obviously regular form, as John of Damascus, in the middle of the eighth century, who made abstracts of some of Aristotle's works, and introduced the study of the author into theological education. These two writers lived under the patronage of the Arabs; the former was favoured by Amrou, the conqueror of Egypt; the latter was at first secretary to the Caliph, but afterwards withdrew to a monastery1o.

At this period the Arabs became the fosterers and patrons of philosophy rather than the Greeks. Justinian had, by an edict, closed the school of Athens, the last of the schools of heathen philosophy. Leo, the Isaurian, who was a zealous Iconoclast, abolished also the schools where general knowledge had been taught, in combination with Christianity"; yet the line of the Aristotelian commentators was continued, though feebly, to the later ages of the Greek empire. Anna Comnena' mentions a Eustratus who employed himself upon the dialectic and moral treatises, and whom she does not hesitate to elevate above the Stoics and Platonists, for his talent in philosophical discussions. Nicephorus Blemmydes wrote logical and physical epitomes for the use of John Ducas; George Pachymeus composed an epitome of the philosophy of Aristotle, and a compend of his logic: Theodore Metochytes, who was famous in his time alike for his eloquence and his learning, has left a paraphrase of the books of Aristotle on

10

Deg. iv. 150.

11 Ib. iv. 163

12 Ib. 167.

Physics, on the Soul, the Heavens, &c. Fabricius states that this writer has a chapter, the object of which is to prove, that all philosophers, and Aristotle and Plato in particular, have disdained the authority of their predecessors. He could hardly help remarking, in how different a spirit philosophy had been pursued since their time.

3. Greek Commentators of Plato and others.—I have spoken principally of the commentators of Aristotle, for he was the great subject of the commentators proper; and though the name of his rival, Plato, was graced by a list of attendants hardly less numerous, these, the Neoplatonists, as they are called, had introduced new elements into the doctrines of their nominal master, to such an extent that they must be placed in a different class. We may observe here however, how, in this school as in the Peripatetic, the race of commentators multiplied itself. Porphyry, who commented on Aristotle, was commented on by Ammonius; Plotinus's Enneads were commented on by Proclus and Dexippus. Psellus the elder was a paraphrast of Aristotle; Psellus the younger, in the eleventh century, attempted to restore the New Platonic school. The former of these two writers had for his pupils two men, the emperor Leo, surnamed the Philosopher, and Photius the patriarch, who exerted themselves to restore the study of literature at Constantinople.

14

13

Deg. iv. 168.

14

Ib. iv. 169.

We still possess the Collection of Extracts of Photius, which, like that of Stobæus and others, shows the tendency of the age to compilation, abstracts, and epitomes, the extinction of philosophical vitality.

4. Arabian Commentators of Aristotle.-The reader might perhaps have expected, that when the philosophy of the Greeks was carried among a new race of intellects, of a different national character and condition, the chain of this servile tradition would have been broken; that some new thoughts would have started forth; that some new direction, some new impulse, would have been given to the search for truth. It might have been anticipated that we should have had schools among the Arabians which should rival the Peripatetic, Academic and Stoic among the Greeks;-that they would preoccupy the ground on which Copernicus and Galileo, Lavoisier and Linnæus, won their fame;-that they would make the next great steps in the progressive sciences. Nothing of this, however, happened. The Arabians cannot claim, in science or philosophy, any really great names; they produced no men and no discoveries which have materially influenced the course and destinies of human knowledge; they tamely adopted the intellectual servitude of the nation which they conquered by their arms; they joined themselves at once to the string of slaves who were dragging the car of Aristotle and Plotinus. Nor, perhaps, on a little further reflection, shall we be surprised at this want of vigour and productive

power, in this period of apparent natural youth. The Arabs had not been duly prepared rightly to enjoy and use the treasures of which they thus became possessed. They had, like most uncivilized nations, been passionately fond of their indigenous poetry; their imagination had been awakened, but their rational powers and speculative tendencies were still torpid. They received the Greek philosophy without having passed through those gradations of ardent curiosity and keen research, of obscurity brightening into clearness, of doubt succeeded by the joy of discovery, by which the Greeks had had their minds enlarged and exercised. Nor had the Arabs ever enjoyed, as the Greeks had, the individual consciousness, the independent volition, the intellectual freedom, arising from the freedom of political institutions. They had not felt the contagious mental activity of a small city; the elation arising from the general sympathy in an admiration of speculative pursuits diffused through an intelligent and acute audience; in short, they had not had a national education such as fitted them to be disciples of Plato and Hipparchus. Hence, their new literary wealth rather encumbered and enslaved, than enriched and strengthened them: in their want of taste for intellectual freedom, they were glad to give themselves up to the guidance of Aristotle and other dogmatists. Their military habits had accustomed them to look to a leader; their reverence for the book of their law had prepared them to accept a philosophical

Koran also. Thus the Arabians, though they never translated the Greek poetry, translated, and merely translated, the Greek philosophy; they followed the Greek philosophers without deviation, or, at least, without any philosophical deviations. They became for the most part Aristotelians;-studied not only Aristotle, but the commentators of Aristotle; and themselves swelled the vast and unprofitable herd.

The philosophical works of Aristotle had, in some measure, made their way in the east, before the growth of the Saracen power. In the sixth century, a Syrian, Uranus, encouraged by the love of philosophy manifested by Cosroes, had translated some of the writings of the Stagirite; about the same time, Sergius had given some translations in Syriac. In the seventh century, Jacob of Edessa translated into this language the Dialectics, and added Notes to the work. Such labours became numerous; and the first Arabic translations of Aristotle were formed upon these Persian or Syriac texts; in this succession of transfusions, some mistakes must inevitably have been introduced.

The Arabian interpreters of Aristotle, like a large portion of the Alexandrian ones, gave to the philosopher a tinge of opinions borrowed from another source, which I shall have to speak of under the name of mysticism. But they are, for the most part, sufficiently strong examples of the peculiar

15 Deg. iv. 196.