On Heraclitus Author(s): M. Marcovich Source: Phronesis, Vol. 11, No. 1 (1966), pp.

19-30 Published by: BRILL Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4181774 . Accessed: 12/09/2011 18:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Phronesis.

http://www.jstor.org

OnHeraclitus
M. MARCOVICH

Fr. [91b) DK

Plut.

de E 392 B
ou

no7tsP.(
Ov)TYg 8aE7

yxTpo0)x

ganLv e[p5vaa &

GL

Lurt xcxo'

'Hp0CXevrLov, xcd TC

[3rQOXY

ovua(c, &K & csaOauxovroc LEtv o@k &nurl'n XC'L xa(i 7LV GaUlV yEL, a&Xov gi o068i 7v xcd 7rpOt6aL XOcL &7cLa<V>.

ov8' U,aopov

aXX {pa aaUV v xa0Cr0CL xcil 0rO?dnet

Schleiermacher(fr. 20)1, R. Walzer2,C. Mazzantini3,G. S. Kirk4, R. Mondolfo5and W. K. C. Guthrie6accepted the three pairs of verbs as Heracitean7; K. Reinhardt8 only the pairs 2 and 3; and Bywater (fr. 40), Zeller (16, p. 797 n. 2), Diels (Heraklit2= VS4) and Kranz the pairs 1 and 3. The editors of Plutarch coincide in seeing (VS5-10) in pairs 1 and 3 some referenceand in consideringpair 2 as a comnmentary (correction) by Plutarch himself; so G. Bernardakis (Teubn. 1891 = 1894), W. R. Paton (Weidmann 1893), W. Sieveking (Teubn. 1929), F. C. Babbitt (Loeb 1936), R. Flaceliere (in the version)." I think none of these verbs is likely to be by Heraclitus. (1) The reference to Heraclitus ends with xO"Hp&x?Xseov. The words ov8e 9Etv (sc. &aAv)are a continuation (application) of Plutarch's own (o68i = 'so too; in like manner')10. We find a similar comparisonin the preceding text (392 A): 6&iep (plus a concrete example) ... ourcoll. Also in 392 C Plutarch (= his source) applies a Heraclitean saying12 to his own purpose (ov' yap I.6vov, s 'HpdxX?Ltoq 9),ye... &?X s
Museum der Alterthumswiss. 1 (1807), 357f. Sdmmtliche Werke, III, 2 (Berlin 1838), 30f. 2 Eraclito (Florence 1939), 126 (with an improbable text). 8 Eraclito (Turin 1945), 83 f.; 175. 4 Heraclitus, the Cosmic Fragments (Cambridge 1954; reprint 1962), 381 ff.; KirkRaven, The Presocratic Philosophers (Cambridge 1957), nr. 217. b Zeller-Mondolfo, La filosofia dei Greci, I, 4 (Florence 1961), 46. A History of GreekPhilosophy, I (Cambridge 1962), 441. 7 Improbably Cl. Ramnoux, H6raclite ou l'homme entre les choses et les mots (Diss. Paris 1959), 222; 457. 8 Parmenides etc. (Bonn 1916), 207 ff. n. 9 Annales de l'Universitd de Lyon, III s6rie, Lettres, 11 (Paris 1941). 10 Cf. e.g. xal +uXml 8' x'X ('and souls also,,,') in fr. [12b] and Kirk 372.
I

Il Cf. also ?mr3aOaL = &4a=Oau (cf. 1086 A); *Lv. tAvov'oq x'X = xam-& Is The Stoic distortion of fr. 36 = [76].

19

Er' ucv &v). Thus the words from ou8&onwards are aocxpk=epov not meant by Plutarch as a reference to Heraclitus, and the Ovq ouicmappears as the common subject to all the pairs of verbs (as becomes clear from 392 C T6yLyVO,LsVov MUT% ... p?X&2uav). (2) Now, it could be that Plutarch in the pairs 1 and 3 is paraphrasing 8'e - a7obto; cL), somebody's words (since he corrects them in a;XXov but these words are taken from his Sceptic source for the whole of chapters 18-19 (= Aenesidemus?), and not from Heracitus' riversimile. The water in a river flows in one direction, and does not behave as described in these six verbs, which rather imply a movement (or action) in opposite directions:13 'it scatters and gathers again... it comes together (=- takes shape) and fails (deceases)... it approaches and departs'. Especially auv(=armt(which implies a formation, organization etc., cf. LSJ s.v. IV-V) is unsuitable to the shapeless water. Since the whole ch. 18 deals with the Sceptic topic'4 of &acra OvV)rT
L XOCa xdOop& (t?mq IV La(O ysvkazo
yevop.'vn,

with

t6

yLyvo6uvov xxL so

'exc'a'ou'Cv m07'trCov xal 1Lerm),q it is reasonable pOetLp6tievov enough to see in these six verbs the behaviour of the mortalsubstance as the object of perception. It is said to provide only a phantom or &(Luapparition of itself, dim and uncertain ((pa[,O 7CPEeL xacl a6X7aLV
xocd &3?a3ocLov 8pm&v mu&Tir): thus exactly

like a phantom the mortal sub-

stance 'approaches' the knowing subject (npZvor 'Fo

and o6yco&)

'de-

parts', it 'takes a certain shape' and 'fails' again etc. As for the third pair, already von Arnim'6had referredto Philo de Ios. 126 (IV, p. 87
Cohn) jXOov &a7i XOov, &epa v Tac v a7r&en-'aGv (sc. ME cpv'a(ra )16, avvi=ovrouand auva&yL Obviously np6aeLaL, imply TO yLyv6Pevov of the mortal substance, and their opposites r6 ?pOzp6pevov au&vG.If so, then

we have the same Sceptic terminology also in de comm. not. 1083 B t eV zpet waos ouatacxpeLV oXi' epaaOLr TX 0&iva&vrv z0Oz'ar e
7ro0ev ErL6v'c 7poaC8Xop6voc- ot, 8i 7p6aeLGL XxL &7r{LGLV mptoxtoz6 &?X 9repa, yEVeaOau, TaoC, ?Lp-%LEUVMLt7pOa68oL i 7AOemL, toa&X&8LoX[lVeLV <xcd &cp6aoLq add. Herwerden> F,a;XXy4 v -ri o'tuacx X;vao.avou0'%7; the word ax2vwa is also Sceptic: 1085 B oAaEcc O'MaOrp&a xali cixe8maJ4
13 As correctly pointed out by A. Rivier, Mus. Helv. 13 (1956), 161 n. 50.
'1

Cf. J. Schroeter, Plutarchs Stellung zur Skepsis (Leipzig 1911), pp. 11; 20; 49f.

15 Quellenstudien zu Philo (Philol. Unters. 11, Berlin 1888), 94ff. 16 Cf. also de spec. leg. I, 26 (V, p. 6 C.).
17 Cf. also Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. hyp. III, 115. The source is probably Plato Tim. 42 A xcc so ,uiv rport(OL TO 8'&7toL 'Oi ac'tLMoq a&T,v (quoted by Reinhardt);

Phileb. 42 C etc. 33 C; 82 B &=6nv% npomL6v; 43 A 17rEppu'rovaCatm x.a &7n6ppvrov;

20

%odMt yepo?V

xeL

tpo8papc& xoL pxod oa0V ; the same is true of the {arzo

simile (392 A)18 and of the phrase 60U'Tnq x %trod-t

z pc3oXq19.

(3) The verbs of 392 B are used elsewhere by Plutarch: he uses the form axavca&L (qu. conv. 688 B; de fac. in orbe 933 D; 939 C)20; oM7o)XZ71nLV in this sense ('be wanting', Odyssey VII, 117) we have at 688 A
Mse'LTi &ZtoUX7Lr[OVrO4 (W'q
&VoX ?cp&C0V
';

UcpLa ?ZoL);

1067 C; Anton. xa

78

('to decease'); Demetr. 45. Cf. also

1025 C);
T

auva&yeLv

xc

aUVLntaVOL

(de an. procr.

aUV?ZeL (de

,?v yocp (sc. ytX'L?) aUv&yst

xoYL auvEa-t

amicor. multit. 95 A); 8aXLa -? x'p1oW-.n V, auvLar-XawV(non a'&pVOvLc posse suaviter vivi sec. Epic. 1096 B); de tuenda sanit. 129 C.21 (4) Further, axtLavna and auv&ysrare undoubtedly transitive; no instances for their use as intransitive are known (contra Kirk 384 "The question whether the first pair can be taken intransitively or not (they must be if used as above) remains"; Kranz "zerstreut sie sich und sammelt sich wiederum"22 etc.). I would suggest the reading
CaTLV% L

xoa

WOTV

uvayeL

< oCUcv>23.

J. Bernays24

has supposed

tenta-

tively <-o&c pipn aoc&>, and Flaceliere 62 renders "en dispersent les
elements, puis les reunissent 'a nouveau".

As already said, the subject of these verbs is Ov?yr-oUaLoc; Bernardakis and Diels have supposed Oseo (taken from Ps.-Heracl. epi. VI, p. 74,1 ff. Bywater, quoted by the same ad fr. 40; but this Posidonian passage has nothing in common with Heraclitus, contra Kirk 383); and Reinhardt (209 n.), Mazzantini and Kirk suggested the river as subject; both are improbable. (5) The words p3EXXov a? - a0oXsL7rL are a clear correction of 7'JX&V by Plutarch himself. The parenthetic character of these words might have been the reason for their omission in all the existing manuscripts (Paton even deleted them, but his reasons are not convincing enough). While correcting his Sceptic source Plutarch has at the same time changed the order of words adjusting the second pair of verbs
18

Cf. 1082 A.

Cf. de virt. mor. 446 F; Sext. Emp. adv. math. VIII, 7; Philo de spec. leg. I, 127 (V, p. 7 C); Sext. Ph. III, 115. 20 Quoted by Reinhardt 208 n. 21 This is probably again Platonic ... 1ca terminology, cf. e.g. Tim. 66 C 606TOCV
19 8 7oCp& (p6aLv iUVeaTCOTOC X SxUV'voc T 22 So already Schleiermacher; but
23

p?v EUVM'y?L -T

correctly Diels H.2

o6XLq

a' xOXaL. = VS4.

Cf. perhaps Philopoem.

20 auvxocyy&v
C7) 5ATj.

scxuTOv ('to collect oneself');

1077 C

... ?et ?ocU v a5bMcyop?6v5 24 Die heraklitischen Briefe

(Berlin 1869), 55.

21

both to the third one and to the general theme of y6veaq xocd pOop&i. In conclusion, in Plutarch's 392 B no reliable Heraclitean material is contained (contra e.g. Guthrie l.c.: "[392 B] ... reveals in contrast to most contemporary testimony the true Heraclitean conception" or Kirk, who puts these six verbs at the end of fr. 12a making out of them one single (and impossible) saying). Fr. [49a] ocuto <aL>25 Heraclit;qu. Hom. 24 7co-CoC,uoL -CoLq EPCXVOF.6v -e
p4oLvOVev, Pip?Lv tI

xocL OUX

xoOt oUx

eYev Sen. ep. 58, 23 in idem flumen bis

descendimus et non descendimus. 0. Gigon26 and Kirk 373f. were right in rejecting the fragment (contra e.g. DK; G. Vlastos, AJP 76, 1955, 343; G. Calogero, Gnomon 34, 1962, 324): its first part is reducible to the Platonic-Aristotelian (= Cratylian) summary of fr. 12a; as for the second part ('we exist and do not exist'), Kirk thinks that it "very probably" comes from Aristotle e.g. metafph. F 7, 1012 a 24 0otxe a' 6 p' 'HpocxXzV0ou Xoyoq, sivox, &7Uzv'rO X&?O67toeZv.I think it is improe ?T.yOV 7=6v7C eLVOL xOd' bable. It is clear that both Seneca and Heraclitus Homericus have used a common source. Now, from the context of Seneca (58,22: quaecumque videmus aut tangimus, Plato in illis non numerat quae esse proprie putat. fluunt enim et in assidua deminutione atque adiectione sunt... corpora nostra rapiuntur fluminum more... rem fugacissimam cor.Pus...) it becomes highly probable that this source was a Sceptic one (Aenesidemus?). Thus I suggest that the phrase eT,uev OAx -csxoca elysv comes from a source which was common also to Plut. 392 E... ou`-e toca3?Xov o <ouae& otux eaT-.TLV, oU' ?CTIaV ... Sieveking> o ocu-r64 ear&v. ?et'

25 26 27
&)

< > Schleiermacher (fr. 72), accepted by Walzer.

Untersuchungen zu Heraklit (Leipzig 1935), 106 f.; 97. The probable source for the Scepsis was e.g. Plato Theaet. 152 D ... nkvaoc a
(pm?ev
etVaL,

oiX

4p06)q

7pOGOyOpeOVT?4

gaTL

[I.V

yp

o08'7OT'

0o8?V,

YEyve'?oa.

22

Fr. 12a This is the only originalform of the river-statement (correctlyKirk374 contraVlastos 338 ff.). I think we can explain the genesisof other existing versions. Obviously the present tense 4LfP3VOUatV was meant by Heracitus as 'cursive' (Brugmann): 'Upon those who are (in the process of) stepping into the same rivers...' But it was understood (say by Cratylus) as iterative ('Upon those who several times step into the same rivers...). That is why we have since Piato onward the form with 8C5 plus Aorist: Crat. 402 A lg ec T6v UoTOv 7oaoy.GV oux Ov E[PaG (Plut. nat. in qu. 912 A; Simplic. Phys. p. 1313,11 Diels); Aristotle metaph. r 5, 1010 a 14 8AK notxit nooctuot oux macv 4iPvoar (Plut. de E 392 B; de sera num. 559 C; Simpl. in phys. p. 77,32; Olympiod. in cat. p. 4,33
Stiive; Philopon. in cat. p. 2,7 ff. Busse). Cratylus must have known
HO-?OLtcL '0oZLv aO
OZaLV .Lf3C4VOULmv 1T?pot

zXoc 8eptp

?7rLppZL.28 OC'Txa

because he correctsit: O'Cr6q the version with 8&s, yap Cro ou' &wai (Aristotle I.c.). As for the words oux I=Lv ,uLpv=, they were deduced from trepotxoct 9sspa{3cx'. The Scepsis (probably Aenesidemus) was an important transmitter of the saying (in the distortion of Cratylus). But if both Plutarch 912 A O'UXa'v (OGT0Cp06GL... &q5 TOZq CU'TO-K 58aCTa) 44POE-j... 9TEpOyap C"MppC-L and fr. [49a] come from a Sceptic source (as I would say they do)29, then we may suppose that Aenesidemus,besides Plato, has used Heraclitus' original saying as well (in view of the plural nora,uoLq, of the and of the phrase 9Xgpa present tense e[oc(voCuev eimppdZ turoc as well). Thus the stemma of the transmission of the river-statement might look grosso modo as follows. Reinhardt30was not conclusive enough, and Kirk's useful attempt (p. 375) seems to be incomplete (since he did not count with Cratylusand Aenesidemus).
This rhythmical and balanced Heraclitean saying consists of 2 x 13 syllables: the phrase 1cepa xa) 9-cepo(= Xtfpa &.t) is due to the stylistic reasons. Kirk's interpretation (p. 378): this repetition "strongly suggests the regularity" of the passage of water seems unlikely to me; the same phrase in Aristotle meteor. B 3,
28

357 b 30 &Ctyip &Wo xOa &)Xo y[yvVt7L TO6T@CV 1Xama-ov is, according

to Kirk 379

in fr. 12"; but this is a common phrase "strongly reminiscent of #sepa xxl crepm
in Greek: cf. Aristotle 341 a 8; 342 a 6; Plato Laws 632 E 9T?epov xxl o0cLt 9Tcpov ?8oq ^4 &.peqj-; Menand. fr. 536,8 Kock (= 656,8 Korte) &tFpav 7rCpLtLC1VaL etc. (-i?Levm Edmonds) X&'Fpav 'vrpLxuodazv 2* In view of 8ig and oux &v&ItLpodi (912 A); of bis and etlv re xxl oiuxeuev

(fr. 49a). *0 Hermes 77 (1942), 18 n. 2 = VermdchtnisderAntike (G6ttingen 1960), 60. n.24.

23

...............

Heraclitus (ap. Cleanth. SVF I, nr. 519) fr. 12a

.,

I~~~~~~~~~~~~4
<Cratylus814'rCk c&rc7 ooraiL
gaTLV ?FLVGL> OUYX

.,

;~~~~~~~~~~~~4
Plato and Aristotle

<Aenesidemus>

(1) Seneca, Heraclit. Homer. = fr. [49a] (2) Plutarch 392 B (== fr. [91]); 559 C; 912 A (?) (3) Simplic., Olympiod., Philopon. etc. [A 22] This group (Aristotle eth. Eud. H 1, 1235 a 25; Plutarch de Is. 370 D; Numenius fr. 16 Thedinga = A 30 Leemans, ap. Chalcid. in Tim. c. 297 Wrobel; Schol. AT on II. XVIII, 107; Simplic. in cat. p. 412,22 Kalbfleisch, quoted by Kirk 242f.) has no evidential value for Heracitus; it was overestimated by Bywater (fr. 43); Zeller3l; Burnet32; Guthrie447 and especially by Kirk ("this important saying"), Kranz33;
Kirk-Raven (p. 196 and nr. 216 "... the world as such would be
a7ropEaL7t. yEca4

destroyed"). Namely:
(1) All three Aristotelic passages with the (EN 1155

a 32ff.; EE 1235 a 4ff.; MM 1208 b 7ff.) have a source common also to Plato Lysis 214 A-216 A34.Besides, it is highly probable that EE ou yxcp&V CZVacL &op.LOVEOVV .L 6vro4 O'Eqo xocxL apoc... ?vowVr[Wv6vTmw is influenced by Plato symp. 187 A (so Dirlmeier VII, 372). The same
31 cotxticraOo ykp 1at Tr&iscv, vielleicht 824 n. 32 "It must represent something that was phy'-' 136 n. 3. 33 Hermes 69 (1934), 116. 34 "Miindliche Diskussionen" according deutsch, VI, 511: cf. 523f.; VII, 370: VIII,

Worte der heraklitischen Schrift..." in the original", Early Greek Philoso-

to Fr. Dirlmeier, A ristoteles Werke 435f.

24

will be true also of EN ex -Cov 8tm?poVvc = fr. [8].35

(sc. t6vwv) xoxMa'lv &pFov'Lv

(2) Now, at EN 7rtv1Ta x' gpLv yLVeaOotAristotle just paraphrases by memory fr. 80; but in the EE passage he attempts some sort of
commentary on the same fragment: xoL 'HpO(xXevToq
EnLtLMLCL O)t nOl-

II. XVIII, 107. No new material from Heracitus himself is aocvm present here. As for the words ou'K'ro ~Caoc (&Ov elvoa) &veu OXeoqxcxL
'vocv'wv 6,vrv ib., they are another explanation by Aristotle: &ppevoq

cf. [demundo]5, 396 b 9ff. (3) Plutarch is proabbly depending on Aristotle EE: his words rr come from ou yrp &v?eVXLc... xovrpcp(evov (sc. rov"Op.pov) nvTh.)v yev6aeL & Loc; as for the words ix VuaXnxxcx&vTLvtaOeLo 'rv ykveaLv &x6v'rcov, they are an explanation of Plutarch's own: cf. de soll. anim. 964 E XOC'rJ7VyevSaLv OWurrv g OXLOaq auWtv1uyXQvetv ?kyouaL(sc. 'Eprz8ox67tOU
Xiq x%l'HpOCXvr'oq), 'cot
09nTUL

auvepxoCevou

tX. Troi &OCV&0,ou

(4) Further, Numenius and Schol. AT depend on Plutarch: optaverit and e5XeaOt come from Plut. eVx6o' v; mundum deleri and yxuaLv or &,t&v'r(xv: from 'fl) 7rv-vrwv yeviaet x ap?4evov; quodnon inx6apuou
tellegeretfrom XavOvetv.

(5) Finally, Simplicius combines the EE topic with the Peripatetic rafters-simile:
Simpl. in cat. p. 412,23 Kalbfl.
4JUf OtXOL'O
Oiv'Toc. 86 aV
7'V'Ot

?L

Philopon. in cat. p. 104,34 Busse

ous kmetxmcxaouaL m&
,n) XOC't roq06MVTpelaoVlV

yap T6 9repov -r)V e'vxv'd&v brtXetvocva&cpO

T6L XoC pLe4 0o" sc7m6v-rL qg

(sc. ra' 7tpo6 W-XCa

up6c'Hpax),etSroq

ptg

Oerv gx r' vOpCrowv&7r6?XotT~O'. Oty)ScrEaOO yap pist. wavTa I

XXTe

&cvoLpeOkv'roc o1x avt),tsz u o 7c6 vo

U 'OV &pou 0u?)otq tOu&,rcV y&p T ~a-r or 'r6

Alexand. ap. Elias in cat. p. 242, 14 Busse MOV'rLKetiVaC, g5 xoL drc

xmaomaL t6Am
aC,)Let

7rmpm8r.LytLm XoapTLVOq

0Le?TmMvTLOe, as p &Vet, &'TLVM &;XJqXo36.

cf. e.g. Laches 188 D. Cf. also [de mundo] 5, 396 b 15 jiotastx3 xxMeaTy OpCowtvx ... &v a6pom; qcavov &-ircTXc"cv &pLovEacv and Hippocr. de victu I, 18. 4k,uv As for the words of EN sr &v'tiouv auLFpov, they probably also come from symp. 187 A, namely from Heraclitus' fr. 51 8Locxp6Levov ... kuLppea6OaL paraphrased by Plato there. 36 Cf. also Chrysipp. ap. Gell. VII, 1, 3 et quasi mutuo adverso quaeque fulta nisu consistere (SVF II, nr. 1169), and K. Praechter, Philol. 99 (1933), 342ff.

25

Simplicius' evidence is highly misleading; he changed the Aristotelic terminology: vxtpe0e'os into e' kmXeC[LeL, OUX araL into OLXy-aeaktL... McpvLaOvto, and (what is worse) TO Xocorv into nm&vta(under the inis only the av'dOLeaL fluence of the topic ar'yxumL x6apou).For him gptq = 'he means' (and not 'he exor &vCY peta of the relatives, and pnvat pressly says'). Consequently, no new material from Heraclitus is contained. Fr. [67a] Nothing is here from Heraclitus (contra M. Pohlenz37,Diels, Kranz38, Kirk-Raven p. 160 etc.) . (1) In the Stoic spider-simile (cf. Chrysipp. de an. ap. Chalcid. in Tim. c. 220 Wrobel - SVF II, nr. 879) aranea plays the role only of (animae principale), and not of the soul as such. the 4qy'uoVLxOv (2) The words cui (corpori) firme et proportionaliter iuncta (anima) only repeat the Stoic images of the hegemonicon, and have nothing to do with Heraclitus' fr. 31 sK ro'vouvrov?oyov (contra Diels, VS4, and Kranz 113): cf. Chrysipp.I.c. animae principale, positum in media sede
cordis, sensuum exordia retinere; animae partes velut ex capite fontis cordis sede manantes per universum corpus porriguntur... totaque anima sensus... velut ramos ex principali parte illa tamquam trabe pandit...

The image of the spider's web or of the tree implies enough proportionality and symmetry by itself. (3) The words impatiens laesionis corporis (sc. anima) and de lii persectione dolens (sc. aranea) presuppose frr. 110 and 111 Wehrli of 'rr xactT 7rtcaOY Straton from Lampsacus (1-rpX&OV x xac -ak
&v aOCaULc eVGL j,Y eyOVLX(dl, 'r6tLt OVx eV tOLt 7rsMV06oOL

ovLavxa'OaL

and
Gt Vo

;parOLv... xxi.ac,
6X4

L &Xyiotv x6nacq ... xKG 7t6vou x0a 68Cvxc39 xoi xo .tpvic,

-7 'o

MtaOv aV IV 'flXr mJUX7t aUVLAO... 7tO,xaIOV

F 'X

' o6 rr'rovOe Puxsk occp

festine meat fr. 67a).4?
37 Berl. Ph. W. 23 (1903), 972.
30

anima aliqua parte corporis laesa illuc

Hermes 73 (1938), 112f. Cf. Fr. Solmsen, Mus. Helv. 18 (1961), 181ff.; H. Diller, Herm. 76 (1941), 378.

39 Wyttenbach: t8ov&4codd.
40

- Hippocr. epidem. VI, 5,5 (V, p. 316 L.) tuxn4 neprovro5 ppov-di &vOp'TrOLaLV

(cf. de victu 1,6 = DK I, p. 183,21) is not an argument pro the authenticitv of fr. 67a (differently K. Deichgraber, Die Epidemien u.d. Corpus Hippocr., Abh. Akad. Berlin, Phil.-hist. Kl. 3 (1933), 61; Diller, Gnomon 18 (1942), 76).

26

(4) The name of Heraclitus came to Hisdosus Scholasticus (about 1100) through Aenesimedus;cf.:
Sext. Emp. adv. math. VII, 349 rG5 o'L tuiv sCxrO'q &XX' CT(O[ovr(sc. 'Tv &xVOLaV), @6 AivsaL8Tog xa(350) o'L8i oc6 'v elvoc
8gt CUEt, XOCOM7ep
TOCq

alo-'
TOV f^c

TLVOV47t(V
X U7T OIT OV

piV zTCp UC X -n(o 4pe Drpomov-re (uCL6 Trocaewq xocl Atv-atL&joq (cf. Diels, Dox. 209ff.). oCST L

O~aOinrpl&)v

spoxus7t<Oua.o,4'

r&v alaOjr.xv 8L&& 7t6p&v aL&TLV(s)V OUpC8WV &3-Mep 7poxG4as (130)

{X

6X

MfLro ^5M

) ...

41

Tertull. de an. 15,5; 14,5 ut neque extrinsecus agitari putes principale istud secundumHeraclitum. non longe hoc exemplum (sc. Archimedis organum hydraulicum) est a Stratone et Aenesidemo et Heraclito.nam et ipsi unitatem animae tuentur, quae in totum corpus diffusa et ubique ipsa, velut flatus in calamo per cavernas42ita per sensualia variis modis emicet,41 non tam concisa quam dispensata (cf. Waszink2pp. 217 f.). Chalcid. in Tim. c. 237 Wr. at vero Heraclitusintimum motum, qui est intentio animi sive animadversio, porrigi dicit per ocu-

lorum meatus atque ita tangere tractarequevisenda.

[A 16] This is a sheer forgery by Aenesidemus, without evidential value for Heraclitus (contra Kranz I.c.; Kirk-Raven nr. 237 and p. 208 "Sextus' information... is obviously important" etc.). It presupposes: (1) the discovery of the dLa-rLXO' t6nOpoL (probably by Straton); (2) the teaching of the air as cosmic principle (i.e. after Diogenes from Apollonia frr. 4; 5; cf. Sext. adv. math. X, 233 ro6r Ov xccrO' C6v 'HpcxXeL'ov&p ecsLv, ~co p)atv o A1vjaL]i8moq; IX, 360 xotr' EvLouq'HpcaxeLr-qos&6px (SZVrLL &px-v xal a-oLXeZov)43;(3) also the coal-simile is elsewhere known
4" Cf. Philo fr. 615 Mangey; Cic. Tusc. I, 46; Lucret. III,359f.

(cf. Heinze pp. 103f.; Bailey p. 1052); Anon. physiognom. II, p. 17 Forster; Philo de plantat. 169 (II, p. 167 Wendl.) etc. 4" Cf. SVF II, nr. 885. is Cf. W. Theiler, Zur Gesch. d. teleol. Naturbetrachtung bis auf Aristoteles (Zurich 1924), 6; 58; Diller, Herm. 76, 372ff.

27

(Xenophan. A 38; Hippon A 2 = Cratin. fr. 155 K.; Aristoph. Clouds 96f.; Tzetz. in nub. 96a cf. Holwerda p. 404; Epictet. III, 16,2).44 Fr. 35
Clem. strom. V, 140,6 Xpy yap ei [LM?X cno?XiWv tatopacMrpt?oa6Ocouq &v8poxq &v'CyxN"t7COX&TCXOvCi0-vML &8T')JVOV etvct xoc6`Hp ?Eev'rov, xacl rL 6vrLO'C *p~i.evm& 'AOX6v1.45 Only the words 7rto?XXv tsaropc Xp' e.g. MivOp(7rouq (cf. frr. 1; 107)

might be by Heracitus." Although Xp' could well belong to Clement47,nevertheless it is more probably authentic: because of the analogy to &vxcyx(Xp' Anecd.: aeZ Plut.) in Phocylides, and because something like this must have existed in Heraclitus' saying justifying its use by Clement here. The same will be true of 7t. . On the other as hand, ?5 tiAop (which goes rather with Xp48 than with noXLXv,
eltvL

usually interpreted) and the clX6co?ot Uvpeq probably belong to Clement. Contra of e? ciXoca it can be said that it is very common in

Clement (22 instances in Stahlin's Index) and that it has here much the
same function as rc-ot 6V-r.49 And against 'the philosophers' in the text of

&v pCv and Clement's Heracitus can speak strom.I, 68,3 yev' ycpoa6oq&c as adjective.50 predilectionfor 9LX6aocpoq Fr. 23
AEX4

oc 6vom oux &mv ?C&acxv El Trak

v. Pseudo-Heraclitean

letter

VII (p. 76,14 Byw.) and Clement,strom.IV, 9,7 coincidein interpreting

Cf. Diels, Dox. 209 f.; H. v. Arnim, Quellenst. zu Philo 88 f.; 92 n. 1; A. Goedeckemeyer, Die Gesch. d. gr. Skeptizismus (Leipzig 1905), 230 n. 3; Reinhardt, Kosmos u. Sympathie (Munich 1926), 192ff.; K. v. Fritz, CP 40 (1945), 235. 4 Phocylid. fr. 13 D.; cf. Plut. 47 E; Cramer, Anecd. Par. I, p. 166,17; Wilamowitz, Sappho u. Simonides (Berlin 1913), 174 n. 2. 46 Similarly H. Wiese, Heraklit bei Klemens v. Alex. (Diss. Kiel 1964), 258ff. for (typewritten). K. Reinhardt, Nachlass ap. Wiese 317f., took only ra'ropmq
'"

genuine.
47

In view of e.g. strom. VI, 65, 1 ,ro?u?a&x8i etvcx Xph'r6v VOarKx6V (cf. Wiese 260 n. 3). 48 So also Wiese 256; 260 n. 2. 4 Against this word also Reinhardt 318; Wiese 258 n. 4. 60 Wiese 259 n. 3 referred to Plato Phaed. 64 D. - Porphyr. de abstin. II, 49 seems to be of no evidential value, since probably depending on Clement (cf. Wilamowitz, Philol. Unters. 1, 1880, 214ff.; Platon, Berlin 1918, I, p. 107 n. 1; K. Deichgraber, Hermes 70, 1935, 110 n. 4, contra DK ad fr.).

28

gtx- as x6X=aL4 or vo4w; (i.e. punishment), and rat-U as &&LxLa, [ap'Ltx; thus they have understood Heraclitus' saying as follows: Clem.
St a4?aprEOC ,

v, x6?,ocL4 oix &v2tv.

evexx &xycO&v oiux avyevAOoic. vo6kov

Letter

otv4tmoL eiat Tex0vptov. aQ&x1ocq

What follows in the Letter (ei yap ,j 2aocv[sc. oLv6,uot]xwr.) has no more close relation to Heraclitus' saying. Consequently, both the Letter and Clement have understood 'o65oc as e.g. &L&X-UXtw, and to refer to Law or laws they do not provide support for taking rockoa (contra Schuster5l; Zeller 913 and n. 4; Diels, H.2 "Entweder die Gesetze .. ."; and Kirk 125f.). Now, that the word which lay outside the quotation of Clement,
and to which this siTa. refers, was really something like
'a& aLx

rocia,

we may infer from Chrysippus (SVF II, nr. 1169): nullum adeo contrarium est sine contrario altero. quo enim pacto iustitiae sensus esse posset,nisi essentiniuriae?52 Fr. [115]? Stob. III, 1, 180a (III, p. 130 H.) Zwxpacous-QuX4 SaL XOyosSMU'r6v au'cov.Hense, Schenkl and Diels attributed this saying to Heracitus. But I think it might be spurious; not so much because it is transmitted under the name of Socrates, but because of the following instances: Plotin. VI, 5 (23), 9 za xo 6 v cx x. ocCiv apL0 L4v geyov, ot3& uo vT ou's6 (III, 6 [26], 1; V, 1 [10], 5); Plut. de an. procr. 1012 D swvvp:iatv
r4 apt,v oCaLxv Puxn- rv O CPLO.L4
(irO&V 1(P,'9aOt)o5
XLVOUELVOV

7O9C7VOVLEVO

, v uPuxrv 404 b 29 axo:prjvOxCjVOL &ptop)v xwoUVO' zvut6v; A 4, 408 b

(sc. Xenocrates Academicus, fr. 68 Heinze); Aristotle de an. A 2,

32ff. According to Heracitus' fr. 45 the soul has a 'measure' (logos), probably for the change water-fire and vice versa (fr. 36). But the measure implies something constant, and a 'measure which increases
"I

Heraklit v. Eph. (Acta Soc. Philol. Lips., 3, 1873), 304. " Cf. J. Burnet, The Ethics of Aristotle, London 1900, I, p. 351 n. No change of 'Xoc' is necessary (correctly Kirk 125 ff. contra 'r&vTEa 'das Entgegengesetzte' of Diels, t&fwxx of Kranz). Improbably Reinhardt, Parmen. 204 n. 1 TT')rc, and Bignone (ap. Diels, VS4 p. XXIII) 'the opposites (cf. fr. 80)'.

29

itself' seems unlikely to me. Thus here I suppose this )Ayo4comes from

Xenocrates'IpLof.53
Universityof Merida, Venezuela.
I' The Hippocratic instances quoted by Diels (epidem. VI, 5, 1 _ V, p. 314 L.; de victu I, 6 and 7) seem not to belong here.

30