HEIDEL. — ON FRAGMENTS OF TIIR PUE-SOCRATICS. ()S5 



is of courso far from tliiiikiii<,' of Aiiaxiiiiimdcr and lias in iniiul 

 Horaclitiis and tlic Stoics only; l)nt wc know that thr conception of 

 Horaclitns was older than the fifth century, l»ein^ traceahie to Alc- 

 niaeon, a contemporary of Anaxiniander. Tlie laovoiila rdv hwajxeoiv 

 (Alcmacon, fr. 4), as the condition of healtli, and the kirLKpareta and 

 irXeove^ia of the several constituents of the human hody as the cause 

 of disease, are fixed factors of practically the whole medical tradition 

 of Greece. We may therefore confidently affirm that th(> laovoixia 

 Ktwp (TTOLxdoiv or rather tcou epauTLOT-qroiuy- fji' auTLdcdoacnv a\\r]\oLS, 

 which Philo attributes to Heraditus and the Stoics, applies with equal 

 propriety to Anaxiniander, and explains his m(>anin^^ These different 

 factors, correlated also with tlu> seasonal chans^es, are mentioned by 

 Plato, Legjj;. 90(5 C, (pafxep 5' elval ttov to vvp opofxa^Ofxevou aytapT-qixa, 

 TTjv Tr\eopei;iap, kp fxep aapKiPOL^ (ToofxaaLP pdarjjjLa KaXoufiepop, ep 8e ibpacs 

 (TUP /cat iPLavTols Xot/xot', ep 8e ToXeatp Kal TroXtretats tovto avro, piy^tart 

 nereaxVP^o-T'-f^l^^^op, ddLKiap. The connection, here hardly more than 

 suggested, is clearly noted by Plato, Symp. 188 A, eirel Kal -q tojp 

 (hpup Tov epiavTOv avaraais jjLtcTTr] karip ajjLcfiOTkpwp tovtojp, Kai kTreidap 

 fxep irpos aXKriXa tov Koafxiov tvxv epooros a pvpBri eyco eXeyop, to. re depp.6. 

 Kal to. \j/vxpo. Kal ^r]pa Kal by pa, Kal apfiopiap Kal Kpdaip Xd,??/ ao)4>popa, 

 rjKH (l)epoPTa eveTrjpiap re Kal vyieiap dpdpcj^TroLS Kal toIs clWols i'wots re 

 Kal <f>VTo7s, Kal ovbh rjdiKrjcrep • OTap 5e 6 /lerd ttjs u.9pecos "Epcos eyKpaTt- 

 (TTepos irepl tols tov ePLavTOV upas yhrjTaL, dLe4)deLpep re TroXXd Kal 

 r]8iKr]aep. On this passage cp. Hirzel, Themis-, Dike and Ifricundtrs, 

 p. 220 sq. The medical doctrine expounded by Eryximachus in the 

 Symposium, although perhaps slightly colored with Heraclitean 

 thought, is that of the Hippocratic treatises, notably of Ilept (pixTLOs 

 dpdpojTTov, from which we may quote one passage, c 7 (6.48 L.), Kard 

 (f)vatp yap avTecc raOrd eaTL judXtcrra tov epiavTOv . . . exet /xep ovp raDra 

 irdPTa aiel to acoyua tov dpdpojirov, inro 8e ttjs irepuaTaiJLkprjs ihprjs Trore 

 fiep irXetoj yipeTaL avTO. ecjVToJp, vrore 5e eXdo-ao;, eKaara Kara fxkpos [= ep 

 ^lepei] Kal KaTO. (I>vaip [sc. tov eptavTOv] . . . iaxvei 8e kp rc3 kpiavTia TOTe 

 Hep 6 xf'M'*^^' /udXtara, TOTe 8e to rjp, TOTt be to depos, totI 5e to (pdipo- 

 iroipop • ouroj 5e Kal ep tco dudpcowo) TOTe fiep to 4>\eyp.a laxbei, totI 8e to 

 alfia, TOTe 8e rj x^Xr], TpociTOP p.ep rj ^apdri, cTretra 5' i] jjieXatpa KoKeotxeprj. 

 Not to repeat what I have elsewhere said in regard to the doctrines 

 of Heraclitus and Empedocles, I refer the reader to my essay Quatitatii^e 

 Change in Pre-Socrutic Philosophi/, Archiv fiir Gesch. der J^hilos., 

 Vol. 19. pp. 360 sq. and 365. Since the dSi^ia and the Siktj Kal tLctls 

 of Anaxiniander refer not to the origin ancl destruction of individual 

 objects but to the successive encroachment of the elemental opposites 



