AEISTOTLE. 161 



works as appear to stand in opposition to the exoteric, are Xo'yoi 

 iywKXioi, \oyoi Kara fylXocrofyiav and piOolog, and in such cases we 

 are always directed to scientific treatises containing a system of several 

 parts methodically arranged and organically cohering, such in short as 

 would be formed by the outline of a continuous course of lectures on 

 some main "branch of philosophy. And that the works included under 

 the name acroamatic or acroatic by the philosophers since the time of 

 Andronicus Rhodius, were of this description, seems most probable, Division of 

 not only from the appearance presented by those which hav come ^^ go hers 

 down to us, but from the fact that, at the time when Greek philosophy 

 was first imported into Borne, the word <k-poa<me had become the 

 technical term for such productions. Crates Mallotes, who came to 

 Rome on an embassy between the second and third Punic wars, is 

 spoken of by Suetonius in terms which seem to show that a similar 

 distinction to that which obtained in Aristotle's works, prevailed also 

 in his. 1 



If now we keep steadily in view this distinction which it is plain Primary cha- 

 that Aristotle himself made in his discourses, the distinction between ractenstics - 

 cyclical, methodical, scientific productions, and insulated, independent 

 essays, we shall perceive at once from the nature of the case, that, with- 

 out any premeditated design on the part of the author, the former would 

 only be appreciable by genuine disciples, those who were able and will- 

 ing to afford a steady and continuous application to the development 

 of the whole, while the latter might be understood by those who 

 brought no previous knowledge with them, but merely attended to 

 the matter in hand ; 2 that the one required a severe and rigid logic 

 to preserve all parts of the system in due coherence, the other readily 

 admitted of the aid which the imagination affords to the elucidation of 

 single points, but which often becomes mischievous when they are to 

 be combined ; that to the first the demonstrative form of exposition 

 would alone be appropriate, to the second any one, narrative or dia- secondary 

 logic, or any other, which might be most fit for placing the one matter character- 

 are never used by Aristotle, and the word airopfaros only in the ordinary classical 

 sense. Even the phrase e|a>Tept/cta is often applied by him not in reference to these 

 discourses. For instance, rois ecu0ez> \6yois (Polit. p. 1264, line 39), " with dis- 

 cussions foreign to the subject:" QurepiKT) apx^l (Id. p. 1272, line 19), "external 

 rule :" e|coTepo> Triirrova-i TCUS irXticrTais ruv ir6hfO)V (Id. p. 1295, line 32), " do 

 not apply to the generality of states." 



1 Suetonius, De Cl. Grammat. cap. 2, "plurimas acroases subinde fecit, assi- 

 dueque disseruit." Here is obviously a distinction intended between the disserta- 

 tions which he continually delivered, and the lectures which he gave from time to 

 time. 



2 An illustration may, perhaps, be useful in clearing up what we apprehend to 

 have been the real division. For the demonstration of Pythagoras' s celebrated 

 theorem (the forty-seventh proposition of the first book of Euclid) the whole of the 

 preceding part of the book is requisite. This, then, is an example of a \6yos Kara. 

 <t>i\offofy(av. But in the particular case of a square, the property of the square of 

 the diameter being equal to twice the square of the side, may be directly shown to 

 a person ignorant of geometry, as it is by -Socrates in Plato's dialogue, Meno. This 

 we conceive might be described as a \6yos e|wrepi/cds. 



[G. R. P ] M 



