From the Beginning to Plato

THE IONIANS 73
does not really represent Anaximander’s position, he must actually have another
proponent of it in mind.
19 Simplicius complains that Alexander’s presentation of the indifference theory
substitutes considerations about equilibrium (derived from Plato) for an argument
from likeness (which is what Aristotle’s text actually gives us): On the Heavens
535.4–8.
20 The major study of Anaximander: Kahn [2.49]. On Anaximander’s book and its
significance: Kahn [2.49], 6–8, 199–208; Burkert [2.25], 239–40. Although he is said
to have been the first to write ‘on nature’ (see KRS, pp. 102–3), the claim of the
strange Pherecydes of Syros to be the first prose author is stronger if not
overwhelming: evidence in KRS, pp. 51–2; discussion e.g. in Kahn [2.49], 240;
Schibli [2.56], 4.
21 See especially Physics III.4, 5. Modern discussions of the apeiron: KRS, pp. 105–
17, Kahn [2.49], App. II; Guthrie [2.13] I: 83–9.
22 See in general Diels [2.1]; for Anaximander in particular Kahn [2.49], 11–71. A
brief statement in KRS, pp. 1–6.
23 Often observed by readers, but particularly well discussed by Kahn [2.49], 112 n.1.
24 For a contrary view see e.g. Guthrie [2.13] I ch. 3 (esp. pp. 89–91), who holds that
Anaximander conceived of the emergence of the world as the development of a
cosmic organism; see also West [2.59]. On Anaximander’s analagies : Lloyd [1.
37].
25 Tannery [2.58], 92 (quoted by Kahn [2.49], 102).
26 So e.g. KRS, pp. 141–2; Kahn [2.49], 112–13.
27 One text attests Anaximander’s recognition of the ecliptic: the circles of the sun
and moon ‘lie aslant’ (Aetius II.25.1 [DK 12 A 22]).
28 See Aristotle Meteorology 353b5–11 [KRS 132], with Alexander Meteorology 67.
3–12 [DK 12 A 27]. Well discussed by Kahn [2.49], 66–7.
29 Spheres: Aetius II.16.5; planet circle: Aetius II.15.6 [DK 12 A 18]. Zones: Kahn [2.
49], 88–9.
30 See West [1.21], 89–91.
31 So Kahn [2.49], App. II.
32 Eternal motion: Hippolytus Refutation I.6.2 [KRS 101, 115]; intermediate
character: Aristotle On the Heavens 303b10–13 [KRS 109], On Generation and
Corruption 332a19–25 [KRS 103], with discussion in KRS, pp. 111–13; Kahn [2.
49], 44–6.
33 Theophrastus’ words: Simplicius Physics 24.17–18 [KRS 101]. Assimilation to
atomist theory: Simplicius Physics 1121.5–9, [Plutarch] Miscellanies 2 [KRS 101],
Aetius 1.3.3 [DK 12 A 14]. Right in general thrust: so Conche [2.46], ch.5 (cf. also
Guthrie [2.13] I: 106–15), against, e.g. KRS, pp. 122–6; Kahn [2.49], 46–53.
34 See above all Kahn [2.49], ch. 3 (but his suggestion that the fragment may extend
back to ‘And out of those things…’ is idiosyncratic and unpersuasive).
35 For this interpretation see Barnes [2.8], 33–4.
36 Good general accounts of Anaximenes in KRS and Guthrie [2.13] I.
37 For the later coinage (sunkratein) and substitution of pneuma see KRS, pp. 158–
62. For hoion as ‘for example’ see Longrigg [2.51]. Barnes notes the absence of a
connecting particle, common with this use of hoion ([2.8], 55).
38 Cf. Barnes [2.8], 46–7, 55.