Le principe d’inertie constitue la loi fondamentale qui a permis à la nouvelle physique du XVIIe siècle de construire son édifice en s’opposant aux explications scolastiques des phénomènes physiques. Tant Descartes que Spinoza ont proposé des démonstrations de cette loi physique en l’intégrant chacun dans son propre système philosophique. Spinoza dans ses Principes de la philosophie de Descartes propose même implicitement une critique de la démonstration cartésienne. Nous analysons cette critique dans la première partie de cet article et dans la (...) suite nous proposons une lecture de la manière dont Spinoza déduit le principe d’inertie dans l’Éthique. Comme ce principe présente quant à son énoncé et quant à sa conceptualisation des affinités avec la théorie du conatus de la troisième partie de l’Éthique, cet article met en valeur la relation de ces deux parties du système et tire de leur confrontation quelques conclusions concernant le statut et la place de la physique dans la philosophie de Spinoza. (shrink)

Epaminondas the soldier has been much admired. His two great battles rank as masterpieces of the military art. Epaminondas himself perhaps regarded them as his greatest achievements, to judge by his last words as reported by Diodorus . He had been carried from the battlefield of Mantinea with a spear stuck in his chest. The doctors declared that when the spear was removed he would die. After hearing that his own shield was safe and that the Boeotians had (...) won, he ordered that the spear be removed. One of his friends said to him ‘But you die without a son.’ He answered ‘I do, by God, but I leave two daughters, my victory of Leuctra and my victory of Mantinea’, and then he died. Nor were his ‘daughters’ unadmired. By remarkable chance the future Philip II of Macedon was hostage at Thebes at the very time of Epaminondas' pre-eminence and did not fail to learn, as Chaeronea was to show. (shrink)

The view that Pausanias 9. 13. 1–15. 6 is a simple epitome of Plutarch's lost Epaminondas, first advanced by Wilamowitz in 1874 and later elaborated by Wilamowitz himself and by Ludwig Peper, has commonly been accepted, with little or no further discussion, by students of Plutarch, Pausanias and fourth-century history. In a recent general reaffirmation of the thesis John Buckler does note that what Pausanias says about Mantinea is hard to square with Plutarchan evidence and he therefore admits some (...) contamination of the hypothetical source with non-Plutarchan material. But Buckler's discussion of the matter within the framework of a book on the Theban hegemony is necessarily brief and somewhat unsystematic, and may be thought over-ready to assume Plutarchan connections where none can be demonstrated. The purpose of this paper is to show that the Wilamowitz/Peper hypothesis in its pure form cannot reasonably be sustained, that at the very least some degree of contamination must be presumed, and that the existence of a direct connection between Pausanias and Plutarch can hardly be regarded as established beyond reasonable doubt. (shrink)

The story of Epaminondas' trial has come down to us in two divergent traditions, which differ as to the occasion, the ground, and the result of the action. One group of authors, of whom Plutarch may be taken as the chief representative, gives the following data: The trial took place after Epaminondas' first campaign in Peloponnesus— i.e. in spring 369 b.c. The charge preferred against Epaminondas was that he had outstayed his term of office as boeotarch. The (...) trial resulted in his acquittal. (shrink)

The story of Epaminondas' trial has come down to us in two divergent traditions, which differ as to the occasion, the ground, and the result of the action. One group of authors, of whom Plutarch may be taken as the chief representative, gives the following data: The trial took place after Epaminondas' first campaign in Peloponnesus— i.e. in spring 369 b.c. The charge preferred against Epaminondas was that he had outstayed his term of office as boeotarch. The (...) trial resulted in his acquittal. (shrink)

Name der Zeitschrift: Journal of Ancient History Jahrgang: 5 Heft: 2 Seiten: 280-303.

In CQ n.s. 26 . 62–84 I argued that the defeat of Sparta in 371 B.C. was not due to the pursuit of unwise policies towards the other Greek states. Unwise policies there had been. Sparta being by no means superior to Athens in the formulation of foreign policy, but these did not affect the position on the eve of Leuctra when, with Thebes politically isolated, and with some of the Boeotians disaffected, Cieombrotus at the head of a numerically superior (...) Spartan and allied army was poised for the, destruction of Theban power; a triumph of policy it must have seemed. Sparta failed for military reasons. Her army was unequal to the military genius of Epaminondas. (shrink)