The criticism of the Paradigmatism which is put into the mouth of Parmenides in Plato's Parmenides, focuses the point on the Resemblance of the image or copy to the original, and tries to deduce the second 'Third Man'. To interpret the original-image relationship as a mere resemblance is, we may say, a static reading of the Paradigmatism. We also perceive another aspect in the relationship-a dynamic imitating of the original(which is in Plato's context a Form or an ideal model.)According to this reading, resemblance relation is but a derivative from imitation, one of the results of the imitating process. Plato's Paradigmatism consists of these two factors, Imitation and Resemblance. There seems to be a correspondence between these two factors in Plato's usage of παραδειγμα. Plato uses this word as an example or an illustration in one sense we call this usage P_1( and in the other as an ideal standard or model-we call this P_2. P_1 is a substitute for the original. It has only the status of an image or copy in its reality, but its suggestive function enables us to have an insight into the unclear through the clearly known. We may interpret this function as a kind of analogy. It throws light upon what the Resemblance is between the two orders of being. P_2 presupposes ορεζι&b.sigmav; or a voluntary action to approach the ideal model as closely as possible. We find this kind of action of the creation in the artistic process. In a creative production, the completion of the creation presupposes an access to its model. It aims at perfect resemblance or identification with its model. It continues approaching the model, but inevitably comes up against the obstacle of approximation. In a word, images are imperfect and inferior to the model. But this deficiency does not necessarily mean an utter defeat in the context of Paradigmatism. It simply constitutes an inadequacy in the progress toward the model, because its goal is too far away. This kind of ορεζι&b.sigmav; or continual imitation-progress requires the permanent suspension of time from the beginning, as we perceive from the idea of the Philosopher-King. Imitation based on the desire for complete resemblance produces a number of images as its results. These results form a series of gradual approaches or several stages of resemblance, and eventually form the most perfect image within the limitations of this world. This perfect image functions as a standard in this world and thus the meaning of Resemblance of the image to the original, which is differently ordered, can be clearly understood.

View full abstract

"What is Place?" To this question Aristotle proposes four possible answers: form (ειδο&b.sigmav;) , matter (υλη) , the empty interval (διαστημα) between the extremities of the containing body and the limit of the containing body (περα&b.sigmav; του περιεχοντο&b.sigmav;), and examines these possibilities one by one. First, both place and form contain things so that we could say they are similar in this respect. But, while form is the boundary of the contained body and not separable from it, place is the boundary of the containing body and separable from the contained one. So we must say place is not form. Second, both place and matter receive qualities or other limitations, and in this respect they somehow seem to resemble each other. But, while matter is neither separable from the thing nor contains it, place is separable from it and contains it. So, also in this case, we must say matter is not place. The third possible answer, that is, the empty interval seems to be most appropriate as the explanation of place. But Aristotle denies even this answer. His main argument is as follows. If there were an interval which existed by itself(καθ' αυτο ειναι) , it would be a hypostatized κενον, which would further demand its own place to be in, so that there would be a place of place ad infinitum. (This argument of Aristotle seems in my opinion not to be so successful. But even if it fails, it reveals, by his strong denial of the existence of κενον, his conception of κοσμο&b.sigmav; which matters to us. Thus the only remaining answer is the fourth, that is, "the first unmoved limit of the containing body(πρωτον ακινητον περα&b.sigmav; του περιεχοντο&b.sigmav;)" which is indeed to be the final definition of place by Aristotle. This definition has two important characteristics. One point : Place as Aristotle understands it, is not an independent reality but the relation of a containing body to a contained one. In other words, place is an attribute of bodies. Another point: Although place as above said is the relation between bodies, it does not necessarily mean that place is a relative phenomenon. Rather, he says, the containing body realizing the role of place must be unmoved. From this it follows that place as a relation must be based on an absolute measure. This measure is just the everlastingly revolving circumference of the universe (κοινο&b.sigmav; τοπο&b.sigmav;)and the four ringed layers of the elements fire, air, water, earth-(οικειο&b.sigmav; τοπο&b.sigmav;)whose unalterable absolute arrangement in the incessant change into one another imitates the constant movement of the heaven. This fact that the elements have a natural tendency to move towards their own(respectively different)places is the very reason why he denied so strongly the existence of the void which implies the negation of all differentiation. Conclusion: the universe which is reflected in his theory of place is a finite(πεπερασμενον) and complete (τελειον) universe which is so densely filled (πληρε&b.sigmav;) by bodies that it has no empty interstices at all. Actually there exists no infinite thing. In ontology he was essentially the most genuine successor to Parmenidean theory of being.

View full abstract

Aristotle's classification of beings (οντα)into four types in Cat. chap. 2 is found to be, on close investigation, neither exact nor thorough in some aspects. This paper attempts to make clear the distinction between these four types through the following assertions :- 1) As to the distinction between the genera and species in the category of substance and the genera and species in the other categories, Aristotle says that while both the name and the definition of the former can be predicated, in the latter sometimes only the name can be predicated. In addition, two types of predication should be distinguished, i.e. the specific pred. and the nominal or accidental pred. -Aristotle's remark is valid only in the latter case. 2) The predications in the category of substance are synonymous predications, while the nominal or accidental predications are homonymous or paronymous predications. 3) Concerning the relation between individuals and universals, it cannot be said simply that either one is prior to the other, but in Cat. at least, Aristotle maintains the priority of the existence of the primary substance, saying that all the others are either predicated to or present in the primary substance. 4) The individual properties owe their individuality to the primary substance in which they are present. The different individual properties should be regarded as different ways of presence in the same species of the property. Yet Aristotle distinguishes them as one separate type of being(ον).

View full abstract

The object of this article is to examine Xenophon's experience in "Anabasis" in an attempt to pinpoint the origin of his theory of the state. We begin by examining his account of the foundation of the polis at Cotyora (V. vi. 15-16)and Calpe Harbour(VI. iv. 1-6). Then we analyse its disintegration which was brought about by the absence of any clearcut purpose on the part of the expeditionary force and the nature of the soldiers who were gathered from various places. The great number of well-trained army personnel and their location at the Black Sea makes Xenophon conceive of a realizable polis even if it may have had the character of a military base, suggesting colonization. Xenophon in hostile countries puts his point of view on the soldiers' πειθεσθαι τοι&b.sigmav; ρχουσιν and ευτακτοι (III. ii. 29-30) and makes much of the consequent unity. Later however, once relieved, they abandon this unity. Xenophon, comparing their condition to a storm-tossed ship, issues a warning to them. This situation corresponds to that of Mem. III. v. 5-6 and to that of Cyrop., in which anideal image of governors is elaborated. In Cyrop. an ideal image of citizens is also described as follows, to εκοντα&b.sigmav; πειθεσθαι(I. vi. 21), την<πολιν>μαλιστα τοι&b.sigmav; αρχουσιν εθελουσαν πειθεσθαι(VIII. i. 4). This Hellenistic view of a military state seems to have had its origin in the "Anabasis", deriving from Xenophon's military experience.

View full abstract

In this paper, I wish to consider the effects of Agis IV's reforms on the Spartan community with particular references to the redistribution of land (anaplerosis) and its significance. When Agis ascended the throne, economic polarization, especially the concentration of land and the so-called origanthropia had reached extremes. The Spartiatai werereduced to 700, of which only 100 were rich men who had kleros and land. Ochlos, i.e. people without means who had been stripped of their civic rights, were watching for some opportunity for change and revolution. Agis and Cleomenes III, their main aim being personal glory and the restoration of Spartan hegemony in Greece, conceived or executed plans to distribute the land and increase the number of citizens. Cleomenes' land-distribution scheme consisted of a complete division of Spartan land. It was first distributed to Spartiatai, then to suitable perioikoi and foreigners. Agis' plan was similar. The distribution of kleros to the suitable perioikoi and the foreigners meant their enfranchisement and this was anaplerosis. It seems that the main beneficiaries of these reforms were the men deprived of civic rights who had been on the increase at that time and thus the new laws seem tohave been aimed at hypomeiones, i.e. ochlos first of all, though there is no mention of them in the sources. As for perioikoi and helots, Agis and Cleomenes did not intend to change their institutions which were the bases of the Lykurgan regime. However Cleomenes enfranchised some able bodied perioikoi to increase the number of soldier-citizens. He also freed 6,000 helots, though he did not make them citizens, in order to raise war funds just before the battle of Sellasia. So the attempt to reconstruct the Spartan community by anaplerosis seems to suggest that the Spartan political system was already in the process of dissolution, revealed by the enfranchisement of perioikoi and foreigners and the emancipation of helots. When Nabis ascended the throne in 207, he expelled rich and illustrious men, and distributed their land to poor citizens, emancipated slaves, i.e. ex-helots and mercenaries. We cannot confirm whether the entire Spartan land was the object of his land-distribution, but it was on a large scale. The intention was to reinforce the Spartan army as Agis and Cleomenes had also intended. The emancipated slaves mentioned by Polybios and Livius were not cattle slaves or neodamodeis, but helots. Though they were enrolled in the citizen-body, their emancipation did not mean the abolition of heiloteia. That the number of ex-helots was large gives us the impression that heiloteia lasted as an institution, but almost lost its substance. As for perioikoi however, there are no references to them in the sources. Some scholars assume that they were also enfranchised, which I think is very possible. In any case, Sparta was deprived of its maritime cities populated by perioikoi under the provisions of the peace with Rome, thus losing one of the important foundations of Spartan society. Therefore Nabis entirely changed and dissolved the Spartan social structure. The serious loss of man power in battles and the increase of new citizens considerably reduced the proportion of the old Spartiatai to the former deriving from perioikoi, helots and mercenaries. The reform movement was intended to reconcile the Spartans to the Lykurgan regime, to reinforce the Spartan armies and create a hegemony in the Peloponnesus by reorganizing the citizen-body. Nevertheless it resulted in the introduction of perioikoi and helots into the body of citizens and changed the quality of the Spartan community, undermining the Spartan social structure. After Nabis fell, the institution of perioikoi almost collapsed and it became doubtful how far heiloteia fulfilled its function. The possibility cannot be denied, as Busolt, Roussel and Shimron think, that as the result of

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

View full abstract

Benveniste explains the gnomic character of the "nominal sentence" by the absence of any verbal form implying determinations of tense, mood, aspect…etc. The close parallelism of significance between the nominal sentence and the gnomic aorist suggests that the same principle could be applied to explain the gnomic aorist : the gnomic aorist does not originally, contrary to widely accepted theories, designate a past tense, but is a form free from any determination of tense, mood and aspect. As for the aspect, we consider the aorist to be neutral. The existence of neutral forms with regard to tense and mood is assumed to be proto-Indo-European, and they can still be seen in the Veda and Avesta under the name of "injunctive". Here the injunctive appears in two forms, the injunctive aorist and the present, which do not essentially differ from the indicative aorist and imperfect except the absence of the augment and are used sometimes in the gnomic sense. This usage of the injunctive aorist remained in Greek side by side with the preterit aorist, while the injunctive present was absorbed in the indicative present.

View full abstract

Cet article fait partie d'une serie d'etudes consacrees au theme de la Resurrection du Christ, dont le premier article a ete deja, publie dans "Orient", XIII, 1977 ("Ce que l'iconographie des Saintes Femmes au Tombeau doit a l'art funeraire paien"). Dans ce second article, nous voulons examiner une representation fort originate et inome-vue du cote de l'art chretien-des trois personnages habilles en blanc qui s'evadent a, travers de deux portes entr'ouvertes, peintes en perspective et amenagees dans deux compartiments du cubiculum F de la nouvelle catacombe de Via Latina a Rome. La structure de ces ouvertures avec deux vantaux repliants et la presence de personnages au dessus de leurs seuils peuvent etre rapprochees de la representation semblable au decor d'interieur qu'on trouve souvent dans la peinture romano-campanienne. Mais, cette comparaison ne sufnt pas pour expliquer le geste precipite et l'expression d'etonnement que montrent nos trois personnages. L'un vu de dos, la jambe droite projetee en arriere, essaie d'ecarter les vantaux de la porte avec sa main droite et son epaule gauche. Deux autres se retournent un instant apres avoir traverse le seuil de la chambre funeraire. C'est surtout une serie de sarcophages, dite de "la porte d'Hades", recemment etudiee par B. Haarlov, y compris le celebre sarcophage de Velletri, qui nous aide a elucider la signification de ces personnages peu habituels. En effet, mise a part une simple porte sans figure humaine et en trois etats differents fermee, entr'ouverte ou brisee par force , on y trouve quelquesfois l'ombre du defunt ou des personnages mythologiques (Alcestis, Protesilaos) accompagnes des divinites psychopompes (Hercule, Hermes) , qui emergent de la porte entr'ouverte d'Hades. Une longue tradition iconographique depuis l'art etrusque nous montre que l'ouverture de la porte du tombeau signifie a la fois le depart vers le monde d'audela, et le retour a, la vie, la resurrection. Les ivoires paleochretiens autour de l'annee 400 ont adopte le meme motif de la porte en trois etats differents, pour le tombeau du Christ dans la scene des "Saintes Femmes au Tombeau" : elle est fermee dans l'ivoire de Munich, entr'ouverte dans celui de Milan et detruite dans celui de Londres. Surtout deux derniers etats doivent evoquer la sortie miraculeuse du Christ de son tombeau, a savoir une Resurrection par excellence qui garantie celle des chretiens en general. Mais dans tous les cas, la representation realiste, la resurrection corporelle du Christ est evitee. Elle n'apparait que plus tardivement sous l'influence des illustrations des Psaumes. Il est generalement admis que la representation de la resurrection des morts ne commence qu'a, partir du 9^e siecle-de meme que celle du Christ en corps-, et qu'elle est associee soit avecle "Crucifiement" (selon Mat. 27, 52), soit avec le "Jugement Dernier". Dans ces cas, les morts ressuscitent en deplacant les couvercles des sarcophages et ce n'est plus a travers de la porte de l'edifice ou de la chambre funeraire. Pourtant, le theme traditionnel de l'ouverture de la porte a ete utilise d'une autre maniere par ces artistes medievaux, a la fois pour l'iconographie de "l'Ascension" en tant que l'ouverture de la porte du Paradis (Adventus du rois de gloire, inspire par le psaume 23)et pour celle de la "Descente aux Limbes" en tant que la destruction de la porte d'Enfers. Nous reviendrons a ce probleme dans notre prochain article. Pour expliquer les gesticulations tres vives de nos trois personnages, nous avons essaye de les confronter avec quelques textes du Nouveau Testaments relatifs a la resurrection des morts, entre autres I Ep. Cor., IS,

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

View full abstract