A Thought Pattern in Heraclitus

A Thought Pattern in Heraclitus
Author(s): Hermann Frankel

Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 59, No. 3 (1938), pp. 309-337
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/291582
Accessed: 18-01-2020 21:31 UTC
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Journal of Philology
This content downloaded from 85.245.153.249 on Sat, 18 Jan 2020 21:31:22 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
A THOUGHT PATTERN IN HERACLITUS.
"They that seek gold, dig up much earth and fin

says Heraclitus (22).1 Students of the classics, familia
are with the dusty business of archaeological or literar
tion, may nevertheless be warned that we are going t
for a small grain of Heraclitean philosophy in an espe
pleasant and unpromising ground. The late legend on
and death of the obscure philosopher is an accumu
imbecilities. Its author (or authors) tried to be faceti
ironical, but the attempt resulted in stupid vulgarity.
In Diogenes Laertius, 9, 3 (= Vors., A 1), the last pe
Heraclitus' life is thus described: ". . . finally he f
misanthropy. He secluded himself and lived in the m
feeding on grass and plants. This caused him to c
dropsy. He went back to town and consulted the phy
asking them in cryptic language whether they were able
deluge into drought. But they did not understand
buried himself in a place where cattle were stalled, ho
the tepid cow-dung would have an evaporating effect
even that helped, and so he died, being sixty years old
The repellent story is not based on any historical t
Lassalle was the first to remark that it belongs to
group of stories and anecdotes that invent appropriate de
prominent people.2 The fictitious conditions unde
famous men are said to have ended their lives symbo
peculiar merits or foibles. In the case of Heraclitus t
is unusually circumstantial and the caricature unusual
rate. As the judges of the underworld condemn the
ners to suffer what they did unto others, so the auth
posthumous libel turns loose against Heraclitus th
defects of his writing and the absurdities of his doct
1 quote from Diels-Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratike

22 in the 5th ed., Berlin (Weidmann), 1934 (= ch. 12, previous
The numbers, if not preceded by " A," refer to the "B " series.
fragments of Heraclitus (with few exceptions) have recently
cussed with circumspection by Olof Gigon, Untersuchungen zu
Leipzig (Dieterich), 1935.
2 Ferdinand Lassalle, Gesamtwerke, ed. Schirmer, Leipzig (
1905, vol. 6, p. 58, note 1.
309
310 HERMANN FRINKEL.
in addition he throws his victim into such situations and makes

him commit such actions as Heraclitus, outraging decent hu-
manity, had slanderously ascribed to ordinary man.
Let us try to explain, in the spirit of its originators, the
Philistines' impotent revenge on genius. Heraclitus, the scorner
of humanity, cannot bear any longer the intercourse with his
fellow creatures and retires into uninhabited mountains. He
had charged ordinary people with enjoying only the crude pleas-
ures of the body, like animals feeding on weeds (4), and of
being blind to real values, like asses that prefer straw to gold
(9). Now he himself, in his secluded remoteness from proper
living conditions, under the sway of bare material necessity
which he so haughtily despised, has to eat grass and weeds.
Heraclitus had advanced the theory that the soul of man con-
sists of divine and living fire, but that in most men the flame is
soiled and deteriorated by a considerable admixture of water,
preventing the mind from shining brightly and understanding
clearly. Now fate makes Heraclitus contract a dropsy as a con-
sequence of his unhealthy diet. Heraclitus, being well aware
that "it is death for souls to be turned into water" (36), is
compelled to return to the city and to consult the doctors. What
a humiliation! Had he not insulted in his book the whole pro-
fession by maintaining that its practitioners only took money
from their patients for inflicting further pains on them (58) ?
If what Heraclitus taught were true, viz. that "what is moist
dries" (126; cf. [Heracl.], Epist. V, p. 72, 33, Bywater), he
should have been cured easily. But unfortunately he spoke
to the doctors in the style with which he drives his readers
to despair: he asked them to turn deluge into drought,3 and
they did not understand what he wanted them do. This served
him right. How often had he abused all humanity for not
grasping the meaning of his riddles (1 and passim) ! Now
Heraclitus tries a cure of his own invention. He buries him-
self in dung, and, on the assumption that the process of life is
sustained by a constant exhalation and evaporation (12 et al.),
he hopes that the tepid manure will save him. But his hope is
vain, and he dies.
8 Lassalle is probably right when he feels that the very words eirofB3pla
and acXVzxos are taken from some passage in Heraclitus.
A THOUGHT PATTERN IN HERACLITUS. 311
There are some variants and additions in other versions. Thus

Neanthes of Kyzikos (A , 4) relates that the transformation
(,tLETajoX}) of the philosopher into an apparent heap of manure
caused the dogs not to recognize (ayvoELv) him; consequently,
they ate him up. According to Heraclitus, life means incessant
change, and transformation is a kind of rest and renewal (!,era-
P/3aov avaTraverat, 84). On the other hand, he had upbraided his
unbelieving public telling them that "dogs bark at all those
whom they fail to recognize " (p,u y7LV(aKwo, 97).
Our interpretation of the legend does not claim to be accurate
throughout. Our incomplete material does not allow us to quote
point for point the particular and specific references which the
author had in mind when composing his parody. We have been
able, however, to illustrate the story from beginning to end by
some pertinent tenets and sayings of Heraclitus. But there is
one notable exception. That Heraclitus should have buried him-
self under filth is an idea not warranted by the known frag-
ments of Heraclitus.4 And yet this loathsome oddity recurs
in all the different versions, with only slight variations in
details.5 It is therefore a legitimate guess that this motif is,
like all the rest, parodic, and that Heraclitus, in one of his
irksome criticisms, had used the words "he buries (KaToprTTct)
himself in filth," or the like.
Now it happens that the two significant words /3op/3opw
KaTropwpvy/ievov recur in a no less dignified book than Plato's
Republic, and that they recur in a quotation from an unnamed
author. Plato says (Rep., vii, 533 d): 7 8taAfXEKLKr eL0o8o . . .
T) OVTLt e /Pop/fOpO /fap/3apiK( TLVL TO T)'S FVX\jS o/LLa KaTropwpvyJLCvov
qpeLja p XKEt Kal dvayet avco. That Plato is quoting someone is
proved by the words r6 OVTt which, as they stand, can only mean
T) OVTL OVTW& EXEct wao7rep Kat 7raXac cAcyov cr(olo TLtVE alvSpes. We
may conclude with confidence that the author whom Plato
4 Frags. 13 and 37 seem to be somehow related but their purport is

as yet uncertain (Gigon, p. 121).
5 The tradition varies in so far as Heraclitus either buries (KaroprreL)
or anoints himself or asks children to cover him with the substance.
(Time and again he expresses his disdain for immature childhood; n
he needs the help of children.) The stuff is always described as cow
dung; only Suidas (A la) speaks instead of sand. To the evidence as
printed in Vorsokratiker may be added Marc. Aur., 3, 3, 4.
312 HERMANN FRANKEL.
quotes is iEeraclitus, and that Heraclitus had said: the or

man cannot perceive metaphysical reality because he has
himself in filth. This accounts well enough for two wo
Plato's quotation;6 but what about the rest? What about
"eyes of the soul, prevented by barbarism from clear p
tion "? 7 They are taken, almost literally, from another
of Heraclitus:
107 KaKot adprvpe? avvOpw7rorvL o4OaAXpot Kat WTra 8appdpovs qvXas

exovrtov.
fXOVT(DV.
The double coincidence (both between the quotation and the

biography of Heraclitus, and between the quotation and frag-
ment 107 of ieraclitus), a coincidence in expressions of such
a peculiar coinage, makes the identification certain. It may
be accepted as established that Plato, in his one quotation, com-
bines two cognate passages from Heraclitus, frag. 107 and the
new one.8
One inference is at once obvious. Heraclitus' book contained
a thought which Plato was to develop into his cave parable.
Heraclitus had contended that man is buried in filth and that
thereby his spiritual view is obstructed. Plato, in the begin-
ning of the seventh book of the Republic, sets forth how man
is, as it were, buried in a subterranean cave, unable to see the
daylight of spiritual truth. It is now clear that Plato, when
quoting Heraclitus in the same seventh book of the Republic, is
paying homage to the archaic author who, by his blunt and crude
verdict on the human state, had given him the inspiration for
his consummate parable of the cave.9
6 Adam in his commentary on the Republic (Cambridge [Univ. Press],

1902) says that the image poppo6pc KaTopwpvyjevozo is taken from Orphic
theology and refers to Rep., ii, 363 d: MovaaEos . . Kal 6 vbs avro . . .
Trots dvoaiovs . . . Kal ai[KovS els 7rlX6'\v Ttva KaTopvTrovLVTT ev "AsLov Kal
KOrKiv 1 v'bwp ava'ycKaovOt feipetv, nt re ivTras els KaKaS 86oas aTovres . .
(= Orphic. fragmenta, ed. Kern, no. 4). The relationship between the
two passages in the Republic will be discussed below on p. 323, note 32.
7 The words 7jpe4Ja eXKEEL Kai dvaCye avw are not part of the quotation
but refer back to Plato's own cave simile (cf. 518cff.).
8 The blending of the fpppfopos fragment and the pdcppapos fragment
results in the pun popp6pOp pappapKcw. Perhaps the pun, in some form
or other, was already in the original.
It is not necessary to expatiate on the analogous way in which
For Heraclitus himself, the result does not appear

Two words, something like /op/,opp KaTOpVTTETal ,
covered. But the gain might prove less meager if w
position to restore also the original setting of the tiny
evidence and to determine its original bearing. Thi
be impossible since Plato's quotation shows beyo
what sense the image was applied by Heraclitus. P
new fragment may shed some light in its turn o
tradition.
Looking round for analogies among the known fragments,

we note, in the first place, fragment 107, an allusion to which
had been blended by Plato with the allusion to this one. Both
fragments refer to the same idea of Heraclitus that ordinary
man, however able and experienced according to current stand-
ards, has only a superficial contact with reality. But to him
who has seen the light of metaphysical truth, things become
transparent. His insight penetrates through appearance and
proceeds to the core of objects and events. He witnesses a spec-
tacle more sublime than anything one could suspect (18) and at
the same time as close to everyday life as the most manifest
sensations are. For it is not to a remote dreamland somewhere in
the void that the Heraclitean discoveries carry the mind, but
they make the enlightened among us understand more deeply
this our world, make them experience more fully and intelli-
gently these our lives, and make them perform more wisely and
aptly the actions which are required from the best.10
In the second place, there are three more fragments in which
"dirt" or " mud " is mentioned (13, 37, 5), and to these may
be added the evidence appropriately collected by Bywater in his
Heraclitus and Plato call for liberation of the mind from confinement
and entanglement. The fundamental identity of views necessarily led to
parallelisms in detail.
10 It is in the particular Heraclitean sense that I shall distinguish
in the following pages "metaphysical reality" or "the divine" from
"superficial reality" or "the mundane," and "the enlightened" from
"ordinary man" respectively. I admit that these expressions are
vague, but it is beyond the scope of this article further to determine
the vista which Heraclitus claims to have opened up. The specific
quest and pursuit of the early metaphysicians has been admirably
clarified by Georg Misch, Der Weg in die Philosophie, Leipzig (Teubner),
1926.
note on frag. 13 (= no. 54 in his edition).l An imag

mind, when confronted with this accumulated evidenc
once see emerge from it the idea of an elaborate symb
even allegorism, a system in which certain philosophica
tions seem to be represented by certain definite metap
of them being " filth." A critical mind, however, will s
the objection that all combinations are vague and pre
unless the proper relation of the different notions a
position in the Heraclitean system are reliably asc
Fortunately this is feasible. The single symbols ca
curately interpreted as elements in a characteristic pa
Heraclitus' thought. The pattern, as we shall see, is mo
just a favorite scheme of reasoning or speaking. It is
external form, interchangeable with several others, b
been instrumental in molding to some extent the subs
the doctrine.
The pattern is obvious in this saying:
79 'AvrTp v7'rtLO VjKOvae 7rpos SaLpuovoO, sOKWo7rp 7rats 7rpos aYvpos'.
Man is stamped as infantile by divinity, just as the child is

by man.
For the sake of convenience, we call this pattern by the name of

the geometrical mean and transcribe it by formulae such as
God/man = man/boy, or else A/B = B/C, using mathematical
language rather loosely and disclaiming mathematical strict-
ness. To ascertain the actual meaning and function of the
pattern, we shall have to analyze the instances in which Heracli-
tus uses the scheme, starting from fragment 79.
There are three planes: the levels of God, man, and child
(A, B, and C). The degree of perfection decreases, and the
degree of imperfection increases, in equal measure in the transi-
tions from A to B and from B to C (A/B = B/C). Or (and
this will paraphrase more correctly what Heraclitus had in
mind) we might speak of contrasts and say that the contrast
between perfection and imperfection is the same in both cases.
Thus man, being the geometrical mean, may be called wise when
compared to a boy, and childish when compared to God. He
combines opposite qualities. It all depends on the standard by
11 The fragments will be quoted and discussed below, on pp. 322 ff.
which he is judged. An adult man is perfect accor

ventional conceptions but utterly defective accordi
sophical truth.
Of the three elements A, B, and C, each has its characteristic
function. The member C (child) is a .known magnitude and
its inferiority is unquestionable. For it was a truism for Hera-
clitus and his public that a child is a weak, foolish, and despica-
ble being.l2 Referring to the indisputable defects of a child,
Heraclitus makes the startling assertion that any respectable and
dignified citizen when viewed in the light of divinity, is by no
means less miserable than an infant. B (man) is tantamount to
C (child) when compared to A (God). Thus the term C
(child) serves as predicate in the statement, and it indicates
what specific quality or circumstance is ascribed to B and A:
in this case, imperfection and perfection respectively.
It follows that the element C varies according to the predicate
to be given the statement, or even to the shade of its meaning.
Another saying of Heraclitus expressed the same idea of human
imperfection in a more bitter and caustic way through the
choice of a different term of reference. The saying is not pre-
served in its original wording, but its purport was that the most
beautiful and wise of men, when compared to God, is like an ape
(82 and 83). That which makes the ape appear so hideous,
contemptible, and ridiculous is the fact that he seemingly tries
to look like a man and to act and behave like a man. This is
precisely the situation of man in reference to God. Humanity
is a caricature of divinity.13
The pattern implies, as we have seen, the statement that the
middle element B, when considered from a higher standpoint, is
no better than its apparent opposite C. Thus Heraclitus can
reduce the equation to a shorter form by simply asserting that B
12 It may be recalled that in the art of the period children are repre-
sented as miniature adults. The specific positive qualities of children
were only discovered much later.
13 The element B is put here in the superlative: "even the most
beautiful and most wise of men." Heraclitus is fond of using the
superlative in such statements and to show that even those who are
commonly considered as supreme in reality are incompetent and ridicu-
lous (56; 57; cf. 124). For the comparison of ape and man cf. McDermott,
T. A. P.A., LXVI (1935), p. 167.
virtually amounts to its opposite C. Of this type are t

ments in frag. 1 that ordinary people are equally uni
before and after they have been told the truth; that they
experience their own experiences; that even while awake t
like sleepers, unaware of what they had ever known
All such assertions can easily be transformed into the
scheme of the double proportion, e. g.: the conscious
alertness of ordinary people, eagerly pursuing their a
is like unconscious and torpid sleep when compared to
of a mind that has awakened to the contact with meta
reality. The opposites are said to be equivalent also
fragment:
34 'A~vveroL aKOVO'avTE Ko aOtv YV fotKaoLt caLTts av'irolat

7rapeovTras aTrevat.
They that have no understanding, though heari

like 14 the deaf. The expression "present but abse
fitting for them.
Those who hear the message and are present in a

sense (viz. bodily) are virtually deaf and absent (viz. m
if they do not understand what has been said and fail
lish a contact with that metaphysical reality which su
them and which is the very essence of their existenc
we thus qualify the opposite notions, in order to ma
compatible, by adding "bodily" and "mentally," we m
careful not to overlook that the two restrictions are on a differ-
ent plane. It is mental comprehension alone that really matters.
In statements of this type, Heraclitus does not mean to say that
any predication can only be relative and therefore has to be
properly qualified as to the conditions under which it is valid.
The wording of fragment 79 shows how far Heraclitus was from
14 Here, as in frag. 1, the notion "tantamount" is rather vaguely

indicated by eolKaoL. Heraclitus does not use technical language for
the expression of his pattern. All the early Greek philosophers abstain
from developing technical language. The specific meaning is not couched
in specific terms or stereotyped schemes but it results by implication
from an unlimited variety of expressions in current language and style,
including instances, images, and other devices to guide the imagination.
The philosophical ideas are intimated to the reader instead of being
forced upon him with rigid and coercive strictness.
advocating relativity as a universal and uniform prin

is by no means to an equally limited degree correct to
nary man wise or foolish, for his claim to wisdom is b
on his superiority to complete foolishness, while the c
verdict is passed on him by God's wisdom. Relative, a
tively real, is man's wisdom but his foolishness is abs
true. When Heraclitus distinguishes two different fact
ing for contrary predications, he usually implies that
of them is decisive and the other comparatively neglig
futile. In the following fragment he explicitly distin
between the bodily and the mental factors in perceptio
the same time he makes it clear that the final result de
the soul:
107 KaKot 4uaaprvpes avOpw7rotatv O6aaXo,hol Kai cTra fapfadpovs f/vXa'

EXOVTOlv.
Bad witnesses for men are eyes and ears of those that have
barbarian souls.
Many a time the opponents of Heraclitus will have recurred to

common-sense experience in order to refute the lofty paradoxes
of his creed.'5 But their experience, so Heraclitus points out,
though they are proud of being civilized and enlightened Greeks,
amounts to no more than the experience of primitive savages
with an horizon confined to their base needs and menial inter-
ests.16 The insight is a question not of sensual perception and
superficial assimilation but of a deeper consciousness and thor-
ough interpretation.17
In all the instances quoted so far it was always the element C
(child, ape, sleeping, deaf, etc.) alone which varied, and with it
the predicate of the statement. The term B constantly repre-
sented ordinary humanity, and the element A referred, in some
15 Cf. the attitude of the half blind cave-dwellers in Plato's Rep., vii,
516 e toward those who see.
6 Again we can form a double proportion: Barbarian / Greek

Greek / the really enlightened.
1I Perhaps the notion "barbarian" indicates rather the inability to
understand Greek (or, figuratively, to understand the language of
reality) than the lack of civilization and education. The difference is
only slight, as in any case the fragment is concerned with the problem
of interpretation.
sense or other, to God and the Absolute. The equatio

geometrical mean is a method of denouncing and hum
humanity; it is equally a method for praising and exto
divine. But there is one more gradation implied in th
The term C (child, barbarian, etc.) is, as we have obse
well known thing with notorious defects; the term B
man) happens to be a supposedly well known magnitu
supposedly worthy subject, but the equation reveals
common evaluation is erroneous and that the qualities
are in actual fact the opposite of what was generally
But then the term A (the Absolute) represents that w
unknown to mankind, not visualized by anyone, not w
or revered appropriately, until Heraclitus discovered
essence and preached its gospel. God and True Real
something beyond the ken of inexperienced experience, se
sensations, unreal realizations, and unwise wisdom; so
beyond the competence of human imagination and des
The scheme of the geometrical mean thus becomes a
express the inexpressible and to explain the inexplica
equation may be rewritten, on this view, with an x in
an A: x/B= BC. What is God? God is that comp
which the most perfect man will appear as an infant
hideous and ridiculous ape. What is divine clarity of m
the insight of an illuminated soul, burning in a clear, una
ated, fiery glow? It is a state in comparison to which
consciousness is like sleep, and sober reasoning like th
ness of a drunken man, not knowing whither he goes
being moist.18
18 I have combined frag. 1 (sleep) and frag. 118 ("Dry sou

and best ") with frag. 117: "A man when drunk is led by an
child, not noticing whither he goes, his soul being moist." F
is in itself an instance of the geometrical mean (Man, drun
child/man, sober; cf. supra, pp. 90 f.). But I feel confident
fragment, taken as a whole, in the original was only the on
a double proportion, such as indicated in the text above. It is not
likely that Heraclitus should have condescended, for its own sake, to
a trivial denunciation of intoxication, or to a physiological proof of
his thesis on the nature of the soul. And the words " not understanding
whither he goes" are echoed, within a series of excerpts from Hera-
clitus, by Marcus Aurelius, 4, 46, 2: "he who forgets where his way
leads him" (==Frag. 71; cf. Seneca, Epist., 98, 10: obliti quo eant,
Constantly upbraiding humanity, scolding and abu

Heraclitus tries to arouse it from its spiritual stupor a
ness and calls it to a new and unheard of awakeness and s
He hates mysticism and ecstasy (14; 15), just as h
vulgar intoxication, and yet he has a message that dem
almost superhuman effort of the mind to reach the
illumination:
18 'Eav i" CA7hrrTTaL avcXTraTrov OVK tcevp]crat, aveEcpEvvrTOV cov Kat

a7ropov.
Unless one hopes against hope, he will not find out that
which is indiscoverable and inaccessible.19
Instead of trying to enrapture his readers, to envelop them in a

misty cloud of vague enthusiasm and whirl their minds upward
to the beyond in a tornado of oratory, Heraclitus is content
calmly to point out the direction in which the reasoning has to
travel. Like the Delphian God who " does not tell nor hide but
indicates" (93),20 Heraclitus asks his readers to find the trans-
cendental by the indirect means of extrapolation, through the
device of the double proportion. The greatness of the meta-
physical organization, the perfection of the hidden harmony
which is far finer than the apparent one (123; 54), is indicated
by him in this same way:
124 <oK>OwcrrEp crap/La 21 Kt(K KEXv/EXv KXaawTro KOOWS.
The most perfectly organized universe is like a heap of

garbage dumped at random - (scil. when compared to the
less obvious organization behind and beyond the manifest
regularity of sun, stars and life 22).
scil. ad mortem; and Pind., Nem., 6, 6 ff. in a context strongly influenced

by Heraclitus), where the "way" is clearly metaphorical. It seems
therefore that the " drunken man " was only an image used for exposing
the state of man in general.
19 In this instance, the combined opposites do not express incompetence
but on the contrary the triumph of him who overcomes almost invincible
obstacles.
20 Cf. Snell, Hermes, LXI (1926), p. 371.

21 crdpta is an excellent emendation by Diels for crdp.
22 There is no means, as far as I can see, to have the quotation fi
precisely and with strict logic into Theophrastus' own argument. Th
smoothest way, however, of coordinating the quotation with the res
The obscure frag. 52 is perhaps taken from a similar con

52 Alwv 7raiLs Tn 7 ra"TI v, ravvT(WVV 7rTal8ooS - pacrtXtrIr.
Human existence is a child at a game, playing draugh

child rules as king.
The course of nature, the sway of necessity, the codes of law

convention, or careful planning, or whatever else is contr
our lives, all this amounts to the wilful moves of a child play
a game of arbitrary rules 23- scil. when compared to th
law divine. This interpretation, however, is no more tha
guess.
The notion of "the one divine law" which we tentatively
supplied in the preceding fragment is to be found in this saying:
114 SEv vow AEyov7raS taXvpliEeaGff XP' T ~vv 7ardvrowv, OKoro7Tep VOd.)
I7r6Os, Kat 7ro\V 'oXvpO'Tpow TppoVTr a yap 7raVT?E ol avOpWT'LOi
! e - _ ex t
VOaLOl VTO
feapKeL 7rac
One mus
means 24
to all, as
and even
who are
by the on
sufficien
ing (supe
Reason is,
of the cont
is even mo
Theophrast
if the fine
accident and
definite pri
23 Cf. Plato
24 It seem
Otherwise
auxiliary /
sentence, R
TOv ie'Xovr
of Plato's s
its coincide
individual but a suprapersonal power; it is common

versal (frag. 2, etc.). Thus Heraclitus at first rema
communities are strong as long as they act in confo
their constitutional law (cf. 44), so individual mind
when they comply with the common law of reaso
as in an afterthought, a new gradation is added in the
the geometrical mean: The individual citizens / th
law of their social organization = all the individual
laws / the law of laws, the one divine law.25
Our analysis has ascertained that Heraclitus had
tion for the thought pattern of the geometrical me
this scheme helped him in the arduous task of appr
conception of the transcendental. The essence of t
is 26 that mundane values, when compared to the
are tantamount to their opposites, the non-values.
idea is implied in various statements and expressed
ways. There is no external uniformity. Heraclit
use stereotyped figures of speech, though the thou
seems to invite and provoke their application.27 N
clothe his thoughts in the distinctive but monotono
technical language.2 In the absence of any techn
there is no clue to indicate the field in which Her
have become acquainted with the scheme of the con
portion before he applied it to metaphysics. Per
learned from the Pythagoreans about the harmonio
in a succession of tones with equal intervals (i. e. eq
tions of string length) and about correspondent pro
geometry and algebra.29
25 This equation differs from all those analyzed before. N

criticism is implied, for Heraclitus had no intention of
the laws of man. This time positive and direct advice is
transcendental is extolled not by contrast alone but explicitl
26 With the exception of frag. 114, cf. the preceding note
27 It is true that there is much in the style of Heraclitus
the reader of the figurae orationis as they were taught later by
rhetoricians, but in the writing of Heraclitus the subject determines
the expression and not the reverse. Cf. Norden, Antike Kunstprosa, 1,
pp. 18 ff.; Logos und Rhythmus, p. 23.
28 Cf. supra, p. 316, note 14, and Snell, "Die Sprache Heraklits,"
Hermes, LXI (1926), p. 353.
29 There are some references to music and musical harmony in the
5
The function of the pattern is now, I hope, sufficien

established to allow us to integrate and to interpret
support another group of incomplete fragments.
9 "OVOL v'pjLarT' av ZAoLvro fpuiov i Xpwrov.
Asses would prefer chaff to gold.
The text suggests the equations: Ass/ordinary man = o

man/the discriminating philosopher, and correspo
Refuse/gold = gold/real values. This interpretatio
roborated by the following two fragments.
4 Si felicitas esset in delectationibus corporis, bove
diceremus cum inveniant orobum ad comedendum.30
29 ALpeCrTat yap Cv aVTL aTradVTwV O apLoroL, KAO'S acvaov Ov7-qr6v ol

8e 7roXAAo KeKOpr7vraL OKoKwo7rEp KrTqva.
The best men prefer one thing to all other things, everlast-
ing fame to things mortal; but the many are glutted in the
way of cattle.
The mass of humanity is degraded to the rank of their domestic

animals, and their happiness to the delights of cattle and asses.31
With archaic thoroughness, Heraclitus further and further ex-
ploits the conception of man owning animals, disposing of them
freely and despising them profoundly, but not being aware that,
measured against the standard of what he ought to be, he is
by no means their superior. For it is an easy guess that when
Heraclitus speaks of
13 Pfop/Sop xaLpetv
revelling in filth,
he is denouncing the pleasures of the unenlightened. And this
fragments (10 cum test.; 51). Pythagoras is mentioned twice (40;

129). The usual derogatory tenor does not preclude indebtedness to
the school (cf. Wilamowitz, Der Glaube der Hellenen, 2, p. 188). It
is less likely that Heraclitus should have invented the scheme of the
continued proportion independently.
30 It goes without saying that the original form of this saying was
different from the text as given by Albertus Magnus.
81 Speaking of the fodder of asses (9), Heraclitus aptly uses the
word av6pua "litter, refuse, chaff," just as he had compared the kosmos
to adpuca "garbage" (124).
becomes certain on the strength of some other allusions

utterances of Heraclitus: Clem. Alex., Protr., 10, 92,
(the heathen) cKWAoXKYov S(iKrV 7rEpt T XpaaTa Ka' pop
8Oovr?q pevLTara, KaXtLYovIMevot avov& Tovs Kat avoTOv' EKPo
Tpvcab5, v 8ttS rives apv rop o Zes " yap v, T ]8ov0Tat f/
,uaAXov ' Kcaap9 V8aT? KaL cc nrt OcwpvT9 fpLapyatvovatv K
KpLTov (= Vorsolcr., 68, B 147). Plotinus, I, 6 (7ept TOV
6: Ato Kat at TrXETat OpGwS aLvITTOVTaL TOV u- KeKaOap/ev
'Atlov Ketaroffat eyv opP/3Op, OTL TO el Kaoapov p3opp/opw
<tAov- ota 8\ Kac ES, ov0 KaOapaL TO rw a/a, XaLpovacr TL) T
A new, and more specific, note is brought into the carica
this saying:
37 Heraclitus ait sues caeno, cohortales aves pulvere vel cinere
lavari.
For the expression "they wash in mire and dust" (Ko'vet =

"pulvere vel cinere ") implies that those whose horizon is re-
stricted to this world, when trying to cleanse themselves, actually
do nothing but befoul themselves a second time. The unen-
lightened, unable to find their way out of this sphere of worldli-
ness and "filth," try to wash off mire with mire. For the mad-
ness of such a procedure Heraclitus has found an especially
striking example in the rite of purifying murderers by washing
their hands with the blood of a pig:
5 KaOat'povTat aS aXAA / cujartl atcatvo,Levot, olov el T<S rs rr7oXv 43Lfas
7rrj7 arrovio0tro, i LacvecrOaC at vor T a vrov E a v a Opovwrwv
7rL?CpacaarTO ovTwc 7rofLovra. Kat rois ayrAXpwu TOVTOULtV XO Va
OKOlOV et Ttig dAoOtOoL XEorXV'7vLTO0T O'V Tl& YtyoVTKV E0oVs ovS' p(oas
01TtVW EtCrt.
32 It is obvious (and was so interpreted by Plotinus) that the sinners

in the underworld were thought to be buried in mud because they had
been revelling in filth, as it were, during their lifetime. The conception
of their punishment is derived from the verdict on their guilt. Now
the punishment is attested for the Orphics by Plato in book ii of the
Republic (cf. supra, p. 312, note 6), while the verdict on their
behavior in life is attested for Heraclitus (frag. 13; 37; and Plato's
quotation in book vii). It follows either that both ideas were originally
Orphic and that Heraclitus borrowed the one from the Orphics, or that
the Orphics borrowed from Heraclitus the one conception and duplicated
it with the idea of correspondent punishment. This would have taken
place in the time between Heraclitus and Plato.
They purify themselves by defiling themselves with

blood, as if one who had stepped into mud would wash hi
self in mud; any man who discerned what he (the ri
purifier 33) was doing would deem him mad. And
pray to these images, as if one were to prate to dwel
not knowing (this refers to the man who addresses im
instead of the gods) what gods are and heroes.
That in the rite actually the same substance, blood, is a

to take away the stain of bloody murder makes the blund
more manifest, but it is not essential for what Heraclitu
tends to make clear. The main thing is that some mundane m
is applied as a remedy for such a pollution. Not even
religious acts does man succeed in establishing a contact
the beyond. Instead, he clings to "these" images (the
"these" is significant), which may or may not be the dw
places of divinity but certainly are not themselves divi
cannot escape the mire of this superficial reality; and, w
tries to do so, he only covers himself with more of the
substance. How, then, should he be able to visualize that
is beyond the ken of trivial experience? The vicious cir
ignorance and faulty behavior closes and imprisons its
in a grave of " filth." 34 In this sense Heraclitus had ex
ordinary man as "burying himself in filth."
Thus the new fragment has found its place in the Herac
system. It has been linked to a considerable number of
fragments, which have all proved to be interrelated and t
bine into a solid and homogeneous fabric. Not only d
express cognate and coherent ideas but most of them ap
the metaphysical reality by the same procedure, the th
pattern of the geometrical mean. Using this scheme, Her
contends that ordinary man, when compared to the enlig
is no better than a domestic animal; and that the super
reality to which he confines his horizon, when compared
33 The style and structure of this fragment has been analyze

Gottinger Nachrichten, 1924, pp. 105 ff.
34 While in the vicious circle a wrong attitude prevents a true
standing and the lack of understanding prevents an improvem
behavior, quite the opposite is true for those souls which poss
logos: 115 tpvxxs aTt; Xoyos eaavrbv av"wv.
transcendental, is no more valuable than refuse and fil

ing into menial experience, man covers, as it were, h
of perception with a crust of mire.35 A comparison of
inspired the originator of the Heraclitus legend to his
invention. He made the metaphysician, when stricke
very realistic and mundane pains of bodily disease, tr
off his sickness by covering himself with a crust of cow
We could stop here if we were concerned only with
5 Empedocles (Vorsokr., 31, B 2, 2) likewise speaks of "t

petty imprints blunting our thoughts," and again he says (in
that, just as the metaphysical insight will wane in a mind set on
worldly things, it will wax and increase by itself (avra aviet) in a mind
engrossed in "pure" meditations (= Heraclitus, frag. 115, cf. preceding
note).-It is worth while to compare, for the sake of analogy, the ex-
pressions of medieval Christian mysticism. I translate some passages
by Tauler (ca. 1300-61), all taken from one and the same sermon " Beati
oculi qui vident quod vos videtis et c." (no. 45 in Vetter's edition,
Deutsche Texte des Mittelalters, 11, pp. 194-201). In spite of the
fundamental differences on which it is needless to expatiate, some
coincidences are striking. "Man has two kinds of eyes, external and
internal eyes. And but for the internal eye man would be like some
other kind of animal or beast" (cf. Heracl., frag. 107, p. 317 of this
article; and fragments 9, 4, 13, 37, pp. 322ff). "Dear children, how
can it be that noble reason, the internal eye, is so miserably blindfolded
that it fails to perceive the true light? The fatal defect results from
this: a thick coarse skin, a thick hide is laid over it, and this is love
and affection to creatures, or else to one's own self or some of what
one possesses, and through that one has become blind and deaf ....
What are those skins? They are whatever you turn to intentionally. . ."
(cf. Heracl., the new fragment; frag. 34, p. 316; frag. 1). "My dear,
let yourself sink down, sink down to the bottom (" entsink in den
grunt"), and all the best of all things will be yours. ... This true
humiliation sinks down into the divine internal abyss" (cf. Heracl.,
frag. 101; frag. 45, p. 327). "This is the naught of which St. Dennis
has said that God is none of whatever can be grasped or understood
or comprehended" (cf. Heracl., frag. 18, p. 319).
36 Dung is mentioned by Heraclitus in frag. 96: iVKveS Ko,rpiwv iePXq-
6Toepot. For the sake of demonstration we might circumscribe the
probable purport of this saying in the style of frag. 5: "They revere
dead bodies and worship them as heroes with ritual offerings, not under-
standing that carcasses are more properly to be cast away than dung."
Heraclitus wants to make as clear as possible the line of demarcation
between priceless values such as a living soul enlightened by the logos
and worthless non-values such as a dead body emptied of the soul which
it once contained.
fragment and its interpretation. But the story of the ge

cal mean in the philosophy of Heraclitus is not yet e
the extant tradition appears to yield yet other in
instances.
The scheme helps us better to understand the well known
fragment
53 IIHXe[Los 7ravrwv tEv 7rarTp ErrcT '7ravrwv 8e ac/3rtAe6s, KaL ToV'S /ev
&XEvE'pOVs.
Strife is father of all things, and king of all things, and

he appointed some as gods and the others as men, he made
some to become slaves and the others to be free.
Here again three levels are mentioned. Man (the ordinary free
citizen) holds the central position between the gods above and
the slaves below him. As slaves are ruled by (free) men, so man
is controlled by his heavenly lords: The gods/(free) men =
free men/slaves. The power behind both these relationships is
the same creative and dominating force of strife. The slaves
have been thrown into their position through the strife of war-
fare, and between gods and men there is not only the contrast
of opposite qualities (62) but also antagonism and strife as
expressed in Hesiod's and Aeschylus' representations of the Pro-
metheus myth.
The following fragment is not concerned with man and god
but with some phenomena of nature's:
99 Et \L7 1AXtos I7v, tEVEKa rWv daLXwv aTrpwv ?Vfp vrl av rqV.
If the sun did not exist there would be night in spite of all
the other stars.
The fire of any star, of any aiOle'vov 7rvp 8tarpc7rov vvKiwt, cannot
break the spell of the night, nor can they all together with their
combined efforts; but the one sun outshines them all and turns
night into day, Ev aJEpa 0aevvov aTpov EprIy/as &' ate'pos.38 The
37 The wording is hardly authentic.

88 I borrow expressions from the exordium of Pindar's first Olympian
to indicate that this passage, like others, shows the influence of Hera-
clitus. In the exordium are implied the Heraclitean ideas of water
being superior to the varieties of the base element, and of fire equally
surpassing water (see infra, pp. 333 ff.) ; of day and the one sun sur-
glamor of all the stars, brilliant though they are, a

to darkness and is called night by comparison with
in which the one sun illuminates the world (Darkne
of the stars = brilliancy of the stars/light of the s
Thus the sun is extolled as by far the greatest of
in our visible universe. But then again we read:
3 'HAIov erpo0 7roSo5 avOponrdEov.
The width of sun: that of one human foot.
Lying down on your back and lifting one leg, you are able to
blot the whole sun with one foot. The largest and most power-
ful of the heavenly bodies does not amount to more than that.
This sounds exactly like many of the statements which we have
analyzed. Even the greatest things of this world are contempti-
ble-viz. when compared to divine things. The other half of
the double proportion is missing. Can we hope to recover it?
In our extant tradition (A 1, 7) a reference to this fragment
3 is linked to another fragment (45), and we have been unwise
in ignoring their connection. The other fragment supplies
perfectly what is needed and makes an admirable complement:
45 vx7s rel'para iWv OVK av epo o, rv po , oav 7rt7ropevolzevoe oS&v,
OV7T) paOvv Aoyov cXeL.
The boundaries of soul you will not find, wandering in

whatever direction, so deep is the logos it possesses.
The soul is the one thing in the world of man that can blend
with the boundless logos, the all-embracing law of laws.
Through insight and clear consciousness the soul can share in
the supreme power of the logos and can intelligently and ac-
tively live the rules that govern the universe, instead of being
unwittingly and passively controlled by them. The sun, on the
other hand, is not more than an intermittent phenomenon, anni-
hilated every night and produced anew on every morning.39
passing night and the many stars (Heraclitus, 99); of fire corresponding
to gold (90); and of renown (as won by an Olympian victory) corre-
sponding to gold (29 + 9).
89 Frag. 6; Plato, Rep., 498a with schol. Cf. Gigon, op. cit. (p. 309,
note 1), p. 84 ff. Gigon is right in pointing out the similarity in the
views of Xenophanes and Heraclitus. Cf. also frag. 16.
The course it has to take is strictly prescribed to it and the

officers of Nature's justice enforce the heavenly traffic rul
94 "HAkto yap ov~ VT7rEp/rqcE7Tat /LETpa * el 8E I Ep, wEpiVveS yt

TE7TKOVpOtL e,EVp?)oovU(V.
Sun will not overstep its measures; if it does, the Eri

assistants of Justice, will find it out.
While the logos in the soul may increase indefinitely

the extension of the sun is invariably determined by the
the container in which the flaming masses are gathere
the thing that man calls sun is not a real body, freely f
in the void, but a certain quantity of fiery exhalation rising
below during day time and intercepted by a bowl turned
down. The sun is not so much an object as a transitory p
a fire kindled when the bowl rises, being sustained throu
the day by a steady flow of new material and extingui
soon as the bowl sets at the horizon. That petty mecha
appliance, the bowl with what it holds, can be cover
blotted by one human foot (3). But-it is only a "bu
have to supply-the same foot, wandering in any directio
never reach the end of a living soul. So deep is the l
possesses (45).40
It can hardly be doubted that the thought pattern of the
tinued proportion was primarily used, if not invented, by H
clitus in order to clarify the contrast between the mund
divine. But we may well expect that so familiar a t
served him for other purposes as well. One instance
definition of a generation. A generation is passed, so h
and one cycle of human nature completed, as soon as, aft
lapse of thirty years, the begetter sees the begotten a be
40 It is not impossible that the three fragments 99 and 3 + 4

connected in the original as indicated in our text above: The s
far surpasses all other fires, but the sun itself is equally surpa
the soul (fires / sun = sun / soul). The brilliancy of the sun
"mother of our eyes" (Pind., Paean, 9, 2), but what are the e
the body when compared to the soul with the living and per
logos in it? The latter thought is expressed by Plutarch (De Fo
98c) in connection with Heraclitus, frag. 99; and on the other
is implied in Heraclitus, frag. 107. Seneca, Epist., 88, 13 may o
not be vaguely related.
The cycle closes when the equation Son/father = gr

has been enacted, so that the central figure is endowed
the opposite qualities, sonhood and fatherhood.41
There may be more instances in our extant tradit
anywhere outside the sphere to which the scheme
longs, we shall first of all expect it to underly th
three 42 elements of nature. As fire for Heraclitus is either
identical or cognate with the divine, it may well be that it takes
the position of the divine (A) in the equation, with water and
earth as the B and C elements respectively.
The authentic evidence as to the Heraclitean theory of ele-
ments is scanty and the indirect tradition unreliable. The best
approach to our problem, though it requires some discussion, is
the historical one. Tracing the development of the idea both
before and after Heraclitus and comparing his thesis with those
of his predecessors and successors, we can hope to reach a more
definite result and to understand more fully its implications.
Heraclitus was the only philosopher to assume three elements.
Thus their number coincided with the number of the states of
matter, the gaseous, liquid, and solid. Heraclitus taught that
the elements are convertible into one another and in fact laid a
special stress on the conversions. We can therefore say as well
that he assumed only one element, the basic form of which is
fire. "Fire" can be precipitated and become "water," and
" water" can freeze to " earth," and vice versa. The relation
of the other liquids to "water," and of the other solid sub-
stances to "earth " is not determined but it is obvious that with
him, as with many others, "water," " earth," and perhaps also
" fire " each represent a whole group of different varieties. The
quantities resulting from the conversions are said by Heraclitus
to be determined by a Aoyoc, i. e. law of proportions (31), and
the general relationship of "fire" to all other substances or
objects is one of " equivalence " or "exchange value " (avra/oLt/,
frag. 90).43 This system might have worked out very well and
41 Heraclitus, A 19. For particulars, cf. supra pp. 89 ff.

42 Gigon, pp. 99 if., contends that Heraclitus assumed four, instead of
three, elements. His arguments are not convincing. Cf. Cherniss, A. J. P.,
LVI, p. 415.
43 It goes without saying that any attempt at paraphrasing implies
some adulteration and modernization of the original conceptions.
330 HERMANN FRINKEL.
have led to important progress,44 had it not soon been

seded by the theory of four elements, earth, water. air, an
The new theory, introduced by Empedocles, became then ca
cal and prevailed for a very considerable number of centur
Shortly before Heraclitus, Anaximenes had laid down
similar thesis that the basic element is "air," and he had also
maintained that " air" can be transformed into other sub-
stances. With him, density is the determining factor, and a
density can exist in an indefinite number of degrees, any num
ber of substances can be brought under the same principle an
can find their places in the one progression. We are told th
according to him air, when rarified, becomes fire, but when con-
densed, becomes in succession wind, cloud, water, earth, and
stone. We thus get away from the idea of some very few ele
ments. Perhaps Anaximenes even assumed that the number of
possible conditions of matter is indefinite.
Contemporary with Heraclitus and holding views diametrically
opposite to his, Parmenides, in his analysis of the world of
appearance, assumed a strict duality of elements. They ar
called " fire " and " night." The positive and the negative el
ment do not change into one another, and their interaction i
restricted to attraction and mixture. Their quantitative rela
tionship is determined by sums, not proportions; since ther
cannot be any void, the sum of both elements in any given space
is a constant.45 The qualities resulting from any given mixtur
are likewise controlled by the laws of addition and subtraction
As the one element is nothing but the negative counterpart of th
other, equal quantities of both will neutralize each other and the
amount of surplus remaining on this or that side will determine
the character of the resulting quality and the degree to whic
the mixture possesses it (Vors. 28 [Parmenides] B 16 and 18)
It is obvious that this theory is unrelated to that of Heraclitu
The philosophical systems of Anaximander, Pythagoras, and
Xenophanes have to be ruled out as far as this problem is con
44 A progress, it is true, in which Heraclitus himself would not have

taken much interest. Like most of the pvaLKoi, he was no physicist,
though every one of them made good use of whatever physical phe-
nomenon might help to corroborate his system.
'4 Cf. Gottinger Nachrichten, 1930, pp. 176 ff.
cerned, because there is nothing in the extant evide

a fruitful comparison.
Thales alone seems to remain. He maintained, we
that water is the basic substance. But not even to the ancients
was authentic information about his theory available, as he did
not write a book to expound his doctrine.
Instead, we possess in its original form one precious little
piece of very early evidence, allegedly contemporary with Thales,
which refers to a theory of two elements. This text is not
usually mentioned or discussed in connection with the history
of Greek cosmology. For the author of the passage happens to
be not a philosopher but a poet, and a rather poor satirical poet
at that. It is odd enough that we should receive such informa-
tion from such a quarter; but, badly in need of authentic ma-
terial as we are, we have to take whatever we can get and be
grateful.
Semonides of Amorgos, in his otherwise well known iambos
on womankind, enumerates nine types of bad women and one of
good women. With the exception of only two, all the types are
determined by their resemblance to certain animals, swine, fox,
dog, ass, cat, horse, and ape for the bad types, and bee for the
one good type. In the wording of the text, however, not only is
there similarity but each type is said to be made by the
Olympian gods " out of " (e) the animal to which it belongs.
With the archaic Greeks, substances and objects are determined
by inherent qualities much more than by size and quantity or by
shape and arrangement of the parts within the whole. This
particular view is largely responsible for the archaic theories
concerning the elements composing the universe.46 As to the
types of women, the principle led to the idea that their charac-
ters are due to the qualities of the substance which was used in
making them. In seven plus one types, as we have seen, a cer-
tain animal substance is said to be the cause of the resulting
character, and these eight make a natural and homogeneous
46 The theory of Anaximenes is a notable exception in that it makes

all the main qualities only a function of one quality (density) and
that this one quality is assumed not as being simply present or absent,
pure or adulterated, but as existing in various degrees. Density has no
specific substratum but is a factor in any substance. All this is
strikingly unarchaic.
series. But in the middle of this series Semonides has inserted

a pair of entirely different substances. Two bad women are
"molded out of earth" and "made out of sea" respectively,
and their characters bear the marks of the qualities inherent to
earth and sea:
Semonides, 7, 21 Tvjv 8e 7rAaEavTcr yrl'vr7v 'OAv/lrtoi

COwKav avopi, 7rrpoV' OVTE yap KaKOV
ovT' EreAOX ov8ev oioSE TroavTr y7vvr),
Epywv o f Lovvov e1aOLEv l7rtarTat.
25 Kovs' rV KaKOV XeCtlAva TtoLro'- 0oE,
ptyWcra IOcfpov aCrUov EKETaL 7rvpo:.
Trv 8' EK 0aAacrar), 6v' ev /pealv voe.
T7rv I,Lv yEXca T Kat yEyr60ev r jLEprvv'
E7TaLVEOsEL
v7ratv?o'e. FLV~evog
i.Ltv t EOC~v
ElEo0l
- 80 oto"
1/O llVa
8v
30 "OVK EarTV aAXX7 T7rae A7S wov yvvr4
ev 7rdaCv avOpw7wroLatLV ovoe KaAAthh(,"
T,rV o OvK aVEKTO< Ov8' (v O6)0aAuo3LO IOelv
OVT' aCrTov EAOELV, XAA ILatveTral TrTE
a7rwXVTOV WJtcrep aduLt TEKVOtatV KVIcV,
35 a,LetAtX0os 8e 7rdaLT Ka7roOv/tLr7
E6 poZotvv tira Kal t IXtOLctL yLyveraL'
a0o7rep OaOAaraa 7roAhAahKtc /Av arpe/irLy
E(TrK aTrrjqLov, Xap/ta vavTy7Oav yIeya,
Oepeo0 iv Wp?7, 7roXakKtcs of atveTa
40 /apvKTV7roat KV/LaLtv 4opev/leVlr
Tav7l dLaXLUT COcKE TOtavTq7 yvvri
opyrv, 4v1v o8 t 7rovoTOs dXXAAot'v EXEL.
It is obvious that here a cosmological system is reflected accord-

ing to which two basic substances, or qualities, make up the
whole of the universe. Earth is the negative, passive, and more
material element and is primarily characterized by its lethargic
inertia. The only activity which the corresponding woman pos-
sesses, her only "ability" (e7rt'oraat), is consumption of food-
matter. The lack of energy gives rise to the comparison with a
cripple (7rrpos), a person who is by himself helpless and will get
nowhere by his own effort. The positive element, sea, on the other
hand, is distinguished by an excess of wilful spontaneity. It is
spirited to the extreme, sometimes raging in dreadful fury and
sometimes "laughing" 47 in peaceful and happy mood. Thus
earth and sea, as together they make the bulk of the world in
47 The Greeks speak of the "laughter " of the sea when it is sparkling
as in quiet and friendly happiness (Aesch., Prom., 90, etc.).
which we live, also provide together the main quali

takes to equip the world with whatever else it con
solidity and inertia of matter on the one hand and,
hand, the activity of motion and force together wi
taneity of will and spirit. Everything can be broad
through the presence, the interaction, and the antagon
contrasting primary qualities. Sea, of course, a
power, has the leading role and its partner is subj
some way subordinated to it. Thus even in this du
could be said that the primary agent or cause of ev
one, viz., sea or " water."
After the time of Thales and the unknown autho
Semonides (he may be identical with Thales), the sea pr
key position in the system of Anaximander (Vors.,
30), fundamentally different though his views oth
and to some degree also in what Xenophanes taught
the central position among the three elements for
likewise, and Clement says that sea, in his doctr
germ of creation" (31 testim.). This word may
correctly describe what Heraclitus meant but certa
from which both ways are open, the way upward t
rising fiery whirlwind to fire, and downward to earth
31 IIvpos 'rpo7rat 7rpwrov OaXaoaua' 0aXaoraar 8E TO5 pev

S6 jpixrv TrpqoTp-Tp -. OadXaaaa &taXeeTaL Kat eATpeE
avrTOv X6yov OKOLs 7rporOev Xv 1 yevearOaI y/j.
The second part seems to be incomplete and therefo

obscure, but it can hardly be doubted that XAyos
sense which at least comes very near to "correspo
"proportion," 49 and that the proportion, whatever th
be, is meant to prevail in all the four upward and dow
versions: Fire/sea sea/earth. There is no lack of fu
roboration for the equation. The middle term alway
opposite qualities, as we have seen in numerous inst
its relations to the things above are the opposite of
things below it. This is precisely stated for the sea
48 Cf. Vors., 21, Xenophanes, A 33, 5-6; Gigon, p. 66.

49 The idea of a ratio and fixed proportion in the relation
the elements is likewise borne out by frag. 90.
334 HERMANN FRiNKEL.
61 ?daaaaca v8'op KaOapwraTov KaL uJtapwTaTov, LXO6VaL 1A

Kat owTrjpLov, avOpwrotL OE aTorovr Kal oheGpv.
Sea is purest water and foulest, to fish drinkable

giving, to men undrinkable and destructive.
In the sea all pollution collects, and yet its waters ar

ritual purification; 50 it is pure when compared to dirt,
when compared to purity. The sea is life for base an
much earth in their constitution,51 but it is death for
endowed with a soul of fire.52
Life and the soul of man is, in the view of Heraclitus, a pro-
cess sustained by continuous conversion of " water" into
its opposite, "fire," i. e. through evaporation. Evaporation
supplies the air for respiration and thus supports consciousness
and reasoning; evaporation likewise brings about the assimila-
tion of food (A 15; A 16, 130).53 The opposite transformation,
precipitation, is death for souls:
36 .vXX-~tv Oavarog wv)p yevecrOaL, voar& 8e aavaroS yOv yeveTOat'

EK y?73 SE V&Jp ytverat, Ce i8aros oSf Ivx\.
It is death for souls to be turned into water, and for water
60 For particulars cf. Philologus, LXXXVII (1932), p. 475.

'1 For the idea of prevalence of earth in base animals cf. Plato,
Timaeus, 92 a-b and Taylor's note on 92a, 4.
62 Perhaps Heraclitus has also spoken of the sea as being mastered
and dominated by the "fire " of storms, but overpowering and destroying
in its turn the solid matter of ships (frag. 53 likewise implies the
progression, Master / servant / servant's slave, supra, p. 326). This
idea is indicated, though not very clearly, in Nicander, Alexiph., 172-6.
The passage from Nicander has been inserted by Diels among the frag-
ments of Heraclitus (A 14a) because Nicander uses the Heraclitean
expression 7rvp aeltwov (== frag. 30) and because the scholion on Nicander
twice refers to Heraclitus. The first reference in the scholion should be
emended to this effect: or 8e 8ovXeveit 1 OcaXaoaa adv'eAots Ka<(Ta> rb<v>
7rvp<bs Oeaoo6v (176)>, Kara Oefov P6oLop 68Xqov6T, ro0ro E[i ] Kal 'Hpd&KXCTOS
Kal MeveKpcaTrs (which?) etpflKev.
53 In the early theories respiration and digestion are closely connected
and in fact identical. The action of "fire" (heat) which disintegrates
and concocts the food to prepare it for assimilation is thought to be
both dependent on and responsible for respiration by Plato in Timaeus,
78e and 80d. The lungs, named 7wXevfoLes for their function in respira-
tion, are likewise supposed to be the recipient of drink (Alcaeus, frag.
94 Diehl; Plato, Tim., 70c and 91a).
to be turned into earth. But out of earth water is

out of water soul.
The two downward conversions are equivalent to a twofold

death, and the two upward transformations to a double birth,
with water (it is not "sea" this time) in the central position,
where the ways of birth and death meet.
We are now in a position to reach a conclusion. The old con-
ception of sea and earth as contrasting elements or bodies 54 pos-
sessing opposite qualities still prevails in the system of Heracli-
tus, with a similar relationship between the partners. But then
Heraclitus follows Anaximenes in increasing the number of the
elements and in assuming that they are convertible into one
another. Unlike Anaximenes, however, he considers the changes
from one condition to the next not as slight and gradual transi-
tions but as violent and dramatic transformations from opposite
to opposite, and he restricts the number of elements to three.
By this means they are made to coincide with the three states of
matter (the solid, liquid, and gaseous), and at the same time to
comply with the pattern of the geometrical mean. The contrast
between dead inertia and vivid power exists twice in this con-
figuration, with sea or water in the central position. This thesis
explains the kosmos and the meteorological phenomena but it
holds good equally in everyday experience. Fire and heat, the
substance of life, makes dead matter in the rigid state gain life
and motion and melt; and again it makes half-dead matter in the
heavy state of liquidity gain real life and energy, lose its weight,
6" Our little survey has shown that the theory primarily referred less
to the substances water and earth than to the objects sea and land, the
components of the world in which we live. To the prehistory of the
conception belong the Homeric similes symbolizing powerful motion by
the waves of the sea and stubborn resistance by the stable cliff upon
which the waves break. In some of the similes storm takes the place
of roaring sea, or storm is associated with waves to symbolize the will
of the leaders who stir the crowd (sea) and push it into motion. Solon
(frag. 11 Diehl, cf. Jaeger, Berliner Sitzungsberichte, 1926, p. 81) uses
the simile of sea and wind in order to state that not the crowd (= sea)
but the leaders (= storms) are responsible for political unrest. This
clever remark in some way preludes the development from Thales (sea
or water as motive power) to Anaximenes (air as motive power). As
a rule, the discoveries and theorems of Greek philosophy are preceded
by anticipation on the moral field.
break its bonds, freely evaporate upward and become dur

transition, in statu nascendi, conscious breath and liv
Deprivation of fire and life, making things travel dow
one and the same path, has the opposite result.55
As soon as Empedocles had firmly established his f
ment theory, the scheme of the geometrical mean was see
ruled out for ever from that province. But just at th
stage of the development it happened for the first time t
scheme was explicitly, as such, applied to the elements of
Plato in the Timaeus (31b ff.) deduces the Empedoclean
by starting from the extreme elements fire and earth, an
pointing out that an intermediate is necessary to bind
flicting bodies to one another. He goes on to say that t
ing element, in order to serve its purpose of mediati
harmonization, must be determined by the principle of
metrical mean, for only through a geometrical progressio
complete cycle of mutual relations be brought about.
elements are tridimensional bodies, he infers that not
two geometrical means have to be inserted between f
earth. The final result is a sequence of four elements
mined by the double equation Fire/air = air/water= -
earth. It has been assumed that either Plato himself, o
bly Philolaus, introduced into cosmology the " Pytha
idea of the geometrical progression.56 We now learn th
clitus had done it long before, except for the mathematic
ness of expression. The difference in the number of el
really negligible. For every reader of the Timaeus
that the duplication of the geometrical mean comes as som
surprising and unconvincing.57 The line of thought lea
55 This, however, is perhaps not the whole story. If we can t

indirect evidence (A 1, 9-11), Heraclitus, in order to account for the
phenomena of day and night and of the weather, introduced two kinds
of evaporation, a bright and a dark one. This would involve a con-
cession in the line of Anaximenes and not be consistent with the
main thesis. But Cherniss (A.J.P., LVI, p. 415) is inclined to dis-
believe the accounts of a double evaporation, and they are indeed open
to several grave objections.
66 Cf. Taylor, Commentary on Plato's Timaeus, p. 98.
57 Plato's argument that there is one geometrical mean for planes
but two for tridimensional bodies seems to be based on the theorems
Eucl., Elem., viii, 11 and 12 (cf. Eva Sachs, Philol. Unters., 24, Berlin
to three, instead of four, elements, mutually related acco

the simple pattern of the geometrical mean. This
what Heraclitus taught. With an unimportant modif
Plato finally formulated with technical precision a bas
ple of Heraclitean thought.
The strong consistency in the grandiose system of H
imposes on the interpreter the duty of seeking the co
between the parts of the doctrine, connections whic
original were either expressed or tacitly implied. On
hand, there is much to mislead our efforts. The
Heraclitus' thought and style is so overwhelming that
to carry away the imagination of his readers (of thos
who do respond) beyond the limits of sober interp
Neither the ancient philosophers and physicians nor
scholars have escaped the danger of allowing their fan
riot and heraclitizing on their own account. The Stoics
blended with their own ideas the inspirations for wh
were indebted to the obscure philosopher. We have t
the material and yet be utterly suspicious of the vie
which it is presented. Almost every single statement
indirect tradition, if it can be compared with the origina
to which it refers, affords a striking proof of limited ab
to speak of limited will, to assimilate archaic though
produce it correctly. It is fortunate that we are able
some of the problems by tracing back a certain pa
Heraclitus' original thought. HERMANN FRA
STANFORD UNIVERSITY.
[Weidmann], 1917, p. 126, note 1; substantially the same explanation

is given by Taylor, p. 96, but a different one by von Fritz, R. E., XVII,
2268, s. v. Oinopides).
Index to passages cited: Anaximenes: 330; n. 46. Empedocles: n. 35.

Heraclitus, A 1, 3/4: 309; 325. A 1, 9-11: n. 55. A 14a: n. 52. A 15/16:
334. A19: 328f. A 130: 334. B1: 316-8. 3: 327f. 4: 322. 5: 323. 6:
327. 9: 322. 13: 322. 16: n. 39. 18: 313; 319. 29: 322. 31: 333. 34:
316. 36: 334. 37: 323. 44: 321. 45: 327f. 52: 320. 53: 326; n. 52.
71: n. 18. 79: 314; 316f. 82/83: 315. 90: 329. 94: 328. 96: n. 36.
99: 326-8. 107: 312; 317; n. 40. 114: 320. 115: n. 34f. 328. 117 and
118: n. 18. 124: 319. Orphics: nn. 6; 32. Parmenides: 330. Pindar:
nn. 18; 24; 38. Plato, Rep. ii 363d: n. 6; vii 517c: n. 24; 533d: 311 f.;
Tim. 31b ff.: 336. Sch. Nic. Alex. 172: n. 52. Semonides: 331. Solon 11:
n. 54. Tauler: n. 35. Thales: 331; 333.
6

A Thought Pattern in Heraclitus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Thought Pattern in Heraclitus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Thought Pattern in Heraclitus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Thought Pattern in Heraclitus

Author(s): Hermann Frankel

"They that seek gold, dig up much earth and fin

1 quote from Diels-Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratike

in addition he throws his victim into such situations and makes

There are some variants and additions in other versions. Thus

4 Frags. 13 and 37 seem to be somehow related but their purport is

quotes is iEeraclitus, and that Heraclitus had said: the or

107 KaKot adprvpe? avvOpw7rorvL o4OaAXpot Kat WTra 8appdpovs qvXas

The double coincidence (both between the quotation and the

6 Adam in his commentary on the Republic (Cambridge [Univ. Press],

For Heraclitus himself, the result does not appear

Looking round for analogies among the known fragments,

note on frag. 13 (= no. 54 in his edition).l An imag

Man is stamped as infantile by divinity, just as the child is

For the sake of convenience, we call this pattern by the name of

which he is judged. An adult man is perfect accor

virtually amounts to its opposite C. Of this type are t

34 'A~vveroL aKOVO'avTE Ko aOtv YV fotKaoLt caLTts av'irolat

They that have no understanding, though heari

Those who hear the message and are present in a

14 Here, as in frag. 1, the notion "tantamount" is rather vaguely

advocating relativity as a universal and uniform prin

107 KaKot 4uaaprvpes avOpw7rotatv O6aaXo,hol Kai cTra fapfadpovs f/vXa'

Many a time the opponents of Heraclitus will have recurred to

6 Again we can form a double proportion: Barbarian / Greek

sense or other, to God and the Absolute. The equatio

18 I have combined frag. 1 (sleep) and frag. 118 ("Dry sou

Constantly upbraiding humanity, scolding and abu

18 'Eav i" CA7hrrTTaL avcXTraTrov OVK tcevp]crat, aveEcpEvvrTOV cov Kat

Instead of trying to enrapture his readers, to envelop them in a

The most perfectly organized universe is like a heap of

scil. ad mortem; and Pind., Nem., 6, 6 ff. in a context strongly influenced

20 Cf. Snell, Hermes, LXI (1926), p. 371.

The obscure frag. 52 is perhaps taken from a similar con

Human existence is a child at a game, playing draugh

The course of nature, the sway of necessity, the codes of law

individual but a suprapersonal power; it is common

25 This equation differs from all those analyzed before. N

The function of the pattern is now, I hope, sufficien

Asses would prefer chaff to gold.

The text suggests the equations: Ass/ordinary man = o

29 ALpeCrTat yap Cv aVTL aTradVTwV O apLoroL, KAO'S acvaov Ov7-qr6v ol

The mass of humanity is degraded to the rank of their domestic

he is denouncing the pleasures of the unenlightened. And this

fragments (10 cum test.; 51). Pythagoras is mentioned twice (40;

becomes certain on the strength of some other allusions

For the expression "they wash in mire and dust" (Ko'vet =

32 It is obvious (and was so interpreted by Plotinus) that the sinners

They purify themselves by defiling themselves with

That in the rite actually the same substance, blood, is a

33 The style and structure of this fragment has been analyze

transcendental, is no more valuable than refuse and fil

5 Empedocles (Vorsokr., 31, B 2, 2) likewise speaks of "t

fragment and its interpretation. But the story of the ge

Strife is father of all things, and king of all things, and

37 The wording is hardly authentic.

glamor of all the stars, brilliant though they are, a

The boundaries of soul you will not find, wandering in