Empedocles’ Emulation of Anaxagoras and Pythagoras (D.L. 8.56)
Diogenes Laertius cites Alcidamas for the statement that Empedocles emulated Anaxagoras and Pythagoras in his dignity of bearing and the philosophy of nature. Contrary to the standard view, I shall argue that Alcidamas made Empedocles imitate Anaxagoras in his manners and Pythagoras in his teaching
Section (1) explains why the Deveni papyrus has often been misunderstood: among the main reasons are the wrong label “Orphic” and the confusion of two types of pantheism in Greek thought: the ethico-religious and the naturalistic. The Orphic hymn to Zeus is a classical example of the first type, the Derveni commentary – of the second (which is incompatible with the immortality of the soul and afterlife). Section (2) deals with the literary genre, the general purpose and the hermeneutical method of the Derveni treatise, and draws a preliminary intellectual portrait of its author describing his peculiar features, a kind of «composite image». In the section (3) we argue for Prodicus as the author of PDervand present 18 testimoniaon which this attribution is based. These include both the verbatimquotations with Prodicus' name that find an exact correspondence in the text ofPDervand the common peculiar features of the language and style. In the section (4) we propose a reconstruction and interpretation of the text of the col.IV that contains a quotation from Heraclitus. This column is of primary importance for the understanding of the aims and allegorical method of the author in general as well as for his theory of names. Section (5) detects a neglected (polemical) peritrope of Prodicus' benefaction theory of the origin of religion in Xenophon's Memorabillia4.4. In the section (6) the problems of the original title and date of the Derveni treatise are addressed, as well as its relation to the Psephismaof Diopeithes (432 BC) as well as the trial and death of Anaxagoras. The last section (7) clarifies our use of the term peritropeand explains the Derveni treatise as a polemical naturalistic peritropeof a religious text (Orphic theogony).
The paper analyses two aspects of the legend of the pythagoreanism of King Numa Pompilius. The one aspect considers Numa as a disciple of Pythagoras of Samos, the other deals with the episode of the discovery of Numa's Books in 181 BC, and burnning them in accordance with the resolution of the Roman Senate. According to information received from Greek and Roman authors it is possible to fix the date of origin of this myth, to trace back the stages in its development and to point out different forms of its existence in the Republican Rome. The author stresses the decisive role of the pontiffs in making Numa the founder of Roman religious and legal institutions.
Empedocles’ theory of knowledge is a quite difficult problem, as the fragments and doxography give us rather contradictory data. On the one hand, according to Aristotle and Theophrastus, the Sicilian philosopher did not make any distinction between thinking and sense perception and he considered them to be mechanically determined. On the other hand, the true knowledge is the result of revelation from Muse. In order to reconstruct Empedocles’ theory of knowledge it is necessary to examine the fragments of his poems in their historical context. This approach apparently seems to be able to give an explanation of the originality of Empedocles’ thought.
Empedocles is one of the main representatives of Early Greek philosophy in Magna Graecia, as well as Parmenides. While speaking about the early period of the history of Greek philosophy we must make a strict division between the Western tradition and the other ones (for instance, Milesian school). One of the grounds for this division is the language of Greek epic as a form of expression of philosophical doctrines. The poems of Parmenides and Empedocles may be considered as a part of Early Greek epic tradition. There is no strict terminology in the philosophical poetry of Empedocles, sometimes he uses poetical images in order to describe the world physical processes. That is why the main aim of the research of the Empedocles’ language is to analyze his word usage and his style in each fragment.
The present article continues the investigation of the Soqotri verbal system undertaken by the Russian-Soqotri fieldwork team. The article focuses on the so-called “weak” and “geminated” roots in the basic stem. The investigation is based on the analysis of full paradigms (perfect, imperfect and jussive) of more than 170 “weak” and “geminated” Soqotri verbs.