[253] Natural Science was divided by the Stoics themselves (Diog. 132): (1) εἰδικῶς into τόποι περὶ σωμάτων καὶ περὶ ἀρχῶν καὶ στοιχείων καὶ θεῶν καὶ περάτων καὶ τόπου καὶ κενοῦ· (2) γενικῶς into three divisions, περὶ κόσμον, περὶ στοιχείων, and the αἰτιολογικός. The first of these divisions covers ground which is partly peculiar to natural science and is partly shared by the mathematician (astronomy. Posidonius in Simpl. Phys. 64, b, discusses at length the difference between astronomy and natural science); and the third, ground which is shared by both the physician and the mathematician. The precise allotment of the subject into these divisions is not known. At best, it would be a very uncomfortable division. [254] Soph. 247, D. [255] Plut. Com. Not. 30, 2, p. 1073: ὄντα γὰρ μόνα τὰ σώματα καλοῦσιν, ἐπειδὴ ὄντος τὸ ποιεῖν τι καὶ πάσχειν. Plac. i. 11, 4: οἱ Στωϊκοὶ πάντα τὰ αἴτια σωματικά· πνεύματα γάρ. iv. 20: οἱ δὲ Στωϊκοὶ σῶμα τὴν φωνήν· πᾶν γὰρ τὸ δρώμενον ἢ καὶ ποιοῦν σῶμα· ἡ δὲ φωνὴ ποιεῖ καὶ δρᾷ ... ἔτι πᾶν τὸ κινοῦν καὶ ἐνοχλοῦν σῶμά ἐστιν ... ἔτι πᾶν τὸ κινούμενον σῶμά ἐστιν. Cic. Acad. i. 11, 39: [Zeno] nullo modo arbitrabatur quidquam effici posse ab ea [natura] quæ expers esset corporis ... nec vero aut quod efficeret aliquid aut quod efficeretur (more accurately: in quo efficeretur aliquid. Conf. Ritter, iii. 577) posse esse non corpus. Seneca, see below p. 128, 1; 129, 1; Stob. Ecl. i. 336 (see p. 95, 2) and 338: Χρύσιππος αἴτιον εἶναι λέγει δι’ ὅ. καὶ τὸ μὲν αἴτιον ὂν καὶ σῶμα, κ.τ.λ. Ποσειδώνιος δὲ οὕτως. αἴτιον δ’ ἐστί τινος δι’ ὃ ἐκεῖνο, ἢ τὸ ἀρχηγὸν ποιήσεως, καὶ τὸ μὲν αἴτιον ὂν καὶ σῶμα, οὗ δὲ αἴτιον οὔτε ὂν οὔτε σῶμα, ἀλλὰ συμβεβηκὸς καὶ κατηγόρημα. See p. 95, 1 and 2. Diog. vii. 56: According to Chrysippus, Diogenes (see Simpl. Phys. 97, a), and others, the voice is material, πᾶν γὰρ τὸ ποιοῦν σῶμά ἐστι. Ibid. 150: οὐσίαν δέ φασι τῶν ὄντων ἁπάντων τὴν πρώτην ὕλην, ὡς καὶ Χρύσιππος ἐν τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν φυσικῶν καὶ Ζήνων· ὕλη δέ ἐστιν, ἐξ ἧς ὁτιδηποτοῦν γίνεται ... σῶμα δέ ἐστι κατ’ αὐτοὺς ἡ οὐσία. Hippolyt. Refut. Hær. i. 21: σώματα δὲ πάντα ὑπέθεντο, κ.τ.λ. [256] As do Ritter, iii. 577, and Schleiermacher, Gesch. der Philos. 129. [257] Diog. vii. 135: σῶμα δ’ ἐστὶ (φησὶν Ἀπολλόδωρος ἐν τῇ φυσικῇ) τὸ τριχῇ διαστατὸν, κ.τ.λ. [258] See p. 98. The corporeal nature of deity and the soul will be subsequently discussed. [259] See p. 105. Sen. Ep. 102, 7, remarks, in reference to the difference of ἡνωμένα· (see p. 103, 1): nullum bonum putamus esse, quod ex distantibus constat: uno enim spiritu unum bonum contineri ac regi debet, unum esse unius boni principale. Hence the objection raised in Plut. Com. Not. 50, 1, p. 1085: τὰς ποιότητας οὐσίας καὶ σώματα ποιοῦσιν, and Ibid. 44, 4, the statement discussed on p. 101, 2.