APPEKDIX. 297 



or hig love for his son and bis son s tutor, nor do they sur 

 pass credibility. The gold mines of Philippi supplied the 

 munificence and liberality of Philip. But there are difficul 

 ties in the narrative which make us question the credibility 

 of the author of this munificence. For instance, the 

 names of Plato and Theophrastus are mentioned ; but the 

 name of Theophrastus could not be so great and illustrious, 

 even if it were known to the Greeks at all, as to have at 

 tracted the liberality of Philip, before the death of his master 

 Aristotle, whom also he succeeded in the School at Athens. 

 I should, therefore, rather imagine that ^Elian, who was 

 more diligent in the accuracy of his Attic diction than his 

 historical fidelity, has committed some error in the name of 

 Philip, or in those of Plato and Theophrastus, whom he has 

 appended to his narrative. 



The narrative of Athenams, (ix. 398,) derived from the 

 report of an unknown author, is very different ; he calls 

 the History of Animals a very expensive work, and then 

 adds &quot; There is a report that Aristotle received 800 talents 

 from Alexander, for writing the History of Animals&quot; 

 a sum of money which Perigonius, in his Notes on ^Elian, 

 estimates at l,4iO,000 caroli. To this narrative, or, as 

 it may be more justly termed, rumour, is opposed the 

 opinion of lo. Heur. Schulzius, in his History of Medicine 

 (Leipsic, 1738, p. 358). &quot;When I consider this matter 

 aright, it appears to me that the whole story is very doubt 

 ful, and, for the most part, fabulous. And it can easily 

 be proved, that the whole revenue of Macedon, if Alexander 

 had paid it all to Aristotle for several years, would not 

 have amounted to this sum. It is impossible, therefore, 

 that he could have paid so much to Aristotle before the 

 conquest of Asia ; and after his expedition had been suc 

 cessfully accomplished, his affection was alienated from 

 Aristotle, and, in order to annoy him, he liberally en 

 riched other philosophers, who had done nothing to deserve 

 his patronage. Their labours, therefore, are in vain, who 

 demand justice of our excellent Aristotle, even in his grave, 

 because he did not use such an immense sum of money in 

 the composition of a more veracious history. 



&quot; I am certainly of opinion that a great deal has been made, 

 fsa usual, of a very little matter, namely, that if Aristotle 



