is certainly abrupt, but if chapter IX. ought to begin here, as Halm supposes, a reader would not be much incommoded. Labefactavit, that Antiochus still continued to include Aristotle in the supposed old Academico-Peripatetic school can only be explained by the fact that he considered ethical resemblances as of supreme importance, cf. the strong statement of Varro in Aug.  XIX. 1 nulla est causa philosophandi nisi finis boni. Divinum:  see R. and P. 210 for a full examination of the relation in which Plato’s [Greek:  ideai] stand to his notion of the deity. Suavis:  his constant epithet, see Gellius qu.  R. and P. 327.  His real name was not Theophrastus, he was called so from his style (cf. loquendi nitor ille divinus, Quint.  X. 1, 83).  For suavis of style cf. Orat. 161, Brut. 120. Negavit:  for his various offences see D.F. V. 12 sq., T.D. V. 25, 85.  There is no reason to suppose that he departed very widely from the Aristotelian ethics; we have here a Stoic view of him transmitted through Antiochus.  In II. 134 Cic. speaks very differently of him.  Between the particular tenet here mentioned and that of Antiochus in 22 the difference is merely verbal. Beate vivere:  the only translation of [Greek:  eudaimonian].  Cic. N.D. I. 95 suggests beatitas and beatitudo but does not elsewhere employ them.

Sec.34. Strato:  see II. 121.  The statement in the text is not quite true for Diog.  V. 58, 59 preserves the titles of at least seven ethical works, while Stob.  II. 6, 4 quotes his definition of the [Greek:  agathon]. Diligenter ... tuebantur:  far from true as it stands, Polemo was an inchoate Stoic, cf.  Diog.  Laert.  IV. 18, Ac. II. 131, D.F. II. 34, and R. and P. Congregati:  “all in the Academic fold,” cf. Lael. 69, in nostro, ut ita dicam, grege.  Of Crates and Crantor little is known. Polemonem ...  Zeno et Arcesilas:  scarcely true, for Polemo was merely one of Zeno’s many teachers (Diog.  VII. 2, 3), while he is not mentioned by Diog. at all among the teachers of Arcesilas.  The fact is that we have a mere theory, which accounts for the split of Stoicism from Academicism by the rivalry of two fellow pupils.  Cf.  Numenius in Euseb. Praep.  Ev. XIV. 5, [Greek:  symphoitontes para Polemoni ephilo timethesan].  Dates are against the theory, see Zeller 500.

Sec.35. Anteiret aetate:  Arcesilas was born about 315, Zeno about 350, though the dates are uncertain. Dissereret:  was a deep reasoner.  Bentl. missing the meaning conj. definiret. Peracute moveretur:  Bentl. partiretur; this with definiret above well illustrates his licence in emendations.  Halm ought not to have doubted the soundness of the text, the words refer not to the emotional, but to the intellectual side of Zeno’s nature.  The very expression occurs