 
i 7. i. 5. iv. 10. vy. 3.: vi. 2. vii: 1. 
viii, 4, 6. ix. 1,10. x. 6. xi 1. Xi. 
2. ii. 5. iii. 3,9. iv. 10. v. 1,10. vi. 4. 

ottws I. v. 6. vi. 5, 16. v.i. 10, 34, ix. 
5. x. 2,10, 14,15, 16. xii. 8. xiii. 1, 
FOV518. WL. 7; 8.47, 8.- iv. 2, 
6. vi. 1, 2,9, 19, 20. vii. 8. viii. 2, 4. 
ix. 2. IIL. iv. 2, 3. v. 14, 16, 21, 22. 
vi He vii. 8. viii. 11. xi. 8. xii. 8, 
IV. iii, 18, 32. vii. 1,3. ix. 6. V. iii. 
11. v. 12, 16,17. vii. 1,2. ix. 1. VI. 
i. 2,4. v. 1. x. iii, xiii. 2. VIL. Re 
3. iii. 13. vi. 1. ix. 5. xiv. 2. VIII. 
$0 1._v..1, 8, x. 8y DOLE 95.74.,-5, 
10. iv. 10. X.i. 2. ii. 1. iv. 3. v. 6. 
vii. 8. viii. 13 ix. 7, 11, 14. 


liv INDEX VERBORUM, 


otrwot II. i. 7. 
épetAnua VIII. xiii. 6. IX. ii. 5. 


épetAe IL. ii. 3. VILL. xiv. 4. IX. ii. 
3. dpelAera: VIII. xiv. 4. IX. vii. 
1. épetAovar IX. vii. 1. dqpelAovtes, 


épeirdvrwy ibid.  dpeiAovtas IX. ii. 
8. déeldovra VIII. xiv. 4. 

bpedos IL. ii. 1. VIL i. 1. xiv. 1. 

bpbarpmimwor X, iv. 8. 

épGadpmod I. vii. ll. Il. vi. 2. dp0ar- 
pov IL. vi. 2. dpOaduods I. xiii. 7. 

OxAnbetev IX. v. 3. dxAnOevTes IX xi. 5. 

oxAnpov IV vii. 14. é6xAnpérarar IV. 
v. 10. 

OWis As. Vin) 125 AVAIL ave dl: 
dpeos Il. x. 8. VIL xiii. 1. 
3. dWe IX. xi. 3. 
Vicsxiit, 1 Akvis 9. 

oa II. x. 9. Sor III. x. 5. 
VII. xiv. 2. 

dWoroinrixy VII. xii. 6. 

dpopayos III. x. 9. 


be, ee 
LX: y. 
byw IIL. v. 17. 


bos 


116 


mayKakot I, viii. 15. 

mayxdaderov VIII. viii. 6. 

radnjuact II. vii. 14. viii. 2. 

mayntikov X. iv. 8. mabnrixod II. v. 2. 

adéos I. iii. 7. IL. iii. 8. vi. 18. III. 
viii, 12, IV. v. 2. ix. 3.¢ Vi. ing 4-6, 
vi. 1. viii. 12. VIL LG. 1:2. Fad, 
vii. 8. viii. 5. ix.2. VIIL. iii. 5. v. 5. 
IX. viii. 6. X.ix. 7. md@ous IV. v. 
8,5. ix, 2. VII. iit. 120 tiv. 6:72 5. 
vii. 8. waOe II iii. 3. IV. ix. 1, 3. 
Wallets 2s. ots US. vile 3: VIEL We: 


X.ix.4. 2467 IL. iii. 3. v. 6, 10, 12. 
vii. 14, IIL i.1,27. V. viii.8. VIL 


15) VUE 37.) EXS i 6.. - Xi 6, 
wabovi.xi.4, md@eor Li. 6. I. 
vi 16. ix. 1. VII iii, 7,8. IX. viii. 
4,7. X.iv. 3 viii. 1,2 

madaywyou III. xii. 8. 

maidela II. iii. 2. madefas V. ii. 11. 
VIII. xi. 2. watdelay V.ii. 11. ma 
Setar X. ix. 15. 

maidevovot X.i.1. maidevdérres VIII. 
xii. 6. memadevuevos L.iii.5. memar- 
Sevpevov I. iii. 4. IV. viii. 4. mar- 
SevOjva VIL. xii. 5. madevOfoorvrat 
Mix. 4. 

mada IV. viii. 11. VID. vii. 7. XX. vi. 
6 madias IV. viii. 1,5. X. vi. 6, 7. 
naidiG II. vii. 11,13. IV. viii 4. X. 





vi.6. maddy X.vi.6. madiov X. 
vi. 3.. madiais IV, viii. 12. 

madicod IV. ii, 18. marducats IX. iii. 
4. moiSueas IIL. xii, 5. marducdy X, 
vi. 6. 

mwadiov VII. vi. 2. madfov VII. vy. 7. 
X. iii. 12. wadéa III. xii. 6. VIL. xi. 
4. xii. 7. X. iii. 12. 

madiodns VII. vii. 7. 

malCew X. vi. 6. maloas III. i. 17. 
malCovres LV. viii. 3. 

mais I. ix. 10. IIL. xii. 6. VI. viii. 6. 
VIL. i. 1. IX. iii. 4. waides I. viii. 
16. III. i. 22. ii, 2, VILL iv. 4. X. 
vi. 4. matdas III. vi. 5. aida III. 
xi. 8. maldwy VII. v. 3. X, ix. 13. 
matot VI. xiii. 1. X. vi. 4, 

madaiav I, viii. 3. modraot I. viii. 7. 
nmadad@v IV. viii. 6. madaod X, ix. 5. 

wdAns II. vi. 7. 

addw I, vii. 1. x. 4,8,14. Viv. 7. VI. 
iii. 1. xiii, 1. VIL. iii. 12. 

mdunav lV. iii, 15, 17. VIL. xiii 5. 
VII. xii. 6. 

awdumoadv II. i. 8. 

taupdyov VII. vi. 6. 

navalaxns I. viii. 16. 

mavdpioros I. iv. 17. 

mavoupyta VI. xii. 9. 

mavovpyous VI. xii. 9. 

mavraxd0ev III. xii. 7. 

tmavtaxov V. vii. 1, 2, 5. 

maytedous LV, iii. 17, 20. 

movTed@s I, v. 3. x. 2. X, vii. 6. 

mdyty I. x. 11, 15. 

tmavtodamas I, x. 4. 

mavrobev IV. i. 40. 

moytoiat I. ix. 11. mavrotas X. viii. 1. 
mavrotas I xi,2. IX, ii. 2. 

mavrote 1X, iv. 4. 

mavr@s I. x. 11, 15. IV. iii. 23. viii. 4. 

aavu IL. vii. 3. III. ii. 12. 138. x. % xi. 
7. IV.i. 11,380. VIL. iii. 4. iv. 5. 
vi..1, 5, 6. xiii. 3. TX. vil. Gy ape 
X. ii. 4. v. 4. 

wopa I. i. 2,5. V. vii. 3. 

mapaBdrAew VII. xiii. 6. 

maparyyeAlav II. ii. 4. 

mapayiverat I. ix.1,3. Il i.4. IV.i. 88. 

mapaberypa I. vi. 14. xiii. 3. 

mapadelypata VIII, x. 4. 

mapadiidvres X. ix. 18. 

mapadota VI. ii. 8. 

mapavet II, x. 3. mapawodvras X. vii. 8. 

mapaxaAre? I. xiii, 15. maparadreiv X. ix, 


INDEX VERBORUM. lv 


10. mapakéxAnra X. iv. 9. mapa- 
KkAnrtéov IX. xi. 5. 
Tmapacatadnkn V. ii, 8. tmaparcatadnkny 


V. viii. 4. mapaxarajKas X. viii. 7. 
mapdrAnots I xiii. 18. 
mapaxoAovet II. iii. 7. 
maparovew VII, vi. 1. 
maparauBdvouev III. iii. 10. 

Bovtes LV. i. 20. 

vii. 7. 
moparelre: Ve x. 5. mapadelrovor I. vi. 

15. mapadurdvrwy X. ix. 22. 
mapaddyws V. viii. 7. 

Tapadeduueva I. xiii. 15. 

TapnucAnuern X. iv. 9. 

TapapeutxOar X, vii. 3. 

mapauventicdy LX, xi. 3. 

mapdvowos V. i. 8, 11, 12. mapdvomov 

V.i. 8. ii. 8,9. mapdvoua I. xi. 4. 
mapamAnotoy I. iii. 4. IIL. viii. 12. IV. 

ix, 2. Vil wi.7. TX ix. 10. X. v.5. 
mapamAnoiws IV, iii. 1. VI. xiii. 1. VII. 

te “EX, ix: 10. 
mapaceloavtt LY. iii. 15. 
mapackevd ce X. vii. 6. 

WEES SIV. 5: 
mapackevys III. viii. 15. 

III. viii. 9. 
mapactarny V. ii. 5. 
mapararrovtes III. viii. 5. 
mapapéperat I. xiii, 15. mapapepduevov 

I. xiii. 16. 
mapapudd: I, vi. 2. 
mapexkAtvov II, i. 1. 
maphy VI. viii. 4. 
mopexBawver VIII. x. 3. 


TEE, ik. 35. 


TApara- 
mapadaBdévrwy LX. 


Topackevacouot 


Tapackevals 


mapexBatvev 


If. ix. 8. IV. v. 18.. mapeéeBnuer I. 
v. 1. 

mapéxBacts VIII. x. 2. mapexBdoers 
VILL. x.1. mapexBiceow VIII. xi. 6. 


mdpepya I. vii. 19. 
mapéxer I, x.4. mapéxovar X. vi. 3. 
maplnot IX. viii. 1. maperéov X i, 2. 
mapod@ LV. ii, 20. : 
mapoiuia VIII. ix. 1. mapomiay VIII. 
iii. 8. mapoumtg VII. ii. 10. mapor- 
plat IX. viii. 2. 
mopoimiaCduevor V. i. 15. 
mapolxerat IX. vii. 6. 
mapdmowo III, viii. 13. 
mopopav LV. iii. 30. 
mapopunoar X. ix. 3, 
mapovola IX. xi. 2, 3, 5, 6. 
IX. v. 3. 
mappnctay IX, ii. 9, 


mapovolas 





mappnotacticds LY, iii. 28. 

mdppacis VII. vi. 3. 

mdpwv V.x.5. mapodoa Il. ii, 11. ma- 
pov I. xiii. 10. VII. iti, 2. VIIT. 
iii. 5. mapévros Il. ii. 5. VIII. ix. 
5. IX. iv. 6. vii. 6. mapovons VII. 
iii, 13. VIL i. 7. Xv. 3. mapdvre 
I. x. 13. X. iv. 11. mapdvtwv V. 
Wii 3. 

was Il. ii. 3. vi. 8. IIL i. 14. v. 15. ix. 
8, X11, 2. IV. i.e ce 6% V. 
ixi-3. x4 Vii Se Vid. wi. 4. 
ix. 4, . EX. vii. 3. vil xi. 4. XX. 
ix. 15.. waoa J.i.1,4. iv. 3. xiii. 
18. ° IT. i. 6. ‘ii.. 5; 10, vi: 2, °9,°18. 
FR, dil, 12) x3 9° TV. Th 1S VE 
iii. 3. iv. 4. @was VIII. i. 3. X. 
Vili, 8. wav L. Tii...5.. xii; 2. xiii. 7. 
10. II.i. 8. iv. 8. vi. 18. IE. i. 16. 
NU oF ik, ANS GEV 2 ADS ses 
iii. 19. v. 9. viii. 8. V. vii. 3. ix. 2. 
xi. 9, VIL iii. 10. IX. x. 3. Grav 
IVE. 9.98. Vicis.4, 2. x17. +wauris 
T.-vi..8; ‘yii. 17, 28. E17. 5. m2. 
VI. ii. 8. VIL. iii. 9. dons II. ii. 
8. vi. 9. III. vii. 6. VI. vi. 1. mavrt 
T.vits: 10,- 123, TR 8. viseda 7 Be, 
6. ATL vie%.- vill. AV cv.c 9 Vi: 
ii, 11. VII. vii. 3. don II. iii, 3. 
IV. ix. 3. amdon I. vii. 1. wdvro I. 
Lol. i, bo av7. vii 8; 11. xiik 82. 
IF, di.7.. i. 7:- vi. 18. ‘vik 140 TIT. 
PLT US dks 10s Vi Ss vate, Oss wilt, 


-10, xi 4. IV. 1. & ii-14, 20, 21. 
Wit, 14. WE, 84 Vere 10,15. vit. 
9. ix. 17. VII.i. 6. «dyes I. vii. 


1} «<xiss. 
V7... viic 5. 


TE 4.6; 7.7 TR Aasdhe 

IV. i. 39, 40. iti. 29. 
VI. iii. 2. Gwovres III. i. 5. moa 
Lovic 152 DE sth De vis BV am 
43. viii, 12. VI. xi. 2. mdvrwr I. 
1 45 Weds VUNG, V4 ee ee Bye 
3, fl. tis ky ai. 6. FV. vin 
amavrwy I. vi. 4. maocav VII. vii. 3. 
amdous 1. i. 4. Il]. ix. 5. Gao I. 
Hide Vis We. vile 8; 205) xii Le 
TVedi 12. Xie. 6. “wast l..iv. 3: 
1045. Uh 7785. 01.5. va. 1h 1S: 
15. iz. 6,9: ID. vii. 1. IV. i. 30 
viii. 10. V. vi. 4. mdoas I. vi. 3. 
IL. viii. 1. mwavras V. i. 3. vii. 4. 
andocas Il. iv. 4. Gmavra I. vi. 12. 
vill. 5, 14. TIL 1.175 IV. ¥. 7. 
&wavras I. vi. 15. x. 13. xi. 8. wd- 
cas I..x. 13. IL, ii. 7. vii. 3. III. 


lvi INDEX VERBORUM. 


x.3. IV.ii.1. waco I. vii. 5. ix. 
Golo OS, HLL; ixs 14s LV. dlls; Ae 
Viz le PVE Ye 6: 


mwaoxet III. vii. 5. V.v. 14. ix. 6, 9. 
xi. 3,5. mdoxouey V. viii. 3. 74- 
oxovat IX iv. 9. maoxew II. v. 5. 
DV4-57,/8: ¥siXs 3. 3b O. “WIL ay, 
5. VILL siv.4. LX. vii. 1546,.07. fix, 
2. wdoxov IIL. i. 3. xaoxovros IIT 
x. 2. magxov V. iv. 12. v. 9. eracxe 


V. iv. 12. v. 9. mdoxovres VIII. 
xiii. 4, mwaOety II. ix. 6. III. viii. 7, 


8. émwafov II. ix. 6. III. viii. 16. 
waddvrt III.i.8. V.iv. 5. IX, vii. 
5,6. mdPwor lV. iii. 25. madov LV. 
iii. 25. wdé0o: V. v. 3. VIII. ii. 4. 
érade V. xi. 5. VIL. xiii. 9. wa- 
Oovra VIII. xiii. 9. maédvros VIII. 
xiii. 10, 11. waOdyres VIII. xiii. 10. 
IX. vii 1. wa@dvrus IX. vii. 1. mee- 
oducba III. vy. 7. mewrouevov X. iv. 
7. mweicouevwy IX. ix. 2. memrovOws 
IV. iii. 24. Vi ix. 3. wemdv@acr IV. 
iii. 25. IX. iv. 1. wémove IX. v. 3. 
mewovOdras IX. vii. 2. memovOds IX. 
vii. 4, 

maratat III. viii. 7. V. ix. 14, 16. VIII. 
ix. 8. wardgeev III. 1.17. mardtavre 
V. iv. 5. éwaratey V. ii. 5. v. 4. 
maratn V. iv. 4, 

marepa V. viii. 8. VIL iv. 5. vi. 2. 
MEE vill 1. ix. Br mie. > Seo: 
IX.ii. 4. warhp V. viii. 3. VIII. xi. 
2. marpds I. xiii. 18, 19, VIII. x. 
4. warpt VIII. vii. 1. x. 4. xiv. 4. 
TX 31... 6) 8: 

morn Villox; 4, xis 2) XK. ix: 19; 
matpuchy IX. ii, 8. matpujs VIII. 
xii. 2. warpixody V. vi. 8. 

natpl5os IX, viii. 9. 

mavaa IV. v. 10. 

maver IV. v. 10. waveras III. iii. 17. 
mavecOa VII. vi. 2. ematcare VII. 
ii. 10. mavovrat IV. v. 8. VILL. iii. 8, 
5. matoera III. v. 14. 

meiOapxyet I. xiii. 17. IX. viii. 8. me- 
Oapxetv X. ix. 4, mweapxjoew X. ix. 
10. wme@apxovor X. ix. 9. 

meOapximoy I. xiii. 18. 

metoer III. iii, 11. wefOerar I. xiii 18. 
IX. viii. 6. mel@.cOa VI. xii. 2. IX. 
ii. 1. weoOjvar Ul. v. 7. ereicOn 
VIL. ii. 7. ix. 4. wlO@nrar I. iv. 7. 
méemerorat VII. viii. 4. meretoOar VII. 
ii. 10. viii. 4. memesopévos VIL. ii. 





10. memeiouevor X. i, 2. -€réreroro 
VIL. ii. 10. 

mewny Ul.v. 7. mewavres ILL. viii. 11. 
nwew@ot III. x. 6. 

nelyns VIL. iv. 3. 

meiparat V. iv. 4. mepavra X, iii. 4. 
ix.21. meipadauev X. ix. 23. meipo- 
pevot VIL. vii. 6. metparéov I. ii. 3. 
vii. 2, 22. II. ii. 5. vii. 11. IX. ii. 9. 
iv,.10, X.ix. 2, 14. 

médas II. vii. 15. IV. ii. 22. vii, 18. IX. 
vi. 4. viii. 7. ix. 5. 

mwevns IV. ii. 18. VIII. viii. 6. 

mevia VIil. i. 2. meview IIL. vi. 8, 4. 
vii. 13. 

méveoOat IV. i. 35. mevduevos I. iv. 3. 

wévte III, viii.l. V.v.15, 16. VI. iii. 1. 

mepat TV. v. 10. 

mépas I. iv. 5. IIL. vi. 6. 

memepacmevov II. vi. 14. 

mept cum genitivo IV. i. 1, 45. 

mept cum aceusativo LV, i. 1, 3, 6. viii. 12. 
WEI. 495.9% 

mepiamrou I. viii. 12. 

meprylverau II. iv. 3. 

mepryeypdpew I. vii. 17. 

meprypagy I. vii. 17. 

mepteAkew VII. ii. 1. mepréAwerar VIL. 
iii. 13. 

meptepyot IX. x. 2. 

meptexee V. i, 11. mepréxor I. ii. 7. 
meprexera VI. iv. 2. 

TlepixAéa VI. v. 5. 

meptAaBeiv I. ii. 3. IIL. ix. 7. V. ii. 6. 

meplrumos IV. ii. 18. 

mepropav IV. v. 6. 

mepiaxnta LX. viii. 4, 9. 

mepimintovra VIL, xiii. 3. mepimeveiv 1. 
ix. 1l. mepirecdvres III. viii. 16. 
mepiréon I. x 14. 

mepirmowoiro IX, viii. 5. meprmotodpeba 
X. vii, 5. mepimoovuevos IX. viii. 9. 
mepitovounern X. vii. 6. 

mepiooous VI. viii. 4. mwepirrd VI. vii. 5. 

mepitiOnot X. ix. 15. 

mepipepelg I. xiii. 10. 

meptxap)s IV. iii. 18. 

Tidpoas V. vii. 2. VIII. x. 4. 

Mepowrh VIII. x. 4. : 

wy I. xiii. 19. VIL. viii. 8. xiii. 1. IX, 
viii. 3. ix. 4. 

anAliov V. vi. 8. 

memnpwpevors I. ix. 4. 

mhpwos V. ii. 13. mhpwow IIL vy. 15. 
anpeces VII. i. 3, v. 1. vi. 6. 


INDEX VERBORUM. lvl 


miBavoroyovrros I, iii, 4. 

wiOaverepov I. vi. 7. 

mGavérnta I. vi. 15. 

mxpol IV. v.10. «pe IIL. iv. 4. X. 
iii. 8  mupots VII. xii. 2. 

tive III. xi. 3. 

winre ILii. 4. weoew V. xi. 8, VIIL i. 6. 

miotedouev VI. iy. 2. mioretovor VI. 





viii. 6. VIL. iii. 4. miorevew VIL. 


aid. xiveS- VOL iv. 3. EX: ii. 1. 
morevoa VIII. iv. 3. miorevovres 
VIIL viii. 2. éewiorevce IX. i. 9. 
mioretwo.l.v.5. moretoa wey LV. 
vii, 1.. miorevovra: X. i. 4. mwem- 
orevxact VILL i. 7. morevéy VIII. 
iii. 8. meored’n VL. iii. 4. 
motoy IX. viii. 2. morot X. i. 3. m- 
orérepa X. ii. 4, 
Titraxdy IX. vi. 2. 
wAavny I. iii. 2,3. wAdvas VIIL. i. 3. 
TMAdrov I. iv. 5, III. iii. 2. X. ii. 3. 
mAcioraxis VIL. xiii. 6. 
maAcovd e IL. vi. 5. 
mAcovaxa@s IV. iv. 4. V.i.6 VIL ix. 4. 
mAcoventet V.ii. 2 ix. 12. wAeoventij 
V.ii. 2. emdcovéwter V. ix. 9. 
mAcovéxtns V.i. 8, 9,10. ii. 4. wAeo- 
véxtou IX. viii. 4. 
maAcovetla V.i. 10. _ wAcovetias IX. vi. 4. 
mheupas IIL. iii. 3. 
mAcupiry V. xi. 8. 
wAnyns IIL. v. 15. 
mwAjOos IV. i. 23. VI. viii. 5. IX. x. 3. 
wAhOovs VIII. x. 3. IX.x.3. wane 
TE xiv 8. »JV.7i. 19. VIL, xii: 2. 
wAHGeot IIL viii. 9. 
wAnoeq IIL. xi. 3. 
wAnumerés IL. ix. 17. 
aan I. vi. 10. xiii. 13. II. iv. 13. vii 8. 
Ben 72 ix Gh. . x5 774 ; DY. i229. 
iii. 28. vi 5. V-. ix. 16. VI. xiii. 1. 
VIILx.6 IX vi4.x6. X. iii. 8 
wi. 5, 11. vi. 6. viii. 7. 
mAnpoovres III. xi. 3. mAnpotmevov 
VIL i. 6. 
mAnyi V. iv. 4. wAnyiva V. v. 4. 
metAnyuevos VIL. vii. 6. 
wAnotov V. v.17. ix. 14. 
taAoioyv I. i. 3. 
aAooy Il. ix. 4, VIIL. ix. 5. 
mdovoly VIII. viii. 6. mAovciov X. viii. 
- 11. aAovetous IV. i. 35. 
wAouteiv IV. i. 20. VIII. x. 3. X. iii. 9. 
mAovutover IV. i. 21. VIII. i.1. mAov- 
toortes LV. iii. 19. 
VOL. I. 








mAovtos 1.1. 3. v. 8. IV. i. 6. iii. 18. 
mAobrou I. viii. 15. mAovT@ IV. i. 6, 
20. wAovroyr I. iii, 3. iv. 3. vii. 3. 
IV. ii. 20. iii, 18. V. iii. 7. VIL, iv. 
2 Vix. 5; 

mwAwtipes VILL ix. 5. 

aviyn VIL. ii. 10. 

wd0ev IV. i. 34. X. iv. 3. ix. 18. 

mwoGetra I. vii. 9. 7004 IX. y. 3. 

wd0ov II. ii. 2. 

wot Ill. i. 3. X. iv. 3. 

moet I. vii. 7, 16. x. 12. IL. ii. 6. vi 2. 
Ill. viii. 2. xi 5. xii. 2. IV. iii. 16, 
19. v.13... Vow. 82 vi, $e Dh xe Ss 
xi. 5. VI. ii. 5. viii. 5. xii. 5, 6, 8, 
10. xiii 7. VIL ii. 7. vi. 4. x. 3, 
xive3, F.: VEIL =. 5.,.53 1.3; 1X. 
iv. 5. xi 2. wotovpévos I. iii. 7. 
monoducba I.y.7. émoiouy L. vi. 2. 
moetra I. ix. 8. mojo LI. ix. 8. 
IL iv.2. TMD. vai, 7. -IV: wii -3...%. 
v. ll. VIL. viii. 5. X.ix. 3. wore I, 
x. 13. xi. 5, 6. xiii. 2. IL i. 4 i. 8, 
vi. 18. IV. i. 7, 8, 34, 87. ii, 19, 21. 
iii. 24, 35. vii. 3, 5. viii. 8. V.i. 14. 
ix. 9, 10,11, 14, 16. VI. ii. 6. xii. 1. 
VIL. ix. 6. VIII. v. 1. xiii. 8. xiv. 4. 
IX. i. 5, 7. ii. 5, 7. iii. 3. vi. 4. vii. 1, 
7. ix. 2, 3. xi. 6. X. ii. 2. vii. 8. viii. 
7. ix. 17. mowtvres II. i. 4, iv. 6. 
ix. 7. VIII. iii. 9. ix. 5. xiii, 4. IX, 
i.6,7. moovor IL i. 5. iv. 6. ix. 5. 
Lid, v.10... viii. 14.. x29. Vi i985. 
VIL xit. 4, 5. - VIL iis. 7,. TX xar2. 
X. v. 5. moretoOar II. iii. 1. VIII. 
xiii. 10. morhon II. iv. 2. IX. ii. 5. 
X iv. 2. mowdper IL. vii. 9. X. vy. 4 
éwoince III. x. 7. mothoe: I. x. 12, 
Ill. iii. 11. IV.i. 24. ii. 10, 20. vi. 
5. viii. 8,10. VI. vii. 7. LX. vii. 6. 
movovytos 1V.i. 16. movoovrs IV. ii, 
12. vi. 7. VL iv. 4. gexoinxe VIL. 
il. momoapévovs VII. i. 1. xootv- 
tov VIl.iv.2. wemoinra X. ix. 20. 
memorjobat X. ix. 13. wom IV. ii. 19, 
21. mwowy IV. iii. 3, 5. ii. 5. VIL 
vi. 4. X. iii. 12. mootca VI. xii. 3. 
mowvvras VI. xii. 7. moody V. iv. 
12. v.9. mowotyra V.v.6. mojoay 
V.v. 14. motovpévp VI.iv. 4. worh- 
govros X.iv.7. wemutnndre IX. vii. 
6. memwornkdres IX. vii. 2. X. ix. 18. 
rwowovrta VIII. xiii. 2.  worhoas Vill. 
xiv. 4. IX. vii. 4. X.v.5. wemrorh- 
waot VIII, xii. 5. moiqoayt: VIII, 


vii INDEX VERBORUM. 


xii. 2. mwornoavra IX. vii. 4. motod- 
mevoe VIII. ix. 3. morhoee VII. iv. 2. 
vi. 7. éwole IV. iii. 7. vii. 14. V. 
iv. 12, v. 9. vii. 38. mwormowor IV. 
iii. 25. movhoaytos IV. iii. 25. morh- 
covet VII. xii. 6. EX, ax. 2.) x58. 
moinoalueba X. iii. 12. mowiro X. 
vii. 6. mwomréoy I. vii. 19. VII. i. 4. 
VIIL. xiii. 9. IX.i. 7. x. 1. morjra 
IV. i. 20. 

Trornpwara IX, vii. 3. 

moinots VI. iv. 1, 2, 5. momoews VI. 
iv. 5. v. ye4s- X. iv. 2. 

month VII. xiv. 8. momras IX. vii. 3. 

mointiky VI. iv. 3,6. momricod X, iv. 8. 
montinns VI. ii. 8,5. iv. 2. momrixdy 
V.i. 5. momrikats VIL. iii. 9, mownrixd 
I. vi. 8. V. i. 18. Gi. BVO Ws 1. 

mwointoy VI. ii. 5. iv. 1. 

mottaos I. x. 14. 

momeva VIII. xi. 1. 

mola V.i. 1. X. ix. 28. ola vis I. ix. 7. 
IL. vi. 1,4. Vii. 7. motdév rt X. iv. 1. 
ix. 20. molas I. ii 6. IL i. 8. ii. 1. 
I. x1. Vi. LS! XG vitiots -atolp 
I. vi. 2,3. otal. vi. 10. IIL i. 10. 
ii, 20. v.23. “vii 6." DMR IR N. 
vii. 7. VI. i. 2. Swed wits Zi 2, 
iii, 1, iv. 1. X. ix. 20, 21, 23. rozov 
I. vii. 19. xii 2. TG. 95 AIG TV. 
vii. 4. woods I. ix. 8 VIII. iii. 1. 
X. iii. 2. motos II. ix. 7. IV. v. 13. 
X. ix. 20,21. motov III. i. 9. motwy 
IIL. i, 10. moto: Ill. ii. 11. yv. 20. 
viii. 17. mofay X. v. 11. 

moudtnTes, Tovorntwy X. iii. 1. 

modeuetv VII. vi. 1. X. vii. 6. mode- 
poduev X. vii. 6. 

movcuky I. i. 4. moAeutots III. vi. 4, 
viii. 6. IV.i. 1. X. vii. 6. moreu- 
Kkotata I. x. 13. moAemnoy IX. ii. 1, 
ToAcuikat X, vii. 6, 7. 

moAgutov III. i. 17. modeulwy V. xi. 8. 
moAemtous II. vi. 2. X. vii. 6. 

mwod€uov III. viii. 6.  morgum I. vi. 4. 
TI. vi. 8. ix.4, méAeuor III. vi. 10. 
VIII. ix. 5. Xs’ vile. 

més IV. i115. Viv. 6. xi. 3. VIL 
x. 3. 1X. viii. 6. x. 3. mddrews I. ii. 
8. VIII. ix..6. x. 3. xi Fee, 
3. wore I, ii. 8.- VI. xiii. 8. VII. 
x. 3. X. ix. 18. wédAw IV. ii. 11. V. 
xi. 3. VI. viii. 2. wéAes IV. i. 42, 
VII. i. 4. iv. 4. IX. vi. 1, 2. X. ix. 
23. méAewv X. ix. 18. mddcot I. ii, 





6,8. IL i. 5. IIL vi. 9. VIII. iv. 4. 
X. ix. 14, 19. 

modtrela Il.i 5. X. ix. 28. modcrelas 
Ii. 5. Vi ii. 12. VIL viii. 4. VEEL 
x. 1,38. X. ix. 22. wodrrefay VILL 


xX. 1. modArrela V. vii. 5. VIIL x. 1. ° 


moAurelas VIII. xiv.3. modrre@y III. 
iii. 18, VIII. xi. 1. X. ix. 21,23; 
mwodttevecOat VI. viii, 2. X. vii. 6. 
moAtevovta: X. ix. 23.  modcrev- 
owro III. iii. 6. modArrevduevor X. 
ix. 18. 

moAlitn V. ii, 11. moAtrny VIIL. ix. 3. 
mwoAtrat III. viii. 1. VIIL xi. 5. o- 
Alras I, ix. 8. xiii. 2. IL i, 5. moat- 
vas I. vii. 6. VII. ix. 2. IX. ii, 9. 
X. vii. 6. ‘ 

modiTikds I, yo 1. xiii. 2. TID. iii. 11. 
X. viii. 4. moArrixh I. ii. 5, 9. iii. 2. 
xiii. 7. IIL viii. 1. VI. vii. 4. viii. 1, 
2,8. ix. 4,5. IX. vi. 2. woAcrinijs 
1. iii. 5. viii. 15. i2eSl ai eee 
ii. 11. VIII. ix. 4,6. X. vii. 6. ix. 
18,19. moArrixhy I. iv. 1. VIL vii. 3. 
xiii. 8. VII. xi. 1. VIIL ix. 5. moAr- 
tixav I. iv. 6. X. ix. 18.  mwodrrixod 
Lv. 4,6. V.vi.9. vii. l. X. vii. 6. 
moditixoy I. vii. 6. xiii. 7. V. vi. 4, 
9. VIII. xii 7. IX.ix.2. modrrueg 
L. xiii. 8. wodrtae@ IL. iii. 10. V. i. 
13. IX. i, 1. modArrued ILI. viii. 9. 

- X. ix. 18. moArrixods VI. v. 5. X. 

ix. 18. moArtixol VI. viii. 4. X. ix. 
19. moArricad VIII. xii. 1. X. vii. 7. 
TmokiTikois X. vii. 6. ix. 20. 

moditik@s IX. x. 6. 

modAduis Liv. 8. x. 7,8. TL.i.4. iv. 3. 
III. viii. 18. IV. ii. 8. V. i. 5, 15. 
x. 3. VILL. iii. 5. -v. 4.) Ta 2a. 
6. X. vi. 5. 

moAAaxou V. y. 4. 

modAaxa@s II. vi. 14, III, xi. 4. V. ix. 
11. 

modAooT@s X. v. 11. 

modveides IV. i, 38. modvesdys VIII. 
xii. 2. 

TloAvKAertov VI. vii. 1. 

moAvKowoyr I, ix, 4. 

moAvéewos IX. x. 1. 

modumpaynoves VI. viii. 4, 

mwodv I, xi. 4. Il. vi. 7. ix. 5. IIL. xii. 
7 IV. i. 82) ve 14. Viv eee 
vii. 4. VIII. iii. 5. vii. 4. x. 6. IX, 
iii. 4. X.v. 4,5. vii. 8. viii 4. oa- 
Aov Ii. 3. x. 12,14, xi. 2. VII. x. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


4. xiii. 2. VIIL vi. 2. vii. 5. IX. 
iv. 9. X.i. 3. viii. 5,9. moAA@ I. i. 
3) SNL! 230. vii 15.) x 19) xiie-7. 
Il. vi. 6. vii. 2. IIL. vii. 7. viii. 6, 
Piwix: 3:i xii. 2.' IV. Sh. 149, 
Op. vy. 2... ix. 8. Vi. mi 2O. svt“ 6. 
viii. 3. VII. ix. 2,6. VIII. xi. 8. IX. 
i.9. iv. 8. viii.9. X. iii. 12. viii. 2. 
modAois I. iii. 3. viii. 11. III. iv. 5. 
VI. viii. 4. VIL xiv. 5. VIIL vi. 2, 
3,7. IX iv. 7. x.2,4,5. X. viii. 11. 
ix. 8. moAAoi I.iv.2. v.2,3,8. viii. 
9.4L i6... TLL vii. 9: xi. 4.. IV. i. 
35, 37, 38. iii, 22. iv.4. V.i 15. 
VII. vii. 1, 5,6. viii. 2. ix. 2. xiii. 
§. VIIL ii. 4. iv. 1. vi. 3. viii. 1, 2. 
xiv. 4, IX. vii. l. viii. 4,5, 11. ix. 4. 
x. 6. X.vi.3. ix.9,14. moddods I. 


v.83. IL ii. 8. ILM. viii. 13. IV. iii. 
28. VII. vi. 2. IX. viii. 4. x. 6. 


X. i. 2. ix. 8,17. moddal I. vi. 4. 
ieee’ TH: 810, VE vii. 4: VIL 
xi.3. X.iii.7. iv.3. v.11. moAAas 
ay 94,122. TV. iv:-3.. VIL v. 1. EX. 
ii. 2. viii. 9. moAAaisI x.12. aoAAG 
I.x.14. IV.i. 40. VIIL iv. 3. zoa- 
Ajv Il. ii. 8. IIL xii. 6. VI. viii. 4. 
Xi.2. modiw1V.v.10. VL ix. 2, 6. 
IX. viii. 9. moAAod IX. i. 9. viii. 4. 
mOAAY V.i. 7. wAcloy IL. viii. 4. VIII. 
i.1. mAcioy L. vii. 23. xiii. 8. IL. i. 1. 
vi. 4. viii. 5,7. IIL. xi. 3. V. iii. 4. 


ix.9. VIII. viii. 6. xiv. 1,2. IX. 
viii. 4. X. vii. 5. mAetovs I. vii. 15. 
Voit, 7. IX x2 Xv. ll. wrclw 


I. vii. 1, 3, 19. IL ii. 6. vii. 11. 1V. 
v. 7,11. VI i. 2. VIII i. 7. iv. 4. 
ix. 2. IX.i.4. iv. 6. viii.9. X. iv. 1. 
aaéov IL, ix. 8. IV. v. 4. V.i. 10. ii 
9. iii.2,14 iv. 6,11, 13, 14. v.17. 
vi. 4,6. ix. 8,9, 10,13, 15. xi. 7. 
VI. viii. 4. VIII. xi. 4. xiii. 7, 11. 
xiv. 1. IX. viii. 11. wAesdvoyr III. 
iii. 11. IV. iii. 24. IX.x.5. X viii. 
5. Aelovos V. iv. 6. VIII. xiii. 3. 
areloow V. xi. 4. X. viii. 6. wAclorn 
IL. viii. 5. VIII. xii. 6. mAcioroy II. 
viii. 5. III. iv. 5. VIII. vii. 4. x. 2. 
xi.8. maAclorny I. ix. 8. mAciora I. 
viii. 7. VIL i. 5. VIII. x.3. wAclotov 
I. iv. 2. IV. viii. 4. VII. vii. 1. x. 4. 
mdelorov IV. ii. 10. VIII. x. 3. mAc?- 
orat IX. iii. 1. mAeforas X. ix. 13. 
mAciorous VIII. xiiie 8. IX. x. 1, 3. 
maetorots VII. i.8. TX. vii. 1. mAei- 





h2 


lix 


oro lV. vii.13. VIL. xi. 2. VIII. x. 1. 
EX: =. 3: 

modu piAia VIII. i. 5. 

mwodvgiArov IX. x. 1. modvpiros IX. x. 6. 
ToAupiAetarov IX. x. 5. 

mwoAuxpéviov I. vi. 6. VII. x. 4. IX. vii. 
6. moduvxpdvia LV. ii. 16. 

moduwpenés I. iii. 7. 

movet V. vi. 6. VII. xiv. 5. oveiv VI. 
i, 2. X. vi. 6. movnon VIL. vii. 5. 
wenov7ja Gc I. xiii. 2. mexovnuévos I. 
xii. 7. 

mwovnpta VII. viii. 1. 
xi, 4.5 V5 xiv::8. 

movnpos III. v. 13. V.xi.5 VII. x. 3, 
4, xiv.8. movnpov IX. ii. 5. vii. 1. 
movnpov IX. iii. 3. wovnpot V. viii. 8. 
movnpots VII. x. 4. movnpods IV. i. 
42. 

mévos III. ix. 3. mévos I. vi. 4. IX. vi. 
4, mévous II. ii. 8. 

Iidvrov VIL. v. 2. 

mop0ovvras IV. i. 42. 
ii. 6. 

mopiCew IV.i. 834. IX. ix. 1. mopiCover 
IV.i. 35. VIIL iii. 2. v.1. viii. 6. 
mopiCovres VIII. ix. 5. mopi¢wv VIII. 
xiv. 3. mopi€éuevor VIII. ix. 4. o- 
picac@at X. ix. 3. memdpiora IX, i. 
2. wopioOjvar ITI. iii. 13. 

topvoBockol IV. i. 40. 

wéppw III. viii. 16. xi. 7. V.i. 7. VII. 


movnplay V. ii. 2. 


TwemopOnkevat VI. 


v. 6. VII. xii. 4. X. ix. 20. mop- 
pwrépw II. viii. 4. 

troppupay IV, ii. 20. 

mocaxas V. i. 8. = 

aécov Il. ix. 7, 8. AV. v. 13. VIII. 


vii. 3. IX. x.3. wdéooe III. v. 23. 
V. v.15. méoa III. i. 16. V. v.10. 
vii. 7. moog I. vi. 3. wécov IV. ii. 9. 

mote VIII. iii. 2. viii. 6. 

mote VY. ix. 15. VIII. xii. 1, 4. 

wore I. ii. 3. vi. 5. vii. 1,12. II. v. 
17, viii. 2.., IV, i. 39. v. 5. V. ix. 8. 
IX. iv. 4. xii. 2. 

mérepov I, iv. 5. vii. ll. ix. 1. x. 1. 
xiii. 10. IIL. i. 4,23. xii. 5. IV. viii. 
we Va tie tlw, ix. 1, 3, 8 xi 1.7 VL 
ix, ]. -VII. iii. 1, 2. iv. 1. vi. 7. ix. 
1. VIII. i. 7. ii. 2. iv. 6. viii. 1. IX. 
fu Des Se le, 1, 2... X.-iv., VE. vill: 
5. morépov III. xii. 5. IX-i.5 70- 
vepa I. xii. 1. IIL. iii. 1. WII. xiii. 
10. IX. ii. 1,4. X. viii. 7. worépos 
IX. viii. 2. 


lx INDEX VERBORUM. 


mworépws V. viii. 10 

TlovAvdduas III. viii. 2. 

modds I, vii. 11. 

mpayua Il. vi. 4,6. mpdyuaros I. iii. 
4. II. vi. 5, 8. viii. 7,8 V. viii. 10. 
x. 4. VIL. iii. 6. mpdymara IT. iv. 4. 
V. iii. 5. x. 7. mpaypdrwv IV vi. 1. 

mpayuareta II. ii. 1. iii, 10. amporypa- 
tetav II, iii. 9. 

mpayuareverOa: X. vi. 6. mpayyaredb- 
ovra I. xiii. 7. IV. i. 43. 

mpaxréov Il. ii, 1. IV. ix. 4. mpaxréa 
Lea aL 

mpaxtixds Iix.10. V.v.17. x 8. VIL. 
x. 2. mpakricods I. ix, 8. mpaxTinh 
I. vii. 13. IL iii. 6. VI. ii. 2, 5. iv. 
2. vii. 7. viii. 2. xiii. 7. mparrixol 
I.v. 4. xii. 6. V.i.3. mpaxriat III. 
v.21. mpaxrixais L.ii 7. VI. xi. 4. 
mpartikoy LV, iii. 27. mparricjs VI. 
ii. 3. mpacriucod VI. ii. 8. mpaxte 
Kyv VI. v. 4, 6. mpaxtixas VI. xii. 
10. mpaxtinay X. vii. 5,6. mpaxrti- 
kos X.vili, 12. mpaxtinorepot VI. vii. 
7. xii, 1. mpaxtixwrépous VI. xii. 7. 

mpaxroy I, vi. 18. vii. 1. VI. ii. 5. iv. 
1. v. 3,6. vii. 6. viii. 2.8. mpaxrd 
I. vi. 14. VI. v. 6. xi. 3. VII. iil. 6. 
IX. vi. 2. mpaxrav T.ii. 1. iv. 1. vii. 
1,8. TL i. 8.. SEO eae Vere, 
4. VI. v. 6. vii. 6. xii. 10. mpacrois 
igs. 

mpakis I. i, 1,4. iii, 6. vii. 10. IL. vi. 
18. IIT. i. 15,18,20. Viiv. 4. VI 
iv. 1, 2,5. VIL. xiv. 8 VIL vig oe 
viii. 9 mpagews III. i. 6. IV. i. 14. 
V. ix.9. VI ii. 1, 2,4,5. ¥. 8,4 
VU. i.2. mpdtec I. vii. 1. IL. iii. 3. 
HEL 13. CTV. ii.45. eG VE ai. 
4. VIL ii. 9. mpagys TIT. i. 19. v. 
11. viii. 8. VIL. Siv.77s Ee Hi os BS 
viii. 9. X.vii. 5. mpdfes I. i. 2. vii. 
11, 14. viii. 2, 3, 15; 128: xiv 2H, 
ii: 1. iii, 3, 8,9. vi 10,12. vii. 1. 
Ill. i. 6, 10, 27. iii. 15. v. 1, 22. IV. 
1. 12. ii. 1.) Vi. ave wai oe ki, 
4. VIIL 4.2. i856 TX i1:°6, 7° viii. 
7, 10..4x. 547° Ro 9k OV Ge vinta 5, 
7. mpdgew I. i. 3, 5. iii.5. IL. vi. 
18. vi, 11. TID i. 1. i158. 9.6, 
22. IV. iii. 35. viii, 12. VII. iii. 18. 
X. vii. 7. mpdéeor I. viii. 12, II. ii. 
3. vi. 16. vill. 2. ix Eee. 
vi .19.; IV. vii. 3. VEi 1.Vig ae; 
4, IX. ix. 6. X.i. 3. viti.2.: 





mpGos I. xiii. 20. IV. v. 3,4. mp@or Il. 


i. 7. mpGov IL. vii. 10. pdous II. 
ix. 7. IV. v.13. mpdov V. i. 14. 


mpadrns IV. v. 1,3. mpgdrara IL. vii. 


10. IV.v.1. IX. iv. 1. mpgdryrt 
TV. -v. 12. 


mpaots V. ii. 13. 
mparret III. i. 6, 16, 17. ii. 4. v.13, 17. 


vii. 5,6. IV. vii. 5. Vii. 17. Vl. 
i. 6. ii. 9,10. IX iv. 3. viii. 1.8. X. 
ix. 18. mpdtp III. i. 7. V. viii. 6. 
mparrew I. ii. 7. iv. 2. viii. 4, 15. x. 
13. II. ii. 2. iv. 8,5. TLL. i. 6, 14. 
iii, 13. v. 2, 7, 19. IV. i. 7,8. iii 28. 
ix.4,7. Vi viii. 4. °ix. &. VLE. 
viii. 4. ix. 2. x. 2. xii. 1, 6,7, 9. xiii. 
1,7. VIL ii. 1, 3, 5,9 iii 5, 6, 9. 
IX. iv. 8. vii. 4. viii. 1,5, 7,9. x. 2. 
X. vi. 3. vii.2. viii. 4,6, 7, 10, 11. 
ix. 1,11, 18. mpdrrovor LI. iii. 7. vii. 
1. ILiv. 1, 4,6. vii 15. Wi. 11. 
v. 18. viii. 11. IV. iii. 21, V. viii. 1. 
VL. viii. 2. xii. 7. mpdrrerat I. vii. 1. 
viii, 15. IL iv. 8. IL i. 4. Vi i. 4. 
VIII. x. 4. mpdrrovres I. viii. 9. IL. 
14,7. mpdrrecOu I. xi. 4. VI. xii. 
8. mpdrrouev I, xii. 8. IL. iii, 1. UL 
i. 23. V. viii. 3, 5.. X. viii. 1. mpar- 
tovtt III. i.10. mpdérrovras II. ii. 4. 
iv. 1. TIL v. 7. - VI. xii. 7 VEL 
viii. 3. X. viii, 13. apértoy II. iv. 
8,4. IIL i. 3. VIL ii, 10, ix. 4. IX. 
viii. 7. mpdrrp IL. iv. 3. IV. vii. 5 
V. viii 1, 8,11. VIL. xiv. 8. mpdgee 
IL. iv. 5. IV. ix. 6. mparrnra II. 
vi. 20. mpaéa Ill. i. 4. IV. i. 89. 
ix. 7. V.ix. 165 Viw 8.12 Vi 
2. vi. 5. IX. viii.10. mpdgavros III. 
i. 4. mpdrrovra IIL. i. 6. mpdéas 
IL. i. 13. wémpaxe ibid. mpdrrovta 
IIL. i. 17... IV. ii. 12. ix. 7, mpa- 
xoévra IIL. ii, 8. mpdrro: IV. i. 22. 
VIL. vii. 3. mpater I. viii. 9. x. 11, 
13. TIL i. 22. iii..17. IV. ix. 6. V. 
iii 2. mpdooovras VI. viii. 4. mpar- 
Touevov VII, xiv. 8. . mparrévras VIL. 
xiv. 7. mparrouévev VI. xii. 7, mpar- 
Toueva V. vii. 6. ix. 15. mpaxOp V. 
vii. 7. mpaxOjjva ibid. mwempaypéva 
VL. ii. 6. mpdtovor VIL iii. 4. mpdr- 
twot VIII. xi. 1. IX. vi. 1. mempa- 
yhévov IX, iv. 5. wempayevor 1X. 
viii. 6. memparydras X. viii, 11. mpér- 
tovtos IX, iii. 2. wémpaxrat IX. iv, 9. 


mperdvrws IV. ii. 18, 16. 











INDEX VERBORUM. 


mpémet IV. ii. 14. mpérovoa IV. ii. 1. 
mpemov IV. ii. 2,5, 6,17. vi. 8. X. 
viii. 1. mpémovoa IV..ii. 6. mpé- 
movta IV. viii. 4. mpémew TV. ii. 12. 

mperwdéorarov IV. ii. 9 

mpeoBurépm VIII. vii. 1. IX.ii.9. mpeo- 
Birepov IV. ix. 8. mpecBurépwy VI. 
xi. 6. mpeoBurépots VILL. i. 2. 

mpecBirat VIII. vi. 1. mpeoBdraus VIII. 
iii. 4. 

mpeoBurixors VIII, vi. 1. 

TIptapurais I. x. 14, 

Tipiduov I. ix. 11. Wpdporv VIL. i. 1. 

mply V. v.16. vii. 7. VII. ii. 2. vi. 1, 
VIII. iii. 8. IX. i. 9. 

mpd III. ii. 17. vii. 12. 

mpoaryaryeiv I. vii. 17. 
ix. 18. 

mpoaywyela V. ii. 13. 

mpoatpeois I. i. 1. iv. 1. III. ii. 3, 5, 7, 
9, 10, 13, 17. iii. 19, 20. VL. ii. 2, 4, 
6. xiii. 7. VII. x. 3. VIII. v. 5. xiii. 
ll. X. viii. 5. mpoapéoer I. vii. 2. 
TIL. i. 15. ii. 5. IV. vii. 12. VII. viii. 
1. ix. 1. VIII. xiii, 11. mpoatpeow 
Verasii..4.2 ILL, 2, 65° V, veo7. VI. 
xii. 7, 8. VII. iv. 3. vi..7. vii. 2. viii. 
8. x. 2. IX.i. 7. X. ix. 1. mpoope- 
oes Il, v. 4. mpoapécews II. v. 4. 
TIL. ii. 1, 2, 15. . V. vi. 1. viii. 9, 11. 
xi 5. VI. ii. 4. VIII. v. 5. 

mpoapetrat III. ii. 8. V.v. 1,8. VI. ii 
6. IX. ix. 5. mpoapetoOau III. ii. 7, 
1], 14. VII. iv. 3. VIII. xiii. 8. 
X. ix. 14. mpoapoduevor I. v. 3. 
mpoatpoupevev I. xiii. 15. VIL. vii. 3. 
mpoatpovmevos II. iv. 3. ILI. ii. 4. 
VIL ii. 10. iii, 2. apoapodpevor III. 
iii. 17. IV. iv. 8. mpooupotueda IIL. 
ii. 9, 12, 13. mpoatpodvra: VII. iv. 4. 
X. iv. 2 mpoopavra 1X. vi. 1. mpo- 
auphoerar IV. vi. 7. mpoerduevar V. 
viii. 5. mpoéAowro III. iii. 18. X. ix. 
19. mpoédorro III. viii. 15. mpoedrd- 
pevos V. viii. 11. mpoeiAducba V. 

-) ix.:'8. 
poaiperinds V. x. 8. 
153) VILA. 2: 

mpoatperoy III. ii. 16. iii, 17. VI. ii. 6. 
mpooperou III. iii. 19. mpoaiperay III. 
ve 1. 

mpouoOduevor VII. vii. 8. 

mpéBara V. vii. 1. mpoBdtwy VIII. 
xi. 1. ; 

mpoBovactoas V. viii. 8. mpoBovdevod- 


mponyuevov X. 


mpocipeTixy IL. vi. 





Ixi 


evar V. viii. 5. 
> OT. i.26, 

mpoyapyadloayres VII. vii. 8. 

Tpoyeverrépwy X. ix, 23. 

mpoylverat III. ii. 15. mpoyevouévny IX. 
ii, §, 

TpoywwoKonevov VI. iii. 3. 

mpdyovor VIII. xi.2. mpoydver IY. ii. 
14. mpoyédvois VIII. xi. 2. 

mpodnaots III. viii. 15. 

mpoddyrt X. iii. 9. 

mpodiepydoarbar X. ix. 6. 

mpoeyelpayres VII. vii. 8. 

mpoiddvres VIL. vii. 8. 

mpotevat VII. ii. 8. mpoetor I. ii, 1. vii. 
7. mpotovar LV. i. 28. 

mpocipnuéva, IIL. viii. 13. X. vi. 1. viii. 
12. mpoe:pnuéver I. vii. 18. mpoeipn- 
pévas V. i. 2. 

mpoerOdvros VIII. xii. 2. 

mpoéoet II. vii. 4. 

mpoerixoy LY. i. 20. 

Tpoetix@s LY. ii, 8. 

mpoéxovrTa IX. i. 8. mpoéxovor X. vii. 7. 
mpoéxorres I. v. 2. 

mponodels IX. v. 3. 

tmpoOupeicOar IX. xi. 6. 
VIII. xiii. 2. 

mpodvpws LY. iii. 26. IX. xi 5, 6. 

mpotevrar IV. i. 9. mpoeuéve IIL. v. 14. 
mpotéuevot IX. i. 7. mpoteuévov IX. 
i. 5. mpotéwevos ibid. mponoerou IX, 
viii. 9,10. mpdowro IX. viii. 9. 

mpokeluevov X. iv. 2. mpoxemévov X. 
viii. 3. mpoxeimévwr I. xiii. 8. 

mpodraBdvros IX. i. 5. ~ mpoAaBdyres IX. 
i. 6. 

mpodumndévras X. iii. 6. 

mpovontixyy VI. vii. 4. 

mpovolas V. viii. 9. 

mpoopovra III, viii. 11. 

mponérera, VII. vii. 8. 

mporet7 VII. vii. 8. 
12. 

mpomnArakiConevov IV. v. 6. 

mpomnrakiopos V. ii. 13. 

mpos LV. i. 35. iii. 10, 12. V. ii. 11,15. 
v.12, 15. vid, 6. x. 7. xi 6. VLG 
1, 5. -xii. 3. xiii. 4. VIL. ii, 4. vi. 3. 
vii. 6. xiii. 4, VIII. iii. 8. apos €re- 
pov V.i. 15, 16,17, 18. ii. 6. mpds 
at VI. ii. 5. mpds xphuara IX. 
> ar 

mpooaryopever VIII. x. 4. mpooa'yoped- 
ovat VIII. ix. 1. mpooayopevew VII. 


mpoBeBovacupevoy 


mpoOvuovvrat 


mpomerets III. vii. 


]xu INDEX VERBORUM. 


i. 3. mpocayopevouer VI. vy. 5. mpoa- 
ayopevovrat IV. i. 5. viii. 8, 4. 

mpooavaipovor X. i. 3. 

mpoodvrous I, vi. 1. 

mpocarrouev IV. i. 8. 

mpooyevoito VII. iv. 4. 

mpoodeiv X.ix.19. mpoodehoe I. iv. 7. 
mpoodetoOa I. viii. 17. VII. xiii. 4, 
mpoodcouern I. viii. 15. mpoode?rat 
I. viii. 12. x. 9... WIL xiii. 2. We 
iii 8. x. 2. mpoodéovrm VIII. i. 4. 
iii, 4. 

mpocdtomoroyeloOw II. ii. 3. 

mpocd.wpi(dueba VI. iii. 4. 

mpoodoxw@peva. IIL. i. 9. | 

mpocdoxia IX. vii. 6. mpoodoxlay III. 
vi. 2. 

mpdceatt V. xi. 8. mpoog V. viii. 2. 

mpooemiTiOevtes VII. iv. 6. 

mpooépxovTat III. viii. 11. 

mpocéexew VI. xi. 6. X. v. 3. 

mpoonyopia IX. viii. 4.  mpoonyoplas 
IN 139% 

mpoohke IV. vi. 5. ix. 1. VIII. v. 3. 
viii. 3. mpoohkev VIII. xiv. 1. X. 
ix.14. mpoohkovros VILL. xiii. 4. 

mpdc0eors III. v.22. mpdobeow VII iv, 
3. v. 8. 

mpooberéov I. x. 15. V. ix. 5. VIIL. 
ii. 4. 

mpooterat IX. xi. 4. 

tpooketaOw V. iv. 12. 
xi. 4. 

mpookexpouxdrtes IX. iv. 1. 

mpocdapBdvwy V. ii, 4. mpocraBdryra 
IV. vi. 4. mpocAaBovoa III. viii. 12. 

tpocopaAnoer LV, iii. 24. 

mpoomatou IX. vy, 2. 

mpoomalws IX. v. 2. 

mposmoetrat VIII. viii. 1, mpoomotod- 
peva IV. vii. 15. mpooemoerro IX. 
iii. 1.  mpoomotoduevos LV. vii. 10. 
mpoorowovvrat LV. vii. 13. X. viii. 4. 

tpoomonpartt IV, vii. 1. 

mpoomoinots II. vii. 12, 
IX. iii. 2. 

mpoomointikos III, vii. 8. IV. vii. 2. 

mpoontaloparos V. xi. 8. 

mpoorratcavTa V. xi. 8 

mpdotayua III. xii. 8. 

mpdatagis X. ix, 12. 
Vien): 

mpootarre: V. i. 14. ii, 10. mpoorarrd- 
peva V.ii.10. mporrattoméevev II, iv. 
6. mpoordte II. vi. 7. mpoordrror 


mpockeicOa V. 


TMpooTOLjoews 


mpoordtews VII. 





Ill.i.4. mpoordéy Ill. v.21. mpoo- 
tatrovres III, viii. 5. 

mpoorifels V. ii. 14. mpoorlOerat II. 
iii. 5. mpoor:@éuevoy I. vii. 8. mpoo- 
TiWenevns I. vii. 14. mpooOeivas I. 
vii. 17. II. vi. 9. V. iv. 11. - mpoa- 
Ti@éaot VI. xiii. 4. mpooribevres VII. 
iv. 2,6. mpocédnxer V.iv, 8. mpoo- 
TO V.iv. 10. mpooerébn V. iv. 10. 
mpooredéevtos X. ii. 3. mpoorWeuevny 
X, ii. 3, 

mpoopeperbau VI. i. 2, 

mpoopépov X, ix. 15, 

mpéracis VII. iii. 18. mpotdoews VI. 
xi. 4. mpordoewy VII. iii. 6. 

mpérepov I. v. 8 vi. 2. x. 6,7. Il. i, 
4. v. 5. ILI. vii. 7, 12. viii. 8. IV. 
v.13. vii. 6. V. ii. 8 iv. 148,41, 
17. vi. 3,6. viii. 8. ix. 9, xi. 5. VIL 
11,5. VILi. 4. ii. 5. iv. 5. vii. 1 
ix. 1. ‘VIL. iii. 8. xii. 75 ee 
v. 1, X. vi. 2,8. vii. 2,9. mporépov 
III. xii, 5. V. iv. 2.  mporépwr X. 
ix, 22. 

mporiéucba I. iii, 8. mporéra VI. ix. 
4. mporebévra X, ix. 17. 

mpotimay I, vi. 1. 

upotpémecOar X. ix. 10, mporpéwovras 
Xi. 4. mporpémwerat III. v. 7. mpo- 
Tpevovres III. v.7. mporpépacbau X. 
ix. 3, 

tpotmapxnv IX. ii. 5. 

mpoimdpxe: IV. ii. 14. mpovrapxew I, 
xi.4, X.ix.8. mpotmdpyover X. ix, 14, 

mpopavy III. viii. 15. 

mpopépovras X, iii, 8, 

mpany II. iii. 5. 

Tipwraydpav IX. i. 5. 

Tpwrevovor LY, iii, 27. 

mp@ros III. viii, 8. mp@rov I, vii, 17, 
20. IL. ii. 6. iv. 3, ix. 3. III. i, 22. 
iii, 11, 12. v. 23, viii. 1, IV. iii, 1. 
Vii. 3.'.vs 82 xs 1512. Vi. Larges 
xii. 4. VII. i. 5. iii, 1,8. xii. 1, xiv. 
4, X. iv. 9. ix. 22. mpdror IIL, viii, 
9. IX.ix. 4.  mpdéros IV. iv. 1, 4, 
VII. x.2. mpérov V.iii.9. mpdtwr 
VI. xi. 4. mpéras VIL. vi. 6, 

mpotws VIII. iv. 4, vii. 3. 

arjows X, iv. 8. 

mracoovra III. viii. 4. : 

TivOarydpiot I. vi, 7, Ll. vi. 14, V.yv. 1. 

mina VII. vi. 3. 

muxvorns V.i. 5. _ muxvdrntos ibid. 

ao«rots IIT, ix. 3, 


— in il it lak — 


= a 


EEO eee 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


mukTikos X. ix. 15. 

wop II.i. 2. Vz. vii. 2. 

mupértovtTt X. vy. 9. ix. 15, 

mw VI, ix. 4, 6. 

mwdrew V. iv. 13. mwdodow V. vii. 5. 

més I. iii, 8. vi. 1, 12,16. x. 7. xiii. 16. 
Il. ii, 1, 2. iv. 1. v. 3. vic 3. vii 16. 
$x, Fee Od. :1 16,17. fi. 12. iif. 6, 
8,11, 14,17. v.23. IV. i. 34. ii. 9, 
Steers. -V. vid. ix. 15, x. 1. VI. 
Wales Sit. 7 VIN. ii. 1. iii, 1,2, 12, 
Ravaivi 5.’ x.-5, xii. 7. xiv. 9. - VILL 
ieeke th. 4<. xii, 8, “EX, ii. 4: wiilks 3. 
X, ii. 4. iii. 5. iv. 9. viii. 4. ix. 7,18, 
20, 23. 

mows I. vi. 8. viii. 9. ix. 1. xii, 2. xiii, 
2788... LY. Hii, 2. dv. 8. ve 4 viz 20, 
wiii;.1;8. Il. iii. 13; v.17, 20:: IV. 
MoS, 2, «Vi. -10, 12, v. 10. . ix. 
15. xi. 4. VI. iii. 4. xiii. 1,4. VII. 
iii. 7, 10. iv. 4. vi. 1. xiii, 5. xiv. 2. 
WILL. -vii.. 3.. -xii. 8." EX, vila. X. 
ix. 8. 


PR. 


paBddécews X, iv. 2. 

‘Padaudvévos V. vy. 3. 

pddiov I. viii, 15. IL. vi. 14. ix. 2,7, 8 
III. i. 10. xii. 2. IV. i. 20, 23, 30, 
39. iii, 21,26. v. 13. ix. 14, 15. 
VIII iv. 3. vi.2. IX.ii2. ix. 5. X. 
ix. 5, 20. 

padiws I. iv. 7. x. 14, 

pdov IX. ii, 10. fgov IV. i. 9. VII. x. 
4. IX, ix. 5. 

pgora Il. ix. 9. ILL. iii, 11. VIII. x. 3. 

padupeiy VI, i, 2. 

pew. pete V. v. 3. 

péwew X.i.2. férwor VIL. vii. 1. 

pnOqjoeron II. ii. 2. vii. 6,9. IV. i. 14, 
pnOévrwy VIL. iii. 7. pyréov IL. vi. 2. 


MibehiH VES Ril 2. 
pnti X. ix. 20.  pnrots VIII, xiii. 6, 
as 9. 


pntopicdy I. iii. 4. pyropuchy I. ii. 6. 

bhrwp III. iii. 11. 

piCay VILLI. xii. 3. 

pivas IIT. viii. 10. 

plwrew III. xii. 38. V. i. 14. 
v.14. pirrwy IT. i. 1, 2. 
ii, 2. 

pddwv IIT. x. 5. 

bowhy I. ii, 2, vii, 22. x, 12, xi. 3, X. 
2-1. 

pumatvove: I. viii. 16. 


pipar III. 
pibas V. 





lxill 


>. 


cabpas I. x. 8. 

Sapdavardrw I. v. 4. 

odpriwvo IIT. ix. 3. 

gapkos V.i. 5. capt ibid. 

Bdrupos VIL. iv. 5. 

capnveias II. vii. 11. 

capes VILi. 2. capéorepor VI. xii. 8, 

oetos VII. i, 3. 

ceiomov IIT, vii. 7. 

oeuvov IV. iii, 26. VII. ii, 6. VIII. i. 6. 

oeuviverbau LV, iii. 26. 

onuatvew IIT. viii. 10. 
vii. 1. VII. iv. 4. 

onueiov II, iii, 1. V. ii, 2. VIL v. 2. 
8.7 ville 6..xi. 1, 6. xili. 4: VIL. iii. 
8. iv. 2. xii. 2. xiii. 5. VIII. viii. 3. 
X. vi. 4. viii. 8. onuelm VIII, i. 7. 
viii. 2. 

o0€vos III. viii. 10. 

Sixvwviors ILI. viii. 16. 

Suwvldy LV, i. 27. 

owapnwpig VII. vii. 6. 

owrnpa V. vii. 5. 

otrta II. ii. 6. 

owrtos III, v. 9. 

atrov V. v. 13. 

oxanrijpa VI. vii. 2. 

oxerréoy I, viii. 1. 
VI. viii. 4, xiii. 1. VII. iii. 1. 

oxemroucda Il. ii, 1. oxéWaro 1V. ii. 
9. VI. viii. 6. oreoueba I. vi. 9. 
oxéfacOa Il. ii, 1. VII. vi. 1. 

oxevos X. v. 2. 

oxéus I. xiii. 4. 
ix:.3;.° Vile itis 2. 

oKAnpot IV. viii. 3. 

oxoreiy I], ii. 4, -ix. 4. X. viii. 12. 
oxormovmer III. ii. 15. orordrv LV. i’. 
21. oromwe? VIII. x. 2. oromotcr 
Ill. iii, 1. ockometra: I. iii, 2. oKo- 
moupevos V.x.1. okomoln. VIII. x. 2. 

oxowds III, xii. 9. VI. i. 1. xii. 9. 
okorod If, vi. 14. oxomdy I. ii. 2. 
VI. xii. 6, 9. 

SxvOar IIT. iii. 6. 

oxutéws I, vii. 11. 

oxutov I. x, 13. 

oxvtoréuos V. v. 8, 12. oKvrordmov 
ibid. oxvrotéum IX. i. 1. oxvtord- 
pov I. x.3. _ V. v.10, 12. 

oxeupa. LY, viii. 9. 

oxonrew IV, viii. 4,9. oxdmrovra IV, 
viii. 7. okwmTopevor IV, viii, 3. 


onualvovres VI, 


Iv. 1s Voc 1 


Vi. 2 onxdbews I. 
VII. i. 7. 


Sxvbav VII. vii. 6. 


lxiv 


Sdérwv I. x. 3. X. viii, 11. SdAeva I 


x21. 


copia tl. viii, 6, Vi. iii. 1. vi, 3558. 


WH 2535) 4556 ks Te es: EE 
copia VI. vii. 4. codiav I, xiii. 20. 
VI. vi. 2. vii. 1,4, X. vii. 8. cogias 
VI. xii. 3. xiii. 8. 

cogiorat IX, i. 7. 

copiotinds VII. ii. 8. copiotixal X, ix, 
18. ocogiorikwy X. ix. 20. 
Sopoxaéous VII. ii. 7. x. 4. 


copes I, xiii. 20, VI. viii. 6. xi. 5. X. 


vil. 4. viii, 13. cody I. xiii. 20. 
IV. vii. 18. Voix. Th Vi vill, 
3,4. copots I. iv. 2. copod VI. vi. 
1. IX. ii. 8. cool VI. viii. 5. oo- 
gods VI, vii. 2,5. copdtrepos X, vii. 
4. ocopev X. vii. 11. cop@ X., viii. 
13. copwrdros VIII. vii. 4. 


omdvios VII. i. 3. omdvov II, ix. 2. 


VILi. 3. omavtas VIII. iii. 8. 


omépua X. ix. 6. 
Srevourmos I. vi. 7. VII. xiii. 1. 
omevoTikos LY, iii. 34. 


onovdd¢e IV.ii. 15. omovdd Cover LV. i. 
3. aonovdd(ovtos LV. iii. 82. o7ov- 
dacréov I. vii.22. omovdacn X. vi. 6. 
onovdd(wy LV, iii, 834. omovdd Cortes 
VIL. iv. 5. omovddSew VIII. i. 4. 
X. vi. 6. omovdactbv VIII. xiv. 4. 
éorovddnact IX. viii. 4.  omovddCor 
IX, viii. 5. omovddCovra IX, viii. 7. 


orovéaios I, viii. 13. Ill. iv. 4, 5. V. 


ii. 6. VIL x. li .VEElevieGeari xX. 
iv. 2. viii. 10, 11. i€.-B,7GA¢ 30. 
X. vi. 6. omovdala I, xiii. 13. VIL ii. 
2.. VII. ii. 6,.7..- DE. ixy 3. -ogov- 
Saiov I. xii. 2. II. vi. 2. ix. 2. TIM, 
v.19. V. ix. 6. «x.3.72 Vib. veoh, 
7. VII. ix. 8) . xiv. 45-REadw Ss, 
omovdatov I. vii. 14. VII. xiii, 7, 
IX. viii. 9.  omovdator IT. iv. 6. v. 8. 
orovdaim III, iv. 4. VIII. xiv. 1. 
IX. ii. 1, iv. 8 ix. 7. Xi. WOoowi. 
5. omovdatwy IV. iii. 17. VII. i. 6. 
iv. 5. IX. ix. 5, 10) eReieri4, 
orovdata V. x. 1. X. iv. 6. vi. 3, 7. 
omovdalg X.v. 6. omovdaiow V. x. 2. 
omovoalois VI, xii..2.  omovdalovs 
VII. x. 3. IX. x. 3. omovdaias VII. 
xi. 5. omovdata VII. xiv. 4. X, vi. 
4. omovdaorepay X. vi. 7. omov- 
daidratov X. iv. 5. omovdaordrny 
VI. vii. 3. 

omovony X, iii. 12. omovdp X. vii. 3. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


oradlw Liv. 5, X, iv. 3. 

oraoid(e: IX. iv. 9. oracid¢ew IX. vi. 
4. oraaidCover IX, vi. 2. 

ordomos IV. iii, 34, 

ordow VIII. i. 4. 

orépye IX. vii. 4. orépyov X. ix. 8. 
orépyew IV. vi. 4,5. VIII. xiii. 6. 
éorepte VI. iv. 5. orépyovor VIIL. 
Bi Os. jail 2.0. EX vse. 
oréptwor VIII. iv. 3. orépyovras 
VIIL iv. 4. orépyovres VIII. xii. 6. 
IX. vii. 2. Xv ix, 14. @orepyor IX. 
i. 3. 

éorepnucva X. viii 8, 

orepioxerat VI. ii. 6. 

otépavos III, ix. 3. 

orepavovvra: I. viii. 9, 

orryuns X. iv. 4, 

oroxafovrat VIII. ix. 4. oroxaCduevor 
IV, viii. 3. Vii. 13. oroxdComevos 
IV. vi. 9, oroxaCéuevoy II. ix, 3. 
oroxdoerat IV, vi. 6, 

oroxaorinds VI. vii. 6. oroxactich II, 
Vi. 9, 13.. ix. 1. 

orparnyikh I. vid. orparnyincis I. i. 
2. otparnyig i. vii. 1. ortparny- 
whv I. i. 4, 

orparnyiuerepos I. vi. 16. 

otparnyov I, x. 13. IX. ii, 1. otparn- 
yoo IX, ii. 8. 

orpari@ra III. viii. 6, 9. oTpari@ras 
IIL, ix. 6. 

orparomédy I. x. 13. 

otparod VI, viii. 4, 

orpapels V. ix. 16. 

otpupvol VIII, v. 2. vi. 1. 

ovyyéverav X. ix. 14, 

ovyyevijs VIII. xi. 4. cvyyerh VIL. iii. 
1. ovyyevés III. xii. 7. VII. vi. 2. 
ovyyevets VIII, xii. 4. IX. ii, 7. 
ovyyevav VIII. xii. 7, cvyyevéor IX, 
ii. 9, suyyeveorrdry X. viii. 7. ovy. 
yeveordr@ X, viii. 13. : 

ovyyevixy VIII, xii, 2. cupyeriehy 
VIII. xii. 1. 

ovyyéverOaur V. ix. 14,16. avyyévorro 
V. vi. 1. 

ovyy! éun IIT. i, 7,15. VI. xi. 1. VIL 
ii, 4. vi. 2. ovyyvoduns IIL i. 1. 
ovyyvepiy VI. xi. 1. 

ovyyvepovinds IV, v. 4. ovyyvomort- 
nov VI. xi. 1, VII. vii. 6. ocuyyro- 
povika V, viii, 12. 

cuyyvouov VI, xi. 2. 

ovyypanudrov X, ix. 21, 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


ovyyuprvddouer IX. xii. 2. 

ovykomdas VIII. x. 5. 

ovyxpivey IX. ii. 9. 

ovykvuBevovar IX. xii. 2. 

ouvykurnyotor IX. xii. 2. 

ovyxaipey IX. x. 5. ovyxatpovor IX. 
iv. 9. ouvyxatpovra IX. iv. 1. 

ovykexupevws VII. i. 6. 

ouveCeuxta X. viii. 3. 
iv. 11. 

ovCeviis V. iii. 12. v. 8. 

ou(jv IV. vi. 1. vii. 1. VIII. iii. 5. v. 3. 
Wi 4S ES x87, V0. Xs. 8a DS 
1,2. ovG@j X. viii. 8. ocv€aor VIII. 
iii, 4. sv(@vres VIII. v. 1, 3. 

ovaAartas IV, i. 42. 

ovverAnupeva II. vi. 18. 

ovaAnBdnv V. i. 15. 

ovAdoyicduevos VIL. vi... cvAdAoyior€éov 
326. 

ovaAdoyiopes VI. iii. 3. VIL ii. 8. ova- 
Aoyioue VL. iii. 8. ix. 5. cvAAoyopol 
VI. xii. 10. 

ovddAvurew IX. xi. 4. 

ovpBalve: I. xii. 3. xiii. 13. II. viii. 7. 
Mek: iv. 2. IV.i. 21. v.8. V. 
iii. 13, 14. viii. 8. x. 2. VI. xiv. 1. 
VIL. ii. 9. iii, 10. xii. 1.- xiii, 1. xiv. 
7. VIII. xiii. 8. IX. i. 3 iv. 1. v. 2. 
vi. 4. vii. 3. viii. 9. xi.6. X. iii. 7. 
y. 4, 5,9. oupBalvor IX. i. 8. oup- 
Batvew I. iii, 3. vii. 6. x.4 xi. 4. 
Vib; wi 18. EX.-xi. 3. X. vii. 2. 
ovupBatvoyra I. x. 12. X.ix.16. ovp- 
Bawvévroy I. xi. 2. ovpBalvovor II. 
vii.15. VIL ii.12. v.3. xii. 3. xiv. 4. 
ovvéBy IIL. viii. 9. V. viii. 6. oupii 
Ill. viii. 14. V.x.5. ovpBalyn IV. 
1.25. ovuBéBnke V. viii. 1. VIL. xii. 
6. IX. vii. 3. cuuBeBnxds III. x. 5, 
7. V. viii. 1,3,4. ix.3,15,16. xi. 8. 
Vii 4. “Vil. i..10;. ix 1. -xi.'3: 
xii. 2. xiv.4,7. VIII. iii. 2, 6. iv. 5, 
6. viii. 2,7. X. viii. 8. ocupBeBnxdre 
I. vi. 2. ovuBatn V. xi. 8. 

oupBdarerau VII. xiv. 3. cupBddrdcoOan 
Exe i, 6-2 TV. iif. 19. X. ix. 14, 19. 
oupBddAerou IIT. i. 10. cupBadrro- 
pévou III, i..12. cupBddrdcv VIL. vi. 
7. gcupBarrAduevos LV. viii. 10. cup- 
BarAduevor VIII. xiv. 1. 

ovpBiov IX, xi. 1. 

ouuBwiv IV. v. 18. IX, iii. 4, 
Bwotéov VILL. xii. 8. ~ 

auuBaAnra V. v. 10. 


YOL. II. 


ouveCedx Oar X. 


oup~ 





Ixv 


oupuBoratwy IX. i. 9. 

oupBovrAovs III. iii. 10. 

oupmaxety IX. vi, 2. 

ouppaxtar VIII. iv. 4. 

ouupéever V.v.6,8. cuppevovar V. v. 6. 

oupmetaBdrAa I. x. 4. 

oupmerpla X. iii. 3. ovpperpias V. v. 14. 

oupmerpor LV. iii. 5. ovdpperpa IL. ii. 6. 
V. v. 14, 15. 

ovupretder IV. vy. 10. 

ovuptepatver@ar I. iii, 4. 
VII. ii 8. iii. 9. 

oupmepaopuatos I. viii. 1. VI. ii. 4. 

ouumaparauBdvover I, viii. 6. 

ouuntvovat IX. xii. 2. 

oupnimrew 1X.x.5. cuvérece VIL. vii. 6. 

oupmA€xovtes IV. i. 3. 

oupmdAoixat VIII. xii. 1. 

ovuraAous VIII. ix. 1. 

oupmopevovrat VIII. ix. 4. 

ouumpdtacey IX. v. 2, 3. 

oupgaves I. ix. 7. 

ouudéper ITI. ii, 12. VIL iii. 6. X. ix. 
15. oupupépev 1X. viii. 6. cupdépov 
Tent. 7 AV «v3.6: V.-vit Ss: Vix: 
dat ELE 1G. tH Ae PI Ks 45. Xo By 4s 
IX. vii. 4. cuupéporra IL. ii. 3. II. 
45. Vitis. VE de vile ie dee 
vi. 2,3. ocupdéportos II. iii. 7. V. i. 
13. VIII. iv. 4. ix. 4,5. oupépovrs 
IV. vi. 8. VIII. iv. 2. ix. 4. cup- 
pepdvrwy IX. vi. 1. 

oupdiArocopodva: IX. xii. 2. 

oungorrntrihy VILL. xii. 8. 

oupopats I, ix. 11. 

ouugvéorepoy IV. i. 37. | 

ouppova VIL. iii. 8. 

oupdovety IL, vii. 1. IIL. xii. 9. X. viii. 
12. 

cuvayarydyTt X. ix. 20. cuvyypéevwv X. 
ix. 23. 

cuvaywyat X. ix. 21. 

ouvdde I. vii. 1. X. ix. 20. cuveddytwy 
X. viii. 12. 


oupmepar bev 


cuvacbaveuevor 1X. ix. 9. ouvacbdve- 
oOa IX. ix. 10. 

ovvatriot III. v. 20. 

ovvaxorovboinuer I. x. 8. 

ouvadyev IX. x. 5. xi.2. cuvadyet IX, 


iv. 2. ouvadryovo. IX.iv.9. ouvadr- 
yoovra IX. iv. 1. ouvadyotvtas IX. 
xi. 4. cuvadryotvrwy IX. xi. 2. 

cuvaraAdypact I. i. 7. V.ii. 12. iv. 1, 
3. viii.10. X. viii. 1. ocuvadAayudtov 
V. ii, 13. 


Ixvi 


ouvar\aAdtas VIII. xiii, 8. ocuvadrAdtwor 
VIII. xiii. 5. ouvadddgtavras VIII. 
xiii. 6. 

ovvavadk@oat VITI. iii. 8. 

ovvanre: VIII. iii. 7. ouvdmrovor VIII. 
iv. 5. 

ovvapOuerras IT. iv. 3. 
I. vii. 8. 

ouvnptnuevat X. viii. 3. 

cuvavtavouern IX. xii. 3. 

ovvavée: X. v. 2. vii. 7. ouvattovor X, 
v.2. ouvattovra X. v. 2. 

ovvaxOer Oa IX. ix. 5. 

ovvdecuos VIII. xii. 7. , 

ovvdiayew VIII.v. 3. xiii. 3. TX. iv. 5. 
cuvd.dyovra IX. iv. 1. 

ovvdovAou VII. v. 3. 

ovvbuacer V. iii. 11. 
30. VIII. iv. 5. 

ovvdvacrinoyv VIII. xii. 7. 

otveyyus III. ii. 7. V.i. 7. VIII. xii. 4. 
xX, Ve 6. 

cuvedores I. iv. 3. ovvidoimey X. ix. 28. 
ouvmddévtes LV. vii. 1. 

ouveln X. ix. 7. 

ovveipovot VII. iii. 8. 

ovvemixoopev I. x. 12. 

ovverréuevos LV, vi. 8. 

ouvepyety III. viii. 11. ouvepyouvra IX. 
xI2G; : 

ouvepyds I, vii. 17. 
ouvepyous X. vii. 4. 

ouvepxouevw VIII, i. 2. 
IA 

obveois VI.x.1,3,4. xi. 8. odbverw I. 
xiii, 20. VI. xi. 2, 5. VIIL xii. 2. 
ovvégews X. ix. 20. 

ovveros I, xiii. 20. VI. xi. 2. ouverol 
VI. x.1,2. ouverobs VI.x.1. xi. 2. 

ouvexis V.iii.9,14. VIL. viii.1. ouvexe? 
IL. vi.5. cuvexeorépa IX. ix. 6. ouv- 
exéorata I, x. 10. ovvexeotdtn X. 
vii. 2. 

ouvéxet V. v. 6, 11, 13. VIIL. xii. 7. 
ouvexew VIII. i. 4. 

ouvexa@s VIIL. vi.4. IX. ix. 5. X. iv. 9. 
vi. 6. vii. 2. 

ovynyopjoat I. xii. 5. 

cuvideta IX. iv. 5. ocuvndecOa IX. x. 5. 

ouvndivew LY. vi. 6, 7,8. ocuvnddvovros 
IV. vi. 9. 

ouvnbeiqa VIII. vi. 3. ouvnOelas VIII. 
lige AV ENS llicoer Vas ako dk. ds 
ovynderay IX. v. 3. 

ovvjdes IV. vi. 5. VIL xiv. 5. VIII. 


ovvapOmounevnv 


cuvdudacerar IV. i. 


ouvepy& I. ix. 7. 


ovvedAGerv VIII. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


xii. 4. cuvhOwy IV. vi. 5. cuvijOn 
>. Gib et: ) 

ournuepevew VIIL. iii, 5. v. 2,3. vi. 1. 
xiii. 3. IX. ix. 8. x. 4. ouvnueped- 
ovres IX. xii. 2, ouvnmepedoovar IX. 
iv. 9. 

ovv@éAovor IX. v. 2. 

cbvOeots X. iv. 2. 

ovvberdy X, viii. 3. 
Viii. 3. 

ouvnkn V. vii. 4. ouvOqjnns VIII. xi. 
7. ocvvOhenv V.v. 11. vii. 5. 

ouméva VI. x. 3, 4. 

ouvixveroOa I. x. 5. ouvicvovpevoy I, 
Xi02: 

cuvicact X. ix. 20. 

ovvéorney VI. vii. 4. VII. xii. 2. 

ovvoda, cvyddous VILLI. ix. 5. 

ouvexelwra VIII. xii. 2. ocuv@remobat 
X. i. 1. v. 2. viii, 2. cuvprelovrat 
VIII. xii. 4. 

ovvoikovor VIII. xii. 7. 

cuvewpdxaot III, viii. 6. 

ovvopo VIII. x. 3. 

ovvovolas VIII. ix. 5. 

ouvretve. IV. vii. 7. ouvrelvoyra VI. 
xii, 9. 

ovyredeiv I. vi. 12. 

ouvredy V. iii. 11. 

ouvroumtepos X. vi. 1. 

otvtovos IV. iii. 34. 

ovvré0parrat II, iii. 8. 

obvtpogoy VIII. xii. 4. obvrpopo: VIII. 
xii. 6. 

cuvpdol x. i. 4. ouv@dds I. vii. 8. 

ouvevupos V. ii. 6. 

ovpuata X. v. 8. 

ovotevd ovat IX. xi. 4. 

ovornua. II. viii. 6. 

avorotxig I. vi. 7. 

overpari@rat VILL. ix. 5. ovorpariéras 
Vall. ix. t- 

opaipa IV. ii. 18. 

eopawpaoOa III. i. 17. 

opddrrcoOat VI. xiii. 1. 

opdrrav V. xi. 2. 

operépos X, ix. 14. 
18. 

opddpa III. i, 16. xi. 8. IV. 1.18. v. 
14. VII.i. 1,3. iv. 4. vii. 3. xiv. J. 
VIII. vic 2; IX. ‘viii: 9.-x:<Oegae 
v. 4. ‘ 

oodpat III. xii. 7. VII. xiv. 4,5, opo- 
5p@ VII. xiv. 6. 

cpodpérnra VII, vii. 8. 


ovv@erod X. vii. 8. 


ogperépous X, ix. 


INDEX VERBORUM. lxvii 


oodpas II. v. 2. 

oxeddv I, iv. 2. v. 4. viii. 4. IT. vii. 10. 
EVS iv. ds Vii: Woe Ve i 10; x42: Vi. 
xi 5. TX. iv. 8 X. v. 5. 

oxiua V. v.12. x. 7. VIII. x. 4. oxh- 
aot ITT, x. 3. 

éoxdda(oy VIII, ix. 5. ocxordQwuer X. 
vii. 6. 

oxoAalws IX. xi. 6. 

oxoAacTiKoy X, vii. 7. 

oXOAR X. vii. 6. 

od(e: II. ii, 6. VI.v.6. VII. viii. 4. 
WEEE xiv. (3.- TX. 1, X:ix,./ 29: 
oa (ev I. ii, 8. odCera II. ii. 7. 
VII. vii. 5. cwQotons IL. vi. 9. od- 
(owro IIL. i. 4. odCovcay VI. y. 5. 
ob CeO VIII. ii. 8. IX. iv. 3. vii. 2. 
od Coro VIIL. i. 1. 

Zwxpdrns III. viii. 6. IV. vii. 14. VI. 
aa 355° VEL ii, 1.-ii. 13. 

cape I, viii. 2.. xiii. 7. II. iv. 6. III. v. 
26.'es 1h. VIL i 2... VIL wi.7. xiv. 
6.5 WETL. xi. 6:- X. iti. 6. vill. 4, 9. 
oduatt I. vi. 12. IV. iii. 5. VI. xiii. 
1. VII. xiii. 2. cduaros I. xiii. 6, 7, 
10, 15. Ill. v.15. x. 2. cduacr I. 
xiii. 16. oduara III. viii. 8. IV. 
viii. 4. cwpudtoy III. iv. 4. X. vi. 3. 

owparikal III. x. 2, VII. xiii. 6. xiv. 1, 
3. cwpatihy VII. xiv. 4. ocwpari- 
nav I. xii. 6. IL. iii. 1. VII. iv. 2. 
xiv. 1, 2. Xvi. 8. cwparimas III. 
x. 3.. VIL iv. 3. vi. 5. vii. 2. viii. 4. 
ix. 6. xii. 7. X. vi 4. copuarind IV. 
re S. VIN. iv. 2... ix..7. X. ii.6. 
owpuarikois VII, ix. 5. owuartixais 
IX. viii. 4. 

owrnplas III. i. 16. viii. 9. IX. vii. 1. 
owtnpla I. vi. 1. Ill.i. 5,17. owrn- 
play III. vi. 11. V. ii. 6. 

owppovetv X. ii, 2. iii, 2. 

owopovixol VI. xiii. 1. 

owppdvws II. iv. 3. X. viii. 11. ix. 8. 

owppootvy II. ii. 7. vii. 8. III. x. 1, 3, 
we) VIL; v. 9.. vi. 6. vil. 1. ix. 5. 
cwppootivns II. ii. 7. vi. 20. III. x. 
1. xii. 10. ocwdpocdvry I. viii. 6, 8. 
VIL. iv. 6. owppootvny I. xiii. 20. 
VI. v. 5. VII. iv. 2. 

céppoy I, xiii. 20. II. iii, 1. iv. 4, 5. 
Vie 25 Pe ik. 5; 8. xi. 9. IV. i. 1. 
iii. 4. VII. ii. 6. vii. 2. viii. 4. ix. 6. 
xi. 4. xii. 7, X. ii, 1. vii. 4. oe&ppo- 
vos I, xiii. 17, III.-xii. 9. V. i. 14. 
VII. ii. 6, ix. 6. xii, 7. odqpova II. 


14. -4¥..1;'3;.4):5. TV. iv. 4 VIL-3: 
6. iv. 3,4. vi. 6. xii. 7. IX. viii. 5. 
cédppoves II. i. 4, 7. ii. 9. iv. 1, 4. 
Ill. x. 2, 3. X. viii. 7. cwppdvas 
Il. iv. 1. UL x. 4. odppom X. 
viii. 4, 


hs 


Tayaov T.i. 1. v. 4. vi. 3. vii. 1, 10. 
Sas 5. give 2545" VIE i, 1D: 
|B. SSh STAs Per Ate faz: Sew). Ch aes Tha Bae 
iii. 4,13. ta&yaGod I. vi. 11. III. iv. 
1. ré&yaba I. iii. 3. vie 9. TID ii 1, 
VII. ii. 9. VIII. ii. 8,4. iii. 1, 6. v. 
1. vii. 6. IX. iv. 1,3, 4. v. 3. viii, 2. 
beg tip Rear 

TaAnbes I. iii. 4. viii. 1. III. iv. 475: 
VI. ii. 8. VIL. xiv. 3. 

TuAAG IV. i, 12. iii, 18. VI. xiii. 1. 

tavavtia VII. ii. 9. 


tdget V. vii. 7. tdtiv Vi. 11. X. ix. 


Li. 
tamewot LV, iii, 29. ramewors IV. iii. 
26. 


tdrret III. xii. 9. rdrrev IX. i. 8. 
tdattwy X. ix, 12. térrover I. viii. 
17, raga ID. viii. 4. IX. i. 5, 9. 
tain IV. v. 3. rdtere VIII. xii. 1. 
TatTwot IX.i.9. rTaxOetra X. ix. 23. 
tetaynevn V. ii. 10. tetayuéa V. 
xi. 2. VI. xii. 7.. réraxOat X. ix. 8. 

tavTd VI. vii. 4. viii, 1. x.2. xi. 2. xiii, 
Ve VRS 2 suis 4. VEE xi: 32 
IX. ii. 7. XK. iv. 8. v. 6,.7. rabrob 
VIII. vi. 7. vraira IV. ii. 10, 16. 
V. ii. 9. vii. 5. VIL iv.4. VIII. vi. 4. 
ix. 1,2. IX. ii. 6. iv. 1. radrdy III. 
ii, 2,11, 15. V. ii. 9,11. vi. 8 ix. 
3,16. x.1,2. VI. i.6. ravry VI. 
Wie S:- VINES iis 7." EX. ive 6, 76 
ix.. 10. 

tavtérns VIII. xii. 3. 

tape LY. ii. 16. 

tTabpov III. viii. 5. 

taxa I. v. 6. vi. 14. vii. 10. x. 6. xi. 2. 
xt 2, VUE, VEX vis 1. vitro: 
X. ix. 17, 21, 23. 

taxéws IV. i. 30. v. 8. VIII. iii. 5, 9. 
Vi. Ge; be Tt, 4 

tdxos X. iii. 4. 

raxd I. vit: 1. IV.i..84, VIL ix. 2, 6. 
VII. viii. 2. VIIL. vi. 1. taxeta VIII. 
iii. 5,9. Taxes VII. vi. 1. 





t2 


Ixvill 

taxuris IV. iii. 834. taxtrnta VIL. vi. 
1. vii. 8. 

retvovoa VI. xi. 2. 

tréxvov V. vi. 8. tTéxva V. vi. 9. VIL. iv. 
5. VIII. vii. 1, 2. ix. 2. xii. 2, 3, 
réxvwv I. x. 3. Lll.v. 5. VIII. x. 4. 
réxvots I. vii. 6. WILL. vii. 2. xii. 5. 
Xe1x... 14, 

rexvorrotew VIII, xii. 7. 

rexvorrottas VIII. xii. 7. 

Textav I. vi. 16. vii, 19. 
vii. 11. 

réAcios VII. xiii. 2. vTeAela IIL. v. 17. 
XoeiVen Lou. Oh Ores Vile iy es NG Tee 
rédctov I. viii. 83, 4,6, 8 x. 15. X. 
iii, 4. iv. 4. vil. 7. veAetou I. ix. 10. 


td 
rTéxtovos I, 


Xe vol. = reAclas Fx 10.- Vile bos 
xi. 7. reAelm I. vii. 16. x. 14. III. 


y.19. vreAcloy I, x. 15. xiii. 1. VII. 
vi. 1. X.iv. 2. tréjgua I. viii 3./ V. 
i.15. VIII. iii. 6,9. reAclor I. xii. 
7. VIII xiii, 2. X.iv. 4. reAetos 
I. xiii. 1, TeAesdrepov I. ii. 8. vii. 4. 
Teredtatov I. vii. 3. TeAeoTtarny I. 
vii. 15. TeAeoTdrn X. iv. 5. 
Terciovga X. v. 2,11. Teremoe X. iv. 
l. TeAcw6hoera: X. iv. 1. Tere? 
X. iv. 6, 8, 10, 11. v. 2. reAeotcba 


X. v. 1. reAewoupévwy VII. xiv. 4. 
TeAcounevors II. i, 3. TercwwO7 X. 
ix. 22. 


TeAciwow VIII. xii. 3. 

Tédos Lii. 1. iii. 6. v. 4,6. vii. 1, 8. 
viii. 3. ix. 3,8 x.1, 7,15. Li 6. 
ii. 9. iii 11,16. v.1,17,18, 19, 20. 
vii. 2, 6. ix. 8: VI. ii.5. .v..2,4. ‘vil. 
Guxy (see Os Xi, 6... Ku LO, xii) 7s 
We x1,0 52 2x09. Ray lVe, Os Vi bs Oe 
ix, lc. (‘weAous II1.:ii,-9.: ii. LR iv. 1. 
v.1,17,22 VIL xi. 1. X. iv. 2 
vii. 7, TéAe III. vii. 6. TéAn I. i. 2, 
3, 4,5. v. 8. vii 3. III. iii, 11, 16, 
2026 VILE is 2) reA@r-l. i, :25- 0, 
iii, 11. 7éAeor VII. xi. 4, 

Terevtala VII. iii. 13. 

Tedkevt@oav VII. x. 4. rTeAeuThoovTa 
Ix. 15. TeAevriocayTt I. x. 4. Te- 
Aevtjcavta I, x. 11, TeAevtnodvras 
I. xi. 4. 

Teuvew V. ix. 16. Teuvduevos X, iii. 6. 
TetTunuerns V, iv. 8 

Tepme X.iv.9. v.9. Tépwew IV. viii. 
7. vépmovte VILL, xiii. 3, 

Tépyw IX.i, 4. 

teraptou VI. xii. 6. 








INDEX VERBORUM. 


tetpaywvos I. x. 11. 

TétTapa. V. iii. 9. TéTTapow Y. iii. 5, 8,9. 

Texvacew VIL. iv. 4, 

rvéxvn Ii. 1. IL. i. 6. iii, 10. VIL iii. 1. 
iv. 3,4, 5.6. v.2,3,7. vil. VIL 
xi. 4. xii. 6. réxvns IL vi. 9. VI.v. 
7. vii. 1. VII. xi..4, 2386) Bees 
téxvy I. vii. 1. V. xi. 8. VIL. 7. 
vTéxvnv I. vi. 16. ix. 6. ID. ii. 4. VI. 
iv. 5. texvav I. i. 3. vii. 17. IL i. 
4. iv. 2,3. V.iv. 12. v.9 Téxvals 
VL. vii. 1. réxvas II. iy. 8.. IL, iii, 
9. Vievitil. 

Texvicp X. ix. 16. 

rexviry I. vii. 10, VIII. xi. 6. Texvirac 
II. vi.9. rexviras I. vi. 15, x. 13. 
Texvitav IX, vii. 3. 

rTndixodra: VIII. iii, 4. THAtcovror I, 
vi. 15. THAumadra I. xi, 6. THAcKov- 
tous IV, ix. 3. 

Th pev, TH Se VI, xiii. 3. 

anvixadta I. x. 3. 

rnpotvtwy IX. vi. 4. typnGeln VILL. i. 1. 

Tnra@pevor I, viii. 16. 

TiOeuev I. vii. 7, 14. viii. 2. x. 15. xii. 


8 VIlLiv.4. Xvil. Oéc@at V. 
x. 6. Tip V. iii, 9. riOevres I. vi 
7, VIIL xii. 7. X. iii, 4, Oct I. vi. 


10. vii. 11. xiii, 11. érfOeuer I. ix. 8 
érl@ecay X. ix. 20. riOévar III. i. 27. 
O€uevor IIL, iii. 11. Ti0émeda III. v. 
20. Gelnuev IV. iii. 10. Oécay VI. 
vii. 2. riOéacr VIII. i. 6. iii. 4, IX. 
iv. 1. @euev VII. iy. 2. xi. 2. Oeréov 
VIL. iii. 1. . riOévras VIL i. 5, 

thaces VII. v. 3. 

tiwav IV. iii, 28. IX.i.9. tys@or Iv. 
4. Ill. v. 7. IX.i. 9. reyenOnodpevar 
IV. iii. 36. rimwpévw I. v. 4. Te 
pGoOu Iv. 5. IV. iii. 18. iv.3. VILL 
viii. 1,2. xiv. 8. Tiywa@vros IV. i. 15. 
tyaovTa IV.i. 20. timav IV. i. 26. 


tyovras X. viii. 18. reTiyqoOat V. 
v. 14. Timmpevor VIII. viii. 2. Tt 
pavra VIII. xi. 3. tyuarar VIII. 


xiv. 3. Timdpeva X. vi. 4. Tiyunréos 
IV. iii. 20. Tyo IX.i. 5. eriwa 
IX. i. 9. , 

vmh IV. ii. 18.. iii, 27. VIIL viii. 2. 
tidy I. iv. 8. v. 4, 5.. vii. 5. IL. vii. 
7, 8 IV. iii, 11, 18,37. iv. 5. V. 
ii. 6. VII. iv. 2,5. . VIIL viii. 2. 
xiv. 3. IX. ii. 9. read I. vi, 10, x. 
8. TIL. vi. 9 ix. 3. riyfs I. vi. 11. 
Ii, vii. 8. III. viii. 3. IV. iii. 11, 15. 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


19. iv. 2, 3, 5 vii, 11. V. ii. 12. 
VIL. i. 7. iv. 2,6. VIIL viii. 2. xiv. 
2. rimas IIT. i, 2. viii. 1. IV. iii. 10, 
17,18. VIII. ix. 5. IX. ii. 8. viii. 9, 
10. X. vii. 6. riph IV. iii. 10, 17, 
18. V. vi. 7. VII. iv. 5. VIII. xiii. 
2,3. IX. i, 7. Tipats VIL. xiv. 4. 
IX, viii. 4. 

Tihpatt VIII. x. 3. 
. on 

tiwoy I, xii. 8. 


tyunpdtev VIII. 


tystwy I. xii, 1, 7. 
Tima TV.ii 11. X. vi. 4, 5. viii. 8 
Tyuwrépa I, xiii. 7. Tiyumrepov VIL. 
1.2. IX. iii. 2. ripeérara: I. x. 10. 


Tyuaratoy IV. ii. 10. Tipswtatwr 
VL. vii. 3, 5. 

Tyudtytt X. vii. 8. 

tiyokpatia VIII. x. 2, 3. timoxpatias 


VII. x. 3. 

tywoKparichy VIII. x. 1. xi. 5. 
xpatixp VIII. x. 6. 

Tiwwpooyvra IIL. vy. 7. Tywpoduevo: III. 
viii. 12. tipwpeiobat IV. v. 12. 

Tiwontikds IV. v. 4. 

tyepia IV. v.10. timwpias IV. v. 11. 
V. ix. 12. X. ix. 4,10. tipwplav 
VII. vi. 1. 

twes VIl.x.2. tivay V. iii. 4. Twas 
VL. vii. 3. vuoi VIIL vi. 4. X. v. 7. 
mm V.y.11. IXi.8. tioly V. iii. 
45 iv. 5siv.-1. 

Tipe, Tuhwart V. iv. 8. 

tolvuv Y. iii. 4. v. 10, 17. VIL. vi. 5. 
IX. ii..5. 

towode IV. vii. 12. oidde V. i. 20. ii. 
13. IX ii. 1. rodvde IIL v. 20. VI. 
xii. 10. VIL iii. 6. romode IIL. xi. 
1. VIL. xiv. 7. Towiode X. ix. 15. 

* rotxov V. xi. 6. 

Torxwpuxet V. xi. 6. 

Toxoras IV. i. 40. 

ToApnpe IIL. viii. 11. 

trophy VY. ix. 5. 

tééorax I, ii, 2. 

toro, téxos VIII. v. 1. 
X. iv. 3. 

tocadl Y. vy. 10. 

tocovroy I. iii. 4. vi. 16. vii. 18. x. 166 

Paki we 15,: ix. 9. IIL ix. * 
IV. v.3. V.iv. 12. v. 9,15. ix. 15. VI. 
xiii. 1, VIIL iii. 4, ix. 1. xii. 7. xiv. 
4. IX i.5,8,9. xii.4. Tocovrous 
IX. x. 5, tocotrov IX. i. 9. tocatrn 
VIIL. xiii. 11. tocatrny I. iii. 2. toc- 
avra IV. i. 45. VIL. iii, 14. VIII. 


Tio- 


tong I. vi. 3. 





lxix 


xiii. 4. X. viii. 10. tocotrer IV, 
iii.7. VIIL xiii. 4. tovotr VIII. i. 
2. IX 4 viii. X. vii. 8. 

aére i. x.2,7. ILivi2. TLL. vy. 
14. V.iv.8. VIII. vii. 2. 

tovvaytiov V. v.18. VL. iv. 6. X.i.2. 
v. 5. 

tobvoua IV. ii. 1. v.9. V.v.11. VL 
x. 4, 

Touréott V. iii. 12. 

TpaynuariCovres X. y. 4. 

Tpory@diats I. xi. 4. 

tpavpara III. ix. 4. 

tpes I. vy. 2. Il. vii. 11. IV. viii. 12. 
tpwov II. iii. 7. viii. 1. V.viii.6. VI 
vi. 2. VIIL ii. 3. rpia ILv.1. VI 
ve SS VE VE 4k. 1: 
x. 1. 

Tpépeo@cu I. xiii. 11. VIII. viii. 3. pe- 
gopevas I. xiii, 11. tpadjva: VIII. 
xii. 5. Kix. 11. tpapévra X. ix. 8. 

Tpéxew V.ix. 16. dpayety II. vi. 2. 

TpryAvou X. iv. 2. 

tplywvov VI. iii. 9. v. 6. 

Tpinpapxeiy IV. ii. 11. 

tpinpapxy IV. ii. 2. 

tpiros I. vy. 2, 7. 
tpirov V. iii. 9. 
VIL. xi. 3. 

tpitra@y VIIL. xiii. 1. 

tptxn L. viii. 2. 

tphpews III. x. 11. 

tpémos VIL. ii. 2 IX. viii. 10. tpdrov 
Li. 4. iii 4. vi. 8 vii. 19. viii. 10. 
x33. Ti. vins'9. ix 45. Tae 
IV. i. 32. V. i. 8, 4,13. v.17, 19. 
x. 2. .xi. 10. VI: 5. iii. 4, 5. xiii. 
I. VEU ai. 7... v. 5, S.ixs25R Shiv, 
6,8. pdx IV. i. 38. VIL. iii. 6. 
tpémovus III. viii, 1. VIL iii. 6. 

tpor@y III. iii. 4. 

tpoph) V. v.12. X.v.8. pois III. 
xiv.l. WHI xi. 2.: 1X2 ii.’8.- Xsix. 
9,13. tpopf I.vi.4. V. v.10. IX. 
x. 2. tpopny IL. ii. 8. V. v. 10, 
VIL. iv. 2. X, ii. 1. iii, 6. viii. 9. 
ix. 8. 

Tpoxi(Suevov VII. xiii. 3. 

tpupy VIL. vii. 5. tpuis VIL. i. 4. 

tpugay VIL. vii. 5. 

Tpéecot III. viii. 3. 

tpwtes VII. v. 3. tpéon V. viii. 6. 
tpécavras III. viii. 10. 

tuyxdvower Lii. 2, tvyxdvover I. v. 
BNE Wn VE vie 1... VELL xin. 4 


tpitn VIIL x. 1. 
tplrov II. iy. 3. 


lxx 


wuxew L vine 14. x. As. Ti. cix:. 4, 
VI. ix. 5,6. X.ix.8,9.. reruxjKact 
If. vii. 8. ruyxdvew II. viii. 7. VI. 
xii. 9. Tev€dueOa IL. viii. 9. ervxe 
III. iv. 2,3. v.14. V.v.18. ix.9. VII. 
xiii 2. IX.i.2. tuyxave ILI. xi. 5. V. 
ii. 5. vii. 7. VI.ix.5. xi.7. VIII, viii. 
6. 1X.i.4. Xvix.15. vérevxe IIL. xi. 
7. tuyxdvev LV. iii, 17. VIIL xiii. 


Qe <rbywor IV. tile la Va Avs ve 
tuyxdvn IX. i. 4, redgera VIL ix. 4. 
teviduevor V. iv. 7. Tvyxdvomev 


Visa ds sixy- VIL. iii 10), 1x,'2, 
revéeoOou VIII. viii. 2. revxdvrwyr I. 
Seda xi lS. UNE xi: Bex. 2. IV; 
Wi.17. [X.ix.8. cruxdvra I. x. 15. 
III. xi. 38. ruxdv II. iv. 4. VI. xii. 
10. X. iii. 5. ruxovor IV. i. 17. vi. 
8. VII. xiv. 6. ruxav 1V.i.36. X. 
vi, 8. ruxdvros X. iii, 5. ix. 17. 
TevkTiky VIL. ix. 4. 

TudelSns III. viii. 2. 

TUN@ Loin Sy ila. KiniBe Als ik Oo Vile 
Doli. 205, Ver 2 elke vs. Wolke Ss 
EXGVicolste  TUROLS ONG 1K. wll s 

qainmtet V. viii, 3. romrev V. i. 14. 
timrot V. viii. 8. VII. vi. 2. vii. 3. 
tomtovtes IIL. viii. 5. TUrec Oar LIL. 
ix. 3. tumréuevor V, viii. 3. Turrd- 
pevot III, viii. 11. 

tupavvikh) VIII. x. 4. 

tupayvis VIII. x. 2,3.  rupavvid: VIII. 
xi. 6. tupavvida VIII. x. 3. Tupay- 
vio VIII. xi. 8, 

tvpavvos III.i.4. V.vi. 5. VIIL x. 2, 
3. Tvpavvot V. vi. 7. Tupdvvous IV, 
i. 23,42. rupdvvos X. vi. 3. 

tupaA®@ III. v. 15. 

TUX. iis 7. VIsIv, Os 
Die Live. (TE ii 5: Vile xin. 
24. Ty 1, 1x. 6... IV. 1. 21. 
vixny I, ix. 1,5. x12. VI. iv. 5. 
moxal I, ix. NT. -tbyais <1: ixs Al. 
x. 8,9,14. sbyas-L'x.7, 21,18. 
eels 

tuxdvTws LV. iii. 22, IX. viii, 9. 


toxns I. vi. 


se 


bBpiCer VII. vi. 4. 
bBpiCov VII. vi. 4. 

bBpis VII. vi. 1. bBper VII. vii. 6. 
vBpw II. vi. 5. TV. iii. 32. 

bBpioral IV. iii. 21. 

byidcew V. ix. 16. 


bBpifew V. i. 14. 


byidoes IIT. iii, 11. 


« xowl.x.7. IX. ix..9. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


byalvew I, viii. 14. IIT. ii. 9. VI. xii. 
2. Xi. 9. iv. 6. viii 9. dyatvomerv 
IIL. ii. 9. Syratvwy Vii. 4. syral- 
vovtt X. v. 9. 

bylee I. i. 8. vii. 1. VL aii: 5. Ki iv. 
6. tyelas IL ii. 6. IIL i, 24. Vii. 
4. VI. xiii. 8. dylewy I. iv. 3. vi. 
16. IL ii. 6. IIL. xi. 8 Wiis 
VL v. 1. vil. 7. xii. 2,5. Vila 
X. iii. 3. 


byewdy V, xi. 7. VI. vii. 4. dyrewa 


IL. ii. 3. IIL. iv.4. V.i.4. VI. vii. 
7% xii, 1. ‘VIL: xiii 4.7 Raines: 


byevev VI. x. 1. 
bytewas V. i. 4. 
byihs III. v. 14. Syovds VII. xiv. 7. 
bypas IIL. xi. 1. Syp@ VIII. viii. 7. 
b5€pw VII. viii. 1. 


Bdwp VIL. ii. 10. 85a7a VI. viii. 7. 


vidy III. i. 17. VIII. vii. 1. xiv. 4, 
vig VIII. vii. 1.. xiv. 4. — viets VIII. 


x.4, X.ix.18. viéot VIII. vii. 2. 
x.4, vidv VIII. xi. 2. 
tAaxtovow VII, vi. 1. 
BAn III. viii. 11. V. x. 4, 
1. vii. 18. . TI. ii:'3, 
buvovpevar IX. x. 6. 
tmddAayua V. v.11, 
bravacrdoe IX. ii. 9. 
imdpxet I. iv. 7. viii. 14. x. 10,16. III. 
v. 19. vi. 12. ix. 5.. x10) “aves 
20, v.7. vii, 2... V. vi 9. ix. AOaev 
i.5. VIL ii. 7. VILL. iii. 7. wi Sew. 
IX. iv. 5, 7. viii.2. ix.3,4,5. X.iii, 4, 
vii. 8. viii. 8,13. ix.6. imdpxovcr VI. 
xiii, 1. VIII. xii. 6. dadpyew I. viii. 
5. ix. 7. V. iii. 7. ix. 7. Vilas 
VILL iii. 7, 9. xii. 7. EX. ive 6a 
1, 10. x. 4. X. iii, 2. viii, 9, 10. 
brdpxot X. vi. 2. ix.21. dmdpxn IX, 
i.3. bmrdptovor VI. xiii.6. strdptecev 
IX. viil. dwdptoe Tix. 4. X.ix. 19. 
brdpge I. x. 11,16. VII. vi.4. IX, 
iii. 4.  drdptas IV. iii, 24.  drap- 
xovon VI. xiii, 6. drdpxovra I. viii. 
1 IV.i. 34, vi. 4. IX Signs 
ix. 8. dmdpxovoay I. viii. 9. tarap- 
brapxévrev 
e yx. 18. IVs ii, 12; vio, IO Ya 
viii. 3. X. ix. 5. danpypevor VIL. 
xiv. 4. dmrdpxovros X. iv, 7. 
brelxew X. ix. 7. 
brevaytiov V. x. 2. 
inép V.v. 4. 
brepayandor IX, vii. 2. 


tAnv I, iii. 


INDEX VERBORUM 


ireparobvijcney IX, viii. 9. 

bmepBdAde II. vii. 4. IV. i. 29. ii. 20. 
iii. 13. dmwepBdddAovor II. vii. 4. viii. 
5. Ti. vii. 19... xi.4. IV; i%..38;40. 


iii. 8. dwepBaddew II. vi. 16. IV. i. 
18, 23, 31. ii. 6. VIL. iv. 5. dwep- 
Bdddovra IL. ii. 6. SrepBadrdrAdvrev 


SL ik Si EE va %.. VIL vii. 7. 
brepBadAwy II. vii. 2, 8, 10, 13, 14, 
15 WWE vii 7,10. IV. i. 23. ii. 20. 
iii. 35. VIII. xiii. 2. dwepBddAdAoucay 
VII. xiv. 4. dwepBddAdouvoa VII. vi. 
5. xiii, 4. dwépBaddAov VII. x. 


4. tmepBdddovoa IY. ii. 4. dzep- 
Bdddovres IV. viii. 3. dmepBdr- 


Aovras VII. i. 3. iv. 2. dwepBadrAov 
vos VIII. xiv. 4. drepBaddoucar VII. 
vii. 6. 

brepBeBAnucrws III. x. 4, 

bmepBody II. vi. 10, 12, 14, 19, 20. vi. 


3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 13.. viii, 6, 8. . IIL. xi. 
b- IV. 38. i. 4. viv. 2,4, y. 2. 
SIG, wii. 2... V.° v.18. ix, 17. 


VIE; iv: 5.) xiv. 2. IX. iv. 6. =x 5. 
imepBorjis IL. ii. 6, 7. vi. 4, 9, 19, 20. 
IV.i.388 VILi.1. VIL. vi. 1. dmep- 
Boag IV. v. 9. VII. xiv. 2. VIII. 
vi.2. X. viii. 9. dwepBorry II vi. 


8, 15,19. viii. 1. ix. 1, 9. IIL x. 
3. IV.v.12. V.ix.17. VI. i 1. 
VIL. i. 2. iv, 2, viii. 3. xiv. 2, 7, 


IX. iii. 5. x. 1. dwepBodal IL. vi. 18. 
V3. %..3, 29. v.14. ViL iv, 5.° vii. 
2. swepBodas II. viii. 2. IV. vii. 9. 
Vevel2. VIL. iv..3,4,- vii. 2. xii. 
7. xiv.4. IX. i. 6. 

trepéxer II. vi. 6. IV.ii.1. Vz. iv. 8, 
10,11,12. XX. vii 8. dwepéxor IV. 
iii. 9. VIIL. xii. 5. swepéxerar II. 
vi 6. V.iv. ll. dwepéxew IV. iii. 
21, 25,26. smwepéxovros IV. iii. 24. 
bwepexopévov ibid. dmepetxe V. iv. 
10. Smrepéxovt: VIII. vi. 6. xiv. 2. 
_ brepéxnrat VIII. vi. 6. drepexduevos 
VIII. vi. 6. viii. 1. dwepéxoucr VIII. 
vii. 4. IX. vii. 6. dmwepéxwy VIII. 
x. 2. 

brepémrat IV. iii. 18, 21. 

bxepoxy I. vii. 18. dmepoxijs I. vii. 14. 
trepoxy IV. ii. 19. VIII. xi. 1, 3. 
brepoxnv VY. v. 10. VIII. vii. 1, 2. 

sili, 1. xiv. 1. dwepoxais VIII. 
xiii. 1. 

bwepreiver IIL. i. 7. dwepreivy LL. viii. 

9 IX 5 xi 4 





breppiday IX. i. 2. 

iwnkédous I. xiii. 2. 

brnpectat VIII. vi. 3. 

oanpereiv IV. iii. 26. sanperotn III, 
viii. 5. danpernréov IX. ii. 1. 

brvos I, xiii, 13. savov I. xiii. 12. 
tavas ibid. 

brd Li. 4, 

imoyuia IIT. vi. 10. 

inddnua l.x.13. V.v.8. dSrodtuara 
V. v.10. dwodnudrwv IX. i. 1, 

brodoxas IV, ii. 15. 

bro(iryiov X..ix. 10. 

brodécews IV. ix. 7. 
oes VII, viii. 4. 

brdnertar II. iii, 6, ‘broxeicOw II. ii. 2. 
V.i. 3. VILi. 5. Swoxemévny I. iii. 
l. vii. 18. droxemévwv Vii. 5. 

broxpwopévous VII. iii. 8. 

broxpice: III. x. 4, 

broxpirhy III. ii. 8. VII. iv. 6. 

brodauBaver VII. ii. 9. bro OvTa 
VIL. ii 1. troAauBdvey VII. ii. 1. 
brodapBavover I. iv. 2. VIII. ii. 4. 


V.v. 15. dtrode- 


IX. iv. 2, 7. trodapBavew I. v. 1. 
viii. 9. dmoAdBo I. v. 6, 8. trodap- 


Bavovres I, vii. 5. twéAaBe V. viii. 
6. dwordBp IX. iii, 2. swodaBew 
X. viii. 11. sreanpévan I. x. 7. trei- 
Afgauer X, viii. 7. sweiAfoacw ibid. 
trodnnréovy VII. i. 4. iii, 8. iv. 6. 
X. viii. 12. 

bréAntis VI. vi. 1. ix. 7. VII. ii. 4. 
broahye: VI. iii. 1. trdAnyw VI. v. 
6. VIL. iii, 4, 11. 

brodolmou VII. xii. 2. ~ 

bropevetinérepos III, vi. 6. 

brouéve: III. vii. 6, 13. IV. viii. 8. 
VII. xiv. 3. IX. xi. 4. sroperwv 


Il. ii. 7. iii, 1. III vii. 5, dwopé- 
vew II, ii. 8,9. III. viii..1, 14. ix. 
2. xi.5. trouévwor III. i. 7. swo- 


petvat ibid. dwoueve? III. vii. 2. bxo- 
pévover III. vii. 9. IV. i, 41, 43. 
broueiva: IIT. i. 7. VIL. vi. 4. t2o- 
Hévovtos VII. xiv. 7. sSxouévy VIII. 
xiii. 9. drouévovtas X. viii. 7. bro- 
meveréor III. i. 9. 

irdévowa LY. viii. 6. 

bromrevover III. viii. 16. 

broonuatve: IV. ii. 1. sroonualvey III. 
ii. 17. 

brocxéoets IX. i. 4, 

bwobeuevov II, iv. 2. 
xii. 9, 


broteOevta VI. 


lxxil 


trotum@ca I. vii, 17, 

broupyias IX, i, 7. 

bropalverat I. vi. 8 

votepov I. vi. 2. vii 17. IL.i. 4. vii. 
SiGe. Dixie O.. oD Veli 4s oi-8, 
We liopllen ive Naor vileds, Vale L, 4. 
EXE CULI De mcac ae 2 Os 

bpavrns I. vi. 16. dpdvTyn IX. i, 1. 

bonynucvov II, vii. 9. 


®, 


gayety II. vi. 7, VIL v. 7. poryov VIL. 
v.3. gaydvTt X, iii, 9. 

gaiverat I. i, 2. ii, 5,8 iii. 4. v. 4, 6, 
8. vi. 16. vii. 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12. 
Wille/.2) Os, IXeiGen XLPky cee ih ep As 
17, US. xil,.12, 16. Dh. citi. 7. - viii. 
2, 5,8 Il. i.8 i 2,16. iii. 12. 
iv. 3, 4,5. v. 6, 17, 18, 19. ix. 3. 
lve LV. 41. five Be v9. vik 
9,10; 15,17. ix. 2.x. 1. VIL. vil. 4. 
xii. 10. VII. xiv. 3. VIIL. v. 3. vii. 
Se: Xe 1 4:5; 6. -xi,4.. xi. 8. xiv. 3. 
XS, 2852 Os Vi 2 LOS Pedy Wi ee 
Vils lao Vallee le XtoMe lta hens a Ve 
11. v.1, 7, 10. vi. 4, 6. vii. 8. viii. 
3. ix, 18. gavetra VI. v. 6. pavely 
X. v. 2, 3, 8 viii. 7, 11. avodyrat 
X. viii. 7. gpalvoiro I. iv. 7. IV. iii. 
15. VIII. xii. 3. X. viii. 7. palvov- 
tatI,v. 3. xi. 6. xii. 3. III. viii. 6, 
16. x. 8,9. IV. iv. 6. vii. 14, 16. 
VI. xiii. 1. VIL. ix. 5. xii. 1. ‘xiv: 3. 
VIII. ii. 4. iv. 2. vi. 5,7." viii 6. 
ip aera ster <0 oa Cia ©. Ci | ay Poem Ohgy | Sa 3 
ix. 3, 18, 20,21. arf VII. xiv. 3. 
VII. iii, 8. aivnra III. iii, 13, 
gpalveoOu III. vii. 8. VIL xiv. 4. 
gpawonen V. viii, 10. awduevorv 
WL sate-7.. ‘iv. 8,:4.. -VIEISi, “2: 311. 
v.10. awouévou IIL. iii, 11. iv. 1. 
v.17. avdmeva III. viii, 14. VII. 
i5. IX iv. 1,2. X iii. 8. aswd- 
mevae X. vy. 10. pawouévos VII. 
ii. 2: 

bdAapis 
v. 2. 

pavepdurcov IV. iii, 28, 

gavepoy II. iii, 7, V. ii. 6,10. ix. 10. 
x. 8. xi. 1,7. VI. iii, 2. vii. 4. viii, 
8. xii, 10. VII. ii. 2. iv. 1. vi. 3. viii. 
A Seo Kills Vo VELL. 35-2. he DB 
pavepay I. iv. 3. gpavepois II. ii. 6. 
pavepa IV, iii, 36. vii, 15,16. Vii. 


VIL v. 7. &dAapw VII. 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


5. avepmrepoy IV, i, 28, VIII. x. 
2. IX. ix. 8. avepwrépwr II, ii, 8. 
paveporara VI. vii. 4. avepod IV. 
v. 8. gavepay VIL. ix. 5. 

gpavepdpiror IV. iii. 28. 

pavepas IV. iii, 28, 

goavtacla VII. vi. 1. avractas III. v. 
17. davractay VIL. iii, 11. ar 
taolg VIL. vii. 8. 

pavrdopara I. xiii. 13, 

papuakela V. ii. 13, 

papuanevew V. ix. 16, 

gdpuyya IIT. x. 10, 

gdots VI. ix. 3, pdoeor VI. xi. 6. 

pdoxov VILL, i. 6. pdoxovres VIL. xiii. 
8. xiv. 5. 

gpatros IV.i. 81. iii. 15. V. iv. 3. VIL 
ix. 4, xii. 9, VII. viii. 5. ix. 4. xiv. 
2. IX. iv. 10. viii. 1. pavan I. xiii. 
13, VIL ii. 6,7. viii. 5. pavadov IV. 
ix. 7. V.iv. 3. xi. 8. VIL. xiv..5. X. 
i. 2. ix. 10. qgadvaAov III. i. 7. IV. 
ix. 6. IX. viii, 4. gadans IL. i. 5. 
VII. xiv. 4. gata IL. iv. 4. IV. 

vii, 10, IX, iii, 3. adap X, v. 6. 
gadao Il. vy. 3. VII. xiv. 6. VIII. 
iv. 6. IX. iv. 10. X.v. 4. gavAc 
II. iii. 5. VII. i. 6. ii. 6. iv. 5. xi, 3. 
xii. 1. xiii, 2. gadaa Ix. 13. IL 
iil, 1. vi. 18. TV. ix. 6.’ V. ay Ter Woe 
viii. 7, VII. i. 6, xii, 4. X. ix. 11. 
gatawy VII, i. 6. xiii, 2. xiv. 4, 
VIII. viii. 5. IX. iv. 7. xii. 3. X. i 
2. ix. 4. adaAos III. v. 3, IV. ix. 4 
VIII. iv. 2, IX. iv. 7, 8. viii. 7. ix. 
6. X. ii. 4, vi. 4. adadous VIII. iv. 
2, IX. vi. 4. gadtaas VIL. ii. 6. ix. 
5, 6 xii, 4. X. viii. 7. avadraror 
IV. i. 4. avadrara VIL. ii. 5. 

gavadrns VII. vi. 7. VIII. x. 3, pavdd- 
Tytt X. v. 6. 

Pediay VI. vii. 1. 

gpetdwdot LY, i, 39. 

pépew I, x. 13. IV. iii, 21. 
12, IV. vi. 7. ofoe I. x. 11. éevey- 
nev II. vi. 2. épovot VIII. vi. 4. 
Epepov X. ix. 3. pépomuer III. xii. 5. 
IV. iv. 4. v. 1. épovre V. v, 14, 
pépovras X, viii. 12. péper@ar II. i, 
2. X. ii. 1. epduevos Il. i. 2. epd- 
peva III, viii. 10. ; 

gpevye: Il, vi. 8. VIL iv. 4. xi. 4. xii 7 
xiv. 2, IX. xi, 4. gedyo: VII. xiii. 
7. p.tbyov Il. ii, 7. ILL vii. 13. 
VII. iv. 3. pedyesw II, iii, 5. TIL. vii. 


eon I, x. 


INDEX VERBORUM. IxxHl 


13, vii, 9. IV. iii, 15. Vii. 15. VIL 
ii, 102. vii. 35. 7, VIO. v.. 2. 
gevyouvo: III. iv. 6. viii. 9, 14, 16. 
VUl. xiv. 4. LX. iv. 8,9. X.i. 1. ix. 
4. gedtyovra III. vii. 13. etyortes 
IM, viii. 4. IV. vii,.14. XX .ii. 5. 
guyey III. ii. 12. puvyéew III. viii. 
4. everéoy IX, iv. 10. 

geverdy III. xii. 1. VII. iv. 6. xiii. 1. 
X. ii. 2. gevar@ VIL xiii. 1. pev- 
«ral VII. iv. 5. geverd III. i. 26. 
X. ii, 5. geveray VIL i. 1. X, 
v. 6. 

ghun VIL. xiii. 5. 

gnut VII. x. 4. pmol II. iii. 2, 10. IIT. 
xi, 1. V. ix. 7.. VI. iv. 5. vii. 2. IX. 
ix. 7. aev I, vii. 14. viii. 14, xiii. 
See 5 Fisix, 7. IEE, ii. 9. IV. v. 13. 
Wei42: i.1. VI. i. 1. vii. 6. xi. 1. 
xii..9. VII. ii. 10, 11. iv. 6. X. ii. 4 
iv. 7. gaol I. xiii, 12. Il. ix. 4. II. 
i, 17. vii. 7. IV. i. 39. V. iv. 8, 14. 
Vb 6. VL vii. 4,° 5. ix. 2. xiii. 3; 
VIN. 3. '2,.6,7. ii. 1, 3. v2; vi. 3, xi. 
Poms. Xiv. 5. VIII. 1.6. 115 3: ix: 
4. xii. 3, 5. xiii, 10. xiv. 1. IX. i. 5. 
vi. 1. viii. 2. ix. 1. X.ii, 5. iii,2. ix. 
10. gatey III. vii. 4. VII. xiii. 6. 
dvs 1. xiii. 19. I. i. 24. VI. ii, 2 
Va hie-95- ait S.. ep IX. i 4, 
ohoee VIL ii. 5. aly Il. i. 11. ii. 
4: VL xiii. 8. VIL xiii. 1. IX. y. 3. 
vii. 2. hoe III. viii. 2. %pacay V. 
v. 1. IX i. 6. papery VIL i. 4. 
garéov III. i. 10. iv. 4. v. 5. V. viii. 
4, X. v.11. 

p0aptixh VI. v. 6. 

p0apra VIL. xiv. 8. 

péecipe: Il. ii. 6. ILL. xii. 2. VIL. viii, 4. 
X. v. 3. ix. 23. Oeiperar II. i. 6. 
ii, 7. iii, 1. POelpec@u II. ii. 6. 
pbetpotons II. vi. 9. pOelpew IV. i. 
5. POelpovar X, v. 5. 

pice: VIL. viii. 1. 

POovepds II. vii. 15. 

gOdvos Il. vi. 18. Odvou II. vii. 15. 

. pOdvov II. vii. 2. X. vi. 5. 

pOopa IV. i. 5. X. iii. 5. POopad IT. ii. 
8. VII. x. 1. X.v.10. Oopats III. 
vi. 12. 

piraaneys IV. vii. 8. 

piravOpérovs VILL. i. 3. 

piraper@ I. viii. 10, 

piravaa X. v. 3. 

pldAavtos IX. viii. 6. plAavror IX. viii. 





| 
| 


k 


3, 5, 7, 11. gtAatros IX. viii. 4. 
ptrabrous IX. viii. 1, 4, 5. 

gireiv IV, vi. 5. VII. iv. 5. VIII. ii. 2. 
Wis Cs Vile D> “Ville 6 7)4e5 Salle bey Lc 
iii. 1. vii. 1,6. viii. 1,2. gedodvTa 
Vitis wines VL ii 2. verbs 
pian IX. i. 38. eptaovy IX. i 
prAover VIII. ii. 2,3. iii. 1, 5. v. 5. 
Wills Will. 6, 6.: xi..2))9,. DXc.v.3; 
vil. 2. xi. 4. giAetrae VIII. iii. 2. 
pirciobar VIII. i. 2. vii. 2. viii. 1, 2, 
3, 6. IX. iii, 2. vii. 6. giAodyTes 
VAIL. iii, '15)'2; °3i..y.- 5s) svi A: pte 
Aovytt VIII. iii. 7. iAodvra VIII. 
xiii, 2. gtdoduevos VIII. iii. 2. gi- 
Aovpevors VIEL. v. 5. gtAnréov IX. 
ili. 3. viii. 2. 

pirndeow VIII. iv. 4. x. 6. xi. 1. 

plansis VIIL. v. 5. vii. 2. IX. v. 1. vii. 
2, 6. giarjoe VII. ii. 8. IX. v. 1. 
gianow VIII. vii. 2. piajoes VIII. 
iT. vit: V3. = 

piarntucds TIT. x. 2. 

piarnrds VILL. iii. 8. ptAnrod VIIL.i. 2. 
gidnrov VIL. ii. 1, 2. v. 4. IX. i, 2. 
iii. 3. iv. 9,10. vii. 5, 6. tAnrot 
VIII. iii. 9. @tAnrots VIII. iii. 1. 
pirntovs VIII. viii. 6. g¢sAnra VIII. 
i. 2. iii. 7. KX. v. 9 : 

gata IL. vii. 13. VIL. i. 4, 7. ii. 3. iii. 
3, 4: DOs, 15,955 Ve. 0s) .Ver4; Oa Vig ts 
vil; 2: “vil. 2,4, 6.° ix. }. xi: 3, 4,°5, 
Grizer ale Ly Oder -xiVe ly On PU Aor ad, 
iv. 5, 6. v.1. vi. 2. xii, 1, 8. uAias 
IV. vi. 5. VII xiv. 9. VIIDL i 1, 4. 
% TF, 8:06 ived; Gar Vi Fe VA 1. 
vii. 1, 2. viii. 4.. xi.°6, 7. xiii. 2, 5, 
ll. xiv. 2,4. IX. 3. iii 1, 3. iv. 
6. ¥..5..x..1, 5. xii, 4. Ki vi,-1 1% 
1. gle IV. vi. 4. VIL. i. 4. ive 3. 
vi. 4, vii, 3. ix. 3. xii, 7. xiii. 2. xiv. 
Te) EXayi. ds. (gtAltar IL y.'2.-= VIEL 
11D, De: Var. Fal Vd. 25° X1V 0d 0. = Lake Fo 
1. iii, 5,. ive ls. Ve Ss: x. 6.) ~piAlac 
VAD ie dS De ively Vi-4,.%6 Vite, Le 
ix. 6, xi. 8. IX.i. 3. iv. J. gidiov 
VIII. ix. 2. xiii, 1. ptAfaus VIII. vii. 
Os xive LEX. t. 1, i. 4. 

pidicdy VIILG.4 IX.iv. 9. perucod 
IX. x. 3. ptAuchy VIII. xiii. 6. pie 
Aucot VILL. v. 2. pide VILL. iii. 9. 
vi. 1. xii. 7.. IX. iv. 1. vii. 6. viii. 25 
obiAunerarov IX. x. 3. 

pidaunas VIL. vo 1. TX. iv. 10. vi. 1. 


| pirtare I, viii. 10. . 


Ixxiv 


pirodixaiw I. viii. 10. 

prodedpy I. viii. 10. 

piroucodduot X, v. 2. 

pirdonados I. viii. 11. 
iv. 4. 

piroxlybuvos IV. iii. 23. 

piroxdAakes VIII. viii. 1. 

bivonthrns VI. vii. 6. bidokt7Ty VU. 
His, Fac dKe Ss 

pirouabys X. iv. 10. 

prAouadia IIT. x. 2. 

prAdumovoo X. v. 2. 

prouvOous IIL, x. 2. 

birdkevos II. x. 10. 

Piroratwp VII. iv. 5. 

pidos II. vii. 13. VIL vi. 1. VOL v. 
5 vit. O viii Ve 1 th BBs sive, 
10. v. 3. viii. 2. ‘ix. 7, 10, xiv: 
ii, 1. iii, 11. laov VIII. xiii, 9. 
xiv. 1. IX.i. 7. viii. 1. ix. 2, 5, 10. 
xi. 6. @id@ VIII. ii. 3, 6. vii. 6. xii. 
8. xiii. 2,7. IX. ii. 1. ii, 4. plrov 
IV. iii. 29. vi. 4. VIII. i. 3. v. 5. vi. 
2. xii. 8. xiii, 9. xiv. 1. IX. iii. 3. 
iv. 1, 5..x. 5. viii. 2. ix. 1,10 x6. 
xi. 1, 2, 5, 6. xii, 2. X.ix.18. ide 
VII. x. 4. gidor I. viii. 16. VIIL. 
iii. 3, 5, 6,9. iv. 2,4, 5,6. vi. J. vii. 
4,5, 6. viii 4,5. xiii, 1,2. DX. iii. 
1,4. iv. 5. viii 9 x.6. iro I, 
vii. 7. viii 15. xi. 1, 6. xiii. 18, DI. 
iii. 13. 1V.i.48; VUULS 1p 45 dv. 
3. viii. 4. ix. J. xiii... UStivet. 
viii, 2,9. ix. 1,3, 4,5, 10. x.8, xi. 
1,2,5,6. xii 2. X.ix. 18. pirow 
lovi.l. lacus I. wi. 6. TL x; 2. 
IV. v.10. VII. iii. 6, 7, 9. v. 3. vi. 
4,5. viii. 5. IX. iii 5. xi. 4. xii. 1. 
X. ix. 14. plaovs I. vi. 1. vii. 7. xi. 
3,. VIII i. 1,2, 5,6, 7. side 1808. 
iv. 2,4. vi. 4. ix. 1,3, IX. fii 1,4. 

li -ve/3.-vied, ts 24 zs ei. 

4, 5. X. vii. 6. ldap IX. iv. 1. 
viii. 9,10. pArdros X, ix. 19. 

procope Il. iv. 6. Pidogopoivres 
ibid. giAogopovvtos VIL. xi. 1. 

pirocopla X. ix. 22. . pidogopias I. vi, 
el BCs Pay 

gidoadpous I, vi. 1. 

prrorenvdrepat IX. viii. 7. 

girotmla Il. vii. 8. HI. x. 2. IV. 
iv. 5. gidotiniay IV, iv. 5. VHI 
vii. 1. 

pirdtigmos, pirrotiuov II, vii. 8. 
tiysov II. vii, 8. IV. iv. 3, 4. 


girdcadroy IV. 


iv. 
: 
3, 


pird- 


INDEX VERBORUM. 


pirorowodtos I. viii. 10. diAorototrov 
IV. iv. 4. iAoroovrwy III. xi. 4. 

propirwr VIII. viii. 4. 

piroxphuarot 1V. i. 37. 

poBepdy III. vii. 1. poBepd I. ii. 9. 
IIL vi. 2. vii. 3, 7, 8,9, 13. viii. 14, 
ix. 1. X. viii. 7. qoBepay II, ii. 9. 
III. vi. 6. xii. 2. oBepdrepoy VII. 
vi. 7. oBepwraror III. vi. 6. | 

poBetrat Lil. vi. 5. vii. 11. oBeio@at 
IL. i. 7. vii. 2, IIL vi. 3,4. vii. 3, 
10. viii. 11. qoBodmevos II. ii, 8. v. 


3. III. vi. 3. vii. 5. @oBodueda IL 
v4 IIL. vi. 2,3. oBnO7jvec I. vi. 


10. goBjoera II. vii. 2. oBorro 
IIL. vii. 7. oBovmevor III. viii. 9. 
IV. ix.2. goBovpevov FY. iii, 28. 

~éBos IV. ix. 1. dBq IV. ix. 2. X. ix. 
4. dBov Il. v.2. IIL i. 4. vi. 2. 
viii. 4. IV. i. 39. V. viii. 4. pdBors 
IL. viii. 15. 68ovs IL. vii, 2. WIL. 
vi. 1. ix. 1. 

Powloous 1X vi. 2, 

pdva X. vii. 6. 

pope X. iv. 3. 

gpoptixds X. viii. 7. oprucdv IV. iii. 27. 
poptixol LV. viii, 3. — poprucwrarot I, 
¥. 2 

povet 1X. iv. 3. ppoveiy I. vi. 10. VII. 
xi 4. X. vii. 8. povéovros VII. vi. 
9. povolny VI. viii. 4. 

ppdvnois I. viii. 6. VIL iii, 1. v. 3, 8 
vi. 1, 2. vii. 6, 7. viii. 1, 2,3, 5, 8, 9. 
ix. 7%, x. 2, 3. xiv 2 xe eo, 
xiii. 1, 2,5. X. viii 3. ix. 17. po- 
vnoews I. vi. 11. VI. v.1, 7, 8. xiii. 
2,3,6,7. VILi.5. x.% Xi & 
villi. 3. ix. 12. gpovhoe: VI. x. 1. 
xiii. 6. VIL xii. 5. X. viii. 3. gpd- 
vyow I. xiii. 20, VI. v. 6, 7. vi. 2. 
vii, 3. x. 8. xi.3. xii. 6, 7. xiii, 4, 
X. viii. 3. dpovnoes VI. xiii. 3. 

| ppdévimos II, vi. 15. VI. v, 2. viii. 4, 5. 

xi, 2, VII. ii. 5. x1, 26° ae 
7. opdévmov VI. vii. 4, xi. 3. xii, 2, 
10; xiii; 6. Vi. 4.7. x25 ae 
gpdviuor VIL x. 2. ppoviuov VIL. v. 1. 
vii. 6. VII. ii, 5. povtuwr I. y. 5. 
VI. ix. 7. xi. 6. pdviywa VIL. vii. 4, 
X. ii. 4. ppovivous VI. v. 1, 2, 5. vii. 
5. xi. 2. xii. 9. VIL i. 2 


IV. vi. 2. sia AE 
guy) VI. ii. 2. guyhvy TL. viii. 3. 





ovyas UL iii, 7. VIL. vii. 1. 


s 


um~p2b 


gpovriew IV. i. 34. vi. 5. gppovrlfovres 






INDEX VERBORUM. 


vdanh IV. i. 7. 

pudactindy 1V.i. 20. vdanricd I. vi. 
33. V7. i138. 

pvaAdk V. vi. 5. 

guddrrew IV. i. 89. gvdAdtacGor III. 
viii. 7. puAakréoy II, ix. 6. 

guaérat VIII. ix. 5. pudéras IX, ii. 9. 

gpudetixal VIII. xii. 1. 

ovat Il. v. 17. pv IIL v.17. régukev 
Bimiris. iis 14. ix. 5, 7.. x. 12: 
iel4. IL ii. 6. iii. 5. TM. v.17. 
WAS xii: 8. VILL vi. 2: ix. 3. X. iv: 
8. mepixacr I, vii. 22. I. iii, 4, 
X. ix. 4. mepucévacL. xii. 2. IIL. v. 
17. VILL. xii. 3. mepuxdra I. xiii. 
10. VILL xii. 3. wepueds I. xiii. 15. 
VLi. 5. IX.ix. 3. mwepuxdrov IL. i. 
2. mepucdor II. i. 3. meptxaper II. 
viii. 8. ix, 4. émepdxer V. vi. 9. 

voids VI. viii. 6. vow) IIL. xi 1, 
3. VI. xiii. 1, 2. VIL. viii. 4. puoidy 
BE yore. xi 2: Vi vii, 1." tsi 12. 
1X. vii. 4. Kit. 4. vomit VIL. 
xii. 2. pvows VIII. xiv. 4. pvorxol 
VIL. xiv. 5. gvoixdy VII. x. 4. gu- 
oumas VI. xiii. 6. vorats IIT. xi. 3. 
VIL. vi.2. gvoume V. vii. 5. viii. 7. 
Vix. 5. VIL. 7. X.ve2. gue 
oual VI. xiii. 1. VII. vi. 6.  gv- 
oKwrdrn LIL. viii. 12. puoumerepov 
WIL vi. 2. VIII. i. 6 IX. vii. 2. ix.7. 

guouwes VIL. iii. 9. 

guowArdyeov VIL. iii, 12. 

¢uots I. ii, 4. xiii, 15. IL vir 4,9. 
Fil, is7..-V. v. 19. x. 6: VIL y. 4. 
xiii, 6. xiv.8. VIII. v.2. X. viii. 9. 
puoews VI. xi. 6. VII. v. 6. vi. 1, 6. 
x. 4,. xii, 2,3. xiv. 4,.7. TX. :ixs 7. 
X. ix. 6. toe I. iii, 2. vi. 2. vii. 6. 
vii, 11, ILi 2, 3,4. v.5. IDL iii, 
4. iv. 3. v. 15, 18,19. V.v. 11. vii. 
2:3) 4,7; vili. 3. 1x. 4. VIL. vii. 5; 
Sioo.. St, 1. VIL. iv. 5. v.13, 6. 
Se 4c xii. 2. xiii. 6.-xiv. 7,8. VILL 
Bice xi, 7;- IX; ix, 3, 5, 7, 9, 10. 
X. v. 6. vii. 9. ix. 6,14. vow I. 
ikeuoodled Oo. ii. 5. TL 17: ve 15. 

Deetuemamit.. 20 Ve vii. 5.. VE. ive 4. 
vii. 4. VII. vii. 6. x. 4. xi. 4. xii. 3. 
xiv. 5, 6,8. VIII. xii. 7. IX. xis 4. X. 
iii. 6. vii. 1. does VII. v. 1. xii. 1. 

guticdy I. xii. 18. guTie@ I. xii. 11. 

gutod X. vi. 2. gurois I. vii. 12. 

pov IV. iii. 34. Govys Il. x. 7 
porn ibid. periy I, ix. 6. 





Ixxv 


X. 


xaipe TIT. x. 2. xi. 7. VID. xi. 4. xiv. 
8 IX ix.6. Xv. 10. yxalpey IT. 
Hs) 2, G5 vided, EIN ks 'O, Gade dt, 
xi, 4, VII. v.2. ix. 5. xi. 2. xiv. 5. 
VERS vi. 15) JERS vils.6:. Xe dtes tii: 
12. viii. 18. ix. 6. xalpwor VIII. vi. 
1,4. yxalpovor III. x. 5,7, 9. xi. 4. 
WIS ise 3. xin. De ixive © Bo) VEL. 
iy. 2, vis 1s vill. 2.. xifi. 3; IX. xf..4, 
xalpocey VIIL. xii. 7. Exape IV. vii. 
10. xalpwv I. viii, 12, Il. iii. 1. 
IV. vii. 12. IX. v.3. xalpovra I. 
viii. 12. yxalpovres III. x. 3. xi. 7. 
Wi, «i.-4; xiv, 8: DX ix. 6. X. v. 
10. xalpovras III. x. 4, 5, 6. VIII. 
v. 3. xopdvrwv IV. viii. 4. xal- 
povoc VIII. viii. 3. 

xareratver VII. vi. 1. xadremalvew IV. 
v.1. xadremalvovras II. ix. 7. IV. v. 
11, 13. 

xadremds IX. ix. 5. xademdv II. iii. 8. 
Vi 14s ix4,-7. “TES. 9, ixs 7 IV3 
iii. 16,26. V.118. iz. 15; EX x, 5. 
X. ix. 8. xaXrewol IV. v.12. yarce- 
mods 1V.v.11. xadera Ill. v.8. VI. 
vil. 5. Xadrerwrepoy II. iii. 10. UIT. 
i.9. ix: 2. ; 

xarerdryns VIL.v. 5. vi.2. xoadrerdrnra 
V. is 2. 

Xarworontixh I. i. 4. v. 8. vii. 1, 5. 
xii. 8. xiii. 8. II. i. 11. 

Xarkelwv V. ix. 7. 

Xamarcovra I. x. 8. 

xapay II. v. 2. 

xaples IV. viii. 9, 10. VIII: xiii. 2. 
xapievres I. iv. 2. v.4. xiii. 7. IV. 
vii. 16. viii, 4. xaptéorepor IV. vii. 
14. 

xapiCeroe IX. viii. 6. yxaplCovra IX. 
viii. 4. xapiCerO@u IX. iii. 5. xapiCs- 
Mevov, xapicapevy V.v. 7. xapirréov 
IX. ii. 3. xaprCduevos IX. viii. 6. 

xapis IV. i. 8. xXapitos V.v.7. ix. 12. 
xdpw I.i.4. IV. vii. 13. VI. xii. 2, 
10. VIIL ix.4. xii. 7, IX.i4. ii. 1. 
iv. 1. viii. 1. xii. 2. X. ii. 2. vi. 6. 
ix. 10. xdpiras IX. vii. 1. xapirwr 
Neve 7g. 

xabvos IV. iii. 6, 18,35. xadvor IV. iii. 
36. > 

xavvérys Il. vii. 7. xavvdrnros IV. iii. 
37. 

xetmoor III. i, 5. 


k2 


Ixxvl 


xelp V. ix. 11. yepds I. vii. 11. VIL. 
xiii. 6. xetpa V. viii. 3. VIII. xiii. 6. 
xep) V. ix. 14. 

xepotexvat VI. viii. 2. 

xetpotoynteov IX, ii. 1. 

xelpwv IL. iii, 4. IV. vii. 17. VI. xii. 3. 
VIL. vii.3. VII. xiv. 1. xelpom VIII. 
xili. 1. xetpoy III. i. 6. IV. iii. 37. 
vii. 1. Vii. 14. x.8. xi. 7. xelpous 
IIL. viii. 4, 16. IV. iii. 35. v.12. VII. 
vii. 1. xeipiory VIIL x. 2. xi. 6. 

xeAldwv I. vii. 16. 

xidve I. vi. 11. 

xopnyav IV. ii. 20. 
| a oye 
Kexopnynuevous X. viii. 11. 
Vai ls 

xopnyias X. viii. 4. 

xpeta III. iii. 14. IV.i.6. V..v.11,13. 
IX) xi. 6: X. ville 4,6. malas A v. 
11, VIIL.vi.J. xpeta V.v.13. VIII. 
i]. IV. xi.6. xpetavV.v.15. VII. 
iv. 2. ypetais VIII. xiii. 10. X. viii. 1. 

ii 4. x51. oEXevil-2. 


KeXopnynLevov 
Kexopnynuevey X. vii. 4. 
xopnyeiv 


xpewy I. ii. 6. 
MWe 7's 
xen I. vii. 18. xiii. 19. VIC xii. 7. EX. 
ii. 8. viii, J1. X. vii. 8. viii. 12. 

xphoas VILLI. xiii. 7. 

xphuara II. vii. 6. IV. i. 2, 5, 6, 7, 14, 
£021) 265. ll. Vis 9. Vedi G, Wee 
iv.5. WITT. ix. 'S;- xiv..3.. 21%. 3.5%. 
vii. 7. viii, 9. xpnudroy II. vii. 4. 
II. iii. 18. vi. 4. IV..4..1,:7,:2450 40. 
2. vi. 9. V. ii. 12: Av.2. SVE, 
VIIL ix. 5. xiv. 1. X. vit. 4. xph- 
Reo Ue x. 25 TV: le Warde 
IX. vili. 4. 

xenuatiCerbat VITI. xiv. 3. 

xpnuatiomoy VII, xii. 4. 

xpnuatiorys I. v. 8 

xpnuatiorixhy IIL, iii. 8 

xpjo0u I. x. 13. II. ii. 6. TIL. v. 22. 
Wilts VeXe Ge LVI. Gs. Nott: Foye VE 
Senos WIT nies: VID. vii, ae aes 
2. xpavra VIII. x. 4. xpnoduevoyv 
I, ix. 11. éxpnoduecéa II, i. 4. xpn- 
capevo Il, i. 4. xparac1V.i.6, V. 
jis O.civ. do. Vi. x,.S. ete. VIL x. 
3. xpnoera IV. i. 6. xpdbuevor IV. 
vii. 16. VIII. xiii, 4. = xpwpeévns I, 
ii. 7. xpemevos II. iii. 10. V.i. 18, 
MIT: ili <5 xpwuevev VII. xii. 3. 
VAL oxi: -6 xpapevov VII, ii’. 6, 
xpwpevyn X. ix. 23. xpwuérvn VII. x. 
4, xpnoréoy J, xiii. 9, IX, iii. 4 





INDEX VERBORUM. 


xphomos VI. xii. 2, VIII. iii. 3. vi. 6. 
xpnotun I. vii. 19. xphomor I. v. 8, 
vi. 3. IILi.2. VIILi 2. ii. 13. 
iv. 1,2, 4,5, 6.'vie 3, 4,7. vill. 6. 
xii, 6,7. xiii. 1, 4,5, 11. IX 23, 
iii, 1. v. 3. vii. 6. = xphomor VI. xii. 
1. VIII. vi. 5. viii. 6. TX. vii, 2. 
xehomwa I. ix. 7. xpnoimeov IV. i. 6. 


VIM. vi. 4. IX. vii6. xi.2. xpnot- 
pous VIIL ii. 4. vii 5. IX. ix. 4. 


xpnowerara X, i. 4. 

xpos I.x. 12. IV.i. 7. V. i, 15. ii. 
10,13. xphoe I. viii 9.  xphow 
IX. ii. 9. v. 3. x. 2. 

xpnoral VIL. ii. 6. 

xpoviCouernv IX. v. 3. 

xpévos VIII. iv. 1. 

Xpoviwrépas X. v. 5. 

xpévos I. vii. 16,17. xpdvou II. i. 1. 
IV. v. 10. VI. viii, 5. VIL. tii. 8. 
xii, 2. X.iv.2. x xpévm I. vi. 3. xX. 
14, VIII. iv. 3. vi. 8. X. iv. 2, 3, 4, 
xpdvor I. iii. 17. x. 5,15. IL. ix. 7. 
Ill. viii. 16. IV. v. 8, 7, 10, 11, 13. 
VI. ix. 2,6. xii. 1, VIL iii. 9. vie 
4, viii. 5. xii. 8. xiii. 6. IX. viii. 9. 
X. iv. 1. xpdvos X. vy. 6. 

Xpicea Vax J 

xpucds IV. ii. 10. xpuood, xpucdy X. 
VeGs"" 

xpepact III. x. 3. 

xehay HL x. 9. 

xeépas IL. vii. 8. , 

xwpiCera IV. i. 38. xwpicavres I. vi. 

9. . xwpiobn V. vi. 8. xwpiCovra VI. 
xiii, 6. xwplCecOar X. v. 7. xwpt- 
obevtes VIII. vii. 5. KkexwploOar X, 
v. 7. Kexwptopéevo: VILL v. 1. Ke- 
xwpiopevn X. viii. 3 

xepiordy I. vi. 13. 

xwpis VIII. xiv. 4. 

xwpicpoy X. iv. 11. 


X. ii. 3. 


¥; 


peyouer IV. iv. 3. Vii 2. peter IX. 


viii. 5. veyew X. i. 3. Wéyovres TV. 


iv.4. Weydueba Il. v. 3,5. eyerat 
IL v. 3. vi. 12. ix. 8 IV. v. 5, 13. 
V. viii. 2. VII. iv. 2. Wéyovra TIT 
19s ONES eB Weyorra IV. iii 


31. éyovres IV. iv. 4. Weyor X 


i. 3. 


Wexrds IT. ix. 8. _IV. v. 13. vii. 11. 










INDEX VERBORUM. 


Wexroy III. xi. 5. IV.vii. 6. V. xi. 
7. wWexrol IV. vii. 6. exrat IV. v. 
4. vi.3. X.v.6. werd IL. vii. 11. 
Wextov VII. i. 6. ii. 4. iv. 6. 

WevderOa VIL. ix. 4. Wevdduevos VII. 
ii. 7,8. wWevdouevor LY. vii. 6. wWev- 
Souévwr TV. vii. 1. 

Wevins. pevdet VI. ix. 5. VIL. ii. 7. ix. 
l. wevdods VI. iv. 6. Wevdq VI. 
ix. 5. 

Wevdouaptupta V. ii. 13. 

Wevdos IV. vii. 6,8. VI. ii. 3. 
evi}. IEE, ii. 10. v..4. 
10,12. wWevdovs VIL. xiv. 3. 

Wevorns LV. vii. 12. 

wnoicera VIL. x. 3. 

Whpicpa V. x. 7. VI. viii. 2. dndioua- 
tos V. x. 6. wWndicuara VIL. ix. 3. 

Wndicuata@in V. vii. 1. 

Wippvdie I. vi. 11. 

Wéyou I. x. 11. Wéyor IIL. i. 9. 
EEE, it. 

Wopjon VIL. vy. 6. vi. 1. 

wox? VL iii. 1. IX. iv. 9. viii 2. yu- 
xs I. vii. 14,15. ix. 7.. xiii. 1, 6, 7, 
8, 11, 13, 15, 16. IL. iii. 5. IIL. v. 
15; Vo xi 9.. VLi. 3, 4, 5, 8: xi. 7. 
xii. 6, 10. IX. viii. 4. qux7 1. vi. 
T2y, x13. 16. I. v.1. VLit i. VAT. 
xi. 6.  Woxhv I. viii. 2, 3. IL. iv. 6. 
Vil. iit, 9. TX. iv. 3. X. ix. 6. 

woxical IL. x. 2. Wuxinay I. viii. 10. 
xii. 6. uxunas I. viii. 2. 

wWoxous VIL iv. 3. 


Wevder 
IV. vii. 


yoyor 


Q. 


ode II. vi. 4. VII. iii. 9. 

dt V. ix. 14, 16. VIL. iii. 2. 

apots VII. v. 2. 

awveirba V. iv. 13. 

avy V. ii. 13. 

evios IX. i. 8. 

&pa X. iv. 8. Spas VIL. iv. 1. 

és IV. vii. 11. viii. 2. -V. ii. 10. iii. 6. 
vii. 3. ix. 12. VI.i.1. VII. i. 4. vi. 

_5, 7. viii. 2. x. 3. xii 2. 

és IV. viii. 1. V. viii. 3. ix. 4. xi. 2. 
VI. ix. 6. VII. iii. 2. ’ 

as &y II. vi. 20. 

éoabrws Il. iii, 11. Vii. 9. VII. iv. 4. 
v. 4. 

Gs én) 7d wodd I. iii. 4. TIT. i. 9. 


a@voovrat V. vii. 5. 





Ixxvii 


Gonep I. iii, 1. iv. 5. vii. 10, 14. viii. 
9,12. ix. 10. xii. 3. xiii, 7,17, 18, 
19, Ibis it 1,9, 467. Ww. 16, 
vi. 9, 2U. vii. 11. viii. 2,4. III. i. 17. 
iii. 11. iv. 4,5. v. 5, 14, 17, 20, 22. 
Vis.48910, ot xi. 8. SEV, tO 
23, ii. 1, 6, 12,15, 20. iii, 27, 37. iv. 
EF 24.00 A 2es VilisiSe, Veils 1015-0; 
9. v. 1, 11,13. vi 8 vii. 2. viii. 3, 
AU Yas bog ats ee ag came epi Fp gy Sere 
VI. iit. 3. iv. 6. v. 7. vii. 2,3. viii. 2, 
8. x. 3... xi. J, 2; 7.- xii. F, 8 VI. 
i. 2, 5. ii. 1. iii, 13. iv. 2, 6. v. 3, 4, 
So Viel, 2,-6;-7< Nils 6, S.- vill. 12; 
3. ix. 3, 5. x. 3,4. xii. 3. xiii. 1, 2. 
xiv. 4, 5,6, 8 VILE. iv. 4. v. 1. vi. 
9. xi. 1, 6... IX. ii. 8. iv. 5,9. v. 3. 
vi. 2, 3. vii. 3. viii. 6. ix. 5, 10. x. 3. 
si, 2: cot.) ib 1, 1.4, 9.: iv: 7; 
9; v. 7, 8, Pl. vi. 4. viiie 7, 13% 1x6; 
10, 14, 17, 20. 

Gore I. ii. 1, 7. vi. 2, 10. vii. 1, 3. viii. 
2. 41.. xi. 5, 6; UL iii.:2, 10. vii V5, 
viii, 5. TEE. v..2, 10: xi. 6. sit Sy 
EV. t1.. 6. 4x:.5;56. V8.8; Ld ard; 
9. iii. 9. iv. 4, 6, 12,14. v. 10, 12, 
17. vi. 4. viii. 2,10. ix. 2, 9. x. 1,7. 
SH AL VEL E62 ie So. IVS 2: 95 2565 
vii. 2, 3,7. ix. 4, 5. xi. 6. xii. 7, 10. 
xiii. 2. VII. i.2. ii. 6,9. iii. 6, 7, 8, 
ll. vil, 3. vii. 3. viii. 5. ix. 1, 3. 
KX, 9: <i: xi. 2, 7. xive 3) 8, 
VIII. i. 2. iv. 1. viii. 4. xiii, 9. xiv. 
4, 1X. vii. 5. vili.. 7+ 1/9. - xii le 
X. v. 4, 6. viii. 7, 8, 13. 

@péerea LV. vi. 9. VIII. iv. 2. xiii. 11. 
a@peActas II. vii. 18.  VIIL v. 3. vi. 
7. viii. 6. @erelq VIII. xiii. 4, 10. 
apedcfars VIII. xiii. 1. 

ampere? IV. i. 32. @pedctrat VIII. xi. 
6. xiii. 11. apeany IX. i. 8. ade- 
Anoet IX. viii. 7. a@peAqoey IX. xi. 
5. wpedcto@ar IX. xi. 6. apedodv- 
va X. vi. 3. . @PeAo wer VIII. xiv. 
3. dapednOjcerar I. vi. 16. 

@peAmov V. ix. 17, VI. ix. 6. VIII. 
iii, 4. xiii, 8. d@eAluov V. v. 18. 
apeAtuos IX. vi. 4. a@péAtua VI. vii. 
S. VEPR.Me. 22 xii. 8. iz. 21. 
@permo: LV. i, 11. VIII. iii. 4, 6. 
apertuwr I. vi. 9. IV. iii. 33. adpe- 
Amoétepos VIII. xiv. 1. wpedmare- 
pov VIII. vii. 2. 

axpi@ot LV, ix. 1 


i & 


INDEX 


GREEK WORDS COMMENTED UPON, 


ay es 


&BéBaos ii. 310. 

ayabol ‘nobles’ i. 60. 

ayépaios ii. 262. 

G0avacia ii. 16. 

aidiov ii. 19. 

aidés in Hesiod i. 54, 430. 

aiperdy and everéy ii. 316. 

aic@nots i. 375. 

aisxpompayely ii. 58. 

akddagros ii, 54. 

acplBera i, 322, 324, 349, 374, ii, 19. 

axpoxerpl(ecOau ii. 13. 

axpdxoros ii. 82. 

GAexTpuev i, 85. 

"AAHGea, work of Protagoras i. 85. 

&AAos idiomatic i, 406. 

Guetpta ii. 319. 

avaBoAn ii. 277. 

avacOnota i. 434, 

tivOpwros ii, 210. fem. ii, 213. 

adpiotos i. 202-3, 423, ii. 304. 

amrelracat ii. 280. 

&meipov, iévau eis i. 346. 

ames and kata mpdcbeow i. 414. amrA@s 
ayaéa ii. 101. 

amé ii. 205. 

amodéxeo Oat ii. 258, 260. 

amodavoTikés i. 356. 

aroudoow ii. 811. 

amomponypeva i, 254. 

dropiat i. 326. 

aper7 i. 320, 373, 879, 401. 

&ppeva ‘masculines’ i. 85. 

apxh i. 319, 324, 355. ‘ywdoews nat 
yevécews 394. év Gpx® 43. 

apxOewpos ii. 67. 

apxitextoviKds i, 345. 

dowTos il. 58. 





avdddns ii. 85. 
abdéxacros ii. 87. 
avdol i. 368. ; 
abrapces i. 141. abrapKea i. 369, ii, 
_ 301. 

abrovs, 5: ii, 283. ab’ ii. 255. 
abra@v, ém rér ii. 294. 

aparpéoer, ev, &c. ii, 171. 

Bavavoos ii. 67. pe 
Bdpos ii. 309. 

Biatos i. 359. 

Bios i. 356, 373. 

Bovderat ii. 58, 81, 272. 

BovaAnots ii. 23. 

Bawmorédxos ii, 90. 


yaorrpiuapyos ii. 50. 
vyéveois i, 186, 344. 

yévos i. 350. 

youn ii. 178. 

ywopima &mdras, huiv i. 355. 


dé in apodosis i, 345. 

de? i. 812. Sé€ov i. 320, 346. 
de:Aof ‘ commonalty ’ i. 60. 

“Sewds ii. 185. 

dexdw i. 436. 

bY adre@y ii. 116, 

SiaBarrAw ii. 259. 

diaywy7 ii. 90. 

diddeots i. 428. « 

Srouperdy i. 421. 

Sidiceuat i. 419. 

diapevw ii. 286. 

didvore ii. 174, 

didracts ii, 292. 

Siaeddouar ii. 287. f 
dixatoy i. 349. etymology ii. 114. 





= 


INDEX OF WORDS COMMENTED UPON. 


Sicasomparyta ii. 122. 

didpPwue ii, 113. 

didte ii. 170. 

dirAdouor i. 362. 

Sipar ii. 246. 

done? i. 343. 

duds, Svas adpioros i. 362. 
ddvamus i, 182 sqq. ‘art’ i. 344, 


eyyuntis, vouos ii. 121. 

eynvKAtor Adyou i. 332. 
359. 

éeyreéuia i, 394. 

eOicuds i. 375. 

tos i. 404, ii, 343. 

eidos i. 365. 

elvat i. 425, ii. 104, 

elpwr ii. 86. 

évépyera i. 181-201. etymology 183. 
this and ddvaus Megarian 183-4. 
‘energy’ 319. 344, ii, 296. evépyera 
TaY apETav ii. 26. 

évredexeia i. 184-5. 

ekaywyn i. 272, ii. 121. 

efanpiBdw ii. 329. 

eis i. 191, 319, ii, 204. 

Zéovota ii. 339. 

eEwrepixol Adyar i. 328-332. 

eraywy? i. 375. 

érapKéw ii. 286. 

éreicaxtos ii, 302. 

érfSeréis i. 90. 

énl5oais i, 434. 

ememhs, emeixera ii. 139, 272. 

émi(ntéw i. 377. 

éribuplayv AapBdvew ii, 228. 

émimoAd(w i. 354. 

emothun i. 345. 
ii. 68. 

Epyov i. 142,371. 7a Epya ii. 298. 

pws etymology ii. 292. 

éc@Aol ‘nobles’ i. 60. 

érxarov ij. 168, 172. 

éraipirh ii. 307. 

evdaluwv i, 389. 

evOnvovrvTa i. 384. 

e¥poia i, 259. 

ebtpdaredos ii, 90. 


Goh i. 356. 


eyKixAuos i. 


emaoripwr ‘artistic’ 


# in questions i. 344. 

7 indefinite ii, 111, 182. 
HdeoOa and joOjveas ii;-320. 
H5n ii, 179. 








lxxix 


ndov} oixela and &dAdorpla. ii. 328, 
HOos i. 404. 


Ocios i, 348, 

OeogiAgs ii. 342. 

Oéors i. 858. 

Bewpéw ii. 154, 203 
Ondéa. ‘ feminines’ i, 85. 
Oupds ii. 42. 


idéa, prob. Democritean word i. 150, 365. 
‘form’ ii. 100. . 

toracOat i. 346, ii. 173. 

tows i, 343. 


xa@daov i. 361. 

al ‘or’ ii, 152. 

Kawwd TOD wWoA€uov ii. 40. 

kakol * commonalty’ i. 60. 
Kardy i. 349, ii, 9. 
kadoxwyabla ii. 75, 183. 
ndpdomos i. 85. 

xaraBéBAnrvrat i. 360. 
katdorasis ii. 236. 

Karéx@ ii, 215. 

KaToKexiwos ii. 844, 

keva TOO TOAEuov ii. 40. Kevarepov i, 426. 
klyynots i, 186. 

kaels ii. 100. 

kAnpwrds ii. 270. 

xowdy i, 408. Kowdrepoy 426. 
kplots ii. 58. 

kdpios i, 347, ii. 299. 


AcoBia oirodoph ii, 140. 

Aoyikds i. 431. 

Aoytorikéy ii. 149. 7 

Adyos i. 409. ‘ inference’ ii. 163. forms 
of Adyos classified by Protagoras i. 85. 
no theory of Adyos in Book VL, i. 39. 
dpOds Adyos i. 38, 148, 409. Adyor 
éxew i. 400. kata Adyor i. 49, 372. 
peta Adyou i, 37, 39, 49, 372, ii. 162. 


padnuarind, 7d i. 400. 
pardpios i, 389. 
pdduore, i, 843. 
pavOdvew ii. 177. 
payredouat i, 357, 
meéOo8d0s i, 343. 
peAaryxorukol ii. 223. 
meodTns, méoov i. 201-12. pécos Sica- 
orgs ii, 114. 
peotdios ii. 114. 
‘undérepos ii. 259. 
povadicds apiOuds ii, 111. 


Ixxxil 


181. Corruptio optimi, ii. 187. 
oetos avnp, ii. 194. 

III. Logic. Cicero’: account of the 
Topics, i. 8. Aristotle claims to be 
founder of logic, i. 13. 

1V. Metaphysics. Unity of Thought 
and Being, ii. 8304. His nominalism, 
i. 161. Analytic, i. 162. Four causes, 
i. 171-2. Absolute and relative know- 
ledge, i. 354. doxal, how come by, i. 
375. Knowledge better than search, ii. 
335. Fruition only -at intervals, ii, 
337. Ideas not practical, i. 8367. Pro- 
ductive art, ii. 156-158. Things that 
can be made perfect, ii. 328. Mathe- 
matics, ii. 171. 

V. Physics. Treatise on Physics 
appears to have been edited by Eudemus, 
i. 20. Nature, i. 221-9. ‘Chance,’ i. 
222. ‘Necessity, i, 223. Optimism, 
i. 225. Design in nature, i. 172, 
223-226. Chain of nature, i. 226- 
229, ii.303. Heavenly bodies, i. 228- 
229. Stars more divine than man, ii. 
166. Secular catastrophes, i. 230. 
Nature desires good, ii. 267. Makes 
nothing in vain, i, 346. Man and 
nature, i, 335. 

Life, i. 205. Life sweet, ii. 304. 
Seale of life, i. 237. Plants, i. 206. 
Running, ii. 74. Senses of brutes, ii. 
48. Moral qualities of brutes, ii. 187, 
207, 218. 

Purer senses, ii, 330. Separate 
senses and common sense, ii. 172. 
Sleep and dreams, i, 398. Youth like 
wine, ii. 246. Psychology a branch of 
physics, ii. 206. Aristotle’s psychology 
chiefly Platonic, i. 142. Soul, i. 236- 
242, 394-401. Division of mind, i. 
343. Modes of mind three, i. 418. 
Resemblance of subject and object, ii. 
149. Two kinds of reason, i. 239. 
Permanence of mental states, i. £87. 
Attention, ii. 327. Immortality, i. 240- 
242. 

VI. Ethics. For the question of the 
three doubtful books of the Nicomachean 
Ethics, see Ludemian Ethics. 

Date of Nicomachean Ethics, i. 139. 
Arvistotle’s ethical method, i. 322-327, 
349. Individual brought forward by 
Cynics, i. 130. Advance on Plato— 
appeal to experience, and formulas, i. 
170. Abstract words have their mean- 





INDEX OF MATTERS. 


ing ethicised,i. 171. Virtue not pre- 
dicable of God, i. 284. Boys have no 
virtue, i. 384. No doctrine of moral 
obligation, i. 416. Condemns suicide, 
ii. 37. Evil self-destructive, ii. 82. 

Book 1. End, Chief Good, Happi- 
ness: Psychology. — Doctrine of 
7édos, i. 171-181. Partly Cyrenaic, 
i. 132. Ends in Plato, i. 368. 
End-in-itself, i. 171-181. Chief 
good must be afrapxes (Platonic), i. 
141. Cannot be added to (Platonic), 
i. 141. Cannot be painful, ii, 263. 
€pyov (Platonic), i. 142, Happiness, 
i, 200-201. Requires body and soul, — 
ii. 231. 

Book 2. Habit and Definition of 
Virtue.—Virtue can be taught, i. 
123, 382. Doctrine of habit implicitly — 
Socratic, i. 123, Habit second 
nature, ii. 231. €£is, i. 191. evép- 
yera and habits, i. 181-201. 
‘Mean’ (Platonic), i. 201-12. 
Ignorance, ii. 11. Virtue a quality, — 
i. 418. 

Book 3. Will and the Virtues : 
Courage, Temperance.—Will, i. 227. 
Freedom of will overlooked, i. 317. 
List of virtues, i. 162. : 

Book 4, Liberality, Magnificence, 
Highmindedness, ote 
pirla, GANG, ebrpareAla, aidés,— 

Anger, ii. 215. 
Book 5. Justice,—Fustios, is 163. 
_ Natural and Conventional Justice, 
ii. 126. Justice a proportion, ii, 109, 
110, 124. 

Book 6. Moral Standard and In- 
tellectual Virtues.—pdvnois partly 
Platonic, i144. pdévimos as stan- 
dard Cynic, i. 129, 

Book 7. Incontinence and Moral 
Struggle: Pleasure.—Practical Syl- 
logism, i. 212, sqq. Three motives, 
ii. 150. 

Books 8-9. Friendship. — Partly 
suggested by Plato, i. 147. 

Book 10. Pleasure: Speculation: 
Transition to Politics.—Pleasure, i. — 
197-199. Prominence of Pleasure 
suggested by Cyrenaics, i. 184, 
Pleasure in Plato, i. 147. Pleasure 
and pain, i. 412-414. Pleasure not 
chief good, ii. 234. Amusements, 
ii. 333. Philosophy above morality, 


INDEX OF 


ii. 338. 

337. 

VIL. Politics. Political ideas in 
Nic. Eth. i. 333-336. Ethics subor- 
dinate to Politics, i. 348. Philosophy 
end of state, i. 177-178, 348. Neces- 


Daty of. aspiration, ii. 


sity of Politics to Ethics, ii. 343-351. | 


Law universal, ii. 101, 141. Division 
of the science, ii. 168. Communities 
arise from mutual need (Platonic), 
ii. 117. Best form of government, ii. 
128. Tyranny worst form, ii. 125. 
Various forms, ii. 269-272. State 
prior in idea to family, ii. 275. Limited 
size of state, ii. 306. Legislation higher 
part of politics, ii. 347. Justice a pro- 
portion, ii. 109, 110, 124. Praises 
Sparta, ii. 345. Bad Political Economy, 
ii. 66. Money, ii. 119,122. Educa- 
tion should be public, ii. 107. Slave, 
ii. 334. Contempt for potentates, 
ii. 341. ; 

VIL. Rhetoric and Art. His ac- 
count of the rise of Rhetoric, i. 83. Art 
of composition, i. 90. The Ludicrous, 
ii. 92. Art, i, 205-206. Music, i. 
207. Masical sense, ii. 303. 

IX. Religion, i. 164-165.  Pro- 
vidence, i. 173, 235-6; ii. 342. God, 
i, 229-236, 185, 194, 196, 226; ii. 
247. ‘The gods,’ i. 233-234; ii. 128, 
275. God’s life is thought, ii. 330. 
Theology, ii. 332. Prayer, ii. 101. 

X. Lost Writings. ‘Dialogues, i. 5. 
Titles given by Diogenes, i. 9. Zuva- 
ywryh Texvav, i.83. ‘ Exoteric works,’ 


i, 329. ‘Gryllus’ i. 330. moArreta 
ii. 350. 
XI. Spurious Writings. De Virtu- 


tibus et Vitiis,i. 12. See also Eude- 
mian Ethics and Magna Moralia. 
Rhetoric to Alexander, i. 13. De 
Xenophane, &e. i. 94. De Motu 
Animalium, i. 213; ii. 186. Cate- 
gories, i. 362. 

Arrian, i. 293. 

Asceticism, i. 51. 

Aspasius, Commentator, i. 21. 

Athenians, no naval feeling, ii. 35. Their 
social freedom, ii. 345. 

Athenodorus, Stoic, i. 246,277. Another, 
j. 246, 278. 

Atticus, Platonist, i. 10. 

_ Aurelius, Marcus, i. 296-98, 


MATTERS. Ixxxul 

Bacon, quoted, ii. 335. His ‘ believing 
Christian, i. 260. Depreciates Ari- 
stotle, i. 326. His ‘ forms,’ i. 424. 

Balbus, Lucilius, i. 299. 

Barea Soranus, i. 281. 

Beauty, size essential to, ii. 73. 

Bentham, i. 124. 

Berkeley, vision, i. 189. 

Bias of Priene, i. 59. 

Boethius, i. 8. 

Brasidas, ii. 127. 

Banyan, i. 304. 

Burke, quoted, ii. 38. 

Butler compared with Stoies, i. 257; i. 
311, 314. His ‘self love, ii. 300. 
Quoted, ii. 335. 


Czeranus, Stoic, i. 282. 

Callicles, i. 107, 109. 

Cannibalism, ii. 213. 

Carneades, Academic, i. 274. 

Casaubon, i. 34. 

Catiline, ii. 59. 

Cato the Censor, i. 274. Cato of Utica, 
i. 271, 277, 283. 

Chorus, comic and tragic, ii. 71. 

Chrysippus, Stoic, i. 246, 251-252, 260, 
264, 268, 269, 270, 271, 273, ii. 200. 

Cicero mentions ‘dialogues’ and ‘com- 
mentaries’ of Aristotle, i. 5. Had no 
real acquaintance with his. philosop':y, 
i. 8. Mentions Nic. Eth. by name, i. 10. 
Does not know who wrote them, i. 13. 
Quotes Aristotle’s Suvaywyh Texvav 
on rise of rhetoric, i. 83. Hears Posi- 
donius, i. 276. His philosophy, i. 279. 
On Aristotle’s ‘exoteric discourses, i. 
329. On Aristotle’s ‘Constitutions, i. 
350. Quoted, i. 357. 

Cleanthes, i. 246, 250-251. 
i, 266-267, 268. 

Cleobulus of Lindus, i. 59. 

Clitomachus, i. 274. 

Comedy, new, ii. 91. 

Convention and nature, i. 107-109, ii. 
126-127. 

Corax, i. 83. 

Coriscus, name used as example, i, 99. 

‘Corruption, human,’ i. 321, 433. 

Crantor, Academic, i. 169. 

Crates of Thebes, i. 130, 249. 


His hymns, 





Criticism on Aristotle, ancient and mo- 
|  dern, i. 1 sqq. 

_ Critolaus, Peripatetic, i. 274. 

' Cronus, Megarian, i. 249. 


2 


Ixxxiv INDEX OF 
Customs, variety of, ii. 127. 

Cynics, i. 128-130, 146, 377. 

Cyrenaics, i, 128, 131-134, ii. 237, 320. 


Dante, quoted, i. 365. 

Delian epigram, i. 380. 

Demetrius, Peripatetic, i, 277. 

Democritus of Abdera, i. 68, 98, 108, 
116, 150, 227, 317. His arapatia, 
i. 414, : 

Demodocus of Leros, ii. 225. 

Diceearchus of Messana,quot ed, i. 57. 

Dignity, personal, among Greeks, ii. 118. 

Diogenes Laertius, his list of Aristotle's 
writings, i. 9. 

Diogenes of Sinope, i. 129-130. 

Diogenes of Babylon, i. 246, 274. 

Dionysodorus, i. 100. 

Dryden, quoted, i. 397. 

‘Duty,’ i. 212, 263, 313 sqq. 


Editors of Aristotle, their additions and 
interpolations, i. 35, 41. 

Education, systematic, begins with So- 
phists, i. 82. Position of teachers, 7b. 

Egnatius Celer, i. 281, 293. 

Eleatic ‘one, i. 364. 

Empedoeles, i. 98, 223, ii. 149. 

Epaphroditus, i. 293. 

Epicharmus, quoted, ii. 337. 

Epictetus, i, 293-296. 

Epicurism contrasted with Stoicism, i. 
247-248, 

Epicurus, i. 251, 

Ethics not a separate science before Ari- 
stotle, i, 44. Eras of morality, i. 46. 
Unconscious era, i. 48. Beauty of, 7b. 
Morality natural, i. 49. Influenced by 
Sophists, i. 101. Real ethics begin 
with Stoies, i. 244. 

Eubulides, Megarian, ii. 200. 

Eudemus of Rhodes, pupil of Aristotle, i. 7. 
No particulars of his life, i. 19. Story 
that Aristotle preferred Theophrastus, 
i. 19. His correspondence with Theo- 
phrastus, i. 20. Names of his writings, 
20, 21. 

Endemian Ethics, origin of name, i. 14. 
Negiected by commentators, i. 15. 
Commencement examined, i. 16-18. 
Often give Aristotle’s quotations, &c., 
more fully, i.17. Quoted as Eudemian 
by Aspasius, i. 21. Contents of, ib. 
Style, i.22. Compared with Aristotle's 
doctrines, i.23. Innovation on Aristotle, 





MATTERS. 


i. 24. Style,i. 37. Describe virtue as 
giving end, i. 38. Practical and moral 
tendency, i. 39. On will, i. 212, ii. 5. 
Use of phrase efwrepixo Adyor, i. 332. 
Partly separate Ethics aud Politics, i. 
848. Correct Aristotle, ii. 40. 

Three books common to them and 
Nicomachean Ethics,i.33. Hypothesis 
of Casaubon, i, 34. Arguments for 
giving them to Aristotle, i. 35.. And 
to Eudemus, 35, 39-43. Refer to Eu- 
demian Ethics, i. 39. Do not complete 
Nic. Eth. i. 39. Possible theories as to, 
i. 42-43. Treatise on Pleasure (Book 
VIL.),i.145. Theory of Justice (Book 
V.), i. 8334. Full of logical formulas, 
ii.99, 150. Of subject of incontinence, 
ii 135. Of physiology, ii. 130, 171, 
206. Differ from Aristotle, ii. 98, 107, 
157, 176, 180, 184,240. Resemble or 
quote Eth. Nic., ii. 187, 138, 173, 181, 
182, 186, 206, 209, 219, 230, 233, 
234, 241, 245,247. Resemble or quote 
Eth. Eud. ii. 98, 100, 101, 104, 129, 
130, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 167, 
168, 183, 184, 185, 194, 198, 209, 
212, 219, 226, 228, 232, 235, 243. 
Borrow from Organon, ii. 153-156. 
Metaphysics, ii. 156-158, 167, 201. 
De Animd, ii. 149, 150, 152, 162, 
Politics, ii. 109, 110, 113. 


Eudoxus of Cnidas, ii. 315-316, i. 169, 
ii. 242. On Pleasure, i. 146. 

Euthydemus, i. 100, 127. 

Euxine, ii. 213. : 

Evenus of Paros, ii, 231. 


Freedom of will, i. 316-318. 

Fritzsche, Dr. A. T. H., editor of Budemian 
Ethics, i. 34. Thinks Book V. Ari- 
stotle’s, VI. and VII. Eudemian, i. 34. 
—ii. 169. 


Gender, transition from masculine to neuter, 
i. 388. 

Goats sacrificed to Theban Ze.s, ii. 127, 
286. 

Goethe quoted, i. 124,195. Dream-images, 
ii. 142. Yonth, ii. 246. 

Good, chief, great question of Greek ethies, 
i. 66.—109. a 

Gorgias of Leonti.m, i. 81, 87-88. His 
philosophy, i. 94-98.—100, Does not 
teach virtue, i. 102, 


INDEX OF 


Hampden, Bishop, quoted, ii. 193. 

Harper, story of, ii. 282. 

Hegel quoted, i. 48. His Moralitiit and 
Sittlichkeit, i. 372.—ii. 200. 

Hegesias, i. 134. 

Heiresses, ii. 271. 

Heraclitus of Ephesus, i. 67, 150. On 
anger, i. 215.—His pride, ii 203. On 
senses, ii, 207.—ii. 253.—ii. 331. 

Herbert, George, quoted, ii. 337, 341. 

Herillus, Stoic, i. 246. 

Hermeum, ii. 41. 

Hesiod, his morality, i. 54-56. Frag 
mentary nature of Hesiodic writings, 
i. 55.—202. 

Hipparchus, son of Pisistratus, i. 51. 

Hippias of Elis, i. 86. His Neoptolemus, 
i. 105. 

Hobbes, ii. 60. 

Homer, his morality, i. 51-53. Plato’s 
respect for, i. 361. 

Honour, i. 357-358, ii. 74, 266, 279. 


Imperfect in quotations, i, 354, ii. 126, 
208, 288. 

Individual merged in State in Greece, i. 108. 

Instruments, ii. 273. 

Isocrates, i. 73. Upon Sophists and philo- 
sophers, i. 74-75, 102. On profits of 
Sophists, i. 81. On Gorgias and other 
Sophists, i. 94-95.—ii. 337. 


Jealousy, notion of divine, i. 64. 

Justinian, i. 301. 

Kant, his antinomies, i. 96. His ideal- 
ism like that of Gorgias, i. 97. 
Charges Aristotle with eudsemonism, 
i. 174. His theory of pleasure, i. 198, 
Accuses Aristotle of making only quanti- 
tative difference between virtue and vice, 
i. 208. On foundation of morals, i. 315— 
316. On freedom, ii. 20.—ii, 34.— 
ii. 64. 


Laconia invaded by Thebans, ii. 76. 

Lelius, C., i. 275. 

* Law’ in morals, i. 208-210, 263. Ro- 
man law and Stoicism, i, 299-302. 

Locke quoted, ii. 323. 

Lucilius, Epistles of Seneca addressed to 
him, i. 285 sqq. 

Lucretius, i. 279. 

Lyceum, Aristotle’s place of teaching, 
i 2: , 





MATTERS. lxxxv 


Marcellinus, friend of Seneca, i. 291-292. 

Maxims, basis of popular morality, i. 50 
sqq- Of the Seven Sages, i. 59. 

Mayo, Dr. Thomas, quoted, ii. 191. 

Megarians, their ddvauis and évépyea, i. 
183-184. Their ‘ good,’ i. 364. 

Melitus or Meletus, accuser of Socrates, 
i. 120. 

Milesians, ii. 225. 

Milton, i. 304. 

Mimnermus of Colophon, i. 58. 

Monotheism, i. 267. 

Moralia, Magna, origin of name, i. 14. 
Neglected by commentators, i. 15. 
Commencement examined, i. 18-19. 
Contents, &c., i. 24-25. Follow Ende- 
mus, 16. Begin by sketching history 
of ethies, i. 45.—i. 434, ii. 189, 197. 

Morals, see Ethics. 

Mothers, love of, ii. 267, 288. 

Mosaic code, its retaliation, ii. 117. 

Musonius Rufus, Stoic, i. 282, 293. 

Mysteries, &c., i. 64-66. 


Nature and convention, i. 107-109, ii. 
126-127. 

Neleus of Scepsis, i. 6. 

Neoptolemus, ii. 198. 

Nicomachus, father of Aristotle, i. 12. 
Son of Aristotle, i. 12-13. Notices of 
his life, i. 25-26. Did he edit Nic. 
Eth.? i. 26. 


‘ Obligation,’ i. 263. so £ 

* One,’ 364. ; - : 

Opinion, Aristotle constantly appeals to 
common, i. 44-47. His relation to, 
and borrowings from, i. 66. 


Petus, i. 282. 

Paley, i. 225, 313. 

Panetius, i. 275-276. 

Parliaments, French, ii. 22. 

Parmenides, i. 98. 

Patricius quoted, i. 67. 

Paul, St., his speech at Athens, i. 266. 

Paulus quoted, ii. 122. 

Pelagius, i. 306. 

Peripatetics, wrote works on same subjects 
as Aristotle, i. 20. 

Persseus, Stoic, i. 246. 

Petit, Samuel, his account of name Nico- 
machean, i. 12. 

Phanias, pupil of Aristotle, i. 7. 

Philetas of Cos, ii. 200. 


lxxxvl INDEX OF 


Philo, Megarian, i. 249. 

Philolaus, i. 183. 

Philosophy, transition to modern, i. 243. 

Phocylides, i, 202. 

Pittacus of Mytilene, i. 63, ii. 28, 293. 

Plato, Aristotle his pupil for twenty years, 
i. 2. 

I. General. Borrows from various 
sources, i 136, 150. Development in 
his dialogues, i. 185-137. His pre- 
sentation of Socrates, i. 119-127. On 
the Sophists, i. 78-80, 99-100, 102, 
104, 107. On Protagoras, i. 92. 

Il. Dialectic or Science of Ideas. 
Destructive dialectic, i. 47. One and 
many, i. 96. His one, i. 364. Dialec- 
tic of contraries, ib, Delays teaching 
dialectic, i. 106. “History of doctrine, 
i. 115, 149-150. Ideas,i, 151. Idea 
of good, i. 152. The same criticised 
by Aristotle, i, 153-162. Synthetic, i. 
162. Infinite and limit, i, 204. His 
method, i. 354. Idea affects life, i. 
367. Mathematics have no basis, ii. 226. 

III. Physics. Matter an ‘ undefined 
duad,’ i. 203. Heavenly bodies, i, 229. 
Purer senses, ii. 330. Division of 
mind, i. 125, 139. Reminiscence, i. 
151. Immortality, i. 

IV. L£thics and Politics, Contempt 
for unphilosophic virtue, i. 48. Diffe- 
rent moral points of view in Republic, 
i. 46. Moral responsibility, i. 317. 
Virtue cannot be teught, i. 123, 382. 
All ethical conceptions go together, i. 
137. Adds metaphysics to religion, 
i138. Ends, i. 368. Happiness, i. 
378.  Protagorean identification of 
pleasure and good, i. 124, Prominence 
of pleasure suggested by Cyrenaics, i. 
134. Pleasure, i. 197-198. Not chief 
good, ii, 234, 317, 320. Intellectual 
pleasures, ii, 322. Four virtues, i. 

426. Justice, ii. 104. Justice a pro- 
portion, ii. 109. Implies its contrary, 
ii, 137, Injustice worse than being 
injured, ii, 142. Injustice better if vo- 
luntary,i. 126. ‘ Pigeon-house,’ ii. 203. 

Praise of Sparta, ii. 345. Com- 
munity of wives from Cynics, i. 130. 
Sducation in the Laws,i. 166. Anni- 
lilates individual, i. 138, 

V. Religion and Art. Philosopher 
under care of gods, ii. 342. Prayer, ii. 
101. Rbetoric, i. 90. 





MATTERS. 


VI. Doubtful Works. Hipparchus, 
account of, i. 51. Laws, i. 167. 
Menexenus, i. 390. mept Siucatov, ii 
26. 

Plutarch, i. 5, 252, 270, ii. 62, 

Polemo, i. 169, 249. 

Polus of Agrigentum, i. 84, 109. 

Polygnotus, painter, i. 249. 

Pompey, i. 276. 

Porphyry, philosopher, his account of the 
three ethical treatises, i, 12. 

Posidonius, Stoic, i. 246, 258, 266-267. 

Poste, E., quoted, ii. 226, 

Present in quotations, i, 354. 

‘ Principle,’ i. 219. 

Prodicus of Cos, i. 85-86. Hisxpaiogaes 
i. 103. 

Promises, unfulfilled, in Nie. Eth, i. 
29-31. 

Proportion, arithmetical, ii, 113. 

Protagoras, i. 76-77, 150. On grammar, 
&e., i, 84-85. His philosophy,i. 91-94. 
—100.—His professions, i i. 102. First 
taught for money, ii. 282-283, 

Protarchus, i. 222. 

Protasis, complex, i. 391. 

Ptolemzus, Peripatetic, gives list of 
Aristotle’s writings, i. 11. 

Pythagoras, his metaphor, i. 356. : 

Pythagoreans, i 67, 116, 168, 202, 203, 
209, 238, 364, ii. 116, 261. 

Pythias, first wife of Aristotle, i. 25. 


. 


Ransom, ii. 127. 

Religion, often superstitious in Greece, i i. 
50.—ii. 263. 

Renonvier, quoted, i, 59, 131. 

Rhetoric, created .by Sophists, i. 83. 
General considerations on, i. 88-90. 
Roman tendency to, i. 278. 

‘ Right,’ i. 262. 

Rubellius Plautus, i. 282. 


Salt, proverb about, ii. 258, 

Sardanapalus, his epitaph, i. 357. - 

Sceevola, i, 299. 

Scaliger, J. C., his theory of —_— 
of Aristotelian writings, i. 3. 

Sciences, origin of division of, i. 118. 

Scythian malady, ii. 222. 

Seneca, i. 283-293. 

Senses, purer, ii. 330. 

Seven Wise Men, i. 56-59, 202. 

Sextius, Stoic, i. 280. ; 

Shakspeare quotes Nic. Eth., i. 352, On 


INDEX OF 


courage, ii, 43, Murderers, ii. 46. 
‘Kept not time,’ ii. 71. Anger, ii. 81. 
Love, ii. 292. 

Sicyonians, ii. 44. 

Sight, ii. 323. 

Simonides of Ceos, his definition of justice, 
i, 46, 64. His morality, i. 62-64. 
Patronized by Hipparchus, i. 51, 62. 
On riches, ii. 62.—i. 434. 

Socrates, i. 111.—127, 377. On Sophists, 
i. 101. On courage, ii. 40. Various 
opinions, ii. 188, 195, 197. 

Solon, his poetry and philosophy, i. 57-59. 
Isocrates on him, i. 75.—179. His 
saying discussed, i. 241, 384-390. 

Sophists, i. 68-111, 123. See also under 
Aristotle and Plato. 

Sophocles quoted, i. 387. _ = 

Sotion, Stoic, i. 280. 

Sositheus, comic poet, i. 251. 

Spengel, Professor Ludwig, bis theory as 
to the three ethical treatises, i. 16. 
Quoted, i. 410. 

Speusippus, nephew of Plato, i. 167-169, 
364, ii. 207, 234, 237-240, 315 sqq. 

Spheerus, Stoic, i. 246. 

Spinoza quoted, ii. 337. 

Stewart, Dugald, given as example of 
modern philosophy, i. 308-311. 

Stilpo, Megarian, i. 249. 
Stoies, i. 243-305. Roman Stoics, i. 129. 
Separated Ethics and Politics, i. 348. 

Suicide, i. 272, 292, ii. 141. 

‘Suitable,’ i. 262. 

Swedenborg, his clairvoyance, is 113. 

Sybarites, ii. 222. 

Syllogisms, do we always reason in? ii. 216. 


THE 


MATTERS. Ixxxvii 

Tennyson quoted, ii. 224. 

Thales of Miletus, i. 57, ii. 166. 

Theatres, sweetmeats in, i’, 329. 

Theodectes, i. 14, ii. 222. 

Theognis of Megara, i. 60-62. Quoted, ii. 

| 803, 344, 

Theophrastus, i. 6-7, ii. 244, “Story that 
Aristotle preferred him to Eudemus, i. 
19. His correspondence with Eudemus, 
i.20. Educates Nicomachus, i. 25. 

Thrasea, i. 283. 

Thrasymachus of Chalcedon, i. 46, 107, 
109. 

Thucydides, i. 71. 

Tickling, ii. 223. 

Tigellinus, i. 282. 

Tisias, i. 83. 


Utility, i. 313. 
Vatican scholium, ii, 240.. 


Wise Men, Seven, i. 56. 

Will, i. 216 sqq. 

Wordsworth quoted. Duty, i.209. Happy 
Warrior, ii. 45. 


Xenocrates, i. 169, 249, 378. 

Xenophon, i.71. On the Sophists, i. 71—. 
73,102. On Socrates, i. 117, 119-127. 
evo éBeia of his Socrates, i. 426, Eco- 
nomics quoted, ii. 275. 2. 


Zaleucus, his law of retaliation, ii. 117. 
Zeno, founder of Stoies, i. 246, 249-250. 
Zeno of Sidon, i. 246. 





END. 


LONDON 


PRINTED BY SPOTTISWOODE AND CO, 


NEW-STREET SQUARE 


« 
a 
“* 














Sheets 


At 
dey g ite 
PA maha 
a 
nG 
ine Be) 
t 


(f 


awe 


SNE 
Saas 


eS 


ey 


rh oemnes 


ae 


== 


eae 


een 
Peep SS 


n> 
re! 


ee f erahy vy; 


‘i 
per 


aren: 


a) 
a } iP 
Mi i 
is 


vi 


—— 


Soa 


< 


SES 
aSten 


a 
A 


a 
MSL Ap PL 


5 aS 


realy 
us 
NG 
WS 


“a. 
on 











