286 HEIDEL. 



wish to know far more about it than the grudging record vouchsafes. 

 It is perhaps possible even yet by a close scrutiny of the whole early 

 tradition to gather certain further data in detail regarding his opinions 

 and the structure of his chart; but of the economy and spirit of Anaxi- 

 mander's book we seem with our present resources to be able to learn 

 no more than we have above set forth. A part even of this is of course 

 not susceptible of strict proof; but we have endeavored to conduct 

 our inquiry with due regard to the evidence and the principles which 

 must be observed in historical studies. Though Anaximander was 

 apparently a name not uncommon in ^Miletus, we do not meet it else- 

 where; and the literary tradition seems to have recorded two persons 

 only of that name as authors of books. ■'^"^ We have therefore to 

 choose between them when it is a question of assigning a datum 

 attributed simply to 'Anaximander'; and the result of our inquiry 

 is what one might reasonably have expected. The name 'Anaxi- 

 mander' must have suggested to the Greek the great jNIilesian of the 

 sixth century as naturally as the name 'Jefferson' or 'Washington' 

 suggests to an American the well known personages of our own his- 

 tory. That another writer of the same name and born in the same 

 city was known is indeed clear from the record; but the sole refer- 

 ence to him outside the entries of a biographical and bibliographical 

 nature is of a sort to lead naturally to his identification, even though 

 he is not expressly called ' Anaximander the Younger.' 



Anaximander's book must be seen in its true perspective, that is to 

 say, in relation to the tradition of which it was a part. Whether it 

 stood at the head of the series or itself had predecessors, we do not 

 certainly knoAv; but of its successors we may discover enough to 

 discern in part the lines of connection. From Anaximander onw'ard 

 we can trace several streams of tradition gro\\'ing in volume and pro- 

 gressively differentiating themselves until they give rise to quite 

 distinct and special sciences. One takes on the form of cosmogony or 

 cosmology and a study of the microcosm, the latter developing into 

 scientific medicine ;^°^ another begins as history with a geographical 

 appendix, which in time constitutes a science apart. Mathematics and 

 cosmography, fructified by a new interest born partly of Orphic and 

 other religious speculations, give rise to new points of view and to 



101 This is certainly implied in the name 'Anaximander the Younger.' 



102 In this study I have chosen for various reasons to say httle or nothing of 

 the medical tradition. One reason is that in mv Bepl <i>va€w; I treated of it at 

 some length, the other, and more important, is that no intelligent studv of the 

 Corpus Hippocrateum in relation to the earlier history of medicine exists. 

 The clue, I believe, lies in the treatise Uepi apxa.Lrjs irjTpiKrjs; but I have not 

 found the leisure to follow it up. 



