CHAPTER FOUR

GREEK PHILOSOPHERS IN REF. BOOK I AND IN BOOKS IV -IX

IV 1 Which Philosophers Are Listed

In Ref. I Hippolytus describes the doctrines of (or, in some cases, refers by name to) twenty-threel Greek philosophers: Thales, Pythagoras, Em­ pedocles, Heraclitus, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Anaxagoras, Arche­ laus, Parmenides, Zeno (of Elea), Leucippus, Democritus, Xenophanes, Metrodorus, Ecphantus, Rippon, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Chrysippus, Zeno (of Citium; Chrysippus and Zeno-note the order-are oi :E'tomco{), Epicurus and Pyrrho (the latter in a chapter about the 'A KaBTJJ.tatKT, atp£philo­ sophers (who remain anonymous) referred to at Ref. I 5 and I 10 but excluded from further treatment, there are also other groups which are referred to although as a rule their doctrines are not described. Socrates founded a large school and had pupils, of whom only Plato is men­ tioned and treated (Ref. I 18-9). In the Plato chapter, we find a discussion of divergent views among the Platonists, but no names are given (19.5 nve~ ... 'tWV IlAa'trovtKWV. 19.6-8 oi J.LEv ... oi Be ... oi Be ... oi B£. 19.10-3 oi J.LEv ... oi Be ... oi Be ... oi Be ... nve~ J.Lev oi>v ... oi Be ou). At Ref. I 20.7 both oi ... a1to 'tOU Zflvrovo~ and oi ... a1to 'tOU 'AptO'tO'teA.ou~ are mentioned in the context of an explanation of the names Peripatos and Stoa. At Ref. I 22.4 reference is made to a difference of opinion between otherwise unidentified groups of Stoics (oi J.LEv ... oi Be). And Ref. I 23, as we have noticed, deals with Hippolytus' Academic-Pyrrhonist hairesis as a whole. I suggest that we forget about Socrates' other pupils and count as one

1 I do not include Aristoxenus (Fr. 13, but Wehrli seems to award Aristoxenus more than his due) who at Ref I 2.12 is only a source referred to by a source. We must further note that the Cynics are not mentioned in Ref I, although Marcion (Ref VII 29.1, X 19.4) and Tatian (Ref X 18) are connected with the Cynic bios and Marcion 's followers are called 'dogs barking at the Demiurge' (Ref VII 30.1). Iren. (cf. infra, n. 19) Adv. haeres. II 14.5 compares the Valentinians to the Cynics, so Hippolytus' compliments addressed to Marcion and Tatian may be a remini­ scence of Irenaeus. GREEK PHILOSOPHERS IN REF. BOOK I AND IN BOOKS IV- IX 45

each of the following four: (a) Plato and the Platonists, (b) Aristotle and the Peripatos,3 (c) Chrysippus, Zeno, the Stoics and (d) Pyrrho, the Aca­ demics, the Pyrrhonists. By means of this inclusion of the post-Socratic schools connected with Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Epicurus and Pyrrho we may bring down our total of philosophers to 22, Zeno, Chrysippus and the Stoics counting as I. If we add the two groups and the one individual (the Brahmans, Druids and Hesiod) which conclude book I at chs. 24-6, this total rises to 25, at the cost, however, of adding the non-Greek Brahmans and Druids. Presumably, we should at any rate subtract the Druids or at least not count them among the non-Greeks; having been taught by 'Pythagoras' slave Zamolxis'-cf. Ref I 2.17, where this is also said-, they "belong with the Pythagorean philosophy right from the start" (Ref I 25.1 'tU ITu8ayopdcp qnA.oaocpi~ Ka't' aKpov ryK{nvav'te~). 4 With some apologies for so much computation and not including the Brahmans and Druids but only adding Hesiod, I therefore suggest 23 as the number of Greek philosophical individuals-and-groups treated in the Philosophoumena, or 22 excluding Hesiod. I have not taken 'the Egyptians' into account who are said to have taught Pythagoras (Ref I 2.18), or the Indian gymnosophists, Egyptian priests, astrologers and Babylonian Magoi who are said to have taught Democritus (Ref I 13.1).

IV 2 Which Philosophers Are Used

I have checked the occurrences of these names of Greek philoso­ phers and philosophical schools in the body of the Ref which contains the refutation of the Gnostic sects and heresiarchs by means of the argument that they stole their doctrines from the Greek philosophers, viz. in books IV-Ix.s

2 Cf. supra, Ch. I n. 50, Ch. III n. 17. The ch. is printed as Pyrr. T82 2nd text. 3 At Ref V 21.1-2, there is an isolated and neglected but historically important reference to Andronicus of Rhodes ('AvopovtlC

eros and the similar views of others the Sethians are said to have plagiarized. On Andronicus see further infra, Ch. V 3. 4 A good metaphor for the establishing of a connection with a stemma. The ex­ pression lCO.'t' UlCpOV is apt for 'the top of the line', while Eyrim'tElV is synonymous with VEUElV which is often used of lines inclining or verging to a given point. Note that Ref I 25 is thus linked to source Dl. D. T. Runia suggests to me that lCO.'t' a1Cpov means 'at its zenith' because the origin of a hairesis represents this in its purest form. 5 We should notice (cf. infra, App. 1 p. 318) that the summary of Greek philo­ sophy in Ref X does not derive from Ref I but from an independent source, viz. Sextus or-less likely-a Skeptical source common to Sextus and Hippolytus. For this survey (and the references to philosophical doctrines in Ref X 32) see infra, Ch. IV 9; in book X, there is no explicit argument that the Gnostics stole their ideas from the Greeks. Furthermore, it has to be acknowledged that one cannot tell to what