BOOK
IX
Chapter 1. HERACLITUS
Heraclitus,
son of Bloson or, according to some, of Heracon, was a native of
Ephesus. He flourished in the 69th Olympiad.
1 He was lofty-minded beyond all other men,
2 and
over-weening, as is clear from his book in which he says : "Much
learning does not teach understanding ; else would it have taught
Hesiod and Pythagoras, or, again, Xenophanes and Hecataeus."
3 For "this one thing is wisdom, to
understand thought, as that which guides all the world
everywhere."
4 And he used to say
that "Homer deserved to be chased out of the lists and beaten with
rods, and Archilochus likewise."
5
[
2]
Again he would say : "There is more need to
extinguish insolence than an outbreak of fire,"
6 and "The people must fight for the law as for
citywalls."
7 He attacks the
Ephesians, too, for banishing his friend Hermodorus : he says :
"The Ephesians
would do well to end their
lives, every grown man of them, and leave the city to beardless
boys, for that they have driven out Hermodorus, the worthiest man
among them, saying, `We will have none who is worthiest among us ;
or if there be any such, let him go elsewhere and consort with
others.'"
8 And when he was
requested by them to make laws, he scorned the request because the
state was already in the grip of a bad constitution.
[
3]
He would retire
to the temple of Artemis and play at knuckle-bones with the boys ;
and when the Ephesians stood round him and looked on, "Why, you
rascals," he said, "are you astonished? Is it not better to do this
than to take part in your civil life ?"
Finally, he became a
hater of his kind and wandered on the mountains, and there he
continued to live, making his diet of grass and herbs. However, when
this gave him dropsy, he made his way back to the city and put this
riddle to the physicians, whether they were competent to create a
drought after heavy rain. They could make nothing of this, whereupon
he buried himself in a cowshed, expecting that the noxious damp
humour would be drawn out of him by the warmth of the manure. But,
as even this was of no avail, he died at the age of sixty.
[
4]
There is a piece of my own about him as follows
9 :
Often have I
wondered how it came about that Heraclitus endured to live in this
miserable fashion and then to die. For a fell disease flooded his
body with water, quenched the light in his eyes and brought on
darkness.
Hermippus, too, says that he asked the doctors
whether anyone could by emptying the intestines draw off the
moisture ; and when they said it was
impossible, he put himself in the sun and bade his servants
plaster him over with cow-dung. Being thus stretched and prone, he
died the next day and was buried in the market-place. Neanthes of
Cyzicus states that, being unable to tear off the dung, he remained
as he was and, being unrecognizable when so transformed, he was
devoured by dogs.
[
5]
He was exceptional from his boyhood ; for
when a youth he used to say that he knew nothing, although when he
was grown up he claimed that he knew everything. He was nobody's
pupil, but he declared that he "inquired of himself,"
10 and learned everything from himself. Some,
however, had said that he had been a pupil of Xenophanes, as we
learn from Sotion, who also tells us that Ariston in his book
On Heraclitus declares that he was cured of the
dropsy and died of another disease. And Hippobotus has the same
story.
As to the work which passes as his, it is a continuous treatise
On Nature, but is divided into
three discourses, one on the universe, another on politics, and a
third on theology.
[
6]
This book he deposited in the temple of Artemis
and, according to some, he deliberately made it the more obscure in
order that none but adepts should approach it, and lest familiarity
should breed contempt. Of our philosopher Timon
11 gives a sketch in these words
12 :
In their midst
uprose shrill, cuckoo-like, a mob-reviler, riddling Heraclitus.
Theophrastus puts it down to melancholy that some parts of his
work are half-finished, while other parts make a strange medley. As
a proof of his magnanimity Antisthenes in his
Successions of
Philosophers cites the fact that he renounced his
claim to the kingship in favour of his brother. So great fame did
his book win that a sect was founded and called the Heracliteans,
after him.
[
7]
Here is a general summary of his doctrines. All
things are composed of fire, and into fire they are again resolved ;
further, all things come about by destiny, and existent things are
brought into harmony by the clash of opposing currents ; again, all
things are filled with souls and divinities. He has also given an
account of all the orderly happenings in the universe, and declares
the sun to be no larger than it appears. Another of his sayings is :
"Of soul thou shalt never find boundaries, not if thou trackest it
on every path ; so deep is its cause."
13 Self-conceit he used to call a falling sickness (epilepsy)
and eyesight a lying sense.
14
Sometimes, however, his utterances are clear and distinct, so that
even the dullest can easily understand and derive therefrom
elevation of soul. For brevity and weightiness his exposition is
incomparable.
[
8]
Coming now to his particular tenets, we may
state them as follows : fire is the element, all things are exchange
for fire and come into being by rarefaction and condensation
15 ; but of this
he gives no clear explanation. All things come into being by
conflict of opposites, and the sum of things flows like a stream.
Further, all that is is limited and forms one world. And it is
alternately born from fire and again resolved into fire in fixed
cycles to all eternity, and this is determined by destiny. Of the
opposites that which tends to birth or creation is called war and
strife, and that which tends to destruction by fire is called
concord and peace.
16 Change he called
a pathway up and
down, and this determines the birth of the world.
[
9]
For fire by
contracting turns into moisture, and this condensing turns into
water ; water again when congealed turns into earth. This process he
calls the downward path. Then again earth is liquefied, and thus
gives rise to water, and from water the rest of the series is
derived. He reduces nearly everything to exhalation from the sea.
This process is the upward path. Exhalations arise from earth as
well as from sea ; those from sea are bright and pure, those from
earth dark. Fire is fed by the bright exhalations, the moist element
by the others. He does not make clear the nature of the surrounding
element. He says, however, that there are in it bowls with their
concavities turned towards us, in which the bright exhalations
collect and produce flames. These are the stars.
[
10]
The flame of the
sun is the brightest and the hottest ; the other stars are further
from the earth and for that reason give it less light and heat. The
moon, which is nearer to the earth, traverses a region which is not
pure. The sun, however, moves in a clear and untroubled region, and
keeps a proportionate distance from us. That is why it gives us more
heat and light. Eclipses of the sun and moon occur when the bowls
are turned upwards ; the monthly phases of the moon are due to the
bowl turning round in its place little by little. Day and night,
months, seasons and years, rains and winds and other similar
phenomena are accounted for by the various exhalations. Thus the
bright exhalation, set aflame in the hollow orb of the sun, produces
day, the opposite exhalation when it has
got
the mastery causes night ; the increase of warmth due to the bright
exhalation produces summer, whereas the preponderance of moisture
due to the dark exhalation brings about winter. His explanations of
other phenomena are in harmony with this. He gives no account of the
nature of the earth, nor even of the bowls. These, then, were his
opinions.
The story told by Ariston of Socrates, and his
remarks when he came upon the book of Heraclitus, which Euripides
brought him, I have mentioned in my Life of Socrates.
17
[
12]
However, Seleucus the grammarian says that a certain
Croton relates in his book called
The Diver
that the said work of Heraclitus was first brought into Greece by
one Crates, who further said it required a Delian diver not to be
drowned in it. The title given to it by some is
The
Muses,18 by others
Concerning Nature ; but Diodotus calls it
19
A helm
unerring for the rule of life ;
others "a guide of
conduct, the keel of the whole world, for one and all alike." We are
told that, when asked why he kept silence, he replied, "Why, to let
you chatter." Darius, too, was eager to make his acquaintance, and
wrote to him as follows
20 :
[
13]
"King Darius, son of Hystaspes, to Heraclitus the wise man of
Ephesus, greeting.
"You are the author of a treatise
On Nature which
is hard to
understand and hard to interpret. In certain parts, if it be
interpreted word for word, it seems to contain a power of
speculation on the whole universe and all that goes on within it,
which depends upon motion most divine ; but for the most part
judgement is suspended, so that even those who are the most
conversant with literature are at a loss to know what is the right
interpretation of your work. Accordingly King Darius, son of
Hystaspes, wishes to enjoy your instruction and Greek culture. Come
then with all speed to see me at my palace.
[
14]
For the Greeks as a rule
are not prone to mark their wise men ; nay, they neglect their
excellent precepts which make for good hearing and learning. But at
my court there is secured for you every privilege and daily
conversation of a good and worthy kind, and a life in keeping with
your counsels."
"Heraclitus of Ephesus to King Darius, son of
Hystaspes, greeting.
"All men upon earth hold aloof from
truth and justice, while, by reason of wicked folly, they devote
themselves to avarice and thirst for popularity. But I, being
forgetful of all wickedness, shunning the general satiety which is
closely joined with envy, and because I have a horror of splendour,
could not come to Persia, being content with little, when that
little is to my mind."
So independent was he even when
dealing with a king.
[
15]
Demetrius, in his book on
Men of the Same Name, says that he despised even
the Athenians, although held by them in the highest estimation ;
and,
notwithstanding that the Ephesians thought
little of him, he preferred his own home the more. Demetrius of
Phalerum, too, mentions him in his
Defence of
Socrates21; and the commentators on his work are very numerous,
including as they do Antishenes and Heraclides of Pontus, Cleanthes
and Sphaerus the Stoic, and again Pausanias who was called the
imitator of Heraclitus, Nicomedes, Dionysius, and, among the
grammarians, Diodotus. The latter affirms that it is not a treatise
upon nature, but upon government, the physical part serving merely
for illustration.
22
[
16]
Hieronymus tells us that
Scythinus, the satirical poet, undertook to put the discourse of
Heraclitus into verse. He is the subject of many epigrams, and
amongst them of this one
23:
Heraclitus am I. Why do ye drag me up and
down, ye illiterate? It was not for you I toiled, but for such as
understand me. One man in my sight is a match for thirty thousand,
but the countless hosts do not make a single one. This I proclaim,
yea in the halls of Persephone.
Another runs as follows
24:
Do not
be in too great a hurry to get to the end of Heraclitus the
Ephesian's book : the path is hard to travel. Gloom is there and
darkness devoid of light. But if an initiate be your guide, the path
shines brighter than sunlight.
[
17]
Five men have borne the name
of Heraclitus : (1) our philosopher ; (2) a lyric poet, who wrote a
hymn of praise to the twelve gods ; (3) an elegiac
poet of Halicarnassus, on whom Callimachus wrote the following
epitaph
25:
They told me, Heraclitus, they told me you were
dead,
They brought me bitter news to hear and bitter tears to
shed.
I wept as I remembered how often you and I
Had
tired the sun with talking and sent him down the sky.
And now
that thou art lying, my dear old Carian guest,
A handful of
grey ashes, long, long ago at rest,
Still are thy pleasant
voices, thy nightingales, awake ;
For Death, he taketh all
away, but them he cannot take ;
26
(4) a Lesbian
who wrote a history of Macedonia ;
(5) a jester who adopted
this profession after having been a musician.
Chapter 2. XENOPHANES27
(570-478 B.C.)
[
18]
Xenophanes, a native of Colophon, the son
of Dexius, or, according to Apollodorus, of Orthomenes, is praised
by Timon, whose words at all events are :
Xenophanes, not
over-proud, perverter of Homer, castigator.
He was banished
from his native city and lived at Zancle in Sicily [and having
joined the colony planted at Elea taught there]. He also lived in
Catana. According to some he was no man's pupil,
according to others he was a pupil of Boton of Athens,
28 or, as
some say, of Archelaus. Sotion makes him a contemporary of
Anaximander. His writings are in epic metre, as well as elegiacs and
iambics attacking Hesiod and Homer and denouncing what they said
about the gods. Furthermore he used to recite his own poems. It is
stated that he opposed the views of Thales and Pythagoras, and
attacked Epimenides also. He lived to a very great age, as his own
words somewhere testify
29 :
[
19]
Seven
and sixty are now the years that have been tossing my cares up and
down the land of Greece ; and there were then twenty and five years
more from my birth up, if I know how to speak truly about these
things.
He holds that there are four elements of existent
things, and worlds unlimited in number but not overlapping [in
time]. Clouds are formed when the vapour from the sun is carried
upwards and lifts them into the surrounding air. The substance of
God is spherical, in no way resembling man. He is all eye and all
ear, but does not breathe ; he is the totality of mind and thought,
and is eternal. Xenophanes was the first to declare that everything
which comes into being is doomed to perish, and that the soul is
breath.
30
[
20]
He
also said that the mass of things falls short of thought ; and again
that our encounters with tyrants should be as few, or else as
pleasant, as possible. When Empedocles remarked to him that it is
impossible to find a wise man, "Naturally," he replied, "for it
takes a wise man to recognize a wise man."
Sotion says that he was the first to maintain that all things are
incognizable, but Sotion is in error.
31
One of his poems is
The
Founding of Colophon, and another
The
Settlement of a Colony at Elea in Italy, making 2000 lines in
all. He flourished about the 60th Olympiad.
32 That he buried his sons with his own hands like
Anaxagoras
33 is stated by Demetrius of
Phalerum in his work
On Old Age and by
Panaetius the Stoic in his book
Of
Cheerfulness. He is believed to have been sold into slavery by
[... and to have been set free by] the Pythagoreans Parmeniscus and
Orestades : so Favorinus in the first book of his
Memorabilia. There was also another Xenophanes, of
Lesbos, an iambic poet.
Such were the "sporadic"
philosophers.
Chapter 3. PARMENIDES34 [flor. c. 500 B.C.]
[
21]
Parmenides, a native of Elea, son of Pyres, was a pupil of
Xenophanes (Theophrastus in his
Epitome makes
him a pupil of Anaximander).
35 Parmenides, however, though he was instructed
by Xenophanes, was no follower of his. According to Sotion
36 he also associated with Ameinias the
Pythagorean, who was the son of Diochaetas and a worthy gentleman
though poor. This Ameinias he was more inclined to follow,
and on his death he built a shrine to him, being himself of illustrious birth and possessed of great wealth ; moreover
it was Ameinias and not Xenophanes who led him to adopt the peaceful
life of a student.
He was the first to declare that the earth
is spherical and is situated in the centre of the universe. He held
that there were two elements, fire and earth, and that the former
discharged the function of a craftsman, the latter of his material.
[
22]
The generation of man proceeded from the sun as first cause ; heat
and cold, of which all things consist, surpass the sun itself. Again
he held that soul and mind are one and the same, as Theophrastus
mentions in his
Physics, where he is setting
forth the tenets of almost all the schools. He divided his
philosophy into two parts dealing the one with truth, the other with
opinion. Hence he somewhere says
37
:
Thou must needs learn all things, as well the unshakeable
heart of well-rounded truth as the opinions of mortals in which
there is no sure trust.
38
Our
philosopher too commits his doctrines to verse just as did Hesiod,
Xenophanes and Empedocles. He made reason the standard and
pronounced sensations to be inexact. At all events his words
are
39 :
And let not
long-practised wont force thee to tread this path, to be governed by
an aimless eye, an echoing ear and a tongue, but do thou with
understanding bring the muchcontested issue to decision.
[
23]
Hence Timon
40 says of him
41:
And the strength of high-souled Parmenides, of no
diverse opinions, who introduced thought instead of imagination's
deceit.
It was about him that Plato wrote a dialogue with the
title
Parmenides or Concerning Ideas.
He
flourished in the 69th Olympiad.
42 He
is believed to have been the first to detect the identity of
Hesperus, the evening-star, and Phosphorus, the morning-star ; so
Favorinus in the fifth book of his
Memorabilia
; but others attribute this to Pythagoras, whereas Callimachus holds
that the poem in question was not the work of Pythagoras. Parmenides
is said to have served his native city as a legislator : so we learn
from Speusippus in his book
On Philosophers.
Also to have been the first to use the argument known as "Achilles
[and the tortoise]" : so Favorinus tells us in his
Miscellaneous History.
There was also
another Parmenides, a rhetorician who wrote a treatise on his
art.
Chapter 4. MELISSUS
[
24]
Melissus,
the son of Ithaegenes, was a native of Samos. He was a pupil of
Parmenides. Moreover he came into relations with Heraclitus, on
which occasion the latter was introduced by him to the Ephesians,
who did not know him,
43 as Democritus was to the citizens of Abdera by
Hippocrates. He took part also in politics and won the approval of
his countrymen, and for this reason he was elected admiral and won
more admiration than ever through his own merit.
In his view
the universe was unlimited, unchangeable and immovable, and was
one, uniform
and full of matter. There was no
real, but only apparent, motion. Moreover he said that we ought not
to make any statements about the gods, for it was impossible to have
knowledge of them.
According to Apollodorus, he flourished in
the 84th Olympiad.
44
Chapter 5. ZENO OF ELEA
[
25]
Zeno was a citizen of
Elea. Apollodorus in his
Chronology says that
he was the son of Teleutagoras by birth, but of Parmenides by
adoption, while Parmenides was the son of Pyres. Of Zeno and
Melissus Timon
45 speaks thus
46:
Great Zeno's strength which, never known to fail,
On each
side urged, on each side could prevail.
In marshalling
arguments Melissus too,
More skilled than many a one, and
matched by few.
Zeno, then, was all through a pupil of
Parmenides and his bosom friend. He was tall in stature, as Plato
says in his
Parmenides.47 The same philosopher [mentions him] in his
Sophist,48 [and
Phaedrus,]49 and calls him
the Eleatic Palamedes. Aristotle says that Zeno was the inventor of
dialectic, as Empedocles was of rhetoric.
[
26]
He was a truly
noble character both as philosopher and as politician ; at all
events, his extant books are brimful of intellect. Again, he plotted
to overthrow Nearchus the tyrant (or, according to others,
Diomedon) but was arrested : so Heraclides in his epitome of
Satyrus. On that occasion he was crossexamined as to his
accomplices and about the arms
which he was
conveying to Lipara ; he denounced all the tyrant's own friends,
wishing to make him destitute of supporters. Then, saying that he
had something to tell him about certain people in his private ear,
he laid hold of it with his teeth and did not let go until stabbed
to death, meeting the same fate as Aristogiton the tyrannicide.
[
27]
Demetrius in his work on
Men of the Same
Name says that he bit off, not the ear, but the nose. According
to Antisthenes in his
Successions of
Philosophers, after informing against the tyrant's friends, he
was asked by the tyrant whether there was anyone else in the plot ;
whereupon he replied, "Yes, you, the curse of the city!" ; and to
the bystanders he said, "I marvel at your cowardice, that, for fear
of any of those things which I am now enduring, you should be the
tyrant's slaves." And at last he bit off his tongue and spat it at
him ; and his fellow-citizens were so worked upon that they
forthwith stoned the tyrant to death.
50 In this version of the story
most authors nearly agree, but Hermippus says he was cast into a
mortar and beaten to death.
[
28]
Of him also I have written as
follows
51
:
You wished, Zeno, and noble was your wish, to slay the
tyrant and set Elea free from bondage. But you were crushed ; for,
as all know, the tyrant caught you and beat you in a mortar. But
what is this that I say? It was your body that he beat, and not
you.
In all other respects Zeno was a gallant man ; and in
particular he despised the great no less than
Heraclitus. For example, his native place, the Phocaean colony,
once known as Hyele and afterwards as Elea, a city of moderate
size, skilled in nothing but to rear brave men, he preferred before
all the splendour of Athens, hardly paying the Athenians a visit,
but living all his life at home.
[
29]
He was the first to propound
the argument of the "Achilles," which Favorinus attributes to
Parmenides, and many other arguments. His views are as follows.
There are worlds, but there is no empty space. The substance of all
things came from hot and cold, and dry and moist, which change into
one another. The generation of man proceeds from earth, and the soul
is formed by a union of all the foregoing, so blended that no one
element predominates.
We are told that once when he was
reviled he lost his temper, and, in reply to some one who blamed him
for this, he said, "If when I am abused I pretend that I am not,
then neither shall I be aware of it if I am praised."
52
The fact that there
were eight men of the name of Zeno we have already mentioned under
Zeno of Citium.
53 Our philosopher
flourished in the 79th Olympiad.
54
Chapter 6. LEUCIPPUS55
[
30]
Leucippus was born at Elea, but some say at
Abdera and others at Miletus. He was a pupil of Zeno. His views were
these. The sum of things
is unlimited, and they
all change into one another. The All includes the empty as well as
the full. The worlds are formed when atoms fall into the void and
are entangled with one another ; and from their motion as they
increase in bulk arises the substance of the stars. The sun revolves
in a larger circle round the moon. The earth rides steadily, being
whirled about the centre ; its shape is like that of a drum.
Leucippus was the first to set up atoms as first principles. Such is
a general summary of his views ; on particular points they are as
follows.
[
31]
He declares the All to be unlimited, as already
stated ; but of the All part is full and part empty,
56
and these he calls elements. Out of them arise the worlds unlimited
in number and into them they are dissolved. This is how the worlds
are formed. In a given section many atoms of all manner of shapes
are carried from the unlimited into the vast empty space. These
collect together and form a single vortex, in which they jostle
against each other and, circling round in every possible way,
separate off, by like atoms joining like. And, the atoms being so
numerous that they can no longer revolve in equilibrium, the light
ones pass into the empty space outside, as if they were being
winnowed ; the remainder keep together and, becoming entangled, go
on their circuit together, and form a primary spherical system.
[
32]
This
parts off like a shell, enclosing within it atoms of all kinds ;
and, as these are whirled round by virtue of the resistance of the
centre, the enclosing shell becomes thinner, the adjacent atoms
continually combining when they touch the vortex.
In this way the earth is formed by portions brought to the centre
coalescing. And again, even the outer shell grows larger by the
influx of atoms from outside, and, as it is carried round in the
vortex, adds to itself whatever atoms it touches. And of these some
portions are locked together and form a mass, at first damp and
miry, but, when they have dried and revolve with the universal
vortex, they afterwards take fire and form the substance of the
stars.
[
33]
The orbit of the sun is the outermost, that of the
moon nearest to the earth; the orbits of the other heavenly bodies
lie between these two. All the stars are set on fire by the speed of
their motion; the burning of the sun is also helped by the stars;
the moon is only slightly kindled. The sun and the moon are eclipsed
[when ..., but the obliquity of the zodiacal circle is due
57] to the inclination of the earth to the
south ; the regions of the north are always shrouded in mist, and
are extremely cold and frozen. Eclipses of the sun are rare ;
eclipses of the moon constantly occur, and this because their orbits
are unequal. As the world is born, so, too, it grows, decays and
perishes, in virtue of some necessity, the nature of which he does
[not] specify.
Chapter 7. DEMOCRITUS(? 460-357
B.C.)
[
34]
Democritus was the son of Hegesistratus, though some
say of Athenocritus, and others again of Damasippus. He was a native
of Abdera or, according to some, of Miletus. He was a pupil of
certain Magians and Chaldaeans. For when King
Xerxes was entertained by the father of Democritus he left men in
charge, as, in fact, is stated by Herodotus
58; and from these men, while still a boy, he learned
theology and astronomy. Afterwards he met Leucippus and, according
to some, Anaxagoras, being forty years younger than the latter. But
Favorinus in his
Miscellaneous History tells us
that Democritus, speaking of Anaxagoras, declared that his views on
the sun and the moon were not original but of great antiquity, and
that he had simply stolen them. Democritus also pulled to pieces the
views of Anaxagoras on cosmogony and on mind,
[
35]
having a spite against
him, because Anbaxagoras did not take to him. If this be so, how
could he have been his pupil, as some suggest ?
According to
Demetrius in his book on
Men of the Same Name
and Antisthenes in his
Successions of
Philosophers, he travelled into Egypt to learn geometry from
the priests, and he also went into Persia to visit the Chaldaeans as
well as to the Red Sea. Some say that he associated with the
Gymnosophists in India and went to Aethiopia. Also that, being the
third son, he divided the family property. Most authorities will
have it that he chose the smaller portion, which was in money,
because he had need of this to pay the cost of travel; besides, his
brothers were crafty enough to foresee that this would be his
choice.
[
36]
Demetrius estimates his share at over 100 talents, the whole
of which he spent. His industry, says the same author, was so great
that he cut off a little room in the garden round the house and shut
himself up there. One day his father brought an ox to sacrifice and
tied it there, and he was not aware of it for a considerable
time,
until his father roused him to attend the
sacrifice and told him about the ox. Demetrius goes on : "It would
seem that he also went to Athens and was not anxious to be
recognized, because he despised fame, and that while he knew of
Socrates, he was not known to Socrates, his words being, `I came to
Athens and no one knew me.'"
[
37]
"If the
Rivals be the work of Plato," says Thrasylus,
"Democritus will be the unnamed character, different from Oenopides
and Anaxagoras, who makes his appearance when conversation is going
on with Socrates about philosophy, and to whom Socrates says that
the philosopher is like the all-round athlete.
59 And truly Democritus was
versed in every department of philosophy, for he had trained himself
both in physics and in ethics, nay more, in mathematics and the
routine subjects of education, and he was quite an expert in the
arts." From him we have the saying, "Speech is the shadow of
action." Demetrius of Phalerum in his
Defence of
Socrates affirms that he did not even visit Athens. This is to
make the larger claim, namely, that he thought that great city
beneath his notice, because he did not care to win fame from a
place, but preferred himself to make a place famous.
[
38]
His
character can also be seen from his writings. "He would seem," says
Thrasylus, "to have been an admirer of the Pythagoreans. Moreover,
he mentions Pythagoras himself, praising him in a work of his own
entitled
Pythagoras.60 He
seems to have taken all his ideas from him and, if chronology did
not stand in the way, he might have been thought his pupil." Glaucus
of Rhegium certainly says that
he was taught by
one of the Pythagoreans, and Glaucus was his contemporary.
Apollodorus of Cyzicus, again, will have it that he lived with
Philolaus.
He would train himself, says Antisthenes, by a
variety of means to test his sense-impressions by going at times
into solitude and frequenting tombs.
[
39]
The same authority states that,
when he returned from his travels, he was reduced to a humble mode
of life because he had exhausted his means ; and, because of his
poverty, he was supported by his brother Damasus. But his reputation
rose owing to his having foretold certain future events ; and after
that the public deemed him worthy of the honour paid to a god.
61
There was a law, says Antisthenes, that no one who had squandered
his patrimony should be buried in his native city. Democritus,
understanding this, and fearing lest he should be at the mercy of
any envious or unscrupulous prosecutors, read aloud to the people
his treatise, the
Great Diacosmos, the best of
all his works ; and then he was rewarded with 500 talents ; and,
more than that, with bronze statues as well ; and when he died, he
received a public funeral after a lifetime of more than a century.
[
40]
Demetrius, however, says that it was not Democritus himself but his
relatives who read the
Great Diacosmos, and
that the sum awarded was 100 talents only ; with this account
Hippobotus agrees.
Aristoxenus in his
Historical Notes affirms that Plato wished to burn
all the writings of Democritus that he could collect, but that
Amyclas and Clinias
the Pythagoreans prevented
him, saying that there was no advantage in doing so, for already the
books were widely circulated. And there is clear evidence for this
in the fact that Plato, who mentions almost all the early
philosophers, never once alludes to Democritus, not even where it
would be necessary to controvert him, obviously because he knew that
he would have to match himself against the prince of philosophers,
for whom, to be sure, Timon
62 has this
meed of praise
63 :
Such is the wise Democritus, the guardian of
discourse, keen-witted disputant, among the best I ever read.
[
41]
As regards chronology, he was, as he says himself in the
Lesser Diacosmos, a young man when Anaxagoras was
old, being forty years his junior. He says that the
Lesser Diacosmos was compiled 730 years after the
capture of Troy. According to Apollodorus in his
Chronology he would thus have been born in the 80th
Olympiad,
64 but according to Thrasylus
in his pamphlet entitled
Prolegomena to the Reading
of the works of Democritus, in the third year of the 77th
Olympiad,
65 which makes him, adds
Thrasylus, one year older than Socrates. He would then be a
contemporary of Archelaus, the pupil of Anaxagoras, and of the
school of Oenopides ; indeed he mentions Oenopides.
[
42]
Again, he
alludes to the doctrine of the One held by Parmenides and Zeno, they
being evidently the persons most talked about in his day ; he also
mentions Protagoras of Abdera, who, it is admitted, was a
contemporary of Socrates.
Athenodorus in the eighth book of
his
Walks relates that, when Hippocrates came
to see him, he ordered
milk to be brought, and,
having inspected it, pronounced it to be the milk of a black
she-goat which had produced her first kid ; which made Hippocrates
marvel at the accuracy of his observation. Moreover, Hippocrates
being accompanied by a maidservant, on the first day Democritus
greeted her with "Good morning, maiden," but the next day with "Good
morning, woman," As a matter of fact the girl had been seduced in
the night.
[
43]
Of the death of Democritus the account given by
Hermippus is as follows. When he was now very old and near his end,
his sister was vexed that he seemed likely to die during the
festival of Thesmophoria and she would be prevented from paying
the fitting worship to the goddess. He bade her be of good cheer and
ordered hot loaves to be brought to him every day. By applying these
to his nostrils he contrived to outlive the festival ; and as soon
as the three festival days were passed he let his life go from him
without pain, having then, according to Hipparchus, attained his one
hundred and ninth year.
In my
Pammetros
I have a piece on him as follows
66 :
Pray who was so wise, who wrought
so vast a work as the omniscient Democritus achieved ? When Death
was near, for three days he kept him in his house and regaled him
with the steam of hot loaves.
Such was the life of our
philosopher.
[
44]
His opinions are these. The first principles of
the universe are atoms and empty space ; everything else is merely
thought to exist. The worlds are unlimited ; they come into being
and perish. Nothing can come into being from that which is not
nor pass away into that which is not. Further, the
atoms are unlimited in size and number, and they are borne along in
the whole universe in a vortex, and therby generate all composite
things--fire, water, air, earth ; for even these are conglomerations
of given atoms. And it is because of their solidity that these atoms
are impassive and unalterable. The sun and the moon have been
composed of such smooth and spherical masses [
i.e. atoms], and so also the soul, which is
identical with reason. We see by virtue of the impact of images upon
our eyes.
[
45]
All things happen by virtue of necessity, the
vortex being the cause of the creation of all things, and this he
calls necessity. The end of action is tranquillity, which is not
identical with pleasure, as some by a false interpretation have
understood, but a state in which the soul continues calm and strong,
undisturbed by any fear or superstition or any other emotion. This
he calls well-being and many other names. The qualities of things
exist merely by convention ; in nature there is nothing but atoms
and void space. These, then, are his opinions.
Of his works
Thrasylus has made an ordered catalogue, arranging them in fours, as
he also arranged Plato's works.
[
46]
The ethical works are the
following :
I. Pythagoras.
Of the Disposition of the
Wise Man.
Of those in Hades.
Tritogeneia (so called
because three things, on which all mortal life depends, come from
her).
II. Of Manly Excellence, or Of Virtue. Amalthea's Horn
(the Horn of Plenty).
Of Tranquillity.
Ethical Commentaries : the work on Wellbeing is not to be
found.
So much for the ethical works.
The physical
works are these :
III. The Great Diacosmos (which the school
of Theophrastus attribute to Leucippus).
The Lesser
Diacosmos.
Description of the World.
On the
Planets.
IV. Of Nature, one book.
Of the Nature of
Man, or Of Flesh, a second book on Nature.
Of Reason.
Of the Senses (some editors combine these two under the title Of
the Soul).
V. Of Flavours.
Of Colours.
[
47]
Of the
Different Shapes (of Atoms).
Of Changes of Shape.
VI.
Confirmations (summaries of the aforesaid works).
On Images,
or On Foreknowledge of the Future.
On Logic, or Criterion of
Thought, three books.
Problems.
So much for the
physical works.
The following fall under no head :
Causes of Celestial Phenomena.
Causes of Phenomena in the
Air.
Causes on the Earth's Surface.
Causes concerned
with Fire and Things in Fire.
Causes concerned
with Sounds.
Causes concerned with Seeds, Plants and
Fruits.
Causes concerned with Animals, three books.
Miscellaneous Causes.
Concerning the Magnet.
These
works have not been arranged.
The mathematical works are
these :
VII. On a Difference in an Angle, or On Contact with
the Circle or the Sphere.
On Geometry.
Geometrica.
Numbers.
VIII. On Irrational Lines and Solids, two
books.
Extensions
67 (Projections).
[
48]
The Great
Year, or Astronomy, Calendar.
Contention of the Water-clock
[and the Heaven].
IX. Description of the Heaven.
Geography.
Description of the Pole.
Description of
Rays of Light.
These are the mathematical works.
The
literary and musical works are these :
X. On Rhythms and
Harmony.
On Poetry.
On Beauty of Verses.
On
Euphonious and Cacophonous Letters.
XI.
Concerning Homer, or On Correct Epic Diction, and On Glosses.
Of Song.
On Words.
A Vocabulary.
So much for
the works on literature and music.
The works on the arts are
these :
XII. Prognostication.
Of Diet, or
Diaetetics.
Medical Regimen.
Causes concerned with
Things Seasonable and Unseasonable.
XIII. Of Agriculture, or
Concerning Land Measurements.
Of Painting.
Treatise
on Tactics, and
On Fighting in Armour.
So much for
these works.
[
49]
Some include as separate items in the list the
following works taken from his notes :
Of the Sacred Writings
in Babylon.
Of those in Meroë.
A Voyage round the
Ocean.
Of [the Right Use of] History.
A Chaldaean
Treatise.
A Phrygian Treatise.
Concerning Fever and
those whose Malady makes them Cough.
Legal Causes and
Effects.
Problems wrought by Hand.
68
The other works which some attribute
to Demo-
critus are either compilations from
his writings or admittedly not genuine. So much for the books that
he wrote and their number.
The name of Democritus has been
borne by six persons : (1) our philosopher ; (2) a contemporary of
his, a musician of Chios ; (3) a sculptor, mentioned by Antigonus ;
(4) an author who wrote on the temple at Ephesus and the state of
Samothrace ; (5) an epigrammatist whose style is lucid and ornate ;
(6) a native of Pergamum who made his mark by rhetorical
speeches.
Chapter 8. PROTAGORAS (481-411
b.c.)
[
50]
Protagoras, son of Artemon or, according to
Apollodorus and Dinon in the fifth book of his
History of Persia, of Maeandrius, was born at
Abdera (so says Heraclides of Pontus in his treatise
On Laws, and also that he made laws for Thurii) or,
according to Eupolis in his
Flatterers, at Teos
; for the latter says :
Inside we've got
Protagoras of Teos.
He and Prodicus of Ceos gave public
readings for which fees were charged, and Plato in the
Protagoras69 calls Prodicus
deep-voiced. Protagoras studied under Democritus. The latter
70 was nicknamed "Wisdom," according to
Favorinus in his
Miscellaneous History.
[
51]
Protagoras was the first to maintain that there are two sides to
every question, opposed to each other, and he even argued in this
fashion, being the first to do so. Furthermore he began a work thus
: "Man is the measure of all things, of things that are that they
are, and of things that are not that they
are
not." He used to say that soul was nothing apart from the senses, as
we learn from Plato in the
Theaetetus,
71 and that everything is
true. In another work he began thus : "As to the gods, I have no
means of knowing either that they exist or that they do not exist.
For many are the obstacles that impede knowledge, both the obscurity
of the question and the shortness of human life."
[
52]
For this
introduction to his book the Athenians expelled him ; and they burnt
his works in the market-place, after sending round a herald to
collect them from all who had copies in their possession.
He
was the first to exact a fee of a hundred minae and the first to
distinguish the tenses of verbs, to emphasize the importance of
seizing the right moment, to institute contests in debating, and to
teach rival pleaders the tricks of their trade. Furthermore, in
his dialectic he neglected the meaning in favour of verbal
quibbling, and he was the father of the whole tribe of eristical
disputants now so much in evidence ; insomuch that Timon
72 too speaks of him as
73
Protagoras, all
mankind's epitome,
Cunning, I trow, to war with words.
[
53]
He too first introduced the method of discussion which is called
Socratic. Again, as we learn from Plato in the
Euthydemus,
74 he was the
first to use in discussion the argument of Antisthenes which strives
to prove that contradiction is impossible, and the first to point
out how to attack and refute any proposition laid down : so
Artemidorus the dialectician in his treatise
In
Reply to Chrysippus. He too invented the shoulder-pad on which
porters carry their burdens, so we are told by Aristotle in his
treatise
On Education ; for he himself had been
a porter,
says Epicurus somewhere.
75 This was how he was
taken up by Democritus, who saw how skilfully his bundles of wood
were tied. He was the first to mark off the parts of discourse into
four, namely, wish, question, answer, command
76 ;
[
54]
others divide into seven parts, narration,
question, answer, command, rehearsal, wish, summoning ; these he
called the basic forms of speech. Alcidamas made discourse fourfold,
affirmation, negation, question, address.
The first of his
books he read in public was that
On the Gods,
the introduction to which we quoted above ; he read it at Athens in
Euripides' house, or, as some say, in Megaclides' ; others again
make the place the Lyceum and the reader his disciple Archagoras,
Theodotus's son, who gave him the benefit of his voice. His accuser
was Pythodorus, son of Polyzelus, one of the four hundred ;
Aristotle, however, says it was Euathlus.
[
55]
The works of his
which survive are these :
* * The Art of Controversy.
Of Wrestling.
On Mathematics.
Of the State.
Of Ambition.
Of Virtues.
Of the Ancient Order of
Things.
On the Dwellers in Hades.
Of the Misdeeds of
Mankind.
A Book of Precepts.
Of Forensic Speech for a
Fee, two books of opposing arguments.
This is the list of his
works.
77 Moreover
there is a dialogue which Plato wrote upon him.
Philochorus says that, when he was on a voyage to Sicily, his
ship went down, and that Euripides hints at this in his
Ixion.
[
56]
According to some his death occurred, when
he was on a journey, at nearly ninety years of age, though
Apollodorus makes his age seventy, assigns forty years for his
career as a sophist, and puts his
floruit in
the 84th Olympiad.
78
There is an
epigram of my own on him as follows
79 :
Protagoras, I hear it told of
thee
Thou died'st in eld when Athens thou didst flee ;
Cecrops' town chose to banish thee ; but though
Thou
`scap'dst Athene, not so Hell below.
The story is told that
once, when he asked Euathlus his disciple for his fee, the latter
replied, "But I have not won a case yet." "Nay," said Protagoras,
"if I win this case against you I must have the fee, for winning it
; if you win, I must have it, because
you win
it."
There was another Protagoras, an astronomer, for whom
Euphorion wrote a dirge ; and a third who was a Stoic
philosopher.
Chapter 9. DIOGENES OF APOLLONIA
80
[
57]
Diogenes of Apollonia, son
of Apollothemis, was a natural philosopher and a most famous man.
Anti-
sthenes calls him a pupil of Anaximenes ;
but he lived in Anaxagoras's time. This man,
81 so great was his
unpopularity at Athens, almost lost his life, as Demetrius of
Phalerum states in his
Defence of Socrates.
The doctrines of Diogenes were as follows.
82 Air is the universal
element. There are worlds unlimited in number, and unlimited empty
space. Air by condensation and rarefaction generates the worlds.
Nothing comes into being from what is not or passes away into what
is not. The earth is spherical, firmly supported in the centre,
having its construction determined by the revolution which comes
from heat and by the congealment caused by cold.
The words
with which his treatise begins are these : "At the beginning of
every discourse I consider that one ought to make the starting-point
unmistakably clear and the exposition simple and
dignified."
Chapter 10. ANAXARCHUS
[
58]
Anaxarchus, a native of Abdera, studied under Diogenes of
Smyrna,
83 and
the latter under Metrodorus of Chios, who used to declare that he
knew nothing, not even the fact that he knew nothing ; while
Metrodorus was a pupil of Nessas of Chios, though some say that he
was taught by Democritus. Now Anaxarchus accompanied Alexander and
flourished in the 110th Olympiad.
84 He
made an enemy of Nicocreon, tyrant of Cyprus. Once at a
banquet, when asked by Alexander how he liked the
feast, he is said to have answered, "Everything, O king, is
magnificent ; there is only one thing lacking, that the head of some
satrap should be served up at table." This was a hit at Nicocreon,
[
59]
who never forgot it, and when after the king's death Anaxarchus was
forced against his will to land in Cyprus, he seized him and,
putting him in a mortar, ordered him to be pounded to death with
iron pestles. But he, making light of the punishment, made that
well-known speech, "Pound, pound the pouch containing Anaxarchus ;
ye pound not Anaxarchus." And when Nicocreon commanded his tongue to
be cut out, they say he bit it off and spat it at him. This is what
I have written upon him
85 :
Pound, Nicocreon, as hard as you like : it
is but a pouch. Pound on ; Anaxarchus's self long since is housed
with Zeus. And after she has drawn you upon her carding-combs a
little while, Persephone will utter words like these: "Out upon
thee, villainous miller !"
[
60]
For his fortitude and contentment
in life he was called the Happy Man. He had, too, the capacity of
bringing anyone to reason in the easiest possible way. At all events
he succeeded in diverting Alexander when he had begun to think
himself a god ; for, seeing blood running from a wound he had
sustained, he pointed to him with his finger and said, "See, there
is blood and not
Ichor which courses in the veins of the
blessed gods."
86
Plutarch reports this as spoken by Alexander to
his friends.
87 Moreover, on another occasion, when Anaxarchus was
drinking Alexander's health, he held up his goblet and said :
One of the gods shall fall by the stroke of mortal man.
88
Chapter 11. PYRRHO
(c. 360-270 b.c.)
[
61]
Pyrrho of Elis was the son of
Pleistarchus, as Diocles relates. According to Apollodorus in his
Chronology, he was first a painter ; then he
studied under Stilpo's son Bryson
89: thus Alexander in his
Successions of
Philosophers. Afterwards he joined Anaxarchus, whom he
accompanied on his travels everywhere so that he even forgathered
with the Indian Gymnosophists and with the Magi. This led him to
adopt a most noble philosophy, to quote Ascanius of Abdera, taking
the form of agnosticism and suspension of judgement. He denied that
anything was honourable or dishonourable, just or unjust.
90 And so, universally, he held that there is
nothing really existent, but custom and convention govern human
action ; for no single thing is in itself any more this than
that.
[
62]
He led a life consistent with this doctrine, going out
of his way for nothing, taking no precaution, but facing all risks
as they came, whether carts, precipices, dogs or what not, and,
generally, leaving nothing to the arbitrament of the senses ; but he
was kept out of harm's way by his friends who, as Antigonus of
Carystus tells us, used to follow close after him. But Aenesidemus
says that it was only his philosophy that was based upon suspension
of judgement, and that he did not lack foresight in his everyday
acts. He lived to be nearly ninety.
This is what Antigonus of
Carystus says of Pyrrho in his book upon him. At first he was a poor
and unknown painter, and there are still some indifferent
torch-racers of his in the gymnasium at Elis.
[
63]
He would
withdraw from the world and live in solitude, rarely showing himself
to his relatives ; this he did because he had heard an Indian
reproach Anaxarchus, telling him that he would never be able to
teach others what is good while he himself danced attendance on
kings in their courts. He would maintain the same composure at all
times, so that, even if you left him when he was in the middle of a
speech, he would finish what he had to say with no audience but
himself, although in his youth he had been hasty.
91 Often, our informant adds, he would leave his home
and, telling no one, would go roaming about with whomsoever he
chanced to meet. And once, when Anaxarchus fell into a slough, he
passed by without giving him any help, and, while others blamed him,
Anaxarchus himself praised his indifference and
sang-froid.
[
64]
On being discovered once talking
to himself, he answered, when asked the reason, that he was training
to be good. In debate he was looked down upon by no one, for he
could both discourse at length and also sustain a cross-examination,
so that even Nausiphanes when a young man was captivated by him : at
all events he used to say that we should follow Pyrrho in
disposition but himself in doctrine ; and he would often remark that
Epicurus, greatly admiring Pyrrho's way of life, regularly asked him
for information about Pyrrho ; and that he was so respected by his
native city that they made him high priest, and on his account they
voted that all philosophers should be exempt from taxation.
Moreover, there were many who emulated his
abstention from affairs, so that Timon in his
Pytho92 and in his
Silli93 says
94 :
[
65]
O Pyrrho, O aged Pyrrho, whence and
how
Found'st thou escape from servitude to sophists,
Their dreams and vanities ; how didst thou loose
The bonds
of trickery and specious craft ?
Nor reck'st thou to inquire
such things as these,
What breezes circle Hellas, to what
end,
And from what quarter each may chance to blow.
And again in the
Conceits95 :
This, Pyrrho, this my heart is fain to know,
Whence peace of mind to thee doth freely flow,
Why among
men thou like a god dost show ?
Athens honoured him with her
citizenship, says Diocles, for having slain the Thracian Cotys.
[
66]
He
lived in fraternal piety with his sister, a midwife, so says
Eratosthenes in his essay
On Wealth and
Poverty, now and then even taking things for sale to market,
poultry perchance or pigs, and he would dust the things in the
house, quite indifferent as to what he did. They say he showed his
indifference by washing a porker. Once he got enraged in his
sister's cause (her name was Philista), and he told the man who
blamed him that it was not over a weak woman that one should display
indifference. When a cur rushed at him and terrified him, he
answered his critic that it was not easy entirely to strip oneself
of human weakness ; but one should strive with all one's might
against facts, by deeds if possible, and if not, in word.
[
67]
They say that, when septic salves and surgical and caustic
remedies were applied to a wound he had sustained, he did not so
much as frown. Timon
also portrays his
disposition in the full account which he gives of him to Pytho.
Philo of Athens, a friend of his, used to say that he was most fond
of Democritus, and then of Homer, admiring him and continually
repeating the line
As leaves on trees, such
is the life of man.Il. vi.
146.
He also admired Homer because he likened men
to wasps, flies, and birds, and would quote these verses as well
:
Ay, friend, die thou ; why thus thy fate deplore ?
Patroclus too, thy better, is no more,
97
and all the passages
which dwell on the unstable purpose, vain pursuits, and childish
folly of man.
98
[
68]
Posidonius, too, relates of
him a story of this sort. When his fellow-passengers on board a ship
were all unnerved by a storm, he kept calm and confident, pointing
to a little pig in the ship that went on eating, and telling them
that such was the unperturbed state in which the wise man should
keep himself. Numenius alone attributes to him positive tenets. He
had pupils of repute, in particular one Eurylochus, who fell short
of his professions ; for they say that he was once so angry that he
seized the spit with the meat on it and chased his cook right into
the market-place.
[
69]
Once in Elis he was so hard pressed by his pupils'
questions that he stripped
and swam across the
Alpheus. Now he was, as Timon too says, most hostile to
Sophists.
Philo, again, who had a habit of very often talking
to himself, is also referred to in the lines
99:
Yea, him that is
far away from men, at leisure to himself,
Philo, who recks
not of opinion or of wrangling.
Besides these, Pyrrho's
pupils included Hecataeus of Abdera, Timon of Phlius, author of the
Silli, of whom more anon, and also Nausiphanes
of Teos, said by some to have been a teacher of Epicurus. All these
were called Pyrrhoneans after the name of their master, but
Aporetics, Sceptics, Ephectics, and even Zetetics, from their
principles, if we may call them such--
[
70]
Zetetics or seekers because
they were ever seeking truth, Sceptics or inquirers because they
were always looking for a solution and never finding one, Ephectics
or doubters because of the state of mind which followed their
inquiry, I mean, suspense of judgement, and finally Aporetics or
those in perplexity, for not only they but even the dogmatic
philosophers themselves in their turn were often perplexed.
Pyrrhoneans, of course, they were called from Pyrrho. Theodosius in
his
Sceptic Chapters denies that Scepticism
should be called Pyrrhonism ; for if the movement of the mind in
either direction is unattainable by us, we shall never know for
certain what Pyrrho really intended, and without knowing that, we
cannot be called Pyrrhoneans. Besides this (he says), there is the
fact that Pyrrho was not the founder of Scepticism ; nor had he any
positive tenet ; but a Pyrrhonean is one who in manners and life
resembles Pyrrho.
[
71]
Some call Homer the founder of this school,
for to the same questions he more than anyone else is
always giving different answers at different times, and
is never definite or dogmatic about the answer. The maxims of the
Seven Wise Men, too, they call sceptical ; for instance, "Observe
the Golden Mean," and "A pledge is a curse at one's elbow," meaning
that whoever plights his troth steadfastly and trustfully brings a
curse on his own head. Sceptically minded, again, were Archilochus
and Euripides, for Archilochus says
100
:
Man's soul, O Glaucus, son of Leptines,
Is but as
one short day that Zeus sends down.
And Euripides
101 :
Great
God ! how can they say poor mortal men
Have minds and think?
Hang we not on thy will ?
Do we not what it pleaseth thee to
wish ?
[
72]
Furthermore, they find Xenophanes, Zeno of Elea, and
Democritus to be sceptics : Xenophanes because he says,
102
Clear truth hath no man seen nor e'er
shall know ;
and Zeno because he would destroy motion,
saying, "A moving body moves neither where it is nor where it is
not"; Democritus because he rejects qualities, saying, "Opinion says
hot or cold, but the reality is atoms and empty space," and again,
"Of a truth we know nothing, for truth is in a well."
103 Plato, too, leaves the truth to gods and sons of
gods, and seeks after the probable explanation.
104 Euripides says
105 :
[
73]
Who knoweth if to die be but to
live,
And that called life by mortals be but death ?
So too Empedocles
106 :
So to
these mortal may not list nor look
Nor yet conceive them in
his mind ;
and before that
107 :
Each
believes naught but his experience.
And even Heraclitus
: "Let us not conjecture on deepest questions what is likely."
108 Then again Hippocrates showed himself
two-sided and but human. And before them all Homer
109 :
Pliant is the
tongue of mortals ; numberless the tales within it ;
and
Ample is of words the pasture, hither thither widely ranging
;
and
And the saying which thou sayest, back it cometh
later on thee,
where he is speaking of the equal value of
contradictory sayings.
[
74]
The Sceptics, then, were constantly
engaged
110 in overthrowing the dogmas of all schools, but
enuntiated none themselves ; and though they would go so far as to
bring forward and expound the dogmas of the others, they themselves
laid down nothing definitely, not even the laying down of nothing.
So much so that they even refuted their laying down of nothing,
saying, for instance, "We determine nothing," since otherwise they
would have been betrayed into determining
111; but we put forward, say they,
all
the theories for the purpose of indicating
our unprecipitate attitude, precisely as we might have done if we
had actually assented to them. Thus by the expression "We determine
nothing" is indicated their state of even balance; which is
similarly indicated by the other expressions, "Not more (one thing
than another)," "Every saying has its corresponding opposite," and
the like.
[
75]
But "Not more (one thing than another)" can also be taken
positively, indicating that two things are alike ; for example, "The
pirate is no more wicked than the liar." But the Sceptics meant it
not positively but negatively, as when, in refuting an argument, one
says, "Neither had more existence, Scylla or the Chimaera." And
"More so" itself is sometimes comparative, as when we say that
"Honey is more sweet than grapes" ; sometimes both positive and
negative, as when we say, "Virtue profits more than it harms," for
in this phrase we indicate that virtue profits and does not harm.
[
76]
But the Sceptics even refute the statement "Not more (one thing than
another)." For, as forethought is no more existent than
non-existent, so "Not more (one thing than another)" is no more
existent than not. Thus, as Timon says in the
Pytho, the statement means just absence of all
determination and withholding of assent. The other statement, "Every
saying, etc.,"
112 equally compels suspension of judgement; when facts
disagree, but the contradictory statements have exactly the same
weight, ignorance of the truth is the necessary consequence. But
even this statement has its corresponding antithesis, so that after
destroying others it turns round and destroys itself, like a purge
which drives the substance
out and then in its
turn is itself eliminated and destroyed.
[
77]
This the dogmatists
answer by saying that they do [not merely] not deny the statement,
but even plainly assert it. So they were merely using the words as
servants, as it was not possible not to refute one statement by
another ; just as we
113 are accustomed to say
there is no such thing as space, and yet we have no alternative but
to speak of space for the purpose of argument, though not of
positive doctrine, and just as we say nothing comes about by
necessity and yet have to speak of necessity. This was the sort of
interpretation they used to give ; though things appear to be such
and such, they are not such in reality but only appear such. And
they would say that they sought, not thoughts, since thoughts are
evidently thought, but the things in which sensation plays a
part.
[
78]
Thus the Pyrrhonean principle, as Aenesidemus says in
the introduction to his
Pyrrhonics, is but a
report on phenomena or on any kind of judgement, a report in which
all things are brought to bear on one another, and in the comparison
are found to present much anomaly and confusion. As to the
contradictions in their doubts, they would first show the ways in
which things gain credence, and then by the same methods they would
destroy belief in them ; for they say those things gain credence
which either the senses are agreed upon or which never or at least
rarely change, as well as things which become habitual or are
determined by law and those which please or excite wonder.
[
79]
They
showed, then, on the basis of that which is contrary to what induces
belief, that the probabilities on both sides are equal.
Perplexities arise from the agreements
114 between appearances or
judgements, and these perplexities they distinguished under ten
different modes in which the subjects in question appeared to vary.
The following are the ten modes laid down.
115
The
first mode relates to
the differences between living creatures in respect of those things
which give them pleasure or pain, or are useful or harmful to them.
By this it is inferred that they do not receive the same impressions
from the same things, with the result that such a conflict
necessarily leads to suspension of judgement. For some creatures
multiply without intercourse, for example, creatures that live in
fire, the Arabian phoenix and worms ; others by union, such as man
and the rest.
[
80]
Some are distinguished in one way, some in another,
and for this reason they differ in their senses also, hawks for
instance being most keen-sighted, and dogs having a most acute sense
of smell. It is natural that if the senses,
e.g. eyes, of animals differ, so also will the
impressions produced upon them; so to the goat vine-shoots are good
to eat, to man they are bitter ; the quail thrives on hemlock, which
is fatal to man ; the pig will eat ordure, the horse will not.
The
second mode has reference to the natures
and idiosyncrasies of men; for instance, Demophon, Alexander's
butler, used to get warm in the shade and shiver in the sun.
[
81]
Andron
of Argos is reported by Aristotle
116 to
have travelled across the waterless deserts of Libya without
drinking. Moreover, one man fancies the profession of medicine,
another
farming, and another commerce; and the
same ways of life are injurious to one man but beneficial to
another; from which it follows that judgement must be suspended.
The
third mode depends on the differences
between the sense-channels in different cases, for an apple gives
the impression of being pale yellow in colour to the sight, sweet in
taste and fragrant in smell. An object of the same shape is made to
appear different by differences in the mirrors reflecting it. Thus
it follows that what appears is no more such and such a thing than
something different.
[
82]
The
fourth mode is
that due to differences of condition and to changes in general ; for
instance, health, illness, sleep, waking, joy, sorrow, youth, old
age, courage, fear, want, fullness, hate, love, heat, cold, to say
nothing of breathing freely and having the passages obstructed. The
impressions received thus appear to vary according to the nature of
the conditions. Nay, even the state of madmen is not contrary to
nature; for why should their state be so more than ours? Even to our
view the sun has the appearance of standing still. And Theon of
Tithorea used to go to bed and walk in his sleep, while Pericles'
slave did the same on the housetop.
[
83]
The
fifth mode is derived from customs, laws, belief in
myths, compacts between nations and dogmatic assumptions. This class
includes considerations with regard to things beautiful and ugly,
true and false, good and bad, with regard to the gods, and with
regard to the coming into being and the passing away of the world of
phenomena. Obviously the same thing is regarded by some as just and
by others as unjust, or as good by some and
bad
by others. Persians think it not unnatural for a man to marry his
daughter; to Greeks it is unlawful. The Massagetae, acording to
Eudoxus in the first book of his
Voyage round the
World, have their wives in common ; the Greeks have not. The
Cilicians used to delight in piracy ; not so the Greeks.
[
84]
Different
people believe in different gods ; some in providence, others not.
In burying their dead, the Egyptians embalm them; the Romans burn
them ; the Paeonians throw them into lakes. As to what is true,
then, let suspension of judgement be our practice.
The
sixth mode relates to mixtures and participations, by virtue of which nothing appears pure in and by itself, but
only in combination with air, light, moisture, solidity, heat, cold,
movement, exhalations and other forces. For purple shows different
tints in sunlight, moonlight, and lamplight ; and our own
complexion does not appear the same at noon and when the sun is low.
[
85]
Again, a rock which in air takes two men to lift is easily moved
about in water, either because, being in reality heavy, it is lifted
by the water or because, being light, it is made heavy by the air.
Of its own inherent property we know nothing, any more than of the
constituent oils in an ointment.
The
seventh mode has reference to distances, positions,
places and the occupants of the places. In this mode things which
are thought to be large appear small, square things round ; flat
things appear to have projections, straight things to be bent, and
colourless coloured. So the sun, on account of its distance, appears
small, mountains when far away appear misty and smooth, but when
near at hand
rugged.
[
86]
Furthermore, the sun at
its rising has a certain appearance, but has a dissimilar appearance
when in mid-heaven, and the same body one appearance in a wood and
another in open country. The image again varies according to the
position of the object, and a dove's neck according to the way it is
turned. Since, then, it is not possible to observe these things
apart from places and positions, their real nature is
unknowable.
The
eighth mode is concerned
with quantities and qualities of things, say heat or cold, swiftness
or slowness, colourlessness or variety of colours. Thus wine taken
in moderation strengthens the body, but too much of it is weakening
; and so with food and other things.
[
87]
The
ninth mode has to do with perpetuity, strangeness, or rarity. Thus earthquakes are no surprise to those among
whom they constantly take place ; nor is the sun, for it is seen
every day.
117 This ninth mode is put eighth by Favorinus
and tenth by Sextus and Aenesidemus; moreover the tenth is put
eighth by Sextus and ninth by Favorinus.
The
tenth mode rests on inter-relation,
e.g. between light and heavy, strong and weak,
greater and less, up and down. Thus that which is on the right is
not so by nature, but is so understood in virtue of its position
with respect to something else ; for, if that change its position,
the thing is no longer on the right.
[
88]
Similarly father and brother
are relative terms, day is relative to the sun, and all things
relative to our mind. Thus relative terms are in and by themselves
unknowable. These, then, are the ten modes of perplexity.
But Agrippa and his school add to them
118 five
other modes, resulting respectively from disagreement, extension
ad infinitum, relativity, hypothesis and
reciprocal inference. The mode arising from disagreement proves,
with regard to any inquiry whether in philosophy or in everyday
life, that it is full of the utmost contentiousness and confusion.
The mode which involves extension
ad infinitum
refuses to admit that what is sought to be proved is firmly
established, because one thing furnishes the ground for belief in
another, and so on
ad infinitum.
[
89]
The mode
derived from relativity declares that a thing can never be
apprehended in and by itself, but only in connexion with something
else. Hence all things are unknowable. The mode resulting from
hypothesis arises when people suppose that you must take the most
elementary of things as of themselves entitled to credence, instead
of postulating them : which is useless, because some one else will
adopt the contrary hypothesis. The mode arising from reciprocal
inference is found whenever that which should be confirmatory of the
thing requiring to be proved itself has to borrow credit from the
latter, as, for example, if anyone seeking to establish the
existence of pores on the ground that emanations take place should
take this (the existence of pores) as proof that there are
emanations.
119
[
90]
They would deny all demonstration, criterion,
sign, cause, motion, the process of learning, coming into being, or
that there is anything good or bad by nature. For all demonstration,
say they, is constructed out of things either already proved or
indemonstrable. If out of things already proved, those things too
will require some demonstration,
and so on
ad infinitum ; if out of things indemonstrable,
then, whether all or some or only a single one of the steps are the
subject of doubt, the whole is indemonstrable.
120 If you think, they add,
that there are some things which need no demonstration, yours must
be a rare intellect, not to see that you must first have
demonstration of the very fact that the things you refer to carry
conviction in themselves.
[
91]
Nor must we prove that the elements are
four from the fact that the elements are four. Besides, if we
discredit particular demonstrations, we cannot accept the
generalization from them. And in order that we may know that an
argument constitutes a demonstration, we require a criterion ; but
again, in order that we may know that it is a criterion we require a
demonstration ; hence both the one and the other are
incomprehensible, since each is referred to the other. How then are
we to grasp the things which are uncertain, seeing that we know no
demonstration ? For what we wish to ascertain is not whether
things appear to be such and such, but whether they are so in their
essence.
They declared the dogmatic philosophers to be fools,
observing that what is concluded
ex hypothesi
is properly described not as inquiry but assumption, and by
reasoning of this kind one may even argue for impossibilities. As
for those who think that
[
92]
we should not judge of truth from
surrounding circumstances or legislate on the basis of what is
found in nature, these men, they used to say, made themselves the
measure of all things, and did not see that every phenomenon appears
in a certain disposition and in a certain reciprocal relation to
surrounding circumstances. Therefore we must affirm either that
all
things are true or that all things are
false. For if certain things only are true [and others are false],
how are we to distinguish them ? Not by the senses, where things in
the field of sense are in question, since all these things appear to
sense to be on an equal footing; nor by the mind, for the same
reason. Yet apart from these faculties there is no other, so far as
we can see, to help us to a judgement. Whoever therefore, they say,
would be firmly assured about anything sensible or intelligible must
first establish the received opinions about it ; for some have
refuted one doctrine, others another. But things must be judged
either by the sensible or by the intelligible,
[
93]
and both are
disputed. Therefore it is impossible to pronounce judgement on
opinions about sensibles or intelligibles ; and if the conflict in
our thoughts compels us to disbelieve every one, the standard or
measure, by which it is held that all things are exactly determined,
will be destroyed, and we must deem every statement of equal value.
Further, say they, our partner in an inquiry into a phenomenon is
either to be trusted or not. If he is, he will have nothing to reply
to the man to whom it appears to be the opposite
121 ; for just as our friend who describes what appears to
him is to be trusted, so is his opponent. If he is not to be
trusted, he will actually be disbelieved when he describes what
appears to him.
[
94]
We must not assume that what convinces us is
actually true. For the same thing does not convince every one, nor
even the same people always. Persuasiveness sometimes depends on
external circumstances, on the reputation of the speaker,
on his ability as a thinker or his artfulness, on the
familiarity or the pleasantness of the topic.
Again, they
would destroy the criterion by reasoning of this kind. Even the
criterion has either been critically determined or not. If it has
not, it is definitely untrustworthy, and in its purpose of
distinguishing is no more true than false. If it has, it will belong
to the class of particular judgements, so that one and the same
thing determines and is determined, and the criterion which has
determined will have to be determined by another, that other by
another, and so on
ad infinitum.
[
95]
In addition to
this there is disagreement as to the criterion, some holding that
man is the criterion, while for some it is the senses, for others
reason, for others the apprehensive presentation. Now man disagrees
with man and with himself, as is shown by differences of laws and
customs. The senses deceive, and reason says different things.
Finally, the apprehensive presentation is judged by the mind, and
the mind itself changes in various ways. Hence the criterion is
unknowable, and consequently truth also.
[
96]
They deny, too, that
there is such a thing as a sign. If there is, they say, it must
either be sensible or intelligible. Now it is not sensible, because
what is sensible is a common attribute, whereas a sign is a
particular thing. Again, the sensible is one of the things which
exist by way of difference, while the sign belongs to the category
of relative. Nor is a sign an object of thought, for objects of
thought are of four kinds, apparent judgements on things apparent,
non-apparent judgements on things nonapparent, non-apparent on
apparent, or apparent on non-apparent ; and a sign is none of these,
so
that there is no such thing as a sign. A
sign is not "apparent on apparent," for what is apparent needs no
sign ; nor is it non-apparent on non-apparent, for what is revealed
by something must needs appear ; nor is it non-apparent on apparent,
for that which is to afford the means of apprehending something
else must itself be apparent ;
[
97]
nor, lastly, is it apparent on
non-apparent, because the sign, being relative, must be apprehended
along with that of which it is the sign, which is not here the case.
It follows that nothing uncertain can be apprehended ; for it is
through signs that uncertain things are said to be apprehended.
122.
Causes, too, they
destroy in this way. A cause is something relative ; for it is
relative to what can be caused, namely, the effect. But things which
are relative are merely objects of thought and have no substantial
existence.
[
98]
Therefore a cause can only be an object of thought ;
inasmuch as, if it be a cause, it must bring with it that of which
it is said to be the cause, otherwise it will not be a cause. Just
as a father, in the absence of that in relation to which he is
called father, will not be a father, so too with a cause. But that
in relation to which the cause is thought of, namely the effect, is
not present ; for there is no coming into being or passing away or
any other process : therefore there is no such thing as cause.
Furthermore, if there is a cause, either bodies are the cause of
bodies, or things incorporeal of things incorporeal ; but neither is
the case ; therefore there is no such thing as cause. Body in fact
could not be the cause of body, inasmuch as both have the same
nature. And if either is
called a cause in so
far as it is a body, the other, being a body, will become a cause.
[
99]
But if both be alike causes, there will be nothing to be acted upon
Nor can an incorporeal thing be the cause of an incorporeal thing,
for the same reason. And a thing incorporeal cannot be the cause of
a body, since nothing incorporeal creates anything corporeal. And,
lastly, a body cannot be the cause of anything incorporeal, because
what is produced must be of the material operated upon ; but if it
is not operated upon because it is incorporeal, it cannot be
produced by anything whatever. Therefore there is no such thing as a
cause. A corollary to this is their statement that the first
principles of the universe have no real existence ; for in that case
something must have been there to create and act.
Furthermore
there is no motion ; for that which moves moves either in the place
where it is or in a place where it is not. But it cannot move in the
place where it is, still less in any place where it is not.
Therefore there is no such thing as motion.
[
100]
They used also to
deny the possibility of learning. If anything is taught, they say,
either the existent is taught through its existence or the
non-existent through its non-existence. But the existent is not
taught through its existence, for the nature of existing things is
apparent to and recognized by all ; nor is the non-existent taught
through the nonexistent, for with the non-existent nothing is ever
done, so that it cannot be taught to anyone.
Nor, say they,
is there any coming into being. For that which is does not come into
being, since it
is ; nor yet that which is not,
for it has no sub-
stantial existence, and that
which is neither substantial nor existent cannot have had the
chance of coming into being either.
[
101]
There is nothing good or
bad by nature, for if there is anything good or bad by nature, it
must be good or bad for all persons alike, just as snow is cold to
all. But there is no good or bad which is such to all persons in
common ; therefore there is no such thing as good or bad by nature.
For either all that is thought good by anyone whatever must be
called good, or not all. Certainly all cannot be so called ; since
one and the same thing is thought good by one person and bad by
another ; for instance, Epicurus thought pleasure good and
Antisthenes thought it bad ; thus on our supposition it will follow
that the same thing is both good and bad. But if we say that not all
that anyone thinks good is good, we shall have to judge the
different opinions ; and this is impossible because of the equal
validity of opposing arguments. Therefore the good by nature is
unknowable.
[
102]
The whole of their mode of inference can be
gathered from their extant treatises. Pyrrho himself, indeed, left
no writings, but his associates Timon, Aenesidemus, Numenius and
Nausiphanes did ; and others as well.
The dogmatists answer
them by declaring that the Sceptics themselves do apprehend and
dogmatize; for when they are thought to be refuting their hardest
they do apprehend, for at the very same time they are asseverating
and dogmatizing. Thus even when they declare that they determine
nothing, and that to every argument there is an opposite argument,
they are actually determining these very points and
dogmatizing.
[
103]
123The others reply, "We
confess to human weaknesses ; for we recognize that it
is day and that we are alive, and many other apparent facts in life
; but with regard to the things about which our opponents argue so
positively, claiming to have definitely apprehended them, we suspend
our judgement because they are not certain, and confine knowledge to
our impressions.
124 For we
admit that we see, and we recognize that we think this or that, but
how we see or how we think we know not. And we say in conversation
that a certain thing appears white, but we are not positive that it
really is white. As to our `We determine nothing' and the like,
125 we use the expressions in an undogmatic sense,
[
104]
for
they are not like the assertion that the world is spherical. Indeed
the latter statement is not certain, but the others are mere
admissions. Thus in saying `We determine nothing,' we are
not determining even that."
Again, the
dogmatic philosophers maintain that the Sceptics do away with life
itself, in that they reject all that life consists in. The others
say this is false, for they do not deny that we see ; they only say
that they do not know how we see. "We admit the apparent fact," say
they, "without admitting that it really is what it appears to be."
We also perceive that fire burns ; as to whether it is its nature to
burn, we suspend our judgement.
[
105]
We see that a man moves, and that he
perishes ; how it happens we do not know. We merely object to
accepting the unknown substance behind phenomena. When we say a
picture has projections, we are describing what is apparent ; but if
we say that it has no projections, we are then speaking, not of what
is apparent, but of something else. This is
what makes Timon say in his
Python that he
has not gone outside what is customary. And again in the
Conceits he says
126 :
But the apparent is omnipotent wherever it goes
;
and in his work
On the Senses, "I
do not lay it down that honey is sweet, but I admit that it appears
to be so."
[
106]
Aenesidemus too in the first book of his
Pyrrhonean Discourses says that Pyrrho determines
nothing dogmatically, because of the possibility of contradiction,
but guides himself by apparent facts. Aenesidemus says the same in
his works
Against Wisdom and
On
Inquiry. Furthermore Zeuxis, the friend of Aenesidemus, in his
work
On Two-sided Arguments, Antiochus of
Laodicea, and Apellas in his
Agrippa all hold
to phenomena alone. Therefore the apparent is the Sceptic's
criterion, as indeed Aenesidemus says ; and so does Epicurus. Democritus, however, denied that any apparent fact could be a criterion,
indeed he denied the very existence of the apparent.
[
107]
Against this
criterion of appearances the dogmatic philosophers urge that, when
the same appearances produce in us different impressions,
e.g. a round or square tower, the Sceptic, unless
he gives the preference to one or other, will be unable to take any
course ; if on the other hand, say they, he follows either view, he
is then no longer allowing equal value to all apparent facts. The
Sceptics reply that, when different impressions are produced, they
must both be said to appear
127 ; for things which are apparent are so called because
they appear. The end to be realized they hold to be suspension of
judgement, which brings with it
tranquillity
like its shadow : so Timon and Aenesidemus declare.
[
108]
For in matters
which are for us to decide we shall neither choose this nor shrink
from that ; and things which are not for us to decide but happen of
necessity, such as hunger, thirst and pain, we cannot escape,
128 for they are not to be removed by force of reason. And
when the dogmatists argue that he may thus live in such a frame of
mind that he would not shrink from killing and eating his own father
if ordered to do so, the Sceptic replies that he will be able so to
live as to suspend his judgement in cases where it is a question of
arriving at the truth, but not in matters of life and the taking of
precautions. Accordingly we may choose a thing or shrink from a
thing by habit and may observe rules and customs. According to some
authorities the end proposed by the Sceptics is insensibility ;
according to others, gentleness.
129
Chapter 12. TIMON (c.
320-2 30 B.C.)
[
109]
Timon, says our
130 Apollonides of Nicaea in the first book of his
commentaries
On the Silli, which he dedicated
to Tiberius Caesar, was the son of Timarchus and a native of Phlius.
Losing his parents when young, he became a stage-dancer, but
later
took a dislike to that pursuit and went
abroad to Megara to stay with Stilpo ; then after some time he
returned home and married. After that he went to Pyrrho at Elis with
his wife, and lived there until his children were born ; the elder
of these he called Xanthus, taught him medicine, and made him his
heir.
[
110]
This son was a man of high repute, as we learn from Sotion in
his eleventh book. Timon, however, found himself without means of
support and sailed to the Hellespont and Propontis. Living now at
Chalcedon as a sophist, he increased his reputation still further
and, having made his fortune, went to Athens, where he lived until
his death, except for a short period which he spent at Thebes. He
was known to King Antigonus and to Ptolemy Philadelphus, as his
own iambics
131 testify.
He was, according to
Antigonus, fond of wine, and in the time that he could spare from
philosophy he used to write poems. These included epics, tragedies,
satyric dramas, thirty comedies and sixty tragedies, besides
silli (lampoons) and obscene poems.
[
111]
There are also
reputed works of his extending to twenty thousand verses which are
mentioned by Antigonus of Carystus, who also wrote his life. There
are three
silli in which, from his point of
view as a Sceptic, he abuses every one and lampoons the dogmatic
philosophers, using the form of parody. In the first he speaks in
the first person throughout, the second and third are in the form of
dialogues ; for he represents himself as questioning Xenophanes of
Colophon about each philosopher in turn, while Xenophanes answers
him ; in the second he speaks of the more ancient philosophers, in
the third of the
later, which is why some have
entitled it the Epilogue.
[
112]
The first deals with the same subjects,
except that the poem is a monologue. It begins as follows
132 :
Ye sophists, ye
inquisitives, come ! follow !
He died at the age of
nearly ninety, so we learn from Antigonus and from Sotion in his
eleventh book. I have heard that he had only one eye ; indeed he
used to call himself a Cyclops. There was another Timon, the
misanthrope.
133
Now this philosopher, according to
Antigonus, was very fond of gardens and preferred to mind his own
affairs. At all events there is a story that Hieronymus the
Peripatetic said of him, "Just as with the Scythians those who are
in flight shoot as well as those who pursue, so, among philosophers,
some catch their disciples by pursuing them, some by fleeing from
them, as for instance Timon."
[
113]
He was quick to perceive
anything and to turn up his nose in scorn ; he was fond of writing
and at all times good at sketching plots for poets and collaborating in dramas. He used to give the dramatists Alexander and Homer
materials for their tragedies.
134 When disturbed by
maidservants and dogs, he would stop writing, his earnest desire
being to maintain tranquillity. Aratus is said to have asked him
how he could obtain a trustworthy text of Homer, to which he
replied, "You can, if you get hold of the ancient copies, and not
the corrected copies of our day." He used to let his own poems lie
about, sometimes
half eaten away.
[
114]
Hence, when
he came to read parts of them to Zopyrus the orator, he would turn
over the pages and recite whatever came handy ; then, when he was
half through, he would discover the piece which he had been looking
for in vain, so careless was he.
135 Furthermore, he was so easy-going that
he would readily go without his dinner. They say that once, when he
saw Arcesilaus passing through the "knaves-market," he said, "What
business have you to come here, where we are all free men ?" He was
constantly in the habit of quoting, to those who would admit the
evidence of the senses when confirmed by the judgement of the
mind, the line--
Birds of a feather flock
together.Usually explained, after Diogenianus, of two
notorious thieves, Attagas the Thessalian and Numenius the
Corinthian. There may, however, be a sly hit at Pyrrho's disciple
Numenius (supra, § 102). Or merely the birds
partridge and woodcock may be meant, not any Mr. Partridge and Mr.
Woodcock.
Jesting in this fashion was habitual
with him. When a man marvelled at everything, he said, "Why do you
not marvel that we three have but four eyes between us ?" for in
fact he himself had only one eye, as also had his disciple
Dioscurides, while the man whom he addressed was normal.
[
115]
Asked once
by Arcesilaus why he had come there from Thebes, he replied, "Why,
to laugh when I have you all in full view !" Yet, while attacking
Arcesilaus in his
Silli, he has praised him in
his work entitled the
Funeral Banquet of
Arcesilaus.
According to Menodotus he left no successor,
but his school lapsed until Ptolemy of Cyrene re-established it.
Hippobotus and Sotion, however, say that he had as pupils
Dioscurides of Cyprus, Nicolochus of Rhodes, Euphranor of Seleucia,
and Praÿlus of the
Troad.
137
The latter, as we learn from the history of Phylarchus, was a man of
such unflinching courage that, although unjustly accused, he
patiently suffered a traitor's death, without so much as deigning to
speak one word to his fellow-citizens.
[
116]
Euphranor had as pupil
Eubulus of Alexandria ; Eubulus taught Ptolemy, and he again
Sarpedon and Heraclides ; Heraclides again taught Aenesidemus of
Cnossus, the compiler of eight books of Pyrrhonean discourses ; the
latter was the instructor of Zeuxippus his fellow-citizen, he of
Zeuxis of the angular foot (
γωνιόπο
υς, Cruickshank), he again of Antiochus of Laodicea on the
Lycus, who had as pupils Menodotus of Nicomedia, an empiric
physician, and Theiodas of Laodicea ; Menodotus was the instructor
of Herodotus of Tarsus, son of Arieus, and Herodotus taught Sextus
Empiricus, who wrote ten books on Scepticism, and other fine works.
Sextus taught Saturninus called Cythenas,
138 another
empiricist.