49. Nevertheless, Plato himself said these things either against the Philosophers who were before him, or against those who were his contemporaries: and, that these also,—(as) he also afterwards cries out,—were those who took up arms against him, the evidence is clear. For Aristotle, who arranged himself against Plato, went off with his whole school from his doctrines.

Others again, the Juniors⁸⁷ afterwards arose, who attacked the philosophical notions of Aristotle; and, on the other hand, animadverted on the Stoics. Others, the Sceptics, put forth Pyrrho⁸⁸ and the reserve⁸⁹: and, at once, ridiculed every body ! For, they all fully equipped themselves for a mighty war of soul against one another: and (this) by means of words, fell moreover, but little short of arming themselves, fighting, and attacking one another, with spears and shields! Where it was any thing but right, they divided: but, where it was necessary they should contend with all their power,—I know not how it was,—they agreed; and particularly in the error of a multiplicity of Gods ! They agreed (I say) in that, which before all men, and more than all men, they knew was a non-entity! That is to say, the Epicureans, (agreeing) with the Stoics: the followers of Aristotle, with those of Plato: the professors of Physics, with the Sceptics; (these) one and all, together with their wives, their daughters, and the ignorant crowd, going to the Temples, and presenting themselves for the purpose of worshipping with (their) vows, as Gods, the inanimate Idols, (formed)

in the likeness of men: and these they honoured with libations, fumes, blood, and the sacrifices of irrational animals: shewing by this means,—and in this one thing only did they relax their enmity towards one another,— that they all studiously gave their assent to this their error. And (again), when the truth was laid open to them, they opposed it! For it was right, that where their knowledge was correct, there should they have shewn their character to be firm: that they should have contended and warred for the truth; and, had it been necessary, they should have even died for it: (and) should have received it readily in the love (thereof), as men boasting themselves that they were Philosophers. These same persons were therefore, friendly to one another in this, that they brought themselves together for the sake of falsehood: and, about those things, on which it was unbecoming they should contend,—because of the hidden and unknown properties of these,—they contended as if it had been for the truth; readily too was their contention carried on about shadows, while they attacked and reproached one another, with innumerable wounding expressions. But, What need can there be, that (I should record) the contentions of the Philosophers against one another, their controversial expressions, and the common warfare which they set up, and in which they fell; since they availed themselves of human wisdom (only), and of the reasoning of the mortal mind: God the Teacher not having presented himself to them ?