four cardinal virtues (fpdvnats, dvipeia, cwppoadvy, and dicato-
ETHICS | 11, vol. i. 230.
6-12).! As to Philo, it will suffice to draw attention \ Xenocrates, fr.7Heinze to such passages as De Post. C. 95, De Post. C. 133 (
| (= Aristotle, Top. vi. 3.14
131), Quod det. pot. ins. sol.
9 ( = SVF iii. 33), and De spec. Leg.
| olov et ds Bevoxparns rhv ss 48 and 73 | ow OploTiKiy Kat Oewpynti er | dvraw dnotv elvar.
2. Let us now go on to examine more in detail each of the four cardinal virtues (fpdvnats, dvipeia, cwppoadvy, and dicato- | ee ovvn). ki
: i (a) Ppdvnars. In the second book of the Stromateis Clement is | led by his eulogy of wicvis to quote a passage of Ecclesiasticus,
{ codia év ordpate moray (15: 10). The word co¢ia which occurs The expression Gewpytu in the sentence gives him the opportunity ofreporting a doctrine used by Clement in St of Xenocrates:
\ similarity with the expr ix ss sia, bees Sha NINE YATE, pelos | i. 178. 1; the term dpior Strom. ii. 24.
1 (= Xenocrates, fr. 6 Heinze): éwel kal Zevoxpdrns ' a Pp Sui a feds \ wae , yi , ot q terms Svaxpiricy and d: év 7@ Ilepi dpovijcews tiv codiay emornuny tav mpdrwv airiwy kal Tis vonrijs oboias elval dno, rHv ppdvnow iyovpevos Surriv,
Sages Cl . ri pev mpakrucv, Thy S& Oewpyruchy, Av 61) kal copiav éevurdpyew | Fot ement ¢pdvnars avOpurrivyy. i) which leads man to th : y Baits "ehiere 'aval }) and also directs his be The way in which Clement speaks ree aa aS nay ok y
' theoretical activity is accepts the aaguiie doctr re - fhe— dpdvnois. oe , Clement's thought, one a of this doctrine can also be found in two other passages of the | sages of Strom. i. 178. 1 a Stromatets:
| Xenocratic doctrine of Strom. i. 177. 3-178.
1 (ii. 109. 14-20): abrn yap 7@ dvre 7 Sradenrurt) } the same meaning as th dpdrnols eore rept ra vonra Siarperixy ... 7) S¥vayus mept ra rav i also dpdvnots was both a mpaypdruw yévn SuaperiKy ..
. Tapexopern Exactov Tay dvrwy oldv ) same cannot be said abo é (veoOar.
816 Kai porn ab'ryn emt tiv adnOA codiav xeipaywye?, .
, iea <A a adi il é te « M oy fie , a a i * See also Strom. ii. 24. 2 (ii. ares OTs Ouvapis VEN: TwY PETARY ws ie dean FETE: a dpovnas copia. However, Clem Strom. vi.
(ii. 511. 16-19): dpdvnals or, Svvayus puyis | ulvwv mpaypdrey (Paed. ii. 35. 3
Oewpytixl) tov dvrwy Kal Tod dxodovBov duolov re Kal dvopolov \ 2, vii. 70. 5).
This definition, Staxpureny Te ad Kal avvOeruKcy Kat TpooTaKktiK) Kal amayopevTiK.
Xenocrates (Strom. ii. 24. 1) a i Stoic origin: see SVF ii. 35-6 The sentence of Strom. i. 178. 1, wdvn adrn emt rip ddnOA codiay | rightly pointed out). It also o oot fort Suvi > bela. tev dvrwr peieriiok.
Philo: see De Fin. ii. 37: adh ee RELS USS SETe ONES Sa dee me 1, { quae potest appellari rite sapientia closely related to Strom. ii. 24.
1 (= Xenocrates, fr. 6 Heinze), | Witt, 29, and the literature qu civ 5é Bewpyruciy, jv 5} Kal codlav evundpyew dvOpwmivny.
Pracchter, Grundr. der Gesch. de E hic dtcce eactiiaeits ¢ Rental a aaa aa q ii, 228; quarum sapientiam disc Moreover, both Strom. vi. 154. 4 and Strom. 1.2979. 9-1 78.1 should
EU Ph loc see footapte'g un ps S be compared with another fragment of Xenocrates, which Aris- | See for instance Phaedo 79 totle has preserved:
| Plation of the intelligible worl rat ne d from the body, defines ' For further detail on the presence of this topic in Justin see Andresen, art. cit.
S Seris 73 mdOnwa dpdvqars xéx 209 a 5-9, 179-81.
ETHICS { \ K ledge -ventually c 1e mots to the practical ) Po i money to codia, eventually confir ed dpdvyats t pra g-10), Strom. iii, 84.
, | hestl 'cal tue out that the definition ve consider for the , the theoretical part o!
{ ofica iee aver i If we consider for the moment = the theore a I qrowntéov, amayopeutixos lement s piney? we can observe a close correspondence be exactly, it goes back to tween him and Albinus:
Clement's conception o Albinus, Did. 153. 4-6: 4) puxi 8) © Clem. Strom. vi. 154.
} Chrysippus without att Oewpotoa pev 7 Oetov kai rds 16-17) : 70 8é oddev GA'
4} Hpdvnais by Philo of this Chrysip vores Tod Belov edmabetv te core, Sdvapis Yuxijs Pewpyrixy) Tov of the Jewish law, and w éyerar Kal robro 76 TAInpa adrAs dvTav...
' which Philo necessarily Ppornais wvopacrar. especially in this partic 'Therefore Albinus also reproduces the Platonic and Xenocratic seem to be, since Pohlen doctrine of¢pdyars.? Plutarch and Philo on the contrary, follow- ' publication of his artic ing Aristotle, regard ¢pdvnois only as a practical virtue and dis- : which exists between the tinguish it sharply from co¢ia.3 nition of vopos.3 It is wo We can now proceed to examine the practical function of an which the use of the Clement's ¢pdvyais.
The first thing to observe is that the expression | of the Jewish law is part Adan hopes '
. mpoorakruct kal dmayopeutixy which in Strom. vi. 154. 4.refers to the PORTE ad tons. {ce land a oe eae o4 4 hat chick Leg. Alleg. i. 94. (i. 86. practical role of dpdvycts isthe same expression as that which eydvrew.
Clement uses when speaking about the divine Logos or the Jewish Quod D. sit imm. 53 (ii. vopos; see Paed. i, 8. 3 (i. 85. 3-4), Paed. i. 65. 2 (i. 128. 12-13), pevoeor vopwv...
Strom. i. 166. 5 (ii. 104. 10-12) =SVFiii. 132, Strom. ii. 34. 4 (ii. 131.
De Migr. Abr. 130 (ii. 29 t Aristotle defines copta as emoriun Kal vods rv ryuwrdrew 7Hpve, EN 11412, D mpoordrrwy & Sei xal cf. Met, A 981*27-9 (his conception of aog/a is therefore substantially identical e Jos. 29 (iv. 67. 17with that of Xenocrates, as R. Heinze, 5, has observed) ; as to his idea of ¢pdvnos dv romréov, dayopevt
Ne beon—1 a be (Ari ~ disti ishes i Bia see EN 1140°20-1 and 1141°B (Aristotle distinguishes itfrom émor#pn, see EN De Vita Mos. ii. 4 (iv.
114145-7). There is, however, an evolution in the Aristotelian conception of Gruvéve ica ; pee i ak ar Beteghean i & mayopevots TOY ov T , d¢pdvnas: in his earlier works, which are still under Plato's influence, Aristotle
De Pr ot Pr op uses ¢pdv7acs in its Platonic meaning: see for instance Protr., fr.
CeO CEO SS NY 18-36. 4 and p. 36. 16-19 (cf. W. Jaeger, Aristoteles, 67; p. 67 also in the English Adyos mpoordrrwy & x « translation made by R. Robinson, Oxford, 1948, 2nd ed.). On the distinction
. between codla and gpdrqais in the Peripatetic school sce Arius Didymus, Stob.
There is no doubt that C Ecl, ii. 145. 19 ff. quoted above, is referri Sas , above, is referri 2 'The influence of Xenocrates on Albinus' conception of gpdvqais has been the Old Test, observed by Witt, 145 it is important to notice that Albinus' words Kal roGro 76 d Testament he nd0qua adrfs ¢pdvnots dvépacrat go directly back to Phaedo 79 d 6-7. forget that his concepti 3 Plutarch, De Virt. m. 4434 (cf. also Praechter, Grundr. der Gesch. der Philos. that of Philo. Clement, 539) ; Philo, De Praem. et Poen. 81 (v. 35413-14) (it must be remembered that for the definiti ro B Philo the Gepareta Geod is one and the same thing with the Bewpla 70d xpdrou q cfinition of véuos g airlov). As to Apuleius, he seems to adopt the Platonic and Xenocratic doctrine
"NGA, phil--hist. Kl. (1943), of dpsvnais, De Plat. ii. 228: illam virtutem, quae ratione sit nixa et est spectatrix di- '
SUP it Gta Forthe St (1943; judicatrixque omniun rerum prudentiam dicit atque sapientiam. Immediately afterwards, Suhinase Gieliec however, he distinguishes codéa from ¢pévyais just as Aristotle, Arius Didymus, i ¢ eam reba Pee ae ?
7A, phil.-hist. KI. (1943) Plutarch, and Philo do: guarum sapientiam disciplinam vult videri divinarum humanarum3 NGA, phil.-hist. K1 a que rerum, prudentiam vero scientiam esse intelligendorum bonorum et malorum
(on this 8'947 Z 96 in hisvel. ii, nee point sce also Moreschini, Studi sul 'De dogm. Plat.' di Apuleio, 81-2). tifa oe ee Mee TS dp W : orrespondence betwe