Manteia en Aristóteles

De Gruyter
in Aristotle, "de Caelo" II 1 Author(s): A.P. Bos Source: Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Spring 1988), pp. 29-54 Published by: De Gruyter Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40913574 . Accessed: 23/02/2014 13:56
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
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 support@jstor.org.
De Gruyter is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Apeiron: A Journal for Ancient Philosophy and Science.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 181.118.153.57 on Sun, 23 Feb 2014 13:56:21 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
de CeloII 1 gavieta in Aristotle,

A.P. Bos
I Introduction a remarkable Aristotle de CeloII 1 contains final passage mentioning tv Gev.1 The standard of thispasf| |xavT6a f| Tiepi interpretation to whichit refers to human convictions about the sage, according blessedcondition ofgod, seemsimplausible. I proposethatnavieia hereconcerns theknowledge received the bythecosmic godsthrough ofthesupreme, influence transcendent is based god. Thishypothesis on a reconstruction of the myth about a 'dreaming god Kronos'in Aristotle's a reconstruction which follows ideas dialoguetheEudemus, developedby J.H.Waszinkand O. Gigon. to manyscholars, II 1 occupiesa specialposiAccording chapter tionin thede Celo.Comparedwiththe dryand highly technical exin the last of book it seems a I, planations chapters pervaded by quite different The style is polished,and showsa certain discursivespirit. nessandredundancy, inone ofAristotle's suggesting origins dialogues. Thechapter has very been linked tothedePhilosophia.2 Accommonly
1 De Celo II 1, 284b3 2 Cf. P.Moraux, Aristote Du del (Paris: Les Belles Lettres1965), lxxxvi-lxxxvii. ' Rheinisches Cf. also F.Blass, 'Aristotelisches, Museum30 (1875), 500ff;W.JaeAristotle: Fundamentals the ger, (Oxford: Clarendon of History ofHis Development Press 1948), 303-6: F.Solmsen, Aristotle's System of thePhysicalWorld(Ithaca, NY: Cornell UniversityPress 1960), 292; I.Dring, Aristoteles (Heidelberg: Carl WinterUniversittsverlag und The1966), 363ff;B.Effe,Studienzur Kosmologie 'berdie Philosophie' ologiederAristotelischen (Munich: Beck 1970), 132 Schrift with n 21. R. Walzer and M. Untersteiner include the whole chapter as a fragment (nos 29 and 30 respectively)of the de Philosophia.L. Elders (Aristotle's
APEIRON a journal forancient philosophy and science 0003-6390/88/2101 29-54 $3.00 AcademicPrinting& Publishing
30 A.P. Bos
makesclearthat thethemes dealt toW.Jaeger, thefinal section cording and metaphysical withherewereoriginally embeddedin a religious context.3
II The structure of de Celo II 1
II 1 of the de Celohas the following structure: Chapter must,on thebasis (a) 283b26- 284a2:The heavensin their entirety and imwell as be one as ofthepreceding ungenerated arguments, perishable. traditions ancient (b) 284a2 - 284al3: Thisclaimsupports according to whichthe gods live in theonlypartof the cosmosnot subjectto death. and theheavensbeingungenerated (c) 284al4 - 284al8: Apartfrom from discomof as 'free be must also any thought they imperishable, and as 'tcovoc;.' of mortality' to the condition fort belonging views orphilosophical thosemythical (d) 284al8 - 284a35:Therefore doctrine of whichare at odds withtheAristotelian mustbe rejected elementof which it is the celestialsphere and the naturalfifth composed. as subelement natural ofthefifth (e) 284a35- 284b5:the doctrine without leaddoctrine the is stance ofthecelestial which, only sphere
on thede Celo [Assen: van Gorcum 1966], 175ff) A Commentary Cosmology:
notes(a) theabsenceofhiatus,whichdoes occurin thepreceding chapters; of thesentences balancedconstruction (c) the (e.g., 284a2ff): (b) thecareful, in 284a32; ofhendiadys (b29;al;a4;all); (d) theuse ofpoeticterms frequency chiastic word-order; all; 284a34;284a35;al4; a3; and al7: (e) parallellisms: (284a27). hyperbaton of suchtextual The reasonforthepresence striking passagesdisplaying thetext in preparing is seldomdiscussed.Did Aristotle, divergencies stylistic his auworksto remind includeintegral ofhis lectures, partsofhis published and his argument between theconsistency dienceofthemand to emphasize one and the of thiskindduring variation known? thewritings Stylistic already efsinceit would tendto have a ridiculous is hardly same lecture probable, his own noteswith wouldrearrange thatAristotle Nor does it seemlikely fect. and glue in orderto add bitsof old text. scissors 306 3 Jaeger,
de Celo II 1 31 |xavi8ain Aristotle, tothedoctrine oftheworld's is bothappropriate ingtocontradictions, with tv 9ev.4 and in naviea 7iep tt xfj eternity harmony Ill Proposedinterpretations In hisIndex H. Bonitz refers s.v. navieia totwoplaceswheretheword mustmeandivinatio: to manbysuperhuman beknowledge conveyed II de for which he then does he mention Celo 284b3, 1, ings.5Only he choosesthetranslation us to the which opinio, meanings referring has givenoftheverbixavxeOeoOai.6 He does note,however, thatC. Prantl the translation vaticinatio forthe jiavieia in 284b3.7 preferred Bonitz'stranslation followsthe ancient commentator Simplicius, who explainsnavieia as follows: vvoiav, ifivKoivfiv tcxttiv rv e%oKai naKapiiriTo toOGeou.8 means nevrapifircova Simplicius thatin all (normal, thatthe reasonable) people thenotionis present are free of and blessed. cares gods Moreor less thesame lineis takenby modern scholars and interfind in Thus we Stocks: 'a with consistent J.L. preters. theory popular divinations of the divinenature';9 W.K.C. Guthrie: 'a consistent ac-
4 De Celo II 1, 284a35-b4 5 Hist AnimVIII 18, 601b2, and fr.12,1475M1 (= de Philos fr12a Ross) 6 H. Bonitz, Index445b. For navxeueoGai he lists the meanings 'oraculum consulere'; Vaticinan'; 'suspicari'; 'divinare/ 7 Aristoteles, VierBcherberdas Himmelgebude und zwei BcherberEntstehen und Vergehen, griechischund deutsch und mit sacherklrendenAnmerkungenherausgeg. von C. Prantl (Leipzig 1857) III: 'welche zugestandenermassen mit der den Gott betreffenden heiligen Kunde in Einklang sind.' 8 Simplicius, In L. de Caelo II 1,2 (382,28 ed I.L.Heiberg): navrsav icXeae vvoiav fivxonev rcepitt rcova Kai naicapirnio toO xf|vKoivfjv TaTT|v Oeou,ti KpeiTTOvcoc f| Kaia rteiiv vu7ipxouoa eaioxaTTiKai eoTiv'xoiaiai yp ai âvTeai Kai Geav yvcooiv jroav ^6T7reioT<; 7cp 7ieiîvTcpoepxêvainex tcotec jieiaOTou.
9 TheWorks trans, intoEnglish, vol II (Oxford 1930),n 3: 'by "divinaofAristotle, tion"(navieia) Aristotle of prophecy or the means,notanyreligious practice theinspired to like,butsimply sense,'withreference guessesof common Simplicius.
32 A.P. Bos
countand one whichfitsin withour premonitions of divinity';10 JTricot: 'une thorie en accord avecla divination surla nature divine';11 P. Moraux:'des thories s'accordent tout fait qui, de l'avisgnral, avec l'intuition a L. Elders follows but l'on de Dieu.'12 Guthrie, que viz. adds: 'ForAristotle there aretwosources ofreligious knowledge, of heavenly the innerexperience of the soul and the observation phenomena.'13 from theinterpreOnlyO. Longo'stranslation departs appreciably in noi tations modo 'soltanto potremo professare just given: questo ci dicesul delleteorie con quantola scienzaoracolare che s'accordino with toidentify seemserroneously divino.'14 Buthistranslation navreia
IXaVTlKT] T6XVT|.
IV Objectionsto the standard interpretations areevident there In spiteofthestrong consensus, objections scholarly is The mostimportant outlined. to thetradition ofinterpretation just be a that must conviction,' iLiavieia accepted ('generally given meaning
On theHeavens,with an English translation(London: W. Heinemann 10 Aristotle 1939), 135 Traitdu Ciel, trad et notes (Paris: J. Vrin 1949), 67 with n 1: 'Aristote 11 Aristote entend non pas la mantique proprementdite, mais le sentimentpopulaire, expression de la conscience collective,sur l'impassibilit et la batitude de la divinit/ 12 Aristote Du Ciel, textetabli et traduit(Paris: Les Belles Lettres1965), 56 and lxxxvi-lxxxix introduction, fr12a (Ross), where xo v13 Elders, 182. The author refersto de Philosophia, Kai T âvieia is spoken of preciselyin connection with the Gouguxohox; 'inner experience of the soul' mentioned. We shall have to returnto this text later. A variationon this view is found in Jaeger,159nl. He takes navieia nepi tv Gevto mean 'the inner sense of God ... which rests on immediate feeltook the notion of inner divination ing.' 'Presumably it was Plato who first (navieeoGai) which the poets were already using in the sense of the presentiment of externalevents, and stamped it with the philosophical meaning of a Aristotlethen divinationnot of the futurebut of deep and hidden affinities. cf. ibid, and faith of the to the first time it for knowledge...'; problem applied 305: 'popular divinationsof the divine nature.' De Celo, introd., testo critico,trad, e note (Florence: Sansoni 1962), 14 Aristotele 109
de Celo //1 33 naviea in Aristotle, oeuvre. for whichno parallel can be foundin Aristotle's 'assumption') in Greek is highly the literature Indeed,such a meaning exceptional ofthisperiodas a whole. The meaning 'prophecy,' 'prophetic powthat evenin thosefewPlatonic ers'is so predominant passageswhere Platomaywellbe sugnavieia seemsto be used in a loosersense,15 in discusthe 'daemonic' of Socrates or his partners gesting qualities sion. Thereis no basis forthe assumption that[xavieiamight mean 'a reasonable conviction.' These lexicalconsiderations themselves by shouldmakeus lookforan interpretation of284b3in whichinavxeia mightmean 'prophecy,' 'prophetic explanation.' A closeranalysisshows thatSimplicius' is above all commentary unsoundbecause it neglects to observea distinction whichAristotle In bracketing himselfmakes emphatically. togetheramova and of as attributes the failsto make M-aKapiTTi typical deity, Simplicius a differentiation essential toAristotle's Forwhen philosophical system. in EN X that Aristotle 8 'of the we assume most of all says gods that are blessed and he adds the 'For which they happy,' explanation: should we attribute to them?'16 further on he reTipei Slightly marksthateverything to do withactionsis 'small' and 'unworthy ofthegods.'17 Thisagreesentirely withhisconclusion that eainovot in theprimary sense can onlybe associatedwiththe contemplative life.18 But in the de Celoit is made quiteclearthatthe celestial sphere as a whole and itsvariousspheresindividually are also activein the sense. Therefore thegood without 'practical' theydo notattain perone ormore As longas itis notproved np&iq.19 forming beyond questionthatthepassage citedin de CeloII 12 cannotbe reconciled with deCelo II 1,we must assumethat bothparts ofthat work aregoverned Thuswe shallalsohavetoassumethat Aristobythesamesystematics. tlehas, withprecision, to thecelestial assigneda levelof'well-being' sphere- a level which,it is true,surpassesby farthatof ordinary but whichis by no meansinterchangeable withthatof the mortals,
15 Plato, AlcibI 127e; Laws II 694c; Philb 66b 16 EN X 8, 1178b8 17 Ibid, 1178bl7 18 Ibid 19 De Celo II 12, 292a20
34 A.P. Bos
and the heavenlysphereis aTtaofjc metaphysical deity.Certainly, butitis notpositively identified as naKpioand euoaipicov. rcovo,20 It is hardly thatan assumption whichotherAristotelian statelikely him Aristotle at mentsshow to be thought is wrong by regarded by 284b3as a correct conviction held by all people. Next,it mustbe notedthatjiavxeianowhereelse meansinsight orinformation divine butalwaysstates something concerning beings, in about of mortals the orfuture. thecondition Moreover, past,present, the subjector the content rapi followed indicating by an accusative In suchcases Greekuses Tuepi of|xavT8a is an irregular construction. draws Rather itseemsthat followed rcepi plusaccusative bya genitive.21 botha certain to indicate a widercircle arounda giventopic,in order relatedto it.22 subjectand matters
20 De Celo II 1, 284al4-15 21 Aristotle,RhetIII 17 1418a24-5. According to Sextus Empiricus Math 3 (Phys 1), 20-3 (= Aristde Philos fr 12a Ross), Aristotleheld that the notion of gods (vcomes to exist in man on account of certainpsychic phenomena voiav Gecov) and the contemplationof the celestial beings. On account of psychic phenomena i xo v xo U71VOIC; yivonvouxaxtivOouoiaaiio Kai x ^lavxea. yp xv jxv Apparently,Aristotlecited an example fromHomer: TteTtoiKE Kepi xij 'EKxopo vaipaecoc;, nTpoKXov v tcvaipeoOou rcpoayopeovxa Cf. also the passage in Plutarch tv ' 'EKiopa Ttepi xeXeuxifc. xff 'AxiAAco Kai de Facie 942a on the island of Kronos: xo anova icevouTtepirceiv tv Kpvov, ... , Kai noXX [lv cp' auTcovnavTiKo via (teparceOeiv tcvêyoTcov (b vepaxa toO Kpvou Kainpo^yeiv x ^yiGta Kai Ttep Plato, Laws XI 914a. I know no instance of navxea rcepin ovxac; âyyXXeiv. the sense of 'oracular knowledge about7followed by an accusative, even followed by a genithough grammarsdo not usually distinguishbetween rcepi tive or accusative. 22 Cf. Herodotus II 49: x rcepixv Aivooov, 'the cult of Dionysus and all things ... connected therewith/Stephanus Byzantius, s v "Aypa: x niKp (xuoxTpia Harina xcovKepi xv Aivuoov. Diogenes Laertius III 63: ... oocpiavrjyexai Gev Ka vxcoc; vxcov eivai [se Piato] xf]vxcovvot|xcov f^v(t'gi Tcep 7tiaxi|j,T|v, Plutarch Quaest ConvivIX 14, 746c: r' Kai M/uxTiv KEXcopiofxvnv. ocofxaxoc XII 23: ooa. CorpHerrn kn'oTr''n' Kai Ga fiyeîov Geou; 0êia, xfjTcep ouxe oxfina ouxe xpvo Tcepi xv Oev ouxe ttoixti ouxe nyeGoouxe x7to oxi. Tiv yp oxi... . Cf., by way of contrast,the two textsin Olympiodorus, on: xf]vnavxeiav tt]v In PI Phaedon6 par 13, which we shall deal with further Kepi [= 'at the approach of '] xv Gvaxov, and 1 par.6: nxpoKXo navxiK xeXemr'v. yeyov Tiepixf^v
1 35 de Celo // naviea in Aristotle, in makesthetrain ofthought the standard Finally, interpretation II 1 muddled. Aristotle frequently distinguishchapter unnecessarily and current views held by all es betweenviews supported byargument or mostpeople. Wherepossible,he shows thatthe two correspond An instance and reinforce ofthisis readily foundin de one another. CeloI 3.23 Aristotle has justarguedthatthecelestial spheremustbe nature moves in an eternal of a natural element which by composed and unchangeable. circular orbit and whichis imperishable He conwiththistheory. All tinues:The experience ofreality is in agreement menhave an assumption aboutthegods, and all assignthehighest and theydo so, ofcourse,becausethey whichis divine, placeto that consider the immortal to gods be associatedwithimmortal reality/ in de CeloII 1 is similar: Aristotle's conclusion theargumentation in favour oftheuniverse's and the refutation of alternative scieneternity tific thatthere theories tradition is an immoragreeswiththeancient in perpetual taland divinereality And he refers movement.24 to what was said in I 3: The heavensand theposition on highwereassigned to thegods, as beingthe onlyimperishable by the ancients place.'25 ButthenAristotle returns tothescientific and observes: The argument demonstrates that the is preceding argument heavenly place imperishableand ungenerated, butalso that itis notsusceptible toanydiscomfort to the condition of that moreover, itdoes not belonging mortality, knowtoil....'26Here,therefore, Aristotle a new introduces consequence the on the celestial element: the assumption of philosophical exposition that themovement ofthecelestial element is a natural movement entailsthat thiselement does notsuffer from thediscomforts ofthemortal condition and does not knowtoil. Aristotle viewsdiametrically one. goeson todiscuss opposedtothis Both themythical tradition ofAtlasthesky-bearer andthephilosophical theories ofEmpedocles and Platoimply, toAristotle, ttvo according forthecelestial as itwould be prevented from sphereinasmuch purcourse.27 Aristotle underlies how objectionasuingitsnatural heavily
23 De Celo I 3, 270b4 24 De Celo II 1, 284a2-5 25 De Celo, 284all 26 De Celo II 1, 284al3 27 De Celo, 284al8-35. Cf. the very similarpassage in de Anima I 3, 407a34-bll which, as 406b26 makes clear, formspart of a critiqueof Plato's Timaeus.
36 A.P. Bos
ble suchtheories are by comparing thecondition whichtheyascribe in thenether to theheavensto thatofIxion,who, imprisoned world and boundtohisrevolving eternal The wheel,mustsuffer pain.28 conbe as and miserable dition of the celestial would thus pitiful sphere ofearthly whomAristotle elsewhere to the as that mortals, compares such that tied Etrurian After were onto prisoners corpses by pirates.29 wereto an argument itwouldbe strange, to say theleast,ifAristotle and theeffortlessness refer toa 'generally heldconviction' concerning blissof the deity, as Simplicius suggests. V Divinationin Aristotle no other The text as itstandsin thede Celooffers keysforinterpretII 1 alsofuncde to 284b3. however, Celo scholars, ing According many in lost in another one of Aristotle's tioned context, writings.30 namely 'deCelo' lectures to Aristotle's thosewho listened Letus assumethat with The navieia passagemaythen hislostwritings. wereacquainted whatthedeCelo from a background which is different be seenagainst lead us to expect. alone might we are for deCelo a different In trying tofind 284b3, interpretation are also Aristotle's We the loss of dialogical writings. by handicapped a has made Aristotle into which the back held interpretation by him from his contemideas with modern separating philosopher lostworks thatAristotle's in thenotion The view persists poraries.31
Mundi 47, where he 28 An interesting comparison can be made with Phil, Aeteruit argues against the Stoic idea that the celestial beings too will perish: ei yp fl npou iarcpounocpiivaaGaiKaOTiepvioi tcvoa nepi eancoTTipiou to ouuTtavxooupavo. Cf. SomnI 22. This notion of the physi(pXuapovTcov cal universe as a 'prison' is familiarfromXenocrates,fr19 (Heinze) which explains the Platonic notion of (ppoupd(Phaedo62b). It is also found in Plotinus, Enn IV 8 (6) 1.33 and 3.4, and in Proclus, In Plat Tim I 333.26. Concerning this theme, cf. M.Zepf, 'Der Mensch in der Hhle und das Pantheon/ Gymnasium 69 (1958) 355-82. 10b (Ross): B 107 (During) 29 Aristotle,Protrepticus 30 See above, n 2. is most clearlyexpressed by Jaeger,whose views on the 31 This interpretation development of Aristotle'sthoughtit has wholly determined; cf. A.P.Bos, 'The
in Aristotle, 1 37 de Celo // ixavxea viewswhich toan early dateand must havecontained must be assigned inlater toJaeabandonedand rejected life. thephilosopher According a and follower of then deveAristotle started out as Plato, pupil ger, a first of speculativeand independent,strongly loped, by way in a final which towards scientific/ phase 'purely theological phase, assumes that main interest. This also research was his theory empirical and attention to 'natural more more Aristotle phenomena'and paid in and declined. his interest the that, conversely, 'supernatural' myths it is Divination too came to be valued less and less by Aristotle, supposed.32 with other Thisinterpretation is inconflict information aboutAristotle'sviews whichtradition has handed down to us. FromthisinforitbecomesclearthatAristotle allowedforthetransference of mation to mortals and that he knowledge by superhuman beings, explicitly man'spotential for suchknowledge. Aristotle was recognized acquiring nota modern for whom divination to positivist belonged 'supernatural phenomena' scientific Aristotle defying analysis.On thecontrary, natural classified mantic as albeit phenomena phenomena, belonging to the 'daemonic'level of Nature.33 In dealingwithour present itis usefulto makea distincsubject, tionbetween cultic divination and (b) individual, (a) institutional, private cases of divination. One should also distinguish betweenthe variousways in whichmanticknowledgereachesman. Countless manualson the different kindsof divination were compiledin the Hellenistic theflourishing ofliterature on thissubperiod.Evidently, ingeneral that theancients tookdivijectis tobe explained bythefact nationseriously.
relation between Aristotle's lostwritings and thesurviving Aristotelian cor52 (1987),24 ff.Forthecurrent verdict on Jaeger's Reformata pus,' Philosophia in Die Philosophie derAntike, vol 3, herausviews,cf.H.Flashar, 'Aristoteles,' Schwabe1983):'heute... ein breiter Kongeg. von H.Flashar(Basel/ Stuttgart: ... dass die Ergebnisse sens darber im Gesamtkonzept wie in viele Jaegers als verfehlt anzusehensind.' Einzelheiten in n 57. 32 See theauthors mentioned 33 On Aristotle's cf.M.Dtienne, La notion de Damon dansle demonology, ancien and Ph.Merlanin 1963)146ff. (Paris:Les BellesLettres Pythagorisme
Press1970),34 withn.l, and H.B.Gottschalk, Heraclides bridge University of Pontus Clarendon Press1980),98. (Oxford:
and EarlyMedievalPhilosophy Cambridge History ofLaterGreek (Cambridge: Cam-
38 A. P. Bos
It is equallyclearthatthephilosopher who acceptsthepossibility in whatever of divination form mustaccountforthe natureof such diviAristotle referred morethanoncetotheinstitutional phenomena. and a matter to which nation for Delos as in, instance, practised Delphi serious consideration was given.34 No principled ofitis found rejection a inhiswork.35 to divination Therearereferences by personregularly Aristotle as a seeror iivii.36 Lastly, speaksabouttheinfunctioning is cidental cases in whichsuperhuman knowledge acquired.The latin the first contacts betweena tercategory comprises place all direct in Aristotle's acis described mortal and a daemon.Such a situation Aristotle alsowrote between Midasand Silenus.37 count ofthemeeting in thedialogue'On mostnotably value of dreams, aboutthemantic dreamofEudemusoccupiedan imthesoul/in whichtheprophetic a similar Aristotle seemstohaveascribed experience portant position.38 to as a Greekking.39 in tradition referred to another Arabian figure, Aristotle as believing describes without Tertullian, anyreservations,
veXev Ge navTeuouvco 34 Cf. Hist AnimIII 20, 522al7: tcv Arjuvco rcKTTiaiv oeaGai kttiucitcv. Athenaeus, VII 296 D (= Aristfr490 Rose3): 'Ap. 6' v TvGaXxxiova|iova) v Ai^co Kaxoi7ioXiTia (FâOKv (pT]oi TfjAt^cov to Gôuai navieeaGai. Schol in Aristoph Kiioavia (xex xcovNripiVicov Lysistr 1153 (= Arist. fr395 Rose3): 'Ap. (pT|oi... xpôf^v yevoGaixo AKcoaiv Kataêiv xf]vTupavva, xfjFIuGa ... ouvexcototo xpcoariaio Alex 799 (143 Kinkel) ) = navTeuo^voi. Schol vet (cod Marc 476) ad Lycophr v 'IGaKTiocov 7roXii6aEupUTvacGvoevai Arist. fr508 Rose3): eAp. (pr|oiv tt| AhcoXa vonaoGv rc Eprcovo,rcap' o evai navxeov 'Odoox;. 35 But we do find it in later authors, e.g., Origen, C C VIII 3: uvaxv 'ikv r''v aovayouaiv arc 'ApioioxXou Kai tcvi xoO nepircxou(piXooopTicvxcuv toO rcepiifi IluGa Kai tcvXoirccov o)K Xya eirceiv xpr|OTTipei vaxporcfiv covXyou,and VIII 45. Cf. also Eusebius, Praep Evang IV 2.13, 136A-B and IV 3.14, 139D. 36 Cf. RhetIII 17, 1418a23. Also belonging to this categoryare the nviei of whom it is said in De Celo II 2, 285a4 that they qualifycertainphenomena as 'right-hand'('favourable') or 'left-hand'('unfavourable'), according to whether or left-handside. One thinks those phenomena occur on the seer's right-hand here of ornithomancers, but astrologersmightbe considered too. 37 Arist. Eudemusfr6 (Ross) 38 Ibid, fr1 (Ross) 39 Ibid, fr11 (Ross). Cf. A.P.Bos, 'Is the "Greek King" in Aristotle,Eudemusfr11 in The ModernSchoolman (1988). (Ross) Endymion of Elis?', forthcoming
de Celo II 1 39 (lavTeain Aristotle, in theprophetic thatAristonature ofdreams.It is in thisconnection In Greek Kronos.'40 litertleappearstohavespokenabouta 'dreaming a 'dreaming atlarge,according toJ.H.Waszink, we find Kronos' ature Fiin contexts wherehisfunction is thatofdream-orac/e.41 exclusively know that about the we Aristotle spoke favourably prophetic nally, whenthey valueofwordsuttered are aboutto die. He byindividuals is supposed to have citedthe celebrated and examplesof Patroclus Hector.42 Iftheaboveinformation aboutAristotle is correct, hisviewsarein linewiththoseofnearly all his contemporaries, Platoand including and Heraclides othermembers of the Academy, such as Xenocrates Ponticus.43 There is no tradition which ofantiquity records that Aristotle had exceptional ideas about divination and the daemonic. VI Aristotle's of manticphenomena explanation to Sextus according Empiricus Earlier on (cf.n. 21) we mentioned a text in SextusEmpiricus which statesthatAristotle the of divination and exaccepted phenomenon
40 Cf. Tertullian, deAnima fr20 Ross). On this,see A.P.Bos, 46 (= Arist. Protr 'Aristotle's Eudemus and Protrepticus: Are theyReallyTwo Different Works?', 8 (1984),43ff. Dionysius 41 Cf. J.H.Waszink, 'TracesofAristotle's lostdialoguesin Tertullian,' Vigiliae 1 (1947)137-49, Christianae Kronosin theCorpus esp.149;id, The dreaming of thistheme, 942a. Fortheimportance see also A.P.Bos,'A "Dreaming Kronos" in a LostWork in L'Antiquit 58 by Aristotle,' forthcoming Classsique (1989). 42 SextusEmpiricus, de Philos Math3 (Phys1) 20-3(= Arist. fr12a Ross) 43 On divination in Plato,see Apol22d8;21cl; 21a4; 29a3; 33c5;Defin 414b2;b3; 202e7;206b8;Phaedrus 257c8;LawsI 642d7;VII 792d3;VI 772dl; VIII Symp On oneiromancy, 828a2;IX 914a; Epin985c3;988a3;Phaedo Illb8; Tim71a7ff. cf.R.G.A. van Lieshout, Greeks on Dreams (diss. Utrecht 1980),esp.131:'The value of dreamsas a method of acquiring of anykindis nearly alknowledge van Lieshout Aristotle declares:'Withthe waysaccepted.'Of theperiodbefore ofXenophanes ... no philosopher or scholar... rejects thedreamout exception ofhand as a sourceof information' (136).
de Hermeticum,'MlangesH.Grgoire(Brussels 1950), Annuairede l'Institut orientales et slaves 10 (1950) 639-51, and Plutarch,de Facie Philol. et d'Histoire
40 A.P. Bos
We shall now have to discussthistext way.44 plainedit in a certain twosourcesresponfurther. to Aristotle indicated Sextus, According Sextususes theexsibleforthenotionofgods in people. Although totheinference the itself leads 'notion of pression gods/ exposition only menofa single'divinebeing'or 'deity.'The two sourcesreputedly human of the are: certain tioned Aristotle soul; (b) (a) by experiences to man. and all reveal heavens and the earth of the they contemplation lead tothecontoAristotle, Bothcategories ofphenomena, according thanboththe a order clusionthattheremustbe something of higher soul and the heavenly bodies. whichmay thepsychic It appearsthat, forAristotle, phenomena and mantic were'theecstatic ina notion ofthedivine result experiences before death. Aristotle and of the soul during sleep'45 shortly powers the soul in the of this by stating change capacity striking explained itsown nature death,thesoul regains that,during sleep and before The textin Sextusgivesno reasonto asbecause it is left to itself.46 dreamto have mantic sumethat Aristotle significance, every thought thepossibility without reserve he accepted butitdoes makeclearthat contact kindof humansoul establishes casesa certain thatin certain about a in and this a superhuman with wayacquires knowledge sphere Aristotle saw condition. liesbeyondman'sordinary which humanlife in many as 'unfree condition thesoulofmaninhisearthly respects,'47 in whichman It is thecondition as 'bound'to theperishable body.48
44 Sextus Empiricus, Math 3 (Phys 1) 20-3 (= Arist. de Philos fr 12a Ross): 'Ap. n uev pxcov vvoiav GecvZXeyz yeyovvai v to vOpamoi, n te tcv ouuaivovTcov Kai arc tcov ixETecopcov.XX* n nv tcov rcep nzpi TT]vv|/uxT|v oouaivovTcov i to v xo onvoi yivoM-voix;totti vGouoiaoTf]v v|/i)xf'v no Kai l navxea. iav yap, (pTiaiv, v tco tcvoOv Ka9s arciv yvriTai f| Txe Tfjv iov aTtoXaooa (puoiv rcponavxeueTai te Kai Tcpoayopeei x vj/oxi, 'iXXovta. Toiarn cm Kai v tc KaT tv Gvaxov xcopeoGai tv ocoîtcv. rcoxexai yov Kai tv tcoitittiv"Oniipov cb toto 7capaTTpf|oavTa. 45 Ibid, n tcv 7isp ttiv v|/uxtv GUM.aivovT(ovi to v to tcvok; yivo^vouc; TaTTi vGouoiaoô Kai T navTEa tte ttv iov 46 Ibid, Tav yp, (pTioiv, v t imvov KaG' aTf]v yvriTai f| vj/uxi, arcoXaooa cpoiv TiponavTEETai, and v tc kot tv GvaTOV xpiCEoGai tcv oconTcov.
47 Cf. MetaphA 2, 982b29. 48 Cf. the image of the 'binding' of prisoners by Etrurianpirates in Aristotle,Profr10b (Ross); B 107 (During). trepticus
de Celo 772 41 |iavT6ain Aristotle, in whichhe is subjectto and preoccupied suffers (rcvo), hardship in humanexistence, so thathe mustreinherent withthedifficulties of perfect maindestitute (ppvrioi.49 to ask what Sextusmeansby the 'own nature'of It is important the the soul. It is possiblethatAristotle, Plato,presented following and themortal soul as theoppositeoftheociiaxaconstituting body In that was thinking itas ociiaTO. case Aristotle alongthe qualified wherethetheme ofdeathas 'liberasamelinesas Platoin thePhaedo, tradia central there is a strong tion'is also accorded place. However, in that Aristotle's lost a which tion writings recording developed theory thesoul consists ofa veryspecial,divinefifth thesame eleelement, made.50 ofwhichthecelestial are That ment element too is enbeings of the constituent bodies. It has distinct from parts earthly tirely nothing itis imperishable and ungeneratin common withthefour elements, ed and cannot else,sinceithas no ot|in comchangeintosomething other But that monwith acojiaia. notwithstanding very specialnature, it is a oconaand, whatis more,a oco|ia belonging to (poi. The soul's'own nature' mentioned bySextusEmpiricus maytherefore notrefer to thenature ofan acuaxovin thePlatonic sense,but of fifth to thenature ofa substance the free from element, composed theobstruction contact withtheperishable caused by direct sphere. In thatcase Sextusis sayingthat,according to Aristotle, thehuman soul gains mantic in condition, powerswhen it resumesits original ifhumansouls acquireknowledge One might add that, ofthefuture whenthey thecondition oftheheavenly that acquire gods,thisimplies thesecosmicgods too knowthe future, as whollyagreeswiththeir
whichit is of thesame nature and thesameessenceas thecelestial beings.
49 In sharp contrastwith, for instance, the condition of the celestial sphere, which is in no way connected with the sublunary sphere and which can thereforebe qualified as TcaGfi nor'<; Gvttt uaxepea (de Celo II 1, 284al4), as not ooxoXo and not deprived of noT'c,ecotcovtk 07COVO (al5), and therefore ncppovo(a31-2). 50 Cf. the texts collected in de Philos fr27 (Ross). In fr27d (Cie. Tuse I 26.65-27.66) one of the reasons adduced to account for this special element is that in the four earthlyelements 'nihil inest ... quod et praeteritateneat et futuraprovideat et complecti possit praesentia. Quae sola divina sunt, nee invenieturumquam unde ad hominem venire possint nisi a deo/ For a defence of the value of these testimonies,cf. Ch. Lefvre,'"Quinta natura"et psyRevue philosophique de Louvain69 (1971) 13-39. chologie aristotlicienne/
42 A.P. Bos
ofthe thewayis pavedfor Atthesametime divine nature. prediction In celestial movements. of the future Pythagoreanbycontemplation thenew geometrical ismand theOld Academy approachto astronoled to a newand positive of the its deification bodies, heavenly by my, had beenregarded as Chalthat time which before inastrology, interest dean and exotic.51
attitude to oneiromancy VII Did Aristotle's change? and lucidoneiroI sketched theconsistent sections In theforegoing Thissketch to Aristotle. attribute sources indirect which various logy about thesigwithwhatAristotle willnow have tobe compared says in his of dreamsin his preserved nificance works,and in particular that to which is devoted de Divinatione treatise Somnum, subject. per indications norindirect direct are neither I repeatthatthere First, Of coursehe comtobe 'mantic/ all dreams considered that Aristotle value withtheconvichave mantic binedtheview thatdreamsmay andliberation detachment Mostlikely, areempty/52 dreams that 'most tion ofmanin theacquisition factor a crucial Aristotle ofthesoul was for ticpowers.53
Die Geschichte und Sterndeutung: 51 See F.Boll, C.Bezold, W.Gundel, Sternglaube . It is really quite und das WesenderAstrologie (Darmstadt 1917; 19746) 19ff remarkablethat Aristotle'stheoryregardingthe great influenceof the cosmic basis for (celestial) gods on the sublunary sphere could provide the doctrinary astrologicalpreoccupations, and that philosophy in the period immediately afterAristotleshows a sharp increase of such preoccupations,but that hardly a trace of them is to be found in his preserved works. fr9 (Ross); B 101 (During). In 'Aristotle'sEudemusand Protrepti52 Cf. Protrepticus I cus.../ 45-51, argued that this passage need not be at odds with the positive valuation of (some) dreams. A.H.M.Kessels (Studieson the Dream in GreekLiterature([Utrecht1973], 106) likewise states that 'all dreams which are told to the are supposed to come fromthe full in these poems [i.e., the Iliad and Odyssey] not exclude the possibility does this other the On dead. ... or the hand, gods that there may have been certaindreams that did not have any divine origin.' 53 The idea that there are gradations in the purityof the soul is also found in Plutarch,de Facie 945a-b (and in St Augustine, de OrdineII ix 26).
de Celo 7/1 43 Haviea in Aristotle, in thetreatise text referred tois thestateSecond,themoststriking But emment that arenotQem'xnxa dreams (sentbyGod).54 Aristotle nevertheless be located in breath that dreams should the same phasizes Dreamsarecertainly 'natural' for inthedaemonic phenomena sphere. sense. In his view, 'natural' but not in a flat,positivistic Aristotle, that include thedaemonic and within the sphere, sphere, phenomena dreams also counted of Prophetic phenomena.55 category superhuman inthelostworks, whereAristotle as 'natural supposedly phenomena' relatedthemto the soul's 'own nature';theycountedas 'natural inasmuch as thefifth assumedto be the subelement, phenomena' to be a partof (poi. stanceof the soul,56 was reckoned Likewisewe can be surethatthelostworkstoo did notconsider dreamsto be 'sentby (themetaphysical, transcendent) god.' On the de Div the text cited from the Somn locates other dreamsin hand, per far removed from man's thedaemonic transient condition. There sphere a profound are no groundsforassuming between the de opposition Divper Somn and whattradition tells us aboutAristotle's lostwritings.57
54 De Div per Somnum o 2, 463bl3: Geonemia nv ok v er| T vTtvia, yyovetotou xpw (aiôva hevtoi' f| yp (poi ai|iova, AA' o Geia). 55 Cf. Dtienne, 46, who translatesthe above-mentioned textas follows: '[Les songes] ne sont pas envoys par les dieux, mais bien par les dmons ... .' See further pp. 140-68. His position is stronglysupported by Merlan, 33-4 and n 1: 'In Plato and in the Academy, including Aristotle,interestin demons had always existed.' 56 Cf. Cie. Tuse 1.17Al and 1.26.65-27.66 (= Arist. de Philosophia fr27 Ross). In Cic. Acad 1.7.26 and Cic. Tuse 1.10.22, also included by Ross, the fifth element is called the substance of the mentes. From the contextit is clear that the 'rational soul' or 'discursive reason' is meant, not 'pure intellect'or 'pure intuition.' 57 Jaeger,162 with n 1, did assume a profound opposition, which he explained to be a result of development in the Stagirite'sthought. Cf. also F. Pfeffer, Studienzur Mantikin der Philosophie derAntike(Meisenheim am Gian: Hain 1976), 61: 'In seiner frhenSchrift n. cpiXoGOipiac; hatte Aristotelesdie Traummantik mit Hilfe pythagorisierender Vorstellungenerklrt:Im Schlaf lst sich die Seele vom Krper und kommt in Kontakt mit dem Gttlichen'(with reference to de Philos fr12a Ross). 'In seinen spteren Schriften erklrter alle Trume beruhen auf rein innerseelischenVorgnpsychologisch: Traumvorstellungen gen; eine gttlicheEinwirkungist nicht anzunehmen.' Cf. also p.4: 'Die Haltung des Aristotelesluftin den meisten seiner Ausfhrungenauf eine rationalisierendeErklrungmantischerPhnomene hinaus; gttlichesMitwir-
44 AP. Bos Iftheselostwritings talkedaboutthehumansoul regaining its'own whatmusthave been meantis thatit acquiresa 'daemonic' nature/ condition. VIII Solutions theXyou tv 0ev for Gunqxovou ttjixavieaxf|rcepi I have arguedthatthestandard ofthefinal passage in interpretation In thefirst deCelo II 1 meetswithseriousobjections. place,theword without at is a 284b3 M-avteia meaning parallelin given generalized from Aristotle's work.Second,thestandard interpretation, Simplicius and ignores ofthepassageinquestion thecontext onwards, disregards distinction between theperfect Aristotelian theimportant contemplaand theeffortless, tionand eainovaofthetranscendent goaldeity and productivity of the celestial directed gods who are part activity thestandard ofcpGic. dependson an unusualgramreading Finally, case wouldhave the accusative followed matical construction: Tiepi by is about.Instead,I have arguedthatin to denotewhatthe ixavxeia theterm worksand his other lostdialogical bothAristotle's writings of in of 'oracular used the sense is navxeia knowledge,' knowledge is room whether there I will discuss now Therefore origin. superhuman of the finalpassage in de CeloII 1. foran alternative explanation
1 Corruption of the text?
in our chapter thetext whether we mustconsider First, maybe corin the indication manuscript point.Thereis no such ruptat a crucial mentions thevariant for ourpassagemerely which tradition, readings
ken wird abgelehnt. Dies bedeutet im Grunde eine Ablehnung der Mantik.' Here it should be objected that Aristotleexplained mantic phenomena 'psychologically'in his lost writingstoo and that propheticdreams will not have makes Aristotle been called Gene^Kia there either. Quite wrongly,Pfeffer himself into someone who, virtuallyon his own, rejected ideas which Pfeffer agrees were commonplace in Plato's time (cf. 9; see also Merlan, 33-5). That is has to twist his argumentsin order to explain that Peripateticslike why Pfeffer Dikearchus and Cratippus are traditionally assigned views which seem to be cf. 62 with quotawholly in line with those of Aristotlein the de Philosophia; tion fromCicero, de Divin I 70 and II 100.
de Celo 771 45 jxavieain Aristotle, and tcv insteadoftv 0ev.Thesereadings tcv 06CV Gecov can only made by copyists be explained as corrections who felt uneasyabout theaccusative case after thetext rapiandwishedto'regularize' byreadis a a there remarkable text from the lateHowever, ing genitive. whichallowsat leastthepossibility classical tradition ofa corruption. in Olympiodorus' inquestion Thetext is found on Placommentary to's Phaedo. on the Platonic where Socrates reCommenting passage marks that the highest knowledge is only attainable for and thusonly'whenthedeity himself has freed the-soul-on-its-own, us' (i.e., from thebody),58 adds the remark: Olympiodorus following he means it who because is he over here, 1)y"god" Dionysus presides life and death;overlife on account oftheTitans, overdeathonaccount tv Gvaiov).59 The reference to theTitansis explainedin the same the remark that commentary by Dionysusis thegod ofindividuation because in theOrphicmyth he is tornapartby theTitans.60 Further on Dionysusis again said to presideoverlifeand death;overdeath because wineenthuses and because prior to deathwe becomemore to as is clear from thefactthatin Homer susceptible voouoiaoix, Patroclus when death.'61 acquires prophetic powers nearing Referring to thenow familiar textin SextusEmpiricus,62 L.G.Westerink notes
withdeath'(8i ttjvnavxeav ttjvTtepi associated ofthethemantic powers
58 Plato, Phaedo 67a6. The use of KGapo (twice), KaGapco(twice), and KaGapeucoin 66d-67b will have carried a religious connotation forthe Greek reader too. 59 Olympiodorus, In PI Phaedo 6 par 13 (ed L.G.Westerink, The GreekCommentarieson Plato: Phaedo. [Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company 1976], Kai 103): 0vvxaGa KaXe tv Aivuoov, iti outo cpopoKai cofi Gavaiou, cfi |iv i to Tuva, Gavxou i ttiv navTeiav tt]vrcepi tv Gvaxov. 60 Ibid, 1 par 5.9ff(ed. Westerink,45) 61 Ibid, 1 par 6.1-5 (ed. Westerink,47): Kai yevaecoAAcoecpopoxiv Aivuao, ixi Kai coiiKai xeXeuif'cofj nv yp cpopo,neifiKai xf Kai rcepxf|vxeXeuifiv , iti vGouoiv ovo Ttoie yevoec, TeXeuifi vGouoiacTiKcxepov yivêGa, (b titan rcap' 'OnipcpnaxpoKôc; âvxiK yeyovx;TiepittivteXeuttv 62 Sextus Empiricus,Math 3 (Phys 1) 20-3 (= Arist. de Philos fr12al Ross). Cf. Cicero, Div ad Brutum1.30.63 (= Arist. de Philos fr 12a2 Ross), where Aristotle is assigned the view that the soul near death acquires mantic powers, with citation of the same Homeric example.
46 A.P. Bos
thatthe passage from represents Dionysianecstasy, Olympiodorus and death as merely threedifferent ways in prophetic inspiration, world.Allthree from thevisible which thesoulcanbecomeseparated In yeta belongto the domainof DionysusLyseus(the'liberator').63 death: life and 'of death is called the cause of third passage Dionysus because he presides over the jiavieia which does not admit of (pavxaoia.'64 thereare several is a late Neoplatonist, Olympiodorus Although de a relation betweenhis textand Aristotle, reasonsforconsidering CeloII 1: mantic thesoul neardeathacquires (a) The idea that powersis, as who uses to Aristotle Sextus we have seen, attributed Empiricus, by Homer. the same examplefrom or thatin his dialogueEudemus (b) Thereare variousindications and traditions from borrowed soulAristotle On the intensively Orphic hereby G. Mautis topics.Valuableanalyseshave been contributed ofthedaemonSilenusin thediThe appearance and J.Brunschwig.65 aboutman's ofDionysus,and his 'revelation' alogue,thecompanion with connected areall clearly in hisearthly lackoffreedom condition, theOrphictheology Dionysus.Likewisethetopicofthe concerning It is to Orphictradition.67 is bestseen in relation Kronos'66 'dreaming a drew scheme Aristotle Eudemus in the in that fact, up quitepossible, tothe correlate and 'purification,' levelsof'liberation' several involving of levels of various knowledge. acquisition wouldbe thedepothefirst (c) In sucha scheme phaseofliberation'
63 Westerink,46-7 64 Olympiodorus, In PI Phaedo 7 par 10.14-17 65 Cf. G. Mautis, 'L'Orphisme dans YEudmed'Alistte/ Revuedes tudesAn'Alistte et les pirates Tyrrhniens( 57 (1955) 254-66. J.Brunschwig, ciennes de la France Revue Philosophique 60 Rose du Protreptique)/ propos des fragments 88 (1963) 171-190. fr20 Ross) 66 Tertullian,de Anima46 (= Arist. Protrepticus 43-4. It is worth noting that, ac67 Cf. Bos, 'Aristotle'sEudemusand Protrepticus,' cording to Damascius, Xenocrates too explained the passage on the (ppoup in to the Orphic tradition,fr20 (Heinze): TiTavuaj Plato, Phaedo 62b by referring eon Kai ei Aivuoov noKopucpooTai.Cf. Westerink,vol I, 8.
in Aristotle, de Celo 7/1 47 |i(XVTa and somatic and theassumption sition ofcoarsemateriality nature of a purepsychic condition. Aristotle to have attributed this state appears to theheavenly as is appropriate to imbeingstoo. Their knowledge, must include into the sempiternal perishable, beings, insight pastand thefuture. Butoverand abovethislevelAristotle mustalso have disthepurenoeticcondition ofall transcendent, tinguished metaphysical beings.To thesehe would have attributed a knowledge whichis not temporally qualified. ofmantic theacquisition (d) In thescheme knowledge during sleep orbefore deathis presumably seen as theresult ofa processin which man'sperishable is transformed nature intoan imperishable, eternal natureon the level of the heavenly gods.68 II 1 ofthedeCelodiscussestheceles(e) As we have seen,chapter tialspheres and thedivine fifth and emphasizes element that thiselementis freeofthelimitations the condition of mortal imposedupon beings. we noted, haveposited a closerelationship bescholars, (f)Various tweende CeloII 1 and Aristotle's lost works. Allthese lendcredence considerations tothesuggestion that deCelo II 1, 284b3shouldbe amendedtoxfj tv iiavieigifircepi Gvaiov.The ofthetext who corruption mayeasilyhave been caused by a copyist did not understand the phrase7tepi tv Gvorcov. are twoobviousobjections to thissolution. In the However,there first withanother, lostworkis absolutely place,familiarity indispensable to an understanding ofthepassage thusconstrued. Second,we would have to assumea seriousbreakin Aristotle's train ofthought at thispoint.Forthecontext ofde CeloII 1 does notmakeclearwhy thesubject ofAristotle's shouldsuddenly shift from theconargument dition ofthecelestials to thatofearthly mortals and their to potential thecondition ofthosedivine traacquire beings.And sincethetextual
68 Cf. theCiceronian testimonies aboutthefifth element as substance of the celestial underAristotle, de Philos fr27abeingsand thehumansoul, included d (Ross). Severalscholars have arguedthatthesetexts originally belongedto - e.g., O.Gigon,'Prolegomena theEudemus to an Edition of the Eudemus,' in
I. During and G. E.L.Owen, eds., Aristotle and Plato in theMid-Fourth Century Passato 17 (1962), 98ff.;H.J.Easterling, 21 'Quinta natura/MuseumHelveticum (1964), 79-80.
'Cicerone e YEudemo/ Parola del 1960),23; A.Grilli, (Gteborg: Almqvist/Wiksell
48 A.P. Bos
dition no indication ofcorruption, we can onlyacceptsuch provides a solution whenallother have been exhausted. Thatpoint possibilities has notyetbeen reached.
2 An ancientlogosfrom as iiavxeia? Orphictheology
Ifthetext is retained as ithas beenhandeddowntous, whatmeaningxv0ev?Is the fulinterpretation can be givento tt| navieia xfj rcepi in about the sense of 'revelation' or'in'jiavxeia meaning god' possible A in hint that direction be found about god? might spired knowledge' intheapxcriouc Kai ixXioxa ... Xyou mentioned earli7iaxpoi) f||xv er on in thechapter.69 tradiThe reference is to an ancient ancestral tionaccording in to whichthere is an imperishable, divineprinciple, all that causes the and end of other movement, beginning perpetual a Tcaôucx; refers to thesame tradimovements.70 Plato,citing Xyoc,, tionin bookIV ofhis Laws.71 ThisPlatonic citedin passage is in turn In find of an de Mundo.72 the latter treatise we also the part Orphic poem in question.73 Inasmuch thenaXaiXyoc, whichmaywellrepresent
69 De Celo II 1, 284a2. 70 Ibid., 284a2-ll. Cf. also MetaphA 8, 1074bl-13, where the ancient poets are said to have already handed down, in a mythicalform,the traditionthat the celestial beings are gods and that the whole of nature is surrounded by diviniis, to say the least, peculiar, forAristotleemphatty. This piece of information ically includes the planets in his argument,whereas the ancient mythicalpoets can be solved if one may aspaid no separate attentionto these. The difficulty sume that Aristotleis thinkingof an allegorical explanation of the mythconcerningKronos and the Titans, an explanation which Xenocrates (fr 19 and 20 Heinze) seems also to have used. 71 Plato, Laws IV 715e7. The preceding part 713a sqq is taken up by the mythical narrationof how the god Kronos created a perfecthuman society by appointing aijiove as supervisors and rulers over the people. 72 De Mundo 7, 401b26. On this writing,cf. A.P. Bos, 'Greek philosophical theology and the de Mundo' in Th. G. Sinnige (ed.), On and Offthe BeatenTrack; Studiesin Platonism 1986) 1-30. (Nijmegen: Centrale Interfaculteit 73 De Mundo 7, 401a27-29: Al Kai v xo 'OptpiKoo KaKco Xeyeiai*'Ze keOn the evidence of the Derveni (paXii,Ze nooa, Ai ' K nvxa xTUKTCu! date from the fifth must in this found 1962, century;it is alpoem papyrus ready commented on in the papyrus, which dates back to around 400 BC. Cf.
in Aristotle, de Celo 771 49 |xavT6a as suchOrphic be considered ofinspired poemsmight products poets and 'theologians/ have been referred to the they may by wordnavTeia. 3 Therevelation Silenus as navieia? ofthedaemon to another Thetext 'revelation' thenature ofthe mayrefer concerning One recalls here the of the daemon in who the Silenus, deity. figure 'On the Soul' the revealed miserable condition of mordialogue earthly tals to kingMidas. Variousmodernauthorshave notedthatthese on theillsofsublunary existence must havebeencompronouncements a about in and bliss. plemented by story beingsliving greater glory Such a story have featured the who inhabit 'the isles of may beings theblessed' or the 'isles of Kronos.'74 4 ixavxeia not 'about god' but 'aroundgod' The problem withtheaboveinterpretations is that failto explain they tv 08v was used rather than to Geo or Becv. Tiepi raptcv whyrapi thecontext in deCeloII 1 offers no occasionfor a concludMoreover, thepassage would remain iji such a vein. Finally, ingremark excepin speaking tional ofa navxeiaaboutgod. Forin all knowninstances mantic are concerned withthecondition ofmortals pronouncements in the past, present, or (usually)future.75 It is necessary, therefore,
In other as a nakai Xyo: Phaedo placesPlatoalso citedtheOrphictradition VII 335a3. 70c5;Phaedrus 240cl; Epist 74 R.Walzer, Aristotelis in usum scholarum (Florence 1934),n 2 on fr13 of fragmenta theEudemus; Traces of Aristotle's Lost Dialoguesin Tertullian,' J.H.Waszink, Christianae 1 (1947),139ff.; 87 (1959),161; Bos, Vigiline Gigon,24; id., Hermes
'Aristotle'sEudemusand Protrepticus/ 43-4
G. Reale, Aristotele Trattato sul cosmoperAlessandro f redo 1974), 273. (Naples: Lof
information 75 The mantic whichEudemusreceived in his dreamconcerned the of Pherae,therecovery deathofAlexander ofEudemus,and his 'return' after fr1 Ross); themantic fiveyears(Eudemus of the'Greekking'conknowledge cernedthedeathsofcontemporaries and and thedatesof future earthquakes and tidalwaves (Eudemus fr11 Ross); themantic referred to pronouncements in de Philos fr12a (Ross) concerned thedeathsof Hectorand Achilles. Cf. also thePlatonic as a 'certain 414b2,wherenavxeiais defined Definitiones
50 A.P. Bos
toproposestill another one in whichthetext mentioninterpretation, and the of the de are Celo related |xavT6a ing preceding part clearly to each another. in section We already notedthat Aristotle attributes 284al4-35 preto those the celestial which Sextus cisely qualities sphere Empiricus, inwhatis taken tobe a fragment ofthedePhilosophia,76 as esregards The celestial of sential to thepossibility ofdivination. consists sphere ofwhichthehumansoul is made,acether, i.e., thesame substance to Aristotle's It is free ofall discomforts adherlostwritings. cording it with to the mortal since has no contact condition, sublunary ing It is freeoftoiland pain, and enjoystheotium ocfiaia.77 necessary to Aristoa life ofthetruth. Notso, according for giventoknowledge the in about other theories about the Atlas, tle, toiling sky-bearer the world-soul or about rotation of celestial fire (Empedocles), whirling which totheheavenly attribute conditions (Plato);suchtheories sphere to that of misit from a level of knowledge superior reaching prevent erablemortals. that the inAristotle's entails Another doctrine cosmology important In for nature. of the divine celestial are executors masterplan gods who of a A the free members 10 are to familia Metaph they compared In the unliketheslavesand cattle.78 sharein theplansofthemaster, de Mundothey are imaginedin the role of bodyguards, treatise of thewillof executors to thePersiansovereign, ministers, viceroys that share of the celestials is Essential to this role thedivine they king. has which the the for of deity supreme masterplan reality knowledge order is based. which the cosmic out.Itis this knowledge upon thought of forknowledge And thisknowledge condition is also a necessary to mortals. the future and its communication the related A crucial is in whatway Aristotle however, question, to the the depengod metaphysical knowledge possessedby supreme,
knowledge which is not grounded in argumentationand which indicates an action beforehand.' 76 Aristotlede Philos. fr.l2a (Ross) 77 Sextus Empiricus speaks about the Kcrrtv Gvaxov xpieaOaixcov of the soul. In de Celo I 3, 269bl4 Aristotlehad said that the fifth ocnaTCOV element is a ocona: napa xa oc^crrax eOpo Kai rcep fm xepov Kexcopionvov. 78 MetaphA 10, 1075al6-23
1 51 de Celo // naviea in Aristotle, it dentknowledgepossessed by the cosmicgods. Communication, bea mutual The communication wouldappear,is necessarily process. intermediate is presenttween (Saiiove) beings godsand menthrough In a 'great Plato. the he calls Eros ed as a mutual Symposium process by and qualifies 'the daemonic7 as thatwhichconveyshuman Saincv' and offerings to the gods and divineordersand rewards to prayers all ixaviiKf) humanbeings.79 'The daemoniccontrols and all priestly offices with toofferings, all navieia consecrations, conjurations, regard and sorcery/80 Aristotle's differs on a decisive that however, theology, pointfrom ofPlato.Aristotle the ad denies actio emphatically supreme deity any extra. in kinetic Aristotle ends with Analyzing processes Nature, up the notionof the supremedeityas UnmovedMover,who does not movebyimparting butby'provoking' movement Kive movement, c Likewise Aristotle's in the of pcnevov.81 analysis cognitive processes natural in thesupreme as theultisphereappearsto culminate deity matebasis ofall knowledge; thisdeity does notcause knowledge by it through active'enlightenment,' but by 'provoking' it in imparting a mindwhichhas reached theappropriate oriendisposition through tation towards thedeity.82 God is thecause ofall orderin Naturebecause god is the cause of all perfect of thatorderin the knowledge celestial inasmuch as is causafinalis. beings god their Only thuscan Aristotle attribute theactivity ofeoopia tothetranscendent solely deity and assignall Tipi as a provident, to thecosmic beTtpai orderly stature. ingsof imperishable De Celo II 1 is a text, in whichAristotle makesclearthat therefore, thecondition ofthecelestial ofcognibeingsexcludes anyobstruction tive powers such as mortals we know that Moreover, experience. Aristotle holdsthese topossessknowledge ofthedivine masterbeings which outwithout intheir direcNature, planfor they carry anyactivity tion on thepart ofthesupreme ofthese considerations god. In thelight
79 Plato Symp202d-e. Cf. Phaedo 111b; Symp188b-d; Statesman 290c; Epin 984e; 985b-c. 80 Md., 202e 81 MetaphA 7, 1072b3 82 Cf. de Anima III, 5 and V.Kal, On Intuition and DiscursiveReasoningin Aristotle (Leiden: Brill 1988), 84-109.
52 A.P. Bos
I feel in suggesting II 1, Aristotle at theend ofdeCelo is that, justified that a fifth element as his about substance 'natural/ saying theory special oftheheavenly for Plais so muchmore than, instance, cogent spheres theeternity ofthe to'stheory abouttheworld-soul becauseitguarantees and inharworld.Butatthesametime itis theonlytheory consistent with with tv that is to consistent 0ev, navxea xfj rcepi xfi mony say, in around arises the celesthemantic Mantic knowledge activity god.83 fire tialbeings'aroundgod' in thesame way thata haystack catches of the transcendent of the the divine knowledge through heating hay; condition. But the flaming up of this mantic god is its necessary in a Aristotle's is still 'natural' eyes,and notthe process, knowledge ofa 'supernatural' intervention. result II 1, therefore, indeCelo Thefinal remark assignsan intermediary todaemons. Plato the role which roletothecelestial element, assigned the The heavenly ordinary lyingbeyond beingspossess knowledge such knowledge, of mortals; however, beingknowledge knowledge in the temporal about matters sphere,is of a lowerorderthanthe While the deity. metaphysical knowledge possessedby transcendent, to the this enables Aristotle accommodate belief, firmly popular theory area source ofsuinGreek that mantic entrenched culture, phenomena that he chosen his words so has information, carefully yet perhuman as need be assumedon thepartofthesupreme no intervention deity in of a order. In this view the lower initiator ofmantic activity beings as bounded aboutthewholeofreality celestial knowledge godsreveal On the one reveal thefuhand,they (and time). sphere bythecelestial in and that their in ture tonvraspecialized astrology, positions paths On theother events.84 on terrestrial havean impact hand,their superhutheintermediation tomortals manknowledge is madeknown through souls. ofindividual theecstatic ofdaemonsor through experiences
83 In that case, therefore, Tiepiplus accusative is taken in a spatial sense. Cf. Simplicius, In Ar. de Celo II 1 (375.13): "AxXa e ^v taxi Kai aT tcov
TtEp TV AlVDOOV TlTVCOV.
84 Cf. the nvxei which are mentioned in de Celo II 2, 285a4, and which one mightlink up with the Pythagoreantradition.Elsewhere Aristotlementions withoutcomment that Thaes, on the basis of his axpoXoya, 'observed' a good olive harvest six months in advance (PoliticsI 17, 1259alO). Later Plotinus ouv T xpa>nvxei too gives a serious answer to the question: rcGev Kai e tjv to navx (ppav pcvTercpoTa aXXaic jiavTeiaic TtpoXyouoi npoUyovoi TaTa; (Enti III 3 (48) 6.1-3; II 3 (52) 1).
de Celo II 1 53 liavTeain Aristotle, inbroaching thesubject ofiiavieia,AristoItis clear, however, that, indeCelo I and his main from concerns tomovefar tlethreatens away in and windsup withtheremark short II. Thatis whyhe cutshimself 284b5.85 IX Conclusions indeCelo II 1 has a meaning Thusinterpreted, thetext similar strikingly in Plutarch's deFaciein Orbe to thatoftheKronosmyth Lunae.As we already pointedout (pp. 39, 46, and 49 withnn. 40, 41, 66, and 74), a connection in Plutarch withtherelevant text runsthrough fragment 20 oftheProtrepticus, wherea dreaming Kronos is mentioned. Thetext in de Facie(941ff.) too mentions divination daemons and Kronos by himself. The latter is said to communicate themostimportant predictionsin his capacity ofdream-oracle. His prescience dependson parin thedivinecouncilofZeus. Whatappearsto be essential ticipation hereis that mantic is notacquired on thepart knowledge byan action is to saybythepacification ofhis titanic, nature. i.e., emotional, Just as theremoval oftheobstruction whichthematerial for bodyforms thesoul impliesthatthesoul starts to regainitsmantic so potential, oftheobstruction theremoval which forms (anyremaining) irrationality for themindmeansthatthemindregains itsdivinenature and takes of the transcendent partin the divinecontemplation god Zeus. But thebondageof Kronosis not an unnatural bondage,as that ofIxionor theprisoners whomEtrurian bound ontocorpses. pirates Bothaspectsof his condition are 'natural/ just as bothwakingand are natural statesofa living in quality. Besleeping being,ifdifferent ingswiththe statusof Kronosand his daemonspotentially possess thevti oftheir whichis free from the nature, ok; ofZeus on account obstructions ofthemortal condition. WithKronoshimself thereis a continual actualization of thatpotential, sincehis titanic nature(his
of Zeus, but by theremoval on thepartofKronos,that ofan obstruction
85 De Celo II 1, 284b5: XX tgjv lvtoioOtcv Xycov &Xi oic t vOv. A comat a point where the proper limitsof physics are in parable breaking-off danger of being exceeded is found in de Gen An III 11, 761b23: XX rcepnv totcovaMo v ei Xyo. In EN I 3, 1069a3 we find something similar,and the reason given there is that the subject was already discussed in the lost writings.Cf. I 13, 1102bll.
54 A.P. Bos
has been completely in the sleep of the soul which Tiafj) pacified acreleasesnoetic aroundZeus themantic powers.And itis thusthat of the cosmicbeingswiththeir ethereal natureis generated. tivity A curious in the fact mention here.Atfirst theKronosmyth merits de Faciewas a meansof arriving at possibleexplanations of de Celo II 1. Butnow we see that ofthefinal theproposedinterpretation pasin II 1 for the de Celo that,in the hypothesis sage provides support was strongly influenced by Aristotelian mythof de Facie,Plutarch themes.86
Summary
II 1, 284b3, deCelo ofAristotle, Thestandard according interpretation about to humanconvictions tv 9evrefers thenaviea rcepi towhich on linguistic and philosophical ofgod,mustbe rejected thecondition of superhugrounds.Mavieia shouldbe takento mean'knowledge accordAristotle was taken which mannature' ordivinatio, seriously by testimonies. to ing many ofthetext, arediscussed Various (including corruption possibilities The most read navxeiajcepi tv Gvaxov). whichmayhave originally II is to the in 1 284b3 Aristotle that de Celo is these of referring likely the cosmic gods, knowledge possessed by knowledge superhuman divine with thetranscendent their contact which through they acquire inferior order.87 to of mediate and which voO beings they VrijeUniversiteit Centrale Interfaculteit Postbus7161 1007MC Amsterdam Netherlands
antinellastoriografia sul pensiero di eclettismo 86 Cf. also P.Donini,'II concetto de Faciein Orbe di Plutarco, co (con un saggiodi interpretazione Luna)'to theDublinFIEC congress, August1984. Paperpresented Prof.P. Donini, to Prof. 87 I wouldliketo express J.Mansfeld, mygratitude valuablecomments fortheir and Prof. D.M. Schenkeveld Prof.G.W.R. Ardley version of thisarticle. on an earlier

Manteia en Aristóteles

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Manteia en Aristóteles

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

De Gruyter

de CeloII 1 gavieta in Aristotle,

II The structure of de Celo II 1

on thede Celo [Assen: van Gorcum 1966], 175ff) A Commentary Cosmology:

and EarlyMedievalPhilosophy Cambridge History ofLaterGreek (Cambridge: Cam-

'Cicerone e YEudemo/ Parola del 1960),23; A.Grilli, (Gteborg: Almqvist/Wiksell

Você também pode gostar