denial, despised as beggars, and feared as moralists, full of contempt for the follies, of pity for the moral miseries of their fellow men, they met both the wisdom and the effeminacy of their time with the rude vigour of a resolute will, hardened even to insensibility. Possessing the pungent, ever ready native wit of the plebeian, benevolent, with few wants, full of whims and jokes, and national even to their very dirtiness, they resemble in many points the friars of the Middle Ages; nor can it be doubted that, notwithstanding all their extravagances, their action was in many ways beneficial. For all that, philosophy could expect but little from this mendicant philosophy. Not until it had been supplemented by other elements, regulated and received into connection with a wider view of the world in the Stoa, was Cynicism able to bear fruit on a large scale. The Cynic School, as such, appears to have had only a very narrow extension, a fact which will not appear strange, considering the terrible severity of its demands. Besides it was incapable of philosophic expansion, and even its practical action was chiefly of a negative character. It attacked the vices and the follies of men. It required independence and self-denial, but it separated man from man. It placed the individual entirely by himself, thus offering play to moral pride, The Cynics really have a historical connection with the monks of Christendom. The link between the two is the Cynicism of the time of the Cæsars, and the late Pythago rean asceticism, which exer- CHAP. XIII. CHAP. vanity, and the most capricious whims, which were not left unindulged. The abstract sovereignty of the personal will resulted ultimately in individual caprice, and thus Cynicism trenched on the ground of the philosophy of pleasure, to which as a system it was diametrically opposed. CHAPTER XIV. THE CYRENAICS.1 СНАР. XIV. 3 of the RESPECTING the Cyrenaic branch of the Socratic school, the information we possess is quite as imperfect, or even more so, than that which we A. History have touching the Cynics. Aristippus of Cyrene, Cyrenaics. the founder, had been brought to Athens by a call from Socrates, whose extraordinary personal influence had unusual attractions for him," although his I See Wendt, De Philosophia Cyrenaica, Gött. 1841. 2 The accounts of ancient and the views of modern writers on the life of Aristippus are found in detail in H. v. Stein's De Philosophia Cyrenaica, Part. prior. de vita Aristippi (Gött. 1855), which ought to have proceeded somewhat more sceptically. There too are references to the earlier literature. 3 All authorities without exception state this. His father is called Aritadas by Suid. 'Apl στιππος. Eschin. in Diog. ii. 65, says that he came to Athens κатà κλέος Σωκράτους, and Plut. Curios. 2, p. 516, gives full particulars how at the Olympic games he heard of Socrates and Z 4 his teaching from Ischomachus, 5 Aristippus is not only uni- СНАР. XIV. character was too weak to endure in the last trial.' From Cyrene, his luxurious home, which at that time was at the height of its wealth and power,2 he had brought habits far removed from the simplicity and abstemiousness of Socrates.3 Perhaps he had been already touched by those Sophistical influences which may be observed in his subsequent career.1 At any rate we may assume that he had attained to a certain ἑταῖρός γ' ἡμῶν, ἔφη, οὐδὲν τοιοῦτον, λέγων τὸν Σωκράτην (which Steinhart, Plat. Leben, 303, 17, contrary to the natural sense, refers to Plato's too sanguine expectations of the younger Dionysius). We also see from Xen. Mem. i. 2, iii. 8, that he was on an intimate footing with Socrates; and Plato in blaming him, Phædo, 59, C., for being absent from the circle of friends who met on the day of Socrates' death, evidently reckons him as belonging to this circle. Conf. Stein., p. 25, who also, pp. 50 and 74, groups together the authorities respecting Aristippus' relations to the pupils of Socrates. Plato, 1. c., who however only says that Aristippus and Cleombrotus had been in Ægina; that on this fertile island they caroused on the day of their master's death, as Demetr. de Elocut. 288, asserts, is barely possible. The accuracy of Plato's statement is indisputable, notwithstanding Diog. iii. 56; ii. 65; but whether Aristippus left Athens from excessive regard for his own safety, or whether his weakness led him to wish to escape the painful interval pending the death of Socrates, cannot be ascertained. 2 See Thrige, Res Cyrenensium, 191. This may be gathered from Xen. Mem. ii. 1, 1, in addition to the proof afforded by his later conduct. That Aristippus belonged to a wealthy family would seem to be established by his whole mode of living, and by the journey which he undertook to Athens. 4 We might have imagined that a city so rich and cultivated as Cyrene (on this point see Thrige, 1. c., p. 340, 354), would not have been neglected by the Sophists, even if there were no express evidence to prove it. It is, however, known from Plato, Theætet. 161, B.; 162, A., that the celebrated mathematician, Theodorus of Cyrene, was a friend of Protagoras, and the principles of Protogoras are also afterwards met with in Aristippus. From the zeal with which Aristippus followed Socrates it may be further conjectured that the study of philosophy was to him no new thing. maturity of thought when he first became acquainted with Socrates. It is, therefore, no cause for wonder that this talented young man 2 met his teacher with a considerable amount of independence,3 not on the whole so blindly following him as to sacrifice his own peculiarities. He is even said to have come forward as a teacher before the death of Socrates; that he did so afterwards is a better established fact, and also that, contrary to the principles of his greatest friend, but quite in harmony with the practice usual among the Sophists, he required payment for his instruction." In yet another point he followed the 1 The chronology of his life is very uncertain. Neither the time of his birth nor of his death is known to us. According to Diodorus, xv. 76, he was living in 366 B.C., and Plut. Dio. 19, tells us that he met Plato on his third visit to Sicily, which is placed in 361 B.C. But Diodorus probably derived from Dionysius his anecdote about the interview with Plato. Its accuracy cannot therefore be relied upon; and as we are ignorant how old Aristippus was at the time, these accounts are anything but satisfactory. According to Diog. ii. 83, however, it would appear, he was older by several years than Eschines; and it would also appear, from what has been said p. 337, 4, that at the time he followed Socrates he was independent in his civil relations, and further that he was connected with him for several years. 2 This is what he appears to have been from all that is 3 See Xen. Mem. ii. 1; iii. 8. 4 According to Diog. ii. 80, Socrates blamed him for taking pay for his instruction. How little dependence can be placed upon this story will be seen from the fact that Aristippus says, in his reply, that Socrates did the same, only taking less. Another passage, Diog. ii. 65, seems to imply, on the authority of Phanias, that Aristippus offered to give Socrates some of the money he had gained in this way. Perhaps, however, all that Phanias said was, that Aristippus had taken pay, and offered it to his teacher, without however bringing the two facts into closer temporal connection. 5 Phanias in Diog. ii. 65; Ibid. 72; 74; 80, where it is also stated in what way he defended this conduct. Alexis in Athen. xii. 544, e; Plut. Edu. Pu. 7, p. 4; Stob. Exc. e Floril. CHAP. XIV. |