49, in the words, "principalis intentio in hoc capitulo est de simplicibus in mundo corporibus ostendere, &c.," the Latin has rightly capitulo, but the Greek, instead of xeλ, has κεντρω. Farther still, in p. 34 a, Comment. 56, Simplicius says, it is demonstrated in the Physics of Aristotle, " quod nullum finitum finitam distantiam in infinito tempore pertransit." And this is rightly asserted, and is undoubtedly what Simplicius intended to say; but the Greek has most erroneously, ori ouder πεπερασ μενον εν πεπερασμένῳ χρόνῳ διεισιν. In p. 35 a, Comment. 60, Simplicius, in elucidating the demonstration of Aristotle, that there is not an infinite body, observes that Aristotle physically infers this "6 ex eo quod elementa numero et magnitudine sunt finita. Neque enim omnia infinita possibile est esse, non enim utique multa infinita, &c." Here the Latin has rightly infinita in the words Neque enim omnia infinita, &c., but the Greek most erroneously TETEрaσμsva. In p. 37 a, Comment. 71, Simplicius rightly referring to the Physics of Aristotle, says that in the 8th book of that work, Aristotle demonstrates that no finite magnitude possesses an infinite power, "nullam autem finitam magnitudinem virtutem habere infinitam, quod quidem in octavo ejusdem negotii demonstravit." But the Greek, instead of εν τῳ ογδοῳ, has εν τω εννατῳ, though the Physics do not consist of more than eight books. In p. 45 b, Comment. 97, Simplicius observes, that Aristotle is there speaking of the intellectual and immoveable principles which are the causes of the motions of the celestial spheres; "de intellectualibus et immobilibus principiis videtur dicere de moventibus cœlestes sphæras.-Nam cœlum movet immobilis causa existens melior ipso." But the Greek, instead of TEPI Twv voɛpwv, de intel· lectualibus, has most erroneously περι των ουρανίων. In p. 46 a, Comment. 97, we find in the Latin, "Continuus autem circularis motus ostensus est in octavo de naturali auditu." And this is correct; for Aristotle does demonstrate in his Physics, that a circular is a continual motion. But the Greek, instead of ouvexns, continuus, has xoivorepov. And in the next line, the Latin has rightly, "Sed et quia circulariter movetur cœlum ad intellectum conversum." In the Greek, however, we have oupavov, heaven, instead of vovv, intellect. In one part of the following passage in p. 47 b, Comment. 102, both the Latin and Greek are discordant with each other, and both are erroneous. The passage is this, "puta quod trigonum ex tribus rectis secundum angulum compositis, tribus autem ex trigonis sex secundum angulos et lineas, sed non secundum plana compositis." Simplicius is here speaking of the analysis of things composite into such as are simple, after the manner of mathematicians. Hence the Latin should be, cubum autem ex tetragonis sex ; instead of "tribus autem ex trigonis sex ;" and the Greek, which is εκ τριων δε τριγωνων εξ, should be τον κυβον δε εκ τετραγωνων εξ. For the terminating sides of a cube are six squares. That this reading is correct, is evident from what Simplicius shortly after says, i. e. "Nam mathematicus quidem-resolvit trigonum in tres rectas et cubum in sex tetragona." Many other instances of great difference between the Latin and Greek might be adduced; but as I persuade myself that the learned and intelligent reader will be sufficiently convinced from those already given, that the Greek of Simplicius is not a translation from the Latin of Moerbeka or Morbetus, I shall conclude this article with corrections of certain passages which are faulty, both in the Latin and Greek, but which, though erroneous, accord with each other. In p. 30 b, Comment. 37, Simplicius observes, that Aristotle having shown that no simple body is infinite in magnitude, and it being evident that simple bodies are finite in number, concludes that the whole, which is composed of them, viz. the universe, is finite. He then adds, "Primo autem ostendit, quod necessaria est naturalis ratio discernens, sive est aliquid corpus infinitum sive non; siquidem hæc differentia causa fere totius contradictionis inter naturales est, quæ apud physiologos. Propter hanc enim hi quidem unum mundum, et finitum dicebant, quicunque non acceptabant infinitum in principio, ut Aristoteles et Plato; hi autem unum infinitum, ut Anaximenes aërem infinitum principium esse dicens ; bi autem et multitudine infinitos mundos, ut Anaximandrus quidem infinitum magnitudine principium ponens, infinitum sic et mundum dicebat." In this passage, for multitudine in the words "hi autem et multitudine infinitos mundos," it is necessary to read magnitudine: for it was the dogma of Democritus, as Simplicius shortly after observes, that there are worlds infinite in multitude. But the Greek has also erroneously in this part of the above passage, T λ, instead of To Meyede. In p. 46 a, Comment. 99, in the words, "et hæc scripsit, mundum hunc neque aliquis deorum, neque aliquis hominum fecit, sed erat semper," the name of Heraclitus is wanting immediately after scripsit, and it is also wanting in the Greek. For from what is afterwards added by Simplicius, it is evident that the above words are to be ascribed to Heraclitus. But he adds as follows: "Verumtamen Alexander volens Heraclytum dicere mundum genitum et corrupti bilem, de intelligibili mundo sic ipsum dixisse ait." Alexander, who considered Heraclitus as one who asserted that the world is generable and corruptible, says, that in the above citation he speaks of the intelligible world. This remarkable passage of Heraclitus is in the Greek τον κοσμον τουτον, ουτε τις θεων, ούτε τις ανθρωπων εποίησεν, αλλ' ην αει. In p. 58. b, Lib. 2, Comment. 3, Simplicius, explaining what Aristotle says about the fable of Atlas supporting the heavens, and which is alluded to by Homer when he says of Atlas in the Odyssey, And the long pillars which on earth he rears End in the starry vault, and prop the spheres, observes as follows: "Si autem fabula est divinum aliquid occultans in seipsa et sapiens, dicatur quod Atlas unus quidem est et eorum Tartareorum qui circa Bacchum sunt, qui eo quod non attendebat ipsi perfecte, hoc est non secundum solum Tartaream congregationem operabatur circa Bacchi operationem, sed declinabat aliqualiter et ad Jovialem continentiam, secundum ambos proprietatis operatur circa marimas mundi partes, discernens quidem et sursum tenens cœlum a terra, ut non confundantur superiora cum inferioribus.— cum etiam columnæ simul utramque habeant virtutem, discretivamque simul et continuativam eorum quæ supra posita sunt cum inferius positis." In this passage for congregationem it is necessary to read separationem, and in the Greek for σuyxpion which corresponds to congregationem, we must substitute diaxpio. This emendation is evidently requisite from what Simplicius adds in the latter part of this extract, viz. " that pillars possess both these powers, a power of separating, and a power of connecting things placed above with those placed below." In p. 82 a, Comment. 47, Simplicius observes that the Pythagoreans supposing the decad to be a perfect number, were willing to collect the number of the bodies moved in a circle, into the decadic number. He adds, "hence they say, that the inerratic sphere, the seven planets, this our earth, and the antichthon, complete the decad; and in this manner Aristotle understands the assertions of the Pythagoreans." He then observes: "Qui autem sincerius ista callent (γνησιεστερον αυτων μετασχοντες) ignem quidem in medio dicunt conditivam virtutem (δημιουργικην δυναμιν) ex medio totam terram alentem, et quod infrigiditatum ipsius est recreantem (avεyelpovσav). Propter quod hi quidem Zenus turrem (Zyvos Upуov) ipsum vocant, ut ipse in Pythagoricis narravit. Alii autem Jovis custodiam (4105 Quλaxŋv) ut in his. Alii autem Jovis thronum (405 Ogovov) ut alii aiunt. Antrum (avrpov) autem VOL. XXVI. Cl. JI. NO. LII. R terram dicebant, tanquam organum et ipsum temporis. Dierum enim hæc et noctuum causa est. Diem enim facit versus solem pars illuminata. Noctem autem versus conum umbræ factæ ab ipsa. Antichthonam autem lunam vocabant Pythagorici, sicut et ætheriam terram, et tanquam obumbrantem solare lumen quod est proprium terræ, et tanquam terminantem cœlestia sicut terra id quod sub luna est." In that part of this remarkable passage in which it is said both in the Latin and the Greek, that the Pythagoreans called the earth a cavern, it is necessary for avτpov to read aσтpov, a star. For a little before, both Aristotle and Simplicius inform us that the Pythagoreans asserted that the earth exists as one of the stars. And this is confirmed by their calling the earth one of the instruments of time for the stars are thus denominated by Plato in the Timæus. Meursius in his Denarius Pythagoricus, p. 19. thinks we should read κεντρον for αντρον ; but he was evidently mistaken. From this account given by Simplicius, it appears that the above mentioned decad of the Pythagoreans consists of, the inerratic sphere, the seven planets, the earth, and the fire in the centre of the earth. It is also evident from this passage, as I have elsewhere observed, that the moderns are mistaken in supposing, that by the fire in the middle, the Pythagoreans meant the sun. And in p. 87 a, Comment. 60, Simplicius observes: "Cum autem ostendisset ambo problemata, et quod in medio est terra, et quod inmobilis, neque circulariter circa medium, neque super rectam mota, communem adjecit conclusionem dicens esse manifestum ex dictis, quod neque movetur, neque extra medium movetur." In the last word of this passage for movetur, it is obviously necessary to read ponitur, and in the Greek for vital, to substitute xɛitai. I shall conclude these observations, with noticing an error into which the learned Professor has fallen, through not understanding what Simplicius says of Empedocles and Eudemus the celebrated disciple of Aristotle. The error I allude to is in 52, where the Professor cites the following passage of Simplicius, in his commentary on the Physics. TouTO 8' EQIXED EμTEδοκλης αν ειπειν, οτι το κρατειν και κινειν εν μέρει την φιλίαν και το νεικος εξ ανάγκης υπαρχει τοις πραγμασιν ει δε τουτο, και το ηρεμειν εν τω μεταξύ χρονῳ των γαρ εναντιων κινήσεων ηρεμία εν τω μεταξύ Εύδημος ουν την ακινησίαν εν τη της φιλίας επικράτεια κατα την σφαίραν εκδέχεται, επειδαν απαντα συγκριθῇ ενθ' ουτ' ηελίοιο διειεται ωκεα γη. εστιν. αλλ' ως φησιν, ούτως αρμονίης πυκινῳ κρυφῳ εστηρικται, The Professor then re And after these other verses follow. marks, "Quis credat totidem esse Eudemi versus ? Etsi ejus φυσικα, liber περι γωνιας, et Historia Geometrica et Astrologica exciderint, fragmenta tamen a Simplicio servata argumento sunt, illum neque metro sua scita commendasse, neque eum esse cui Amicitia, Discordia, Sphærus saperent. Quapropter nullus vereor emendare, ut sit Εμπεδοκλης ουκ την ακινησίαν pro eo quod est Εύδημος ουν, facillima nominum permutatione, si Εμπεδοκλης compendiose scribatur." The Professor's mistake originated from not perceiving that in the words αλλ' ως φησιν, Empedocles is understood; for the verses that follow these words were evidently written by that philosopher. The meaning of Simplicius therefore is, that Eudemus admits immobility in the domination of friendship in the sphere of Empedocles. T. AN INQUIRY into the Symbolical Language of Ancient Art and Mythology. By R. P. KNIGHT. PART VIII.-[Continued from No. 51. p. 51.] 184. AFTER the conquests of Alexander had opened a communication with India, Minerva was frequently represented with the elephant's skin upon her head instead of the helmet ;2 the elephant having been, from time immemorial, the symbol of divine wisdom among the Gentoos; whose god Gonnis or Pollear is represented by a figure of this animal half humanised; which the Macha Alla, or god of destruction of the Tartars, is For awy here, the Professor very properly substitutes yawv. Thus too, Parmenides, speaking of the one being, says, παντοθεν ευκυκλου σφαίρης εναλίγκιον ογκω μεσον ισόπαλες, και μόνη περιηγει χαίρων. 2 See coins of Alexander II. king of Epirus, and some of the Ptolemies. |