ECLECTICISM AND REACTION
[Sidenote: The “bankruptcy of science.”]
184. With Leukippos our story should properly come to an end; for he had
really answered the question first asked by Thales. We have seen,
however, that, though his theory of matter was of a most original and
daring kind, he was not equally successful in his attempt to construct a
cosmology, and this seems to have stood in the way of the recognition of
the atomic theory for what it really was. We have noted the growing
influence of medicine, and the consequent substitution of an interest in
detailed investigation for the larger cosmological views of an earlier
time, and there are several treatises in the Hippokratean _corpus_ which
give us a clear idea of the interest which now prevailed.[986] Leukippos
had shown that “the doctrine of Melissos,”[987] which seemed to make all
science impossible, was not the only conclusion that could be drawn from
the Eleatic premisses, and he had gone on to give a cosmology which was
substantially of the old Ionic type. The result at first was simply that
all the old schools revived and had a short period of renewed activity,
while at the same time some new schools arose which sought to
accommodate the older views to those of Leukippos, or to make them more
available for scientific purposes by combining them in an eclectic
fashion. None of these attempts had any lasting importance or influence,
and what we have to consider in this chapter is really one of the
periodical “bankruptcies of science” which mark the close of one chapter
in its history and announce the beginning of a new one.
Footnote 986:
Cf. what is said in Chap. IV. p. 167, _n._ 383, of the Περὶ διαίτης.
The Περὶ ἀνθρώπου φύσιος and the Περὶ ἀρχαίης ἰατρικῆς are invaluable
documents for the attitude of scientific men to cosmological theories
at this date.
Footnote 987:
Cf. Chap. VIII. p. 379, _n._ 919.
I. HIPPON OF SAMOS
185. Hippon of Samos or Kroton belonged to the Italian school of
medicine.[988] We know very little indeed of him except that he was a
contemporary of Perikles. From a scholiast on Aristophanes[989] we learn
that Kratinos satirised him in his _Panoptai_; and Aristotle mentions
him in the enumeration of early philosophers given in the First Book of
the _Metaphysics_,[990] though only to say that the inferiority of his
intellect deprives him of all claim to be reckoned among them.
Footnote 988:
Aristoxenos said he was a Samian (R. P. 219 a). In Menon’s _Iatrika_
he is called a Krotoniate, while others assign him to Rhegion or
Metapontion. This probably means that he was affiliated to the
Pythagorean medical school. The evidence of Aristoxenos is, in that
case, all the more valuable. Hippon is mentioned along with Melissos
in Iamblichos’s Catalogue of Pythagoreans (_V. Pyth._ 267).
Footnote 989:
Schol. on _Clouds_, 94 sqq.
Footnote 990:
Arist. _Met._ Α, 3. 984 a 3 (R. P. 219 a).
[Sidenote: Moisture.]
With regard to his views, the most precise statement is that of
Alexander, who doubtless follows Theophrastos. It is to the effect that
he held the primary substance to be Moisture, without deciding whether
it was Water or Air.[991] We have the authority of Aristotle[992] and
Theophrastos, represented by Hippolytos,[993] for saying that this
theory was supported by physiological arguments of the kind common at
the time. His other views belong to the history of Medicine.
Footnote 991:
Alexander in _Met._ p. 26, 21 (R. P. 219).
Footnote 992:
Arist. _de An._ Α, 2. 405 b 2 (R. P. 220).
Footnote 993:
Hipp. _Ref._ i. 16 (R. P. 221).
Till quite recently no fragment of Hippon was known to exist, but a
single one has now been recovered from the Geneva Scholia on Homer.[994]
It is directed against the old assumption that the “waters under the
earth” are an independent source of moisture, and runs thus:
The waters we drink are all from the sea; for if wells were deeper
than the sea, then it would not, doubtless, be from the sea that we
drink, for then the water would not be from the sea, but from some
other source. But as it is, the sea is deeper than the waters, so all
the waters that are above the sea come from it. R. P. 219 b.
We observe here the universal assumption that water tends to rise from
the earth, not to sink into it.
Along with Hippon, Idaios of Himera[995] may just be mentioned. We
really know nothing of him except that he held air to be the primary
substance. The fact that he was of Sicilian origin is, however,
suggestive.
Footnote 994:
_Schol. Genav._ p. 197, 19. Cf. Diels in _Arch._ iv. p. 653. The
extract comes from the Ὁμηρικά of Krates of Mallos.
Footnote 995:
Sext. _adv. Math._ ix. 360.
II. DIOGENES OF APOLLONIA
[Sidenote: Date.]
186. After discussing the three great representatives of the Milesian
school, Theophrastos went on to say:
And Diogenes of Apollonia, too, who was almost the latest of those who
gave themselves up to these studies, wrote most of his work in an
eclectic fashion, agreeing in some points with Anaxagoras and in
others with Leukippos. He, too, says that the primary substance of the
universe is Air infinite and eternal, from which by condensation,
rarefaction, and change of state, the form of everything else arises.
R. P. 206 a.[996]
Footnote 996:
On this passage see Diels, “Leukippos und Diogenes von Apollonia”
(_Rhein. Mus._ xlii. pp. 1 sqq.). Natorp’s view that the words are
merely those of Simplicius (_ib._ xli. pp. 349 sqq.) can hardly be
maintained.
This passage shows that the Apolloniate was somewhat later in date than
the statement in Laertios Diogenes[997] that he was contemporary with
Anaxagoras would lead us to suppose, and the fact that he is satirised
in the _Clouds_ of Aristophanes points in the same direction.[998] Of
his life we know next to nothing. He was the son of Apollothemis, and
came from Apollonia in Crete.[999] The Ionic dialect in which he wrote
is no objection to this; it was the regular dialect for cosmological
works.[1000]
Footnote 997:
Diog. ix. 57 (R. P. 206). The statement of Antisthenes, the writer of
_Successions_, that he had “heard” Anaximenes is due to the usual
confusion. He was doubtless, like Anaxagoras, “an associate of the
philosophy of Anaximenes.” Cf. Chap. VI. § 122.
Footnote 998:
Aristoph. _Clouds_, 227 sqq., where Sokrates speaks of “mixing his
subtle thought with the kindred air,” and especially the words ἡ γῆ
βίᾳ | ἕλκει πρὸς αὑτὴν τὴν ἱκμάδα τῆς φροντίδος. For the ἱκμάς, see
Beare, p. 259. Cf. also Eur. _Tro._ 884, ὦ γῆς ὄχημα κἀπὶ γῆς ἕδραν
ἔχων κ.τ.λ.
Footnote 999:
Diog. ix. 57 (R. P. 206).
Footnote 1000:
Cf. Chap. VII. pp. 327 sqq.
The fact that Diogenes was parodied in the _Clouds_ suggests that he had
found his way to Athens; and we have the excellent authority of
Demetrios Phalereus[1001] for saying that the Athenians treated him in
the usual way. He excited so great dislike as nearly to imperil his
life.
Footnote 1001:
Diog. ix. 57, τοῦτόν φησιν ὁ Φαληρεὺς Δημήτριος ἐν τῇ Σωκράτους
ἀπολογίᾳ διὰ μέγαν φθόνον μικροῦ κινδυνεῦσαι Ἀθήνησιν. Diels follows
Volkmann in holding that this is a note on Anaxagoras which has been
inserted in the wrong place. I do not think this is necessary, though
it is certainly possible.
[Sidenote: Writings.]
187. Simplicius affirms that Diogenes wrote several works, though he
allows that only one survived till his own day, namely, the Περὶ
φύσεως.[1002] This statement is based upon references in the surviving
work itself, and is not to be lightly rejected. In particular, it is
very credible that he wrote a tract _Against the Sophists_, that is to
say, the pluralist cosmologists of the day.[1003] That he wrote a
_Meteorology_ and a book called _The Nature of Man_ is also quite
probable. This would be a physiological or medical treatise, and perhaps
the famous fragment about the veins comes from it.[1004]
Footnote 1002:
Simpl. _Phys._ p. 151, 24 (R. P. 207 a).
Footnote 1003:
Simplicius says Πρὸς φυσιολόγους, but he adds that Diogenes called
them σοφισταί, which is the older word. This is, so far, in favour of
the genuineness of the work.
Footnote 1004:
Diels gives this as fr. 6 (_Vors._ p. 350). I have omitted it, as it
really belongs to the history of Medicine.
[Sidenote: The Fragments.]
188. The work of Diogenes seems to have been preserved in the Academy;
practically all the fairly extensive fragments which we still have are
derived from Simplicius. I give them as they are arranged by Diels:—
(1) In beginning any discourse, it seems to me that one should make
one’s starting-point something indisputable, and one’s expression
simple and dignified. R. P. 207.
(2) My view is, to sum it all up, that all things are differentiations
of the same thing, and are the same thing. And this is obvious; for,
if the things which are now in this world—earth, and water, and air
and fire, and the other things which we see existing in this world,—if
any one of these things, I say, were different from any other,
different, that is, by having a substance peculiar to itself; and if
it were not the same thing that is often changed and differentiated,
then things could not in any way mix with one another, nor could they
do one another good or harm. Neither could a plant grow out of the
earth, nor any animal nor anything else come into being unless things
were composed in such a way as to be the same. But all these things
arise from the same thing; they are differentiated and take different
forms at different times, and return again to the same thing. R. P.
208.
(3) For it would not be possible for it to be divided as it is without
intelligence, so as to keep the measures of all things, of winter and
summer, of day and night, of rains and winds and fair weather. And any
one who cares to reflect will find that everything else is disposed in
the best possible manner. R. P. 210.
(4) And, further, there are still the following great proofs. Men and
all other animals live upon air by breathing it, and this is their
soul and their intelligence, as will be clearly shown in this work;
while, when this is taken away, they die, and their intelligence
fails. R. P. 210.
(5) And my view is, that that which has intelligence is what men call
air, and that all things have their course steered by it, and that it
has power over all things. For this very thing I hold to be a
god,[1005] and to reach everywhere, and to dispose everything, and to
be in everything; and there is not anything which does not partake in
it. Yet no single thing partakes in it just in the same way as
another; but there are many modes both of air and of intelligence. For
it undergoes many transformations, warmer and colder, drier and
moister, more stable and in swifter motion, and it has many other
differentiations in it, and an infinite number of colours and savours.
And the soul of all living things is the same, namely, air warmer than
that outside us and in which we are, but much colder than that near
the sun. And this warmth is not alike in any two kinds of living
creatures, nor, for the matter of that, in any two men; but it does
not differ much, only so far as is compatible with their being alike.
At the same time, it is not possible for any of the things which are
differentiated to be exactly like one another till they all once more
become the same.
(6) Since, then, differentiation is multiform, living creatures are
multiform and many, and they are like one another neither in
appearance nor in intelligence, because of the multitude of
differentiations. At the same time, they all live, and see, and hear
by the same thing, and they all have their intelligence from the same
source. R. P. 211.
(7) And this itself is an eternal and undying body, but of those
things[1006] some come into being and some pass away.
(8) But this, too, appears to me to be obvious, that it is both great,
and mighty, and eternal, and undying, and of great knowledge. R. P.
209.
Footnote 1005:
The MSS. of Simplicius have ἔθος, not θεός; but I adopt Usener’s
certain correction. It is confirmed by the statement of Theophrastos,
that the air within us is “a small portion of the god” (_de Sens._
42); and by Philodemos (_Dox._ p. 536), where we read that Diogenes
praises Homer, τὸν ἀέρα γὰρ αὐτὸν Δία νομίζειν φησίν, ἐπειδὴ πᾶν
εἰδέναι τὸν Δία λέγει (cf. Cic. _Nat. D._ i. 12, 29).
Footnote 1006:
The MSS. of Simplicius have τῷ δέ, but surely the Aldine τῶν δέ is
right.
That the chief interest of Diogenes was a physiological one, is clear
from his elaborate account of the veins, preserved by Aristotle.[1007]
It is noticeable, too, that one of his arguments for the underlying
unity of all substances is that without this it would be impossible to
understand how one thing could do good or harm to another (fr. 2). In
fact, the writing of Diogenes is essentially of the same character as a
good deal of the pseudo-Hippokratean literature, and there is much to be
said for the view that the writers of these curious tracts made use of
him very much as they did of Anaxagoras and Herakleitos.[1008]
Footnote 1007:
Arist. _Hist. An._ Γ, 2. 511 b 30.
Footnote 1008:
See Weygoldt, “Zu Diogenes von Apollonia” (_Arch._ i. pp. 161 sqq.).
Hippokrates himself represented just the opposite tendency to that of
those writers. His great achievement was the separation of medicine
from philosophy, a separation most beneficial to both (Celsus, i.
pr.). This is why the Hippokratean corpus contains some works in which
the “sophists” are denounced and others in which their writings are
pillaged. To the latter class belong the Περὶ διαίτης and the Περὶ
φυσῶν; to the former, especially the Περὶ ἀρχαίης ἰατρικῆς.
[Sidenote: Cosmology.]
189. Like Anaximenes, Diogenes regarded Air as the primary substance;
but we see from his arguments that he lived at a time when other views
had become prevalent. He speaks clearly of the four Empedoklean elements
(fr. 2), and he is careful to attribute to Air the attributes of Nous as
taught by Anaxagoras (fr. 4). The doxographical tradition as to his
cosmological views is fairly preserved:—
Diogenes of Apollonia makes air the element, and holds that all things
are in motion, and that there are innumerable worlds. And he describes
the origin of the world thus. When the All moves and becomes rare in
one place and dense in another, where the dense met together it formed
a mass, and then the other things arose in the same way, the lightest
parts occupying the highest position and producing the sun. [Plut.]
_Strom._ fr. 12 (R. P. 215).
Nothing arises from what is not nor passes away into what is not. The
earth is round, poised in the middle, having received its shape
through the revolution proceeding from the warm and its solidification
from the cold. Diog. ix. 57 (R. P. 215).
The heavenly bodies were like pumice-stone. He thinks they are the
breathing-holes of the world, and that they are red-hot. Aet. ii. 13,
5 = Stob. i. 508 (R. P. 215).
The sun was like pumice-stone, and into it the rays from the aether
fix themselves. Aet. ii. 20, 10. The moon was a pumice-like
conflagration. _Ib._ ii. 25, 10.
Along with the visible heavenly bodies revolve invisible stones, which
for that very reason are nameless; but they often fall and are
extinguished on the earth like the stone star which fell down flaming
at Aigospotamos.[1009] _Ib._ ii. 13, 9.
Footnote 1009:
See Chap. VI. p. 292, _n._ 657.
We have here nothing more than the old Ionian doctrine with a few
additions from more recent sources. Rarefaction and condensation still
hold their place in the explanation of the opposites, warm and cold, dry
and moist, stable and mobile (fr. 5). The differentiations into
opposites which Air may undergo are, as Anaxagoras had taught, infinite
in number; but all may be reduced to the primary opposition of rare and
dense. We may gather, too, from Censorinus[1010] that Diogenes did not,
like Anaximenes, speak of earth and water as arising from Air by
condensation, but rather of blood, flesh, and bones. In this he followed
Anaxagoras (§ 130), as it was natural that he should. That portion of
Air, on the other hand, which was rarefied became fiery, and produced
the sun and heavenly bodies. The circular motion of the world is due to
the intelligence of the Air, as is also the division of all things into
different forms of body and the observance of the “measures” by these
forms.[1011]
Footnote 1010:
Censorinus, _de die natali_, 6, 1 (_Dox._ p. 190).
Footnote 1011:
On the “measures” see Chap. III. § 72.
Like Anaximander (§ 20), Diogenes regarded the sea as the remainder of
the original moist state, which had been partially evaporated by the
sun, so as to separate out the remaining earth.[1012] The earth itself
is round, that is to say, it is a disc: for the language of the
doxographers does not point to the spherical form.[1013] Its
solidification by the cold is due to the fact that cold is a form of
condensation.
Footnote 1012:
Theophr. _ap._ Alex. in _Meteor._ p. 67, 1 (_Dox._ p. 494).
Footnote 1013:
Diog. ix. 57 (R. P. 215).
Diogenes did not hold with the earlier cosmologists that the heavenly
bodies were made of air or fire, nor yet with Anaxagoras, that they were
stones. They were, he said, pumice-like, a view in which we may trace
the influence of Leukippos. They were earthy, indeed, but not solid, and
the celestial fire permeated their pores. And this explains why we do
not see the dark bodies which, in common with Anaxagoras, he held to
revolve along with the stars. They really are solid stones, and
therefore cannot be penetrated by the fire. It was one of these that
fell into the Aigospotamos. Like Anaxagoras, Diogenes affirmed that the
inclination of the earth happened subsequently to the rise of
animals.[1014]
We are prepared to find that Diogenes held the doctrine of innumerable
worlds; for it was the old Milesian belief, and had just been revived
by Anaxagoras and Leukippos. He is mentioned with the rest in the
_Placita_; and if Simplicius classes him and Anaximenes with
Herakleitos as holding the Stoic doctrine of successive formations and
destructions of a single world, he has probably been misled by the
“accommodators.”[1015]
Footnote 1014:
Aet. ii. 8, 1 (R. P. 215).
Footnote 1015:
Simpl. _Phys._ p. 1121, 12. See Chap. I. p. 83, _n._ 123.
[Sidenote: Animals and plants.]
190. Living creatures arose from the earth, doubtless under the
influence of heat. Their souls, of course, were air, and their
differences were due to the various degrees in which it was rarefied or
condensed (fr. 5). No special seat, such as the heart or the brain, was
assigned to the soul; it was simply the warm air circulating with the
blood in the veins.
The views of Diogenes as to generation, respiration, and the blood,
belong to the history of Medicine;[1016] his theory of sensation too, as
it is described by Theophrastos,[1017] need only be mentioned in
passing. Briefly stated, it amounts to this, that all sensation is due
to the action of air upon the brain and other organs, while pleasure is
aeration of the blood. But the details of the theory can only be studied
properly in connexion with the Hippokratean writings; for Diogenes does
not really represent the old cosmological tradition, but a fresh
development of reactionary philosophical views combined with an entirely
new enthusiasm for detailed investigation and accumulation of facts.
Footnote 1016:
See Censorinus, quoted in _Dox._ p. 191.
Footnote 1017:
Theophr. _de Sens._ 39 sqq. (R. P. 213, 214). For a full account, see
Beare, pp. 41 sqq., 105, 140, 169, 209, 258. As Prof. Beare remarks,
Diogenes “is one of the most interesting of the pre-Platonic
psychologists” (p. 258).
III. ARCHELAOS OF ATHENS
[Sidenote: Anaxagoreans.]
191. The last of the early cosmologists was Archelaos of Athens, who was
a disciple of Anaxagoras.[1018] He is also said to have been the teacher
of Sokrates, a statement by no means so improbable as is sometimes
supposed.[1019] There is no reason to doubt the tradition that Archelaos
succeeded Anaxagoras in the school at Lampsakos.[1020] We certainly hear
of Anaxagoreans,[1021] though their fame was soon obscured by the rise
of the Sophists, as we call them.
Footnote 1018:
Diog. ii. 16 (R. P. 216).
Footnote 1019:
See Chiapelli in _Arch._ iv. pp. 369 sqq.
Footnote 1020:
Euseb. _P. E._ p. 504, c 3, ὁ δὲ Ἀρχέλαος ἐν Λαμψάκῳ διεδέξατο τὴν
σχολὴν τοῦ Ἀναξαγόρου.
Footnote 1021:
Ἀναξαγόρειοι are mentioned by Plato (_Crat._ 409 b 6), and often by
the Aristotelian commentators.
[Sidenote: Cosmology.]
192. On the cosmology of Archelaos, Hippolytos[1022] writes as follows:—
Archelaos was by birth an Athenian, and the son of Apollodoros. He
spoke of the mixture of matter in a similar way to Anaxagoras, and of
the first principles likewise. He held, however, that there was a
certain mixture immanent even in Nous. And he held that there were two
efficient causes which were separated off from one another, namely,
the warm and the cold. The former was in motion, the latter at rest.
When the water was liquefied it flowed to the centre, and there being
burnt up it turned to earth and air, the latter of which was borne
upwards, while the former took up its position below. These, then, are
the reasons why the earth is at rest, and why it came into being. It
lies in the centre, being practically no appreciable part of the
universe. (But the air rules over all things),[1023] being produced by
the burning of the fire, and from its original combustion comes the
substance of the heavenly bodies. Of these the sun is the largest, and
the moon second; the rest are of various sizes. He says that the
heavens were inclined, and that then the sun made light upon the
earth, made the air transparent, and the earth dry; for it was
originally a pond, being high at the circumference and hollow in the
centre. He adduces as a proof of this hollowness that the sun does not
rise and set at the same time for all peoples, as it ought to do if
the earth were level. As to animals, he says that when the earth was
first being warmed in the lower part where the warm and the cold were
mingled together, many living creatures appeared, and especially men,
all having the same manner of life, and deriving their sustenance from
the slime; they did not live long, and later on generation from one
another began. And men were distinguished from the rest, and set up
leaders, and laws, and arts, and cities, and so forth. And he says
that Nous is implanted in all animals alike; for each of the animals,
as well as man, makes use of Nous, but some quicker and some slower.
Footnote 1022:
Hipp. _Ref._ i. 9 (R. P. 218).
Footnote 1023:
Inserting τὸν δ’ ἀέρα κρατεῖν τοῦ παντός, as suggested by Roeper.
It is not necessary to say much with regard to this theory, which in
many respects contrasts unfavourably with its predecessors. It is clear
that, just as Diogenes had tried to introduce certain Anaxagorean ideas
into the philosophy of Anaximenes, so Archelaos sought to bring
Anaxagoreanism nearer to the old Ionic views by supplementing it with
the opposition of warm and cold, rare and dense, and by stripping Nous
of that simplicity which had marked it off from the other “things” in
his master’s system. It was probably for this reason, too, that Nous was
no longer regarded as the maker of the world.[1024] Leukippos had made
such a force unnecessary. It may be added that this twofold relation of
Archelaos to his predecessors makes it very credible that, as Aetios
tells us,[1025] he believed in innumerable worlds; both Anaxagoras and
the older Ionians upheld that doctrine.
Footnote 1024:
Aet. i. 7, 4 = Stob. i. 56 (R. P. 217 a).
[Sidenote: Conclusion.]
193. The cosmology of Archelaos, like that of Diogenes, has all the
characteristics of the age to which it belonged—an age of reaction,
eclecticism, and investigation of detail.[1026] Hippon of Samos and
Idaios of Himera represent nothing more than the feeling that philosophy
had run into a blind alley, from which it could only escape by trying
back. The Herakleiteans at Ephesos, impenetrably wrapped up as they were
in their own system, did little but exaggerate its paradoxes and develop
its more fanciful side.[1027] It was not enough for Kratylos to say with
Herakleitos (fr. 84) that you cannot step twice into the same river; you
could not do so even once.[1028] But in nothing was the total bankruptcy
of the early cosmology so clearly shown as in the work of Gorgias,
entitled _Substance or the Non-existent_, in which an absolute nihilism
was set forth and based upon the Eleatic dialectic.[1029] The fact is
that philosophy, so long as it clung to its old presuppositions, had
nothing more to say; for the answer of Leukippos to the question of
Thales was really final. Fresh life must be given to the speculative
impulse by the raising of new problems, those of knowledge and conduct,
before any further progress was possible; and this was done by the
“Sophists” and Sokrates. Then, in the hands of Demokritos and Plato,
philosophy took a new form, and started on a fresh course.
Footnote 1025:
Aet. ii. 1, 3.
Footnote 1026:
Windelband, § 25. The period is well described by Fredrich,
_Hippokratische Untersuchungen_, pp. 130 sqq. It can only be treated
fully in connexion with the Sophists.
Footnote 1027:
For an amusing picture of the Herakleiteans see Plato, _Tht._ 179 e.
The new interest in language, which the study of rhetoric had called
into life, took with them the form of fantastic and arbitrary
etymologising, such as is satirised in Plato’s _Cratylus_.
Footnote 1028:
Arist. _Met._ Γ, 5. 1010 a 12. He refused even to speak, we are told,
and only moved his finger.
Footnote 1029:
Sext. _adv. Math._ vii. 65 (R. P. 235); _M.X.G._ 979 a 13 (R. P. 236).
APPENDIX
THE SOURCES
_A._—PHILOSOPHERS
[Sidenote: Plato.]
1. It is not very often that Plato allows himself to dwell upon the
history of philosophy as it was before the rise of ethical and
epistemological inquiry; but when he does, his guidance is simply
invaluable. His artistic gift and his power of entering into the
thoughts of other men enabled him to describe the views of early
philosophers in a thoroughly objective manner, and he never, except in a
playful and ironical way, sought to read unthought-of meanings into the
words of his predecessors. Of special value for our purpose are his
contrast between Empedokles and Herakleitos (_Soph._ 242 d), and his
account of the relation between Zeno and Parmenides (_Parm._ 128 a).
See Zeller, “Plato’s Mittheilungen über frühere und gleichzeitige
Philosophen” (_Arch._ v. pp. 165 sqq.); and Index, _s.v._ Plato.
[Sidenote: Aristotle.]
2. As a rule, Aristotle’s statements about early philosophers are less
historical than Plato’s. Not that he failed to understand the facts, but
he nearly always discusses them from the point of view of his own
system. He is convinced that his own philosophy accomplishes what all
previous philosophers had aimed at, and their systems are therefore
regarded as “lisping” attempts to formulate it (_Met._ Α, 10. 993 a 15).
It is also to be noted that Aristotle regards some systems in a much
more sympathetic way than others. He is distinctly unfair to the
Eleatics, for instance.
It is often forgotten that Aristotle derived much of his information
from Plato, and we must specially observe that he more than once takes
Plato’s irony too literally.
See Emminger, _Die Vorsokratischen Philosophen nach den Berichten des
Aristoteles_, 1878. Index, _s.v._ Aristotle.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Stoics.]
3. The Stoics, and especially Chrysippos, paid great attention to early
philosophy, but their way of regarding it was simply an exaggeration of
Aristotle’s. They did not content themselves with criticising their
predecessors from their own point of view; they seem really to have
believed that the early poets and thinkers held views hardly
distinguishable from theirs. The word συνοικειοῦν, which Cicero renders
by _accommodare_, was used by Philodemos to denote this method of
interpretation,[1030] which has had serious results upon our tradition,
especially in the case of Herakleitos (p. 157).
Footnote 1030:
Cf. Cic. _De nat. D._ i. 15, 41: “Et haec quidem (Chrysippus) in primo
libro de natura deorum, in secundo autem vult Orphei, Musaei, Hesiodi
Homerique fabellas accommodare ad ea quae ipse primo libro de deis
immortalibus dixerat, ut etiam veterrimi poetae, qui haec ne suspicati
quidem sunt, Stoici fuisse videantur.” Cf. Philod. _de piet. fr._ c.
13, ἐν δὲ τῷ δευτέρῳ τά τε εἰς Ὀρφέα καὶ Μουσαῖον ἀναφερόμενα καὶ τὰ
παρ’ Ὁμήρῳ καὶ Ἡσιόδῳ καὶ Εὐριπίδῃ καὶ ποιηταῖς ἄλλοις, ὡς καὶ
Κλεάνθης, πειρᾶται συνοικειοῦν ταῖς δόξαις αὐτῶν.
[Sidenote: Skeptics.]
4. The same remarks apply _mutatis mutandis_ to the Skeptics. The
interest of such a writer as Sextus Empiricus in early philosophy is to
show that skepticism went back to an early date—as far as Xenophanes, in
fact. But what he tells us is often of value; for he frequently quotes
early views as to knowledge and sensation in support of his thesis.
[Sidenote: Neoplatonists.]
5. Under this head we have chiefly to consider the commentators on
Aristotle in so far as they are independent of the Theophrastean
tradition. Their chief characteristic is what Simplicius calls
εὐγνωμοσύνη, that is, a liberal spirit of interpretation, which makes
all early philosophers agree with one another in upholding the doctrine
of a Sensible and an Intelligible World. It is, however, to Simplicius
more than any one else that we owe the preservation of the fragments. He
had, of course, the library of the Academy at his disposal.
_B._—DOXOGRAPHERS
[Sidenote: The _Doxographi graeci_.]
6. The _Doxographi graeci_ of Professor Hermann Diels (1879) threw an
entirely new light upon the filiation of the later sources; and we can
only estimate justly the value of statements derived from these if we
bear constantly in mind the results of his investigation. Here it will
only be possible to give an outline which may help the reader to find
his way in the _Doxographi graeci_ itself.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: The “Opinions” of Theophrastos]
7. By the term _doxographers_ we understand all those writers who relate
the opinions of the Greek philosophers, and who derive their material,
directly or indirectly, from the great work of Theophrastos, Φυσικῶν
δοξῶν ιηʹ (Diog. v. 46). Of this work, one considerable chapter, that
entitled Περὶ αἰσθήσεων, has been preserved (_Dox._ pp. 499-527). And
Usener, following Brandis, further showed that there were important
fragments of it contained in the commentary of Simplicius (sixth cent.
A.D.) on the First Book of Aristotle’s Φυσικὴ ἀκρόασις (Usener,
_Analecta Theophrastea_, pp. 25 sqq.). These extracts Simplicius seems
to have borrowed in turn from Alexander of Aphrodisias (_c._ 200 A.D.);
cf. _Dox._ p. 112 sqq. We thus possess a very considerable portion of
the First Book, which dealt with the ἀρχαί as well as practically the
whole of the last Book.
From these remains it clearly appears that the method of Theophrastos
was to discuss in separate books the leading topics which had engaged
the attention of philosophers from Thales to Plato. The chronological
order was not observed; the philosophers were grouped according to the
affinity of their doctrine, the differences between those who appeared
to agree most closely being carefully noted. The First Book, however,
was in some degree exceptional; for in it the order was that of the
successive schools, and short historical and chronological notices were
inserted.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: Doxographers.]
8. A work of this kind was, of course, a godsend to the epitomators and
compilers of handbooks, who flourished more and more as the Greek genius
declined. These either followed Theophrastos in arranging the
subject-matter under heads, or else they broke up his work, and
rearranged his statements under the names of the various philosophers to
whom they applied. This latter class form the natural transition between
the doxographers proper and the biographers, so I have ventured to
distinguish them by the name of _biographical doxographers_.
I. DOXOGRAPHERS PROPER
[Sidenote: The _Placita_ and Stobaios.]
9. These are now represented by two works, viz. the _Placita
Philosophorum_, included among the writings ascribed to Plutarch, and
the _Eclogae Physicae_ of John Stobaios (_c._ 470 A.D.). The latter
originally formed one work with the _Florilegium_ of the same author,
and includes a transcript of some epitome substantially identical with
the pseudo-Plutarchean _Placita_. It is, however, demonstrable that
neither the _Placita_ nor the doxography of the _Eclogae_ is the
original of the other. The latter is usually the fuller of the two, and
yet the former must be earlier; for it was used by Athenagoras for his
defence of the Christians in 177 A.D. (_Dox._ p. 4). It was also the
source of the notices in Eusebios and Cyril, and of the _History of
Philosophy_ ascribed to Galen. From these writers many important
corrections of the text have been derived (_Dox._ pp. 5 sqq.).
Another writer who made use of the _Placita_ is Achilles (_not_ Achilles
Tatius). Extracts from his Εἰσαγωγή to the _Phaenomena_ of Aratos are
included in the _Uranologion_ of Petavius, pp. 121-164. His date is
uncertain, but probably he belongs to the third century A.D. (_Dox._ p.
18).
[Sidenote: Aetios.]
10. What, then, was the common source of the _Placita_ and the
_Eclogae_? Diels has shown that Theodoret (_c._ 445 A.D.) had access to
it; for in some cases he gives a fuller form of statements made in these
two works. Not only so, but he also names that source; for he refers us
(_Gr. aff. cur._ iv. 31) to Ἀετίου τὴν περὶ ἀρεσκόντων συναγωγήν. Diels
has accordingly printed the _Placita_ in parallel columns with the
relevant parts of the _Eclogae_, under the title of _Aetii Placita_. The
quotations from “Plutarch” by later writers, and the extracts of
Theodoret from Aetios, are also given at the foot of each page.
[Sidenote: The _Vetusta Placita_.]
11. Diels has shown further, however, that Aetios did not draw directly
from Theophrastos, but from an intermediate epitome which he calls the
_Vetusta Placita_, traces of which may be found in Cicero (_infra_, §
12), and in Censorinus (_De die natali_), who follows Varro. The
_Vetusta Placita_ were composed in the school of Poseidonios, and Diels
now calls them the Poseidonian Ἀρέσκοντα (_Über das phys. System des
Straton_, p. 2). There are also traces of them in the “Homeric
Allegorists.”
It is quite possible, by discounting the somewhat unintelligent
additions which Aetios made from Epicurean and other sources, to form a
pretty accurate table of the contents of the _Vetusta Placita_ (_Dox._
pp. 181 sqq.), and this gives us a fair idea of the arrangement of the
original work by Theophrastos.
[Sidenote: Cicero.]
12. So far as what he tells us of the earliest Greek philosophy goes,
Cicero must be classed with the doxographers, and not with the
philosophers; for he gives us nothing but extracts at second or third
hand from the work of Theophrastos. Two passages in his writings fall to
be considered under this head, namely, “Lucullus” (_Acad._ ii.), 118,
and _De natura Deorum_, i. 25-41.
(_a_) _Doxography of the “Lucullus.”_—This contains a meagre and
inaccurately-rendered summary of the various opinions held by
philosophers with regard to the ἀρχή (_Dox._ pp. 119 sqq.), and would be
quite useless if it did not in one case enable us to verify the exact
words of Theophrastos (Chap. I. p. 52, _n._ 2). The doxography has come
through the hands of Kleitomachos, who succeeded Karneades in the
headship of the Academy (129 B.C.).
(_b_) _Doxography of the “De natura Deorum.”_—A fresh light was thrown
upon this important passage by the discovery at Herculaneum of a roll
containing fragments of an Epicurean treatise, so like it as to be at
once regarded as its original. This treatise was at first ascribed to
Phaidros, on the ground of the reference in _Epp. ad Att._ xiii. 39. 2;
but the real title, Φιλοδήμου περὶ εὐσεβείας, was afterwards restored
(_Dox._ p. 530). Diels, however, has shown (_Dox._ pp. 122 sqq.) that
there is much to be said for the view that Cicero did not copy
Philodemos, but that both drew from a common source (no doubt Phaidros,
Περὶ θεῶν) which itself went back to a Stoic epitome of Theophrastos.
The passage of Cicero and the relevant fragments of Philodemos are
edited in parallel columns by Diels (_Dox._ pp. 531 sqq.).
II. BIOGRAPHICAL DOXOGRAPHERS
[Sidenote: Hippolytos.]
13. Of the “biographical doxographies,” the most important is Book I. of
the _Refutation of all Heresies_ by Hippolytos. This had long been known
as the _Philosophoumena_ of Origen; but the discovery of the remaining
books, which were first published at Oxford in 1854, showed finally that
it could not belong to him. It is drawn mainly from some good epitome of
Theophrastos, in which the matter was already rearranged under the names
of the various philosophers. We must note, however, that the sections
dealing with Thales, Pythagoras, Herakleitos, and Empedokles come from
an inferior source, some merely biographical compendium full of
apocryphal anecdotes and doubtful statements.
[Sidenote: The _Stromateis_.]
14. The fragments of the pseudo-Plutarchean _Stromateis_, quoted by
Eusebios in his _Praeparatio Evangelica_, come from a source similar to
that of the best portions of the _Philosophoumena_. So far as we can
judge, they differ chiefly in two points. In the first place, they are
mostly taken from the earliest sections of the work, and therefore most
of them deal with the primary substance, the heavenly bodies and the
earth. In the second place, the language is a much less faithful
transcript of the original.
[Sidenote: “Diogenes Laertios.”]
15. The scrap-book which goes by the name of Diogenes Laertios, or
Laertios Diogenes (cf. Usener, _Epicurea_, pp. 1 sqq.), contains large
fragments of two distinct doxographies. One is of the merely
biographical, anecdotic, and apophthegmatic kind used by Hippolytos in
his first four chapters; the other is of a better class, more like the
source of Hippolytos’ remaining chapters. An attempt is made to disguise
this “contamination” by referring to the first doxography as a “summary”
(κεφαλαιωδής) account, while the second is called “particular” (ἐπὶ
μέρους).
[Sidenote: Patristic doxographies.]
16. Short doxographical summaries are to be found in Eusebios (_P. E._
x., xiv., xv.), Theodoret (_Gr. aff. cur._ ii. 9-11), Irenæus (_C.
haer._ ii. 14), Arnobius (_Adv. nat._ ii. 9), Augustine (_Civ. Dei_,
viii. 2). These depend mainly upon the writers of “Successions,” whom we
shall have to consider in the next section.
_C._—BIOGRAPHERS
[Sidenote: Successions.]
17. The first to write a work entitled _Successions of the Philosophers_
was Sotion (Diog. ii. 12; R. P. 4 a), about 200 B.C. The arrangement of
his work is explained in _Dox._ p. 147. It was epitomised by Herakleides
Lembos. Other writers of Διαδοχαί were Antisthenes, Sosikrates, and
Alexander. All these compositions were accompanied by a very meagre
doxography, and made interesting by the addition of unauthentic
apophthegms and apocryphal anecdotes.
[Sidenote: Hermippos.]
18. The peripatetic Hermippos of Smyrna, known as Καλλιμάχειος (_c._ 200
B.C.), wrote several biographical works which are frequently quoted. The
biographical details are very untrustworthy indeed; but sometimes
bibliographical information is added, which doubtless rests upon the
Πίνακες of Kallimachos.
[Sidenote: Satyros.]
19. Another peripatetic, Satyros, the pupil of Aristarchos, wrote (_c._
160 B.C.) _Lives of Famous Men_. The same remarks apply to him as to
Hermippos. His work was epitomised by Herakleides Lembos.
[Sidenote: “Diogenes Laertios.”]
20. The work which goes by the name of Laertios Diogenes is, in its
biographical parts, a mere patchwork of all earlier learning. It has not
been digested or composed by any single mind at all. It is little more
than a collection of extracts made at haphazard, possibly by more than
one successive possessor of the MS. But, of course, it contains much
that is of the greatest value.
_D._—CHRONOLOGISTS
[Sidenote: Eratosthenes and Apollodoros.]
21. The founder of ancient chronology was Eratosthenes of Kyrene
(275-194 B.C.); but his work was soon supplanted by the metrical version
of Apollodoros (_c._ 140 B.C.), from which most of our information as to
the dates of early philosophers is derived. See Diels’ paper on the
Χρονικά of Apollodoros in _Rhein. Mus._ xxxi.; and Jacoby, _Apollodors
Chronik_ (1902).
The method adopted is as follows:—If the date of some striking event in
a philosopher’s life is known, that is taken as his _floruit_ (ἀκμή),
and he is assumed to have been forty years old at that date. In default
of this, some historical era is taken as the _floruit_. Of these the
chief are the eclipse of Thales 586/5 B.C., the taking of Sardeis in
546/5 B.C., the accession of Polykrates in 532/1 B.C., and the
foundation of Thourioi in 444/3 B.C. Further details will easily be
found by reference to the Index, _s.v._ Apollodoros.
INDEXES
I. ENGLISH
Aahmes, 22, 46
Abaris, 87, 97 _n._ 205
Abdera, school of, 381
Abstinence, Orphic and Pythagorean, 102 sq., 104 sq.;
Empedoklean, 289
Academy, 35
Achilles and the Tortoise, 367
Aether. _See_ αἰθήρ
Aetios, App. § 10
Aigospotamos, meteoric stone of, 292, 312, 413 sq.
Air, 77, 78, 79 _n._ 154, 120, 173, 214, 224, 263, 309, 336, 341, 411
sq. See ἀήρ
Akousmata, 105 sq., 328
Akousmatics, 96, 103
Akragas, 228 sqq.
Akron, 231
Alexander Aetolus, 295
Alexander Aphrodisiensis, 139, 209
Alkidamas, 229 _n._ 504, 231 _n._ 5, 235, 297 _n._ 675, 321 _n._ 739,
360
Alkmaion, 123 _n._ 263, 223 sq., 236, 327, 344, 350
Amasis, 39
Ameinias, 193
Anaxagoras, 290 sqq.;
and Perikles, 294 sqq.;
and Euripides, 295;
relation to Ionic school, 292;
and Zeno, 362
Anaxagoreans, 35 _n._ 50, 415
Anaximander, 52 sqq.
Anaximenes, 75 sqq.;
School of, 83, 292, 408 _n._ 997
Androkydes, 328
Andron of Ephesos, 93
Animals, Anaximander, 72 sqq.;
Empedokles, 279 sqq.;
Anaxagoras, 315 sqq.;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 414
Antichthon, 344, 349 sqq.
Antonius Diogenes, 92
Apollo Hyperboreios, 93 _n._ 189, 97 _n._ 205, 232
Apollodoros, App. § 21, 43, 52, 75, 94 _n._ 192, 125, 143, 192 sq., 228
sq., 290 sq., 358, 370
Apollonios of Tyana, 90, 92
Apophthegms, 51, 127
Archelaos, 415 sqq.
Archippos, 99, 319
Archytas, 110, 319, 328, 346
Aristarchos of Samos, 349
Aristeas of Prokonnesos, 87, 97 _n._ 205
Aristophanes, 75, 296 _n._ 669, 381, 408
Aristotle, App. § 2;
on Egypt, 18, 23;
on Thales, 47 sqq., 50;
on Anaximander, 57 sqq.;
on Pythagoras, 93 _n._ 189, 100, 107 _n._ 226;
on Xenophanes, 137 sq., 139 sq.;
on Herakleitos, 160 _n._ 373, 162, 177, 179;
on Parmenides, 193, 203, 207, 208, 213;
on Alkmaion, 223;
on Empedokles, 177 _n._ 401, 228 _n._ 502, 231 _n._ 511, 234, 237,
253 _n._ 565, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 271, 272, 274 _n._ 606,
278, 280, 281, 397 _n._ 962;
on Anaxagoras, 263 _n._ 582, 291, 303, 305, 306, 309, 310;
on the Pythagoreans, 100 _n._ 208, 110, 111 _n._ 232, 119, 331 sqq.,
353 sqq.;
on Zeno, 361, 365 sqq.;
on Melissos, 374 sq., 377, 378;
on Leukippos, 380, 385 sq., 387, 397 _n._ 962;
on Hippon, 49 _n._ 2, 406;
on the _galeus levis_, 74 _n._ 141;
on the theoretic life, 90, 108;
on the mysteries, 91
[Aristotle] _de Mundo_, 185
[Aristotle] _de Plantis_, 279 _n._ 618, 298 _n._ 677, 315
Aristoxenos on Pythagoras, 92, 94 _n._ 191, 95, 96 _n._ 201, 3, 98 sq.,
102, 109 _n._ 231;
on the Pythagoreans, 107, 319, 334, 353;
Πυθαγορικαὶ ἀποφάσεις, 100 _n._ 209, 325;
on Hippon, 406 _n._ 988;
on Plato, 323 sqq.
Arithmetic, Egyptian, 22, 111 _n._ 233;
Pythagorean, 109 sq.
Arithmetical symbolism, 111
Astronomy, Babylonian and Greek, 25 sqq.
_See_ Heavenly bodies, Sun, Moon, Planets, Stars, Earth, Eclipses,
Geocentric and Heliocentric hypothesis
Atheism, 51, 75, 141
Athens, Parmenides and Zeno at, 192;
Anaxagoras at, 294
Atomism. _See_ Leukippos
Atoms, 387 sqq.
Babylonian language, 21 _n._ 29;
astronomy, 25 sqq.;
eclipse cycle, 41;
μαθηματικοί, 350 _n._ 834
Beans, 102
Biology. _See_ Animals, Plants
Blood, Empedokles, 286, 288;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 414
Brain, Alkmaion, 224;
Empedokles, 235;
Sicilian school of medicine, 288 _n._ 645
Breath. _See_ Respiration.
Breath of the World, 79, 120
Cave, Orphic, 257 _n._ 571
Chaos, 8, 9 _n._ 7
Chronos, 10
Cicero, App. § 12;
on Thales, 50;
on Anaximander, 64;
on Anaximenes, 82;
on Parmenides, 220, 221 _n._ 482;
on Atomism, 393 _n._ 953, 394 _n._ 956
Clement of Alexandria, 19
Comic poets on Pythagoreans, 103 _n._ 218
Condensation. _See_ Rarefaction
Conflagration. _See_ ἐκπύρωσις
Continuity, 369
Copernicus, 349
Corporealism, 15 sq., 206, 227, 357, 377
Cosmogonies, 8 sqq.
Croesus, 28, 37, 38
Çulvasūtras, 24
Damasias, 43 _n._ 68
Damaskios, 9 _n._ 10, 232
Darkness, 79, 121, 173, 214
Death, Herakleitos, 171 sqq.;
Parmenides, 222;
Alkmaion, 225;
Empedokles, 283
Dekad, 113
Demetrios Phalereus, 290, 408
Demokritos, 2 _n._ 1;
date, 381;
on Egyptian mathematics, 24;
on Anaxagoras, 291, 381;
primitive astronomy of, 345, 392;
and Leukippos, 381
Diagonal and Square, 116
Dialectic, 361
Dikaiarchos on Pythagoras, 92, 96 _n._ 202, 100
Diogenes of Apollonia, 381, 407 sqq.
Divisibility, 304, 306, 362, 365, 376
Dodecahedron, 341 sqq.
Doric dialect, 325, 327 sq.
Earth, a sphere, 26;
Thales, 47 sqq.;
Anaximander, 70, 72;
Anaximenes, 80, 81, 83 _n._ 167;
Xenophanes, 136;
Anaxagoras, 313;
Pythagoreans, 344 sqq.;
Leukippos, 401;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 413
Echekrates, 343
Eclipses, Thales, 40 sqq.;
Anaximander, 67;
Anaximenes, 82;
Herakleitos, 164;
Alkmaion, 224;
Empedokles, 276;
Anaxagoras, 299;
Pythagoreans, 349 sq.;
Leukippos, 401
Ecliptic. _See_ Obliquity
Effluences. _See_ ἀπορροαί
Egypt, 39;
Thales in Egypt, 43;
Pythagoras and Egypt, 94 sq.
Egyptian arithmetic, 22 sq.;
geometry, 23 sq., 44 sq.
Ekphantos, 338 _n._ 794, 387 _n._ 939
Elea, era of, 125 _n._ 270, 127, 192
Eleatics (_see_ Parmenides, Zeno, Melissos), 35 _n._ 49;
Leukippos and, 382 sqq.
Elements (_see_ στοιχεῖα, Roots, Seeds, ἰδέα, εἶδος, μορφή), 56 _n._
103, 57, 59, 235, 263 sqq., 265 _n._ 586, 339 sqq.
Eleusinia, 86
Embryology, Parmenides, 203 _n._ 448;
Empedokles, 282
Empedokles, 227 sqq.;
relation to Leukippos, 236, 383, 392;
on Xenophanes, 138, 246 _n._ 555;
on Pythagoras, 232, 259 _n._ 577;
on Parmenides, 239, 261
Ephesos, 143 sqq.
Epicurus and Leukippos, 380 sq., 388 _n._ 940, 391 _n._ 949, 394 sq.
Epimenides, 9, 87
Equinoxes, precession of, 25, 347 _n._ 824
Eratosthenes, App. § 21, 228 _n._ 502
Eros, 9, 219
Euclid, 116, 117
Eudemos on Thales, 44 sq.;
on Pythagoras, 115 _n._ 241, 116 _n._ 243;
on Parmenides, 203 _n._ 449;
on Zeno, 363, 366 _n._ 889;
on the term στοιχεῖον, 263 _n._ 580
Eudoxos, 118, 216, 342
Eukleides of Megara, 355
Euripides (fr. inc. 910), 12 _n._ 14, 14 _n._ 18;
and Anaxagoras, 295 sq.
Eurytos, 110 sq., 320, 322
Eusebios, 19
Euthymenes, 44
Even and Odd, 333 sqq.
Evolution, Anaximander, 73 sq.;
Empedokles, 281;
Anaxagoras, 315
Examyes, 40
Experiment, 31 sq., 274
Figures, numerical, 110 sq., 337
Fire, 121, 160 sq., 215
Fire, central, 218, 344 sqq.
Forgeries, 46, 113 _n._ 235, 185
Fossils, 136
Galen, 234
_Galeus levis_, 74 _n._ 141
Geocentric hypothesis, 31, 123, 218
Geometry, Egyptian, 23 sq.;
of Thales, 45 sq.;
of Pythagoras, 115 sq.
Glaukos of Rhegion, 228 _n._ 503
Gnomon (the instrument), 31 _n._ 4, 53
Gnomon (in geometry and arithmetic), 114 _n._ 238
Gods, Thales, 50;
Anaximander, 64, 74;
Anaximenes, 82;
Xenophanes, 140 sq.;
Herakleitos, 188 sq.;
Empedokles, 264, 272, 288 sq.;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 410 _n._ 1005
Gorgias, 229 _n._ 504, 231, 234, 256 _n._ 569, 287 _n._ 642, 417
Great Year, 25, 175
Harmonics, 118
“Harmony of the Spheres,” 122, 351.
_See_ ἁρμονία and Soul
Harpedonapts, 24, 116
Hearing, Empedokles, 285;
Anaxagoras, 317
Heart, 235, 288 _n._ 645
Heavenly bodies, Anaximander, 66 sqq.;
Anaximenes, 80, 81;
Pythagoras, 122 sq.;
Xenophanes, 133 sqq.;
Herakleitos, 165 sqq.;
Parmenides, 215;
Empedokles, 274 sq.;
Anaxagoras, 312;
Leukippos, 401;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 413
Hekataios, 20, 44, 46, 53
Heliocentric hypothesis, 27, 347 _n._ 825, 348 sq.
Herakleides of Pontos, on Pythagoras, 104, 105, 108, 321 _n._ 739, 387
_n._ 939;
on Empedokles, 228 _n._ 502, 3, 233 _n._ 520, 236 _n._ 532;
heliocentric hypothesis of, 349
Herakleiteans, 35 _n._ 48, 140, 417
Herakleitos, 143 sqq.;
on Homer, 182, 185;
on Pythagoras, 94, 107, 143;
on Xenophanes, 143
Hermodoros, 143
Herodotos, on Homer and Hesiod, 8;
on Egyptian influence, 17;
on geometry, 23;
on Orphicism, 95 _n._ 195;
on Solon, 28;
on Lydian influence, 38;
on Thales, 38, 39, 40, 43 sq., 46;
on Pythagoras, 93, 94 _n._ 191, 95 _n._ 195, 2, 107
Hesiod, 6 sqq.
Hieron, 125
Hippasos, 103 _n._ 217, 117, 121, 156, 215, 341, 343, 354
Hippokrates, 235 _n._ 528, 405 _n._ 987, 411 _n._ 1008;
Περὶ ἀέρων ὑδάτων τόπων, 79 _n._ 154
[Hippokrates] Περὶ διαίτης, 167 _n._ 383, 183 _n._ 413, 305 _n._ 695,
307 _n._ 699, 405 _n._ 986
Hippokrates, lunules of, 343
Hippolytos, App. § 13, 156
Hippon of Samos, 49, 58 _n._ 109, 406 sqq.
Hippys of Rhegion, 121 _n._ 260
Homer, 5 sqq.
Hylozoism, 15
Hypotenuse, 116
Iamblichos, _V. Pyth._, 92 _n._ 186
Ibykos, 220 _n._ 482
Idaios of Himera, 58 _n._ 109, 407
Ideas, theory of, 354 sqq.
Immortality, 91, 172 sq., 225
Incommensurability, 116 sq.
Indian philosophy, 21.
_See_ Transmigration
Infinity, Anaximander, 59 sqq.;
Xenophanes, 137 sq.;
Parmenides, 207;
Melissos, 375.
_See_ Divisibility, ἄπειρον
Injustice, 56, 71, 160, 226
Ionic dialect, 327 sq., 408
Justice, 32, 161 _n._ 374
Kebes and Simmias, 320, 343, 354, 355
Kebes, Πίναξ, 194
Kratinos, 406
Kratylos, 417
Kritias, 288 _n._ 645
Kroton, 95 _n._ 198, 222
Kylon, 97 _n._ 204, 98
Lampsakos, 297, 415
Leukippos, 380 sqq.;
and the Eleatics, 382, 384 sqq.;
and Empedokles, 236, 383, 392;
and Anaxagoras, 383 sq., 392;
and the Pythagoreans, 387, 389, 392;
and Demokritos, 381, 389 sqq., 401 _n._ 979
Light, Empedokles, 276.
_See_ Moon
Lightning and Thunder, 68, 70, 401 _n._ 979
Limit, 121, 215, 333 sqq.
Lives, the three, 108, 109 _n._ 229, 154 _n._ 362
Love. _See_ Eros, Love and Strife, 266 sqq.
Lucretius, on Empedokles, 237;
on Anaxagoras, 306 _n._ 696
Lydia, 37 sqq.
Lysis, 99, 319, 326
Man, Anaximander, 73;
Herakleitos, 168 sqq.
Maoris, 9
Map, Anaximander’s, 53
Materialism, 208
Matter. _See_ ὕλη
Measures, 167 sq., 181, 410, 413
Medicine, history of, 222, 225, 226, 234, 236, 265 sq., 288 _n._ 645,
322, 344, 405, 411, 414
Megarians, 355
Melissos, 369 sqq.
_Melissos, Xenophanes and Gorgias_, 138 sqq.
Menon, Ἰατρικά, 49 _n._ 85, 235 _n._ 527, 322 _n._ 742, 327 _n._ 763,
340 _n._ 799, 406 _n._ 988
Metapontion, 95 _n._ 199, 97 _n._ 205
Metempsychosis. _See_ Transmigration
Meteorological interest, 49, 70
Miletos, 37 sqq., 76, 380, 382
Milky Way, 69, 220, 314
Milo, 99, 222
Mochos of Sidon, 19 _n._ 27
Monism, 206, 227
Monotheism, 141 sqq.
Moon, 68;
light of, 202 _n._ 446, 275, 276, 299, 314
Motion, eternal, 15, 61;
denied by Parmenides, 207;
explained by Empedokles, 267;
Anaxagoras, 309;
criticised by Zeno, 366;
denied by Melissos, 376;
reaffirmed by Leukippos, 392 sq.
Mysteries, 90, 190
Necessity. _See_ Ἀνάγκη
Nikomachos, 92, 112 _n._ 234
Nile, 43 sq., 313
Noumenios, 19
Nous, 309 sq.
Numbers, Pythagorean, 331 sqq.;
triangular, square, and oblong, 114
Obliquity of the ecliptic (zodiac), 52, 82, 401
Observation, 29 sq., 73 sq.
Octave, 118
Opposites, 56, 186 sq., 225, 235, 266, 305
Oriental influences, 17 sqq.
Orphicism, 5, 9 sqq., 87 sq., 95 _n._ 195, 109 _n._ 229, 194, 221, 232,
257 _n._ 571, 258 _n._ 573
Parmenides, 192 sqq.;
on Herakleitos, 143, 198 _n._ 438, 204 sq., 210;
and Pythagoreanism, 210 sqq.
Pausanias, 234 _n._ 523, 238
Pentagram, 343
Perception, Parmenides, 202 _n._ 447, 222;
Alkmaion, 223 sq.;
Empedokles, 284 sq.;
Anaxagoras, 316 sq.;
Leukippos, 401 sq.;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 414
Perikles and Zeno, 193;
and Anaxagoras, 294 sq.;
and Melissos, 369
Petron, 65, 121
Pherekydes of Syros, 9, 87
Philistion, 234 _n._ 523, 235 _n._ 526 and 527, 266 _n._ 587, 288 _n._
645, 356 _n._ 850
Philo of Byblos, 19 _n._ 27
Philo Judaeus, 18, 158, 185
Philodemos, 50 _n._ 89, 64, 221 _n._ 483
Philolaos, 319, 320 sqq.
Philosophy as κάθαρσις, 89;
Pythagorean use of the word, 89 sqq., 194, 321 _n._ 739, 359;
synonymous with asceticism, 18
Phleious, 89 _n._ 178, 94 _n._ 191, 109 _n._ 229, 320
Phoenician influence, 18, 19 _n._ 27, 39
Physiology, Parmenides, 221 sq.;
Alkmaion, 223;
Empedokles, 282;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 411
Pindar, 232
Planets, names of, 26 _n._ 40, 220;
distinguished from fixed stars, 26, 82, 276, 392, 401;
motion of, 122 sq., 225, 350, 353;
system of, 344 sq.
Plants, Empedokles, 277 sq.;
Anaxagoras, 315 sq.
Plato, App. § 1;
on Egyptians and Phoenicians, 17, 20, 27 _n._ 41;
on Egyptian arithmetic, 22;
on schools of philosophy, 35;
on Pythagoras, 96 _n._ 202;
on Xenophanes, 140;
on Herakleitos, 140, 159, 162, 176, 178;
on Herakleiteans, 161 _n._ 373, 188 _n._ 418;
on Parmenides, 192, 207, 221;
on Empedokles, 159, 178, 269 _n._ 593;
on Anaxagoras, 291 _n._ 655, 295, 297 sq., 309;
on Philolaos, 319;
on Pythagoreans, 121, 124;
on incommensurables, 117 _n._ 245;
on Zeno, 192, 358, 360, 361;
on Melissos, 379 _n._ 919;
_Phaedo_, 89 _n._ 178, 91 _n._ 183, 108 _n._ 228, 109 _n._ 229, 172
_n._ 391,182 _n._ 411, 320 sq., 342, 343, 345, 354;
_Cratylus_, 417 _n._ 1027;
_Theaetetus_, 117 _n._ 245, 263 _n._ 580, 338 _n._ 794, 417 _n._
1027;
_Sophist_, 356 _n._ 849, 358 _n._ 853;
_Politicus_, 280 _n._ 621;
_Parmenides_, 358 _n._ 852, 359, 360 sq.;
_Philebus_, 323;
_Symposium_, 221, 281 _n._ 625;
_Phaedrus_, 295;
_Gorgias_, 321;
_Meno_, 234 _n._ 524;
_Republic_, 25 _n._ 39, 90 _n._ 181, 177 _n._ 400, 216, 219 sq., 352;
_Timaeus_, 61 _n._ 115, 79 _n._ 154, 113 _n._ 237, 118 _n._ 248, 121,
122, 225, 287, 340, 342, 345 _n._ 818, 346, 352, 396;
_Laws_, 107 _n._ 227, 117 _n._ 246, 353
Pleasure and pain, Empedokles, 285;
Anaxagoras, 317
Pliny, 42, 52
Pluralism, 227 sqq., 357
Political activity of philosophers, Thales, 46;
Pythagoras, 96 sq.;
Parmenides, 195;
Empedokles, 230 sq.;
Zeno, 358
Polybios, 99 _n._ 206
Polybos, 379
Polykrates, era of, 53 _n._ 97, 94
Pores. _See_ πόροι
Porphyry, 92 _n._ 187, 104 _n._ 219, 257 _n._ 571
Poseidonios, 19 _n._ 27, 81 _n._ 159
Precession. _See_ Equinoxes
Proclus, commentary on Euclid, 44, 115 _n._ 243
Proportion, 117 sq.
Protagoras, 188, 360
Purification. _See_ καθαρμός, κάθαρσις
Pyramids, measurement of, 45.
_See_ πυραμίς
Pythagoras, 91 sqq.;
forged writings, 325
Pythagoreans, 212 sqq., 319 sqq.
Rarefaction and condensation, 77 sqq., 163, 204, 403, 412
Religion, 85 sqq., 189, 294.
_See_ Orphicism, Monotheism, Gods, Sacrifice
Respiration, 235, 253 _n._ 565, 284
Rest. _See_ Motion
Revolution, diurnal, 61, 274, 346 sq.
Rhegion, 99, 220 _n._ 482, 319
Rhetoric, 86, 234
Rhind papyrus, 22 sqq.
Roots, 263
Sacrifice, mystic, 104 _n._ 220;
bloodless, 258 _n._ 576
Salmoxis, 93
Sanchuniathon, 19 _n._ 27
Sardeis, era of, 43 _n._ 67, 53, 75
Schools, 33 sqq., 293
Sea, Anaximander, 66, 70 sq.;
Empedokles, 277;
Anaxagoras, 313;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 413
Seeds, 306
Seqt, 23, 46
Seven Wise Men, 39, 46, 51
Sight, Alkmaion, 224;
Empedokles, 284, 287 sq.;
Anaxagoras, 316
Silloi, 129
Sleep, Herakleitos, 169 sq.;
Empedokles, 283
Smell, Empedokles, 285;
Anaxagoras, 316
Sokrates, Parmenides and Zeno, 192 sq., 358;
and Archelaos, 415
Solids, regular, 328 sq., 340
Solon. _See_ Croesus
Soul, 86, 91, 168, 225, 343, 414
Space, 204, 207, 366, 389
Speusippos, 113 _n._ 236;
on Parmenides, 195;
on Pythagorean numbers, 321, 336 _n._ 790
Sphere, Parmenides, 207 sq.;
Empedokles, 262.
_See_ Earth, Eudoxos, Harmony
Stars, fixed, 68, 80
Stoics, App. § 3, 157, 179 sq.
Strabo, 19 _n._ 27, 194, 195 _n._ 430
Strife, Herakleitos, 184;
Empedokles, 266 sqq.
Sun, Anaximander, 68;
Anaximenes, 80;
Xenophanes, 134 sq.;
Herakleitos, 165 sq., 174;
Empedokles, 274 sq., 347 sq.;
Anaxagoras, 314
Taras, 97 _n._ 204, 319
Taste, Empedokles, 285;
Anaxagoras, 316
Tetraktys, 113 sqq.
Thales, 39 sqq.
Theaitetos, 117, 329
Theano, 353
Thebes, Lysis at, 99, 320;
Philolaos at, 99
Theodoros of Kyrene, 117
Theogony, Hesiodic, 6 sqq.;
Rhapsodic, 9 _n._ 10, 232
Theologians, 10
Theology. _See_ Gods
Theon of Smyrna, 27 _n._ 41
Theophrastos, App. § 7;
on schools, 33, 35, 52;
on Prometheus, 39 _n._ 55;
on Thales, 48;
Anaximander, 54 sqq., 66;
on Anaximenes, 76 sqq.;
on Xenophanes, 126, 136, 137;
on Herakleitos, 145, 156, 163 sqq.;
on Parmenides, 209, 213, 214, 218, 220;
on Empedokles, 229 _n._ 504, 236, 267 sq., 272 sqq., 278, 284;
on Anaxagoras, 291, 292, 293 _n._ 660, 313 sq., 316 sq.;
on Leukippos, 380 sq., 382, 384 sqq., 390 sqq., 402;
on Diogenes of Apollonia, 381, 407 sq., 412;
on Hippon of Samos, 406
Theoretic life, 291
Theron of Akragas, 229, 232
Thourioi, era of, 228
Timaios Lokros, 323 sqq.
Timaios of Tauromenion, 228 _n._ 508, 230, 233, 237 _n._ 534
Timon of Phleious, 129, 324
Touch, Empedokles, 285;
Anaxagoras, 316
Transmigration, 95, 101 sqq., 124, 289 sq.
Triangle, Pythagorean, 24, 115
Unit, 337, 365
Void, Pythagorean, 120, 214, 224, 336, 383;
Parmenides, 204, 207;
Alkmaion, 224;
Atomist, 389 sq.
Vortex, Empedokles, 274;
Anaxagoras, 311;
Leukippos, 399 sqq.
Water, 48 sqq., 407
Weight, 394 sqq.
Wheels, Anaximander, 67 sq.;
Pythagoras, 122;
Parmenides, 215
Worlds, innumerable, Anaximander, 62 sqq.;
Anaximenes, 82 sq.;
Pythagoras, 121;
Xenophanes, 136;
Anaxagoras, 312;
Diogenes of Apollonia, 414;
Archelaos, 417
Xenophanes, 124 sqq.;
on Thales, 41;
on Pythagoras, 124
Year. _See_ Great Year
Zamolxis, 93
Zankle, 127 _n._ 275
Zeno, 358 sqq.;
on Empedokles, 359;
on Pythagoreans, 362
II. GREEK
ἀδικία, 56, 60, 71
ἀήρ, 79 _n._ 154, 263, 264 _n._ 583, 284 _n._ 634.
_See_ Air
αἰθήρ, 263, 264 _n._ 583, 312 _n._ 709
ἀκούσματα, 105 sq., 328
ἀκουσματικοί, 96, 103
Ἀνάγκη, 219, 256 _n._ 569, 269
ἀναθυμίασις, 167 _n._ 382, 168 _n._ 385
ἀντέρεισις, 400
ἄντυξ, 216
ἄπειρον, 57 _n._ 105, 60 _n._ 113
ἄπνους, ἡ, 233 _n._ 520, 236 _n._ 533
ἀπορροαί, 236, 287 _n._ 642
ἀποτομή, 391 _n._ 949
ἀριθμητική dist. λογιστική, 23, 111 _n._ 233
ἁρμονία, 122, 158, 184
ἁρπεδονάπται, 24
ἀρχή, 13, 57
αὐτὸ ὃ ἔστιν, 355 _n._ 847
γαλεοί, 73 sq.
γόητες, 106
δαίμων, 155 _n._ 364, 172 _n._ 391
διαστήματα, 65 _n._ 126
δίκη, 32, 161 _n._ 374
δίνη. _See_ Vortex
διορίζω, 120 _n._ 254
εἶδος, 355, 388 _n._ 943
εἴδωλα, 403
εἶναι, 198 _n._ 435;
τὸ ἐόν, 204 _n._ 450
ἔκθλιψις, 397 _n._ 962
ἔκκρισις, 61
ἐκπύρωσις, 178 sqq.
ἕν, τὸ, 140, 363 _n._ 880, 377
ἐναντία. _See_ Opposites
ἑνίζειν, 139 _n._ 306
ἐπίψαυσις, 400
ἐστώ, 330 _n._ 770
θεός, 74.
_See_ Gods
θεωρία, 28, 108
ἰδέα, 235 _n._ 527, 263 _n._ 580, 355, 356 _n._ 850, 388 _n._ 943
ἶδος, 243 _n._ 549, 249 _n._ 558
ἰσονομία, 225
ἰσορροπία, 398
ἱστορία, 14 _n._ 18, 28, 107 _n._ 244
καθαρμός, κάθαρσις, 88, 107 sq.
κεγχρίτης λόγος, 1 _n._ 862
κλεψύδρα, 253 _n._ 565, 254 _n._ 566, 263, 309, 384
κληροῦχος, 219
κόσμος, 32, 148 _n._ 336, 182 _n._ 412
κρατέω, 310
λογιστική dist. ἀριθμητική, 23
λόγος, 146 _n._ 332, 148 _n._ 339, 152 _n._ 355, 153 _n._ 358 and _n._
359, 157;
λόγος τοῦ εἶναι, 355 _n._ 847
μεσότης, 118
μετάρσια, 296 _n._ 670
μετεμψύχωσις, 101 _n._ 212
μετενσωμάτωσις, 101 _n._ 212
μετέωρα, 32
μορφή, 263 _n._ 580, 356 _n._ 850
ὄγκοι, 338 _n._ 794, 368 _n._ 894, 387 _n._ 939
ὁλκάς, 341 _n._ 805
ὁμοιομερῆ, 306
ὅμοιος, ὁμοιότης, 72 _n._ 138
ὄργια, 88 _n._ 175
ὅρος, 115 _n._ 240
οὐρανός, 31, 140 _n._ 310;
Aristotle’s πρῶτος οὐρανός, 177
πάγος, 273 _n._ 603
παλιγγενεσία, 101 _n._ 212
παλίντονος, 150 _n._ 184
παλίντροπος, 150 _n._ 347, 198 _n._ 438
πανσπερμία, 307, 389
περιαγωγή, 63 _n._ 119
περιέχω, 60 _n._ 114, 170 _n._ 389
περίστασις, 63 _n._ 119
πίλησις, 77 _n._ 151
πόροι, 224, 226 _n._ 500, 236, 269, 284 sq., 383
πρηστήρ, 69 _n._ 133, 165
πυραμίς, 25 _n._ 38
ῥαψῳδῶ, 127 _n._ 276
ῥοπή, 398
σῆμα σῶμα, 321
στασιῶται, 140 _n._ 307
στέφαναι, 215
στοιχεῖον, 54 _n._ 101, 56 _n._ 103, 263 _n._ 586, 265 _n._ 586, 306,
333, 388 _n._ 942
συνοικειῶ, 157 _n._ 370
τετρακτύς, 113 sq.
τροπαί, 67 _n._ 129, 174
ὕλη, 57, 330 _n._ 770, 342 _n._ 807
ὑπόθεσις, 33 _n._ 46, 360 _n._ 866, 361 _n._ 871
ὑποτείνουσα, 116 _n._ 242
φαινόμενα, σῴζειν τὰ, 33 _n._ 46
φιλοσοφία, φιλόσοφος, φιλοσοφῶ, 28.
_See_ Philosophy
φύσις, 12 sq., 56, 388 _n._ 941 and _n._ 944
χώρα, 114 _n._ 238, 115 _n._ 240
_Printed by_ R. & R. CLARK, LIMITED, _Edinburgh_.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcriber’s Note
When Burnet gives the fragments of a Greek philosopher, he does so
selectively, resulting in gaps in the sequence.
Some quoted and translated passages, printed as prose, also include line
numbers in the right margin. These now appear in the text delimited by
<< >> at the place in the text where they originally appeared. These
numbers should be regarded as approximate.
In note 813, the Greek phrase includes an unmatched closing bracket.
This is a direct quotation from p. 234 of _Scholia in Lucianum_, edited
by Hugo Rabe. The bracket was used by Rabe to separate the topic (the
pentagram) from its gloss.
Errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and
are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original.
75.13 according to Theophra[s]tos Added.
197.21 Look stea[fd/df]astly with thy mind Transposed.
212.26 It seem[s] to me Added.
213.18 and Theoph[astros/rastos]certainly followed Misplaced.
him
249.21 meadows of Aph[h]rodite Removed.
292.34 διήκουσε)[”] Added.
331.19 Aristotle on the Number[s]. Added.
332.32 τὰ γοῦν θεωρήματα πρ[ό/ο]σάπτουσι Replaced.
402 οἱ μὲν ἄλλοι φύσει τὰ αἰσθητ[α/ά] Replaced.
415.6 Anaxagorea[ns] Presumed.
433.5 παλίντροπ[ὸ/ο]ς Replaced.