Pythagoras, Abaris and the Hyperboreans

Apart from his teachings, wonders and scientific discoveries Pythagoras was also known
for his wide-ranging journeys. Ancient authors alleged that he visited many countries and
nations from Egypt till India, stayed with Phoenicians and Ethiopians and talked to the Persian
Magi and Gallic Druids. However, he never went to the North. If, nevertheless, he turned out
to be closely associated with the North, it is only because representatives of the northern with
respect to the Greeks people themselves came into close contact with him. The first of them
was Zalmoxis, a deity of a Thracian tribe the Getae. According to a story that Herodotus heard
from the Pontic Greeks, Zalmoxis was a slave of Pythagoras still on Samos and, having
apprehended from him the doctrine of immortality, converted his tribesmen into it (IV, 94–96).
The tendency of the story is quite clear: the Thracians lived a miserable life and were simple-
witted, but Zalmoxis having been in service to Pythagoras, one of the wisest Greeks, came to
know the Ionic way of life, which allowed him to achieve success in the homeland. Thus, a
Samian wise man turns out to be higher than a deity of the barbarous people neighboring the
Greeks.
The next quest of Pythagoras, already after his emigration to Croton, was Abaris, a priest
of Apollo and a messenger of the most northern people – happy Hyperboreans, with whom
Apollo spent the cold part of the year. Plato’s student Heraclides of Pontus asserted that
traveling around Greece Abaris came to Croton and when Pythagoras has shown him his
golden thigh recognized in him Apollo Hyperborean. And indeed, the Crotoniates, according to
Aristotle, called Pythagoras Apollo Hyperborean (fr. 191). One more quest, who came
admittedly after Pythagoras’ death, is considered to be Aristeas of Proconessus, the author of a
poem Arimaspea, in which he described his journey to the lands of the Hyperboreans. Though
Aristeas got only to the tribe of Issedones, he recounted about the Hyperboreans what he learnt
from the other people, thus having become one of the experts in this field. According to
Herodotus, 240 years later Aristeas suddenly has appeared in Metapontum, where, as we know,
Pythagoras had died and where until the mid-fifth century existed a numerous Pythagorean
community, and told the Metapontians that of all the Italians Apollo had come only to them
and that he, Aristeas, accompanied the god in the shape of a raven. Before disappearing again,
he ordered the Metapontians to build an altar and a statue of him, what was fulfilled after
consulting the Delphic oracle.
Abaris’ visit to Croton and Aristeas’ posthumous visit to Metapontum left some interesting
consequences both miraculous and quite historical. Thus, Abaris recognized in Pythagoras not
just a superhuman being but Apollo Hyperborean himself. This clearly singles him out the
Presocratics, even if we recall that Empedocles in his poem «Purifications» declared himself
an immortal god. To be sure, Hyperboreanism of Pythagoras remained an isolated episode of
his legendary biography. After the fourth century B.C. the only subject developed by
philosophical biography was his meeting with Abaris, to which with time more and more
fabulous new detail had accrued. The second, historical result of the visits was that in the
catalogue of the Pythagoreans compiled by Aristotle’s student Aristoxenus appeared the names
of Abaris the Hyperborean and Aristeas, though no longer of Proconessus, but of Metapontum.
Since this list is a source of primary importance based on documentary evidence, the fact that
it includes these two characters makes an unexpected and odd impression. In this connection I
would like to examine how a tradition about Pythagoras’ encounters with representatives and
connoisseurs of the northern people was formed and a partial interpenetration of the
Pythagorean and Hyperborean occurred.
As early as the first story, on Zalmoxis, clearly shows the principles according to which
Pythagoras was gradually associated with the remaining characters. The Pontic and
Hellespontic Greeks, with whom Herodotus communicated, had perceived a resemblance
between Pythagoras’ teaching on transmigration of the souls and religious beliefs of the Getae
(a resemblance which was certainly very superficial and in no way pointed out to the real
contacts between them) and made Zalmoxis not just a student but a slave of Pythagoras.
Herodotus did not fully believe in this legend and still he reported it since it suited his own
notions of the intercultural communications. In all other cases the starting point also was some
resemblance, real or imaginary, between teachings and wonders of Pythagoras and those with
whom he was brought together in the legendary tradition. The roles of the giving and receiving
sides were prearranged and depended on the Greek notions whom they ought to learn from and
whom to teach. In case of the contacts of Pythagoras with the Oriental people he always was
an active, seeking side and they were his wise teachers. When at issue were people living to
the north from the Greeks, whether real or mythical, the giving or simply the stronger side
turned to be the Greek wise man.
Interestingly, since Herodotus’ times these two principles – resemblance and
prearrangment of the roles – are not in the least antiquated: they are used with the same
success in scholarly and para-scholarly literature devoted to Pythagoras, the Hyperboreans,
Abaris and Aristeas. Thus, in the last book of Peter Kingsley, once an English scholar and now
an American pop-guru, entitled A Story Waiting to Pierce You, the land of the Hyperboreans
turns out to be Mongolia, whereas Abaris becomes a shaman of the Mongolian tribe Avars,
who initiated Pythagoras into the depth of Oriental spiritual tradition. The deciding factor in
such an identification is, first, coincidence of the name Abaris with the Greek appellation of
the Avars, whom the Byzantines have meet for the fist time in the sixth century A.D., and,
secondly, an arrow that Abaris carried with him – for an arrow was in great esteem with the
Mongolians. Revealingly, the Hyperboreans in Kingsley are turned from the northern people
into Oriental one, which is to say in those, who according both to the ancient and modern ideas

2
are allowed to be the teachers of the Greeks. Indeed, rationalization of the ancient mythical
geography – the Hyperboreans, the one-eyed hairy Arimaspi and the griffins guarding the gold,
who have been described by Aristeas, turned out into such a fascinating enterprise that I only
unwillingly leave this topic and return to the early Greek sources.
Let us consider how a story about Abaris’ visit to Pythagoras emerged. Originally
traditions about them evolved independently. The first to mention the Hyperborean were
Pindar and Herodotus, then Plato and Lycurgus the orator. Abaris came from the land of
Hyperboreans, he abstained from meat, in his hands he carried an arrow, a sign of Apollo, and
predicted the future. He is still unconnected with Pythagoras, though in Plato’s Charmides
Abaris together with Zalmoxis appear as healers who used magical incantations (ἐπῳδαί) to
treat the sick. This points out that he was linked if not with Pythagoras, then at least with his
Thracian student. The first author to directly link them together was Heraclides of Pontus, who
devoted to Abaris one of his dialogues. Generally, Heraclides in his full of fantasy dialogues
wrote about many of those who had reputation of a wonder-worker Pythagoras, Empedocles,
Abaris, Aristeas, Hermotimus. Therefore, if before Heraclides we do not find traces of Abaris’
visit to Pythagoras, their first encounter can be related to the literary, not the folklore part of
the legendary tradition.
But how should we explain the fact that Aristoxenus, a student of the last Pythagoreans,
included Abaris in his documentary list of the Pythagoreans? He did not feel sympathy for the
miraculous side of Pythagoreanism and by all means tried to rationalise it, so that it is very
hard to suppose that he put Abaris on the list, relying not on the Pythagorean tradition but on
the fantasies of Heraclides. Peters Corssen, a classicist and Gymnasialprofessor from Berlin,
who published a century ago an exemplary paper on Abaris, did not take Aristoxenus’ evidence
into consideration. Does it outweigh the facts adduced by Corssen in favor of Heraclides as the
author of the version on the meeting between two wonder-workers? We can avoid this choice
by suggesting that Abaris was inserted into the catalogue by somebody else after Aristoxenus,
since this text is known to us only from Iamblichus. However, the catalogue bears no clear
traces of later editing, so that we should consider a possibility that Abaris of Heraclides’
dialogues, who fled on an arrow, turned out into a historical character in Aristoxenus, more
over a Pythagorean. In principle, historisation of the mythical characters is a feature of many
genres of Greek literature, and if Pindar regarded Abaris as a historical character and this view
was shared by many contemporary scholars including Martin Nilsson, should we exclude such
a possibility for Aristoxenus? Let us leave this question open for the moment and focus on the
material collected by Aristotle, our main source on the legendary side of Pythagoreanism.
As I told, Aristotle does not mention Abaris, but reports that (H 1) ὑπὸ τῶν Κροτωνιατῶν
τὸν Πυθαγόραν Ἀπόλλωνα Ὑπερβόρειον προσαγορεύεσθαι . It is important that this

3
quotation from Aelian deals with the Crotoniates who called Pythagoras the Hyperborean
Apollo, and not with his students who considered him to be Apollo having retuned from the
Hyperboreans as Diogenes Laertius and Iamblichus relate (H 2). Variant of Aelian, who
directly referred to Aristotle was most likely the original one, and it does not imply that
Pythagoras was identified with Apollo and even more so – venerated as a god. In addition, this
would be at variance with fact that the early legendary tradition ascribed to Pythagoras an
intermediary status between a deity and a mortal. This statement just as many similar
wonderful stories in Aristotle’s work On the Pythagoreans derives to all appearances from the
Italian tradition on Pythagoras. Croton was famous for his cult of Apollo and minted coins
with a tripod before Pythagoras emigrated to the city. A myth of the Hyperboreans, which was
current in the regions with a developed cult of Apollo, in the first place in Delphi and on
Delos, was much older and more popular than a legend of Abaris. It is quite natural, therefore,
that Pythagoras could have been linked with the Hyperboreans even before he was visited by
Abaris, though the latter pretended to be the first to recognize in Pythagoras the Hyperborean
Apollo.
Meanwhile, many fourth-century sources point out to Pythagoras’ connection with the cult
of Apollo; Archytas’ student Eudoxus of Cnidus even relates a legend that he was Apollo’s son.
The problem, however, is that a deity Apollo the Hyperborean is never mentioned by himself,
independently from Pythagoras, and his cult is nowhere attested. In other words, the epiclesis
Ἀπόλλων Ὑπερβόρειος or Ἀπόλλων ἐξ Ὑπερβορέων or Ἀπόλλων ἐν Ὑπερβορέοις occurs
in the Greek literature only in those several passages where it applies to Pythagoras. Thus, we
are dealing not with likening of Pythagoras to a god, existing independently from him, but
with a kind of nickname (recall Diodorus Cronus and Menecrates Zeus) that pointed out to his
resemblance with Apollo who returned from the Hyperboreans and through him with the
Hyperboreans themselves. What this similarity consisted in? All early biographers of
Pythagoras, including Aristotle and Aristoxenus, agree that he went to Delos for burying there
Pherecydes of Syros. Two late biographers, Diogenes Laertius and Iamblichus report that on
Delos he worshiped to the altar of Apollo Genitor, upon which only cereal gifts were offered.
(H 3). This fact was first mentioned by Cicero, who may have relied on the fourth-century
sources. If there was only one such altar on Delos, the Hyperboreans themselves completely
abstained from any animal food and lived only on wild fruits and nuts, which is quite typical
for the characters of the geographical utopias. The first to mention this was Herodotus
contemporary Hellanicus of Lesbos (H 4), but in itself this legend is ancient, and it is linked
with the corn gifts which were confined to the agrarian festivals and sent by the Hyperboreans
to Delos. Apollo who is going to the Hyperboreans and returning from them is in the first place
an agrarian deity. I believe that precisely bloodless sacrifices and an abstinence from the

4
animal food was the main feature which allowed to link Pythagoras with the Hyperboreans and
their patron Apollo.
Generally speaking, the tradition on Pythagoras’ vegetarianism is contradictory, a part of
the early sources claims that he abstained only from certain organs (e.g. the uterus and the
heart) or certain kinds of meat (e.g. from non-sacrificial animals). There is no evidence that
any specific Pythagorean was a vegetarian, thought we can hardly doubt that such Pythagorean
did exist. Aristotle, however, repots not about the Pythagoreans but about Crotoniates, and by
no means necessarily Crotoniates of Pythagoras’ times. By this last remarks I would like to
draw your attention to the fact that after the mid-fifth century when many Pythagoreans were
killed or left Italy, legendary tradition on Pythagoras evolved not only and may be not so much
in the Pythagorean circles as outside of them. According to the fifth-century sophist
Alcidamas, Pythagoras was honored by the Italiotes, which points out to a rather
wide circle, not confined to only one city. Now, in Heraclides Pythagoras shows
his golden tight to Abaris and the latter recognizes in him Apollo Hyperborean,
whereas in Aristotle these two episodes are independent from each other and Abaris does not
figure in them. Therefore, I believe that Apollo Hyperborean appeared in the legends on
Pythagoras much earlier than Abaris who was inserted in them by Heraclides. As Plutarch
noted, Heraclides asserted, with a distinctive for him blend of history, myth and fantasy, that
the Hyperboreans captured Rome, whereas Aristotle correctly reported that the city was taken
by the Gauls. Since the event at issue took place in 387, the Hyperboreans turn out to be
contemporaries and even neighbors of the Greeks. Such pseudo-historical details could have
mislead the readers of Heraclides, including his younger contemporary Aristoxenus.
Aristeas of Proconessus, being a more historical character than Abaris represents not less
complicated case. Its dating, as well as the circumstances of his journeys, both in his lifetime
and posthumous, until now are the subject of diametrically opposed opinions. James Bolton, an
author of a very learned monograph on Aristeas, considered him a traveler of the 7th century
who reached Altai and, possibly, ended his life in China, and also a poet, whose description of
the Hyperboreans inspired Pythagoras to convert into vegetarianism. My Moscow colleague
Askold Ivanchik regarded Aristeas as an early Pythagorean, who at the turn of the sixth and
fifth centuries emigrated to Magna Graecia and at some point was confused with the
Metapontine hero Aristaios, a son of Apollo. In the ancient texts the range of opinions is not so
wide. Herodotus, our main source of evidence on Aristeas points out that he did not reach the
Hyperboreans, but as early as Heraclides’ contemporary Theopompus claimed that Aristeas
came to Metapontum returning from the Hyperboreans (Н 5). Thus, bringing together of
Aristeas and Pythagoras on the basis of their closeness to the Hyperboreans seems quite
possible. The following circumstances, however, deserve attention. None of Pythagoras’
biographies links him with Aristeas: in Diogenes Laertius and Porphyry he does not figure at

5
all, while Iamblichus notes just once that the Pythagoreans trust all the stories about Aristeas
and Abaris, which may be true if under “Pythagoreans” we understand Iamblichus himself.
Generally, in Greek literature Aristeas is surprisingly seldom mentioned together with
Pythagoras, and every time as a part of the narrow or wide list of the wonder workers, as for
example in the fragment of Heraclides (Н 6). On their personal encounter or on Aristeas’
Pythagoreanism our sources have nothing to say.
Pythagoras and Aristeas did have common miraculous traits, for example, they both
possessed a gift of bilocaton, and it is quite possible that this ability was transferred from
Aristeas to Pythagoras. But still that was not enough to give rise to the version about their
personal contacts. Herodotus’ story on the second posthumous coming of Aristeas to
Metapontum implies a special status of Apollo in the city, but I do not see anything specifically
Pythagorean in the story itself. Aristeas’ journeys in the flesh, even in the shape of a raven, do
not resemble posthumous transmigrations of Pythagoras’ soul into the bodies of various
people. Thus, we have to conclude that the figures of Abaris and Aristeas both in the tradition
of the fifth-forth centuries and in the late stories based on it seriously differ in their respect to
Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans. Abaris was directly brought together with Pythagoras in
Heraclides’ dialogues, which was further evolved in the subsequent biographic tradition,
whereas Aristeas, being a figure in some sense kindred to Pythagoras, did not directly
contacted with him and his followers. What then should we do with Aristeas’ appearance in the
catalogue of the Pythagoreans? The simplest answer to this question is that a person figuring in
the catalogue is Aristeas of Metapontum, otherwise regrettably unknown. Bolton’s idea that in
fact we are dealing here with Aristeas of Proconessus appeared quite appealing, and previously
I shared it too, but on second thoughts I decided to drop it. A person who moved to another
city could sometimes give its name as a place of his origin, as for example Herodotus of
Thurii, though normally he referred to his native city. But to change Proconessus to
Metapontum as a result of a short posthumous visit proved to be unattainable even for
Aristeas: in all ancient text he figures as Aristeas of Proconessus, and not as Aristeas of
Metapontum. Neither editors of Iamblichus nor Diels have identified these two persons.
Thus, after closer inspection the tradition linking Pythagoras with the north, as imagined
by the Greeks, happens to be somewhat poorer than it is usually believed. Resigning the idea
of Pythagoras as a hypostasis of the Hyperborean Apollo and of Aristeas of Proconessus as a
Pythagorean or, according to Bolton, an inspirer of Pythagoras, we gain instead a little more
clarity and certainty.