Notes on the current edition
Concerning the Face which Appears in the Orb Of the Moon
1.
=
S. V. F. ii, p. 195, frag. 646.
2.
Lamprias refers directly to the words of Pharnaces at 923 E - F
supra.
cf.
Stoicorum Repugnantiis, 1055 A:
εἰ γὰρ αὐτός γε νεύειν ἐπὶ τὸ αυτοῦ μέσον ἀεὶ πέφυκε καὶ τὰ μέρη πρὸς τοῦτο κατατείνειν πανταχόθεν
3.
That
τῶν ῥερόντων can stand alone in this sense, pace Adler (
Diss. Phil. Vind. x, p. 96), is proved by
Aristotle,
Caelo, 312 B 24
.
4.
Aristotle (
Caelo, 296 B 9-25) asserted that heavy,
i.e. earthy, objects move to the centre of the universe and so only
accidentally to the centre of the earth. The Stoics distinguished the cosmos as
ὅλον from
τὸ πᾶν, which is the cosmos plus the infinite void encompassing it (
S. V. F. ii, p. 167, frags. 522-524), putting the cosmos in the centre of the
πᾶν and explaining this as the result of the motion of all things to the centre of the latter (
S. V. F. ii, pp. 174-175, frags. 552-554;
cf. note d on 923 F
supra) but stating that within the cosmos those things that have weight,
i.e. water and earth, move naturally down,
i.e. to the centre (
S. V. F. ii, p. 175. 16-35, frag. 555). Nevertheless, Chrysippus’s own words could be used to show that the natural motion to the centre must belong to the parts of the universe
qua parts of the whole and not because of their own nature (
cf.
Stoicorum Repugnantiis, 1054 E 1055 C); and with the very word
οἰκειώσεται Lamprias turns against the Stoics their own doctrine of
οἰκείωσις (
cf.
Stoicorum Repugnantiis, 1038 B =
S. V. F. ii, p. 43, frag. 179).
5.
According to Reinhardt (
Kosmos und Sympathie, pp. 173-177) the source of Plutarch’s argument must be Posidonius; but none of the passages cited contains any parallel to this statement concerning the sun, for references to the attractive power of the sun over the other planets (Reinhardt,
Op. cit. p. 58, n. 2;
cf. R. M. Jones,
Class. Phil. xxvii [1932], pp. 122 ff.) are irrelevant. There may rather have been a connection between this notion and the doctrine of Cleanthes referred to in
Communibus Notitiis, 1075 D =
S. V. F. i, p. 114, frag. 510.
6.
This is not a reference to aeroliths as Raingeard and Kronenberg suppose nor to the imaginary stone in intercosmic space (
Defectu Oraculorum, 425 C) as Adler believes, but to any
γεῶδές τι ὑπὸ βίας ἀναρριφέν, in the words of Pharnaces (923 F
supra);
cf. Aristotle’s use of
ὁ λίθος in the statement of his principle of natural motion (
Eth. Nic. 1103 A 19-22).
7.
The men referred to in 924 D,
ἑτέρους
ἄνω τὴν σελήνην, gῆν οὖσαν, ἐνιδρύοντας, whom the Stoics attack and among whom are Lamprias and Lucius themselves and
our comrade (921 F).
8.
i.e. even if it is the centre of our cosmos;
cf.
Defectu Oraculorum, 425 A - E, where concerning the possibility of a multiplicity of universes in
τὸ πᾶν Plutarch points out that even on the hypothesis of natural motion and proper place up, down, and centre would apply separately within each cosmos, there could be no centre of
τὸ πᾶν, and the laws of motion in any one universe could not affect objects in any other or hypothetical objects in intercosmic space.