At this point, it may be well to indicate briefly the conclusions to
which we shall come in the next few chapters with regard to the
development of philosophy during the first half of the fifth century
B.C. We shall find that, while the old Ionic school was still capable of
training great men, it was now powerless to keep them. Anaxagoras went
his own way; Melissos and Leukippos, though they still retained enough
of the old views to bear witness to the source of their inspiration,
were too strongly influenced by the Eleatic dialectic to remain content
with the theories of Anaximenes. It was left to second-rate minds like
Diogenes to champion the orthodox system, while third-rate minds like
Hippon of Samos even went back to the cruder theory of Thales. The
details of this anticipatory sketch will become clearer as we go on; for
the present, it is only necessary to call the reader’s attention to the
fact that the old Ionic Philosophy now forms a sort of background to our
story, just as Orphic and Pythagorean religious ideas have done in the
preceding chapters.
[Sidenote: Anaxagoras at Athens.]
123. Anaxagoras was the first philosopher to take up his abode at
Athens. We are not to suppose, however, that he was attracted thither by
anything in the character of the Athenians. No doubt Athens had now
become the political centre of the Hellenic world; but it had not yet
produced a single scientific man. On the contrary, the temper of the
citizen body was and remained hostile to free inquiry of any kind.
Sokrates, Anaxagoras, and Aristotle fell victims in different degrees to
the bigotry of the democracy, though, of course, their offence was
political rather than religious. They were condemned not as heretics,
but as innovators in the _state_ religion. Still, as a recent historian
observes, “Athens in its flourishing period was far from being a place
for free inquiry to thrive unchecked.”[661] It is this, no doubt, that
has been in the minds of those writers who have represented philosophy
as something un-Greek. It was in reality thoroughly Greek, though it was
thoroughly un-Athenian.
Footnote 661:
Holm, _Gr. Gesch._ ii. 334. The whole chapter is well worth reading in
this connexion.
It seems most reasonable to suppose that Perikles himself brought
Anaxagoras to Athens, just as he brought everything else he could. Holm
has shown with much skill how the aim of that great statesman was, so to
say, to Ionise his fellow-citizens, to impart to them something of the
flexibility and openness of mind which characterised their kinsmen
across the sea. It is possible that it was Aspasia of Miletos who
introduced the Ionian philosopher to the Periklean circle, of which he
was henceforth a chief ornament. The Athenians in derision gave him the
nickname of Nous.[662]
Footnote 662:
Plut. _Per._ 4 (R. P. 148 c). I follow Zeller, p. 975, n. 1 (Eng.
trans. ii. p. 327, n. 4), in regarding the sobriquet as derisive.
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