HEIDEL. — ON FRAGMENTS OF THE PRE-SOCRATICS. 683 



copied the reference, jiltlKnifi;li the resemblance is ahopether superficial 

 and without sif^uificance. Recently Professor Reid, Lucrrtiana, Har- 

 vard Studies in Chiss. Phil()lo«>y, \'oI. 22, j). 2, has once more fh-awn 

 attention to Sen. Diah S. 5. (i, Cogitatio nostra each nuinimeuta j)cr- 

 rumpit nee contenta est id, quod osten(htur, scire: ilhid, inquit, scru- 

 tor, quod ultra munchnn iacet, utrumne profunda vastitas sit an et hoc 

 ipsuni terniinis suis chidatur, etc. I douiit, however, the correctness 

 of his statement that Seneca was here imitatinj^ Lucretius. It seems 

 to me more prohahle that both authors are rcprockicing with some 

 freedom the thouglit of an earher, perhaps Stoic, writer, who may have 

 been Posidonius. Be that as it may, the thouj^ht common to Lucre- 

 tius, Seneca, and PHny (and I may add, Bishop Dionysius, ap. Euseb. 

 P. E. 14. 27. 8) is that a great revelation has come, rending as it were 

 the curtain or outer confines of the world and permitting a glimpse 

 into the utmost secrets of nature. Such a revelation, according to 

 Pliny, ensued upon the discovery of the oblifpiity of the ecliptic; and 

 a study of early Greek cosmology clearly demonstrates the capital 

 importance attached to it. To some aspects of this question I drew 

 attention in my article, Tlie Aiui] in Anaxiinfftcs and Annxiindiidrr, 

 Class. Philol., \'ol. 1, p. 279 sq. \'ery much more remains to be said, 

 but I shall have to reserve the matter for a future occasion. 



V 13, 2. Wva^lixavbpos . . . o.pxvi' Te kcll cttolx^^ov elpr]Ke toov ovtuv 

 TO aireipop. 



I^'or the meaning of apx'n Diels refers in V^ to the preliminary 

 statement in my Ilept •i'uo-ecos. Proceed, of Amer. Acad, of Arts and Sc, 

 \'oI. 45, p. 79, n. 3. The subject has now received a fuller treatment 

 in my essay On .iuaximmidcr, Class. Pliilol., Vol. 8 (1912), p. 212 sq. 

 To the statement there given, though much might be said by way of 

 enlargement and confirmation, I think it unnecessary to add anything, 

 except to say that the results of my investigations dovetail admirably 

 into certain other observations recently' made by different scholars. 

 I refer among others to the views of Otto Gilbert as to the original 

 meaning of the 'elements' set forth in his (Jrirch. Jiflir/ion.tplulo.sopluc, 

 1911, which reached me at the same time with the off-prints of my 

 essay; and to Mr. Cornford's conception of MoTpa as developed in 

 Froju Religion io Philosophy, 1912. L'nfortunately both these authors 

 accept the Peripatetic tradition regarding the meaning of Anaxi- 

 mander's apxv', conseriuently their observations remain fruitless 

 when they proceed to interpret the early history of Greek philosophy. 



