This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
by FRIEDRICH SOLMSEN The Third Book of Aristotle's Physics embodies bis doctrine of the Infinite1. As so often in this work, bis own views emerge gradually from an examination of the opinions advanced by bis predecessors. He tries to be fair and understanding. The Presocratics had good reasons for introducing the apeiron into physicalthought, and there is something ευλογον even about the tendency to treat it s a principle (αρχή)2. For if it were not given this place, difficulties would arise: some other entity would have to serve s principle for the Infinite, and this would lead to the absurd conception of an Infinite that has an αρχή and a πέρας, i. e. limits. Therefore, καθάττερ λέγομεν, ου ταύτης αρχή, αλλ* αυτή των άλλων είναι δοκεΐ και περιέχειν άπαντα και πάντα κυβερνάν, ως φασιν όσοι μη ποιουσιν παρά το άπειρον αλλάς αιτίας, οϊον νουν ή φιλίαν3. It will be well to put here also the immediately following sentences which bring this train of thought to an end: και τουτ' είναι το θείον (seil, δοκεΐ) ' άθάνατον γαρ και άνώλεθρον, ώσπερ φησίν Αναξίμανδρος και οί πλείστοι των φυσιολόγων. In the clauses beginning with όσοι and ώσπερ Aristotle gives indications regarding the authors or Sponsors of these thoughts. The only individual thinker mentioned by name is Anaximander. He would to Aristotle's mind be a good spokesman of those who invested the Infinite with the august character of an αρχή 4 . It will nevertheless be necessary to ask whether Aristotle here presents excerpts from Anaximander's treatise or whether he has produced a kind of cento from the works of different physicists5.
See esp. Phys. III, 4—8. III, 4.202b36—203bl5. Besides the physicists proper Aristotle also includes the Pythagoreans and Plato in this survey of opinions. εύλόγω$ δε κσΐ αρχήν αυτό τιθέασι πάντες 203b4. 3 203blOff. 4 Cf. THEOPHRASTUS in DIELS-KRANZ, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (9th ed. Berlin 1960) 12A9 and 9a. 6 Strong arguments for the intrinsic unity and authenticity of this sequenco of thoughts are given by WERNER JAEGER, The Theology of the Early Greck Philosophers, Oxford 1947, 19ff. and CHARLES H. KAHN, Festschrift Ernst Kapp, Hamburg 1958, 19ff,
Arch. Gesch. Philosophie Dd. 44
Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 126.96.36.199 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM
F r i e d r i c h Solmsen
Wo shall not lose sight of this question. But it seems better first to turn to another passage in Book III where Aristotle, again prcscnling Statements celebrating the άπειρον, includes an item which is absent from the former passage. This second passage is fouiui at a juncture where the analysis of the concept and the critical discussion with the earlier thinkers have been carried much fartlier, and it is in a critical spirit that Aristotle now returns t o those who have made such 'solemn' Statements about the άπειρον. He has just shown how wrong it would be to identify, or in any way t o associate, the concept of the Infinite with that of the "whole" (το όλον) 6. The whole must have form and boundary, a ττέρας. Yet such an erroneous identification of the whole and the Infinite underlies, in Aristotle's opinion, some of the early speculations about the άπειρον and has inspired some descriptions of it: έντευ θέν γε λαμβάνουσι την σεμνότητα κοττά του απείρου, το πάντα περιέχειν και το παν εν έαυτω έχει ν, δια το έχει ν τινά ομοιότητα τω δλω7. In Aristotle's own view the άπειρον is nothing to be solemn about. It is "unknowable" (άγνωστοv), and it has more in common with matter than with form; και ου περιέχει, άλλα περιέχεται fj άπειρον 8. Το the end of the chapter (6) he goes on exposing the fallacies involved in the identification of άπειρον and όλον (or το παν). The earlier passage furnishes us with the words περιέχειν άπαντα και πάντα κυβερνάν. Here we find (το) πάντα περιέχειν και (το) παν εν έαυτω Ιχειν. The two cola of the later passage are clearly intended to illustrate the solemnity which Aristotle considers unwarranted. But it can hardly be denied that the descriptions of the άπειρον included in the earlier passage are just s solemn — if πάντα περιέχειν is solemn now it must be solemn also in the other chapter, and nobody would wish to maintain that to treat the Infinite s αρχή, t o speak of it s αθάνατο v and άνώλεθρον, or to say that it πάντα κυβερνά is less solemn than the phrase common to both passages. The earlier passage has its very definite ethos and atmosphere; by a momentary evocation Aristotle here brings them back. By now it seems possible-perhaps even likely-that one early thinker was particularly enthusiastic about the άπειρον and that it is he from whom Aristotle quotes on both occasions.
6.206b33ff.; esp. 207a8ff. Ibid. alSff. The δια clause explains the εντεύθεν. We need more than a comma before έπεί (18) and less than a period before ou (17). 8 a21, 24f.
Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 188.8.131.52 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM
On the value of E ( = Par. writes και ουτω$ λοιπόν τα τω δλω υπάρχοντα του απείρου κατηγοροϋσι.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences Hl However we must examine the second passage somewhat more closely. The third commentator. Themistius11 too reproduces the thought of our passage: ήδη και σεμνύνουσι το άπειρον. offers nothing that is relevant. 103 ff. yet we must not therefore regard it s immaterial that both have πάντα where the available manuscripts of Aristotle have παν or το παν12.gr. α τω δλω προσήκει και τω παντι ταύτα επί το άπειρον μεταφέροντες. 27ff. 1853. I should mention. ineuntis) see W. Let us apply the 'pragmatic test' to πάντα and see how it works out. Some manuscripts of the Physics—including the best and presumably oldest—omit the words και το παν εν έαυτφ έχει ν 9. ROSS. If we find an alternative wording. Simplicius10. 12 If the second το in Aristotle's text were to be the article we could regard the first s introducing the entire quotation and there would be a presumption that the clauses were continuous in the original text. Aristotle's Physics. The alternative wording may seem to diverge only in minutiae but s there is now some hope that we may here recover the authentic words of one of the earliest thinkers we surely need not apologize for pondering every syllable. X. V (95. Graeca IX ad loc. But possibilities of haplographia and haplologia would also enter into the question. Philoponus. ("special importance" s "sole representative of one family").12ff. saec. although I would not make too much of it. The sequence of the relevant words in both commentators suggests that they may take a certain liberty. we are in a position t o reconstruct a sentence of which the άπειρον would be the logical or the grammatical subject and which would run s follows: (α) πάντα εν έαυτω έχει και The words are lacking in E and V. Accepting πάντα.). Of the two το the former evidently has the function of a double colon or a quotation mark. 11 Ibid. paraphrasing Aristotle's argument and following him into his exposure of the mistaken identification. But this omission is obviously due to the homoeoteleuton and there can be no serious doubt that the phrase is a part of Aristotle's text. (502. 8* 9 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132.). in Arist. Still it is well bear in mind that not all manuscripts are present to attest the wording of this clause. Oxford 1936. το πάντα περιέχειν και το πάντα εχειν εν έαυτω. that there are instances in which E (or V) alonc agrees with an ancient commentator (see ibid.9. το περιέχειν πάντα και πάντα εν έαυτω εχειν. the second must either have the same function or be the article of παν.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM .). D. 113ff. 10 Comm.248. this will not have to contend with the unanimous testimony of all manuscripts.
13 and 10. Two of our cola. phrased his thought differently on the later occasion ? In truth πάντα εν έαυτω έχει v and πάντα περιέχει ν are not two alternative ways of expressing the same idea. περιέχειν means more than to "include in oneself". and n. comprise. 153. 16 Class. admit nevertheless that "the whole phrase may form a single rhythmical unit"13. and probably also a perfect description of the άπειρον s i t was conceived by Anaximander. 209ff. Munich 1926. although it would not be unthinkable that Anaximander chose the anticlimactic sequence. E. If this could be said while only two members of the period were known it should be evident that the sentence s it now Stands forms a rhythmical or stylistic unit . Vlastos16 has taught us to regard Parmenides' άμφι$ G. \vhili! thinking it possible that Aristotle combined ττεριέχειν άτταντα and ττάντα κυβερνάν from different sources. a perfect climax. KIRK and C.) that in a text reflecting Stoic thought we could expect συνέχειν rather than περιέχειν.248. Tliere is one difficulty.9.39 and 42. comprehend. 115. even if not supported by recensio. πάντα περιέχει and πάντα εν έαυτω έχει strike the modern reader s tautological. of συγκρατεϊν. however K. excell. cit. REINHARDT admits (Kosmos und Sympathie. JAEGER. I prefer the climactic arrangement of the three cola. The Presocr.]\2 F r i e d r i c h Solmscn (ά)τταντα περιέχει καΐ (ά)τταντα κυβερνςί. deserves very serious consideration. In the prose of the earliest thikers we do not expect to find stylistic tricks or redundancy of expression. 13A7). would legitimately inherit the περιέχειν. In his opinion περιέχειν s used by Anaximander implies a 'safeguarding'. Cambridge 1957. The dictionary15 offers us a large choice of meanings: encompass. Serious reasons militate against the authenticity of this fragment. B 8. perhaps resuming a point he had made previously. Philosophers. surround. or something very close to a synonym. 14 13 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. being a successor of Anaximander's άπειρον (Vorsokr.5—7. 202 n. Each of these verbs suggests more than the physical presence of one entity within another. embrace. Kirk and Raven. v. What better result could wo vvish ? The reconstructed sentence is a perfect tricolon. He refers to PARM. By the rules of recensio we should be justified to adopt πάντα for each of the three xlauses but άπαντα. Phil.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . Themistius and Simplicius probably found ιτάντα in their Aristotelian text. Are we then to dismiss the idea of a tricolon and rather suppose that the author. overcome. 15 See esp.s well s a unit of thought14. LIDDELL and SCOTT s. 42 (1947) 172 ff. Α tricolon two of whose members are identical in meaning would exhibit a climax of dubious honesty. surpass. Cf. RAVEN. In Anaximenes B2 the verb is a synonym. protect. op. This may well be the reason why the tricolon has never yet been reconstructed and why in particular Anaximander's paternity has never been considered for the colon πάντα εν έαυτω έχει. S. The air of Anaximenes.
.303t>12 and de gen. My reason for referring to it is that it helps us to understand why Aristotle quotes περιέχειν άπαντα along with πάντα κυβερνάν where he is anxious t o illus tr te the conception of the Infinite s an αρχή18.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM .1059b25ff. 17 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. whereas it would have been pointless to quote πάντα κυβερνά. The next point to be made is that the tricolon certainly does not lack σεμνότη$. The word indicates a control. a precedence. Aristotle refers to the Infinite s περιέχον also de caelo III. II. If it reaches its climax in the clause πάντα κυβερνά. K I. Vlastos argues. Stands half-way between εν έαυτω εχειν and κυβερνάν. When Aristotle says φαμέν το μεν περιέχον του είδους είναι. while present in περιέχειν. We shall presently see that later thinkers not only preserved these nuances of meaning but deveioped them and used them in establishing new relations between concepts. cf. a superiority. 18 It is probably not the περιέχειν but the πάντα περιέχειν which qualifies something s αρχή. 5. in the later passage where he has to explain why some thinkers are prone to identify the Infinite with the whole. Melaph. et corr. 4. It would not be easy to find a better intermediary or mediator. cf. is a divine prerogative.9. Conversely. no large step is needed to arrive from here at the predicate or predicates by which the Infinite acquires divine Status. 5.310b7—10.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 113 έέργειν s the equivalent of Anaximander's περιέχει v: the former expression means "to hold the limits (πείρατα)" and thereby to exercize a control which. Pann.332a25. 3. In poetry it was customary to describe the gods s steering or sitting on the De caelo IV. For περιέχειν s describing the relation of the whole and its parts cf. PL. Here the first part of our tricolon could not have served his purpose. We must of course not read this Aristotelian doctrine into Anaximander. overlapping the former inasmuch s both mean "to contain" and the latter inasmuch s both entail the notion of control. το δε περιεχόμενον τή$ Ολης17. do not exhaust its content.. we may now say.: (το 6v and το εν) μάλιστ' αν ύποληφθείη περιέχειν τα δντα πάντα καΐ μάλιστα άρχαΐ$ έοικέναι δια το είναι πρώτα τη φύσει. selecting each time the items germane to the development of his own argument. 145b. Περιέχειν.312al2f.248. Physical and spatial connotations. Thus it is reasonable to assume that Aristotle on both occasions quotes from the same text. he vindicates the precedence or axiological priority of the περιέχον over the περιεχόμενον. εν έαυτω εχειν and περιέχειν present themselves s the concepts applicable (or actually applied) to ^oth. since nobody would think of the whole in the role of a helmsman.
. For κυβερνάν and words of similar meaning in the poets see esp. 30ff. 9f. άνώλεθρο$ see now KAHN. 43.. dt. 2.114 F r i e d r i c h Solmscn hclmsman's bench.9. 30A2ff.6. where many illustrations are provided. the infinitely small. in Melissus to Being. Aeschylus' Agamemnon. By his time matters had become more complicated inasmuch s a new variety of the Infinite. 1. instead of continuing to be the subject. Anaximander's). Philos. But the place is never again the central and dominating one. EDUARD FRAENKEL. cf. αθάνατος. 59Blf. s. comes to find itself in the position of an adjective or predicate. On the divinity of το άπειρον see JAEGER. G ttingen 1955. I agree with Kahn that "at least the Homeric άγήρω$ must be his" (i. Anaximander is the only thinker for whom the άπειρον itself was the enduring and all-encompassing entity. the power in control of all that comes t o pass in the Universe. Anaxagoras explains at the beginning of his treatise in what sense he uses the word and to what entities he applies it. B2. 203bl3) is Anaximander's word. It is possible that Aristotle here states the thought in his own language. v. Anaximander is the only philosopher whom he mentions by name and there are tfood reasons to doubt that any other Presocratic would speak in such solemn words about the άπειρον. άγήρω$ ("immer mit άθάνατο$ verbunden. Actually αθάνατος καΐ άγήρως is a Homeric combination. cf. dt. au er HES. Note the word σεμνόν in this passage. . On άίδιο$. VLASTOS. loc.. 19 n. This is a remarkable 'conversion' of Anaximander's original proposition. Quart. in Empedocles to iheSphairos20. 108ff. Theog. LIESELOTTE SOLMSEN in Lexikon des fr hgriech. . but this would indeed be the minimum. ττοιητικώτερον19. and Anaximander's language was. 13A5. s Theophrastus obscrvcd. Anaximander and the History of Greek Cosmology. (1952) 113 doubts that θείον (Phys.248. 955").. Wo probably necd no longer worry about the possibility that Aristotlc in the first of our passages produced a cento of thoughts and quotations taken from different earlier thinkers. New York 1960.e. Epos. 31B28. had been brought into the discussion. KAHN. B2) is the only authority for it. 20 Vorsokr.7 (1).8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . We cannot here follow up all these developments but think it appropriate to quote one of Anaxagoras' Statements: και το γε περιέχον άπειρον εστί το πλήθος21. although Hippolytus (All. σέλμα σεμνόν ήμένων (Α g. op. I should of course not press this observation to the point of maintaining that See A9. 21 Ibid. 1. 19 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. Oxford 1950. In good philological language we may say that the άπειρον. Several later physicists accepted the concept of infinity from him and gave it a place in their own accounts. 182) s embodying the helmsman image. As far s we can form an opinion on the basis of the fragmentary mateiial. Fraenkel accepts the ancient exegesis of δαιμόνων . In Anaximenes the quality of άπειρον attaches to the air.
II. The Infinite has ceded its titles to the Cosmos. When Empedocles and Anaxagoras introduced a 'moving cause' this cause took over the task of steering. ibid. However. deor. the trend of the development will be ciaer. de nat.248.. 1. The thought is surrounded by arguments for which Chrysippus is named s author. Fortunately another Stoic argument (likewise reported by Cicero) leaves even in its Latin Version no doubt s to the meaning of its terms: mundus quoniam omnia complexus est neque est quicquam quod non insit in eo perfectus undique est2*. ever after we may have to look to the movers for this function which Anaximander's allpowerful deity combined with the two others. V. 35. 203bl2. 38. 3.9.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . those who believed in infinity would either attach this concept to one of these other entities or set up some other kind of relationship between the άπειρον and the pivotal ideas of their System. The 'perfect' and divine entity must still legitimate itself s such by showing that it fulfils the condition of πάντα εν έαυτω εχειν s well s of πάντα περιέχειν25.2). The only fragment which shows the Aoyos in this role (CuRYS.537. In the later thinkers it was entities other than the άπειροι that occupied the place of the principle (to use this convenient term). In the later history of physical thought each of the predicates that figure in our tricolon was treated with the respect and care due to a precious heirloom.390) has no relation to cosmology. Still.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 115 after Anaximander it could never again be used s subject. In examining some phases of their later fate we shall find ample support for our contention that for Greek feeling there is a considerable difference between πάντα εν έαυτω εχειν and πάντα περιέχειν.. For the κυβερνάν motif Aristotle in the passage which forms our starting point gives us a very valuable 'lead'22. F. Even when a Stoic argument (preserved in Cicero's de natura deorum) leads us from the primae incoataeque naturae to the universa natura and having reached the latter declares its perfection: universam naturam nulla res potest impedire propterea quod omnis naturas ipsa cohibet et continet2*. it is not quite easy to decide which Greek word (or concept) is rendered by each of the Latin verbs. it would be rash to regard cohibere and continere s mere Synonyms. Cosmic piety would not easily havecome to terms with an 22 23 Cic. Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 26 For κυβερνάν in Stoic though see CLEANTHES' hymn (S/. 24 Ibid..
a separate — and entirely different — argument s needed to establish this thesis. 19. 110. ..8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM .. The passage also shows that the concept and the qualities of the 'whole' (το όλον) which Aristotle denies to the Infinite associate themselves very readily with the Cosmos27. άπαντ' εν αυτω γένη . . This argument makes no reference to the total amount of the elements or of other material constituents or ingredients of the world. 39e5. (however. Giving the περιέχειν motif a new turn.2β. Note the twb last predicates. άίδιο$ and άγήρατο$ are found between other and less exalted words).248. . . and in the case of the πάντα εν έαυτω εχειν motif this expectation is in fact borne out: των δε δη τεττάρων εν όλον εκαστον εϊληφεν ή του κόσμου σύσταση εκ γαρ πυρός παντός υδα/τός τε και αέρος και γης συνέστησεν αυτόν ό συνιστάς. Regarding his word for the latter concept we suffer from an embarras de richesse — in this of all authors! Plato hesitates to call his Cosmos immortal (introducing the word άνοσος in place of it ?). In the Timacus this process is well under way. πρώτον μεν ίνα όλον δτι μάλιστα ζωον τέλεον εκ τελέων των μερών εϊη. . and also 31a3ff. It is the more important for Plato to show that the Cosmos contains everything. cf. προς δε τούτοις εν. had gone back to Anaximander's belief in Infinity. Anaximander probably called the άττειρον imageing (άγήρω$) and immortal. The principle of the limit and the idea of boundaries — probably first set up by the · Pythagoreans in Opposition to the unlimited —have won a complete victory even in cosmology28. 26 Tim. εντό$ εαυτού εχειν 31al = εν έαυτω περιλάβω ν εχειν 30c8. εχειν 41b8f.9.)· Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. but since to 'embrace' is not the same s to 'contain'. . et above n. nor can he have used the word γένος in its Platonic significance. τάδε διανοηθείς. 33b2ff. Plato's Cosmos does 'embrace' everything. περιέχειν is a concept of less distinctly or less exclusively physical connotations than εν έαυτω εχειν. Aristotle's Cosmos has of course again both qualities (de caelo I. This thesis is proved with the help of the model-copy (παράδειγμα-εικών) relationship between the intelligible and the physical Cosmos. 28 The later Presocratics. 32c5ff. However it was not the Stoics but Plato and Aristotle who transfered the titles. We might expect t o find ττάντα here used with reference to the entire amount of the elemrnts that build up Plato's Cosmos. Anaximander had not yet known of the relations obtaining between Forms and copies. unwilling to accept Parmenides' doctrines that the v is bounded. 27 See above p. 29 See esp. έτι δε ϊν' άγήροον και άνοσο ν ή . . μέρος ουδ /> ουδέ δύναμιν έξωθεν υπολιπών.1]6 Friedrich Solmscn "nll-cncompassing" Infinite.270blf. 3. Plato asserts that the Cosmos s a living being embraces all other gener a of living beings29. As we have already said.
is sometimes used s relating to the circumference of our world and sometimes s relating to το συνεχές σώμα τη εσχάτη περιφορά. Aristotle works out his proofs not so much with reference to the κόσμος s to the ουρανός. it still is worth considering what he means by the word ουρανός.278b8. i. The section of special interest to us begins at I. The identy of ovpccvos with όλον and παν (20) is again notcworthy. it is the circumference of it which πάντα περιέχει. His proofs differ from Plato's in that they are based on charao teristic properties of the elements. he here explains. The word. e. It is of ουρανός in this sense — in the sense of Cosmos — that Aristotle now asserts and proves το όλον το υπό της εσχάτης περιεχόμενον περιφοράς εξ άπαντος ανάγκη συνεστάναι του φυσικού και αισθητού σώματος33. 82 Ibid.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM .9. 8 and esp. 16—18. and while it is true that he has the Cosmos in mind. We must quote the decisive sentence of the third definition: (ουρανός is) το περιεχόμενον σώμα υπό της εσχάτης περιφοράς32. For Aristotle. to the entire celestial area extending s it does from the outermost circumference to the moon31. in other words of the entire Cosmos. 21 f. the proofs that our Cosmos "contains everything" establish at the same time the thesis that there is no other Cosmos besides ours. to be precise. 83 Ibid. The chapters in question include a passage where Aristotle himself distinguishes three meanings of ουρανός. What matters in particular is that Aristotle has separated these two heirlooms and allotted them to different claimants. It would however not be wise to assume on the strength of this passage that he could identify the περιέχον only with the outermost circumference of our world. Thus it emerges that while for Aristotle the Cosmos πάντα εν έαυτώ έχει. s for Plato. Evidently the περιέχον or πάντα περιέχον must be something different. 80 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 278bll—15. 9. 81 Ibid. 19 f. and our sentence in fact specifies it s the circumference of the world.248. the heavenly circumference. most notably on the connection of each with its specific 'cosmic place'. He would probably not have been averse to regarding his "first body" (the aelher) s encompassing everyDe caelo I. 9.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 117 Aristotle gives us in de caelo new proofs of the doctrine that the entire substance of all elements is contained in this Cosmos30. However. The sentence makes clear that it is the Cosmos which consists of the entire physical material. and enclosed by. Let us however also note that the sentence describes the Cosmos s περιεχόμενον. What concerns us is the third meaning: ουρανός is also used of all that is within.
II. 272e4. Plato does not use the word κυβερνάν in cosmological contexts36. London-Cambridge. the first body and its movements. for the διοπ<υβερνδν of vo s and φρόνησις in the cosmology of earlier thinkers. et corr. 1. Cf. In actunl fact hc ncvcr uses this term of it but only formulates what wo might considcr a corollary of such a doctrine. D. . In all pertinent passages he uses περιέχειν not.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . In the words not included in our quotation Aristotle gives this movement of the first body the character of an αρχή. De caelo II. The latter are the αρχή κινήσεως. των δε δεχόμενη την παολαν34. then. 2. We may add one more observation with regard to Aristotle. LOEBedition. and it is only the πάντα εν έαυτω εχειν which must attach itself to the Cosmos s a whole. water. we need not be altogether guided by them. the πάντα περιέχον is for Aristotle not the Cosmos but a part or phase of it. 1952). Evidently. καΐ αυτή τέλειος ούσα περιέχει τάς ατελείς και τάς έχουσας πέρας καΐ παολαν .. LEE'S note ad loc. I.. with ivference to classes or gener a but in a good physical or even spatial sense.339a22f. for to say of it that it has neither αρχή nor -nipccs amounts to this (cf. We may be grateful to Aristotle because on one occasion he employs the word κυβερνάν. το γαρ τέλος των περιεχόντων εστί. The Stoics seem to have returned to Plato's decision that the 'containing' s well s the 'encompassing' should be associated with the Cosmos. (on δύναμη see H. again the Physics passage 203b6ff. 35 Meteor. yet Aristotle here at the beginning of the inquiry emphasizes that all physical processes that come to pass in it are caused by the eternal movements of the outer Cosmos. and thus it can be said that the entire 'capacity' (δύναμις) of the inner Cosmos κυβερνάται εκείθεν35.248. Mass. seil. . also Polit. The subject of this treatise will be the inner Cosmos. 28d8f. 36 See however Phil. Cf. 10. air.284a5ff. P.118 Friedrich Solmsen thing. At any rate. namely that l ho movement of tliis body encompasses (περιέχει) all other cosinic inovoments: (αυτή ή κίνησις) των άλλων πέρα$. the "first cause". των μεν αΙτία της αρχής. Yet while the reappearance of Anaximander's words is undoubtedly a matter of considerable interest and significance. At the beginning of the Meteorologica he distinguishes between what for short we may call the inner Cosmos consisting of the four elements or elementary strata (in the sequence fire.). like Plato.9. Critias 109c2f. the power of κυβερνάν πάντα and that of πάντα περιέχειν reside once more in the same entities. also the Implementation of the idea in de gen. earth) and the outer Cosmos. 34 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132.
4. a referencc to Anaximander's System. (p.9. or air. he here forces Anaximander into conformity with the others. assuming that he must have aimed at perfection and completeness.248. He makes the same assertion also earlier in that chapter. In the meantime we have learned something about the place of the άπειρον in later Presocratic thought. If so.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . We now return to Aristotle's Physics. Nor is it difficult to say which power 'steers' in Plato's Cosmos. In the Laws he speaks of itscosmic ruie s a παιδαγωγεΐν37. he also. ll ff. 41 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. for while in the other passage he imposes Anaximander's conception of αρχή upon the rest of the physicists. The only entity that Plato would entrust with this task is the world-soul. he again overstates his case but this time it is in the opposite direction. There is a difference between παιδαγωγεΐν and κυβερνάν but it is essentially a difference of ethos (it would of course also be pertinent to say that the world-soul s conceived by Plato directs cosmic events in ways formerly unknown).. ™ III. Here he very probably means to include Anaximander with the physicists who gave the Infinite a substratum41. Plato needs the world-soul. s we have seen. and what we have learned suggests that Aristotle overstated his case when in the passage from which he started he says that all physicists posit the Infinite s αρχή39. 897b2. X. although he there qualifies it by affirming that the physicists — in fact again "all physicists" — do not posit the Infinite s such "but provide a substratum for it" (ύποτιθέασιν έτέραν φύσιν τω άπειρω). or something eise in the role of an infinite body40. It is only in Aristotle that the three venerable capacities originally associated with the άπειρον become completely absorbed into the physical organization of the Cosmos38.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 119 but we would after all even without the help of this passage be able to teil in which part of bis physical world the power of directing events is concentrated. Plato reconstructs a λογισμός of the Demiurgc. which means that they introduce fire. 38 37 Ibid. the judicious disquisition in KIRK-RAVEN. note also άγει 896e8 (897a5). In contexts of this kind. a non-physical reality. 18 οίον ύδωρ ή αέρα ή το μεταξύ τούτων (ύποτιθέασιν). We must not allow Legg. s a ruie. uses περιέχει ν in a nonphysical sense. op. to keep the Cosmos under control. Even the arguments by which Aristotle proves that the Cosmos "contains everything" have a more distinctly 'physical' character than those used by Plato for the same purpose. 116). the phrase μεταξύ τούτων is. 203a3ff. 203b4ff. 16 ff. cif. Cf. whercas Aristotle operates with φνσικαΐ υποθέσεις regarding the natural places of the elements. 40 Ibid.
that of the Infinite some part is always left 'beyond'. 43 Cf. Not this language but the thought introduced by the former λέγουσι has a standing in the philosophical tradition. the word bearing emphasis would be μηδέν.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . What they say is evidently that there is μηδέν (or ουδέν) έξω του απείρου. seil. The following is a passage of the kind: συμβαίνει δε τουναντίον είναι άπειρον ή ως λέγουσιν ου γαρ ου μηδέν έξω. dt. being unnecessary. 206b33ff.248. 197. VLASTOS. If Anaximander said that outside was μηδέν (or ουδέν). 42 (1947) 172. 44 The authenticity of the word οντά in Bl is not above doubt. while εστίν. All οντά are within the infinite body 44 . Aristotle's own opinion.2 that it "in all probability reflects the true language of this early thinker". dt. Every φασίν and λέγουσιν of these chnpttTs inust be scrutinized on the assumption that Anaximander is 11 ic best. op.9. Anaximander is and romains thc only physicist for whom the άπειρον s such was the principlc and thc ccntral subject of physical thought. was probably omitted. It was not a fortunate thought to find in this popul r use or misuse of language — a ring called άπειρον because in turning it you reach no division or end — a clue for Anaximander's idea. candidate. interfering with its processes and upsetting their mutual balance43. 368). This approach will not yield results of mathematical certainty but in the case of a t hinker s important — and at the same time s poorly known— s Anaximander even possible additions t o his scanty legacy are worth recording. it seems reasonable to ask whether Aristolle does not also elsewhere in Book III look to Anaximander for descriptions of the άπειρον. the ontological significance of his Statement would be latent rather than explicit. Class. This vvould strike us s a corollary of the Statement: (το άπειρον) πάντα εν έαυτω έχει. rests on the principles of infinite division and infinite addition whose exposition he has just concluded. It is the contrary of what "they say". For a superficial Interpretation there might seem to be no difference between λέγουσι here and two lines below where it means "people call" (Ross. But a reader approaching Anaximander's treatise with an ontological bias could with perfect justification conclude ουδέν γαρ εστίν ή III. Phil. aithough not of course the only. αλλ' ου αεί τι έξω τούτο άπειρον εστίν42. 42 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132.120" Friedrich Solmsen oursclves to bc influenccd by thcse manipulations. Anaximander would have reasons for formulating the corollary and for excluding every possibility that anything might enter the άπειρον from the outside. I should agree with JAKGER. op. Tliis bcing the Situation. 6.
Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 121 εσται άλλο παρέξ του εοντο$45 and could call what is outside μη δν.37. and Aristotle.. who propounded it had to make every effort to provide the strongest proofs not only that nothing was. 1022a4. 45 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. himself takes care to make sure ότι οΰτ' εστίν έξω οΰτ' έγχωρεΐ γενέσθαι σώματος oyxov ουδενός. 128). . 48 Aristotle's arguments at 206b33 are directed not simply against a thoughi but against a specific wording of this thought. (Vorsokr.)· Cf. Plato's Demiurge is very careful to leave μέρος ουδέν ουδέ δύναμιν έξωθεν of his Cosmos. . Even μηδέν δ'ουκ εστίν46 could be deduced from what he had said.)· For ARISTOTLE see de caelo I.. παρέκ " s prep. In Plato and in Aristotle the ουδέν έξω and the πάντα εν έαυτω έχει are so closely tied up with one another that it is difficult to say which of them is the corollary of the other. while needing no Demiurge.9. 1) . g. cf. Quite certainly the idea that the Cosmos included everything was new. B6.7. 28) B8. and perhaps even paradoxical. We may feel inclined to suggest that if he had had a concept of space he could have made his point more easily by stating that PARM. Δ 4. His thesis was no less new and no less daring. cf. 9. except. but even that nothing could be outside the boundary of the Cosmos. 47 For PLATO see Tim.279a6. « PARM. B8.2. Parm. 33c2.7 (on c6 see below p. CORNFORD'S commentary shows that these early sections of Plato's cosmology embody many variations on Presocratic themes (Plato's Cosmology. London 1937.16 (the proofs which here come to an end repeatedly make clear that no άπειρον is possible. . 32c7ff.248. 12 f. revolutionary. But let us not therefore suppose that Anaximander's Situation was essentially different. he too had every reason to make perfectly sure — and perfectly clear — that when he spoke of the άπειρον s "including everything" (or including "all that is") he meant to reject the possibility that anything at all could exist outside it 48 . e.47 The most effective way of dismissing a venerable old conception is to present a new s ready and qualified to serve in all its functions. and in this instance too Parmenides merely changed the accents and the articulation. v. In this case too the Cosmos inherits the description of the Infinite.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . 53ff." There was "nothing outside11 that could join — or interfere with — τα οντά. Neither of these momentous departures involved materially the slightest modification of Anaximander's scheine. 2) besides. For many generations the opposite view had prevailed.277a20ff.3. also Metaph. 8. The two propositions are the obverse and the reverse of the same coin. LIDDELL and SCOTT s. outside . Cf. bold.
esp.. We may indulge in the experiment of imagining what effect a Statement like μηδέν έξω αυτού would have in the accounts of. αλλ' ώ$ άδιεξίτητον54. Empedocles. 49 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. B 17. 4. B14. 28. Melissus. easy t o define but we may try t o approximate it. The reason for this is less. The έξω would now be used of the Infinite itself s surrounding the Cosmos. or Anaxagoras50.204a9ff. Without preliminary disquisitions philosophers could now focus upon το παν or τα πάντα. and if a μηδέν or μη δν required consideration— or rejection — it would be that which threatened to arise between the πάντα: τοο παντό$ δ'ουδέν κενεόν πόθεν ο5ν τί κ' έπέλθοι. δ2 EMP.9.205blff. and s seen from it51. wondering about the correct definition of the άπειρον.32ff. Once the concepts of the πάν and the άπειρον had been 'grasped'.. while rejecting a view of the άπειρον by which it would lose its quantitative character and properties. Even so Anaximander's ckiinis remain the strongest. and with Melissus at 6. 51 Cf. Cf. 63 III. Bl. he says: ούχ o rcos ούτε φασιν είναι οι φάσκοντε$ είναι το άπειρον ούτε ήμεΐ$.. 1t would bc rash to deny that other Presocratics could use the phrusc μηδέν ?ξω of the Infinite or of something that they considered infinite (e. Yet slightly later. he may well by an arbitrary Interpretation elicit from one or the other of them a view regarding the άπειρον49. This opens up the possibility that in the early accounts the Infinite was described s something that cannot be traversed. 50 MELISSUS Bl—7. it was pointless to state that the former included everything and that there was nothing outside the latter. of the παν).248. say. EMP. Since Aristotle in these chapters tonds to force other physicists into line with Anaximander.7.204a2ff. ANAXAG. It would produce a jarring note. ARCHYTAS (Vorsokr. In this instance it would He does something of the sort with Anaxagoras at 5. το άδιεξίτητον53. meaning of άδιεξίτητον. g. LIDDELL and SCOTT fail to list 'intraversable' s the basic. At the end of chapter 4 Aristotle. The possibility has a certain interest. bis conccrn was vvith "things". MELISSUS B7. Here nothing suggests that he may be thinking of definitions or descriptions advanced by others. indicates several possibilities of connecting it with the 'intraversable' (το αδύνατον διεξελθεΐν. τα οντά. 47) A24.207al5ff. Actually t ho conccpt of spacc could not have served Anaximander's purpose.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM .122 F r i e d r i c h Solmsen Ihe cntirc space of Ihc Univcrse is occupicd by the άττειρον. 13f.52. 64 5.
it is not impossible that Aristotle at 204al3 has Zeno. sea. rather than Anaximander or anyone eise.) and the views held by the Champions of the άπειρον. On the other hand. therefore. Yet I do not see why this should be fatal to my hypothesis. 145. the bounded Cosmos is in principle traversable55. There is one point on which I disagree with Kirk. XENOPH.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 123 obyiously be fut e to look for anything similar in Plato's and Aristotle's conception of the Cosmos. di filol. earth. VLASTOS. applied to it also designations of a less sophisticated kind. 66 Theog. In my opinion he insists too rigidly on distinguishing between πηγή "in the metaphorical sense of origin" and a πηγή which only "feeds" but does not produce and which. 24 (1950) 235ff. for with or without space travel. the poet says: ουδέ κε πάντα τελεσφόρον εί$ ένιαυτόν οΟδα$ ΐκοιτ' ει πρώτα πνλέων εντοσθε γένοιτο56. The hypothesis bas been questioned by G. Cambr. Proc. If it were not for the possible links with earlier cosmological speculation. in mind. preserving ideas that had originated in the Imagination of the poets. New York 1951. des fr hen Griechentums.5D. Our uncertainty is increased by the fact that άδιεξίτητον serves Aristotle here s a kind of common denominator for his own definitions (a2ff. It. been inclined t o look upon this passage s an antecedent of Anaximander's άπειρον58. 1. 736ff. Dichtung und Philos. 740f. This imaThe reappearance of the άδιεξίτητον motif in Zeno's paradoxes would of course be noteworthy (Vorsokr. so obvious a "metaphor" cannot be ruled out for the early period (note πηγή = γενέτωρ. Kirk may well be right in denying Hesiod's authorship of the passage and it is certainly true that the cosmology of these sections is not s logically consistent or s satisfactory s the doctrines incorporated in the account of a physicist. besides offering for his άπειρον definitions of great speculative significance and of corresponding importance for the future of physical thought. B30. at least in one of Aristotle's definitions: δ μόγις (διέξοδον έχει) 57 . even without using Aristotle s witness for the άδιεξίτητον motif.248. Gnomon 27 (1955) 74. should on no account be = γένεσι$. Soc. 67 204a5. 184 (new ser. Aristotle's equation of the άπειρον with the άδιεξίτητον shows how closely the two conccpts were associated for Grcek fecling..-K). 29A25. the passage could hardly be presented for serious consideration. A cosmological section of Hesiod's Theogony presents a vision of the huge chasm which holds the "springs" and the "boundaries" of heaven. Some of us have.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . esp. S. Surcly. 26 ?). KIRK.9. In any case. Ι should not find it difficult to believe that Anaximander. See also HERMANN FR NKEL. 55 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 4) 10 ff. 58 I advanced this opinion in Stud. Philol. and Tartarus. Here is the άδιεξίτητον. But there are fascinating perspectives in the opposite direction — the concept of an άδιεξίτητον would throw light on Anaximander's debt to earlier speculation. Describing this chasm.
has long figured in the reconstruction of Anaximander's System. It would become Anaximander's άπειρον to cause the γένεσις of the elements or powers emerging within it and to receive their όλεθρος61.124 F r i e d r i c h Solmson gination h ad not yct grasped the idca of an "absolute" άπειρον. London 1948. Yet even here there is ground for doubt regarding the accuracy or trustworthiness of Aristotle's report.10. Early Greek Philos. See above p.9. 125 f. perhaps on the authority of Theophrastus.204b23ff. The 'moving cause' had not yet been split off from the 'encompassing' principle. ει άπειρον εΐη όθεν αφαιρείται το yiyνόμενον62. I have nothing to add to the discussion. 61 From Anaximander Bl it has rightly been inferred that the elements "pass into" one another.. 4th ed. "not t o bc traversed in a whole year" is its conception of the maximal expunse.284a7. 3. As the power which 'steers'. 118. 738). See also SIMPL. The 'infinite1 chasm of the Theogony may be said to περιέχει v the beginnings and ends of the major parts of the world (πηγαί and ττείρατα. the Infinite heads the pedigree of many later principles of motion. But the άπειρον need not therefore be a mere onlooker of these processes. 63 See esp.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . 59 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132.3 definitely ascribes this point of view to Anaximander. 57ff.203bl8ff. in Phys. I. 60 De caelo II. Aristotle's Physics refuses to yield more — at least to one of its students 59 . 62 III. As we have already seen. and we should reckon with the possibility that the description of these later principles preserves some ancestral features.318al7ff. . AETIUS I. των δε δεχόμενη την παυλαν60. 3. It has rightly been feit that if any of the five reasons goes back to Anaximander it would be this63. 4. 1. Of the five reasons (πίστεις) which Aristotle in Physics III enumerates s responsible for the belief in an άπειρον only one has a 'physicaT character: ούτως αν μόνον μη έπιλείπειν γένεσιν και φθοράν. 203b7ff. But Echo need not travel in only one direction.248. et corr. ν. the περιέχειν motif proved applicable not only to the Cosmos and its circumference but also to the first cosmic movement in its relation to the other movements of the world: αυτή (ή κίνησι$) τέλειος ούσα περιέχει τά$ ατελείς και τάς έχουσας πέρας και παολαν . It 5. τοο yap και γένος εισίν. See also de gen. JOHN BURNET. see below p. By dropping the qualification "in a year" the philosopher arrives at the absolute. των μεν αιτία της αρχής. Historically it would make sense i l Anaxirnander was the philosopher who took this step — and if he postulated that the entity which according to this passage of the Theogony holds the ττέρατα of other things should be itself without ττε(ί)ρατα. .
and none without the first heavenly movement or movements of Aristotle's scheine67. In other words. PLATO.208a9ff. ενδέχεται γαρ την θατέρου φθορά ν θατέρου είναι γένεσιν. the argument which Aristotle later in Book III plays off against this 'reason' (πίστις) would in essence be famili r already to Anaximander: ούτε γαρ ϊνα ή γένεσις μη έπιλείττη. 8. 245c5ff. 'Steering' and feeding are entirely different occupations. also Legg. X. esp. γένεση and φθορά). άναγκαϊον ενεργεία άπειρον είναι σώμα αισθητό ν. 26. the principle which moves and by moving causes the formation of all things68.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 125 has been argued that Anaximander would not need the άπειρου s source of supply for γένεση because bis scheine provided for a balance between production and destruction so that γένεση would receive enough 'material' from φθορά64. 31B17. What the source of motion provides is not necessarily new material. Sind. 44 64 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. VIII.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . 376 (W. de gen. and yet it is not at all by providing new material that this soul preserves the continuity of γένεσις. the movements that are caused by the αρχή and that produce the physical entities are σύγκριση and διάκρισι$. Cf. 895a6ff. 59B12ff. and especially in the later Presocratics. 250b24ff. . d7ff. ϊνα μη έπιλείπωσιν αύται αϊ μεταβολαί.248. 336a 23ff. CHERNISS. It would suffice to suppose that Aristotle understood the cessation of γένεσις too literally and with too exclusive reference to the material. We need not project these specific processes back into Anaximander but I Cf. 8%a(>. Philosophie 1kl. That such a balance operates in Anaximander's System is certainly true and that this fact prima fade militates against attributing to him the reason ίνα ή γένεση μη έπιλείπη must also be admitted. none without vo s. As a rule. . 10. αεί μεν τι κινεισθαι. 67 See esp. Mus. Phys. The last four words reflect of course Aristotle's own cosmological position.. 65 III.. Rh. Gesch. esp. raises similar objections). This task is hardly in keeping with its nature. 93 (1950) 366ff. Aristotle's Criticism of Presocr. in Class. 1. But we need not therefore dismiss Aristotle's physical πίστις. Cf.. et corr.9. ARIST. Vorsokr.. " Vorsokr. 66 Phaedr. esp. What Plato says of his World-Soul would be true of all 'moving causes\ There would be no γένεση without Strife and Love. (a34 ανάγκη . Philos. Baltimore 1935. γένεσις would definitely — and most drastically — come to an end if the World-Soul ceased to operate (the proof in the Phaedrus66 leaves no doubt about this). KRAUS. 9 Arch. 59B1. PhiloL 63 (1958) 275ff. II. Anaxagoras actually described an initial condition of rest s prevailing before the Operation of his vo s. Legg.. πεπερασμένου όντο$ του παντός65. X. ARIST. seil. 35. See my discussion Harv.
The World-Soul of the Phaedms is. άγένητον και άνώλεθρον. .250bl8 almost certainly refers also to Anaximander. VIII. Theog. Phys. It is hardly possible to stcer without producing movements. It is tempting to carry the comparison between Plato's proof for the World-Soul and Anaximander farther or to reconstruct something like an archetype of Melissus'. performs a movement. 73 Phaedr.. ibid. 41. being a self-mover.17 Diels (άπειρον τίνα φύσιν .. op. I see neither a possibility nor indeed a need of reconstructing anything of the kind and should be perfectly willing to acquiesce in the wise conclusions reached by KIRK and RAVEN. Doxographic accounts derivod from Theophrastus actually ascribe an eternal motion to Anaximander's άπειρον69. and s a whole. dt. (Anaximander is unlikely to have used these words but in his System too nothing could come to be without the eternal movement in the άπειρον). ης την cdSiov κίνησιν αίτίαν εϊναι τή$ των ουρανών γενέσεως) and in Vorsokr. 128. Plato's. again HESIOD. yet the Infinite too might well have to be considered s an υφ' αυτού κινούμενον. like locomotion or rotation70. ARIST. Plato's point is that the soul. The idea which SIMPL in Phys. and Aristotle's arguments that the principle cannot have come into being and cannot pass away because it can have neither αρχή nor τέλος. 70 Changing and steering are hardly possible without causing local motioa. at least in the sense that the Contents of the οπτειρον are in constant motion — this is not the same s to believc that the άπειρον itself. 738. 1.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . I should accept their Statements s substantially correct. there being nothing όθεν κινηθέντα γενήσεται73. HIPPOL. Another question is whether Anaximander specified any kind of 'mechanisrn' by which the άττειρον produces the processes within itself. 245d7 (el). 2. All.9. 69 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 72 Cf. 9a. and I should adhere to this meaning of κίνησι$ also for Anaximander. A further item probably common to both is the thought that without this principle everything would come to a standstill. .126 F r i e d r i c h Solmscn do not sce why \ve sliould hesitate to think that the άπειρον too causcd and proserved the etcrnal motions which make the worlds and everything in theni arise and pass away. is the best αρχή κινήσεως. although Uvo K LSCHER (Hermes 81 (1953) 260ff. like Anaximander's άπειρον. 268) has reminded us that the word comprehends a variety of changes. 245c9. 12Α9. 71 Phaedr. Both are τοις άλλοι$ δσα κινείται αρχή και πηγή κινήσεως71 (πηγή may easily have been Anaximander's "more poetic" word which he used side by side with αρχή)72.248.
an αρχή κινήσεως. Anyone more famili r with Systems in which these principles were distinct might therefore be liable to error when deciding how and why the Infinite ensured the continuity of Becoming. 58a2ff. Cherniss has acutely observed that the revolution of the cosmic circumference is itself a maniSee esp.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . I should however allow for the possibility that his argument proceeded in a direction somewhat different from that of the later texts. If we are right in charging Aristotle with a mistake of Interpretation he would have this excuse. .284. Movement and γένεση in the Cosmos would. This thought. 58a4ff. After all he had to establish the idea of an άπειρον and may have done so by arguing that nothing that had a beginning and an end could be the everlasting principle of things. 242 ff. In this context Plato finds the moving force in the pressure exerted by the revolving circumference of the world: ή του παντός περίοδος . Festschrift (see note 5) 23 f. Kahn may be right in holding that Aristotle's text is closest to the Original·. long ago have come t o an end if there were no κινήσον75. and KAHN. besides being the prototype of our three texts. The pressure produces the movements άνω κάτω which in turn cause a constant regrouping and re-formation of the cosmic entities. Plato's Cosmology. KARL REINHARDT.9. Still it is well to emphasize that for Anaximander the principle which causes or encompasses all movements is identical with the πάντα εν έαυτω έχον.Anaximander's Infinite: Traces and Influences 127 underlies such attempts74 is probably sound. The argumentation of all three passages has a markedly 'conceptual· character which may strike us s post-Parmenidean but it is perhaps better not to yield to this impression and not to deny that Anaximander could argue in terms of αρχή and τέλο$ (or. Plato "refines" everything that he accepts. like the World-Soul. 57e3. . New York 1957.. de caclo II.. 76 Tim. rather. s Plato here points out. The reason why he accepts so much is not simply that Anaximander's άπειρον was an αρχή but that it was. ergo an άπειρον which is αρχή and πείρας for everything eise. Cf. F.248. 255f. 8* 74 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 1937. ™ Tim. for it is possible that Aristotle already 203b6 (or 7) begins to 'report' whereas the two others have the intention of doing better than Anaximander. London. G ttingen 1960. But I doubt whether we can do much more than state the probability that Anaximander's treatise included the archetype — or prototype — of these arguments. would also bring us close to ARIST. Verm chtnis der Antike. πεΐρα$). 1. M. σφίγγει πάντα και κενήν χωράν ουδεμία ν έα λείπεσθαι76. CORNFORD'S commcnts. How completely and beautifully consistent an emphasis on the source of motion is with the conception of immanent balance may be learnt from the Timaeus. what is needed is something without αρχή and πείρας. πέρα$.7—11 which may well include echoes of Anaximander's argument.
δραν — πάσχειν and τροφή — φΟίσι$. Plato here eschews words that have moral connotations. Both pairs of concepts.248. Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 'Food' and 'waste' are not likely to have been the terms by which he conveyed his belief in balance. Yet Plato's Cosnios cortainly h s its immanent balance. Without the soul and without this first cosmic movcment thcre would be no γένεσις. 448ff. But it is only the philosophical language which has become modernized.9. Baltimore 1944. 77 78 Anstaue*s Criticism of Plato and the Academy. and whether he employed the pair δραν and πάσχειν may also be considered open to doubt. Plato has done relativcly little to explain how it is maintained but he affirms its Operation. Anaximander's άπειρον was not εκ τέχνη5. One of his pairs is more abstract. Tim. are new ways of expressing what he expressed by setting δίκη and τίσι$ against αδικία79. simultaneously with the 'autarky' of the Cosmos.J 28 F r i e d r i c h Solmscn fcslation of tlic world soul 77 . 12B1. nor had it come into being (γέγονε). the other more physical than the words attested for Anaximander. at the bcginning of his account78: οαττ|ει τε γαρ ουδέν ουδέ ττροσήειν αντω ττοθεν — ουδέ γαρ ην αυτό γαρ Ιαυτω τροφήν την εαυτού φθίσιν τταρέχον καΐ ττάντα εν έαυτω καΐ υφ' εαυτού ιτάσχον και δρών εκ τέχνης γέγονε. 33c6ff. 79 Vorsokr.8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . The original idea is faithfully preserved.
ibid. DIELS (Vorsokr. Recent Interpreters seem to favor the meaning "life" (Κικκ.279a28ff. 83 ARISTOTLE. In a doxographic account ultimately derived from Theophrastus80 (Tlutarch'. which causes and "receives" the other cosmic movements (or changes).9. It is not certain in what meaning he uses the word αΙών in B52. It Stands to reason that Anaximander's Infinite would be no less good an Illustration. At de caelo II. It would therefore not be at all str nge if he applied the word άπειρον — or at any rate the concept — also to the time and duration of his Infinite. 82 Heraclitus is the first to come to mind and perhaps the only one about whom we may be positive. When Aristotle de caelo I. defines it s τον πάντα χρόνον καΐ την άπειρίαν περιέχον he may well be interpreting and reviving an important idea of Anaximander83. XIII. 12A10). The important role of time (χρόνος) in Anaximander's scheme is famili r to us from his longest and most significant fragment (B 1). Rather. Festugiere himself mentions "monde" and "ciel" s instances of such entities. Stromata 2) we read that Anaximander άπεφήνατο την φθορά ν γίγνεσθαι και πολύ πρότερο ν την γένεσιν εξ απείρου αιώνος ανακυκλουμένων πάντων αυτών. 9. after a reference to the "ancients".8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . "Lebenszeit". if not indeed a better one. 1.Appendix ^ have become aware of the possibility that Aristotle's eternal κίνησι$. See Doxogmphi Graeci 132f. The word αιών would be ideally suited to Anaximander's purpose. The relation between this αιών of the Infinite and the χρόνος operating in the cosmological scheme could again be defined by the verb περιέχειν.. Festugiere81 has shown that αιών — a poetic word — originally means "life" and that it acquires the meaning "eternity" when the early philosophers use it in connection with enities whose "life" is in their scheme eternal. 1.. (23) refers also to the other meaning ("life") of the word and explains how it could be transferred to the eternal duration of the Cosmos. preserves a pattern that originated with Anaximander. Cambridge 1954. 81 80 Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. 176. We also know that his άπειρον is eternal and "immortar. Yet he could also employ another word. who introduced the word αιών. At de caelo II. αίών would be a perfectly appropriate word for the life of his deity.283b28 he actually uses αΙών in the meaning of "life". And we need not even think that what made Anaximander prefer the word αιών was his penchant for "poetic words". Heraclili^.284a 9 Aristotle calls this basic movement άπαυστος τον άπειρον χρόνον. for there are not many early physicists who regard the Cosmos or the Heaven s eternal82. To convey this idea he may have spoken of an άπειρος χρόνος. Parola del passato 4 (1949) 172ff.248. KRANZ in Vorsokratiker). which makes me wonder how life can be visualized s a "king". since the άπειρον was for him alive and divine.
If Aristotle was able t o go back to the original meaning of αιών86. The other passage is found in Parmenides90: άκίνητον μεγάλων εν πείρασι δεσμών εστίν άναρκτον άπαυστον. The opposite idea is παΟλα κινήσεω$. 83. The evidence for άπαυστο$ includes two other interesting items. Phaedr.279bl. Cf. belonging s it does to the world of becoming and having itself just been "created". 89 Suppl. we have seen that βίος is practically a synonym of αιών. PL. .8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM .248. and it is possible that the doxographic or philosophic tradition has prcserved this qualifyer. 37dlff. also PLATO. 417c5 (where φορά is used s an equivalent of κίνησι$). 85 90 84 B8. 86 See above n. II. 5ff. 1.l 30 Λ p p cn d i χ ITowcver. Unfortunately we cannot indicate precisely the point where this contact ceases. In the Stromata we luive found άπειρος αίών. 6. 1. Parmenides' language in this passage is certainly s "original" s his thought but it makes sense to think that his linguistic originality lies not in his introSee above pp...284a2ff. Tim. which occurs in a number of passages that are close to Anaximander's original conception. ARIST. which I quote with Hermann's generally accepted corrections <δι'> αιώνος κρέων άπαύστου Ζευ$ .284a9. Plato reserves this concept for the eternal "modcl"85. 574. 87 De caelo I. 125ff. Phys. cannot be given an αίών. In the scheme of the Timaeus the soul. A7. 245c6. de caelo II. Another adjective that deserves consideration is cnrouonros. Metaph. Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. αΙών by itsclf would liardly yet for Anaximander mean "ctcrnity" or "cternal life". VIII.' It seems noteworthy that in two instances the affirmation of this etemal movement is preceded by a praise of the αρχαίοι and their wisdom88.9. 88 De caelo I.. one might say. Aristotle repeatedly refers to an άπαυστο$ κίνησις which the Cosmos needs and which must characterize its primum mobile*7. Plato would know it. . TJiis meaning would result from its being conplocl with the right adjective.1072a21. cf. Crat. 1.250M3. The World-Soul of the Timaeus in some sense certainly a descendant of Anaximander's αρχή84 — θείαν αρχήν ήρξατο άτταύστου και εμφρονος βίου προς τον σύμπαντα χρόνο ν. a potiori.284a8. 1. In both of them we have reasons to believe that having bestowed this praise he tries for a time to keep in close contact with this wisdom.. It occurs s adjective t ο αιών and is used for the exaltation of the highest deity in a passage of Aeschylus89. It is of course possible that the word is here for the first time used in a philosophical context —although it would be rather ironical if the adjective which Aristotle so often connects with κίνησις was in its first occurrence associated with the άκίνητον. 9. 9. 11.279a22ff.259b25. paraphrasing some of the "ancient" ideas. .27 (DlELS-KRANZ). However. II.
8 Download Date | 4/18/13 4:26 AM . άπειρον. 4 ( IELS-KRANZ). His advice and criticism have been most valuable. although I believe that my study suggests a somewhat different view of the άπειρον itself. Plato and Aristotle amounts to something. uses αρχή and τελευτή s opposites and s mutually complementary and associates the άπειρον withwhat "hasnobeginning" (αρχήν ουκ έχει)93. HERMANN FR NKEL. Denkens..Appendix - 131 duction of this word but in his use of it s the opposite of άναρκτον. But Parmenides has declared Being to be bounded. In Anaximander the opposite of "without beginning" would be "without end". Melissus. B8. It would be significant if he transferred to Being an adjective which Anaximander had applied to time or movement. He is probably closer to Anaximander's pattern. On the points in question I consider myself in complete agreement with Fr nkel.9. Munich 1955. even from the limited material that we have we can see that he often proceeds by reorganizing (or reaccenting) Anaximander's concepts92.248. Wege und Formen fr hgriech. 93 B2.30ff. Brought to you by | UNAM Authenticated | 132. Unfortunately the evidence points partly to αιών s the noun which άπαυστο$ modified and partly to the idea of a never ceasing movement. i. cf. and thus made it impossible for himself to call it άπειρον or άτελεύτητον91. Aeschylus. It may be true that not every occurrence of άπαυστο$ here presented creates a strong presumption for Anaximander's use of the word but the combined testimony of Parmenides. 91 92 For the relation between Anaximander and Parmenides. we may note. e. And it remains possible that άπειρος αιών in the doxographer has preserved the original wording. 42 f. 186ff. especially with regard to ττέρα$ and άττειρον. 193ff. Professor Gregory Vlastos has kindly read this paper..