I\-OTES, BOOK VI[. 7. 26.5
snong to allow of such a union, and the country was too much
divided by natural barriers. The cities on the coast might be
coerced into an Athenian Empire, but could not be fused into a
political whole. Cp. Herod. ix. 2, where the Thebans say to
nlardonius that the Greeks if united would be a match for the
\Thole world,--ward paw yiip rd bxvpdv *EXX?~Q~ dpo$pouiovrar, o%rirsp
ra; ar;p~s r&h +ivouKov, XaXrnh Elvat ?;cpryiut~eol Kai &4Ul dvep&nolol.@ui rivrs 6riv hipxcw rois +~XQ[L, ri, $LX?rlKo;s piu cIuai K.T.X. 7, 5.
This, like some of Aristotle’s other criticisms on Plato, is chiefly
interesting as shewing the difficulty which he found in under-
standing the play of language which is characteristic of Plato. [See
Essay on Aristotle’s Criticisms of Plato.] The passage referred to
is Rep. ii. 375 E, sph~ piv TO& uuujBris rc KQ~ yvop+w~ &s oTdu re
apaorirovs fluor, npbr 62 robs dyu5ras rob~nv~io~, where we may observe
that the word $tXvriKhs is not used by Plato.6 Bupds, 7. 5.
‘ Passion ’= the depth or force of character which makes a good
lover or a good hater. Compare Theognis, 1. 1091 Bergk-
c;pyo’h;wr pol Bupbs FXfl nrpl uijs $lXdTOTOS,
ocrr ytrp /XBuipw oih $A& 6;vapar.
But in the Topics ii. 7, 113 b. I Aristotle raises the question
whether +Ah resides in TA fhdUp7lTlKbV and not in rb BuporiSCs.
Like our word passion, Bup& has both a wider and narrower use,
and is employed by Aristotle here in a more philosophical, but in
the Topics in a more popular sense.Aristotle truly remarks that anger is felt, not against strangers, 7. 5-8.
but against friends who have wronged or slighted us. Cp. Rhet.
ii. c. 2, 1379 b. 2, KQ~ [dpyi{owral] paXhov rois $how 4 rois pi $his:
and Psalm xli. g, ‘Yea, even mine own familiar friend, ahom
I trusted, who did also eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel
against me.’
06 yi,p 8; ?;EP\L $IXOU dnriyxro.
The reading of the hISS. which is repudiated in the translation
is not indefensible, though, in the absence of context, it is im-