022 
PERIPATETIC. 
gance of his language than the depth of his pliilofophy ; 
by Critolaus, a Lydian, who, with Carneades and Dioge¬ 
nes, was deputed by the Athenians on an embaffy to 
Rome, and who is faid to have held the doctrine of the 
eternity of the world ; and Diodorus, with whom the un¬ 
interrupted fucceflion of the Peripatetic fchool termina¬ 
ted. Of this fchool Demetrius Phalereus was an illuftri- 
ous ornament. 
The Peripatetic pliilofophy found its w'ay into Rome, 
in the time of Sylla, with the writings of Ariftotle and 
Theophraftus. However, the obfcurity of Ariftotle’s 
wri tings greatly obft rubied the progrefs of this pliilofophy; 
and Cicero, who feems to have had fome refpebt for the 
Peripatetic pliilofophy, acknowledges that it was under- 
Hood by very few even of the philofophers themfelves. 
Under the Cfefars, it regained its ancient credit; and 
from the time of Andronicus, the preceptor of Plutarch, 
who, with Tyrannio, brought it to Rome, to that of Am- 
monius, that is, till the time of Nero, the peripatetic doc¬ 
trines were taught with great purity in its fchools. But 
after Ammonius it began to experience the influence of 
that fpiritof confuflon which prevailed among the eclectic 
philofophers; and the plan of Antiochus, who had for¬ 
merly attempted a coalition between Ariftotole, Plato, 
and Zeno, was revived. From this time the Peripatetic 
febl was divided into two branches; the one confiding of 
fuch as attempted to combine the dobtrines of other 
fchools with thofe of Arilttle; the other, including 
thofe who.wifhed to follow more clofely the fteps of the 
Stagy rite. 
Julius Csefar and Auguftus patronized the Peripatetic 
pliilofophy; the former in the perfon of Sofigenes, the 
latter in that of Nicolaus. Under the tyrannical reigns 
of Tiberius, Caligula,-and Claudius, it experienced worfe 
fortune; many excellent men of this febl, as W'ell as 
others, being either baniflied from Rome, or obliged, 
through fear of perfecution, to remain filent. In the 
reign of Nero, the philofophers of this febl, as well as 
others, enjoyed the temporary proteblion of the impe¬ 
rial court; but after a period of five years, they fliared 
the fate of the profeflors of magical arts, or, as they were 
then called, “ mathematicians,” and were again baniflied 
the city. During the firft century of the Roman empire, 
we find few celebrated names among the Peripatetic plii- 
lofophers. The principal are Sofigenes, Boethius, Nico¬ 
laus, and ZEgeus. About this time Ammonius, the pre¬ 
ceptor of Plutarch, attempted to extend the authority of 
Ariftotle beyond the limits of his own febl, by blending 
the Platonic and Stoic dobtrine with the Peripatetic. 
After his death many Platonifts ftudied the writings of 
Ariftotle, and commented upon them; and thus prepa¬ 
red the way for the formation of the Ecleblic Sebl under 
Ammonius Sacca, who flouriflred about a century later 
than Ammonius the Peripatetic. After this time we 
meet with feveral genuine followers of Ariftotle, of whom 
the moftcelebrated was Alexander Aphrodifeus. Among 
the ecleblic commentators upon Ariftotle, we may reckon, 
befides Porphyry, Jamblichus, Plutarchus, Neftorius, &c. 
Darippus, Themiftius, Olympiodorus, and Simplicius. 
From this concife detail we may learn, that, under fe¬ 
veral of the CaTars, the philofophers of this fchool firared, 
with their brethren, the common difcouragements and 
infelicities of oppreflion. The concife and logical method 
of philofophifing, which prevailed in this fchool, could 
obtain few admirers at a period remarkable for a loofe 
and florid kind of eloquence. Befides, the dobtrine, 
which the Peripatetics of this period had received from 
their mailer, fullered much adulteration from the unwea¬ 
ried endeavours of the Alexandrian philofophers to efta- 
biifh an eclectic fyftem. Many bold but injudicious 
grammarians and critics attempted to fupply cliafms, and 
to clear up abfurdities, in the writings of Ariftotle, 
from their own ingenious conjebtures, which they pre¬ 
fumed to incorporate with the author’s text. Even Alex¬ 
ander Aphrodifeus, who profeffed to reftore the genuine 
Ariftotelian fyftem, not confining himfelf to the dofirine 
of his mailer, contributed towards its adulteration. But 
nothing proved .0 injurious to the Peripatetic pliilofophy, 
as the rage for commenting upon the works'of Ariftotle, 
which prevailed among his followers. Notes, paraphra- 
fes, arguments, fummaries, and diflertations, piled up, 
century after century, under the general name of Com¬ 
mentaries upon Ariftotle, created, as might be expedited, 
endlefs difputes concerning the meaning of his writings ; 
and it may perhaps be aliened with truth, that their ge¬ 
nuine fenfe, after all the pains which have been taken to 
explore it, yet remains, in many particulars, undifcovered. 
Some knowledge of the Ariftotelian fyftem was intro¬ 
duced among the Jews by Arillobulus, an Alexandrian 
Jew, who lived in the reign of Ptolemy Philometer, and 
w'as an admirer of the Greek philofophy. In order to fa¬ 
cilitate the ftudy of Ariftotle among the Jews, his wri¬ 
tings were, in a fubfequent period, tranflated from the 
Arabic into the Hebrew tongue; and towards the end of 
the 13th century, the name of Ariftotle was fo highly 
refpefted among the Jews, that they not only called him 
the Prince of Philofophers, but maintained that his phi¬ 
lofophy was the perfeflion of human fcience, and could 
only be excelled by the dofirine of divine revelation ; 
and, in order to fcreen themfelves from cenfure for fub- 
mitting to receive wifdom from a heathen philofopher, 
they pretended that Ariftotle was himfelf a profelyte to 
Judaifm, and was indebted to Solomon for a great part 
of his philofophy. 
The commencement of the Ariftotelian philofophy 
among the Arabians may be referred to the time of Al- 
Mamon, who, among other writings in various languages, 
caufed the works of Galen and of Ariftotle to be tranf¬ 
lated into Arabic. After his death, which happened ii} 
the year 833, philofophy continued its progrefs among 
the Saracens, to which the eminent fchools that were 
founded in different parts of the empire in no fmall de¬ 
gree contributed. In order to accommodate the efta- 
blifhed fyftem, which was guarded by the fanflion of 
penal laws, to their philofophical ideas, they blended the 
abftrafl fpeculations of the fchools with the grofs and 
vulgar conceptions of the Koran. They made ufe of the 
fubtleties of the Ariftotelian philofophy in the defebtive 
and corrupt ftate in which it had come into their hands, 
to afiift them in improving upon the literal meaning of 
their facred books, and thus gave a new, and for the 
moft part a metaphyfical, turn to the religion and law of 
Mahomet. This, it is faid by one of their own writers, 
was the origin of their religious feels. Many of the Ara¬ 
bian philofophers, among whom we may reckon Jacobus- 
Al-Kendi of Baflora, Al-Farabi, or Abu-Nair, a native 
of Balch Farab, who flourifhed in the 10th century, Al- 
Rafi, called alfo Abubeker and Al-Manfor, a native of 
Rai in Perfia, Avicenna, Avenpace, a Spanifh Saracen, 
who flourifhed about the middle of the 12th century, 
Avenzoar of Seville, Thophail of the fame city, and 
Averroes, acquired celebrity by their commentaries upon 
Ariftotle, and other philofophical works. In every 
branch of fcience, in which Ariftotle led the way, the 
Arabian philofophers followed him as an infallible 
guide ; infomuch that their tenets, as far as they are dif- 
tincl from the peculiar dogmas of the Koran, are, with¬ 
out variation, thofe of the Peripatetic fchool. 
In the earlier ages of Chrijlianity , the Platonic philofo¬ 
phy was more generally preferred to the Peripatetic : the 
Chriftian fathers pointed the fevereft cenfures againfl the 
Peripatetic and Epicurean febts. The dobtrines of the 
Peripatetics concerning Divine Providence, and the eter¬ 
nity of the world, chiefly excited their averfion againfl 
this febl; and, befides this, they were much difpleafed 
with Ariftotle, for having furniflied heretics and infidels 
with the weapons of fophiflry. Neverthelefs this did not 
prevent the doctrine of Ariftotle from forcing its way 
into the Chriftian church. Towards the dole of the 
fifth century, it rofe into confiderable credit: the Plato¬ 
nics, 
1 
