My OperaDID ARISTOTLE OWN A SCHOOL IN ATHENS BETWEEN 335/34 and 323 B.C.?
Saturday, May 2, 2009 7:02:43 AM
The key to the attitude of the Hippocratics towards both Diogenes and Alcmaeon is to be found, I suggest, in the basic incompatibility of Diogenes' monism and Alcmaeon's concep¬tion of juii-ig. The Hippocratic doctors' awareness of the incom¬patibility did not overcome a basically empiricist spirit of ec¬lecticism which could retain elements of both theories without a complete adherence to either. This spirit is in accord with the general precepts of the Hippocratic corpus with regard to the formulation of a diagnosis. Both Diogenes and Alcmaeon are implied in the reference of the Hippocratic writer to "occult and dubious subjects" (rd d(pavsa rs xal d)
John Colin Davies
Sheffield
DID ARISTOTLE OWN A SCHOOL IN ATHENS BETWEEN 335/34 and 323 B.C.?
Diogenes Laertius and other biographers of Aristotle main¬tain that after his return to Athens in 335/34 B. C, the Stagirite founded and owned an independent school in that city1) - that is, a distinct school in the physical and legal sense of the term, with its own grounds ("garden", xfjnog), buildings and library. If this were actually true, then the school of Aristotle must have been on an equal, or almost equal, footing with the Platonic Academy or Museum.
In this distinct school, which allegedly was established in (or near) the Lyceum, and which was, and still is, frequently referred to as the "Peripatus" or the "Ly¬ceum", Aristotle taught philosophy and presided as the "schol¬ar ch", at least until the summer or early fall of 323 B. C, when he was compelled to leave Athens2).
This account, which ap parently was widely accepted in ancient times, and which is still accepted today, however, is open to serious challenge. What is challenged here is not the report that Aristotle was the founder of a "school53 or tradition of philosophic thought3), but the story that he possessed and had legal title to a "garden" (кгјлод) and to a building or buildings which subsequently, though erroneously, was identified with the Lyceum and, at some later time, was called "Peripatus"4).
As a matter of fact, the term "Peripatus33 did not come into general usage until about the time of Theophrastus and, more likely, some time after the death of Theophrastus, that is, after c. 287/86 B. C.
There also exist some fanciful stories that Aristotle founded his own independent school by outrightly seceding from the Academy (while Plato was still alive); that he started a sort of competing school in a spirit of antagonism or spitefulness in order to demonstrate his intellectual independence5); that he founded this new school when on the death of Speusippus (in 339/38 B. C.) he was not elevated to the scholarchate of the Academy6); and also that at one time (after the death of Speu¬sippus) the Lyceum and the Academy were joint enterprises, the Lyceum being directed by Aristotle and the Academy by Xenocrates7).
Needless to say, these stories, some of which might go back to Hermippus, are without foundation in fact.
They are the product of a biographical tradition which either in an encomiastic vein attempted to show that from the very be¬ginning Aristotle was an original thinker who intellectually owed nothing to Plato from whom he seceded at an early stage of his philosophical development; or which in a spirit of antag¬onism towards the Stagirite wished to demonstrate that the latter was an ungrateful and arrogant fellow who tried to anta¬gonize and embarrass his teacher Plato by seceding from him and by founding his own independent school8). The story that at one time the Academy and the Lyceum were "joint enter¬prises3 % on the other hand, might have been an effort on the part of some biographer to de-emphasize the rivalry between these two "schools" or, perhaps, an attempt to deny that Ari¬stotle ever seceded from the Academy or from Plato's philoso¬phic teachings.
The account that Aristotle had legal title to, owned and presided over his own independent school in Athens with its distinct building or buildings and grounds, is challenged here. In order to substantiate this challenge, it might be helpful to review some of the major historical events in the relationship of Aristotle to Athens. In the summer of 348 B. C, and prior to the death of Plato, Aristotle left Athens. This departure was precipitated by the outbreak of wide-spread anti-Macedonian sentiments in the city over King Philip's attack upon, and con¬quest of, Olynthus.
Feeling no longer safe in hostile Athens, Aristotle, the Macedonian, simply departed9). In 335/34 B. C, during the archonship of Evaenetus or in the second year of the 1 nth Olympiad10), he returned to Athens. The particular circumstances of his return are of vital interest.
In 336 B. C, on the assassination of King Philip, the Greek states revolted against their Macedonian overlords. By a quick show of force, King Alexander immediately restored Macedonian rule over Greece.
Subsequently, he turned upon the Epirotes, Thracians and Illyrians, all of whom he subdued after some spectacular campaigns.
While Alexander was thus fully engaged in the Bal¬kans, the Greek cities revolted for a second time in 335 B. C, believing that the Macedonian king had been killed in one of these campaigns. Alexander immediately pounced upon Greece: Thebes was taken by storm, and Athens meekly surrendered11).
The particular circumstances surrounding Aristotle's re¬turn to Athens in 335/34 B. C. - the fact that he moved back to that city in the van of the conquering Macedonian phalanx, made him a rather unwanted, hated and a highly suspect person in the eyes of the majority of the Athenians.
Athens at that time had become a distinctly xenophobic town, especially as regards persons who had recently come from Macedonia.
Aristotle's biographers stress the fact that in Athens he was a Macedonian "resident alien" or me tic (£evog) who lived there by mere suf¬ferance12), always subject to sudden expulsion or wanton per¬secution. To make matters worse, he was probably suspected by the Athenians of being a "political agent" of Macedonia planted in their very midst by their arch-foe - a member of the Macedonian "intelligence system" in Greece who would report on any anti-Macedonian stirrings in Athens and Greece13).
It was under such distressing and unfavorable conditions that Aristotle is said to have founded and owned an independent school with its own buildings, "garden", and other appurten¬ances - a school, that is, which as regards its physical plant and as regards its intellectual influence or importance was compa¬rable to the Platonic Academy.
The main arguments against the assumption that between 335/34 and 323 B. C. Aristotle taught philosophy in his "own school" or own school building - a school or school building to which he had full legal title as Plato, for instance, had full title to the Academy or Museum which the latter could sell, leave or bequeath to his heirs - and that this "school" was the Lyceum, are the following:
First, the Lyceum, the place where Aristotle is said to have taught, was in fact a "communal build¬ing" accessible to, and used by, all sorts of people, but never Aristotle's personal property. Several biographical sources, which seem to be based on Philochorus, relate that at one time Aristotle taujjfit in the Lyceum, as did other teachers or public figures.
These particular sources do not report, however, that he founded or possessed there a school of his own in the legal or physical sense of the term14).
Second, according to tradition, the Peripatus acquired its own, and apparently, first кѓјтгод only during the scholarchate of Theophrastus, that is, several years after Aristotle's death15). This belated acquisition, which is also attested by Theophrastus' last will and testament, accord¬ing to the testimony of Diogenes Laertius, had been made pos¬sible by the cooperation and assistance of Demetrius of Phaleron, the friend and disciple of Theophrastus and, at that time, prob¬ably the most influential and most powerful politician in Athens.
Third, unlike the testaments of Theophrastus16), Straton of Lampsacus17) and Lycon18), which are replete with rather detailed directives concerning the school, the mainten¬ance of the school, the school buildings, the school library and the school inventory, the last will and testament of Aristotle does not contain any provisions whatever regarding some real property, real estate or "school" in Athens or, for that matter, to any school property, school buildings, "garden" or school library. This omission, which probably constitutes the most far-reaching aspect of Aristotle's will, furnishes the strongest argument against the assumption that Aristotle had his own school in Athens or that he owned a building there. Neither does this will refer to a successor to the scholarchate of such a school, or to any members of the xoivcovia19).
These arguments or facts, which can be ascertained by means of a thorough study and proper understanding of the relevant ancient biographical reports about Aristotle, strongly militate against the assumption that between 335/34 and 323 B. C. Aristotle founded and possessed his own independent school or нтјлод in Athens which allegedly was called "Lyceum33 or "Peripatus.33 In support of the contention that Aristotle did not own a school or school buildings in Athens, we might also cite an Athenian law which prevented "resident aliens33 from acquiring legal title to any real property (syKtrjaig), that is, land or houses, in Athens or Attica20).
Against this it might be argued that in the course of history not infrequently exceptions were made to this interdict; and that on occasion the latter was flagrantly circumvented by all sorts of devices or under certain pretexts. Accordingly, it could be alleged that Aristotle, too, did avail himself of one of these "exceptions33 or made use of some device to circumvent the law. Perhaps he used an Athe¬nian citizen (who might have been his friend or disciple?) as a "front-man33 in the purchase of a house; perhaps in his parti¬cular case the law was not strictly enforced; or, perhaps, due to his close connections and personal influence with the Macedo¬nian conquerors he simply ignored this Athenian law or had it "set aside" in his particular case.
The arguments against the assumption that Aristotle owned a school building in Athens, as has been shown, find probably their most persuasive support in the fact that, unlike the wills of Theophrastus, Straton of Lampsacus or Lycon, Aristotle's testament does not once refer to any school or school-building in Athens.
This vital fact or piece of evidence cannot be ignored or simply played down as "mere accident". Naturally, it is al¬ways possible that Aristotle sold his school building or, per¬haps, donated it to a friend (Theophrastus?), as he is said to have donated his library (the "school library" ?) to Theophra¬stus on the eve of his departure from Athens in the year 323 B. C.21).
There is no evidence, however, that at any time he sold or gave away such a school building. Moreover, a sale of a house by an alien to an alien in Athens would have encountered some serious legal difficulties. An outright gift of a house, on the other hand, would have been faced by further legal prob¬lems: Aristotle had a daughter, Pythias, and an adopted or legitimized son, Nicomachus. This being so, under Athenian law, provided Athenian law should apply here, he could not alienate so valuable a piece of property as a house by donating it to Theophrastus, thus depriving his children, and especially his descendants through Pythias, of their rightful claim to this property.
Conversely, one might adduce the following in support of the claim that, after all, Aristotle had a xfjjzog in Athens which served as his "school": In his last will and testament, Theo¬phrastus bequeathed a house which he had in Stagira22).
It may be surmised that originally he had received this house from Aristotle. This being so, there exists no reason why in 323 B. C. Aristotle should not also have handed over his Athenian nrpioq to Theophrastus, the more so, since the latter might have been a remote relative of Aristotle.
If at some later time Theophrastus required the intercession or assistence of politically so influen-tial a man as Demetrius of Phaleron in order to acquire legally Aristotle's KYJTtoQ in Athens23), then all this means only that, as a me tic living in Athens, Theophrastus needed an influential Athenian friend who would arrange the legal conveyance of title (еуктгЈспд) to the Aristotelian school building in Athens.
In other words, Demetrius of Phaleron did for Theophrastus what previously some unknown Athenian friend had done, or might have done, for Aristotle when the latter acquired his кгјжод sometime between 335/4 and 323 B. C. This, then, would imply that Aristotle, indeed, owned a school building in Athens; that originally he acquired this кгјлод with the assistance of an Athenian friend; that on his departure from Athens in 323 B.C. he de facto transferred this school building (by sale or gift) to Theophrastus; and that, thanks to the assistance of Demetrius of Phaleron, this de facto transfer was legalized at some later time. Due to the lack of sufficient evidence, this ingenious and almost persuasive argument cannot be verified, however.
In the light of the surviving testimony and viewed in the general context surrounding Aristotle's stay in Athens between 335/34 and 323 B. C, the following might be stated with a reasonable degree of certainty: Aristotle taught or discussed philosophy, and he did so probably in the Lyceum (and, per¬haps, in some other place or places).
But it is rather unlikely that he acquired legal title to, or possessed, a distinct building of his own (near the Lyceum ?) in which he taught philosophy, met his students and kept his library. Conversely, at one time he probably rented a private house in which he lived, taught and stored his library; and that this house might have been located near the Lyceum24).
Under Athenian law, a "resident alien" was not barred from renting a house in Athens.
It is also possible that on his departure from Athens, he transferred this lease to Theophrastus. This is probably the meaning of Dio¬genes Laertius V. 36, where we are told that (in 323 B. C. ?) Theophrastus "took over the school of Aristotle"25).
Such an interpretation could also be harmonized with the statement, found in Diogenes Laertius V. 39, namely, that thanks to the personal intercession of Demetrius of Phaleron, Theophrastus finally succeeded in acquiring, that is, in receiving full legal title to, a distinct ктјжод in Athens which subsequently served him and the Peripatus as "the school"26).
A.-H. Chroust
University of Notre Dame
Notre Dame, Indiana U. S. A.
QUELQUES REFLEXIONS SUR L'INTERPRETATION PROSOPOGRAPHIQUE DE L'HISTOIRE ROMAINE*)
Alors que la generation qui nous a precede-et qu'il me soit permis de saluer les noms de Dessau, Klebs et von Rohden, les auteurs de la premiere PIR entreprise grace a l'initiative du grand Mommsen, et ceux d'E. Groag et A. Stein, dioscures de la seconde edition de la PIR, avait concentre son interet sur la vie politique et administrative romaine, les temps modernes ont promu des recherches dans le domaine social et economique, a …
Ober den AnlaB der folgenden Ausfiihrungen gibt der SchluB-passus des Beitrags hinreichend Auskunft; Einfiihrung und Charakteristik der vier Einzelbeitrage zum Thema der prosopographischen Interpreta¬tion der romischen Geschichte, die dem Verfasser als Sektionsleiter ob-lagen, konnten hier wegbleiben.
Ref:
1) See Diogenes Laertius V. 2, and ibid., V. 10; Vita Hesychii 5 ; Vita Marciana 23; Vita Vulgata 18; Vita Latina 23-24; (anonymous) II Vita Syriaca 4-5; (An-Nadim) / Vita Arabica 10-11; (Al-Mubashir) // Vita Arabica 14-16, and ibid., 24-26; 31; (Usaibia) IV Vita Arabica 4, and ibid., 6; 22—24; 33; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, / Epistola ad Ammaewn 5. Some of the Vitae referred to in this note can conveniently be found in I. During, Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition (Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis, vol. 63, no. 2., Goteborg, 1957),passim.
2) See A.-H. Chroust, "Aristotle's Flight from Athens in the Year 323 B. C", Historia, vol. XV. no. 2 (1966) pp. 185-191.
3) See, for instance, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, op. cit., prooem.
4) See, for instance, Diogenes Laertius V. 2; Cicero, De Oratore III. 28. 109; Philochorus, Frag. Hist. Graec. (Jacoby) F. 224; Index Philos. Acad. Hercul. VI. 28 (p. 37, ed. Mekler). For a reference to the term "Peri¬patetics," see also Plutarch, Adversus Coloten 14 (Moralia 1115 A); Athe-naeus, Deipnosophistae (Posidonius) V. 214 D; Cicero, Academica I 4. 17, and ibid, 4. 18; 4. 19—21; St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei VII. 12; the Com¬mentaries of Ammonius, Elias, Olympiodorus, David and Philoponus; // Vita Syriaca 5; // Vita Arabica (Mubashir) 14; IV Vita Arabic a (Usaibia) 4; and others.
5) Diogenes Laertius V. 2; Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica XV. 2. 3, and ibid., XV. 2. 5; XV. 2. 13; Aelian, Varia Historia III. 19, and ibid., IV. 9; Aelius Aristides, Oratio XLVI 249. 10; St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei VIII. 12; Theodoretus, Graecorum Affectionum Curatio IV. 46; Philo¬ponus, Comment, in Arist. Analytica Priora, CIAG, vol. XII, part 3 (ed. M. Wallies, Berlin, 1909), 133, 20.
6) Diogenes Laertius V. 3. See also Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria III. 1. 14; Cicero, De Oratore III. 35. 141; Syrianus, Scholia in Hermogenem II. 51. 21 (ed. H. Rabe); Philodemus, De Rhetorical Volumina Rhetorica XLVIII, 36 (vol. II, p. 50, ed. S. Sudhaus).
7) Vita Marciana 24; Vita Vulgata 18; Vita Latina 24.
8) The Vita Aristotelis of Diogenes Laertius (V. 1-16), for instance, represents both of these biographical trends. See, for instance, P. Moraux, "La Composition de la Vie d'Aristote chez Diogene Laerce", Revue des Etudes Grecques, vol. 68, (1955), pp. 124-163; O. Gigon, "Interpretationen zu den antiken Aristoteles-Viten53, Museum Helveticum, vol. 15 (1958), pp. 147-193; A.-H. Chroust, "A Brief Analysis of the Vita Aristotelis of Dio¬genes Laertius (DL V. 1-16)", Antiquiti Classique, vol. 34, fasc. 1 (1965), pp. 97-129; A.-H. Chroust, "A Brief Account of the Traditional Vitae Aristotelis"', Revue des Etudes Grecques, vol. 77, nos. 364-365 (1964), pp. 50-69.
9) See A.-H. Chroust, "Aristotle Leaves the Academy", Greece and Rome, vol. 14, no. 1 (1967), pp. 39-41.
10) See Diogenes Laertius V. 4-5, and ibid., V. 10; Vita Marciana 23; Vita Vulgata 21; Vita Latina 23; Dionysius of Halicarnassus, I Epistola ad Ammaeum 5.
11) See A.-H. Chroust, "Aristotle Returns to Athens in the Year 335 B. C", Lava/ Thiologique et Philosophique, vol. 23, fasc. 2 (1967), pp. 244-
25Ф
12) See Vita Marciana 12, and ibid., 42; Vita Latina 12.
13) In his Oration Against the Philosophers, delivered in 306 B. C. by Demochares in support of Sophocles' motion to have all "subversive" foreign philosophers expelled from Athens, Demochares alleged that in 349 B. C. Aristotle had betrayed Stagira to Philip of Macedonia; that in 348 B. C. he had denounced to Philip the wealthiest citizens of Olynthus; and that after 335/34 B. C. he had sent many "letters" or messages (intel¬ligence reports?) to Antipater. Some of these messages, Demochares maintained, had been intercepted by the Athenians and their content had been found to be detrimental to the political interests of Athens. See Pseudo-Plutarch, Vita Decem Oratorum (Moralia 850B ff.); Eusebius, op. cit., XV. 2. 6; Pollux IX. 12; Athenaeus, op. cit. supra, note 4, XIII. 610 EF, and ibid., XI. 509B; Diogenes Laertius V. 38. See also A.-H. Chroust "Aristotle and Athens: Some Comments on Aristotle's Sojourns in Athens", Laval Thiologique et Philosophique, vol. 22, fasc. 2 (1966), pp. 186-19
14) The story that Aristotle had his own independent school or xrJTioQ in Athens, called "Lyceum55, seems to have been first recorded by Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis I. 14. Diogenes Laertius V. 2, who relies here apparently on Hermippus, relates that Aristotle "founded his school in the Lyceum". As a matter of fact, Hermippus seems to have been of the opinion that the name "Peripatus" was in some way connected with the Lyceum. See also Vita Hesychii 5, a report which probably goes back to Hermippus. See A.-H. Chroust, "Brief Account of the Traditional Vitae jAristotelis"y Revue des Etudes Grecques, vol. 77, nos. 364—365 (1964), pp. 50—69, especially, pp. 52ЃТ.
15) Diogenes Laertius V. 39: "He [scil., Theophrastus] is said to have become the owner of a garden (xfjnog) of his own after Aristotle's death, through the intercession of his friend Demetrius of Phaleron."
16) Ibid., V. 51-57.
17) Ibid., V. 61-64.
18) Ibid.,V. 69-74.
19) For the last will and testament of Aristotle, see Diogenes Laer-tius V. 11-16, and the Arabic versions of this will preserved by the Arabic biographers of Aristotle (Ibn Abi Yaqub An-Nadim, Al-Qifd Gamaladdin al-Qadi al-Akram, and Ibn Abi Usaibia). See A.-H. Chroust, "Aristotle's Last Will and Testament", Wiener Studien, vol. 80 (vol. I, Neue Folge, 1967), pp. 90-114; A.-H. Chroust, "Estate Planning in Hel¬lenic Antiquity: The Last Will and Testament of Aristotle", Notre Dame Lawyer, vol. 45, no. 4 (1970), pp. 629-662.
20) See, for instance, J. Pecirca, The Formula for the Grant of Enktesis in Attic Inscriptions (Acta Universitatis Carolinae Philosophica et Historica, Monographia no. XV, Prague, 1966), passim.
21) Theophrastus himself was a "resident alien" in Athens and, hence, was likewise barred from acquiring real property there, whether through purchase or in the form of a gift. And finally, according to the testimony of Diogenes Laertius V. 39, as has already been shown, Theo-phrastus acquired the first хгјлод or "garden" for his school only after the death of Aristotle.
22) Diogenes Laertius V. 52.
23) Ibid., V. 39. See also note 15, supra.
24) There exist a number of reports relating that Aristotle taught some of his "courses" by walking up and down, others by sitting down; that in some of these "courses" he addressed a large audience, while in others he spoke only to a small group of students; and that he taught both in the morning and in the afternoon or evening. See, for instance, Gellius, Attic Nights XX. 5 ; Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria III. 1; Strabo XIV. 1. 48; Syrianus, Scholia in Hermogenem IV. 297 (ed. Chr. Walz), II. 5. 21 (ed. H. Rabe); Cicero, Tuscul. Disput. II. 3. 9; Philodemus, op. cit. supra, note 6, vol. II, pp. 5off. See also P. Moraux, op. cit. supra, note 8, p. 155. It is quite possible that Aristotle delivered his "exoteric Lectures" (which were ad¬dressed to a larger audience) in the Lyceum, while he gave his "esoteric lectures" or "esoteric discussions" (which were addressed to a small au¬dience) in his private home.
25) Diogenes Laertius V. 36: "When the latter [sciL, Aristotle] with¬drew to Chalcis, he [scil., Theophrastus] took over the school (rrjv a%oXr]v) himself in the 144th Olympiad \scil.} in 323 B. CJ." It will be noted that Diogenes Laertius refers here to a a%oXr} rather than to a xfjnog.
26) After completing this paper, I read R. A. Gauthier, Aristote: UJSthique a Nicomaque, vol. I (2nd ed., Louvain-Paris, 1970), pp. 43-44, note 107. Although Gauthier makes a most valiant and certainly a most scholarly effort to prove that, after all, Aristotle had his own school build¬ing or xfjnog in Athens, I am not convinced by his arguments.
