[Sidenote: The heavenly bodies.]
58. The intention of one of these fragments (fr. 32) is perfectly clear.
“Iris too” is a cloud, and we may infer that the same thing had just
been said of the sun, moon, and stars; for the doxographers tell us that
these were all explained as “clouds ignited by motion.”[290] To the same
context clearly belongs the explanation of the St. Elmo’s fire which
Aetios has preserved. “The things like stars which appear on ships,” we
are told, “which some call the Dioskouroi, are little clouds made
luminous by motion.”[291] In the doxographers this explanation is
repeated with trifling variations under the head of moon, stars, comets,
lightning, shooting stars, and so forth, which gives the appearance of a
systematic cosmology.[292] But the system is due to the arrangement of
the work of Theophrastos, and not to Xenophanes; for it is obvious that
a very few hexameters added to those we possess would amply account for
the whole doxography.
Footnote 290:
Cf. Diels _ad loc._ (_P. Ph. Fr._ p. 44), “ut Sol et cetera astra,
quae cum in nebulas evanescerent, deorum simul opinio casura erat.”
Cf. _Arch._ x. p. 533.
Footnote 291:
Aet. ii. 18, 1 (_Dox._ p. 347), Ξενοφάνης τοὺς ἐπὶ τῶν πλοίων
φαινομένους οἷον ἀστέρας, οὓς καὶ Διοσκούρους καλοῦσί τινες, νεφέλια
εἶναι κατὰ τὴν ποιὰν κίνησιν παραλάμποντα.
What we hear of the sun presents some difficulties. We are told, on the
one hand, that it too was an ignited cloud; but this can hardly be
right. The evaporation of the sea from which clouds arise is distinctly
said to be due to the sun’s heat. Theophrastos stated that the sun,
according to Xenophanes, was a collection of sparks from the moist
exhalation; but even this leaves the exhalation itself unexplained.[293]
That, however, matters little, if the chief aim of Xenophanes was to
discredit the anthropomorphic gods, rather than to give a scientific
theory of the heavenly bodies. The important thing is that Helios too is
a temporary phenomenon. The sun does not go round the earth, as
Anaximander taught, but straight on, and the appearance of a circular
path is solely due to its increasing distance. So it is not the same sun
that rises next morning, but a new one altogether; while the old one
“tumbles into a hole” when it comes to certain uninhabited regions of
the earth. Besides that, there are many suns and moons, one of each for
every region of the earth.[294] It is obvious that things of that kind
cannot be gods.
Footnote 292:
The passages from Aetios are collected in _P. Ph. Fr._ pp. 32 sqq.
(_Vors._ p. 42).
Footnote 293:
Aet. ii. 20, 3 (_Dox._ p. 348), Ξενοφάνης ἐκ νεφῶν πεπυρωμένων εἶναι
τὸν ἥλιον. Θεόφραστος ἐν τοῖς Φυσικοῖς γέγραφεν ἐκ πυριδίων μὲν τῶν
συναθροιζομένων ἐκ τῆς ὑγρᾶς ἀναθυμιάσεως, συναθροιζόντων δὲ τὸν
ἥλιον.
Footnote 294:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account