HEIDEL. — ON FRAGMENTS OF THE PHE-SOCRATICS. 087 



tion of the aweLpov-apx'n which gave rise to the present world. Tan- 

 nery, Zellcr. Burnet, and others regard e/c tou aidlov as referring to the 

 aiTHpop, thinking j)erhaps of certain passages referring to Xenoplianes, 

 MeHssus, anil Anaxagoras; but Zeller at least percei\ed that this was 

 not to be accepted Avithout considerable violence to the text. I main- 

 tain the correctness of my suggestion, On Anaximandcr, p. 229, n. 2, 

 that we are to supply oltto tov airdpov with a-KOKpidrjvaL, whether it 

 ever stood in the text or not, and that the phrase tK tov aiblov, which 

 stands just where it belongs, means "from eternity." \Ve are familiar 

 with €s albiov, "forever," and Marc. Aurel. 2. 14; 4. 21; 10. 5 thrice 

 uses t^ kiblov in that sense, and numerous other instances might be 

 cited. It happens that I cannot point to another instance of e/c tov 

 dtSt'ou, but the analogy of parallel expressions occurring with and 

 without the article would render it not at all surprising if such should 

 be found in late authors. The expression under consideration may !)e 

 taken with confidence to mean " The eternal substratum capable by 

 dynamic evolution of producing hot and cold." 



The remainder of this interesting passage also deserves renewed 

 consideration. It speaks of a ' sphere of flame,' and this appears to be 

 generally accepted as establishing the sphericity of Anaximander's 

 cosmos. Diels has not, to my knowledge, expressed himself in un- 

 mistakable terms ; but his description of the (fAoyds cr4>a'ipa as a " Wa- 

 berlohe" would be best taken as applical)le to a circle. A conclusion 

 so opposed to the apparent meaning of the word c4>a1pa will surprise 

 no one who is familiar with the general ambiguity of words in Greek 

 meaning 'round' and the uncritical habit among later authors of 

 attributing Eudoxian notions to earlier cosmologists and astronomers, 

 provided that the remainder of the statement points to a circle rather 

 than a sphere. I have no intention of discussing here the whole 

 subject, which would require a connected examination of all the data 

 of early Greek cosmology, but propose to confine my attention to this 

 one passage. It is pertinent, however, to remark that on other 

 grounds I have elsew^here found reasons for doubting the correctness 

 of the Aristotelian account, which places the earth in Anaximander's 

 scheme at the center of a sphere; for if Aristotle's authority is accepted 

 as final, the interpretation here offered will be ruled out of court 

 without a hearing. See my essay. The Mvr\ in Ana.vimcncs and 

 Anaximandcr, Class. Philol., Vol. 1, p. 279 sq., especially p. 281. 



Let us then address ourselves to the text: /cat Tiva e/c tovtov 4)\oyds 

 a^alpav TrepLcpvfjpaL t(2 wepl T-qp yrjp depi cos tc3 5ep8p<j} 4>\ol6p • tjcttlpos 

 a.Troppayei(Tr]s Kai el's Tipas a7roK\ei.adH(Tr]s kvkXovs viroaTrjpaL top t]\lop Kal 



