Allan D. J. - ΑΝΑΓΙΓΝΩΣΚΩ and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)

download Allan D. J. - ΑΝΑΓΙΓΝΩΣΚΩ and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)

of 9

Transcript of Allan D. J. - ΑΝΑΓΙΓΝΩΣΚΩ and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    and Some Cognate Words

    Author(s): D. J. AllanSource: The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 30, No. 1 (1980), pp. 244-251Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: .

    Accessed: 09/08/2011 08:29

    Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

    JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

    content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

    of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

    Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

    and extend access to The Classical Quarterly.
  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    ANAFIlFN 2zK2 AND SOME COGNATE WORDSPresumably it is common ground that this verb has in addition to the basic sense'recognize' the derivative sense 'read', and that one must judge from the contextwhether reading to one or more other people, or private reading, is meant.' Thereading of the text of a law to a jury at an orator's request is marked by the cir-cumstances themselves as public reading; so is the reading of the Athenian decreeto the Mitylenaeans in Thucydides.2 When Theaetetus answers in the affirmativethe question whether he has read the book of Protagoras which contains thestatement that man is the measure of all things (&hvywcoKa,Kai7rokXXc);3 orwhen it is asked 'Why is it that some people, if they begin to read, are overcomeby sleep even against their will, whereas others wishing to be overcome by sleepare kept awake by taking up a book?'4 Evidently what is intended is reading inthe privacy of one's own room. When Socrates in the Phaedo says that he hearda person reading from Anaxagoras and eagerly took the book home to read (97B-98 B), both senses are found within a few pages. Finally it is obvious that infifth century Athens the reading of poems and prose works to an audience wasa mode of publication, though not necessarily the only one: Lyco, fourth headof the Peripatos, who died c. 225 B.C., bequeathes to his servant Chares thoseof his own books which he has read, and to his colleague Callinus his unpublishedworks (anekdota) with a request that he may carefully edit them.5But on turning from the verb to the associated nouns and adjectives, we soonget on to more difficult terrain, as I shall try to show from a few instances.ANAGNO STIKOS POIETESLiddell and Scott distinguish two senses of the adjective &va vwartd6: 1, 'fondof reading', Plutarch, de garrulitate 514 A; 2, 'suitable for reading', Aristotle,Rhet. 3. 12, 1413b 12. It is therefore opposed to d&yovtzrudc: the text is asfollows:CanrS6%Xt ypaowu~) v 7) &Kp4e6orr,&7CV7T77i &S0%oKptrtrcrrKr(ravir7 8& 60d5'&77,?uv yaLp7Otu?8e 7raOr77~urtK)6a- oirioKptrai ra70ota7aTwVS8paltdrwvt8twKOVct,Katoi rotiTraioN)rotowrov .aoard&o~rat6oi dvayvwcortuto(,ov Xatp~pwv(duppe7 ydp 6owrepXoyoypdqoc),KaiAutKwvtoqrOv.8tOvpa4p3orrotLv.(1413b 9-14)The assignmentof this passage o the secondheadingseemsto havewon theunanimousassentof editors,and two slightlydifferentEnglish ranslationshaveemerged:a. 'Yet poets whose plays are meant to be read are read and circulated;Chairemon,or instance,who is as finished as a professional peech-writer;andLicymniusamongthe dithyrambicpoets': so somewhatparaphrastically,

    1 The history of this, and semanticallyrelated verbs, is discussed by P. Chantraine,'Les verbes grecs signifiant "lire" (Qvayty-v$uo(w, trrnLAyoplat, vrvvyxdvw, dvahX'o-gat)', HIAKAPHEIA. Melanges H. Gregoire2 = Annuaire de l'Inst. de Philol. et d'Hist.Orientales et Slaves 10 (1950), 115-26:

    pp. 115-121 are on anagignuska: on publicand private reading see 120.2 Thuc. 3.49.4.' Plato, Tht. 152 A.4 Arist. Probl. 18.1, 916b2-4, E. S.Forster's transl., Loeb edn.s D.L. 5.73.

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    ANAFIFNP1 eKn2 AND SOME COGNATE WORDS 245W. Rhys Roberts.6 Similarly J. E. C. Welldon, and R. C. Jebb both have'poets who write to be read'.7b. 'The poets who can be read are continually in our hands'; thus M. E.Hubbard.8On the border-line is E. M. Cope in his commentary on the Rhetoric:9 'At thesame time the poets that can be read (that write to be read as well as acted orrhapsodised) become pocket-companions or favourites'.A version of type (b) seems to give an unhelpful tautology: we do indeed carryabout for private reading what can be read, and it would be foolish to do other-wise. Or if it is proposed to restrict the meaning to what can be read withpleasure - is there not another word for this, namely e)avd'vwaoroC?10With a version of type (a), tautology is barely avoided: the statement madedoes contain a particle of fact, namely that authors who have addressed readersrather than spectators have generally achieved their aim. But it is hard to believethat hope or purpose can be conveyed merely by the termination -ikos. What Iwish to maintain is that the suggested second sense of &vazvw`ortKd is anillusion.To keep here only to the Aristotelian instances, adjectives which have thistermination qualify an art or capacity or, where appropriate, its possessor, forexample: 7cv 8rptovptyr7adaavTxvM7VvOewpoIpev,owiv Tv7pa5tKUi 7V7rXaartu~'v.11 his is their primary use. The most that can be said against this isthat the adjective is easily transferred from the person to his product or per-

    formance; thus rtietutru6 denotes a type of speaker but applies secondarily tothe kind of oration he delivers, and in the above Rhetoric passage )T7roKptrtr~means 'actor-like' or 'fit for an actor'. So a&vayvcwrtu6emay be expected tomean capable of reading, a specialist in it, fond of it - anything rather thanreadable, though that sense cannot be entirely excluded. It may, however, besaid that there is a fatal flaw in any such generalization. AeKTtK6d,wice used inPoetics ch. 4, means at least according to some versions 'easily spoken'. If this iscorrect, why should not an &dvavxo0rtnKixo7roTr7 be one who is suitable forreading? After all, -ikos adjectives do have the general sense of 'to do with', andmay be either active or passive. If &vayvwortudo6 as been formed from a&vy-vwCroCor avdvcwaroq - rather than &vddyvwoat it is more likely to be passive,in so far as -tos adjectives usually are.12Or is the translation of the text from Rhet. 3 equally at fault in both cases?Further light on the question may be cast by some other uses of XeKr7U6dnAristotle. I quote a passage from Poetics 4, 1449a 22-8:r6d PVYdP rrpCro-VrerparpTw XPcwro 8t d r6 arvptuK7Vai6pX7aUrt~wrpav

    6 The Worksof Aristotle translatedinto English, ed. W. D. Ross, ix (Oxford,1924).7 Welldon, The Rhetoric of Aristotle,transl. with an analysis and critical notes(London, 1886), trans., p. 271; Jebb, TheRhetoric of Aristotle. A. Translation, ed.,with an intro. etc., by J. E. Sandys (Cam-bridge, 1909).8 In D. A. Russell and M. Winterbottom,eds., Ancient Literary Criticism (Oxford,1972), p. 156.

    9 The Rhetoric of Aristotle, with aCommentary (Cambridge, 1877) iii, ad. loc.10 In Arist. Rhet. 3.5, 1407b11, andDemetrius, On Style 193: ypa4LK?i6' hAiXteh eaavadyvwaroc." P.A. 1, 645a 12 f.12 Cf. the collections of material and dis-cussions in C. D. Buck and W. Petersen, AReverse Index of Greek Nouns and Adjec-tives (Chicago, n.d. [1945) esp. the dis-cussion on pp. 469-71 (-roc) and 636-8

    (-Koq, -LKOq,etc.)

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    246 D. J. ALLANetvaa ?v roT77w,'?eC e8YeevogEcyari ? oivt r6o iKeov grpozvz)pe.pdIXtr-ayadpXeKr71Kdvdv rpwVrdiapcetdv orw- orjpe7ov&6roTrovo, hrXel(a,yp hzpq3eiayopev &v - 65taeKr 7-7 qp6 &hhXXovq, 6perpa 6 6y6tCtKt.aiCKf3a'vovZrecjT XeKrTKiW&pAOViao.Here we can best start from Bywater's exposition. Commenting on 6p>X'ort-KwTrpav he writes: '6pXort~ud in this connexion means practically pqr77Kd%66pXUoewC,just as i'OtK6d n the Poetics (see on 6, 1450a29) means tp7?rTtKO7iOovq.imilarly XeK7tu6d p rU kTK6C X~ewC (comp. 21, 1459al2), 7rpaKr7tUKE=tqip-6' Irpdewq, and iraOr'rtuK6 jqirpu6 r~ov ,.13This excellent note, which puts the facts in a nutshell, would seem to rule outthe translation 'speakable'. It is therefore with some surprise that, on turning toBywater's version, we find that just this word has been used: 'The iambic, weknow, is the most speakable of metres, as is shown by the fact that we veryoften fall into it in conversation, whereas we rarely talk hexameters, and onlywhen we depart from the speaking tone of voice.'Two objections suggest themselves. First, 'speakable' does not mean 'resem-bling speech'. Bywater has here taken a liberty with the English language.Secondly, an uninstructed reader of his version would naturally take it to meanthat the iambic metre gained its place in tragedy because it is suited to deliveryby an actor, which may be true, but is not what Aristotle is saying. His claim isthat the iambic metre lends itself more than does the hexameter to representa-tion of unstudied speech, not that iambic lines are easily spoken; these are twosomewhat different facts, of which the latter is a consequence of the former. Sothere is much to be said for S. H. Butcher's version: 'For the iambic is, of allmeasures, the most colloquial: we see it in the fact that conversational speechruns into iambic lines more frequently than into any other kind of verse; rarelyinto hexameters, and only when we drop the colloquial intonation.'14 A. Rostagnigives the translation: 'il piji discorsivo', and comments, 'cio& l piuiconforme altono della comune conversazione'. s The comparable passage in Rhetoric 3. 8,1408b 32 f.: 7C3Tv %-vOup 6pV'UV ipCo oepU~ Kai XeKru7tKq16ppoViaCI e6qde8 o...', is translated by W. Rhys Roberts as follows: 'The heroic rhythm has dignity,but lacks the tone of the spoken language.'

    The use of XeKru6o, then, after all provides no parallel for the interpretationof &dvavwourucd6s 'readable' in Rhetoric 3.12. Aristotle, I suggest, is herecasually alluding to the existence in his own time of a class of dramatic authorswho wrote without any thought of performance, but read their own compositionsand cultivated a literary style suitable for such occasions. The effect of his remarkis that the dramatists and dithyramb-writers who read their work to the public,in preference to having it staged, are also a favourite choice for private reading.'713 I. Bywater, Aristotle on the Art ofPoetry (Oxford, 1909), ad 1449a 23.14 Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and FineArt3 (London, 1902), trans.1s Aristotele. Poetica2 (Turin, 1945),ad. loc.16 hEKTLKr7 is a generally received emen-dation of the MS. reading heKTLK0d aL."1 A possible parallel for works aimed atpublic reading, in the time of Cleanthes,may be provided by an anecdote in D. L.

    7.163: CotOLov 70ronlr7oToo Cv Oed'rpyeindvroc irp6qard6v irapdvra, oqk+7KheidvOovu pwpla 3ol77arEL,epLEweEV nirTraro3 oxariparo?0' 4, tyacrOvrec oliKpoaTaL7rdv L)%Kpd~"rlaav, 7"Tv& wal-Oeov ?t3ahXov, where Elrrdtroc is practicallyequivalent to vagyviv-roc (cf. R. D. Hicks'stransl., in the Loeb. edn., 'uttered theverse'). Whether the passage in the Poeticsin which Aristotle takes note of the readingof tragedies ( 7 ydp rT7qrpayw6Slacq 5vamLq

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    ANArIrN92FK92 AND SOME COGNATE WORDS 247ANAGNOSISi7IAvoiv 1&rt6ELKtrUdtq 'ypa0ucWrcir7'6 'yapp-yovi~ )rri?b'yvoat.&evrepab il6ucavui'. (Rhet. 3. 12, 1414a 17 f.) Which type of reading ismeant - public or private? Or is the point intentionally left undetermined?This is hard to decide, and of no great practical importance. An orator deliver-ing a festival speech or funeral oration from a prepared text, even though heused abundant gestures, might still be described as 'reading'. When deducing theexistence of three kinds of oratory at the opening of 1.3, Aristotle says that thelistener (akroatis) must be either an observer (theoros) or a judge, and in thelatter case a judge either of what has been done or of impending events. One wholistens to a declamatory speech is an observer of dynamis, i.e. apparently ofthe orator's ability. This does not help us, since even the person who is sittingalone and reading is a kind of listener, or observer.ANAGNOSTESI wish now to discuss a text from the Life of Aristotle known as Vita Marciana.18The essential facts about its origin are that it is derived, but probably after muchcompression and interpolation, from a Life composed by a certain Ptolemy, whoat the same time produced a systematic Catalogue of Aristotle's writings, doubt-less a revision of that drawn up by Andronicus. This Catalogue has not survivedin the Greek, but has reached us in a Syro-Arabic version. A. Dihle and I. Diiringindependently arrived at the view that the biographer Ptolemy was a neo-Platonist mentioned by lamblichus and Proclus, and not, as had sometimes beensupposed, the Ptolemaeus Chennus who lived c. A.D. 100 and is known fromPhotius' extract19 from his Katl 'Ioropia.20The V.M. has this to say about Aristotle's life in the Academy: Kaio3rtoctXdhrovwq HXdmwo An rc)v olKtWVzro6 &avaayW'urovicla7vrpouayopevOivat"Oapadp HlXdrwvX- Xe'yeV,AiCwpev eiC7v 7r0o&vavyurov obdcav,Kaia&r67roqriq &xpodaewC&vegpda'O Node&reart,,K.oodv r7d K.poar pwto.21Diiringcom-ments as follows:22It is curious that this anecdote, which says something very essential about the difference ofapproach between Plato and Aristotle, is found only in this obscure place. The status of an&vaeyvaor7rlcin the Academy was that of a servant;he was probably a slave trained for histask .... Most people, including the young men in the Academy, 'heard' books; AristotleKatavev hydyvoc Kat nroKpLtrovrw ,1450b 18 f.; cf. 1462a 12 St&"yp rd tva-yLVWoaKetV avep& 6nola ri eiarv) hasreference to public or to private reading,I shall not here try to decide. Either makesgood sense in the context.18 This is so-called owing to its appear-ance in a single manuscript of the fourteenthcentury, cod. Marc. 257, where it is pre-ceded by an anonymous commentary on thede Interpretatione.19 Bibl., cod. 190.20 For detail, I would refer to A. Busse,'Die Neuplatonische Lebensbeschreibungdes Aristoteles', Hermes 23 (1893), 252-76; A. Dihle, 'Der Platoniker Ptolemaios',Hermes 85 (1957), 314-25; I. Diring,Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical

    Tradition (Gothenburg, 1957), pp. 94-119and 184-246. Duiringhas greatly assistedfuture research in making available thetexts of the ancient and medieval Lives,together with an English translation ofSyriac and Arabic material derived ulti-mately from the Life by Ptolemy. Cf. nowalso P. Moraux, Der Aristotelismus bei denGriecben von Andronikos bis Alexandervon Apbrodisias i (Berlin, 1973), 64-94,whose conclusions do not entirely coincidewith those of Dihle and During.

    21 The text is partly obliterated here, butthe Latin Life has, 'intellectus abest, surdumest auditorium' (printed e.g. in V. Rose,Aristotelis Fragmenta (Leipzig, 1886),p. 443; Diuring,op. cit. (n.20), p. 152).22 Ibid.108.

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    248 D. J.ALLANdifferedrom hemajorityn thisrespect he 'read' ooks swedo;we havehisownwords orthisfact."2Afterhim hisbecamemuchmore ommon,nd ojokewith hishabitwould henhavebeenpointless. his swhyIbelievehat hisstory s true: hepointis understandablenly f thedictumwascoinedn the360's.

    It is interesting hat ProfessorO. Gigon,while findingit perfectlycompre-hensible that the polymathAristotle should be regarded s a patternof encyclo-pedic knowledge,should add an importantreservation. n an articlepromptedbythe appearance f Diiring'sworkhe writes 'Wasstirt, ist (trotz dem auchsonstanfechtbarenKommentarDiiringsS.103) die Szenerie:derMeister,dermit derJiungerscharen fleissigstenunter allenJiingern n seinerZelleaufsuchengeht.'24I amentirelyof the sameopinion;the behaviourascribedon this viewto Plato,in returningagainandagainwith visitorsto the scene, seemsremarkable, venbizarre.It seems to me that a freshstudy of this text is called for.Did those who repeated his story then, that is, Ptolemyandthose who usedhis workfor teaching n neo-Platoniccircles,simplymeanthat Aristotlewaswhatcollegetutorsof a bygone generationwouldhave called 'a hard-readingman'?Withthe ambiguityof &vaytyvUfKcown mind,we mightunderstandt in this way:Plato often proposeda visit to Aristotle's odgingsbecausehe likedto hearhimread a philosophical ext, perhapswith commentaryand criticism.Conversely(KairoT'roc etc.), if he noticed the absence of Aristotle from his own lecture hewasdisappointed:quoting,apparently,a line of Epicharmus e exclaimedthathisaudiencewasdead.2sIf so, the two partsof the anecdotebelong together,andit clearlycomesfrom a source favourable o Aristotle.In this case,we shallloseDiiring'sreasonfor accepting he story, thoughone may decide on some othergroundthat it is credible.But the reliabilityof the tale is not my presentconcern.To deal next with some apparentobjections.Themention of Aristotle'sindustry(tbXorovia)does no doubt tend to favourDiring's exposition. But theremark s intelligibleon my view also, if it is recognized hat the preparation flectures is a form of rdvoc.As for the claim that the statusof andvayvoeurC inthe Academywasthat of a servant; t is true (1) that Plato hasrepresentedEuclidesof Megara s having n his householda servant rainedfor this function,26(2) that the noun is used in that senseby Cicero,CorneliusNepos,and Plutarch nhisLife of Crassus,27nd (3) that thereis no instanceof its occurrence n anothersense,unless a passage n Epictetus1.26.1328andthatin V.M.are such.But,lookingto the situationrather hanto the wordused,thereareplenty of instancesfromPlato onwardsof readingsof prosebooks preceded, nterrupted,or followedby explanationand discussion readingswhichmaybe either to a single personor to a largeraudience. Besides hose in Plato'sdialogues,note Aristotle,Pro-trepticus r. 1,29 Cratesand the cobbler,a story derived rom Zeno the Stoic, andps.-Demosthenes 1, Eroticus,which has a prefacebeginning: But sinceyou wish

    23 Diring, ibid., refers to Top. 1.14,105b 12-18, where Aristotle advises thetrainee in dialectic to make his own selec-tion from written Xdyot.24 'Interpretationen zu den antikenAristoteles-Viten', MH 15 (1958), 157.21 Diels-Kranz, Vorsokr.' (Berlin,1951), 23 B 12. The Syriac translator took

    KWOdV in the sense dumb and supposed thateaorwis to be supplied: 'Let the audience

    keep silence (until he arrives)'.26 Tbt.143 C.27 Cic. Att. 1.12.4, Cornelius Nepos,Att. 13.3, Plut. Crass.2.7,544a; LSJ alsocite Philodemus, Rb. i.199 Sudhaus, where,however, the word is partly restored.28 Cited by Chantraine, loc. cit (n.1),p. 120: this instance is not given by LSJ.29 In the editions of Walzerand Ross.

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    ANAIPrNn EK2 AND SOME COGNATE WORDS 249to hear the logos, I'll show it and read it to you' (6Seio oot Kaidvayvuoolat).Incidentally this later includes an instance of XeKruc6tn the sense 'speech-like': roiqC v d'p XeKtoq 7rCov 6'yyVd&rXCCai

    6odoiCCqoq dVeK ro nrapax-

    piyid rcte'trnotpLret ye'ypdcOa,roiq6' etq r6v rXei~cXp6voveOuoog~VotqTrornrurCqKai7teptrr6tCd&PAd6etUv'yKELOatibid. 2). In the Pbaedo, 97 B: &XX'duxoolac ev nrore&K 3XWiovTwdv, jq 6O, 'Avagay6pov dvaytyv&UKOVTOq,aiXAyovrocdcq pa vove ~7rw 6 5taKoaUcOvr6eKaL rcwv a'rOOCrarn7 6irijtair7iau0prav.. the last part might refer to words of explanation added by thereader; this is no doubt uncertain, but it would be better not to give a para-phrase or version which excludes that possibility. Most of those which I haveseen do so, e.g.Afterwards ocrateshearsa passage f Anaxagoras,wherein hatphilosopher eclares hatmindis the universal ause.(R. D. Archer-Hind)30Socrates hen heard omeonereading louda bookby Anaxagoras,he philosophic riendofPericles,whichsaid that the worldhadbeen orderedby anIntelligence.. (F. M.Cornford)31I heard omeonereading n extractfromwhathe saidwas a bookby Anaxagoras,o theeffect that it is Mind hatarrangesll things n order.. . (R. Hackforth)32Hackforth adds: 'Whether or not we take this incident as historical, it is natural,asJ. Burnet says,33 to think of the reader as Archelaus, the successor of Anaxago-ras at Athens'.It is not, then, positively said either that the reader enlarged upon the text, orthat questions from his audience followed, or that Socrates spoke at the time.But all these things are likely, the more so if Burnet's suggestion is right, and atranslation which commits us to a mere reading does not give the full effect of thepassage. However this may be, readers of books who added introductory sen-tences, made extracts, and participated freely in discussion were not servants.The noun &vayvjuoorTqmay not yet have been in use in Plato's day. The verb, Iwould think, already connoted, for philosophers at least, a public reading withcommentary, the latter variable in extent according to circumstances. Informaldiscussion arising from a text may, as I have elsewhere suggested,34 be what isintended in de Anima 407b27-30. For convenience, I give the text: Kat' XXvq5T Lrq56a rapa&6o'ratnept vXiqc, 0lav? gvIroXpe ol oi)6e oiaq TTrrovwCvXe'yolvwov, X6dyovq' Wounepe606votq(Apelt, for eOO6vaq) e6Kvuta Ka TO-qCVKOLV)'YLVOeOVOCtv.l. Xe0yoVotq)X6dyotqAppoviavydp7vd aTrjl)X~'yovut.Here as a prelude to his criticism of the opinion that the soul is a barmoniaof physical qualities Aristotle says that this view has been submitted to scrutiny(X6dyovq oxnrep O)vot 6e60oKvvia)n discussions which are35occurring bv KOLVP.The Phaedo would be the obvious starting-point for these, and we know thatAristoxenus and Strato both thought the refutation used in that dialogue un-satisfactory.Among the Greek commentators, Philoponus expounds the phrase 'v KowvP

    30 The Phaedo of Plato (London, 1883),ad. loc.31 Before and After Socrates (Cam-bridge, 1932), pp. 2 f.32 Plato's Phaedo (Cambridge, 1955),trans.33 Plato's Phaedo, ed. with intro. and

    notes (Oxford,1911), ad.loc.34 'Aristotleand theParmenides',nAristotleandPlatoin the mid-fourthcentury,ed. I. Duiringnd G. E. L.Owen(Gothenburg, 960), pp. 135 Or'havebeen',if ywotpdvotCepre-sentsanimperfectndicative.

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    250 D. J. ALLANetc. as referring itherto unwrittendiscussionsbetweenAristotle andhis col-leagues,or to exotericwritingssuchasthe dialogueEudemus; he formerwouldcoincide with my suggestion:Xyot 6' dv j tr&&'ypd6ova"robuvovourovac 7rp6roCr&raipov7, ~a& wrepuPtavyypdqppIara, v eilt Kaioi &dX0oyot, OvE&'5ppoC.36Is it a coincidencethat in anotherworkPhiloponus howsknowledgeof thebiographerPtolemy's story about Plato'shigh opinionof Aristotle?riCyap&tomordrTepocudprv rCTHXqldrwvoC6?r ybvocr' v 'Apt17oroov, k eMKooLIuv rov vtavro e 1eyaOrqrevKK'vaLXyerat H rWVt....r 0H7lrcwvo TroUoTrov7rlC&y1(woitaayLo,

  • 7/28/2019 Allan D. J. - and Some Cognate Words (CQ, 1980)


    ANAIIrNINEK AND SOME COGNATE WORDS 251Ross gives the translation: 'For great mental effort must be applied to theexplaining of Aristotle, if you are to read him.'" Rabinowitz45 translates: 'If onereads Aristotle, a great effort of mind is required to undo his complexities.' He

    then states a difficulty (p. 27):Yet Cicero'sdescriptions f Aristotle's tyle andexpositionasbrilliant, learandtrans-lucentare adduced o support he theorythatAristotle n anearlyperiodwrote exotericworkswhichwereeasier o understand ndmorepopular han his latertreatises. t follows,then,either that the statementof Ciceroaboutthe difficultyof understanding ristotlewhich hasbeenpreserved y Nonius s a reference o the treatises,or, if the statementdoesrefer to the Protrepticus, that the Protrepticus must not be considered an exoteric work.46

    I agree that there is a problem for consideration, but only so long as it isassumed that private reading is meant. This would appear to be a practice whollyoutside Rabinowitz's experience. It was not outside Cicero's, for he speaks ofreading his own dialogue On the Republic to Sallustius.47 I can see no goodreason, stylistic or other, for the omission of in explicando. The remark may (ineffect) mean: 'If you propose to conduct a seminar on Aristotle you must dosome homework and expect some awkward questions.' Further, Cicero couldreasonably say so even if his knowledge of Aristotle were limited to the morepopular writings, which personally I by no means admit; and it would be quiteconsistent with his declaring those works to be composed in a pleasant and lucidstyle. So are Plato's dialogues, but difficulties spring up when one prepares tolecture on them. Thus for all that has been shown hitherto I think the Noniuspassage might well remain among the Testimonia to the Protrepticus.I do not claim that legere already had for Cicero the meaning which it had inmediaeval Latin, 'read and expound', for there may have been something else inthe context which made his intention clear. As I have said above, there is nothingto show at what point in the Hortensius this occurred. One would expect theinfluence of Aristotle to appear in the central speeches, whereas a statementabout him would be more in place in the introduction.48Oxford D. J. ALLANt

    44 In the Oxford translation of Aristotle(see n.6) vol. xii (1952), p. 26.45 Op. cit. (n.40), p. 23, reading legas.46 Ibid., p. 27.47 Or having a draft read over to himwhile Sallustius listened, ad Q.Fr. 3.5.1; cf.also Tusc. 5.116 and B. M. W. Knox's com-

    ments thereon, 'Silent reading in Antiquity',GRBS 9 (1968), 427.48 Donald Allan died before he could putthis article into its final form. The editorswould like to thank Dr. H. J. Blumenthal fordoingso.