SU YAPILARINDA ÖNCÜLER I PIONEER IN WATER HERITAGE I

- (1792-1750) Babylon 2-5

-TUTHALIA IV. (1237-1209) Hattusas 6-7

-MENUA (810-786) Tuscba (Van) 8

-WARPALAWA (730-710) Ereğli 9

-SENNACHERIP (638-568) Nineveh 10

-SOLON (638-568) Athens 11-17

-ANAXAGORAS (510-428) Klozemanai (izmir) 18-21

-TEOPHRASTUS (371-287) Athens 22-31

-STRABO (63BC- 24 AD) Amassia 32-37

Hammurabi, King of Babylon (1792-1750 BC) Born in Babylon 1810 BC

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For other uses, see Hammurabi (disambiguation). Not to be confused with Ammurapi.

Hammurabi

Hammurabi (standing), depicted as receiving his royal insignia from Shamash. Hammurabi holds his hands over his mouth as a sign

of prayer[1] (relief on the upper part of the stele ofHammurabi's code of laws).

Hammurabi (Akkadian from Amorite ʻAmmurāpi, "the kinsman is a healer", from ʻAmmu, "paternal kinsman", and Rāpi, "healer"; died c. 1750 BC) was the sixth Amorite king of Babylon (that is, of the First Babylonian Dynasty, the Amorite Dynasty) from 1792 BC to 1750 BC middle chronology (1728 BC – 1686 BC short chronology[2]). He became the first king of the Babylonian Empire following the abdication of his father, Sin-Muballit, who had become very ill and died, extending Babylon's control over Mesopotamia by winning a series of wars against neighboring kingdoms.[3] Although his empire controlled all of Mesopotamia at the time of his death, his successors were unable to maintain his empire. Hammurabi is known for the set of laws called Hammurabi's Code, which constitute one of the earliest surviving codes of law in recorded history.

Reign and conquests[edit]

Map showing the Babylonian territory upon Hammurabi's ascension in c. 1792 BC and upon his death in c. 1750 BC

Hammurabi was an Amorite First Dynasty king of the city-state of Babylon, and inherited the power from his father, Sin-Muballit, in c. 1792 BC.[5] Babylon was one of the many largely Amorite ruled city-states that dotted the central and southern Mesopotamian plains and waged war on each other for control of fertile agricultural land.[6] Though many cultures co-existed in Mesopotamia, Babylonian culture gained a degree of prominence among the literate classes throughout the Middle East under Hammurabi.[7] The kings who came before Hammurabi had founded a relatively minor City State in 1894 BC which controlled little territory outside of the city itself. Babylon was overshadowed by older, larger and more powerful kingdoms such as , , Isin, Eshnunna and Larsa for a century or so after its founding. However his father Sin-Muballit had begun to consolidate rule of a small area of south central Mesopotamia under Babylonian hegemony and, by the time of his reign, had conquered the minor city-states of Borsippa, , and Sippar.[7] Thus Hammurabi ascended to the throne as the king of a minor kingdom in the midst of a complex geopolitical situation. The powerful kingdom of Eshnunna controlled the upper Tigris River while Larsa controlled the river delta. To the east of Mesopotamia lay the powerful kingdom of Elam which regularly invaded and forced tribute upon the small states of southern Mesopotamia. In northern Mesopotamia, the Assyrian king Shamshi-Adad I, who had already inherited centuries old Assyrian colonies in Asia Minor, had expanded his territory into the Levant and central Mesopotamia,[8] although his untimely death would somewhat fragment his empire.[9] The first few decades of Hammurabi's reign were quite peaceful. Hammurabi used his power to undertake a series of public works, including heightening the city walls for defensive purposes, and expanding the temples.[10] In c. 1801 BC, the powerful kingdom of Elam, which straddled important traderoutes across the Zagros Mountains, invaded the Mesopotamian plain.[11] With allies among the plain states, Elam attacked and destroyed the kingdom of Eshnunna, destroying a number of cities and imposing its rule on portions of the plain for the first time.[12]In order to consolidate its position, Elam tried to start a war between Hammurabi's Babylonian kingdom and the kingdom of Larsa.[13] Hammurabi and the king of Larsa made an alliance when they discovered this duplicity and were able to crush the Elamites, although Larsa did not contribute greatly to the military effort.[13] Angered by Larsa's failure to come to his aid, Hammurabi turned on that southern power, thus gaining control of the entirety of the lower Mesopotamian plain by c. 1763 BC.[14] As Hammurabi was assisted during the war in the south by his allies from the north such as and Mari, the absence of soldiers in the north led to unrest.[14]Continuing his expansion, Hammurabi turned his attention northward, quelling the unrest and soon after crushing Eshnunna.[15] Next the Babylonian armies conquered the remaining northern states, including Babylon's former ally Mari, although it is possible that the 'conquest' of Mari was a surrender without any actual conflict.[16][17][18] Hammurabi entered into a protracted war with Ishme-Dagan I of Assyria for control of Mesopotamia, with both kings making alliances with minor states in order to gain the upper hand. Eventually Hammurabi prevailed, ousting Ishme-Dagan I just before his own death. Mut- Ashkur the new king of Assyria was forced to pay tribute to Hammurabi, however Babylon did not rule Assyria directly. In just a few years, Hammurabi had succeeded in uniting all of Mesopotamia under his rule.[18] The Assyrian kingdom survived but was forced to pay tribute during his reign, and of the major city-states in the region, only Aleppo and Qatna to the west in the Levant maintained their independence.[18] However, one stele of Hammurabi has been found as far north as Diyarbekir, where he claims the title "King of the ".[19] Vast numbers of contract tablets, dated to the reigns of Hammurabi and his successors, have been discovered, as well as 55 of his own letters.[20] These letters give a glimpse into the daily trials of ruling an empire, from dealing with floods and mandating changes to a flawed calendar, to taking care of Babylon's massive herds of livestock.[21] Hammurabi died and passed the reins of the empire on to his son Samsu-iluna in c. 1750 BC, under whose rule the Babylonian empire began to quickly unravel.[22]

Code of laws[edit] Main article: Code of Hammurabi

Code of Hammurabi stele. Louvre Museum, Paris

Hammurabi is best known for the promulgation of a new code of Babylonian law: the Code of Hammurabi. One of the first written laws in the world,[citation needed] the Code of Hammurabi was inscribed on a stele and placed in a public place so that all could see it, although it is thought that few were literate. The stele was later plundered by the Elamites and removed to their capital, ; it was rediscovered there in 1901 in Iran and is now in the Louvre Museum in Paris. The code of Hammurabi contained 282 laws, written by scribes on 12 tablets. Unlike earlier laws, it was written in Akkadian, the daily language of Babylon, and could therefore be read by any literate person in the city.[23] The structure of the code is very specific, with each offense receiving a specified punishment. The punishments tended to be very harsh by modern standards, with many offenses resulting in death, disfigurement, or the use of the "Eye for eye, tooth for tooth" (Lex Talionis "Law of Retaliation") philosophy.[24] The code is also one of the earliest examples of the idea ofpresumption of innocence, and it also suggests that the accused and accuser have the opportunity to provide evidence.[25]However, there is no provision for extenuating circumstances to alter the prescribed punishment. A carving at the top of the stele portrays Hammurabi receiving the laws from the god Shamash or possibly Marduk,[26] and the preface states that Hammurabi was chosen by the gods of his people to bring the laws to them. Parallels between this narrative and the giving of laws by God in Jewish tradition to Moses and similarities between the two legal codes suggest a common ancestor in the Semitic background of the two. Fragments of previous law codes have been found.[27][28][29][30] P. Wright argues that the Jewish law used Hammurabi's collection as a model, imitating both its structure and content.[31] Similar codes of law were created in several nearby civilizations, including the earlier Mesopotamian examples of -Nammu's code, Laws of Eshnunna, and Code of Lipit- Ishtar, and the later Hittite code of laws.[32]

Tudhaliya IV (Reign 1237-1209) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tudhaliya

Depiction of king Tudhaliya on a relief

King of Hatti

Reign ca.1237 – 1209 BCE

Predecessor Hattusili III

Father Hattusili III

Mother Puduhepa

Tudhaliya IV was a king of the Hittite Empire (New kingdom), and the younger son of Hattusili III. He reigned ca. 1237 BCE–1209 BCE. His mother was the great queen, Puduhepa.

Biography[edit]

Tudhaliya was likely born in his father's court in Hattusa, after his brother and crown prince Nerikkaili, but still while their father was governing on his brother Muwatalli II's behalf. He was a good friend of Muwatalli's son, Kurunta, and Hattusili ordered that they stay on good terms. After Hattusili as King wrote up a treaty with "Ulmi-Tessup" which confirmed Kurunta's rule over Tarhuntassa, Hattusili elevated Tudhaliya over his older brother to be his crown prince. Tudhaliya as king drew up a bronze tablet treaty confirming the links between him and Kurunta. During his reign, 13 dams were built after a severe drought, one of which still survives to this day at Alacahöyük.[1]

He suffered a severe defeat at the hands of Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria in the Battle of Nihriya, ca 1230 BCE.

Tudhaliya had a sister, queen Maathorneferure of Egypt. He had two sons, who were the last two kings of the before their empire fell due to the Sea People.

Menua (Reign 810-786) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Menua

King of Urartu

Reign c. 810-c. 786 BC

Predecessor Ishpuini

Successor Argishti I

Father Ishpuini

Menua (Armenian: Մենուա) was the fifth known king of Urartu from c. 810 BC to approximately 786 BC.

A younger son of the preceding Urartuan King, Ishpuini, Menua was adopted as co-ruler by his father in the last years of his reign. Menua enlarged the kingdom through numerous wars against the neighbouring countries and left a large number of inscriptions across the region. He organized a centralised administrative structure, fortified a number of towns and constructed fortresses. Amongst these was Menuakhinili located on Mount Ararat. Menua developed a canal and irrigation system that stretched across the kingdom. Several of these canals are still in use today.

He was succeeded by his son, Argishti I.[1]

Warpalawas (730-710) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ivriz relief - (on the left) and Warpalawas

Ancient Near East portal

Warpalawa(s) was a late 8th century BC (ca 730-710 BC?) Late Hittite (or Neo-Hittite) king of in south-centralAnatolia (modern ). The political center of this Early regional state was probably Tuwanuwa (or or Tuhana/ later Roman ).

Among other commemorative monuments, Warpalawas most notably commissioned the carving of a rock-relief at the site of Ivriz near a spring, south of Tuwanuwa in the province of Konya. In the relief, he is depicted with the storm-godTarhunzas. His attire in the relief is seen as an evidence for his kingdom's close affinity with the . The relief is accompanied with a hieroglyphic Luwian inscription. The Tabalian king Urballa, mentioned in the Assyrian texts at the time of Tiglath-pileser III and Sargon II probably is Warpalawas.

Bibliography[edit]

 Melchert, H C. (ed.); 2003. The Luwians. (Leiden: Brill Publishers). ISBN 90-474-0214- 6 (ebook) ISBN 90-04-13009-8 (print)  Hawkins, J. David; 1999. The Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-014870-6.

SENNACHERIP (ASUR KİNG 704-681)

The city grew dramatically in size, grandeur and fame, however, under the reign of King (704 - 681) who made Nineveh capital of his Assyrian Empire. Sennacherib was the son of King Sargon II who was killed inbattle (a death considered shameful because it was believed that such a death was a punishment from the gods for one's sins) and the new ruler wished to distance himself as much as possible from his father. Sennacherib abandoned Sargon II's new capital city of Dur-Sharrukin and moved it to Nineveh early in his reign. Anything which could be moved from Dur-Sharrukin was relocated to Nineveh. He built great walls around the city with fifteen gates, created public parks and gardens, aqueducts, irrigation ditches, canals, and greatly expanded upon and improved the structures of the city. His palace had eighty rooms and he proclaimed it "the palace without rival" (the same phrase used by his father to describe his own palace at Dur- Sharrukin). The historian Gwendolyn Leick notes, "Nineveh, with its heterogeneous population of people from throughout the Assyrian Empire, was one of the most beautiful cities in the Near East, with its gardens, temples, and splendid palaces" (132) and further cites Nineveh as having a carefully planned and executed series of canals and aquaducts to ensure a steady supply of water not only for human consumption but also to keep the public parks and gardens irrigated; an aspect of urban life not every city attended to with as much care and planning. Recent scholarship claims that the famous Hanging Gardens of Babylon were actually located at Nineveh and were constructed under Sennacherib's reign. The historian Christopher Scarre writes:

Sennacherib’s palace had all the usual accoutrements of a major Assyrian residence: colossal guardian figures and impressively carved stone reliefs (over 2,000 sculptured slabs in 71 rooms). Its gardens, too, were exceptional. Recent research by British Assyriologist Stephanie Dalley has suggested that these were the famous Hanging Gardens, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World. Later writers placed the Hanging Gardens at Babylon, but extensive research has failed to find any trace of them. Sennacherib’s proud account of the palace gardens he created at Nineveh fits that of the Hanging Gardens in several significant details (231).

Solon (638-558 BC) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bas-relief of Solon from the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives

Solon (/ˈsoʊlɒn, ˈsoʊlən/; Greek: Σόλων; c. 638 – c. 558 BC) was an Athenian statesman, lawmaker, and poet. He is remembered particularly for his efforts to legislate against political, economic, and moral decline in archaic Athens.[1] His reforms failed in the short term, yet he is often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy.[2][3][4] He wrote poetry for pleasure, as patriotic propaganda, and in defense of his constitutional reforms.

Our knowledge of Solon is limited by the fact that his works only survive in fragments and appear to feature interpolations by later authors, and by the general paucity of documentary and archaeological evidence covering Athens in the early 6th century BC.[5] Ancient authors such as Herodotus and Plutarch are the main source of information, yet they wrote about Solon long after his death, at a time when history was by no means an academic discipline. Fourth century orators, such as Aeschines, tended to attribute to Solon all the laws of their own, much later times.[6][7]

Biography[edit]

Bust of Solon from the National Museum, Naples.

Solon was born in Athens around 638 B.C.[8] His family was distinguished in Attica as they belonged to a noble or Eupatrid clan although only possessing moderate wealth.[9] Solon's father probably was Execestides. Solon's lineage, therefore, could be traced back to Codrus, the last King of Athens.[10] According to Diogenes Laërtius, he had a brother named Dropides who was an ancestor (six generations removed) of Plato.[11] According to Plutarch, Solon was related to the tyrant Peisistratos for their mothers were cousins.[12] Solon was eventually drawn into the unaristocratic pursuit of commerce.[13]

When Athens and Megara were contesting for the possession of the Salamis Island, Solon was given leadership of the Athenian forces. After repeated disasters, Solon was able to increase the morale and spirits of his body of troops on the strength of a poem he wrote about the islands.[8] Supported by Peisistratos, he defeated the Megarians either by means of a cunning trick[14] or more directly through heroic battle around 595 B.C.[8][15] The Megarians however refused to give up their claim to the island. The dispute was referred to the Spartans, who eventually awarded possession of the island to Athens on the strength of the case that Solon put to them.[16]

According to Diogenes Laertius, in 594 B.C. Solon was chosen archon or chief magistrate.[8][17] As archon, Solon discussed his intended reforms with some friends. Knowing that he was about to cancel all debts, these friends took out loans and promptly bought some land. Suspected of complicity, Solon complied with his own law and released his own debtors, amounting to 5 talents (or 15 according to some sources). His friends never repaid their debts.[18]

After he had finished his reforms, he travelled abroad for ten years, so that the Athenians could not induce him to repeal any of his laws.[19] His first stop was Egypt. There, according to Herodotus he visited the Pharaoh of Egypt Amasis II.[20] According to Plutarch, he spent some time and discussed philosophy with two Egyptian priests, Psenophis of Heliopolis and Sonchis of Sais.[21] According to Plato's dialogues Timaeus and Critias, he visited Neith's temple at Sais and received from the priests there an account of the history of Atlantis. Next Solon sailed to Cyprus, where he oversaw the construction of a new capital for a local king, in gratitude for which the king named it Soloi.[21]

Croesus awaits fiery execution (Attic red-figure amphora, 500-490 BC, Louvre G 197)

Solon's travels finally brought him to Sardis, capital of Lydia. According to Herodotus and Plutarch, he met with Croesus and gave the Lydian king advice, which however Croesus failed to appreciate until it was too late. Croesus had considered himself to be the happiest man alive and Solon had advised him, "Count no man happy until he be dead." The reasoning was that at any minute, fortune might turn on even the happiest man and make his life miserable. It was only after he had lost his kingdom to the Persian king Cyrus, while awaiting execution, that Croesus acknowledged the wisdom of Solon's advice.[22][23]

After his return to Athens, Solon became a staunch opponent of Peisistratos. In protest and as an example to others, Solon stood outside his own home in full armour, urging all who passed to resist the machinations of the would-be tyrant. His efforts were in vain. Solon died shortly after Pisistratus usurped by force the autocratic power that Athens had once freely bestowed upon him.[24] He died in Cyprus at the age of 80[8] and, in accordance with his will, his ashes were scattered around Salamis, the island where he was born.[25][26]

The travel writer, Pausanias, listed Solon among the seven sages whose aphorisms adorned Apollo's temple in Delphi.[27]Stobaeus in the Florilegium relates a story about a symposium, where Solon's young nephew was singing a poem of Sappho's; Solon, upon hearing the song, asked the boy to teach him to sing it. When someone asked, "Why should you waste your time on it?" Solon replied ἵνα μαθὼν αὐτὸ ἀποθάνω, "So that I may learn it then die."[28] Ammianus Marcellinus however told a similar story about Socrates and the poet Stesichorus, quoting the philosopher's rapture in almost identical terms: "ut aliquid sciens amplius e vita discedam",[29] meaning "in order to go away knowing more out of life".

Background to Solon's reforms[edit]

Solon, the wise lawgiver of Athens

During Solon's time, many Greek city-states had seen the emergence of tyrants, opportunistic noblemen who had taken power on behalf of sectional interests. In Sicyon, Cleisthenes had usurped power on behalf of an Ionian minority. In Megara,Theagenes had come to power as an enemy of the local oligarchs. The son-in-law of Theagenes, an Athenian nobleman named Cylon, made an unsuccessful attempt to seize power in Athens in 632 BC. Solon was described by Plutarch as having been temporarily awarded autocratic powers by Athenian citizens on the grounds that he had the "wisdom" to sort out their differences for them in a peaceful and equitable manner.[30] According to ancient sources,[31][32] he obtained these powers when he was elected eponymous archon (594/3 BC). Some modern scholars believe these powers were in fact granted some years after Solon had been archon, when he would have been a member of the Areopagus and probably a more respected statesman by his (aristocratic) peers.[33][34][35]

The social and political upheavals that characterised Athens in Solon's time have been variously interpreted by historians from ancient times to the present day. Two contemporary historians have identified three distinct historical accounts of Solon's Athens, emphasizing quite different rivalries: economic and ideological rivalry, regional rivalry and rivalry between aristocratic clans.[36][37] These different accounts provide a convenient basis for an overview of the issues involved.

 Economic and ideological rivalry is a common theme in ancient sources. This sort of account emerges from Solon's poems (e.g. see below Solon the reformer and poet), in which he casts himself in the role of a noble mediator between two intemperate and unruly factions. This same account is substantially taken up about three centuries later by the author of the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia but with an interesting variation: "...there was conflict between the nobles and the common people for an extended period. For the constitution they were under was oligarchic in every respect and especially in that the poor, along with their wives and children, were in slavery to the rich...All the land was in the hands of a few. And if men did not pay their rents, they themselves and their children were liable to be seized as slaves. The security for all loans was the debtor's person up to the time of Solon. He was the first people's champion."[38] Here Solon is presented as a partisan in a democratic cause whereas, judged from the viewpoint of his own poems, he was instead a mediator between rival factions. A still more significant variation in the ancient historical account appears in the writing of Plutarch in the late 1st – early 2nd century AD: "Athens was torn by recurrent conflict about the constitution. The city was divided into as many parties as there were geographical divisions in its territory. For the party of the people of the hills was most in favour of democracy, that of the people of the plain was most in favour of oligarchy, while the third group, the people of the coast, which preferred a mixed form of constitution somewhat between the other two, formed an obstruction and prevented the other groups from gaining control."[39]  Regional rivalry is a theme commonly found among modern scholars.[40][41][42][43] "The new picture which emerged was one of strife between regional groups, united by local loyalties and led by wealthy landowners. Their goal was control of the central government at Athens and with it dominance over their rivals from other districts of Attika."[44] Regional factionalism was inevitable in a relatively large territory such as Athens possessed. In most Greek city states, a farmer could conveniently reside in town and travel to and from his fields every day. According to Thucydides, on the other hand, most Athenians continued to live in rural settlements right up until the Peloponnesian War.[45] The effects of regionalism in a large territory could be seen in Laconia, where Sparta had gained control through intimidation and resettlement of some of its neighbours and enslavement of the rest. Attika in Solon's time seemed to be moving towards a similarly ugly solution with many citizens in danger of being reduced to the status of helots.[46]  Rivalry between clans is a theme recently developed by some scholars, based on an appreciation of the political significance of kinship groupings.[44][47][48][49][50][51] According to this account, bonds of kinship rather than local loyalties were the decisive influence on events in archaic Athens. An Athenian belonged not only to a phyle or tribe and one of its subdivisions, the phratry or brotherhood, but also to an extended family, clan or genos. It has been argued that these interconnecting units of kinship reinforced a hierarchic structure with aristocratic clans at the top.[36][52] Thus rivalries between aristocratic clans could engage all levels of society irrespective of any regional ties. In that case, the struggle between rich and poor was the struggle between powerful aristocrats and the weaker affiliates of their rivals or perhaps even with their own rebellious affiliates.

The historical account of Solon's Athens has evolved over many centuries into a set of contradictory stories or a complex story that might be interpreted in a variety of ways. As further evidence accumulates, and as historians continue to debate the issues, Solon's motivations and the intentions behind his reforms will continue to attract speculation.[53]

Solon's reforms[edit]

Solon, depicted with pupils in an Islamic miniature

Solon's laws were inscribed on large wooden slabs or cylinders attached to a series of axles that stood upright in the Prytaneum.[54][55] These axones appear to have operated on the same principle as a Lazy Susan, allowing both convenient storage and ease of access. Originally the axones recorded laws enacted by Draco in the late 7th Century (traditionally 621 BC). Nothing of Draco's codification has survived except for a law relating to homicide, yet there is consensus among scholars that it did not amount to anything like a constitution.[56][57] Solon repealed all Draco's laws except those relating to homicide.[58] Fragments of the axones were still visible in Plutarch's time[59] but today the only records we have of Solon's laws are fragmentary quotes and comments in literary sources such as those written by Plutarch himself. Moreover, the language of his laws was archaic even by the standards of the fifth century and this caused interpretational problems for ancient commentators.[60] Modern scholars doubt the reliability of these sources and our knowledge of Solon's legislation is therefore actually very limited in its details.

Generally, Solon's reforms appear to have been constitutional, economic and moral in their scope. This distinction, though somewhat artificial, does at least provide a convenient framework within which to consider the laws that have been attributed to Solon. Some short-term consequences of his reforms are considered at the end of the section. Constitutional reform[edit] Main article: Solonian Constitution

Before Solon's reforms, the Athenian state was administered by nine archons appointed or elected annually by the Areopagus on the basis of noble birth and wealth.[61][62] The Areopagus comprised former archons and it therefore had, in addition to the power of appointment, extraordinary influence as a consultative body. The nine archons took the oath of office while ceremonially standing on a stone in the agora, declaring their readiness to dedicate a golden statue if they should ever be found to have violated the laws.[63][64] There was an assembly of Athenian citizens (the Ekklesia) but the lowest class (the Thetes) was not admitted and its deliberative procedures were controlled by the nobles.[65] There therefore seemed to be no means by which an archon could be called to account for breach of oath unless the Areopagus favoured his prosecution. According to the Athenian Constitution, Solon legislated for all citizens to be admitted into the Ekklesia[66] and for a court (the Heliaia) to be formed from all the citizens.[67] The Heliaia appears to have been the Ekklesia, or some representative portion of it, sitting as a jury.[68][69] By giving common people the power not only to elect officials but also to call them to account, Solon appears to have established the foundations of a true republic. However some scholars have doubted whether Solon actually included the Thetes in the Ekklesia, this being considered too bold a move for any aristocrat in the archaic period.[70] Ancient sources[71][72]credit Solon with the creation of a Council of Four Hundred, drawn from the four Athenian tribes to serve as a steering committee for the enlarged Ekklesia. However, many modern scholars have doubted this also.[73][74]

There is consensus among scholars that Solon lowered the requirements—those that existed in terms of financial and social qualifications—which applied to election to public office. The Solonian constitution divided citizens into four political classes defined according to assessable property[66][75] a classification that might previously have served the state for military or taxation purposes only.[76] The standard unit for this assessment was one medimnos (approximately 12 gallons) of cereals and yet the kind of classification set out below might be considered too simplistic to be historically accurate.[77]

The Areopagus, as viewed from theAcropolis, is a monolith where Athenian aristocrats decided important matters of state during Solon's time.

Anaxagoras (510-428) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For other uses, see Anaxagoras (disambiguation).

Anaxagoras

Anaxagoras; part of a fresco in the portico of the National University of Athens.

Born c. 510 BC Klazomenai

Died c. 428 BC Lampsacus

Anaxagoras (/ˌænækˈsæɡərəs/; Greek: Ἀναξαγόρας, Anaxagoras, "lord of the assembly"; c. 510 – 428 BC) was a Pre-Socratic Greek philosopher. Born in Clazomenae in Asia Minor, Anaxagoras was the first philosopher to bring philosophy to Athens. According to Diogenes Laertius and Plutarch, in later life he was charged with impiety and went into exile in Lampsacus; the charges may have been political, owing to his association with Pericles.

Responding to the claims of Parmenides on the impossibility of change, Anaxagoras described the world as a mixture of primary imperishable ingredients, where material variation was never caused by an absolute presence of a particular ingredient, but rather by its relative preponderance over the other ingredients; in his words, "each one is... most manifestly those things of which there are the most in it".[2] He introduced the concept of Nous (Mind) as an ordering force, which moved and separated out the original mixture, which was homogeneous, or nearly so.

He also gave a number of novel scientific accounts of natural phenomena. He produced a correct explanation foreclipses and described the sun as a fiery mass larger than the Peloponnese, as well as attempting to explain rainbowsand meteors.

Biography[edit]

Anaxagoras appears to have had some amount of property and prospects of political influence in his native town of Clazomenae in Asia Minor. However, he supposedly surrendered both of these out of a fear that they would hinder his search for knowledge. The Roman author Valerius Maximus preserves a different tradition: Anaxagoras, coming home from a long voyage, found his property in ruin, and said: "If this had not perished, I would have." A sentence, denoted by Maximus, as being "possessed of sought-after wisdom!"[3][4] Although a Greek, he may have been a soldier of the Persian army when Clazomenae was suppressed during the Ionian Revolt.

In early manhood (c. 464–461 BC) he went to Athens, which was rapidly becoming the centre of Greek culture. There he is said to have remained for thirty years.Pericles learned to love and admire him, and the poet Euripides derived from him an enthusiasm for science and humanity.

Anaxagoras brought philosophy and the spirit of scientific inquiry from Ionia to Athens. His observations of the celestial bodies and the fall of meteorites led him to form new theories of the universal order, and to a putative prediction of the impact of a meteorite in 467BC.[5] He attempted to give a scientific account of eclipses,meteors, rainbows, and the sun, which he described as a mass of blazing metal, larger than the Peloponnese. He was the first to explain that the moon shines due to reflected light from the sun. He also said that the moon had mountains and believed that it was inhabited. The heavenly bodies, he asserted, were masses of stone torn from the earth and ignited by rapid rotation. He explained that, though both sun and the stars were fiery stones, we do not feel the heat of the stars because of their enormous distance from earth. He thought that the earth is flat and floats supported by 'strong' air under it and disturbances in this air sometimes causes earthquakes.[6] These speculations made him vulnerable in Athens to a charge of impiety. Diogenes Laertius reports the story that he was prosecuted by Cleon for impiety, but Plutarch says that Pericles sent his former tutor, Anaxagoras, to Lampsacus for his own safety after the Athenians began to blame him for thePeloponnesian war.[7]

About 450 BC, according to Laertius, Pericles spoke in defense of Anaxagoras at his trial.[8] Even so, Anaxagoras was forced to retire from Athens to Lampsacus inTroad (c. 434–433 BC). He died there in around the year 428 BC. Citizens of Lampsacus erected an altar to Mind and Truth in his memory, and observed the anniversary of his death for many years.

Anaxagoras wrote a book of philosophy, but only fragments of the first part of this have survived, through preservation in work of Simplicius of Cilicia in the sixth century AD. Philosophy[edit]

Anaxagoras, depicted as a medieval scholar in the Nuremberg Chronicle

According to Anaxagoras all things have existed in some way from the beginning, but originally they existed in infinitesimally small fragments of themselves, endless in number and inextricably combined throughout the universe.[9] All things existed in this mass, but in a confused and indistinguishable form.[9] There was an infinite number of homogeneous parts (Greek:ὁμοιομερῆ) as well as heterogeneous ones.[10]

The work of arrangement, the segregation of like from unlike and the summation of the whole into totals of the same name, was the work of Mind or Reason (Greek: νοῦς).[9] Mind is no less unlimited than the chaotic mass, but it stood pure and independent, a thing of finer texture, alike in all its manifestations and everywhere the same.[9] This subtle agent, possessed of all knowledge and power, is especially seen ruling in all the forms of life.[11] Its first appearance, and the only manifestation of it which Anaxagoras describes, is Motion.[9] It gave distinctness and reality to the aggregates of like parts.[9]

Decease and growth only mean a new aggregation (Greek: σὐγκρισις) and disruption (Greek: διάκρισις).[9] However, the original intermixture of things is never wholly overcome.[9] Each thing contains in itself parts of other things or heterogeneous elements, and is what it is, only on account of the preponderance of certain homogeneous parts which constitute its character.[10] Out of this process arises the things we see in this world.[10]

Literary references[edit]

In a quote chosen to begin Nathanael West's first book "The Dream Life of Balso Snell", Marcel Proust's character Bergotte says, "After all, my dear fellow, life, Anaxagoras has said, is a journey."

Anaxagoras appears as a character in The Ionia Sanction, by Gary Corby.

Anaxagoras is referred to and admired by Cyrus Spitama, the hero and narrator of Creation, by Gore Vidal. The book contains this passage, explaining how Anaxagoras became influential:

[According to Anaxagoras] One of the largest things is a hot stone that we call the sun. When Anaxagoras was very young, he predicted that sooner or later a piece of the sun would break off and fall to earth. Twenty years ago, he was proved right. The whole world saw a fragment of the sun fall in a fiery arc through the sky, landing near Aegospotami in Thrace. When the fiery fragment cooled, it proved to be nothing more than a chunk of brown rock. Overnight Anaxagoras was famous. Today his book is read everywhere. You can buy a secondhand copy in the Agora for a drachma.[12]

William H. Gass begins his novel, The Tunnel (1995), with a quote from Anaxagoras: "The descent to hell is the same from every place."

See also[edit]

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Theophrastus

Statue of Theophrastus, Orto botanico di Palermo

Born c. 371 BC Eresos

Died c. 287 BC Athens

Theophrastus (/ˌθiːəˈfræstəs/; Greek: Θεόφραστος; c. 371 – c. 287 BC[1]), a Greek native of Eresos in Lesbos, was the successor to Aristotle in the Peripatetic school. He came to Athens at a young age and initially studied in Plato's school. After Plato's death, he attached himself to Aristotle. Aristotle bequeathed to Theophrastus his writings and designated him as his successor at the Lyceum. Theophrastus presided over the Peripatetic school for thirty-six years, during which time the school flourished greatly. He is often considered the "father of botany" for his works on plants. After his death, the Athenians honored him with a public funeral. His successor as head of the school was Strato of Lampsacus. The interests of Theophrastus were wide ranging, extending from biology and physics to ethics and metaphysics. His two surviving botanical works, Enquiry into Plants (Historia Plantarum) and On the Causes of Plants, were an important influence on Renaissance science. There are also surviving works On Moral Characters, On Sensation, On Stones, and fragments on Physics and Metaphysics. In philosophy, he studied grammar and language and continued Aristotle's work on logic. He also regarded space as the mere arrangement and position of bodies, time as an accident of motion, and motion as a necessary consequence of all activity. In ethics, he regarded happiness as depending on external influences as well as on virtue and famously said that "life is ruled by fortune, not wisdom."

Life[edit] Most of the biographical information we have of Theophrastus was provided by Diogenes Laërtius' Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers, written more than four hundred years after Theophrastus' time.[2] He was a native of Eresos in Lesbos.[3] His given name was Tyrtamus (Τύρταμος), but he later became known by the nickname "Theophrastus," given to him, it is said, by Aristotle to indicate the grace of his conversation (from Ancient Greek Θεός "god" and φράζειν "to phrase", i.e. divine expression).[4]

Aristotle, Theophrastus, and Strato of Lampsacus. Part of a fresco in the portico of theUniversity of Athens painted by Carl Rahl, c. 1888.

After receiving instruction in philosophy in Lesbos from one Alcippus, he moved to Athens, where he may have studied under Plato.[5] He became friends with Aristotle, and when Plato died (348/7 BC) Theophrastus may have joined Aristotle in his self-imposed exile from Athens. When Aristotle moved to Mytilene on Lesbos in 345/4, it is very likely that he did so at the urging of Theophrastus.[6] It seems that it was on Lesbos that Aristotle and Theophrastus began their research into natural science, with Aristotle studying animals and Theophrastus studying plants.[7] Theophrastus probably accompanied Aristotle to Macedonia when Aristotle was appointed tutor to in 343/2.[6] Around 335 BC, Theophrastus moved with Aristotle to Athens where Aristotle began teaching in the Lyceum. When, after the death of Alexander, anti-Macedonian feeling forced Aristotle to leave Athens, Theophrastus remained behind as head (scholarch) of the Peripatetic school,[6] a position he continued to hold after Aristotle's death in 322/1. Aristotle in his will made him guardian of his children, including Nicomachus with whom he was close.[8] Aristotle likewise bequeathed to him his library and the originals of his works,[9] and designated him as his successor at the Lyceum.[10] Eudemus of Rhodes also had some claims to this position, and Aristoxenus is said to have resented Aristotle's choice.[11] Theophrastus presided over the Peripatetic school for thirty-five years,[12] and died at the age of eighty-five according to Diogenes.[13] He is said to have remarked "we die just when we are beginning to live".[14] Under his guidance the school flourished greatly — there were at one period more than 2000 students, Diogenes affirms,[15] and at his death, according to the terms of his will preserved by Diogenes, he bequeathed to it his garden with house and colonnades as a permanent seat of instruction. The comic poet Menanderwas among his pupils.[15] His popularity was shown in the regard paid to him by Philip, Cassander, and Ptolemy, and by the complete failure of a charge of impiety brought against him.[16] He was honored with a public funeral, and "the whole population of Athens, honouring him greatly, followed him to the grave."[17] He was succeeded as head of the Lyceum by Strato of Lampsacus.

Writings[edit]

Historia plantarum, 1549

From the lists of Diogenes Laërtius, giving 227 titles, it appears that the activity of Theophrastus extended over the whole field of contemporary knowledge.[11] His writing probably differed little from Aristotle's treatment of the same themes, though supplementary in details. Like Aristotle, most of his writings are lost works.[11] Thus Theophrastus, like Aristotle, had composed a first and secondAnalytic (Ἀναλυτικῶν προτέρων and Ἀναλυτικῶν ὑστέρων).[18] He had also written books on Topics (Ἀνηγμένων τόπων, Τοπικῶν and Τὰ πρὸ τῶν τόπων);[19] on the Analysis of Syllogisms (Περὶ ἀναλύσεως συλλογισμῶν and Περὶ συλλογισμῶν λύσεως), on Sophisms(Σοφισμάτων) and On Affirmation and Denial (Περὶ καταφάσεως καὶ ἀποφάσεως)[20] as well as on the Natural Philosophy (Περὶ φύσεως, Περὶ φυσικῶν, Φυσικῶν and others), on Heaven (Περὶ οὐρανοῦ), and on Meteorological Phenomena (Τῆς μεταρσιολεσχίας and Μεταρσιολογικῶν).[21]

Frontispiece to the illustrated 1644 edition of theEnquiry into Plants (Historia Plantarum)

In addition, Theophrastus wrote on the Warm and the Cold (Περὶ θερμοῦ καὶ ψυχροῦ),[22] on Water(Περὶ ὕδατος), Fire (Περὶ πυρὸς),[23] the Sea (Περὶ θαλάττης),[23] on Coagulation and Melting (Περὶ πήξεων καὶ τήξεων), on various phenomena of organic and spiritual life,[23] and on the Soul (Περὶ ψυχῆς), On Experience (Περὶ ἐμπειρίας) and On Sense Perception (also known as On the Senses; Περὶ αἰσθήσεων).[24] Likewise, we find mention of monographs of Theophrastus on the early Greek philosophers Anaximenes, Anaxagoras, Empedocles, Archelaus,[25] Diogenes of Apollonia,Democritus,[26] which were made use of by Simplicius; and also on Xenocrates,[27] against theAcademics,[28] and a sketch of the political doctrine of Plato.[26] He studied general history, as we know from Plutarch's lives of Lycurgus, Solon, Aristides, Pericles, Nicias, Alcibiades, Lysander,Agesilaus, and Demosthenes, which were probably borrowed from the work on Lives (Περὶ βίων).[18] But his main efforts were to continue the labours of Aristotle in natural history. This is testified to not only by a number of treatises on individual subjects ofzoology, of which, besides the titles, only fragments remain, but also by his books on Stones, his Enquiry into Plants, and On the Causes of Plants (see below), which have come down to us entire. In politics, also, he seems to have trodden in the footsteps of Aristotle. Besides his books on the State (Πολιτικῶν and Πολιτικοῦ), we find quoted various treatises on Education (Περὶ παιδείας βασιλέως and Περὶ παιδείας),[29] on Royalty (Περὶ βασιλείας, Περὶ παιδείας βασιλέως and Πρὸς Κάσανδρον περὶ βασιλείας),[30] on theBest State (Περὶ τῆς ἀρίστης πολιτείας), on Political Morals (Πολιτικῶν ἐθῶν), and particularly his works on the Laws (Νόμων κατὰ στοιχεῖον, Νόμων ἐπιτομῆς and Περὶ νόμων), one of which, containing a recapitulation of the laws of various barbarian as well asGreek states, was intended to be a companion to Aristotle's outline of Politics, and must have been similar to it.[31] He also wrote on oratory and poetry.[32]Theophrastus, without doubt, departed further from Aristotle in his ethical writings,[33] as also in his metaphysical investigations of motion, the soul, and God.[34] Besides these writings, Theophrastus wrote several collections of problems, out of which some things at least have passed into the Problems that have come down to us under the name of Aristotle,[35] and commentaries,[36] partly dialogues,[37] to which probably belonged the Erotikos (Ἐρωτικός),[38] Megacles (Μεγακλῆς),[27]Callisthenes (Καλλισθένης),[39] and Megarikos (Μεγαρικός),[22] and letters,[40] partly books on mathematical sciences and their history.[41] Many of his surviving works exist only in fragmentary form. "The style of these works, as of the botanical books, suggests that, as in the case of Aristotle, what we possess consists of notes for lectures or notes taken of lectures," his translator Arthur F. Hort remarks.[2] "There is no literary charm; the sentences are mostly compressed and highly elliptical, to the point sometimes of obscurity".[2] The text of these fragments and extracts is often so corrupt that there is a certain plausibility to the well-known story that the works of Aristotle and Theophrastus were allowed to languish in the cellar of Neleus of Scepsis and his descendents.[42] On Plants[edit]

Frankincense trees in Dhufar

Main article: Historia Plantarum (Theophrastus)

The most important of his books are two large botanical treatises, Enquiry into Plants (Περὶ φυτῶν ἱστορία), and On the Causes of Plants (Περὶ φυτῶν αἰτιῶν), which constitute the most important contribution to botanical science during antiquity and the Middle Ages,[11] the first systemization of the botanical world; on the strength of these works some, followingLinnaeus, call him the "father of botany."[7] The Enquiry into Plants was originally ten books, of which nine survive. The work is arranged into a system whereby plants are classified according to their modes of generation, their localities, their sizes, and according to their practical uses such as foods, juices, herbs, etc.[43] The first book deals with the parts of plants; the second book with the reproduction of plants and the times and manner of sowing; the third, fourth, and fifth books are devoted to trees, their types, their locations, and their practical applications; the sixth book deals with shrubs and spiny plants; the seventh book deals with herbs; the eighth book deals with plants that produce edible seeds; and the ninth book deals with plants that produce useful juices, gums, resins, etc.[43]

Cinnamomum verum, fromKöhler's Medicinal Plants, (1887)

On the Causes of Plants was originally eight books, of which six survive. It concerns the growth of plants; the influences on their fecundity; the proper times they should be sown and reaped; the methods of preparing the soil, manuring it, and the use of tools; and of the smells, tastes, and properties of many types of plants.[43] The work deals mainly with the economical uses of plants rather than their medicinal uses, although the latter is sometimes mentioned.[43] Although these works contain many absurd and fabulous statements, they include valuable observations concerning the functions and properties of plants.[43] Theophrastus detected the process of germination and realized the importance of climate and soil to plants. Much of the information on the Greek plants may have come from his own observations, as he is known to have travelled throughout Greece, and to have had a botanical garden of his own; but the works also profit from the reports on plants of Asia brought back from those who followed Alexander the Great: to the reports of Alexander's followers he owed his accounts of such plants as the cotton- plant, banyan, pepper, cinnamon,myrrh, and frankincense.[2] Theophrastus' Enquiry into Plants was first published in a Latin translation by Theodore Gaza, at Treviso, 1483;[44] in its original Greek it first appeared from the press of Aldus Manutius at Venice, 1495–98, from a third-rate manuscript, which, like the majority of the manuscripts that were sent to printers' workshops in the fifteenth and sixteenth century, has disappeared.[45] Wimmer identified two manuscripts of first quality, the Codex Urbinas in the Vatican Library, which was not made known to J. G. Schneider, who made the first modern critical edition, 1818–21, and the excerpts in the Codex Parisiensis in theBibliothèque nationale de France. The standard author abbreviation Theophr. is used to indicate this individual as the author when citing a botanical name.[46]

Characters[edit] His book Characters (Ἠθικοὶ χαρακτῆρες), if it is indeed his, deserves a separate mention. The work contains thirty brief, vigorous, and trenchant outlines of moral types, which form a most valuable picture of the life of his time, and in fact of human nature in general.[11] They are the first recorded attempt at systematic character writing. The book has been regarded by some as an independent work; others incline to the view that the sketches were written from time to time by Theophrastus, and collected and edited after his death; others, again, regard the Characters as part of a larger systematic work, but the style of the book is against this.[11]Theophrastus has found many imitators in this kind of writing, notably Joseph Hall (1608), Sir Thomas Overbury (1614–16), Bishop Earle (1628), and Jean de La Bruyère (1688), who also translated the Characters.[11] George Eliot also took inspiration from Theophrastus' Characters, most notably in her book of caricatures,Impressions of Theophrastus Such. Writing the "character sketch" as a scholastic exercise also originated in Theophrastus's typology. On Sensation[edit] A treatise On Sense Perception (Περὶ αἰσθήσεων) and its objects is important for a knowledge of the doctrines of the more ancient Greek philosophers regarding the subject. A paraphrase and commentary on this work was written by Priscian of Lydia in the sixth century.[43] With this type of work we may connect the fragments onSmells, on Fatigue, on Dizziness, on Sweat, on Swooning, on Palsy, and on Honey.[42] Physics[edit] We also possess in fragments a History of Physics (Περὶ φυσικῶν ἱστοριῶν). To this class of work belong the still extant sections on Fire, on the Winds, and on the signs of Waters, Winds, and Storms.[47] Various smaller scientific fragments have been collected in the editions of Johann Gottlob Schneider (1818–21) andFriedrich Wimmer (1842—62) and in Hermann Usener's Analecta Theophrastea. Metaphysics[edit] The Metaphysics (anachronistic Greek title: Θεοφράστου τῶν μετὰ τὰ φυσικά),[48] in nine chapters (also known as On First Principles), was considered a fragment of a larger work by Usener in his edition (Theophrastos, Metaphysica, Bonn, 1890), but according to Ross and Fobes in their edition (Theophrastus, Metaphysica, Oxford, 1929), the treatise is complete (p. X) and this opinion is now widely accepted. There is no reason for assigning this work to some other author because it is not noticed in Hermippus and Andronicus, especially as Nicolaus of Damascus had already mentioned it.[42] On Stones[edit]

Cut emeralds

In his treatise On Stones (Περὶ λίθων), which was to be used as a source for other lapidaries until at least the Renaissance,[49]Theophrastus classified rocks and gems based on their behavior when heated, further grouping minerals by common properties, such as amber and magnetite, which both have the power of attraction.[50][51][52] He also comments on the effect of heat on minerals and their different hardnesses. Theophrastus describes different marbles; mentions coal, which he says is used for heating by metal-workers; describes the various metal ores; and knew that pumice-stones had a volcanic origin. He also deals with precious stones, emeralds,amethysts, onyx, jasper, etc., and describes a variety of "sapphire" that was blue with veins of gold, and thus was presumablylapis- lazuli.[50] He knew that pearls came from shell-, that coral came from India, and speaks of the fossilized remains of organic life.[50] Theophrastus made the first known reference to the phenomenon of pyroelectricity, noting that the mineral tourmaline becomes charged when heated. He also considers the practical uses of various stones, such as the minerals necessary for the manufacture of glass; for the production of various pigments of paint such as ochre; and for the manufacture ofplaster.[50] He discusses the use of the touchstone for assaying gold and gold alloys, an important property which would require the genius of Archimedes to resolve in quantitative detail when he was asked to investigate the suspected debasement of a crown a few years later. Many of the rarer minerals were found in mines, and he mentions the famous copper mines of Cyprus and the even more famous silver mines, presumably ofLaurium near Athens, and upon which the wealth of the city was based, as well as referring to gold mines. The Laurium silver mines, which were the property of the state, were usually leased for a fixed sum and a percentage on the working. Towards the end of the fifth century the output fell, partly owing to the Spartanoccupation of Decelea. But the mines continued to be worked, though Strabo records that in his time the tailings were being worked over, and Pausanias speaks of the mines as a thing of the past. The ancient workings, consisting of shafts and galleries for excavating the ore, and washing tables for extracting the metal, may still be seen. Theophrastus wrote a separate work On Mining,[22] which like most of his writings is a lost work. Pliny the Elder makes clear references to his use of On Stones in his Naturalis Historia of 77 AD, while updating and making much new information available onminerals himself. Although Pliny's treatment of the subject is more extensive, Theophrastus is more systematic and his work is comparatively free from fable and magic,[53] although he did describe lyngurium, a gemstone supposedly formed of the solidified urine of the lynx (the best ones coming from wild males), which was included in many lapidiaries until it gradually disappeared from view in the 17th century.[54] From both of these early texts was to emerge the science of mineralogy, and ultimately geology. Pliny is especially observant on crystal habit and mineral hardness, for example.

Philosophy[edit]

Theophrastus, depicted as a medieval scholar in theNuremberg Chronicle

The extent to which Theophrastus followed Aristotle's doctrines, or defined them more accurately, or conceived them in a different form, and what additional structures of thought he placed upon them, can only be partially determined because of the loss of so many of his writings.[42] Many of his opinions have to be reconstructed from the works of later writers such as Alexander of Aphrodisias and Simplicius. Logic[edit] Theophrastus seems to have carried out still further the grammatical foundation of logic and rhetoric, since in his book on the elements of speech, he distinguished the main parts of speech from the subordinate parts, and also direct expressions (κυρία λέξιςkuria lexis) from metaphorical expressions, and dealt with the emotions (πάθη pathe) of speech.[55] He further distinguished a twofold reference of speech (σχίσις schisis) to things (πράγματα pragmata) and to the hearers, and referred poetry and rhetoric to the latter.[56] He wrote at length on the unity of judgment,[57] on the different kinds of negation,[58] and on the difference between unconditional and conditional necessity.[59] In his doctrine of syllogisms he brought forward the proof for the conversion of universal affirmative judgments, differed from Aristotle here and there in the laying down and arranging the modi of the syllogisms,[60] partly in the proof of them,[61] partly in the doctrine of mixture, i.e. of the influence of the modality of the premises upon the modality of the conclusion.[62] Then, in two separate works, he dealt with the reduction of arguments to the syllogistic form and on the resolution of them;[63] and further, with hypothetical conclusions.[64] For the doctrine ofproof, Galen quotes the second Analytic of Theophrastus, in conjunction with that of Aristotle, as the best treatises on that doctrine.[65] In different monographs he seems to have tried to expand it into a general theory of science. To this, too, may have belonged the proposition quoted from his Topics, that the principles of opposites are themselves opposed, and cannot be deduced from one and the same higher genus.[66] For the rest, some minor deviations from the Aristotelian definitions are quoted from the Topica of Theophrastus.[67] Closely connected with this treatise was that upon ambiguous words or ideas,[68] which, without doubt, corresponded to book Ε of Aristotle's Metaphysics.[42] Physics and metaphysics[edit] Theophrastus introduced his Physics with the proof that all natural existence, being corporeal and composite, requires principles,[69] and first and foremost, motion, as the basis of all change.[70] Denying the substance of space, he seems to have regarded it, in opposition to Aristotle, as the mere arrangement and position (taxisand thesis) of bodies.[71] Time he called an accident of motion, without, it seems, viewing it, with Aristotle, as the numerical determinant of motion.[72] He attacked the doctrine of the four classical elements and challenged whether fire could be called a primary element when it appears to be compound, requiring, as it does, another material for its own nutriment.[73]

Aristotle

He departed more widely from Aristotle in his doctrine of motion, since on the one hand he extended it over all categories, and did not limit it to those laid down by Aristotle.[74] He viewed motion, with Aristotle, as an activity, not carrying its own goal in itself (ateles), of that which only potentially exists,[75] but he opposed Aristotle's view that motion required a special explanation, and he regarded it as something proper both to nature in general and the celestial system in particular:

Surely, then, if the life in animals does not need explanation or is to be explained only in this “ way, may it not be the case that in the heavens too, and in the heavenly bodies, movement does not need explanation or is to be explained in a special way?[76] ”

— Theophrastus, Metaphysics, 10a.16-29 He recognised no activity without motion,[77] and so referred all activities of the soul to motion: the desires and emotions to corporeal motion, judgment (kriseis) and contemplation to spiritual motion.[78] The idea of a spirit entirely independent of organic activity, must therefore have appeared to him very doubtful; yet he appears to have contented himself with developing his doubts and difficulties on the point, without positively rejecting it.[79] Other Peripatetics, like Dicaearchus, Aristoxenus, and especially Strato, developed further this naturalism in Aristotelian doctrine. Theophrastus seems, generally speaking, where the investigation overstepped the limits of experience, to have preferred to develop the difficulties rather than solve them, as is especially apparent in his Metaphysics.[42] He was doubtful of Aristotle's teleology and recommended that such ideas be used with caution:

With regard to the view that all things are for the sake of an end and nothing is in vain, the “ assignation of ends is in general not easy, as it is usually stated to be ... we must set certain limits to purposiveness and to the effort after the best, and not assert it to exist in all cases without qualification.[80] ”

- Theophrastus, Metaphysics, 10a.22–24, 11a.1–3 He did not follow the incessant attempts by Aristotle to refer phenomena to their ultimate foundations, or his attempts to unfold the internal connections between the latter, and between them and phenomena.[42] In antiquity, it was a subject of complaint that Theophrastus had not expressed himself with precision and consistency respecting God, and had understood it at one time as Heaven, at another an (enlivening) breath (pneuma).[81] Ethics[edit]

The bust inscribed "Θεόφραστος Μελάντα Ἐρέσιος (Theophrastos Melanta Eresios)"

Theophrastus did not allow a happiness resting merely upon virtue,[82] or, consequently, to hold fast by the unconditional value ofmorality. He subordinated moral requirements to the advantage at least of a friend,[83] and had allowed in prosperity the existence of an influence injurious to them. In later times, fault was found with his expression in the Callisthenes, "life is ruled by fortune, not wisdom" (vitam regit fortuna non sapientia).[84] That in the definition of pleasure, likewise, he did not coincide with Aristotle, seems to be indicated by the titles of two of his writings, one of which dealt with pleasure generally, the other with pleasure as Aristotle had defined it.[22] Although, like his teacher, he preferred contemplative (theoretical), to active (practical) life,[85] he preferred to set the latter free from the restraints of family life, etc. in a manner of which Aristotle would not have approved.[86] Theophrastus was opposed to eating meat on the grounds that it robbed animals of life and was therefore unjust. Non-human animals, he said, can reason, sense, and feel just as human beings do.[87]

The "portrait" of Theophrastus[edit] The marble herm figure with the bearded head of philosopher type, bearing the explicit inscription, must be taken as purely conventional. Unidentified portrait heads did not find a ready market in post-Renaissance Rome.[88] This bust was formerly in the collection of marchese Pietro Massimi at Palazzo Massimi and belonged to marchese L. Massimi at the time the engraving was made. It is now in the Villa Albani, Rome (inv. 1034). The inscribed bust has often been illustrated in engravings[89] and photographs: a photograph of it forms the frontispiece to the Loeb Classical Library Theophrastus: Enquiry into Plants vol. I, 1916. André Thevetillustrated[90] in his iconographic compendium, Les vraies Pourtrats et vies des Hommes Illustres (Paris, 1584), an alleged portrait plagiarized from the bust, supporting his fraud with the invented tale that he had obtained it from the library of a Greek in Cyprus and that he had seen a confirming bust in the ruins of Antioch.[91]

In popular culture[edit] A world is named Theophrastus in the 2014 Firefly graphic novel Serenity: Leaves on the Wind. Perhaps alluding to his skill at botany, it appears to be a green and pleasant world.

Strabo (63 BC- 24 AD)

Strabo

Strabo as depicted in a 16th-century engraving.

Born 64 or 63 BC

Amaseia, Pontus (modern-day Amasya, Turkey)

Died c. 24 AD

Ethnicity Greek

 Geographer Occupation  Philosopher  Historian

Strabo[1] (/ˈstreɪboʊ/; Greek: Στράβων Strabōn; 64/63 BC – c. AD 24), was a Greek geographer, philosopher, andhistorian.

Contents [hide]

Life[edit]

Title page from Isaac Casaubon's 1620 edition of Geographica.

Strabo was born to an affluent family from Amaseia in Pontus (modern Amasya, Turkey),[2] a city that he said was situated the approximate equivalent of 75 km from the Black Sea. Pontus had recently fallen to the Roman Republic, and although politically he was a proponent of Roman imperialism, Strabo belonged on his mother's side to a prominent family whose members had held important positions under the resisting regime of King Mithridates VI of Pontus.[n 1]

Strabo as depicted in the Nuremberg Chronicle.

Strabo's life was characterized by extensive travels. He journeyed to Egypt and Kush, as far west as coastal Tuscanyand as far south as Ethiopia in addition to his travels in Asia Minor and time spent in Rome. Travel throughout the Mediterranean and Near East, especially for scholarly purposes, was popular during this era and was facilitated by the relative peace enjoyed throughout the reign of Augustus (27 BC – AD 14). He moved to Rome in 44 BC, and stayed there, studying and writing, until at least 31 BC. In 29 BC, on his way to Corinth (where Augustus was at the time), he visited the island of Gyaros in the Aegean Sea. Around 25 BC, he sailed up the Nile until reaching Philae,[n 2] after which point there is little record of his proceedings until AD 17.

Statue of Strabo in his hometown (modern-day Amasya, Turkey), beside the Iris (Yeşilırmak) River.

It is not known precisely when Strabo's Geography was written, though comments within the work itself place the finished version within the reign of Emperor Tiberius. Some place its first drafts around 7 BC,[3] others around 17[4] or 18 AD.[3]The latest passage to which a date can be assigned is his reference to the death in AD 23 of Juba II, king of Maurousia (Mauretania), who is said to have died "just recently".[5] He probably worked on the Geography for many years and revised it steadily, not always consistently. On the presumption that "recently" means within a year, Strabo stopped writing that year or the next (24 AD), when he died. The first of Strabo's major works, Historical Sketches (Historica hypomnemata), written while he was in Rome (c. 20 BC), is nearly completely lost. Meant to cover the history of the known world from the conquest of Greece by the Romans, Strabo quotes it himself and other classical authors mention that it existed, although the only surviving document is a fragment of papyrus now in possession of the University of Milan (renumbered [Papyrus] 46).

Education[edit] Strabo studied under several prominent teachers of various specialties throughout his early life[n 3] at different stops along his Mediterranean travels. His first chapter of education took place in Nysa (modern Sultanhisar, Turkey) under the master of rhetoric Aristodemus, who had formerly taught the sons of the very same Roman general who had taken over Pontus.[6][n 4] Aristodemus was the head of two schools of rhetoric and grammar, one in Nysa and one in Rhodes, the former of the two cities possessing a distinct intellectual curiosity of Homeric literature and the interpretation of epics. Strabo was an admirer of Homer's poetry, perhaps a consequence of his time spent in Nysa with Aristodemus.[n 5] Around the age of 21, Strabo moved to Rome, where he studied philosophy with the Peripatetic Xenarchus, a highly respected tutor in Augustus's court. Despite Xenarchus's Aristotelian leanings, Strabo later gives evidence to have formed his own Stoic inclinations.[n 6] In Rome, he also learned grammar under the rich and famous scholar Tyrannion of Amisus.[n 7] Although Tyrannion was also a Peripatetic, he was more relevantly a respected authority on geography, a fact obviously significant, considering Strabo's future contributions to the field. The final noteworthy mentor to Strabo is Athenodorus Cananites, a philosopher who had spent his life since 44 BC in Rome forging relationships with the Roman elite. Athenodorus endowed to Strabo three important items: his philosophy, his knowledge, and his contacts. Unlike the Aristotelian Xenarchus and Tyrannion that preceded him in teaching Strabo, Athenodorus was Stoic in mindset, almost certainly the source of Strabo's diversion from the philosophy of his former mentors. Moreover, from his own first-hand experience, Athenodorus provided Strabo with information about regions of the empire which he would not otherwise have known.

Geographica[edit] Main article: Geographica

Map of the world according to Strabo.

Strabo is most famous for his work Geographica ("Geography"), which presented a descriptive history of people and places from different regions of the world known to his era.[5]

Map of Europe according to Strabo.

Although the Geographica was rarely utilized in its contemporary antiquity, a multitude of copies survived throughout theByzantine Empire. It first appeared in Western Europe in Rome as a Latin translation issued around 1469. The first Greek edition was published in 1516 in Venice.[7] Isaac Casaubon, classical scholar and editor of Greek texts, provided the first critical edition in 1587. Although Strabo cited the antique Greek astronomers Eratosthenes and Hipparchus, acknowledging their astronomical and mathematical efforts towards geography, he claimed that a descriptive approach was more practical, such that his works were designed for statesmen who were more anthropologically than numerically concerned with the character of countries and regions. As such, Geographica provides a valuable source of information on the ancient world, especially when this information is corroborated by other sources. Strabo is pro-Roman politically but culturally reserves primacy to Greece.[8] "... pro-Roman throughout the Geography. But while he acknowledges and even praises Roman ascendancy in the political and military sphere, he also makes a significant effort to establish Greek primacy over Rome in other contexts." In India, Strabo described small flying reptiles that were three feet long with a snake-like body and bat-like wings. Other historians, such as Herodotus, Aristotle, and Flavius Josephus have mentioned similar creatures. These descriptions sound like the small Rhamphorhynchus.

Geology[edit] As quoted from Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology: Strabo... enters largely, in the Second Book of his Geography, into the opinions of Eratosthenesand other Greeks on one of the most difficult problems in geology, viz., by what causes marine shells came to be plentifully buried in the earth at such great elevations and distances from the sea. He notices, amongst others, the explanation of Xanthus the Lyclian, who said that the seas had once been more extensive, and that they had afterwards been partially dried up, as in his own time many lakes, rivers, and wells in Asia had failed during a season of drought. Treating this conjecture with merited disregard, Strabo passes on to the hypothesis of Strato, the natural philosopher, who had observed that the quantity of mud brought down by rivers into the Euxine was so great, that its bed must be gradually raised, while the rivers still continued to pour in an undiminished quantity of water. He therefore conceived that, originally, when the Euxine was an inland sea, its level had by this means become so much elevated that it burst its barrier near Byzantium, and formed a communication with the Propontis, and this partial drainage had already, he supposed, converted the left side into marshy ground, and that, at last, the whole would be choked up with soil. So, it was argued, the Mediterranean had once opened a passage for itself by the Columns of Hercules into the Atlantic, and perhaps the abundance of sea-shells in Africa, near the Temple of Jupiter Ammon, might also be the deposit of some former inland sea, which had at length forced a passage and escaped. But Strabo rejects this theory as insufficient to account for all the phenomena, and he proposes one of his own, the profoundness of which modern geologists are only beginning to appreciate. 'It is not,' he says, 'because the lands covered by seas were originally at different altitudes, that the waters have risen, or subsided, or receded from some parts and inundated others. But the reason is, that the same land is sometimes raised up and sometimes depressed, and the sea also is simultaneously raised and depressed, so that it either overflows or returns into its own place again. We must therefore ascribe the cause to the ground, either to that ground which is under the sea, or to that which becomes flooded by it, but rather to that which lies beneath the sea, for this is more moveable, and, on account of its humidity, can be altered with great celerity. It is proper,' he observes in continuation, 'to derive our explanations from things which are obvious, and in some measure of daily occurrence, such as deluges, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and sudden swellings of the land beneath the sea; for the last raise up the sea also, and when the same lands subside again, they occasion the sea to be let down. And it is not merely the small, but the large islands also, and not merely the islands, but the continents, which can be lifted up together with the sea; and both large and small tracts may subside, for habitations and cities, like Bure, Bizona, and many others, have been engulfed by earthquakes.' In another place, this learned geographer [Strabo], in alluding to the tradition that Sicily had been separated by a convulsion from Italy, remarks, that at present the land near the sea in those parts was rarely shaken by earthquakes, since there were now open orifices whereby fire and ignited matters and waters escaped; but formerly, when the volcanoes of Etna, the Lipari Islands, Ischia, and others, were closed up, the imprisoned fire and wind might have produced far more vehement movements. The doctrine, therefore, that volcanoes are safety valves, and that the subterranean convulsions are probably most violent when first the volcanic energy shifts itself to a new quarter, is not modern.[9] The very first written definition/discussion on the fossil formation (mentioning Nummulite quoted from A.M. Celâl Şengör). One extraordinary thing which I saw at the pyramids must not be omitted. Heaps of stones from the quarries lie in front of the pyramids. Among these are found pieces which in shape and size resemble lentils. Some contain substances like grains half peeled. These, it is said, are the remnants of the workmen's food converted into stone; which is not probable. For at home in our country (Amasia), there is a long hill in a plain, which abounds with pebbles of a porus stone, resembling lentils. The pebbles of the sea-shore and of rivers suggest somewhat of the same difficulty [respecting their origin]; some explanation may indeed be found in the motion [to which these are subject] in flowing waters, but the investigation of the above fact presents more difficulty. I have said elsewhere, that in sight of the pyramids, on the other side in Arabia, and near the stone quarries from which they are built, is a very rocky mountain, called the Trojan mountain; beneath it there are caves, and near the caves and the river a village called Troy, an ancient settlement of the captive Trojans who had accompanied Menelaus and settled there.[10] The very first written definition/discussion of volcanism (Effusive eruption) observed at Katakekaumenē (modern Kula, Western Turkey) until Pliny the Youngerwitnessed to the eruption of Vesuvius on 24 August 79 AD in Pompeii:

Karadivlit Scoria Cone and AA type basaltic fissure lava flow in Katakekaumenē (modern-day Kula, Turkey).

…There are no trees here, but only the vineyards where they produce the Katakekaumene wines which are by no means inferior from any of the wines famous for their quality. The soil is covered with ashes, and black in color as if the mountainous and rocky country was made up of fires. Some assume that these ashes were the result of thunderbolts and sub‐ terranean explosions, and do not doubt that the legendary story of Typhon takes place in this region. Ksanthos adds that the king of this region was a man called Arimus. However, it is not reasonable to accept that the whole country was burned down at a time as a result of such an event rather than as a result of a fire bursting from underground whose source has now died out. Three pits are called “Physas” and separated by forty stadia from each other. Above these pits, there are hills formed by the hot masses burst out from the ground as estimated by a logical reasoning. Such type of soil is very convenient for viniculture, just like the Katanasoil which is covered with ashes and where the best wines are still produced abundantly. Some writers concluded by looking at these places that there is a good reason for calling Dionysus by the name (“Phrygenes”)”[11]