Academica by Marcus Tullius Cicero

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24

Sec.55. _Irridentur_: the contradictions of physical philosophers were the
constant sport of the sceptics, cf. Sext. _A.M._ IX. 1. _Absolute ita
paris_: Halm as well as Bait. after Christ, brackets _ita_; if any change
be needed, it would be better to place it before _undique_. For this
opinion of Democr. see R. and P. 45. _Et eo quidem innumerabilis_: this is
the quite untenable reading of the MSS., for which no satisfactory em. has
yet been proposed, cf. 125. _Nihil differat, nihil intersit_: these two
verbs often appear together in Cic., e.g._D.F._ III. 25.

Sec.56. _Potiusque_: this adversative use of _que_ is common with _potius_,
e.g._D.F._ I. 51. Cf. _T.D._ II. 55 _ingemescere nonnum quam viro concessum
est, idque raro_, also _ac potius_, _Ad Att._ I. 10, etc. _Proprietates_:
the [Greek: idiotetes] or [Greek: idiomata] of Sextus, the doctrine of
course involves the whole question at issue between dogmatism and
scepticism. _Cognoscebantur_: Dav. _dignoscebantur_, Walker
_internoscebantur_. The MSS. reading is right, cf. 86. _Consuetudine_: cf.
42, "experience". _Minimum_: an adverb like _summum_.

Sec.57. _Dinotatas_: so the MSS., probably correctly, though Forc. does not
recognise the word. Most edd. change it into _denotatas_. _Artem_: [Greek:
technen], a set of rules. _In proverbio_: so _venire in proverbium_, _in
proverbii usum venire_, _proverbii locum obtinere_, _proverbii loco dici_
are all used. _Salvis rebus_: not an uncommon phrase, e.g. _Ad Fam._ IV. 1.
_Gallinas_: cf. fragm. 19 of the _Acad. Post._ The similarity of eggs was
discussed _ad nauseam_ by the sceptics and dogmatists. Hermagoras the Stoic
actually wrote a book entitled, [Greek: oi skopia] (egg investigation)
[Greek: e peri sophisteias pros Akademaikous], mentioned by Suidas.

Sec.58. _Contra nos_: the sense requires _nos_, but all Halm's MSS. except one
read _vos_. _Non internoscere_: this is the reading of all the MSS., and is
correct, though Orelli omits _non_. The sense is, "we are quite content not
to be able to distinguish between the eggs, we shall not on that account be
led into a mistake for our rule will prevent us from making any positive
assertion about the eggs." _Adsentiri_: for the passive use of this verb
cf. 39. _Par est_: so Dav. for _per_, which most MSS. have. The older edd.
and Orelli have _potest_, with one MS. _Quasi_: the em. of Madv. for the
_quam si_ of the MSS. _Transversum digitum_: cf. 116. _Ne confundam omnia_:
cf. 53, 110. _Natura tolletur_: this of course the sceptics would deny.
They refused to discuss the nature of _things in themselves_, and kept to
_phenomena_. _Intersit_: i.e. _inter visa_. _In animos_: Orelli with one
MS. reads _animis_; if the MSS. are correct the assertion of Krebs and
Allgayer (_Antibarbarus_, ed. 4) "_imprimere_ wird klas sisch verbunden _in
aliqua re_, nicht _in aliquam rem_," will require modification. _Species et
quasdam formas_: [Greek: eide kai gene], _quasdam_ marks the fact that
_formas_ is a trans. I have met with no other passage where any such
doctrine is assigned to a sceptic. As it stands in the text the doctrine is
absurd, for surely it must always be easier to distinguish between two
_genera_ than between two individuals. If the _non_ before _vos_ were
removed a better sense would be given. It has often been inserted by
copyists when _sed_, _tamen_, or some such word, comes in the following
clause, as in the famous passage of Cic _Ad Quintum Fratrem_, II. 11,
discussed by Munro, Lucr. p. 313, ed. 3.

Sec.59. _Illud vero perabsurdum_: note the omission of _est_, which often
takes place after the emphatic pronoun. _Impediamini_: cf. n. on 33. _A
veris_: if _visis_ be supplied the statement corresponds tolerably with the
Academic belief, if _rebus_ be meant, it is wide of the mark. _Id est ...
retentio_: supposed to be a gloss by Man., Lamb., see however nn. on I. 6,
8. _Constitit_: from _consto_, not from _consisto_ cf. 63 _qui tibi
constares_. _Si vera sunt_: cf. 67, 78, 112, 148. The _nonnulli_ are Philo
and Metrodorus, see 78. _Tollendus est adsensus_: i.e. even that qualified
assent which the Academics gave to probable phenomena. _Adprobare_: this
word is ambiguous, meaning either qualified or unqualified assent. Cf. n.
on 104. _Id est peccaturum_: "which is equivalent to sinning," cf. I. 42.
_Iam nimium etiam_: note _iam_ and _etiam_ in the same clause.

Sec.60. _Pro omnibus_: note _omnibus_ for _omnibus rebus_. _Ista mysteria_:
Aug. _Contra Ac._ III. 37, 38 speaks of various doctrines, which were
_servata et pro mysteriis custodita_ by the New Academics. The notion that
the Academic scepticism was merely external and polemically used, while
they had an esoteric dogmatic doctrine, must have originated in the
reactionary period of Metrodorus (of Stratonice), Philo, and Antiochus, and
may perhaps from a passage of Augustine, _C. Ac._ III. 41 (whose authority
must have been Cicero), be attributed to the first of the three (cf. Zeller
534, n.). The idea is ridiculed by Petrus Valentia (Orelli's reprint, p.
279), and all succeeding inquirers. _Auctoritate_: cf. 8, 9. _Utroque_:
this neuter, referring to two fem. nouns, is noticeable, see exx. in Madv.
_Gram._ 214 c.

Sec.61. _Amicissimum_: "_because_ you are my dear friend". _Commoveris_: a
military term, cf. _De Div._ II. 26 and Forc., also Introd. p. 53.
_Sequere_: either this is future, as in 109, or _sequeris_, the constant
form in Cic. of the pres., must be read. _Approbatione omni_: the word
_omni_ is emphatic, and includes both qualified and unqualified assent, cf.
59. _Orbat sensibus_: cf. 74, and _D.F._ I. 64, where Madv. is wrong in
reproving Torquatus for using the phrase _sensus tolli_, on the ground that
the Academics swept away not _sensus_ but _iudicium sensuum Cimmeriis_.
Goer. qu. Plin. _N.H._ III. 5, Sil. Ital. XII. 131, Festus, s.v.
_Cimmerii_, to show that the town or village of Cimmerium lay close to
Bauli, and probably induced this mention of the legendary people. _Deus
aliquis_: so the best edd. without comment, although they write _deus
aliqui_ in 19. It is difficult to distinguish between _aliquis_ and
_aliqui_, _nescio quis_ and _nescio qui_, _si quis_ and _si qui_ (for the
latter see n. on 81). As _aliquis_ is substantival, _aliqui_ adjectival,
_aliquis_ must not be written with impersonal nouns like _terror_ (_T.D._
IV. 35, V. 62), _dolor_ (_T.D._ I. 82, _Ad Fam._ VII. 1, 1), _casus_ (_De
Off._ III. 33). In the case of personal nouns the best edd. vary, e.g.
_deus aliqui_ (_T.D._ I. 23, IV. 35), _deus aliquis_ (_Lael._ 87, _Ad Fam._
XIV. 7, 1), _anularius aliqui_ (86 of this book), _magistratus aliquis_
(_In Verr._ IV. 146). With a proper name belonging to a real person
_aliquis_ ought to be written (_Myrmecides_ in 120, see my n.).
_Dispiciendum_: not _despiciendum_, cf. _M.D.F._ II. 97, IV. 64, also _De
Div._ II. 81, _verum dispicere_. _Iis vinculis_, etc. this may throw light
on fragm. 15 of the _Acad. Post._, which see.

Sec.62. _Motum animorum_: n. on 34. _Actio rerum_: here _actio_ is a pure
verbal noun like [Greek: praxis], cf. _De Off._ I. 83, and expressions like
_actio vitae_ (_N.D._ I. 2), _actio ullius rei_ (108 of this book), and the
similar use of _actus_ in Quintilian (_Inst. Or._ X. 1, 31, with Mayor's
n.) _Iuratusque_: Bait. possibly by a mere misprint reads _iratus_.
_Comperisse_: this expression of Cic., used in the senate in reference to
Catiline's conspiracy, had become a cant phrase at Rome, with which Cic.
was often taunted. See _Ad Fam._ V. 5, 2, _Ad Att._ I. 14, 5. _Licebat_:
this is the reading of the best MSS., not _liquebat_, which Goer., Kl., Or.
have. For the support accorded by Lucullus to Cic. during the conspiracy
see 3, and the passages quoted in Introd. p. 46 with respect to Catulus, in
most of which Lucullus is also mentioned.

Sec.63. _Quod ... fecerat, ut_: different from the constr. treated by Madv.
_Gram._ 481 b. _Quod_ refers simply to the fact of Lucullus' admiration,
which the clause introduced by _ut_ defines, "which admiration he had shown
... to such an extent that, etc." _Iocansne an_: this use of _ne ... an_
implies, Madv. says (on _D.F._ V. 87), more doubt than the use of _ne_
alone as in _vero falsone_. _Memoriter_: nearly all edd. before Madv. make
this mean _e memoria_ as opposed to _de scripto_; he says, "_laudem habet
bonae et copiosae memoriae_" (on _D.F._ I. 34). See Krebs and Allgayer in
the _Antibarbarus_, ed. 4. _Censuerim_: more modest than _censeo_, see
Madv. _Gram._ 380. _Tantum enim non te modo monuit_: edd. before Madv.,
seeing no way of taking _modo_ exc. with _non_, ejected it. Madv. (_Em._
160) retains it, making it mean _paulo ante_. On the other hand, Halm after
Christ asserts that _tantum non_ = [Greek: monon ou] occurs nowhere else in
Cic. Bait. therefore ejects _non_, taking _tantum_ as _hoc tantum, nihil
praeterea_. Livy certainly has the suspected use of _tantum non_.
_Tribunus_: a retort comes in 97, 144. _Antiochum_: cf. I. 13.
_Destitisse_: on the difference between _memini_ followed by the pres. and
by the perf. inf. consult Madv. _Gram._ 408 _b_, obs. 2.

Sec.Sec.64--71. Summary. Cic. much moved thus begins. The strength of
Lucullus argument has affected me much, yet I feel that it can be
answered. First, however, I must speak something that concerns my
character (64). I protest my entire sincerity in all that I say, and
would confirm it by an oath, were that proper (65). I am a passionate
inquirer after truth, and on that very account hold it disgraceful to
assent to what is false. I do not deny that I make slips, but we must
deal with the _sapiens_, whose characteristic it is never to err in
giving his assent (66). Hear Arcesilas' argument: if the _sapiens_ ever
gives his assent he will be obliged to _opine_, but he never will
_opine_ therefore he never will give his assent. The Stoics and
Antiochus deny the first of these statements, on the ground that it is
possible to distinguish between true and false (67). Even if it be so
the mere habit of assenting is full of peril. Still, our whole argument
must tend to show that _perception_ in the Stoic sense is impossible
(68). However, a few words first with Antiochus. When he was converted,
what proof had he of the doctrine he had so long denied? (69) Some
think he wished to found a school called by his own name. It is more
probable that he could no longer bear the opposition of all other
schools to the Academy (70). His conversion gave a splendid opening for
an _argumentum ad hominem_ (71).

Sec.64. _Quadam oratione_: so Halm, also Bait. after the best MSS., not
_quandam orationem_ as Lamb., Orelli. _De ipsa re_: cf. _de causa ipsa_
above. _Respondere posse_: for the om. of _me_ before the infin, which has
wrongly caused many edd. either to read _respondere_ (as Dav., Bait.) or to
insert _me_ (as Lamb.), see n. on I. 7.

Sec.65. _Studio certandi_: = [Greek: philoneikia]. _Pertinacia ... calumnia_:
n. on 14. _Iurarem_: Cic. was thinking of his own famous oath at the end of
his consulship.

Sec.66. _Turpissimum_: cf. I. 45, _N.D._ I. 1. _Opiner_: _opinio_ or [Greek:
doxa] is judgment based on insufficient grounds. _Sed quaerimus de
sapiente_: cf. 115, _T.D._ IV. 55, 59 also _De Or._ III. 75 _non quid ego
sed quid orator_. _Magnus ... opinator_: Aug. _Contra Acad._ III. 31 qu.
this passage wrongly as from the _Hortensius_. He imitates it, _ibid._ I.
15 _magnus definitor_. _Qua fidunt_, etc.: these lines are part of Cic.'s
_Aratea_, and are quoted in _N.D._ II. 105, 106. _Phoenices_: the same fact
is mentioned by Ovid, _Fasti_ III. 107, _Tristia_ IV. 3, 1. _Sed Helicen_:
the best MSS. om. _ad_, which Orelli places before _Helicen_. _Elimatas_:
the MSS. are divided between this and _limatas_. _Elimare_, though a very
rare word occurs _Ad Att._ XVI. 7, 3. _Visis cedo_: cf. n. on 38. _Vim
maximam_: so _summum munus_ is applied to the same course of action in
_D.F._ III. 31. _Cogitatione_: "idea". _Temeritate_: cf. I. 42, _De Div._
I. 7, and the charge of [Greek: propeteia] constantly brought against the
dogmatists by Sext. _Praepostere_: in a disorderly fashion, taking the
wrong thing first.

Sec.67. _Aliquando ... opinabitur_: this of course is only true if you grant
the Academic doctrine, _nihil posse percipi_. _Secundum illud ... etiam
opinari_: it seems at first sight as though _adsentiri_ and _opinari_ ought
to change places in this passage, as Manut. proposes. The difficulty lies
in the words _secundum illud_, which, it has been supposed, must refer back
to the second premiss of Arcesilas' argument. But if the passage be
translated thus, "Carneades sometimes granted _as a second premiss_ the
following statement, that the wise man sometimes does opine" the difficulty
vanishes. The argument of Carneades would then run thus, (1) _Si ulli rei_,
etc. as above, (2) _adsentietur autem aliquando_, (3) _opinabitur igitur_.

Sec.68. _Adsentiri quicquam_: only with neuter pronouns like this could
_adsentiri_ be followed by an accusative case. _Sustinenda est_: [Greek:
ephekteon]. _Iis quae possunt_: these words MSS. om. _Tam in praecipiti_:
for the position of _in_ cf. n. on I. 25. The best MSS. have here _tamen
in_. Madv. altered _tamen_ to _tam_ in n. on _D.F._ V. 26. The two words
are often confused, as in _T.D._ IV. 7, cf. also n. on I. 16. _Sin autem_,
etc.: cf. the passage of Lactantius _De Falsa Sapientia_ III. 3, qu. by P.
Valentia (p. 278 of Orelli's reprint) _si neque sciri quicquam potest, ut
Socrates docuit, neque opinari, oportet, ut Zeno, tota philosophia sublata
est_. _Nitamur ... percipi_: "let us struggle to prove the proposition,
etc." The construction is, I believe, unexampled so that I suspect _hoc_,
or some such word, to have fallen out between _igitur_ and _nihil_.

Sec.69. _Non acrius_: one of the early editions omits _non_ while Goer. reads
_acutius_ and puts a note of interrogation at _defensitaverat_. M. _Em._
161 points out the absurdity of making Cic. say that the old arguments of
Antiochus in favour of Academicism were weaker than his new arguments
against it. _Quis enim_: so Lamb. for MSS. _quisquam enim_. _Excogitavit_:
on interrogations not introduced by a particle of any kind see Madv.
_Gram._ 450. _Eadem dicit_: on the subject in hand, of course. Taken
without this limitation the proposition is not strictly true, see n. on
132. _Sensisse_: = _iudicasse_, n. on I. 22. _Mnesarchi ... Dardani_: see
_Dict. Biogr._

Sec.70. _Revocata est_: Manut. here wished to read _renovata_, cf. n. on I.
14. _Nominis dignitatem_, etc.: hence Aug. _Contra Acad._ III. 41 calls him
_foeneus ille Platonicus Antiochus_ (that _tulchan_ Platonist). _Gloriae
causa_: cf. Aug. _ibid._ II. 15 _Antiochus gloriae cupidior quam
veritatis_. _Facere dicerent_: so Camerarius for the MSS. _facerent_.
_Sustinere_: cf. 115 _sustinuero Epicureos_. _Sub Novis_: Faber's brilliant
em. for the MSS. _sub nubes_. The _Novae Tabernae_ were in the forum, and
are often mentioned by Cic. and Livy. In _De Or._ II. 266 a story is told
of Caesar, who, while speaking _sub Veteribus_, points to a "_tabula_"
which hangs _sub Novis_. The excellence of Faber's em. may be felt by
comparing that of Manut. _sub nube_, and that of Lamb. _nisi sub nube_. I
have before remarked that _b_ is frequently written in MSS. for _v_.
_Maenianorum_: projecting eaves, according to Festus s.v. They were
probably named from their inventor like _Vitelliana_, _Vatinia_ etc.

Sec.71. _Quoque ... argumento_: the sentence is anacoluthic, the broken thread
is picked up by _quod argumentum_ near the end. _Utrum_: the neuter
pronoun, not the so called conjunction, the two alternatives are marked by
_ne_ and _an_. The same usage is found in _D.F._ II. 60, _T.D._ IV. 9, and
must be carefully distinguished from the use of _utrum ... ne ... an_,
which occurs not unfrequently in Cic., e g _De Invent._ II. 115 _utrum
copiane sit agri an penuria consideratur_. On this point cf. M. _Em._ 163,
_Gram._ 452, obs. 1, 2, Zumpt on Cic. _Verr._ IV. 73. _Honesti inane nomen
esse_: a modern would be inclined to write _honestum_, in apposition to
_nomen_, cf. _D.F._ V. 18 _voluptatis alii putant primum appetitum_.
_Voluptatem_ etc.: for the conversion of Dionysius (called [Greek: ho
metathemenos]) from Stoicism to Epicureanism cf. _T.D._ II. 60, Diog.
Laert. VII. 166--7. _A vero_: "coming from a reality," cf. 41, n. _Is
curavit_: Goer. reads _his_, "_solet V. D. in hoc pronomen saevire_," says
Madv. The scribes often prefix _h_ to parts of the pronoun _is_, and Goer.
generally patronises their vulgar error.

Sec.Sec.72--78. Summary. You accuse me of appealing to ancient names like a
revolutionist, yet Anaxagoras, Democritus, and Metrodorus, philosophers
of the highest position, protest against the truth of sense knowledge,
and deny the possibility of knowledge altogether (72, 73). Empedocles,
Xenophanes, and Parmenides all declaim against sense knowledge. You
said that Socrates and Plato must not be classed with these. Why?
Socrates said he knew nothing but his own ignorance, while Plato
pursued the same theme in all his works (74). Now do you see that I do
not merely name, but take for my models famous men? Even Chrysippus
stated many difficulties concerning the senses and general experience.
You say he solved them, even if he did, which I do not believe, he
admitted that it was not easy to escape being ensnared by them (75).
The Cyrenaics too held that they knew nothing about things external to
themselves. The sincerity of Arcesilas may be seen thus (76). Zeno held
strongly that the wise man ought to keep clear from _opinion_.
Arcesilas agreed but this without _knowledge_ was impossible.
_Knowledge_ consists of _perceptions_. Arcesilas therefore demanded a
definition of _perception_. This definition Arcesilas combated. This is
the controversy which has lasted to our time. Do away with _opinion_
and _perception_, and the [Greek: epoche] of Arcesilas follows at once
(77, 78).

Sec.72. _De antiquis philosophis_: on account of the somewhat awkward constr.
Lamb. read _antiquos philosophos_. _Popularis_: cf. 13. _Res non bonas_:
MSS. om. _non_, which Or. added with two very early editions. Faber
ingeniously supposed the true reading to be _novas_, which would be written
_nobas_, and then pass into _bonas_. _Nivem nigram_: this deliverance of
Anaxagoras is very often referred to by Sextus. In _P.H._ I. 33 he quotes
it as an instance of the refutation of [Greek: phainomena] by means of
[Greek: nooumena], "[Greek: Anaxagoras toi leuken einai ten chiona,
anetithei hoti chion estin hydor pepegos to de hydor esti melan kai he
chion ara melaina]." There is an obscure joke on this in _Ad Qu. Fratrem_
II. 13, 1 _risi nivem atram ... teque hilari animo esse et prompto ad
iocandum valde me iuvat_. _Sophistes_: here treated as the demagogue of
philosophy. _Ostentationis_: = [Greek: epideixeos].

Sec.73. _Democrito_: Cic., as Madv. remarks on _D.F._ I. 20, always
exaggerates the merits of Democr. in order to depreciate the Epicureans,
cf. _T.D._ I. 22, _De Div._ I. 5, II. 139, _N.D._ I. 120, _De Or._ I. 42.
_Quintae classis_: a metaphor from the Roman military order. _Qui veri esse
aliquid_, etc.: cf. _N.D._ I. 12 _non enim sumus ii quibus nihil verum esse
videatur, sed ii qui omnibus veris falsa quaedam adiuncta dicamus_. _Non
obscuros sed tenebricosos_: "not merely dim but darkened." There is a
reference here to the [Greek: skotie gnosis] of Democr., by which he meant
that knowledge which stops at the superficial appearances of things as
shown by sense. He was, however, by no means a sceptic, for he also held a
[Greek: gnesie gnosis], dealing with the realities of material existence,
the atoms and the void, which exist [Greek: eteei] and not merely [Greek:
nomoi] as appearances do. See R. and P. 51.

Sec.74. _Furere_: cf. 14. _Orbat sensibus_: cf. 61, and for the belief of
Empedocles about the possibility of [Greek: episteme] see the remarks of
Sextus _A.M._ VII. 123--4 qu. R. and P. 107, who say "_patet errare eos qui
scepticis adnumerandum Empedoclem putabant_." _Sonum fundere_: similar
expressions occur in _T.D._ III. 42, V. 73, _D.F._ II. 48. _Parmenides,
Xenophanes_: these are the last men who ought to be charged with
scepticism. They advanced indeed arguments against sense-knowledge, but
held that real knowledge was attainable by the reason. Cf. Grote, _Plato_
I. 54, Zeller 501, R. and P. on Xenophanes and Parmenides. _Minus bonis_:
Dav. qu. Plut. _De Audit._ 45 A, [Greek: mempsaito d' an tis Parmenidou ten
stichopoiian]. _Quamquam_: on the proper use of _quamquam_ in clauses where
the verb is not expressed see _M.D.F._ V. 68 and cf. I. 5. _Quasi irati_:
for the use of _quasi_ = almost cf. _In Verr. Act._ I. 22, _Orat._ 41.
_Aiebas removendum_: for om. of _esse_ see n. on I. 43. _Perscripti sunt_:
cf. n. on I. 16. _Scire se nihil se scire_: cf. I. 16, 44. The words
referred to are in Plat. _Apol._ 21 [Greek: eoika goun toutou smikroi tini
autoi toutoi sophoteros einai, hoti a me oida oude oiomai eidenai], a very
different statement from the _nihil sciri posse_ by which Cic. interprets
it (cf. R. and P. 148). That [Greek: episteme] in the strict sense is
impossible, is a doctrine which Socrates would have left to the Sophists.
_De Platone_: the doctrine above mentioned is an absurd one to foist upon
Plato. The dialogues of search as they are called, while exposing sham
knowledge, all assume that the real [Greek: episteme] is attainable.
_Ironiam_: the word was given in its Greek form in 15. _Nulla fuit ratio
persequi_: n. on 17.

Sec.75. _Videorne_: = _nonne videor_, as _videsne_ = _nonne vides_. _Imitari
numquam nisi_: a strange expression for which Manut. conj. _imitari? num
quem_, etc., Halm _nullum unquam_ in place of _numquam_. Bait. prints the
reading of Man., which I think harsher than that of the MSS. _Minutos_: for
the word cf. _Orat._ 94, also _De Div._ I. 62 _minuti philosophi_, _Brut._
256 _minuti imperatores_. _Stilponem_, etc.: Megarians, see R. and P.
177--182. [Greek: sophismata]: Cic. in the second edition probably
introduced here the translation _cavillationes_, to which Seneca _Ep._ 116
refers, cf. Krische, p. 65. _Fulcire porticum_: "to be the pillar of the
Stoic porch". Cf. the anonymous line [Greek: ei me gar en Chrysippos, ouk
an en Stoa]. _Quae in consuetudine probantur_: n. on 87. _Nisi videret_:
for the tense of the verb, see Madv. _Gram._ 347 _b_, obs. 2.

Sec.76. _Quid ... philosophi_: my reading is that of Durand approved by Madv.
and followed by Bait. It is strange that Halm does not mention this
reading, which only requires the alteration of _Cyrenaei_ into _Cyrenaici_
(now made by all edd. on the ground that _Cyrenaeus_ is a citizen of
Cyreno, _Cyrenaicus_ a follower of Aristippus) and the insertion of _tibi_.
I see no difficulty in the _qui_ before _negant_, at which so many edd.
take offence. _Tactu intimo_: the word [Greek: haphe] I believe does not
occur in ancient authorities as a term of the Cyrenaic school; their great
word was [Greek: pathos]. From 143 (_permotiones intimas_) it might appear
that Cic. is translating either [Greek: pathos] or [Greek: kinesis]. For a
clear account of the school see Zeller's _Socrates_, for the illustration
of the present passage pp 293--300 with the footnotes. Cf. also R. and P.
162 sq. _Quo quid colore_: cf. Sext. _A.M._ VII. 191 (qu. Zeller _Socrates_
297, R. and P. 165). _Adfici se_: = [Greek: paschein]. _Quaesieras_: note
the plup. where Eng. idiom requires the perfect or aorist. _Tot saeculis_:
cf. the same words in 15. _Tot ingeniis tantisque studiis_: cf. _summis
ingeniis, maximis studiis_ in 15. _Obtrectandi_: this invidious word had
been used by Lucullus in 16; cf. also I. 44.

Sec.77. _Expresserat_: "had put into distinct shape". Cf. 7 and I. 19.
_Exprimere_ and _dicere_ are always sharply distinguished by Cic., the
latter merely implying the mechanic exercise of utterance, the former the
moulding and shaping of the utterance by conscious effort; cf. esp. _Orat._
3, 69, and _Ad Att._ VIII. 11, 1; also _De Or._ I. 32, _De Div._ I. 79, qu.
by Krebs and Allgayer. The conj. of Dav. _exposuerat_ is therefore
needless. _Fortasse_: "we may suppose". _Nec percipere_, etc.: cf. 68, n.
_Tum illum_: a change from _ille, credo_ (sc. _respondit_), the _credo_
being now repeated to govern the infin. For the constr. after _ita
definisse_ cf. _M.D.F._ II. 13 (who quotes exx.); also the construction
with _ita iudico_ in 113. _Ex eo, quod esset_: cf. 18, n. _Effictum_: so
Manut. for MSS. _effectum_, cf. 18. _Ab eo, quod non est_: the words _non
est_ include the two meanings "is non existent," and "is different from
what it seems to be"--the two meanings of _falsum_ indeed, see n. on 47.
_Eiusdem modi_: cf. 40, 84. MSS. have _eius modi_, altered by Dav. _Recte
... additum_: the semicolon at _Arcesilas_ was added by Manutius, who is
followed by all edd. This involves taking _additum_ = _additum est_, an
ellipse of excessive rarity in Cic., see Madv. _Opusc._ I. 448, _D.F._ I.
43, _Gram._ 479 a. I think it quite possible that _recte consensit additum_
should be construed together, "agreed that the addition had been rightly
made." For the omission of _esse_ in that case cf. Madv. _Gram._ 406, and
such expressions as _dicere solebat perturbatum_ in 111, also _ita
scribenti exanclatum_ in 108. _Recte_, which with the ordinary stopping
expresses Cic.'s needless approval of Arcesilas' conduct would thus gain in
point. Qy, should _concessit_ be read, as in 118 _concessisse_ is now read
for MSS. _consensisse_? _A vero_: cf. 41.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24