translated several of Aristotle's logical treatises into Latin. These translations and Porphyry's " Intro- duction" were the only Aristotelean works known to the first of the Schoolmen, that is to say, to the Christian philosopliers of Western Europe from the ninth to the twelfth century. In the t%velfth cen- tury the .Arabian tradition and the Byzantine tra- dition met in Paris, the metaphysical, physical, and ethical works of .Aristotle were translated partly from the .\rabian and partly from the Greek text, and, after a brief period of suspicion and hesitancy on the part of the Church, Aristotle's philosopliy was adopted as the basis of a rational exposition of Chris- tian dogma. The suspicion and hesitation were due to the fact that, in the Arabian text and its com- mentaries, the teaching of Aristotle had become per- verted in the direction of materialism and pantheism. After more than two centuries of almost universally unquestioned triumph, Aristotle once more was made the subject of dispute in the Christian schools of the Renaissance period, the reason being that the Humanists, like the Arabians, empha-sized those ele- ments in Aristotle's teaching that were irreconcilable with Christian doctrine. With the advent of Des- cartes, and the shifting of the centre of pliilosophical inquiry from the external world to the internal, from nature to mind, Aristoteleanism, as an actual system, began to be more and more identified with traditional scholasticism, and was not studied apart from scholasticism except for its historic in- terest.
Writings. — It is customary to distinguish, on the authority of Gellius, two classes of Aristotelean writ- ings: the exoteric, which were intended for the gen- eral public, and the acroatic, which were intended merely for the limited circle of those who were well versed in the phraseology and modes of thought of the School. To the former class belonged the " Dia- logues", of which the best known were the "Eude- mus", three books on "Philosophy", four books "On Justice", also the treatises (not in dialogue form) "On the Good", and "On Ideas", all of which are unfortunately lost. Under this head mention should be made also of the "Poems", "Letters", "Ora- tions", "Apology", etc., which were at one time ascribed to Aristotle, though there can be little doubt of their spuriousness. To the class of acroatic writ- ings belong all the extant works and also the lost treatises, avarotxal (containing .anatomical charts), Trepl ipvTuiv, and the woKiriiai. (a collection of the different political constitutions of the Greek States; a portion, giving the Constitution of Athens, was discovered in an Egyptian papyrus and published in 1891). The extant works may be arranged in the following cla.sses, with the Latin titles by which they are generally cited:
Logical Treatises: These were known to the By- zantine writers as the "Organon", including (1) "Cat- egoria;"; (2) "De Interpretatione"; (3) "Analytica Priora"; (4) "Analytica Posteriora"; (5) "Topica"; (6) " De Sophisticis Elenchis".
Metaphysical Treatises: The work commonly cited as "Metaphysica" or "Metaphysics" was (or, at least, a portion of it was) entitled by .\ristotle " First Philo.sophy" (Tpdr-q 0iXoi7o0/a). "The title iMeri. to (pvaixi was first given it by .-Vndronicus of Rhodes, in whose coUeclion, or edition, of Ari.stotle'.s works it was placed after the physical treatises.
Physical Treatises: (1) "Physica", or "Physica Auscultatio", commonly called Physics; (2) "De CorIo"; CA) " Meteorologica".
Biologiral and Zoological Treatises: (1) "Hi.storia; Anim.aliimi"; (2) " De Generatione et Corruptione "; (3) "De Generatione .\nimalium"; (4) "De Partibus Animalium".
Psychological and Anthropological Treatises: (1 ) " De Anfmil ": (21 " De ^ensu et Sensibili "; (31 " Do
Memoria et Reminiscentia"; (4) " De Vitd et Morte"; (5) " De Longitudine et Brevitate vitae".
Ethical and Political Treatises: (1) " Ethica Nico- machea"; (2) " Politica ". The "Eudemian Ethics" and the " Magna moralia " are not of directly .Aris- totelean authorship.
Poetical and Rhetorical Treatises: (1) "De Poet- \ck"; (2) "De Rhetorica"; both of these are genuine only in parts.
Of the extant works some were written in their present form and were intended for finished scien- tific expositions. Others, though written by Aris- totle, were intended merely for lecture notes, to be filled out in oral teaching. Others, finally, are noth- ing but the notes jotted down by his pupils, and were never retouched by the m.aster. This consid- eration, it is obvious, leads the student of Aristotle to attach very different values to different parts of the text; no one, for example, would think of at- taching to a citation from the First Book of the " Metaphy.sics " the same vahie as to a quotation from the Second Book. According to a well-known story, first told by Strabo and repeated by Plutarch and Suidas, Aristotle's library, including the manu- scripts of his own works, was willed by him to Theophrastus, his successor as head of the Peripa- tetic School. By Theophrastus it was bequeathed to his heir, Neleus of Scepsis, .\fter Neleus's death the manuscripts were liidden in a cellar or pit in order to avoid confiscation at the hands of royal book- collectors, and there they remained for almost two centuries, vintil in Sulla's time they were discovered and brought to Rome. At Rome they were copied by a grammarian named Tyrannion and edited (about 70 B. c.) by Andronicus of Rhodes. The substance of this story may be regarded as true; the inference, however, that during all that time there was no copy of Aristotle's writings available, is not war- ranted by the facts. It is not implied in Strabo's narrative, nor is it in itself probable. One or two books may have been lost to the School until An- dronicus's edition appeared; but the same cannot be true of the whole Corpus Aristotelictim. Androni- cus's edition remained in use in the Peripatetic School during the first few centuries of our era. For the various translations of the text into Syriac, Ara- bic, Latin, etc., see preceding.
The standard edition of Aristotle's works is that of Bekker (5 vols. Berlin Academy, 1831-70); Firmin-Didot ed. (5 vols. Paris, 1848-69) gives the Greek text and Latin translation in parallel columns. The best edition of the (later) Scholastic commentary on Aristotle is Maitrus, Arist, opera omnia (latine) . . . (Rome, 1868, and Paris, 1886); Grote, Aristotle (London, 1872, new ed. 1880); Siebeck, Ariatotelea (Stutt- gart, 1902): T.ALAMO, I'Aristotelismo nella sloria drlla filosofia (Naples. 1873); Put, Aristole (Paris, 1903); Zei.leii, Aris- totle and the Earlier Peripatetics (2 vols., London, 1897); Ueberweo, Hist, of Phil. tr. Morris (New York, 1902), I, 157 sq.; Azarias, Aristotle and the Christian Church, in Esfimis Philosophical (Chicago, 1896); Turner, Hist, of Phil. (Boston, 1903).
Alius, an heresiarch, b. about .k. d. 2.50; d. 336. He is said to have been a Libyan by descent. His father's name is given as Ammonius. In 306, Arius, who had learnt his religious views from Lucian, the presbyter of Antioch, and afterwards the martyr, took sides with Meletius, an Egyptian schismatic, against Peter, Bishop of .'Mexandria. But a recon- ciliation followed, and Peter ordained Arius deacon. Further disputes led the lii.shop to excommunicate his restless churchman, who, however, gained the friendship of Achillas, Peter's succes.sor, was made presbyter by him in 313, and had the charge of a well- known district in Alexandria called Baucalis. This entitled Arius to expound the Scriptures officially, and he exercised much influence when, in 318, his quarrel with Bisliop .\lcxandcr broke out over the fundamental truth of Our Lord's ilivirie Son.ship and substance. (See Aui.anism.) While many Syrian