¹ Vollgraff, W., ‘La vie de Sextus Empiricus’, Revue de Pbilologie (1902), pp. 195–210.Google Scholar

² Patrick, Pappenheim, Haas, Brochard, Zeller, Goedeckemeyer, and dal Pra place Sextus late in the second century. Kudlien, F. (Rib. Mus. 106 (1963), 253 ff.) places Sextus around A.D. 100. Vollgraff (p. 201) argues that Sextus was head of the Pyrrhonean School from A.D. 115 to 135. Vollgraff's thesis has been adequately demolished by Brochard and need not detain us.Google Scholar

³ Pappenheim, E., Lebensverbdltnisse des Sextus Empiricus (Berlin 1887) p. 13;Google ScholarPatrick, M. M., Sextus Empiricus and Greek Scepticism (Cambridge, 1899), pp. 8, 10, 14, 20;Google ScholarBrochard, V., Les Sceptiques grecs (2nd edn. Paris, 1932, repr. Paris, 1959), pp. 314–15;Google ScholarHaas, M., Leben des Sextus Empiricus (Burbhausen, 1882), p. 15;Google ScholarGoedeckemeyer, A., Die Geschichte des griechischen Skepthismus (Leipzig, 1905, repr. Darmstadt, 1968), pp. 266₂,, 274;Google ScholarZeller, E., Die Pbilosophie der Griechen (5th edn., ed. Wellman, E., Leipzig, 1923), iii. 2. 10, 49;Google ScholardalPra, M., Lo Scetticismo greco (Milan, 1950), pp. 373 ff.Google Scholar

⁴ Sextus Empiricus' polemical treatises all begin with a survey of the dogmas, which have been asserted by the poets and philosophers throughout the ages, which are relevant to the topic which he proposes to study. He does not treat them in chronological order. Sextus Empiricus appears to be solely concerned with the fact that they were dogmatists.

⁵ P. H. i. 65.

⁶ Bury's translation reflects the ambiguity of the .

⁷ See P. H. i. 69 ff.

⁸ P. H. i. 69.

⁹ P. H. i. 69.

¹⁰ Prophyry, Life, 20–70.

¹¹ ‘Les historiens insistent, pour fixer la date de Sextus, sur ce fait qu'il nomme le stoicien Basilides (M, viii. 258), qu'on regarde généralement comme un des maîtres de Marc-Aurele. Mais Zeller a montré qu'il s'agit peut-étre ici d'un autre Basilides, compris dans la liste des vingt stoiciens dont un fragment de Diogène, récemment publié par Val. Rose (Hermès, i. 370, Berlin, 1866), nous fait connaître les noms. Au surplus, quand il serait acquis par là que Sextus est postérieur à Marc-Auréle, ce fait ne jetterait pas une grande lumière sur l‘époque précise de sa vie.’ Brochard, p. 315₈,.Google Scholar

¹² Zeller, p. 10₄. Patrick (p. 9) notes that Zeller accepted the view that Basilides was identical with one of the teachers of Marcus Aurelius in the second edition of the above mentioned work but rejected this view in the third edition of the same work.

¹³ See M i. 1–6.

¹⁴ D. L. ix. 116.

¹⁵ Kudlien (pp. 252 ff.), Goedeckemeyer (p. 266), Patrick (p. 9), Zeller (p. 10), and Brochard (p. 315) take the view that the Herodotus whom Diogenes (D. L. ix. 116) mentions was the Herodotus mentioned by Galen (see Zeller, pp. 31 and 104). Dal Pra (p. 367)and Robin, , Pyrrbon et le scepticisme grec, (Paris, 1944), p. 197, disagree with them. The evidence which Galen gives on the relation of the Pyrrhoneans to the Medical Sects is scattered throughout his works. Zeller and Brochard provide the most detailed discussion of this evidence. They do not deal with this evidence separately but rather they introduce it into their discussions of the particular Sceptics. Kudlien has introduced new evidence which is considered on p. 231.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Patrick, p. 10.

¹⁷ ‘Dass Sextus vor 220 gelebt hat, ergibt sich daraus, dass H ippolytus ihn in seiner zwischen 220 und 230 verfassten Widerlegung der Haeresieen benutzt hat…’ Goedeckemeyer; p. 262. Chadwick, H., in The Oxford Classical Dictionary (2nd edn. 1970), fixes Hippolytus' dates as c. A.D. 170–236. The evidence, which Goedeckemeyer cites, would at least indicate that Sextus lived before A.D. 236.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Patrick, p. 10.

¹⁹ Kudlien, p. 253.

²⁰ D. L. ix. 116.

²¹ See Zeller, p. 50 n. 1 continued from p. 49.

²² See pp. 235 ff.

²³ Kudlien, pp. 252 ff.

²⁴ Kudlien, p. 252.

²⁵ Suda or Suidas, Lexicon, ed. I. Bekker (Berlin, 1854).

²⁶ ‘Wenn Suid. lib, 714 Bernh. in seine Angaben über den … besprochenen Sextus ausChaeronea, den Neffen Plutarch's solche iiber Sextus Empir. und dessen Schriften einmengt, einen Theil der letzteren aber (die 3 uns erhaltenen) Sp. 715 auch wieder einem beilegt, so beweist diess, wie längst bemerkt worden ist, ledigiich, dass in diesem Fall, wie bei Suid. ofters, verschiedene Artikel durch einander gerathen sind.' Zeller, p. 50 n. 1 continued from p. 49. See Brochard, p. 316.

²⁷ Haas, p. 6. Vollgraff also believes the Suda to be accurate. Vollgraff's article is of interest as an illustration of what crazy constructions one must propose to make a case for the evidence of the Suda.

²⁸ M. i. 295.

²⁹ It has been argued that Libya is given special attention of the sort that would suggest it was Sextus Empiricus' home land. See Patrick, p. 11. However, the evidence to support this view is too weak to merit serious consideration.

³⁰ P.H. i. 83;M. xi. 15, 16; P.H. iii. 202, 205.

³¹ P.H. i. 84;P.H. iii. 224;M. viii. 147; M. ii. 105.

³² P.H. ii. 98;M. viii. 145;P.H. iii. 24; M. ix. 368;M. i. 87;M i. 148;M i. 228; M. i. 246;M ii. 22, 35, 77;M. vi. 14.

³³ P.H. ii. 221; M, x. 15,95.

³⁴ P.H. i. 149, 152; P.H. iii. 211; M, i. 218.

³⁵ Patrick, pp. 12–21.

³⁶ Euseb. Praep. Evang., xiv, xviii, 29.

³⁷ P.H. ii. 98 and M viii. 145 (Athens); P.H. iii. 221 (Alexandria). The evidence as regards Athens is weak. All he says is that Athens is not in his line of vision at the moment that he lectures. Whether his view of Athens is simply blocked because he is in a room or not is not made clear.

³⁸ P.H. iii. 120.

³⁹ Pappenheim, E., Der Sitz der Scbule der griechiscben Skeptiker, (Berlin, 1887), p. 4.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ See P.H. i. 152; P.H. iii. 211, 214. … Haas argues that is referring back to . The statement goes on: … … P.H. i. 152. This evidence is very weak. It could equally well be used to show that Sextus Emoiricus was teaching in Persia!

⁴¹ … P.H. i. 146.

⁴² Haas does not attempt to show that the laws Sextus identifies with would not conform with the Greek laws also. Were he to argue this he would find himself in great difficulty because Sextus does not speak of laws which are curiously provincial. In the late second century the general laws of Greece and Rome were almost identical.

⁴³ Haas, pp. 14 and 15;

⁴⁴ Patrick, p. 18.

⁴⁵ Patrick, p. 20. See pp. 8 ff.

⁴⁶ Patrick, p. 20. See P.H. iii. 32;M. vii. 91, 202, 323, 380;M. viii. 7, 188, 220;M. ix. 363;M. x. 318.

⁴⁷ Patrick, p. 21.

⁴⁸ Patrick, p. 21.

⁴⁹ Brochard argues that Aenesidemus and his successors were purely interested in the negative end of destroying dogmatism and put nothing in place of the standpoint they destroyed. He then contrasts the period of Menodotus and Sextus with their predecessors as follows: ‘Les sceptiques de la derniere periode sont des médecins: s'il veulent aussi, et de la me^me manière, détruire le dogmatisme ou la philosophic, c'est pour la remplacer par l'art, fondé sur l'observation, par la médecine, c‘est-a-dire par une sorte de science.’ p. 310. Patrick maintains that the ancient Sceptics ‘… advocated a spirit of progress-the forever seeking. The seeking of the Pyrrhonists was in the direction of scientific research, particularly of empirical or inductive research.’ Patrick, M. M., The Greek Sceptics, (New York, 1929). p. 285.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ P.H, ii. 238.

⁵¹ M. i. 260.

⁵² M. vii. 202.

⁵³ M. i. 61.

⁵⁴ Perhaps this is most obviously displayed in his discussion of the ten tropes. P.H. i. 40-169.

⁵⁵ P.H. i. 148.

⁵⁶ P.H. ii. 52.

⁵⁷ Sextus does not relate personal information about himself as regards any aspect of his life. However, he writes from the standpoint of a Pyrrhonean and does not ever speak as a member of the Medical Sect.

⁵⁸ Brochard, p. 317; Natorp, P., Forscbungen zur Gescbichte des Erkenntnis Problems im Alterthum (Berlin, 1884), p. 155; Patrick, p. 9, believes that Sextus was, at least, an Empirical Doctor for the first part of his life and that he may have belonged to the Methodic Sect later on. Zeller, p. 50, continued from n. 1, p. 49, says that Sextus' view may have altered under the influence of Pyrrhonism but that he remained an Empirical Doctor.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ P.H. i. 236-41;M. ii. 326–328;M. viii. 191.

⁶⁰ P.H. i. 210-41; chs. xxix-xxxiv.

⁶¹ P.H. i. 236-91, ch. xxxiv.

⁶² P.H. i. 236.

⁶³ Natorp, p. 157, thinks that Sextus is only criticizing a particular doctrine of the Empirical School in its theory of knowledge but is not condemning the School at large. He says that it is only a minor philosophical difference not concerned with medical practice.

⁶⁴ … … P.H. i. 236–7.

⁶⁵ P.H. i. 237–41.

⁶⁶ P.H. i. 241.

⁶⁷ M. viii. 327–8.

⁶⁸ M. viii. 191.

⁶⁹ Patrick, pp. 4–5; Brochard, p. 317; Robin, p. 197. Robin (p. 197) proposes the following solution: ‘… dans le dernier chapitre du I.I de ses Hypotyposes, il considere les Méthodiques comme repré-sentant l'orientation sceptique mieux que ne font les Empiriques, tandis qu'ailleurs (M. VIII, 191) il identifie ces deux dernières orientations. La solution la plus plausible de cette difficulté est que, les Hypotyposes étant (c'est lui-mêne qui nous l'apprend, M. VII, 1), anterieures à ses livres Contre les Dogmatiques, Sextus ait incliné d'abord, en tant que sceptique, vers le Methodisme, et soit venue plus tard au pur Empirisme, dont ces derniers livres reflètent sans aucune ambiguité la thèse.' Dal Pra proposes the solution: ‘… che Sesto, mentre scriveva la sua prima opera (gli Schizzi pirroniani), fosse inclinato piu verso la setta metodica che verso quella empirica, mentre più tardi sarebbe venuto al puro empirismo, di cui i libri Contro i dogmatici rifletterebbero le tesi sostanziali. Il probabile orientamento di tale evoluzione consistette forse nell' ac-centuazione del valore dell'esperienza e quindi, indirettamente, nell'esclusione di ogni altra via all'intuori di essa; ma questa questione solleva il problema del dogmatismo di Sesto, che potra essere meglio approfondito piu avanti.’ I maintain that there is not a contradiction which requires an explanation.

⁷⁰ Patrick, pp. 4–5.

⁷¹ M. viii. 191.

⁷² M. viii. 187.

⁷³ M. viii. 187 ff.

⁷⁴ M. viii. 188.

⁷⁵ M. viii. 145–159.

⁷⁶ M. viii. 159–160.

⁷⁷ Galen, , Opera Omnia, ed. Kühn, , (Leipzig, 1826), ‘Isagoge’ XIV. 683: .Google Scholar

⁷⁸ D. L. ix. 116.

⁷⁹ Hossenfelder, M., Sextus Empiricus. Grundriss der Pyrrhonischen Skepsis, (Frankfurt am Main, 1968), pp. 84 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ P.H. i. 236 ff.

⁸¹ P.H. i. 236 ff.