706 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



sicut amaracini blandum stactaeqiie liqiiorem 

 et nardi florem, nectar qui naribus halat, 

 cum facere instituas, cum primis quaerere par est, 

 quoad licet ac possis reperire, inolentis olivi 

 naturam, nullam quae mittat naribus auram, 

 quam minime ut possit mixtos in corpore odores 

 concoctosque suo contractans perdere viro, 

 propter eandem rem debent primordia rerum 

 non adhibere suum gignundis rebus odorem, etc. 



Heeding the suggestions afforded by these passages from Plato and 

 Lucretius, which seem to me clearly to reproduce, however freely, 

 the thought of Heraclitus in our fragment, it should be possible with 

 considerable certainty to restore the text and to determine its meaning. 

 It is obvious that in the Cratylus Plato slightly changed the figure, 

 substituting drugs for unguents, because of the advantage of thus 

 being able to appeal to the expert knowledge of the physician. He 

 may have l)een influenced also by certain Heraclitean elements in 

 the medical literature, such as we find in Hippocrates Ilept dLairqs 

 and Ilept rpocfiyjs. At all events, it is clear that <7rDp>, which Diels 

 has adopted from the conjecture of Dr. Thomas Davidson, and <olvos>, 

 which Bergk proposed, are alike inadmissible. The latter part of the 

 fragment and the use of dvwyLo., which Hesychius defines with jjLvpov 

 and apcofjLa, point clearly to the conclusion that Heraclitus, as we 

 should infer from Plato and Lucretius, referred to an unguent. The 

 instances of 6voiij.a (Herod. 2. 86; Lucian, De Dea Syra, 8 and 46) 

 refer to unguents. If one or the other of the passages in Lucian 

 should be doubtful, there can be no question in regard to Hippocr. 

 TvvacKeiwv (3, 209 (8, 404 L.), exl/eiv to. dvco/jLara a es to fxvpov e/x/3dXXerat, 

 with which compare ibid. 202 (8, 386 L.) and 206 (8, 398 L.) In the 

 making of unguents (see Bliimner, Tecknologie und Terminologie dcr 

 Gewerbe und Kunste~, I., 359 sq.), the neutral base, as well as the 

 product resulting from the union of aromatic substances with it, was 

 called /xupof or eXatov. The finished product bore a variety of names 

 determined by the volatile ingredients. Theophrastus, Ilept oapcjv, 

 gives ample information, from which we may quote a few sentences. 

 V. 25, TTpos tKacTTOV 8e tcov /j.vpo)v e/UjSdXXoucrt to. Tvpoacjiopa tuiv apojfj.a- 

 Toov, olov ets p-ev rrjv Kvirpou Kapbapwpov, aaTaXaOov ava(f)vpaaavTes 

 Tip eucbSet. \ I. 27, awaPTa 8e avuridePTaL to. pvpa to. pep air' apddp 

 TO. 8e oltto (pi'XXwp to. 8e awo kKojpos to. 8' awo pl^ijs to. 8' airo ^vXoov 

 TO. 8' airo Kapirov to. 8' airo 8aKpiKj:p. piKTO. 8e irdpd' cos elTretp. In inten- 



