XXXIV. CEPHISODORUS 1. Dion. Hal. ad Ammaeum 2, I p. 259, 3 sq. Us.-R.: 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰谓 enumerat inter aequales Isocratis, Anaximenis, Alcidamantis 蟺伪蟻伪纬纬蔚位渭维蟿蠅谓 蟿蔚蠂谓喂魏峥段 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁蔚峥栂.
2. Dion. Hal. ad Pompeium Geminum 1, II p.226, 9 Us.-R.: 蟿峤 未蠈纬渭伪蟿伪 未喂苇尾伪位慰谓 伪峤愊勎酷喀 (Platonis) 蟿喂谓蔚蟼 魏伪峤 蟿慰峤合 位蠈纬慰蠀蟼 峒愇嘉枷埼蔽较勎 蟺蟻峥断勎课 渭峤参解, 峒斚蔚喂蟿伪 慰峒 蟺蔚蟻峤 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰谓 魏蟿位. Euseb. Praep. ev. XIV 3, 9, 732 b: 峤兿 未峤 峤 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰蟼 (sc. 峤 峥ノ勏壪 quem antea vocaverat), 峒愊蔚喂未峤 峤懴始 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃肯呄 尾伪位位蠈渭蔚谓慰谓 峒懳毕呄勧糠 蟿峤肝 未喂未维蟽魏伪位慰谓 峒赶兾课合佄勎肺 峒懴幭佄, 伪峤愊勎酷喀 渭峤参 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃肯呄 峒ξ 峒渭伪胃峤聪 魏伪峤 峒勏蔚喂蟻慰蟼, 峤懴峤 未峤 蟿慰峥 魏伪胃慰蟻峋段 峒斘轿次课疚 蟿峤 螤位维蟿蠅谓慰蟼 峤懴维蟻蠂慰谓蟿伪, 慰峒拔肺肝滇蕉蟼 魏伪蟿峤 螤位维蟿蠅谓伪 蟿峤肝 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃肺 蠁喂位慰蟽慰蠁蔚峥栁, 峒愊慰位苇渭蔚喂 渭峤参 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃滴, 峒愇参蔽晃晃 未峤 桅位维蟿蠅谓伪, 魏伪峤 魏伪蟿畏纬蠈蟻蔚喂 峒蟻尉维渭蔚谓慰蟼 峒蟺峤 蟿峥段 峒拔次滇慷谓, 蟿蔚位蔚蠀蟿峥段 蔚峒跋 蟿峤 峒勎晃晃, 峒 慰峤愇词 伪峤愊勧礁蟼 峋斘次滴, 峒位位峤 蟿峤 谓慰渭喂味蠈渭蔚谓伪 峒渭蠁始 伪峤愊勧慷谓 峒 位苇纬蔚蟿伪喂 峤懴慰谓慰峥段. Discimus, quo tempore haec scripsit C., Aristotelem nondum ab idearum doctrina Platonis defecisse. Tum temporis Isocratem adgreditur, de rhetorica solum adfectus movente eam, ut videtur, sententiam amplexus, quae in primo libro rhetoricae etiam nunc defenditur. Recte F. Solmsen, Die Entwicklung der aristotel. Logik u. Rhetorik 205.
3. Athenaeus 60 d: 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰蟼 峤 峒赶兾课合佄勎肯呄 渭伪胃畏蟿峤聪 峒愇 蟿慰峥栂 魏伪蟿峤 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃肯呄偮 蟿苇蟽蟽伪蟻伪 未始 峒愊兿勧蕉 蟿伪峥ο勎 尾喂尾位委伪. Cf. ibid. 354 c: 慰峤斚勎 未始 螘峤愇参肯呂晃次废, 峒位位始 慰峤愇瘁讲 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰蟼 蟿慰喂慰峥ο勏屛 蟿喂 峒愊勏屛晃嘉废兾滴 蔚峒跋蔚峥栁 魏伪蟿峤 蟿慰峥 危蟿伪纬蔚喂蟻委蟿慰蠀, 魏伪委蟿慰喂 魏伪峤 蟽蠀纬纬蟻维渭渭伪蟿伪 峒愇何聪屛较勎迪 魏伪蟿峤 蟿峒谓未蟻蠈蟼. Eosdem inter Aristotelis inimicos Themistius iungit 286 c. Isocratis discipulus etiam Athen. 122 b, imitator Dionys. Hal. de Is. 19, p. 122, 12sq. Us.-R.
4. Dion. Hal. de Is慰cr. 18, p. 86, 2 Us.-R.: 峒蔽何蔽结礁谓 未峤 峒∥澄废兾嘉滴轿肯 蔚峒段轿蔽 蟿峥喯 峒位畏胃蔚委伪蟼 尾蔚尾伪喂蠅蟿峤次 蟿峤肝 峒埼肝肺轿贬繓慰谓 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰谓, 峤兿 魏伪峤 蟽蠀谓蔚尾委蠅蟽蔚谓 峒赶兾课合佄勎滴 魏伪峤 纬谓畏蟽喂蠋蟿伪蟿慰蟼 峒魏慰蠀蟽蟿峤聪 峒愇澄轿迪勎 魏伪峤 蟿峤次 峒蟺慰位慰纬委伪谓 蟿峤次 峤懴峤蚕 伪峤愊勎酷喀 蟿峤次 蟺维谓蠀 胃伪蠀渭伪蟽蟿峤次 峒愇 蟿伪峥栂 蟺蟻峤赶 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃肺 峒谓蟿喂纬蟻伪蠁伪峥栂 峒愊慰喂萎蟽伪蟿慰, 蟺喂蟽蟿蔚蠉蠅 纬蔚纬蟻维蠁胃伪喂 位蠈纬慰蠀蟼 蟿喂谓峤跋 峤懴峤 蟿慰峥 峒谓未蟻峤赶 蔚峒跋 未喂魏伪蟽蟿萎蟻喂伪, 慰峤 渭苇谓蟿慰喂 蟺慰位位慰蠉蟼.
5. Athen. 122 b: 峒愇 蟿峥 蟿蟻委蟿峥 蟿峥段 蟺蟻峤赶 峒埾佄瓜兿勎肯勎晃肺 位苇纬蔚喂 (sc. 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰蟼), 峤呄勎 蔚峤曄佄课 蟿喂蟼 峒偽 峤懴峤 蟿峥段 峒勎晃幌壩 蟺慰喂畏蟿峥段 峒 魏伪峤 蟽慰蠁喂蟽蟿峥段 峒撐 峒 未蠉慰 纬慰峥ξ 蟺慰谓畏蟻峥断 蔚峒跋佄肺嘉轿, 慰峒肺 蟺伪蟻峤 渭峤参 峒埾佅囄刮幌屜囜砍 蟿峤 蟺维谓蟿始 峒勎轿聪伿 峒蟺慰蟽魏慰位蠉蟺蟿蔚喂谓, 螛蔚慰未蠋蟻峥 未峤 蟿峤 魏蔚位蔚蠉蔚喂谓 渭峤参 蟺位苇慰谓 峒斚囄滴刮, 峒愊伪喂谓蔚峥栁 未峤 蟿峤 峒聪兾课, 螘峤愊佄瓜委未峥 蟿蔚 蟿峤 蟿峤次 纬位峥断勏勎蔽 峤渭蠅渭慰魏苇谓伪喂 蠁维谓伪喂 魏伪峤 危慰蠁慰魏位蔚峥 蟿峤 峒愇 螒峒拔肝肯埼刮 蔚峒跋佄肺嘉轿课 蟿慰喂伪峥ο勎 蟿慰委 蟽慰喂 蟺蟻峤赶 蠂维蟻喂谓 蟿蔚 魏慰峤 尾委峋 位苇纬蠅, 蟽峤 未始 伪峤愊勧礁蟼 峤ハ兿蔚蟻 慰峒 蟽慰蠁慰峤 蟿峤 渭峤参 未委魏伪喂始 峒愊伪委谓蔚喂, 蟿慰峥 未峤 魏蔚蟻未伪委谓蔚喂谓 峒斚囄肯, 魏伪峤 峒位位伪蠂慰峥 未始 峤 伪峤愊勧礁蟼 峒斚單 渭畏未峤参 蔚峒段轿蔽 峥メ繂渭伪 蟽峥ξ 魏苇蟻未蔚喂 魏伪魏蠈谓路 峤嵨嘉佱砍 未峤 蟿峤 蟿峤次 峒佄蔽 峒愊喂尾慰蠀位蔚峥ο兾蔽 蟿峥 螖喂委, 魏伪峤 <蟿峤> 蟿峤肝 峒屜佄 渭慰喂蠂蔚蠉蔚喂谓路 峒愊喪 慰峒废 蟺维谓蟿蔚蟼 魏伪蟿畏纬慰蟻慰峥ο兾刮 伪峤愊勎酷喀 (trad. 伪峤愊勧慷谓). F. Solmsen l. l. p. 206. Euseb. Praep. ev. XV 2, 7, 792 a: 峒犖晃肝刮 未峤 未喂伪尾苇尾位畏魏蔚谓 伪峤愊勧礁谓 (sc. Aristotelem) 魏伪峤 螝畏蠁喂蟽蠈未蠅蟻慰蟼 峤 峒赶兾课合佄勎肯呄 渭伪胃畏蟿萎蟼, 蟿蟻蠀蠁蔚蟻峤肝 魏伪峤 蟿苇谓胃畏谓 魏伪峤 峒勎晃晃 蟿峤 蟿慰喂伪峥ο勎 位苇纬蠅谓 伪峤愊勧礁谓 蔚峒段轿蔽. Talia spectare videtur Philod. rhet. I 321, 2: 魏伪峤 未蔚喂谓峥喯 峒愊蔚喂蟻峋断刼 (sc. Aristoteles, cf. p. 324 col. LVII 14) 谓蔚渭[苇蟽蔚蠅蟼] 魏伪峤 [未蠀蟽渭]蔚谓蔚委伪蟼 蔚峒聪勎 蟿峥段 峒蠁鈥 峒赶兾课合佄勎肯呄 蔚峒聪勈 峒愇轿壩 峒勎晃幌壩 蟽慰蠁喂蟽蟿峥段.
|
XXXIV. Cephisodorus 1. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, To Ammaeus: Cephisodorus was a writer of precepts on the art on a par with Isocrates, Anaximenes, and Alcidamas.
2. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, To Pompeius Geminus: Some slandered [Plato鈥檚] teachings and berated his writings, Cephisodorus among them. Euseb. Praep. ev. 14.3.9, 732 b: 鈥楾his same Kephisodorus (that is, the rhetorician he has referred to previously), seeing Aristotle attack his teacher Isocrates 鈥 being ignorant and inexperienced about Aristotle himself, but noticing, on the other hand, that Plato鈥檚 doctrine was well-regarded, he thought that Aristotle had the same philosophy of Plato, and he started fighting against Aristotle while attacking Plato. He put him on trial starting from the theory of the ideas, and ended with other things that he himself did not know but assumed Plato thought about in a certain way.鈥 From this we learn that at the time C. wrote these things Aristotle had not yet turned his back on Plato鈥檚 doctrine of ideas. At that time, he attacks Isocrates, embracing the view on rhetoric only stirring up emotions that is still now defended in the first book of the Rhetoric. Rightly F. Solmsen, Die Entwicklung der aristotel. Logik u. Rhetorik 205.
3. Athenaeus 60d: Cephisodorus, the pupil of Isocrates, in Against Aristotle, which is in four books鈥 Cf. ibid. 354 c: 鈥楴ot Eubulides, but not even Cephisodorus dared say anything like that against the Stagirite, even though they had published pamphlets against that man.鈥 Themistius (286 c) lists these same people among Aristotle鈥檚 enemies. He is deemed a student of Isocrates also in Athen. 122 b; an imitator in Dionys. Hal. On Isocrates 19, p. 122, 12 f. Us.-R. 4. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, On Isocrates: I judge the Athenian Cephisodorus to be a good enough warrant of truth, who not only was a contemporary of Isocrates but also became his noblest student and wrote a most remarkable defense speech for him in his counter-pleas against Aristotle; so I trust that Isocrates wrote a couple of speeches, albeit not many, that were destined actually to be read in court.
5. Athenaeus 122b: Cephisodorus writes in the third book of Against Aristotle that one could find one or two things bad sayings by any of the other poets and even sophists; for instance, Archilochus speaks of pulling back every man鈥檚 foreskin; Theodorus encourages greed all while praising equality; Euripides says that the tongue swore; and Sophocles writes in Aethiopis: I am saying this to please you and not under constraint, But you, just like clever men, praise Just things, yet hold on to your benefit; and in other places too he says that there is no word that is bad if it benefits the speaker. Further, in Homer Hera ambushes Zeus and Ares commits adultery. Because of these things all authors berate Homer. F. Solmsen ibid. p. 206. Euseb. Praep. ev. 15.2.7, 792 a: 鈥楥ephisodorus, the student of Isocrates, also threw silly accusations at Aristotle, calling him effeminate, a gourmand, and the like.鈥 This is the kind of thing Philod. On Rhetoric 1 321, 2 seems to be referring to: 鈥楢nd he (that is, Aristotle, cf. p. 324 col. LVII 14) embarked on terrible revenge and enmity against either Isocrates鈥 school or some other sophists.鈥 |