transl. by A. Johnson (Oxf. 1832. 8). § 182.-Bähr, Geschichte der Röm. Lit. § 306, 307.-G. P. Hollenberg, De præcipuis Stoica Philosophiæ Doctoribus et Patronis apud Romanos. Lpz.1793. 4. § 458. The Peripatetic philosophy does not appear to have found very warm admirers among the Romans. The writings of Aristotle and Theophrastus were brought to Rome from Athens by Sylla; they were, however, very difficult for the Romans to understand. Yet this sect had its advocates; and its doctrines were taught in the public schools under the emperors, and numerous commentaries and treatises were written upon the works of its original founder. These writings, however, seem to have been entirely in the Greek language. The most eminent Peripatetics after the Christian era, did not reside at Rome; Themistius, who illustrated several of the treatises of Aristotle, gave instruction at Constantinople (cf. § 125); Alexander Aphrodiseus, author of several works still extant, and called by distinction the Commentator, taught at Athens or Alexandria, about A. D. 200.

Enfield, bk. iii. ch. 1. ch. 2. sect. 5. — Johnson's Tennemann, § 183.

§ 459. The Cynics seem never to have enjoyed any reputation at Rome. The opinion of Cicero respecting them, was, that the whole body ought to be banished from the state. Julian (§ 127) pronounces the Cynics of his day to be troublesome and mischievous. In the reign of the Antonines philosophers of this sect were forbidden to maintain any public schools. Lucian treats them with great severity, particularly in the piece on Peregrinus (cf. § 121). Enfield, bk. iii. ch. 2. § 6.

$460. The Epicurean philosophy had sunk into great discredit on account of the improprieties indulged by its advocates, before its introduction to Rome, Notwithstanding this disadvantage, it soon obtained admirers. The free indulgence of the inclinations which it allowed, greatly conduced to its popularity. Cicero condemned and opposed it; but Atticus, his intimate friend and correspondent, embraced it. Horace, if not an Epicurean entirely, yet found the lightness and gaiety which it cherished very congenial to his feelings. The poet Lucretius (cf. § 357) was the first who gave the Romans, in their own language, a full account of the doctrines of Epicurus; and the reputation of his poetry no doubt contributed in an eminent degree to give currency to these doctrines. Pliny the elder (cf. 470) is sometimes ranked among the Epicureans, but he did not rigidly adhere to any sect. Lucian the satirist, and Celsus the early adversary of Christianity, are also included by some. Diogenes Laertius (cf. § 255a) likewise is thought to manifest plainly his predilection for the doctrines of Epicurus.

Enfield, bk. iii. ch. ii. sect. 8. - Johnson's Tennemann, 181. - Account of the philosophy of Lucretius in the translations of Busby & Good, cited § 357. 4. — Schöll, Litt. Rom. 11. 155.

$461. The school of Sceptics or Pyrrhonists gained no celebrity among the Romans. The peculiar doctrines of the Sceptics corresponded, in some degree, with those of the Academy. Pyrrhonism, however, had avowed abettors and supporters; among them were particularly several physicians.-We have no written remains from any of them in the Latin language; and the only author that specially deserves notice here, as an advocate of Scepticism under the Roman empire, is Sextus Empiricus, who flourished about A. D. 200, and wrote in Greek (cf. § 197).

Enfield, Hist. Phil. bk. iii. ch. ii. sect. 9. — Johnson's Tennemann, §186–193. — Thorbecke, Do discrimine inter Acad. et Sceptic. Lug. Bat. 1820.

§ 462. It will be recollected that the four sects, which we have here mentioned first, the Academic and Peripatetic, Stoic and Cynic, were derived through Socrates from the old Ionic school (cf. § 171-173); and that the two last mentioned, the Epicurean and Sceptic, descended from the old Italic or Pythagorean school (§ 170, 177).

As the Pythagorean school in Magna Græcia was so celebrated among the Greeks, we might suppose that it would have attracted great attention among the Romans, as soon as they learned any thing of the literature and philosophy of the Greeks. This however does not appear to have been the fact, although the name of Pythagoras was ever regarded with great reverence (Cic. de Senect. c. 21). The poet Ennius is said to have embraced the doctrine of metempsychosis, and a friend of Cicero, by the name of Publius Nigidius Figulus, is mentioned as an advocate of the doctrines of Pythagoras. But after the establishment at Crotona (§ 170) was broken up, no school was

formed in Greece or Italy that adopted the principles and institutions of Pythagoras.

Schöll, Litt. Rom. 11. 187. — Burigny, Vie et ouvrages de Publ. Nigid. Figulus, in the Mem. Acad. Inscr. XXIX. 190.

§ 463. There were however a number of philosophers, who are sometimes termed the New Pythagoreans, and who professed to be supporters of the real Pythagorean doctrines, although they in fact blended with them many notions derived from other sources. A leader in this class of philosophers was Q. Sextius, a Roman of the time of Augustus, who wrote in Greek. To the same class belonged Sotion, of Alexandria, who was preceptor to Seneca at Rome; and also the famous impostor Apollonius of Tyana, whose life is given by Philostratus (cf. 255b). Moderatus of Gades was another; he flourished in the first century; and in several different treatises he collected and illustrated the remains of the Pythagorean doctrines.

Enfield, bk. iii. ch. ii. sect. 2. — Johnson's Tennemann, § 184. — Prideaux, Life of Apollonius.

Some of these philosophers endeavored to discover a sublime and occult science in the Pythagorean doctrine of Numbers. They seem to have supposed that an explanation of the system of the physical world was to be found in the mysterious properties of mathematical figures and numbers. An essay on this occult science is found in the works of Sextus Empiricus against the mathematicians (x. 248). — Cf. § 197. The celebrated Kepler is supposed to have been influenced by such speculations, when he wrote his treatise entitled Mysterium Comographicum, 1598. — Čf. Maclaurin, Account of the Discoveries of Newton.

464. A school of New Platonists also appeared under the Roman emperors (cf. 181). Most of them wrote in Greek, in which language we have fragments from a few of the number. The principal Latin writer commonly referred to this school was Lucius Apuleius, who flourished, as is supposed, about the time of the latter Antoninus, and whose work entitled the Golden Ass has been mentioned under the head of Romance. These philosophers blended with their Platonic notions many derived from the Pythagoreans and the followers of Aristotle, and were therefore in reality Eclectics. Enfield, bk. iii. ch. ii. sect. 3.-Johnson's Tennemann, § 185.

§ 465. The Eclectics, however, although often mentioned under the name of the later Platonists, are usually distinguished from the last mentioned school. Their founder (cf. § 181) is said to have been Ammonius of Alexandria. He was a man of low birth, obliged to gain his livelihood as a porter, from which circumstance he derived his surname Saccas. With much enthusiasm he and his followers labored to reconcile the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle. We have in the Greek language the writings of several of the most eminent philosophers of this school; but nothing is preserved in the Latin, unless we except the commentary on Cicero's Dream of Scipio, by Macrobius (430. 1), who seems to have been a disciple of the Eclectics. The emperor Julian was a warm patron of this sect, perhaps on account of the hostility of its principal advocates towards the Christian religion.

Cf. § 182.- Enfield, bk. iii. ch. ii. sect. 4. — Johnson's Tennemann, § 203-221.

§ 466. A species of philosophy also grew up gradually among the Christian Fathers, although the study of philosophy was at first deemed superfluous and even dangerous by some of them (P. I. § 83), especially some of the Latin church. The chief Latin writers illustrating this Christian Philosophy are Tertullian, Arnobius, Lactantius, Ambrose, and Augustine.

Cf. § 182.-Johnson's Tennemann, 222-235.-On the writings of the Fathers above named, cf. Clarke, Murdock, &c. as cited § 293.

§ 467. In acccordance with the method followed in this work, some general sources of information respecting the Roman philosophy should be mentioned before noticing the individual authors.

The principal original sources are the same as those from which is learned the philosophy of the Greeks, cf. § 183. — To the modern works on the history of philosophy there cited we also refer.

More particularly on the Roman, we add the following.-K. F. Renner, De impedimentis quæ apud veteres Romanos Philosophiæ negaverint successum. Hal. 1825.- Paganinus Gau dentius, De Philosophiæ apud Romanos origine et progressu. Pisa, 1643. 4. Reprinted in the Nova rariorum Collectio, Hal. 1717. -J. L. Blessig, Diss. de Origine Philosophiæ apud Romanos. Strasb. 1770. 4.-Bahr, Gesch. Röm. Lit. p. 604-664, as cited § 299. 8.

§ 468 t. M. T. Cicero, chief among the orators of Rome, was also eminent in philosophy. He was a Platonist, and is commonly considered as a disciple

of the New Academy, although in questions of morality he preferred the more rigid principles of the Stoics. In his philosophical writings he sets forth the notions of all the various sects, and seems to be favorable to them all excepting the Epicurean. These writings are a most valuable collection, and have proved a mine of information to succeeding ages.

1. "The general purpose of Cicero's philosophical works was rather to give a history of ancient philosophy than dogmatically inculcate opinions of his own. It was his great aim to explain to his fellow-citizens in their own language whatever the sages of Greece had taught on the most important subjects, in order to enlarge their minds and reform their morals. He was in many respects well qualified for the arduous and noble task which he had undertaken of naturalizing philosophy in Rome, and exhibiting her, according to the expression of Erasmus, on the stage of life. Never was a philosopher placed in a situation more favorable for gathering the fruits of an experience employed on human nature and civil society, or for observing the effect of various qualities of the mind on public opinion and on the actions of men. But he appears to have been destitute of that speculative disposition which leads us to penetrate into the more recondite and original principles of knowledge. He had cultivated eloquence as clearing the path to political honors, and had studied philosophy as the best auxiliary to eloquence. But the contemplative sciences only attracted his attention, in so far as they tended to elucidate ethical, practical, and political subjects, to which he applied a philosophy which was rather that of life, than of speculation. His philosophic dialogues are rather to be considered as popular treatises, adapted to the ordinary comprehension of well informed men, than profound disquisitions, suited only to a Portico or Lyceum. They bespeak the orator even in the most serious inquiries. Elegance and fine writing he appears to have considered as essential to philosophy. Although it may be honoring Cicero too highly to term his works, with Gibben, a Repository of Reason, they are at least a Miscellany of Information, which has become doubly dear from the loss of the writings of many of those philosophers whose opinions he records." The greater part of the philosophical writings of Cicero were composed during a single year; and this rapidity of execution has led many to suppose that they must have been chiefly translations from Greek works, an idea that is thought to be sanctioned by a passage in a letter to Atticus (Ep. Lib. xii. Ep. 52), алоуQaqa sunt."

-

Dunlop, Hist. Rom. Lit. 11. 218. ed. Phil. 1827. — On C.'s philosophical writings, see also Bakr, as cited § 299. 8.- - Also references given below (3 & 4).

2. The following may be properly ranked among the philosophical works of Cicero. (a) Academica, or Quæstiones Academica, in two books; so called probably, because the work relates chiefly to the Academic philosophy. These two books are supposed by many critics to be parts of two different works of Cicero, or rather of two different editions of the Academica. The first edition is said to have consisted of two books, inscribed Catulus and Lucullus; the former of which is lost; the latter is one of the books now extant. The second edition is said to have consisted of four books, the first of which is one of the two books now extant, while the other three are lost; in the extant book, Varro is the chief speaker and gives an account of the origin and progress of the Academy. (b) De Finibus bonorum et malorum, in five books; an account of the various opinions entertained by the Greeks respecting the supreme good and extreme evil; and considered one of the most subtle and difficult of Cicero's philosophical writings. - (c) Tusculana Disputationes, in five books; they are so named by Cicero from having been held at his favorite seat near Tusculum. On a certain occasion, Cicero spent five days at this villa in company with friends taken with him from Rome, and on the afternoon of each day, held a conference, or rather gave a sort of discourse on some topic suggested by them; these were afterwards committed to writing, and formed the Tusculan Disputations. The first book or dialogue is entitled, De contemnenda morte; the second, De tolerando dolore; the third, De agritudine lenienda; the fourth, De reliquiis animi perturbationibus; in the fifth Cicero maintains that virtue alone is sufficient for perfect happiness. (d) De Natura Deorum, in three books; containing an exposition of the doc

trines of three of the celebrated sects of philosophers, viz. the Epicureans, the Stoics, and the Academics, respecting the Essence of the Divine Being, and his government and providence. In this work Cicero betrays a melancholy degree of uncertainty and doubt in reference to the administration of God in guiding and controlling human affairs. (e) De Divinatione, in two books; forming a sort of supplement to the treatise on the nature of the gods. In the first book, Quintus, the brother of Cicero, states the considerations urged by the various philosophers in defence of the art of divination; in the second, Cicero refutes all the arguments, and shows the complete absurdity of the pretended science. (f) De Fato, one book, or rather a fragment. The part now extant contains a refutation of the doctrine of Chrysippus the Stoic, which was that of fatality.—(g) De Legibus, in three books. It has been supposed that the work originally consisted of six books; Macrobius quotes a fifth (Saturnal. vi. 4); in the three now extant considerable chasms occur. In the first book, Cicero speaks of the origin of laws and the source of obligation; and in the others, sets forth a body of laws conformable to his plan of a well ordered state. The work seems to have been intended for a supplement to that entitled De Republica. · (h) De Republica, consisting originally of six books, of which considerable fragments are now extant. [See below under 3 (h).] This work was begun by Cicero in the fifty-second year of his age, before any of his other philosophical writings; it was made public previously to his departure for the government of Cilicia, and appears to have met with very flattering success at Rome (cf. Cic. Epist. Famil. viii. 1. Ep. ad Att. vi). In this work Cicero presents a discussion supposed to have been held between Scipio Africanus, Quintus Tubero, P. Rutilius Rufus, and others, " in which," says he, "nothing important to the right constitution of a commonwealth appears to have been omitted." According to Mr. Dunlop, the chief scope of Cicero was a eulogy on the Roman government, such as it was, or as Cicero supposed it to have been, in the early ages of the commonwealth; the same writer remarks, “although the work will disappoint those who expect to find in it much political information, still, as in Cicero's other productions, every page exhibits a rich and glowing magnificence of style, ever subjected to the control of a taste the most correct and pure.' -In this work was inserted the beautiful fiction entitled Somnium Scipionis, which implies, and seems indeed to have been intended by Cicero expressly to teach, the doctrine of the soul's immortality. (i) De Officiis, in three books, addressed to his son. In this Cicero treats of moral obligations and duties; and in some parts of it he is supposed to have closely followed a treatise entitled Пegi Kalinovтos, written by a Greek philosopher named Panatius, who resided at Rome in the time of Scipio. (j) De Senectute, entitled also Cato, because Cato the Censor is represented as delivering the discourse. It was written in Cicero's 63d year, and is addressed to his friend Atticus. The supposed evils of old age are considered under four heads; the refined pleasures, which may be secured notwithstanding all the losses and deprivations resulting from advanced years, are pointed out. It is an exceedingly interesting piece, containing examples of eminent Romans, who passed a respectable and happy old age. It is the model of the dialogue by Sir Thomas Bernard, entitled Spurinna or the Comforts of Old Age, in which illustrations are drawn chiefly from British history.. (k) De Amicitia, called also Lælius, who is represented as holding a conference with Fannius and Scævola his sons-in-law, shortly after the death of his very intimate friend Scipio Africanus. (1) Paradoxa, a piece containing a defence of six peculiar opinions or paradoxes of the Stoics; designed perhaps merely as a humorous effusion, rather than a serious philosophical essay. (m) Cicero composed several other works that would fall under the head of philosophical, which are lost; as, De Consolatione, written on the death of his daughter Tullia; De Gloria, in two books, written while sailing along the coast of Campania on a voyage to Greece; De Philosophia, or Hortensius, on the comparative value of eloquence and philosophy, a piece often cited and highly commended by Augustine. Some of the works falsely ascribed to Cicero might also be named among the philosophical; e. g. Orpheus, or De adolescen te studioso, purporting to have been addressed to his son while at Athens.

19

and

3. Editions. - For WHOLE WORKS, See § 404. 5. Here we notice only the PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS. (A) Collectively.-Best, R. G. Rath (& Ch. G. Schutz). Halle,1804-11.6 vols. 8. based on the editions of separate tracts by Davies, and containing the text and commentary of Davies, with additional notes.-I. A. Garenz. Lpz.1809-13. 3 vols, designed to be completed in 6 vols. 8. The first 3 vols. (containing the pieces noticed under the letters a, b, e, & g,) are highly commended. The Princeps, by Sweynheym & Pannartz. Rom. 1471. 2 vols. fol.There is a French translation of the Phil. Works by Barett, Bouhier & others. Par. 1796. 10 vols. 12. (B) Separately; we must not omit to notice some of the works singly; but to avoid repeating the titles, they will be designated merely by the letters used in the descriptive paragraphs above. — (a) J. Daries (Davisius). Camb. 1736. 8.-J. C. Orellius. Turici, 1827. 8.- Transla tions-French; D. Durand. Par. 1796. 2 vols. 12.-English; W. Guthrie (l he Morals of Cicero). Lond. 1744. 8. Illustrative. A. C. Ranitz, De libr. Cic. Academicis Commentatio. Lpz. 1809. 4.-S. Parker, Disputationes de Deo et providentia. Ox. 1703. 4. ————(b) J. Davies, Camb. 3d ed. 1741. 8. Repr. Oxf. 1809. 8.-Fr. G. Otto. Lpz. 1831. 8. Translations.-English; S. Parker. Lond. 1702. 1812.8. (c) J. Davies. Camb. 4th ed. 1738. 8. Repr. Oxf 1805. 8.-G. H. Moser, Han. 1836-38. 3 vols. 8. - Translations. - English; J. Dollmann. Lond. 1561. 8. - Anonymous. Lond. 1758. 8.- A new translation, by G. A. Otis, is announced, Bost. 1839. prepared on the suggestion of J. Q. Adams.- -(d) J. Davies. Cantab. 1718. 8. Repr. Oxf.1807. 8.-L. F. Heindorf. Lpz.1815. 8. critical and good.-Translations.-German ; J. F. von Meyer. Frankf. 1806. 8. — English; Thom. Franklin (with notes). Lond. 1741. 1775. 8. Mustrative. Ch. V. Kindervater, Ammerkungen und Abhandlungen &c. über Cic. Bücher von der Natur der Götter. Lpz. 1790-92. 2 vols. 8. commended by Harles, Suppl. to Brev. Not. i. 287. partly incorporated, in Latin, in Kindervater's edition of these Books. Lpz. 1796. 8. -G. S. Franke, Geist und Gehalt. der Cic. Büch. von der Nat. der Götter. Alt. 1806. 8. — Perhaps here ought to be named a fabrication, purporting to be a fourth Book of Cicero's De Nat. Deorum. It was published by an unknown author (W. M. L. de Wette has been conjectured), under a fictitious name, with the following title: M.T. Cic. de nat. Deor. liber quartus; e pervetusto codice ms. membranaceo nunc primum edidit P. Seraphinus. Bononiæ, 1811. 8. Republ. Oxf. 1813. The real design of the author is not apparent, the purity and elegance of Cicero are not preserved in the style.-Cf. Dunlop, Hist. Rom. Lit. ii. 250.—————(g) J. Davies. Camb. 2d ed. 1745. 8. — I. F. Wagner, Gött. 1804. 2 vols. 8. The 2d vol. a commentary.-G. H. Moser & F. Creuzer. Francf. 1824. 8. (h) A. Mai. Rom. 1822. 8. also in fol. and in quarto. It contains a simile of the palimpsest in which the work was found. Repr. Stuttg. 1822. Lond. 1823. 8. (Also Bost. 1823. but without the introductory matter.) It is also in the 1st vol. of the work entitled Classic. Auctor, e codd. Vat. edit. Coll. (curante A. Maio.) Rom. 1828. 4.-G. H. Moser & F. Creuzer. Frankf. 182. 8.-Translations.-French; Villemain, with original Latin, and Notes & Dissertations. Par. 1823. 3 vols. 12. - English; G. W. Featherstonhaugh. New York, 1829. much censured in South. Review, as below cited.- The whole work DE REPUBLICA was extant, it is said, as late as the 11th century, after which it disappeared, and the loss became a theme of constant lamentation among the admirers of Cicero and all lovers of classical literature. About the year 1821, Angelo Mai, in examining the Palimpsests (cf. P. I. §84) of the Vatican, discovered a considerable portion of it, which had been expunged (in the 10th century, it is supposed) and crossed by a new writing, that contained Augustine's commentary on the Psalms. Mai published the portion thus recovered, in the ed. just cited. — Of the first book, we now have about two thirds in the part recovered by Mai and two fragments preserved in Lactantius and Nonius; we have about the same proportion of the second, drawn from the palimpsest; of the third, the part obtained is interrupted by many chasms; only slight fragments were found of the fourth and fifth; and of the sixth, the palimpsest presented nothing; but this book contained the Somnium Scipionis, which is preserved by Macrobius (§ 430); we have also a Greek version of it, which has been ascribed to Theodore Gaza, and with more propriety to Planudes. For an analysis of the Republic, see Southern Review, No. VII. - Cf. also, N. Am. Rec. No. XL. For the Greek version of Scipio's Dream, see the ed. of Cato by Gotz, cited below. — Cf. The Theology and Philosophy in Cicero's Somnium Scipionis explained; or a brief attempt to demonstrate that the Newtonian System is agreeable to the Notions of the wisest Ancients. Lond. 1751. 8. (i) C. Beier. Lpz. 1820. 2 vols. 8. There have been many school editions.-Johnson, Lat. & Engl. Lond. 1898. 8.-C. K. Dillaway. Bost. 1837. 12. Cf. Bibl. Repos. No. xxvIII. p. 497. - Translations: German; Ch. Garve. Brest. 6th ed. 1819. 4 vols. 8. with a commentary; commended by Schöll, Litt. Rom. 11. 174.-English; W. M. Cartney. Lond. 1798. 8.-W. Guthrie. Lond. 1755. 8. (j & k) J. A. Gotz. Lpz. 1816. 8. with Somn. Scipionis. C. K. Dillaway. Bost. 1837. 12. — Translations. - English; W. Guthrie, as Just cited (i). — W. Melmoth. Lond. 1777. 1807. 8. including also Paradoxa (1) and Scipio's Dream.-J. Denham, Cato (j), a Poem, in 4 parts. Lond. 1648. 12. (m) Attempts were

made, after the revival of letters, to collect the scattered fragments of the lost works.-C. SigoRius, Fragmenta Ciceronis. Ven. 1559. 8. Han. 1606. 19. — The same Sigonius publi: hed the fragments of De Consolatione connected together by sentences interpolated by himself. Bon. 1583.8.-An English tran lation, in the work entitled Paraclesis, or Consolations deduced from Natural and Revealed Religion; two dissertations, the first supposed to have been composed by Cicero; the last originally written by Thos. Blacklock, DD. Lond. 1767. 8.-Cf. C. F. Nobbe, Programm. de fragment. libror. Cic. incertorum. Lpz. 1827.—I he work entitled Orpheus was first published, Ven. 1.593. 8. republished by J. A. Folierini, Ven. 1793. 4.-Respecting lost works of Cicero, and works falsely ascribed to him, cf. Bahr, p. 633. — Harles, Brev. Not. Suppl. i. 247.-Fabricius, Bibl. Lat. 1. 212–216.

4. There are works (besides those already mentioned) illustrative of Cicero's philosophical writings, too numerous to be cited here; we name a few. -J. Ch. Brieglieb, De philosoph. Ciceronis. Cob. 1784. 4 — Cr. F. Hulse nain, De ind le phil. Ciceronis, Luneb. 1799. 4. - R. Khner, Cicer. in phils, ejusq. partes merita. Hamb. 1825. 8. — H. Dodwell, Apology &c. in Parker's translation, cited above (b). — Gautier de S.bert, Examen de la Philos. de Ciceron, in the Mem. Acad. Iascr. XLI. 436. an. 101.

§ 460. L. Annæus Seneca was a zealous adherent of the Stoic philosophy, although he had previously made himself acquainted with the doctrines of all