Notes on the current edition
Lives of Eminent Philosophers
1.
The alteration of the numeral from 23 to 13 is supported by what little we know of Sotion’s work. It was from a similar source that Clement of Alexandria must have taken what we find in
Strom. i. 71 concerning Chaldaeans, Druids, Magians, Gymnosophists, and other barbarian philosophers.
2.
Anth. Pal. vii. 615.
3.
Anth. Pal. vii. 616.
4.
Anth. Plan. ii. 99.
5.
Compare Pliny,
N.H. xx. 11. 242: Zoroaster lived in the wilderness on cheese (
cf.
Yasht, xxii. 18
Spring butter is the ambrosia of the blessed). For fuller comments on 7-9 see J. H. Moulton’s
Early Zoroastrianism, pp. 410-418.
6.
This popular etymology, though wide-spread, is erroneous, the true form of the prophet’s name being Zarathustra, almost certainly derived from
zarath =
old (a Zend stem, parallel to
γέροντ-) and
ustra=
camel.
Cf. J. H. Moulton,
op. cit. p. 426, and, for star-lore in the Avesta,
ib. p. 210.
7.
In this clause the word
ἐπικλήσεσι is usually taken as equivalent to
ὀνόμασι (names). The meaning then would be:
What exists now will exist hereafter under its own present name. Diels would alter
ἐπικλήσεσι to
περικυκλήσεσι, thus obtaining something very like the Heraclitean union of opposites:
the things which are will continue to be through all their revolutions. But
ἐπίκλησις like
ἐτικαλεῖσθαι can be used of prayer, and there is some evidence that Avestan religion fully recognized the efficacy of prayers and spells. The testimony of Theopompus, who wrote in the fourth century, to the Zoroastrian doctrine of immortality is regarded by J. H. Moulton as specially important:
cf.
Early Zoroastrianism, pp. 177
sq. and 416.
8.
This is confirmed by Clement,
Strom. i. 61, who also repeats (
Strom. i. 24) the statement that
σοφιστής =
σοφός.
9.
Compare Clem. Alex.
Strom. i. 59. His authority includes another candidate for admission to the Seven, Acusilaus of Argos, but makes no mention of Pisistratus.
10.
See iv. 59-61, where Lacydes is made the founder of the New Academy, although other authorities,
e.g. Sext. Emp.
Pyrrh. Hyp. i. 220. say the Third or New Academy began with Carneades. But the claim of Lacydes is supported by
Ind. Acad. pp. 76. 37
sq. Mekler, and the article
s.v. in Suidas, which comes from Hesychius.
11.
This succession (Pythagoras, Telauges, Xenophanes, Parmenides) does not exactly agree with what is said in the lives of Xenophanes and Parmenides, ix. 18, 21, where Parmenides, not Xenophanes, is made a pupil of the Pythagoreans. The arrangement followed in i. 12-15 treats the Italian school as a true succession, whereas in Book IX. many of them are regarded as sporadic thinkers, according to the view expressed in viii. 91.
12.
The separation of the followers of Anniceris from the Cyrenaic school was made by the author whom Clement of Alexandria followed in ii. 130. This author may have been Antiochus of Ascalon. Strabo x. 837
s.f. supports the same view:
Ἀννίκερις ὁ δοκῶν ἐπανορθῶσαι τὴν Κυρηναϊκὴν αἵρεσιν, καὶ παραγαγεῖν ἀντ’ αὐτῆς τὴν Ἀννικερείαν.
13.
Cf. the distinction drawn by Sextus Empiricus in
Pyrrh. Hyp. i. 16, 17. If by rules for conduct dogmas are implied, then the Pyrrhonians are not a sect,
i.e. a dogmatic school.
14.
Certainly not the same as the person mentioned by Porphyry in his
Life of Plotinus, 9, 11, for Polemo, not Potamo, is the correct form of the name in that place. Potamo is said by Suidas (
s.v.
Ποτάμων Ἀλ.) to have lived shortly before and contemporary with Augustus, whence it follows that Diogenes has taken without alteration a statement by an earlier writer who might truthfully say
not long ago of the reign of Augustus. Suidas, whose article
αἵρεσις agrees closely with our text, naturally omits
πρὸ ὀλίγου.