Chapters 6 and 7 of the pseudo-Aristotelian treatise On the Cosmos (Περὶ κόσμου = De mundo) display ‘a series of well-crafted and carefully organized analogies’ in order to represent the power of god pervading the whole universe.Footnote ¹ The last analogy (400b14–28), which is by far the most important in this section,Footnote ² compares the rule of god over the world to the rule of the law in a Greek city (ὁ τῆς πόλεως νόμος). As shown by the author in the previous analogies, the perfect order of the universe is the result of the continuous creation and dissolution of single things: this process—based upon the harmony of opposites—is the keystone of the eternity and equilibrium of our world. Similarly, the law is the unmoved (ἀκίνητος) mover of every activity and experience in the city: both positive and negative situations involving single citizens contribute to the supreme order and stability of the city. Positive examples include the activity of rulers, officials and members of the assemblies (ἄρχοντες, θεσμοθέται, βουλευταί, ἐκκλησιασταί), whereas negative examples include those who go to trial defending themselves (ὁ δὲ πρὸς τοὺς δικαστὰς ἀπολογησόμενος) and those who are imprisoned and destined to capital punishment (ὁ δὲ εἰς τὸ δεσμωτήριον ἀποθανούμενος). In spite of their difference, all of these actions are due to one single order (κατὰ μίαν πρόσταξιν), that is, the civic law, which ensures the stability of the city. To stress and illustrate this concordia discors, which characterizes both the city and the universe, the author of the treatise closes the passage with a quotation from Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannus (lines 4–5):

The author reads these verses as a perfect example of a context characterized by opposite situations: in fact, the city is full of paeans (παιάνων), which are interpreted as ‘songs of joy and relief’, and, at the same time, it is also full of laments and mourns (στεναγμάτων). The same interpretation can be found in the Latin translation of the treatise, which gives even more emphasis to the opposition between life and death:Footnote ³ uideasque illam ciuitatem pariter spirantem Panchaeis odoribus et graueolentibus caenis, resonantem hymnis et carminibus et canticis, eandem etiam lamentis et ploratibus heiulantem.

However, the author of the De mundo and his Latin translator fall into a serious misquotation. In fact, instead of representing a bittersweet situation, characterized by both joy and pain, Sophocles’ verses aim at depicting the utter desperation among the citizens of Thebes, caused by the plague sent by the gods to punish Oedipus’ faults. The sequence θυμιαμάτων, παιάνων and στεναγμάτων is not an antithesis but an evident example of climax, showing the triumph of death in the city. The error is due to the misinterpretation of the word παιάνων, which does not mean here ‘joyous hymns of triumph’ but rather ‘prayers to the gods’—especially Apollo—in order to avert the plague.Footnote ⁴ This interpretation is found in medieval commentators on Sophocles’ tragedy.Footnote ⁵

The wrong interpretation of παιάνων can be found in many passages from Plutarch, who uses Sophocles’ verses in order to illustrate situations of contrast between opposite forces.Footnote ⁶ For example, in Quaestiones conuiuales, Plutarch quotes the verses to represent the contradictory effects of love (623C7–D1): (…) οὐκ ἂν ἄλλο πάθος εὕροις οὔτε λύπας δριμυτέρας ἔχον οὔτε σφοδροτέρας περιχαρείας οὔτε μείζονας ἐκστάσεις καὶ παραφροσύνας, ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ τὴν Σοφοκλέους πόλιν ἀνδρὸς ἐρωτικοῦ ψυχὴν ‘ὁμοῦ μὲν θυμιαμάτων γέμουσαν | ὁμοῦ δὲ παιάνων τε καὶ στεναγμάτων’. These misquotations are probably due to the tendency of ancient authors to draw their quotations from anthologies and collections of maxims (gnomologia), ignoring the original context of the lines.Footnote ⁷ This favoured the transformation of Sophocles’ verses into a sort of proverb, epitomizing situations in which both good and bad coexist.Footnote ⁸

Could Aristotle have fallen into such a formidable mistake? The answer to this question is probably negative. Unlike Plutarch, Aristotle lived only a century after Sophocles’ tragedy. Undoubtedly, anthologies already existed during the fourth century and some lines from classical tragedy had become maxims, not associated with their original literary context, even by ‘a highly educated man as Aristotle’.Footnote ⁹ Nevertheless, none of Aristotle's misquotations subverts the original context in such a disruptive way. In fact, by quoting Sophocles’ verses about Thebes during the plague under Oedipus’ reign, the author of the treatise implicitly compares the perfect cosmic city (kosmopolis) ruled by god to a city which represents indeed the archetype of chaos (both physical and moral), or, as Zeitlin states, ‘a place corrupted beyond redemption’.Footnote ¹⁰ It seems hardly credible that Aristotle could choose Oedipus’ Thebes, the city punished by the gods, the supreme example of ‘anti-cité’ (as Vidal-Naquet suggests), as a synthesis and illustration of his providential cosmic city.Footnote ¹¹ Accepting Aristotle's authorship of the treatise would force us to accept the idea that Aristotle ignored the context of the first verses of the Oedipus Tyrannus, a tragedy which he himself knew very well and repeatedly praised for the excellence of its recognition.Footnote ¹² Therefore, it seems more likely that this misquotation should be attributed not to Aristotle but rather to a later author of a protreptic treatise, who took these verses from a collection of maxims (or considered them as a proverb) without knowing their original context.Footnote ¹³ This conclusion fits well with other studies about quotation strategies in the De mundo, which provide further proof of its inauthenticity.Footnote ¹⁴