ARISTOTLE. 121 



to barbarian blood, and which the influences of Leonidas had tended 

 rather to increase than diminish, were never entirely subdued by 

 Alexander. 1 The character of Lysimachus, the other instructor espe- Lysimachus.. 

 daily noticed by Plutarch, was very different, but hardly likely to 

 have produced a much more beneficial effect. He was by birth an 

 Acarnanian, and an expert flatterer, by which means he is said to have 

 gained great favour. His favourite thought appears to have been to 

 compare Alexander to Achilles, Philip to Peleus, and himself to 

 Phoenix, as the characters are described in the epic poetry of Greece ; 

 and this insipid stuff it was his delight to act out in the ordinary 

 business of life. At a later period, this passion for scene-making 

 nearly cost poor Phoenix and his master their lives ; 2 and to it is pro- 

 bably due, in^ a great measure, the cormorant appetite for adulation 

 which is the most disgusting feature in the history of the latter. To 

 neither, then, of these two individuals and if not to these, of course 

 much less to the crowd of masters in reading, writing, horsemanship, 

 harp-playing, and the other accomplishments included by ancient 

 education in its two branches of fiovaiKrj and yv/zmort/aj can we 

 ascribe a share in the production of that character which distinguishes 

 Alexander from any successful military leader. But to Aristotle Alexander's 

 some of the ancients attribute a degree and kind of merit in this 

 respect which is perfectly absurd. Plutarch says that his pupil gained 

 from him more towards the accomplishment of his schemes than from 

 Philip. 3 Alexander himself was accustomed to say, that he honoured 

 Aristotle no less than his own father ; that to the one he owed life, 

 but to the other all that made life valuable : 4 and it is very likely that 

 the misinterpretation of such phrases as these led to the belief that the 

 conqueror had received from his instructor direct advice for the accom- 

 plishment of the great exploit which has made him known to posterity. 

 But the obligations to which he really alluded were probably of a 

 totally different kind. Philip is said to have perceived, at a very 

 early age, that his son's disposition was a most peculiar one, sensible 

 in the highest degree of kindness, and tractable by gentle' measures, 

 but absolutely ungovernable by force, and consequently requiring, 

 instead of the austerity of a Leonidas, or the flattery of a Lysimachus, 

 the influence of one who could, by his character and abilities, com- 



1 " Leonidas Alexandri paedagogus, ut a Babylonio Diogene traditur, quibusdam 

 eum vitiis imbuit, quse robustum quoque et jam maximum regem ab ilia institu- 

 tione puerili sunt prosecuta."* Quintilian, Inst. Or. i. 1, 8. Is it not probable 

 that Aristotle, in the seventh book of his Politics (p. 1324, col. 1, line 23, et seq., 

 and p. 1333, col. 2, line 10, et seq.) has a particular reference to the views of 

 Leonidas ? 



2 Plutarch, Vit. sec. 24. 



3 Plutarch, De Fortun. Alexandri. See Ste. Croix, Examen Historique, p. 84. 

 Such expressions as these led later writers to yet more extravagant ones ; such as 

 Roger Bacon's, " per vias sapientiae mundum Alexandro tradidit Aristoteles;" and 

 probably to the same source is to be traced the romance of the philosopher having 

 personally attended his pupil in his expedition. 



4 Plutarch, Vit. Alex. sec. 8. 



