Stoic hands and then into those of Antiochus. _Adeptum esse
omnia_: put rather differently in _D.F._ V. 24, 26, cf. also _D.F._ II. 33,
34, _Ac._ II. 131. _Et animo et corpore et vita_: this is the [Greek:
trias] or [Greek: trilogia ton agathon], which belongs in this form to late
Peripateticism (cf. _M.D.F._ III. 43), the third division is a development
from the [Greek: bios teleios] of Aristotle. The [Greek: trias] in this
distinct shape is foreign both to Plato and Arist, though Stobaeus,
_Ethica_ II. 6, 4, tries hard to point it out in Plato; Varro seems to
merge the two last divisions into one in Aug. _De Civ. Dei_ XIX 3. This
agrees better with _D.F._ V. 34--36, cf. also Aug. VIII. 8. On the
Antiochean _finis_ see more in note on 22. _Corporis alia_: for ellipse of
_bona_, see n. on 13. _Ponebant esse_: n. on 36. _In toto in partibus_: the
same distinction is in Stob. _Eth._ II. 6, 7; cf. also _D.F._ V. 35.
_Pulchritudinem_: Cic. _Orator_ 160, puts the spelling _pulcher_ beyond a
doubt; it often appears in inscr. of the Republic. On the other hand only
_pulcrai_, _pulcrum_, etc., occur in inscr., exc. _pulchre_, which is found
once (_Corp. Inscr._ I. no 1019). _Sepulchrum_, however, is frequent at an
early time. On the tendency to aspirate even native Latin words see Boscher
in Curtius' _Studien_ II. 1, p. 145. In the case of _pulcher_ the false
derivation from [Greek: polychroos] may have aided the corruption.
Similarly in modern times J.C. Scaliger derived it from [Greek: poly cheir]
(Curtius' _Grundz_ ed. 3, p. 8) For _valetudinem viris pulchritudinem_, cf.
the [Greek: hygieia ischys kallos] of Stob. _Eth_. II. 6, 7, and _T.D._ V.
22. _Sensus integros_ [Greek: euaisthesia] in Stob., cf. also _D.F._ V. 36
(_in sensibus est sua cuiusque virtus_). _Celeritatem_: so [Greek:
podokeia] in Stob., _bene currere_ in Aug. XIX. 3. _Claritatem in voce_:
cf. _De Off._ I. 133. _Impressionem_: al. _expressionem_. For the former
cf. _De Or._ III. 185, which will show the meaning to be the distinct
marking of each sound; for the latter _De Or._ III. 41, which will disprove
Klotz's remark "_imprimit lingua voces, non exprimit_." See also _De Off._
I. 133. One old ed. has _pressionem_, which, though not itself Ciceronian,
recalls _presse loqui_, and _N.D._ II. 149. Pliny, _Panegyric_, c. 64, has
_expressit explanavitque verba_; he and Quintilian often so use
_exprimere_.

Sec.20. _Ingeniis_: rejected by many (so Halm), but cf. _T.