Transcriber’s Note: In the original, parts of this book were printed with the Greek text on one page with critical notes below, and the English translation on the facing page. This is not practical to reproduce in an e-text, so the Greek is given first, followed by the critical notes, followed by the translation. THE FIRST PHILOSOPHERS OF GREECE THE FIRST PHILOSOPHERS OF GREECE AN EDITION AND TRANSLATION OF THE REMAINING FRAGMENTS OF THE PRE-SOKRATIC PHILOSOPHERS, TOGETHER WITH A TRANSLATION OF THE MORE IMPORTANT ACCOUNTS OF THEIR OPINIONS CONTAINED IN THE EARLY EPITOMES OF THEIR WORKS BY ARTHUR FAIRBANKS LONDON KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRÜBNER & CO. LTD. PATERNOSTER HOUSE, CHARING CROSS ROAD 1898 (_The rights of translation and of reproduction are reserved_) PREFACE The Hegelian School, and in particular Zeller, have shown us the place of the earlier thinkers in the history of Greek thought, and the importance of a knowledge of their work for all who wish to understand Plato and Aristotle. Since Zeller’s monumental work, several writers (e.g. Benn, _Greek Philosophers_, vol. i. London 1888; Tannery, _Science hellène_, Paris 1887; Burnet, _Early Greek Philosophy_, London 1892) have traced for us the history of this development, but the student who desires to go behind these accounts and examine the evidence for himself still finds the material difficult of access. This material consists of numerous short fragments preserved by later writers, and of accounts of the opinions of these thinkers given mainly by Aristotle and by the Greek doxographists (i.e. students of early thought who made epitomes of the opinions of the masters). The Greek text of the doxographists is now accessible to students in the admirable critical edition of H. Diels (Berlin 1879). The Greek text of the fragments has been published in numerous short monographs, most of which are not readily accessible to the student to-day; it is contained with a vast deal of other matter in Mullach’s _Fragmenta Graecorum Philosophorum_ (Paris 1883-1888, vol. i.-iii.), but the text is in many places so carelessly constructed that it does not serve the purposes of the scholar.