A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

1292 XENOCRATES. X ENOCRATES.
ration and connection of the different modes of extending beyond it. He appears to have called
cognition and comprehension, than did Speusippus. it in the highest sense the individual soul, in a
tie referred science (-7riG)u7-) to that essence derivative sense a self-moving number, that is, the
which is the object of pure thought, and.is not first number endowed with motion. To this worldincluded in the phenomenal world; sensuous per- soul Zeus, or the world-spirit, has entrusted - in
ception (acrfrsVos) to that which passes into the what degree and in what extent, we do not learn
world of phenomena; conception (60'a) to that - dominion over that which is liable to motion
essence which is at once the object of sensuous and change. The divine power of the world-soul
perception, and, mathematically, of pure reason - is then again represented, in the different spheres
the essence of heaven or the stars; so that he con- of the universe, as infusing soul into the planets,
ceived of 8o4a in a higher sense, and endeavoured, sun, and moon, -- in a purer form, in the shape of
more decidedly than Plato, to exhibit mathematics Olympic gods. As a sublunary daemonical power
as mediating between knowledge and sensuous (as Here, Poseidon, Demeter), it dwells in the
perception (Sext. Emp. adv. M1ath. vii. 147, &c.; elements, and these daemonical natures, midway
comp. Boith. inAristot. de Interp. p. 297). All three between gods and men, are related to them as the
modes of apprehension partake of truth; but in isosceles triangle is to the equilateral and the
what manner scientific perception (i-CrG'T?7,uovuc ae- scalene (Stob. 1. c.; Plut. de Orac. defect. p. 416, c.;
Oaois) did so, we unfortunately do not learn. Even Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 13). The divine world-soul
here Xenocrates's preference for symbolic modes of vwhich reigns over the whole domain of sublunary
sensualising or denoting appears: he connected the changes he appears to have designated as the last
above three stages of knowledge with the three Zeus, the last divine activity. It is not till we get
Parcae, Atropos, Lachesis, and Clotho. It is the to the sphere of the separate daemonical powers of
more to be regretted that we know nothing further nature that the opposition between good and evil
about the mode in which Xenocrates carried out begins (Stob. Ecl. Phys. p. 62), and the daemonical
his dialectic, as it is probable that what was pe- power is appeased by means of a stubbornness
crliar to the Aristotelian logic did not remain which it finds there congenial to it; the good
unnoticed in it, for it can hardly be doubted that daemonical power makes happy those in whom it
the division of the existent into the absolutely takes up its abode, the bad ruins them;for eudaeexistent, and the relatively existent (-rb KaO' av'Tb monia is the indwelling of a good daemon, the
ral rb rpo's ri, Simpl. il Am-ist. Categ. iii. f. 6, b; opposite the indwelling of a bad one (Plut. de bsid.
Schol. in Arist. p. 47), attributed to Xenocrates, et Os. p. 360, d., 361, a, de Orac. defect. p. 419, a.;
-was opposed to the Aristotelian table of categories. Arist. Top. ii. 2; Stob. Serrn. civ. 24). Ilow
We know from Plutarch (de Animae procreat. Xenocrates endeavoured to establish and connect
e Tim. p. 1012, d., 1013, e.) that Xenocrates, if scientifically these assumptions, which appear to be
he did not explain the Platonic construction of taken chiefly from his books on the nature of the
the world-soul as Crantor after him did, yet gods (Cic. 1. c.), we do not learn, and can only
conceived of it in a peculiar manner, so that discover the one fundamental idea at the basis of
one branch of interpretation of the Tim2aeus con- them, that all grades of existence are penetrated by
nected itself with him; and further (Arist. de divine power, and that this grows less and less
(aelo, i. 10. p. 279, b., 32, Mletaph. xiv. 4; Schol. energetic in proportion as it descends to the perishin Arist. p. 488, b. &c., 827, b.) we learn that he able and individual. Hence also he appears to have
stood at the head of those who, regarding the uni- maintained that as far as consciousness extends, so
verse as in-originated and imperishable, looked far also extends an intuition of that all-ruling divinle
upon the chronic succession in the Platonic theory power, of which he represented even irrational anias a form in which to denote the relations of mals as partaking (Clem. Alex. Stromn. v. 590). But
conceptual succession. Plutarch unfortunately pre- neither the thick nor the thin (7rvvbv Kal lcavov),
supposed, as known, that of which only a few to the different combinations of which he appears
obscure traces have been preserved, and contented to have endeavoured to refer the various grades of
himself with bringing forward the well-known as- material existence, were regarded by him as in
sumption of the Chalcedonian, that the soul is a themselves partaking of soul (Plut. tie Fce. inl orte
self-moving number (I. c.; comp. Arist. (le Anima, i. lunae, p. 943, f.); doubtless because he referred
2, 4, Anal. Post. ii. 4, ib. Interp.). Probably we them immediately to the divine activity, and was
should connect with this the statement that Xeno- far from attempting to reconcile the duality of the
crates called unity and duality (povas and vads) principia, or to resolve them into an original unity.
deities, and characterised the former as the first Hence too he was for proving the incorporeality of
male existence, ruling in heaven, as father and the soul by the fact that it is not nourished as the
Zeus, as uneven number and spirit; the latter as body is (Nemesius, p. 31, Ant.). But what more
female, as the mother of the gods, and as the soul precise conception he formed of the material prinof the universe which reigns over the mutable world cipium, the twofold infinite, or the undefined
under heaven (Stob. Ecl. Phys. i. 62), or, as others duality, or which of the different modes of exhave it, that he named the Zeus who ever remains pression attributed by Aristotle to the Platonists
like himself, governing in the sphere of the immu- (Metapls. N, 1. p. 1087, b., p. 1038. 15. c. 2,p. 1088,
table, the highest; the one who rules over the b., 28. c. 5, p. 1092. 35) belonged to him, can
mutable, sublunary world, the last, or outermost hardly be determined with certainty. As little
(Plut. Plat. Qutaest. ix. 1; Clem. Alex. Strom. v. can we ascertain which of the three assumptions,
604). If, like other Platonists, he designated the noticed by Aristotle, respecting the primal numbers,
material principle as undefined duality (&Iopuxrros and their relation to the ideas and to mathematical
rvcid), the world-soul was probably described by numbers (Mlfetaph. M, 6. p. 1080, b., 11. c. 9,
him as the first defined duality, the conditioning p. 1086. 2. c. 8, p. 1083. 27., comp. N, 5. p. 1090.
or defining principle of every separate definitude in b., 31, &c.) was his. We call only assume as prothe sphere of the material and changeable, but not bable, that, after the example of Plato, he designated